The Justice Ginsburg lecture Series Features distinguished leaders who like Justice Ginsburg have committed their lives to furthering equality and human rights. It is an opportunity for our graduating students to hear from a giant in the law as she reflects on her career and offers advice to them as they graduate. And we are truly fortunate that the first speaker in this series will be, of course, Justice Ginsburg. Another round of applause. [applause] Justice Ginsburg is a legend in the law and in life. She has served with the greatest distinction on the Supreme Court andthe past 25 years, even if she had never been a judge or justice, she would still have learned a great place in legal history for her groundbreaking work in her advocacy to promote gender equality. A great justice, a great advocate, and who else has come become a cultural icon . [laughter] Justice Ginsburg has been honored by scores of followers with, to name only a few, a rap nickname. [laughter] numerous books inclu
Mr. Mcmaster we need leaders to make sure that they are not part of the problem, that they are not creating opportunities for our adversaries. Judy all that on more on tonights pbs newshour. Announcer major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by moving our economy for 160 years. Bnsf the engine that connects us. Announcer Consumer Cellular, johnson and johnson, Financial Services firm raymond james. Supporting social entrepreneurs and their solutions to the worlds most pressing problems, skolfoundation. Org. The lemelson foundation, committed to improving lives in the u. S. And around the world, on the web at lemelson. Org. And with the ongoing support of these institutions. This program was made possible by T Corporation for public broadcasting and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. Than you. Judy two big stories dominate e news tonight, the highstakes battle builds over the future of the u. S. Supreme court, and criminal charges are filed in the sh
Discrimination. Last october, the court heard oral arguments for two consolidated cases concerning employment and Sexual Orientation. This is an hour. We will hear in case 171618, bostic versus Clayton County in a consolidated case. Take you thank you. When an employer fires a male men, he for dating violates title vii. The employer has discriminated against the man because he treats that man worse than women who want to do the same thing. That discrimination is because of sex. Because the adverse employment malesis based on the employee to confirm about how men should behave that men should be attracted only to women and not to men. There is no analytic difference between this kind of discrimination and forms of discrimination that have been already recognized by every court to have addressed them. For example, discrimination against men who are effeminate rather than macho. That discrimination is because of nonconformity with an expectation of how men should behave. The attempt to ca
Versus clayton county. Thank you, mr. Chief justice. When an employer filed a male employee for dating men but does not fire female employees that dates men discriminated against the man because he treats that and worse than women that want to do the same thing. That discrimination is because of sex. Because the adverse employment action is based on the male toloyees failure to conform a particular expectation about how men should behave. That men should be attracted only to women. There is no difference between this kind of discrimination and forms of discrimination that of an already recognized by every court to have addressed them. Her example, discrimination against men who are a feminine. Is becausemination of nonconformity with an expectation about how men should behave. Carve outt to discrimination against men for being gay from title vii cannot be administered with consistency or integrity. Resort tojudges to been counting where they count epithets tos of determine whether or n
Who want to do the same thing. That discrimination is because of sex. Because the adverse employment malesis based on the employee to confirm about how men should behave that men should be attracted only to women and not to men. There is no analytic difference between this kind of discrimination and forms of discrimination that have been already recognized by every court to have addressed them. For example, discrimination against men who are effeminate rather than macho. That discrimination is because of nonconformity with an expectation of how men should behave. The attempt to carve out discrimination against men for being gay, from title vii, cannot be administered with either consistency or integrity. Resort tojudges to lexical deed county where epithets to determine whether or not discrimination is based on sex or Sexual Orientation. That attempt is futile because when a man is discriminated against for being gay, he is discriminated against for not conforming to an expectation abo