by Amy Matsui, Senior Counsel,
National Women's Law Center
This post is part of a series about the nomination of Judge Sotomayor for the Supreme Court.
The Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on the nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor for the Supreme Court are coming up next week, and we will be listening carefully to the questions that Senators on the Committee will be asking Judge Sotomayor. The hearings are an opportunity for Senators to ask Judge Sotomayor about many of the legal issues that come before the Supreme Court that impact women’s lives, including the right to privacy, equal protection under the law, anti-discrimination protections, health and safety regulations, and more.
Given the attention that focused on the Court’s decision this term in Ricci v. DeStefano, which dealt with employer’s ability to voluntarily address discrimination under Title VII (since Judge Sotomayor was on the panel whose decision the 5-4 majority of the Court reversed), we expect that Senators on the Committee will be asking Judge Sotomayor about antidiscrimination protections, like Title VII, at her hearings next week.
So let’s talk about those protections. Congress has passed a number of laws that protect against sex discrimination, including at work and at school. These include Title IX, the landmark law that bars sex discrimination in educational institutions and programs that receive federal funds, and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of sex, race, national origin, or religion. Other laws protect against discrimination on the basis of age or disability in the workplace.
These laws have been critical in breaking down barriers for women and girls in many facets of life. They protect against sexual harassment (at work and at school), which can make learning and working environments unbearable for women and girls. In schools, these laws require that girls get the same opportunities to compete in athletics as the boys. They protect against pregnant girls getting kicked out of school, and against women being fired, or demoted, when they become pregnant. They protect against employers who refuse to cover contraceptive drugs or devices under their health insurance plan –- but cover Viagra. And they have helped increase the number of girls studying math, science, and engineering –- and the number of women becoming police officers, or firefighters, or plumbers or electricians.
Some of these protections have not been given the most robust of interpretations by the Supreme Court in recent years, to say the least, and Congress has been paying attention. Last year, the Senate Judiciary Committee held a number of hearings on Supreme Court decisions that affected women, including the Court’s 2007 decision in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire. And the Court’s decision in Ricci can only have piqued Congress’ attention further.
Judge Sotomayor’s approach to antidiscrimination protections is very important because the Court’s decisions in this area of the law will affect women and their families for generations to come. So it’s important to listen to the questions that Senators will likely be asking Judge Sotomayor about antidiscrimination protections next week.
Amazingly enough women discriminate against women more than men do at times.
It may be weight, hair, or a general appearance issue in the work place.
I have been compared to my boss's 27 year old daughter who if she just took medication would feel better. That is a personal issue my boss has with her daughter and it does not in any way involve me.
I left that job because my boss seemed to want to get me to fit in a cookie cutter mold she had already prepared for her daughter.
Suprise! I didn't fit her mold and apparently neither did her daughter. Discrimination can take on some ugly heads. This seemed to be an inescapable situation so I put in my 2 weeks notice and informed my boss I would make her job easier by her not having to write me up anymore.
nwgrny@yahoo.com
Posted by: Sheilah A. | July 11, 2009 at 01:40 PM