What laws protect employees from sexual orientation discrimination?

While there are a number of federal, state, and local anti-discrimination laws, few of these laws make sexual orientation discrimination and harassment illegal. There has been increased pressure in recent years, however, at the federal, state, and local levels to pass--and enforce--laws and regulations that prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation. Approximately 14 states and the District of Columbia have enacted such protective laws, as have a number of cities and counties. Contending that an employee can be fired anywhere else simply for being gay or a lesbian, civil rights advocates cite reports indicating that a significant majority of Americans believe sexual orientation discrimination should be illegal.

Fourteen states and the District of Columbia have passed laws that prohibit private employers from discriminating against employees on the basis of their actual or perceived sexual orientation. Sexual orientation is defined as being heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual. Sexual orientation discrimination is unequal treatment based on a person's actual or perceived sexual orientation. An example of sexual orientation discrimination is when an employer refuses to hire an equally qualified female job applicant solely because the applicant wears clothing that the employer feels is more suitable for men and looks more like a man than a woman.

Civil libertarians contend that discrimination based on sexual orientation deprives all people--not just those who are homosexual or bisexual--of protection of basic civil rights and fundamental freedoms protected by the United States Constitution and state constitutions.

If passed, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act would prohibit sexual orientation discrimination

Civil rights organizations, as well as many major corporations, have sought the passage of the federal Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) since 1996. So far, these efforts have been unsuccessful. The legislators who have sponsored ENDA say they have done so because sexual orientation in the workplace is commonplace and unacceptable. The purpose of ENDA is to prohibit intentional sexual orientation discrimination in the workplace. ENDA would accomplish this goal by adding sexual orientation to the list of protected traits or characteristics that presently includes race, national origin, gender, religion, age, and disability.

ENDA would not be applicable to the military, to employers with fewer than 15 employees, and to religious organizations.

Not surprisingly, supporters and opponents disagree about purpose of ENDA

Supporters of ENDA say that the law has failed to pass Congress mostly due to Republican resistance. Some opponents of ENDA argue that it would provide special rights to gays, lesbians, and bisexuals. Supporters of ENDA counter that ENDA's coverage is limited and that it would specifically forbid special treatment and quotas. Instead, they say, ENDA would only mandate equal employment opportunity, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity.

Some critics of the proposed law say the ENDA is unnecessary because gay, lesbian, and bisexual employees already are protected under existing laws. Supporters contend that it is currently possible for employers in 36 states to expressly deny employment and promotion opportunities based on sexual orientation, without any federal recourse available to job applicants and employees who have suffered such discrimination.

Copyright 2010 LexisNexis, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc.