Today will go down as one of the most important days in LGBTQ legal history.

[demmiblue]

Today will go down as one of the most important days in LGBTQ legal history. Here’s the line of people waiting to get into the court to watch. #RiseUpOct8

Link to tweet

TODAY: SCOTUS determines whether settled law protecting queer and trans people in the workplace will be overturned. Despite the Trump administration lobbying SCOTUS to take away our rights, we fight back. We are watching. #NoPrideInPrejudice #NoRightToDiscriminate #RiseUpOct8

Link to tweet

[TidalWave46]

1. K&R

Historic Supreme Court arguments Tuesday in LGBTQ workplace rights dispute

Washington (CNN)Aimee Stephens finally mustered the courage back in 2013 to tell her co-workers about something that she had struggled with her entire life: her gender identity.

"I have known many of you for some time now," Stephens explained in a letter, and then she told them she had decided to have sex reassignment surgery and reject the sex she'd been assigned at birth.

"The first step I must take is to live and work full-time as a woman," Stephens wrote. "I will return to work as my true self, " she added, "in appropriate business attire."

Not long after, she was fired from her job as the director of a funeral home. She sued.

CNN

[OliverQ]

2. I'm pretty sure the court is going to vote to allow

discrimination. I have no trust in them whatsoever.

[Ms. Toad]

3. Just a dose of reality - it is NOT settled law that SCOTUS is considering.

It is important that people realize that those of us who are LGBT have never had reliable protection from being fired for who we are, absent employer contracts or state law, or living in a circuit which has interpreting gender discrimination to include discrimination on the basis of sexualorientation, gender identity or expression - which are far less than universal.

Way too many, including members of DU assume such protection exists. It does not - which is one reason the immediate dismantling of domestic partnerships once marriage was legal. A couple with one progressive employer who offered health insurance, and one regressive employer who did not, was forced to choose between coming out to the regressive employer (via a public record of their marriage) and forfeiting health insurance.

This decision, if it goes against us, will make the status quo rock solid - but it is not taking something that exists.I

ETA - sorry this was intended as a reply to the OP, not a specific reply to you. (Mobile posting error)