U.S. judge allows first transgender person to sue under disability law

katie lynn blatt

Kate Lynn Blatt: Forced to wear a name tag with a male name.

From Yahoo: (Reuters) – A U.S. judge ruled on Thursday that a transgender woman could move forward with a sex discrimination lawsuit against her employer under the Americans with Disabilities Act, even though it explicitly excludes transgender people from protection.

The plaintiff, Kate Lynn Blatt, becomes the first transgender person to be allowed to sue under the ADA for gender dysphoria, according to her Philadelphia-based lawyer, Neelima Vanguri.

But U.S. District Judge Joseph Leeson avoided ruling on the constitutionality of the ADA, as the plaintiffs had sought, under the legal principle that courts should avoid decisions on constitutional grounds if possible.

Being transgender is not considered a disorder by the American Psychiatric Association, but it can give rise to gender dysphoria, a type of anxiety that may require medical treatment. Gender dysphoria forms Blatt’s basis for making a claim under the ADA.

Leeson, from the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, found that simply being transgender would be insufficient to bring a case, but that gender dysphoria was a medical condition worthy of protection against discrimination.

He also said the law should be broadly construed to give people with disabilities recourse to pursue discrimination claims.

Blatt is suing her former employer, the retail chain Cabela’s Inc, for sex discrimination, saying she was fired after harassment that included denying her use of the women’s bathroom and temporarily forcing her to wear a name tag with her male name given at birth.

Blatt, 36, worked at the Cabela’s store in Hamburg, Pennsylvania, in 2006 and 2007. She was fired, she said, when Cabela’s alleged she threatened a co-worker’s child during an altercation at work, an accusation Blatt denies.

Cabela’s representatives did not respond to after-hours requests for comment. The company previously declined to comment because the litigation was pending.

The ADA was passed in 1990 as a landmark law protecting people with disabilities. But the lawsuit, filed in 2014, challenges a little-known clause in the act that “disability” shall not include “transsexualism.”

The lawsuit, which also cites protections in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 against sex discrimination in employment, had asked the judge to rule that the ADA clause violates the U.S. Constitution because it denies equal protection under the law.

Vanguri said Leeson’s ruling will help others who want to bring claims under the ADA. “I’m hopeful we will be able to expand civil rights for transgender people just a little,” she said.


17 responses to “U.S. judge allows first transgender person to sue under disability law

  1. You can’t claim gender dysphoria AND insist that “transgenderism” is real — and force the rest of society to concur that there really is such a thing as “transgenderism”.

    The former United States of America is profoundly sick.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Leeann Springer

      That thing is demonically possessed. The judge who ruled for this case to go forward, needs a swift kick off the bench. Who knows, the judge is probably a nut job too. Having worked in Medical Administration for many years, there has never been a diagnosis related code, for demonic possession or “mental freaks”. These creatures need to be put back in their cages. Leeann Springer

      Liked by 4 people

      • Leeann . . . I love the fact that you “Tell It Like It Is!” The fact that nutso judge has indicated that He/She could proceed with a lawsuit will just open the floodgates for other people to do the same.

        Why would it be wrong for an employer to insist that an employee wear a name bade indicated a male name, if that is the name under which they were first employed, and if they have not brought “legal proof” that the name in question has L-E-G-A-L-L-Y been changed to something else.

        My Heavens . . . I don’t know what this person looked like when he presented himself as a male . . . but damn nation, he/she is one U-G-L-Y looking girl, with five o’clock shadow.

        I would suspect that He/She is not employable at this time (who would want an employee who looks like this, who looks like a walking, talking being engulfed in severe mental illness,) and that they feel they need to have a “big payday” because . . . after all, their problems must be the fault of someone else!

        I hope that the employer can prevail, although just look at the fact that hiring attorneys to try to protect themselves from this kind of assault, is an expense that will be passed onto this store’s customers. Therein is the outrage in this whole matter. The only one to win are the attorneys. I do hope that it can be proven that she was discharged for harassment of the co-workers child during the alleged altercation. The fact that his/her dates of employment go back to 2007 . . . my goodness that was 10 years ago. It is for this reason I think that she is looking for a payday at the expense of an employer dating back 10 years. Someone ought to see this as being outrageous. Perhaps she is looking to be put on Social Security Disability . . . I just don’t see her as being a person who is employable at this point in time.

        It may not be correct but all of a sudden when I go to my neighborhood Fred Meyer Store (think Kroger store) all of a sudden we have two different overweight females, 35ish, who have shaved one side of their head down to the scull, and the other side has been dyed. Frankly, I have enough distress in my own personal life . . . I don’t want to interact with someone who obviously has such an overwhelming burden of mental illness that they would choose to present themselves as such. I am not saying that I am right, I am just saying that seeing this sets my teeth on edge. Individuals need to present themselves as being an asset to their employer . . . not a side show attraction.

        Liked by 3 people

        • If Barnum & Baily were to hire a bunch of these people, they could restart the sideshows back and not have to go bankrupt! I think a company should be able to make you wear a name tag that reflects your LEGAL name. That way if you do something stupid the customer can complain on the correct employee.

          Liked by 2 people

    • The lunatics are running the asylum…and the government too.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. I guess it is time for me to sue under the so-called disability act. I am only 5’1″ tall. I have to ask for tall people, when and If i can find one to help, to reach things on the top shelf in most stores. I think maybe I should sue so the stores will have to assign a tall associate to peruse the store with me while I am shopping so I am not inconvenienced by having to ask a stranger to help me. If this guy/girl wants to wear a female name tag at work then maybe he/she should have his name legally changed to avoid the problem!

    Liked by 3 people

    • Don’t forget,though,that singling out a particular employee to help you because he or she is TALL could cause a Discrimination suit. See how ridiculous this is getting?

      Liked by 2 people

  3. Genesis 1:27 ~ “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.”

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Children’s Hospital Boston Offers “Sex Change” to Adolescents

    Liked by 1 person

  5. I feel mildly nauseous just looking at s/he/it…

    Liked by 2 people

  6. Boy, they let the flood gates open! Since ‘transgendered’ isn’t considered a disability, if they win this, then anyone can be considered ‘discriminated’ against and also ‘disabled’, can’t they?
    It’s easy to see that is NO woman. Just a butt ugly man trying to dress the part.

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s