Caffarelli & Martin Ltd

News

2 minutes read

Seventh Circuit Holds that Discrimination on the Basis of Sexual Orientation Violates Title VII

Published

For the past several years, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has interpreted the Civil Rights Act’s prohibition against sex discrimination to include claims based upon sexual orientation, and on April 4, 2017, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with the EEOC in the case of Hively v. Ivy Tech Community College. The Hively decision is the first time that a federal court of appeals has adopted the EEOC’s position. The Plaintiff, Kimberly Hively, was an openly gay, part-time adjunct professor at Ivy Tech Community College in Indiana. Although she applied for multiple full-time positions between 2009 and 2014, the college declined to renew her contract and she sued, claiming that she was discriminated against on the basis of her sexual orientation. Based upon Seventh Circuit precedent, the district court held that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation does not constitute “sex discrimination” as defined by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, and thus dismissed Hively’s claims. A panel of the Seventh Circuit reluctantly affirmed based upon Seventh Circuit precedent, but cited the shifting legal landscape in light of recent Supreme Court and other Seventh Circuit opinions. The panel decision was then reviewed and overturned by the full Seventh Circuit, which explained that adverse employment actions taken on the basis of sexual orientation were in fact a “subset of actions taken on the basis of sex.” Focusing its analysis on prior gender nonconformity cases (which violate Title VII), the court reasoned that Hively was being treated differently in the same manner – because of her nonconformity with heterosexual women, who are stereotypically attracted to men. Consequently, the court concluded that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is the functional equivalent of discrimination based upon that person’s sex. The Seventh Circuit also relied upon Hively’s right to freedom of association. Because the Seventh Circuit’s holding conflicts with every other Circuit, it is likely that the Supreme Court will take up and settle this issue on a national basis.

Back to News

Recent Posts

Blog

Caffarelli & Martin Secures Class Certification in Biometric Privacy Case Against Aimbridge

Caffarelli & Martin, Ltd. (p/k/a Caffarelli & Associates) is pleased to announce a significant victory for Illinois workers in Gutierrez v. Aimbridge Employee Service Corp. and Aimbridge Hospitality, LLC. On June 2, 2026, Judge Caroline Kate Moreland of the Circuit Court of Cook County granted Plaintiffs’ renewed motion for class certification in a lawsuit brought under the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act, commonly known as BIPA. The case concerns Aimbridge-managed hotels in Illinois that allegedly required employees to use UltiPro...

Read More
Blog

Caffarelli & Martin Ltd. Secures Unanimous Jury Verdict in Sexual Harassment Case Against El Milagro

Caffarelli & Martin Ltd. is proud to announce a trial victory on behalf of Lilia Carrillo in her hostile work environment sexual harassment case against El-Milagro, Inc. d/b/a El Milagro under the Illinois Human Rights Act. After a five-day jury trial in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, the jury unanimously found in favor of the Plaintiff. The case was tried by Alejandro Caffarelli and Whitney Barr of Caffarelli & Martin Ltd. Ms. Carrillo worked for a placement company,...

Read More
Blog

Alexis Martin Quoted in Borderless Magazine

Alexis D. Martin of Caffarelli & Martin Ltd. was recently quoted in a Borderless Magazine article discussing the growing delays in DACA renewal processing and the legal uncertainty many recipients are facing under current immigration policies. The article highlights the significant impact these delays are having on work authorization, employment, and deportation concerns for DACA recipients across the country. You can read the full article here.

Read More