Caffarelli & Associates 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

When “Training Agreements” Become Forced Labor: Federal Court Applies Anti- Trafficking Laws to Coercive Employment Contracts

A recent decision from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois highlights that forced labor and human trafficking laws apply far beyond what most people imagine as traditional trafficking scenarios. In Melone v. Niki Moon Salon, LLC, Case No. 25-C-5445 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 12, 2025) (Gettleman, J.), the court allowed claims under the federal Trafficking Victims’ Protection Act (TVPA) and the Illinois Trafficking Victims’ Protection Act (ITVPA) to proceed based on an employer’s use of a coercive...

Read More
Blog

Illinois Expands Protections for Whistleblowers

Illinois employees who speak up about unlawful workplace conduct now have stronger legal protections under recent amendments to the Illinois Whistleblower Act. These changes expand the types of disclosures that are protected and broaden what qualifies as unlawful retaliation– making it easier for employees to assert their rights when they are punished for doing the right thing. Expanded Protection for Speaking Up Under the amended law, employers may not retaliate against an employee who discloses– or threatens to disclose– information...

Read More
Blog

Court Rejects Defendant’s Attempt to Evade Illinois Biometric Privacy Law Under Government Contractor Exemption

Caffarelli & Associates secured a significant victory for workers’ biometric privacy rights this week when a Cook County court denied Total Airport Services, LLC’s motion to dismiss a class action brought under the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA). The ruling allows the case to move forward on behalf of employees whose fingerprints were allegedly collected without the disclosures and consent required by Illinois law. The court agreed with Caffarelli & Associates that the defendant failed to establish it was...

Read More