By BTL Staff
LANSING – In the House and Senate, Michigan is once again looking at legislation that seeks to add sexual orientation and gender identity into a list of protected classes under Michigan's Civil Rights Bill, but some legislators have a difference of opinion.
House Speaker Jase Bolger (R-Marshall) recently signaled that he will not allow the bill sponsored by all 50 Democrats to come up for a vote after the primary in November. He claims that the bill fails to establish "an important balance" between the LGBT community and religious exemptions.
Bolger questions the language of adding gender identity and expression to the possible expansion of the Civil Rights Act, which means that the transgender community may not be part of the potential Republican proposal. In an interview with MLive, Bolger noted a series of federal court rulings where transgender individuals won "sex stereotyping" cases on the grounds of sex discrimination, which is already part of Michigan's law. Bolger says he wants to get the policy right and that courts show him that gender is already protected.
A poll conducted by the Detroit News found that 74 percent of Michigan voters are likely to support an amendment to the Elliott-Larsen Act to include protections for gender identity and sexual orientation. Only 18 percent said that they would oppose adding these protections. The poll had a margin of error of plus or minus four points.
In 2012, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission declared that anti-transgender bias is a form of sex discrimination under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. This decision affects companies with at least 15 employees and means that transgender workers can file sex discrimination complaints with their local EEOC offices.
Jim Murray, president of AT&T Michigan and co-chair of the Competitive Workforce Coalition, a business group urging lawmakers to update Elliott-Larsen, said that the group's legal counsel has looked into who might already be included under the sex discrimination clause, and who might not.
In an interview with MLive, Murray is quoted as saying "If I'm hungry, a half a pizza still looks pretty good," he said. "I'm going to fight for whatever I can get, whatever that means."
But does excluding a gender identity clause from any civil rights protections bill fully reflect the inclusion and acceptance of all types of Michigan citizens?
Other partner groups in the business coalition, including Equality Michigan, say that not having transgender discrimination protections is a deal breaker.
"If gender identity and expression were removed from the Elliott-Larsen amendment, the LGBT community would remove themselves from any support for Elliott-Larsen and our push for amending the act," Emily Dievendorf, executive director of Equality Michigan, told MLive.
Other members of congress, like State Rep. Jeff Irwin of Ann Arbor, have come out saying they would not support a bill that does not include gender identity and expression protections.
