About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


169 U. Pa. L. Rev. Online 1 (2020-2022)

handle is hein.journals/pennumbra169 and id is 1 raw text is: ESSAY WHAT TAYLOR SWIFT AND BEYONCE TEACH US ABOUT SEX AND CAUSES ROBIN DEMBROFF, ISSA KOHLER-HAUSMANN & ELISE SUGARMANt INTRODUCTION One of the most anticipated decisions of this term will be the three consolidated cases pending in front of the Supreme Court, Bostock v. Clayton County, Altitude Express v. Zarda, and R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes v. EEOC, which collectively present the question of whether Title VII's prohibition on discrimination because of sex includes discrimination against gay, lesbian, and transgender employees. On October 8, 2019, Prof. Pamela Karlan's oral argument for Zarda and Bostock centered around one basic hypothetical: [W]hen you tell two employees who come in, both of whom tell you they married their partner Bill last weekend, when you fire the male employee who married Bill and you give the female employee who married Bill a couple of days off so she can celebrate the joyous event, that's discrimination because of sex.1 t Robin Dembroff, Assistant Professor Philosophy, Yale University. Issa Kohler-Hausmann, Professor of Law & Sociology, Yale Law School. Elise Sugarman, J.D. candidate, Yale Law School; PhD candidate, Philosophy, Stanford University. The authors wish to thank Jonathan Schaffer and Mark Schroeder for helpful conversation and feedback during the development of this paper, and Martha Fitzgerald, Lily Hu, Lisa Hogan, Esteban Morin, Amanda Shanor, Katie White, and Gideon Yaffe for their help in thinking through a related amicus brief submitted by two of the authors. 1 Transcript of Oral Argument at 7-8, Bostock v. Clayton County, No. 17-1618 (U.S. argued Oct. 8, 2019). (1)