According to a new poll from the Project Right Side (PRS) Foundation, 3 out of 4 Georgians mistakenly believe that it’s illegal under state law to fire someone because they’re gay or transgender. But that could not be further from the truth.

Former Atlanta resident Ashland Johnson is a case in point.

In her first job out of college Ashland worked in the registrar’s office at a small Atlanta school. Things went well for nearly a year. But one day, when Ashland was out sick, her boss found an email exchange between Ashland and her girlfriend. Evidently, her boss took issue with her sexual orientation, because by the time Ashland returned to work, her boss had already drafted resignation letter.

Watch Ashland’s full story here:

After she was fired, Ashland called HR and some LGBT rights organizations, but because Georgia has no statewide non-discrimination law explicitly protecting LGBT people from employment discrimination, there was nothing they could do to help her.

And Ashland is not the only Georgian to face such treatment at work. According to a recently released report, Liberty & Justice in Georgia: Protecting Our Heritage & Growing Our Competitive Future, 45% of LGBT Georgians say they have been discriminated against or harassed at their jobs.

No one should be discriminated against because of their sexual orientation or gender identity—and more and more Georgians agree. This year, we saw an unprecedented amount for LGBT-inclusive non-discrimination protections, including three legislative measures that would have made these protections a reality.

The legislative session may be over, but we’ll never stop pushing for LGBT non-discrimination in Georgia. If you’re with us, click here to sign the Georgia Unites Against Discrimination pledge.

For 31 years, Connie Galloway poured her heart and soul into working for a local community organization that served individuals with mental illness and substance abuse problems. The work was challenging, but rewarding—and Connie excelled at it, receiving numerous commendations from the board for her service.

So it was a shock to Connie when she was suddenly demoted. Why? Another coworker didn’t like the fact that Connie is gay and complained to the CEO, who ultimately terminated Connie, right before Christmas—just because of who she is.

Watch Connie’s full story:

After her termination, Connie consulted with employment lawyers but all told her the same thing: Because there are no explicit federal or statewide non-discrimination laws in Georgia that prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity,, her firing was technically not illegal.

“I shouldn’t be terminated because I’m a lesbian. I’m just a hardworking individual.” –Connie Galloway, on being fired from her job of 31 years because she is gay

Connie’s story is, unfortunately, not rare. According to survey results included in a new report, Liberty & Justice in Georgia: Protecting Our Heritage & Growing Our Competitive Future, 45% of LGBT Georgians say they have been discriminated against or harassed at work over the last year. But a statewide civil rights law that protects LGBT Georgians from workplace discrimination could ensure that what happened to Connie never happens to anyone else.

Lawmakers can take concrete action right now to begin to address this kind discrimination by advancing HR 404, a bipartisan resolution that would create a study committee to consider the importance of LGBT protections. If a committee were created, it would give lawmakers the opportunity to hear other stories of discrimination, and learn first-hand why these protections are necessary.

However, there’s only two weeks left for lawmakers to advance this resolution, so they need to act fast. If you support advancing these protections, click here to urge your lawmakers to take action on HR 404 before March 31st.

CLICK HERE to read the original article on the AJC.

By Bill Rankin

The question of whether employers may legally fire people because they are gay or lesbian is likely to return before the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta, now that an appeals court in Chicago has issued a landmark ruling in a similar case.
On Tuesday, the Seventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago became the first appellate court in the country to rule that gays and lesbians are a “protected class” under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. By an 8-3 vote, the full court ruled that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is a form of sex discrimination.

Last month, a three-judge panel of the 11th Circuit in Atlanta ruled the other way, saying federal law does not prohibit employers from discriminating against workers because they are lesbian or gay. The 2-1 ruling said the court was bound by a 38-year-old precedent that said an employee’s “discharge for homosexuality” from Gulf Oil Co. was not prohibited by federal law.

Moreover, the ruling held that Title VII specifically prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion and national origin — but not sexual orientation.

On Friday, Jameka Evans, the plaintiff in the Georgia case, asked the entire 11th Circuit, which is allotted 12 judges, to reconsider the three-judge panel’s decision. The court currently has a vacancy, so an “en banc” hearing would be before 11 judges.

In her lawsuit, Evans claimed she was harassed and fired from her job as a security guard at Georgia Regional Hospital in Savannah because she’s a lesbian.

“I will shocked to the point of picking up my jaw if the full 11th Circuit didn’t hear the case,” said Anthony Kreis, a Chicago-Kent College of Law professor who has closely followed LGBT discrimination cases nationwide. “If the conditions aren’t ripe for a full court review now, they never will be.”

If Evans’ case is heard by the entire 11th Circuit court, which has jurisdiction over Georgia, Alabama and Florida, gays and lesbians will be one step closer to having workplace protections against discrimination here. This would be the same legal route as the one taken by the Seventh Circuit in Chicago, whose ruling on Tuesday overturned a decision by one of its own three-judge panels.

That outcome was a victory for Kim Hively, an Indiana math teacher who said she was fired by Ivy Tech Community College after being seen kissing her girlfriend in a car in the school parking lot.

In a statement, Ivy Tech spokesman Jeff Fanter said the college denies discriminating against Hively and rejects discrimination of all types.

Notably, Fanter added, Ivy Tech does not intend to appeal Tuesday’s ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court. This allows other appellate courts, like Atlanta’s, to continue to weigh in on the issue.

The Seventh Circuit ruling marked a long-sought milestone by the LGBT community.

“Hively’s claim is no different from the claims brought by women who were rejected for jobs in traditionally male workplaces, such as fire departments, construction and policing,” Chief Judge Diane Wood wrote.

“Any discomfort, disapproval or job decision based on the fact that the complainant – woman or man – dresses differently, speaks differently or dates or marries a same-sex partner, is a reaction purely and simply based on sex,” Wood added. “That means that it falls within Title VII’s prohibition against sex discrimination.”

Judge Richard Posner, in a concurring opinion, said discrimination against a woman because she’s a lesbian is analogous to a woman being discriminated against because she’s a woman.

“That woman didn’t choose to be a woman; the lesbian didn’t choose to be a lesbian,” he wrote. “I don’t see why firing a lesbian because she is in the subset of women who are lesbian should be thought any less a form of sex discrimination than firing a woman because she’s a woman.”

Posner acknowledged that his court was imposing a different meaning to sex discrimination than the one passed by Congress in 1964. Those legislators did not foresee the society’s changing attitudes toward the gay community or the sexual revolution of the 2000s, he said.

“We should not leave the impression that we are merely the obedient servants of the 88th Congress (1963-1965), carrying out their wishes,” Posner said. “We are not. We are taking advantage of what the last half-century taught.”

Judge Diane Sykes, writing in dissent, called the ruling “momentous” — all the more reason to pay careful attention to the role of the judiciary.

Sexual orientation is not on the list of Title VII’s forbidden categories of discrimination, she wrote. A “striking cultural change” in attitudes toward the LGBT community “may eventually persuade the people’s representatives to amend the statute to implement a new public policy.”

As for the courts, she said, “We are not authorized to infuse the text with a new or unconventional meaning or to update it to respond to changed social, economic or political conditions.”

Lambda Legal, the LGBT civil rights group, is pressing the issue in courts across the nation, said one of its lawyers, Greg Nevins, who represents both the plaintiff in Indiana and the one in Georgia.

“Tuesday’s ruling by the Seventh Circuit was the first jewel in the crown,” Nevins said. “It’s a new day. Does the full 11th Circuit now need to revisit this issue? I think the answer is yes.”

In what is the most significant federal court decision since the US Supreme Court’s ruling on marriage equality, the U.S. Appeals Court for the Seventh Circuit found yesterday that federal employment non-discrimination protections apply to gay, lesbian and bisexual workers.

This is the first time in history that a federal court has applied Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964’s prohibition on sex-based employment discrimination to cover sexual orientation. A 2011 ruling from a different appellate court found that these protections apply to transgender people. That case, Glenn v. Brumby et. al., involved a transgender Georgia General Assembly employee.

The facts of this case, Hively v. Ivy Tech Community College, center around an Indiana woman named Kimberly Hively. Hively is a former part-time employee of Ivy Tech Community College, where she was discriminated against when the school denied her full time employment because she is a lesbian.

BREAKING: Federal court rules employers can't fire people for being gay! This is a HUGE victory! #LGBTQ https://t.co/2WKlwza48a

— Lambda Legal (@LambdaLegal) April 4, 2017

The Court ruled 8–3 in favor of Hively, finding that Ivy Tech’s discriminatory treatment of her on the basis of her sexual orientation was unlawful.

Because this ruling is an appellate decision, two things can happen now: Ivy Tech could appeal the decision to the Supreme Court, or it could refuse to appeal the decision, meaning that gay and lesbian employees in the Seventh District—which covers Indiana, Illinois and Wisconsin—will continue to be protected from employment discrimination under federal law.

However, there are several similar cases pending right now in appellate courts across the country that could result in this case being elevated to the Supreme Court. One of those is Evans v. Georgia Regional Hospital, whose plaintiff, Jameka Evans, is a Savannah woman who was fired from her job as a security guard because she is a lesbian.

The U.S. Appeals Court for the Eleventh Circuit is currently deciding if they will grant a full review of Jameka’s case. If they do, and the full Court rules against Jameka, the question of whether or not employment discrimination against gay and lesbian workers is illegal could go before the Supreme Court.

It is hard to overstate how significant the Hively case is to the movement to pass LGBT non-discrimination protections. Now, for the first time in U.S. history, there is legal precedent that says discriminating against gay, lesbian, and bisexual employees is unconstitutional. As we continue to press forward in courts and legislatures across Georgia and the country, this case will go down in history as laying the foundation for LGBT non-discrimination protections nationwide.

The 2017 legislative session ended after the traditional midnight deadline, in the early morning hours of Friday, March 31st.

When the Senate finally gaveled out, LGBT advocates issued a sigh of relief: No anti-LGBT RFRA legislation will advance in 2017.

There were rumors circulating the Capitol late into the evening that there might be a last ditch effort to revive religious exemptions legislation that would permit people to discriminate simply by citing their “religious beliefs.”

ACT NOW: We’re hearing rumors the Senate could attach anti-#LGBT #RFRA amdmts to bills any moment. Let’s mobilize: https://t.co/VmrtboLU9c pic.twitter.com/69mqCZ3Zro

— Georgia Unites (@GeorgiaUnites) March 31, 2017

RFRA legislation (SB 233) was introduced earlier in the 2017 legislative session to fierce backlash from advocates, and bipartisan lawmakers—including Governor Nathan Deal. It never won the majority votes in needed to advance through the Legislature.

Then, last week, there were sneak attempts to attach RFRA as an amendment to a good adoption bill (HB 159), which thereby stalled the legislation. After that, a third effort was made to advance anti-LGBT discrimination as an add-on to an unrelated bill (HB 257), which was immediately tabled by a 50 – 3 vote.

Despite the best efforts of a few strong proponents of so-called “religious freedom” bills to advance their anti-LGBT agenda, this year there was no appetite for legislation that would grant a license to discriminate in Georgia.

This is a tremendous victory for LGBT advocates, who have for four years battled legislative attempts to roll back the rights of gay and transgender Georgians, and cast them as second-class citizens.

Meanwhile, a record five pieces of legislation were introduced in effort to address the very real problem of LGBT discrimination in the state. Those bills did not receive a vote, and so they are eligible for consideration in 2018.

But there were casualties in the fight to block anti-LGBT legislation from passing in 2017.

After anti-LGBT “poison pill” amendments were added to a strong adoption bill (HB 159), LGBT advocates teamed up with child welfare experts in a concerted push to #SaveHB159 by removing the discriminatory sections and passing a clean bill.

Senate is still in session! Urge your Sen to #SaveHB159 & pass the bill w/o discriminatory anti-#LGBT amdmnts https://t.co/82NzWz2qiG #GAPol pic.twitter.com/JSzbFQGCmI

— Georgia Unites (@GeorgiaUnites) March 24, 2017

This should have been a no brainer. Georgia’s adoption laws have not been updated since 1990. HB 159 was the product of decades of work by child welfare advocates to modernize and improve Georgia’s adoption and foster care system. The bill passed the House with strong bipartisan support. It was endorsed by both House Speaker David Ralston and Governor Nathan Deal.

But a handful of Senators on the Senate Judiciary Committee held the bill hostage by tacking on anti-LGBT amendments. And even after thousands of Georgians, leading national child welfare organizations, and elected leaders called on the Senate to do what is right and advance a clean bill—committee members refused, and doubled down on their commitment to anti-LGBT discrimination.

As the Senate refused to act, the House of Representatives took the lead and tacked the good components of HB 159 onto another piece of legislation in efforts to give the much-needed adoption updates a second path to the Governor’s desk. But this new adoption bill still needed a Senate vote.

Late last night, the Senate had the opportunity to do what was right—to vote on the side of the 12,000+ children in Georgia’s adoption and foster care systems waiting for forever homes—and they failed.

Sine Die ended with no vote on the adoption bill update.

This is a travesty first and foremost for Georgia’s children. And a blow to the advocates who worked tirelessly to craft and advance this important legislation. We are thankful to everyone who spoke out in support of updating Georgia’s adoption laws. And to everyone who helped defend LGBT Georgians against discrimination—thank you, as always.

There’s some good news today out of the capital for the 12,000 children in Georgia’s adoption and foster care system.

Last night, the adoption language from HB 159 was added as an amendment to another bill, meaning that much needed funding and reforms for Georgia’s currently overburdened child welfare system are back on track to pass during the current legislative session.

Meanwhile, the Senate Judiciary Committee continues to stall on the original bill because seven committee members refuse to advance a clean bill to the full Senate. Currently, HB 159 includes anti-LGBT amendments that would allow adoption agencies to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation—as well as race, ethnicity, and religion—all while receiving public funding.

However, the fact that this critical adoption language has been added to another bill means that anti-LGBT members’ cynical political ploy—playing politics with children’s lives all for the sake of advancing a license to discriminate—hasn’t worked. There is strong bipartisan support for updating Georgia’s adoption laws. The original language of HB 159 is the product of decades of work by child welfare advocates, it’s got strong endorsements from House leadership and Republican Governor Nathan Deal.

Sens. William Ligon, Josh McKoon and Greg Kirk—the lead proponents of the anti-LGBT amendments that held this bill hostage until late Tuesday night—need to take a hard look at their attempt to sabotage a good bill with anti-LGBT discrimination and reconsider whether this will be a winning legislative strategy in the future (hint: it won’t be).

Thanks to everyone who called and emailed their state senators and members of the Senate Judiciary Committee urging them to do the right thing. Even though a handful of extremist lawmakers ultimately chose not to, the strong grassroots pushback against HB 159’s anti-LGBT amendments ultimately paved the way for passage of a clean adoption bill.

Yesterday, members of the Senate Judiciary Committee took the coward’s way out.

After spoiling a strong adoption bill (HB 159)—which had advanced out of the House with bipartisan support—with anti-LGBT amendments, the Senate Judiciary Committee was given a second chance to do the right thing and fix the bill.

HB 159 was slated for a second hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee yesterday. This would have been the moment for Senators to fix the bill by removing the anti-LGBT amendments. Instead, before the day even started, there were rumors percolating that certain committee members—led by Senator William Ligon—were planning to double down on the discriminatory components of the legislation.

There were hours of testimony on HB 159 in support of removing discriminatory amendments and advancing a clean bill, including from Kathy Colbenson, CEO of CHRIS 180 (an organization that provides mental health and trauma services to children in the foster care system), Rev. Beth LaRocca-Pitts, senior pastor at Saint Mark United Methodist Church, and Melissa Carter, Executive Director of the Barton Child Law and Policy Center.

By the end of the day it was clear that the Senate Judiciary Committee would not take measures to fix the legislation. But in an unexpected turn of events, the committee adjourned for the day without voting on the anti-LGBT legislation at all.

Now, what was otherwise a strong adoption bill—which could have been easily resurrected by removing discriminatory anti-LGBT components—is effectively dead in the water for 2017.

“It is unfortunate that a handful of senators have decided to hold hostage such an important and needed piece of legislation, rather than setting aside a blatant attempt to write LGBT discrimination into law.” -Jeff Graham, Georgia Unites

Jeff Graham, the head of the Georgia Unites Against Discrimination coalition, condemned this cowardly move, saying: “Thank you for all who have taken action over the past week. It is unfortunate that a handful of senators have decided to hold hostage such an important and needed piece of legislation, rather than setting aside a blatant attempt to write LGBT discrimination into law. While it appears that no further action on HB 159 will take place this year, the bill has not been officially tabled and could therefore be forwarded to the Senate for a vote at any point between now and sine die.”

As amended, the tainted version of HB 159 would have allowed adoption agencies to discriminate against and refuse to work with same-sex couples and prospective LGBT parents looking to give children in need a loving and forever home. Critics of the tainted bill ranged from LGBT advocates to leading national child welfare organizations to Republican Governor Nathan Deal.

Not only did the amended legislation allow for explicit state-sanctioned discrimination against LGBT people. It jeopardized hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding to Georgia’s hamstrung adoption and foster care systems, according to the Division of Family and Children Services. And it put the lives of the 12,000 orphans and children in the foster system on the line by needlessly restricting the pool of prospective parents and families.

Georgia’s adoption code hasn’t been updated since 1990. According to a recent analysis by the AJC, there has been wariness among state lawmakers to advance adoption legislation because of concerns it would be perverted and used as a vehicle for advancing anti-LGBT discrimination in Georgia. Now, despite bipartisan support for updating the state’s archaic adoption laws, and a strong majority support for LGBT equality across Georgia—a select few lawmakers have wasted an opportunity to do what was right: Fix and pass HB 159.