New Jersey Law Journal
June 18, 2020
“As LGBTQ rights advocates celebrated Monday's landmark
ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court, making it a violation of Title VII to fire
someone for being gay or transgender, some in New Jersey might have wondered
about the decision's local impact."
The article later stated, “In
addition, the ruling makes federal court litigation of discrimination claims
related to sexual orientation or gender expression a more viable option, said
Thomas Prol, a Sills Cummis & Gross attorney who has analyzed the Bostock
case in his class on law and sexuality at Seton Hall University School of Law.
After Monday's ruling, a litigant in federal court can cite the court's
decision, rather than merely rely on Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
opinions, which are generally supportive to gays and lesbians but are subject
to shifting political influences, Prol said.
“Having similar positions from
state and federal laws on discrimination against LGBTQ people makes for a case
that is ‘more sturdy,’ without the ‘hybrid analysis’ in which state laws find
discrimination where federal law does not, Prol said.
New Jersey, it just harmonizes federal and state law in many respects. New
Jersey has been so prescient on this that the federal courts will look to our
analysis with favor,’ Prol said.”