After David Schroer applied for and was offered a counter-terrorism job with the Library of Congress in Washington D.C., he excitedly accepted. The week before beginning the new position he informed his future supervisor that he was in the process of transitioning from a male to a female. He told the supervisor that when he began the new job he would go by the name Diane, dress as and appear to be a woman. The next day the job offer was rescinded.
Schroer along with the American Civil Liberties Union brought a sexual bias suit against the library in 2005. The Library petitioned the court to dismiss the case but in April 2006, a D.C. district court judge ruled that the case could proceed to trial. Trial began this week in D.C.
This is a potentially important case and a new issue that has never been debated in the federal government. The outcome of this case could affect federal employment policy across the country. Only twelve states and Washington D.C. have already specifically banned job discrimination based on gender identity. The federal government had not addressed the issue until this case arose.
The ACLU contends that the Library’s actions violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. A 1989 Supreme Court ruling opened the door to this issue, stating that “under some circumstances” the act could protect transgender employees. In that case, Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, Ann Hopkins sued the auditor for denying her a proposed promotion because of sex-role stereotyping. The court ruled in Hopkins’ favor but the language of the decision was vague and, therefore, left many gray areas on the issue.
Schroer, a retired Army colonel was especially shocked by the discrimination because she was a 25-year veteran of the U.S. Army who headed classified national security operations as an Airborne Ranger and was a qualified Special Forces Officer. "I couldn't understand how the country that I had risked my life for could believe that it was ok to rescind its job offer to me solely because I'm transgender," Schroer said.
U.S. Attorney, Jeffery Taylor, who is representing the Library of Congress contends that other issues led the decision to rescind the job offer. He claimed that changing her name and appearance would affect her high-level military clearance and intelligence connections. This statement suggests that the job offer was revoked not for discriminatory reasons, but because the transition would make her incapable of doing the job for which she was hired.
Schroer’s lawyer, claims that is untrue and maintains that e-mails and documents show “direct evidence” that the decision was based completely on discrimination.
The trial will continue and the outcome may change federal hiring practices in this country forever.
***All attorney listings are a paid attorney advertisement, and do not in any way constitute a referral or endorsement by an approved or authorized lawyer referral service.
