“I have found that this memorandum is in many ways inconsistent with the E.O.,” Friel wrote to colleagues in the Civil Rights Department. “I plan to speak to the department management about issuing revised guidelines that are compatible with the E.O. As part of this process, we will seek input from subject matter experts in the department. “
The unexpected 6-3 Supreme Court ruling last June in Bostock v Clayton County concluded that a half-century-old ban on gender discrimination in employment applies equally to discrimination against gay and lesbian workers as well as transgender workers.
While the ruling – written by Trump’s appointed Judge Neil Gorsuch – did not specifically extend the same rationale to discrimination in areas such as education or housing, many lawyers said the ruling’s logic would inevitably apply to other laws that prohibit gender discrimination .
However, the analysis, published publicly by the Trump administration the day before Trump’s departure, advised against such an interpretation and often appeared to be more in love with Justice Samuel Alito’s dissent with Bostock than with the majority opinion of Control.
“We have to hesitate to apply Bostock’s reasoning to different texts adopted at different times and in different contexts,” wrote Assistant Attorney General John Daucasus in Sunday’s memo.
By late Friday, Daucasus’ long memo was gone from the Justice Department’s website.