1 00:00:00,040 --> 00:00:03,200 Speaker 1: The governor of Louisiana has lost another battle in court 2 00:00:03,320 --> 00:00:07,760 Speaker 1: over his executive order protecting lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender 3 00:00:07,800 --> 00:00:12,719 Speaker 1: people in state government from discrimination and harassment. Louisiana's first 4 00:00:12,720 --> 00:00:16,560 Speaker 1: circuit Court of Appeal found Governor John Bell Edwards overstepped 5 00:00:16,560 --> 00:00:21,240 Speaker 1: his authority by including sexual orientation and gender identity among 6 00:00:21,280 --> 00:00:24,400 Speaker 1: the list of protected classes in the state. The unanimous 7 00:00:24,440 --> 00:00:27,560 Speaker 1: appellate court panel sided with a lower court judge who 8 00:00:27,560 --> 00:00:31,120 Speaker 1: blocked enforcement of the order in December after a challenge 9 00:00:31,160 --> 00:00:35,080 Speaker 1: by Attorney General Jeff Landry, joining us as Anthony christ 10 00:00:35,080 --> 00:00:39,680 Speaker 1: a professor at Chicago Kent College of Law. Anthony Edwards 11 00:00:39,720 --> 00:00:44,080 Speaker 1: attorneys argued that nothing prevents the governor from establishing policy 12 00:00:44,159 --> 00:00:47,080 Speaker 1: by executive order as long as it doesn't conflict with 13 00:00:47,159 --> 00:00:51,480 Speaker 1: existing law, and Edwards said, even President Trump agrees, as 14 00:00:51,479 --> 00:00:54,360 Speaker 1: he has kept in place a federal executive order which 15 00:00:54,440 --> 00:00:57,760 Speaker 1: is virtually identical to the order I put in place. 16 00:00:58,280 --> 00:01:02,000 Speaker 1: What was the court's answer to that arguments? So the 17 00:01:02,080 --> 00:01:06,480 Speaker 1: court ultimately sided with the Louisiana Attorney General um and 18 00:01:06,600 --> 00:01:10,240 Speaker 1: said that what the governor was doing was not um 19 00:01:10,280 --> 00:01:14,000 Speaker 1: not just implementing current policy and current law, but was 20 00:01:14,200 --> 00:01:19,040 Speaker 1: actually um in effect lawmaking, so so basically taking the 21 00:01:19,160 --> 00:01:24,000 Speaker 1: legislature's role um and and making creating law. UM. And 22 00:01:24,040 --> 00:01:26,920 Speaker 1: so the court, based you know, looked to federal law 23 00:01:26,920 --> 00:01:31,760 Speaker 1: and state law, which neither expressly protect against sex orientation 24 00:01:31,880 --> 00:01:35,880 Speaker 1: or gender identity discrimination. And they looked to federal interpretation 25 00:01:36,120 --> 00:01:39,119 Speaker 1: or federal courts interpretation or federal law, which in Louisiana 26 00:01:39,160 --> 00:01:43,440 Speaker 1: have yet to recognize that sexual orientation or gender identity 27 00:01:43,440 --> 00:01:47,039 Speaker 1: discrimination is a form of sex discrimination. And um, because 28 00:01:47,280 --> 00:01:51,160 Speaker 1: they because they said, um, Louisiana law doesn't recognize that 29 00:01:51,280 --> 00:01:55,440 Speaker 1: this kind of discrimination is unlawful. Um. It really basically 30 00:01:55,520 --> 00:01:58,400 Speaker 1: validated the Attorney General's position that the governor was making 31 00:01:58,400 --> 00:02:02,520 Speaker 1: a law and not just imple meaning current law and policy. 32 00:02:02,880 --> 00:02:07,600 Speaker 1: But Anthony, the governor is the head state official. Couldn't 33 00:02:07,600 --> 00:02:11,440 Speaker 1: he isn't it within his purview under Louisiana law to say, Look, 34 00:02:12,040 --> 00:02:14,360 Speaker 1: the government that I run is not going to discriminate 35 00:02:14,400 --> 00:02:17,600 Speaker 1: against people based on their sexual identity, and we're not 36 00:02:17,720 --> 00:02:21,760 Speaker 1: going to contracts with companies that do that. What Why 37 00:02:21,840 --> 00:02:24,840 Speaker 1: is it that under Louisiana law he can't do that? Um. 38 00:02:25,080 --> 00:02:27,080 Speaker 1: You know, I think that ultimately it will be up 39 00:02:27,080 --> 00:02:29,959 Speaker 1: to Louisiana Court to to really settle this UM. A 40 00:02:30,040 --> 00:02:33,400 Speaker 1: number of governors and you know, again President Obama have 41 00:02:33,520 --> 00:02:37,240 Speaker 1: done similar things in North Carolina. Just this last month, 42 00:02:37,440 --> 00:02:41,959 Speaker 1: Governor Cooper um initiated a similar executive order UM. And 43 00:02:42,120 --> 00:02:46,320 Speaker 1: and so it'll be remain remain to be seen. UM. 44 00:02:46,360 --> 00:02:49,760 Speaker 1: You know what exactly the Louisiana State Supreme Court will 45 00:02:49,800 --> 00:02:53,760 Speaker 1: will do. UM. But generally speaking, governors and you know, 46 00:02:53,880 --> 00:02:57,079 Speaker 1: the executive branch has a decent amount of of latitude 47 00:02:57,560 --> 00:03:01,720 Speaker 1: UM to create policies, personnel policies for the executive branch 48 00:03:01,800 --> 00:03:05,440 Speaker 1: and for the state government UM employees. UM. Again, so 49 00:03:05,520 --> 00:03:09,639 Speaker 1: long as they're not inconsistent with state law. And if 50 00:03:09,680 --> 00:03:12,280 Speaker 1: the governor, you know, if the governor's executive order is 51 00:03:12,360 --> 00:03:15,120 Speaker 1: unpalatable to the state legislators, they have the authority to 52 00:03:15,160 --> 00:03:18,880 Speaker 1: override it by statute UM as well. So UM, I 53 00:03:18,919 --> 00:03:21,960 Speaker 1: think most people would have assumed that this kind of 54 00:03:21,960 --> 00:03:26,519 Speaker 1: executive order would have been, you know, within the governor's prerogative. UM. 55 00:03:26,560 --> 00:03:29,240 Speaker 1: And so this decision, to me strikes me as as 56 00:03:29,400 --> 00:03:31,640 Speaker 1: as a step with what most states and the federal 57 00:03:31,680 --> 00:03:35,240 Speaker 1: government allows in this area. But UM, it will ultimately 58 00:03:35,280 --> 00:03:38,040 Speaker 1: be up to the Louisiana State Supreme Court. Let's talk 59 00:03:38,040 --> 00:03:41,040 Speaker 1: about the Supreme Court. There's a case before the Supreme 60 00:03:41,080 --> 00:03:45,240 Speaker 1: Court involving the firing of a lesbian hospital security guard 61 00:03:45,320 --> 00:03:48,600 Speaker 1: in Georgia, and the attorneys general of seventeen states and 62 00:03:48,680 --> 00:03:52,280 Speaker 1: the District of Columbia are urging the justices to decide 63 00:03:52,320 --> 00:03:56,400 Speaker 1: if Title seven of the Civil Rights Act protects LGBT 64 00:03:56,600 --> 00:03:59,720 Speaker 1: individuals from discrimination on the job. And it's something that 65 00:03:59,800 --> 00:04:03,720 Speaker 1: the E E O C and the Justice Department are 66 00:04:03,800 --> 00:04:09,120 Speaker 1: in opposition on. Would that taking that case be an 67 00:04:09,160 --> 00:04:14,320 Speaker 1: important step in understanding this? Yeah? So so Ultimately, UM, 68 00:04:14,560 --> 00:04:19,839 Speaker 1: the the Louisiana Pelate Court UM noted that if federal 69 00:04:19,920 --> 00:04:23,760 Speaker 1: law was interpreted in such a way that to recognize 70 00:04:23,760 --> 00:04:28,120 Speaker 1: a sex discrimination or sexual orientation discrimination is a form 71 00:04:28,160 --> 00:04:31,520 Speaker 1: of sex discrimination, as those Attorneys General UM are asking 72 00:04:31,600 --> 00:04:34,720 Speaker 1: the Supreme Court United States Supreme Court to do. UM, 73 00:04:34,880 --> 00:04:39,000 Speaker 1: then the governor's executive order would be merely uh, the 74 00:04:39,040 --> 00:04:44,080 Speaker 1: implementation of of federal federal law and and perhaps state 75 00:04:44,320 --> 00:04:48,000 Speaker 1: uh state employment law UM, and his executive order would 76 00:04:48,040 --> 00:04:52,080 Speaker 1: be would be lawful under the Louisiana Constitution. So UM 77 00:04:52,160 --> 00:04:54,680 Speaker 1: in that sense, Uh, you know that that's an incredibly 78 00:04:54,839 --> 00:04:58,560 Speaker 1: or the Evans case UM could help resolve the issue 79 00:04:59,040 --> 00:05:02,200 Speaker 1: UM in Louisiana enough, but UM Devin's case has a 80 00:05:02,240 --> 00:05:04,719 Speaker 1: lot more promise in the sense that it can protect 81 00:05:05,440 --> 00:05:08,640 Speaker 1: people in private employment UM, in the private employment sector 82 00:05:08,720 --> 00:05:12,160 Speaker 1: and the public appointment sector across the country. UM. If 83 00:05:12,160 --> 00:05:15,360 Speaker 1: Title seven is ruled or interpreted in such a way 84 00:05:15,720 --> 00:05:19,200 Speaker 1: that LGBT people are protected under the sex discrimination ban, 85 00:05:19,520 --> 00:05:23,640 Speaker 1: Anthony in about thirty seconds, what's your opinion of whether 86 00:05:24,200 --> 00:05:28,600 Speaker 1: LGBT should be protected under Title seven? UM, I absolutely 87 00:05:28,600 --> 00:05:31,680 Speaker 1: think that that LGBT employees have a have a cognizable 88 00:05:31,720 --> 00:05:34,599 Speaker 1: claim under Title seven. UM. You can't really discriminate against 89 00:05:34,600 --> 00:05:37,800 Speaker 1: sex orientation or someone's gender identity with really taking their 90 00:05:37,800 --> 00:05:39,440 Speaker 1: sex into account. And at the end of the day, 91 00:05:39,480 --> 00:05:41,680 Speaker 1: Title seven is meant to end sex discrimination in all 92 00:05:41,680 --> 00:05:44,320 Speaker 1: its forms. Thank you, Anthony, as always for being on 93 00:05:44,320 --> 00:05:47,919 Speaker 1: Bloomberg Law. That's Anthony christ He's a professor at Chicago 94 00:05:48,000 --> 00:05:49,239 Speaker 1: Kent College of Law.