The Courts’ Rulings:

In the Christiansen case, the 2^nd Circuit clearly expressed reservations about the current state of the law, noting that “in the context of an appropriate case, our Court should consider reexamining the holding that sexual orientation claims are not cognizable under Title VII. Other federal courts are grappling with this question, and it well may be that the Supreme Court will ultimately address it.” Nonetheless, the Court found that it was bound by its earlier decisions and rejected the employee’s sexual orientation discrimination claim. The 11^th Circuit simply noted that it was also bound by earlier precedent in dismissing the employee’s sexual orientation claim in the Evans case.

Both courts, however, recognized that the employees could assert a sex-stereotyping claim under Title VII – in other words that they were subject to discrimination because they did not conform to typical male or female sexual stereotypes.