Evans Vows to Take Sexual Orientation Discrimination Case to the U.S. Supreme Court
2 min read
Jul 7, 2017
The Supreme Court may soon answer the most significant question to arise under Title VII in recent years: is sexual orientation discrimination "sex discrimination" within the meaning of the statute? The case to watch: Evans v. Georgia Regional Hospital.
On July 6, 2017, Jameka Evans' attorneys announced they would take her case all the way to the Supreme Court. Evans' announcement follows the 11th Circuit's refusal to grant her request for a rehearing en banc of the court's earlier ruling, by a 3-judge panel, that sexual orientation discrimination is not sex discrimination under Title VII. That panel based its ruling on binding 11th Circuit precedent, writing it could not hold otherwise until the earlier decision was overruled by the U.S. Supreme Court or the 11th Circuit sitting en banc.
The 11th Circuit's decision to deny en banc review parts ways with two other circuits.
In April of this year, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals granted an en banc review of a 3-judge panel's ruling in Hively v. Ivy Tech. Like the 11th Circuit, the 3-judge panel held it was bound by prior precedent to hold that sex discrimination does not encompass sexual orientation discrimination. On review, the full court overturned the old ruling, underscoring "the common-sense reality that it is actually impossible to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation without discriminating on the basis of sex." It also called out the fallacy of courts' ongoing attempts to differentiate between gender non-conformity discrimination, a cognizable Title VII claim, and sexual orientation discrimination, aptly observing that not being heterosexual is "the ultimate case of failure to conform" to gender stereotypes.
In May 2017, the 2nd Circuit agreed to review en banc a 3-judge panel decision affirming the dismissal of gay skydiving instructor's sexual orientation discrimination claim. The 2nd Circuit panel also based its ruling on dated but binding precedent. The full court is set to hear the case on September 26, 2017.
All will have to wait to see if the Supreme Court agrees to hear Evans' case. Given the circuit split created by the 11th Circuit's decision and recent momentum in LGBTQ rights cases, it will likely agree to hear the case.
Featured Insights

Healthcare Alert
Aug 3, 2026
Fixing the Emergency Refill Trap: What California’s AB 1587 Means for Pharmacies

Consumer Crossroads: Where Financial Services and Litigation Intersect
Jul 30, 2026
Should Text Messages be Considered “Calls” Under the TCPA? The Seventh Circuit Says No

Healthcare Alert
Jul 30, 2026
California Courts Sharply Curtail the MICRA Damages Cap in Nursing Home Litigation

Insights for Insurers Alert
Jul 30, 2026
Analyzing a Couple of Cases Involving Exclusions in D&O Policies

In The News
Jul 29, 2026
Hinshaw Authors Contribute Two Articles in Latest Edition of the CCFL Quarterly Report

Webinar
Jul 28, 2026
Cathy Mulrow-Peattie and Sabrina Janeiro Present on Legal AI Technology

In The News
Jul 27, 2026
Scott Seaman Discusses How the Insurance Industry Contributed to the 2026 FIFA World Cup

Privacy, Cyber & AI Decoded Alert
Jul 27, 2026
Compliance Guidance for the New Vermont Data Privacy and Online Surveillance Act (VDPOSA)

Healthcare Alert
Jul 24, 2026
Q&A: Right to Electronic Monitoring Extended to Illinois Assisted and Shared Living Facilities

Press Release
Jul 23, 2026
Insurance Partner Christophe Burusco Joins Hinshaw in Los Angeles

In The News
Jul 16, 2026
Jennifer Driscoll Anticipates Epic Battle Between “Titans of the Antitrust Bar”

