New York District Court Holds Sexual Orientation not Protected by Title VII
2 min read
Mar 10, 2016
Last week, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") announced filing its first federal lawsuits against private-sector businesses, challenging sexual orientation discrimination as sex discrimination. Coincidentally, a week later, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York held in Christiansen v. Omnicom Group, Inc. that, although sexual orientation discrimination is "reprehensible," it does not violate Title VII. These cases demonstrate the legal community's struggle in defining and interpreting the law as currently written while, at the same time, attempting to ensure equal protections for gay and lesbian individuals.
Matthew Christiansen filed suit alleging, among other things, that his employer was "openly hostile and resentful" towards him because he was gay. DDB moved to dismiss the claim on the basis that sexual orientation discrimination claims are not cognizable under Title VII. Christiansen responded that in light of the significant transformations in our society's ability to define and understand sex and gender, Title VII should be expanded to recognize sexual orientation as a protected status.
The Christiansen court held that, under the law as it currently stands, and despite the shift in society's perception regarding the protections warranted for same-sex relationships, Christiansen could not state a claim for Title VII discrimination. In so holding, the court distinguished between claims based on sexual orientation and those based on nonconformity with sex stereotypes — the latter of which may form the basis for a Title VII action, the former of which may not. The court clearly struggled with its decision, referring to DDB's actions as "reprehensible," and questioned whether it is ever possible to desegregate acts of discrimination based on sexual orientation from those based on sex stereotyping.
Employers should note that although Title VII does not explicitly include sexual orientation in its list of protected categories, it is clear the EEOC will enforce Title VII's prohibition of sex discrimination as forbidding any employment discrimination based on gender identity or sexual orientation. In addition, some state and municipal laws specifically prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
Christiansen has already filed a notice of appeal. Stay tuned for updates on the appeal, as well as the suits recently filed by the EEOC. In the meantime, should you have any questions about sexual orientation or sex identity discrimination, please contact your local Hinshaw employment attorney.
Featured Insights

Press Release
Apr 30, 2026
Six-Attorney Team Joins Hinshaw’s Consumer Financial Services Group

In The News
Apr 29, 2026
Lauren Campisi Featured in the 20th Anniversary of Louisiana Super Lawyers Magazine

In The News
Apr 28, 2026
Matt Henderson Provides Media Insights as Conflict of Interest Lawsuits Target Law Firms

In The News
Apr 28, 2026
Akeela White Analyzes US House Hearing on Credit Reporting Compliance Reforms

In The News
Apr 24, 2026
Michael Dowell Reviews New PBM Reform Reshaping Pharmacy Reimbursement

Lawyers for the Profession® Alert
Apr 21, 2026
When Does a Client’s Duty to Investigate Begin? Lessons from a Time-Barred Malpractice Case

Press Release
Apr 20, 2026
Tom Kuzmanovic Selected for BizTimes Milwaukee 2026 Notable Leaders in Law

Press Release
Apr 17, 2026
André Sesler Elected to the Board of Trustees of the University of Florida Law Center Association

Hinshaw Alert
Apr 17, 2026
Q&A: How to Submit Your IEEPA Refund Claim as CAPE Portal Launches April 20, 2026



