³Ô¹Ï´ó±¾Óª

The ACLU, ACLU of Maine, and Americans United for Separation of Church and State filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit arguing that religious schools in Maine participating in the state’s school tuition program must comply with all eligibility requirements of the program – including a prohibition on discrimination on the basis of religion, sexual orientation, and gender identity, among other protected characteristics.

The ACLU, ACLU of Maine, and Americans United for Separation of Church and State filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit arguing that religious schools in Maine participating in Maine’s school tuition program must comply with all eligibility requirements of the program, including a prohibition on discrimination against students based on their religion, sexual orientation, and gender identity.

On October 28, 2024, the ACLU and ACLU of Washington filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit supporting affirmance of a Washington district court decision holding that a religiously affiliated nonprofit organization violated Title VII and the Washington State antidiscrimination law when it rescinded a hiring candidate’s job offer because she is a woman married to a person of the same sex. Should the Ninth Circuit accept the organization’s First Amendment defense—that religious organizations can discriminate on any basis so long as it is grounded in their religious belief—it would gut employment protections for LGBTQ individuals and pave the way for religious organizations to discriminate on the basis of not only sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity but also other protected characteristics like race, color, and national origin.

On April 11, 2024, the ACLU, ACLU of Southern California, ACLU of Northern California, and ACLU of San Diego & Imperial Counties filed an amicus brief with the California Court of Appeal, Fifth Appellate District supporting the California Civil Rights Department’s appeal of a lower court judgment finding that a bakery owner did not violate the California public accommodations law when she refused to sell a wedding cake to a same-sex couple.