Maryland may be one of the first states to consider how the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2020 ruling in an LGBTQ+ rights case, Bostock v. Clayton County, plays a broader role in interpreting two state anti-discrimination statutes, with a potential opinion coming as early as September.
In the present case, a gay plaintiff identified as “John Doe” sued his employer, Catholic Relief Services, a social services agency constituted by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops in a workplace discrimination case. Doe, a data analyst, alleges that CRS abruptly terminated his legal spouse’s health benefits after more than a year of coverage when the organization discovered the couple’s homosexual marriage—despite Doe’s disclosures about his relationship.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
