Laserfiche WebLink
The stated purpose of the Indiana Civil Rights Act is "[t]he promotion of equal <br /> opportunity without regard to race, religion,color, sex,disability,national origin, or <br /> ancestry through reasonable methods."IC 22-9-1-2(b). The Act does not include sexual <br /> orientation and gender identity as protected statuses, but it also does not state that it is <br /> acceptable to discriminate because of these statuses. It certainly cannot;be said that the <br /> Act"expressly permits"'discrimination on the.basis of either of these statuses. <br /> Accordingly, the first hurdle is met—there is no clear"conflict"with the statute. <br /> The only remaining question is whether the inclusion of sexual orientation and <br /> gender identity in the Ordinance is logically consistent with the purpose of the Indiana <br /> Civil Rights Act. This must be answered in the affirmative.. The"public policy <br /> statement"in IC 22-9-1-2(a) speaks about equal opportunity for all citizens not only <br /> those in the specifically enumerated protected classes. And the"construction guidance" <br /> in IC 22-9-1-2(f) states that the Act is to be "construed broadly." In broadest terms, the <br /> Act's goal is ending discrimination and providing equal opportunity in employment and <br /> housing for all of Indiana's citizens. The evidence presented to the South Bend City <br /> Council demonstrates that South Bend cannot meet this ultimate goal unless it explicitly <br /> prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in addition <br /> to discrimination 6n the basis of race, religion, color, sex, disability, national origin, and <br /> ancestry. Unquestionably, the proposed amendment to the Ordinance is no more than a <br /> necessary, logical extension with the same goal as the Indiana Civil Rights Act—the <br /> elimination of discrimination and the provision of equal opportunity for all those who <br /> live in South Bend. <br /> B. The proposed amendment does not violate the federal constitutional right to <br /> equal protection of the lave. <br /> 1. Background for equal protection analysis. <br /> According to the United States Supreme Court: <br /> The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment <br /> commands that no State shall "deny to any person within its <br /> jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws,"which is <br /> essentially a direction that all persons similarly situated should <br /> be treated alike. Section 5 of the Amendment empowers <br /> Congress to enforce this mandate,but absent controlling <br /> congressional direction, the courts have themselves devised <br /> standards for determining the validity of state legislation or <br /> other official action that is challenged as denying equal <br /> protection. The general_rule is that legislation is presumed to be <br /> valid and will be sustained if the classification drawn by the <br /> statue is rationally_related to a legitimate state interest. When <br /> social or economic legislation is at issue,the Equal Protection <br /> Clause allows the States wide latitude, and the Constitution <br /> 10 <br />