Skip to Content

Press Releases

Carter Opposes Trial Lawyer Payoff That Threatens Faith-Based Businesses

U.S. Congressman John Carter (TX-31) today voted against H.R. 3685, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. This bill creates hiring protections on the basis or sexual orientation, both actual and perceived. "We have seen this type of legislation from the New Majority all year long – creatin...

Washington, Nov 7, 2007 -  U.S. Congressman John Carter (TX-31) today voted against H.R. 3685, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. This bill creates hiring protections on the basis or sexual orientation, both actual and perceived.

“We have seen this type of legislation from the New Majority all year long – creating policy to benefit their base, in this case trial lawyers, instead of the American people,” Congressman Carter, a former District Court Judge, said. “This bill creates a new protected class of people outside the scope of the Civil Rights Act, and forces businesses of faith to choose between their faith-based morals or the law.”

The Employment Non-Discrimination Act prohibits discrimination on the basis of imprecise and perceived characteristics. The term “perceived” is vague and not defined anywhere in the bill. This exclusion drastically increases employer liability and will require costly litigation to determine what it means and how it is to be applied.

“This bill allows anyone of any sexual orientation to claim to have been discriminated against because of their perceived sexual orientation,” Carter continued. “How does an employer credibly refute that accusation in a courtroom? Should we expect employers to keep records on their perceptions of employees’ sexual orientation?”

Additionally, the bill eliminates current-law protections that allow employers to consider marital status as a condition of employment. On top of prohibiting employers from hiring the individuals they believe are best suited for the job, this provision could undermine the rights of states to define, protect and preserve the institution of marriage.

“Bottom line: this bill is a bad bill that is so vague and inconclusive that it would take hundreds of trial lawyers and costly courtroom hours to come up with a conclusion based on opinion,” Carter said. “There is no doubt this legislation will tie our legal system in knots at the cost of employers, workers and taxpayers.”

###

Newsletter Subscription

Stay Connected

Add your email to get the latest updates