Missouri
How Bostock v. Clayton County applies in Missouri: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Other.
Missouri recognizes protections against employment discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity under the Missouri Human Rights Act (MHRA). While state courts have historically been cautious in their interpretations, the principles in Bostock provide a strong foundation for greater protections.
Under the Missouri Human Rights Act, it is unlawful for employers to discriminate against individuals based on sexual orientation or gender identity as part of broader anti-discrimination protections.
The court ruled that discrimination based on sexual orientation falls under the definitions of unlawful discrimination in the context of public employment.
This case affirmed that gender identity is a protected characteristic under Missouri law, allowing for claims similar to those recognized in Bostock.
The court expanded the interpretation of discrimination to include claims based on perceived sexual orientation in public employment settings.
Missouri's approach aligns with the federal standard established in Bostock, where the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is a form of sex discrimination under Title VII. However, Missouri's laws offer more specific definitions and protections that may vary from federal interpretations.
Candidates preparing for the Missouri bar exam should ensure a solid understanding of the state's anti-discrimination laws, especially in light of the Bostock decision's implications on sexual orientation and gender identity protections.