In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit No. 15-1720 KIMBERLY HIVELY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. IVY TECH COMMUNITY COLLEGE OF INDIANA, Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, South Bend Division. No. 3:14-cv-1791 — Rudy Lozano, Judge.

ARGUED NOVEMBER 30, 2016 — DECIDED APRIL 4, 2017.

WOOD, Chief Judge.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 makes it unlawful for employers subject to the Act to discriminate on the basis of a person’s “race, color, religion, sex, or national origin … .” 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a). For many years, the courts of appeals of this country understood the prohibition against sex discrimination to exclude discrimination on 2 No. 15-1720 the basis of a person’s sexual orientation. The Supreme Court, however, has never spoken to that question. In this case, we have been asked to take a fresh look at our position in light of developments at the Supreme Court extending over two decades. We have done so, and we conclude today that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is a form of sex discrimination. We therefore reverse the district court’s judgment dismissing Kimberly Hively’s suit against Ivy Tech Community College and remand for further proceedings.  

. . . 

Nothing in the complaint hints that Ivy Tech has an anti-marriage policy that extends to heterosexual relationships, or for that matter even an anti-partnership policy that is gender-neutral. 

. . .

Viewed through the lens of the gender non-conformity line of cases, Hively represents the ultimate case of failure to conform to the female stereotype (at least as understood in a place such as modern America, which views heterosexuality as the norm and other forms of sexuality as exceptional): she is not heterosexual.

. . .

Accessed July 18, 2017 from: http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2017/D04-04/C:15-1720:J:Wood:aut:T:fnOp:N:1942256:S:0