TRENTON, NJ – Phil Murphy’s cadre of gender police have announced charges against three individuals for sexual bias and discrimination in three separate incidents.
New Jersey Attorney General Matthew J. Platkin, alongside the Division on Civil Rights (DCR), has announced the issuance of Findings of Probable Cause in three cases involving allegations of discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity or expression, in violation of the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (LAD).
Among the cases, two are related to employment discrimination, one based on sexual orientation and the other based on gender identity or expression. The third case involves alleged discrimination based on gender identity or expression.
Attorney General Platkin emphasized the state’s commitment to protecting LGBTQIA+ individuals from discrimination, highlighting the importance of preventing mistreatment based on gender identity, gender expression, or sexual orientation, both in the workplace and public establishments such as restaurants.
Director Sundeep Iyer of the DCR emphasized that discrimination against LGBTQIA+ individuals in New Jersey is all too common, but the state’s laws clearly prohibit such behavior. The DCR remains dedicated to enforcing these protections against employers and businesses that discriminate against LGBTQIA+ residents.
In one case, a teacher at a Monmouth County school was instructed not to discuss their gender identity with students. Additionally, they were prohibited from wearing a pin indicating their preferred pronouns to avoid being misgendered after coming out as non-binary. DCR’s investigation found sufficient evidence supporting the suspicion that the school discriminated against the teacher based on their gender identity and/or expression. The investigation also uncovered probable cause to support the teacher’s claim of unlawful retaliation by the school when the teacher’s employment was terminated almost two months prior to their intended resignation date, shortly after the teacher reported the discrimination.
In the second case, a gay man alleged that his employer, a restaurant chain with multiple locations across New Jersey, subjected him to a hostile work environment due to his sexual orientation. The employee claimed that when he requested medical leave for an upcoming surgery, his manager made offensive remarks questioning whether he was undergoing a sex change operation.
As a result, the employee requested and received a demotion to be transferred to a different restaurant location where he would not interact with the offending manager. However, once a management official at the new location discovered the employee’s scheduled medical leave, the employee was terminated. DCR’s investigation found probable cause that the restaurant violated the LAD by denying the employee the transfer based on his upcoming medical leave and creating a hostile work environment through the manager’s demeaning comments.
In the third case, a Monmouth County restaurant refused service to a non-binary customer, claiming they did not adhere to the restaurant’s gender binary dress code, which forbade men from wearing sleeveless shirts without imposing similar restrictions on women.
Despite the patron previously informing staff about their non-binary identity, the restaurant insisted that they conform to the dress code designated for men. DCR’s investigation established probable cause that the restaurant violated the LAD by discriminating against the patron based on their gender identity or expression.