The original version of this article contained an error and has been changed. See the bottom of the article for more information.
A moot court justice interrupted a law student mid-sentence Saturday to ask if derogatory comments about a nurse’s physical appearance – short hair, lack of lipstick and jewelry – were gender or sexual orientation discrimination.
The interruption came during a debate about the fictional dismissal of a nurse from her job at a hospital and the reasons behind it. The pretend case was written for law students competing in the Williams Institute Moot Court Competition Saturday.
The justice, Alex Ferrando, a transactional attorney who recently graduated from the UCLA School of Law, presided over the second round of the court.
For the past 11 years, the Williams Institute, which researches gender identity policies at the UCLA School of Law, has hosted the competition, which exclusively focuses on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender legal issues. Forty-two teams from 32 law schools across the country competed on Saturday.
This year, the mock case concerned Janet Hall, a self-identified masculine woman and atheist nurse who sued a hospital for firing her over alleged sex and religious discrimination.
After receiving negative comments from her coworkers about her appearance, Hall complained to her supervisor who told her she should “act like one of the girls.” Later, after seeing her dropped off at work by a woman, several of her coworkers wore pins that said “homosexuality is a sin.”
The case attempted to address concerns about the vulnerability of the LGBT community to sexual orientation discrimination in many states, said Alexandra Lang Susman, director of strategic education and initiatives at the Williams Institute and the author of this year’s case. Susman said she thinks the prominence of marriage equality has dominated the national discussion of LGBT discrimination.
“Anti-discrimination (in the workplace) has been eclipsed by the marriage issue,” Susman said.
Each team represented either the hospital or the nurse. In addition to submitting written briefs, teams discussed gender discrimination and religious discrimination in their two 15-minute oral arguments.
Kelly Curtis and Sae Yun, both second-year law students, comprised one of the two teams from UCLA.
“It’s really hard to be really prepared,” Yun said. “You can’t focus if you’re nervous.”
Curtis and Yun’s second round of the day was in front of a panel of two justices: Ferrando and Ronald Katsky, a litigator who attended the UCLA School of Law as well. During their argument, the team was off-brief, meaning it represented the hospital.
In response to Ferrando’s question about derogatory comments made to the nurse, Curtis argued that because Hall had been called “butch” and “sir,” the discrimination was based on her sexual orientation, a position which is not protected under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Gender discrimination is protected under that law.
During the opposing team’s argument, a duo from Northwestern University School of Law argued that Hall’s case should go to trial by a jury because of the ambiguity about whether the discrimination she faced was based on gender or sexual orientation.
Although the majority of states have legalized gay marriage, many still lack protections for LGBT individuals in the workplace, according to the Human Rights Campaign.
“You can get married on a Sunday and fired on a Monday for being gay,” said Tony Oncidi, head of the labor department of Proskauer Rose, a local law firm. He served as a justice during the moot court.
In July, President Barack Obama signed an executive order adding protection against discrimination of LGBT employees of federal contractors.
The protection, however, does not extend to employees of private companies. Twenty-nine states have no laws prohibiting sexual orientation discrimination and 32 have no gender identity protection in the workplace, according to the Human Rights Campaign.
Some contestants said part of the moot court’s attraction was the litigation experience and receiving critiques from judges.
“I wanted to be a part of something that helps with practical issues,” said Curtis, who is also a member of the UCLA Moot Court Honors Board.
Curtis, who hopes to become a litigator, said she participated because none of her classes offer her the hands-on experience of a moot court.
By the end of Saturday, two teams were left: one from Northwestern University School of Law and another from the University of Michigan Law School. The final round will be held on April 17 at UCLA.
Correction: Gender discrimination, not sexual orientation discrimination, is protected under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.