## Facts

- Medina Rene, an openly gay male, worked as a butler on the MGM Grand’s VIP floor from 1993 to 1996, where the butlers and their supervisor were all male.
- Rene alleged that, over roughly two years, male coworkers and a supervisor harassed him on an almost daily basis.
- The alleged conduct included repeated sexualized verbal and gestural acts (e.g., blowing kisses, calling him “sweetheart” and “muñeca,” crude jokes, sexual “joke” gifts, and forcing him to view explicit images).
- Rene also alleged frequent unwelcome physical conduct of a sexual nature, including hugging and caressing, grabbing his crotch, and digitally poking his anus through clothing.
- Rene believed he was targeted because he was gay.
- Rene sued under Title VII, alleging a hostile work environment based on sex.
- The district court granted summary judgment to MGM, treating the alleged harassment as sexual-orientation-based rather than discrimination “because of sex.”
- Rene appealed, and the Ninth Circuit heard the case en banc.

## Issues

1. Whether severe or pervasive, unwelcome physical conduct of a sexual nature by same-sex coworkers and a supervisor can constitute discrimination “because of sex” under Title VII.
2. Whether a plaintiff’s allegation that harassment was motivated by sexual orientation bars a Title VII hostile-work-environment claim when the alleged conduct is sexual and abusive.

## Decision

- The Ninth Circuit (en banc) reversed the summary judgment for MGM and remanded.
- The court held that allegations of severe or pervasive unwelcome physical conduct of a sexual nature can state a Title VII hostile-work-environment claim “because of sex,” including in same-sex settings.
- The court rejected the view that the plaintiff’s sexual orientation, or the harassers’ possible sexual-orientation-related hostility, categorically defeats a sex-based harassment claim when the conduct otherwise fits Title VII’s sexual harassment framework.
- The court concluded that a reasonable jury could find the alleged conduct sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of employment and create an abusive working environment.

## Legal Principles

- Title VII permits hostile-work-environment claims based on “severe or pervasive” unwelcome harassment that alters the conditions of employment and creates an abusive environment.
- Same-sex sexual harassment is actionable under Title VII when the evidence supports an inference that the harassment occurred “because of sex.”
- A plaintiff’s sexual orientation is not, by itself, a required element of a Title VII sex-harassment claim and does not automatically preclude one; the focus is whether the workplace conduct constitutes sex-based harassment under Title VII standards.
- Summary judgment is improper where the record would allow a reasonable jury to find repeated, unwelcome physical conduct of a sexual nature that is severe or pervasive.

## Conclusion

The Ninth Circuit held that repeated unwelcome sexual touching and other sexually explicit harassment by male coworkers and a supervisor could support a Title VII hostile-work-environment claim “because of sex,” even where the plaintiff also believed the harassment was tied to his sexual orientation, and it remanded for further proceedings.


Rene v. MGM Grand Hotel, Inc., 305 F.3d 1061 (9th Cir. 2002) (en banc)