## Facts

- Diane J. Schroer, a highly decorated retired Army Colonel with extensive counterterrorism experience and a long-standing Top Secret/SCI clearance, applied for a terrorism specialist position with the Congressional Research Service (CRS) at the Library of Congress.
- Schroer applied and interviewed while presenting as male; CRS’s selection committee unanimously recommended her, and the selecting official, Charlotte Preece, extended and Schroer accepted an offer.
- After accepting, Schroer disclosed to Preece that she was transitioning from male to female and would begin work presenting as a woman.
- Following the disclosure, Preece reacted negatively, consulted others, sought photographs of Schroer presenting as female, and the Library rescinded the offer.
- The Library asserted nondiscriminatory reasons, including concerns about Schroer’s ability to obtain the required clearance, alleged “trustworthiness” concerns, and anticipated workplace disruption or distraction caused by her transition.
- Schroer sued under Title VII, alleging the offer was rescinded because of sex.

## Issues

1. Whether rescinding an accepted job offer because an applicant will transition and present as female constitutes sex discrimination under Title VII as impermissible sex stereotyping.
2. Whether discrimination against an applicant because of a change from male to female is direct discrimination “because of sex” under Title VII.
3. Whether the employer’s asserted reasons were pretext masking discriminatory motive.

## Decision

- The court entered judgment for Schroer after a bench trial, holding the Library violated Title VII by refusing to hire her because of sex.
- The court found the Library’s stated reasons were pretextual and not credible given Schroer’s qualifications and clearance history and the timing of the reversal after disclosure of her transition.
- The court held liability on two independent grounds:
  - rescission based on sex stereotyping prohibited by Title VII, and
  - rescission because of an intended change from male to female constitutes discrimination “because of sex.”
- The court awarded appropriate relief, including back pay and other remedies.

## Legal Principles

- Title VII prohibits employment actions motivated by sex-based stereotypes, including penalizing an individual for failing to conform to expectations associated with the person’s perceived sex.
- An employer who takes adverse action because a person is transitioning from one sex to another discriminates “because of sex” within Title VII’s text.
- Evidence that an employer praised and selected a candidate, then reversed course immediately after learning of gender transition, supports an inference that the stated reasons are pretext and that sex was the real motive.
- Discomfort with, or anticipated coworker or client reactions to, an employee’s gender transition is not a lawful justification for an adverse employment decision under Title VII.

## Conclusion

The court held that rescinding a job offer upon learning the applicant would transition and work as a woman was unlawful sex discrimination under Title VII, both as sex stereotyping and as direct discrimination because of sex, and it rejected the employer’s asserted justifications as pretext.


Schroer v. Billington, 577 F. Supp. 2d 293 (D.D.C. 2008)