[PAST EVENT] Discussion with Professor William N. Eskridge, Jr.: "On the basis of sex"
Join Professor William Eskridge of Yale Law School for a discussion of whether federal antidiscrimination law prohibits workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and transgender status. These topics are being argued before the Supreme Court this month. Come hear about it and ask questions of one of the nation’s leading experts on antidiscrimination law and statutory interpretation. Sponsored by the Equality Alliance.
About Professor Eskridge
Professor William N. Eskridge, Jr. is the John A. Garver Professor of Jurisprudence at Yale Law School.
Born and raised in Princeton, West Virginia, Professor Eskridge received his B.A., summa cum laude, from Davidson College in 1973 and his Master’s degree in History from Harvard University in 1974. At Harvard, his primary Master’s thesis analyzed the political thought of the Marian exiles (1553-58). Professor Eskridge earned his J.D. from Yale Law School, where he was the Note & Topics Editor of The Yale Law Journal (1977-78). After clerking for Judge Edward Weinfeld and practicing law at Shea & Gardner, he became a law professor. His primary academic homes have been the Georgetown University Law Center (1987-98) and the Yale Law School (1998-present), but Professor Eskridge has also taught at NYU, Stanford, Toronto, Harvard, Columbia, Virginia, and Vanderbilt. His primary legal academic interest has been statutory interpretation. Together, Professor Eskridge and Professor Philip Frickey (a friend from Shea & Gardner) developed an innovative casebook on Legislation. Professor Eskridge has also published a monograph and several dozen law review articles (many with Frickey) on statutory interpretation theory and practice. Professors Eskridge and Frickey's project has been to understand the dynamics of statutory evolution and the proper methodology judges should apply when construing statutes. In 1990-95, Professor Eskridge represented a gay couple suing for recognition of their same-sex marriage. Since then, he has published a field-establishing casebook, three monographs, and dozens of law review articles articulating a legal and political framework for proper state treatment of sexual and gender minorities. The historical materials in his book on Gaylaw formed the basis for an amicus brief he drafted for the Cato Institute and for much of the Court’s (and the dissenting opinion’s) analysis in Lawrence v. Texas (2003), which invalidated consensual sodomy laws.