Here is the United States’ amicus brief in Zarda v. Altitude Express (2d Cir. 15-3775 July 26, 2017), in which the government argues that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 should not be interpreted to cover employment discrimination based on on employee’s sexual orientation.
The government argues, inter alia:
The question presented is not whether, as a matter of policy, sexual orientation discrimination should be prohibited by statute, regulations, or employer action. In fact, Congress and the Executive Branch have prohibited such discrimination in various contexts. … The sole question here is whether, as a matter of law, Title VII reaches sexual orientation discrimination. It does not, as has been settled for decades. Any efforts to amend Title VII’s scope should be directed to Congress rather than the courts. [Brief p. 2; ECF p. 10 of 36.]
Interestingly, in a separate amicus brief, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) – which is part of the federal government – has taken the opposite position.