In a legal filing this week, the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission expressed support for the city’s position that SEPTA should comply with the city’s LGBT-inclusive antibias law.
SEPTA refuses to comply with the city’s Fair Practices Ordinance, which forbids discrimination on the basis of various categories, including sexual orientation and gender identity. SEPTA is the region’s mass-transit system, serving more than 650,000 riders daily in Philadelphia, four surrounding counties and parts of New Jersey and Delaware.
In court papers, SEPTA claims adherence to the city’s FPO would be too expensive and burdensome.
In August, Commonwealth Court sided with SEPTA. The court noted that SEPTA is a state agency, thus it’s only subject to state antibias laws, which aren’t LGBT-inclusive. State antibias laws are enforced by PHRC.
The city is challenging the Commonwealth Court ruling in state Supreme Court. This week, PHRC filed a “friend of the court” brief, supporting the city’s position.
“The position of the PHRC is simple,” the filing states. “The PHRC rejects SEPTA’s contention that it’s not subject to the Fair Practices Ordinance. It is the position of PHRC that the legislature intended SEPTA to be subject to the FPO. This furthers the goal of the commonwealth to eradicate unlawful discrimination within the commonwealth.”
The “plain language” of state law requires SEPTA to abide by the city’s FPO, which is enforced by the Philadelphia Commission on Human Relations, the filing adds.
“Any conclusion that the Philadelphia Commission on Human Relations does not have authority over SEPTA, a local authority, would blatantly disregard the plain language of the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act,” the filing states.
The state Human Relations Act encourages local antibias efforts and doesn’t make an exemption for SEPTA, according to the filing.
“The [act] provides for the concurrent and robust enforcement of local anti-discrimination ordinances. And the Fair Practices Ordinance should be so enforced.”
The highly contentious litigation began in 2009, after trans woman Charlene Arcila complained to the city’s Human Relations Commission about SEPTA’s placement of gender stickers on transpasses.
Arcila died in April 2015, and SEPTA no longer places gender stickers on transpasses. But Arcila’s complaint remains held in abeyance, due to the possibility that monetary damages will be awarded to her estate.
In a 66-page brief filed this week, the city urged the high court to vacate the Commonwealth Court ruling and order SEPTA to comply with local antibias laws. According to the city, it’s an urgent civil-rights issue.
This week, Mazzoni Center and the ACLU of Pennsylvania also filed a “friend of the court” brief in support of the city’s position.
“If the Commonwealth Court’s decision is not reversed, the power of municipalities to enforce anti-discrimination law that has been in effect for more than six decades will be undermined,” the brief states.
Andrew A. Chirls, a pro-bono attorney for Mazzoni Center and ACLU of Pennsylvania, disputed SEPTA’s position.
“This could set a bad precedent for a lot of regional agencies set up by the state government who might want to claim the same exemption as SEPTA,” Chirls told PGN. “SEPTA claims they don’t have to follow local laws because it’s too complicated and expensive. It makes no sense in light of the fact that private employers that operates in a lot of towns have to follow all the local antibias laws.”
Patrick M. Northen, a lead attorney for SEPTA, declined to comment for this story.
“We will respond when we file our brief, in accordance with the rule of appellate procedure,” Northen told PGN.