Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/19pdf/17-1618_hfci.pdf
Page Number: 67

30 

BOSTOCK v. CLAYTON COUNTY 

ALITO, J., dissenting 

This view of homosexuality was reflected in the rules gov-
erning the federal work force.  In 1964, federal “[a]gencies
could  deny  homosexual  men  and  women  employment  be-
cause of their sexual orientation,” and this practice contin-
ued  until  1975.    GAO,  D.  Heivilin,  Security  Clearances:
Consideration of Sexual Orientation in the Clearance Pro-
cess 2 (GAO/NSIAD–95–21, 1995).  See, e.g., Anonymous v. 
Macy, 398 F. 2d 317, 318 (CA5 1968) (affirming dismissal of 
postal employee for homosexual acts). 

In 1964, individuals who were known to be homosexual 
could not obtain security clearances, and any who possessed 
clearances were likely to lose them if their orientation was
discovered.  A  1953  Executive  Order  provided  that  back-
ground  investigations  should  look  for  evidence  of  “sexual 
perversion,” as well as “[a]ny criminal, infamous, dishonest,
immoral, or notoriously disgraceful conduct.”  Exec. Order 
No.  10450,  §8(a)(1)(iii),  3  CFR  938  (1949–1953  Comp.).
“Until about 1991, when agencies began to change their se-
curity  policies  and  practices  regarding  sexual  orientation,
there  were  a  number  of  documented  cases  where  defense 
civilian  or  contractor  employees’  security  clearances  were
denied  or  revoked  because  of  their  sexual  orientation.” 
GAO, Security Clearances, at 2.  See, e.g., Adams v. Laird, 
420 F. 2d 230, 240 (CADC 1969) (upholding denial of secu-
rity  clearance  to  defense  contractor  employee  because  he 
had “engaged in repeated homosexual acts”); see also Web-
ster v. Doe, 486 U. S. 592, 595, 601 (1988) (concluding that 
decision to fire a particular individual because he was ho-
mosexual fell within the “discretion” of the Director of Cen-
tral  Intelligence  under  the  National  Security  Act  of  1947
and thus was unreviewable under the APA).

The picture in state employment was similar.  In 1964, it 
was common for States to bar homosexuals from serving as
teachers.  An article summarizing the situation 15 years af-
ter  Title  VII  became  law  reported  that  “[a]ll  states  have 
statutes that permit the revocation of teaching certificates