Post a 300-word main post to the weekly discussion question below:

Theodore Rosenblatt, a white attorney, worked for the law firm of Bivona & Cohen, P.C. When Bivona & Cohen terminated Rosenblatts employment, he filed a suit in a federal district court against the firm. Rosenblatt claimed that he had been discharged because he was married to an African American and that a discharge for such a reason violated Title VII and other laws. The firm filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing that he was alleging discrimination against his wife, not himself, and thus did not have standing to sue under Title VII for racial discrimination. Should the court grant or deny the motion?

Does the Supreme Court's ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County affect your answer when it held: "[In Title VII of the] Civil Rights Act of 1964 ... Congress outlawed discrimination in the workplace on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Today, we must decide whether an employer can fire someone simply for being homosexual or transgender. The answer is clear. An employer who fires an individual for being homosexual or transgender fires that person for traits or actions it would not have questioned in members of a different sex. [Thus,] Sex plays a necessary and undisguisable role in the decision, exactly what Title VII forbids... When the express terms of a statute give us one answer and [other] considerations suggest another, its no contest. Only the written word is the law, and all persons are entitled to its benefit."