Attorney General Nessel Files Brief to Safeguard Workers from Unjust Discrimination by Employers

LANSING – Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel has joined a coalition of 20 attorneys general in filing an amicus brief (PDF) in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Zinski v. Liberty University. The brief, filed in support of plaintiff Ellenor Zinski, urges the Court to affirm Zinski’s right to sue her former employer, Liberty University, for sex-based discrimination after Liberty fired her upon learning of her identity as a transgender woman. The coalition explains that the lower court’s ruling protects states’ ability to enforce employment anti-discrimination laws.  

“No employee should lose their livelihood simply because of who they are,” Nessel said. “Liberty University’s actions against Ms. Zinski are a clear violation of the law, and I stand with my colleagues in urging the Court to uphold her right to seek justice, because workers should be judged by their performance, not gender identity.” 

Zinski was hired by Liberty University in February 2023 to work at its IT Help Desk. In July 2023, after the end of the 90-day probationary period, Zinski notified the university’s human resources department of her identity as a transgender woman and that she planned to legally change her first name to Ellenor. One month later, Liberty University terminated her employment, asserting that, as a religious institution, it was entitled to fire her because of her transgender status.  

In July 2024, Zinski sued the university, arguing that her termination violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of sex. In April 2025, a federal judge denied Liberty’s motion to dismiss Zinski’s case. The university appealed that decision.  

In their brief, Attorney General Nessel and the coalition argue that although Liberty incorrectly claims that the First Amendment right of expressive association – which can allow groups to exclude members if exclusion is necessary to preserve the group’s identity or message – justifies its actions, court precedent does not support applying expressive association in employment scenarios. The coalition also argues that the First Amendment’s ministerial exception – which shields religious institutions’ ability to select individuals for “certain key roles” from antidiscrimination laws – does not bar Zinski’s claims, as she performed purely secular and administrative duties.    

If Liberty’s weaponization of the First Amendment were to prevail, the coalition asserts that it would dramatically constrict states’ ability to enforce employment discrimination laws. As such, the coalition asks the Court to uphold the lower court’s ruling and reject Liberty’s motion to dismiss Zinski’s case.  

Joining Attorney General Nessel in submitting this brief are the attorneys general of California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawai'i, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin.