For many folks I talk to regularly, 2017 has felt like an eternity. The daily drum beat of policy proclamations, the rushed consideration of harmful legislation through of harmful bills in Congress, and Tweets from the Trump White House have served as a daily reminder to the challenges faced today by those who cherish our Constitution and want to expand access to basic rights for many. It has been a long, hard, and constant fight.

Last week, someone I know expressed concern as the calendar turns over to a new year. They stated their apprehension that 2018 might well be more difficult than 2017.  They further expressed concern that people will just give up and accept the “new normal.” 

I don’t share this pessimism. Not in the least. I don’t see fear, I see hope.

2017 has demonstrated to me what is possible if we work together in the State of Illinois. Against the backdrop of all the craziness in Washington, we saw an important and meaningful expansion of access to abortion care in Illinois. After a push that has taken many years, Medicaid will now pay for abortion care in Illinois, and allow low income women to receive the same access to reproductive health care as anyone else.

We have seen bi-partisan support for fixing the dreadful civil asset forfeiture process in Illinois, forcing the State to prove that a resident’s property is not taken without some meaningful evidence that it was used in a crime. This horrific system is being promoted by Attorney General Jeff Sessions at the federal level, making our state improvements even more important. 

We saw our state modernize its vital records laws, allowing those who are transgender to update the gender marker on their birth certificate without unnecessary and expensive surgery. The measure was possible through the courageous testimony of many people who are transgender and their families, courage magnified by the hostility that emanates from the Trump Administration. 

But there is something more fundamental that makes me optimistic. You. 

Over the course of 2017 I did more than 125 speaking engagements in communities all across Illinois. While I saw lots of friendly faces, it was striking in each and every community to see new advocates, new participants in our democratic system. 

And, what I have seen has been so amazing. In the Northwest suburbs of Chicago, I saw people outraged and committed to addressing the problems of racism in our criminal justice system. In Peoria, I heard the cheers of an auditorium of Muslim worshippers when I said the ACLU would protect the rights of LGBTQ people across the nation. In a unique and important show of unity, I have seen advocacy groups who work on a variety of different issues join together to stand up for immigrants and refugees. 

It was moving to see in 2017 the mothers of students who are transgender work together, go door-to-door and win a critical election for school board that might have affected their children and others like them. It was inspiring to see men and women who never participated in an advocacy effort before the 2016 election raise an important issue for our state – Illinois’ participation in the “Crosscheck” system – and engage state legislators in that effort. Illinoisans are engaging, protesting, advocating, and showing up for each other like never before. It was exhilarating to speak to a ballroom full of people in Normal who just want fairness for immigrant families. 

In short, in these dark times, I have seen the best of people. I have seen that their hopes are not for discrimination and exclusion, but for fairness and inclusion. And, because I have seen that resistance, that persistence and that insistence on the part of so many across Illinois, I am hopeful as we enter 2018. And I look forward to working with all of you to build the kind of Illinois that we all want.      

Imagine you’re at work and your boss tells you he is firing you because he is “old school” and believes that a woman should really stay home to care for her children. You would think that “he can’t do that. It’s sex discrimination.” Maybe not if a recent court decision is allowed to stand. 

For decades, the U.S. Supreme Court has interpreted the equality protections of the U.S. Constitution and federal non-discrimination laws to require courts to look carefully at the reasons the government and employers give for treating people differently. We fought hard for this longstanding legal precedent so we can better realize the promise of equal opportunity for all to participate fully in their workplace, at school, and at home – free from popular assumptions about their capacity to do so.

Recently, the ACLU of Illinois weighed in on a case before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in an effort to ensure that this important legal principle is not undermined. In its recent opinion in Tagami v. City of Chicago, a majority of the three-judge panel affirmed the dismissal of an equal protection challenge to a Chicago municipal ordinance that makes it illegal for women – but not men – to bare their breasts in public.

Although the Seventh Circuit correctly recognized that the ordinance distinguishes based on sex, and thus must be reviewed under heightened scrutiny, it ignored that standard and instead relied solely on “traditional moral norms and public order” it claimed were “self-evident.” While this result may seem unsurprising at first glance – we have all become so used to the idea that women are not allowed to bare their breasts – it is startling in its potential impact.  

If women can’t expose their breasts, why should men have that right? In answering this question, the Seventh Circuit fell back on “traditional moral norms” without even requiring the City of Chicago to offer any evidence for why women should be treated differently. Doing so runs counter to the teachings of the Supreme Court and throws decades of precedent into doubt.

If traditional notions of morality alone could justify differential treatment based on gender, many discriminatory laws rooted in assumptions about gender roles would have remained on the books. As Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg recently noted, there was once a time “when the law books of our Nation were rife with overbroad generalizations about the way men and women are.”

Under existing precedent, courts are required to do better. By suggesting that so-called “self-evident” traditional moral norms alone are sufficient to satisfy this standard, the Seventh Circuit has created troubling uncertainty for all people who rely on sex discrimination protections in federal law. If traditional moral norms are considered a legitimate basis for gender-based distinctions, employers could deny women jobs in traditionally male-dominated fields because they are perceived as not being strong – or feminine – enough. Gay or transgender people could be fired because they failed to meet popular gender norms about how people should look or live their lives.

Established precedent makes clear that these actions are not permitted, but the Seventh Circuit’s recent decision has created unnecessary ambiguity and risk. It has an opportunity to fix its error and secure the rights of citizens who seek to foster equality by overcoming gender-based stereotypes that long have limited opportunities for many Americans. Refusing to do so could pave the way for a return to the days when governments and private parties were free to rely on arbitrary stereotypes and notions of morality to discriminate based on gender.