构筑黄砖路:防止金融服务中对LGBTQ+群体的歧视

Cyrus Mostaghim
{"title":"构筑黄砖路:防止金融服务中对LGBTQ+群体的歧视","authors":"Cyrus Mostaghim","doi":"10.36639/mbelr.11.1.constructing","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, and Questioning (“LGBTQ+”) community lacks explicit statutory protections from discrimination in financial services. After the Supreme Court held in Bostock that employment discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity was illegal, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) issued an informal interpretive rule for the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) and Regulation B that made discrimination in the access to credit based on sexual orientation or gender identity illegal.\n\nHowever, this article argues that an informal interpretive rule is easily rescinded and does not provide sufficient protection. Thus, alternative action is needed to create ore durable protection from discrimination against the LGBTQ+ community in the provision of financial services. Additionally, the increased use of AI in the financial industry magnifies the need for more durable protections to prevent the accidental usage of biased data to build and train the industry’s AI algorithms.\n\nThis article examines the potential and limitations of existing consumer protection laws, possible pathways to create more permanent protection, and potential impacts from regulatory changes. This article also considers additional regulatory changes to other consumer protection statutes that may be needed to enable the identification of discriminatory acts. These changes may require financial institutions to collect sexual orientation and gender identity data – something that must be done with sensitivity because of a data privacy issue unique to the community: accidental outing.","PeriodicalId":333345,"journal":{"name":"Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Constructing the Yellow Brick Road: Preventing Discrimination in Financial Services Against the LGBTQ+ Community\",\"authors\":\"Cyrus Mostaghim\",\"doi\":\"10.36639/mbelr.11.1.constructing\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, and Questioning (“LGBTQ+”) community lacks explicit statutory protections from discrimination in financial services. After the Supreme Court held in Bostock that employment discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity was illegal, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) issued an informal interpretive rule for the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) and Regulation B that made discrimination in the access to credit based on sexual orientation or gender identity illegal.\\n\\nHowever, this article argues that an informal interpretive rule is easily rescinded and does not provide sufficient protection. Thus, alternative action is needed to create ore durable protection from discrimination against the LGBTQ+ community in the provision of financial services. Additionally, the increased use of AI in the financial industry magnifies the need for more durable protections to prevent the accidental usage of biased data to build and train the industry’s AI algorithms.\\n\\nThis article examines the potential and limitations of existing consumer protection laws, possible pathways to create more permanent protection, and potential impacts from regulatory changes. This article also considers additional regulatory changes to other consumer protection statutes that may be needed to enable the identification of discriminatory acts. These changes may require financial institutions to collect sexual orientation and gender identity data – something that must be done with sensitivity because of a data privacy issue unique to the community: accidental outing.\",\"PeriodicalId\":333345,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.36639/mbelr.11.1.constructing\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36639/mbelr.11.1.constructing","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

女同性恋、男同性恋、双性恋、变性人、酷儿和质疑者(LGBTQ+)群体在金融服务中缺乏明确的法律保护,不受歧视。在最高法院裁定基于性取向或性别认同的就业歧视是非法的博斯托克案之后,消费者金融保护局(CFPB)对《平等信贷机会法》(ECOA)和条例B发布了一项非正式解释规则,规定基于性取向或性别认同的信贷歧视是非法的。然而,本文认为,非正式解释性规则很容易被撤销,并没有提供足够的保护。因此,需要采取其他行动,在提供金融服务时为LGBTQ+社区提供持久的保护,使其免受歧视。此外,金融行业越来越多地使用人工智能,这加大了对更持久保护的需求,以防止意外使用有偏见的数据来构建和训练行业的人工智能算法。本文研究了现有消费者保护法的潜力和局限性,创造更永久保护的可能途径,以及监管变化的潜在影响。本文还考虑了可能需要对其他消费者保护法规进行的额外监管变更,以便能够识别歧视性行为。这些变化可能要求金融机构收集性取向和性别认同数据——由于社区独有的数据隐私问题:意外外出,因此必须谨慎行事。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Constructing the Yellow Brick Road: Preventing Discrimination in Financial Services Against the LGBTQ+ Community
The Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, and Questioning (“LGBTQ+”) community lacks explicit statutory protections from discrimination in financial services. After the Supreme Court held in Bostock that employment discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity was illegal, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) issued an informal interpretive rule for the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) and Regulation B that made discrimination in the access to credit based on sexual orientation or gender identity illegal. However, this article argues that an informal interpretive rule is easily rescinded and does not provide sufficient protection. Thus, alternative action is needed to create ore durable protection from discrimination against the LGBTQ+ community in the provision of financial services. Additionally, the increased use of AI in the financial industry magnifies the need for more durable protections to prevent the accidental usage of biased data to build and train the industry’s AI algorithms. This article examines the potential and limitations of existing consumer protection laws, possible pathways to create more permanent protection, and potential impacts from regulatory changes. This article also considers additional regulatory changes to other consumer protection statutes that may be needed to enable the identification of discriminatory acts. These changes may require financial institutions to collect sexual orientation and gender identity data – something that must be done with sensitivity because of a data privacy issue unique to the community: accidental outing.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信