i think commissioner achtenberg set for 20 years. it's been controversial and it hasn't passed yet and suddenly it sounds like well it covers all of this anyway. could you tell me what endo would cover that you believe is not covered by title vii? >> i think the main issue with respect to endo that i could comment on is that the courts have not taken a uniform position by any means with respect to the interpretations of title vii sex discrimination. >> were there some cases you didn't discuss with us that found these theories were inappropriate and not covered by title vii? >> certainly there are number of those cases. >> why did you leave them out of your first testimony? >> i didn't. they are discussed in the cases such as the mohammed brief. this facts brief reference in my testimony. the commission goes through its analysis and discusses why those decisions in its view don't use the direct analysis. but there certainly are a wide range of approaches that the case law is not consistent. there are particularly on the sexual orienta

. >> commissioner achtenberg. followed by commissioner yaki. >> i have a question, there was reference there were over 50 studies of discrimination that have been undertaken, the conclusion of which studies were that employment discrimination against lgbt people is significant and pervasive. in 2007 an analysis was done by the williams institute which drew the same conclusion. it's my understanding that for more than 40 years your organization has made available to lgbt people a nationwide advice and counselling line. i'm imagining you have gathered statistics over that period of time as well. could you discuss how the conclusions of the 50 studies and the williams institute analysis compares to the statistics that you have gathered over this period and could you also identify the kinds of discrimination that your callers identify as pertinent to this particular inquiry that we're undertaking here? >> yes. thank you for that. what we see is very consistent with what the studies and the reports see and so to your q

>> i join commissioner achtenberg for her rejection. spent add me as well then, for the record. >> why are we having a briefing? >> because there are some actual series issues about how you best implement this, and as you and i have debated on many issues, there are a lot of gray areas that even if you disagree on something, hopefully we can find some common ground to improve the entire framework. i think this is, in fact, a very important enterprise. i wanted to start by addressing commissioner kirsanow's concern regarding the makeup of the panel. i believe that staff did invite a broad range of you to be present in fact all commissioners are invited to present ideas for staff of people to be invited and to help staff actually recruit people, and, of course, we ask many groups are interested in stakeholders who may be watching on air to know that they have, that they have is it 30 days? >> yes. >> my mic won't stay on. >> use this one for now. >> that we have 30 days for people to submit written comments. so if you are out there and ha

. >> commissioner achtenberg. >> i have a question there was reference there were over 50 studies of discrimination that have been under taken, the conclusion of which studies were that employment discrimination against lgbt people is significant and pervasive. in 2007 an analysis was done by the williams institute which drew the same conclusion. it's my understanding that for more than 40 years your organization has made available to lgbt people a nationwide advice and counselling line. i'm imagining you have gathered statistics over that period of time as well. could you discuss how the conclusions of the 50 stew dips and the williams institute analysis compares to the statistics that you have gathered over this period and could you also identify the kinds of discrimination that your callers identify as pertinent to this particular inquiry that we're undertaking here? >> yes. what we see is very consistent with what the studies and the reports see and so to your question and also to vice chair's question many of the calls that we get are from individuals in these 29 states where th

vice chair or new vice chair patricia timmons goodson as well as commissioners narasaki, herriot achtenberg and kladney. commissioner is joining us by phone. and the purpose of the briefing as i indicated is going to be to examine the equal protection concerns that we had raised with the department of homeland security, and immigration customs and enforcement over the treatment of adult and minor detainees in representative detention centers across the country that are being held under federal law. experts you'll see at the course of this briefing are going to talk to us about both the issues that they face from the government perspective, as well as from the ngo perspective, and other activists and individuals who have information to share with us on this important topic. from a personal perspective, i want to once again reiterate a thanks to all of my colleagues for approving this hearing. this is an issue that's been important not only to me but to the commission. the commission has looked at the issue of immigration for many years, starting in 1980, with our seminal report on the tarnis