Labor & Employment Law Daily Wrap Up, LITIGATION NEWS, TRENDS—Lawsuit against Chicago Blackhawks alleges discrimination based on sexual orientation, (Aug 21, 2025)

By Patricia K. Ruiz, J.D.

The plaintiff was fired shortly after the publication of his interview with Outsports, a website covering LBGTQ+ issues and individuals in sports.

A lawsuit filed by a former employee of Chicago Blackhawk Hockey Team, Inc. (employer) alleges that the employer terminated the employee from his position as manager of public relations one day after he complained to his supervisor that he was being criticized for participating in a media interview. The lawsuit, which the former employee filed in the Northern District of Illinois after receiving a Notice of Right to Sue from the EEOC, alleges the proffered reasons for the termination are pretextual and that the true reasons were discrimination based on sexual orientation and retaliation for engaging in protected activity.

Alleged discrimination. The former employee reported to the head of the Brand and Marketing Department, who the lawsuit alleges treated the former employee differently than other similarly situated employees he supervised, discriminating against him because of his sexual orientation. The former employee reported the department head to human resources for his hostile and aggressive actions toward him and for other marketing-related issues. Soon after, the department head retaliated by increasing his hostile actions toward him.

Outsports interview. On April 1, 2024, the employee received a performance review with a perfect rating. On April 4, Outsports, a website covering LBGTQ+ issues and individuals in sports, presented him with an opportunity to share his experiences of being a homosexual male in the world of a professional hockey organization. The employee discussed the opportunity with the organization’s chairman/chief executive officer, through text message and in-person at the CEO’s office. The CEO gave his approval to the employee to interview with Outsports and stated that the article would be beneficial to the organization’s reputation in the LBGTQ+ community. The article was published on April 29, 2024.

Termination. Despite having obtained approval from the CEO to participate in the interview, the employer’s director of brand and communications advised the employee that the publication had been flagged and that the department was very angry about the article. Subsequently, the employee advised his supervisor that he believed the criticism was because of the director’s sexual orientation-based discrimination. The employer terminated his employment the following day, May 3, 2024.

The employee argued that the proximity between his complaint about discrimination and his termination is direct evidence of retaliation and that the employer’s stated reasons for termination—alleged policy violations and performance deficiencies—were fabricated, exaggerated, or not the actual basis for the decision and that similarly situated employees outside of the former employee’s protected class who engaged in comparable conduct were not terminated.

Claims; relief requested. The employee brought claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for discrimination based on sexual orientation and retaliation. He requested that the court declare the employer’s conduct violated Title VII, and award back pay with interest, front pay, lost benefits, and compensatory and punitive damages.

The case is No. 1:25-cv-09720.

News: LitigationNewsTrends Discrimination SexDiscrimination Retaliation Discharge