I’m not sure what the choice is. Option A, accept bad laws and don’t challenge them. Option B, challenge them unsuccessfully. Why does B result in a worse outcome than A?
you write as if this is something soon remedied
You wait. Choose the time of the battle. You can appeal to the appellate court, lose, and then rest. You do not have to request an appeal to the SC. Wait until the time is right.
Btw, it you win at the appeals level, you can bet your bottom dollar the current administration will make its own appeal. The federal government itself will line up against the cause. Not even sure it is worth risking a favorable appellate decision, frankly.
You write as though you can change the polling results on trans athletes in a few months. I think its gonna be slower than you think.
1 Like
I’m beginning to doubt the competence of plaintiffs’ lawyers in all these cases that overturn simple civil liberties and rights. They do not seem to be making a solid case and instead are simply saying, “I mean, come on.”
No, I have not read any cases.
Legal Eagle has read some dissenting opinions in some of the recent SC cases and it is pretty clear that at least 3 justices see solid cases and consider what the others are doing as either completing ignoring law/Constitution or just making sh*t up.
It’s incredible to hear some of the Justices consistently calling out the majority as eroding the rule of law and the credibility of the courts by enacting preferential justice, and everybody shrugs.
1 Like
Precedent is set. In theory, precedent set by SCOTUS is difficult to reverse.
(Not that you can tell with the current Court…but a SCOTUS that flip-flops whenever its political balance shifts is not something we should want.)
But as you mention this current court has almost no respect for precedent.
It will be interesting what future courts do with that, but this one has pretty much thrown it out the window the past few years and an ever increasing rate on a multitude of issues.
Damned activist justices.
Yeah, really. For people that pretend to care what the founding fathers meant, they sure do a good job of ignoring it when convenient.
2 Likes
State Department said in a court filing today that they are keeping a list of all trans people that are being issued passports under the injunction and plans on revoking them once it is overturned.
(Gift link)
Pride erasure by the administration is now hitting bisexuals. Some evolution of the Stonewall National Monument page:
Factual note: In addition to key figures at Stonewall being trans, many of the early pride organizers were openly bi.
1 Like
It isn’t enough to cave and do what the right wants. They still want retribution.
On Thursday, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed a lawsuit against a fitness nonprofit called U.S. Masters Swimming, for allowing two trans women to compete in an event in San Antonio in April. The lawsuit cites “false, deceptive, and misleading practices” as the basis for the suit. Florida AG James Uthmeier also threatened legal action against the organization on Tuesday if the organization did not fully bar trans women from competing in the women’s category.
Paxton first announced an investigation into the membership based group in May. In response, USMS changed its policies for trans women to no longer “be included in Recognition Programs unless they are swimming in the competition category that aligns with their sex assigned at birth.” The lawsuit says this policy change is “too little, too late,” going on to say, “U.S. Masters Swimming swindled countless women and it must be held accountable.” The tactic used here, that equates trans acceptance to fraud, is closely tied to the Republican goal of exterminating trans people from public life.
1 Like
Big Brother is watching.
“The agreement also includes a clause that empowers the federal government to take “further action” to enforce compliance.”
This part sounds ominous.
It’s almost like when prominent conservatives meant it when they said things like “Transgenderism must be eradicated from public life entirely–the whole preposterous ideology, at every level.”