Kansas Trans People Suing State For Right To Change Birth Certificates

Kansas is one of three states  (Ohio and Tennessee are the other two) that obstinately refuse to allow trans people born there  to change their birth certificates under any circumstances. 

It's BS, so four Kansas trans residents filed a federal lawsuit on October 15 to change that unjust policy.   I was happy to discover but not surprised to find out that two of the four people suing are my Kansas based BTAC fam in Luc Bensimon and Nyla Foster

The lawsuit argues that the Kansas policy violates the due process and equal protection clauses of the Constitution.   It's also arguing that the policy violates the plaintiff's free speech rights.

The other plaintiffs in the suit are a transperson person identified as C.K., Jessica Hicklin, and the Kansas Statewide Education project (K-STEP)

The defendants are Jeff Anderson, secretary of the Kansas Department of Health and Environment; Elizabeth W. Saadi, the Kansas state registrar; and Kay Haug, director of the state’s vital statistics office, a unit of the Kansas Department of Health and Environment.
Bensimon said the state's unjust policy made it easier for people to discriminate against him, “on top of the discrimination I already confront based on my disability.”

“I’m here to seek justice,” said Nyla Foster, a transgender woman and one of the plaintiffs. “My birth certificate does not reflect the gender I identify as, and I’m here to correct it so I can move forward with my life.”|

At a press conference in front of the federal courthouse in Kansas City, Kansas, Lambda legal attorney Omar Gonzalez-Pagan explained why it was challenging the state's transphobic documentation stance.

"A birth certificate is more than a piece of paper.It's the quintessential identity document that follows a person from birth to death.  It must reflect a person's identity."

Gonzales-Pagan also pointed out that birth certificates can determine access to education, employment, healthcare, travel and impact the ability to obtain other identity documents.

Good luck to you in overturning this unjust policy.  Thanks Lambda Legal for having our backs again.

US Seventh Circuit Court Of Appeals Full Panel Rules You Can't Be Fired For Being Gay

“I have been saying all this time that what happened to me wasn’t right and was illegal. Now I will have my day in court, thanks to this decision, No one should be fired for being lesbian, gay, or transgender like happened to me and it’s incredibly powerful to know that the law now protects me and other LGBT workers.”-Kimberly Hively

That's something I always believed and many Americans believed was already the case for TBLGQ Americans, but now we have a federal court decision to back that up in the Hively vs Ivy Tech Community College case.

On Tuesday a full panel of the US Seventh Circuit in Chicago by an 8-3 margin found that workplace discrimination based on sexual orientation violates Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

“… Hively represents the ultimate case of failure to conform to the female stereotype (at least as understood in a place such as modern America, which views heterosexuality as the norm and other forms of sexuality as exceptional): she is not heterosexual. Our panel described the line between a gender nonconformity claim and one based on sexual orientation as gossamer-thin; we conclude that it does not exist at all. Hively’s claim is no different from the claims brought by women who were rejected for jobs in traditionally male workplaces, such as fire departments, construction, and policing. The employers in those cases were policing the boundaries of what jobs or behaviors they found acceptable for a woman (or in some cases, for a man).”
-Chief Judge Diane Wood

This came just three weeks after a three judge panel in Atlanta ruled the other way that Title VII doesn't cover discrimination based on sexual orientation.

The plaintiff in this case, Kimberly Hively, was an instructor at Ivy Tech Community College  who in August 2014 sued the school with the help of Lambda Legal after she was seen kissing her girlfriend in the parking lot of the school and subsequently denied promotions and full employment.

Hively's suit argued that Ivy Tech violated Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.  The trial court dismissed her suit and claimed that Title VII of the CRA, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex, race, color, national origin and religion, doesn't protect employees from anti-gay discrimination.

In April 2015 Lambda Legal appealed the case to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals seeking a reversal of the trial court decision and reinstatement of Hively's complaint.  The three judge panel ruled against Hively in July 2016, but Lambda Legal requested it be heard by a full Seventh Circuit eleven judge panel.   The request was granted on October 11. 2016 and heard in November 2016.

What also makes this ruling notable is that the Seventh Circuit not only leans conservatives, five of the eight majority judges in this 8-3 decision were appointed by Republican presidents.

Once again, that 'strict constitutionalism' cuts both ways. so spare me any calls of 'judicial activism'.. You conservafools don't complain when those same federal judges make rulings in your direction.  .

“In many cities and states across the country, lesbian and gay workers are being fired because of who they love. But, with this decision, federal law is catching up to public opinion: ninety-percent of Americans already believe that LGBT employees should be valued for how well they do their jobs—not who they love or who they are. Now, through this case and others, that principle is backed up by the courts,” said Greg Nevins, Employment Fairness Program Director for Lambda Legal. who argued the case in front of the full Seventh Circuit judicial panel.  

“This decision is gamechanger for lesbian and gay employees facing discrimination in the workplace and sends a clear message to employers: it is against the law to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation.”

And it remains to be seen whether this decision gets litigated at the Supreme Court.      

Unjust Injunction Granted In Texas vs United States Trans Rights Case

The transphobic oppressors won a round in federal district court as US District Judge Reed O'Connor, a known anti-LGBT rights oppressor and GW Bush judicial appointee issued a preliminary nationwide injunction Sunday against the federal government's DOE/DOJ guidance to public schools regarding their legal responsibility to allow transgender students to use the same restrooms as other cisgender students.

Translation: the current jacked up status quo is in place until the lawsuit flied by my indicted attorney general works its way through the federal court system.  The federal government can appeal the injunction and request a stay of it if they wish to the appellate court or the SCOTUS.

All elections at every level of government matter.  Presidential elections matter because they get to select SCOTUS and federal judges.  If you're pissed off about this ruling, keep that in mind on November 8.

Lambda Legal, the ACLU of Texas, the Transgender Law Center, the GLBTQ Legal Advocates and Defenders (GLAD) and National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR) had submitted a joint friend of the court amicus brief in the lawsuit by Texas and 10 other Republican controlled states subsequently joined by two others against the United States, the Departments of Education, Justice and Labor and several federal officials

Those organizations issued a joint statement shortly after Judge O'Connor's unjust ruling.:

A ruling by a single judge in one circuit cannot and does not undo the years of clear legal precedent nationwide establishing that transgender students have the right to go to school without being singled out for discrimination. This unfortunate and premature ruling may, however, confuse school districts that are simply trying to support their students, including their transgender students.

 So let us make it clear to those districts: your obligations under the law have not changed, and you are still not only allowed but required to treat transgender students fairly.

The scope of this injunction has no effect on the ability of other courts or lawyers representing transgender people to continue to rely on the federal government’s interpretations of Title IX or on prior decisions that have reached similar conclusions about the scope of federal sex discrimination laws. 

The court’s misguided decision targets a small, vulnerable group of young people – transgender elementary and high school students – for potential continued harassment, stigma and abuse.

Those five civil rights organizations pointed out that Judge O'Connor failed to consider the interests of the transgender students the federal laws sought to protect,  and pledged "We will continue to file lawsuits representing transgender students and litigate them to the fullest extent of the law-regardless of what happens with this particular federal guidance."

Chuck Smith, the CEO of Equality Texas also expressed his organization's disappointed over the unjust ruling.

We are disappointed by the ruling, but despite this setback, we are hopeful and know that the civil rights of all students will ultimately prevail. 

Transgender Texans, and in particular transgender kids, must be afforded the most basic dignity to use the restroom. Paxton’s actions seek to punish and harm transgender students who have done nothing wrong. 

We will continue to fight with the parents of these children until “ALL” children do not face discrimination and are treated equally under the law.
An injunction doesn't change what existing law is. It would only apply to the DOJ's issuance of its interpretation. So schools still need to comply with the law. Title IX and VII still prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex.

This decision does nothing to prevent school districts to work with parents on an individual basis to ensure they are protected in school and do not face bullying, alienation or discrimination.

In the ruling, Judge O’Conner said, “the difficult policy issue is not a subject of his order.” We believe this civil rights issue will ultimately be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.

The band of trans oppressor states joining together to gleefully oppress trans students in addition to my home state of Texas, includes Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky (through its GOP Gov. Matt Bevin) Louisiana, Mississippi, (through its GOP Gov. Phil Bryant ), Oklahoma, Tennessee, Utah, West Virginia and Wisconsin.   Other plaintiffs seeking to oppress trans students are the  Arizona Department of Education, the Heber-Overgaard Unified School District in Arizona, Harrold ISD in Texas and Maine Gov. Paul LePage (R)

The good news is that many of these plaintiffs are in the Fourth, Sixth, Ninth and Eleventh Circuits which have already issued binding appellate rulings that are consistent with the guidance of the federal agencies.

This is just the opening rounds of this court battle.  I'm positive there is going to be a day coming soon that I will have good news to report when it comes to this Texas v United States case and common sense and justice will prevail.

Lambda Legal Statement On Texas Anti-Trans Lawsuit

The statement from Lambda Legal concerning the unjust lawsuit filed by Texas and 10 other states over the Obama Administration guidelines reminding them that federal law protects transgender students.

***

Today, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced that Texas and other states and officials have filed a lawsuit challenging the Obama Administration’s recently released guidance to schools across the country clarifying that federal law already prohibits discrimination against students based on gender identity. Paul D. Castillo, Staff Attorney in Lambda Legal’s South Central Regional Office in Dallas, issued the following statement:

 “By attacking laws that protect transgender people in schools and at work these state officials are determined to perpetuate fear, enshrine discrimination and endanger transgender people—and  students in particular. The suit filed today by Texas Attorney General Paxton completely and willfully misunderstands who transgender people are and the challenges they face in life. We are already in discussions with our partners here in Texas and elsewhere on next steps, and will move quickly to fight this attempt to turn back the clock. It is as true today as it has always been in the fight for civil rights: the discomfort of some can never be used to justify the discriminatory treatment of others.

“Across the country, including here in Texas, school districts have implemented without incident fair and inclusive policies that respect the rights and dignity of transgender students. In fact, accompanying the federal guidance issued two weeks ago was abundant documentation from school districts nationwide demonstrating successful implementation of these policies and the improved outcomes such respectful policies produce for all.

“Singling out transgender students for separate and unequal treatment is demeaning and harmful, and compelling them to use bathrooms that don’t correspond with their gender identity subjects them to potential abuse and harassment. All students deserve the opportunity to learn and thrive in school, free of harassment, discriminatory treatment and the threat of violence.”

***