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.

"Active, Intentional Dialogue"

There is still palpable anger and feelings of betrayal in Trans World over NCLR and the Task Force withdrawing their  support from an Equality Michigan sponsored petition that has the goal of ending the trans feminine exclusion for those trans women who desire to go to the Michigan Womyn's Music Festival.

The intent is to engage in 'active, intentional, dialogue with a long time foe of the trans community in the hopes she will reverse their longtime ban on trans women entering The Land'.

Active, intentional dialogue with someone like Lisa Vogel who doesn't even trcognize the humanity of trans women?   Yeah, right.  I have some waterfront property I'd like to sell you along I-10 in the Atchafalaya Swamp.

Toni D'orsay  has written a post at her Dyssonance blog commenting on the controversy:

There are folks who know Kate and Rea better than I do.  By far. One thing I do know is that both of them have a common history that is very much a commonality among many lesbian leaders of established organizations.  In something that goes back as far as the involvement of lesbians with the work for women that Eleanor Roosevelt did, there is a strong and persistent line of what we think of today as radical feminism that informs them and their outlook on the world.

I am not a lesbian, I am bisexual, and I share much of that — it is part of the time and place and the world we grew up in.

Like most, though, they backed away from the uglier parts of it as trans people moved forward and they knew the lies they were being told were lies.

But they also understand that mindset — far better than most of my peers do.  Not all — and believe me, I am not saying they are part of the TERF movement, they are merely people who understand it.  They are, after all, cis women, and one of the most potent attacks that the TERFs have been using is the whole basis behind the argument about trans women and cis women being lovers and the problems around that.

Because they incorporate an element of “lesbian hate” into their arguments. One that ignores the fact that said hate is coming from other lesbians, but that’s because they refuse to see them as women, and therefore not lesbians.

Exciting, isn’t it?

Here's the link to the rest of the Dyssonance post entitled ''Active Intentional Dialogue': Michfest, NCLR and the Task Force  that definitely needs to be signal boosted.