💬 Off-Topic Transgender Legislation and Litigation

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Late, gay etc

Izdaja Slika said:
Australia's ABC, still completely captured by trans ideology of course, avoids all pronouns for the offender, calls him a 'parent' (he's the father) and uses the pseudonym 'Maloney' for him.
Click to expand...

As pozzed as it is normally, the ABC must by law refer to him by a pseudonym. It is illegal to identify a child victim of sexual assault. If you name the father, it is not hard to work out the name of the daughter, especially if you know the family, hence the public court records will not name him either.

As for the pronoun and parent thing, a truly pozzed ABC would have referred to him as the mother and used female pronouns. The fact it did not is actually quite telling.

Izdaja Slika said:
And yet some people (the majority of the Australian public?) will tell you the judge was right
Click to expand...

I really doubt the majority would think that, even in Victoria, the socialist gloryhole of our nation where this happened. People vote in stupid governments for solid reasons like health and education, and don’t bother looking into every idiotic policy. They then get this shit introduced by stealth. At the next election, you won’t find swinging voters (who really decide elections) who’ll switch votes on this alone. Plus Victoria in particular has a shit opposition. As a result people will probably be stuck with this insanity in Victoria whether they like it or not until the Liberal Party offers a credible alternative.
 
Strangio and the troons lost again.

"FIRST ON FOX: The legal defense to "save women's sports" scored a big win in its Supreme Court battle over transgender athletes this week.

After an Idaho trans athlete tried to have the potential landmark SCOTUS case dropped, a federal judge struck down the attempt to dismiss it and ruled that the case should proceed.

U.S. District Judge David Nye, appointed by President Donald Trump in 2017, rejected former Boise State trans athlete Lindsay Hecox's motion to dismiss the case. The trans athlete started the legal battle in 2020, but tried to have it dismissed in September after the Supreme Court agreed in July to hear the case.
Now Nye has denied Hecox’s request.

Nye emphasized that after years of litigation, "[Idaho] has a fair right to have its arguments heard and adjudicated once and for all." And that, "[T]he Court feels {Hecox’s} mootness argument is, as above, somewhat manipulative to avoid Supreme Court review and should not be endorsed."

The Little v. Hecox lawsuit was initially filed by Hecox in 2020, when the trans athlete wanted to join the women's cross-country team at Boise State, and had the state's law to prevent trans athletes from competing in women's sports blocked.

Hecox was joined by an anonymous biological female student, Jane Doe, who was concerned about the potential of being subjected to the sex dispute verification process. The challenge was successful, as a federal judge blocked Idaho's state law.

A 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel upheld an injunction blocking the state law in 2023, before the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case back in July. Hecox then asked SCOTUS last month to drop the challenge, claiming the athlete "has therefore decided to permanently withdraw and refrain from playing any women’s sports at BSU or in Idaho."

The defense team, led by Idaho Attorney General Raul Labrador and Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) attorney Kristen Waggoner pushed back against Hecox's attempt to end the battle before it reaches the Supreme Court, arguing dismissal violated the agreed-upon stay.

"From day one in office, defending this law has been a top priority because Idaho's daughters deserve fair competition based on biological reality. The district court has ruled that years of litigation, Idaho has earned the right to present our case to the nation’s highest court. This decision keeps our lawsuit alive, and I won’t stop until women and girls are safe to compete, participate, and excel in competitive sports," Labrador told Fox News Digital of Nye's decision.

Hecox's efforts to have the case dropped aren't completely over, as SCOTUS must still rule on whether the case is moot. But Labrador and his team believe Nye's ruling is a "good sign" for their side.

Ultimately, the defense in this case is looking for a bigger-picture outcome than simply whether Hecox can play women's sports. Labrador told Fox News Digital he is calling for the court to protect the rights of states to protect women's sports.

Labrador previously said he hopes for the Supreme Court to cast a decision with a wider impact than just letting one state carry out its own specific law on the issue. He wants a new national precedent. "I believe that that's what they're gonna do," Labrador previously told Fox News Digital in an exclusive interview.

"I think they're going to have a big ruling on whether men can participate in women's sports, and more importantly, how to determine whether transgender individuals are protected by the federal constitution and state and federal laws."

Attorneys general from 27 states and the U.S. Territory of Guam have signed onto amicus briefs to support the defense in the upcoming SCOTUS case.
Labrador's case is just one of two focused on the issue of trans athletes in women's sports that will be heard by the Supreme Court.

West Virginia, which enacted the "Save Women’s Sports Act" in 2021, is appealing a lower-court ruling that allowed transgender athlete Becky Pepper-Jackson to compete on the school’s cross-country and track teams. This past year, Pepper-Jackson qualified for the West Virginia girls high school state track meet, finishing third in the discus throw and eighth in the shot put in the Class AAA division.

The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Pepper-Jackson, who has been taking puberty-blocking medication, in an April 2024 ruling based on the Constitution's equal protection clause.

Federal judge rules in favor of allowing SCOTUS case over trans athletes to proceed after attempt to dismis
 
It's about time ACLU and its cult supporting lawyers were held to account for this nonsense.
Lying in court is a punishable offense and anything they say in order to support trans ideology is a complete lie.

It's public money these fuckers are wasting so they can play at being lawyers.
 
Nero Fiddled said:
It's about time ACLU and its cult supporting lawyers were held to account for this nonsense.
Lying in court is a punishable offense and anything they say in order to support trans ideology is a complete lie.

It's public money these fuckers are wasting so they can play at being lawyers.
Click to expand...

They are dumping cases to avoid createing adverse precedent.

ACLU drops challenge to SC law that stopped transition-related medical treatments

Legal challenge to SC’s transgender health care law quietly dropped. Why?

Get fucked troons!

EEOC Says Agency Has Control Over Transgender Bias Enforcement
 
Stabby_Pencil said:
Would the ACLU benefit from firing Strangio or is there someone else pulling the strings? ACLU is picking a lot of losing legal battles lately.
Click to expand...
It depends on what you mean by 'benefit'. All trans ideologists are totally delusional, so substituting one for another would be pointless. Mizz Strangio is pursuing legal battles in line with her beliefs, not because she has made a rational assessment of winning against a hostile Supreme Court.

But, since the ACLU is now absolutely captured and converted to all trans and only trans all the time, they benefit from Mizz Strangio because that is all they want to do. I've said it before and I will say it again. The ACLU used to defend the free speech rights of the KKK. Now, they defend the government withholding information from the public about the numbers of trans prisoners housed in the female estate.

If you had written a speculative fiction about the ACLU in 1985 about its values and battles thirty years later in a fictive 2015, every publishing house in the world would have said 'that's ridiculous, speculative fiction has to have a modicum of grounding in reality'.

The ACLU is dumb and evil and captured.
 
Izdaja Slika said:
It depends on what you mean by 'benefit'. All trans ideologists are totally delusional, so substituting one for another would be pointless. Mizz Strangio is pursuing legal battles in line with her beliefs, not because she has made a rational assessment of winning against a hostile Supreme Court.

But, since the ACLU is now absolutely captured and converted to all trans and only trans all the time, they benefit from Mizz Strangio because that is all they want to do. I've said it before and I will say it again. The ACLU used to defend the free speech rights of the KKK. Now, they defend the government withholding information from the public about the numbers of trans prisoners housed in the female estate.

If you had written a speculative fiction about the ACLU in 1985 about its values and battles thirty years later in a fictive 2015, every publishing house in the world would have said 'that's ridiculous, speculative fiction has to have a modicum of grounding in reality'.

The ACLU is dumb and evil and captured.
Click to expand...

A loss in court by the aclu is probably worth more in donations than a win.

If the aclu is captured, then the cause is good for donations.
 
Stabby_Pencil said:
Would the ACLU benefit from firing Strangio or is there someone else pulling the strings? ACLU is picking a lot of losing legal battles lately.
Click to expand...
The latter, the ACLU had a bitter donor/internal battle in the 2010s that ended with a hard left faction winning over people who wanted to focus on civil liberties. There would probably be a revolt from all 3 of donors, rank and file staff, and senior execs if Strangio started making less ambitious but less futile arguments.

That said this is easier said than done when SCOTUS is very conservative and the kinds of treatments that might get upheld, like talk therapy for adults, are not being targeted. You can't ask a court to protect access to something that nobody is trying to take away.
 
The only thing "ground breaking" about this is how totally frivolous it is.

See if you can follow:

Troon in Maryland

Flies a lolsuit in New Jersey

To enforce a New York Law

Against a defendant in Colorado.

Silliest of all, the Olympics are not regulated by state law.

Tony Reed still thinks executive orders are not enforceable.

Troon Civil Complaint

Screenshot 2025-10-17 075451.png
Screenshot 2025-10-17 075508.png
Screenshot 2025-10-17 075525.png
Screenshot 2025-10-17 075547.png
 
"CHARLESTON, S.C. (WCSC) - A transgender teen’s family has dropped an appeal in a case against the state of South Carolina’s school bathroom law.

The law that was enacted as a proviso in the state budget first became the subject of litigation last year in November. The law stated that people, including students, must use school restrooms and locker rooms based only on their biological sex at birth. Any school found to be in violation of the law risked losing a quarter of their state funding.

The lead plaintiff, who goes by the alias of John Doe, a transgender student who was 13 when the lawsuit was filed, was enrolled in the Berkeley County School District, which is named in the lawsuit.

The student and his family argued that this law caused them to face “grave violations of their civil and constitutional rights.”
The lawsuit stated that the teen had been using the boys’ restroom at his middle school before the law was put into place and had been reportedly doing so to no objections from his fellow students.

However, school leadership told Doe that, because of the new law, he would be required to either use the girls’ restroom or the single-stall restroom in the nurse’s office. They later suspended the teen and threatened to expel him for using the boys’ bathroom as he had before.

The teen alleged he had faced harassment from other students because of this and moved to online classes.

In August, the U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a temporary injunction applying exclusively to the teen, saying he must be allowed to use the bathroom of his choice.
The United States Supreme Court additionally denied a request from South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson to stay the injunction and not allow the specified student to use the bathroom that aligned with his identity.

The teen reportedly withdrew the appeal because he no longer attends his in-person public high school, reportedly leaving after being subject to discrimination for his gender identity. Students’ Civil Rights Project Litigation Director Alexandra Brodsky said the teen was harassed not only by his peers, but by school staff.

“For that reason, he is no longer pursuing this appeal for a preliminary injunction. He will, however, continue with his lawsuit challenging South Carolina’s bathroom ban,” Brodsky said. “Our client’s experience at school is, unfortunately, not unique. Transphobic harassment is rampant in many South Carolina public schools. And it is spurred by discriminatory laws like the proviso, which feed baseless stereotypes about, and hostility toward, transgender people.”

“The law is in full effect and continues to protect the privacy and safety of students across our state,” Wilson said of the withdrawn appeal. “While this case isn’t completely over yet, I will continue to defend the law at the district court level and all the way to the Supreme Court if I have to.”

Transgender Berkeley County teen fighting SC bathroom law withdraws appeal
 
Not Dr. Evil said:
The lawsuit stated that the teen had been using the boys’ restroom at his middle school before the law was put into place and had been reportedly doing so to no objections from his fellow students.
Click to expand...

Not Dr. Evil said:
The teen alleged he had faced harassment from other students because of this and moved to online classes.
Click to expand...
So, that pretty much sounds like an "objection" to me if you read it in plain language instead of tranny speak.
 
General Zoider said:
if it hasnt yet all HRT drugs should be classed as schedule 1 drugs from all the fallout of people using them.
Click to expand...
The problem with that is that almost all of them are used for actual legitimate medical treatments for people with actual hormonal disorders, including puberty blockers which are used to treat precocious puberty. You don't class drugs with actual legitimate uses as Schedule I (except THC, but we didn't know it had actual legit uses until multiple decades after it was classed), you class them as at most Schedule II alongside meth (ADHD and diet-resistant obesity disorders), cocaine (topical anaesthetic), and heroin (painkiller, and precursor to other, better painkillers). You'll note that these Schedule II drugs I just named are all ones where improper possession, sale, and/or usage still gets you sent to a pound-me-in-the-ass prison for a decade.
 
Ed Special said:
You'll note that these Schedule II drugs I just named are all ones where improper possession, sale, and/or usage still gets you sent to a pound-me-in-the-ass prison for a decade.
Click to expand...
fair, ill take schedule 2 as long as they keep the possession charges. I just wanted it off the streets and for things like DIY methods to be criminalized.
 
It just needs a definitive list of conditions that these particular drugs can be supplied for ,and make sure that no lunatics are allowed anywhere the production of the list.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom