Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Judge Freezes Obama’s Transgendered Bathroom Policy

Judge Freezes Obama’s Transgendered Bathroom Policy

Once again, federal overreach gets swatted back

In May, Texas, joined by twelve other states filed suit against the Obama Administration who’d recently issued a national transgendered bathroom use policy for publicly funded schools.

A mixed bag of states joined Texas in legal action, those states included: Alabama, Wisconsin, West Virginia, Tennessee, Arizona’s Department of Education, Maine Gov. Paul LePage, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Utah, and Georgia.

“This represents just the latest example of the current administration’s attempts to accomplish by executive fiat what they couldn’t accomplish through the democratic process in Congress,” said Texas Attorney General, Ken Paxton.

Late Sunday, a federal judge granted the temporary injunction. Reuters reports:

Reed O’Connor, a judge for the Northern District of Texas, said in a decision late on Sunday that the Obama administration did not follow proper procedures for notice and comment in issuing the guidelines. He said the guidelines contradict with existing legislative and regulatory texts.

O’Connor, an appointee of Republican President George W. Bush, said the guidelines from the defendants, which included the U.S. Departments of Education and Justice, were legislative and substantive.

“Although Defendants have characterized the Guidelines as interpretive, post-guidance events and their actual legal effect prove that they are ‘compulsory in nature,'” he wrote.

The office of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, a Republican who frequently sues the Democratic Obama administration, said he was pleased with a decision against “illegal federal overreach.”

At a hearing on the injunction in Fort Worth on Aug. 12, lawyers for Texas said the guidelines usurp the authority of school districts nationwide. They said they were at risk of losing billions of dollars in federal funding for education if they did not comply.

U.S. Department of Justice lawyers sought to dismiss the injunction, saying the federal guidelines issued in May were non-binding with no legal consequences.

The guidance issued by the Justice Department and Education Department said public schools must allow transgender students to use bathrooms, locker rooms and other intimate facilities that correspond with their gender identity, as opposed to their birth gender, or face the loss of federal funds.

Under the injunction, the Obama administration is prohibited from enforcing the guidelines on “against plaintiffs and their respective schools, school boards, and other public, educationally based institutions,” O’Connor wrote.

Full decision here:

Texas Et Al v. U.S. Et Al – Nationwide PI by Legal Insurrection on Scribd

Follow Kemberlee on Twitter @kemberleekaye

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Transgender (i.e. deviation from the close correlation of sex and gender — e.g. homosexual)/crossover.

Invading little girls’ spaces. The female chauvinist arm of the Democrat Party will tolerate it for their and the Party’s greater good — fascism.

buckeyeminuteman | August 22, 2016 at 10:43 am

We need to get all federal money out of education. That what state income tax and local property tax is for. It’s why we elect people to our county boards of educations and hire district superintendents. Without dangling the carrot of federal money in their faces, local people would actually have a say in what is taught in local schools. What a novel idea!

    The only way to eliminate corruption in high places is to eliminate high places. By nature the federal bureaucracy is corrupt. It thinks it exists to exercise this sort of power over us. To take back the money that is rightfully theirs, take their cut so they can live the high life and afford three-quarter to a million dollar houses, then use the rest to bludgeon us into doing what they or some interest group they pay to sue the government demands. It’s not just education.

    It all needs to go. And what can’t go, for instance we need an EPA just so car makers oil companies have a 50 state standard and rein in Kali which would go nutz, needs to be neutered or at least hand cuffed and shackled.

      Ragspierre in reply to Arminius. | August 22, 2016 at 11:20 am

      I’m confused by your last statement. Kuhlifornia has its own standards for everything, right down to weed whackers and chainsaws.

The Obama administration getting slapped again by the Federal Court system!

Can you say Over reach once again.

If only we had a presidential candidate who wants to eliminate the Dept. of Education!

Texas, that place that the rest of the country would be so screwed without.

You’ll miss us when we go…

They’re actually referring to transsexual, a form that does not exist in the natural world. What does exist is an abnormal variance between sex and gender, that may be caused by the influences of nature or nurture. The “secular” orthodoxy, which has a notably selective outlook, prefers to believe the former.

So the feds’ defense was that these are just suggestions? In that case why didn’t the judge just take them at their word, and say “OK, plaintiffs’ motion for an injunction is denied, but defendants are estopped from ever trying to enforce these suggestions”?

PS: Yes, I do understand the DOE’s actual position: That this is how we understand the law that already exists, this is what we believe it has always meant, and this is how we intend to enforce it. You are free to have a different understanding, but know that if you act on that different understanding we will enforce the law as we understand it, and it will be up to you to challenge it in court. You can’t challenge it right now because we haven’t yet had occasion to enforce it, so there’s no case or controversy. To challenge it you must create a test case, and if you lose you’re in deep sh*t.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend