The Human Rights Campaign (HRC) filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against Florida over its transgender law SB 1028. It also promised future lawsuits against Arkansas, Mississippi, and Tennessee over their laws.
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signed the bill on June 1. Athletes must compete in sports associated with their biological sex.
With the law firm Arnold & Porter, HRC filed the lawsuit in the District Court for the Southern District of Florida on behalf of an 8th grader and her parents. (As you know, I will address you however you want, but I will not ignore your biological sex.)
HRC identifies her as Daisy, while the lawsuit names her as D.N. The defendants include:
Daisy identifies as a female, but she is a biological male. The lawsuit claims Daisy presented herself as a female in preschool. Somehow, at three years old, Daisy knew all about gender because she told “her parents in clear terms” that she viewed “herself as a girl.” Her parents realized Daisy was transgender when she was five or six. They have used the name Daisy since she was in second grade.
Daisy’s parents put her on hormone blockers at age 11. She started estrogen in 2021.
Gee, if my parents acted like Daisy’s parents, they would have raised me as a male and put me on testosterone. I’m glad they never did because, before junior high, I realized I am just a tomboy. Did anyone know about gender at three years old? Or did Daisy’s parents force gender on her? (Don’t answer. It’s rhetorical because we all know the truth.)
DeSantis said the bill is “based off biology, not based on ideology.” HRC said DeSantis used the word etiology, but I don’t recall it. Anyway, etiology is “the cause of a disease or abnormal condition.”
HRC said DeSantis’s “statement fails to acknowledge the complexity of biology, as it relates to sex and gender identity.”
No. Biology is not complex. You either have XX or XY chromosomes.
Daisy participates on the girls’ soccer team at school, a girls’ travel team, and a girls’ recreational league.
The lawsuit alleges the Florida bill violates Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 and the Equal Protection Clause and Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment.
The lawsuit insists Daisy “is irreparably harmed by Defendants’ violation of Title IX.” The law supposedly violates Title IX because “excluding transgender individuals from school programs or athletic opportunities within schools is discrimination on the basis of sex.”
Um, estrogen does not make you female. Having XX chromosomes makes a person a female.
“Neither Title IX nor any federal regulations permit a state or locality to discriminate based solely on a person’s gender assigned to them at birth,” continued the plaintiffs. “Because this law contains a definition of sex that directly contradicts federal law, and segregates transgender girls based solely on their status as transgender girls or women, it violates Title IX.”
Um, nature gives you your sex. Biology! The XX sperm obviously fertilized the egg. No one assigned Daisy’s sex at birth except nature. Plus, the Florida law states the actual definition of sex. It doesn’t surprise me it contradicts the federal government because it allows women to murder their unborn human beings, so it’s obvious they don’t know basic biology.
HRC and Daisy allege SB 1028 violates the Equal Protection Clause because it treats transgender girls and boys differently. I read the law as everyone must participate in the sport associated with their biological sex. Transgender girls receive all the attention because they’re the ones trying to play all the female sports.
It is precious they claim the law “ignores basic medical science about transgender students, as well as the impact of hormone suppressants.” As I said above, chromosomes make you male or female. Not hormones.
The plaintiffs assert SB 1028 violates the Due Process Clause since it says no one can be “deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.” They write:
The right to liberty under the Due Process Clause provides individuals with a right to be free from unnecessary government intrusion into their private affairs and from unnecessary interference with their private conduct. Defendants’ enforcement of the law would require Plaintiff to disclose sensitive medical information that would otherwise not be available, including to third parties, parents and other students who might file claims under this law. It would require such disclosure even if her legal documents, and in particular her birth certificate, identified her gender as female since she would have to produce information as to her assigned gender at the time of birth.Defendants cannot justify this discriminatory action because it is not related to any compelling or important governmental interest.
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY