Off-Topic Transgender Legislation and Litigation

[Surfin Terf]

This is interesting. Under the temporarily blocked Idaho law you can sue a troon for $5,000 per violation for improper bathroom access.

"Senate Bill 1100, signed by Gov. Brad Little during the 2023 legislative session, prevents transgender students from using the school bathroom, locker room or changing facility that aligns with their gender identity. Instead, students must use facilities that align with their “biological sex,” or sex assigned at birth. If a student is unwilling or unable to use the bathroom corresponding with their sex assigned at birth, they can request that the school make accommodations for them to use a single-use restroom or alternate facility.

A private action clause in the law allows students to seek a minimum of $5,000 in damages if they encounter a transgender student in a bathroom that doesn’t align with their biological sex."

Courts hear arguments on controversial transgender bathroom law

"Gender identity" is just accepted as a real thing, but "biological sex" gets scare quotes as if it's some sort of disputed concept. I wonder if this Sadie Dittenber might just be a little biased.

 

[Trianon]

Injunction granted against California school district trying to force teachers not to disclose gender identity to parents without student permission. (U.S. District Court, Southern District of California)
Opinion: Mirabelli, West v. Olson

• The teachers who sued for relief made an interesting point that their religious beliefs precluded them from lying to parents, regardless of what the issue was: "to be consistent with their sincerely-held religious beliefs, they cannot conceal pertinent information that can impact the health and well-being of a student or affirmatively mislead a student’s parent." (p. 9)
• The school district used antidiscrimination law to threaten teachers to go along with the policy: "Disclosing that a student is transgender without the student’s permission may violate California’s antidiscrimination law by increasing the student’s vulnerability to harassment and may violate the student’s right to privacy." (p. 9)
• The order heavily cites Dr. Erica Anderson, a moderate trans doctor, who argues that parents have to be informed immediately about these incredibly pertinent medical issues for their child and that facilitating a "double life" goes against WPATH standards.
• It then goes into the well-established, near-absolute right of parents to direct children's upbringing.

B. Youthful Impetuosity
Though it does not require the wisdom of a Supreme Court Justice to see, the Supreme Court recognizes that youth tend to make impetuous and ill-considered life decisions. “First, as any parent knows and as the scientific and sociological studies . . . tend to confirm, ‘a lack of maturity and an underdeveloped sense of responsibility are found in youth more often than in adults and are more understandable among the young. These qualities often result in impetuous and ill-considered actions and decisions.’” Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551, 569 (2005) (citations omitted). In the same vein, and perhaps especially true in the school setting, “juveniles are more vulnerable or susceptible to negative influences and outside pressures, including peer pressure.” Id. And “the character of a juvenile is not as well formed as that of an adult. The personality traits of juveniles are more transitory, less fixed.” Id. at 570 (citation omitted). “Indeed, notes the Court, “the relevance of youth as a mitigating factor derives from the fact that the signature qualities of youth are transient; as individuals mature, the impetuousness and recklessness that may dominate in younger years can subside.” Id. (p. 14)

• "The privacy right of a child, according to FERPA, takes second place to his or her parents’ right to know. In the end, EUSD’s policy of elevating a child’s gender-related choices to that of paramount importance, while excluding a parent from knowing of, or participating in, that kind of choice, is as foreign to federal constitutional and statutory law as it is medically unwise." (p. 17-18 )
• The order says there are some areas where children can obtain medical procedures without permission (I assume abortion is one under California law), but that "privacy" obviously does not apply to things like social transition because "After all, one element of a right to privacy is a reasonable expectation of privacy. A student who announces the desire to be publicly known in school by a new name, gender, or pronoun and is referred to by teachers and students and others by said new name, gender, or pronoun, can hardly be said to have a reasonable expectation of privacy or expect non-disclosure." (p. 19)
• However, this order only concerns how teachers are allowed to communicate with teachers and can't directly address parental rights. "Tangentially, plaintiffs claim that the federal constitutional rights of parents of school district students are being violated. As an initial impression, it would seem so. However, no parents have joined as plaintiffs at this time." (p. 21)
• It concludes: "The school’s policy is a trifecta of harm: it harms the child who needs parental guidance and possibly mental health intervention to determine if the incongruence is organic or whether it is the result of bullying, peer pressure, or a fleeting impulse. It harms the parents by depriving them of the long recognized Fourteenth Amendment right to care, guide, and make health care decisions for their children. And finally, it harms plaintiffs who are compelled to violate the parent’s rights by forcing plaintiffs to conceal information they feel is critical for the welfare of their students -- violating plaintiffs’ religious beliefs." (p. 35)

 

[Not Dr. Evil]

"Democrats should totally do this thing that the federal court just declared unconstitutional"

Tony Reed - "legislative researcher"

 

[JULAY]

"Democrats should totally do this thing that the federal court just declared unconstitutional"

Tony Reed - "legislative researcher"

View attachment 5340667

It turns out that when the House and Senate are controlled by different parties, not a lot gets done in Congress.

You'd think a certified genius legislative researcher would know that.

 

[Not Dr. Evil]

Do Alex and the Huff Post troon think that Jack Turban and his cronies have been testifying for free?

How is this "journalism" when the central claims in this clap trap have been repeatedly smacked down by the Circuit Court of Appeals? Moreover, how is this "journalism" when the Huff Post troon did not do the same analysis on troon friendly "experts" like Jack Turban et al?

 

[Not Dr. Evil]

This is not the "own" that you think it is Tony. Cantor is a Clinical Psychologist, not a Medical Doctor. There is no reason at all for him to know the name of puberty blocking drugs because his area of practice does not involve medications. Of course, Tony is banking on his herd of low info confused troons not knowing this.

 

[Trianon]

Sixth Circuit upholds Tennessee/Kentucky ban on puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones for minors. (Full PDF attached.)

This country does not have a “deeply rooted” tradition of preventing governments from regulating the medical profession in general or certain treatments in particular, whether for adults or their children.

They compare the notion of having a right to a specific medical treatment to wanting physician-assisted suicide in a state that bans it. In a previous case, the courts said the state can ban it, even if the patient and doctor are in agreement.

They also spend a lot of time talking about how new all of the treatments are and why legislatures have a right to weigh in on new developments that the Constitution is silent on.

It is difficult, at any rate, to maintain that these treatments have a meaningful pedigree. It has been about a decade since the World Professional Association for Transgender Health, the key medical organization relied upon by the plaintiffs, first said that hormone treatments could be used by all adolescents, no matter how young. And some of the same European countries that pioneered these treatments now express caution about them and have pulled back on their use.

Another point is that states can absolutely come to different opinions about the risks of puberty blockers because...

It is difficult to maintain that the medical community is of one mind about the use of these hormones for gender dysphoria when the FDA is not prepared to put its credibility and testing protocols behind the use.

Off-label use coming back to bite them in the ass.

Experts have no power here...

Must we defer to a consensus among economists about the proper incentives for interpreting the impairment-of-contracts or takings clauses of the Constitution? Or to a consensus of journalists about the meaning of free speech? Or even to a consensus of constitutional scholars about the meaning of a constitutional guarantee?

No, all these questions are put to the people and their representatives. No one else gets veto power.

They cite Notorious RBG saying sex differences are real.

Recognizing and respecting biological sex differences does not amount to stereotyping—unless Justice Ginsburg’s observation in United States v. Virginia that biological differences between men and women “are enduring” amounts to stereotyping.

The dissenting opinion says that only 1% regret transitioning! Puberty blockers are completely reversible! The plaintiffs threw up when they thought they'd have to go through their own puberty, isn't that sad?

She goes on to say that it's stereotyping children to expect them to conform to gender expectations, like ... going through puberty.

And both [Tennessee and Kentucky] statutes’ texts effectively reveal that their purpose is to force boys and girls to look and live like boys and girls. Statutes, like these, that “rely on overbroad generalizations about” how “males and females” should appear and behave, VMI, 518 U.S. at 533, cannot survive scrutiny.

She argues it's sex discrimination to prevent trans-identified children from getting this treatment while those with precocious puberty or other developmental disorders can get them. The majority opinion addresses this by saying the regimen is completely different (it's like saying anyone should be able to overdose on X for Y reason because a certain drug has been approved for reason Z). It doesn't follow at all.

ACLU responds.

 

[Joe Lieberman]

Re: off-label use - does anyone know the general sentiment of the trans community regarding FDA regulation/approval of medication used for puberty blockers? Are there trans people who think that Lupron etc. need to be tested and regulated and approved to prevent bans like this from happening, because puberty blockers are "safe and reversible," or is the "medication at all costs, even if you have to import sketchy hormones from other countries or make it yourself" attitude that's discussed here commonly held? From what I've seen the latter looks like an extreme position espoused by a vocal minority, but is there organizing around the former?

 

[Not Dr. Evil]

8th Circuit Court of Appeal rules against the troons and strikes down a school policy requiring accommodations such as pronouns and bathroom access for trannies. Alex Caraballo one of the hardest hit).

Transgender Jordan School District student speaks out as adults discuss school restroom use

Troon activist group tries to rehash the Florida bathroom ban case that they already lost at the 11th Circuit En Banc panel. Notably, none of the plaintiffs are actually from Florida.

Florida restroom law challenged by LGBTQ+ group

New troon restrictions in Nebraska including a cooling off period before starting troonshine and an extended period of mandatory non-affirming therapy.

Nebraska imposes 40 hours of therapy and other restrictions on care for trans youths

State of Oregon actively covering up assault on female students by a troon.

Oregon middle school refuses to say if hulking bully filmed pulverizing much smaller girl to floor on hallway is transgender, after sickening clip triggered bomb threat

Troons take another L. Wisconsin judge strikes school district policy allowing students to troon out behind their parents backs.

Waukesha judge: Kettle Moraine teachers need parent consent to use trans

students' names

Five New Jersey school districts reverse course and stop offering accommodations to troons.

Trans student rights at risk as some N.J. districts repeal policies

 

[Procrastinhater]

More and more signs even the normies are reaching peak trans and we may be at the high-water mark of the Slaaneshi influence.
I fully expect the troons to get even more vocal as this pushback continues, the good news though is that's its this exact loud and pushy obnoxious shit that is tipping the scales against these freaks.
The only danger is that once it becomes undeniable that the troon has had its day, the more violent and unstable ones like that fucking goblin Pooner Audrey Hale will lash out violently as they gas each other up about "genocide" even now.

Again though, it's the troons tendency for histrionic shit that has worn out people's patience, the louder they get the more people peak.

It's the astroturfing from above that's concerning, this shit was never natural to begin with, it's the product of ideological capture of institutions by fanatics and they're likely to try all the tricks they can with their MSM social engineering tools to try and fight a return to decency.
This time last year though I saw no end in sight, now I'm cautiously optimistic that the troons mistake of confusing grudging silence for acceptance and their ever more pushy demands has finally woken people up to the troon cancer.
Patience for their deviant shit has reached its limit, and we're finally seeing real pushback.

TTD.
Drive these daemonspawn fetishists back into the Abyss.

 

[Not Dr. Evil]

Florida judge exonerates Miami teacher fired for refusing to use student’s preferred pronouns​

A Florida law judge has ruled in favor of a Miami teacher who was fired for refusing to use a student’s preferred pronouns, calling transgenderism a “new secular faith” in his controversial ruling.

The teacher, Yojary Mundaray, told a student during a 2019 classroom exchange that she would not use their desired pronouns due to her Christian beliefs that “God makes no mistakes.”

The student — referred to as “Pat” in the decision — told administrators at Jose de Diego Middle School about Mundaray’s comments and the teacher was eventually terminated after an investigation.

But administrative law judge John Van Laningham called for a formal exoneration on Monday and argued that the educator was wrongly fired.

“Advocates of transgenderism can be as doctrinaire as religious zealots these days,” he wrote in his decision. “As this case demonstrates, adhering to the traditional view that gender is biologically determined can get a person excommunicated, from a job in this instance.”

Florida judge exonerates Miami teacher fired for refusing to use student’s preferred pronouns

Federal Judge in Oklahoma denies a request to block that state's troon ban.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.oknd.65971/gov.uscourts.oknd.65971.138.0.pdf

 

[Accidental Protege]

I couldn't find a good non-paywalled article about this, but the Idaho AG filed a memo in response to a suit trying to stop the state's new ban on puberty blockers and hormones for minors from taking effect. It's a good read, but my favorite takeaway might be that one of the firms representing the Plaintiffs is called "Groombridge, Wu, Baughman & Stone LLP"

Spoiler: Bloomberg Article

Idaho Backs Gender-Affirming Care Ban in Constitutional Conflict​

• Barred care provides no proven benefits, state attorney says
• Three states given power to enforce bans, more suits pending

An Idaho law that prohibits doctors from using puberty-blocking drugs and cross-sex hormones to treat gender dysphoria in minors should take effect as planned Jan. 1, the state says, because it protects youths against unproven therapies and significant risks of lifelong, irreversible harm.

Attorney General Raúl Labrador (R) asked the US District Court for the District of Idaho to deny a preliminary injunction and dismiss a a lawsuit that seeks to prohibit the state from enforcing its gender-affirming care ban for minors. The treatments barred by Idaho’s Vulnerable Child Protection Act “provide no proven benefits,” Labrador said in Monday’s filing.

Idaho is one of 22 states that ban some form of gender-affirming care for minors. So far, the Sixth and Eleventh circuits have allowed bans to take effect in Alabama, Kentucky, and Tennessee, and the Seventh and Eighth circuits have been asked to weigh in on Indiana and Arkansas laws that bar the treatments.

This case potentially puts the question of whether the bans violate the 14th Amendment’s equal protection and due process clauses before yet another federal appeals court—the Ninth Circuit. That court recently upheld a ruling that blocked implementation of Idaho’s ban on transgender women and girls participating in school sports.

Labrador emphasized that Idaho law permits mental-health therapy to treat a condition in which transgender people suffer severe distress due to the mismatch between the sex they were assigned at birth and their gender identity. He also clarified that the law doesn’t apply to adults.

But there’s no proof of the long-term effects drug and hormone therapy might have on young people, and there’s “total uncertainty” over the potential side-effects of suppressing puberty in healthy adolescents, Labrador said.

The Idaho law is constitutional as to the minors, Labrador said. It isn’t subject to heightened scrutiny “merely because it acknowledges biological differences that must be considered in the medical context,” he said. Additionally, the law would survive even if reviewed under this higher standard because it serves a compelling state interest in protecting minors from harmful and unproven health care, he said.

The parents can’t succeed on their parental rights claim, Labrador also said. They don’t have a substantive due process right to allow their children to access unproven treatments because such a right isn’t deeply rooted in the nation’s history, he said.

Cooper & Kirk PLLC and Labrador’s office represent the state. Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP; Groombridge, Wu, Baughman & Stone LLP; Wrest Collective; the American Civil Liberties Union Foundation; and the ACLU of Idaho represent the plaintiffs.

The case is Poe v. Labrador, D. Idaho, No. 23-cv-269, brief opposing preliminary injunction filed 10/2/23.

 

[TheBigZee]

I'm impressed at how squeaky clean big pharma continues to be in all of this. I guess they learned all the right lessons from the last pediactric off label scandal and the $20 billion in legal settlements.

 

[Not A Bunny]

I'm impressed at how squeaky clean big pharma continues to be in all of this. I guess they learned all the right lessons from the last pediactric off label scandal and the $20 billion in legal settlements.

It helps to have all the right friends in all the right places.

There's something about being a troon that comes across as, well, stupid. Someone coined the term "customer-affirming care", and damn it, that needs to be a thing. It can't have possibly passed them by that they've damned themselves to dependence on big pharma for their lifestyle, unless they're unbelievably trifling morons.

 

[TheBigZee]

By all the right lessons, I mean that pharma doesn't seem to have engaged in direct off label marketing, or tried to seek a pediatric gender dysphoria approval for GrMH drugs that I can find.

It's all been beyond arms length. Giving money to lgbTqia+ groups. Giving money to research LGBT mental health to the pediatric associations. Giving money to lambda legal.Supporting Trans kids.

Lupron for CPP was an orphan drug. It's suprising that three different pharmaceutical companies chose to bring drugs to market for the same indication considering the actual market is so small. It's equally strange that so many changes regarding advocacy and research began to happen around the time the drugs were just waiting for final approval. It's suprising to see so many of the pharmaceuticals creating patent extenders and seeking approval.

Edit: I found one tiny chink that could open the door. A 2010 non-peer reviewed report provided to the FDA by Abbott Labs did not investigate joint and bone issues. Other than that, squeaky clean.

 

[monstrous bubo]

I couldn't find a good non-paywalled article about this, but the Idaho AG filed a memo in response to a suit trying to stop the state's new ban on puberty blockers and hormones for minors from taking effect. It's a good read, but my favorite takeaway might be that one of the firms representing the Plaintiffs is called "Groombridge, Wu, Baughman & Stone LLP"

Good find, thanks.

For those who didn’t spot it, there is a link to the full memo in the article.Along with the technical legal argument, there is a pretty good summary of the state of knowledge on these treatments (spoiler: it’s dire). Having said that, the legal arguments are worth reading. I liked the demolition job on the stereotyping argument - it’s such a stupid argument and yet it keeps being made.

https://www.bloomberglaw.com/public...rtDocket/3?doc_id=X3CNBUPMS4O87MO8DP6CUBUFNQE

 

[Accidental Protege]

Good find, thanks.

For those who didn’t spot it, there is a link to the full memo in the article.Along with the technical legal argument, there is a pretty good summary of the state of knowledge on these treatments (spoiler: it’s dire). Having said that, the legal arguments are worth reading. I liked the demolition job on the stereotyping argument - it’s such a stupid argument and yet it keeps being made.

https://www.bloomberglaw.com/public...rtDocket/3?doc_id=X3CNBUPMS4O87MO8DP6CUBUFNQE

It really is a good read.

I like that the standard of review was addressed. Seeing it being treated as a strict scrutiny issue always strikes me as off.

"Moreover, a statute regulating medical procedures does not trigger heightened scrutiny when it acknowledges sex-based distinctions. As the Supreme Court recently explained, '[t]he regulation of a medical procedure that only one sex can undergo does not trigger heightened constitutional scrutiny' absent a showing of "invidious discrimination against members of one sex or the other."'

"The Act serves the compelling government interest of protecting minors from harmful and unproven medical interventions. And a prohibition on those interventions is necessary to adequately serve that compelling interest because almost nothing is known about the long-term consequences associated with them. In addition, the existence of detransitioners —those who have transitioned but later come to identify with their sex — offers living proof that, as Plaintiffs’ experts conceded, providers cannot know who has a “true” need for these interventions ahead of time."

 

[Not Dr. Evil]

New frivolous lolsuit filed in Montana.

MISSOULA, Mont. — A group of transgender and intersex individuals are suing the state over a new law. Senate Bill 458 revised Montana Code to provide a common definition for the word “sex” when referring to a human.

The lawsuit alleges the bill violates the Montana Constitution and forces gender diverse people to misidentify themselves.

The suit was filed Wednesday in District Court.

Upper Seven Law released the following information:

On Wednesday, a group of transgender and intersex individuals and the Montana Two Spirit Society filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Senate Bill 458 (“SB 458”), which codifies an unscientific sex and gender binary.

The law effectively eliminates state law protections and benefits for all gender nonconforming Montanans. The bill violates the Montana Constitution’s rights to privacy, dignity, equal protection, and freedom of speech, as well as the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Transgender, intersex group files lawsuit in Montana

 

[countrybumpkin]

Troon footballer is threatening to sue for "discrimination" because nobody wants to compete against him after he broke a woman's knee. Story

I bet you can't pick out the troon in the pic since they blend in oh so well!

​

 

[Not Dr. Evil]

West Virgina may begin classifying troons as sexual deviants.

West Virginia Bill