Off-Topic Transgender Legislation and Litigation

[Not Dr. Evil]

A place to discuss transgender legislation and litigation.

Resources:

6th Circuit Court of Appeals decision on Tennessee gender affirming care ban.

https://casetext.com/case/l-w-v-skrmetti-2

6th Circuit Court of Appeals decision on Kentucky gender affirming care ban.

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca6/23-5609/23-5609-2023-07-31.html

11th Circuit Court of Appeals decision on Alabama gender affirming care ban.

https://casetext.com/case/eknes-tucker-v-governor-of-the-state-of-ala

11th Circuit Court of Appeals decision on Florida transgender bathroom ban.

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca11/18-13592/18-13592-2022-12-30.html

District Court decision denying an injunction in the Florida case involving adult gender affirming care ban.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flnd.460963/gov.uscourts.flnd.460963.151.0.pdf

 

[AMHOLIO]

I hope Erin Reed watches this thread like he stalks ovarit. And every other trans news person and legislator.

 

[JULAY]

California just passed a bill allowing the state to take your kids if you refuse to troon them out:

https://www.wcbm.com/2023/09/08/california-state-assembly-passed-a-bill-allowing-parents-to-lose-custody-of-their-children-if-they-refuse-to-accept-their-childs-gender-transition-video/

Archive: https://archive.ph/TrxeM

California State Assembly passed a bill allowing parents to lose custody of their children if they refuse to accept their child’s gender transition​

JUST IN: California State Assembly has just passed a bill allowing parents to lose custody of their children if they refuse to accept their child's gender transition.

They want your kids.

“California lawmakers send Gov. Gavin Newsom a proposed law that would require judges to consider a parents affirmation of their child’s identity in custody cases,” reported @ZavalaA on X.

State senator Scott Wiener, who has no kids, co-authored the legislation. Creep.


Video of a bald negress saying, among other things, "Because that is the duty of parents, to Affirm. Our. Children!"

https://twitter.com/i/status/1700234789687853534

 

[Gog & Magog]

Here's some good news for a change.
Article | Archive
School district pays $100,000 to settle suit saying it supported secret transitioning of student

Spoiler: Selected Excerpts

The Spreckels Union School District, which encompasses an elementary and middle school in the Salinas area, paid nearly $100,000 to a Monterey County mother and daughter over an alleged violation of the parent’s 14th Amendment right to raise her child.
The settlement, agreed to in mid-June and approved by a federal judge Aug. 3, brings an end to the legal action pursued by Jessica Konen and her daughter Alicia, who went by the initials A.G.

...Also named as defendants in the lawsuit were Buena Vista teachers Lori Caldeira and Kelly Baraki — who ran the school’s gay-straight alliance club, “You be You,” or UBU — and then-Principal Katelyn Pagaran. Baraki and Caldeira resigned shortly after the district placed them on administrative leave in November. Pagaran resigned at the end of June.

...A.G. returned to using her original name and uses female pronouns at her high school, the lawsuit said.

 

[g55c]

California just passed a bill allowing the state to take your kids if you refuse to troon them out:

https://www.wcbm.com/2023/09/08/california-state-assembly-passed-a-bill-allowing-parents-to-lose-custody-of-their-children-if-they-refuse-to-accept-their-childs-gender-transition-video/

Archive: https://archive.ph/TrxeM

California State Assembly passed a bill allowing parents to lose custody of their children if they refuse to accept their child’s gender transition​

JUST IN: California State Assembly has just passed a bill allowing parents to lose custody of their children if they refuse to accept their child's gender transition.

They want your kids.

“California lawmakers send Gov. Gavin Newsom a proposed law that would require judges to consider a parents affirmation of their child’s identity in custody cases,” reported @ZavalaA on X.

State senator Scott Wiener, who has no kids, co-authored the legislation. Creep.


Video of a bald negress saying, among other things, "Because that is the duty of parents, to Affirm. Our. Children!"

https://twitter.com/i/status/1700234789687853534

Nothing represents modern day America better than a fat bald sub 80 IQ sheboon arguing to take your kids away cause you won’t ruin their life.

 

[Perfectly Innocent]

The UK has decided that any characteristic not covered by hate crime legislation, can be used to record a "non-crime hate incident" which names you and whatever someone alleges you did, even if it remains unproven: Non-Crime Hate Incidents: Code of Practice on the Recording and Retention of Personal Data

"This code applies specifically to incidents involving the characteristics set out above, but there may be instances where a force deems it necessary to record an incident involving a different characteristic that is not covered by hate crime legislation."

You better not criticise stupid people for being stupid or that would make you the stupid one...

 

[Jacques1194]

California just passed a bill allowing the state to take your kids if you refuse to troon them out:

https://www.wcbm.com/2023/09/08/california-state-assembly-passed-a-bill-allowing-parents-to-lose-custody-of-their-children-if-they-refuse-to-accept-their-childs-gender-transition-video/

Archive: https://archive.ph/TrxeM

California State Assembly passed a bill allowing parents to lose custody of their children if they refuse to accept their child’s gender transition​

JUST IN: California State Assembly has just passed a bill allowing parents to lose custody of their children if they refuse to accept their child's gender transition.

They want your kids.

“California lawmakers send Gov. Gavin Newsom a proposed law that would require judges to consider a parents affirmation of their child’s identity in custody cases,” reported @ZavalaA on X.

State senator Scott Wiener, who has no kids, co-authored the legislation. Creep.


Video of a bald negress saying, among other things, "Because that is the duty of parents, to Affirm. Our. Children!"

https://twitter.com/i/status/1700234789687853534

Oh California.A place where Los Angeles, and San Francisco are a mess, and a lot of business people are complaining about all the crime, and homeless to the point where they're closing up shop ,and moving elsewhere, but hey thank god they're taking kids away because parents wont play pretend with their children.

 

[Generic Anime Girl]

Oh California.A place where Los Angeles, and San Francisco are a mess, and a lot of business people are complaining about all the crime, and homeless to the point where they're closing up shop ,and moving elsewhere, but hey thank god they're taking kids away because parents wont play pretend with their children.

it's shame how obvious the divide is between people in large cities of a state and the people that live no where near. California is a good example, but I think New York State is the best example by far. The NYC area is very liberal, but the minute you go upstate, it feels like a whole different place. Open land, rural, and lot of conservative people. You can also see this in places like Georgia, Oregon, Minnesota, and even New Jersey. I wish there was a good way to address this huge divide in demographics, especially when it comes to representation in the federal government. But alas, le constitution says no.

 

[JULAY]

it's shame how obvious the divide is between people in large cities of a state and the people that live no where near. California is a good example, but I think New York State is the best example by far. The NYC area is very liberal, but the minute you go upstate, it feels like a whole different place. Open land, rural, and lot of conservative people. You can also see this in places like Georgia, Oregon, Minnesota, and even New Jersey. I wish there was a good way to address this huge divide in demographics, especially when it comes to representation in the federal government. But alas, le constitution says no.

Pennsylvania is like that too... Pittsburgh on one side, Philly on the other, and Kentucky in the middle.

 

[Not Dr. Evil]

Eli Erlick Amended lolsuit against Blaire White. The amended lolsuit has the same defects identified in the motion to dismiss.

https://www.docdroid.net/6jnBly3/eli-erlick-amended-lolsuit-pdf

Blaire White motion to dismiss.

https://www.docdroid.net/0tXEtI1/show-temp-pdf

 

[Procrastinhater]

The UK has decided that any characteristic not covered by hate crime legislation, can be used to record a "non-crime hate incident" which names you and whatever someone alleges you did, even if it remains unproven: Non-Crime Hate Incidents: Code of Practice on the Recording and Retention of Personal Data

"This code applies specifically to incidents involving the characteristics set out above, but there may be instances where a force deems it necessary to record an incident involving a different characteristic that is not covered by hate crime legislation."

You better not criticise stupid people for being stupid or that would make you the stupid one...

"None crime hate crime" is a perfect example of Orwellian Newspeak and the absolute insanity of it.
Police that are perfectly happy to protect grooming gangs targeting children harassing people for doubleplusungoods.
It's complete fucking idiocy.

 

[The Morning Visitor]

California just passed a bill allowing the state to take your kids if you refuse to troon them out:

https://www.wcbm.com/2023/09/08/california-state-assembly-passed-a-bill-allowing-parents-to-lose-custody-of-their-children-if-they-refuse-to-accept-their-childs-gender-transition-video/

Archive: https://archive.ph/TrxeM

California State Assembly passed a bill allowing parents to lose custody of their children if they refuse to accept their child’s gender transition​

JUST IN: California State Assembly has just passed a bill allowing parents to lose custody of their children if they refuse to accept their child's gender transition.

They want your kids.

“California lawmakers send Gov. Gavin Newsom a proposed law that would require judges to consider a parents affirmation of their child’s identity in custody cases,” reported @ZavalaA on X.

State senator Scott Wiener, who has no kids, co-authored the legislation. Creep.


Video of a bald negress saying, among other things, "Because that is the duty of parents, to Affirm. Our. Children!"

https://twitter.com/i/status/1700234789687853534

Jesus christ, California. Get your shit together.

The bill doesn't seem to allow for CPS to remove children from a "non-affirming" home, but it does equate "not affirming" with child abuse in a custody battle, heavily swaying custody to a parent that at least claims they entertain a child's delusions.

What the lawmakers are currently doing: giving too much credit to a child's words, skewing the custody battle in favor of the worse parent, allowing for deceitful parents to lie under oath for a Free Custody pass.

What is absolutely going to happen within the next few years if California doesn't stop this ship in its tracks: "non-affirming" households will be deemed abusive across the board (outside of custody battles), CPS will use your political leanings and voter registration to strip you of your parenthood. This is the precedent being set.

 

[Procrastinhater]

This is the precedent being set.

Shit like this (and the ridiculous taxes and crime) is why Californians are fleeing the State every year.
Unfortunately like most fucking Democrat refugees they flee the failed States their insane policies make and then keep voting for the same failed policies.
It's what's turned Cities like Austin into fucking shitholes.
I have have huge sympathy for sane Californians who have seen their State ruined by three big shithole cities, but its not those guys that are fleeing mostly, it's rich assholes from L.A. that bring their insanity with them.

 

[Not Dr. Evil]

What is absolutely going to happen within the next few years if California doesn't stop this ship in its tracks: "non-affirming" households will be deemed abusive across the board (outside of custody battles), CPS will use your political leanings and voter registration to strip you of your parenthood. This is the precedent being set.

This unconstitutional bill will likely fail under a RFRA or first amendment religious liberty challenge. The bill does not have a carve out for sincerely held religious beliefs which is a fatal defect in my view.

 

[Procrastinhater]

This unconstitutional bill will likely fail under a RFRA or first amendment religious liberty challenge. The bill does not have a carve out for sincerely held religious beliefs which is a fatal defect in my view.

Violates the 1st and 14th Amendment.

 

[JULAY]

The bill doesn't seem to allow for CPS to remove children from a "non-affirming" home, but it does equate "not affirming" with child abuse in a custody battle, heavily swaying custody to a parent that at least claims they entertain a child's delusions.

That's my general reading of it too, the way the bill was written with specific reference to CA 3011 which covers parental disputes, it's not a broad "CPS can take your kids for not affirming" if both parents are married and agree that troonery is nonsense... However, it's not hard to imagine this exact same language getting inserted into a bill that would empower CPS to do exactly that:

"(B) As used in this paragraph, the health, safety, and welfare of the child includes, among other comprehensive factors, a parent’s affirmation of the child’s gender identity or gender expression. Affirmation includes a range of actions and will be unique for each child, but in every case must promote the child’s overall health and well-being."

Sourced from here: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240AB957

Regardless, the idea that CA courts will weigh this as a factor in custody disputes is reprehensible. If one parent wants to troon their kid, and the other one doesn't, give weight to the one who wants to troon them out. Surely this won't result in a shitshow of massive proportions!

 

[Not Dr. Evil]

That's my general reading of it too, the way the bill was written with specific reference to CA 3011 which covers parental disputes, it's not a broad "CPS can take your kids for not affirming" if both parents are married and agree that troonery is nonsense... However, it's not hard to imagine this exact same language getting inserted into a bill that would empower CPS to do exactly that:

"(B) As used in this paragraph, the health, safety, and welfare of the child includes, among other comprehensive factors, a parent’s affirmation of the child’s gender identity or gender expression. Affirmation includes a range of actions and will be unique for each child, but in every case must promote the child’s overall health and well-being."

Sourced from here: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240AB957

Regardless, the idea that CA courts will weigh this as a factor in custody disputes is reprehensible. If one parent wants to troon their kid, and the other one doesn't, give weight to the one who wants to troon them out. Surely this won't result in a shitshow of massive proportions!

There is probably an actionable equal protection violation there as well where custody battles involving non-troon kids are subjected to different criteria than custody battles that do involve troon kids (which I personally do not acknowledge as being a real thing - that is shitty parents imposing their wacky social and political views on their children).

 

[Big Bobs Beepers]

it's shame how obvious the divide is between people in large cities of a state and the people that live no where near. California is a good example, but I think New York State is the best example by far. The NYC area is very liberal, but the minute you go upstate, it feels like a whole different place. Open land, rural, and lot of conservative people. You can also see this in places like Georgia, Oregon, Minnesota, and even New Jersey. I wish there was a good way to address this huge divide in demographics, especially when it comes to representation in the federal government. But alas, le constitution says no.

You'd be surprised, cuz the further you get from the more trendy areas of Manhattan and Brooklyn, NYC is full of pretty based traditional working class Catholics. Like Lower Manhattan and Bushwick are faggy as hell, but it's pretty isolated to areas like that since anywhere outside of that part of town might as well be the ghetto to Genderspecials. As I started making friends here with the blue collar types, I learned pretty fast that a good chunk of that crowd is pretty sick of the troon shit. The thing about them is that they can't be bothered with it all because they're doing shit like living their lives and raising families, which we all know is pretty effective against deterring the troons; the guys I've talked to at the skate park are also based as hell, but they just don't speak up because they can't be bothered with dealing with a barrage of online pitchforks

But I do agree with you, there is no good way to address the divide, especially if the troons who monitor shit like this constantly would throw a huge bitchfit about it. Denying reality has become the troon modus operandi, and if they were faced with the fact that the general public has been getting sick of their shit for a long time would probably result in some pretty unsavory shit. But at the end of the day, it's really all about where you look

 

[Not Dr. Evil]

Question:
Why is WPATH filing lolsuits with the specific purpose of hiding the source materials and methods that they use to formulate their so called "standards of care?"

Boe v. Marshall​

This case raises a constitutional challenge to the Alabama Vulnerable Child Compassion and Protection Act. During discovery, Defendants issued a nonparty subpoena to the World Professional Association for Transgender Health. (Doc. 208-2 at 56-70). WPATH moved to quash the subpoena-which generally sought information pertaining to WPATH's recommended standards for treating gender dysphoria in minors-on the grounds that production of the requested documents would exceed the permissible scope of discovery and violate the First Amendment. (Doc. 208 at 1, 10). After extensive briefing and two oral arguments, the Court rejected WPATH's position and denied its motion to quash. (Doc. 263 at 1-3, 10).

Boe v. Marshall

 

[Sprate Header]

Why is WPATH filing lolsuits with the specific purpose of hiding the source materials and methods that they use to formulate their so called "standards of care?"

WHAT!?

After extensive briefing and two oral arguments, the Court rejected WPATH's position and denied its motion to quash.

This could get very interesting.