Federal Court Forces School To Let Transgender Teen Into Boy’s Bathroom

[rangerrebew]

Federal Court Forces School To Let Transgender Teen Into Boy’s Bathroom
Amber Randall
4:02 PM 06/24/2016
 

A federal district court ruled that a Virginia school must allow a transgender teenager to use the bathroom that corresponds to his “gender identity” on Thursday.

U.S. District Judge Robert G. Doumar told the Gloucester School County Board that Gavin Grimm, who was born female but transitioned to male, must be able to use the bathroom that he wants while his lawsuit is working its way through the courts, reports the Daily Press.

“I am elated to hear that I’ll be able to attend my senior year of high school with my full rights restored. After nearly two years of humiliation and intense struggle, equality has finally prevailed. Now hopefully other transgender people will not have to face this type of discrimination,” Grimm said in a statement.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/24/federal-court-forces-school-to-let-transgender-teen-into-boys-bathroom/#ixzz4CaXi5gUl

READ MORE

[mountaineer]

The school let Grimm use the boy’s bathroom for a few week after he brought proof of his transition in 2014, he told ABC news.

Excuse me while I whip this out ...



Seriously, has this girl had the addadicktome surgery (what surgeon does that to a child?), or is a couple of testosterone-induced whiskers sufficient "proof of transition"?

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Federal Court Forces School To Let Transgender Teen Into Boy’s Bathroom
Amber Randall
4:02 PM 06/24/2016
 

A federal district court ruled that a Virginia school must allow a transgender teenager to use the bathroom that corresponds to his “gender identity” on Thursday.

U.S. District Judge Robert G. Doumar told the Gloucester School County Board that Gavin Grimm, who was born female but transitioned to male, must be able to use the bathroom that he wants while his lawsuit is working its way through the courts, reports the Daily Press.

“I am elated to hear that I’ll be able to attend my senior year of high school with my full rights restored. After nearly two years of humiliation and intense struggle, equality has finally prevailed. Now hopefully other transgender people will not have to face this type of discrimination,” Grimm said in a statement.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/24/federal-court-forces-school-to-let-transgender-teen-into-boys-bathroom/#ixzz4CaXi5gUl

READ MORE

A federal court cannot force anything.

A state has the right to refuse this edict.

What exactly would this court do if they did?

[Synthesist]

A federal court cannot force anything.

A state has the right to refuse this edict.

What exactly would this court do if they did?

Judges, in a case like this, normally expect an individual or a group of individuals to obey their ruling. If not, the judge can rule them in contempt of court and can go so far as to immediately have them arrested and incarcerated. A famous instance that illustrates this is the case of Kim Davis, the Kentucky county clerk who refused a judge’s order to issue marriage licenses to homosexuals. She was declared by the judge to be in contempt of court and ordered to be arrested and jailed.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Judges, in a case like this, normally expect an individual or a group of individuals to obey their ruling. If not, the judge can rule them in contempt of court and can go so far as to immediately have them arrested and incarcerated. A famous instance that illustrates this is the case of Kim Davis, the Kentucky county clerk who refused a judge’s order to issue marriage licenses to homosexuals. She was declared by the judge to be in contempt of court and ordered to be arrested and jailed.

Still, that judge does not come down with a gun and arrest anybody.

Overreach by a judge does not guarantee 'forcing' anyone to do anything.  who do you arrest if the school board refused to comply?  All of them? only those who voted to not comply?

[austingirl]

Won't the National Government just keep more of the money they confiscate from the State? I thought that was their go-to position.

[Synthesist]

Still, that judge does not come down with a gun and arrest anybody.

Overreach by a judge does not guarantee 'forcing' anyone to do anything.  who do you arrest if the school board refused to comply?  All of them? only those who voted to not comply?

@IsailedawayfromFR

From what I have seen, it is totally up to the discretion of the judge who he declares is in contempt of court. If the judge thinks the entire school board is refusing to obey his order, then he could declare everyone on the board to be in contempt.

It really is too bad that law enforcement seems to always enforce judge’s contempt of court declarations, no matter how outrageous the ridiculous reasons given. I have never heard of an instance of law enforcement refusing to arrest and jail anyone on a contempt charge. Wouldn’t it have been absolutely glorious if in the Kim Davis case that law enforcement just told that judge that they have much more important things to do, like actually serving and protecting the public from REAL criminals, instead of joining in with the judge’s persecution of a county clerk for exercising her 1A right not to be forced to violate her religious beliefs?

[Synthesist]

Won't the National Government just keep more of the money they confiscate from the State? I thought that was their go-to position.

@austingirl

Oh yes, that is the gun that they usually hold to the head of state officials, especially when a federal administration agency regulation is defied. In this case, this administration has already issued “guidance” to public schools that they let anyone use the restroom of their choosing. It would not surprise me at all at this point if the feds threaten to withhold funding for any state that refuses this “guidance”.

[geronl]

The world is going insane

[austingirl]

@austingirl

Oh yes, that is the gun that they usually hold to the head of state officials, especially when a federal administration agency regulation is defied. In this case, this administration has already issued “guidance” to public schools that they let anyone use the restroom of their choosing. It would not surprise me at all at this point if the feds threaten to withhold funding for any state that refuses this “guidance”.

This why I am disappointed that a Convention Of States has not been called. I doubt if it is even possible now given acceptance/surrender to the patently unconstitutional SC decision on Obamacare that is doing such harm to the economy, same-sex marriage which goes against centuries of the fabric of society, and transgenderism which is pure mental illness. This is also why I am in favor of peaceful secession for Texas and any other State that wants to protect their borders and return to Constitutional principles.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

@IsailedawayfromFR

From what I have seen, it is totally up to the discretion of the judge who he declares is in contempt of court. If the judge thinks the entire school board is refusing to obey his order, then he could declare everyone on the board to be in contempt.

It really is too bad that law enforcement seems to always enforce judge’s contempt of court declarations, no matter how outrageous the ridiculous reasons given. I have never heard of an instance of law enforcement refusing to arrest and jail anyone on a contempt charge. Wouldn’t it have been absolutely glorious if in the Kim Davis case that law enforcement just told that judge that they have much more important things to do, like actually serving and protecting the public from REAL criminals, instead of joining in with the judge’s persecution of a county clerk for exercising her 1A right not to be forced to violate her religious beliefs?

And therein is how one  deals with a federal judge ruling on what is clearly a state issue.

Ignore him. He cannot enforce what he decrees.

[Synthesist]

And therein is how one  deals with a federal judge ruling on what is clearly a state issue.

Ignore him. He cannot enforce what he decrees.

The problem is still to get law enforcement to ignore a judge’s contempt of court arrest warrant. I have not researched this issue. Maybe some TBR members could chime in and explain why law enforcement seems compelled to always act on a judge’s order.

Could it be that they swore an oath to execute any arrest warrant that is issued, whether or not they agree with the judge’s reason? On second thought, it occurs to me that an arrest warrant probably does not even include any explanation of the reason, possibly only the charge, e.g. “contempt of court”. Unless an arresting officer has independent knowledge of the facts in a case, they may not even have a clue that the arrest warrant is based on totally bogus reasons.