Posted on 07/16/2022 3:19:49 PM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
A judge in Tennessee has temporarily barred two federal agencies from enforcing directives issued by President Joe Biden’s administration that extended protections for LGBTQ people in schools and workplaces.
U.S. District Judge Charles Atchley Jr. in an order on Friday ruled for the 20 state attorneys general who sued last August claiming the Biden administration directives infringe on states’ right to enact laws that, for example, prevent students from participating in sports based on their gender identity or requiring schools and businesses to provide bathrooms and showers to accommodate transgender people.
Atchley, appointed by President Donald Trump in 2020, agreed with the attorneys generals’ argument and issued a temporary injunction that prevents the agencies from applying that guidance on LGBTQ discrimination until the matter can be resolved by courts.
The attorneys general are from Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee and West Virginia.
With its guidance, the Biden administration in part took a stand against laws and proposals in a growing number of states that aim to forbid transgender girls from participating on female sports teams. The state attorneys general contend that the authority over such policies “properly belongs to Congress, the States, and the people.”
The education policy carried the possibility of federal sanctions against schools and colleges that fail to protect gay and transgender students.
(Excerpt) Read more at apnews.com ...
It’s about time this madness was put to a stop.
Is there actually any part of the relevant statutes extending “protections” to gay and transgender students? Or is the admin just pulling these requirements out of its butt?
Yeah... Sure...
That will work...
The barn door has been ripped off and the horses are long gone...
This whole thing makes no sense. Allowing someone born male to participate against a natural born female is unfair.
These are not protections. They are additional priviledes that are only to these people. It is illegal and unconstitutional.
Is there any enumerated power for the federal to require non-State actors to respect / honor federal civil rights?
Nope, none at all.
Sort of like rejecting a well qualified candidate for admission, employment or promotion because of their race to admit, employ or promote a less qualified candidate because of their race.
Well, there are requirements for recipients of Federal monies to meet the standards set in statute. It’s just that I think there are no such statutory requirements: they are twisting Title IX’s requirement for equal access to women to mean that schools must destroy women’s sports by allowing “transgendered” athletes.
Thinking like a sane person will get you nowhere in today’s lunatic asylum of a world. I’m starting to think our best hope is to convince every leftist male that he’s actually a woman and that only cutting off his parts would enable him to express his “true identity.” Just to be sure, we might also want to encourage the leftist females to live as males to prevent any temptation of young conservative males to “cross pollinate.”
Yup, and who opened that closet door.
For now… but name a society in history that had sustained open queers running amuck that didn’t collapse.
It was made simple, 1 or 2, and bedammed if we haven’t screwed that up too.
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
Assemble on Lexington Green and at Concord Bridge the National monument grounds and in every town square...
Open carry recommended...
there is no enumerated power for the federal to spend that money for those purposes among the several States
Perhaps, but no court go that far back up the legal questions to toss the Biden regime’s claims. It’s enough after EPA simply to point out that Title IX was written to explicitly provide protections for women. If Congress had wanted to add other groups, it would have stated that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.