Big ruling yesterday from the Eleventh Circuit in another case dealing with transgender rights. A Florida statute forbids public school teachers from asking their students to call them by a name/title that doesn’t correspond to his or her sex (so, if the teacher is a man, the teacher can’t ask students to use “Ms.,” “Mrs.,” “she,” “her,” etc. when addressing him).
A teacher, Katie Wood, challenged the statute, arguing it violated her First Amendment rights. The trial court issued a preliminary injunction in her favor.
The Eleventh Circuit saw things differently and reversed. The court’s ruling hinged on a threshold question courts ask when a government employee’s freedom of speech is at issue: is the employee speaking as a “citizen" or as a "government employee"? If the answer is government employee, the First Amendment claim is dead. If the answer is citizen, more analysis is necessary. In the specific case of Wood, the court ruled that she had spoken as an employee. Critical to the court’s ruling was the location and timing of the speech at issue—Wood wanted students to use her preferred pronouns in the classroom during instruction hours. That, according to the court, meant she was speaking as a government employee, not a citizen.
Judge Newsom wrote the opinion and was joined by Judge Brasher. Judge Jordan dissented. He first said that the majority applied the wrong standard of review (he thinks it should have been abuse of discretion, not de novo). But he also wrote that the majority got the citizen/government employee ruling wrong, noting that “not every word uttered by a teacher in the classroom is the speech of the government.”
That’s a high-level overview, but there’s much more here than just that. If you want to have a read, the opinion is below.
Wood Case by John Byrne on Scribd
27 comments:
My personal pronouns are Pastrami on Rye
Cue the backwards, uninformed, and obliviously toxic comments from the boomers, who it's not even worth trying to explain trans concepts to. (One already slipped through).
Just remember nana, the internet is forever; history will be the judge of you. Gen z doesn't give two shits about the binary framework you need to feel ok inside.
Brilliance from Judge Jordan.
You are right and you are wrong.
The government has no business telling people how they should ask to be addressed. It is complete bullshit. This law, and others (including policies) being enacted are just fucked up, cruel and completely unnecessary. People who are gay, trans, bisexual, etc., should be able to live their lives free from any form of discrimination.
But you are wrong that the issue is boomers and that a biology doesn't matter.
The sports thing went way too far and was over the top. A guy who was a NCAA swimmer absolutely should be able to decide he is a woman, and be treated as a woman. But, that woman, who is a biological man (whether intact or not, boobs or not), should not then be able to compete against women in sporting events. The same is true for almost any other sport that has gendered categories, including high school sports.
This is not a boomer issue, and people are not out of touch or bigots because they feel this way. It is a issue of fundamental fairness. Biological women and girls should not be forced to compete against people who have more athletic capability because they were born biologically male.
Yes, there will be really difficult issues, for example Caster Semenya, who was treated unfairly, is one. And yes, some type of solution need to be had to make sure that if trans athletes want to compete in a category other than the one matching their biology, they can. Whether this means two additional categories (trans male and trans female), I do not know.
Ex. A.
O, the fucking sports thing. You drank the koolaide without even realizing it. Kudos to you for knowing these laws are fucked up. But your suggested "separate but equal" solution proves my point. I implore you to watch this and see that "biology" doesn't actually make a difference, uniformed 'popular' opinion notwithstanding. And then stop pretending you care about woman's sports to begin with.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=flSS1tjoxf0
Suppose I am a public school teacher and" identify" as a dog and want my students to call me "it" and allow me to bark at them instead of calling them by name? I guess that is ok as it protects my freedom of speech.
1:08 please tell us who you are because that's quite possibly the dumbest thing that's ever been written on this blog.
Do you litigate with this kind of reasoning too? Yikes.
Re 1:08. The comment, although brutal and banal, does make sense. Your sex is not a matter of choice. You are either born a man or woman. Your sex is not determined by how you feel. When objective reality is determined by emotional reaction as opposed to scientific fact, chaos will ensue. Thus, every 15 year old can identify as a 25 year old and head to the nearets liquor store and get toasted. So if a man wants to "identify" as a dog and demand that others respect that decision, why is that differant from a man "identifying" as a woman?
It is this type of mindless rigidity that has brought you the gop dominance they are enjoying. Keep lashing out at people who are allies and get used to ceding power to the people who hate people who are trans. And yes, trans people in sport is an issue that you just cannot be so stupid on. Saying you are a girl does not change the physical advantage of have a male body. Just look at Lia Thomas. Middling male swimmer. NCAA champ as woman. And at the same time, there was a trans male swimmer from Yale. But he chose to swim in the women’s races. Why do you think that was? When you allow people to chose who they compete against for athletic advantage, and that means trans women get to chose to compete against biological girls, you allow fundamental unfairness in sport. It is not unreasonable, cruel or bigoted to recognize this. It is a problem and people should be so intentionally blind not to recognize this. Jk has this one right. The other problem is that if people do not 100 percent agree with you on the issue, they are derided and told they are drinking the koolaid, etc. good strategy.
It's "different" because it's never happened, in the history of humanity. Whereas trans people--albeit an incredibly small number (and therefore unworthy of any legislative attention or your stupid diatribe--very much do. You also need a primer on the difference between "sex" and "gender."
I see you wouldn't spare 30 mins of your time to be better informed, 'ally.' No one "chooses" a different gender for a competitive advantage in sports. And the fact that you think anyone cares to engage with you (ie, tiptoe around your ignorance) or otherwise adhere to some "strategy" to appease your bigotry ... again, really not worth it. You and your ilk will be gone soon enough. We can wait.
True. Sooner or later. In a blink, you will join me. And when I am gone, and after you as well, people will still be born male or female, with very little exception.
And people will still understand it is not fair for somebody with a male body to compete against women.
And people will still get that a woman who has a penis should not be permitted to force other girls to change with them in a locker room because it makes some people understandably uncomfortable.
And no, I am not suggesting that trans women are rapists or child molesters or anything of the sort.
But the hysteria that is apparent in your posts is the clearest demonstration of the problem - a lack of conformity to your views in toto is required or I am a bigot. No room for discussion, no room for thought or reconsideration. Just obey and agree or else. You don’t care that I actively try to aid and support the trans and gay community. You care only that I don’t agree with you on an issue that barely ever comes up.
By the way, how did you know I didn’t watch the clip? Lol…Stalker.
All this concerns me because I do not want to see the maniacs who currently control the government gain more power and continue to impose their beliefs and bigotry on others. Because I want to trans people to be loved and respected just like everybody else. And they do not.
Dear 1:08 pm and 7:43 am—
I initially hoped that 1:08 p.m.'s comment was a very poor attempt at humor. However, seeing 7:43 a.m.'s defense, I'm increasingly doubtful.
I also find it ironic that you are making these comments anonymously about a case in which Ms. Wood courageously litigated publicly.
Perhaps we can address this. Why don't we ask Messrs. Byrne or Markus to host a public debate on the court's decision and the merits of the issue? 1:08 can defend their decision to analogize a fellow human being to a dog, and 7:43 can defend their sanitized analogy.
For me, this boils down to two main points. First, this is a matter of common decency. We should respect our fellow human beings and call them what they would like to be called—simple. Second, the root of this issue is the exercise of governmental power. The current administrations are hostile to LGBTQ+ rights and, in a real sense, question whether this community has the right to exist. The war on pronouns is a way to erase and diminish this community.
Anyway, let's set this up!
Have a Happy 4th everyone. "A Republic if you can keep it."
Why do you find it ironic that anyone would reply anonymously? This coming from a member of the soft, weak left who when someone disagrees with you, you run to cancel that person. That is what weak, soft people do. Because you can’t handle someone disagreeing with you. And that is the true irony.
A matter of common decency? How about being decent to the 5 year old elementary school kid? You want to be a potato who wears a diaper in your own private life? Go ahead. I’m all for that but just teach the kids. I remember being in elementary in the 80s here in miami when my teachers wore dresses down to their ankles, they weren’t all tatted, and didn’t film tik toks during class. I can assure you, none of my teachers had pronouns other than “Mrs. ________” and all we cared about was reading comprehension, the vowels, math, duck duck goose and dodgeball. What a time to be alive.
You just stay on the left, I’ll stay on the right. No big deal. Don’t cry about it. You’re a grown adult so you should understand this simple concept: people are allowed to like and dislike whatever/whomever they want. Deal with it. You think your heroes Biden and Harris are perfect people who love everyone and don’t have their own biases? That’s hilarious. To your face, they say the things you want to hear. Imagine what they say behind closed doors. (Now watch all the libs reply “I would hope you’re not a member of the defense bar blah blah blah”)
I know you didn't watch it because you keep yammering on with conservative talking points that have zero empirical support or are actually refuted by the research that does exist, as noted therein. And I don't think you understand what "hysteria" is.
Well-said. But a public debate would do little good in these times. No one listens anymore; not when their politics has become their identity. And even when they do, they respond only with logical fallacies that are unworthy of reply.
As to the Republic - it appears to me we're well on the path to a second revolution, or at least civil war. Most countries have more than one. We're overdue. Happy 4th!
"You just stay on the left, I’ll stay on the right."
All well and good until one side starts legislating away the rights of people they don't agree with (or wish didn't exist). Only one side does that.
Also, the nostalgia of your long-gone youth isn't impressing anyone. Skirts shorter than the ankle and tattoos!!?? The poor children!
Hahaha. 11:05 and 11:29 should marry each other. Peas in a pod.
People getting worked up about controlling another’s pronouns while income inequality is up, health care access is slashed, civil society is becoming ever more militarized, mass incarceration ramps up, checks and balances are eroded, and legislators are assassinated. People are so easily outraged (manipulated) away from the things that matter. Squirrel!
Or, people can multitask? It would be kind of weird to start commenting about all those other major problems on a blog post about trans rights, don't you think?
On-topic, robust and passionate discussion about the issue at hand isn't a sign of 'manipulation.' I care equally about the things you mention. But that doesn't mean I care less about our trans brothers and sisters being stripped of their human dignity.
9:19 here, you misunderstand me. I care about them too. Those whose outrage is being manipulated IMO are those who direct so much energy to controlling which pronouns, bathrooms, and sports teams are available to others.
@9:19 - "away from the things that matter"?? I think the First Amendment and trans (ie, human) rights fall within that category. So fucking tone-deaf.
12:31 replying - Oh! Well in that case, 100% agree. The legislative (and rhetorical) energy being consumed on a virtually non-existent problem is mind-numbing.
Sorry for misreading. Although I see I wasn't the only one 🥴 (@12:55)
Hmmmm. Some might say that a woman's, nee man's, human and First Amendment rights, to enter women's locker rooms and compete against cis women in sport also impact's cis women's rights to not feel uncomfortable or even threatened, and have a level athletic playing field.
But of course, there can only be one answer to this - only the bigoted asshole would be concerned about the protection of rights that may or may not be impacted by the expansion of other rights.
Well when you consider that states can now deny kids access to health care they, their parents, and their doctors deem appropriate, and teachers cannot ask their students to refer to them by how they identify then yes, bigoted asshole about covers it. If bathrooms and sports were the real issue then data would back up the concerns and the fixes would be limited to bathrooms and sports. But the assault is much broader because this is actually about bigotry.
This is not actually about bigotry, it is about fraudulent misrepresentation. With the exception of intersex, everyone was born as either a male or a female. Once upon a time as a young single straight man in my early 20's I met a person who appeared to be a young woman. We went back to her place. She still appeared to be a young woman after she removed her top. She began to perform fellatio on me. But something was not right. She was too excited. When I asked, she refused to remove her pants, claiming she was having her period. So I reached down outside her pants and felt her penis. I ended our encounter and left. This is the problem. Trans folks who pretend to be someone other than who they are actually, are frauds.
Trans folks should embrace their transgenerdism and live open transgender lives, as do many folks who are homosexual or lesbian. Anything else is fraud. Personally I identify as wealthy, even though my bank account may soon be overdrawn. Under the Constitution, I have a right to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. But I cannot pursue happiness with the income of a pauper. While I may try to cash a check for a million dollars, the check will come back marked "insufficient funds." When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all Americans, yes, rich and poor, would be guaranteed the "unalienable Rights" of "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness". So is it obvious today that America has defaulted on this promissory note, insofar my million dollar check is concerned? Why should my lack of money, lack of talent or crippling disability deny me the pursuit of Happiness? A million dollars is a reasonable amount to obtain a 3 bedroom home in Miami, to furnish the home, and fill the two car garage with a Ford and a Chevrolet.
Why should people like Donald Trump and P. Diddy be able to pursue happiness, but not me?
Post a Comment