Neither DOJ nor Education took a position on the underlying question of whether Title IX and its regs provide gender identity protections.
-
-
The guidance — due to a district court injunction — already was on hold in most places and ways, too, so that's not changed.
-
What about GG? That ~is~ a good question, and I think people of good will, as they say, will reach different conclusions about that.
-
In one sense, the case can still be decided, on the underlying question of whether Title IX's sex discrim ban bars anti-trans discrim.
-
But, that question was not the basis for the Fourth Circuit's ruling, so the Supreme Court also could, sooner or later, send the case back.
-
For Gavin Grimm specifically, therefore, this move could have the effect of dragging out his case beyond his high school graduation.
-
And, finally, there is the ~message~ effect: The recollection of AG Lynch’s strong statement of support for trans people’s legal protection.
-
That certainly has changed & could make a difference to school districts (in states w/o other protections) who were undecided on the issue.
-
I know people don't get my thinking on DeVos, but it was either DeVos, as reported repeatedly, or the White House that pulled back Sessions.
-
We don't know for certain. But someone did, multiple reports say it was DeVos, and that makes sense in light of all I've heard and know.
-
Anyway, that's all I got for now. Thanks for listening; I think I responded to all of the issues raised by folks in the tread. </end>
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.