Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Nitrousoxide
May 30, 2011

do not buy a oneplus phone



CommieGIR posted:

And, lo, the Federal Courts did reach down and slap the gently caress out of North Carolina for not understanding the Supremacy Clause.

This isnt a supremecy clause issue.

The feds can entice States to make a lot of laws it wouldn't normally be able to require (like a 21 drinking age) by making Federal funding contingent on their compliance with that. Here school funding is contingent on being compliant with the relevant Federal rules so they are free to say gently caress you to the feds but they risk Federal funding.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

CommieGIR
Aug 22, 2006

The blue glow is a feature, not a bug


Pillbug

Nitrousoxide posted:

This isnt a supremecy clause issue.

The feds can entice States to make a lot of laws it wouldn't normally be able to require (like a 21 drinking age) by making Federal funding contingent on their compliance with that. Here school funding is contingent on being compliant with the relevant Federal rules so they are free to say gently caress you to the feds but they risk Federal funding.

The law violates the 14th. They may removing the funding as an initial punishment, but at the end of the day it's an unconstitutional law and does violate the supremacy clause.

german porn enthusiast
Dec 29, 2015

by exmarx
how long do trans people in north carolina have to deal with this if NC doesn't capitulate?

sexpig by night
Sep 8, 2011

by Azathoth

So on Monday a federal judge is gonna respond with "Yes, we literally can"

joat mon
Oct 15, 2009

I am the master of my lamp;
I am the captain of my tub.
It is a Supremacy Clause issue in that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is a federal law that binds the states (and businesses with more than 15 employees) through the Commerce clause. (enforced by federal marshals with a court order)
Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 seeks to influence the states through the Appropriations clause. (enforced by withholding of funds)
The DoJ effort is not being pursued as a 14th Amendment issue.

There are some circuit court cases (though none in the 4th Circuit, where NC is) and some Equal Employment Opportunity Commission rulings that have held that bathroom preference discrimination against transgendered people is gender discrimination. None of these are controlling on NC. The question is, does NC have the time, money and desire for negative spotlight to work the cases through district court, the 4th Circuit, and the Supreme Court?

Tatum Girlparts posted:

So on Monday a federal judge is gonna respond with "Yes, we literally can"
No, on the Title VII side, DoJ will have to file a lawsuit which will require hearings, rulings and appeals.
On the Title IX side, the Dept. of Education has an administrative process which can end up with compliance or either withholding funds or having DoJ file a lawsuit to withhold funds.

joat mon fucked around with this message at 18:27 on May 6, 2016

Quorum
Sep 24, 2014

REMIND ME AGAIN HOW THE LITTLE HORSE-SHAPED ONES MOVE?
I've mentioned this before but Obama stacking the previously ridiculously-conservative Fourth Circuit with liberal judges to turn it into one of the best circuits is absolutely the best thing he ever did for me personally. Plus their courthouse is like three blocks away from me so I can go and watch important cases sometimes and that's cool.

CommieGIR
Aug 22, 2006

The blue glow is a feature, not a bug


Pillbug
Roy Moore has been suspended for Ethics violations.

Which resulted him lying and throwing a tantrum:

http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovemen...me_sex_marriage

quote:

Despite rulings by both a federal judge and later, the U.S. Supreme Court, "Moore instructed probate judges throughout Alabama to ignore those higher courts and to refuse to issue licenses to same-sex couples," AL.com reports.

Moore and his attorney, the head of an anti-gay hate group, Liberty Counsel, last month held a press conference to explain his positions. He said, “transsexualism is a known mental illness,” and claimed there "is nothing in writing that you will find that I told anybody to disobey a federal court order. That’s not what I said.”

Clearly, the JIC filed a differing opinion.

Friday night, Moore told AL.com, "The Judicial Inquiry Commission has chosen to listen to people like Ambrosia Starling, a professed transvestite and other gay, lesbian and bisexual individuals, as well as organizations that support their agenda."

Full text of complaint: https://www.splcenter.org/sites/default/files/documents/coj46complaint.pdf

CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 03:43 on May 7, 2016

MaxxBot
Oct 6, 2003

you could have clapped

you should have clapped!!
Man this has been like the week from hell for the religious right. Their True Believer candidate got humiliated in favor of "Two Corinthians" Trump who changes his position on abortion on a daily basis and clearly gives no fucks about their concerns. Their precious anti-trans laws are headed to certain defeat whether it be legislative or judicial. Now their favorite judge has been punished at the behest of the Godless sodomite lobby. I'd almost feel bad if they weren't such terrible people.

Al-Saqr
Nov 11, 2007

Can someone explain to me what the Gender neutral bathroom signs actually mean? What's the difference between the blue signs and simply stating that a bathroom is Unisex?

Gyre
Feb 25, 2007

So, it's happening.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/05/09/north-carolina-justice-dept-face-monday-deadline-for-bathroom-bill/

quote:

North Carolina governor Pat McCrory filed a lawsuit Monday against the United States Justice Department, asking a federal court to rule that its so-called “bathroom law” is not discriminatory.

In his complaint, McCrory (R) accused the federal government of “baseless and blatant overreach.”

“The Obama administration is bypassing Congress by attempting to rewrite the law and set restroom policies for public and private employers across the country, not just North Carolina,” McCrory said in a related statement. “This is now a national issue that applies to every state and it needs to be resolved at the federal level.”

It's going to be delicious when his poo poo gets smacked down.

CommieGIR
Aug 22, 2006

The blue glow is a feature, not a bug


Pillbug

Gyre posted:

It's going to be delicious when his poo poo gets smacked down.

The best part:

quote:

North Carolina's suit said that Title VII, which the Department of Justice said House Bill No. 2 violates, doesn't recognize transgender status as a protected class. "If the United States desires a new protected class under Title VII, it must seek such action by the United States Congress," the suit said.

What better way to get that done than to sue in Federal Court over a law that is Constitutionally dead in the water, while you cry about being given a week to rectify a law that you took less than a day to pass as a bill and signed into law the same day in a special session.

Seriously, someone in the DoJ is laughing their rear end off right now, and I'm willing to bet that he made this lawsuit under advise of the Liberty Council, because it reeks of 'Kim David part deux' because nobody but Liberty Council would be so loving stupid to think this would fly.

Mr. Nice!
Oct 13, 2005

c-spam cannot afford




Today is the deadline the feds gave them to pass something that says the law will not be enacted or enforced. I wonder if they'll pull the trigger and yank the money.

CommieGIR
Aug 22, 2006

The blue glow is a feature, not a bug


Pillbug

Mr. Nice! posted:

Today is the deadline the feds gave them to pass something that says the law will not be enacted or enforced. I wonder if they'll pull the trigger and yank the money.

Considering they are suing? They'll probably ACCELERATE yanking the money.

Sharkie
Feb 4, 2013

by Fluffdaddy
Meanwhile in NC, they're suing the Justice Department: http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/09/politics/north-carolina-hb2-justice-department-deadline/ (beaten lol)

quote:

"This unrealistic deadline by the federal government is quite amazing," he said in his Fox News interview. "It's the federal government being a bully."...
McCrory also points to the fact that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act uses the term "sex" when it comes to gender issues, and "Congress does not define sex" as something that can be chosen.

The Justice Department, of course, doesn't agree with this interpretation.http://documents.buzzfeed.com/Title%20VII%20Memo.pdf

quote:

The most straight forward reading of Title VII is that discrimination "because of ... sex" includes discrimination because an employee's gender identification is as a member of a particular sex, or because the employee is transitioning, or has transitioned, to another sex. As the Court explained in Price Waterhouse, by using "the simple words 'because of,' ... Congress meant to obligate" a Title VII plaintiff to prove only "that the employer relied upon sex-based considerations in coming to its decision." 490 U.S. at 241-242. It followsthat, as a matter of plain meaning, Title VII' s prohibition against discrimination "because of ... sex" encompasses discrimination founded on sex-based considerations, including discrimination based on an employee's transitioning to, or identifying as, a different sex altogether.


Al-Saqr posted:

Can someone explain to me what the Gender neutral bathroom signs actually mean? What's the difference between the blue signs and simply stating that a bathroom is Unisex?

There's no difference. If you're referring to the signs I'm thinking of, they're usually put up when there's a third bathroom (aside from male and female) to indicate it's for parents with very young children/disabled people/etc.

CommieGIR
Aug 22, 2006

The blue glow is a feature, not a bug


Pillbug

Sharkie posted:

The Justice Department, of course, doesn't agree with this interpretation.http://documents.buzzfeed.com/Title%20VII%20Memo.pdf

Seriously, whose ready to watch the inevitable spanking?

Nostalgia4Infinity
Feb 27, 2007

10,000 YEARS WASN'T ENOUGH LURKING
Y'all act like getting bitchslapped by the Feds isn't going to feed their persecution narrative.

CommieGIR
Aug 22, 2006

The blue glow is a feature, not a bug


Pillbug

Nostalgia4Infinity posted:

Y'all act like getting bitchslapped by the Feds isn't going to feed their persecution narrative.

Everything feed into their persecution narrative. The entire backstory for the Liberty Council and half the Evangelicals is that they are being oppressed by NOT being allowed to oppress others.

Sharkie
Feb 4, 2013

by Fluffdaddy

CommieGIR posted:

Everything feed into their persecution narrative. The entire backstory for the Liberty Council and half the Evangelicals is that they are being oppressed by NOT being allowed to oppress others.

Yeah, the only thing that wouldn't feed into their persecution narrative would be to roll over and let them run roughshod over LGBT people. So gently caress 'em. The important thing is getting bad law overturned.

joat mon
Oct 15, 2009

I am the master of my lamp;
I am the captain of my tub.

CommieGIR posted:

The best part:

quote:

North Carolina's suit said that Title VII, which the Department of Justice said House Bill No. 2 violates, doesn't recognize transgender status as a protected class. "If the United States desires a new protected class under Title VII, it must seek such action by the United States Congress," the suit said.
That's 100% true, and shows that 1)strict construction and 2)living constitution/laws arguments know no ideology. (though it's usually right+strict construction and left+living constitution)
1) When congressmen added 'gender' to the civil rights act of 1964 as a poison pill, intending that the inclusion of women would scuttle the whole thing, did they intend to include transgendered people as well?
Of course not. If congress didn't intend gender identity to be part of the civil rights act, congress has to amend the civil right act to include it.
2) Congress' inclusion of 'gender' as something that shouldn't be a basis for discrimination is sound, fair and honorable. In the last 50 years, we have come to /are coming to a broader and more inclusive understanding of 'gender' and believe that those same principles that prohibit discrimination based upon biological sex apply equally to discrimination based upon subjective gender. Therefore gender identity is covered by the civil rights act. This is DoJ's current position, as noted by:

Sharkie posted:

The Justice Department, of course, doesn't agree with this interpretation.http://documents.buzzfeed.com/Title%20VII%20Memo.pdf

CommieGIR posted:

What better way to get that done than to sue in Federal Court over a law that is Constitutionally dead in the water, while you cry about being given a week to rectify a law that you took less than a day to pass as a bill and signed into law the same day in a special session.
Maybe running out of steam as a matter of historical fact, but the Constitutional question is definitely still out there.

CommieGIR posted:

Seriously, someone in the DoJ is laughing their rear end off right now, and I'm willing to bet that he made this lawsuit under advise of the Liberty Council, because it reeks of 'Kim David part deux' because nobody but Liberty Council would be so loving stupid to think this would fly.
NC's lawsuit isn't screechy enough for Liberty Council and flies in a legal sense. On the other hand, it's still too screechy for my tastes in legal writing, and their arguments aren't very good. 1: All sorts of courts have said trans isn't covered by Title VII (in the 1980s) 2: Differences in male/female GROOMING STANDARDS aren't discrimination, so we can discriminate here 3: Need to balance "bodily privacy" interests of non-trans with trans people's gender identity (by denying bodily privacy of trans people)

Mr. Nice! posted:

Today is the deadline the feds gave them to pass something that says the law will not be enacted or enforced. I wonder if they'll pull the trigger and yank the money.
That trigger has a really long pull.

Mercury_Storm
Jun 12, 2003

*chomp chomp chomp*
NC is making "bathroom policy" the hill they die on? Really?

Who What Now
Sep 10, 2006

by Azathoth

Nostalgia4Infinity posted:

Y'all act like getting bitchslapped by the Feds isn't going to feed their persecution narrative.

I'm absolutely ok with that. And if that's what they really want, I have no problem with giving it to them.

Kristov
Jul 5, 2005

Oh my loving god. There is literally a part of that law that makes it impossible to sue for employment discrimination OF ANY KIND in state courts and they try to play this bullshit.

Kristov
Jul 5, 2005
It would be nice if a company that pulled out of NC changed their minds. But then deliberately and explicitly refused to hire any and all straight white men.

A Winner is Jew
Feb 14, 2008

by exmarx

Who What Now posted:

I'm absolutely ok with that. And if that's what they really want, I have no problem with giving it to them.

Yeah, if that's the way they get their kink on who am I to shame them.

CommieGIR
Aug 22, 2006

The blue glow is a feature, not a bug


Pillbug

joat mon posted:

That's 100% true, and shows that 1)strict construction and 2)living constitution/laws arguments know no ideology. (though it's usually right+strict construction and left+living constitution)
1) When congressmen added 'gender' to the civil rights act of 1964 as a poison pill, intending that the inclusion of women would scuttle the whole thing, did they intend to include transgendered people as well?
Of course not. If congress didn't intend gender identity to be part of the civil rights act, congress has to amend the civil right act to include it.
2) Congress' inclusion of 'gender' as something that shouldn't be a basis for discrimination is sound, fair and honorable. In the last 50 years, we have come to /are coming to a broader and more inclusive understanding of 'gender' and believe that those same principles that prohibit discrimination based upon biological sex apply equally to discrimination based upon subjective gender. Therefore gender identity is covered by the civil rights act. This is DoJ's current position, as noted by:


Maybe running out of steam as a matter of historical fact, but the Constitutional question is definitely still out there.

NC's lawsuit isn't screechy enough for Liberty Council and flies in a legal sense. On the other hand, it's still too screechy for my tastes in legal writing, and their arguments aren't very good. 1: All sorts of courts have said trans isn't covered by Title VII (in the 1980s) 2: Differences in male/female GROOMING STANDARDS aren't discrimination, so we can discriminate here 3: Need to balance "bodily privacy" interests of non-trans with trans people's gender identity (by denying bodily privacy of trans people)

That trigger has a really long pull.

Even if it is still in question, I doubt North Carolina is going to be the one to finally sway that into the Conservative's favour, and this will likely just make the DoJ more staunch in knocking these sort of things down.

Mr. Nice!
Oct 13, 2005

c-spam cannot afford



Statement from the DoJ coming at 3:30

Alec Bald Snatch
Sep 12, 2012

by exmarx

joat mon posted:


There are some circuit court cases (though none in the 4th Circuit, where NC is) and some Equal Employment Opportunity Commission rulings that have held that bathroom preference discrimination against transgendered people is gender discrimination. None of these are controlling on NC.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...3cf6_story.html

McCrory filed an amicus brief in that case.

CommieGIR
Aug 22, 2006

The blue glow is a feature, not a bug


Pillbug

Yeah, which is part of why its likely his little lawsuit will go nowhere.

joat mon
Oct 15, 2009

I am the master of my lamp;
I am the captain of my tub.
That was a Title IX case, prosecuted by the Department of Education.
What this means is that there's no 4th Circuit binding precedent with regard to Title VII.
However, the issues presented in the Title IX case are going to be analyzed in the same way as a Title VII case, so the former case is a good indicator of which way at least that panel of the 4th will go.

Mr. Nice!
Oct 13, 2005

c-spam cannot afford



Lynch just came out and said that the DOJ is suing the state of NC over HB2 to enjoin enforcement and that financial sanctions on the state are still on the table during the process.

CommieGIR
Aug 22, 2006

The blue glow is a feature, not a bug


Pillbug

Mr. Nice! posted:

Lynch just came out and said that the DOJ is suing the state of NC over HB2 to enjoin enforcement and that financial sanctions on the state are still on the table during the process.

I think they are leaving them on the table as a good faith bait, but the way Lynch was talking, DoJ is going to rip them a new one if they don't back down now.

Mr. Nice!
Oct 13, 2005

c-spam cannot afford



CommieGIR posted:

I think they are leaving them on the table as a good faith bait, but the way Lynch was talking, DoJ is going to rip them a new one if they don't back down now.

Yeah the DoJ is not happy at all that NC didn't even respond to them and instead just filed suit.

CommieGIR
Aug 22, 2006

The blue glow is a feature, not a bug


Pillbug

Mr. Nice! posted:

Yeah the DoJ is not happy at all that NC didn't even respond to them and instead just filed suit.

Seriously, it was such a bad move on NCs part. Oh, they just filed a second suit as well.

But if Lynch is talking this way, NC might as well have just thrown a temper tantrum, because DOJ is going to take them through the ringer for that.

Lynch just announced UofNC board of governors is meeting tomorrow and they reached out to the DoJ, chances are they are going to be game.

Mercury_Storm
Jun 12, 2003

*chomp chomp chomp*
Oh my god, that speech owned.

Taking questions now:

https://www.justice.gov/live-stream

Sharkie
Feb 4, 2013

by Fluffdaddy
Transcript for those who missed it:

https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/attorney-general-loretta-e-lynch-delivers-remarks-press-conference-announcing-complaint

quote:

Today, we are filing a federal civil rights lawsuit against the state of North Carolina, Governor Pat McCrory, the North Carolina Department of Public Safety and the University of North Carolina. We are seeking a court order declaring House Bill 2’s restroom restriction impermissibly discriminatory, as well as a statewide bar on its enforcement. While the lawsuit currently seeks declaratory relief, I want to note that we retain the option of curtailing federal funding to the North Carolina Department of Public Safety and the University of North Carolina as this case proceeds.

William Bear
Oct 26, 2012

"That's what they all say!"

quote:

Let me also speak directly to the transgender community itself. Some of you have lived freely for decades. Others of you are still wondering how you can possibly live the lives you were born to lead. But no matter how isolated or scared you may feel today, the Department of Justice and the entire Obama Administration wants you to know that we see you; we stand with you; and we will do everything we can to protect you going forward. Please know that history is on your side. This country was founded on a promise of equal rights for all, and we have always managed to move closer to that promise, little by little, one day at a time. It may not be easy – but we’ll get there together.

Powerful stuff. Are these the strongest words a Federal official has ever said in support of transgender rights?

Aleph Null
Jun 10, 2008

You look very stressed
Tortured By Flan

William Bear posted:

Powerful stuff. Are these the strongest words a Federal official has ever said in support of transgender rights?

I just read the whole transcript (it's not long).
As a middle-aged trans woman who hides her trans status out of fear, knowing that the federal government sees me as a human being with rights, and not an abomination to be shunned... It brought tears to my eyes and to my wife's. It's acceptance on a scale I didn't think I'd see for another decade at least.
It gives me hope.

Nostalgia4Infinity
Feb 27, 2007

10,000 YEARS WASN'T ENOUGH LURKING
That DOJ statement is why getting out and vote this year is so important. All that support goes bye bye in a Republican administration.

Nostalgia4Infinity fucked around with this message at 13:02 on May 10, 2016

Aleph Null
Jun 10, 2008

You look very stressed
Tortured By Flan

Nostalgia4Infinity posted:

That DOJ statement is why getting out and vote this year is so important. All that support goes bye bye in a Republican administration.

Honestly, it's enough to make me vote Hillary. I was on the fence before.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Nostalgia4Infinity
Feb 27, 2007

10,000 YEARS WASN'T ENOUGH LURKING
It was self evident from the moment the Obama administration actually started doing anything with LGBT issues.

Any liberal who sits out or votes third party this election is a traitor to the cause as far as I'm concerned. :commissar:

  • Locked thread