I Hate Court Cases

It is a crap shoot; you never know how it is going to turn out.

There is a federal court case now in Virginia where a trans boy is suing the school district to allow him to use the boys bathroom.

The New York Times has an editorial about the case yesterday, in the article they said,

 On Monday, Judge Robert Doumar of Federal District Court in Virginia is scheduled to consider whether the school board’s decision to prohibit Gavin from using the male restroom is unlawful discrimination. The case addresses one of the main unresolved battles in the fight for transgender equality.

A favorable decision for the student would be the first time a federal court has ruled that refusing transgender students access to proper restrooms is discriminatory. Any other outcome would reinforce cruel policies that deny dignity to some of the most vulnerable students and subject them to more bullying and stigmatization.

As usual the other students had no problems with him using the boy’s bathroom, but then the parents and elected officials got involved,

Soon, though, feeling that most students were supportive or unfazed, he received permission to use the boys’ room, and did so for seven weeks last fall without any problem. But when word of this reached parents in the community, many were incensed. In response, a Gloucester County school board member, Carla Hook, introduced a resolution in November stipulating that access to locker rooms and restrooms “shall be limited to the corresponding biological genders, and students with gender identity issues shall be provided an alternative appropriate private facility.”
[…]
Since then, Gavin has tried to use the nurse’s restroom at school as infrequently as possible, which has caused urinary tract infections. The ordeal has made him a pariah to many in his community. Judge Doumar has an opportunity to end blatant discrimination by ruling against the school board. Gavin’s lawyers are seeking an injunction that would restore his right to use the proper restroom before school starts in September. A final ruling in the case may take several months.

Judge Robert Doumar is a Reagan appointee and was a  delegate to three Republican national conventions before becoming a federal judge.

In Buzzfeed they have more about the hearing today,

But Doumar announced midway through Monday’s hearing that he was throwing out that argument. “Your case in Title IX is gone, by the way,” he told ACLU staff attorney Joshua Block, who argued on Grimm’s behalf. “I have chosen to dismiss Title IX. I decided that before we started.”
  The announcement was unexpected not only because it diverges from the recent legal trend on the question of whether sex discrimination bans include anti-transgender discrimination, but also because a lawyer for the U.S. Department of Justice who had come to argue in Grimm’s favor on the Title IX question had not yet been given a chance to speak.
[…]
But Doumar pointed out that Title IX allows segregating single-sex facilities in general, like restrooms and locker rooms, for male and female students. And as such, he appeared to argue, transgender students can be segregated as well based on their birth sex. He suggested birth sex is solely at issue in Title IX, not a person’s chosen gender.
  “I have no problem with transgender. I have a lot of problems with sex,” said Doumar. “I am convinced he is a biological female who wants to be a male.”
  Grimm’s lawyers countered that the Supreme Court used gender and sex interchangeably.
Doumar is letting another one of Grimm’s arguments proceed — a constitutional argument for equal protection. However, Doumar warned Grimm’s lawyers, “[Y]ou have an uphill battle.”

The judge said several times about being trans is a mental disorder and was corrected the ACLU attorney that it is "gender dysphoria — the medical term for being transgender — was problematic only if a patients could not live in accordance with their gender identity."

The judge then goes on to show his basis in the case…

On Monday, Doumar repeatedly interrupted lawyers and waxed on tangents about his frustrations with how the United States is changing. “Where the U.S is going scares me,” he said. “It really scares me.”

When the federal government’s lawyer was asked to answer questions toward the end of the hearing, Doumar patronized the Department of Justice for enforcing marijuana prohibition in some states while allowing other states to tax and regulate pot, filing a brief in another unspecific case without pursuing a penalty, and other perceived shortcomings.
  “I am sorry for the Department of Justice,” he said. “Sanctuary cities. Where are we going?”
  “I get perplexed, very perplexed,” he continued. “I believe in the Constitution. … I am worried about where we are going. Maybe I am just old fashioned.” Doumar then went on to cite the works of philosophers Rousseau and Voltaire, saying Congress was too quick to pass new laws.

ABC 13 News Now had this video about the hearing today,

It is nail biting time again. This could be a major victory or a major defeat and end up going all the way to the Supreme Court.