Senate Bill 458 ended legal recognition for transgender people in the state. A Montana judge has ruled that the bill's title is unconstitutionally vague.
Legal definitions of sex that erase trans people from the law are a particularly hurtful and dangerous form of discrimination against trans individuals. Right-wing zealots know this, and that’s why they push for these types of laws. Despite the favorable Montana ruling, sadly, one should expect more such laws in the future - including at the federal level if the GOP wins the elections in November.
The Right's plan for transgender rights is clearly articulated in the Heritage Foundation's fascist manifesto called Project 2025. Needless to say, erasure of the entire transgender identity is Goal Number One for Conservatives.
Yes and that is what is so worrying. It’s a very under-appreciated danger, even among trans people. Expect the right-wing zealots to come for passports - that prospect is something they salivate over. Gender marker changes will end, and they may even seek to reverse such changes that have already taken place. Besides being cruel and demeaning, will put trans travelers at significant risk, especially in certain countries. There may be lawsuits over this that, depending on the stranglehold that the 2025 people have over the future administration, may result in prolonged court battles. There are no guarantees this will happen. But it is almost guaranteed that the future will not be pretty.
I'm sorry, this decision is not good enough, regardless of the outcome. Do we really want to be cheering a victory on a technicality when the judge couldn't be bothered to rule that trans and intersex people can not and should not have their basic human rights massively violated? What happens when the legislation cleans up the language and passes an equally harmful law? This decision only delays the inevitable in a state ruled by enemies of our community. This only reinforces my opinion that we can't rely on the "impartial" justice system to save us.
That's actually how they are supposed to operate, make the most restrained, minimal, gets the job done decision they can. It's when they get creative and sweeping they are more commonly a problem.
To a degree, to make such sweeping calls is SCOTUS' job, being the court of final appeal "in matters of law and equity". They are not intended to only settle individual cases, but categories of cases.
You can not identify a subset of lawful citizens for the purpose legislative discrimination. It's blatantly unconstitutional . Namely the 6th and 14th Amendment. Legislative genocide must end.
That's how it DOES operate, not how it is SUPPOSED to operate. That judge knew damn well that the law was blatantly unconstitutional, yet he chooses the "cover your ass" route. It was an act of cowardice.
Legal definitions of sex that erase trans people from the law are a particularly hurtful and dangerous form of discrimination against trans individuals. Right-wing zealots know this, and that’s why they push for these types of laws. Despite the favorable Montana ruling, sadly, one should expect more such laws in the future - including at the federal level if the GOP wins the elections in November.
The Right's plan for transgender rights is clearly articulated in the Heritage Foundation's fascist manifesto called Project 2025. Needless to say, erasure of the entire transgender identity is Goal Number One for Conservatives.
Yes and that is what is so worrying. It’s a very under-appreciated danger, even among trans people. Expect the right-wing zealots to come for passports - that prospect is something they salivate over. Gender marker changes will end, and they may even seek to reverse such changes that have already taken place. Besides being cruel and demeaning, will put trans travelers at significant risk, especially in certain countries. There may be lawsuits over this that, depending on the stranglehold that the 2025 people have over the future administration, may result in prolonged court battles. There are no guarantees this will happen. But it is almost guaranteed that the future will not be pretty.
People suck, but we aren't going to stop fighting this trend. There cannot be submission to the faux theocracy.
I'm sorry, this decision is not good enough, regardless of the outcome. Do we really want to be cheering a victory on a technicality when the judge couldn't be bothered to rule that trans and intersex people can not and should not have their basic human rights massively violated? What happens when the legislation cleans up the language and passes an equally harmful law? This decision only delays the inevitable in a state ruled by enemies of our community. This only reinforces my opinion that we can't rely on the "impartial" justice system to save us.
That's actually how they are supposed to operate, make the most restrained, minimal, gets the job done decision they can. It's when they get creative and sweeping they are more commonly a problem.
I'll be happy with good news when I get it.
Unlike SCOTUS which has shown it tends to go far reaching when it should not.
To a degree, to make such sweeping calls is SCOTUS' job, being the court of final appeal "in matters of law and equity". They are not intended to only settle individual cases, but categories of cases.
We celebrate every win! Please stay safe and well, Everyone! Sending lots of Love from London Ontario Canada.
You can not identify a subset of lawful citizens for the purpose legislative discrimination. It's blatantly unconstitutional . Namely the 6th and 14th Amendment. Legislative genocide must end.
The # of states where I won’t spend my money grows and grows.
That's how it DOES operate, not how it is SUPPOSED to operate. That judge knew damn well that the law was blatantly unconstitutional, yet he chooses the "cover your ass" route. It was an act of cowardice.
Judges often do the right thing. :)
Unless they're on the Supreme Court
Supreme Court ruling on Grants Pass is a disturbing sign of things to come:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-175_19m2.pdf
If the SC is happy to criminalise being homeless, they'll be happy to criminalise being trans too.