Imagine if our state and federal governments put as much effort into fixing real problems as they do into screwing over trans people. What a world that could be.
Surely this is plainly unconstitutional, even by the current SC's jurisprudence. It plainly treats people differently according to sex, no matter how those troglodytes want to define it.
I wish I could believe you, but this Supreme Court hasn't met a minority group it wouldn't screw by turning laws expressly written to protect them in weapons against them. They seem to revel in making up new arguments which class us as non-humans and not only legalize discrimination against us, but to nearly require it.
When it comes to the most recent trans rights cases before the court, their wonderfully stupid argument has been that since the laws which, for instance, ban youth gender-affirming care apply equally to male and female persons alike, there is no equal protection violation. One interpretation of this is that they are fine with discrimination against trans people as long as that discrimination is against both trans women and trans men.
As this law expressly singles out trans women, it's sex discrimination, even by the court's narrow and bigoted way of defining the word.
I think this forces the court to apply a different standard - but I have no doubt that Roberts, in his vast intellectual toolbox, has some other legal reasoning which would either fully justify the law, or extend its discrimination to trans men as well.
Such episodes may ring hollow to the conservatives on today's court, but law students will study these strained inconsistencies and understand the animus that must have been behind such uneven rulings. In tying itself in knots today, the court may well set up some landmark, precedent-flipping rulings in the future.
If this bill passes, it’s time for cis women to step up and support the transgender community by using the men’s rooms as well. If they want transgender women to use the men’s bathroom, they get all of us in there!
Oh my God. Instead of stupidly targeting ANYONE, why don't we just get one seater bathrooms. Any gender. Totally private. Hell, I'd love to be able to take a public dump in private
People on both sides have proposed more single person restrooms. Those on the right who’ve suggested more single person restrooms have been admonished and attacked by the likes of nancy mace. It’s not about sensible solutions. It’s about the political value of attacking us. Plain and simple
If this passes, I predict that cis women who are very tall (6’1” or taller) are going to stop using bathrooms all over the state, unless the bathroom owner knows them personally. The reason is that they will likely be concerned about being misidentified as trans women when the stakes are high. Even if they can later prove their sex (say with a BC), it’s too late - once the arrest and accusation are made, the damage - emotional and otherwise - is already done.
Considering the "transvestigators" craze (look it up; find it on Facebook), I think ALL women are going to start having problems. These nutjobs are able to imagine just about any cisgender woman as trans. I would think that doubly true for right wing women, who seem to enjoy a drag queen sort of esthetic.
Agree except that I don’t think all women will have problems - I think it will primarily be women who strongly don’t gender conform (whether cis or trans). Most people using the bathroom just want to get their business done and leave. So folks who strongly gender-conform should be fine. But there will always be a few busybodies intent on bigotry and enforcing gender stereotypes - and for these, visual cues are all they have to go on. The potential for such misidentification are why these bathroom bills are a bad idea - and why cis women should be strongly opposing them.
While I agree the 5'11" women out there are the canaries in the coal mine, I'm astonished at the ability of these "transvestigators" to find transness where it absolutely doesn't exist. Seriously, go on Facebook and do a search for one of their groups. You can see their posts in which they expose numerous cisgender women as being supposedly trans, and I'm NOT talking about women with masculine features. Example: Taylor Swift, because they don't like her hairline. Their posts are so appalling that you don't know whether to laugh or cry.
The weird thing about this witch hunt is that most of the witch hunters have never seen a witch and don't know what the hell they're searching for. So, to them, everyone looks like a witch.
And as someone who has read a good deal of history on the original witch hunts and the consequences of James VI of Scotland's (James I of England) publication of "Daemonologie", I assure you that you're absolutely spot on..."never seen a witch and don't know what they're looking for".
I'm reminded of the 2015-2016 attempt in several southern states, particularly Texas, to enforce bathroom bans. Of persons harassed, attacked, accused, and or arrested, 90% were cisgender women and NOT transgender people.
Why makes New Hampshire so backwards compared to the rest of New England? I've heard people from neighboring states refer to it as "the Mississippi of the North". Such a disappointment. My spouse and I did a leisurely summer tour through New England a decade ago in a far gentler era and somehow managed to miss New Hampshire by overstaying in Portland, Maine. I used to regret that.
This the most deplorable state, it even beats Texas's which is the most ignorant, immoral, regressive, racist state in the country. Those democrats to turned their back on the trans community are not any better than the republicans who spew their garbage. If this is a sample of the people of this state they should be ashamed of themselves. Anyone thinking of going on vacation to this state should think again.
The DNC has to strip NH of their first in the country primary in Presidential elections. Allowing these troglodytes have a disproportionate say in who becomes the Democratic nominee is a joke.
This is cruel and ridiculous, but the usual caveat applies - how are you going to enforce it. Going on appearance will ensnare some cis women, and they will be none too happy at the idea of criminal charges levied on them just because the state wants to try to ostracize trans women.
Also, can’t the state ACLU sue over this? It seems patently unconstitutional because of how it treats the sexes differently.
Imagine if our state and federal governments put as much effort into fixing real problems as they do into screwing over trans people. What a world that could be.
I can imagine such a government because that government exists in New York State and will exist in NYC!
Surely this is plainly unconstitutional, even by the current SC's jurisprudence. It plainly treats people differently according to sex, no matter how those troglodytes want to define it.
I wish I could believe you, but this Supreme Court hasn't met a minority group it wouldn't screw by turning laws expressly written to protect them in weapons against them. They seem to revel in making up new arguments which class us as non-humans and not only legalize discrimination against us, but to nearly require it.
I did not mean my comment to sound optimistic.
When it comes to the most recent trans rights cases before the court, their wonderfully stupid argument has been that since the laws which, for instance, ban youth gender-affirming care apply equally to male and female persons alike, there is no equal protection violation. One interpretation of this is that they are fine with discrimination against trans people as long as that discrimination is against both trans women and trans men.
As this law expressly singles out trans women, it's sex discrimination, even by the court's narrow and bigoted way of defining the word.
I think this forces the court to apply a different standard - but I have no doubt that Roberts, in his vast intellectual toolbox, has some other legal reasoning which would either fully justify the law, or extend its discrimination to trans men as well.
Such episodes may ring hollow to the conservatives on today's court, but law students will study these strained inconsistencies and understand the animus that must have been behind such uneven rulings. In tying itself in knots today, the court may well set up some landmark, precedent-flipping rulings in the future.
The conservatives (reactionaries, rather) have no legal principles other than “what’s good for the Republican Party?)
If this bill passes, it’s time for cis women to step up and support the transgender community by using the men’s rooms as well. If they want transgender women to use the men’s bathroom, they get all of us in there!
We are exhausted in NH but we will keep fighting. The 2026 state election is super important. Time to vote these evil people out!
Sending you all my good vibes and hope!
Oh my God. Instead of stupidly targeting ANYONE, why don't we just get one seater bathrooms. Any gender. Totally private. Hell, I'd love to be able to take a public dump in private
People on both sides have proposed more single person restrooms. Those on the right who’ve suggested more single person restrooms have been admonished and attacked by the likes of nancy mace. It’s not about sensible solutions. It’s about the political value of attacking us. Plain and simple
If drinking water fountains were still a thing, we'd start seeing 'CIS Only' fountains any day now.
So much for live free or die. So sad. My daughter will not be able to return to her home state. So glad we moved.
I had the same reaction. "Live free or die. Except if you're transgender. Then just die."
I hope they get sued by a cis woman who uses a wheelchair and needs help from her cis husband
If this passes, I predict that cis women who are very tall (6’1” or taller) are going to stop using bathrooms all over the state, unless the bathroom owner knows them personally. The reason is that they will likely be concerned about being misidentified as trans women when the stakes are high. Even if they can later prove their sex (say with a BC), it’s too late - once the arrest and accusation are made, the damage - emotional and otherwise - is already done.
MAGAts and anti-Trans Dems d give a good god-damned about ACTUALLY protecting women, they just want to exterminate Trans people.
Considering the "transvestigators" craze (look it up; find it on Facebook), I think ALL women are going to start having problems. These nutjobs are able to imagine just about any cisgender woman as trans. I would think that doubly true for right wing women, who seem to enjoy a drag queen sort of esthetic.
Agree except that I don’t think all women will have problems - I think it will primarily be women who strongly don’t gender conform (whether cis or trans). Most people using the bathroom just want to get their business done and leave. So folks who strongly gender-conform should be fine. But there will always be a few busybodies intent on bigotry and enforcing gender stereotypes - and for these, visual cues are all they have to go on. The potential for such misidentification are why these bathroom bills are a bad idea - and why cis women should be strongly opposing them.
While I agree the 5'11" women out there are the canaries in the coal mine, I'm astonished at the ability of these "transvestigators" to find transness where it absolutely doesn't exist. Seriously, go on Facebook and do a search for one of their groups. You can see their posts in which they expose numerous cisgender women as being supposedly trans, and I'm NOT talking about women with masculine features. Example: Taylor Swift, because they don't like her hairline. Their posts are so appalling that you don't know whether to laugh or cry.
The weird thing about this witch hunt is that most of the witch hunters have never seen a witch and don't know what the hell they're searching for. So, to them, everyone looks like a witch.
And as someone who has read a good deal of history on the original witch hunts and the consequences of James VI of Scotland's (James I of England) publication of "Daemonologie", I assure you that you're absolutely spot on..."never seen a witch and don't know what they're looking for".
I'm reminded of the 2015-2016 attempt in several southern states, particularly Texas, to enforce bathroom bans. Of persons harassed, attacked, accused, and or arrested, 90% were cisgender women and NOT transgender people.
I live in Vermont, a stones through from New Hampshire. I do a lot or shopping, entertainment and other things in that state
If this bill passes, I would seriously have to consider the wisdom of ever stepping foot in the state again.
It is sad to see NH consistently getting more red every year. Where does this hate come from? It is surrounded by deep blue states (and Canada).
*Throw. :)
Why makes New Hampshire so backwards compared to the rest of New England? I've heard people from neighboring states refer to it as "the Mississippi of the North". Such a disappointment. My spouse and I did a leisurely summer tour through New England a decade ago in a far gentler era and somehow managed to miss New Hampshire by overstaying in Portland, Maine. I used to regret that.
This the most deplorable state, it even beats Texas's which is the most ignorant, immoral, regressive, racist state in the country. Those democrats to turned their back on the trans community are not any better than the republicans who spew their garbage. If this is a sample of the people of this state they should be ashamed of themselves. Anyone thinking of going on vacation to this state should think again.
Our fury aside, it’s pretty on brand for the right wing perverts to be obsessed with peoples’ bathroom business
Lovely! /s
Now TX and FL will feel left out.
New Hampshire aka Alabama North.
The DNC has to strip NH of their first in the country primary in Presidential elections. Allowing these troglodytes have a disproportionate say in who becomes the Democratic nominee is a joke.
Well, there is no chance this is un-constitutional, no-siree-bob.
And this is why I don't vote for Dems just because they aren't MAGAts. If a Dem isn't an ally, they don't get my vote.
This is cruel and ridiculous, but the usual caveat applies - how are you going to enforce it. Going on appearance will ensnare some cis women, and they will be none too happy at the idea of criminal charges levied on them just because the state wants to try to ostracize trans women.
Also, can’t the state ACLU sue over this? It seems patently unconstitutional because of how it treats the sexes differently.