District Court judge Robert Chatigny has ordered attorneys representing three high school girls that they must refer to the trans athletes on the other side of the case as “female,” an action which has alarmed many as demonstrative of partiality.
The case in question is a suit filed in February 2020 by the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) on behalf of three female high school athletes: Selina Soule, Alanna Smith, and Chelsea Mitchell; against the Connecticut Interscholastic Athletic Conference (CIAC). The CIAC policy allows individuals to compete in sports on the basis of their gender identity, meaning male-to-female transgender athletes compete against biological women. Connecticut is one of 17 states which adheres so extremely to the transgender ideology.
Before the suit, the ADF also filed a complaint with the Department of Education in June 2019. The situation also led to a petition in support of the students sponsored by LifeSiteNews which currently has almost 190,000 signatures.
National Review has summarized the situation that led to the suit as follows:
“The case centers on the participation of two transgender sprinters, Terry Miller and Andraya Yearwood, who have combined to win 15 girls indoor and outdoor championship events since 2017. The year prior to Miller and Yearwood’s participation, those titles were held by ten different girls. The three plaintiffs have competed directly against Miller and Yearwood and have lost to them in nearly every case.”
All three girls have spoken out emotionally about the personal impact the situation has had on them and others, saying that they “feel defeated before a race begins,” and are just asking for “a fair chance” for “every young woman who dreams of competing, of having her chance, of being rewarded for doing her very best.”
Selina Soule described her situation at a press conference, saying:
“Like the other track athletes standing here today, I face an impossible situation… Now, when we line up in front of our blockers and the starter calls us to get into position, we all know how the race will end. We can’t win. We’ve lived it. We’ve watched it happen… We’ve missed out on medals, on opportunities to compete. But when we’ve asked questions, we’ve been told we’re allowed to compete, but we shouldn’t expect to win.”
In a later interview, she added that “it’s just really frustrating and heartbreaking, because we all train extremely hard to shave off just fractions of a second off of our time. And these athletes can do half the amount of work that we do, and it doesn’t matter. We have no chance of winning.”
The basis of the legal case is the allegation by the plaintiffs that the CIAC’s policy is in violation of Title IX, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex, because it disadvantages the biologically female athletes.
However, according to a conference call transcript obtained by National Review, judge Robert Chatigny recently forbade the ADF’s attorneys from referring to Miller and Yearwood as “male,” and ordered the ADF to call them “female,” even though that question lies at the heart of the case. Chatigny’s statement as per the transcript:
“What I’m saying is you must refer to them as “transgender females” rather than as “males.” Again, that’s the more accurate terminology, and I think that it fully protects your client’s legitimate interests. Referring to these individuals as “transgender females” is consistent with science, common practice and perhaps human decency. To refer to them as “males,” period, is not accurate, certainly not as accurate, and I think it’s needlessly provocative. I don’t think that you surrender any legitimate interest or position if you refer to them as transgender females. That is what the case is about. This isn’t a case involving males who have decided that they want to run in girls’ events. This is a case about girls who say that transgender girls should not be allowed to run in girls’ events. So going forward, we will not refer to the proposed intervenors as “males”; understood?”
The ADF’s lead attorney, Robert Brooks, responded to this by calling out the absurdity of the order in the context of the case:
“The entire focus of the case is the fact that the CIAC policy allows individuals who are physiologically, genetically male to compete in girls’ athletics. But if I use the term “females” to describe those individuals — and we’ve said in our opening brief, we’re happy to use their preferred names, because names are not the point to the case. Gender identity is not the point of this case. The point of this case is physiology of bodies driven by chromosomes and the documented athletic advantage that comes from a male body, male hormones, and male puberty in particular. So, Your Honor, I do have a concern that I am not adequately representing my client and I’m not accurately representing their position in this case as it has to be argued before Your Honor and all the way up if I refer to these individuals as “female,” because that’s simply, when we’re talking about physiology, that’s not accurate, at least in the belief of my clients.”
Later on in the conversation, Chatigny responded:
“So if you feel strongly that you and your clients have a right to refer to these individuals as “males” and that you therefore do not want to comply with my order, then that’s unfortunate. But I’ll give you some time to think about it and you can let me know if it’s a problem. If it is, gosh, maybe we’ll need to do something. I don’t want to bully you, but at the same time, I don’t want you to be bullying anybody else. Maybe you might need to take an application to the Court of Appeals. I don’t know. But I certainly don’t want to put civility at risk in this case.”
In response, on Saturday the ADF’s legal team filed a motion for Chatigny to recuse himself, calling his order “legally unprecedented” and stating that “a disinterested observer would reasonably believe that the Court’s order and comments have destroyed the appearance of impartiality.”
Under AG Bill Bar, the Trump Justice Department has taken an interest in the case, filing a statement of interest this March and stating that the CIAC is in violation of Title IX, as well as referring to the transgender athletes as “biologically male.”
Stories like this will only become increasingly common if conservatives do not effectively push back. Perhaps between the ADF’s able legal team and the Trump administration’s support, this will be one case that stems the tide.
A Researcher at Brown University Claims that Trump Signs and American Flags Frighten Black People
America’s “Finest” Institutions Down the Insane Path of Wokeness
Carycruz Bueno, a postdoctoral researcher at Brown University, tweeted about how Black Airbnb guests may actually receive trauma from looking at Trump signs.
A few weeks ago Bueno tweeted that the online vacation rental company “doesn’t understand the trauma” that Trump signs allegedly cause for Black people.
As Ben Zeisloft of Campus Reform noted, “Airbnb rentals are privately owned properties listed for short-term and long-term rental on Airbnb. Airbnb, unlike hotels, does not own the properties. It is the platform that connects private owners with renters and facilitates payments.”
Bueno claimed that when she and her husband arrived at a property they rented in Maine they saw “Trump signs and other white nationalist symbols” in the yard. Bueno recalled that she was “immediately scared” for her life and her family’s safety.
According to Bueno’s account of the situation, Airbnb said they could do nothing to address the situation. The Brown University researcher said that this a “prime example [of] how White companies make a BLM statement,”and then proceed to “do nothing” when a Black person declares that she doesn’t “feel safe.”
Bueno is of the opinion that Airbnb is “only words no action,” and should “do better” to accommodate the grievances of so-called persecuted groups.
She also advocated for the establishment of a “greenbook version of AirBnB” in order for BIPOC (black indigenous people of color) not have “to pay to feel uncomfortable and scared.”
Bueno even went as far as to say that the American flag could serve as a symbol “used in many places to scare Black people,” on top of KKK and Confederate symbols.
Several conservative students on campus were not happy with Bueno’s remarks.
Brown University Students for Trump President Emma Rae Phillips said to Campus Reform that she is “disappointed by Bueno’s comments.”
Phillips is an economics major and observed that Bueno’s “tweets do not seem to show much understanding of how free markets work” given how people who use Airbnb can patronize other services instead.
Additionally, she noted that “American flags and Trump signs are not racist in any way, shape, or form.”
With how radically indoctrinated many students have become, you can only expect the most outlandish of behavior coming from these students. Late stage political correctness if you will.
Conservatives may have to social distance themselves from these institutions of higher learning. They’re more like indoctrination centers at this point.
ANTIFA3 days ago
Cops Stand Down as ANTIFA Terrorists Attack Trump Supporters at Rally in Ithaca, NY
Tech3 days ago
Supreme Court Justices Slam Google in Copyright Case That Could Break Up Their Tech Monopoly
Crime2 days ago
North Carolina Police Officer Viciously Beaten as Onlookers Laugh, Film for 11 Minutes
Crime4 days ago
L.A. County Transfers up to $14 Million from Cops to Illegal Migrants
Violent Left2 days ago
Conservative Activist Brutally Beaten by Leftist, BLM Militants At Supreme Court
Big League Guns3 days ago
FBI Data: Four Times as Many People Killed With Knives Than With Rifles in 2019
Crime3 days ago
Authorities Identify Suspect in Maryland 7-11 Shooting of Mother of 4
Free Speech3 days ago
Amazon Bans Coronavirus Book for “Content Violations” Because It Criticizes the Official Narrative