On August 17, 2020, a federal judge rule that transgender women and girls in Idaho cannot be prohibited from participating in female sports, which effectively blocks an Idaho law that banned this practice.
“This is a victory for all women and girls in Idaho. Trans people belong in sports,” declared the American Civil Liberties Union in a statement. The leftist advocacy group provided legal counsel in the case.
CNN reported that Governor Brad Little signed the “Fairness in Women’s Sports Act” into law back in March, which would prevent athletes from participating in a women’s team without first inspecting that person’s “internal and external reproductive anatomy” if her sex is in question. However, Judge David Nye issued a motion for a preliminary injunction against the act on August 17.
Transgender athletes have put up fights against legislation in states such as South Dakota, Tennessee, and Connecticut, that limits their participation in sports where biological females participate in.
Nye asserted that Idaho did not provide enough justifications for the law to exist.
“The State has not identified a legitimate interest served by the Act that the preexisting rules in Idaho did not already address, other than an invalid interest of excluding transgender women and girls from women’s sports entirely, regardless of their physiological characteristics,” Nye wrote in his ruling. The biological male and cross-country athlete Lindsay Hecox filed a lawsuit against the state’s law. Hecox isa student at Boise State University.
A second plaintiff involved in the case — a 17-year-old female athlete — was concerned about invasively having to “prove” her sex because of her athletic physique and “masculine” personal traits.
Judge Nye was in agreement with her concerns and “being subject to a sex dispute is itself humiliating.” The law does not outline a similar requirement for male athletes, Nye pointed out.
The preliminary injunction does not finalize lawsuit. However, Nye stated in his 87-page order that “plaintiffs are likely to succeed in establishing the Act is unconstitutional.”
Activist judges are hell-bent on overturning the sovereign acts of states who fight for the interests of their residents.
One reason why conservatives must re-elect Donald Trump is to keep the courts falling into the Left’s hands. Leftist control of the courts would mark the end of American constitutional governance.
Merrick Garland Suggests that Getting Rid of Lawsuit Protections is Not a Second Amendment Violation
Garland as AG will be a disaster for the right to bear arms.
If Merrick Garland is nominated as Attorney General, the Second Amendment is in big trouble.
Based on his comments at a Senate hearing on February 22, 2021, Garland made a suggestion that the repeal of lawsuit protections for gun manufacturers is not unconstitutional.
AWR Hawkins of Breitbart News reminded his readers that President Joe Biden campaigned on a platform of repealing the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), which shielded lawful gun manufacturers from lawsuits.
In a previous Breitbart News report, Biden spoke at an MSNBC forum in 2019 alongside gun control organizations such as March for Our Lives where he expressed his support for gun manufacturers to be subject to lawsuits.
At the speech, Biden suggested that the PLCC be repealed. He declared, “No other outfit in history has gotten this kind of protection” and asserted that the legal actions would bring about “change overnight.”
In a subsequent occasion on February 7, 2020, Breitbart News covered Biden’s remarks to a New Hampshire crowd, in which he stated that it was a “mistake” to shield firearms manufacturers from lawsuits. He continued, “The first thing I’m going to do as president is work to get rid of that.”
Later that month, Breitbart News recalled how Biden called out gun manufacturers at a South Carolina rally and boasted, “I’m going to take you down.”
According to a report by The Salt Lake Tribune, Utah Senator Mike Lee asked Garland about his views on removing protections for gun manufacturers. Garland responded, “I have not thought myself deeply about this. I don’t think it raises a Second Amendment issue.”
When he was questioned if he is in favor of Biden’s plans to ban so-called “assault weapons”, Garland responded, “Where there is room under the law for the president’s policies to be pursued, then I think the president is entitled to pursue them.”
Biden’s track record as a gun control proponent is well-documented. From his support of gun-free zones at schools to the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban, Biden is Gun Control Inc.’s guy. With Democrats in control of the House and the Senate, there will most certainly be attempts to ram gun control down our throats. If they can’t beat us legislatively, they will most certainly use the courts to undermine the Second Amendment. Pro-gun organizations should be ready to lawyer up and use whatever means possible to keep courts from destroying our rights.
Congress3 days ago
An America First Patriot is Challenging Dan Crenshaw in Next Year’s GOP Primary. Here’s Why.
Tech2 days ago
BETRAYED: How Parler Sold Out to the Globalist Establishment to Get Back Online
White House2 days ago
NOT MENTALLY FIT: Three Dozen House Democrats Demand Biden Relinquish Control of Nuclear Codes
Opinion4 days ago
Opinion: CPAC’s Incompetency and Hypocrisy on Full Display in Their Handling of the Young Pharaoh Situation
Big League Economics3 days ago
Globalists are Planning ‘Climate Lockdowns’ to Finish Off Economic Prosperity in the West
Congress4 days ago
RINO ALERT? David Perdue Sat on Millions in Campaign Cash as Democrats Took Georgia Senate Seats
Campaign 20244 days ago
Donald Trump Will Reportedly Claim He’s the “Presumptive 2024 Nominee” in CPAC Speech
Tech2 days ago
Leaked Video Shows Tech Boss Describing How All Conservatives Will Be Frozen Out of the Market