LGBT News Federal Government decides to sue NC over HB2

Wow, this is great. I'm not very well versed in the governmental functions, but how long should this take to see progress and/or the results of the lawsuit? What would happen if the Federal Government won? I'm assuming that HB2 would no longer be in effect and this would set a precedent for other states in regard to further discriminatory bill passing attempts. And alternatively, what would happen if NC won the lawsuit?

 

For a case like this to truly be settled, it could very well take the Supreme Court to settle it. They would have to determine if the NC law truly does violate federal law. And for it to go to the Supreme Court, it may take a year or two. But the Supreme Court would have to accept a case first. It's very rare for the court to take a case, but it would seem much more likely when a State and Federal government are suing each other.

Keep in mind the Court determines whether or not it violates law. From my point of view, it seems like they would favor NC, because I'm not quite sure they can make a big case about whether or not they can segregate bathrooms on the basis of sex/gender, because gender identity isn't a protected class and sex (for cis people) is something that we've always segregated without any issues.

The precedent they set would probably not only affect segregated bathrooms, it would probably also affect the scope of the Federal Government's power to enforce the Civil Rights Act. Can they apply it to sports teams? Private single-sex schools? In reality: there really isn't a clear answer.

The result of this case would ultimately depend on the beliefs of the Justices, and whether or not they agree. And at this time, where a vacancy is open in an ideologically divided court, it's hard to tell what they'll say.

They may just do the cop-out method and rule that they have no "legal standing". (Just like they did in 2013 with Prop 8). And considering the circumstances, ruling that they have no legal standing seems possible.

 

I hope they don't do that. I think it's ridiculous that there's still legalized gender discrimination and segregation. They should get rid of it.

 

A very powerful statement. I didn't know I still had this optimism, honestly! I can only imagine the trans community in NC would feel, reading or hearing that.

While I don't think the law will be struck down anytime soon, at least it shows that something's being done, at least.

Then let's hope it doesn't go to the Supreme Court then.

What happens if they cop out and say "no legal standing"? Is it just dumped back onto the Federal Government?

 

Good.

 

I know this isn't a popular opinion, but I don't think that the lawsuit is going to succeed. Federal law, specifically Titles VII and IX, deal with sex discrimination. If sex and gender are different, then I don't see how the argument that this is sex discrimination holds up. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but that's a very real possibility.

 

I wonder what lgbt conservatives think of this potential "overreach" by the federal government.

Hopefully in the end everyone can use the bathroom, wash their hands, and leave.

 

Hopefully nearly everyone by now knows NC's little theocracy is getting out of control, and this obviously unconstitutional little rampage of theirs can be put to a stop. They've had their tantrum, and now it's time for them to sit in the corner and behave...

 

Unfortunately, I agree with this assessment. I would love for the Federal Government to win, but we also have to take into account the intent Congress had when they passed the law. It's hard to imagine the courts wouldn't take that into consideration, and I believe it is a huge and heavy lift to say that the United States Congress intended to protect LGBTQ people by passing Titles VII and IX. It is very easy to make the argument that the Federal Government is basically reading into the law intentions that were not there.

The good news is that I do believe the NC Law and all others are in violation of the Supreme Court's Romer v. Evans ruling. So, I am very confident that we will win in the Courts, just not through Titles VII and IX claims.

What I would like to see is the Federal Government immediately move to cut all funding to NC in the hopes of getting the state to back down. They could then drop the law suits before going to court, and the Federal Government could continue interpreting VII and IX as they do currently as the courts haven't ruled they could do otherwise as far as I am aware.

I suppose if the case goes forward, though, the best argument for Title VII and IX protections would be based around profiling and stereotypes. In other words, the government could argue that it's discriminatory and a violation of Title VII, as it is an attempt to narrowly define what a particular gender should be, and then profile and police those who don't conform to the states standard.

Even then, though, I think the Romer v. Evans path is a slam dunk.

 

I just hope everything works out in the end. I want to be optimistic about this state's future, but some of the odds are against the federal government. Even so, this law will not last forever. It might not be removed right away, but it will not stay forever.

 

For all intents and purposes when it comes to sex discrimination under Title IX, most Universities and other entities such as the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission believe that this protects all of sex, gender, and sexual orientation discrimination. The federal government is using this and the necessary and proper clause to ensure equal treatment of all citizens within a state, so unless the courts want to overturn Title IX, it should be a good lawsuit.

 

Thanks for that link Eveline. I think my position will shift now because of that link. I think the odds of the Courts favoring the Federal Government go way up now. In fact, I would say the odds are in the Federal Government's favor as a result of these two rulings from the SCOTUS from your link:

It is difficult to imagine the Court reversing course now. Siding with the Federal Government is more-or-less just upholding these two previous rulings. Scalia, speaking for the majority in Oncale, more or less killed the only reasonable argument against it: that it wasn't the intent of those who passed the law. As they ruled in Oncale, "it is ultimately the provisions of our laws rather than the principal concerns of our legislators by which we are governed."

Ironically, Scalia always comes up in pro-LGBT rulings. When it came to the gay marriage rulings, lower court justices enjoyed citing him and his arguments from the minority opinions. To be fair, he was making rational arguments, but he was also providing an unintentional blueprint toward marriage equality. Similar situation here except he happened to be in the majority, and was likely wanting those protections for himself in case he was ever sexually harassed by another man. That is the ruling that opens the door for the Federal Government's interpretation of the law--it is a valid interpretation in that context, once you factor out legislative intent.

 

Yeah, I'll add that in the case of my local state, to get gender identity and expression covered by the existing sex discrimination framework explicitly, they amended the law to define sex in the context of that particular law to include gender identity and expression. But if you ignore the definitions, it reads as only covering sex discrimination.

The upside is that sometimes a cigar is more than just a cigar. But the downside is that the layperson may not actually know the legal definition of a cigar anymore.

 

This is gonna get crazy. I can feel it.