Opponents of House Bill 2 protest across the street from the North
Carolina State Capitol in Raleigh, N.C
RALEIGH, N.C. - Lawsuit legal duel over North Carolina on a
bathroom used by transgender people have landed in the hands of three federal
judges appointed by Republican presidents, with both sides trying to maneuver
into the courtroom the most favorable possible.
legal experts expect some or all of the five cases to be combined.
But it remains to be seen whether they will be decided in a court of law chosen
by the opponent's moderate reputation, or on the court more conservative GOP
selected by the supporters of this measure.
"This is clearly a strategic decision by the claimant to file
in the district they like," said Tom Metzloff, a Duke University law
professor and expert civil procedures.
Either way, the dispute could eventually lead the US Supreme Court
to rule once and for all whether the federal legislation, including the Civil
Rights Act of 1964 protects transgender people from discrimination.
At issue is a state law that says transgender people should use
public bathrooms, showers and locker room corresponding to the sex on their
birth certificate. Supporters say the law is needed to safeguard people's
privacy and protect women and children from molesters. Opponents, including the
Obama administration, saying the danger is imaginary and discriminatory laws.
With mounting economic pressure on the country, the governor of the
US Department of Justice and the North Carolina sued each other over the size
Monday. Lawsuits for and against the law have also been filed by the American
Civil Liberties Union, the leader of the state Republican-controlled
Legislature, and conservative legal organization.
As for the possibility of a clue how the judge could rule, one of
them has decided to support transgender plaintiff in a separate case. Another
GOP leaders sided with the state in high-profile cases in the voter ID law,
while environmentalists were upset with the ruling party on a bridge project in
ecologically fragile Outer Banks.
However, whatever the background of judges, the opponent has a
strong hand because federal appeals court ruling last in favor of transgender
teens who want to use the boys' bathroom at his Virginia high school. The
verdict by the 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals, which oversees North Carolina,
interpreting federal discrimination law Title IX in a way that directly affects
key aspects of the case of North Carolina.
"It will be difficult for the judge to not follow the
precedent 4 Circuit. And if he does that, the language of Title VII - the '64
Civil Rights Act - is basically the same as the language of Title IX. Prohibit
discrimination on the basis of sex," said William Yeomans, a lawyer who
spent 26 years in the Justice Department during the administration of Democrats
and Republicans.
Five cases were divided between two districts - one in the eastern part of
the country is considered to be more conservative, the other in the middle.
legal scholars agree that the opponents of the law chose the central
district for the overall reputation is more moderate than his six judges.
Strategies that only goes so far, however, because the case was originally
assigned randomly, Metzloff said.
Two cases challenging the law of North Carolina - one filed by the ACLU,
the other by the Ministry of Justice - the wound before US District Judge
Thomas Schroeder.
In April, Schroeder rejected arguments by the Justice Department and the
NAACP in the decision upholding voter ID law passed by the legislature. He
wrote that "some segments of the African country last American
socio-economic gap that can be attributed to declare discrimination," but
the plaintiffs "failed to show that the gap will have an adverse effect on
the ability of a material that minority voters to vote."
He was nominated to the federal bench in 2007 by President George W. Bush.
While considered more moderate than some of his colleagues, "he
certainly is not known as a liberal," said Maxine Eichner, a law professor
at the University of North Carolina.
In the east, the case filed by the governor in the legal defense of the
wound before US District Judge Terrence Boyle, a former aide to Sen. Jesse
Helms archconservative denied seats in Circuit 4 by the Democrat after 16 years
of stalemate. He was first appointed to the federal bench by President Ronald
Reagan in 1984.
However, observers say the conservative reputation may be overstated. In
2015, he gave a favorable decision for transgender job applicants who alleged
gender discrimination when she applied for a job as a nurse at High Point.
"In this case, Judge Boyle was not appropriate to decide
transgender protected by Title VII, but it comes pretty close," said
Katharine Bartlett, a Duke University law professor and expert on gender and
the law.
Two other cases were filed this week in support of the law is also in
the eastern district, before Judge Louise Wood Flanagan, who was nominated by
Bush in 2003 and served as chief judge of the district for seven years. In 2013
he sided with the state transportation department in a lawsuit filed by
environmental groups over the bridge at the outer edge.
Although it is difficult to predict how the judge North Carolina will
unknot tangled case, Bartlett said: "Because the division is now among the
federal courts, eventually the Supreme Court will have to decide whether the
discrimination transgender is sex discrimination. I do not know how fast, or
where laws this. "
EmoticonEmoticon