Decision Time for DEI

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
State Senator Roem posted the following (I didn’t cut/paste the entire post) which seems to show that the districts are following current statutes?


On August 26, 2020, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (CA4 for short) ruled in favor of the plaintiff Gavin Grimm in the case Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board, which directly affected public schools in the Commonwealth of Virginia.

The Supreme Court of the United States declined to overturn the ruling on June 28, 2021, which means the CA4 ruling from 2020 still stands today, almost exactly five years after the decision.

In that ruling, the judges wrote, "At the heart of this appeal is whether equal protection and Title IX can protect transgender students from school bathroom policies that prohibit them from affirming their gender. We join a growing consensus of courts in holding that the answer is resoundingly yes."

You can read that ruling here:
https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca4/19-1952/19-1952-2020-08-26.html

Today, the Prince William County School Board joined four other Northern Virginia public school systems in rejecting a demand from the federal administration to break federal and state law regarding its restroom policy for transgender and gender nonconforming students.

You can read the Prince William Times story about it here:
https://www.princewilliamtimes.com/news/breaking-prince-william-schools-keeps-its-inclusive-transgender-bathroom-rules/article_7c0f9de9-d08d-4637-a278-f7bfceb30448.html

In response, "The U.S. Department of Education said Friday that it will take action against the school districts that are defying its order to reverse their policies," according to the Richmond Times-Dispatch.
https://richmond.com/news/state-regional/government-politics/article_b2d32a33-6a80-4b7f-8aac-27add1ff8b64.html

However, no action from the federal administration, Congress or Supreme Court of the United States has overturned the CA4 ruling in Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board -- not even the United States v. Skrmetti decision from June 18 of this year.

What that means is, regardless of whether anyone personally supports or opposes the outcome of the ruling, public school systems in Virginia have to follow the law and the CA4 ruling is law.

In addition to that, this is also a matter of state law.

§ 2.2-3900 of the Code of Virginia -- known as the Virginia Human Rights Act -- states in Section B, Paragraph 1 that it is the policy of the Commonwealth to "Safeguard all individuals within the Commonwealth from unlawful discrimination because of race, color, religion, ethnic or national origin, sex, pregnancy, childbirth or related medical conditions, age, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, military status, or disability in places of public accommodation, including educational institutions and in real estate transactions."

You can read the Virginia Human Rights Act here:
https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacodepopularnames/virginia-human-rights-act/

Woke ruling, by a woke court at the height of the woke movement. SC will have to step in and correct. SC is going to have a very busy schedule over the next few years.

Ok, so regardless of your opinion of it being “woke” (and I’m one who agrees that biological males should not be on women teams), we agree that the school districts’ stance falls correctly under current law.

Which is why the administration has to step in and take a hard line. So that federal law (Title IX) is affirmed as the law of the land by the SC and girls/woman are protected. Fastest way to solve the problem.

Agree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
State Senator Roem posted the following (I didn’t cut/paste the entire post) which seems to show that the districts are following current statutes?


On August 26, 2020, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (CA4 for short) ruled in favor of the plaintiff Gavin Grimm in the case Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board, which directly affected public schools in the Commonwealth of Virginia.

The Supreme Court of the United States declined to overturn the ruling on June 28, 2021, which means the CA4 ruling from 2020 still stands today, almost exactly five years after the decision.

In that ruling, the judges wrote, "At the heart of this appeal is whether equal protection and Title IX can protect transgender students from school bathroom policies that prohibit them from affirming their gender. We join a growing consensus of courts in holding that the answer is resoundingly yes."

You can read that ruling here:
https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca4/19-1952/19-1952-2020-08-26.html

Today, the Prince William County School Board joined four other Northern Virginia public school systems in rejecting a demand from the federal administration to break federal and state law regarding its restroom policy for transgender and gender nonconforming students.

You can read the Prince William Times story about it here:
https://www.princewilliamtimes.com/news/breaking-prince-william-schools-keeps-its-inclusive-transgender-bathroom-rules/article_7c0f9de9-d08d-4637-a278-f7bfceb30448.html

In response, "The U.S. Department of Education said Friday that it will take action against the school districts that are defying its order to reverse their policies," according to the Richmond Times-Dispatch.
https://richmond.com/news/state-regional/government-politics/article_b2d32a33-6a80-4b7f-8aac-27add1ff8b64.html

However, no action from the federal administration, Congress or Supreme Court of the United States has overturned the CA4 ruling in Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board -- not even the United States v. Skrmetti decision from June 18 of this year.

What that means is, regardless of whether anyone personally supports or opposes the outcome of the ruling, public school systems in Virginia have to follow the law and the CA4 ruling is law.

In addition to that, this is also a matter of state law.

§ 2.2-3900 of the Code of Virginia -- known as the Virginia Human Rights Act -- states in Section B, Paragraph 1 that it is the policy of the Commonwealth to "Safeguard all individuals within the Commonwealth from unlawful discrimination because of race, color, religion, ethnic or national origin, sex, pregnancy, childbirth or related medical conditions, age, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, military status, or disability in places of public accommodation, including educational institutions and in real estate transactions."

You can read the Virginia Human Rights Act here:
https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacodepopularnames/virginia-human-rights-act/

Woke ruling, by a woke court at the height of the woke movement. SC will have to step in and correct. SC is going to have a very busy schedule over the next few years.

Ok, so regardless of your opinion of it being “woke” (and I’m one who agrees that biological males should not be on women teams), we agree that the school districts’ stance falls correctly under current law.

Which is why the administration has to step in and take a hard line. So that federal law (Title IX) is affirmed as the law of the land by the SC and girls/woman are protected. Fastest way to solve the problem.

Completely agree.

Additionally, Title IX was originally designed to protect and promote the rights of women and girls in federally funded educational programs, especially in sports. This federal civil rights law also defends women’s rights to safety, privacy and dignity by allowing them the ability to have their own private spaces, separate from men. This would include school sponsored overnight trips when students share a room - and many times a bed for cost effecting purposes. During these trips, there are chaperones and staff who watch over the safety of the students, including during room checks prior to calling it the night. The protection of these privates spaces and the importance to segregate them by sex is plain common sense during these occasions.

[Anonymous]

Interesting. I worked in two different school systems. In the first, the principal told us to have her report abuse because she was respected in the community, and we were mostly very young teachers. And, that is how we worked it. And, I did and she did. County social worker then took over.

In other system, the counselor or school nurse reported it as they did not want the teacher caught in the middle. I guess Virginia is different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Interesting. I worked in two different school systems. In the first, the principal told us to have her report abuse because she was respected in the community, and we were mostly very young teachers. And, that is how we worked it. And, I did and she did. County social worker then took over.

In other system, the counselor or school nurse reported it as they did not want the teacher caught in the middle. I guess Virginia is different.

Oops. Wrong thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
State Senator Roem posted the following (I didn’t cut/paste the entire post) which seems to show that the districts are following current statutes?


On August 26, 2020, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (CA4 for short) ruled in favor of the plaintiff Gavin Grimm in the case Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board, which directly affected public schools in the Commonwealth of Virginia.

The Supreme Court of the United States declined to overturn the ruling on June 28, 2021, which means the CA4 ruling from 2020 still stands today, almost exactly five years after the decision.

In that ruling, the judges wrote, "At the heart of this appeal is whether equal protection and Title IX can protect transgender students from school bathroom policies that prohibit them from affirming their gender. We join a growing consensus of courts in holding that the answer is resoundingly yes."

You can read that ruling here:
https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca4/19-1952/19-1952-2020-08-26.html

Today, the Prince William County School Board joined four other Northern Virginia public school systems in rejecting a demand from the federal administration to break federal and state law regarding its restroom policy for transgender and gender nonconforming students.

You can read the Prince William Times story about it here:
https://www.princewilliamtimes.com/news/breaking-prince-william-schools-keeps-its-inclusive-transgender-bathroom-rules/article_7c0f9de9-d08d-4637-a278-f7bfceb30448.html

In response, "The U.S. Department of Education said Friday that it will take action against the school districts that are defying its order to reverse their policies," according to the Richmond Times-Dispatch.
https://richmond.com/news/state-regional/government-politics/article_b2d32a33-6a80-4b7f-8aac-27add1ff8b64.html

However, no action from the federal administration, Congress or Supreme Court of the United States has overturned the CA4 ruling in Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board -- not even the United States v. Skrmetti decision from June 18 of this year.

What that means is, regardless of whether anyone personally supports or opposes the outcome of the ruling, public school systems in Virginia have to follow the law and the CA4 ruling is law.

In addition to that, this is also a matter of state law.

§ 2.2-3900 of the Code of Virginia -- known as the Virginia Human Rights Act -- states in Section B, Paragraph 1 that it is the policy of the Commonwealth to "Safeguard all individuals within the Commonwealth from unlawful discrimination because of race, color, religion, ethnic or national origin, sex, pregnancy, childbirth or related medical conditions, age, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, military status, or disability in places of public accommodation, including educational institutions and in real estate transactions."

You can read the Virginia Human Rights Act here:
https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacodepopularnames/virginia-human-rights-act/

Woke ruling, by a woke court at the height of the woke movement. SC will have to step in and correct. SC is going to have a very busy schedule over the next few years.

I stopped reading after the 2nd "woke". Just stop that Karen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
State Senator Roem posted the following (I didn’t cut/paste the entire post) which seems to show that the districts are following current statutes?


On August 26, 2020, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (CA4 for short) ruled in favor of the plaintiff Gavin Grimm in the case Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board, which directly affected public schools in the Commonwealth of Virginia.

The Supreme Court of the United States declined to overturn the ruling on June 28, 2021, which means the CA4 ruling from 2020 still stands today, almost exactly five years after the decision.

In that ruling, the judges wrote, "At the heart of this appeal is whether equal protection and Title IX can protect transgender students from school bathroom policies that prohibit them from affirming their gender. We join a growing consensus of courts in holding that the answer is resoundingly yes."

You can read that ruling here:
https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca4/19-1952/19-1952-2020-08-26.html

Today, the Prince William County School Board joined four other Northern Virginia public school systems in rejecting a demand from the federal administration to break federal and state law regarding its restroom policy for transgender and gender nonconforming students.

You can read the Prince William Times story about it here:
https://www.princewilliamtimes.com/news/breaking-prince-william-schools-keeps-its-inclusive-transgender-bathroom-rules/article_7c0f9de9-d08d-4637-a278-f7bfceb30448.html

In response, "The U.S. Department of Education said Friday that it will take action against the school districts that are defying its order to reverse their policies," according to the Richmond Times-Dispatch.
https://richmond.com/news/state-regional/government-politics/article_b2d32a33-6a80-4b7f-8aac-27add1ff8b64.html

However, no action from the federal administration, Congress or Supreme Court of the United States has overturned the CA4 ruling in Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board -- not even the United States v. Skrmetti decision from June 18 of this year.

What that means is, regardless of whether anyone personally supports or opposes the outcome of the ruling, public school systems in Virginia have to follow the law and the CA4 ruling is law.

In addition to that, this is also a matter of state law.

§ 2.2-3900 of the Code of Virginia -- known as the Virginia Human Rights Act -- states in Section B, Paragraph 1 that it is the policy of the Commonwealth to "Safeguard all individuals within the Commonwealth from unlawful discrimination because of race, color, religion, ethnic or national origin, sex, pregnancy, childbirth or related medical conditions, age, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, military status, or disability in places of public accommodation, including educational institutions and in real estate transactions."

You can read the Virginia Human Rights Act here:
https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacodepopularnames/virginia-human-rights-act/

Woke ruling, by a woke court at the height of the woke movement. SC will have to step in and correct. SC is going to have a very busy schedule over the next few years.

Ok, so regardless of your opinion of it being “woke” (and I’m one who agrees that biological males should not be on women teams), we agree that the school districts’ stance falls correctly under current law.

Which is why the administration has to step in and take a hard line. So that federal law (Title IX) is affirmed as the law of the land by the SC and girls/woman are protected. Fastest way to solve the problem.

Ok, but are agreeing to what Sen Roem wrote, which was to say that the districts’ policies abide by current law as they stand?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
State Senator Roem posted the following (I didn’t cut/paste the entire post) which seems to show that the districts are following current statutes?


On August 26, 2020, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (CA4 for short) ruled in favor of the plaintiff Gavin Grimm in the case Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board, which directly affected public schools in the Commonwealth of Virginia.

The Supreme Court of the United States declined to overturn the ruling on June 28, 2021, which means the CA4 ruling from 2020 still stands today, almost exactly five years after the decision.

In that ruling, the judges wrote, "At the heart of this appeal is whether equal protection and Title IX can protect transgender students from school bathroom policies that prohibit them from affirming their gender. We join a growing consensus of courts in holding that the answer is resoundingly yes."

You can read that ruling here:
https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca4/19-1952/19-1952-2020-08-26.html

Today, the Prince William County School Board joined four other Northern Virginia public school systems in rejecting a demand from the federal administration to break federal and state law regarding its restroom policy for transgender and gender nonconforming students.

You can read the Prince William Times story about it here:
https://www.princewilliamtimes.com/news/breaking-prince-william-schools-keeps-its-inclusive-transgender-bathroom-rules/article_7c0f9de9-d08d-4637-a278-f7bfceb30448.html

In response, "The U.S. Department of Education said Friday that it will take action against the school districts that are defying its order to reverse their policies," according to the Richmond Times-Dispatch.
https://richmond.com/news/state-regional/government-politics/article_b2d32a33-6a80-4b7f-8aac-27add1ff8b64.html

However, no action from the federal administration, Congress or Supreme Court of the United States has overturned the CA4 ruling in Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board -- not even the United States v. Skrmetti decision from June 18 of this year.

What that means is, regardless of whether anyone personally supports or opposes the outcome of the ruling, public school systems in Virginia have to follow the law and the CA4 ruling is law.

In addition to that, this is also a matter of state law.

§ 2.2-3900 of the Code of Virginia -- known as the Virginia Human Rights Act -- states in Section B, Paragraph 1 that it is the policy of the Commonwealth to "Safeguard all individuals within the Commonwealth from unlawful discrimination because of race, color, religion, ethnic or national origin, sex, pregnancy, childbirth or related medical conditions, age, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, military status, or disability in places of public accommodation, including educational institutions and in real estate transactions."

You can read the Virginia Human Rights Act here:
https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacodepopularnames/virginia-human-rights-act/

Woke ruling, by a woke court at the height of the woke movement. SC will have to step in and correct. SC is going to have a very busy schedule over the next few years.

Ok, so regardless of your opinion of it being “woke” (and I’m one who agrees that biological males should not be on women teams), we agree that the school districts’ stance falls correctly under current law.

Which is why the administration has to step in and take a hard line. So that federal law (Title IX) is affirmed as the law of the land by the SC and girls/woman are protected. Fastest way to solve the problem.

Ok, but are agreeing to what Sen Roem wrote, which was to say that the districts’ policies abide by current law as they stand?

The current policies violate Federal law (Title IX) so the state statute becomes irrelevant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
State Senator Roem posted the following (I didn’t cut/paste the entire post) which seems to show that the districts are following current statutes?


On August 26, 2020, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (CA4 for short) ruled in favor of the plaintiff Gavin Grimm in the case Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board, which directly affected public schools in the Commonwealth of Virginia.

The Supreme Court of the United States declined to overturn the ruling on June 28, 2021, which means the CA4 ruling from 2020 still stands today, almost exactly five years after the decision.

In that ruling, the judges wrote, "At the heart of this appeal is whether equal protection and Title IX can protect transgender students from school bathroom policies that prohibit them from affirming their gender. We join a growing consensus of courts in holding that the answer is resoundingly yes."

You can read that ruling here:
https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca4/19-1952/19-1952-2020-08-26.html

Today, the Prince William County School Board joined four other Northern Virginia public school systems in rejecting a demand from the federal administration to break federal and state law regarding its restroom policy for transgender and gender nonconforming students.

You can read the Prince William Times story about it here:
https://www.princewilliamtimes.com/news/breaking-prince-william-schools-keeps-its-inclusive-transgender-bathroom-rules/article_7c0f9de9-d08d-4637-a278-f7bfceb30448.html

In response, "The U.S. Department of Education said Friday that it will take action against the school districts that are defying its order to reverse their policies," according to the Richmond Times-Dispatch.
https://richmond.com/news/state-regional/government-politics/article_b2d32a33-6a80-4b7f-8aac-27add1ff8b64.html

However, no action from the federal administration, Congress or Supreme Court of the United States has overturned the CA4 ruling in Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board -- not even the United States v. Skrmetti decision from June 18 of this year.

What that means is, regardless of whether anyone personally supports or opposes the outcome of the ruling, public school systems in Virginia have to follow the law and the CA4 ruling is law.

In addition to that, this is also a matter of state law.

§ 2.2-3900 of the Code of Virginia -- known as the Virginia Human Rights Act -- states in Section B, Paragraph 1 that it is the policy of the Commonwealth to "Safeguard all individuals within the Commonwealth from unlawful discrimination because of race, color, religion, ethnic or national origin, sex, pregnancy, childbirth or related medical conditions, age, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, military status, or disability in places of public accommodation, including educational institutions and in real estate transactions."

You can read the Virginia Human Rights Act here:
https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacodepopularnames/virginia-human-rights-act/

Woke ruling, by a woke court at the height of the woke movement. SC will have to step in and correct. SC is going to have a very busy schedule over the next few years.

I stopped reading after the 2nd "woke". Just stop that Karen.

Excellent example of how the left hates women, especially the ones who dare to push back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How do you know a kid is trans?

Are kids peeing in open stalls these days? Are there genital checks?

I don't really care if my kid uses the bathroom with a trans kid. Everyone pees. And schools have stalls.

But dang, seems like Republicans are getting really worked up about it. Sure, bring up the Loudoun County boy -- who was not trans. Bring up the one or two trans kids who play sports in an entire state.

I just wonder, since trans are pretty rare, why can't schools handle the cases all on their own. Why does the federal government have to get involved?

Or maybe it's just a reason to have Republicans bond together in their collective hate.

MAGA is obsessed with other people's genitals. It's creepy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
State Senator Roem posted the following (I didn’t cut/paste the entire post) which seems to show that the districts are following current statutes?


On August 26, 2020, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (CA4 for short) ruled in favor of the plaintiff Gavin Grimm in the case Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board, which directly affected public schools in the Commonwealth of Virginia.

The Supreme Court of the United States declined to overturn the ruling on June 28, 2021, which means the CA4 ruling from 2020 still stands today, almost exactly five years after the decision.

In that ruling, the judges wrote, "At the heart of this appeal is whether equal protection and Title IX can protect transgender students from school bathroom policies that prohibit them from affirming their gender. We join a growing consensus of courts in holding that the answer is resoundingly yes."

You can read that ruling here:
https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca4/19-1952/19-1952-2020-08-26.html

Today, the Prince William County School Board joined four other Northern Virginia public school systems in rejecting a demand from the federal administration to break federal and state law regarding its restroom policy for transgender and gender nonconforming students.

You can read the Prince William Times story about it here:
https://www.princewilliamtimes.com/news/breaking-prince-william-schools-keeps-its-inclusive-transgender-bathroom-rules/article_7c0f9de9-d08d-4637-a278-f7bfceb30448.html

In response, "The U.S. Department of Education said Friday that it will take action against the school districts that are defying its order to reverse their policies," according to the Richmond Times-Dispatch.
https://richmond.com/news/state-regional/government-politics/article_b2d32a33-6a80-4b7f-8aac-27add1ff8b64.html

However, no action from the federal administration, Congress or Supreme Court of the United States has overturned the CA4 ruling in Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board -- not even the United States v. Skrmetti decision from June 18 of this year.

What that means is, regardless of whether anyone personally supports or opposes the outcome of the ruling, public school systems in Virginia have to follow the law and the CA4 ruling is law.

In addition to that, this is also a matter of state law.

§ 2.2-3900 of the Code of Virginia -- known as the Virginia Human Rights Act -- states in Section B, Paragraph 1 that it is the policy of the Commonwealth to "Safeguard all individuals within the Commonwealth from unlawful discrimination because of race, color, religion, ethnic or national origin, sex, pregnancy, childbirth or related medical conditions, age, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, military status, or disability in places of public accommodation, including educational institutions and in real estate transactions."

You can read the Virginia Human Rights Act here:
https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacodepopularnames/virginia-human-rights-act/

Woke ruling, by a woke court at the height of the woke movement. SC will have to step in and correct. SC is going to have a very busy schedule over the next few years.

Ok, so regardless of your opinion of it being “woke” (and I’m one who agrees that biological males should not be on women teams), we agree that the school districts’ stance falls correctly under current law.

Which is why the administration has to step in and take a hard line. So that federal law (Title IX) is affirmed as the law of the land by the SC and girls/woman are protected. Fastest way to solve the problem.

Ok, but are agreeing to what Sen Roem wrote, which was to say that the districts’ policies abide by current law as they stand?

The current policies violate Federal law (Title IX) so the state statute becomes irrelevant.

Please know I’m not arguing, only asking to clarify. Doesn’t this court ruling (read the summary), say that the policies do not violate federal law?

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca4/19-1952/19-1952-2020-08-26.html

The beginning of the summary states: The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 can protect transgender students from school bathroom policies that prohibit them from affirming their gender.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
State Senator Roem posted the following (I didn’t cut/paste the entire post) which seems to show that the districts are following current statutes?


On August 26, 2020, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (CA4 for short) ruled in favor of the plaintiff Gavin Grimm in the case Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board, which directly affected public schools in the Commonwealth of Virginia.

The Supreme Court of the United States declined to overturn the ruling on June 28, 2021, which means the CA4 ruling from 2020 still stands today, almost exactly five years after the decision.

In that ruling, the judges wrote, "At the heart of this appeal is whether equal protection and Title IX can protect transgender students from school bathroom policies that prohibit them from affirming their gender. We join a growing consensus of courts in holding that the answer is resoundingly yes."

You can read that ruling here:
https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca4/19-1952/19-1952-2020-08-26.html

Today, the Prince William County School Board joined four other Northern Virginia public school systems in rejecting a demand from the federal administration to break federal and state law regarding its restroom policy for transgender and gender nonconforming students.

You can read the Prince William Times story about it here:
https://www.princewilliamtimes.com/news/breaking-prince-william-schools-keeps-its-inclusive-transgender-bathroom-rules/article_7c0f9de9-d08d-4637-a278-f7bfceb30448.html

In response, "The U.S. Department of Education said Friday that it will take action against the school districts that are defying its order to reverse their policies," according to the Richmond Times-Dispatch.
https://richmond.com/news/state-regional/government-politics/article_b2d32a33-6a80-4b7f-8aac-27add1ff8b64.html

However, no action from the federal administration, Congress or Supreme Court of the United States has overturned the CA4 ruling in Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board -- not even the United States v. Skrmetti decision from June 18 of this year.

What that means is, regardless of whether anyone personally supports or opposes the outcome of the ruling, public school systems in Virginia have to follow the law and the CA4 ruling is law.

In addition to that, this is also a matter of state law.

§ 2.2-3900 of the Code of Virginia -- known as the Virginia Human Rights Act -- states in Section B, Paragraph 1 that it is the policy of the Commonwealth to "Safeguard all individuals within the Commonwealth from unlawful discrimination because of race, color, religion, ethnic or national origin, sex, pregnancy, childbirth or related medical conditions, age, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, military status, or disability in places of public accommodation, including educational institutions and in real estate transactions."

You can read the Virginia Human Rights Act here:
https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacodepopularnames/virginia-human-rights-act/

Woke ruling, by a woke court at the height of the woke movement. SC will have to step in and correct. SC is going to have a very busy schedule over the next few years.

Ok, so regardless of your opinion of it being “woke” (and I’m one who agrees that biological males should not be on women teams), we agree that the school districts’ stance falls correctly under current law.

Which is why the administration has to step in and take a hard line. So that federal law (Title IX) is affirmed as the law of the land by the SC and girls/woman are protected. Fastest way to solve the problem.

Ok, but are agreeing to what Sen Roem wrote, which was to say that the districts’ policies abide by current law as they stand?

The current policies violate Federal law (Title IX) so the state statute becomes irrelevant.

Please know I’m not arguing, only asking to clarify. Doesn’t this court ruling (read the summary), say that the policies do not violate federal law?

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca4/19-1952/19-1952-2020-08-26.html

The beginning of the summary states: The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 can protect transgender students from school bathroom policies that prohibit them from affirming their gender.

Prediction: it will be overturned.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
State Senator Roem posted the following (I didn’t cut/paste the entire post) which seems to show that the districts are following current statutes?


On August 26, 2020, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (CA4 for short) ruled in favor of the plaintiff Gavin Grimm in the case Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board, which directly affected public schools in the Commonwealth of Virginia.

The Supreme Court of the United States declined to overturn the ruling on June 28, 2021, which means the CA4 ruling from 2020 still stands today, almost exactly five years after the decision.

In that ruling, the judges wrote, "At the heart of this appeal is whether equal protection and Title IX can protect transgender students from school bathroom policies that prohibit them from affirming their gender. We join a growing consensus of courts in holding that the answer is resoundingly yes."

You can read that ruling here:
https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca4/19-1952/19-1952-2020-08-26.html

Today, the Prince William County School Board joined four other Northern Virginia public school systems in rejecting a demand from the federal administration to break federal and state law regarding its restroom policy for transgender and gender nonconforming students.

You can read the Prince William Times story about it here:
https://www.princewilliamtimes.com/news/breaking-prince-william-schools-keeps-its-inclusive-transgender-bathroom-rules/article_7c0f9de9-d08d-4637-a278-f7bfceb30448.html

In response, "The U.S. Department of Education said Friday that it will take action against the school districts that are defying its order to reverse their policies," according to the Richmond Times-Dispatch.
https://richmond.com/news/state-regional/government-politics/article_b2d32a33-6a80-4b7f-8aac-27add1ff8b64.html

However, no action from the federal administration, Congress or Supreme Court of the United States has overturned the CA4 ruling in Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board -- not even the United States v. Skrmetti decision from June 18 of this year.

What that means is, regardless of whether anyone personally supports or opposes the outcome of the ruling, public school systems in Virginia have to follow the law and the CA4 ruling is law.

In addition to that, this is also a matter of state law.

§ 2.2-3900 of the Code of Virginia -- known as the Virginia Human Rights Act -- states in Section B, Paragraph 1 that it is the policy of the Commonwealth to "Safeguard all individuals within the Commonwealth from unlawful discrimination because of race, color, religion, ethnic or national origin, sex, pregnancy, childbirth or related medical conditions, age, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, military status, or disability in places of public accommodation, including educational institutions and in real estate transactions."

You can read the Virginia Human Rights Act here:
https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacodepopularnames/virginia-human-rights-act/

Woke ruling, by a woke court at the height of the woke movement. SC will have to step in and correct. SC is going to have a very busy schedule over the next few years.

Ok, so regardless of your opinion of it being “woke” (and I’m one who agrees that biological males should not be on women teams), we agree that the school districts’ stance falls correctly under current law.

Which is why the administration has to step in and take a hard line. So that federal law (Title IX) is affirmed as the law of the land by the SC and girls/woman are protected. Fastest way to solve the problem.

Ok, but are agreeing to what Sen Roem wrote, which was to say that the districts’ policies abide by current law as they stand?

The current policies violate Federal law (Title IX) so the state statute becomes irrelevant.

Please know I’m not arguing, only asking to clarify. Doesn’t this court ruling (read the summary), say that the policies do not violate federal law?

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca4/19-1952/19-1952-2020-08-26.html

The beginning of the summary states: The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 can protect transgender students from school bathroom policies that prohibit them from affirming their gender.

Prediction: it will be overturned.

Yep it would be best to comply rather than draw the SCOTUS attention. Soon to be the law of the land. Talk about a self own.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
State Senator Roem posted the following (I didn’t cut/paste the entire post) which seems to show that the districts are following current statutes?


On August 26, 2020, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (CA4 for short) ruled in favor of the plaintiff Gavin Grimm in the case Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board, which directly affected public schools in the Commonwealth of Virginia.

The Supreme Court of the United States declined to overturn the ruling on June 28, 2021, which means the CA4 ruling from 2020 still stands today, almost exactly five years after the decision.

In that ruling, the judges wrote, "At the heart of this appeal is whether equal protection and Title IX can protect transgender students from school bathroom policies that prohibit them from affirming their gender. We join a growing consensus of courts in holding that the answer is resoundingly yes."

You can read that ruling here:
https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca4/19-1952/19-1952-2020-08-26.html

Today, the Prince William County School Board joined four other Northern Virginia public school systems in rejecting a demand from the federal administration to break federal and state law regarding its restroom policy for transgender and gender nonconforming students.

You can read the Prince William Times story about it here:
https://www.princewilliamtimes.com/news/breaking-prince-william-schools-keeps-its-inclusive-transgender-bathroom-rules/article_7c0f9de9-d08d-4637-a278-f7bfceb30448.html

In response, "The U.S. Department of Education said Friday that it will take action against the school districts that are defying its order to reverse their policies," according to the Richmond Times-Dispatch.
https://richmond.com/news/state-regional/government-politics/article_b2d32a33-6a80-4b7f-8aac-27add1ff8b64.html

However, no action from the federal administration, Congress or Supreme Court of the United States has overturned the CA4 ruling in Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board -- not even the United States v. Skrmetti decision from June 18 of this year.

What that means is, regardless of whether anyone personally supports or opposes the outcome of the ruling, public school systems in Virginia have to follow the law and the CA4 ruling is law.

In addition to that, this is also a matter of state law.

§ 2.2-3900 of the Code of Virginia -- known as the Virginia Human Rights Act -- states in Section B, Paragraph 1 that it is the policy of the Commonwealth to "Safeguard all individuals within the Commonwealth from unlawful discrimination because of race, color, religion, ethnic or national origin, sex, pregnancy, childbirth or related medical conditions, age, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, military status, or disability in places of public accommodation, including educational institutions and in real estate transactions."

You can read the Virginia Human Rights Act here:
https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacodepopularnames/virginia-human-rights-act/

Woke ruling, by a woke court at the height of the woke movement. SC will have to step in and correct. SC is going to have a very busy schedule over the next few years.

Ok, so regardless of your opinion of it being “woke” (and I’m one who agrees that biological males should not be on women teams), we agree that the school districts’ stance falls correctly under current law.

Which is why the administration has to step in and take a hard line. So that federal law (Title IX) is affirmed as the law of the land by the SC and girls/woman are protected. Fastest way to solve the problem.

Ok, but are agreeing to what Sen Roem wrote, which was to say that the districts’ policies abide by current law as they stand?

The current policies violate Federal law (Title IX) so the state statute becomes irrelevant.

Please know I’m not arguing, only asking to clarify. Doesn’t this court ruling (read the summary), say that the policies do not violate federal law?

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca4/19-1952/19-1952-2020-08-26.html

The beginning of the summary states: The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 can protect transgender students from school bathroom policies that prohibit them from affirming their gender.

Yes, an activist court choice to create an outcome to their liking and consistent with the previous administration’s view of Title IX. As a result the current administration is acting to get the SC to rule on Title IX. At that point the 4th circuit decision will be vacated and VA’s “law” will not stand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These Northern Virginia counties are clown shows. This is a stupid hill to die on and it shows disrespect for actual women and girls. I can't even believe we are here.

Trump doesn’t get to interpret the laws. He has to follow the laws. His letters and threats do not follow the law (nor do they follow the required processes for investigation). It’s the same BS he is pulling on colleges. I don’t know why so many of you are willing to lay down and let this man be your king, legislature and courts. We have a system in America.

This. And which group does he and his administration go after next?

What part of Title IX is Trump violating?

You think he’s that picky about which laws he violates? He will violate all of them by the time he’s done raping our county.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
State Senator Roem posted the following (I didn’t cut/paste the entire post) which seems to show that the districts are following current statutes?


On August 26, 2020, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (CA4 for short) ruled in favor of the plaintiff Gavin Grimm in the case Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board, which directly affected public schools in the Commonwealth of Virginia.

The Supreme Court of the United States declined to overturn the ruling on June 28, 2021, which means the CA4 ruling from 2020 still stands today, almost exactly five years after the decision.

In that ruling, the judges wrote, "At the heart of this appeal is whether equal protection and Title IX can protect transgender students from school bathroom policies that prohibit them from affirming their gender. We join a growing consensus of courts in holding that the answer is resoundingly yes."

You can read that ruling here:
https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca4/19-1952/19-1952-2020-08-26.html

Today, the Prince William County School Board joined four other Northern Virginia public school systems in rejecting a demand from the federal administration to break federal and state law regarding its restroom policy for transgender and gender nonconforming students.

You can read the Prince William Times story about it here:
https://www.princewilliamtimes.com/news/breaking-prince-william-schools-keeps-its-inclusive-transgender-bathroom-rules/article_7c0f9de9-d08d-4637-a278-f7bfceb30448.html

In response, "The U.S. Department of Education said Friday that it will take action against the school districts that are defying its order to reverse their policies," according to the Richmond Times-Dispatch.
https://richmond.com/news/state-regional/government-politics/article_b2d32a33-6a80-4b7f-8aac-27add1ff8b64.html

However, no action from the federal administration, Congress or Supreme Court of the United States has overturned the CA4 ruling in Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board -- not even the United States v. Skrmetti decision from June 18 of this year.

What that means is, regardless of whether anyone personally supports or opposes the outcome of the ruling, public school systems in Virginia have to follow the law and the CA4 ruling is law.

In addition to that, this is also a matter of state law.

§ 2.2-3900 of the Code of Virginia -- known as the Virginia Human Rights Act -- states in Section B, Paragraph 1 that it is the policy of the Commonwealth to "Safeguard all individuals within the Commonwealth from unlawful discrimination because of race, color, religion, ethnic or national origin, sex, pregnancy, childbirth or related medical conditions, age, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, military status, or disability in places of public accommodation, including educational institutions and in real estate transactions."

You can read the Virginia Human Rights Act here:
https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacodepopularnames/virginia-human-rights-act/

Woke ruling, by a woke court at the height of the woke movement. SC will have to step in and correct. SC is going to have a very busy schedule over the next few years.

Ok, so regardless of your opinion of it being “woke” (and I’m one who agrees that biological males should not be on women teams), we agree that the school districts’ stance falls correctly under current law.

Which is why the administration has to step in and take a hard line. So that federal law (Title IX) is affirmed as the law of the land by the SC and girls/woman are protected. Fastest way to solve the problem.

Ok, but are agreeing to what Sen Roem wrote, which was to say that the districts’ policies abide by current law as they stand?

The current policies violate Federal law (Title IX) so the state statute becomes irrelevant.

Please know I’m not arguing, only asking to clarify. Doesn’t this court ruling (read the summary), say that the policies do not violate federal law?

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca4/19-1952/19-1952-2020-08-26.html

The beginning of the summary states: The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 can protect transgender students from school bathroom policies that prohibit them from affirming their gender.

Prediction: it will be overturned.

So your answer is, “Currently the districts’ policies don’t violate federal law, but I predict that law will be overturned”.