Our Five Favorite Excerpts from Judge Thomas Schroeder’s HB 2 Smackdown | Triangulator | Indy Week
Pin It

Our Five Favorite Excerpts from Judge Thomas Schroeder’s HB 2 Smackdown 

On Friday, U.S. District Court Judge Thomas D. Schroeder granted the ACLU's request for a preliminary injunction against a part of House Bill 2, heading off any potential enforcement of the law's bathroom provision until we get a ruling following the November trial. Here are five excerpts from the decision that demonstrate Schroeder's intense skepticism of the state's defense.

• "While there are no reported cases [of peeping, indecent exposure, and trespass violations] involving transgender users, at the preliminary injunction hearing Governor McCrory, Senator [Phil] Berger, and Representative [Tim] Moore indicated their assumption that this was so because transgender users have traditionally been excluded (or excluded themselves) from facilities that correspond with their gender identity. The evidence in the current record, however, suggests the opposite."

• [On the state's lack of preparation for the trial, compared with an affidavit the ACLU submitted from an expert who helped develop a protocol for transgender students in California.] "Defendants have not offered any evidence whatsoever on these points, despite having four months between the filing of this lawsuit and the hearing on this motion to do so. Indeed, the court does not even have a legislative record supporting the law to consider."

• "The individual transgender Plaintiffs have clearly shown that they will suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief. ... In their response to Plaintiffs' motion, Defendants suggest that the individual transgender Plaintiffs' claims of irreparable harm are speculative and exaggerated, but Defendants have not presented any evidence to contradict Plaintiffs' evidence."

• "The current record indicates that many public agencies have become increasingly open to accommodating the interests of transgender individuals as society has evolved over time. This practice of case-by-case accommodation, while developing, appears to have gained acceptance in many places across North Carolina over the last few years. And the preliminary record contains uncontested evidence that these practices allowed the individual transgender Plaintiffs to use bathrooms and other facilities consistent with their gender identity for an extended period of time without causing any known infringement on the privacy rights of others."

• "In fact, rather than protect privacy, it appears at least equally likely that denying an injunction will create privacy problems, as it would require the individual transgender Plaintiffs, who outwardly appear as the sex with which they identify, to enter facilities designated for the opposite sex (e.g., requiring stereotypically-masculine appearing transgender individuals to use women's bathrooms), thus prompting unnecessary alarm and suspicion."

Worth noting: even if this part of HB 2 is struck down once and for all, and even though HB 2's ban on workplace discrimination lawsuits has been repealed (with caveats, of course), the rest—including the provision preempting local governments' living-wage and antidiscrimination laws—will remain intact.

triangulator@indyweek.com

Comments (2)

Showing 1-2 of 2

Add a comment

 
Subscribe to this thread:
Showing 1-2 of 2

Add a comment

INDY Week publishes all kinds of comments, but we don't publish everything.

  • Comments that are not contributing to the conversation will be removed.
  • Comments that include ad hominem attacks will also be removed.
  • Please do not copy and paste the full text of a press release.

Permitted HTML:
  • To create paragraphs in your comment, type <p> at the start of a paragraph and </p> at the end of each paragraph.
  • To create bold text, type <b>bolded text</b> (please note the closing tag, </b>).
  • To create italicized text, type <i>italicized text</i> (please note the closing tag, </i>).
  • Proper web addresses will automatically become links.

Latest in Triangulator



Twitter Activity

Comments

I'd take the 800 square foot studio for $500 a month, actually. As long as my neighbors are nice and …

by ammi on Capitol Broadcasting Wants Community Input on Its American Tobacco Campus Expansion. By God We're Going to Give It to Them. (Triangulator)

I want to acknowledge how lucky Durham is to have such incredible leaders in the community as provided by the …

by duh on Capitol Broadcasting Wants Community Input on Its American Tobacco Campus Expansion. By God We're Going to Give It to Them. (Triangulator)

Most Recent Comments

I'd take the 800 square foot studio for $500 a month, actually. As long as my neighbors are nice and …

by ammi on Capitol Broadcasting Wants Community Input on Its American Tobacco Campus Expansion. By God We're Going to Give It to Them. (Triangulator)

I want to acknowledge how lucky Durham is to have such incredible leaders in the community as provided by the …

by duh on Capitol Broadcasting Wants Community Input on Its American Tobacco Campus Expansion. By God We're Going to Give It to Them. (Triangulator)

It's well and good for elected officials to state support for CACs after they voted May 2 to approve a …

by George Farthing on McFarlane’s Attempt to Overhaul CACs Might Be a Big Issue in Raleigh’s Mayor’s Race (Triangulator)

I don't understand the Perry Woods response. To say that Nancy McFarlane hasn't attended to basic concerns of the public …

by ct on McFarlane’s Attempt to Overhaul CACs Might Be a Big Issue in Raleigh’s Mayor’s Race (Triangulator)

Respectfully, Mr. Goldsmith, you should learn to read the CAFR before publishing things that are NOT FACTUAL. What you've decided …

by Trixsie M on Wake County Found an Extra $3 Million. Who Decides How to Spend It—Commissioners or Bureaucrats? (Triangulator)

© 2017 Indy Week • 320 E. Chapel Hill St., Suite 200, Durham, NC 27701 • phone 919-286-1972 • fax 919-286-4274
RSS Feeds | Powered by Foundation