In a stroke of judicial sanity, the en banc Eleventh Circuit ruled last Thursday (in Adams v. School Board of St. Johns County) that a public school does not violate the Equal Protection Clause or Title IX when it separates school bathroom based on sex. It rejected the claims brought by Drew Adams, a so-called “transgender boy”—i.e., a girl who identifies as a boy—who objected to being barred from the boys’ restrooms and to instead having the choice to use either the girls’ restrooms or the single-stall restrooms that the school made available for students who preferred not to use the restrooms that correspond with their sex...
Justice Thurgood Marshall observed, “a sign that says ‘men only’ looks very different on a bathroom door than a courthouse door.” That the protection of individual privacy will sometimes require segregation between the sexes is “beyond doubt,” as then-professor Ruth Bader Ginsburg recognized in her advocacy of the Equal Rights Amendment. “It is no surprise, then, that the privacy afforded by sex-separated bathrooms has been widely recognized throughout American history and jurisprudence.” “The Supreme Court acknowledged this when it stated [in an opinion by Justice Ginsburg] that admitting women to the Virginia Military Institute for the first time ‘would undoubtedly require alterations necessary to afford members of each sex privacy from the other sex in living arrangements.’”
Donna,
This is an example of an article that is heavier on expressing opinion than on reporting fact. It's not journalism...
Just so you understand that pb knows the difference...and is honest about it.
BTW, this is how a republic works. This law is the work product of "the people and their representatives."
