August, 22 2016, 09:45am EDT
District Court Issues Injunction Against Guidance Protecting Transgender Students
“We will continue to file lawsuits representing transgender students and litigate them to the fullest extent of the law...”
FORT WORTH, TEXAS
A U.S. District Court judge today issued a preliminary injunction against the federal government's guidance to public school districts regarding their legal responsibility to allow transgender students to use the same restrooms as other students. The ruling came in the multi-state lawsuit, Texas v. United States.
Five civil rights organizations who had submitted a joint amicus (friend-of-the-court) brief in the lawsuit - Lambda Legal, American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and ACLU of Texas; National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR); Transgender Law Center; and GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD) - issued the following statement in response to U.S. District Court Judge Reed O'Connor's ruling:
"A ruling by a single judge in one circuit cannot and does not undo the years of clear legal precedent nationwide establishing that transgender students have the right to go to school without being singled out for discrimination. This unfortunate and premature ruling may, however, confuse school districts that are simply trying to support their students, including their transgender students. So let us make it clear to those districts: your obligations under the law have not changed, and you are still not only allowed but required to treat transgender students fairly. The scope of this injunction has no effect on the ability of other courts or lawyers representing transgender people to continue to rely on the federal government's interpretations of Title IX or on prior decisions that have reached similar conclusions about the scope of federal sex discrimination laws.
"The court's misguided decision targets a small, vulnerable group of young people - transgender elementary and high school students - for potential continued harassment, stigma and abuse."
Although the court failed to consider the interests of the very students the federal laws were intended to protect, the five civil rights organizations who advocated on their behalf avowed, "We will continue to file lawsuits representing transgender students and litigate them to the fullest extent of the law--regardless of what happens with this particular federal guidance."
Texas v. United States was brought by Texas and 10 other states -- subsequently joined by two additional states -- against the United States, the Departments of Justice, Education and Labor and numerous federal officials. The plaintiffs include the states of Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky (through its governor), Louisiana, Mississippi (through its governor), Oklahoma, Tennessee, Utah, West Virginia, and Wisconsin, and the Arizona Department of Education, the Heber-Overgaard Unified School District in Arizona, Harrold Independent School District in Texas, and Maine Governor Paul LePage. Several of these plaintiffs lie in the Fourth, Sixth, Ninth, and Eleventh Circuits, which had issued binding appellate decisions consistent with the guidance of the federal agencies.
The lawsuit targets various federal letters, guides, memos, and statements regarding Title IX of the Education Amendments that conclude that federal bans on sex discrimination encompass gender identity discrimination, and that transgender individuals should be allowed to use restrooms consistent with their gender identity. The lawsuit claims that that guidance is in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act and the Constitution. A copycat lawsuit was filed recently by the state of Nebraska, joined by Arkansas, Kansas, Michigan (through its attorney general), Montana, North Dakota, Ohio, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Wyoming.
The court's order can be read here.
The joint amicus brief filed by the five civil rights organizations can be read here.
This press release can be found here: https://www.aclu.org/news/district-court-issues-injunction-against-guidance-protecting-transgender-students
The American Civil Liberties Union was founded in 1920 and is our nation's guardian of liberty. The ACLU works in the courts, legislatures and communities to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to all people in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States.
(212) 549-2666LATEST NEWS
Tlaib Rips Lawmakers Who 'Drool at the Opportunity to Fund War' While Opposing Healthcare for All
"They’re gutting healthcare and food assistance to pay for bombs and weapons. It’s a sick vicious cycle," said Rep. Rashida Tlaib.
Dec 11, 2025
"Imagine if our government funded our communities like they fund war."
That was Rep. Rashida Tlaib's (D-Mich.) response to the House's bipartisan passage Wednesday of legislation that authorizes nearly $901 billion in military spending for the coming fiscal year, as tens of millions of Americans face soaring health insurance premiums and struggle to afford basic necessities amid the nation's worsening cost-of-living crisis.
Tlaib, who voted against the military policy bill, had harsh words for her colleagues who "drool at the opportunity to fund war and genocide, but when it comes to universal healthcare, affordable housing, and food assistance, they suddenly argue that we simply can’t afford it."
"Congress just authorized nearly a trillion dollars for death and destruction but cut a trillion dollars from Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act," said Tlaib, referring to the budget reconciliation package that Republicans and President Donald Trump enacted over the summer.
"They’re gutting healthcare and food assistance to pay for bombs and weapons. It’s a sick vicious cycle," Tlaib continued. "Another record-breaking military budget is impossible to justify when Americans are sleeping on the streets, unable to afford groceries to feed their children, and racking up massive amounts of medical debt just for getting sick."
House passage of the 2026 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) came as Republicans in both chambers of Congress pushed healthcare proposals that would not extend enhanced Affordable Care Act (ACA) tax credits that are set to expire at the end of the year, resulting in massive premium hikes for millions.
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that a Senate Democratic plan to extend the ACA subsidies for three years would cost around $85 billion—a fraction of the military spending that House lawmakers just authorized.
The NDAA, which is expected to clear the Senate next week, approves $8 billion more in military spending than the Trump White House asked for in its annual budget request.
According to the National Priorities Project, that $8 billion "would be more than enough" to restore federal nutrition assistance to the millions expected to lose it due to expanded work requirements included in the Trump-GOP budget law.
"Our priorities are disgustingly misplaced," Tlaib said Wednesday.
Keep ReadingShow Less
‘Don't Give the Pentagon $1 Trillion,’ Critics Say as House Passes Record US Military Spending Bill
"From ending the nursing shortage to insuring uninsured children, preventing evictions, and replacing lead pipes, every dollar the Pentagon wastes is a dollar that isn't helping Americans get by," said one group.
Dec 10, 2025
US House lawmakers on Wednesday approved a $900.6 billion military spending bill, prompting critics to highlight ways in which taxpayer funds could be better spent on programs of social uplift instead of perpetual wars.
The lower chamber voted 312-112 in favor of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for fiscal year 2026, which will fund what President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans call a "peace through strength" national security policy. The proposal now heads for a vote in the Senate, where it is also expected to pass.
Combined with $156 billion in supplemental funding included in the One Big Beautiful Bill signed in July by Trump, the NDAA would push military spending this fiscal year to over $1 trillion—a new record in absolute terms and a relative level unseen since World War II.
The House is about to vote on authorizing $901 billion in military spending, on top of the $156 billion included in the Big Beautiful Bill.70% of global military spending already comes from the US and its major allies.www.stephensemler.com/p/congress-s...
[image or embed]
— Stephen Semler (@stephensemler.bsky.social) December 10, 2025 at 1:16 PM
The Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) led opposition to the bill on Capitol Hill, focusing on what lawmakers called misplaced national priorities, as well as Trump's abuse of emergency powers to deploy National Guard troops in Democratic-controlled cities under pretext of fighting crime and unauthorized immigration.
Others sounded the alarm over the Trump administration's apparent march toward a war on Venezuela—which has never attacked the US or any other country in its nearly 200-year history but is rich in oil and is ruled by socialists offering an alternative to American-style capitalism.
"I will always support giving service members what they need to stay safe but that does not mean rubber-stamping bloated budgets or enabling unchecked executive war powers," CPC Deputy Chair Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) said on social media, explaining her vote against legislation that "pours billions into weapons systems the Pentagon itself has said it does not need."
"It increases funding for defense contractors who profit from global instability and it advances a vision of national security rooted in militarization instead of diplomacy, human rights, or community well-being," Omar continued.
"At a time when families in Minnesota’s 5th District are struggling with rising costs, when our schools and social services remain underfunded, and when the Pentagon continues to evade a clean audit year after year, Congress should be investing in people," she added.
The Congressional Equality Caucus decried the NDAA's inclusion of a provision banning transgender women from full participation in sports programs at US military academies:
The NDAA should invest in our military, not target minority communities for exclusion.While we're grateful that most anti-LGBTQI+ provisions were removed, the GOP kept one anti-trans provision in the final bill—and that's one too many.We're committed to repealing it.
[image or embed]
— Congressional Equality Caucus (@equality.house.gov) December 10, 2025 at 3:03 PM
Advocacy groups also denounced the legislation, with the Institute for Policy Studies' National Priorities Project (NPP) noting that "from ending the nursing shortage to insuring uninsured children, preventing evictions, and replacing lead pipes, every dollar the Pentagon wastes is a dollar that isn't helping Americans get by."
"The last thing Congress should do is deliver $1 trillion into the hands of [Defense] Secretary Pete Hegseth," NPP program director Lindsay Koshgarian said in a statement Wednesday. "Under Secretary Hegseth's leadership, the Pentagon has killed unidentified boaters in the Caribbean, sent the National Guard to occupy peaceful US cities, and driven a destructive and divisive anti-diversity agenda in the military."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Fed Cut Interest Rates But Can't Undo 'Damage Created by Trump's Chaos Economy,' Expert Says
"Working families are heading into the holidays feeling stretched, stressed, and far from jolly."
Dec 10, 2025
A leading economist and key congressional Democrat on Wednesday pointed to the Federal Reserve's benchmark interest rate cut as just the latest evidence of the havoc that President Donald Trump is wreaking on the economy.
The US central bank has a dual mandate to promote price stability and maximum employment. The Federal Open Market Committee may raise the benchmark rate to reduce inflation, or cut it to spur economic growth, including hiring. However, the FOMC is currently contending with a cooling job market and soaring costs.
After the FOMC's two-day monthly meeting, the divided committee announced a quarter-point reduction to 3.5-3.75%. It's the third time the panel has cut the federal funds rate in recent months after a pause during the early part of Trump's second term.
"Today's decision shows that the Trump economy is in a sorry state and that the Federal Reserve is concerned about a weakening job market," House Budget Committee Ranking Member Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.) said in a statement. "On top of a flailing job market, the president's tariffs—his national sales tax—continue to fuel inflation."
"To make matters worse, extreme Republican policies, including Trump's Big Ugly Law, are driving healthcare costs sharply higher," he continued, pointing to the budget package that the president signed in July. "I will keep fighting to lower costs and for an economy that works for every American."
Alex Jacquez, a former Obama administration official who is now chief of policy and advocacy at the Groundwork Collaborative, similarly said that "Trump's reckless handling of the economy has backed the Fed into a corner—stuck between rising costs and a weakening job market, it has no choice but to try and offer what little relief they can to consumers via rate cuts."
"But the Fed cannot undo the damage created by Trump's chaos economy," Jacquez added, "and working families are heading into the holidays feeling stretched, stressed, and far from jolly."
Thanks to the historically long federal government shutdown, the FOMC didn't have typical data—the consumer price index or jobs report—to inform Wednesday's decision. Instead, its new statement and projections "relied on 'available indicators,' which Fed officials have said include their own internal surveys, community contacts, and private data," Reuters reported.
"The most recent official data on unemployment and inflation is for September, and showed the unemployment rate rising to 4.4% from 4.3%, while the Fed's preferred measure of inflation also increased slightly to 2.8% from 2.7%," the news agency noted. "The Fed has a 2% inflation target, but the pace of price increases has risen steadily from 2.3% in April, a fact at least partly attributable to the pass-through of rising import taxes to consumers and a driving force behind the central bank's policy divide."
The lack of government data has also shifted journalists' attention to other sources, including the revelation from global payroll processing firm ADP that the US lost 32,000 jobs in November, as well as Gallup's finding last week that Americans' confidence in the economy has fallen by seven points over the past month and is now at its lowest level in over a year.
The Associated Press highlighted that the rate cut is "good news" for US job-seekers:
"Overall, we've seen a slowing demand for workers with employers not hiring the way they did a couple of years ago," said Cory Stahle, senior economist at the Indeed Hiring Lab. "By lowering the interest rate, you make it a little more financially reasonable for employers to hire additional people. Especially in some areas—like startups, where companies lean pretty heavily on borrowed money—that's the hope here."
Stahle acknowledged that it could take time for the rate cuts to filter down to employers and then to workers, but he said the signal of the reduction is also important.
"Beyond the size of the cut, it tells employers and job-seekers something about the Federal Reserve's priorities and focus. That they're concerned about the labor market and willing to step in and support the labor market. It's an assurance of the reserve's priorities."
The Federal Reserve is now projecting only one rate cut next year. During a Wednesday press conference, Fed Chair Jerome Powell pointed to the three cuts since September and said that "we are well positioned to wait to see how the economy evolves."
However, Powell is on his way out, with his term ending in May, and Trump signaled in a Tuesday interview with Politico that agreeing with immediate interest rate cuts is a litmus test for his next nominee to fill the role.
Trump—who embarked on a nationwide "affordability tour" this week after claiming last week that "the word 'affordability' is a Democrat scam"—also graded the US economy on his watch, giving it an A+++++.
US Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) responded: "Really? 60% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck. 800,000 are homeless. Food prices are at record highs. Wages lag behind inflation. God help us when we have a B+++++ economy."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular