he student no longer attends the school involved in the suit.

by

The transgender agenda has infiltrated the country with overwhelming effects. While this is generally a social issue, it recently reached political levels once again when the Supreme Court ruled in a transgender man’s favor regarding using the appropriate bathroom.

Under the ruling, the Obama nominated judge ultimately decided that it was illegally discriminatory for the now-man’s high school to mandate that he use the women’s restroom or “alternative facilities” such as a family bathroom, based on the indisputable truth that he was born biologically female.

The student, Gavin Grimm, 19, sued the Gloucester County Public Schools system over its policies which required, at the time, her, to use the facilities designated for females. He was “represented by the ACLU.”

On Tuesday in Newport News, Virginia, Federal Judge Arenda Wright Allen ruled in Grimm’s favor on the basis that his school understandably mandated that students are to use the appropriate restroom according to their biological gender.

The ruling is said to be “a boon to the LGBT community, as it found the trans student is covered by civil rights laws.”

However, Grimm no longer attends the public high school, illustrating that this is simply an item on the transgender agenda.

In court, Grimm claimed that the supposed discrimination “violates Title IX which bans gender discrimination in education and the Constitution’s equal protection clause.”

Under Title IX, former President Obama mandated in May 2016 that transgender persons are legally permitted to use the bathroom of their preference, obviously with no regard for this being a safety concern.

Thankfully, President Trump has since “rescinded the Obama-era guidance.” After doing so in March 2017, the Grimm’s case was sent back to a lower court.

Upon such occurring, Joshua Block of the ACLU noted that it was “a detour, not the end of the road.”

Unfortunately, he was correct, and the LGBT agenda continued the so-called fight for equality.

It is notable that even under Obama’s new restroom policy, it was never fully legal considering that the already corrupt president’s administration “did not follow the legally-proscribed process for changing regulations.”

However, Grimm’s case reached the Supreme Court due to a “relatively new civil rights theory” that states that federal law already protects transgender rights, as protected by Title IX and the Civil Rights Act.

To not uphold such rights is said to be “gender stereotyping or discrimination against individuals for failing to conform to expectations about sex,” citing the 1988 case of Price Waterhous v. Hopkins.

Judge Allen unbelievably followed this logic in ruling in Grimm’s favor.

She even continued that the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause also ensures these rights.

Again, disregarding other students’ safety, Allen argued that the district’s policy did more to single out transgender students than it did to protect others.

While the arguments surrounding the theory that transgender protection laws already existed before Obama may be technically correct in claiming that all citizens have human rights, their interpretation of such in this case sets the stage for additional ridiculous protections to be granted in the future.

A school district, or any place for that matter, should be allowed to make its own policies regarding the appropriate sex using its restrooms or changing facilities.

Even more important, a rule stating such is in no way unreasonable.

Disputing this fact is a mere symptom of the disease that is liberalism.

Grimm and the court may claim that he was singled out; however, he admittedly opted for the associated treatment when the former female determined he was born as the wrong gender.

Following the ruling, Grimm reported feeling “relieved and vindicated” and claimed that he has been advocating for transgender bathroom rights since being 15.

As with any liberally motivated ruling, this makes one wonder what is next as sensitive individuals continue to advocate for additional privileges if they are claimed to be civil rights issues.

This could manifest in people identifying as the most outrageous things that are not even human.

Correction: this has already occurred and will continue to as long as politicians and judges continue to recognize them as legitimate.

Recently, a Florida woman married a ficus to prevent it from being cut down.

Even stranger, a man in New York with a rare eyesight condition had a device attached to his head, giving him a robot-like appearance. Due to this, he claims that the government should recognize ‘non-humans’ as an identity.

Thankfully President Trump has been tirelessly working to overturn Obama-era policies in preventing the country from being forced into political correctness as seen in these examples. Unfortunately, liberals continue to push as far as legally possible in defying established laws.