Woke judge rules women's nude spa must allow men pretending to be women
- Thread starter DerekJohnson
- Start date
Just so perverted and dangerous to women. Liberals suck.
Disgusting.
Pitchfork51
Active poster
Women brought this on themselves. They could vote against it. But until they do I have no reason to fight it
Per usual liberals are completely for it until it affects them personally.
HHusky
New Fish
Narrow issue argued by the spa owners. Narrow decision by the Court. You girls were against "judicial activism" before you were for it.
But outrage! of course.
- - - - - -
Notably, the Spa did not challenge this definition or the language of the statute. The Spa did not argue that the statute was vague or that the Spa’s conduct did not fit within the statute’s definition of discrimination on the basis of gender expression or identity. Nor did the Spa challenge the implementing regulations or the HRC’s related policies, either in this lawsuit or during the HRC’s enforcement action against it.
Although the enforcement action is grounded in state law, the Spa sued state officials (the Executive Director and Civil Rights Investigator for the HRC) on First Amendment grounds, claiming that WLAD, as enforced against the Spa’s entrance policy, violates its rights to the freedom of speech, religion, and association. Because the enforcement action did not violate the Spa’s First Amendment rights, we affirm the district court’s dismissal of the Spa’s complaint.
The dissent endeavors to make this case about anything but the Spa’s First Amendment claims, instead offering a political screed against the HRC’s enforcement of the statute, which relies on an unargued—and unfounded— interpretation of WLAD’s plain language. But this case has nothing to with President Trump or discrimination against Asian Americans. The Spa simply did not challenge the statute itself, and it is not our role to rewrite the statute. We are not unmindful of the concerns and beliefs raised by the Spa. Indeed, the Spa may have other avenues to challenge the enforcement action. But whatever recourse it may have, that relief cannot come from the First Amendment.
But outrage! of course.
- - - - - -
Notably, the Spa did not challenge this definition or the language of the statute. The Spa did not argue that the statute was vague or that the Spa’s conduct did not fit within the statute’s definition of discrimination on the basis of gender expression or identity. Nor did the Spa challenge the implementing regulations or the HRC’s related policies, either in this lawsuit or during the HRC’s enforcement action against it.
Although the enforcement action is grounded in state law, the Spa sued state officials (the Executive Director and Civil Rights Investigator for the HRC) on First Amendment grounds, claiming that WLAD, as enforced against the Spa’s entrance policy, violates its rights to the freedom of speech, religion, and association. Because the enforcement action did not violate the Spa’s First Amendment rights, we affirm the district court’s dismissal of the Spa’s complaint.
The dissent endeavors to make this case about anything but the Spa’s First Amendment claims, instead offering a political screed against the HRC’s enforcement of the statute, which relies on an unargued—and unfounded— interpretation of WLAD’s plain language. But this case has nothing to with President Trump or discrimination against Asian Americans. The Spa simply did not challenge the statute itself, and it is not our role to rewrite the statute. We are not unmindful of the concerns and beliefs raised by the Spa. Indeed, the Spa may have other avenues to challenge the enforcement action. But whatever recourse it may have, that relief cannot come from the First Amendment.
Last edited:
Must
Defend
Everything
Defend
Everything
Well then, fuck the 14th Amendment because some guy likes to show his dong in front of women and small girls in a private place of business.
Retard H keeps posting the ridiculous opinions of these insane rulings as if it means anything other than some Leftist judge allowing grown men to get their jollies in a spa (in this instance).
You have never been an attorney. It’s obvious.
Retard H keeps posting the ridiculous opinions of these insane rulings as if it means anything other than some Leftist judge allowing grown men to get their jollies in a spa (in this instance).
You have never been an attorney. It’s obvious.
Expert legal analysis yet again from HHutzky (some guy on The Shed came up with this one).
Baffling to me how you take any legal opinion you agree with as an absolute truth, dummy. Your posting of KJB’s hilarious recent dissent shows you’re a fraud. You’re clueless.
Last edited:
HHusky
New Fish
You're free to "analyze" the opinion. But you'd have to read it. A Bridge too far for the TugCon brain trust.Expert legal analysis yet again from HHutzky (some guy on The Shed came up with this one).
You don’t even read past the headlines of the articles you post, O’Keefed.
HHusky
New Fish
In other words, you aren't going to read it and I'm right again.
I read what you copy/pasted. I commented on it. That you can’t understand my counter is not my fault, dummy.
HHusky
New Fish
Right you are, Einstein!
Judge says men get to shower with girls. Nothing can be done
If you defend this you're a giant piece of shit
If you defend this you're a giant piece of shit
HHusky
New Fish
Judge says bring the right claims in the right court.
Shrill cries arise from the Tug sewing circle.
Like i said
Giant piece of shit
Giant piece of shit
HHusky
New Fish
Like I said.
You gals are for judicial activism.
How about, "This is horrific and a decent society would never allow it to happen."