Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Deadline: Legal Blog-Supreme Court lets transgender boy use boys' school bathroom in South Carolina
The justices are set to consider the issue of transgender sports participation at school in a separate case this coming term.
SCOTUS made the right decision! ⬇ï¸â¬‡ï¸â¬‡ï¸ But what is SCOTUS up to? How did SCOTUS get this right ⬇ï¸â¬‡ï¸â¬‡ï¸ but are horribly wrong with other decisions? SCOTUS IS SO F🤬🤬KED UP!
— Tabby (@tabbys-corner.bsky.social) 2025-09-11T11:22:15.750Z
Supreme Court lets transgender boy use boys’ school bathroom in South Carolina www.msnbc.com/deadline-whi...
https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/south-carolina-transgender-bathroom-ban-supreme-court-rcna229930
The Supreme Court won’t let South Carolina enforce its restroom policy against a transgender boy while his challenge to the policy proceeds in the lower courts.
A federal appeals court blocked the state from enforcing its transgender bathroom ban against a student referred to in court papers by the pseudonym John Doe. The ban says public school multistall restrooms “designated for one sex shall be used only by members for one sex” and defines sex as “a person’s biological sex, either male or female, as objectively determined by anatomy and genetics existing at the time of birth.”....
South Carolina appealed to the justices, seeking an emergency lift of the circuit’s injunction. The state told the high court that relief is warranted “not only because Grimm was wrongly decided and should (and may soon) be overturned, but because in the absence of this Court’s immediate intervention, the State, the school district, and its students are suffering actual, ongoing, material harms.” The state said the issue should be guided not by the circuit’s Grimm case but by the high court’s recent ruling in the Skrmetti case, which upheld a ban on gender-affirming care.
The Supreme Court rejected South Carolina’s application on Wednesday. “The denial of the application is not a ruling on the merits of the legal issues presented in the litigation,” the court said in its order. “Rather, it is based on the standards applicable for obtaining emergency relief from this Court.” The order noted that Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch would have granted the application.
Doe’s lawyers urged the justices to stay out of it, reminding them that the state’s emergency application “concerns one ninth-grader’s restroom use.” They noted that the circuit’s injunction applies only to Doe and thus doesn’t stop the state from enforcing it otherwise, making it “hardly an emergency warranting a stay from this Court.”
A federal appeals court blocked the state from enforcing its transgender bathroom ban against a student referred to in court papers by the pseudonym John Doe. The ban says public school multistall restrooms “designated for one sex shall be used only by members for one sex” and defines sex as “a person’s biological sex, either male or female, as objectively determined by anatomy and genetics existing at the time of birth.”....
South Carolina appealed to the justices, seeking an emergency lift of the circuit’s injunction. The state told the high court that relief is warranted “not only because Grimm was wrongly decided and should (and may soon) be overturned, but because in the absence of this Court’s immediate intervention, the State, the school district, and its students are suffering actual, ongoing, material harms.” The state said the issue should be guided not by the circuit’s Grimm case but by the high court’s recent ruling in the Skrmetti case, which upheld a ban on gender-affirming care.
The Supreme Court rejected South Carolina’s application on Wednesday. “The denial of the application is not a ruling on the merits of the legal issues presented in the litigation,” the court said in its order. “Rather, it is based on the standards applicable for obtaining emergency relief from this Court.” The order noted that Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch would have granted the application.
Doe’s lawyers urged the justices to stay out of it, reminding them that the state’s emergency application “concerns one ninth-grader’s restroom use.” They noted that the circuit’s injunction applies only to Doe and thus doesn’t stop the state from enforcing it otherwise, making it “hardly an emergency warranting a stay from this Court.”
1 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
