Wait, what? A “courtesy” to who?
Just one more reason to get out the DEM vote this fall in bigly yuge numbers.
Difficult for me to parse this.
You will not be shocked to learn that Alito, Thomas, Roberts and Kennedy were joined by “…Justice Stephen Breyer [who] indicated that he had voted to grant the board’s application “as a courtesy” – a practice most commonly seen in last-minute death penalty proceedings.” I can’t get too het up about who uses which bathroom (as we have known since the days of the ERA, every house in this country has a unisex bathroom). This is going to be resolved by the 29th, so no need to freak out…yet. Yet another solution in search of a problem, much like “voter fraud.” Since this deals with icky sex issues, it’s no wonder that many are upset. scotusblog has more details.
This is only an annoying speed bump – not a final decision. In the fight for equality over the years, we in the LGBTQ community have endured much worse. While this decision is a set-back for Gavin Grimm, personally, it’s procedural – nothing more (right now).
This is just another reminder how vitally important it is we on the left/progressive side of the aisle GOTV. The Supreme Court sets the stage for a decade or two on any number of important issues. Personally, I find it in my best interest(s) to vote in the lesser of two evils (if you happen to see this race in that way; I don’t) elections than get sideswiped by a ruling not in my favor – then have to wait a couple decades for another chance at them getting it right. If you aren’t a member of the LGBTQ community, perhaps you have family members and/or friends, coworkers who are. Aren’t they worth it? This isn’t speaking to the other cases addressing pressing issues working their way up the system: Voting Rights, Women’s Choice, to name just a couple.
SCOTUS is worth your vote, folks.
Was going to write basically what your wrote, but you beat me to it. Great minds and all that. 
+1000 on the importance of the Supreme Court.
The court’s Liberal vs. Conservative balance is on the ballot this fall. Its not Just Garland (5th vote) but if Hillary is elected, expect both Ginsberg and Breyer to step off the Court. If Trump were to win, Ginsberg may not last 4 years, and Kennedy or Thomas might step off. Even if Clinton wins, its possible that either or both Thomas and Kennedy steps off.
No better reason not to vote for the Naderite candidate.
As to this ruling, Breyer has had issues in the past with refusals to grant stays (see the dissent he cites to) and given that he sees little harm here, he I am sure figures that he will give Kennedy some space to see the issue. it takes 4 votes for cert, and 5 for a stay, and in Breyer’s thinking there is no harm to Plaintiff (not saying I agree, but I expect this is his thinking) and he scores points with Kennedy. It also signals to the 4 conservatives that if they vote for cert, then they are unlikely to get his vote.
The next four years could see four or more SCOTUS appointments. There is one open seat plus Ginsburg, Kennedy and Breyer are 78-83 years of age.
So the next president could control the direction of the Court for the next generation.
Most definitely!
COWARDS, knuckling under Xtain bigots…
IM so sad. I wanted To be A fat, lEsbian MolEster of gay Boys and The Supreme Court literally Murdered my Choices. Libtards have too many choices1!1!1!1!!!one!!!1!1!1!!!
Seriously, why is this such an issue?
On every occasion that I am compelled to use a public bathroom my focus is usually on completing the task at hand and getting out of there.
I’m not at all interested in who else might be in a stall in close proximity unless there is screaming going on.
I used to go through the Port Authority in NYC every morning and believe me, you learn just to carry on with your day.
Sad. Very sad.
So when they hear the case it’ll be 4-4 tie, and uphold the lower court ruling. Or, if the Senate votes on an Obama appointment, it’ll be 5-4 concurring with the lower court ruling. No matter what happens, it’ll be a win for Gavin.
Not necessarily. Kennedy has been relatively good on LGBT issues, compared to to the rest of his conservative brethren. A 5-3 decision in favor of Grimm and letting transgender people use the bathroom that matches their psychological gender, rather than their biological sex, is a real and likely possibility - if SCOTUS decides to hear the case.
Breyer said in a concurrence to the order that he had voted to halt the ruling “as a courtesy,” while noting that “we are currently in recess, and that granting a stay will preserve the status quo (as of the time the Court of Appeals made its decision).”
Wait. Forever, a trans student who identifies (dresses, acts, etc) as male has been free to walk into the male bathroom. Then this year a new law was made to make that illegal. The Court of Appeals strikes down the decision, but to “preserve the status quo” you put the illegal law back up? The “status quo” that is important here is the one that has been in place for one hot minute while the tea party zealots got their way, not the status quo from hundreds of years of public bathrooms and transgendered individuals?
Boggles the mind …
There are also rumors that Clarence Thomas might retire after the election.
Well, it will be resolved by the 29th, if SCOTUS decides not to hear the case. If the four conservative justices decide to hear the case (and why wouldn’t they?) then it won’t be resolved until after oral arguments and the court makes a final ruling. That could very well be after Gavin Grimm graduates.
Jesus ducking Christ. We’ve got the sharpest legal minds in the country arguing who can evacuate their bowels where. This is just absurd.