Trans Women May Actually Face Several Disadvantages in Athletic Competition, Study Finds
A new study funded in part by the International Olympic Committee cautions against blanket bans on trans athletes.
More: https://www.them.us/story/trans-women-disadvantages-athletic-competition-study
The Oklahoma State Athletic Commission issued a formal warning that misgendered Rose and reprimanded her for violating rules that prohibit athletic competitions “between males and females,” as defined solely by chromosomes.
More: https://www.them.us/story/trans-wrestler-nyla-rose-competed-against-cis-wrestler-oklahoma
USA: New Title IX regulation provides protections against discrimination for 3.6 million LGBT students
| The U.S. Department of Education released the final rule to Title IX today. The rule explicitly provides protections for LGBTQI+ students from discrimination, harassment, and assault based on their sexual orientation, gender identity, and sex characteristics in educational programs that receive federal funding. However, the regulations leave some issues unresolved, including transgender sports participation. This rule protects an estimated 3.6 million students in the U.S. who identify as LGBT, including about 300,000 who identify as transgender. Several Williams Institute studies have documented widespread and pervasive harassment and bullying of LGBTQ+ students at school A recent study found that one-third of LGBTQ people experienced bullying, harassment, or assault at college, compared to 19% of non-LGBTQ people. |
See: https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/t9-unofficial-final-rule-2024.pdf
See also: https://www.them.us/story/bidens-title-ix-rules-lgbtq-students-not-trans-student-athletes
USA: West Virginia’s Trans Sports Ban Discriminates Against Trans Teen, Appeals Court Rules
_________________________________________________________________
The US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ruled on Tuesday that West Virginia’s ban on transgender girls competing on girls’ sports teams violates a transgender student’s rights under Title IX.
The law, which is known as the “Save Women’s Sports Act,” prohibits individuals who were assigned male at birth from competing on girls’ athletic teams. The act also says, however, that it shall not be “construed to restrict the eligibility of any student to participate in any… teams or sports designated as ‘males,’ ‘men,’ or boys.’” The court therefore found that the law prohibits only one category of students, transgender girls, from participating in sports teams that correspond with their gender.
The plaintiff, a 13-year-old transgender girl named Becky Pepper-Jackson, filed suit against the West Virginia State Board of Education in 2021. She claimed the act violated her right to equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment as well as her rights under Title IX, a federal law that prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in federally-funded educational programs.
The court found for the plaintiff on the Title IX claim, stating the plaintiff demonstrated that “applying the Act to her would treat her worse than people to whom she is similarly situated, deprive her of any meaningful athletic opportunities, and do so on the basis of sex.” The court stated, “‘[E]motional and dignitary harm… is legally cognizable under Title IX’ and it requires no feat of imagination to appreciate the ‘[t]he stigma of being’ unable to participate on a team with one’s friends and peers.” The ruling also stated that the act “goes further by requiring [the plaintiff] to take on additional harms to avoid forfeiting the ability to play school sports altogether.” Provided that the plaintiff has been publicly living as a girl for more than five years, changed her name and sex on her birth certificate, takes puberty-blocking medication, and has only participated on girls’ sports teams, the court found that “offering [her] a ‘choice’ between not participating in sports and participating only on boys teams is no real choice at all” and would “directly contradict the treatment protocols for gender dysphoria.”
The court declined to overrule the law or prohibit government officials from creating and drawing the line between separate teams for boys and girls. The ruling stated, “We also do not hold that Title IX requires schools to allow every transgender girl to play on girls’ teams, regardless of whether they have gone through puberty and experienced elevated levels of circulating testosterone.” The court also reversed the lower court’s decision that found in the defendants’ favor on the equal protection claim and sent that issue back to the lower court.
West Virginia Governor Jim Justice signed the bill into law in April 2021, and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the ACLU of West Virginia, and LGBTQ+ rights group Lambda Legal filed suit on behalf of the plaintiff a month later. Legal Director of the ACLU of West Virginia Aubrey Sparks celebrated the court’s ruling, stating, “We hope today’s ruling sends a message of hope to the trans youth of West Virginia… and a message of warning to politicians who continue to dehumanize this vulnerable population.”
West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey, however, said he planned to appeal the ruling. He stated, “We must keep working to protect women’s sports so that women’s safety is secured and girls have a truly fair playing field.”
West Virginia is one of 24 states that ban transgender students from participating in sports consistent with their gender identity. In January, the Ohio legislature overrode the governor’s veto of a bill that would restrict transgender participation in sports, but an Ohio court temporarily blocked that ban on Tuesday. Earlier this month, Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers vetoed a bill that would require schools to separate sports based on students’ assigned sex at birth.
The post US appeals court finds West Virginia transgender sports ban violates anti-discrimination law appeared first on JURIST – News.
US Supreme Court allows Idaho gender-affirming care ban for minors to go into effect
The US Supreme Court granted an emergency request for stay led by Idaho officials, allowing the state to temporarily enforce a statewide ban on gender-affirming care for certain minors. This ban is one of the first cases related to transgender health care to reach the nation’s highest court. Labrador v. Poe is the case that challenged the law enacted in Idaho last year, which prohibits treatments such as puberty blockers and hormone therapy for transgender minors.
Under the new law, physicians who provide gender-affirming care to transgender children could face up to 10 years in prison and up to $5,000 in fines. While the law can now be enforced statewide, it cannot be applied against the two plaintiffs who challenged it. Often, emergency docket decisions do not include reasoning. However, this 34-page decision included concurrences by Justices Neil Gorsuch, Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett.
The court’s written opinion emphasized that this case poses a question about “the propriety of universal injunctive relief, a question of great significance that has needed the Court’s attention for some time.” In other words, the Ninth Circuit granted relief to the plaintiffs and additionally decided the Idaho law’s enactment was to be halted. The Supreme Court ruled this was an overstep of the lower court’s authority. The court’s three liberal justices, Ketanji Brown Jackson, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, objected to this decision, arguing that the law should have remained entirely blocked and that it was the natural order of a case to be challenged and move through the lower courts appropriately.
The state of Idaho and its Attorney General Raul Labrador argue that “Every day Idaho’s law remains enjoined exposes vulnerable children to risky and dangerous medical procedures and infringes Idaho’s sovereign power to enforce its democratically enacted law.” The state says that since the plaintiffs both want access to a single procedure, it is unfair that the Ninth Circuit’s injunction applies to all 20+ procedures that the Idaho law regulates as they are two minors and their parents, and the injunction covers 2 million.
The plaintiffs, two transgender teenagers whose identities are protected, argue that the law violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution, enforceable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, which protects individuals and groups from discrimination by the government. The brief for the teens cites that the new law does not ban cisgender boys who are forecasted to have a post-pubertal height of 5’4″ or shorter as they may be treated with testosterone for “short stature.” Idaho doctors are thus free to prescribe testosterone to cisgender boys, including to affirm cisgender boys’ gender identity with overdeveloped breast tissue. Similar differences are allowed for cisgender girls to receive estrogen for specific delayed puberty issues. Thus, counsel argues that the law has “nothing to do with protecting children and everything to do with expressing disapproval of, and stigmatizing transgender people.”
This case is part of broader state jurisprudence across the country, with more than 20 conservative states enacting similar bans targeting care for transgender youth. This spring, appeals concerning similar laws in Tennessee and Kentucky will be up for consideration by the justices.
The post US Supreme Court allows Idaho gender-affirming care ban for minors to go into effect appeared first on JURIST – News.
Germany eases gender change rules
The German parliament has passed a law making it easier for citizens and residents to legally change gender.
More: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-68801392
See the comments by Nora Eckert (in German): https://www.queer.de/detail.php?article_id=49125&pk_campaign=Nwsl
_________________________________________________
Germany’s parliament, the Bundestag, passed the Self-Determination Act on Friday, allowing transgender and non-binary citizens to modify the gender marker on their legal documents through self-identification.
The Transsexuals Act is the German law that is currently in place to govern the legal requirements for modifying gender identity on legal documentation. Section 8 of the act requires that a transsexual person could be legally deemed the opposite sex if they are permanently incapable of reproduction and have undergone a surgical procedure that changes their external sexual characteristics. The law also requires transgender individuals to provide a local court with two expert reports attesting to “a high degree of probability” that the applicant will not want to revert to their previous legal gender. According to a report by the German government in 2017, obtaining these reports requires the disclosure of immaterial details from their childhood and sexual history. The report also found that the legal procedure could last for 20 months and cost an average of approximately 1900 euros.
The new act will abolish these requirements and make modifying gender entry easier. Under the act, transgender, intersex and non-binary people could change their gender entry by submitting an Erklärung mit Eigenversicherung, or a declaration with self-insurance, that assures the chosen gender entry or deletion of the gender entry best corresponds to their gender identity.
The act imposes an additional requirement for minors to have their gender entry amended. For minors up to 14 years old, the application can only be filed by their legal guardians who have also received appropriate advice when making the application. Minors aged 14 or above can apply with the consent of their legal guardians. The family court could also issue that consent if the court believes that the change of gender entry is in the best interests of the child.
The government contended that other civil rights associated with gender identity will not be affected or will be regulated by other legal reforms. For instance, the act dictates that gender entry in the civil status register will not affect the availability of gender-specific medical treatment. The availability should be determined based on individual needs, taking into account their biological and psychological circumstances. The act will also be an interim solution to replace “mother” or “father” with “parent” under parental law before further reform is carried out. Sports associations will also continue enjoying their autonomy to decide which people are admitted to which competition.
The German government previously set up a working group in light of the rising violence against the queer community within the country. The federal interior minister Nancy Faeser reported that 1,400 violent crimes against sexual minorities were recorded annually and that the number continued to rise in 2022.
Senior LGBT rights researcher at Human Rights Watch Cristian González Gabrera welcomed the enactment of the new law, claiming that “pathologizing requirements for gender recognition … have no place in diverse and democratic societies.” He added, “Germany’s new law sends a strong message that trans people exist and deserve recognition and protection.”
Principle 3 of the Yogyakarta Principles provides that self-defined sexual orientation and gender identity are integral to a person’s personality and should be legally recognized without the individual being required to undergo any medical procedures. Currently, 15 countries recognize gender registration based on self-declaration, and Spain and Finland recently passed legislation to recognize gender identity based on self-declaration.
The post Germany parliament passes self-determination legislation allowing gender identity modification appeared first on JURIST – News.
The National Health Service in England started restricting gender treatments for children, making it the fifth European country to limit the use of medication in such cases.
England’s move is part of a broader shift in northern Europe, where health officials have been concerned by soaring demand for adolescent gender treatments in recent years. Several transgender advocacy groups in Europe have condemned the changes, saying that they infringe on civil rights and exacerbate the problems of overstretched health systems.
Source: NYT, 10 April 2024
Austria: Commercial Court Vienna Violates European Union Law – Without Consequences (reported by Dr Helmut Graupner)
The Court found no gender-discrimination in the exclusion of gender assignment surgeries from a (private company) health insurance contract arguing that all kinds of gender assignment surgeries are excluded and no difference made between female-to-male and male-to-female. An argument the CJEU has rejected repeatedly since its first gender identity judgment back in 1996.
Despite that the Commercial Court Vienna, the final instance in the case, alleged that its judgment would be in line with the constant CJEU case-law (!) and refused to refer the case to the CJEU.
https://www.derstandard.at/story/3000000214100/das-handelsgericht-wien-bricht-eu-recht-folgenlos
UN Human Rights Council adopts resolution to combat discrimination against intersex persons
The UN Human Rights Council passed a resolution Thursday on Combating Discrimination, Violence, and Harmful Practices against Intersex Persons who are born with sex characteristics differing from conventional binary perceptions of male or female anatomy. The resolution was adopted by a vote of 24 in favor, none against and 23 abstentions.
In Resolution A/HRC/55/L.9, the council requested that the Office of the High Commissioner prepare a report “examining discriminatory laws and policies, acts of violence and harmful practices against persons with innate variations in gender characteristics in all regions of the world, and their root causes,” as well as best practices for intersex people to enjoy the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health.
The Office of the High Commissioner highlighted that despite increased awareness, human rights violations against intersex persons continue. These violations range from infanticide to discriminatory practices in various areas such as education, sports and employment. The office has expressed deep concern about coercive and forced medical interventions against intersex children, who are often subjected to unnecessary surgical procedures aimed at conforming to binary gender stereotypes. This often irreversible procedure can result in permanent infertility, pain, incontinence, loss of sexual sensation and lifelong psychological suffering. According to the office, the procedure is regularly carried out without the full, free and informed consent of the person concerned, who is often too young to participate in the decision-making process, violating their rights.
The Office of the High Commissioner emphasized in one of its press releases that states should urgently enact legislation to prohibit medically unnecessary surgeries and procedures on intersex children. In addition, the office stated that it is imperative to raise awareness of the rights of intersex persons and to address the underlying causes of these violations, such as harmful stereotypes, stigma and the pathologization of intersex variations.
The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) has noted that intersex older persons have specific health needs related to their age but are also affected by their physical diversity, which can pose challenges in accessing and receiving adequate medical care. In addition, the IACHR highlighted that many of these persons suffer the consequences of medical interventions aimed at conforming to binary gender stereotypes, resulting in chronic pain, physical scarring, emotional trauma, hormone dependency, genital insensitivity and sterilization.
The post UN Human Rights Council adopts resolution to combat discrimination against intersex persons appeared first on JURIST – News.
Hong Kong revises requirements for transgender individuals to change government ID sex
The Hong Kong government revised on Tuesday the Hong Kong ID cards sex entry policy. After the revision, individuals who have not completed full sex reassignment surgery may apply to change the gender marker on their identity cards.
After the revision, preoperative transgender individuals may still apply for an amendment if the individual has completed surgical treatment such as the removal of breasts or removal of the penis and testes. The individual must also make a statutory declaration to confirm they have gender dysphoria, have lived in the opposite sex throughout the period of at least two years before the application, and will continue to live in the opposite sex for the rest of their lives. In addition, the individual must also have received hormonal treatment for two years before the application is made and must confirm that they will continue to undergo hormonal treatment and submit blood test reports when required by the Director of Immigration.
The government reiterated that the change to the gender marker on Hong Kong ID cards does not represent the holder’s sex as a matter of law. It also does not affect other government policies or the handling of any other gender-related matters under the law.
To apply for an amendment to the gender marker on the Hong Kong ID cards, the government previously required transgender individuals to undergo full sex-reassignment surgery. In February 2023, the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal ruled that the requirement was unconstitutional. The court held that requiring transgender individuals to undergo the most invasive surgical intervention in the range of treatments for gender dysphoria went to far because it may be medically unnecessary. The court, therefore, required the government to present a more compelling reason to uphold the policy. Consequently, the court also held that a full sex reassignment surgery is not the only workable, objective and verifiable criterion to determine the application to change gender marker.
International human rights experts came up with the Yogyakarta Principles in 2006. Principle 3 provides for the right to recognition before the law. It specifically states, “[E]ach person’s self-defined sexual orientation and gender identity is integral to their personality and is one of the most basic aspects of self-determination, dignity and freedom.” Principle 3 also provides that undergoing medical procedures should not be a requirement for legal recognition of people’s gender identity.
Requirements for legal gender recognition vary among different countries. South American countries such as Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay, Colombia and Ecuador have already provided legal gender recognition by self-determination. The revised policy adopted by Hong Kong is similar to the UK Gender Recognition Act 2004, except with an additional requirement of having completed certain surgical treatments.
The post Hong Kong revises requirements for transgender individuals to change government ID sex appeared first on JURIST – News.
International and Comparative SOGIESC Law - Professor Andreas R Ziegler 