this post was submitted on 18 Sep 2026
16 points (100.0% liked)

US Law (local/state/federal) ⚖

96 readers
1 users here now

This is the only decentralized venue for chatter about law in the US. Federal law and law of various states and territories is on topic here.

Loosely related:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
evenwicht@lemmy.sdf.org
16
Judge’s anti-trans language ‘harmful,’ even for winning lawyers in Oregon case (www.sfchronicle.com)
submitted 3 weeks ago by TRAHR@quokk.au to c/law_us@lemmy.sdf.org
2 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

While the court “agreed with our core legal arguments” that Oregon carefully evaluates the needs and proper placement of transgender inmates, “we strongly disagree with the court’s harmful language,” said Jenny Hansson, spokesperson for the state attorney general’s office. “It does not reflect our brief or our values.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] evenwicht@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Right-wing assholes and their language aside, surely a men’s prison would have both genuine transgender women and also “transgender women” who are genuinely men who will say anything to get access to female inmates. The genuine transgender women need to be moved to a woman’s prison for their own safety. But false (“transgender women”) need to stay in the men’s prison for the safety of female inmates.

How is that distinction made? I hope the trans rights defenders would not argue for simply trusting prisoners’ declarations. Surely that would be a recipe for disaster. Do sex offenders lose their privilege to declare their own gender? Or would they decide based on the gender of sex offenders’ victims?

[–] TRAHR@quokk.au 1 points 2 weeks ago

If they are a danger to other inmates, you segregate them from the others.