It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

DOJ Informs North Carolina That HB2 Is Illegal

page: 1
8
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 4 2016 @ 04:31 PM
link   
Didn't see this coming.

News Obersver - US Justice Department: HB2 violates federal Civil Rights Act


RALEIGH U.S. Justice Department officials Wednesday notified Gov. Pat McCrory that House Bill 2 violates the U.S. Civil Rights Act. The department gave state officials until Monday to address the situation “by confirming that the State will not comply with or implement HB2.” The letter says HB2, which pre-empted Charlotte’s anti-discrimination ordinance, violates Title IX of the Civil Rights Act, which bars discrimination in education based on sex, and Title VII, which bars employers from discriminating.


“Access to sex-segregated restrooms and other workplace facilities consistent with gender identity is a term, condition or privilege of employment. Denying such access to transgender individuals, whose gender identity is different from the gender assigned at birth, while affording it to similarly situated non-transgender employees, violates Title VII … “HB 2...is facially discriminatory against transgender employees on the basis of sex because it treats transgender employees, whose gender identity does not match their biological sex, as defined by HB2, differently from similarly situated non transgender employees…


The letter came from Vanita Gupta, principal deputy assistant attorney general and similar letters were issued to the NC Department of Public Safety and the Univ of North Carolina, informing both that the DOJ has concluded that they've engaged in violations of Title VII and Title IX of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The letter gave them until the close of business on May 9th to respond to the DOJ, informing them whether they intended to enforce HB2 or not.

So what happens if they don't?

I'm not sure how this would work exactly and the article doesn't go into any detail at all but the violations of Title IX, which prohibits discrimination in education, could possibly lead to a loss of nearly a billion dollars in federal education funding according to the article:


If that determination is upheld, North Carolina could lose millions in federal school funding. During the current school year, state public schools received $861 million in federal funding.


Again, that's the extent of the detail about that aspect and I don't know that the letter even implies anything of the sort so it would be more than a little irresponsible to say that NC has been threatened with this particular consequence. I didn't disagree with anything else about the DOJ's actions in sending the letter but if withholding funding for education is somehow ultimately on the table, I would strongly disagree with that.




posted on May, 4 2016 @ 04:42 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

How did you not see this coming? The DOJ is run by the spineless twit Obama.

This is not a surprise from an administration that selectively enforced the law (by their own admission). The DOJ has become a joke as has the current administration.



posted on May, 4 2016 @ 04:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

The states have the right to do what the Feds do not have the power to do, but now the "nice state you have there ... sure would be a shame is something were to happen to it ..." twisting begins.

Colorado tried to resist the alcohol limits the Feds wanted too a long time ago, so the Feds simply threatened to cut off highway money.



posted on May, 4 2016 @ 04:48 PM
link   
Another win for the good guys, but dont worry you guys will find another way to discriminate against somebody else.



posted on May, 4 2016 @ 04:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

I didn't see it coming because the NC State AG came out last month and said that HB2 was a "national embarrassment" and that his office would not defend it against any legal challenges whatsoever. I was thinking that HB2 was going to go down in flames in court.

I don't know exactly what about this has anything to do with Obama being a "spineless twit" at all but I'll take your word for it.



posted on May, 4 2016 @ 04:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969
Another win for the good guys, but dont worry you guys will find another way to discriminate against somebody else.


Obama and the DOJ are NOT good guys. That statement is idiotic.



posted on May, 4 2016 @ 04:54 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian



I don't know exactly what about this has anything to do with Obama being a "spineless twit" at all but I'll take your word for it.


Because he will cave to any political pressure from the left.



posted on May, 4 2016 @ 04:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969
Another win for the good guys, but dont worry you guys will find another way to discriminate against somebody else.


So when the state AG decides not to enforce or defend a law, it's OK if you don't like it, but when someone in a legal position decides to ignore a law that you do like it's horrible and she should be jailed?

Do you or do you not believe in the rule of law or simply the rule of what you think should be the law which is actually chaos.



posted on May, 4 2016 @ 04:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

Lol this is not about obama, this is about discrimination, but nice try do.



posted on May, 4 2016 @ 04:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969
Another win for the good guys, but dont worry you guys will find another way to discriminate against somebody else.


Obama and the DOJ are NOT good guys. That statement is idiotic.


By good guys, I believe they were referring to transgenders and our civil rights in general, not Obama and the DoJ.



posted on May, 4 2016 @ 04:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969
Another win for the good guys, but dont worry you guys will find another way to discriminate against somebody else.


So when the state AG decides not to enforce or defend a law, it's OK if you don't like it, but when someone in a legal position decides to ignore a law that you do like it's horrible and she should be jailed?

Do you or do you not believe in the rule of law or simply the rule of what you think should be the law which is actually chaos.


This is about making laws to use public washrooms and discrimination, nothing else.


(post by Metallicus removed for a serious terms and conditions violation)

posted on May, 4 2016 @ 05:00 PM
link   
Another win for freedom, liberty and equal rights!

Congratulations to the DOJ!



posted on May, 4 2016 @ 05:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969
a reply to: Metallicus

Lol this is not about obama, this is about discrimination, but nice try do.


No, it is about states rights being eroded by an Authoritarian Government, but I suppose it depends on your perspective. I am tired of Overlord Obama and HIS DOJ...yes, it is HIS DOJ so it does have everything to do with the Executive branch of Government and the Dark Lord.



posted on May, 4 2016 @ 05:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Another win for freedom, liberty and equal rights!

Congratulations to the DOJ!


What freedom? State rights have been eroded.

You are celebrating Authoritarian rule.

People are so dense.



posted on May, 4 2016 @ 05:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Metallicus

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969
Another win for the good guys, but dont worry you guys will find another way to discriminate against somebody else.


Obama and the DOJ are NOT good guys. That statement is idiotic.


By good guys, I believe they were referring to transgenders and our civil rights in general, not Obama and the DoJ.

POST REMOVED BY STAFF


Constitutional freedoms and civil rights are for all of us. We are all the good guys unless we are trying to deny someone else their rights.
edit on Wed May 4 2016 by DontTreadOnMe because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 4 2016 @ 05:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Another win for freedom, liberty and equal rights!

Congratulations to the DOJ!


What freedom? State rights have been eroded.

You are celebrating Authoritarian rule.

People are so dense.


States rights are exactly the same as they've always been under our Constitution ... subordinate to Federal law.

All "rule" is authoritarian, particularly State law that wants to invade the bathrooms.

The Federal government is preventing individual rights from being trampled by stupid and utterly unnecesssary State overreach.

Working as intended.



posted on May, 4 2016 @ 05:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

States don't have rights to discriminate. No state can just decide to start lynching black people again, or to take the vote away from women. Nor can they tell transgender people that they have to use a specific restroom whether it fits them or not.



posted on May, 4 2016 @ 05:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Metallicus

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969
Another win for the good guys, but dont worry you guys will find another way to discriminate against somebody else.


Obama and the DOJ are NOT good guys. That statement is idiotic.


By good guys, I believe they were referring to transgenders and our civil rights in general, not Obama and the DoJ.

POST REMOVED BY STAFF




What makes them good guys is that their human beings...with feelings, rights, and good and bad in them just like you
edit on 4-5-2016 by Willtell because: (no reason given)

edit on Wed May 4 2016 by DontTreadOnMe because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 4 2016 @ 05:16 PM
link   
a reply to: dukeofjive696969

No, it's about whether or not you think the 10th Amendment is still valid and whether or not states have the power to make their own laws and the AG of the state has the job of upholding and defending those laws and whether or not this is an issue that should work its way through the courts instead of being one that is strong-armed.



new topics

top topics



 
8
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join