US — prisoner rights — partial reversal — Krause In a significant prisoner case, a divided Third Circuit panel today ruled in favor of a prisoner whose suit alleged that USP Lewisburg administators retaliated against him for filing inmate grievances by moving him into a cell with another prisoner known for assaulting his cellmates. The prisoner did not to administratively exhaust that claim with prison officials before filing suit—understandably! The panel split over a second exhaustion issue. The panel majority held that, with the PLRA as with habeas, a claim is exhausted even if it was not properly presented if it was considered anyway and denied at the highest level of review.
And claiming to be trans-gendered somehow absolves them of being rapists and molesters? It makes it so no one can question a guy who goes into a women's restroom,because they may "feel" that they are a woman,and "who are you to ask? BTW,this has already happened several times since these "new policies" have gone into effect.
Hanging out in a bathroom to perv out on the occupants is still illegal. People got arrested before transgender accomodation happened and they got arrested after transgender accomodation. Nothing to see here.
A woman complained to a security guard that a man dressed as a woman was in the ladies room at some mall in the NE. The security guard was fired. A man went into the ladies locker room at a YMCA and the staff refused to do anything about it due to gender freedom.
The point is NOT about rape, it is about privacy. In your home, does your wife let guests in while she is in the shower? This is about showers too you know. And no, bathroom stalls are not viewing-tight, and no, "creepers" are not arrested in bathrooms as you claim.
The public locker room is analogous to your private bathroom?
If you are serious about this "privacy" argument, it seems you should be objecting to the status quo, where girls and boys are expected to shower, naked, in view of each other. That you apparently do not object to this suggests that your actual concern is something different.
A recent tour of the Balkans proved a potent reminder once again of the importance of this region to U.S. and Western policymakers. The Balkans are steeped in history and very much in the middle. Jun 26, · In a landmark opinion, a divided Supreme Court on Friday ruled that same-sex couples can marry nationwide, establishing a new civil right and handing gay rights advocates a historic victory. Since , the Supreme Court has not heard any further 2nd amendment cases; the most recent ruling prior to “Heller”, in , overturned part of the Brady Bill, but did not address 2nd amendment rights.
What a dumb objection. The air tight counter argument to all this bathroom and locker-room panic is a single word:Sep 19, · Nevertheless, the Supreme Court has held that despite its breadth, the authority is not immune to review by the High Court of Justice, and that review covers all the known reasons for review under administrative law.
May 08, · Should Prostitution Be a Crime? A growing movement of sex workers and activists is making the decriminalization of sex work a feminist issue.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. Syllabus. UNITED STATES v. WINDSOR, executor of the ESTATE OF SPYER, et al. at issue here—when what has preceded that assurance is a lecture on how superior the majority’s moral judgment in favor of same-sex marriage is to the Congress’s hateful moral judgment against it.
I promise you this: The. The Court added that it therefore follows that the second issue before the court, as to whether or not same-sex marriages be recognized in states that ban them, is also resolved: "if States are required by the Constitution to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, the justifications for refusing to recognize those marriages performed.
However, Feenstra and Virginia, the most recent Supreme Court equal protection rulings in favor of women, were 15 years apart.
Nguyen, the Court's most recent constitutional ruling on gender discrimination, is a more typical case than either. The U.S.
Supreme Court handed down two victories in favor of free speech this past Monday. In Matal v.
Tam, the Court struck down the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s disparagement clause.