//  5/25/17  //  Commentary

On a new episode of Versus TrumpTake Care's podcast, we discuss the status of G.G. v. Gloucester County School Board, a major case about transgender rights, and then speak with Patti Goldman of Earthjustice about an important lawsuit that her organization has filed. As usual, you can listen online below or at takecareblog.com/podcast, and subscribe here with any podcast player or here in iTunes.

We lead off this week [start-34:40] with a roundtable discussion of the G.G. case, which is a challenge to a public school's policy that requires students to use bathrooms that correspond to their "biological gender." After recapping what's happened so far in the case, we evaluate the arguments for and against each side, discuss a controversial New Yorker article that wondered about the interests of those traumatized by sexual assault, and disagree somewhat about the overall attitude so far of the Trump Administration on LGBT rights.

In our interview segment [35:10-57:50], Charlie speaks with Patti Goldman, the managing attorney of EarthJustice's Seattle office. Patti discusses a legal challenge to the so-called "2-for-1" executive order, which requires agencies to repeal two regulations for every new regulation that is adopted. She discusses the role of the executive branch in directing agency rulemaking, what the immediate impact of the executive order has been and what proposed regulations are being held up, and the future of the litigation.

Our discussion segment closes with listener feedback, including our first voicemail! [57:50-end.] You can be caller number two: 505-333-8106.

Listen online below or at takecareblog.com/podcast, and subscribe here with any podcast player or here in iTunes.

Please share or provide feedback, and rate us in iTunes. You can find us at @VersusTrumpPod on twitter, or send us an email at versustrumppodcast@gmail.com.

Links

G.G. Discussion

  • All of the legal documents in the G.G. case, including the most recent round of amicus briefs, can be found here.
  • The Obama Administration's two "dear colleague" letters are here and here. The Trump Administration's letter rescinding the guidance on transgender bathroom access is here.
  • The New Yorker post by Jeannie Suk Gersen claiming there is now "a potential Title IX collision course" between the federal government's "directives on sexual violence and on bathrooms" is here.
  • A report that Ivanka and Jared stood up for LGBT rights is here.
  • An article detailing Republican Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen's slam of the White House over transgender rights is here.
  • Easha also mentioned other evidence of the Trump Administration's additude on LGBT rights, including the removal of a website with information about LGBT rights and the deletion of a question about LGBT status from the census.
  • All of Take Care's coverage about LGBT rights is here.

Patti Goldman Interview

  • Earthjustice's page on the "one-in, two-out" litigation is here.
  • The challenged executive order is here.

Listener Feedback

  • Zach Price mentioned his paper "Law Enforcement as Political Question," which discusses why citizens typically have no judicial recourse if the executive branch refuses to enforce a violation of the law. It's available for free download here

The Procedure Fetish

3/7/19  //  Commentary

If adding new administrative procedures will so obviously advance a libertarian agenda, might not relaxing existing administrative constraints advance progressive goals?

Nick Bagley

University of Michigan Law School

Versus Trump: Is The State Department Discriminating Against Same-Sex Marriages?

2/28/19  //  Uncategorized

On this week's episode of Versus Trump, Charlie, Jason, and Easha discuss a decision from a federal court in Los Angeles ordering the Trump Administration to grant citizenship to both children of a same-sex couple born abroad to one U.S. parent. Listen now!

Easha Anand

San Francisco

Charlie Gerstein

Civil Rights Corps

Jason Harrow

Equal Citizens

Against Establishment Clause Concession

2/28/19  //  In-Depth Analysis

There are reasons to worry about whether certain liberal justices on the Supreme Court fully appreciate that we are at an inflection point in the history of the Religion Clause

Nelson Tebbe

Brooklyn Law School

Micah Schwartzman

University of Virginia School of Law