Stopping Edu. Funds for Disabled Students over Bathroom Laws

[Libraria and Ausitoria]

Where's the "provide additional funding so both A and B can be done at the same time" option?

[Renewed Imperial Germany]

Where's the "provide additional funding so both A and B can be done at the same time" option?

The matter here is that Obama, under Title IX of the Education Ammendments, has withdrawn funding from schools that do not offer Transgender persons equal protection, so the "A and B" option doesn't exist, as its not a matter of not being able to fund bathroom integration.

[Noraika]

Sounds like a sci-fi/horror thing.

You maniacs!

They're trying to destroy their society by expecting people to be treated equally in society, in order to get funding for federal aid, as established according to pre-existing law!

[Emerald Ilses Empire]

So, see tons of people argue over the legality of the order, so might as well throw my two cents in.


So far, the closest example of a case is South Dakota V. Dole ( http://www.casebriefs.com/blog/law/cons ... ta-v-dole/ ), which established a five point rule regarding these types of financial penalties for non-compliance.


1. The spending must promote "the general welfare";
2. The condition must be unambiguous;
3. The condition should relate "to the federal interest in particular national projects or programs";
4. The condition imposed on the States must not in itself be unconstitutional; and
5. The condition must not be coercive.

First thing so far: This change was implemented via a letter detailing the department of education and justice detailing that they viewed that under the current wording of regulations that bathrooms would have to let any individual into the bathroom according to gender, not to sex (Gender is mental, sex is what you are born with). ( http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/o ... gender.pdf ). It is also worth noting this also applies to classrooms segregated by sex as well as housing (Such as in college dormitories).

AKA, there is no change in regulation, but a change in interpretation of regulation.

Obviously, federal funding of state public schools do promote "the general welfare", and these regulations are unambiguous. Of course the federal governemnt is interested on issues against what they view as illegal segregation, and since there is no CHANGE in the law, it isn't President Obama unconstitutionally using the power of the purse (Which lies with congress) to force states into his plan.

The main issues for this are going to lie with 5 and with the interpretation.


While there is no set definition of what makes certain financial funding is allowable or not, "some circumstances the financial inducement offered by Congress might be so coercive as to pass the point at which "pressure turns into compulsion." In South Dakota v. Dole, it was deemed a 5% lost in funds ultimately wasn't too much money where it was irresistible. However, federal funding in terms of schooling can often reach up as high as over 15% of a district's funding, and may be viewed as extremely coercive by the court.

The other issue would be whether the supreme court will agree with the current interpretation proffered by President Obama. Obviously, many states and school boards disagree that bathrooms originally designed to segregate based on sex (And not by gender preference) should now be segregated based on gender identity (And not biological sex). This argument is further proffered by the substantial difference between the two bathrooms due to anatomical differences between the two sexes (i.e., Anatomical males haves dicks, anatomical females don't).

When undoubtedly either when states sue the Federal Government for illegal holding of funding when they are complying, or when the federal government sues states for non-compliance, the Supreme Court will decide.

[Crockerland]

You maniacs!

They're trying to destroy their society by expecting people to be treated equally in society, in order to get funding for federal aid, as established according to pre-existing law!

By attempting to pass a law allowing the police to implant GPS devices in people's cars without a warrant?
Okay....

[Renewed Imperial Germany]

They're trying to destroy their society by expecting people to be treated equally in society, in order to get funding for federal aid, as established according to pre-existing law!

By attempting to pass a law allowing the police to implant GPS devices in people's cars without a warrant?
Okay....

On topic, bitte.

This is about Title IX and bathroom discrimination. Arguments about anything else will be ignored by me and hopefully anyone else. If you really want to talk about "Kaiser Obama," take it somewhere else.

[Cymrea]

Again, I reffer you to the massive margin of victory Obama won over Romney. That is what we in politics call a "mandate."

Well I suppose if you conveniently cherrypick the presidential election and fail to consider the congressional election in which the American people supported the Republican party by nearly 5 million more votes, then yes it could be called a mandate.

The presidential election is for an executive position, and the congressional is for legislative - two separate branches.

But if you want to conveniently dismiss the presidential election in which a candidate you already disagreed with won....

[Thiefs County]

>"hey lets punish everyone in this state even though they had nothing to do with making the law"


fuck this

[Galloism]

>"hey lets punish everyone in this state even though they had nothing to do with making the law"


fuck this

I mean, under that theory, they should never pull school funding no matter how many violations the schools commit against the conditions to receive that funding.

In which case, why have conditions at all?

[Ifreann]

>"hey lets punish everyone in this state even though they had nothing to do with making the law"


fuck this

Who elected the state government of North Carolina? New Yorkers?

[Crockerland]

By attempting to pass a law allowing the police to implant GPS devices in people's cars without a warrant?
Okay....

On topic, bitte.

If you actually bothered to read the comment chain:

Sounds like a sci-fi/horror thing.

You maniacs!

which was a response to Galloism's post, a response to this post:

anticonstitutionally implanted

I lol'd.

Which was a snippet of my post

Well just for example, his attempts to oppress freedom of expression by pro-life protesters, tried to allow a persons' car to be anticonstitutionally implanted with a GPS tracking device without a warrant or any reason to suspect terrorist activity, and though those were thankfully stricken down by the supreme court, you obviously haven't been keeping up with Obama if you need me to explain why he's a tyrant.

Which was referring to this article

So yeah, it's sometimes a good idea to know what you're actually talking about before talking about it.

[Wallenburg]

>"hey lets punish everyone in this state even though they had nothing to do with making the law"


fuck this

They didn't elect the legislators or the governor who have passed and defended this ridiculous law? Huh. North Carolina is in violation of the Constitution then.

[Thiefs County]

>"hey lets punish everyone in this state even though they had nothing to do with making the law"


fuck this

I mean, under that theory, they should never pull school funding no matter how many violations the schools commit against the conditions to receive that funding.

In which case, why have conditions at all?

what kind violations

[Renewed Imperial Germany]

On topic, bitte.

If you actually bothered to read the comment chain rather than bellowing out a post without bothering to know what you were responding to, you'd know what Noraika was responding to Wallenburg's post

You maniacs!

which was a response to Galloism's post, a response to this post
:

I lol'd.

Which was a snippet of my post

Well just for example, his attempts to oppress freedom of expression by pro-life protesters, tried to allow a persons' car to be anticonstitutionally implanted with a GPS tracking device without a warrant or any reason to suspect terrorist activity, and though those were thankfully stricken down by the supreme court, you obviously haven't been keeping up with Obama if you need me to explain why he's a tyrant.

Which was referring to this article

So yeah, it's sometimes a good idea to know what you're actually talking about before talking about it.

The whole chain is offtopic, so, again: On topic, bitte.

[Galloism]

I mean, under that theory, they should never pull school funding no matter how many violations the schools commit against the conditions to receive that funding.

In which case, why have conditions at all?

what kind violations

Gender discrimination, in the case of north carolina.

Previously across much of the south, this same tool was used when schools refused to desegregate.

[Thiefs County]

>"hey lets punish everyone in this state even though they had nothing to do with making the law"


fuck this

They didn't elect the legislators or the governor who have passed and defended this ridiculous law? Huh. North Carolina is in violation of the Constitution then.

No, what Im saying is that people that did vote them in but are against the trans bill thing are getting punished too, even though the person responsible is the governer or whatnot.

[Vassenor]

They didn't elect the legislators or the governor who have passed and defended this ridiculous law? Huh. North Carolina is in violation of the Constitution then.

No, what Im saying is that people that did vote them in but are against the trans bill thing are getting punished too, even though the person responsible is the governer or whatnot.

Then maybe they should get rid of him at the next election and make all this stop.

[Renewed Imperial Germany]

They didn't elect the legislators or the governor who have passed and defended this ridiculous law? Huh. North Carolina is in violation of the Constitution then.

No, what Im saying is that people that did vote them in but are against the trans bill thing are getting punished too, even though the person responsible is the governer or whatnot.

So Obama shouldn't enforce the law? That is, after all, the Executives job.

[Wallenburg]

They didn't elect the legislators or the governor who have passed and defended this ridiculous law? Huh. North Carolina is in violation of the Constitution then.

No, what Im saying is that people that did vote them in but are against the trans bill thing are getting punished too, even though the person responsible is the governer or whatnot.

Then they should tell their elected officials that they are being a bag of dicks, and that they should stop violating federal law.

[Thiefs County]

what kind violations

Gender discrimination, in the case of north carolina.

Previously across much of the south, this same tool was used when schools refused to desegregate.

Well I mean, you really shouldn't punish everyone for that kind of thing.

And lets not forget the fact that education is a pretty valuable thing, especially for Americans.

[Noraika]

I mean, under that theory, they should never pull school funding no matter how many violations the schools commit against the conditions to receive that funding.

In which case, why have conditions at all?

what kind violations

Title IX of ED Regulations and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Under current legislation a state is required to abide by anti-discrimination laws in order to receive federal funding. Right now North Carolina is just trying to victimize themselves by saying that, by knowingly violating the terms under which they agreed to in order to get the funding, and by violating anti-discrimination law, and overreaching to forcible eliminate all the anti-discrimination laws at the local levels, they're the victims, and heaven forbid that the Department of Justice, Department of Education, and the executive branch, enforce the law.

[Thiefs County]

No, what Im saying is that people that did vote them in but are against the trans bill thing are getting punished too, even though the person responsible is the governer or whatnot.

Then they should tell their elected officials that they are being a bag of dicks, and that they should stop violating federal law.

Well if you walk up to someone with a lot of power and say "hey can you cut that out, it's bad, thanks" they don't always listen.

[Thiefs County]

No, what Im saying is that people that did vote them in but are against the trans bill thing are getting punished too, even though the person responsible is the governer or whatnot.

Then maybe they should get rid of him at the next election and make all this stop.

Yeah, too bad that will take a while.

[Wallenburg]

Gender discrimination, in the case of north carolina.

Previously across much of the south, this same tool was used when schools refused to desegregate.

Well I mean, you really shouldn't punish everyone for that kind of thing.

And lets not forget the fact that education is a pretty valuable thing, especially for Americans.

Then North Carolina's leaders should have thought more carefully about whether being bigoted assholes was worth the cost to their citizenry.

[Galloism]

Gender discrimination, in the case of north carolina.

Previously across much of the south, this same tool was used when schools refused to desegregate.

Well I mean, you really shouldn't punish everyone for that kind of thing.

And lets not forget the fact that education is a pretty valuable thing, especially for Americans.

Which is why the state shouldn't fuck with it by violating the conditions attached to the funding.

I mean, even if you don't agree with those conditions, as I said:

So, what happens in 20 years? If states aren't complying to laws protecting beastiality, they can all go straight to hell?

I mean, think about it this way. Let's suppose I'm an eccentric billionaire, and I'll pay you $100 per day to wear a fruit basket on your head. You do so for many years, and I pay you $100 every day.

One day, you decide you're no longer going to wear a fruit basket on your head. You don't want to anymore. Fruit baskets are evil.

I stop paying your $100 per day.

What's your source of complaint?