The US Supreme Court on Wednesday (September 10th) ruled to reject the application filed by South Carolina, which sought to enforce a statewide ban prohibiting students from using public school bathrooms that correspond to their gender identity (but differ from their biological sex).
This unsigned order from the Supreme Court represents a minor setback for the state’s efforts to tighten policies regarding transgender individuals. The related litigation will continue in lower courts, with no decision made yet, and it is too early for the Supreme Court to take on the case.
Prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling, the federal appeals court had issued a temporary injunction in this case, prohibiting South Carolina from enforcing the related ban during the litigation.
South Carolina had hoped the Supreme Court would temporarily lift the appeals court’s injunction.
The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, located in Richmond, Virginia, had previously issued the injunction in response to a request from a ninth-grade student named “John Doe”. The student claimed that the bathroom they were using did not correspond to their identified gender.
In the litigation, the student’s lawyers argued to the Supreme Court that since this case involves only one student, there was no need for the Supreme Court to urgently suspend the Fourth Circuit Court’s injunction.
The legal team notably pointed out that there were no other students objecting to “John Doe” using the male bathroom.
In the court documents, the lawyers emphasized that “in fact, no one has complained about sharing the bathroom with John, who has lived as a male since childhood and his appearance and attire are consistent with male characteristics.”
The Supreme Court did not express an opinion on the substance of the case, nor did they disclose how they will handle this controversial cultural issue in the future.
Previously, in June, the Supreme Court upheld Tennessee’s ban on specific transgender medical procedures for minors. Currently, the justices are preparing to hear arguments in the next term on the controversy surrounding transgender participation in school sports.
South Carolina’s lawyers cited the Tennessee appeal case in requesting the justices to allow the state’s ban to take effect. This case in the next term will be a highly anticipated focus.
The South Carolina state government lawyers stated in the lawsuit, “This case involves controversial emotions and differing viewpoints, and as such, during the appeal process, the decisions of the state legislatures should be respected, as this ruling falls within the purview of the South Carolina legislature.”
Currently, the Supreme Court justices are in recess (usually from late June or early July until the start of the new term on the first Monday of October), during which they do not hear oral arguments but do not take a long vacation either. They are still working, busy writing opinions and handling other legal matters.
(This article referenced reporting from FOX NEWS)