If people would stop taking the shots, then the world would likely recover…’What the Faux Medicine Pirates Don’t Want You to Know,‘ by Dr. Steve LaTulippe.   Listen on podcast to ‘My Brother’s Keeper‘ and the Cuomo Scandal.   Our free APPS on Apple, Android, or Alexa give you 24/7 access to great talk radio on the iHeart Radio Network.

December 6, 2021

December 6, 2021

Your Source for Free Speech,
Talk Radio, Podcasts, and News.

First Amendment Challenge: Taking Offense v. State of California

by | Oct 11, 2021 |

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Justice is supposed to be blind. But what happens when certain groups are treated differently before the law? A recent case out of the Court of Appeals in California gives us an example of what happens when sexual opinion trumps facts and evidence. If those in the LGBT+ community are allowed to bully you into compliance, then they have truly earned the nickname “The Rainbow Mafia”. And with the assistance of the courts, they are making America an offer you can’t refuse. 

A recent case out of the Court of Appeals of the State of California brings up some interesting questions. First, does someone have the legal right to tell you how to refer to them? Second, does a mental disorder give someone the legal authority to infringe on the rights of others? The opinion, in this case, shows the irrationality of both the transgender activists and the judicial branch. Which leads me to another question: Is the mental confusion we call transgenderism contagious?

The case in question, Taking Offense v. State of California, stems from California Senate Bill 219 (2017-2018 Reg. Session), which added code to the states Health and Safety Code called the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) Long-Term Care Facility ResidentsBill of Rights. Taking Offense challenged two provisions of this law:

1439.51.  (a) Except as provided in subdivision (b), it shall be unlawful for a long-term care facility or facility staff to take any of the following actions wholly or partially on the basis of a persons actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, or human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) status:

(3) Where rooms are assigned by gender, assigning, reassigning, or refusing to assign a room to a transgender resident other than in accordance with the transgender residents gender identity, unless at the transgender residents request.

(5) Willfully and repeatedly fail to use a residents preferred name or pronouns after being clearly informed of the preferred name or pronouns.

California Senate Bill 219

First heard in state Superior Court, the decision was appealed to the states Court of Appeals. The appeals court started with the First Amendment Challenge” in subsection 5.

First Amendment Challenge

Taking Offense listed four specific problems with the speech requirements of the law.

(1) a prior restraint on speech; (2) a violation of the freedom of thought, comparing transgender residents of long-term care facilities to kings and masters over the rest of the people” and employees of long-term care facilities to their virtual subjects and slaves”; (3) a violation of the freedom of conscience, religion and belief”; and (4) a violation of the right to free exercise of religion.

Taking Offense v. State of California

The court agreed that subsection 5 of the law is a content-based restriction on freedom of speech. The court went on to explain:

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution states: Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech . . . .” This fundamental right to free speech applies to the states through the Fourteenth Amendments due process clause.

As Ive stated more times than I care to remember, this cannot be a First Amendment issue since Congress did not make this law. The legal fiction that the First Amendment applies to the states via the Fourteenth Amendments Due Process Clause was made up out of thin air by the Supreme Court to federalize cases that the Constitution does not treat as federal issues. While this court focuses on the First Amendment, it does note that the protections of freedom of speech in California comes from the California Constitution.

Similarly, article I, section 2, subdivision (a) of the California Constitution provides: Every person may freely speak, write and publish his or her sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of this right. A law may not restrain or abridge liberty of speech or press.” Article Is free speech clause enjoys existence and force independent of the First Amendment to the federal Constitution.

While we are free to speak, write, and publish on all subjects, what is stated in the California Constitution applies to the federal one as well: We are responsible for the abuse of this right. Often erroneously called the prohibition on yelling fire in a crowded theater”, we see this most often in libel, slander, and perjury laws. You cannot lie under oath or slander someone, then claim exemption from punishment because of free speech.

The State of California claims its compelling interest in preventing misgendering” is sufficient for them to regulate free speech. The court agrees:

We agree with the Attorney General that the state has a compelling interest in eliminating discrimination on the basis of sex. … The high court has recognized that discrimination on the basis of sex” includes discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or transgender status.

While the high court” may recognize that a persons belief is equivalent to the physical properties of sex, the Constitution of the United States does not. The Bostock v. Clayton County decision the court refers to is simply another example of the oligarchs on the Supreme Court placing their opinions above the supreme law of the land. Thankfully, in this case, government interest alone is not considered sufficient to infringe on your rights. The court found that alternatives to restricting speech showed that the governments case was insufficient to allow it to criminalize speech.

In regards to free speech though, we have a final question: Does the use of a pronoun other than the one preferred rise to a level of injury as to require state sanction? The court rightly found that it does not.

The pronoun provision at issue here tests the limits of the governments authority to restrict pure speech that, while potentially offensive or harassing to the listener, does not necessarily create a hostile environment. As the Third Circuit Court of Appeals has recognized, “ ‘[w]here pure expression is involved,anti-discrimination law steers into the territory of the First Amendment.’ ”

WATCH THE VIDEO AND SUBSCRIBE ON RUMBLE

Equal Protection Challenge

Now lets take a look at the challenge to the room assignment requirements based on the Equal Protection Clause.

Taking Offense contends the room assignment provision violates the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution,8 article I, section 7 of the California Constitution, and the Unruh Civil Rights Act. It makes two implicit assumptions about the room assignment provision: (1) the provision requires a facility to accommodate a transgender residents request to be assigned to a room other than in accordance with the residents gender identity; and (2) a residents request to be assigned a room other than in accordance with the residents gender identity is equivalent to dictating the gender or gender identity of the residents roommate. Based on those assumptions, Taking Offense asserts the provision grants transgender residents special rights” to choose whether to be assigned a roommate according to the transgender persons gender identity or the persons assigned sex at birth, while failing to recognize the same right of non-transgender residents. We disagree.

The question at hand is if Californias room assignment provision of SB 219 unlawfully requires people to be treated differently under the law. A quick look at the language should make this perfectly obvious since the roommate request of two residents are treated differently depending on whether one of them claims to be transgendered”.

Consider this example: In any room sharing situation, there are at least two people who will be sharing a room. If the room assignments are made according to sex, then the facility has a physical basis for making those assignments. However, if the room assignments are made based on gender identity”, the decision is made based on an arbitrary decision of only one of the residents. Now consider the situation where a woman is required to share a room with a man because he claims he is a woman. Not only is the roommate request of only one of the residents considered, but only the transgendered” person is allowed to make such a request. This is not to be done based on a physical or medical condition, or even based on a legal relationship between the residents, but solely on the subjective assertion of one of the residents. Sounds pretty unequal to me. Apparently though, this obvious discriminatory practice is not so obvious to the court.

The equal protection clause requires the state to treat all persons similarly situated alike or, conversely, to avoid all classifications that are arbitrary or irrational” and those that reflect “ ‘a bare . . . desire to harm a politically unpopular group.

Arent two or more residents in a long-term care facility who will be sharing a room similarly situated”? Is the determination of sexual orientation” arbitrary or irrational? Does the denial of the right to request a roommate of a specific sex to anyone not currently identifying with a group currently politically favored in California, show a desire to harm a politically unpopular group”? I would say the answer to all three questions is yes. Apparently, this is too difficult for the members of the court to understand.

This provision creates a general rule and an exception to the rule. The general rule makes it unlawful for a long-term care facility or facility staff to assign, reassign, or refuse to assign a room to a transgender resident other than in accordance with the residents gender identity. This requirement provides no special rights to transgender residents; rather, it only clarifies that gender-based room assignment decisions involving transgender residents must be made according to the residents gender identity rather than their biological sex at birth.

According to the members of the court, the fact that only the transgendered” resident gets to decide the sex of their roommate does not make that a special right. However, I must ask if what they want or desire rises to unequal treatment in this courts eyes? Not only do they not see the unequal treatment of forcing a female resident to live with a male resident against her will, but the gross abuse of her rights? Somehow, I think only a lawyer or a judge could be so deluded. Perhaps we should not be surprised that this opinion came out of California. Based on other recent cases, I fear this elevation of a mental disorder above the supreme law of the land will be with us for quite some time.

So in this split decision”, we have one part which follows the law and protects the legitimate rights of everyone, while the other only cares about a politically favored group. Apparently, justice is not so blind as one would assume from looking at her statue.

While staff at long-term facilities in California will not be forced to keep a running track of who wants to be called what, the residents there are being forced to bow to the god of transgenderism”. It seems weve thrown reason, logic, and evidence out the window when a man can claim to be a woman or vice versa, and everyone is expected to act as if it were true. If a man with this disorder wants to share a room with a woman, I dont think the state should be involved. That means the state should not deny the request, but neither should it force a woman to comply against her will.

This opinion not only elevates those who suffer from the transgender” disorder, but it also dehumanizes the vast majority of people who do not. In California, if you are not transgendered,” you are a second-class citizen and your rights only matter if the transgendered” allow it. This disease is spreading across the nation. Are you prepared to defend yourself, your rights, and those of your family, against these attacks?

Paul Engel

Author and speaker Paul Engel has spent more than 20 years studying and teaching about both the Bible and the U.S. Constitution. That experience helps Paul explain difficult concepts in a way most people can understand. As one manager described, “Paul can take the most complex idea and explain it in a way my grandmother can understand.” Freely admitting that he “learned more about our Constitution from School House Rock (a Saturday morning cartoon) than in 12 years of school,” he says that anyone can be a constitutional scholar. Since 2014 I have been helping everyday Americans read and study the Constitution of their country and teaching the rising generation to be free. Using news and current events as a springboard, I explain the Constitution and encourage others to stand up and secure the blessings of liberty for themselves, their children, and the nation.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
1 Comment
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Pat Frank
Pat Frank
1 month ago

Is there a time limit on transgender decisions? Suppose a biological woman is required to share a room with a male who identifies as a woman. Can the biological woman then decide to self-identify as a male? Can the newly minted ‘he’ then ask that the (biologically male) transgender woman be roomed elsewhere?

Once the transgender pseudo-she moves out, the biological woman can re-identify as female. A change of gender like a change of clothes. Why not? It appears the court has sanctioned it.

And if the court claims such decisions are whimsical, then how is anyone’s transgender decision to be differentiated? They’re all indistinguishable from whim (except for those who have locked in the change through surgery).

One could see residents creating havoc by switching their gender back and forth as need required, making large problems for care facilities. There’s plenty of entertainment value in the vision.

Some lawyer ought to get involved to facilitate this. Recruit some willing elders. A whole series of lawsuits to sustain defensive gender switching may earn a firm substantial income from court-mandated penalties.

Disclaimer: The information contained in this website is for educational, general information, and entertainment purposes only and is never intended to constitute medical or legal advice or to replace the personalized care of a primary care practitioner or legal expert.

While we endeavor to keep this information up to date and correct, the information provided by America Out Loud, its website(s), and any properties (including its radio shows and podcasts) makes no representations, or warranties of any kind, expressed, or implied, about the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability, or availability with respect to its website(s) or the information, products, services or related graphics and images contained on the website(s) for any purpose.

The opinions expressed on the website(s), and the opinions expressed on the radio shows and podcasts, are the opinions of the show hosts and do not necessarily represent the opinions, beliefs, or policies of anyone or any entity we may endorse. Any reliance you place on such information is therefore strictly at your own risk.

At no time, nor in any event, will we be liable for any loss, or damage, including without limitation, indirect or consequential loss of data or profits arising out of, in an association of, or connection with the use of this website.

Through this website, users can link to other websites that may be listed. Those websites are not under the control of America Out Loud or its brands. We have no control over the nature, content, or availability of those sites. America Out Loud has no control over what the sites do with the information they collect. The inclusion of any links does not necessarily imply a recommendation, nor does it endorse the views expressed with or by them.

Every effort is made to keep the website up and running smoothly. However, America Out Loud takes no responsibility for, nor are we, and will not be liable for being temporarily unavailable due to technical difficulties beyond our control. America Out Loud does not sell, trade, nor market email addresses or other personal data.

Use the code ‘OUTLOUD’ and receive your 20% discount on your first order.

Connecting The Dots Through Worldwide Chaos!

Connecting The Dots Through Worldwide Chaos!

Some would call this the “Great Awakening,” and others would call it the “Global Destruction of Humanity,” but for those Watchmen who connect the dots, they will proclaim that we are living through the Biblical times of Revelations, or good-vs-evil. This is a time of Revelations and Revolution, a time of great transformation…

Taking Back America Starts in Virginia

Taking Back America Starts in Virginia

Far too much damage has been done to our country in less than a year. Republicans will have much to do to repair the real damage, as well as the damage done to our national psyche. The good ole boy system of slapping each other on the back as they continue lining each other’s pockets must end. Our country is at stake…

Free College and The $20 Big Mac

Free College and The $20 Big Mac

We are headed for a New World Order where college will be ‘free,’ but it’ll be $20 for a Big Mac, $10 for a gallon of gas, and it will cost $1,000 per month to heat your house in the winter. On top of that, you will have to pay 60% of your income for that ‘free’ college, making you glad it is ‘free,’ and making you sorry that nobody can afford a Big Mac anymore…

The Game is On, Let’s Keep The Ball Rolling

The Game is On, Let’s Keep The Ball Rolling

Youngkin’s message of real Americanism to disgusted Virginia voters addressed their deep fears on the socialization of America, the Marxist indoctrination of their children in public schools, and this racist CRT nonsense. Clearly, he struck home. We must give a shout-out to the Louden County School Board for their Soviet-style handling of…

DHS: “Heightened Threat Environment Across the US”… For Who?

DHS: “Heightened Threat Environment Across the US”… For Who?

That DHS bulletin included those “motivated by a range of issues, including anger over COVID-19 restrictions, the 2020 election results, and police use of force.” Also included potential DVEs individuals in “opposition to immigration.” The worry, so said the DHS, is that these and similar “drivers” could cause certain DVEs to attack “elected officials and government facilities.”

Free Speech, Free Enterprise, and Thought Control

Free Speech, Free Enterprise, and Thought Control

The Facebook phenomenon has been preempted by the dark forces of progressivism as dangerous to their new philosophy for American happiness, Marxism. As politically correct as it has become, as government demands, Facebook is now voluntarily censuring Americans on Progressive governments’ behalf. But, they still must maintain some measure of earning profit despite more demands to control the free speech of Americans…

Compassion Abuse is Weakening America

Compassion Abuse is Weakening America

A significant reason for the moral rot is the indiscriminate abuse of compassion. We Americans have had the Christian virtue of compassion hi-jacked by Progressive Socialists for their own agenda: producing dependent drones who unthinkingly obey the “sugar daddy” socialist state which showers goodies on them indiscriminately in the name of compassion…

More Like the Corleone House than a Court of Law

More Like the Corleone House than a Court of Law

The government in Washington, D.C. is now filled with criminals. Going to federal court for a redress of grievance today seems more like going to the Corleone house than a court of law. Your fate is no longer decided by the laws of the nation, but by the opinions of oligarchs in black robes. As Abraham Lincoln said: The people — the people — are the rightful masters of both Congresses, and courts — not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert it…

How Much Longer Must We Endure This Communist Epidemic?

How Much Longer Must We Endure This Communist Epidemic?

Many federal government functions are redundant to other agencies, soaking up funds requiring a growing need to steal by taxation, inflation, and theft, monies from the people it governs. That well ran dry long ago, so they simply print more money, or worse, borrow it from an expanding Communist China and hang around the necks of yet unborn Americans the albatross of a debt never to be realized. And what moron thinks paying illegals $450,000 a head is good policy? 

COVID Q & A with Dr. Henry Ealy, #2

COVID Q & A with Dr. Henry Ealy, #2

If an exemption is not possible for me, do you know of some way that I can protect my body from all the toxins and chemicals in this vaccine? Chelation therapy maybe? – My husband is being forced to take the vaccine by the end of November. What can I do to treat him afterward to mitigate the effects? – Dr. Henry Ealy joins Malcolm on the Voice of a Nation to answer listener questions…

The Biden DOL Rule Puts Social Justice in Charge of Your Money

The Biden DOL Rule Puts Social Justice in Charge of Your Money

We are witnessing an ideological totalitarian value-determinate trend very similar to this that is being imposed through a “Social Credit System” by Xi Jinping and the CCP. Famously influential free-market economist Milton Friedman argued that public companies that assume moral authority to direct funds to causes other than their shareholders’ best business interests are “preaching pure and unadulterated socialism.”

Vaccinate On Demand or Face Swift Justice in America

Vaccinate On Demand or Face Swift Justice in America

These “leaders” don’t care if people are really vaccinated or not. They are thrilled to see how the public is caving under the pressure they’ve mounted. After all, when looking at the progression of this whole pandemic it becomes exceedingly clear that science is not what’s being followed⏤it’s the capitulation of the public to the will of the authority that really matters most to government leaders…

Header

Your Source for Free Speech, Talk Radio, Podcasts, and News.

 

Here we take on the challenges of our generation so that we can preserve future generations. Please consider making a contribution in the fight for liberty!

iHeartRadio

The APPS are free; the mission is priceless!

Free APP

Podcast Networks

Apple Podcasts
Google Podcasts
Spotify
Pandora
Tunein
iHeart
Stitcher

Subscribe and Listen on Your Favorite APP

Our Columnists and Show Hosts

COVID Solution Summit

Apple Podcasts

Evacuating Americans & fully-vetted Afghan's at Risk - Help Us!

Apple Podcasts

Empowering and mentoring conservative trailblazers from Generation Z to win!

Apple Podcasts

Turning Point Action is Recruiting Precinct Chairs - Become a Grassroots Warrior Today!

Apple Podcasts

URGENT - KEEP NINE
Please join us to protect the Supreme Court:
Sign the Petition!

Apple Podcasts

The LATINO USA EXIT from the Democrat Party, click for details...

Apple Podcasts

Fighting corporate censorship and ensuring voter integrity...

Apple Podcasts

Support wounded and fallen police officers. The Wounded Blue.

Wounded Blue
Share via
Copy link
Powered by Social Snap