A federal judge has ruled that Florida’s transgender health care ban discriminates against state employees and violates their civil rights. Chief U.S.

A federal judge has ruled that Florida’s transgender health care ban discriminates against state employees and violates their civil rights.

Chief U.S. District Judge Mark Walker ruled Thursday that the state’s ban violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which protects employees and job applicants from employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex and national origin.

The lawsuit was filed in 2020 by three current and former state employees against the Florida Department of Management Services. The employees had challenged the denial of medically necessary treatment for their gender dysphoria under the state’s categorical exclusion of coverage for “gender reassignment or modification services or supplies.”

  • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
    251·
    3 months ago

    There really needs to be a severe punishment for passing laws that violate people’s rights like this that get overturned. The punishment can be a sliding scale based on how blatant and likely it is to be a violation.

    They just keep making the laws and then drag them out in court for years tormenting people and wasting money.

    Also maybe any law that even has the slightest remote possibility of being a violation has an automatic stay until resolved and not be at the mercy of the right judge issuing one.

    • 418_im_a_teapot@lemmy.world
      3·
      3 months ago

      The appropriate punishment should be as simple as getting voted out of office. The fact that people who do this get re-elected is the result of the bitter, hateful, uninformed constituents who want this type of bigoted legislation and wasted resources. It’s sadly what the majority of people living in Florida want.

      • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
        7·
        3 months ago

        Getting voted out isn’t really enough when you make people suffer for all the years you’ve remained in office while the law that trampled people’s rights was in effect.

        That’s the absolute bare minimum of what should, but doesn’t, happen.

    • Jojo, Lady of the West@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      1·
      3 months ago

      If I try to do something illegal, I get in pretty big trouble. If I work with other people to do it, that’s even more trouble for me.

      Lawmakers working together to try to break the rules in the Constitution or just acts of Congress could be criminal conspiracy?

      Seems pretty dangerous to set as a precedent, but

      • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
        2·
        3 months ago

        Throw in some emails showing they know it’s going to fail but they’re going to do it anyway to get more votes from their base next election before it’s overturned and criminal conspiracy doesn’t sound so bad.

        You could do the same thing with proof you think it’s legitimately fine and not get the same punishment.

        It’s really about the intent, and the sad thing is the intent is usually intentionally violating our rights, so yes, maybe with the right proof it is a criminal conspiracy.

  • Optional@lemmy.world
    111·
    3 months ago

    I will no longer be accepting any articles about how Florida’s fascism is failing in court without a dollar amount of legal defense fees the Florida taxpayers have paid to date.

    AP, other corporate news - get your shit together.

        • ripcord@lemmy.world
          6·
          3 months ago

          I dunno, but when it marks the AP and Reuters and…The Internet Archive as “Center-Left” - its current source clearly has very little value.

          • PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
            1·
            3 months ago

            It’s because the Overton window has shifted so far right that neutral reporting is now considered center-left. And even when factual reporting is high, it’s still possible to be biased because of what stories you choose to report on. For instance, maybe a news source is extremely accurate and adds very little opinion, but exclusively reports on topics that are on one side of the spectrum.