Well, I suppose I can't be surprised.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/21/us/politics/transgender-trump-administration-sex-definition.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

"The department argued in its memo that key government agencies needed to adopt an explicit and uniform definition of gender as determined “on a biological basis that is clear, grounded in science, objective and administrable.” The agency’s proposed definition would define sex as either male or female, unchangeable, and determined by the genitals that a person is born with, according to a draft reviewed by The Times. Any dispute about one’s sex would have to be clarified using genetic testing."

@Phorm

given their inability to write policy that gets through the court on the first try, and that states who control the issuing of ids having very different standards, if we are lucky this can get tied up in the court until the next administration and never fully go into effect.

@001zlnv

I want to believe what you're saying, but in this situation we're not talking about a law at all. They're doing this to establish a definition outside of the current legislative process.

And that will still wind up being debated by the judicial bodies, no doubt. But considering that the fascists now control the courts, I wouldn't hold out much hope for a favorable judgement there moving forward. Even in spite of precedent.

@Phorm

the fascists have a 1 man majority on the court provided they avoid the sacred cows of the older conservatives on the court.

states rights is that cow.

@001zlnv

I question that, honestly.

Anyone who seemed to be republican aligned yet decent has, in the last two years, eschewed decency and humanity for naked power.

I have no confidence that this trend will stop.

It's only taken less than two short years for them to say "Let's roll back everything, regardless of precedent". What's to stop them now?