Thread by @MorosKostas

The Ninth Circuit is BIG mad about Judge VanDyke's latest dissent from denial of en banc rehearing.

Yes, it certainly is provocative. I guess Judge VanDyke may have read "Plain English for Lawyers."

But their outrage is misplaced. What they should be outraged at is this absurd situation. Biological men trying to force their way into a Korean spa that serves women and girls? Have we gone mad?

I am not some hardcore anti-trans activist, and I criticized the rumors of a "trans gun ban" last year. But this is preposterous. Nobody should be able force their way into a place where women and girls are exposed and vulnerable, with the State of Washington assisting them no less!

If a eyebrow-raising dissent helps this get attention (I certainly hadn't heard of this case before now), then good.

The basic facts of the case.

Note that the spa doesn't even ban trans women, just pre-op trans women. Pretty progressive overall for a traditional Korean spa.

Yet it wasn't enough.

Sidenote - this kind of legal bullying does not do the trans community any favors in terms of public perception.

Judge Lee's dissent from the panel opinion explains the nature of Korean spas, and points out that girls as young as 13 are naked there.

"One would think that the Washington Human Rights Commission would be sympathetic to the Spa’s owners—members of a racial minority group who want to share their cultural heritage and provide a safe space for women and girls. Instead, it threatened prosecution for defying the state’s contorted reading of its anti-discrimination law."

Here is one of the pearl-clutching statements, raging at Judge VanDyke for saying they have all lost their minds for the sake of their woke ideology.

Well, they have. Truth hurts. Glad someone on the bench is finally willing to speak openly and honestly. It's refreshing. And I can only hope the current administration notices should their be a SCOTUS vacancy.

Says the Court that has reversed every single Second Amendment panel victory in its history, save for one.

There*

Not clear why Judge Owens and Judge Forrest didn't just join the other angry statement with all the other judges. But for whatever reason, they filed their own.

And again, they are shocked at the wrong thing.

Echoing criticisms he has made in Second Amendment and immigration cases, Judge VanDyke accuses (or more accurately, correctly identifies that) his colleagues are ignoring the Supreme Court's clear precedent in pursuit of their political aims.

Getting angrier as I read this.

Both at the situation, and that in reading this, what the other judges got upset about was that Judge VanDyke was mean to them.

VanDyke responds to his colleagues' anger: "That kind of selective outrage speaks for itself."

"The public deserves a court that is actually trustworthy...

...The fact that so many on our court want to pretend that this case is about anything other than swinging dicks is the very reason the shocking language is necessary. The panel majority uses slick legal arguments and deflection to studiously avoid eye contact with the actual and horrific consequences of its erroneous opinion...

...Sometimes coarse and ugly words bear the truth. I coarsely but respectfully dissent from our court’s willingness to leave this travesty in place."

Judge Tung also wrote a separate dissent, which Judges R. Nelson, Bumatay, and VanDyke joined.

Judge Tung makes similar points to conclude his dissent, but because he didn't use provocative language, there was no pearl-clutching for him.

What they are actually mad about is that Judge VanDyke's stylistic choices are going to get more attention on this case, and on the absurd result they are forcing on this Korean Spa.

I really only scratched the surface of the case and all the opinions here, as I don't like to go too in depth on subject matter outside of my 2A lane.

It is worth reading though -

cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opin…