Hey, kids, did you know that a lawsuit was filed by Texas Attorney General Paxton? Can Paxton to be actually accurate and challenging the inclusion of gender dysphoria under section five O four of the Rehabilitation Act of seventeen ry not seventeen nineteen seventy three. Yeah, that's the greed.
That's the year.
People.
Let's go with that. Let me start talking before I start putting my foot in the mouth, and let AJ tell your story.
HEYJ think you Cindia? Your correct? A lawsuit was filed by my very own taxes Attorney General Ken Paxton, and as you said, he wants to challenge the inclusion of gender dysphoria under Septune five O four. This act, the Rehabilitation Act of nineteen seventy three, protects individuals with disabilities from discrimination in federally funded institutions such as schools or hospitals.
And while the lawsuit primarily targets gender identity protections, it also argues that section five O four itself is unconstitutional, given judges the option to eliminate it entirely. Now the gender This four year class was added by President Biden and with the administration, the administration change the lawsuits. Future is currently uncertain, but in Texas alone, the outcome could impact over four hundred thousand students that rely on these protections.
So this story is from KHU dot com by Victor Jacobo and Chris Hannah on February fifteenth, twenty twenty five.
That's a lot of people that you mentioned that could be affected. And I would even conjecture adversely concerning the outcome of how Section five or four is interpreted. So, AJ, I'm going to pick your brain a little bit if you would allow me, what would be the real world consequences if Section fible for were declared unconstitutional, particularly for students and patients relying on these protections.
There's a lot of stake, you know. This protection applies to any organization that receives financial assistance from the federal government. It can be public schools, public colleges, universities. There's even libraries, museums,
public parks, recreation programs. I don't know local government agencies that we said, hospitals, clinics, mental health facilities, nursing homes that receive Medicare, Medicaid, anything that receives a grant from the federal government or contract from the federal government has to comply with these non discrimination rules from Section faber four. So this is so that people with disabilities can have equal access to services, education, employment opportunities. It offers so much.
It offers things like wheelchair rems, elevators, UH, being able to sit up at the front in school because you have a visual impairment, material braier for fully blind students, a cel interpreters for deaf people like myself, other accommodations for for hearing impairments, classroom accommodations for things like taking
a long break. My kids had a fib or four plant because they're autistic and have a hard condition, so these accommodated things like being able to go to a cool down area when they were felt like they're hard anxiety, things like being able to take a break during PE classes if they frow out of bread, all kinds of things for people with medical needs, like being able to carry your your insulin pump okay if you're diabetic, being able to carry on epipene if you have life threatening allergies,
being able to go to the nurse. It's not just about the gender. UH dysphoria issue that they that they're trying to target again and this is just about erasing transgender people. But they don't realize that if they were to succeed in taking away these vibl form protections, they will be affecting so many children and adults, not just children, but adults as love that benefit from all of these amazing protections.
Norm all sounds like they're trying to turn the ADA upside down. Yeah, because like the ADA of itself, that particular legislation that came out, I want to say in nineteen ninety two does exactly what you say gives people who are you know, Americans who are living with disabilities, the ability to quell some of the things that they may be experiencing that may not necessarily affect, you know,
the general populace of the United States. Right. So I can carry my EpiPen, I can carry my insulin pump. I can get special accommodations when I'm taking tests because I'm living with autism or I'm living with add you know.
And I think that if you just allow me just like a little room just to kind of just say what's on my mind, just oftentimes think about like people who happen to be on the right of these issues, and they don't really realize the real world implication taking away protections that have been fought for since the fifties and sixties can be even in their perview, I don't necessarily think that they understand that, like everything has been regulated to CRT woke in DEI bad And if this
five oh four section five oh four, it's because it has a caveat of protections for transgender people in that same area. They are willing I'm specifically talking about the right, are willing to throw the baby out with the bath water until it gets to the point where you realize that, oh, well, I'm not transgender. Yeah, but you may be living with a disability. You may be diabetic, you may be you know,
a person that is susceptible to anaphylexics. You may be a person who you know requires like durable medical equipment in order for you to be able to move through your day to day. So if this is you and this section protects you, are you willing to throw it out too? And as of late, I would conjecture that a lot of people would say yes to prove what type of point. I don't know, but Glenn, I'm coming
to you. I'm wondering how does targeting gender dysphoria in section five or four reflect broader legal, legal, and political trends regarding disability rights and LGBTQ protection.
Well, fir Cynthia, I have to say that I think a lot of these people, what really happens is is they're going, yeah, yeah, yeah, kill that DEI, get rid of that woke garbage, get rid of that, and until they realize that they just sabotage their own self interest and then they're like, oh I. And we see this time and again happening with the things that are going on with people who have voted for certain people and then when they got an office go oh, I didn't
mean you know, you're gonna men fire me, and this type of mentality. It's the same thing with these types of programs. We see people who, yeah, let's get rid of that woke trash, let's get rid of that, until it affects them and oh, that's what this does. Oh, because they've accepted someone telling them that this label belongs to this program, and so it's all garbage because it's all woke, So let's get rid of it. It's all DEI, let's get rid of it.
And so they don't do any actually in depth digging because most of these new politically aware people that we've seen come on seen in the last ten years have no They couldn't tell you the basics of how it build gets passed through Congress, much less the nuances of subcommittees, there are all the other things that how things actually work in the real world.
They just hear this, oh, and that sounds terrible, so let's go that way. And that's what's going on with this bill, because I don't think that when you got down to it, if most people really understood many of the things we're talking about with this would be far this. My child goes to school under one of these plans
as well because of their spinal cord injury. So when it comes down to it, this isn't a right left issue, but it's been framed in a way that certain people on the right see it as a wright left issue. So until it impacts them personally, Yeah, it's at the stick it to the libs. Let's go ahead and show those libs. Let's let's get rid of this woke stuff. Let's let's show them oh wait, wait what, I'm not woke. I'm I'm I'm I'm I'm not woke at all. What's
going on? Why? Why did it cost me something? And I think that that's what it's going to take before these people realize just held terrible the bill of goods they've been sold, because they've been sold in this concept that one tenth or less of one percent is ruining their world, so we need to make sure we do something about it, when in reality, all they're doing is being sucker punch and go and hit me again.
Sam, I think you're brought out a really good point in that they don't understand the bill and they don't understand what is going on here because if you look at the gender or dysphourier protections that are offered in the File four brand, it isn't anything out there. It
isn't anything worke. It's like having a flexible schedule for a medical appointments, having been able to access to medical devices, having seed in preference, if you want to sit, you know away first centred people being respecting change in names or pronouns, which I guess that's where they see the big issue. I don't know or like being able to go to the nurse restaurom instead of like the gender rest I'm just like, what is the big fucking deal
about that. It's just like barely anything and they're completely put everything out because of these couple of things that are like.
Oh, everything that you have said is the woket a woke of Wokan and woking on them.
DEI in there too, Yeah.
And CRT just to make you know, like you know, people like Matt Watches go absolutely insane. Cups Yeah, yeah, Yeah, it's a mixture, people, It's a cake. We're gonna put two cups CRT, three cups DEI, and then a pinch of inclusion with a uh splammoring of wokeness and there goes your marginalized community cake. You know, I don't know.
I mean like I just look look at like all this particular stuff, and I'm just like, you just gonna fuck around and find out any person that is going to be, you know, with those who happen to be in power, and and let's let's let's keep it a buck. The people who are now deciding these particular policies are
the oligarchs, the kleptocracy, and the robber bearns this. These are the people who are doing it right, and at the end of the day, the only thing that they are concerned about is their own personal agenda, and their personal agenda is to make sure that their bottom line is actually maintained and continued under the administration that we are looking at right now. And if that means that a few people are going to be burned in the fray because of the policies that we are espousing, so
fucking be it. I mean, like, I don't see I mean, like, you know, maybe my viewpoint when it comes to like things like this may be a bit on the data side of life. I will admit that, but according to like my own observation, I don't see any other way outside of that. And if that means that I need to work on myself, fine, I'll take that. You know, I'll call a therapists tomorrow and battle health and we
can go ahead and go at it. But until then, unless like any other empirical data has been presented to me to actually say otherwise, I don't see it. So, Aaron, I'm coming to you. My question for you is how does targeting gender dysphoria in section five O four reflect broader legal and political trends regarding disability rights and lgbt LGBTQ protection.
Well, now is the perfect time for anybody that's that wants to be dogmatic around the other stuff to bring your lawsuits because we have a corrupt Supreme Court. We have a Supreme Court that is no longer using law and case hate histories. I can't remember what that's called, actually called, but his story Decisives I think, is the name where the Supreme Court defers to previous decisions and
doesn't tend to reverse itself. We have a court now that doesn't really care that they want to depend on traditions as the basis for laws instead of the actual laws and the actual previous decisions. So now is the perfect time to go after any one of your pet issues, especially gender and gender dysphoria. I have no doubt whatsoever that if this reaches its way to the Supreme Court that it will it will strike this down. Because what
happens is the law. I think from what I researched, the law states that reasonable accommodations have to be made, and then it's the government, I camera which department, If it's the Department of Education or what. But one of the departments actually outlines what this means, right, so they published documents telling everybody, this is what this law means. It means that you can't discriminate it for and it just you know, itemizes it. It goes off for tens dozens,
hundreds of pages. I couldn't get through it all, it was so long. And so what they're going after is this this explanation of what the law means, analogy to be interpreted. And if that gets struck down, and then the Supreme Court is already struck down the Chevron doctrine Chevron difference, where the where courts and judges were instructed to defer to experts in their fields when determining things,
which which gave the government the ability to write regulations. Well, the Supreme Court said, sorry, if it's not passed by a legislature, it doesn't count. So I have no doubt that that if this gets overturned it makes it to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court is going to say, sorry, if it's not in law, you can't write it down. And so they're gonna have to get They're gonna be stuck with the literal words in Section five O four at best and at worst, they're just going to they're
going to strike it down. And so this is the perfect time for getting these kinds of dogmatic religious issues struck down instead of by a corrupt Supreme Court.
So gay them.
I guess, well, it's kind of like what Justice Soda Mayra said, the lemon test is dead.
Oh yeah, yes it is. And what do they replace it with?
Tradition?
That literally, that's what I can't remember says in his decision that we need to use traditions to determine what's what's legal and what's not. Oh my gosh, well that's that was true. We'd still have a lot of horrible things going on in this country.
But if you use traditions, then you're going to be regulated to the same way that Oh my god, Justice what is his name, Scalia? I think Scolia used his you know, moniker for tradition when he came up with his concurrence for overturning the dops kit. He used laws written in England in the freaking sixteen hundreds to cite tradition. I like, my dude, the United States wasn't even form yet. What are you doing right now.
Yeah, people that aren't lawyers can see the corruptness of their decisions. If I can read the decision and look and see and know how corrupt it is. If a regular citysen can see that, it's it's just ridiculous, it's awful.
Yeah, and I'm sorry, No, it wasn't. It was a Scali was corsage. That's that that that fucker. But you know, regardless, heyday, I want to come back to you. I'm asking this question basically saying, should state have the power to challenge federal civil rights protections or does this set a dangerous precedent for rolling back other anti discrimination laws.
That's a tough question because I mean, I do think that states should have the ability to challenge these things, Okay, But at the same time, you have right now, like this lawsuit came from these states and to challenge the whole,
the whole protection of fiber four plans. So, I mean, I guess the only thing that I see positive from the research that I was doing while looking for information this article was an update on this and I saw that last week it was announced that the lawsuit has been paused because the original lawsuit was against the previous Secretary of Health Time Human Services, who has now been replaced with Ara of k Junior. So because of that, they decided that they were gonna they were going to
continue to wait and see what happens. And one of these states that was included in the lawsuit Iowa, their attorney general, Brenda Bird. She said she came out with a statement trying to reassure the public that despite the world on the lawsuit, the target was, you know, only the gender dysphoria rule and not the entire fible for as a whole, and that she wouldn't make sure that
the Act didn't get dismantled in the process. She claims that Biden and Harris forced transgender ideologists into schools at the expense of kids with disabilities.
But Ken, we all know that's a fucking lie. We are as a fucking but continue.
Yeah, but like, can we really trust that that what she's saying, Like, is she gonna be able to protect that because the loss of is already out there and the warding is already out there. So if they get a judge that decides that the warding, you know, is correct, and that they want to throw away them, like you said throw the baby with the bad water, then that they will do that. It's not up to her now, So like it's is frustrating.
As an aside, I'm sorry, I just got to say this, guys, because like this is really something that really grinds my
gears that you know. I listened to a bunch of different political pundits talk about why did the Democrats lose in twenty four and a lot of them were citing that Democrats overly talked about transgender issue, They overly you know, show their support to transgender people, transgender rights, transgender sensibilities, you know, and to the point where, you know, some even went to the you know, to the stream to say that everybody needs to go ahead and put in
their emails a signature line with their own pronoun and that is such a fucking lie. I know that one of the things that Kamala Harris did is not mentioned her race, not mention her gender, and not mention where she actually falls on the gender spectrum as far as like her support.
Never did it, not.
One time, And even if you happened to look at some of the other campaigns that were running at the time with Democrats, a lot of them tried to escape that issue as well, and even you know, run to the point where they were trying to say that sports should be separate and that you know, any biological man should not be participating in women's sports. You know, you actually had people who were running for federal positions that called themselves democrat that actually said that. So this whole
lit that the right is espousing that. You know, you know that the left is like, you know, completely did you know, debase themselves and has rolled themselves up into this ideology when it comes to gender. It's absolutely false, and I wish it really stopped doing that. But you know, we live in an area where misinformation leads to narrative, and I think there's an old adage that says that a lie travels the world ten times before the truth can get up and put its pants on. Yeah, go ahead.
One one thing I wanted to say is that I agree that I don't think that the left lost because of their position on gender, but I do think that the right was very successful in putting gender very much in the forefront of people's minds. And you would think that we were about to be invaded by transgender aliens from outer space coming through Mexico the way they acted. But the reality is is that it's such a negligible amount they created. They fabricated an issue, just like they've
done time and time again. They've used the LGBTQ people in the past, they use the Southern strategy, they use African Americans with it. This isn't anything new. This is the thing, but this won't last forever. And as far as litigating why one side one and why one side loss,
it's important to understand those things. But I have to say that in the future, I just don't think that there are the legs under making this minute proportion who need to be considered, not othered, but this minute proportion of people that they're taking and trying to make it act like everything in the world that happens falls on the transgender as some of them would use the term. Because I feel like I'm listening in animal farm to blame the snowball for everything that happened bad in the
entire farm because it's snowball. It's snowball. That's absolutely as absurd as they are with this issue, and I'm really hoping it where its thin. I'm not exactly sure how But the first thing I say is is that I don't want to fight them on their territory. I'm not going to argue with them about that, because the issues that really face the US is not just that issue. It's that and others, And it starts with the way
we treat people. And if we learn to treat people with respect, then whether you're trans, whether you're head noormative, whether you're white, whether you're African American, whether you're Latino, whatever you are, is not relevant. If we can get people to understand that there's a level of human decency that we need to return to and push back against this other ring and making an insign statistically insignificant portion of the population the boogeyman that everything is their fault.
That's what we had to push back against.
Their platform always run on picking on minorities, starting with people of color way back when. Okay, that was like always always speaking on minorities, And currently I guess their obsession is with genitals at this point.
So yeah, guess what it works in the world and look at history. Yeah, and it works and until people until the electric decide that not for it not to work anymore, it's going to continue to work.
You know, guys, I had a whole, like written down, noted assistant commentary to say at the end of the segment, but I can't do it now because all of you have got me thinking about one of my very favorite movies in the entire world, School Day. I love that damn movie. The music, the dance scene, that acting, all
of it was absolutely spectacular. But I think that one of the things it was actually like written and directed by Spike Lee and produced by him and forty acres in the meal, and one of the things that he was trying to, you know, use even though he used like the elements of the musical and the dance scene and the part and the performance and the end the presentation two in order for him to be able to present this art form, it was also an underlining message
that was not necessarily so subverb but very overt about waking up. And at the very end of the movie, the protagonist named Dak ran out of a dormitory in
the middle of the quad and screamed, way God. He ran to his compatriots and went to their bed, their their specific beds, wake up, wake up, wake up, you know, shaking them to the point that they had to like, you know, get the slumber off of their eyes in order for them to rise, to get him to get off the hell but get the hell off of him, right, And then you have another shot of you know, I would say, like the Spike Lee special where you have your antagonists and then all of a sudden, like the
background is moving, but the protagonist is still as they're screaming whatever the hell of they're screaming. In this particular case, it's wake up. And also at the very end of the movie, after he has screamed, wake up to his compatriots, scream, wake up to the quad, scream, wake up to the person that he woke up next to, scream, wake up to his roommate. He rang a bell. He rang a bell that looked very muscle, like the Liberty bell that's
in Pennsylvania. That's crack. And all of a sudden, you had the administration, students, staff athletes, the whole nine spill out from their various dormitories into the crowd and formed a crowd. Rather next thing, you know, you had the antagonists meet Dap in the middle of the quad and looked at him without saying anything, and then both of them happened to turn their faces into the camera and said,
please wake up. And that is the only thing that I can tell our fellow electorate when it comes to any of these particular narratives that we are experiencing now, I totally totally need you, voter, need you, citizen, need you, mom and pop, need you who have a dog in this fight, to wake up.