New York
Judge strikes down county’s ban on female transgender athletes after roller derby league sues
EAST MEADOW, N.Y. (AP) — A New York judge on Friday struck down a Long Island county’s order banning female transgender athletes after a local women’s roller derby league challenged it.
Judge Francis Ricigliano ruled that Nassau County Executive Bruce Blakeman didn’t have the authority to issue his February executive order, which denies park permits to any women’s and girl’s teams, leagues or organizations that allow female transgender athletes to participate.
He wrote in his 13-page decision that Blakeman’s order was aimed at preventing transgender women from participating in girls’ and women’s athletics in county parks, “despite there being no corresponding legislative enactment” providing him with such authority.
“In doing so, this Court finds the County Executive acted beyond the scope of his authority as the Chief Executive Officer of Nassau County,” Ricigliano wrote.
Amanda Urena, president of the Long Island Roller Rebels, which challenged the order, said the decision sends a “strong message” against discrimination.
“Today’s decision is a victory for those who believe that transgender people have the right to participate in sports just like everyone else,” Urena said in a statement. “County Executive Blakeman’s order tried to punish us just because we believe in inclusion and stand against transphobia. Trans people belong everywhere, including in sports, and they will not be erased.”
The New York Civil Liberties Union, which filed the suit on behalf of the league, said the decision overturned a harmful policy that attempted to “score cheap political points by peddling harmful stereotypes about transgender women and girls.”
Blakeman dismissed the judge’s decision as one that didn’t address the merits of the case. The ruling doesn’t delve into the civil rights arguments raised by both sides, instead focusing on the limitations of the county executive’s powers.
“Unfortunately girls and women are hurt by the court,” he wrote in an emailed statement.
Blakeman had maintained the ban was meant to protect girls and women from getting injured if they are forced to compete against transgender women.
It impacted more than 100 athletic facilities in the densely populated county next to New York City, including ballfields, basketball and tennis courts, swimming pools and ice rinks.
But the roller derby league, in its suit, argued that the state’s human rights and civil rights statutes explicitly prohibit discrimination based on gender identity.
The league’s lawsuit cited the state’s Gender Expression Non-Discrimination Act, or GENDA, as well as guidance from the state Division of Human Rights, which confirms that public accommodations cannot deny transgender people access to programs and activities consistent with their gender identity.
The league filed suit after it applied for a permit to host a slate of games at roller rinks in various county parks this summer that it’s used in previous years for practices and other events.
The Nassau County-based league, which was founded in 2005, said it welcomes “all transgender women, intersex women, and gender-expansive women” and has at least one league member who would be prohibited from participating under the county’s order.
A federal judge, in a separate legal case, rejected Blakeman’s bid to prevent the state attorney general’s office from taking action against the ban after it issued a cease-and-desist letter warning him that the order violated the state’s anti-discrimination laws.
LGBTQ+ advocates say bills banning trans youth from participating in sports have passed in 24 states.
California
Federal judge temporarily halts Biden plan to lower credit card late fees to $8
LOS ANGELES (AP) — A federal judge in Texas temporarily halted a plan by the Biden administration to lower late fees on credit cards to $8 that was slated to go into effect next week.
The temporary nationwide injunction imposed by Judge Mark Pittman in the Northern District of Texas is a win for the big banks and major credit card companies, which collect billions in revenue each year in late fees and were looking to stop the proposal from going into effect. It is also a win for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which led the lawsuit on behalf of the banks.
The new regulations that were proposed by Consumer Financial Protection Bureau would have set a ceiling of $8 for most credit card late fees or require banks to show why they should charge more than $8 for such a fee.
The rule would bring the average credit card late fee down from $32. The bureau estimates banks bring in roughly $14 billion in credit card late fees a year.
White House spokesperson Jeremy Edwards said in a statement Friday night, “We are disappointed that a court sided with House Republicans, big banks and special interests to hit pause on a critical measure to save American families billions in junk fees.”
Banks had sued to stop the lawsuit earlier this year, but they had run into a roadblock when Pittman ordered the case moved to Washington, D.C., because of the fact that few banks operate in northern Texas. However, an appeals court reversed most of Pittman’s decision and ordered him to rule on the bank’s request for an injunction.
While Pittman did impose the injunction, he used a significant portion of his order to chastise the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals for sending this case back to him after he had already ruled that the case should be handled out of Washington. Critics of the lawsuit have called the case the latest example of judicial “forum shopping,” where a company files a lawsuit in a friendly district in order to have a greater likelihood of getting a favorable ruling.
As part of his reelection campaign, President Joe Biden has tried to highlight his administration’s push to clamp down on what he calls “junk fees,” which are bank-related fees like late fees, ATM fees and overdraft fees.
“Every month that the credit card late fee rule is blocked will cost Americans over $800 million,” the White House said Friday.
Banks have seen the campaign as a political battle against their business model, while consumer advocates have seen these bank fees as excessive based on the amount of risk that banks and credit card companies are taking on.
“In their latest in a stack of lawsuits designed to pad record corporate profits at the expense of everyone else, the U.S. Chamber got its way for now -- ensuring families get price-gouged a little longer with credit card late fees as high as $41,” said Liz Zelnick with Accountable.US.
Judge strikes down county’s ban on female transgender athletes after roller derby league sues
EAST MEADOW, N.Y. (AP) — A New York judge on Friday struck down a Long Island county’s order banning female transgender athletes after a local women’s roller derby league challenged it.
Judge Francis Ricigliano ruled that Nassau County Executive Bruce Blakeman didn’t have the authority to issue his February executive order, which denies park permits to any women’s and girl’s teams, leagues or organizations that allow female transgender athletes to participate.
He wrote in his 13-page decision that Blakeman’s order was aimed at preventing transgender women from participating in girls’ and women’s athletics in county parks, “despite there being no corresponding legislative enactment” providing him with such authority.
“In doing so, this Court finds the County Executive acted beyond the scope of his authority as the Chief Executive Officer of Nassau County,” Ricigliano wrote.
Amanda Urena, president of the Long Island Roller Rebels, which challenged the order, said the decision sends a “strong message” against discrimination.
“Today’s decision is a victory for those who believe that transgender people have the right to participate in sports just like everyone else,” Urena said in a statement. “County Executive Blakeman’s order tried to punish us just because we believe in inclusion and stand against transphobia. Trans people belong everywhere, including in sports, and they will not be erased.”
The New York Civil Liberties Union, which filed the suit on behalf of the league, said the decision overturned a harmful policy that attempted to “score cheap political points by peddling harmful stereotypes about transgender women and girls.”
Blakeman dismissed the judge’s decision as one that didn’t address the merits of the case. The ruling doesn’t delve into the civil rights arguments raised by both sides, instead focusing on the limitations of the county executive’s powers.
“Unfortunately girls and women are hurt by the court,” he wrote in an emailed statement.
Blakeman had maintained the ban was meant to protect girls and women from getting injured if they are forced to compete against transgender women.
It impacted more than 100 athletic facilities in the densely populated county next to New York City, including ballfields, basketball and tennis courts, swimming pools and ice rinks.
But the roller derby league, in its suit, argued that the state’s human rights and civil rights statutes explicitly prohibit discrimination based on gender identity.
The league’s lawsuit cited the state’s Gender Expression Non-Discrimination Act, or GENDA, as well as guidance from the state Division of Human Rights, which confirms that public accommodations cannot deny transgender people access to programs and activities consistent with their gender identity.
The league filed suit after it applied for a permit to host a slate of games at roller rinks in various county parks this summer that it’s used in previous years for practices and other events.
The Nassau County-based league, which was founded in 2005, said it welcomes “all transgender women, intersex women, and gender-expansive women” and has at least one league member who would be prohibited from participating under the county’s order.
A federal judge, in a separate legal case, rejected Blakeman’s bid to prevent the state attorney general’s office from taking action against the ban after it issued a cease-and-desist letter warning him that the order violated the state’s anti-discrimination laws.
LGBTQ+ advocates say bills banning trans youth from participating in sports have passed in 24 states.
California
Federal judge temporarily halts Biden plan to lower credit card late fees to $8
LOS ANGELES (AP) — A federal judge in Texas temporarily halted a plan by the Biden administration to lower late fees on credit cards to $8 that was slated to go into effect next week.
The temporary nationwide injunction imposed by Judge Mark Pittman in the Northern District of Texas is a win for the big banks and major credit card companies, which collect billions in revenue each year in late fees and were looking to stop the proposal from going into effect. It is also a win for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which led the lawsuit on behalf of the banks.
The new regulations that were proposed by Consumer Financial Protection Bureau would have set a ceiling of $8 for most credit card late fees or require banks to show why they should charge more than $8 for such a fee.
The rule would bring the average credit card late fee down from $32. The bureau estimates banks bring in roughly $14 billion in credit card late fees a year.
White House spokesperson Jeremy Edwards said in a statement Friday night, “We are disappointed that a court sided with House Republicans, big banks and special interests to hit pause on a critical measure to save American families billions in junk fees.”
Banks had sued to stop the lawsuit earlier this year, but they had run into a roadblock when Pittman ordered the case moved to Washington, D.C., because of the fact that few banks operate in northern Texas. However, an appeals court reversed most of Pittman’s decision and ordered him to rule on the bank’s request for an injunction.
While Pittman did impose the injunction, he used a significant portion of his order to chastise the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals for sending this case back to him after he had already ruled that the case should be handled out of Washington. Critics of the lawsuit have called the case the latest example of judicial “forum shopping,” where a company files a lawsuit in a friendly district in order to have a greater likelihood of getting a favorable ruling.
As part of his reelection campaign, President Joe Biden has tried to highlight his administration’s push to clamp down on what he calls “junk fees,” which are bank-related fees like late fees, ATM fees and overdraft fees.
“Every month that the credit card late fee rule is blocked will cost Americans over $800 million,” the White House said Friday.
Banks have seen the campaign as a political battle against their business model, while consumer advocates have seen these bank fees as excessive based on the amount of risk that banks and credit card companies are taking on.
“In their latest in a stack of lawsuits designed to pad record corporate profits at the expense of everyone else, the U.S. Chamber got its way for now -- ensuring families get price-gouged a little longer with credit card late fees as high as $41,” said Liz Zelnick with Accountable.US.
