Trump-appointed judge's dissent is called out as 'vulgar' in 9th Circuit trans rights case

This is read by an automated voice.Please report any issues or inconsistencies here.

Judges in the U.S.9th Circuit Court of Appeals recently decided not to rehear a case from Washington state, but conversation about their ruling — which protects transgender people’s right to patronize sex-segregated facilities — has been dominated by a dissenting opinion that members of the bench called “vulgar barroom talk.” The dissent by Judge Lawrence VanDyke argued it was unconstitutional to force a Korean spa to remove language from its website limiting admission to “biological women.”“This is a case about swinging d—,” VanDyke wrote.

“The Christian owners of Olympus Spa — a traditional Korean, women-only, nude spa — understandably don’t want them in their spa.Their female employees and female clients don’t want them in their spa either.

But Washington State insists on them.And now so does the Ninth Circuit.” VanDyke went on to denounce the court’s liberal majority as “woke judges” who had “collectively lost their minds” and now sought to impose “Frankenstein social experiments ...

on real women and young girls.” (The spa also permitted trans women who had undergone vaginoplasty, while barring those with penises, court records show.) The response was swift and fierce.The court “is not a place for vulgar barroom talk,” Judge M.

Margaret McKeown clapped back in a concurrence joined by 25 fellow judges.“That language makes us sound like juveniles, not judges, and it undermines public trust in the courts.” Judge John B.

Owens was more succinct.“Regarding the dissenting opinion of Judge VanDyke: We are better than this,” he wrote.

VanDyke is among President Trump’s most outspoken judicial appointees, courting controversy from the moment he was nominated to the 9th Circuit in 2019.California A Trump-appointed appellate court judge broke with his colleagues in a California gun case by posting a “dissent video” ...