Timothy Paul Coyle aka Samantha Amanda Coyle is a man who identifies as a woman. He wants access to the Downtown Hope Center’s shelter for women. when they told him know, he filed a complaint with the Anchorage Equal Rights Commission. Coyle wants to be able to be sheltered anywhere without regard to any rules, as discussed in this interview.
As reported elsewhere:
“His court records show that Coyle is a man with an extensive criminal record, including violent crimes. There are no court records found in extensive research by Must Read Alaska that pertain to his assumed female identity.
Coyle, 52, appears to have lived in Anchorage, Colorado and Idaho. He has a long list of prior arrests and convictions that include charges for armed robbery with a deadly weapon (dismissed by prosecution), and other theft charges, including shoplifting, resisting arrest, and violation of probation.
As late as January, 2017, his last interaction with the Alaska criminal justice system, the court referred to Coyle as a male, and no records were found for a name change.”
Men don’t belong in women’s shelters.
Discrimination complaint against downtown Anchorage women_s shelter opens up political front – Anchorage Daily News
In a 2-1 decision, the Missouri Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s ruling dismissing a case from R.M.A., a female minor who identifies as a transgender boy, “which alleged discrimination in public accommodation, specifically, the boys’ locker rooms and restrooms, based on sex.”
This decision affirms a lower court’s ruling dismissing the case on grounds that “the Missouri Human Rights Act does not extend its protection to claims based on gender identity.” According to the opinion, “Our judicial role does not permit us to vary settled legislative intent based on evolving social sensitivities. Instead, we are bound by the state of the law as it currently exists.”
Missouri appeals court: State’s Human Rights Act does not cover gender identity — kcur.org
R.M.A. (a minor child), by His Next Friend: Rachelle Appleberry vs. Blue Springs R-IV School District, et al — July 18 2017
The American Civil Liberties Union continues to demonstrate that it does not care about the rights of children in taking up the cause of a teenage girl in Michigan who wants access to boys’ facilities because she says she’s a boy. It sent a letter to the Jenison High School superintendent on behalf of the girl, who apparently is offended that she was told that she could choose between the bathroom corresponding with her actual sex , one of three unisex staff bathrooms or a so-called gender-neutral bathroom installed.
Letter to Superintendent TenBrink
Michigan school’s bathroom policy stigmatizes transgender students, ACLU argues _ MLive
The Board of Education for the Highland Local School District (“Highland”) filed a brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, asking the court to reverse a lower court’s decision in it’s lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Education. The brief also asks the court to deny a motion for preliminary injunction from third-party plaintiff Jane Doe, a male student in the Highland Local School District seeking access to sex-segregated facilities reserved for female students.
On September 26, 2016 U.S. District Court Judge Algenon L. Marbley granted a preliminary injunction to Jane Doe stating, “The Court orders School District officials to treat Jane Doe as the girl she is, including referring to her by female pronouns and her female name and allowing her to use the girls’ restroom at Highland Elementary School.”
In its brief filed April 19, Highland asserts, “This appeal concerns the efforts of Appellants to ensure a safe and secure learning environment for Intervenor Third-Party Plaintiff-Appellee Jane Doe, a minor, by and through her legal guardians Joyce and John Doe (“Doe”), as well as all the other students enrolled in Highland, and the competing efforts of Doe and other parties to improperly expand both Title IX and the Equal Protection Clause to encompass the concept of gender identity in violation of the plain language of the statute, congressional intent, and existing federal case law.” [emphasis added]
The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 in favor of Gavin Grimm, 16, a female teen who identifies as a transgender boy. Grimm is suing Virginia’s Gloucester County School Board, arguing that its policy requiring students to use sex-segregated spaces based on their sex (or “gender-neutral” single-person facilities) is a violation of Title IX of the US Education Amendments of 1972. Title IX bans discrimination based on sex at schools that receive federal funding. Continue reading
The North Carolina State Assembly approved a bill, House Bill 2, that overturns Charlotte, NC’s expansion of its non-discrimination ordinance, specifically, the controversial provision that allows individuals access to the sex-segregated facilities they identify with, rather than the facility intended for an individual of their sex class. Governor Pat McCrory signed the bill, stating, “This new government regulation defies common sense and basic community norms by allowing, for example, a man to use a woman’s bathroom, shower or locker room…While local municipalities have important priorities working to oversee police, fire, water and sewer, zoning, roads, and transit, the mayor and city council took action far out of its core responsibilities. As a result, I have signed legislation passed by a bipartisan majority to stop this breach of basic privacy and etiquette…It is now time for the city of Charlotte elected officials and state elected officials to get back to working on the issues most important to our citizens.” Following the announcement of McCrory’s signing of this bill, the ACLU of North Carolina issued a Tweet in which they state they are “considering legal challenge.”
NC legislature debating LGBT non-discrimination ordinance _ WCNC
Kendall Oliver is a Woman suing a barbershop after the owner refused to give her a haircut, stating that he only serves “men” due to his religious beliefs.
We hope she wins. A barbershop exists for the sole purpose of cutting hair. If you hold yourself out to the public as being in the business of providing haircuts, you must provide haircuts to all who seek haircuts. Prohibiting sex discrimination should trump “religious freedom” in this instance because here, religious freedom results in no service.
Transgender man to sue barbershop that denied service for ‘religious’ reason _ US news _ The Guardian