U.S. Supreme Court Sends Transgender Bathroom Case Grimm v. Gloucester Back to Lower Court

Gavin Grimm on  Aug. 25, 2015.

By Liberty McArtor Published on March 6, 2017

The U.S. Supreme Court declined to rule in the transgender bathroom case Grimm v. Gloucester Monday morning and is sending the case back to a lower court.

The case began with Gavin Grimm, a high school student in Gloucester County, Virginia suing for the right to use the boys’ restroom. Grimm is a biological female who identifies as a male.

The move comes less than a week after the defendants asked the Court to postpone the ruling until the new presidential administration had a chance to offer input. Oral arguments were originally set for March 28. Nearly two weeks ago on February 22, the Trump administration rescinded an Obama-era policy mandating that students identifying as transgender be permitted to use the restroom with members of the opposite biological sex. Grimm’s lawyers had asked the Court to rule even though the Obama policy had been rescinded, Reuters reported

The case will now return to the Richmond, Virginia-based 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which last year ruled in favor of Grimm, “for further consideration in light of the guidance document” issued by the Trump administration. 

“What this means is that the Fourth Circuit’s badly confused ruling has been wiped out,” Ed Whelan at National Review writes. “It is no longer binding precedent in the Fourth Circuit, nor should it be cited by any other court.”

Additional material provided by Anika Smith.

Print Friendly
Comments ()
The Stream encourages comments, whether in agreement with the article or not. However, comments that violate our commenting rules or terms of use will be removed. Any commenter who repeatedly violates these rules and terms of use will be blocked from commenting. Comments on The Stream are hosted by Disqus, with logins available through Disqus, Facebook, Twitter or G+ accounts. You must log in to comment. Please flag any comments you see breaking the rules. More detail is available here.
  • Triple T

    But won’t that court simply issue the same ruling again? I’m not entirely sure that this is a victory. Somebody, please feel free to correct me if I am mistaken.

    • Autrey Windle

      I think what the reporting was telling us is that the original ruling was confused among other problems and that the Supremes sent some sort of instructions to the lower court. I got from that, that the lower court might now make a different ruling with the Obama policy having been rescinded and Trumps suggestions put in the record. We can pray and wait. I see God’s hand showing His power in new and different ways all over the place lately.

Inspiration
Jealous of the Pigs
Dudley Hall
More from The Stream
Connect with Us