Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2024/04/01/texas-appeals-court-blocks-state-from-investigating-families-of-trans-kids.html
…
18 Likes
Good news from Texas for a change. This is precisely the reason that fascist hatemongers like Abbott and Paxton will do anything they can to undermine an independent judiciary given the chance.
22 Likes
I’d be more heartened if it weren’t for the “until…” bit.
Specifically, they may not be “subjected to an unlawful and unwarranted child abuse investigation; intrusion and interference with parental decision-making” until a trial court has reviewed the policy to determine its legality.
I assume that some trial court in TX will happily determine that it’s legal to go back to terrorizing people.
11 Likes
Not necessarily. After all, this appeals court was literally just upholding the decision of the trial court. Granted, the trial still has to happen. This was just about enforcing an injunction pending the trial outcome, but still…it indicates that right now, both the trial court and the appeals court are leaning towards thinking the State of Texas overstepped its authority here.
17 Likes
From your lips to FSM’s ears.
4 Likes
The decision on whether or not to issue an injunction involves a two step analysis. The first step is asking, “Is the party asking for the injunction likely to win at trial?” If the answer is no, that’s the end of the analysis and the injunction is not granted. If the answer is yes, then you move on to step two, which is determining if the party is likely to suffer harm if the injunction is not granted. If the answer to that question is no, then the injunction is not granted. If it’s yes, then it is. So implicit in the trial and appeal courts’ decisions to grant this injunction is that (1) the plaintiffs are likely to win this lawsuit, and (2) they are likely to suffer harm if this law is enforced in the meantime. Now, is there a chance that evidence comes up during the trial that changes the mind of the court (or the jury if it’s a jury trial) that results in the plaintiff losing? Of course. But this does mean that right now, both of these courts are of the opinion that the plaintiffs are likely to win.
13 Likes
Part of the Troika, ruling by fiat.
These are some of the theocratic oligarchs that are actually running things:
Three West Texas billionaires have quietly taken over Republican politics in the state and have swung Texas to the far right.
Tim Dunn, Farris Wilks and Dan Wilks have funneled immense resources to politicians who are carrying out their vision of Christian nationalism.
This trio has also been financing Defend Texas Liberty, a PAC that recently hosted the likes of Nick Fuentes.
That same PAC also gave Dan Patrick [the other member of the Troika]
several million dollars in loans & contributions.
The Czar has a major donor in Jeff Yass, who wants to destroy the public school system. He used that money to drive out opponents to his school voucher schemes.
Of course, the Troika doesn’t give a flying fuck about the residents of Texas.
I look for the Czar to appeal this decision and start looking to oust those judges that dared defy him.
2 Likes
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
