Trans man wins $4.7 million from school district that didn't let him use the restroom - eviltoast
  • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    91
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    4 months ago

    This is the problem when we ‘win’ lawsuits like this.

    The money doesn’t come out of the pockets of the police or the politicians who are doing wrong; the taxpayers foot the bill.

    I’m saying not to sue, I’m saying we need to change the way people are held responsible.

    • qjkxbmwvz@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      47
      ·
      4 months ago

      In California, the major utility provider was found guilty in relation to wildfires, and fined.

      Guess what happened to electricity rates…

      • bradv@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        61
        ·
        4 months ago

        That’s an argument for making utilities publicly-owned again more than anything else.

        • dan@upvote.au
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          At least in the Bay Area, there’s a few cities that have municipal utilities (owned and ran by the city). Usually this is because they installed power lines before PG&E existed.

          In those areas, the electricity rates are less than 1/3 of PG&E’s rates. Residential electricity is around $0.16/kWh in Palo Alto and Santa Clara (city, not county), compared to something like $0.55-0.60/kWh in summer peak with PG&E.

          One of the things with PG&E is that customers in city areas subsidise customers in rural areas, since it’s quite a bit more expensive to service customers in rural areas. Most of the price difference is greed, though. PG&E have record profits every year. The municipal electricity providers are non-profits and have an incentive to keep prices low.

      • dan@upvote.au
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        The thing that confuses me is that California bailed out PG&E when they declared bankruptcy, yet PG&E are still operating as a for-profit company? They essentially just got free money from the government. Why didn’t the government take over the company?

    • MsPenguinette@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      4 months ago

      Eh, if the government fucks up then it has to pay, the taxpayers should pressure the government to not fuck up again if they don’t like having to pay for making people whole

      • bamboo@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        I agree with you, but to the average citizen, they are unaware of the direct consequences of those who they are voting for, especially when it relates to taxes. To some, this could be seen as a direct result of the “woke agenda” and would be anti-woke tax. They might double down and reelect their candidate who got them into this mess to “fix” the system and stop the tax increases, since that’s easier than actually creating meaningful changes in society.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          4 months ago

          It should be the job of the opposition politicians to let the citizens know that was the consequence of who they were voting for.

    • stoly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      The point here is that they and everyone else in the state has to correct their behavior now and one person was made whole.

      • tatterdemalion@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        And how has this penalty incentivised any change in behavior? I assume the money will come from the school district, which is earmarked from local and federal taxes. So now there’s less money to pay for schools. In practice the school board may do as they wish with less funding until they are not reelected. Do you think they will be firing or docking pay of the people who are actually to blame?

        • stoly@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          Because a court just said that they can’t do that. That’s what incentivized change.

  • Wahots@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Judge Anthony Gabbert said that the school district’s reasoning for excluding RMA, which was that he had female genitalia, was not a valid reason. Gabbert said that the district “did not actually determine the nature of RMA’s genitalia.”

    God, we live in such a wild world. Arguing over a child’s genitalia, jesus. Can’t we focus our energy on literally anything more important? If he says he’s a boy, he’s a boy. The school district doesn’t need to see evidence and should focus on a quality education like they are supposed to do. This is so unprofessional, it’s almost beyond belief.

  • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    3 months ago

    Another proud moment for our civilization. Arguing about the private parts of children in the court room to make the baby Jesus crowd happy

    • mosiacmango@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      47
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Hes been fighting this fight for 10 years, and was specifically and blatantly discrimination agaisnt on many occasions by the school district.

      No, its not too much. If the taxpayers think it’s too much, they should not discriminated against in people the future.

      • felykiosa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Well I think it s way too much , but I m not american and don’t have a trial mentality. 5M for that ?-? Like I agree that they are asshole to not let him use it but man thats a lot of money.

    • asteriskeverything@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      IKR you think the district would take the stick out of their ass and let the man use the damn men’s restroom and locker room! You can be a bigot for much less than that.

    • homura1650@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      The US has largly privatized regulation. Where most countries would have a government agency enforce the law, the US tends to give individuals the right to sue to do so. This means that the rewards need to be high enough to both incentize lawsuits, and make up for the cases that don’t get brought.

      In this case, according to the appalet court [0], the compensatory damages were only $175k. The rest of the judgment cane from $4m in punitive damages, and about $560 in attorney’s fees.

      [0] https://mediaassets.kshb.com/NWT/Sam/Opinion_WD85778.pdf