Full complaint is case 5:24-cv-00225-C filed in the US District Court Northern District of Texas.
It seems that the heart of the lawsuit is that the Biden Admin tried to get gender dysphoria to be a disability under the Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and ADA by means of administrative rule making. The text of both of those laws as written *by Congress and signed by the Executive have clauses stating they do not encompass trans people. (Cites are in line 2 of complaint)
I’d wager the constitutional argument on the spending power is to preserve another option for appeal. Realistically I think they’ll probably win and get the Final Rule held to be a violation of the APA and struck down without the rest of Section 504 being touched. Their constitutional argument boils down to if the Final Rule isn’t violating the law the law is too vague to be enforceable.
Full complaint is case 5:24-cv-00225-C filed in the US District Court Northern District of Texas.
It seems that the heart of the lawsuit is that the Biden Admin tried to get gender dysphoria to be a disability under the Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and ADA by means of administrative rule making. The text of both of those laws as written *by Congress and signed by the Executive have clauses stating they do not encompass trans people. (Cites are in line 2 of complaint)
I’d wager the constitutional argument on the spending power is to preserve another option for appeal. Realistically I think they’ll probably win and get the Final Rule held to be a violation of the APA and struck down without the rest of Section 504 being touched. Their constitutional argument boils down to if the Final Rule isn’t violating the law the law is too vague to be enforceable.
*Edit