I’m very confused here…

He blocked Title IX enforcement in Louisiana, Mississippi, Idaho and Montana, but Wikipedia says:

The United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana (in case citations, W.D. La.) is a United States federal court with jurisdiction over approximately two thirds of the state of Louisiana, with courts in Alexandria, Lafayette, Lake Charles, Monroe, and Shreveport. These cities comprise the Western District of Louisiana.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_District_Court_for_the_Western_District_of_Louisiana

And he is “chief judge for the Western District of Louisiana” according to the article.

So how can he block it in Idaho?

Also, worse news:

Appeals from the Western District of Louisiana are taken to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

I assume that’s why it was done in this court.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_District_Court_for_the_Western_District_of_Louisiana

I know people will have much more radical stances on this, but it doesn’t sound like that Title IX is limited to discrimination of biological gender only. It looks to me like they were trying to aim higher, for discrimination in general. At least if I get the jist of the Title. That would make this ruling legally questionable as well. This raises more issues because in case of intentionality this might become a separation of powers issues where the judicial branch is trying to make a law something that it isn’t, therefore acting in the role of the legislative branch. That’s some serious shit.

I’m saying this because obviously morally this is repulsive already, but I wanted to show that legally there’s some shaky stuff going on as well imo.

Obligatory IANAL.