ACLU blocks woman's request for data on numbers of transgender inmates in women's prisons

[Metaphor]

ACLU blocks woman's request for data on numbers of transgender inmates in women's prisons | The Post Millennial

A woman was interested to know how many inmates in Washington state identify as transgender, and how many of those transgender identified inmates have been given transfers to go from men's prison to women's prison, and the reverse. To get this information, she filed a Freedom on Information Act request. Instead of getting the information she requested, she got sued by the ACLU.


To be clear, at no point had this woman contacted the ACLU to tell them she was filing a FOIA. She had used ACLU resources to figure out how to file a FOIA, but that was freely available on their website. The state of Washington is under no obligation to let the ACLU know about every FOIA request they receive, so it remains entirely unclear as to how the ACLU became aware of this woman's FOIA in the first place.
Nonetheless, instead of receiving the information she requested, she received an injunction. The ACLU has filed a lawsuit against a private citizen for requesting public records from the Washington State Department of Corrections on the number of inmates in state custody who identify as transgender and the number of male inmates who are housed in women's facilities.
The woman, who didn't want to be named given the sensitive nature of this peculiar situation, submitted her public records request on March 18, 2021.


The Washington Public Records Act guarantees that citizens have the right to access public records, and requires the government to respond to requests within five days. Only personal student or patient information, employee files, and some investigative records are exempt.
Yet by April 8, instead of the information she requested, she received an email that the ACLU of Washington Foundation and Disability Rights Washington, along with their clients "who are current and former transgender, non-binary, and intersex inmates and in the custody of Washington Department of Corrections," had personally named her in a lawsuit to prevent the information she requested from being released.
The email stated, "We have filed for an emergency Temporary Restraining Order and a Motion for Preliminary Injunction to prevent the disclosure of documents you have requested from the Department of Corrections."

In a twist of irony that no screenwriter could have the audacity to add to their movie, the FOI applicant found out how to file FOI requests FROM THE ACLU

"I decided to seek the data myself through public records requests because citizens have a right to know about what the government is doing in our name. I'm appalled that an organization like the ACLU, whose own resources helped me make this request, would try to stop a citizen from exercising their rights."

This latest move is hardly a surprise from the ideologically captured ACLU, whose head transactivist has called for the stopping of circulation of books he doesn't like:
ACLU lawyer calls for censorship of books that criticize the promotion of transgenderism in children | The Post Millennial

 

[bigfield]

Are you opposed to transgender activism in general or just this particular action by the ACLU?

 

[Metaphor]

Are you opposed to transgender activism in general or just this particular action by the ACLU?

With respect to the ACLU, it went from an organisation that once had the cojones to have defended the KKK's right to march in the street, to an organisation that lies day and night about trans issues (especially under their Transliar-in-Chief Chase Strangio), and now has taken the most anti civil-libertarian position I can think of: blocking a citizen's right to know what her government is doing.

But the ACLU is simply another institution captured by trans ideology. Unlike some other people and institutions though, we might have expected the ACLU to know better.

 

[Ford]

Are you opposed to transgender activism in general or just this particular action by the ACLU?

But the ACLU is simply another institution captured by trans ideology.

Oh, now being trans is an "ideology."

Pray tell, what are the tenets of this ideology?

Let me guess...suggesting that trans people have rights is a belief system...

 

[bigfield]

Are you opposed to transgender activism in general or just this particular action by the ACLU?

With respect to the ACLU, it went from an organisation that once had the cojones to have defended the KKK's right to march in the street, to an organisation that lies day and night about trans issues (especially under their Transliar-in-Chief Chase Strangio), and now has taken the most anti civil-libertarian position I can think of: blocking a citizen's right to know what her government is doing.

But the ACLU is simply another institution captured by trans ideology. Unlike some other people and institutions though, we might have expected the ACLU to know better.

It does seem bizarre that the ACLU would take legal action to block an FOI request. It's just information, after all.

As for trans ideology: what position do you think the ACLU should be taking when it comes to trans people? Should the ACLU defend people's right to have a trans identity?

 

[Metaphor]

Oh, now being trans is an "ideology."

No. Being trans is having a gender identity that is different to your actual sex. Trans ideology is a set of beliefs and demands that range from ridiculous (like that sexual orientation is based on gender and not sex) to the dangerous (to gender non-confirming children and women in prisons). Most people who peddle trans ideology are not trans, and there are trans people who do not peddle trans ideology.

Pray tell, what are the tenets of this ideology?

I'll list off some:
* There is no such thing as same-sex attraction: homosexuals are same-gender attracted. (This is a ridiculous lie that hurts gay and lesbian people).
* Having a gender identity of 'female' is the sole determinant of being female. That is, any person, no matter what their actual sex is, who utters 'I am female', is biologically female. (Vice versa for gender identity 'male').
* Transwomen are murdered at an alarming rate and it is happening to them because they are trans (no evidence for this is ever produced)
* Transwomen and transgirls, including transwomen and transgirls who have had no transition process whatsoever, do not have any advantage in playing sports and they deserve to play sports in the team that accords with their gender identity (and not their sex).
* Anything other than total and unconditional affirmation of gender identity is erasing trans lives.
* Preverbal children can signal their trans status by (for example) removing bows that are put into their hair.

Let me guess...suggesting that trans people have rights is a belief system...

Well, that's a belief. It isn't a belief system.

 

[Metaphor]

Are you opposed to transgender activism in general or just this particular action by the ACLU?

With respect to the ACLU, it went from an organisation that once had the cojones to have defended the KKK's right to march in the street, to an organisation that lies day and night about trans issues (especially under their Transliar-in-Chief Chase Strangio), and now has taken the most anti civil-libertarian position I can think of: blocking a citizen's right to know what her government is doing.

But the ACLU is simply another institution captured by trans ideology. Unlike some other people and institutions though, we might have expected the ACLU to know better.

It does seem bizarre that the ACLU would take legal action to block an FOI request. It's just information, after all.

As for trans ideology: what position do you think the ACLU should be taking when it comes to trans people? Should the ACLU defend people's right to have a trans identity?

I do not know what it means to defend somebody's right to have a 'trans identity'. Do you have an example in mind?

 

[Ford]

I'll list off some:
* There is no such thing as same-sex attraction: homosexuals are same-gender attracted. (This is a ridiculous lie that hurts gay and lesbian people).
* Having a gender identity of 'female' is the sole determinant of being female. That is, any person, no matter what their actual sex is, who utters 'I am female', is biologically female. (Vice versa for gender identity 'male').
* Transwomen are murdered at an alarming rate and it is happening to them because they are trans (no evidence for this is ever produced)
* Transwomen and transgirls, including transwomen and transgirls who have had no transition process whatsoever, do not have any advantage in playing sports and they deserve to play sports in the team that accords with their gender identity (and not their sex).
* Anything other than total and unconditional affirmation of gender identity is erasing trans lives.
* Preverbal children can signal their trans status by (for example) removing bows that are put into their hair.

Did you just make all those up right now, or did you get them from some website that shares your anger?

 

[Metaphor]

I'll list off some:
* There is no such thing as same-sex attraction: homosexuals are same-gender attracted. (This is a ridiculous lie that hurts gay and lesbian people).
* Having a gender identity of 'female' is the sole determinant of being female. That is, any person, no matter what their actual sex is, who utters 'I am female', is biologically female. (Vice versa for gender identity 'male').
* Transwomen are murdered at an alarming rate and it is happening to them because they are trans (no evidence for this is ever produced)
* Transwomen and transgirls, including transwomen and transgirls who have had no transition process whatsoever, do not have any advantage in playing sports and they deserve to play sports in the team that accords with their gender identity (and not their sex).
* Anything other than total and unconditional affirmation of gender identity is erasing trans lives.
* Preverbal children can signal their trans status by (for example) removing bows that are put into their hair.

Did you just make all those up right now, or did you get them from some website that shares your anger?

Your sentence proposes a false binary. I neither made it up nor got it from 'some website'.

I listed a few things I have seen and heard and read over the past few years.

 

[Ford]

I'll list off some:
* There is no such thing as same-sex attraction: homosexuals are same-gender attracted. (This is a ridiculous lie that hurts gay and lesbian people).
* Having a gender identity of 'female' is the sole determinant of being female. That is, any person, no matter what their actual sex is, who utters 'I am female', is biologically female. (Vice versa for gender identity 'male').
* Transwomen are murdered at an alarming rate and it is happening to them because they are trans (no evidence for this is ever produced)
* Transwomen and transgirls, including transwomen and transgirls who have had no transition process whatsoever, do not have any advantage in playing sports and they deserve to play sports in the team that accords with their gender identity (and not their sex).
* Anything other than total and unconditional affirmation of gender identity is erasing trans lives.
* Preverbal children can signal their trans status by (for example) removing bows that are put into their hair.

Did you just make all those up right now, or did you get them from some website that shares your anger?

Your sentence proposes a false binary. I neither made it up nor got it from 'some website'.

I listed a few things I have seen and heard and read over the past few years.

Ah, so your anger has been brewing for years, and you've carefully built a narrative. Got it.

 

[Metaphor]

Your sentence proposes a false binary. I neither made it up nor got it from 'some website'.

I listed a few things I have seen and heard and read over the past few years.

Ah, so your anger has been brewing for years, and you've carefully built a narrative. Got it.

I surely have: righteous anger. And as trans ideology begins eroding more and more rights, it is less and less viable to stay silent and simply hope the world will come to its senses.

 

[Metaphor]

I forgot one that I read a while ago but was reminded of the other day.

Biological sex is white supremacy/white colonialist.

 

[Ford]

Your sentence proposes a false binary. I neither made it up nor got it from 'some website'.

I listed a few things I have seen and heard and read over the past few years.

Ah, so your anger has been brewing for years, and you've carefully built a narrative. Got it.

I surely have: righteous anger. And as trans ideology begins eroding more and more rights, it is less and less viable to stay silent and simply hope the world will come to its senses.

And the rights you have lost due to the people you so clearly hate are...?

 

[Metaphor]

I surely have: righteous anger. And as trans ideology begins eroding more and more rights, it is less and less viable to stay silent and simply hope the world will come to its senses.

And the rights you have lost due to the people you so clearly hate are...?

For one thing, I have lost the right, in Australia, to use pronouns that fit somebody's biological sex. The Australian Government can punish people (and already has) for "misgendering".

I have already answered multiple questions from you, including what trans ideology is doing, which you did not answer or even acknowledge, except to marvel that I could produce such a list.

Also, who are "the people you so clearly hate"? Will you acknowledge anything I posted in my list, and whether you think it's a problem or not?

 

[Ford]

I surely have: righteous anger. And as trans ideology begins eroding more and more rights, it is less and less viable to stay silent and simply hope the world will come to its senses.

And the rights you have lost due to the people you so clearly hate are...?

For one thing, I have lost the right, in Australia, to use pronouns that fit somebody's biological sex. The Australian Government can punish people (and already has) for "misgendering".

I have already answered multiple questions from you, including what trans ideology is doing, which you did not answer or even acknowledge, except to marvel that I could produce such a list.

Also, who are "the people you so clearly hate"? Will you acknowledge anything I posted in my list, and whether you think it's a problem or not?

So if you see a Sheila who looks more like a bloke to you, and you call her a bloke, you're hauled off to prison? Well then...don't forget to write.

Do you also reserve the right to grab a crotch or two just to confirm your suspicions?

As for the last bit, you do seem very, very angry at trans people. Hateful, in fact. You've been building a case against them for years now, and are currently whining very loudly about them asserting their rights. My goodness you must have suffered such terrible abuses at the hands of trans people. Have you thought about suing them for mental distress?

 

[Metaphor]

So if you see a Sheila who looks more like a bloke to you, and you call her a bloke, you're hauled off to prison? Well then...don't forget to write.

No, not to prison, though a woman in my own city was fined $10,000 and ordered to publically apologise when she 'liked' certain comments on her Facebook.

But, if I did go to prison, I may well write. Jean Genet wrote Our Lady of the Flowers while in prison after all.

Do you also reserve the right to grab a crotch or two just to confirm your suspicions?

What a bizarre thing to think. I don't touch strangers without their permission.

As for the last bit, you do seem very, very angry at trans people.

I'm not angry at trans people as a class. I 'follow' Blaire White and Rose of Dawn and Debbie Hayton and Buck Angel, who are all trans.

Hateful, in fact.

Much less am I hateful.

You've been building a case against them for years now,

I haven't been "building a case" against trans people. I have observed what trans activists are saying and demanding.

and are currently whining very loudly about them asserting their rights.

I did not know it was a right to play on a sports team consistent with your gender identity and not your sex. Why do you believe any person has that right?

My goodness you must have suffered such terrible abuses at the hands of trans people. Have you thought about suing them for mental distress?

Evidently, you are simply not interested in discussion of any kind.

 

[bigfield]

It does seem bizarre that the ACLU would take legal action to block an FOI request. It's just information, after all.

As for trans ideology: what position do you think the ACLU should be taking when it comes to trans people? Should the ACLU defend people's right to have a trans identity?

I do not know what it means to defend somebody's right to have a 'trans identity'. Do you have an example in mind?

By trans identity, all I mean is that someone identifies as a gender other than the sex they were born with. More to the point, they present according to that gender. I know there are lots of jokes about identifying as an attack helicopter, or men identifying as women to game the system, but I'm more interested in how this affects actual trans people who are making an effort to be accepted as the gender they identify as.

The way I see it, if I meet someone who, as far as I can tell, is a woman, then don't see why I should have any trouble addressing her as such, and I don't see what would cause anyone to be alarmed when she uses the women's toilets. I think that most people would agree that this is common sense, but some jurisdictions have laws banning trans women from identifying as women when it comes to something as mundane as taking a shit. To defend trans identity, in that instance, would be to oppose such legislation.

I would think that the ACLU's natural position is to defend a person's rights to privacy (people shouldn't have to prove their biological sex when it isn't necessary) and freedom of expression (if a biologically female person wants to identify as a man then why not let her?). What do you think their position should be on the matter?

 

[Bronzeage]

Apparently, the ACLU has more power than I realized. I read the article and it doesn't say which Judge, or in which Court, the injunction was granted. The writer gives the impression the ACLU has the power to force the Washington State government to do as it bids.

 

[Jarhyn]

I'll list off some:
* There is no such thing as same-sex attraction: homosexuals are same-gender attracted. (This is a ridiculous lie that hurts gay and lesbian people).
* Having a gender identity of 'female' is the sole determinant of being female. That is, any person, no matter what their actual sex is, who utters 'I am female', is biologically female. (Vice versa for gender identity 'male').
* Transwomen are murdered at an alarming rate and it is happening to them because they are trans (no evidence for this is ever produced)
* Transwomen and transgirls, including transwomen and transgirls who have had no transition process whatsoever, do not have any advantage in playing sports and they deserve to play sports in the team that accords with their gender identity (and not their sex).
* Anything other than total and unconditional affirmation of gender identity is erasing trans lives.
* Preverbal children can signal their trans status by (for example) removing bows that are put into their hair.

Did you just make all those up right now, or did you get them from some website that shares your anger?

I will note, in strict terms, there is no same sex attraction. There is gender attraction and genital fetishizaton and genital kink.

That's actually a fact. Now, a lot of homosexual people have a penis fetish, or a vagina kink. But I know I'm either attracted or not long before I look into someone's pants, am most definitely gay.

 

[Metaphor]

By trans identity, all I mean is that someone identifies as a gender other than the sex they were born with.

In what sense could somebody have that 'right' taken away?

More to the point, they present according to that gender.

What you mean is: transgender people sometimes attempt to present as a sex they are not. Note though that while there are different degrees of 'success' in 'passing', transgender ideology does not say that trans people need to pass, or attempt to pass, as the opposite sex, in order to receive the sex-based rights (or access to restricted spaces) of that sex.

I know there are lots of jokes about identifying as an attack helicopter, or men identifying as women to game the system, but I'm more interested in how this affects actual trans people who are making an effort to be accepted as the gender they identify as.
The way I see it, if I meet someone who, as far as I can tell, is a woman, then don't see why I should have any trouble addressing her as such,

But who is stopping you from addressing a trans person the way you want to address them? As far as I can tell, nobody anywhere. It is rather the opposite: trans activists demand that other people address trans people with their 'preferred pronouns'. The penalty for refusing this demand depends on the legal and social capture that trans ideology has made in certain jurisdictions.

and I don't see what would cause anyone to be alarmed when she uses the women's toilets.

Are you a female? Why do you imply that 'alarm' might be the only justifiable reason to exclude males from female space? Why isn't it enough for women and girls to say 'we want a female only space'?

I think that most people would agree that this is common sense, but some jurisdictions have laws banning trans women from identifying as women when it comes to something as mundane as taking a shit.

No one can stop you 'identifying' as a woman. But they might be able to stop you entering a single-sex space if you are not the sex that qualifies.

To defend trans identity, in that instance, would be to oppose such legislation.

I would think that the ACLU's natural position is to defend a person's rights to privacy (people shouldn't have to prove their biological sex when it isn't necessary) and freedom of expression (if a biologically female person wants to identify as a man then why not let her?). What do you think their position should be on the matter?

It seems to me there is no barrier to 'freedom of (gender) expression'. What laws (in the Western world, I mean) forbid men from dressing in clothes marketed to women? Or women from dressing in clothes marketed to men? What law forbids women to have buzzcuts or men to wear makeup? (The military has differing dress codes for men and women, and that should be lifted. If you allow one sex makeup or jewelry it ought be allowed for both. But that isn't a trans issue.)

It seems to me the only freedom of expression that is being curtailed is a person's freedom to dissent to radical gender ideology.

You ask about the 'right to privacy'. How do you think, for example, a single-sex space violates a right to privacy? A person's sex is not a secret; the government knows your sex already. Indeed, if the sex of your child was meant to be a secret, parents all over the world for millennia have been 'violating' this right, by freely disclosing the sex of their children to family, friends, strangers. Single-sex spaces are an honour system already: what keeps men out of women's toilets right now is the fact that men don't belong in women's toilets.

What 'right to privacy' do girls and boys have if someone of the opposite sex can be in their intimate spaces? Do you think an 11 year old girl has the right to not see an adult male's penis when she is changing? If you don't think she has the right not to see it, why have separate intimate spaces delineated by sex at all? Note that there's no right to privacy from your own sex being discussed: people never had that right.