We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: CHANN GOVERNMENT v. AHMAD RAZAMID, in his capacity as Governor of the Province of Razamid, 4032 M.H.C. 1
Details
Submitted by[?]: Chann National Party (CNP)
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This bill is a resolution. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: July 4034
Description[?]:
| SUMMARY: The Province of Razamid passed the Bathroom Privacy Act of 4030, which forbade persons identifying as Transgender from accessing and using bathrooms of the sex with which they identified. The Chann Government brought suit to enjoin the enforcement of the act, arguing that the act violates the constitutional rights of Transgender citizens. The Provincial Court of Razamid denied the Government's injunction and the Government appealed. The Ministerial Court of Appeals for the Province of Razamid reversed and remanded and Ahmad Razamid, the Appellant before this Court appealed. ISSUES PRESENTED: Whether the Bathroom Privacy Act of 4030 violates the constitutional rights of Transgender Citizens. JUDGE PRESIDING: Sok Chann, Minister of Justice and Chief Justice of the Ministerial Court The Province of Razamid passed the Bathroom Privacy Act of 4030, which forbade persons identifying as Transgender from accessing and using bathrooms of the sex with which they identified. The Chann Government brought suit to enjoin the enforcement of the act, arguing that the act violates the constitutional rights of Transgender citizens. The Provincial Court of Razamid denied the Government's injunction and the Government appealed. The Ministerial Court of Appeals for the Province of Razamid reversed and remanded and Ahmad Razamid, the Appellant before this Court appeals. Appellant, Razamid Province, argues principally that (1) citizens have an expectation of and right to privacy in the use of bathrooms assigned to a certain gender based on the gender assigned to them at birth and, alternatively, that (2) there exists no constitutional rights for those who identify as transgender. The concept of gender has advanced, evolved, and morphed within the past few decades. The binary that once existed between male and female, the line between the two, has become obscured with the rise of new scholarship, literature, and science on the issue of what, exactly, is gender. Is it defined by physical biological characteristics, as has traditionally been the case, or is it an internal, almost spiritual characteristic developed and refined by the individual as they come of age and as they live through life. Is it something which doctors and practitioners, or even the Government, assigns, or should it be left to the individual to decide upon? This Court believes that the emerging literature and science surrounding gender identity has cast reasonable and considerable doubt on the status quo. Likewise, national societal opinion has reached a critical mass in the acceptance of these developments. It is a quickly diminishing minority, led by religious fundamentalists who, coincidentally, also espouse the restoration of a state religion, have sought to overreach and impose their views on a growing majority of citizens in support of a traditionally and historically marginalized community now coming out of the cracks created by the lack of adequate policy and legal consideration. We do not, today, announce or create a new right for Transgender people, but rather enunciate that recent developments in science and literature has made more stark and more clear the need of Transgender citizens to be protected from unwarranted government intrusion and from breaches of the right of privacy accorded to every citizen under our Common and Constitutional Jurisprudence. In other words, the Government has no legitimate purpose in depriving the privacy of others in order to protect the privacy of some. Here, the Province of Razamid has provided us a pretextual purpose in protecting the privacy of citizens using bathrooms assigned to the gender they were assigned with while ignoring wholesale the emerging science and literature and ignoring what regulatory regime they would have to impose in order to provide this "protection." In order to enforce this new law, they would have to invade the privacy of Transgender citizens and submit them to physical examinations in order to determine whether they may or may not use a bathroom. Thus, we hold that (1) all citizens have an equal right to privacy and (2) while there exists no special rights for Transgender citizens, they do have the right against unwarranted and invasive government intrusion in using the bathroom of the gender with which they identify. |
Proposals
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribeVoting
| Vote | Seats | |
| yes | Total Seats: 100 | |
| no | Total Seats: 0 | |
| abstain |
Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Players who deliberately attempt to present a misleading picture of the nation's current RP laws will be subject to sanction. |
| Random quote: "A single death is a tragedy; a million deaths is a statistic." - Josef Stalin |