The Court reversed the dismissal of G. But the school division says in its response that Grimm has not complained of any harassment or discriminatory treatment — only that he cannot use the boys' restrooms and locker room. In addition to case law, it is helpful to remember that guidance from numerous sources still addresses transgender students and transgender employees and has not been withdrawn.
The judges also said Doumar did not properly weigh evidence that Grimm presented about the impact of the high school's restroom policy in refusing to grant a preliminary injunction. Send Print Report.
Hubbard can be reached by phone at One of the two, Senior Judge Andre Davis, however, added that he would have ordered a preliminary injunction himself. The lawsuit was filed inand a judge said earlier this year that the university didn't discriminate against the year-old student when it prohibited him from using male facilities because he was medically a woman.
Recommended on Capital Gazette.
Department of Education that schools should treat transgender students consistent with their gender identity. The appeals court directed Doumar to reconsider Grimm's request for preliminary injunction ordering the high school to let him use the boys' bathrooms. The major factor in whether to stay a ruling like this is whether the appealing party, in this case, the school district, has a high likelihood of winning on the merits by the end of the case.
The court also went a bit further.
Courts, legislatures, and citizens have been debating whether transgender students should use the restroom that corresponds to their biological sex, or whether they can choose to use the facilities which align with their gender identity. Until further notice, however, the decision in Highland is good law.
Gloucester Cty. Unit 26 , ME 11, 86 A.