October 22, 2025
Judge to Issue Arbitrary and Capricious Order
Timothy Birdnow
What didn't this Clinton-appointed judge not get about the Suprme Court ruling saying lower courts couldn't issue nationwide injunctions?
Clinton-Appointed Federal Judge Blocks Push to Remove Gender Brainwashing From Sex Ed Curricula
Yes, she has declared she is going to issue an injunction restoring federal funding to states that promote transgenderism in the schools. And not just in her own Oregon district.
According to the Epoch Times article:
So why is Oregon "leading the group" and why was it filed there? Because they knew they would get this judge, or a similar judge, who would put ideology ahead of the law.
And this was filed as a class-action to circumvent the Supreme Court's order about not issuing nationwide injunctions. States should not be able to participate in class action suits; they should each have to follow the regular procedure and file in their own jurisdictions. This is just a con to circumvent the SCOTUS ruling.
The Department of Health and Human Services had issued warnings to multiple states that their PREP grants would be cut off if they persisted in promoting transitioning of children. PREP stands for Personal Responsibility Education Program . Also, Title V Sexual Risk Avoidance Education programs bans this form of child abuse.
So yet another pet Democrat judge plans on wading in where angels fear to tread and risk the inevitable spanking from the Supreme Court to slow down the implementation of the Trump agenda, an agenda that was eagerly adopted by the American People.
Collectively, all these states stood to lose a paltry $35 million in federal grant money, yet they are probably going to waste more taxpayer dollars on fighting the order than what they would receive from the grants. Why? Because they are absolutely desperate to stop Trump wherever he takes any action and they are desperate to keep the trannie juggernaut rolling. It's about fa more than the money. It's about trying to turn the tide and about compelling the American People to fund the insane schemes the Left hatches up and implements in states they control.
The article continues:
Who is exercising "arbitrary and capricious power" in this instance? The guys trying to stop the waste of taxpayer money for things that the majority of Americans do not want or the people who demand to be paid for child abuse and their pet psycho-sexual theories?
And what of this "excludes certain categories of students" business? We do that all the time. Why, pray tell, aren't the children of Klansmen or Nazis not given educational material stating Jews and Blacks ae inherently inferior? Would that be acceptable to these people? Of course not, nor should it be. Yet we can tell a child he's not really a boy and steer him towards a life-altering action while he's not old enough to make such decisions and yet that is not just o.k. it's a civil right, somehow. Well, why isn't being a Nazi or a Klansman a civil right?
Beecause neither are and we all know it.
This judge didn't even bother to hold a formal hearing, choosing to instead take the case pleas over the phone. In other words,she had no intention of wasting time on a foregone conclusion.
She argued this is akin to "separate but equal" in the schools prior to Brown V. the Board of Education. But it is not even remotely similar and she knows it. Separate but Equal was not equal and was never intended to be equal, and it was about including STUDENTS. This is about educrats imposing their own worldview on Children via curriculum.
And if you want to argue about that let me point to the case of Scopes in the famous Monkey Trial. Most people think Scopes won because "inherit the Wind", a pure propaganda piece, suggested he did. But he actually lost, but wasn't fined but a dollar. Still, he lost. William Jennings Bryan argued the case by claiming the PEOPLE of the state had the right to set the curriculum since they were the ones paying for it and it was their children. The infamous scene where Clarence Darow put the fictitious pseudo-Bryan on the stand and asked him a bunch of questions which he couldn't answer and he started spouting "I beleeeevveee in GAWDddd" never happened. Scopes set a precedent in many ways.
Educatrats and even state legislators do not have unlimited authority to set the curriculum. And they most certainly do not have the right to reach into the pockets of people in other states.
Trump's Administration never said they couldn't promote transgenderism if they chose, just that Missouri or Texas or Florida wasn't going to be required to underwrite that teaching.
That is so very Leftist; spit in the faces of the citizenry and make them pay for the spit.
I suspect this ruling will be overturned fairly easily, but it's purpose is to simply slow down the Trump team and to tie them up with useless fights when they could be doing so many other, more important things. And if Trump should cave then they own him.
And maybe SCOTUS won't want to get into this particular fight? There is a good chance of that.
What didn't this Clinton-appointed judge not get about the Suprme Court ruling saying lower courts couldn't issue nationwide injunctions?
Clinton-Appointed Federal Judge Blocks Push to Remove Gender Brainwashing From Sex Ed Curricula
Yes, she has declared she is going to issue an injunction restoring federal funding to states that promote transgenderism in the schools. And not just in her own Oregon district.
According to the Epoch Times article:
U.S. District Judge Ann Aiken, based in Eugene, made the comments in reference to a lawsuit filed by 16 states, including Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington, and Wisconsin, as well as the District of Columbia. The states of Oregon, Washington, and Minnesota are leading the group.
So why is Oregon "leading the group" and why was it filed there? Because they knew they would get this judge, or a similar judge, who would put ideology ahead of the law.
And this was filed as a class-action to circumvent the Supreme Court's order about not issuing nationwide injunctions. States should not be able to participate in class action suits; they should each have to follow the regular procedure and file in their own jurisdictions. This is just a con to circumvent the SCOTUS ruling.
The Department of Health and Human Services had issued warnings to multiple states that their PREP grants would be cut off if they persisted in promoting transitioning of children. PREP stands for Personal Responsibility Education Program . Also, Title V Sexual Risk Avoidance Education programs bans this form of child abuse.
So yet another pet Democrat judge plans on wading in where angels fear to tread and risk the inevitable spanking from the Supreme Court to slow down the implementation of the Trump agenda, an agenda that was eagerly adopted by the American People.
Collectively, all these states stood to lose a paltry $35 million in federal grant money, yet they are probably going to waste more taxpayer dollars on fighting the order than what they would receive from the grants. Why? Because they are absolutely desperate to stop Trump wherever he takes any action and they are desperate to keep the trannie juggernaut rolling. It's about fa more than the money. It's about trying to turn the tide and about compelling the American People to fund the insane schemes the Left hatches up and implements in states they control.
The article continues:
Attorneys for the states argued that the administration’s requirements contradict the statutory frameworks set up by Congress for these programs and infringe lawmakers’ authority over federal spending, thus violating the U.S. Constitution.
They further asserted that the policy is an "arbitrary and capricious” exercise of power under the Administrative Procedure Act, since it allegedly excludes certain categories of students from educational materials.
They further asserted that the policy is an "arbitrary and capricious” exercise of power under the Administrative Procedure Act, since it allegedly excludes certain categories of students from educational materials.
Who is exercising "arbitrary and capricious power" in this instance? The guys trying to stop the waste of taxpayer money for things that the majority of Americans do not want or the people who demand to be paid for child abuse and their pet psycho-sexual theories?
And what of this "excludes certain categories of students" business? We do that all the time. Why, pray tell, aren't the children of Klansmen or Nazis not given educational material stating Jews and Blacks ae inherently inferior? Would that be acceptable to these people? Of course not, nor should it be. Yet we can tell a child he's not really a boy and steer him towards a life-altering action while he's not old enough to make such decisions and yet that is not just o.k. it's a civil right, somehow. Well, why isn't being a Nazi or a Klansman a civil right?
Beecause neither are and we all know it.
This judge didn't even bother to hold a formal hearing, choosing to instead take the case pleas over the phone. In other words,she had no intention of wasting time on a foregone conclusion.
She argued this is akin to "separate but equal" in the schools prior to Brown V. the Board of Education. But it is not even remotely similar and she knows it. Separate but Equal was not equal and was never intended to be equal, and it was about including STUDENTS. This is about educrats imposing their own worldview on Children via curriculum.
And if you want to argue about that let me point to the case of Scopes in the famous Monkey Trial. Most people think Scopes won because "inherit the Wind", a pure propaganda piece, suggested he did. But he actually lost, but wasn't fined but a dollar. Still, he lost. William Jennings Bryan argued the case by claiming the PEOPLE of the state had the right to set the curriculum since they were the ones paying for it and it was their children. The infamous scene where Clarence Darow put the fictitious pseudo-Bryan on the stand and asked him a bunch of questions which he couldn't answer and he started spouting "I beleeeevveee in GAWDddd" never happened. Scopes set a precedent in many ways.
Educatrats and even state legislators do not have unlimited authority to set the curriculum. And they most certainly do not have the right to reach into the pockets of people in other states.
Trump's Administration never said they couldn't promote transgenderism if they chose, just that Missouri or Texas or Florida wasn't going to be required to underwrite that teaching.
That is so very Leftist; spit in the faces of the citizenry and make them pay for the spit.
I suspect this ruling will be overturned fairly easily, but it's purpose is to simply slow down the Trump team and to tie them up with useless fights when they could be doing so many other, more important things. And if Trump should cave then they own him.
And maybe SCOTUS won't want to get into this particular fight? There is a good chance of that.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
07:13 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 998 words, total size 7 kb.
27kb generated in CPU 0.0622, elapsed 0.2143 seconds.
35 queries taking 0.1919 seconds, 182 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
35 queries taking 0.1919 seconds, 182 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
