The Supreme Court announced it'll hear a major transgender rights case. This is big.

The Supreme Court did something pretty extraordinary on Oct. 28, 2016.

It announced that next year, the justices will hear a likely game-changing case for transgender rights in the United States.

Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images.


Usually the justices are hesitant to hear cases on hot-button topics with large ramifications, as Reuters noted — especially now that the court is short its tie-breaking ninth justice.

But not this time.

In 2017, the court will decide whether senior Gavin Grimm will be able to use the bathroom that matches his gender identity at his high school in rural Virginia.

Grimm was assigned female at birth. But in 2014, when he was beginning high school as a freshman, he came out as transgender to his family. He began undergoing hormone treatments and changed his name.

Since Grimm is a guy, he naturally wanted to use the boys' restroom. It caused an uproar.

Grimm's principal allowed him to use the bathroom that matched his identity. The school district, however, wasn't thrilled. It mandated that students in Gloucester County use restrooms that correspond to the sex they were assigned at birth, NBS News reported.

As for trans students like Grimm? They would need to use single-occupant bathroom facilities.

"I continue to suffer daily because of the school board’s decision to make my bathroom use a matter of public debate," Grimm wrote in The Washington Post.

Grimm, arguing the new rule left him feeling isolated and stigmatized, sued. The Fourth U.S. Circuit of Appeals in Virginia agreed with him, too — the school district's mandate violated Title IX, a measure that prohibits discrimination by sex in any school receiving federal funding, the court argued.  

Photo by Lior Mizrahi /Getty Images.

It was a landmark decision, raising the bar for protections of transgender students.

The Supreme Court justices put the lower court's ruling on hold in August to decide whether to take up the case themselves — which leaves us where we are today.

The court's decision in 2017 could have a lasting impact on these discriminatory "bathroom bills" that have crept up across the country, most notably in North Carolina.

With approval from Gov. Pat McCrory, the Tar Heel State passed HB2 earlier this year — a measure that strips away many LGBTQ protections and forces all North Carolinians to use the bathroom that matches the sex they were assigned at birth in government buildings.

Gov. Pat McCrory. Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images.

It's been called the most anti-LGBTQ state law in America; it's really not all that popular with Americans; and — aside from being morally reprehensible — it's terrible for business, too.

Just this week, the state lost out on a $250 million business development when a real estate firm decided to go elsewhere — and take its job openings, too — according to Business Insider. HB2 played a major role in the firm's decision.

Grimm's case is causing a wave of hope among transgender activists and allies who want to make sure all American students can feel safe at school — and not stigmatized — regardless of how they identify.

"Now that I am visible, I want to use my position to help the country see transgender people like me as real people just living our lives," wrote Grimm. "We are not perverse. We are not broken. We are not sick. We are not freaks."

"I hope the justices of the Supreme Court can see me and the rest of the transgender community for who we are — just people," Grimm wrote. "And rule accordingly."

More
via Twitter / Soraya

There is a strange right-wing logic that suggests when minorities fight for equal rights it's somehow a threat to the rights already held by those in the majority or who hold power.

Like when the Black Lives Matter movement started, many on the right claimed that fighting for black people to be treated equally somehow meant that other people's lives were not as valuable, leading to the short-lived All Lives Matter movement.

This same "oppressed majority" logic is behind the new Straight Pride movement which made headlines in August after its march through the streets of Boston.

Keep Reading Show less
popular

For most of us, the hypothetical question of whether we would stick with a boyfriend or girlfriend through the trials of cancer and the treatments is just that – a hypothetical question. We would like to think we would do the right thing, but when Max Allegretti got the chance to put his money where mouth is, he didn't hesitate for a second.

Keep Reading Show less
popular
via bfmamatalk / facebook

Where did we go wrong as a society to make women feel uncomfortable about breastfeeding in public?

No one should feel they have the right to tell a woman when, where, and how she can breastfeed. The stigma should be placed on those who have the nerve to tell a woman feeding her child to "Cover up" or to ask "Where's your modesty?"

Breasts were made to feed babies. Yes, they also have a sexual function but anyone who has the maturity of a sixth grader knows the difference between a sexual act and feeding a child.

Keep Reading Show less
popular
Instagram / JLo

The Me Too movement has shed light on just how many actresses have been placed in positions that make them feel uncomfortable. Abuse of power has been all too commonplace. Some actresses have been coerced into doing something that made them uncomfortable because they felt they couldn't say no to the director. And it's not always as flagrant as Louis C.K. masturbating in front of an up-and-coming comedian, or Harvey Weinstein forcing himself on actresses in hotel rooms.

But it's important to remember that you can always firmly put your foot down and say no. While speaking at The Hollywood Reporter's annual Actress Roundtable, Jennifer Lopez opened up about her experiences with a director who behaved inappropriately. Laura Dern, Awkwafina, Scarlett Johansson, Lupita Nyong'o, and Renee Zellweger were also at the roundtable.

Keep Reading Show less
popular