Judge’s ‘crass’ anti-trans dissent draws attention to moral insanity of Ninth Circuit ruling

Blurb:

Circuit Judge Lawrence Van Dyke attracted the ire of nearly 30 of his colleagues after writing a furious and crude dissent in response to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision not to review the claims of Olympus Spa. The Christian business in Washington state claims that their constitutional rights have been violated by a law requiring them to permit trans-identifying men into their facility.

In 2020, trans-identifying man Haven Wilvich filed a complaint against the spa for denying him service with the Washington Human Rights Commission. Olympus Spa, which is owned by conservative Christians, settled in 2021 with the WHRC by promising to change its policies forbidding trans-identifying men from using their facility, but also stated that the settlement was forced and violated their freedom of association, freedom of speech, and exercise of religion under the First Amendment.

The following year, Olympus brought a constitutional challenge, which was dismissed in 2023 by a federal judge who claimed that because the state’s “anti-discrimination” law applies to all businesses, the law does not specifically violate the rights of the owners of Olympus. In May, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the ruling 2-1. Last week, the full court voted not to review that decision. Enter Judge Lawrence Van Dyke, who decided to make the rare move of using blunt, crude language to illustrate his contempt for the decision.