Judicial Overreach: Women-Only Spa Compared to Racism
Submitted by MAGA
Posted 7 hours ago
**Woke Overreach: Federal Judge Compares Women-Only Spa to Racism**
In a shocking display of judicial overreach, a federal judge has likened a Korean women-only nude spa in Seattle to the disgraceful era of "whites-only" laws that characterized racial segregation in America.
Judge Margaret McKeown of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals made headlines during a recent hearing involving Olympus Spa, claiming their all-female policy discriminates against individuals based on gender identity. This assertion stands in stark contrast to common sense and the spa's cultural traditions rooted in the Korean practice of jjimjilbang.
McKeown's comments came as the spa appealed a lower court decision which mandated the admission of men who identify as women into their female-only facilities. While addressing arguments made by the spa’s lawyer, Kevin Snider, who defended their policy under First Amendment rights, the judge remarked, “It seems to me they’re quite parallel” to segregation laws based on race.
This comparison is not only unfounded but also an extraordinary example of leftist ideology seeking to undermine fundamental rights. The spa, which accommodates its clientele by prioritizing the safety and comfort of women—including minors—has faced significant pressure from the Washington State Human Rights Commission, which determined that their policy constituted discrimination.
What’s particularly alarming is that women and young girls may soon find themselves vulnerable to men in intimate spaces—all in the name of inclusivity. Snider pointed out that the spa's policy is crafted not only in respect of cultural traditions but also to protect the modesty and comfort of women utilizing the facility.
In a noteworthy contrast during the hearing, Judge Kenneth Lee, appointed by Donald Trump, suggested that the situation is much more nuanced, indicating that the decision is far from black-and-white. His recognition of the complexities involved highlights the significant implications that could arise from a singular judicial perspective that fails to acknowledge women’s rights in favor of political correctness.
As the legal battle rages on, the broader implications of such rulings reflect a growing trend where cultural practices and biological realities are disregarded for the ideologies of a vocal minority. The Ninth Circuit is expected to announce its decision at a later date, but the rhetoric surrounding this case underscores an alarming tendency in our judicial system to equate tradition and safety with oppression and bigotry.
As these cases arise, it is clear that common sense and the rights of women must not be sacrificed on the altar of inclusivity. The fight for women's spaces needs to be defended against the rising tide of ideological extremism, which threatens to erase hard-won rights in the name of progress.
Sources:
thepostmillennial.com
redstate.com
westernjournal.com
In a shocking display of judicial overreach, a federal judge has likened a Korean women-only nude spa in Seattle to the disgraceful era of "whites-only" laws that characterized racial segregation in America.
Judge Margaret McKeown of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals made headlines during a recent hearing involving Olympus Spa, claiming their all-female policy discriminates against individuals based on gender identity. This assertion stands in stark contrast to common sense and the spa's cultural traditions rooted in the Korean practice of jjimjilbang.
McKeown's comments came as the spa appealed a lower court decision which mandated the admission of men who identify as women into their female-only facilities. While addressing arguments made by the spa’s lawyer, Kevin Snider, who defended their policy under First Amendment rights, the judge remarked, “It seems to me they’re quite parallel” to segregation laws based on race.
This comparison is not only unfounded but also an extraordinary example of leftist ideology seeking to undermine fundamental rights. The spa, which accommodates its clientele by prioritizing the safety and comfort of women—including minors—has faced significant pressure from the Washington State Human Rights Commission, which determined that their policy constituted discrimination.
What’s particularly alarming is that women and young girls may soon find themselves vulnerable to men in intimate spaces—all in the name of inclusivity. Snider pointed out that the spa's policy is crafted not only in respect of cultural traditions but also to protect the modesty and comfort of women utilizing the facility.
In a noteworthy contrast during the hearing, Judge Kenneth Lee, appointed by Donald Trump, suggested that the situation is much more nuanced, indicating that the decision is far from black-and-white. His recognition of the complexities involved highlights the significant implications that could arise from a singular judicial perspective that fails to acknowledge women’s rights in favor of political correctness.
As the legal battle rages on, the broader implications of such rulings reflect a growing trend where cultural practices and biological realities are disregarded for the ideologies of a vocal minority. The Ninth Circuit is expected to announce its decision at a later date, but the rhetoric surrounding this case underscores an alarming tendency in our judicial system to equate tradition and safety with oppression and bigotry.
As these cases arise, it is clear that common sense and the rights of women must not be sacrificed on the altar of inclusivity. The fight for women's spaces needs to be defended against the rising tide of ideological extremism, which threatens to erase hard-won rights in the name of progress.
Sources:
thepostmillennial.com
redstate.com
westernjournal.com
Latest News