Are there two states for two people?
Back in March 2021, New Jersey Democrat Governor Phil Murphy signed the “LGBTQI+ Senior Bill of Rights."
Under the bill, residents at long-term care facilities cannot be discriminated against based on their gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation or HIV status.
Specifically, the bill gives residents the right to request a room not based on gender and prohibits forbidding residents from using restrooms based on gender.
In simple terms, this requires long-term care facilities to permit a transgender woman (who is a biologically male) to share a room with a woman.
Moreover, the bill prohibits the facility from disclosing to the roomates whether the new resident is transgender.
Apparently, state prisons get different treatment, the Appellate Division has recently ruled.
The case involves "Dory," an incarcerated transgender person who currently identifies as female. She was initially housed in 2011 in a men's correctional facility. In August 2020 she was transferred to Edna Mahan Correctional Facility, a woman's correctional facility after she informed the New Jersey Department of Corrections (DOC) she identified as a transgender woman and wished to be housed consistent with her gender identity.
In April 2022, prison staff learned that, while housed in the woman's correctional facility, Dory got two female inmates pregnant. In response, On June 24, 2022, Dory was transferred back to the men's correctional facility.
Dory appealed DOC's decision to the Appellate Division, arguing it was arbitrary and capricious and discriminatory towards her as a transgender woman to not permit her to reside in a female prison.
In a written ruling note released, Appellate Judges Sabatino, Berdote Byrne, and Jacobs affirmed DOC's decision.
With respect to the first factor, the DOC has "complete discretion in determining an inmate's place of confinement." Smith v. N.J. Dep't of Corr.
A correctional facility's decision to house a transgender inmate who identifies as female in a men's facility does not automatically violate the duty to prevent harm. See Richardson v. District of Columbia.
Considering these facts in their totality, their decision to transfer Dory out of EMCF was reasonable and based on her safety concerns at EMCF as well as the correctional facility's security concerns... The DOC's decision.. was not arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable.
So, there you have it. Gov. Murphy made it unlawful for long-term care facilities to say "only men permitted in this room," however, Murphy's state prisons don't have the same requirement.
To join the FAA News WhatsApp Status, click here.
No comments:
Post a Comment