WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2026 Poal.co

1.0K

New federal regulations that would effectively force employers and employees to use transgender pronouns are illegal, says a lawsuit filed by 18 states against the Democrat-run executive agency.

Filed on Monday in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee, the lawsuit brought by Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti and 17 other attorneys general contends that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC’s) unilateral move to extend the 1964 Civil Rights Act’s Title VII protections to include so-called “gender identity” represents an unlawful attempt to “enshrine sweeping gender-identity mandates without congressional consent.”

“In America, the Constitution gives the power to make laws to the people’s elected representatives, not to unaccountable commissioners, and this EEOC guidance is an attack on our constitutional separation of powers,” Skrmetti said in a statement. “When, as here, a federal agency engages in government over the people instead of government by the people, it undermines the legitimacy of our laws and alienates Americans from our legal system.”

[Source.](https://thefederalist.com/2024/05/14/democrats-cant-force-employees-to-use-transgender-pronouns-18-state-lawsuit-says/) > New federal regulations that would effectively force employers and employees to use transgender pronouns are illegal, says a lawsuit filed by 18 states against the Democrat-run executive agency. > Filed on Monday in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee, the lawsuit brought by Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti and 17 other attorneys general contends that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC’s) unilateral move to extend the 1964 Civil Rights Act’s Title VII protections to include so-called “gender identity” represents an unlawful attempt to “enshrine sweeping gender-identity mandates without congressional consent.” > “In America, the Constitution gives the power to make laws to the people’s elected representatives, not to unaccountable commissioners, and this EEOC guidance is an attack on our constitutional separation of powers,” Skrmetti said in a statement. “When, as here, a federal agency engages in government over the people instead of government by the people, it undermines the legitimacy of our laws and alienates Americans from our legal system.”

(post is archived)

[–] 2 pts

Do any of the pronoun freaks have a problem with 'you/your'? It's getting to where the safest thing to do is use the person's name instead of 'give it to him', say 'give it to {NAME}.' But even that pisses me off because I'd have to be careful not to use he or she all day in the office. I avoided interaction with the obvious tall fucker man in women's shoes with long hair and makeup last meeting. I don't want to know his pronouns or his made up name. He is a he and I just don't want to participate in discussions anymore.

[–] 1 pt

Repeat after me: "I have a sincerely held religious belief that sex cannot be changed, and that I am not to bear false witness. Therefore it is my sincerely held religious belief that I must use pronouns truthfully in accordance with birth. If you have any further questions, please refer to the 1964 Civil Rights Act."

If they fire you, file an EEOC complaint and lawyer up because you just won the lottery.

[–] 0 pt

So carbon dioxide is no longer a pollutant?