Exclusive: Transgender Groups Mute Their Opposition to Amy Coney Barrett

Democrats and transgender groups are muting their strong opposition to Amy Coney Barrett, even though she may shift the court’s sex-related rulings back to the mainstream, says Terry Schilling, an advocate who is running a campaign to block the transgender ideology.

“They’re not going bring up [the idea of] gender identity in these hearings because they know that the American people aren’t with them,” said Schilling, the director of the American Principles Project.

If confirmed to the Supreme Court, Coney Barrett may help protect the mainstream legal and civic recognition that men and women are different, equal, and complementary, but not interchangeable, he told Breitbart News:

Being a strict constitutionalist means letting the American people decide these issues, like gender identity and LGBT rights and all of that. That’s what being a strict constitutionalist means. It means that people are deciding it. And as a strict constitutionalist, she’s gonna let the people, decide not the courts.

In June, the court’s four progressives allied with Justice Neil Gorsuch to jointly establish the transgender ideology’s demand that each person’s fluid feeling of gender be more important in law and culture that their male or female biology.

But Gorsuch was was only able to write the Bostock v. Clayton County decision with the fifth vote of now-deceased Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Coney Barrett is expected to get Ginsburg’s vote once she is confirmed.

“It’s not unreasonable to think that Title IX [sex discrimination in sports] will be challenged in regard to the states allowing boys to compete on girls’ athletic teams due to their perceived gender identity,'”  said Schilling.

“I could see Amy Cony Barrett working with someone like Neil Gorsuch — who was ruled against conservatives, against the constitutionalists on the Bostock decision regarding gender identity — and I could see her being persuasive on that issue,” he said.

The transgender activists are also trying to minimize media coverage of transgender demands in the 2020 election, Schilling said, adding:

The thing about the Democrats and the left in general is they do have a lot more discipline and they do follow orders more. The conservatives are much harder to keep in line. The conservatives are kind of like trying to herd cats. But Democrats are very top-down. The money flows from the top and it goes all the groups to the bottom and they all just take their orders.

A September poll conducted by a feminist group showed overwhelming public opposition to the ideology’s demand that children be allowed to permanently alter their bodies in a futile effort to change their sex. The same poll showed overwhelming opposition to the transgender demand that society must agree that boys can be girls in girls’ athletic competitions.

The well-funded pro-diversity, pro-transgender movement sharply opposes Barrett’s confirmation. The groups have posted their opposition — but show no sign of mounting a major effort to block the appointment, said Schilling.

“Amy Coney Barrett’s judicial record and public statements are clear,” said an October 12 statement from the Transgender Legal Defense & Education Fund. The fund continued:

She has expressed opposition to basic protections for transgender people, and sought to undermine decades of case law protecting fair employment and access to health care. Judge Barrett has also misgendered transgender girls and women and perhaps most disturbingly, she has targeted transgender children. None of this comes as a shock when you consider her affiliations. Judge Barrett has cozied up to groups that fan the flames of anti-transgender rhetoric and aspire for transgender people to simply not exist.

On October 6, a progressive coalition group, dubbed “The Leadership Conference on Civil and Hum­­­­an Rights,” slammed Barrett’s for her skepticism towards the transgender ideology’s claims:

Judge Barrett opined that the sex discrimination provisions of Title IX should not extend to transgender people.  Discussing a case that had come before the Supreme Court about whether a transgender student should be permitted to use the restroom that correlated with his gender identity, Judge Barrett said “it does seem to strain the text of the statute to say that Title IX demands it.” She said that if policymakers want to add gender identity to Title IX, they should amend the statute.

The group noted Barrett’s views contradict Gorsuch’s gender-beats-biology claim in Bostock:

Her position is in direct contradiction to the Supreme Court’s text-based interpretation of an analogous statute, Title VII, in Bostock v. Clayton County, where the Court ruled 6-3 that the prohibition of employment discrimination on the basis of “sex” should be read to include gender identity and sexual orientation.

A lawyer at the pro-transgender group, Lambda Legal, wrote October 6:

Alarmingly, Judge Coney Barrett has referred to transgender women as “physiological males” and made public statements against same-sex marriage. Other Trump appointed judges have also gone out of their way to refer to trans plaintiffs as “gender dysphoric” or refuse to use correct pronouns, in referring to a trans person or misgender them, while ruling against trans people.

“ACB made clear that she doesn’t think Title IX applies to trans people,” said Chase Strangio, a transgender lawyer with the ACLU. “I think she is to the right of [former Justice Antonin] Scalia,’ he said in a September tweet.

“.Judge Barrett has … also argued that Title IX protections, the cornerstone of equality in our education system, shouldn’t apply to transgender students,” said an October 8 tweet from the account of Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the top Democrat on the Senate’s judiciary panel.

Numerous polls show Americans are not hostile to individuals who claim to be transgender, but are overwhelmingly opposed to the very far-reaching political demands of the aggressive transgender movement.