Judge who loves ‘preferred’ pronouns refuses to let women appeal trans case
A federal judge whose biased courtroom policy – he routinely orders case participants to use “preferred” pronouns demanded by the leftist transgender agenda – has refused to let women athletes involved in a dispute over a promotion of transgenderism appeal.
The fight involves S. Kato Crews, who is paid as a federal judge in Colorado. He’s hearing a case involving women athletes against the Mountain West Conference over its decision to allow a man, Blaire Fleming, to compete on the women’s team in the conference.
The update comes from Cowboy State Daily, which noted that multiple women from the University of Wyoming are involved.
Crews routinely orders those in his court to use “preferred” pronouns for participants. That could be the totally inaccurate “she” or “her” for a man.
The women bringing the action against the conference asked him to recuse from the case, as his courtroom demeanor suggested he had prejudged the case. He refused.
They asked to appeal. And he refused again.
He claimed that he was allowing an exception for the women in this legal fight, so there were no grounds to appeal.
The underlying fight is over Fleming, and his presence on the women’s team for San Jose State University’s volleyball team.
“Eleven current and former collegiate athletes and one SJSU volleyball coach on Nov. 13 sued the Mountain West Conference, and SJSU and its umbrella organization in the federal U.S. District Court for Colorado,” the report explained.
Wyoming forfeited two of its games against San Jose State University because of the man’s participation on the women’s team. Several other teams also forfeited.
The report noted, “Crews maintains a rule requiring the use of ‘preferred’ pronouns for transgender people referenced in his court.”
The women argued that he should not hear the case, as he has shown he “has pre-judged the case and its question of whether a transgender volleyball player is a woman under the law.”
The response from Crews, over his refusal to allow an appeal, was that he said he waived the pronoun requirement for participants in this case.
The judge turned sarcastic in his response to the women athletes, stating, “Rather than operating under the purported ‘stigmas’ and ‘specters,’ the Court encourages Plaintiffs to take ‘yes’ for an answer. Countless times now, the Court has told Plaintiffs they may use whatever pronouns they choose in these proceedings. They’ve done so from the start. They’ve done so without sanction or admonishment from the Court.”
However, his answer did not address the fact that his ordinary courtroom standards include the “pronoun” requirement, leaving still standing the perception of his bias.
The judge also claimed his rules that benefit one side of the transgender arguments do not suggest a pre-judgment.
The case will now proceed in the district court where it was filed.