Ninth Circuit judges rebuke colleague’s vulgar dissent in transgender discrimination case involving Washington spa
The Facts
- The full Ninth Circuit declined to rehear (en banc) the Olympus Spa v. Armstrong case.
- Judge Lawrence VanDyke wrote a dissent from the denial of rehearing that used the phrase “this is a case about swinging dicks.”
- After VanDyke’s dissent, a large group of Ninth Circuit judges issued written rebukes/responses criticizing the dissent’s coarse or vulgar language.
- The dispute involves Olympus Spa, described as a women-only Korean spa in Washington state, and its refusal to serve a transgender woman.
- The spa argued that Washington state’s anti-discrimination law (and its enforcement) violated the spa’s constitutional rights.
- VanDyke is an appointee of President Donald Trump.
Context
What was the court decision that prompted the dissent and rebukes?
The Ninth Circuit declined to rehear the case en banc, leaving in place earlier rulings that rejected the spa’s lawsuit challenging Washington’s anti-discrimination enforcement. Reuters,Talking Points Memo,Reason
What language drew criticism from other judges?
VanDyke’s dissent opened with the phrase “this is a case about swinging dicks,” which multiple reports describe as unusually crude for a judicial opinion and which triggered written responses from many colleagues. Reuters,Reason,news.bloomberglaw.c…
What is the underlying dispute about Olympus Spa?
The case centers on a women-only spa in Washington state and whether the state can enforce its anti-discrimination law in connection with the spa’s refusal of service to a transgender woman; the spa contended the enforcement violated its constitutional rights. Reuters,Talking Points Memo,news.bloomberglaw.c…
The receipts — all 18 sources
Wire services (1)
Independent coverage (17)
Facts first. Then every angle.
The day’s biggest stories in one short brief — the facts everyone agrees on, then the competing values behind the headlines. Free in your inbox.