Texas AG Ken Paxton sues Biden admin over LGBTQ policies he falsely claims put ‘women and children at risk’
Ken Paxton (Screen Shot)

Teas Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton, running for re-election, on Monday sued the Biden administration in litigation falsely attacking LGBTQ people.

Paxton filed a lawsuit in a federal court seen as a friendly pipeline to the Supreme Court, over LGBTQ-related Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) guidance, and even used the litigation to prop up a far right wing conspiracy theorist, who is also running for re-election. EEOC Commissioner Charlotte Burrows and Attorney General Merrick Garland are named as defendants.

The EEOC "guidance misstates the law, increasing the scope of liability for the State in its capacity as an employer," Paxton claims in the lawsuit, as Bloomberg Law reports.

But as Courthouse News' David Lee reports, the Paxton lawsuit also relies on old, false, and bigoted tropes about transgender people, saying allowing them to use restrooms that correspond to their gender identity, "puts many women and children at risk."

A June 2020 landmark Supreme Court found that sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination is sex discrimination. The Biden Equal Employment Opportunity Commission used that ruling to form policy that mandates workplace guidance, including on who can use which restrooms.

Curiously, and for no discernible reason, Paxton's lawsuit also promotes the Texas Dept. of Agriculture (TDA), which is headed by conspiracy theorist Sid Miller.

“TDA has both unisex single-occupancy bathrooms and bathrooms that are designated by sex. It interprets 'sex' as referring to biological sex rather than gender identity," the lawsuit says. “If any employee wanted to use the bathrooms designated for the opposite sex, TDA would reject such a request."

Paxton has a long and ugly history of attacking transgender people.

Newsweek adds that Paxton's lawsuit "says that the TDA interprets sex to mean biological sex, rather than gender identity. The complaint says, 'If any employee dressed as a member of the opposite sex, TDA would consider such conduct to be a violation of its standards.'"

It also says the TDA would reject requests for "any employee wanted to use the bathrooms designated for the opposite sex" or any employee who "wanted TDA to require other employees to use pronouns based on gender identity."