{"id":2637108,"date":"2026-07-29T08:40:57","date_gmt":"2026-07-29T12:40:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/utm_sourcerssutm_mediumrssutm_campaignwhen-judges-cave-to-preferred-pronouns-they-surrender-ultimate-truth\/"},"modified":"2026-07-29T08:48:57","modified_gmt":"2026-07-29T12:48:57","slug":"utm_sourcerssutm_mediumrssutm_campaignwhen-judges-cave-to-preferred-pronouns-they-surrender-ultimate-truth","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/utm_sourcerssutm_mediumrssutm_campaignwhen-judges-cave-to-preferred-pronouns-they-surrender-ultimate-truth\/","title":{"rendered":"When Judges Cave To &#8216;Preferred Pronouns&#8217; They Surrender Truth"},"content":{"rendered":"<aside class=\"mashsb-container mashsb-main mashsb-stretched\"><div class=\"mashsb-box\"><div class=\"mashsb-count mash-medium\" style=\"&quot;\"><div class=\"counts mashsbcount\">18<\/div><span class=\"mashsb-sharetext\">SHARES<\/span><\/div><div class=\"mashsb-buttons\"><a class=\"mashicon-facebook mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservativenewsdaily.net%2Fbreaking-news%2Futm_sourcerssutm_mediumrssutm_campaignwhen-judges-cave-to-preferred-pronouns-they-surrender-ultimate-truth%2F\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Facebook<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-twitter mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/intent\/tweet?text=&amp;url=https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/?p=2637108&amp;via=ConservNewsDly\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Twitter<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-subscribe mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"#\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Subscribe<\/span><\/a><div class=\"onoffswitch2 mash-medium mashsb-noshadow\" style=\"display:none\"><\/div><\/div>\n            <\/div>\n                <div style=\"clear:both\"><\/div><\/aside>\n            <!-- Share buttons by mashshare.net - Version: 4.0.47--><p>On the final day of the Supreme Court\u2019s 2025 Term, the Court upheld that laws allowing states like West Virginia and Idaho to reserve women\u2019s and girls\u2019 sports for biological females are valid. The majority based it&#8217;s decision on two key points: that Title IX supports separate sports teams by sex, and that these laws do not violate the Fourteenth Amendment\u2019s Equal Protection Clause. The case featured multiple opinions, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/planned-parenthood-dragged-so-hard-for-abortion-is-healthcare-meme-they-shut-down-replies\/\" title=\"Planned Parenthood Faces Backlash Over &#039;Abortion Is Healthcare&#039; Meme, Disables Comments\">highlighting differing views<\/a> on how judges should refer to transgender litigants.Some,including most justices,used neutral or initial-based references and emphasized biological facts,while Justice Sotomayor used female pronouns and Justice Thomas emphasized biological distinctions,criticizing the idea that gender identity should override biological reality.<\/p>\n<p>The article argues that judges should use pronouns based on biological sex rather than gender identity to preserve judicial integrity and resist ideological pressures.it stresses that the judiciary\u2019s role is to apply the law impartially and truthfully,rather than conform language to personal or political beliefs. The piece warns that accommodating gender ideologies through language-such as mandatory pronouns- risks eroding the foundation of rational discourse and legal clarity.It criticizes efforts to enshrine gender identity into federal policies and highlights how incremental steps toward affirmation become mandates, ultimately threatening free speech and the recognition of biological facts.The author advocates for courts to reject compelled pronoun use that denies biological realities, emphasizing that respecting individuals does not require endorsing falsehoods, and that courts must speak the law based on truth to uphold the principles of self-government.  <\/p>\n<p class=\"readmore\">\n    <button onclick=\"showReadMore()\" id=\"readmorebtn\">Read more&#8230;<\/button>\n<\/p>\n<hr id=\"line\">\n<span id=\"more\"><\/p>\n<div>\n<p>On the final day of the Supreme Court\u2019s 2025 Term, it delivered a resounding victory for biological reality. In <a href=\"https:\/\/www.supremecourt.gov\/opinions\/25pdf\/24-43_2b35.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\"><em>West Virginia v. B.P.J. and Little v. Hecox<\/em><\/a>, the court allowed West Virginia and Idaho to reserve women\u2019s and girls\u2019 sports for biological females.<\/p>\n<p>The majority reached this outcome on two grounds. First, a unanimous court held that Title IX\u2019s <a href=\"https:\/\/amzn.to\/3YuVZYV\" >sports regulations authorize separate teams<\/a> for each sex in competitive and contact sports. Second, the majority held that the state laws complied with the Fourteenth Amendment\u2019s Equal Protection Clause.<\/p>\n<p>As part of the decision, the justices produced five separate opinions debating several nuanced legal questions. Beneath these is a smaller fight with enormous consequences: the words judges use to describe transgender litigants.<\/p>\n<p>The opinions reveal three distinct approaches. The majority of justices referred to the plaintiff by initials (\u201cB.P.J.\u201d) and described the plaintiff as a \u201cbiological male who identifies as female.\u201d In contrast, Justice Sonia Sotomayor\u2019s dissent used female pronouns. Justice Clarence Thomas firmly stated that \u201c[m]en and boys with gender dysphoria are not women or girls, even if they believe that they are.\u201d Thus, the opinions presented a spectrum of responses in the transgender debate: avoidance, affirmation, and rebuke.<\/p>\n<p>Ultimately, this split poses a fundamental question: how should federal judges address transgender litigants? The correct answer is Justice Thomas\u2019s approach. Judges should use the litigants\u2019 biological pronouns and reject the semantic games of the transgender movement\u2019s pronoun regime. Doing so upholds the role of judging and supplies resistance to the transgender movement\u2019s hostile takeover of American institutions.<\/p>\n<h2>Judges Must Apply the Law to Facts<\/h2>\n<p>The role of a judge is to impartially apply the law to relevant facts.\u00a0Inviting warped realities into that analysis defeats this purpose.<\/p>\n<p>This approach aligns with the Founders\u2019 vision for an independent judiciary and of the role of a judge. In <a href=\"https:\/\/constitutioncenter.org\/the-constitution\/historic-document-library\/detail\/alexander-hamilton-federalist-no-78-1788\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Federalist 78<\/a>, Hamilton explains that an independent judiciary \u2014 wielding \u201cneither force nor will, but merely judgment\u201d \u2014 is \u201crequisite to guard the Constitution.\u201d The judge is thus an arbiter of legal truth. A court that makes language conform to a litigant\u2019s erroneous claim of identity abandons that duty.<\/p>\n<p>Courts have sometimes used preferred pronouns as a <a href=\"https:\/\/clearinghouse.net\/case\/17376\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">courtesy<\/a>. But courtesy is discretionary. And in this realm of discretion, judges must never subordinate their fundamental obligation to the truth to personal politeness.<\/p>\n<p>Giving a practical example of this principle, the Fifth Circuit reached the same conclusion in <a href=\"https:\/\/www.ca5.uscourts.gov\/opinions\/pub\/19\/19-40016-CR0.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\"><em>United States v. Varner<\/em><\/a>. There, the court denied a request of a litigant to be addressed with female pronouns.<\/p>\n<p>Writing for the majority, Judge Kyle Duncan explained that no federal statute or rule requires judges, court personnel, or other litigants to use pronouns matching a litigant\u2019s gender identity. Justice Thomas\u2019s approach is therefore a clear application of an existing principle: courtesy may guide a judge\u2019s tone, but it cannot dictate the court\u2019s account of reality.<\/p>\n<h2>Preventing a Hostile Takeover By False Ideology<\/h2>\n<p>Adopting Justice Thomas\u2019s approach also supplies resistance to the transgender movement\u2019s hostile takeover of American institutions. The <em>Varner<\/em> scenario is the judicial front of this campaign, and the examples behind it show it has no limiting principle. <\/p>\n<p>Consider the progression that has happened over the years. The first step began with the soft language of accommodation. For example, a <a href=\"https:\/\/uwm.edu\/lgbtrc\/support-resources\/gender-pronouns\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">university pronoun guide<\/a> lists forms such as \u201cze\u201d and \u201cxem,\u201d along with similar pronoun inventions. Each measure seems small, yet teaches all within the institution to treat self-declaration as authoritative. Once that premise is accepted, the vocabulary expands.<\/p>\n<p>From there, benign accommodation mutates into enforcement. For example, New York City\u2019s human-rights \u201c<a href=\"https:\/\/www.nyc.gov\/site\/cchr\/law\/legal-guidances-gender-identity-expression.page#3.1\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">guidance<\/a>\u201d treats refusal to use a preferred name or pronoun as evidence of discrimination in employment and public accommodations. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission\u2019s 2024 harassment \u201c<a href=\"https:\/\/www.eeoc.gov\/newsroom\/eeoc-commission-votes-rescind-2024-harassment-guidance\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">guidance<\/a>\u201d took a similar path by treating repeated intentional use of pronouns inconsistent with a person\u2019s gender identity as potential workplace harassment before the agency voted to rescind the policy.<\/p>\n<p>The federal government also tried to write gender identity into Title IX. The Department of Education\u2019s <a href=\"https:\/\/www.ed.gov\/media\/document\/title-ix-final-rule-summary-33970.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">2024 Title IX rule<\/a> defined sex discrimination to include gender identity before a federal court <a href=\"https:\/\/www.aalrr.com\/newsroom-alerts-4101\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">vacated<\/a> the rule.<\/p>\n<p>Taken individually, each measure is presented as a small accommodation. Taken together, they are a mandate to affirm what is false. Thus, pronouns become a low-cost, high-reward instrument of power. The claimant announces a vocabulary; the institution assumes the work of enforcement; then everyone else bears the cost of dissent.<\/p>\n<p>This is deeply troubling for the future of our country. Dialogue cannot exist when language is distorted. Words like \u201cman\u201d and \u201cwoman,\u201d and \u201cboy\u201d and \u201cgirl,\u201d assert biological truths. But when those words become meaningless, constructive disagreement dissipates since people cannot even agree on foundational premises that should be self-evident.<\/p>\n<p>However, other judges, like Justice Thomas and Judge Duncan, demonstrate how to stand in the way of this erasure of the American practice of reasoned self-government through the means of free speech.<\/p>\n<p>Judges have a duty that ordinary citizens do not always have. In a pronoun dispute, a private person might choose evasive language to avoid conflict at work. However, a court speaks with public authority. Its words settle disputes and create precedent. So if courts cave to the transgender movement, they give the compulsory pronoun regime the prestige of law. But if courts refuse, they mark a clear boundary that other institutions can replicate.<\/p>\n<p>This is why courts should firmly reject motions asking judges to call a male \u201cshe\u201d or a female \u201che\u201d in the court\u2019s voice. They should also never force litigants or lawyers to repeat words that contradict biological sex.<\/p>\n<p>To be clear, no litigant should be mocked. Indeed, the court in <em>B.P.J. <\/em>agreed litigants should not be \u201costracized or vilified.\u201d However, respect does not require affirming blatant fantasies. The law can protect persons from abuse while refusing to conscript others into a lie.<\/p>\n<p>Courts exist to say what the law is. That duty begins with saying what is true.<\/p>\n<hr>\n<p>      Jimmy Murphy is a law student at the University of Notre Dame and a future law clerk on  the Fifth Circuit. His conservative commentary has been featured in outlets such as The  American Thinker, The American Spectator, The Washington Times, and elsewhere.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<p><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court affirms biological sex in sports and law<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4375,"featured_media":2637109,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mo_disable_npp":"","fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/Copy-of-Copy-of-CORRECT-Twitter-template-1-2026-07-28T155403.822.png","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[33651],"tags":[83373,83371,79900,83372],"class_list":["post-2637108","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-the-western-journal","tag-freeexpression","tag-judicialbias","tag-legalethics","tag-pronoundebate"],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/Copy-of-Copy-of-CORRECT-Twitter-template-1-2026-07-28T155403.822.png","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2637108","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4375"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2637108"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2637108\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2637112,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2637108\/revisions\/2637112"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2637109"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2637108"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2637108"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2637108"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}