Staff Reports
Once again, the California court system has drawn attention for organizing a controversial activist training session centered on pronouns and "gender identity" for judges. It's incredulous, but the Superior Court of Santa Cruz County deemed it appropriate to host a training session featuring a speaker named Tristan E.H. Higgins, purportedly a "DEI" (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) expert. The aim? To shape judges' perspectives through the lens of gender ideology, transforming courtrooms into arenas of ideological discourse rather than bastions of justice and fairness.
The event claimed to equip judges and legal professionals with an understanding of gender identity issues within the courtroom. However, the question arises – why divert judges' attention and taxpayer dollars towards matters of pronouns when their primary focus should be upholding the law and ensuring justice prevails? This training appears more like a guise for virtue signaling than a genuine effort to enhance legal proficiency.
California Court Enlisted ‘Diversity’ Activist To Train Judges On Preferred Pronouns, Gender Identity
— Rob (@_ROB_29) February 2, 2024
To add to the incredulity, Higgins' presentation purportedly delineated over 20 "types of gender," challenging the foundational principles of biology and common sense. The training suggested that judges should refrain from using conventional honorifics like Ms., Mr., or Mx. Instead, they were encouraged to adopt gender-neutral titles such as "plaintiff, witness, party, counsel, litigant, juror." This raises the question – should court proceedings prioritize linguistic niceties over evidence and legal principles?
The absurdity of the training extends further. It outlined discussions on how judges and attorneys should inquire about litigants' pronouns, address those with unknown gender identities, and handle situations where individuals are deliberately misgendered in the courtroom. Are courtrooms transforming into support groups rather than arenas for legal proceedings? Judges, burdened with the responsibility of maintaining a fair trial and safeguarding the rights of all parties, should not be drawn into the complexities of "pronoun politics."
This training epitomizes the left's preoccupation with political correctness, embodying their relentless pursuit to reshape reality. GianCarlo Canaparo, a Senior Legal Fellow at the Heritage Foundation, aptly described DEI training as "profoundly ideological and partisan." It is an accurate characterization as these sessions jeopardize the impartiality of judges and inadvertently endorse discrimination in the name of equality. It's high time to cease these diversions and refocus on the paramount principles that should guide our courts – upholding the rule of law and protecting the rights of all Americans, irrespective of their gender identity.
