The Washington Post apparently knows when it’s appropriate to completely omit a majority viewpoint from a news story: when an Obama-appointed U.S. district judge in California orders “sex reassignment surgery” for a murderer because denying an expensive surgery on the taxpayer dime is a denial of “her” constitutional rights.
Lindsey Beyer reported that Jeffrey Norsworthy, who now identifies as “Michelle,” is creating a real problem for prison officials:
In 1987, Norsworthy was convicted of murder and sentenced to life behind bars. She is now being held at an all-male prison called Mule Creek State Prison, some 40 miles from Sacramento. Officials have argued that if she has the surgery, keeping her in that facility — or any men’s prison — could put her at risk for sexual assault. Moving her to a women’s prison, they said, could put her or other inmates at risk because she has a history of domestic violence, the AP reported.
But Judge Tigar is narrowly concerned about the murderer’s “medical” well-being:
U.S. District Court Judge Jon S. Tigar in San Francisco said on Thursday that the department denied her request for sex reassignment surgery, or SRS, likely because it has a policy against approving it as a treatment for transgender inmates. He granted a preliminary injunction, telling the prison system to let her have the operation “as promptly as possible.”
“The weight of the evidence demonstrates that for Norsworthy, the only adequate medical treatment for her gender dysphoria is SRS, that the decision not to address her persistent symptoms was medically unacceptable under the circumstances, and that [California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation] denied her the necessary treatment for reasons unrelated to her medical need,” Tigar wrote in his ruling. Denying her the surgery, he said, would violate her constitutional rights.
Beyer did not include the note that Tigar was selected by Team Obama in 2012. In the liberal bow for sensitivity, Beyer gave repeated nods to the biased “experts” at the Transgender Law Center, but nothing for anyone who would say it’s an outrage to spend as much as $100,000 on “reassignment surgery” for a murderer.
The Los Angeles Times wouldn’t allow any dissent either.
