This is how it is done if you cross a liberal in power folks, especially this particular King….take away the people’s tax dollars from the state!
You need to read the full story to get an appreciation of what is really going on with this one! Although we may not agree with North Carolina’s law in its entirety, it is made clear that the argument focuses on what federal law says, or doesn’t say about discrimination of gays and transgenders. As noted in the story:
“Mr. Forest is correct that federal anti-discrimination laws do not explicitly mention gay and transgender people: the Obama administration has repeatedly called on Congress to pass a law banning discrimination against them in employment decisions. On several occasions, however, the administration has also said that gay, lesbian and transgender people are already covered by laws banning sex discrimination.”
So in getting around the laws to enforce his will, King Obama has obviously directed all Agencies and Departments to research on what they can do to withhold money from the state!
You can bet that next comes the “Big Strong-Arm”…Attorney General Loretta Lynch…because after all she doesn’t have anything important to do on the radar, like charging and prosecuting Hillbilly Hillary for her crimes!
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is considering whether North Carolina’s new law on gay and transgender rights makes the state ineligible for billions of dollars in federal aid for schools, highways and housing, officials said Friday.
Cutting off any federal money — or even simply threatening to do so — would put major new pressure on North Carolina to repeal the law, which eliminated local protections for gay and transgender people and restricted which bathrooms transgender people can use. A loss of federal money could send the state into a budget crisis and jeopardize services that are central to daily life.
Although experts said such a drastic step was unlikely, at least immediately, the administration’s review puts North Carolina on notice that the new law could have financial consequences. Gov. Pat McCrory of North Carolina had assured residents that the law would not jeopardize federal money for education.
But the law also represents a test for the Obama administration, which has declared that the fight for gay and transgender rights is a continuation of the civil rights era. The North Carolina dispute forces the administration to decide how aggressively to fight on that principle.
The North Carolina law created a mandatory statewide anti-discrimination policy, but it did not include specific protections based on sexual orientation or gender identity. The law prohibits transgender people from using public bathrooms that do not match the sexes on their birth certificates.
Anthony Foxx, the secretary of transportation, first raised the prospect of a review of federal funding in public remarks on Tuesday in North Carolina. The Department of Transportation provides roughly $1 billion a year to North Carolina. The New York Times then asked other federal agencies whether they were conducting similar reviews.
A Department of Education spokeswoman, Dorie Nolt, said on Friday that her agency was also reviewing the North Carolina law “to determine any potential impact on the state’s federal education funding.” She added, “We will not hesitate to act if students’ civil rights are being violated.”
The agency said it provided $4.3 billion to North Carolina last year for kindergarten through 12th grade as well as colleges.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development said it was doing a similar evaluation. “We’re reviewing the effects of the law on HUD funding allocated for North Carolina,” said Cameron French, a department spokesman.
White House officials had no comment.
Any decision on federal aid would take time, experts said. Federal agencies have successfully used the threat of lost money to pressure a handful of municipal governments in California and Illinois to change their policies and allow transgender students to use the restrooms of the gender they identify. There is no recent precedent for the federal government applying similar pressure to address a state law that it sees as discriminatory.