Tony Perkins of the conservative Family Research Council says the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to return to a lower court a case regarding a transgender student born female who wants to use boys' bathrooms at school is "good news" for those opposed to boys and girls showering together.
"The Supreme Court has provided good news to parents and students concerned about privacy and safety in school showers, locker rooms and bathrooms," Perkins said in a statement on Monday.
"In light of [former President Barack] Obama's edict being withdrawn and this case now remanded, we are cautiously optimistic that the Fourth Circuit Court of appeals will reverse itself," he added.
"As the Fourth Circuit stated in its earlier opinion, it would 'leave policy formulation to the political branches,' for 'the weighing of privacy interests or safety concerns' was not to be left 'to the courts.'"
The Supreme Court had initially agreed to hear an appeal in the case of Gloucester County School Board v. Gavin Grimm, which concerns Gimms' lawsuit against the Virginia public school and its policy requiring students to use facilities corresponding to their birth sex.
On Monday, the highest court decided to return the case back to the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, however, given that President Donald Trump's administration has overturned Obama's guidance, thus changing the legal landscape for the case.
Perkins interpreted that policymakers and the Supreme Court "are increasingly skeptical of the federal government forcing boys and girls to shower together, room together on school trips, and use the same locker rooms and bathrooms."
"The American people have shown at the ballot box that they want to get away from Washington bureaucrats imposing a one-size fits all policy. State and local officials working together with parents are best equipped to design policies that respect the dignity, privacy, and safety concerns of all students," the FRC president added.
Josh Brock, senior staff attorney for the LGBT Project of the American Civil Liberties Union, argued that transgender students like 17-year-old Grimms will suffer as a result of this delay.
"What's really unfortunate is that there's going to be so many trans kids held in limbo in the meantime, suffering some pretty significant consequences from the delay," Brock told Yahoo News.
"This is just a procedural delay, not a merits ruling by any means. It just means the Supreme Court wants to wait for the Fourth Circuit to rule on the issue first before deciding it themselves. That's not unusual" he added.
Ed Whelan, a legal expert and president of the Ethics and Public Policy Center of the National Review, warned that the case is not closed yet.
"What this means is that the Fourth Circuit's badly confused ruling has been wiped out: It is no longer binding precedent in the Fourth Circuit, nor should it be cited by any other court," Whelan said.