Rooms, and public shower facilities. This was not a North Carolina state agenda. No one in North Carolina was talking about bathroom policy until the Charlotte City council imposed in mandate on private businesses. Required with accessal penalty or find to restrooms, showers facilities the based upon ones gender identity or gender expression. Rejected policy was just months earlier by the voters of houston, texas by 61 of the vote. This caused major privacy malesns about amles entering female facilities or females entering male facilities. Our state legislature believed this was an unnecessary government overreach into the private sector, imposing regulations and impacting ones personal privacy. And this Legislature Governor also believed that guidelines needed to be put in place because of this new public buildings,overnment our schools and rest stops, to ensure privacy and expectation privacy for everyone. Just five days ago, the u. S. Department of justice sent letters to my office, the department of public safety, and to the University System suggesting that having Government Employees use the bathroom, locker room, or shower facility that corresponds to their biological sex is in conflict with federal policy. The department of justice asks all parties to set aside the constitutional duty and refuse to follow or enforce our state law. This was a substantial request with very serious implications. The u. S. Government gave us a mere three Business Days to respond to this letter. We asked the department of justice for additional time but they refused unless i made a statement where i would publicly agree with their interpretation of federal law and if i did, they would give me one additional week to respond. I could not agree with that because i do not agree with their interpretation of federal law. That is why this morning i have asked a federal court to clarify what the law actually is. Now, i anticipate our own legislature, other private sector entities from throughout the United States and possibly other states to join us in seeking this clarification because this is not just a North Carolina issue, this is now a National Issue and an issue which imposes new law on every private sector employer throughout the United States of america. We believe a court, rather than a federal agency, should tell our state, our nation and employers across the country what the law requires. And let me say something. Our nation is one nation, especially when it comes to fighting discrimination, which i support wholeheartedly. Ultimately, i think its time for the u. S. Congress to bring clarity to our national antidiscrimination provisions under title vii and title ix. Let me repeat that one more time to all of our u. S. Representatives and the leaders of both the republican and democratic parties in congress. Ultimately, think its time for the u. S. Congress to bring clarity to our national antidiscrimination provisions under title vii and title ix. Right now, the Obama Administration is bypassing congress by attempting to rewrite the law and set basic restroom policies, locker room policies and even shower policies for public and private employers across the country, not just North Carolina. Now, i am still asking the North Carolina legislature to reinstatement the ability to sue for wrongful termination for discrimination in state court. I encourage them to do this and do it quickly. I also welcome additional dialogue with the city of charlotte and our state legislature which has been ongoing for the past week and i want to ensure the people of our state and our country that North Carolina has long held traditions of ensuring equality. The majority of our citizens in this great state and this governor did not seek out this issue. However, the state of North Carolina and this governor welcome the opportunity to be part of the solution for all of the states and especially our nation, the greatest nation, the United States of america. Thank you very much. Everybody hear me . Good. The question im bob stephens. Im governor mccrorys general counsel. Its a ph, thank you for answering. The question that was just asked of me was why was a claim under title ix not asserted in this lawsuit and the answer to that is, the title ix issue was raised against the University System, not directed towards the governor, nor was it directed towards the department of public safety. Those are the two claims that we addressed in our lawsuit. The University System will make their own decisions about what they want to do with that title ix issue. [inaudible question] do not know. My understanding is the board of governors is meeting tomorrow and my assumption is they will take that up then and make a decision. [inaudible question] in the graham case. They have not. Its important to note that. What happened in the Fourth Circuit case, a split panel, 21, made a decision that the District Court, the lower court, had used the wrong evidentiary standard in deciding the case and that split panel was to send the decision back to the District Court to have the trial over again so no mandate was issued to the District Court. District court has not conducted any further proceedings. And until that happens, it is not the law in the federal court, nor is it the law in North Carolina. Second, we now know that the defendants in that case have petitioned the Fourth Circuit for a hearing before the full Fourth Circuit, all 15 judges. That petition was filed that stayed everything opportunity this point. The Fourth Circuit has not yet ruled on that. Until the Fourth Circuit rules, thats not the law of North Carolina. And in fact, what youll see in our complaint is there is no law in North Carolina that answers some of the questions that we are raising. Thats why weve gone to the court to try to get the court to do it. [inaudible question] we you cant tell you. Ill give you i cant give you even an estimate. Thats going to depend on what the other side does in this case. I was a litigator for 40 years before i became the governors general counsel and i learned early on you cant you cant really anticipate whats going to happen. We believe that this should be decided on motions. We believe it should be decided very quickly and we hope it will be decided very inexpensively. Is there any Common Ground that the state has with the department of justice that could avoid a Long Court Battle . Well have to see if thats what happens. Right now we simply have a letter from them that says our statute, which we refer to as hb2, violates title vii. [inaudible question] weve had no conversation so the answer to your question is yes, theres no basis to believe that. [inaudible question] this is our response to that deadline. [inaudible question] it could be what . Im sorry. [inaudible question] well, well see. Well see what happens. But this is our response so weve met the deadline and now well go forward. Two more questions. [inaudible question] id like to be able to dust off my crystal ball and answer these questions with specificity for you. I suspect it may be more than months but we really hope to expedite this thing. Weve asked for a declaratory judgment. I dont need to get into the weeds about what that means but in law declaratory judgment actions are given preference so we hope we will get this in front of the court and have it decided very quickly. It started with a local ordinance. [inaudible question] when you say its the federal government, remember, this is a letter. This is a letter from the department of justice that says we have violated title vii. As the governor said, title vii let me back up. We have specifically not violated title vii and if the Justice Department believes that we have, theyre going to need to go back to congress and get congress to change the law because right now, in spite of what this letter says to us, the class of people that the Justice Department are referring to are not a protected class under title vii and until Congress Changes that, thats the law. Our bill, therefore, doesnt violate that. Thank you very much. Now, attorney general Loretta Lynch lays out the Justice Departments federal lawsuit against the state of North Carolina over its law on public restroom access for transgender people, joined by a Justice Department civil rights lawyer working on the case, at that 25minute briefing. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, thank you all for being here. I am joined by anita gupta, head of the Civil Rights Division here at the department of justice. We are her a