This is a big surprise coming out of the courtroom in Dallas, TX.

After days of outcry across the political spectrum (and don’t be fooled, this went far past conservative concerns), Judge Kim Cooks has ruled that Jeffrey Younger, the father of James Younger, will have decisionmaking power over the boy’s medical decisions. This is big news because it appears to grant him the authority to veto any attempts by the mother to “transition” the 7-year-old boy into a “girl.”

Here’s a recent video that exposed some of the mother’s mental manipulation of the boy.

Originally, a jury decision had recommended a sole conservatorship and that it not be Mr. Younger in charge. This would have put all decision making power in the hands of his mother, who insanely admitted in court that she decided James was really a girl after he took a liking to a McDonald’s toy.

I’m going to link to the latest media reports on the judge’s ruling but with the caveat that there could be other unforeseen or misunderstood roadblocks here. So keep that in mind.

DALLAS, Texas, October 24, 2019 (LifeSiteNews) – The judge presiding over the case of Jeffrey Younger, the father who is trying to protect his seven-year-old son, James, from chemical castration via a gender “transition,” ruled today that the parents will have joint conservatorship over James, which includes making joint medical decisions for the child.

Judge Kim Cooks of the 255th district also put a gag order on the father so that he cannot speak to the press about the case and decided that the father is not required to pay attorney fees. The judge’s decision means that the Save James website will have to be shut down.

While the gag order may seem a bit much, I think it’s a worthy sacrifice if this truly means Mr. Younger will now be able to veto medical decisions made by his wife, including giving hormone blockers to their young boy. It should also be noted that the mother admitted in court she wasn’t even the boy’s biological mother, instead having him via donor eggs. This may have played a role in the decision.

The father was also relieved of the requirement to pay legal fees, something the mother’s attorneys had requested in the proceedings.

There is some confusion about the details of this ruling that trace back to the original jury decision. It appears the judge overruled the jury in this case, but RedState can not confirm that without more information. We’ll be sure to pass that along when it is available.

What we do know is that this certainly appears to be good news compared to what the expectations were originally.

————————————————

Enjoying the read? Please visit my archive and check out some of my latest articles.

I’ve got a new twitter! Please help by following @bonchieredstate.