Court: Women-only gym areas violate state discrimination law

In the ruling, Robinson wrote there is no implied customer gender privacy exception to the ban against gender-based discrimination in the state’s Public Accommodation Act. The two gyms that are defendants in the case argued there was such an exception.

State law exempts bathrooms, sleeping areas and locker rooms from anti-gender-discrimination laws, but doesn’t specifically mention female-only workout areas.

“A reading of (the law) to imply a gender privacy exception, although presumably to benefit women, could also negatively affect the rights of women in a different way,” Robinson wrote. “Such an exception could be invoked to exclude women based on the privacy interests of men and could justify discrimination against transgender individuals because some customers, ‘due to modesty, find it uncomfortable’ to be around such people.”

Robinson wrote that the legislature is better suited to determine where to specifically limit anti-discrimination protections, saying it’s a public policy issue.

A message seeking comment was left for an attorney for Edge Fitness

Mario Borelli, a lawyer for Club Fitness, said he was disappointed with the court’s ruling. He said it was too early to say whether there will be an appeal to the federal court system.