A school board in the eastern state of Virginia has filed an emergency appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court to halt a ruling that allows a transgender student to use the boys' restroom next school year. The Gloucester County School Board is trying to prevent Gavin Grimm from using the bathroom that matches his gender identity when school resumes later this year, saying it will "put parents' constitutional rights in jeopardy.'' Grimm sued the school district last year for the right to use the boys' restroom after the school board enacted a policy limiting bathroom use to the one corresponding with a person's biological sex rather than the gender with which the student identifies. Grimm was born female but identifies as male. "Depriving parents of any say over whether their children should be exposed to members of the opposite biological sex, possibly in a state of full or complete undress, in intimate settings deprives parents of their right to direct the education and upbringing of their children,'' attorneys for the school board wrote. The ACLU, which is defending Grimm, has argued that forcing him to use the girls' bathroom is a violation of Title IX and the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The issue is one that has been hotly debated in schools, courts and state legislatures across the U.S. The Obama administration in May directed the nation's public schools to allow transgender students to use bathrooms and locker rooms that match their gender identity or risk losing their federal funding. Twenty-one states have sued to overturn the directive. The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals sided with Grimm in April. The court reinstated Grimm's Title IX claim and sent it back to the district court for further consideration. The school board wants the Supreme Court to put Grimm's district court case on hold until the justices decide whether to review the appeals court decision. The board says it plans to file its petition for Supreme Court review by late August. Question: After the end of the text, the Supreme Court has probably === The answer to the above question is
OPTIONS:
- ruminated on the issue
- decided the issue
- discussed the issue
- not enough information

Answer: decided the issue

Question: U.S. President Donald Trump says he is considering tariffs, quotas, and retaliatory taxes on imports of steel and aluminum from countries such as China, Japan, and South Korea. The comments came during a wide-ranging trade discussion Tuesday between Trump and a bipartisan group of lawmakers at the White House. The president said U.S. steel and aluminum industries are being "decimated" by the "dumping" of cheap imports of those materials into U.S. markets. Trump has long threatened what he calls "reciprocal" trade action to deal with steel, aluminum, and other imports. But he has so far avoided taking any major steps, ostensibly out of fear of hurting the country's strong economic performance since he took office. Several lawmakers on Tuesday urged Trump to be cautious when considering retaliatory trade steps, saying such measures could spark a trade war that leads to higher prices for U.S. producers and consumers. "It's very, very much a double-edged sword," Trump conceded. "I want to keep prices down, but I also want to make sure that we have a steel industry and an aluminum industry," he added. The Trump administration is currently renegotiating the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), as well as the U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement with South Korea. Trump called the U.S.-South Korea deal "very, very bad" and "horrible." He also said Canada has "treated us very, very unfairly." Last month, the U.S. Commerce Department sent a so-called "232 report" to the White House, examining the national security impacts of steel and aluminum imports, and giving Trump 90 days to impose quotas or tariffs. Under section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, the president can initiate a probe to determine if imports threaten national security. "It's about our economy," Vice President Mike Pence during the meeting. "It's about our national security." Trade was a major topic for Trump during the presidential campaign he vowed to impose a 45 percent tax on Chinese imports and a 35 percent tax on Mexican imports. Question: After the trade discussion Trump is most likely doing what? === The answer to the above question is
OPTIONS:
- Still looking for a double edged sword
- Still reading the 232 report
- not enough information
- Still considering imposing tariffs
Answer: Still considering imposing tariffs

Question: I don't see a point. That's the biggest problem with my life currently. I honestly, don't see a point. Am I working towards temporary monetary gain? Is my goal supposed to be buying my dream car(s)? Is my goal spiritual? I'm currently Catholic, but I've seen how spiritually those around me have changed. I've even wondered what's the point of heaven, if everything I want is there. I like life because of the ups and the downs. I enjoy learning and discovering new things. The idea of perfection seems like an impossible concept to me. Maybe even an unenjoyable one. Maybe my goal is to have a family. Being catholic naturally we gravitate towards larger families. But as a libertarian I don't see a lot of potential in the United States at it pertains to economic freedoms. I see the government encroaching more and more into our lives. Is this the type of country I want to raise a family in? I certainly don't want to be outside the United States (no offense towards anyone outside of the U.S). Maybe my goal is political. I've always wanted to run for office. Maybe governor one day. Would I be able to avoid the waves of bipartisanship, and actually do what I believe is the best for the people of my state. Or would I collapse under the political pressures and sign up for agreements I know in my heart and mind won't help the people. Only time will tell. I just don't see a point. I actually have many goals, but I struggle to see the overall point of accomplishing any of it. Especially seeing as anything I do will be lost in the ink-blots of history. Question: After the end of this story, the author probably is what religion? === The answer to the above question is
OPTIONS:
- not enough information
- the author probably remains Catholic
- the author probably becomes atheist
- the author probably becomes protestant
Answer:
the author probably remains Catholic