Just don’t put it in writing and it’s not discriminatory.
21 Likes
Oh you’ve worked in corporate America, I see.
22 Likes
It looks like MAGA is going after Amy Coney Barrett.
ETA: This badly edited line made me laugh, though:
The newest Supreme Court justice remains reliably conservative
20 Likes
SCOTUS upheld TN law restricting gender affirming care for minors on my tv. Fuck.
19 Likes
My tv says that SCOTUS used the rational basis for review rather than more stringent standards; which signals they will use that for sex discrimination going forward. This is very bad.
23 Likes
They won’t use rational basis for sex discrimination. They’ll restrict the definition of sex discrimination to not include sexual orientation or gender identity. This is bad, indeed. I’m not sure how it doesn’t overturn Bostock. I’ll have to read the opinion when I have time today.
23 Likes
Joyce Vance was just saying that according to SCOTUS; there is no equal protection for transgender people.
17 Likes
6-3. Of course. What a fucked up timeline!!
17 Likes
I’m reading it now. This is the first WTAF moment so far, and I’m only a couple of pages in:
By the same token, SB1 does not exclude any individual from medical treatments on the basis of transgender status. Rather, it removes one set of diagnoses—gender dysphoria, gender identity disorder, and gender incongruence—from the range of treatable conditions.
That set of diagnoses only apply to transgender people, so . . . how is that exclusion not on the basis of transgender status?
ETA: They’re basically saying, “Oh no, this doesn’t discriminate against you. It just discriminates against your medical diagnosis. So that’s fine. What’s your problem? Get fucked.”
20 Likes
OMFG. The next few sentences:
SB1 divides minors into two groups: those seeking puberty blockers or hormones to treat the excluded diagnoses, and those seeking puberty blockers or hormones to treat other conditions. While the first group includes only transgender individuals, the second encompasses both transgender and nontransgender individuals.
In other words, because some transgender individuals may also have other conditions for which these treatments are appropriate, and they would still be able to get treatment for those conditions, the law doesn’t discriminate on their status as transgender people. These assholes must make amazing pretzels.
ETA: The Court has used this logic before, as they point out in this opinion. IN 1974!!! In a case involving a California insurance program which denied coverage for disabilities resulting from pregnancy, the Court held that the program wasn’t discriminating on the basis of sex because, while only women can get pregnant, women can also NOT get pregnant and they have other conditions which were still covered by the program, so it wasn’t sex discrimination. That logic was fucking wrong then, and it’s fucking wrong now. Jesus fucking Christ, I may have to stop reading this, because, both as a lawyer-to-be and a trans woman, this decision is PISSING ME OFF! This is bad legal reasoning. I mean bad.
27 Likes
So, it excludes individuals from medical treatment on the basis of transgender status. These are smart people. They have to know this sentence is utter bullshit. Which leaves “they just don’t care, it gets what they want” as the only viable explanation. No, just no.
20 Likes
From Thomas’s concurrence:
Applying Bostock’s reasoning to the Equal Protection Clause would also invite sweeping consequences. Many statutes “regulate medical procedures defined by sex.” L. W. v. Skrmetti, 83 F. 4th 460, 482 (CA6 2023) (collecting examples, including laws referencing testicular and pros-
tate cancer).
So . . . if they protected trans youth . . . then a cisgender woman who wanted surgery for prostate cancer would be able to sue if she was denied? WTF is he saying here?
22 Likes
Ok, I’m not reading this anymore. This is seriously fucking me up right now. Why do they hate us so much?
24 Likes
I don’t know and don’t really want to. Best i can say is for the same reason the Nazis hated the Jews. Because there was little cost to them for doing so. It obviously has not led to massive uprisings of popular support, much to our shame. They have to have a group to hate. I choose to hate fascists.
28 Likes
That’s to make sure that MAGAts can force gender assignment surgery when their babies are born intersex.
They really do cover their bases, don’t they?
22 Likes
It’s not just that, but it is part of it. There are legitimate non-transgender, non-intersex related medical reasons for puberty blockers and some of these other treatments. So they have to come up with some logic to explain why one use is ok and another is not in a way that isn’t sex based discrimination. The pretzel logic is some of the most twisted I’ve ever seen.
24 Likes
I feel like eating an entire pizza by myself. I know that’s not a healthy response to this news, and I probably won’t, but that’s what I feel like doing right now.
24 Likes
I’m leaving it till later. PT shortly. Hopefully I can be distracted from my fear and anger for a short time.
18 Likes
I’m studying for the bar exam. I’m not sure that’s going to help, lol.
19 Likes
And if I remember correctly, they didn’t apply this standard WRT abortion - in other words, even if the diagnosis was preeclampsia, ectopic pregnancy, or miscarriage, they upheld the state law banning treatment. So they aren’t even being consistent with their own precedent.
23 Likes