I especially appreciate the judge (different judge) who called the gender critical to be, "obvious charlatans".
It is that the Social Conservatives have no possible case at all, that more than anything but the harm they do, justifies their prosecution under U.S.C. § 1983, 18 U.S.C. § 241, & 18 U.S.C. § 242 for their engineering, funding, and carrying out the propaganda campaign and enacting the laws and policies against transgender people.
Thanks for sharing! Let's hope this good news holds up in the courts with djt always trying to wiggle his way out of the truth. But this helps. We need more judges like this!
"Judicial activism!" cry the Republicans whenever a judge rules against them. Yet when SCOTUS literally gutted Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act they immediately set to erasing Black voting districts from their states.
So "Judicial activism" is obviously fine whenever THEY benefit from it because they are nothing but the biggest fucking hypocrites on the planet.
Judge Carl Folsom III showed exactly what judicial prudence and fairness should look like.
He carefully listened, examined the evidence, reviewed the testimony from the state’s witnesses and outside groups, and repeatedly found major credibility problems in the arguments being used to justify Kansas’ attack on transgender healthcare.
His recognition that Kansas’ ban may even violate the Kansas Constitution is a powerful reminder that constitutional rights apply to everyone, including transgender citizens.
This ruling marks a major victory for the transgender community in Kansas and sends a strong message that ideology and political fearmongering cannot replace facts, evidence, and equal protection under the law.
If I recall the judge also referred to the US Supreme Court ruling against California saying that parents have a right to direct the upbringing of their children (or to that effect). He used it here to help establish the right of parents to support their transgender children.
Because the ruling rests on the Kansas state constitution, it *should* be immune from scrutiny by the US Supreme Court.
Somehow, though, I suspect that at least some of the conservative justices will find excuses to grant the appeal and override the state constitution anyway. Alito and Thomas, almost certainly. Maybe Coney-Barret and Kavanaugh. Probably not Gorsuch or Roberts, but you never know.
There's a good chance the eventual ruling will hold, but there's still a decent chance it won't.
I'm sorry I totally got derailed by the James Cantor thing. I can't even... how... a group that wants to 'destigmatize pedophilia'? At first I thought it didn't make sense, but I suppose it does. What better way to destigmatize pedophilia than accusing half of America of being pedophiles? It's not like there's an argument FOR it.
Same! And I can’t help wondering WHEN James Cantor will be charged with a crime involving pedophilia?!? And what attorney thought this guy would make a good expert in case involving KIDS?!? It is so effed up💀
This judge's brilliant dissection and rejection of the Kansas argument in defense of the state's gender care ban law is the most comprehensive and effective rebuttal of such a law that I have ever seen. I congratulate and thank Judge Folsom for his fine work.
I hope that legal advocates and lawyers at organizations like Lambda Legal and A4TE make close note of his arguments.
The question is, will judges on higher courts, namely SCOTUS, see it the same way. Because I fear that SCOTUS will agree to hear it on appeal.
Judge Folsom did his homework! This is the kind of judicial responsibility I’ve been hoping for- the facts supporting GAC are strong, the anti-gac facts are weak at best. I’m really grateful for his careful review (and scathing take downs)! Thanks for the article.
This is exactly what I have been trying to point out to the members of the Kansas legislature for three years. It is my prayer that now they will understand. 🙏
I especially appreciate the judge (different judge) who called the gender critical to be, "obvious charlatans".
It is that the Social Conservatives have no possible case at all, that more than anything but the harm they do, justifies their prosecution under U.S.C. § 1983, 18 U.S.C. § 241, & 18 U.S.C. § 242 for their engineering, funding, and carrying out the propaganda campaign and enacting the laws and policies against transgender people.
Thank you Erin.
Thanks for sharing! Let's hope this good news holds up in the courts with djt always trying to wiggle his way out of the truth. But this helps. We need more judges like this!
"Judicial activism!" cry the Republicans whenever a judge rules against them. Yet when SCOTUS literally gutted Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act they immediately set to erasing Black voting districts from their states.
So "Judicial activism" is obviously fine whenever THEY benefit from it because they are nothing but the biggest fucking hypocrites on the planet.
Judge Carl Folsom III showed exactly what judicial prudence and fairness should look like.
He carefully listened, examined the evidence, reviewed the testimony from the state’s witnesses and outside groups, and repeatedly found major credibility problems in the arguments being used to justify Kansas’ attack on transgender healthcare.
His recognition that Kansas’ ban may even violate the Kansas Constitution is a powerful reminder that constitutional rights apply to everyone, including transgender citizens.
This ruling marks a major victory for the transgender community in Kansas and sends a strong message that ideology and political fearmongering cannot replace facts, evidence, and equal protection under the law.
Now this is great news. Now to see if the courts still have power over the executive
Delicious.
If I recall the judge also referred to the US Supreme Court ruling against California saying that parents have a right to direct the upbringing of their children (or to that effect). He used it here to help establish the right of parents to support their transgender children.
Chef's kiss!
Because the ruling rests on the Kansas state constitution, it *should* be immune from scrutiny by the US Supreme Court.
Somehow, though, I suspect that at least some of the conservative justices will find excuses to grant the appeal and override the state constitution anyway. Alito and Thomas, almost certainly. Maybe Coney-Barret and Kavanaugh. Probably not Gorsuch or Roberts, but you never know.
There's a good chance the eventual ruling will hold, but there's still a decent chance it won't.
Sounds like Cantor is probably a member of NAMBLA, too. Just a thought.
I'm sorry I totally got derailed by the James Cantor thing. I can't even... how... a group that wants to 'destigmatize pedophilia'? At first I thought it didn't make sense, but I suppose it does. What better way to destigmatize pedophilia than accusing half of America of being pedophiles? It's not like there's an argument FOR it.
Same! And I can’t help wondering WHEN James Cantor will be charged with a crime involving pedophilia?!? And what attorney thought this guy would make a good expert in case involving KIDS?!? It is so effed up💀
Right!? The extent to which the masks have come off is honestly scrambling my brain.
We need all the good we can accrue. Thank you for your reporting as always!
Fantastic! Thanks, Erin, for this report.
This judge's brilliant dissection and rejection of the Kansas argument in defense of the state's gender care ban law is the most comprehensive and effective rebuttal of such a law that I have ever seen. I congratulate and thank Judge Folsom for his fine work.
I hope that legal advocates and lawyers at organizations like Lambda Legal and A4TE make close note of his arguments.
The question is, will judges on higher courts, namely SCOTUS, see it the same way. Because I fear that SCOTUS will agree to hear it on appeal.
So thankful for judges who both know and follow the rule of law.
This is such good news! I am so happy for my friends who still live in KS. That judge was on fire!
Judge Folsom did his homework! This is the kind of judicial responsibility I’ve been hoping for- the facts supporting GAC are strong, the anti-gac facts are weak at best. I’m really grateful for his careful review (and scathing take downs)! Thanks for the article.
This is exactly what I have been trying to point out to the members of the Kansas legislature for three years. It is my prayer that now they will understand. 🙏
Wow! Wonderful news. Thank you, Erin!