We don't have to take this abuse. We have a way to reform government, replace Trump, end the Supreme Court being the final authority. Where the system has failed, it must be addressed, and abortion is health care just like puberty blockers are. This isn't a state-by-state question. I demand justice and equality in every jurisdiction.
Taking a limited ruling and trying to push it further than the letter of the law it contained? Sounds like SCOTUS are learning from the UK Equality and Human Rights Commission. Disappointed of course. Not surprised.
As awful as this is for us as transfolk, it should be apparent that those who are fighting against us are also working hard to overturn Obergefell and Loving, and the movement to disenfranchise women is also not insignificant. It’s everywhere, and everybody.
If states have protective trans legislation already on the books (WA, NY, CA, IL, MA, etc.) are those protections safe and secure, or are those protections endangered by anything the Supreme Court is doing (or will do)?
They aren't endangered by anything the Scurrilous Six (the SCOTUS majority) *have* done because denial of federal-level (i.e,, Constitutional) protection does not limit the power of states to offer such protections.
By anything they *will* do? Who the hell knows? They have already proven themselves willing to twist words, logic, and the Constitution into knots to achieve their intended ends.
Well they must be thinking if they make enough "limited scope" & "narrow" rulings they get what they want without coming out and saying what they know will ruin them in history books like Scott V Sandford did Taney's bench. A proper ruckus in the streets may disabuse them of their delusion.
Ugh. It's paywalled, so I can't read the entire thing, but what I can read is just ... ugh. And while she references Cass, I don't see (in the limited part I can see without paying for it) anything about the recent Utah report. The extremely thorough and detailed Utah report ( https://le.utah.gov/AgencyRP/reportingDetail.jsp?rid=636 ) clearly contradicts Cass, the Florida AHCA report, and the US HHS report. And it brings the receipts.
Yup, that worked. Opened it in Notes. Selected all, copied and pasted into a Pages document. Yay. Went back to Notes to get rid of it and somehow deleted *all* my notes. Oops. Not a great trade off. sigh.
Hopefully, since Skrmetti didn’t directly touch these issues nor ruled on whether transgender people are protected by the equal protection clause, it should be easy for lower courts to see the ruling as not applicable to these other issues and keep their rulings in favor of trans rights.
“Transgender people had for more than a century before been regarded as beings of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the Cis people... and so far inferior, that they had no rights which the Cis person was bound to respect.”
You bring up Loving, very correctly... But I'm equally worried about the precedent Dobbs set. By declaring substantive due process to be null and void, and supporting "diagnosis-based" or "purpose-based" discrimination, I don't think it's long before we see across-the-board bans on gender-affirming care at the state level. :(
As I said in a skeet on BlueSky, “The United States Supreme Court is not a legitimate court but a rubber stamp for fascism.”
https://bsky.app/profile/ironcurtainyc.bsky.social/post/3lskbisn2jc2q
We don't have to take this abuse. We have a way to reform government, replace Trump, end the Supreme Court being the final authority. Where the system has failed, it must be addressed, and abortion is health care just like puberty blockers are. This isn't a state-by-state question. I demand justice and equality in every jurisdiction.
At the very least, there should be term limits for SCOTUS justices.
Taking a limited ruling and trying to push it further than the letter of the law it contained? Sounds like SCOTUS are learning from the UK Equality and Human Rights Commission. Disappointed of course. Not surprised.
And now, to all the smug schmucks who thought this wouldn't affect *their* rights because they weren't (shudder) trans: do you get it yet?
Exactly. Once the right is done with transgender people, the rest of the rainbow is next one the menu.
Actually, some of them aren't even waiting for that. Take the various Pride bans, for example.
As awful as this is for us as transfolk, it should be apparent that those who are fighting against us are also working hard to overturn Obergefell and Loving, and the movement to disenfranchise women is also not insignificant. It’s everywhere, and everybody.
As has been noted by many, bigotry is very intersectional.
If states have protective trans legislation already on the books (WA, NY, CA, IL, MA, etc.) are those protections safe and secure, or are those protections endangered by anything the Supreme Court is doing (or will do)?
They aren't endangered by anything the Scurrilous Six (the SCOTUS majority) *have* done because denial of federal-level (i.e,, Constitutional) protection does not limit the power of states to offer such protections.
By anything they *will* do? Who the hell knows? They have already proven themselves willing to twist words, logic, and the Constitution into knots to achieve their intended ends.
Well they must be thinking if they make enough "limited scope" & "narrow" rulings they get what they want without coming out and saying what they know will ruin them in history books like Scott V Sandford did Taney's bench. A proper ruckus in the streets may disabuse them of their delusion.
Has anyone seen Helen Lewis' screed in "The Atlantic", a regurgitation of every transphobic trope a la Cass? What gives there? https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2025/06/transgender-youth-skrmetti/683350/
Ugh. It's paywalled, so I can't read the entire thing, but what I can read is just ... ugh. And while she references Cass, I don't see (in the limited part I can see without paying for it) anything about the recent Utah report. The extremely thorough and detailed Utah report ( https://le.utah.gov/AgencyRP/reportingDetail.jsp?rid=636 ) clearly contradicts Cass, the Florida AHCA report, and the US HHS report. And it brings the receipts.
If you save that as HTML only and open from your drive as a file, the paywall is gone.
Ooh, that definitely worked! And then I was able to Print to PDF to save it as a PDF file. Thank you!!!
I keep in mind, criticism is fair use.
Yup, that worked. Opened it in Notes. Selected all, copied and pasted into a Pages document. Yay. Went back to Notes to get rid of it and somehow deleted *all* my notes. Oops. Not a great trade off. sigh.
I can open it in as a file in Opera, Firefox, Edge, & Chrome. A FWIW.
Here are links to pdfs of two recent trans hatchet jobs articles at the Atlantic that are behind paywalls.
The Liberal Misinformation Bubble About Youth Gender Medicine - The Atlantic
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1KHihsluzwc-y715jgKxLLoNeWeGvUk0m/view?usp=drive_link
The Trump Administration’s Nasty Campaign Against Trans People - The Atlantic
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rCkTcdHKEdpVSQ4CAg0JWZeDwDsCcV6w/view?usp=drive_link
In contrast — a song of solidarity: P is for Pronoun.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmbTU7Bj-PI
My hope in mentioning The Atlantic piece is to generate pushback about it.
Much appreciated. I confess I don't have the bandwidth to digest it right now, but I will later.
Hopefully, since Skrmetti didn’t directly touch these issues nor ruled on whether transgender people are protected by the equal protection clause, it should be easy for lower courts to see the ruling as not applicable to these other issues and keep their rulings in favor of trans rights.
This isn’t particularly hopeful to me, because then trans opponents in these states could just appeal back to SCOTUS and get the ruling they want.
Yeah that’s always a possibility unfortunately
The containment and elimination of sexual and gender nonconformity is a fundamental requirement of the patriarchal project.
The dissolution of essentialized "natural" sexual and gender roles is an inevitable condition of modernity.
Our politics makes little sense outside of those principles and the contradiction and conflict they contain.
The current assault on trans people is a distilled expression of those principles.
I'm disgusted, but not surprised. I think we all know where this is headed. 😢
Ah, so I see we've reached the "just stop pretending you even care about the rules" stage of fascism.
We'll meet them in the streets.
The more things change..
Sounds like a paraphrase of Dred Scott to me...
“Transgender people had for more than a century before been regarded as beings of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the Cis people... and so far inferior, that they had no rights which the Cis person was bound to respect.”
The more things stay the same.
As human beings, we ALL have the right to healthcare!
Ugh, more attempts at bathroom bans.
This is a nightmare
You bring up Loving, very correctly... But I'm equally worried about the precedent Dobbs set. By declaring substantive due process to be null and void, and supporting "diagnosis-based" or "purpose-based" discrimination, I don't think it's long before we see across-the-board bans on gender-affirming care at the state level. :(