Lefties RAGE Against Latest SCOTUS Ruling About Trans Issues In Tennessee
Some of them seem like they've gone off their meds... or maybe some need a prescription?
The Dems and Journos give the game away when they try to use the phrose ‘gender affirming care’ as if it held some kind of strong medical and scientific backing, rather than a novel and highly-politicized procedure.
The question at the heart of the issue:
Tennessee is one of more than half of American states that have legal prohibitions against providing puberty blockers and similar gender-related procedures to children under the age of 18.
Activists for the cause challenged this on the basis of it being (as they alleged) a violation of the equal protection clause of the Constitution.
SCOTUS was not convinced.
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for a conservative majority that the law banning puberty blockers and hormone treatments for trans minors doesn’t violate the Constitution’s equal protection clause, which requires the government to treat similarly situated people the same.
“This case carries with it the weight of fierce scientific and policy debates about the safety, efficacy, and propriety of medical treatments in an evolving field. The voices in these debates raise sincere concerns; the implications for all are profound,” Roberts wrote. “The Equal Protection Clause does not resolve these disagreements. Nor does it afford us license to decide them as we see best.” —AP
In simple terms, this means that SCOTUS doesn’t claim to be the scientific arbitrator of rival medical theories. It’s the province of legislators to wrestle with such questions, and the majority leaves room for the states to do exactly that… each according to the consensus decision of their own local elected leaders. Exactly the model Federalism would predict.
Actiivst judges like Sotomeyer surprise nobody in their dissent. But the AP isn’t even TRYING to appear impartial in writing this concluding paragraph, complete with FIVE different hyperlinks in the original to drive the point home.
The decision comes amid other federal and state efforts to regulate the lives of transgender people, including which sports competitions they can join and which bathrooms they can use. In April, Trump’s administration sued Maine for not complying with the government’s push to ban transgender athletes in girls sports.
The phrase ‘regulate the lives of transgender people’ is pretty rich for a chattering class that (not so long ago) watched a few guys in labcoats shut down the world and insist on mandatory medical procedures — or else! — because of a bad case of the sniffles.
The left wing rag, Vox, weighed in with their usual ‘standard’ of ‘impartiality’.
Ultimately, Roberts’s Skrmetti opinion largely reveals something that close observers of this Supreme Court already know. The Court’s Republican majority is impatient. They are often so eager to reach ideological or partisan results that they hand down poorly reasoned opinions and incomprehensible legal standards.
Because the Skrmetti opinion is so incoherent, it is difficult to predict its broader implications for US anti-discrimination law. One thing that is certain, however, is that this decision is a historic loss for transgender Americans. — Vox
The same fraud that claims to be fighting against ‘big pharma’ is making unhinged statements like this:
As if we don’t already have evidence of cynical medical clinics licking their chops at the cash flow that would come in from the lives that would be destroyed with this ‘gender-affirming care’.
As for the wildcard they liked to play in bullying parents into accepting procedures that would radically alter — not to mention sterilize — teens struggling with questions like identity and body image at the most volatile time of thier lives? The Sophie’s Choice of: ‘would you rather have a live daughter or a dead son’?
The study throwing cold water on that claim has been released:
🚨 The long-suppressed Olson-Kennedy puberty blocker study is finally out.
After 2 years on blockers, youth showed no significant improvement in depression, emotional health, or parent-reported behavior.
Once again, the Dutch study results failed to replicate. pic.twitter.com/WWC3yzhhFa
— Genspect (@genspect) June 5, 2025
If you can’t read the caption, it reads:
The long-suppressed Olson-Kennedy puberty blocker study is finally out.
After 2 years on blockers, youth showed no significant improvement in depression, emotional health, or parent-reported behavior.
Once again, the Dutch study results failed to replicate.