It seems to be one sided… and we are going to court over it! And our healthcare is on the bench.
There is only one party that is going after us, there is only one party that is creating animosity against us, there is only one party passing laws against us. The ACLU writes about the case,
This case will affect all the states that are banning our healthcare and has the ability ban our healthcare in all of those states.
Our healthcare should be between us and our doctors! Not some judge.Parental Rights Face a Surprising Moment of Truth at the Supreme Court
Slate
By Hila Keren
September 19, 2024As a new term of Supreme Court rulemaking approaches, minors’ access to gender-affirming care is on the chopping block. In the high-profile case L.W. v. Skrmetti, the court will decide whether statutory bans on treating gender dysphoria—already in place in about half of states—violate the Constitution or survive judicial scrutiny. The outcome will have an immediate impact on the health and well-being of countless minors residing in red states whose doctors and parents agree that they are in need of medical treatments such as puberty blockers and hormone therapies to handle incongruence between their sex assigned at birth and their gender identity. In addition, the decision in Skrmetti will have a broader effect, either restraining or legitimizing numerous other anti-LGBTQ+ bills rapidly spreading across the country and hounding minors and adults alike.
[…]
The issue arrived at the highest court after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit affirmed treatment bans enacted by Tennessee and Kentucky, rejecting a pair of distinct constitutional challenges raised by trans minors, parents, and doctors who regularly provide gender-affirming care. Those plaintiffs argued that the bans not only discriminate on the basis of sex and transgender status in violation of the equal protection clause but also infringe on fundamental parental rights protected under the due process clause. When the 6th Circuit dismissed these two claims, the plaintiffs from Tennessee and Kentucky filed separate petitions for Supreme Court review of the ruling’s reasoning regarding discrimination and parental rights. Regrettably, the court has taken no action on these petitions thus far.
The issue arrived at the highest court after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit affirmed treatment bans enacted by Tennessee and Kentucky, rejecting a pair of distinct constitutional challenges raised by trans minors, parents, and doctors who regularly provide gender-affirming care. Those plaintiffs argued that the bans not only discriminate on the basis of sex and transgender status in violation of the equal protection clause but also infringe on fundamental parental rights protected under the due process clause. When the 6th Circuit dismissed these two claims, the plaintiffs from Tennessee and Kentucky filed separate petitions for Supreme Court review of the ruling’s reasoning regarding discrimination and parental rights. Regrettably, the court has taken no action on these petitions thus far.
In addition to banning best practice medical care for trans youth up to age 18, Public Chapter No. 1 would require trans youth currently receiving gender-affirming care to end that care within nine months of the law’s effective date of July 1, 2023, or by March 31, 2024. The law also establishes a private right of action against medical providers providing medically necessary care to trans youth.
My body, my choice!
My body, my choice
My body, my choice!
Vote Blue!
You remember that a judge Trump appointed dismissed the classified document case, well that judge like another judge do not believe that laws apply to them.
Judge Aileen Cannon Failed to Disclose a Right-Wing Junket
Cannon, whose oversight of the Donald Trump classified documents case has garnered widespread criticism, has repeatedly violated a rule requiring that federal judges disclose their attendance at private seminars.ProPublicaby Marilyn W. Thompson and Alex Mierjeski
September 17, 2024Federal Judge Aileen M. Cannon, the controversial jurist who tossed out the classified documents criminal case against Donald Trump in July, failed to disclose her attendance at a May 2023 banquet funded by a conservative law school.
Cannon went to an event in Arlington, Va. honoring the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, according to documents obtained from the Law and Economics Center at George Mason University. At a lecture and private dinner, she sat among members of Scalia’s family, fellow Federalist Society members and more than 30 conservative federal judges. Organizers billed the event as “an excellent opportunity to connect with judicial colleagues.”
A 2006 rule, intended to shine a light on judges’ attendance at paid seminars that could pose conflicts or influence decisions, requires them to file disclosure forms for such trips within 30 days and make them public on the court’s website.
It’s not the first time she has failed to fully comply with the rule.
In 2021 and 2022, Cannon took weeklong trips to the luxurious Sage Lodge in Pray, Montana, for legal colloquiums sponsored by George Mason, which named its law school for Scalia thanks to $30 million in gifts that conservative judicial kingmaker Leonard Leo helped organize.
Yep, just like the other Republicans, laws don't apply to them.
No comments:
Post a Comment