This Does Not Bode Well!

Sometimes we can see the hand writing on the wall and we try not to believe it. Right now whoever wrote that on the wall should have their mouth washed out will soap! We though that the US v. Skrmetti was bad, well this one is even worst!

Why Roberts and Gorsuch may decide the Supreme Court’s blockbuster transgender sports case

CNN

By John Fritze and Devan Cole

July 5, 2025

The Supreme Court’s decision Thursday to weigh in on transgender sports bans will put two conservative justices in the spotlight in coming months, both because of what they have said in past cases involving LGBTQ rights – and what they haven’t.

Only two justices have written majority opinions involving transgender Americans – Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Neil Gorsuch – and both avoided revealing their thoughts about the sports cases last month when, in a blockbuster ruling, the Supreme Court upheld Tennessee’s ban on puberty blockers and hormone therapy for trans youth.

For the second time in as many years the high court will wrestle with a heated legal dispute involving young transgender Americans at a time when they are facing severe political backlash driven in part by President Donald Trump and conservative states. The court agreed to hear appeals in two related cases challenging laws in West Virginia and Idaho that ban transgender girls and women from competing on women’s sports teams – including one that was filed by a middle school student at the time.

With this case we do or die... there is not redress!

“Even though the court ruled against the transgender plaintiffs in Skrmetti, it did not decide the larger and more important question of whether discrimination based on transgender status triggers more searching judicial review,” said Steve Vladeck, CNN Supreme Court analyst and professor at Georgetown University Law Center.

“Everything,” Vladeck predicted, “is going to come down to where Roberts and Gorsuch are.”

Our goose will be cooked if this goes against us! They are trying to weasel around the 14th Amendment with a challenge that does take that in to account. The cases are Little v. Hecox (Idaho) and West Virginia v. B.P.J. They are not hearing it as an ordinary court case but in writ of certiorari, which means according to Cornell Law School,

The word certiorari comes from Law Latin, meaning "to be more fully informed." A writ of certiorari orders a lower court to deliver its record in a case so that the higher court may review it. The writ of certiorari is a common law writ, which may be abrogated or controlled entirely by statute or court rules. This also means that the court is often not under any obligation to hear the petitioned cases.

Certiorari is generally associated with the writ that the Supreme Court of the United States issues to review a lower court's judgment. A case cannot, as a matter of right, be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. As such, a party seeking to appeal to the Supreme Court from a lower court decision must file a writ of certiorari.   

In the Supreme Court, if four Justices agree to review the case, then the Court will hear the case. This is referred to as "granting certiorari," often abbreviated as "cert." If four Justices do not agree to review the case, then the Court will not hear the case - this is referred to as “denying certiorari.”

The U.S. Supreme Court will grant a writ of certiorari to cases that have national significance and precedential value that harmonize different rulings in the federal and state courts. The Court typically accepts 100 to 150 cases out of the more than 7,000 cases that file a petition every year. The cases usually come from an appropriate U.S. Court of Appeals, or the highest court in a state (in limited situations). Some of the considerations are outlined under Rule 10 of Supreme Court Rules.

So this case would not have made to the Supreme Court with this sleight of hand. So this case out of over 5000 petitions for a writ of certiorari only about 75 are accepted. To me that seems like there is a little bias in picking the case.

On the conservative website Texas Values...

July 3, 2025: Today, the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari for two cases involving state laws that keep boys of girls’ sports. SCOTUS has agreed to hear Little v. Hecox, a case involving a Save Women’s Sports law in Idaho and West Virginia v. B.P.J., a suit involving a boy who wanted to compete against other middle school girls but could no longer do so once West Virginia passed their Save Women’s Sports Act. Texas Values signed on to an amicus curiae brief for Little v Hecox. 

Mary Elizabeth Castle, Director of Government Relations for Texas Values said.

“While we often look to the Supreme Court to grant answers to complicated issues of law, this decision will be an easy one. Men do not belong in women’s sports. Congress made this clear when they went the extra mile on our civil rights laws by passing Title IX to protect women in sports and ensure our fair chance at victory and excellence. We have held the line in Texas in protecting women’s sports in our state because you don’t mess with Texas women and girls. I hope to stand in support of the girls in Idaho and West Virginia as they fight for fair play.”

So they are trying to do a "two-step" around the Fourteen Amendment because they know that banning us is discriminatory!