Alto questions ACLU lawyer on male/female in context of equal protection.
Interesting discussion. At what point does a transitioning person become the other sex, if at all? And do they have the same rights as a person born into that sex? Basically an equal protection argument. ACLU argues heightened scrutiny s/b applied.
The ACLU seems to concede that just thinking you are the other gender doesn’t do the trick. So, wonder if this then swings the other way from their perspective to gain protection under ADA, but then you have to concede it is some form of disability.
Link: SC Case
Replies to: Alto questions ACLU lawyer on male/female in context of equal protection.
Great law school exam questions... issues galore!
The law is bordering on fantasies.
At what point are they going to bring a biologist in to testify?
(no message)
I'm surprised the ACLU would concede this.
(no message)
This lawyer is a total moron. Truly - a dolt.
His entire case rests on hoping that the Supreme Court opts not to take the language of Title IX precisely. In other words, "let's pretend that it really means 'gender identity' instead of what it actually says."
Yeah, it's an easy layup and especially for this court. The arguments show you how absurd this
whole line of thinking is. I think I am something so you therefore have to treat me accordingly, and especially so if I happen to have disfiguring surgery.
This is just nonsense the court is wasting their time on, they must be bored
(no message)
Thank God Trump ran and won the first time and appointed the members he did.
Otherwise, we'd be living in a world where my perception outweighs your facts and my being offended outweighs your rights.
I can’t believe “what does it mean to be a woman or a man?” has made it to the
Supreme Court. And worse off, the question couldn’t be answered.
It's what Pope Leo was talking about (and yes, I know he was critical of the right as well).
But when you can't even decide on what's a man and what's a woman, your society is cooked. Inmates running the asylum.
It's not "sex" that is the issue... it's mental illness.
If you look down and see that you have a penis and declare that you are a woman... there is a "glitch" in your mental processes... not your biology.
Even Tyrone concedes this point and advocates for treatment of those suffering from "gender dysphoria."
However, no one wants to delve into the etiology of THAT syndrome and the related ramifications for human psychology in general... for good reason!
So, the easy answer for SCOTUS is to rule that unless Congress passes legislation redefining sex the Court will live with the biological fact of life.
It's a social contagion layered on top of various mental illnesses.
Most of these people don't suffer from what was known as gender dysphoria. They suffer from something else, and are seeking something in the transgender identity. But ultimately, you are right in that it's a form of mental illness.
Poor parenting is the root cause of
(no message)
My wife works with one.
She is transitioning her 11 year old daughter. It is actually sad, her husband divorced her over the bullshit and there is nothing he can do living in NY. She is as far left as you can get and always playing the victim.
Biden's World.
(no message)
Munchhausen syndrome by proxy
(no message)
Yep.
(no message)
Child abuse aided by the state. Sad.
(no message)
He’s not off-bass with the tenor of those queries…
(no message)
Well done
(no message)
If he gets into treble, he risks turning this into an episode of sopranos.
(no message)
Is there a chance SCOTUS will throw this back to the individual states?
(no message)
No. If they wanted to punt don't think they would have taken the case.
(no message)
Not if Title IX is central to the ruling.
(no message)
Consent Management