Editorials & Other Articles

Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin

(116,545 posts) Thu Dec 5, 2024, 05:16 PM Dec 5

Amy Coney Barrett's Mind-Boggling Question in Supreme Court Trans Case

Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barret asked a team of ACLU lawyers advocating for trans rights if trans people had ever really been discriminated against.

The court on Wednesday held oral arguments in United States v. Skrmetti, a landmark case originating from Tennessee that could decide just how far the federal government has to go, if at all, to protect the rights of trans people. In 2023, Senate Bill 1 became law in Tennessee, banning hormone therapy and puberty blockers for minors and imposing civil penalties on doctors who don’t fall in line. Skrmetti is challenging S.B. 1, but the conservative justices don’t seem to be having any of it.

“One question I have is, at least as far as I can think of, we don’t have a history—that I know of—we don’t have a history of de jure discrimination against transgender people,” Coney Barrett said during oral arguments on Wednesday morning. “You point out in your brief that in the last three years there might have been these laws, but before that we might have had private societal discrimination.… Is there a history that I don’t know about where we have de jure discrimination?”

By de jure Coney Barrett means “federally mandated,” and she goes on to note that other minority groups have experienced that kind of discrimination, while to her knowledge trans people haven’t.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/amy-coney-barrett-mind-boggling-194718116.html

8 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Amy Coney Barrett's Mind-Boggling Question in Supreme Court Trans Case (Original Post) Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Dec 5 OP

She is either lying or totally clueless. Irish_Dem Dec 5 #1

She will never see what she does not want to see and deal with Attilatheblond Dec 5 #2

I think she has a point -- though probably not her intention -- it is only recently under MAGA for laws discriminating Silent Type Dec 5 #3

Here's a few things that would indicate a past federal discrimination against transgenders. sinkingfeeling Dec 5 #4

Does she think trans people have been able to be open en masse for less than the last 10 years? underpants Dec 5 #5

Those... 2naSalit Dec 5 #6

Message auto-removed Name removed Dec 5 #7

"No amount of evidence will ever persuade an idiot"..Mark Twain Deuxcents Dec 5 #8

Irish_Dem

(59,744 posts)

1. She is either lying or totally clueless.

Reply to Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin (Original post)

Thu Dec 5, 2024, 05:18 PM

Dec 5

Attilatheblond

(4,569 posts)

2. She will never see what she does not want to see and deal with

Reply to Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin (Original post)

Thu Dec 5, 2024, 05:18 PM

Dec 5

She's got her head up somebody's ass.

Silent Type

(7,346 posts)

3. I think she has a point -- though probably not her intention -- it is only recently under MAGA for laws discriminating

Reply to Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin (Original post)

Thu Dec 5, 2024, 05:29 PM

Dec 5

against transgenders at state level.

In fact, the Civil Rights Act specifically makes it illegal.

"Federal laws against sex and disability discrimination make it illegal to fire, refuse to hire, harass, or otherwise discriminate against you because of your gender identity, gender transition, sex assigned at birth, or transgender status. This was definitively clarified by the Supreme Court case Bostock v. . . . . ."

https://transequality.org/resources/know-your-rights-employment#:~:text=Federal%20laws%20against%20sex%20and,Supreme%20Court%20case%20Bostock%20v.

I don't think we had discriminitory LAWS at Federal level, although we damn sure had a bunch of crappy people who love bashing minority groups.

sinkingfeeling

(53,263 posts)

4. Here's a few things that would indicate a past federal discrimination against transgenders.

Reply to Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin (Original post)

Thu Dec 5, 2024, 05:30 PM

Dec 5

The Department of Defense (DoD) ended the ban on transgender service members in 2016. Bill Clinton, via Executive Order, prohibited discrimination in federal hiring (1998) and Obama expanded that with Executive Order 13672 to include federal contractors.

Then came the first TSF administrations roll-back.

https://transequality.org/news/discrimination-administration

Here's just one entry:
October 6, 2017: The Justice Department released a sweeping "license to discriminate" allowing federal agencies, government contractors, government grantees, and even private businesses to engage in illegal discrimination, as long as they can cite religious reasons for doing so.

underpants

(187,391 posts)

5. Does she think trans people have been able to be open en masse for less than the last 10 years?

Reply to Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin (Original post)

Thu Dec 5, 2024, 05:31 PM

Dec 5

Attorney Chase Strangio, the first transgender lawyer to argue in front of the Supreme Court, also later addressed Coney Barrett’s tone-deaf question.

“Transgender people are characterized as having a different gender identity than their birth sex. That is distinguishing,” Strangio said. “I would also point, if I could, to the history of discrimination—and there are many examples—of in-law discrimination, exclusions from the military, criminal bans on cross-dressing, and others.”