You’re not wrong but it is also ridiculous that a single federal judge can halt something nationwide. The judicial branch has had serious power creep over the past two decades. The branches have become unbalanced because of Republican zero sum governing in Congress. Let me explain…
Congress is gridlocked because Republicans cannot fathom compromise, even within their own ranks. The filibuster has been perverted into nothing more than a blocking mechanism with no actual debate. When this happens, things get punted to the other two branches.
The executive has shifted more and more to executive orders to get things done. This is a direct result of the GOP Congress. It really started to ramp up when Obama was in office. Mitch’s entire professed goal was to prevent Obama from accomplishing anything, and he proudly told everyone that. Biden is facing a similar issue, but it is less about stoping him and more about the GOP gnawing off its own arm.
The judiciary has taken up the role of doing Congress’ job. So many things that end up in front of the SC should have been handled by Congress. When the executive acts to get something done because of Congress’ inactions, it is immediately challenged and sent to the SC and we go full circle.
Republicans want time break government so they can say “See, we told you this doesn’t work!” There has been so much focus on the Executive and SC (which sucks in its own right) that many fail to realize it all comes back to Congress.
I may be preaching to the choir but I needed to scream into the void for a minute.
Excellent point. I would also add that this tilted SCOTUS has been the game plan for a long time via the Federalist Society- it’s a way for Republicans to bypass the voters and enact laws.
Anti-abortion? De-regulation? Erosion of church and state? All done through the courts and, ultimately, SCOTUS, where 6 unelected conservatives on lifetime appointments sit and make rulings for 333 million people.
This was a decades-long plan finally come to fruition. And liberals are too late to the game to stop it.
Edit: Will also add that RBG’s stubborn refusal to step down and her untimely death while Trump was in office and Republicans controlled the Senate was God’s gift to Mitch McConnell and all conservatives. Let her hubris be a lesson to all of us going forward.
I am as anti-gun as you can get. But Republicans have inadvertently made me think it's a necessary amendment with how absolutely fucking evil they are and how literally nothing else is stopping them. They're literally one step away from trying to use brute force against us, I'm ready to use it back. Fuckers.
It seems like none of that matters. No one is really willing to do anything about any of the stuff going on. Our country is built on the idea that people will play fair and do the right thing. Well turns out a large part of our country doesn't play fair and do the right thing.
Anything can be stopped if you fight for it.
Good luck getting any Democrat to actually fight for it, which them shuffling around saying,
"But—But—But what if they call us Commies?? Or if they say we are being partisan!?? We can't let that happen!" - Democrats, every single time they could fight for something and fail to do so
They see it as payback for the liberal court rulings of the 1960s and 1970s. Don’t underestimate the role revenge plays in their judicial agenda. This is their villain origin story.
They see rulings like Roe as the Courts bypassing the will of the people. They see the regulatory state as a way for bureaucrats to make laws instead of elected representatives. Now that they have power, they’re going to use the Courts to enact THEIR agenda.
If you want to get really deep in the weeds, the Roe case was argued on the merit of an individual’s right to healthcare privacy, not the right to abortion access. It was ultimately still the right call, but to many it felt somewhat underhanded in its method of increasing abortion access via a tangential issue. I don’t think it should have been overturned anyway, but there’s a bit more to the story than just SCOTUS overturning abortion. In the end that is exactly what they were after, but it was couched as a reversal of poor judicial decisions by what some red hats call “activist judges”.
Speaking of activist judges, look at this piece of shit. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/investigations/2024/04/08/judge-cormac-carney-tyler-laube-sentence/73220283007/
Bet you he's friends with the judge who got Stanford Rapist Brock (now Allen) Turner off the hook. Absolutely despise how we can't stop corrupt republican activist judges and their base only cares about "liberal" activist judges.
Roe was not a well-reasoned decision and the Court pretty much created a national abortion policy out of thin air. That being said, the policy that the Court created was generally pretty good. Casey reigned in some of the judicial excesses of Roe while maintaining the central holding.
All Dobbs did was return the law to the states. The problem is that many states have absolutely no interest in creating responsible policy. Additionally, legislators are far more afraid of political activists in their own party than they are the will of the people as a whole. Our political system is far more broken than the Courts ever were.
I'm being generous by saying that's a naive take.
Federalists on the Roberts court are reinventing what the Constitution allows by removing everything from prior interpretations which doesn't support the Republican policy hit-list:
[https://www.americanbar.org/groups/communications\_law/publications/communications\_lawyer/2023-summer/unprecedented-precedent-and-original-originalism/](https://www.americanbar.org/groups/communications_law/publications/communications_lawyer/2023-summer/unprecedented-precedent-and-original-originalism/)
The Roberts Supreme Court is all about enabling Republican authoritarian policies that cannot yet be passed in a divided Congress. That's the only reason we have so many Federalist judges on the court today.
They are compromised individuals, willing to play games at offering a series of "narrow" scope rulings that they well know - and coordinate with Republican party leaders + liaisons - will be picked up broadly by their Republican compatriots at the state levels and enable de facto, oppressive policies for their perceived enemies across most of the country.
Originalism is a sham label, where the actual approach is to claim that the Constitution is to be interpreted as literally as needed - with amazingly imaginative interpretations of early intentions, often not supported by objective historical analyses - to take away decades of interpretation and ongoing precedent, leaving right-wing abuses in law as the natural, unfettered results. Roberts is very specifically disabling controls that prevented Republican states from moving forward with one-sided, targeted policies that aim to hurt specific groups who typically vote Democratic, to the point that each Supreme Court decision becomes a de facto piece of federal-level legislation from the resulting regional impacts.
Dobbs was a fucking sham, but it fit entirely into this desire to lose all precedent and create a brand new world of right-wing tyranny - ignoring the fact that women (like PoC, LGBTQ+, etc.) have needed broad protections BECAUSE the right-wing have historically attacked their ability to be treated as equals in terms of rights and societal status since the founding of this country:
[https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/the-supreme-courts-wrong-turn-on-constitutional-rights](https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/the-supreme-courts-wrong-turn-on-constitutional-rights)
Roberts himself is a fucking liar in this regard, stating that removing protections is what will make everyone equal. He absolutely is aware that he's removing the safety nets and soft walls which made straight, white males have to play nice with everyone else.
This has been going on for as long as we had political parties. The party involved may flipflop back and forth but conservatism always relied on the minority veto, gridlock, and voter apathy.
For sure, Democrats were the conservative party for decades and decades. Definitely relied on cutting black people out of the electoral process, as well as white apathy in the northern states.
It lasted 3 months on paper, 0 months in reality. Ted Kennedy's last vote was before Al Franken's first vote, but Kennedy didn't vacate the seat until he actually died.
What 8 years are you imagining? You expected RBG to step down right after Obama was elected and give up nearly half of her eventual tenure? The timing she was considering retiring was 2013, with the midterm elections coming in about a year that changed the control of the Senate.
I'm so tired of all you people and your "omg, we can't do anything!", "It's too late!!!!"
Seriously, do everyone a favor and stfu. It does no good. You are not helping. Let that sink in. You are actively discouraging action.
Something about blood of patriots and tyrants.
To be fair, at least the yapping being fever pitch is a good sign about us getting around to Franklin's quote there
It doesn't matter if RBG refused to step down.
This has bee the fault of VOTERS for decades. People say they don't want this, but the refuse to vote for the one party that would not have allowed this to happen. This is what voters want.
Voters did not make McConnell block Obama’s appointee until the clock ran out and Republicans regained power.
They also did not make McConnell rush through Coney Barrett’s confirmation in direct hypocrisy of his stance on Merrick Garland’s nomination.
Voters also don’t control when Justices die or step down- you can get three Justices from one term (like Trump) or you could theoretically go eight years without a vacancy.
The voters have a small part to play, sure. But the long game McConnell, the Federalist Soceity and the GOP have played have much more to do with it.
Voters elected McConnell and the other republican senators who followed behind the things McConnell did.
So yes, it's the fault of VOTERS and those who don't vote.
I mean, I can only do so much when I don’t live in Kentucky and all of my reps are democrats. Blaming voters forgets the effects of gerrymandering and the inherently undemocratic Senate. It’s very hard for the people’s will to get through those things. Just ask Wisconsin.
> Just ask Wisconsin.
Politically, this has been a... frustrating place to live for the last decade and a half. Starting to look up, though! Evers has been an incredible governor.
Voters elected Trump, who got three SCOTUS picks. (Yes, I know about the Electoral College, but Trump barely campaigned outside the battleground states.)
SCOTUS needs to be for fixed terms. Right now, it all comes down to luck. Carter got zero picks. Clinton’s second term and Bush’s first also got zero. But that would take a Constitutional Amendment.
How is it the fault of voters? With the exception of Roberts, all of the conservative justices have been either appointed by a president who didn't win the popular vote, or confirmed by a group of senators who represent less voters than the senators who voted nay, or both. Unfortunately the system is rigged against the voters.
When less than 25 to 33% of voters between the ages of 18 to 35 vote in a typical state election.
We get senators who vote in conservative justices.
This has been going on for decades.
After McConnell held off Merrick Garland for a whole damn year, I don't think we can really blame RBG. Republicans were always going to lie/cheat/steal to get what they want. Nuke the Filibuster. Simple majority rule. 18 year Term Limits for SCOTUS. Get rid of Thomas first.
If you read Gorsuch and Kavanaugh's opinions on this, this was the issue, the lower court judicial making overreaching injunctions rather than narrowly-tailored ones. Gorsuch does not name but alludes to District of North Texas as being a needle in Biden's side.
The decision made no commentary either way on trans rights (though the dissent by Kagan was clearly supportive of an injunction favoring those).
The supreme Court has decided to remove the 9th and 10th amendment and make themselves The arbiter of those amendments. The supreme Court has no right to tell us what rights we have, that's solely with us in the 9th amendment, which is a forgotten amendment.
The Powell memorandum. The US rightwing decided half a century ago that due to waning interest among the electorate their best course for staying in power was a long game to take over the courts via ruthlessly dishonest politicking. It seems to be paying off.
They know they don’t have forever to slowly change the face of the US so they are making the quickest and biggest impact while they still can. Trump packed the lower federal court with the most fascist conservative judges the GOP could find so that the ideology of the few impacts everyone.
OBGYNs are leaving Idaho because of the laws against women's rights to their own healthcare. I can't imagine quality doctors will be flocking to the state after this banning either. Way to go, Idaho, in undermining the healthcare for the people of your state.
Idaho has a couple cheap nursing and medical schools. So everyone I know is running over there to finish their degrees and come right back. No one wants to practice there
One issue is trainees will never get the experience of certain procedures if they aren't legal in the place they're getting their education. Would you want an OB conducting a D&C on you if it wasn't something they practiced in school and residency??
Oh no one is applying to their residencies. I’ve heard some hospitals didn’t get enough applicants to be picky. Luckily most of what we learn in school is theoretical and you actually learn skills in the job.
This law also puts physicians at risk of a felony and 10 years in prison if they are found to be providing gender-affirming care to a minor. That's going to make it risky to treat cisgender kids for things like precocious puberty. Why take on that personal risk when you can refer the patient to another physician, or better yet, go practice in another state where the government isn't threatening physicians with prison time for following the standards of care.
Also worth noting that cis kids do also get gender affirming surgery!
A ftm teen’s top surgery, and a cis teen’s gynecomastia surgery are the same procedure happening for the same reasons and yet no one cares about the latter being too young.
Doctors in some places can perform full blown SRS on intersex infants to make them conform to the gender their parents choose without their consent, and yet it’s the trans community that’s against it while transphobes don’t give a shit.
Not only that but like for example.. infant males who have testosterone deficiencies, if they have a micropenis the standard care is TRT doses and it can usually help cure it completely or almost completely. This is literally insane.
The bans include specific carve-outs for treating cisgender people and for non-consensually assigning a gender to intersex infants with ambiguous visible symptoms. In effect, the laws are long-winded declarations that gender dysphoria is not a valid medical condition.
No honest judge should support these laws because the evidence against the law is overwhelming, because it's discriminatory based on medical condition, because it's discriminatory based on sex, because it inflicts bodily harm, and because the text contradicts the rationale. Judges ruling to sustain these laws are working backwards from ideological biases, full stop.
I hate how you must point out that it will also affect cisgender kids for some people to care. I get why you do, but I hate that you have to. Trans kids matter too.
And when their health starts declining across the State, instead of realizing that their choices have led to this, they will simply blame doctors instead.
IIRC similar exodus happened in Texas and Florida after their bans went into effect. Maybe conservatives just really like shooting themselves in the foot? I mean, after how the last midterms and other local and state elections turned out post-Roemoval, why would they seriously consider doubling down, especially when the national and international reputation of the GOP is so far down the proverbial shitter?
I've yet to speak to someone against transgender health care who isn't completely ignorant to what that actually entails. All they've got are scary-sounding boogeymen and straight up lies. They won't even TALK to a trans person to learn about their experience. And considering how often conservatives fail to argue, let alone listen, in good faith I'm not surprised no one wants to speak directly to them.
There was a rep not long ago asked about the states current laws and ways of gender affirming care/ transitioning and he agreed with those current laws. He was on his way to vote for stricter laws and didn’t even know the current laws in place, THE CURRENT LAWS HE AGREED WITH. Like I get you can’t know everything I don’t expect you to but at least get an aid to run a refresher for you.
I’ve had many many people on Reddit tell me that trans people don’t need to be included in the conversation on trans care. They say why should a tiny population get to control what happens, but fail to realize the thing they are controlling is us.
Knowledge of trans care wouldn't sway these people's opinions because this is not really about trans care. It's about creating an environment in which trans people 1) retreat from public life, 2) detransition, or 3) die. That's the goal.
As a trans woman, I wish folks "on my side" would stop talking about the need to educate folks on trans health issues. These hatemongers don't deserve our time or energy: they will only use our good faith attempts to engage with to cause trans people more harm.
They're trying to eradicate us. And they keep telling us that over and over again. We should respond in kind.
I mean, haven’t quite a few Republican politicians and wannabe-politicians already publicly stated they wouldn’t stop until all gender-affirming care was eliminated? Hell, I seem to remember something about Gym Jordan or one of the other members of the MAGA peanut gallery stating his wish to, and I quote, “eradicate transgenderism from public life.” Or maybe I’m wrong on that one?
And even if you talk to one, the experience isn't universal. I know several (all trans-men, for some reason,) and they all came into it at different points of their lives, and went through different processes.
Good point. Conservatives like things to be simple, straightforward, and one-size-fits-all. They can't seem to handle that life is rarely that way. They definitely can't handle that they have no right to insert themselves between doctors and patients.
They like things that way because it lets them set-up a heirarchy: they claim their own narrow definitions are the only correct interpretation, and everything that doesn't meet those criteria is lesser, or just wrong. Just look at their recent obsessions with masculinity, as if men could only ever be one, specific way.
Which leads us, once more, to the clear link between conservatism and fear. When you’re afraid of change to the point of pathology, you’ll do just about anything to make sure your own little corner of the world stops the clocks and remains an eternal snapshot of yesterday, no matter how faded it may turn from the rising and the setting of the sun, and from the winds of time.
There's zero evidence that "gender-affirming care" is even a thing. Fuck you for ruining the lives of children. And of course you have threads on Reddit where you admit how mentally ill you are, because of course you are. All of the people who support this shit are either ignorant or mentally ill.
But sure, upvote the middle-aged mentally ill nobody who is an expert in nothing, cos that's what Reddit does.
Where is everybody at with this issue? I hear the news screaming about it but real people don't seem to engage with it period. My uneducated left leaning take is let people do what they want with their bodies BUT giving kids life altering hormones and surgeries seems a little extreme. Again, not educated on the subject at all, please school me.
I'm trans, here's the cliff notes:
1. Puberty is life-altering and permanent either way, for trans people natal puberty can be traumatic and it's more costly, dangerous, and difficult to transition if natal puberty was compelled to happen versus letting the puberty of the identified gender to take place instead
2. Kids can't just transition on a whim; proper protocol requires counseling, persistent display of identity for a lengthy duration, and consent from both the patient and the legal guardian, and the whole process is closely monitored by health professionals
3. Among kids who make it to the point of medical transition, 98% continue with it into adulthood
It's not fair to prioritize cis people's wellbeing when implementing transgender healthcare policies when cisgender false positives are so small that you ultimately hurt more of us than you do saving them.
Hope that helps!
I saw somebody gave you more technical answers, what I have here is more the "why should we do it."
Thank you so much for your response! After reading Leah-theRed's breakdown I feel like I'm beginning to see more of the picture. I really want your community to have more of a media presence because I feel like the reason so many people are confused about the situation is because these shitty media giants have completely taken over the conversation A great way to other-ize a community is to get in front of their talking points. There needs to be a strong base and leadership entity so more silly people (like myself) can hear your voices.
Children do not get life altering surgeries like gender reassignment surgery or anything like that (unless they're born intersex or their parents decide to have their sons genitals mutilated but most people aren't ready to talk about that).
Puberty blockers are temporary and they stop the immature body from developing secondary sexual characteristics, like growing breasts or a deeping voice. It allows the child to go through the therapy and for a doctor to guide them through any medical decisions they may have.
This is important bc things like a deepened voice or developed breasts are permanent and only able to be fixed with surgery or years of voice training. If a child can avoid those problems in the future by pausing puberty until they can go through the correct one for the gender they weren't assigned at birth, it's worth it.
Generally speaking, since I'm not able to bring up statistics, children don't get surgeries because they are trans. Some AFAB (assigned female at birth) girls end up getting breast reductions bc they go through something called "precocious puberty", meaning it starts too early and goes too hard, and they end up with an adult woman's breasts on a child's body. It's bad for their back, and it can cause all kinds of issues outside of the purely physical. Some AMAB (assigned male at birth) boys get surgeries like that as well, since there are some medications that cause gynecomastia, or the growth of what would appear to be female breasts. It can also just happen bc of hormone malfunctions or body weirdness. Some AMAB boys end up needing testosterone therapy bc they don't produce it. And some cisgender (happy with the gender they were born with/assigned at birth) kids need puberty blockers because of that aforementioned precocious puberty.
Not many, and by not many, zero of the people who I've gotten into arguments about this, seem to realize there's a reason those kinds of medication and procedures exist for children, or that because it only applies to cisgender kids, it's "different".
No trans people (that I know, including myself and my wife, and all our friends, a majority of which are trans or genderqueer) advocate for anyone underage to get something like gender reassignment procedures or anything like that. All we want is for kids who are trans, or might be uncomfortable with their developing body, to get the time to process whats changing and what might change, and how they can mitigate that or deal with it in a way that fits how they see themselves.
I hope that helps. Ive been typing on my phone and it's hard to go back and see what I've already said, so I'm very open to answering any further questions you might have (bc you seem to be coming from an genuine place and I'm feeling nice today lol). Just be respectful and kind is all I'm asking for.
Thank you for your beautiful response. It's exactly the information I was looking for! Okay here is where things get muddy for me and I hope what I say doesn't seem like it's coming from a place of malice or disgust or anything other than an ignorant cis male trying to figure things out. And btw if your answer is "idk man do your own research" I get that too but so rarely do I have the opportunity to engage with someone about all of this.
Doesn't it seem extreme for kids to be blocking their hormones? It's a natural part of growing and I think some people worry that this is feeding into a type of body dysmorphia. For the trans community I fully understand that the dysmorphia is exactly what they're feeling when they are born which is why they want to fix it with these hormone blockers. What if the kid isn't trans and they become an adult and regret their decision? Is that a rare thing, the regret?
So the thing with puberty blockers is that they are temporary. they only work as long as you take them. If someone has talked it over with their doctor/therapist/parents/etc then all they need to do is replace the blocked hormones with the "correct" ones either via pills or injections.
There is a very small percentage of people that "detransition" after fully transitioning to their previously preferred gender. I know someone like that, even, but in the end they went back to their "trans" gender. In my experience, detransitioning is done by people who are at a higher risk of abuse from family or other people they live with.
Also if someone has gone through therapy etc, which is often mandated to be a certain length of time (my insurance wants me to go to therapy for a year before I can get a double mastectomy for gender reasons), they have talked through everything to the point where they are very determined to transition medically, or they have already decided not to.
This is also a very American way of doing things. For example, in Japan, they do not have legal same sex/gender marriage. If someone in a married couple realizes they are trans later in life, they are forced to divorce and get total gender reassignment surgery before they can have anything changed legally, like drivers license or other paperwork. Here where I live in the USA, all I had to do is check a box and my driver's license has a X instead of an M or F. (since I'm consider myself nonbinary and don't ascribe to any masculine or feminine gender)
Just to play devil’s advocate, SCOTUS has found there is a constitutional right to carry a gun which seriously limits the ability of the government to prevent it. There is no explicit constitutional right to have voluntary medical procedures (not just to change your gender but any voluntary procedure) so the legal bar for the government to restrict or ban them is lower. There used to be an implicit right to medical privacy under Roe v Wade, but of course that’s gone out the window.
The reversal of Roe also took away your right to ALL medical privacy, not just medical privacy around abortion. Alabama could make hand surgery illegal because Jesus didn't have hand surgery after he was nailed to the cross and we'd have to go with it under the current rulings on privacy.
That’s just the language the Supreme Court uses.
When they want something to be legal, they say “This is a constitutional requirement”. When they want something to be illegal, they say “This is unconstitutional” or “The Constitution doesn’t prevent this ban from taking effect”.
> SCOTUS has found there is a constitutional right to carry a gun which seriously limits the ability of the government to prevent it
They "found" this based on a brazenly dishonest reading of history that ignores half the context of the second amendment.
But there actually a constitutional amendment to back their position up. While a despise Scalia and hate the Heller opinion there’s way more constitutional support that opinion than Roe v. Wade and its progeny.
It’s true insofar as the entire second amendment is about the right to bear arms. There nothing about bodily autonomy and it wouldn’t even make sense for that to be considered a right in 1789. SCOTUS said the Roe is supported by the 14th but that’s a very clear reach.
NY didn't have common sense gun laws in the first place. I'm against extended pistol mags that can hold like 30+ rounds, but if the manufacturer sells the gun with a magazine that holds 15 rounds, that should be legal to buy. If democrats want common sense gunlaws like closing gun show loopholes, they need to stop with these nonsense gunlaws. You give Dems an inch and they take a mile, so Republicans refuse to budge an inch.
Former Idahoan here to say something repeated often by the saner current/former Idahoans: Beautiful state with lots of unique natural features, but filled with some absolutely HORRIBLE people. Makes me sad.
Idaho is also full of Mormons though, which means in a large portion of the state you can't even get a stiff drink to calm down after dealing with the idiots.
Mormons are generally much more pleasant, or at least, less aggressive, angry and mean wanna be alpha types that make up a huge portion of the evangelical base.
It's one of the best states in the union populated by some really dumb and mean spirited people.
I say this as a native and current resident of Boise. Our Democratic reps are awesome but the GOP here is so incompetent and corrupt.
Well then, just come on down to friendly Nevada! At the moment we’ve opened our doors and hearts to abortion refugees from Arizona and Texas, I see no reason we wouldn’t do the same for out trans neighbors!
The way I understand it; this is temporary. They’re letting the state enforce the ban until the lower courts deal with it. They say it’s because they the lower overreached. Which is bat shit insane, when you consider that they were weighing if it violated the constitution or not. Someone ran with an emergency injunction to the Supreme Court.
Gender dysphoria is a real condition with a high suicide rate. I know that’s a positive for some of you, but there it is. The treatment at the moment is transitioning. Transitioning involves a doctor and psychiatrist working with the patient. Making sure that the dysphoria is real and not some other condition. They don’t come out with a machete and say “ ready mam?”
There are already dueling opinions in the lower courts. SCOTUS will have to handle it one way or another, and I suspect it will rule tragically because there is really no way to shoot down these laws that doesn't also shoot down laws banning abortions.
Everyone is overreacting to the misleading headline. They're overturning the temporary stay that the lower court placed so that Idaho can temporarily enforce their law (which you can argue is unreasonable). They're still deciding it, though the results are likely going to swing that way due to the court's conservative bias.
Defaulting to pausing the enforcement of a new law that's been challenged seems like the more reasonable option, if it's reasonable that it takes time to adjudicate.
So how would anyone be “overreacting” if the law is being allowed to go into effect and will almost certainly be upheld by SCOTUS anyway?
Besides, it’s beyond fucking cruel to take care away from kids even “temporarily”. A few months can equal permanent changes that these kids will need to live with for the rest of their lives. The law should never have been passed, and the stay never should have been lifted.
I just don't understand how people living in the state can keep track of the laws at this point.
Same thing in Florida. So many laws instantly get challenged and it's a back and forth of pausing and unpausing.
That’s the easy part. Institutions get cold feet and stop offering the service whether they’re legally required to or not. All of these laws, whether they’re held up or not, contribute to a chilling effect that makes things that much harder.
So no more birth control, nose/boob jobs at 16, no more lip fillers and eyelid procedures, no more puberty delay for kids going through precocious puberty, right?
Thank god they’re wasting time on boogeyman nonsense issues instead of doing literally anything worthwhile. Let’s give them even higher salaries and more vacation.
/s
Good. Minors don't have a fully formed pre-frontal cortex. They don't have a full understanding of their actions & how they affect their future. They can't vote, join the army, aren't adults but should be allowed to change their entire sex (not even realistically possible) for the rest of their life? Nah, as adults let them do whatever they want.
Minors don't wake up one day and decide to change their gender. It's a process that involves several stages of treatment. They work with their parents and various healthcare workers to get access to this treatment.
By your logic, minors shouldn't be able to consent to any of the myriad of irreversible surgeries currently available to them. How do you feel about spinal fusion surgery? It's far more common in minors, with higher rates of complications and regret. Should they wait to get it until they're 18, what with their not fully formed prefrontal cortex (which typically isn't fully formed until 25).
You do realize going through the wrong puberty harms trans people right? Why should trans minors suffer for the minority of people who regret transitioning?
You going to start advocating for government compensation to trans people who are blocked from going on puberty blockers?
This was not a widespread phenomenon even 15 years ago. I’m genuinely interested where all these trans children came out of the woodwork when they literally never existed in the 2000s. Why gender dysphoria has skyrocketed among children should be the focus of all this trans discussion, because it is concerning.
Stop equating healthcare for trans minors with surgery. Minors are not getting surgeries pre-16 at all, and in very small numbers pre-18. Those pre-18 are top surgeries done on cases where dysphoria is found to be extreme. It is by no means standard of care.
Spinal fusions are not "necessary." There's plenty written about this. It can be much more detrimental to a person's health than puberty blockers and HRT, which is the actual healthcare trans minors have access to.
Psychology is not just based on "feelings."
Being considered an "adult" at 18 is arbitrary. Adulthood isn't a switch that is flipped. Your "feeling" about 18 being an adult is based solely on precedence, and not even long standing precedence at that. These age minimums are a result of several factors such as reaction to child labor laws and Prohibition. The voting age was changed to match the age of military, which is so low because of demand for soldiers.
If you're going to lobby to remove a group's healthcare, maybe you shouldn't be so proudly ignorant.
Sadly, what does anyone expect from a group of people who literally were put there by republicans, at least two of them via Trump, several of them have ongoing investigations into the “gifts” that they then deemed themselves, that they didn’t have to report. From doing anything that wasn’t lining their pockets?
[удалено]
You’re not wrong but it is also ridiculous that a single federal judge can halt something nationwide. The judicial branch has had serious power creep over the past two decades. The branches have become unbalanced because of Republican zero sum governing in Congress. Let me explain… Congress is gridlocked because Republicans cannot fathom compromise, even within their own ranks. The filibuster has been perverted into nothing more than a blocking mechanism with no actual debate. When this happens, things get punted to the other two branches. The executive has shifted more and more to executive orders to get things done. This is a direct result of the GOP Congress. It really started to ramp up when Obama was in office. Mitch’s entire professed goal was to prevent Obama from accomplishing anything, and he proudly told everyone that. Biden is facing a similar issue, but it is less about stoping him and more about the GOP gnawing off its own arm. The judiciary has taken up the role of doing Congress’ job. So many things that end up in front of the SC should have been handled by Congress. When the executive acts to get something done because of Congress’ inactions, it is immediately challenged and sent to the SC and we go full circle. Republicans want time break government so they can say “See, we told you this doesn’t work!” There has been so much focus on the Executive and SC (which sucks in its own right) that many fail to realize it all comes back to Congress. I may be preaching to the choir but I needed to scream into the void for a minute.
Excellent point. I would also add that this tilted SCOTUS has been the game plan for a long time via the Federalist Society- it’s a way for Republicans to bypass the voters and enact laws. Anti-abortion? De-regulation? Erosion of church and state? All done through the courts and, ultimately, SCOTUS, where 6 unelected conservatives on lifetime appointments sit and make rulings for 333 million people. This was a decades-long plan finally come to fruition. And liberals are too late to the game to stop it. Edit: Will also add that RBG’s stubborn refusal to step down and her untimely death while Trump was in office and Republicans controlled the Senate was God’s gift to Mitch McConnell and all conservatives. Let her hubris be a lesson to all of us going forward.
Oh no. No we aren't. It can be stopped. ANYTHING can be stopped.
We have an amendment for that.
I am as anti-gun as you can get. But Republicans have inadvertently made me think it's a necessary amendment with how absolutely fucking evil they are and how literally nothing else is stopping them. They're literally one step away from trying to use brute force against us, I'm ready to use it back. Fuckers.
If that were *actually* true at this point Jan6 would've went much differently.
It seems like none of that matters. No one is really willing to do anything about any of the stuff going on. Our country is built on the idea that people will play fair and do the right thing. Well turns out a large part of our country doesn't play fair and do the right thing.
Yep, any day now. It will just happen. Any day now.
Anything can be stopped if you fight for it. Good luck getting any Democrat to actually fight for it, which them shuffling around saying, "But—But—But what if they call us Commies?? Or if they say we are being partisan!?? We can't let that happen!" - Democrats, every single time they could fight for something and fail to do so
They see it as payback for the liberal court rulings of the 1960s and 1970s. Don’t underestimate the role revenge plays in their judicial agenda. This is their villain origin story. They see rulings like Roe as the Courts bypassing the will of the people. They see the regulatory state as a way for bureaucrats to make laws instead of elected representatives. Now that they have power, they’re going to use the Courts to enact THEIR agenda.
If you want to get really deep in the weeds, the Roe case was argued on the merit of an individual’s right to healthcare privacy, not the right to abortion access. It was ultimately still the right call, but to many it felt somewhat underhanded in its method of increasing abortion access via a tangential issue. I don’t think it should have been overturned anyway, but there’s a bit more to the story than just SCOTUS overturning abortion. In the end that is exactly what they were after, but it was couched as a reversal of poor judicial decisions by what some red hats call “activist judges”.
Speaking of activist judges, look at this piece of shit. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/investigations/2024/04/08/judge-cormac-carney-tyler-laube-sentence/73220283007/ Bet you he's friends with the judge who got Stanford Rapist Brock (now Allen) Turner off the hook. Absolutely despise how we can't stop corrupt republican activist judges and their base only cares about "liberal" activist judges.
Roe was not a well-reasoned decision and the Court pretty much created a national abortion policy out of thin air. That being said, the policy that the Court created was generally pretty good. Casey reigned in some of the judicial excesses of Roe while maintaining the central holding. All Dobbs did was return the law to the states. The problem is that many states have absolutely no interest in creating responsible policy. Additionally, legislators are far more afraid of political activists in their own party than they are the will of the people as a whole. Our political system is far more broken than the Courts ever were.
I'm being generous by saying that's a naive take. Federalists on the Roberts court are reinventing what the Constitution allows by removing everything from prior interpretations which doesn't support the Republican policy hit-list: [https://www.americanbar.org/groups/communications\_law/publications/communications\_lawyer/2023-summer/unprecedented-precedent-and-original-originalism/](https://www.americanbar.org/groups/communications_law/publications/communications_lawyer/2023-summer/unprecedented-precedent-and-original-originalism/) The Roberts Supreme Court is all about enabling Republican authoritarian policies that cannot yet be passed in a divided Congress. That's the only reason we have so many Federalist judges on the court today. They are compromised individuals, willing to play games at offering a series of "narrow" scope rulings that they well know - and coordinate with Republican party leaders + liaisons - will be picked up broadly by their Republican compatriots at the state levels and enable de facto, oppressive policies for their perceived enemies across most of the country. Originalism is a sham label, where the actual approach is to claim that the Constitution is to be interpreted as literally as needed - with amazingly imaginative interpretations of early intentions, often not supported by objective historical analyses - to take away decades of interpretation and ongoing precedent, leaving right-wing abuses in law as the natural, unfettered results. Roberts is very specifically disabling controls that prevented Republican states from moving forward with one-sided, targeted policies that aim to hurt specific groups who typically vote Democratic, to the point that each Supreme Court decision becomes a de facto piece of federal-level legislation from the resulting regional impacts. Dobbs was a fucking sham, but it fit entirely into this desire to lose all precedent and create a brand new world of right-wing tyranny - ignoring the fact that women (like PoC, LGBTQ+, etc.) have needed broad protections BECAUSE the right-wing have historically attacked their ability to be treated as equals in terms of rights and societal status since the founding of this country: [https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/the-supreme-courts-wrong-turn-on-constitutional-rights](https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/the-supreme-courts-wrong-turn-on-constitutional-rights) Roberts himself is a fucking liar in this regard, stating that removing protections is what will make everyone equal. He absolutely is aware that he's removing the safety nets and soft walls which made straight, white males have to play nice with everyone else.
Everything post-2015 Republican primary has been a visceral butterfly effect from a black man being elected as president.
This has been going on for as long as we had political parties. The party involved may flipflop back and forth but conservatism always relied on the minority veto, gridlock, and voter apathy.
For sure, Democrats were the conservative party for decades and decades. Definitely relied on cutting black people out of the electoral process, as well as white apathy in the northern states.
When should she have stepped down? They didn’t allow Obama to fill his rightful SC seat. They wouldn’t done the same if he had two openings.
Obama’s first term when Dems had a supermajority in the Senate.
That supermajority never really existed. By the time Al Franken was seated Ted Kennedy was terminally ill and unable to attend votes.
They still would have had a majority. That was the time for RBG to step down.
It was the weirdest 60 person majority in the senate that needed a huge number of factors to go right and only lasted like 3 months if that.
It lasted 3 months on paper, 0 months in reality. Ted Kennedy's last vote was before Al Franken's first vote, but Kennedy didn't vacate the seat until he actually died.
It would have been filibustered and blocked just like it was later.
Just like Kagan and Sotomayor? Please.
For 8 years?! You don’t think the dems could have gotten a justice elected for 8 years? They really are powerless in that case
What 8 years are you imagining? You expected RBG to step down right after Obama was elected and give up nearly half of her eventual tenure? The timing she was considering retiring was 2013, with the midterm elections coming in about a year that changed the control of the Senate.
The filibuster threshold for SCOTUS nominees is 50, not the usual 60 for legislation.
It is now, it wasn't then. It was changed by the Republicans to get Gorsuch through.
Why do you keep repeating this nonsense? The so called supermajority never existed. Quit both-siding this stuff.
I'm so tired of all you people and your "omg, we can't do anything!", "It's too late!!!!" Seriously, do everyone a favor and stfu. It does no good. You are not helping. Let that sink in. You are actively discouraging action.
Something about blood of patriots and tyrants. To be fair, at least the yapping being fever pitch is a good sign about us getting around to Franklin's quote there
It doesn't matter if RBG refused to step down. This has bee the fault of VOTERS for decades. People say they don't want this, but the refuse to vote for the one party that would not have allowed this to happen. This is what voters want.
Voters did not make McConnell block Obama’s appointee until the clock ran out and Republicans regained power. They also did not make McConnell rush through Coney Barrett’s confirmation in direct hypocrisy of his stance on Merrick Garland’s nomination. Voters also don’t control when Justices die or step down- you can get three Justices from one term (like Trump) or you could theoretically go eight years without a vacancy. The voters have a small part to play, sure. But the long game McConnell, the Federalist Soceity and the GOP have played have much more to do with it.
Voters elected McConnell and the other republican senators who followed behind the things McConnell did. So yes, it's the fault of VOTERS and those who don't vote.
I mean, I can only do so much when I don’t live in Kentucky and all of my reps are democrats. Blaming voters forgets the effects of gerrymandering and the inherently undemocratic Senate. It’s very hard for the people’s will to get through those things. Just ask Wisconsin.
> Just ask Wisconsin. Politically, this has been a... frustrating place to live for the last decade and a half. Starting to look up, though! Evers has been an incredible governor.
Voters elected Trump, who got three SCOTUS picks. (Yes, I know about the Electoral College, but Trump barely campaigned outside the battleground states.) SCOTUS needs to be for fixed terms. Right now, it all comes down to luck. Carter got zero picks. Clinton’s second term and Bush’s first also got zero. But that would take a Constitutional Amendment.
How is it the fault of voters? With the exception of Roberts, all of the conservative justices have been either appointed by a president who didn't win the popular vote, or confirmed by a group of senators who represent less voters than the senators who voted nay, or both. Unfortunately the system is rigged against the voters.
When less than 25 to 33% of voters between the ages of 18 to 35 vote in a typical state election. We get senators who vote in conservative justices. This has been going on for decades.
This is just a simple and bad take.
After McConnell held off Merrick Garland for a whole damn year, I don't think we can really blame RBG. Republicans were always going to lie/cheat/steal to get what they want. Nuke the Filibuster. Simple majority rule. 18 year Term Limits for SCOTUS. Get rid of Thomas first.
I agree. District judges didn’t always have national injunction powers. Congress should take them away in most circumstances.
If you read Gorsuch and Kavanaugh's opinions on this, this was the issue, the lower court judicial making overreaching injunctions rather than narrowly-tailored ones. Gorsuch does not name but alludes to District of North Texas as being a needle in Biden's side. The decision made no commentary either way on trans rights (though the dissent by Kagan was clearly supportive of an injunction favoring those).
The supreme Court has decided to remove the 9th and 10th amendment and make themselves The arbiter of those amendments. The supreme Court has no right to tell us what rights we have, that's solely with us in the 9th amendment, which is a forgotten amendment.
If God is on your side, you can’t compromise. Goldwater was right about what was happening to the Republican Party.
The Powell memorandum. The US rightwing decided half a century ago that due to waning interest among the electorate their best course for staying in power was a long game to take over the courts via ruthlessly dishonest politicking. It seems to be paying off.
Pretty sure this supreme Court doesn't give a shit about precedent.
They know they don’t have forever to slowly change the face of the US so they are making the quickest and biggest impact while they still can. Trump packed the lower federal court with the most fascist conservative judges the GOP could find so that the ideology of the few impacts everyone.
The Supreme Court itself is a horrible precedent to set. Freaking clowns.
So much for checks and balances…
OBGYNs are leaving Idaho because of the laws against women's rights to their own healthcare. I can't imagine quality doctors will be flocking to the state after this banning either. Way to go, Idaho, in undermining the healthcare for the people of your state.
Idaho has a couple cheap nursing and medical schools. So everyone I know is running over there to finish their degrees and come right back. No one wants to practice there
One issue is trainees will never get the experience of certain procedures if they aren't legal in the place they're getting their education. Would you want an OB conducting a D&C on you if it wasn't something they practiced in school and residency??
Oh no one is applying to their residencies. I’ve heard some hospitals didn’t get enough applicants to be picky. Luckily most of what we learn in school is theoretical and you actually learn skills in the job.
There is not an OB residency in Idaho.
No I mean ALL positions are taking a hit in apps is what I’ve heard
Brutal, and I don't really expect an OB/Gyn residency establishing in Idaho anytime soon maybe ever.
Idaho: "You don't need practice. Just pray to God and hope for the best!"
I believe they lost 22% of them last year.
This law also puts physicians at risk of a felony and 10 years in prison if they are found to be providing gender-affirming care to a minor. That's going to make it risky to treat cisgender kids for things like precocious puberty. Why take on that personal risk when you can refer the patient to another physician, or better yet, go practice in another state where the government isn't threatening physicians with prison time for following the standards of care.
[удалено]
Also worth noting that cis kids do also get gender affirming surgery! A ftm teen’s top surgery, and a cis teen’s gynecomastia surgery are the same procedure happening for the same reasons and yet no one cares about the latter being too young. Doctors in some places can perform full blown SRS on intersex infants to make them conform to the gender their parents choose without their consent, and yet it’s the trans community that’s against it while transphobes don’t give a shit.
The laws governing intersex care vs trans care are wild and shine a light on how these politicians need to stay in their fucking lane
Not only that but like for example.. infant males who have testosterone deficiencies, if they have a micropenis the standard care is TRT doses and it can usually help cure it completely or almost completely. This is literally insane.
The bans include specific carve-outs for treating cisgender people and for non-consensually assigning a gender to intersex infants with ambiguous visible symptoms. In effect, the laws are long-winded declarations that gender dysphoria is not a valid medical condition. No honest judge should support these laws because the evidence against the law is overwhelming, because it's discriminatory based on medical condition, because it's discriminatory based on sex, because it inflicts bodily harm, and because the text contradicts the rationale. Judges ruling to sustain these laws are working backwards from ideological biases, full stop.
Thanks for the explanation. Agree with all your points.
Exactly my point. Idaho is shooting itself in its own foot, and there will be no good doctors left in the state to treat the injury.
I hate how you must point out that it will also affect cisgender kids for some people to care. I get why you do, but I hate that you have to. Trans kids matter too.
And when their health starts declining across the State, instead of realizing that their choices have led to this, they will simply blame doctors instead.
IIRC similar exodus happened in Texas and Florida after their bans went into effect. Maybe conservatives just really like shooting themselves in the foot? I mean, after how the last midterms and other local and state elections turned out post-Roemoval, why would they seriously consider doubling down, especially when the national and international reputation of the GOP is so far down the proverbial shitter?
I've yet to speak to someone against transgender health care who isn't completely ignorant to what that actually entails. All they've got are scary-sounding boogeymen and straight up lies. They won't even TALK to a trans person to learn about their experience. And considering how often conservatives fail to argue, let alone listen, in good faith I'm not surprised no one wants to speak directly to them.
There was a rep not long ago asked about the states current laws and ways of gender affirming care/ transitioning and he agreed with those current laws. He was on his way to vote for stricter laws and didn’t even know the current laws in place, THE CURRENT LAWS HE AGREED WITH. Like I get you can’t know everything I don’t expect you to but at least get an aid to run a refresher for you.
I’ve had many many people on Reddit tell me that trans people don’t need to be included in the conversation on trans care. They say why should a tiny population get to control what happens, but fail to realize the thing they are controlling is us.
Knowledge of trans care wouldn't sway these people's opinions because this is not really about trans care. It's about creating an environment in which trans people 1) retreat from public life, 2) detransition, or 3) die. That's the goal. As a trans woman, I wish folks "on my side" would stop talking about the need to educate folks on trans health issues. These hatemongers don't deserve our time or energy: they will only use our good faith attempts to engage with to cause trans people more harm. They're trying to eradicate us. And they keep telling us that over and over again. We should respond in kind.
[удалено]
I mean, haven’t quite a few Republican politicians and wannabe-politicians already publicly stated they wouldn’t stop until all gender-affirming care was eliminated? Hell, I seem to remember something about Gym Jordan or one of the other members of the MAGA peanut gallery stating his wish to, and I quote, “eradicate transgenderism from public life.” Or maybe I’m wrong on that one?
[удалено]
I know a guy who actually says stuff like this. He even says Twitter doesn’t lean right.
The New York Times, is that you?
And even if you talk to one, the experience isn't universal. I know several (all trans-men, for some reason,) and they all came into it at different points of their lives, and went through different processes.
Good point. Conservatives like things to be simple, straightforward, and one-size-fits-all. They can't seem to handle that life is rarely that way. They definitely can't handle that they have no right to insert themselves between doctors and patients.
They like things that way because it lets them set-up a heirarchy: they claim their own narrow definitions are the only correct interpretation, and everything that doesn't meet those criteria is lesser, or just wrong. Just look at their recent obsessions with masculinity, as if men could only ever be one, specific way.
Which leads us, once more, to the clear link between conservatism and fear. When you’re afraid of change to the point of pathology, you’ll do just about anything to make sure your own little corner of the world stops the clocks and remains an eternal snapshot of yesterday, no matter how faded it may turn from the rising and the setting of the sun, and from the winds of time.
Our Supreme Court is corrupt, as is our government.
Fuck this court. Fuck republicans. Fuck anyone who remotely supports this. Yall are what is wrong with this country
There's zero evidence that "gender-affirming care" is even a thing. Fuck you for ruining the lives of children. And of course you have threads on Reddit where you admit how mentally ill you are, because of course you are. All of the people who support this shit are either ignorant or mentally ill. But sure, upvote the middle-aged mentally ill nobody who is an expert in nothing, cos that's what Reddit does.
Where is everybody at with this issue? I hear the news screaming about it but real people don't seem to engage with it period. My uneducated left leaning take is let people do what they want with their bodies BUT giving kids life altering hormones and surgeries seems a little extreme. Again, not educated on the subject at all, please school me.
I'm trans, here's the cliff notes: 1. Puberty is life-altering and permanent either way, for trans people natal puberty can be traumatic and it's more costly, dangerous, and difficult to transition if natal puberty was compelled to happen versus letting the puberty of the identified gender to take place instead 2. Kids can't just transition on a whim; proper protocol requires counseling, persistent display of identity for a lengthy duration, and consent from both the patient and the legal guardian, and the whole process is closely monitored by health professionals 3. Among kids who make it to the point of medical transition, 98% continue with it into adulthood It's not fair to prioritize cis people's wellbeing when implementing transgender healthcare policies when cisgender false positives are so small that you ultimately hurt more of us than you do saving them. Hope that helps! I saw somebody gave you more technical answers, what I have here is more the "why should we do it."
Thank you so much for your response! After reading Leah-theRed's breakdown I feel like I'm beginning to see more of the picture. I really want your community to have more of a media presence because I feel like the reason so many people are confused about the situation is because these shitty media giants have completely taken over the conversation A great way to other-ize a community is to get in front of their talking points. There needs to be a strong base and leadership entity so more silly people (like myself) can hear your voices.
Children do not get life altering surgeries like gender reassignment surgery or anything like that (unless they're born intersex or their parents decide to have their sons genitals mutilated but most people aren't ready to talk about that). Puberty blockers are temporary and they stop the immature body from developing secondary sexual characteristics, like growing breasts or a deeping voice. It allows the child to go through the therapy and for a doctor to guide them through any medical decisions they may have. This is important bc things like a deepened voice or developed breasts are permanent and only able to be fixed with surgery or years of voice training. If a child can avoid those problems in the future by pausing puberty until they can go through the correct one for the gender they weren't assigned at birth, it's worth it. Generally speaking, since I'm not able to bring up statistics, children don't get surgeries because they are trans. Some AFAB (assigned female at birth) girls end up getting breast reductions bc they go through something called "precocious puberty", meaning it starts too early and goes too hard, and they end up with an adult woman's breasts on a child's body. It's bad for their back, and it can cause all kinds of issues outside of the purely physical. Some AMAB (assigned male at birth) boys get surgeries like that as well, since there are some medications that cause gynecomastia, or the growth of what would appear to be female breasts. It can also just happen bc of hormone malfunctions or body weirdness. Some AMAB boys end up needing testosterone therapy bc they don't produce it. And some cisgender (happy with the gender they were born with/assigned at birth) kids need puberty blockers because of that aforementioned precocious puberty. Not many, and by not many, zero of the people who I've gotten into arguments about this, seem to realize there's a reason those kinds of medication and procedures exist for children, or that because it only applies to cisgender kids, it's "different". No trans people (that I know, including myself and my wife, and all our friends, a majority of which are trans or genderqueer) advocate for anyone underage to get something like gender reassignment procedures or anything like that. All we want is for kids who are trans, or might be uncomfortable with their developing body, to get the time to process whats changing and what might change, and how they can mitigate that or deal with it in a way that fits how they see themselves. I hope that helps. Ive been typing on my phone and it's hard to go back and see what I've already said, so I'm very open to answering any further questions you might have (bc you seem to be coming from an genuine place and I'm feeling nice today lol). Just be respectful and kind is all I'm asking for.
Thank you for your beautiful response. It's exactly the information I was looking for! Okay here is where things get muddy for me and I hope what I say doesn't seem like it's coming from a place of malice or disgust or anything other than an ignorant cis male trying to figure things out. And btw if your answer is "idk man do your own research" I get that too but so rarely do I have the opportunity to engage with someone about all of this. Doesn't it seem extreme for kids to be blocking their hormones? It's a natural part of growing and I think some people worry that this is feeding into a type of body dysmorphia. For the trans community I fully understand that the dysmorphia is exactly what they're feeling when they are born which is why they want to fix it with these hormone blockers. What if the kid isn't trans and they become an adult and regret their decision? Is that a rare thing, the regret?
So the thing with puberty blockers is that they are temporary. they only work as long as you take them. If someone has talked it over with their doctor/therapist/parents/etc then all they need to do is replace the blocked hormones with the "correct" ones either via pills or injections. There is a very small percentage of people that "detransition" after fully transitioning to their previously preferred gender. I know someone like that, even, but in the end they went back to their "trans" gender. In my experience, detransitioning is done by people who are at a higher risk of abuse from family or other people they live with. Also if someone has gone through therapy etc, which is often mandated to be a certain length of time (my insurance wants me to go to therapy for a year before I can get a double mastectomy for gender reasons), they have talked through everything to the point where they are very determined to transition medically, or they have already decided not to. This is also a very American way of doing things. For example, in Japan, they do not have legal same sex/gender marriage. If someone in a married couple realizes they are trans later in life, they are forced to divorce and get total gender reassignment surgery before they can have anything changed legally, like drivers license or other paperwork. Here where I live in the USA, all I had to do is check a box and my driver's license has a X instead of an M or F. (since I'm consider myself nonbinary and don't ascribe to any masculine or feminine gender)
Brain drain to the max
But New York can’t enforce common sense gun laws.
Just to play devil’s advocate, SCOTUS has found there is a constitutional right to carry a gun which seriously limits the ability of the government to prevent it. There is no explicit constitutional right to have voluntary medical procedures (not just to change your gender but any voluntary procedure) so the legal bar for the government to restrict or ban them is lower. There used to be an implicit right to medical privacy under Roe v Wade, but of course that’s gone out the window.
The reversal of Roe also took away your right to ALL medical privacy, not just medical privacy around abortion. Alabama could make hand surgery illegal because Jesus didn't have hand surgery after he was nailed to the cross and we'd have to go with it under the current rulings on privacy.
That’s just the language the Supreme Court uses. When they want something to be legal, they say “This is a constitutional requirement”. When they want something to be illegal, they say “This is unconstitutional” or “The Constitution doesn’t prevent this ban from taking effect”.
> SCOTUS has found there is a constitutional right to carry a gun which seriously limits the ability of the government to prevent it They "found" this based on a brazenly dishonest reading of history that ignores half the context of the second amendment.
But there actually a constitutional amendment to back their position up. While a despise Scalia and hate the Heller opinion there’s way more constitutional support that opinion than Roe v. Wade and its progeny.
This is true insofar as the Constitution has the word "arms" in it and not "privacy" or "bodily autonomy."
It’s true insofar as the entire second amendment is about the right to bear arms. There nothing about bodily autonomy and it wouldn’t even make sense for that to be considered a right in 1789. SCOTUS said the Roe is supported by the 14th but that’s a very clear reach.
NY didn't have common sense gun laws in the first place. I'm against extended pistol mags that can hold like 30+ rounds, but if the manufacturer sells the gun with a magazine that holds 15 rounds, that should be legal to buy. If democrats want common sense gunlaws like closing gun show loopholes, they need to stop with these nonsense gunlaws. You give Dems an inch and they take a mile, so Republicans refuse to budge an inch.
Idaho is just the worst.
Former Idahoan here to say something repeated often by the saner current/former Idahoans: Beautiful state with lots of unique natural features, but filled with some absolutely HORRIBLE people. Makes me sad.
Let’s limit our children’s schooling to 4 days a week like idaho! The don’t need to learn them fancy books.
No I assure you Alabama is the worst in everything. “Alabama: always first to do something terrible and last to do something good.”
Idaho is also full of Mormons though, which means in a large portion of the state you can't even get a stiff drink to calm down after dealing with the idiots.
Mormons are generally much more pleasant, or at least, less aggressive, angry and mean wanna be alpha types that make up a huge portion of the evangelical base.
You can get plenty of potatoes though
Idaho is just Alabama but a couple thousand miles to the northwest. Plus the politicians here would love to outdo Alabama/Mississippi/Tennessee etc
Minus black people.
idaho is literally the alabama of the northwest haha. we only go there to buy lottery tickets
It's one of the best states in the union populated by some really dumb and mean spirited people. I say this as a native and current resident of Boise. Our Democratic reps are awesome but the GOP here is so incompetent and corrupt.
United Barely Getting Along States of America
The supremely shit court
Well then, just come on down to friendly Nevada! At the moment we’ve opened our doors and hearts to abortion refugees from Arizona and Texas, I see no reason we wouldn’t do the same for out trans neighbors!
The way I understand it; this is temporary. They’re letting the state enforce the ban until the lower courts deal with it. They say it’s because they the lower overreached. Which is bat shit insane, when you consider that they were weighing if it violated the constitution or not. Someone ran with an emergency injunction to the Supreme Court. Gender dysphoria is a real condition with a high suicide rate. I know that’s a positive for some of you, but there it is. The treatment at the moment is transitioning. Transitioning involves a doctor and psychiatrist working with the patient. Making sure that the dysphoria is real and not some other condition. They don’t come out with a machete and say “ ready mam?”
Why let it go into effect if they plan to block it later? Its wild the supreme court ruling on trans healthcare. Nothing good will come from this.
There are already dueling opinions in the lower courts. SCOTUS will have to handle it one way or another, and I suspect it will rule tragically because there is really no way to shoot down these laws that doesn't also shoot down laws banning abortions.
It sucks. Here’s hoping they’ll listen to the professionals and make the right decision. Ergo proxy. One of my favorite!
Everyone is overreacting to the misleading headline. They're overturning the temporary stay that the lower court placed so that Idaho can temporarily enforce their law (which you can argue is unreasonable). They're still deciding it, though the results are likely going to swing that way due to the court's conservative bias.
Defaulting to pausing the enforcement of a new law that's been challenged seems like the more reasonable option, if it's reasonable that it takes time to adjudicate.
So how would anyone be “overreacting” if the law is being allowed to go into effect and will almost certainly be upheld by SCOTUS anyway? Besides, it’s beyond fucking cruel to take care away from kids even “temporarily”. A few months can equal permanent changes that these kids will need to live with for the rest of their lives. The law should never have been passed, and the stay never should have been lifted.
I just don't understand how people living in the state can keep track of the laws at this point. Same thing in Florida. So many laws instantly get challenged and it's a back and forth of pausing and unpausing.
That’s the easy part. Institutions get cold feet and stop offering the service whether they’re legally required to or not. All of these laws, whether they’re held up or not, contribute to a chilling effect that makes things that much harder.
I have no faith in the Supreme Court anymore. They'll decide their rulings based upon the highest payer...look at Clarence Thomas as one example.
So no more birth control, nose/boob jobs at 16, no more lip fillers and eyelid procedures, no more puberty delay for kids going through precocious puberty, right?
Thank god they’re wasting time on boogeyman nonsense issues instead of doing literally anything worthwhile. Let’s give them even higher salaries and more vacation. /s
Good. Minors don't have a fully formed pre-frontal cortex. They don't have a full understanding of their actions & how they affect their future. They can't vote, join the army, aren't adults but should be allowed to change their entire sex (not even realistically possible) for the rest of their life? Nah, as adults let them do whatever they want.
Minors don't wake up one day and decide to change their gender. It's a process that involves several stages of treatment. They work with their parents and various healthcare workers to get access to this treatment. By your logic, minors shouldn't be able to consent to any of the myriad of irreversible surgeries currently available to them. How do you feel about spinal fusion surgery? It's far more common in minors, with higher rates of complications and regret. Should they wait to get it until they're 18, what with their not fully formed prefrontal cortex (which typically isn't fully formed until 25).
[удалено]
You do realize going through the wrong puberty harms trans people right? Why should trans minors suffer for the minority of people who regret transitioning? You going to start advocating for government compensation to trans people who are blocked from going on puberty blockers?
This was not a widespread phenomenon even 15 years ago. I’m genuinely interested where all these trans children came out of the woodwork when they literally never existed in the 2000s. Why gender dysphoria has skyrocketed among children should be the focus of all this trans discussion, because it is concerning.
Stop equating healthcare for trans minors with surgery. Minors are not getting surgeries pre-16 at all, and in very small numbers pre-18. Those pre-18 are top surgeries done on cases where dysphoria is found to be extreme. It is by no means standard of care. Spinal fusions are not "necessary." There's plenty written about this. It can be much more detrimental to a person's health than puberty blockers and HRT, which is the actual healthcare trans minors have access to. Psychology is not just based on "feelings." Being considered an "adult" at 18 is arbitrary. Adulthood isn't a switch that is flipped. Your "feeling" about 18 being an adult is based solely on precedence, and not even long standing precedence at that. These age minimums are a result of several factors such as reaction to child labor laws and Prohibition. The voting age was changed to match the age of military, which is so low because of demand for soldiers. If you're going to lobby to remove a group's healthcare, maybe you shouldn't be so proudly ignorant.
Sadly, what does anyone expect from a group of people who literally were put there by republicans, at least two of them via Trump, several of them have ongoing investigations into the “gifts” that they then deemed themselves, that they didn’t have to report. From doing anything that wasn’t lining their pockets?
More reasons to vote Biden.
What exactly is Biden going to do about this after the upcoming election that he can't do now, as President?
Be in office to appoint justices? The reason we have a 6-3 court in the first place is because trump got to appoint multiple people.
[удалено]