Free-access link to WaPo, here.
Here's the full text of the opinion, which is 6-3, divided as you would expect a 6-3 case to be divided. The Chief writes the opinion, and the other 5 conservatives join, but Alito only joins parts I and II-B. There are concurring opinions from Thomas, Barrett, and Alito. There's also some discord among the dissenters, with Kagan only joining part of Sotomayor's opinion.
MORE: The Chief's opinion rejects heightened scrutiny because the Tennessee law — "[w]hen properly understood from the perspective of the indications that puberty blockers and hormones treat" — "does not classify on the basis of sex."
What about sex-based stereotyping? The Chief, applying a rational-basis standard, writes:When, for example, a transgender boy (whose biological sex is female) takes puberty blockers to treat his gender incongruence, he receives a different medical treatment than a boy whose biological sex is male who takes puberty blockers to treat his precocious puberty.
SB1, in turn, restricts which of these medical treatments are available to minors: Under SB1, a healthcare provider may administer puberty blockers or hormones to any minor to treat a congenital defect, precocious puberty, disease, or physical injury...; a healthcare provider may not administer puberty blockers or hormones to any minor to treat gender dysphoria, gender identity disorder, or gender incongruence.... The application of that prohibition does not turn on sex.
Tennessee’s stated interests in “encouraging minors to appreciate their sex” and in prohibiting medical care “that might encourage minors to become disdainful of their sex,” §68–33–101(m), simply reflect the State’s concerns regarding the use of puberty blockers and hormones to treat gender dysphoria, gender identity disorder, and gender incongruence, see Brief for Respondents 26–27 (“Given high desistance rates among youth and the tragic ‘regret’ of detransitioners, it was not improper to conclude that kids benefit from additional time to ‘appreciate their sex’ before embarking on body-altering paths. Nor is it improper for the State to protect minors from procedures that ‘encourage them to be-ome disdainful of their sex’—and thus at risk for serious psychiatric conditions.” (citations and alterations omitted))..."
Barrett, joined by Thomas, writes separately to reach the question the Chief doesn't answer: whether transgender status is a suspect classification (demanding heightened scrutiny). Her answer: "In future cases, however, I would not recognize a new suspect class absent a demonstrated history of de jure discrimination."
Posts
114 comments:
I knew it.
Wise Latina, ""[The Court] authorizes, without second thought, untold harm to transgender children and the parents and families who love them. Because there is no constitutional justification for that result, I dissent."
How did this woman get on the Court?
Hey,
Qweirdos,
You should've left those kids alone!
Boyd was right.
Three ideologues.
Three ideologues.
Justice Thomas, "This case carries a simple lesson: In politically contentious debates over matters shrouded in scientific uncertainty, courts should not assume that self-described experts are correct. Deference to legislatures, not experts, is particularly critical here."
Same deal with global warming.
So progressive females on the court are OK with child mutilations and child abuse. got it.
Supposedly, 1.6 million kids identify as transgender. Giant number.
Gender (i.e. masculine, feminine): sex-correlated attributes. Gender-transition has liberalized following the progressive path and grade from mental grooming to physical corruptionion with Diverse precedents.
Kagan, "the Court of Appeals (because it applied only rational-basis review) never addressed the relevant issues."
Brutal.
Leave them kids alone... until they reach the age of informed consent to turning their lives, their bodies inside out with forward-looking debt and profit.
Big Pharma(D) and Big Surgery(D) - demand your body.
@Peachy, it's hard not to see it all now, especially after the covid farce. It's hard not see how a large part of this isn't just multinational media, lifestyle, and pharmaceutical conglomerates wanting to turn kids into lifelong hormone junkies and bank ATMs buying pride merch for gay kwanzaa every June.
Thomas is correct. Some Choices... uh, choices, are necessarily a societal "burden"... burden, and we will have to live with ourselves, the majority in a democracy, a minority with Super Democratics, and, of course, Dreams of Herr Mengele for profit.
Six of nine Supreme Court justices say mutilating children is bad, two say it is okay and one says “what is a child? I’m not a biologist.”
MIC, PIC, and SIC with DIC patronage. But there are dissenting voices who question the viability of Choices... choices brayed by the selfie-declared authorities and the basis of statistical inference to back judgment and fitness.
I am so glad that the robed Pharisees Have dined to allow state to write a law.
When the opinions come out, I will be curious to see if any of them cited the ninth and 10th amendments because The only place these judges have in this Issue is the quote the ninth and 10th amendments and but the fuck out.
The Supreme Court has now decided that it is control over the legislative branch of all 50 states as well as the executive and the legislative branch in the United States federal government.
These people need to be put In their place.
What is a child? We could check the carbon dating, before forcing catastrophic anthropogenic childhood change.
And not a single word about Munchausen Syndrome.
"So progressive females on the court are OK with child mutilations and child abuse. got it."
Have you ever seen video of a late-stage abortion? Of course they're OK with this.
They get off on it. Sexually.
Bob B said...
Six of nine Supreme Court justices say mutilating children is bad, two say it is okay and one says “what is a child? I’m not a biologist.”
If that’s the case, they are all wrong.
The only thing Supreme Court should’ve done say this is a state issue that the federal government needs to stay out of it, and that court at the state level cannot exceed the authority of the state constitution and that they need to allow their legislative and executive branches function as intended when passing these laws.
Munchhausen by proxy.
Children are not trans. What children are are blank pages wanting to be filled and parental approval is a large part of that.
Have you ever seen video of a late-stage abortion? Of course they're OK with this.
They get off on it. Sexually.
Sadomasochism is legal under Democratic law. An ethical virtue with #NoJudgment #NoLabels #HateLovesAbortion in progressive sects.
"Supreme Court Allows..." Grrr.
The Supreme Court doesn't "allow" anything. It is not a legislative body.
"Will no one think of the pedos in the teacher unions-ummm...I mean, CHILDREN?!"
I'm curious under what provision or penumbra of the Constitution the so-called liberals on the court think minors have a constitutional right to whatever surgeries they want -- or that doctors have the right to perform whatever surgeries they want on children. It seems like an extremely libertarian position for someone to assert that the legislature cannot prohibit certain medical practices or treatment modes, especially where the patient is a minor.
"Gender affirming care" - the most twisted Orwellian language to come out of the corrupt left.
If you're 18 and you want to gender -bender yourself - go for it. ...and pay for it yourself.
otherwise - HEY LEFTISTS - LEAVE THEM KIDS ALONE.
Six of nine Supreme Court justices say mutilating children is bad, two say it is okay and one says “what is a child? I’m not a biologist.”
That's not what the holding is. Six of nine say the legislature of the State of Tennessee is the place to conduct this inquiry and decide these issues, and there is nothing "unconstitutional" about that.
The other three say "we don't like what the legislature of Tennessee decided, so it's unconstitutional".
Interstate commerce, migration: slavery, Diversity, political congruence ("="), human rites, and gender corruption therapy, too.
Would a similar headline from the WaPo regarding a different type of banned procedure read, "Supreme Court allows ban on Conversion therapy care for minors"?
"Peachy said...
If you're 18 and you want to gender -bender yourself - go for it. ...and pay for it yourself."
I get this as a legal position to take, but honestly I would hesitant of any person younger than 23 or 25 or so transitioning.
Roberts is right about sex and gender (i.e. sex-correlated attributes). Affirmation of the transgender spectrum can wait until an informed age of consent, particularly bands that require gender corruption therapy.
"How did this woman get on the Court?"
Obama and the democrats hate caucasian firefighters. And caucasians in general.
"boatbuilder said...
"Supreme Court Allows..." Grrr.
The Supreme Court doesn't "allow" anything. It is not a legislative body."
I too share a dislike for this turn of phrase. I would go further and say that in Free Societies legislative bodies don't allow anything either, they only function to limit certain activities in limited circumstances. The default of Free people is to be able to do whatever they like so long as they aren't directly harming someone else.
Peachy said...
So progressive females on the court are OK with child mutilations and child abuse. got it.
Where does this idea that women are less prone to violence and abuse come from?
Women are just as likely to do harm to others as men. It is less often physical but still just as damaging.
For example who does the actual female circumcision operation in Muslim countries?
Glad our Lawyer-Kings decided to let the law stand. What an insane system we have. Lets cut out the middle man - congress and state/local governments - and let the Lawyer-Kings rule. They're already running the Presidency. Give them State and local governments.
When NE's law was up for debate, the Jacobin-Dems in the Unicameral kept talking about how NE's law was going to be struck down. Wrong again.
Achilles - please don't do that. Why you pose arguments - I never made? It's very bizarre.
Vault Dweller - My position is to get the left to back off their insanity and child abuse. Whatever age above 18, is fine with me.
Sexualizing Children at young ages - is all in the same wheelhouse as the left's desire to mainstream sex with children.
Clinical trials have demonstrated that there is no medical or psychiatric skill to predict who will benefit, be harmed, or remain unaffected by gender corruption therapy.
the left's desire to mainstream sex with children.
Queer sexual orientations (e.g. pedophilia) are licit under Democratic law, but people, in the majority, still consider it an ethical vice and immoral Choice... choice.
"The Supreme Court allows...." This is showing how journalism is the Progressive's tool, using language for social conditioning.
Henceforth, Justices Kagan, Sotomayor, and Jackson shall be addressed as the "Castrators" or the "Genital Mutilators."
That this even had to be considered is one of the reasons that people are fleeing the Democrat Party.
Hallelujah!
Dave Begley's quote from Clarence Thomas says it all clearly and concisely.
Ron Winkleheimer said, "That this even had to be considered is one of the reasons that people are fleeing the Democrat Party."
I've said it previously but it bears repeating - we are in fact two separate countries now. Culturally at least. One country - the one with the majority - contains the sane along with an ever-growing cohort of rational independents the progressives are determined to scare the crap out of.
The other country contains everyone else - a large minority - that the former country now unequivocally knows to be batshit insane.
There was a commenter named Buwaya who once predicted that this growing divide will get worse. He was right. It has and it will continue. The qweirdos from the latter country will continue to double-down. Only picklocks of biographers know where or when it will end.
CNN: "The Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld Tennessee’s ban on gender-affirming care for trans minors in a blockbuster ruling that will bolster efforts by conservative state lawmakers to pass and preserve other divisive laws targeting transgender Americans."
Divisive?
I guess in the newsrooms of America it's "divisive" in that the argument is whether children can mutilate themselves at age 4 or 8.
I asked a tangential q to ChatGPT yesterday, which responded using the term “assigned at birth”. I was flabbergasted and argued with it for half an hour re biology and biological sex. This dreg permeates our vaunted system of attaining truth.
I’m grateful for this SCOTUS result regardless of how sad it is we’ve come to this. States will have to follow the law decided here, including protected classification requirements.
The ethical principle of Political congruence ("=") by liberal lawmakers is divisive and bigoted.
I'm curious about the constitutional intersection between state legislative bans over the last several years on "gender-transition care" and "conversion therapy."
First, because "conversion therapy" can involve a restriction on speech, whereas "gender-transition care" seems to involve actual medical and surgical alteration of the patient.
Second, whether "gender-transition care" for minors is itself subsumed under the existing rubric of "conversion therapy"?
Massachusetts has enacted legislation banning conversion therapy for minors.
Key facts about the law:
Prohibition: The law prohibits licensed mental health professionals from engaging in conversion therapy with individuals under the age of 18.
Purpose: The legislation aims to protect LGBTQ youth from the harmful and discredited practice of conversion therapy, which has been widely condemned by major medical and mental health organizations.
Massachusetts was the 16th state in the U.S. to pass such a ban. Neighboring states like Vermont, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and New Hampshire also have similar laws in place.
What is Conversion Therapy?
Conversion therapy, also known as "reparative therapy" or "sexual orientation change efforts," is a range of practices aimed at changing a person's sexual orientation or gender identity. It is considered harmful and ineffective by major medical and mental health organizations and can have severe negative impacts on the well-being of LGBTQ individuals. Examples of these practices include talk therapy and aversion treatments.
Why the ban is important:
Protects vulnerable youth: The law protects LGBTQ minors from a practice that is known to be ineffective and potentially harmful. Affirms LGBTQ youth: The ban sends a message to LGBTQ youth that they are accepted and valued as they are.
Aligns with medical and mental health consensus: The ban reflects the consensus of major medical and mental health organizations that conversion therapy is harmful.
Conversion therapy bans are transgender spectrum oriented.
Thank God that destruction of the sex organs is banned for children.
Consensus is a sociopolitical construct. Everyone has a religion (i.e. behavioral protocol or model) and faith (i.e. trust logical domain). Appeal to a higher authority is a logical fallacy, right? When systemic or institutional it is organized.
destruction of the sex organs is banned for children.
Destruction, corruption, and forward-looking physical and mental therapy, and profit for MIC, PIC, SIC, and DIC patrons.
I hope Trump reconsiders The Federalist Society role in making these mayor, mayor decisions possible. This is up there with the overturning of Roe.
"Under SB1, a healthcare provider may administer puberty blockers or hormones to any minor to treat a congenital defect, precocious puberty, disease, or physical injury...; "
Right. Years ago in California it was discovered that marijauna was beneficial to "patients" with eye problems.
Next, legal to prescribe medical marijauna.
Next, glaucoma epidemic in Ca.
Next, Drs. holding outdoor and stadium prescription parties.
Now, legal to grow six plants for personal use.
Expect "disease" to be trending among confused kids and recognized by specific Drs.
Wince, I wonder the same thing but from a more philosophical view. How can you justify supporting medical treatment when a kid says they don't like their biological sex while opposing treatment if the kid says they don't like their sexual orientation? (I know an argument is often made about parental coercion but that would seem to be equally applicable)
The left put itself in a paradox over several decades, as 100% acceptance of some faction's ideals (e.g., bio-feminism and the ERA; gays and lesbians are "born that way" per bio-identity) is incompatible with choose-your-sex-adventure absolutist ideals.
They root explanation for the sudden rise of transgenderism is Obamacare demanding that medical insurance cover sex reassignment surgery and care. Without the reassignment money, people with mental health issues would merey shift to another (bad) idea. Obamacare chiefly is a payoff for greedy, corrupt, and psychopathic doctors.
The background explanation for the rise of transgenderism is that pro-abortion, pro-environment / anti-growth, and latent religious impulses on the left caused the return of child sacrifices.
The left's religious True Believers are useful idiots for the greedy moneymen. The transgender culture will self-limit and likely die out due to widespread sterility, and/or suicide. The doctors will not talk about it, just like the Germans who self-censored after WW2 but kept their power.
FullMoon, I suspect that insurance companies in Tennessee will be just fine with denying claims based on SB1. This isn't a dime bag of weed we're talking about
At some point what can't go on--won't go on. This insanity of allowing or encouraging six or seven year old children to "change their sex" without parental involvement had to stop. The trans movement overegged the pudding with their demands.
Roberts gets another one right.
In a sane world - it would be 9-0.
Boatbuilder nailed it at 10:13
Yes it would Peachy
"I hope Trump reconsiders The Federalist Society role in making these mayor, mayor decisions possible. This is up there with the overturning of Roe."
Damn skippy. His 1st term picks have been underwhelming IMO.
"The background explanation for the rise of transgenderism is that pro-abortion, pro-environment / anti-growth, and latent religious impulses on the left caused the return of child sacrifices."
It's hard separating Tanit-worshippers from their tophet. They make incremental changes. Instead of passing kids through fire a little pop pills and snip-snip is just as good where golden calves are concerned.
As Enigma points out, Obamacare made it possible for doctors to make up conditions outside the realm of traditional disease and medicalize those conditions so that the doctors and insurance companies could force the general public to foot the bill. People should be allowed to purchase insurance that provides no coverage for sex change operations, and that doesn't include such medical costs in the actuarial rate base. Medicare and Medicaid should exclude such procedures as well.
“Munchhausen by proxy”
Buttmunchers by nature.
Consider the beneficiaries of an increased population of underage trans youth and you'll find its most fervent supporters.
@PM - paraphrasing, Q: "where can you usually find predators?"
A: Wherever the prey is
This goes into a discussion that I’m not really equipped to tackle. The discussion about treatment, which must be sexed based to work, seems significant. As a concept; someone can “affirm their gender”, but they can’t change their sex, because medical care requires treating based on sex. Is that discussion in the opinion laying the groundwork for deciding future related cases, such as men in women’s sports or sex being officially recognized (passport or census) over gender?
“absent a demonstrated history of de jure discrimination“
This case of de jure discrimination doesn’t count, yet. That does beg the question, just how much de jure discrimination is needed to count as “history.”
“ Sexualizing Children at young ages - is all in the same wheelhouse as the left's desire to mainstream sex with children.”
Cookie assured me that this would never happen.
@RideSpaceMountain: "It's hard separating Tanit-worshippers from their tophet."
I'm gonna run for President. My platform will be:
"A temple in every town.
An altar in every temple.
A sharp knife for every parent.
An equitable funeral pyre for every body."
I'll create a lot of jobs this way. It'll also bring down global warming...as sacrifices always make the weather better and make crops grow...as a bonus, ashes make for great fertilizer...
Achilles said...
“I am so glad that the robed Pharisees have dined to allow [a] state to write a law.”
They could’ve just ordered in pizza and gotten the same result.
“Supreme Court allows”
Yeah, right…
Supposedly, 1.6 million kids identify as transgender.
And I suspect that number - 10 years ago - was close to 0.
Some day, people are going to have to answer for their heinous actions. And it won't be pretty.
I've cited the Justice Thomas quote in my Big Wind brief.
Achilles: "“I am so glad that the robed Pharisees have dined to allow [a] state to write a law.” Took me awhile, but I am guessing "deigned" is the word being fumbled for.
IMO - There are people born with chromosomes that are - for lack of a better word - messed up. and those people should be allowed proper care...
But as children, it's still very wrong - to mess with them. They are children. And much of this is a progressive social contagion - that has nothing to do with messed up chromosomes.
@Enigma:
American cultists circa 500 AD - "Maybe if we sacrifice a few children we can make it rain!"
American cultists 2025 AD - "Maybe if we sacrifice a few children we will win more elections!"
Enigma said, "I'm gonna run for President. My platform will be:
A temple in every town.
An altar in every temple.
A sharp knife for every parent.
An equitable funeral pyre for every body."
You could also try:
Vote for Enigma! He's got the Baal/Tanit endorsement! Head over to his campaign HQ so you can get your "GO BA'ALS DEEP!" shirts! Need newborn tuckable pampers? STEP RIGHT UP! Tomorrow Enigma will be hosting a "How To Sacrifice Your Child To Tanit" seminar at the library.
VOTE FOR ENIGMA & BAAL/TANIT 2028! NO FETUS CAN BEAT US!
I predict the metropolitan core AWFUL vote is a 100% lock...
For any of those who may have decided to research Tanit and the archeological proof of child sacrifices at the Carthaginian Tophet, just wait till you read that a large part of that their hideous cultish practices were centered around sacred prostitution (also a feature of Ishtar and Innana worship), and that many child sacrifices were the offspring from temple unions.
Killing the unwanted burdens on a YOLO lifestyle goes back a long, long way...
American cultists 2025 AD - "Maybe if we sacrifice a few children we will win more elections!"
Human rites performed for social, clinical, criminal, political, and climate progress.
The Chief's opinion rejects heightened scrutiny because the Tennessee law — "[w]hen properly understood from the perspective of the indications that puberty blockers and hormones treat"
Gosh, I never even realized that an indication could have a perspective, much less an understanding. I’m so glad our country is in the hands of such brilliant minds.
"Some day, people are going to have to answer for their heinous actions."
Unfortunately, aside from leaving it up to themselves and their consciences (if any), I expect most won't.
https://twitchy.com/justmindy/2025/06/18/bluesky-trans-threats-against-justices-n2414427
That sound you hear is dInga, PedoFredo, Kak/RichSockpuppet and their transurrectionist butt budies over at Bluesky gnashing their teeth and calling for assassinations of SCOTUS judges...
Dr. Az Hakeem is a specialist in gender dysphoria in the UK, whose findings are at odds with the trans activists. He says he would no more "affirm" someone's delusions about gender than he would affirm an anorexic's delusion that they're fat.
"Unfortunately, aside from leaving it up to themselves and their consciences (if any), I expect most won't."
"Doctor" John Money never did. In fact, his disgusting research is still harming people from beyond the grave.
ronetc said...
Achilles: "“I am so glad that the robed Pharisees have dined to allow [a] state to write a law.” Took me awhile, but I am guessing "deigned" is the word being fumbled for.
Yes. Speech to text is still catching up.
I could probably have emphasized the "dained" variation to help it out.
Thank God. Destroying young people for profit can be banned.
boatbuilder said...
"Supreme Court Allows..." Grrr.
The Supreme Court doesn't "allow" anything. It is not a legislative body.
It's a judicial body, and in this case it has agreed that there's no Constitutional ban on State banning child mutilation.
So "allows" is correct here.
“NO FETUS CAN BEAT US!”
My money’s on CLETUS!
IMO - There are people born with chromosomes that are - for lack of a better word - messed up. and those people should be allowed proper care...
But as children, it's still very wrong - to mess with them. They are children. And much of this is a progressive social contagion - that has nothing to do with messed up chromosomes.
Prior to sex-"change" hormones and surgery, these people - we must assume - existed, and had to come to terms with their situation. Some might have turned to suicide, as some always have, but since we don't know of a stable trend of relatively youthful suicides that began to decrease once "gender-affirming care" became possible (quite the reverse, I've heard), I guess we have to conclude that the chromosomally "messed up," as you say, just lived lives of quiet desperation in the past.
Or else they did indeed come to terms with whatever their messed-up-ness caused in them.
Watchful waiting and physical and emotional maturation, plus a society in which being gay is pretty mainstream: these seem like the ingredients for much healthier (and fertility-preserving) care of the gender dysphoric kid.
tcrosse said...
Dr. Az Hakeem is a specialist in gender dysphoria in the UK, whose findings are at odds with the trans activists. He says he would no more "affirm" someone's delusions about gender than he would affirm an anorexic's delusion that they're fat.
This. 1000x this. It's something I thought of a while ago, and have been waiting to use on a leftie :-)
There are age limits for so many things,I believe it should adhere in this situation.Once you reach the age deemed approprite then choices can be mad,You need to be an age to buy a gun,drink alcohol drive a car etc...When its time make a choice
I wonder if there is a correlation to the advent of children claiming to be transgender and the growing popularity of
tik-tok?
Dinky, there is still the question of who pays. If it's mandated coverage under health insurance plans, the answer is "everybody," even if - say, five years from now (because this is looking ever more likely), we have determined that "gender-affirming care"... isn't either gender-affirming or care.
I'm perfectly willing (if not exactly happy) to affirm that adults can choose to make profound changes to their bodies. But is this particular suite of changes actually effective treatment for the underlying condition?
Buwaya (or someone writing using that name) commented the other day. I wish he'd post here regularly again.
William50 said...
I wonder if there is a correlation to the advent of children claiming to be transgender and the growing popularity of
tik-tok?
Tangential at most.
This was all cause by the teachers unions and the psychiatry institutions which are all overwhelmingly controlled by stupid over credentialed women. They have been poisoning and confusing kids for a while.
“My position is to get the left to back off their insanity and child abuse. Whatever age above 18, is fine with me.”
While brain maturity is at least a half a decade away, at 18, sexual maturity is quite away along. But at, say, 12, or thereabouts, you are just starting puberty. Hormones are starting to rage and swing dramatically. No wonder that some young people aren’t comfortable with who they are sexually. But by 18, most are. The girls face getting used to their monthly cycles, while the boys face similar issues. Horner 24/7, pls controll8ng rage. And then, they begin to be used to it. And their sexual identity solidifies.
Jeez, n.n., can you please can the cutesy-obscure-punning comments and save us all the trouble of scrolling past them? How unbelievably tedious you are!
BTW, n.n., I’m every bit as pro-life as you are — but you’re not convincing anyone. At all.
Options for Underage Coolness:
Smoking. Drinking. Tagging. Shooting. Gender-flipping
Donatello,
Here is my theory about n.n. (forgive me if I have mentioned this before.)
Based on the evidence: repeated use of stock phrases, only tangentially related at best to the subject of the post, combined in various arbitrary ways exhibiting little internal coherence... All this leads me to conclude that the account is not that of a human being, but rather an early AI bot, based not on an LLM but on some kind of hand coded Eliza script.
Thanks, Kirk. I’ll bet you’ve put your finger on it. Still sure is annoying, though. I believe I’ve seen this character in comment threads on other sites.
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.