Fox News panelists are delinquent in not discussing whether or not the Tennessee ban on transgender care for children is constitutional.

[DGS49]

Supreme Court focuses on effects and feelings associated with so-called “gender affirming care”. Ignores our rule of law, our Constitution.​

What is most disturbing to me is, during Strangio’s argument before the Court, there was little to nothing offered to the Court defending the petitioner’s argument alleging Tennessee’s SB1, discriminates on the bases of sex, and is therefore forbidden by the 14th Amendment. The oral arguments, almost exclusively, focused on the effects and feelings associated with so-called “gender affirming care”. Even the Justices focused on everything but the fundamental question of whether or not the 14th Amendment prohibits Tennessee’s SB1.

All the emotionally stated effects and feelings associated with “gender affirming care” are irrelevant with respect to Tennessee’s constitutionally protected authority to regulate those “. . . objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.”

Seems to me our constitutional system of a rule of law, and the division of power commanded by the Tenth Amendment, are subtilty being replaced by the whims and fancies of those which our Constitution was explicitly designed to control and regulate by a written constitution.

So, why is the fundamental question not being argued before the Supreme Court which is, does Tennessee’s SB1, violate the 14th amendment as the petitioners allege?

Why are the Courts Justices focusing on all the emotionally stated effects and feelings associated with “gender affirming care” rather than focusing on the rule of law which is our Constitution?

JWK

Why have a written constitution, approved by the people, if those who it is meant to control are free to make it mean whatever they wish it to mean?

How does the law "discriminate on the basis of sex"? Both sexes are treated the same.

Please explain.

 

[whitehall]

Delinquent in not discussing? How is it possible to be guilty of not discussing something? Why isn't ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS MSNBC and CNN guilty of lying about Biden's mental health for several years not to mention election interference by fudging the Harris polls to make it seem she was ahead?

 

[johnwk]

How does the law "discriminate on the basis of sex"? Both sexes are treated the same.

Please explain.

Why are you asking me that question?

 

[johnwk]

Delinquent in not discussing? How is it possible to be guilty of not discussing something? Why isn't ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS MSNBC and CNN guilty of lying about Biden's mental health for several years not to mention election interference by fudging the Harris polls to make it seem she was ahead?

They are guilty . . . guilty by omission.

 

[johnwk]

Our "wise Latina" Supreme Court Justice, Sotomayor, compares Aspirin’s possible side effects to child mutilation procedure.

Sotomayor makes Aspirin side effect comparison in question on trans medical procedures during oral argument | Fox News Video

Justice Sonia Sotomayer said 'every medical treatment has a risk, even taking Aspirin' during oral arguments in high-profile SCOTUS case involving trans surgeries for minors.

noticias.foxnews.com

.
And nitwit Justice Jackson, outrageously compared banning child mutilation medical procedures to banning interracial marriage, during the oral arguments.
.

.
How on earth did either of these two pass the Senate's "advice and consent" process?