Sotomayor Writes the Court ‘Abandons' Transgender Children to ‘Political Whims'
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, one of the court's three liberals, wrote a scathing dissent criticizing her conservative colleagues' decision to uphold a state ban on some medical treatments for transgender youths.
The justice said that the court had retreated from 'meaningful judicial review exactly where it matters most,' adding that 'the court abandons transgender children and their families to political whims.'
Justice Sotomayor also took the rare step of reading her dissent from the bench during the opinion announcement on Wednesday, a move typically reserved to emphasize a justice's extreme displeasure with a decision.
She took issue with the majority's view that questions about such medical treatments should be resolved by 'the people, their elected representatives and the democratic process.' In her 31-page dissent, she argued that 'judicial scrutiny has long played an essential role' in guarding against efforts by lawmakers to 'impose upon individuals the state's views about how people of a particular sex (or race) should live or look or act.'
Justice Sotomayor pointed to landmark Supreme Court cases that pushed back against discriminatory laws and policies. She cited United States v. Virginia, the 1996 case in which the court struck down Virginia Military Institute's male-only admissions policy, along with Loving v. Virginia, the 1967 case that declared state laws prohibiting interracial marriage unconstitutional.
'Those laws, too, posed politically fraught and contested questions about race, sex and biology,' the justice wrote. In the interracial marriage case, she wrote as an example, Virginia had argued that if the court intervened in the matter, it would find itself in a 'bog of conflicting scientific opinion upon the effects of interracial marriage, and the desirability of preventing such alliances, from the physical, biological, genetic, anthropological, cultural, psychological and sociological point of view.'
Her dissent was joined fully by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson and, in part, by Justice Elena Kagan.
Although justices often include 'respectfully' in the essay explaining their dissents, Justice Sotomayor wrote only this: 'In sadness, I dissent.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
7 minutes ago
- The Hill
Appeals court rules Louisiana law requiring Ten Commandments in schools is unconstitutional
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit ruled Friday a Louisiana law requiring the Ten Commandments to be posted in all public-school classrooms is unconstitutional. The law required easily readable posters to go up in all public school classrooms of the Ten Commandments, regardless of what subject the classroom teachers. The judges said the law would be in violation of the First Amendment, giving a big win to advocates who say this bill violated the separation of church and state. 'We are grateful for this decision, which honors the religious diversity and religious-freedom rights of public school families across Louisiana,' said the Rev. Darcy Roake, a plaintiff in the case. 'As an interfaith family, we believe that our children should receive their religious education at home and within our faith communities, not from government officials.' The law first went into effect at the beginning of last school year but has been held up in the courts. The Hill has reached out to Louisiana's attorney general's office for comment. This case could go to the Supreme Court, giving another test to the conservative-leaning high court of the role of religion in schools. Most recently, the Supreme Court in a deadlock decision ruled against a religious charter school in Oklahoma, although Justice Amy Coney Barrett recused herself from the case.
Wall Street Journal
37 minutes ago
- Wall Street Journal
Man Arrested for Antisemitic Threats Against GOP Lawmaker in Ohio
A man in Ohio was arrested for shouting antisemitic slurs and threats at U.S. Rep. Max Miller as he drove to work Thursday morning, authorities said. The congressman, who is Jewish, tweeted that the other person ran him off the road and showed him a Palestinian flag.
Fox News
38 minutes ago
- Fox News
Trump says Harvard agreement on international students may be announced within a week
President Donald Trump on Friday said a deal with Harvard University, related to its policies surrounding international students, may be announced within a week. "Many people have been asking what is going on with Harvard University and their largescale improprieties that we have been addressing, looking for a solution," Trump wrote on Truth Social. "We have been working closely with Harvard, and it is very possible that a Deal will be announced over the next week or so." The president noted the university "acted extremely appropriately" during negotiations, applauding leadership's apparent commitment to do "what is right." "If a Settlement is made on the basis that is currently being discussed, it will be "mindbogglingly" HISTORIC, and very good for our Country," Trump wrote. The announcement came as Federal Judge Allison Burroughs on Friday issued a preliminary injunction, allowing Harvard University to continue hosting international students, despite a Trump executive order. It is a major legal victory for the Ivy League school, which has been fighting a variety of restrictions imposed by the administration. The temporary court order stays in effect until the case is fully decided on the merits. Harvard University sued the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), challenging the revocation of Harvard's Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP). Without the program, current and future international students would be barred from attending the university. Harvard alleged the revocation was the culmination of a retaliatory campaign by the Trump administration on academic freedom at Harvard. Attorneys argued the policy is an infringement of the university's Due Process and First Amendment rights, in particular Harvard's constitutional right to be free of retaliatory action for protected speech, as well as violating the Administrative Procedures Act (APA). The order states the revocation cannot be used to negatively affect visa applications, deny entry to the U.S., or be used as a reason to claim a visa holder has lost their non-immigrant status. Harvard University did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital's request for comment.
