I understand what Chase is saying, but this: "if it gets to the Supreme Court ... there's no guarantee of what they'll do." Seriously? We know exactly what they'll do. And it won't end well, not only for trans folks but people generally because they're going to reach into other people's existing privacy rights - again. People need to throw out as many Republicans as they can all over the place and work hard to flip the Court.
This case has more implications than just trans-affirming care for minors. This SCOTUS could use this opportunity to gut the right to trans-affirming care for adults as well. This court has served notice they have no remorse or shame in taking legal rights back to those given in the 19th or even the 18th century based on 'tradition'.
Go Chase Strangio! What a brave man. Chris, thank you for publishing this interview. 👍🏽 I believe Chase is correct, trans stories have to be, must be, 100 percent required to be told in the public square. As humans usually show, if they’re familiar with someone different, if they’ve met someone different, then those someones become less familiar”scary,” less different, less “other.” Society needs to wake up on this issue (fast) and it’s going to take telling trans folk’s stories to make that happen. Thanks again, Chris and Chase! 👊🏽
1. You're not a subscriber and your subscriptions make clear your position, so I am really not going to mess around with you.
2. This is ridiculous rhetoric on the substance given the fact that these bans do the worst at the trial level. There are losses at trial in Arkansas and Florida, as well as losses following PI hearings in every case except Oklahoma.
3. The violent language, particularly in this instance, is disgusting and unnecessary. I have no problem blocking and will do so if you continue with it. You've got your own space where you obviously are free to say whatever you wish.
I understand what Chase is saying, but this: "if it gets to the Supreme Court ... there's no guarantee of what they'll do." Seriously? We know exactly what they'll do. And it won't end well, not only for trans folks but people generally because they're going to reach into other people's existing privacy rights - again. People need to throw out as many Republicans as they can all over the place and work hard to flip the Court.
People with a mouthpiece/ platform need to get this concept out, in case it’s not already crystal clear.
Spectacular interview with a substantive person. Thanks, Chris--and good luck to Chase.
This case has more implications than just trans-affirming care for minors. This SCOTUS could use this opportunity to gut the right to trans-affirming care for adults as well. This court has served notice they have no remorse or shame in taking legal rights back to those given in the 19th or even the 18th century based on 'tradition'.
Chase!
Thank you for this interview. I had the same reaction probably everyone else did, but hearing from Chase has made me feel confident in their strategy.
Go Chase Strangio! What a brave man. Chris, thank you for publishing this interview. 👍🏽 I believe Chase is correct, trans stories have to be, must be, 100 percent required to be told in the public square. As humans usually show, if they’re familiar with someone different, if they’ve met someone different, then those someones become less familiar”scary,” less different, less “other.” Society needs to wake up on this issue (fast) and it’s going to take telling trans folk’s stories to make that happen. Thanks again, Chris and Chase! 👊🏽
Excellent, thank you!
The ACLU wants to show the Supreme Court its case now because Consovoy McCarthy will beat it to a pulp at trial.
OK.
1. You're not a subscriber and your subscriptions make clear your position, so I am really not going to mess around with you.
2. This is ridiculous rhetoric on the substance given the fact that these bans do the worst at the trial level. There are losses at trial in Arkansas and Florida, as well as losses following PI hearings in every case except Oklahoma.
3. The violent language, particularly in this instance, is disgusting and unnecessary. I have no problem blocking and will do so if you continue with it. You've got your own space where you obviously are free to say whatever you wish.
You forgot Missouri.
Sorry, I meant federal courts, but yes, you are correct that there was a PI loss in Missouri state court.
An evidentiary hearing where the lawyers for the state were prepared and adequately resourced. That's a preview of many of the trials we'll be seeing.
There have been many other — and more — evidentiary hearings where the lawyers for the state were prepared and adequately resourced and lost.
Be well.