28 Comments

What Sutton and other judges don't take into consideration, is that hormonal and surgical treatments for sexual dysphoria have been in place for years, for teens as well as adults, and NO state or local government had taken upon itself to legislate bans against these medically sanctioned and approved treatments. Only the past 2-3 years have we seen Red state legislators work themselves up into a fury over not only medically supervised transgender rectification, but also a hysterical animadversion directed toward the transgender themselves, with memes such as "the transgender agenda" - whatever the hell THAT means - demeaning them and even criminalizing their families and their medical teams with their shitty, cruel laws.

Settled medical judgments and treatments don't NEED "sorting out" by "accountable public officials"...I mean, we're not talking about Nazi "eugenics" or Mengele concentration-camp experiments, for god's sake...what is wrong with these judges who endorse state intervention into private medical decisions?? That's the crime, full stop.

Expand full comment

Medical decisions should be between the patient & their physician. Legislators & judges are not qualified to decide these matters, & they should not make ignorant laws that interfere with the necessary health care of all people.

Expand full comment

I don't know if this makes me more sad or more angry, but it certainly makes me something.

Thank you for keeping us updated on these issues.

Expand full comment

The idea that no animus drove the passage of these laws because they apply only to transgender persons under 17 is laughable, pitiable and false: "we know we cannot limit the choice of fully legal adults regarding their own medical care (absent a fetus in play) but we can direct our hatred to these youngsters whose parents appear to be caring for them."

Animus played a very large role in the Prop 8 trial. I hope it continues to rear its head in these cases as well. You can't make laws against people you've said you hate.

Expand full comment

I was pleased to see this: "Michigan Supreme Court Adopts New Rule Requiring Use of Preferred Pronouns, or Respectful Alternative"

The concurrences and dissents are informative. http://religionclause.blogspot.com/2023/09/michigan-supreme-court-adopts-new-rule.html

I think this is generally germane. Anyway, I saw someone cite Judge Sutton and note how he remembered "conservatives" speaking about judicial humility. But, conservative judges are rarely consistently humble. And, humility and blindness are two different things.

There are narrow issues in this area where there might be room for reasonable disagreement. This is not same sex marriage. This is more like state constitutional amendments that targeted same sex couples even in non-marriage relationships. It is clear targeted discrimination.

Expand full comment
author

OK, all, I tried deleting his most inflammatory posts, but that wasn't working, so Kyle is banned.

Expand full comment

How are people formally diagnosed with a condition defined in DSM-5 not a discrete group? This is simply disingenuous.

Expand full comment

I agree that Judge White's dissent is excellent. It's as good an appellate-level distillation of the issues involved as Judge Marks's decision was a trial-court-level distillation. You can also *feel* her frustration with Sutton's decision to pretend his arrogance is humility.

Expand full comment

Chris,

Thank you so very much. Judge Sutton has the depth of a Santa Cruz Banana Slug and the mental height of it’s slime trail.

Expand full comment

Really appreciate the coverage, as I have two transgender kids. One already is more or less already a refugee in Canada. Beautiful argument using the right-to-experimental-treatment law. That creates as strong a “totally arbitrary” reasoning as I can recall. Of course likely the decision won’t withstand appeal. Is there any conventional wisdom about where the Montana Supreme Court might stand on this?

Expand full comment

The fact that our judicial system is abdicating it's single-most important responsibility to uphold and protect the basic fundamental rights of minority populations, such as the right to personhood and self-determination, should give every American pause. By asserting that compromises can be made on the humanity of transgender people and that we should respect the democratic processes surrounding this "issue," Judge Sutton is directly engaging with the "transgender question" being advanced on the right. And if this is what our judicial system is willing to tolerate, our democracy will not survive.

Expand full comment

Sutton is smarter than most GOP appointed judges but he still feels the pull of FedSoc approval for a potential SCOTUS seat or at least some nice perks. Hence, “thoughtful debate.” By that standard, Mengele was just doing medical research.

Expand full comment

To say that gender identities aren’t discrete classes is absurd. Gender identity is just as immutable as other protected characteristics, and why they seem to think it has to be readily apparent at birth is beyond me.

Not to mention the complete lack of consideration for evidence supporting the provision of the care. The state clearly lacks pertinent interest depriving youth of this care.

Expand full comment

The targeting of groups and using the power of office to single out people IS ILLEGAL. It’s a HATE CRIME. Practicing medicine without a license or practicing medicine without consultation of medical experts IS ILLEGAL. As if it would be helpful . . . These fascist republicans should review capricious decisions that led up to the Magna Carta. . ... but they are FASCISTS: Authoritarians who actually serve their Neo nazi Billionaire Handlers. The RNC operates as a CRIME SYNDICATE, and there needs to be accountability. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sex-redefined-the-idea-of-2-sexes-is-overly-simplistic1/

Expand full comment

You should review footnote 4 of carolene maybe it will hedge your disdain for the legislature, the most important bodies of our government

Expand full comment
Removed (Banned)Oct 4, 2023·edited Oct 4, 2023
Comment removed
Expand full comment