Trans people centered themselves in a trans case before a very not trans court
Not only was Chase Strangio arguing, but trans plaintiffs were in the courtroom, as were many other trans lawyers, journalists, and observers. It matters.
I’ll have much more on the U.S. v. Skrmetti arguments — and the implications of various possible decisions — going forward, but today I wanted to step back and just write something about Wednesday: who was there and why I think it mattered in that moment.
Chase Strangio, a proudly and openly trans lawyer who is the co-director of the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Project, stood up in front of the justices immediately following Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar. Prelogar is widely seen as one of the best advocates who appears in front of the court these days. Her ease with argument is only made more impressive by her apparent knowledge of almost all of the United States Code and Federal Register. And yet, when Strangio got up, he more than stood his ground — and provided a manifest grounding to the arguments that might have otherwise been lacking.
“Trans people are real, are here, and will be affected by your decisions,” Strangio said without saying a word — simply by standing up. His actual words that followed, at times, provided even more knowledge than the encyclopedic Prelogar brought to the court. When Prelogar, for example, dodged Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s question about de jure discrimination faced by trans people in the past, Strangio followed up with specifics. It was a minimal — but potentially important — catch.
Watching the case from the benches of observers opposite the justices was L.W. — the trans teen at the center of the case — and her parents. The trio sat in court with Casey Parks, a Washington Post reporter who has provided extensive coverage of trans lives and the challenges trans people face in simply trying to live them. Ryan Roe, one of the other plaintiffs, was there as well.
Here is a key part of what Parks wrote about L.W.’s presence on Wednesday:
“Some children suffer incredibly with gender dysphoria, don’t they?” Justice Sonia Sotomayor asked Solicitor General Elizabeth B. Prelogar.
L.W. raised her hand, too low for anyone but her parents to see. In her preteen years, before she told her family she was trans, she felt as if she were underwater. She looked around and everyone else seemed to be a fish. They knew how to swim, how to breathe, but she did not. Every day, she felt like she was drowning.
She never felt like that anymore. Hormones had made her feel confident and at peace, even in this courtroom where several of the justices kept calling trans girls “boys.”
When ACLU lawyer Chase Strangio took the podium, both L.W. and her mom brightened. Strangio was the first openly trans lawyer to argue before the court. As he finished, Williams leaned over, pumped her fist, and said “crushed it!” L.W. nodded in agreement.
To the justices’ right — although they couldn’t see many of them — were many journalists who are transgender, as well as journalists who are otherwise a part of the LGBTQ community.
Among the reports I’ve seen from those journalists include several raising the voices of trans people — and focusing on the real-world impact of the cases.
Valorie Van-Dieman at Assigned Media set the scene with a report on the overnight line for seats in the courtroom and early morning lawyers arriving at the court:
Jessie McGrath, a Deputy District Attorney for Los Angeles County and a member of the Transgender Bar Association, spoke with Assigned Media as she walked towards the court to join the line for Supreme Court Bar members.
“I think there will be around 20 transgender lawyers there today,” McGrath said. “We’ve been admitting members to the Bar daily.”
Orion Rummler, from the 19th, was in the courtroom. Rummler and Shefali Luthra’s coverage noted:
As conservative justices on the court asked how European countries have regulated gender-affirming care and whether it should be the role of the Supreme Court to overrule state medical regulations, Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar and Chase Strangio, co-director of the ACLU’s LGBT & HIV Project, reminded the justices that they are not asking the court to decide the merits of gender-affirming care or even to prevent Tennessee from regulating the care. But banning such care outright for only one group of people is not regulating it, Prelogar said.
Erin Reed focused on Justice Amy Coney Barrett and her discussion with Strangio of the historical discrimination faced by trans people:
Jo Yurcaba, from NBC News, talked with trans people who came to the court — from across town and across the country — to attend the arguments:
Kaleb Todd, 27, said that he has a personal connection to the decision both because he is a trans man and because he and his wife chose to move from Texas to Philadelphia in April because they want to start a family soon and they fear Texas’ policies regarding women, educators and trans people.
Todd, an engineer, said he also showed up outside the court in the chilly temperatures to send a message to the court itself.
“I think it’s important to remind people who get to make these decisions that we’re here and we’re beautiful and we know what’s best for ourselves,” Todd said.
There were many others as well, and though the day was long and rough, it did reassure me to see so many trans people and other queer people front and center — literally, as to Strangio — as the justices took on the case.
Trans people were not hidden Wednesday, and that matters.
It was good that Strangio talked with Barrett talked about anti-trans discrimination. It was good that he talked with the four Republican appointees who seemed most skeptical of the challenge — Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas, Sam Alito, and Brett Kavanaugh — as well.
This is not an abstract case, and the result will have real effects. It is good for the justices to face that — and good for the rest of us, including those trans people who will be affected by their decision, that trans people were in the courtroom forcing the justices to do so.
Thank you for your coverage, Chris. I pointed to your Monday post when people were asking for info to prep for Wednesday, and second you here: trans participation in the process is important.
I don't expect it to change the outcome, but I do consider it important.
Chris, thank you for not merely covering that trans journalists, lawyers, and other professionals were at the Supreme Court today but also, and more importantly, placing their writing and work directly in front of your audience. What you wrote here might appear simple and brief, but it is one of the best instances I've seen recently of someone using their space to inform, humanize, *and* demonstrate the power of people who will be most affected by the outcome of an event. I appreciate this piece so much.