Today the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case that sought to overturn a ban on gender affirming care for minors in Tennessee. Of course you can’t always tell how things are going to turn out by listening to the arguments but you can sometimes get a hint of what each justice is thinking. So here are some of the highlights (or lowlights depending how you look at it).
U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth B. Prelogar Argues the Ban is Sex Discrimination
First up and setting the tone for the opponents of the ban was Prelogar.
She argues that the law is a fundamental example of sex discrimination because it treats the sexes unequally.
She calls it a “facial sex classification.”
ACLU Lawyer Chase Strangio Also Argues the Ban is About Sex and Therefore Unconstitutional
It’s a somewhat convoluted argument.
Strangio explains it like this: A birth-sex male who hits…
