How does this ruling FORCING a state to fund something not violate this?
Posted on 04/30/2024 1:19:00 PM PDT by packagingguy
Eight Democrat-nominated judges shoved transgender surgery closer to becoming a constitutional right via their decision Monday in a federal appeals court.
No Democrat-nominated judges voted with the six Republican-nominated judges who strenuously denounced the court’s decision, further demonstrating how transgenderism has quickly become a litmus test for ambitious progressives in the Democratic Party.
The majority decision in the Fourth Circuit federal appeals court said existing constitutional rules forbidding sexual discrimination also forbid denials of transgender surgeries in state-run healthcare programs.
Any denial of the surgeries cannot be enforced without first deciding if the patient is male or female by checking their biology and asking for their “gender identity,” the court said. Judge Roger Gregory wrote that the determination of male or female status would be “obviously discriminatory” because:
The exclusions cannot function without relying on direct — not just proxy-based — [sex and gender] discrimination … While the exclusion may apply to everyone, for many treatments, it is only relevant to transgender individuals. The billionaire-backed supporters of transgenderism say the federal government must enforce the wishes of people who say their unverifiable sense of “gender identity” is more important than their male or female sex — whether in sports, bathrooms, workplaces, or civic awards. Transgender people comprise less than one percent of the population, and their political demands would prevent the remaining 99 percent of Americans from recognizing that the two sexes have different but complementary needs and preferences.
A small share of adults who claim to be transgender undergo genital surgery. However, a significant number of older teenagers and 20-something youths undergo irreversible surgeries amid a chaotic, diversified culture.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
I just knew that the “straw that broke the camels back” would be something stupid.
Forcing me to pay for genital mutilation to “adjust” someone to their mental disorder goes TOO FAR.
imposing trandgeneridm by judicial fiat.
We can state in the law that “sex” or “gender” in all federal law refers to the biological sex/gender and not to any identity dysphoria induced pretense.
Moreover, there are people claiming that if George Washington was here today he would be fighting to impose sex-change surgeries on children.
I don't believe it.
Enough! These satanist judges should be removed from the bench.... oh, if only Americans had proper representation.
If we’re to live in a banana republic we should at least have bananas.
“constitutional rules forbidding sexual discrimination”
Is that in the Constitution?
There’s women’s suffrage in there but that’s about it.
Am I missing something?
thank you, sincerely.
many 60+ yr olds I talk with say “not my problem, you deal with it” sort of remarks as they continue to party away the rest of their lives.
"Eight Democrat-nominated judges shoved transgender surgery closer to becoming a constitutional right via their decision Monday in a federal appeals court."
FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument
Mr. Munro evidently doesn't understand that new constitutional rights require the states to appropriately amend the Constitution.
"The majority decision in the Fourth Circuit federal appeals court said existing constitutional rules forbidding sexual discrimination [??? emphasis added] also forbid denials of transgender surgeries in state-run healthcare programs."
"19th Amendment: The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.
Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation."
"From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added]." —United States v. Butler, 1936.
Democrats [and RINOs] Are Terrified Of An Educated And Informed Public (3.12.23)
So if court "magicians" are trying to pull politically correct, Democratic vote-winning transgender surgery out of the “magical hat” Civil Rights Act of 1964 and its titles (aka legislating politically correct "rights" from the bench to keep Democrats in power), consider that probably most of that act and its titles are unconstitutional imo.
In fact, if race-related federal civil rights protections aren't reasonably related to 15th Amendment voting rights protections, then they are likewise unconstitutional imo.
"15th Amendment:Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation."
It is in, if the people who determine what is in or out say it is in.
We can argue whether it was “wrongly decided” but we have to live under the result.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obergefell_v._Hodges
“Affirming care” sounds so compassionate. Almost gentle and motherly. Never mind they are removing healthy body parts from mentally ill people. It’s “Affirming”
Democrats are disgusting human beings. Look at what they love. Killing babies. Enabling Trannies. Grooming children. Islamic Terrorism. Jew hatred. Hatred for America.
Why does my right of free press not require you to buy me the magazines of my choice
I do. Washington and Adams were, along with Hamilton, Federalists in their political philosophy. They supported a strong central government with the ability to make meaningful improvements and changes within the nation.
Who would have guessed that sterilizing children and cutting off their breasts, genitals and reproductive organs would be the liberals’ next great constitutional right? This is an issue that Republicans can definitely win on if they present it as what it really is: child mutilation.
Republican congresscritters should pass a bill called the “No Child Mutilation Act” prohibiting the sexual mutilation and sterilization of children. Sure, the democrats will never allow it on the Senate floor, but after the November election when Republicans retake the Senate and Trump is re-elected President then the Senate will pass it and President Trump will sign it.
I haven't given up yet, but I'm only in my 60s and hope to have a few years left.
Do women understand that when they remove their ovaries they're instantly in MENOPAUSE?
And quite possibly castrated!
And to that you say: “I do.”
Kind-of proves my point.
No Problem, The States just need a TAX on members of the Judiciary, every last Officer of the Court should be taxed whatever is necessary to PAY for the decisions made by the Judiciary.
I can answer this question easily.
When I was speaking with a Democrat about Gavin Newsom and the insanity of taking people’s kids away to be sterilized she said “That’s not the same as transgender surgery!”
I tried to explain that a boy who has his genitalia cut off is not going to become pregnant and give birth to babies.
She said “But trans women are women.”
Gave up trying to use logic with her and this is not a joke.
Symbol of telling fedzilla to get bent.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.