"We can talk about suspect classes and what's equal protection under the law. But at the end of the day, we are talking about biological boys and men who are imagining themselves to be women and wanting to participate in women's sports and thereby displacing women and taking away scholarship opportunities and the like, Urbahn said. It's kind of shocking, Emily, I think that we're even here at the Supreme Court having to discuss this and litigate this."
"What we're saying is the way it implies in practice is to exclude birth-sex males categorically from women's teams and there is a subset of those birth-sex males where it doesn't make sense to do so according to the state's own interest, Hartnett said. Alito then asked, How can a court determine whether there's discrimination on the basis of sex without knowing what sex means for equal protection purposes?"
A central question before the U.S. Supreme Court is how to determine discrimination on the basis of sex when no uniform legal definition of sex exists. The case challenges an Idaho law banning transgender girls and women from participating in women's school sports. The plaintiff is Boise State student Lindsay Hecox, who sought to join women's track and cross country. Justice Samuel Alito pressed whether courts can find sex-based discrimination without a clarified legal meaning of sex. Arguments focus on whether categorically excluding birth-sex males displaces biological women and removes athletic and scholarship opportunities.
Read at www.mediaite.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]