Twin Victories on the Legal Front

It’s not every day that common sense wins in the court of law. But two such victories in the same week is virtually unprecedented.

The first “W” came in a case heard by the U.S. Supreme Court that upheld a 2023 Tennessee law banning gender transition care for young people. The verdict wasn’t even close, with six of the nine justices siding with the Volunteer State.

Just so we are clear, the phrase “gender transition care” used in this context refers to prescribing puberty blockers and opposite sex hormones, and performing permanent and irreversible body-mutilating surgery on minor children who are confused about their gender identity.

In other words, “gender transition care” is a euphemism for “child abuse”.

The case, known as The United States v Skrmetti, was the first time the high court had addressed the issue of transgender healthcare. Three Tennessee transgender teenagers, their parents, and a doctor who provides transition medications had argued that the state's ban violated the constitutional guarantee of equal protection under the law by discriminating on the basis of sex.

Thankfully, not even wishy-washy Chief Justice John Roberts fell for that argument.

"Tennessee concluded that there is an ongoing debate among medical experts regarding the risks and benefits associated with administering puberty blockers and hormones to treat gender dysphoria, gender identity disorder, and gender incongruence," Roberts wrote in his majority opinion. “SB1's ban on such treatments responds directly to that uncertainty.”

Like I said, he’s wishy-washy at best, but at least Roberts’ ambivalence caused him to vote the right way this time.

Not surprisingly, the three liberal justices – Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson – dissented from the ruling. Sotomayor, who wrote the dissent and also read it from the bench to emphasize her strong disagreement, said that in its ruling, "the Court abandons transgender children and their families to political whims".

No, Madame Justice, a political whim would be drugging and/or carving up a young boy or girl by amputating their sexual organs simply because the radical LGBTQ+ nutjobs are looking for new converts to their dying cause.

Tennessee's Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti called the decision a "landmark victory", saying that “This is a big win for evidence-based medicine, this is a big win for democracy, for letting state governments decide what state laws should be.”

(In case you didn’t catch it, the fact that this case was known as The United States vs. Skermetti means that the Biden administration had used its power – and countless millions in taxpayers’ dollars – to sue the State of Tennessee. Thankfully, there is a new sheriff in town by the name of Donald J. Trump, and neither he nor Attorney General Pam Bondi will tolerate such nonsense.)

The second big win was a “W” for DJT and a royal smackdown of California Gov. Gavin Newsom. Newsom had sued President Trump over his federalizing of the California National Guard to quell the Los Angeles riots and specifically, to protect federal buildings and federal law enforcement officers there.

In a 38-page unanimous ruling, a three-judge panel of the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeal said Trump was within his rights earlier this month when he ordered 4,000 members of the CA National Guard into service for 60 days to “protect federal personnel performing federal functions and to protect federal property”.

“Affording appropriate deference to the President’s determination, we conclude that he likely acted within his authority in federalizing the National Guard,” the panel wrote. The court also ruled that although Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had bypassed Gov. Newsom in issuing the takeover order to Major General Matthew P. Beevers, as head of the CA National Guard Beevers was an “agent” of the governor and so, the order was entirely legal.

In a social media post after the decision, a defiant Newsom promised to pursue his legal challenge.

“Donald Trump is not a king and not above the law,” he wrote on X. “Tonight, the court rightly rejected Trump’s claim that he can do whatever he wants with the National Guard and not have to explain himself to a court. We will not let this authoritarian use of military soldiers against citizens go unchecked.”

For his part, President Trump called the court’s decision a “BIG WIN” on Truth Social, adding “Congratulations to the Ninth Circuit, America is proud of you tonight!” Mr. Trump also called Gov. Newsom “incompetent” and “ill-prepared” in his post.

Somewhere in Los Angeles – or possibly Sacramento – Gavin Newsom is doing a slow burn, and his carefully-coiffed hair may actually be a bit disheveled. That’s what happens when you get publicly schooled by the 47th President of the United States and even more publicly smacked down by a federal court based in your home state... and in San Francisco, of all places.

Like I said, it was a very good week on the legal front. Hopefully, it's the start of a long-running trend.