Artwork

Nội dung được cung cấp bởi The Daily Signal. Tất cả nội dung podcast bao gồm các tập, đồ họa và mô tả podcast đều được The Daily Signal hoặc đối tác nền tảng podcast của họ tải lên và cung cấp trực tiếp. Nếu bạn cho rằng ai đó đang sử dụng tác phẩm có bản quyền của bạn mà không có sự cho phép của bạn, bạn có thể làm theo quy trình được nêu ở đây https://vi.player.fm/legal.
Player FM - Ứng dụng Podcast
Chuyển sang chế độ ngoại tuyến với ứng dụng Player FM !

Understanding the ‘Transgender’ Case Before the Supreme Court

57:24
 
Chia sẻ
 

Manage episode 453919731 series 2568694
Nội dung được cung cấp bởi The Daily Signal. Tất cả nội dung podcast bao gồm các tập, đồ họa và mô tả podcast đều được The Daily Signal hoặc đối tác nền tảng podcast của họ tải lên và cung cấp trực tiếp. Nếu bạn cho rằng ai đó đang sử dụng tác phẩm có bản quyền của bạn mà không có sự cho phép của bạn, bạn có thể làm theo quy trình được nêu ở đây https://vi.player.fm/legal.

After the Civil War, the equal protection clause was added to the Constitution as part of the 14th Amendment to protect the rights of black Americans. Simply stated, the equal protection clause provides that every American is to be treated equally under the law.

In the case United States v. Skrmetti, attorneys representing the U.S. government argued Wednesday before the Supreme Court that the clause in the Constitution prevents states from banning transgender medical treatments for minors. (The case, which comes out of Tennessee, is named after that state’s chief law enforcer, Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti.)

The problem with the government’s argument, Heritage Foundation senior legal fellow Sarah Parshall Perry says, is that the high court already has determined that the equal protection clause applies only to immutable characteristics, qualities someone is born with, such as race or nationality.

“The Supreme Court has never determined that something that is subjective and internal, something that you choose and you act upon, is sufficient for constitutional protection,” Perry says on The Daily Signal’s “Problematic Women” podcast.

The Supreme Court has been asked to give protection under the equal protection clause to individuals with a certain poverty status or education level, Perry says, but “both times the Supreme Court has said, ‘No way.’”

The case before the high court follows passage of a Tennessee law banning transgender medical treatments for anyone under 18. Perry predicts that the court will send the issue back to the American people, allowing each state to pass laws regarding minors and such gender treatments.

Perry joins this episode of “Problematic Women” to discuss the high-profile case and its likely outcome.

Also on today’s show, we discuss President Joe Biden’s decision to pardon his son Hunter Biden. And later, we sit down with Dr. Ingrid Skop, vice president and director of medical affairs for Charlotte Lozier Institute, to discuss the organization’s recent study on the abortion pill.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

  continue reading

373 tập

Artwork
iconChia sẻ
 
Manage episode 453919731 series 2568694
Nội dung được cung cấp bởi The Daily Signal. Tất cả nội dung podcast bao gồm các tập, đồ họa và mô tả podcast đều được The Daily Signal hoặc đối tác nền tảng podcast của họ tải lên và cung cấp trực tiếp. Nếu bạn cho rằng ai đó đang sử dụng tác phẩm có bản quyền của bạn mà không có sự cho phép của bạn, bạn có thể làm theo quy trình được nêu ở đây https://vi.player.fm/legal.

After the Civil War, the equal protection clause was added to the Constitution as part of the 14th Amendment to protect the rights of black Americans. Simply stated, the equal protection clause provides that every American is to be treated equally under the law.

In the case United States v. Skrmetti, attorneys representing the U.S. government argued Wednesday before the Supreme Court that the clause in the Constitution prevents states from banning transgender medical treatments for minors. (The case, which comes out of Tennessee, is named after that state’s chief law enforcer, Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti.)

The problem with the government’s argument, Heritage Foundation senior legal fellow Sarah Parshall Perry says, is that the high court already has determined that the equal protection clause applies only to immutable characteristics, qualities someone is born with, such as race or nationality.

“The Supreme Court has never determined that something that is subjective and internal, something that you choose and you act upon, is sufficient for constitutional protection,” Perry says on The Daily Signal’s “Problematic Women” podcast.

The Supreme Court has been asked to give protection under the equal protection clause to individuals with a certain poverty status or education level, Perry says, but “both times the Supreme Court has said, ‘No way.’”

The case before the high court follows passage of a Tennessee law banning transgender medical treatments for anyone under 18. Perry predicts that the court will send the issue back to the American people, allowing each state to pass laws regarding minors and such gender treatments.

Perry joins this episode of “Problematic Women” to discuss the high-profile case and its likely outcome.

Also on today’s show, we discuss President Joe Biden’s decision to pardon his son Hunter Biden. And later, we sit down with Dr. Ingrid Skop, vice president and director of medical affairs for Charlotte Lozier Institute, to discuss the organization’s recent study on the abortion pill.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

  continue reading

373 tập

ทุกตอน

×
 
Loading …

Chào mừng bạn đến với Player FM!

Player FM đang quét trang web để tìm các podcast chất lượng cao cho bạn thưởng thức ngay bây giờ. Đây là ứng dụng podcast tốt nhất và hoạt động trên Android, iPhone và web. Đăng ký để đồng bộ các theo dõi trên tất cả thiết bị.

 

Hướng dẫn sử dụng nhanh

Nghe chương trình này trong khi bạn khám phá
Nghe