Leftist blog writing about Supreme Court cases bleats leftist lies about a trans case

There's a popular blog called "scotusblog," run by a leftist named Amy Howe.  Like all leftists, Amy carefully avoids all normal references to sex in her summaries, to make it hard for anyone NOT in her camp to know the real effect of legal rulings.

So with that background:  In March of 2020 Idaho passed a law titled "the Fairness in Women’s Sports Act."  It was the first in the U.S. to ban biological males--males the lying left (including Amy) invariably calls "transgender women"--from competing on girls’ sports teams in public schools.  The law took effect July 1, 2020.
 
So just days later the tranny mafia (Democrats) predictably sued, and in August of 2020 a federal judge in Idaho temporarily barred the state from enforcing the law, DECREEING that it likely violated the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection under the law.

It take most people awhile to begin to grasp the total inversion of logic in the judge's RULING.  See, for decades Leftists have bleated that males are AWFUL--toxic and thuggish, eh?--in large part because they're bigger and stronger than girls.  But if a bigger, stronger male simply declares dat he (she) IS a girl, suddenly--like magic--all those objections by feminists about how girls iz oppressed by bigger, stronger males suddenly vanish!  

See, by a male simply declaring he's a girl, he magically becomes a REAL girl!  And if you accept that, you MUST allow 'em to play on girls' teams, eh?  It's world-class bullshit, but ALL leftist judges support it. 

So: a 3-judge "panel" of the 9th Circuit upheld the district judge’s ruling, agreeing that the Idaho law discriminated "based on transgender status," and thus violated the 14th Amendment because “its text, structure and effect show that the purpose of the law was to ban transgender women and girls from public school sports teams that correspond with their gender identity.” 

Well DUH.  But notice how cunningly the panel avoided dealing with the more basic question of "How, exactly, do tranny plaintiffs--biological males--claim to have become girls, eh?"  Cuz that would show most rational people how insane the court rulings were.  So instead the leftist judges simply CALLED the male plaintiffs "women and girls," neatly avoiding the obvious flaw in their argument.

The leftist 3-judge panel also DECREED that another reason the Idaho law discriminated on the basis of sex was because "students on girls’ and women’s sports teams are subject to invasive sex verification procedures to implement the law," while “participants in male athletics” aren't.

This is bullshit.  First, note how Amy uses the deliberately vague term "students on girls' sports teams..." to hide the truth that she's referring to males claiming to be girls.  Second, the leftist judges use the term "invasive sex verification procedures" deliberately, to create imagined scenarios of teenage girls being forced to undress in front of leering, mouth-breathing men.  But in reality any "sex verification" could easily be done by doing a DNA test on skin cells.  But the three judges on the "panel" wanted to create support for their RULING.  Classic tactic.

And lest you naively think the panel's ruling was NOT supported by a majority of the shitheads on the 9th Circuit, the full court declined to rehear the case.  

So with the panel citing the 14th Amendment's "equal protection" language, let's take a look at how that emerged.

The Civil War ended on April 9th, 1865.  Barely a year later a congress consisting ONLY of northern states passed the 14th Amendment (June 8, 1866).  Then on March 2, 1867--again with no southern states allowed in congress--the northern states passed the first of the "Reconstruction Acts," ORDERING that no southern state would be re-admitted to congress unless it ratified the 14th Amendment. 

Wow, not much freedom of choice allowed there, eh citizen?

"Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

The known purpose of the 14th was to make all former slaves citizens of the U.S.  The notion of "trannies" wouldn't be known for another 90 years or so.  So to claim congress intended the 14th to mean that males claiming to be female would actually make them female is utterly absurd.  Horseshit.  The notion wasn't even known back then.  And yet that's what the Democrats have done, and are doing.

Source: "scotusblog"

https://www.scotusblog.com/2026/01/the-transgender-athlete-cases-an-explainer/