Unfortunately, Clarence Thomas wants another free world-class vacation, so I expect the US Supreme Court to soon rule the way hateful billionaires want them to…
“The majority in this case made the independence of its analysis explicit, writing: “Montana case law interpreting the Individual Dignity provisions directs our analysis, not federal precedent.” The dissent cited Trump v. Orr and Skrmetti—both hostile federal rulings—but the majority rejected them outright. What this means in practice is that Montana’s transgender residents now have a constitutional shield completely independent of the Supreme Court of the United State’s decisions.”
Unfortunately, Clarence Thomas wants another free world-class vacation, so I expect the US Supreme Court to soon rule the way hateful billionaires want them to…
From the article:
“The majority in this case made the independence of its analysis explicit, writing: “Montana case law interpreting the Individual Dignity provisions directs our analysis, not federal precedent.” The dissent cited Trump v. Orr and Skrmetti—both hostile federal rulings—but the majority rejected them outright. What this means in practice is that Montana’s transgender residents now have a constitutional shield completely independent of the Supreme Court of the United State’s decisions.”