Supreme Court throws out appellate rulings in favor of transgender people in 4 states
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Monday threw out appellate rulings in favor of transgender people in four states following the justices' recent decision upholding a Tennessee ban on certain medical treatment for transgender youths.
But the justices took no action in cases from Arizona, Idaho and West Virginia involving the participation of transgender students on school sports teams. The court could say as soon as Thursday whether it will take up the issue in its next term.
The high court ordered appellate judges to reexamine cases from Idaho, North Carolina, Oklahoma and West Virginia involving access to medical care and
birth certificates
.
The action was unsurprising because the court had set the cases aside until after it decided
the Tennessee case
, as typically happens when the same legal issue is being considered.
The rulings all included findings that the restrictions on transgender people imposed by the states violate the Constitution's equal protection clause.
In the Tennessee case, the Supreme Court ruled that there was no constitutional violation in a state law prohibiting puberty blockers and hormone therapy to treat gender dysphoria in people younger than 18.
The justices ordered the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia, to review its decision that West Virginia's and North Carolina's refusal to cover certain health care for transgender people with government-sponsored insurance is discriminatory.
The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will get back a case from Idaho stemming from the state's ban on certain surgical procedures for Medicaid recipients.
The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver will review its ruling blocking an Oklahoma ban on people changing their gender on birth certificates.
In one other case, from Kentucky, the justices rejected the appeal of transgender minors and their families challenging that state's ban on gender-affirming care.
___
Follow the AP's coverage of the U.S. Supreme Court at
https://apnews.com/hub/us-supreme-court
.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Associated Press
4 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Judge again delays Abrego Garcia's release from Tennessee jail over deportation concerns
NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — Kilmar Abrego Garcia will stay in jail for now over concerns that he could be deported if he's released to await his trial on human smuggling charges, a federal judge in Tennessee ruled Monday. Abrego Garcia's attorneys had asked the judge to delay his release because of what they described as 'contradictory statements' by President Donald Trump's administration over what would happen to the Salvadoran national. The lawyers wrote in a brief to the court that 'we cannot put any faith in any representation made on this issue' by the Justice Department, adding that the 'irony of this request is not lost on anyone.' Abrego Garcia, a construction worker who had been living in Maryland, became a flashpoint over Trump's hardline immigration policies when he was mistakenly deported to his native El Salvador in March. Facing mounting pressure and a Supreme Court order, Trump's Republican administration returned him this month to face the smuggling charges, which his attorneys have called 'preposterous.'
Newsweek
7 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Did Republicans Just Kill the Filibuster?
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Republicans are relying on rarely employed accounting methods to push Donald Trump's "one, big beautiful bill" through the Senate, and in doing so could upend established Congressional procedures surrounding the reconciliation process and the filibuster. Why It Matters The filibuster—a procedural move allowing senators to extend debates on bills indefinitely without a 60-vote majority—has long been viewed as a move to encourage bipartisanship in Congress and as a bulwark against political dominance by slim majorities in the upper chamber. Experts told Newsweek that recent moves by Republicans while trying to pass Trump's tax legislation could create new precedent surrounding the filibuster for years to come, including past the period of GOP control. Senate Budget Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham looks out from the upper chamber, June 11, 2025. Senate Budget Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham looks out from the upper chamber, June 11, 2025. J. Scott Applewhite/AP Photo What To Know Republicans are employing the reconciliation process to pass Trump's tax bill, the centerpiece of his second-term domestic agenda, allowing them to eventually advance the bill with only a majority vote rather than the 60 votes normally needed to do away with the threat of a filibuster. A central element of the bill, which the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimates would add $4.2 trillion to the nation's deficit through 2034, is the extension of the tax cuts enacted during Trump's first term. Sweeping fiscal moves of this kind are traditionally restricted by the Byrd Rule, adopted in 1985, which limits the sort of policies that can be folded into bills passed through reconciliation, and forbids legislation from adding to the nation's deficit beyond 10 years. However, as reported by AP, Congressional Budget Office Director Phillip Swagel recently notified Democratic Senator Jeff Merkley of the Senate Budget Committee that elements of the Big, Beautiful Bill would increase the deficit "in years after 2034." Going by this assessment, the Republican bill would violate the rule that determines what legislation can clear the Senate with a simple majority, which could force Republicans to amend significant portions of the legislation. In response to these concerns, and Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough advising that certain provisions in the bill were not budget-related and therefore in violation of Senate rules, Republicans have now argued that Trump's 2017 tax cuts should be treated as part of the fiscal "baseline" forecast, even though these have not yet been extended. Republicans have also cited Section 312 of Congressional Budget Act to argue that the final authority for determining baseline spending figures, and whether the tax portion of the bill violates Byrd, lies with Republican Senate Budget Committee Chair Lindsey Graham. When approached by Newsweek for comment, a spokesperson for Senator Graham said: "Republicans do not want a $4 trillion tax hike—which is what would happen if the Democrats had their way and the 2017 tax cuts expired." They also referenced past support from Democrats for the notion that the Senate Budget Committee Chairman has the power to establish the baseline, citing former Chairman Bernie Sanders' 2022 remark that "the Budget Committee, through its Chair, makes the call on questions of numbers." Sanders is an independent who caucuses with the Democrats. Experts have said that this new "Byrd Bath"—as it has been referred to by some on Capitol Hill—could establish a new precedent regarding budget reconciliation and the avoidance of filibusters by those in power in the future. "The budget process established in 1974 and reinforced by rules and precedents since then was intended to allow a simple majority to pass a budget as long as the contents of a budget measure were limited to budget-related spending and tax provisions," Steve Smith, professor of politics at Arizona State University, told Newsweek. "Playing partisan games with the budget process to set aside the 10-year budget period or use it for nonbudget purposes is contrary to the plain language of the Budget Act and the Byrd rules adopted by the Senate," he added. "It is a precedent that will get repeated over and over again." Michael Ettlinger, a political adviser who previously worked with the Biden-Harris campaign, said, "If the Republican's new accounting method becomes the norm, it will be far easier to pass deficit increasing legislation in the Senate with a simple majority vote—limiting the impact of the filibuster." Ettlinger, who is currently a senior fellow at the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP), noted that nothing would then stop Democrats from employing the same precedents to bypass the filibuster in future bills. "If the Democrats reclaim the Senate they will have the opportunity to undermine the filibuster as the Republicans have done," he told Newsweek. "It's their choice." Democratic Senator Rubén Gallego, reiterated this argument, posting to X: "There is no filibuster if the Senate [Republicans] do this and when Dems take power there is no reason why we should not use reconciliation to pass immigration reform." What People Are Saying Democratic Senator Ron Wyden, ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, in a statement released Sunday, said: "The only way for Republicans to pass this horribly destructive bill, which is based on budget math as fake as Donald Trump's tan, was to go nuclear and hide it behind a bunch of procedural jargon. We're now operating in a world where the filibuster applies to Democrats but not to Republicans, and that's simply unsustainable given the triage that'll be required whenever the Trump era finally ends." Steve Smith, professor of politics at Arizona State University, told Newsweek: "If a small Senate majority can put anything in a budget measure or ignore the ten-year budget window, then nothing is left for regular legislation that is subject to a filibuster. It represents a "get-it-while-you-can" partisanship that Republicans have adopted since [Mitch] McConnell became leader that, step-by-step, has undermined longstanding Senate norms." Republican Senator and Senate Budget Committee Chair Lindsey Graham, speaking on the Senate floor on Monday, said: "I'm not the first chairman to change a baseline for different reasons." "The budget Chairman, under [Section] 312, sets the baseline," Graham continued. "This has been acknowledged by Republicans and Democrats." What Happens Next? Debate over President Trump's megabill has now reached the final stages. A "vote-a-rama" on the bill—a marathon session during which lawmakers may introduce amendments to a reconciliation package—kicked off in the Senate on Monday morning. Should the bill pass a Senate vote, expected this week, it will then be sent back down to the House for approval. On Friday, Trump said that his preferred deadline of July 4 was not the "end all," but later said via Truth Social that the House of Representatives "must be ready" to send the bill to his desk by this date.
10 minutes ago
US Rep. Dusty Johnson announces he's entering race to become South Dakota governor
SIOUX FALLS, S.D. -- South Dakota's lone member of the U.S. House, Republican Dusty Johnson, announced Monday that he will run for governor next year, potentially facing off against the incumbent governor. 'We have challenges, but our state has the foundation, the work ethic and the values we need to become even better,' he said at a Sioux Falls hotel, citing priorities of cutting property taxes, combating drugs and addiction and making college and tech schools more affordable. Johnson has served as South Dakota's only congressman since 2019, succeeding Kristi Noem's congressional tenure, and has taken moderate stances during his time in Washington. He has supported antitrust legislation and opposed the Respect for Marriage Act, which codified the Supreme Court's federal recognition of gay marriage. He will have served eight years in the House at the end of his current term. He sometimes joined a minority of Republicans in voting against President Donald Trump, including when he voted to override Trump's veto of a measure that revoked his declaration of an emergency at the southern border. He was later one of 35 House Republicans who voted to establish a commission to investigate the Jan. 6 Capitol riots. 'The U.S. House can be frustrating, but let's be honest, being governor of South Dakota is going to be frustrating sometimes, too,' Johnson said. 'That's just the nature of the beast.' 'This is not an easy area to serve,' he said. 'Our country, our state, we face real problems.' He told supporters that U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson and President Donald Trump look to him 'to help bridge the divide of a rowdy and colorful Republican House.' Now the 48-year-old aims to become the first elected governor since Noem, who used her time in Pierre to build a national profile and draw attention to the small-population Midwest state. Noem has since become Trump's secretary of Homeland Security, leaving her position in January which was filled by the current governor, Larry Rhoden. Johnson is entering what could be a crowded Republican primary next June, competing against state Rep. Jon Hansen, an Aberdeen businessman who championed a landowner movement against a carbon capture pipeline. Johnson may also be challenged by Rhoden, though the latter has not yet announced a gubernatorial campaign. No Democrats have announced plans to run for governor, a post that Republicans have held since 1979. Rhoden, a rancher who was Noem's lieutenant governor for six years, became governor in January during the state's legislative session. He has been traveling South Dakota visiting towns and businesses and touting economic development, with plans to visit Lemmon on Monday. South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley has announced plans to seek Johnson's congressional seat. Johnson first entered public office when he was elected to be a public utilities commissioner in 2004 and became the youngest commissioner in the nation at age 28. He later served as chief of staff for South Dakota Gov. Dennis Daugaard. ___
