Summary of "What A Day" Podcast Episode: "How The Supreme Court Just Failed Trans Youth"

Release Date: June 19, 2025
Host: Jane Coaston (Guest Host: Erin Ryan)

Introduction

In this poignant episode of What A Day, hosted by Erin Ryan in place of Jane Coaston, the spotlight is cast on a landmark Supreme Court decision that profoundly impacts transgender youth across the United States. The episode delves into the recent ruling in United States vs. Scormetti, where the Supreme Court upheld a Tennessee law banning gender-affirming care for transgender minors, a decision that reverberates through 24 other states with similar legislation.

Supreme Court Ruling in United States vs. Scormetti

Erin Ryan introduces the case, emphasizing its significance:

[02:23] Erin Ryan: "So the case was filed by the parents of transgender minors challenging a Tennessee law that prohibited individuals from accessing certain treatment to treat gender dysphoria."

The lawsuit, representing the interests of transgender minors, contested the constitutionality of Tennessee's restrictive law. The federal government's intervention on behalf of the parents underscored the case's national importance.

Legal Reasoning and Implications

Leah Littman, author of How the Supreme Court Runs on Conservative Grievance, Fringe Theories and Bad Vibes and host of the Crooked Media podcast Strict Scrutiny, provides an in-depth analysis:

[02:15] Leah Littman: "The Supreme Court decided whether laws like Tennessee's that ban gender-affirming care trigger what's called heightened scrutiny."

The Court opted for deference to the legislature, categorizing the law outside the realm of heightened scrutiny. This decision implies that states can impose such bans with minimal judicial interference, potentially undermining protections against discrimination.

Erin Ryan probes further into the motivations behind the ruling:

[04:45] Erin Ryan: "What did they say about that ultimately?"

Littman explains the Court's rationale:

[04:45] Leah Littman: "The court said two things. One, they said this law does not discriminate on the basis of sex... The law allows, you know, CIS youth to obtain some healthcare treatments that trans youth couldn't."

The majority opinion dismissed the law as non-discriminatory, despite its explicit references to sex and its disparate impact on transgender minors. Justice Sonia Sotomayor's dissent vehemently opposed this interpretation:

[07:17] Leah Littman: "Justice Sotomayor said... the law explicitly mentions sex that is a sex classification... she accused the majority of abandoning judicial review exactly where it was needed."

Dissenting Opinions and Concerns

The dissenters—Justices Sotomayor, Ketanji Brown Jackson, and Elena Kagan—highlighted the law's discriminatory nature:

[07:17] Littman: "She expressed sorrow for the implications of this case on the lives of trans kids and their families."

The dissent underscores the personal and societal ramifications of the ruling, emphasizing the Court's retreat from protecting marginalized communities.

Potential Ripple Effects

Erin Ryan raises concerns about the ruling's broader impact:

[08:18] Leah Littman: "When the Court is citing these old cases that upheld laws that discriminated against pregnant people... you are providing a real blueprint for all kinds of laws that treat men and women differently."

Littman warns that reviving archaic interpretations of sex discrimination could erode legal protections, paving the way for further discriminatory legislation.

Future Outlook for Transgender Youth and Families

Addressing the immediate consequences:

[09:49] Erin Ryan: "What is gonna change for the families seeking trans care in Tennessee for their kids?"

Littman paints a bleak picture:

[09:49] Leah Littman: "These bans on gender-affirming care are going to go into effect, and that is catastrophic for families with transgender individuals... depriving individuals of care that has been described as life-saving."

She draws parallels to the Dobbs v. Jackson decision on abortion, predicting a fragmented landscape where access to care varies dramatically by state:

[12:24] Leah Littman: "This is absolutely going to create a patchwork of protections where not all states are going to ban gender-affirming care. Some will, and some will even go a step further and try to prohibit residents of their own state from obtaining care elsewhere."

Call to Action and Resilience

Despite the grim outlook, Littman encourages collective action:

[12:54] Leah Littman: "The justices are heavily influenced by the cultural milieu and society they are a part of... we should all recognize that and fight back against some of these false narratives about the fight for transgender rights."

She advocates for shaping the narrative around transgender rights and resisting discriminatory laws through societal and legislative efforts.

Conclusion

This episode of What A Day serves as a critical examination of the Supreme Court's recent decision and its devastating impact on transgender youth and their families. Through insightful analysis and compelling discourse, host Erin Ryan and guest Leah Littman shed light on the legal and societal challenges ahead, urging listeners to remain informed and proactive in defending transgender rights.

Notable Quotes:

• Leah Littman: "...the majority has signaled the legal protections against sex discrimination are in real jeopardy." [06:04]

• Justice Sonia Sotomayor (as cited by Littman): "...leaving trans kids and their families to political [decisions]." [07:17]

• Leah Littman: "...this is absolutely going to create a patchwork of protections where not all states are going to ban gender affirming care." [12:24]

For more insightful discussions and in-depth analyses, subscribe to What A Day on your favorite podcast app or YouTube. Stay informed with Crooked Media.