Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Skrmetti (Docket No. 23-477) is a pending United States Supreme Court case on whether bans on transgender medical procedures (including puberty blockers and hormone therapy) for minors under the age of 18 violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
The Memphis gynecologist, one of the plaintiffs who challenged the law in a case going before the U.S. Supreme Court on Dec. 4, recalled the "hype and hysteria" as public debate coarsened over the ...
One of the plaintiffs in the Supreme Court case on a ban on gender-affirming care for transgender minors, Dr. Susan Lacy, poses for a portrait at her clinic in Memphis, Tennessee, U.S., November ...
The Supreme Court will dive headfirst into the politically fraught issue of transgender rights on Wednesday when it hears a challenge to Tennessee’s ban on gender-affirming care for minors in ...
After 1925, most cases have been subject to being granted a writ of certiorari which the Court can grant or deny without ruling on the merits. This change greatly reduced the Court's workload. [1] [2] In the past decade, approximately 7,000-8,000 new cases are filed in the Supreme Court each year. Plenary review, with oral arguments by ...
Case history; Prior: Judgment for plaintiff, 618 F. Supp. 1109 (D.D.C. 1985); Affirmed, 263 U.S. App. D.C. 321, 825 F.2d 458 (1987): Holding; Once a Title VII plaintiff proves that gender played a motivating part in an employment decision, the defendant can only avoid a finding of liability by proving by a preponderance of the evidence that it would have made the same decision regardless of ...
The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in a landmark case that concerns gender-affirming care for transgender Americans. Here's what's at stake.
The case revolves around protections relating to public and private employees from being discriminated upon because of sex and whether this applies to gender identity for transgender persons. [5] In May 2020, before the Supreme Court had issued a decision, Stephens entered hospice care, as her long-term kidney disease had become untreatable. [10]