WDI USA has filed a friend of the court brief before the U.S. Supreme Court in a case called United States v. Skrmetti. At issue is a Tennessee ban on the medicalization of children (often referred to by the euphemism “gender affirming care”). We had previously filed a similar brief in the same case before the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.
WDI USA has filed amicus briefs before the Supreme Court before, but the previous briefs only concerned the question of whether the Court should take up a case. This is the first time WDI USA has presented the radical feminist critique of “gender identity” before the Supreme Court directly and we’re proud to have done so.
From the brief:
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which represents the [original plaintiffs] in this matter, defines the term “transgender” to mean “a broad range of identities and experiences that fall outside of the traditional understanding of gender.” It continues: “Some of those identities and experiences include people whose gender identity is different from the sex they were assigned at birth, people who transition from living as one gender to another or wish to do so (often described by the clinical term ‘transsexual’), people who ‘cross-dress’ part of the time, and people who identify outside the traditional gender binary (meaning they identify as something other than male or female). Some transgender people describe themselves as gender variant or gender nonconforming. Not everyone who doesn’t conform to gender stereotypes, however, identifies as transgender. Many people don’t conform to gender stereotypes but also continue to identify with the gender assigned to them at birth, like butch women or femme men.” It would defy reason to establish a quasi-suspect class of such people for equal protection purposes, and this Court ought not want to be the Court that establishes such a classification for a group of people that, at least according to the ACLU, includes part-time cross-dressers.
Download and read our brief here:
WDI-USA-Skrmetti-SCOTUS-Merits-brief-10-11-2024.pdf
Bravo! This nonsense was started in the courts and needs to END in the courts. Time for women to use the rights they STILL have to protect the butchery and poisoning of children to forward identities based on the delusional belief one can be born in the wrong body. Teaching children to loathe the gift of their natural healthy bodies so as to forward gendered stereotypes is about the most nihilistic evil there is.
There is NO kindness in promoting medicalization of children which results in impaired physical, mental and emotional health due to interference with natural puberty.
This looks great.
Please forgive my ignorance, but I have never heard the terms “suspect class” or “quasi-suspect class”. I do not know what this means. It sounds somewhat self-explanatory, but I don’t want to make an assumption. It would be helpful if WDI USA could provide a definition at some point.