SCOTUS: The courts implementing Project 2025, without Trump.
Earlier this month, the Supreme Court refused to allow a new rule issued by the Department of Education to go into effect and protect trans students under Title IX, which promises equality in education and specifically forbids discrimination “on the basis of sex.” In 2020 the court famously decided, in Bostock v. Clayton County,that “it is impossible to discriminate against a person for being homosexual or transgender without discriminating against that individual based on sex.” The new rule, which is for now blocked from taking effect, has sought to apply this logical conclusion to Title IX’s demand for equality.
However, since the release of Bostock, two central things have changed: the court’s structure and the prospect of former President Donald Trump’s reelection. These developments have inspired a concerted attempt on the right side of the political map to roll back Bostock, and a detailed plan to that effect was included in Project 2025, the 922-page document detailing the blueprint for a Trump administration. Yet, as this month’s decision demonstrates, the groups behind Project 2025 are already executing their plan through the courts in 2024.
Project 2025 directly targets Bostock, arguing that the ruling should not apply to various protections of equality outside its immediate circumstances. “The New Administration,” it states, “should restrict Bostock’s application of sex discrimination protections to sexual orientation and transgender status in the context of hiring and firing.” It further declares that “the President should direct agencies to withdraw unlawful ‘notices’ and ‘guidances’ purporting to apply Bostock’s reasoning broadly outside hiring and firing” and “rescind regulations interpreting sex discrimination provisions as prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, transgender status, sex characteristics, etc.” Without waiting for November’s election, the leaders of Project 2025 are already in courts, rehearsing this part of their playbook in a multifront war against Bostock and LGBTQ+ students, patients, and employees.
Advertisement Advertisement Advertisement AdvertisementRelated From Slate
Shirin Ali
The Trump Hush Money Trial Judge Is Getting Pretty Tired of This
Read MoreTake the court’s recent 5–4 decision, for example. With the exception of Justice Neil Gorsuch, who penned Bostock, all the other conservative justices, including Chief Justice John Roberts, who joined Gorsuch in Bostock, affirmed the blocking of the entire Title IX rule by district courts in Louisiana and Kentucky. This latest ruling is the culmination of a line of cases in which red states and conservative advocacy groups, like the Alliance Defending Freedom, argue that because Bostockwas decided under Title VII to protect employees, it cannot be used to protect LGBTQ+ students under Title IX.
In a similar battlefield focused on health care, red states have attacked Bostock to prevent its reasoning from protecting trans minors’ access to treatments that are available to cisgender adolescents. When the minors, their parents, and supportive doctors sought preliminary injunctions against bans on gender-affirming care, they temporarily won in many district courts that found that the bans were likely unconstitutional by applying Bostock to the equal protection clause’s broad prohibition on discrimination. However, a conservative majority of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6thCircuit lifted those injunctions, holding that Bostockdoes not apply outside Title VII and thus is “irrelevant” to the interpretation of the equal protection clause. The case, L.W. v. Skrmetti, was recently taken up by the Supreme Court and will be heard in its 2024–25 term, probably before any new administration is in place.
Advertisement AdvertisementLikewise, still in the health care trenches, lawsuits have been filed to prevent another of the Biden administration’s rules protecting LGBTQ+ people from going into effect. This rule was set by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services under the nondiscrimination provision of the Affordable Care Act, demanding—based on Bostock—that medical providers avoid discriminating against LGBTQ+ patients. In response, the ADF, which is one of the chief groups behind Project 2025, launched litigation to block the rule, recently winning nationwide and statewide preliminary injunctions issued on the same day by Mississippi and Florida courts. Again, the prevailing argument was that Bostock had no life outside Title VII.
AdvertisementPopular in News & Politics
- Kamala Harris May Finally Be the Opponent That Makes Donald Trump Fully Lose It
- So Is Donald Trump Jr. Cursed, or What?
- A Global Problem Is Preventing the Wars in Ukraine and Gaza From Coming to an End
- The Trump and Harris Campaigns Are Pivoting to a New Skirmish
Remarkably, a wave of litigation is now rising to castrate Bostock even within Title VII. In this battleground, Project 2025’s exact words matter, and employers are now arguing that they, too, can discriminate as long as they not do that in the narrow context of “hiring and firing.” For example, in Texas, the group leading Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation, attacks (in the courtroom of a far-right judge) Bostock-based guidance to employers by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Similarly, the ADF represents a group called the Christian Employers Alliance, arguing at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9thCircuit that they are allowed to deny employees health care coverage based on their gender identity because deprivation of needed gender-affirming care falls outside “hiring and firing.” And earlier this month, the conservative U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11thCircuit agreed to vacate and reconsider en banc its former 2–1 decision that applied Bostock and held that an employer who prevented such care to a transgender employee engaged in unlawful discrimination.
Although candidates on the campaign trail debate the future impact of Project 2025, much of the damage it orders is already happening in a war in the courts that seeks to hollow Bostock of any meaning.
Tweet Share Share Comment-
Best smart home deal: The Amazon Smart Thermostat is just $63.99便民新举措 爱心暖人心2020年山东有望地震提前5秒预警 伤亡比减少22%签约金额42亿元,南雄市高质量发展招商大会结硕果The local version of Project 2025 is already causing devastation.青岛市与德企达成合作 共促3D打印产业化发展开学了 让学生感受“回家”的温暖青岛联通开展“关爱员工送凉爽”活动Best smart home deal: The Amazon Smart Thermostat is just $63.99黄金创年内最大单日跌幅 下半年形势持续承压
下一篇:Sports minister says audits into football, badminton federations set to conclude in Sept.
- ·雅安公安接连破获两起汉源湖非法捕捞案
- ·平安人寿青岛分公司扶贫公益跑 传递保险正能量
- ·交通银行青岛市北三支行暖心服务送上门
- ·淘宝拍把椅子收到一堆石头 水军刷销量刷好评
- ·Yoon touts pension reform drive amid stagnant popularity rating
- ·便民新举措 爱心暖人心
- ·青岛第一支影视文化专项基金 落地在西海岸
- ·喜旺被共青团中央授予全国“青年文明号”称号
- ·Deceased K
- ·揭东农技驿站给“竹”科技支持,”锁”住鲜美串起富民产业链
- ·我市两家工业园区被确定为省级循环化改造示范试点园区
- ·平安人寿青岛分公司扶贫公益跑 传递保险正能量
- ·Europe now has a huge AI gap, for better or for worse
- ·便民新举措 爱心暖人心
- ·鸽子花,“飞出”雅安绽放全球(下)
- ·涓浗骞冲畨澶氶」搴旀€ヤ妇鎺Н鏋佸簲瀵瑰洓宸濅弗閲嶅北浣撳灝濉屼簨鏁卂涓浗灞变笢缃慱闈掑矝
- ·Doosan scraps controversial Robotics
- ·加快建设文教新城 不断繁荣城市经济
- ·涓浗骞冲畨澶氶」搴旀€ヤ妇鎺Н鏋佸簲瀵瑰洓宸濅弗閲嶅北浣撳灝濉屼簨鏁卂涓浗灞变笢缃慱闈掑矝
- ·开展重点行业领域 扫黑除恶线索摸排
- ·Supercritical geothermal power: Limitless promise or impossible dream?
- ·红掌新品种培育走前列,广州这样打造“千万级”花卉育苗工厂
- ·青岛联通测试1200公里保障旅游旺季4G网络质量
- ·兴农评丨城乡公交不让站,这是给出行添堵
- ·What to expect when a tech bubble bursts
- ·比夏天的气温更热的是TA!老司机都懂!
- ·The Composer Has No Clothes
- ·复工复产要倾听需求侧的声音
- ·23省份2016年平均工资出炉 看看你达标了吗?
- ·鈥滃競闀挎澂鈥濆皬寰紒涓氬垱鏂板ぇ璧涘磦灞卞尯鍒濊禌寮€璧沖涓浗灞变笢缃慱闈掑矝
- ·Project 2025 Comstock Act: Trump’s new abortion comment exposed.
- ·2017青岛国际啤酒节推出支付宝码上支付 更可获得AR红包
- ·对标对表检查验收 立行立改推动问题解决
- ·防疫教学两手抓 生活学习两不误
- ·Families of S. Korean detainees in NK appeal to embassies for support
- ·涓嶅彧鏄浗鍐呴暱閫旀极娓歌垂 杩戞湡杩欎簺鏀惰垂閮借鍙栨秷锛乢涓浗灞变笢缃慱闈掑矝