Official portrait of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson Credit: Fred Schilling / United States Supreme Court
The dumbest Supreme Court Justice once again humiliated the legendary institution with not only her ignorance of the case at hand but with a question that resembled Kamal Harris’s worst word salads. The embarrassment was so severe that Justice Neil Gorsuch had to step in at one point.
As CBS reported, the Supreme Court heard arguments </>on Tuesday on whether laws from Idaho and West Virginia that ban biological males from playing in girls’ and women’s sports violate the Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection and the landmark law known as Title IX.
Two bio males, Lindsay Hecox of Idaho and Becky Pepper-Jackson of West Virginia, sued their respective states, claiming they discriminate based on sex and transgender status. They claim the states’ laws ban every ‘transgender’ female from school sports, and treat them worse than others.
This is, of course, not true. West Virginia and Idaho are simply relying on science to ensure actual fair play and the rights of female athletes.
During oral arguments, Ketanji Brown Jackson ignored the biology and promptly took the side of the fake females.
At one point, she appeared to be trying to ask Idaho Attorney General Alan Michael Hurst whether transgender females who have undergone medical transition should be treated the same as actual men under equal-protection law.
But as one will notice, her question came out quite messy, which confused Hurst for a moment. Then she interrupted him to clarify further.
Hurst responded by schooling Jackson before Justice Gorsuch intervened at the end.
LISTEN:
JACKSON: So, to the extent that you have an individual who says what is happening in this law is that it is treating someone who transgender, but does not have, because of the medical interventions and the things that have been done, who does not have, uh, the same, uh, threat to physical competition and safety and all the reasons the state puts forward – that’s actually a different class, says this individual.
And uh, so you’re not treating the class the same. And how do you respond to that?
In other words, the as-applied challenge essentially redefines the class…So what is wrong with that number one and how do you square that with our uh, holdings, in Caban…In other words, Layer suggests that as-applied challenges of this nature do exist.
HURST: Well, certainly… Let me take a second for the question. Caban says nothing of “as applied.”
(Caban) says…
JACKSON: I understand, but those two cases were in juxtaposition with one another, and Layer comes out the way it does, disguising Caban on the basis that it is an as-applied challenge and we have a facial challenge, and it’s basically the same facts. So, if you’re right, these two cases can’t come out the way that they do.
HURST: I don’t think so, your Honor. Layer was briefed as a standing argument of maybe you might be able to argue that this law is overbroad, but you individually are not in the overbroad part. And therefore, you don’t get to challenge it.
The Court didn’t use language, like expressed stated language in the opinion, but that is the logic of the opinion.
GORSUCH: Mr. Hurst, there’s another way to think about the case. Your friends on the other side pause it.
The post Justice Brown Jackson Faceplants with a Bizarre Word Salad of a Question While Trying to Defend Boys in Girls’ Sports, Gets Schooled by Idaho AG – Then Justice Gorsuch Steps In (AUDIO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.