The Supreme Court likely just invalidated Trump's roll back of LGBTQ protections in health care

[StarfishSaver]

I suspect the Trump team was confident this case would go the other way and rushed through the revocation of the regulation because it thought they were all in sync.

The action last Friday revoked an Obama-era regulations interpreting the Affordable Care Act prohibition against discrimination on the basis of sex to include prohibition against discrimination against LGBTQ people.

Although today's case applies to the Civil Rights Act, its ruling that the definition of sex discrimination in the Civil Rights Act includes LGBTQ means that the same prohibition in the ACA would also apply to LGBTQ.

So now the administration no longer has the power to issue regulations interpreting the law as it chooses since the Court just told them, in no uncertain terms, what the law says.

Sweet ...

[jpak]

1. Link?

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

2. Sweetest of all is that it was Gorsuch's opinion.

Is Fat Nixon going to try to fire him now? Sometimes that lifetime appointment thing can bite you right on the butt. I don't think Gorsuch is ever going to be another Earl Warren, but he doesn't seem to be Trump's puppet either.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

4. Still not happy that he got to put Gorsuch in there

after Republicans blocked Garland's nomination but glad he went the right way on this ruling.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

5. I'm definitely not a fan, but this shows that supreme court justices

might do their own thing regardless of how they got appointed. And sometimes their own thing isn't what was expected; even Kavanaugh has sided with the liberal justices in a few cases. Thomas and Alito are hopeless but Roberts, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh won't always toe the party line.

[Ms. Toad]

6. That's the primary argument in favor of lifetime appointments.

Once appointed, they no longer have to worry about the person who invited them to the ball.

In many instances (probably more frequently than not) this turns out well.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

7. Exactly. People who complain about lifetime appointments

don't seem to get the fact that this frees judges from political pressure. Some of them are going to suck anyhow (Thomas and Alito), but then you get the occasional David Souter and Earl Warren. I don't like it that we're stuck with Thomas and Alito in particular (those two assholes don't need political pressure to be right-wingers), but I do like it that we're also stuck with RBG who, despite her age and health problems, cannot be forced to leave the court.

[Ms. Toad]

8. +1000

People forget the historical patterns in the short term angst. Historically, lifetime appointments trend to shifting left. Not in every case. But in enough to make it better than tying judges to the favor of whoever currently holds the office that controls their employment.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

3. Could have implications for the Trans Millitary Ban as well

But at this point, all of the junk Trump is putting out there will be gone with a stroke of the pen once Biden takes office