Tennessee law enforces a controversial quasi regulation

In a recent legal case concerning the Tennessee law, Justice Elena Kagan played a crucial role in seeking a middle ground that aims to provide future protections for transgender individuals. This development unfolded as Justice Kagan queried her former law clerk regarding whether the law in question imposed a distinct type of classification based on the status of being transgender. This led to reflections on previous Supreme Court rulings such as Cleburne and Romer, which addressed similar classifications that were subject to a Rational Basis "Plus Bite" scrutiny. During the discussions, Kagan engaged the Solicitor General about the potential classification of transgender individuals as quasi-suspect, a concept previously significant in the 1970s and 1980s legal framework but less prominent in contemporary judgments. Moreover, Kagan's inquiry highlighted the changing landscape of legal interpretations concerning transgender rights. The Solicitor General indicated that the Supreme Court has largely moved away from relying on older precedents like Cleburne. Meanwhile, Kagan expressed her viewpoint that rather than applying standard rational basis scrutiny to the Tennessee law, the Court should acknowledge transgender individuals as a quasi-suspect class, thereby subjecting laws discriminating against them to a more rigorous review standard. Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Neil Gorsuch were also present during the discussions. Barrett noted that the issue of parental rights raised by the case was not before the Court, pointing out Gorsuch when emphasizing this argument. Interestingly, Gorsuch remained silent throughout the proceedings, leaving observers eager to see his position on Kagan's proposed compromise. The case is set for oral arguments in December, with many anticipating Gorsuch's response and how it may align with Kagan's attempts to provide legal protection for transgender individuals. As the case approaches its hearing date, stakeholders are closely watching the dynamics between the justices, particularly Kagan’s significant push for a more nuanced recognition of transgender rights within the legal framework. Whatever decision emerges from the Court could clarify the future of legal protections available to transgender persons and the standards that govern laws perceived to discriminate against them.