The three liberal justices dissented as the high court dramatically narrowed a district court judge’s sweeping ruling barring enforcement of the state’s attempt to block treatment for transgender youth.
Related Posts
When ‘elective’ doesn’t mean optional: Lloyd Austin’s cancer surgery
A prostatectomy, the surgery Austin underwent last month, can be serious and is required for some patients, even if not…
Biden’s got pharma’s back in global pandemic treaty negotiations
For those countries and their advocates, it’s a striking stance — given what happened after Covid arrived: They shared data…
‘Another hot potato’: Alabama’s IVF ruling risks political, legal backlash
“It certainly intersects, badly, with general election politics for Republicans,” said Stan Barnes, a political consultant and former Republican state…