Sam Seder
@TheMajorityReport·2M subscribers·30.1K videos
Massive Sex Discrimination Case Begins At Supreme Court | Ian Millhiser | TMR
Posted
December 12, 2024
Views
10,842
Likes
506
Comments
100
Engagement
5.59%
December 12, 2024
10,842
506
100
5.59%
Every word spoken in this episode is indexed. Type any phrase to jump straight to the moment it was said.
Type any word or phrase that may have been spoken. Click a result to seek the player to that exact moment.
Try a name, a topic, or a quoted line
46:11Now PlayingLive-streamed on December 3, 2024
Ian Millhiser, senior correspondent at Vox, discusses some of the oral arguments going on in front of the Supreme Court this week.
Ian Millhiser then joins, diving right into the impending oral arguments on United States v. Skrmetti, marking the first full hearing on the constitutional question of the government’s ability to restrict the rights of (and explicitly target) transgender people (a term first used at the Supreme Court in 2010), outlining the case’s origin in the extensive red-state backlash to trans rights under the Biden Administration, with myriad prohibitions and restrictions placed on gender-affirming care for people under 18. After stepping back to tackle Skrmetti’s connection to Bostock v Clayton County (2020) and the Court’s decision (held by Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Gorsuch) that any discrimination based on gender identity or sexual orientation constitutes, no matter what, a form of sex discrimination, Millhiser and Sam parse through the various problems that still face the prosecution, including the extension of this question beyond the workplace, and the added context of exceptions for presumptively unconstitutional governmental actions, whether the Court is likely to get fully on-board with the defense’s conspiracy-centered argument about “trans ideology,” and what a more limited (though still devastating) decision in favor of the State’s right to discriminate against trans people could look like. Next, Ian looks to the FDA v. R.J. Reynolds Vapor Co, a case centered on the FDA’s ability to regulate tobacco and tobacco products, first walking through the history of the FDA’s right to regulate tobacco products, and their initial (and very late) attempts to reign in the ever-growing vaping industry beginning in 2016, before wrapping up by expanding on the role of the Chevron doctrine – the deference of the Courts to federal agencies when it comes to reading the ambiguity of federal legislation – in problematizing what should be an open-and-shut case for the Conservative majority.
Watch the Majority Report live MondayFriday at 12 p.m. EST on YouTube OR listen via daily podcast at
#SamSeder #EmmaVigeland #MajorityReport #politics #news
Support the show by becoming a member
Get all your MR merch at our store
Gift a Majority Report subscription here
Subscribe to the AMQuickie newsletter here
Join the Majority Report Discord!
Get the free Majority Report App!
CHECK OUT MORE from the MR crew:
Matt Binder DOOMED
Brandon Sutton DISCOURSE
Emma Vigeland ESVN
Matt Lech LEFT RECKONING
OTHER LINKS:
Check out Ava Raiza's music here!
The Majority Report with Sam Seder
Image Credit, APK
Image has been cropped and color has been altered.
Sentinel Indexing in Progress
Metadata and chapters are available. Claim extraction for this episode is pending.
All video content is delivered via YouTube embedded players in accordance with the YouTube Terms of Service. Sentinel provides research tools that promote discovery and accountability across political media.
