Supreme court lgbtq case fall 2022
Caribbean LGBTQ+ activists celebrate as court strikes down colonial-era laws
Activists have hailed a historic judgment striking down colonial-era laws that criminalised gay sex in St Lucia as a step forward for LGBTQ+ rights in the Caribbean country.
This week the Eastern Caribbean supreme court found that the island’s so-called buggery and gross indecency laws, which criminalised consensual anal sex, were unconstitutional.
In a joint statement to the Guardian, a group of activists who were the claimants in the case described the judgment as “deeply personal” but added that there was “still work to be done”.
“We know not everyone will agree with the judgment – and that’s OK. We’re not asking anyone to change their opinions. What we are asking for is fairness. These laws were outdated and violated the basic human rights of LGBTQ+ people. Striking them down is just the beginning of creating a safer, more inclusive Saint Lucia for all of us,” the statement said.
Speaking to reporters at a press conference after the judgment, attorney Veronica Cenac, who worked on the case, said it was important to remember the origin of the laws.
“Many persons trust that [they are] a part of o
Washington — The Supreme Court on Friday ruled in favor of a collective of Maryland parents who challenged their school district's decision to deny them the ability to opt their elementary-aged children out of instruction featuring storybooks that address gender culture and sexual orientation.
The elevated court said in a 6-3 decision in the case of Mahmoud v. Taylor that the government burdens parents' religious exercise when it requires their children to participate in guide that violates the families' religious beliefs. Justice Samuel Alito authored the majority opinion, with the three liberal justices — Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson — in dissent.
The court's conservative majority said that the parents who brought the case are entitled to a preliminary injunction while their lawsuits proceed. The high court ordered the board to notify parents in advance when one of the story books at issue in the case will be used, and allow them to have their kids excused from the instruction.
"[W]e contain that the Board's introduction of the 'LGBTQ+-inclusive' storybooks — combined with its decision to withhold observe to parents and to
What to Know Ahead of the Supreme Court Case on Youth Access to Gender Affirming Care
Background
Youth access to gender affirming care has become an increasingly politicized and contentious issue in recent years. Today, 26 states have enacted laws restricting youth access to gender affirming care, most of which are facing legal challenges. On December 4th, the Supreme Court will hear a case challenging the constitutionality of such state restrictions for the first second. The case before the Supreme Court challenges the Tennessee ban (United States v. Skrmetti) under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. Both the plaintiffs, three families and a provider, who originally challenged the statute (L. W. et al v. Skrmetti et al) and the Biden administration, as an intervener, requested review and the Court granted certiorari in the challenge brought by the Biden administration.
The case has garnered significant attention with 84 amicus briefs having been filed, 32 in endorse of the petitioners, 51 in assist of the respondents, and one in support of neither party. Amicus briefs in support of the petitioner enclose those from The American Academy of Pediatrics, The Amer
LGBTQ book opt-out judgment triggers national response from parents, educators, advocates
After the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 on Friday that parents in Montgomery County, Maryland, must be allowed to opt their children out of LGBTQ-themed elementary school lessons, reactions were swift and sharply divided.
The case, Mahmoud v. Taylor, stemmed from Montgomery County's 2022 decision to incorporate LGBTQ-inclusive books into elementary classrooms.
Titles included "Uncle Bobby's Wedding," which features a same-sex couple, and "Born Ready," which tells the story of a trans child.
The school district initially allowed parents to opt out their children from exposure to the books but later reversed that policy, citing administrative burdens and in an effort to foster inclusion.
In a urge briefing shortly after the decision, U.S. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche venerated the ruling.
"Restoring the right of parents to make decisions about their children's education might feel like common sense," Blanche said, "but it took the Supreme Court to set the tape straight."
For some, however, the ruling felt like a step backw
For Women Scotland Ltd (Appellant) v The Scottish Ministers (Respondent)
Case summary
Case ID
UKSC/2024/0042
Parties
Appellant(s)
For Women Scotland Ltd
Respondent(s)
The Scottish Ministers
Issue
Is a person with a full gender recognition certificate (“GRC”) which recognises that their gender is female, a “woman” for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010 (“EA 2010”)?
Facts
In this appeal, the Appellant challenges the lawfulness of statutory guidance issued by the Respondent, which has the effect that a GRC recognising that a person’s gender is female brings them within the EA 2010 definition of a “woman”. The Gender Representation on Universal Boards (Scotland) Act 2018 is an Act of the Scottish Parliament (“ASP 2018”). It sets targets for increasing the proportion of women on common boards. The original ASP 2018 definition of a “woman” included people: (i) with the protected representative of gender reassignment; (ii) living as a woman; and (iii) proposing to undergo / undergoing / who have undergone a gender reassignment process. In a 2022 legal test brought by the Appellant (“FWS1”), the Inner Home found that this statutory definition was unlawful, as it deal