David Frum: The Minneapolis Shooting Was a MAGA Version of a Third-World Honor...
Lieu vs. Reality: Congressman Slams ICE Shove, Gets Slammed Back for Ignoring Man...
From MSNBC Flop to Georgetown Fellow: Mehdi Hasan Lands Qatari-Backed Gig
Hot Take: ICE Has No Jurisdiction Over US Citizens and Cannot Arrest Them
Bill Kristol: ‘MAGA Types’ a Half Century Ago Denounced ‘Agitators’ Giving Bull Connor...
Rep. Ilhan Omar Calls Elon Musk 'One of the Dumbest People on Earth'
VP of Saint Paul City Council Organizing Grocery Runs for Illegals So They...
LA Times: Billionaires Flee State When It Asks for ‘A Little Something Back’
Law Prof Claims Minnesota Is a ‘Separate, Sovereign’ Entity Entitled to Enforce Its...
Kristi Noem Calls on Jake Tapper to Call Out the Rhetoric of Jacob...
Lee Zeldin and Richard Grenell Call 'Fake News' on the NY Times for...
RFK Delivered More Vaccine Clarity Than We Could've Ever Hoped for
Donald Trump Jr. Noticed What Open Border, Anti-ICE Hypocrite Celebs Did NOT Say...
Just LEAVE Already: Senior Ilhan Omar Staffer BEGS Other Countries for Help
Paid Agitator Storms Into MN Newscast and WATCH What She Does After Finding...

WaPo Spin on SCOTUS Ruling Protecting Minors Is Chock-Full of the Usual 'Journalism'

meme

As we told you earlier, the Supreme Court issued a ruling that upholds the right of states to ban what the Left and much of the media calls "gender-affirming care." 

Advertisement

Our previous story contained the conclusion of the majority opinion, but if you missed that here it is

'This case carries with it the weight of fierce scientific and policy debates about the safety, efficacy, and propriety of medical treatments in an evolving field. The voices in these debates raise sincere concerns; the implications for all are profound. The Equal Protection Clause does not resolve these disagreements. Nor does it afford us license to decide them as we see best. Our role is not “to judge the wisdom, fairness, or logic” of the law before us, Beach Communications, 508 U. S., at 313, but only to ensure that it does not violate the equal protection guarantee of the Fourteenth Amendment. Having concluded it does not, we leave questions regarding its policy to the people, their elected representatives, and the democratic process.

The judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit is affirmed. 

It is so ordered.'

The public sentiment over so much of what's going on these days -- whether it's enforcing immigration laws or about the mutilation of minors -- are called "80-20 issues" for very good reason: 

Advertisement

However, the media continue to report these things as if it's a major source of contention within the U.S.

The Washington Post called the SCOTUS ruling a "polarizing national issue":

It is in no way a "polarizing national issue":

Also you'll notice the Trump administration has "seized" again, and the "pouncing" can't be far behind. 

Advertisement

Then there's the "divided" court. Yeah, about that:

It depends on what your definition of "divided" is.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement