Swivel Defense: Scott Jennings Halts Tezlyn Figaro’s Dizzying Spin on Democrat Redistricti...
Rep. Sarah McBride’s Kwanzaa Greeting Tees Up a Pile-On
Wajahat Ali Reminds JD Vance That a White Man From a Christian Family...
Ilhan Omar’s Husband’s Firm Scrubbing Names From Website as Her Worth Grows to...
Keir Starmer Is Delighted That Man Who Wants the Genocide of White People...
Dead Week Dreams: Health Goals, Less Noise, More Beach – What X is...
WaPo Triggered by ‘Overtly Sectarian’ Christmas Messages From Trump Administration Officia...
Paws and Reflect, Tim: Governor Tweets Cat Pic Instead of Addressing Minnesota's Multi-Bil...
Maryland Man Kilmar Abrego Garcia Now Posting Cringe Lip-Sync TikTok Videos
Minnesota Star Tribune's Year in Review Ignores Massive Fraud Scandal: Protecting Dems at...
European Lists All of the Advantages He Has as Compared to Americans
JonBenét Ramsey Case Revived: Advanced DNA Testing Offers Breakthrough as Dad Pleads for...
The 'JD Vance Is Worse Than Trump' Hyperbole Has Arrived Three Years Early
Rep. Jasmine Crockett: People Are Understanding It's Not Good to Have a Con...
Ron DeSantis STILL Waiting for CBS to Update This Panicked Decades-Old Warning About...

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