Congresswoman Is Appalled That Trump and Vance Can't Stop With the Openly Racist...
Brian Stelter Pretty Jazzed That Canadian TV Channel Has Posted That 60 Minutes...
DOJ Sues DC Metropolitan Police Department for Infringement on Second Amendment Rights
Palmeri Claims Blowing Up Terrorist Boats Damages Trump's Legacy More Than Biden's Afghani...
Harmeet K. Dhillon Suing Minneapolis Public Schools for Anti-White Discrimination
'PEAK IRONY!' Joe Biden's Preemptively Pardoned Son Slams Connected Elites Who Avoid Conse...
There’s More to the Story of Four Masked Federal Agents Tacking a Man...
NPR's Hilarious Memo Ends Professor Carl Tobias's Reign as Rent-a-Quote King After 77...
Ezra Klein and the NYT Ask a VERY Stupid Question; Twitter Obliges Them...
'This Is Amazing': Rep. Jasmine Crockett Says the Right Fears Her Authenticity (Roll...
Leftists Lose It Over Bari Weiss's Sane Memo: 'Just Add Context and Sources'...
Mass Deportation Checks Tripled: Kristi Noem Gets Serious
Tubba Bubba Exposed: Eli Lake Demands Clinton Accountability Over Damning Epstein Photos—I...
The Spiciest, Weirdest, and Funniest Hot Takes From TPUSA’s AmericaFest 2025
Governor DeSantis Drops Truth Bomb: Stop the Student Loan Scam by Making Unis...

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