Justice Jackson raises eyebrows with 'questionable' comparison in major case

now turning to this you're looking live at the United States Supreme Court and right now as we speak oral arguments are underway in a case that could reshape National regulations on gender treatments for children the case surrounds an equal protection challenge to Tennessee's ban on different types of gender treatment for minors 25 states have bans that could be affected and it will be the first time that the high court will consider restrictions on puberty blockers hormone therapy and surgery life altering surgery for children the Court's decision could also have broader implications for transgender people including

access to restrooms and participation in school sports but first let's bring in Justice correspondent David sput with more details David hi Kaye oral arguments have been underway since 10:00 this morning shows you how contentious this case is as you mentioned the first time the justices have weighed directly on this controversial issue the case originates out of Tennessee involves the treatment like puberty blockers and other hormone therapies this specific state law bans medical care for transgender adolescence one of about two dozen states with similar measures in 2023 Donald Trump's campaign promised to ban treatment for adolescence

nationally while Banning Medicare and Medicaid insurance coverage for such care groups for and against the law are outside the Supreme Court they've been outside the Supreme Court for several hours because Kaylee this case will have implications that extend far past the Tennessee borders this will have a broad effect in all 50 states and go past the walls of a medical facility think transgender Protections in sports and access to bathrooms here's Khloe Cole an activist against some of this care who detransitioned watch to allow them to make a decision that will affect not only the entire

course of the development physically psychologically and reproductively is completely ridiculous and it's okay to allow your child to experience this discomfort because it's normal to experience discomfort that P that you're going through puberty everybody goes through it lgbtq groups Have Eyes on President Biden in his final weeks in office to see if maybe he'll issue some sort of executive order or blanket protection that does not involve let's a fractured Congress right now in Washington the White House has touted his work with the LGBT community in the past but many are worried as the Trump Administration

is coming to town on this issue we expect a decision from the Supreme Court likely later in the spring when Trump is well underway in office back to you David thank you thank you you know I listen to these oral arguments you have highly competent attorneys talk about sharp you have to be to argue in front of the Supreme Court I listened to Justice Roberts Thomas among others definitely the conservative wing of the Court seems to be expressing some skepticism of the arguments being made on behalf of transgender surgeries for minors I do want to

rewind just before these oral arguments the ACLU attorney who's arguing the case was on CNN and had a statement that I would call I brow raising when you do the math listen to this these are young people who may have known since they were 2 years old exactly who who they are who suffered for six seven years before they had any relief and what's happening here it's not the kids who are consenting to this treatment it's the parents who are consenting to the treatment and as a parent I would say we when our children are

suffering we are suffering so let's do some math two-year-olds who know they want to change their gender I have had two two-year-olds I I don't know how a 2-year-old knows that and then you add six years that they've been struggling that was advocacy for 8-year-olds having life altering surgery and let's pull up the Washington Post kff poll on this matter you find 68% of us adults do not think those 10 to 14 year olds should be able to get this life-altering treatment I wonder how the nation feels if you change that to let's say eight-year-old

Tammy yes and this is the problem most of us if you know children uh the tendency here and I've been arguing against this for years is for the gay community and other adults who have some sexual issues or sexual Frameworks they're dealing with is to not project it on to children to justify the choices that we are making as adults and this is what this has been from the beginning my concern about the Supreme Court goes back to 2020 uh with the bosic versus Clayton County decision and judge uh justice Gorsuch noted and it was

6 to3 regarding U um discrimination against workplaces which said yeah yes sexual identity or transgenders fit into that framework his framework was he used the phrase If an employer penalizes a person identified as male at Birth for traits or actions that it tolerates for in an employee identified as female at Birth now that is political language taken from the left it is not scientific it was using this framework that someone at Birth is identifying that baby as one thing or another meaning that it is fluid and this is my concern when you're dealing with 2-year-old

sixy olds 8-year olds of the assigning or identifying as as opposed to it existing through scientific reality so my concern is and they're using this case here to say that this is a legitimate aspect regarding small children little kids two-year-olds Etc and we should not it is a political it's an ideology it is political and children should not be thrown into that volcano I want to note that oral arguments just wrapped so that was about two hours and 30 minutes on the needle about if my mind serves me correctly roie Wade the arguments there in

the Dos decision ran about that long so they have just wrapped and Emily I want to bring up a point that I think is very very very important I believe Science Matters I believe facts matter Europe has followed the science on this issue United States we've been wrapped around political arguments so I want to bring in some of the science this is international review of Psychiatry listen to this closely the conclusion from studies that have been conducted is that children with gender gender dysphoria strongly Associated later in life with the lesbian gay or bisexual outcome

and the majority of children 85.2% the gender dysphoric feelings remitted around or about puberty in other words 85% of kids who thought they had gender dysphoria and wanted to change their gender ended up not 85% around puberty I want to make this personal as someone who has had a bilateral masectomy because I have a high risk of cancer it is a life-altering surger surgery you cannot reverse it removing your ovaries Chloe Cole made this point no 5-year-old 10-year-old 15-year-old should go through menopause at that age why are we doing life altering procedures on 85% of

children who may change their mind and why are states stepping in in local parentice and acting as parents to those who are seeking Sanctuary with that decision from a parent that only to protect the children's biological body it is absolutely aberant I want to make this point for viewers that the current administration's Department of Justice filed a brief in this case out of nowhere they decided to join in and I just want to make sure everyone understands that it is the current administration's Department of Justice that seeks to weigh in and support the mutilation and

the butchering irreversibly of this children of these children and that January 20th cannot come fast enough because with the new Administration will be no it will be a they will seek to restore not only Law and Order but also the foundation of of biology in the protection of the family unit the protection of children's of children's whims because absolutely what children explore and feel and think are all over the Spectrum and if we can't trust the kids to vote to drive to do things obviously we don't to smoke why do we think we can trust

them with an irreversible biological butchering to say the least but this is Biden's doj that just weighed in on this case yeah and iing yes I I want to bring in uh justice katoni Brown Jackson she drew a questionable comparison between children having life-altering surgery and interracial marriage listen to this what oh my god well and the thing I thought that was most interesting about the com potential comparison to loving is that in that case um everyone seemed to concede upfront that a racial classification was being drawn by the statute that was sort of like

the starting point the question was whether it was discriminatory because it applied to both races and it wasn't you know necessarily invidious or whatever but you know as I read the statute here the excuse me the case here um you know the court starts off by saying that Virginia is now one of 16 states which prohibit and punish marriages on the basis of racial classifications and when you look at the structure of that law it looks in terms of incon you know you can't do something that is inconsistent with your own characteristics it's sort of

the same think so it's interesting to me that we now have this different argument and I wonder whether Virginia could have gotten away with what they did here by just making a classification argument the way uh that Tennessee is in this case you know Harris katoni Brown Jackson is a a brilliant brilliant jurist however I have heard members of the view or other media Outlets make arguments that somehow interracial marriage is compromised because of a reversal in roie weight it seems to me a huge stretch in a leap well if you're talking about protecting children

who literally cannot make medical decisions as Emily pointed out there are a whole lot of decisions we don't give them the the wheel for it that is one of them um if if your goal is to protect children then that's separate I'm in a biracial marriage I'm in an ecumenical marriage um if we're protecting children how is that going to jeopardize me and Tony right if you're if you're telling me that that children are at hand here puberty blockers by the way one of the number one drugs is meant to treat prostate cancer can you

imagine if you make put that in a little one's body Dr seagull has said it it makes your bones brittle it stops you from growing the right way we don't know what it does to the brain yet it can't possibly help mental health we've seen a suppressed report that's part of this whole case as well about that about the effects of puberty blockers I mean the goal is to protect the kids but I'm going to take this in a place that I know I'll get criticism from I don't care this is about spirituality as well

when we are born God decides who we are you get XX you get XY and if you want gender fluidity it's got to come at a time when you can actually understand and express it and I'm here to tell you A two three four 5-year-old can't do that so why in the world are we messing with God's creation at that point good point uh to to the statement made earlier about the 2-year-old needing an advocate if your 2-year-old is trans or trapped in the wrong body it's cuz you've convinced them they are okay as a

parent of one child I can tell you if you're blessed with a gift of a child you've taken a MacBook Air out of the packing peanuts and you're responsible for the direction it takes in life all right yeah I mean my 2-year-old doesn't know what he wants to eat for dinner he throws it on the floor um I he's hardly qualified to decide to change his gender hey everyone I'm Emily compano catch me and my co-hosts Harris vulner and Kaye mechineni on outnumbered every weekday at 12:00 p.m. Eastern or sets your DVR also don't forget

to subscribe to the Fox News YouTube page for daily highlights