'Heightened Scrutiny' details the high-stakes Supreme Court case over trans health care
The Supreme Court is expected to issue a decision in the next few weeks in a high-stakes case that could affect transgender people's access to transition-related care nationwide.
The case, U.S. v. Skrmetti, concerns a law in Tennessee that prohibits certain care for minors, including puberty blockers and hormone therapy, and whether the restrictions are discriminatory on the basis of sex and transgender status.
A new documentary, 'Heightened Scrutiny,' follows Chase Strangio, an American Civil Liberties Union attorney, as he represents trans youth, their families and a doctor who filed suit against the law in April 2023. Strangio became the first openly trans person to argue in front of the Supreme Court during oral arguments in December. The film premiered at the Sundance Film Festival earlier this year and will show at NewFest, a queer film festival in New York, on May 29, and then at other film festivals across the country.
The film's director, Sam Feder, said it is a follow-up to another documentary he directed called ' Disclosure,' which was released in 2020 and evaluated how trans people are depicted in film and television.
'The motivation to make that film was to explore how the rise in visibility could lead to backlash,' Feder said. 'I did not know it would be as terrifying as it is now.'
'Heightened Scrutiny' features interviews with trans activists including actress Laverne Cox, and with journalists including Jelani Cobb, dean of the Columbia Journalism School and a writer for The New Yorker; Lydia Polgreen, a New York Times opinion columnist; and Gina Chua, one of the most high-profile trans media executives.
Much of the documentary focuses on the effects of increasing media coverage, particularly from The New York Times, on minors' access to transition-related care.
Julie Hollar, a senior analyst at the media watchdog group FAIR, says in the documentary that she evaluated the Times' front page coverage for 12 months, and during that time, she said, the Times 'actually published more front page articles that framed trans people, the trans movement, as a threat to others than they did articles about trans people being threatened by this political movement.'
Amy Scholder, who produced both 'Heightened Scrutiny' and 'Disclosure,' said that while researching media coverage of trans people over the last few years, she was astonished by how quickly much of the public appeared to go from celebrating trans visibility after 'Disclosure' to questioning it.
'It was disconcerting how many avowed feminists were questioning health care for trans adolescents and questioning the participation of trans people in sports, and especially adolescents in sports — things that just seemed so against my understanding and experience of what it means to be a feminist,' she said.
She compared the public response to laws targeting trans youth to what she experienced during the AIDS epidemic, when people distanced themselves from the crisis because they didn't think it affected them or didn't want it to.
'Then the irony is,' Feder said, 'people thought it didn't affect them, but you chip away at anyone's bodily autonomy and you're chipping away at everyone's bodily autonomy.'
The documentary shows that media coverage that is critical of transition care for minors has been referenced by state legislators trying to pass laws to restrict the care, and by states that are defending those laws in court, with Strangio saying at one point during the film that he had never previously seen news articles referenced so regularly as evidence in lawsuits.
Feder said the film was originally going to focus entirely on media coverage, but Strangio's story allowed them to show viewers the real-world consequences of that coverage. They followed Strangio from July, just after the Supreme Court announced that it would hear the Skrmetti case, to Dec. 4, the day Strangio argued the case.
The film shows Strangio the day after the election, a month before his oral arguments at the high court, when he says he's 'had moments of 'I can't do this again,' but then I wake up this morning and I think, 'F--- it, we fight.''
'That's part of what is so extraordinary about him — he has that fight in him,' Scholder said. 'He knows how to be strategic, and he's such a brilliant legal mind and has always reminded us that we're going to take care of each other, and that these laws, for better or worse, will never actually take care of us.'
Feder said that going forward, he hopes the film provokes conversations about how laws restricting transition-related care could have widespread effects outside of the trans community. He also said he hopes people will 'examine and understand how they want to be able to make decisions about their own body.'
'We're seeing state after state ban abortion, and soon it's going to be all contraception, and then it's who are you going to be able to marry, do you have any privacy in your own home? It's going there. This is one example of how we are a moment of complete civil liberty freefall,' he said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NBC News
an hour ago
- NBC News
Trump aims to build a MAGA judiciary, breaking with traditional conservatives
WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump is signaling a new approach to selecting judges in his second term, departing from his first-term formula of younger up-and-comers, elite credentials and pedigrees in traditional conservative ideology and instead leaning toward unapologetically combative, MAGA-friendly nominees. The president turned heads last week by launching a searing attack on Leonard Leo and the conservative legal network known as the Federalist Society, which played a major role in selecting and steering 234 Trump-nominated judges, including three Supreme Court justices, through Senate confirmation during his first term. Trump's transformation of the federal courts and the creation of 6-3 conservative Supreme Court majority, which led to the overturning of the landmark abortion rights case Roe v. Wade in 2022, was possibly his biggest achievement in his first term. But Trump slammed Leo as a 'sleazebag' in late May after a panel of judges, including one he appointed, blocked some of his tariffs. 'I am so disappointed in the Federalist Society because of the bad advice they gave me on numerous judicial nominations,' he wrote on Truth Social. Leo, who declined an interview request, praised Trump's first term judicial appointments, saying in a statement that they will be his 'most important legacy.' Of Trump's early judicial nominees in his second term, much attention has been focused on his decision to tap Emil Bove, his former personal criminal defense lawyer and current Justice Department official, to serve on the Philadelphia-based 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. 'What's different about him is that MAGA world is very excited about him because it sees him as someone who has been ruthlessly implementing the White House's wishes,' said Ed Whelan, a veteran conservative judicial nominations analyst who works at the Ethics and Public Policy Center. The president's early actions have raised warning signs among conservative lawyers who favor a nonpartisan judiciary. 'It's potentially a watershed moment in the relationship between Trump and the traditional conservative legal movement,' said Gregg Nunziata, former chief nominations counsel to Senate Republicans who now leads the Society for the Rule of Law, a group of right-leaning lawyers that has been critical of Trump. 'There are allies and advisers to the president who have been agitating for a different kind of judge — one more defined by loyalty to the president and advancing his agenda, rather than one more defined by conservative jurisprudence.' Nunziata warned that the president is 'turning his back on' his first-term legacy of prioritizing conservative jurisprudence. Trump's social media posts were welcomed by some conservatives who want a new approach to judicial nominations in his second term — including Mike Davis, another former Senate GOP chief counsel for nominations, who runs the conservative Article III Project advocacy group and offers his suggestions to the White House on judicial nominees. Trump needs to avoid 'typical FedSoc elitists' who were 'too weak to speak out' on issues like what MAGA world perceives as lawfare against Trump during the Biden years, Davis said. 'We need to have evidence that these judicial nominees are going to be bold and fearless for the Constitution, and there were plenty of opportunities for them over the last five years to demonstrate that,' he added. Jonathan Adler, a professor at Case Western Reserve University School of Law who mixes in Federalist Society circles, said some federal judges may have concerns about stepping down if they are not convinced Trump will replace them with someone they consider to be qualified. Certain judges, Adler said, want to be succeeded by 'someone that understands the judicial role, understands that their obligation is to follow the law and apply the law, as opposed to someone that is seen as a political hack and is going to rule in a particular way merely because that's what their team is supposed to want.' Whelan said he has heard a sitting judge express such concerns. "I recently heard from a conservative judge who has decided not to take senior status because of concerns over who would be picked as his or her successor," he said. He declined to name the judge. GOP senators steer clear of Trump-Leo clash During the first term, Leo played a key role in advising Trump on whom to pick. He helped come up with a list of potential Supreme Court nominees during the 2016 election, when some on the right were worried Trump would not pick a justice who was sufficiently conservative to replace Justice Antonin Scalia, who died earlier that year. In Trump's second-term, the deputy White House counsel for nominations, Steve Kenny, has daily oversight of judicial nominations with input from chief of staff Susie Wiles, White House counsel David Warrington and Trump himself, among others. Like Davis, Kenny previously worked for Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, on the Senate Judiciary Committee. 'In choosing these judges, we are looking for judges who are constitutionalists, who won't be judicial activists on the bench,' a senior White House official said. The administration is looking for judges whose judicial philosophy is similar to conservative Supreme Court justices such as Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, the official added. Both are seen within MAGA world as more aligned with Trump than his own appointees to the court: Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett. Despite the alliance with Leo delivering achievements that many Senate Republicans take pride in, few were willing to jump to his defense in the wake of Trump's personal attack. 'I'm not going to get involved in those personality conflicts,' said Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, a senior member of the Judiciary Committee. Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., another Judiciary Committee member, pleaded the Fifth: 'That's between Leonard and the president.' But, he added, 'I like the Federalist Society.' Grassley praised Trump's initial slate of nominees. 'Republicans remain laser-focused on putting strong conservatives on the federal bench,' he said. 'President Trump's first five judicial nominees, who all came before the Judiciary Committee this week, are high-caliber legal minds who will faithfully defend the Constitution and serve the American people well.' Despite the first-term success, there were already indications once Trump was re-elected that his second-term approach to judicial nominations would differ. Leo is no longer advising Trump, and both the president and his allies have been sharply critical of judges who have ruled against the administration in its early months over its aggressive use of executive power. Barrett has been one target, as have some lower court judges. 'Federalist Society lawyers are very bright. They're very intellectual, kind of the academic side of the law. This Trump White House is looking for more practical judges,' said a senior Republican lawyer close to the White House. 'A second element is there are some decisions that have been made by Amy Coney Barrett, in particular, that really disappointed the Trump administration, and Trump people more broadly, and that has filtered down to some of these lower court decisions," the lawyer added. For Democrats, Trump's public break with the Federalist Society — along with another move to refuse to cooperate with the American Bar Association, which traditionally provides recommendations on judicial nominees — are part of the same trend. "They don't want anyone looking over the shoulders of nominees to find out what they believe, what they've said and what they've done," Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said Wednesday during the first hearing for Trump's new wave of nominees. 'The Trump 1.0 Federalist Society mode' So far, Trump has announced two nominees to the influential federal appeals courts, as well as nine district court nominees. In addition to Bove, the other appeals court nominee is Whitney Hermandorfer, who has been tapped for a seat on the Cincinnati-based 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. While Bove is not viewed as the type of nominee Leo might suggest, Hermandorfer is seen as a traditional Federalist Society pick. She served as a law clerk for Barrett and Alito, as well as for Kavanaugh when he was an appeals court judge. Hermandorfer has also been involved in some culture war litigation while serving under Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti. She is 'very much in the Trump 1.0 Federalist Society mode,' said Russell Wheeler, a scholar at the nonpartisan Brookings Institution who tracks judicial nominations. Five of Trump's district court nominees are from Florida, and four are from Missouri. Hermandorfer, joined by the Missouri nominees. appeared at the confirmation hearing Wednesday where she said her job would not be to do the president's bidding. "That would not be my role. My role would be to carry out my oath,' she said. Hermandorfer called the Federalist Society, of which she is a member, a "wonderful place" to discuss issues with other lawyers. According to the federal judiciary, there are 49 pending vacancies, with only three of them on the appeals courts. Another three have announced plans to step down. The Republican lawyer close to the White House said it is a little early to know how different Trump's second-term picks will be from the first because the president got off to a slow start in nominating his first batch of judges. Trump may struggle to match the numbers of his first term, in part because this time around there are not as many vacancies as there were in 2017. Then, Trump benefited from a Republican Senate that blocked many of President Barack Obama's picks, including his nominee to replace Scalia, Merrick Garland. Legal activists tend to focus more on federal appeals court nominees than district court nominees because they have more power to change the law and are often more likely to be tipped for potential slots on the Supreme Court. There are currently 24 Republican-appointed appeals court judges in total who are eligible for retirement, according to Wheeler. Generally, judges are more likely to step down when a president of the same party who appointed them is in office. 'Activist judges with an agenda' Even if Trump wants to depart from the Leo playbook, he will find it difficult to find qualified conservative lawyers who do not have some links with the Federalist Society, Whelan said. 'If you are looking for talented lawyers with the sort of experience that would make them good judges, most of the people you are looking at are going to be Federalist Society types,' he added. Kenny, for example, who holds daily oversight over nominations at the White House, 'is definitely a proud member of the Federalist Society,' the lawyer said. 'But he's also going to follow the administration's lead on the kinds of judges they want.' Nunziata said it's up to GOP senators to push back on nominees like Bove, warning that acquiescing would send a signal to Trump that he has a 'free hand' to nominate more individuals like him, including to a possible Supreme Court vacancy. 'I hope there will be pushback. Time will tell,' he said, citing former Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell's key role in steering Trump's first-term judicial nominees. 'I would expect him to be alarmed by this turn and to fight against it with his remaining time in the Senate.' McConnell's office declined to comment. Democrats say that with nominees like Bove, Trump is making it more explicit that he simply wants loyalists. 'He's putting in all the people that will support him, or have a relationship to him,' Sen. Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii, said. 'That's what it's all about for the president. … He just wants people who will support what he wants.' 'Of course not,' she said.
North Wales Chronicle
an hour ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Trump announces travel ban and restrictions on 19 countries
The ban takes effect Monday at 12.01am, a cushion that may avoid the chaos that unfolded at airports nationwide when a similar measure took effect with virtually no notice in 2017. Mr Trump, who signalled plans for a new ban upon taking office in January, appears to be on firmer ground this time after the Supreme Court sided with him. Some, but not all, of 12 countries also appeared on the list of banned countries in Mr Trump's first term. The new ban includes Afghanistan, Myanmar, Chad, the Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. There will be heightened restrictions on visitors from Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan and Venezuela. In a video released on social media, Mr Trump tied the new ban to Sunday's terror attack in Boulder, Colorado, saying it underscored the dangers posed by some visitors who overstay visas. Mr Trump said some countries had 'deficient' screening and vetting or have historically refused to take back their own citizens. His findings rely extensively on an annual Homeland Security report of visa overstays of tourists, business visitors and students who arrive by air and sea, singling out countries with high percentages of remaining after their visas expired. 'We don't want them,' Mr Trump said. The inclusion of Afghanistan angered some supporters who have worked to resettle its people. The ban makes exceptions for Afghans on Special Immigrant Visas, generally people who worked most closely with the US government during the two-decade war there. Afghanistan was also one of the largest sources of resettled refugees, with about 14,000 arrivals in a 12-month period through September 2024. Mr Trump suspended refugee resettlement on his first day in office. 'To include Afghanistan – a nation whose people stood alongside American service members for 20 years – is a moral disgrace. It spits in the face of our allies, our veterans, and every value we claim to uphold,' said Shawn VanDiver, president and board chairman of #AfghanEvac. Mr Trump wrote that Afghanistan 'lacks a competent or co-operative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents and it does not have appropriate screening and vetting measures'. He also cited its visa overstay rates. Haiti, which avoided the travel ban during Mr Trump's first term, was also included for high overstay rates and large numbers who came to the US illegally. Haitians continue to flee poverty, hunger and political instability deepens while police and a UN-backed mission fight a surge in gang violence, with armed men controlling at least 85% of its capital, Port-au-Prince. 'Haiti lacks a central authority with sufficient availability and dissemination of law enforcement information necessary to ensure its nationals do not undermine the national security of the United States,' Mr Trump wrote. The Iranian government offered no immediate reaction to being included. The Trump administration called it a 'state sponsor of terrorism', barring visitors except for those already holding visas or coming into the US on special visas America issues for minorities facing persecution. Other Middle East nations on the list – Libya, Sudan and Yemen – all face ongoing civil strife and territory overseen by opposing factions. Sudan has an active war, while Yemen's war is largely stalemated and Libyan forces remain armed. International aid groups and refugee resettlement organisations roundly condemned the new ban. 'This policy is not about national security – it is about sowing division and vilifying communities that are seeking safety and opportunity in the United States,' said Abby Maxman, president of Oxfam America. The travel ban results from a January 20 executive order Mr Trump issued requiring the departments of State and Homeland Security and the director of national intelligence to compile a report on 'hostile attitudes' toward the US and whether entry from certain countries represented a national security risk. During his first term, Mr Trump issued an executive order in January 2017 banning travel to the US by citizens of seven predominantly Muslim countries — Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia and Yemen. It was one of the most chaotic and confusing moments of his young presidency. Travellers from those nations were either barred from getting on their flights to the US or detained at US airports after they landed. They included students as well as businesspeople, tourists and people visiting friends and family. The order, often referred to as the 'Muslim ban' or the 'travel ban', was retooled amid legal challenges, until a version was upheld by the Supreme Court in 2018. The ban affected various categories of travellers and immigrants from Iran, Somalia, Yemen, Syria and Libya, plus North Koreans and some Venezuelan government officials and their families. Mr Trump and others have defended the initial ban on national security grounds, arguing it was aimed at protecting the country and not founded on anti-Muslim bias. However, the president had called for an explicit ban on Muslims during his first campaign for the White House.
Daily Record
an hour ago
- Daily Record
Donald Trump bans citizens of 12 countries from entering US
The ban comes into place on Monday at 12.01am. US President Donald Trump has resurrected a hallmark policy of his first term, announcing that citizens of 12 countries would be banned from visiting the United States and those from seven others would face restrictions. The ban takes effect Monday at 12.01am, a cushion that may avoid the chaos that unfolded at airports nationwide when a similar measure took effect with virtually no notice in 2017. Mr Trump, who signalled plans for a new ban upon taking office in January, appears to be on firmer ground this time after the Supreme Court sided with him. Some, but not all, of 12 countries also appeared on the list of banned countries in Mr Trump's first term. The new ban includes Afghanistan, Myanmar, Chad, the Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. There will be heightened restrictions on visitors from Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan and Venezuela. In a video released on social media, Mr Trump tied the new ban to Sunday's terror attack in Boulder, Colorado, saying it underscored the dangers posed by some visitors who overstay visas. The suspect in the attack is from Egypt, a country that is not on Mr Trump's restricted list. The Department of Homeland Security says he overstayed a tourist visa. Mr Trump said some countries had 'deficient' screening and vetting or have historically refused to take back their own citizens. His findings rely extensively on an annual Homeland Security report of visa overstays of tourists, business visitors and students who arrive by air and sea, singling out countries with high percentages of remaining after their visas expired. 'We don't want them,' Mr Trump said. The inclusion of Afghanistan angered some supporters who have worked to resettle its people. The ban makes exceptions for Afghans on Special Immigrant Visas, generally people who worked most closely with the US government during the two-decade war there. Afghanistan was also one of the largest sources of resettled refugees, with about 14,000 arrivals in a 12-month period through September 2024. Mr Trump suspended refugee resettlement on his first day in office. 'To include Afghanistan – a nation whose people stood alongside American service members for 20 years – is a moral disgrace. It spits in the face of our allies, our veterans, and every value we claim to uphold,' said Shawn VanDiver, president and board chairman of #AfghanEvac. Mr Trump wrote that Afghanistan 'lacks a competent or co-operative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents and it does not have appropriate screening and vetting measures'. He also cited its visa overstay rates. Haiti, which avoided the travel ban during Mr Trump's first term, was also included for high overstay rates and large numbers who came to the US illegally. Haitians continue to flee poverty, hunger and political instability deepens while police and a UN-backed mission fight a surge in gang violence, with armed men controlling at least 85% of its capital, Port-au-Prince. 'Haiti lacks a central authority with sufficient availability and dissemination of law enforcement information necessary to ensure its nationals do not undermine the national security of the United States,' Mr Trump wrote. The Iranian government offered no immediate reaction to being included. The Trump administration called it a 'state sponsor of terrorism', barring visitors except for those already holding visas or coming into the US on special visas America issues for minorities facing persecution. Other Middle East nations on the list – Libya, Sudan and Yemen – all face ongoing civil strife and territory overseen by opposing factions. Sudan has an active war, while Yemen's war is largely stalemated and Libyan forces remain armed. International aid groups and refugee resettlement organisations roundly condemned the new ban. 'This policy is not about national security – it is about sowing division and vilifying communities that are seeking safety and opportunity in the United States,' said Abby Maxman, president of Oxfam America. The travel ban results from a January 20 executive order Mr Trump issued requiring the departments of State and Homeland Security and the director of national intelligence to compile a report on 'hostile attitudes' toward the US and whether entry from certain countries represented a national security risk. During his first term, Mr Trump issued an executive order in January 2017 banning travel to the US by citizens of seven predominantly Muslim countries — Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia and Yemen. It was one of the most chaotic and confusing moments of his young presidency. Travellers from those nations were either barred from getting on their flights to the US or detained at US airports after they landed. They included students as well as businesspeople, tourists and people visiting friends and family. The order, often referred to as the 'Muslim ban' or the 'travel ban', was retooled amid legal challenges, until a version was upheld by the Supreme Court in 2018. The ban affected various categories of travellers and immigrants from Iran, Somalia, Yemen, Syria and Libya, plus North Koreans and some Venezuelan government officials and their families. Mr Trump and others have defended the initial ban on national security grounds, arguing it was aimed at protecting the country and not founded on anti-Muslim bias. However, the president had called for an explicit ban on Muslims during his first campaign for the White House.
