The Last Time Supreme Court Considered Trans Rights, It Protected Them
The Supreme Court last decided a major case about transgender rights in June 2020, a win for the L.G.B.T.Q. community in a dispute over workplace discrimination against gay and transgender workers.
In that case, Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, a group of plaintiffs — among them, a funeral director, an advocate for at-risk children, and a skydiving instructor — argued that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 guaranteed nationwide protection from workplace discrimination to gay and transgender people, even in states that offered no protection.
In a vote of 6 to 3, the justices agreed. But that was a different court — and a different political moment.
Although the court already had a conservative majority, the court's makeup shifted further rightward since then, after President Trump nominated Amy Coney Barrett to fill the seat left by the liberal icon Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
The politics around transgender issues have also shifted rightward. Soon after Mr. Trump began his second term in January, he issued an executive order that federal agencies should limit surgeries, hormone therapy and other gender transition care for children and teenagers under 19. Lawyers for the Trump administration had urged the justices to uphold a Tennessee law banning some medical treatment for transgender youth.
In the court's decision on Wednesday to uphold that law, the majority said that it would not determine whether the reasoning from the Bostock decision reached beyond employment discrimination.
In the majority opinion, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. explained a view that, unlike in the employment discrimination context, changing a minor's sex or gender would not alter how the state law applied to them.
The majority reasoned that if a transgender boy sought testosterone to treat gender dysphoria, the Tennessee law would prohibit a health care provider from giving it to him. If the patient was a girl, the law would still prohibit the hormone treatment because the person would lack a qualifying diagnosis, Chief Justice Roberts wrote.
In her dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor disagreed, arguing that the court's decision in Bostock would require a different result.
She wrote that, as Bostock outlined in the employment discrimination case, 'it is impossible to discriminate against a person for being homosexual or transgender without discriminating against that individual based on sex.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
19 minutes ago
- New York Times
The Supreme Court Upheld a State Ban on Transgender Care for Minors
The Supreme Court announced today that it had upheld a Tennessee law that prohibits some medical treatments for transgender youths. The decision, which shielded similar laws in more than 20 other states, was supported by the court's six conservative justices. All three liberal justices dissented. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the majority opinion that the ban did not violate the Constitution's equal protection principles, dismissing the argument that it discriminated based on sex. He acknowledged the 'fierce scientific and policy debates about the safety, efficacy and propriety' of the treatments, but wrote that those questions should be resolved by elected legislators. (See our annotated version of the court's decision here.) Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in dissent that the court's decision 'authorizes, without second thought, untold harm to transgender children and the parents and families who love them.' For more: These 27 states have restricted gender-transition treatments for minors since 2021. Go deeper: 'The Protocol' is a new Times podcast about the development of medical treatment for transgender minors and how it became a target of the Trump administration. Listen to it here. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
CBS News
20 minutes ago
- CBS News
Trump administration to shutter specialized LGBTQ+ suicide lifeline option, sparking backlash
A part of the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline dedicated to LGBTQ+ youth — known as 988 option 3 — is being terminated under the Trump administration, the federal Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration announced. "On July 17, the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline will no longer silo LGB+ youth services, also known as the 'Press 3 option,' to focus on serving all help seekers, including those previously served through the Press 3 option," a statement Tuesday from SAMHSA read. The agency said those who contact 988 will "continue to receive access to skilled, caring, culturally competent crisis counselors who can help with suicidal, substance misuse, or mental health crises, or any other kind of emotional distress." It's unclear if staff for the specialized option 3 care line will be cut or moved to the general 988 line. CBS News has reached out to SAMHSA for more information. The nation's 988 hotline brings critical access to care for those battling mental health emergencies. Nationwide, calls increased 40% soon after the three-digit number was officially launched in 2022. Jaymes Black, CEO of The Trevor Project, a nonprofit focused on suicide prevention for LGBTQ+ young people, described the planned change as "devastating." "This means that, in 30 short days, this program that has provided life-saving services to more than 1.3 million LGBTQ+ young people will no longer be available for those who need it," Black said in a statement Wednesday. "Suicide prevention is about people, not politics. The administration's decision to remove a bipartisan, evidence-based service that has effectively supported a high-risk group of young people through their darkest moments is incomprehensible." The news comes in the middle of Pride Month, which Black called "callous." He also criticized "the administration's choice to remove the 'T' from the acronym 'LGBTQ+' in their announcement," saying, "Transgender people can never, and will never, be erased." Sen. Tammy Baldwin also condemned the agency's move as "cruelly and needlessly taking" away a crucial resource for LGBTQ+ people in crisis. "During Pride Month, a time to celebrate the progress we've made, the Trump Administration is taking us a step back and telling LGBTQ+ kids that they don't matter and don't deserve help when they are in crisis," she said in a statement. Baldwin, a Democrat from Wisconsin, wrote the legislation that created the three-digit 988 hotline. The Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees SAMHSA, has announced plans to reorganize and fold its functions into a new Administration for a Healthy America. SAMHSA has also lost staff to job cuts this year, including some who worked on the 988 hotline team. The 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline can be reached by calling or texting 988. You can also chat with the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline here. The Trevor Project's trained crisis counselors are available 24/7 at 1-866-488-7386, via chat at or by texting START to 678678. For more information about mental health care resources and support, The National Alliance on Mental Illness HelpLine can be reached Monday through Friday, 10 a.m.–10 p.m. ET, at 1-800-950-NAMI (6264) or email info@
Forbes
21 minutes ago
- Forbes
The Business Of Freedom: What Juneteenth Teaches Us About Black Wealth
On June 19, 1865, Union troops arrived in Galveston, Texas, to enforce President Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation, delivering freedom to enslaved people more than two years after its signing. That date, now celebrated as Juneteenth, marks not just legal independence but also the beginning of an incomplete economic quest: the fight for Black wealth. Yet today, rising Black-led enterprises—from early 20th-century hair empires to interstate beauty megabrands—forge a new path toward legacy, ownership and intergenerational capital. For the newly freed, the bigger question following emancipation was, what does freedom mean without the financial foundation to sustain it? As we remember Juneteenth 160 years later, that same question continues to come up in Silicon Valley boardrooms, beauty labs in Los Angeles and venture capital offices in New York. The answer, it turns out, has been hiding in plain sight within the holiday itself: true freedom requires ownership. Juneteenth arguably represents one of America's most entrepreneurial moments—a mass liberation that instantly created the world's largest startup class. Suddenly, over four million people needed to build lives, businesses and generational wealth from nothing. They had no family offices, no inherited portfolios and no network effects from elite universities. What they had was necessity as the mother of invention. The parallels to today's startup ecosystem are striking. Like any founder facing a market disruption, the newly freed had to quickly identify opportunities, bootstrap resources and scale. Within a generation of emancipation, Black Americans had accumulated wealth equivalent to hundreds of millions in today's dollars. With that success, they built banks, launched newspapers, founded universities and created entire commercial districts. Then came the systematic destruction—through Jim Crow laws, redlining, urban renewal and what economists now recognize as the most successful wealth extraction program in American history. Between 1910 and 1997, economists estimate that discriminatory lending practices alone transferred $164 billion in wealth from Black to white communities, while the Tulsa Race Massacre destroyed what would be $200 million in today's Black-owned assets in a single day. Emancipation symbolized moral justice, but economic justice lagged. Reconstruction-era Black families were systematically denied land, access to banking and the homesteading opportunities white families received. Fast forward to 2022: the typical Black family held just $44,890 in median wealth versus $285,000 for white families—a staggering 6× gap, according to the Brookings Institution. And though overall median wealth rose during the pandemic, the racial wealth gap widened by nearly $50,000. Policies like the GI Bill, FHA loans and New Deal programs entrenched a structural advantage that Whites continue to benefit from. Wealth in itself represents more than savings. Instead, it is a launchpad that enables risk-taking, business founding, wealth transfer across generations and capital access. But Black families have lagged behind without multilingual fluency in capital, bank loans, venture equity and homeownership. Numerous Black founders still struggle to raise F&F rounds by tapping sparse generational wealth; Black founders receive less than 1% of venture capital, despite being a little over 12% of the population. The 1% figure masks deeper structural issues: Black founders raising Series A rounds face average valuations 25% lower than comparable white-led startups, while 83% of VC partners are white men, creating what Harvard Business School calls 'pattern recognition bias' in investment decisions. So Juneteenth remains, in many ways, an unfulfilled promise that represents a day to celebrate freedom while spotlighting the work that still lies ahead. The first chapter of modern Black wealth began with Madam C.J. Walker, born Sarah Breedlove and emancipated in 1867. By age 37, she created a national hair-care empire for Black women, later hiring 20,000 sales agents, developing her factory, training schools and supply chain. Walker used wealth strategically—investing in real estate, arts, philanthropy and activism. She turned business into a tool to uplift thousands of Black women economically and socially. Today, that legacy echoes in modern founders. Case in point: Beyoncé, through Parkwood and haircare line Cécred, and Rihanna with Fenty Beauty and Savage X Fenty, have built culturally resonant, global brands, generating wealth and shifting the zeitgeist of media narratives. Fenty as a brand, for instance, revolutionized inclusivity, but it also generated billions and reinvested in Black creatives. When Rihanna launched Fenty Beauty in 2017, she did so with a radical proposition that paid off: makeup for all skin tones. And like Walker, she revamped an entire market category in a way that made consumers pay attention and money. Fenty Beauty generated $100 million in sales within 40 days, ultimately valued at $2.8 billion, and Rihanna's 50% stake made her a billionaire. Rihanna's success stemmed from her distribution strategy: partnering with Sephora for premium placement while maintaining manufacturing control through Kendo Brands, which allowed her to capture both wholesale margins and retail premiums that traditional celebrity licensing deals surrender. More importantly, she proved that when Black entrepreneurs control distribution and narrative, they can capture value previously extracted by others. The pattern repeated with Beyoncé's Ivy Park and now, Cécred, Issa Rae's media empire and Tyler Perry's studio complex. Each represents strategic integration—owning production, distribution and intellectual property rights rather than simply licensing talent for existing platforms. The next frontier lies at the intersection of ownership and innovation. Take the Liberated Capital Fund, part of Edgar Villanueva's Decolonizing Wealth Project, which has deployed $20 million in reparative capital targeted at Black and Indigenous communities. Or consider VC: while Black entrepreneurs still receive under 1% of venture dollars, Black-led funds and accelerators are scaling—Harlem Capital, Backstage Capital, DVP's accelerator—transforming ecosystem dynamics. Their intent isn't charity, per se, as much as business. And it's innovative business: a McKinsey study shows inclusive firms far outperform their peers. Another engine is creator-economy ownership. Issa Rae, featured in TIME's 'Closers,' uses her platform to build cross-media brands, reinvesting capital back into community creatives. Aurora James's Fifteen Percent Pledge moves $14 billion in revenue to Black-owned businesses, turning consumer attention into capital deployment. These strategies mirror Walker's entrepreneurial DNA and the vertically integrated empire that she built, one that uplifted the Black community through economic infrastructure. Part of Walker's vertical integration included owning her zinc and sulfur supply chains, operating beauty schools that doubled as product training centers, and creating a commission structure that paid agents 25% more than domestic work, a move that turned what was economically necessary into entrepreneurial opportunity. So what does Juneteenth teach the Forbes audience today? The lessons for today's business leaders are as clear as they are urgent. Capital remains the prerequisite for sustainable freedom—emancipation without assets creates agency without options. Walker understood that wealth functions as generational infrastructure, a truth that modern Black founders are internalizing through equity structures and IP ownership. Most importantly, the data proves that ownership trumps charity every time. When Black entrepreneurs control distribution and narrative, they capture the market share and redefine entire categories. Juneteenth does not solely represent a litany of injustice, nor is it a celebration for its own sake. It's a lens: from 1865's slow crawl toward freedom, through Madam Walker's road-blocked rise, to today's multi-billion-dollar empires of Beyoncé and Rihanna. It tells a story, one of liberation deferred; empowerment circumvented and wealth half-granted or, perhaps, half-seized. The most profound lesson of Juneteenth isn't about the past but about the future. Freedom delayed is opportunity denied, but freedom claimed is wealth created. Every day that systemic barriers prevent Black entrepreneurs from accessing capital is a day that superior returns remain uncaptured. Regardless, the arc continues. Black founders are building generational wealth through brand ownership, VC carve-outs, reparative capital and self-sovereign IP. As Madam C.J. Walker once did with her 'Walker System,' today's Black entrepreneurs are piecing together freedom in practice: culturally, economically and generationally. And that is the business of freedom.
