That still would be barred by Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S. 644 (2020). If they do any on that basis they’d instantly get sued. 7/9 of the justices are the same since then. 4 members of the majority remain on the court and the two new appointments both should be predicted to uphold the precedent.
But those same judges have also showed in the last year or two that precedence means very little to them if it gets in the way of something they (or their patrons) want
That still would be barred by Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S. 644 (2020). If they do any on that basis they’d instantly get sued. 7/9 of the justices are the same since then. 4 members of the majority remain on the court and the two new appointments both should be predicted to uphold the precedent.
But those same judges have also showed in the last year or two that precedence means very little to them if it gets in the way of something they (or their patrons) want
deleted by creator