If you’d like to read this issue on my website, click here! If you’d like to sign-up, and receive this in your inbox each week, click here! Read past issues here.
Good Friday Morning! I hope everyone had a great Thanksgiving holiday week. Speaking of, how do you say Thanksgiving? I thought this was a settled concept, but apparently not. Preply, an online language learning platform, writes, “Celebrants might pronounce the harvest holiday “THANKS-giving,” with an emphasis on the prefix, or like “Thanks-GIV-ing,” where the oomph is placed in the middle. Others kick the K and rattle off a “Happy Thangsgiving.”
Additionally,” they also drew upon a Harvard study, which reportedly found that 74% of Americans emphasized the “give,” while just 16% stressed the “thanks,” The Mirror reported. Preply found that the states that predominantly pronounced the holiday the latter way were Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas.
The kicker, for those in the south like myself, is that “the rest of the country says “Thanksgiving” with the exclamation in the center. …[T]he general rule is that Southerners say “THANKSgiving” while Northerners say ‘thanksGIVing.'”
I might just go with Turkey Day from now on.
This week, I’ll touch on the Supreme Court’s oral arguments about Tennessee’s ban on doctors giving puberty blockers and other drugs to trans-kids—links to follow.
Quick Hits:
- The New York Times and CBS News have confirmed reporting in Politico earlier this week that Biden was considering “preemptive pardons.” I’ve got two columns and a YouTube episode up talking about it all. The thing that struck me most about the Hunter Biden pardon is how early it was. You’d expect something like this on January 19, 2025, at 11:59 pm. Biden cutting this pardon so early makes me believe this preemptive pardon chatter is more than just theory; this White House will issue a ton of last-minute pardons to everyone, and it will get hairy fast. One of those pardons could go to retired General Mark Milley after it was revealed he secretly called China during the Trump administration.
Where you can find me this week
Please subscribe, rate, and review The Horse Race on YouTube — the reviews help listeners, and readers like you find me. Make sure to sign up for the Conservative Institute’s daily newsletter.
Horse Race Ep. 018: Biden’s Pardon Crisis | Trump Transition Is Popular | Dems Civil War Brewing…
Joe Biden Pardons Hunter Biden For Nearly 11 Years Of Criminal Acts Known… And Unknown – Conservative Institute
Joe Biden Will Pardon The Rest Of His Family… And More – Conservative Institute
Republicans Swept Democrats On All The Issues – Conservative Institute
Conservatives Poised To Win First Major Case On Puberty Blockers To Kids
Arguably, the most significant case of next summer was argued before the Supreme Court this week: United States vs. Skremetti. This is the case where the Biden administration is attempting to block Tennessee’s law blocking minors from using sex change drugs to transition to another sex. There are two quick takeaways from oral arguments:
- Tennessee’s law is highly likely to stand.
- The utter incoherence of the pro-trans side of this argument is making it impossible to argue the case under current Supreme Court doctrines.
I expect the Court not to attempt to step into the fray. Kavanaugh and Roberts expressed serious doubts about the Court’s role in deciding this contentious issue. It’s clear that both of them see this as the abortion debate 2.0, and it’s better to allow the political process to take all the slings and arrows, with the Court stepping in to handle narrow questions.
There are two facets to the left’s argument: the Biden administration argues that Tennessee law should be blocked on equal protection grounds because it discriminates on the basis of sex. However, the petitioners undercut this argument by arguing the pro-trans argument that sex is not immutable—they say it’s the opposite; you can change it.
Here’s why that’s important: under law, if a state tries to legislate something on the basis of race or religion, courts are supposed to exercise “strict scrutiny.“ It is very difficult for states to meet this burden because the law presumes that discriminating on the basis of race or religion is presumed bad. These are things that are immutable characteristics of the world or involve deeply held beliefs. We don’t want people judged poorly based on these things.
Sex is somewhat similar, although the bar is lower. So, for instance, we do allow some discrimination on the basis of sex, like allowing Title IX to exit, which carves out space for women. However, the courts have struck down things like the Boy Scouts preventing girls from entering the organization and forcing military academies to allow women into their institutions.
The reason for all this is that sex, race, and more are viewed as immutable – thus, we should protect people from being discriminated against for being a given gender.
The pro-trans arguments undercut this, as Alito goes into in his back-and-forths with the lead ACLU attorney. Alito asked, “whether transgender status is immutable.“ The ACLU attorney tries to answer that it is immutable, that being trans is something a person can’t change (no scientific evidence of this exists; it is merely asserted). Alito continued:
JUSTICE ALITO: Are there individuals who are born male, assigned male at birth, who at one point identify as female but then later come to identify as male, and, likewise, for individuals who are assigned female at birth, at some point identify as male — as female — I’m sorry — identify as male but later come to identify as female? Are there not such people?
MR. STRANGIO: There are such people. I agree with that, Justice Alito.
JUSTICE ALITO: So it’s not an immutable characteristic, is it?
MR. STRANGIO: Well, I think people’s understanding of it — of it shifts, but the evidence shows that there is at least a strong underlying basis. And I think the normative reason for that particular consideration is whether or not this is something that someone should or could change and whether they should have to change it in order to receive constitutional protections, and I think transgender status squarely fits within that.
JUSTICE ALITO: We — we have said that having a disability is not a suspect or quasi-suspect classification, so, if we were to agree with you on the question of quasi-suspect classification, how could we justify saying, for example, that a person who is schizophrenic does not fall within a category that — that — that is not a law that — that distinguishes on that ground is not a suspect classification? And I’m not suggesting that gender dysphoria is a disease, a mental illness. I’m not suggesting that at all. I’m just saying, how could we justify the different treatment?
It’s — it’s immutable in the sense that there isn’t any cure for it. There’s been severe discrimination against people suffering from schizophrenia. At one point, they were locked up in hellish institutions. They can make a valuable contribution to society. Think of John Nash. How would we distinguish that?
There’s no real answer for that. The Court ends up moving on. Because the inherent point of the trans movement is being able to change sex to whatever you decide, you can’t then claim that the sex you’ve chosen is immutable, never-changing. It’s just that day’s flavor.
The counterargument is that being like this is immutable in itself, but Alito’s point is that we have other people coming out with multiple personalities. How do you treat people with those shifting personalities differently than a trans person? We treat them utterly differently as a society.
Another notable point from Alito’s questioning came over the studies we do have on the topic. The ACLU and the Federal Government argued that changing the sex of children is a necessity. One of the flash points was over the “Cass report.” It’ssomething the UK’s NHS put out, and the left has ignored while the right has touted. National Review sums up:
To counter [Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar], Alito cited extensive research from European countries showing otherwise, including a study from a Swedish medical board that concluded the risks of transgender treatments likely outweigh purported benefits. Alito also referred to the United Kingdom’s Cass Review, which found little evidence to further the viewpoint that the benefits of transgender treatment are greater than the risks.
“I wonder if you would like to stand by the statement in your position or if you think it would now be appropriate to modify that and withdraw your statement,“ Alito said.
The World Health Organization has similarly acknowledged that the evidence to support transgender procedures is sorely lacking. Research from Finland published earlier this year also found that suicides among kids with gender dysphoria is extremely rare, dispelling the common activist narrative that gender transitions are needed to save the lives of children.
Confronted with the Cass Report’s finding that trans procedures like those at issue in the case don’t reduce suicidality among the adolescents who receive them, Strangio conceded the point, acknowledging that very few gender-dysphoric children actually go through with suicide, but argued that there is evidence that the procedures reduce suicidal inclinations.
The broader point for Kavanaugh and Roberts is that the argument that trans science is settled and ready for adjudication by the courts is seriously suspect. They have no interest in deciding what they see as more appropriately a public policy decision—and frankly, I could see Kagan siding with them on this one.
Where does Kagan end up in this case? If she’s smart, she chooses to push the Court out of this area with Roberts and Kavanaugh. I don’t know if that’s where this falls, but I’d be surprised by any broad rulings beyond letting the states figure this out. That will enrage the left, but let this play out in the political sphere.
No doubt, the media and press will play this case up, continuing to let the states sort this out amongst themselves. This means that starting in the fall of 2025, we’re going to see other states jump into the fray with regulations on this topic across the spectrum. It’s similar to Dobbs: when a big issue gets thrown into the sunlight, everyone starts scrambling at once.
I’d expect Democrats to also call for a national legislative action on this issue. Republicans won’t take it up. But it’s something they’ll start clamoring for loudly. Basically, I’m describing next summer for you.
The last notable point from the arguments is that Justice Neil Gorsuch was quiet – no statements or questions. Gorsuch wrote the majority opinion in the Bostock case, flipping the case for liberals. Gorsuch is more of a libertarian than the rest, and it’s unclear how he’ll handle this decision.
I’m expecting a win for conservatives on this case. Look for this opinion to drop sometime between April and June 2025.
Links of the week
California Fast Food Restaurants Shed Thousands of Jobs after $20 Minimum Wage Hike – National Review
Marc Andreessen: Biden Admin Has Been Debanking “Politically Exposed Persons” In “Privatized Sanctions Regime” – RealClearPolitics
Trump FCC Chair Pick Brendan Carr Wants To “Smash Censorship Cartel,” Protect “Core Political, Religious, Scientific Speech” – RealClearPolitics
At MSNBC, Rising Tensions Fuel Fears of Collapse: The network has lost half of its viewership and is being spun off into a separate company. – The American Spectator
No, you are not on Indigenous land: Pieces of territory belong to institutions, not to racial groups. – Noah Smith
The Rot In Britain—and the Remedy: Lately it seems that mine is a country with a death wish. Can we avoid national suicide? – Niall Ferguson, The Free Press
Bullets fired at UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson had words written on them, officials say – CBS News
The Extremely Gleeful, Extremely Dark Reaction to a CEO’s Killing: This is real life. Not ‘John Wick.’ – The Free Press
Will Kash Patel Fix the FBI—or Break It? With his pick for FBI director, Donald Trump has found someone who despises the deep state as much as he does. – Eli Lake, The Free Press
The ‘Wild, Wild West’ of the American Egg Donor Industry: It’s sold as an easy way to make money and help others. Nobody mentions the long-term risks. ‘I never saw this coming.’ – Rina Raphael, The Free Press
The Re-Skilling of America: Instead of subsidizing America’s greedy and unequal diploma mills, how about dropping degree requirements and rewarding skills? – Michael Lind, Tablet Magazine
X/Twitter Thread(s) of the week
Comparing how the media covered Biden’s pardon, versus Trump pardons.
Satire of the week
Judge Delays Decision After Learning One Menendez Brother Always Lies, One Always Tells The Truth – The Onion
Tragic: Celebrities Flee To Canada Only For Trump To Annex It – Babylon Bee
Suspicious? Biden Pardons Hunter For Anything He Might Do Tonight Between 2:30 and 4:17 AM Outside The Capitol Heights Applebee’s – The Babylon Bee
Playlist That Started Out Cohesive Now Just List of Every Song Woman Has Ever Liked – Reductress
Joe Biden Pardon’s Hunter After Being Told the Man Is His Son – The Hard Times
Studio Begins Animated Remake of Beloved Live-Action Retelling of Cherished Animated Classic – The Hard Drive
“That’s Bad Form Now” Kim Jong Un Urges South Korean President To Stand Down – Waterford Whispers News
Thanks for reading!