BLUE
Profile banner
DS
👻 Desperately Shrieking Susan 👻
@susanrinkunas.com
Reporter: abortion & politics. Contributing writer, Jezebel. Seen in Slate, The New Republic, The Nation, The Guardian, and more. @wgaeast.bsky.social council. From PA, now in BK. ❤️‍🔥 linktr.ee/susanrinkunas 💌 susanrinkunaswrites @ gmail
7.7k followers1.1k following3.5k posts
DSsusanrinkunas.com

Very Smart Reporters are going to act like US v. Skrmetti only implicates gender-affirming care for trans kids. In fact, it could allow sex discrimination in many other kinds of medical care. Yes, like birth control. Me in @tnr.bsky.social on how our rights are intertwined:

The Supreme Court May Use Dobbs to Take Down Trans Rights—and Beyond
The Supreme Court May Use Dobbs to Take Down Trans Rights—and Beyond

The overturning of Roe was always going to affect more than just abortion, and we’re about to find out how bad it can get.

5

Llkrigel.bsky.social

Tim Walz is right. These people's obsession with other people's sexuality is just weird. And creepy. It wouldn't matter if they didn't have power. The fact they want to use their power to destroy those they don't understand is horrific. We have to render them powerless.

0
SWstaidwinnow.bsky.social

The SCOTUS did not need the Constitution to grant absolute immunity to Trump. The SCOTUS does not need Dobbs to take down trans rights.

0
CBpat0615.bsky.social

Don't you want to slap that smug ass face. Vergogna

0
LMleemeade.bsky.social

They’ve said they’re coming for it all. We need to believe them.

0
DSsusanrinkunas.com

Namely, if the Supreme Court agrees that Tennessee's ban is "regulating medical care" not sex discrimination, states could also ban care for trans *adults.* (It was never about kids.) Experts told me states could use this same playbook on birth control newrepublic.com/article/1870...

screenshot from The New Republic:

If the Supreme Court blesses this line of reasoning, states could use the precedent to attack other forms of health care. Banker said that Tennessee’s argument could have “really radical implications”—and pointed to birth control, as well as certain fertility treatments that would likely end up endangered.

Gillian Branstetter, a communications strategist at the American Civil Liberties Union, underscored that allowing politicians to regulate medical care based on sex is a risk for people who aren’t trans. “There really is no such thing as regulating other people’s lives because of who they are—you’re opening the door for the state to do the same thing to you,” Branstetter said. “The attacks are already escalating into things like IVF access and other reproductive health care. It’s not hard to imagine how it would then escalate into things like contraceptive access.”
Screenshot from The New Republic:

Branstetter noted that solidarity is key: “The goal is for other people to be so afraid of transgender people’s freedom that they’re willing to sacrifice their own.”

The various right-wing playbooks against bodily autonomy have overlapped for years. **There are already cases moving through the court system concerning minors’ right to access birth control without involving their parents.** Earlier this year, the Fifth Circuit ruled in favor of a conservative father who said a federal program offering contraception without parental consent violated his parental rights. The conservative blueprint Project 2025 wants a future Trump administration to target insurance coverage of emergency contraception, and we could also see states passing laws restricting minors’ access to those pills and to IUDs.
1
Profile banner
DS
👻 Desperately Shrieking Susan 👻
@susanrinkunas.com
Reporter: abortion & politics. Contributing writer, Jezebel. Seen in Slate, The New Republic, The Nation, The Guardian, and more. @wgaeast.bsky.social council. From PA, now in BK. ❤️‍🔥 linktr.ee/susanrinkunas 💌 susanrinkunaswrites @ gmail
7.7k followers1.1k following3.5k posts