S6, Ep. 06: Oral arguments in U.S. v. Skrmetti: Medical care for transgender youth and the Equal Protection Clause
Release Date: 12/19/2024
Respecting Religion
One religious freedom case at the Supreme Court isn’t getting the sort of attention as others, despite how it’s uniting groups that often disagree. So, why did the justices sound so skeptical in the courtroom? Amanda and Holly review this week’s oral arguments in Landor v. Louisiana Department of Corrections, which involves the remedy available to a man whose religious freedom rights were violated when he was in prison. The violation isn’t in question, so why is the remedy? Amanda and Holly review the details in this case, play audio from key moments in the courtroom, and...
info_outlineRespecting Religion
Today, we are bringing you a special presentation on the contested issue of “sanctuary,” which continues to cut into the immigration debates in our country. Dr. Sergio M. González traces the sanctuary movement to its roots in the 1980s and examines how we arrived at a moment where mercy is met with repression. This presentation was given on the campus of the University of St. Thomas in St. Paul, Minn., on Oct. 22, 2025, as part of BJC’s annual Walter B. and Kay W. Shurden Lectures on Religious Liberty and Separation of Church and State. SHOW NOTES Segment 1 (starting...
info_outlineRespecting Religion
We hear a lot of misinformation about a long-standing part of the tax code that protects the nonprofit sector, and it’s newly under attack in a questionable manner. On this episode, Amanda and Holly discuss the Johnson Amendment, what it does and doesn’t do, and the concerning way the Trump administration is trying to undo it without going through a normal process. They also provide reminders of what all nonprofits – including houses of worship – can do without jeopardizing their 501(c)(3) status under that current law. It’s a curious case – politicians say no one wants this part...
info_outlineRespecting Religion
In this LIVE conversation, Amanda and Holly take a moment to catch up and review some of the recent news since last week’s program. They discuss how religious leaders have been engaging in peaceful protests of immigration raids, how the ongoing government shutdown is impacting court cases, a change in Oklahoma regarding Bible teaching in public schools, and more. This show first aired live on Thursday, October 23, at 11 a.m. Eastern Time on BJC’s YouTube, Facebook, and Instagram channels. SHOW NOTES: Do you want special emails about the show, including notifications...
info_outlineRespecting Religion
As the Supreme Court begins a new term, we can’t ignore what else is going on in our country – attacks on the rule of law, weaponization of the Department of Justice, the militarization of American cities, disruptive and chaotic immigration enforcement, and a government shutdown. Amanda Tyler and Holly Hollman are back for a new season of Respecting Religion to bring thoughtful conversations to these issues and more at the intersection of religion and the law. In the season 7 premiere, they focus on the current Supreme Court term, including a case with an egregious violation of a...
info_outlineRespecting Religion
With attacks on the rule of law, the militarization of troops in American cities, and a new Supreme Court term starting up, there is no better time to tune in to Respecting Religion. Join Holly and Amanda as they return for a new season to share analysis, opportunities for action, and ways to make sense of issues at the intersection of religion and the law. Respecting Religion is available on your favorite podcasting platform, and now, for the first time, with video on YouTube! We'll see you on October 16 for the season 7 premiere of Respecting Religion! Subscribe today, and...
info_outlineRespecting Religion
On our season 6 finale, Amanda Tyler and Holly Hollman explore some of the consequential decisions from the final days of the Supreme Court term, including Mahmoud v. Taylor – which involves parents who want to opt their children out of curriculum they find in conflict with their religious beliefs – and U.S. v. Skrmetti, which focuses on access to medical care for transgender youth. They discuss the real world implications of these and other recent rulings. Amanda and Holly also celebrate a decision from the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals striking down Louisiana’s law...
info_outlineRespecting Religion
What’s the difference between religious privilege and religious freedom? How does Christian nationalism spread? Why do so many ideas that start in Texas expand to other parts of the country? On this podcast, we bring you a special panel discussion on Christian nationalism in the Texas public sphere, recorded live on April 8. It features BJC Executive Director (and Respecting Religion co-host) Amanda Tyler, scholar David Brockman, professor Mark Chancey, and journalist Robert Downen. Moderated by Jack Jenkins, it was part of an all-day event focused on telling the story of religion in Texas...
info_outlineRespecting Religion
With decisions from the Supreme Court, a new travel ban, and a federally militarized presence in Los Angeles, there are many activities in our world that deserve attention. Amanda and Holly discuss several current events in this episode, including the revival of one of the ugliest policies of the first Trump administration. Plus, they review the unanimous decision in a Supreme Court case about religious exemptions to employment law and discuss the Court’s decision not to hear a case involving the protection of sacred land. SHOW NOTES Segment 1 (starting at 00:37): Recent and...
info_outlineRespecting Religion
A case with a thin record is raising plenty of questions at the Supreme Court. In this episode, Amanda and Holly examine the case of Mahmoud v. Taylor, which involves parents who want to opt their children out of public school curriculum they say conflicts with their religious beliefs. But, what’s the difference between expected exposure and unconstitutional coercion? Does age matter? What happens when opt-out options become too burdensome and overwhelming to accommodate? Amanda and Holly examine the issues in this case as well as the challenges for the school district and for the...
info_outlineA Supreme Court case on medical care for transgender youth could have major ramifications – not only for children who have gender dysphoria and their families but also for how other statutes are reviewed under the Equal Protection Clause. In this episode, Amanda and Holly examine the oral arguments in U.S. v. Skrmetti, breaking down key moments in the heated courtroom exchanges, examining the specific constitutional question in this case, and discussing the broader implications of the possible ruling. While the specific question in this case involves the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and not the Religion Clauses of the First Amendment, religion and religious arguments often loom large in cases that involve sexual orientation or gender identity.
SHOW NOTES
Segment 1 (starting at 00:38): The stakes of Skrmetti and the specific question presented
For more on the atmosphere surrounding the case, read this piece from Mark Walsh for SCOTUSblog: Inside the Supreme Court arguments on transgender care
Visit the website of the National Archives for more information on the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Segment 2 (starting at 07:17): The heated oral arguments
The U.S. Supreme Court heard U.S. v. Skrmetti on Dec. 4, 2024. The Supreme Court’s website has links to listen to the oral arguments or read a transcript of the arguments.
We played four clips from the courtroom:
- The opening argument of Elizabeth Prelogar, Solicitor General of the United States (from 00:00:10 in the oral argument)
- A question and statement from Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson (from 01:41:25 in the oral argument)
- The opening argument of Matthew Rice, Solicitor General for the state of Tennessee (from at 01:45:26 in the oral argument)
- An exchange between Matthew Rice and Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson (from 02:10:17 in the oral argument)
Holly mentioned the Bostock v. Clayton County decision from 2020, which interpreted Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to prohibit employment discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity. Holly and Amanda discussed the decision in episode 17 of season 1, titled “A landmark case for LGTBQ rights: What’s next for religious liberty?”
Segment 3 (starting 39:57): Thank you to our listeners
Our most-listened to episode in 2024 was episode 21 of season 5, titled “But … is it Christian nationalism?”
Respecting Religion is made possible by BJC’s generous donors. Your gift to BJC is tax-deductible, and you can support these conversations with a gift to BJC.