Wonder how Indiana’s law would comport with the Constitution’s full faith and credit clause (basically how gay marriage came about) when a transgender person born outside of Indiana but has updated their birth certificate relocates to Indiana. Birth certification is a power reserved to the states under the 10th Amendment. So, SCOTUS can’t set an interviening rule about how birth certificates are to be written if a dispute arises between the states on this.
Weird way of reporting by using the opposition’s stance as a headline.
It’s almost like they’re trying to tell us what to think or something, lol.
Jesus Christ these people are deranged. All of the bullshit happening around us and they keep hammering trans people…
With this Supreme Court?
Crazy that rules for birth certificates are not national.
That sounds like an argument for abolishing the fundamental parts of the united states.
It would be very bad thing if every governor and attorney general suddenly became as subject to Republican malfeasance as local mayors in Texas.
Also, there are some federal rules for what counts as special “birth certificates” to efficiently prove that a US citizen asking for a passport was born in the USA. But states don’t have to follow them if they choose, and depending on their reason could presumably go to court to get the federal rule adjusted or discarded.
https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-22/chapter-I/subchapter-F/part-51/subpart-C
Kind of wish we lived in a society where we didn’t need them
“Do you have proof of birth?”
“Well I’m here, ain’t I?”
