SCOOP: He was one of a handful of Democrats who joined Republicans in May to pass an anti-trans bill through the House. Last night, instead of listening to trans constituents at a meeting that I attended, Eugene Vindman got angry. It went downhill from there. www.advocate.com/politics/nat...
Virginia congressman's meeting with transgender Democrats erupts into profanity. Then he walked out
Constituents in King George County confronted Rep. Eugene Vindman over his vote for Republican-backed legislation affecting trans students, triggering a heated exchange.
advocate.com
![Respondents’ equal protection claim also has no basis in the Constitution. The Constitution has only one Equal Protection Clause, and it applies only to the “State[s],” not the Federal Government. Amdt. 14, §1. Respondents, of course, sued the Federal Government. When asked at argument how the Equal Protection Clause could have anything to do with a suit against the Federal Government, respondents’ counsel, drawing on precedents of this Court, stated that the claim “arises under . . . the Fifth Amendment’s equal protection guarantee” because “the Fifth Amendment constrains the federal government in the same way that the Fourteenth Amendment constrains states.” Tr. of Oral Arg. 118. Because the Fifth Amendment has no Equal Protection Clause, this Court was wrong to read equal protection into it in Bolling v. Sharpe, 347 U. S. 497 (1954). And, even if the Due Process Clause does prohibit some discrimination, it would not do so in a case about immigration status.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:24vva42nxim6zbcmnozegoef/bafkreidjqxkxpuj6qwtmub4kyzawtfxbs4ckudtriirts5vnh6ctidsrte)
