<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<mods xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3" version="3.7" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3 http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/v3/mods-3-7.xsd">
  <titleInfo>
    <title>From Erosion to Evisceration - Skremetti’s Narrowing of Sex-Based Protection under Equal Protection</title>
  </titleInfo>
  <name type="personal" usage="primary">
    <namePart>Purvis, Dara</namePart>
    <role>
      <roleTerm type="text">Author</roleTerm>
    </role>
    <role>
      <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="code">aut</roleTerm>
    </role>
  </name>
  <typeOfResource/>
  <genre authority="rdacontent">Text</genre>
  <originInfo>
    <place>
      <placeTerm type="code" authority="marccountry">xx#</placeTerm>
    </place>
    <dateIssued encoding="marc">2025</dateIssued>
  </originInfo>
  <originInfo eventType="publisher">
    <place>
      <placeTerm type="text"/>
    </place>
    <publisher>Verfassungsblog</publisher>
    <dateIssued>2025-06-24</dateIssued>
  </originInfo>
  <language>
    <languageTerm authority="iso639-2b" type="code">eng</languageTerm>
  </language>
  <physicalDescription>
    <form authority="marccategory">electronic resource</form>
    <form authority="marcsmd">remote</form>
    <form type="media" authority="rdamedia">Computermedien</form>
    <form type="carrier" authority="rdacarrier">Online-Ressource</form>
  </physicalDescription>
  <abstract displayLabel="Summary">Last week, the Supreme Court decided the case United States v. Skrmetti. As Ryan Thoreson has argued on this blog, the Court’s opinion rolls back existing understandings of sex discrimination in ways that will likely play out in future cases. Building on that insight, I examine how the Court narrows what counts as sex discrimination and strips the concept of stereotypes of its constitutional force. The most troubling aspects of the decision, however, appear in concurrences written by the ultraconservative members of the Court, which confine the reach of equal protection to formal legal classifications alone.</abstract>
  <accessCondition type="use and reproduction">CC BY-SA 4.0</accessCondition>
  <note type="statement of responsibility">Purvis, Dara</note>
  <subject>
    <topic>Equality</topic>
  </subject>
  <subject>
    <topic>USA. Supreme Court</topic>
  </subject>
  <subject>
    <topic>anti-discrimination</topic>
  </subject>
  <subject>
    <topic>gender and sex discrimination</topic>
  </subject>
  <subject>
    <topic>gender equality</topic>
  </subject>
  <subject>
    <topic>transgender rights</topic>
  </subject>
  <subject xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" authority="gnd" xlink:href="(DE-588)35650-5">
    <topic>USA. Supreme Court</topic>
  </subject>
  <classification authority="ddc" edition="23">342</classification>
  <location>
    <url displayLabel="raw object" usage="primary display">https://verfassungsblog.de/skrmetti-scotus-transgender/</url>
  </location>
  <relatedItem type="host">
    <titleInfo>
      <title>Verfassungsblog</title>
    </titleInfo>
    <identifier type="issn">2366-7044</identifier>
    <name>
      <namePart>Max Steinbeis Verfassungsblog gGmbH</namePart>
    </name>
  </relatedItem>
  <identifier type="doi">10.59704/9afdbb8012092c30</identifier>
  <recordInfo>
    <recordCreationDate encoding="marc">250624</recordCreationDate>
    <recordIdentifier source="DE-Verfassungsblog">10.59704/9afdbb8012092c30</recordIdentifier>
    <recordOrigin>Converted from MARCXML to MODS version 3.7 using MARC21slim2MODS3-7.xsl
				(Revision 1.140 20200717)</recordOrigin>
  </recordInfo>
</mods>
