From TalkingPointMemo, on the Supreme Court oral arguments challenging the Idaho ban on trans girls paying in girls sports:
The justices spent most of their time during oral arguments on the equal protection claims, and seemed to coalesce behind a position that could have ramifications for small minorities beyond the trans community: that Idaho and West Virginia’s laws segregating student athletes based on sex at birth is permissible because they don’t discriminate against the vast majority of people. Even if they do discriminate against trans people, a lawyer for the Trump administration suggested Tuesday, the group is too small to bring a claim.
Interesting… I wonder how the justices would feel about a law that only violated the constitutional rights of, say, nine individuals. More seriously, this sounds like the sort of logic that could open the door to a death by a thousand cuts. Will redlining will soon be back on the table as long as it’s done just one small neighborhood at a time? Transcript of oral arguments is here; just search for 99.