1. United States
2. Letter

The Montana Supreme Court's decision in Kalarchik v. State of Montana provides a clear framework for how you should rule on upcoming transgender rights cases. Transgender discrimination is, by its very nature, sex discrimination. The Montana court got it right. When cisgender people can update their identity documents to match their gender but transgender people cannot, that's discrimination based on sex. Justice McKinnon explained it clearly: transgender people are "prevented, based on their sex, from obtaining the same attributes of public life that a cisgender Montanan may obtain." The 5-2 ruling declared transgender people a suspect class under Montana's Equal Protection Clause, requiring strict scrutiny for any laws that discriminate against trans individuals. This standard should apply to federal equal protection analysis as well. The state's own expert witness misgendered plaintiffs throughout his testimony, undermining the credibility of arguments against equal treatment. This reasoning applies directly to the cases before you. Bathroom bans, forced outing laws, sports bans, and other anti-trans policies are sex-based classifications that deny equal access to public life. Montana's constitution explicitly prohibits sex discrimination, and so does the Fourteenth Amendment. Follow Montana's lead and recognize that equal protection means equal protection. https://transitics.substack.com/p/montana-supreme-court-effectively