State laws on gender-affirming surgery, quickly becoming a major culture war issue, were on the mind Tuesday of at least one justice during the U.S. Supreme Court’s argument over a California ban on the sale of pork from sows housed in ways inconsistent with the state’s standards.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett raised the gender-affirming surgery theoretical in a blizzard of hypotheticals posed by the justices as they explored whether the so-called dormant commerce clause is violated by California’s law, which is based on a morality interest and an interest in health and safety.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]