Way back when, the first head of the FDA had a hateon for caffeine. To that end, the FDA seized some Coke as it crossed state lines and sued it(as was the style at the time); Coke's main defense was that it was part of the secret recipe; SCOTUS struck that idea down by pointing out that part of the law they alleged offered them a way out should be interpreted as allowing normal ingredients that would technically fail due to the presence of inert toxins in their natural state, specifically referencing Congressional intent.
Tying back to this, the plain text of the law does not ban discrimination on the basis of gender identity nor does Congressional intent. Any argument that it applies is nothing more than desperate people grasping at straws.
[–] ShinyVoater ago
Way back when, the first head of the FDA had a hateon for caffeine. To that end, the FDA seized some Coke as it crossed state lines and sued it(as was the style at the time); Coke's main defense was that it was part of the secret recipe; SCOTUS struck that idea down by pointing out that part of the law they alleged offered them a way out should be interpreted as allowing normal ingredients that would technically fail due to the presence of inert toxins in their natural state, specifically referencing Congressional intent.
Tying back to this, the plain text of the law does not ban discrimination on the basis of gender identity nor does Congressional intent. Any argument that it applies is nothing more than desperate people grasping at straws.