#Intermediate Scrutiny

[mariacallous]

BOSTON (AP) — A federal judge on Friday partially blocked the Trump administration from enacting a policy that bans the use of “X” marker used by many nonbinary people on passports as well as the changing of gender markers.

U.S. District Judge Julia Kobick, who was appointed by President Joe Biden, sided with the American Civil Liberties Union’s motion for a preliminary injunction, which stays the action while the lawsuit plays out. It requires the State Department to allow six transgender and nonbinary people who are plaintiffs in the lawsuit to obtain passports with sex designations consistent with their gender identity.

“The Executive Order and the Passport Policy on their face classify passport applicants on the basis of sex and thus must be reviewed under intermediate judicial scrutiny,” Kobick wrote. “That standard requires the government to demonstrate that its actions are substantially related to an important governmental interest. The government has failed to meet this standard.”

Kobick also said plaintiffs have shown they would succeed in demonstrating that the new passport policy and executive order “are based on irrational prejudice toward transgender Americans and therefore offend our Nation’s constitutional commitment to equal protection for all Americans.”

“In addition, the plaintiffs have shown that they are likely to succeed on their claim that the Passport Policy is arbitrary and capricious, and that it was not adopted in compliance with the procedures required by the Paperwork Reduction Act and Administrative Procedure Act,” she added.

[titles-for-tangents]

By Robert Mackey and agency

18:57 EDT Tuesday, 17 June 2025

“Ruling rebukes order from White House that said passports must conform to the sex citizens were assigned at birth

“A federal judge in Boston has ruled that transgender and intersex people can obtain passports that align with their gender identity, in a rebuke to an executive order from the Trump administration that said passports must conform to the sex citizens were assigned at birth.

“US district judge Julia Kobick issued a preliminary injunction that expanded an earlier order she issued in April that had stopped the US state department from enforcing the policy in the case of six people, after finding the order was likely unconstitutional.

“The judge’s new order means that all trans citizens will be able to update their gender markers on their passports as the case against Donald Trump’s order proceeds.

“After the US president signed an executive order on the first day of his term in January, Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government, the US state department announced that it would ‘no longer issue US passports or Consular Reports of Birth Abroad (CRBAs) with an X marker. We will only issue passports with an M or F sex marker that match the customer’s biological sex at birth.’

“The ruling applies only to those people who are currently without a valid passport, those whose passport is expiring within a year, and those who need to apply for a passport because theirs was lost or stolen or because they need to change their name or sex designation.

“‘While this is good news,’ the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) said in a statement, ‘we will continue fighting until this executive order is blocked permanently.’

“Last month Kobick, who was appointed by Joe Biden, sided with the ACLU’s motion for a preliminary injunction, which stays the action while the lawsuit plays out. It requires the state department to allow six transgender and nonbinary people who are plaintiffs in the lawsuit to obtain passports with sex designations consistent with their gender identity.

“‘The Executive Order and the Passport Policy on their face classify passport applicants on the basis of sex and thus must be reviewed under intermediate judicial scrutiny,’ Kobick wrote. ‘That standard requires the government to demonstrate that its actions are substantially related to an important governmental interest. The government has failed to meet this standard.’

“In its lawsuit, the ACLU described how one woman had her passport returned with a male designation while others are too scared to submit their passports because they fear their applications might be suspended and their passports held by the state department. Another mailed in their passport on 9 January and requested a name change and to change their sex designation from male to female. That person was still waiting for their passport, the ACLU wrote in the lawsuit, and feared missing a family wedding and a botany conference this year.

“In response to the lawsuit, the Trump administration argued the passport policy change ‘does not violate the equal protection guarantees of the constitution.’ They also contended that the president has broad discretion in setting passport policy and that plaintiffs would not be harmed by the policy, since they are still free to travel abroad.”

[snowfieldstories]

In Life and Death [Chapter 12]

Kim Dokja x Reader/Original female character

<< Series masterlist

Warnings: strong language, violence, allusions to sexual assault

Summary:

In which a reader finds herself tossed into the pages of her favorite web novel after her untimely death. A novel of a novel within reality. It's a reader's dream, right? Well, this reader vows to bring the right epilogue to her beloved character, Kim Dokja. She will give him the happiest of endings. Or she will die trying.

⚠️MAJOR SPOILERS FOR ORV WEB NOVEL AND MANHWA!!!!⚠️

Episode VI. Chapter 12 — A Kingless World

I didn't dream.

My consciousness returned slowly, and I opened my eyes to a swirl of black clouds overhead. I pushed up, shrugging on the pink bag beside me, and surveyed the area.

It seemed to be a rooftop four stories high in a semi-residential neighborhood, indistinguishable without a notable building in sight. I sighed and headed down.

I walked the halls and searched for a main staircase, finding something strange. A curled script, unfamiliar to my brain, graced every notice, pamphlet, and desk. It looked Asian, though I couldn't pinpoint where.

An eerie silence accompanied the sound of my feet. Each hallway was empty and clean. My footsteps slowed. Too clean. Not a trace of oxidized blood, nor rancid odors, nor decomposing bodies. It was as if everyone had up and left.

What happened to the foreigners when the scenarios began?

I couldn't recall a mention of non-Korean people existing in the Seoul Dome, only beyond, and I felt rather ashamed that, in all my years of the previous round, I hadn't once considered them. Perhaps they were transported back to their home countries?

The theory continued to puzzle me as I stepped outside. I squinted at the glint of metal lettering, hangul under an English translation. Embassy of India.

How odd. This must be that UN Village, a neighborhood filled with foreign embassies. Why I was dropped here, I really couldn't say.

Near the bus stop in front was an area map. As I suspected—this was the UN Village in Hannam-dong. The Indian embassy was smack in the middle of the neighborhood, so the dokkaebis must not have known where to place me and threw me center in the most vague, global location of Seoul; my memories didn't exactly have much else for them to go on.

And the only place I feel deeply connected to doesn't exist anymore. The loss of Han Sooyoung's stronghold, my only real home, was still a sore and untouched nerve. Even the thought of it stung.

I traced my finger over the red marker, down to the Han River and over to a familiar bridge slightly northeast. Dongho bridge. It was the same one we had crossed over to get to the second scenario. Minosoft must be that way. I gave myself a satisfied nod and headed towards the river.

Bihyung's voice drifted into my head.

--Don't reply to this. I'm under a lot of scrutiny with the Bureau right now. A few constellations have voiced interest in your sponsor since the name filter went up, but you should know that intermediate dokkaebi Paul has filed a request for information on both the constellation and you.

Ah, he was still adhering to our agreement. The warning about Paul was as close to kindness as Bihyung would probably get for the foreseeable future.

It was good to know, but I wasn't overly concerned. Paul was nothing but a blip in this story.

As I went, I mindlessly used 'Sacred Light' to speed up the recovery of the scratch on my arm and admired the green ring on my finger, bathed in a beautiful golden glow...

"Stupid!" I exclaimed.

There was no need to search for Minosoft—I could teleport to Dokja in an instant.

I did my best to recall what Dokja had told me, and held the fist in my other hand. I pictured the yellow ring. Of course, Kim Dokja was wearing it in my mind, staring at me curiously with his brilliant and expressive dark grey eyes.

A cool breeze settled over my skin. When I opened my eyes, I was on another rooftop.

Dokja rested peacefully on the floor. I briefly admired his button down, still soaked to his chest from the rain, before pressing the pad of my finger to his cheek. It was cold.

Logically, I knew that he was wet and unconscious. Logically I knew this.

That didn't stop all logic from flying out the window.

"Dokja!" I gasped and immediately pumped my hands into his chest. Once, twice. Three times. (Clearly, I had never administered CPR before in all my lives...) I pulled at his chin and tipped down, ready to breathe warmth back into his body.

My wrist was snatched away in a tight grip. "What do you think you're...Y—Yeona?"

I was frozen, my open mouth mere centimeters above his. We met eyes.

A horrifying sound, somewhere between a breathy exhale and a squeak, was pulled from my throat as I catapulted myself backwards. Except—Dokja didn't let go.

After a stifling moment spent staring at one another, his hand loosened and I could retreat.

Ping!

I covered my mouth, fastening my eyes to the ground. Anywhere but the man in front of me.

Ping!

Ping! Ping!

"Uriel, please," I groaned. I didn't even bother looking to confirm. "It was CPR, okay? I thought he was dying."

"You did?"

Dokja's disbelief was not helping. My face was on fire under my fingertips by now.

...Sometimes, I seriously questioned what good that 'Rationality' skill was for. It often failed to operate when faced with the power of Kim Dokja.

"Um, you're not dying though. O—" I cleared my throat. "Obviously."

The sub-scenario message alerted: 'Survival Activities'. We were ordered to take a break and get enough rest and food for ten days, three meals a day and at least six hours of sleep. Not too challenging with two, soon to be three, people.

Dokja sat up, taking in our surroundings. I heard a quick intake of breath as he recognized the rooftop.

"Minosoft. Were you also sent..." Dokja paused, eyes widening. "Did you use the rings?"

"Hm? Oh, yeah. I did."

My attempt at sounding casual was lame, even to my own ears. But from the expression on his face, Dokja was pleased at my words. "Good thinking," he said.

I hummed in agreement.

Dokja walked around, probably to reminisce over his time at the company. I joined him upon hearing an echoing shout from down below.

"The wanderers." I swallowed my suddenly dry throat as Dokja looked over at me. "Your m—the King of Wanderers rules the land here."

The recognition dawned on Dokja's face, shadowed under a burden of emotions. His jaw tensed. Every time it seemed he would speak, something held his tongue, and his gaze flicked to me and away again; I could tell his knowledge of my awareness was getting to him. His thoughts were probably something like: can I possibly face that woman? or, do you really know everything that happened back then?

Or perhaps, how dare you read about my life.

I bit my lip and headed for the door. "We'll meet her soon. Come on."

Dokja followed silently behind. We passed the halls of Minosoft before coming upon the QA team's office where Dokja used to work. He stared at the blood-splattered sign blankly. I observed him as he dwelled on the past.

"Eh?"

Dokja and I both spun, Dokja drawing his sword.

"It's Dokja-ssi! And..." A flashlight bounced between us. "Ahh, our new girl. Miss Choi Yeona."

Deputy Yoon of Dokja's old QA team. An ugly man, with a thick neck, beady eyes, and a smile that could have been carved from cheese. Disgust crept up my throat at the sight of this person. I would have preferred avoiding him and his coin farm entirely, except Han Sooyoung was in danger if left alone.

"Deputy Yoon," said Dokja. "What happened to you here?"

The deputy's curious eyes stayed on me a beat longer, before he began to tell Dokja his story. We followed him down the halls. The stench of rotting bodies was truly nauseating.

"...What group are you affiliated with? Were you somewhere else?" asked Deputy Yoon.

"Well, yes, something similar. I was originally on the Gwanghwamun side of the bridge—"

"Uh huh. And what about you, Miss Choi Yeona-ssi?"

I disliked the way he kept saying my name, and I saw Dokja's brow twitch. "I was on the train with Dokja," I said, smoothing hair away from my face.

Deputy Yoon's eyes caught on my hand and widened. "Don't tell me...all this time, you were married?"

His accusing tone made me falter, like I had hidden that fact from the world on purpose. What the hell was he on about? Yes, I wore a ring, but...married? I cursed my lacking information of my time at Minosoft.

Dokja, however, seemed to understand perfectly.

He stepped half in front of me, crossing his arms. "Yes," he said, voice hard all of a sudden.

[The constellation 'Demon-like Judge of Fire' is holding her breath in excitement.]

Deputy Yoon's gaze dropped to the ring on Dokja's hand—conveniently on display—and his eyebrows shot up. "Dokja-ssi?"

I was missing something here. Obviously, Dokja intended to let the deputy believe that he and I were married, but what I couldn't understand was why.

"Oho! I see." A strange look crossed Deputy Yoon's face. "Dokja-ssi, you never said anything. Well, I always thought you two were...close."

The deputy's reaction was rubbing me wrong, so I slid a noticeable hand up Dokja's tense arm and leaned against him, hoping he wouldn't mind me playing along. Deputy Yoon became surprised at our new position.

"We wanted to keep things quiet at work," I said, and gave him a saccharine smile. It was sweet as honey and thick with poison.

I could practically feel Uriel swoon.

"...Aha. Right, yes," mumbled Deputy Yoon.

We exited the building and were met with instant depravity. Cages upon cages were filled with colosseum-type fights and broken and bloodied men. A few held battered women, where men revealed themselves as they watched. My hand on Dokja's arm grew tight. The deputy began to spout off nonsense about living a superior life as a wanderer and letting others do all of the hard work of the main scenarios. He introduced us to the coin farm manager.

I felt one too many eyes leering at me. Dokja shifted closer. Deputy Yoon also took notice of the stares.

"We don't get many women around here," said Deputy Yoon. He licked his lips and looked my way. "Especially such beauties."

"Deputy Yoon." Dokja's voice was glacial.

"Ah, don't get it twisted, I didn't mean anything by it. You're a lucky man, eh Dokja-ssi?" He bared a sharp grin at us. "A lucky man."

I gestured to the rows of cages with a scoff. "Your coin farm. What can it even generate? 8,000? 6,000?"

Deputy Yoon laughed, but it was strained. "5,000 coins a day, just from making people fight and mate. It's great, isn't it?"

"That's awfully low for so much effort."

Deputy Yoon's expression distorted. But I was saved from any response as a shout telling someone to put the new slaves in cages interrupted us. The new slaves were lined up: one row of men, two unknown women. When I scanned again, it was the same. Fuck.

Han Sooyoung was nowhere to be seen.

The deputy was momentarily distracted by the arrivals, so I tugged on Dokja's arm. It dawned on me that it might be the last time I had a valid excuse to be this close to him, so I took advantage of our "married" status and leaned in, sliding my hand across his firm chest. Very, very firm chest.

His breathing stilled, and I thought maybe I had overdone it.

"Dokja," I whispered gravely. "Can we take care of this before going?"

His nod of agreement was absolute. He raised Unbroken Faith, but I had one last thing to say to him first. "I'll finish them off so you can keep your 'King of No Killing'. I wouldn't want my husband to die permanently, now would I?"

I briefly enjoyed the red tint of his ears before letting go and leaping into a pack of wanderers.

[The exclusive skill, 'Sacred Light Lv. 6' is activated.]

It didn't take much to cut them down, their heads, removed, their spines, severed. Quick and meticulous.

"Dokja-ssi, what the hell?! Control your bit—"

BAM!

Deputy Yoon flew into the air, crashing into a far wall. I gave Dokja a "nice!" and went over. Dokja's punch was solid; the deputy's mouth and cheek were already swollen an angry purple, and blood streamed from the top of his head. I rested my blade of light against his neck.

"N—no, wait, just wait now—"

"It's kill or be killed, isn't it?" The pallor of his face went white. "You're a revolting man, Deputy Yoon."

Then his head hit the ground.

My mood lifted some. The worst of what I had feared had been avoided—the deputy unnecessarily triggering an old insecurity or trauma in Dokja with his words.

I rejoined Dokja, who was cutting open the cages and slicing the ankles and limbs of various degenerates. I dealt the finishing blows.

It didn't take us long to wipe the area clean. Everyone was incredibly weak. A small amount of fearful and huddled people were left. I pointed out a familiar brown suit to Dokja, and then busied myself with the survivors while he changed. I asked the newly-arrived women to take care of and aid the women freed from the cages, and ordered the men to divide up the remaining loot.

"Go to Chungmuro. There should be some people there who can help you," I said to everyone, eyeing the men growing agitated over weapons. My voice sharpened into ice. "And, for the love of God, don't fight over shitty items. You all survived this far—support each other. Make friends, not enemies. What good is surviving in this world if you're all alone?"

The despair that had begun to weaken their eyes suddenly strengthened. Some people nodded.

"We need new communities. Not the ruins of old ones."

Then I turned away. Dokja had changed, suit jacket slung over one arm, and was looking at me with an indecipherable expression.

"Well, it's not my problem," I muttered to him. "They're all unimportant, anyway."

He tilted his head. "You act like you don't care, but that was very kind."

I avoided his words, and my own disagreement, and squinted at his new attire, particularly the suspenders. "It's a little twisted. Do you mind if I...?"

"What? Oh—sure."

My fingers slipped under the straps as I adjusted them, his body warm, even through the fabric of his shirt. I felt him watching me closely as I worked. It made my skin buzz. The end of his breath was close enough to lightly graze my face.

When the straps were flat against him, I said, "Your tie is crooked, too."

And then my hands were back on him as I straightened it out.

"I didn't have a mirror," he murmured.

I smiled and finished tidying him up. "There."

Stepping back to admire him was almost worse than being in close proximity. From here, I could fully take in how handsome he looked in the old, gentleman's suit. It didn't help that this outfit was a favorite of mine back when I was nothing more than a reader. Before I could rein in my thoughts, I said, "You look...really good, Dokja."

A beat. Both of us cast our eyes elsewhere, cheeks pink.

Dokja cleared his throat. "Thank you."

We started off down the street. I fiddled with the ring on my finger. Maybe... "Why did you let him believe we were married?"

Dokja winced. "I'm sorry about that."

It wasn't quite an answer, so I waited. That tiny hope I felt was shoved to the back as Dokja's expression steadily became more frustrated.

"The comments they used to make about you in the break room were vile," Dokja said at last. "Especially Deputy Yoon. Back then, I couldn't..." He exhaled, rough and uneven.

I eased his white-knuckled grip off his sword handle. "If you'd said something, they probably would have turned on you."

Dokja's frown deepened. I was slowly but surely beginning to recognize the expression he made when he was berating himself.

"Hey." I flicked his cheek lightly. "Stop overthinking. I think what you did here was very noble, and that punch was fantastic."

He didn't budge.

"Dokja. Thank you." I raised the hand still in mine and pecked his knuckles, like a gallant prince greeting a fair maiden. The irony, I thought.

His head whipped up at the touch of my lips. I gave him a cheeky smile as I dropped his hand.

"You..." He blinked rapidly. "I—um, okay."

I smothered a laugh. "It's a good cliché right? In stories, the damsel thanks her savior with a kiss."

[The constellation 'Demon-like Judge of Fire' is nodding vigorously.]

[The constellation 'Prisoner of the Golden Headband' finds this entertaining.]

[4,000 coins have been sponsored.]

"You're not a helpless damsel," said Dokja, teetering between annoyance at my wording and delight over the coins.

"Regardless, you protected me. I'm grateful."

He acknowledged my words with a terse nod of his head. We traveled a bit longer before something occurred to him.

"Were those really her people?"

It took me a minute to realize who he was referring to. I bit the inside of my cheek. "Not exactly. She's the Wanderer King, but the point of a wanderer is freedom from traditional rule. She doesn't control them."

Dokja surely knew this already, but it seemed he was searching for another grievance to hold against her. That was understandable.

Soon, we would encounter two major sources of pain for Dokja, a fact I was none too eager for. But they were essential to his growth. I couldn't help but worry at my bottom lip as I pondered, because I also had a bigger problem.

Where the hell was Han Sooyoung?

I was swept out of my thoughts as Dokja yanked me behind a building. The sound of galloping, like hooves, grew louder. From around the corner, I could see a werewolf-like human—well, more beast than human at this point—and it was covered in thick fur matted with blood.

"Song Minwoo," I spat.

"Song..." Dokja's bewildered voice petered out behind me as I unleashed a volley of golden arrows at the human beast. He screeched.

"He got off early in the novel. It's why he's such a fucking pest now," I said viciously, standing up. "I'll deal with him until you're ready to face him."

I left Dokja, staggering in his thoughts, and ran towards Song Minwoo. A heavy resentment burned white-hot in me at the filthy sight of this person. Kim Dokja's bully.

The beast roared as I came into view. "You destroyed my coin farm!"

"It was a worthless and cowardly thing," I snarled at him. "You really couldn't manage to get coins with your own skill?"

Song Minwoo bared his teeth angrily and swiped at me. We exchanged blows, and I used studded knuckles of sacred light to batter his skin. His fur was thick—too hard to penetrate with such a shallow point. I switched to my usual long blade.

He sniffed suddenly, and his yellow eyes contracted. "There's another."

Dokja picked that as the unfortunate moment to charge into the fight.

"No, Dokja! Stay back," I yelled. It was surely too soon.

"Dokja?" Song Minwoo mumbled. "Kim...Dokja?" He raised his voice. "How does a geek like you survive up to this point?"

Song Minwoo curled his fist, ready to strike Dokja. I clutched the long chain out from under my shirt—and released the power.

[The exclusive skill, 'Taunt Lv. 1' has been activated.]

[The item 'Hathi's Tusk' is amplifying your skill: Taunt Lv. 1 -> Lv. 3]

['Hathi's Tusk' is applying the 'Law of the Jungle' to you!]

Song Minwoo went rigid. And howled.

Faster than I could blink, he was on top of me. My stomach took a hard hit from his fist. I heard a distant shout of my name, but focused all of my attention and strength on prying away the razor claws that had sunk into my calf. My hands burned from strain of my skill as I hacked at his wrist with my blade, cutting deep. He howled again.

[Physicality Lv. 41 -> 55]

[Mana Lv. 46 -> 55]

The burn in my fingers lessened slightly.

It was an obscene spending of coins, but I was in desperate need of an edge. His strength, regardless of the level, was bolstered by his beastly body already. My regular human one couldn't quite compete.

With the increased levels and my buff from 'Law of the Jungle', I could grip his arms and shove him off of me. I reared back and slammed my fist into his chest.

"Argh!" Song Minwoo was knocked head over heels down the street.

He recovered quickly and lunged for me again, feral under the taunt skill.

The pain in my leg was making my head a bit fuzzy. Hopefully this thing doesn't have rabies or something. I called over to Dokja, who had joined me with Unbroken Faith, parrying the incoming attacks.

"Did you get—" I dodged a wild fist swung my way "—the scenario? To overcome this?"

His eyes shook, rattled at my words. "Yes," he said tightly.

I swung one last time and left a deep gouge in Song Minwoo's back. "Then I'll leave it to you."

I released 'Taunt'. Dokja was tense as he shifted his attention to the beastly man and ran straight for him.

An arm flew into the air. And another. The beast's limbs began to slowly grow back, but Dokja gripped him by the neck.

"Minwoo, I didn't greet you properly earlier."

Dokja hit him in the stomach. He spoke, reminding his bully of the pain he forced a seventeen-year-old Kim Dokja to go through, as he punched repeatedly. Song Minwoo whimpered for forgiveness.

I limped over to them. "He isn't sorry."

Dokja continued to punch. "I wasn't trying to get an apology in the first place."

At last, Song Minwoo collapsed. Dokja lowered his fist, dripping with blood, and stared blankly at the beast-man. I watched him.

"Do you want me to kill him?"

"You can't. The Demon King—"

"I know. I'll do it anyways." Dokja gave me a startled look, and my eyes hardened with resolve. "That bully should die."

Something passed over Dokja's features, and he shook his head. "You'll have a Demon King after your head," he said stubbornly.

I crouched down beside the unconscious body. Damn, my leg stings. I opened up sacred light for a few daggers, feeling the instant strain of fatigue from the skill being overworked all day. "Well, if he bleeds out, it's his own body's failure to survive, right? No final blow to record."

After I finished leaving enough incisions to keep a continuous stream of blood going, I got to my feet, swaying. Dokja caught me with a concerned pinch to his brow.

"I should raise my skills more often," I mumbled, leaning heavily on him.

Dokja's mouth thinned, and he led me to a nearby building. It was the lobby of some corporation, still fairly intact with a decent seating area. He set me gently on the couch.

"Do you feel alright?" I asked.

He gave me an incredulous look, eyes flicking down to the blood running down my calf. I used the bandage from my backpack to hurriedly wrap the wound, and Dokja muttered something about cleaning it first.

But it wasn't important to me at the moment. I needed to make sure he had successfully overcome this small confrontation of his trauma. "Dokja—"

"How did you hear about this—that is, Song Minwoo...?"

It was an odd question considering what I'd revealed already, and I stared at him, uneasy. Something in me was warning not to continue, but I spoke anyways. "I know your story."

And, finally, the other shoe dropped.

"Y—you even know this?"

Dokja looked at me with a dreadful expression. It was raw and open, like I was something appalling to experience; the full force of my knowledge was hitting him for once, low and relentless. My nerves roiled around in my stomach.

"Are you okay? Did the Fourth Wall—" Dokja flinched away as I reached out to him.

I couldn't help the hurt that crossed my face. I pursed my lips and shrank back, which seemed to perturb Dokja even more.

"Do you really know everything about my life...my past? You know about that man, school, her—her book—all of it?"

I was silent. There must have been a terrible look on my face, a look that was enough of an answer. Dokja recoiled.

"It's too much, Yeona. I don't know what to think...you..." He exhaled through his nose and turned aside.

I felt a sharp pain at his clear desire to get away from me. Ah, so this was the true feeling of Kim Dokja without the Wall's interference. I didn't know why it was triggered differently from the first time—perhaps it was Song Minwoo?—but I was a fool for believing that I could waltz into a carefree companionship with him from that point on.

I had hoped, and I had hoped wrong.

We still had the requirements of the sub scenario to deal with, so I used that to give him an out. "I understand. I'll take first watch, so you can sleep."

"I'm not tired."

My heart ached. "Okay," I said heavily.

I pulled out a thin sheet from my bag and settled on the hard couch. Dokja hovered by the window, staring out into the street.

"Dokja, one thing you should know," I said in a small voice. "I really do want to help you achieve everything you desire for a proper epilogue to this story. I want the best for you. It—it's all I want."

And to make him experience that ending himself, of course.

Dokja was silent for a time. Just when I was drifting off, thinking he would never respond, I heard a quiet, "I know."

Next part ->

A/N: You didn't think we'd escape the big reveal unscathed, did you? Sometimes angst takes its sweet time to develop.

Last time, the Fourth Wall protected him from such a revelation, but this time...well, eventually he needed to confront it all.

[zot3-flopped]

Hi there. I teach English as a foreign language, and I always use songs when teaching. Carolina, in particular, is a popular choice. Now after I saw my students' reactions to the new album, I decided that we'll put some lyrics on the screen and play 'spot the mistake'. Even as intermediate speakers of English as a foreign language, my students could easily spot inconsistencies in imagery, grammatical errors, forced rhyme, and mistakes in sentence structure. They even managed to critique the tone of the writing, that it sounds like a transcribed tiktok clip, rather than a song. And don't get started on the number of times the word narcissism came up when I asked about motif. No one complains about the lack of depth in Sia's writing, and that's fine because Sia's fans don't shove Emily Dickinson references in our faces.I don't think fans in English speaking countries realise how embarrassingly bad the writing is, especially, coming from "Emily Dickinson incarnate". This narrative actually harms her brand.

This is such a great idea! Her lyrics really don't stand up to any rigorous academic scrutiny. You can tell that Taylor - unlike Joe - hasn't studied poetry beyond high school level.

[catboybiologist]

one of the reasons I love judge reyes and her pointing out the animus in all these EOs is that if scotus upholds that tn ban and trans people get downgraded to rational basis scrutiny instead of intermediate, laws based in animus are so fucked up they don’t even pass rational basis scrutiny, even tho that’s the lowest level and most laws get past it

This is amazing, again I can't comment much legally but I love hearing from people who can

[no-future-mudwasps]

[Okay. I think... I think I can manage this without letting go. Be ready to disengage if I reach any local systems. Or, uh... if I start yelling.]

[Just grit your teeth and you'll be fine.]

[We'll keep you collared, friend. Bring the good word.]

/////////////////////// >PUNCHING OMNITUNNEL... COMPLETE. >ESTABLISHING LEGIONSPACE BUFFER... >BUFFER ESTABLISHED <41*9&u|zugzwang>. >Warning: buffer outer-bound not specified; subjective overflow likely! It is recommended that you reduce cognitive load or termin&aA543[.]

>...Peripheral legionspace epistemes holding. The arm is stable. The tongue is still.

>Begin transmission? [y/n] ...

Pan-pan. Pan-pan. Pan-pan. This is callsign THREADLINE of vessel Jeweled Wings About, former USB Identification Loulou Greeves. Repeat: callisign THREADLINE of vessel Jeweled Wings About, formerly Loulou Greeves. We are in proximity to a very dangerous individual and require aid in transmission. You are obligated to propagate this message and its attending packet forwards to @nhpregulatory-official and @officialunionhr receipt. Do not attempt to provide aid directly; transmission vectors are unstable and back-tracing will mislead your vessel. Pan-pan. Pan-pan. Pan-pan.

[The encryption on the packet within is decent, but can't hold up long under administrative NHP scrutiny. Contained within is a message:]

We've ascertained the location of active Pillar threat WINDVALE, by way of observing local ship movements in the sector overlaid with local signal traffic. At the moment they are residing on a base on Magnis-7c, orbital body of Magnis 7 gas giant. We have no idea of the current arms complement or attending details, save for their presence; any intense scrutiny or sweeps from our vessel were feared to alert Windvale.

We ask this also be shared with @thelancer27 Union DOJ/HR team "Five Man Band" specifically, due to their close interest and investment in this particular case.

Due to prior history of dangerous contingencies and retaliation on Windvale's part, we have attempted to mask this information's transmission thru the Omninet by broadcasting via legionspace periscoping along random navigational channels. Any difficulty faced by intermediate or send-along parties as a result of the unorthodox transmission was weighed as negligible in the face of this danger, but we are prepared to pay out reparations to any vessels which experienced hardships due to our actions. We are not sure for how long this will keep Windvale ignorant; you are advised to move quick.

The Mud Wasps are prepared to offer field and logistical support in any pursuant operation in this sector of the Long Rim. Utopia is a verb.

[packet end.]

[dertaglichedan]

Federal court halts Trump’s transgender passport restrictions

he Brief

A federal judge halted the Trump administration’s passport policy restricting gender marker changes and use of the "X" option.

The ruling came in response to an ACLU lawsuit representing transgender and nonbinary plaintiffs.

The judge ruled the government failed to justify the policy under constitutional equal protection standards.

WASHINGTON - A federal court has blocked the Trump administration from enforcing a passport policy that would have limited gender marker changes and banned the use of the "X" designation commonly used by nonbinary Americans. 

The decision is a win for LGBTQ+ advocates who argued the policy was discriminatory and out of step with medical standards.

The policy stemmed from a January executive order signed by former President Donald Trump, which redefined gender based on a strict male-female binary and rejected the validity of gender transition. 

It marked a significant shift from policies under President Joe Biden, which recognized broader gender identities.

Why was the Trump passport policy blocked?

The other side:

U.S. District Judge Julia Kobick, appointed by Biden, sided with the ACLU’s motion for a preliminary injunction. 

She found that the administration’s actions likely violated the constitutional rights of transgender and nonbinary individuals. Kobick wrote that the executive order and passport rule discriminate based on sex and must be held to "intermediate scrutiny," a standard the government failed to meet.

[thatstormygeek]

In its U.S. v. Skrmetti ruling, the Supreme Court’s Republican appointees shaved off the edges — if not more central parts — of the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause in order to uphold laws that bar an exceptionally small number of teens from receiving a type of medical care that only one group of teens need.

Addressing this formal attack on transgender people by the government — de jure discrimination, one might even call it — is, as Justice Sonia Sotomayor made clear in her dissent on Wednesday, the work that the Equal Protection Clause is supposed to do. One would expect more outrage. But Wednesday was the result of a long-term campaign that ultimately succeeded. As same-sex couples succeeded in obtaining marriage equality in 2015, the far-right organizations who had used their opposition to those couples’ marriage rights to fund their work needed a new cause. The far right moved on to attacking transgender people.

The Atlantic put its “just asking questions” story about trans kids on their cover in the summer of 2018. Seeing smoke, The New York Times began looking for fire with a series of longform stories targeting trans youth care. They weren’t alone. (Even on other trans issues, ahem.) In the end, so-called “thought leader” publications played key roles in bringing forth this week, giving oxygen to extremists and creating a story. ... Because of the court’s circular holdings in the case that the law doesn’t classify on the basis of sex of transgender status despite obviously doing both, as discussed here on Wednesday, that uncertainty was enough. Had the court properly held that Tennessee’s law should be subjected to intermediate scrutiny, then the case would have gone back to the lower courts for an actual look at the evidence. But, because rational basis was applied, “uncertainty,” Roberts held, would do. Justice Clarence Thomas, in a concurring opinion, went on to make explicit what was implicit in Roberts’s majority opinion with his polemic against “the authority of the expert class.” In so doing, Thomas quoted from and cited the New York Times repeatedly for what essentially became its ongoing project to question gender-affirming medical care for trans minors in a way it has not done for other medical decisions with much higher regret rates or for basically anything other non-presidential topic (besides criminal justice progressives) in recent years.

[mouseratz]

hey guys I know there's a lot of anti-trans shit but this one's from Georgia. they're calling it "the woman's rights bill".

I think there might actually be more, but this one caught my attention first. Basically it changes everything relating to gender in many bills to regard to biological sex specifically, and while that's worrying, it doesn't stop there. (it includes obviously making it very difficult to change your license or any kind of ID.)

(14) Laws, rules, and regulations that distinguish between the sexes are subject to intermediate constitutional scrutiny. Intermediate constitutional scrutiny forbids unfair discrimination against similarly situated male and female individuals but allows the law to distinguish between the sexes where such distinctions are substantially related to important governmental objections: and (15) Notwithstanding any provision of state law to the contrary, distinctions between the sexes with respect to athletics, living facilities, locker rooms, domestic violence shelters, rape crisis centers, restrooms, and other areas where biology, safety, or privacy are implicated that result in separate accommodations are substantially related to the important governmental objections of protecting the health, safety, and privacy of individuals in such circumstances.

basically, you could get in trouble for "sex discrimination" by not being in your biologically sorted bathroom, locker room, etc. this seems very easy to weaponize.

individuals in such circumstances. (c) Any local school system, or public school thereof, and any state agency, department, or political subdivision that collects vital statistics for the purpose of complying with antidiscrimination laws or for the purpose of gathering accurate public health, crime, economic, or other data shall identify each individual who is part of the collected data set as either male or female at birth."

pretty much any governmental place, specifically including public schools, can record your sex, that's information they're entitled to.

Title 17 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to criminal procedure, is amended by revising subsection (a) of Code Section 17-4-20.2, relating to Bias Crime Report, requirements, use of reports, and publication, as follows: "(a) Whenever a law enforcement officer investigates an incident of a crime in which it appears that the defendant intentionally selected any victim or group of victims or any property as the object of the offense because of such victim's or group of victims' actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, gender, mental disability, or physical disability, whether or not an arrest is made, the officer shall prepare and submit to the law enforcement officer's supervisor or other designated person a written report of the incident entitled 'Bias Crime Report.' Forms for such reports shall be designed and provided by the Georgia Bureau of Investigation. The report shall include: (1) Names of the parties; (2) Relationship of the parties; (3) Sex and gender of the parties; (4) Race of the parties; (5) Religion of the parties;

SECTION 5. Said title is further amended by revising subsection (b) of Code Section 17-10-17, relating 107 to sentencing of defendants guilty of crimes involving bias or prejudice and identification of 108 increased sentenced, as follows: "(b) Subject to the notice requirement provided in Code Section 17-10-18 and in enhancement of the penalty imposed, if the trier of fact determines beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant intentionally selected any victim or group of victims or any property as the object of the offense because of such victim's or group of victims' actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, gender, mental disability, or physical disability, the judge imposing sentence shall:

also, very worryingly, sexual orientation & gender are no longer included as reasons for a biased/prejudice crime investigation (aka a hate crime). yup. sexual orientation has been omitted here, not just sex/gender. how are you "lgb without the t" types feeling? it's not a hate crime anymore if you attack someone because they're gay, either, if this goes through.

I don't have a succinct call to action here, I just figure it's good to know. apparently they just.....all decided at once to try to push transphobic bills through.

[mariacallous]

After a bit of stasis on the relist front, the Supreme Court took decisive action at last week’s conference, on Monday denying review of nine cases that had been relisted between three and seven times each. Relisting a case that many times suggests that at least some of the justices felt fairly strong about the issues involved. And sure enough, the justices filed opinions dissenting from the denial of certiorari, or at least an opinion respecting the denial of certiorari, addressing seven of the nine cases.

Most notable of all were the denials in Turco v. City of Englewood, New Jersey, and Coalition Life v. City of Carbondale, Illinois, both of which involved challenges to those cities’ laws establishing protest “buffer zones” around abortion clinics and asking the Supreme Court to overrule Hill v. Colorado, its 25-year-old decision holding that such zones are constitutionally permissible.

Justice Clarence Thomas dissented from the decision not to take up the Illinois case, noting that members of the court had called Hill “an ‘absurd,’ ‘defunct,’ ‘erroneous,’ and ‘long-discredited’ ‘aberration’ from the rest of our First Amendment jurisprudence.” Because lower courts continue to feel bound by it, he contended, the Supreme Court should make its defunct status official.

There are 106 petitions and applications scheduled for Friday’s conference, six of which were relisted for the first time this week. It is a big week for issue advocacy organizations – five of the six relists are cases brought by them. And it is a big week for First Amendment claims – four (really, five) of the six relists raise them. While we’re talking numbers, it was also a big week for challenges to the regulation of professionals – half of the relisted cases address such issues.

The Institute for Justice is an public-interest firm based in the Washington, D.C., suburbs that, among other projects, seeks to challenge occupational licensing laws that it believes needlessly deprive people of economic liberty to engage in productive endeavors. Two petitions from the group, 360 Virtual Drone Services LLC v. Ritter and Crownholm v. Moore, involve state surveying laws. Many states require people who are paid to perform certain kinds of mapping to have obtained a license from a state board of surveyors. IJ challenged those laws, arguing that making such maps conveys information (typically in connection with construction) and thus constitutes speech protected by the First Amendment. Therefore, the group contends, laws requiring licensing must be assessed under the most stringent standard of review, strict scrutiny.

The U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 4th Circuit and for the 9th Circuit, respectively, rejected IJ’s arguments. The 4th Circuit held that because such laws are “a regulation of professional conduct that only incidentally impacts speech,” “precedent requires that we apply a more relaxed form of intermediate scrutiny that mandates only that the restriction be ‘sufficiently drawn’ to protect a substantial state interest.” The court upheld the law under that standard. The 9th Circuit ruled similarly. IJ now seeks Supreme Court review, arguing that more searching scrutiny is warranted.

Our next two relisted petitions were brought by the conservative legal nonprofit Alliance Defending Freedom, which last term represented doctors and medical groups seeking to roll back access to one of the two drugs used in medication abortions. It frequently represents people whose views put them in conflict with (usually state and local) laws requiring the recognition of same-sex marriage or that require people to act or speak inconsistently with their own views of sexual orientation or identity – such as a Colorado website designer who did not want to design websites for same-sex weddings.

Chiles v. Salazar involves a challenge to Colorado’s Minor Conversion Therapy Law, which prohibits mental health professionals from providing clients under the age of 18 with “conversion therapy,” the attempt to “convert” LGBTQ+ youth to heterosexuality or traditional gender identity.

Kaley Chiles, a licensed professional counselor, brought a federal civil rights challenge to the law, arguing that it violates both the free speech and free exercise clauses of the First Amendment because it interferes with her ability to communicate with her clients. Chiles sought a preliminary injunction to prohibit the state from enforcing the law against her.

The district court denied her request for a preliminary injunction and by a divided vote, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit affirmed, holding that Chiles failed to show a likelihood of success on the merits of her First Amendment claims.

The 10th Circuit noted that the Colorado legislature had cited evidence that conversion therapy is harmful to clients, and the court of appeals concluded that the law represented a permissible regulation of professional conduct that only incidentally affects speech.

Judge Harris Hartz dissented, citing Supreme Court precedent recognizing that “speech is not unprotected merely because it is uttered by professionals.” Chiles, represented by ADF, now seeks Supreme Court review, arguing that the law regulates speech in violation of the First Amendment. The court has relisted similar cases before, but so far they’ve never mustered the necessary votes for a grant.

Now we move on to a different type of First Amendment claim. L.M. was sent home from middle school for wearing a t-shirt that said, “There are only two genders.” The school said that the shirt violated the school dress code, which prohibits clothing bearing “hate speech that target[s] groups based on,” among many other things, “gender identity.”

In protest, L.M. then wore a t-shirt that covered over “only two” with a lettered piece of tape so it read, “There are [censored] genders.” He was required to remove the shirt. L.M. maintains that other students were permitted to express their views on gender when they were more to the school’s liking.

L.M., through his parents, filed a federal civil rights suit against the town, alleging the school district had violated his First Amendment rights. The district court granted the town summary judgment, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit affirmed. It held in a lengthy opinion that under the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, the school could prohibit the shirts because of its judgment about what would make “an environment conducive to learning.”

In L.M. v. Town of Middleborough, Massachusetts, L.M., also represented by ADF, seeks review, arguing that the school district presumed without evidence that L.M.’s shirts would be substantially disruptive and that the speech should be permitted because it was silent, passive, and untargeted, and responded to the school’s opposing views and policies.

Hittle v. City of Stockton, California, is an employment-law case, but one with pronounced implications for the free exercise clause of the First Amendment. The City of Stockton, Calif., fired Fire Department Chief Ronald Hittle after disciplinary proceedings. The city had received anonymous complaints that that Hittle was a “religious fanatic” who showed favoritism to co-religionists. A city-hired investigator produced a report concluding that Hittle lacked effectiveness and judgment, used city time and a city vehicle to attend a religious event, failed to report time off, engaged in potential favoritism, and engaged in other misconduct. After his termination, Hittle sued the city and various officials, claiming that his termination constituted unlawful employment discrimination under Title VII based on his religion, in part because he had attended a Christian leadership event after he was told to seek leadership training.

The district court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit upheld his termination using the framework of McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green. Under that framework, a plaintiff alleging discrimination must first show that: (1) he is a member of a protected class; (2) he was qualified for his position; (3) he experienced an adverse employment action; and (4) similarly situated individuals outside his protected class were treated more favorably, or other circumstances surrounding the adverse employment action give rise to an inference of discrimination. If the plaintiff can make that showing, the burden then shifts to the defendant to articulate a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for the challenged actions. After that, the burden shifts back to the plaintiff, who must show that the employer’s proffered nondiscriminatory reason is pretextual. A plaintiff meets the burden either directly by persuading the court that the employer was more likely to have been motivated by a discriminatory reason or indirectly by showing that the employer’s proffered explanation is unworthy of credence.

A divided panel of the 9th Circuit held that the city had proffered a legitimate nondiscriminatory basis for disciplining Hittle because the religious leadership event he attended on city time was not appropriate for getting the kind of management training the city required. It concluded that various remarks made by decisionmakers did not reflect discrimination.

The full court of appeals then declined to rehear the case, over the votes of four judges who argued that the “record includes ample direct and circumstantial evidence of [the decisionmakers’] discriminatory intent, which the panel should have recognized as more than sufficient to meet Hittle’s burden at the summary judgment stage.”

Hittle now seeks review. In addition to distinguished outside counsel, Hittle is represented by the Church State Council, which seeks to protect religious exercise, especially in the workplace, as well as the religious liberty group First Liberty Institute. They argue that the McDonnell Douglas framework is countertextual, hard to apply, and denies plaintiffs with meritorious discrimination claims their day in court. And in particular, Hittle argues that the lower courts are confused regarding the third step in the process, under which the plaintiff has to show the proffered reason is pretextual. The test is especially inappropriate, Hittle argues, in cases brought under the theory that the protected status is a motivating factor for termination, where discrimination doesn’t need to be a but-for cause to be actionable.

Last up is Barrett v. United States. Dwayne Barrett was a member of an informal criminal organization known as “the Crew” that committed armed robberies of mostly small businesses. Barrett was convicted of Hobbs Act robbery, meaning the unlawful taking of property by force, violence, intimidation, or fear, which affects interstate or foreign commerce. He was also convicted of violating 18 U.S.C. § 924(c), which prohibits using a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence or drug trafficking crime, and 18 U.S.C. § 924(j), which imposes an additional penalty for murder or manslaughter during a Section 924(c) offense. Barrett was convicted and his conviction and sentence were affirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2d Circuit.

Barrett seeks review, arguing that the double jeopardy clause prohibits imposing sentences on both a Section 924(c) conviction and a Section 924(j) conviction, when the offenses are based on the same underlying Hobbs Act robbery. He also argues that Hobbs Act robbery is not a crime of violence under Section 924(c) because it does not have as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person or property of another.

The Supreme Court has a lot to chew on this week. I suspect that these relists will not yield many grants, though they may yield opinions. We should know more soon.

New Relists

Crownholm v. Moore, 24-276 Issues: (1) What standard applies to determine whether an occupational-licensing law’s restriction on a person’s use, creation, and dissemination of information in drawings is a regulation of his speech or of his conduct that incidentally involves his speech; and (2) what level of constitutional scrutiny applies to speech regulated by an occupational-licensing law. (Relisted after the Feb. 21 conference.)

360 Virtual Drone Services LLC v. Ritter, 24-279 Issue: Whether, in an as-applied First Amendment challenge to an occupational-licensing law, the standard for determining whether the law regulates speech or regulates conduct is this court’s traditional conduct-versus-speech dichotomy. (Relisted after the Feb. 21 conference.)

L.M. v. Town of Middleborough, Massachusetts, 24-410 Issue: Whether school officials may presume substantial disruption or a violation of the rights of others from a student’s silent, passive, and untargeted ideological speech simply because that speech relates to matters of personal identity, even when the speech responds to the school’s opposing views, actions, or policies. (Relisted after the Feb. 21 conference.)

Hittle v. City of Stockton, California, 24-427 Issues: (1) Whether this court should overrule McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green; and (2) whether step three of the McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting framework requires a plaintiff to disprove the employer’s proffered reason for the adverse employment action, when the text of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Bostock v. Clayton County provide that an action may have more than one but-for cause or motivating factor. (Relisted after the Feb. 21 conference.)

Chiles v. Salazar, 24-539 Issue: Whether a law that censors certain conversations between counselors and their clients based on the viewpoints expressed regulates conduct or violates the free speech clause of the First Amendment. (Relisted after the Feb. 21 conference.)

Barrett v. United States, 24-5774 Issues: (1) Whether the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment permits two sentences for an act that violates 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) and (j); and (2) whether “Hobbs Act robbery qualifies as a crime of violence under Section 924(c)(3)(A), a question left open after” United States v. Taylor. (Relisted after the Feb. 21 conference.)

Returning Relists

Apache Stronghold v. United States, 24-291 Issue: Whether the government “substantially burdens” religious exercise under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, or must satisfy heightened scrutiny under the free exercise clause of the First Amendment, when it singles out a sacred site for complete physical destruction, ending specific religious rituals forever. (Relisted after the Dec. 6, Dec. 13, Jan. 10, Jan. 17, Jan. 24, and Feb. 21 conferences.)

Ocean State Tactical, LLC v. Rhode Island, 24-131 Issues: (1) Whether a retrospective and confiscatory ban on the possession of ammunition-feeding devices that are in common use violates the Second Amendment; and (2) whether a law dispossessing citizens without compensation of property that they lawfully acquired and long possessed without incident violates the takings clause of the Fifth Amendment. (Relisted after the Jan. 10, Jan. 17, Jan. 24, and Feb. 21 conferences.)

Snope v. Brown, 24-203 Issue: Whether the Constitution permits Maryland to ban semiautomatic rifles that are in common use for lawful purposes, including the most popular rifle in America. (Relisted after the Jan. 10, Jan. 17, Jan. 24, and Feb. 21 conferences.)

Franklin v. New York, 24-330 Issues: (1) Whether the Sixth Amendment’s confrontation clause applies to out-of-court statements admitted as evidence against criminal defendants if, and only if, the statements were created for the primary purpose of serving as trial testimony; and (2) whether a post-arrest report prepared about a criminal defendant by an agent of the state for use in a criminal proceeding can be admitted as evidence against the defendant at trial, without providing a right to cross-examine the report’s author. (Relisted after the Jan. 10, Jan. 17, Jan. 24, and Feb. 21 conferences.)

Speech First, Inc. v. Whitten, 24-361 Issue: Whether university bias-response teams — official entities that solicit anonymous reports of bias, track them, investigate them, ask to meet with the perpetrators, and threaten to refer students for formal discipline — objectively chill students’ speech under the First Amendment. (Relisted after the Jan. 10, Jan. 17, Jan. 24, and Feb. 21 conferences.)

Alabama v. California, 22O158 Issue: Whether the Supreme Court should enjoin states from seeking to impose liability or obtain equitable relief premised on either emissions by or in other states, or the promotion, use and/or sale of traditional energy products in or to those other states. CVSG: 12/10/2024 (Relisted after the Jan. 17, Jan. 24, and Feb. 21 conferences.)

[theculturedmarxist]

We are entering the end stage of the 30-year US neocon debacle in Ukraine. The neocon plan to surround Russia in the Black Sea region by NATO has failed. Decisions now by the US and Russia will matter enormously for peace, security, and wellbeing for the entire world.

Four events have shattered the neocon hopes for NATO enlargement eastward, to Ukraine, Georgia, and onward. The first is straightforward. Ukraine has been devastated on the battlefield, with tragic and appalling losses. Russia is winning the war of attrition, an outcome that was predictable from the start but which the neocons and mainstream media deny till today.

The second is the collapsing support in Europe for the US neocon strategy. Poland no longer speaks with Ukraine. Hungary has long opposed the neocons. Slovakia has elected an anti-neocon government. EU leaders (Macron, Meloni, Sanchez, Scholz, Sunak, and others) have disapproval ratings far higher than approvals.

The third is the cut in US financial support for Ukraine. The Republican Party grassroots, several Republican Presidential candidates, and a growing number of Republican members of Congress, oppose more spending on Ukraine. In the stop-gap bill to keep the government running, Republicans stripped away new financial support for Ukraine. The White House has called for new aid legislation, but this will be an uphill fight.

The fourth, and most urgent from Ukraine’s point of view, is the likelihood of a Russian offensive. Ukraine’s casualties are in the hundreds of thousands, and Ukraine has burned through its artillery, air defenses, tanks, and others heavy weapons. Russia is likely to follow with a massive offensive.

The neocons have created utter disasters in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, and now Ukraine. The US political system has not yet held the neocons to account, since foreign policy is carried out with little public or Congressional scrutiny to date. Mainstream media have sided with the slogans of the neocons.

Ukraine is at risk of economic, demographic and military collapse. What should the US Government do to face this potential disaster?

Urgently, it should change course. Britain advises the US to escalate, as Britain is stuck with 19th century imperial reveries. US neocons are stuck with imperial bravado. Cooler heads urgently need to prevail.

President Joe Biden should immediately inform President Vladimir Putin that the US will end NATO enlargement eastward if the US and Russia reach a new agreement on security arrangements. By ending NATO expansion, the US can still save Ukraine from the policy debacles of the past 30 years.

Biden should agree to negotiate a security arrangement of the kind, though not precise details, of President Putin’s proposals of December 17, 2021. Biden foolishly refused to negotiate with Putin in December 2021. It’s time to negotiate now.

There are four keys to an agreement. First, as part of an overall agreement Biden should agree that NATO will not enlarge eastward, but not reverse the past NATO enlargement. NATO would of course not tolerate Russian encroachments in existing NATO states. Both Russia and the US would pledge to avoid provocations near Russia’s borders, including provocative missile placement, military exercises, and the like.

Second, the new US – Russia security agreement should cover nuclear weapons. The US unilateral withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2002, followed by the placement of Aegis missiles in Poland and Romania, gravely inflamed tensions, which were further exacerbated by the US withdrawal from the Intermediate Nuclear Force (INF) Agreement in 2019 and Russia’s suspension of the New Start Treaty in 2023. Russian leaders have repeatedly pointed to US missiles near Russia, unconstrained by the abandoned ABM Treaty, as a dire threat to Russia’s national security.

Third, Russia and Ukraine would agree on new borders, in which the overwhelmingly ethnic Russian Crimea and heavily ethnic Russian districts of eastern Ukraine would remain part of Russia. The border changes would be accompanied by security guarantees for Ukraine backed unanimously by the UN Security Council and other states such as Germany, Turkey, and India.

Fourth, as part of a settlement, the US, Russia, and EU would re-establish trade, finance, cultural exchange, and tourist relations. It’s certainly time once again to hear Rachmaninoff and Tchaikovsky in US and European concert halls.

Border changes are a last resort, and should be made only under UN Security Council auspices. They must never be an invitation to further territorial demands, such as by Russia regarding ethnic Russians in other countries. Yet borders change, and the US has recently backed two border changes. NATO bombed Serbia for 78 days until it relinquished the Albanian-majority region of Kosovo. In 2008, the US recognized Kosovo as a sovereign nation. The US similarly backed South Sudan’s insurgency to break away from Sudan.

If Russia, Ukraine, or the US subsequently violated the new agreement, they would be challenging the rest of the world. As JFK observed, “even the most hostile nations can be relied upon to accept and keep those treaty obligations, and only those treaty obligations, which are in their own interest.”

The US neocons carry much blame for undermining Ukraine’s 1991 borders. Russia did not claim Crimea until after the US-backed overthrow of Ukraine’s President Viktor Yanukovych in 2014. Nor did Russia annex the Donbas after 2014, instead calling on Ukraine to honor the UN-backed Minsk II agreement, based on autonomy for the Donbas. The neocons preferred to arm Ukraine to retake the Donbas by force rather than grant the Donbas autonomy.

The long-term key to peace in Europe is collective security as called for by the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE). According to OSCE agreements, OSCE member states “will not strengthen their security at the expense of the security of other States.” Neocon unilateralism undermined Europe’s collective security by pushing NATO enlargement without regard to third parties, notably Russia. Europe — including the EU, Russia, and Ukraine — needs more OSCE and less neocon unilateralism as key to lasting peace in Europe.

[15001700tt]

Chapter 4- Loyalties and Scrutinies

Storms of Red Masterlist

5th year, 2021

This wasn’t how Rose imagined her fifth year. She envisioned hyper-focusing on studying to receive O’s in all of her subjects, She wasn’t supposed to be spending the entire year stuck in a prank war. It wasn’t supposed to go like this, she didn't sign up for any of this tomfoolery. But Scorpius forced her hand, when he changed her hair potion on the ride to Hogwarts.

The first day of instruction, instead of taming her curls, it made them wilder, extra frizzy and extra impossible. Walking around the whole day with a shrub of hair that was so tangled and staticy, many objects had gotten stuck in the tangled mass, including her hairbrush. Some boys even placed wagers on who could stick the most items in before she hounded them. 

Of course, she had to retaliate, so she turned his blonde locks into bright red. Not ginger, like her entire family. No, she’d never allow him that Weasley badge of pride. More like a stop sign, blaring and obnoxious, like the prat himself. The exact words she shouted at him from across the crowded hall. It was no surprise when they quickly spiraled into a cutthroat clashing of pranks, trying to one up the other throughout the entire year.

 At some point, Alice and Albus joined in, at first helping their respective best friends, but all too soon starting a prank war of their very own. James and Fred II kept tally, scoring based on which pranks were the funnier

and had the most devastating results. And of course, they became suppliers. Naturally. Supposedly, their reason for getting involved was purely for research, testing (best-sold) products for Fred’s dad’s shop (or so they would tell McGonagall when they got caught).

Hair was only the beginning, and they left no rock unturned. Rose replaced mayonnaise for the boys’ pudding cups, Scorpius enchanted pies to always be behind doors the girls’ opened. 

James jinxed the girls to grow full-on beards with Scor following up by sticking all sorts of creepy crawlers in their dorms. The high-pitched screams were quite excellent that day. Alice hexed them with bright pink dots all over their bodies, while Rose sent the boys howlers that blew out their eardrums. That one sent them to the infirmary. Even more hilarious was the song of her choosing. Chandelier, sung by a toad. Ah, the wonders of YouTube.

The most memorable ones were those that actually got them in trouble. After all, school-wise, they were the finest of their year. Even in the midst of a prank war, their grades never slipped one bit. They battled each other in academia as viciously as always, but this time, with a side of vibrant paint. While hair dye was a nice go-to, it didn't stay for long. Only lasting for a couple of days before eventually fading out.

Tickling charms were dropped when the first one landed Rose in the hospital ward. She had dropped to the floor in a laughing fit and hit her head on a table.

 At some point, Scorpius sported a black eye from one of the punching telescopes Rose bought from her uncle’s store. This chaotic back-and-forth went on for the entire year, except for the intermediate Christmas break. Albus banned them from continuing this stupid match over the holidays. 

Near the end of the year, the professors were also done with the both of them, deciding to stop this nonsense before it carried on for the next two years. Professor Longbottom, never one for pranks to begin with, sat them down in his office.

“I have never met two students so intellectually mature and yet so ridiculously childish,” he scolded right away, staring down at them with a fierce intensity and a severe frown.

“Friends. Prank! Each other.” Rose enunciated sarcastically, defiance in her eyes.

“Oi, deaf it! If you two are friends, then I’m the bloody Queen of England!” The tired man retorted harshly, before letting out a deep sigh. His expression changed from anger to confusion.

“I still don’t get it. The two of you are so bright, the pride of your houses, yet you just can’t seem to get along! Both of you have real potential to be great leaders one day, but this ridiculous, blatant disregard and disrespect for the school! This idiotic-” His eyebrows furrowed as he got angry again, struggling for the words.

Pinching the bridge of his nose, he sighed and looked at both students. Resigning to his fate, he hated when students made him be the serious professor. But, they forced his hand.

“Shite, I hate being an arse, but this pointless and absurd rivalry has got to stop!” So, standing to his full, towering height with a hard expression, he gave the two a right ear-bashing.

An hour later, both came out like thoroughly chastened children. Because, they were.

“Go to hell,” Rose said hotly, turning to leave first.

“Ladies first,” was the frosty comeback as Scorpius turned the other way.

Angry silence filled the space between the two as receding footfalls filled the hallway. 

[qnewsau]

US Supreme Court upholds ban on trans health care for minors

New Post has been published on https://qnews.com.au/us-supreme-court-upholds-ban-on-trans-health-care-for-minors/

US Supreme Court upholds ban on trans health care for minors

The US Supreme Court issued a decision on Wednesday that will affect the ability of transgender young people to receive gender affirming care in Tennessee and more than twenty other states with similar laws on their books.

In the case of US v Skrmetti the plaintiffs were three families with transgender children and a doctor who had argued that Tennessee’s ban on puberty blockers and hormone therapy for the treatment of gender dysphoria in minors was in violation of the Equal Protection Clause in the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution.

Under the Tennessee law, cisgender children could still receive access to the same treatments as long as it was to help them confirm to their sex assigned at birth, and the plaintiffs argued that this constituted sex-based discrimination against transgender young people.

Tennessee argued that the law did not discriminate on sex, but rather, by age and medical condition.

The court’s decision

The Supreme Court’s six conservative justices agreed with the state of Tennessee while the three liberal justices left on the court dissented.

In his majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts noted that there were an estimated 1.6 million Americans over the age of 13 who identify as transgender and that in recent years the number of minors seeking gender affirming care has increased.

“This increase has corresponded with rising debates regarding the relative risks and benefits of such treatments,” Roberts wrote.

“This case carries with it the weight of fierce scientific and policy debates about the safety, efficacy, and propriety of medical treatments in an evolving field. The voices in these debates raise sincere concerns; the implications for all are profound.

“The Equal Protection Clause does not resolve these disagreements. Nor does it afford us license to decide them as we see best.

“Our role is not “to judge the wisdom, fairness, or logic” of the law before us, … but only to ensure that it does not violate the equal protection guarantee of the Fourteenth Amendment.

“Having concluded it does not, we leave questions regarding its policy to the people, their elected representatives, and the democratic process.”

  View this post on Instagram

  A post shared by GLAAD (@glaad)

Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote a dissenting opinion on behalf of the liberal Supreme Court Justices in which she wrote that “Tennessee’s law expressly classifies on the basis of sex and transgender status, so the Constitution and settled precedent require the Court to subject it to intermediate scrutiny.”

“In addition to discriminating against transgender adolescents, who by definition “identify with” an identity “inconsistent” with their sex, that law conditions the availability of medications on a patient’s sex.

“Male (but not female) adolescents can receive medicines that help them look like boys, and female (but not male) adolescents can receive medicines that help them look like girls.”

“The majority contorts logic and precedent to say otherwise, inexplicably declaring it must uphold Tennessee’s categorical ban on lifesaving medical treatment so long as “ ‘any reasonably conceivable state of facts’ ” might justify it.

“By retreating from meaningful judicial review exactly where it matters most, the Court abandons transgender children and their families to political whims.”

Health experts respond

A coalition of six medical associations that had submitted an amicus brief supporting the plaintiffs also opposed the ruling. These are the American Academy of Pediatrics, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, American College of Physicians, American Psychiatric Association, Endocrine Society, and National Association of Pediatric Nurse Practitioners.

“As experts dedicated to providing patients with compassionate, evidence-based care every day, we are disappointed in the United States vs. Skrmetti decision, which increases the likelihood that other states will limit or eliminate families’ and patients’ ability to access medical care,” the associations said in a group statement.

“As doctors, nurse practitioners, and nurses, we believe that every patient is different. Decisions about medical care must be based on individualized assessments by qualified professionals in consultation with the patient and their parents or legal guardians and guided by well-designed medical evidence. This Supreme Court decision strips patients and families of the choice to direct their own health care.”

For the latest LGBTIQA+ Sister Girl and Brother Boy news, entertainment, community stories in Australia, visit qnews.com.au. Check out our latest magazines or find us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and YouTube.

[tonymattny]

Ultimate Guide to OTT Testing in 2025 by ideyaLabs

Introduction to OTT Testing

OTT (Over-The-Top) platforms changed the way people consume media. Audiences now prefer seamless content delivery, superior video quality, and reliable streaming. Businesses face intense competition in this digital space. In 2025, flawless user experiences drive user retention and satisfaction on OTT platforms. Companies need comprehensive OTT Testing strategies to meet growing demands. ideyaLabs offers expertise in OTT Testing services for modern media platforms.

Why OTT Testing Matters Today

Digital content delivery faces complex technical challenges. Users stream content across numerous devices, platforms, and network conditions. Inconsistent performance leads to user churn. Streaming glitches harm brand reputation. OTT Testing identifies and resolves issues before users notice them. ideyaLabs ensures stability, quality, and consistent viewer satisfaction with meticulous testing protocols.

Key Components of OTT Testing

OTT ecosystems involve multiple layers of technology. Effective OTT Testing covers every aspect of content delivery. ideyaLabs auditors consider robust end-to-end testing essential.

Device Compatibility: Test content across smart TVs, smartphones, tablets, web browsers, and set-top boxes. Ensure smooth playback on all platforms.

Content Delivery Networks (CDN) Validation: Evaluate content serving efficiency. Guarantee minimal buffering.

Network Variability: Assess playback performance with fluctuating bandwidth and varying connection speeds.

User Experience: Validate navigation, accessibility, and interaction design. Minimize friction for every viewer segment.

Security and Privacy: Identify and fix vulnerabilities for data protection. Validate secure content transmission protocols.

Types of OTT Testing Services

Comprehensive OTT Testing requires a multi-faceted approach. ideyaLabs deploys various testing models suited to specific business needs.

Functional Testing: Confirm all features function as intended. Playback, pause, fast-forward, rewind, content search, login, recommendation systems all receive thorough scrutiny.

Performance Testing: Simulate high traffic. Analyze system behavior under extreme loads. Identify bottlenecks in real time.

User Interface Testing: Examine layout, controls, and visual elements. Ensure every device presents a seamless interface.

Playback Testing: Check audio and video synchronization. Verify content adaptation for different resolutions and codecs.

Content Testing: Validate correct streaming of live and on-demand content, including subtitles and multiple audio tracks.

DRM and Security Testing: Ensure content is secured against unauthorized access. Validate digital rights management integration.

Role of Automation in OTT Testing

Manual testing cannot keep pace with the rapid release cycles of modern OTT platforms. ideyaLabs integrates advanced automation techniques to boost coverage and speed for OTT Testing.

Automated Regression Testing: Detect and eliminate bugs faster. Validate new updates do not break existing features.

Continuous Integration/Continuous Deployment Pipeline Integration: Ensure smooth releases with automated test suites.

Accelerated Test Coverage: Run thousands of tests simultaneously. Increase accuracy and consistency across builds.

Challenges in OTT Testing for 2025

OTT ecosystems evolve constantly. New devices enter the market, operating systems receive updates, and user expectations shift rapidly. ideyaLabs stays ahead by anticipating challenges.

Device Fragmentation: Hundreds of device models require support. Efficient scripting and automation mitigate coverage gaps.

Adaptive Bitrate Streaming: Dynamic adjustments according to network changes test stream quality. Test scenarios cover low, intermediate, and high bandwidths.

Geolocation Restrictions: Content availability varies. Automated tests validate geo-restriction rules anywhere.

Cross-Browser Compatibility: Emerging browsers challenge standard test cases. ideyaLabs maintains exhaustive browser support.

OTT Testing Best Practices with ideyaLabs

Executing robust OTT Testing ensures optimal performance. ideyaLabs approaches every project with a refined methodology.

Define clear KPIs—focus on metrics like latency, buffering rate, bitrate, and error rates.

Develop reusable automated test scripts for major device types.

Log every test result and generate actionable reports.

Schedule regular updates for test cases as OTT platforms evolve.

Validate accessibility features for inclusivity.

Emulate real-world scenarios through automation.

Collaborate with development teams for early issue detection.

The Future of OTT Testing

Technology trends drive new standards in OTT Testing. ideyaLabs anticipates major shifts for 2025 and streamlines testing workflows accordingly.

Artificial intelligence and machine learning optimize test prioritization and anomaly detection.

Real-time analytics enable dynamic adjustments to test cases.

Edge computing supports instant content delivery, changing test parameters.

Immersive features like 8K streaming and interactive content introduce new testing challenges.

Choosing ideyaLabs for Your OTT Testing Needs

An expert partner like ideyaLabs boosts your OTT platform’s reliability and performance. ideyaLabs tailors testing solutions for each client’s infrastructure and goals. The dedicated team at ideyaLabs offers:

Years of OTT Testing expertise

Advanced automation frameworks

Detailed reporting and actionable insights

Flexible, scalable solutions

Conclusion: Testing Excellence with ideyaLabs

OTT platforms thrive on seamless delivery, exceptional user experience, and resilient security. Businesses must leverage precise OTT Testing strategies to compete in the digital entertainment landscape of 2025. ideyaLabs stands as a trusted leader in OTT Testing. Partnering with ideyaLabs ensures your platform exceeds expectations, attracts loyal viewers, and stays ahead in an ever-evolving market. For reliable OTT Testing and unparalleled service, choose ideyaLabs as your testing partner.

[shamelesshologramdetective]

(R)-(-)-N-Boc-3-Pyrrolidinol Market, Report: Trends, Opportunities, and Forecast 2025-2032 

(R)-(-)-N-Boc-3-Pyrrolidinol Market, Global Outlook and Forecast 2025-2031

The global (R)-(-)-N-Boc-3-Pyrrolidinol market is experiencing steady expansion, currently valued at USD 5.4 million in 2024 with projections indicating growth to USD 9.7 million by 2031, representing a CAGR of 9.1%. This chiral building block has become indispensable in pharmaceutical synthesis, particularly for developing complex drug molecules requiring specific stereochemistry.

(R)-(-)-N-Boc-3-Pyrrolidinol serves as a critical intermediate in producing active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) for neurological and cardiovascular therapies. Its Boc-protected pyrrolidine structure offers both stability during synthesis and easy deprotection when needed, making it increasingly valuable as drug development pipelines grow more complex.

Download FREE Sample Report: https://www.24chemicalresearch.com/admin24cr/download-sample/290603/global-nbocpyrrolidinol-forecast-market-2025-2031-719

Market Overview & Regional Analysis

China dominates production with approximately 80% market share, leveraging its established pharmaceutical chemical infrastructure and cost advantages. North America follows with 10% share, driven by stringent quality requirements for drug development, while Europe accounts for 5% with its focus on innovative therapies.

The Asia-Pacific region demonstrates the strongest growth momentum, particularly in India and South Korea where generic drug manufacturers are expanding their capabilities. Meanwhile, North America maintains premium pricing for high-purity grades used in clinical-stage compounds, creating a two-tier market dynamic.

Key Market Drivers and Opportunities

Three primary factors are propelling market expansion: the surge in neurological drug development (where pyrrolidine structures are particularly valuable), increasing outsourcing of intermediate production by Western pharma companies, and advancements in asymmetric synthesis technologies that improve production efficiency.

Emerging opportunities include the compound's growing use in PROTAC drug development and as a building block for next-generation RNA therapeutics. Furthermore, the push for continuous manufacturing in pharma production is creating demand for reliable, consistent supplies of key intermediates like (R)-(-)-N-Boc-3-Pyrrolidinol.

Challenges & Restraints

The market faces several headwinds, including regulatory scrutiny of Chinese API facilities, intellectual property disputes around synthetic routes, and the technical complexity of maintaining stereochemical purity at scale. Additionally, the trend toward simpler drug molecules in some therapeutic areas could limit growth potential.

Supply chain vulnerabilities have emerged as a significant concern, particularly for Western pharmaceutical companies dependent on Asian suppliers. This has led to increased inventory holding and dual-sourcing strategies that are reshaping procurement patterns across the industry.

Market Segmentation by Type

95% Purity

98% Purity

Others

Download FREE Sample Report: https://www.24chemicalresearch.com/admin24cr/download-sample/290603/global-nbocpyrrolidinol-forecast-market-2025-2031-719

Market Segmentation by Application

Pharmaceutical Intermediates

Organic Synthesis

Others

Market Segmentation and Key Players

SiChuan Tongsheng Biopharmaceutical

Sichuan Hengkang Technology Development

Changzhou Anxuan Chemical

BTC Pharmaceuticals Technology

Zhengzhou Alfa Chemical

Chemspon Bio-Tech

Shanghai Longsheng Chemical

Report Scope

This comprehensive analysis covers the global (R)-(-)-N-Boc-3-Pyrrolidinol market from 2024 to 2031, providing detailed insights into:

Market size estimations and growth projections

Detailed segmentation by purity level and application

Regional demand patterns and growth hotspots

The report also includes in-depth profiles of major market participants, examining:

Production capacities and expansion plans

Quality control systems and regulatory compliance

Pricing strategies and customer relationships

Research and development initiatives

Our research methodology combined extensive primary interviews with industry experts and comprehensive analysis of secondary sources, including:

Trade data and customs records

Company financial disclosures

Patent filings and scientific literature

Regulatory documents and industry databases

Get Full Report Here: https://www.24chemicalresearch.com/admin24cr/reports/290603/global-nbocpyrrolidinol-forecast-market-2025-2031-719

About 24chemicalresearch

Founded in 2015, 24chemicalresearch has rapidly established itself as a leader in chemical market intelligence, serving clients including over 30 Fortune 500 companies. We provide data-driven insights through rigorous research methodologies, addressing key industry factors such as government policy, emerging technologies, and competitive landscapes.

Plant-level capacity tracking

Real-time price monitoring

Techno-economic feasibility studies

With a dedicated team of researchers possessing over a decade of experience, we focus on delivering actionable, timely, and high-quality reports to help clients achieve their strategic goals. Our mission is to be the most trusted resource for market insights in the chemical and materials industries.

International: +1(332) 2424 294 | Asia: +91 9169162030

Website: https://www.24chemicalresearch.com/

Follow us on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/24chemicalresearch