Brian Lindauer
@lindauer.bsky.social
Reposted by Brian Lindauer
For the record, which one hopes will one day matter, a President who believes he is a Messiah unbounded by law and intends to act as such should quite obviously be removed from office immediately. “Let’s see what the courts say” is rather like giving Motrin to someone who is drowning.
February 15, 2025 at 7:18 PM
For the record, which one hopes will one day matter, a President who believes he is a Messiah unbounded by law and intends to act as such should quite obviously be removed from office immediately. “Let’s see what the courts say” is rather like giving Motrin to someone who is drowning.
Reposted by Brian Lindauer
From a federal court decision blocking Trump's anti-trans healthcare order: "The Court cannot fathom discrimination more direct than the plain pronouncement of a policy resting on the premise that the group to which the policy is directed does not exist."
![Section 3(g) of the Gender Identity Order is admittedly slightly vaguer than Section 4 of
the Healthcare Order in that it only proscribes the use of "[fJederal [grant] funds [to] promote
gender_ idcology."
The Gender Identity Order, appears, however, to deny the existence of
transgender persons altogether. See Gender Identity Order $ 1 (describing the purpose of the order
as "defend[ing] women's rights and protect[ing] freedom of conscience by using clear and accurate
language and policies that recognize women are biologically female, and men are biologically
40
Case 8:25-cv-00337-BAH
Document 62
Filed 02/14/25
Page 41 of 53
male"); id. $ 2 ("It is the policy of the United States to recognize two sexes, male and female.
These sexes are not changeable and are grounded in fundamental and incontrovertible reality.")
The Court cannot fathom discrimination more direct than the plain pronouncement of a policy
resting on the premise that the group to which the policy is directed does not exist. Thus, Section
3(g) of the Gender Identity Order can only be read as doing exactly what Section-4 of the
Healthcare Order does
cease funding institutions, including medical institutions, that provide
gender affirming medical care to patients under the age of nineteen.
Thus, as with Section 4 of
Healthcare Order, Kadel mandates a similar finding of discrimination as to Section 3(g) of the
Gender Identity Order.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:mlmouohgzbjofidukcp4pxf2/bafkreifbrt37exq6fjaxqrit6kxtuoqkkl47uxsuoylsryumtv6bbfx7zy@jpeg)
February 15, 2025 at 4:23 PM
From a federal court decision blocking Trump's anti-trans healthcare order: "The Court cannot fathom discrimination more direct than the plain pronouncement of a policy resting on the premise that the group to which the policy is directed does not exist."
Agreed that the Joshua Saxe talk is excellent and worth a watch
Personal favorites: Joshua Saxe's keynote: www.camlis.org/joshua-saxe-...
Using vision transformers for malware detection (trying to get closer to the bytes-in-decision-out paradigm): www.camlis.org/david-krisil...
Finding backdoors in LLMs by adding new ones: www.camlis.org/tamas-voros-...
Using vision transformers for malware detection (trying to get closer to the bytes-in-decision-out paradigm): www.camlis.org/david-krisil...
Finding backdoors in LLMs by adding new ones: www.camlis.org/tamas-voros-...
November 18, 2024 at 9:08 PM
Agreed that the Joshua Saxe talk is excellent and worth a watch