FYI: Oregon and the other plaintiffs flag the Supreme Court's briefing order and then make the "regular forces = regular military forces" argument on pages 10-12 of their post-trial brief, filed Saturday:

Thanks for this very helpful exchange. Have a good weekend.

I completely understand why this situation is prompting you to ask these types of rhetorical questions, but I don't think such questions are going to be persuasive with the Court. I do think some arguments distinguishing Geduldig and Skrmetti might be, and I'm endeavoring here to examine them.

2/2 ... is it because use of same term in common parlance doesn't match relevant difference in biology? Because here, Trump Admin is claiming there's a relevant difference in biology (female breasts have a role related to reproduction that male breasts do not).

1/2 I see that argument, but still have a lingering concern. If bound by Geduldig/Skrmetti, do you reach same conclusion about "male vs female" circumcision (it's a sex classification triggering heightened scrutiny)? If so (and if you think courts will agree), I think I'm convinced. But if not ...

Now that the Internet Archive is back up, here are direct links to the IA captures:

April 5:
web.archive.org/web/20250405...

April 21:
web.archive.org/web/20250421...

Here you go:
www.va.gov/resources/pr...