This market is to predict what the final ruling in the case of US v. Skrmetti, which held oral arguments on December 4, 2024, and is expected to have a final decision in June of 2025. The case deals with a Tennessee law, SB1, which:
"declares that the state has a 'compelling interest in encouraging minors to appreciate their sex, particularly as they undergo puberty.' SB1 prohibits doctors from performing surgery (a ban not at issue before the justices) or prescribing puberty blockers and hormone therapy to affirm the gender identity of transgender teens. The law, however, allows the use of the same treatments for other purposes. For example, puberty blockers may be used to treat young people experiencing early puberty, while hormone therapy can be used for young people for whom puberty is delayed."
The market will resolve when the court's final decision is released to the public. The "any other result" criteria would hit in the instance that a justice leaves the court (retires or expires), or if the court makes a decision which does not either overturn nor uphold the law (such as kicking it back down to the lower courts).
As one commenter noted, there is no 9-0 overturning ban. While it was a mistake on my part not to include this, I would place this under the "any other result" category.
Possible clarification from creator (AI generated):
Concurring, concurring in part, and dissenting in part decisions will be categorized as either overturning or upholding the law
If any justice rules that the decision should be sent back to lower courts, this will resolve as any other result
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ161 | |
| 2 | Ṁ141 | |
| 3 | Ṁ139 | |
| 4 | Ṁ137 | |
| 5 | Ṁ94 |
People are also trading
https://www.scotusblog.com/cases/case-files/united-states-v-skrmetti/
See above link for details on the resolution. I still need to read the actual opinion but at first glance appears to be clean cut as far as resolution criterea. All the concurrences and dissents fit neatly into either votes for or against the legislation. If anyone has comments/suggestions on how this market could have been improved (especially in the event there had been more concurring-in-part/dissenting-in-part opinions) please leave a comment. I will not respond to comments about the substance of the decision.
@Fay42 any other result has you covered (I guess you are also buying abstentions and other unlikely stuff with that option)
@Fay42 yeah, this was a mistake on my end, but as the other commenter said, it will be covered by the "any other result option." I would find this to be an extremely unlikely result, personally, but I guess we'll see!
Remember everybody, bet wide, or else we will repeat this tragedy.
@Quroe I'm going to try and fit concurring/concurring in part/dissenting in part decisions into one of the two boxes of overturning or upholding, but yes, if there is a single justice who holds that the decision should be kicked down to the lower courts for some reason, this would fall under the "any other result" resolution. It seems like this case has fewer moving parts than the Immunity case, so I don't anticipate this to be an issue, but we'll see!
@Quroe Thanks! I do think that the realistic answers here are pretty bounded though. I would be seriously surprised at any results that aren't 6-3/5-4 uphold, 6-3/5-4 overturn, or "any other result." The liberal justices are clearly going to vote to overturn. Alito and Thomas are clearly going to vote to uphold. Of the remaining conservative justices Gorsuch has the highest likelihood of voting to overturn based on his opinion in Bostock, but even he is at best a tossup. I doubt there's a world in which all three of Kavenaugh, Barret and Roberts vote to overturn, and even two of them voting to do so would be a little surprising.