The dissenting opinion in the 8th Circuit case makes an important point, one that I hope state AGs will take to heart in the remaining state court lawsuits. The dissent points out that the trial court accepted the plaintiff's assertions about gender. "As the district court found, “[t]ransgender people have a gender identity that does not align with their birth-assigned sex,” and gender dysphoria is the “significant distress” associated with “[t]he lack of alignment between one’s gender identity and their sex assigned at birth.” In 2025, there is no excuse for any state AG to uncritically accept the use of the terms gender or gender identity. Gender and gender identity have no scientific basis and their existence should never be admitted in a brief by the state. The term "gender" itself should only be used in quotes. These terms have no more scientific support than the idea of a human soul.