Joy Reid of MSNBC links opposition to trans medical procedures to Nazi Germany.

On Wednesday, Joy Reid of MSNBC claimed that denying children access to gender transition medical procedures is similar to Nazi Germany's actions.

Reid contended that Republicans were exploiting concerns about transgender minors during the 2024 election, and that focusing on such a small population was equivalent to targeting the entire city of Phoenix, Arizona, population 1.65 million, because of its desert landscape. In reality, there are more children who have experienced gun violence, estimated at 3 million, than there are transgender Americans of all ages combined.

The host of MSNBC cited Nazi Germany as an example of those who oppose trans medical procedures for minors, implying that their stance is rooted in hatred.

The targeting of trans people is not a new practice," she stated. "It has been a longstanding tradition, as seen in Nazi Germany's use of brutally violent methods in the 1930s. While the Supreme Court has not taken any action on weapons of war in schools, they appear to be considering upholding Tennessee's ban on gender-affirming care for minors. Although a decision is not expected for several months, a majority of the justices have parroted a series of debunked talking points, all under the guise of protecting children, but not all children.

This week, the Supreme Court heard arguments in the United States v. Skrmetti case, which focuses on a Tennessee law that prohibits gender-transition medical procedures for minors. Enacted in March 2023, the law also targets healthcare providers in Tennessee who continue to provide gender-transition treatments to transgender minors, exposing them to fines, lawsuits, and other legal liabilities.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson compared the Tennessee law to past laws that prohibited interracial marriage, despite a majority of Supreme Court justices indicating their willingness to uphold it.

"Jackson commented on the familiarity of the arguments being made regarding who decides and the concerns and legislative prerogatives, etc., stating that they reminded him of the same kinds of arguments made during the 1950s and 1960s with respect to racial classifications and inconsistencies. He specifically mentioned Loving v. Virginia and wondered if the speaker had considered the parallels between the statute and the anti-miscegenation statutes in Virginia."

Planet Chronicle' Breanne Deppisch contributed to this report.