General Discussion

The passport case is about the lower court injunction. It reversed it. That doesn't mean it is legal to require gender markers - it means that the lower court is prohibited from blocking Trump's order UNTIL the matter proceeds through the courts. This is the normal course of events - injunctions are supposed to be rare things. While I agree that these times are unusual - and were I in the lower court's shoes - I would be issuing injunctions right and left. BUT that isn't how the courts are are supposed work, which is why there are so many of these lower court injunctions being reversed.

As to the marriage case, Davis is framing it as being about marriage, but it is really about whether she has to do her job when her moral compass doesn't align with the law. If they grant cert, they can, and almost certainly will, decide the latter (does she get a religious get-out-of-jail-free card) without touching the former (is marriage legal). Most likely they won't even grant cert.