to hear from you again yes i'm back your honor rabbi just already butterfield also are transgender inmate this prisoner in custody in south dakota very similar claims  south dakota brought in an expert from johns hopkins to help them up with transgender inmates in custody and since you know i was born we went out to s falls and interview people including people who are field and she said that this is one of the more severe cases she had seen and recommended hormones  eighteen meanwhile cody butterfield was filing grievances asking for the same saying and losing them all and she filed in court and her st case was dismissed she filed again that case but i did house to the south dakota penitentiary to send me the medical file on the and that's what i found the odds for me court they had had it for over a year i don't use the word very often because i think it's overused but i submit that some operators that they were turning down her grievances when their own expert was telling them she should get what she said asking for  it would be fair to say the judge lang got a false start in this case by not having the benefit of this and it isn't his fault but it's it's what is possible under this open ended reading appreciate that something that would be sort of a travesty if it were known areas can slip between the cracks i have asked the court to consolidate the two cases i don't know what i really wanted is what happened which is to present them to the sake of all on the same day so whether you formally consolidate them or not i got what i want it's in that it's in the base the complaint so is that i mean is that enough now now or in the i simply disagree with what the what the the board corrections or south dakota ended up doing are we i don't think counseling alone is enough once those then a period of counseling i think the the standard of care which is pretty well accepted as the hormones follow counsel and they need to be considered and there was no policy to consider them i think that we had in proust's what we have in both cases the diagnosis in one case we have a policy but no plan in this case we have a plan but no policy and you really should have all three in both cases and that's what i'd like to see the co all these cases i'm going to continue to be filed pro se the district courts and it shouldn't be there shouldn't be such a wide variation in the way redistributed let the states come forward but the district judges get a little more before they dismiss and some of them are doing that what would that we need an order look like well how would that read well i think the three men would be for further proceedings it would some of the originally per se litigants remain and for further proceedings as the district court deems appropriate i think that would be enough if you wanted to write more obviously you could but that would and case that comes up as you're writing i just want to mention it came up in a mood in fact the dismissal in this case was without prejudice unlike prose but i don't think that should make any difference this case and butterfield i think a district judge misconstrued equal protection he analyzed and in terms some verbal harassment and  discords cases on that subject and those are really th amendment cases and i don't think that that was the correct standard i think the courage to advance the law had not shaded in my earlier argument it's either discrete group or it stereotyping verbal harassment goes to whether the conditions are cruel and unusual and it's a tougher standard f are at least i would argue it was