Tennessee; Ban on Minors' Gender-Affirming Care Upheld by Court

(The Post News)– The United States Supreme Court has ruled that a Tennessee law banning gender-affirming care for minors can stand. The ruling was a devastating loss for transgender rights activists in a case that might pave a way for dozens of future lawsuits concerning the transgender children’s rights.

Three families of transgender children and a provider of gender-affirming care filed the case—United States vs Skrmetti—a year ago. The complainants and the U.S. government, led by former President Joe Biden, argued that Tennessee’s law represented gender bias, which therefore violated the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause. Tennessee’s law states that a female assigned at birth cannot be prescribed testosterone, while a male assigned at birth can.

However, Tennessee has maintained that the restriction is necessary to safeguard minors from “experimental” medical treatment. While major medical and mental health organisations determined that gender-affirming care is both evidence-based and medically required, the conservative justice appeared to be receptive of Tennessee’s argument.

Each of the six Supreme Court’s conservative justices participated in at least some of the decisions to uphold the law, while several also issued opposing opinions. Meanwhile, in his majority decision, Chief Justice John Roberts emphasised that the judgement was based primarily on the judge’s determination that the law did not violate the equal protection principle, rather than on a philosophical objection to trans rights.

Roberts noted that the case carries the weight of intense scientific and policy disputes regarding the safety, efficacy, and appropriateness of medical therapies in a rapidly expanding profession. Roberts added that the voices in these arguments express genuine concern, and the consequences are severe for everyone.

Opposing the court’s ruling, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, a member of the court’s liberal wing, said that she dissents because the court leaves trans children and their families up to “political whim”. According to Sotomayor, for the sole reason that a different court might overturn SB1 or similar categorical healthcare bans, the majority chooses not to confront the problem directly and instead obscures a gender classification that is obvious from the text of the law. Moreover, she noted that the court’s decision irreparably harms the Equal Protection Clause and urges lawmakers to discriminate by concealing apparent gender classifications in plain view.

The Supreme Court’s ruling was passed down as President Donald Trump and his administration move to limit access to gender-affirming care in general. In February, Trump signed an executive order to end federal funding for trans-related care for minors. He has also advocated for federal legislation in this regard, urging Congress in a joint address to approve a bill permanently prohibiting and criminalising sex modifications on minors and putting an end to the myth that children are “trapped in the wrong body”.