Prom
Since 2021, 26 states have imposed limitations on gender-transition treatments for minors. Transgender minors, along with their parents, guardians, and medical professionals, have contested these restrictions in 18 states, leading to varying outcomes.
States have implemented laws prohibiting minors from receiving gender-affirming care, based on information from court records and state laws analyzed by the New York Times and the Movement Advancement Project. It is important to note that Georgia’s ban does not apply to puberty blockers, while Idaho’s ban is currently halted for two individuals involved in a legal case.
Written by Amy Harmon
The issue being brought before the Supreme Court this week originated in 2021, when Arkansas passed a law prohibiting gender-transition treatments for minors, making it the first state to do so. Alabama also passed a similar law in 2022. Tennessee’s law was part of a larger trend among Republican-controlled states, with 24 out of 28 states now restricting doctors from providing puberty blockers, hormone therapies, or surgery to transgender minors. New Hampshire and Arizona have laws that only ban surgeries for transgender minors.
The reason for the ban in Florida was questioned by federal district judge Robert Hinkle, who suggested that some lawmakers were motivated by discriminatory attitudes. Republican lawmakers in various states have argued that they are trying to protect young people from engaging in a lifestyle they are not yet mature enough to understand. According to Republican strategists, focusing on this issue was a successful tactic leading up to the 2024 election.
United States v. Skrmetti is a case challenging Tennessee’s ban on a specific issue. In the past three years, there have been a total of 18 similar cases filed, with different outcomes. For example, Texas and Nebraska have upheld their bans while federal district judges in Florida and Arkansas have struck down bans in those states. However, these decisions are being appealed. In Alabama and Indiana, federal district judges issued preliminary injunctions on the bans, but these were reversed by separate appeals courts. There are currently 11 other cases in different stages of litigation.
The decision made by the Supreme Court in the Skrmetti case will likely impact how lower courts address challenges to similar laws in various states. However, the result may not be consistent across the board.
Jim Campbell, the chief counsel for the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative legal advocacy group supporting Idaho’s ban on transition treatments for minors, explained that if Tennessee wins, some states may believe that Skrmetti controls the situation, and vice versa. The losing side in the case may argue that the situation is actually different and provide reasons for their perspective.
Amy Harmon explores the impact of changing views on gender on daily life in the United States. Learn more about Amy Harmon.
Prom
Page Index
Navigation to Site Information