Prom
In 2021, 26 states have implemented restrictions on gender-transition treatments for minors. Transgender individuals under the age of 18, along with their families and healthcare providers, have contested these bans in 18 states, leading to varying outcomes.
A recent analysis by the New York Times of court records and state laws has identified several states that have implemented bans on gender-affirming care for minors. Georgia’s ban does not cover puberty blockers, while Idaho’s ban is currently facing legal challenges from two plaintiffs.
Written by Amy Harmon
The issue currently being debated in the Supreme Court originated in 2021 when Arkansas passed a law banning gender-transition treatments for minors. Following suit, Alabama passed a similar law in 2022. Tennessee’s law was part of a larger trend, with 24 out of 28 states controlled by Republicans now imposing restrictions on doctors providing transgender minors with puberty blockers, hormone therapies, or surgery. New Hampshire and Arizona have also implemented bans on surgeries for transgender minors.
The reason for the ban in Florida was investigated by federal district judge Robert Hinkle, who found that some lawmakers were motivated by discriminatory beliefs. Republican lawmakers in other states have stated that they are trying to protect young people from a lifestyle they may not fully understand. Republican strategists believe that making this issue a priority will be beneficial in the 2024 election.
The case United States v. Skrmetti, which challenges Tennessee’s ban, is one of 18 similar cases that have been filed in the past three years. The outcomes of these cases have been mixed. While the highest courts in Texas and Nebraska have upheld their restrictions, federal district judges in Florida and Arkansas have struck down bans in those states. However, these decisions are being appealed. In Alabama and Indiana, preliminary injunctions on the enforcement of bans were reversed by separate appeals courts. There are eleven other cases at different stages of litigation.
The decision made by the Supreme Court in the Skrmetti case is likely to influence how lower courts address challenges to similar laws in various states. However, the impact of this ruling may not be consistent nationwide.
Jim Campbell, who is the chief counsel for the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative legal advocacy group supporting Idaho’s ban on transition treatments for minors, mentioned that if Tennessee wins, people will attribute it to Skrmetti’s influence, while if Idaho wins, the same will be said. The losing side will then argue that the situation is not the same and provide reasons for their stance.
Amy Harmon discusses the impact of changing views on gender on daily experiences in the United States. Learn more about Amy Harmon.
Prom
Index of Pages
Navigation for Site Information