Major transgender rights case lands at Supreme Court at the moment after Biden appealed in opposition to Tennessee’s ban on gender-affirming medical look after minors
A major transgender rights case will be heard by the Supreme Court today amid growing debate over a ban on medical treatments for minors in Tennessee.
The court will assess whether the law violates the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment, requiring the government to treat similarly situated people the same.
The outcome could affect state laws also concerning which sports competitions trans people can join, and which bathrooms they can use.
The case is coming before a conservative-dominated court after Donald Trump and his allies promised to roll back protections for transgender people during the election.
Biden, as well as families and health care providers challenging the law, have urged the court to apply the same sort of analysis used four years ago in a key ruling that ‘sex plays an unmistakable role’ in employers’ decisions to punish trans people for traits and behavior they otherwise tolerate.
The court previously ruled in favor of Aimee Stephens, who was fired by a Michigan funeral home after she told the owner that she was a transgender woman.
The court held that trans people, as well as gay and lesbian people, are protected by a landmark federal civil rights law that prohibits sex discrimination in the workplace.
An outcome is not expected for several months.
The case is coming before a conservative-dominated court (pictured, 2022) after Donald Trump and his allies promised to roll back protections for trans people during the election
The court previously ruled in favor of Aimee Stephens, who was fired by a Michigan funeral home after she told the owner that she was a transgender woman (pictured in 2019)
A view of the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, U.S. June 29
Tennessee’s law bans puberty blockers and hormone treatments for transgender minors, but not ‘across the board,’ lawyers for the families wrote in their Supreme Court brief.
The lead lawyer, Chase Strangio of the American Civil Liberties Union, is the first openly transgender person to argue in front of the justices.
The administration argues there is no way to determine whether ‘treatments must be withheld from any particular minor’ without considering the minor’s sex.
‘That is sex discrimination,’ Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar wrote in her main court filing.
The state acknowledges that the same treatments that are banned for transgender minors can be prescribed for other reasons. But it rejects the claim that it is discriminating on the basis of sex.
Instead, it says lawmakers acted to protect minors from the risks of ‘life-altering gender-transition procedures.’
The law ‘draws a line between minors seeking drugs for gender transition and minors seeking drugs for other medical purposes. And boys and girls fall on both sides of that line,’ Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti wrote in the state’s Supreme Court brief.
While the challengers invoke the 2020 ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County for support, Tennessee relies on the court’s precedent-shattering Dobbs decision in 2022 that ended nationwide protections for abortion and returned the issue to the states.
The Supreme Court seen from the columns of the Capitol in Washington, December 3, 2024
Julia Williams holds a sign in counterprotest during a rally in favor of a ban on gender-affirming health care legislation, Monday, March 20, 2023, at the Missouri Statehouse in Jefferson City
The two sides battled in their legal filings over the appropriate level of scrutiny the court should apply. It’s more than an academic exercise.
The lowest level is known as rational basis review and almost every law looked at that way is ultimately upheld.
Indeed, the federal appeals court in Cincinnati that allowed the law to be enforced held that lawmakers acted rationally to regulate medical procedures, well within their authority.
The appeals court reversed a trial court that employed a higher level of review, heightened scrutiny, that applies in cases of sex discrimination.
Under this more searching examination, the state must identify an important objective and show that the law helps accomplish it.
If the justices opt for heightened scrutiny, they could return the case to the appeals court to apply it.
Gender-affirming care for youth is supported by every major medical organization, including the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Psychiatric Association.
People attend a rally as part of a Transgender Day of Visibility in Washington, March 31, 2023
But Tennessee is pointing to health authorities in Sweden, Finland, Norway and the United Kingdom that found that the medical treatments ‘pose significant risks with unproven benefits.’
None of those countries has adopted a ban similar to the one in Tennessee and individuals can still obtain treatment, Prelogar wrote in response.
The Williams family of Nashville, Tennessee are among those challenging the state law. Brian Williams said that as a result of puberty blockers and hormone treatments, his transgender daughter, L.W., is a ’16-year-old planning for her future, making her own music and looking at colleges.’
But because of Tennessee’s ban, she has to travel to another state to receive the health care that ‘we and her doctors know is right for her.’
