This month, England sent shockwaves around the world when its National Health Service announced that children will no longer be prescribed puberty blockers, which Townhall covered.
These blockers are part of so-called “gender-affirming” care given to people who think they’re “transgender.” Other services include hormone therapy treatments and sex reassignment surgery.
One state may soon prohibit public funds from being used to cover these kinds of services.
Idaho lawmakers are considering a bill that would prohibit public funds from being used for so-called “gender-affirming care.” This ban would include state employees using work health insurance and for adults covered by Medicaid.
According to ABC News, lawmakers are expected to vote on the bill this week. The bill cleared the state House and needs enough Senate votes before it is sent to Republican Gov. Brad Little’s desk (via ABC):
If the legislation is enacted, Idaho would become at least the 10th state to ban Medicaid funding for gender-affirming care for people of all ages, according to the advocacy and information organization Movement Advancement Project. The laws are part of an ongoing national battle over the rights of LGBTQ+ Americans.
Opponents to the Idaho bill say it almost certainly will lead to a lawsuit in federal court. The state has already been sued multiple times over attempts to deny gender-affirming care to transgender residents and so far has not had much success defending the lawsuits.
In one case, the state was ordered to provide a transgender inmate with gender-transition surgery, and the inmate was later awarded roughly $2.5 million in legal fees.
Earlier this year, Townhall covered how an Idaho law that protected children from these irreversible, experimental transgender treatments was blocked by a federal judge. Little signed the bill, H.B. 71, known as the Vulnerable Child Protection Act, into law, last April. Any medical professional convicted of providing this type of care could be convicted of a felony and imprisoned for up to 10 years. At least 20 other states have implemented these kinds of restrictions on so-called “gender-affirming” care.
District Court Judge B. Lynn Winmill made the decision and claimed that the law violated the U.S. Constitution.
"Transgender children should receive equal treatment under the law," Winmill reportedly stated in his decision. "Parents should have the right to make the most fundamental decisions about how to care for their children."
"Time and again, these cases illustrate that the Fourteenth Amendment’s primary role is to protect disfavored minorities and preserve our fundamental rights from legislative overreach ... and it is no less true for transgender children and their parents in the 21st Century,” he added.
