Democrats Try Pretending to Be Normal to Fool Normal Voters
Did You Miss Trump Absolutely Wrecking Nancy Pelosi at the State of the...
If The Dems Lose the Midterms, This Moment at the State of the...
Liberal Media Reactions to Trump's State of the Union Were Wild, But This...
The Mother of the Hughes Brothers Just Imploded a Ton of Liberal Narratives...
Pronoun Twitter Might Commit Mass Suicide After Trump Said This About the US...
Here's the Tweet That Best Summarized Trump's Epic State of the Union Address
This State Agency Rejected Her Because She's White – Now She's Suing
It's (D)ifferent: Check Out What the Left Once Said About Hockey Players Visiting...
The Medical Gaslighting of Women Comes From the Left, Too
It Had to Hurt CBS to Admit President Trump Was Right About the...
This Democrat Just Said How Her Party Really Feels About Standing Up for...
Abigail Spanberger's State of the Union Rebuttal Was a Massive Failure, Just Like...
How Can You Not Stand?
What Does 'Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness' Mean?
Tipsheet

Supreme Court Announces Decision on Idaho's Ban on 'Gender Affirming Care' for Kids

Supreme Court Announces Decision on Idaho's Ban on 'Gender Affirming Care' for Kids
AP Photo/Alex Brandon

On Monday, the United States Supreme Court allowed Idaho to enforce a ban on so-called “gender affirming care” for minors. This encompasses puberty blockers, hormone therapy treatments, and sex reassignment surgery. 

Advertisement

According to The New York Times, three liberal Supreme Court justices, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, and Justice Elena Kagan, objected to allowing the ban to be enforced. 

The law, passed by the state legislature and signed into law by Republican Gov. Brad Little, makes it a felony for doctors to provide this kind of experimental, irreversible transgender “care” for children. Many states, including Indiana and Louisiana, have similar laws. 

Reportedly, the ban would apply to everyone except for the plaintiffs who brought the challeng (via NYT):

Notably, the opinions focused not on transgender care, a hot-button political issue that has prompted several Republican-led legislatures to approve bills to restrict puberty-blocking drugs and hormone treatments, but on a broader legal question: universal injunctions.

Universal injunctions are when a single judge issues a sweeping decision that applies beyond those directly involved in the dispute. Some justices have signaled an interest in looking at the tactic.

Although orders in response to emergency applications often include no reasoning, the justices in this case divided into several factions.

Advertisement

Related:

TRANSGENDER

Predictably, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), representing the plaintiffs in the case, said the outcome was “an awful result for transgender youth and their families across the state.”

“Today’s ruling allows the state to shut down the care that thousands of families rely on while sowing further confusion and disruption,” the left-wing organization said in a statement.

Idaho Attorney General Raul Labrador celebrated the ruling. 

“Denying the basic truth that boys and girls are biologically different hurts our kids,” Mr. Labrador said. “No one has the right to harm children, and I’m grateful that we, as the state, have the power — and duty — to protect them.”

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos