Total Mayhem Ensues As Police Move to Break Up Pro-Hamas Rally at VCU
There's Nothing Like John Fetterman Sitting on a Bench Brushing Off Pro-Hamas Protesters
Why Speaker Mike Johnson Is Here to Stay
Is This the Cringiest Kamala Harris Interview?
OnlyFans Star Claims Biden Administration Paid Her to Spread Propaganda
What Triggered Nancy Pelosi's Meltdown on MSNBC Yesterday
The Left Wants to Play Stupid Games
Four Radical Reforms to Shrink the Federal Budget
Trump Held in Contempt for Violating Gag Order. Here's the Penalty.
Columbia Issues Warning to Students and Staff After Pro-Hamas Agitators Occupy Building
RFK Jr. Qualifies for Ballot in Another State
Here's How Members of Congress Are Responding to Reports ICC May Issue Arrest...
U.S., Mexico, Vow to Crack Down on Illegal Border Crossings
Surprise, Surprise: Pro-Hamas Agitators on Campus Have a New 'Demand'
Oversight Chair James Comer Is Right to Challenge Biden’s Bureaucratic Hiring Spree
Tipsheet

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

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

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement