Here's Why Iran's Government Has Gotten Away With Tyranny
Trump Says He Is Concerned About the Midterm Elections
Don't Let Cea Weaver's Tears Fool You
Inside the Massachusetts Prison Where Women Live in Fear of 'Transgender' Inmates
Mamdani Voters Shrug at Venezuelan Immigrant's Warning Against Socialism
Guess Who Has Become a Propaganda Tool in Iran As the Regime Shuts...
Over a Dozen Oil Executives to Meet the President Trump As Venezuelan Oil...
The Gift of America and the Gift of Life
New York Man Indicted for Threatening to Kill Federal Agent and His Children
Texas Couple Convicted of Running $25M COVID-Era Pyramid Scheme That Defrauded 10,000 Vict...
Automakers Eat Billion-Dollar Losses on Electric Vehicles
Texas AG Ken Paxton Shuts Down Taxpayer Funded 'Abortion Tourism'
$500K Stolen, 20 States Targeted: Detroit Man Admits Wire Fraud and Identity Theft
DHS to Surge 1,000 Additional Agents Into Minneapolis As Protests Escalate
Oklahoma Chiropractor Indicted in $30M Health Care Fraud and COVID Relief Theft Scheme
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

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

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement