MS Now Host's Rant Over These Remarks From Pete Hegseth Is Going to...
The Dignity Act – Amnesty or Real Immigration Reform?
Illinois Lawmakers Move to Ban Creepy AI Pricing Tricks
This Is the Human Cost of Trans Activism
Lawrence O'Donnell Sees the Sexism in a Rescue Mission, and CNN Is in...
While Politicians Push for Amnesty, Another Illegal Immigrant Beat and Raped a Woman...
Psychology Today: The Solution to Suicides is Word Games on Guns
The Niece of Iranian Gen. Soleimani Is Begging Her Ex-Boyfriend To Help Her...
Iryna Zarutska's Killer Deemed 'Incapable to Proceed' in State Murder Trial
CNN’s Dana Bash Sounds the Alarm On Marxist Streamer Hasan Piker
Pakistani National Pleads Guilty in ISIS-Inspired Plot to Attack Brooklyn Jewish Center
Guatemalan National Gets Prison Time in Michigan Fake ID Scheme
FBI Arrests Former Clearance Holder Accused of Leaking Classified Information
Alleged Illegal Immigrant Charged With Using Dead Man’s Identity to Collect $12,000 of...
California Man Pleads Guilty in $270M Medi-Cal Fraud Scheme
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

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement