The Most Important Lesson of the Iran War Is to Buy Guns and...
Watch Elise Stefanik Take CNN's Jake Tapper to the Cleaners
Of Course, the Media Is Going to Fume Over Trump's Latest Remarks About...
Bill Maher: I Thought Swalwell Was a 'F**king Creep'
What This Dem Operative Just Said Only Reinforces the Push to Nuke the...
Could This Be the Craziest Neighbor Ever Caught on Ring Cam?
Do All Democrats Have to Be Complete Jerks?
Tim Kaine Confirms VA's Redistricting Scheme Isn't About 'Fair Maps' but About This...
Japan Issues Tsunami Warnings After Major Quake Strikes Off Its Northern Coast
Wisdom From the Founders: Why Eric Swalwell Should Never Have Been Elected in...
Those Who Can Afford to Be Frivolous
Trump Takes on the Pope, and the Pope Gets Trumped
American Values
For Trump, Winning Is the Catalyst for the American Renaissance
Grievance Culture Is Destroying American Resilience
Tipsheet

Clarence Thomas Rails Against Trans Youth 'Experts'

Clarence Thomas Rails Against Trans Youth 'Experts'
AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, File

This week, Townhall covered how the Supreme Court of the United States upheld Tennessee’s ban on so-called “gender-affirming care” for minors suffering from gender dysphoria.

Advertisement

In a 6-3 decision, the Court ruled that Tennessee’s law does not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment because it does not classify based on sex or gender identity. It concluded that the state has a legitimate interest in protecting children from the adverse impact of these treatments.

Going forward, Tennessee children will be protected from puberty blockers, hormone replacement therapy, and sex reassignment surgery.

Justice Clarence Thomas penned a solo concurring opinion slamming so-called transgender youth “experts.”

“The Court rightly rejects efforts by the United States and the private plaintiffs to accord outsized credit to claims about medical consensus and expertise. The United States asserted that ‘the medical community and the nation’s leading hospitals overwhelmingly agree’ with the Government’s position that the treatments outlawed by SB1 can be medically necessary…The implication of these arguments is that courts should defer to so-called expert consensus. There are several problems with appealing and deferring to the authority of the expert class…contrary to the representations of the United States and the private plaintiffs, there is no medical consensus on how best to treat gender dysphoria in children,” he wrote.

Advertisement

Related:

SUPREME COURT

“This case carries a simple lesson: In politically contentious debates over matters shrouded in scientific uncertainty, courts should not assume that self-described experts are correct,” Thomas wrote.

Anymore, if medical providers try to “transition” children, they could face $25,000 civil fines for breaking the law. 

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement