Here's the House Republican Who Wants Amnesty for Illegals
DHS Obliterates This Biden Official Who Penned This Shameless Op-Ed About Immigration
Matt Gaetz Defends Pam Bondi
One Dem Rep's Visit to 'Alligator Alcatraz' Was Peak Performance Art
Our Base Is Feuding, the Dem’s Base Is Fracturing
Big Green
Looking Sensible at the State Department Cuts
Review of Kurt Schlichter's 'AMERICAN APOCALYPSE : The Second American Civil War'
Never Start Your Argument by Posing With an Elmo Puppet
Time For New Immigration Law
God and Trump
This Convicted Criminal Recrossed Biden's Border
The Real Reason the TSA Finally Ended the Shoe Rule
Record-Breaking Victories for Trump at SCOTUS
Reverse Biden’s Stringent Air Quality Standard
Tipsheet

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

“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