It's Official: Peter Navarro Is Back for the Second Trump Term
Tom Homan Ups the Ante in Verbal War With Sanctuary City Mayors
Was Kamala the First Candidate to Not Flip a Single County Since 1932?
Trump Called Pete Hegseth. Here's What He Told Him.
Elder Rape Is a Strength!
AGs Ask SCOTUS To Toss Mexican Lawsuit
McConnell Sounds Off on Two Federal Judges Who Reversed Retirement Plans After Trump...
UnitedHealthcare CEO Fatally Shot in NYC
The Final House Race Has Been Called
Democratic Stronghold Caves Into Trump's Popularity
Pete Hegseth's Mother Sets the Record Straight After 'Despicable' NYT Published Private Em...
Trump Makes Major Move in Crumbling Fani Willis Case
Trump's Threat to Hamas Represents Blunt, Refreshing Change
Voter Turnout Was High, and Even Higher Participation Would Have Increased Trump's Victory...
Tipsheet

Here's What You Need to Know About the First-Ever SCOTUS Case on the Medical Mutilation of 'Trans' Minors

AP Photo/Susan Walsh

For the first time, the U.S. Supreme Court is set to consider restrictions on so-called "transgender care" for gender dysphoric minors.

SCOTUS is scheduled to hear oral arguments on Wednesday in a major case weighing a state ban on the medical mutilation and chemical castration of "transgender"-identifying children.

Advertisement

The case, United States v. Skrmetti, centers on a Tennessee law that prohibits pediatric "gender-transitioning treatments," such as puberty blockers and hormone replacement. Specifically, the legislation (Tennessee SB1) penalizes healthcare providers in the state who continue to perform such procedures on adolescents, subjecting violators to fines, lawsuits, and other forms of legal liability.

Now, the critical question before the highest court in the land is whether the state law violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, as the petitioners are arguing. The state of Tennessee says the law does not discriminate on the basis of gender; rather, it simply sets parameters around age- and use-based regulations.

The case is brought by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which sued to overturn the Tennessee law on behalf of the parents of three "transgender" teenagers, and a Memphis-based doctor who "treats" patients of the like. Earlier this year, the Biden administration joined the side of the petitioners under a federal law that allows federal intervention in certain cases certified by the attorney general to be of "general public importance."

U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar and ACLU lawyer Chase Strangio will represent the petitioners.

In a court filing submitted ahead of oral arguments, Prelogar's office argued that the Tennessee law deliberately focuses on "sex and gender conformity," citing a portion of the bill that "declares that its very purpose is to 'encourag[e] minors to appreciate their sex' and to ban treatments 'that might encourage minors to become disdainful of their sex.' Tenn. Code § 68-33-101(m)."

Advertisement

"That," the federal government wrote, "is sex discrimination."

Thus, the petitioners posit, SB1 imposes "differential treatment based on the sex an individual is assigned at birth."

Strangio, the deputy "transgender justice" director for the ACLU's LGBTQ and HIV Project, will be the first openly transgender-identifying person to argue before the Supreme Court.

Tennessee passed Senate Bill 1 in March 2023. It's just one of many U.S. states that have enacted similar measures to protect the health and welfare of children.

In an ACLU press release, Strangio said such bans represent "a dangerous and discriminatory affront to the well-being of transgender youth across the country and their Constitutional right to equal protection under the law."

"They are the result of an openly political effort to wage war on a marginalized group and our most fundamental freedoms," Strangio said.

Between 2019 and 2023, there were at least 13,994 minors in the U.S. who underwent some sort of "sex-change" medical intervention, including 5,700 subjected to surgeries, according to healthcare watchdog Do No Harm's database that compiled figures from insurance claims.

Advertisement

SB1 notes that these procedures can cause a minor to become irreversibly sterile, incur increased risk of disease, and suffer from "adverse and sometimes fatal psychological consequences."

"Moreover, the legislature finds it likely that not all harmful effects associated with these types of medical procedures when performed on a minor are yet fully known, as many of these procedures, when performed on a minor for such purposes, are experimental in nature and not supported by high-quality, long-term medical studies."

The state legislature also found that minors lack the maturity to "fully understand and appreciate the life-altering consequences of such procedures" and that many patients expressed regret later on.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement