The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday heard oral arguments in a pivotal case challenging Tennessee's 2023 law banning gender-affirming medical treatments for transgender minors. The case, brought by the Biden administration on behalf of families of trans youth, has brought the question of transgender youth and the role of state regulation of medical procedures into sharp focus.
At the heart of the case is Tennessee’s 2023 prohibition on prescribing hormone therapies - such as puberty blockers and hormone replacement therapy - to transgender individuals under 18. While the law does not extend to surgical interventions, which are rarely performed on minors, it represents a significant restriction on gender-affirming care. While the Biden administration is leading the charge, the law is being challenged by three transgender teenagers, their families, and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), who argue that the legislation violates constitutional rights.
Listen:
As Truth in Media notes further; Chase Strangio, a notable figure as the first openly transgender lawyer to argue before the Supreme Court, articulated the case’s essence. “The government of Tennessee is displacing the decision-making of loving parents,” Strangio argued, emphasizing that such care is supported by numerous medical associations, including the American Medical Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics, for its benefits in alleviating gender dysphoria.
NEW: ACLU transgender lawyer says children should be allowed to be castr*ted, stating that even two-year-olds know when it's time to transition.
— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) December 3, 2024
Nothing could prepare me for this voice.
Transgender Chase Strangio will be arguing before the Supreme Court in favor of trans… pic.twitter.com/F0AswDi6M4
The state, however, defends its position, with Sen. Jack Johnson, who sponsored the bill, asserting that the legislation is akin to other age-based restrictions like tattoos or alcohol consumption, aimed at protecting minors from irreversible decisions. Tennessee’s argument hinges on the notion that the law regulates medical practices rather than discriminates based on sex or gender identity.
This case arrives at the Supreme Court amid a broader wave of legislation across the U.S., where more than two dozen states have similar restrictions. The outcome could set a precedent not only for transgender youth but potentially for all minors seeking medical care that involves hormone treatments or puberty blockers for any condition.
The courtroom was packed on Wednesday, with observers from various advocacy groups and parents of transgender children present, highlighting the personal stakes involved. For families like that of LW, a transgender teen from Tennessee, the law has forced them to undertake long journeys out of state to continue her medical treatment, illustrating the practical implications of such bans.
The Supreme Court’s decision, expected by summer, could either affirm the rights of transgender youth to access gender-affirming care or uphold state authority to regulate medical treatments for minors. This ruling might also influence future cases regarding transgender rights, especially in states with pending or active litigation against similar bans.
