Court likely to support ban on youth transgender care

Listen To Story Above

Supreme Court justices appeared inclined to uphold Tennessee’s restrictions on transgender medical treatments for minors during oral arguments, causing alarm among LGBTQ+ advocates and progressive legal experts.

During the December 4 hearing, five justices signaled support for Tennessee’s child protection law, despite claims that it contradicts previous rulings on sex-based discrimination.

Based on the questions from the Justices during the hearing, it appears the #SupremeCourt will uphold Tennessee’s restriction of gender transition medical care to kids in this controversial case.#LegalNews pic.twitter.com/AwAXON4upX

— Seth Berenzweig (@SethBerenzweig) December 6, 2024

/div>

Ian Millhiser of Vox.com expressed concern, writing: “The argument went terribly for transgender Americans, as many of the justices suggested creating a carveout from the ordinary constitutional rule restricting sex-based discrimination of all kinds.”

He noted Chief Justice Roberts’ position: “If the Court adopts Roberts’s approach, which seems likely, that’s not just a devastating blow to transgender youth and their families. It’s also a sea change in the Court’s approach to sex discrimination of all kinds.”

The Nation characterized the proceedings as “two hours of bigotry disguised as a hearing,” suggesting the conservative majority would likely maintain Tennessee’s ban on gender-affirming care.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson voiced concerns about undermining equal protection principles, stating: “I’m worried that we’re undermining the foundations of some of our bedrock equal protection [in sex discrimination] cases.”

Legal experts suggest the Court might instead consider the parental rights argument. The case, known as Skrmetti, challenges state restrictions on medical treatments for transgender youth.

Progressive advocates argue the law discriminates based on sex, while supporters maintain it protects both male and female minors from potentially harmful medical interventions.

Justice Gorsuch’s silence during arguments particularly worried LGBTQ+ advocates, given his previous support for transgender workplace protections in the 2020 Bostock decision.

QVoicenews.com noted: “Notably, Justice Neil Gorsuch — who authored the landmark Bostock v. Clayton County opinion that held transgender people cannot be discriminated against in employment — did not ask a single question during the hours-long session.”

Slate.com expressed concern about potential broader implications, suggesting the case could impact gender discrimination doctrine and lead to increased discrimination against transgender individuals and other vulnerable groups.

The case, United States v. Skrmetti, No. 23-477, continues to be closely watched as advocates worry about diminishing support for transgender rights amid growing public scrutiny of gender-affirming treatments.

This morning, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in one of the most significant cases of this term, United States v. Skrmetti.

The challenge to Tennessee’s law barring risky gender-transition interventions for minors is another baseless attempt to take a policy issue away… pic.twitter.com/vWh2BKyinE

— Carrie Severino (@JCNSeverino) December 4, 2024