Some Justices Signal Willingness To Let Transgender Care Bans Stand
Neil Gorsuch's silence and Amy Coney Barrett's impartial approach to questions during the hearing make it hard to predict which way the court will rule in the case regarding Tennessee's ban on gender-affirming treatment, The Wall Street Journal reports.
The Wall Street Journal:
Some Supreme Court Justices Appear Ready To Allow Bans On Transgender Care. Gorsuch Is A Mystery.
Several Supreme Court justices signaled a willingness Wednesday to let states prohibit transgender teenagers from obtaining puberty blockers and other treatments, but the outcome of the case appeared uncertain after one closely watched justice, Neil Gorsuch, said nothing during more than two hours of proceedings. The court heard arguments to decide the constitutionality of a 2023 ban enacted in Tennessee. The families of three transgender teens, along with the Biden administration, argued that the measure discriminates based on sex, therefore violating the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause. Their argument hinges on the fact that Tennessee forbids medical treatment only for what practitioners call gender dysphoria but allows use of the same hormones and drugs for other conditions. (Bravin and Kusisto, 12/4)
CNN:
Takeaways From The Historic Transgender Care Arguments At The Supreme Court
Several of the court’s conservatives appeared heavily focused on so-called detransitioners – individuals who regret receiving gender-affirming treatments earlier in their lives – as they expressed skepticism toward arguments that transgender Americans should receive heightened protection under the law. Justice Samuel Alito, in particular, was interested in the question of whether transgender status is “immutable.” Historically, the court has considered immutability to be a key aspect of the characteristics of a group deserving of more protection. (Cole, Fritze and Sneed, 12/4)
The New York Times:
Outside The Supreme Court, America’s Culture Wars Play Out.
Even before arguments got underway, the undercurrents of America’s culture wars pulsed through the crowd. Speakers from both sides blasted their speeches over microphones, each trying to drown out the other. Senator Ed Markey, Democrat of Massachusetts, was nearly shouting when he said it was a “moral obligation” to defend the rights of transgender people. ... Outnumbered, the supporters of the Tennessee law more often expressed their perspective through posters than chants. Standing before a sign reading “Stop the Harm,” they framed the measure as an effort to protect children from “barbaric doctors.” (Kim and Kavi, 12/4)
USA Today:
The Science Behind The Transgender Minors Supreme Court Case
Gender-affirming care is a range of social, psychological, behavioral and medical interventions designed to support a person in affirming their gender identity, according to the World Health Organization. The American Medical Association, which represents more than 250,000 U.S. doctors, passed a resolution last year calling for protection for this type of care. More than 30 major medical associations and health organizations worldwide support health care for transgender adults and youth, which they say can help prevent suicide in this vulnerable population. (Rodriguez, 12/5)
The Washington Post:
How RFK Jr. Could Affect Child Gender-Affirming Care As Trump’s HHS Secretary
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has speculated herbicide chemicals are turning kids transgender. He called puberty blockers “repurposed castration drugs.” Kennedy’s comments, made in the last two years, have plunged him into the debate over transgender care since President-Elect Donald Trump, who campaigned against transgender rights, tapped him last month to lead the Department of Health and Human Services. (Nirappil, 12/4)
