Schumer rips Supreme Court decision upholding state ban on transgender treatments for minors: 'Awful'
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., slammed the U.S. Supreme Court's decision on Wednesday to uphold Tennessee's ban on transgender "treatments" for minors.
"This Supreme Court seems to have forgotten that one of their jobs is to protect individual rights and protect individuals from being discriminated against. It's an awful decision," Schumer told reporters on Capitol Hill.
Schumer accused Republicans of trying to infringe on the rights of transgender youths.
Scotus Rules On State Ban On Gender Transition 'Treatments' For Minors In Landmark Case
"On the floor, we had a bill, that the Republicans wanted to take away these rights," Schumer said. "And we got, I believe, every Democrat voting against it. So it failed because it needed 60 votes. So we're going to explore every solution."
Schumer further condemned the Court's 6-3 decision online.
Read On The Fox News App
"Republicans' cruel crusade against trans kids is all an attempt to divert attention from ripping healthcare away from millions of Americans," Schumer wrote. "We'll keep fighting, and we'll keep marching on."
The Republican Attorneys General Association (RAGA), meanwhile, said the majority's decision "helps restore sanity for millions of families across America."
"Boys are boys and girls are girls," RAGA President and Executive Director Adam Piper said in a statement to Fox News Digital. "While Republican AGs crusade against risky, irreversible gender transition procedures for minors, Dem pander to their extreme donors and slouch towards Gomorrah. We must continue to protect our daughters from men trying to invade their single-sex spaces, privacy and athletic competitions."
Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti – whose office handled the defense in the case – praised the decision, saying that "the common sense of Tennessee voters prevailed over judicial activism."
"The rapid and unexplained rise in the number of kids seeking these life-altering interventions, despite the lack of supporting evidence, calls for careful scrutiny from our elected leaders," he said in a statement. "This victory transcends politics. It's about real Tennessee kids facing real struggles. Families across our state and our nation deserve solutions based on science, not ideology. Today's landmark decision recognizes that the Constitution lets us fulfill society's highest calling – protecting our kids."
Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee praised Skrmetti for securing the "historic" Supreme Court victory, adding that "protecting children is a fundamental responsibility that we take seriously."
"I was proud to sign this bipartisan legislation that lawfully safeguards young people from irreversible, life-altering medical decisions," Lee said in a statement to Fox News Digital. "Voters, through their elected representatives, should have the power to decide what they believe on serious issues like this one."
Supreme Court Appears Divided Over State Bans On Gender Transition 'Treatments' For Minors
The case centered on Tennessee state law SB1, which restricts sex transition treatments for minors for the treatment of gender dysphoria.
The Tennessee legislature's findings, as detailed in the statute, included that such treatments "can lead to the minor becoming irreversibly sterile, having an increased risk of disease and illness, or suffering from adverse and sometimes fatal psychological consequences." The Republican-controlled state body also noted that minors "lack the maturity to fully understand and appreciate" these consequences and may later regret undergoing the treatments and want to de-transition.
Writing for the conservative majority, Justice John Roberts noted that the case from Tennessee "carries with it the weight of fierce scientific and policy debates about the safety, efficacy, and propriety of medical treatments in an evolving field."
"The voices in these debates raise sincere concerns; the implications for all are profound," he wrote. "The Equal Protection Clause does not resolve these disagreements. Nor does it afford us license to decide them as we see best.
The conservative justices ruled that SB1 is not subject to heightened scrutiny under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. They said the law incorporates two classifications – on the basis of age and the basis of medical use.
"Healthcare providers may administer certain medical treatments to individuals ages 18 and older but not to minors," Roberts wrote. "Healthcare providers may administer puberty blockers or hormones to minors to treat certain conditions but not to treat gender dysphoria, gender identity disorder, or gender incongruence. Classifications that turn on age or medical use are subject to only rational basis review."
The decision says neither of those classifications turns on sex. Rather, SB1 "prohibits healthcare providers from administering puberty blockers or hormones to minors for certain medical uses, regardless of a minor's sex."
All three liberal justices dissented, with Justice Sonia Sotomayor arguing that the majority "abandons transgender children and their families to political whims."Original article source: Schumer rips Supreme Court decision upholding state ban on transgender treatments for minors: 'Awful'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Chicago Tribune
32 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
Letters to the Editor: Vote-by-mail's not the reason Republicans are losing elections; chromosomes not a simple solution for trans sports issue
I find it amusing that Kevin Coyne, chair of the DuPage County GOP, has concluded the only reason DuPage Republicans are losing elections is because they don't vote by mail. Like most of the Republicans left in his party, he refuses to admit that his is now a party of insanity. Many Republicans have jumped ship to the Democratic Party, wandered off as independents or become non-voters out of disgust. Some did so during President Trump's first term; still more in his latter. No, it must be that all-powerful vote by mail and not because Trump rejected the outcome of the 2020 elections, incited a violent insurrection on Jan. 6 and then pardoned the participants, hobbled emergency and health agencies like FEMA and the National Weather Service, and gutted the EPA so polluters are fully free to poison our air and water for greater profits. It can't possibly be because the president rolled back decades of progress for civil and human rights, shut down the heinous 'Sesame Street' or diverted money from seniors' Meals on Wheels so millionaires can be a given a greater tax break. He's made it so it's now OK to threaten universities and oppose law firms you don't like, to accept foreign gifts for personal favor and to sell U.S. citizenship, for which many veterans gave their lives, for the bargain price of $5 million. No, Republicans losing elections must be the result of something else. So, yes, Kevin, please sign your entire party up for vote-by-mail. It's a great plan — for the rest of us, who live in the world of the sane.I am writing in response to the letter, 'Chromosomes should dictate who competes against who,' which ran in the June 15 edition of the Naperville Sun. The idea that 'chromosomes should dictate who competes against who' in sports competitions is overly simplistic and does not reflect the reality of genetic diversity in human beings. Chromosomally, sex is not easily defined. There are many chromosomal variations other than XX or XY, including XXX, XYY and XXX, and many more. What about women who have Turner syndrome or only have one X chromosome or men with Klinefelter syndrome with an XXY karyotype? Should we bar them from sports too? The vast majority of people have not had their own genome sequenced. The original letter writer herself may even have a chromosomal variation other than XX and may never know it. There is no one way for women's bodies, and genes, to be. Trans people belong in sports and denying them the right to participate based on their chromosomes is up in Naperville deeply influenced my path. The opportunities I had at Naperville School District 203 ignited my passions for science and service. Later, federal research experiences shaped my future. When I approached graduation from Lake Forest College, I felt lost. How could I blend my passions into a career? I found the answer during a research internship at Rush University on a project funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Disease. Today, at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, I am a doctoral candidate in epidemiology, the field that works to understand and reduce disease. My research and training are largely supported by the National Cancer Institute. Epidemiologists help fight cancer by collecting and analyzing data on cancer cases and deaths. For example, epidemiology research supports the 2022-27 Illinois Cancer Control Plan to reduce cancer, promote prevention and improve care. My research explores why people get colorectal cancer at different rates. While overall rates have decreased since the 2010s, cases in people under 50 have increased by 44% in Illinois over the past two decades. At all ages, Black Illinoisans face the highest rates. Despite great strides, we have a long way to go in the fight to end cancer. But I fear for the future of this fight. This year, federally mandated cuts to the National Institutes of Health's budget will eliminate essential resources like staff, buildings and utilities. Public universities in Illinois are facing a $71.5 million loss in funding, devastating science infrastructure and destroying jobs. Additionally, Illinois universities have had millions in already-awarded grants canceled (including more than $1 million at Rush). These cuts pause essential research, threaten economic growth and undermine the training of the next generation of scientists. Dwindling research funds are not the only threat. In March, the Centers for Disease Control blocked $449 million awarded to the Illinois Department of Public Health. With these cuts, we lose support to fight chronic diseases, like cancer, and infectious disease, like the flu and COVID-19. This is not an issue of political affiliation. Sweeping cuts threaten the research and resources needed to fight disease, leaving everyone's health at stake. Please contact your local, state and federal elected officials and tell them you oppose cuts to science and public health funding. You can also express support by signing the Citizens for Science Policy pledge at was the recent U.S. Army's 250th anniversary overlooked? There was lots of coverage and criticism of the June 14 parade but not much in the way of gratitude for the U.S. Army. Although there's a lot of political turmoil right now, let us never, ever forget that freedom is not free. I'm not going to talk about political views but just be sure to thank all of our military folks and especially the U.S. Army, whose soldiers have protected our freedoms for 250 years! Maybe what was overlooked is that our military are the ones who really guard the gates of freedom around the world for all of us. They are the ones who enable the rights we all enjoy, especially the right to free speech, and have been doing so from 1775 to 2025. Whatever our political views may be, I think we should be both mindful of and thankful for the Army's faithful service to our country. They did a great job in the parade and made us proud. May God continue to bless our country and all of our military.
Yahoo
36 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Mahmoud Khalil ordered released by federal judge
A federal judge is ordering the release of Columbia University pro-Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil. U.S. District Judge Michael Farbiarz indicated that he will issue an order requiring that Khalil be released today. He denied a motion by the government to stay the ruling for seven days. MORE: Judge denies Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil's request for release The judge asked the parties to consult with a magistrate judge about any conditions that will be attached to Khalil's release on bail. Last week, Judge Farbiarz issued a preliminary injunction barring the Trump administration from continuing to detain Khalil based on Secretary of State Marco Rubio's determination that his continued presence in the country would pose a risk to foreign policy -- but the judge subsequently sided with the government in ruling that Khalil could continue to be detained on the grounds that he misrepresented information on his green card application. Khalil, a green card holder who is married to an American citizen, has been held in a detention facility since he was arrested by ICE agents in New York City in March. This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
Yahoo
36 minutes ago
- Yahoo
NY Daily News calls Adams' ban of City Hall reporter unconstitutional, demands reversal
NEW YORK — New York Daily News management is demanding that Mayor Eric Adams reverse his stated ban on the paper's senior City Hall reporter from mayoral press conferences, calling the move a violation of the Daily News' constitutional rights. An attorney for the paper made the demand in a letter sent to the city's Law Department Friday. 'Banning (senior City Hall reporter Chris) Sommerfeldt from attending the Mayor's press conferences is plainly unconstitutional,' attorney Matthew Leish wrote, citing both First and 14th amendment issues. Leish asked the Adams administration to drop the ban by noon on Monday at the latest, and did not rule out further legal action. '(T)he Daily News and Mr. Sommerfeldt expressly reserve all of their rights and remedies,' he wrote. As previously reported by the Daily News, Adams banned Sommerfeldt from future press conferences Tuesday after the reporter asked a question without raising his hand. Sommerfeldt has not been called on by the mayor's press staff in more than three months. The reporter had just asked a follow-up to another journalist's question when Adams said: 'You're calling out a lot, Chris, stop calling out!' the mayor said in a sing-song tone. 'You must have done that in school.' 'Listen, if he does that again, he's not to come into our conferences,' Adams then said to his press staff. Sommerfeldt then asked the mayor, 'You want to take a question from me, then?' 'He did it again,' Adams replied. 'Make sure security knows he's not allowed back into this room.' In his letter Friday, Leish, the Daily News' attorney, said the purported ban 'unquestionably violates the First Amendment,' which prohibits selective regulation of the press. 'The Mayor's press conferences are generally open to any credentialed journalist, and the purported reason for Mr. Sommerfeldt's exclusion – the fact that he asked questions without being called on – is completely arbitrary given that other journalists have done exactly the same thing without incident,' Leish wrote. The attorney said the ban also violated Sommerfeldt's 14th Amendment right to due process to address the proposed ban. Asked during a round table on the upcoming mayoral primary on WPIX Thursday about his plans, Sommerfeldt said he was going to continue 'doing my job.' Adams, asked if he planned to enforce the ban during a News 12 interview, said he expected there would be conversations between his team and Daily News management and that 'we'll decide what we're going to do from there.' City hall did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The letter comes amid a groundswell of opposition to the ban. The New York Press Club, the Freedom of the Press Foundation and PEN America have all called on Adams to drop the ban, as has the Daily News Union. Republican mayoral hopeful Curtis Sliwa and Democratic candidate Zellnor Myrie also criticized Adams for the ban. _____
