U.S. Supreme Court OKs Tennessee ban on gender-affirming care for kids, a setback for transgender rights

The U.S. Supreme Court is seen on Capitol Hill in Washington, Dec. 17, 2024. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, File)
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld Tennessee's ban on gender-affirming care for transgender minors, a stunning setback to transgender rights.
The justices' 6-3 decision in a case from Tennessee effectively protects from legal challenges many efforts by U.S. President Donald Trump's Republican administration and state governments to roll back protections for transgender people. Another 26 states have laws similar to the one in Tennessee.
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for a conservative majority that the law does not violate the Constitution's equal protection clause, which requires the government to treat similarly situated people the same.
In a dissent joined by her liberal colleagues, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that the majority 'abandons transgender children and their families to political whims.'
The decision comes amid a range of other federal and state efforts to regulate the lives of transgender people, including which sports competitions they can join and which bathrooms they can use. In April, Trump's administration sued Maine for not complying with the government's push to ban transgender athletes in girls sports.
The Republican president also has sought to block federal spending on gender-affirming medical care for those under age 19 — instead promoting talk therapy only to treat young transgender people. In addition, the Supreme Court has allowed him to kick transgender service members out of the military, even as court battles continue. The president also signed another order to define the sexes as only male and female.
Trump's administration has also called for using only therapy, not broader health measures, to treat transgender youths.
The justices acted a month after the United Kingdom's top court delivered a setback to transgender rights, ruling unanimously that the U.K. Equality Act means trans women can be excluded from some groups and single-sex spaces, such as changing rooms, homeless shelters, swimming areas and medical or counseling services provided only to women.
Five years ago, the Supreme Court ruled that transgender people, as well as gay and lesbian people, are protected by a landmark federal civil rights law that prohibits sex discrimination in the workplace. That decision is not affected by Wednesday's ruling.
But the justices on Wednesday declined to apply the same sort of analysis the court used in 2020 when it found that 'sex plays an unmistakable role' in employers' decisions to punish transgender people for traits and behaviour they otherwise tolerate.
There are about 300,000 people between the ages of 13 and 17 and 1.3 million adults who identify as transgender in the United States, according to the Williams Institute at the UCLA School of Law. The Williams Institute is a think tank that researches sexual orientation and gender identity demographics to inform laws and public policy decisions.
When the case was argued in December, then-U.S. president Joe Biden's Democratic administration and families of transgender adolescents had called on the high court to strike down the Tennessee ban as unlawful sex discrimination and protect the constitutional rights of vulnerable Americans.
They argued that the law violates the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.
Tennessee's law bans puberty blockers and hormone treatments for transgender minors, but it allows the same drugs to be used for other purposes.
Soon after Trump took office, the Justice Department told the court that its position had changed.
A major issue in the case was the appropriate level of scrutiny courts should apply to such laws.
The lowest level is known as rational basis review, and almost every law looked at that way is ultimately upheld. Indeed, the federal appeals court in Cincinnati that allowed the Tennessee law to be enforced held that lawmakers acted rationally to regulate medical procedures, well within their authority.
The appeals court reversed a trial court that employed a higher level of review, heightened scrutiny, which applies in cases of sex discrimination. Under this more searching examination, the state must identify an important objective and show that the law helps accomplish it.
___
Mark Sherman, The Associated Press

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

CBC

3 hours ago

• CBC

The U.S. is cutting billions from science. Canadian researchers say it's time to step up

Social Sharing Scientists in Canada are scrambling. Over the past few months, the U.S. government has cut billions of dollars in funding from scientific research as part of sweeping cost-cutting measures. "It's really shocking. It's really like this big cloud over science," Kate Moran, CEO of Ocean Networks Canada, told Quirks & Quarks. Ocean Networks Canada participates in a project called the Argo system, an international program that collects information from on and under the ocean using a fleet of robotic instruments that drift with the ocean currents. But that program, which is led by researchers in the U.S., could be at risk. Many Canadian research groups rely heavily on U.S. partners for support and data. But since Donald Trump was elected president of the United States, that support has taken a massive hit. The New York Times reported in March that the administration plans to reduce the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) workforce by up to 20 per cent, which Moran says could have a direct impact on their work. Some of those staffing cuts at the NOAA have already happened. "Because the U.S. is such a big player, I'm not sure we could step up and be like the U.S.," said Moran. And cuts are happening across the board. The administration terminated $1 billion US in cuts to the National Institutes of Health, a move ruled "void and illegal" and blocked by a district judge earlier this month. The government has also been in a battle with Harvard University, putting billions of dollars of potential funding in jeopardy. Layoffs across a number of government agencies have been put on hold by a federal judge in California. In an executive order issued by the White House in May, Trump said that "over the last 5 years, confidence that scientists act in the best interests of the public has fallen significantly." "My Administration is committed to restoring a gold standard for science to ensure that federally funded research is transparent, rigorous, and impactful, and that Federal decisions are informed by the most credible, reliable, and impartial scientific evidence available." Environment and Climate Change Canada told CBC in a statement it "has a long-standing relationship with the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) on operational and research activities related to weather, climate, satellites, and water monitoring," and that the "department has not been formally informed of any changes to its collaboration with NOAA." The trickle-down effect of cuts has left Canadian researchers trying to figure out how to adapt to these uncertain times, while others say it's now Canada's responsibility to step up. Targeting climate science Environmental science and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts seem to be a direct target of the Trump administration's cuts. More than 1,000 scientists and other employees are set to be laid-off from the Environmental Protection Agency's research office. The effects have been felt in Canada. Researchers here filling out forms for U.S. government grants have had to answer questions such as "Can you confirm this is not a climate or 'environmental justice' project or include such elements?" and "Can you confirm that this is no DEI project or DEI elements of the project?" The political climate has Deborah Wench on edge. She relies heavily on information from long-term monitoring projects to fuel her research into the carbon cycle. Wench studies how carbon flows between different climates. To do that, she needs long-term data sets collected from satellites. Wench says the U.S. operates a lot of the satellites used in her research. "I'm not really sure how to express this. It's mostly, for me, a sense of impending doom," said Wench, an associate professor at the University of Toronto. "It's taken decades and the careers of thousands of people to build up these measurement records, and it looks like it will take months to destroy them." Though she didn't want to specify which specific instruments she uses, she says she's concerned it's on the chopping block in the U.S., which would mean a loss of long-term monitoring. Then there's HAWC, a project that will use three Canadian-built instruments to measure the amount of aerosols, water vapour and thin ice clouds in the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere. The information could be used to improve future climate projects, assuming it continues to receive NASA support. Trump's 2026 budget, released in May, proposed a $6 billion US funding cut to the space agency, amounting to 24 per cent of NASA's current budget. WATCH | Canadian scientists trying to keep world's ocean sensors afloat: Canadian scientists trying to keep world's ocean sensors afloat 12 minutes ago Duration 1:32 These robot scientists dive deep into the ocean to measure the vital signs of planet Earth. But proposed funding cuts in the U.S. could mean critical climate data is on the chopping block. "Much of it is just so speculative, right?" said Chris Fletcher, an associate professor at the University of Waterloo. "We're still kind of on the descent.... So it's unclear yet exactly how all of this will shake out, and it's quite unsettling." One of the HAWC instruments was supposed to be attached to a NASA satellite. But Fletcher says that's now in question. "I'm confident from the Canadian side that because of this tremendous investment that Canada has made, that our instruments will fly. The question is about which components of the proposed NASA mission will fly," said Fletcher. CBC reached out to the Canadian Space Agency, but did not recieve a comment before publication. What happens next Canada's Department of Innovation, Science and Industry did not provide an interview or comment to CBC about how Canada plans to respond to funding cuts in the U.S. Frédéric Bouchard says the turmoil in the U.S. means a greater responsibility for Canada to assert its scientific sovereignty. He was part of the federally funded Advisory Panel on the Federal Research Support System, which, in 2023, took a deep dive into how Canada could better support scientific research. "It's our own responsibility to make sure that we have a strong and generous science capacity so we have access to the experts we need, when we need them," said Bouchard, a philosopher of science and dean of the faculty of arts and sciences at the Université de Montréal. "We shouldn't wait for other countries to do all the hard work and hope that we can benefit from it." He says that as American scientists leave the United States, Canada could welcome some of those researchers. He also said it will be important to invest in the future, including support for graduate students both in Canada and abroad in the United States, to make sure they're able to continue work in their field. Even so, Bouchard says, what's happening in the U.S. is going to have an impact — there's no stopping that. "What's happening is destabilizing science across the world," said Bouchard. "We need to make sure we play a larger role and that we build our own muscle mass, if you will, to be able to withstand more of the disruption." Moran says Ocean Networks Canada, and other organizations like it, are ready to do so. She says they are prepared to do simple things, such as download data to protect the long-term data sets. And if there are more cuts in the U.S., she says she's prepared to make the case to the Canadian government and request more funding. "We're talking about what we could do to fill those gaps," said Moran. "Canada has all the skills and knowledge and scientists." Politically-driven chaos is disrupting U.S. scientific institutions and creating challenges for science in Canada. Science is a global endeavour and collaborations with the U.S. are routine. In this special episode of Quirks & Quarks, we explore what Canadian scientists are doing to preserve their work to assert scientific sovereignty in the face of this unprecedented destabilization. Canadian climate scientists brace for cuts to climate science infrastructure and data U.S. President Donald Trump's attacks on climate science are putting our Earth observing systems, in the oceans and in orbit, at risk. Canadian scientists who rely on U.S. led climate data infrastructure worry about losing long-term data that would affect our ability to understand our changing climate. With: Kate Moran, the president and CEO of Ocean Networks Canada and Emeritus Professor of Oceanography at the University of Victoria Debra Wunch, Physicist at the University of TorontoChris Fletcher, Department of Geography and Environmental Management at the University of Waterloo U.S. cuts to Great Lakes science and monitoring threaten our shared freshwater resourceU.S. budget and staffing cuts are jeopardizing the long-standing collaboration with our southern neighbour to maintain the health of the Great Lakes, our shared resource and the largest freshwater system in the world. With: Jérôme Marty, executive director of the International Association for Great Lakes Research and part-time professor at the University of OttawaGreg McClinchey, policy and legislative director with the Great Lakes Fishery CommissionMichael Wilkie, Biologist at Wilfred Laurier UniversityBrittney Borowiec, research associate in the Wilkie Lab at Wilfred Laurier UniversityAaron Fisk, Ecologist and Canada Research Chair at the University of Windsor Unexpected ways U.S. culture war policies are affecting Canadian scientists One of the first things President Trump did after taking office was to sign an executive order eliminating all DEI policies in the federal government. This is having far-reaching consequences for Canadian scientists as they navigate the new reality of our frequent research partner's hostility against so-called 'woke science.'With:Dr. Sofia Ahmed, Clinician scientist, and academic lead for the Women and Children's Health Research Institute at the University of Alberta Angela Kaida, professor of health sciences and Canada Research Chair at Simon Fraser University in VancouverDawn Bowdish, professor of immunology, the executive director of the Firestone Institute for Respiratory Health and Canada Research Chair at McMaster UniversityKevin Zhao, MD/PhD student in immunology in the Bowdish Lab at McMaster UniversityJérôme Marty, executive director of the International Association for Great Lakes Research Canada has a 'responsibility' to step up and assert scientific sovereigntyA 2023 report on how to strengthen our federal research support system could be our roadmap to more robust scientific sovereignty. The Advisory Panel on the Federal Research Support System made recommendations to the federal government for how we could reform our funding landscape. The intent was to allow us to quickly respond to national research priorities and to make Canada a more enticing research partner in world science. With: Frédéric Bouchard, Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences and professor of philosophy of science at the Université de Montreal. Chair of the Advisory Panel on the Federal Research Support System.

CBC

3 hours ago

• CBC

How music fuelled, and was fuelled by, the No Kings protests

If you were online last week, you probably saw footage from the No Kings protests. The gigantic demonstration against U.S. President Donald Trump took place across the United States and portions of Canada — but was connected by one prevailing aspect: music. There was Les Miserables 's rousing Do You Hear the People Sing?, sung by a crowd in Auburn, Calif. There was Bella Ciao — a lesser-known piece strongly linked to the Italian anti-fascist movement of the 1940s — performed by a brass band to drown out counter-protesters in Atlanta. And there was a raft of other music, new and old, by musicians looking to tie themselves to the No Kings demonstrations. "There's a fascinating mixture of new music as well as old songs being brought back into the mix," said Benjamin Tausig, an associate professor of critical music studies at New York's Stony Brook University. It's "inspiring people in the context of protest at this moment." That's because of music's inextricable connection to — and ability to inspire — political action, he says. When used in a specific way, some songs can become almost irresistible calls to action. And the beginning of protest movements often fundamentally alter both what music we are exposed to, and what music artists choose to release, says Tausig. But when it comes to protest music, not all songs are created equal, says Noriko Manabe, chair of Indiana University's department of music theory and co-editor of the upcoming Oxford Handbook of Protest Music. And the way that we engage with that music, she says, speaks to why some of the most widespread songs used at recent protests have been older, less traditionally popular tunes. Songs like Bella Ciao, Do You Hear the People Sing? or even The Star-Spangled Banner — which had moments of its own at the protests — tend to be of a specific type, she says. They are "participatory" versus "presentational." While presentational music is meant for one skilled performer, participatory music, like other iconic protest songs such as We Shall Overcome, is not. It's "more repetitive so that people can more easily join in," she said. "Whether or not they're virtuosic is actually not the point. The point is to get as many people involved as possible." And with participation, she says, comes ideology. "The idea of moving vocal cords and muscles together, where you have to listen to other people and feel their movements — " Manabe said. "Just the act of voicing it itself makes you feel that this is part of your belief system." Co-opted music Tausig says that participatory aspect can even eclipse what the song is actually about. Historically, he says, the most popular protest songs tend to be co-opted, with no direct or apparent connection to any political movement. That's because the cultural iconography associated with them tends to hold more weight. Kendrick Lamar and Beyonce became very important in the Black Lives Matter movement, for example. "Their songs didn't even specifically have to address Black Lives Matter to still become really effective at mobilizing people," he said. Some songs are even adopted by movements they seem to be explicitly against. For example, Tausig notes, Bruce Springsteen's Born in the U.S.A., about a disillusioned Vietnam War veteran, was famously referenced in a 1984 campaign speech by U.S. President Ronald Reagan. More recently, Creedence Clearwater Revival's draft-dodging ditty Fortunate Son was played at a military parade, prompting speculation over whether it was either a form of protest or due to a common misinterpretation of the song's meaning. In both cases, he says, what the song appeared to represent was more important than what it actually said. A long history But even still, songs being used by both sides of a political debate have a long history in protest music, Manabe says. Going back to Britain in the 1600s, warring factions of Royalists and Parliamentarians would disseminate "broadsheets": large pieces of paper with often-rhyming lyrics in support of their side. But to make sure they were easy to remember, they would be set to well-known tunes. That resulted in "contrafacta": each side singing the same "song," though with completely different words supporting completely different ideals. That phenomenon continues to today. Manabe points to protests in Hong Kong in 2014, when both defenders and critics of the democracy movement used Do You Hear the People Sing? Meanwhile, rock, country, EDM and hip-hop artists seemingly jumped on the bandwagon to release or re-release their political music, creating musical touchstones and viral moments in the protests themselves. Arkansas folk musician Jesse Welles, who crafted social media fame by releasing songs tied to the news, debuted a new track No Kings which has already racked up over 150,000 views on YouTube. In Salt Lake City, EDM musician Subtronics added a "No Kings" section to his performance, gaining over two million views on TikTok. Meanwhile, the Dropkick Murphys, Soundgarden and Pavement have all made posts connecting their music, old and new, to the protests — along with Canadian Grammy-winner Allison Russell, lesser known blues, country and bluegrass musicians and even an AI hip-hop track simply titled No Kings that's amassed over 750,000 views on YouTube. "Expressing dissent or resistance to authority through nonviolence is one of the most potent weapons that we can wield," said Canadian musician Jordan Benjamin (known artistically as Grandson) who also released new music directly tied to the No Kings protests. From an artist's standpoint, the sudden swell makes sense: given the cyclical nature of pop culture, music that may have seemed old-fashioned or out of step has suddenly become more in demand. And at the beginning of such changes in direction, Tausig says, which songs will define that movement becomes an important question.

Winnipeg Free Press

6 hours ago

• Winnipeg Free Press

Diplomatic breakthrough elusive as Israel-Iran war stretches into second week

TEL AVIV, Israel (AP) — Hours of talks aimed at de-escalating fighting between Israel and Iran failed to produce a diplomatic breakthrough as the war entered its second week with a fresh round of strikes between the two adversaries. European ministers and Iran's top diplomat met for four hours Friday in Geneva, as President Donald Trump continued to weigh U.S. military involvement and worries rose over potential strikes on nuclear reactors. European officials expressed hope for future negotiations, and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said he was open to further dialogue while emphasizing that Tehran had no interest in negotiating with the U.S. while Israel continued attacking. 'Iran is ready to consider diplomacy if aggression ceases and the aggressor is held accountable for its committed crimes,' he told reporters. No date was set for the next round of talks. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Israel's military operation in Iran would continue 'for as long as it takes' to eliminate what he called the existential threat of Iran's nuclear program and arsenal of ballistic missiles. Israel's top general echoed the warning, saying the Israeli military was ready 'for a prolonged campaign.' But Netanyahu's goal could be out of reach without U.S. help. Iran's underground Fordo uranium enrichment facility is considered to be out of reach to all but America's 'bunker-buster' bombs. Trump said he would put off deciding whether to join Israel's air campaign against Iran for up to two weeks. The war between Israel and Iran erupted June 13, with Israeli airstrikes targeting nuclear and military sites, top generals and nuclear scientists. At least 657 people, including 263 civilians, have been killed in Iran and more than 2,000 wounded, according to a Washington-based Iranian human rights group. Iran has retaliated by firing 450 missiles and 1,000 drones at Israel, according to Israeli army estimates. Most have been shot down by Israel's multitiered air defenses, but at least 24 people in Israel have been killed and hundreds wounded. Worries rise over the perils of attacking Iran's nuclear reactors Addressing an emergency meeting of the U.N. Security Council, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency warned against attacks on Iran's nuclear reactors, particularly its only commercial nuclear power plant in the southern city of Bushehr. 'I want to make it absolutely and completely clear: In case of an attack on the Bushehr nuclear power plant, a direct hit would result in a very high release of radioactivity to the environment,' said Rafael Grossi, chief of the U.N. nuclear watchdog. 'This is the nuclear site in Iran where the consequences could be most serious.' Israel has not targeted Iran's nuclear reactors, instead focusing its strikes on the main uranium enrichment facility at Natanz, centrifuge workshops near Tehran, laboratories in Isfahan and the country's Arak heavy water reactor southwest of the capital. Grossi has warned repeatedly that such sites should not be military targets. After initially reporting no visible damage from Israel's Thursday strikes on the Arak heavy water reactor, the IAEA on Friday said it had assessed 'key buildings at the facility were damaged,' including the distillation unit. The reactor was not operational and contained no nuclear material, so the damage posed no risk of contamination, the watchdog said. Iran previously agreed to limit its uranium enrichment and allow international inspectors access to its nuclear sites under a 2015 deal with the U.S., France, China, Russia, Britain and Germany in exchange for sanctions relief. But after Trump pulled the U.S. unilaterally out of the deal during his first term, Iran began enriching uranium up to 60% — a short, technical step away from weapons-grade levels of 90% — and restricting access to its nuclear facilities. Iran has long maintained its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes, but it is the only non-nuclear-weapon state to enrich uranium up to 60%. Israel is widely believed to be the only Middle Eastern country with a nuclear weapons program but has never acknowledged it. Israel says 'difficult days' ahead Israel said its warplanes hit dozens of military targets across Iran on Friday, including missile-manufacturing facilities, while an Iranian missile hit Israel's northern city of Haifa, sending plumes of smoke billowing over the Mediterranean port and wounding at least 31 people. Iranian state media reported explosions from Israeli strikes in an industrial area of Rasht, along the coast of the Caspian Sea. Israel's military had warned Iranians to evacuate the area around Rasht's Industrial City, southwest of the city's downtown. But with Iran's internet shut off — now for more than 48 hours — it's unclear how many people could see the message. The Israeli military believes it has destroyed most of Iran's ballistic missile launchers, contributing to the steady decline in Iranian attacks. But several of the roughly three dozen missiles that Israel said Iran fired on Friday slipped through the country's aerial defense system, setting off air-raid sirens across the country and sending shrapnel flying into a residential area in the southern city of Beersheba, a frequent target of Iranian missiles where a hospital was hit Thursday.