US supreme court upholds Tennessee ban on youth gender-affirming care
A Tennessee state law banning gender-affirming care for minors can stand, the US supreme court has ruled, a devastating loss for trans rights supporters in a case that could set a precedent for dozens of other lawsuits involving the rights of transgender children.
The case, United States v Skrmetti, was filed last year by three families of trans children and a provider of gender-affirming care. In oral arguments, the plaintiffs – as well as the US government, then helmed by Joe Biden – argued that Tennessee's law constituted sex-based discrimination and thus violated the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment. Under Tennessee's law, someone assigned female at birth could not be prescribed testosterone, but someone assigned male at birth could receive those drugs.
Tennessee, meanwhile, has argued that the ban is necessary to protect children from what it termed 'experimental' medical treatment. During arguments, the conservative justices seemed sympathetic to that concern, although every major medical and mental health organization in the US has found that gender-affirming care can be evidence-based and medically necessary. These groups also oppose political bans on such care.
All six of the supreme court's conservative justices joined in at least part of the decision to uphold the law, although several also wrote their own concurring opinions. In his majority decision, Chief Justice John Roberts emphasized that the ruling primarily rested on the justices' finding that the law did not violate the equal protection clause, rather than on an ideological opposition to trans rights.
'This case 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,' Roberts wrote. He added: 'We leave questions regarding its policy to the people, their elected representatives, and the democratic process.'
In recent years, the question of transgender children and their rights has consumed an outsized amount of rightwing political discourse. Since 2021, 26 states have passed bans on gender-affirming care for minors, affecting nearly 40% of trans youth in the US. Twenty-six states have also outlawed trans kids from playing on sports teams that correspond with their gender identity.
Many of these restrictions have been paused by court challenges, but the supreme court's decision could have vast implications for those lawsuits' futures. A study by the Trevor Project, a mental health non-profit that aims to help LGBTQ+ kids, found that anti-trans laws are linked to a 72% increase of suicide attempts among trans and nonbinary youth.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissented from the majority opinion, alongside Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson and Elena Kagan. Because the law discriminates on the basis of sex, Sotomayor argued in her dissent, it should face higher legal scrutiny than the majority decided to give it.
'Male (but not female) adolescents can receive medicines that help them look like boys, and female (but not male) adolescents can receive medicines that help them look like girls,' Sotomayor wrote. 'By retreating from meaningful judicial review exactly where it matters most, the Court abandons transgender children and their families to political whims. In sadness, I dissent.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Bloomberg
17 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Iran Foreign Minister Condemns US Attacks
00:00 The Islamic Republic of Iran condemns in the strongest terms the United States brutal military aggression against Iran's peaceful nuclear facilities. It is an outrageous, grave and unprecedented violation of the fundamental principles of the charter of the United Nations and international law. The warmongering and lawless administration in Washington. Is solely and fully responsible for the dangerous consequences and far reaching implications of its act of aggression. The U.S. military attack on the territorial integrity and national sovereignty of a U.N. member state carried out with genocidal Israeli regime, carried out in collusion with the genocidal Israeli regime, has once again revealed the extent of the United States hostility towards the peace seeking people of Iran who will never compromise over their independence and sovereignty. The Islamic Republic of Iran continue to defend Iran's territorial sovereignty, security and people. By all means necessary. Against not just U.S. military aggression, but also the reckless and unlawful actions of the Israeli regime.
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Iranian missiles intercepted over Jerusalem after US attacks Iran nuclear sites
Iranian missiles could be seen in the sky over Jerusalem early Sunday after the United States earlier struck three Iranian nuclear sites. Air raid sirens and explosions could be heard as the missiles flew overhead and were intercepted.
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Is TikTok getting banned? Trump says he'll 'probably' extend deadline again
President Donald Trump said on Tuesday that he will "probably" extend the TikTok ban deadline yet again before its expiration on Thursday, June 19. "We probably have to get China approval. I think we'll get it," Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One on Tuesday, June 17. "I think (Chinese) President Xi will ultimately approve it." TikTok, a short-form video app, went dark for about 12 hours in January when China-based ByteDance failed to divest the app's U.S. assets, as required by federal law. Since coming into office on Jan. 20, Trump has issued two executive orders to extend the ban's deadline. But so far, a deal has yet to be struck, and the next deadline is Thursday, June 19. When asked by reporters if he has the legal basis to extend the deadline again, Trump said, "Yes, I do." If ByteDance does not divest TikTok by Thursday, June 19, the platform could be banned in the U.S. again. However, Trump has repeatedly signaled he would extend the deadline if the sale isn't finalized in time. Under federal legislation that put the TikTok ban in place, the president can implement a 90-day extension on the deadline to sell. But Trump didn't take this route in January or April. Instead, he signed executive orders delaying the ban by 75 days. If Trump wishes to sign another executive order ahead of the June 19 deadline, he can. Former President Joe Biden signed federal legislation in 2024 that gave ByteDance until Jan. 19, 2025 to divest TikTok or face a ban in the U.S. Some politicians see TikTok as a national security threat, expressing concern that ByteDance may be sharing U.S. user data with the Chinese government. ByteDance has denied these claims, which remain unsubstantiated. However, ByteDance did not divest in time. In January, TikTok went dark for a little more than 12 hours in the U.S. after the app was effectively banned. U.S. internet hosting services made TikTok unavailable to access, and app stores removed the app for download. During the short-lived shutdown, Trump promised internet hosting services and app stores that they could restore TikTok and not face legal penalties. Under the federal legislation, companies could be fined $5,000 per user they help access TikTok. For companies like Google and Apple, this could mean a $5,000 fine for each user who downloads or updates TikTok. It wasn't until Feb. 13 that TikTok became available again in the Apple App Store and Google Play Store. This story will be updated. Greta Cross is a national trending reporter at USA TODAY. Story idea? Email her at gcross@ This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: TikTok ban: Trump says he'll 'probably' extend deadline again
