The Supreme Court has ruled, in a 6-3 decision, to uphold the Tennessee law banning gender transition care for young people.
The case, United States v Skrmetti, was taken to court by three transgender teenagers, their parents and a doctor that provides transition medications. Their argument was that the Tennessee law banning hormone supplements and puberty blockers was an infringement of rights on the basis of sex.
This ruling will likely impact on a wider scale than just Tennessee, given that 25 states have similar laws.
Chief Justice John Roberts, who wrote the decision, said that it does not discriminate against transgender people, despite the banned medications still being permitted for use for other medical issues besides transition care.
Sonia Sotomayor, one of the justices that dissented, wrote that this ruling leads to “medical discrimination on the basis of sex.” She also said that by doing this “the Court abandons transgender children and their families to political whims.”
The ban is viewed as necessary because Tennessee argues that the effects of these medications are irreversible, but transgender advocates have disagreed saying that drugs like puberty blockers are completely reversible.
This was the first time The Supreme Court has seen a case dealing with transgender healthcare, so this ruling is extremely important for the future of the LGBTQ+ community. It sets a legal precedent that will influence how all courts and lawmakers approach discrimination and medical access for transgender individuals, and most likely beyond.
In wake of this decision, healthcare professionals and transgender people will now be grappling with uncertainty for their futures. There will most likely be legal risks for doctors in Tennessee, and other states, who distribute these medicates. For transgender youth, he ruling may mean losing access to care that has been shown to reduce rates of depression and suicide.
Legal experts also warn that this decision could open the door to broader challenges against LGBTQ+ rights, especially if states interpret the ruling as a green light to pass further restrictions based on political ideology rather than medical evidence.
This ruling, overall, is a massive step backwards for the transgender community. Major organizations and medical professionals have become increasingly supportive of transitional care as it has proven to be safe and affection. This, however, will most likely take a turn, and transgender youth will feel the effects.
