{"id":188110,"date":"2024-09-05T14:55:15","date_gmt":"2024-09-05T18:55:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.aclu.org\/?p=188110"},"modified":"2024-11-14T14:58:12","modified_gmt":"2024-11-14T19:58:12","slug":"the-supreme-court-case-on-trans-health-care-explained","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.aclu.org\/news\/lgbtq-rights\/the-supreme-court-case-on-trans-health-care-explained","title":{"rendered":"The Supreme Court Case on Trans Health Care, Explained."},"content":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"author":112,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_relevanssi_hide_post":"","_relevanssi_hide_content":"","_relevanssi_pin_for_all":"","_relevanssi_pin_keywords":"","_relevanssi_unpin_keywords":"","_relevanssi_related_keywords":"","_relevanssi_related_include_ids":"","_relevanssi_related_exclude_ids":"","_relevanssi_related_no_append":"","_relevanssi_related_not_related":"","_relevanssi_related_posts":"","_relevanssi_noindex_reason":"","footnotes":""},"tags":[],"metadata":[1764,1763,1756,1750,2024,1755,1769,1753,2026,1768],"class_list":["post-188110","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","metadata-advocacy-news","metadata-context","metadata-explainer","metadata-layout","metadata-length","metadata-narrative-frame","metadata-national-affiliate-staff","metadata-plain-text","metadata-standard","metadata-voice"],"acf":{"header_layout":"full-bleed","header_image":188140,"mobile_header_image":188141,"description":"The court will soon hear a landmark legal challenge brought by the ACLU against a ban on hormone therapies for transgender youth.","authors":[49441],"components":[{"acf_fc_layout":"text","text":{"text":"Since 2021, 24 states<\/a> have banned hormone therapy for transgender youth with gender dysphoria. Leading medical experts and organizations \u2014 such as the American Medical Association, the American Psychiatric Association, and the American Academy of Pediatrics \u2014 oppose these restrictions, which have already forced thousands of families across the country to travel to maintain access to medical care or watch their child suffer without it.\r\n\r\nIn July 2023, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected requests from families and medical providers to block laws in Tennessee and Kentucky banning gender-affirming medical care for transgender youth. At the same time, the Court elected to combine the requests, linking plaintiffs like a Nashville-based couple and their transgender teenage daughter, and a medical provider who supports trans youth with families in Kentucky. Both states asked the United States Supreme Court to rule on whether these laws are unconstitutional."}},{"acf_fc_layout":"single-image","single-image":{"":null,"image-group":{"image":188150,"":null,"caption":"","credit":"","link-settings":"none","url":""},"width":"standard","alignment":"left"}},{"acf_fc_layout":"text","text":{"text":"What is gender-affirming care? Your questions, answered.<\/i><\/a>\r\n\r\nThis year, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case, now listed as U.S. v. Skrmetti<\/i>. The plaintiffs in the Tennessee case are represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Tennessee, Lambda Legal, and Akin Gump. Our legal challenge is limited to the provisions of Tennessee\u2019s ban targeting hormone therapies \u2014 such as hormone replacement therapy and puberty blockers \u2014 and does not implicate surgical care. To understand what\u2019s at stake, the ACLU breaks down the case and who it impacts. We also share what we can all do to protect gender-affirming care and support trans rights."}},{"acf_fc_layout":"heading","heading":{"":null,"text":"How Could U.S. v. Skrmetti. Impact Trans Health Care?","anchor":"","sub-heading":"","type":"h2","heading-style":"standard"}},{"acf_fc_layout":"text","text":{"text":"The question in this case is whether Tennessee\u2019s law banning gender-affirming hormone therapies for transgender minors violates the Equal Protection Clause of the US Constitution. Tennessee\u2019s ban, like every other passed by politicians in recent years, specifically permits these same hormone medications when they are provided in a way that Tennessee considers \u201cconsistent\u201d with a person\u2019s sex designated at birth. This means, for example, a doctor could prescribe estrogen to a cisgender teenage girl for any clinical diagnosis but could not do the same for a transgender girl diagnosed with gender dysphoria<\/a>.\r\n\r\nThe ACLU argues that Tennessee\u2019s ban is a clear example of discrimination on the basis of sex and transgender status making it a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. We made a similar argument in 2020 when, alongside other legal advocates, we successfully argued in front of the Supreme Court on behalf of LGBTQ clients fired because of their sexual orientation and gender identity, including a transgender woman fired from her job at a Michigan funeral home. In a 6-3 ruling, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of LGBTQ workers and found \u201cit is impossible to discriminate against a person for being homosexual or transgender without discriminating against that individual based on sex\u201d and therefore discrimination against LGBTQ workers was impermissible sex discrimination under Title VII, the federal law prohibiting sex discrimination in employment.\r\n\r\nIn recent years, district courts unanimously blocked bans in Arkansas, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, and Tennessee, but the Sixth, Seventh, and Eleventh Circuit Courts of Appeals have allowed these bans to take effect. The Supreme Court must now decide whether states can<\/i> ban medical treatment for transgender youth with gender dysphoria, but not whether they must<\/i>. If the court finds Tennessee\u2019s law constitutional, the immediate impact on access to these treatments will be limited to the two states where the bans are already in effect."}},{"acf_fc_layout":"heading","heading":{"":null,"text":"How Does this Case Impact Other Health Care, Like Birth Control?","anchor":"","sub-heading":"","type":"h2","heading-style":"standard"}},{"acf_fc_layout":"text","text":{"text":"When arguing against transgender people and their families, states with bans like Tennessee\u2019s have relied heavily on the Supreme Court\u2019s opinion Dobbs v.<\/i> Jackson Women\u2019s Health Organization<\/i><\/a>, which overturned Roe v. Wade<\/i> and allowed states to ban abortion. U.S. v. Skrmetti<\/i> will be a major test of how far the court is willing to stretch Dobbs<\/i> to allow states to ban other health care. The court\u2019s ruling could serve as a stepping stone towards further limiting access to abortion, IVF, and birth control."}},{"acf_fc_layout":"single-image","single-image":{"":null,"image-group":{"image":188149,"":null,"caption":"","credit":"","link-settings":"none","url":""},"width":"standard","alignment":"left"}},{"acf_fc_layout":"heading","heading":{"":null,"text":"How Can We Support Access to Gender-Affirming Care?","anchor":"","sub-heading":"","type":"h2","heading-style":"standard"}},{"acf_fc_layout":"text","text":{"text":"