The Supreme Court agreed on Monday to take up a challenge by the Biden administration to a Tennessee law that restricts transgender procedures for minors.
The decision to hear the case United States v. Skrmetti marks the first time the high court will rule on matters arising from the major culture war battle over transgender medical treatments for children. The Tennessee law in question restricts puberty blockers, hormone therapy, and surgery for minors.
Gov. Bill Lee (R-TN) signed the bill into law in March, and the Department of Justice filed suit against the measure in late April. More than 20 states have enacted similar bans, meaning the case could determine the constitutionality of similar provisions when the justices issue their decision, likely by the end of June 2025. Oral argument will likely be held some time close to the end of this calendar year.
Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti (R) said this case “will bring much-needed clarity to whether the Constitution contains special protections for gender identity.”
“We fought hard to defend Tennessee’s law protecting kids from irreversible gender treatments and secured a thoughtful and well-reasoned opinion from the Sixth Circuit. I look forward to finishing the fight in the United States Supreme Court,” Skrmetti added.
In its petition to the high court, the Biden administration argued intervention over the Tennessee law was “urgently needed” after a federal judge blocked the state’s ban on puberty blockers and hormone therapy but left in place a ban on surgeries.
“Absent this Court’s review, families in Tennessee and other States where laws like SB1 have taken effect will face the loss of essential medical care,” the DOJ wrote in court documents.
Tennessee’s transgender law was challenged by a group of anonymous minors and parents, including at least one doctor. The lawsuit argued that the state law violates the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment because it denies puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones to transgender youth “while allowing non-transgender minors to access the same or similar procedures.”
The justices are tasked to decide only the question of whether the state’s law violates the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause.
For several years, the high court has avoided opportunities to get involved in disputes surrounding transgender issues, such as lawsuits over transgender bathroom laws.
Additionally, the high court did not take action in a similar case in Kentucky when a federal judge blocked the state’s ban on puberty blockers and hormone therapy. The plaintiffs in the case did not challenge the state’s restrictions on surgeries, such as mastectomy or vaginoplasty.
Lucas Cameron-Vaughn, a staff attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee who is against the state’s law, said Monday that the case is about “fundamental freedom to access vital, life-saving healthcare” in a statement to the Washington Examiner.
The deeper issue of the case gives the justices a chance to decide whether the Tennessee law marks a form of sex discrimination that triggers heightened scrutiny under the equal protection clause. Numerous lower courts have stricken or curbed similar laws in light of Justice Neil Gorsuch’s majority opinion in Bostock v. Clayton County, though the case gives a chance for the recent 6-3 Republican-appointed majority on the Supreme Court to determine whether the Bostock precedent is more limited to the context of employment disputes.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
Because the case has been taken up for review during an election year, it’s possible the DOJ could change its positions in the case depending on whether President Joe Biden or former President Donald Trump wins a second term in the Oval Office.
It’s likely that the case will already be argued before the next presidential inauguration, though a future administration would be permitted to change its position following oral arguments.
