Nearly two dozen states are asking a federal appeals court to uphold Florida's ban on child sex-reassignment surgery, warning that sterilizing children for gender dysphoria may not be viewed favorably in history.

In briefs filed Wednesday and obtained by the Daily Caller News Foundation, Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall and attorneys general from 22 other states urged the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals to overturn a lower court decision that struck down Florida's ban on pediatric sex-change treatments. The amicus briefs noted that until recently, “providing sex-change treatments to minors was virtually unthinkable,” and acknowledged that many states and European countries already have age limits on sex-change medical interventions.

“History may be repeating itself in a tragic way, and we may one day wonder how this medical scandal became so widespread,” the report said. “In any case,[e] “The district court seriously erred on the 'likelihood' that Florida acted to protect children from sterilization.”

The brief argues that the Court made a serious miscalculation by assuming the Florida Legislature did not act in good faith, while assuming the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) did.

WPATH It is an influential transgender medical organization. Recommend to children undergoing sex-change interventions such as puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, or sex-change surgery;

Federal District Court Judge in June Robert L. Hinkle Ruling Against Florida Legislation SB 254 The decision bans minors from receiving irreversible gender reassignment treatments, such as puberty suppressants, cross-sex hormones, and sex-change surgery. Currently on appeal And the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals An injunction was issued Judge Hinkle's ruling allows Florida's anti-pediatric sex-change law to be enforced during the court process.

“Gender identity is a reality,” Hinkle argued in his opinion, and suggested that Florida lawmakers were driven by bigotry when they banned pediatric sex-change practices.

“Prejudice against transgender people has existed for a long time and still exists today,” Hinkle said. Written“Common experience bears this out, and some of the comments made by the congressman above bear it out. And even when not based on prejudice, there are people who mistakenly but sincerely believe that gender identity is not real, but merely a choice.”

The term “gender identity” has been controversial. Sexologist John MoneyTransgender activists use the term to describe an internal feeling of being male or female that is different from one's natural gender.

The lawsuit, led by the state of Alabama, says the bias allegations are false and made without a “presumption of good faith on the part of the lawmakers,” and notes that pediatric sex-change surgery is a “booming business with devastating consequences for many.”

“If Congress has acknowledged 'legitimate concerns' about the 'serious harm' that fertility treatments pose to children, there is no basis to infer that bias is the real reason for the government's action,” the report states.

The brief also denies Hinkle's claim that Florida lawmakers' citations of a Bible passage that says God created humans “male and female” are “evidence” that the passage of Florida's anti-sex change law was motivated by “animosity.”

Judge Hinkle referred to the WPATH standard of care throughout his decision, calling it the “established standard of care” that underpins much of his argument to overturn Florida's ban on child sex reassignment.

New Arrivals: Other #WPATH The court documents are disclosed and the evidence is irrefutable. @SecretaryLevine Political pressure was applied throughout the drafting process of the WPATH guidelines to remove age restrictions on gender reassignment surgery for minors. #FireLevin pic.twitter.com/49VnxquvH5

— Do No Harm (@donoharm) June 28, 2024

The amicus brief challenges WPATH's credibility, citing recently unsealed court documents that show that Biden-Harris Administration officials, concerned about the political impact of a minimum age requirement, pressured WPATH to remove the lower age limit for sex-reassignment surgery from its clinical guidelines. (Related article: Gender doctor calls genital surgery an 'adventure' for young people, explains frightening complications)

“Senior government officials influenced the guidelines, which are now described as 'evidence-based.'” Assistant Secretary of Health Admiral Rachel Levin met regularly with WPATH leaders and “wanted to know when SOC 8 would be issued.”[t]WPATH was not able to support SOC 8 [was] “This has proven to be an obstacle to the Biden Administration's optimal policy progress,” the report said.

“After WPATH provided Levin with exclusive access to a near-final draft of SOC 8, Levin urged WPATH to remove the recommended minimum age for transition treatment. According to a source in Levin's office, the admiral was concerned that 'listing a specific minimum age for treatment would lead to devastating legislation for transgender care.'”

The pattern of prioritizing politics and ideology over science was also seen again in documents showing that WPATH violated international standards for guideline development by allowing clinicians with financial conflicts of interest to help write treatment standards and by suppressing the publication of their own research. (Related: Documents reveal that “social justice lawyers” told WPATH to avoid “evidence-based review” of gender transition guidelines for minors)

“While the standards indicate how guideline panels can benefit from the expertise of these clinicians, they naturally recommend against placing the responsibility for evaluating the safety or effectiveness of the very services under consideration on clinicians who are financially dependent on those services. WPATH has done the opposite, explicitly limiting the authors of SOC-8 to existing WPATH members who already practice or advocate for 'gender-affirming care,'” the summary states.

WPATH did not respond to a request for comment.

As an independent, nonpartisan news service, all content produced by the Daily Caller News Foundation is available free of charge to any legitimate news publisher with a large readership. All republished articles must include our logo, reporter byline, and affiliation with the DCNF. If you have any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact us at licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.