Supreme Court Upholds Tennessee’s Ban on Minors’ Gender Procedures
Alabama’s Attorney General, Steve Marshall, is expressing satisfaction following the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent ruling that supports Tennessee’s statewide ban on specific “gender preservation” treatments for minors.
The Court’s 6-3 decision in the case of US vs. Skrmetti was announced on a Wednesday, reinforcing Tennessee’s legislation while also setting age-related limits on access to gender reassignment procedures. This ruling came in response to challenges posited by both the Biden administration and the ACLU, focusing on equal protection under the law.
Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti commented that this decision acknowledges the Constitution’s highest purpose, which is to shield children.
The ruling not only backs Tennessee law but also lays the groundwork for enforcing similar regulations in Alabama and other regions. In Alabama, there’s a prohibition against doctors administering surgeries or prescribing puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, or other gender transition procedures to minors.
“Just a few years back, the notion of providing children with gender-change procedures was almost unimaginable,” Marshall reflected. “It seemed that the judiciary was expected to assess evidence and allow children, who are grappling with gender-related psychological distress, access to powerful hormones that could permanently alter their bodies and possibly lead to sterilization.”
Moreover, U.S. Senator Tommy Tuberville (R-Auburn) praised the verdict, labeling it as “a great victory for common sense and our children.”
Alabama’s law, enacted in 2022 to curb minors’ access to gender reassignment procedures, faced immediate legal challenges from the Biden administration and groups like the ACLU and SPLC.
During the legal process, Alabama sought extensive court orders to evaluate the reliability of the “standards of care” set forth by the World Professionals Association for Transgender Health (WPATH). There were ongoing discussions among healthcare institutions about postponing these standards in light of the lawsuits.
Documents uncovered by Marshall regarding WPATH revealed medical, legal, and political issues concerning the proposed standards, with plaintiffs challenging Alabama’s law ultimately retracting their claims.
Marshall praised the state government for recognizing its duty to oversee medical practices against medical groups he views as promoting radical gender ideologies that overshadow evidence-based medicine and patient well-being.
