The Supreme Court has ruled that Idaho can enforce its ban on gender-affirming care for transgender youth while legal challenges are ongoing. This law, passed in 2023, allows for severe penalties for physicians who provide gender-affirming care to individuals under the age of 18. The court’s decision reverses lower court rulings and allows the law to go into effect. However, the two transgender teens who sued to challenge the law will still be able to obtain the care they need despite this ruling.
The federal judge had previously blocked the law in its entirety, citing the need to protect the teens involved. Opponents of the law argue that it could lead to an increase in suicide rates among transgender youth. In contrast, supporters of the law claim that it is necessary to protect children from medical treatments for gender dysphoria. Despite their arguments, there is little evidence to suggest that gender-affirming surgeries are currently being performed on transgender youth in Idaho.
Gender-affirming care for youth is supported by various medical organizations, including the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the American Psychiatric Association. These organizations recognize the importance of providing care that aligns with a person’s gender identity to help alleviate severe psychological distress associated with gender dysphoria. The court’s decision to allow Idaho to enforce its ban on gender-affirming care may have significant implications for other states facing similar legal challenges.
This ruling comes as the Supreme Court considers whether to take up cases involving bans on gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors in other states, such as Kentucky and Tennessee. At least 23 states have enacted laws restricting or banning such care for transgender youth, with many facing legal challenges. In Arkansas, a federal judge struck down a similar ban as unconstitutional, and Montana’s ban is also currently on hold.
The list of states that have enacted laws restricting or banning gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors includes Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, and West Virginia. These laws have sparked widespread debate and legal challenges as advocates and opponents continue to fight over the rights of transgender youth to access necessary medical care. The Supreme Court’s ruling in the Idaho case could have far-reaching consequences for similar laws in other states.
