Advertisement

Missouri judge puts rule banning gender-affirming care on hold until May 15

A St. Louis County judge has put on hold an emergency rule by the state's attorney general that would have placed widespread restrictions on gender-affirming care in the state. File Photo by Bill Greenblatt/UPI
A St. Louis County judge has put on hold an emergency rule by the state's attorney general that would have placed widespread restrictions on gender-affirming care in the state. File Photo by Bill Greenblatt/UPI | License Photo

May 2 (UPI) -- A St. Louis County judge temporarily blocked an emergency rule enacted by the attorney general in Missouri that placed wide-ranging restrictions on transgender healthcare.

Circuit Court Judge Ellen Ribaudo on Monday placed a temporary restraining order on the restrictions put together by Attorney General Andrew Bailey until at least May 15, charging that they would cause irreparable harm to a group of transgender patients and healthcare providers who filed suit challenging Bailey.

Advertisement

"We are immensely gratified by today's ruling, which strikes a blow against this outrageous attempt to ban gender-affirming care for broad categories of transgender people of all ages," Nora Huppert, staff attorney with Lambda Legal, which filed for a temproary retraining order alongside ACLU Missouri and Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP, said in a statement.

"We will continue to fight for our clients and for all transgender people in Missouri until this dangerous and unprecedented policy is set fully aside, and we will not be deterred by any attempt to shield this policy from the scrutiny of Missouri's courts."

Ribaudo on April 26 initially delayed the emergency rule last week, before delivering the longer pause on Monday.

Advertisement

The attorney general's new rule seeks to force transgender patients to attend 15 separate hourlong therapy sessions over at least 18 months and provide documentation of an "intense pattern" of gender dysphoria for at least three years before care could be given.

On the health provider's side, they would have to prove that the patient's mental health condition has been "treated and resolved."

Plaintiffs argued that Bailey does not have the power to use the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act to create sweeping healthcare policies.

Bailey said last month in a statement that the emergency rule was meant to protect children and follow the science around gender-affirming care.

"My office has uncovered a clandestine network of clinics across the state who are harming children by ignoring the science," Bailey said in April. "When even progressive countries like Sweden, Norway, Finland, and the United Kingdom have all sharply curtailed these procedures, it's time for the United States to course correct."

Latest Headlines