| Advertisement |
Dec. 4 (UPI) -- The Supreme Court's conservative majority Wednesday appeared willing to uphold a Tennessee law banning gender-affirming care for minors as oral arguments were heard on a Biden administration challenge to that law. The three left-leaning justices appeared to support the challenge to the ban.
Advertisement
The challenge to the law was filed on behalf of transgender youth and their families, alleging the law discriminates on the basis of sex, violating the Constitution's 14th Amendment guaranteeing equal treatment under the law.
The law bans puberty blockers and hormone therapy for trans people but not for other reasons.
The argument from the government against the Tennessee law said, "Put simply, an adolescent assigned female at birth cannot receive puberty blockers or testosterone to live as a male, but an adolescent assigned male at birth can," the Biden administration's legal brief in the case said.
Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar said during oral arguments Wednesday that the Supreme Court should remand the case for reconsideration under a higher standard of scrutiny.
She said the law sets up a facial sex classification -- meaning it explicitly discriminates based on sex.
Texas Solicitor General Matthew Rice argued the law as written reasonably regulates medical treatment based on the purpose of the treatment.
"It's application on medical purpose, not on a patient's sex," Rice told the court.
During arguments heard Wednesday, Chief Justice John Roberts expressed skepticism that the high court should even be involved in deciding the issue.
"It seems to me that it's something where we are extraordinary bereft of expertise," Roberts said.
The three liberal justices support the challenge to the law.
Justice Elena Kagan said during oral arguments, "It's a dodge to say that this is not based on sex. The medical purpose is utterly and entirely about sex."
Justice Neil Gorsuch could be a wild card on this case. He wrote a majority opinion four years ago in a surprise decision in favor of transgender employees in a discrimination case.
He didn't ask a single question during oral arguments, providing no hints as to where he stands on the case.
The conservative majority on the court as a whole leaned toward upholding the Tennessee law banning gender-affirming care for minors.
Those justices were skeptical of the court counteracting the state legislature on this law.
In his comments, Roberts said the Supreme Court isn't the best-suited to address the issue and indicated he believes that makes a stronger case for the court to leave the Tennessee legislature's law standing.
Justice Samuel Alito questioned the Biden administration's assertion that medical evidence overwhelmingly supports the efficacy of puberty blockers and hormone treatments for transgender youth.
Brian Williams, a Tennessee plaintiff in the case seeking to have the law overturned, said in a call with reporters, "Tennessee's ban on gender-affirming medical care is an active threat to the future my daughter deserves."
He said his 16-year-old daughter began puberty blockers for gender-affirming care at 13. Williams said she shared with him the pain she suffered in not being able to live "as the girl she truly is."
He said the law will force his family to seek further treatment for his daughter out of state.
