WASHINGTON, D.C. (LifeSiteNews) — Chief Justice John Roberts and several other Republican-appointed justices pushed back on claims that prohibitions on transgender drugs and surgeries for minors are “unconstitutional” under the Equal Protection Clause.
The Supreme Court heard arguments today in the U.S. v. Skrmetti case about whether Tennessee, Kentucky, and other states by extension, can protect gender-confused minors from permanently damaging drugs and surgeries. The hearing lasted nearly two and a half hours, with conservative justices typically appearing sympathetic to the premise the bans fell under the states’ right to regulate medical procedures. Liberal justices, meanwhile, argued the prohibitions were akin to racism and were discriminatory.
Chief Justice Roberts’ skepticism of the federal government’s position could be a positive sign, as he has previously ruled in favor of expanding federal law to find a right to cross-dress at work.
Roberts and Justice Neil Gorsuch previously joined with the court’s liberals in Bostock v. Clayton County to expand the definition of federal law to include “gender identity,” despite their assumed belief in a limited, originalist reading of the Constitution.
Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar argued the federal government’s position, claiming Tennessee’s “sex-based lines” are wrong. She also used the unscientific terms of “assigned at birth” during the argument and the euphemism “gender-affirming care.” Prelogar also regularly made the false claim that being denied transgender drugs and surgeries heightens suicide risk.
She also appeared to say that the laws were akin to racial discrimination when responding to liberal justices, but then argued for “guardrails” and allowing some state prohibitions in some cases when responding to conservative justices.
Justice Clarence Thomas challenged the claim of an “outright ban,” saying the case is really about “age-classification” since the laws apply to minors, not all people.
After she responded, Justice Thomas pressed her on boys versus girls using testosterone. Prelogar acknowledged there are “biological differences” between the sexes.
Chief Justice John Roberts asked Prelogar if, given the “medical nuances” of the interventions, the courts should not just defer to the states to sort out the issues.
“The Court could recognize that concern can be accommodated,” she said. But she disputed the idea the state had proved its case for prohibiting the interventions across the board.
It “would be sufficient” for the Court to send the case back to the 6th Circuit and analyze the scrutiny level of the law. When responding to conservative justices, Prelogar several times argued for a narrower approach.
Justice Samuel Alito then pushed back on the government’s argument that there is “overwhelming evidence” in support of the interventions. He cited Sweden’s criticism of the interventions, which was public before the government’s brief. He also cited the United Kingdom’s Cass Review, which criticized chemically and surgically “transitioning” minors, noting it came out after her petition.
— Matt Lamb (@MattLamb22) December 4, 2024
Alito also brought up the Dobbs v. Jackson case as a precedent for restricting certain medical procedures. He wrote the Dobbs decision, which reversed Roe v. Wade. LifeSiteNews previously analyzed the role of Dobbs in this case.
Prelogar said transgender interventions “can be” necessary for some people, and Liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor claimed that the “evidence is very clear” that “some children” need surgical and chemical interventions, despite widespread evidence linking “transition” procedures to heart diseases, cancer, infertility, and other serious and even life-threatening injuries.
Prelogar cited medical associations that support the interventions and repeated the discredited claim of increased suicidality due to being denied them. However, the medical organizations have been under pressure from groups like the “World Professional Association for Transgender Health” and the Biden administration to push for the procedures.
Justice Elena Kagan argued the law discriminates so-called “transgender” people. She also repeatedly used the term “cis,” which is a political term that refers to “cisgender” people, which just means people who don’t have gender dysphoria.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh asked why the issue should not be left to the states. He also pointed out that the law prohibits both girls and boys from obtaining the drugs and surgeries, suggesting the law applies equally to both sexes. Later, Justice Amy Barrett also brought up that line of argument, appearing sympathetic to the state’s position.
Prelogar said “hormones” can harm fertility but claimed that “puberty blockers” do not present the same problems. However, this claim is not supported by evidence. She acknowledged some people “detransition” in response to a question by Justice Kavanaugh.
Kavanaugh, a basketball coach, also asked about the government’s position on men playing in girls’ sports.
Prelogar said “sex-separated spaces” are a different issue and said “courts have split” on the sports issue and largely declined to weigh in on that topic.
— Matt Lamb (@MattLamb22) December 4, 2024
Justice Jackson, who cannot define what a woman is, suggested the prohibitions are similar to racist laws that prohibited interracial marriages.
Also arguing for the legality of surgically removing healthy body tissues and chemically stopping puberty was “Chase” Strangio, a woman who claims to be a man. She is an attorney for the ACLU. During her arguments, she used terms like “birth males” and “birth females.”
Prior to the hearing today, a clip circulated on social media of Strangio defending the castration of two-year-olds on CNN. She appeared on Jake Tapper’s show last night.
This is the transgender lawyer from the ACLU who will argue before the Supreme Court that underage children should be allowed to undergo life-altering surgeries (castration, chest binders, horomones etc.).
This “person” argues even two year olds know they should be trans. pic.twitter.com/HH5ne4EXiI
— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) December 3, 2024
Justice Alito also broke open the problems of gender ideology by bringing up the term “gender fluid,” which suggests that people may change their genders back and forth regularly. This would undermine the claim that being “transgender” is “immutable.”
Strangio agreed, in response to a question from Justice Kavanaugh, that some people regret the procedures.
Regulation of drugs is common in law, Tennessee says
Tennessee Solicitor General Matthew Rice defended the state’s law in front of the Supreme Court.
The law protects minors from “risky, unproven medical interventions,” he told the Court.
The law is not based on sex but “medical purpose,” Rice said.
“There has to be a medical purpose for these drugs,” he told the Court during questioning.
— Matt Lamb (@MattLamb22) December 4, 2024
“We have other laws, and Tennessee law, that prevent malpractice” and the abuse of drugs, he said. Testosterone, for example, is covered by prescription laws and cannot be prescribed for just any reason, Rice said.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor also picked up the idea that the law is akin to racism, offering an opinion, and not a question, that “transgender” people are not protected by the democratic process. She compared it to the mistreatment of black individuals. Justice Jackson later asked Rice about the ban on interracial marriages.
There is no “sex-based line,” Rice explained in response, in the same way that there was a “race-based line” when Virginia prohibited interracial marriages.
He also explained the differences between boys and girls taking testosterone. He also repeated an example of someone taking the drug morphine for pain management versus killing themselves.
The court will likely release a decision in summer 2025. It often releases decisions on contentious social issues in June.
Problems of drugs, surgeries is well-established
Medical experts, theologians, legal experts, and families harmed by transgender ideology all asked the Supreme Court through amicus briefs to uphold prohibitions on the procedures.
In addition to sex being immutable, numerous studies and personal testimonies provide evidence of the harms of transgender drugs and surgeries, as extensively documented by LifeSiteNews.
The drugs and surgeries have been linked to suicidality, bone density loss, and numerous other medical problems. Puberty blockers can also cause infertility, as would be expected from drugs intended to stop the normal and healthy development of reproductive organs.
Many European countries, meanwhile, have moved to restrict the drugs and surgeries for minors.