WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear a challenge to a Tennessee law that prohibits gender-affirming hormone treatments for individuals under 18, marking its latest foray into the contentious arena of cultural and social issues. The case, which will be heard next fall with a decision expected in 2025, centers around whether the law violates the constitutional guarantee of equal protection.
The challenge is brought by three transgender teenagers, aged 13 to 16, who have been receiving puberty blockers as part of their transition from their sex assigned at birth. Alongside their parents, they argue that the Tennessee law infringes on the equal protection clause of the Constitution and impinges on parental rights to determine their children’s medical treatment.
The Supreme Court will specifically address the claim that Tennessee’s law discriminates against trans minors by allowing hormone treatments for certain medical conditions, such as precocious puberty, but banning them for gender transition purposes. This limited scope aligns with a request from the Biden administration, which, in a separate lawsuit, asked the court to focus on whether such laws should face more rigorous judicial scrutiny.
In its previous ruling, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals applied the lowest level of judicial scrutiny, the “rational basis” test, concluding that the Tennessee legislature had a legitimate reason for enacting the law. Chief Judge Jeffrey Sutton, writing for a divided panel, stated there was “no reason to apply skeptical, rigorous, or any other form of heightened scrutiny to these laws.” Opposing this, the Biden administration and the ACLU, representing the trans minors, contend that heightened scrutiny is warranted because the law explicitly discriminates against trans minors by treating them less favorably than other minors who receive hormone treatments for different medical reasons.
This upcoming case will be the Supreme Court’s fourth ruling on transgender issues. Notably, in 2020, the Court ruled that the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination in employment, applies to gay, lesbian, and transgender employees.
Currently, approximately 25 Republican-led states have enacted various bans on gender-affirming hormone treatments for minors. Like Tennessee’s law, many of these statutes also prohibit surgeries related to gender transition for minors, although surgical procedures are not at issue in this particular case.
These legislative bans are strongly opposed by major medical organizations, including the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Medical Association (AMA). In 2021, the AMA sent a letter to the National Governors Association citing evidence that gender-affirming care significantly reduces suicide attempts and decreases rates of depression and anxiety among transgender youth.
In addition to the Sixth Circuit, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals has also upheld similar bans, rejecting legal challenges. The Supreme Court has declined to block these rulings while it deliberates on the broader issue in the upcoming term.
This case promises to be a landmark decision in the ongoing debate over the rights of transgender minors and the extent of parental authority in medical decisions, set against a backdrop of growing legislative efforts to regulate gender-affirming care across the United States.