The Supreme Court agreed to let Idaho enforce its ban on gender-transition drugs and surgeries for minors, overruling a lower-court injunction except in the cases of the two transgender teenagers who sued to halt the 2023 state law.
The court sided with Idaho Attorney General Raul Labrador in sharply narrowing the preliminary injunction issued in December, meaning that only the two teens, ages 15 and 16, will be able to continue to access puberty blockers and sex-change hormones while the legal fight plays out.
“Ordinarily, injunctions like these may go no further than necessary to provide interim relief to the parties,” said Justice Neil M. Gorsuch in the Monday ruling. “In this case, however, the district court went much further, prohibiting a state from enforcing any aspect of its duly enacted law against anyone. Today, the court stays the district court’s injunction to the extent it provides ‘universal’ relief.
“That is a welcome development.”
Justice Gorsuch was joined in lifting the preliminary injunction by Justices Samuel A. Alito Jr. and Clarence Thomas. Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh wrote a separate concurring opinion with Justice Amy Coney Barrett.
Those on the high court’s liberal wing — Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor —would have kept the injunction in place.
The decision represented a victory for Idaho Republicans. Gov. Brad Little signed the Vulnerable Child Protection Act in April 2023, only to see it blocked by U.S. District Judge B. Lynn Winmill, a Clinton appointee, before it went into effect on Jan. 1.
Judge Winmill said in his order that “transgender children should receive equal treatment under the law.” The case is now before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.
Under Idaho’s House Bill 71, healthcare providers who prescribe gender-transition drugs and surgeries to those under 18 face up to 10 years in prison.
Mr. Labrador called the use of drugs and procedures used on children to treat gender dysphoria “a preventable tragedy.”
“The state has a duty to protect and support all children, and that’s why I’m proud to defend Idaho’s law that ensures children are not subjected to these life-altering drugs and procedures,” he said in a statement. “Those suffering from gender dysphoria deserve love, support and medical care rooted in biological reality. Denying the basic truth that boys and girls are biologically different hurts our kids.”
Twenty-two states have taken action to prohibit minors from accessing gender-transition procedures over the objections of transgender-rights advocates, who argue that “gender-affirming care” is potentially life-saving for children struggling with gender dysphoria.
Their case took a major hit last week with the release of the U.K.’s Cass Review, the most comprehensive analysis of “gender-affirming care” for minors to date, which found “remarkably weak evidence” in support of treating adolescents with puberty blockers.
The American Civil Liberties Union stressed that the ruling says nothing about the law’s constitutionality, but that it represents “an awful result for transgender youth and their families across the state.”
“Today’s ruling allows the state to shut down the care that thousands of families rely on while sowing further confusion and disruption,” the ACLU said. “Nonetheless, today’s result only leaves us all the more determined to defeat his law in the courts entirely.”
• Valerie Richardson can be reached at vrichardson@washingtontimes.com.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.