To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Minnesotans hold a rally at the Minneapolis to support transgender kids on March 6, 2022.
"It's crucial to recognize that for trans youth and their families, this isn't about politics—it's about the fundamental freedom to access vital, lifesaving healthcare," said one advocate.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday agreed to hear a challenge to Tennessee's March 2023 ban on gender-affirming healthcare for transgender youth—a development that LGBTQ+ rights advocates sought but which has them worried given the six right-wing justices.
The Biden administration along with the national and state ACLU, Lambda Legal, and the law firm Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP asked the justices to review the Tennessee ban after a September decision by the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals allowed it to stay in effect.
The justices granted certiorari in seven cases for the term beginning this fall, including United States v. Skrmetti, the administration's challenge to the Tennessee ban. Law Dork's Chris Geidner noted that they rejected local challenges to that law and a similar one in Kentucky, "which also raised a parental rights due process claim."
"These bans represent a dangerous and discriminatory affront to the well-being of transgender youth across the country."
Still, rights advocates cautiously welcomed the news and called on the justices to apply precedents including the Supreme Court's 2020 Bostock v. Clayton Countyruling that it is illegal for employers to discriminate against a worker because of transgender status and sexual orientation. That majority opinion was written by right-wing Justice Neil Gorsuch, who was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and the four left-leaning members of the court at that time. Now, there are just three liberal justices.
"This court has historically rejected efforts to uphold discriminatory laws, and without similar action here, these punitive, categorical bans on the provision of gender-affirming care will continue to wreak havoc on the lives of transgender youth and their families," Lambda Legal senior counsel Tara Borelli said Monday. "We are grateful that transgender youth and their families will have their day in the highest court, and we will not stop fighting to ensure access to this lifesaving, medically necessary care."
While 15 states plus Washington, D.C. have enacted shield laws protecting access to gender-affirming healthcare, over two dozen states have banned some or all of such care for trans youth, according to the Movement Advancement Project. Medical professionals and rights advocates across the country have warned that these bans endanger the lives of trans people.
"The future of countless transgender youth in this and future generations rests on this court adhering to the facts, the Constitution, and its own modern precedent," said Chase Strangio, deputy director for Transgender Justice at the ACLU's LGBTQ & HIV Project, in a statement after the justices agreed to take the case.
"These bans represent a dangerous and discriminatory affront to the well-being of transgender youth across the country and their constitutional right to equal protection under the law," Strangio continued. "They are the result of an openly political effort to wage war on a marginalized group and our most fundamental freedoms."
Lucas Cameron-Vaughn, staff attorney at the ACLU of Tennessee, stressed that "Tennesseans deserve the freedom to live their lives as their authentic selves without government interference, yet every day this law remains in place, it inflicts further pain and injustice on trans youth and their families."
"As politicians continue to fuel divisions for their own political gain, it's crucial to recognize that for trans youth and their families, this isn't about politics—it's about the fundamental freedom to access vital, lifesaving healthcare," the attorney added.
For now, the Tennessee ban remains in effect—and since its passage last year, the Campaign for Southern Equality has supported families of transgender youth through the Southern Trans Youth Emergency Project.
"This is a high-stakes moment for transgender youth and their families, and we're glad that trans youth and their families will have their day in court to make the case that the bans are unconstitutional, interfere with private medical decisions, and severely harm families," Allison Scott, the campaign's director of impact and innovation, said Monday. "Everyone who needs gender-affirming care should be able to access it affordably, and close to home, and our team will never stop working to make that happen."
Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place. We're hundreds of thousands strong, but every single supporter makes the difference. Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will. |
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday agreed to hear a challenge to Tennessee's March 2023 ban on gender-affirming healthcare for transgender youth—a development that LGBTQ+ rights advocates sought but which has them worried given the six right-wing justices.
The Biden administration along with the national and state ACLU, Lambda Legal, and the law firm Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP asked the justices to review the Tennessee ban after a September decision by the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals allowed it to stay in effect.
The justices granted certiorari in seven cases for the term beginning this fall, including United States v. Skrmetti, the administration's challenge to the Tennessee ban. Law Dork's Chris Geidner noted that they rejected local challenges to that law and a similar one in Kentucky, "which also raised a parental rights due process claim."
"These bans represent a dangerous and discriminatory affront to the well-being of transgender youth across the country."
Still, rights advocates cautiously welcomed the news and called on the justices to apply precedents including the Supreme Court's 2020 Bostock v. Clayton Countyruling that it is illegal for employers to discriminate against a worker because of transgender status and sexual orientation. That majority opinion was written by right-wing Justice Neil Gorsuch, who was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and the four left-leaning members of the court at that time. Now, there are just three liberal justices.
"This court has historically rejected efforts to uphold discriminatory laws, and without similar action here, these punitive, categorical bans on the provision of gender-affirming care will continue to wreak havoc on the lives of transgender youth and their families," Lambda Legal senior counsel Tara Borelli said Monday. "We are grateful that transgender youth and their families will have their day in the highest court, and we will not stop fighting to ensure access to this lifesaving, medically necessary care."
While 15 states plus Washington, D.C. have enacted shield laws protecting access to gender-affirming healthcare, over two dozen states have banned some or all of such care for trans youth, according to the Movement Advancement Project. Medical professionals and rights advocates across the country have warned that these bans endanger the lives of trans people.
"The future of countless transgender youth in this and future generations rests on this court adhering to the facts, the Constitution, and its own modern precedent," said Chase Strangio, deputy director for Transgender Justice at the ACLU's LGBTQ & HIV Project, in a statement after the justices agreed to take the case.
"These bans represent a dangerous and discriminatory affront to the well-being of transgender youth across the country and their constitutional right to equal protection under the law," Strangio continued. "They are the result of an openly political effort to wage war on a marginalized group and our most fundamental freedoms."
Lucas Cameron-Vaughn, staff attorney at the ACLU of Tennessee, stressed that "Tennesseans deserve the freedom to live their lives as their authentic selves without government interference, yet every day this law remains in place, it inflicts further pain and injustice on trans youth and their families."
"As politicians continue to fuel divisions for their own political gain, it's crucial to recognize that for trans youth and their families, this isn't about politics—it's about the fundamental freedom to access vital, lifesaving healthcare," the attorney added.
For now, the Tennessee ban remains in effect—and since its passage last year, the Campaign for Southern Equality has supported families of transgender youth through the Southern Trans Youth Emergency Project.
"This is a high-stakes moment for transgender youth and their families, and we're glad that trans youth and their families will have their day in court to make the case that the bans are unconstitutional, interfere with private medical decisions, and severely harm families," Allison Scott, the campaign's director of impact and innovation, said Monday. "Everyone who needs gender-affirming care should be able to access it affordably, and close to home, and our team will never stop working to make that happen."
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday agreed to hear a challenge to Tennessee's March 2023 ban on gender-affirming healthcare for transgender youth—a development that LGBTQ+ rights advocates sought but which has them worried given the six right-wing justices.
The Biden administration along with the national and state ACLU, Lambda Legal, and the law firm Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP asked the justices to review the Tennessee ban after a September decision by the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals allowed it to stay in effect.
The justices granted certiorari in seven cases for the term beginning this fall, including United States v. Skrmetti, the administration's challenge to the Tennessee ban. Law Dork's Chris Geidner noted that they rejected local challenges to that law and a similar one in Kentucky, "which also raised a parental rights due process claim."
"These bans represent a dangerous and discriminatory affront to the well-being of transgender youth across the country."
Still, rights advocates cautiously welcomed the news and called on the justices to apply precedents including the Supreme Court's 2020 Bostock v. Clayton Countyruling that it is illegal for employers to discriminate against a worker because of transgender status and sexual orientation. That majority opinion was written by right-wing Justice Neil Gorsuch, who was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and the four left-leaning members of the court at that time. Now, there are just three liberal justices.
"This court has historically rejected efforts to uphold discriminatory laws, and without similar action here, these punitive, categorical bans on the provision of gender-affirming care will continue to wreak havoc on the lives of transgender youth and their families," Lambda Legal senior counsel Tara Borelli said Monday. "We are grateful that transgender youth and their families will have their day in the highest court, and we will not stop fighting to ensure access to this lifesaving, medically necessary care."
While 15 states plus Washington, D.C. have enacted shield laws protecting access to gender-affirming healthcare, over two dozen states have banned some or all of such care for trans youth, according to the Movement Advancement Project. Medical professionals and rights advocates across the country have warned that these bans endanger the lives of trans people.
"The future of countless transgender youth in this and future generations rests on this court adhering to the facts, the Constitution, and its own modern precedent," said Chase Strangio, deputy director for Transgender Justice at the ACLU's LGBTQ & HIV Project, in a statement after the justices agreed to take the case.
"These bans represent a dangerous and discriminatory affront to the well-being of transgender youth across the country and their constitutional right to equal protection under the law," Strangio continued. "They are the result of an openly political effort to wage war on a marginalized group and our most fundamental freedoms."
Lucas Cameron-Vaughn, staff attorney at the ACLU of Tennessee, stressed that "Tennesseans deserve the freedom to live their lives as their authentic selves without government interference, yet every day this law remains in place, it inflicts further pain and injustice on trans youth and their families."
"As politicians continue to fuel divisions for their own political gain, it's crucial to recognize that for trans youth and their families, this isn't about politics—it's about the fundamental freedom to access vital, lifesaving healthcare," the attorney added.
For now, the Tennessee ban remains in effect—and since its passage last year, the Campaign for Southern Equality has supported families of transgender youth through the Southern Trans Youth Emergency Project.
"This is a high-stakes moment for transgender youth and their families, and we're glad that trans youth and their families will have their day in court to make the case that the bans are unconstitutional, interfere with private medical decisions, and severely harm families," Allison Scott, the campaign's director of impact and innovation, said Monday. "Everyone who needs gender-affirming care should be able to access it affordably, and close to home, and our team will never stop working to make that happen."