Supreme Court to weigh bans on puberty blockers, hormones for trans teens

[BioHawk]

You would have loved the Warren court, throwing a hundred years of precedence out of the window every day. Oh wait those were the lefties, so that was a non-partisan justice loving court. I see how you play the game.

They understood that what was appropriate in the late 18th century is completely inappropriate for modern society. Even Thomas Jefferson understood that change was going to be necessary to maintain a functioning government.

 

[sober_teacher]

Yeah, you democrats still aren't happy that we freed your slaves.

Such a stupid post.

 

[FAUlty Gator]

Ann Marimow

The Supreme Court appeared deeply divided along ideological lines Wednesday in a historic case involving gender transition care for transgender minors, with key conservative justices expressing concern about courts intervening in an evolving nationwide debate over access to treatments for young people.

A majority of justices seemed likely to uphold a lower-court decision that allows Tennessee to ban young people from using hormones and puberty blockers for gender transition care that most leading medical organizations say are safe and effective, but that the state characterizes as risky and unproven. The high court’s ruling will have implications for the thousands of transgender young people who live in one of 23 other states that have banned similar treatments in recent years.


Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh repeatedly suggested that medical policies involving gender transition care for minors should be left to the states.

“There are risks both ways,” Kavanaugh said of the outcomes for transgender minors in states that have banned or permitted such care. “Why isn’t that a choice for policymakers?”

Roberts suggested that the court should “leave this to the medical community” because of conflicting reports about the health treatments.

Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, who authored the court’s first major decision protecting gay and transgender employees from workplace discrimination in 2020, asked no questions. And another conservative justice, Amy Coney Barrett, suggested that the Tennessee law could still be challenged at a later date based on different arguments not before the court Wednesday.

The court’s three liberal justices — Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson — were united in their skepticism of Tennessee’s defense of its law. They expressed agreement with the Biden administration and the American Civil Liberties Union that the ban discriminates based on sex because it allows minors who are not transgender to use the same medical treatments for other purposes.

Kagan told the state’s lawyer that Tennessee’s ban is “utterly and entirely about sex.” She suggested that the state’s purpose for passing the ban was not based on medical concerns, but instead about wanting “boys to be boys and girls to be girls.”

In a sign of the significance of the case, the court’s argument lasted more than two hours and touched on issues involving transgender athletes, access to bathrooms and interracial marriage.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/12/04/supreme-court-transgender-rights-case/

I notice they left out Alito's skewering of the plaintiff. When Alito is using actual results from huge medical studies and Brown and Sotomayor are building strawmen, comparing the reversal of the hormone system in a child to taking aspirin and inter racial marriage, I'd say it's not looking good for the offense.

Another case of the left using "follow the science" only when it suits them.

Alito quoted Prelogar’s petition to the Court claiming “overwhelming evidence” supports the notion that puberty blockers and hormone treatments improve the well-being of unwell adolescents confused about their gender.

The solicitor general’s statement parrots common left-wing activist talking points in favor of giving minors life-altering hormonal and surgical treatments to address mental health struggles during puberty.

To counter Prelogar, Alito cited extensive research from European countries showing otherwise, including a study from a Swedish medical board that concluded the risks of transgender treatments likely outweigh purported benefits. Alito also referred to the United Kingdom’s Cass Review, which found little evidence to further the viewpoint that the benefits of transgender treatment are greater than the risks.

“I wonder if you would like to stand by the statement in your position or if you think it would now be appropriate to modify that and withdraw your statement,” Alito said.

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/alito-accuses-solicitor-general-of-ignoring-research-that-exposed-risks-of-trans-procedures-for-kids/

 

[cigaretteman]

Yeah, you democrats still aren't happy that we freed your slaves.