Key Takeaways from Supreme Court Case on ‘Transgender’ Interventions

The U.S. Supreme Court heard a historic case on December 4 about a Tennessee law protecting minors from experimental and damaging “transgender” medical interventions – drugs, hormones and surgery.

Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar and ACLU Staff Attorney Chase Strangio, a woman who identifies as a man, argued that the law, Senate Bill 1, should be struck down. Tennessee Solicitor General Matt Rice argued in favor of protecting children.

Here’s a brief synopsis of the case, followed by some reactions from conservatives about the oral arguments.

Tennessee’s measure prohibits medical procedures “enabling a minor to identify with, or live as, a purported identity inconsistent with the minor’s sex.” The interventions would still be available to a child with a real medical issue such as precocious puberty, when sexual development begins at a very young age.

The case gained national attention, as the outcome could affect 23 states that have shielded children from these destructive procedures, along with 17 lawsuits fighting these protections. The day before the case was presented, people camped outside the Supreme Court to get seats. Groups supporting and opposing the law held separate rallies outside the court before oral arguments took place.

The ACLU and other LGBT activist groups filed a lawsuit against SB 1 on behalf of minors with sexual identity confusion and their parents. The Biden administration’s Department of Justice also sued to block the law, and the court combined the suits into one case.

The main question before the Court was whether or not the law is constitutional. Proponents of transgender medical interventions arguing that SB 1 discriminated on the basis of sex, violating the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution.

Justices also asked questions about the effectiveness of transgender medical procedures, whether transgenderism is immutable, and whether the state has an interest in helping children “appreciate their sex.”

Pro-child activist Robby Starbuck, producer of the documentary The War on Children, noted that Justice Alito “dismantled the government’s argument that Tennessee’s ban on trans drugs and procedures for kids is sex based discrimination via immutable characteristics.” Strangio agreed that some with sexual identity confusion do revert to their birth sex.

Justice Alito just dismantled the government’s argument that Tennessee’s ban on trans drugs and procedures for kids is sex based discrimination via immutable characteristics.

He got their lawyer to admit that some natural born women who later say they’re men return later to… pic.twitter.com/0hnA2FWHbC

— Robby Starbuck (@robbystarbuck) December 4, 2024

James Lynch commented in National Review on Justice Samuel Alito’s questioning of Prelogar’s petition to the court where she said there was “overwhelming evidence” that these medical interventions help children. He wrote that Alito “tore into” the solicitor general for this false statement, adding that the justice read evidence to the contrary:

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./strong>

Similarly, pro-child activist Matt Walsh noted that Alito pointed to “The Cass Review,” a thorough examination of the available literature on these harmful procedures, noting they “don’t actually prevent suicide.”

Huge moment at SCOTUS. Alito pulled up Page 195 of the Cass report, showing that child sex-changes don’t actually prevent suicide. ACLU attorney Chase Strangio admits in response that there’s “no evidence” that these procedures actually reduce suicides.

pic.twitter.com/shl1PyGpS8

— Matt Walsh (@MattWalshBlog) December 4, 2024

Transgender-identified activists often claim that all of us – and parents, especially – must affirm children in their sexual identity confusion – or they will die. But Strangio admitted in the exchange, “Completed suicide, thankfully and admittedly, is rare.”

Several commentators focused on Justice Sonja Sotomayor’s cavalier dismissal of the extreme risks and harms to children’s bodies and minds from experimental, dangerous drugs, hormones and surgeries. Will Chamberlain, senior counsel at the Article III Project, noted that she trivialized the damage by saying, “Well, aspirin has side effects, too.”

No joke, Sotomayor should simply be impeached for this statement

Cavalierly dismissing the butchering of children by saying “well aspirin has side effects too” is beneath the dignity of the highest court in the land
pic.twitter.com/TjhWE7ZaMZ

— Will Chamberlain (@willchamberlain) December 4, 2024

The Manhattan Institute’s Leor Sapir, a staunch defender of children’s health, wrote that Sotomayor’s speaking about “girls who just ‘don’t want their breasts,’” demonstrates how gender ideology has “has normalized the unthinkable and seeped into every crack of our institutions.”

The casual manner in which Justice Sotomayor, a supposed feminist, spoke about girls who just “don’t want their breasts,” shows how this pseudoscientific, anti-humanistic ideology has normalized the unthinkable and seeped into every crack of our institutions.

— Leor Sapir (@LeorSapir) December 4, 2024

Tyler O’Neil, writing at The Daily Signal, noted several falsehoods in Prelogar’s statements, including the lie that puberty blockers are reversible, saying they are “just pressing pause on someone’s endogenous puberty to give them more time to understand their identity.”

In fact, as the Daily Citizen reported, the United Kingdom National Health Service retracted its statement that puberty blockers are “fully reversible” four years ago, with the group stating:

Little is known about the long-term side effects of hormone or puberty blockers in children with gender dysphoria. … It is not known what the psychological effects may be. It’s also not known whether hormone blockers affect the development of the teenage brain or children’s bones. Side effects may also include hot flushes, fatigue and mood alterations.

Children placed on puberty blockers can never go back in time and replace the lost years when they should have been growing and maturing through the natural process of puberty. The Manhattan Institute reports, “Puberty blockers may have serious side-effects, including lower IQ, osteoporosis, early and aggressive menopause, infertility, and depression.”

Though Prelogar said children can give informed consent about the possibility of losing their fertility with these powerful drugs, O’Neil pointed out that even transgender activists doubt whether minors have the emotional and cognitive ability to assess these risks.

PANTS ON FIRE

U.S. SG Elizabeth Prelogar repeatedly lies about “gender-affirming care.”

1⃣She claims “puberty blockers” are fully reversible: They are “just pressing pause.”

2⃣She acknowledges that cross-sex hormones can affect fertility but suggests that kids can be… pic.twitter.com/MFwrO02Bdz

— Tyler O’Neil (@Tyler2ONeil) December 4, 2024

Finally, The Heritage Foundation’s Roger Severino noted that Justice Clarence Thomas’ questioning of Strangio destroyed the convoluted argument that not allowing girls to access opposite-sex hormones, in order to “transition,” constituted sex discrimination.

Tennessee does not allow boys who want testosterone to build muscle size and strength. But if the ACLU and DOJ prevail, as Thomas pointed out, only girls would be allowed to take testosterone to develop male sex characteristics – “which is … sex discrimination!” Severino exclaimed.

Justice Thomas sprung a killer question on the ACLU lawyer: “What remedy are you seeking?” Strangio, flummoxed by such a seemingly simple question said an injunction. Justice Thomas then asked “practically, you would get different treatment based on sex?” and the trap was laid.… pic.twitter.com/CI4dJI74H2

— Roger Severino (@RogerSeverino_) December 4, 2024

It’s clear that giving children puberty blockers, hormones and surgeries for the purpose of identifying as the opposite sex is dangerous experimentation. The state of Tennessee wants to help children live in reality and appreciate their birth sex – a much more compassionate approach.

When parents and medical professionals irreversibly damage children with these procedures, the state is right to step in and stop them.

We’re praying common sense and compassion rule the day at the Supreme Court as the justices make their decision.

The case is United States v. Skrmetti. Here’s a transcript of oral arguments.

Image credit: Getty.

The post Key Takeaways from Supreme Court Case on ‘Transgender’ Interventions appeared first on Daily Citizen.

Read More

Daily Citizen

Generated by Feedzy