Judge Allows Kentucky Trans Health Care Ban to Take Effect
Judge stays his own ruling, based on ab unfavorable decision from the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals in a similar case out of Tennessee.
A federal judge has issued an order halting an injunction he previously issued to prevent Kentucky state authorities from enforcing the state’s ban on gender-affirming care. As a result, state authorities can begin penalizing doctors who prescribe gender-affirming treatments to minors.
The decision by U.S. District Judge David Hale, of the Western District of Kentucky, to stay the temporary injunction he issued on June 28, came less than a week after a federal appeals court overturned a lower court judge’s order blocking a similar law in Tennessee.
Despite finding that the plaintiffs — a group of seven families with transgender children — were likely to succeed in proving the ban on gender-affirming care is unconstitutional, Hale also recognized that any appeal of his earlier ruling would come before the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals — the very court that just allowed Tennessee’s ban to go into effect.
In that ruling, the appeals court ruled 2-1 to lift the injunction on the Tennessee law on the grounds that issues like bans on gender-affirming care are better left to state lawmakers to decide.
In his order staying his own injunction, Hale noted that the 6th Circuit had noted that the Tennessee law contains an exemption for minors who had begun treatment before the law took effect, with the aim of weening them off treatments and phasing out the exemption by March 31, 2024. As a result, the appeals court found that the exemption “lessens the harm” to minors who will continue to receive treatment during that window period.
While the Kentucky plaintiffs’ legal arguments differ somewhat from those of the Tennessee plaintiffs, Hale nonetheless found that the 6th Circuit was likely to reach a similar conclusion, and stayed his injunction, thereby allowing Kentucky’s restrictions to go into effect, while the courts work to determine the case based on its merits.
Hale previously ruled that the hormonal interventions prohibited by Kentucky’s law were “medically appropriate” and adhered to evidence-based standards of care that are commonly regarded by most major medical organizations as the appropriate treatment for treating youth suffering from gender dysphoria.
The plaintiffs in the case did not challenge other provisions in the law outlawing surgical interventions on minors, which have already taken effect.
The restrictions on hormonal interventions were passed as part of a broader anti-LGBTQ bill that also restricts which restroom and locker room facilities transgender students can use, allows teachers and other students to misgender trans-identifying minors in schools, and prohibits certain types of classroom instruction on related to sexuality, HIV and sexually-transmitted diseases, or LGBTQ-related topics.
Although the bill was vetoed by Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear over concerns that it was unconstitutional, Republican lawmakers overrode that veto to enact the law. The seven plaintiff families subsequently sued, arguing that the law singles out transgender youth for discrimination, and limits the rights of parents of transgender youth to make informed medical decisions for their own children.
Kentucky Republican Attorney General Daniel Cameron, who is defending the law in court — and is also challenging Beshear in this year’s gubernatorial election — issued a celebratory tweet after Hale’s decision.
“The latest ruling from the District Court is a victory for the rule of law and for the protection of our children,” he wrote. “I’ll continue to defend Senate Bill 150 and stand up for the right of children to be children, free from radical gender ideology.”
The American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky called Hale’s ruling “heartbreaking and devastating.”
“While we strongly disagree with this opinion, it is only in effect while our appeal is pending in front of the Sixth Circuit,” Corey Shapiro, the legal director for the ACLU of Kentucky, said in a statement appearing to indicate that the 6th Circuit might rule differently on the case based on the unique legal arguments made that distinguish the Kentucky lawsuit from the Tennessee lawsuit.
“It is not the final word, and we remain optimistic that with a full briefing we will achieve a positive result,” Shapiro added.
“Banning essential medical care for transgender youth in Kentucky is harmful, discriminatory, and egregious government overreach,” the organization said in a news release. “Lawmakers have no place inserting themselves into the personal medical decisions of families of transgender youth and their health care providers, and by doing so, they are violating the fundamental rights and freedoms of parents to direct the upbringing of their children.”
The National Center for Lesbian Rights, which is also representing the plaintiff families, noted that the 6th Circuit’s decision in the Tennessee case strays significantly from other courts’ findings when considering whether to block bans on gender-affirming care from taking effect.
“Six federal district court judges have ruled on challenges to medical bans, including Kentucky’s. Each one has listened carefully to the evidence and found that these bans have no basis in medical science, discriminate against transgender youth, and cause serious harms by denying medically needed care,” Shannon Minter, the group’s legal director, said in a statement. “We are hopeful that when the Sixth Circuit reviews the record and has the benefit of full briefing in this case, it will reach the same conclusion.”
Support Metro Weekly’s Journalism
These are challenging times for news organizations. And yet it’s crucial we stay active and provide vital resources and information to both our local readers and the world. So won’t you please take a moment and consider supporting Metro Weekly with a membership? For as little as $5 a month, you can help ensure Metro Weekly magazine and MetroWeekly.com remain free, viable resources as we provide the best, most diverse, culturally-resonant LGBTQ coverage in both the D.C. region and around the world. Memberships come with exclusive perks and discounts, your own personal digital delivery of each week’s magazine (and an archive), access to our Member's Lounge when it launches this fall, and exclusive members-only items like Metro Weekly Membership Mugs and Tote Bags! Check out all our membership levels here and please join us today!
You must be logged in to post a comment.