The U.S. Supreme Court has granted a petition for divided argument in U.S. v. Skrmetti, the federal challenge to Tennessee’s law prohibiting doctors from prescribing treatments for gender dysphoria to transgender youth.
The court previously agreed in June to take up the case, as well as its companion case, L.W. v. Skrmetti, during the 2024-2025 court session.
The outcome of the case will likely determine the fate of similar laws in 23 other states, where Republican lawmakers have sought to criminalize the provision of gender-affirming care, like puberty blockers or hormones, to transgender youth to help them transition and assuage their feelings of gender dysphoria.
Two other states — Arizona and New Hampshire — have only banned surgical interventions on minors. Oral arguments in the case have been set for December 4, 2024.
A federal judge initially blocked the law from taking effect, but Tennessee appealed the ruling and asked that it be reversed. The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals subsequently lifted that injunction, thereby allowing the law to take effect. A few months later, the 6th Circuit rejected a separate request seeking to block enforcement of the law.
The Justice Department intervened, asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review the 6th Circuit’s rationale for the decision, in hopes of reversing it.
The plaintiffs in the original L.W. v. Skrmetti lawsuit challenging the ban — three families with transgender children and a Memphis-based doctor — are being represented by a coalition of legal organizations and firms, including Lambda Legal, the AmericanCivilLibertiesUnion, the ACLU of Tennessee, and Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP.
Lawyers for the plaintiffs recently petitioned the court for divided argument, enabling them to split time with the U.S. Department of Justice in arguing for the ban to be overturned. On October 21, the court granted that request.
As a result, Chase Strangio, the co-director of the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Project, will now appear before the high court to argue for overturning the Tennessee ban — and others like it — on behalf of his clients, with those arguments becoming part of the case’s official record.
Strangio’s appearance will make him the first out transgender person to argue a case before the prestigious legal body.
Strangio is the leading U.S. legal expert on transgender rights, ACLU Legal Director Cecillia Wang told Reuters.
“He brings to the lectern not only brilliant constitutional lawyering, but also the tenacity and heart of a civil rights champion,” Wang said.
The Pentagon will start forcibly discharging transgender service members within 60 days unless an individual can obtain a special waiver to allow them to continue serving.
On Wednesday, February 26, the Pentagon issued a policy memo outlining how the U.S. Department of Defense is complying with an executive order by President Trump to prohibit transgender individuals from serving openly in the U.S. military.
Trump's executive order claims that allowing transgender people to serve in the Armed Forces threatens military readiness and undermines unit cohesion.
It contradicts a 2016 RAND Corporation study, commissioned by the Pentagon, that found allowing transgender members to serve openly had no negative impact on unit cohesion, operational effectiveness, or readiness.
The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to take up a challenge to a Colorado law prohibiting mental health therapists from subjecting LGBTQ youth to conversion therapy.
The court will hear the case during its next term, which begins in October and runs through June 2026.
Conversion therapy is a practice intended to change a person's sexual orientation or gender identity to align with heterosexual or cisgender norms. Most mainstream medical organizations have largely discredited it as ineffective and potentially even harmful.
Yet, many social conservatives insist that people who hold religious beliefs opposing homosexuality should be allowed to enroll their children, or, in the case of adults, themselves, in the practice.
Republicans in nine states are calling for the overturn of marriage equality.
In Idaho, Michigan, Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota, lawmakers have introduced resolutions demanding the U.S. Supreme Court reverse its landmark 2015 decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, in which the court struck down all existing state-level same-sex marriage bans.
Last month, the Idaho House of Representatives voted 46-24 to approve one such resolution, asking the nation's highest court to "restore the natural definition of marriage, a union of one man and one woman."
While the resolution is non-binding and doesn't require the Supreme Court to take action, Republican lawmakers see it as a "messaging" bill that expresses their extreme displeasure with same-sex marriage.
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.