The six conservative justices say the ban does not violate the equal protection clause.
The Supreme Court ruled this week that the state of Tennessee can enforce its state law banning transgender medical interventions for minors.
While the majority of justices stated that they could not weigh in on the scientific research regarding transgender procedures for minors, they could rule on the argument that the ban violates the Constitution’s equal protection clause, which requires state governments to note “make or enforce” laws that “abridge the privileges” of citizens. The high court majority ruled that the law did not violate this clause since it is “based on diagnosis, not sex.“
“This case carries with it the weight of fierce scientific and policy debates about the safety, efficacy, and propriety of medical treatments in an evolving field. The voices in these debates raise sincere concerns; the implications for all are profound,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote. “The Equal Protection Clause does not resolve these disagreements. Nor does it afford us license to decide them as we see best.”
“In recent years,” the chief justice explained, “the number of minors requesting sex transition treatments has increased.” The increase, he continued, has “corresponded with rising debates” over whether these treatments are effective or safe.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote the dissent for the three liberal justices wrote a dissent due to the Tennessee law preventing parents from obtaining such treatments for their children.
As the Lord Leads, Pray with Us…
- For Chief Justice Roberts to seek God’s guidance as he presides over the Supreme Court.
- For the justices to be discerning as they deliberate the final opinions of the current term.
Sources: AP News, PJ Media, USA Today
