A federal court ruled on Tuesday that an Idaho law prohibiting doctors from providing transgender minors with access to gender-affirming care is likely unconstitutional and blocked the law from taking effect. The gender-affirming healthcare ban, which was originally planned to go into effect on January 1, would have made providing puberty blockers and hormone therapies to transgender youth a felony.
“This victory is significant for Idaho transgender youth and their parents, and will have an immediate positive impact on their daily lives,” Leo Morales, executive director of the ACLU of Idaho, said in a statement.
Judge B. Lynn Winmill of the U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho held that Idaho’s anti-trans law likely violated the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause under the 14th Amendment.
“Transgender children should receive equal treatment under the law. Parents should have the right to make the most fundamental decisions about how to care for their children,” Winmill said in his ruling.
According to the court order, when Idaho’s gender-affirming care ban passed the legislature, Jane Doe, a 16-year-old transgender girl and one of the plaintiffs challenging the law, wept in the hallway at her school and her parents had to take her home. Before receiving gender-affirming care, she “sometimes wished she did not even exist,” the complaint challenging the law said, but access to gender-affirming care “significantly improved” her mental health.
“Every family wants what is best for their children, and families who love and accept their transgender youth are no different,” Li Nowlin-Sohl, senior staff attorney for the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Project said in a statement. “These dangerous efforts to control our bodies and our families threaten the well-being of trans youth, the strength of our communities, and the ability of every family to determine what’s best for their child.”
Another plaintiff in the lawsuit, Pam Poe, a 15-year-old trans girl, “struggled with depression, anxiety and self-harm” before receiving gender-affirming care which “greatly improved” her mental health. If the gender-affirming healthcare ban went into effect, her and her family would have considered leaving the state.
“This judicial decision is a much-needed ray of hope for trans people amid a years-long onslaught against their rights to access health care and ability to navigate the world around them,” Morales said in a press release. “Everyone should be free to live and thrive in their authentic identity, which means transgender people should not be shut out of accessing medically sound health care.”
Idaho is one of 22 states that have restricted or banned transgender youth from accessing gender-affirming care, according to the Movement Advancement Project (MAP). In a recent report, MAP described the gender-affirming healthcare bans as part of a “war against LGBTQ people in America and their very right and ability to openly exist.” While many of these bans have been temporarily blocked by the courts, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth and Eleventh Circuits have reversed lower court injunctions, allowing bans in Kentucky, Tennessee and Alabama to go into effect.
Research by the Trevor Project shows that debates around anti-trans bills negatively affect transgender and nonbinary youth’s mental health and a majority of those trans youth (55 percent) said anti-trans bills “very negatively” affected their mental health. Gender-affirming healthcare bans don’t just hurt transgender and nonbinary people, but also affect the health and well-being of LGBTQ+ adults, according to a Human Rights Campaign poll. The poll found that 8 in 10 LGBTQ adults said that the bans made them feel less safe and “worsen[ed] harmful stereotypes, discrimination, hate and stigma.”
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.