It wasn’t that long ago that social conservatives were understandably concerned that transgenderism was on the road to full normalization and perhaps even coerced celebration throughout American society. But the tide has been turning for a couple of years. The two major battles in this particular front in the culture war have been biological men competing in women’s sports and so-called “gender-affirming care” for minors. In the case of transgenderism and athletics, progressives have been losing in state legislatures, the courts, and, as Carl Trueman argues, the court of public opinion. The same can be said of transgenderism and teenagers.
On June 18, the United States Supreme Court announced its much-anticipated ruling in United States v. Skrmetti. In a landmark 6-3 decision that broke along conservative-progressive lines, the court upheld Tennessee’s ban on puberty blockers and hormone therapy for transgender minors. The stakes are nothing less than the health of children, the importance of science-based medicine, and the religious liberty of Americans who dissent from progressive views of gender and sexuality.
In 2023, the Tennessee General Assembly approved SB1, a bill that affirms biological sex and prohibits gender transition procedures for minors. The law provides numerous reasons for the ban. The known and suspected health risks for young people are simply too high. Minors aren’t mature enough to make such radical, irreversible, life-altering decisions. The moral objections (including those rooted in religious convictions) have been ignored and even threatened by the state. The profit motive has played far too important a role in the push for “gender-affirming care” for minors.
Under the Biden Administration, the federal government sided with three transgender teenagers and their families who argued that SB1 constitutes sex discrimination and violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th amendment. In February, however, the government reversed its position, noting it wouldn’t have challenged SB1 had Donald Trump been president at the time the law was passed.
Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority in the Skrmetti ruling, argued that Tennessee lawmakers provided a rational basis that SB1 is rooted in a legitimate government interest. “Tennessee concluded that there is an ongoing debate among medical experts regarding the risks and benefits associated with administering puberty blockers and hormones to treat gender dysphoria, gender identity disorder, and gender incongruence. SB1’s ban on such treatments responds directly to that uncertainty.”
Click Here to Read More (Originally Published at World Magazine)
