SCOTx has its hearing on gender affirming care ban

I don’t know what to expect.

The Texas Supreme Court heard a legal challenge Tuesday to a new state law banning doctors from prescribing gender-affirming care for transgender youth, a prohibition that a district court judge said was unconstitutional.

After Gov. Greg Abbott signed the measure barring transgender Texas youth from accessing puberty blockers and hormone therapy, some of their families filed a lawsuit seeking to block the law from going into effect. They argued the new law violates their parental rights by stopping them from providing medical care for their children and it discriminates against transgender children on the basis of sex.

After a Travis County district court temporarily blocked the law from going into effect, arguing that it infringed on Texas parents’ right to make medical decisions about their children, a state appeal to the Texas Supreme Court enabled the law to go into effect in September.

Kennon Wooten, a partner with Scott, Douglass & McConnico who argued on behalf of the families, said that Senate Bill 14 uniquely strips away a parent’s right by narrowly targeting a specialized form of health care for a distinct group of people.

“In this case, what we have is the state defining the rights so specifically … we risk death by a thousand cuts of the fundamental right under the Constitution that parents have to make decisions about the care for their children,” Wooten said.

The state reasserted its stance that it has a vested interest in protecting the well-being of Texas youth, which it claimed the law does by preventing children from taking medications that have long-lasting impacts.

“Minors, generally, cannot get tattoos,” said Natalie Thompson, an assistant solicitor general for the state, referencing limits the state places on children compared to adults. “Minors, of course … cannot have alcohol or nicotine and even in medicine there are examples.” Thompson cited ephedrine, a medication used to treat low blood pressure that Texas law states can only be sold to individuals older than 16, among other restrictions.

The justices spent just under an hour probing each side’s arguments, asking why the state would restrict health care supported by all major medical associations and where the line must be drawn when it comes to parental rights.

[…]

While the justices did not hand down a decision, they considered the option of ruling on the constitutional merits of SB 14, or sending the case back to the Travis County district court for a full trial. The high court is still considering the case and did not provide a timeline of when a decision will come down.

The state hoped that the all-Republican Supreme Court would make a final decision in their favor. Legal groups advocating for the families asked the high court to kick the case back to the district court so more evidence could be reviewed.

“It’s important for people to be able to tell their stories,” Lynly Egyes, legal director of Transgender Law Center, one of the law groups representing the families, said to reporters after the hearing. “We want the families heard. We also want the doctors heard because it’s really important for everyone to have a better understanding of the impact of SB 14 on people’s lives.”

See here, here, and here for some background. I would note that while state law may forbid the sale of ephedrine to people over the age of 16, it does not forbid a parent from buying it for their child, which is exactly what SB14 does do. I hope the justices are smart enough to realize that.

Like I said, I don’t know what the Court will do. It would be ideal if they just upheld the lower court’s ruling, but as that was for a temporary restraining order, I don’t think that’s on the table. Sending it back to the district court for the trial on the merits while restoring the TRO is probably the best case. Keep your fingers crossed, and remember that what this Lege did another, better, Lege can undo. The Chron has more.

Related Posts:

This entry was posted in Legal matters and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to SCOTx has its hearing on gender affirming care ban

  1. Pingback: Texas blog roundup for the week of February 5 | Off the Kuff

Comments are closed.