The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments Wednesday (12/4) in United States v. Skrmetti, a pivotal transgender rights case. The case challenges a Tennessee law prohibiting gender-affirming medical care for minors, such as puberty blockers and hormone therapy. While framed around care for youth, the state’s arguments could extend to bans affecting adults. Chief Justice John Roberts and other conservative justices appeared inclined to uphold the law, signaling potential changes to constitutional protections against sex-based discrimination.
Conservatives Advocate Medical Carveouts
Several justices expressed support for a “medical carveout” from traditional heightened scrutiny applied to sex discrimination cases. Roberts argued for deference to state lawmakers on medical issues, claiming judges lack expertise in such areas. Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett echoed this sentiment, with Barrett asking whether heightened scrutiny has ever applied to medical judgments. Critics worry this approach weakens protections for women and LGBTQ+ individuals by narrowing constitutional safeguards.
Tensions over Established Precedent
The case centers on whether Tennessee’s law improperly classifies individuals by sex, as it allows some treatments for cisgender youth but not transgender youth. Under United States v. Virginia (1996), all sex-based classifications are subject to heightened scrutiny, which assumes such laws are unconstitutional unless proven otherwise. However, many justices suggested a departure from this precedent, signaling openness to limiting its scope. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson voiced concern over eroding “bedrock principles” of anti-discrimination law, warning against creating broader exceptions.
Implications Beyond Transgender Rights
The case has far-reaching implications for anti-discrimination laws. Legal experts warn that a ruling in Tennessee’s favor could weaken constitutional standards protecting against sex-based and potentially race-based discrimination. Critics, including the Biden administration and ACLU, worry about a rollback of protections under the guise of medical policy. While no final decision is expected until June 2025, the arguments suggest a likely victory for Tennessee, with potential consequences extending beyond transgender rights.
Source:
The horrifying implications of today’s Supreme Court argument on trans rights
Photo by Alexander Grey on Unsplash
About Post Author
