Federal court rules trans activists are NOT marginalized, allows Tennessee, Kentucky to ban child sex changes

In a 2-1 ruling obtained by Just the News, the Cincinnati, Ohio-based 6th Circuit Court of Appeals stated, “The concept of gender dysphoria as a medical condition is relatively new and the use of drug treatments that change or modify a child’s sex characteristics is even more recent.”

The court added, “Prohibiting citizens and legislatures from offering their perspectives on high-stakes medical policies, in which compassion for the child points in both directions, is not something life-tenured federal judges should do without a clear warrant in the Constitution.”

The ruling stated that the case was brought forth because they claimed that the law violated a "suspected class."

"The plaintiffs and the federal government separately invoke a distinct theory of equal protection—that the Act violates the rights of a suspect class: transgender individuals. But neither the Supreme Court nor this Court has recognized transgender status as a suspect class. Until that changes, rational basis review applies," the ruling states.

"Other considerations that the Court has highlighted when recognizing a new suspect class do not improve plaintiffs’ chances of success" of being recognized as a new suspect class, which the Supreme Court has not done for decades.

To be considered, the ruling stated that the group needed to be considered a "politically powerless group."

"Whatever may have been true in the past about our society’s treatment of individuals with gender dysphoria, some of it surely lamentable, it is difficult to maintain that the democratic process remains broken on this issue today," the ruling states.

"The President of the United States and the Department of Justice support the plaintiffs. A national anti-discrimination law, Title VII, protects transgender individuals in the employment setting. Fourteen States have passed laws specifically allowing some of the treatments sought here. Twenty States have joined an amicus brief in support of the plaintiffs. The major medical organizations support the plaintiffs. And the only large law firms to make an appearance in the case all entered the controversy in support of the plaintiffs.

"These are not the hallmarks of a skewed or unfair political process—and they offer no explanation for inviting a greater political dysfunction problem: the difficulty of amending the Constitution if the federal courts err in choosing to occupy the field."

The ruling was a defeat for the American Civil Liberties Union, which had challenged the laws banning child mutilation and vowed to take the battle all the way to the US Supreme Court.

The organization said in a statement, “Denying transgender youth equality before the law and needlessly withholding the necessary medical care their families and their doctors know is right for them has caused and will continue to cause serious harm.”

In March, hundreds of protesters descended on the Kentucky State Capitol as GOP lawmakers enacted a sweeping ban on sex changes for minors after overriding the veto of the Democratic governor.