Appeals court hears arguments on gender-affirming care ban
ST. LOUIS — Arguments before a federal appeals court that is considering whether to reinstate Arkansas’ first-in-the-nation ban on gender-affirming care for minors focused Thursday on whether it and similar restrictions adopted by two dozen states discriminate on the basis of sex.
Ten judges with the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Louis heard arguments over a judge’s ruling last year that struck down the ban as unconstitutional. The 2021 law would prohibit doctors from providing gender-affirming hormone treatment, puberty blockers or surgery to anyone under 18.
An attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union, which challenged the law on behalf of four transgender youths and their parents, said the restriction infringes on the longstanding rights of parents to make decisions about their children’s medical care.
“Arkansas believed that that government knew better than the loving parents in this case what was best for their minor children,” Chase Strangio, deputy director for transgender justice for the ACLU’s LGBTQ and HIV Project, told the court. “That burdens that longstanding right of parents to direct the medical care of their children.”
At least 24 states have adopted laws restricting or banning gender-affirming medical care for
transgender minors, and most of those face lawsuits. The restrictions on health care are part of a larger backlash against transgender rights, touching on everything from bathroom access to participation in sports.
The 43-minute hearing on the Arkansas law drew a packed audience that included the actor Elliot Page, who has filed a brief asking the court to uphold last year’s ruling.
Dylan Jacobs, the deputy solicitor general for Arkansas, argued that the law doesn’t discriminate based on sex because it bans the treatments for a specific purpose.
“Minors may be prescribed testosterone for any purpose other than gender transition under this
statute,” Mr. Jacobs said, adding that states have “wide-ranging authority” to regulate health, safety and medical ethics.
The case went before the full court rather than a three-judge panel after it granted a request by Republican Attorney General Tim Griffin.
The move could speed up the case’s march toward the U.S. Supreme Court, which has been asked to block similar laws in Kentucky and Tennessee. All but one of the judges hearing arguments Thursday were appointed by Republican presidents.
It’s unclear when the 8th Circuit will make a ruling. Chief Judge Steven Colloton said it will issue a decision “in due course.”