cover of episode The Supreme Court Takes On Transgender Care for Minors

The Supreme Court Takes On Transgender Care for Minors

2024/12/5
logo of podcast The Daily

The Daily
People
A
Adam Liptak
E
Elizabeth Prelogar
M
Matthew Rice
M
Michael Barbaro
Topics
最高法院就田纳西州一项禁止为未成年跨性别者提供某些医疗服务的法律进行了裁决。此案关系到全国数十项类似法律的命运，并引发了关于宪法平等保护条款、性别歧视以及州政府在医疗决策中的作用等问题的广泛讨论。政府律师认为，该法律构成基于性别的歧视，因为相同的医疗措施根据患者的性别而有不同的适用性。他们认为，这违反了宪法平等保护条款，应受到严格的司法审查。保守派法官则认为，最高法院不具备裁决医疗实践的专业知识，应将此问题留给民选代表。他们还质疑，是否应该将跨性别身份视为受宪法保护的不可改变的特征。田纳西州的律师则辩称，该法律并非基于性别歧视，而是基于医疗程序的目的，并且对男女都有效。他们认为，该法律旨在限制某些医疗程序，而不是歧视任何特定性别。自由派法官则质疑田纳西州律师的论点，认为该法律的本质是基于性别的，并对该法律可能造成的对跨性别青年的伤害表示担忧。 本案的核心争议在于田纳西州法律是否构成基于性别的歧视。政府律师认为，该法律对医疗护理的限制是基于性别的，因为同一种药物或手术，根据患者的性别而有不同的适用性。他们认为，这违反了宪法平等保护条款，应受到严格的司法审查。保守派法官则认为，该法律并非基于性别歧视，而是基于医疗程序的目的，并且对男女都有效。他们认为，最高法院不应干涉州政府在医疗决策中的权力。自由派法官则认为，该法律对跨性别未成年人造成了不成比例的伤害，并质疑田纳西州律师关于医疗目的与性别歧视之间区别的论点。

Deep Dive

Key Insights

Why did the Supreme Court take up the case on transgender care for minors?

The case is significant as it could uphold or dismantle dozens of laws across the country concerning the rights of transgender children. It addresses a defining social issue at a time when trans rights are highly scrutinized, impacting not just presidential campaigns but also school boards and sports leagues.

What specific medical treatments does the Tennessee law ban for transgender minors?

The Tennessee law prohibits puberty blockers, hormone therapy, and surgery for transgender minors under 18 years of age.

How does the Biden administration argue that the Tennessee law violates the Constitution?

The Biden administration argues that the law discriminates based on sex, as it denies certain forms of care to transgender minors while allowing the same treatments for other minors, thus triggering the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

What was the reaction of the conservative justices during the arguments?

The conservative justices, particularly Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Kavanaugh, expressed reluctance to make medical decisions, suggesting that such matters should be left to state lawmakers rather than the Supreme Court.

What was the significance of Chase Strangio's argument before the Supreme Court?

Chase Strangio, a transgender lawyer with the ACLU, became the first openly transgender lawyer to argue before the Supreme Court. His argument was significant both personally and legally, as he addressed the immutability of transgender identity, a key point in determining legal protections.

How did the liberal justices challenge the Tennessee law's defense?

The liberal justices, including Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson, pressed the Tennessee lawyer on the distinction between medical purpose and sex discrimination, arguing that the law's prohibition of certain treatments for transgender minors amounts to sex-based discrimination.

What potential impact could the Supreme Court's ruling have on other state-level bans on transgender care?

If the Supreme Court upholds the Tennessee law, it would likely validate similar bans in other states, suggesting that they are constitutional under an equal protection challenge. This could lead to a patchwork of laws where some states allow gender-affirming care and others do not.

What alternative constitutional argument was hinted at during the case?

An alternative argument hinted at was the constitutional right of parents to direct the medical care of their children, similar to conservative stances on parental rights in issues like vaccinations.

Chapters
The Supreme Court heard arguments on a Tennessee law banning gender transition care for minors. The case involves claims of sex discrimination under the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. The justices' questions ranged from the specifics of sex discrimination to broader questions of medical expertise and state's rights.
  • Supreme Court heard arguments on a major case concerning transgender children's rights
  • Tennessee law bans medical treatments for transgender youth challenged
  • Case involves claims of sex discrimination under the 14th Amendment
  • Justices questioned the scope of judicial review in medical decisions

Shownotes Transcript

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court heard a major case on the rights of transgender children that could help uphold or dismantle dozens of laws across the country.

Adam Liptak, who covers the Supreme Court for The Times, explains how the questioning played out and how the justices are likely to rule. 

Guest: Adam Liptak), who covers the Supreme Court and writes Sidebar), a column on legal developments, for The New York Times.

Background reading: 

For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily). Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday. 

Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts) or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.