Nashville, Tennessee (AP) – A decision from the US Supreme Court on Wednesday supported Tennessee’s ban on gender-affirming care due to uncertainties expressed by minors regarding their transgender identities and concerns from their parents about future implications.
The ruling marked a significant victory for the Trump administration and Republican-majority states, shielding them from numerous legal challenges and preserving restrictions on transgender protections.
Transgender rights advocates convened on June 18, 2025, at the Lutheran Church in Capitol Hill, Washington. (AP Photo/Mariam Zuhaib)
The case revolves around a Tennessee law banning hormone treatments and puberty blockers for transgender minors. Opponents of gender-affirming care argue that young people may later regret their transition.This argument persists among advocates.
Families of transgender children assert that these laws violate the constitutional rights of vulnerable individuals, with claims that such bans reflect illegal sexism.
Students advocate for an inclusive future
Eli Givens, a transgender activist who spoke out against Tennessee’s gender-affirming care ban in 2023, expressed the dire implications of legislative decisions, stating, “It’s disheartening that our lawmakers are enveloped in fiction.”
A non-binary college student from Spring Hill underwent a mastectomy at 17 and shared the law’s adverse effects on their advocacy; they attended a Supreme Court hearing on their 20th birthday.
“We’re not creating a world that welcomes trans youth,” Givens remarked. “It’s troubling to contemplate what it may lead to.”
Jennifer Solomon, an advocate with Equality Florida, expressed her dismay, stating this decision will “ultimately bring shame to the court.”
“This decision is concerning for every parent,” she commented. “Every family should be alarmed when politicians overrule the right to make medical choices for their children.”
Conservative activists applaud the ruling
Chloe Cole, a conservative activist noted for discussing her experience with detransitioning, celebrated the court’s decision on social media, claiming, “Now all children in America are safer.”
Republicans in Tennessee have cited Cole’s story as a justification for the necessity of the law.
Activist Matt Walsh, an early supporter of Tennessee’s legal changes, expressed his approval of the Supreme Court’s ruling. Walsh previously shared videos of medical professionals labeling gender-affirming procedures as “financial exploitation” and encouraged those with religious concerns to step aside.
“This is a monumental victory, and I’m proud to be part of it. I’ve battled for our community alongside many others,” Walsh proclaimed on social media.
Concerns over upcoming legislative actions post-Supreme Court ruling
Rosie Emilic worries the ruling may embolden lawmakers in New Hampshire. There’s potential legislation that might prohibit hormone treatments and puberty blockers for youth, which is pending the governor’s approval.
Some lawmakers are contemplating restricting access for minors who have already started treatment, including Emilic’s nine-year-old child.
“This is deeply troubling, and I’m at a loss for how to explain this to my children,” Emilic said.
She and her husband are now discussing relocating from New Hampshire while awaiting further developments.
“We both have roots here; we want to raise our family in this community,” she explained. “But if it comes to that, we may have no choice but to leave.”
Challenges faced by families moving for gender-affirming care
Erica Barker relocated her family from Jackson, Mississippi to North Las Vegas, Nevada two years ago to ensure access to gender-affirming treatment for her child.
Barker’s daughter, a transgender individual, had already been receiving care for three years before the family moved after Mississippi enacted a ban on such services.
Barker reflected on the difficult transition, which involved her husband finding new employment and managing the sale of their Mississippi home, but was grateful for improved access to healthcare for her daughter.
“We empathize for those who haven’t had the same opportunities,” Barker acknowledged.
In Oklahoma, Erica Dubose faces significant hurdles to secure care for her 17-year-old non-binary child, Sidney Gebhardt, forcing them to drive four hours to Kansas and mail prescriptions from Oregon.
“I hope the younger generation won’t have to endure such challenges,” Gebhardt shared. “They deserve to focus on education, connect with friends, and envision a fulfilling future.”
Advocates argue gender-affirming care is life-saving
Sarah Moscanos, from Wisconsin, emphasizes that her 14-year-old transgender daughter, who sought counseling for nearly a decade, is living proof that gender-affirming care can save lives.
“Numerous studies support what works for these youth,” she asserted. “Enhanced care is crucial in safeguarding trans children’s lives.”
While Wisconsin lacks a gender-affirming care ban, Moscanos voiced concerns over accessibility to care for her daughter, highlighting the precarious nature of political climates.
“We’re merely one election away from potentially catastrophic outcomes for our children,” she cautioned.
A vow to remain resilient
Mo Jenkins, a 26-year-old transgender Texan who has been receiving hormone therapy since age 16, expressed their commitment to advocacy.
“My journey has been about survival,” Jenkins stated.
With a past ban on gender-affirming care for teenagers enacted two years prior, Texas Republicans recently passed a law defining gender strictly based on biological traits.
“While I’m not shocked by this ruling, I am disappointed,” Jenkins stated. “Trans individuals aren’t going away.”
___
Mulvihill reported from Cherry Hill, New Jersey, while Seewer reported from Toledo, Ohio. Associated Press journalists contributed from multiple locations, including Susan Hay in Hartford, Connecticut; Kenya Hunter in Atlanta; Laura Bergfeld in Chicago; and Nadia Rasan in Austin, Texas.
Source: apnews.com