Supreme Court Grants Biden’s DOJ Opportunity To Argue That Parents Have Right To Alter Their Children’s Bodies Through Radical Gender Surgeries, Hormone-Blocking Drugs

Supreme Court Grants Biden's DOJ Opportunity To Argue That Parents Have Right To Alter Their Children's Bodies Through Radical Gender Surgeries, Hormone-Blocking Drugs

Supreme Court Grants Biden’s DOJ Opportunity To Argue That Parents Have Right To Alter Their Children’s Bodies Through Radical Gender Surgeries, Hormone-Blocking Drugs

Image Credit: canva

The Tennessee Conservative [By Kelly M. Jackson] –

After sitting in legal purgatory for several months, The Supreme Court has granted the Biden DOJ’s writ of certiorari, and will allow the government to make the argument that Tennessee’s law protecting children from life altering treatments for what amounts to a mental diagnosis violates the 14th Amendment of The Constitution, or the right of equal protections under the law. 

HB0001 which was passed and signed by Governor Lee last year, reads, “As introduced, prohibits a healthcare provider from performing on a minor or administering to a minor a medical procedure if the performance or administration of the procedure is for the purpose of enabling a minor to identify with, or live as, a purported identity inconsistent with the minor’s sex.” 

Almost immediately, the new law was met with legal action, engaged by progressive organizations like the ACLU on behalf of parents who argued that they have the legal right to surgically alter their children’s bodies and introduce hormone blocking drugs (the same sort used in chemical castration treatments of those convicted of sex offenses) irrevocably changing their child’s physiology and with potentially devastating, long-term consequences.

A federal judge initially granted an injunction enjoining the law from being enforced, but the 6th circuit court of appeals later reversed the lower court, and granted a partial injunction for the plaintiffs due to a lack of standing. He said that because the injunctive relief being sought was directed specifically at the hormone therapy that the new law would be prohibiting access to, then there was no standing for these plaintiffs to ask for injunctive relief regarding the surgical procedures named in the language of the law. 

Then in September of last year, a three-judge panel in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, rejected an appeal from the families who engaged in the suit, stating that the laws do not discriminate based on age or sex. The ruling, which prohibits treatments such as puberty blockers, hormones, and surgeries, applies to both Tennessee and Kentucky.

In a 2-1 decision, the court said that without the laws, “Tennessee and Kentucky will suffer harm from their inability to enforce the will of their legislatures, to further the public-health considerations undergirding the laws, and to avoid health risks to their children. As for the public interest, Tennessee and Kentucky’s interests in applying these laws to their residents and in being permitted to protect their children from health risks weigh heavily in favor of the States at this juncture.”

In his ruling, Chief Judge Jeffrey Sutton of the 6th Circuit wrote “This is a relatively new diagnosis with ever-shifting approaches to care over the last decade or two. Under these circumstances, it is difficult for anyone to be sure about predicting the long-term consequences of abandoning age limits of any sort for these treatments.” 

Sutton continued, “That is precisely the kind of situation in which life-tenured judges construing a difficult-to-amend Constitution should be humble and careful about announcing new substantive due process or equal protection rights that limit accountable elected officials from sorting out these medical, social, and policy challenges.”

What then followed was an appeal to the Supreme Court, which was filed in November of last year. It has remained there until this week, where a decision on whether the Supreme Court would weigh in, was provided.

There were initially three writs filed with the court, two of which came out of Tennessee, the only one of which being granted came from the Biden DOJ. 

There are 20 other states with a similar law on their books that will be affected by any ruling that is handed down from the Supreme Court on the matter. 

Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti commented in recent reports after The Supreme Court released its decision to review, “We fought hard to defend Tennessee’s law protecting kids from irreversible gender treatments and secured a thoughtful and well-reasoned opinion from the Sixth Circuit… I look forward to finishing the fight in the United States Supreme Court. This case will bring much-needed clarity to whether the Constitution contains special protections for gender identity.”

The case is likely to be argued before the court right before or right after the Presidential election which could also have a political impact on the case.

The ruling in this case could also be a preview of rulings yet to come out of the federal courts, namely, Friends of Georges v. Mulroy. That lawsuit has made it all the way to the same 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, where it is being decided if there are 1st Amendment violations in Tennessee’s law that attempted to prohibit children from having access to drag performances.  

As The Tennessee Conservative previously reported, the final arguments in that case were made on February 2nd, and Tennessee citizens are waiting for the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals to render their verdict.

The Tennessee Conservative will continue to follow all cases, and keep readers updated on any new developments. 

About the Author: Kelly Jackson is an escapee from corporate America, and a California refugee to Tennessee. Christ follower, Wife and Mom of three amazing teenagers, she has a BA in Comm from Point Loma Nazarene University, and has a background in law enforcement and human resources. Since the summer of 2020, she has spent any and all free time in the trenches with local grassroots orgs, including Mom’s for Liberty Williamson County and Tennessee Stands as a core member.  An outspoken advocate for parents rights, medical freedom, and individual liberty, Kelly also has a YouTube channel @Tennessee_Truth_Teller and is planning on expanding out to other channels soon. Kelly can be reached at kelly@tennesseeconservativenews.com.

Share this:

3 Responses

  1. If I take a belt to my kid and he reports me, I’m in a huge pile of doo doo. Yet a parent, any parent thinks they have the right to have their child, drugged, in some case mutilated and living with something that’s irreversible. For some, it’s a lifetime of medical care yet some parents see nothing wrong with it. When a child is of legal age to make such a decision, it’s your job as a parent to protect that child from making a mistake that can’t be corrected.

    1. Lucifer’s dimmercraps have criminalized Godly parenting. Lucifer’s RINOS just sit by.

  2. This is PURE Evil Parents to Destroy a Child’s whole life for their DEMENTED whim. This is not being a Parent and they do not have this right. There is NO difference than beating a child half to death and calling it a spanking!

Leave a Reply