Last Wednesday the US Supreme Court began the first hearings in one of the cases on trans rights that could be decisive for Donald Trump’s arrival in the White House in January. The president-elect has vowed to dismantle many of the group’s advances, such as access to gender-affirming treatments or legal gender recognition.
Transsexual children, transformed into an electoral weapon in the United States
The Supreme court,with a conservative majority,will examine arguments against the ban in the state of Tennessee on minors accessing care that allows them to live with their gender identity,irrespective of the sex they were registered with at birth. These procedures include puberty blockers or other hormone treatments.
Trump’s second term poses a tangible threat to trans people, so the Supreme court’s ruling in the Tennessee case will be an indicator of the extent to which the high court will serve as a firewall against the president-elect’s desire to end trans rights.
The resolution will also set a precedent for the other 25 states that have enacted similar laws and will set the limits for future legislative proposals related to trans people, such as those that could regulate their participation in sports or the use of bathrooms.
An electoral workhorse
The rights of trans people and,above all,the access of minors to gender-affirming treatments,were one of Trump’s main battle points during the campaign. although Democratic candidate Kamala Harris barely mentioned identity politics or the trans community, many Republican campaign ads closed with the slogan “Kamala is for them/them. President Trump is for you.” In English, pronouns They Yes They They are the ones used as a neutral formula for non-binary people.
In August, during an event organized by the ultra-conservative group Mom is for FreedomTrump promised that “on day one” of his arrival in the White House, he will sign an “executive order directing all federal agencies to stop promoting gender or sexual transition at any age.” The republican did not specify which federal agencies he was referring to, but said he would stop sending funds to schools that promote the ideas. he woke upamong these, those relating to trans people or gender transition.
Just as he has targeted abortion clinics, Trump has also attacked hospitals and centers that provide gender-affirming treatments. During the campaign, he promised that he would cut funding to clinics that offered these types of procedures and that these clinics would no longer meet federal health and safety standards. another of the most vital promises that appears in the Republican Party platform is “keeping men out of women’s competitions”.
Is it “sexual discrimination”?
The U.S. Supreme Court will have to decide whether Tennessee’s ban violates the 14th Amendment’s provision that people in similar circumstances be treated equally under the law. That state bans puberty blockers and treatments for minors,but “not in all cases,” as they continue to be prescribed to minors in other situations. For this reason, the families have appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that it is “discrimination based on sex” that prevents trans minors from accessing these treatments, while others have access to them.
The State of Tennessee is aware of this reality,but rejects that sex discrimination exists and defends that the ban was passed to protect minors from the risks of life-altering “gender transition” procedures. One of the arguments of defenders of the state ban on the use of hormones and blockers in trans minors is that many children who said they were trans ended up changing their minds. Both supporters of the ban and families who have appealed it say they are acting to protect minors.
Currently, Tennessee families with trans minors are forced to travel out of state to receive care. Various research shows that trans minors have a tendency to suffer from stress, depression and have suicidal thoughts, while other studies suggest that treatments for gender dysphoria can improve people’s well-being.
During the campaign, Trump revived the hoax that schools encourage boys and girls to undergo sex-reassignment surgery as part of gender-affirming treatments.The reality is that surgeries in gender affirmation treatments are very rare and specific in minors, and the majority of those performed are breast reductions in older minors.
Gender-affirming treatments are supported by the american Medical Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics. When a trans minor begins the process of gender affirmation, he or she first undergoes a medical evaluation and diagnosis, from which the administration of puberty blockers may be recommended. Only after treatment with blockers is it assessed whether the administration of hormones is necessary. Surgery is the last resort and is very rarely applied in minors.
How can civil society effectively advocate for transgender rights in the current political climate?
Interview: Examining Trans Rights in Today’s Political Landscape
Time.news Editor: Welcome to Time.news. Today, we’re diving deep into a pressing issue that has captured national attention: the rights of transgender individuals, especially minors, as we approach an critically important Supreme Court ruling. Joining us is Dr. Samira Patel, a leading expert in gender studies and legal advocacy for LGBTQ+ rights.Dr. Patel, thank you for being here.
Dr. Samira Patel: Thank you for having me.This is such an important topic, especially in today’s political climate.
Time.news Editor: Last week, the Supreme Court began hearings on a pivotal case from Tennessee regarding access to gender-affirming care for minors. Why is this case so crucial at this moment?
Dr. Samira Patel: This case is absolutely critical. It isn’t just about Tennessee; it has broader implications for all 25 states that have enacted similar laws.What’s at stake is the access to necessary medical treatments—like puberty blockers and hormone therapies—that allow minors to live authentically according to their gender identity. If the Supreme court rules against this access, it could set a risky precedent for future legislation, potentially limiting rights in several key areas, including participation in sports and access to facilities like bathrooms.
Time.news Editor: You mentioned its potential impact on future legislation. What are some of the broader implications for transgender rights if the ruling does not favor the plaintiffs in this case?
Dr.Samira patel: A ruling against trans rights in this context could embolden other states to introduce harsher laws, effectively rolling back the progress we’ve made.Moreover, it may signal that the courts will not protect the rights of trans individuals, making them vulnerable to discriminatory practices. We might also see increased politicization of trans issues, treating them as electoral points rather than human rights, which takes us back decades in terms of progress.
Time.news Editor: Speaking of politicization, it truly seems like during the recent election campaign, trans rights became a pivotal weapon for some parties, especially among Republicans. Can you elaborate on how these rights have been weaponized in political discourse?
Dr. Samira Patel: Certainly. The rhetoric used during the campaign not onyl highlighted trans rights but framed them in a way that created division. Trump’s slogan effectively polarized the electorate by suggesting that protecting trans rights was akin to neglecting the needs of ‘regular’ Americans. This strategy portrays trans individuals as a threat rather than as people deserving of rights and protections, which is deeply problematic and undermines civil discourse.
Time.news Editor: It’s alarming to think that individuals’ identities can be used this way. How do you think the Biden administration or Democratic leadership can respond to counter this narrative effectively?
Dr. Samira Patel: I believe that the Democrats need to take a more vocal and assertive stance on trans rights. This involves not only setting legal precedents but also engaging in public messaging that highlights the dignity and humanity of trans individuals. They should emphasize how supporting these rights ultimately enriches society as a whole, promoting equality and acceptance. Moreover, advocacy for complete anti-discrimination legislation at the national level could help create a more supportive surroundings for LGBTQ+ individuals across all states.
Time.news Editor: as we await the Supreme Court’s ruling,what message would you like to convey to our audience regarding trans rights and the role of civil society in this issue?
Dr. Samira Patel: It’s imperative for everyone—nonetheless of their political affiliation—to understand that trans rights are human rights. We all have a role to play in advocacy, whether by educating ourselves, supporting trans-led organizations, or even engaging in conversations with our peers to foster understanding. Now is the time to stand in solidarity with the trans community and challenge discriminatory narratives. Each of us can contribute to creating a more just society.
Time.news Editor: Thank you so much, Dr.Patel. Your insights have been invaluable,and we appreciate you highlighting such an important issue during these crucial times.
Dr. Samira Patel: Thank you for covering this topic. It’s vital we keep this conversation going.