Federal judge blocks Idaho gender-affirming care ban for minors
The ruling came days before the prohibition was supposed to go into effect
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.A federal judge preliminarily blocked an Idaho ban on gender-affirming health care for minors from going into effect.
The ruling came down days before HB 71, the law prohibiting minors from receiving puberty blockers, hormones and other treatments, would have gone into effect on 1 January 2024.
Under the law, clinicians could face up to 10 years in prison if they provide such treatment to those under 18.
The decision marked a victory for two Idaho teenagers and their parents who brought the suit, claiming that the ban violates protections laid out in the US Constitution. They were represented by several law firms and the ACLU.
Leo Morales, Executive Director of the ACLU of Idaho, said in a statement, “This judicial decision is a much-needed ray of hope for trans people amid a years-long onslaught against their rights to access health care and ability to navigate the world around them. Everyone should be free to live and thrive in their authentic identity, which means transgender people should not be shut out of accessing medically sound health care.”
Li Nowlin-Sohl, Senior Staff Attorney for the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Project, also said: “These dangerous efforts to control our bodies and our families threaten the well-being of trans youth, the strength of our communities, and the ability of every family to determine what’s best for their child.”
HB 71 was signed by the state’s governor Brad Little in April, adding Idaho to a grouping of more than 20 states that have passed such bans. Many of these states face lawsuits challenging the harsh laws.
The temporary injunction in Idaho doesn’t stand alone. In Arkansas, a federal judge found the ban unconstitutional and issued a permanent injunction on the law. Meanwhile, in Alabama and Indiana, the bans are temporarily blocked.
Earlier this month, Wisconsin’s Democratic Gov Tony Evers vetoed a bill that sought to prohibit gender-affirming care for minors.
However, in Kentucky and Tennessee, minors cannot obtain gender-affirming care as the bans went into effect.
According to the ACLU, in 2023 alone, 510 bills anti-LGBTQ+ measures were introduced across the US; 137 of these bills attempted to limit healthcare for trans individuals.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments