A Florida law that bans gender-affirming health care for transgender minors and restricts access to care for certain adults is unconstitutional, a federal judge ruled Tuesday.
U.S. District Court Judge Robert Hinkle’s ruling permanently blocks a law championed by Republican state lawmakers and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R), as well as rules adopted by the state’s medical boards in 2022 that bar minors from having access to treatments such as puberty blockers and hormones.
The law, signed by DeSantis in May 2023, prohibited health care providers from administering gender-affirming care to minors and created significant barriers for transgender adults seeking care. Gender-affirming healthcare for transgender adults and minors is considered medically necessary by all major medical organizations, although not all trans people choose to medically transition or access care.
“Florida has adopted a statute and rules that prohibit gender-affirming care for minors, even when medically appropriate,” Hinkle wrote Tuesday. in a 105-page decision. “The ban is unconstitutional.”
Hinkle, who temporarily blocked enforcement of the law last June, added that the law was motivated by the “anti-transgender animus” of state lawmakers and a “deeply flawed and biased” report from the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration, that determined the gender. assert that care for minors is experimental and should be excluded from Medicaid coverage.
Florida medical boards, in turn, “imposed requirements that have no medical justification and were clearly intended to deter or deter patients from receiving gender-affirming care,” Hinkle wrote.
“Transgender opponents are, of course, free to maintain their beliefs. But they are not free to discriminate against transgender individuals just because they are transgender,” Hinkle wrote in Tuesday’s ruling. “Over time, discrimination against transgender individuals will decrease, just as racism and misogyny have decreased. To paraphrase a civil rights advocate from an earlier era, the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.”
“However, federal courts have a role to play in upholding the Constitution and laws,” Hinkle wrote. “The State of Florida may regulate as necessary, but may not categorically deny transgender individuals safe and effective medical treatment – treatment with medications routinely provided to others with the full approval of the State, as long as the purpose is not to support the patient’s transgender identity .”
The Florida Department of Health did not immediately return a request for comment. A spokesperson for DeSantis said the state will appeal Hinkle’s decision.
“Through their elected representatives, the people of Florida acted to protect the children of this state, and the Court was wrong to ignore their wishes,” they said in an emailed statement. “We disagree with the Court’s erroneous decisions on the law, on the facts and on science. As we have seen here in Florida, in the United Kingdom and across Europe, there is no good evidence to support the chemical and physical mutilation of children. These procedures cause permanent and life-altering damage to children, and history will look back on this fad with horror.”
The state is also appealing a separate decision by Hinkle to overturn Florida’s Medicaid policy, which excludes gender-affirming health care coverage.
Hinkle, in Tuesday’s ruling, disputed claims often made by opponents of transgender health care that European countries have banned gender-affirming care for minors.
“The statement is false. And no matter how many times defendants say it, it will still be false,” he wrote. “No country in Europe – or, as far as this record shows, anywhere in the world – completely bans these treatments.”
Transgender advocates celebrated Tuesday’s ruling as a victory for LGBTQ rights.
“The federal court found Florida’s health care ban for transgender minors and adult restrictions for what they are: discriminatory measures that cannot survive constitutional review,” said Simone Criss, director of Southern Legal Counsel’s transgender rights initiative. , in a statement.
“This decision means that I will not have to watch my daughter suffer needlessly because I am unable to provide her with the care she needs,” said Jane Doe, mother of plaintiff Susan Doe, a 12-year-old transgender girl. “Seeing Susan’s fear regarding this ban was one of the most difficult experiences we have faced as parents. All we wanted was to take away that fear and help her continue to be the happy, confident child she is now.”
This story originally appeared on thehill.com read the full story
