POLITICS
Federal Judges Block Anti-Trans Laws in Two States
State laws target trans youth in healthcare, sports
BY ARTHUR S. LEONARD
On July 21, federal judges
in Arkansas and
West Virginia issued
preliminary injunctions
against the enforcement of
anti-transgender state laws while
the parties litigate over statutory
and constitutional challenges to
the laws. Issuing such preliminary
injunctions requires the judges to
determine that the plaintiffs are
likely to win their cases.
District Judge James M. (Jay)
Moody, Jr., temporarily blocked a
law that was enacted over a veto by
Arkansas Governor Asa Hutchinson.
The law, which was set to go
into effect on July 28, would have
made Arkansas the fi rst state to
prohibit doctors from providing
gender-confi rming hormone treatment
or surgical procedures or puberty
blocking treatment to anyone
under 18 years of age. The law also
prohibits doctors from referring
minors to other health care providers
to receive such treatment.
In West Virginia, District Judge
Joseph R. Goodwin temporarily
blocked the enforcement of a state
law barring individuals assigned
male at birth from competing in
female athletic competitions sponsored
by public schools, colleges,
or universities in the state, but the
order applies only to the plaintiff in
the case, Becky Pepper-Jackson, a
transgender girl who was informed
that because of the recently-enacted
law she would not be able to
compete as a girl in middle school
cross country races. The law was
signed into effect on April 28 and
is one of several such state laws
enacted recently. The lawsuit,
brought on her behalf by Lambda
Legal and the ACLU, does not pose
a facial challenge to the law, but
argues that it is invalid as applied
to her.
The fi rst state law banning
transgender girls from athletic
competition, passed by Idaho,
was declared illegal by a federal
district court last year, and
the state’s appeal is now pending
before a three-judge panel of
Arkansas Governor Asa Hutchinson unsuccessfully tried to veto a state law targeting healthcare for trans youth, but a federal judge temporarily blocked the
law anyway.
the US Court of Appeals for the
Ninth Circuit.
Judge Moody, who was appointed
to the court by President Barack
Obama, ruled from the bench after
hearing lawyers’ arguments on
July 21, announcing his reasoning
without issuing a written opinion.
The six plaintiffs in the case, represented
by the ACLU and a large
team of cooperating attorneys from
Sullivan & Cromwell, LLP, and local
Arkansas counsel, are transgender
youths who have been undergoing
treatments that would be cut off
as of July 28 if the preliminary injunction
had not been issued. Testimony
about the impact this would
have on the plaintiffs and others
in their situation weighed heavily
on Judge Moody, who said, “To
pull this care midstream from these
patients, or minors, would cause irreparable
harm.”
According to an Associated Press
report of a news conference held
after Judge Moody’s decision was
announced, lead plaintiff Dylan
Brandt, a 15-year old transgender
boy, said “This care has given
me confi dence that I didn’t know
I had.” ACLU attorneys argued to
the court that the impending implementation
of the law was forcing
families with transgender children
to consider moving to other states
REUTERS/JIM YOUNG
so that their children could continue
treatment.
Reacting to the court’s ruling,
Governor Hutchinson issued a
statement explaining that the reasons
for his veto of the bill were the
same that the court relied upon
to stay its implementation. “The
act was too extreme and did not
provide any relief for those young
people currently undergoing hormone
treatment with the consent
of their parents and under the care
of a physician,” he wrote. “If the
act would have been more limited,
such as prohibiting sex reassign-
➤ ANTI-TRANS LAWS, continued on p.9
JULY 29 - AUGUST 11, 2 6 021 | GayCityNews.com
/GayCityNews.com
