吃瓜大本营

HELENA, Mont. 鈥� A Montana court has granted a preliminary injunction preventing the state of Montana from enforcing policies that bar transgender people from obtaining accurate sex designations on their birth certificates and driver鈥檚 licenses. After a prior restriction on amendments of birth certificates was struck down by the courts, in early 2024 the state of Montana enacted a new rule that categorically bars transgender Montanans from correcting the sex designation on their birth certificates. Around the same time, the Montana Department of Justice adopted a policy similarly restricting amendment of driver鈥檚 licenses. The plaintiffs challenged these policies in state district court, arguing that they violate various constitutional provisions, including the right to equal protection of the law. In a recent Montana Supreme Court decision, two justices concluded that discrimination on the basis of transgender status 鈥� as the state is engaging in here 鈥� is a form of sex discrimination that violates the Montana Constitution鈥檚 equal protection clause. The plaintiffs, two transgender women, are represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Montana, and Nixon Peabody LLP. Plaintiff Jessica Kalarchik, a veteran who served in the United States Army for 31 years, said: 鈥淎fter finally being able to live my life openly as the woman I know myself to be, I am frustrated that my birth state, Montana, wants me to carry around a birth certificate that incorrectly lists my sex as male. I live my life openly as a woman, I am treated as a woman in my daily life, and there is no reason I should be forced to carry a birth certificate that incorrectly identifies me as male. Fortunately, the court agrees that this ridiculous policy should not be in effect.鈥� 鈥淥nce again the State of Montana chose to adopt a draconian policy that is clearly intended to marginalize transgender Montanans, only for that discriminatory action to be blocked by the courts,鈥� said Akilah Deernose, executive director for the ACLU of Montana. 鈥淗ere in Montana we treasure our right to privacy and to live our lives free from governmental intrusion. The State of Montana clearly has not learned any lessons from the past few years, where courts have repeatedly struck down unconstitutional laws targeting transgender Montanans.鈥� 鈥淔orcing anyone to carry documents that contradict their identity unjustly violates their rights to privacy, equal treatment, and not being compelled to convey a government message about their sex that they disagree with,鈥� said Malita Picasso, staff attorney for the ACLU鈥檚 LGBTQ & HIV Project. 鈥淪uch a policy marks transgender people for further mistreatment and discrimination, essentially requiring them to carry papers that out them as transgender any time they need to provide identity documents. Fortunately, the court has refused to allow the state of Montana to subvert the freedom of transgender Montanans to control their own identity as this case goes forward.鈥� In granting the plaintiffs鈥� motion for a preliminary injunction, the court held, 鈥淸i]f the challenged state actions discriminate against transgender individuals on the basis of their transgender status, they also necessarily discriminate the basis of sex.鈥� The state has the option of appealing the district court鈥檚 ruling to the Montana Supreme Court, but the underlying case will proceed in district court. A trial has not yet been scheduled.

On September 30, 2024, the Florida Department of Corrections rescinded its policy regarding treatment of gender dysphoria, which allowed for hormone therapy when deemed medically necessary, as well as access to clothing and grooming standards that accord with one鈥檚 gender identity. Under this new policy, grooming and clothing accommodations have been stripped away, and hormone therapy is not permitted unless an exception is deemed constitutionally required. The ACLU brought a class action challenging the policy.

Two incarcerated transgender women have sued the state of Idaho alleging that HB 688, a 2024 law barring state funding for gender-affirming medical care for transgender people, denies them access to the health care their doctors have prescribed for them and is a violation of their Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. They represent a class of all incarcerated folks within the state of Idaho who face the loss of hormone therapy due to HB 668.

WASHINGTON 鈥� The U.S. House of Representatives today passed a version of the National Defense Authorization Act that would ban coverage for gender-affirming care for transgender youth whose parents are active-duty military personnel. The American Civil Liberties Union is opposing final passage of the defense bill over the inclusion of this health care ban and scoring the vote. Section 708 of the NDAA would prohibit insurance coverage for 鈥渕edical interventions for the treatment of gender dysphoria鈥� such as hormone therapy and puberty-suppressant medications, which Speaker Mike Johnson says would 鈥減ermanently ban transgender medical treatment for minors.鈥� The same treatments would be covered by TRICARE for any medical purpose other than treating gender dysphoria, the clinical diagnosis for the psychological distress experienced by transgender people related to their gender identity. 鈥淚t is shameful that a traditionally bipartisan, non-controversial bill would be turned into a targeted weapon against transgender youth and their parents in uniform,鈥� said Mike Zamore, National Director of Policy & Government Affairs at the ACLU. 鈥淚n the interests of scoring political points, this measure strips hundreds of young people of the health care they need, putting Members of Congress in between servicemembers, their children, and their doctors.. We strongly urge members of the Senate to pass a clean version of the NDAA and likewise urge President Biden to uphold his longstanding legacy of support for the LGBTQ community and the principle of keeping politics out of health care by vetoing it should it reach his desk.鈥� If passed by the Democratic-controlled Senate and signed into law by President Biden, this health care ban would be the first new anti-LGBTQ provision enacted by Congress since the passage of 鈥淒on鈥檛 Ask, Don鈥檛 Tell鈥� and the so-called 鈥淒efense of Marriage Act鈥� in the 1990s. It is unknown how many transgender youth are currently enrolled in TRICARE or how many of those enrolled are currently receiving coverage for gender-affirming care. In one 2022 analysis, 2,500 minor patients sought care for gender dysphoria through TRICARE Prime insurance at military or civilian treatment facilities in 2017, and 900 received puberty-suppressants or gender-affirming hormones. That amounts to one tenth of one percent (or 0.1%) of the 918,000 youth aged 6 to 18 years who have at least one parent on active-duty or ready reserve military status. TRICARE has covered gender-affirming treatments for transgender youth since 2016. Last week, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a landmark case brought by the ACLU, the ACLU of Tennessee, Lambda Legal, and Akin Gump on behalf of three families and a medical provider challenging a Tennessee ban on gender-affirming hormonal therapies for transgender youth on the grounds the ban violates the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution.