DOJ Sues Tennessee Over Ban on Gender-Affirming Treatment for Minors

The Department of Justice announced on Wednesday that it has filed a lawsuit challenging Tennessee’s new law banning gender-affirming treatments for minors —  one of several bills targeting the state’s LGBTQ+ community.

The DOJ said that SB1 violates the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause by denying “necessary medical care to youth” based on transgender status.

“The right to consider your health and medically-approved treatment options with your family and doctors is a right that everyone should have, including transgender children, who are especially vulnerable to serious risks of depression, anxiety and suicide,” said Assistant U.S. Attorney General Kristen Clarke in a press release. “The Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department will continue to aggressively challenge all forms of discrimination and unlawful barriers faced by the LGBTQI+ community.”

The DOJ argues that the treatments are medically necessary for transgender youth diagnosed with gender dysphoria and that the banned care has been “recommended by major medical associations for consideration in limited circumstances in accordance with established and comprehensive guidelines and standards of care.” The department is asking the court for to issue an immediate order to stop the law from going into effect on July 1.

Republican Gov. Bill Lee signed the legislation earlier this year, banning minors from receiving gender-affirming care and prohibiting surgeries and hormone treatments for transgender youth. Across the nation, GOP lawmakers have proposed laws aimed at the LGBTQ+ community, with at least 14 states restricting or outright banning gender-affirming care for transgender youth.

“SB1 violates the constitutional rights of some of Tennessee’s most vulnerable citizens,” said U.S. Attorney Henry Leventis for the Middle District of Tennessee in a statement. “Left unchallenged, it would prohibit transgender children from receiving health care that their medical providers and their parents have determined to be medically necessary. In doing so, the law seeks to substitute the judgment of trained medical professionals and parents with that of elected officials and codifies discrimination against children who already face far too many obstacles.”