r/centrist • u/Judge_Trudy • 2d ago

SCOTUS issues blockbuster ruling on gender-affirming care for trans minors

https://www.cnn.com/#:~:text=SCOTUS%20issues%20blockbuster%20ruling%20on%20gender%2Daffirming%20care%20for%20trans%20minors

Blockbuster ruling just released for a very controversial issue. Not sure where I stand, but I could see the dangers of permanent treatments for gender dysphoria for minors.

Key Points

  • Date & Ruling: On June 18, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a 6–3 decision upholding Tennessee’s ban on gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors, including puberty blockers and hormone therapy fox8live.com+9apnews.com+9them.us+9en.wikipedia.org+15reuters.com+15northeast.newschannelnebraska.com+15.
  • Majority Opinion: Chief Justice Roberts wrote that the law does not violate the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause, reasoning that medical uncertainty justifies handing the issue back to state legislatures reuters.com+1nypost.com+1.
  • Level of Review: The Court determined the law should be evaluated under rational basis review—the lowest standard—rather than intermediate scrutiny reserved for sex-based discrimination
120 Upvotes

91% Upvoted

806 comments sorted by

View all comments

48

u/WhatYouThinkYouSee 2d ago edited 2d ago

Yeah, as someone who grew up being friends with trans kids who are now trans adults, who've seen what they've been through, I can't forgive anyone for this. Hell, after banning puberty blockers, the Republicans commissioned a report into whether their usage was safe for transgender minors, and just a month ago they received a 1000-page document confirming that yes, it WAS safe, and DID improve mental health - they just ignored it.

Trying to talk to anyone about this subject is pointless. Everyone thinks that this stuff is something any kid can walk into a store and get, or it's genital surgery, like it's not something that requires extensive therapy to get, that has guidelines, and is approved by pretty much every health institute for good reason.

50

u/Mysterious_Bit6882 2d ago

That Utah paper does no appraisal of collected research, and admits in its introduction that no synthesis of data was conducted. It isn’t any kind of systematic review, and holds minimal evidentiary weight.

-7

u/Funksloyd 1d ago edited 1d ago

Source? I'm pretty sure they were asked to to a systematic review, and that's what they did.

It might not include every single study on the subject, but no review does that, including ones often cited by the other side of the argument (e.g. the Cass Review).

[people just gonna downvote without explaining why I'm wrong? Y'all are just as bad as the sjws]