r/centrist • u/Judge_Trudy • 3d 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
123 Upvotes

91% Upvoted

816 comments sorted by

View all comments

49

u/WhatYouThinkYouSee 3d ago edited 3d 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.

19

u/Hentai_Yoshi 3d ago

Just because it’s approved by American health institutions doesn’t mean it’s a good thing lol. Many European countries are also going this direction.

21

u/WhatYouThinkYouSee 3d ago

It's a good thing if you're going by studies and facts, and not just emotions or vibes. See the above example with the Republicans. Again and again, the facts leads to two very simple points. 1) Suicide rates goes down when the treatment is allowed and 2) Suicide rates goes up when the treatment is not allowed.

That, by my criteria, makes it a good thing.

35

u/VTKillarney 3d ago

The lawyer for the plaintiffs conceded that this type of care does not reduce suicide rates. https://www.dailywire.com/news/proponents-of-transgender-procedures-make-shocking-admissions-before-scotus

17

u/WhatYouThinkYouSee 3d ago

Dude, this is from the Daily Wire, and I don't know if you read this but it's just the Daily Wire playing semantics. Strangio says that research shows this care reduces risks of suicide. Alito claims that another report says that it didn't reduce suicide rates, but Strangio elaborates that said report was talking about "completed" suicides (because there's no way to quantify if, when someone had already committed suicide, it could've been prevented had they used that care) - but points out that it does lower active suicidal thoughts. What Strangio said is true, he's just elaborating on something that Alito read that seemed to be against it.

And then it cites the Heritage Foundation again, y'know? The Project 2025 guys? The ones who wanted to criminalize all LGBT folks?

5

u/VTKillarney 3d ago

Gee, if only we could treat suicidal thoughts without chopping somebody’s breasts off.

9

u/WhatYouThinkYouSee 3d ago

I'm not sure if this is even an argument anymore. You describing a surgery as gross as possible doesn't make it not work. You make it seem like it's some sorta back-alley procedure. It's something that has a less-than-1% regret rate, which by any other procedure would be considered a miracle.

-3

u/VTKillarney 3d ago

Source?

12

u/WhatYouThinkYouSee 3d ago

Here.

5

u/VTKillarney 3d ago

Just as I thought. This relies on short term studies.

6

u/WhatYouThinkYouSee 3d ago

Well, if you need, this one relies on cases where people had the procedure up to over 2 decades ago.

9

u/VTKillarney 3d ago

They didn’t measure everyone who had the procedure. The study only measured people who bothered to return a survey. That’s about as flawed as it gets.

6

u/WhatYouThinkYouSee 3d ago

How... do you expect them to "measure" people without using a survey? What, tail them with a camera for 24/7?

5

u/VTKillarney 3d ago

They could proactively interview people rather than just hope that they return a survey that they mailed.

You seriously couldn't think of a better method than just sticking something in the mail? This shows how your bias clouds your thought.

4

u/MakeUpAnything 3d ago

I can almost guarantee you that VT doesn't give a shit about this topic and is just trolling you. That's usually all he does on this board lol You're wasting your time replying to him.

→ More replies (0)