Transgender care ruling confirms what we knew: Lawmakers disregarded the Constitution | Opinion
.jpg "A group of people waved flags and chanted in support of LGBTQ+ rights at the Idaho Capitol on March 31.")
Christmas came just a day late for transgender children and their families in Idaho.
U.S. District Judge B. Lynn Winmill issued a preliminary injunction Tuesday banning the implementation of Idaho’s cruel and discriminatory ban on gender-affirming care.
Winmill found that the bill very likely violates the 14th Amendment’s requirement that all people are given equal protection under the law, as well as their rights to due process, and said plaintiffs were likely to be successful in court challenging the law.
The outcome is not surprising. It was very obvious from the start that this law was unconstitutional, as obvious as it was in the case of the law banning transgender people from getting proper government identification and other recent attempts by Idaho Republicans to engage in legal discrimination.
Some lawmakers who voted for this bill may have been tricked into thinking they were protecting children. To the degree that they believed that, they revealed themselves to be utterly naive, easily manipulable pawns.
They were using their overwhelming government powers to engage in bullying.
They were destroying kids’ mental health and making their already difficult lives much harder for no good reason at all.
And all of them betrayed their oath to support and defend the U.S. Constitution, as Winmill laid out plainly.
“(It) is important to briefly address a criticism common to court decisions that apply the Fourteenth Amendment to strike down legislative enactments,” Winmill wrote. “Critics say such decisions are anti-democratic and frustrate the will of the people as expressed by their elected legislature. And they are right. But that is precisely how our constitutional democracy is supposed to work. The authors of the Fourteenth Amendment fully understood and intended that the amendment would prevent state legislatures from passing laws that denied equal protection of the laws or invaded the fundamental rights of the people.”
What did lawmakers do to these kids and their families when they tried to take away their rights?
Pam Poe, one of the two minor plaintiffs using pseudonyms, “struggled with anxiety, depression and self-harm” and had to be admitted to a residential treatment facility as she entered puberty, according to Winmill’s ruling. Her mental health improved after moving through incremental stages of gender-affirming care.
The treatment worked well enough that Poe’s family decided they might have to leave the state after the transgender care ban passed. They were ready to make a tremendous sacrifice. Those who supported the ban should reflect on that fact with shame.
Plaintiff Jane Doe’s story was similar.
“Since receiving gender-affirming medical care, Jane’s mental health has significantly improved, but the debate over HB 71 and other anti-transgender bills has affected her mental health and her grades; when the bill passed, Jane wept in the hallway at school, and her parents had to take her home. The passage of the bill has also caused the Doe family to consider leaving Idaho so that Jane can continue to access the medical care that has helped her so significantly,” Winmill wrote.
The Republican-dominated Legislature heard many stories like these in committee hearings before it did what it often does — ignored the testimony and the overwhelming medical consensus to strip them of their rights. The heartless decision to turn their backs on those children should haunt their consciences.
They also voted to strip parents of their rights to manage the care of their children in consultation with doctors, which puts the lie to any claim they support “parental rights.” Instead, they wish to write into law what a family can be and do according to culturally conservative values.
Let’s hope some lawmakers who supported this bill get the message: It is not your place to make other people’s private decisions, to decide how their families work, to decide how they should live. Respect constitutional rights or get out of the business of writing laws.
This story was originally published December 27, 2023 at 12:12 PM.