What does Supreme Court’s ruling on Tennessee law mean for Michigan’s trans youth?
How did your country report this? Share your view in the comments.
Diverging Reports Breakdown
What does Supreme Court’s ruling on Tennessee law mean for Michigan’s trans youth?
The U.S. Supreme Court on June 18 ruled to uphold a Tennessee law that bans gender-affirming care for minors. Michigan doesn’t have a law banning such treatment for young people. Conservative lawmakers introduced a package of bills in the Michigan House of Representatives seeking to make such care illegal. “In Michigan we stand firm. Trans youth are loved, protected and supported here. We will fight like hell to keep it that way,” said Equality Michigan Action Network.
Michigan does not have a law banning gender-affirming treatment for young people.
Some lawmakers want Michigan to ban gender-affirming treatment for minors.
Medical community backs gender-affirming care.
The U.S. Supreme Court on June 18 ruled to uphold a Tennessee law that bans gender-affirming care for minors, a decision, transgender advocates in Michigan decried.
But what will it’s true impact be in Michigan?
Because Michigan doesn’t have a law prohibiting gender-affirming care for minors, nothing will change.
Young people seeking such treatments will be able to continue to do so. “In Michigan we stand firm. Trans youth are loved, protected and supported here. We will fight like hell to keep it that way,” Erin Knott, executive director of Equality Michigan Action Network said in a prepared statement.
Still, the ruling is another in example of the erosion of transgender rights led by President Donald Trump and sweeping the nation. Knott labeled the court’s decision “cruel and dangerous.” She added: “It ignores the overwhelming consensus of the medical community and opens the doors for politicians to play games with kids’ lives.”
And it is is expected to only embolden opponents of gender-affirming care for young people.
Last month conservative lawmakers introduced a package of bills in the Michigan House of Representatives seeking to make illegal gender-affirming care for minors. Their bills have been referred to the Committee on Health Policy.
Brad Paquette (R-Niles), one of the sponsors, said he believed the Supreme Court ruling was inevitable. “The more people look at what these procedures are, they’re horrified with what they entail and what they do to children,” he said. “We’re a little slow to act in Michigan and that’s unfortunate.”
Contact Georgea Kovanis: gkovanis@freepress.com
Gender-affirming care remains legal in Michigan, despite court ruling
A U.S. Supreme Court ruling Wednesday upheld Tennessee’s ban on some types of medical care for transgender minors. That ban is similar to prohibitions currently in effect in more than 20 other states. LGBTQ advocacy groups stressed that care should continue uninterrupted in Michigan, where the state has expanded its civil rights protections to include gender identity and expression. Republican state legislators in Michigan have recently introduced legislation similar to Tennessee’s ban, but it’s unlikely to pass while Democrats control the state Senate. The ACLU of Michigan asked patients, families and healthcare workers to file a report with the group if they do experience any disruptions or “outages” in gender-affirming care in the state.“Some politicians in Michigan who are not doctors, do not have transgender kids, who don’t even have the decency or regard for keeping the children of our state fed while they are at school,” one activist said.
That ban is similar to prohibitions currently in effect in more than 20 other states.
But LGBTQ advocacy groups stressed that care should continue uninterrupted in Michigan, where the state has expanded its civil rights protections to include gender identity and expression.
“While we have seen continued targeted attacks on the trans community in our state, it is crucial that trans youth and their loved ones know that gender affirming care is still safe and accessible and legal despite today’s ruling,” ACLU of Michigan staff attorney Jay Kaplan said in a statement. “It is also supported by every major medical, pediatric, and psychological association in the U.S. We call on our lawmakers and state leaders to do their jobs and join us as we continue our fight to preserve access to healthcare for all — especially the most vulnerable among us.”
Republican state legislators in Michigan have recently introduced legislation similar to Tennessee’s ban, but it’s unlikely to pass while Democrats control the state Senate.
Representative Brad Paquette (R-Niles), sponsored legislation in May to protect “minors from chemical and surgical mutilation,” which is the same language the Trump administration has used to describe hormone therapy and other types of gender-affirming care for transgender minors. (Paquette did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Wednesday. Representative Jason Woolford, a Republican who represents Livingston County and sponsored similar legislation in March, also did not immediately return a request for comment.)
Kaplan said any such ban would be challenged in court as a violation of the state’s expanded Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act, which affirms “legal protections for sexual orientation” and expands “coverage to include gender identity and expression.”
Emme Zanotti, a senior director with Equality Michigan Action Network, asked patients, families and healthcare workers to file a report with the group if they do experience any disruptions or “outages” in gender-affirming care in the state.
“Some politicians in Michigan who are not doctors, do not have transgender kids, who don’t even have the decency or regard for keeping the children of our state fed while they are at school, already tried to emulate the style of ban we saw in this case,” Zanotti said at a press conference Wednesday. “They want Michigan to turn into Tennessee, who ranks in the bottom 10 of all U.S. states as it relates to health care. I’ll be clear for them. Michigan does not go backward.”
Earlier this year, Attorney General Dana Nessel, also a Democrat, responded to an executive order from President Donald Trump’s administration that attempted to withhold federal funds from healthcare providers who offer gender-affirming care to transgender minors. (The order is one of a series the Trump administration has taken seeking to block such care.)
In a February letter to healthcare providers , Nessel told them that they have an “obligation to comply with Michigan laws, including those that prohibit discrimination” against individuals based on their sex, gender identity, or gender expression.
“Refusing healthcare services to a class of individuals based on their protected status, such as withholding the availability of services from transgender individuals based on their gender identity or their diagnosis of gender dysphoria, while offering such services to cisgender individuals, may constitute discrimination under Michigan law,” Nessel said.