A federal judge trumped the state legislature and Gov. Ron DeSantis when he issued a preliminary injunction allowing three transgender minors to continue receiving gender dysphoria medical care.
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida Judge Robert Hinkle’s order is in direct conflict with Senate Bill 254, which prohibits transgender minors from obtaining prescriptions for puberty blockers.
“SB 254 is an unconstitutional law and therefore, if the state's attorneys decide to prosecute a doctor or the boards of medicine decide to revoke the license of a doctor, they're doing so in contravention of a federal court order,” said Attorney Simone Chriss, director of the Transgender Rights Initiative at Southern Legal Counsel in Gainesville.
DeSantis signed SB 254 into law on May 17. The parents of seven transgender children subsequently sued in response.
“The plaintiffs’ adolescent children will suffer irreparable harm — the unwanted irreversible onset and progression of puberty in their natal sex — if they do not promptly begin treatment with GnRH agonists,” Hinkle wrote in the June 6 preliminary injunction. “The treatment will affect the patients themselves, nobody else, and will cause the defendants no harm. The preliminary injunction will be consistent with, not adverse to, the public interest.”
The PI applies to any minor in the state who is similarly situated and allows them to begin or continue gender-affirming medical care unless the state files an appeal.
"When a court says a law is unconstitutional, the state can't enforce it against anyone but it's impossible to tell how long the injunction will last," Chriss told the Florida Record. "We're trying to move swiftly and have a trial on this case very quickly. Once we have a trial and we get an ultimate ruling on the case, the preliminary injunction would no longer be relevant. It would become a permanent injunction if we were to win."
Transgender medical care has been practiced nationwide for more than a decade but in recent years has developed opposition.
When asked whether transgender teens should be allowed to receive gender-affirming care with parental consent, 56% of Americans strongly disagree, somewhat disagree, and are unsure, according to an Ipsos LGBT+Pride 2023 study, and when asked whether transgender people should be allowed to use public restrooms that correspond to their selected gender identify, 61% strongly disagree, somewhat disagree, and are unsure.
States that have banned gender-affirming care include Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, and West Virginia, according to media reports.
Chriss blames the trend on election strategy.
“It’s a rapid issue that has come up out of nowhere because, before 2020, we didn't see a single ban proposed in a single state legislature across the country,” she said. “It was not an issue because this care is provided in multidisciplinary settings by professionals in accordance with the WPATH standards of care. So, they've made something out of nothing to get their base angry about something and get them to turn out to vote.”