Indiana’s Ban on Gender-Affirming Care for Minors Partially Blocked by Federal Judge

A block on the Indiana ban against transgender minors accessing puberty blockers and hormones was ordered by a federal judge on Friday, just before its scheduled enforcement on July 1.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Indiana had requested this provisional injunction in its lawsuit against the Republican-supported law, which came into being during the GOP-led national campaign to limit LGBTQ+ rights this spring.

James Patrick Hanlon, U.S. District Court Judge, delivered the order, allowing the law’s ban on gender-affirming surgeries to be implemented. However, Hanlon also blocked parts of the law which would prevent Indiana’s doctors from discussing gender-affirming care for patients under 18 with out-of-state doctors.

The ACLU filed the lawsuit right after Indiana’s Republican Governor, Eric Holcomb, approved the bill on April 5. The case was argued on behalf of four young individuals receiving transgender treatments and a local doctor who provides such services, stating that the ban breached the U.S. Constitution’s equal protection clause and violated parental rights to determine their child’s medical treatment.

Indiana’s Republican-majority Legislature passed the ban following contentious debates, where strong opposition, claiming that gender-affirming care reduces the incidence of depression and suicide among transgender youth, was the focal point of the testimonies.

ACLU leaders, including Ken Falk, ACLU of Indiana’s legal director, welcomed Hanlon’s ruling, calling it a triumph in the struggle “to defend the right of all trans people to be their authentic selves, free from discrimination.” Falk added, “We won’t rest until this unconstitutional law is struck down for good.”

Twenty GOP-controlled states have passed laws restricting or banning such medical treatments for transgender minors following Missouri’s governor enacting the state’s bill last week. Legal challenges have emerged against transgender treatment bans in several states. Federal judges have blocked these laws in Alabama and Arkansas, and Oklahoma has agreed to withhold enforcing its ban while awaiting a temporary court order to block it.

Republican Rep. Joanna King of Middlebury, who sponsored the Indiana bill, argued during the debate that the ban would “protect our children from irreversible, harmful, life-altering procedures.”

As of now, the Indiana attorney general’s office has not responded to requests for comments on Hanlon’s decision or whether it would attempt to appeal the injunction before July 1.

Indiana Solicitor General Thomas Fisher stated during a court hearing on Wednesday that gender-affirming treatments during puberty could have risks, such as future fertility, bone strength, brain development, and possible reversibility, which have not been sufficiently studied. Fisher argued that these issues gave the Legislature the authority to rule that “we don’t want our children to be part of this grand experiment.”

Despite the prevailing guidelines from leading authorities on gender-affirming medical care suggesting that surgery should generally be reserved for adults, with exceptions for older teenagers who meet specific criteria, the Indiana law demands an outright ban on gender-affirming surgeries.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about Indiana’s Transgender Minors Ban

More about Indiana’s Transgender Minors Ban

• ACLU of Indiana
• Gender-Affirming Care Guidelines
• Transgender rights in the United States
• Current Legislation on Transgender Healthcare
• Indiana State Legislature