Skrmetti Decision In - Puberty Blocker Ban Stands

Majority finds it's legal to protect kids from medical harm. AAP goes mad.

The Supreme Court’s decision on U.S. v Skrmetti is in. The court voted 6-3 to uphold the constitutionality of Tennessee's ban on gender-transition treatments for minors. As with all things related to gender ideology, reaction was swift, divided and heated.

In her dissent, Justice Sotomayor laments the “untold harm this will do to transgender children”. What is she about? The harm of trans ideology is not “untold”. It has been told again and again. She just refuses to see it. So much for following the science.

The New York Times used this opportunity to profile a family whose attempt to sterilize their trans-identified daughter, who is most likely same-sex attracted and/or on the autism spectrum, has been thwarted by this decision. As if that was a bad thing.

And the American Academy of Pediatrics released a reaction statement claiming that “…the science still supports gender-affirming care, children will still need it”. This would be a hilariously egregious statement if children weren’t being harmed by their stupidity. Instead, it is criminal.

For those of us in the trenches fighting back against this medical scandal, it is a decision to celebrate. The decision most likely will allow 24 other states with similar bans to bar some treatments for trans-identified youth. This isn’t a victory for “TERFs” and for parents who refuse to buckle. It is a victory for logic, for reason and for science. Maybe with an assist from TERFs.

Justice Thomas summed it up best in his concurring opinion on the ruling: “The sovereign prerogative does not bow to major medical organizations. Experts and elites have been wrong before - and they may prove to be wrong again. And, despite the supposed expert consensus that young children can consent to irreversible sex-transition treatments, States have good reasons to disagree; as “any parent knows,” children’s comprehension is limited, and the growing number of detransitioners illustrates the risks of assuming otherwise.“

Transcript of decision here.