Trump Judge Tosses Indiana ​​Anti- Trans Law Because STOP PICKING ON KIDS GODDAMMIT

Seems like a good trend!

On Friday, a federal judge issued a temporary restraining order blocking enforcement of Indiana's law banning gender-affirming care for minors. Judge Patrick Hanlon, who was appointed to the federal bench by Donald Trump, determined that "Senate Enrolled Act 480" (SEA 480) shouldn't go into effect while it's being litigated, because it likely violates the Constitution by discriminating on the basis of sex, and because forbidding medical care to trans youth would likely cause "irreparable harm."

As independent journalist Erin Reed notes, that makes Indiana the fourth ban on gender-affirming care to be blocked in court. As of yet, not a single such law has been upheld. Let's hope that continues to be the case. Judge Hanlon found that the care ban fell afoul of three key tests: It violates the 14th Amendment's guarantee of equal protection, requires "heightened scrutiny" because it discriminates on the basis of sex, and would be harmful to trans young people.

Hanlon's order notes that the law is plainly discriminatory on the basis of sex, since it prohibits identical treatments for transgender young people that would remain legal for cisgender youth, as Reed explains:

To put it plainly, if a cisgender boy experiences gynecomastia (enlarged breasts), he can access treatment for reduction; however, this option is denied to transgender boys. Similarly, a cisgender girl can get medical assistance to suppress excessive testosterone, but transgender girls are prohibited from the same treatment. These biased regulations are wholly founded on sex, leading the judge to unequivocally rule that “sex-based classifications are not just present in S.E.A. 480’s prohibitions, they’re determinative.”

Since the law is a sex-based regulation, the state has an obligation to show that it has an "exceedingly persuasive justification," which Hanlon ruled Indiana had failed to do, since the state claims — wrongly — that gender-affirming care is "controversial and unsettled," even though virtually all reputable medical organizations in the US have endorsed the treatment. Hanlon rejected the state's claims that puberty blockers and hormone therapy have dangerous side effects, and also rejected the claim that European countries have similarly prohibited such treatment.

In fact, Reed points out, no European countries have imposed a blanket ban on gender-affirming care. Even the most restrictive, the UK, allows gender-affirming care in research settings. Finland allows it for cases of "severe" dysphoria, and Sweden allows gender- affirming treatment in research settings and for patients over 16. France and the Netherlands still fully allow care, and some other European states, like Spain and Germany, have relatively few limits.

Hanlon instead agreed with the plaintiffs' evidence that medical interventions for gender dysphoria are in fact life-saving, since they greatly reduce the risk of suicide among trans youth, and that blocking such care would be harmful.

Also, in a semi-related story, the authors of the Gay Penguin Book  And Tango Makes Three  are suing one of the several Florida school districts where books on LGBTQ topics have been banned, joining students and parents in a bid to overturn Ron DeSantis's "Don't Say Gay" law, and we say bring on all the gay lawsuits you can, America. Damn well about time to punch some fascists right in the First Amendment. And the liability insurance.

OPEN THREAD!

[ Erin in the Morning / Politico ]

Yr Wonkette is funded entirely by reader donations. If you can, please help us with a monthly donation of $5 or $10 so we can keep bringing you the nice times as they happen!

 Do your Amazon shopping through this link, because reasons .