A federal appeals court ruled against Texas doctors who had tried to sue President Biden’s administration transgender policy this week.
The three judges on the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals did not rule on the merits of the case, but instead ruled unanimously that the doctors did not have standing. Monday’s court ruling said the doctors had not violated the policy and had not faced any threat of enforcement.
The Biden policy bans discrimination against transgender people in health care. Monday’s ruling reverses an earlier favorable decision by U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk for the doctors.
Biden’s Health and Human Services Department announced a rule change in 2021, choosing to make a portion of the Affordable Care Act that banned discrimination on the basis of sex also apply to transgender people. The three Texas doctors argued that interpretation goes beyond the text of the law.
SUPREME COURT CAN TAKE HUGE STEP IN PREVENTING TRANS ATHLETES IN GIRLS’ SPORTS WITH HISTORIC HEARING
Doctors in Texas are trying to challenge President Biden’s transgender policy. (Nathaniel Pawlowski, REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque/File Photo)
The doctors further argued that the policy could force them to use treatments they do not support. They cited examples such as prostate cancer in a transgender woman, which would require treatment based on the individual’s biological sex.
The ruling comes just weeks after the ruling The Supreme Court heard arguments in his own case on transgender policy, one involving whether the Constitution allows state bans on transgender surgeries for minors.
TRUMP’S AG PICK HAS ‘HISTORY OF CONSENSUS BUILDING’
Conservative Supreme Court justices appeared reluctant in oral arguments to overturn Tennessee’s law in the case. Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh suggested that state legislatures, not the courts, are best equipped to regulate medical procedures. The Constitution leaves such questions to the people’s representatives, Roberts noted during arguments, and not to nine Supreme Court justices, none of whom is a doctor.
A transgender rights advocate takes part in a rally outside the U.S. Supreme Court. (Getty Images)
However, Justice Samuel Alito cited “overwhelming evidence” from certain medical studies that listed negative consequences for adolescents undergoing gender transition treatment. Should the justices rule along party lines to uphold the lower court’s decision, it will have far-reaching consequences for more than two dozen U.S. states that have passed similar laws.
Petitioners in the case were represented by the Biden administration and the ACLU, which sued on behalf of the parents of three transgender adolescents and a Memphis-based doctor to overturn the Tennessee law.
A flag supporting LGBTQ+ rights adorns a desk on the Democratic side of the Kansas House of Representatives during a debate. (AP Photo/John Hanna, File)
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Wednesday’s oral arguments focused on the level of scrutiny courts should use to assess the constitutionality of state bans on transgender medical treatment of minors, such as SB1, and whether these laws are considered discriminatory on the basis of sex or in violation of a “quasi” ban. -suspect class,” thereby justifying a higher level of scrutiny under the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution.
Fox News’ Breanne Deppisch and Reuters contributed to this report.
