The U.S. Supreme Court will take up a challenge to Tennessee's ban on certain gender-affirming treatments for minors that could set precedent for states that have restricted such care, including Texas.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has sued three doctors for allegedly violating SB 14, which went into effect last year.
四虎影院's Bekah Morr spoke with health reporter Kailey Broussard about the lawsuits and continued state and national legal battles surrounding gender-affirming care.
This interview transcript has been edited for length and clarity.
Bekah Morr: For those who aren鈥檛 familiar already, walk us through why Paxton is suing these doctors.
Kailey Broussard: Attorney General Ken Paxton has said he鈥檚 鈥渃racking down鈥� on providers who violate SB 14, the ban on medical treatments considered gender-affirming care. That ban took effect last September, but we haven't seen any doctors face consequences, until now. Paxton first sued Dr. May Lau, a North Texas pediatrician, in mid-October. He called her a quote 鈥渞adical gender activist鈥� and accused her of prescribing hormone treatments to patients after the ban took effect. He also claims Lau used different diagnoses and billing codes along the way.
He made many of the same accusations in the lawsuits he鈥檚 filed since against Dr. M. Brett Cooper of North Texas and of El Paso. He鈥檚 calling for all three doctors to have their medical licenses revoked.
Now to be clear, most medical associations endorse treatment including hormone therapy, puberty blockers and surgery as ways to treat gender dysphoria in patients of all ages. Doctors rarely recommend surgery for minors and treatment decisions are made on a case-by-case basis.
What have the doctors, or their hospitals, said in response?
Not much. Cooper and Lau both had out of office email responses. UT Southwestern didn鈥檛 respond to requests for comment, and Children鈥檚 Hospital simply said it 鈥渁dheres to state health care laws.鈥�
But other, outside groups have weighed in: A senior attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union said the lawsuits put politicians in the middle of decisions that should be left to families and their health providers.
I also spoke with Alex Sheldon, who heads GLMA, a national association of LGBTQ+ health professionals. They pointed to the term 鈥渞adical gender activist鈥� as a way of discrediting physicians for providing necessary medical care.
"Gender-affirming care is not a radical or fringe practice. It is evidence-based medicine and labeling a practitioner of that care as a radical gender activist is simply inflammatory," Sheldon said.
Both GLMA and the ACLU were against the state to stop the ban from taking effect. The Texas Supreme Court in a June ruling.
Paxton said because of that decision, the on whether treatments should continue.
As best as you can tell, is that true?
Not exactly. The three lawsuits are pending in North Texas courts... so we won鈥檛 know their outcome for a while. But there鈥檚 a lot of policy discussions in store at the state and federal level.
For example, the case going before the U.S. Supreme Court today over Tennessee鈥檚 ban. However the court rules in will set precedent for the 26 states with bans or restrictions in place 鈥� That obviously includes Texas, which in the case to defend Tennessee鈥檚 law.
Here in Texas lawmakers have begun filing bills ahead of next year鈥檚 legislative session... and already we鈥檙e seeing issues surrounding gender-affirming care and trans individuals. Among them are proposals to ban taxpayer resources from funding quote . Another would let parents that do not notify them if their student鈥檚 gender identity does not match up with their assigned sex at birth.
Lawmakers also seem ready to revive that failed in 2017. So time will tell how these proposals and more play out in Austin.
Got a tip? Email Kailey Broussard at kbroussard@kera.org.
四虎影院 is made possible through the generosity of our members. If you find this reporting valuable, . Thank you.
