Transgender battle of Tennessee

The latest battle in the gender wars is the Supreme Court case of United States v. Skrmetti. In this case, the Attorney General of Tennessee is defending the state’s law that prohibits the use of puberty blockers and hormones to protect the “transgender” agenda.

The case United States v. Skrmetti is ultimately a controversy about rights. Do minors have the right to treatments that permanently alter their bodies, or does the state have the right and duty to protect these children from harm?

The United States asserted that “the medical community and the nation’s leading hospitals overwhelmingly agree” with the Government’s position that the treatments outlawed by SB1 can be medically necessary. … The implication of these arguments is that courts should defer to so-called expert consensus.

There are several problems with appealing and deferring to the authority of the expert class. First, so-called experts have no license to countermand the “wisdom, fairness, or logic of legislative choices.” … Second, contrary to the representations of the United States and the private plaintiffs, there is no medical consensus on how best to treat gender dysphoria in children. Third, notwithstanding the alleged experts’ view that young children can provide informed consent to irreversible sex-transition treatments, whether such consent is possible is a question of medical ethics that States must decide for themselves. Fourth, there are particularly good reasons to question the expert class here, as recent revelations suggest that leading voices in this area have relied on questionable evidence and have allowed ideology to influence their medical guidance.

Read the full article... watch and learn from Constitutional Expert Paul Engel; there is always much more to learn back at America Out Loud: https://www.americaoutloud.news/.