A panel of three Tenth District Court of Appeals judges has partially overturned a state law barring “gender-affirming medical care” for LGBTQ+ youth in Ohio.
The 10th District Court of Appeals in Franklin County ruled a ban on gender-affirming pharmaceutical care codified as part of House Bill 68 “interferes with parent-appellants’ fundamental right to care for their children.”
Lawmakers passed the measure in January 2024, overriding a veto from Republican Gov. Mike DeWine. After vetoing the measure, DeWine signed an executive order banning transgender transition surgeries on minors.
The court found that “the state failed to meet its burden of showing that H.B. 68’s categorical prescription ban is narrowly tailored to advance the state’s compelling interest in protecting children so as to survive strict scrutiny.”
The ruling returns the case to the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas “to impose a permanent injunction as to [the] enforcement of H.B. 68’s provisions banning the use of puberty blockers and hormones ‘for the purpose of assisting the minor individual with gender transition.’” However, Axios reported that it does not block a ban on surgical treatments for gender-affirming care.
The American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Ohio, and the Goodwin law firm filed a legal challenge in March 2024 on behalf of two families.
On Aug. 6, 2024, following a five-day trial, a judge entered a judgment, finding the law does not violate any of the constitutional provisions the appellants cited, allowing the ban to take effect. They appealed, leading to the 10th District Court of Appeals ruling.
“We are gratified by the Court’s decision, which soundly rejects this interference of politicians with Ohioans’ bodily autonomy,” ACLU of Ohio Legal Director Freda Levenson said in a statement.
“Although this litigation will likely not end here, we remain fervently committed to preventing this egregious bill from ever again taking effect,” Levenson added. “The path towards protecting the rights and civil liberties of trans Ohioans goes on, and we will continue to hold the torch.”
Unsurprisingly, Attorney General Dave Yost signaled that the state would appeal the ruling.
“This is a no brainer – we are appealing that decision and will seek an immediate stay,” Yost, who is running for governor next year, said in a statement. There is no way I’ll stop fighting to protect these unprotected children.
“Ohio’s elected representatives properly passed legislation protecting children from irreversible chemical sex change procedures, and the trial court upheld the law,” Yost added. “But now the 10th district court of appeals has just greenlighted these permanent medical interventions against minors.”
As the opinion noted, the question the court considered “is not what the correct course of treatment is for an adolescent with gender dysphoria,” and added: “Rather, it is whether H.B. 68’s prescription ban is narrowly tailored to the state’s articulated interest of protecting children from allegedly dangerous medical treatments,” the opinion read. “Based on the present record, we conclude it is not. To the contrary, H.B. 68 is severely underinclusive in that it categorically prohibits only a limited segment of minors from using puberty blockers or hormones, while leaving these medical therapies available for all other minors, who would face the precise risks the state contends H.B. 68 is intended to protect against."
The opinion continued: “At the same time, H.B. 68’s prescription ban is gravely overinclusive in that it fails to consider its impact of preventing parents from exercising their fundamental right to choose a treatment for their children’s gender dysphoria diagnosis and corresponding symptoms in accordance with medical advice and the prevailing standards of care. Such a sweeping and inflexible ban on parents’ ability to access medical care for their children is not narrowly tailored to advance the state’s articulated interest: the protection of children.”
