ONGOING CASES
United States v. Skrmetti
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
On June 24, 2024, the Supreme Court agreed to hear oral arguments on this case and an analogous trans healthcare case in Kentucky, to take place on December 4, 2024. It is unclear how the Justices will rule on this issue; what is known, however, is that whatever decision the high Court delivers will have far-reaching consequences for trans people, especially trans children, for the foreseeable future.
Doe v. Surgeon General, State of Florida
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
On August 26, 2024, a split panel on the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals stayed enforcement the district court's June 2024 decision pending resolution of the appeal. The now-invalid lower court decision, which was a resounding victory for trans Floridians, struck down the state's severe trans healthcare restrictions after determining that they violated the U.S. Constitution. The restrictions may now go info effect while the merits of the state's appeal are evaluated by the appellate court.
Lange v. Houston County, Georgia
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
On August 15, 2024, the Eleventh Circuit decided to reconsider en banc the recent panel ruling which upheld Ms. Lange’s right to seek coverage for gender-affirming care through her employer's healthcare plan. The order also vacated the panel’s order pending the Court’s en banc decision. The ruling may now be overturned, which could gravely affect the rights of trans employees seeking to have the costs of gender-affirming care covered by their employer's health insurance. Oral arguments will be heard by the en banc court on February 4, 2025.
B.P.J. v. West Virginia State Board of Education
FOURTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
On April 16, 2024, the Fourth Circuit ruled in favor of the plaintiff, a middle school-aged trans athlete and held that a West Virginia law prohibiting trans students from participating equally in school sports violated Title IX. On November 18, 2024, the Supreme Court denied defendants’ petition for review.
Hecox v. Little
NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
In April of 2020, female athletes (both trans and cis) filed a complaint against the Idaho Governor challenging HB 500, which broadly banned trans and intersex females from participating in women’s and girls’ sports and mandated invasive medical testing to be done on girls and women whose “biological sex” was “in dispute.” The district court blocked enforcement of the law, as did the appellate court. However, in light of the Supreme Court’s stay order in Poe v. Labrador, the appellate court amended the injunction to apply only the plaintiff. Proceedings are currently stayed pending resolution of the State’s petition for review with the Supreme Court.
K.C. v. Medical Licensing Board of Indiana
SEVENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
In April of 2023, families of trans youth in Indiana sued the state challenging a law banning gender-affirming care for trans youth. The district court stayed enforcement of the law, but the appellate court allowed the law to go into effect. The parties are still waiting for a determination on the case’s merits from the district court.
Anderson v. Crouch
FOURTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
VICTORY! On April 29, 2024, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a joint decision en banc in Kadel v. Folwell and Anderson v. Crouch, finding that healthcare plans that cover medically necessary treatments for certain diagnoses but bar coverage of those same medically necessary treatments for patients diagnosed with gender dysphoria violate federal law and the U.S. Constitution.
Kadel v. Folwell
FOURTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
VICTORY! On April 29, 2024, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a joint decision en banc in Kadel v. Folwell and Anderson v. Crouch, finding that healthcare plans that cover medically necessary treatments for certain diagnoses but bar coverage of those same medically necessary treatments for patients diagnosed with gender dysphoria violate federal law and the U.S. Constitution.
Hammons v. University of Maryland Medical System, Inc.
FOURTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
Jesse Hammons was denied a commonly performed medical procedure at the University of Maryland St. Joseph Medical Center because he is transgender. The taxpayer-owned hospital claims that providing Hammons with medical care would be a violation of their religious beliefs. The case is currently in abeyance pending the Fourth Circuit's en banc decision in Anderson v. Crouch.
Zinner v. Tennessee
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
Plaintiffs Gerda Zinner and Story VanNess brought suit against the State of Tennessee, alleging that the state’s public employee health benefits program unlawfully deprived both women of coverage for essential medical services because they are transgender.
Brandt v. Griffin
EIGHTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
On April 11, the Eighth Circuit en banc Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in this case, which involves a challenge to an Arkansas law banning gender-affirming care for trans youth and prohibiting doctors from treating or even referring minors for gender-affirming care.