Ohio’s ban on puberty blockers, cross-sex hormon…

Ohio, State Capitol building in Columbus, Ohio. | iStock/pabradyphoto

An Ohio appeals court panel has blocked a state law prohibiting the prescription of puberty-blocking drugs and cross-sex hormones for kids with gender dysphoria, overturning a lower trial court decision.

A three-judge panel of the Court of Appeals of Ohio, Tenth Appellate District unanimously ruled Tuesday in the case of Moe v. Yost that Ohio’s House Bill 68 — also known as the Saving Adolescents From Experimentation (SAFE) Act — violated the state constitution’s Article I, Section 21, which guarantees the freedom to choose one’s healthcare.

“In enacting H.B. 68, the legislature has categorically prohibited appellants from accessing treatment protocols in accordance with the standards of care and guidelines widely accepted in the professional medical community to treat gender dysphoria in minors,” wrote Judge Carly M. Edelstein for the panel.

Get Our Latest News for FREE

Subscribe to get daily/weekly email with the top stories (plus special offers!) from The Christian Post. Be the first to know.

The court’s decision is limited to the prohibition of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones since the plaintiffs “have not expressed a desire or plan to undergo surgery as part of their treatment for gender dysphoria and none of the appellants have raised a challenge to the law’s surgery provision.”

The American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio, which helped to represent the parents of trans-identified children challenging the state law, celebrated the panel decision.

“This win restores the right of trans youth in Ohio to choose vitally important health care, with the support of their families and physicians,” said Freda Levenson, legal director at the ACLU of Ohio, 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. The path towards protecting the rights and civil liberties of trans Ohioans goes on, and we will continue to hold the torch.”

For his part, Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost promised to appeal the decision “and seek an immediate stay.”

“This is a no brainer — we are appealing that decision,” he stated. “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. But now the 10th district court of appeals has just greenlighted these permanent medical interventions against minors.”

Aaron Baer, president of the conservative advocacy group Center for Christian Virtue, which supports the law, said the bill prevents pharmaceutical companies from being able to “emotionally manipulate parents and children for profit.”

“Today’s decision by the activist judges on the 10th District Court of Appeals is shameful. Ohio legislators enacted the Saving Adolescents From Experimentation (SAFE) Act to protect children from the irreversible harms caused by the misuse of puberty blockers and wrong-sex hormones. In overturning the ban, the court put our kids back in the crosshairs of the medical industry,” Baer said. 

“I’m grateful for Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost’s strong advocacy for the protection of our children and remain confident that ultimately, the SAFE Act will be upheld, and Ohio’s kids will be protected.”

In January 2024, Ohio lawmakers overrode Republican Gov. Mike DeWine’s veto HB 68, which, among other things, banned cosmetic sex-change surgeries for children, the prescription of puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones to minors and males from participating in girls’ high school and college sports.

The ACLU filed a lawsuit against the ban last March in the Court of Common Pleas for Franklin County, claiming it violated multiple parts of the state constitution.

Follow Michael Gryboski on Twitter or Facebook
Views: 0
About Steve Allen 537 Articles
My name is Steve Allen and I’m the publisher of ThinkAboutIt.news and ThinkAboutIt.online. Any controversial opinions in these articles are either mine alone or a guest author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the websites where my work is republished. These articles may contain opinions on political matters, but are not intended to promote the candidacy of any particular political candidate. The material contained herein is for general information purposes only. Commenters are solely responsible for their own viewpoints, and those viewpoints do not necessarily represent the viewpoints of Steve Allen or the operators of the websites where my work is republished. Follow me on social media on Facebook and X, and sharing these articles with others is a great help. Thank you, Steve

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.