Clarence Thomas Rails Against Trans Youth ‘Experts’

This week, Townhall covered how the Supreme Court of the United States upheld Tennessee’s ban on so-called “gender-affirming care” for minors suffering from gender dysphoria.

In a 6-3 decision, the Court ruled that Tennessee’s law does not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment because it does not classify based on sex or gender identity. It concluded that the state has a legitimate interest in protecting children from the adverse impact of these treatments.

Going forward, Tennessee children will be protected from puberty blockers, hormone replacement therapy, and sex reassignment surgery.

Justice Clarence Thomas penned a solo concurring opinion slamming so-called transgender youth “experts.”

“The Court rightly rejects efforts by the United States and the private plaintiffs to accord outsized credit to claims about medical consensus and expertise. 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…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,” he wrote.

“This case carries a simple lesson: In politically contentious debates over matters shrouded in scientific uncertainty, courts should not assume that self-described experts are correct,” Thomas wrote.

Anymore, if medical providers try to “transition” children, they could face $25,000 civil fines for breaking the law. 

This week, Townhall covered how the Supreme Court of the United States upheld Tennessee’s ban on so-called “gender-affirming care” for minors suffering from gender dysphoria.

In a 6-3 decision, the Court ruled that Tennessee’s law does not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment because it does not classify based on sex or gender identity. It concluded that the state has a legitimate interest in protecting children from the adverse impact of these treatments.

Going forward, Tennessee children will be protected from puberty blockers, hormone replacement therapy, and sex reassignment surgery.

Justice Clarence Thomas penned a solo concurring opinion slamming so-called transgender youth “experts.”

“The Court rightly rejects efforts by the United States and the private plaintiffs to accord outsized credit to claims about medical consensus and expertise. 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…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,” he wrote.

“This case carries a simple lesson: In politically contentious debates over matters shrouded in scientific uncertainty, courts should not assume that self-described experts are correct,” Thomas wrote.

Anymore, if medical providers try to “transition” children, they could face $25,000 civil fines for breaking the law.