The Texas Supreme Court has affirmed the state’s prohibition on puberty blockers, hormone therapy and gender-affirming surgeries for minors. This ruling, issued on Friday, backs Senate Bill 14, which Gov. Greg Abbott enacted in June 2023 to restrict medical interventions for transgender children.
In an 8-1 decision, the court dismissed challenges from parents who contended that the law violated their rights to make healthcare decisions for their children. The majority opinion stated, “We conclude the Legislature made a permissible, rational policy choice to limit the types of available medical procedures for children, particularly in light of the relative nascency of both gender dysphoria and its various modes of treatment and the Legislature’s express constitutional authority to regulate the practice of medicine.”
The court emphasized that the law does not violate constitutional rights, stating, “The statute does not unconstitutionally deprive parents of their rights or physicians or healthcare providers of an alleged property right in their medical licenses or claimed right to occupational freedom.”
Senate Bill 14, which took effect in September 2023, prohibits the use of hormone therapy, puberty blockers, and gender-affirming surgeries for minors. The Texas Supreme Court had previously lifted a temporary injunction against the law, which had been imposed after a district court found it violated the rights of transgender children and medical professionals.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton praised the ruling, pledging to enforce the law rigorously. “Today, the Texas Supreme Court upheld SB 14, a law protecting children from dangerous gender confusion procedures by prohibiting puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and mutilative surgeries on minors,” Paxton announced on social media. “We will always defend children in Texas from these irreversible procedures. My office will use every tool at our disposal to ensure that doctors and medical institutions follow the law.”
Supporters of the ban argue that such treatments are experimental and pose significant risks to minors, while opponents believe the law infringes on individual rights and the ability of parents and healthcare providers to make informed decisions for transgender youth. The ruling represents a significant moment in the ongoing national debate over the rights of transgender individuals and the role of state governments in regulating medical care.
