ACLU Files Lawsuit Claiming Oklahoma's Ban On Gender-Affirming Care For Minors Is Unconstitutional

A lawsuit has been filed against the state, calling the ban on gender-affirming care for minors unconstitutional. Now both sides have presented their response.

“Unconstitutional, sex based and trans status-based discrimination,” ACLU Legal Director Megan Lambert said.

Senate Bill 613 would put a ban on gender-affirming care for minors, including hormone therapy or surgeries. The lawsuit was filed by the ACLU and five families with transgender children, who were receiving puberty blockers or hormone therapy. 

“Our clients in this case went through about a year of therapy to ensure to the extent possible, other underlying issues were remedied before additional medical interventions took place,” Lambert said.

A response filed this week by the ACLU cites medical professionals who say gender-affirming care is both safe and effective. The suit also states, “SB 613 infringes on parents’ right to direct their children’s medical care.”

“We illustrate that parents are extremely careful when considering gender affirming care for their children,” Lambert said.

Last month, Attorney General Gentner Drummond put a temporary stay on SB 613 that will be in place until the hearing this month. The ACLU is asking for that relief to be extended.

“We illustrated that an injunction is necessary to ensure transgender adolescents across Oklahoma can access the only evidence-based medical treatment for gender dysphoria,” Lambert said.

The state’s response included testimony from three Oklahomans who have now de-transitioned. 

“They do not present relevant testimony to a categorical ban on care for adolescents in Oklahoma,” Lambert said.

One of the women cited in the state’s response said after months of trying to get her mom to consent to hormone therapy- “My mother ultimately consented to the testosterone prescription because the therapist told her that I would commit suicide if my mother did not agree.”

Another woman cited in the state's response said “They were not forthright with their clinicians while they were being evaluated for gender dysphoria,” said Lambert. 

The ACLU’s response said, “Defendants rely on “experts: who lack relevant clinical experience or research expertise,” adding, “Adolescents do not consent to medical treatment; their parents do”

The suit also states: “Nonetheless, the Defendants favor either doing nothing or trying psychotherapy alone. But no clinical or research evidence supports either option as effective in treating the severe symptoms of gender dysphoria”

It goes on to say, “Therapy can help with anxiety and depression, but it cannot resolve the clinically significant distress of living in a body that does not align with one’s gender identity. Further, it is unethical to try to use therapy to resolve gender dysphoria by making someone not transgender.”

“Gender affirming care is safe. and well established. it does not pose unique risks that warrant a categorical prohibition,” Lambert said.

The hearing on the ACLU’s motion for preliminary injunction is set for July 25.