Plaintiffs push back battle for Florida transgender medical treatment

On July 31, 2024By Rgal Nv

TALLAHASSEE — Lawyers for a transgender man and parents of transgender children urged a federal appeals court Monday to reject a request that would allow Florida to restrict treatments for gender dysphoria while a legal battle continues.

On July 17, the state filed a petition with the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals seeking a stay of a ruling by U.S. District Judge Robert Hinkle that blocked Florida’s restrictions on treatment of transgender people last year.

The motion, if granted, would allow the restrictions to remain in effect while the appeals court considers the state’s underlying appeal of Hinkle’s ruling — a process that likely will take months.

But in a 46-page response filed Monday, attorneys for the plaintiffs in the case argued that the Atlanta-based appeals court should deny the motion, saying state officials had “failed to even attempt to meet their burden of demonstrating that the district court’s (Hinkle) careful, detailed and well-supported conclusions are ‘clearly erroneous.'”

“Neither defendants (state officials) nor the public will suffer any harm by allowing transgender Floridans to maintain the same access to medical care that they had for many years prior to 2023,” the response said. “In contrast, the evidence at trial demonstrated the real and serious harm that plaintiffs and class members will continue to suffer if they cannot access treatments that have been proven safe and effective in relieving the symptoms of gender dysphoria.”

The plaintiffs’ attorneys also highlighted what they described as Hinkle’s “detailed and well-supported findings that the legislative and regulatory processes were tainted by animus and an improper purpose to single out transgender people for adverse treatment.”

Last month, Hinkle barred state health officials from implementing the 2023 law and regulations, which would ban the use of puberty blockers and hormone therapy to treat children with gender dysphoria and make it harder for transgender adults to access care.

In the 101-page decision, Hinkle writes that “gender identity is real” and compares opposition to transgender people to racism and misogyny.

“The State of Florida may regulate as needed, but cannot outright deny transgender individuals safe and effective medical treatment—treatment with medications routinely provided to others with the full approval of the State, so long as the purpose is not to support the patient’s transgender identity,” he wrote.

Florida quickly appealed, and in its motion for a stay, it challenged Hinkle’s findings on issues such as animus toward transgender people. The motion asked for a stay “as soon as possible.”

“The state is suffering irreparable harm because its laws have been violated,” the motion said. “And the state and its citizens are facing the prospect of receiving risky, potentially ineffective, and certainly life-changing treatments.”

Florida and other Republican-controlled states have passed a number of laws and regulations in recent years that focus on transgender people. One of the most high-profile issues has been restricting the use of puberty blockers and hormone therapy for minors with gender dysphoria.

The federal government clinically defines gender dysphoria as “significant distress a person may experience when the sex or gender assigned at birth is not the same as his or her identity.”

In addition to banning puberty blockers and hormone therapy for minors with gender dysphoria, Florida’s 2023 law also affected transgender adults. It allowed only doctors — not nurse practitioners — to approve hormone therapy and banned the use of telehealth for new prescriptions. Opponents argued that the restrictions significantly reduced access to hormone therapy for adults.

The administration of Gov. Ron DeSantis has long disputed arguments about the effectiveness of treatments for gender dysphoria, particularly for minors.

“Leaving the state’s laws in place pending the outcome of the appeal is the most logical solution,” the stay motion said. “It is up to the state to decide whether to use a hammer or a scalpel to regulate gender dysphoria treatments.”

But attorneys for the plaintiffs in the class-action lawsuit argued in Monday’s response that state officials “provide no evidence that anyone in Florida is receiving inadequate care or suffering adverse consequences, and provide no evidence to suggest that minors would be better off receiving no medical treatment at all than the same care that was available through 2023.”

“Finally, the public has no interest in preventing transgender people from accessing the medical care they need,” the response reads. “Nor does the public have an interest in the state enforcing an unconstitutional law.”