Alabama Know Your Rights - Page 2 of 2 - GLAD Law
Überspringen Sie die Kopfzeile zum Inhalt
GLAD Logo Primäre Navigation zum Inhalt überspringen

Nachricht

Eltern und Ärzte zeigen sich erleichtert, dass Transgender-Jugendliche auch während ihrer Klage gegen SB 184 weiterhin die notwendige medizinische Versorgung erhalten können.

Ein Bundesbezirksrichter in Alabama hat eine Urteil blockiert die Durchsetzung von Alabama SB 184 Währenddessen läuft eine rechtliche Anfechtung des Gesetzes. SB 184 kriminalisiert Eltern, die medizinische Versorgung für ihre Transgender-Kinder in Anspruch nehmen wollen. Es sieht eine Freiheitsstrafe von bis zu zehn Jahren für jeden vor, der – einschließlich Ärzten und Eltern – dabei hilft, die notwendige Versorgung dieser jungen Menschen zu erhalten.

Der Anzug, Rev. Eknes-Tucker gegen Marshall, wird von vier Eltern aus Alabama aus dem gesamten Bundesstaat eingereicht, mit der Begründung, dass ihnen dadurch das Recht entzogen wird, wichtige Entscheidungen über die Gesundheitsversorgung ihrer Kinder zu treffen. Ihnen schließen sich ein niedergelassener Kinderarzt im ländlichen Südosten Alabamas, ein klinischer Psychologe des UAB-Gesundheitssystems und Reverend Paul Eknes-Tucker, Pastor der Pilgrim United Church of Christ in Birmingham, an. Allen könnte nach dem Gesetz eine strafrechtliche Verfolgung drohen. Das US-Justizministerium hat sich der Klage ebenfalls angeschlossen, da Kläger-Intervenient Sie stellt die Verfassungsmäßigkeit des Gesetzes in Frage, das Transgender-Jugendlichen etablierte medizinische Behandlungen verweigert, anderen jedoch nicht.

Das Urteil folgte einer zweitägigen Beweisanhörung am 5. und 6. Mai, in der Ärzte und medizinische Experten die allgemein anerkannte Sicherheit und Wirksamkeit der medizinischen Versorgung von Transgender-Jugendlichen mit Geschlechtsidentitätsstörung sowie die gesundheitlichen Schäden für die Kinder bei Verweigerung einer solchen Versorgung erläuterten. Das Gericht erhielt Beweise dafür, dass über 22 große medizinische Organisationen die etablierte Behandlungsmethode für Transgender-Jugendliche anerkennen. Das Gericht hörte außerdem die Eltern der Kläger in einer Stellungnahme und in nichtöffentlichen Zeugenaussagen über die äußerst positiven Auswirkungen des Zugangs zu angemessener medizinischer Versorgung auf die Gesundheit und das Wohlbefinden ihrer Kinder und die verheerenden Schäden, die ein Abbruch der Behandlung verursachen würde.

Die American Academy of Pediatrics, das Alabama Chapter der Academy of Pediatrics, die American Medical Association und andere staatliche und nationale medizinische Organisationen reichten eine amicus curiae Schriftsatz beschreibt den Konsens in der medizinischen Gemeinschaft, der die Standards der Versorgung transgender Jugendlicher unterstützt und Gesetze wie SB 184 ablehnt, die nachweislich notwendige Versorgung kriminalisieren und verbieten.

Klägerin Megan Poe, Mutter der 15-jährigen Allison aus Nordalabama:
Wie alle Eltern ist es meine größte tägliche Sorge, dass mein Kind gesund, glücklich und sicher ist. Es ist eine enorme Erleichterung zu wissen, dass meine Tochter weiterhin die Unterstützung und Fürsorge erhält, die sie braucht. Das hat ihr ermöglicht, zu der selbstbewussten, engagierten Teenagerin zu werden, die sie heute ist. Ich weiß, dass viele Menschen nicht verstehen, was es bedeutet, ein transsexuelles Kind zu haben. Ich bin dankbar, dass das Gericht auf die Erfahrungen meiner Familie und anderer Familien wie unserer gehört hat, die Angst vor den Folgen von SB 184 hatten. Die Blockierung des Gesetzes gibt uns etwas mehr Auftrieb, bis es hoffentlich endgültig gestoppt wird.

Reverend Paul Eknes-Tucker, der seit 2015 als leitender Pastor der historischen Pilgrim Church UCC tätig ist:
Ich habe mit vielen Familien gesprochen, die erlebt haben, wie ihre Transgender-Kinder mit der richtigen Betreuung und Unterstützung aufblühten. Dieselben Familien haben mir ihre Sorgen darüber mitgeteilt, was mit ihren Kindern passieren würde, wenn dieses Gesetz in Kraft tritt. Dieses Urteil macht mir Mut. Es wird ihre Sorgen für die unmittelbare Zukunft lindern, sodass sie sich weiterhin auf die Unterstützung ihrer Kinder konzentrieren können.

Dr. Rachel Koe, Kinderärztin mit eigener Praxis im ländlichen Südosten Alabamas:
Eltern wollen und müssen die Möglichkeit haben, vertrauenswürdigen medizinischen Rat und medizinische Betreuung in Anspruch zu nehmen, um die Gesundheit ihrer Kinder zu unterstützen. Eine Unterbrechung der Behandlung kann verheerende Folgen haben. Dieses Urteil ist eine Erleichterung für Transgender-Kinder, die weiterhin die benötigte Betreuung erhalten können, und für Eltern, die das Beste für ihre Kinder wollen.

James Zoe, Vater des 13-jährigen Zachary aus Birmingham:
Dieses Urteil bedeutet, dass wir unserem Kind weiterhin die medizinische Versorgung zukommen lassen können, die es braucht. Nichts könnte wichtiger sein und unserer Familie mehr Erleichterung verschaffen. Alabama ist unsere Heimat, und wir hoffen, dass dieses grausame Gesetz uns nicht aus ihr vertreiben wird. Wir kämpfen für unser Kind und werden weiter dafür kämpfen, dass es und alle Transgender-Jugendlichen in Alabama weiterhin angemessene medizinische Versorgung erhalten können.

Die Familien, die das Gesetz anfechten, kommen aus dem ganzen Staat und gehen anonym vor, da sie Gefahr laufen, nach SB 184 strafrechtlich verfolgt zu werden, und um ihre Privatsphäre und Sicherheit zu wahren. Es handelt sich um Brianna Boe und ihren 12-jährigen Transgender-Sohn Michael Boe aus Montgomery, James Zoe und seinen 13-jährigen Transgender-Sohn Zachary Zoe aus Birmingham, Megan Poe und ihre 15-jährige Transgender-Tochter Allison Poe aus Nordalabama sowie Kathy Noe und ihren 17-jährigen Transgender-Sohn Christopher Noe aus Ostalabama.

Die Kläger werden vertreten durch Lightfoot, Franklin & White LLC, King & Spalding LLP, GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD), das National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR), das Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), Und die Menschenrechtskampagne (HRC).

„Dieses Urteil bedeutet, dass Eltern von Transgender-Kindern in Alabama weiterhin die Gesundheitsentscheidungen treffen können, die für ihre Familien am besten sind. Das ist eine außerordentliche Erleichterung. Eltern sollten nicht dafür bestraft werden, dass sie das Beste für ihre Kinder wollen.“ sagte Jennifer Levi, Leiterin des GLAD Transgender Rights Project.

„Dieses Urteil lindert den enormen Stress, dem Familien in Alabama seit der Verabschiedung des Gesetzes SB 184 im letzten Monat ausgesetzt sind. Ein Staat sollte Eltern und Ärzte nicht dafür kriminalisieren, dass sie medizinische Richtlinien befolgen und notwendige medizinische Behandlungen durchführen.“ sagte Asaf Orr, leitender Anwalt des NCLR und Leiter des Transgender Youth Project.

„Wir sind dankbar, dass das Gericht die eindringlichen Bitten der Familien und Versorger erhört hat, die durch dieses Gesetz so stark geschädigt würden. Eltern sollten niemals in die unvorstellbare Lage gebracht werden, sich entscheiden zu müssen, ob sie ihren Transgender-Kindern die notwendige Gesundheitsversorgung verweigern oder ins Gefängnis müssen.“ sagte Sarah Warbelow, Rechtsdirektorin des HRC.

„Die Blockierung der Durchsetzung von SB 184 dient dem Wohlergehen transgender Jugendlicher in Alabama und den Rechten der Eltern, denen es nach dem Gesetz untersagt wäre, die bestmögliche Betreuung für ihre Kinder zu suchen.“ sagte Scott McCoy, stellvertretender Rechtsdirektor des SPLC für LGBTQ-Rechte und Sonderstreitigkeiten.

Erfahren Sie mehr über den Fall.

Boe gegen Marshall

Springen zu Dokumenten

This case is also known as Eknes-Tucker v. Ivey.

Zusammenfassung

Facing criminal penalties and a devastating loss of essential medical care for their children, Alabama parents, medical providers, and Rev. Eknes-Tucker of Pilgrim UCC Church in Birmingham are asking a federal court to block a law criminalizing well-established medical care for transgender youth from taking effect.

The law, SB 184, punishes parents and their children’s doctors for providing – or even suggesting – well-established essential medical care for their transgender children. The punishment can include up to 10 years in prison.

The plaintiffs are represented by GLAD, the National Center for LGBTQ Rights, the Southern Poverty Law Center, the Human Rights Campaign, Lightfoot, Franklin & White LLC, and King & Spalding LLP.

U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Alabama

The filing in U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Alabama – Northern Division is on behalf of four Alabama parents, a private practice pediatrician, a clinical psychologist with the UAB medical system, and Reverend Paul Eknes-Tucker, Senior Pastor at Pilgrim United Church of Christ in Birmingham. The court filing explains that the law strips them of the right to make important decisions about their children’s healthcare.

A hearing on plaintiffs motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction took place on May 5, 2022 in Montgomery. Days later, a federal judge halted the law from being enforced while the lawsuit continued.

On July 1, 2024, plaintiff families challenging Alabama’s ban on health care for transgender adolescents asked the court to deny the State’s request to rule on the lawfulness of the ban before a full trial.

The Plaintiffs’ filing meticulously refutes false claims made in the State’s motion for summary judgment about the established standards of medical care for transgender adolescents. The Plaintiffs’ brief cites expert evidence about the rigorous development of those standards, the careful assessment and multidisciplinary approach involved in the delivery of care to transgender adolescents in Alabama, and the well-established benefits of care for transgender adolescents suffering from gender dysphoria.

The families challenging the ban argue that rather than short-circuit the process as the State requests, the case must be allowed to proceed to trial to ensure full consideration of the factual record on the safety and efficacy of transgender health care, the harm suffered by transgender adolescents when they are denied necessary care, and the purposeful discrimination against transgender people that motivated the sweeping ban.

11th Circuit Court of Appeals

In August 2022, the State of Alabama appealed the district court’s May 13 order blocking the law from being enforced to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit. The plaintiffs filed a response brief urging the Court of Appeals to keep the injunction against SB 184 in place, citing the district court’s reliance on well-established, evidence-based medical standards and parents’ fundamental right to obtain medical care for their children.

Later that month, families, medical experts, faith groups, and 21 states filed amicus (friend-of-the-court) briefs urging the court not to reinstate the law criminalizing healthcare for transgender youth. You can find those filings below.

On August 21, 2023, a three-judge panel of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals issued a decision ending the freeze on the ban. Alabama parents have since requested a hearing by the full 11th Circuit to reinstate the pause so their children can continue accessing essential medical care.

In January 2024 the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals issued an order allowing Alabama’s ban on medical care for transgender adolescents to take effect. This order grants a request by the state of Alabama to stay the trial court’s 2022 decision blocking the law from being enforced while the challenge against it proceeds.

Latest filings:

New Report:

A new report by legal and medical experts from Yale Law School, the Yale School of Medicine’s Child Study Center and Departments of Psychiatry and Pediatrics, and the University of Texas Southwestern gives an in-depth analysis of misleading scientific claims that informed Alabama’s move to criminalize medical treatment for transgender youth.

Nachricht

Alabama Parents, Joined by Minister and Medical Providers, Seek Emergency Court Order Blocking Law that Will Criminalize their Transgender Children’s Ongoing Medical Care

Facing criminal penalties and a devastating loss of essential medical care for their children, four Alabama parents from across the state, joined by two medical providers and Rev. Eknes-Tucker of Pilgrim UCC Church in Birmingham will ask a federal court to block SB 184 from taking effect

Four Alabama parents are asking a federal court to stop SB 184 from taking effect on May 8, saying the law strips them of the right to make important decisions about their children’s healthcare. SB 184 punishes parents and their children’s doctors for providing – or even suggesting – well-established essential medical care for their transgender children. The punishment can include up to 10 years in prison.

The new legal challenge, Rev. Eknes-Tucker v. Ivey was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Alabama – Northern Division. Because the plaintiffs face criminal penalties and a dangerous loss of necessary medical care for their children under SB 184 they will ask the court to block the law from going into effect while their case against it proceeds.

Joining four Alabama parents in their challenge to SB 184 are a private practice pediatrician in rural Southeast Alabama, a clinical psychologist with the UAB medical system, and Reverend Paul Eknes-Tucker, Senior Pastor at Pilgrim United Church of Christ in Birmingham.

The families asking the court to block the law come from across the state and are proceeding anonymously due to the risk of criminal prosecution under SB 184. They are Brianna Boe and her 12-year-old transgender son, Michael Boe of Montgomery; James Zoe and his 13-year-old transgender son Zachary Zoe of Birmingham; Megan Poe and her 15-year-old transgender daughter Allison Poe of Northern Alabama; and Kathy Noe and her 17-year-old-transgender son Christopher Noe of Eastern Alabama.

The two medical providers are also proceeding anonymously due to the risk of criminal prosecution.

“As a minister I counsel parents with transgender children about how best to love and support their children. Under SB 184, those conversations now come with a risk of criminal prosecution,” said Reverend Paul Eknes-Tucker, who has served as Senior Pastor at historic Pilgrim Church UCC since 2015. “This dangerous law is an unthinkable infringement on parental rights and the freedom of pastors and other faith leaders to counsel their own parishioners. This law is destructive not only to families in Alabama, but to the freedoms and values Alabamians hold dear.”

“I know people who don’t have a transgender child may not understand my experience. I have done everything I can to learn about what my daughter is going through, and being able to seek guidance from our pediatrician and medical specialists was a turning point for our family,” sagte Megan Poe, mother of 15-year-old Allison of Northern Alabama. “With that support and care Allison has become a confident and social teenager who is thriving in school. Without it, I’m terrified she will again become withdrawn, depressed, or even worse. I only want what’s best for my daughter, like any parent. For the state to take away my ability to provide that essential care and support is unthinkable.”

“Our family is challenging this cruel law because it infringes on our ability as parents to ensure our child receives appropriate medical care, and targets transgender youth simply for being transgender,” sagte James Zoe, father of 13-year-old Zachary of Birmingham. “We have the choice to leave our home state of Alabama, or stay and fight. We have chosen to fight for our child and for all transgender children in Alabama. In the end, we believe this unfair law will be overturned and we will be able to continue providing our child with the medical care he needs.”

“Parents come to me seeking trusted medical advice but under SB 184 both I and the parents consulting me are subject to a prison sentence for even discussing the best recommendations for supporting their children’s health,” sagte Dr. Rachel Koe, pediatrician in private practice in rural Southeast Alabama. “SB 184 criminalizes effective, established medical treatment that is recognized as the standard of care in the medical field, including by the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Medical Association.”

Die Kläger in Rev. Eknes-Tucker v. Ivey are represented by Lightfoot, Franklin & White LLC, King & Spalding LLP, GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD), das National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR), das Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), und die Human Rights Campaign (HRC).

“The parents challenging this law, like all parents, want what’s best for their kids, but SB 184 punishes them for that. This is a dangerous law that undermines the ability of Alabama parents to make the best healthcare decisions for their families,” sagte Jennifer Levi, Leiterin des GLAD Transgender Rights Project. 

“Allowing SB 184 to go into effect will cause enormous stress and harm to families across Alabama. A state should not criminalize parents and doctors for following medical guidelines and providing needed medical treatments,” sagte NCLR Senior Staff Attorney and Transgender Youth Project Director Asaf Orr.

“SB 184 disregards the well-being of transgender youth in Alabama and disrespects the rights of parents who under this law are prohibited from seeking the best possible care for their children,” sagte Scott McCoy, stellvertretender Rechtsdirektor des SPLC für LGBTQ-Rechte und Sonderstreitigkeiten.

“These care providers and families want nothing more than to do what’s best for their children, yet SB 184 threatens them with criminal penalties for providing critically important care that is often life-saving for transgender youth,” said Sarah Warbelow, HRC Legal Director.

Follow the case page for the latest updates.


The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) is a catalyst for racial justice in the South and beyond, working in partnership with communities to dismantle white supremacy, strengthen intersectional movements, and advance the human rights of all people.

The National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR) is a national legal organization committed to advancing the human and civil rights of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer community through litigation, public policy advocacy, and public education. Since its founding, NCLR has maintained a longstanding commitment to racial and economic justice and the LGBTQ community’s most vulnerable.

Through strategic litigation, public policy advocacy, and education, GLBTQ-Rechtsanwälte und -Verteidiger works in New England and nationally to create a just society free of discrimination based on gender identity and expression, HIV status, and sexual orientation.

The Human Rights Campaign (HRC) is America’s largest civil rights organization working to achieve lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender equality. HRC envisions a world where LGBTQ+ people are embraced as full members of society at home, at work and in every community.

Ladinsky v. Ivey

Update: This case was dismissed in 2022. Check out the Boe gegen Marshall case page to learn more about our pending litigation against SB184.

Gender-affirming care is necessary, lifesaving care. We’re suing to stop Alabama’s criminalization of healthcare for transgender youth.

On April 8, 2022, Governor Kay Ivey signed SB 184 into law. The bill punishes parents for making important decisions about their children’s healthcare and doctors for providing – or even suggesting – well-established medically necessary care. The punishment can include up to 10 years in prison.

The same day, GLAD, along with the National Center for Transgender Rights, the Southern Poverty Law Center, and the Human Rights Campaign filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of two Alabama families and two medical providers.

SB 184 is an appalling attack on transgender youth, their families, and medical providers. It will not hold up in court.

Erfahren Sie mehr über den Fall.

Read the filing.

Corbitt v. Taylor

Aktualisieren: On September 20, 2024, the 11th Circuit rule that Alabama’s refusal to issue accurate drivers licenses did not violate the constitution. Mehr erfahren.

GLAD co-authored an amicus (friend of the court) brief in the 11th Circuit case Corbitt v. Taylor about Alabama’s needless and unjust requirement for transgender people to undergo surgery to update their driver’s license. As the brief explains,

“The Amici Curiae write to highlight the arbitrary and irrational nature of Alabama’s policy to require transgender people to undergo genital surgery to obtain an accurate driver’s license. Requiring surgery contradicts the medical consensus and standards of care and presents an insurmountable barrier for many transgender people to obtain state-issued identification that reflects who they are. This policy inflicts concrete harms on transgender people and undermines social stability by impeding their ability to engage in a wide range of important activities, from voting to obtaining housing and employment. A majority of states and the federal government, understanding the need to track contemporary medical standards and adopt policies that promote economic and social stability and positive health outcomes, have aligned their policies to enable transgender people to obtain identification that matches who they are. In contrast, Alabama’s policy denies transgender people equal protection and serves no legitimate government interests.”

Read the amicus brief.

Amici include the following state, regional, and national organizations:

  • Equality Federation
  • Gleichheit Florida
  • Gleichheit Maine
  • Equality Ohio Education Fund
  • Equality South Dakota
  • Equality Texas
  • Gleichberechtigung der Familie
  • Fairness Campaign
  • FreeState Justice
  • Maryland’s LGBTQ Advocates
  • Garden State Equality
  • Georgia Equality
  • GLBTQ-Rechtsanwälte und -Verteidiger (GLAD)
  • Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund
  • Massengleichheit
  • Mass. Trans Political Coalition
  • Nationales Zentrum für LGBTQ-Rechte
  • One Colorado
  • PROMO
  • Southern Legal Counsel, Inc.
  • TransOhio, Inc.
  • Wyoming Equality

V.L. v. E.L.

March 7, 2016: Victory! The U.S. Supreme Court today reversed the Alabama Supreme Court’s decision in which it refused to recognize a lesbian mother’s Georgia adoption of her three children. GLAD congratulates the adoptive mother, V.L. and her children, as well our friends at NCLR on this important victory for all families. Many thanks to Foley Hoag LLP who joined GLAD in submitting an amicus brief to the Court on behalf of Equality Alabama Foundation, Equality Federation, Georgia Equality, the Human Rights Campaign, Immigration Equality, the National Black Justice Coalition, the National Center for Transgender Equality, the National LGBTQ Task Force, PFLAG, the Stonewall Bar of Georgia, and the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Background:

GLAD and Foley Hoag LLP have filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court urging the Court to grant review in the Alabama second-parent adoption case, V.L. v. E.L., No. 15-648.

V.L. and E.L. are former lesbian partners who agreed to have and raise three children together but are now separated. Before their separation, the two had obtained an adoption judgment in Georgia making V.L. a legal parent. After their separation, the birth mother, E.L., took the position that the Alabama courts could disregard Georgia’s judgment of adoption. The Alabama Supreme Court agreed, holding that E.L. was the children’s only legal parent.

The brief urges the Supreme Court to hear the case, arguing that Alabama cannot disregard the Georgia adoption judgment simply because Alabama believes the Georgia court’s adoption order should not have issued in the first place. If states disregard each other’s adoptions, it will severely undermine the security, stability, and predictability of parent-child relations secured by adoption and parentage judgments across the nation.

The amicus brief was filed on behalf of GLAD, Equality Alabama Foundation, Equality Federation, Georgia Equality, the Human Rights Campaign, Immigration Equality, the National Black Justice Coalition, the National Center for Transgender Equality, the National LGBTQ Task Force, PFLAG, the Stonewall Bar of Georgia, and the Southern Poverty Law Center.

The Foley Hoag team on the brief included Marco J. Quina, Claire Laporte, Catherine Deneke, Jenevieve Maerker, and Kevin J. Conroy, with assistance from paralegal Margaret McKane.

de_DEDeutsch
Datenschutzübersicht

Diese Website verwendet Cookies, damit wir dir die bestmögliche Benutzererfahrung bieten können. Cookie-Informationen werden in deinem Browser gespeichert und führen Funktionen aus, wie das Wiedererkennen von dir, wenn du auf unsere Website zurückkehrst, und hilft unserem Team zu verstehen, welche Abschnitte der Website für dich am interessantesten und nützlichsten sind.