Tennessee Know Your Rights - GLAD Law
Accéder au contenu
GLAD Logo Passer à la navigation principale vers le contenu

Nouvelles

GLAD Law et NCLR répondent à la Skrmetti Décision de la Cour suprême  

Aujourd'hui, la Cour a failli à sa tâche. Elle a choisi de détourner le regard, abandonnant à la fois les enfants vulnérables et les parents qui les aiment. Aucun parent ne devrait être contraint de regarder son enfant souffrir alors que des soins médicaux éprouvés lui sont inaccessibles pour des raisons politiques.

WASHINGTON, DC — La Cour suprême des États-Unis aujourd'hui a rendu sa décision dans États-Unis c. Skrmetti, confirmant l'interdiction des soins de santé pour les jeunes transgenres dans le Tennessee. 

La décision d’aujourd’hui n’a aucun impact dans les États où les soins de santé pour les jeunes transgenres ne sont pas actuellement interdits.

Toutes les grandes associations médicales, y compris la Association médicale américaine et le Association américaine de psychologie Nous soutenons ces soins, soutenus par des décennies de recherche et s'appuyant sur les mêmes médicaments sûrs et efficaces que ceux utilisés pour traiter divers autres problèmes de santé chez les enfants et les adultes. Le mois dernier, dans l'analyse la plus complète à ce jour, une étude nouveau rapport de plus de 1 000 personnes commandé par la législature de l'Utah ont constaté que ces soins sont étayés par des preuves substantielles, qu’ils sont sûrs et efficaces et qu’ils réduisent le risque de suicide.

Directrice principale des droits des personnes transgenres et homosexuelles de GLAD Law Jennifer Levi et Directeur juridique du Centre national pour les droits LGBTQ Shannon Minter, qui ont tous deux plus de 30 ans d'expérience chacun en matière de litiges liés aux personnes LGBTQ+, notamment dans les affaires de soins de santé des personnes transgenres, et qui sont eux-mêmes transgenres, ont réagi à la décision de la Cour suprême rendue aujourd'hui :

« La Cour n’a pas fait son travail aujourd’hui », a déclaré Jennifer Levi, directrice principale des droits des personnes transgenres et queer de GLAD Law.Lorsque le système politique s'effondre et que les législatures cèdent à l'hostilité populaire, le pouvoir judiciaire doit être l'épine dorsale de la Constitution. Au lieu de cela, il a choisi de détourner le regard, abandonnant à la fois les enfants vulnérables et les parents qui les aiment. Aucun parent ne devrait être contraint de regarder son enfant souffrir alors que des soins médicaux éprouvés lui sont inaccessibles pour des raisons politiques.

« La décision de la Cour abandonne les jeunes transgenres et leurs familles aux attaques politiques. Elle a ignoré une discrimination manifeste et ignoré sa propre jurisprudence en permettant aux législateurs de cibler des jeunes en raison de leur transsexualité », a déclaré Shannon Minter, directrice juridique du Centre national pour les droits LGBTQ« Les décisions en matière de santé relèvent des familles, et non des politiques. Cette décision aura de graves conséquences. »

La décision de la Cour suprême envoie un message dangereux : même les lois portant préjudice immédiat aux jeunes transgenres peuvent rester en vigueur pendant que les recours judiciaires avancent devant les tribunaux, un processus qui prend souvent des mois, voire des années. Cela permet aux États d'appliquer des politiques discriminatoires qui bouleversent des vies, restreignent les soins médicaux et créent peur et instabilité, avant même que leur constitutionnalité ne soit pleinement établie. En juin 2025, des lois similaires avaient été adoptées ou proposées dans plus de 20 États, créant un patchwork juridique qui laisse de nombreuses familles dans l'incertitude quant à la possibilité pour leur enfant de bénéficier de soins appropriés.

Cette décision ouvre la voie à une vague plus large de législation anti-transgenre sous l'administration Trump, renforcée par le retour au pouvoir du président Trump et de multiples décrets ciblant les personnes transgenres, notamment des efforts visant à éliminer la reconnaissance fédérale de l'identité de genre, à restreindre l'accès aux soins de santé pour les personnes transgenres de tous âges et à interdire aux étudiants transgenres de participer aux sports et à l'inclusion dans les écoles publiques.

Les lois anti-transgenres, comme celle du Tennessee, s'inscrivent dans une campagne nationale croissante visant à priver les personnes transgenres de leurs droits, de leur dignité et de leur accès à des soins vitaux. Ces lois ne reposent pas sur des preuves médicales ni sur le souci des enfants, mais sur la peur, la désinformation et la volonté d'effacer les personnes transgenres de la vie publique. Le préjudice qu'elles causent est réel, immédiat et profond. Chez GLAD Law, nous nous engageons à contester ces attaques devant les tribunaux, à soutenir les familles concernées et à œuvrer pour un avenir où toutes les personnes transgenres pourront vivre ouvertement, en toute sécurité et en pleine égalité.

Faites un don aujourd’hui pour soutenir notre plaidoyer juridique et garantir que chaque jeune puisse grandir avec la liberté d’être lui-même.

United States v. Skrmetti and Doe v. Thornbury

Mise à jour: On June 18, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States a rendu sa décision dans États-Unis c. Skrmetti, upholding Tennessee’s ban on health care for transgender youth. This decision has no impact in states where health care for transgender youth is not currently banned. Read GLAD Law’s response to the ruling.

Cour suprême des États-Unis

The U.S. Supreme Court will review a ruling from the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals that let Tennessee and Kentucky enforce bans on transgender health care while lawsuits against the bans continue. The key question is whether laws that block transgender people from accessing health care because they are transgender violate the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

In September 2024, Kentucky parents of transgender children and a wide array of civil rights groups filed an amicus brief dans États-Unis c. Skrmetti. They are represented by GLAD Law, NCLR, the ACLU of Kentucky, and Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP.

The brief argues that the bans in Tennessee and Kentucky, like those passed in other states, intentionally discriminate against transgender youth by denying them medications that are prescribed for other youth. These laws do not ban these medications for all minors, but only when they are prescribed for transgender minors. As a result of this discriminatory treatment, transgender youth are unable to obtain the only effective treatment for the severe distress caused by gender dysphoria. 

Check out GLAD Law Staff Attorney, Lisa Rodriguez-Ross, explaining what is at stake in this case.

YouTube #!trpst#trp-gettext data-trpgettextoriginal=156#!trpen#vidéo#!trpst#/trp-gettext#!trpen#

6th Circuit Court of Appeals

GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD Law), the National Women’s Law Center (NWLC), Campaign for Southern Equality and eleven other women’s, healthcare and LGBTQ+ organizations filed an amicus, or friend-of-the-court, brief in the U.S. Court of Appeal for the Sixth Circuit in August 2023 urging reinstatement of the court order preventing enforcement of transgender healthcare bans for adolescents in Tennessee and Kentucky while the legal challenges to those bans continue.

The brief argues that Tennessee and Kentucky state laws prohibiting doctors from providing healthcare to transgender adolescents discriminate on the basis of sex, and are therefore subject to heightened judicial scrutiny. These bans target transgender adolescents to deny them care, even when they, their doctors and their parents agree it is essential for their health. Such laws reflect hostility and serve only to harm young people.

The amici are organizations committed to ensuring everyone, including women and LGBTQ+ people, can access the healthcare they need, In addition to GLAD Law and NWLC, the organizations joining the friend-of-the-court brief are:

  • Campaign for Southern Equality
  • Equality Federation
  • Égalité familiale
  • Campagne pour les droits de l'homme
  • Memphis Center for Reproductive Health
  • National Center for Transgender Equality,
  • OUTMemphis
  • Southern Legal Counsel
  • Southern Poverty Law Center
  • Tennessee Equality Project
  • Projet Trevor
  • White Coats for Trans Youth

L.W. v. Skrmetti was filed by the ACLU, ACLU of Oklahoma, et Lambda Legal. Doe v. Thornbury was filed by the ACLU of Kentucky et Centre national pour les droits LGBTQ.

Nouvelles

LGBTQ Civil Rights, Health Groups Respond to Supreme Court Argument in U.S. v Skrmetti

Following Wednesday’s Supreme Court argument in U.S. v. Skrmetti, LGBTQ+ civil rights and health organizations expressed encouragement that the Court will be receptive to the U.S. and Plaintiff families’ position that Tennessee’s law banning health care for transgender adolescents discriminates based on sex and must therefore be held to a higher level of scrutiny.

National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR):

“The plaintiffs today made a strong case that this law discriminates by barring medications based solely on a person’s birth sex,” said Shannon Minter, Vice President of Legal at the National Center for Lesbian Rights. “The State of Tennessee had no effective response to that obvious fact, which several Justices made clear. Based on today’s argument, we are hopeful the Court will rule that Tennessee’s law discriminates based on sex and must therefore be subject to the same high standard of review applied to all other sex-based laws. That would be a huge victory and would provide clear guidance for the lower courts about how to evaluate these laws.” 

GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD Law):

“Today’s argument powerfully showed how these bans unfairly target transgender adolescents and deny them medications that all other adolescents can obtain when medically indicated. You don’t have to know about health care to know that these bans are not about medicine – they are about discrimination,” said Jennifer Levi, Senior Director of Transgender and Queer Rights at GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD Law). “They insert politicians between families and medical providers and block parents from getting their transgender children the health care that allows them to be healthy and thrive. The stigma and discrimination baked into these laws is intentional, clear, and devastating.”

The Movement Advancement Project: 

“The arguments at the Supreme Court made it unequivocally clear: banning medically necessary care for transgender youth is unlawful discrimination that puts their health and well-being at risk,” said Naomi Goldberg, Executive Director of the Movement Advancement Project. “Tennessee is one of 24 states that have taken away families’ freedom to obtain essential health care for their transgender child. These are decisions that rightfully rest with doctors, families, and patients—and based on the case laid out in yesterday’s arguments, we’re hopeful that the Court will see these bans for the discriminatory laws they are.”


Projet Trevor

“I am encouraged by the arguments before the Court, as the justices had the opportunity to directly engage with the real-world harms that discriminatory laws have on the health and well-being of transgender young people and their families,” said Casey Pick, Director of Law and Policy at The Trevor Project. “The Trevor Project regularly hears from young people across the U.S. about the life-saving nature of the medical care at risk in this case. For any parent, it is unimaginable to think of the government telling you that you can’t give your child the medicine they need to stay healthy. But that is exactly what Tennessee’s law says to parents with transgender children.”

Whitman-Walker Institute:

“The plaintiffs’ arguments on Wednesday made a powerful case for ensuring that transgender youth can receive the medical care they need,”  said Dr. Kellan Baker, executive director of Whitman-Walker Institute, an LGBT health-focused research organization. “Solicitor General Prelogar shared the story of Ryan Roe, whose gender dysphoria was so severe that he was throwing up daily and almost became mute because of the intense distress he experienced at the sound of his own voice. When Ryan’s parents were able to get him the care he needed, he started thriving—but then Tennessee took that care away. Though this care is supported by every major medical expert organization, transgender youth and their families in two dozen states are facing the same cruel denial of care that Ryan experienced. We hope the Supreme Court will issue a ruling addressing the discrimination inherent in these dangerous bans.”

Nouvelles

GLAD Statement on Supreme Court Action on Transgender Health Care Bans

Today the United States Supreme Court agreed to review a decision from the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals preventing transgender youth from receiving necessary medical care in Tennessee and Kentucky.

GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD) issued the following statement:

State bans on health care for transgender adolescents are causing tremendous harm and suffering for transgender people and their families. In taking up this case, the Supreme Court has the opportunity to affirm what it found in its ruling in Bostock just 4 years ago and to make clear that our Constitution does not abide laws that single out transgender people for discrimination.

The Sixth Circuit decision which the Supreme Court has now agreed to review reversed federal district court rulings halting transgender health care bans in Kentucky – in a challenge brought by NCLR and the ACLU of Kentucky – and in Tennessee – in challenges brought by Lambda Legal and the ACLU as well as by the Department of Justice.

GLAD is currently challenging state bans on health care for transgender people in Alabama as well as in Floride, where a federal court earlier this month permanently blocked the law banning care for transgender adolescents and severely restricting it for adults.

Nouvelles

Women’s, Healthcare, and Human Rights Organizations Urge 6th Circuit to Reinstate Block on Transgender Health Bans in TN, KY

Friend-of-the-court brief argues bans on access to care for transgender adolescents constitute sex discrimination and are subject to heightened scrutiny, which the laws fail

GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD), the National Women’s Law Center (NWLC), Campaign for Southern Equality, and eleven other women’s, healthcare and LGBTQ+ organizations filed an amicus, or friend-of-the-court, brief in the U.S. Court of Appeal for the Sixth Circuit urging reinstatement of the court order preventing enforcement of transgender healthcare bans for adolescents in Tennessee and Kentucky while the legal challenges to those bans continue.

The brief argues that Tennessee and Kentucky state laws prohibiting doctors from providing healthcare to transgender adolescents discriminate on the basis of sex, and are therefore subject to heightened judicial scrutiny. These bans target transgender adolescents to deny them care, even when they, their doctors, and their parents agree it is essential for their health. Such laws reflect hostility and serve only to harm young people.

The Sixth Circuit panel’s order allowing the Tennessee and Kentucky bans to go into effect despite pending legal challenges means transgender adolescents can’t get the care they need and their parents are blocked from acting in their children’s best interests.

The Sixth Circuit is an outlier among courts to consider laws denying healthcare access to transgender adolescents. District court judges in seven states to consider such bans, including Tennessee and Kentucky, as well as the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals  have found in preliminary proceedings that such bans violate the constitutional rights of transgender people and cause immediate, irreparable harms. A federal judge in Arkansas, the first to issue a final ruling, has now blocked that state’s ban permanently.

The amici are organizations committed to ensuring everyone, including women and LGBTQ+ people, can access the healthcare they need. In addition to GLAD and NWLC, the organizations joining the friend-of-the-court brief are Campaign for Southern Equality, Equality Federation, Family Equality, Human Rights Campaign, Memphis Center for Reproductive Health, National Center for Transgender Equality, OUTMemphis, Southern Legal Counsel, Southern Poverty Law Center, Tennessee Equality Project, Trevor Project, and White Coats for Trans Youth. The brief was filed by Jenner & Block LLP.

Visit the case page et read the brief.

Curb Records v. Lee

UPDATE: On May 17, in a separate case brought by the ACLU of Tennessee, a federal judge issued a ruling striking the law on First Amendment grounds.

On June 30, 2021, renowned independent record label Curb Records and the Mike Curb Foundation a déposé une plainte fédérale challenging a new Tennessee law, HB 1182, that requires businesses to post a demeaning notice on their premises if they have policies allowing access for transgender individuals on an equal basis to other patrons.

The complaint asserts that HB 1182 – which designates precise dimensions, red and yellow coloring and specific language amounting to a “not welcome” sign to patrons – promotes a hostile climate for LGBT people in the state and denies them equal access to businesses open to the public as well as to employment and educational opportunities. Curb Records and the Mike Curb Foundation argue that the law compels them and other Tennessee businesses to endorse a climate of fear and nonacceptance of LGBT people, in contradiction to their company values of integrity, respect for diversity and nondiscrimination.

Curb Records and the Mike Curb Foundation are represented in their suit by Sherrard Roe Voigt & Harbison, attorney Abby Rubenfeld, the National Center for LGBTQ Rights (NCLR), and GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD).

Read GLAD’s statement on the filing.

fr_FRFrançais
Aperçu de la confidentialité

Ce site web utilise des cookies afin de vous offrir la meilleure expérience utilisateur possible. Les informations sur les cookies sont stockées dans votre navigateur et remplissent des fonctions telles que vous reconnaître lorsque vous revenez sur notre site web et aider notre équipe à comprendre les sections du site que vous trouvez les plus intéressantes et utiles.