by Steve MacDonald, Granite Grok

The Nation’s highest court has ruled Wednesday, June 18 that the 14th Amendment does not prohibit states from banning transgender transition treatments on minors. The 6-3 ruling does not prevent states from advocating for them or protecting them, it simply states that it is not discrimination to deny a child access to transgender “health care.”

“The Equal Protection Clause does not resolve these disagreements. Nor does it afford us license to decide them as we see best,” he added. “Our role is not ‘to judge the wisdom, fairness, or logic’ of the law before us … but only to ensure that it does not violate the equal protection guarantee of the Fourteenth Amendment. Having concluded it does not, we leave questions regarding its policy to the people, their elected representatives, and the democratic process.”

The matter, according to the Court, is one for individual states and their residents to decide.

Tennessee claims its Constitution compels it to protect children from these sorts of experimental procedures, promoting the passage of SB1, banning the treatments for minors. The ACLU brought the suit in the name of three families of transgender children.

In New Hampshire, each session in recent years has made some progress in protecting kids from nutty virtue signaling (or just confused) parents and or educators who are trying to groom them. Top surgery was banned last session, and this year, the General Court advanced HB377.

332-N:2  Prohibitions for Health Care Providers.

I.  Except as provided in paragraphs II and III, a person shall not knowingly perform or offer to perform on a minor, or administer or offer to administer to a minor, a medical procedure, including but not limited to a puberty-blocking or cross-sex hormone medication, if the performance or administration of the procedure or medication is for the purpose of altering or attempting to alter the appearance of or affirm the minor’s perception of his or her gender or sex, if that perception is inconsistent with the minor’s biological sex as defined in this chapter:

(a)  Enabling a minor to identify with, or live as, a purported identity inconsistent with the minor’s biological sex; or

(b)  Treating purported discomfort or distress from a discordance between the minor’s biological sex and asserted identity.

That’s the watered-down Senate version. The house did not concur with its changes, and a conference committee is supposed to find parity before it goes to the Governor. The primary issue is the grandfathering and grace period, which would allow chaotic advocates to get their kids on puberty-blocking drugs or cross sex hormones before the deadline.

The UK Banned Puberty blockers, along with several other EU countries, citing the risk of harm and a lack of evidence that they reduce suicide.

The author is a long-time New Hampshire resident, award-winning blogger, and a member of the Board of Directors of The 603 Alliance. He is the owner of Grok Media LLC and the Managing Editor, Executive Editor, assistant editor, Editor, content curator, complaint department, Op-ed editor, gatekeeper (most likely to miss typos because he has no editor), and contributor at GraniteGrok.com.