A LANDMARK SUPREME COURT CASE |
|
The United States Supreme Court heard arguments this week in United States v. Skrmetti, in which the Biden Administration is arguing before the Court that Tennessee is violating the equal protection clause of the Constitution by banning transgender medical procedures for children. The fact that this is even a question before the Supreme Court is ludicrous on its face, but hopefully the conservative majority will settle this debate that has national implications.
The basic argument the Biden Administration and challengers like the ACLU are making against Tennessee is that there is no rational distinction between genders. It is an absurd argument, but one that may resonate with the Court’s liberal justices. After all, the newest liberal justice Kentanji Brown Jackson could not define what a woman is in her confirmation hearing.
Tennessee is rightly arguing that there is a clear distinction between genders, and that banning certain medical procedures such as puberty blockers for the purpose of altering one’s gender does not violate the equal protection clause. A boy receiving puberty blockers for something like precocious puberty is entirely different than a boy receiving puberty blockers to irreversibly change his sex. This is common sense.
I am hopeful that the Supreme Court will uphold the Tennessee law. Similar laws exist across the United States, including Texas. In upholding the Tennessee law, the Supreme Court will be defending the rights of individual states to protect their youth against these irreversible, damaging medical procedures on children.
|
|
MY LEGISLATION TO WITHHOLD FUNDING FROM CHILDREN’S HOSPITALS WHO ENGAGE IN TRANSGENDER TREATMENT ON MINORS |
|
The Supreme Court upholding the Tennessee law will be a step in the right direction, but it is not nearly enough. Congress must step in here.
I’ve introduced a straightforward legislative solution to disincentivize this kind of child abuse. Every children’s hospital in the country receives funding from a program called the Children’s Hospital Graduate Medical Education Payment Program. This is a fund replenished by Congress every few years to offset the cost of training new medical professions, which is a significant portion of their operating budgets. My legislation simply blocks any of this funding from going toward children’s hospital that engages in child abuse via transgender treatment on minors.
Taxpayers shouldn’t be footing the bill for this pseudoscience and Congress should not be incentivizing it. In fact, we should be actively discouraging it from continuing. My bill accomplishes that.
While this legislation has passed committee, it still needs a vote on the House floor. I have been relentless in pushing for the bill to be put up for a vote before the end of the year and will continue to advocate for this policy until it is law.
|
|
THE DARK REALITY OF TRANSGENDER MEDICAL PROCEDURES ON CHILDREN |
|
I penned an op-ed debunking the “science” behind so-called “gender-affirming care.” I put both phrases in quotations because this is child abuse, not science. And these procedures are the exact opposite of gender-affirming care.
This radical ideology has spread like wildfire in the United States. There are nearly 100 pediatric gender clinics operating in the United States today, a more than tenfold increase from just 15 years ago. Moreover, the rate of new diagnoses for “gender dysphoria” increased at an alarming rate of 20 percent every year between 2017 and 2020, and then jumped a whopping 70 percent during the pandemic. This is evidence of a mental health crisis, not a novel medical phenomenon, and it is reflective of the over-diagnosing that is plaguing pediatric medicine with damaging results.
Sweden, Finland, the U.K., and Florida have all done systematic reviews on these procedures, and all reached the same conclusion: There is no evidence that the benefits of this approach for treating gender-related distress in youth outweigh the risks. Denmark also imposed restrictions, and Norway is poised to follow suit. Even progressive European countries recognize that high-risk and irreversible interventions must meet a high threshold of evidence. Remember, these procedures on children are permanent. There is no turning back once you start to change a child's gender. As our peer-countries have admitted, there is zero high quality evidence for the benefits of this pseudoscience.
The Cass report, which was cited by conservative Justice Samuel Alito in the Tennessee case this week, recommends “extreme caution” in the use of even masculinising/feminising hormones in minors.
The left always screams about “THE SCIENCE!!!” In the case of transgender surgery or hormone therapy on minors, they are actively disregarding it.
|
|
IMPORTANT READS ON THE SUPREME COURT CASE |
|
Below are several articles that can educate you on this specific Supreme Court case and its importance to the broader debate over transgender ideology. I encourage you to follow this debate closely as we head into the first year of the second Trump Administration.
|
|
That's it for this week's campaign brief. Thank you for reading.
|
|
|
|
|
These updates are only possible with the generous gift of supporters like you! If you'd like to donate by check, please make your check payable and mail to: Dan Crenshaw for Congress, 5900 Memorial Drive, Suite 215, Houston, TX 77007.
|
|
|
No longer want to receive these emails? Unsubscribe.
Team Crenshaw 5900 Memorial Drive Suite 215 Houston, Texas 77007 |
|
|
|
|
