Adobe Stock
CV NEWS FEED // The Montana Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld a preliminary injunction against a state law that sought to protect children from being subjected to puberty blockers and hormone therapy.
The court reaffirmed a lower ruling blocking the bill by an injunction on the basis that it allegedly violates privacy rights as outlined in the state’s constitution. A preliminary injunction temporarily halts the state’s enactment of the law, arguing it would cause “irreparable harm.”
The case was filed by two families who include teenage children they identify as “transgender.” The families are the plaintiffs in the case against the state of Montana.
The families first filed the suit because the child-protective law did not allow for the teens to be subjected to “gender-affirming medical care,” which the plaintiffs argued was a violation of “their constitutional rights to equal protection, the right to seek health care and the right to dignity.”
The bill, titled SB 99, was originally passed in 2023 and effectively outlawed doctors subjecting children to hormone therapy for so-called “gender transition” purposes. The state law specifically keeps “transgender” industry doctors from subjecting children to surgical procedures, hormone therapy, and puberty blockers, providing that doctors who violate the legislation would face losing their licenses.
District Court Judge Jason Marks first heard the case and ruled that the ban violated the right to privacy relating to medical treatments. “The legislature has no interest … to justify its interference with an individual’s fundamental privacy right to obtain a particular lawful medical procedure from a healthcare provider,” Marks stated.
The first “transgender” member of House Representatives of Montana, Zooey Zephyr (born Zachary Raasch; a man who identifies as a woman), applauded Wednesday’s ruling, praising the state’s Supreme Court for striking down what he called an act of “government overreach.”
“The gender-affirming care ban in Montana has been BLOCKED by the MT Supreme Court in a unanimous decision,” wrote Zephyr. “Montana has a constitutional right to privacy, including in our healthcare decisions. And today our constitution continues to protect individuals from government overreach.”
Justice Beth Baker wrote the opinion of the court, stating in part:
The District Court made no error of law and did not manifestly abuse its discretion. We affirm its grant of a preliminary injunction on the basis of Plaintiffs’ right to privacy claim. The case will proceed to trial, at which point the District Court will finally resolve the disputed facts and issue a final determination on the constitutional issues presented.
According to the Associated Press, Republican Sen. John Fuller remarked on the outcome of the ruling:
Republican Sen. John Fuller, who sponsored the bill, said Wednesday’s decision “is an egregious example of the hyperpartisanship of the Montana Supreme Court.” He criticized the courts for upholding the “ability to sterilize and mutilate children” and denying protection to children “from unscientific and experimental drugs and operations that have grown increasingly evident as a danger to children.”
Montana Republican Senate President-elect Matt Regier referred to the ruling as an alignment with “radical liberals.” In a video posted to X (formerly Twitter), Regier stated: “Once again our Montana Supreme Court has ruled with radical liberals at the expense of common sense.”
“Our Montanan children should not be going through irreversible transgender surgeries,” continued Regier. “Montana legislature will continue to fight against this crazy ‘wokeness’ and against Montana Judges that are activists and out-of-control.”
