#

Attorneys challenging Tennesse’s law banning sex-change medical procedures for children before the U.S. Supreme Court Wednesday struggled to make their case before skeptical judges. If the court upholds Tennessee’s law, that would add more support to a similar law here in New Hampshire.

The Biden administration’s Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar joined ACLU attorney Chase Strangio in challenging the law. They suffered a major setback when Strangio was forced to admit a commonly-used argument regarding sex-change treatment for minors and suicide is in fact false.

Both the Biden administration and the ACLU argue Tennessee’s ban, which is similar to the ban Gov. Chris Sununu signed into law this summer, violates the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution. They argue that because hormone treatments can be given to minors struggling with the impacts of puberty to advance their sexual development — such as giving males testosterone — but these treatments can’t be used to change a child’s sex — giving testosterone to females — it is discriminating on the basis of sex.

Without those treatments, children deemed to be suffering from gender dysphoria will be at risk of suicide, according to Prelogar.

“Left untreated, gender dysphoria can result in severe physical and psychological harms. Those harms include ‘debilitating distress, depression, impairment of function, substance use, self-surgery to alter one’s genitals or secondary sex characteristics, self-injurious behaviors, and even suicide,’” Prelogar wrote in her brief to the Court. 

Alito confronted Prelogar with multiple studies that found no significant change in suicide rates, including research from Sweden and Great Britain. For example, he cited the United Kingdom’s Cass Review, which found little evidence to further the viewpoint that the benefits of transgender treatment are greater than the risks.

“I wonder if you would like to stand by the statement in your position, or if you think it would now be appropriate to modify that and withdraw your statement?” Alito asked.

Chase Strangio, the ACLU lawyer who was born a biological woman and now identifies as a man, conceded the facts show suicide among untreated transgender adolescents does not happen, but claimed untreated transgender kids think about suicide.

“Completed suicide is thankfully and admittedly rare,” Strangio said. 

The actual rarity of transgender-identifying adolescents committing suicide hasn’t stopped Democrats from using the trope to argue in favor of surgically altering children or allowing schools to socially transition kids behind their parent’s back.

New Hampshire Democratic Party Chairman Ray Buckley claimed transgender kids would kill themselves if schools were legally barred from hiding transitioning efforts from parents.

“[The children] will be kicked out or beaten (to death) or commit suicide,” Buckley wrote on social media.

Strangio also didn’t help the cause by appearing on CNN and suggesting that children as young as two years old know they were born in the wrong bodies.

“These are doctors who are wanting to treat their patients in the best way that they know how, based on the best available evidence to us,” Strangio said of doctors who give hormone treatments to young children. “And these are young people who may have known since they were two years old exactly who they are, who suffered for six or seven years before they had any relief.”

Given the Court’s 6-3 conservative majority, it is likely to side with Tennessee and uphold the ban. The conservative justices generally expressed skepticism that the medical science surrounding transgender adolescents is settled as more data comes in from Europe showing the harms of using surgery and hormone therapy on children, contradicting the current state of medicine in America.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh said the fact that the medical communities in progressive European countries are expressing reservations should give leaders in America pause.

“If it’s evolving like that and changing, and England’s pulling back and Sweden’s pulling back, it strikes me as a pretty heavy yellow light, if not red light, for this court,” Kavanaugh said.

The United States Supreme Court is set to hear arguments over whether states have the right to ban gender reassignment medical procedures for minors. It’s a case that could impact New Hampshire’s newly-passed law.

The American Civil Liberties Union and the Biden administration want to overturn the transgender surgery ban put in place by Tennessee. It outlaws doctors giving puberty-blocking medications to children whose parents identify them as transgender. The law also bans doctors from performing procedures like vaginoplasties, the surgical creation of a vagina from other parts of the body; phalloplasty, the surgical creation of a penis; and metoidioplasty, the transformation of a clitoris to a penis, on children.

Supporters of those bans note the surgeries are permanently disfiguring and difficult — if not impossible — to entirely reverse. Earlier this year, the Biden administration released a policy statement declaring its opposition to sex-change surgery for minors.

That was a reversal from the same Biden health officials whose original draft guidelines would have lowered the age minimums to 14 for hormonal treatments, 15 for mastectomies, 16 for breast augmentation or facial surgeries, and 17 for genital surgeries or hysterectomies.

In response to those aggressive actions by the federal government, states began passing laws banning the extreme procedures from being performed on children. Tennessee’s ban is similar to the law Gov. Chris Sununu signed this summer, HB 619.

“HB 619 ensures that life-altering, irreversible surgeries will not be performed on children,” Sununu said in his signing statement.

If the Biden administration and the ACLU are successful at the Supreme Court arguing against the Tennessee ban, HB 619 could be in trouble. However, conservative lawyer Ian Huyett with Cornerstone, said even if Tennessee wins, New Hampshire could still lose.

“The Tennessee case is about whether a state can ban gender transition therapy for minors under the federal Equal Protection Clause,” Huyett told NHJournal. “New Hampshire has a narrower ban on genital reassignment surgery on minors, RSA 332-M, that is similar to Tennessee’s law. A victory for Tennessee in this case could insulate that law from federal Equal Protection Clause challenges.

“However, our state courts in New Hampshire are the final authority on the New Hampshire Constitution—and they do not need to follow the federal courts. Our state courts could still hold that the state Constitution provides a right to chemically castrate minors, or a right to go into the locker rooms of the opposite sex. That could then be the law in New Hampshire for 10 years, regardless of what the US Supreme Court says,” according to Huyett.

The ACLU lawyer who will be arguing the case before the Supreme Court claimed Tuesday that children as young as two years old can “know” they were born in the wrong bodies.

“Our argument is that it treats people differently because of their sex,” attorney Chase Strangio — who was born female and now lives as a male — told CNN’s Jake Tapper. “These are young people who may have known since they were two years old who they are … It’s not the kids who are consenting to the treatment, it’s the parents who are consenting to the treatment.”

Strangio claimed years of medical data show gender reassignment surgeries and puberty blockers are good for transgender children.

“This is medical treatment that provides critical benefits to adolescents that need it,” Strangio said. 

However, the data does not actually show that children need gender reassignment. Great Britain banned puberty blockers for children after the National Health Service commissioned Dr. Hilary Cass to perform an independent review of medical treatment for children who identify as transgender. The Cass Report found a shocking lack of data to back up the life-changing treatments given to children.

“The reality is that we have no good evidence on the long-term outcomes of interventions to manage gender-related distress,” the Cass Report states. 

Several other European countries, including Sweden, Norway, and France, are taking a more restrictive approach to gender-reassignment procedures as more data become available.

In the U.S., however, studies that raise questions about gender reassignment have been suppressed or left unpublished due to politics.

For example, the World Professional Association for Transgender Health, or WPATH, is the group that developed the SOC-8 guidelines for medical care for children for the federal Health and Human Services agency. 

WPATH is the group that recommends castrations as a medical treatment for men who identify as eunuchs. Even still, WPATH’s first draft of the SOC-8 guidelines included age limits for children seeking gender reassignment treatment. But Biden’s Surgeon General Rachel Levine, a transgender woman, reportedly pressured WPATH to remove age restrictions from the SOC-8 draft, court records show. 

WPATH was caught hiding evidence that did not support gender reassignment surgeries and other treatments for children in other instances, according to court records.

Dr. Karen Robinson, research team leader from Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine working on SOC-8, reported to HHS that WPATH was suppressing her research because it found there is no real evidence gender reassignment surgeries actually helped children. 

Robinson first reported to HHS that her researcher looked at the reported benefits of gender reassignment procedures and “found little to no evidence about children and adolescents.” At the same time she told HHS that WPATH was blocking her from publishing the report.

“[WPATH is] trying to restrict our ability to publish,” Robinson wrote to HHS.

WPATH was simply enforcing its policy that all SOC-8 researchers write articles that “use the Data for the benefit of advancing transgender health in a positive manner,” according to court records.

The ‘Soccer Dad’ season is over for Marc Jacques.

The father of a male Kearsarge High School athlete who’s a star in girls competitions, Jacques has agreed to start his prison sentence on a federal conviction for distributing child sex abuse images.

Marc Jacques was sentenced to five years in prison back in September. But using concerns over his child’s challenges as a male who identifies as female, he was given until December to turn himself in. Part of the reason was to let him attend his child Maelle Jacques’ girls soccer games.

When parents learned a man convicted of child porn charges was attending their daughters’ soccer matches, they immediately expressed alarm. They were even more upset when the elder Jacques was busted last month for allegedly accessing more child sex abuse images online while he was on supervised, pre-incarceration release.

Last week, Marc Jacques waived his violation hearing and agreed to begin his five-year prison term.

Maelle Jacques, a biological boy, dominated the girls track competition earlier this year. Maelle Jacques’ participation on the Kearsarge girl’s soccer team caused several teams to forfeit games as the district openly flouts a state law banning biological boys from girl’s sports.

Initially, girls on opposing teams and their families were concerned about the competitive imbalance presented by Maelle Jacques playing goalie, but they were later outraged to learn that Marc Jacques was attending the games despite his status as a convicted sex offender.

Marc Jacques used his child’s sexual identity to successfully plead for more free time before his prison sentence, telling United States District Court Judge Paul Barbadoro that Maelle Jacques needed him at the games.

“Maelle is going to need me to be present and in attendance to support [Maelle] and protect [Maelle] in the face of the fears [Maelle] will have of what could happen to [Maelle] on the athletic fields,” Marc Jacques wrote in a letter to the court.

Kearsarge officials knew about the conviction and sentence, but they allowed Marc Jacques onto school property to attend games anyway. They also said nothing to opposing teams when Kearsarge went on the road, either. Superintendent John Fortney said in a letter to parents there was no legal way for the district to stop Marc Jacques from attending the games.

“Because these events are open to the public, the district may restrict access only in the case of a prior civil no trespass order, or active court order. In general terms, we cannot selectively determine who may or may not attend any event,” Fortney stated. 

Whether or not the opposing school administrators had advance knowledge of Marc Jacques’ conviction, none of them seemed able or willing to put a stop to his presence.

Hopkinton school officials only found out about Marc Jacques’ conviction when Hillsboro-Deering mother Betsy Harington alerted them hours before Kearsarge and Marc Jacques were set to be in Hopkinton last month.

While Hopkinton did contact police to be present at that game, no steps appear to have been taken to either block Marc Jacques from the game, or alert Hopkinton parents. 

Officials at Bishop Brady High School in Concord were aware of Marc Jacques and his conviction before their game last month with Kearsarge. But Bishop Brady girls and their parents were advised by the Roman Catholic Diocese not to boycott the game. In fact, the girls and their families were told to play against Kearsarge so as not to discriminate against Maelle Jacques.