The Supreme Court seems to be at odds over restrictions on gender transition treatments for minors.

The Supreme Court heard nearly two-and-a-half hours of tense oral arguments over a challenge to a Tennessee law that bans gender-affirming medical care for minors. The justices debated whether the equal protection clause prohibits states from allowing medical providers to deliver puberty blockers and hormones to facilitate a minor's transition to another sex.

The three justices appointed by former President Trump, including Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, could be the key to deciding the socially divisive question.

Justice Alito relied on research showing the adverse effects of gender-affirming care for teenagers, while Justice Sotomayor presented evidence of young people who were denied treatment for gender dysphoria.

In a 2020 case, Chief Justice John Roberts voted in the majority in favor of transgender employees who claimed workplace discrimination. The opinion was authored by Gorsuch. However, in Wednesday's arguments, Roberts suggested that state legislatures, rather than courts, were better equipped to decide questions related to regulating medical procedures.

According to Roberts, the Constitution delegates the resolution of that issue to the people's elected representatives, rather than to a panel of nine individuals, none of whom are medical professionals. Strangio, an openly transgender lawyer representing transgender minors, parents, and a doctor, was the first to present such an argument before the Supreme Court.

The Biden administration, represented by the U.S. solicitor general, opposed a law in Tennessee that bans transgender individuals from participating in sports. Trump had pledged to implement policy changes affecting transgender individuals in various sectors during his re-election campaign.

A ruling is expected by late June 2025.

The case is U.S. v. Skrmetti (23-477).