FL-Federal judge blocks Florida banning child sex changes, declares 'gender identity is real'

[Anti Federalist]

Federal judge blocks Florida banning child sex changes, declares 'gender identity is real'

https://thepostmillennial.com/break...es-gender-identity-is-real?utm_campaign=64483

"The elephant in the room should be noted at the outset. Gender identity is real. The record makes this clear."

Libby Emmons Brooklyn NY Jun 6, 2023

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis and his state legislature have made it clear that they are fully opposed to child sex changes in the state, enacting a law prohibiting the act, but now a federal judge has blocked the ban on such mutilating medical procedures that was due to take effect.

The block is temporary, but it stops the state from preventing doctors from giving minors puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones in service to gender transition. Puberty blockers are used to halt the natural development of children into adults and can cause lifelong, irreversible changes, such as stunted growth.

The application of cross-sex hormones, testosterone in girls and estrogen in boys also results in lifelong changes, such as body and facial hair in girls, along with a lower voice, and gynecomastia in boys, or the growth of female-appearing breasts.

Judge Robert Hinkle made the decision, issuing a temporary injunction so that three children who are already in the process of undergoing sex changes may be permitted to continue.

"The elephant in the room should be noted at the outset. Gender identity is real. The record makes this clear," Hinkle said. In issuing the temporary injunction, he used language that is clearly skewed toward the views of the plaintiffs in the case, notably the term "cisgender," which is a derogatory term for people who do not identify as transgender.

"Despite the defense admissions," Hinkle said, "there are those who believe that cisgender individuals properly adhere to their natal sex and that transgender individuals have inappropriately chosen a contrary gender identity, male or female, just as one might choose whether to read Shakespeare or Grisham."

Parents of the children brought suit against the state, wanting to continue the supposed transitioning of their children to appear as the opposite sex. Hinkle asserted that gender identity is not a choice and said that those who believe it is "tend to disapprove all things transgender and so oppose medical care that supports a person’s transgender existence."

He claimed the children were at risk if they were not allowed to continue treatment. That risk is commonly believed to be the suicide of the child who isn't permitted to undergo a sex change.

"There are risks attendant to not using these treatments, including the risk — in some instances, the near certainty — of anxiety and depression and even suicidal ideation. The challenged statute ignores the benefits that many patients realize from these treatments and the substantial risk posed by foregoing the treatments," Hinkle proclaimed.

He claimed that the risk of allowing a child to grow into an adult naturally was greater than the risk of irreversible medical intervention.

DeSantis has been outspoken against these cultural influences, and has famously proclaimed that "Florida is where woke goes to die."

 

[GlennwaldSnowdenAssanged]

The only way to know for sure what is right is to wait for the judges rulings.

 

[PAF]

The only way to know for sure what is right is to wait for the judges rulings.

Unfortunately, yep. Because they're idiots.

 

[69360]

I would think if/when this makes it to scotus, the current makeup of the court would uphold the law. Also states rights. DeSantis will not back down.

 

[johnwk]

Federal Judge Hinkle gives green light in Fl. to child mutilation procedure

.



See: Judge's blistering ruling halts Florida's ban on gender-affirming care for minors

"In a strongly worded ruling, a federal judge said that minors who filed suit against Florida's gender-affirming care bans would "suffer irreparable harm." An appeal to the injunction is expected."

If I were the Governor of Florida, I would hold a press conference and tell the sexual deviant federal judge Hinkle to keep his nose out of a subject matter reserved by the States under the Tenth Amendment, and recently affirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization

JWK

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States, respectively, or to the people.

 

[johnwk]

.

The nitwits at NPR (which ought to be known as National Propaganda Radio) point out Judge Hinkle called the ban, "an exercise in politics, not good medicine." And he said it amounts to purposeful discrimination.”

But the fact is, the very purpose of criminal law is to discriminate, e.g., every state has laws prohibiting the sale of cigarettes and alcohol to minors. And the Florida law is directed at minors. Additionally, there is nothing in the federal Constitution prohibiting state laws making distinctions based upon sex other than with respect to voting. Hinkle needs to keep his nose out of a State regulatory matter.

Why on earth would anyone encourage an irreversible mutilation procedure to be performed on a minor when therapy ought to be pursued until the subject is mature enough to make such a life altering change?

.

 

[johnwk]

Is the "big guy" getting a piece of the child mutilation action?​

.
See: Transgender Surgery Poised To Become A $5 Billion Industry

and then see:

HHS secretary signals sex-change surgeries for minors should be covered by taxpayers: Report

I got this gut feeling that the “big guy” is somehow getting his piece of the action for promoting taxpayer financed, child mutilation surgery.
.
JWK

We are here today and gone tomorrow, but what is most important is what we do in between, and is what our children will inherit and remember us by.

 

[Occam's Banana]

Florida's laws preventing child sex changes, drag show for kids struck down by federal judge
The law doesn't define what constitutes a "child", "lewd conduct", or "lewd exposure of prosthetic or imitation genitals or breasts," Presnell wrote in his ruling.
https://thepostmillennial.com/flori...ag-show-for-kids-struck-down-by-federal-judge
Sara Higdon (24 June 2023)

This Month, two US District Judges have blocked three Florida bills intended to prevent the sexualization of children. On Friday, US District Judge Gregory Presnell blocked a bill to ban child attendance of drag shows.

The judge said the bill that banning minors from attending "obscene live performances" is too broad of a category and violates of the performer's first amendment rights. "Florida already has statutes that provide such protection (from obscene performances). Rather, this statute is specifically designed to suppress the speech of drag queen performers,” he stated.

The law would ban children from attending performances that "depicts or simulates nudity, sexual conduct, sexual excitement, specific sexual activities, ... lewd conduct, or the lewd exposure of prosthetic or imitation genitals or breasts."

Presnell wrote in his ruling that the law doesn't define what constitutes a "child", "lewd conduct", or "lewd exposure of prosthetic or imitation genitals or breasts." The same goes for what a "live performance" is.

A live performance "could conceivably range from a sold-out burlesque show to a skit at a backyard family barbecue," he reportedly said.

Governor DeSantis' press secretary, Jeremy Redfern said in reaction to the ruling, "Of course, it’s constitutional to prevent the sexualization of children by limiting access to adult live performances."

On Wednesday, US District Judge Robert Hinkle declared that a law that banned state Medicaid to pay for procedures related to treating gender dysphoria saying it violates the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, the federal Medicaid statute, and the Affordable Care Act's prohibition of discrimination based on a persons sex.

On June 6, the same Judge ordered a preliminary judgment to prevent Florida from implementing a ban on sex changes for three individuals under the age of 18. "I find that the plaintiffs’ motivation is love for their children and the desire to achieve the best possible treatment for them. This is not the State’s motivation," the ruling states.

"We obviously disagree with the judge's ruling," Redfern responded to the declaration. "We will continue fighting against the rogue elements in the medical establishment that push ideology over evidence and protect against mutilating our kids."

According to Reuters, Florida is the fifth state to have a law that bans child sex changes blocked by US District Courts. Alabama, Arkansas, Indiana, and Oklahoma are the others, while 21 states total have passed similar laws.

On Tuesday, a US District Judge in Arkansas ruled the state's ban on child sex changes unconstitutional for violations of the Fourteenth and First Amendments.

 

[johnwk]

Josef Rudolf Mengele, the father of today's child mutilation sex surgery

.

Seems that Josef Rudolf Mengele comes to mind when talking about child mutilation procedures, falsely portrayed today as gender affirming care for minors.

.

 

[johnwk]

Hinkle perpetuates lie about sex-based protection contained in Fourteenth Amendment

.
In Judge Hinkle’s written opinion we find: “The ban on treating minors with puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones violates the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause”.

The truth is the clause in question (“No State shall . . . deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws…”) requires an equal application of the laws when applied to “any person” in its jurisdiction. Its text does not, nor was it ever intended to, forbid distinctions in law based upon sex. This is the real “elephant” in the room contrary Judge Hinkle’s pontificated “elephant in the room”, and his adolescent charge of “bigotry” which he banters in his written opinion.

The irrefutable fact is, Judge Hinkle embraces and perpetuates the subjugation of the Fourteenth Amendment's limitations by pretending it is a bar to distinctions in state laws based upon sex.

As judge Hinkle wrote in his opinion . . . "Any proponent of the challenged rule and statute should put up or shut up."


So, Judge Hinkle needs to document where in the text of the Fourteenth Amendment, or its documented legislative intent, it forbids state laws which make distinctions based upon sex. How about judge Hinkle, putting up or shutting up?

JWK


What makes a Supreme Court opinion legitimate is when it is in harmony with the text of our Constitution and its documented legislative intent which gives context to its text.
.