Last week, Idaho Family Policy Center – along with thirty other state-based family policy councils – filed a brief in support of a recently enacted Tennessee law that protects children from sex change drugs and procedures.
The Tennessee law was allowed to take effect earlier this month after the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals temporarily overruled a lower court order blocking the state from enforcing some of its provisions.
The appeals court plans to resolve the case and issue a final order by the end of September.
The amicus brief from IFPC and other family policy councils argues that under the U.S. Constitution, state legislatures retain the power to enact laws protecting children from the harmful and sterilizing effects of puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and sex reassignment surgeries.
“In terms of our history and legal tradition, it cannot seriously be maintained that a mother or father has the right to jeopardize or injure a child’s procreative physiology or commission removal of healthy anatomy,” the amicus brief said.
At this time, more than twenty states have passed laws protecting children from experimental medical interventions performed under the guise of “gender-affirming care.”
That includes Idaho, where Idaho Family Policy Center partnered with Rep. Bruce Skaug (R-Nampa) and Sen. Lori Den Hartog (R-Meridian) in championing the Vulnerable Child Protection Act this year.
Our new law goes into effect on January 1, 2024, although it is facing a federal court challenge brought by the ACLU.
“We’re deeply disappointed that the ACLU would waste taxpayer money and resources with this frivolous legal challenge,” Blaine Conzatti, president of Idaho Family Policy Center, said when the ACLU filed the lawsuit in June.
“The evidence is clear: these so-called ‘gender-affirming treatments’ wreak havoc on developing bodies,” he said. “Laws like these are necessary to protect gender-confused children from medically unnecessary drugs and procedures that result in lifelong harms.”
“The Vulnerable Child Protection Act is constitutionally, scientifically, and morally sound law, and we remain confident that it will be vindicated in the courts,” Conzatti concluded.