Federal Judge Victoria Calvert has permanently blocked a portion of Georgia’s law banning prisoners from receiving gender-affirming care, ruling on Dec. 3 that the state’s blanket ban on hormone therapy violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.
Signed by Gov. Brian Kemp in May and implemented in July, the law bars prisoners from receiving hormone therapy or other treatment for gender dysphoria — even when a doctor deems it medically necessary. It prohibits the state from funding such care and blocks transgender inmates from paying for it themselves. Non-transgender prisoners, however, may still receive hormone therapy and other gender-affirming treatments so long as the care is not related to gender transition.
Five prisoners diagnosed with gender dysphoria sued over the law, noting they were acting on behalf of nearly 300 transgender people in Georgia’s prisons. They warned that the ban risks catastrophic health consequences, including cardiovascular complications, cognitive decline, and severe psychological distress that can lead to suicide or self-harm.
“The Court finds that there is no genuine dispute of fact that gender dysphoria is a serious medical need,” Calvert wrote. “Plaintiffs, through their experts, have presented evidence that a blanket ban on hormone therapy constitutes grossly inadequate care for gender dysphoria and risks imminent injury.”
Calvert stressed that the ruling does not entitle every inmate to hormone therapy, but requires that medical decisions be made by physicians based on individual need rather than blanket policy.
She added that inmates still face a “heavy burden” if they wish to challenge a doctor’s determination that hormone therapy is not medically necessary. The Court, she wrote, is not creating a “one-way constitutional ratchet,” noting that prison doctors may taper patients off treatment if the decision is grounded in medical judgment.
The Georgia Department of Corrections has previously acknowledged, in response to past lawsuits by the Center for Constitutional Rights, that transgender people in its custody are entitled to “constitutionally appropriate” medical care.
Chinyere Ezie, a senior staff attorney at the Center for Constitutional Rights, welcomed the ruling, calling it a “powerful reminder that the Constitution applies to everyone, including trans people in prison.”
The summer of 1985, I turned 16. In Belgium. While I lived primarily in rural, red Florida, summers sometimes had me staying with Dad's family. At the time, my Army father was assigned to the American embassy in Brussels. With $100 in American Express "travelers' cheques," our go-to global currency of the time, it was a thrilling summer.
In Florida, I would've spent those months mopping floors or working the grill at a mall job. Instead, I had urban mass transit and could drink in bars. Granted, my Euro '80s summer was more Depeche Mode than anything as explicit as Call Me By Your Name. Though virginal, at least I passed for something seedier one afternoon.
Dutch authorities say Veronica Clifford-Carlos failed to prove she faces a "legitimate risk of persecution" or threat of physical harm in the United States.
A Dutch court has upheld a ruling rejecting a U.S. transgender woman's bid for asylum, finding she does not face a substantial enough threat of persecution in her home country.
Veronica Clifford-Carlos, a 28-year-old visual artist from California, said she once believed she’d build a life in the United States, but felt compelled to flee after receiving death threats over her gender identity.
Clifford-Carlos left the United States -- leaving behind friends and her dog -- and flew to the Netherlands with her father. Upon arrival, she applied for asylum, telling authorities about the abuse she endured in the United States, particularly after President Donald Trump’s re-election last fall.
The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that cisgender students may repeatedly and intentionally misgender transgender classmates, invalidating an Ohio school district's policies that sought to stop the practice.
In a 10-7 decision, the court found that Olentangy Local School District's prohibition on using "gendered language they know is contrary to the other student's identity," including pronouns and honorifics, infringes on the rights of students who believe there are only two genders.
The challenged policies include an anti-harassment rule prohibiting "discriminatory harassment" or bullying based on gender identity and other protected traits that "places a student or school employee in reasonable fear of harm," interferes with education or work, or disrupts school operations, according to The Associated Press.
These are challenging times for news organizations. And yet it’s crucial we stay active and provide vital resources and information to both our local readers and the world. So won’t you please take a moment and consider supporting Metro Weekly with a membership? For as little as $5 a month, you can help ensure Metro Weekly magazine and MetroWeekly.com remain free, viable resources as we provide the best, most diverse, culturally-resonant LGBTQ coverage in both the D.C. region and around the world. Memberships come with exclusive perks and discounts, your own personal digital delivery of each week’s magazine (and an archive), access to our Member's Lounge when it launches this fall, and exclusive members-only items like Metro Weekly Membership Mugs and Tote Bags! Check out all our membership levels here and please join us today!
You must be logged in to post a comment.