A landmark transgender rights case before the US Supreme Court will reportedly include testimony from doctors described as “deeply biased” and who have a “history of advocating for trans health care,” an investigation has found.

The case, which will determine whether transgender youth in Tennessee have a constitutional right to access gender-affirming healthcarehas taken testimony from doctors linked to a right-wing Christian legal group, The Guardian revealed.

The newspaper claimed that six doctors who have defended the state’s ban on gender-affirming care for minors have a “history of advocating for trans health care”, while five of them have been “reprimanded or discounted” by judges in previous cases because of their backgrounds.

Four of the doctors have been linked to the legal group, with the newspaper claiming they have “profited” from testifying against gender-affirming care.

In addition, Dr Paul Hruz, Dr James Cantor and Dr Michael Laidlaw have little or no experience treating trans children, it is claimed. In a 2017 deposition, Hruz swore, “I don’t knowingly treat transgender people.”

In a 2022 case in Alabama, a judge noted that Cantor had never diagnosed or treated adolescent gender dysphoria and had no knowledge of the treatment methods used in the state’s clinics, giving his testimony “very little weight”.

In 2023, a federal judge in Arkansas said Hruz “testified more from a religious doctrinal standpoint rather than what is required of experts,” The Guardian reported. Judges in North Carolina and Florida were also critical of him.

The federal judge in Tennessee who initially blocked the ban in the US v. Skrmetti case described Cantor and Hruz as having a “deficiency in their experience,” adding that their arguments were “minimally persuasive.”

Caroline Ciccone, a former deputy assistant secretary at the US Department of Health and Human Services, told The Guardian that the case rests on “junk science”, describing the evidence as “unscientific, biased testimony from a small group of doctors who stand far outside the medical the mainstream”.

She went on to say: “The testimony of these so-called experts has already been discredited by the courts. It’s very telling that they can’t come up with anything better.”

What is the case USA v. Skrmetti about?

USA v. Skrmetti will rule on the legality of a bill that would ban transgender people from receiving gender-affirming medical care in Tennessee. Jonathan Skrmetti is a state prosecutor.

The bill would deny anyone under the age of 18 in the state the right to gender-affirming health care, including puberty blockers. It would also put doctors who provide such care to minors at risk of legal action.

Tennessee is one of 24 across the U.S. to pass laws restricting trans health care for youth, though two are currently blocked by the courts.

The bill has been heavily criticized and several families, supported by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) sued the state in April 2023 to prevent the bill from passing.

Although the ban was initially blocked by courts, it was upheld on appeal in September 2023. The ACLU described the decision as “beyond disappointing”.

The Supreme Court, which has a conservative majority, agreed to hear the case in June, and it will be heard on December 4. While the outcome will specifically affect people in Tennessee, it will likely set a legal precedent for similar laws across the country.

Samantha Williams, of Nashville, one of the parents who brought the case for her transgender daughter’s teenage daughter, said it was “incredibly painful” to see her child suffer as a consequence of the proposed legislation.

“We have a confident, happy daughter now who is free to be herself and she is thriving,” Williams added ACLUadding that a ban on trans health care could force them to leave Tennessee.

Williams’ daughter added: “I don’t even want to think about having to go back to the dark place I was in before I was able to come out and access the care that my doctors prescribed for me. I want this law to be struck down like that I can continue to get the care I need, in discussions with my parents and my doctors, and have the freedom to live my life and do the things I enjoy.”

Share your thoughts! Let us know in the comments below and remember to keep the conversation respectful.