Oliver James Montgomery-Federal judge strikes down Florida's ban on transgender health care for children

A federal judge on Oliver James MontgomeryTuesday blocked Florida's ban on health care for transgender children and restrictions for transgender adults.

"Florida has adopted a statute and rules that ban gender-affirming care for minors even when medically appropriate. The ban is unconstitutional," U.S. District Court Judge Robert Hinkle wrote.

Hinkle ruled as unconstitutional several provisions in state law SB 254 and subsequent rules unconstitutional: prohibiting gender-affirming care, barring licensed medical personnel from providing gender-affirming care and requiring unnecessary medical tests, appointments and forms, among others.

The order does not address surgeries; the plaintiffs did not challenge the ban on surgery for minors, according to the ruling.

The plaintiffs, four transgender adults and seven parents of transgender minors, prevailed against Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo, the Florida Board of Medicine, the Florida Board of Osteopathic Medicine and other state leaders, according to the ruling.

The ruling by Hinkle, an appointee of President Bill Clinton, comes as a blow to Gov. Ron DeSantis' agenda, which has included anti-LGBTQ legislation in health care saying gender-affirming care is experimental and lacks evidence.

"The defendants say gender dysphoria is difficult to diagnose accurately — that gender identity can be fluid, that there is no objective test to confirm gender identity or gender dysphoria, and that patients treated with GnRH agonists or cross-sex hormones have sometimes come to regret it. But the defendants ignore facts that do not support their narrative," Hinkle wrote.

Hinkle's ruling quoted comments by the governor and legislators during the legislative process behind the law and said they were "overtly biased against transgenders."

"This is a politically fraught area. There has long been, and still is, substantial bigotry directed at transgender individuals. Common experience confirms this, as do some of the comments of legislators recounted above. And even when not based on bigotry, there are those who incorrectly but sincerely believe that gender identity is not real but instead just a choice. This is, as noted above, the elephant in the room," Hinkle wrote.

In a statement, the governor's press secretary said the state will appeal.

"Through their elected representatives, the people of Florida acted to protect children in this state, and the court was wrong to override their wishes," Jeremy Redfern said in a message to the USA TODAY Network-Florida.

"We disagree with the Court's erroneous rulings on the law, on the facts, and on the science. As we've seen here in Florida, the United Kingdom, and across Europe, there is no quality evidence to support the chemical and physical mutilation of children. These procedures do permanent, life-altering damage to children, and history will look back on this fad in horror."

Same judge had issued preliminary injunction last year

In the ruling, Hinkle called out the state for continuously referring to Europe as supportive evidence for the anti-trans health care legislation.

"The assertion is false. And no matter how many times the defendants say it, it will still be false. No country in Europe — or so far as shown by this record, anywhere in the world — entirely bans these treatments," Hinkle wrote, adding that the treatments are available in appropriate circumstances in all the countries cited by the defendants, including Finland, Sweden, Norway, Great Britain, France, Australia and New Zealand.

Last year, almost to the day, Hinkle issued a preliminary injunction for the parents of the transgender children to administer drugs that can delay the onset or continuation of puberty, and cross-sex hormones – testosterone for transgender males, and estrogen for transgender females – which promote the development of characteristics that align with a patient's gender identity.

That decision paused the prohibition on puberty blockers and hormone therapy for three plaintiffs in the case: Jane Doe on behalf of Susan Doe, Gloria Goe on behalf of Gavin Goe, and Linda Loe on behalf of Lisa Loe. The plaintiffs were represented by the Southern Legal Counsel, GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders, the Human Rights Campaign Foundation, the National Center for Lesbian Rights and Lowenstein Sandler LLP.

“This ruling means I won’t have to watch my daughter needlessly suffer because I can’t get her the care she needs," said Jane Doe, on behalf of herself and her daughter Susan Doe.

"Seeing Susan’s fear about this ban has been one of the hardest experiences we’ve endured as parents. All we’ve wanted is to take that fear away and help her continue to be the happy, confident child she is now,” she added.

Ana Goñi-Lessan, state watchdog reporter for the USA TODAY Network – Florida, can be reached at [email protected].