COLUMBUS, Ohio – DECEMBER 13: Supporters of the transgender community protest outside the Senate chamber and repeatedly shouted “shame” as they heard lawmakers had passed HB 68, which would prohibit gender-affirming care for transgender youth and prohibit transgender children from participating on sports teams, on December 13, 2023, at the Statehouse in Columbus, Ohio. (Photo by Graham Stokes for the Ohio Capital Journal. Only repost photo with the original article.)
The Ohio Supreme Court will decide the constitutionality of an Ohio law banning gender-affirming care for transgender youth.
Last Tuesday, the court heard oral arguments in the contested case Ohio House Bill 68 and a decision will be made in the coming months. The court consists of six Republicans and one Democratic judge.
The bill, which prevents transgender youths from starting hormone therapy and puberty-blocking drugs, went into effect in April 2024 after the Ohio House and Senate voted to override Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine’s veto.
“HB 68 prevents parents from accessing treatments that they and their children believe are necessary, recommended by doctors treating minors, and available to minors with other medical conditions,” said Jordan Bock, representing the plaintiffs in the case.
The American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Ohio and the Goodwin law firm filed the lawsuit in 2024 on behalf of two transgender girls and their families. One of the girls was already using puberty blocking drugs, the other, at the time of filing the lawsuit, was meeting with doctors about starting the trial.
“Grace doubted that death would allow her to come back as a girl,” Bock said. “And Madeline Moe told her parents that she wanted to die and just be reborn. But once they were able to live as girls, they blossomed.”
Franklin County Common Pleas Court dismissed the plaintiff’s complaint to the court in August 2024, allowing the ban on gender-affirming care to come into force. The ACLU of Ohio appealed the decision, and the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals ordered a constant injunction against the law in March 2025.
Gender-affirming care is supported by: every major medical organization in the United States.
“This does not mean that there is a right answer in every specific case, but it is the parents who have the right to decide, taking into account the girls’ situation, whether treatment is appropriate,” Bock said.
Bok argued that the ban was contradictory the Healthcare Freedom Amendment Ohio voters approved it in 2011.
Ohio Solicitor general Marthura Sridharan, however, argued that children did not have a constitutional right to gender reassignment procedures.
“Parents have the freedom to decide how their children are treated,” she said during oral arguments. “Even if there are some benefits to treating gender dysphoria with gender reassignment medications, well, that doesn’t outweigh the significant risks and significant costs.”
Sridharan mentioned Chloe Cole, who started transitioning at age 12 and started transitioning at age 16.
“Children have written off their fertility forever,” Sridharan said. “There are other serious physical consequences, and there are significant known and unknown psychological risks.”
Ohio Democratic Supreme Court Justice Jennifer Brunner recalled how DeWine spent time talking to families of youthful transgender people before vetoing the bill.
“I only ask about this because the evidence given to children has shown that there are children who are actually harming themselves by not caring about how they behave because of gender dysphoria,” she said.
Follow Ohio Capital Journal reporter Megan Henry on X Or on Bluesky.
YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.
