The Supreme Court’s decision about a Tennessee law banning gender-affirming medical care for trans youth will determine how strongly the equal protection clause protects trans people.

Last month, the Supreme Court heard arguments on whether banning essential health care for trans youth is constitutional. What the justices (and lawmakers in many states) probably don't realize is that they're putting teenage lives at risk when they increase anti-trans measures.

A decision in Tennessee’s favor would pave the way for courts to uphold broader bans on gender-affirming care in the future. “There really is much more at stake,” says Katie Eyer, who teaches anti-discrimination law at Rutgers University, “including potentially the ability of people of any age to effectively get [gender] care in the United States.”

The 19th explains that the stakes in United States v. Skrmetti are even higher than most Americans realize. If the court rules to keep the ban on gender-affirming care in place, the consequences could be wide-reaching.

The Supreme Court is hearing a landmark case over whether state bans on certain gender-affirming medical treatments for minors violate the Constitution.

The state's justices agreed with a lower court judge who found the law likely violates the state's constitutional right to privacy.

The Montana Supreme Court is continuing to block a law that sought to ban gender-affirming medical care for minors while it goes through the courts