A federal judge has temporarily blocked an Idaho law that would have barred transgender inmates from accessing hormone therapy while incarcerated. While more extensive legal challenges to the law are pending, Chief U.S. District Judge David Nye’s decision on Tuesday permits transgender inmates to continue receiving hormone treatment. Two transgender women, Katie Heredia and Rose Mills, filed a lawsuit, claiming that House Bill 668 violated their constitutional rights.
The plaintiffs, represented by the ACLU of Idaho and the national American Civil Liberties Union, argued that Idaho’s ban on hormone therapy for transgender inmates constituted cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment. They further argued that the law’s implementation would result in severe emotional distress and potentially irreversible harm for transgender individuals who rely on these treatments to manage gender dysphoria.
The Ruling
Judge Nye’s decision to grant a preliminary injunction against the law applies narrowly to transgender inmates in Idaho prisons. The ruling does not extend to other provisions of the law, which also restricts access to gender-affirming care for individuals on Medicaid, state employees using state health insurance, and patients seeking treatment in public hospitals. Crucially, the judge’s ruling does not halt the law’s ban on gender-affirming surgeries, which remains in effect for all Idaho residents.
In his written opinion, Judge Nye underscored the significance of the plaintiffs’ claims of irreparable harm, stating that denying them access to hormone therapy could lead to increased anxiety, depression, and emotional distress. He pointed out that the state provided little medical testimony or evidence to support its claims that banning hormone therapy was necessary to protect individuals from potential harm. “At this stage, the Court has little information about the medical testimony on which the legislature relied,” Nye wrote.
As a result, Nye concluded that the harm to transgender inmates outweighed the state’s concerns, and the court ordered that hormone treatments should continue for inmates diagnosed with gender dysphoria. He further noted that the ruling could be broadened to cover all transgender inmates in Idaho prisons, not just the plaintiffs in the case, as the lawsuit may proceed as a class-action suit.
Plaintiffs’ Response
The two plaintiffs in the lawsuit, Heredia and Mills, both issued statements following the judge’s decision, expressing relief and a sense of duty in challenging the law. “I’m not in this for recognition,” said Heredia. “We are just normal people who happen to be trans. We have medical conditions and deserve access to medical treatment.” Mills echoed similar sentiments and emphasized the humanity of those who were subject to the law. “We really are human beings who just want to be treated like everybody else,” she said. “This decision was not people-led; it was just a few people who decided that, and the public needs to know that.”
The ruling was met with mixed reactions. While transgender advocacy groups and allies hailed it as a victory for human rights, conservative groups supporting the law criticized the court’s intervention, arguing that the state has the right to regulate the use of public funds for medical treatments.
A spokesperson for Idaho Attorney General Raúl Labrador declined to comment on the case. The state had previously argued that the law was necessary to protect individuals from the risks associated with hormone treatments, though the court found those arguments unconvincing.
The Broader Legal Landscape
Idaho’s law, passed in March 2023, is part of a wave of legislation across the U.S. aimed at restricting access to gender-affirming care, particularly for transgender youth and individuals reliant on state-funded health programs. House Bill 668, also known as the “No Funds for Gender Transition Act,” prohibits the use of public funds for hormone therapy and surgeries related to gender dysphoria for incarcerated individuals, Medicaid recipients, and state employees.
The class action lawsuit filed by the ACLU of Idaho at the end of June specifically challenges the portion of the law that affects incarcerated individuals diagnosed with gender dysphoria. Under the Eighth Amendment, prisoners have the right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment, which the plaintiffs argue includes the denial of medically necessary treatments like hormone therapy.
The case has also drawn attention due to Idaho’s history with transgender rights litigation. In 2022, the state was ordered to pay over $2.5 million to a transgender inmate who successfully sued for being denied gender-affirming surgery. That case set a significant precedent for the rights of transgender individuals in Idaho’s correctional system.
Hormone Therapy and Gender Dysphoria
Hormone therapy is a widely recognized treatment for gender dysphoria, a condition where an individual’s gender identity does not align with their assigned sex at birth. Medical professionals, including the American Medical Association and the American Psychological Association, have long advocated for access to hormone therapy as a critical component of care for transgender individuals. For many, hormone therapy alleviates the distress associated with gender dysphoria, helping them align their physical characteristics with their gender identity.
In Idaho, Centurion, the healthcare provider for the Idaho Department of Correction, had been providing hormone therapy to inmates diagnosed with gender dysphoria before House Bill 668 went into effect. According to Centurion’s chief medical officer, John May, between 60 and 70 inmates in Idaho prisons have been diagnosed with gender dysphoria, and 54 of them were receiving hormone therapy before the law’s implementation. The healthcare provider had begun tapering off treatments for these individuals as the July 1 deadline approached.
The Ongoing Battle for Transgender Rights in Idaho
Idaho has been at the forefront of legal battles over transgender rights in recent years, with multiple high-profile cases drawing national attention. In addition to the lawsuit over House Bill 668, another case involving transgender individuals on Medicaid is currently making its way through the courts. Two transgender residents filed that case, which challenges the denial of coverage for gender-affirming surgeries and claims discrimination in violation of federal law. A decision in that case is still pending.
Governor Brad Little has also been vocal in his opposition to transgender rights, particularly regarding sports and education. In 2020, Little signed House Bill 500, which made Idaho the first state to ban transgender women and girls from competing in women’s sports. A federal court blocked that law, known as the “Fairness in Women’s Sports Act,” due to legal challenges.
More recently, in response to the Biden administration’s expansion of Title IX protections to include gender identity and sexual orientation, Little signed an executive order challenging the federal government’s interpretation of the civil rights law. Title IX, which prohibits sex-based discrimination in educational programs receiving federal funding, has long been a battleground for debates over transgender rights, particularly in the context of school sports and access to facilities like bathrooms and locker rooms.
Idaho’s stance on transgender issues is emblematic of a broader national trend, with states like Florida, Texas, and Arkansas also enacting laws aimed at curbing access to gender-affirming care and limiting the rights of transgender individuals.
What’s Next?
The future of Idaho’s transgender care ban remains uncertain. While Judge Nye’s ruling provides temporary relief for transgender inmates, the broader constitutional questions surrounding House Bill 668 have yet to be fully resolved. The case will continue to make its way through the courts, and additional legal challenges may arise as more transgender individuals step forward to assert their rights.
For now, transgender inmates in Idaho can continue receiving hormone therapy, a crucial lifeline for managing gender dysphoria. However, the road ahead remains long and fraught with legal and political battles that will shape the future of transgender rights in the state.
As these cases unfold, it is clear that Idaho will remain a key battleground in the fight for transgender rights, with implications that could reverberate across the country. Transgender individuals, their families, and their allies will be watching closely as the courts weigh in on these critical issues.
The Bottom Line
The struggle for transgender rights in Idaho is far from over. While the recent court ruling represents a victory for transgender inmates, the broader battle over access to gender-affirming care and equal treatment under the law continues. Transgender individuals, particularly those in vulnerable situations such as incarceration, remain at the center of legal and political debates that have profound implications for their lives and well-being. As Idaho’s legal battles play out, the importance of empathy, understanding, and a commitment to human rights cannot be overstated.
