In back-to-back victories for parents and children, two major federal courts upheld bans on transgender medical procedures for minors, signaling a dramatic turn in the legal war over gender ideology.
The first decision came from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit, which voted 8-2 to uphold Arkansas’s “Save Adolescents From Experimentation” (SAFE) Act. The law prohibits doctors from prescribing puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, or surgical procedures to minors and even bans referrals to out-of-state providers. A Clinton-appointed judge had previously blocked the law, but Tuesday’s ruling overturned that decision.
The court’s majority held that parents “do not have unlimited authority to make medical decisions for their children,” and that the state had a legitimate interest in protecting minors from irreversible medical harm. Importantly, the judges ruled that the law did not unlawfully discriminate against transgender people or violate the rights of medical professionals.
The Arkansas case was heavily influenced by the Supreme Court’s June ruling in U.S. v. Skermetti, which found restrictions on child transition procedures constitutional. That decision set a powerful precedent and played a central role in guiding the 8th Circuit’s judgment.
Just days earlier, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals issued a nearly identical ruling upholding Oklahoma’s SB 613, another law banning “gender-affirming care” for minors. In its opinion, the court noted “no evidence exists” that lawmakers acted out of animus toward transgender individuals and emphasized that there is “no deeply rooted tradition” granting parents a right to demand gender transition procedures for their children.
Together, these rulings represent a major turning point. Twenty-seven states now ban child transgender medical procedures, and that number could soon climb higher. With both the Supreme Court and multiple federal appellate courts affirming these laws, activists face shrinking legal ground. The dream of using the courts to impose gender ideology nationwide is quickly slipping away.
Critics of the bans argue that restricting “gender-affirming care” strips families of choice. But defenders say the laws are common-sense protections against irreversible procedures on children who may later regret them. Supporters also stress that states have always had authority to regulate medical practices, particularly when minors are involved.
The broader political implications are enormous. For years, progressive activists pushed gender ideology into schools, sports, and medicine, often framing it as the “civil rights battle of our time.” But with courts now siding against them, the momentum appears to have shifted.
The last three months may ultimately be remembered as the breaking point of the transgender movement. Between state-level bans, Supreme Court backing, and growing public resistance, the once-unchecked push for child transition procedures is running into walls at every level.
As more states prepare similar legislation, momentum is on the side of those who believe children deserve protection from irreversible medical experimentation. If the trend continues, the movement to normalize transgender surgeries for kids could soon find itself cornered — with the courts standing firmly in the way.