Emotions Run High as Trial Resumes Over Gender Transition of Minors

ACLU brings army of lawyers into battle in Arkansas court

Fairfax County mother Stacy Langton (L) protests the school district's pro-transgender policies and "gender-affirming care" outside a Fairfax County School Board meeting in Falls Church, Va., on Nov. 3, 2022. Terri Wu/The Epoch Times

The national debate over transgender medical treatment for minors has raged with white-hot intensity in rallies, online rants, and prominent news coverage.

But as a pivotal trial on the once-obscure topic enters its final phase on Nov. 28, a federal judge is tasked with taking a cool, level-headed approach to the controversial issue.

District Court Judge James Moody Jr. is considering whether to invalidate the first U.S. statewide ban on transgender procedures for minors.

Following a month-long recess in a trial that began in October, testimony is expected to last until Dec. 2 in U.S. District Court, Little Rock, Arkansas.

Activists are expected to show up at the courthouse, organizers said.

A transgender activist wearing all black stands near detransition demonstrators in Anaheim, Calif., on Oct. 8, 2022. John Fredricks/The Epoch Times

The closely-watched case could greatly influence how America responds to a small but rapidly widening pool of families and children in turmoil over gender identity. Fueling the phenomenon is the widespread teaching of radical gender ideology in public school classrooms across the nation.

During the first half of the trial, Moody heard from witnesses who are opposed to the law, known as the Arkansas Save Adolescents From Experimentation (SAFE) Act.

That law prohibits “gender-transition procedures,” puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgeries, from being used on patients younger than 18. It has been on hold since its passage in 2021.

But the law inspired similar legislation in a number of other states, including Ohio, where hearings were held on a version of the SAFE Act earlier this month. Meanwhile, other states, such as California, passed laws supporting the use of these procedures for young people.

Science Versus Legal Eagles

Claiming that the SAFE Act is unconstitutional, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) sued state officials on behalf of four minors and their families. They contend that the procedures are beneficial for children suffering from “gender dysphoria,” persistent dissatisfaction with one’s gender.

Now Moody will hear from witnesses presented by the Arkansas attorney general in defense of the SAFE Act.

Throughout the trial, the four lawyers representing the Attorney General’s Office (AGO) sat in “the well”  facing off against an army of ACLU lawyers. At least nine ACLU attorneys filled seats at the main counsel table, with some rotating into those positions from nearby seats.

Ohio attorney Mike Allen, a former prosecutor who hosts a radio talk show on station 700 WLW in Cincinnati, said the number of lawyers might create a perception that the ACLU has an advantage. However, he suspects that with a case of this magnitude the AGO likely has multiple additional lawyers working behind the scenes.

The SAFE Act’s lead sponsor, Arkansas Rep. Robin Lundstrum (R-Elm Spring) isn’t intimidated by the ACLU’s show of force.

“I don’t think the AG’s office is outgunned,” she told The Epoch Times. “I think science is just the science. It isn’t a matter of showing how many attorneys you can beat your chest with. The facts are simply the facts—and it boils down to this: You shouldn’t mutilate children.”

An ACLU spokeswoman did not respond to The Epoch Times’ request for comment.

Supporters, Opponents Line Up

Witnesses who testified for the ACLU have described the medical procedures as “gender-affirming care” to alleviate severe dysphoria, which can be associated with debilitating depression.

ACLU witnesses said puberty blockers are the most common medical treatments, but even those aren’t used often.

Cross-sex hormones are even more rarely used in minors, and surgeries are rarest of all; those are usually “top surgeries,” or the removal of healthy breasts from girls who identify as boys.

Genital-altering operations are still generally frowned upon for minors, although witnesses testified that they were aware of a few teens who underwent these “bottom surgeries.”

The ACLU lists many large medical groups in its corner, including the American Medical Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics.

Supporters of the SAFE Act worry that these procedures could proliferate if they’re not outlawed, resulting in infertility and other lifelong consequences that barely register on the radar of short-sighted teens and parents desperately seeking solutions for their children’s distress.

SAFE Act supporters include some gay and lesbian groups, such as Gays Against Groomers, which is planning to make its presence known at some point during the trial.

Jaimee Michell, a lesbian who is president of that group, objects to the “LGBT community” label. She says that the “LGB’s”—lesbians, gays and bisexuals—often have little in common with the “T’s,” or transgenders. Her group has been called “transphobic” and “anti-trans” for its stance against “the sexualization, indoctrination and medicalization of children.”

Michell is vehemently opposed to medical procedures being used for gender transitions of children.

“They should be banned completely,” Michell said. “We believe that the doctors that perform these surgeries and prescribe these drugs should be jailed. They should be done on no child under 18.”

She said a case could be made to delay the procedures until age 25, when most people’s brains are more mature, “because there are young adults that are getting these procedures that deeply regret them.”

Still, because the age of 18 is considered adulthood in America, that probably would be the age at which the procedures will be allowed, Michell said.

She lamented that opposition to the procedures seems to align with political ideology; leftists are in favor of them, but people who are politically conservative are against them, Michell said.

Arkansas Rep. Robin Lundstrum, a Republican who sponsored the nation's first law to ban medical gender-transition procedures for minors, speaks at a legislative session on Feb. 15, 2022. Courtesy of Robin Lundstrum

‘Important’ Legislation

Arkansas Sen. Alan Clark (R-Lonsdale) called the SAFE Act “one of the most important pieces of legislation that we have passed” during his nearly 10 years in the state legislature.

Clark said he became concerned about these procedures after hearing about them from constituents. He originally crafted a bill similar to Lundstrum in late 2020, but threw his support to Lundstrum in 2021 after seeing that her version was “more comprehensive” than his was.

He said it’s hard to find a middle ground with people who oppose the SAFE Act.

“I think they’re terribly wrong, and I think they’re hurting kids; they think I’m terribly wrong, and they think I’m hurting kids,” Clark said.

Clark said he was disappointed and surprised when Gov. Asa Hutchinson vetoed the SAFE Act—and not because he’s a fellow Republican.

He perceived that medical associations heavily swayed the governor’s decision. Clark said he asked Hutchinson if he talked to various other groups. The governor said he hadn’t, according to Clark.

“The views he took in seem to be somewhat one-sided,” Clark said.

The Epoch Times was unable to reach Hutchinson for comment.

But Hutchinson was unable to seek re-election because of term limits. Sarah Huckabee Sanders was elected governor and Rutledge will serve as lieutenant governor.

Attorneys push a cart laden with files in the complex case of Brandt v. Rutledge, which challenges the constitutionality of an Arkansas law banning transgender medical treatments for minors, on Oct. 17, 2022. Janice Hisle/The Epoch Times

Attorney General Digs In

Rutledge emailed a statement expressing her commitment to the court battle over Lundstrum’s bill.

“As attorney general, I am wholeheartedly defending the SAFE Act; it is my hope that parents and children will be empowered by this information and avoid these permanent, life-altering procedures or medications for children,” Rutledge said.

She emphasized that the law does not impede transgender-identifying children from receiving mental health care—a point that Rutledge believes has been lost amid the debate.

Those children “are still able to receive counseling services or medications for psychiatric diagnoses, just as any other child would,” she said.

“The state is protecting children from undergoing experimental surgeries and treatments for the purpose of gender transition,” Rutledge said.

“The SAFE Act protects children from life-altering, permanent decisions that they may desire to make as an underage child but could regret as an adult; no law in Arkansas prevents someone from making these decisions as an adult.”

In court records, the ACLU has provided dozens of statements from transgender adults, including some who underwent procedures as youths, attesting to their happy, productive lives and the beneficial effects of the treatments.

Those statements contrast sharply with affidavits from “detransitioners” who support the SAFE Act and describe lifelong regret and medical complications.

After the judge weighs all of the evidence, including the forthcoming testimony, Lundstrum expects that his decision will be appealed by the losing side—and that the case would likely reach the U.S. Supreme Court, which could be years in the future.

“This is a marathon,” Lundstrum said. “Sooner or later, the adults are going to have to come in the room and look at what’s best for children. And mutilating children is never the right thing to do.”