法院现在是“针对跨性别人士的党派项目的一名愿意的参与者，他在密歇根大学的法学教授辩称，最近的美国最高法院裁决田纳西州坚持田纳西州对未成年人的“性别求助”护理的禁令是“显然是歧视[Ory]……在6月18日的某个地方，该公司可能适用于成人，并在18月18日对成年人进行了调查。志愿者国家可以禁止对非印第安人（包括“激素治疗”和青春期阻滞剂）的性别照顾，并且这样的禁令“不受第14条修正案的平等保护条款的审查。 take.Litman said Skrmetti “crystallizes” the fact that the SCOTUS conservative majority “is no longer operating as a neutral arbiter of law but as a willing participant in a partisan project targeting transgender people and other vulnerable groups.”She said the majority decision “collapses under scrutiny: the very same treatments remain legal for cisgender minors with other conditions, such as precocious puberty, but are banned when prescribed对于性别烦躁不安。”“顺式女孩[…]可以得到青春期的阻滞剂和荷尔蒙，但跨性别男孩不能。” Litman补充说。 “So that’s obviously discrimination on the basis of gender identity.”Litman further claimed Skrmetti “opens up” the possibility of states banning gender-affirming procedures for adults — since Justice Clarence Thomas had invoked “irreversible risks and other things.”MORE: Fire professors who oppose ‘gender-affirming care,’ Harvard faculty chair saysThe conservative bloc’s “motivations” for the decision were due to Litman继续说道：“长期对性别不合格，对错误信息的易感性”和“导致社会变革道德恐慌的'父权制承诺”。