NASHVILLE (BP) — The Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC) has filed an amicus brief in an upcoming Supreme Court case which will decide the constitutionality of a Tennessee law banning gender transition procedures or so-called “gender affirming care” for minors.

The ERLC filed the brief Tuesday (Oct. 15) in conjunction with the Tennessee Baptist Mission Board.

The case, United States v. Skrmetti, involves three transgender teenagers and the Biden administration suing Tennessee officials in order to bar the state from enforcing the ban. Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti is named as the defendant in the case.                  

Brent Leatherwood, president of the ERLC, said the amicus brief supporting the Tennessee law could play a key role in this “monumental” case.

“The Supreme Court’s decision will have a monumental impact on the safety and security of children vulnerable to a harmful gender ideology, not just in the state of Tennessee, but across the nation,” Leatherwood said in a press release.

“Harmful procedures like hormone therapy, puberty blockers and surgery impose lifelong, devastating consequences on their well-being. An amicus brief allows the ERLC to put these convictions and arguments in front of our justices and in many cases, can sway the outcome of the case.”

Randy Davis, executive director of the Tennessee Baptist Mission Board, also spoke on the importance of the case for his state.

“Tennessee Baptists stand behind the state of Tennessee in its protection of vulnerable lives and refusal to succumb to a culture confused on matters of gender,” Davis said in the release.

“The Baptist Faith & Message 2000 rightly proclaims, ‘Man is the special creation of God, made in His own image. He created them male and female as the crowning work of His creation. The gift of gender is thus part of the goodness of God’s creation.’ To that end, it would be devastating for the Supreme Court to rule in a manner that strikes down this law that sets an important precedent and protects children.”

The Tennessee law in question is Senate Bill 1 (S.B. 1), which passed into law on March 1, 2023.

It prevents healthcare providers from prescribing medication or performing procedures on minors in order to “transition” them to an identity opposite of their biological sex.

Additionally, the new law also required doctors to cease all current gender procedures on minors by March 31, 2024.

After the legislation was passed, the three transgender teenagers along with their parents and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) quickly filed a lawsuit alleging Tennessee violated the Equal Protection Clause and the Due Process Clause of the 14^th Amendment.

The Biden administration’s Department of Justice joined the suit arguing the U.S. has a vested national interest in preventing the law from taking effect. 

The plaintiffs allege the law intentionally targets transgender individuals and is therefore sex-based discrimination that interferes with the parents’ ability to make medical decisions for their children. 

The lawsuit was originally filed as L.W. v. Skrmetti, and the Tennessee District Court ruled that the plaintiffs did not have legal right to challenge the ban on gender-transition surgeries because they had not indicated that they wanted to undergo such surgeries.

The judge then issued an injunction placing the other aspects of Tennessee’s ban (hormone therapy and puberty-blockers) on hold while litigation continued.

The state later appealed the injunction to the U.S. Court of Appeals where the judges rendered a split-decision ruling that the law is not discriminatory on the basis of sex, and permitted it to take effect. The appeals court combined the Skrmetti case with a similar case in Kentucky, which they also deemed to be constitutional.

The challengers went to the Supreme Court, who announced in June that they had agreed to hear the case.

The High Court began their latest term this month, but a date for oral arguments in the Skrmetti case has yet to be set. A decision in the case would likely come in May or June of 2025.

The ERLC explained the case may be heavily influenced by the Supreme Court’s decision in the case of Bostock v. Clayton County, which ruled that the definition of “sex” under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act includes sexual orientation and gender identity. 

The entity wrote that the Skrmetti case presents a new opportunity for the court to clarify the extent of the Bostock ruling or limit its scope, and will also delve into important questions regarding parental rights.

Currently, 25 states have laws in effect that prohibit doctors from performing gender transition surgeries and procedures on minors, and New Hampshire will become the 26th state on Jan. 1, 2025.

Many of these laws are currently undergoing litigation, and the outcome of the Skrmetti will determine if they can remain in place.

The ERLC’s brief explains that Tennessee’s ban must be upheld because so-called “gender affirming care” goes against fundamental truths that Southern Baptists believe and is deeply harmful to the well-being of children.  

“Amici submit this brief because this case implicates fundamental truths that Southern Baptists hold dear, which coincide with the legal arguments,” the brief states.

“First, that biological sex is not only immutable but also part of the goodness of God’s creation. Second, that children are a blessing from the Lord. Third, that government has a responsibility to restrain evil and promote the good of its people, including the young and vulnerable. Accordingly, amici have an interest in ensuring that governments protect children’s developing healthy bodies, including by prohibiting medical procedures that refashion healthy bodies based on the children’s perceived or desired gender.”

The full brief can be read here.

(EDITOR’S NOTE — Timothy Cockes is a writer in Nashville.)