Horne urges Arizona law after SCOTUS ruling on gender-affirming care

Tom Horne Superintendent | Arizona Department of Education

Supt. Tom Horne has called for Arizona to implement a law following the recent Supreme Court decision that upheld the constitutionality of prohibiting gender-affirming care for minors. This decision has sparked discussions on both scientific and policy fronts regarding the safety and efficacy of such medical treatments.

Horne emphasized, "This case carries with it the weight of fierce scientific and policy debates about the safety, efficacy, and propriety of medical treatments in an evolving field. The voices in these debates raise sincere concerns; the implications for all are profound."

In defense of Arizona's existing law that bans biological boys from competing in girls' sports, Horne stated that extensive research has been conducted into the potential harm these medical procedures could cause young people. He noted, "Because we have been in court vigorously defending Arizona’s law banning biological boys from competing in girls’ sports, we have thoroughly researched the evidence on the harm that such medical procedures do to young people."

Horne pointed out that European countries had previously allowed gender-affirming care before it was introduced in the United States and have since become aware of its long-term negative effects. "As we pointed out to the Court of Appeals in the girls’ sports case, England actually banned youth gender affirming care due to the dangers and scientific uncertainty," he said. He also mentioned Sweden's national Board of Health and Welfare's findings: "Sweden‘s national Board of Health and Welfare found that the risks of puberty blockers and hormones currently outweigh the possible benefits pretty heavily."

Further referencing the Supreme Court's stance, Horne remarked: "In upholding the Tennessee law, the United States Supreme Court stated that such treatments can lead to the minor becoming irreversibly sterile, having increased risk of disease and illness, or suffering from adverse and sometimes fatal psychological consequences." The Court also expressed concern over minors' ability to fully comprehend these consequences due to their lack of maturity.