Judge O'Connor felt that a trial victory for the plaintiffs was probable, and wanted to prevent harm to their cause. Good on ya, sir! On New Year's Eve, a federal judge in Texas issued an injunctionagainst what has become known as the "transgender mandate." The injunction prevented enforcement of a new federal regulation issued this spring whose consequences have been hotly debated, which would have gone into effect on Jan. 1. The Becket Fund, which litigated on behalf of religious healthcare provider networks, has argued ever since the rule was promulgated that it will require many doctors to perform procedures related to gender reassignment, even on children, and even where it violates their medical judgment, let alone their religious beliefs about sex changes. The state plaintiffs in the case, who had sued alongside the providers, argued (among other things) that their state laws requiring doctors to act on their best medical judgment would be overturned by this new federal rule. They also argued that the rule would require them to provide state employees with insurance plans that cover sex reassignment procedures.
But can we please dismantle the Health and Human Services Department so we have one less blunt instrument whereby Leviathan can attempt to redefine "sex" and make us all do likewise?
No comments:
Post a Comment