The ruling marks the latest decision in a legal challenge the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana filed against the ban, enacted last spring amid a national push by GOP-led legislatures to curb LGBTQ+ rights.

A federal appeals court on Tuesday allowed Indiana’s ban on gender-affirming care to go into effect, removing a temporary injunction a judge issued last year.

The ruling was handed down by a panel of justices on the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago. It marked the latest decision in a legal challenge the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana filed against the ban, enacted last spring amid a national push by GOP-led legislatures to curb LGBTQ+ rights.

  • LufyCZ@lemmy.world
    0·
    9 months ago

    Let’s take it from the other side.

    Should I have the liberty to not pay taxes? The liberty to dump my garbage into a lake? The liberty to burn a forest down?

    You’re flexing words into meanings that suit you, but if they actually were possible to be interpreted this widely, it’d be chaos.

    • idiomaddict@feddit.de
      0·
      9 months ago

      Those each hurt third parties, which is a very good reason to restrict a liberty. This one doesn’t, so I don’t really see how it fits with the others.

      • LufyCZ@lemmy.world
        0·
        9 months ago

        But that’s an opinion, isn’t it? We all don’t have the same opinions, that’s why politics is a thing?

        Maybe transcare hurts someone’s feelings, you might not agree with that, but we live in a world where their opinion matters, too, for better (or in this case) for worse.

        • idiomaddict@feddit.de
          0·
          9 months ago

          Feelings being hurt does not meet the standard of restriction outside of abuse or harassment, which this is not. That’s not a political opinion, and anyone telling you it is is trying to distort your view of reality. Being trans, gay, or having any immutable characteristic cannot possibly have the same effect on people as targeted abuse or harassment.