In a recent decision, the Supreme Court upheld a Tennessee law that prohibits minors from accessing gender-affirming care as they transition from their sex assigned at birth. This decision has sparked a new debate in the ongoing culture war, with half of the states adopting similar bans while the other half still allow some form of gender-affirming care for teenagers.

The vote was 6-to-3, with justices divided along conservative and liberal lines.

Supporters of the law, such as state Sen. Jack Johnson, are celebrating the victory. Johnson argues that just like minors are restricted from getting tattoos, smoking, or drinking, it is necessary to regulate medical procedures to prevent irreversible consequences for kids. This includes gender-affirming care.

The legal battle over access to puberty blockers and other treatments for gender dysphoria was initiated by three teenagers and their parents in Tennessee. They argued that the ban on these treatments violates the constitutional right to equal protection under the law, as it prohibits certain treatments only for minors seeking to transition, while allowing the same medications for other medical conditions.

The ACLU, representing the challengers, highlighted that major medical associations have endorsed these treatments for teenagers with gender dysphoria. However, state Sen. Johnson points out that some countries in Western Europe have reconsidered these treatments due to potential adverse effects outweighing the benefits.

While the Supreme Court's decision is a victory for Tennessee and 24 other states, many questions remain unanswered. The implications for ongoing treatments, issues in school boards and team sports, and parental rights in determining treatments for minors are all still unresolved.