Ohio Supreme Court keeps ban on gender-affirming care for transgender youth while case continues
The Ohio Supreme Court is keeping the ban on gender-affirming care for transgender youth as the case goes through litigation.
In March, the 10th District Court of Appeals partially blocked the state from enforcing House Bill 68, a ban on gender-affirming care for LGBTQ+ youth, allowing doctors to continue prescribing puberty blockers and hormone therapy.
Attorney General Dave Yost filed a motion with the high court to stay the law, or pause changes, until a full review by the justices. This was granted Tuesday.
H.B. 68 went into effect in 2024. The controversial legislation prevented LGBTQ+ minors from accessing care such as hormone blockers, hormone replacement therapy (HRT) and some mental health services.
'There is no way I'll stop fighting to protect these unprotected children,' Yost said, in part, in a statement from the March ruling.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
The law has been in court for months now, with the ACLU of Ohio arguing that it is unconstitutional and goes against parental rights and the right to bodily autonomy.
'It is a terrible shame that the Supreme Court of Ohio is permitting the state to evade compliance with the Ohio Constitution. Our clients have suffered tangible and irreparable harm during the eight months that H.B. 68 has been in place, including being denied essential health care in their home state,' Freda Levenson, ACLU legal director, said. 'The Court of Appeals was correct that H.B. 68 violates at least two separate provisions of the Ohio Constitution. We will continue to fight this extreme ban as the case goes ahead before the Supreme Court of Ohio.'
The law also prohibits trans athletes from participating in middle, high school or college athletics on teams that align with their identity.
In July 2024, parents and doctors testified to prevent the state from enforcing the ban, citing that the ban would 'deny basic human rights.'
Follow WEWS statehouse reporter Morgan Trau on Twitter and Facebook.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
6 days ago
- Yahoo
Major HRT supplier sanctioned after whistleblowers raise concerns over patient safety
A major UK supplier of menopause drug HRT has been sanctioned after whistleblowers claimed patients were being put at risk, it has emerged. A group of employees from Theramex, which supplies HRT treatments to millions of patients in the UK, wrote a letter to the pharmaceutical regulator Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry over allegations the company was not following regulatory standards and may 'jeopardise' patient safety. The whistleblowers claimed some products featured inaccurate prescribing information and failed to highlight common side effects. They claimed they had been forced to contact the regulator after their attempts to raise issues internally were brushed off. The company has now admitted it breached regulatory codes, amounting to 'bringing discredit upon, and reducing confidence in the pharmaceutical industry', according to an interim case report from the ABPI. It also failed to maintain high standards and provide accurate and up-to-date prescribing information, the report said. Theramex is a global pharmaceutical company specialising in women's health products, such as hormone replacement therapy (HRT) and fertility treatments. Theramex UK is its London-based arm. It supplies common HRT therapies including Evorel, Bijuve and Intrarosa. From April to June 2025, there were 760,000 prescriptions of Evorel and 2,748 prescriptions of Bijuve, according to data from the NHS Business Services Authority. In 2023-24, there were 2.8 million prescriptions of Evorel. One employee wrote the complaint on behalf of a group, according to the complaint published by the Prescription Medicines Code of Practice Authority, which is part of the ABPI. The complaint, filed in October 2024, said: 'We are a group of employees from various cross-functional teams at Theramex, and we are writing to express our growing concerns regarding the company's adherence to regulatory standards and the accountability of its leadership. 'While we have attempted to escalate these issues internally on numerous occasions, there has been a consistent lack of action or meaningful response, which leaves us with no choice but to seek external guidance and support.' The complaint alleged that some of Theramex's products, such as Intrarosa and Evorel, had not had their prescribing information updated. In the case of Evorel, information for health professionals was 'incomplete' and did not include information on common side effects such as uterine spasms and vaginal infection, the letter claimed. For another drug, the letter alleged that prescribing information had not been updated for five years. The complaint warned: 'This oversight can lead to healthcare professionals (HCPs) not being fully informed of potential risks, which could jeopardise patient safety.' The PMCPA panel found Theramix's 'failure to provide accurate and complete prescribing information was unacceptable'. The employees also alleged the company failed to comply with regulators for clinical trial compliance warning. 'The lack of resources within Theramex's global headquarters to ensure compliance with these standards is alarming,' it said. Finally, the letter alleged the company has a 'blame culture' that was 'deeply concerning.' In response to the complaint, Theramex UK said it took its obligations under the ABPI code of practice 'very seriously' and launched an internal investigation. It said that, although it had a process to update prescribing information, this was not sufficiently robust to ensure prescribing information was immediately updated. The pharma company acknowledged it did not meet standards concerning this allegation and admitted that, at the time of the complaint, it did not have a process in place for clinical studies. The employees' letter claimed it had tried to escalate matters to senior leaders within Theramex. The company claimed it was not aware of any of the matters having been escalated internally prior to them being reported to the regulator. As part of the sanction, Theramex must provide written confirmation that it will cease practices that breach codes, pay a charge and advertise details of the case. Theramex UK said it 'absolutely acknowledges' the recent ruling and 'respects the [regulator's] decision'. 'Of course, we remain fully committed to ensuring our practices align with the highest ethical standards and necessary steps and corrective measures have been taken,' it said.
Yahoo
17-07-2025
- Yahoo
Redistricting: Ohio must draw a new congressional map. Republicans hold all the cards
It's almost time to redraw Ohio's congressional map, and Republicans hold all the power to draw more GOP districts headed into competitive national midterm elections. Republicans control every aspect of the redistricting process in Ohio. They have a supermajority in the Ohio Legislature, which gets the first opportunity to draw a new congressional map. They hold five of the seven seats on the Ohio Redistricting Commission. And they have a 6-1 advantage at the Ohio Supreme Court, which will determine whether the map complies with anti-gerrymandering rules voters approved in 2018. And Republicans already hold two-thirds of the state's seats in Congress under the current map. The stakes are high for Republicans: the GOP holds a narrow majority in the U.S. House of Representatives, and midterm elections are historically tough for the party that holds the White House. President Donald Trump's policies on immigration, Medicaid cuts and the "big, beautiful bill" have been polarizing. Ohio is one of the only states redrawing its map before the 2026 elections. Texas is another. Other states could redraw their maps depending on the outcome of legal fights. "The nation may turn its focus to Ohio because the U.S. House of Representatives is so close," Republican strategist Mark Weaver said. "It's likely that there will be at least one more Republican from Ohio in the House of Representatives come 2027 when the new Congress takes the oath. It could be two." Asked about that pressure, a spokesperson for Speaker Matt Huffman, R-Lima, said: "The speaker is focused on delivering a durable outcome for Ohio, not on meeting external expectations." Redrawing Ohio's map offers an opportunity for Republicans to pick up a couple of seats in a state that Trump won by 11 percentage points in 2024. Last year, voters rejected a redistricting reform measure that would have given Democrats more say in the mapmaking process. Republican Gov. Mike DeWine proposed a different approach, modeled after Iowa, but that has gone nowhere. Ohio Democrats have little recourse to stop a GOP-drawn map, but they will make some noise about the process. "The Republicans have this level of single-party control in the state precisely because they have drawn maps that favored themselves," said House Minority Leader Dani Isaacsohn, D-Cincinnati. "How do we break out of single-party rule? We have to end gerrymandering. In the meantime, we have to hope and hold the majority party to account that they will respect the makeup of the state." Here's what you need to know: Why does Ohio have to draw a new congressional map? Ohio Republicans approved the state's current congressional map in 2021. But the map lasted only four years because no Democrats voted for it. Ohio's leaders must now draw a new map for the three next elections. The map also faced legal challenges. In 2022, a divided Ohio Supreme Court ruled the map was unconstitutional. Later that year, Republican leaders took the issue to the U.S. Supreme Court, which sent it back to the Ohio Supreme Court under new leadership to review. To avoid uncertainty, the map's opponents asked the court to dismiss their lawsuits. In 2024, Ohio voters rejected a new redistricting proposal to replace elected officials with a citizen commission. Democrats blame the loss on GOP-crafted ballot language that confused voters. "It's partisan politics that have prevented us from being able to have a fair redistricting plan," said Senate Minority Leader Nickie Antonio, D-Lakewood. "As long as you have people in positions of power who are legally allowed to lie to the people of Ohio about what they're even voting on, I don't know how we get a fair ballot measure." What should Ohio's congressional map look like? Ohio's current congressional delegation includes 10 Republicans and 5 Democrats. Sen. Bernie Moreno told Punchbowl News that Republicans would probably end up with a 12-3 map that "reflects the state." That would give Republicans 80% of the congressional seats in a state where Trump won 55% of the votes. Isaacsohn said Ohio should have six Republican districts, five Democratic ones and four tossups to match the state's partisan leanings. Antonio said she'd support the current map. "The 5-10 map would give some representation and some voice in Congress to the people who are looking for a Democratic representative and believe that their values line up with the Democratic platform," Antonio said. Huffman's spokesperson, in a statement, said he supports "a fair and data-driven redistricting process that accurately reflects Ohio's political landscape and provides consistency for voters. He believes input from newly elected members of the General Assembly is essential to ensure the process is representative and forward-looking." Senate President Rob McColley, R-Napoleon, could not be reached for comment. Who is on the chopping block? Republicans would love to flip the seat held by Toledo Democratic Rep. Marcy Kaptur, the nation's longest-serving congresswoman. Kaptur's 9th congressional district is the most competitive in the state and, on paper, skews Republican. Trump won the district by 6.7 percentage points in 2024 as Kaptur narrowly defeated Republican challenger Derek Merrin. A libertarian candidate in the race likely pulled votes from Merrin, too. Weaver said Kaptur was "well out of touch" with that district. "She has seen her effectiveness come and go." Isaacsohn disagreed, saying: "They've been trying to take out Marcy Kaptur for a very long time, and so far, they keep running extremist after extremist that are totally out of touch with that district." Before 2022, Kaptur's Democratic district stretched from Toledo to Cleveland and became known as "the snake on the lake" for its obvious gerrymander. Any change to Kaptur's current district would likely require dipping into Rep. Bob Latta's safe Republican district that surrounds Kaptur's. Another district to watch is the Akron-based Ohio 13th held by Democratic Rep. Emilia Sykes. The toss-up district, which includes Summit County and parts of Stark and Portage counties, is highly competitive. The map used before 2022 was notorious for slicing Summit County into multiple districts. Changing the 13th could impact the balance for nearby Republican Reps. Max Miller or Dave Joyce. If Republicans really want to push the envelope, they could go after the 1st congressional district held by Democratic Rep. Greg Landsman. That district currently stretches from Cincinnati to Warren County. Anti-gerrymandering rules require Cincinnati to be kept in one congressional district, but the race could be more competitive if the city were paired with deeper red territory. Weaver called Landsman a "very weak incumbent" who could lose his seat if Republicans perform well in 2026. Any changes to Landsman's district could impact GOP Rep. Warren Davidson's 8th, which includes Hamilton, Butler, Darke and portions of Miami counties. Trump threatened to primary Davidson for voting against the president's "big, beautiful bill." Also nearby is a district held by Rep. Mike Turner, R-Dayton. Turner has disagreed with Trump on some foreign policy and was ousted as chairman of the powerful House Intelligence Committee earlier this year. What is the deadline for approving a new congressional map? Ohio must approve a new congressional map by Nov. 30 to use in the 2026 elections. But there are other deadlines before that final one. Lawmakers have until Sept. 30 to pass a congressional map with support from at least three-fifths of lawmakers in each chamber and half of the Democrats. That's unlikely to happen if Republicans choose to increase their majority in Congress. Then, the Ohio Redistricting Commission has until Oct. 31 to pass a map with bipartisan support. That commission includes three Republican statewide officials, two Republican lawmakers and two Democratic lawmakers. The pen returns to lawmakers, who can approve a map with support from three-fifths of members and one-third of Democrats on board. The final option is for the Ohio Legislature to pass a map without any Democratic support. If Republicans take that route, they must follow some rules: they cannot "unduly" favor a political party or incumbents or "unduly" split counties, townships and municipalities. Any map approved by lawmakers will be sent to DeWine for his signature or veto. What are the rules for drawing Ohio's new map? Ohio voters approved lawmakers' anti-gerrymandering rules in 2018. These rules require districts to be compact, contiguous and in compliance with federal laws protecting against racial gerrymandering. Cities with at least 100,000 residents, including Cleveland, Cincinnati, Akron, Dayton and Toledo, cannot be split into multiple congressional districts. Columbus can be divided because its population (about 933,000 residents) exceeds the number of people in a congressional district (about 792,000 people). A "significant portion" of Columbus must be kept in the same district, which is currently the 3rd, represented by Democratic Rep. Joyce Beatty. The Ohio Supreme Court, where Republicans hold a 6-1 majority, will interpret whether the map violates any of the anti-gerrymandering rules. Democrats are pessimistic that the Ohio Supreme Court will rein in fellow Republicans. "They've (Republicans) been willing to put forward unconstitutional maps for the last four years," Isaacsohn said. "I don't see what stops them now." State government reporter Jessie Balmert can be reached at jbalmert@ or @jbalmert on X. This article originally appeared on Cincinnati Enquirer: Will Ohio GOP expand its advantage in new congressional map?
Yahoo
14-07-2025
- Yahoo
Missouri House bill ignites debate on reducing limitations
KANSAS CITY, Mo. — A Missouri House bill aimed at reducing the statute of limitations for personal injury claims is concerning for the partners at the Right Side Law Firm. 'You find individuals who have been hurt really, really bad,' said Tracey Chappell Vick, one of their managing partners. 'And so their treatment will go beyond the two-year statute of limitations that's being currently proposed.' Liberty 9-year-old battling cancer competes for national title The bill would decrease the statute of limitations from five years to two years. The bill's supporters say that it would 'help businesses thrive, reduce legal uncertainties and streamline litigation.' Chappell Vick says that she fears it will cause a backlog in our court system. 'When we are filing lawsuits within a two-year time period, I feel like we are starting to clog up the court systems,' she said. 'And that's something that we desperately do not want to do. We have enough cases in the court system, especially here in Jackson County.' House Bill 68 was introduced in the 2025 Missouri legislative session. It passed the House but never got a vote in the Senate. It's unclear if the bill will be reintroduced in the 2026 legislative session that starts on January 7. Melinda Marshall, another managing partner at Right Side, says that she has a preference after working in both Kansas and Missouri. 'We cannot help our clients in Kansas the way we can help them in Missouri,' she said. 'A lot of it has to do with the fact that they have such a short time frame in order to allow us to bring a lawsuit.' Both lawyers say that a two-year statute of limitations causes them to file suit without the evidence they'll need in their cases. Metro school districts react to new Missouri cell phone policy 'So even though you're in court quicker, you may be there two or three years longer than you should be because you're just not ready,' Marshall said. 'This bill is not giving plaintiffs' attorneys the opportunity to really flesh out what this case needs and how to really bring this case to a close,' Chappell Vick said. 'Sometimes, more often than not, it's forcing us to file a lawsuit. That's not what we want to do. And I believe that that is exactly what this bill is forcing us to do.' 25 other states have their statute of limitations set at two years. Chappell Vick says that other states should be following Missouri's lead, not the other way around. 'I believe that the way that it currently sits, we can give our clients the opportunity to finish up their treatment. We can then negotiate with the insurance companies if we need to. And if the negotiation doesn't go anywhere, our clients are fully treated and if they then need to file a lawsuit, they can then do so.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
