In Moe v. Yost, (OH Com. Pl., Aug. 6, 2024), an Ohio state trial court held that Ohio's ban on surgical or hormonal treatment of minors for gender dysphoria does not violate the equal protection or due process clause of the 14th Amendment, or the Ohio constitution's single subject rule, due course of law clause or its Health Care Freedom Amendment. The court said in part:
25. The State of Ohio has a legitimate government interest in protecting the health and safety of its citizens.
26. The Court finds that upon weighing the evidence received at trial, the Health Care Ban is rationally related to this interest. It is limited to minors. Moreover, the medical care banned carries with it undeniable risk and permanent outcomes. Indeed, countries once confident in the administration of gender affirming care to minors are now reversing their position as a result of the significant inconsistencies in results and potential side effects of the care. Thus, there can be no doubt that the Health Care Ban is neither arbitrary nor unreasonable.
The court thus vacated the temporary restraining order previously entered in the case.
The ACLU announced that it would file an immediate appeal of the decision.
