Cross v. State
Affirmed a lower court’s preliminary injunction against Montana’s ban on gender-affirming care for minors. Applying strict scrutiny, the state high court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that the ban likely violates the state constitution’s express right to privacy.
Related Commentary
What This Year's U.S. Supreme Court Term Means for State Courts
The Court’s decisions on religious liberties, transgender rights, gun restrictions, and more have significant implications for state lawmakers, courts, and constitutions.
Are State Courts More Protective of Transgender People than Federal Courts?
As the U.S. Supreme Court deals another blow to trans rights, a new survey finds that almost 55 percent of related state cases from 2022 to 2024 had a positive impact on trans lives.
How Far Does the Kansas Constitution Go in Protecting Bodily Autonomy and Dignity?
Two recent transgender rights cases may help answer this question.
What this Year’s SCOTUS Term Means for State Courts
Several rulings will impact the power of state courts and the cases that come before them.