SCOTUS Transgender Arguments Will Impact Charitable Tax Exemption

 

Here is a quick reminder.  The Supreme Court hears oral arguments this morning at 10:00 am in U.S. v. Skrmetti.  The case has important Civil Society implications, especially in Tennessee, because the outcome may impact property and income tax exemption for charities involved in transgender rights and gender affirming care. If the respondents lose, the case could impact transgender rights and gender affirming health care organizations the way Students for Fair Admissions has impacted DEI nonprofits.  More than a year ago we reported that legislators in Tennessee were challenging Vanderbilt's property tax exemption because it engaged in gender affirming care as part of its educational and charitable mission.  Here is a brief recap of the case from SCOTUSblog:

The case challenges a Tennessee law that bans the use of puberty blockers and hormone therapy for transgender teens. The dispute could be one of the most significant decisions of the term. And with similar laws in 23 other states, the court’s ruling is likely to have broader implications for the protections available to transgender people across the country.

Enacted in 2023, the Tennessee law – known as SB1 – declares that the state has a “compelling interest in encouraging minors to appreciate their sex, particularly as they undergo puberty.” SB1 prohibits doctors from performing surgery (a ban not at issue before the justices) or prescribing puberty blockers and hormone therapy to affirm the gender identity of transgender teens. The law, however, allows the use of the same treatments for other purposes. For example, puberty blockers may be used to treat young people experiencing early puberty, while hormone therapy can be used for young people for whom puberty is delayed.

The plaintiffs won a preliminary injunction against the law in the district court, which held that the law was sex discrimination (ruling by a Trump appointee who issued long and detailed findings of facts). The 6^th Circuit concluded there was no sex discrimination, and without considering the factual record, upheld the law under rational basis review.

You can listen to argument live here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/live.aspx.  The recording will be posted here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_audio/2024.

darryll k. jones