U.S. appeals court rejects constitutional challenge to three Washington state laws regulating rights of minors, particularly minors who are transgender

U.S. appeals court rejects constitutional challenge to three Washington state laws regulating rights of minors, particularly minors who are transgender

A federal appeals court has dismissed a constitutional challenge to three Washington state laws that regulate the rights of minors, particularly those who are transgender. The decision, handed down by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on July 23, 2025, upholds the state's ability to enforce these laws, which have been the subject of ongoing legal battles.

The three laws in question are:
1. A law prohibiting doctors from providing puberty-blocking drugs or cross-sex hormones to transgender minors.
2. A restriction on transgender children from participating in women's sports in K-12 schools or colleges.
3. A restriction on birthright citizenship for children born to undocumented immigrants or parents with temporary visas.

The lawsuit, brought by various advocacy groups and individuals, argued that these laws violated the U.S. Constitution, particularly the 14th Amendment, which guarantees equal protection and due process under the law. The plaintiffs contended that the laws discriminated against transgender minors and children born to undocumented immigrants.

However, the appeals court, in a 2-1 decision, ruled that the laws do not violate the Constitution. The majority opinion, written by Judge Ronald Gould, stated that the laws are "rationally related to a legitimate state interest" and do not infringe upon the rights of the plaintiffs. Gould further argued that the laws do not target specific groups based on their gender or immigration status but rather address broader public health and safety concerns.

The dissenting judge, Patrick Bumatay, argued that the laws do infringe upon the rights of the plaintiffs and that the states lack standing to bring litigation over the order. However, his dissent did not address the issue of the injunction's scope.

This decision comes amidst a broader national debate over the rights of transgender individuals and the immigration policies of the United States. It also follows a series of legal challenges to similar laws in other states, with varying outcomes.

The ruling is expected to have significant implications for the ongoing legal battles over these laws and may set a precedent for future challenges. However, it is important to note that this decision does not end the legal fight, and the Trump administration can still appeal the case to the Supreme Court.

References:
[1] https://thebuckeyeflame.com/2025/07/23/ohio-supreme-court-to-consider-ban-on-gender-affirming-care-for-minors/
[2] https://washingtonstatestandard.com/2025/07/23/appeals-court-maintains-was-nationwide-block-of-birthright-citizenship-order/
[3] https://san.com/cc/appeals-court-blocks-trumps-attempt-to-end-birthright-citizenship/