Robed Tyrants Abuse the Law to Shield Pro-Transgender Medical Charlatans From Accountability

Robed tyrants in the federal judiciary based in Illinois successfully blocked Florida’s attorney general from applying Florida laws in Florida state court to protect Florida families from deceptive practices regarding transgender medical interventions.

Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier, a Republican, sued the World Professional Association for Transgender Health, the Endocrine Society, and the American Academy of Pediatrics in December for deceiving the public about sex-rejecting procedures. He claimed these organizations violated Florida statutes against deceptive practices, racketeering, and monopolies.

Uthmeier noted the “rapid rise” in young people diagnosed with gender dysphoria (the painful and persistent condition of identifying with the gender opposite one’s sex) and the trend of encouraging therapy and counseling rather than experimental medical interventions to help resolve this distress. The Department of Health and Human Services has concluded that there is little evidence of positive impacts from transgender medical interventions on minors, but it found many documented harms.

The attorney general argued that WPATH, the Endocrine Society, and AAP have “financial incentives” to recommend “a treatment protocol that irreversibly alters children’s bodies to conform to their anxieties.”

While these nonprofit entities claim to represent medical professionals and to uphold medical standards, their advocacy for chemical castration and mutilation in the false name of “gender-affirming care” has not only eroded their own reputations but also irreparably harmed children and families across the country. Uthmeier makes an extremely strong case against these charlatans, so they resorted to a rather unusual tactic.

Transgender Activists Flee to Federal Court

The American Academy of Pediatrics, which is based in Illinois, sued Uthmeier in Illinois federal court, claiming retaliation on its free speech rights. AAP asked U.S. District Judge Matthew F. Kennelly, an appointee of President Bill Clinton, to issue a temporary injunction blocking Uthmeier’s lawsuit in Florida state court.

To call such a move unusual would be an understatement. In Younger v. Harris (1971), the Supreme Court ruled that federal courts should refrain from exercising jurisdiction over federal constitutional claims that seek to interfere with state proceedings, except in narrow circumstances. The Supreme Court recognized a “narrow” exception when “the state proceeding is motivated by a desire to harass or is conducted in bad faith.”

Kennelly ruled that Uthmeier conducted his lawsuit in bad faith, and issued a temporary injunction to block the lawsuit. Uthmeier appealed, and two of the three judges on a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit agreed with the lower court. (President Barack Obama appointed Judge David Hamilton and President Joe Biden appointed Judge Candace Rae Jackson-Akiwumi.)

Hamilton and Jackson-Akiwumi ruled that Uthmeier “appeared to have filed the enforcement action with no reasonable expectation of success.” Kennelly ruled that Uthmeier had sued AAP in bad faith, citing a delay in the attorney general serving the academy with a lawsuit, the supposed weakness of Uthmeier’s claims, and Uthmeier’s “inflammatory public comments.” The judge claimed that, since AAP and the other defendants are nonprofits, they are somehow immune from antitrust and consumer protection liability.

A Powerful Dissent

Yet Judge Michael Scudder, an appointee of President Donald Trump, dissented. He noted that the exception to Younger’s general rule is extremely narrow.

“Uthmeier’s claims are not so plainly lacking merit that we should infer bad faith,” he wrote.

“Make no mistake about the legal magnitude of what is at stake here,” Scudder added. “A federal court in Illinois has enjoined a state’s chief legal officer from proceeding in state court, all because it doubts the merits of his state law claims.”

“The implications are grave,” he warned. “It is hard to see why future state defendants will not turn to federal court whenever they think a state complaint warrants dismissal and a public comment suggests ‘bad faith.'”

Similarly, Uthmeier addressed Kennelly’s claims in a motion asking the full 7th Circuit to rehear the case. Uthmeier noted that his office had served AAP well within the deadline of 120 days; that Florida’s consumer protection and antitrust laws apply to nonprofits as well as for-profit companies; and that federal courts have rejected the notion that “inflammatory statements” are enough to prove “bad faith.”

Ultimately, AAP and Uthmeier will resolve the issues in the case “at trial—in Florida. Neither the Seventh Circuit nor the Illinois district court have any business making themselves the factfinders.”

Uthmeier Prevails—For Now

Likely for this reason, the 7th Circuit reversed the panel’s decision Wednesday, allowing Uthmeier’s case to proceed in Florida courts while the eleven judges on the circuit court consider AAP’s lawsuit against Uthmeier.

The 7th Circuit’s reversal is a key win for federalism—and for sanity.

The American Academy of Pediatrics, WPATH, and the Endocrine Society have boosted grotesque “treatments” that leave patients stunted, scarred, and infertile. It’s high time these medical charlatans face accountability for promoting the dubious effectiveness of these interventions while the real harms are obvious.