WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court rebuffed the Trump administration’s emergency petition to immediately revive its restrictions on transgender treatment for inmates in federal prisons on Wednesday.
President Trump’s team had requested the high court stay a lower court ruling blocking that policy from taking effect while litigation over it plays out, but the high court rejected it without explanation, which is standard practice for emergency applications.
Republican appointed Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas both would’ve granted Trump’s request for a stay on the lower court’s ruling against the Trump administration.
Trump has enjoyed a high success rate before the Supreme Court with emergency petitions since he returned to the White House in January of last year, though his record on merits cases has been much more mixed.
The Supreme Court typically refrains from providing a rationale for its decisions on the motions docket in order to avoid prejudging cases that may come before it on the merits docket in the future.
Its use of the motions docket has drawn criticism from the left due to the frequent victories Trump has notched with emergency petitions and the lack of an explanation about why.
Emergency decisions are often based on the balance of harm in a case.
During his first day back in office, Trump signed an executive order vowing to bring back “biological truth to the federal government,” which required federal agencies to define biological sex as immutable.
Earlier this year, the Bureau of Prisons issued a memo restricting facilities from funding transgender medications or treatments for inmates, as well as allowing prisoners to wear outfits that don’t correspond with their biological sex.
But the Trump administration claimed in court documents that the BOP’s policy change wasn’t based on the president’s executive order, but rather an independent judgment call.
There were just shy of 2,200 transgender inmates in federal prisons as of February of last year, according to data from the Osborne Association.
Backers of the suit against the administration claim there are some 1,000 transgender inmates at risk of losing treatment.
Multiple transgender inmates sued and were supported by the American Civil Liberties Union, alleging the policy flouted the Constitution’s Eighth Amendment protections against cruel and unusual punishment.
U.S. District Court for DC Judge Royce Lamberth, a Reagan appointee, concluded the Trump administration neglected to assess the impact of the policy change on transgender prisoners.
“Despite providing gender-affirming care to inmates in its custody for years, the government cites in the Program Statement zero evidence from its own medical or mental health professionals to support its conclusions,” he wrote.
The government provided no evidence that the previous plan was “ineffective or harmful,” he wrote in his ruling.
The appeals court declined the administration’s push to stay Lamberth’s ruling.
The Trump administration had accused Lamberth of enacting his “own policy judgment” with the ruling.
