Judge Blocks Ohio’s Anti-Transgender Bans

metroweekly.com:

challenge the law in court last month, were likely to suffer “immediate” harm, in the form of reduced access to health care providers willing to treat their gender dysphoria, if the law — which imposes penalties on doctors who prescribe gender-affirming treatments — were to take effect.Holbrook found that, because the plaintiffs were likely to succeed in their lawsuit, it was best to issue a temporary restraining order “maintaining the status quo while the Court can more thoroughly review the evidence and argument following a full hearing.”Holbrook also noted that the whole law had to be blocked because lawmakers combined the bill banning gender-affirming care with a separate bill banning transgender athletes from women’s sports to gain the necessary votes to pass the Republican-controlled state legislature.In December, Ohio Republican Gov.

Mike DeWine vetoed the bill from taking effect, expressing qualms about infringing on parents’ rights to make medical decisions for their own children.

Republican lawmakers overrode that veto in January.In his emergency motion asking the Ohio Supreme Court to intervene and block Holbrook’s restraining order, Yost argued that the judge “acted beyond the scope of his powers” in issuing the two-week restraining order, which is renewable, reported the Ohio Capital Journal.Yost also argued that the statewide restraining order is too broad and not narrowly tailored to prevent specific plaintiffs from suffering alleged harms.

Yost argues the plaintiffs failed to present Holbrook with sufficient evidence that they faced immediate harm if the law were to take effect.“Statewide injunctions were once rare,” Yost wrote in his motion.