United States v. Skrmetti

605 U.S. _____ (2025)

From our private database of 47,100+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

United States v. Skrmetti

United States Supreme Court
605 U.S. _____ (2025)

United States v. Skrmetti

Facts

In 2023, Tennessee enacted SB1, which prohibited certain medical treatments for transgender minors. Among other things, SB1 barred healthcare providers from prescribing puberty blockers or hormones to address gender dysphoria, gender identity disorder, or gender incongruence. SB1 did not prevent healthcare providers from administering treatments to individuals aged 18 and older, nor did it prevent the use of puberty blockers or hormones in minors to treat other conditions. In enacting SB1, the Tennessee legislature cited the potential negative physical and psychological effects of the barred medical treatments. The legislature believed that minors were not mature enough to appreciate those consequences and found that gender dysphoria in minors could be resolved by less-invasive approaches. The legislature also noted a lack of certainty about the treatments’ effects, changing guidelines regarding the treatments, and increased restrictions on the treatments in other countries. Three transgender minors, their parents, and a doctor (the challengers) (plaintiffs) sued Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti (defendant) in federal court to prevent enforcement of SB1, asserting that SB1 violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The challengers described the negative effects of gender dysphoria on transgender minors and their families and presented evidence that multiple professional organizations considered the banned treatments to be appropriate and medically necessary. The United States (plaintiff) intervened in the action to challenge SB1. The district court enjoined SB1’s ban on puberty blockers and hormone treatments, finding that SB1 discriminated based on sex and transgender status and likely would not survive intermediate-scrutiny review. The appellate court reversed, finding that transgender individuals were not a suspect class and that SB1 did not discriminate based on sex. The appellate court thus analyzed SB1 using rational-basis review and held that SB1 met that standard. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Roberts, C.J.)

Concurrence (Thomas, J.)

Concurrence (Barrett, J.)

Concurrence (Alito, J.)

Dissent (Sotomayor, J.)

Dissent (Kagan, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 905,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 905,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,100 briefs, keyed to 995 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 905,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 47,100 briefs - keyed to 995 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership