Governor Gavin Newsom signed a bill into law last week that makes California a "haven" for minors from across the country who want to have sex change operations and obtain gender affirmation medications.
The new legislation, known as SB 107, will go into effect on January 1, 2023 and is expected to be implemented by January 1, 2023. This legislation prohibits disclosing medical information related to the person or entity that takes part in the gender transition process. This specific point would be contrary to the laws of states such as Texas, Alabama, Louisiana, Arizona or Idaho that impose penalties on parents who allow their children access gender affirmation medications.
Criticism of the law lies in the fact that children who want to make their gender transition could move from anywhere in the country to California, violating the laws of their home states.
The law does not establish a minimum age
Newsom stated that the law allows free "parental choice" over their children's sex change. However, Breitbart News pointed out that there is nothing in the bill that specifies that the "gender affirmation medical care" must be carried out with parental consent. It also does not detail the minimum age a child must be to qualify for surgery or pharmaceuticals.
Newsom is supported by organizations such as Equality California and Planned Parenthood, which described the law as "hopeful" and believe it will end the "criminalization of people just because of who they are."
Gender-affirming health care for Trans Youth is life-saving. Don't believe us? Read these Medical Association statements supporting Trans Youth healthcare. Thank you, @glaad for this compilation: https://t.co/OKcSJSipYo
- Equality California (@eqca) August 10, 2022
Possible conflicts with the Constitution
The bill was pushed by Sen. Scott Wiener (D), who also promoted a 2020 law that reduced penalties for adults having oral or anal sex with minors. The law apparently addressed discrimination against LGBTQ people.
Despite being signed by Newsom, there is question as to whether the law will hold up in court due to federal requirements that states recognize other states' laws when residents travel.
Wiener points out that although "it is unclear whether the law will conflict with the Constitution "amendments were made that include special clauses to avoid violations of federal law: "We may have limits under the country's Constitution, but we are going to go to the limit of what we can do."
One of the clauses included at the last minute was the "severability" clause that allows parts of a law to remain in force even if other provisions are repealed.
"A real child abduction"
The measure has generated great controversy in the Golden State. The organization Parents With Inconvenient Truths About Trans stated that the law is "a scandal," since, according to their experience with trans children, "most" of the children who will request gender affirmation treatment actually suffer from temporary gender dysphoria "typical of adolescence."
Gigi LaRue, a representative of Our Duty USA, an association of parents against gender ideology, warned of the dangers of passing the law, which could cause "lifelong health problems" in minors:
When testosterone and estrogen are administered to the opposite sex, it can cause lifelong health problems.... "Support, yes. Love, yes. Therapy that allows them to explore why they feel the way they do, yes. But this type of operation, no, because it's a real child abduction."
In the political arena, state Sen. Brian Dahle (R) noted that California will be put in a difficult position "if one parent were to support transgender surgery for a child and the other parent were to oppose it."
