Case: Van Garderen v. Montana

This case centers around SB 99, a bill that bans evidence-based gender-affirming care for transgender minors in Montana but does not ban those same treatments for cisgender minors. The bill was set to go into effect on October 1, 2023. On May 9, 2023, two families with transgender youth—who have been diagnosed with gender dysphoria and are currently receiving gender-affirming care—and two medical providers, represented by the ACLU and Lambda Legal, filed suit in Montana's district court for Missoula County against the state of Montana and various state officials, challenging SB 99. Plaintiffs alleged that SB 99 violated their rights under the Montana Constitution, including the right to equal protection, the right of parents to direct the upbringing of their children, the right to privacy, the right to seek health, the right to dignity, and the right to freedom of speech and expression. Plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief, and attorneys’ fees. 

This case was assigned to Judge Shane Vannatta. However, on June 12, 2023, defendants moved to substitute the judge, and the case was reassigned to Judge Jason Marks on June 14, 2023. Clearinghouse is unable to determine why defendants moved to substitute the judge, but it is notable that Judge Shane Vannatta is the first openly gay judge to serve in the state of Montana.

On July 17, 2023, plaintiffs filed a motion for preliminary injunction, asking that the court enjoin defendants from enforcing SB 99 while the case proceeded. The court heard oral argument on September 18, 2023, and Judge Marks ruled on plaintiffs’ motion on September 27, 2023. Applying strict scrutiny, Judge Marks found that SB 99 likely violated the plaintiffs’ right to equal protection under Montana’s state constitution. Because the Montana Supreme Court has not yet ruled on what level of scrutiny to apply to equal rights claims brought on the basis of gender or sex, Judge Marks also analyzed the merits of plaintiffs’ equal rights claim using both middle-tier scrutiny and rational basis review. Judge Marks found that plaintiffs were likely to succeed on their claim even applying these lower levels of scrutiny. The court also found that plaintiffs were likely to succeed on their right to privacy claim. Finally, Judge Marks found that plaintiffs would suffer irreparable harm absent a preliminary injunction in two ways. First, the violation of plaintiff’s constitutional rights would constitute an irreparable harm. Second, plaintiffs had demonstrated that denying transgender youth access to gender-affirming care would place them at risk of severe psychological distress. The court found defendant’s argument that the ban was necessary to protect the health and safety of transgender youth unpersuasive, considering that the gender-affirming care at issue was the widely accepted best practice within the medical community, and the ban did not proscribe the treatments for cisgender minors. For these reasons, Judge Marks granted plaintiffs’ motion and issued a preliminary injunction, enjoining defendants from enforcing SB 99, which would have gone into effect on October 1, 2023.

On September 29, 2023, defendants appealed the district court’s decision to the Supreme Court of Montana. On December 11, 2024 Montana's Supreme Court upheld the preliminary injunction motion, finding that plaintiffs had standing to challenge this law and that the statute likely infringed on an individual's privacy rights under the state constitution. 

This case is ongoing.