Moe v. Yost

Citations

• 2025 Ohio 914

Syllabus

R.C. 3129.02(A)(2) — GENDER-AFFIRMING CARE — MEDICAL CARE OF CHILDREN — PARENTS' FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS — DUE COURSE OF LAW — HEALTH CARE FREEDOM AMENDMENT: The trial court erred in applying rational basis review to parents' claim that R.C. 3129.02(A)(2)'s categorical ban on gender-affirming pharmaceutical medical care for minors diagnosed with gender dysphoria violates parents' fundamental right under the Ohio Constitution to direct and obtain medical treatment for their children that has been recommended by qualified medical professionals and is consistent with the prevailing standards of care. Such a sweeping and inflexible ban on parents' ability to access medical care for their children is not narrowly tailored to advance the state's articulated interest: the protection of children. Applying strict scrutiny, R.C. 3129.02(A)(2) facially violates Ohio parents' right to substantive due process under the Due Course of Law Clause of the Ohio Constitution. Moreover, R.C. 3129.02(A)(2) facially violates the Health Care Freedom Amendment to the Ohio Constitution, as adopted by voters, because it impermissibly prohibits parents, acting on behalf of their minor children, from accessing treatment protocols in accordance with the standards of care and guidelines widely accepted in the professional medical community to treat gender dysphoria in minors by subjecting medical care providers who follow accepted medical practices to professional discipline. Judgment reversed and cause remanded for imposition of a permanent injunction as to enforcement of R.C. 3129.02(A)(2)'s categorical ban on transgender minors' access to gender-affirming pharmaceutical medical care.