TFF Files Legal Briefs in 4 Major Cases, Join Us in Praying for The Supreme Court
Later this month, the U.S. Supreme Court will announce decisions in most of its cases from its past term. The Family Foundation is closely watching 4 of those cases due to their impact on pro-family policies. We signed onto amicus (“friend of the court”) briefs in the following cases: United States v. Skrmetti, Free Speech Coalition, Inc. v. Paxton, Mahmoud v. Taylor, and Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic.
In the Skrmetti case, the Court will determine if states have the ability to regulate and restrict transgender interventions on minors. At least 25 states, including Kentucky, have passed Help Not Harm laws to protect kids from gender “transitions” that result in permanent chemical or physical mutilation. LGBT advocates are challenging Tennessee’s Help Not Harm law by arguing that these protections violate the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Our brief argued that states have a duty to protect kids from experimental and dangerous medical practices, and the U.S. Constitution gives power to the states to take action when necessary. The Family Foundation was instrumental in the passage of SB 150 in 2023, which banned gender “transitions” on minors. The ACLU quickly sued to stop the law, and the Sixth Circuit upheld the law. That decision is the one the Supreme Court is reviewing in Skrmetti. If the Court correctly rules that Help Not Harm laws are constitutional, Kentucky’s Help Not Harm law will remain in full effect.
In the Free Speech Coalition case, the Court will determine whether states have the ability to require age verification on pornography websites. At least 24 states, including Kentucky, have laws that require pornographic websites to verify the ages of the users before granting access to their sites. This ensures that kids do not have easy access to such vile content. In response to Kentucky’s law, Pornhub, the world’s largest distributor of pornographic material announced it was banning access in Kentucky. Allies of the pornography industry are challenging Texas’s age verification law by arguing it violates the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Our brief argued that states have the ability to mitigate the harms that pornography causes children by regulating access to such material. The Family Foundation played a key role in the passage of Kentucky’s Age Verification law (HB 278) in 2024. If the Court correctly rules in favor of Texas, Kentucky’s age verification law will remain in full effect.
In the Mahmoud case, the Court will decide if public schools must provide notice and/or an opportunity to opt out of an LGBT school curriculum. This case began when a Maryland school district eliminated its religious opt out for required LGBT readings. A coalition of parents from various faiths—Christians, Muslims, and Jews—objected to this new policy and sued the district, arguing that eliminating religious opt outs burdens their religious freedom as protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Our brief argued that matters of sexuality are so closely tied to religion that the government infringes on religious liberty when it seeks to indoctrinate children on such topics against the religious beliefs of the parents. A favorable ruling from the Court would ensure that parents know when their kids will be confronted with LGBT indoctrination and have an opportunity to opt their kids out of that instruction. Thanks to the passage of SB 150 in 2023, Kentucky law currently requires public schools to obtain a parental opt in before talking to kids about topics dealing with sexuality.
In the Medina case, the Court will decide whether states can defund abortion mills like Planned Parenthood from Medicaid programs. In 2018, South Carolina Governor Henry McMaster banned abortion clinics from participating in the state’s Medicaid program. Planned Parenthood sued to stop that regulation, arguing that the federal Medicaid statute gives individuals the right to select where they receive services. Our brief argues that individuals do not have an individual right to select their services, allowing states to regulate which providers are eligible to receive Medicaid dollars. If the Court rules for South Carolina, it will open the door for conservative states like Kentucky to remove abortion mills like Planned Parenthood from their Medicaid programs.
We will be sure to keep our supporters up to date as we get news from the Supreme Court on any of these cases. In the meantime, please be praying that all nine Justices seek truth in their deliberations and decisions as they debate these important legal issues.
