Temporary halt on trans healthcare ban challenged in Ohio’s Supreme Court

COLUMBUS, Ohio (WCMH) — A ruling by a Franklin County judge to temporarily block a law banning gender-affirming care for transgender youth is being challenged in the Ohio Supreme Court, Attorney General Dave Yost announced on Monday.

Yost filed an emergency motion on Monday arguing that Franklin County Common Pleas Judge Michael Holbrook “overstepped his judicial authority” when he issued a two-week temporary restraining order on April 16 to block House Bill 68. The legislation would prohibit Ohio’s children’s hospitals from providing treatment like hormone therapy to trans minors and was set to take effect on April 24.

“One judge from one county does not have more power than the governor’s veto pen,” Yost said, asking the state’s Supreme Court to “narrow the injunction and order Holbrook to act within the limits of his judicial authority.”

Holbrock’s ruling followed a lawsuit by the ACLU against the measure filed in March on behalf of two families whose children are at risk of losing access to their healthcare. The temporary restraining order is to be in effect for 14 days or until the hearing of the ACLU’s motion for a preliminary injunction.

The legal challenge came after the Statehouse voted to override Gov. Mike DeWine’s veto of the legislation. DeWine decided to reject the bill after visiting several children’s hospitals, arguing “parents should make these decisions and not the government.”

Yost argues Holbrook “acted beyond the scope of his power” because the law contains several other provisions beyond gender-affirming care, like also banning trans athletes’ participation in women’s sports. It was “illegal” for Holbrock to place the entire law on hold when “the plaintiffs in the case include just two families who are affected by only certain medical provisions of the law.”

“Judicial rules for common pleas courts state that preliminary injunctions can be broad only enough to protect the plaintiffs in a case,” said Yost’s office. “Yost’s motion notes how Holbrook’s overly broad injunction not only is illegal but also harms Ohioans by preventing the protective law from taking effect.”

The ACLU had previously argued H.B. 68’s multiple provisions are what make the law unconstitutional. The organization said the law violates the Ohio Constitution’s single-subject rule, requiring bills to only be about one topic. The two measures had been separate bills before Ohio House legislators combined them in June last year.

“I think the judge made the right call,” said Maria Bruno, public policy director of Equality Ohio, when Holbrook granted the temporary hold. “We are obviously relieved that families have a few more weeks without their care being cut off. We also know this is a temporary solution so we, of course, anxiously await the ultimate result of the case.”

For the latest news, weather, sports, and streaming video, head to NBC4 WCMH-TV.