Ketanji Brown Jackson法官将田纳西州禁止对未成年人进行性别确认护理的禁令与最高法院听审期间的禁止种族间婚姻相比。 Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson compares Tennessee's ban on gender-affirming care for minors to interracial marriage bans during Supreme Court hearing.

在美国最高法院听证会上, 特内西州禁止对未成年人进行性别确认的护理, 司法官Ketanji Brown Jackson将该禁令与禁止跨种族婚姻的法律相比较, 认为这可能违反第14修正案的平等保护条款. During a Supreme Court hearing on Tennessee's ban on gender-affirming care for minors, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson compared the ban to laws prohibiting interracial marriage, arguing it could violate the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. 这一比较引起了强烈的反应,一些法官质疑禁令的医疗方面,另一些法官则支持国家进行医学监管的权利。 The comparison drew strong reactions, with some justices questioning the medical aspects of the ban and others supporting the state's right to regulate medicine. 该案,即美国诉Skrmetti案,突出了法院对性别歧视和法官在医疗决定中的作用的深刻分歧。 The case, U.S. v. Skrmetti, highlights deep divisions on the court over sex discrimination and the role of judges in medical decisions.