Kim Hutton spearheaded an initiative to bring gender-affirming care to the Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis. In October 2013, she agreed to meet with Dr. Paul Hruz, a skeptic who held opposing views. They met at a local cafe, where Hruz immediately launched into a lecture on his beliefs without giving Hutton a chance to share her struggles. Despite Hruz’s efforts to stop the gender clinic, Washington University proceeded with its plans. However, Hruz has since become a central figure in the assault on trans rights and has profited from his involvement.
Hruz is among a small group of expert witnesses who travel across the country to defend anti-trans laws and policies in court. These individuals rely on fringe medical ideas to argue against the scientific validity and safety of gender-affirming care. Many of them practice medicine in fields related to gender-affirming care but have limited experience with trans patients or research. Some even belong to anti-trans groups and actively support laws that they are paid to defend.
The Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), a conservative legal organization with a mission to promote far-right Christian values, has enlisted several of these witnesses. Many of these witnesses share ADF’s extreme hostility toward LGBTQ+ individuals. Despite their lack of credibility, these expert witnesses can lend a sense of scientific legitimacy to policies restricting trans rights for a significant hourly rate, and they are having an increasing impact.
HuffPost conducted extensive research to uncover the financial implications of this cottage industry. State and local governments have spent over $1.1 million on expert testimony since 2016, with a significant portion going to just six preferred witnesses. In addition, governments have relied on high-cost external legal teams, spending another $6.6 million. These numbers likely underestimate the true cost, as less than half of the agencies defending anti-trans laws disclosed their spending.
Over the years, these expert witnesses have struggled to establish their credibility in court. Judges have found their testimony biased, illogical, conspiratorial, or fabricated, often dismissing their testimony entirely. More than a dozen major medical associations in the U.S. have endorsed gender-affirming care as necessary, including for adolescents. Despite this, some courts have begun to accept their arguments, resulting in a surge of bills targeting trans healthcare and legal recognition introduced by state lawmakers, mostly Republicans, in 2023.
The rulings in favor of these anti-trans laws increase the likelihood of a division among circuit courts and the possibility that the Supreme Court will hear a case related to gender-affirming care. In the meantime, these expert witnesses have successfully hindered access to medically necessary care for many trans individuals across the country.
Despite the efforts of these witnesses, trans individuals like Dylan Brandt, who challenged Arkansas’ ban on gender-affirming care for minors, remain steadfast in their identity and fight for their rights. Brandt believes that those who oppose trans rights are wasting their time trying to deny people like him the ability to express who they truly are.
Denial of responsibility! Vigour Times is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
