In response to Maine’s extreme transgender protection bill, which would let child trafficking over state lines and into Maine, where kids would get legal protection while receiving “gender-affirming care,” fifteen states have now banded together and threatened to sue the state.
A measure under consideration in Maine would protect any kid, regardless of background, who wants to undergo transgender operations. Additionally, because the treatments would constitute the patient’s “legal entitlement” in Maine, the law would instantly nullify any court decision in any other state that may tend to prevent a kid from receiving “gender-affirming care.”
Democrats in the blue state have launched LD 227, the “Maine Healthcare Freedom Act,” a plan that will significantly impact not only Maine but all other states as well.
Many other states have banded together to threaten Maine with a federal court lawsuit to prevent the measure from becoming law, citing the drastic invalidity of any legal action in any other state and the establishment of Maine as a “sanctuary state” for the transgendering of minors.
In response to Maine’s bill to nullify lawsuits filed outside of Maine, the attorneys general of Arkansas, Florida, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Indiana, Montana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and West Virginia have signed a letter cautioning Maine not to “contravene the lawful policy choices of our States.”
The attorneys general stated in their letter that “LD 227’s specific constitutional breaches require our opinion, even though it is exceedingly rare for states to intervene themselves in another state’s lawmaking,” according to WMTW-TV. By forcing Maine’s opinions on contentious topics like gender transition surgery for children on the rest of the nation, LD 227 aims to go against the legitimate policy preferences of our state’s residents. The extensive provisions of the statute are unheard of.
The attorneys general contend that Maine’s statute “flouts the federalist system that permits each of our states to engage in self-government” and violates the United States Constitution. They assert that the other states will “vigorously avail themselves of every avenue our Constitution allows” in the event that Maine approves LD 227.
The measure would prohibit the serving of court orders from the jurisdictions from which the children are trafficked and would permit anybody to bring minors to Maine for “gender-affirming care.” For example, if Texas parents are successful in getting a court order prohibiting their child from receiving gender-affirming care, then LD 227 permits the child to be transported to Maine, whereupon the Texas parents would not be permitted to communicate with their transgender treatment, abortion, or in-vitro fertilization patient.
Additionally, LD 227 would shield foreign nationals seeking to fly to Maine for in-vitro fertilization or extreme late-term abortion, both of which are prohibited in other jurisdictions, from having their home state’s court judgments enforced.
Additionally, the measure prevents out-of-state residents from suing insurance companies, hospitals, physicians, and even law enforcement.
Another extreme part of the bill would allow people to sue anyone, anywhere, for attempting to obstruct “gender-affirming” procedures. This means that parents who attempt to prevent a third party from forcing their child to change their gender could face legal action from the hospital, doctors, or any other party with a tangential interest.
Under LD 227, those who have been the subject of “hostile action” in another state may file a countersuit in Maine and get compensatory damages, punitive damages, and attorney costs.
These clauses basically give Maine the authority to challenge other states’ laws if they disagree with the state’s declarations supporting late-term abortion, in-vitro fertilization, and transgenderism.
