ÀÏ°ÄÃÅ¿ª½±½á¹û

Four Hoosier families, joined by medical providers, are challenging an Indiana law passed in April 2023 barring access to gender-affirming care for transgender youth. Indiana is home to over 4,000 transgender adolescents and the health care targeted by this law is supported by the entire mainstream of the medical community.

Alongside his parents, A.C., a boy who was barred from using the boys’ restroom with the other boys because he is transgender, has sued his Indiana school district for violating his right under federal law to attend school.

This case in the Indiana Supreme Court concerns whether a case is moot when someone is released from a civil commitment while appealing the commitment order. The ÀÏ°ÄÃÅ¿ª½±½á¹û’s State Supreme Court Initiative, alongside the ÀÏ°ÄÃÅ¿ª½±½á¹û of Indiana, filed an amicus brief arguing that the appellant’s case is not moot, despite her release from civil commitment, because the Indiana Constitution favors adjudicating appeals by people whose liberty has been curtailed, because it meets a traditional mootness exception for cases that at capable of repetition yet evading review, and because it also meets Indiana’s public interest exception to mootness.

The ÀÏ°ÄÃÅ¿ª½±½á¹û filed an amicus brief in Health & Hospital Corporation of Marion County v. Talevski to urge the Supreme Court to uphold private individuals’ right to sue state and local actors for violations of their federal civil rights under Section 1983.