Court sets fall arguments on trans youth treatment ban

U.S. Court Watch

A federal appeals court will hear arguments in November over Alabama’s efforts to outlaw the use of gender-affirming medications to treat transgender minors.

Alabama is asking a federal appeals court to lift an injunction and let it enforce a law that would make it a felony to give puberty blockers or hormones to transgender minors to help affirm their gender identity. The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has tentatively set arguments for the week of Nov. 14 in Montgomery.

U.S. District Judge Liles Burke in May issued a preliminary injunction to stop the state from enforcing the medication ban while a lawsuit goes forward.

Families and advocacy groups challenged the ban as an illegal intrusion into family and medical decisions. Alabama has maintained the ban is needed to protect children.

The state has appealed. Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey in May referred to the injunction as a “temporary legal roadblock.”

Alabama’s appeal cites the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling on abortion, invoking the majority opinion that argues that unenumerated constitutional rights — those not explicitly mentioned in the document — must be “deeply rooted in the Nation’s history and traditions.”

Related listings

  • Arizona judge nixes suit that wants Trump backers off ballot

    Arizona judge nixes suit that wants Trump backers off ballot

    U.S. Court Watch 04/23/2022

    A judge in Phoenix has dismissed lawsuits seeking to disqualify three Republican lawmakers from this year’s ballot because they participated in or helped organize the Jan. 6, 2021, rally in Washington that led to an unprecedented attack on Cong...

  • Bankruptcy is Just Filling Out Some Forms, Right?

    Bankruptcy is Just Filling Out Some Forms, Right?

    U.S. Court Watch 06/22/2021

    Nothing could be further from the truth! My job as a Bankruptcy Attorney is to help clients understand the process, and how to navigate all of the complexities of Bankruptcy Law. My job is also to educate the public about common misconceptions of the...

  • British lawyer Karim Khan sworn in as ICC’s chief prosecutor

    British lawyer Karim Khan sworn in as ICC’s chief prosecutor

    U.S. Court Watch 06/16/2021

    British lawyer Karim Khan was sworn in Wednesday as the new chief prosecutor for the International Criminal Court, pledging to reach out to nations that are not members of the court in his quest to end impunity for atrocities and to try to hold trial...

What Is Meant by ‘No-Fault’ Workers’ Compensation in Illinois?

If you were injured in a work-related accident and have been researching workers’ compensation, you may have seen it described as a “no-fault” system. One of the most important things to understand about the workers’ compensation system in Illinois is that it is based on a “no-fault” system. What does this mean, exactly?

Most employers in Illinois are required by law to have workers’ compensation insurance. And the workers' compensation in Illinois is a “no-fault” system, which means that any worker who has been hurt on the job is entitled to workers' compensation benefits. If you have been hurt on the job, you are entitled to workers’ compensation benefits no matter whose fault the accident was.

A no-fault insurance system, such as workers’ comp, works by paying claims regardless of who is to blame for an accident. This provides an important layer of protection for injured workers, sparing them from having to through additional litigation and the through the additional burden of proving who was at fault before receiving benefits.

In Illinois, even though you don’t have to prove that your injury was your employer’s fault, you do have to prove that your injury happened at work or as a result of work. If you would like help to file your workers' compensation claim, Krol, Bongiorno, & Given’s experienced workers' comp lawyers are here to help. With over 60 years of combined legal experience, the KBG law firm is a leader in the field of workers’ compensation law and we have earned the reputation as aggressive advocates for injured workers before the IWCC.