US Supreme Court upholds ban on gender-affirming care for minors

The US Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld a state law banning gender-affirming medical treatments for transgender minors -– an issue at the heart of the American culture wars.The court voted 6-3 to uphold a Tennessee law barring hormone therapy, puberty blockers and gender transition surgery for those under the age of 18.The six conservative justices on the top court rejected a challenge to the law while the three liberals dissented.Two dozen Republican-led states have enacted laws restricting medical care for transgender youth, and the case will have repercussions for the prohibitions across the country.”This case carries with it the weight of fierce scientific and policy debates about the safety, efficacy, and propriety of medical treatments in an evolving field,” wrote Chief Justice John Roberts, author of the majority opinion.”The Court’s role is not ‘to judge the wisdom, fairness, or logic’ (of the law) but only to ensure that the law does not violate equal protection guarantees,” Roberts said. “It does not. Questions regarding the law’s policy are thus appropriately left to the people, their elected representatives, and the democratic process.”The Supreme Court heard the case in December and the Justice Department of then-president Joe Biden joined opponents of the law, arguing that it violated the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause since it denies transgender minors access to medical treatments permitted to others.Republican President Donald Trump has since taken office and he signed an executive order in January restricting gender transition procedures for people under the age of 19.While there is no US-wide law against gender-affirming medical treatments for transgender youth, the Trump order ended any federal backing for such procedures.Reacting to the ruling, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) said it “sets a dangerous precedent for legislative interference in the practice of medicine.””Gender-affirming care is medically necessary for treating gender dysphoria and is backed by decades of peer-reviewed research, clinical experience, and scientific consensus,” the AAP said.”Denying patients access to this care not only undermines their health and safety, it robs them of basic human dignity.”- ‘Must end’ -The Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative legal group, welcomed the ruling as a “huge win for children” and a “step toward ending dangerous experiments on kids.”During oral arguments in December, Tennessee Solicitor General Matthew Rice told the court the law was designed to “protect minors from risky, unproven medical interventions” with “often irreversible and life-altering consequences.”Chase Strangio, an American Civil Liberties Union attorney representing three transgender adolescents, their parents, and a Memphis-based doctor, countered that the law has “taken away the only treatment that relieved years of suffering.””What they’ve done is impose a blunderbuss ban, overriding the very careful judgment of parents who love and care for their children and the doctors who have recommended the treatment,” said Strangio, the first openly transgender lawyer to argue before the court.Trump, in his inauguration speech, said his government would henceforth only recognize two genders — male and female — and he issued his executive order a week later restricting gender transition procedures for minors.”Across the country today, medical professionals are maiming and sterilizing a growing number of impressionable children,” the executive order said. “This dangerous trend will be a stain on our Nation’s history, and it must end.”Trump’s order said it would now be US policy that it would “not fund, sponsor, promote, assist, or support the so-called ‘transition’ of a child from one sex to another.”The order bars funding for gender transition under the Medicaid health insurance program for poor families, the Medicare scheme used by retirees, and Defense Department health insurance that covers some two million children.According to a study by UCLA’s Williams Institute, an estimated 1.6 million people aged 13 and older in the United States identify as transgender.

Oil prices drop following Trump’s Iran comments, US stocks rise

Oil prices dropped Wednesday as comments by President Donald Trump trimmed concerns about an imminent US intervention in the Israel-Iran conflict.Meanwhile, Wall Street’s main indices advanced in late morning trading as investors also awaited the Federal Reserve rate decision, although they were mixed elsewhere.Oil prices initially rose after Iran’s supreme leader Ali Khamenei rejected US President Donald Trump’s demand for an “unconditional surrender”, adding to sharp gains made the previous day.Six days into the conflict, Khamenei warned the United States would face “irreparable damage” if it intervenes in support of Israel.But oil prices then fell after Trump spoke later and indicated he was still considering whether the United States would join Israeli strikes and indicated that Iran had reached out to seek negotiations.”For now at least, the US is not getting involved, if one can believe Trump,” said City Index and FOREX.com analyst Fawad Razaqzada. Despite heightened tensions, “there has been no sense of panic from investors”, said David Morrison, market analyst at financial services firm Trade Nation.”As far as the US is concerned, events are taking place a long way from home,” he said. “But there’s also a feeling that investors are betting on a short and sharp engagement, resulting in a more stable position across the Middle East than the one that currently exists.”Of particular concern, however, is the possibility of Iran shutting off the Strait of Hormuz, through which around one fifth of global oil supply is transported.In Europe, the London stock market rose but Paris and Frankfurt ended the day down. Asian equities closed mixed as well.- Fed watch -The Federal Reserve is widely expected to hold interest rates steady on Wednesday, as officials gauge the impact of US tariffs on inflation.The central bank has ignored calls from Trump to cut borrowing costs as the world’s biggest economy faces pressure.Trump again publicly berated Fed chief Jerome Powell on Wednesday, calling him a “stupid person” for not cutting interest rates.The Federal Reserve will also release on Wednesday its rate and economic growth outlook for the rest of the year, which are expected to take account of Trump’s tariff war.Weak US retail sales and factory output data on Tuesday rekindled worries about the impact of tariffs on the economy but also provided hope that the Fed would still cut rates this year.”The Fed would no doubt be cutting again by now if not for the uncertainty regarding tariffs and a recent escalation of tensions in the Middle East,” said KPMG senior economist Benjamin Shoesmith.In a busy week for monetary policy, Sweden’s central bank cut its key interest rate on Wednesday to try and boost the country’s economy, as it cited risks linked to trade tensions and the escalating conflict in the Middle East.The Bank of England is expected to keep its key rate steady Thursday, especially after official data Wednesday showed UK annual inflation fell less than expected in May.The Bank of Japan on Tuesday kept interest rates unchanged and said it would taper its purchase of government bonds at a slower pace, as trade uncertainty threatens to weigh on the world’s number four economy.- Key figures at around 1530 GMT -Brent North Sea Crude: DOWN 2.0 percent at $74.93 per barrelWest Texas Intermediate: DOWN 2.0 percent at $71.82 per barrelNew York – Dow: UP 0.5 percent at 42,411.50 pointsNew York – S&P 500: UP 0.4 percent at 6,007.85 New York – Nasdaq Composite: UP 0.5 percent at 19,624.09London – FTSE 100: UP 0.1 at 8,843.47 (close)Paris – CAC 40: DOWN 0.4 percent at 7,656.12 (close)Frankfurt – DAX: DOWN 0.5 percent at 23,317.81 (close)Tokyo – Nikkei 225: UP 0.9 percent at 38,885.15 (close)Hong Kong – Hang Seng Index: DOWN 1.1 percent at 23,710.69 (close)Shanghai – Composite: FLAT at 3,388.81 (close)Euro/dollar: UP at $1.1530 from $1.1488 on TuesdayPound/dollar: UP at $1.3471 from $1.3425Dollar/yen: DOWN at 144.59 yen from 145.27 yenEuro/pound: UP at 85.59 pence from 85.54 penceburs-rl/rmb

Musk’s X sues to block New York social media transparency law

Elon Musk’s X Corp. has filed a lawsuit challenging a New York state law that requires social media companies to report how they moderate hate speech and disinformation.The complaint, filed in a federal court in Manhattan, seeks to halt the law, which X argues violates the First Amendment by forcing platforms to disclose sensitive information about their content moderation practices.”Today, @X filed a First Amendment lawsuit against a New York law, NY S895B,” X’s Global Government Affairs team posted Tuesday, adding that it had successfully challenged a similar law in California.”X is the only platform fighting for its users by challenging the law, and we are confident we will prevail in this case as well,” the company said. The New York law requires social media companies with over $100 million in annual revenue to submit semiannual reports detailing how they define and moderate hate speech, racism, extremism, disinformation and harassment.Companies face fines of $15,000 per day for violations, which can be sought by the attorney general’s office.X says the law is “an impermissible attempt by the State to inject itself into the content-moderation editorial process” and seeks to pressure platforms into restricting constitutionally protected speech.- ‘Stop Hiding Hate’ -Reporters Without Borders said in a statement that asking X “account for their actions against misinformation is by no means an infringement of freedom of expression, but the bare minimum to clean up the digital space.””Freedom of expression does not come without responsibilities,” it added.The lawsuit comes after X successfully challenged a nearly identical California law last year, according to the filing. New York’s law is “a carbon copy” of the California provisions that were struck down, the filing adds.X claims New York lawmakers refused to discuss changes to the bill after the California ruling, with sponsors saying they declined to meet because of content on X promoted by owner Musk that “threatens the foundations of our democracy.” The company argues this indicated “viewpoint discriminatory motives” behind the law’s passage. Senator Brad Hoylman-Sigal and Assembly member Grace Lee — who introduced the law — said in a statement that their act “does not infringe upon the First Amendment rights of social media companies, nor does it conflict with federal law.” “Instead, the Stop Hiding Hate Act requires narrowly tailored disclosures by social media companies to allow consumers to better decide which social media platforms they utilize,” they added.”The fact that Elon Musk would go to these lengths to avoid disclosing straightforward information to New Yorkers as required by our statute illustrates exactly why we need the Stop Hiding Hate Act.”

Iran-Israel war: a lifeline for Netanyahu?

The Iran-Israel war has helped strengthen Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu domestically and overseas, just as his grip on power looked vulnerable.On the eve of launching strikes on Iran, his government looked to be on the verge of collapse, with a drive to conscript ultra-Orthodox Jews threatening to scupper his fragile coalition.Nearly two years on from Hamas’s unprecedented attack in 2023, Netanyahu was under growing domestic criticism for his handling of the war in Gaza, where dozens of hostages remain unaccounted for.Internationally too, he was coming under pressure including from longstanding allies, who since the war with Iran began have gone back to expressing support.Just days ago, polls were predicting Netanyahu would lose his majority if new elections were held, but now, his fortunes appear to have reversed, and Israelis are seeing in “Bibi” the man of the moment.– ‘Reshape the Middle East’ –For decades, Netanyahu has warned of the risk of a nuclear attack on Israel by Iran — a fear shared by most Israelis.Yonatan Freeman, a geopolitics expert at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, said Netanyahu’s argument that the pre-emptive strike on Iran was necessary draws “a lot of public support” and that the prime minister has been “greatly strengthened”.Even the opposition has rallied behind him.”Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is my political rival, but his decision to strike Iran at this moment in time is the right one,” opposition leader Yair Lapid wrote in a Jerusalem Post op-ed.A poll published Saturday by a conservative Israeli channel showed that 54 percent of respondents expressed confidence in the prime minister.The public had had time to prepare for the possibility of an offensive against Iran, with Netanyahu repeatedly warning that Israel was fighting for its survival and had an opportunity to “reshape the Middle East.”During tit-for-tat military exchanges last year, Israel launched air raids on targets in Iran in October that are thought to have severely damaged Iranian air defences.Israel’s then-defence minister Yoav Gallant said the strikes had shifted “the balance of power” and had “weakened” Iran.”In fact, for the past 20 months, Israelis have been thinking about this (a war with Iran),” said Denis Charbit, a political scientist at Israel’s Open University.Since Hamas’s October 7, 2023 attack on Israel, Netanyahu has ordered military action in Gaza, against the Iran-backed Hezbollah group in Lebanon and the Huthis in Yemen, as well as targets in Syria where long-time leader Bashar al-Assad fell in December last year.”Netanyahu always wants to dominate the agenda, to be the one who reshuffles the deck himself — not the one who reacts — and here he is clearly asserting his Churchillian side, which is, incidentally, his model,” Charbit said.”But depending on the outcome and the duration (of the war), everything could change, and Israelis might turn against Bibi and demand answers.”– Silencing critics –For now, however, people in Israel see the conflict with Iran as a “necessary war,” according to Nitzan Perelman, a researcher specialised in Israel at the National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS) in France.”Public opinion supports this war, just as it has supported previous ones,” she added.”It’s very useful for Netanyahu because it silences criticism, both inside the country and abroad.”In the weeks ahead of the Iran strikes, international criticism of Netanyahu and Israel’s military had reached unprecedented levels.After more than 55,000 deaths in Gaza, according to the health ministry in the Hamas-run territory, and a blockade that has produced famine-like conditions there, Israel has faced growing isolation and the risk of sanctions, while Netanyahu himself is the subject of an international arrest warrant for alleged war crimes.But on Sunday, two days into the war with Iran, the Israeli leader received a phone call from European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, while Foreign Minister Gideon Saar has held talks with numerous counterparts.”There’s more consensus in Europe in how they see Iran, which is more equal to how Israel sees Iran,” explained Freeman from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said Tuesday that Israel was doing “the dirty work… for all of us.”The idea that a weakened Iran could lead to regional peace and the emergence of a new Middle East is appealing to the United States and some European countries, according to Freeman.But for Perelman, “Netanyahu is exploiting the Iranian threat, as he always has.” 

Gaza Humanitarian Foundation initiative ‘outrageous’: UN probe chief

The use of the US and Israeli-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation to distribute food in the Palestinian territory is “outrageous”, the head of a UN inquiry said Wednesday.Navi Pillay, who chairs the UN’s Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Israel and the Palestinian territories, joined a growing chorus of criticism of the GHF’s operations, and cited its US links.”In every war, the siege and starvation surely leads to death,” the former UN rights chief told journalists.”But this initiative of what’s called a foundation, a private foundation, to supply food, is what I see as outrageous, because it involves the United States itself, the government, and it turns out, as we watch daily, that people who go to those centres are being killed as they seek food.”An officially private effort with opaque funding, GHF began operations on May 26 after Israel completely cut off supplies into Gaza for more than two months, sparking warnings of mass famine.The United Nations and major aid groups have refused to cooperate with the foundation over concerns it was designed to cater to Israeli military objectives.Dozens of Palestinians have been killed while trying to reach GHF distribution points.Pillay said the commission would “have to look into… the policy purpose and how it’s being effected.”We have to spell out what is the motive of, right now, the killing of people who are coming for humanitarian aid from this so-called foundation — and that lives are being lost just in trying to secure food for their children.”Unprecedented in its open-ended scope, the three-person Commission of Inquiry was established by the UN Human Rights Council in May 2021 to investigate alleged violations of international humanitarian and human rights law in Israel and the Palestinian territories.South African former High Court judge Pillay, 83, served as a judge on the International Criminal Court and presided over the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.On Tuesday she presented the commission’s latest report to the Human Rights Council.It said Israel had attacked Gaza’s schools, religious and cultural sites as part of a “widespread and systematic” assault on the civilian population, in which Israeli forces have committed “war crimes” and “the crime against humanity of extermination”.Israel does not cooperate with the investigation and has long accused it of “systematic anti-Israel discrimination”.

Les Bourses européennes terminent sans élan

Les marchés boursiers européens ont fini la séance sans impulsion mercredi, prudents face à la poursuite du conflit entre Israël et l’Iran, sans pour autant céder à la panique.Paris a perdu 0,36% et Francfort 0,50%. Les places de Milan (+0,08%) et Londres (+0,11%) sont restées à l’équilibre.