Lawmakers intervene in federal suit over prisoners’ gender transitions

North Carolina’s top legislative leaders want to intervene in a federal lawsuit challenging the state’s ban on funding gender transition procedures for prison inmates.

Lawmakers filed a motion Friday to intervene in the case Kwiatkowski v. Dismukes. Five NC inmates are pursuing a class-action case against the secretary and medical director of the state Department of Adult Correction.

Plaintiff and defendants in the case “do not oppose” legislative intervention, according to the motion.

“[T]he presence of executive-branch named defendants — here, officials of the North Carolina Department of Adult Correction — does not adequately represent the legislative branch’s unique interests in defending the challenged law,” lawmakers’ lawyers wrote in a memorandum supporting the motion.

The lawsuit filed in February challenges provisions of House Bill 805, approved in 2025 over Gov. Josh Stein’s veto.

“Plaintiffs’ complaint alleges that North Carolina’s law prohibiting the use of state funds for gender transition procedures for prisoners incarcerated in North Carolina state prisons … violates the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution,” according to the court filing. “Plaintiffs seek a declaration that the challenged Statute violates the Eighth Amendment and preliminary and permanent injunctions forbidding the statute’s full implementation or enforcement.”

Lawmakers cited the US Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in Berger v. North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP. That precedent allowed legislative leaders to intervene in a federal lawsuit challenging the state’s voter identification law.

“The same structural incentives that undergirded the Supreme Court’s conclusion in Berger that ‘different officials’ are likely to advance ‘different interest and perspectives’ apply equally here,” lawmakers’ lawyers wrote. “Indeed, Governor Josh Stein vetoed the very legislation that Plaintiffs challenge, which was enacted only because the General Assembly overrode his veto. And the named defendants are politically accountable to Governor Stein: he has the power to appoint the heads of principal departments, including the Secretary of the North Carolina Department of Adult Correction.”

“Just as in Berger, then, Proposed Intervenors are entitled to intervene and advance their distinct interest in ‘defending the law vigorously on the merits without an eye to crosscutting administrative concerns,’” the court filing explained.

In a separate document answering the complaint, lawmakers object to class certification that would extend the lawsuit beyond the five named plaintiffs: AJ Kwiatkowski, Ashlee Inscoe, Pumpkin Snuggs, Lulubell Frazier, and Tremayne Izzard.

Lawmakers argue that the suit “fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and should be dismissed” and that its claims “are barred, in whole or in part, by lack of standing, ripeness, or mootness.”

“There is medical uncertainty concerning the proper treatment of gender dysphoria, and the North Carolina Legislature has authority to regulate the treatment of gender dysphoria,” lawmakers’ lawyers argued.

“HB 805 constitutes a valid exercise of the State’s legislative authority over appropriations and correctional administration,” the court filing continued. “HB 805 is rationally related to legitimate governmental interests, including (1) allocation of limited public resources, (2) regulation of public expenditures, (3) correctional administration, (4) and the State’s authority to define publicly funded medical care.”

“Federal courts must afford substantial deference to legislative judgments concerning correctional policy and public expenditures,” lawmakers’ lawyers added.

The plaintiffs face the “imminent loss of essential healthcare” due to HB 805, according to the initial complaint filed on Feb. 6. The law prohibits the use of state funds for surgical gender transition procedures, puberty-blocking drugs, and cross-sex hormones for any prisoner in the state system.

“HB805 only permits gender-affirming hormone therapy or surgery if, absent that treatment, a patient will experience ‘imminent physical harm,’ with no consideration of a patient’s mental or behavioral health or longer-term physical consequences. It provides no exceptions for a patient’s mental health,” the lawsuit continued.

“HB805 presents a medically unjustified barrier to gender-affirming medical care in North Carolina prisons regardless of an individual patient’s needs,” the plaintiffs’ lawyers wrote. “To allow gender-affirming care only when a patient faces imminent physical harm is a gross departure from the standard of care and has no basis in sound medical practice.”

“Lawmakers intervene in federal suit over prisoners’ gender transitions” was originally published on www.carolinajournal.com.