On March 17, the Department of Justice filed an amicus brief, weighing in on Lange v. Houston County in Houston County, Georgia, in which the plaintiff was denied treatment for gender dysmorphia under her healthcare plan. 

Amicus briefs are filed when a case presents “one or more important legal questions involving the interpretation or application of a statute that the Civil Rights Division enforces.”

In October of 2020, Anna Lange, a former sheriff’s deputy, filed a suit against Houston County, Georgia, and Sheriff Cullen Talton, alleging “that the exclusion of coverage in the County’s health insurance plan for gender-affirming surgery and related medication violates Title VII ‘by intentionally providing lesser terms of compensation to employees.’”

Lange was denied “medically necessary” care based on an exclusion in her healthcare plan for “services and supplies for a sex change.”

Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield, the Houston County healthcare administrator, recommended the county amend this aspect of the plan in 2016 after a new federal nondiscrimination policy. Houston County refused to make the change and has instead spent upwards of $1 million dollars battling Lange in court. 

The DOJ wrote in their brief that “the plan would have covered such care, however, if it were provided for some other medically necessary purpose.”

Recent years have seen a trend in state legislation that denies protections for trans healthcare, including Arkansas and Mississippi which have laws that “explicitly permit insurers to refuse to cover gender-affirming care.”

Still, David Brown of the Transgender Legal Defense and Education Fund said that among fortune 500 companies and state employees, “only a small minority of each includes the kind of blanket refusals to cover transgender care we’re challenging in Houston County, Georgia.”

Brown said that this is the case due to “courts have increasingly made it clear that it’s illegal.”

A Federal court in Baltimore ruled in favor of a transgender man with a similar case earlier this year.

In Lange v. Houston, the DOJ stated that they are supporting Lange and are “urging affirmance on the issues addressed,” saying denying her coverage is in violation of title VII of the Civil Rights Act. 

Ultimately, the DOJ’s amicus, or “friend of the court,” brief cannot alone make the decision on Lange’s case, as it serves to inform the court of the executive branch’s stance as the DOJ cannot force the enactment of a law. 

Nevertheless, the court will have to weigh the DOJ’s stance supporting Lange. The influence the stance will have on the case is yet to be seen.

[email protected]