Van Garderen v. Montana

Amicus; submitted April 18, 2024

In an amicus brief* submitted to the Montana Supreme Court, Compassion & Choices (C&C) argued that the Court should uphold Montana’s broad constitutional privacy protections, which extend to medical decision making. The case, Van Garderen v. Montana, concerns a Montana law, SB99, that bans a wide range of gender-affirming treatment for minors. C&C submitted a brief in favor of two families with transgender youth and two medical providers who work with transgender youth who are challenging SB99 as an unconstitutional restriction of their rights. C&C weighed in because an adverse ruling in the suit could have consequences far beyond limiting access to gender-affirming care in Montana, and could diminish an individual’s ability to make complex and highly sensitive end-of-life decisions in line with their needs, values, and beliefs.

On December 11, 2024, the Montana Supreme Court ruled that SB 99 likely violates Montanans’constitutional right to privacy, upholding the lower court’s preliminary injunction of the gender-affirming care ban. The Montana Supreme Court’s decision is important because it preserves the broad constitutional privacy protections that encompass medical decision making at the end of life. The private treatment decisions made between doctors and patients involve complex medical issues that deserve protection from legislative intrusion. Everyday Montanans – not politicians in Helena – should remain in charge of their own healthcare decisions.

Compassion & Choices is thankful for the Montana Supreme Court’s ruling and the opportunity to submit briefing on how SB99 and similar laws impact end-of-life treatment decisions.

Compassion & Choices is committed to ensuring patients have access to quality care and the full range of options at the end-of-life. To learn more about our legal advocacy work, please visit our Legal Advocacy webpage.

*Amicus curiae is Latin for “friend of the court.” Amicus briefs are commonly submitted by anyone wanting to make a point relating to a court case that the litigating parties are not addressing.