Law likely unconstitutional, judge says, ruling on class action lawsuit brought by trans people in Georgia prisons

September 4, 2025, Atlanta – A federal judge today preliminarily blocked a Georgia law prohibiting people in state prisons from receiving treatment for their gender dysphoria, and ordered immediate briefing on whether to enjoin the law permanently. Ruling on a class action lawsuit filed by incarcerated trans people, the judge found that the plaintiffs would be likely to succeed on their claim that Georgia SB185 violates the Eighth Amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishment, and has granted relief to a class of people incarcerated within the Georgia Department of Corrections (GDC) who are seeking treatment for gender dysphoria. 

A plaintiff in the case, who asked to be anonymous, said, “To be on hormones but then have them taken away feels like I'm being pushed back into the closet. I experienced joy and freedom, and then to have it taken away, it feels like being in a prison inside the prison.”

Signed by Governor Kemp in May and implemented by GDC starting in July, SB185 targets hormone therapy and other forms of gender dysphoria care that doctors, judges, and GDC itself have deemed medically necessary. The law not only prohibits the state from spending money on gender dysphoria care in prison; it also bans incarcerated people from paying for it themselves. Meanwhile, it allows people who are not trans to receive the same treatments, such as hormone therapy, that it denies trans people. 

The five plaintiffs, two men and three women, were all diagnosed with gender dysphoria and have been prescribed or are seeking evaluations for treatment. Represented by the Center for Constitutional Rights and lawyers from Bondurant Mixson & Elmore LLP, they brought the suit on behalf of the more than three hundred incarcerated trans people who face catastrophic consequences from the defendants’ enforcement of the new law. Withdrawal of hormone therapy can cause severe medical and psychological problems, from cardiovascular complications to cognitive decline. Cutting off essential care also ensures the return of the conditions that necessitated care in the first place, including severe depression and anxiety, which can lead, in turn, to self-harm and suicide. 

In enjoining the law, the judge granted the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction to restore hormone therapy and treatment evaluations, and said a denial of such treatment is likely to violate the Eighth Amendment. Federal courts have paused enforcement of laws similar to SB185 in other states due to constitutional concerns. 

Judge Victoria M. Calvert wrote, “At its core, this case is no different from any case challenging prison medical care… when a prisoner presents evidence that the treatment decision was based on something other than medical judgment, and backs it up with uncontroverted expert evidence that the prison’s decision put them at a serious risk of harm, the prisoner generally prevails. When properly framed this way, the result here is straightforward.”

“GDC’s decision to impose a blanket ban on gender dysphoria treatment and forcibly detransition those in its custody is cruel, unusual, and indefensible. GDC already knows that trans people in custody have a constitutionally-protected right to healthcare because, together with Ashley Diamond, I’ve sued them about this issue twice before,” said Chinyere Ezie, a senior staff attorney at the Center for Constitutional Rights. 

Because of the Diamond lawsuits, for more than a decade prior to the passage of SB185, GDC acknowledged that people with gender dysphoria in its custody are entitled to “constitutionally appropriate” medical care. Two of the defendants, GDC Commissioner Tyrone Oliver and Assistant Commissioner Randy Sauls, adopted and implemented the previous standards of care and related policies, and two other defendants, GDC Statewide Medical Director Marlah Mardis and Centurion of Georgia, LLC, were responsible for providing treatments to incarcerated trans people based on those standards and policies. 

For more information, see the case page.