CHARLESTON, W.Va. — West Virginia is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review rulings that found the state's refusal to cover certain health care for transgender people with government-sponsored insurance is discriminatory, Republican Attorney General Patrick Morrisey said Thursday.
In April, the Richmond-based 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 8-6 in the case involving coverage of gender-affirming surgery by West Virginia Medicaid, finding that the ''coverage exclusions facially discriminate based on sex and gender identity," according to a majority opinion penned by Judge Roger Gregory.
The state of West Virginia had argued that officials in states with limited resources should have discretion to utilize those resources as they see fit to meet the needs of the population. West Virginia is one of the U.S. states with the most people living under the poverty line and the worst health outcomes.
''We're not a rich state — we can't afford to do everything,'' Morrisey said Thursday during a live-streamed briefing with press. ''And that's one of the challenges that we have with this mandate. There's only so much money to go around, and spending money on some treatments necessarily takes it away from others.''
West Virginia is ''a state that's trying to help ensure that we're covering people with heart disease, with diabetes, and all sorts of medical conditions,'' Morrisey said, adding that long-term research on gender affirming surgery is still limited.
In the majority 4th Circuit opinion, judges said the cost of treatment is not a sufficient argument to support upholding a policy found to be discriminatory: ''Especially where government budgets are involved, there will frequently be a ‘rational' basis for discrimination,'' Judge Gregory wrote.
During Thursday's briefing, Morrisey said he didn't have the data in front of him to answer a question from a reporter about how many West Virginia Medicaid recipients had pursued obtaining gender-affirming surgery, and what the actual cost to the state was.
''We can look at it and we can evaluate it, but that's not the question in this case,'' he said.