The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has vacated a lower court's preliminary injunction that required the State of Oregon to assign transgender women inmates to the only state-run women’s prison. The decision, made on September 17, 2026, affects more than a hundred inmates and raises significant questions about the treatment of transgender individuals in the prison system.
The case, S.D. v. Reese (No. 26-4872), began when two plaintiffs, S.D. and J.F., filed a class action lawsuit against Oregon officials, claiming that the state’s prison policies violated their Eighth Amendment rights. They argued that the policies exposed them to a substantial risk of harm by housing them in men’s prisons. The district court initially sided with the plaintiffs, issuing an injunction that mandated a presumption of placement for transgender women in the women’s prison.
The Ninth Circuit's ruling is significant because it challenges the lower court's findings and the basis for the injunction. The court found that the district court had made a clear error in concluding that Oregon officials had a default presumption that transgender inmates should be housed in men’s prisons. The ruling emphasizes the need for individualized assessments in housing decisions for transgender inmates, rather than blanket policies.
Background
The plaintiffs in this case, S.D. and J.F., are transgender women who claimed they faced a heightened risk of violence and sexual assault while housed in men’s prisons. They sought a preliminary injunction to ensure that they and other transgender women inmates would be placed in women’s facilities unless there were documented safety concerns. The case was filed in the District of Oregon, where Magistrate Judge Mark D. Clarke initially granted the plaintiffs' request.
The district court's injunction required the Oregon Department of Corrections to end the categorical housing of transgender women in men's facilities without individualized safety assessments. This meant that the state would have to conduct case-by-case reviews for all transgender women in custody, starting with a presumption of placement in accordance with their gender identity.
However, the defendants, which included Oregon state officials and the Department of Corrections, appealed the decision, arguing that the district court's findings were not supported by the evidence. They contended that the lower court had mischaracterized the state's policies and practices regarding the housing of transgender inmates.
The Ruling
The Ninth Circuit Court, led by Judge Eric C. Tung, ruled in favor of the defendants, vacating the preliminary injunction and ordering the class to be decertified. The court stated, "Plaintiffs fail to show that they are likely to succeed on the merits. The remaining Winter factors weigh against them too." The ruling emphasized that the plaintiffs did not provide sufficient evidence to support their claims of a default presumption in housing decisions.
The court found that the district court had based its injunction on the erroneous belief that Oregon officials applied a default presumption that placed transgender women in men’s prisons. The Ninth Circuit noted that the evidence presented by the defendants demonstrated that housing decisions were made on an individualized basis and that many transgender inmates did not wish to be housed in women’s facilities.
The Ninth Circuit also pointed out that the district court's reliance on statistics regarding the risk of sexual assault among transgender inmates was flawed. The statistics cited were outdated and did not accurately reflect the current conditions within Oregon's prison system. The court stated, "The district court’s use of stale statistics does not justify finding a 'substantial risk of harm.'" Additionally, the court found that the class was improperly certified, as the plaintiffs did not demonstrate that their claims were common to all class members.
Impact
This ruling has significant implications for the treatment of transgender inmates in Oregon and potentially beyond. By vacating the injunction, the Ninth Circuit has reinforced the need for individualized assessments in housing decisions for transgender individuals in prison. The court's decision highlights the importance of considering the unique circumstances of each inmate rather than applying blanket policies.
The ruling may also influence similar cases across the country, as it sets a precedent regarding the treatment of transgender individuals in the prison system. The court's emphasis on individualized assessments could lead to changes in how prisons across the United States handle housing decisions for transgender inmates, potentially improving their safety and well-being.
What's Next
The Ninth Circuit's ruling is final unless the plaintiffs seek further review from the U.S. Supreme Court. There are no related cases pending at this time. The outcome of this case may prompt discussions and potential legislative changes regarding the treatment of transgender individuals in the correctional system.