Pharmacists file lawsuit against Walgreens, Minnesota Board of Pharmacy

A pair of pharmacists have filed a lawsuit against Walgreens and the Minnesota Board of Pharmacy "when they refused to dispense gender transition medications due to religious reasons."

Fox9 is reporting that "Dr. Dora Ig-Izevbekhai and Dr. Rachel Scott filed a lawsuit against Walgreens and the Minnesota Board of Pharmacy" in "the United States District Court of Minnesota." They filed this lawsuit after "they refused to dispense gender transition medications due to religious reasons."

According to Fox9's reporting, "Walgreens responded to Dr. Scott and stated it was against Minnesota law to decline dispensing gender transition medication on religious grounds and denied her request."

The First Amendment is always relevant in determining what's unconstitutional or what's permissible. Minnesota's Constitution doesn't trump the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. A little tutorial is instructive in this instance. First, a state's constitution always trumps that state's laws. Next, a state's constitution is trumped by federal laws and the U.S. Constitution. That's the case because of something called the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

If it seems like a significant percentage of Minnesota's most controversial bills are getting additional judicial scrutiny, it's because that's exactly what's happening. During the 2023-2024 Trifecta years, the DFL passed quite a few controversaial bills.

In a few instances, the DFL Was told that the bills they were passing were unconstitutional. In the past year, some of those bills were ruled unconstitutional, often on separation of powers grounds or because they violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

What they're saying:

Both pharmacists are seeking a number of relief requests, including a declaration that no Minnesota law or rule requires them to dispense or compound drugs for the purpose of gender transition due to their religious beliefs.

They are also seeking a declaration that the Minnesota law or the Minnesota Board of Pharmacy violated their First and Fourteenth Amendments.

This isn't a difficult case to figure out. These pharmacists have the right to live their deeply-held religious beliefs. The government can't create laws that ignore the First Amendment's Establishment Clause.