With proponents of gender transition procedures for minors in unceremonious retreat, Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall (R) managed to score one last victory after time expired. Nearly two months after the transgender activists who sued to block Alabama’s law protecting minors from gender transition procedures in 2022 agreed to drop their lawsuit last month, Marshall has secured the publication of yet more documentation from the widely discredited World Professional Organization for Transgender Health (WPATH).

After triggering a judge-shopping investigation that exposed WPATH’s political collaboration with the Biden administration, cornering the White House into a flip-flop apology, and handily winning his case before the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, it would be understandable if Marshall and his successful team wished to ride off into the proverbial sunset. Instead, they apparently live by a different motto: when life gives you lemons, squeeze out every last sour drop.

The most recent motion concerns hundreds of video recordings which WPATH turned over during the discovery process, but which ultimately did not feature in the case. These videos, including a 2023 training video and three years of WPATH conferences, were marked “Confidential — Attorney’s Eyes Only” and scheduled to be destroyed by June 30, 2025. Alabama asked the court to remove the “confidential” label so that the videos could be released to the public.

The motion surely gave WPATH traumatic flashbacks to the legal bruising it received at Alabama’s hands over the past three years. Marshall’s initial victory stemmed from his office’s extensive exposure of evidence during discovery, which saw through the scientific veneer of those wishing to provide gender transition procedures to minors and called their bluff.

“Unsurprisingly, the Defendants sought discovery from WPATH regarding, among other things, the evidence it used to develop its guidelines and standards of care,” observed District Judge Liles Burke in a June 9 ruling. “But surprisingly, the organization allegedly responsible for creating the benchmark for gender dysphoria treatment was not so keen on turning over the evidence it used to develop that standard.”

This was surprising, Burke explained, because WPATH “touts its guidelines and standards of care for treating transgender children as the product of rigorous science and broad consensus. Given this wide acceptance of what WPATH claims to be reliable evidence, one would think it would be willing and eager to demonstrate as much. It is not.”

When WPATH was finally forced to turn over the evidence, the reason for their reluctance became apparent: not only was the evidence supporting the provision of gender transition procedures to minors far weaker than they claimed, but the documents produced also revealed an organization whose scientific integrity was hopelessly compromised by politics.

In the most recent motion, WPATH’s lawyers continued to oppose the public release of seminars, discussing what it claims contains bulletproof science. WPATH argued that it had “a legal duty to protect the confidentiality,” that releasing the videos could subject it or its speakers to harassment, and that releasing the videos would harm its economic interests and chill the free speech of speakers at future conferences.

The judge was not impressed. He noted “WPATH’s burden to demonstrate that there is good cause to keep the videos confidential” and complained that they offered no reasoning besides “generalized, subjective assertions of fear.” Either WPATH’s lawyers simply didn’t have good arguments to offer, or they were too demoralized by this case to construct one.

In a sense, WPATH’s involvement in the challenge to Alabama’s law is a “gift that keeps on giving,” as the state has extracted deeper and broader concessions about the flimsy evidence supporting gender transition procedures for minors.

Notably, somereporters have misstated the substance of Burke’s ruling, suggesting that the judge “ordered [WPATH] to publish videos” of its conferences.

Legal analyst Eugene Volokh was more precise, writing that Burk’s decision “dealt with whether the defendants should be able to publicly disclose documents that they had obtained in discovery.” He explained, “The court noted that the materials were discovery materials that weren’t filed in court, so there was no public right of access to them. But there was still the question whether defendants, who had gotten the documents through discovery, should continue to be legally barred from disclosing them. And the court said no.”

Rulings such as this remind Christians that all deception will eventually come to light. “Nothing is covered up that will not be revealed, or hidden that will not be known. Therefore whatever you have said in the dark shall be heard in the light, and what you have whispered in private rooms shall be proclaimed on the housetops,” Jesus warned (Luke 12:2-3). Therefore, Paul urged believers, “Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them” (Ephesians 5:11).