The Supreme Court of India has suspended proceedings in several high courts to consolidate challenges against the constitutional validity of the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Act, 2026.

印度最高法院已暫停數個高等法院的程序，以合併處理針對《2026年跨性別人士（權利保護）修正案》違憲性的挑戰。

The judicial intervention commenced following a petition by the Union government, represented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, which posited that concurrent litigation across the Rajasthan, Delhi, Karnataka, and Kerala high courts could precipitate divergent judicial pronouncements. A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice V Mohana issued a stay on these proceedings, indicating a preference for the centralization of the matter to ensure legal uniformity. This procedural shift occurs as the apex court is already seized of similar petitions filed by community leaders and activists.

此次司法介入始於聯邦政府（由總檢察官 Tushar Mehta 代表）提出的一項請願，認為在 Rajasthan、Delhi、Karnataka 和 Kerala 高等法院進行的併行訴訟可能會導致分歧的司法裁決。由首席大法官 Surya Kant 和法官 V Mohana 組成的合議庭對這些程序發出暫停令，表明傾向將案件集中處理以確保法律統一。此次程序轉移發生在最高法院已在受理由社群領袖和活動人士提交的類似請願之際。

The core of the legal dispute concerns the perceived erosion of the principle of self-identification, a precedent established in the 2014 National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) v. Union of India judgment. Petitioners contend that the 2026 Amendment, which received presidential assent on March 30, replaces a broad definition of transgender identity with a restrictive framework. This new regime limits recognition to specific socio-cultural categories—such as hijra, kinner, aravani, jogta, and eunuch—or medically diagnosable congenital variations. Consequently, it is argued that the legislation reinstates 'medical gatekeeping' and violates constitutional guarantees of dignity and autonomy under Articles 14, 19, and 21.

法律爭議的核心在於被認為侵蝕了「自我認同」原則，該原則是 2014 年「國家法律服務局 (NALSA) 訴印度聯邦政府」判決所確立的先例。請願者主張，於 3 月 30 日獲得總統批准的 2026 年修正案，將原先寬泛的跨性別身份定義替換為一個限制性的框架。新制度將認可限制在特定的社會文化類別（如 hijra, kinner, aravani, jogta 和太監）或醫療可診斷的先天變異。因此，有人認為該立法恢復了「醫療把關」，且違反了憲法第 14、19 和 21 條關於尊嚴與自主權的保障。

Furthermore, the litigation addresses the introduction of stringent penal provisions. While protections against abuse remain, the amended Act prescribes penalties up to life imprisonment for the coercive induction of individuals into transgender presentation. Petitioners assert that such provisions impermissibly criminalize transgender presentation. Conversely, the Union government maintains that the legislation is designed to regulate forced procedures rather than prohibit voluntary gender-affirming treatments. The judiciary has noted the necessity of balancing individual self-identification with the prevention of benefit misappropriation, while acknowledging Parliament's competence to modify the legal basis of prior judicial rulings within constitutional limits.

此外，訴訟涉及嚴厲刑事條款的引入。儘管針對虐待的保護依然存在，但修正後的法案規定，強迫他人採取跨性別表現者，最高可處以終身監禁。請願者聲稱，此類條款是不合理地將跨性別表現刑事化。相反，聯邦政府堅稱，該立法旨在監管強迫性程序，而非禁止自願的性別肯定治療。司法機關指出，有必要在個人自我認同與防止濫用福利之間取得平衡，同時承認議會在憲法限制內有權修改先前司法裁決的法律基礎。

The Supreme Court has stayed high court proceedings and scheduled further hearings for July to determine the constitutional viability of the 2026 Amendment.

最高法院已暫停高等法院的程序，並將進一步聆訊安排在 7 月，以判定 2026 年修正案的憲法可行性。