A federal judge in Indiana has ordered the state’s Department of Correction (IDOC) to facilitate sex reassignment surgery for a transgender inmate, Autumn Cordellioné, who was convicted of the reckless homicide of a baby. This ruling marks a new chapter in the ongoing legal battle over an Indiana law that bans the use of taxpayer money for sex-change surgeries for inmates.
Autumn Cordellioné, born Jonathan Richardson, is at the center of this case. She has been seeking sex reassignment surgery for over a year now. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a lawsuit on Cordellioné’s behalf in 2023, challenging the state’s law, which prevents the use of public funds for sex reassignment surgeries for incarcerated individuals.
The ACLU argues that this law violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on “cruel and unusual punishment.”On March 5, 2025, Judge Richard Young ruled in favor of Cordellioné, ordering the Indiana Department of Correction to arrange for the surgery to be performed as soon as possible. This was Cordellioné’s second attempt to secure a legal order for the surgery, as a previous injunction had expired in early March.
In his ruling, Judge Young noted that the surgery may take time due to the need for a surgeon outside of the state’s contracted medical providers but stressed that it should be provided as soon as possible.
The judge has indicated that the injunction will be renewed every 90 days until the surgery is completed. Cordellioné, who was diagnosed with gender dysphoria in 2020, has been receiving female hormones and testosterone blockers since then.
The lawsuit also reveals that while incarcerated, she has been allowed to wear feminine clothing, use makeup, and wear panties, all as part of gender-affirming accommodations. According to the ACLU, Cordellioné believes that gender-affirming surgery is the only way to address her gender dysphoria and the distress it causes her.
In defense of Indiana’s law, state Attorney General Todd Rokita has argued that the state is not obligated to provide sex reassignment surgery. In a legal brief submitted in January 2025, Rokita stated that the Eighth Amendment does not require the state to fund what he described as an “experimental treatment.” He also emphasized that several doctors had concluded that Cordellioné was not a suitable candidate for the surgery.
According to Rokita, the law does not violate the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause because it bans sex reassignment surgeries for all inmates, regardless of their gender identity. Despite the state’s opposition, the court dismissed the arguments presented by the Attorney General. Judge Young found that the medical evaluation by psychologist Kelsey Beers, who had concluded that Cordellioné was not a suitable candidate for the surgery, was insufficient to overturn the ruling.
Beers had cited Cordellioné’s diagnoses of antisocial personality disorder and borderline personality disorder as reasons for questioning the validity of Cordellioné’s gender dysphoria. However, the court found the report did not provide enough new evidence to justify a change in the ruling. Cordellioné’s case has drawn national attention as it raises important questions about the rights of transgender individuals, particularly those who are incarcerated.
Many advocates argue that transgender inmates deserve access to gender-affirming healthcare, including surgeries, to help alleviate the psychological distress caused by gender dysphoria. Critics of the law, including the ACLU, insist that denying transgender individuals the right to receive such medical care is a violation of their constitutional rights.
Cordellioné’s legal team has emphasized that she has identified as a woman since she was six years old, and they argue that denying her surgery is an act of cruel and unusual punishment. They contend that her gender dysphoria is a serious medical condition that requires surgical treatment to be effectively managed. This case also sheds light on the broader issue of gender-affirming care in the prison system.
In recent years, there has been increasing pressure on correctional facilities to provide such care, as transgender individuals often face significant mental health challenges due to the lack of access to gender-affirming healthcare. The case of Autumn Cordellioné is likely to set a precedent for similar legal battles in the future. Cordellioné’s history includes a tragic crime.
In 2001, she was convicted of strangling her then-wife’s 11-month-old daughter to death while the mother was at work. At the time of the crime, Cordellioné reportedly showed little emotion when recounting the incident to police. While the crime was horrific, Cordellioné’s legal team argues that her gender identity and the distress caused by her gender dysphoria should not be overlooked in her case.
As the legal battle continues, the focus remains on the question of whether transgender individuals should be allowed access to gender-affirming healthcare while incarcerated. The courts have yet to settle this issue definitively, but the ruling in Cordellioné’s case represents a significant development in the ongoing debate over transgender rights in the United States.
Disclaimer: This article has been meticulously fact-checked by our team to ensure accuracy and uphold transparency. We strive to deliver trustworthy and dependable content to our readers.
