An activist federal judge temporarily blocked aspects of a Florida law banning children from receiving puberty blockers on Tuesday, accusing its proponents of “bigotry” and declaring the state had no rational basis for preventing minors from transitioning.

Judge Robert Hinkle approved a temporary restraining order on the law, allowing three transgender minors to continue receiving puberty blockers. The decision was specifically focused on the case of the three minors whose parents initiated the lawsuit.

The move raises questions around the legislation, which was signed by Governor Ron DeSantis shortly before he announced his candidacy for the Republican presidential nomination.

Hinkle wrote in his ruling:

With extraordinarily rare exceptions not at issue here, every person is born with external sex characteristics, male or female, and chromosomes that match. As the person goes through life, the person also has a gender identity—a deeply felt internal sense of being male or female. For more than 99% of people, the external sex characteristics and chromosomes—the determinants of what this order calls the person’s natal sex—match the person’s gender identity.

For less than 1%, the natal sex and gender identity are opposites: a natal male’s gender identity is female, or vice versa. This order refers to such a person who identifies as female as a transgender female and to such a person who identifies as male as a transgender male. This order refers to individuals whose gender identity matches their natal sex as cisgender.

The elephant in the room should be noted at the outset. Gender identity is real. The record makes this clear. The medical defendants, speaking through their attorneys, have admitted it.

Hinkle, who was nominated to the court by President Bill Clinton in 1996, went on to claim that the “elephant in the room” was the bigotry of Florida lawmakers toward transgender people:

This is a politically fraught area. There has long been, and still is, substantial bigotry directed at transgender individuals. Common experience confirms this, as does a Florida legislator’s remarkable reference to transgender witnesses at a committee hearing as “mutants” and “demons.” And even when not based on bigotry, there are those who incorrectly but sincerely believe that gender identity is not real but instead just a choice.

This is, as noted above, the elephant in the room. Where there is bigotry, there are usually—one hopes, always—opponents of bigotry. It is hardly surprising that doctors who understand that transgender identity can be real, not made up—doctors who are willing to provide supportive medical care—oppose anti-transgender bigotry.

State Rep. Randy Fine, who sponsored the legislation, criticized the ruling and declared that he will “not stop fighting to defend children.”

The ruling comes less than a month after DeSantis signed the prohibition on treating children for transgenderism, as well as several other bills expanding the state’s parental rights law and restricting the teaching of sexuality to very young children. The legislation also outlaws sexual reassignment surgery on minors. However, Hinkle’s ruling does not extend to this aspect of the law.

“What we’ve said in Florida is we are going to remain a refuge of sanity and a citadel of normalcy,” said DeSantis at the time. “Kids should have an upbringing that reflects that.”