Anti-Trans Doctor Misrepresents Credentials to Court

While acting as an authority on pediatrics to bolster arguments for limiting the availability of health care for trans people, the Atlanta-based Van Meter described himself in two cases – Eknes-Tucker v. Ivey in Alabama (also known as Boe v. Marshall), from May 2022, and Dekker v. Weida in Florida, both in October 2022 and March 2023 – as serving on the clinical faculties of the Emory University School of Medicine and Morehouse School of Medicine.

Hatewatch has learned that Van Meter does not currently serve on the faculty of either school, and in fact he may not have in some time. Emory told Hatewatch in an email that Van Meter is “not affiliated” with their school but did not respond to follow-up emails inquiring about his date of departure. Van Meter included a resume in court documents for the Dekker v. Weida case that listed his employment end date at Emory as 2020, despite testifying in the same 2023 court case that he was currently serving on Emory’s faculty.

Hatewatch also found archives of Van Meter’s website claiming to work for Emory as late as this February. By June, someone had changed it to past tense, the archives show. Unlike Emory, Van Meter still claims to be a clinical adjunct professor at Morehouse College on his website, but this claim appears also to be inaccurate.

Lynn Gardner, the director of Morehouse College’s Pediatric Residency Training Program, told Hatewatch in August that the school removed Van Meter’s name from their list of adjunct faculty “last year,” which would have been 2022, but that he had not taught there in at least five years.

“He has not taught or supervised Morehouse Pediatrics residents in at least five years,” Gardner said in her email.

Hatewatch repeatedly attempted to reach Van Meter through his practice, but no one answered the phone. Van Meter is the former president of the anti-LGBTQ+ hate group American College of Pediatricians (ACPeds). ACPeds continues to list Van Meter on their website, as he serves on their board. Hatewatch left the group a voicemail, but no one returned the call.

Whether Van Meter knowingly misstated his credentials under oath while serving as an expert is unclear. People who knowingly make material false statements under oath risk prosecution, if prosecutors are inclined to pursue the case, according to Melissa Redmon, the Prosecutorial Justice Program director at the University of Georgia.

“Any time you testify under oath, and you lie under oath, you’re subject to being charged with perjury,” Redmon told Hatewatch. “It would be up to a prosecutor whether they want to charge [someone who did that].”

She elaborated to explain the difference between that and Van Meter’s apparent willingness to publicize credentials that are not up to date.

“Perjury requires the statement to be under oath or affirmation, relevant to a material fact at issue, and during a judicial proceeding,” she added. “If a statement of his credentials is material and under oath, like in an affidavit, and attached to a pleading, it could possibly be a violation of the false swearing statute.”

Van Meter’s critics point to other events that lower his status as an expert on pediatrics. A Texas judge ruled in 2020 that Van Meter lacked the qualifications to serve as an expert on transgender health care. A website for the Georgia Composite Medical Board shows that he settled a medical malpractice suit for $1 million in June 2017.

Elizabeth Wagner, a Georgia-based mother of a transgender teen, has followed Van Meter’s career closely and reached out to institutions connected to him to warn them about inconsistencies she discovered in his track record.

“It was clear when I heard him give testimony in Georgia that it was totally false. I don’t understand how it’s permissible to pass bills based on falsehoods. Talking about how, ‘Well, studies show that kids grow out of it’ and all this nonsense,” Wagner said, referring to Van Meter’s testimony in his home state on behalf of a Republican-backed bill that bans doctors from performing gender-affirming care. “When, what does it matter to you anyway? It’s not about children, it’s about protecting your religious view and legislating it.”

R.G. Cravens contributed to this report.

Photo illustration by SPLC