Judge blocks Trump’s gender-affirming care executive orders nationwide

BALTIMORE — A federal judge Thursday blocked parts of two executive orders issued by President Trump that collectively seek to restrict gender-affirming care.

U.S. District Judge Brendan Hurson at the conclusion of a hearing found a group of transgender teens and LGBTQ organizations that sued were likely to prevail on all of their claims that the orders are without authority and amount to illegal and unconstitutional discrimination.

“Stopping care in the middle of receiving it, any care, really, casts doubt on whether in fact the goals are to protect the recipients of the care,” said Hurson, an appointee of former President Biden.

It adds to a series of court orders across the country in recent days temporarily blocking Trump’s actions, ranging from orders restricting birthright citizenship to transferring incarcerated transgender women to male facilities to Trump’s firing of the head of a whistleblower office.

Under Hurson’s new ruling, various federal agencies are temporarily prohibited from withholding or conditioning funding based on a health care facility providing gender-affirming care anywhere in the country.

The plaintiffs — a group of transgender teens, their parents and two organizations, PFLAG and GLMA: Health Professionals Advancing LGBTQ+ Equality — raised alarm that hospitals across the country quickly moved to cancel appointments after Trump issued two executive orders as part of what his administration has called a crackdown on “gender ideology.”

One order, which Trump signed on his first day in office, states that “federal funds shall not be used to promote gender ideology.” The other, which Trump signed Jan. 28, directs agencies to ensure that institutions receiving federal dollars don’t provide gender-transition treatments for people up to 19 years old.

Hospital systems across the country responded by suspending gender-affirming treatment while they evaluated Trump’s order, which could disrupt care for more than 300,000 transgender minors nationwide.

“That order had immediate consequences,” Joshua Block, an American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) attorney representing the plaintiffs, said at Thursday’s hearing.

The Justice Department contested the plaintiffs’ arguments, also insisting that the case was premature and should wait for additional guidance. The judge rejected those arguments, going as far to call the government’s position “disingenuous” at one point.

“When there’s smoke coming out of your house, you don’t know what room it’s in, but you don’t wait to call 911 until you know the exact location of the fire,” Hurson said. “These plaintiffs have received phone calls stopping their care.”

Thursday’s hearing in Baltimore attracted a protest outside the federal courthouse in Baltimore of more than 50 people supporting transgender rights.

“The science clearly tells us that these kids know who they are, and that affirming care is critical to their mental health,” Rebecca Wald, a psychologist and mother of a transgender teen who protested, said in an interview.

Emily Heinlein, who attended the protest carrying a sign with the slogan “Protect Health Care and Democracy,” said she felt it was important to speak up.

“I’m worried that this executive order of banning health care for one group of people is really dangerous precedent,” said Heinlein.  “And if allowed to stand, what next, health care for women will be banned? Health care for any other group of people will be banned.”

Hurson won’t be the only judge to weigh Trump’s order. Democratic attorneys general in Washington, Minnesota and Oregon are set to ask a judge in Seattle to block one of the provisions at a hearing Friday.