SEATTLE — President Donald Trump’s recent plan to cut federal funding for institutions providing gender-affirming care for transgender youth has been blocked on a long-term basis by a federal judge’s ruling in Seattle on Friday.
The ruling comes after Democratic attorneys general from Washington, Oregon, Minnesota, and Colorado filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration. U.S. District Court Judge Lauren King had previously granted a two-week restraining order, which expired on Friday. After hearing arguments, she issued a preliminary injunction blocking most of Trump’s plan until a final decision is made on the case.
However, the judge did find that the states lacked standing on one point: the order’s protections against female genital mutilation. The judge stated that female genital mutilation is already illegal in the four states involved in the lawsuit and there was no evidence that the plaintiffs planned to perform such procedures.
Washington Attorney General Nick Brown praised the ruling, while the White House has yet to release a comment on the matter.
The case revolves around two of Trump’s executive orders. The first, “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism,” aims to strip federal funding from programs that promote “gender ideology.” The second, “Protecting Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation,” calls for the federal government to cut off research and educational grants for institutions that provide gender-affirming care to individuals under the age of 19. Following the order, several hospitals across the country stopped providing gender-affirming care, including puberty blockers and hormone treatments.
This order also raises concerns about the potential end of Medicaid coverage for gender-affirming care and the possibility of medical professionals facing criminal charges for providing such care to minors. The states involved in the lawsuit argue that this is both morally repugnant and legally unsupported.
It is important to note that young people who experience gender dysphoria, a condition where one’s gender identity differs from their sex assigned at birth, are at a higher risk of severe depression and suicide if they do not receive treatment. Such treatment can include evaluation by a team of medical professionals, social transition, and eventually, puberty blockers or hormones. Surgery is extremely rare for minors.
In her ruling, Judge King stated that the executive order is not limited to children or irreversible treatments and does not specifically target medical interventions performed on cisgender children. This means that a cisgender teenager could receive puberty blockers from a federally funded provider as part of cancer treatment, while a transgender teenager with the same cancer care plan could not.
During the court hearing, Washington Assistant Attorney General William McGinty emphasized the urgency of the issue, stating that there are young people who may take their own lives if they are no longer able to receive this essential care.
Judge King also questioned Justice Department attorney Vinita Andrapalliyal about the meaning and impact of Trump’s executive orders. She continued to press for a legitimate government interest that would justify the orders.
The four Democratic attorneys general involved in the lawsuit argued that these orders violate equal rights protections, the separation of powers, and the states’ right to regulate issues that are not delegated to the federal government. The Trump administration disputed these claims in their court filings, stating that the President has the authority to direct subordinate agencies to implement his agenda within their own statutory authorities.
In conclusion, the ruling by Judge King serves as a victory for transgender youth and their access to necessary medical care. It highlights the importance of equal rights and the role of the federal government in protecting the well-being of all individuals, regardless of their gender identity. This decision also sends a message that discrimination and prejudice have no place in our society and that every person deserves the right to live their life authentically and with dignity.
