A federal judge in Oregon has sided with plaintiffs in a lawsuit challenging Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s declaration that gender-affirming care for minors does not “meet professionally recognized standards.”

A coalition of states sued Kennedy and the HHS Department in December after the administration announced a plan to effectively end gender-affirming care for minors nationwide. Along with Kennedy’s declaration, the administration announced proposed rules that would block all federal funding through Medicare, Medicaid, and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) for any hospital that provides gender-affirming care to patients under the age of 18. The proposed rules would amount to a nationwide ban on gender-affirming care for minors at hospitals that rely on federal Medicare and Medicaid funding.

Related

19 blue states sue to stop RFK’s proposed gender-affirming care hospital ban

While the proposed rules would require a period of public comment and review before implementation, Kennedy’s declaration would have had wider and more immediate consequences, according to the New York Times. The statement asserted that it superseded previously established standards of care and that HHS could exclude hospitals and private clinicians from federal programs if they failed to meet new standards based on the president’s anti-trans executive orders.

During oral arguments on Thursday, Allie Boyd, an Oregon state attorney representing the coalition of states, noted that more than a dozen hospitals have been referred to HHS’s Office of Inspector General for investigation since Kennedy issued his declaration and that many have preemptively ended their youth gender-affirming care programs, according to STAT News. In February, HHS General Counsel Mike Stuart announced that he had referred four community health centers, including New York’s Callen-Lorde and the Los Angeles LGBT Center, for investigation as well.

Never Miss a Beat

Subscribe to our newsletter to stay ahead of the latest LGBTQ+ political news and insights.
Subscribe to our Newsletter today

In their lawsuit, the states argued that Kennedy’s declaration amounted to the administration unilaterally establishing a new national standard of care in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act.

Justice Department lawyers representing HHS argued that the declaration was a “non-binding policy position” without the force of law, according to both the Times and STAT.

Following oral arguments on Thursday, District Court Judge Mustafa Kasubhai sided with the states, agreeing that Kennedy had not followed normal procedures and overstepped his legal authority.

Kasubhai, a Biden appointee, said that the declaration not only “materially modified” how standards of care might apply in gender-affirming care, but it also asserted “that there is no standard of care that can be applied for even considering the provision of gender-affirming care in those plaintiff states.”

“The declaration itself is no mere opinion,” Kasubhai said, according to STAT. “When the government suggests that Secretary Kennedy is not invoking any authority, so therefore there is no authority for me to consider rendering an opinion over, it’s a recursive and incoherent sort of logic.” 

While an official written decision is forthcoming, according to STAT, Kasubhai said on Thursday that he would vacate Kennedy’s declaration and would also consider the states’ request to block its implementation.

While the decision offers temporary relief to hospitals and clinics that provide gender-affirming care to minors, according to the Times, the decision is likely to be appealed.

Subscribe to the LGBTQ Nation newsletter and be the first to know about the latest headlines shaping LGBTQ+ communities worldwide.