Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Mar 5, 2025 /
17:25 pm
A federal judge blocked the enforcement of an executive order issued by President Donald Trump that restricts doctors from performing gender transition surgeries on minors or giving them drugs to chemically facilitate a gender transition.
The executive order, issued in January, rescinds federal funds for health care providers that perform surgeries or prescribe drugs to facilitate gender transitions for anyone under the age of 19.
United States District Judge Brendan A. Hurson on Tuesday, March 4, issued the sweeping order, which prevents the federal government from enforcing the president’s executive order in any part of the country as legal challenges against the policy are still ongoing.
The court’s decision is not a final ruling but rather puts enforcement on hold indefinitely until the case is settled. The lawsuit challenging Trump’s executive order was brought by nonprofit organizations, including the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), that represent Americans who have children who self-identify as transgender.
In October 2024, the medical watchdog group Do No Harm found nearly 14,000 instances in which doctors facilitated gender transitions for minors in the United States between 2019 and 2023, which included nearly 5,750 surgeries. The data is based on publicly available insurance claims, but the researchers warned that their dataset is likely incomplete and the actual number may be much higher.
In his 66-page opinion, Hurson explains that he issued the ruling because enforcement of the executive order is “likely to be found unconstitutional.” He states that the order classifies people “on the basis of transgender status” and characterizes it as a form of discrimination. The judge referenced previous court rulings that considered discrimination against a person’s transgender status as a form of illegal sex-based discrimination.
“To determine whether [a medical treatment] is permitted or restricted under the order, [it] necessarily requires the evaluation of a patient’s sex assigned at birth and then a determination of whether the treatment is sought to align the patient’s physical characteristics with that birth sex or with a different sex — one that aligns with the person’s identity,” the judge wrote.
Hurson also wrote in his ruling that Trump likely exceeded his presidential authority and that the executive order likely violates the separation of powers “because [it directs] agencies to withhold funding on a condition that Congress has not authorized.”
Some lower courts and some appellate courts have reached similar conclusions with respect to sex-based discrimination claims and have blocked state laws that prohibit transgender surgeries and drugs for minors.
However, the United States Supreme Court has not yet issued a ruling on whether such bans constitute a form of sex discrimination. The Supreme Court is currently hearing a lawsuit that challenges a Tennessee law banning gender transition drugs and surgeries for minors. The Supreme Court’s decision is expected within the next few months.
During oral arguments in December, many Republican-appointed justices — who make up six of the nine members of the court — appeared skeptical of the assertion that the law constitutes sex-based discrimination.
Hurson was appointed to the United States District Court for the District of Maryland in 2023 by former President Joe Biden.
The Department of Justice could appeal Hurson’s order to the United States Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit.
Tyler Arnold is a staff reporter for Catholic News Agency, based in EWTN News’ Washington Bureau. He previously worked at The Center Square and has been published in a variety of outlets, including The Associated Press, National Review, The American Conservative, and The Federalist.
Credit: Source link
