A federal judge in Washington state has blocked a key part of President Donald Trump’s executive order that sought to restrict access to gender-affirming care for transgender youth, ruling that it is unconstitutional. This marks the second time in a week that a judge has stood in the way of Trump’s attacks on trans kids.
Keep up with the latest in LGBTQ+ news and politics. Sign up for The Advocate's email newsletter.
U.S. District Judge Lauren King issued the decision Sunday, granting a temporary restraining order that halts enforcement of provisions in Trump’s directive that would cut off federal funding to medical institutions that provide gender-affirming care to minors. The ruling follows a lawsuit filed by the Democratic attorneys general of Washington, Oregon, and Minnesota, along with three doctors who argued that the order violated constitutional protections and overstepped presidential authority.
Related: Federal judge blocks Trump’s gender-affirming care ban for minors
King found multiple constitutional issues with the order, including that it attempted to impose restrictions beyond the powers of the presidency, interfered with states’ rights to regulatemedical care, and unlawfully targeted transgender people. She wrote, “The President’s power is at its ‘lowest ebb’ when he contravenes the express will of Congress, for what is at stake is the equilibrium established by our constitutional system.”
The decision highlighted that Trump’s order imposed funding restrictions on providers treating transgender patients while allowing similar treatments for cisgender youth, creating an unconstitutional distinction based on gender identity. “The Court finds it likely that Plaintiffs will succeed on the merits in showing that Section 4 of the Executive Order violates the Fifth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause,” King wrote.
Related: Lawsuit challenges Trump’s executive order targeting gender-affirming care
Additionally, the court ruled that the directive unlawfully attempted to redefine how federal grant money could be used despite Congress having already appropriated those funds. By requiring agencies to withhold funding from hospitals and universities that offer gender-affirming care, King wrote, the order exceeded executive authority and violated the separation of powers. “The United States Constitution exclusively grants the power of the purse to Congress, not the President and the ‘President does not have unilateral authority to refuse to spend the funds’ Congress appropriates,” she ruled.
The ruling also took issue with the scope of the order, noting that while it claimed to protect children from “irreversible procedures,” it failed to address similar medical interventions performed on cisgender youth. King pointed out that “the Executive Order prevents transgender youth from obtaining necessary medical treatments that are completely unrelated to their gender identity,” giving the example of a cisgender teen who could receive puberty blockers for cancer treatment while a transgender teen would be barred from the same treatment under the order.
Related: Major Virginia medical center stops gender-affirming care for minors after Trump’s executive order
This ruling follows a similar decision last week in Baltimore, where a federal judgetemporarily blocked the order nationwide in response to a lawsuit filed by LGBTQ+ advocacy groups and families with transgender children. That case, heard by U.S. District Judge Brendan Hurson, found that the order likely violated constitutional protections and disrupted access to critical health care.
Trump’s executive order, signed last month, tried to eliminate federal support for gender-affirming medical care for anyone under 19. It directed federal health agencies, including Medicaid and the military’s TRICARE system, to stop covering treatments such as puberty blockers and hormone therapy for trans youth. Additionally, it instructed the Department of Justice to take legal action against health care providers offering such care and urged Congress to enact further restrictions.
