PORTLAND, Ore. — A federal judge has struck down a controversial federal policy restricting gender-affirming care for minors, sharply criticizing Robert F. Kennedy Jr. for overstepping his authority.
In a strongly worded ruling, U.S. District Judge Mustafa T. Kasubhai said the Health and Human Services secretary acted with “wanton disregard” for legal procedures when issuing the directive.
Court Rejects Federal Declaration
The ruling invalidates a December declaration from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services that sought to restrict federal funding for gender-affirming care for minors.
Judge Kasubhai found the policy unlawful, stating that the agency lacked authority to impose new medical standards or penalize healthcare providers without following required rulemaking procedures.
“This Court can scarcely recall an action so clearly unlawful,” the judge wrote in his 49-page opinion.
Injunction Blocks Enforcement Nationwide
In addition to overturning the declaration, the court issued an injunction preventing the federal government from enforcing similar restrictions.
The decision reinforces that healthcare standards — including treatments such as hormone therapy — must align with professionally recognized guidelines and state-level authority.
Legal Challenge Led by Oregon and Coalition
The case was brought forward by a coalition led by Dan Rayfield, along with 20 states and the District of Columbia.
Rayfield praised the ruling, saying federal officials should not interfere in medical decisions made by families and doctors.
“Oregon will always stand up for the dignity and wellbeing of every person,” he said in a statement.
Judge Criticizes Lack of Due Process
Central to the ruling was the court’s finding that the federal agency bypassed mandatory procedures under the Administrative Procedure Act, including:
- Public notice of policy changes
- Opportunity for comment
- Formal rulemaking process
The judge rejected the government’s argument that the declaration was merely advisory, calling it a “clear directive” that pressured healthcare providers to comply immediately or risk losing funding.
Impact on Hospitals and Providers
According to court records, multiple hospitals had already halted gender-affirming care for minors following the federal directive. At least 17 healthcare providers were reportedly referred for potential exclusion from federal funding.
The court found that these actions caused harm and created confusion within the healthcare system.
Federal Response Pending
Attorneys for the federal government argued that an injunction was unnecessary, but the judge said it was essential to prevent further overreach.
Officials have not yet issued a detailed response to the ruling.
What Happens Next
The decision marks a significant legal setback for the policy and reinforces limits on federal authority over state-regulated healthcare practices.
Further legal challenges or appeals could follow as the case continues to unfold.
Leave a Comment