Minnesota joins lawsuit against Trump’s move to restrict gender-affirming care
Go Deeper.
Create an account or log in to save stories.
Like this?
Thanks for liking this story! We have added it to a list of your favorite stories.
Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, alongside attorneys general from Washington and Oregon and three unnamed doctors, filed a federal lawsuit Friday calling for a halt on a presidential executive order that would end federal funding to medical institutions that provide gender-affirming care.
Ellison argues that “the order violates the Fifth Amendment’s equal protection guarantee by singling out transgender individuals for mistreatment and discrimination.”
President Donald Trump has said he opposes what he calls “gender ideology” and signed an executive order on his first day in office declaring that the U.S. government would recognize only two sexes, female and male. One week into his presidency, Trump signed another executive order that aims to restrict access to gender-affirming health care for transgender people under the age of 19.
The order calls for a complete reversal of federal support for hospitals, clinics and medical schools that provide gender-affirming care. It also includes removing coverage for gender-affirming care from federal health insurance policies and directs criminal enforcement against medical professionals and patients involved in such care.
Turn Up Your Support
MPR News helps you turn down the noise and build shared understanding. Turn up your support for this public resource and keep trusted journalism accessible to all.
Medical treatments covered in the order include hormone therapy, puberty blockers and surgical procedures.
In recent years, 26 states have passed laws restricting access to gender-affirming care for youth. In 2023, the Minnesota Legislature passed a law protecting the rights of transgender people to seek and receive gender-affirming health care. The law still exists.
The Human Rights Campaign states that “it is important to note that executive actions do not have the authority to override the United States Constitution, federal statutes, or established legal precedent.”
Trump’s executive order to restrict access to gender-affirming care is a directive, not a law and it is already facing other legal challenges in addition to the lawsuit filed by the three attorneys general Friday.
Teresa Nelson, legal director for the ACLU of Minnesota, said the executive order will do very little to change practitioners’ ability to provide medical care, and it does not offer any legal basis for a denial of care at this point.
“Our state cannot deny medically necessary care based on somebody’s status as transgender,” Nelson said. “Kids should have access to the care that they need, and this will cast a pall on receiving care.”
Almost every major medical association, including the American Medical Association and American Psychological Association, supports gender-affirming care. Christy Hall, senior staff attorney at Gender Justice, said health care practitioners in Minnesota are continuing to provide care for now.
In an email, Children’s Minnesota said they continue to monitor potential impacts of the executive order, but services remain unchanged.
A spokesperson for M Health Fairview said, “nothing has changed about how we care for our patients.”
MPR News contacted Mayo Clinic and did not hear back before publication.
Hall added that the president does not have the power to unilaterally ban gender-affirming care with an executive order. Existing civil rights laws prohibit most health insurance plans from discriminating against a person because they are transgender.
“It is important to be clear about who the executive order is directing,” she said. “It is not directing a hospital to do anything. It is not directing a pharmacist or individual health care provider to do anything. It is directing executive branch officials to do illegal and unconstitutional things.”