A coalition of civil rights organizations, including Maryland Aclu Lawyer Members, has launched a federal legal challenge against a controversial executive order from the Trump administration. This order aims to severely limit access to essential medical care for transgender individuals under the age of 19 across the nation.
The executive order in question directs federal agencies to withhold crucial funding from medical providers and institutions that offer gender-affirming care to minors. Treatments targeted by this order include puberty suppressants and hormone therapies, which are considered medically necessary by established healthcare standards for many transgender youth. If implemented, this order would have devastating consequences, potentially forcing hospitals, clinics, and individual doctors to discontinue providing this vital care due to funding cuts. Reports already indicate that some providers have begun canceling appointments and ceasing care in anticipation of the order’s enforcement.
In response to this alarming development, the American Civil Liberties Union, Lambda Legal, the ACLU of Maryland, and law firms Hogan Lovells and Jenner & Block have joined forces to file a lawsuit. This legal action represents two transgender young adults and five transgender adolescents, along with their families, all of whom have already experienced disruptions in their healthcare due to the President’s order.
Adding further weight to this legal battle are PFLAG National, the largest national organization dedicated to supporting LGBTQ+ individuals and their families, boasting over 550,000 members and supporters across nearly 350 chapters, and GLMA, the leading national organization of LGBTQ+ and allied health professionals. Both organizations have officially joined the lawsuit as plaintiffs, underscoring the broad opposition to the executive order.
Brian K. Bond, CEO of PFLAG National, passionately stated, “PFLAG parents are loving and supportive individuals who want the best for their transgender children. President Trump’s order inflicts harm on these families by denying access to medically necessary care. We are standing firm against this attack on transgender and nonbinary youth.”
Echoing this sentiment, Alex Sheldon, Executive Director of GLMA, emphasized the medical consensus supporting gender-affirming care: “For decades, healthcare professionals have adhered to established medical standards in providing care for transgender youth. This politically motivated order disregards medical expertise and endangers young people. GLMA is committed to fighting this in court to protect both patients and providers.”
The lawsuit has been officially filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, signaling the critical role of Maryland ACLU lawyer members and the state’s legal system in this national fight. A request for an immediate restraining order against the enforcement of President Trump’s order is expected to follow swiftly.
Joshua Block, Senior Counsel for the ACLU’s LGBT & HIV Project, highlighted the administration’s broader agenda: “President Trump is clearly determined to marginalize transgender people from public life. This order is a calculated attempt to block access to life-saving medical care for transgender youth nationwide, undermining family decisions and inserting politics into the doctor-patient relationship. We are resolute in our commitment to challenge this unconstitutional order.”
Omar Gonzalez-Pagan, Senior Counsel and Health Care Strategist for Lambda Legal, condemned the order as both immoral and illegal: “The federal government is overstepping its bounds by interfering in personal medical decisions that should remain between patients, families, and their healthcare providers. This order inflicts unnecessary suffering on transgender youth and their families, denying them access to the same standard of care available to their non-transgender peers.”
This legal challenge arises in the context of ongoing national debates about transgender rights. In December 2024, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in U.S. v. Skrmetti, a significant case questioning Tennessee’s ban on gender-affirming hormone therapy for transgender youth. This case, also supported by the American Civil Liberties Union and Lambda Legal, argues that such bans violate the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution by discriminating on the basis of sex. The Supreme Court’s decision on the Tennessee case, expected by June 2025, will have significant implications for the legal landscape surrounding transgender rights, regardless of the current administration’s stance.
The executive order targeting gender-affirming care is part of a series of actions taken by the Trump administration that advocates argue are discriminatory towards transgender individuals. These actions include targeting schools that support transgender students, banning transgender individuals from military service, restricting gender marker updates on passports, and implementing discriminatory policies against transgender government employees. These orders have employed harmful rhetoric, dehumanizing transgender individuals and comparing their identities to negative concepts.
The lawsuit brought by Maryland ACLU lawyer members and their partners represents a crucial stand against these policies, aiming to protect the rights and well-being of transgender youth and ensure their access to necessary healthcare.
