Federal judge in courtroom vacating HHS gender-identity provisions, with state representatives and legal documents.
Federal judge in courtroom vacating HHS gender-identity provisions, with state representatives and legal documents.
Image generated by AI

Federal judge vacates HHS gender-identity provisions in Biden-era health rule

Image generated by AI
Fact checked

A federal judge has struck down portions of a Biden-era regulation interpreting federal health care nondiscrimination law to cover gender identity, siding with Tennessee and 14 other states that sued the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

On October 22, 2025, U.S. District Judge Louis Guirola Jr. of the Southern District of Mississippi granted summary judgment to a 15-state coalition and vacated provisions of HHS’s May 6, 2024, Section 1557 final rule to the extent they interpreted sex discrimination to include gender identity. The court also issued a declaratory judgment that HHS exceeded its statutory authority by adopting that interpretation and by issuing related regulations on gender-affirming care.

The case—State of Tennessee, et al. v. Kennedy, et al.—was brought by Tennessee and joined by Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Virginia, and West Virginia. The plaintiffs challenged parts of the 2024 rule that amended multiple HHS and CMS regulations and, among other things, identified gender identity as a form of sex discrimination under Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act, which incorporates Title IX’s prohibition on sex discrimination.

“In the opinion of the Court, Congress only contemplated biological sex when it enacted Title IX in 1972,” Judge Guirola wrote. “Therefore, the Court finds that HHS exceeded its authority by implementing regulations redefining sex discrimination and prohibiting gender-identity discrimination.”

Citing specific provisions of the rule, the court noted that covered entities—including state-run health benefit exchanges and recipients of Medicaid and Medicare funds—would have been barred from denying or limiting health services sought for gender transition or other gender‑affirming care if those services are provided for other purposes and the denial is based on sex assigned at birth or gender identity. The judge concluded that HHS lacked authority to extend Title IX’s meaning of sex to gender identity via Section 1557 and vacated the identified provisions on a nationwide basis.

The ruling followed a July 3, 2024, preliminary injunction that had already paused enforcement of the rule’s gender-identity provisions. After a change in administration in January 2025, HHS sought dismissal on ripeness grounds, pointing to new executive orders and asserting there was no realistic threat of enforcement. The court rejected that argument, finding the rule remained on the books and that “the threat of enforcement and legal action is real,” warranting a final decision on the merits.

Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti praised the outcome, saying the coalition had prevented an unlawful reinterpretation of federal law. “When Biden-era bureaucrats tried to illegally rewrite our laws to force radical gender ideology into every corner of American health care, Tennessee stood strong and stopped them,” he said in a statement reported by the Daily Wire.

HHS finalized its Section 1557 rule on May 6, 2024, stating that sex discrimination includes, among other categories, gender identity. Multiple courts issued stays or preliminary injunctions against aspects of the rule in 2024, and Wednesday’s decision converts those temporary limits into a final judgment vacating the challenged provisions to the extent they treat gender identity as sex under Title IX as incorporated into Section 1557.

Related Articles

Illustration depicting BOP's new gender dysphoria policy document alongside a federal injunction blocking its enforcement, symbolizing legal tensions over transgender inmate care.
Image generated by AI

Bureau of Prisons adopts new gender dysphoria policy; federal injunction continues to block enforcement

Reported by AI Image generated by AI Fact checked

The U.S. Bureau of Prisons (BOP) issued a new program statement on February 19, 2026, titled “Management of Inmates with Gender Dysphoria,” setting out mental-health “evaluation and treatment” guidelines that describe gender dysphoria as a DSM-5-TR mental health diagnosis and define gender identity as “disconnected from biological reality and sex.” Advocates say the policy would end or restrict gender-affirming hormones and require the removal of gender-affirming personal items, but a federal court order in Kingdom v. Trump has required the BOP to continue providing hormone therapy and certain accommodations while the case proceeds.

A Biden-appointed federal judge in Oregon issued a verbal ruling Thursday blocking a Trump administration HHS declaration that deemed transgender medical procedures for minors unsafe and ineffective. The decision sides with Democratic attorneys general who sued over the December 2025 policy from HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Reported by AI

The US Supreme Court has issued a preliminary ruling in Mirabelli v. Bonta, reinstating an injunction against California school policies that conceal students' gender transitions from parents. The decision upholds parents' constitutional rights to direct their children's upbringing, particularly in matters affecting mental health like gender dysphoria. The ruling comes amid ongoing debates over parental involvement in schools.

Vanderbilt University Medical Center has announced it will stop performing gender-affirming plastic surgeries for adults due to operational limitations. The Nashville-based hospital continues to offer nonsurgical gender-affirming care for those 19 and older but provides no such care for patients under 19. This decision follows earlier criticism of the program's former director for comments on the profitability of these procedures.

Reported by AI Fact checked

U.S. District Judge Brian E. Murphy issued an 81-page opinion in late February 2026 setting aside the Trump administration’s guidance for deporting immigrants to “third countries” without meaningful notice and an opportunity to object, concluding the policy violates due process protections and undermines challenges under U.S. and international anti-torture safeguards.

This website uses cookies

We use cookies for analytics to improve our site. Read our privacy policy for more information.
Decline