Some Real Talk About the Iran Deal
How Did ‘I’ll Fight the Jews’ Become a Selling Point For Democrats?
Wrong!
LA Does Not Love LA
Same S**t, Different Day
Pool Attacks Reflect the Left's Insanity
Your Castle, Their Plans: 21 Years After Kelo, the Government Still Holds the...
America Needs Fewer Performers and More Adults
No Ceasefire in the Islamic Republic’s War Against Women
Trump to Pardon 250 for 250: Will Paul Petersen, Imprisoned Victim of Lawfare,...
Colombia's Socialist Despot Blames Israel After Electoral Loss to Trump-Backed Candidate
More Than 20 Shot in Chicago Over Weekend As Trump Offers Help
This NYT Father's Day Article Will Make You Vomit
Sen. Gallego Under Fire for Using Campaign Cash on Super Bowl Tickets, Family...
This Golfer's Dad Got a Perfect Father's Day Gift at the U.S. Open
Tipsheet

Federal Court Strikes Down Gender Identity Mandates on States, Health Care Providers

Federal Court Strikes Down Gender Identity Mandates on States, Health Care Providers
AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta, File

A federal court struck down the Biden administration's attempt to impose gender-identity mandates on health care providers and state Medicaid programs through regulations implementing Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act. 

Advertisement

Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti and Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch had sued over the Biden administration's attempt to impose gender-identity mandates on health care providers and state Medicaid programs through regulations implementing Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act. About 15 other states joined the lawsuit.

The states argued that the rules would have forced doctors to perform gender-transition procedures and force taxpayers to fund them.  The Court’s final judgment eliminates those provisions, but it also makes it more difficult for future administrations to revive them. 

The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi held that the Department of Health and Human Services exceeded its authority when it issued a rule in May 2024 redefining Title IX’s prohibition against discrimination “on the basis of sex”—which Congress incorporated into the ACA through Section 1557—to include gender identity. HHS’s 2024 rule represented a disturbing federal intrusion into the States’ traditional authority to regulate health care and make decisions about their own Medicaid programs. 

Specifically, the rule would have prohibited health care facilities from maintaining sex-segregated spaces, required certain health care providers to administer unproven and risky procedures for gender dysphoria, and forced states to subsidize those experimental treatments through their Medicaid programs. 

Advertisement

In vacating the rule, Judge Louis Guirola determined that when Congress passed Title IX in 1972, "sex" meant biological sex and that federal agencies cannot unilaterally rewrite laws decades later to advance political agendas. 

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

Skrmetti welcomed the ruling. 

“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,” said Attorney General Skrmetti. “Our fifteen-State coalition worked together to protect the right of health care providers across America to make decisions based on evidence, reason, and conscience. This decision restores not just common sense but also constitutional limits on federal overreach, and I am proud of the team of excellent attorneys who fought this through to the finish.”

 

Advertisement

 Pr25 51 Opinion  by  scott.mcclallen 


Tennessee, along with Mississippi, led a broad coalition of 15 states in this lawsuit, including Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Virginia, and West Virginia. 

"Plaintiffs’ claims are not premature, abstract, or contingent," the court wrote. "The promise of HHS 'consideration' offers little comfort or protection from, as noted below, an overreach of executive authority. The Rule is in place, and the threat of enforcement and legal action is real. Therefore, this lawsuit is ripe for a decision."

Editor’s Note: The Schumer Shutdown is here. Rather than put the American people first, Chuck Schumer and the radical Democrats forced a government shutdown for healthcare for illegals. They own this.

Help us continue to report the truth about the Schumer Shutdown. Use promo code POTUS47 to get 74% off your VIP membership.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement