Susan's Place Transgender Resources

Trump administration caves after avalanche of opposition to anti-trans hospital rule

https://www.advocate.com/politics/national/trump-abandons-trans-hospital-rule

Christopher Wiggins (14 July 2026)

A flood of public opposition helped stop one of the Trump administration's most extreme attempts to force hospitals nationwide to abandon gender-affirming care for transgender young people, offering a rare and instructive victory against a federal government that has otherwise moved aggressively to dismantle trans rights.

The Department of Health and Human Services has abandoned a proposed rule that would have threatened hospitals with the loss of all Medicare and Medicaid funding if they continued to provide transition-related care to minors, NPR was first to report on Monday. The proposal, issued in December, never took effect.

Its collapse followed more than 30,000 public comments submitted to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Nearly 20,000 came from Human Rights Campaign members and supporters, according to the organization. Equality California said major medical groups, including the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the Children's Hospital Association, also urged the administration to withdraw the rule.

We'll take that. 🙂

Yes, we will!

Teh W00t!

I think that people forget that the ones all these laws harm are children. They are struggling with a lot and here they are openly telling the world that they are a group to be hated. I pity these people and the future they have when this finally dawns on them.

Quote from: tammy753 on July 14, 2026, 05:15:59 PMI think that people forget that the ones all these laws harm are children. They are struggling with a lot and here they are openly telling the world that they are a group to be hated. I pity these people and the future they have when this finally dawns on them.

True. I went to a hospital that was out of town to discuss some stuff. They had cops and metal detectors. I have seen plenty of security guards through the years. But never metal detectors. That was wild. They would offer transcare for kids. Not sure what it was since I wasn't in that age group. But it is beyond disgusting that this would be an issue in some people's eyes. People need to get a life.

It would be interesting to speculate about the motivation for backtracking on this issue.  Why cave on the one issue they are so forceful about?  There's got to be some really serious reason.  Like maybe they are SO worried about the mid-term election that they realize they need to back off.

Hi Everyone

I think the most fundamental reason for the reversal is being missed.  Section 1801 of the Social Security Act, now 42 U.S.C.  § 1395, limits the federal government's power to use Medicare to control the practice of medicine or how medical services are provided.

This proposed rule was not simply saying that Medicare or Medicaid would not pay for a certain treatment.  It threatened hospitals with the loss of all Medicare and Medicaid funding if their doctors continued providing that treatment.  That could be seen as the federal government using funding to take control of medical decisions that the law leaves to doctors and hospitals.

The administration tried to get around this by claiming that gender-affirming care was not legitimate medical care.  However major medical organisations opposed that claim and thousands of public comments placed the legal and medical problems directly into the official record.

Medicare and Medicaid participation rules have traditionally dealt with matters such as hospital safety, staffing and procedures.  They have not normally been used to ban a particular treatment for a particular diagnosis.  This made the proposal look less like an ordinary funding condition and more like an attempt to control medical practice through the threat of losing federal funding.

The government has not admitted that this law caused the reversal.  Still it seems more than likely that the rule was withdrawn because it exceeded federal authority and would have been difficult to defend in court.  The public opposition mattered because it helped expose that weakness.

The law may have provided the weakness but public pressure forced that weakness into the open.

People Power!

Best Wishes Always
Sarah B
Global Moderator

Quote from: Sarah B on July 14, 2026, 08:18:47 PMThe government has not admitted that this law caused the reversal.  Still it seems more than likely that the rule was withdrawn because it exceeded federal authority and would have been difficult to defend in court.  The public opposition mattered because it helped expose that weakness.

That's interesting given the fact that this administration and particular its crime-lord-in-chief have never concerned themselves with the legalities of exceeding federal authority. It always makes me suspicious when they do things that aren't morally, ethically and legally corrupt.

Quote from: Sarah B on July 14, 2026, 08:18:47 PMThat could be seen as the federal government using funding to take control of medical decisions that the law leaves to doctors and hospitals.

Ah, that makes sense.  They must have figured that that was something that even their bought-and-paid-for Supreme Court would not support.