Federal Court Bars Mandate for Gender-Affirming Care in Religious Healthcare Plans

Several recent federal court rulings have addressed the contentious issue of gender-affirming care in the United States, reflecting deep divisions over medical and religious considerations. Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti defended the state's ban on gender-affirming treatments for minors before the Supreme Court, framing his role as divinely appointed and emphasizing a broader cultural struggle. Meanwhile, a U.S. district judge blocked the Trump administration's attempt to end gender-affirming care for transgender federal inmates, allowing continued access to hormone therapy for those diagnosed with gender dysphoria. In North Dakota, a federal judge permanently enjoined the Department of Health and Human Services and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission from enforcing rules that would require Catholic employers to provide or cover gender-affirming care, recognizing religious objections and rejecting the agencies' argument for case-by-case exemptions. These rulings protect religious organizations from mandates to cover or perform gender transition procedures while allowing gender-affirming care to continue in other contexts, illustrating the ongoing legal and cultural battles over transgender healthcare rights and religious freedom.