The Harm

You see all over the news how the Republicans are saying that they are saving the children, but the opposite is true, they are harming us, not saving us!

Overview of President Trump’s Executive Actions Impacting LGBTQ+ Health

KFF

Authors: Lindsey Dawson and Jennifer Kates

Published: Apr 21, 2026

Starting on the first day of his second term, President Trump began to issue numerous executive actions, several of which directly address or affect health programs, efforts, or policies to meet the health needs of LGBTQ+ people. This guide provides an overview of these actions, in the order in which they were issued. The “date issued” is date the action was first taken; subsequent actions, such as litigation efforts, are listed under “What Happens/Implications.” It is not inclusive of administrative actions that impact LGBTQ+ people that are not directly related to health and health care access, such as efforts related to participation in sport even though those actions might have an impact on well-being. In addition, within the actions examined, only provisions directly related to health and health access are described in table.

Trump issued a number of anti-trans EOs!

Initial Rescissions of Harmful Executive Orders and Actions, January 20, 2025

Implications: This order could lead to less oversight, reduced health programing, and fewer policies protecting LGBTQ+ people, which could negatively impact access to care and well-being. Of particular note:

• Rescinds orders that had called for LGBTQ+ people’s health equity, the national public health needs of LGBTQ+ people, LGBTQ+ data collection, and nondiscrimination protections, including in health care.
• Rescinds orders that had called for nondiscrimination protections for LGBTQ+ young people in school, which could contribute to stigma and worsened mental health.

Executive Order: Defending Women From Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to The Federal Government, January 20, 2025

Implications: This order is broad, directed to all federal agencies and programs. Because federal health programs reach LGBTQ+ people, and some are specifically designed to be inclusive of the LGBTQ+ community, or account for gender identities in addition to biological sex, this Order could widely affect program funding, guidance, and access. It has several possible implications:

The terms used in the Order include several biological and social inaccuracies which could perpetuate misinformation about LGBTQ+ people and transgender people’s health needs. It also takes steps towards ban gender care in certain area, most explicitly in prisons.

Executive Order: Protecting Children From Chemical and Surgical Mutilation, January 28, 2025

Implications: If fully implemented, the Order would broadly and extensively limit access to gender affirming care for young people, across a range of payers and providers. Access to gender affirming care is associated with improved mental health outcomes for transgender people and limiting this care with negative ones, including poorer mental health outcomes. Additional impact includes:

• The executive order includes details about sex, gender identity, gender affirming care, and transgender people that conflict with science and evidence. These inaccuracies include suggesting that large shares of youth are seeking gender affirming medical care, that regret rates among those seeking care are high, and conflating “female genital mutilation” and gender-affirming care. This has the potential to promote hostility, stigma, and discrimination, and can lead to care denials.

But judges are going "Wait a minute!" some judges are throwing out the EO based on junk science while other judges are saying that they are an overreach of the laws.

Federal judge rebuffs Trump administration push to restrict gender-affirming care for minors

The ruling in the U.S. District Court for Maryland keeps protections in place for providers offering gender-affirming care to patients under 19 while the legal fight continues.

The Advocate

Christopher Wiggins

Apr 06, 2026

A federal judge has refused to lift a nationwide block on key portions of President Donald Trump’s effort to restrict gender-affirming care for minors, preserving access to treatment even as the case remains tied up in an appeals process.

On Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Brendan A. Hurson denied the administration’s request to stay a preliminary injunction that bars federal officials from conditioning or terminating funding for health care providers based on their provision of gender-affirming care to patients under 19.

The ruling keeps in place a March 2025 injunction secured by PFLAG, families, and medical organizations challenging two executive orders directing federal agencies to limit funding tied to what the administration has described as “gender ideology” and certain medical treatments for transgender youth.

In another court this time in Oregon,

Federal Court Strikes Down Kennedy Declaration on Transgender Healthcare

JD Supra

April 20, 2026

On April 18, 2026, the United States District Court for the District of Oregon issued a sweeping opinion vacating the “Kennedy Declaration,” a directive issued by HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. in December 2025 without notice-and-comment rulemaking. The Kennedy Declaration purported to establish that transgender healthcare for minors falls below professionally recognized standards of health care and threatened providers with exclusion from Medicare and Medicaid. Opinion and Order, State of Oregon, et al. v. Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., et al., No. 6:25-cv-02409-MTK (D. Oregon Apr. 18, 2026) (ECF 93).

The court granted summary judgment for the 22 Plaintiff States, vacated the Kennedy Declaration in its entirety, declared that HHS lacks authority to unilaterally establish standards of care superseding state-recognized standards, and permanently enjoined HHS and its Office of Inspector General (OIG) from implementing the Kennedy Declaration or any materially similar policy against any provider in the Plaintiff States.

This ruling delivers immediate, concrete protection to healthcare providers in Oregon, Washington, New York, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawai’i, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Wisconsin. The court’s opinion—notable for its extraordinarily pointed criticism of the administration’s conduct as causing “very real harm to very real people”—found the Kennedy Declaration unlawful on multiple grounds.

Even with these ruling hospitals are going to be gun-shy to take up any healthcare for us. The hospital are worried about losing funding for Medicare and Medicaid. I doubt very much that any trans healthcare programs will be restarted out of not legal fears but fear of Trump's vengeance.