Vermont Attorney General Charity Clark prevailed Saturday in a multistate lawsuit challenging the Trump Administration over a rule that would have restricted gender-affirming care for minors.
In December, U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced a proposed rule seeking to completely withhold Medicaid and Medicare funds from hospitals that provide gender-affirming care to young people. The same day, Kennedy’s office released a declaration stating that “sex-rejecting procedures” for minors are “neither safe nor effective.”
The rule would have conflicted with Vermont’s 2023 shield laws, which protect providers and recipients of this care. It would also have stood in opposition to many of the country’s leading professional medical associations — including the American Medical Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics — which are supportive of gender-affirming care for minors.
Clark joined an Oregon-led coalition of peers in 20 states and Washington, D.C. suing Kennedy days after his announcement.
Oregon federal judge Mustafa T. Kasubhai ruled in favor of Clark and her colleagues on Saturday, effectively blocking the rule. He also said Kennedy did not have legal authority to publish a document unilaterally revising standards for care.
“This decision is a victory in our ongoing fight for bodily autonomy and the rights of transgender youth,” said Clark in a statement Monday. “We will continue to fight to ensure that gender-affirming care remains safe, effective, and protected.”
With both legal protections and robust infrastructure in place to provide such care, Vermont is positioned to become a haven for those seeking gender-affirming care, particularly at the University of Vermont Medical Center’s Transgender Youth Program.
In December, Vermont Health Commissioner Rick Hildebrant reaffirmed the state’s commitment to supporting such care, writing: “We will continue to support providers and work to preserve access to care for vulnerable Vermont communities, regardless of any potential federal changes.”
The written opinion Saturday followed Kasubhai’s oral ruling last month granting summary judgement, meaning that the case held no real uncertainty and did not require a full trial.
“Unserious leaders are unsafe,” wrote Kasubhai in Saturday’s strongly-worded opinion. “Tragically, this case is one of a long list of examples of how a leader’s wanton disregard for the rule of law causes very real harm to very real people.”