New York Attorney General Letitia James issued a strong warning to hospitals across the state on Monday, reminding them that New York law protects the provision of gender-affirming care for minors.
The statement came in response to President Donald Trump’s executive order aimed at curtailing federal funding for gender-affirming treatments, sparking confusion and policy shifts at hospitals in several states.
Trump’s Executive Order: A Nationwide Controversy
What the Executive Order Says
President Trump signed the executive order last week, directing federal agencies to ensure that hospitals receiving federal research and education grants stop providing gender-affirming treatments for individuals under the age of 19.
The order describes gender-affirming care using terms like “chemical and surgical mutilation,” language that contradicts established medical guidelines in the U.S.
The White House released a statement on Monday claiming that the order is “already having its intended effect,” as some hospitals in states like Colorado, Virginia, and Washington, D.C., have paused such treatments for young people pending further review.
Letitia James’s Response
A Warning to New York Hospitals
In a letter to healthcare providers, James emphasized that refusing to provide gender-affirming care would violate New York’s anti-discrimination laws.
“Regardless of the availability of federal funding, we write to further remind you of your obligations to comply with New York State laws,” her letter reads, asserting that state laws protecting LGBTQ+ rights supersede any federal order in this context.
Legal Basis for Protection
New York’s anti-discrimination laws safeguard access to healthcare for transgender individuals. This means that any hospital refusing to provide gender-affirming care could face legal consequences.
Gender-Affirming Care and Political Debate
Gender-affirming treatments, such as puberty blockers and hormone therapy, have been at the center of heated political debates across the U.S. However, studies show that these treatments are not common. A recent study revealed that fewer than 1 in 1,000 U.S. adolescents with commercial insurance received puberty blockers or hormones over a five-year period.
Despite its rarity, gender-affirming care has been subject to legislative and executive actions, particularly in conservative states and now at the federal level.
Hospitals Evaluate the Impact
Ongoing Discussions
Brian Conway, spokesperson for the Greater New York Hospital Association, said that hospitals are collaborating to understand the legal and clinical implications of Trump’s order.
“We are collaboratively working through every aspect of the EO to determine its legal and clinical implications. That work is ongoing,” Conway said.
Hospitals in other states, such as Colorado and Virginia, have temporarily paused gender-affirming treatments while administrators assess the impact of the executive order.
Potential Consequences of Compliance or Non-Compliance
For Hospitals
- Non-Compliance Risks: Hospitals that comply with the executive order risk violating New York’s anti-discrimination laws, which could result in legal challenges and penalties.
- Compliance Risks: Hospitals that ignore the order could face federal funding cuts, particularly affecting their research and educational programs.
For Transgender Youth
Pausing gender-affirming treatments could have significant mental and physical health impacts for transgender youth. Medical experts warn that delaying such care could contribute to higher rates of anxiety, depression, and suicidal ideation among transgender adolescents.
The clash between Trump’s federal directive and New York’s state laws is likely to result in legal battles, setting the stage for broader national discussions on healthcare access for transgender individuals.
While some hospitals evaluate their options, Letitia James’s statement underscores that New York is committed to protecting gender-affirming care. As the legal and political landscape continues to shift, the well-being of transgender youth remains at the center of the debate.