The activist judiciary needs to be reined in. That isn’t going to happen soon.
Because a Biden-appointed federal judge just threw Trump for a loop.
Trump Administration’s Bold Stand for Kids Blocked by Activist Judge
The Trump administration’s decisive effort to protect American children from experimental “s-x-rejecting procedures” suffered a temporary setback when a federal judge appointed by Joe Biden in 2023 blocked key HHS guidance from Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
In December, HHS issued a strong declaration concluding that puberty blockers, cross-s-x hormones, and surgeries like mastectomies or v-ginoplasties for minors with gender dysphoria are neither safe nor effective, fail to meet professional medical standards, and carry documented risks of significant harm with weak evidence of any real benefit.
This common-sense position aligned directly with President Trump’s campaign promise to shield children from what he has called “transgender mutilation surgeries,” reinforcing his commitment to evidence-based medicine over radical ideology. The declaration aimed to prevent federal funding from supporting these controversial interventions on kids, prioritizing their long-term health and well-being.
Blue States and Biden-Appointed Judge Push Back Against Protection Efforts
A coalition of 20 Democrat-led states plus Washington, D.C.—many of which have aggressively promoted these treatments—sued to challenge the declaration, claiming it overstepped authority and bypassed formal rulemaking.
U.S. District Judge Mustafa Taher Kasubhai in Oregon sided with the plaintiffs after a lengthy hearing, granting preliminary relief to providers and blocking immediate enforcement against hospitals and doctors offering the procedures.
In his remarks, the judge criticized the approach as a “‘break it and see’ action” that does not adhere to the “rule of law,” stating: “There’s a theme of ‘Break it and see what others will do,’ and that’s not a system or method committed to the rule of law. That notion that ‘I will go forward, issue a declaration and see if we can get away with it,’ that is not a principle of governance that adheres to the overarching commitment to the democratic public that requires the rule of law to be regarded and respected and honored as sacred.”
The Trump administration had defended the declaration as a non-binding policy statement based on a thorough review of medical literature, international trends moving away from such interventions, and core ethical principles.
HHS emphasized that Secretary Kennedy was simply articulating an informed opinion on practices that put vulnerable minors at risk.
Trump’s Commitment to Child Safety Remains Unwavering
New York Attorney General Letitia James celebrated the ruling, claiming it protects “life-saving treatment” and accusing the administration of intimidation tactics.
Yet growing international consensus, mounting evidence of harms, and concerns from medical professionals worldwide continue to validate the Trump team’s focus on caution and protecting America’s youth from irreversible decisions.
This ruling by a Biden-era judge highlights the challenges of implementing strong, child-first reforms in the face of entrenched opposition from blue states and activist courts.
Nevertheless, the Trump administration’s proactive leadership—rooted in science, ethics, and a determination to put children before ideology—signals a clear break from prior policies that rushed minors into life-altering interventions. The fight to safeguard the next generation continues, with President Trump’s America-first priorities steadfast in defense of common sense and parental rights.
