Federal judge halts controversial proposed HHS rule

The Biden administration's efforts to foster the application of gender ideology in ever-expanding ways were dealt a noteworthy judicial blow last week.

As the Daily Wire reports, a federal judge in Mississippi temporarily halted the progress of a proposed Health and Human Services (HHS) Department rule that opponents contend would effectively force health care professionals to adopt its radical approach to transgender issues.

Judge rejects HHS rule

The pivotal decision was handed down by U.S. District Judge Lous Guirola Jr. who declared that HHS overstepped its authority by attempting to propose a rule designed to broaden prohibitions on sex discrimination to include those related to gender identity and sexual orientation.

According to a group of GOP officials, including Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti, the rule, if adopted, would require states to cover the costs of transgender surgery for minors.

Guirola's decision indicated that he was blocking the measure “so far as this final rule is intended to extend discrimination on the basis of sex to include discrimination on the basis of gender identity.”

Among the states suing for stop to the rule's promulgation were Mississippi, Georgia, Alabama, Indiana, Kentucky, Kansas, Nebraska, Louisiana, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, South Carolina, Virginia, and West Virginia.

Leaders from those states argued that the rule would trigger a requirement that states “use taxpayer funds to pay for unproven and costly gender-transition interventions through Medicaid and state health plans – even for children who may suffer irreversible harms.”

Reactions pour in

In the aftermath of the judge's ruling, Skrmetti expressed his approval, stating, “Today a federal court said no to the Biden administration's attempt to illegally force every health care provider in America to adopt the most extreme version of gender ideology.”

“The administration has over and over again issued regulations that mangle the law to advance an ideological agenda,” he went on. “This case is just one of many examples of Tennessee working with other states to block the unlawful abuse of regulatory power.”

On the other side of the coin, Kelley Robinson of the Human Rights Campaign voiced disappointment with the outcome, as The Hill noted.

“The discrimination LBGTQ+ people will continue to experience under this injunction is indefensible. Everyone deserves access to the medical care they need to be health and thrive,” said Robinson.

Appearing to pledge a continued court battle over the rule, Robinson added, “This isn't over: all LGBTQ+ people should receive the health care they deserve and be able to make informed decisions about our own bodies.”