Judge Halts Obama Admin Rules That Might Require Doctors to Assist With ‘Gender Transitions’

Photo Credit: George Hodan

AUSTIN, Texas — A federal judge in Texas has halted a rule issued by the Obama administration that some believe might require doctors to aid patients who desire to undergo gender transition treatments—from hormone therapy to mastectomies—despite their convictions or belief that the procedure would not be beneficial for the person.

“Plaintiffs will be forced to either violate their religious beliefs or maintain their current policies which seem to be in direct conflict with the rule and risk the severe consequences of enforcement,” declared Judge Reed O’Connor on Saturday, who also had halted a rule regarding “transgender” restroom use at public schools this past summer.

He found that the hospital regulations would likely violate the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).

As previously reported, Texas, Wisconsin, Kentucky, Nebraska, Arizona, Louisiana, Mississippi and Kansas all filed suit over the matter in August, as well as the Christian Medical and Dental Association and the Roman Catholic Franciscan Alliance.

The states challenged a rule released by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) that “builds on prior federal civil rights laws to prohibit sex discrimination in health care.”

“The final rule requires that women be treated equally with men in the health care they receive and also prohibits the denial of health care or health coverage based on an individual’s sex, including discrimination based on pregnancy, gender identity, and sex stereotyping,” the document released by HHS outlines.

The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty noted that the preamble to the rules outlined that doctors who accept Medicare or Medicaid will be required to provide the same services to transgendered individuals that they would normally offer to others, if those services are considered “medically necessary to treat gender dysphoria.”

  • Connect with Christian News

“The rule requires covered employers, and their healthcare providers and professionals, to perform (or refer for) medical transition procedures (such as hysterectomies, mastectomies, hormone treatments, plastic surgery, etc.), if a physician or healthcare provider offers analogous services in other contexts,” it wrote in its brief.

“For example, in the preamble, HHS stated, ‘A provider specializing in gynecological services that previously declined to provide a medically necessary hysterectomy for a transgender man would have to revise its policy to provide the procedure for transgender individuals in the same manner it provides the procedure for other individuals,’” the organization noted.

The rules were set to go into effect today, Jan. 1, but O’Connor sided with the Plaintiffs in granting a temporary injunction while the case moves forward in court.

“While this lawsuit involves many issues of great importance—state sovereignty, expanded healthcare coverage, anti-discrimination protections, and medical judgment—ultimately, the question before the court is whether Defendants exceeded their authority under the ACA (Administrative Procedure Act) in the challenged regulations’ interpretation of sex discrimination and whether the regulation violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act as applied to Private Plaintiffs,” he wrote.

White House spokeswoman Katie Hill expressed disappointment over the development.

“Today’s decision is a setback, but hopefully a temporary one, since all Americans—regardless of their sex or sexual orientation—should have access to quality, affordable health care free from discrimination,” she said in a statement.

Liberty Counsel Founder and Chairman Mat Staver chimed in on the matter on Monday, stating, “Our First Amendment protects everyone, even doctors, from being forced to take disastrous actions opposing their religious beliefs. These patients, and especially children, need to find a safe environment to address the roots of their desire for sex-change surgery. Oftentimes, surgical mutilation does nothing to heal the hurt and heart of the matter. These people need to be lovingly counseled, not cut up.”


A special message from the publisher...

Dear Reader, because of your generous support, we have received enough funds to send many audio Bibles to Iraqi and Syrian refugees displaced by ISIS in the Middle East. Many have been distributed and received with gladness. While we provide for the physical needs of the people, we seek to provide the eternal hope only found in Jesus Christ through the word of God. Would you join us by making a donation today to this important work? Please click here to send an audio Bible to a refugee family >>

Print Friendly
  • Amos Moses

    Good video ………… good testimony ……….

  • Whiteguy

    He will continue to ignore the problems at the VA but will do all he can for trannies.

    And they are confused at why they last the election…

    • Martha Bartha

      Last? Lost!

      • Whiteguy

        fixed it.

    • Jennifer Ann Mendez

      Come on, think about all the heterosexual men and women who can benefit from legislation like this. It says they have to provide the same treatment to a transgender that they provide to a heterosexual person. Well that works both ways. If they are going to stick double D’s on a man and the insurance and/or employer will have to pay for it, then us ladies will be able to get a new rack too. Just think how wonderful it will be. Brand new double D’s on any women that wants them(or if her man wants her to have them) and the best part is they will be free! After-all it’s illegal to discriminate based on sexual orientation even when the person is heterosexual, lol.

      • Whiteguy

        Not a good trade.

  • Martha Bartha

    Mental Illness!

  • Grace Kim Kwon

    Good Texas. What an evil to try to destroy American children and by bending the doctors’ conscience at that. American children must get educated on God’s creation order and not to want transgenderism.

    • Trilemma

      Where does the Bible say transgender is sin?

      • Grace Kim Kwon

        Genesis 1, Leviticus 18-20, and Deuteronomy 22. God created each person’s gender and prohibited homosexuality and sex-appearance exchange.

        • Trilemma

          Genesis 1 doesn’t mention transgenderism nor does it mention sin. Leviticus 18-20 doesn’t mention transgenderism. Deuteronomy 22:5 isn’t talking about transgenderism. It’s saying a woman must not put on men’s armor to go into battle and a man must not put on women’s clothing to avoid going into battle.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Genesis 1 says that God created male and female. Leviticus 18-20 prohibits all forms of perversion including homosexuality. Deuteronomy 22 prohibits cross-dressing. War has nothing to do with it. Transgenderism and homosexuality are interchangable and the Holy Bible prohibits both. Read also Romans 1.

          • Trilemma

            People who are transgender are male and female.

            Leviticus 18-20 prohibits many perversions but it doesn’t mention transgenderism as one of them.

            Cross-dressing and transgenderism are two different things.

            Homosexuality and transgenderism are two different things.

            Romans 1 doesn’t mention transgenderism.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            God created people male and female. Permanent cross-dressing and transgenderinsm are the same thing. Transgender people commit homosexual sins. Transgenderism is a willful rebellion against the Creator God, but the West demands people to support this rebellion unconditionally. Both homosexuality and transgenderism are unacceptable sins.

            Jesus said, “But from the beginning of the creation, God ‘made them male and female.’ ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’; so then they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.” ( Mark chapter 10)

        • Lisa

          what would you “as a real parent” do if you found out your child was gay? Would you send him to therapy: for a cure? what? throw him out of the house? I am curious to know what Bible believing Christians do under these circumstances .. and it DOES happen.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Pray for children and teach them God’s truth from the Holy Bible and continue evangelizing and educating the mankind. If the society is not too well-fed or bored, transgenderism rarely happens. Rich Western nations’ people are seeking warped amusement out of boredom. Teach children the Biblical truth and raise them according to the birth gender that was given by the Creator God. If adult children claim trangerderism, excommunication should be carried out until repentance, still praying for them.

  • Oboehner

    There you have it, according to those who claim one court decision makes precedent for all to follow, “transgender” bathroom use by opposite biological persons is illegal.
    This article brings up another question, why on earth if some nutjob male thinks he is a woman, would he need hormone therapy? Would he already have all he needs?

    • Ambulance Chaser

      I don’t think you could possibly misunderstand what’s going on in this article any more if you tried. Other than the fact that it involves transgender people, nothing in your comment bears any relationship to what this story is about.

    • Jenny Ondioline

      Well, I think you’re dead from the neck up.

  • Jennifer Ann Mendez

    I can already see the lawsuits coming from heterosexual women. If this essentially says that a man who wants to transgender to a women is allowed to be sent to a plastic surgeon for a breast augmentation, so they can transition and feel more womanly, and the insurance or employer will have to pay for it, then it’s only fair for any women who also wants Breast implants in order to feel more womanly or correct the sagging that sometimes happens after having a child, be allowed it too. Right now Insurance doesn’t cover things like Breast implants unless it’s for reconstruction after Cancer. If this is allowed then it will open the door for any woman to claim discrimination if the insurance says they will provide a man implants but not a woman. That’s sexual discrimination. If this goes thru get in line ladies, because we will all be getting a brand new rack, courtesy of the insurance industry, lol.