The above map illustrates the scope of that litigation, which was initiated by a coalition of 25, e. They’re suing the federal government over a new policy ending coverage for gender-affirming care in all federal health insurance programs. The new policy went into effect at the beginning of this year. Advocates for transgender rights and healthcare access have rightly sounded the alarm over it.
The lawsuit specifically names the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) as a direct defendant. In a letter sent in August, OPM made clear that beginning in 2026, health insurance for federal employees and U.S. postal workers would no longer provide coverage for “chemical and surgical modification of an individual’s sex traits through medical interventions.” This regulatory change is the latest move in the Trump administration’s ongoing campaign to prohibit all gender-affirming medical treatment for transgender minors.
The case addresses the new rules of the game advanced by U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. It is consistent with the goals of the OPM. These regulations would cut off Medicaid and Medicare reimbursements to hospitals that treat minors with gender-affirming care. Under the proposed regulations, the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) would be banned from covering gender-affirming care.
The Human Rights Campaign Foundation has been on the forefront of advocacy. To back up these vulnerable federal employees, they have filed an amicus complaint. The complaint, filed by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of the group, contends that the new policy amounts to discrimination against transgender people.
That’s why Democratic state attorneys general are going to war. They are suing the Trump administration to block proposed regulations that would restrict access to gender-affirming care for minors. These proactive efforts signal the increasing backlash to anti-trans policies that many see as discriminatory and harmful to trans people.
Each of these developments have major implications for federal employees. U.S. postal workers are a particularly vulnerable set of workers who would be impacted by this policy shift. Advocates maintain that removing coverage for gender-affirming care is a blatant attempt to erode access to this essential, life-saving care. This decision is a dangerous precedent for the rights of transgender people.
