U.S. District Court Judge Lauren King
Appointed by: Joe Biden
Posted on 03/03/2025 3:56:33 AM PST by where's_the_Outrage?
On Friday, U.S. District Court Judge Lauren King issued a preliminary injunction blocking the Trump administration's executive order banning funding for hospitals that provide gender-affirming treatments to transgender youth. The order applies to the states of Washington, Oregon, Minnesota and Colorado.
Newsweek contacted the White House press office for comment on Saturday via email outside of regular office hours.
Why It Matters
Since returning to the White House on January 20, President Donald Trump has signed a slew of executive orders impacting on transgender rights, which his supporters claim muddy the biological difference between males and females and are a threat to women's rights.
One executive order blocked federal funding from hospitals and clinics that offer gender-affirming care to those under the age of 19, whilst another banned transgender people from serving in the military, though both have faced legal challenges......
Trump's executive order states: "It is the policy of the United States that it will not fund, sponsor, promote, assist, or support the so-called 'transition' of a child from one sex to another."
However, the plaintiffs argued this was unconstitutional, violating the 5th and 10th Amendments to the Constitution by seeking to impose healthcare policy on individual states. They also argued that the executive restricting funding which Congress had already appropriated undermined the separation of powers.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
They can do whatever they want. They just can force the sane states to pay for it.
And vacuous media “judge” Lauren King (I Izza Injun!) should realize that the States are free to try to sell the idea of them paying for this madness on their own.
Just not the rest of the country.
Transgender healthcare. I dunno. Slavery was states rights.
“which also means they should not be funding it.”
There you go!
Trump’s executive order states: “It is the policy of the United States that it will not fund,
sponsor, promote, assist, or support the so-called ‘transition’ of a child from one sex to another.”
However, the plaintiffs for Washington, Oregon, Minnesota and Colorado argued this violated the 5th and 10th Amendments by seeking to impose healthcare policy; the executive restricting funding which Congress had already appropriated undermined the separation of powers, as well.
OK, let's take this ball and run with it. Article I, Section 8 provides Congress with NO powers over healthcare or health insurance. If this plaintiff is successful, we could use his own argument to strike down Medicare, Medicaid, S-CHIP, CDC, etc. or at least pass those functions down to the states to run and fund how they wish. They can even enter into interstate compacts on healthcare, subject to the approval of Congress. Meantime, the Medicare tax gets eliminated, and the deficit will hopefully go down.
Well, I can dream, can't I?
Appointed by: Joe Biden
Fight, Fight, Fight!
(A reminder for those who think this thing we are doing would be easy)
defund the states in other ways
Someone here was all butt hurt about the EO making English the official language. Said that if the FFs wanted an official language it would be in the Constitution.
There are millions of programs, policies, and laws that exist today that weren’t mentioned in the Constitution. All the things you mentioned are among them.
They also argued that the executive restricting funding which Congress had already appropriated undermined the separation of powers.
Yet Democrats had no issue with Democratic presidents restricting funding of the border and border security congress had already appropriated.
That’s exactly what I’m hoping for as well.
How does it violate the 5th?
And if it violates the 10th, then funding should immediately stop, as its not a federal role.
Oh wait: its up to the states to decide then to force the feds to pay for it?
I hope the SCOTUS is already formulating the correct response to this and other insanities in the system. [Looking at YOU, Roberts and Barret...]
“...the 10th Amendment as the Federal Government does not have the enumerated power over transgender...”
And why do you insist that the 10th amendment is binding on Trump when it is not binding on democrat presidents?
another affirmative action bimbo ...
No, just another evil soul that has obtained too much power and needs to be sent back to where she actually belongs, by the Lord almighty.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.