TL;DR
Get oils, diffusers and self-care delivered free — and shop member deals
- Fast, free delivery on millions of items
- Access to Prime Big Deal Days deals on October 6–7
- Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
The Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court to let it enforce restrictions on gender-affirming care in federal prisons while a lawsuit proceeds. A federal judge ordered the government to continue providing care, and a divided appeals court left that order in place. The Supreme Court has not yet ruled on the emergency request.
The Trump administration has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to let it enforce restrictions on gender-affirming care in federal prisons while a lawsuit continues, seeking to pause a lower court order requiring the government to provide that care. The request follows a divided appeals court decision that left the order in place, and the high court has not yet ruled.
The administration’s emergency appeal asks the justices to freeze an order by U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth. The judge directed the government to continue providing gender-affirming care, including hormone therapy, while the legal challenge proceeds. The report does not specify when the Supreme Court will act.
The policy at issue halts surgeries, hormone interventions and some social accommodations, including wigs, while allowing mental health therapy to continue. The administration says the policy was properly adopted after President Donald Trump issued an executive order on Sept. 29, 2026, directing the Bureau of Prisons to revise its medical care policies. The order said federal funds should not be spent “for the purpose of conforming an inmate’s appearance to that of the opposite sex.”
In its filing, the government said the Bureau of Prisons had concluded that surgeries, hormone interventions in general and social accommodations could no longer be justified as treatment for gender dysphoria. The bureau said in 2025 that it was providing hormone therapy to more than 600 inmates. That is a reported count; the source gives no comparison baseline for the figure.
Care Rules for Federal Prisoners
The Supreme Court’s response could determine whether the restrictions take effect while the case is still being litigated. If the justices pause Lamberth’s order, the administration could enforce its policy during that period. If they leave the order in place, the government would remain required to provide care covered by the ruling while the lawsuit continues.
The case concerns the government’s treatment of people in its custody and the legal limits on prison medical policies. Lamberth wrote that the Bureau of Prisons did not dispute that gender dysphoria can cause severe effects, including depression, anxiety and suicidal thoughts. ACLU attorneys representing the inmates argue that withholding necessary gender-affirming healthcare threatens their well-being and violates their rights. Those are the inmates’ lawyers’ claims; the Supreme Court has not resolved the dispute.
How the Prison Policy Reached Court
The restrictions followed an executive order requiring the Bureau of Prisons to revise its medical care policies. The administration says that directive supports ending the specified treatments and accommodations. The inmates challenged the policy, and Lamberth ordered continued care as the litigation moved forward. A divided panel of the appeals court declined to block his order, prompting the administration to seek emergency relief from the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court has previously upheld state laws restricting certain medical treatments for transgender youth and rules limiting transgender athletes’ participation in women’s sports. It has also issued temporary decisions allowing the administration to proceed with other policies affecting transgender people, including policies concerning military service and passports. Those cases provide context for the court’s recent actions, but they do not decide the legal questions in this prison-care case.
““determined that sex-trait-modification surgeries, hormone interventions in general, and social accommodations could no longer be justified as treatment for gender dysphoria.””
— The Trump administration, describing the Bureau of Prisons’ position in its Supreme Court filing
Supreme Court Ruling Still Pending
The justices have not said whether they will pause Lamberth’s order, and the source report gives no timetable for a decision. It also does not describe the full legal arguments from each side or specify which treatments and accommodations the lower court order covers in every individual case. The underlying lawsuit remains unresolved, so the final legality of the policy is still open.
Emergency Request Awaits Justices
The next immediate step is for the Supreme Court to consider the administration’s request to freeze Lamberth’s order. Its decision will determine whether the restrictions can be enforced during the ongoing lawsuit. The parties will continue litigating the policy in the lower courts, where the broader challenge to its legality remains pending.
Key Questions
What is the Trump administration asking the Supreme Court to do?
It is asking the justices to pause a lower court order requiring continued gender-affirming care in federal prisons, so the administration can enforce its restrictions while the lawsuit proceeds.
What care does the policy restrict?
According to the report, the policy halts surgeries, hormone interventions and some social accommodations, including wigs. It allows mental health therapy to continue.
Has the Supreme Court ruled on the request?
No. The emergency request is pending, and the source report does not give a date for a decision.
What happens while the lawsuit continues?
That depends on the Supreme Court’s response. If it pauses Lamberth’s order, the administration could enforce the restrictions during the case. If it does not, the order requiring continued care remains in effect while litigation continues.
Source: rss
Fall Picks
fall essentials
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
