Families sue Southern California hospital system for withholding care from transgender youth

A group of California families is suing one of the nation’s largest pediatric hospital systems, arguing that its abrupt decision to halt legal gender-affirming care for transgender youth based on Trump administration pressure was not just disruptive, but unlawful.

Keep up with the latest in LGBTQ+ news and politics. Sign up for The Advocate's email newsletter.

The class action complaint, unsealed Thursday morning in San Diego County Superior Court, accuses Rady Children’s Health of discriminating against transgender patients when it moved in January to stop providing care to people under 19. That decision put roughly 1,900 young patients at risk of losing treatment.

The plaintiffs, four minors identified only by initials, represent what their attorneys describe as a broader class of families now navigating canceled appointments, uncertain access, and the possibility of traveling hundreds of miles for care that had, until weeks ago, been routine.

“The suit is filed on behalf of those families and the adolescents who are patients at Rady Hospital,” National Center for LGBTQ+ Rights staff attorney Amy Whelan told The Advocate in an interview.

Related: Trump looks to stop gender-affirming care for America's transgender youth: report

Related: Children’s National Hospital caves under Trump’s pressure & ends gender-affirming care for trans patients

Related: NYU Langone Hospital ends gender-affirming care program for trans teens after Trump funding threats

At the center of the case is a straightforward claim with widespread implications: that Rady’s policy amounts to discrimination.

“Our lawsuit alleges that Rady’s decision to terminate care for transgender patients is discrimination … because Rady is basically deciding to stop care based on who those patients are,” Whelan said. “Under California law, that’s discrimination based on sex and gender identity, which is prohibited.”

Since returning to office in January 2025, President Donald Trump has issued executive orders and proposed regulations aimed at effectively ending such care nationwide, not by outright banning it, but by threatening to cut off Medicare and Medicaid funding to hospitals that provide puberty blockers, hormone therapy, or related treatment to transgender youth. Those moves have been reinforced by federal investigations and public pressure from health officials, contributing to a wave of hospitals pausing or scaling back care; more than 40 systems have restricted services since early 2025.

The legal fight is unfolding alongside a separate case brought by California Attorney General Rob Bonta, who sued the hospital system in January, arguing that it violated state law and the terms of a merger agreement by attempting to eliminate gender-affirming care without approval.

Together, the cases capture a growing crisis in American medicine, with hospitals caught between state laws that explicitly protect transgender patients and federal pressure campaigns that seek to restrict their care.

Rady Children’s Health cited “recent federal actions” when it announced on January 20 that it would end gender-affirming care, according to the complaint. Those actions include threats tied to federal funding, part of a broader push by the Trump administration to curtail access to care for transgender minors.

Related: Mount Sinai Hospital drops gender-affirming care for trans teens, leaving New York families worried

Related: California hospital will continue youth gender-affirming care after families protest

Related: Major Virginia medical center stops gender-affirming care for minors after Trump’s executive order

But Whelan said that rationale does not hold up under California law.

“Hospitals cannot legally refuse to treat a patient because of who they are,” she said. “It is unconscionable that hospitals are caving into the threats of this administration … because in doing so, they are turning away patients that they know need care.”

But in California, those pressures collide with a legal framework designed to do the opposite. According to the American Civil Liberties Union, state law protects access to gender-affirming care for both adults and young people, and providers are required to follow those protections regardless of shifting federal policy.

Whelan said the hospital’s decision reflects a deeper rupture between those obligations and political pressure.

“Medical care is something that is controlled and regulated by states, not the federal government,” Whelan said. “So the actions by this administration are unlawful.”

Still, the effects of those federal threats are already being felt.

Related: Trans 18-year-old sues hospital for last-minute cancellation of gender-affirming surgery

Related: New York AG orders major medical center to resume gender-affirming care for youth

Related: RFK Jr.'s HHS investigates Seattle Children's Hospital over youth gender-affirming care

According to the complaint, some patients were preparing to begin puberty blockers or hormone therapy when their care was halted. Others, already in treatment, now face interruptions that doctors warn can carry lasting physical and psychological consequences, including heightened risks of depression, anxiety, and suicidality.

All major medical associations endorse providing gender-affirming care to young people as necessary and life-saving.

Whelan warned that the hospital’s actions could signal something larger.

“I think if these hospitals comply in advance to these unlawful threats, that is very dangerous to patient care and also sets a very dangerous precedent,” she said.