by Bismarck, ND — A North Dakota judge has upheld the state’s ban on gender-affirming medical care for minors, ruling that the law does not discriminate based on sex but rather on age and medical purpose. The decision means families seeking such care will now have to travel out of state for treatment options.
According to the Associated Press (AP), District Judge Jackson Lofgren issued the ruling on Wednesday, stating that while the law restricts medical care for transgender youth, it does not violate constitutional protections.
Judge’s Ruling and Reasoning
In his written decision, Judge Lofgren emphasized that the law was not passed with discriminatory intent, citing the ongoing debate surrounding the safety and effectiveness of gender-affirming treatments.
“The evidence establishes there is an ongoing international debate regarding the safety and effectiveness of the medical procedures prohibited by the Health Care Law,” Lofgren wrote. “Where there is uncertainty, deference is given to the Legislature to decide where the line should be drawn.”
The court concluded that the North Dakota Legislature acted within its rights in enacting the law, and that there was “little evidence” lawmakers had an invidious discriminatory purpose.
Impact on Families Seeking Care
As a result of the ruling, parents in North Dakota who wish to seek gender-affirming medical care for their children must now travel to other states where such care remains legal. Treatments affected by the law include hormone therapy, puberty blockers, and surgical procedures for minors.
The decision mirrors a broader national trend, as at least 27 U.S. states have enacted similar bans or restrictions on gender-affirming care for minors, according to FOX 35 Orlando.
“It’s a law that needs to be there. We need to protect our youth, and that’s what the whole goal of this thing was from the beginning,” said Republican Rep. Bill Tviet, who introduced the law.
Reaction from Advocates and Legal Experts
The ruling has drawn sharp criticism from civil rights advocates and LGBTQ+ legal organizations who represented the plaintiffs in the case.
“This ruling is devastating for transgender youth and their families in North Dakota,” said Jess Braverman, Legal Director at Gender Justice, which represented the plaintiff. “The evidence in this case was overwhelming: this law inflicts real harm, strips families of their constitutional rights, and denies young people the medical care they need to thrive.”
Braverman added that advocates plan to continue fighting the ruling.
“Across the country, trans youth are being singled out and denied basic rights that every other young person takes for granted. We remain committed to ensuring that every family has the freedom to make private medical decisions without government interference.”
Broader Legal Context
The lawsuit challenging the law was initially filed by multiple affected families and a pediatric endocrinologist, but Judge Lofgren dismissed all but one of the claims, leaving only the doctor as a remaining plaintiff.
In June 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that states may legally ban or restrict gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors, effectively giving states more control over such legislation.
With the North Dakota ruling now standing, at least 27 states have active restrictions on gender-affirming care for youth, marking a significant shift in U.S. healthcare policy.
What are your thoughts on this controversial decision and its impact on families in North Dakota? Share your views in the comments below.
