California AG Bonta Files Groundbreaking Lawsuit Against Rady Children’s Hospital for Dropping Trans Youth GAC

“If my child had a different diagnosis, they would likely have a surgery date tomorrow. But because of who my child is, the door was closed.”

From the Jan. 24 protest outside of Rady Children’s. Provided by TransFamily Support Services.

“For the last five months, there has been one thing standing in the way of getting my child the medically necessary treatment they needed,” Sasha, a California parent of a trans minor, said. Their written speech was read aloud by activists to the crowd of 600 protestors outside of Rady Children’s Hospital in San Diego on Jan. 24, according to organizers on the ground.

“It wasn’t science,” Sasha said of their barriers to care. “It was politics. It was a system deciding that my child’s healthcare was a debate, rather than a diagnosis.”

Sasha battled with insurance companies, with corporate bureaucracy, with the American health care system. “Our family lived on a roller coaster of hope and heartbreak,” they said. “I cannot tell you the relief of looking at my child and saying, ‘We did it. You’re going to get the care you need.’”

Then they called the hospital to schedule an appointment.

“That is when Rady’s told me that they simply don’t do it anymore,” Sasha said. “If my child had a different diagnosis, they would likely have a surgery date tomorrow. But because of who my child is, the door was closed. Not by an insurance algorithm, but by the very institution we trusted to care for them.”

Sasha is a pseudonym; as a parent of a trans kid, they fear they cannot speak out without subjecting their child to violence, harassment or even persecution. Their remarks were provided by Kathie Moehlig, executive director of TransFamily Support Services.

Fourteen years ago, Moehlig’s own trans child was a patient seeking gender-affirming care at Rady Children’s. In fact, they were the very first.

But years of advocacy, coalition building, research and education came to a screeching halt when Trump returned to power. Rady Children’s recently announced they would be ceasing gender-affirming care for trans people under age 19—meaning even legal adults, at 18 years old, are being denied treatment.

Last month, it announced the closure of its Center for Gender Affirming Care, effective Feb. 6. As per a statement to the East Bay Times, Rady is withdrawing “medical interventions, procedures and prescriptions,” but will maintain “counseling, mental health resources and care coordination.”

California Attorney General Rob Bonta, however, isn’t letting that happen. Bonta recently announced he is suing Rady, a bold move amidst a hostile and unpredictable legal landscape for gender-affirming care. He also appears to be the first AG to take such concrete action against a provider who capitulated to the Trump regime.

But because of the Trump regime’s general disregard for the rule of law, Bonta must take on Rady with surgical precision. So he’s not really suing them for violating equal rights laws. He’s suing them for violating a contract.

This playbook, experts tell Erin in the Morning, could inform other Attorneys General trying to protect GAC in their own state.

Images from the Jan. 24 protest outside of Rady Children’s. Provided by TransFamily Support Services:

“We had to think creatively”

Trump has deployed an arsenal of political tactics to try to decimate trans people’s health care. He’s signed executive orders, held Medicaid and Medicare funds hostage, and sent feds on fishing expeditions to investigate, intimidate, and harass GAC providers with boldly overreaching subpoenas.

None of that changes the fact that there is no federal law barring gender-affirming care for trans youth, nor is there any state law against it in California.

“The environment around gender-affirming care has changed dramatically, with escalating federal actions,” Rady Children’s Health said in a statement to the Los Angeles Times. “These developments affect our role and responsibilities as a provider participating in federal programs such as Medicaid and Medicare, which are essential to caring for all children and families in our communities.”

As the Trump regime continues to subvert checks, balances, and democracy, lawyers are tasked with reimagining how they might uphold the laws meant to protect Americans.

Last month, Erin in the Morning reported on how a coalition of public interest lawyers filed a historic, first-of-its-kind class action lawsuit to quash a subpoena after federal officials sought extensive records about trans kids from Children’s Hospital Los Angeles—including names, addresses, patient notes, and social security numbers.

“After the Supreme Court’s June decision in Trump v. CASA made it impossible to extend relief to unnamed but similarly-situated parties outside of a class action,” Khadijah M. Silver, Director of Gender Justice and Health Equity at Lawyers for Good Government, told Erin in the Morning at the time. “We had to think creatively.”

In 2025, the devastating Skrmetti decision determined that Tennessee’s law prohibiting certain medical treatments for transgender minors was not unconstitutional. This reinforced what lawyers post-Roe already feared: SCOTUS, as it stands, can no longer be viewed as a reliable safeguard for constitutional rights, if it ever was one to begin with.

Bonta and officials from other blue states already filed a lawsuit against the federal government over their harassment of pediatric gender clinics, but Bonta appears to be the first to actually hold a health care institution responsible for dropping trans patients over Trumpian threats. And this time, Bonta is using a legal maneuver that could help civil rights defenders sidestep the overreach of Trump’s lackeys.

From the Jan. 24 protest outside of Rady Children’s. TransFamily Support Services.

“A very strategically pled lawsuit”

Last year, Rady Children’s parent company merged with that of Children’s Hospital of Orange County (CHOC). Both companies had to seek approval from the state to complete the merger, and agree to conditions set by the AG’s office. Bonta argues that in dropping gender-affirming care for trans minors when and how it did, Rady violated the contract.

“Rady Children’s Health has chosen to violate its merger agreement and California law in response to the Trump Administration’s illegal campaign against providers of gender-affirming care,” Attorney General Bonta said in a Jan. 30 press release. “Rady flagrantly disregarded its legal obligations by unilaterally deciding to preemptively comply with the Administration’s demands and cease medically necessary care for roughly 1,450 patients.”

“We will not allow Rady to violate its obligations to its patients and the State,” Bonta continued.

It’s notable, experts tell Erin in the Morning, that this was the manner in which Bonta pressed charges, and it’s a strategy that might be advantageous in other states, too.

“This is a very strategically pled lawsuit,” said Rachel See, who spent over a decade as an attorney in the federal government occupying senior enforcement and management roles, in an interview with Erin in the Morning.

“It’s being brought solely under California law, because of the California AG’s unique power to approve mergers between California nonprofit hospitals,” she said. “It means that this is a lawsuit that only the California Attorney General could bring, and only against Rady, because of the merger conditions.”

“The complaint doesn’t speculate about why Rady made this decision because it doesn’t have to,” See continued. “It doesn’t matter why Rady chose to preemptively comply with demands it expects to receive from the federal government. According to the AG, the only thing that matters is that they violated the merger conditions.”

By orienting the lawsuit around the breach of the merger conditions under California nonprofit corporation law, Bonta is able to avoid judicial questions about federal nondiscrimination or constitutional claims. That means it should be able to stay in California state courts instead of a more ornery federal jurisdiction.

“There’s no federal question and no easy way for the Trump administration’s Department of Justice to interfere,” See said. “The complaint does include a demand for civil penalties of $2,500 per violation under California’s Unfair Competition Law, but that’s not the point. The point is the injunction.”

Meanwhile, Bonta has signaled that the door remains open for him to take further actions against hospitals that abandon their responsibility to care for transgender patients.

“I understand that the President’s executive order on gender affirming care has created some confusion,” he said last February. “Let me be clear: California law has not changed, and hospitals and clinics have a legal obligation to provide equal access to healthcare services.”

You can view the full complaint filed by Bonta here.