Federal Judge Rules In Favor Of Public Schools In 16 States That Refused To Comply With Trump's Trans Ban

The judge will block the Trump administration's attempt to restrict funding for sex education from schools that teach it in an inclusive way.

Wayne L. Morse United States Courthouse // Aboutmovies // Wikimedia Commons

Over the past several months, the Trump administration has sought to strip federal funding from schools that teach about gender identity or include transgender students in their policies. Many districts have refused to comply with the administration’s directives, issued under an executive order that labeled transgender people “false,” prompting the withholding of tens of millions of dollars in federal education funds. Now, in a major development, a federal judge in Oregon has informed all parties in a lawsuit brought by 16 states that she intends to issue a preliminary injunction blocking the restrictions—marking a significant victory for transgender students and a sharp rebuke to those who see capitulation as the only path forward.

U.S. District Judge Ann Aiken announced during a conference call between state attorneys and federal officials that she intends to issue a preliminary injunction blocking the policy, denouncing what she described as “a sort of separate-but-equal policy” on sex education. The coalition of 16 states argued that the Trump administration’s new directive violated the Administrative Procedure Act, was arbitrary and capricious, and infringed upon the Constitution’s separation of powers. While the specific grounds for Judge Aiken’s forthcoming injunction are not yet known as the order has not been released publicly as of yet, her decision represents a major setback for the administration—one that will, at least for now, halt some of its efforts to weaponize federal funding against schools that teach about gender identity or include transgender students in their curricula.

The ruling follows months of escalation after the Trump administration issued an executive order barring schools nationwide from engaging in what it called the “social transition” of transgender youth—a term encompassing everything from using a student’s chosen name and pronouns to allowing them to use the bathroom or play sports with their peers. When most schools ignored the order, which carries no force of law and mislabels basic affirming practices as “unlawful,” the administration retaliated by threatening to strip funding from schools that included gender identity in their comprehensive sex education programs. Federal letters soon followed, targeting districts from Virginia to Denver, Chicago, and New York City with the loss of tens of millions of dollars in federal grants for maintaining inclusive policies. The administration’s sweeping threats prompted a 16-state coalition to file suit, arguing that the administration’s campaign against transgender inclusion represents an unconstitutional abuse of executive power.

Among the states rejecting the federal government’s demands was California, which saw millions in sex education funding blocked over what the administration called “gender ideology content”—in reality, lessons that simply acknowledged the existence of transgender people. Maine faced similar threats after its curriculum glossary included a definition for “gender identity.” In Massachusetts, funding was targeted because its sex education materials noted that gender norms are culturally relative, stating that gender consists of “the ideas in a culture or society about the appropriate ways for men and women to dress, behave, think, and feel. Ideas about what gender behavior is appropriate change in different cultures and at different times in history.”

Many individual school districts have also defied the administration’s demands. In Virginia, five major districts rejected federal pressure to restrict transgender students’ bathroom access—prompting the administration to attempt to terminate their federal funding. In Denver, the public schools superintendent vowed that the district “will protect all of their students from this hostile administration,” refusing to comply. Chicago and New York followed suit, rejecting similar mandates despite threats to strip sex education and other federal funding. Even under the weight of those financial threats, these districts stood firm, signaling that the moral and legal cost of capitulation outweighed any fiscal consequence.

Meanwhile, many of the nation’s most prestigious institutions have taken the opposite path—choosing compliance over confrontation. This year, several universities including Brown, Columbia, Harvard, and Penn have accepted the Trump administration’s demands to discriminate against transgender students. More than 20 hospitals have ended gender-affirming care for trans youth, even in blue states with protective policies, out of fear of losing federal funding. Even Fenway Health, one of the country’s most well-known LGBTQ+ healthcare providers, recently announced it would comply with Trump’s transgender care ban rather than fight the administration.

Time and again, organizations and states that challenge the administration’s efforts to weaponize federal funding against transgender people—and against state law—have prevailed in court. This latest win delivers another major blow to the administration’s attempts to strong-arm states into adopting discriminatory policies. It comes amid a broader federal budget battle, with over a dozen anti-transgender provisions embedded in the FY2026 appropriations bills that could shape the outcomes of similar lawsuits in the months ahead. For now, though, the schools that refused to throw their transgender students under the bus have a powerful new legal victory on their side.

The states that were a part of this lawsuit include: the State of Colorado, the State of Connecticut, the State of Delaware, the State of Hawai‘i, the State of Illinois, the State of Maine, the State of Maryland, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, the State of Michigan, the State of Minnesota, the State of New Jersey, the State of New York, the State of Oregon, the State of Rhode Island, the State of Washington, and the State of Wisconsin, as well as the District of Columbia.

You can find the legal complaint filed by the 16 states and D.C. here.