Search Articles
DENVER (CN) — In a 5-2 opinion Monday, the Colorado Supreme Court restored access to gender-affirming care for transgender youth being treated at Children’s Hospital Colorado.
Until last year, Children’s Hospital Colorado was the largest provider of gender-affirming care in the state. On Dec. 18, 2025, however, U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. declared medical gender-affirming care to be neither safe nor effective, and warned that institutions providing such treatment risked losing access to federal funding.
Worried that losing federal funding would mean losing Medicaid and privately insured patients, Children’s Hospital Colorado announced Jan. 5 it would no longer treat gender dysphoria with puberty blockers and hormone therapy for patients under the age of 19.
The hospital promised to continue providing mental health support for all patients. Four transgender minors and their parents sued Children’s Hospital on Jan. 20 under the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act, arguing the policy discriminated against transgender youth since cisgender patients would still have access to puberty blockers and hormone therapy.
Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser joined a separate federal lawsuit challenging Kennedy’s order, in which a federal judge sided with the states.
After holding a hearing, Second Judicial District Judge Ericka Englert denied the minors’ request for a preliminary injunction on Feb. 13, finding that the risks of violating the federal policy and losing funding outweighed the benefits of treating a few patients.
The children appealed.
“Because any potential harm to the public’s interest in access to healthcare is speculative, and because the General Assembly has stated that it is in the public’s interest to prohibit discrimination against individuals based on gender identity and to protect those individuals’ access to medical care, we conclude that the trial court erred by finding that petitioners failed to satisfy the public interest factor,” wrote Supreme Court Justice William Hood in a 30-page opinion.
Hood determined the lower court improperly relied on a strict numerical comparison when considering injunctive relief for a protected class: “Were it otherwise, minority groups would always lose.”
The high court also concluded the declaration itself isn’t a federal law banning gender-affirming care.
Colorado Supreme Court Justice Monica Márquez joined Hood on the opinion along with Justices Richard Gabriel, Maria Berkenkotter and Susan Blanco.
Supreme Court Justice Brian Boatright penned an 18-page dissent, onto which Justice Carlos Samour joined.
Arguing the minor’s lawsuit fails to show a likelihood of success on the merits, Boatright would have upheld the lower court’s denial of the injunction.
“From my perspective, CHC’s decision to terminate gender-affirming care for minors was plainly not ‘because of’ petitioners’ gender identity, sex or disability,” Boatright wrote. “It was a decision driven by the direct threat to the viability of the entire hospital.”
Children’s Hospital is represented by attorney Stanley Garnett of the Denver firm Garnett Powell. A spokesperson said the hospital was in the process of reviewing the decision.
“Children’s Hospital Colorado is reviewing the court’s ruling and assessing our next steps,” the spokesperson wrote via email. “While we do not have updates to share at this time, we will provide guidance in the near future.”
Denver civil rights attorney Paula Greisen represented the youth.
Follow @bright_lampSubscribe to our free newsletters
Our weekly newsletter Closing Arguments offers the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world, while the monthly Under the Lights dishes the legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.
