Hospital TRAPPED: Conflicting Orders Threaten Funding

A California judge has ordered a children’s hospital to resume controversial gender treatments for minors, directly contradicting federal health standards established by the Trump administration and forcing the hospital into an impossible position between state mandates and potential loss of critical federal funding.

Story Snapshot

Judge Matthew Braner ordered Rady Children’s Hospital to continue hormone treatments and puberty blockers for minors under 19, though surgeries remain excluded from the mandate
The hospital had halted these controversial procedures after HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. declared gender-affirming care non-compliant with professional health standards, threatening Medicare and Medicaid funding
California’s Attorney General sued the hospital system for stopping treatments without state approval, exploiting merger conditions that give the AG veto power over service changes
The ruling creates a dangerous precedent where state officials can force medical facilities to provide procedures the federal government deems harmful, risking $800 million in funding that serves 800,000 patients

Federal-State Collision Over Children’s Medical Care

California Superior Court Judge Matthew Braner ruled on February 11, 2026, that Rady Children’s Hospital must resume administering hormone treatments and puberty blockers to patients under 19, directly defying federal health guidance. The order stems from a lawsuit filed by California Attorney General Rob Bonta’s office against Rady Children’s Health, the parent organization overseeing both Rady Children’s Hospital San Diego and Children’s Hospital of Orange County. The hospital had responsibly halted these experimental treatments in January 2026 after U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. declared such care failed to meet professional medical standards, putting billions in Medicare and Medicaid funding at risk.

Hospital Trapped Between Conflicting Government Mandates

Rady Children’s Health faces what attorneys described as a “catastrophic risk” to funding that supports care for 800,000 vulnerable patients. The hospital’s legal team argued that continuing these controversial treatments could trigger federal defunding under Secretary Kennedy’s December 18, 2025 declaration. However, Judge Braner dismissed these concerns as “preemptive,” ruling the funding threat wasn’t immediate enough to justify stopping treatments. The judge exploited a technicality from the hospital’s merger agreement with CHOC, which requires Attorney General approval before discontinuing services. This gives California’s progressive AG unprecedented power to override hospital medical decisions and force continuation of treatments federal authorities have deemed substandard.

Experimental Treatments Imposed Despite Federal Standards

The court order mandates continuation of hormone treatments and puberty blockers through at least March 10, 2026, with a preliminary injunction hearing scheduled for March. While the judge stopped short of ordering surgical procedures, the ruling still forces medical professionals to administer life-altering pharmaceutical interventions to children despite federal health authorities questioning their safety and efficacy. Organizations like the American Academy of Pediatrics endorse these treatments, yet twenty-five states have enacted restrictions protecting minors from such experimental procedures. The Supreme Court upheld Tennessee’s ban in United States v. Skrmetti in June 2025, recognizing states’ authority to protect children from potentially irreversible medical interventions based on gender ideology.

Broader Implications for Medical Freedom and Parental Rights

This judicial overreach represents a troubling erosion of medical autonomy and creates dangerous precedent for government interference in healthcare decisions. California’s Attorney General is weaponizing merger conditions to force hospitals into providing controversial treatments that the Trump administration’s HHS has rightfully identified as failing professional standards. The outcome of Oregon’s challenge to Secretary Kennedy’s declaration, with summary judgment scheduled for March 19, 2026, will determine whether hospitals nationwide can be coerced into administering these treatments. Meanwhile, hundreds of families seeking to protect their children from experimental interventions find themselves trapped in California’s ideological agenda, with hospitals unable to exercise medical judgment without state permission.

Rady Children’s Health issued a minimal statement saying they “respect the court’s directives and will abide by them,” offering no further comment. The hospital system remains caught between constitutional principles of medical freedom and California’s determination to impose progressive gender ideology on vulnerable minors. This case exemplifies the broader battle between common-sense protections for children and radical leftist policies that prioritize political agendas over child welfare, parental rights, and sound medical practice. The Trump administration’s efforts to restore sanity to healthcare policy face determined resistance from blue state officials willing to sacrifice hospital funding and medical ethics to advance their agenda.