Six hospital systems end gender-affirming treatments under DOJ settlements
HEALTHCARE

Six hospital systems end gender-affirming treatments under DOJ settlements

Sep 23, 2026Updated 7:22am ET

The U.S. Justice Department under President Trump has reached settlements with at least six hospital systems that require them to stop providing puberty blockers, hormones, and gender-affirming surgeries to patients under 19, sometimes with payments, in exchange for ending federal probes.

The U.S. Justice Department under President Trump has reached settlements with at least six hospital systems that require them to stop providing puberty blockers, hormones, and gender-affirming surgeries to patients under 19, sometimes with payments, in exchange for ending federal probes.

Corroboration

LowMedHigh
ApnewsABC News MediaThe Boston GlobeBoston HeraldChicago TribuneBoulder Daily Camera

Confirmed by 11+ sources.

What This is

  • The Justice Department reached settlements with at least six major hospital systems over care for transgender minors.
  • Under the deals, hospitals agreed to stop providing puberty blockers, hormones, and gender-affirming surgery to patients under 19.
  • Several hospitals had already discontinued these treatments because of state restrictions or earlier federal pressure.
  • Several settlements include payments to the federal government, including $8.5 million from NYU Langone and $950,000 from UPMC.
  • The hospitals denied wrongdoing, while the Justice Department agreed to conclude its investigations into previously provided care.
  • The settlements also resolved federal subpoenas seeking confidential information about patients, guardians, and healthcare providers.
  • University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC) said its agreement ended a yearlong subpoena dispute and protected the confidentiality of affected patients, families, and providers.

Why This Matters

  • Decisions by major regional hospital systems can leave some families traveling much farther to obtain specialized care.
  • The agreements demonstrate how federal investigations and subpoenas can influence hospital policy without new legislation from Congress.
  • The settlements intensify debate over how medical authority should be divided among clinicians, families, states, hospitals, and the federal government.
  • They raise difficult questions about patient privacy when the government seeks access to sensitive health records.

Who else would want to know this?