Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) introduced a measure to prevent the Biden administration from enforcing a new rule expanding the definition of “sex” in federal healthcare nondiscrimination law to include “gender identity.” This rule, set to go into effect on July 5, has faced opposition from conservatives who believe it will override state laws banning gender transition surgeries and may force faith-based healthcare providers to perform procedures like abortions.
Critics of the new rule are concerned that it will require all health insurance providers, including taxpayer-funded programs like Medicaid and Medicare, to cover transgender surgeries. Marshall’s joint resolution, supported by six other Senate Republicans, expresses disapproval of the HHS rule under the Congressional Review Act, which allows Congress to overturn regulations with a majority vote in each chamber. Marshall has vowed to fight against what he sees as a “radical” ruling by the Biden administration.
Marshall, a former obstetrician, argues that gender is not fluid and sex is not negotiable. He believes the HHS should prioritize Americans’ safety, health, and well-being instead of promoting what he perceives as radical policies. The new regulation restores Obama-era provisions covering transgender individuals that were rolled back during the Trump administration. Despite conflicting court rulings on the issue over the years, the HHS rule explicitly prohibits discrimination based on an individual’s sex assigned at birth, gender identity, or recorded gender.
Conservatives fear that the new regulation will require physicians to provide gender-affirming care to transgender youths, even if they do not offer such treatments to others. Marshall’s use of the Congressional Review Act to strike down the rule faces slim chances of success, as CRAs are rarely successful, and President Biden is unlikely to sign off on any efforts to overturn the regulation. However, Marshall remains committed to fighting what he sees as a crucial battle to protect children against what he views as harmful policies.
The debate over the HHS rule highlights the broader cultural and political divide in the country on issues related to gender identity and healthcare. While some believe the rule is necessary to protect the rights of transgender individuals, others argue that it infringes on religious freedoms and ethical considerations in healthcare. The conversation around the HHS rule is ongoing, with lawmakers like Marshall and others continuing to voice their concerns and advocate for their positions on the matter. As the July 5 deadline for the rule’s implementation approaches, it remains to be seen how the issue will ultimately be resolved.
