On August 12, 2025, two sharply contrasting developments unfolded in the ongoing national debate over transgender rights and access to gender-affirming health care in the United States. In California, the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors unanimously approved a proclamation to protect and affirm gender-affirming care for its residents. Meanwhile, on the other side of the country, a federal appeals court ruled that Arkansas could enforce its 2021 ban on such care for minors, following a recent Supreme Court decision upholding a similar law in Tennessee. These decisions highlight the widening gulf between local and state approaches as well as the growing influence of federal actions on the lives of transgender and gender-diverse Americans.
According to Kym Kemp’s Redheaded Blackbelt, the Humboldt County Board’s proclamation recognizes “the importance of gender-affirming healthcare, including mental health services, as matters of essential daily living and equality.” The legal shield cited in the proclamation is California’s SB107, which offers protections for those seeking or providing gender-affirming care, including mental health support. The proclamation, sponsored by Supervisors Natalie Arroyo and Steve Madrone, was read aloud at the August 12 board meeting and affirms the county’s commitment to uphold the rights of “two-spirit, transgender, gender nonconforming and intersex” residents and visitors—collectively referred to in the document as 2S/TGI.
This move comes at a time of significant national backlash against transgender social acceptance. The proclamation notes that hundreds of bills have been passed across the country, restricting transgender rights in various ways. These include efforts to “prohibit access to lifesaving medical care, prevent youth from playing sports alongside their friends, erase people’s identities from vital records and state driver’s licenses, ban books that include 2S/TGI people and history, prohibit people from using restrooms and facilities where they are safe and affirmed for who they are, frame transgender people as inherently dishonorable, and falsely conflate transgender women and girls with men seeking to harm women and girls.”
The proclamation also draws on research showing that gender-affirming health care is associated with improved quality of life and better mental health outcomes, including lower risks of suicide. Specifically, it references a May 2024 “Humboldt County 2S/LGBTQIA+ School Climate Survey” of middle and high school students. The survey found that “the majority of gender diverse students report their mental health as being negatively impacted by anti-transgender legislation from across the country, not feeling safe at school and avoiding school restrooms due to fears about their personal safety.” Alarmingly, nearly one-third of 2S/TGI youth reported living in fear of losing their housing due to being or seeming queer, with 10% stating they had been kicked out of their home in the prior year due to anti-queer bias.
Supervisor Natalie Arroyo, who read the proclamation, highlighted the importance of Transgender History Month in California, stating, “I urge people to learn about trans history – there’s a lot to learn for all of us.” Aisha Candrian Morton of Queer Humboldt, who accepted the proclamation, emphasized that it was the result of youth advocacy and collaboration with county officials. She explained, “Our youth leaders facilitated a series of sessions where they drafted a sample proclamation and then met with elected officials such as yourselves to discuss this idea and advocate for the proclamation.” Morton thanked the supervisors for “doing the right thing and letting our trans community members know that you haven’t forgotten them and their rights.”
A leading member of the county employee Queer Affinity Group described the proclamation’s timing as crucial: “I think it’s really important now more than ever to show members of our community that we stand with them and that they are important to us, and that they matter, because it can be a very scary and difficult time right now for members of the trans and two-spirit gender non-conforming community.” Supervisor Mike Wilson echoed these sentiments, saying, “I think we need to recognize that our support of transgender and diverse gender identities supports freedom,” and adding, “when we as a society respect how individuals understand and experience their own gender, it upholds our fundamental principle that people should be free to live as their true selves without facing discrimination or being forced to conform to others expectations about how they should be.”
While Humboldt County was reaffirming its support for gender-diverse residents, the legal landscape elsewhere was shifting in the opposite direction. As reported by Nexstar Media, the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on August 12 that Arkansas can enforce its 2021 ban on gender-affirming care for minors, reversing a lower court decision from 2023 that had found the law unconstitutional. The Arkansas law, known as the Save Adolescents From Experimentation (SAFE) Act, was initially vetoed by then-Governor Asa Hutchinson but was passed by the state legislature. The law was challenged by four families of transgender children and two doctors, who argued that it violates their constitutional rights.
The appeals court’s decision hinged on the June 18, 2025, U.S. Supreme Court ruling in U.S. v. Skrmetti, which upheld a similar Tennessee law. Judge Duane Benton, writing for the court, stated, “Because the district court rested its permanent injunction on incorrect conclusions of law, it abused its discretion. The judgment is reversed and the case remanded for proceedings consistent with this opinion.”
The American Civil Liberties Union of Arkansas, which represented the plaintiffs, decried the ruling. Holly Dickson, the group’s executive director, called the decision “a tragically unjust result for transgender Arkansans, their doctors, and their families.” She added, “The state had every opportunity and failed at every turn to prove that this law helps children; in fact, this is a dangerous law that harms children.” The organization is considering its next legal steps.
Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin, on the other hand, praised the ruling, stating on X that he is “pleased that children in Arkansas will be protected from experimental procedures.” Griffin had previously noted that the Supreme Court’s decision in Skrmetti had “positive implications” for Arkansas’s appeal because the state’s law is similar to Tennessee’s.
Since Arkansas became the first state to enact such a ban in 2021, 27 states have passed similar laws restricting gender-affirming care for minors. In July 2025, Puerto Rico became the first U.S. territory to ban gender-affirming care for those under 21. As of May 2025, only Montana’s law remains blocked by a court order, after a district court judge found it violated the state constitution.
The Arkansas ruling also comes as the federal government under President Trump moves to limit access to gender-affirming care for minors. An executive order signed in January 2025 states that the U.S. “will not fund, sponsor, promote, assist, or support the so-called ‘transition’ of a child from one sex to another, and it will rigorously enforce all laws that prohibit or limit these destructive and life-altering procedures.” In May, the Department of Health and Human Services released a report questioning the evidence supporting gender-affirming care for minors and recommending greater reliance on psychotherapy over medical interventions. The agency, under Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., has called for updated treatment protocols aligned with these recommendations. Meanwhile, federal agencies including the Department of Justice, FBI, and Federal Trade Commission are investigating providers of gender-affirming care, and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services is expected to propose barring funding for hospitals and clinics offering transition care to minors.
These developments illustrate the starkly divergent paths taken by local, state, and federal governments on gender-affirming care. As Humboldt County doubles down on its commitment to support and protect its gender-diverse residents, other regions and federal authorities are moving to restrict access, leaving families, providers, and advocates navigating a rapidly changing and often contradictory legal landscape.