In a move that has sent shockwaves through Michigan’s healthcare community and beyond, the University of Michigan Health system has halted all gender-affirming hormonal therapies and puberty blocker medications for patients under 19 years old. This decision, announced on August 25, 2025, comes in the wake of a federal subpoena from the Department of Justice (DOJ), part of a sweeping investigation by the Trump administration into providers of transgender health care for minors.
The university’s statement, shared exclusively with Talking Points Memo (TPM), laid out the stark reality for families across the state: “The University of Michigan, including Michigan Medicine, is one of multiple institutions across the country that has received a federal subpoena as part of a criminal and civil investigation into gender-affirming care for minors. In light of that investigation, and given escalating external threats and risks, we will no longer provide gender affirming hormonal therapies and puberty blocker medications for minors.”
Although gender-affirming care remains legal in Michigan, the Trump administration’s aggressive legal tactics are making it harder for young people and their families to access these services. According to The Advocate, the University of Michigan’s move mirrors similar actions taken by other major hospital systems around the country, all under the shadow of federal probes.
The saga began on July 14, 2025, when University of Michigan Health received its subpoena. An internal memo obtained by TPM revealed that DOJ attorneys were investigating doctors on suspicion of abusing their authority to prescribe medication, among other potential charges. The university’s clinicians were told not to destroy any documents, a clear sign of the gravity of the situation. For many, the administrative subpoena felt less like a routine inquiry and more like a threat of criminal prosecution. “There’s no criminal charge that they can defend against, no new law or federal rule interpretation to challenge in court,” a source familiar with the university’s decision-making told TPM. “All they have is the prospect of heavy legal fees and, for the doctors, a looming fear of potentially losing their medical licenses while under the cloud of an endless investigation.”
The University of Michigan was not alone. The DOJ had announced on July 9 that it had sent more than 20 subpoenas to doctors and clinics “involved in performing transgender medical procedures on children.” The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, and UChicago Medicine were among the institutions reported to have received similar demands. The administrative subpoena to the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, for example, sought a wide range of documents related to “puberty blockers,” “gender-related care,” and more, and required hospital officials to appear before the DOJ’s consumer protection branch.
Meanwhile, the FBI added fuel to the fire by posting a tipline on X (formerly Twitter) in early June, asking the public to report the names of “any hospitals, clinics, or practitioners” allegedly “mutilating children under the guise of gender-affirming care.” This public campaign, coupled with the legal pressure, created a climate of fear and uncertainty for healthcare providers and families alike.
For the Trump administration, the University of Michigan Health’s decision to suspend care was a win. But for transgender youth and their families, the consequences are dire. Rachel Crandall Crocker, co-founder of TransGender Michigan, told TPM, “It would leave a big hole in services. A lot of people would be out of luck.” She explained that the University of Michigan’s medical system is one of only two major providers of transgender health care in the state, and its withdrawal leaves many families scrambling for alternatives.
The pressure campaign is not limited to medical care for minors. Earlier in June, the Trump administration’s Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) launched an investigation into a physician’s assistant at University of Michigan Health who claimed she was fired for refusing to perform gender-affirming care or use patients’ preferred pronouns, citing religious objections. Valerie Kloosterman’s case, championed by the conservative First Liberty Institute, is currently before the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals after a federal judge dismissed her lawsuit and ordered arbitration. The HHS Office for Civil Rights stated in a press release that the investigation would examine whether the health system’s policies were consistent with the Church Amendments, which protect healthcare workers with religious or moral convictions from participating in certain procedures.
Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel responded to the escalating federal actions by joining a multistate lawsuit on August 1, 2025, seeking to block the Trump administration from using threats of criminal prosecution to restrict access to gender-affirming care. The lawsuit argues that the administration’s tactics are not only punitive but also interfere with the rights of patients, parents, and healthcare providers to make private medical decisions informed by experience and expertise.
Suzanne Goldberg, co-founder of Columbia Law School’s Center for Gender and Sexuality Law, offered a blunt assessment to TPM: “The approach now can best be described as misleading, punitive, and invasive of adults’ ability to make their own healthcare decisions in consultation with their providers and, for young people, of the privacy of parents, youth, and their healthcare providers, all informed by experience and expertise in the field.”
The University of Michigan Health system, for its part, emphasized its commitment to supporting those affected by the abrupt change. “We recognize the gravity and impact of this decision for our patients and our community. We are working closely with all those impacted, and we will continuously support the well-being of our patients, their families, and our teams,” the hospital said in its statement. “We are deeply grateful to our clinicians for their unyielding commitment to providing the highest quality care, and to all of our team members for their dedication to helping our patients, and to supporting each other, as we navigate these changes together.”
As the legal and political battles continue, the reality on the ground is stark: transgender youth in Michigan now face even greater obstacles to accessing the care they need, despite its continued legality. The University of Michigan’s decision, made under the weight of federal scrutiny and the threat of criminal and civil prosecution, has left families and providers in an agonizing limbo, uncertain when—or if—comprehensive care will be restored.
The broader implications of this federal campaign are still unfolding, but for Michigan’s transgender youth and their families, the impact is immediate and deeply personal. As one chapter closes at the University of Michigan Health system, the struggle for access and dignity in transgender healthcare enters a new and uncertain phase.