Last week, a federal judge overturned Florida’s restrictions on gender-affirming care for state employees, referring to the insurance program in the state as “facially discriminatory.”

“Our clients dedicated their careers to bettering Florida, and in return they were denied coverage of essential medical care needed to better their own lives,” said Samantha Past, a staff attorney with the ACLU of Florida, in a statementcelebrating the ruling.

“Discrimination has no place here, and we are hopeful that this decision will encourage a commitment from the state to treating members of our transgender community with the respect they deserve and reciprocating their care and devotion to the state of Florida.”

Judge Mark Walker of the District Court for the Northern District of Florida, Tallahassee Division, stated in his ruling that the restrictions are a Title VII violation. Title VII is a provision of the 1964 Civil Rights Act that restricts discrimination on the basis of protected characteristics, including race, sex, religion, and national origin. In 2020, the Supreme Court ruled that Title VII applies to anti-LGBTQ+ job discrimination because such discrimination is impossible without taking sex into account.

“Here, the undisputed facts demonstrate that the challenged exclusions apply only to transgender members, as only transgender individuals would seek the gender-affirming treatment that is excluded from coverage. Here, Plaintiffs are seeking gender-affirming treatment for their gender dysphoria, therefore the challenged exclusions apply to them because they are transgender… According to [Lange v. Houston Cnty., Ga.], this amounts to a facially discriminatory employer action under Title VII,” Walker said in the ruling.

According to the defendants, which included the Florida Department of Management Services and the University of Florida’s Board of Trustees, it was unknown why gender-affirming care was restricted, but it was stated that this restriction dated back to the 1970s when such care was deemed “experimental.” There was no medical or financial reason for the exclusion.

The ruling concerns a lawsuit, Claire et al. v. Florida Dep’t of Mgmt Servs. et al., where the plaintiffs were transgender former and current employees of Florida’s government. Jami Claire, Kathryn Lane, and Ahmir Murphy were all denied gender-affirming care under the provided insurance plan. 

The case was filed in January 2020 and the ACLU filed a supplemental brief in the case in June of this year in an attempt to combat state insurance restrictions in S.B. 254, a sweeping gender-affirming care ban passed in 2023. 

While some provisions of S.B. 254 were overturned earlier this year, a few still remained, including the gender-affirming care ban on state insurance, restrictions on the rare practice of gender-affirming surgeries for minors, and mandated in-person consent forms for adult surgeries.

“We are so grateful that the court is holding the state accountable for its facially discriminatory policy that carves out transgender state employees for unequal treatment,” said Simone Chriss, director of the Transgender Rights Initiative at Southern Legal Counsel, in a statement. “As the court made clear, ‘Title VII prohibits all forms of discrimination because of sex, however they manifest themselves,’ and we are thrilled that this antiquated relic of state-sanctioned discrimination has been left in the past where it belongs.”

This court will be holding a separate trial to determine the amount of damages that will be awarded to plaintiffs. The plaintiffs were represented by the Florida chapter of the ACLU, Southern Legal Counsel, and Legal Services of Greater Miami.

Florida’s Department of Management Services and the office of Gov. Ron DeSantis did not respond to an immediate request for comment. This article will be updated accordingly.