Case: Eyerly v. Trump

This is a case challenging Executive Order 14168 as unlawfully denying gender-affirming medical care and accommodations to transgender individuals incarcerated in federal prisons. Issued by President Trump on March 14, 2025, Executive Order 14168 directed the Federal Bureau of Prisons to prohibit the use of federal funds for gender-affirming healthcare, deny access to gender-appropriate clothing and hygiene products, and require the classification and housing of incarcerated individuals based solely on their sex assigned at birth.

On April 3, 2025, a transgender woman incarcerated at FCC Petersburg filed this lawsuit pro se in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. She sued President Trump, the U.S. Attorney General, the Acting Director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons, and the Acting Warden of FCC Petersburg. The case was assigned to U.S. District Judge Patricia Tolliver Giles.

The plaintiff alleged that the government’s actions violated the Equal Protection Clause, the Eighth Amendment, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the Administrative Procedure Act, and the Separation of Powers. Under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fifth Amendment, she claimed the policy unlawfully discriminated against her on the basis of transgender status and sex, subjecting her to unequal treatment without adequate justification. She further alleged that the denial of necessary medical treatment amounted to cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment, given the federal government's deliberate indifference to her serious medical needs. Invoking the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, she argued that the policy constituted unlawful discrimination on the basis of disability, as gender dysphoria is recognized as a protected medical condition under the Act. Under the Administrative Procedure Act, the plaintiff asserted that the executive order and its implementation were arbitrary and capricious, and issued without proper legal authority or adherence to procedural requirements. Finally, she contended that Executive Order 14168 violated the Separation of Powers by attempting to unilaterally amend or override congressional mandates related to prison healthcare and civil rights protections, thus exceeding the President’s constitutional authority.

The plaintiff claimed the government’s actions caused significant harm by denying her medically necessary treatment for gender dysphoria, including hormone therapy, and by restricting access to gender-appropriate clothing and hygiene products. She alleged these denials worsened her psychological distress and violated her dignity, safety, and basic human rights. Additionally, she contended that forced placement in facilities inconsistent with her gender identity exposed her to heightened risks of harassment, discrimination, and violence while incarcerated.

The plaintiff sought both declaratory and injunctive relief, asking the court to declare Executive Order 14168 unlawful and to order the Federal Bureau of Prisons to provide her with: gender-affirming medical treatment, including hormone therapy; access to appropriate undergarments and hygiene products; and placement in a facility consistent with her gender identity.

On April 11, 2025, Judge Giles granted the plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis. 

This case is ongoing.