0
The Federal Regional Court of the 1st Region (TRF1), in Brasilia, upheld the suspension of Resolution No. 2,427/2025 of the Federal Council of Medicine (CFM), which imposed restrictions on the provision of medical treatments for trans children and adolescents, altered the minimum age for certain procedures and vetoed the blockade of puberty. The decision, rendered by federal judge Roberto Carvalho Veloso, denied the appeal of the CFM and reinforced the decision of the Federal Court in Acre.
The public civil action was filed by the Federal Public Prosecution Service (MPF) shortly after the publication of resolution/Photo: Reproduction
In a preliminary decision, the judge stated that there was no risk of irreparable damage that justified to change the previous position without the contradictory, maintaining the resolution suspended until the final judgment of the case.
The public civil action was filed by the Federal Public Prosecution Service (MPF) shortly after the publication of the resolution. According to the prosecutor Lucas Costa Almeida Dias, the norm represents a social and legal setback, disregards consolidated scientific evidence and increases the vulnerability of trans children and adolescents, contrary to international treaties and the constitutional principle of integral protection for children and adolescents.
The Federal Court in Acre pointed out that Resolution No. 2,427/2025 was prepared exclusively by the CFM, unlike the previous norm (Resolution No. 2,265/19), which had broad debate involving civil society, researchers and various medical and non -medical specialties, such as psychology, social service, anthropology and sociology. The absence of this debate configures, according to the decision, a “procedural vice”.
Among the points emphasized by the court are the right to health, the freedom to decide on their own body and the self -determination of individuals regarding the proper treatment of their needs, without state interference. The decision also cited repeated demonstrations of the Federal Supreme Court (STF) reinforcing that the State should be guided by evidence-based medicine and the principle of reasonableness, which limits interventions in the autonomy and freedom of persons only by proper and necessary legal process.
With the maintenance of the suspension by TRF1, the CFM resolution remains without effect until the judgment is concluded, and appeals should be filed by the parties.
