Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed a landmark lawsuit Monday against Children’s Health System of Texas and Dallas-area doctor Jason Jarin, alleging they illegally performed gender transition procedures on minors and defrauded the state’s Medicaid program.
The suit, filed February 18, 2026, claims Jarin and Children’s Health not only performed banned procedures on children as young as 9 years old, but also manipulated billing records to conceal these activities from state officials after legislation prohibited such interventions.
“I will use every legal tool available to ensure radical gender activists like Jarin face justice for hurting our kids,” Paxton declared in a statement. “This criminal extremist not only permanently harmed children, but he also then defrauded Medicaid and stuck Texas taxpayers with the bill for this insanity.”
Years of Alleged Violations
The lawsuit contends that Children’s Health and Jarin, a pediatric gynecologist and Division Director at the hospital system, have been billing Texas Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) for gender interventions since 2017. More troubling for the defendants, Paxton’s office alleges these practices continued even after Senate Bill 14 explicitly banned such procedures on minors effective September 1, 2023.
According to court documents, Jarin performed procedures and administered puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones to both female and male patients at Dallas and Plano locations. The state is seeking more than $1 million in civil penalties.
The legal action specifically alleges violations of the Texas Health Care Program Fraud Prevention Act. Among the most serious accusations: that the defendants altered patients’ gender in Medicaid claims, falsified medical records and prescriptions, and deliberately manipulated billing practices to circumvent state law.
Part of Broader Campaign
Is this an isolated case? Far from it. The Children’s Health lawsuit represents just one front in Paxton’s aggressive legal campaign focused on what he characterizes as protecting Texas children.
Just days earlier, Paxton sued Snapchat’s parent company for allegedly exposing children to inappropriate content despite the platform’s 12+ age rating. That action seeks penalties of $10,000 per violation under Texas consumer protection laws.
“I will not allow Snapchat to harm our kids by running a business designed to get Texas children addicted to a platform filled with obscene and destructive content,” Paxton said in announcing that case.
The Attorney General has also launched an investigation into what he describes as “unlawful financial incentives” related to childhood vaccine recommendations. “I will ensure that Big Pharma and Big Insurance don’t bribe medical providers to pressure parents to jab their kids with vaccines they feel aren’t safe or necessary,” Paxton stated, claiming a scheme exists that forces children to receive over 70 shots from birth to age 18.
In yet another action, Paxton has targeted CBR Systems for allegedly misleading parents about private cord blood banking. “Taking advantage of parents’ love for their children is reprehensible and illegal,” he asserted.
Legal and Political Context
The gender transition case comes amid a national debate over appropriate medical care for transgender youth. Texas has been at the forefront of states restricting such treatments, with SB 14 making it one of the most restrictive states in the country regarding gender-affirming care for minors.
Critics of Paxton’s legal actions have characterized them as politically motivated, while supporters praise what they see as necessary protection of children from experimental medical procedures.
Neither Children’s Health nor Dr. Jarin had issued public responses to the allegations as of press time. The lawsuit will likely face a lengthy legal process that could establish significant precedent for how gender-related medical care is regulated and prosecuted in Texas.
For Paxton, who has positioned himself as a defender of traditional values, these cases represent both a legal crusade and a political statement – one that places him squarely in the national conversation about where parental rights end and state protection begins.
