High Court sets aside puberty blocker regulations

The High Court has ruled that regulations restricting the prescribing of puberty blockers for young people with gender-related health needs are unlawful, and has set them aside. RNZ reported the decision on 21 October 2026.

Puberty blockers are medicines that pause the onset of puberty. In 2024 the Ministry of Health consulted the public on whether additional safety measures should apply to prescribing them to young people. The majority of submissions in that consultation opposed further restrictions.

In November 2025 the Health Minister recommended regulations that would prohibit new prescriptions of puberty blockers to treat gender dysphoria or gender incongruence in children and adolescents. The proposed rules still allowed the medicines to be prescribed for other medical conditions. They also allowed existing gender-affirming care patients who had been prescribed the blockers before the regulations took effect to continue.

The Professional Association for Transgender Health Aotearoa (PATHA) applied for judicial review of the regulations in December 2025. A judicial review is a legal challenge asking a court to examine whether a government decision was lawful. PATHA describes itself as an interdisciplinary professional organisation that promotes the health, wellbeing and rights of transgender people.

In December 2025 the High Court made a declaration that the Crown, meaning the government, should take no steps to enforce the regulations. The court also granted orders preventing enforcement pending the final resolution of the judicial review.

The court found that the government failed to adequately consult those affected by the regulations. It said this included a failure to consult on their substance and a failure to directly consult gender-diverse young people. The court also found that the regulations unlawfully discriminated against gender-diverse young people, in breach of the New Zealand Bill of Rights.

The court found there was a rational basis for some restrictions on puberty blockers. It found, however, that a complete prohibition on new prescriptions was a disproportionate response to their potential harm.

The court did not accept that the Health Minister had handed his decision-making power to Cabinet. It also did not accept that he had acted for an improper purpose, namely advancing New Zealand First's "anti-woke" agenda.

The court ruled the regulations unlawful and invalid, and made an order setting them aside.