That thread is about medical care, but it is true that the Trump administration is busying itself rolling back lots of Obama guidance and regulation on trans topics.
The problem is this: well-funded and -connected gender activists are pushing an extremist new interpretation of existing laws, demanding that where the word "sex" is used, it should be understood to include "gender identity." (This is problem with the federal Equality Act as just passed by the House, too).
Obama, unfortunately, was on board with this novel interpretation, and issued guidance via the departments of Education and Housing & Urban Development stating that federally-funded institutions, (school, shelters, etc) should accommodate people according to their self-identified, subjective "gender identity" no matter what.
As a result, many school districts have implemented policies letting students self-identify into previously sex-segregated toilets, changing facilities, sports teams. Many have not. There has been much confusion and no consistent policy. Several lawsuits have been brought, both by plaintiffs seeking (and being denied) access to opposite-sex facilities, and by plaintiffs seeking to protect sex-segregated facilities (such as the plaintiffs in Boyertown).
The Trump administration recently rescinded the Obama guidance to schools, but did not do so by requiring sex segregation in school facilities. It just withdrew the guidance that students should deinfitely be accommodated in opposite sex facilities. Its letter also refers to "due regard for the primary role of the States and local school districts in establishing educational policy." So basically he has kicked it back to the local level and it's all still a muddle.
The hope of the plaintiffs in the Boyertown case was that the Supreme Court would take up their appeal and make a clear ruling that in law, "sex" means "sex," and that to allow self-ID into single-sex spaces and opportunities was a violation of the rights of the other students.
Unfortunately the Court declined to hear the appeal. That doesn't necessarily mean they would have ruled against the plaintiffs; it's just that they won't hear this particular case. So the problem gets pushed to the back burner, there to simmer along whilst girls suffer...