Washington DC - President Donald Trump's administration quietly released a report linking those who support the transgender community to political violence.

The Department of Health and Human Services recently published data from an online survey that sought to examine "the psychology behind strong support for radical gender ideology and left-wing authoritarianism."

The survey asked 1,208 participants to rank statements regarding support for the trans community, such as "People should be supported in expressing their transgender identity," and "Parents should support their children's transgender exploration."

Several were about whether using preferred names and pronouns is a "necessary form of support," while another read, "Failure to affirm a transgender person's gender identity increases the risk of serious psychological distress to the trans person."

Donald Trump Trump unveils Space Force uniforms modeled after Nazi-inspired outfit from Starship Troopers

Participants were also given statements regarding their broader political ideologies and reactions to political violence targeting right-wing figures.

The study claims that the findings "suggest that gender ideology is associated with [left-wing authoritarianism] and willingness to justify political violence."

Trump and his administration have made attacks on transgender Americans and so-called "woke" ideologies a focus of his second term.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., an anti-vaccine activist the president tapped to head HHS, has also used his department to block gender-affirming care for minors.

Quickly after its publication, the report has come under scrutiny from critics who questioned the validity of the findings and called out its apparent political interests.

In remarks to The Guardian, several scientists and experts heavily criticized the report for not being peer-reviewed, not being published in a scientific journal, and lacking concrete data.

Gideon Meyerowitz-Katz, an epidemiologist from the University of Sydney, described it as "a very poorly done piece of research" and "nakedly political" in nature.

"This is very silly," Meyerowitz-Katz said. "They're producing what I would describe as pseudoscience... It's a bad, poorly done report."

Murder Lindsay Clancy's attorney seeks Trump pardon after murder mistrial – but can he really intervene?

Daniel Aaron, an associate professor at the University of Utah's SJ Quinney College of Law, also suggested the report may violate the Information Quality Bulletin, a federal regulation that requires peer review for scientific information from the US government.

He also said he didn't believe it would ever survive a peer review process and questioned why HHS published it, as it is "actually not even health related."

Colin Wright, a co-author of the report who regularly uses social media to push right-wing ideologies, told the outlet he believes the study was abruptly and prematurely released because it was leaked to the public.

"We probably could have tightened the language a little bit more," he admitted.

However, Wright still dismissed criticisms of the report, arguing that the research shows how medical guidance around affirming care is "geared to make people sort of have a more extreme reaction to it" and "fuel somewhat authoritarian tendencies of trying to silence people."