WASHINGTON — A judge in the federal court has mandated that government agencies restore online access to health-related webpages and datasets that had been removed in alignment with a presidential executive order issued by Donald Trump.
U.S. District Judge John Bates issued a temporary restraining order following a request from the advocacy group Doctors for America. The ruling requires the government to reinstate several identified pages and datasets that have gone missing, as well as to disclose additional materials that may have been removed without proper notification or justification.
On his first day back in office, President Trump signed an executive order directing agencies to exclusively use the term “sex” instead of “gender” in official documents and policies. This led the acting director of the Office of Personnel Management to instruct government heads to eliminate any resources and programs promoting “gender ideology.”
Doctors for America, with legal representation from the Public Citizen Litigation Group, filed a lawsuit against several federal entities, including OPM, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the Department of Health and Human Services.
The nonprofit organization highlighted the negative consequences of the executive order on two of its members: a physician from a Chicago clinic who needed CDC resources to deal with a chlamydia outbreak at a local high school, and a Yale School of Medicine doctor reliant on CDC information regarding contraceptive methods and sexually transmitted illnesses.
Judge Bates noted, “The time and expertise of these doctors are precious, and having to redirect those efforts elsewhere complicates their work and diminishes treatment effectiveness.”
This case is one of many legal challenges against executive actions taken by Trump shortly after his second inauguration as a Republican president.
The removed materials encompass critical reports on HIV prevention, a CDC webpage that offered guidelines for clinicians on reproductive health care, and an FDA study focusing on the “sex differences in the clinical evaluation of medical products.”
The plaintiffs’ attorneys contended that the removal of vital information from the CDC and FDA websites is interrupting patient care, obstructing research efforts, and complicating doctors’ ability to effectively communicate with their patients.
They argued in a court filing, “The actions taken by the agencies create a perilous void in scientific data, which is essential for monitoring and responding to disease outbreaks, conducting significant health research, and providing physicians with critical resources that influence clinical practices.”
Government attorneys countered that the claims made by Doctors for America fail to convincingly establish any irreparable harm faced by the plaintiffs and are improbable to prevail in court.
During a hearing held on Monday, the judge inquired if the removal of the online content adversely affects public health. Attorney Zachary Shelley affirmed that the interests of the doctors are inherently aligned with those of their patients.
“There is significant harm to the public,” Shelley stated. “Massive threats to public health exist.”
The judge concluded that the implications of the case ultimately affect “everyday Americans” requiring medical care.
“If doctors are unable to provide necessary care within the limited time available, there is a risk that some patients may miss out on treatments, including those needed for serious, life-threatening conditions,” Judge Bates observed.
Doctors for America is a nonprofit organization that represents over 27,000 physicians and medical trainees, tracing its roots back to an earlier group that advocated for healthcare reform and supported Barack Obama during his presidential campaign.
