Court Orders Restoration of Transgender Health Information on Government Websites
Introduction
In a landmark ruling, a federal judge has ordered the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to reinstate public medical information on websites that was removed under an executive order issued by President Donald Trump. The decision comes in response to a lawsuit filed by Doctors for America, a group representing approximately 27,000 doctors and medical trainees.
Background
On his first day in office, President Trump issued an executive order entitled "Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States." This order directed the government to recognize only two genders, male and female, and to take steps to prevent biological men from identifying as women in order to gain access to certain settings, such as domestic abuse shelters and showers.
In response to the executive order, the Office of Personnel Management issued a memo detailing how to avoid promoting "gender ideology." Two agencies within the health department, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), subsequently removed webpages under that guidance.
Legal Challenge
Doctors for America challenged the executive order in federal court, arguing that the removal of publicly available information, some of which had been posted since the 1990s, would harm their treatment of transgender patients. The lawsuit alleged that the missing webpages contained crucial information on a wide range of topics, including:
- CDC surveillance of school-age bullying
- Contraception
- Preventing the spread of the virus that causes AIDS
- How to increase female enrollment in clinical trials
Judge’s Ruling
On Tuesday, March 20, 2018, U.S. District Judge John Bates issued an order requiring HHS to restore the removed webpages to their previous condition as of January 30, 2018, by midnight Tuesday. Judge Bates found that the removal of the websites caused irreparable harm to the public health because doctors rely on the sites for information about treating transgender patients.
The judge noted that if doctors cannot provide these patients with the care they need within the scheduled and often limited time frame, there is a chance that some individuals will not receive treatment, including for severe, life-threatening conditions. The public thus has a strong interest in avoiding these serious injuries to the public health, the judge wrote.
Government’s Defense
James Harlow, a Justice Department lawyer defending the agencies, argued that the doctors were not saying they lacked all information to treat diseases, just that it perhaps took longer to find it. However, Judge Bates rejected this argument, stating that the government had not provided evidence to support its claim that removing the webpages posed no harm to public health.
Implications
The judge’s ruling is a significant victory for transgender rights advocates and healthcare professionals who rely on government websites for medical information. It sends a clear message that the government cannot simply erase the existence of transgender people or deny them the healthcare they need.
The decision also has implications for other government agencies that have removed or altered information on their websites in response to the Trump administration’s policies. It is likely that these agencies will now face similar legal challenges, forcing them to reconsider their actions and restore access to vital information.
Conclusion
The judge’s ruling is a reminder of the importance of evidence-based decision-making and the rule of law. It is also a victory for all Americans who rely on the government to provide accurate and reliable information on public health issues.
