Latest news with #DoctorsForAmerica
Yahoo
03-07-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Trump admin unlawfully killed health websites related to gender, court rules
U.S. District Judge John D. Bates ruled on Thursday that the Trump administration's Office of Personnel Management did not comply with all necessary laws when it ordered the Department of Health and Human Services to speedily comply with the president's executive order on 'gender ideology.' On the first day of his term, President Trump passed a deluge of executive orders, including one that ordered government agencies to change the language of government materials that address 'gender ideology.' This is the administration's way of referring to transgender or non-binary people. Soon after, agencies within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) deleted 'hundreds or even thousands' of government healthcare websites, according to Doctors for America (DFA), the nonprofit that filed the lawsuit. This includes websites from the Center for Disease Control (CDC), the National Institute of Health (NIH), and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), among others. Given a 48-hour timeline to comply with the order, many agencies opted for what Judge Bates describes as 'the most extreme approach: fully removing any webpage with any offending language, no matter how minimal, without any stated intent to modify and republish the webpage.' The government took down websites with, the plaintiffs argued, vital health information on topics like youth mental health, vaping, HIV testing, opioid abuse, contraception, osteoporosis, menopause, sexually transmitted infections, pregnancy, and instructions for clinicians on how to prescribe and administer FDA-approved drugs. To be clear, the judge did not rule on the administration's ideology, but rather in how these agencies went about deleting the sites and data sets. The plaintiffs argued that the speed and decision-making of information removal violated, for instance, the Administrative Procedure Act law. 'The government is free to say what it wants, including about 'gender ideology,'' Judge Bates wrote. 'But in taking action, it must abide by the bounds of the authority and the procedures that Congress has prescribed … and the government failed to do so here.' Not only were these websites removed for Americans seeking reliable health resources, but also, DFA members were blocked from accessing data and reference materials that they long relied on in their daily work, the court documents said. Some doctors testified that the removal of these resources impacted how efficiently they were able to provide care to their patients. One doctor who works in 'one of the most underserved high schools in Chicago' said that she was unable to use CDC resources to help her manage a chlamydia outbreak at the school. Other doctors reported that it became more difficult to provide guidance about STI prevention and contraception to patients with complex medical histories, whose cases may require additional research from clinicians. Judge Bates ruled that the websites that the plaintiff's doctors rely on must be restored if those sites have been taken down or substantially modified. However, it's yet to be seen how much of this health information will be restored, as some federal judges have claimed that this administration can be uncooperative with their rulings.
TechCrunch
03-07-2025
- Health
- TechCrunch
Trump admin unlawfully killed health websites related to gender, court rules
U.S. District Judge John D. Bates ruled on Thursday that the Trump administration's Office of Personnel Management did not comply with all necessary laws when it ordered the Department of Health and Human Services to speedily comply with the president's executive order on 'gender ideology.' On the first day of his term, President Trump passed a deluge of executive orders, including one that ordered government agencies to change the language of government materials that address 'gender ideology.' This is the administration's way of referring to transgender or non-binary people. Soon after, agencies within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) deleted 'hundreds or even thousands' of government healthcare websites, according to Doctors for America (DFA), the nonprofit that filed the lawsuit. This includes websites from the Center for Disease Control (CDC), the National Institute of Health (NIH), and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), among others. Given a 48-hour timeline to comply with the order, many agencies opted for what Judge Bates describes as 'the most extreme approach: fully removing any webpage with any offending language, no matter how minimal, without any stated intent to modify and republish the webpage.' The government took down websites with, the plaintiffs argued, vital health information on topics like youth mental health, vaping, HIV testing, opioid abuse, contraception, osteoporosis, menopause, sexually transmitted infections, pregnancy, and instructions for clinicians on how to prescribe and administer FDA-approved drugs. To be clear, the judge did not rule on the administration's ideology, but rather in how these agencies went about deleting the sites and data sets. The plaintiffs argued that the speed and decision-making of information removal violated, for instance, the Administrative Procedure Act law. 'The government is free to say what it wants, including about 'gender ideology,'' Judge Bates wrote. 'But in taking action, it must abide by the bounds of the authority and the procedures that Congress has prescribed … and the government failed to do so here.' Techcrunch event Save $450 on your TechCrunch All Stage pass Build smarter. Scale faster. Connect deeper. Join visionaries from Precursor Ventures, NEA, Index Ventures, Underscore VC, and beyond for a day packed with strategies, workshops, and meaningful connections. Save $450 on your TechCrunch All Stage pass Build smarter. Scale faster. Connect deeper. Join visionaries from Precursor Ventures, NEA, Index Ventures, Underscore VC, and beyond for a day packed with strategies, workshops, and meaningful connections. Boston, MA | REGISTER NOW Not only were these websites removed for Americans seeking reliable health resources, but also, DFA members were blocked from accessing data and reference materials that they long relied on in their daily work, the court documents said. Some doctors testified that the removal of these resources impacted how efficiently they were able to provide care to their patients. One doctor who works in 'one of the most underserved high schools in Chicago' said that she was unable to use CDC resources to help her manage a chlamydia outbreak at the school. Other doctors reported that it became more difficult to provide guidance about STI prevention and contraception to patients with complex medical histories, whose cases may require additional research from clinicians. Judge Bates ruled that the websites that the plaintiff's doctors rely on must be restored if those sites have been taken down or substantially modified. However, it's yet to be seen how much of this health information will be restored, as some federal judges have claimed that this administration can be uncooperative with their rulings.
The Guardian
02-07-2025
- Health
- The Guardian
Mayors sue over Trump's efforts to restrict Obamacare signups
New Trump administration rules that give millions of people a shorter timeframe to sign up for the Affordable Care Act's health care coverage are facing a legal challenge from Democratic mayors around the country. The rules, rolled out last month, reverse a Biden-era effort to expand access to the Affordable Care Act's health insurance, commonly called 'Obamacare' or the ACA. The previous Democratic administration expanded the enrollment window for the coverage, which led to record enrollment. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) rolled out a series of new restrictions for Obamacare late last month, just as Congress was weighing a major bill that will decrease enrollment in the health care program that Donald Trump has scorned for years. As many as 2 million people – nearly 10% – are expected to lose coverage from the health department's new rules. The mayors of Baltimore, Chicago and Columbus, Ohio, sued the federal health department on Tuesday over the rules, saying they will result in more uninsured residents and overburden city services. 'Cloaked in the pretense of government efficiency and fraud prevention, the 2025 Rule creates numerous barriers to affordable insurance coverage, negating the purpose of the ACA to extend affordable health coverage to all Americans, and instead increasing the population of underinsured and uninsured Americans,' the filing alleges. Two liberal advocacy groups – Doctors for America and Main Street Alliance – joined in on the complaint. The federal health department announced a series of changes late last month to the ACA. It will shorten the enrollment period for the federal marketplace by a month, limiting it to 1 November to 15 December in 2026. Income verification checks will become more stringent and a $5 fee will be tacked on for some people who automatically re-enroll in a free plan. Insurers will also be able to deny coverage to people who have not paid their premiums on past plans. The rules also bar roughly 100,000 immigrants who were brought to the US as children from signing up for the coverage. The new rules 'safeguard the future of the marketplace', and will lower premiums for those who remain in the program, HHS spokesman Andrew Nixon said in a statement. 'The rule closes loopholes, strengthens oversight, and ensures taxpayer subsidies go to those who are truly eligible – that's not controversial, it's common sense,' Nixon said. But the three mayors argue that the polices were introduced without an adequate public comment period on the policies. 'This unlawful rule will force families off their health insurance and raise costs on millions of Americans. This does nothing to help people and instead harms Americans' health and safety across our country,' said Skye Perryman, the president of Democracy Forward, which is representing the coalition of plaintiffs in the lawsuit. The lawsuit does not challenge the Trump administration's restriction on immigrants signing up for the coverage. The Biden administration saw gains in Obamacare enrollment as a major success of the Democratic president's term, noting that a record 24 million people signed up for the coverage, thanks to generous tax breaks offered through the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act. But the program has been a target of Trump, who has said it is riddled with problems that make the coverage unaffordable for many without large subsidies. Enrollment in the program dipped during his first term in office.
The Guardian
02-07-2025
- Health
- The Guardian
Mayors sue over Trump's efforts to restrict Obamacare signups
New Trump administration rules that give millions of people a shorter timeframe to sign up for the Affordable Care Act's health care coverage are facing a legal challenge from Democratic mayors around the country. The rules, rolled out last month, reverse a Biden-era effort to expand access to the Affordable Care Act's health insurance, commonly called 'Obamacare' or the ACA. The previous Democratic administration expanded the enrollment window for the coverage, which led to record enrollment. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) rolled out a series of new restrictions for Obamacare late last month, just as Congress was weighing a major bill that will decrease enrollment in the health care program that Donald Trump has scorned for years. As many as 2 million people – nearly 10% – are expected to lose coverage from the health department's new rules. The mayors of Baltimore, Chicago and Columbus, Ohio, sued the federal health department on Tuesday over the rules, saying they will result in more uninsured residents and overburden city services. 'Cloaked in the pretense of government efficiency and fraud prevention, the 2025 Rule creates numerous barriers to affordable insurance coverage, negating the purpose of the ACA to extend affordable health coverage to all Americans, and instead increasing the population of underinsured and uninsured Americans,' the filing alleges. Two liberal advocacy groups – Doctors for America and Main Street Alliance – joined in on the complaint. The federal health department announced a series of changes late last month to the ACA. It will shorten the enrollment period for the federal marketplace by a month, limiting it to 1 November to 15 December in 2026. Income verification checks will become more stringent and a $5 fee will be tacked on for some people who automatically re-enroll in a free plan. Insurers will also be able to deny coverage to people who have not paid their premiums on past plans. The rules also bar roughly 100,000 immigrants who were brought to the US as children from signing up for the coverage. The new rules 'safeguard the future of the marketplace', and will lower premiums for those who remain in the program, HHS spokesman Andrew Nixon said in a statement. 'The rule closes loopholes, strengthens oversight, and ensures taxpayer subsidies go to those who are truly eligible – that's not controversial, it's common sense,' Nixon said. But the three mayors argue that the polices were introduced without an adequate public comment period on the policies. 'This unlawful rule will force families off their health insurance and raise costs on millions of Americans. This does nothing to help people and instead harms Americans' health and safety across our country,' said Skye Perryman, the president of Democracy Forward, which is representing the coalition of plaintiffs in the lawsuit. The lawsuit does not challenge the Trump administration's restriction on immigrants signing up for the coverage. The Biden administration saw gains in Obamacare enrollment as a major success of the Democratic president's term, noting that a record 24 million people signed up for the coverage, thanks to generous tax breaks offered through the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act. But the program has been a target of Trump, who has said it is riddled with problems that make the coverage unaffordable for many without large subsidies. Enrollment in the program dipped during his first term in office.
Al Arabiya
01-07-2025
- Health
- Al Arabiya
Mayors, Doctor Groups Sue Over Trump's Efforts to Restrict Obamacare Enrollment
New Trump administration rules that give millions of people a shorter timeframe to sign up for the Affordable Care Act's health care coverage are facing a legal challenge from Democratic mayors around the country. The rules rolled out last month reverse a Biden-era effort to expand access to the Affordable Care Act's health insurance, commonly called Obamacare or the ACA. The previous Democratic administration expanded the enrollment window for the coverage, which led to record enrollment. The Department of Health and Human Services rolled out a series of new restrictions for Obamacare late last month just as Congress was weighing a major bill that will decrease enrollment in the health care program that Republican President Donald Trump has scorned for years. As many as 2 million people – nearly 10 percent – are expected to lose coverage from the health department's new rules. The mayors of Baltimore, Chicago, and Columbus, Ohio, sued the federal health department on Tuesday over the rules, saying they will result in more uninsured residents and overburden city services. 'Cloaked in the pretense of government efficiency and fraud prevention, the 2025 Rule creates numerous barriers to affordable insurance coverage, negating the purpose of the ACA to extend affordable health coverage to all Americans and instead increasing the population of underinsured and uninsured Americans,' the filing alleges. Two liberal advocacy groups – Doctors for America and Main Street Alliance – joined in on the complaint. The federal health department announced a series of changes late last month to the ACA. It will shorten the enrollment period for the federal marketplace by a month, limiting it to Nov. 1 to Dec. 15 in 2026. Income verification checks will become more stringent, and a $5 fee will be tacked on for some people who automatically re-enroll in a free plan. Insurers will also be able to deny coverage to people who have not paid their premiums on past plans. The rules also bar roughly 100,000 immigrants who were brought to the US as children from signing up for the coverage. HHS said in a statement that the policies are temporary measures to immediately tamp down on improper enrollments and the improper flow of federal funds. The mayors – all Democrats – argue that the policies were introduced without an adequate public comment period on the policies. 'This unlawful rule will force families off their health insurance and raise costs on millions of Americans. This does nothing to help people and instead harms Americans' health and safety across our country,' said Skye Perryman, the president of Democracy Forward, which is representing the coalition of plaintiffs in the lawsuit. The lawsuit does not challenge the Trump administration's restriction on immigrants signing up for the coverage. The Biden administration saw gains in Obamacare enrollment as a major success of the Democratic president's term, noting that a record 24 million people signed up for the coverage thanks to generous tax breaks offered through the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act. But the program has been a target of Trump, who has said it is riddled with problems that make the coverage unaffordable for many without large subsidies. Enrollment in the program dipped during his first term in office.
