0
0
Washington, D.C. – In a significant ruling, a federal judge has ordered the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to restore access to public health websites that were previously taken down under President Trump’s executive order on gender.
On February 11, U.S. District Judge John D. Bates granted a temporary restraining order filed by the nonprofit organization Doctors for America (DFA). The order halts the removal of public-facing websites that were deemed to “inculcate or promote gender ideology” under President Trump’s directive. According to the judge’s written opinion, the affected agencies must restore these websites and datasets by 11:59 PM EST on February 11.
The removal of these resources significantly impacted healthcare professionals, restricting access to vital information necessary for medical treatment, research, and public health initiatives. According to DFA and as noted in Judge Bates’ ruling, the affected sites provided critical information on sexually transmitted infection testing, HIV clinical care, contraception, assisted reproductive technologies, and guidelines for increasing female participation in clinical trials. The absence of such resources, as testified by several clinicians in court filings, has disrupted essential medical care and scientific research.
“The balance of equities and the public interest strongly favor the DFA,” Judge Bates wrote, emphasizing that the removal of these websites has already caused harm and would continue to negatively impact healthcare providers and patients alike. He further stated that restoring these resources would not interfere with the agencies’ efforts to comply with President Trump’s broader executive orders on gender-related policies.
As federal agencies move to comply with the court’s ruling, healthcare professionals and researchers are expected to regain access to essential medical data, ensuring continued support for public health and clinical practices.
Disclaimer: This article is based on a court ruling and statements from involved parties. The situation may evolve, and readers are encouraged to refer to official government sources for the latest updates.
