Federal Judge Rules FDA, CDC Must Restore Health Websites Removed Under Trump Order

Follow Drugslib on

Medically reviewed by Carmen Pope, BPharm. Last updated on Feb 12, 2025.

By India Edwards HealthDay Reporter

TUESDAY, Feb. 12, 2025 -- A federal judge has ordered the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to restore access to public health websites that were removed or modified in response to a Trump administration executive order on gender.

The order, issued Feb. 11 by U.S. District Judge John Bates, grants a temporary restraining order requested by Doctors for America, a nonprofit group that sued the administration over the website removals.

The affected sites, some of which have been online for decades, contain public health information on HIV prevention, youth health risks, fertility treatments and more.

The ruling states that the two health agencies removed the sites without explanation and likely violated federal law.

“By removing long relied upon medical resources without explanation, it is likely that … each agency failed to ‘examine the relevant data and articulate a satisfactory explanation for its action,’ ” Bates wrote.

He ordered the CDC and FDA to restore access by the day's end Tuesday, a process that staff members were scrambling to complete.

“It was a double waste for us because we took them offline, put some of them back, edited others and now are putting it back again,” a federal health official who wanted to remain anonymous told The Washington Post.

The removed sites included:

  • The CDC's guidelines for HIV and PrEP, a medication that reduces the risk of contracting AIDS.

  • The CDC's Social Vulnerability Index -- which was key to identifying high-risk hot spots during COVID.

  • FDA databases that track diversity in clinical trials.

  • The National Assisted Reproductive Technologies Surveillance System, which monitors fertility treatment success rates.

  • Information on youth health risks.

    • Some researchers also reported that scientific studies on racial health disparities were removed, The Washington Post reported.

    Lucia Leone, an associate professor of community health and health behavior at the University of Buffalo, said in a social media post that a 2017 study she co-authored on food access in low-income communities was taken down, likely because it contained the word “diverse."

    Physicians and researchers were alarmed about the removals.

    “Restoring access to this vital data is welcome news, if it happens," Dr. Steven Woolf, director emeritus and professor of family medicine and population health at Virginia Commonwealth University, told The Washington Post. “But this list doesn’t cover everything that has gone missing.”

    Some doctors who treat HIV patients said they were already struggling without the CDC’s HIV and PrEP guidelines.

    “We recently had an outbreak of Chlamydia at the high school where I work and are actively meeting with school leadership to address increasing our efforts around STI testing and prevention,” Dr. Stephanie Liou, who screens students for sexually transmitted infections and prescribes PrEP, said in a court declaration. “Without these crucial CDC resources, I am not able to do my job to help address this urgent situation that is affecting our youth.”

    Dr. Reshma Ramachandran, assistant professor at the Yale School of Medicine, said the CDC’s contraceptive guidance for providers was also removed, The Washington Post reported.

    “I take care of female patients of reproductive age, many of whom have other medical conditions making it imperative to select the appropriate contraceptive that would not interfere with their existing comorbidities and other medications,” Ramachandran explained.

    The lawsuit argues that the CDC and FDA violated federal law by failing to follow correct procedures for removing public information.

    The Justice Department, defending the Trump administration, claimed Doctors for America lacked legal standing to challenge the actions. It said the sites could still be accessed through an online archive called the Wayback Machine, The Washington Post reported.

    “The doctors just prefer not to search," Justice Department attorney James Harlow argued in a legal filing. "But one’s ‘desire’ for information from a preferred government source and in a preferred format does not establish informational injury when the content is otherwise obtainable.”

    Bates' 21-page opinion rejected that argument, ruling that the health agencies’ actions would harm “everyday Americans, and most acutely, underprivileged Americans, seeking healthcare."

    “If those doctors cannot provide these individuals the care they need (and deserve) 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,” Bates wrote.

    Sources

  • The Washington Post, media report, Feb. 11, 2025
  • Memorandum opinion, Doctors for America v. Office of Personnel Management et al., Feb. 11, 2025

    • Disclaimer: Statistical data in medical articles provide general trends and do not pertain to individuals. Individual factors can vary greatly. Always seek personalized medical advice for individual healthcare decisions.

    Source: HealthDay

    Posted : 2025-02-13 06:00

    Read more

    Disclaimer

    Every effort has been made to ensure that the information provided by Drugslib.com is accurate, up-to-date, and complete, but no guarantee is made to that effect. Drug information contained herein may be time sensitive. Drugslib.com information has been compiled for use by healthcare practitioners and consumers in the United States and therefore Drugslib.com does not warrant that uses outside of the United States are appropriate, unless specifically indicated otherwise. Drugslib.com's drug information does not endorse drugs, diagnose patients or recommend therapy. Drugslib.com's drug information is an informational resource designed to assist licensed healthcare practitioners in caring for their patients and/or to serve consumers viewing this service as a supplement to, and not a substitute for, the expertise, skill, knowledge and judgment of healthcare practitioners.

    The absence of a warning for a given drug or drug combination in no way should be construed to indicate that the drug or drug combination is safe, effective or appropriate for any given patient. Drugslib.com does not assume any responsibility for any aspect of healthcare administered with the aid of information Drugslib.com provides. The information contained herein is not intended to cover all possible uses, directions, precautions, warnings, drug interactions, allergic reactions, or adverse effects. If you have questions about the drugs you are taking, check with your doctor, nurse or pharmacist.

    Popular Keywords