Posted on 02/12/2025 4:43:41 AM PST by MtnClimber
A federal judge on Tuesday ordered the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to restore pro-gender ideology webpages after they were deleted in the wake of President Trump’s executive order banning government agencies from promoting gender ideology, CBS News reported Tuesday.
Trump’s EO, signed on his first day in office, stated that the U.S. recognizes two sexes, male and female, and directed agencies to “remove all statements, policies, regulations, forms, communications, or other internal and external messages that promote or otherwise inculcate gender ideology,” as well as “cease issuing such statements, policies, regulations, forms, communications or other messages.”
Days after the president issued his order, the Office of Personnel Management issued a memorandum ordering all agencies by 5 p.m. on Jan. 31 to take down all websites, social media accounts and other public-facing media “that inculcate or promote gender ideology.” In response to the memo, the CDC and FDA took offline numerous webpages and data sets, including recommendations on how physicians should treat sexually transmitted infections and adult immunization guidance.
While the wording on some websites was adjusted to adhere to Mr. Trump’s directive, allowing them to stay online, other information, like data from the CDC’s Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System, was removed completely.
The agency said in a banner on its main website that it was “being modified to comply with President Trump’s executive orders.”
U.S. District Judge John Bates, a George W. Bush appointee, granted a temporary restraining order sought by the left-wing nonprofit Doctors for America (originally Doctors For Obama). The activist group was founded in 2008 by Dr. Vivek Murthy, who went on to become Joe Biden’s surgeon general. Doctors For America argued that its members had used the websites for treating patients and conducting research and that the removal of the webpages violated federal law.
Bates, 78, found that the group was likely to succeed in its claim that HHS, the CDC and FDA acted unlawfully when they scrubbed transgender ideology from their public websites.
“It bears emphasizing who ultimately bears the harm of defendants’ actions: everyday Americans, and most acutely, underprivileged Americans, seeking healthcare,” he wrote. Citing declarations from two doctors filed in the case, Bates said if they “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. The public thus has a strong interest in avoiding these serious injuries to the public health.”
Judge John Bates was the judge in the tragic case of Matthew Perna, the j6er who hung himself after Biden DOJ prosecutors sadistically threw the book at him for peacefully trespassing.
The judge said that after the gender ideology info was taken down, doctors were forced to look elsewhere for such material, making “their jobs harder and their treatment less effective,” but that HHS, CDC and FDA faced no burden by keeping the webpages up.
“There is nothing in either the OPM memorandum or the record, and indeed defendants proffered no information at the hearing, to suggest the restoration of the removed webpages would pose a burden on the agencies’ ability to engage in their work,” Bates wrote. “Similarly, there is no information to suggest that restoring public access would even interfere with the agencies’ ongoing efforts to conform those resources with the president’s executive orders.”
The judge ordered the agencies to restore earlier versions of their websites by 11:59 p.m. Tuesday.
Senator Mike Lee registered his disapproval of the judge’s decision on X: “These judges are waging an unprecedented assault on legitimate presidential authority, all the way down to dictating what webpages the government has,” Lee wrote. “This is absurd.”
Reacting with equal dismay, DOGE Chief Elon Musk called for Judge Bates to be fired.
“Truly absurd. Judges as website editors!?” he posted on X. “We should at least ATTEMPT to fire this junky jurist.” He added: “The notion of having a judge job for life, no matter how bad the judgments, is ridiculous! Enough is enough.”
Okay. So what claim are you making relative to the PRA or APA?
Re: 38 - it depends on the data on the webpage being subject to the PRA.
I like the analysis yesterday of a ‘bond’ which is rarely enforced upon those who bring the case before such judges.
Can’t recall the name of the bond, but the post was yesterday.
There is. It requires a professional mechanic, dedicated to his craft.
DOGE should go after Judges , the ones that scream the loudest
WHEN? Have any of these activist judge decisions been appealed in any way to higher courts or SCOTUS? We know the SCOTUS has not always taken 'emergency' cases stating that they must first go through a lower court appeal process.
To paraphrase an old saying, "When minutes count, the courts are only hours away."
“The removal of the webpages and datasets
creates a dangerous gap in the scientific data available to monitor and respond to disease outbreaks,
deprives physicians of resources that guide clinical practice, and takes away key resources for communicating and engaging with patients.”
Websites dealing with health issues normally state that the information is no substitute for a professional education.
“Defendants failed to provide required notice of their action to remove these vitally important webpages and datasets, and their actions are arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with the law.
See 5 U.S.C. § 706(2).”
We had a federal election. The voters said to “cut the ****”.
“Plaintiff Doctors for America (DFA) is a nonpartisan, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) organization of over 27,000 physicians and medical trainees including medical residents and students in all 50 states, representing all medical specialties.”
How many of these would say under oath and penalty of perjury that it is a good idea to cut off my naughty bits if I was deluded?
“To accomplish those goals, the PRA mandates that every agency must “ensure that the public has timely and equitable access to the agency’s public information” and must “regularly solicit and consider public input on the agency’s information dissemination activities.” 44 U.S.C. §§ 3506(d)(1), (2).”
I suspect someone got paid well to do that.
“The PRA further mandates that agencies must “provide adequate notice when initiating, substantially modifying, or terminating significant information dissemination products.” Id. § 3506(d)(3).”
A rather extensive lawsuit is exactly opposite to the purpose of the Paperwork Reduction Act.
“significant information dissemination products”
How many boobs and bits were cut off as a result of the federal webpages?
”5 The Order directed agencies to combat what the President described as “gender ideology,” including by requiring agencies to “use the term ‘sex’ and not ‘gender’ in all applicable Federal policies and documents.”
Gender is a linguistic term.
BTTT
The doctors’ staff have to order brochures from the alphabet mafia. This is hardly making the doctors have to work harder.
Judge is a knuckle dragger. Who knew?
“I was not commenting on 19.”
Feel free to do so:
NEW PAGE
If you were born with male parts and think you are a female, you have a mental problem.
If you were born with a large opening in the front of your lower abdomen and think you are a male, you have a mental problem.
Agree with the bad / awful decisions that parents and others have made that will have adverse effects forging children for a lifetime.
But you really haven’t addressed why the PRA and APA are not applicable in this case.
This case is not going to be won on emotion.
Agree
Agree
I just read somewhere that an injunction is supposed to include a bond payment equal to the amount of damage caused if they’re wrong...it’s just not enforced. The suggestion being, require the bond, it’d halt asinine injunctions like this.
Maybe someone here knows more than I...
“Re: 38 - it depends on the data on the webpage being subject to the PRA.”
A lawsuit on the basis of the Paperwork Reduction Act is an absurdity.
Trump’s team should completely disregard these rogue judges. Hopefully, doing that will accelerate the SCOTUS to take action against these unconstitutional decisions by the rogues. Impeachment should be in their future.
I posted:
“The data on the website(s) is public data subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act, a Federal Law.”
“That data, once public, can’t be removed without adhering the Administrative Procedures Act - another Federal Law.”
In February 2020 I read that masks were worthless.
A few months later I read that they needed to be used.
Okay. So what claim are you making relative to the PRA or APA?
The mask issue was “significant”. Right?
The federal government didn’t dawdle over the APA when it came to masks. Fauci straight out lied to the American public so the providers would get the masks they needed far more than the public.
Congress is in Republican hands, so start impeaching a judge a day that tries to block President Trumps agenda. Start with Engoron and everyone that tries to block the EOS and actions that WE voted for!
“you really haven’t addressed why the PRA and APA are not applicable in this case.”
Medicine is practiced based on years of medical education followed by long mentored practical, real world experience acquisition.
The 27,000+ “physicians” of the plaintiff are about 2.5% of the total. They are a minority. The managers of their practice organization (perhaps a dozen people) wish to continue to have the pervert views of a bunch of perverts tossed out of office by tens of millions of American voters continued to be pedaled by the federal government in clear opposition to the wishes of those voters.
“The information provided using this Web site is only intended to be general summary information to the public.”
“It is not NIH’s intention to provide specific medical advice to users of the NIH Web site, instead we provide users with information to help them better understand their health, diagnosed conditions, and the current approaches related to treatment, prevention, screening, and supportive care. NIH urges users to consult with a qualified health care professional for diagnosis and answers to their personal medical questions.”
https://www.nih.gov/disclaimers
I don’t see judges giving members of the public such as myself practical means of input before issuing legal judgements blocking the President from making the changes tens of millions of Americans have voted for after vigorous public discussion and debate.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.