“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.
You’re not arguing the PRA and APA - both Federal laws.
If your arguments are making the case that the data in contention is not subject to PRA and APA, it seems lacking.
These are legal issues.