Judge Orders Trump To Restore Health Articles Removed Over Transgender References
A United States federal judge has ruled that the Trump administration must restore health articles removed from a government website. The ruling came after the removal of materials referencing transgender patients, which a judge said violated free speech rights.
U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin in Boston issued the order on Friday. He ruled in favor of two Harvard Medical School doctors whose work was removed from the Patient Safety Network (PSNet), a site managed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
The judge stated that the article removals were a clear example of viewpoint discrimination. He said the Trump administration’s actions breached the First Amendment.
The articles were taken down after Trump signed an executive order banning references to what he called “gender ideology.” The directive led to the removal of any material that acknowledged transgender individuals.
Judge Sorokin, appointed by former President Barack Obama, called the removal “a textbook violation” of constitutional free speech rights. He said the decision to remove articles solely because they mentioned transgender patients was unlawful.
The lawsuit was filed by Dr. Gordon Schiff and Dr. Celeste Royce. Their articles, which discussed topics like suicide and endometriosis, were removed from PSNet after brief transgender references were flagged.
The judge ordered that not only Schiff and Royce’s articles but all other third-party contributions deleted under the order be restored.
He emphasized that even minor mentions of transgender people were deemed unacceptable under the Trump policy. Authors were reportedly told they must delete those terms to have their work reinstated.
Trump had signed the executive order upon returning to office on January 20. The order stated the government must recognize only biological definitions of male and female.
The ruling of the judge marked a setback for the controversial directive issued by President Trump. The case highlights ongoing legal debates around free speech, public health, and the rights of transgender individuals.
