District Court Orders Federal Agencies To Restore Access To Resources for HIV Prevention and Contraceptives

On February 11,2025, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia granted a temporary restraining order (“TRO”) ordering the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), CDC, and FDA to restore public access to webpages and datasets that healthcare providers utilize to treat patients and conduct research. 

The TRO arises from a suit brought by advocacy groupDoctors for America (DFA) against various federal agencies following implementation of President Trump’s January 20, 2025 Executive Order 14168, titled “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government.”Following the executive order, OPM issued a memorandum requiring agency heads to, among other things, “terminate any [agency programs] that promote or inculcate gender ideology” and “[t]ake down all outward facing media (websites, social media accounts, etc.) that inculcate or promote gender ideology.” DFA’s complaint alleged that, in response to OPM’s memorandum, healthcare agencies such as the CDC and FDA removed numerous webpages and databases related to medical treatment and public health. The removed webpages included guidelines on “PrEP for the Prevention of HIV Infection in the U.S.,” and “U.S. Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use,”. DFA alleged that the agencies acted arbitrarily and capriciously in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act when removing these webpages and datasets, and that the removals violated the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. § 3506(d)(3), which requires agencies to provide “adequate notice” when “substantially modifying, or terminating significant information dissemination products.”

The district court found DFA proved a substantial likelihood that it would have organizational standing because the removal of the webpages and datasets were already substantially disrupting the work of DFA members caring for patients and conducting research. The court further determined that the removal of the webpages likely violated the PRA because the agencies removed webpages containing significant information without notice, and that the removals likely were arbitrary and capricious because the agencies offered no explanation for the removals and “‘failed to consider’ the ‘important’ issue of the substantial reliance by medical professionals on the removed webpages.'” The court determined that the balance of equities also favored DFA because restoring the webpages would impose a minimal burden on the agencies, but their had caused “widespread disruption” in medical care and would harm “everyday Americans, and most acutely, underprivileged Americans, seeking healthcare.”