Nine private medical and public health advocacy organizations, including two from D.C., filed a lawsuit on May 20 in federal court in Seattle challenging what it calls the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’s illegal deletion of dozens or more of its webpages containing health related information, including HIV information.

The lawsuit, filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, names as defendants Robert F. Kennedy Jr., secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and HHS itself, and several agencies operating under HHS and its directors, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, and the Food and Drug Administration.

“This action challenges the widespread deletion of public health resources from federal agencies,” the lawsuit states. “Dozens (if not more) of taxpayer-funded webpages, databases, and other crucial resources have vanished since January 20, 2025, leaving doctors, nurses, researchers, and the public scrambling for information,” it says.

 “These actions have undermined the longstanding, congressionally mandated regime; irreparably harmed Plaintiffs and others who rely on these federal resources; and put the nation’s public health infrastructure in unnecessary jeopardy,” the lawsuit continues.

It adds, “The removal of public health resources was apparently prompted by two recent executive orders – one focused on ‘gender ideology’ and the other targeting diversity, equity, and inclusion (‘DEI’) programs. Defendants implemented these executive orders in a haphazard manner that resulted in the deletion (inadvertent or otherwise) of health-related websites and databases, including information related to pregnancy risks, public health datasets, information about opioid-use disorder, and many other valuable resources.”

 The lawsuit does not mention that it was President Donald Trump who issued the two executive orders in question. 

A White House spokesperson couldn’t immediately be reached for comment on the lawsuit. 

While not mentioning Trump by name, the lawsuit names as defendants in addition to HHS Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr., Matthew Buzzelli, acting director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Jay Bhattacharya, director of the National Institutes of Health; Martin Makary, commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration; Thomas Engels, administrator of the Health Resources and Services Administration; and Charles Ezell, acting director of the Office of Personnel Management. 

The 44-page lawsuit complaint includes an addendum with a chart showing the titles or descriptions of 49 “affected resource” website pages that it says were deleted because of the executive orders. The chart shows that just four of the sites were restored after initially being deleted.

 Of the 49 sites, 15 addressed LGBTQ-related health issues and six others addressed HIV issues, according to the chart.   

“The unannounced and unprecedented deletion of these federal webpages and datasets came as a shock to the medical and scientific communities, which had come to rely on them to monitor and respond to disease outbreaks, assist physicians and other clinicians in daily care, and inform the public about a wide range of healthcare issues,” the lawsuit states.

 “Health professionals, nonprofit organizations, and state and local authorities used the websites and datasets daily in care for their patients, to provide resources to their communities, and promote public health,” it says. 

Jose Zuniga, president and CEO of the International Association of Providers of AIDS Care (IAPAC), one of the organizations that signed on as a plaintiff in the lawsuit, said in a statement that the deleted information from the HHS websites “includes essential information about LGBTQ+ health, gender and reproductive rights, clinical trial data, Mpox and other vaccine guidance and HIV prevention resources.”

 Zuniga added, “IAPAC champions evidence-based, data-informed HIV responses and we reject ideologically driven efforts that undermine public health and erase marginalized communities.”

Lisa Amore, a spokesperson for Whitman-Walker Health, D.C.’s largest LGBTQ supportive health services provider, also expressed concern about the potential impact of the HHS website deletions.

 “As the region’s leader in HIV care and prevention, Whitman-Walker Health relies on scientific data to help us drive our resources and measure our successes,” Amore said in response to a request for comment from  the Washington Blade. 

“The District of Columbia has made great strides in the fight against HIV,” Amore said. “But the removal of public facing information from the HHS website makes our collective work much harder and will set HIV care and prevention backward,” she said. 

The lawsuit calls on the court to issue a declaratory judgement that the “deletion of public health webpages and resources is unlawful and invalid” and to issue a preliminary or permanent injunction ordering government officials named as defendants in the lawsuit “to restore the public health webpages and resources that have been deleted and to maintain their web domains in accordance with their statutory duties.”

It also calls on the court to require defendant government officials to “file a status report with the Court within twenty-four hours of entry of a preliminary injunction, and at regular intervals, thereafter, confirming compliance with these orders.”

The health organizations that joined the lawsuit as plaintiffs include the Washington State Medical Association, Washington State Nurses Association, Washington Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics, Academy Health, Association of Nurses in AIDS Care, Fast-Track Cities Institute, International Association of Providers of AIDS Care, National LGBT Cancer Network, and Vermont Medical Society. 

The Fast-Track Cities Institute and International Association of Providers of AIDS Care are based in D.C.

U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.)’s “Protect Children’s Innocence Act,” which would criminalize guideline-directed gender affirming health care for minors, will advance to markup in the House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday morning.

Doctors and providers who administer medical treatments for gender dysphoria to patients younger than 18, including hormones and puberty blockers, would be subject to Class 3 felony charges punishable by up to 10 years in prison if the legislation is enacted.

LGBTQ advocates warn conservative lawmakers want to go after families who travel out of state to obtain medical care for their transgender kids that is banned or restricted in the places where they reside, using legislation like Greene’s to expand federal jurisdiction over these decisions. They also point to the medically inaccurate way in which the bill characterizes evidence-based interventions delineated in standards of care for trans and gender diverse youth as “mutilation” or “chemical castration.”

Days into his second term, President Donald Trump signed “Protecting Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation,” an executive order declaring that the U.S. would not “fund, sponsor, promote, assist, or support the so-called ‘transition’ of a child from one sex to another, and it will rigorously enforce all laws that prohibit or limit” medical treatments and interventions intended for this purpose.

Greene, who has introduced the bill in years past, noted the president’s endorsement of her bill during his address to the joint session of Congress in March when he said “I want Congress to pass a bill permanently banning and criminalizing sex changes on children and forever ending the lie that any child is trapped in the wrong body.”

Delaware is considering amending its state Constitution to codify same-sex marriage. The bill, SB 100, will be heard in committee on Wednesday. 

SB 100 was introduced in April 2025 by Democratic Sen. Russ Huxtable of the sixth district of Delaware and is the first leg of an amendment to the Delaware Constitution. The act would “establish the right to marry as a fundamental right and that Delaware and its political subdivisions shall recognize marriages and issue marriage licenses to couples regardless of gender.”

“[SB 100] really came from the community that I represent and so that was the inspiration behind it, addressing concerns that my constituents have,” Huxtable told the Washington Blade. 

CAMP Rehoboth, an LGBTQ community center and advocacy organization based in Rehoboth Beach, sent a letter to members of the Senate Executive Committee in support of SB 100. 

“We applaud this proactive approach because it ensures that even if federal protections are weakened, same-sex couples in Delaware will retain their rights under Delaware law,” the letter reads. “We believe that doing so NOW is crucial for several reasons, particularly in the context of evolving legal landscapes and the erosion of civil rights long recognized in Federal law.”

CAMP Rehoboth Board President Leslie Ledogar is scheduled to testify at the Wednesday hearing on behalf of CAMP Rehoboth. She hopes to convey how personal this bill is for the organization. 

Ledogar said CAMP Rehoboth has an almost 35-year history of advocating on behalf of LGBTQ people in the state of Delaware. Past Board President Chris Beagle and his husband were among the first couples to be married in Sussex County after same-sex marriage was legalized in the state in 2013, with CAMP Rehoboth hosting the ceremony. 

The letter cited concerns with the possibility of Obergefell v. Hodges being overturned in the future, the landmark 2015 Supreme Court case that guaranteed the right to marry for same-sex couples. 

“We really feel that this is a proactive and protective measure that ensures long-term security for LGBTQ+ couples,” Ledogar said. “While we do have that [protection] now, it could be just that temporary and just that fleeting, and everything we’ve worked for and built could fall apart, not by our own initiative but because of the stroke of a pen.”

The letter details the positive impact that the bill would have on Delaware’s LGBTQ community, such as affirming equality and human dignity, preventing legal backsliding and creating legal certainty and reflecting public support. 

“[SB 100] would align the law with the values of a majority of Delawareans, ensuring that legal frameworks reflect contemporary societal norms and standards,” Ledogar said. 

In 2024, the Public Religion Research Institution found that 61% of Delawareans favor allowing same-sex couples to marry. 

Some critics of the bill cite religious concerns, though SB 100 explicitly protects clergy refusal, saying that “the right to marry regardless of gender does not infringe upon the right to freedom of religion because religious organizations and members of the clergy have the right to refuse to solemnize a marriage.” 

The bill requires a vote of two-thirds of the members elected to each house of the General Assembly to pass. If passed, the next General Assembly after the next general election also has to pass it. Delaware is the only state in the country that can amend its state Constitution without a vote of the people. Constituents can register to watch the hearing virtually here.

Other states such as California, Colorado, and Hawaii have introduced and passed similar bills to protect the right of all people of all genders to marry under state law. 

Huxtable said he hopes Delaware can send a message to other states that they can do the same thing and “don’t need to feel the threat from extremists.”  

“I think it’s showing that the General Assembly in Delaware in particular are advocating for good policy celebrating the individual … We’re governing by our values and not our fears.”