Physicians Sue Trump Administration Over Removal of LGBTQ Research Papers: A First Amendment Battle Ensues

Two physicians, Gordon Schiff and Celeste Royce from Harvard Medical School, are taking legal action against the Trump administration for removing two research papers from a government website, the Patient Safety Network (PSNet). The papers were removed because they included the terms “LGBTQ” and “trans(gender).”

The physicians, represented by the ACLU Massachusetts and the Media Freedom and Information Access Clinic at Yale Law School, argue that the removal of the articles violates their freedom of speech. Rachel Davidson, a staff attorney at the ACLU Massachusetts, stated that the government should not dictate what facts are permissible or what views researchers, academics, and doctors can express.

One of the removed articles discussed endometriosis diagnosis in trans and non-genderconforming individuals, emphasizing the importance of understanding this fact for accurate diagnosis. The other article focused on assessing suicide risk in patients, highlighting high-risk groups including LGBTQ individuals.

The removal of the articles was reportedly due to a White House policy on websites promoting “gender ideology,” following an executive order and memo from the Office of Personnel Management. The plaintiffs argue that the removal of their research violates the First Amendment and the Administrative Procedure Act, which regulates federal agency actions.

Legal experts suggest that the case may revolve around whether PSNet postings are considered a “limited public forum” or “government speech.” The government may argue that the removal was a “time, place, and manner restriction” to align with executive orders on “gender ideology.”

The lawsuit against the Office of Personnel Management, AHRQ, and HHS could serve as a test case for researchers challenging the administration’s interference in the scientific process. The plaintiffs hope their actions will encourage other researchers affected by similar censorship to come forward.

The implications of this censorship extend beyond the LGBTQ community, affecting patient safety and healthcare access for all individuals. The case highlights the broader impact of government actions on the medical community and the importance of protecting freedom of speech in research and academia.