February, 10 2020, 11:00pm EDT
ACLU, Planned Parenthood, and Consumers Challenge Trump Administration Rule That Threatens Insurance Coverage for Abortion
The rule imposes more than $1 billion in unnecessary costs in an effort to coerce insurance companies to stop offering coverage for abortion, affecting more than 3 million consumers.
WASHINGTON
Planned Parenthood of Maryland, Inc., and several consumers around the country filed a lawsuit today challenging the Trump administration's new rule designed to make insurance companies stop offering coverage for abortion. They are represented by attorneys with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc., and Brown Goldstein & Levy, LLP.
In December 2019, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the U.S. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) released a new rule that, if implemented, would force insurance companies that sell plans in the Affordable Care Act individual marketplaces to send two separate bills to customers -- one for the coverage of abortion care, and another for coverage of other health care. Insurers will also have to instruct their customers to pay the bills using two checks, two money orders, or two electronic transactions every month.
As the administration acknowledged in finalizing the rule, the extensive administrative burdens will lead to higher premiums for consumers and will cause some insurers to drop insurance coverage for abortion altogether. As the administration also acknowledged, confusion about these new requirements will lead some people to miss payments and risk losing their health insurance coverage entirely.
"If this rule takes effect, I face the terrifying risk of losing not only my insurance coverage for abortion, but my insurance coverage entirely, which would be devastating for me given my pre-existing condition," said Rebecca, a resident of Washington, D.C. and plaintiff in the case. "That's why I'm joining the ACLU and Planned Parenthood to fight back. It is cruel and unacceptable that the Trump administration is interfering in my health care and trying to interfere with how health insurance companies do business, just because they want to make it more difficult for me to access my right to abortion."
"The Trump administration's new insurance rule is another attack on abortion care, designed solely to push safe, legal abortion further out of reach," said Meagan Burrows, staff attorney with the ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project. "And yet again, its actions will have the most devastating effect on already marginalized communities, including low-income people, people with limited English proficiency, and people with disabilities. Abortion is health care, and our government should be making it easier -- not harder -- for people to get the health care they need."
More than 3 million consumers would be affected by the rule's onerous restrictions, including the individual plaintiffs in the lawsuit from Maryland, the District of Columbia, New Jersey, and Maine.The rule would also affect one-third of the individual market exchange plans nationwide, including every individual plan offered on the marketplaces in Maryland. A fact sheet on the impact of the rule can be found here.
"Abortion opponents are waging everything they've got as part of their massive war on our access to health care," said Karen Nelson, President and CEO, Planned Parenthood of Maryland, Inc. "The attacks and deceptions continue, but here's the truth: Abortion care is health care, and it should not be separated, "carved out", or treated differently from any other medical service. We will always fight to eliminate barriers and protect access to safe, legal abortion care and we will continue to provide people with the health care they need."
"This rule exists for one reason: to make it more difficult for people to access safe, legal abortion," said Alexis McGill Johnson, Acting President and CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America. "The administration itself admits this rule has no quantifiable benefit -- its sole purpose is to create extra red tape for millions of people across the country. We will not stand for this administration's attempt to shame people and keep them from accessing health care. All people deserve to be able to access abortion in this country, and to have their health insurance cover this safe, legal medical procedure. Planned Parenthood Federation of America is proud to stand with Planned Parenthood of Maryland, the ACLU and these brave individual consumers to fight back against this harmful rule in court. We will never stop fighting for our patients, or for the right of all people to access sexual and reproductive health care, including abortion, without shame or needless hurdles."
The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland.
The American Civil Liberties Union was founded in 1920 and is our nation's guardian of liberty. The ACLU works in the courts, legislatures and communities to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to all people in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States.
(212) 549-2666LATEST NEWS
Reporters Without Borders Sounds Alarm Over Trump Effort to 'Bring the Press Into Line'
RSF says Trump's moves "have jeopardized the country's news outlets and indicate that he intends to follow through on his threats, setting up a potential crisis for American journalism."
May 02, 2025
Press freedom in the United States has fallen to its lowest level since Reporters Without Borders began publishing its annual ranking more than 20 years ago, with President Donald Trump's return to power "greatly exacerbating the situation," RSF said Friday.
The U.S. fell from 55th to 57th place on RSF's World Press Freedom Index, marking the second straight year that the situation in the country which lists freedom of the press first in its Bill of Rights has been classified as "problematic." The report comes ahead of World Press Freedom Day on May 3.
The U.S. has been trending downward on RSF's index since 2013, when it ranked 32nd in global press freedom. A decade later, it had fallen to 45th place before plunging to 55th place last year amid Trump's attacks on the media.
"Trump was elected to a second term after a campaign in which he denigrated the press on a daily basis and made explicit threats to weaponize the federal government against the media," the report states.
Press freedom in the United States has hit a record low, according to the latest World Press Freedom Index published annually by Reporters Without Borders.
[image or embed]
— Axios (@axios.com) May 1, 2025 at 9:03 PM
"His early moves in his second mandate to politicize the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), banThe Associated Press from the White House, or dismantle the U.S. Agency for Global Media, for example, have jeopardized the country's news outlets and indicate that he intends to follow through on his threats, setting up a potential crisis for American journalism," the publication continues, accusing Trump of using "false economic pretexts" to "bring the press into line."
"The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides broad protections for the press. However, no meaningful press freedom legislation has been passed at the national level in recent years despite the country's consistent slide on the Press Freedom Index," the report notes. "The PRESS Act, a federal shield law, failed to pass for a second successive time in 2024. More than a dozen states and communities have proposed or enacted laws to limit journalists' access to public spaces, including barring them from legislative meetings and preventing them from recording the police."
RSF continued:
Economic constraints have a considerable impact on journalists. Roughly one-third of the American newspapers operating in 2005 have now shuttered. While some public media outlets, and radio stations in particular, have been able to offset this decline thanks to online subscription models, others have found ways to sustain growth through individual donations. Massive waves of layoffs swept the U.S. media throughout 2023 and 2024 and have continued into 2025, affecting both local newsrooms and major legacy outlets. Many parts of the country are now considered news deserts, with the disappearance of local news outlets reaching crisis levels. Since 2022, more than 8,000 journalists have been laid off in the U.S.
Furthermore, "more Americans have no trust in the media than trust it a fair amount. Online harassment, particularly towards women and minorities, is also a serious issue for journalists and can impact their quality of life and safety."
"Politicians' open disdain for the media has trickled down to the public," RSF added. "Journalists reporting on the ground can face harassment, intimidation, and assault while working. When covering demonstrations, journalists are sometimes attacked and physically assaulted by protestors or wrongfully arrested by police. According to the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker, there were 49 journalist arrests in 2024 compared to only 15 in 2023. The last journalist to be killed in the course of his work was Dylan Lyons in February of 2023."
RSF paints a grim picture for journalism around the world.
"The conditions for practicing journalism are bad in half of the world's countries," as "less than 1% of the world's population lives in a country where press freedom is fully guaranteed," the report states.
Noting that economic self-sufficiency is critical to a free press, RSF editorial director Anne Bocandé said in a statement that "guaranteeing freedom, independence,s and plurality in today's media landscape requires stable and transparent financial conditions."
"Without economic independence, there can be no free press," Bocandé continued. "When news media are financially strained, they are drawn into a race to attract audiences at the expense of quality reporting, and can fall prey to the oligarchs and public authorities who seek to exploit them. When journalists are impoverished, they no longer have the means to resist the enemies of the press—those who champion disinformation and propaganda."
"The media economy must urgently be restored to a state that is conducive to journalism and ensures the production of reliable information, which is inherently costly," she added. "Solutions exist and must be deployed on a large scale. The media's financial independence is a necessary condition for ensuring free, trustworthy information that serves the public interest."
RSF's new rankings come days after U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi ended a Biden administration policy that strictly limited the Justice Department's authority to seize journalists' records and compel them to testify in leak investigations.
On Wednesday, the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) published a report on Trump's first 100 days in office, which the group said were "marked by a flurry of executive actions that have created a chilling effect and have the potential to curtail media freedoms."
"It is disturbing that, on the eve of #WorldPressFreedomDay, the Trump administration has dealt major blows to journalists and the public they serve." — Katherine Jacobsen, CPJ's U.S., Canada, and Caribbean program coordinator
[image or embed]
— Committee to Protect Journalists (@pressfreedom.bsky.social) May 2, 2025 at 9:09 AM
"From denying access to upending respect for the independence of a free press to vilifying news organizations to threatening reprisals, this administration has begun to exert its power to punish or reward based on coverage," CPJ said. "Whether in the states or on the streets, this behavior is setting a new standard for how the public can treat journalists."
"The uncertainty and fear resulting from these actions have caused requests for safety advice to increase as journalists and newsrooms aim to prepare for what might be next," the group added. "These moves represent a notable escalation from the first Trump administration, which also pursued banning and deriding elements of the press. After nearly a decade of repeating insults and falsehoods, and filing lawsuits, Trump has normalized disdain for media to an alarming degree."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Genocide in Action' as 60-Day Blockade Plunges Gaza Into Mass Starvation
The two-month-long siege is a "clear and calculated effort to collectively punish over two million civilians and to make Gaza unlivable."
May 02, 2025
"This is genocide in action," said one official with Amnesty International on Friday, referring to Israel's two-month humanitarian blockade in Gaza which has resulted in death, starvation, and suffering on a nearly unimaginable scale.
The human rights group is demanding that Israel's allies, including the United States, take immediate action to ensure the Israeli government lifts the total aid blockade that's plunged the enclave into what the United Nations has called "mass starvation," with food supplies rapidly dwindling and thousands of children diagnosed with acute malnutrition.
"The international community must not continue to stand by as Israel perpetrates these atrocities with impunity," said Erika Guevara Rosas, Amnesty's senior director for research, advocacy, policy, and campaigns.
After a brief cease-fire, Israel reimposed a ban on the entry of commercial goods and aid into Gaza on March 2 and cut off power to the enclave's desalination plant, after it had been briefly reconnected to electricity. The plant's blackout has worsened water scarcity that's plagued Gaza for all of Israel's 17-year blockade and has left some Palestinians resorting to drinking seawater.
A spokesperson for the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) told reporters in Geneva on Friday that the agency is in "constant contact" with Israeli authorities as it advocates for the reopening of border crossings.
"We don't ask if food is nutritious or not, if it's fresh or good; that' a luxury, we just want to fill the stomachs of our children. I don't want my child to die hungry."
"Food stocks have now mainly run out, water access has become impossible," Olga Cherevko said, leaving children "who have been deprived of their childhood for many months... rummaging through piles of trash" in search of food and combustible material to burn for cooking, due to rapidly shrinking supplies of fuel.
"Gaza is inching closer to running on empty," said Cherevko.
Amnesty interviewed 35 internally displaced people about the forced starvation crisis facing Gaza, which began again shortly before Israel resumed its bombardment of the enclave on March 18—killing at least 2,325 people including 820 children since then.
With the severe food scarcity being "exploited by individuals hoarding or looting supplies, selling them at extortionate prices," according to Amnesty, most Palestinians are relying on overcrowded charity kitchens where they can wait for hours each day for just one meal.
"We don't ask if food is nutritious or not, if it's fresh or good; that' a luxury, we just want to fill the stomachs of our children. I don't want my child to die hungry," one parent told the aid group.
Another described sending their son to wait in line for drinking water "for hours and he had to walk long distances."
"With the relentless bombardment and danger lurking everywhere, you don't know," said the parent. "You may send your child to bring water only for him to return in a body bag. Every day is like this here."
OCHA has reported that 92% of infants and pregnant and breastfeeding mothers are not meeting their nutrient requirements, while the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) released a statement Friday warning that malnutrition among children is on the rise across the enclave.
"More than 9,000 children have been admitted for treatment of acute malnutrition since the beginning of the year," said Catherine Russell, executive director UNICEF. "Hundreds more children in desperate need of treatment are not able to access it due to the insecurity and displacement."
"For two months, children in the Gaza Strip have faced relentless bombardments while being deprived of essential goods, services and lifesaving care. With each passing day of the aid blockade, they face the growing risk of starvation, illness, and death—nothing can justify this," Russell added.
One doctor at Al-Rantissi pediatric hospital in Gaza City told Amnesty that healthcare workers have observed "the impact of the hunger on the children who come here to receive treatment... You recommend that the parent give the child specific attention, specific food, and you know that what you are recommending is an impossibility."
The two-month mark of the current siege came as the International Court of Justice held public hearings this week on Israel's humanitarian obligations in Gaza. The ICJ has previously ordered Israel to prevent genocide in Gaza and to allow humanitarian aid into the enclave.
Amnesty argued that the "cruel and inhumane siege" offers "further evidence of Israel's genocidal intent in Gaza."
"Apart from a brief respite during the temporary truce, Israel has relentlessly and mercilessly turned Gaza into an inferno of death and destruction," Erika Guevara Rosas said. "For the past two months, Israel has completely cut off the supply of humanitarian aid and other items indispensable to the survival of civilians in a clear and calculated effort to collectively punish over two million civilians and to make Gaza unlivable."
Mohamad Safa, CEO and representative to the U.N. for the non-governmental organization Patriotic Vision, emphasized that the crisis that is gripping Gaza is "not famine," but rather "forced starvation."
""Forced starvation is an act of genocide," he said.
U.S. Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), the only Palestinian-American member of Congress, repeated her call for an arms embargo on Israel, which counts the U.S. as the largest international funder of its military.
"The government of Israel is starving Gaza to death," said Tlaib. "It's a war crime to use starvation as a weapon. The only way to end this genocide is with an arms embargo. Time for my colleagues to end their silence."
Guevara Rosas accused the international community, especially Israel's allies, of "contemptible failure to live up to their legal responsibilities to prevent and bring an end to Israel's genocide in Gaza."
"These states' decades of inaction helped establish pervasive impunity for Israel's persistent violations and it is now exacting an unprecedented toll of death, destruction, and suffering on Palestinians," said Guevara Rosas. "States must take action to render Israel's violations against Palestinians politically, diplomatically, and economically unsustainable—the siege on Gaza must end now."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'No Legal Basis,' Says Harvard After Trump Declares Tax-Exempt Status Will Be Taken Away
"Such an unprecedented action would endanger our ability to carry out our educational mission," said a spokesperson for the Ivy League school.
May 02, 2025
Harvard University pushed back forcefully Friday after President Donald Trump declared in a social media post that "we are going to be taking away Harvard Tax Exempt Status," adding that is "what they deserve."
Trump's comment came just hours after Democratic senators sent a letter demanding a probe into whether the administration is acting illegally by trying to compel the U.S. Internal Revenue Service to yank the university's tax exemption.
Trump's post did not specify whether the IRS, the entity that has the power to remove an organization's tax-exempt status, is opting to remove Harvard's designation. Multiple outlets noted they got no immediate response from the IRS when they asked the agency for comment.
"There is no legal basis to rescind Harvard's tax-exempt status," a university spokesperson said in a statement, according toPolitico. "Such an unprecedented action would endanger our ability to carry out our educational mission."
It is illegal for the president, vice president, or other top officials to request, indirectly or directly, that the IRS audit a particular taxpayer.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and multiple other Democratic senators on Friday asked the Acting Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) to probe whether the IRS has received illegal pressure from the administration when it comes to Harvard, and to provide information about whether the agency is looking into other entities at the direction of the president or other top officials.
"It is both illegal and unconstitutional for the IRS to take direction from the president to target schools, hospitals, churches, or any other tax-exempt entities as retribution for using their free speech rights," the senators wrote in a letter dated Friday to the Acting TIGTA Heather Hill.
"It is further unconscionable that the IRS would become a weapon of the Trump administration to extort its perceived enemies, but the actions of the president and his operatives have now made this fear a reality. We request that you review whether the president or his allies have taken any step to direct or pressure the IRS to take politically-motivated actions regarding the tax-exempt status of the president's political targets," they continued.
Loss of tax-exempt status, something that would only typically occur after an audit process that allows the university opportunity to defend itself and appeal, would be extremely significant for the university. Tax-exempt status means the school does not pay federal income tax on charitable contributions to the school and other income. It also means that donations to the school are tax-exempt for those who make them.
Trump mused publicly on April 16 that Harvard should lose its tax-exempt status, after the university's president said the institution would not comply with a list of policy demands from the president, that included, according to the Harvard Crimson, derecognizing pro-Palestine student groups and auditing academic programs for viewpoint diversity. The pushback from Harvard prompted the administration to freeze over $2 billion in federal funding for the school.
That same week, it was reported that the IRS was making plans to revoke Harvard's tax-exempt status.
In response to Trump's bullying tactics, Harvard sued the administration, calling the freeze on funding unlawful and asking the court to restore it.
The tangling between Harvard and the Trump administration is part of a broader wave of scrutiny by the White House on higher education.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular