Latest news with #AdministrativeProcedureAct
The Hill
a day ago
- Health
- The Hill
Texas district judge overturns Biden rule on expanded abortion privacy protections
A Texas federal judge late Wednesday overturned a Biden administration rule designed to keep prosecutors from getting the medical records of patients seeking legal abortions or gender-affirming care by boosting privacy protections for women's reproductive health information. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk in Amarillo ruled the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) acted unlawfully when it expanded the scope of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) privacy law last April. Kacsmaryk wrote that the Biden administration 'invoked HIPAA as a shield against abortion-restrictive states.' He said the rule was written to protect 'politically preferred procedures' like abortion and gender transitions but that HIPAA doesn't give HHS the ability to 'distinguish between types of health information to accomplish political ends.' 'Thus, HHS lacks the authority to issue regulations that enact heightened protections for information about politically favored procedures,' he wrote. Such action should only be taken by Congress, he wrote, especially because the issues are of major political significance. 'The 2024 rule creates special rules for information about these politically favored procedures that implicate fundamental and hotly debated questions,' he wrote. The rule prohibits health care providers and insurers from giving information about a legal abortion to state law enforcement authorities who are seeking to punish someone in connection with that abortion. The 2024 rule came in the wake of concerns that patients who travel to clinics for legal abortion or reproductive care will eventually have their records sought following the Supreme Court's overturning of Roe v. Wade. Late last year, Kacsmaryk temporarily blocked HHS from enforcing the rule against the Texas doctor who had brought the lawsuit. Carmen Purl, a Texas physician, sued to declare the rule 'arbitrary and capricious' and 'in excess of statutory authority,' in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act. Wednesday's decision blocks the rule nationwide. Kacsmaryk, who was appointed by President Trump in his first term, has become a go-to judge for blocking Biden-era rules nationwide. Texas has filed a separate lawsuit challenging the rule, which is pending in federal court in Lubbock. HHS in a court filing last month said the Trump administration is evaluating its position in this case.
2 days ago
- Politics
Federal judge to deny Trump administration's motion to dismiss lawsuit over block on wind projects
A federal judge in Massachusetts said Wednesday he plans to deny a motion by the Trump administration to dismiss a lawsuit over its blocking of wind energy projects, siding with a coalition of state attorneys general. Led by New York Attorney General Letitia James, attorneys general from 17 states and Washington, D.C. are suing in federal court to challenge President Donald Trump's Day One executive order halting leasing and permitting for wind energy projects. Judge William G. Young said during a hearing that he plans to allow the case to proceed against Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, but will dismiss the action against Trump and cabinet secretaries other than Burgum named as defendants. He said he thinks states do have standing to sue, which the federal government had argued against. The states can proceed with claims that blocking permits for wind energy projects violates the Administrative Procedure Act, which outlines a detailed process for enacting regulations, but not the Constitution, Young said. Young said his rulings from the bench were tentative and reserved the right to alter them in writing his formal opinion. The coalition of attorneys general sued to ask that a judge declare the executive order unlawful and approve an injunction to stop federal agencies from implementing it. They argued that Trump doesn't have the authority to halt project permitting and doing so jeopardizes the states' economies, energy mix, public health and climate goals. The government is arguing that the states' claims amount to nothing more than a policy disagreement over preferences for wind versus fossil fuel energy development that is outside the bounds of the federal court's jurisdiction. Department of Justice Attorney Michael Robertson said in court that the wind order paused permitting, but didn't halt it, while the Interior secretary reviews the environmental impact and that this effort is underway. He said states have not shown that they were harmed by a specific permit not being issued. Turner Smith, from the Massachusetts attorney general's office, countered that the government has provided no end date and that Trump's order imposes a 'categorical and indefinite halt." She said states have been harmed and pointed to a offshore wind project for Massachusetts, now pushed back by two years because its three outstanding permits are delayed due to the wind order. She said Massachusetts can't meet its targets for procuring offshore wind energy without the SouthCoast wind project. Wind is the U.S.' largest source of renewable energy, providing about 10% of the electricity generated in the nation, according to the American Clean Power Association. Trump prioritizes fossil fuels and said last week that his administration would not approve wind energy projects except in cases of emergency. The administration had ordered a Norwegian company, Equinor, to halt construction on a fully permitted offshore wind project in New York, though Equinor has been allowed to resume work. The coalition includes Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington state and Washington, D.C. ___ The Associated Press' climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at
New York Post
2 days ago
- Politics
- New York Post
Federal judge to deny Trump administration's motion to dismiss lawsuit over block on wind projects
A federal judge in Massachusetts said Wednesday he plans to deny a motion by the Trump administration to dismiss a lawsuit over its blocking of wind energy projects, siding with a coalition of state attorneys general. Led by New York Attorney General Letitia James, attorneys general from 17 states and Washington, D.C. are suing in federal court to challenge President Donald Trump's Day One executive order halting leasing and permitting for wind energy projects. Judge William G. Young said during a hearing that he plans to allow the case to proceed against Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, but will dismiss the action against Trump and cabinet secretaries other than Burgum named as defendants. Advertisement 3 Judge William G. Young said he plans to deny a motion by the Trump administration to dismiss a lawsuit over its blocking of wind energy projects. Los Angeles Times via Getty Images He said he thinks states do have standing to sue, which the federal government had argued against. The states can proceed with claims that blocking permits for wind energy projects violates the Administrative Procedure Act, which outlines a detailed process for enacting regulations, but not the Constitution, Young said. Advertisement Young said his rulings from the bench were tentative and reserved the right to alter them in writing his formal opinion. The coalition of attorneys general sued to ask that a judge declare the executive order unlawful and approve an injunction to stop federal agencies from implementing it. They argued that Trump doesn't have the authority to halt project permitting and doing so jeopardizes the states' economies, energy mix, public health and climate goals. The government is arguing that the states' claims amount to nothing more than a policy disagreement over preferences for wind versus fossil fuel energy development that is outside the bounds of the federal court's jurisdiction. Advertisement 3 The lawsuit presented to the court challenges President Trump's executive order halting the leasing and permitting for wind energy projects. AP Department of Justice Attorney Michael Robertson said in court that the wind order paused permitting, but didn't halt it, while the Interior secretary reviews the environmental impact and that this effort is underway. He said states have not shown that they were harmed by a specific permit not being issued. Turner Smith, from the Massachusetts attorney general's office, countered that the government has provided no end date and that Trump's order imposes a 'categorical and indefinite halt.' Advertisement 3 Despite the federal government's case, Young acknowledges that the states do have the right to have their case heard in court. AP She said states have been harmed and pointed to a offshore wind project for Massachusetts, now pushed back by two years because its three outstanding permits are delayed due to the wind order. She said Massachusetts can't meet its targets for procuring offshore wind energy without the SouthCoast wind project. Wind is the U.S.' largest source of renewable energy, providing about 10% of the electricity generated in the nation, according to the American Clean Power Association. Trump prioritizes fossil fuels and said last week that his administration would not approve wind energy projects except in cases of emergency. The administration had ordered a Norwegian company, Equinor, to halt construction on a fully permitted offshore wind project in New York, though Equinor has been allowed to resume work. The coalition includes Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington state and Washington, D.C.
San Francisco Chronicle
2 days ago
- Politics
- San Francisco Chronicle
Federal judge to deny Trump administration's motion to dismiss lawsuit over block on wind projects
A federal judge in Massachusetts said Wednesday he plans to deny a motion by the Trump administration to dismiss a lawsuit over its blocking of wind energy projects, siding with a coalition of state attorneys general. Led by New York Attorney General Letitia James, attorneys general from 17 states and Washington, D.C. are suing in federal court to challenge President Donald Trump's Day One executive order halting leasing and permitting for wind energy projects. Judge William G. Young said during a hearing that he plans to allow the case to proceed against Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, but will dismiss the action against Trump and cabinet secretaries other than Burgum named as defendants. He said he thinks states do have standing to sue, which the federal government had argued against. The states can proceed with claims that blocking permits for wind energy projects violates the Administrative Procedure Act, which outlines a detailed process for enacting regulations, but not the Constitution, Young said. Young said his rulings from the bench were tentative and reserved the right to alter them in writing his formal opinion. As he set the schedule for future hearings, he said he has had a problem since the beginning of the case — if the plaintiffs win, he said, what can be done? Inevitably, licenses can be withheld so long as there is appropriate, logical support for such action, Young said. Young said it looks like the president has 'bet the country's energy future on fossil fuels. It's not for this court to question that." The coalition of attorneys general want the administration to resume considering the permits and ultimately issue a decision one way or the other under applicable laws and well-established standards and timelines, said Turner Smith, from the Massachusetts attorney general's office. The coalition sued to ask that a judge declare the executive order unlawful and approve an injunction to stop federal agencies from implementing it. They argued that Trump doesn't have the authority to halt project permitting and doing so jeopardizes the states' economies, energy mix, public health and climate goals. The government is arguing that the states' claims amount to nothing more than a policy disagreement over preferences for wind versus fossil fuel energy development that is outside the bounds of the federal court's jurisdiction. Department of Justice Attorney Michael Robertson said in court that the wind order paused permitting, but didn't halt it, while the Interior secretary reviews the environmental impact and that this effort is underway. He said he did not know how long the process would take, but that states have not shown that they were harmed by a specific permit not being issued. Smith countered that the government has provided no end date and that Trump's order imposes a 'categorical and indefinite halt." She said states have been harmed and pointed to a offshore wind project for Massachusetts, now pushed back by two years because its three outstanding permits are delayed due to the wind order. She said Massachusetts can't meet its targets for procuring offshore wind energy without the SouthCoast wind project and that 'it's impossible to replace this energy.' Wind is the U.S.' largest source of renewable energy, providing about 10% of the electricity generated in the nation, according to the American Clean Power Association. Trump prioritizes fossil fuels and said last week that his administration would not approve wind energy projects except in cases of emergency. The administration had ordered a Norwegian company, Equinor, to halt construction on a fully permitted offshore wind project in New York, though Equinor has been allowed to resume work. Erica Fuller, senior counsel at the Conservation Law Foundation, said after the hearing that it's a win for the states for the case to move forward expeditiously. The nonprofit joined in an amicus brief filed by environmental groups in support of the states. 'We are going to continue our advocacy for the responsible development of affordable wind energy that helps meet our climate goals,' she said. The coalition includes Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington state and Washington, D.C.
Winnipeg Free Press
2 days ago
- Politics
- Winnipeg Free Press
Federal judge to deny Trump administration's motion to dismiss lawsuit over block on wind projects
A federal judge in Massachusetts said Wednesday he plans to deny a motion by the Trump administration to dismiss a lawsuit over its blocking of wind energy projects, siding with a coalition of state attorneys general. Led by New York Attorney General Letitia James, attorneys general from 17 states and Washington, D.C. are suing in federal court to challenge President Donald Trump's Day One executive order halting leasing and permitting for wind energy projects. Judge William G. Young said during a hearing that he plans to allow the case to proceed against Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, but will dismiss the action against Trump and cabinet secretaries other than Burgum named as defendants. He said he thinks states do have standing to sue, which the federal government had argued against. The states can proceed with claims that blocking permits for wind energy projects violates the Administrative Procedure Act, which outlines a detailed process for enacting regulations, but not the Constitution, Young said. Young said his rulings from the bench were tentative and reserved the right to alter them in writing his formal opinion. The coalition of attorneys general sued to ask that a judge declare the executive order unlawful and approve an injunction to stop federal agencies from implementing it. They argued that Trump doesn't have the authority to halt project permitting and doing so jeopardizes the states' economies, energy mix, public health and climate goals. The government is arguing that the states' claims amount to nothing more than a policy disagreement over preferences for wind versus fossil fuel energy development that is outside the bounds of the federal court's jurisdiction. Department of Justice Attorney Michael Robertson said in court that the wind order paused permitting, but didn't halt it, while the Interior secretary reviews the environmental impact and that this effort is underway. He said states have not shown that they were harmed by a specific permit not being issued. Turner Smith, from the Massachusetts attorney general's office, countered that the government has provided no end date and that Trump's order imposes a 'categorical and indefinite halt.' She said states have been harmed and pointed to a offshore wind project for Massachusetts, now pushed back by two years because its three outstanding permits are delayed due to the wind order. She said Massachusetts can't meet its targets for procuring offshore wind energy without the SouthCoast wind project. Wind is the U.S.' largest source of renewable energy, providing about 10% of the electricity generated in the nation, according to the American Clean Power Association. Trump prioritizes fossil fuels and said last week that his administration would not approve wind energy projects except in cases of emergency. The administration had ordered a Norwegian company, Equinor, to halt construction on a fully permitted offshore wind project in New York, though Equinor has been allowed to resume work. The coalition includes Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington state and Washington, D.C. ___ The Associated Press' climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at
