Skip to main content

The context you need, when you need it

When news breaks, you need to understand what actually matters — and what to do about it. At Vox, our mission to help you make sense of the world has never been more vital. But we can’t do it on our own.

We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?

Join now

Judge blocks Trump administration from rolling back birth control mandate

Whoops.

A demonstration outside the Supreme Court during a 2014 hearing on the contraceptive mandate
A demonstration outside the Supreme Court during a 2014 hearing on the contraceptive mandate
The Washington Post / Getty Images
Dylan Scott
Dylan Scott covers health for Vox, guiding readers through the emerging opportunities and challenges in improving our health. He has reported on health policy for more than 10 years, writing for Governing magazine, Talking Points Memo, and STAT before joining Vox in 2017.

A federal court has temporarily blocked the Trump administration’s decision to roll back the Affordable Care Act’s birth control mandate, Pennsylvania’s attorney general announced on Friday.

The decision would stop the new regulations from taking effect nationwide, according to Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro.

The Trump administration issued regulations rolling back the mandate in October. As Vox explained at the time:

New regulations released Friday significantly broaden the types of companies and organizations that can request an exemption from that rule. This could lead to many American women who currently receive no-cost contraception having to pay out of pocket for their medication.

The new rules take effect immediately. And they allow large, publicly traded companies to seek an exemption from the birth control requirement if they have a religious or moral objection to providing such coverage. The Obama administration barred these large businesses from such exemptions.

The problem appears to be that the rules took effectively immediately. Some legal experts, like the University of Michigan’s Nicholas Bagley, argued when the regulations were issued that the Trump administration had opened itself up to a legal challenge by skipping the usual public comment period for federal rulemaking.

The ruling from US district court judge Wendy Beetlestone cited the likelihood that opponents of the regulations would prevail on issues relating to the Administrative Procedure Act — which sets guidelines for issuing federal regulations — in ordering the injunction to block the changes.

The Trump administration is blocked under the order from loosening the exemptions from the mandate until the full case is heard.

More in Politics

Podcasts
The Supreme Court abortion pills case, explainedThe Supreme Court abortion pills case, explained
Podcast
Podcasts

How Louisiana brought mifepristone back to SCOTUS.

By Peter Balonon-Rosen and Sean Rameswaram
Politics
Trump’s China policy is nearly the exact opposite of what everyone expectedTrump’s China policy is nearly the exact opposite of what everyone expected
Politics

As Trump heads to China, attention and resources are being shifted from Asia to yet another war in the Middle East.

By Joshua Keating
Politics
Are far-right politics just the new normal?Are far-right politics just the new normal?
Politics

Liberals are preparing for a longer war with right-wing populists than they once expected.

By Zack Beauchamp
The Logoff
Flavored vapes doomed Trump’s FDA headFlavored vapes doomed Trump’s FDA head
The Logoff

Why Marty Makary is out at the FDA, briefly explained.

By Cameron Peters
Politics
Virginia Democrats’ irresponsible new plan to save their gerrymanderVirginia Democrats’ irresponsible new plan to save their gerrymander
Politics

Democrats just handed the Supreme Court’s Republicans a loaded weapon.

By Ian Millhiser
The Logoff
Can Trump lower gas prices?Can Trump lower gas prices?
The Logoff

What suspending the gas tax would mean for you, briefly explained.

By Cameron Peters