Health Equity Blog

Last month, 17 former recipients of National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding filed a proposed class-action lawsuit in a California federal court against the NIH, Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and others. The complaint targets recent administrative policies and mid-cycle grant terminations which they claim were intended to realign research funding with the Trump administration’s political priorities by restricting or defunding projects related to topics such as climate change, diversity, and LGBTQ issues. Represented by several organizations, including the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), plaintiffs allege that these directives violate the First Amendment and the federal Administrative Procedure Act (APA) by imposing unconstitutional viewpoint-based restrictions on scientific research.

A lawsuit filed in Oklahoma on September 16 challenging the state’s stringent 22-week and total abortion bans is the latest in a series of similar challenges nationwide. Brought forward by affected patients, medical professionals, and advocacy groups, the complaint argues that forcing individuals to carry unviable pregnancies involving fatal fetal diagnoses violates fundamental state constitutional rights to life, liberty, equal protection, and substantive due process. Plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief barring enforcement of the restrictions where fetuses will not survive.

In Seyb v. Members of the Idaho Board of Medicine, maternal-fetal medicine specialist, Dr. Stacy Seyb, filed a federal lawsuit challenging Idaho’s near-total abortion bans under the U.S. Constitution’s Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses. In August, the district court ruled that Idaho’s abortion ban is unconstitutional to the extent it prevents Dr. Seyb from providing care necessary to protect a patient’s health or prevent suicide, but declined to block enforcement in cases involving life-limiting fetal conditions. The ruling applies only to Dr. Seyb. The case is now before the Ninth Circuit, which issued a temporary administrative stay while the appeal proceeds.

Separately, last month, the family of a San Antonio woman who died from preeclampsia in December 2024 filed suit alleging that Texas’s strict abortion ban and the state officials who enforce it contributed to her death. The petition alleges that medical professionals delayed or denied necessary care out of fear of prosecution under Texas’s near-total abortion ban.

Three Republican-led states (Alabama, Arkansas, and Louisiana) have filed a lawsuit in the U.S. Supreme Court challenging the “shield laws” enacted by three Democratic-led states (California, Massachusetts, and New York) that protect out-of-state medical providers from prosecution for prescribing and mailing abortion pills. The Republican Attorneys General argue that these protections infringe upon their own state sovereignty and undermine their states’ strict abortion bans. Concurrently, these same Republican-led states filed a separate lawsuit against 30 out-of-state medication abortion providers, pharmacies, and other organizations, alleging false advertising and other practices impacting patients in restricted states, setting up an significant dispute over mail-order and interstate telehealth abortion access following the overturn of Roe v. Wade in 2022.

A recent study published in JAMA Network Open examining federal birth and mortality records found that sudden unexpected infant death (SUID) rates have increased among Black infants since 2020 while remaining relatively stable for White infants, reflecting a growing racial disparity. Although preterm births continue to account for a significant share of the overall mortality gap between the two groups, researchers emphasized that the recent surge in SUID is driving an acute public health crisis that persists independently of preterm birth rates. While the exact causes remain under investigation, experts suggest that pandemic-era factors, overlapping respiratory illness surges, and widened health care barriers all may have contributed to the troubling upward trend.

A proposed overhaul of the National Health Interview Survey by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) involves significantly shortening the questionnaire and eliminating several disability-related inquiries, such as those regarding cognitive function, use of hearing and mobility aids, and fatigue. Advocacy groups and researchers have criticized these changes, warning that they could lead to a substantial undercounting of individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities – a group that already experiences high rates of chronic health conditions and severe health disparities. While a Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) spokesperson indicated that the changes are aimed at lowering data collection costs, critics argue that truncating this data will impair the government’s ability to monitor health outcomes and provide adequate support programs.

Effective October 1, a federal policy change under the Trump administration eliminated Medicaid eligibility for certain lawfully present immigrants, including some refugees, asylum seekers, and victims of human trafficking and domestic violence. The Congressional Budget Office projects that the policy change, together with other coverage provisions, will contribute to an increase in the number of uninsured individuals over the coming decade.

According to a recent study published in JAMA Network Open, American Indian and Alaska Native Medicare beneficiaries with cancer had nearly twice the all-cause mortality rate of the broader traditional Medicare population, as well as higher inpatient and emergency care utilization and per-person spending. The study also found lower rates of breast and colorectal cancer screening, while accompanying analysis identified access to specialty care, travel burdens, and other structural factors as potential contributors to these disparities.

Following bipartisan legislative action, including passage of the 988 LGBTQ+ Youth Access Act and the Fiscal Year 2026 funding bill, the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline restored its specialized “Press 3” services for LGBTQ+ youth. The service had been discontinued under the Trump administration and was unavailable for approximately 14 months before being reinstated.

A new study published in The Milbank Quarterly, explores how Massachusetts’ Medicaid Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) implemented maternal health initiatives across multiple waiver periods to improve care quality and equity. By interviewing leaders, clinicians, and care coordinators across 6 Medicaid ACOs regarding initiatives introduced between 2018 and 2024, researchers found that instituting organizational maternal health metrics driven by contractual mandates, alongside providing necessary infrastructure and resources, successfully prompted ACOs to build targeted programs and track patient engagement to advance maternal health care quality.

An article published earlier this month in KFF Health News spotlights that Native Hawaiians are not included in the Medicaid work requirement exemptions granted to Native Americans and Alaska Natives under new federal legislation, likely because they lack federal recognition as a tribal nation. Health officials and administrators worry this exclusion will worsen existing healthcare disparities, create administrative hurdles, and disenfranchise Native Hawaiian enrollees – many of whom already face high rates of poverty, homelessness, and geographic isolation.