Health Care & Reproductive Rights

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta, alongside the attorneys general of Massachusetts and New York, today sent a letter to the Trump Administration expressing deep concern over its review of a federal rule that ensures unaccompanied minors have access to reproductive healthcare, including abortion care. Announced by the Biden Administration’s U.S. Department of Health and Human Services in 2024, the rule has helped provide this essential medical care to young people who have experienced sexual violence in their home countries or during the dangerous journey to the United States. Although the specific regulatory action under consideration is unclear, as no summary is available, recent reporting suggests the Trump Administration is taking action to limit abortion access. 

“Unaccompanied minors, who often face assault on their perilous journey to the United States, are among the most vulnerable and deserve access to reproductive healthcare,” said Attorney General Bonta. “Any rollback of the Biden-era rule could put them at risk of serious health complications and additional trauma. We are requesting a meeting with the Trump Administration to share more information about our position and the considerations we believe must guide any decision.”

Current regulations require that:

• Pregnant unaccompanied minors be provided with information about and access to reproductive healthcare, including pregnancy and abortion care. 
• The federal government prioritize placing minors in shelters where abortion is legal because any pregnant minor could experience miscarriage or complications that require life- or health-saving abortion care.  If a minor is in a shelter in a state with an abortion ban and she requests an abortion, the federal government must transfer her to a state where abortion is legal.

According to a recent NPR article, “The Trump administration is sending all pregnant unaccompanied minors apprehended by immigration enforcement to a single group shelter in South Texas. The decision was made over urgent objections from some of the administration's own health and child welfare officials, who say both the facility and the region lack the specialized care the girls need.” During the first Trump Administration, unaccompanied minors were prevented from accessing abortion care, and the attorneys general are concerned that similar restrictions could be officially reinstated.

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today announced filing an amicus brief in Art Center Holdings, Inc., et al. v. WCE CA Art, et al., a case before the California Second District Court of Appeal involving a dispute between a physician who owned a medical practice and a private equity-backed management services organization (MSO). In California, only licensed medical professionals can practice medicine. For nearly a century, California has prohibited corporations and non-physicians from engaging — either directly or indirectly — in the practice of medicine. This ensures that medical judgment remains independent and focused on patient care. While medical professionals may contract with MSOs to assist with administrative, back-office support, MSOs are vendors and cannot own or operate medical practices, nor can they exert undue influence over licensed medical professionals. Increasingly, however, private equity-backed MSOs have expanded into healthcare, chasing profits at the expense of patient care. In the amicus brief, Attorney General Bonta argues that the trial court correctly held that contractual provisions giving the MSO excessive control over the medical practice — including the power to replace the physician-owner of the medical practice — violate California’s ban on the corporate practice of medicine. 

“State law is clear: medical decisions must be made by licensed physicians, not unduly influenced by corporate interests,” said Attorney General Bonta. “As private equity investment in healthcare grows, we must reaffirm our commitment to California’s prohibition on the corporate practice of medicine and ensure patients remain our top priority.”

In the amicus brief, which supports neither party since both parties seek to weaken the prohibition on the corporate practice of medicine, Attorney General Bonta argues that:

• Important public policy reasons underlie California’s ban on the corporate practice of medicine. Among other things, it protects patients from commercial exploitation, prevents profit-driven corporations from interfering in the doctor-patient relationship, and ensures that doctors' loyalties remain with patients. Medical professionals should be the ones making decisions that affect patient lives as they are trained and licensed to make decisions in patients’ best interests.
• When an agreement gives an unlicensed corporation the right to replace the physician-owner of a medical practice with a different physician of its choice, the corporation effectively owns the practice. Likewise, when the practice’s ostensible physician owner cannot replace the unlicensed MSO without fear of losing ownership over their practice, the MSO has undue control over that practice. 

In filing this amicus brief, Attorney General Bonta wrote only to support the trial court’s holding regarding the corporate practice of medicine.

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta, leading a multistate coalition, asked the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California to enforce its preliminary injunction blocking U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from obtaining and using the data of Medicaid recipients who are lawfully residing in the United States. Attorney General Bonta and the coalition’s recent communications with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) indicate that HHS shared with ICE a “a large and complex data set” of Medicaid recipient data, even though the Court unambiguously held that much Medicaid data, including that of citizens and lawful permanent residents, is “off limits.” The exact contents of this data set are unclear. In filing its motion to enforce, the coalition also asks the court to confirm the scope of its original order includes all individuals lawfully residing in the U.S. and require the federal government to explain what data has been shared by HHS, and how ICE is using that data.

“The Trump Administration appears to be defying a direct court order blocking it from sharing the personal, sensitive data of individuals including U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents. It’s invasive — and deeply troubling,” said Attorney General Bonta. “When Californians signed up for Medi-Cal, they did so with the understanding that their data would not be used for purposes unrelated to administering this program. I urge the court to enforce its earlier order and make clear that these guardrails exist for anyone who is lawfully residing in the United States.” 

BACKGROUND

Created in 1965, Medicaid is an essential source of health insurance for lower-income individuals and particular underserved population groups, including children, pregnant women, individuals with disabilities, and seniors. The Medicaid program allows each participating state to develop and administer its own unique health plans; states must meet threshold federal statutory criteria, but they can tailor their plans’ eligibility standards and coverage options to residents’ needs. As of January 2025, 78.4 million people were enrolled in Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) nationwide.  

California’s Medi-Cal program provides healthcare coverage for one out of every three Californians, including more than two million noncitizens. Noncitizens include green card holders, refugees, individuals who hold temporary protected status, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival recipients, and others. Not all noncitizens are eligible for federally funded Medi-Cal services, and so California uses state-only funds to provide a version of the Medi-Cal program to all eligible state residents, regardless of their immigration status. 

On July 1, 2025, California led a multistate coalition in filing a lawsuit against the Trump Administration arguing that HHS's mass transfer of Medicaid data to ICE violates the law and asking the court to block any new transfer or use of this data for immigration enforcement purposes. The lawsuit highlighted that the Trump Administration’s illegal actions are creating fear and confusion leading noncitizens and their family members to disenroll, or refuse to enroll, in emergency Medicaid for which they are otherwise eligible, leaving states and their safety net hospitals to foot the bill for federally mandated emergency healthcare services. 

In a limited preliminary injunction order, the court allowed some data transfers, but enjoined ICE’s broader efforts to obtain sensitive health data; data of citizens, lawful permanent residents, and others residing lawfully in the U.S.; and data from other CMS administered health programs. 

In filing this motion, Attorney General Bonta leads the attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, and the Governor of Kentucky.

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today announced sponsoring three bills that strengthen protections for patient access to and provider delivery of reproductive health care and gender-affirming care in California. The bills — Assembly Bill (AB) 1854 by Assemblymember Maggy Krell (D-Sacramento), AB 1930 by Democratic Caucus Chair and Assemblymember Rick Chavez Zbur (D-Hollywood), and AB 2448 by Assemblymember Marc Berman (D-Menlo Park) and Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan (D-Orinda) — are in response to continued attacks on these essential medical services by the Trump Administration and Republican officials nationwide. 

“California is a safe haven for reproductive rights and gender-affirming care. In the face of ongoing attacks by the Trump Administration, I’m proud to sponsor legislation that strengthens our role as a safe haven,” said California Attorney General Rob Bonta. “These medical decisions are deeply personal and should be made by patients with their providers, free from interference by politicians. California will not be intimidated into abandoning our values.”     

AB 1854 — Clarifying California Shield Laws

Authored by Assemblymember Krell, AB 1854 would add provisions to the Penal Code that prohibit a broader range of California businesses and individuals from complying with out-of-state legal demands for protected information. It also creates a notification process so the Attorney General can intervene and stop improper disclosures. 

In addition, this bill would clarify that law enforcement cannot arrest someone if the Governor refuses an extradition request. This is relevant because Louisiana recently sought to extradite a California abortion provider for allegedly sending abortion medication to a Louisiana resident. Governor Gavin Newsom promptly rejected this request.

“AB 1854 continues California’s long and proud history of defending reproductive health care freedoms by strengthening California’s shield laws to better stop out-of-state anti-abortion prosecutions and extradition attempts at our border,” said Assemblymember Maggy Krell. “At a time when anti-abortion states are stepping up efforts to target those who legally provide or receive reproductive health care in California, it’s vital we step up our protections.”

AB 1930 — Defending Protected Health Care in California

Authored by Assemblymember Zbur and co-sponsored by Equality California, AB 1930 would add provisions to the Civil Code requiring business entities in California to notify the Office of the Attorney General if they intend to respond to a subpoena or inquiry regarding legally protected health care activity and would authorize the Attorney General to intervene to prevent disclosure of legally protected health care activity. Thus, AB 1930 will help the Attorney General protect patients who receive, and providers of, legally protected health care in California.  

By strengthening California’s existing protections, this bill helps ensure that patients and providers can access and deliver medically necessary care without fear of harassment or retaliation from hostile jurisdictions. It will be heard in policy committee in the coming weeks.

“Patients seeking reproductive health care or gender-affirming care — including access to legal, safe abortion and care for transgender people — deserve the same fundamental protections as anyone else receiving medical treatment: privacy, dignity, and the freedom to make decisions about their health without fear,” said Assemblymember Rick Chavez Zbur. “California has made clear that this care is legal, medically necessary, and protected under our laws. AB 1930 strengthens those protections by ensuring that when individuals or entities attempt to obtain private medical information or intimidate providers, the State of California can step in to defend the patients, families, and health professionals who rely on or provide these services. No one should have to worry that seeking lawful medical care in California could put their safety or privacy at risk.”

“Across the country, we are seeing coordinated efforts to weaponize the legal system to target patients and providers for seeking or delivering lawful, medically necessary health care,” said Equality California Executive Director Tony Hoang. “AB 1930 builds on California’s existing protections for transgender people, those seeking reproductive health care, and the providers who serve them by establishing critical safeguards against out-of-state subpoenas and investigations that threaten privacy, safety, and access to care. At a time of escalating political attacks, this bill sends a clear message: California will continue to stand with transgender people and defend the providers who care for them.”

AB 2448 — Protecting Privacy of Abortion-Related Patient Data

Jointly authored by Assemblymembers Berman and Bauer-Kahan and co-sponsored by Planned Parenthood of California, AB 2448 would ensure that health care providers have the technological capabilities to segregate sensitive health data in electronic medical records. The bill advances California’s commitment to protecting the confidentiality of medical information by requiring entities that maintain electronic health records for sensitive services to implement meaningful, operational safeguards to secure that data. 

"In a post-Dobbs world, protecting the privacy of patients seeking reproductive care is not just good policy, but a moral imperative. I'm proud to partner with Attorney General Bonta, Assemblymember Berman, and Planned Parenthood to protect reproductive rights and gender equity by ensuring the sanctity of the patient/provider relationship,” said Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan. “Women should be able to come here and know they are getting safe, effective, and confidential care.”

"In the years since Roe was overturned, attacks on reproductive and gender affirming care have steadily intensified, threatening access to healthcare services for millions of Californians," said Assemblymember Marc Berman. "In these dangerous times, it is critical that medical providers have access to technology to protect sensitive medical information so that patients who have received reproductive and gender affirming care cannot be identified and targeted. AB 2448 requires the implementation of this technology to protect the privacy and security of medical records, so all Californians can access critical healthcare services without fear."

“With our current federal government hell bent on attacking vulnerable communities, patient privacy, and access to essential health care, PPAC is proud to co-sponsor AB 2448 with Attorney General Bonta to ensure Californians’ sensitive health records are secure,” said President and CEO of Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California Jodi Hicks. “We are grateful to Assemblymembers Berman and Bauer-Kahan for authoring this bill and to Attorney General Bonta for his ongoing partnership and commitment to protecting patients’ rights and reproductive freedom.”

OAKLAND — As part of a coalition of 16 attorneys general, California Attorney General Rob Bonta filed a motion asking the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington to enforce its December 19, 2025 order, which required the U.S. Department of Education (Department) to set aside its unlawful discontinuation decisions on school mental health funding programs established by Congress and to issue new decisions in full compliance with the law. On March 2, 2026, the Department decided to only award grantees six months of funding instead of providing funding for the full year, as is standard practice. The Department’s decision to deny grantees’ access to a full year of funding violates the Court’s order because the decision will effectively end some grantee projects and severely burden many other grantees. Without the certainty of a full year of funding, some grantees will lose essential staff and will be unable to properly plan and budget for the fall semester.

“The Trump Administration’s noncompliance must come to an end. In California and nationwide, grantees have issued layoff notices, and even though they take effect months later, the ongoing uncertainty complicates planning and staffing for critical programs that support students’ mental health,” said Attorney General Bonta. “My fellow attorneys general and I will not give the Trump Administration a free pass. We urge the Court to hold the Administration fully accountable for failing to comply with its order.”

Spurred by episodes of devastating loss from school shootings, Congress established and funded the Mental Health Service Professional Demonstration Grant Program (MHSP) in 2018 and the School-Based Mental Health Services Grant Program (SBMH) in 2020 to increase students’ access to mental health services. On or about April 29, 2025, the Department notified grantees — including state education agencies, local education agencies, and institutes of higher education — that their grants would be canceled for allegedly conflicting with the Trump Administration’s priorities. In the press, the Trump Administration admitted that it targeted the States’ grants for their perceived diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts. In July 2025, Attorney General Bonta and the coalition filed a lawsuit against the Department over the discontinuation of the grants, and in December 2025, the coalition secured a permanent decision declaring that the Department acted illegally and requiring the Department to make new continuation decisions.

In the motion to enforce, Attorney General Bonta and the coalition assert that:

• The Department is continuing to violate the Court’s order. In their most recent act of noncompliance, the Department put new, unnecessary rules in place that achieve the same result as canceling some grants and severely hinder other grantees’ ability to serve students.
• By claiming the grants “will continue under protest,” the Department is making grantees jump through unnecessary hoops — like filling out complicated reimbursement forms that historically have only been required for grantees who mismanaged funds and forcing grantees to submit a meaningless performance report before any new data is available.
• The Department has also threatened to withhold six months of funding that grantees would have normally received and need for the fall semester. 

MHSP addresses the shortage of school-based mental health service providers by awarding multi-year grants to projects that expand the pipeline for counselors, social workers, and psychologists through partnerships between institutes of higher education and local educational agencies. SBMH funds multi-year grants to increase the number of professionals that provide school-based mental health services to students through direct hiring and retention incentives. The ultimate goal of the programs is to permanently bring 14,000 additional mental health professionals into U.S. schools.

The programs have been an incredible success. In their first year, the programs provided mental and behavioral health services to nearly 775,000 elementary and secondary students nationwide. Sampled projects showed real results: a 50% reduction in suicide risk at high-need schools, decreases in absenteeism and behavioral issues, and increases in positive student-staff engagement. Data also showed recruitment and retention efforts are working — in the first year of the programs, nearly 1,300 school mental health professionals were hired and 95% of those hired were retained. Importantly, these newly hired school-based mental health providers were able to create an 80% reduction in student wait time for services. The grants have helped schools hire hundreds of psychologists, counselors, and social workers who have served thousands of students, including in the state’s most economically disadvantaged and rural communities. By all markers, these programs work. 

Joining Attorney General Bonta in filing the motion are the attorneys general of Washington, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Mexico, New York, Nevada, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Wisconsin.

Catastrophic plans offer minimal coverage and high deductibles, leaving consumers with greater financial risk 

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today co-led a coalition of 19 attorneys general in submitting a comment letter responding to a proposed rule by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) that would lead to a massive expansion of catastrophic health insurance plans. Under these plans, which are currently allowed only in very limited situations, health insurance coverage largely does not begin until significant maximum out of pocket costs (MOOP) have already occurred. Right now, that is $10,600 for an individual or $21,200 for a family, which is already too costly. In the 2027 plan year, the proposed rule at issue — entitled the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, HHS Notice of Benefit and Payment Parameters for 2027; and Basic Health Program” — would widen catastrophic plans beyond their original limited use and increase MOOP limits to an unaffordable $15,600 for an individual and $31,200 for a family. The comment letter explains that these changes, and numerous others, are arbitrary and capricious and are therefore unlawful if ultimately adopted. 

“The Trump Administration’s plans to expand catastrophic health plans would indeed be catastrophic for families across the country, leaving them with minimal coverage and huge out-of-pocket bills. After failing to extend ACA subsidies and letting premiums soar for millions of Americans at the beginning of the year, the Trump Administration is now trying to clean up its own mess by offering these policies as the answer to rising health care costs,” said Attorney General Bonta. “This proposed rule is a dangerous deception that uses affordability as a misnomer for plans that cover essentially nothing, and my fellow attorneys general and I insist that it should be withdrawn.”

The proposed rule introduces a broad array of substantial changes over its near 600 pages — including many that are identical or substantially similar to a 2025 Marketplace Integrity and Affordability rule that Attorney General Bonta and a multistate coalition challenged in court. That case is still in active litigation. The proposed rule also introduces a range of other changes that harm consumers. This includes increasing the out-of-pocket cost for catastrophic plans to 130% of the statutory limits while also allowing bronze plans to raise cost-sharing above the statutory maximum out-of-pocket limitations. Together, this would promote an increased use of catastrophic plans with the intent to make those plans cover even less than they already do, thereby driving down premiums at the expense of little to no coverage. The rule also creates uncertainty about defrayal determinations, while making all its changes with rushed or flawed data that is riddled with errors and inconsistencies.

The ACA was passed by Congress and signed into law by President Barack Obama in 2010 to increase the number of Americans with health insurance and decrease the cost of healthcare, but the proposed changes to the law at issue will have the opposite effect. Projections indicate that up to two million individuals will lose their health coverage because of the changes — leaving states and residents to bear the cost. Healthier enrollees may drop more extensive coverage. Others, who may enroll in a catastrophic plan and then face a severe medical crisis, might forego needed care until they can switch back to a more generous plan, thus harming their health and potentially increasing the cost of future care. The consequences of these changes will fall hardest on the consumers least able to absorb the surprise medical bills, but all consumers will be affected.

In the letter, Attorney General Bonta and the coalition argue that the proposed rule:

• Is replete with errors and provides insufficient time to implement its substantial changes.
• Reimposes provisions substantially similar to provisions of the 2025 rule — like income verification provisions and the failure-to-reconcile provision — that have been stayed as likely unlawful and arbitrary.
• Reimposes regulations requiring the Federal Exchange to verify 75% of special enrollment period enrollees, despite a court’s prior stay of that provision.
• Contains provisions relating to catastrophic plans, bronze plans, essential health benefits, and other provisions that would harm states and consumers by making healthcare more expensive and dramatically weakening coverage.

In sending this letter, California Attorney General Bonta, Massachusetts Attorney General Campbell, and New Jersey Attorney General Davenport, are joined by the attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington, and Wisconsin.

Multistate coalition pushes back on federal rules that allow employers to restrict access to birth control 

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today joined a coalition of 22 attorneys general in filing an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in support of a lawsuit filed by Pennsylvania and New Jersey concerning reproductive rights. Specifically, the brief backs the two states in opposing the first Trump Administration’s 2017 and 2018 regulations that undermine the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) guarantee of no-cost contraception coverage by employer healthcare plans. The regulations expand religious exemptions and create moral exemptions that allow employers to strip workers of guaranteed, no-cost coverage for birth control and other contraceptive care and services. California led a parallel challenge to the first Trump Administration’s rollback of the contraceptive mandate and that case remains pending before the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The regulations were stayed during the Biden Administration while the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services considered issuing new rulemaking, which Attorney General Bonta supported.

“Decisions about using birth control should be made by women and their doctors — not dictated by their bosses. California has long embraced that principle, and we have no intention of backing down,” said Attorney General Bonta. “My fellow attorneys general and I are urging the Third Circuit to affirm the lower court’s decision that struck down the Trump Administration’s unlawful regulations.” 

More than 80% of women ages 18 to 49 report having used some form of contraception in the past 12 months. With contraception costing an average of $584 per user per year, these unlawful regulations could shift an estimated $73.8 million in costs to individuals who rely on contraceptive care, creating significant barriers to accessing safe, effective healthcare.

In the brief, Attorney General Bonta and the coalition argue that:

• The regulations threaten contraceptive coverage for hundreds of thousands of women, putting at risk their health and the economic and public health of the states generally.
• States will face significant financial strain as they are forced to expend millions of dollars for replacement contraceptive care and services through state-funded programs.
• The regulations deepen already prevalent racial, gender, and income disparities. People of color and people with low incomes are disproportionately likely to live in “contraceptive deserts,” or areas that lack reasonable access to the full range of contraceptive care.
• Access to birth control and contraceptive care has been substantially reduced in the years since these regulations were first implemented, and this harm will be exacerbated if the regulations remain in place because of changes in the landscape for reproductive healthcare.

Joining Attorney General Bonta in filing this brief are the attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaiʻi, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington.

Proposed rule would eliminate one of the most significant guardrails currently in place on a federal level for the use of AI in healthcare 

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today announced that he sent a letter to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) opposing a proposed rule that would roll back regulations that help ensure technology used by healthcare providers is safe, effective, and deployed without reinforcing unjust racial bias. The proposed rule at issue — entitled “Health Data, Technology, and Interoperability: ASTP/ONC Deregulatory Actions To Unleash Prosperity” — would remove certification criteria requiring that model cards accompany health products that use artificial intelligence (AI). Model cards function like nutrition labels, providing critical information to providers and regulators, such as potential risks to patients and how AI models are developed and tested. 

“New and emerging AI tools are used by many healthcare providers to make life-changing decisions, such as which patients to refer to specialists, which diseases to screen a patient for, or whether a reaction to an infection might be deadly. So, when AI gets it wrong in healthcare, the consequences can be deadly,” said Attorney General Bonta. “I oppose the Trump Administration’s proposed rollback of regulations that require clarity about how AI tools used in healthcare were developed and tested. Delivering safe, effective, and equitable access to healthcare services must be at the forefront of any attempt to integrate AI and healthcare.”

In response to the increase of automated decision-making tools trained on electronic health records, the Biden Administration unveiled the model card requirement. The Biden-era rule, previously supported by Attorney General Bonta, requires healthcare software developers seeking certification of their products to be more transparent about the data they are using to model their algorithms and whether they have been tested to ensure their outcomes are fair and unbiased. This is important because if algorithms are trained on a narrow or limited dataset, they can inadvertently learn and perpetuate biases present in that data. For example, a 2019 study found that a widely used algorithm used to help hospitals identify high-risk patients was racially biased.

In his letter today, Attorney General Bonta warns that HHS’s proposed rule would eliminate one of the most significant guardrails currently in place on a federal level for the use of AI in healthcare and urges the federal administration to reverse course. AI systems are novel and complex, and their inner workings are often not understood even by developers and entities that use AI, resulting in situations where AI tools have generated false information or biased and discriminatory results.

The proposed rule also does not take into consideration the significant burden it is placing on health providers by removing the model card requirement. For example, healthcare providers’ compliance with both federal and state laws becomes much more difficult without model card requirements. The Affordable Care Act prohibits providers from discriminating based on a patient’s protected status. And last year, Attorney General Bonta issued an AI advisory about the application of California law to AI in healthcare, providing guidance specific to healthcare entities about their obligations under California law. Removing the model card requirement eliminates a critical tool for providers to ensure that they are providing nondiscriminatory healthcare in compliance with these laws.

Lawsuit also challenges Secretary Kennedy’s appointments to key federal vaccine panel

OAKLAND — In partnership with Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes, California Attorney General Rob Bonta today announced co-leading a multistate lawsuit against the Trump Administration over unprecedented changes that were recently made to the childhood immunization schedule, which will make people sicker and strain state resources. Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Acting Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Director Jay Bhattacharya, and the CDC and HHS are named as defendants. Filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, the complaint challenges a January 5, 2026 "Decision Memo" by the CDC that stripped seven childhood vaccines — those protecting against rotavirus, meningococcal disease, hepatitis A, hepatitis B, influenza, COVID-19, and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) — of their universally recommended status. The lawsuit also challenges Secretary Kennedy's unlawful replacement of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), the expert federal panel that has guided U.S. vaccine policy for decades. The coalition of 14 attorneys general and the Governor of Pennsylvania is asking the court to declare the new vaccine schedule and the new ACIP appointments unlawful, and to enjoin, vacate, and set aside both the new immunization schedule and the ACIP appointments.

“The Trump Administration’s attacks on science are irresponsible and dangerous. Undermining confidence in vaccines will lead to lower vaccination rates and more infectious disease. It will also drive-up costs for states, including increased Medicaid spending and new expenses to combat misinformation and revise public health guidance,” said Attorney General Rob Bonta. “Public health decisions must remain grounded in truth and facts. That’s why, for the 59th time, I’m taking the Trump Administration to court. My fellow attorneys general and I cannot sit on the sidelines while lives are put at risk and our laws are broken.”

“California is going back to court because the Trump Administration is violating federal law and pushing a reckless, unscientific childhood vaccine schedule that puts kids’ lives at risk. These changes ignore decades of medical evidence and will lead to outbreaks of diseases we’ve already beaten,” said Governor Gavin Newsom. “We will not stand by while politics overrides science and endangers our children. Just as we’ve done before, we’re standing up — alongside 14 other states — to defend the law, protect public health, and keep our kids safe.”

Among children born in the U.S. between 1994 and 2023, researchers have estimated that routine childhood vaccinations prevented approximately 508 million cases of illness, 32 million hospitalizations, and over 1.1 million deaths, generating $2.7 trillion in societal savings. This remarkable achievement has been made possible in large part by leading medical scholars and public health experts who have served on the ACIP and established the science-based childhood vaccination schedule that federal agencies, states, and parents have confidently relied on for decades.

Secretary Kennedy is among the most prominent anti-vaccine activists in the country and has significantly contributed to eroding trust in safe and effective vaccines. During Secretary Kennedy’s confirmation process, he made numerous promises in an apparent effort to address concerns about his longstanding anti-vaccine views. One of those promises was that he would not alter the ACIP. The ACIP is a 17-member federal advisory board to the CDC that, under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), must be “fairly balanced in terms of the points of view represented and the functions to be performed,” and not be “inappropriately influenced by the appointing authority or by any special interest[.]” The ACIP develops recommendations for routine immunization of both pediatric and adult populations, which become official CDC policy upon approval by the CDC Director. Once adopted into the CDC immunization schedule, the ACIP’s recommendations determine which vaccines are covered under several federal supported immunization programs.

In a Wall Street Journal opinion column published on June 9, 2025, and ironically titled “HHS Moves to Restore Public Trust in Vaccines,” Secretary Kennedy abruptly announced that he was dismissing all 17 ACIP members. He subsequently appointed new ACIP members. At least nine of the 13 current ACIP members lack the expertise or professional qualifications required for the role, and a majority have publicly expressed views aligned with Secretary Kennedy's well-documented opposition to vaccines. Among other things, Secretary Kennedy failed to issue the required Federal Register notice, to follow FACA’s “fairly balanced” requirement, and to appoint individuals with scientific qualifications as required by ACIP's own charter. 

On December 5, 2025, the ACIP members unlawfully appointed by Secretary Kennedy then voted 8 to 3 to reverse nearly 30 years of CDC policy recommending that the hepatitis B vaccine be universally administered at birth as part of a three-dose series. The hepatitis B vaccine is up to 90 percent effective in preventing perinatal infection when administered within 24 hours of birth. However, the Trump Administration’s reliance on even the unlawfully reconstituted ACIP was temporary. Last month, then-Acting CDC Director Jim O’Neill — who has no medical or scientific background — signed off on a “Decision Memo” that demoted seven vaccines from the universally recommended childhood vaccination schedule to a lesser status that invites confusion and uncertainty. The Decision Memo was not based on any new scientific evidence, any recommendation by a lawfully constituted ACIP, or any systematic review of the available data. Instead, it relied primarily on superficial comparisons to purported "peer countries" — particularly Denmark, which has universal healthcare and a small, homogenous population — while ignoring the fundamental differences between those nations and the United States, as well as the overwhelming evidence supporting the effectiveness of the CDC’s pre-Kennedy childhood immunization schedule.

In response to the lack of science-based leadership from the federal government, California Governor Gavin Newsom announced the creation of the West Coast Health Alliance to create and promulgate communications to the public and to healthcare providers regarding the West Coast Health Alliance’s shared, collective recommendations.

Joining Attorneys General Bonta and Mayes in filing today’s lawsuit are the attorneys general of Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, and the Governor of Pennsylvania.  

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today issued an updated information bulletin to all California District Attorneys, Chiefs of Police, Sheriffs, and State Law Enforcement Agencies reminding them of California’s laws that prohibit law enforcement cooperation with other states’ investigations and prosecutions of abortions that are legal in California. The updated bulletin comes in response to Louisiana’s recent indictment of a California physician for allegedly helping to provide a medication abortion in violation of Louisiana law. Medication abortion is legal under California law, and law enforcement is prohibited from arresting or cooperating with investigations or prosecutions of individuals seeking, providing, or assisting with access to reproductive healthcare that is legal in California.

“California remains firmly committed to serving as a safe haven for reproductive rights. We will not allow anti-abortion extremists from outside our state to reach in and undermine the protections guaranteed under California law,” said Attorney General Bonta. “Whether the attacks are coming from the Trump Administration or another state, I am reminding our law enforcement agencies that they cannot assist in prosecuting individuals who seek or provide reproductive healthcare that is lawful in California.” 

In today’s information bulletin, Attorney General Bonta outlines the following steps for law enforcement who are asked to arrest or otherwise assist with the prosecution of individuals providing or accessing reproductive healthcare in California:

• Law enforcement agencies should be careful, when sharing any information or otherwise cooperating with law enforcement from other states or federal agencies, to prevent information sharing about abortions that are legal under California law.
• Law enforcement agencies should closely examine any out-of-state arrest warrant prior to taking any person into custody. Law enforcement is prohibited from cooperating where the arrest relates to abortions that are legal under California law, even if the warrant may not clearly state that the offense is related to abortion.
• Law enforcement agencies should be aware that an out-of-state warrant does not require arrest or the initiation of extradition proceedings.
• Law enforcement should be careful when applying for authorization from a magistrate to intercept electronic communications or wires, to install trap and trace devices, or for warrants on behalf of other states to ensure the other states are not seeking information relating to abortions that are legal under California law. 
• Law enforcement agencies should immediately contact the California Attorney General’s Office if they have any questions regarding an out-of-state warrant. 

Attorney General Bonta has been a strong defender of reproductive rights. In December, he opposed a push by Congressional Republicans to condition the extension of Affordable Care Act enhanced subsidies on additional abortion restrictions. He has also pressed forward with his lawsuit against Providence St. Joseph Hospital, which alleges that the hospital violated multiple California laws due to its refusal to provide emergency abortion care to people experiencing obstetric emergencies. In addition, Attorney General Bonta played a leading role in opposing the Trump Administration’s efforts to eliminate veterans’ and their families’ access to abortion care, and launched a statewide survey to assess how hospital emergency departments are complying with reproductive healthcare laws, particularly when abortion care is the medically necessary emergency treatment.

Californians who believe their right to reproductive healthcare, including accessing abortion, has been violated should immediately file a complaint at ‪https://oag.ca.gov/report.