Blumenthal, Murray, Schumer, Takano Lead More Than 200 Democrats in Fight to Overturn the Trump Admin's Draconian Abortion Ban at VA

[WASHINGTON, D.C.] - Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee Ranking Member Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), and House Veterans' Affairs Committee Ranking Member Mark Takano (D-CA) led more than 200 Senate and House Democrats in filing an amicus brief to Minority Veterans of America v. Secretary of Veterans Affairs, a lawsuit challenging the Trump Administration's abortion ban at the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).

The lawsuit, pending before the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, seeks to overturn VA's ban on abortion care and counseling. In the brief, the lawmakers argue the Trump Administration's 2025 policy banning abortion counseling and abortion care in almost all cases rests on a flawed legal premise.

"VA's Final Rule rests on a faulty interpretation of federal law that has significant negative consequences for our nation's veterans. The issues presented in this case potentially reach roughly 462,000 women veterans of reproductive age who are enrolled in VA health care, along with an estimated 112,000 women of reproductive age enrolled in the Civilian Health and Medical Program of the Department of Veterans Affairs (CHAMPVA)," the members wrote.

The members continued, "For them, the Final Rule means a VA physician is prohibited from discussing the full range of a patient's options during a pregnancy, prohibited from providing the full range of health care available to pregnant women, and is prohibited from intervening when a pregnancy threatens the patient's health or is the result of rape or incest."

VA's abortion ban, implemented by the Trump Administration in 2025, prohibits abortion counseling and care for veterans and CHAMPVA beneficiaries-even in cases of rape, incest, or if a veteran's health is endangered. The lawmakers argue in the brief that VA's erroneous interpretation of federal law means these women now cannot receive abortion care or counseling even in the most harrowing circumstances. They also argue the Veterans' Health Care Eligibility Reform Act of 1996 allows VA to provide any medical services the Secretary "determines to be needed" and that the Veterans Health Care Act of 1992, which VA used to justify its abortion ban, does not restrict the Secretary's authority to add abortion care to its medical benefits package.

In the Senate, the amicus brief was signed by all 47 Democratic U.S. Senators. In the House, the brief was signed by 165 Democratic U.S. Representatives.

In March, all present Democratic Senators voted in support of Senator Blumenthal's Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution to overturn the Trump Administration's policy ending abortion counseling entirely and abortion care for veterans in cases of rape, incest, or health endangerment. A CRA resolution is an oversight tool Congress can use to overturn final rules issued by federal agencies with a simple majority vote. The vote failed 48-50 due to lack of adequate Republican support, leaving VA's abortion ban in place. While the CRA resolution did not receive a vote in the House, it garnered the support of 155 Democratic cosponsors.

In September 2022, VA began to offer abortion counseling to all pregnant veterans and CHAMPVA beneficiaries, and abortion care in cases of rape, incest, or life or health endangerment of the veteran or CHAMPVA beneficiary. This was in response to the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization ruling, which created urgent risks to the lives and health of pregnant veterans and CHAMPVA beneficiaries in states that banned or otherwise severely restricted access to abortion. VA's dangerous abortion ban means that veterans nationwide now face those same risks.

More than 462,000 veterans of reproductive age are enrolled in VA health care, and more than 112,000 women of reproductive age are enrolled in CHAMPVA. More than half of these women live in states that have enacted abortion bans or restrictions.

The amicus brief can be read in full HERE.