U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer struck down the Trump administration's “conscience rule” that would have protected healthcare providers, as well as health plans, if they refused to participate in or perform abortions on religious or moral grounds. In addition to abortion, the rule encompasses other safe, legal medical care that providers might disagree with on moral or religious standings, such as birth control, gender-affirming surgeries, and even vaccinations.

Basically: The rule favors the comfort of physicians and other medical staff, like nurses, over the rights and health needs of the patient. It’s also part of the Trump administration’s overall march toward religious freedom at the expense of people’s reproductive health.

How would this rule function in practice? Hypothetically, providers would have been able to refuse to give a patient a referral to another provider based on their religious or moral objection to the care—if someone wants gender-affirming surgery but it’s against their primary care doctor’s religious beliefs, they’d possibly be out of luck. This rule could extend all the way to healthcare workers refusing to give people information about birth control or declining to give vaccines. These refusals would be protected even in emergency cases.

“Health care is a basic right that should never be subject to political games," stated New York Attorney General Tish James, who brought the suit. "Once again, the courts have blocked the Trump Administration from implementing a discriminatory rule that would only hurt Americans."

The federal judge in Manhattan declared the “conscience rule” unconstitutional and too coercive. "Wherever the outermost line where persuasion gives way to coercion lies, the threat to pull all HHS funding here crosses it," Engelmayer wrote in the decision, as reported by Reuters. He sided with 26 plaintiffs, including New York state, New York City, and Planned Parenthood. The plaintiffs argued that in addition to the problems for patients, they would lose important funding under this rule.

Aside from the patient-care issue, the rule would have also allowed the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to withhold funding from clinics, hospitals, universities and other providers if they did not comply. And that federal funding, by the way, is nothing to sneeze at—it’s billions.

“Everyone deserves to access the health care they need,” Acting Planned Parenthood President Alexis McGill Johnson said. “This rule put patients’ needs last.” The rule would have gone into effect on Nov. 22. California is also challenging the rule with its own lawsuit.