Letter-Writing Campaign

August 2, 2025

Physicians for Human Rights’ Student Advisory Board Supports Increased Transparency of the Conditions in U.S. Immigration Detention

The Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) Student Advisory Board supports H.R. 3473, the Humane Accountability Act, as a necessary but incomplete measure to improve transparency and oversight in the U.S. immigration detention system. This bill mandates public reporting by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) on deaths in custody, incidents of abuse, medical emergencies, and transfers to external medical facilities. It is an essential step toward exposing ongoing systemic harm.

Extensive documentation by independent investigators, health professionals, and journalists confirms that detainees—especially women, pregnant people, individuals with chronic illness or mental health conditions, and LGBTQ+ persons—are regularly subjected to medical neglect, prolonged solitary confinement, sexual and physical violence, and denial of basic care. This crisis has worsened since January 2024, with a spike in reported deaths and serious health-related incidents in the months that have followed.

While H.R. 3473 promises much-needed transparency, it alone will not stop the abuses occurring in detention facilities or stop unlawful and unneeded detention. The bill lacks enforceable mechanisms to prevent further harm. Still, it may serve as a foundation for future accountability—provided Congress acts swiftly to expand upon it. Transparency must lead to action. 

We urge Congress to pass H.R. 3473 in tandem with legislation that establishes independent monitoring bodies authorized to conduct regular inspections, investigate complaints, and impose consequences when facilities fail to meet basic standards of care. Chronic violations must result in penalties, including contract termination or closure. Detained individuals must be guaranteed timely access to medical and mental health services—especially those who are pregnant, disabled, or in psychological crisis—and be protected from retaliation for reporting mistreatment. As per their constitutional rights, legal counsel must be available, and consistent communication with families and support networks must be preserved. Individuals who are nonviolent residents of the United States - regardless of documentation status - should not be subjected to these facilities. 

As future health professionals and human rights advocates, we are acutely aware that detention and detention conditions are a determinant of health. Research consistently shows that incarceration in immigration facilities significantly increases the risk of depression, PTSD, miscarriage, sexual assault, and delayed diagnoses of chronic illness. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American Psychological Association, and numerous public health institutions have warned against detention—particularly for women and children—because it is incompatible with ethical, evidence-based care.

The U.S. immigration detention system, as it currently operates, is a public health emergency. H.R. 3473 acknowledges this crisis but does not go far enough to end it. We therefore urge Congress to pass this legislation and immediately take further steps to ensure that transparency leads to justice. The systemic abuse of people in detention must end—not only through documentation, but through meaningful, structural change.

We therefore urge Congress to pass H.R. 3473 and immediately take further steps to ensure that transparency is met with justice. The systemic abuse of detained people must end.

Sincerely,

Physicians for Human Rights Student Advisory Board

Children’s Health Committee

July 29, 2025

Physicians for Human Rights Student Advisory Board Supports H.R. 4641 - Keep Kids Covered Act

The Physicians for Human Rights’ Student Advisory Board (PHR SAB) strongly supports H.R. 4641, the Keep Kids Covered Act, which proposes amending Titles XIX and XXI of the Social Security Act to provide continuous eligibility for the Medicaid program and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) for children—up to 6 years of age continuously, and for 24-month periods between ages 6 and 19.

The PHR SAB represents the voices of medical students and trainees dedicated to upholding human rights both domestically and globally. We recognize that access to healthcare is a fundamental human right, and we advocate for multi-year continuous eligibility as a critical safeguard to ensure consistent coverage for children.

Continuous eligibility allows children to remain insured regardless of temporary changes in income or administrative barriers. Children in families with hourly or part-time workers—nearly 20% of adults with children—are especially vulnerable to income fluctuations that may result in the unintended loss of coverage. A single higher paycheck due to more hours worked can temporarily disqualify a child from Medicaid or CHIP, even if subsequent weeks reflect lower income. Additionally, administrative burdens, such as frequent renewals, knowledge gaps in how to access Medicaid/CHIP, long application processing times, or automatic disenrollment policies, cause more children to lose health coverage, often significantly impacting children in low-income areas. 

Lapses in coverage have serious consequences: uninsured children are less likely to see primary care providers and more likely to have delayed medical care or unfilled prescriptions, have unmet medical or dental needs, have suboptimal health, and higher likelihood of future emergency room admissions. These gaps result in poorer health outcomes and increased healthcare costs—up to $2,000 more per uninsured child compared to their insured peers. In contrast, continuous coverage is associated with better school attendance, academic achievement, and long-term economic productivity. From a financial perspective, the Congressional Budget Office has demonstrated that an initial investment of $1,700 per child for Medicaid yields upwards of $3,000 per child in terms of increase in GDP. 

At a time when Congress is focused on reducing waste and fraud, it is essential to support programs that are both effective and efficient. Most improper Medicaid/CHIP payments stem from administrative errors, not fraud. Continuous eligibility helps reduce these errors and streamlines access to care. Furthermore, due to recent changes under the H.R. 1 Budget Reconciliation bill, millions of children are at risk of losing Medicaid coverage. Implementing continuous eligibility is a practical, cost-effective way to protect the health of children and ensure that they will have healthy futures. 

As the Physicians for Human Rights’ Student Advisory Board, we strongly urge lawmakers to support H.R. 4641. Ensuring continuous Medicaid and CHIP eligibility for children is a necessary step toward protecting their health, future, and fundamental rights.

Sincerely,

Physicians for Human Rights Student Advisory Board

Children’s Health Committee

July 11, 2025

Physicians for Human Rights’ Student Advisory Board Opposes Executive Order 14160 and its Attack on Birthright Citizenship

Physicians for Human Rights Student Advisory Board firmly opposes Executive Order 14160, issued in January 2025, which aims to deny the granting of U.S. citizenship to children born in the United States to noncitizen parents. This action undermines the Fourteenth Amendment, destabilizes families, and threatens the foundational principle of equal protection under the law.

Since the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868, the United States has upheld birthright citizenship as a constitutional guarantee for all individuals born on U.S. soil, regardless of the immigration status of their parents. This principle has been reaffirmed repeatedly, most notably by the U.S. Supreme Court in United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), which held that children born in the U.S. to parents who are not U.S. citizens are U.S. citizens under the Constitution.

Executive Order 14160 threatens to upend this long-standing precedent by directing federal agencies to deny citizenship documentation to certain U.S.-born children. This action not only circumvents Congress’s constitutional authority over immigration and naturalization but also represents a troubling case of executive overreach. It is both legally unsound and unconstitutional.

The implications of this policy are far-reaching. It risks creating a stateless class of children—born in the U.S. but denied legal identity, rights, and protections. The burden of this policy would fall disproportionately on low-income, immigrant, and marginalized communities, who are more likely to be undocumented due to the financial and legal barriers that exist in obtaining citizenship in the United States. As a result, this would further entrench systemic discrimination based on parentage and national origin. It violates human rights standards and erodes public trust in government institutions and the rule of law.

Citizenship is not just a legal status—it is a determinant of health and human security. Without it, individuals may be denied access or fear repercussions with attempts to access healthcare, education, housing, and other essential services in the United States. Public health research consistently shows that secure legal status supports individual and community wellbeing. Stripping children of citizenship undermines health equity, threatens family stability, and weakens the fabric of society.

International human rights law, including Article 15 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, affirms that every child has the right to a nationality. By targeting children based on their parents’ documentation status, Executive Order 14160 aligns the U.S. with authoritarian regimes that deny legal identity as a means of exclusion and control. This is incompatible with democratic values and medical ethics.

We, the Physicians for Human Rights Student Advisory Board, strongly oppose Executive Order 14160. We call on lawmakers, legal advocates, and healthcare professionals to reject this unconstitutional and unethical directive. The right to birthright citizenship must be preserved—not only as a matter of law, but as a commitment to justice, equity, and human dignity.

Sincerely,

Physicians for Human Rights Student Advisory Board

Children’s Health Letter Writing Committee

March 23, 2025

Physicians for Human Rights’ Student Advisory Board opposes the dismantling of the U.S. Department of Education

The Physicians for Human Rights Student Advisory Board firmly opposes actions that would dismantle the United States Department of Education. 

Created in 1979, the Department of Education was established with the goal of ensuring equitable access to education for all individuals. The Department plays a critical role in providing access to federal funding for students, especially those from underserved communities. Programs like Title I funding for disadvantaged students, Pell Grants for low-income college students, and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) help to ensure that educational opportunities are accessible to every student, regardless of their background. These programs protect vulnerable populations, and the loss of protections enforced by the Department of Education would disproportionately harm these groups, further exacerbating inequality and limiting access to necessary resources. 

While these programs have been promised to be preserved, there have already been reports of decreased staffing throughout the departments involved in the determination and distribution of these funding sources. It is unclear how these programs would function without centralization by the Department of Education. The absence or delays of these programs during major transitions could have a profound impact on the efficiency and ability of these resources to be utilized by populations in need—often low-income individuals and communities in resource-poor areas. Additionally, it is unclear how transitioning power and oversight of education to states will allow for standardized educational standards and equity across all 50 states within the United States. 

Education is an essential foundation for public health programs and the securing of human rights. A well-educated population is better equipped to make informed decisions about their health, their rights, and their place in society. In particular, the Department of Education has helped to address systemic inequities in the U.S. educational system, ensuring that historically marginalized communities, including those based on race, disability, and socioeconomic status, have access to the resources necessary for success. Dismantling this Department would jeopardize these vital efforts, undermining the fundamental right to education for all Americans.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), adopted by the United Nations, asserts that everyone has the right to education. The U.S. Department of Education plays a crucial role in safeguarding this right by working to guarantee that every child, regardless of their circumstances, has the opportunity to receive a quality education. The Department ensures that educational institutions comply with federal laws regarding non-discrimination, civil rights, and equal access, and it holds systems accountable when they fail to uphold these standards.

Research has shown that individuals with higher levels of education tend to experience better health outcomes, including lower rates of chronic diseases, longer life expectancy, and better mental health. This is due, in part, to the fact that education empowers individuals to make healthier choices, increases access to healthcare, and fosters community resilience. The Department of Education’s work to improve educational access, reduce dropout rates, and create pathways for higher education contributes to improving overall public health in the U.S.

In conclusion, the Physicians for Human Rights Student Advisory Board strongly opposes the dismantling of the U.S. Department of Education. We urge leadership to prioritize the protection and strengthening of the federal Department of Education to ensure that all children, regardless of their background or the state that they are located in, have the opportunity to succeed and thrive.

Sincerely, 

Physicians for Human Rights Student Advisory Board

Children’s Health Letter Writing Committee

March 18, 2025

Physicians for Human Rights’ Student Advisory Board opposes the prohibition of gender affirming care for transgender minors. 

Physicians for Human Rights Student Advisory Board firmly opposes any policies that would prevent transgender minors from accessing gender-affirming care. 

These prohibitory measures would violate the medical, psychological, and human rights of transgender youth across the United States. Gender-affirming care is a critical and evidence-based approach to supporting transgender minors. Medical professionals widely agree that access to gender-affirming care improves the mental health and overall well-being of transgender youth. Research consistently shows that gender-affirming treatments, such as therapy and hormone blockers, are not only safe but life-saving. These treatments help alleviate the distress caused by gender dysphoria and significantly reduce the risk of mental health challenges, including depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation.

It is important to note that transgender minors rarely pursue surgical interventions for gender affirmation. The true impact of many proposed policies throughout the United States would be a significant reduction in access to the medical aspects of transition—such as puberty blockers and hormone therapy—which are crucial during adolescence, a time when puberty causes irreversible changes. For minors whose gender identity does not align with their sex assigned at birth, these medical interventions help align their bodies with their identities, reducing distress and improving overall well-being.

Furthermore, decisions regarding gender-affirming care are made collaboratively between families, minors, and healthcare professionals. These decisions are based on comprehensive, personalized care and are never made lightly. Prohibiting such care would remove the autonomy of families and healthcare providers to determine the best course of action for each child. It also undermines the rights of transgender youth to access the medical care they need to live healthy, fulfilling lives.

The growing movement to criminalize or prohibit gender-affirming care for minors perpetuates harmful stigma and misinformation about transgender people. Claims suggesting that gender-affirming care is harmful, are misguided and unsupported by credible research. To create policies based on such claims sends a damaging message that transgender youth are unworthy of the same dignity, respect, and care as their peers. We must work to create a society where all young people—regardless of gender identity—can live authentically and feel supported.

As the Physicians for Human Rights Student Advisory Board, we oppose any federal or state-level attempts to restrict access to gender-affirming care for minors. Transgender youth deserve the right to live freely, safely, and without fear of discrimination or harm. By protecting their access to essential care, we are upholding their health, well-being, and fundamental human rights.

Sincerely, 

Physicians for Human Rights Student Advisory Board

Children’s Health Letter Writing Committee

March 17, 2025 

Physicians for Human Rights’ Student Advisory Board opposes H.R. 722: Life at Conception Act

Dear House Judiciary Committee,

The Physicians for Human Rights Student Advisory Board (PHR SAB) strongly opposes H.R. 722, the Life at Conception Act. This bill seeks to recognize the moment of conception as the beginning of life, granting personhood and legal rights to embryos and fetuses under the Fourteenth Amendment.

This legislation poses a grave threat to reproductive rights and essential healthcare access. By granting legal personhood to embryos, the bill could criminalize abortion nationwide— even in cases of rape, incest, or when the health of the mother is at risk. This would endanger women's physical and mental health, as research shows that limiting abortion access significantly increases the risk of maternal death. Research also shows that abortion restrictions lead to increased infant mortality and worse perinatal outcomes. 

Currently, individuals facing pregnancy complications or unsafe pregnancies in states with restricted abortion access are forced to travel to other states for care. Under H.R. 722, this burden would worsen, imposing a significant financial strain on all individuals, particularly those with low incomes who struggle to cover the costs of travel, accommodation, and lost wages. This bill would exacerbate barriers, disproportionately affecting those who are already the most vulnerable.

Additionally, physicians would face immense uncertainty, navigating unclear legal risks when providing necessary medical care, which could jeopardize patient safety. The bill could also be used to criminalize miscarriages or other spontaneous abortions, further complicating medical care and burdening both individuals and healthcare providers.

Beyond abortion, H.R. 722 could restrict access to vital fertility treatments, including in vitro fertilization (IVF). The recognition of embryos as persons could create legal challenges for IVF procedures, as evidenced by Alabama’s embryo personhood court decision, which interfered with access to assisted reproductive services. This would place additional burdens on individuals seeking fertility treatments and limit their reproductive choices.

The Life at Conception Act disregards overwhelming scientific evidence that reproductive autonomy is vital for women’s mental and physical well-being. Research consistently demonstrates that access to abortion and other reproductive healthcare services is essential to women’s health. Denial of abortion has been seen to lead to poor maternal bonding with the infant and worse socioeconomic outcomes for families. According to the Pew Research Center, 64% of Americans are in favor of abortion access.

By failing to prioritize evidence-based, patient-centered care, this bill seeks to impose legal and moral values that do not reflect the diverse needs and beliefs of individuals across the nation. Reproductive healthcare decisions should be made by individuals in consultation with their healthcare providers, not dictated by the government.

As the Physicians for Human Rights Student Advisory Board, we strongly oppose H.R. 722. We urge lawmakers to reject this bill in favor of policies that protect and support the rights and health of individuals.

Sincerely,

Physicians for Human Rights Student Advisory Board

Letter Writing Committee