Press coverage of the numerous changes that Barack Obama has made since taking office has overlooked one change that makes a welcome and swift departure from the policies of the previous administration: the revocation of the so-called “global gag rule.”

The rule made it impossible for federal funding to go to international groups that provide abortions or even provide abortion information to the women they serve. It was first passed by President Regan in 1984, overruled by President Clinton in 1993, and put back in place by the second President Bush as one of his first acts as president in 2001.

The global gag rule was put in place by way of executive order. A brief history: although there is no constitutional provision allowing them, executive orders have been used since 1789. They allow the president to shape policies without authorization from the Senate or Congress. Many believe that the root of the power to issue executive orders is in the Take Care clause, found in Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution, where the executive is told his duty is to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” Executive orders are typically used by the president to direct other executive officers as to how to run their operations. Presidents saw their ability to issue executive orders curtailed in the 1952 Supreme Court case Youngstown Sheet & Tube Company v. Sawyer, where President Truman’s order to place all of the steel mills in the U.S. under federal control was ruled unconstitutional because it was making law rather than executing it. Since then, presidents have been careful to demonstrate what law they are purporting to execute in a particular executive order.

It’s easy to see the usefulness behind executive orders. Laws passed by Congress might not include all of the details necessarily for effectively implementing them, for they are to be carried out by our increasingly expansive federal government. On the other hand, the executive order can provide the president with a lot of room to effect policy outside of the laws of Congress, so long as his justification is taken at face value. Very few executive orders have been overturned. The global gag rule is an excellent example of how ideology and presidential politics can infiltrate executive orders. With the sweep of a pen, a president can influence the lives of millions of women worldwide by determining the content of U.S. foreign policy.

Abortion is one the most contentious cultural issues in American politics, and many have seen the global gag rule as a way of advancing right-wing policies. President Obama has agreed, stating that, “For too long, international family planning assistance has been used as a political wedge issue, the subject of a back and forth debate that has only served to divide us.” Republicans have instituted the global gag rule to please their right-to-life constituencies, as proponents say that the tax dollars of anti-abortion Americans should not be used to fund abortion overseas. Federal money also can’t be used to provide abortions within the United States. However, the global gag rule fails to take into account how it might impact other countries’ policies on abortions and the groups that work to promote reproductive health within their borders. And what about the tax dollars of taxpayers who support contraception and women’s health?

Therefore, the moral desires of some Americans were used to justify keeping much needed medical services out of the reach of many foreign women. The global gag rule impacted not just access to abortion and abortion counseling, but contraceptives like condoms — necessary for the prevention of the spread of STDs and especially AIDS — or necessary medical procedures that might be needed to save the life of a woman. Many clinics that offered much needed family planning services also offered abortions, but because of the global gag rule they were denied millions of dollars in funding or had to bend their missions to comport with the rule. And it can be argued that the impact of the global gag rule goes further than its implications on health: lack of access to family planning is often implicated in poverty and even global warming, as some experts have said that human population growth has been contributing to the problem.

President Obama reversed the global gag rule without any press fanfare. I see this as an odd choice given the nature of executive orders. With a Democratic majority in the House and Senate, there is little chance of the order being overruled. And, getting rid of the global gag rule aligns with Obama’s promises to broaden the abortion debate to include access to safe and reliable contraceptives and to aid women’s health. Why not demonstrate his administration’s admirable commitment to aiding women in other countries in achieving the same rights he has promised to American women? If the idea behind the executive order is that the president take care that the laws be faithfully executed, doesn’t an about face on federal policy on such a major issue deserve a little bit more coverage?