Archive by Author

Bill Clinton: Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision has 'put our democracy at risk'

Former President Clinton is slamming the Supreme Court’s ruling to overturn Roe v. Wade, saying it contributes to putting “democracy at risk” and calling the high court “radical” and “activist.”

“This decision puts partisanship ahead of precedent, ideology ahead of evidence, and the power of a small minority ahead of the clear will of the people,” Clinton said in a statement on Friday.

“This jarring removal of rights that had long been guaranteed, along with decisions gutting the Voting Rights Act and abolishing any judicial remedy for admittedly unconstitutional gerrymandering by state legislatures and abuses of power by federal authorities, has put our democracy at risk in the hands of a radical, activist Court,” he added.

He said said voters should be electing people “who will defend, not deny, our cherished rights and liberties” in addition to confirming judges who put the importance of the Constitution over partisanship.

His wife, former Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, called the decision “a step backward for women’s rights and human rights.”

The development comes as the high court ruled on Friday to eliminate federal-level abortion protections, which many anticipated after a leaked draft ruling last month. 

Several states, including Missouri, South Dakota, Louisiana and Kentucky, have now effectively banned abortion. More are expected to follow.

Source: TEST FEED1

On The Money — Employers respond to Roe

Companies are responding to Friday’s stunning Supreme Court decision by implementing measures to help employees get access to legal abortion services.

We’ll also look at how the decision could impact data privacy protections. Plus: We’ll dive into new home sales data and examine another massive crypto theft.

Welcome to On The Money, your nightly guide to everything affecting your bills, bank account and bottom line. For The Hill, we’re Sylvan Lane, Aris Folley and Karl Evers-Hillstrom. Subscribe here.

Companies rush to cover abortion travel costs

Several of the nation’s largest companies are willing to reimburse employees who travel out of state to legally access abortion services.  

Businesses will face increasing pressure to offer that benefit after the Supreme Court on Friday overturned Roe v. Wade, a decision that will lead to abortion bans in at least 13 states.

Most companies already cover abortion care in their health plan, but a number of major employers expanded their benefits to include travel costs after Texas enacted harsh abortion restrictions earlier this year. Friday’s ruling has already prompted more employers to join in. 

• Disney and Meta are among large U.S. employers who reacted to Friday’s ruling by telling their workers that they would reimburse costs to travel out of state for an abortion.
• Amazon, Starbucks and Microsoft announced similar policies shortly after the Supreme Court’s draft decision was leaked last month. 
• A handful of companies slammed the court’s decision, indicating that not all companies will remain silent on the issue that corporate America has long avoided.  

Karl has more here.

HOME SWEET HOME 

New home sales rose in May despite higher mortgage rates

New home sales jumped unexpectedly in May, according to data released Friday by the Census Bureau, defying a spike in mortgage rates and falling consumer sentiment to recover from an April downturn.

• Sales of new homes rose 10.7 percent in May to a seasonally adjusted annualized rate of 696,000 — the total number of homes that would have been sold over a 12-month period at the pace set last month.
• Economists expected sales to decline in May after dropping 16 percent in April.

While sales plunged 51.1 percent in the Northeast and fell 18.3 percent in the Midwest last month, sales rose 12.8 percent in the South and soared 39.3 percent in the West.

Economists expected new home sales to drop for the second consecutive month under the weight of rising interest rates. The Fed’s series of rate hikes has pushed the interest rate on a 30-year mortgage to an average of 5.2 percent in May, according to Freddie Mac, boosting pressure on potential buyers already coping with prices near record highs.

Sylvan breaks down what happened here.

MYOB

Roe v. Wade reversal spurs Democrats’ call for data privacy protections

Supporters of proposals offering protections around data that could provide information about people seeking abortions are pushing for swift action after the Supreme Court’s Friday decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.

As Democrats weigh responses to the 6-3 court decision that will trigger abortion bans in 13 states, and likely lead to severe restrictions in others, supporters of key data privacy proposals said it is urgent to ensure Americans’ location, search and call data isn’t used to target people seeking abortion care.

• Without additional protections, users’ location, search and calling data can be easily accessed and shared with law enforcement in ways that could be used to target people seeking abortions, especially in states that ban or severely restrict abortion access.
• Democrats introduced a couple of proposals aimed at giving users more data protections in recent weeks, following the leak of a draft majority opinion in May that indicated the court was prepared to strike down Roe v. Wade.

The Hill’s Rebecca Klar has more on this here. 

CRYPTO HEIST 

Hackers stole $100 million in latest crypto theft

Harmony, a California-based crypto firm, announced on Thursday night that hackers have stolen $100 million worth of cryptocurrency from one of its blockchain bridges. 

The company said on Twitter that it has partnered up with law enforcement and forensic specialists to try to identify the hackers and retrieve the stolen funds.

• In a blog post, the company said its team has attempted to reach out to the hacker with an embedded message sent to the culprit’s crypto wallet address.
   
• The theft is the latest crypto hack to occur in the last two months. The federal agency identified the hackers behind the theft as the Lazarus Group, which has been associated with the North Korean government.

Read more about this here from The Hill’s Ines Kagubare.

Good to Know

The U.S. is experiencing a chaotic summer travel season and lawmakers in Washington are hoping to ease the burden on airport workers by introducing legislation to boost their pay.

A group of Democratic lawmakers introduced the Good Jobs for Good Airports Act and it aims to force all airport hubs to raise worker wages or risk losing access to federal funds. It includes many frontline travel workers like cleaners, wheelchair agents, baggage handlers, security personnel and more.

Here’s what else have our eye on: 

• Abortion pills are likely to become the next major front of the fight over reproductive healthcare in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision overturning Roe v. Wade. 

ON TAP NEXT WEEK

Monday

• The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation hosts a discussion on antitrust and inflation at 10 a.m. 

Tuesday

• The House Financial Services subcommittee on oversight and investigations holds a hearing “Where Have All the Houses Gone? Private Equity, Single Family Rentals, and America’s Neighborhoods” at 12 p.m. 

Wednesday

• The House Financial Services Committee holds a hearing “Boom and Bust: Inequality, Homeownership, and the Long-Term Impacts of the Hot Housing Market” at 12 p.m. 

Thursday

• The House Financial Services Task Force on Financial Technology holds a hearing “Combatting Tech Bro Culture: Understanding Obstacles to Investments in Diverse-Owned Fintechs” at 12 p.m.

That’s it for today. Thanks for reading and check out The Hill’s Finance page for the latest news and coverage. We’ll see you next week. 

VIEW THE FULL EDITION HERE

Source: TEST FEED1

Court temporarily blocks FDA ban on sale of Juul e-cigarettes

A federal appeals court on Friday temporarily blocked the Food and Drug Administration’s order banning the sale of Juul e-cigarettes, giving a reprieve to the company while the court hears more arguments.  

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit granted Juul’s request to stay the order until the court has time to hear further argument on the issue. The court noted its stay does not reflect on how it will rule on the substance of the case.  

The move comes one day after the FDA banned sales of Juul’s e-cigarettes in a major blow against the company.  

Juul has been at the center of controversy over the rise of youth vaping.   

In making its order, the FDA cited “insufficient and conflicting data” from the company about “potentially harmful chemicals leaching” from its products.  

In its court filing, Juul pushed back by calling the FDA’s order “arbitrary and capricious.” 

The company said the move came “after immense political pressure from Congress once it became politically convenient to blame [Juul] for youth vaping, even though several of its competitors now have a larger market share and much higher underage-use rates.” 

The FDA’s order came as part of its broader review of e-cigarettes and amid concern about teenage use of the products.  

A debate has unfolded over the balance between preventing more young people from using e-cigarettes on one hand, and providing options for adult smokers who are looking to quit on the other.  

Health groups had praised the FDA’s order on Thursday.  

“Juul was the most popular e-cigarette among teens for several years and remains among the most popular today,” said American Lung Association President and CEO Harold Wimmer. “Ending the sale of all Juul products, including its menthol flavor, sends the message to companies that their blatant disregard for public health will not be tolerated.” 

Source: TEST FEED1

To combat opioid crisis, we need to take a different approach

Last week, Reps. French Hill (R-Ark.) and Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.) wrote about legislation they’re championing to address the nation’s opioid epidemic. The Preventing Overdoses and Saving Lives Act 2.0 would require co-prescribing opioid overdose reversal drugs alongside prescriptions for opioid-based painkillers.  

While I applaud the members’ attention to this dire and worsening public health crisis, and with all due respect to the members of Congress, we have tried this type of approach before. Many times. And it hasn’t worked. 

In the last decade, Congress has dedicated hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars toward combatting the opioid epidemic. Money that has gone to support first responders, increase access to treatment for substance use disorder, and ensure widespread availability of naloxone. Yet here we are — with record-breaking numbers of Americans dying every year from an opioid-related drug overdose.  

Last year, the CDC reported that approximately 107,000 Americans died of a drug overdose. Three-quarters of these deaths involved opioids. All told, we lost 220 Americans every day from an opioid-related drug overdose in 2021. This represents a 90 percent increase since 2018. Clearly, this problem is getting worse before it’s getting better. 

It’s time to try something different.   

For many, the path to addiction starts innocently enough — including after undergoing a routine surgical procedure. Ninety percent of surgery patients are prescribed opioids to manage their pain and, of these, four million will initiate long-term opioid use following such procedures. 

Focusing on access to overdose reversal drugs — while important — perpetuates opioids as the standard of care for treating postoperative pain. Such an approach misses the opportunity to prevent substance use. One way to accomplish this would be to minimize unnecessary exposure to opioids for surgical patients. This is particularly important for younger, opioid-naïve patients.  

We must do more to prevent opioid use disorder, including increasing access to safe, effective, and non-addictive pain management options. Unfortunately, current Medicare reimbursement policies continue to incentivize the use of opioids to treat postsurgical pain. This approach puts a non-opioid pain management option out of reach for tens of millions of surgery patients every year. 

Pending federal legislation would address this issue. The Non-Opioids Prevent Addiction in the Nation (NOPAIN) Act (HR 3259 / S 586) would update Medicare reimbursement policy to incentivize the use of FDA-approved non-opioid pain management options. The legislation would increase access to and use of FDA-approved non-opioid pain management options. In the process, the legislation would prevent individuals from developing an opioid use disorder and, ultimately, save lives. 

This legislation would deliver patients, providers, and caregivers options for treating postsurgical pain. And, with fewer patients being exposed to prescription opioids, fewer Americans will initiate a long-term opioid use habit. If we can prevent individuals from misusing opioids, we can save lives. It’s that simple.  

The NOPAIN Act is gaining momentum on Capitol Hill. The legislation is supported by more than 150 members of Congress, including nearly half of the Senate. I urge Congress to take a different approach to the opioid epidemic ravaging our communities. Let’s try preventing opioid addiction before it starts and pass this critical legislation. American lives hang in the balance. 

Chris Fox is executive director for Voices for Non-Opioid Choices. 

Source: TEST FEED1

Defense & National Security — Pentagon ‘evaluating’ policies amid abortion ruling

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said Friday the military is evaluating its policies following the Supreme Court’s ruling striking down Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision which guaranteed a woman’s right to an abortion.

We’ll talk about Austin’s statement. Plus, we’ll examine House Appropriators adding an extension to Title 42 into the Department of Homeland Security’s budget.  

This is Defense & National Security, your nightly guide to the latest developments at the Pentagon, on Capitol Hill and beyond. For The Hill, I’m Jordan Williams. Not on the list? Subscribe here.

Military examines policies in wake of Roe ruling

The Pentagon is evaluating its policies following the Supreme Court’s Friday decision striking down Roe v. Wade, which had for nearly 50 years guaranteed a woman’s right to an abortion, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said.

The ruling is set to affect thousands of military personnel and their families who may be stationed or work in states where abortions will soon be outlawed or heavily restricted.

What Austin said: The Defense Department is “examining this decision closely and evaluating our policies to ensure we continue to provide seamless access to reproductive health care as permitted by federal law,” Austin said in a statement.   

• “Nothing is more important to me or to this Department than the health and well-being of our Service members, the civilian workforce and DOD families. I am committed to taking care of our people and ensuring the readiness and resilience of our Force,” he said.
• Austin did not say what policies would be reviewed or what changes might soon be coming, if any. 

Abortion and the military: The Pentagon had faced pressure ahead of the ruling over whether it would protect access to abortion for pregnant servicewomen who would have to seek the procedure in a different state than where they are stationed.

• Such a process isn’t always easy for troops as they usually must get approval from superiors to travel from their installations.
• Women within the Army are likely to experience the most difficulty in obtaining an abortion as it is the largest military service and has thousands of troops stationed in states that already or will soon have the strictest antiabortion laws, including Texas, Alabama, Georgia, Oklahoma, Louisiana and Kentucky.

Though the Army has a “compassionate reassignment” policy — a rule that permits troops to seek to change their duty station if dealing with a difficult family situation — federal funds cannot be used for abortions, including at military health care centers, unless the pregnancy is the result of incest, rape or a threat to the mother’s life.

Read the story here.

Title 42 extension added to DHS budget 

House appropriators voted Friday to extend a Trump-era border policy, adding a six-month extension of Title 42 to the Department of Homeland Security Budget. 

The amendment, sponsored by Rep. Dan Newhouse (R-Wash.), was passed by voice vote, leaving unclear which Democrats voted in support of the effort.

Recap of Title 42: Title 42 contravenes asylum law, allowing border officials to rapidly expel migrants without allowing them to seek protection in the U.S. 

• The Biden administration continued the policy during the first year of its administration but moved in April to rescind the policy.
• The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) determined the pandemic conditions that Trump used to justify his emergency order were no longer necessary as the U.S. learns to live with COVID-19. 

A federal judge blocked the Biden administration from lifting Title 42, which the administration has appealed. 

The amendment: The Newhouse amendment would require the Biden administration to keep the policy in place for another 180 days beyond the date that Title 42 is eventually terminated.    

The House Appropriations Committee contains a number of Democrats in vulnerable districts, and a source told The Hill a whip count found more than half a dozen Democrats serving on the panel were willing to support Newhouse’s amendment. 

Read the full story here.

New head of US European Command confirmed 

The Senate late Thursday confirmed Army Gen. Christopher Cavoli to serve as commander of U.S. European Command by voice vote.

Cavoli, who is currently commander of U.S. Army Europe and Africa, will also take over as NATO’s supreme allied commander in Europe, overseeing the planning and execution of the alliance’s operations.

About Cavoli: President Biden nominated Cavoli for the role in early May, and the Senate Armed Services Committee advanced the nomination on June 15.

• Cavoli has served as commander of U.S. Army Europe and Africa since 2020, and before then served in a variety of roles in Asia, the U.S. and Europe.
• He brings a wealth of expertise on Europe, however, having served as director of Russia for the Joint Staff and as a general foreign area officer with a focus on Eurasia. In addition, he speaks Italian, Russian and French.

Stepping up: Cavoli will take over as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine drags into its fourth month and the U.S. and the alliance rush billions of dollars in security assistance to Kyiv.

• The alliance is hosting a summit in Madrid on Wednesday and Thursday, during which member states will endorse the alliance’s new Strategic Concept. However, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is expected to also be discussed.
• Cavoli also takes over as Finland and Sweden look to join NATO, something that Cavoli welcomed during his confirmation hearing in late May. 

Read the full story here. 

ON TAP FOR MONDAY

• The Atlantic Council will host a discussion on “Leading from the front: How Ukraine’s local officials resist Russia” at 8 a.m. 
• The U.S. Institute of Peace will host a discussion on “Reflections from Afghan Women: The Consequences of an Unsuccessful Peace Process” at 10 a.m. 
• The Wilson Center will host an event on “Past, Present, and Future of International Organization” at 1:30 p.m. 
• The Wilson Center will host an event entitled “Hindsight Up Front: Defining a Successful Resolution to Russia’s War in Ukraine” at 2 p.m. 
• The SETA Foundation will host an event on “The Madrid Summit: NATO’s New Strategic Concept” at 2 p.m. 

WHAT WE’RE READING

• Zelensky says Ukraine doing everything it can to secure release of American soldiers detained by Russia: report 
• Ukraine withdraws troops from besieged Severodonetsk 
• The Hill Opinion: US must stop hesitating in its support for Ukraine  

That’s it for today. Check out The Hill’s Defense and National Security pages for the latest coverage. See you next week!

VIEW THE FULL EDITION HERE

Source: TEST FEED1

Don’t let Facebook off the hook for Jan. 6

The Jan. 6 committee’s hearings over the past few weeks did crucial work illuminating the players and the plot behind efforts to overturn the 2020 election results. Now I hope lawmakers will take a close look at the technology platform that was at the center of events on Jan. 6: Facebook. 

Numerous reports have documented the pivotal role that Facebook played in spreading the conspiracy theories, calls for violence and far-right militia activity that fueled the mob attack on Congress. The company even ran ads for military gear next to election misinformation by extremist groups — essentially stoking and profiting off the insurrection.

For Facebook, this is a problem that has been building for years. The Tech Transparency Project collected and analyzed more than three years’ worth of news reports about content on Facebook that violated the company’s policies. We found that roughly 70 percent involved violence and incitement, including threats and physical assaults. Another large category included hate speech and other objectionable content.

Beyond showing how Facebook has systematically failed to police its platform, the analysis tracked the company’s responses to the news reports and found that Facebook issued the same cookie-cutter statements over and over again. In short, rather than fixing problems exposed by the media, Facebook resorted to recycled PR.

Few companies have been in hot water for such a broad range of societal harms as Facebook, from allegedly pushing drug content to teens to fueling the migration crisis at the U.S. southern border to purportedly fostering genocide in Myanmar. Facebook executives regularly trot out assurances that their artificial intelligence systems are getting better at finding and taking down violating content. But the vaunted A.I. systems have been failing to identify graphic violence for years, and recent events continue to lay bare the deficiencies of Facebook’s content moderation.

Why is it that a company that boasts sophisticated A.I. technology and more than 40,000 safety and security workers continually fails to stop dangerous content? Why does a company with these kinds of resources end up relying frequently on small groups of experts to find this stuff?

It becomes clearer with each passing day that Facebook is unwilling to make the changes and investments required to make its platform a safer place and instead continues to be focused on growth — even after a calamity like Jan. 6.

When it comes to the insurrection, Facebook has much to answer for. Why didn’t the company immediately implement all the measures recommended by its own researchers, who identified misinformation and daily calls for violence in the platform’s top “civic” groups in the months leading up to the 2020 election? Why did Facebook disband its civic integrity team, which battled election disinformation and other harmful content, in December 2020, even as the “Stop the Steal” movement gained momentum? Facebook said it shared information with federal authorities about potential violence at the Capitol on Jan. 6. When did that happen and what did the company know?

Facebook Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg infamously tried to shift blame away from her company for Jan. 6, saying the Capitol riot was “largely organized” on other tech platforms. But the dubious spin attempt has only gotten more laughable as evidence has piled up about Facebook’s central role in the events of that day.

The Jan. 6 committee has subpoenaed Facebook parent company Meta and other tech companies as part of its investigation, but Facebook executives have yet to appear on the Jan. 6 hearing schedule. Don’t let Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s much-discussed pivot to the metaverse allow the company to distract from its role in turbocharging the violent attempted coup.

Facebook executives continue to mislead the public about the company’s role in the Capitol riot, and the company is undoubtedly hoping Congress will give it a pass. Let’s hope lawmakers will eventually turn their attention to the role of social media in general – and Facebook in particular – in fomenting the insurrection.

Katie A. Paul is the director of the Tech Transparency Project (TTP), where she specializes in tracking extremism, disinformation and criminal activity on online platforms such as Facebook. Paul also serves as co-director and co-founder of the Antiquities Trafficking and Heritage Anthropology Research (ATHAR) Project and a founding member of the Alliance to Counter Crime Online (ACCO).

Source: TEST FEED1

House passes LGBTQI+ Data Inclusion Act

The U.S. House of Representatives Thursday evening passed legislation to standardize data collection of sexual orientation and gender identity, sending the measure to the Senate for consideration.

Under the LGBTQI+ Data Inclusion Act, introduced last June by Arizona Democrat Rep. Raúl Grijalva, more than 100 federal agencies that collect demographic data would be required to “assess needed changes in survey methods related to asking questions on sexual orientation and gender identity.”

Currently, few federal surveys collect data on sexual orientation and gender identity, and none measure intersex populations, according to the bill. Agency heads under the measure would be tasked with changing that, developing methods to include questions on sexual orientation and gender identity in nationally representative surveys while preserving the privacy and confidentiality of respondents.

America is changing faster than ever! Add Changing America to your Facebook or Twitter feed to stay on top of the news.

Should Grijalva’s measure make its way through the Senate and ultimately become law, federal agencies will have three years to incorporate information on sexual orientation, gender identity and other “variations in sex characteristics” into their published reports.

“Full equality and sound policy can only be achieved when we count all members of our community,” Grijalva said Thursday in a statement. “Lawmakers and ​agencies are one step closer to finally ​having comprehensive data to craft better policies to remedy ​and address the disparities faced by LGBTQI+ individuals—particularly people of color – to ensure their needs are met.”

In a statement released by the Congressional LGBTQI+ Equality Caucus, the group’s chair, Rep. David N. Cicilline (D-RI), said the Houses’ passage of the bill “brings us one step closer to obtaining a comprehensive and accurate picture of LGBTQI+ people and their experiences.”

“Good policy is informed by good data,” he said. “By ensuring the LGBTQI+ community is represented in federal studies and surveys, the LGBTQI+ Data Inclusion Act will help us craft better, more inclusive policies and better address the most pressing issues facing LGBTQI+ Americans.”

Earlier this year, the White House announced that its proposed Fiscal Year 2023 budget would include $10 million in funding for the U.S. Census Bureau to investigate how to best ask Americans about their sexual orientation and gender identity without compromising their safety.

The Biden administration has taken several other steps this year to advance LGBTQ+ equality, among them making gender-neutral passports available to Americans identifying as neither male nor female. President Biden has also pledged to protect LGBTQ+ youth – particularly transgender youth – from a tidal wave of legislation in mostly conservative states that jeopardizes their ability to learn, play sports and receive adequate health care.

Source: TEST FEED1

Health Care — Where abortion stands in states after Roe v. Wade

The Supreme Court has delivered a major ruling striking down Roe v. Wade. We’ll dive into the ramifications and where abortion stands in states following the ruling.

For The Hill, we’re Peter Sullivan, Nathaniel Weixel & Joseph Choi. If you enjoy this newsletter, please consider sharing it with a friend. Not on the list? Subscribe here.

Roe v. Wade is struck down. What happens now?

The decision Friday striking down Roe v. Wade leaves abortion laws up to each state, leaving a patchwork of laws across the country.

• Thirteen states have immediate trigger laws to ban almost all abortions: Arkansas, Idaho, Mississippi, Missouri, North Dakota, Kentucky, Louisiana, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah and Wyoming.
• More to watch: States including Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Michigan, South Carolina, Texas, West Virginia, Alabama and Ohio also have pursued laws that would ban abortion, but they would not go into effect immediately.
• Other situations: Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) signed into law a 15-week abortion ban in April, which will go into effect on July 1. Like the Mississippi law at issue in the Supreme Court case, it bans the procedure after 15 weeks of pregnancy and doesn’t include exemptions for rape, incest or human trafficking.

The pro-abortion rights Guttmacher Institute estimates that 33 million U.S. women of child-bearing ages live in states that have laws on the books or set to be implemented that would ban or heavily restrict access to abortion. Guttmacher estimates 26 states are certain or likely to ban abortion.

“Those who have struggled in the past are going to be forced into possibly untenable situations to travel great distances or could be forced to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term,” said Bethany Van Kampen, a senior policy advisor for Ipas, an abortion rights advocacy group. 

Map note: Three states — Oklahoma, Arkansas and Mississippi — have a trigger law for a Roe decision and have also passed pre-Roe decision abortion bans, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. 

View the full map and read more here

Biden reacts to ruling: Court paving ‘extreme’ path

President Biden on Friday accused the Supreme Court of taking an extremist path with its decision overturning Roe v. Wade, arguing the court made a “tragic error.”

• What he said: “It’s a sad day for the court and for the country,” Biden said at the White House. “The health and life of women in this nation is now at risk.”  
• Biden specifically called out the court for completely overturning Roe v. Wade and leaving the decision on abortion rights entirely to states. 
• He noted a person who is the victim of rape and incest would no longer be able to get an abortion unless a state law provides such an exception.

In the room: Biden delivered the remarks just after noon on Friday, roughly two hours after the ruling was issued.

A group of about a dozen female White House aides, including domestic policy adviser Susan Rice, watched on silently during his speech from a corner of the room.

Read more here.  

THOMAS OPENS DOOR TO OVERTURNING OTHER PRECEDENTS

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas on Friday called for overturning the constitutional rights the court had affirmed for access to contraceptives and LGBTQ rights in an opinion concurring with the majority decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.

• In his separate opinion, Thomas acknowledged that Friday’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization does not directly affect any rights besides abortion.
• However, he argued that the constitution’s Due Process Clause does not secure a right to an abortion or any other substantive rights, and he urged the court to apply that reasoning to other landmark cases. 

His argument: Thomas wrote, “In future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell.”

Why it matters: The three cases Thomas mentioned are all landmark decisions and deal with contraceptives, same-sex relationships and same-sex marriage.

Since Justice Samuel Alito’s draft majority opinion overturning Roe was leaked earlier this year, Democrats and liberal activists have warned that the conservative majority would soon turn its attention to other rights that the court has previously affirmed.

Read more here. 

COLLINS: RULING ‘INCONSISTENT’ WITH WHAT TRUMP NOMINEES TOLD ME

Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) on Friday said conservative Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch misled her about their views on the importance of Supreme Court precedent during their confirmation proceedings in 2017 and 2018.

• Collins, who voted to confirm then-President Trump’s first two nominees to the court despite her support for abortion rights, has said she believed the justices would hold up important precedents such as Roe v. Wade.
• A court majority that included Kavanaugh and Gorsuch on Friday struck down the landmark 1973 decision that established a constitutional right to abortion.

What she was told: “This decision is inconsistent with what Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh said in their testimony and their meetings with me, where they both were insistent on the importance of supporting long-standing precedents that the country has relied upon,” Collins said, explaining her votes for those nominees during the Trump administration. 

“The Supreme Court has abandoned a fifty-year precedent at a time that the country is desperate for stability,” Collins said in a statement. “This ill-considered action will further divide the country at a moment when, more than ever in modern times, we need the Court to show both consistency and restraint.”

Read more here. 

Biden vows to protect access to pills, contraception, travel

President Biden on Friday vowed to protect access to abortion pills and contraception in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.

• In remarks from the White House, Biden lambasted the decision as a “tragic error” carried out by an “extreme,” conservative-controlled Supreme Court.
• “It’s a sad day for the country in my view, but it doesn’t mean the fight’s over,” he said, calling for Congress to codify abortion protections through federal law.

White House action: Biden vowed that his administration would protect women’s access to medications approved by the Food and Drug Administration, including both contraceptives and oral abortifacients such as mifepristone.

“My administration will also protect a woman’s access to medications that are approved by the Food and Drug Administration, the FDA. Like contraception which is essential for preventative health care [and] mifepristone, which the FDA approved 20 years ago to safely end early pregnancies and is commonly used to treat miscarriages,” the president said. 

Abortion travel: He also said his administration would defend the “bedrock right” of a woman living in a state where abortions are now outlawed to travel to another state where it is available and terminate her pregnancy. 

“If any state or local official, high or low, tries to interfere with a woman exercising her basic right to travel, I will do everything in my power to fight that deeply un-American attack,” said Biden. 

Read more here

WHAT WE’RE READING

• Covid-19 vaccines prevented nearly 20 million deaths in a year, study estimates (Stat) 
• From joy to anger, faith leaders react to Roe’s reversal (Associated Press) 
• Can I still buy Plan B? Where can I get it? What to know after SCOTUS overturns Roe v. Wade (USA Today)

STATE BY STATE

• A Post-‘Roe’ World in Georgia Will Mean More Restrictions — And More Political Battles (Kaiser Health News) 
• West Coast governors promise to defend abortion rights (Oregon Public Broadcasting) 
• Mississippi Abortion Clinic Will Remain Open Until At Least July 4th (Mississippi Free Press) 

OP-EDS IN THE HILL

We must end the public health emergency carefully

That’s it for today, thanks for reading. Check out The Hill’s Health Care page for the latest news and coverage. See you next week.

VIEW THE FULL EDITION HERE

Source: TEST FEED1

Next big fight looms over abortion pills

Abortion pills are likely to become the next major front of the fight over reproductive healthcare in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision overturning Roe v. Wade.

Republican-led states have been moving to limit or even completely ban access to the drugs, and advocates worry the Supreme Court’s decision will embolden even more states to crack down.

Immediately following the ruling, Attorney General Merrick Garland said the Justice Department will protect the right to an abortion, including medication abortion.

“We stand ready to work with other arms of the federal government that seek to use their lawful authorities to protect and preserve access to reproductive care,” Garland said in a statement. 

“In particular, the [Food and Drug Administration] FDA has approved the use of the medication Mifepristone. States may not ban Mifepristone based on disagreement with the FDA’s expert judgment about its safety and efficacy,” Garland said.

President Biden on Friday also pledged to protect access to abortion pills, though the White House is limited in what it can do. 

In brief remarks, Biden said he was directing the Department of Health and Human Services to ensure that abortion pills would be available to the “fullest extent possible,” without specifying what measures the department would be taking.

There are two pills needed for a medication abortion, which is approved by the Food and Drug Administration for the first 10 weeks of pregnancy. 

Mifepristone, a drug that blocks hormones necessary for pregnancy, was approved in 2000. It is then followed by misoprostol, which causes contractions and helps empty the uterus.

Medication abortion has become an increasingly common method for ending pregnancies. According to the Guttmacher Institute, it accounted for 54 percent of all abortions in 2020. 

The FDA temporarily lifted a requirement that mifepristone be dispensed in-person at a clinic or hospital because of the COVID-19 pandemic, and the Biden administration made the change permanent in December, paving the way for doctors to prescribe the drug digitally and then mail the pills to patients.

Likely in anticipation of the Supreme Court’s decision, state lawmakers introduced a flurry of restrictions on medication abortion this year. There are currently 19 states, mostly in the South and Midwest, that ban providers from prescribing abortion pills through telemedicine.

In 32 states, clinicians who administer medication abortion are required to be physicians.

Texas prohibits the use of medication abortion starting at seven weeks of pregnancy, while Indiana bans its use at 10 weeks. 

This week, Louisiana’s governor signed into law a bill that outlawed out-of-state providers from mailing abortion pills, punishable by up to 10 years in prison and a $75,000 fine. 

Only a few states have tried to ban the pills outright, and those moves are tied up in court. 

Still, now that the Supreme Court has overturned Roe, there’s a concern more states will try and there’s no clear precedent whether the Justice Department has the power to stop them.

States have the authority to regulate practice of medicine, but Garland is seemingly arguing that federal law — and a federal drug approval — takes precedence over state law.

Lawrence Gostin, a professor of global health law at Georgetown University, said Garland needs to take action against any state that sets up barriers or outright bans access to abortion drugs. 

“The FDA is our premier public health regulatory agency. And it should set, and does set, a national uniform standard for safe and effective drugs … states don’t get to pick and choose which FDA approved drugs they will and won’t allow,” Gostin said.

But Gostin also said the Supreme Court doesn’t have a consistent track record ruling about FDA preemption of state law.  

“It’s unclear whether a very conservative Supreme Court would allow FDA to preempt state bans, particularly since it’s already ruled that abortion isn’t protected under the Constitution,” Gostin said. “And so I think it could go either way.”

In one of the more recent examples of FDA preemption, Massachusetts in 2014 tried to ban the FDA-approved opioid Zohydro. The manufacturer sued, and a federal district court struck down the state’s restrictions.

But the state didn’t appeal the decision, so it never advanced in the courts, making its impact on future case law unclear. 

Source: TEST FEED1