PodcastsIt Ain’t Gonna Work – Episode 056July 7, 2020Podcasts / Words of JenIn this episode, I share with you a piece of my writing that is based on actual events. It starts with a neighbor, and two kayaks, one of which is too long to fit inside his pickup truck’s bed. The inspiration for this story occurred on Memorial Day weekend of 2020, while the COVID-19 pandemic was happening. I read “It Ain’t Gonna Work” on episode 056 of Words of Jen. If you enjoyed this episode please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you! https://media.blubrry.com/bookofjen/p/ins.blubrry.com/bookofjen/woj056.mp3Podcast: Play in new window | DownloadSubscribe: Android | RSS... Jen’s Lore Corner: What Happened in Sanctuary… Episode 021June 22, 2020Jen's Lore Corner / PodcastsWelcome to Jen’s Lore Corner, a podcast about the lore of the Diablo video game series. This podcast started as a segment on the Shattered Soulstone podcast. I decided to re-release those segments in their own podcast. New content started with Episode 010. In this episode, I continue with the lore that is connected to Sanctuary. What happened in Sanctuary… didn’t stay in Sanctuary. Before I recorded this episode, I wrote a blog post titled: “What Happened in Sanctuary…” Jen’s Lore Corner: What Happened in Sanctuary…Episode 021 is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you! https://media.blubrry.com/bookofjen/p/ins.blubrry.com/bookofjen/JLC021.mp3Podcast: Play in new window | DownloadSubscribe: Android | RSS... Pandemic Dreams – Episode 055May 18, 2020Podcasts / Words of JenIn this episode, I share three of the most vivid dreams that I have been having since the “stay at home” orders were put in place during the COVID-19 outbreak. I’m not the only one having dreams like this right now. I read “Pandemic Dreams” on episode 055 of Words of Jen. If you enjoyed this episode please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you! https://media.blubrry.com/bookofjen/p/ins.blubrry.com/bookofjen/woj055.mp3Podcast: Play in new window | DownloadSubscribe: Android | RSS... DiabloSeason 21: Without SpeakingSeptember 19, 2020Diablo III / Diablo VideosNot every video goes as planned. In this one, my video recording software decided that it didn’t want to connect to my headset, which has a microphone. Instead, it thought connecting to software that I deleted a while back was the best choice. I didn’t realize this until I started editing the video. For this one, I suppose you can enjoy the sounds of the game instead. Ares the Hardcore Barbarian started out at Level 60. He went through a set of Act II Bounties. Season 21 currently offers double Bounty Caches. It seemed like a good way to level him up some more. The first Bounty I selected was The Hermetic Key, which was located in Temple of the Firstborn Level 1. Having done this one before, I knew it wouldn’t take long to complete. I hit Level 61 while working my way through this Bounty. The next Bounty was to kill Zoltun Kulle. It wasn’t the first time I’ve killed him this Season. If you look closely, you can see that I used one of my skills to Fear the Eternal Guardians. They run away! I hit level 62 shortly after killing Zoltun Kulle. The third Bounty was Clear the Western Channel. It is one where the player must fight their way through level one and then kill everything in level 2. I did not record all of this Bounty – but did hit record after I found a Gelatinous Sire Treasure Goblin. The fourth Bounty was Kill Gryssian (and 150 enemies) in the Dahlgur Oasis. This one took longer than expected, and included an optional event. I hit Level 63 somewhere along the way. I was unable to complete the fifth Bounty – The Ancient Devices – which is located in Desolate Sands. I was playing on Master difficulty, and the monsters guarding the Ancient Devices were too tough for me. My recording software decided to stop recording shortly after I entered The Fowl Lair. It seemed smarter to quit working on this Bounty rather than risk killing my Hardcore Barbarian. As such, I did not earn any Bounty Caches. https://media.blubrry.com/bookofjen/p/ins.blubrry.com/bookofjen/Season_21_Without_Voice.mp4Podcast: Play in new window | DownloadSubscribe: Android | RSS... Season 21: Maghda and Zoltun KulleAugust 24, 2020Diablo III / Diablo VideosMy Hardcore Barbarian started this video at Level 59. He has completely swapped out the armor and weapons he was using in the previous video. This video is short because my recording software doesn’t like it when I make long videos. This change is making me be more focused on what would make the video entertaining in a limited span of time. In this video, I started working on Season 21 Objectives that must be completed after a player has hit Level 60. You can attempt them before you reach Level 60 – but they won’t count for the Season Journey. Objectives completed: Crash: Kill Maghda at level 60 or higher on Hard difficulty or higher.Soul to Squeeze: Kill Zoltun Kulle at level 60 or higher on Hard difficulty or higher. Ares the Hardcore Barbarian ended this video at Level 60. Season 21: Maghda and Zoltun Kulle is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you! https://media.blubrry.com/bookofjen/p/ins.blubrry.com/bookofjen/Season_21_Magda_and_Zoltun_Kulle.mp4Podcast: Play in new window | DownloadSubscribe: Android | RSS... Season 21: Double Bounty CachesAugust 16, 2020Diablo III / Diablo VideosAres the Hardcore Barbarian started this video at Level 51. In this video, I had him complete a set of Bounties so he could open not one, but two Bounty caches. I made a change to how I do videos. My recording software doesn’t like it when I make long videos (and neither does my podcast hosting company). As such, I decided to make shorter videos, in which I feature the most interesting stuff that happened while I was playing Diablo III. This video shows some – but not all of – the set of Bounties I completed. Ares ended the video at Level 55. Season 21: Double Bounty Caches is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you! https://media.blubrry.com/bookofjen/p/ins.blubrry.com/bookofjen/Season_21_Double_Bounty_Caches.mp4Podcast: Play in new window | DownloadSubscribe: Android | RSS... Book ReviewsFather-Mucker by Greg OlearJuly 28, 2020Book Reviews / fictionFather-mucker is a work of fiction from the viewpoint of Josh Lansky. He (tries) to make his living by pitching ideas to magazines and movie studios. He is a stay-at-home dad who is currently parenting his two young children by himself while his wife is on a business trip. Things do not go as planned. This book is, at times, hilarious. It also offers some interesting insights and commentary on parenting, modern culture, politics, and the problems that come when rumors spread. The title of this book confused my dyslexic brain, and I had to stop and take a closer look at it. The meaning of the title is explained in the story by the main character. It’s not anywhere near as bad a meaning as you may have suspected it would be. Josh and his wife, Stacy, have two preschoolers. Roland is autistic, and his primary interests are “states” (as in the individual states that make up the United States) and light fixtures. He enjoys looking at catalogs and online photos of lamps, bathrooms, and big houses – especially if he can find out what state the house is located in. Maude is the younger sibling. She is very demanding and speaks as though she is royalty. She is physically tough, and Josh thinks she might become a linebacker someday. Near the beginning of the story, Josh gets an email from a parenting magazine that has accepted one of his pitches. They will pay him to do an interview with a former punk-rocker who is now a father. Josh’s son happens to have the punk-rocker’s daughter in his class at preschool. Josh is instantly elated, and then realizes that it might not be easy to find a way to interview the former punk-rocker. All he knows is that Roland really likes the musician’s daughter. Of course, Josh posts this good news on Facebook. His friends are a group of mommies who have set up play-dates at one of their homes. Josh is an honorary mommy. Some of the interesting social commentary starts while Josh is on Facebook. For example, someone he follows plays a game that involves killing vampires. It is the type of game that automatically posts the player’s kills. These types of annoying posts were common back in the earlier days of Facebook. Josh wonders if the number of kills his friend has is a high number, or a low one. He considers the idea that that maybe the friend was actually killing vampires. Josh hadn’t finished his coffee yet. Later, Josh opens a magazine and thinks about the ridiculous names that celebrities choose for their children. Apple. Pilot Inspektor. He later thinks about movie stars who “boink babysitters”… and then, sometimes, divorce their wives and marry the babysitter. At the play-date, one of the mommies quietly tells Josh that she believes that his wife, Stacy, is having an affair. This rumor, of course, has him second-guessing his entire marriage. Sleep deprived and exhausted from being the only parent to his children for several days in a row, Josh struggles with this news. After the play-date ends, Josh returns home with Maude. (Earlier that day, he took Roland to preschool). The babysitter that Josh scheduled to come over and watch Maude arrives. She is twenty-six years old and still in college. He finds her to be ditzy, childish, and annoying. She wants a raise. Josh does not give her a raise. The purpose of the babysitter is to entertain Maude so Josh can go with Roland on a class field trip to a pumpkin patch. To his surprise, the punk-rocker dad is among the other parents who accompany their kids on this field trip. Josh is extremely nervous about how to approach the guy and ask for an interview. And then, all hell breaks loose… for a while. A meltdown occurs. There are difficult choices to be made. Josh must decide whether or not to believe the rumor about his wife cheating on him. He goes back and forth on this, often via flashbacks of unrelated things that happened years ago. As a writer, his mind is searching for the clues he now things he missed. Could she have started seeing one of her ex-boyfriends again? If so… which one? More rumors are spread. Could the husband of one of the mommies be having an affair? The mommy group (Josh included) discuss a rumor about two people who live in town that – supposedly – had sex with each other in a public place while having an affair. It’s like high-school, all over again. A clique of board and frustrated people are spreading gossip in an effort to harm others, to make themselves look better in comparison, or just to pass the time. By the end, the rumors get resolved. The truth is revealed. Some of it was predictable (even for the characters), and some was a mystery right up until the end. I won’t spoil the ending by revealing the outcome. Overall, Father-Mucker is a fast moving story, from the viewpoint of an exhausted dad who is struggling with being a (functionally) single parent for several days in a row. Parents who read this will probably relate to the difficulties and absurdities of potty-training, children throwing tantrums, and the high-pitched scream of a child who has been hurt by another kid in the play-group. As I mentioned, there’s a lot of social commentary about rumors, celebrity quirks, Facebook statuses (and the proper way to respond to them). There are brief glimpses of what Josh and Stacy went through while trying to get Roland on an IEP, and memories about what their life was like before children. I ended up liking Josh Lanksy more than I might have expected. I kept wanting things to work out for him, and hoping that he would, eventually, be able to get some sleep. Father-Mucker by Greg Olear is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... The Great Influenza – by John M. BarryJuly 18, 2020Book Reviews / non fictionThe full title of this book is The Great Influenza – The Story of the Deadliest Pandemic in History. I started reading it during the COVID-19 pandemic. It was a book I’d been meaning to read long before COVID hit, and now seemed like a very appropriate time to start. The influenza pandemic happened about 100 years before the COVID-19 pandemic did. There are so many similarities between how people back then reacted to influenza and how people today are reacting to COVID-19. The book is not for everyone, particularly those who are already overwhelmed by everything involved with the COVID-19 pandemic. That said, I recommend the book to those who happen to enjoy reading about science, and health, and history. The book is presented in a way that resembles a narrative. In other words, it is not just a dry pile of facts and figures. John M. Barry did an excellent job of making scientists and doctors who were involved in trying to stop the spread of influenza into relatable, interesting, people. He noted their skill set, their personalities, and their quirks. I learned a lot from this book. It was astonishing how little we have learned between the influenza pandemic and today. “Spanish Flu” The influenza pandemic was, at the time, referred to as the “Spanish Flu”. But, it didn’t start in Spain. Instead, it started in the United States, in rural Kansas. The pandemic started just before the United States got involved in World War I. The governments of the countries that allied with the United States imposed strict rules about what could, and could not, be published in newspapers, played in movie theaters, or sung. The goal was to prohibit anything that might reduce to morale of the troops. Spain stayed out of the war – or, at least, did not join it – for a long time. As such, the newspapers in the country were free to write whatever was newsworthy. Many people first heard about the influenza pandemic after reading about it in Spanish newspapers. At the time, Spain was one of the countries that had been hit by the virus. People (outside of Spain) started calling the virus “Spanish flu”. The book shows evidence that the influenza virus began in rural Kansas, and spread from there to Camp Funston in Fort Riley, Kansas. The enlisted went from there to other camps, some of which were in France. Young men, from different areas of the United States, were packed into quarters that were not designed to accommodate so many people. Influenza spread through the military very quickly. Today, the (impeached) President of the United States calls COVID-19 “The Chinese Virus“, or “Kung Flu“. It is clear that the COVID-19 virus began spreading in Wuhan, China. But, that’s no excuse for the President to refer to the virus in such racist terms. Overloaded Hospitals The hospitals during the influenza pandemic were as overloaded as the ones today that were hit by a surge of COVID-19 patients. In both cases, people did not understand what they were seeing when it started. Back then, the doctors thought their patients had pneumonia, or that it was “only influenza”. They had no way of knowing how bad this particular strain of influenza actually was, but understood that most influenza cases were mild. Today, doctors diagnosed many patients with pneumonia, when it turned out they most likely had COVID-19. Some were turned away from hospitals (in the United States, for sure, perhaps in other countries) because they weren’t considered sick enough for a bed. Access to testing was problematic, and there are many people who had COVID-19 but were never tested. Meanwhile, the (impeached) President Trump has asked his “people” to slow down the testing. Back then, doctors and nurses were dying as they attempted to provide care for overloaded wards of influenza cases. Today, doctors and nurses are getting sick with COVID-19 as they beg their governors, representatives, senators, and (impeached) president to provide them with enough PPE to keep them safe. Sadly, back then and now, morgues were filled to capacity and hospitals had to find other places to store bodies. In both cases, casket makers were unable to make enough to keep up with the need. Then, and now, people were dying at home. In 1918, part of the problem that people were afraid to help neighbors who had influenza. This was especially true in places where there was a high death rate. It should be noted that President Woodrow Wilson was strongly emphasizing that hospital beds should be reserved for the troops. Doctors and nurses were recruited and sent to camps to help treat enlisted men who had caught influenza. The result was that American civilians were dealing with a doctor and nurse shortage. There was also no infrastructure set up to properly remove the bodies of the deceased. Some families placed the bodies of their dead loved one on the porch. Others had no option but to put the person in a corner, or leave them on the bed they died in. Spouses were sleeping on that bed, and I cannot imagine the level of trauma that caused. Today, there are people dying at home from COVID-19. Their family members are calling paramedics, but the person dies before the ambulance can arrive. In 1918, cities sent out wagons which were used to collect the dead. Police came to the door of the houses of the deceased and put the bodies into the wagon. Again, coffins were scarce, so some bodies were in bags. A few were in boxes that were definitely not coffins. Today, there is a man in Houston, Texas, who is collecting the bodies of the dead. He has a contract with the county, the police, and various funeral homes. Mask Slackers The idea of wearing a mask to prevent the spread of a virus seems to annoy some people. That was true one-hundred years ago, and sadly, is true today. Back then, the Red Cross, which was an extremely helpful force in fighting the influenza pandemic, had women make gauze masks. The surgeons at the time wore gauze masks. So, the prevailing thought was the gauze masks would also help other people to prevent spreading the virus. It should be noted that this effort began after the influenza pandemic had spread widely across the United States. Members of the Red Cross set up tables and tried to hand masks to every un-masked person who walked by. Police at the time were allowed to insist that a “mask slacker” wear a mask. Those without masks had to pay a fine, and could be arrested. Today, a quick glance at social media will reveal that we have plenty of “mask-slackers” who like to gather together in large groups, unmasked, and not engaging in social distancing. They are clearly much more aggressive about their resistance to mask wearing than were like-minded people in 1918. To my knowledge, there aren’t any places in the United States today where people can be fined or arrested for refusing to wear a mask. It is possible that some states or counties are considering it. Today, we wear masks when we want to shop at a grocery store. Back then, people stood outside the store and shouted their order loud enough for the shop workers inside the store to hear them. Another option was to write down a list of what they wanted to buy, leave the list near the door, and wait. Science Takes Time The most frightening thing I learned from this book is how long it can take for scientists to develop a vaccine. The scientists of one-hundred years ago had disadvantages to overcome. Few had managed to create a vaccine – for anything. They had to start from scratch while trying to develop an influenza vaccine. Meanwhile, some doctors still believed that it was “only influenza”, and assumed the virus wasn’t very serious. My assumption is, as the death toll rose, at least some of the doctors realized they were mistaken about how dangerous influenza actually was. Shortly before the influenza virus started infecting people, a huge change was made in regards to the determination of who could be considered a doctor. The medical universities in the United States started out as for-profit. Today, we would probably call them “diploma mills”. The purpose of these schools was to create revenue, which was used to pay the professors salaries. Medical students learned from lectures or books, but never once actually saw a patient. Heaven help the first patient those doctors attempted to treat! Those who truly wished to practice medicine in the United States traveled to Europe to attend their medical schools. Those schools actually taught students the knowledge and skills they would need as a doctor. These students worked on cadavers and, eventually patients, before graduating. In short, what happened was the “diploma mills” were examined by someone who not only had plenty of knowledge about medicine, but also had no qualms about giving the schools the bad grades they deserved. Many closed after that, unable to meet the new criteria. Some merged with real medical schools. Johns Hopkins was formed around this time. Today, as I write this book review, we are approximately six months into the COVID-19 pandemic. We have some wonderful doctors and nurses, but they are suffering from not being able to obtain the PPE that they need in order to prevent catching the virus. There are several different companies that are attempting to develop a COVID-19 vaccine. Science takes it own time, however, and there is no way to be certain when a vaccine will become available. Meanwhile, the death toll continues to rise. Looking Ahead The version of The Great Influenza that I read was published in 2005. It includes a new Afterword that I found to be extremely informative. It delves into SARS, H1N1, and other corona viruses. In addition, John M. Barry offered advice about what the United States should do in order to be prepared for a new pandemic. At the time, Barry stated that we were not prepared at all. He recommended that the United States start making their own vaccines, and not depend upon other countries to supply us with it. In 2004, the United States was relying on Great Brittan for vaccines, and faced a problem when Great Brittan cut the total doses available outside of their country by 50%. Berry also emphasized “surveillance” in the form of what we may recognize as contract tracing. The earlier we identify a new virus, he wrote, the better chance we have to develop and distribute a vaccine. My hope is that the next President of the United States will take the time to read The Great Influenza and learn lessons from it. There is potential that we could have a new President in January of 2021. That person will have the opportunity to put plans in place to prepare for the next pandemic – while continuing to fight this one. Based on what we have seen, the current (impeached) President has little to no interest in protecting Americans from COVID-19. The Great Influenza – by John M. Barry is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... The Sovereignties of Invention – by Matthew BattlesJanuary 26, 2020Book Reviews / fictionThe Sovereignties of Invention is a book of short stories – all of which are at least somewhat creepy. Matthew Battles does a good job of keeping readers in a state of curiosity and wonder, which sometimes leads to dread and horror. This may not be the book for everyone, but I really enjoyed it. If you like stories that include strange situations that leave the reader wondering what happens next, this is the book for you. My favorite story in this book is called “The Gnomon”. It takes place at a technology convention, where everyone is walking around wearing lanyards with little plastic pockets that serve as their admission passes. The Gnomon is a black box that has no discernible ports, no lights, and absolutely no one there to explain what it does. It becomes a topic of conversation as people try to figure out what it might be. Then, it starts following the people who are attending the conference on social media. There is a point where the story goes from an interesting puzzle to true horror. The reader is never given a specific explanation of what The Gnomon is, or why it suddenly reacts the way it did. The first story in the book is called “The Dogs in Trees.” It involves a situation where people are noticing that dogs have started appearing in trees. At first, it seems like a quirky story, but it slowly becomes very disconcerting. Only the dogs seem to know why they’ve taken to the trees. A story called “I After the Cloudy Doubly Beautifully” had me interested in it just from the title alone. A librarian was given the tax of clearing out the “X cage” – a repository of things that didn’t quite fit anywhere else. The librarian finds a mechanical translator machine, that involves ball bearings with letters on them that are spun around inside a glass dome. A ticker tape comes out with the words that it makes. The machine can translate back and forth into several languages. The librarian starts translating things from one language, to another, to yet another one. I found myself wondering what the final translation would sound like. But, something happens before the librarian is finished with the machine. There are other stories that I have not mentioned and will leave the reader to discover for themselves. The Sovereignties of Invention is filled with glimpses of strange and beautiful things that can also be creepy and unnerving. I found myself thinking about these stories long after I’d finished reading the book. The Sovereignties of Invention – by Matthew Battles is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... World of WarcraftWoW Classic: EcheyakeeJuly 21, 2020World of Warcraft / World of Warcraft ClassicAt the start of today’s adventure, Vaca was at Level 15. She was ready to take her newly acquired Stonewood Hammer and use it on whatever the quest givers wanted her to kill. She was certain Neverlast was equally ready to go. These screenshots were taken on September 25, 2019. Serga Darkthorn: How goes your hunt, Vaca? Have you found the prowlers? Vaca and Neverlast started their day by turning in the Prowlers of the Barrens quest. It took longer than expected because some of the prowlers lacked claws. The Taurens assumed there was some kind of plague affecting the local wildlife. Serga Darkthorn: Whitemist, Echeyakee in the Tauren tongue, is the king of the savannah cats. He hunts with such stealth, they say he’s like a thin, white mist on the earth. And he kills so fast his prey have no time for fear, or pain. The Tauren say he is both mercy and death. You will learn if that’s true, for I now set you on the path to hunt Echeyakee. His lair is northeast of the Crossroads, among the bones of giant Kodo Go. Blow this horn when you reach his lair. Blow the horn, and he will come. The Taruen decided to take this quest. Did Echeyakee exist? Vaca was certain this would be an exciting battle. All Serga Darkthorn wanted from the kill was Echeyakee’s hide and a report on what the fight was like. The hunt for Echeyakee required Vaca and Neverlast to leave The Crossroads. On the way, they found some very obviously plagued antelope. Neverlast used his fancy Druid skills to heal the plagued antelope. It became healthy again, and appeared to be glowing as it ran off. When the Tauren arrived at what they thought might be the right place, they blew the horns that Serga Darkthorn gave them. After waiting a little while, Echeyakee appeared. He was real! Vaca, being a warrior, rushed into battle to fight this beautiful, dangerous, creature. It was the only way to get the hide that Serga Darkthorn wanted. The battle was difficult, and Vaca may not have survived it if it wasn’t for Neverlast’s ability to heal her with Druid magic. The Tauren were victorious. Echeyakee disappeared right after the Tauren collected its hide. All that was left to do was return to The Crossroads and turn in the quest. On the way back, Neverlast stopped to heal more plagued antelope. They always ran away after he healed them. It was as though they felt better and regained the strength required to run across The Barrens. They came across a herd of antelope. A few that looked fully grown were surrounded by smaller young ones. The Tauren took a moment to stand still and take in the beauty of this world. Vaca hit Level 16 while fighting two Ornery Plainstriders. She survived thanks to Neverlast healing her. The Tauren reluctantly decided to begin working on a quest from Darsok Swiftdagger (who was also at The Crossroads). He wanted Vaca and Neverlast to kill some Harpies and collect 6 Harpy Lieutenant Rings. The rings are only held by Witchling Slayer Harpies. Vaca and Neverlast struggled through their previous battle with harpies. And now, they had to fight the ones that were even tougher! There was a dead Tauren off to the side of where the harpies lived. That’s never a good sign! Neverlast and Vaca started fighting Witchwing Slayer Harpies, each very glad they did not have to do this quest alone. Some of the Harpies dropped Harpy Lieutenant rings. But, not all of them did. Darsok Swiftdagger didn’t mention that before sending the Tauren out on this quest. Neverlast used a Druid spell to hit a harpy from a distance. The harpy immediately flew over to them, where Vaca could fight it without ending up in a mob of Harpies. Neverlast called this technique “fishing for harpies”. Eventually, the Tauren ran out of harpies that were within range. Vaca jumped into a mob, and noticed that the harpies she and Neverlast fought before – that seemed tough at the time – were much easier to kill. Vaca had grown stronger. Meanwhile, Neverlast had gotten into some trouble. Vaca had just finished killing harpies, when she noticed the “parade” that Neverlast was leading. Vaca intercepted the harpies and tried to fight them off. It did not go well for the Tauren. After making a “corpse run”, the Tauren moved away from the harpies and took the high ground. They needed a place to safely rest and recover. When they were ready, the Tauren walked back down the hill and began “fishing for harpies” again. They had not yet obtained enough of the rings they were asked to collect. The Druid spell that Neverlast used was super effective at getting the attention of harpies that had isolated themselves. This was so much more efficient than having to fight a mob of harpies! Eventually, the Tauren decided to return to The Crossroads. First, they handed Darsok Swiftdagger the Harpy Lieutenant Rings he wanted. They were rewarded with some silver. Next, they returned to Serga Darkthorn so they could give her Echeyakee’s Hide. Serga was very interested in hearing about how that battle went. Serga Darkthorn: You’ve beaten Echeyakee, and though his days of hunting are over … his spirit is with you. He will show you the strength found in subtlety, and the honor in mercy. Your path is still long, warrior. Let’s hope you stride it well. Serga Darkthorn had another quest for Neverlast and Vaca. Serga Darkthorn: Now, Vaca, the hunt deepens. Now you must defeat your prey, and then find your way to its lair. Hunt the sunscale raptors to the south. Slay them and remove the feathers they wear. Place the feathers on the scytheclaw nests southwest of the Stagnant Oasis. Show their brethren you do not fear them! By now, after a long day of fighting, Vaca and Neverlast were tired. They decided to spend the night in The Crossroads. The sunscale raptors would still be out there tomorrow. WoW Classic: Echeyakee is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... WoW Classic: HarpiesApril 29, 2020World of Warcraft / World of Warcraft ClassicNeverlast and Vaca had traveled together, fighting a wide variety of creatures and turning in quests. They had no idea how difficult it would be to fight a flock of skinny bird people. These screenshots were taken on September 22, 2019. Today started with Vaca and Neverlast fighting a Lost Barrens Kodo. Vaca, being a Warrior, jumped right in and started swinging. Neverlast, a Druid, healed his impulsive friend. The Tauren would soon learn that fighting Kodos was much easier than fighting Harpies. They needed to collect a few more Prowler claws in order to complete a quest. Strangely, it turned out that many of the Prowlers lacked claws. Vaca and Neverlast assumed that the Prowlers were suffering from the same plague that caused the Zhevra’s to lack hooves. Fortunately, this particular Prowler had some claws. The Tauren would be able to turn in this quest when next they visited The Crossroads. Overall, the day was going pretty well, until they encountered Harpies. The Tauren were asked to collect 8 Witchwing Talons. Little did they know that these winged, annoying, creature would be so difficult to kill. “A fine trophy your head will make, Tauren,” the Harpy threatened. Vaca won this battle, thanks to Neverlast’s help and healing. But, it was a much tougher battle than Vaca was expecting against skinny bird people. “My talons will shred your puny body, Tauren,” the next Harpy yelled. Vaca knew she was much stronger and heavier than this little bird person. She wondered what the Harpies thought the word “puny” meant. Neverlast used a spell and trapped the Harpy in place. It was a good idea. This particular Harpy was tougher than the other ones, and both of The Tauren were getting really tired. Eventually, the last Harpy was down. Neverlast and Vaca finally had gathered up the necessary amounts of Witchwing Talons, and could turn them in to Darsock Swiftdagger at The Crossroads. It was time for a moment of celebration! The next thing to do was to hoof it back to The Crossroads. There was time to enjoy the scenery along the way. Vaca wondered what these big skeletons were. She kept finding them scattered across the land. Maybe they were kodos? On their way through The Forgotten Pools, another Lost Barrens Kodo picked a fight with Vaca. There was no choice but to fight back. You can’t talk a Kodo out of a course of action once they have chosen it. When the battle was over, Neverlast was able to pick up some Thin Kodo Leather. Apparently “thin” is a relative term in this case. Back at The Crossroads, The Tauren climbed a tower and spoke with Darsok Swiftdagger. He was the one who gave them the quest to fight Harpies. It would be great to turn that in and forget all about the horrible bird people. Darsok Swiftdagger: Cut up enough of them yet? Keep slicing and taking trophies. I want 8 Witchwing talons. Neverlast and Vaca happily handed over the Witchwing Talons they collected. They each received some silver coins in return. Harpies are tough to fight, but the pay was worth it. Before The Tauren could start their way back down the tower, Darsok Swiftdagger had something else to say to them. Darsok Swiftdagger: Hahaha. Vaca, Back for more? Good, I like to hear that. This time I want you to assassinate some of the harpy lieutenants in the Dry Hills. Only Witchwing Slayers can be lieutenants, and you can tell them apart by the rings they carry. They are a nasty bunch, but they lead some of the underlings in that area. Taking out 6 of them will be a decisive strike against their matriarchy. Make sure they die painfully, Vaca. We want those harpy wenches to know the idiocy of picking fights with the Horde. Vaca wondered why this tough-talking Orc didn’t go out and fight the harpies himself. But then, she thought about the words Darsok was using. He clearly was afraid of the Harpies, whom he hated in part because they were female. Darsok wanted their matriarchy destroyed. Vaca guessed he saw it as a threat to the Orc’s patriarchal system. It took Vaca a moment to realize that Darsok thought she was a small, male Tauren. The first batch of Harpies were exhausting, and this new group was going to be even tougher. Vaca and Neverlast turned to each other, shrugged, and accepted the quest. Neither were looking forward to it. They decided to rest up before taking on more awful Harpies. Hopefully, the money would be worth the effort. #Blapril2020 WoW Classic: Harpies is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Meipo the Mage – To Level 60!April 25, 2020Adventures of Meipo / World of WarcraftMeipo is the WoW version of one of my Dungeons & Dragon characters. I leveled her up to Level 50 in November of 2019, and eventually got her to Level 60 on February 17, 2020. My plan was to put together a blog about it shortly after that, but I wasn’t able to get around to it until now. Meipo hit Level 50 in Andorhal, so her adventure continues from there. She got in a fight with Darkmaster Gandling, and got pushed up into the air. Meipo was saved by Thassarian and Koltra Deathweaver. After that battle ended, Meipo was able to turn in the Scholomancer quest. Thassarian: Excellently done, Meipo. And now, with the leader of the Scourge forces eliminated from Andorhal, we bide our time. Gandling’s Gloves are a transmog item. Next, Meipo traveled to Chillwind Camp, to talk to Commander Ashlam Valorfist. An Achievement popped up when she arrived: The First Battle for Andorhal Commander Ashlam Valorfist: These farmers from the south wish to take these farms, but I can’t let them enter the plaguelands unprepared. Even with the Scourge gone, danger still looms in the form of the Forsaken. No, we must be ready to fight… and that includes our new visitors. Before doing anything else, however, I would recommend that you travel to Uther’s Tomb, to the east, and place this tribute before his statue to ask for his blessing. Speak with the priest that tends to the tomb when you are finished. She intended to do exactly that…. but got distracted by food instead. Now We’re Cookin’: Cook up one of every Pilgrim’s Bounty dish. Candied Sweet Potato, Cranberry Chutney, Pumpkin Pie, Slow-Roasted Turkey, Spice Bread Stuffing Pilgrim’s Progress: Complete each of the Pilgrim’s Bounty dailies. Can’t Get Enough Turkey, Don’t Forget The Stuffing, Easy As Pie, She Says Potato, We’re Out of Cranberry Chutney Again? Meipo put on all the Pilgrim’s clothing, and used this magic gun to turn some Rogues into turkeys. Short Order Cook: Learn 50 cooking recipes. Issac Allerton gave Meipo a Turkey Caller. It makes a noise like a turkey! It didn’t take long for Meipo to portal back to Stormwind, use the Turkey Caller, and catch all the turkeys she needed. She learned that some of her fire spells would not only stop a turkey from running, but also prepared it for cooking. Meipo also learned that the teleportation spell was extremely useful for getting things done during holiday festivals. Expert Cook: Obtain 225 skill points in the “Classic” category of cooking. Meipo learned the Candied Sweet Potato recipe. Meipo found herself surrounded by turkeys outside Ironforge. Meipo learned the Slow-Roasted Turkey recipe. Meipo hit Level 51 after turning in a cooking quest to Robby Flay. Getting back on track, Meipo flew past Aerie Peak. She noticed, for the first time, that there was a giant stone Gryphon standing on top of it. Meipo arrived at Uther’s Tomb and was greeted by High Priest Thel’danis. Uther the Lightbringer Here lies Uther the Lightbringer First Paladin – Founder of the Order of the Silver Hand Uther lived and died to defend the kingdom of Lordaeron. Though he was betrayed by his most beloved student, we believe that his spirit lives on. He continues to watch over us, even as the shadows close in around our ruined land. His light is the light of all humanity – and so long as we honor his example, it shall never fade. Anonymous Meipo received Uther’s Blessing. High Priest Thel’danis: You and the humans at Chillwind Camp wish to re-take Andorhal? I wish you luck. High Priest Thel’danis: If you truly intend to move forward in this battle for Andorhal… well, perhaps I can help. To the east lies a large crypt. The bottom level of the crypt was once used for storage of weapons and armor…until the Scourge came. Now that the undead have left, the weapons are free for the taking. Most of the weapons are probably rusted and rotten by now, but they will serve better than tunics and pitchforks. Meipo set out to find the Weapons Crate at the bottom of the Crypt in Western Plaguelands. She got temporarily distracted by this sculpture of Uther’s Hammer. Meipo found the Abandoned Crypt and a broken box of weapons. The Abandoned Crypt: Scattered all over the bottom level of the crypt, you find shattered crates that once held weapons and armor. It appears that somebody got here before you did. Meipo got ambushed by skeletons! She fought them with fire. After killing off the skeletons inside the Abandoned Crypt, Meipo gathered up the weapons she could find. Outside, there were more skeletons to fight. The Cryptkeeper’s Belt is a transmog item. Meipo took her collection of weapons, such as they were, to Thurman Grant. She remembered that he was leading a group of farmers who wanted to take back some farmland. But, he didn’t need the weapons. Thurman Grant: I told Commander Valorfist that we could hold our own, and we intend to. I had a little conversation with the death knight general, Thassarian, on my way over here. We farmers plan to help in our own way. We will take control of this farm, begin to cultivate the land… and then when the battle for Andorhal commences, we will attack the Forsaken from the rear. They’ll never expect it. First, we need to get rid of these Forsaken outsiders. Kill some. Then return to me. Meipo found that killing Forsaken with fire was pretty easy – especially if you had a group of farmers helping. The farmers worked surprisingly well as a team. Thurman Grant: In fact, you might still be able to help train some of my men. You probably noticed the abomination outside. We initially tried to fight him, but he didn’t fight back. He seems to want to help out on the farm. Take a group of four settlers and challenge this abomination to combat. He seems to be pretty tough, but with one of him and five of you, I think you’ll have a chance at beating him. Meipo gathered up four settlers and led them to the abomination. There was another group ahead of them, trying to fight the abomination. His name was Gory, and he wasn’t fighting back. Meipo decided to talk to Gory, and learned that he really does want to help out on the farm. He also enjoys standing in the warm sun. Meipo made a friend! She convinced the farmers to stop fighting Gory. Thurman Grant: We can handle things from here. I thank you for your help, Meipo. I assume that when we next meet, it will be in battle. Take care of yourself until then. We’ll get all the help we can get. Meipo earned the A Temporary Peace Achievement. Thurman Grant gave Training Leggings to Meipo. It is a transmog item. Meipo went to the Menders Stead and met Field Agent Kaartish. Field Agent Kaartish: Welcome, mage. As you can see, our camp is a joint expedition between Argent Crusade members and the Cenarion Circle druids, but we welcome all who wish to help heal the land. Miepo met Durnt Brightfalcon. She waved hello, but he didn’t wave back. Durnt Brightfalcon: Word is in from Andorhal, Meipo. The battle has resumed. It has become somewhat well-known among the Alliance forces that you’re a hero of the first battle of Andorhal. Thassarian has requested your presence immediately. Meipo was asked to report to Thassarian at Andorhal in Western Plaguelands. She started going there, but as usual, got a bit distracted on the way. She picked up a Plague Lurker Sample for…. someone. She forgot who. Meipo hit Level 52 while mining for shiny things. Meipo gave all the plague samples she found to Field Agent Kaartish. He was very happy to have them. Field Agent Kaartish: I will need some time to study these samples, Meipo. I will speak to you again when I have completed my analysis. Field Agent Kaartish: We are not the only Argent Crusaders here in the plaguelands. Our headquarters, Hearthglen, lies to the north. Even nearer to the north is a small lumber mill which we also control. Nathaniel Dumah is my main contact at the lumber mill. I encourage you to speak with him, should you find yourself in that part of the woods. Meipo intended to go to the Northridge Lumber Camp. But first… she decided to make more Spiced Bread Stuffing for Caitrin Ironkettle. In doing so, Meipo earned the 50 Daily Quests CompletedAchievement. Meipo made a friend! A Dun Morogh Chicken came up to sit by her campfire while Meipo was cooking. Got My Mind On My Money: Loot 100 Gold. Meipo watched a Dwarf fight a bunch of Goblin Brawlers at Booty Bay. Meipo stopped by the Ruins of Lordaeron to eat some Sweet Potatoes. The Forsaken didn’t seem to mind sharing with her. When Meipo finally made it to the Northridge Lumber Camp, she saw huge spiders everywhere! She decided to use teleport to “nope” on out of there. Meipo hit Level 53 while trying to reach the Pie Chair at Stillwater Pond. These elves were not as friendly as the Forsaken were! Meipo is wearing some combination of the holiday apparel. She also has on a Stormwind Tabard, gloves, and shoulders that are not part of the outfit. The Fine Pilgrim’s Hat is a transmog item. Meipo got lost and ended up in Thousand Needles, where she fought Needlespine Cobras. Meipo ended up in New Thalanaar fighting in a battle that she didn’t understand. These elves wanted help – so she threw fire at their enemies. Meipo fought Snarler in the Lower Wilds. She wasn’t intending to, but he jumped out and snarled at her. Snarler dropped a belt called Captain’s Waistguard of the Quickblade. It was not something Meipo could use. Archaeology involves digging – and that sounded like fun to Meipo. She went to the Ruins of Eldre’thar to see what she could find. Unfortunately, there were angry ghost elves there who tried to attack her. Meipo deployed an ice shield to protect herself. Eventually, she learned how to stay a safe distance away from them, and was able to dig up some interesting artifacts. Meipo learned that the Undead Ravagers in Desolace didn’t like fire! Professional Journeyman: Obtain 150 skill points in a “Classic” category of a profession. Meipo went to Shok’Thokar and fought some Doomguard Invaders. A fishing quest sent Meipo to go find Baby Octopus. They are as big as her! Meipo met Officer Jankie in Tehtris Aran. She stopped Meipo and directed her to Nijel’s Point. It wasn’t a choice. Officer Jankie: Halt! On behalf of the Nijel’s Point Guard, I am under orders to send all able-bodied allies to report directly to Corporal Melkins. I am not authorized to offer any other information. What I can offer is transportation. You are free to use my mount. It will deliver you directly. Dismissed. Shortly after arriving at Nijel’s Point, Meipo met Corporal Melkins. Corporal Melkins: Pentigast! Bring the new gnome up to speed, would you? Captain Pentigast: Yes, yes. Welcome to Desolace, gnome. Sorry we had to be so insistent, but we’re a small outpost, and there are big problems in this region – most of them quite urgent. Bottom line: We need all the help we can muster. To start with, our friend Vahlarriel over there has been getting pretty antsy, insisting that we send a contingent to visit the ruins in the east. Why don’t you go introduce yourself… Vahlarriel Demonslayer was nice to Meipo. “A pleasure to meet you, mage,” he said. Vahlarriel Demonslayer: Simply intolerable! Satyrs of all things, desecrating our sacred lands… Their days are numbered, gnome. I can assure you of that. As soon as we have the numbers, I shall lead a charge that will rid this land of the wicked creatures. For now, though, perhaps you could put my mind at ease? Travel just east of here to Sargeron and scour the ruins. Find the relics of Elune and ensure that they are in good condition. I’ll pay you well for the favor. Meipo hit Level 55 outside of Nijel’s Point. Meipo earned the Thistlefur Cap from finishing a quest. She tried it on, but couldn’t decide if it was better than what she was using before. So, she switched back and forth between them for a while. The Thistlefur Cap is a transmog item. The quests that Meipo was sent to do in Sargeron are a bit strange. First, she visited the Cup of Elune, which wants her to bring it 8 melons. The quest is called: “Nothing a Couple of Melons Won’t Fix.” The markings on the ruins here make one thing clear: There is something special about the old fountain in the Sanctuary of Elune. It would seem that one could expect special power from washing their face in the fountain. First, of course, there would need to be something in the ancient fountain with which to wash. Pondering this problem, you spot a melonfruit at the base of a nearby tree… After filling it with liquid from the melons, you proceed to wash your eyes from the ancient font. Upon opening your eyes, you are able to see the spirits of ancient elves, still faithfully carrying out rituals to their goddess. Spirits of ancient elves appeared. Three were close by the Cup of Elune, and more were wandering around the Sanctuary of Elune. There were spirits of ancient elves around Elune’s Brazier, too. What did the Brazier of Elune want Meipo to get for it? Ten pounds of flesh. Yes, really. According to ancient legend, this ancient brazier was placed her for the performing of sacrifices. From what little you remember of the history, a blessing is bestowed upon the being who places the flesh of Elune’s enemies on the brazier’s burning embers. Looking around, you determine that the satyrs who now possess this reagion would likely qualify. Meipo had no trouble finding Saytrs to fight. Gathering up a total of 10 pounds of Satyr Flesh was kind of icky. One of the Satyr’s dropped Hawkeye’s Cloak. It is a transmog item. Eventually, Meipo was able to gather up the Ten Pound of Flesh that Elune’s Brazier wanted. The divine brazier graciously endows you with a blessing. You feel a deep connection to the distant past having partaken of the ancient blessing granted by this relic. You determine to make as much as you can of this divine gift. Meipo found a statue of Elune’s Handmaiden. She had a quest called: To the Hilt! The handmaiden of Elune! It’s even more glorious than the stories tell. The legends surrounding this relic come to your mind as you draw near it. In ancient time, after battle, the enemies’ weapons were to be cast upon the basin in exchange for a divine gift of some sort. As you ponder this ritual, the glint of steel catches your eye from a nearby weapon rack… After collecting 20 Saytr Sabers from the weapon racks and various Satyrs in the region, Meipo brought them to the statue of Elune’s Handmaiden. With the ritual completed, you are awarded a divine gift. You can’t help but to feel a great sense of honor as you receive one of Elune’s boons. Sandals of Ritual are a transmog item. Meipo received Gloves of Nurture from Vahlarriel Demonslayer. The gloves are a transmog item. Meipo hit Level 56 at Firestone Point. Meipo earned the Pilgrim’s Peril Achievement at Thunder Bluff, will sitting in the Turkey Chair. Pilgrim’s Peril: While wearing either a Pilgrim’s Dress, Robe, or Attire, take a seat at each enemy capital’s Bountiful Table. Orgrimmar, Silvermoon City, Thunder Bluff, Undercity Meipo earned Pilgrim’s Paunch in Exodar while sitting in the Turkey Chair. Pilgrim’s Paunch: Acquire the Spirit of Sharing from a complete Bountiful Table feast at every Alliance capital. Darnassus, The Exodar, Ironforge, Stormwind Meipo earned the “FOOD FIGHT” Achievement outside of Stormwind. “FOOD FIGHT”: Bounce food off a fellow feaster’s head at a Bountiful Table. Meipo earned the Turkey Lurkey Achievement outside of Orgrimmar. There is a story that goes with that screenshot. Meipo was standing outside of Orgrimmar, hoping to turn a Goblin Rogue into a turkey so she could earn the Achievement. She started talking to a fellow Gnome, who just so happened to have a friend who was a Goblin Rogue. The Gnome convinced the Goblin to come by, and the Goblin agreed to be temporarily be turned into a Turkey. Turkey Lurkey: Blast those dirty sneaking Rogues with your Turkey Shooter! Blood Elf Rogue, Dwarf Rogue, Gnome Rogue, Goblin Rogue, Human Rogue, Night Elf Rogue, Orc Rogue, Troll Rogue, Undead Rogue, Worgen Rogue Meipo is riding the Squeakers, the Trickster mount. Together, they look like they fell out of a children’s story or a fairy tale. Meipo earned the Dangerous Love Achievement. Dangerous Love: Assist the Steamwheedle Cartel in stopping the sinister Crown Chemical Co. plot. Meipo hit Level 57 right after completing The Crown Chemical Co. dungeon. Meipo earned the Tough Love Achievement. Tough Love: Defeat the Crown Chemical Co. apothecaries in Shadowfang Keep. Meipo earned the Be Mine! Achievement by eating lots of candy hearts. Be Mine!: Eat the right “Bag of Candies” heart candies listed below: Be Mine!, I’ll follow you all around Azeroth, All yours, I’m all yours, Hot Lips, You’re Mine!, You’re the best!, I LOVE YOU! Meipo earned the Sweet Tooth Achievement by eating a lot of chocolate. Sweet Tooth: Sample the Love is in the Air candies listed below: Buttermilk Delight, Dark Desire, Sweet Surprise, Very Berry Cream It Might Just Save Your Life: Unleash the power of love contained within a holiday necklace. Meipo discovered Ban’ethil Hollow and hit Level 58. Meipo fought Agal (and one of Agal’s friends). Agal dropped the Imbued Pioneer Cloak. It is a transmog item. Meipo helped Oben Rageclaw in the Ban’ethil Barrow Den. Oben Rageclaw: I am finally free of the control of the Gnarlpine. Thank you, Meipo. My spirit may now rest peacefully forever in the Emerald Dream. Perhaps one day we may meet again, young mage. But for now, please accept this reward as a symbol of my gratitude. The Sleeping Robes are a transmog item. Meipo hit Level 59 after she completed The Crown Chemical Co. Dungeon. Meipo fought Ursal the Mauler. She also fought Lord Melenas. His head is a quest item. Meipo brought the quest item to Tallonkai Swiftroot. He gave her boots called Viny Wrappings. I don’t know if they are a transmog item. Meipo earned the Nation of Adoration Achievement. Nation of Adoration: Complete the Lovely Charm Bracelet daily quest for each Alliance capital. A Gift for the High Priestess of Elune, A Gift for the Prophet, A Gift for the Lord of Ironforge, A Gift for the King of Stormwind. Meipo hit Level 60 after she completed The Crown Chemical Co. Dungeon. #Blapril2020 Meipo the Mage – To Level 60! is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Out of Spoons (Chronic Illness)A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempts to Destroy Obamacare – Part Four: April, May, JuneSeptember 22, 2020health insurance / Out of SpoonsImage by Omni Matryx from Pixabay This blog post, like the ones that preceded it, has the “receipts” about every bad thing the GOP and Trump tried to do to American’s health care. (It also includes the good things that Democrats – and occasionally some Republicans – did to protect our healthcare.) If you would like the full story, you may want to start with the blogs I’ve written about this topic so far. They include: A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempts to Destroy Obamacare – Part One A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempts to Destroy Obamacare – Part Two A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempts to Destroy Obamacare – Part Three A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempts to Destroy Obamacare – Part Three – Continued A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempts to Destroy Obamacare – Part Four 2020 marks the fourth year of the Donald Trump Presidency. His administration, and the Republicans in Congress, are still trying to destroy Obamacare. They are also going after reproductive health care, Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security Disability, the ability for LGBTQ people to receive health care, and the ability for undocumented children to be covered by Medicaid. The Guardian reported that President Trump was impeached on December 19, 2019, when the House of Representatives voted 230-197 to approve a first article of impeachment. April April 1, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “NARAL Pro-Choice America Responds to Indiana Governor Eric Holcomb Exploiting COVID-19 Crisis to Push Anti-Choice Agenda”. From the press release: Indiana Governor Eric Holcomb announced yesterday that he intends to block access to abortion care in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, prioritizing an extreme ideological agenda over medical expertise and science. He joins at least five other Republican anti-choice governors who have exploited the public health crisis to advance their agenda to gut reproductive freedom. Ilyse Hogue, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, said:“The radical right has been working for decades to end the legal right to abortion—no matter the cost—and now they are using COVID-19 to achieve that goal.“As we face this national emergency, we must centralize sound science and medical experts in guiding decision making and not allow the individuals driven by ideology to craft policy to meet their beliefs over public welfare. “The medical community is clear and unified: Abortion care is time-sensitive and essential healthcare. They should be allowed to continue their work based on medicine and not arbitrary policy. The health and well-being of all Americans are at risk. Allowing ideology to trump science in this moment imperils everyone and sets a terrifying precedent as we face this national crisis.”The American Medical Association has criticized officials for “exploiting this moment to ban or dramatically limit women’s reproductive health care,” noting that during “this critical moment and every moment, physicians – not politicians – should be the ones deciding which procedures are urgent-emergent and need to be performed, and which ones can wait, in partnership with our patients.”Indiana already has some of the most extreme restrictions on abortion in the United States, including interrogating women about why they’re ending a pregnancy, forcing delays before a woman can receive abortion care, and subjecting women to mandatory biased counseling. At least 70% of Indiana women live in counties with no abortion clinic.Vice President Mike Pence, who is leading the federal COVID-19 response effort, has a history of prioritizing his own extreme personal beliefs over the health, safety, and well-being of Americans. As Governor of Indiana, Pence notoriously botched his handling of the state’s HIV crisis by failing to proactively implement public health measures at the urging of medical experts. April 2, 2020: Senator Cory Booker (Democrat -New Jersey) posted a press release titled: “Booker Blasts Trump Decision to Reject Healthcare Special Enrollment Period, Urges Congress to Pass His Legislation to Reopen HealthCare.gov”. From the press release: U.S. Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) today blasted President Trump for his decision against reopening HealthCare.gov so that individuals currently without health insurance could sign up for coverage. Booker was the first lawmaker to propose leglislation that would create such an enrollment period so that millions of individuals impacted by COVID-19 could access coverage.“This decision is the height of callousness and irresponsibility,” Booker said. “We’re in the midst of a global pandemic and people need health care coverage, yet the President is denying people access to it. The Affordable Care Act was created for this very purpose – so individuals without health insurance could get affordable, quality coverage. At a time when our health care system is already under enormous strain, it makes no sense to willingly allow even one more individual to go without coverage.”“The President should reverse course immediately and allow for a special enrollment period. Failing that, Congress should quickly pass my Carefor COVID-19 Act, which would immediately create a special enrollment period so that uninsured individuals can get covered.”Booker introduced the Care for COVID-19 Act in early March. In addition to creating a special enrollment period for individuals impacted by Coronavirus, the bill would also require health insurance plans to cover services related to the virus, like testing and prevention, with no cost-sharing to patients. This measure, which Booker was also the first to propose, was incorporated in the two Coronavirus relief packages recently passed by the Senate. Millions of Americans will no longer face a cost barrier for Coronavirus testing or preventative services. April 2, 2020: Human Rights Campaign posted news titled: “HRC Responds to Trump Refusing to Reopen Obamacare Exchanges”. From the news: Over 20 million Americans and almost one-in-five LGBTQ people lack health coverage.Today, HRC responded to the Trump administration’s decision against reopening the Affordable Care Act’s Healthcare.gov marketplaces to new customers despite millions of Americans living without health insurance during a global pandemic.“Our country is in crisis. Americans are finding themselves jobless, lying awake at night trying to find ways to make ends meet and put food on their tables. The last thing people should worry about in a pandemic is access to health care,” said HRC President Alphonso David. “Over 20 million Americans and almost one-in-five LGBTQ people lack health coverage. By not reopening the ACA exchange, Trump is making the LGBTQ community, and every marginalized community across this nation, more vulnerable to the virus. Yet again, Trump has failed us when we needed presidential leadership most. Americans need the exchange reopened, President Trump must act now.”… April 3, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorneys General Becerra and Stein Send Letter Urging Trump Administration to Instate Special Enrollment Period on Healthcare.gov to Help Millions of Consumers with COVID-19”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra and North Carolina Attorney General Josh Stein today led a coalition of 22 attorneys general in sending a letter to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and its Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), urging them to reconsider their shortsighted decision to deny a special enrollment period on HealthCare.Gov during the current worldwide pandemic. In the letter, the attorneys general argue that the federal government should take action to make it possible for Americans across the country – who are facing uncertainty as a result of COVID-19 – to obtain the healthcare coverage they need during this critical time.“As Americans work together to ‘flatten the curve’ of this global health crisis, our leaders must do all they can to support our communities through this period of physical and economic uncertainty,” said Attorney General Becerra. “At a time when millions have lost their jobs as a result of the pandemic, denying people the opportunity to gain healthcare coverage through HealthCare.Gov is not only irresponsible, it’s immoral. We’re calling on the Trump Administration to do their part so that people across our nation can access affordable, life-saving healthcare treatment. No one should have to choose between taking care of their health and going bankrupt.” In the letter, the attorneys general point out that as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, millions of individuals have lost their jobs—and with their jobs, their ability to pay for healthcare. Many people may be prevented from obtaining treatment because they lack healthcare coverage, or face financial ruin if they seek care. People working on the front lines in grocery stores, food service, transportation, and sanitation are suffering the brunt of the pandemic as they often lack health insurance and work jobs that do not provide sick leave. Because they are uninsured, they are less likely to have a regular place to obtain healthcare and are more likely to delay obtaining care due to fears of the cost. The Trump Administration has long touted choice and “informed healthcare decisions” as the bedrock of its healthcare policies, but now refuses to give Americans the option of obtaining comprehensive healthcare coverage to combat this unprecedented healthcare care crisis.The attorneys general also highlight that a national solution to this problem requires federal action. While some states run their own health insurance exchanges and may independently extend enrollment – like Covered California did on March 20, 2020 – 38 states, including North Carolina, rely on HealthCare.Gov to run their exchanges. The federal government has the legal ability to call for a special enrollment period, and must take decisive action so that people in those 38 states can obtain the healthcare they need during this critical time. Joining Attorneys General Becerra and Stein in sending the letter are the attorneys general of Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and the District of Columbia. A copy of the letter is available here. April 3, 2020: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) posted a press release titled: “ACOG Leads Coalition of Nearly 1 Million Medical Professionals to Oppose Texas Restrictions on Abortion During the COVID-19 Pandemic”. From the press release: The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) led a coalition of major medical organizations representing nearly 1,000,000 health care professionals in filing an amicus brief telling the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit that the COVID-19 pandemic should not be used as a pretext to effectively ban abortion in Texas.The right to terminate a pregnancy is a constitutionally protected legal right. However, a March 22, 2020, Order from Texas Governor Greg Abbott concerning procedures to be delayed or cancelled during the COVID-19 pandemic and its interpretation by the Texas Attorney General would impose criminal and other penalties on medical professionals for providing such care. “For the first time since 1973, abortion is effectively illegal in Texas,” the brief states. The brief explains that abortion is an essential, time-sensitive, and safe component of health care and that the there is no medical justification for this move.The 20 major medical organizations, which include the American Medical Association and organizations of front-line medical professionals such as the American Academy of Family Physicians, the American College of Physicians, the American College of Nurse-Midwives, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Osteopathic Association, and the American Academy of Nursing, explain that abortion is a time-sensitive procedure that should not be delayed or restricted. The brief explains that permitting abortion care – which is essential, time-sensitive health care – will not substantially increase the burdens hospitals face as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. Instead, forcing women to carry pregnancies to term or to resort to illegal methods of abortion will increase reliance on the already strained health care system. Texas’s approach is contrary to the shared position of ACOG, the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology, the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, and other physician organizations, which categorizes abortion as a time-sensitive, essential procedure. The AMA holds a similar position, as do other professional societies.The brief adds: “The Governor’s decision to effectively ban abortion in Texas and to criminalize physicians and medical professionals for providing necessary abortion care during the COVID-19 pandemic lacks a valid medical justification. If allowed to remain in effect, the Governor’s order will render abortion inaccessible in the state and severely harm women.”The brief explains that there is no evidence that delaying abortion during the pandemic would mitigate personal protective equipment (PPE) shortages or promote public health and safety. Indeed, forcing women to carry pregnancies to term or to resort to illegal abortion is likely to increase use of PPE.ACOG President Ted L. Anderson, MD, PhD, FACOG, FACS, stated, “In the face of this pandemic, physicians and clinicians across specialties on the frontlines are putting themselves at risk in order to meet our professional, ethical, and moral obligation to care for our patients. Imposing criminal penalties on health care professionals during this time will leave them unable to provide patients with needed care. The consequences of being unable to obtain an abortion profoundly impact a person’s life, health, and well-being.”Skye Perryman, JD, Chief Legal Officer for ACOG, added, “We are disappointed to see that Texas is ignoring the voice of the medical community and placing politics above the advice of physicians. Using the COVID-19 pandemic to push political agendas is unconscionable and is harmful the health of women.” Read the full brief. April 3, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Leads Fight to Stop Texas from Blocking Abortions During Coronavirus Pandemic.” From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James today continued her leadership of the nation’s fight to ensure women’s reproductive health care is not stifled or infringed upon in any way during the coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) public health crisis. Attorney General Games is leading a coalition of 19 attorneys general in filing an amicus brief – supporting the plaintiffs in Planned Parenthood v. Abbott, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit – opposing the State of Texas’s directive banning nearly all abortion services in the state, using the coronavirus as an excuse.“Neither Texas nor any other state has the right to use the coronavirus as an excuse to restrict a woman’s constitutional right to access an abortion,” said Attorney General James. “This is clearly an effort to circumvent the Supreme Court’s decision nearly 50 years ago guaranteeing women control over their bodies. Instead of trying to strip women of their choices, Texas should be joining us to increase access to medical abortions as we battle COVID-19. Our coalition will not hesitate to take legal action against any assault on women’s choices, women’s freedoms, and women’s bodies.”On Sunday, March 22, Texas Governor Greg Abbott issued Executive Order GA-09, “postpon all surgeries and procedures that are not immediately medically necessary” in the State of Texas for at least 30 days. The next day, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced that the executive order banned abortion services unless the life of the mother was in jeopardy. The executive order also states that any health care worker caught defying the order could be fined up to $1,000 and/or imprisoned in jail for up to 180 days.Last Wednesday, a lawsuit was filed by the Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, and the Lawyering Project in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, which called on the courts to immediately issue a temporary restraining order blocking the ban.Earlier this week, District Court Judge Lee Yeakel issued a temporary restraining order that stopped the abortion ban from taking effect, stating, “Regarding a woman’s right to a pre-fetal-viability abortion, the Supreme Court has spoken clearly. There can be no outright ban on such a procedure.” Judge Yeakel continued, “This court will not speculate on whether the Supreme Court included a silent ‘except-in-a-national-emergency clause’ in its previous writings on the issue. Only the Supreme Court may restrict the breadth of its rulings.”The very next day — following a request by Texas — the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit halted the district court’s decision, effectively reinstituting the ban on abortions in Texas. According to news reports, women in Texas have already been turned away when seeking an abortion because of the directive.Today, Attorney General James is following through on last week’s pledge to lead a coalition of attorneys general in opposing Texas’ ban and filing an amicus brief in support of the plaintiff organizations. In the amicus brief, Attorney General James and the coalition argue that reproductive health care is an “essential medical service” that should be available to women, despite the ongoing public health emergency and that Texas’s “prohibition blocks the exercise of a woman’s constitutional right to access abortion.” Although Texas claims that its abortion ban is needed to conserve limited personal protective equipment (PPE), “most pre-viability abortions do not use PPE or hospital services, and thus restricting such abortions does not appreciably preserve those resources.”The coalition goes on to argue, at a time when the entire U.S. population is being asked to limit travel, any restriction on abortions could force “women to seek those services in other States, thereby increasing the potential for transmission of COVID-19 and for burdening petitioners’ hospital facilities and PPE supplies.” Further, the coalition contends that residents of New York and other amici states may currently be in Texas without a way to return home, but they still have a right to time-sensitive reproductive care. Additionally, the coalition highlights that as New York nears the peak of projected COVID-19 hospitalizations, health care professionals from other states are being asked to travel to New York to assist, on the understanding that New York health care professionals will eventually travel to other states in an effort to assist when other states’ COVID-19 infection rates rise. These New York physicians should be able to provide residents in Texas with the same health care options they would receive anywhere else.The coalition concludes by arguing that “a public health crisis should not be used as an excuse to deny women ‘an ability to control their reproductive lives,’” and that any ban on abortion — even for a matter of weeks — can end up restricting a woman’s “constitutional right to choose to terminate a pregnancy prior to fetal viability,” especially in states, like Texas, which already have limited timetables in place for electing to have an abortion.Instead of limiting women’s access to abortions, Texas should be joining Attorney General James’ call to increase access to telehealth medicine and the medical-abortion pill so that woman who choose to have an abortion don’t have to fear going out and contracting COVID-19 during this public health crisis. Earlier this week, Attorney General James sent a letter to both the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration requesting that the Trump Administration waive or utilize its discretion not to enforce its Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) designation, which dictates and subsequently impedes women’s access to the medical-abortion prescription drug known as Mifepristone. Attorney General James called on the Trump Administration to ensure that women across the country can more easily access this critical health care service while the pandemic leaves many women unable to seek in-person care.The States of Alabama, Iowa, Mississippi, and Ohio have also implemented similar orders banning abortions during the COVID-19 pandemic, limiting their residents’ constitutional rights to access an abortion. Attorney General James plans to lead coalitions opposing these bans as well… April 3, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Joins Multistate Amicus Brief Challenging Texas’ Restrictions on Abortion During COVID-19″. From the press release”: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra today joined a multistate coalition of 19 attorneys general in filing an amicus brief in the Fifth Circuit Court supporting Planned Parenthood health centers (Planned Parenthood for Choice, Planned Parenthood of Greater Texas, Planned Parenthood of South Texas), Whole Woman’s Health, and other providers in their case challenging a Texas executive order that declares abortion non-essential medical care during the COVID-19 response. The order would ban all abortion services in the state. In the brief, the attorneys general argue that abortion care is an essential healthcare service and urge the Court to enjoin the executive order, so that women can access needed, time-sensitive healthcare, including safe and legal abortion. “During the COVID-19 pandemic, we should be making it easier for women to safely access time-sensitive, essential healthcare, not using a crisis as an excuse to pander to antichoice ideology,” said Attorney General Becerra. “We’re standing with attorneys general across the country to defend women’s right to reproductive healthcare, including safe and legal abortion.” On March 22, 2020, Texas Governor Greg Abbott issued Executive Order GA 09, “relating to hospital capacity during the COVID-19 disaster.” The Executive Order prohibits all surgeries and procedures that are not immediately medically necessary to correct a serious medical condition or to preserve a patient’s life. In response to this Executive Order, on March 23, 2020, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton issued a press release singling out abortion providers and suggesting that non-emergency abortions would violate the Executive Order and could be subject to criminal penalties, including jail time. This also precludes medication abortion which only involves taking medication and is neither a “surgery” nor a “procedure.” In essence, Attorney General Paxton’s press release operates as a near-complete ban on abortion in Texas during the COVID-19 public health emergency. As a result of the Attorney General’s statements, plaintiff providers have cancelled scheduled appointments and have stopped providing all abortion care. This means that the women of Texas do not have the freedom to make a very personal decision in consultation with their medical providers. In the amicus brief the attorneys general argue that the executive order: Harms patients’ physical, emotional, and financial wellbeing, and the wellbeing of their families;Denies Texas women their fundamental right to determine when and whether to have a child or to add to their existing families; and Will force some women to travel to other states in search of services, increasing the potential for transmission of COVID-19 and the burden on state hospitals and healthcare workers. In filing the brief, Attorney General Becerra joins the attorneys general of New York, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and the District Of Columbia. A copy of the brief is available here. April 3, 2020: Politico posted an article titled: “How Trump surprised his own team by ruling out Obamacare”. It was written by Adam Cancryn, Nancy Cook, and Susannah Luthi. From the article: As the coronavirus ran rampant and record jobless numbers piled up, the nation’s health insurers last week readied for a major announcement: The Trump administration was reopening Obamacare enrollment to millions of newly uninsured Americans.It was an announcement that never came.The White House instead rejected the prospect of allowing new sign-ups across the 38 Affordable Care Act marketplaces it controls — a decision that shocked the health care industry, triggered widespread criticism and prompted a scramble within the administration to find a new way to care for the growing population left exposed to the pandemic.It’s also one that allowed Trump to sidestep an awkward reckoning with the Affordable Care Act, which he’s long vowed to kill, and the health care program bearing the name of his Democratic predecessor.The president opposed reopening the Obamacare marketplaces when presented with the option, one person familiar with the decision said — prompting the creation of an initiative that federal officials are now rushing to construct……On Friday, Trump touted his administration’s plan to cover uninsured patients’ coronavirus treatments by paying hospitals for their costs, on the condition that providers also not stick those people with separate charges……That declaration surprised even some officials in the Health and Human Services Department, who believed the concept was still under consideration. And amid a crush of criticism from Democrats led by 2020 presidential frontrunner Joe Biden, it worried officials who viewed the verdict as an unforced error in the middle of a historic pandemic……Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar on Friday insisted that paying providers directly for coronavirus treatment represented a faster and more targeted solution.The uninsured will be able to seek treatment immediately, without worrying about first purchasing insurance coverage, Azar said. And hospitals will be reimbursed swiftly for their expenses, on the additional condition that they not stick their patients with surprise bills……Yet the announcement comes with fresh questions about how smoothly the administration can run the payment process in the middle of an all-consuming crisis, how much of the $100 billion fund already earmarked for hospitals it will consume and how expansive the coverage for the uninsured will be.If Trump had chosen instead to reopen the HealthCare.gov website — as 11 largely blue states that control their own markets have already done — people without insurance could buy more comprehensive policies that not only would cover coronavirus treatments but any follow-up treatment, mental-health care, and future check-ups.Trump, however, has long opposed Obamacare, pledging on the campaign trail to eliminate it and making the law’s repeal and replacement a top priority of his presidency. That aspiration ended in failure in 2017, though the administration has successfully rolled back a central requirement that all Americans purchase health insurance.The White House has since sought to limit Obamacare’s reach, while backing a lawsuit by GOP-led states to wipe out the law altogether — a position it’s continued to hold as coronavirus cases mount……The White House decision also caught the hospital industry off guard, frustrating executives who spent the past week awaiting guidance for how strained front-line facilities could access the new funding… April 3, 2020: California Governor Gavin Newsom posted a press release titled: “Governor Newsom Issues Executive Order to Expand Telehealth Services”. From the press release: Governor Gavin Newsom today signed an executive order to expand protections to medical providers as they amplify the use of video chats and similar applications to provide routine and non-emergency medical appointments in an effort to minimize patient exposure to COVID-19.The order relaxes certain state privacy and security laws for medical providers, so they can provide telehealth services without the risk of being penalized. This action is similar to the federal HHS Office for Civil Rights waiver issued on March 17, 2020 regarding federal privacy and security laws.“This order provides flexibility to our medical and health providers so that they are able to provide continuity of health services to people across the state, and will allow providers to assess a greater number of patients while limiting the risk of exposure and infection of other persons from in-person consultations,” said Governor Newsom.Governor Newsom continues to encourage people to practice safe physical distancing and to comply with stay-at-home orders to bend the COVID-19 curve. A copy of the Governor’s executive order can be found here, and the text of the order can be found here. April 4, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “Court Blocks Oklahoma’s COVID-19 Abortion Ban”. From the press release: Today a federal district judge in Oklahoma granted a temporary restraining order at the request of the Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America and Dechert LLP, allowing providers to continue time-sensitive, essential abortion care in spite of Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt’s order requiring all elective surgeries and minor medical procedures be postponed. He singled out abortion care in a press release, claiming the order prohibited abortions in the state. Today’s ruling allows medication abortions to resume in the state, along with abortion procedures for patients who would be pushed beyond the gestation limit for care.In his decision, federal district Judge Charles Goodwin wrote that the state of Oklahoma, “has acted in an ‘unreasonable,’ ‘arbitrary,’ and ‘oppressive’ way—and imposed an ‘undue burden’ on abortion access—in imposing requirements that effectively deny a right of access to abortion.” Orders like these have forced some patients to travel hundreds of miles in a pandemic just to access basic and essential health care. “The court has stopped Governor Stitt from exploiting this devastating pandemic as a weapon in his battle to ban abortion,” said Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights. “Abortion is time-sensitive, essential healthcare. Women in Oklahoma are again able, for the time being, to access abortion care in their state at a time when travel is even more challenging.”……The Center for Reproductive Rights is challenging a host of other abortion restrictions in Oklahoma, including: a ban on the use of telemedicine to provide medication abortion care; a law that forces patients to delay their abortion care for at least 72 hours after receiving certain state-mandated information; a “physician-only” law that bans qualified medical professionals from providing medication abortion care; a ban on the standard method of abortion after approximately 14 weeks of pregnancy; and a law requiring doctors to tell patients that some abortions can be “reversed”—a patently false statement. This lawsuit was filed by T.J. Tu with the Center for Reproductive Rights, along with Planned Parenthood Federation of America, pro-bono counsel Dechert LLP, and local counsel Blake Patton of Walding & Patton PLLC. Plaintiffs in the case are Trust Women—an abortion provider with clinics in Oklahoma and Kansas—Dr. Larry Burns, and Comprehensive Health of Planned Parenthood Great Plains—which provides abortion services in Oklahoma and Kansas. The decision is available here. April 6, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “Court Blocks Oklahoma’s COVID-19 Abortion Ban”. From the press release: Today a federal district judge in Oklahoma granted a temporary restraining order at the request of the Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America and Dechert LLP, allowing providers to continue time-sensitive, essential abortion care in spite of Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt’s order requiring all elective surgeries and minor medical procedures be postponed. He singled out abortion care in a press release, claiming the order prohibited abortions in the state. Today’s ruling allows medication abortions to resume in the state, along with abortion procedures for patients who would be pushed beyond the gestation limit for care.In his decision, federal district Judge Charles Goodwin wrote that the state of Oklahoma, “has acted in an ‘unreasonable,’ ‘arbitrary,’ and ‘oppressive’ way—and imposed an ‘undue burden’ on abortion access—in imposing requirements that effectively deny a right of access to abortion.” Orders like these have forced some patients to travel hundreds of miles in a pandemic just to access basic and essential health care. “The court has stopped Governor Stitt from exploiting this devastating pandemic as a weapon in his battle to ban abortion,” said Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights. “Abortion is time-sensitive, essential healthcare. Women in Oklahoma are again able, for the time being, to access abortion care in their state at a time when travel is even more challenging.”“It’s a huge relief that we can start seeing patients again, at least for now,” said Julie Burkhart, founder and CEO of Trust Women. “We hope the court will keep the ban blocked so our patients aren’t forced to travel to other states to find abortion care at a time when travel is risky and discouraged.”“Though this is a relief for patients, they should have never had to wait for a judge to rule before accessing the time-sensitive care they needed. Gov. Stitt is wasting valuable time and resources using the COVID-19 pandemic to score political points,” said Alexis McGill Johnson, acting president and CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America. “To politicians and anti-abortion groups playing political games amid a pandemic, let this be a lesson to you that we won’t allow you to put our patients and the community at risk.” “Planned Parenthood is committed to ensuring that every person is able to get the essential health care they need,” McGill Johnson continued. “But the same cannot be said for Gov. Stitt. Planned Parenthood will work day by day, week by week to safeguard the ability of patients and the community to access essential health care, no matter what.”“Today’s ruling is important because our patients need and deserve access to abortion care,” said Brandon Hill, Ph.D., president and CEO of Comprehensive Health of Planned Parenthood Great Plains. “Abortion is an essential and time-sensitive medical procedure that should not be caught in the crosshairs of poltical agendas—especially during this public health crisis. Access to health care is a basic human right, and every person deserves care that gives them control over their own bodies, lives, and futures. Planned Parenthood Great Plains will always be there for our patients. We will do everything in our power to ensure access for patients who need sexual and reproductive health care, including access to abortion.”Oklahoma is not the first state to attempt to ban abortion during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the ACLU, and other allies have also filed lawsuits in Alabama, Iowa, Ohio, and Texas. Temporary restraining orders were also secured in Ohio, Alabama, and Texas. However, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals stayed the temporary restraining order in Texas on March 31.Leading medical organizations like the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American Medical Association (AMA) have opposed these attempts to restrict abortion during the pandemic. The AMA stated, “At this critical moment and every moment, physicians – not politicians – should be the ones deciding which procedures are urgent-emergent and need to be performed, and which ones can wait, in partnership with our patients.”The Center for Reproductive Rights is challenging a host of other abortion restrictions in Oklahoma, including: a ban on the use of telemedicine to provide medication abortion care; a law that forces patients to delay their abortion care for at least 72 hours after receiving certain state-mandated information; a “physician-only” law that bans qualified medical professionals from providing medication abortion care; a ban on the standard method of abortion after approximately 14 weeks of pregnancy; and a law requiring doctors to tell patients that some abortions can be “reversed”—a patently false statement. This lawsuit was filed by T.J. Tu with the Center for Reproductive Rights, along with Planned Parenthood Federation of America, pro-bono counsel Dechert LLP, and local counsel Blake Patton of Walding & Patton PLLC. Plaintiffs in the case are Trust Women—an abortion provider with clinics in Oklahoma and Kansas—Dr. Larry Burns, and Comprehensive Health of Planned Parenthood Great Plains—which provides abortion services in Oklahoma and Kansas. The decision is available here. April 6, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted an article titled: “Court Blocks Oklahoma’s COVID-19 Abortion Ban”. From the press release: Today a federal district judge in Oklahoma granted a temporary restraining order at the request of the Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America and Dechert LLP, allowing providers to continue time-sensitive, essential abortion care in spite of Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt’sorder requiring all elective surgeries and minor medical procedures be postponed. He singled out abortion care in a press release, claiming the order prohibited abortions in the state. Today’s ruling allows medication abortions to resume in the state, along with abortion procedures for patients who would be pushed beyond the gestation limit for care. In his decision, federal district Judge Charles Goodwin wrote that the state of Oklahoma, “has acted in an ‘unreasonable,’ ‘arbitrary,’ and ‘oppressive’ way—and imposed an ‘undue burden’ on abortion access—in imposing requirements that effectively deny a right of access to abortion.” Orders like these have forced some patients to travel hundreds of miles in a pandemic just to access basic and essential health care.Statement from Alexis McGill Johnson, acting president and CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America:“Though this is a relief for patients, they should have never had to wait for a judge to rule before accessing the time-sensitive care they needed. Gov. Stitt is wasting valuable time and resources using the COVID-19 pandemic to score political points. To politicians and anti-abortion groups playing political games amid a pandemic, let this be a lesson to you that we won’t allow you to put our patients and the community at risk.“Planned Parenthood is committed to ensuring that every person is able to get the essential health care they need. But the same cannot be said for Gov. Stitt. Planned Parenthood will work day by day, week by week to safeguard the ability of patients and the community to access essential health care, no matter what.”Statement from Brandon Hill, Ph.D., president and CEO of Comprehensive Health of Planned Parenthood Great Plains:“Today’s ruling is important because our patients need and deserve access to abortion care. Abortion is an essential and time-sensitive medical procedure that should not be caught in the crosshairs of political agendas—especially during this public health crisis. Access to health care is a basic human right, and every person deserves care that gives them control over their own bodies, lives, and futures. Planned Parenthood Great Plains will always be there for our patients. We will do everything in our power to ensure access for patients who need sexual and reproductive health care, including access to abortion.”Statement from Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights:“The court has stopped Governor Stitt from exploiting this devastating pandemic as a weapon in his battle to ban abortion. Abortion is time-sensitive, essential healthcare. Women in Oklahoma are again able, for the time being, to access abortion care in their state at a time when travel is even more challenging.”Statement from Julie Burkhart, founder and CEO of Trust Women:“It’s a huge relief that we can start seeing patients again, at least for now. We hope the court will keep the ban blocked so our patients aren’t forced to travel to other states to find abortion care at a time when travel is risky and discouraged.”Oklahoma is not the first state to attempt to ban abortion during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the ACLU, and other allies have also filed lawsuits in Alabama, Iowa, Ohio, and Texas. Temporary restraining orders were also secured in Ohio, Alabama, and Texas. However, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals stayed the temporary restraining order in Texas on March 31.Leading medical organizations like the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American Medical Association (AMA) have opposed these attempts to restrict abortion during the pandemic. The AMA stated, “At this critical moment and every moment, physicians – not politicians – should be the ones deciding which procedures are urgent-emergent and need to be performed, and which ones can wait, in partnership with our patients.”The Center for Reproductive Rights is challenging a host of other abortion restrictions in Oklahoma, including: a ban on the use of telemedicine to provide medication abortion care; a law that forces patients to delay their abortion care for at least 72 hours after receiving certain state-mandated information; a “physician-only” law that bans qualified medical professionals from providing medication abortion care; a ban on the standard method of abortion after approximately 14 weeks of pregnancy; and a law requiring doctors to tell patients that some abortions can be “reversed”—a patently false statement.This lawsuit was filed by T.J. Tu with the Center for Reproductive Rights, along with Planned Parenthood Federation of America, pro-bono counsel Dechert LLP, and local counsel Blake Patton of Walding & Patton PLLC. Plaintiffs in the case are Trust Women—an abortion provider with clinics in Oklahoma and Kansas—Dr. Larry Burns, and Comprehensive Health of Planned Parenthood Great Plains—which provides abortion services in Oklahoma and Kansas.The decision is available here. April 6, 2020: Centers for Reproductive Rights posted an article titled: “In the Face of COVID-19 Pandemic, Sexual and Reproductive Health Services Are Essential”. From the press release: As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to spread across the globe – pushing healthcare systems to their limits and compelling governments and healthcare institutions to make difficult and increasingly urgent decisions about how to deliver care while also curbing virus transmission – it is critical that responses to this crisis recognize that sexual and reproductive health services are essential, respecting people’s rights to make decisions about their bodily autonomy and integrity.The COVID-19 pandemic poses particular threats to poor and marginalized women who face greater difficultly in protecting themselves from transmission due to lack of information, resources, and access to quality health and social services. Women’s societal roles as caregivers, both within their own households and for others, places them at greater risk of infection and exacerbates the impact of COVID in their lives. The rights and health of these women must be central considerations as governments and other stakeholders formulate their response to this public health crisis.At the same time, anti-abortion groups and some governments are exploiting this situation to deny women and girls access to abortion services. These cynical attempts to rollback decades of progress in increasing women and girls’ access to safe, legal abortion care must be stopped. They otherwise threaten to increase the strain on already over-burdened health care systems by compelling individuals to seek out unsafe abortion services and increase the need for post-abortion care. As resources are rapidly being redeployed in response to COVID-19, we are calling on all governments to:Provide abortion as an essential health service. Abortion access is essential preserve the life and health of pregnant people.The attendant impacts of COVID-19 have the potential to severely undermine access to abortion services, as travel restrictions limit transportation options, the economic slowdown pushes many individuals into more precarious financial situations, and healthcare system capacity becomes increasingly limited. Abortion is always a time-sensitive procedure that should not be postponed. Measures that undermine access to abortion care will force people to seek out unsafe abortion services or services later in pregnancy, putting their lives and health at risk. Remove Legal and Administrative Barriers to Abortion Services, including to Medical Abortion. Governments and healthcare institutions must also remove all legal and administrative hurdles to access abortion services, including lifting criminal sanctions on abortion, and ensure all possibilities to guarantee safe access while minimizing contact with healthcare personnel at the frontlines of tackling the pandemic, including the adoption of technological advancements such as telemedicine and ensuring women and girls are not unnecessarily compelled to make multiple trips to healthcare facilities.Medication abortion is a safe, cost-effective means for enabling women and girls to end an unwanted pregnancy. Misoprostol, one of the active drugs for Medication abortion, is included in the WHO’s Model List of Essential Medicines—meaning that governments should register it as an essential medicine. Yet in many countries, Medication abortion remains unavailable. To increase access to safe abortion services while also reducing the strain on healthcare systems, medication abortion should be made widely available, including over the counter at pharmacies. When desired, women and girls should also be able to utilize telemedicine to consult with healthcare providers on medication abortion.Comply with the Minimum Initial Services Package for Reproductive Health, an international standard of care that should be implemented at the onset of every emergency, including public health emergencies. This priority set of lifesaving and essential services includes obstetric, prenatal, and postnatal care; contraceptive information and services, including emergency contraception; and post abortion care and post-rape care.Guarantee Access to Quality, Respectful Maternal Health Care. As resources are reallocated to respond to the pandemic, it remains critical that all people have access to quality maternal health care, free from discrimination, violence and coercion. Resource constraints and emergency situations are often precursors to human rights violations in maternal health settings, such as mistreatment and abuse of women during delivery and violations of the right to informed consent. Such violations disproportionately impact marginalized populations, such as racial and ethnic minorities, poor women and rural women. Governments must take steps to guarantee women and girls’ rights in these settings. Furthermore, as information continues to evolve about the risk of COVID-19 to pregnant women and newborn children, it is paramount that governments and health care providers continue ensuring women’s rights to make decisions about labor and childbirth to the extent feasible.Ensure Timely Access to Contraception, Including Emergency Contraception. Disrupted supply chains and reallocation of health resources during COVID-19 can have dire impacts on access to contraception. In addition to being essential for enabling people to make decisions about their reproductive autonomy, guaranteeing access to contraception can also mitigate near-term demands on the healthcare system that would result from unplanned pregnancy. States must ensure access to contraceptive information and services as an essential measure for enabling people to avoid unintended pregnancy, which can have significant impacts on their lives and health. April 6, 2020: Human Rights Campaign posted news titled: “An Update on Gender Affirming Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic”. From the news: The postponement of essential surgeries can take a dangerous mental health toll on patients, many of whom have waited years and gone through a long and painful process in order to finally get them scheduled.Post submitted by Carl G Streed Jr. MD, MPH (Research Lead), Jennifer Siegel MD (Medical Director), Center for Transgender Medicine & Surgery at Boston Medical CenterBy now, we all have seen the impact of COVID-19 on our daily lives. We have been quarantining and physically distancing from our loved ones, witnessed hospitals overwhelmed by the crisis and seen people lose their jobs and livelihoods. Some of us may have already experienced personal loss. We know LGBTQ communities are particularly vulnerable to both the economic and health impacts of the virus–because they are more likely to work in industries highly-impacted by the pandemic, such as service industries–and they may have more health risk factors that exacerbate the disease, like smoking.As part of their response to the pandemic, hospital systems across the country have postponed non-emergency surgeries and procedures in order to prioritize care for COVID-19 patients. This includes many gender-affirming procedures, which are now unfortunately on hold.We know that gender-affirming medical and surgical care are essential to the long-term well-being of our transgender and gender diverse patients, families and communities. Just because these procedures have currently been classified as non-urgent does not mean we consider them to be non-essential. We know that gender-affirming care is indeed lifesaving, but we also know that right now the immediate health of the public is paramount. While our transgender and gender-diverse patients understand this, we know that understanding reasons for postponing procedures does not make these postponements any less distressing.As health care professionals, we recognize that the postponement of these essential surgeries can take a dangerous mental health toll on our patients, many of whom have waited years and gone through a long–and often painful–process in order to finally get them scheduled. We want to be sure that our patients know that we are still here for them during this stressful and painful time. If you or a loved one has had gender-affirming care postponed due to COVID-19, you are not alone.Our Center for Transgender Medicine & Surgery at Boston Medical Center is still fielding phone calls, conducting telemedicine visits and managing hormone therapy. We do not know of any shortages of hormone therapy at this time, and we ask that patients do not “stock up” or “hoard” medications as that could potentially lead to a temporary shortage. We need to look out for each other and be sure that everyone is getting the care they can at this time — so please reach out to your trans siblings to let them know they are supported and loved… April 7, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Co-leads Letter Urging Trump Administration to Safeguard Americans’ Healthcare Coverage, Halt Implementation of Their Abortion Separate Payment Rule”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra and New York Attorney General Letitia James, leading a coalition of seven attorneys general, sent a letter urging the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to delay the implementation of its rule that unlawfully reinterprets Section 1303 of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Implementing the rule would limit healthcare coverage, including reproductive care, and endanger Americans’ health as the nation works to combat the COVID-19 pandemic. In the letter, the attorneys general argue that HHS should halt implementation of the rule to aid states’ response to COVID-19 and protect the healthcare coverage that Americans rely on. “The Trump Administration’s separate payment rule puts Americans’ healthcare coverage at risk, and burdens states and health plans at a time when we should be streamlining our response to the global COVID-19 crisis,” said Attorney General Becerra. “This burdensome rule is intended to limit access to women’s reproductive care, but it will foolishly endanger access to all healthcare when people need it most. The Trump Administration should do the right thing and protect Americans’ healthcare coverage during this unprecedented public health crisis.” Under California law, all health plans regulated by the state are required to offer abortion coverage as part of their basic healthcare services. On December 27, 2019, HHS issued a final rule requiring qualified health plans participating in the state exchanges like Covered California to separately bill for the portion of health insurance premiums attributable to abortion coverage. This would require consumers to make a separate payment of at least one dollar for these services. Failure to pay the separate bill puts individuals at risk of losing all of their healthcare coverage. HHS itself has conceded that requiring separate bills and separate payments will inevitably lead to confusion, putting more than 1.4 million enrollees in California alone at risk of losing coverage if they inadvertently fail to make full premium payments on time. The rule also burdens states with unnecessary administrative costs and harms consumers who may face higher insurance premiums as a result of increased costs to carriers. In the letter, the attorneys general argue that implementing the rule during this public health and economic crisis is irresponsible and harmful to people across the country. Over the past several weeks, the U.S. has experienced a significant increase in the need for aid, funding, and other support to help various states respond to the pandemic. Pressing ahead with implementation of this rule during the global health crisis would impose additional financial burdens on state agencies; require countless personnel hours, funds, and resources to come into compliance; and jeopardize the health of consumers more in need of health coverage than ever. Furthermore, HHS has recognized that implementing the rule will have significant economic consequences. According to HHS’s own estimates, the one-time costs to bring all affected health plans into compliance would include over 2.9 million hours of work and approximately $385 million for insurers across the nation. These costs would likely result in increased prices for consumers, who are already suffering from the economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. The attorneys general call on HHS to halt implementation of the rule to protect the health and economic security of consumers across the nation. In sending the letter, Attorney General Becerra joined the attorneys general of New York, Colorado, Maryland, Oregon, Vermont, and the District of Columbia. A copy of the letter is available here. April 7, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Planned Parenthood’s Clergy Advocacy Board: COVID-19 Response Must Preserve Access to Abortion, Reproductive Health Care”. From the press release: The Planned Parenthood Federation of America Clergy Advocacy Board today condemned efforts by some state and national leaders to use the COVID-19 response to halt abortions. This call from faith leaders to support access to reproductive health care follows the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals’ use of an extraordinary measure to allow Texas Gov. Greg Abbott to drastically restrict essential, time-sensitive abortion procedures. Planned Parenthood and our partners are fighting in court in Texas, Ohio, Oklahoma, and Alabama to protect access. Statement from The Rev. Marci Auld Glass, Planned Parenthood Federation of America Clergy Advocacy Board Chair and a Presbyterian minister in Boise, Idaho:“As a pastor who often accompanies members of my community through personal struggle, I know that individuals should always be assured the right to follow their consciences and make their own decisions about their health care, including abortion. Anxieties about how so many will provide and care for themselves and their families are already so high. In this moment of crisis, people of faith must stand together and demand that politicians stop using this pandemic to gamble with women’s health, lives, and well-being by denying them access to abortion care.”For more than two decades, the Clergy Advocacy Board has worked with Planned Parenthood at the national and state levels to further reproductive rights and freedom for all people, building on a history of faith leaders’ activism in support of reproductive health care. Its members, who are dedicated clergy and faith leaders from different denominations and communities throughout the U.S., lead a national effort to increase public awareness of the theological and moral basis for reproductive health.The full statement from the Clergy Advocacy Board is below.Statement of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America Clergy Advocacy Board:“The Clergy Advocacy Board calls upon people of faith to speak out in this moment of crisis and affirm that access to abortion care is a religious value. Every person in our country has the right to make decisions about their reproductive lives, informed by their own culture, faith tradition, conscience, and community values. Americans should not fear that politicians will take advantage of a pandemic to impose their own beliefs on others. We condemn all efforts to put the health and well-being of pregnant people at risk by delaying or denying access to abortion care.“As leaders in our communities, we know how critical it is that our neighbors and friends can receive the essential health care that they, in their hearts, know is right for them. Many of us serve as pastoral counselors and chaplains to families and individuals. People invite us into their lives during the most challenging moments and the hardest medical decisions. Our experience leads us to protect access to reproductive health care, especially during this national medical emergency. We care about community health and want to ensure that basic health care is available in our localities.“The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbates the vulnerabilities faced by a disturbing percentage of our population. So many are already struggling to make ends meet, to get the care they need, and to plan for their families and their futures. This is especially true for our black and brown neighbors, our refugee and immigrant neighbors, our unhoused neighbors, our LGBTQ+ neighbors, those facing domestic violence, and all who face the burden of inequality. Therefore, we call on national, state, and local leaders to do everything necessary to provide health care coverage to all who need it, regardless of their ability to pay, and that must include essential reproductive health care.” April 7, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “5th Circuit Allows Texas to Continue Blocking Abortion Access During COVID-19 Pandemic”. From the press release: Today, in a 2-1 decision, a three-judge panel of the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals used a rare procedural mechanism to rule that the district court was wrong to grant emergency relief to protect access to essential, time-sensitive abortion care. This allows Gov. Abbott to use his COVID-19 order to block access to abortion. This is the latest twist in a lawsuit brought by Texas abortion providers — represented by Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the Center for Reproductive Rights, and the Lawyering Project — to protect access to care. Plaintiffs include Planned Parenthood Center for Choice, Planned Parenthood Greater Texas Surgical Health Services, Planned Parenthood South Texas Surgical Center, Whole Woman’s Health, Whole Woman’s Health Alliance, Southwestern Women’s Surgery Center, and Austin Women’s Health Center. Despite this setback, the providers will continue to fight for patients, who are now scrambling to access care during this pandemic.Enforcement of the governor’s order has already had a dramatic effect on patients’ lives, with some being forced to travel hundreds of miles in a pandemic to access basic and essential health care.The American Medical Association, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and other national medical groups filed an amicus brief with the 5th Circuit calling out the hypocrisy of this executive order, stating: “Indeed, the Governor’s order is likely to increase, rather than decrease, burdens on hospitals and use of PPE. At the same time, it will severely impair essential health care for women, and it will place doctors, nurses, and other medical professionals in an untenable position by criminalizing necessary medical care.”Statement from Nancy Northup, president & CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights:“This is not the last word—we will take every legal action necessary to fight this abuse of emergency powers. Texas has been trying to end abortion for decades and they are exploiting this pandemic to achieve that goal. Texas women are not waiting for the courts—those who are able to travel are already leaving the state to get care. Others are tragically being left behind. The need for abortion care doesn’t disappear during a pandemic.” Statement of Alexis McGill Johnson, acting president and CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America:“This is unconscionable. Patients are already being forced to put their lives in harm’s way during a pandemic, and now will be forced to continue doing so to get the health care they need. Abortion is essential, it’s time-sensitive, and it cannot wait for a pandemic to pass. Instead of playing politics during a pandemic, Gov. Abbott should be focusing on the health care needs of his constituents. Planned Parenthood won’t let this injustice stand. Our patients deserve better. We’ll use every tool at our disposal to fight this harmful order and protect our patients’ health care.”As doctors and nurses in his state work around the clock to care for patients suffering from COVID-19, Gov. Abbott inserted politics into what should be a personal medical decision. As a result, providers have had to cancel appointments for hundreds of patients in the ensuing confusion.Abortion providers in mulitple states also filed similar lawsuits last week to protect abortion access during the COVID-19 pandemic. Thus far, judges have provided temporary relief to protect access to care in Alabama, Ohio, and Oklahoma. The plaintiffs in this case — abortion providers throughout Texas — are represented by attorneys from Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the Center for Reproductive Rights, the Lawyering Project, and the Law Offices of Patrick J. O’Connell PLLC. A copy of the complaint can be found here. April 7, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “5th Circuit Allows Texas to Continue Blocking Abortion Access During COVID-19 Pandemic”. From the press release: Today, in a 2-1 decision, a three-judge panel of the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals used a rare procedural mechanism to rule that the district court was wrong to grant emergency relief to protect access to essential, time-sensitive abortion care. This allows Gov. Abbott to use his COVID-19 order to block access to abortion. This is the latest twist in a lawsuit brought by Texas abortion providers — represented by Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the Center for Reproductive Rights, and the Lawyering Project — to protect access to care. Plaintiffs include Planned Parenthood Center for Choice, Planned Parenthood Greater Texas Surgical Health Services, Planned Parenthood South Texas Surgical Center, Whole Woman’s Health, Whole Woman’s Health Alliance, Southwestern Women’s Surgery Center, and Austin Women’s Health Center. Despite this setback, the providers will continue to fight for patients, who are now scrambling to access care during this pandemic.Enforcement of the governor’s order has already had a dramatic effect on patients’ lives, with some being forced to travel hundreds of miles in a pandemic to access basic and essential health care.The American Medical Association, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and other national medical groups filed an amicus brief with the 5th Circuit calling out the hypocrisy of this executive order, stating: “Indeed, the Governor’s order is likely to increase, rather than decrease, burdens on hospitals and use of PPE. At the same time, it will severely impair essential health care for women, and it will place doctors, nurses, and other medical professionals in an untenable position by criminalizing necessary medical care.”Statement of Alexis McGill Johnson, acting president and CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America:“This is unconscionable. Patients are already being forced to put their lives in harm’s way during a pandemic, and now will be forced to continue doing so to get the health care they need. Abortion is essential, it’s time-sensitive, and it cannot wait for a pandemic to pass. Instead of playing politics during a pandemic, Gov. Abbott should be focusing on the health care needs of his constituents. Planned Parenthood won’t let this injustice stand. Our patients deserve better. We’ll use every tool at our disposal to fight this harmful order and protect our patients’ health care.”Statement from Nancy Northup, president & CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights:“This is not the last word—we will take every legal action necessary to fight this abuse of emergency powers. Texas has been trying to end abortion for decades and they are exploiting this pandemic to achieve that goal. Texas women are not waiting for the courts—those who are able to travel are already leaving the state to get care. Others are tragically being left behind. The need for abortion care doesn’t disappear during a pandemic.”As doctors and nurses in his state work around the clock to care for patients suffering from COVID-19, Gov. Abbott inserted politics into what should be a personal medical decision. As a result, providers have had to cancel appointments for hundreds of patients in the ensuing confusion.Abortion providers in multiple states also filed similar lawsuits last week to protect abortion access during the COVID-19 pandemic. Thus far, judges have provided temporary relief to protect access to care in Alabama, Ohio, and Oklahoma.The plaintiffs in this case — abortion providers throughout Texas — are represented by attorneys from Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the Center for Reproductive Rights, the Lawyering Project, and the Law Offices of Patrick J. O’Connell PLLC. A copy of the complaint can be found here. April 7, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Harris, Senate Democrats to HHS: Reopen the ACA Marketplace, Allow More Americans to Get Health Insurance During COVID-19 Pandemic”. From the press release: U.S. Senator Kamala D. Harris (D-CA) on Tuesday joined Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) and Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) and 25 Senate Democrats in urging the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to reopen the Affordable Care Act’s online marketplace to allow more un- and under-insured Americans to get health insurance as they face potential health issues related to COVID-19. In a letter to the Secretary Alex Azar, the senators urged HHS to allow Americans to enroll through a unique Special Enrollment Period (SEP) that should last throughout the duration of the pandemic in an effort to ensure comprehensive coverage for families and communities to protect themselves from COVID-related illness.The senators wrote, “Currently, millions of Americans are uninsured and anxious, not only about what the possibility of contracting COVID-19 could mean for their health and that of their family, but also for their financial stability. Opening up the ACA marketplace would provide an easy pathway to coverage for those who under previous circumstances may have decided to forego health insurance or purchase a substandard, junk insurance plan, but now in a global pandemic are in vital need of comprehensive coverage to protect themselves, their families, and our broader community.”“We believe opening an ACA SEP is the clearest way to cover the millions of uninsured and underinsured Americans in the 38 states that use the federal platform, and to provide comprehensive protections for COVID-19-related treatment and prevention,” the senators continued.The senators concluded, “We urge you to put aside the partisan politics of the past, and to expand health coverage to millions of Americans by opening an SEP expeditiously.”In addition to Senators Harris, Murphy and Baldwin, the letter was also signed by U.S. Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Joe Manchin (D-WV), Bob Casey (D-PA), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Tina Smith (D-MN), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Angus King (I-ME), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Doug Jones (D-AL), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Jack Reed (D-RI), Gary Peters (D-MI), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Jon Tester (D-MT), Tom Carper (D-DE), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Sherrod Brown (D-OH) and Tom Udall (D-NM).A full text of the letter can be found here and below.Dear Secretary Azar,We write to urge you to reopen the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) online marketplace through a unique Special Enrollment Period (SEP) to allow any American to enroll in a comprehensive health insurance plan. Currently, millions of Americans are uninsured and anxious, not only about what the possibility of contracting COVID-19 could mean for their health and that of their family, but also for their financial stability. Opening up the ACA marketplace would provide an easy pathway to coverage for those who under previous circumstances may have decided to forego health insurance or purchase a substandard, junk insurance plan, but now in a global pandemic are in vital need of comprehensive coverage to protect themselves, their families, and our broader community.The Trump Administration’s reported decision not to open an SEP and leave millions of Americans uninsured and underinsured during this unprecedented public health crisis will inevitably mean fewer individuals seeking testing and treatment—prolonging the spread of the disease—and will put more families in dire financial straits. The COVID-19 pandemic is also causing millions of people to lose their jobs and their employer-provided health insurance. We should be promoting comprehensive health insurance plans to all those impacted, not looking to divert funds appropriated to support hospitals, or promoting junk insurance plans that don’t have to provide coverage for needed services or offer consumer protections. When the ACA was passed, Congress included the authority to establish SEPs because we understood that everyday Americans may face extenuating circumstances for which they should not be penalized. It is inexcusable for you not to exercise that authority during perhaps the largest extenuating circumstance of our lifetimes, and to choose to lock out millions of Americans from the ACA exchanges because they failed to predict a sweeping global pandemic. Furthermore, the Administration’s continued promotion of junk plans which are not required to comply with consumer protections that limit out-of-pocket costs or coverage of essential health benefits, including those that are needed to pay for the treatment and prevention of COVID-19 such as hospital care, emergency care, laboratory services, or preventive services, leave many Americans vulnerable. Families already struggling to make ends meet in light of the global economic downturn should not be exposed to potential financial ruin because of a lack of comprehensive insurance coverage.An additional benefit of opening an SEP is that it would publicize to all Americans who have lost their jobs that the exchanges are open again and that they can enroll in high-quality health insurance, providing at least a modicum of reassurance during these deeply troubling times. Given the millions of job losses in recent weeks and the likelihood of millions more in the near future, now is the time to open up the health insurance marketplace to everyone so that people know that losing their job does not mean they must also lose access to health insurance coverage.We believe opening an ACA SEP is the clearest way to cover the millions of uninsured and underinsured Americans in the 38 states that use the federal platform, and to provide comprehensive protections for COVID-19-related treatment and prevention. In a demonstration of the dramatic demand for such a move, all but one of the 13 state-based marketplaces have opened an SEP, with such high levels of interest that many are now extending the period by several weeks.We urge you to put aside the partisan politics of the past, and to expand health coverage to millions of Americans by opening an SEP expeditiously. April 7, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Leads Multistate Coalition Calling on Trump Administration to Halt Anti-Abortion Rule as Coronavirus Pandemic Rages On”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James today continued her leadership in the national fight to ensure women’s reproductive health care is not stifled or infringed upon in any way during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-2019) public health crisis. Attorney General James is co-leading a multistate coalition of eight attorneys general in asking the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to delay implementation of a final rule that would unlawfully reinterpret Section 1303 of the ACA by requiring qualified health plans that participate in the state exchanges — like the New York State of Health — to send separate bills and collect separate payments of at least one-dollar for abortion services to all consumers. In a letter to HHS Secretary Alex Azar, Attorney General James and the coalition argue against final implementation of the rule that threatens women’s access to abortion coverage, as well as jeopardizes health coverage of all consumers confused by the billing practice as the nation responds to a public health crisis requiring every resource of the federal government focused on battling COVID-19.“At a time when states and the federal government must use every resource as efficiently as possible, it is utterly reckless for the Trump Administration to continue to divert means away from responding to this pandemic just so they can further restrict women’s reproductive rights,” said Attorney General James. “This rule not only stands in direct contrast to federal directives issued by the Administration, but specifically threatens to kick individuals off their health plans as we battle a public health crisis, endangering us all. But the origin of this rule is no doubt rooted in the president’s anti-choice ideology that aims to take us backwards almost half a century, which is why our coalition will never stop fighting against this burdensome and controlling regulation that strips women of their constitutional right to an abortion.”In their letter to Secretary Azar today, Attorney General James and the coalition argue that “implementation of the final rule during this public health and economic crisis is irresponsible and harmful to the residents of the States and the rest of the country, as it will divert attention and resources from fighting the pandemic and saving lives.”Moreover, any effort by HHS to implement the final rule in the coming months would be inconsistent with Office of Management and Budget Directive M-20-16 — issued just three weeks ago — instructing federal agency heads to “prioritize all resources to slow the transmission of COVID-19” and otherwise focus exclusively on “mission-critical activities.”The attorneys general go on to argue in their letter, “There is no plausible argument that implementation or enforcement of the Final Rule, which puts at risk consumers’ health coverage, would slow the transmission of COVID-19; nor can implementation of separate billing procedures be considered mission-critical,” continuing, “HHS unnecessarily detracts from the States’ abilities to prioritize responding to the national crisis of COVID-19, and contravenes the White House’s Directive.”The attorneys general additionally argue that implementing this final rule would impose additional financial burdens on state agencies. “HHS itself recognized that implementation of the Final Rule will have significant economic consequences,” costing approximately $385 million in one-time costs for insurance issuers in the nation to bring all affected issuers across the country “into compliance with the Final Rule and implement the necessary technical changes.”Under New York law, all private health plans regulated by the state are required to offer abortion coverage as part of their basic health care services. The new Trump Administration rule, however, will require consumers to return premium payments in two separate transactions, otherwise risk jeopardizing their health care coverage because issuers are forced to issue separate bills in order to segregate funds attributed to abortion care. HHS itself has conceded that requiring separate bills and separate payments will inevitably lead to confusion for the more than 260,000 New Yorkers that have already enrolled in a qualified health plan this year. Additionally, the rule burdens states with unnecessary administrative costs and harms consumers who may face higher insurance premiums as a result of increased costs to carriers. Last week, the coalition also filed a motion for summary judgment in this lawsuit, calling for the courts to immediately vacate the rule because it violates federal law and is inconsistent with the Affordable Care Act. April 8, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “Texas Abortion Providers Push for Emergency Relief in Federal District Court”. From the press release: This afternoon, Texas abortion providers went back to a federal district court to renew their request for emergency relief for their patients. This comes one day after the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals used unusual legal procedures to enforce Gov. Abbott’s COVID-19 order targeting abortion. Abortion providers are pursuing every legal avenue available to them, which includes seeking a more limited temporary restraining order from the lower court in response to the concerns expressed by the 5thCircuit. Providers are committed to ensuring Texans have access to the health care they need during this pandemic. Statement from Molly Duane, Staff Attorney with the Center for Reproductive Rights“We’re asking the district court to block the state’s order because we believe this is the fastest way to resume full access to abortion in Texas, which is our number one priority. The Fifth Circuit suggested there are outstanding factual questions about the impact of this order. During the last two weeks, abortion has been largely unavailable in Texas, and we have seen that the impact on patients is devastating. That is exactly what we will show the district court.”Read more about the need for abortion access in Texas and the detrimental effects of Abbott’s order from the country’s leading physician organizations, including the American Medical Association (AMA) and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG): Abortion is one of the safest medical procedures performed in the United States, and the vast majority of abortions are performed in out- patient non-hospital settings.But the COVID-19 pandemic does not justify restricting abortion care in Texas. Most abortions do not require use of any hospital resources and use only minimal PPE. Indeed, the Governor’s order is likely to increase, rather than decrease, burdens on hospitals and use of PPE. At the same time, it will severely impair essential health care for women, and it will place doctors, nurses, and other medical professionals in an untenable position by criminalizing necessary medical care. While abortion is a safe and common medical procedure, it is also a time-sensitive one for which a delay may increase the risks or potentially make it completely inaccessible. The consequences of being unable to obtain an abortion profoundly impact a person’s life, health, and wellbeing. Advances in medical science have expanded safe options for pregnancy termination. For example, medication abortion is a safe and effective option in the first trimester. Thirty percent of abortions are medication abortions, where patients typically take the medication to complete the procedure at home. The full amicus brief from the AMA and ACOG can be found here. April 8, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorneys General Becerra and Healey Lead Multistate Amicus Brief Defending ACA Birth Control Coverage Mandate in Supreme Court.” From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra and Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey today co-led a coalition of 21 attorneys general in filing an amicus brief in the United States Supreme Court supporting Pennsylvania in its case defending contraceptive coverage and counseling mandated under the Affordable Care Act (ACA). In the brief filed in Donald Trump et al. v. Pennsylvania, the attorneys general explain that states have an interest in safeguarding the ACA’s birth control coverage requirement, which has benefited more than 62 million women across the country. The coalition argues that access to affordable birth control is critical to the health, well-being, and economic security of the states’ residents. “As our communities grapple with the COVID-19 public health crisis, the importance of delivering critical preventative care to women and families is more clear than ever,” said Attorney General Becerra. “More than 62 million women have benefited from the Affordable Care Act’s birth control coverage over the last decade. This law not only protects equality in healthcare, it supports women’s ability to control their own reproductive health, and promotes access to education, jobs and financial empowerment. We will continue to fight to keep healthcare decisions between women and their doctors, not their employers.”“Decisions about birth control are for women to make, not their bosses, and certainly not the White House,” said Attorney General Healey. “We are urging the Supreme Court to protect the health, well-being and economic security of women in Massachusetts and across the country by upholding their right to access affordable contraception.”In 2017 and 2018, the Trump Administration issued rules which ignored the ACA’s birth control requirement and allowed employers to deny birth control coverage to their employees based on religious or moral objections. California successfully led a coalition of 14 states and Washington, D.C. in defending the ACA’s birth control coverage requirement. California obtained injunctions against the Trump Administration’s harmful, illegal rules in the Ninth Circuit, while Pennsylvania obtained an injunction in the Third Circuit. After California and Pennsylvania won injunctions that protect the birth control coverage mandate, the federal government, Little Sisters of the Poor, and March for Life filed petitions for certiorari in the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court granted the petitions in the Pennsylvania litigation. The petitions from the California litigation remain pending. In the amicus brief, the attorneys general argue that the states have a vested interest in providing women seamless contraceptive coverage. The coalition argues that tens of thousands of women will lose their cost-free contraceptive coverage if employers are allowed to exempt themselves from the ACA requirement. This loss of coverage will result in a reliance on state-funded programs that will increase the states’ costs associated with the provision of reproductive healthcare, and will likely lead to an increase in unintended pregnancies. Joining Attorneys General Becerra and Healey in filing the amicus brief are the attorneys general of Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and the District of Columbia. A copy of the brief is available here. April 8, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement on Amicus Brief in Supreme Court Contraception Case”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued this statement after joining a bicameral amicus brief in the United States Supreme Court in the cases of Trump v. Pennsylvania and Little Sisters of the Poor v. Pennsylvania arguing against the Trump Administration’s expansive rule allowing private employers to opt out of providing contraception coverage for their employees, in violation of the Affordable Care Act’s contraceptive-coverage requirement:“The Trump Administration’s despicable rule allowing private employers and health plans to deny women coverage for contraception is an outrageous attack on women’s health, women’s pocketbooks, and women’s independence.“While our nation faces an unprecedented health crisis, the Administration continues to fight to take away every woman’s right to the critical, comprehensive care that they and their families need. At the same time, the Trump Administration continues to support the outrageous GOP lawsuit to dismangle the entirity of the Affordable Care Act including lifesaving protections for 130 million Americans with pre-existing conditions. And as coronavirus poses a growing threat to all Americans, the Administration is ignoring the health experts by refusing to reopen ACA enrollment of health coverage to millions of uninsured workers and families.“House Democrats are committed to upholding the ACA and its critical protections for women and families. We will continue to oppose any actions by the Trump Administration that jeopardizes the safety and well being of the American people as we work tirelessly to combat this deadly virus and ensure that everyone receives the care and support needed to stay healthy.” The amicus brief is here. April 8, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Fights Trump Admin. Effort to Strip Women of their Right to Birth Control Coverage Under the ACA”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James today continued her leadership in the national fight to ensure women’s reproductive health care is not stifled or infringed upon in any way by the Trump Administration. Attorney General James and a coalition of 20 additional attorneys general from around the nation filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Supreme Court supporting the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and the State of New Jersey in their lawsuit defending the contraceptive coverage and counseling requirement mandated as part of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). In the brief — filed in Donald Trump et al. v. Pennsylvania — the attorneys general explain that states have an interest in safeguarding the ACA’s birth control coverage requirement, which has benefited more than 62 million women across the country. The coalition argues that access to affordable birth control is critical to the health, well-being, and economic security of the states’ residents. “Employers should never have a role in making reproductive health care decisions for their employees, yet the Trump Administration’s rules do exactly that,” said Attorney General James. “The president has repeatedly worked to pit Americans against each other by using faith as a wedge between us, but our coalition will not allow religion to be used as a tool that divides us. This is about ensuring women retain control of their bodies, their choices, and their freedoms, which is why we will never stop fighting to protect women’s access to the health care they need, deserve, and choose.”In 2017 and 2018, the Trump Administration issued rules that ignored the ACA’s birth control coverage requirement by allowing employers to deny birth control coverage to their employees based on religious or moral objections. New York and several coalitions of attorneys general defended the ACA’s birth control coverage requirement and obtained injunctions against the Trump Administration’s harmful, illegal rules in the U.S. Court of Appeals for both the Third Circuit and the Ninth Circuit.The Trump Administration, Little Sisters of the Poor, and March for Life filed petitions for certiorari in the U.S. Supreme Court. The court granted the petitions for review of the Third Circuit decision, while the petitions for review of the Ninth Circuit decision are still pending.In the amicus brief filed today, Attorney General James and the coalition of attorneys general argue that states have a vested interest in ensuring that women have access to seamless contraceptive coverage. Tens of thousands of women will lose access to cost-free contraceptive coverage — one of the preventive benefits guaranteed by the ACA — if employers are allowed to use their own religious or moral beliefs as an excuse to exempt themselves from the ACA’s requirement. This loss of coverage would result in a reliance on state-funded programs — increasing states’ costs and likely leading to an increase in unintended pregnancies nationwide. April 9, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Federal Court Blocks Gov. Abbott’s COVID-19 Order Against Abortion Care AGAIN”. From the press release: Today, a federal district court granted a second temporary restraining order against Gov. Abbott’s COVID-19 order, which the State threatened to enforce as a ban on time-sensitive abortion services. Under this latest order, abortion providers — represented by Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the Center for Reproductive Rights, and the Lawyering Project — may provide medication abortion as well as abortion procedures for patients who would be unable to access abortion due to their gestational age on April 22 (the day after Gov. Abbott’s executive order is set to expire).This comes two days after the 5th Circuit used a rare procedural mechanism to reverse the first emergency restraining order granted to the Texas abortion providers — Planned Parenthood Center for Choice, Planned Parenthood Greater Texas Surgical Health Services, Planned Parenthood South Texas Surgical Center, Whole Woman’s Health, Whole Woman’s Health Alliance, Southwestern Women’s Surgery Center, and Austin Women’s Health Center. As a result of the governor’s order and the 5th Circuit’s rulings, the providers have been forced to turn hundreds of patients away while the legal battle continues.After just a few weeks, the enforcement of Abbott’s order has already had dramatic effects on patients’ lives, with some being forced to travel hundreds of miles in a pandemic to access basic and essential health care.Statement of Alexis McGill Johnson, acting president and CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America:“This is a temporary sigh of relief for at least some Texas patients. We know that abortion is essential because it is time-sensitive care that cannot wait. Gov. Abbott should stop trying to force Texans into unconscionable choices: to travel long distances and increase their risk of exposure to the new coronavirus or carry a forced pregnancy. We won’t stand for it. Planned Parenthood will continue to fight these cruel attacks on our patients. We know your health cannot wait and we are here with you.”Statement from Nancy Northup, president & CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights:“We are relieved that the district court has again stepped in to stop Governor Abbott from blocking women from accessing time-sensitive, essential abortion care. It’s time for Texas to stop its crusade to end abortion, which will inflict irreparable harm on women seeking care at this difficult time.”Statement Rupali Sharma, Senior Counsel and Director at the Lawyering Project:“Today’s ruling ensures some Texans will be able to get the care they need, despite the all-out war politicians in the state have declared on abortion access. The Lawyering Project will continue to fight alongside people who need to end their pregnancies safely and with the dignity they deserve.” Already, courts in Alabama, Ohio and Oklahoma are allowing abortion providers, just like all other doctors, to decide when to provide essential abortion care while conserving needed resources during this pandemic. Texas should be no different. In fact, forcing people to carry their pregnancies to term against their will only creates a heavier burden on a hospital system that’s already stretched thin caring for COVID-19 patients.Medical experts including the American Medical Association and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists said: “Indeed, the Governor’s order is likely to increase, rather than decrease, burdens on hospitals and use of PPE. At the same time, it will severely impair essential health care for women, and it will place doctors, nurses, and other medical professionals in an untenable position by criminalizing necessary medical care.”Texans already have to navigate a long list of restrictions that force abortion patients to have medically unnecessary face-to-face contact with providers, and for some, push abortion out of reach altogether. These harmful restrictions include state-mandated in-person counseling and a mandatory 24-hour waiting period. For many people, traveling out of state or waiting weeks for their medical care will mean they won’t be able to access an abortion at all.The plaintiffs in this case — abortion providers throughout Texas — are represented by attorneys from Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the Center for Reproductive Rights, the Lawyering Project, and the Law Offices of Patrick J. O’Connell PLLC. A copy of the ruling can be found here. April 9, 2020: Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement Calling for Immediate Investigation into Abuse and Mistreatment of Pregnant Women in DHS Custody”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued this statement calling on the Department of Homeland Security’s Inspector General to conduct an investigation into recent reports of severe mistreatment of pregnant women legally seeking asylum in the United States:“The reports of abuse and neglect inflicted by U.S. immigration agents on a pregnant Guatamalan women in labor during asylum processing insist that we investigate this unacceptable behavior.“Very sadly, the appalling and inhuman situation that this woman faced is not an isolated case. There is a pattern of U.S. officials denying and delaying medical treatment to pregnant women and subjecting them to prolonged detention and inappropriate treatment in inadequate facilities. This mistreatment is more disturbing and dangerous, as the coronavirus threatens the health and lives of the most vulnerable among us.“As Speaker of the House, I join Senator Blumenthal and other Senators in calling on the Department of Homeland Security’s Inspector General to immediately conduct an investigation into reports of abuse and mistreatment of pregnant people in custody.“As we observe Holy Week, Passover and Ramadan, we pray for all who are suffering during this heartbreaking time. We also pray that those in power will remember their moral responsibility to ensure that all people are treated with compassion and dignity.” April 10, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Legal Whiplash: Abortion Providers Forced to Cancel Appointments Yet Again After Appeals Court Reinstates Gov. Abbott’s COVID-19 Order Blocking Abortion Access”. From the press release: Today, for the second time this week, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against abortion providers, this time granting a stay reversing in part the federal district court’s latest temporary restraining order. This means abortion is once again largely inaccessible in the state of Texas. The ruling is one of many that has created legal whiplash, causing confusion and uncertainty for hundreds of patients in need of essential, time-sensitive abortion care.Abortion providers — represented by Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the Center for Reproductive Rights, and the Lawyering Project — were in the midst of calling patients back to health centers when the 5th Circuit’s ruling came down today. Once again, providers — Planned Parenthood Center for Choice, Planned Parenthood Greater Texas Surgical Health Services, Planned Parenthood South Texas Surgical Center, Whole Woman’s Health, Whole Woman’s Health Alliance, Southwestern Women’s Surgery Center, and Austin Women’s Health Center — will have to turn patients away unless they will pass the gestational limit for abortions in Texas before April 22 (the day after Gov. Abbott’s order is set to expire). Plaintiffs will evaluate this latest ruling from the 5th Circuit and continue exploring every option, including emergency relief from the Supreme Court, in order to ensure patients can access essential, time-sensitive abortion services.Medical experts including the American Medical Association and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists warned the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals: “Indeed, the Governor’s order is likely to increase, rather than decrease, burdens on hospitals and use of PPE. At the same time, it will severely impair essential health care for women, and it will place doctors, nurses, and other medical professionals in an untenable position by criminalizing necessary medical care.”Statement of Alexis McGill Johnson, acting president and CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America:“We are in a time of crisis — and the state of Texas is sowing fear, confusion, and chaos about whether people can access health care. The same people who are caring for their families, working essential jobs, and trying to make ends meet during this pandemic are now having to experience the trauma of medical uncertainty. This is a nightmare inside of a nightmare. One day patients are called back for their procedures, the next day they are canceled — all at the whim of Gov. Abbott. Abortion is essential because it is time-sensitive. It cannot wait for lengthy legal battles or a pandemic to pass. This political game will have a lasting consequence on Texans for generations to come.”Statement from Nancy Northup, president & CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights:“Once again, Texas women cannot access abortion–with the important exception of those close to the legal limit, who the Fifth Circuit will allow to go forward. The court is unjustifiably forcing women to wait until the eleventh hour to get the time-sensitive, essential healthcare that they are constitutionally guaranteed. We will pursue all legal options to ensure no women are left behind.”Statement Rupali Sharma, Senior Counsel and Director at the Lawyering Project:“Texas politicians are intent on restricting abortion access even as a global pandemic threatens the health and welfare of its residents. With today’s ruling, Texans are once again thrown into a state of uncertainty, as many wonder if they’ll be forced to carry pregnancies to term or risk their well-being to travel out of state to obtain an abortion in a public health crisis. We will continue to explore all legal options to help ensure Texans — no matter how vulnerable — get the health care they need and deserve.”Already, courts in Alabama, Ohio and Oklahoma have stepped in to allow abortion providers, just like all other doctors, to decide when to provide essential care. Texas has not shown why its residents deserve less. In fact, according to medical experts, forcing people to carry their pregnancies to term only creates a heavier burden on a hospital system that’s already stretched thin caring for COVID-19 patients.Texans already have to navigate a long list of state restrictions that force abortion patients to have medically unnecessary face-to-face contact with providers, and for some, push abortion out of reach altogether. These harmful restrictions include state-mandated in-person counseling and a mandatory 24-hour waiting period. For many people, traveling out of state or waiting weeks for their medical care will mean they won’t be able to access an abortion at all.The plaintiffs in this case — abortion providers throughout Texas — are represented by attorneys from Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the Center for Reproductive Rights, the Lawyering Project, and the Law Offices of Patrick J. O’Connell PLLC. A copy of the ruling can be found here. April 10, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “Legal Whiplash: Abortion Providers Forced to Cancel Appointments Yet Again After Appeals Court Reinstates Gov. Abbott’s COVID-19 Order Blocking Abortion Access”. From the press release: Today, for the second time this week, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against abortion providers, this time granting a stay reversing in part the federal district court’s latest temporary restraining order. This means abortion is once again largely inaccessible in the state of Texas. The ruling is one of many that has created legal whiplash, causing confusion and uncertainty for hundreds of patients in need of essential, time-sensitive abortion care.Abortion providers — represented by Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the Center for Reproductive Rights, and the Lawyering Project — were in the midst of calling patients back to health centers when the 5th Circuit’s ruling came down today. Once again, providers — Planned Parenthood Center for Choice, Planned Parenthood Greater Texas Surgical Health Services, Planned Parenthood South Texas Surgical Center, Whole Woman’s Health, Whole Woman’s Health Alliance, Southwestern Women’s Surgery Center, and Austin Women’s Health Center — will have to turn patients away unless they will pass the gestational limit for abortions in Texas before April 22 (the day after Gov. Abbott’s order is set to expire). Plaintiffs will evaluate this latest ruling from the 5th Circuit and continue exploring every option, including emergency relief from the Supreme Court, in order to ensure patients can access essential, time-sensitive abortion services.Medical experts including the American Medical Association and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists warned the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals: “Indeed, the Governor’s order is likely to increase, rather than decrease, burdens on hospitals and use of PPE. At the same time, it will severely impair essential health care for women, and it will place doctors, nurses, and other medical professionals in an untenable position by criminalizing necessary medical care.”… April 10, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Leads Coalition Fighting Oklahoma’s Unconstitutional Ban on Abortion During COVID-19 Pandemic”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James today led a multistate coalition of 19 attorneys general in seeking to stop the State of Oklahoma from banning almost all abortions in the state, using the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-2019) public health crisis as an excuse. Continuing her leadership of the nation’s fight to ensure women’s reproductive health care is not infringed upon, Attorney General James led the coalition in filing an amicus brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit supporting the plaintiffs in Southwind Women’s Center LLC v. Stitt, as they fight to preserve access to reproductive health care for the women across Oklahoma.“Oklahoma’s executive order is just the latest in a series of unconstitutional attacks taken by ideologues across the nation who are using the coronavirus as an excuse to trample on women’s reproductive rights,” said Attorney General James. “A global pandemic should never be used as a backdoor channel for any state to chip away at the protections guaranteed in the U.S. Constitution, yet we are still being forced to fight to defend women’s bodies, choices, and freedoms nearly 50 years after Roe v. Wade. Our coalition will not hesitate to challenge Oklahoma, Texas, or any other state using this crisis as an unlawful justification to attack women’s reproductive rights.”On March 24, Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt issued Executive Order 2020-07 (4th amended), postponing all elective surgeries and minor medical procedures in the State of Oklahoma. Three days later, Governor Stitt’s office confirmed that “any type of abortion services…which are not a medical emergency…or otherwise necessary to prevent serious health risks” to the woman would be included in the executive order. The governor’s office even went so far as to compare an abortion to a “routine” dental procedure. This order came just days after the Oklahoma governor posted on social media about eating out with his family in a “packed” Oklahoma establishment, and after his office encouraged Oklahomans to do the same.Soon after, on March 30, several reproductive health care providers — including the South Wind Women’s Center, the Comprehensive Health Care of Planned Parenthood Great Plains, and Dr. Larry Burns — filed a lawsuit challenging the executive order in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma. Earlier this week, U.S. District Judge Charles Goodwin issued a temporary restraining order halting portions of the Oklahoma abortion ban on the grounds that banning such care was “oppressive” and “unreasonable,” and would cause “irreparable harm” to women unable to obtain abortions in the state. The State of Oklahoma asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit to set aside the lower court’s decision and reinstate the ban. Today, Attorney General James and the coalition of attorneys general filed an amicus brief opposing Oklahoma’s request for a stay of the temporary restraining order, stressing that a ban on medication abortions (an abortion brought on by taking two prescription drugs) or on other abortions for patients who would otherwise permanently lose their right to lawfully obtain an abortion in Oklahoma infringes on a woman’s constitutional rights. The coalition explains that the “characterization of the ban as prohibiting only ‘elective’ procedures fails to recognize how the time-sensitive nature of abortion care distinguishes that care from services that can be deferred without patient harm during the current public health crisis.”The coalition goes on to highlight that if the ban were to be reinstated, women in Oklahoma would be forced to make “risky and expensive” travel plans to cross state lines and obtain an abortion, a point not disputed by the State of Oklahoma. This is especially troublesome at a time when the entire U.S. population is being asked to limit travel to stop the spread of COVID-19.Additionally, the coalition explains why a ban on abortion would not help the state preserve personal protective equipment (PPE), free up hospital beds, or prevent the spread of COVID-19 transmissions. The exact opposite is actually true, as medical abortions do not typically require any PPE and neither a medical abortion nor a procedural abortion require regular hospitalization.Further, the coalition notes that residents of New York and other amici states may currently be in Oklahoma without a way to return home, but they still have a right to time-sensitive reproductive care.The attorneys general conclude by stating that abortion “clinics in amici States have increased the use of telehealth” in an effort to provide women with the proper health care they want and need. Instead of limiting women’s access to abortions, Oklahoma should be joining Attorney General James’ call to increase access to telehealth medicine and the medical abortion pill so that woman who choose to have an abortion don’t have to fear going out and contracting COVID-19 during this public health crisis. Last week, Attorney General James sent a letter to both the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration requesting that the Trump Administration waive or utilize its discretion not to enforce its Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) designation, which dictates and subsequently impedes women’s access to the medication abortion prescription drug known as Mifepristone. Attorney General James called on the Trump Administration to ensure that women across the country can more easily access this critical health care service while the pandemic leaves many women unable to seek in-person care… April 11, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “BREAKING: Texas Abortion Providers Ask Supreme Court to Urgently Restore Medication Abortion During Pandemic; Abortion Services Remain Virtually Inaccessible Under Gov. Abbott’s COVID-19 Order”. From the press release: Today, Texas abortion providers — represented by the Center for Reproductive Rights, the Lawyering Project, and Planned Parenthood Federation of America — asked the U.S. Supreme Court to take emergency action to restore essential, time-sensitive medication abortion services while the case proceeds. This comes after Gov. Greg Abbott tried to block virtually all abortion services through his COVID-19 order. The emergency request comes after the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals granted most of the state’s request to stay a federal district court’s second temporary restraining order. Under the 5th Circuit’s latest ruling, only patients who will be over the state’s gestational age cutoff by April 22 (the day after Gov. Abbott’s executive order lifts) can access an abortion procedure.For almost three weeks, providers — including Planned Parenthood Center for Choice, Planned Parenthood Greater Texas Surgical Health Services, Planned Parenthood South Texas Surgical Center, Whole Woman’s Health, Whole Woman’s Health Alliance, Southwestern Women’s Surgery Center, and Austin Women’s Health Center — have had to cancel appointments for hundreds of patients while Gov. Abbott continues to exploit a pandemic in order to score political points.Meanwhile, leading medical experts, including the American Medical Association, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American Board of Obstetrics & Gynecology told the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals that abortion should not be delayed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Doing so, they said, only creates a greater strain on the hospital system during this global public health crisis.Statement of Alexis McGill Johnson, acting president and CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America:“The past few weeks have been untenable for Texans in need of time-sensitive abortion procedures. We’ve heard patients grow increasingly more desperate for care. Gov. Abbott has blocked abortion access for mothers who have lost their jobs because of COVID-19, people quarantined with abusive partners, and patients with fatal fetal diagnoses. Now is the time to be making abortion more accessible, not less. Medical professionals everywhere are being trusted to make necessary but difficult decisions about if and when to treat patients. Doctors who provide abortions are asking to do the same — because they, not politicians, know what’s best for their patients. This is a matter of health care, not political opinion.”Statement from Rupali Sharma, senior counsel and director, Lawyering Project:“Texans who seek abortion care deserve dignity and compassion — particularly during a public health crisis. Instead, they’ve been thrown into a tailspin of uncertainty, unsure if and when they’ll be able to obtain essential, constitutionally protected healthcare. These extraordinary circumstances require urgent intervention. That’s why we’re asking the Supreme Court to step in and stop Texas from blocking abortion access as its residents contend with unprecedented challenges.”Statement from Nancy Northup, president and CEO, Center for Reproductive Rights:“It is vital that the Supreme Court step in and protect the health, lives and futures of Texas women. This is an extraordinarily difficult time, but this is an easy case. Texas is blatantly abusing its emergency power to obliterate Roe v. Wade. This tactic of using bogus health and safety justifications to close clinics is nothing new. In fact, we have another case before the Supreme Court right now challenging a different sham law designed to shut down clinics. These thinly veiled attempts to end abortion must stop.”Already, courts in Alabama, Ohio and Oklahoma are allowing abortion providers, just like all other doctors, to decide when to provide essential abortion care while conserving needed resources during this pandemic. Texas should be no different. In fact, forcing people to carry their pregnancies to term against their will only creates a heavier burden on a hospital system that’s already stretched thin caring for COVID-19 patients. Texans already have to navigate a long list of restrictions that force patients to have medically unnecessary face-to-face contact with providers, and for some, push abortion out of reach altogether. These harmful restrictions include state-mandated in-person counseling and a mandatory 24-hour waiting period. For many people, traveling out of state or waiting weeks for their procedure will mean they won’t be able to access an abortion at all.The Texas plaintiff abortion providers are represented by attorneys from Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the Center for Reproductive Rights, the Lawyering Project and the Law Offices of Patrick J. O’Connell PLLC. A copy of the complaint can be found here. April 11, 2020: Human Rights Campaign posted news titled: “Virginia Values Act Signed Into Law – Extending Long Delayed, Critical Protections to LGBTQ Virginians”. From the news: …Today, HRC celebrated the signing into law of the Virginia Values Act by Governor Ralph Northam. The law will extend existing state non-discrimination protections in public employment, housing and credit to Virginians on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity and several other characteristics. Similar legislation passed through the Virginia Senate several times in recent years but was blocked by anti-equality lawmakers in the House of Delegates. In the 2019 election, voters in the commonwealth elected pro-equality majorities to both houses of the General Assembly, making this victory possible. In addition to sexual orientation and gender identity, the law also creates all-new protections for Virginians in private employment and places of public accommodation on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, pregnancy, childbirth or related medical conditions, age, marital status, disability, and status as a veteran. Virginia is the first state in the South to have non-discrimination protections for LGBTQ people, the first state in over a decade to add both sexual orientation and gender identity to existing non-discrimination law, and the first state since 1993 to add a prohibition on discrimination in public accommodations (protecting all Virginians) where none existed before.“When this law goes into effect on July 1, LGBTQ people in Virginia — and people of color, people of faith, immigrants, women and more — are at last protected from discrimination at work and in their communities,” said Alphonso David, president of the Human Rights Campaign. “No one should be discriminated against simply because of who they are or whom they love. Right now, as the country and the world deals with an unprecedented pandemic, it is more important than ever to ensure that leaders are looking out for all of us. In this period of uncertainty, it is vital that we are all protected from bias as we earn a living, access housing and healthcare, and seek goods and services. We have arrived at this moment today because of years and years of tireless work from advocates across the commonwealth, and the Virginia voters that filled the halls of the General Assembly with pro-equality champions who fulfilled their promises to their constituents. HRC worked to elect pro-equality lawmakers across Virginia in 2019, and we are proud to see that effort culminate with the signing of this vital law. We want to thank all who helped make this day possible.” “Equality Virginia has been working with lawmakers on both sides of the aisle for years to create a safer and more welcoming commonwealth for LGBTQ people,” said Vee Lamneck, executive director of Equality Virginia. “This law will have a transformative and positive impact on the lives of LGBTQ Virginians and bring Virginia into alignment with its voters.”Virginia is home to 257,400 LGBTQ adults. Under prior Virginia law, LGBTQ people were not explicitly protected from discrimination, meaning they were at risk of being fired, evicted or denied service in restaurants or stores. Virginia was one of only five states without protections in public accommodations for any protected class. The new law brings Virginia into the 21st century, and into alignment with Virginia voters, by modernizing and expanding existing human rights law… April 13, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Appeals Court Allows Care to Continue in Oklahoma During COVID-19 Pandemic”. From the press release: Today, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals let stand a lower court’s decision temporarily blocking Gov. Kevin Stitt’s ban on abortion care in Oklahoma during the COVID-19 pandemic. This means abortion providers in the state can continue providing essential, time-sensitive abortion care. The appeals court denied the state’s request to block a temporary restraining order issued by a lower court on April 6. Abortion providers will now seek a preliminary injunction from the district court which will continue to block the ban from taking effect until the case concludes.“Today Oklahomans can breathe a temporary sigh of relief. But the fight is not over. Instead of responding to the COVID-19 pandemic, Gov. Stitt is wasting valuable time and resources to attack essential, time-sensitive abortion services that cannot wait for a pandemic to pass,” said Alexis McGill Johnson, acting president and CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America. “Gov. Stitt’s relentless attacks on health care access during a public health crisis is making a dire situation even worse. We won’t stand for it. Planned Parenthood will continue to fight these cruel attacks on the abortion services our patients need in Oklahoma and across the country — no matter what.” “We are relieved that the court upheld access to abortion, since we know our patients who need essential, time-sensitive medical procedures like abortion cannot wait,” said Brandon Hill, PhD, president and CEO of Comprehensive Health of Planned Parenthood Great Plains. “The last thing public officials should do in the midst of a public health crisis is attack health care of any kind. We will do everything in our power to ensure our doors remain open for the patients who need sexual and reproductive health care, including access to abortion.”……This lawsuit was filed on March 30 by the Center for Reproductive Rights and Planned Parenthood Federation of America after Gov. Stitt issued an order requiring all elective surgeries and minor medical procedures be postponed. Gov. Stitt subsequently declared that the order prohibits all abortions in the state, forcing all health centers to halt abortion services. Executive orders like these have forced some patients to travel hundreds of miles to find abortion services during the pandemic.Oklahoma is not the first state to attempt to ban abortion during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the ACLU, and other organizations have filed lawsuits in multiple states. Temporary restraining orders allowing abortion services to continue have been secured in Alabama and Ohio. Over the weekend, abortion providers in Texas filed an emergency request with the U.S. Supreme Court, asking that medication abortions be allowed to continue in the state.Leading medical organizations like the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the American Medical Association (AMA) have opposed these attempts to restrict abortion during the pandemic. Both groups filed an amicus brief in this case, stating: “anning abortion will not help address the pandemic. Most abortions do not require any hospital resources and use only minimal PPE. And banning abortion will actually increase use of those resources and contribute to spread of the virus.” The Center for Reproductive Rights is challenging a host of other abortion restrictions in Oklahoma, including: a ban on the use of telemedicine to provide medication abortion; a law that forces patients to delay their abortion for at least 72 hours after receiving certain state-mandated information; a “physician-only” law that bans qualified medical professionals from providing medication abortion; a ban on the standard method of abortion after approximately 14 weeks of pregnancy; and a law requiring doctors to tell patients that some abortions can be “reversed” — a patently false statement… April 13, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Harris, 22 Senators Reintroduce Resolution Designating April 11-17 as Black Maternal Health Week”. From the press release: On Monday, U.S. Senator Kamala D. Harris (D-CA) led 22 of her colleagues in reintroducing a resolution to designate April 11-17, 2020 as Black Maternal Health Week to raise awareness about the Black maternal health crisis. The resolution was led in the House of Representatives by Congresswoman Alma Adams (D-NC).According to the Centers for Disease Control, Black mothers in the United States are three to four times more likely than white mothers to die from pregnancy-related complications and are two times more likely than white mothers to suffer from pregnancy-related illnesses, known as maternal morbidities.“The potential ramifications that could come with giving birth during the coronavirus pandemic — specifically a pandemic that is disproportionately impacting African Americans — is of particular concern to Black women who were already facing a maternal health crisis in our country,” said Senator Harris. “Now more than ever, we need to address this issue. During Black Maternal Health Week, we must continue in the fight to ensure Black women are taken seriously when they speak about their health concerns, and remove disparities and implicit bias from our health care system.”Joining Harris on the resolution are Senators Merkley (D-OR), Durbin (D-IL), Blumenthal (D-CT), Van Hollen (D-MD), Booker (D-NJ), Klobuchar (D-MN), Hirono (D-HI), Markey (D-MA), Jones (D-AL), Duckworth (D-IL), Menendez (D-NJ), Wyden (D-OR), Sanders (I-VT), Feinstein (D-CA), Murray (D-WA), Bennet (D-CO), Baldwin (D-WI), Peters (D-MI), Smith (D-MN), Brown (D-OH), Cortez Masto (D-NV), Stabenow (D-MI), and Gillibrand (D-NY).The resolution is sponsored by Black Mamas Matter Alliance, Center for Reproductive Rights, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Black Women’s Health Imperative, Center for Health and Gender Equity (CHANGE), Commonsense Childbirth, Every Mother Counts, In Our Own Voice: National Black Women’s Reproductive Justice Agenda, March for Moms, National Birth Equity Collaborative, National Black Midwives Alliance, National Medical Association, National Partnership for Women & Families, National Perinatal Task Force, National Women’s Law Center, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Southern Birth Justice Network, and WomenHeart: The National Coalition for Women with Heart Disease.“This resolution says, unequivocally, that Black Moms matter,” said Representative Adams, co-founder and co-chair of the Black Maternal Health Caucus. “I’m proud to stand with my colleagues to raise awareness of Black Maternal Health Week, and urge our Congressional leaders to take action on one of the greatest public health crises of our time.”“The Black Mamas Matter Alliance (BMMA) thanks Senator Harris and Congresswoman Adams for their continued support and amplification of Black Maternal Health Week (#BMHW20). As the founders of #BMHW20, BMMA believes that the experiences, voices, and maternity care work of Black women must be centered in order to address the U.S. maternal health crisis – hence the importance of recognizing April 11th – 17th as Black Maternal Health Week!” said Angela D. Aina, Interim Executive Director of BMMA.“The Center for Reproductive Rights applauds Senator Kamala Harris and Congresswoman Alma Adams on the introduction of this year’s Black Maternal Health Week Resolution. Now more than ever we need recognition of this crisis and federal solutions to save the lives of Black mothers,” said Jennifer Jacoby, Federal Policy Counsel. Breana Lipscomb, Senior Manager, U.S. Maternal Health and Rights Initiative, and BMMA Board Member added, “The COVID-19 pandemic has proven that chronic underinvestment in the public health infrastructure is deadly and Black people pay the price. This year’s resolution is a call to action, reminding us that in this time of crisis we cannot sacrifice the human rights of birthing people.”“Black Maternal Health Week is an important opportunity to bring national attention to the maternal mortality crisis facing Black women. This is a year like no other, as we grapple with the COVID-19 pandemic, an emergency that is endangering the health and economic well-being of millions and having a particularly harmful–and deadly–impact on the Black community. Sadly, we know the maternal mortality crisis and COVID-19 disparities share a common underlying force: racism and structural inequality. Now is the time to address those evils in this country once and for all, and do all that we can to ensure health equity along racial lines,” said Dr. Jamila Taylor, Director of Health Care Reform and Senior Fellow for the Century FoundationThe United States is one of only 13 countries in the world where rates of illness and death during pregnancy are on the rise. From 2000 to 2014, the U.S. experienced a substantial increase of 26.6 percent in maternal mortality rates.A full copy of the resolution can be found here. April 13, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted an article titled: “Black Maternal Health Week: Planned Parenthood calls on Congress to Endorse The Black Maternal Health Momnibus Act of 2020”. From the press release: This Black Maternal Health Week — an initiative spearheaded by the Black Mamas Matter Alliance (BMMA) — Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) joins patients, advocates, and providers to call for reform to improve maternal health care for Black women. Along with 90 other partners and organizations, PPFA endorses the The Black Maternal Health Momnibus Act of 2020, which was introduced last month by U.S. Representatives Lauren Underwood (D-IL) and Alma Adams (D-NC), U.S. Senator Kamala Harris (D-CA), and members of the Black Maternal Health Caucus. The bill addresses the racial disparities in pregnancy outcomes among Black women in America, including higher rates of death and severe morbidity.According to the latest data from the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Black women are 3 times more likely to die from pregnancy-related causes compared to white women. These outcomes are the result of bias of medical providers, structural racism, and economic inequality — leading to limited access to health care and a heightened risk of health complications. And recent data shows that Black Americans are disproportionately affected by COVID-19 due to medical racism and structural barriers to testing and receiving care. Congress must act now and pass the Momnibus Act so that research, policies, resources, and funds are allocated to combat the inequities in maternal health…While there is currently limited data and research on the effects of COVID-19 on pregnant women and infants, there are clear racial disparities in testing, treatment, and mortality rates among Black people who have been infected by the new coronavirus. The COVID-19 crisis makes the problems associated with maternal health even more acute, with social distancing guidance that keeps loved ones and doulas from the delivery room, reducing their ability to advocate for those in labor — and environmental factors that make pre- and postnatal care less feasible. Health equity will not be achieved without addressing racial equity, and addressing implicit bias in health care delivery is a top priority for Planned Parenthood. Planned Parenthood health center providers and staff undergo training to understand and eliminate provider bias, racial microaggressions, and stereotypes. Many Planned Parenthood health centers serve pregnant patients with screenings for diabetes, depression, substance abuse, and environmental and teratogenic exposures, as well as offering obesity management, smoking cessation support, vaccinations (including flu), and preconception genetic screening. Some Planned Parenthood health centers offer care for patients experiencing miscarriage and primary care and behavioral health. Planned Parenthood advocates for Black mothers and maternal health, and the improved health outcomes for Black women and communities. We endorse legislation that improves maternal health care, including the The Healthy MOMMIES Act and The Rural MOMS Act. The Momnibus bill would help ensure pregnancy and birth experiences are not contingent on race and that Black women have the freedom to be pregnant without added fear. It allocates the resources, investment, and support that would allow Black mothers to thrive…. April 13, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Leads Coalition Urging Supreme Court to Halt Public Charge Rule as Coronavirus Rages On”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James today led a coalition of three states and New York City in urging the U.S. Supreme Court to revisit the question of whether to halt implementation of the Trump Administration’s Public Charge Rule as New York and the nation undergo a public health crisis created by the spread of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The Public Charge Rule drives immigrants and their families away from accessing health benefits to which they are entitled by threatening applicants’ eligibility for green cards and visa renewals. The Supreme Court issued an order in January that had been denied by the lower courts, allowing the rule to take effect while legal challenges to the rule are pending in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and through a possible petition to the Supreme Court. Attorney General James and the coalition are today asking the court to revisit the question of interim relief in light of the new and devastating effects that the rule has had on the nation’s public-health and economy as COVID-19 has spread over the last six weeks, and — in an effort to prevent the rule from impeding efforts to slow the continued spread of the virus happening nationwide — to temporarily halt the Public Charge Rule until the national pandemic is over.“Every person who doesn’t get the health coverage they need today risks infecting another person with the coronavirus tomorrow,” said Attorney General James. “Immigrants provide us with health care, care for our elderly, prepare and deliver our food, clean our hospitals and public spaces, and take on so many other essential roles in our society, which is why we should all be working to make testing and health coverage available to every single person in this country, regardless of immigration status. Our country cannot afford to wait, yet the sustained application of the Public Charge Rule continues to harm this nation’s public health and our economy to its core. We’re asking the Supreme Court to temporarily halt this rule until this national crisis is over because any rule that threatens an immigrant’s well-being, threatens all of us.”Last August, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security issued a Public Charge Rule that changed the established meaning of public charge, which had long been that immigrants who use basic, non-cash benefits are not considered public charges because they are not primarily dependent on the government for survival.Federal law allows lawful immigrants to apply for certain supplemental public benefits if they have been in the country for at least five years. But the new Public Charge Rule creates a “bait-and-switch” ― if immigrants use these supplemental benefits to which they are legally entitled, they may jeopardize their chances of later becoming a legal permanent resident or renewing their visa……In the more than two months since the Supreme Court issued its ruling, COVID-19 has fundamentally changed the national landscape. The United States went from not a single reported COVID-19 case to well more than 575,000 confirmed infections and more than 23,000 confirmed deaths, and is now the country with the most virus-related deaths in the world. More than 195,000 of those infections and more than 10,000 deaths have been reported in New York State alone……Since that time, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio has issued a state of emergency, as have cities across the United States. New York Governor Andrew M. Cuomo has issued a state of emergency, as has every other state in the nation. President Donald J. Trump has declared a national state of emergency and has approved federal disaster declarations for all 50 states, as well as Washington, D.C., the U.S. Virgin Islands, the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, and Puerto Rico.The motion filed with the Supreme Court today by Attorney General James and the coalition asks the court to take into consideration the extraordinary events of the last six weeks and the new harms that the rule is causing to the public health and the economy during the COVID-19 crisis. The motion asks the court to temporarily lift or modify its stay to halt implementation of the Public Charge Rule until the national emergency concerning COVID-19 is over. Of note is the fact that immigrants make up a large number of essential workers helping move our nation along at this time, and if they don’t have access to the proper health care today, they are more likely to spread the virus to all Americans, inadvertently, tomorrow — not only contributing to the exponential growth of infection rates, but of fatalities as well.“By deterring immigrants from accessing publicly funded health care, including programs that would enable immigrants to obtain testing and treatment for COVID-19, the Rule makes it more likely that immigrants will suffer serious illness if infected and spread the virus inadvertently to others — risks that are heightened because immigrants make up a large proportion of the essential workers who continue to interact with the public,” the motion argues. “The Rule’s deterrent effect on immigrants’ access to health care and other public benefits for which they are indisputably eligible is impeding efforts to stop the spread of the coronavirus, preserve scarce hospital capacity and medical supplies, and protect the lives of everyone in our communities — citizens and noncitizens alike.”Further, the coalition argues that the nation’s economy cannot undergo further damage from the spread of COVID-19. In the three-week period between March 19 and April 9, more than 16 million residents across the nation lost their jobs and filed for unemployment. And according to estimates by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, between February and March 2020, the number of immigrant adults who are unemployed rose by 26 percent. As today’s motion argues, “many workers who lose their jobs and their employer-sponsored health insurance because of the pandemic are likely to need Medicaid coverage until they can find another job.”Attorney General James and the coalition conclude by arguing that none of these harms were before the Supreme Court when it decided to stay the district court’s orders in January, justifying a temporarily halt of the stay order. “The nature and magnitude of the harms currently being imposed by the Rule warrant temporary relief from the stay, particularly when these harms were not known to the parties or the Court when the Court considered defendants’ stay application. Although this case has always concerned issues of public health and welfare, the COVID-19 outbreak and its ramifications on public health and the economy present sudden and stark new circumstances not previously considered by the Court and have vastly changed and amplified the irreparable harms caused by the Rule. And the likelihood of these harms occurring is no longer a prediction. The Rule’s devastating effects are happening now. Given these new circumstances, the Court should modify or lift its stay temporarily to meet the exigencies and equities of the current public-health and economic crisis.”Joining Attorney General James in filing today’s motion with the Supreme Court are the attorneys general of Connecticut and Vermont, as well as corporation counsel for New York City. April 13, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “NARAL Pro-Choice America Responds to Emergency Appeal to Supreme Court After Texas Exploits Pandemic to Block Abortion Access”. From the press release: Today, doctors in Texas who provide abortion care— represented by the Center for Reproductive Rights, the Lawyering Project, and Planned Parenthood Federation of America — filed an emergency appeal with the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the Court to take immediate action to restore access to medication abortion in the state as the case unfolds.Texas Governor Greg Abbott, along with anti-choice officials in 11 other states, recently seized upon the COVID-19 pandemic to try to ban abortion, falsely claiming abortion care is “elective” rather than time-sensitive and essential healthcare for women. In response, NARAL President Ilyse Hogue released the following statement:“The fate of countless women and pregnant people in my home state of Texas now rests with the Supreme Court. Nine Justices face a choice between following an anti-choice GOP down a path to ignore science and prioritize ideology that undercuts fundamental freedoms and hurts women and families, or they can uphold the rule of law and scientific and medical advice. We’re here. We’re watching. And we’ll never stop fighting.”Anti-choice politicians in Texas have consistently worked to ban abortion and roll back reproductive freedom, even going so far as to introduce a bill last legislative session which would have punished women seeking abortion care with the death penalty. April 14, 2020: Politico posted an article titled: “SCOTUS won’t face abortion case after lower court eases Texas’ pandemic ban”. It was written by Alice Miranda Ollstein. From the article: Abortion rights groups on Tuesday withdrew their request for the Supreme Court to lift Texas’ coronavirus emergency ban on the procedure after a lower court allowed some abortions to resume in the state.The move allows the high court, at least for now, to avoid considering whether anti-aborion states can block access to the constitutionally protected procedure in the name of a public health crisis. However, bans from red states have popped up across the country in recent weeks, so the court could soon be confronted again with a similar question.Abortion rights groups called off their challenge to the Texas ban after the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in a Monday night ruling said medication abortions could continue under the state’s pandemic emergency order.Texas and several other conservative states who have long sought to curb abortion have deemed the procedure nonessential amid the public health crisis, arguing it would cut into short supply of protective gear for health workers and create unnecessary risk of coronavirus infection. Abortion rights advocates say the bans ultimately hurt public health and accuse Republican governors of using a health emergency to advance an anti-abortion agenda……Surgical abortions remain banned in the state for now for most patitents, except for those who would be unable to get an abortion under the state’s 22-week ban if further delayed……Texas’ emergency order is set to expire next week, but the state could decide to extend it. April 14, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “5th Circuit Court of Appeals Backs Down, Restores Medication Abortion in Texas for Now”. From the press release: Late Monday night, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals backed down from its stay of a lower court’s temporary restraining order that had protected access to medication abortions under Texas Gov. Greg Abbott’s COVID-19 order banning “non-essential procedures.” This means medication abortions — a two-pill process — will once again be available in Texas, for now.Last week, for a second time, the 5th Circuit blocked a temporary restraining order and made abortion largely inaccessible across the state. The appeals court ruled without even allowing providers time to respond. Instead, it waited to ask any questions until two days after abortion providers — represented by the Center for Reproductive Rights, the Lawyering Project, and Planned Parenthood Federation of America — asked the U.S. Supreme Court to take emergency action to restore access to medication abortion. Only then did the 5th Circuit ask the parties to further explain whether medication abortion is a “procedure.” This, despite the providers’ submission of numerous briefs in both the trial and appellate courts over the past few weeks making clear medication abortion is not a “procedure.”Consistent with all of its briefing in the case, including several to the 5th Circuit, abortion providers — including Planned Parenthood Center for Choice, Planned Parenthood Greater Texas Surgical Health Services, Planned Parenthood South Texas Surgical Center, Whole Woman’s Health, Whole Woman’s Health Alliance, Southwestern Women’s Surgery Center, and Austin Women’s Health Center — once again explained that medication abortion consists of two pills administered without any personal protective equipment (PPE).Even with the 5th Circuit’s decision to allow medication abortions under Gov. Abbott’s COVID-19 order, the only other abortion procedures that remain available are for Texas patients with a gestational age that would exceed the state’s legal limit by April 22 (one day after Gov. Abbott’s COVID-19 order expires).Statement of Alexis McGill Johnson, acting president and CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America:“It has become a day by day, week to week fight for people whose health care cannot wait. Planned Parenthood and its partners have never wavered in the facts: abortion is safe, necessary, and time-sensitive. While this is a very temporary relief for some Texans, many others still cannot access time-sensitive abortion procedures. As people try and navigate their new realities under a pandemic — job loss, quarantining with abusive partners, or still having to work essential jobs — we need more abortion access, not less. This fight is far from over.”……The 5th Circuit has yet to consider Texas Attorney General’s second petition for writ of mandamus, a rare procedural motion that could quickly end abortion access once again in the state.Leading medical experts, including the American Medical Association, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and the American Board of Obstetrics & Gynecology agree: forcing people to carry their pregnancies to term against their will only creates a heavier burden on a hospital system that’s already stretched thin caring for COVID-19 patients.Already, courts in Alabama, Ohio and Oklahoma are allowing abortion providers — just like all other doctors — to decide when to provide essential abortion care while conserving needed resources during this pandemic. Texas should be no different… April 14, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “Louisiana’s COVID-19 Ban on Abortion Challenged in Court”. From the press release: Today, the Center for Reproductive Rights filed a lawsuit challenging Louisiana’s latest attempt to close abortion clinics in the state. Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry has targeted abortion clinics for closure, citing the COVID-19 pandemic as justification. The Center is asking a federal court to immediately block the state’s attempts to shutter Hope Medical Group for Women and other abortion clinics.“This is a shameful abuse of power,” said Nancy Northup, President & CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights. “Louisiana has been trying for decades to end abortion. We are already fighting a separate Louisiana law at the Supreme Court that would shut down nearly every clinic in the state. If the state’s latest actions are not blocked, that will become a reality before the Supreme Court even rules.”“Hope Medical Group for Women is in full compliance of the Notice, but the Attorney General’s recent actions have thrown our patients into a state of fear and panic. There are women in Louisiana who need an abortion today—they cannot wait. But our hands are now being tied by the state,” said Kathaleen Pittman, clinic administrator for Hope Medical Group for Women in Shreveport, Louisiana. “If women can’t access abortion here in Louisiana, they will no doubt attempt to access care in other states, which will only hurt efforts to contain the spread of the coronavirus. Most of our patients are already mothers, so they are dealing with all this on top of caring for kids while schools are closed, and many are struggling financially.”Louisiana is one of several states that have attempted to restrict abortion access during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the ACLU, and other allies have filed challenges in multiple states. Temporary restraining orders allowing abortion care have been secured in Alabama, Ohio, and Oklahoma. Just last night, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals amended its previous ruling to allow medication abortion care to continue in Texas while they consider the rest of the state’s appeal.Leading medical organizations like the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the American Medical Association (AMA) have opposed these attempts to restrict abortion during the pandemic. Both groups filed an amicus brief in the case challenging Texas’s COVID-19 abortion ban, stating that interpreting Health Department Notices like Louisiana has “is likely to increase, rather than decrease, burdens on hospitals and use of PPE. At the same time, it will severely impair essential health care for women, and it will place doctors, nurses, and other medical professionals in an untenable position by criminalizing necessary medical care.”The Center’s lawsuit argues that although Hope has been in full compliance with the Health Department’s Notice, Louisiana’s recent actions and application of the Notice, would deny Louisianans’ access to essential, time-sensitive healthcare and violate their constitutional right to choose abortion prior to viability and nearly 50 years of Supreme Court precedent protecting a woman’s right to bodily integrity and autonomy under the Fourteenth Amendment. The lawsuit also argues that—contrary to the state’s claims—forcing women to carry a pregnancy to birth or travel out of state for abortion care in the middle of this current crisis is not only cruel and unconstitutional but will also undermine public health, by increasing the risk of spreading COVID-19 and expending more medical resources.The Center is currently litigating three other cases in Louisiana, including June Medical Services v. Russo—a case awaiting a decision from the Supreme Court that could leave just one abortion provider in the state. The Center also filed a lawsuit challenging seven abortion restrictions passed in 2016; and a lawsuit challenging the state’s targeted regulation of abortion providers (TRAP) laws.Louisiana has more abortion restrictions than any other state, andmore than 92% of Louisiana parishes have no abortion clinic. Since 2001, the number of abortion clinics in Louisiana has fallen from 11 to three as the state has imposed a slew of onerous requirements for abortion providers. There are nearly one million women of reproductive age in the state. This case was filed by Center for Reproductive Rights attorneys Jenny Ma, Caroline Sacerdote, and Arielle Humphries on behalf of Hope Medical Group for Women. The full complaint is available here. April 14, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Planned Parenthood Sexual Health Care Via Telehealth To Be Available in All 50 States”. From the press release: Today, Planned Parenthood announced a national expansion of telehealth services to provide health care by phone or video to patients in all 50 states by the end of April. Planned Parenthood knows that even during a pandemic, sexual and reproductive health services can’t wait — they are time-sensitive and essential. Through telehealth, patients can access timely care and information from Planned Parenthood’s trusted providers with fewer visits or without the need to visit a health center at all.While many things are different right now, you can still have a safe, healthy sex life. Planned Parenthood also has new digital resources available with information on the new coronavirus, or COVID-19, and how it can affect sexual and reproductive health. Planned Parenthood’s new webpages provide medically accurate answers to questions like “Can I still have sex?” and “What do I do if my birth control method is about to expire?” and “Can I still get an abortion during the COVID-19 pandemic?” Planned Parenthood has added new information to Roo, our sexual health chatbot, and to our popular Chat/Text program to help people understand how COVID-19 affects their sexual health and how to access health care during the pandemic. Statement from Alexis McGill Johnson, acting president and CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America:Sexual health needs don’t go away, even when our country is in crisis. Planned Parenthood is proud to redouble our efforts to make sure people can still access the care and information they need. We know this pandemic has increased barriers to health care for many of the communities we serve — at exactly the time when people need that care the most. Through telehealth, Planned Parenthood is providing the high-quality care and information people need to stay safe and healthy, even as our everyday reality is rapidly changing. Challenging times require us to innovate, and expand the tools that connect our expert, compassionate providers with patients who need care. No matter how you meet Planned Parenthood — in our health centers, online, or on your phone — we’re here with you.Telehealth appointments, where a patient connects with a provider in a different location using technology, are a secure and private way for people to access health care services without the need to travel. While telehealth services vary health center to health center, patients can access direct-to-patient services including birth control, sexually-transmitted infection (STI) testing and/or treatment, gender-affirming hormone therapy, pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP), UTI screening and treatment, and emergency contraception (also known as the morning-after pill). Some Planned Parenthood health centers also offer counseling and follow-up for abortions through telehealth. April 14, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Co-Leads Push with Michigan and North Carolina AGs for Increased Federal Government Outreach to Inform Americans of Healthcare Coverage Eligibility During COVID-19”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra today co-led a multistate letter to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and its Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) urging them to immediately develop and implement an outreach plan to inform the millions of Americans who have lost – or may lose – their employer-sponsored health insurance coverage about the Special Enrollment Period available to them through Healthcare.gov, the federal Exchange. In the letter, the attorneys general highlight the importance of providing families with the information and tools they need to navigate their healthcare options and access coverage during the unprecedented international healthcare crisis posed by COVID-19. “Healthcare is not a luxury. Neither, sadly, is it a right in America. Not yet. COVID-19 has made that crystal clear, especially for millions of American families suddenly struggling against health and economic uncertainty,” said Attorney General Becerra. “The federal government has the tools to help under the Affordable Care Act. HHS and CMS can actively and immediately reach out to and inform Americans, especially those who have lost their jobs and insurance, that they can now apply for affordable healthcare coverage through the federal healthcare Exchange. We call on the federal government to act, this is no time for spectating.”In the letter, the attorneys general highlight that the Affordable Care Act (ACA) provides the flexibility necessary to help people wrestling with the loss of their livelihood and their family’s healthcare coverage during this critical time. The ACA requires the HHS Secretary to provide yearly open enrollment periods on the Exchanges to permit individuals to enroll in new or different healthcare coverage. Outside of this period, individuals may enroll in coverage through the Exchange only if they qualify for a Special Enrollment Period due to certain life events such as loss of employment offering healthcare coverage. Informing individuals of the potential for replacing the coverage they have lost through Healthcare.gov is vital, as most Americans obtain their healthcare coverage through their employer. In 2018, over half of individuals under age 65 had insurance through an employer. The importance of this outreach will only increase as the economic upheaval of this crisis continues to expand. A new study by the Health Management Associates estimates that the number of people receiving coverage from an employer could decline by up to 35 million due to layoffs caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. This same study estimates that the economic impact to the labor market could disproportionately impact the roughly 58 million non-elderly individuals who have employer-sponsored coverage and earn less than $50,000 per year. This heavily hit population could greatly benefit from navigating their options on the Exchanges where they may qualify for subsidies to help pay for healthcare coverage. The coalition expresses concern that, without immediate and widespread outreach, Americans who have recently been laid off will remain unaware of the Special Enrollment Period and thus not access needed healthcare coverage. Evidence shows that marketplace advertising and consumer assistance increases enrollment numbers and stabilizes markets. For this reason, states that run their own Exchanges, like California, continue to invest heavily in marketing and outreach to support their state-based marketplaces. Yet, over the last few years, the Trump Administration has actively cut marketplace advertising and consumer assistance. HHS, as the operator of Healthcare.gov, must step in to get the word out to consumers in the 38 states that rely on the federal Exchange. HHS should also ensure that outreach materials are translated into the same range of languages as other HHS vital documents in order to ensure meaningful access to information about the Special Enrollment Period. The attorneys general urge HHS to empower individuals and working families across the country to pursue the best coverage option for them, whether it is Exchange coverage, COBRA, Medicare, Medicaid, or the Children’s Health Insurance Program. While the federal government’s promise to reimburse for the testing and treatment of COVID-19 for the uninsured is a step in the right direction, it will not help provide these Americans the comprehensive healthcare they so desperately need and could leave many families with large hospital and insurance bills in the long-run.Joining Attorney General Becerra in sending the letter are the attorneys general of Michigan, North Carolina, and Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington and the District of Columbia. April 14, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “Emergency Lawsuit Filed in Tennessee to Keep Abortion Accessible During Pandemic”. From the press release: Today, a Tennessee order effectively banning abortion procedures in the state was challenged by the Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the American Civil Liberties Union and the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee. The April 8 order, issued by Tennessee Governor Bill Lee in response to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, limits “non-emergency” health care procedures and bars people from getting a procedural abortion. Patients who are less than 11 weeks pregnant are still permitted to obtain medication abortions in the state.Tennessee is not the first state to restrict abortion care during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the ACLU, and other allies have filed lawsuits in multiple states. In Texas, most abortions are currently prohibited, and providers have asked the Supreme Court to intervene on an emergency basis. Court decisions allowing abortion care to continue have occurred in Alabama, Ohio and Oklahoma. Statement from Nancy Northup, President & CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights:“We have filed this case to protect the constitutional rights of women in Tennessee who need access to essential, time-sensitive abortion care. All signs indicate that this crisis will not be over soon, and patients cannot wait until it is. Leading medical experts have been clear that COVID-19 responses should not ban abortion care.”..…The lawsuit filed today argues that Tennessee’s order effectively bans abortion in the state for many women, violating Roe v. Wade and nearly 50 years of Supreme Court precedent protecting a woman’s right to liberty and autonomy under the Fourteenth Amendment. The lawsuit also argues that forcing women to travel out of state for abortion care, or to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term and give birth, will increase the risk of spreading COVID-19 and undermine the state’s asserted goal of preserving medical resources and limiting person-to-person encounters. Leading medical organizations like the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the American Medical Association (AMA) have opposed these attempts to restrict abortion during the pandemic. Both groups filed an amicus brief in the case challenging Texas’s COVID-19 abortion ban, stating: “Indeed, the Governor’s order is likely to increase, rather than decrease, burdens on hospitals and use of PPE. At the same time, it will severely impair essential health care for women, and it will place doctors, nurses, and other medical professionals in an untenable position by criminalizing necessary medical care.” Tennessee also bans the use of telehealth for medication abortion — a tool that could greatly expand access and reduce in-person contact. Other abortion restrictions in Tennessee include: a mandatory 48-hour waiting period (which includes a requirement that patients make an additional, medically unnecessary trip to the clinic to receive state-mandated information); limits on when state and public insurance can cover abortion services; and a requirement that minors obtain parental consent. This lawsuit was filed by the Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the ACLU, the ACLU of Tennessee and pro-bono counsel Kramer Levin. Plaintiffs in the case are CHOICES Memphis Center for Reproductive Health, Knoxville Center for Reproductive Health, Planned Parenthood of Tennessee and North Mississippi, Adams & Boyle P.C, and Dr. Kimberly Looney. The full complaint is available here. April 15, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: Trump Administration’s Decision to Suspend Funding to the World Health Organization is Devastating for Global Health”. From the press release: Yesterday evening, the Trump administration announced it would suspend funding to the World Health Organization (WHO), a move that would be devastating for global health especially amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. An effective response must be evidence-based and grounded in data; it requires global cooperation and coordination from all countries around the world, especially the United States, which now has the largest number of COVID-19 fatalities. As the foremost institution for global health research and response, the WHO has a mandate to promote the highest standard of health for all and provide leadership and expertise in the delivery of essential health care, including sexual and reproductive health. Since its founding over 70 years ago, the WHO has led the global response to health emergencies such as tuberculosis, HIV, malaria, Zika, avian influenza, and SARS.Statement from Monica Kerrigan, Executive Director, Planned Parenthood Global: “As the world faces the COVID-19 pandemic, we need global cooperation and the leadership of the World Health Organization more than ever. Cutting funding to the WHO undermines global health and endangers the lives of all people, including those living in the U.S. This is not the time for political maneuvering—it is the time for bold leadership and urgent action both globally and locally. Abandoning the foremost institution for global health – a powerhouse of research with decades of experience responding to global pandemics – is shortsighted and devastating. We cannot forget that the fates of the U.S. and the rest of the world are intertwined.”This isn’t the first time the Trump administration has withdrawn from UN agencies. For the past three years, the administration has withheld funding from UNFPA, the principal UN agency providing reproductive health care around the world. And in 2018, the Trump administration withdrew from the Human Rights Council, the UN body charged with protection of global human rights. April 15, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “Statement from the Center for Reproductive Rights on the Trump Administration’s suspension of funding of the World Heath Organization”. From the press release: The following is the statement of Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights regarding the Trump Administration’s suspension of funding of the World Health Organization (WHO).“It is irresponsible and unjust for President Trump to direct the United States to halt funding to the WHO during this extraordinary crisis. Countries, health professionals and humanitarian relief organizations across the globe rely on WHO guidance and support to effectively respond to the pandemic. Suspension of funding will limit this ability, including the ability to effectively provide time-sensitive, essential health care, grounded in evidence, equity and human rights.Delay or denial of time-sensitive, essential health care, exacerbates the dire situation we are facing around the globe, but especially for marginalized populations, including women and girls, threatening their rights to life, health and gender equality in fundamental ways. The WHO has provided important guidance for reproductive healthcare, which is central to women’s health and can itself be life-saving. WHO guidance during this pandemic has included information on caring for pregnant women, infants and mothers with COVID-19 as well as information on intrapartum care (IPC) and breastfeeding, and on contraception and family planning during the Covid-19 response.“We call on President Trump to continue United States funding to the WHO and support its urgent global, evidence-based, public health response. April 15, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement on President Trump Halting WHO Funding”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued this statement after President Trump announced that he would halt funding to the World Health Organization in the middle of the coronavirus crisis:“The President’s halting of funding to the WHO as it leads the global fight against the coronavirus pandemic is senseless.“We can only be successful in defeating this global pandemic through a coordinated international response with respect for science and data. But sadly, as he has since Day One, the President is ignoring global health experts, disregarding science and undermining the heroes fighting on the frontline, at great risk of the lives and livelihoods of Americans and people around the world. This is another case, as I have said, of the President’s ineffective response, that ‘a weak person, a poor leader, takes no responsibility. A weak person blames others.’“This decision is dangerous, illegal and will be swiftly challenged.” April 17, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “Court Blocks Tennessee’s COVID-19 Ban on Most Abortions”. From the press release: Today — at the request of the Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the American Civil Liberties Union and the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee — a federal district court in Tennessee granted an emergency motion, allowing clinics to resume procedural abortions during the COVID-19 pandemic. The decision comes after Gov. Bill Lee issued a state order limiting “non-emergency” health care procedures. That order banned all abortions other than medication abortions (which involve taking pills and are only available until 11 weeks of pregnancy), despite leading national medical groups agreeing that abortion procedures are essential and time-sensitive.In his decision, Judge Bernard Friedman wrote, “Moreover, abortion is a time-sensitive procedure. Delaying a woman’s access to abortion even by a matter of days can result in her having to undergo a lengthier and more complex procedure that involves progressively greater health risks, or can result in her losing the right to obtain an abortion altogether. Therefore, plaintiffs have demonstrated that enforcement of EO-25 causes them irreparable harm.” “Women in Tennessee can breathe a sigh of relief for now, knowing abortion procedures are available again in their home state,” said Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights. “Today’s ruling in Tennessee joins those from courts across the country that have blocked these abuses of emergency powers. Women cannot wait until the pandemic is over to access abortion care, and we will continue fighting to make sure they can.” ……Since the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak, many states have attempted to ban or limit abortion. In addition to Tennessee, lawsuits are ongoing in Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Ohio, Oklahoma, and Texas. Court decisions allowing abortion care to continue have been issued in Alabama, Arkansas, Ohio, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Texas. Leading medical organizations like the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the American Medical Association (AMA) have opposed these attempts to restrict abortion during the pandemic. Both groups filed an amicus brief in the case challenging Oklahoma’s COVID-19 ban, stating: “anning abortion will not help address the pandemic. Most abortions do not require any hospital resources and use only minimal PPE. And banning abortion will actually increase use of those resources and contribute to spread of the virus.” Tennessee also bans the use of telehealth for medication abortion — a method that could greatly expand access and reduce in-person contact. Other abortion restrictions in Tennessee include: a mandatory 48-hour waiting period (which includes a requirement that patients make an additional, medically unnecessary trip to the clinic to receive state-mandated information); limits on when state and public insurance can cover abortion services; and a requirement that minors obtain parental consent. This lawsuit was filed by the Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the ACLU, the ACLU of Tennessee and pro-bono counsel Kramer Levin. Plaintiffs in the case are CHOICES Memphis Center for Reproductive Health, Knoxville Center for Reproductive Health, Planned Parenthood of Tennessee and North Mississippi, Bristol Regional Women’s Center, and Dr. Kimberly Looney. The decision is available here. April 19, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Demands Insurance Providers Obey the Law, Protect Women’s Access to Birth Control”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James today demanded that three health insurance companies immediately provide coverage for 12-month supplies of contraceptives in accordance with New York State law. Under the Comprehensive Contraception Coverage Act (CCCA), health insurance providers are required to cover 12-month supplies of contraception at one time, yet the Attorney General’s Office found that Aetna, MetroPlus Health, and Oscar Health have refused to provide coverage for 12-month supplies to patients. In letters to these three companies, Attorney General James stressed the importance of adhering to this law especially in the midst of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, as many New Yorkers lose their jobs, health insurance coverage, and need to limit unnecessary trips to pharmacies.“There’s nothing more important than protecting New Yorkers’ health care, including reproductive care,” said Attorney General James. “With more than one million New Yorkers losing their jobs, and with it their health insurance, it’s critically important that women are able to fill their birth control prescriptions for the full duration allowed under the law. Insurance companies must comply with the law and permit women to get up to a year’s supply of birth control. During this crisis and beyond, I will continue to fight to protect New Yorkers’ health care and their rights.”The Attorney General’s Office received multiple complaints from New Yorkers that these companies refused to provide patients with 12-month supplies when requested and that representatives did not know this was required. The Attorney General’s Office is also reminding other insurers in New York State of their obligations under the CCCA. In addition to ensuring access to 12-month supplies, the CCCA, which took effect on January 1, 2020, requires that health plans cover all forms of contraception without deductible, coinsurance, copayment, or any other cost-sharing requirements, ensures access to emergency contraception, and prohibits any restrictions or delays on coverage, such as pre-authorizations. Attorney General James encourages anyone who has been denied this coverage by their health insurance plan or pharmacy or who believes they are being wrongfully denied other care to please report it to the Attorney General’s Office Health Care Bureau Helpline by filing a complaint or calling 1-800-428-9071. New Yorkers seeking information about available health plans in New York State should visit the state’s health plan marketplace…. April 20, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Court Blocks Tennessee’s COVID-19 Ban on Most Abortions”. From the press release: Today, at the request of the Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the American Civil Liberties Union and the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee – a federal district court in Tennessee granted an emergency motion, allowing clinics to resume procedural abortions during the COVID-19 pandemic. The decision comes after Gov. Bill Lee issued a state order limiting “non-emergency” health care procedures. That order banned all abortions other than medication abortions (which involve taking pills and are only available until 11 weeks of pregnancy), despite leading national medical groups agreeing that abortion procedures are essential and time-sensitive.In his decision, Judge Bernard Friedman wrote, “Moreover, abortion is a time-sensitive procedure. Delaying a woman’s access to abortion even by a matter of days can result in her having to undergo a lengthier and more complex procedure that involves progressively greater health risks, or can result in her losing the right to obtain an abortion altogether. Therefore, plaintiffs have demonstrated that enforcement of EO-25 causes them irreparable harm.” “Let’s be clear: Abortion is essential, it’s time-sensitive, and it cannot wait. Though this is good news for our patients today, we should never have had to go to court to defend their health care access. A pandemic is a time to expand health care, not an excuse to take it away,” said Alexis McGill Johnson, acting president and CEO of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America. “Planned Parenthood is here for the patients and communities we serve in Tennessee, and we won’t back down when it comes to protecting our patients.” “Abortion is essential health care and today is a win for our patients who need and deserve access to that care,” said Ashley Coffield, president & CEO of Planned Parenthood of Tennessee and North Mississippi. “The priority of Planned Parenthood health centers has always been the health and safety of our patients, staff, and community. Since the onset of the pandemic, we have done our part to promote best practices that reduce the transmission of the coronavirus and conserve needed resources. I am grateful that the guidance in the executive order has been clarified so we may continue to do so while still meeting the needs of our patients.”“Women in Tennessee can breathe a sigh of relief for now, knowing abortion procedures are available again in their home state,” said Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights. “Today’s ruling in Tennessee joins those from courts across the country that have blocked these abuses of emergency powers. Women cannot wait until the pandemic is over to access abortion care, and we will continue fighting to make sure they can.” ……Since the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak, many states have attempted to ban or limit abortion. In addition to Tennessee, lawsuits are ongoing in Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Ohio, Oklahoma, and Texas. Court decisions allowing abortion care to continue have been issued in Alabama, Arkansas, Ohio, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Texas.Leading medical organizations like the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the American Medical Association (AMA) have opposed these attempts to restrict abortion during the pandemic. Both groups filed an amicus brief in the case challenging Oklahoma’s COVID-19 ban, stating: “anning abortion will not help address the pandemic. Most abortions do not require any hospital resources and use only minimal PPE. And banning abortion will actually increase use of those resources and contribute to spread of the virus.” Tennessee also bans the use of telehealth for medication abortion — a method that could greatly expand access and reduce in-person contact. Other abortion restrictions in Tennessee include: a mandatory 48-hour waiting period (which includes a requirement that patients make an additional, medically unnecessary trip to the clinic to receive state-mandated information); limits on when state and public insurance can cover abortion services; and a requirement that minors obtain parental consent. This lawsuit was filed by the Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the ACLU, the ACLU of Tennessee and pro-bono counsel Kramer Levin. Plaintiffs in the case are CHOICES Memphis Center for Reproductive Health, Knoxville Center for Reproductive Health, Planned Parenthood of Tennessee and North Mississippi, Bristol Regional Women’s Center, and Dr. Kimberly Looney.The decision is available here. April 20, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “Medication Abortion Blocked Again in Texas COVID-19 Court Battle”. Today, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against abortion providers, prohibiting medication abortion yet again for women in Texas. At Texas’ request, the court vacated a lower court’s ruling that allowed medication abortion to continue. Today’s decision means that most abortions are again prohibited in Texas. Only patients who will pass the state’s gestational limit by April 22 (when the emergency order expires) will be allowed to have an abortion. The ruling is one of many that has created legal whiplash, causing confusion and uncertainty for hundreds of patients in need of essential, time-sensitive abortion care.Statement from Nancy Northup, president & CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights:“The appellate court is creating chaos and uncertainty for women seeking abortions in Texas. Patients who had appointments scheduled will now be thrown into a state of panic yet again. It’s clear this abortion ban has nothing to do with the pandemic. Texas has been trying to restrict abortion for decades and this is part of that larger strategy. We will continue to fight for the rights of the women of Texas.” April 20, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Leads Coalition Fighting Arkansas’ Unconstitutional Abortion Ban During COVID-19 Pandemic”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James has led a multistate coalition of 19 attorneys general in seeking to stop the State of Arkansas from banning almost all procedural abortions in the state, as the state uses the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-2019) public health crisis as an excuse. Continuing her leadership of the nation’s fight to protect women’s reproductive health, Attorney General James led the coalition in filing an amicus brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, supporting the plaintiffs in Little Rock Family Planning Services v. In re Leslie Rutledge, as they fight to preserve access to reproductive health care for the women across Arkansas.“While multiple states are using the coronavirus as an excuse to push their anti-choice political agenda, we will continue fighting every day so that women retain control of their reproductive rights across this country,” said Attorney General James. “A pandemic does not give any state the right to undo all the progress made in the nearly 50 years since Roe, which is why I will continue to lead the fights against Arkansas, Oklahoma, Texas, or any other state that attempts to use this public health crisis as unjustified grounds to control women’s bodies, their choices, and their freedoms.”Women seeking an abortion in Arkansas typically have the choice between one of two options: a medication abortion (induced by taking two different prescription drugs) or a procedural abortion (a procedure performed by aspiration or by dilation and evacuation, neither of which involves general anesthesia or incision). Medication abortions can take place through the 10th week of pregnancy in Arkansas, while a procedural abortion can currently take place through approximately 22 weeks of pregnancy, despite new state laws, passed last year, attempting to scale back that period to just 18 weeks. Only one abortion clinic in the entire State of Arkansas is currently licensed to perform procedural abortions — the Little Rock Family Planning Services (LRFPS) health clinic.On March 11, 2020, Arkansas Governor Asa Hutchinson issued Executive Order 20-03, declaring a state of emergency. Ten days later, on March 21, 2020, the Arkansas Department of Health (ADH) issued a public statement recommending that health care facilities and clinicians “prioritize urgent and emergency visits and procedures now and for the coming several weeks.” The statement detailed that its goals were to “preserve staff, personal protective equipment (PPE), and patient care supplies; ensure staff and patient safety; and expand available hospital capacity during the COVID-19 pandemic.” The ADH stated that “rocedures … that can be safely postponed shall be rescheduled to an appropriate future date.” The ADH issued another directive on April 3 with the same language as the March 21 directive, but which further specified that “urgent” and “care designated as an exception…will continue,” including care for circumstances in which “there is a risk of…progression of staging of a…condition if surgery is not performed.”On April 1, representatives from the ADH called LRFPS twice to inquire about what the clinic was doing to reduce non-essential services, preserve PPE, and protect against the spread of COVID-19. On both occasions, LRFPS summarized practices it was following. On April 7, ADH inspectors performed an unannounced, in-person inspection at LRFPS. At no point during either of the phone calls or the in-person inspection (which occurred on a day during which both procedural and medication abortions were being provided) did the ADH representatives suggest that LRFPS was not complying with the state’s April 3 directive.However, on the morning of April 10, ADH inspectors hand delivered a cease-and-desist order to LRFPS, asserting that the clinic was “in violation of the April 3, 2020 Arkansas Department of Health Directive on Elective Surgeries,” despite acknowledging that the April 7 inspection “did not reveal any deficiencies with respect to the rules for abortion facilities in Arkansas.” The cease-and-desist order stated that the April 3 “prohibition applies to surgical abortions that are not immediately necessary to protect the life or health of the patient” and that “ny further violations of the April 3 Directive will result in an immediate suspension of license.”Although the ADH is using the April 3 directive as the basis for ordering LRFPS to stop performing procedural abortions — except when the life or health of the woman is at immediate risk — the ADH has, to date, continued to allow a range of other non-urgent medical services, including orthodontist visits to adjust orthodontic wires and dentist visits to treat cracked teeth. Further, at an April 9 press conference with Governor Hutchinson and Arkansas State Health Director Dr. Nathaniel Smith, Dr. Smith was asked if “elective surgery” was still permitted in the state, and he responded that judgments at surgical centers would be left primarily to the providers.A lawsuit LRFPS filed last year against government officials in the State of Arkansas in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas was amended on April 13 to add a challenge to the ADH April 3 directive and, specifically, the cease-and-desist order issued on April 10. The next day, the district court issued a temporary restraining order blocking the state from shutting down LRFPS’s procedural abortion services, in which the court noted that the state’s ban would, among other things, “bar access to abortion because medication abortion is contraindicated” for some women; “likely push to a more complex and more time-intensive” abortion procedure; and “likely push beyond the point at which abortion is available in the State.”The district court also noted that the continuation of procedural abortions would not preserve PPE or hospital resources because procedural abortions make minimal use of both, and that continuing to allow procedural abortions would not increase the risk of transmission of COVID-19 any more than other activities that Governor Hutchinson has allowed to continue in Arkansas. Instead, the court observed, the state’s decision to bar procedural abortions in Arkansas will cause some women to undertake lengthy interstate travel that will actually increase the risk of transmission of the disease. The different defendants then asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit to halt the lower court’s order, which would effectively reinstitute the ban on procedural abortions in the State of Arkansas.In the amicus brief filed on Friday, Attorney General James and the coalition lay out why they oppose the request to halt the lower court’s temporary restraining order, stressing that the ban on procedural abortions in Arkansas infringes on a woman’s constitutional rights. The coalition explains that the “characterization of the ban as prohibiting only ‘elective’ procedures fails to recognize how the time-sensitive nature of abortion care distinguishes that care from services that can be postponed without patient harm during the current public health crisis” because “abortions cannot be deferred indefinitely or for long stretches without increasing risks for some women and denying access to others.” The coalition explains that Arkansas’ “ban on abortions will irreparably injure any woman who reaches the legal limit for an abortion during the ban,” resulting in some women “permanently los their right to lawfully obtain an abortion in Arkansas.”Additionally, Attorney General James and the coalition go on to highlight that if the ban were to be reinstated, some women in Arkansas would be forced to make “risky and expensive” travel plans to cross state lines in order to obtain an abortion. This is especially troublesome at a time when the entire U.S. population is being asked to limit travel to stop the spread of COVID-19. Further, the coalition notes that residents of New York and other amici states may currently be in Arkansas without a way to return home, but they still have a right to time-sensitive reproductive care.Finally, the coalition explains why a ban on abortion would not help the state preserve PPE, free up hospital beds, or prevent the spread of COVID-19 transmissions. As the district court noted in its temporary restraining order, the exact opposite is actually true. The attorneys general note that procedural abortions require limited PPE and actually require “far less PPE and medical resources than continuing a pregnancy” does. Additionally, procedural abortions rarely require admission to a hospital.The amended complaint by LRFPS was filed in a suit brought last year when the governor, in March 2019, signed into law several bills intended to restrict a woman’s access to abortion services throughout the state. The laws would criminalize abortions performed after 18 weeks and impose additional undue burdens on a woman’s constitutional right to an abortion. In July 2019, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas granted a preliminary injunction and temporarily blocked the laws restricting abortion care from taking effect. The State of Arkansas appealed the decision to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals shortly thereafter. Earlier this year, in January, Attorney General James filed a multistate amicus brief in support of LRFPS’s lawsuit that seeks to protect a woman’s right to safe and legal abortion care without the burdensome restrictions imposed by Arkansas’ laws… April 20, 2020: American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) posted a press release titled: “AAP does not recommend home births, but offers guidance”. From the press release: The AAP has released updated guidance to protect the health of infants born at home, even as the Academy does not recommend this option.Hospitals and accredited birth centers remain the safest settings for birth in the U.S.Planned home birth in the U.S. has been associated with a two- to three-fold increase in infant mortality and an increased incidence of low Apgar scores and neonatal seizures, according to the policy statement Providing Care for Infants Born at Home from the AAP Committee on Fetus and Newborn.But because some women will continue to choose a home birth, the AAP has issued the guidance – similar to a 2013 policy – to help pediatricians discuss the issue with those seeking information or counsel……The AAP and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists support provision of care by midwives who are certified by the American Midwifery Certification Board or its predecessor organizations or whose education and licensure meet International Confederation of Midwives Global Standards for Midwifery Education.Two care providers should be present at each delivery. At least one should have primary responsibility for the newborn and appropriate training, skills, and equipment to perform full resuscitation of the infant according to the Neonatal Resuscitation Program.This guidance also is supported by the American Heart Association. April 21, 2020: Centers for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “Court Says Oklahoma Abortion Providers Can Stay Open as COVID-19 Lawsuit Continues”. From the press release: Last night, a federal district judge in Oklahoma granted a preliminary injunction allowing most abortion care to continue in the state, and allowing abortion access to resume fully on Friday, April 24, despite Gov. Kevin Stitt’s order banning abortion during the COVID-19 pandemic. The judge previously granted a temporary restraining order allowing most abortion care to continue through April 20, but yesterday’s decision extends that relief until the case concludes, and allows all abortion care to resume on Friday. The request for emergency relief came from the Center for Reproductive Rights and Planned Parenthood Federation of America on behalf of Oklahoma abortion providers.Statement from Nancy Northup, President & CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights:“This ruling should send a clear message: enough is enough. Oklahoma now has struck out three times–twice at the district court and once at the appellate court. It’s time for Oklahoma and other states to stop exploiting the pandemic to close abortion clinics and deny women essential, time-sensitive healthcare.” The decision is available here. April 21, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Leads Coalition Fighting Tennesse’s Unconstitutional Abortion Ban During COVID-19 Pandemic”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James today led a multistate coalition of 19 attorneys general in seeking to stop the State of Tennessee from banning almost all procedural abortions in the state, using the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-2019) public health crisis as an excuse. Continuing her leadership of the nation’s fight to protect women’s reproductive health, Attorney General James led the coalition in filing an amicus brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, supporting the plaintiffs in Adams & Boyle, P.C., v. Slatery, as they fight to preserve access to reproductive health care for women across Tennessee.“Tennessee is the latest state to use the coronavirus as an excuse to outlaw abortion and strip women of their constitutional rights,” said Attorney General James. “This is just another power grab by a state willing to sacrifice women’s abortion rights to push a suppressive political agenda. We are standing up against this ban because the efforts by Tennessee and multiple other states to deny women their constitutionally-guaranteed rights will not go unchallenged. This is about protecting women’s bodies and their freedoms.”Women seeking an abortion in Tennessee typically can obtain a medication abortion (induced by taking two different prescription drugs) or a procedural abortion (performed by aspiration or by dilation and evacuation, neither of which involves general anesthesia or incision). Medication abortions can take place through the 11th week of pregnancy in Tennessee, while a procedural abortion can currently take place through the 20th week of pregnancy, despite indications by the governor and many members of the legislature to scale back those timeframes.On March 23, 2020, Tennessee Governor Bill Lee issued Executive Order No. 18, in which he declared: “All hospitals and surgical outpatient facilities…shall not perform non-essential procedures, which includes any medical procedure that is not necessary to address a medical emergency or to preserve the health and safety of a patient, as determined by a licensed medical provider.” Although the governor — through his aides — made clear his “hope and expectation” that “elective” abortions wouldn’t take place during the pandemic, he allowed for certain exemptions in his order, including one for “pregnancy-related visits and procedures.”As has been reported in multiple news outlets, opponents of abortion — including legislatures, lobbyists, and activists — then put pressure on the governor’s office to clarify the first executive order and ban all abortions in the state. Emails released in the media show one lawmaker even asking the governor’s office if they had explored how other states addressed the “apparent way around” the order Tennessee abortion providers were using to continue providing abortion services. On April 8, before his earlier emergency order expired, Governor Lee issued Executive Order No. 25 with stricter guidelines that declared: “All health care professionals and health care facilities in the State of Tennessee shall postpone surgical and invasive procedures that are elective and non-urgent,” in which the life or health of the patient is not in jeopardy. Following that order, Tennessee Health Commissioner Lisa Piercey warned health care providers about the potential to be charged with a Class A misdemeanor and face penalties and discipline by medical boards if they did not comply with the governor’s executive order.The next week, on April 13, the CHOICES Memphis Center for Reproductive Health, the Knoxville Center for Reproductive Health, Planned Parenthood of Tennessee and North Mississippi, Adams & Boyle P.C, and Dr. Kimberly Looney (an obstetrician-gynecologist) sought to file an amended complaint in a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, along with a motion for a preliminary injunction to immediately halt the ban of all procedural abortions. In that suit, the providers had previously challenged Tennessee’s 48-hour waiting period for any woman seeking an abortion.Last Friday, on April 17, the district court accepted the plaintiffs’ amended complaint and granted a preliminary injunction that immediately halted the ban of procedural abortions. The court found that “elaying a woman’s access to abortion even by a matter of days can result in her having to undergo a lengthier and more complex procedure that involves progressively greater health risks, or can result in her losing the right to obtain an abortion altogether.”That same day, Tennessee appealed the order for a preliminary injunction to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.In the amicus brief filed today in the Sixth Circuit, Attorney General James and the coalition lay out why they oppose the request to halt the lower court’s preliminary injunction, stressing that the ban on procedural abortions in Tennessee infringes on a woman’s constitutional rights. The coalition explains that the Tennessee defendants’ “characterization of the ban as a few weeks’ postponement of an ‘elective and non-urgent’ procedure fails to recognize how the time-sensitive nature of abortion care distinguishes that care from services that can be deferred without patient harm during the current public health crisis” because procedural “abortions cannot be deferred indefinitely or for long stretches without increasing risks for some women and denying access to others.”The coalition notes that a ban on procedural abortions — “which appellants do not dispute will likely be extended even further — will irreparably injure any woman who reaches the legal limit for an abortion during the ban,” resulting in some women losing their constitutional right to a legal abortion.Attorney General James and the coalition also explain that a prohibition on procedural abortions, even for a short period of time, would harm some women by requiring them “to undergo a more invasive and complex procedural abortion.”Additionally, the coalition goes on to highlight that the procedural abortion ban would force some women in Tennessee to make “risky and expensive” travel plans to cross state lines in order to obtain a procedural abortion. This is especially troublesome at a time when the entire U.S. population is being asked to limit travel to stop the spread of COVID-19. Further, residents of New York and other amici states may currently be in Tennessee without a way to return home, but they still have a right to time-sensitive reproductive care.The attorneys general add that: “To decrease transmission risks, reproductive health care clinics in amici States have increased the use of telehealth to conduct assessments, which reduces travel and in-person interactions. Some amici have modified state rules to allow increased use of telehealth during the pandemic. While Tennessee has taken similar steps to increase telehealth, it has refused to do so for abortion care.”Instead of limiting women’s access to abortions, Tennessee should be joining Attorney General James’ call to increase access to telehealth medicine for abortion care and timely medication abortions so that women seeking abortions don’t have to fear going out and contracting COVID-19 during this public health crisis. Last month, Attorney General James sent a letter to both the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration requesting that the Trump Administration waive or utilize its discretion not to enforce its Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) designation, which dictates and subsequently impedes women’s access to the medication abortion prescription drug known as Mifepristone. Attorney General James called on the Trump Administration to ensure that women across the country can more easily access this critical health care service while the pandemic leaves many women unable to seek in-person care.Finally, the coalition explains why a ban on procedural abortion would not help the state preserve PPE or prevent the spread of COVID-19 transmissions. As the district court found in the preliminary injunction it ordered, the exact opposite is actually true. The court found that “ abortions require significantly less PPE and provider-patient interaction than continuing a pregnancy” does. The coalition’s brief also notes that procedural abortion procedures rarely require admission to a hospital. In fact, only one out of 10,000 emergency room visits in the United States each year are abortion-related, whereas “a significant number of hospitalizations resulting from complications and miscarriages” occur early on in a pregnancy. The coalition adds, “ecause some of these events are inevitably avoided by providing access to timely abortion procedures, denying access to timely abortions may not appreciably conserve PPE and reduce transmission risk even in the short term,” but could actually use more resources… April 22. 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Urges FDA to Move Toward Risk Based, Gender Neutral Screening for Blood Donations to Eliminate Bias Against Gay and Bisexual Men”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra led a multistate coalition in submitting comments to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Food and Drug Administration (FDA) supporting efforts to maintain an adequate national blood supply to aid the nation’s medical response during the COVID-19 pandemic. In the letter, Attorney General Becerra argues that while the FDA’s guidance easing restrictions on blood donations from the LGBTQ population, specifically gay and bisexual men, is a step in the right direction, the guidance does not go far enough to meet the nation’s needs. The letter advocates moving toward a risk-based, gender neutral screening model and further revising guidance to make it easier for the LGBTQ population to donate blood and plasma in response to the nation’s needs during the COVID-19 public health emergency. “As Americans stay home to stop the spread of coronavirus, the nation is facing a shortage of blood donations, which provide critical medical support to hospitals and their patients,” said Attorney General Becerra. “During this pandemic, it is important to continue to evaluate and modernize blood donation guidance to be inclusive of LGBTQ Americans. A risk-based model not only protects the health and safety of our communities – it’s the right thing to do.”In the midst of the COVID-19 health crisis, blood drives and donations have dropped significantly. Every day, the United States needs approximately 36,000 units of red blood cells, nearly 7,000 units of platelets, and 10,000 units of plasma to provide blood transfusions for major surgeries, treat patients and victims of trauma, and more. The American Red Cross, which provides about 40 percent of our nation’s blood and blood components, recently reported less than a five-day blood supply on hand. As of mid-March, over 4,000 blood drives have been canceled across the country due to coronavirus concerns and closures of schools and workplaces where these drives are usually held, resulting in over 100,000 fewer blood donations.Recently, the FDA issued revised guidance related to blood donation policies for the LGBTQ community. This guidance reduced the wait period after sexual activity for gay and bisexual men from 12 months to three months. While this reform takes a step toward increasing blood donations made by healthy bisexual and gay men in a time when the nation’s supply of blood and blood products is at risk of collapse due to the COVID-19 pandemic, it does not go far enough. Data from the University of California, Los Angeles School of Law Williams Institute indicates that lifting restrictions completely, as compared to a 12-month waiting period, would produce more than 2 million additional eligible blood donors, including nearly 175,000 likely blood donors, and would potentially produce nearly 300,000 pints of additional donated blood annually.Attorney General Becerra also argues that moving toward a risk-based model, rather than one based on gender, is not only more appropriate to address the population’s needs, but is also more in line with laws that protect against discrimination. A population-based policy singling out bisexual and gay men threatens the constitutional Equal Protection principles under the Fourteenth Amendment and Fifth Amendment. Over the long term, the FDA should instead look at risk behavior rather than sex for determining who should donate blood. A copy of the letter is available here. A copy of the letter is available here. April 22, 2020: California Governor Gavin Newsom posted a press release titled: “Governor Newsom Announces Plan to Resume Delayed Health Care that was Deferred as Hospitals Prepared for COVID-19 Surge”. From the press release: Today, California Governor Gavin Newsom announced plans to allow hospitals and health systems to resume delayed medical care for Californians – such as heart valve replacements, angioplasty and tumor removals, and key preventive care services, such as colonoscopies – which were deferred as the state’s health care delivery systems prepared for a surge of COVID-19 patients. The decision was based on progress toward preparing California hospitals and health systems for a surge in COVID-19 patients – one of the six critical indicators the governor unveiled last week as part of the state’s framework for gradually modifying California’s stay-at-home order.As part of the Western State’s Pact, California will work with Washington and Oregon to share best practices on how our states can allow hospitals and medical providers to resume delayed medical care in areas that have sufficient hospital capacity, while ensuring the safety and health of our health care workers and patients. The Western states had previously announced a shared, science-based vision for gradually reopening their economies and controlling COVID-19 into the future.“From the beginning, I have said California’s decisions will be guided by science, not politics, and that Californians’ health comes first,” said Governor Newsom. “Thanks to the work our health care delivery system has done expanding hospital capacity and reducing the rate of spread of COVID-19, hospitals and health systems can consider resuming medical care that residents have delayed during this crisis, such as heart valve replacements, angioplasty and tumor removals, when such care can be delivered safety and with appropriate protections for health care workers. It’s in the best interest of the overall health of our state to allow these procedures to resume when they can be done safely.”Last week, Governor Newsom announced six indicators that would drive California’s decision to gradually modify portions of the state’s stay-at-home order. They include: Expanding testing and contact tracing to be able to identify and isolate those with the virus;Preventing infection in people who are most at risk;Being able to handle surges in hospitals and the health care delivery system;Developing therapeutics to meet demand;Ensuring businesses, schools and child care facilities can support physical distancing; andDetermining when to reinstate certain measures like the stay-at-home order if need be. Also today, Governor Newsom announced that President Trump has personally committed to sending the state 100,000 testing swabs next week and 250,000 swabs the following week.Health officials also outlined progress toward the first indicator: expanding testing and contact tracing to be able to identify and isolate those with the virus.To that end, the state announced the expansion of community testing in underserved areas. The state is contracting with Verily, an Alphabet company, in partnership with Community Organized Relief Effort (CORE) and with support from Rockefeller Foundation and an anonymous donor, to establish six new community testing sites focused on underserved communities such as farmworkers and communities of color. Additionally, the state is contracting with OptumServe, to establish an additional 80 community testing sites, which too will be focused on underserved communities.“We know that communities of color are disproportionately affected by COVID-19,” said Governor Newsom. “We must ensure that we are deploying testing equitably in an effort to reduce the higher death rates we are seeing in African American and Latino communities.”In addition, the state is: Accelerating equitable COVID-19 testing by aiming to deploy 25,000 tests per day by April 30; establishing an additional 80-100 testing sites; and identifying five new high-throughput testing hubs.Establishing a contact tracing workforce by surveying counties on their capacity; developing a statewide training academy; and training 10,000 public health connectors to conduct contact tracing.Developing isolation protocols and supports by identifying regional alternate isolation sites and building private-public partnerships to support those who are isolated.Deploying data management system and tools by publishing a symptom-check app; deploying a data management platform; and establishing a data dashboard for the public. Now that testing has become more widely available across the state, California updated its testing guidance earlier this week to become the first state to recommend testing of some asymptomatic individuals such as health care workers, first responders and correctional workers. This action will better protect Californians and prevent COVID-19 spread in high-risk settings such as congregate living facilities and correctional facilities. April 23, 2020: California Governor Gavin Newsom posted a press release titled: “Governor Newsom Provides Flexibility to Medi-Cal Providers and the Department of Health Care Services for Continuity of Service Amidst COVID-19”. From the press release: Governor Gavin Newsom today issued an executive order that will give flexibility to the California Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) and Medi-Cal providers on a variety of deadlines and requirements to ensure continuity of service to patients and customers is not impacted by the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic.The executive order will allow fair hearings to continue for California Children’s Services on grievances and appeals to take place by phone or video conference. Additionally, the order will ensure flexibility for DHCS and the Department of Social Services to continue providing mental health care services and programs.Finally, the executive order will temporarily suspend requirements for in-person signatures for people to obtain certain prescription drugs covered by Medi-Cal, and will allow a 90-day extension for providers on cost reporting, change of scope of service and administrative hearings. The text of the Governor’s executive order can be found here and a copy can be found here. April 24, 2020: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) posted a statement titled: “ACOG Statement on Federal Relief Funds for Obstetrician-Gynecologists”. From the statement: Maureen Phipps, MD, MPH, FACOG, CEO of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), released the following statement regarding the Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) methodology for dispersing emergency relief funds: “Obstetrician-gynecologists across the country are on the front lines of responding to the COVID-19 pandemic and providing essential care to women in the midst of a public health crisis. At the same time, the health care system is in upheaval and many obstetrician-gynecologists are facing a financial crisis that threatens to shutter many women’s health practices. In order to ensure that women can continue to receive needed care today and in the months to come, it is vital that the Administration prioritize providing direct financial support to obstetrician-gynecologists and their practices. “The Administration has acknowledged that despite great need, congressionally designated relief funds distributed to date have largely excluded obstetrician-gynecologists, who are among the physicians who provide essential care to underserved patients and make up our nation’s safety net. Although ACOG has proactively and thoroughly outlined specific recommendations for how HHS could quickly disperse funds to obstetrician-gynecologists, the Administration has indicated that women’s health practices may have to wait at least two more weeks until they receive relief funds. For many practices, this two-week delay could be too much to absorb, forcing them to close. “Widespread closures will undoubtedly have a negative impact on the health and wellbeing of women and their families, particularly as our country continues to face a maternal mortality crisis. It is imperative that obstetrician-gynecologists and other women’s health practitioners continue to provide women with the lifelong care they need. “ACOG looks forward to partnering with HHS to ensure that women’s health physicians are prioritized as relief funds are distributed. Access to obstetric and gynecologic care is essential – today and in the future.” April 24, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitla James posted a press release titled: “Supreme Court Rules That Attorney General James Can Take Public Charge Back to Lower Court”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James tonight confirmed that she will lead a coalition of three states and New York City in asking the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York to halt implementation of the Trump Administration’s Public Charge Rule, after the U.S. Supreme Court earlier this evening chose not to act in the matter itself but ruled that the plaintiffs had this option. Last week, Attorney General James and the coalition filed a motion with the Supreme Court, asking the court to revisit the question of interim relief on Public Charge in light of the new and devastating effects that the rule has had on the nation’s public health and economy as the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continues to spread across New York and the rest of the nation.“The Supreme Court’s order tonight allows us to continue the fight to halt the Public Charge Rule during the current public health crisis, and gives us the opportunity to make our case in a federal court in New York,” said Attorney General James. “We will soon file an emergency motion in the Southern District of New York because our country cannot afford to wait. The Public Charge Rule threatens the public’s health, our economy, and all New Yorkers — citizens and non-citizens alike. Every person who doesn’t get the health coverage they need today risks infecting another person with the coronavirus tomorrow.”The Public Charge Rule drives immigrants and their families away from accessing health and nutritional benefits to which they are entitled by threatening applicants’ eligibility for green cards and visa renewals. The Supreme Court issued an order in January that had been denied by the lower courts, allowing the rule to take effect while legal challenges to the rule are pending in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and through a possible petition to the Supreme Court.Last week, Attorney General James led a coalition in asking the Supreme Court to take emergency measures to temporarily halt its earlier order on the Public Charge Rule until the national pandemic is over, in light of the new and devastating effects that the rule has had on the nation’s public health and economy as COVID-19 has spread over the last six weeks and in an effort to prevent the rule from impeding efforts to slow the continued spread of the virus happening nationwide.While the Supreme Court did not halt its own order tonight, the court gave Attorney General James and the coalition permission to take the request back to the district court. In October 2019, after Attorney General James and the coalition filed a motion for a preliminary injunction in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, the district court issued an order that stopped the rule from going into effect during the litigation. The Trump Administration then filed a motion to stay the order, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied the request. The Administration finally filed a motion in the U.S. Supreme Court, which issued a stay of the district court’s preliminary injunction, pending the Second Circuit’s decision in the case and any subsequent petition to the Supreme Court to hear the case.Last August, days after the Trump Administration initially issued the Public Charge Rule, Attorney General James and a coalition of states and New York City filed a lawsuit challenging Trump Administration rule, noting that the rule specifically targets immigrants of color, immigrants with disabilities, and low-income immigrants, while putting these communities at risk, and would have short- and long-term impacts on public health and the economy.The attorneys general of Connecticut and Vermont, as well as corporation counsel for New York City, will join Attorney General James in filing this new motion in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. April 24, 2020: Politico posted an article titled: “Trump team moves to scrap protections for LGBTQ patients”. It was written by Dan Diamond. From the article: The Trump administration is moving to scrap an Obama-era policy that protected LGBTQ patients from discrimination, alarming health experts who warn that the regulatory rollback could harm vulnerable people during a pandemic.The health department is close to finalizing its long-developing rewrite of Obamacare’s Section 1557 provision, which barred health care discrimination based on sex and gender identity. The administration’s final rule on Thursday was circulated at DOJ, a step toward publicly releasing the regulation in the coming days, said two people with knowledge of the pending rule. The White House on Friday morning also updated a regulatory dashboard to indicate that the rule was under review. Advocates fear that it would allow hospitals and health workers to more easily discriminate against patients based on their gender or sexual orientation.The Obama administration moved to create its non-discrimination protections in response to advocates and health care experts who said that LGBTQ patients were being turned away from necessary care or intimidated from seeking it out. The broad rule also offered specific protections for transgender patients for the first time and extended protections for women who had abortions.But a federal judge in 2016 blocked those protections following a lawsuit from religious groups, and the Trump administration has steadily worked to weaken the rule before it could take full effect.In last year’s proposal, the health department also proposed changes that went further than simply rolling back the new Obama protections, moving to eliminate similar nondiscrimination protections for LGBTQ patients that were contained in other regulations……Any rule issued by the Trump administration on LGBTQ protections could be short-lived. The Supreme Court is set to rule on whether the Civil Rights Act protects LGBTQ workers, which could create a new regulatory framework and force health officials to swiftly return to the drawing board.Meanwhile, advocates say they’re worried that LGBTQ patients could be deterred from seeking care during a public health crisis. The liberal-leaning Center for American Progress published findings that 8 percent of lesbian, gay, and bisexual adults and 29 percent of transgender adults said they had been turned away by a health care provider based on their sexual orientation or gender identity. April 25, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “Appellate Court Allows Abortion Services to Continue in Tennessee During Pandemic”. From the press release: Last night, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a preliminary injunction granted by a lower court, allowing abortion clinics in Tennessee to continue providing time-sensitive abortion procedures during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. The decision comes after Gov. Bill Lee issued a state order on April 8 banning all abortion services other than medication abortions (which involve taking pills and are only available until 11 weeks of pregnancy), despite leading national medical groups agreeing that abortion procedures are essential and time-sensitive. Tennessee is one of eight states where officials have exploited the COVID-19 pandemic to limit abortion access.In its decision, the court wrote, “The State has never, at any point in this litigation, attempted to support its policy choice with expert or medical evidence. This is unsurprising because, as far as we can tell, every serious medical or public health organization to have considered the issue has said the opposite.”“This decision sends a clear message to Tennessee: You cannot use a public health crisis to cut off abortion access,” said Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights. “In the last month, courts across the country have ruled that states cannot use emergency powers to deny women the right to end a pregnancy. It’s time for states to stop exploiting this pandemic.” “We are so relieved that we can continue seeing patients and providing the essential abortion care they need,” said Rebecca Terrell, executive director of CHOICES Memphis Center for Reproductive Health. “It’s common sense that abortion is time-sensitive and cannot be delayed.” “Once again, it’s taken a court fight to stop another governor from exploiting this pandemic to score political points. Abortion is time-sensitive, essential health care that cannot wait for a pandemic to pass. Today’s ruling is a sigh of relief for patients,” said Alexis McGill Johnson, acting president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Federation of America. “We cannot forget that the essential workers on the front lines of this pandemic are the same people who are disproportionately harmed when access to health care is attacked. We’ll continue to fight these cruel attacks on abortion in Tennessee and across the country.” “This is a critical victory for Tennesseans who, on top of all the turmoil of this moment, are facing an unintended pregnancy and urgently need care,” said Julia Kaye, staff attorney at the ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project. “We hope the state will now focus on protecting its citizens during the pandemic rather than exploiting the crisis to push an anti-abortion agenda.”Since the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak, many state officials have attempted to ban or limit abortion. In addition to Tennessee, lawsuits are ongoing in Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Ohio, and Oklahoma. Leading medical organizations like the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the American Medical Association (AMA) have opposed Tennessee’s order, stating: “Permitting abortion care — which is essential, time-sensitive health care — will not substantially increase the burdens hospitals face as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. The vast majority of procedural abortions are performed in non-hospital settings, and they typically require only minimal PPE.”Tennessee also bans the use of telehealth for medication abortion — a method that could greatly expand access and reduce in-person contact. Other abortion restrictions in Tennessee include: a mandatory 48-hour waiting period (which includes a requirement that patients make an additional, medically unnecessary trip to the clinic to receive state-mandated information); limits on when state and public insurance can cover abortion services; and a requirement that minors obtain parental consent. This lawsuit was filed by the Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Tennessee, pro-bono counsel Kramer Levin, and local counsel Barrett Johnston Martin & Garrison, LLC. Plaintiffs in the case are CHOICES Memphis Center for Reproductive Health, Knoxville Center for Reproductive Health, Planned Parenthood of Tennessee and North Mississippi, Bristol Regional Women’s Center, and Dr. Kimberly Looney. The decision is available here. April 27, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “NARAL Pro-Choice America Applauds Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear for Safeguarding Reproductive Freedom by Vetoing Extreme Anti-Choice Bill”. From the press release: Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear today vetoed an extreme anti-choice bill (SB 9) designed to expand Republican Attorney General Daniel Cameron’s power to roll back abortion access and promote political interference in deeply personal family decisions.Last week, in the midst of a major public health crisis, the Kentucky General Assembly dedicated the final hours of the state’s legislative session to passing SB 9 in a transparent attempt to circumvent the authority of pro-choice Democratic Gov. Beshear, who in 2019 defeated extreme anti-choice incumbent Matt Bevin in the governor’s race.In response to Governor Beshear vetoing this harmful bill, NARAL President Ilyse Hogue said:“Anti-choice Republicans in Kentucky cravenly pounced on the opportunity presented by the COVID-19 pandemic to advance their agenda of ending abortion access. Governor Beshear has been an advocate for women and families for many years and reaffirmed his commitment today by vetoing SB 9. Now more than ever, sound science and medical expertise should guide public policy, not political games and an extreme agenda. Governor Beshear joins the ranks of other governors, both Republican and Democratic, who have rejected measures designed to meddle in personal decision-making. We applaud him for doing the right thing.”Kentucky NARAL members also voiced their appreciation for Governor Beshear’s commitment to reproductive freedom and ensuring doctors are able to designate what healthcare is essential, not politicians looking to score points… April 28, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “Appellate Court Says Oklahoma Abortion Clinics Can Stay Open During Pandemic”. From the press release: Last night, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of abortion providers, denying Oklahoma’s request to stay a lower court’s ruling from last week that blocked the state’s ban on abortion care during the COVID-19 pandemic. The decision means that abortion clinics can continue providing care as the case continues.Statement from Nancy Northup, president & CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights:“For the past month, Governor Stitt has exploited this pandemic to try to ban abortion, but the courts have repeatedly ruled against him. In the wake of this latest ruling, it’s past time for Oklahoma to respect the essential needs of women seeking abortion care. This attempt to ban abortion is an abuse of emergency powers. It has nothing to do with legitimate public health efforts to address the pandemic and everything to do with politics. There is no question that abortion care is time-sensitive and cannot be delayed.” April 28, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James and Pharmacy Executives Applaud New York’s Expansion of COVID-19 Testing to Pharmacies”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James and representatives from major nationwide pharmacies today responded to the State of New York’s expansion of COVID-19 tests to local pharmacies.“I am grateful that New York will begin to take advantage of its vast system of pharmacies to provide COVID-19 tests to more New Yorkers than ever before,” said Attorney General James. “It is critically important for us to increase the availably for testing in order to accurately capture the scope of the virus in our communities. I encourage all of those eligible to utilize these new testing opportunities.”“New York State has made a significant step in curbing the COVID-19 crisis by working with pharmacists to provide the increased testing needed at this critical time. Pharmacists play a key role in the health and wellbeing of this country, and they have routinely shown that they are able to step in when we need them most. We will continue to work closely with Attorney General James and other officials across the state to ensure that pharmacists have all the resources needed to support New Yorkers through amplified testing efforts,” said Steve Moore, president, Pharmacists Society of the State of New York (PSSNY). “PSSNY is the largest organization in NY state representing the profession of pharmacy to promote and optimize public health and wellness through patient centric pharmacist care in the diverse communities pharmacy serves.” “Approval for pharmacists to conduct COVID-19 tests is a recognition of the critical role that pharmacists play in our communities,” said Emmanuel Kolady, senior vice president, CVS Health. “This action will help us as we expand our testing capabilities in New York. Working together, we can help slow the spread of the virus.”“From the beginning of this crisis, we made it our mission to support our communities and associates and to move as quickly as we can to provide solutions,” said Heyward Donigan, president and chief executive officer, Rite Aid. “I’m incredibly proud of our pharmacy teams – it’s their hard work that has allowed Rite Aid to ramp up testing so quickly and enables us to expand testing criteria to include all adults exhibiting symptoms.” April 29, 2020: New York Attorney Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Continues Fight to Stop Public Charge Rule”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James last night led a coalition of three states and New York City in filing a motion asking the courts to temporarily halt implementation of the Trump Administration’s Public Charge Rule in light of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) public health crisis. A motion seeking a new preliminary injunction with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York was filed after the U.S. Supreme Court, on Friday evening, chose not to act in the matter, but ruled that the plaintiffs had the option to take their argument back to the lower court for a decision.“Unlike the Public Charge Rule, this disease does not discriminate — infecting both citizens and non-citizens alike,” said Attorney General James. “As our state and nation continue to suffer the devastating effects of COVID-19, it has become more and more clear that the Trump Administration’s Public Charge Rule will only further exacerbate the problem and punish New York and other immigrant-rich states by denying many the ability to obtain health care. We’re asking the district court to again take immediate action and suspend this rule and the threat it places on all of us. It’s time to end this national nightmare because every person who doesn’t get the health coverage they need today risks infecting another person with the coronavirus tomorrow.”Federal law allows lawful immigrants to apply for certain supplemental health and nutritional public benefits if they have been in the country for at least five years. But, last August, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security issued a Public Charge Rule that changed the established meaning of public charge, which had long been that immigrants who use basic, non-cash benefits are not considered public charges because they are not primarily dependent on the government for survival. This “bait-and-switch” consequently jeopardized immigrants’ chances of becoming legal permanent residents or renewing their visas if they used these supplemental benefits to which they are legally entitled……Despite the Supreme Court’s decision in January, two weeks ago, Attorney General James led a coalition in asking the Supreme Court to take emergency measures to temporarily halt its earlier order on the Public Charge Rule until the national coronavirus pandemic is over. While the Supreme Court did not halt its own order on Friday, the court gave Attorney General James and the coalition permission to take the request back to the district court, which issued the initial preliminary injunction and originally stopped the rule from going into effect.Since the initial preliminary injunction motion was argued in the district court, COVID-19 has fundamentally changed the national landscape. The United States went from not a single reported COVID-19 case to more than one million confirmed infections and more than 58,000 confirmed deaths, and is now the country with the most virus-related deaths in the world. More than 292,000 of those infections and more than 17,000 deaths have been reported in New York State alone.In the months since the outbreak began, New York City, and cities across the United States have issued states of emergency. New York State and every other state in the nation have issued states of emergency. President Donald Trump has declared a national state of emergency and has approved federal disaster declarations for all 50 states and almost all territories.In last night’s motion asking for a new preliminary injunction from the district court, Attorney General James leads the coalition in asking the court to now take into consideration the extraordinary events of the last two months and the new and devastating effects that the Public Charge Rule has had on the nation’s public-health and economy as COVID-19 has spread across the country, as well as how the rule continues to impede efforts to slow the continued spread of the virus happening nationwide. The motion asks the court to temporarily halt further implementation of the rule until the national emergency concerning COVID-19 is over.Of note in the motion is the fact that immigrants make up a large number of essential workers helping move our nation along during this crisis, and if they don’t have access to the proper health care today, they are more likely to spread the virus to all Americans, inadvertently, tomorrow — not only contributing to the exponential growth of infection rates, but of fatalities as well. In short, “the Rule is undermining efforts to slow the spread of the virus.”Further, the coalition argues that the nation’s economy cannot undergo further damage from the spread of COVID-19. In the five-week period ending April 23, more than 26 million residents across the nation lost their jobs and filed for unemployment, more than 1.4 million of which were New Yorkers. And according to estimates by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, between February and March 2020, the number of immigrant adults who are unemployed rose by 26 percent. As last night’s motion argues, “many workers who lose their jobs and employer-sponsored health insurance because of the pandemic are likely to need Medicaid coverage until they can find another job.”Attorney General James and the coalition end by arguing that while the district court had earlier halted the Public Charge Rule from taking effect, the harms of the rule at the time of COVID-19 have only intensified and exacerbated the reasons why the rule need to be halted.Joining Attorney General James in filing this new motion in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York are the attorneys general of Connecticut and Vermont, as well as corporation counsel for New York City.This matter is being handled by Deputy Bureau Chief of the Civil Rights Bureau Elena Goldstein, Civil Enforcement Section Chief of the Labor Bureau Ming-Qi Chu, and Assistant Attorneys General Abigail Rosner and Amanda Meyer, all under the supervision of Chief Counsel for Federal Initiatives Matthew Colangelo. Additional support was provided by Senior Assistant Solicitor General Judith N. Vale and Deputy Solicitor General Steven C. Wu. The Division for Federal Initiatives is overseen by First Deputy Attorney General Jennifer Levy. April 30, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorneys General Becerra and Healey Urge HHS Not to Finalize Rule That Would Permit Healthcare Discrimination During Global COVID-19 Pandemic”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra and Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey today co-led a multistate coalition in sending a letter to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) urging it not to finalize its proposed regulation, “Nondiscrimination in Health and Health Education Programs or Activities” (Section 1557 Rule). Section 1557 is an anti-discrimination provision that prohibits discrimination in healthcare based on gender, race, ethnicity, sex, age or disability. If finalized, the proposed changes to this provision would seriously undermine the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) critical anti-discrimination protections at a time when they are most needed to help address the COVID-19 pandemic. “Authorizing discrimination in healthcare is not only illegal, it is incredibly dangerous, and doing so in the midst of this global pandemic is nothing short of deadly,” said Attorney General Becerra. “We urge HHS not to move forward with this foolish rule that would threaten communities that already struggle disproportionately to access needed care – communities of color, women, immigrants, LGBTQ individuals, and disabled Americans. We should devote all our resources to the COVID-19 response and recovery efforts, not make it harder on our healthcare professionals and Americans seeking life-saving healthcare.” The proposed rule would roll back anti-discrimination protections for communities of color, women, LGBTQ individuals, those with limited English proficiency, and people with disabilities by undermining critical legal protections that guarantee healthcare as a right. Data shows that the COVID-19 pandemic is already exacerbating racial and ethnic disparities in healthcare that the ACA attempted to address, particularly in states that have not expanded Medicaid. Communities of color have been disproportionately impacted, and recently more than 100 national and local organizations signed on to an open letter to the healthcare community about how COVID-19 may pose an increased risk to the LGBTQ population. HHS itself has long noted that discrimination within the healthcare system contributes to poor coverage and health outcomes, and exacerbates existing health disparities in underserved communities. Individuals who have experienced discrimination in healthcare often postpone or forgo needed healthcare, resulting in adverse health outcomes. In the letter, the attorneys general argue that moving forward with this rule in the midst of this unprecedented healthcare crisis will create unnecessary confusion and administrative burdens for state agencies, healthcare providers, and patients at a time when the healthcare system is battling to save lives. Data suggests that increased access to healthcare could assist with prompt COVID-19 detection and increase early treatment, which helps diminish spread of the disease. For these reasons, the attorneys general warn the Administration that making this major regulatory change in the midst of the current crisis is not only irresponsible, it is potentially deadly.Joining California Attorney General Becerra and Massachusetts Attorney General Healey in filing the comment letter are the attorneys general of Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia. Today’s letter is Attorney General Becerra’s latest effort in his fight to protect the ACA and ensure Californians have access to high quality affordable care. In August 2019, Attorney General Becerra and Attorney General Healey led a multistate comment letter opposing the 1557 proposed rule. Attorney General Becerra also called on the Trump Administration to open a Special Enrollment Period for the ACA due to the COVID-19 pandemic. He is also currently leading a coalition of 21 attorneys general in defending the ACA and the healthcare of millions of Americans in the Supreme Court. A copy of the letter can be found here. April 30, 2020: Arizona Central posted an article titled: “Shady campaign ad for Sen. Martha McSally uses former employee paid $381,000″. It was written by EJ Montini. From the article” For years Republican Sen. Martha McSally has had a problem trying to defend her many attempts to dismantle the Affordable Care Act, including its protections for those with pre-existing conditions.During her losing campaign against Democrat Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, McSally was constantly under fire, correctly so, for pushing to have the ACA dismantled. Not only did McSally vote for such a plan, she was quoted as urging her Republican colleagues to pass it with the fiery profane admonition: “Let’s get this f-ing thing done!”McSally attempts to defend herself by pointing to her vote for American Health Care Act, which prohibited insurance companies from denying people coverage for having pre-existing conditions.The problem is that the bill would have allowed states to eliminate a ban on high-priced premiums for people with preexisting conditions. A big jump in those premiums would have forced many to lose coverage. And the so-called “high-risk pools” that were to be created, and that the Republicans said would help such people, wouldn’t have had enough funding to do so… May May 1, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights, Human Rights Watch, and International Women’s Health Coalition sent a letter to the U.S. State Department Commission on Unalienable Rights. From the letter: Dear U.S. State Department Commission on Unalienable Rights:As human rights organizations, scholars, defenders and activists, we the 167undersigned, write to express our grave concern about the work of the U.S.State Department’s Commission on Unalienable Rights and any potential report or output that undermines the international human rights system and purports to reinterpret its respective treaties and monitoring bodies. In particular, we urge the Commission to reject the prioritization of freedom of religion as a cloak to permit violations of the human rights of women, girls, and lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people.Now more than ever, countries worldwide should prioritize the rights to health and well-being of all their people without discrimination and recognize that reproductive rights are clearly established and articulated under international law. These rights are interrelated and indivisible from all human rights and cannot be subordinated within a hierarchy of rights.There is clear and unequivocal consensus by UN human rights treaty bodies and independent experts that reproductive rights are human rights, grounded in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the core principles underlying the human rights treaties. The human rights treaty bodies have consistently recognized and protected reproductive rights as a component of and essential to the realization of fundamental human rights, including the rights to health, life, equality, information, education, privacy, non-discrimination and protection from torture and other ill-treatment.One of the great advances with respect to rights in the period since World War II was that, through the adoption of the Charter of the United Nations and of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, it was recognized that rights are universal: they apply to everyone everywhere. In addition, these documents recognized that a core value undergirding the universal application of rights is dignity. The Charter of the United Nations provides: “We the peoples of the United Nations, determined ….to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women.” In keeping with the Charter, the UDHR begins with the assertion that: “Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world….”The concept of dignity carries with it a commitment to privacy and autonomy. Human rights advocates in the US and around the world know that rights are grounded in dignity and its embrace of privacy and autonomy. We submit that the values that are inherent in the concepts of dignity, privacy and autonomy do not permit the state to dictate that women must conceive or reproduce. Respect for dignity, privacy, and autonomy—the core values of universal rights—requires that these are matters for each and every person to decide on their own.For example, the UN Human Rights Committee—tasked with monitoring implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)—has consistently recognized that the right to privacy (article 17) obligates the state to ensure reproductive autonomy. It has also made clear that the right to life (article 6) includes the right to access comprehensive reproductive health care, including that state regulation of abortion should not put the lives of women or girls at risk, subject them to ill-treatment, discriminate against them, arbitrarily interfere with their privacy, or lead them to resort to unsafe abortion. The UN Committee Against Torture has found that denying or delaying safe abortion or post-abortion care, in particular, may amount to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. Similarly, the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has concluded that the right to the highest attainable standard of health, set forth in the UDHR and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, includes the right to sexual and reproductive health.These rights, like all human rights protections,attach at birth. The UDHR provides clear language in the first article that is unequivocal: “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.”During the drafting of the declaration, the committee specifically considered, debated, and rejected an amendment that would have removed the specification that rights begin at birth. And while the American Convention on Human Rights (a regional treaty the United States has signed but not ratified) is the only human rights instrument that contemplates that the right to life may attach prenatally, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights has clarified that in regulating abortion, the protection of prenatal life does not prevail over other rights. In the 2012 case of Artavia Murillo et al. (“in vitro fertilization”) v. Costa Rica, the Inter-American Court struck down Costa Rica’s ban on the use of in vitro fertilization, which Costa Rica attempted to justify as a measure to protect the right to life prior to birth. In that case, the Court determined that, under the American Convention, the “right to life should not be understood as an absolute right, the alleged protection of which can justify the total negation of other rights” and that disproportionate restrictions on the exercise of other human rights due to absolute protection of the right to life “would be contrary to the protection of human rights”(paras 259 and 264).Further, these rights are indivisible from other human rights. It is a tenet of human rights that all rights are universal, equal, interdependent, and interrelated. The preamble of UDHR begins by recognizing that the “equal and inalienable rights” of all members of humanity is the “foundation of freedom, justice, and peace.”The UDHR makes clear that each of the thirty articles in the declaration are equally important and that no state or individual can decide that some rights are more important than others. Indeed,the deprivation of rights in one area tends to create conditions for the deprivation of rights in others.Of course, it is of great concern if the exercise of one person’s fundamental right impedes upon the realization of another’s. The ICCPR itself recognizes that this tension may arise. Article 18(1) recognizes the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, which includes both the “freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of choice, and freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance practice and teaching.”The Human Rights Committee in its General Comment No. 22 has emphasized that Article 18 “does not permit any limitations whatsoever on the freedom of thought and conscience or on the freedom to have or adopt a religion or belief of one’s choice,”but—recognizing that religious exercise may affect others—does permit limitations on the freedom to manifest one’s religion or beliefs.Further, the text of the treaty itself recognizes this. Under Article 18(3), states may regulate the manifestation of religion or belief if, and only if, such regulations “are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health, or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.” The Committee has consistently clarified that the freedom of thought, conscience, and religion does not protect religiously motivated discrimination against women, or racial and religious minorities.Thus, in order to protect and uphold the basic rights of all people, states may impose some limitations on acts manifesting religion or belief in order to protect the infringement of other people’s rights. These include limitations to ensure that health care providers do not impede access to reproductive health services. Yet, we continue to see in our work “conscientious objection” policies that allow providers to refuse to provide critical services to women and LGBT people, on the basis of conscience. In many instances, this increases discrimination in care and increased health disparities.Marginalized groups, including women, young people, and LGBT individuals, are particularly at risk. Such was the case for a fourteen-year-old girl in Poland who was denied access to a legal abortion, for a pregnancy resulting from a rape, under claims of “conscience” by providers and health systems. She was compelled to undergo non-fact-based counseling, had her personal information disclosed to the press, and was removed by the state from her mother, who supported her decision to have an abortion. In 2012, the European Court of Human Rights issued its decision in her case in P. and S. v. Poland and determined Poland had violated her right to be free from degrading treatment, as well as her right to privacy. The Court also found that states have the obligation to limit the use of ‘conscientious objections’ in order to guarantee people access to lawful reproductive health services. Despite this clear legal ruling, however, the intersection between religious freedom and reproductive rights has continued to be a flashpoint in Poland. Contraception, particularly emergency contraception, remains difficult to access.While this Commission has indicated an interest in prioritizing and ranking human rights, with a freedom of religion at the apex, as human rights defenders and activists we have seen firsthand how human rights are interdependent and indivisible. In recent years, we have often seen that authoritarian regimes may start by targeting reproductive rights, citing arguments of religion or “traditional values,” before expanding their attacks on other human rights.This has been starkly visible in Turkey, where women’s rights movements were quick to sound the alarm about the Turkish presidency and government’s regressive approach to women rights and role in society. Restrictive amendments have limited access to sexual and reproductive health and rights, reports of gender-based violence have more than doubled, and female employment has decreased in a political context that prioritizes “traditional families.” The presidency of Recep Tayyip Erdogan has overseen a purging of academia and the civil service, the jailing of journalists and opposition politicians, and a broad crack down on civil society. Should it prioritize freedom of religion and conscience over other rights, the Commission on Unalienable Rights will further fuel authoritarian regimes’ readiness to “sacrifice” reproductive rights in the name of “traditional values.”This same pattern has been displayed as well in Brazil. President Jair Bolsonarohas promoted extreme anti-choice religious views at the expense of gender and sexual and reproductive health and rights, stating that he would veto any bill to legalize abortion. Accusing advocates of sexual and reproductive health and rights of encouraging teens to have sex at a young age, Bolsonarois opposed to and has condemned comprehensive sexuality education (CSE). For example, as a member of congress he joined the evangelical caucus in labeling a proposed educational initiative to combat homophobia in schools a “gay kit” intended to “pervert” students. Bolsonaro appointed Damares Alves as Minister of Women, Family and Human Rights, who has promoted abstinence for adolescents and student programs developed by anti-reproductive rights groups. Increasing barriers to access to science-based health information puts at risk Brazil’s steadily decreasing teenage pregnancy rates and young people’s right to access sexual and reproductive health services.In times of crisis, human rights protections only become more important. Just recently, in response to the current pandemic, Hungary’s national government invoked a state of emergency law that allows the government to rule by decree indefinitely, which in reality means that Prime Minister Viktor Orban has absolute power to decide how long he can set aside and adopt laws without parliamentary or judicial scrutiny. Since consolidating his power in the name of fighting the spread of the illness, Orban has cracked down on the press and proposed a new law blocking access to legal recognition for transgender people. Advocates fear this new unbalanced power dynamic will increase assaults on asylum rights, women’s human rights, LGBT people’s rights, and democracy as a whole.We urge the United States to uphold and promote the international human rights framework contained in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in subsequent human rights treaties. Any attempt to undermine the international human rights system would put in jeopardy the rights and protections of the women, girls and all people for whom we stand alongside and fight for the realization of these universal rights. The letter includes several pages filled with organizational signers and individual signers. May 1, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “U.S. Unalienable Right Commission Shouldn’t Cherry-Pick Rights”. From the press release: The U.S. State Department’s Commission on Unalienable Rights should uphold international human rights commitments and not use freedom of religion as a cloak to permit violations of the rights of women, girls, and LGBTQ people, 167 leading human rights activists and groups from 28 countries said today in a letter to the Commission.The Commission on Unalienable Rights is an advisory body created by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in July 2019 to advise on human rights in U.S. foreign policy. It has sparked concern from experts that the United States seeks to unilaterally rewrite agreed-upon human rights obligations and create a hierarchy of rights.The Center for Reproductive Rights, Human Rights Watch, the International Women’s Health Coalition, and other organizations and activists from around the world said that the Commission should prioritize everyone’s rights to health and well-being, without discrimination, and recognize that reproductive rights are clearly established under international law. These rights are essential to people’s dignity and well-being and should not be treated as less worthy of protection than other human rights.“The Trump administration has routinely employed freedom of religion as a tool of discrimination against women, girls, and LGBTQ people,” said Françoise Girard, president of the International Women’s Health Coalition (IWHC). “The Commission on Unalienable Rights is a callous attempt to create a hierarchy of rights and deny the world’s most marginalized their fundamental rights. This politicization of international human rights sets a dangerous precedent and empowers regressive governments worldwide to pick-and-choose human rights obligations based on political ideology—a development with severe consequences for women and girls.”The Commission serves, in Secretary Pompeo’s own words, to distinguish between “unalienable” rights and so-called ad-hoc rights—a worrying sign of the Commission’s intent. These fears are supported by the appointment of commissioners with extensive records opposing access to sexual and reproductive health services, women’s human rights, and rights for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer people. The Commission’s public hearings have not allayed concerns as commissioners have repeatedly alluded to the primacy of freedom of religion over other rights.“The Commission was improperly established as yet another shameful attempt by this administration to erase protections in international human rights law for sexual and reproductive rights,” said Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights. “Reproductive rights are human rights. These attempts by the U.S. State Department, through the Commission, to pick and choose which rights the United States will recognize and prioritize threatens to erode protections for women, LGBTQ people, and other marginalized and vulnerable communities around the world.”Human rights instruments and mechanisms, many ratified by the U.S., clearly lay out fundamental rights that are universal, interrelated, and indivisible. By casting doubt on decades of international human rights law, the Trump administration gives cover to those who seek to roll back essential protections for women, girls, LGBTQ people, and minority groups worldwide, the letter said, urging the United States to uphold all human rights, not only those that fit a narrow political ideology.Freedom of religion—while a fundamental human right—has increasingly been misused as an excuse to discriminate, with particularly severe consequences for women, girls, and LGBTQ people. For example, health care providers worldwide routinely refuse to provide critical health services—including abortion care, contraception, and gender-affirming services—arguing that it goes against their personal beliefs. To this end, the Trump administration has championed the right to freedom of religion at the United Nations and World Health Organization in an attempt to further restrict sexual and reproductive rights.“The Trump administration has a record of curtailing women’s human rights at every opportunity, and this Commission attempts to provide cover to insidious discrimination against women and girls around the world who seek to fulfill their human rights and access the health services they need,” said Amanda Klasing, acting women’s rights co-director at Human Rights Watch. “Redefining some rights, and by extension some people, as ‘less equal’ only increases inequality, insecurity, and injustice.” May 1, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “California and Nevada Co-Lead Multistate Amicus Brief Supporting Challenge to Harmful Trump-Pence Title X Rule”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra and Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford today filed a multistate amicus brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, supporting the City of Baltimore in its lawsuit against the Trump-Pence Administration’s Title X rule. The new rule restricts access to critical preventative reproductive healthcare by prohibiting doctors from providing referrals for abortion or offering complete information to patients about their family planning options. In the brief, the state coalition explains that the new rule endangers the health, well-being, and economic security of their residents, leaving patients in entire regions and states nationwide without providers. The coalition urges the court to uphold a lower court ruling halting implementation of the Title X rule.“With this rule, the Trump-Pence Administration has upended the Title X program, which provides critical reproductive and preventative health services to low-income women and families across the nation,” said California Attorney General Xavier Becerra. “At a time when many Americans are facing uncertainty in both their health and finances due to the coronavirus, programs that provide low-cost healthcare, like Title X, are more critical than ever. Our coalition stands with the millions of women and families across the nation who rely on Title X for healthcare services in urging the court to halt this harmful rule.”“Politics has no place in the doctor’s office, and I’m proud to lead an effort to fight misguided attempts to prevent families from receiving accurate information and options about their healthcare,” said Nevada Attorney General Aaron D. Ford. “Millions of low-income and under-served families rely on Title X for access to a broad range of health services, and my office will use every means to ensure their rights are protected.” The Title X family planning program is instrumental in states’ efforts to deliver preventative and reproductive healthcare to low-income women and families. Over the last 50 years, Title X has created a strong network of medical providers committed to delivering high-quality, evidence-based preventive health services. Prior to 2019, the Title X program funded a wide array of critical public health services, including family planning counseling, access to FDA-approved contraceptive methods, pelvic exams, and crucial screenings for high blood pressure, anemia, diabetes, sexually transmitted diseases and infections, and cervical and breast cancer. The Trump-Pence Administration’s new Title X Rule, however, has harmed the Title X program nationwide.Since the new Title X rule went into effect, the states’ Title X programs have been upended, with many qualified providers leaving the program. In 13 states, more than 50 percent of Title X grantees have withdrawn from the program, and several states no longer have any Title X providers. Further, new providers have not filled the gap caused by the withdrawals. As a result, states have faced increased burdens to meet residents’ needs for essential healthcare. California alone has experienced a significant loss of Title X providers—going from 366 health centers in 38 counties to 229 health centers in only 18 counties. This leaves several rural counties with no Title X providers. As a result of these withdrawals, 38 percent fewer patients were served in 2019 compared to before the Trump-Pence Rule went into effect. And this year, California’s Title X network is projected to serve fewer patients still, a reduction of almost 72 percent since before the rule took effect.The coalition also notes that in light of the recent pandemic, clinic withdrawals from the Title X program place an additional strain on health systems nationwide. Due to COVID-19, many people have lost insurance coverage or are experiencing financial instability due to unemployment and could benefit from Title X’s low-cost services. Today’s brief is the latest step in Attorney General Becerra’s efforts to protect the Title X program. On July 30, 2018, he led a coalition of 13 attorneys general in filing a comment letter opposing the Trump-Pence Administration’s proposed rule. On March 4, 2019, he filed a lawsuit challenging the final rule in the Northern District Court of California, claiming the proposed restrictions to Title X disregard the rule of law and harm California’s healthcare providers and over one million women in our state who relied on Title X for healthcare services. That lawsuit is ongoing in the Ninth Circuit. Joining Attorneys General Becerra and Ford in filing the brief are the attorneys general of Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and the District of Columbia. A copy of the amicus brief is available here. May 2, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement on Trump Administration Assault on the Health of LGBTQ Americans”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi released the following statement on the Trump Administration’s proposed Health and Human Services Department rule that would end anti-discrimination protections for LGBTQ Americans in health care:“The Trump Administration’s latest shameful rule is a shocking attack on the health and well being of the LGBTQ community at a time when access to quality health care is more important than ever.“Our nation is in the midst of a health and economic crisis of staggering proportions. Instead of working to ensure that every American, regardless of who they are or who they love, has access to the care they need to stay healthy and safe, the Administration is working on rolling back life-saving protections for some of the most vulnerable communities and enshrining discrimination into vital federal guideline. Religious freedom is no justification for hatred or bigotry, and every American has the right to seek and recieve care without intimidation or fear. The Administration must immediately abandon this outrageous, un-American plan and give LGBTQ individuals the reassurance that they will never be denied the health care they or their families need.“House Democrats will continue to hold this Administration accountable for their dangerous assault on our fundamental values of equality and justice, and we will never stop fighting to ensure all Americans are treated with the respect and dignity they deserve.” May 5, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “NARAL Pro-Choice America Releases Statement as Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguements in Birth Control Case”. From the press release: Tomorrow, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguements in Trump v. Pennsylvania, a challenge to the Trump administration’s rules that would allow virtually any employer or university to declare itself exempt from the Affordable Care Act’s landmark requirement that health insurers cover birth control without co-pays. NARAL Pro-Choice America President Ilyse Hogue released the following statement:“The Trump administration’s push to undermine this essential part of the Affordable Care Act could rob countless people across this country of their dignity and ability to determine their own futures. These reckless attacks on birth control access are nothing more than another shameless effort by the radical right to advance their agenda of power and control, no matter the cost to women and families. Every body deserves birth control coverage, and your boss or school shouldn’t be allowed to interfere with what kind of coverage you can get. The Trump administration’s rules put ideology above our health and well-being — and thanks to Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation to the Supreme Court, even access to birth control is on the chopping block thanks to a fringe political agenda. We will never stop working to hold accountable all politicians who enabled Trump and his dangerous attacks on reproductive freedom—including the senators who greenlit Kavanaugh’s confirmation.” May 6, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Leads Coalition of 20 States and the District of Columbia Defending the ACA in U.S. Supreme Court”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, leading a coalition of 20 states and D.C., today filed a brief in the U.S. Supreme Court defending the Affordable Care Act (ACA) against efforts by the Trump Administration and the state of Texas to repeal the entire ACA, putting the healthcare of tens of millions of Americans at risk. The Court agreed to review a recent Fifth Circuit decision that held the ACA’s individual mandate unconstitutional and called into question whether the remaining provisions of the law could still stand—jeopardizing Medicaid expansion, critical public health programs that help fight COVID-19, and subsidies that help working families access care, among countless others. Critically, this decision threatens healthcare coverage protections for 133 million Americans with pre-existing conditions, and would allow health insurance companies to deny individuals care or charge more based on their health status.“It’s unconscionable that the Trump Administration continues its attack on healthcare, just when many Americans across the country need it most. A global pandemic is the time to wake up and protect the lives of our loved ones, yet all we see from the President’s team is repeal without replace,” said Attorney General Becerra. “The ACA is the backbone of our healthcare system, making doctor’s visits and care possible for millions of people, while providing critical public health funds for our communities to fight infectious diseases like the coronavirus. Under this hallmark law, more than 133 million people have been guaranteed healthcare protections, who could have been denied coverage entirely pre-ACA. We can’t afford to return to those days, so we’re marching forward at the Supreme Court determined to save the ACA and American lives.”The lawsuit, originally filed by a Texas-led coalition, and later supported by the Trump Administration, argued that Congress rendered the ACA’s individual mandate unconstitutional when it reduced the penalty for forgoing coverage to $0. They further argued that the rest of the ACA should be held invalid as a result of that change. California’s coalition defended the ACA in its entirety, supported by a bipartisan group of amici including scholars, economists, public health experts, hospital and provider associations, patient groups, counties, cities, and more. While the Fifth Circuit held that the individual mandate is unconstitutional, it sidestepped the further question as to the validity of the ACA’s remaining provisions. Attorney General Becerra’s coalition petitioned the Supreme Court for review in order to protect Americans’ healthcare and resolve the uncertainty created by the Fifth Circuit decision.In today’s filing, California’s coalition makes clear that patients, doctors, hospitals, employers, workers, states, pharmaceutical companies and more will be negatively impacted if the ACA should fall. It also highlights important advancements in healthcare access made under the ACA, including: More than 12 million Americans receiving coverage through Medicaid expansion;Nearly 9 million individuals nationwide receiving tax credits to help afford health insurance coverage through individual marketplaces;Millions of working families relying on high-quality, employer-sponsored insurance plans; Important protections prohibiting insurers from denying health insurance to the 133 million Americans with pre-existing conditions (like diabetes, cancer, or pregnancy) or from charging individuals higher premiums because of their health status; Improved payment reforms and increased access to Medicare for seniors and people disabilities; andNearly $1.3 trillion in federal funding being dedicated to keeping Americans healthy and covered, including Medicaid expansion and public health dollars. Joining Attorney General Becerra in defending the ACA are the attorneys general of Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota (by and through its Department of Commerce), Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and the District of Columbia, as well as the Governor of Kentucky. A copy of the brief is available here. May 6, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement on House Brief to Defend Affordable Care Act at Supreme Court”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued this statement after the House filed a brief with the Supreme Court in the California v. Texas health care repeal lawsuit, to defend the Affordable Care Act from the Trump Administration’s assault in the courts:“The Affordable Care Act is a pillar of health and economic security in America, and its protections are more important than ever, as the coronavirus crisis shatters the lives and livelihoods of millions.“As our brief makes clear, the President’s insistence on doubling down on his senseless and cruel argument in court to destroy the ACA and every last one of its benefits and protections is unconscionable, particularly in the middle of a pandemic.“Access to affordable, quality health care is a matter of life and death. On Day One of this Congress, the House voted to throw our full legal weight into the fight to defeat this Republican lawsuit and we will continue to fight to defend the ACA, which is the law of the land, from the President’s attacks. The President must abandon his support for this suit and end his attacks on families’ health now.” May 6, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Fights to Defend ACA in Supreme Court”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James and a coalition of states today fought to defend the Affordable Care Act (ACA) against efforts by the Trump Administration and the State of Texas to repeal the law, putting the health care of tens of millions of Americans at risk. If the ACA is repealed, 133 million Americans with pre-existing conditions could be denied coverage or charged more based on their health status. The ACA is also providing critical public health programs that are helping to fight the spread of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), states’ decisions to expand Medicaid, and subsidies that are helping working families access the health coverage they need, among countless other benefits. Attorney General James and the coalition of 19 additional attorneys general and the governor of Kentucky, have now taken their fight to the U.S. Supreme Court, after the court agreed to review a recent decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit that held that the ACA’s individual mandate was unconstitutional and simultaneously called into question whether the remaining provisions of the law could still stand.“In the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, it has never been more clear how important it is for Americans to have access to quality, affordable health coverage,” said Attorney General James. “Yet, President Trump continues to actively work to strip health coverage away from millions of individuals and families, including more than a million who have the coronavirus. We are asking the Supreme Court to stop the president from kicking Americans off their health plans and finally end his efforts to undo all the progress made over the last ten years.”The lawsuit — originally filed by a Texas-led coalition and later supported by the Trump Administration — argued that a Republican-led Congress rendered the ACA’s individual mandate unconstitutional when it reduced the penalty for forgoing coverage to $0. They further argued that the rest of the ACA should be held invalid as a result of that change. Attorney General James and a coalition of attorneys general defended the ACA in its entirety, supported by a bipartisan group of amici, including scholars, economists, public health experts, hospital and provider associations, patient groups, counties, cities, and more. While the Fifth Circuit held the individual mandate to be unconstitutional, it declined to further rule on the validity of the ACA’s remaining provisions. The court instead sent the case back to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas to determine whether the problem with the mandate requires striking down the whole law. In January, however, Attorney General James and the coalition petitioned the Supreme Court for expedited review to protect Americans’ health care and resolve the uncertainty created by the Fifth Circuit decision. The Supreme Court granted review of the case in March for the upcoming term.In today’s filing, Attorney General James and the coalition make clear that patients, doctors, hospitals, employers, workers, states, and more will be negatively impacted if the ACA is repealed. The brief also highlights important advancements in health care access made under the ACA, including: More than 12 million Americans now receive coverage through the ACA’s Medicaid expansion;Nearly nine million individuals nationwide receive tax credits to help subsidize their health insurance coverage through individual marketplaces;Millions of working families rely on high-quality, employer-sponsored insurance plans;Important protections prohibit insurers from denying health insurance to the 133 million Americans with pre-existing conditions, like COVID-19, diabetes, cancer, or pregnancy, or from charging individuals higher premiums because of their health status; andNearly $1.3 trillion in federal funding has been dedicated to keeping Americans healthy and covered, which includes spending through Medicaid expansion and public health dollars. And in New York: The state uninsured rate reached its lowest point ever recorded in 2018 — 4.7-percent;More than 4.7 million New Yorkers now receive health coverage through the ACA, including nearly 3.3 million on Medicaid;58 percent of enrollees were expected to receive $636 million in tax credits to help subsidize the cost of health care in 2019 alone; andThe average monthly premium tax credit available to eligible Qualified Health Plan enrollees in 2019 was $335. Joining Attorney General James in filing today’s brief are the attorneys general of California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota (by and through its Department of Commerce), Nevada, New Jersey, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and the District of Columbia, as well as the governor of Kentucky. May 12, 2020: Military.com posted an article titled: “Tricare Drops Telehealth Copays, Adds Phone Call Coverage in Emergency Measure”. It was written by Patricia Kime. From the article: Tricare will now cover telephone services for some medical appointments and will eliminate copayments for beneficiaries who use telehealth services in place of an in-person visit to the doctor during the COVID-19 pandemic.Effective Wednesday, the Defense Department health program will cover audio-only remote services for office visits “when appropriate” and will not require copays for telemedicine, according to a notice in the Federal Register.The coverage will extend through the end or suspension of the national emergency as declared by President Donald Trump, according to the ruling.The ruling eliminates cost-sharing, including co-pays and deductibles, for in-network telehealth services for both Tricare Prime and Tricare Select beneficiaries in all geographic locations.It also lifts Tricare’s prohibition on medical services via telephone, allowing physicians or other providers to evaluate a patient’s symptoms by phone. While the ruling is clear that appointments via telehealth — with audio and video capability — are preferred, phone calls are acceptable for those who may not have access to high-speed internet or a computer with Wi-Fi access.The service applies to any illness or injury covered by Tricare, including COVID-19, but calls must be considered medically necessary and conducted by a network Tricare provider within the scope of his or her professional license.To be eligible for reimbursement for a telephone consult, providers should determine that a phone call is “appropriate for accomplishing the clinical goals of the encounter” and must document it, according to the ruling.Any visit requiring a physical exam would not be appropriate for a phone consultation and would not be covered, Tricare officials added.The ruling also lifts some restrictions on providers practicing medicine across state lines. Under normal circumstances, Tricare requires that providers must be licensed in the state where they are practicing, and they can treat patients only in that state.Under the temporary rule, providers will still be required to be licensed but can provide telehealth and audio medicine to patients across state lines. For example, in Washington, D.C., Tricare providers would be allowed to provide telemedicine to their patients who reside in Virginia. Previously, this was prohibited… May 13, 2020: California Attorney General Becerra and Senator Monning Announce That Legislation to Reduce Healthcare Costs, Increase Access to Affordable Care Passes Senate Health Committee”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra and Senator Bill Monning today announced Senate Bill 977 (SB 977), legislation that would make healthcare more affordable and accessible by cracking down on anticompetitive behavior and consolidation in the healthcare market, passed out of Senate Health Committee. The bill would require the Attorney General’s Office to review and approve affiliations or acquisitions between healthcare systems, facilities, or provider groups to ensure transactions either improve care coordination or increase healthcare access for underserved populations. The bill also provides new enforcement tools to reduce anticompetitive behavior in the market that leads to higher costs.“The coronavirus pandemic has shone a light on the crucial importance of our healthcare system and ensuring that everyone has access to affordable, quality healthcare. When giant companies strangle competition in the healthcare market, patients and employers are left paying the price,” said Attorney General Becerra. “I’m grateful to be working with Senator Monning to champion SB 977, a bill that provides our office with new tools to combat anticompetitive behavior in the healthcare market. We must all work together to protect consumers and make healthcare more affordable for all Californians.” “As our state continues to face the devastating impacts COVID-19 has on our healthcare system, it is important to ensure costs remain affordable for patients,” said Senator Monning. “Physicians are facing severe financial pressures because of the current pandemic and data shows that prices skyrocket when providers consolidate and reduce competition in the marketplace. SB 977 will protect existing services for patients and address the issue of unfair business practices that increase healthcare costs for all Californians.”Anticompetitive behavior in the healthcare sector is a growing concern because large healthcare systems can flex their market power to raise prices for patients, employers, and insurers while limiting services and decreasing the quality of care offered to Californians. For example, average prices for hospital care are 35 percent higher in Northern California, where healthcare systems are more consolidated, than in Southern California. The impact of consolidation on prices was reinforced by a 2018 study by professor Richard Scheffler and the Petris Institute at the University of California, Berkeley, which found the percentage of physicians in practices owned by hospitals increased from about 25 percent in 2010 to more than 40 percent in 2016. This increased hospital ownership resulted in an estimated 12 percent increase in premiums from 2014 to 2016 and has led these physician groups to be less flexible and adaptable during the pandemic.SB 977 would work to improve healthcare affordability and limit anticompetitive behavior by requiring healthcare systems to gain approval from the Attorney General’s Office before moving forward with any planned affiliation agreement or acquisition. The Attorney General’s determination to approve or deny a transaction will rely on two factors: Whether the transaction would truly increase care coordination and/or increase access and affordability of care to an underserved population; andWhether the transaction is substantially likely to result in anticompetitive effects that outweigh any benefits. In addition, SB 977 would declare that healthcare systems that exercise substantial market power may not engage in behavior that has a significant likelihood of anticompetitive effects. These behaviors include: raising market prices, diminishing the quality of care, reducing choice, increasing the total cost of care, and diminishing access or availability of healthcare services. Under SB 977, the Attorney General’s Office would have the ability to file civil actions to recover damages and obtain civil penalties against those that abuse market power. May 14, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) tweeted: “It’s unconscionable that Trump and Republicans continue to support a lawsuit to dismantle the Affordable Care Act. Yet that’s exactly what they’re doing. In the middle of a pandemic.” May 14, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Bipartisan Coalition of Leaders and Experts Support Supreme Court Fight to Protect ACA”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra today announced that a diverse group of bipartisan attorneys general, economists, patient groups, hospitals, healthcare providers, insurance companies, cities, counties, tribes, and more filed amicus briefs in the Supreme Court supporting California’s defense of the healthcare system and Affordable Care Act (ACA). The amici coalition also includes new partners in the attorneys general of Maryland, Maine, Montana, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.“As we confront a global pandemic of historic proportions, a bipartisan coalition of leaders, from bipartisan attorneys general to public health experts, stand with us before the Supreme Court in agreement: protecting the Affordable Care Act is critical to protecting the health of our nation and countless loved ones,” said Attorney General Becerra. “While the Trump Administration continues its attempt to destroy the ACA, state attorneys general, legal experts, economists, medical groups, and more know better: our nation’s hallmark healthcare law is lawful and we must do everything we can to protect it, for the sake of saving lives.”The Supreme Court agreed to review a recent Fifth Circuit decision that held the ACA’s individual mandate unconstitutional and called into question whether the remaining provisions of the law could still stand — jeopardizing Medicaid expansion, critical public health programs that help fight COVID-19, subsidies that help working families access care, and healthcare coverage protections for 133 million Americans with pre-existing conditions. The amici support California’s fight to protect America’s healthcare system and the well-being of Americans across the nation.These amicus briefs support California’s defense of the ACA and highlight the importance of safeguarding our public health system – especially given the current COVID-19 pandemic. The briefs highlight not only the critical public health gains made under the ACA, but also crucial ways that the ACA aids the nation in its COVID-19 response, including: The ACA’s pre-existing condition protections keep the millions of Americans who have or may become infected by COVID-19 from being denied coverage based on COVID-19 exposure, or from having their benefits limited to exclude coverage for the ongoing health consequences caused by COVID-19;The ACA’s Prevention and Public Health Fund provides more than 12 percent of the program funding for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the agency at the forefront of the government’s efforts to contain the pandemic; The ACA’s multi-billion-dollar Community Health Center Fund, extended by the recent Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, provides as much as 70 percent of all grant funding for community health centers, which are on the front lines of the COVID-19 response;The ACA’s non-discrimination requirements ensure that access to medical resources may not be denied to COVID-19 patients because a patient is disabled;The ACA’s investment in health care innovation, including telehealth, has paid great dividends during the pandemic by allowing providers and patients to adapt as communities shelter in place;The ACA’s expanded Medicaid program and Special Enrollment Periods provide a backstop for workers who lose their jobs and health insurance coverage; andIn Medicaid expansion states, the ACA will provide financial assistance to anywhere from 66 to 75 percent of laid-off workers in the industries most vulnerable to pandemic-related unemployment. Amicus briefs in support of California’s coalition were filed by: the attorneys general of Maryland, Maine, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin; AARP et al.; Alliance of Community Health Plans and Association for Community Affiliated Plans; America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP); American Cancer Society et al.; American Association of People with Disabilities et al.; American Medical Association et al. (AMA); the American Thoracic Society; the Association for Accessible Medicines; Bipartisan Economic Scholars; Blue Cross Blue Shield Association; the Catholic Health Association of the United States; Constitutional Law Experts; Families USA et al.; First Focus on Children et al.; HCA Healthcare, Inc.; Health Care Policy Scholars; Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, Inc.; Legal scholars; the National Association of Community Health Centers; National Health Law Program et al.; National Hospital Associations; National Women’s Law Center et al.; Small Business Majority Foundation; Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute; Public Citizen, Inc.; Public Health Experts et al.; Service Employees International Union (SEIU) et al.; Tribes and Tribal Organizations; Washington and Lee University School of Law Black Lung Clinic; 47 members of the United States Senate; 44 counties, cities, and towns and the California State Association of Counties; 36 State Hospital Associations; and more. May 15, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Harris, Sanders, Gillibrand, Booker, Warren, Markey, Merkley Introduce Emergency Health Care Guarantee Act”. From the press release: U.S. Senator Kamala D. Harris (D-CA) on Friday joined Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and 5 of their colleagues in introducing the Health Care Emergency Guarantee Act to eliminate all out-of-pocket health costs for every person in America during the COVID-19 crisis. Along with Harris and Sanders, the legislation was cosponsored by Senators Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Edward Markey (D-MA), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Cory Booker (D-NJ), and Jeff Merkley (D-OR).“The COVID-19 pandemic has placed Americans under tremendous stress,” said Harris. “On top of wondering how they will pay rent and put food on the table, paying for medical treatment if they get sick should not be another worry for families. I am proud to join my colleagues to introduce this legislation to protect patients from cost barriers to the medical care they need to stay healthy.”“During this public health crisis, we must make sure that everyone in America is able to receive all of the medical care they need, regardless of their income, immigration status or insurance coverage. No one in this country should be afraid to go to the doctor because of the cost—especially during a pandemic. The American people deserve an emergency health care response that is simple, straightforward, comprehensive, and cost-effective,” said Sanders. “We should empower Medicare to pay all of the medical bills of the uninsured and the under-insured—including prescription drugs—for the duration of the coronavirus pandemic. When so many people in this country are struggling economically and terrified at the thought of becoming sick, the federal government has a responsibility to take the burden of health care costs off of the backs of the American people. The legislation we are introducing today does just that.”New polling reveals overwhelming enthusiasm for this proposal. According to Data for Progress, 73 percent of American voters support Medicare covering all out-of-pocket health expenses during this emergency, including 58 percent of Republicans. In comparison, 55 percent backed a separate proposal to cover the cost of insurance premiums through COBRA, a federal program that allows those who have lost their jobs to temporarily retain their former employers’ health insurance coverage. When presented with evidence that the emergency Medicare proposal is significantly less expensive despite covering millions more people, 61 percent preferred this approach versus 14 percent who backed COBRA subsidies.The legislation would simply leverage the existing Medicare payment infrastructure to affordably and efficiently pay all costs of treatment for the uninsured, and cover all out-of-pocket costs such as copayments and deductibles for those who already have public or private insurance. The bill also halts medical debt collections, prohibits private insurance companies from increasing cost-sharing, and requires ongoing data collection and weekly reporting on health disparities related to COVID-19. The legislation would be effective until a COVID-19 vaccine is widely available to the public. The bill enjoys the endorsement of 32 national organizations and unions including the Association of Flight Attendants-CWA, International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers, National Nurses United, Service Employees International Union (SEIU), United Electrical Radio and Machine Workers of America; Center for Popular Democracy, Indivisible, League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), MoveOn.Org, National Domestic Workers Alliance, People’s Action, Progressive Change Campaign Committee, Public Citizen, Social Security Works, Sunrise Movement, United We Dream, Working Families Party, Business for Medicare for All, Debs-Jones-Douglass Institute, Democracy for America, Democratic Socialists of America, Economic Opportunity Institute, Economic Policy Institute, Faith Action Network, Healthcare-NOW, Hometown Action, Jane Addams Senior Center, Labor Campaign for Single Payer, Legal Voice, Medicare for All Now, Partners for Dignity & Rights, Presente.org, and Progressive Democrats of America. To read a summary of the bill, click here. To read a section-by-section outline of the bill, click here.To read the text of the bill, click here.To read a polling memo on the bill, click here. May 15, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “Coalition of Progressive Groups Slam Rúben Díaz Sr. for his Anti-Abortion Anti-LGBTQ Record”. From the press release: As New York grapples with the COVID-19 pandemic, a broad coalition of progressive groups — including Planned Parenthood Action Fund, LGBTQ Victory Fund, NARAL Pro-Choice America, Latino Victory Fund, and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus BOLD PAC — announced their opposition to Rubén Díaz Sr. as a candidate to represent the 15th Congressional District in New York for his attacks on equal access to basic health care; the LGBTQ community; and the right to safe, legal abortion. Due to historic inequities in health care access for the Latinx community in the district, the Bronx has been one of the hardest hit areas by the COVID-19 pandemic. In the midst of this public health crisis, New York voters need to elect a leader who will fight for equality and their basic health care needs. And that leader is anybody but Díaz Sr. Every other leading Democratic candidate has demonstrated support for protecting and expanding abortion access and LGBTQ rights, and would be far more qualified to represent New Yorkers in Congress.It’s not just that Díaz Sr. is out of step with the values of New Yorkers, he doesn’t have the best interests or well being of those in the district at heart. The Bronx, where the 15th District is located, has the highest abortion rate in the state. Latinx voters — who make up the majority of the district — overwhelmingly support the right to access abortion. Latinx millenials are more likely to identify as LGBTQ than any other group and the New York City metropolitan area has the largest LGBTQ population in the country with more than 750,000. As time has passed, Díaz Sr.’s policies have never been more disconnected from the priorities of New Yorkers.It’s clear voters across the country are ready for candidates who will expand abortion access and LGBTQ rights. In April, Marie Newman beat incumbent Democratic Rep. Dan Lipinski after 15 years of representing the Chicago suburbs in a race where Lipinski’s anti-abortion position was a key issue……The full list of coalition groups includes: Planned Parenthood Action Fund, LGBTQ Victory Fund, NARAL Pro-Choice America, Latino Victory Fund, the Congressional Hispanic Caucus BOLD PAC, Bend the Arc Jewish Action, Congressional Progressive Caucus PAC, Human Rights Campaign, Equality PAC, and People for the American Way Here are just a few of the comments and actions that show how unqualified Rubén Díaz Sr. is to represent New York: Comparing abortion to the Holocaust: Díaz Sr. penned a newsletter piece comparing abortion to genocide, saying, “Hitler was pro-choice. He chose to send the Jews to Auschwitz. That was not their choice that was Hitler’s choice…Murderers, assassins and criminals are pro-choice. They choose to put a gun to your head and take your life.” Observer, 05/01/2012Standing steadfast against marriage equality: Two years after being the lone Democratic state senator to vote against New York’s Marriage Equality Act, Díaz Sr. addressed an anti-marriage equality rally in Washington, D.C., saying “The majority is not always right. 2,000 years ago the majority chose the rabbi and rejected Jesus. Now, the majority are rejecting the Bible and not choosing Jesus. I know my conviction and I know I will not change my view.” Observer, 04/05/2013Pushing homophobic stigma and policies: Díaz Sr. has been peddling misinformation and anti-LGBTQ stigma for decades, saying last year, “When I get to the City Council, I find that the City Council is controlled — most council members out of 51 council members — over there, everybody is controlled by the homosexual community,” New York Times, 02/11/2019Ignoring sexual harassment: Díaz Sr. showed his true colors when he claimed he would protect perpetrators of sexual harassment instead of taking complaints seriously. During a mandatory City Council training, he was asked hypothetically what he would do if he overheard a chief of staff sexually harassing another staffer in an elevator. He responded, “I’m not gonna rat my people out! This place is full of rats!” City & State New York, 05/09/2019Questioning support for abortion and LGBTQ rights: During his floor speech in opposition to the Marriage Equality Act, Díaz Sr. revealed his unfiltered views on support for reproductive and LGBTQ rights, saying, “All Democrats do is abortion and gay marriage, but the Republican party has always been the party that protects traditional values and family values.” LGBTQ Nation, 06/26/2011Supporting Sen. Ted Cruz who proudly attacked “New York values”: After then-presidential candidate Sen. Ted Cruz made his controversial comments about “New York values,” Díaz Sr. invited the Texas senator to his district, saying “Imagine Ted Cruz traveling to the Bronx where there is a grassroots army of Black and Hispanic Evangelical Christians who are just like him — and who have been ignored by every presidential candidate.” City & State New York, 07/17/2018 May 19, 2020: The U.S. Mission to International Organizations in Geneva posted a written statement titled: “U.S. Explanation of Position “COVID-19 Response” Resolution”. From the statement: The United States thanks the European Union and the other co-sponsors for their leadership in preparing the COVID-19 Response resolution for adoption at the virtual 73rd World Health Assembly (WHA). That we are meeting in virtual session, at a time when more than 300,000 people have lost their lives and the global economy has been deeply affected, is a testament to the need to come together in response to this pandemic. This resolution makes an important contribution to that global response, immediately calling for whole-of-government and whole-of-society approaches to fighting the pandemic with the best available evidence, and by urging the international community to come together around all aspects of the response.Most importantly, the terms of this resolution take the first critical steps necessary to ensure that, when we face the next pandemic, we will have a World Health Organization (WHO) and an international system capable of responding effectively and decisively to save lives and protect the vulnerable. We applaud the call for an impartial, independent, and comprehensive review of the WHO’s response, to be undertaken in consultation with Member States, and we urge that work to begin now. This will help ensure we have a complete and transparent understanding of the source of the virus, timeline of events, early discussions, and the decision-making process for the WHO’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic. We must reform the WHO and supporting entities to be fully capable of fulfilling their core and crucial mission moving forward. We further appreciate the mandate given by the resolution to the WHO to investigate the origins of the virus, and we are confident that through this knowledge, researchers and medical practitioners around the world will be empowered in the pursuit of vaccines and other countermeasures.Finally, we wholeheartedly endorse the call in the resolution for all Member States to provide the WHO with timely, accurate, and sufficiently-detailed public health information related to the COVID-19 pandemic, as required by the International Health Regulations (IHR 2005). We stand ready to work with all partners to implement this resolution. If we are to fully realize the promise contained in the IHRs of a safer world for everyone, changes must be made within the WHO to hold Member State accountable to address and reduce risks that threaten public health.Unfortunately, despite our best efforts at working toward consensus language in all areas of this resolution, we regret that the United States must disassociate itself from a few paragraphs due to the following issues:The United States dissociates from operative paragraphs 7.5 and 9.4. The United States strongly supports women reaching the highest attainable outcomes for health, life, dignity, and well-being throughout their lives. We champion access to high-quality health care for women and girls across the lifespan. However, we do not accept references to “sexual and reproductive health,” or other language that suggests or explicitly states that access to abortion is included in the provision of population and individual level health services. The United States believes in legal protections for the unborn, and rejects any interpretation of international human rights (such as General Comment 36 on the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights) to require any State Party to provide access to abortion. As President Trump has stated, “Americans will never tire of defending innocent life.” Each nation has the sovereign right to implement related programs and activities consistent with their laws and policies, free from external pressure. There is no international right to abortion, nor is there any duty on the part of States to finance or facilitate abortion. Further, consistent with the 1994 International Conference on Population and Development Programme of Action and the 1995 Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, we do not recognize abortion as a method of family planning, nor do we support abortion in our global health assistance.The United States must also disassociate from operative paragraphs 4, 8.2 and 9.8 because the language in these operative paragraphs does not adequately capture all of the carefully negotiated, and balanced, language in the World Trade Organization (WTO) Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property (TRIPS) and the Doha Declaration of 2001 and instead presents an unbalanced and incomplete picture of that language at a time where all actors need to come together to produce vaccines and other critical health products. The United States recognizes the importance of access to affordable, safe, high-quality, and effective health products and the critical role that intellectual property plays in incentivizing the development of new and improved health products. However, as currently drafted, paragraphs 4, 8.2 and 9.8 send the wrong message to innovators who will be essential to the solutions the whole world needs.We are concerned that a misinterpretation of international trade obligations in non-WTO multilateral fora may negatively affect countries’ abilities to incentivize new drug development and expand access to medicines. We would also like to clarify our understanding of the reference in 8.2 to “existing mechanisms for voluntary pooling … of patents.” The United States interprets this reference as limited to voluntary mechanisms existing before the COVID-19 pandemic, not new or proposed “patent pooling” mechanisms created in response to the pandemic. It is critical that any such voluntary mechanisms as applied to COVID-19 related technologies be narrowly tailored in scope and duration to the medical needs of the current crisis, and that the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), as the UN agency with technical expertise on intellectual property issues, play an appropriate role in their operation and evolution.The United States is leading global efforts for the development of vaccines, for therapies and treatments for COVID-19, including providing significant funding and leading other initiatives to accelerate innovation in this space, for example the ACTIV Partnership recently unveiled by the United States National Institutes of Health. We applaud other global efforts as well and are committed to supporting a collaborative approach to ensuring that all efforts support one another and that we are truly accelerating progress toward a vaccine.Going forward, given the need for innovation incentives in the development of new health products, the U.S. Government encourages member states to engage with innovators to find mutually-acceptable solutions that achieve increased access to affordable, safe, effective, and high quality COVID-19 health products. By taking an unbalanced and incomplete approach to the issue of access to medicines and TRIPS, this resolution misses an opportunity to galvanize the world, beyond bureaucracy and UN bodies, toward the critical goal of accelerating research, development, distribution and access to affordable, safe, quality and effective COVID-19 related products. We remain committed to working with all partners toward that goal. May 20, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted an article titled: “Amidst COVID-19 Talks at the World Health Assembly, the U.S. Government Inserts Anti-Repro Health, Anti-Abortion Agenda”. From the press release: Yesterday at the World Health Assembly, the administration further isolated the U.S. from other member nations with its refusal to accept references to “sexual and reproductive health” in the World Health Organization (WHO) resolution on the COVID-19 pandemic response. This move follows a letter sent yesterday by the USAID acting administrator to UN Secretary-General António Guterres, demanding the UN delete abortion and sexual and reproductive health as an essential service in guidance for the global COVID-19 response. The administration announced last month it would suspend funding to the WHO, a threat Trump repeated in a letter to the WHO director-general, shared via Twitter Monday night.Statement from Monica Kerrigan, Executive Director, Planned Parenthood Global: “The COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated how interconnected the world is and how a threat to one is a threat to all. The World Health Organization member states came to the table yesterday to develop a critical response to the biggest global health crisis of our time. Yet, instead of working together with the global community, the U.S. government is once again exploiting the crisis to impose its extreme anti-reproductive health, anti-abortion ideology. Abortion is essential, reproductive health is essential, and Planned Parenthood will continue working to ensure that these services are accessible, no matter where you live.”This isn’t the first time the Trump administration has pushed its anti-reproductive health agenda on the global stage. Over the past three years, the administration has tried to undercut global consensus on sexual and reproductive health and rights at forums like the Commission on the Status of Women and the UN Security Council and advanced harmful policies like the expanded global gag rule, which weaken global health systems and erode access to critical health services around the world. The virus has placed a heavy burden on women as frontline workers and caregivers, and has increased rates of gender-based violence for women around the world. A study by the Guttmacher Institute projects that the COVID-19 pandemic will have a devastating impact on global sexual and reproductive health, including as many as 28,000 additional maternal deaths. May 20, 2020: American Academy of Pediatrics posted news titled: “Stay in the know: COVID-19 updates from the nation’s capital”. From the news: …Tucked into the $2 trillion Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act package — which became law — are two long-standing AAP advocacy priorities: over-the-counter (OTC) drug reform and reauthorization of the Pediatric Subspecialty Loan Repayment Program.Understandably, much of the attention paid to this sweeping legislation was on the critical provisions it included to address the pandemic. It also is important to recognize these priorities, which were included with little fanfare but will have a major impact on children’s health.Meaningful reform of the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) OTC drug regulatory system has been long overdue. Pediatric labeling on older drugs is outdated, as it is based on evidence that no longer meets current safety and efficacy standards or is based on incorrect assumptions about how adult data should inform the labeling of drugs for children.The new law will make it easier for the FDA to update labels based on the latest scientific developments, ensuring that OTC drugs are safe and effective for use in children. It also strengthens the agency’s ability to require packaging that keeps children safe from accidental ingestion.The CARES Act also reauthorized the Pediatric Subspecialty Loan Repayment Program for five years. The program helps address shortages of pediatric subspecialists in underserved areas. The Academy is urging Congress to provide $50 million in funding for the program for fiscal year 2021.Pediatric subspecialists provide care for children with complex medical conditions or who require long-term, coordinated care for chronic illnesses. Shortages of pediatric subspecialists force families to face long wait times for appointments or travel long distances.The program would provide up to $35,000 annually for a maximum of three years to pediatric subspecialists who agree to practice in an underserved area, helping to ensure children can receive care no matter where they live.After years of AAP and pediatrician advocacy on both of these issues, their inclusion in the broader coronavirus legislation represents a long-fought victory for children’s health… May 20, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Planned Parenthood Applauds Senate Introduction of HEAL Act”. From the press release: Today, Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) introduced the Health Equity and Access under the Law (HEAL) for Immigrant Women and Families Act, which removes politically motivated barriers to health insurance coverage so all immigrants, regardless of status, can fully participate in federal programs, including Medicaid, the Affordable Care Act’s Marketplace, and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP). Expanding access to health care is always critical but, as the nation struggles to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic, the need is even more urgent. The House version of this bill was introduced last fall. This is the first time the bill has been introduced in the Senate. Statement from Jacqueline Ayers, Vice President, Government Relations & Public Policy, Planned Parenthood Federation of America:“Viruses do not discriminate, and everyone deserves access to health care, regardless of their immigration status. Planned Parenthood Federation of America applauds Sen. Booker for his leadership in introducing the HEAL Act in the Senate for the first time. As the Trump administration continues to attack and leave behind immigrant communities in its COVID-19 response, it is critical we work to remove barriers that prevent immigrants and their families from accessing the care they need. Planned Parenthood calls on Congress to pass the HEAL Act and protect everyone’s access to health care — no matter what.”The HEAL Act removes the five-year waiting period that prevents immigrants from fully participating in federal health care programs, and opens up the Affordable Care Act Marketplace so that all immigrants, including the undocumented and Deferred Action for Child Arrivals (DACA) recipients, can access the affordable health care they need. Additionally, the HEAL Act reinstates Medicaid eligibility for Compact of Free Association (COFA) migrants who lost access to the program in 1996. Facing many systemic barriers to basic health care and information, immigrants endure challenging and life-endangering health care disparities. Many women in immigrant communities are more likely to die from breast and cervical cancers, and some immigrant groups have high rates of HIV and other sexually transmitted infections. All of these diseases could be screened for, and in some cases prevented, with equal access to care. Planned Parenthood Federation of America joins 215 organizations in supporting the HEAL Act, and is committed to ensuring that all individuals, regardless of citizenship, have access to quality care, including reproductive health care. May 20, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “PPFA Denounces Political Attacks on Local Planned Parenthood Health Centers”. From the press release: Today, Planned Parenthood Federation of America released the following statement on the Trump administration’s latest attacks on Planned Parenthood and its patients by targeting independent Planned Parenthood 501(c)(3) organizations that recieved federal assistance under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act.Statement from Jacqueline Ayers, vice president of government relations & public policy, Planned Parenthood Federation of America:“Like many other local nonprofits and health care providers, some independent Planned Parenthood 501(c)(3) organizations applied for and were awarded loans under the eligibility rules established by the CARES Act and the Small Business Administration (SBA), which they met. Planned Parenthood health centers play a core role in the social safety net, and there is no more critical time for the care they provide than during a public health crisis.“And just like other nonprofits and health care providers, this pandemic has had a significant impact on Planned Parenthood health centers’ ability to provide care. Paycheck Protection Program loans have ensured health centers can retain staff and continue to provide patients with essential, time-sensitive sexual and reproductive health care during this crisis.“This is a clear political attack on Planned Parenthood health centers and access to reproductive health care. It has nothing to do with Planned Parenthood health care organizations’ eligibility for COVID-19 relief efforts, and everything to do with the Trump administration using a public health crisis to advance a political agenda and distract from their own failures in protecting the American public from the spread of COVID-19. It is also just the latest salvo in the Trump administration’s long history of targeting Planned Parenthood, and trying to severely limit access to sexual and reproductive health care.“For many patients, local Planned Parenthood health centers are their only source of health care; the unfortunate reality is the pandemic has made existing barriers to care worse for many of the communities they serve. While local Planned Parenthood health centers are focused on providing critical health care for their communities during this pandemic, the Trump administration is focused on attacking critical safety net providers. This is not the time to play politics, and it is certainly not the time to reduce access to critical health care.” May 20, 2020: San Francisco Chronicle posted an article titled: “Nearly 124,000 sign up through Covered California; plans include free coronavirus testing”. It was written by Rusty Simmons. From the article: Nearly 124,000 people have signed up for medical insurance through Covered California since March 20 as the state grapples with the coronavirus pandemic and startling unemployment numbers.According to the state health care marketplace, 123,810 people have sought insurance during Covered California’s special open-enrollment period. The exchange is generally open from Oct. 15 to Jan. 31, but it extended the period amid the crisis……Medi-Cal, which covers 13 million Californians and is offered through Covered California, put a 90-day hold on renewal reviews last month, so people can automatically continue coverage.Under Covered California, people have access to private health insurance plans with monthly premiums that may be subsidized, and coverage begins the first of the month after a person chooses a plan.Californians previously could sign up for health insurance through the marketplace outside of the annual open-enrollment period because of a “qualifying life event,” such as losing coverage, moving, getting married or having a baby. The special enrollment period, which extends through the end of June, is available to people who were unaware of available premium subsidies or the new state penalty for not having health insurance……All Covered California and Medi-Cal health plans include no-charge telehealth options for COVID-19 screening, which allow people to speak to a medical professional via phone or video chat, so they don’t have to go to a doctor’s office or hospital. The coverage includes free coronavirus testing as well as visits to emergency rooms or urgent care for screening or testing… May 21, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Harris, Colleagues Praise Senate Passage of Resolution Marking National Minority Health Month”. From the press release: U.S. Senator Kamala D. Harris (D-CA) on Thursday joined Senators Ben Cardin (D-MD) and Tim Scott (R-SC) and 14 of their colleagues in applauding the passage of the resolution recognizing April as Minority Health Month. As in previous years, the Senators introduce this resolution to raise awareness of the disparities in health care and health outcomes faced by minority populations including American Indians, Alaska Natives, African Americans, Hispanics, Native Hawaiians, Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders. This year, the COVID-19 pandemic places an urgency on this issue, as preliminary data suggests that minority groups have been disproportionately impacted by the disease. Targeted solutions to help communities of color are critical to closing gaps in health outcomes and improving efforts to combat the COVID-19 crisis.“Communities of color have been plagued by health disparities for far too long,” said Harris. “The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated these inequities. We know that people of color are more likely to suffer from conditions such as heart disease, asthma, and lupus — conditions that could also put people at higher risk of complications or death from coronavirus. I’m proud to join my colleagues on this important resolution– it is vital that we take action to eradicate these disparities and improve access to care for minority communities across the nation.”In addition to Senators Harris, Cardin and Scott, the resolution is cosponsored by U.S. Senators Cory Booker (D-NJ), Marco Rubio (R-FL), Bob Menendez (D-NJ), John Boozman (R-AR), Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Kevin Cramer (D-ND), Ron Wyden (D-OR), James Lankford (R-OK), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Mike Braun (D-IN), Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Ed Markey (D-MA) and Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV). May 21, 2020: Reuters posted an article titled: “U.S. Supreme Court rebuffs bid to halt Idaho trangender inmate’s surgery”. It was written by Andrew Chung. From the article: The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday allowed a transgender prison inmate in Idaho to go ahead with sex reassignment surgery, rejecting the state’s bid to put it on hold.The decision by the justices means that the surgery for the inmate, Adree Edmo, which is scheduled for July, will remain on the calendar while they consider whether to hear the state of Idaho’s appeal in the case.The brief court order noted that two of the nine justices, conservatives Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, would have granted the state’s request that the surgery be put on hold.Edmo, 32, is serving a sentence for a 2011 sexual assault of a 15-year-old boy. Edmo is scheduled to be released from prison next year.The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had found that prison officials denied Edmo access to the surgery “despite full knowledge of Edmo’s ongoing and extreme suffering and medical needs” in violation of the U.S. Constitution’s Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.Idaho told the Supreme Court that the 9th Circuit failed to consider the professional opinions of a prison psychiatrist and other officials that Edmo was best served by a more conservative treatment regimen, rather than sex reassignment surgery.Edmo had been diagnosed with gender dysphoria, which the American Psychiatric Association defines as “clinically significant distress” due to a conflict between a person’s gender identity and their sex assigned at birth.Prison officials provided Edmo with hormone therapy. But Edmo continued to experience dysphoria primarily because of her male genitalia, according to court papers. Twice, in 2015 and 2016, Edmo attempted to self-castrate in order to eliminate testosterone from her body, court papers said.A federal judge in 2018 ordered the state to provide the surgery to Edmo, a ruling the 9th Circuit upheld. May 26, 2020: Missouri Governor Michael L. Parson (Republican) posted a press release on his official website titled: “Governor Parson Signs Proclamation Placing Medicaid Expansion on August Primary Ballot”. From the press release: During today’s COVID-19 briefing, Governor Mike Parson announced that Medicaid expansion will be placed on a ballot at the August 4, 2020, primary election.Citizens of Missouri filed an initiative petition with the Secretary of State to place Medicaid expansion on the ballot. Following the Secretary of State’s certification of the petition, Governor Parson today signed a proclamation to place the initiative on the August ballot. “I want to be clear that this is about policy, not politics,” Governor Parson said. “At a time when our state is undergoing a major health, economic, and budget crisis, we need to know exactly where we stand on what would be a massive spending initiative for Missouri.”According to research from Pew Charitable Trusts, Missouri is a top five state for general revenue spending on Medicaid. The state estimates it will need an additional $88 million in general revenue through Fiscal Year 2021 due to COVID-19.“Pass or fail, it is important that we understand the implications of Medicaid expansion as soon as possible,” Governor Parson said. “Placing the initiative on the August ballot will give us more time to prepare and account for the outcome in our state budget.”… May 27, 2020: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) posted a press release titled: “ACOG Suit Petitions Court to Remove FDA’s Burdensome Barriers to Reproductive Care During COVID-19”. From the press release: The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) took another step toward achieving equitable access to care for patients during the COVID-19 pandemic by asking a federal court to require the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to suspend a harmful FDA restriction on mifepristone. Joining ACOG as plaintiffs in today’s lawsuit are the Council of University Chairs of Obstetrics and Gynecology, the New York Academy of Family Physicians, and SisterSong Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective.Mifepristone is an evidence-based treatment prescribed for management of early pregnancy loss as well as induced abortion. Although mifepristone has long been proven to be safe and effective when prescribed through telemedicine and can be safely taken in the comfort of a patient’s home, outdated FDA restrictions require mifepristone to be dispensed in a hospital, clinic, or medical office.“Of the more than 20,000 drugs regulated by the FDA, mifepristone is the only one that patients must receive in person at a hospital, clinic, or medical office, yet may self-administer, unsupervised, at a location of their choosing,” says the complaint, which was filed today by the American Civil Liberties Union and the international law firm Arnold & Porter.For years, the medical community has opposed these restrictions, which have no medical basis, provide no patient benefit, and unnecessarily restrict access to care.In the current COVID-19 pandemic, these burdensome requirements are especially harmful and must be lifted. The requirements disproportionately affect patients from underserved communities who are burdened by the need to travel, arrange childcare, and present to their chosen clinician in person for the dispensing of the medication. Forcing physicians to dispense this drug in person puts patients at increased risk of COVID-19 as a condition of obtaining abortion or miscarriage care and needlessly raises exposure risks for clinicians and other health care staff.“Our request in this case is simple: the federal government should permit patients seeking safe and effective reproductive health care, which includes care for miscarriage and termination of pregnancy, the same ability to access care and protect themselves from exposure as patients in other contexts are afforded,” said Eva Chalas, MD, FACOG, FACS, president of ACOG.People of color have been disproportionately impacted by infections, hospitalizations, and deaths from COVID-19, as well as by the nation’s maternal mortality crisis. The FDA’s restrictions on mifepristone only serve to increase the risk faced by the communities that are already inequitably facing harm from the pandemic.“During the COVID-19 pandemic, the health care community—from individual physicians togovernment agencies—has come together to identify safe, effective ways to provide patients with the care that they need, including through telemedicine. The FDA’s decision to maintain medically unnecessary restrictions on mifepristone is a glaring exception, which results in discrimination in access and threatens to harm patients and their clinicians during a time of national crisis. Lifting the barriers to mifepristone will allow women, including those from underserved communities that are disproportionately affected by both COVID-19 and the ongoing maternal health crisis, the ability to obtain necessary and essential evidence-based care without having to risk potential life-threatening exposure,” Dr. Chalas added.David Chelmow, MD, FACOG, president of the Council of University Chairs of Obstetrics and Gynecology, added, “The medical community must be able to use all the tools at our disposal, including telehealth care where appropriate, to meet patients’ essential medical needs while protecting them from coronavirus. The next generation of health care practitioners must be taught the most safe, effective, and patient-centered care, even during a public health emergency. The FDA’s unique restriction on mifepristone prevents clinicians from exercising their medical judgment during this pandemic, limits the ability to provide the optimal medication for miscarriage and abortion care, and needlessly jeopardizes the safety of patients.”Read the full complaintRead the motion for preliminary injunction May 29, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “BREAKING NEWS: – Victory for Missourians: Abortion Services Protected in Missouri”. From the press release: After a year-long battle with Missouri Gov. Mike Parson’s Department of Health and Senior Services (DHSS), an administrative commission just ruled that the state wrongfully withheld Reproductive Health Services of Planned Parenthood of the St. Louis Region’s (RHS) license. Today, the Missouri Administrative Hearing Commission (AHC) renewed the abortion license for RHS, the last remaining healh center in Missouri with a license to provide abortion. RHS can continue providing abortion services at its St. Louis health center.The commissioner wrote in his decision:“Planned Parenthood has demonstrated that it provides safe and legal abortion care.” The physicians who perform abortions at Planned Parenthood through Washington University and are all exceptionally competent and well trained.”For far too many people, abortion is already inaccessible in Missouri. Data revealed nearly all Missourians already flee the state for abortion services. Many patients have told RHS the same thing: The long list of medically unnecessary abortion restrictions make it too difficult and burdensome to access the care they need in their home state. Statement of Alexis McGill Johnson, acting president & CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America:“Today’s decision is a hard-fought victory for Planned Parenthood patients — and for people across Missouri. This is how we fight for our patients: case by case, day by day, to ensure abortion remains safe and legal across the country. The data shows that many have already paid the price, with the vast majority of Missouri patients forced to cross state lines to get the care they need. This is what it looks like when abortion is a right in name only. There is much more work to be done to ensure patients can access safe, legal abortion inside their home state.“During a worldwide pandemic, every public health care provider including Planned Parenthood should have all the resources they need to care for the complex needs of their communities, including abortion. Planned Parenthood remains committed to helping every patient access the care they need, even if that means having to leave their home state. We know care is much more than the services we provide; it’s how we show up for each other and in the world. In these uncertain times, we’re in this together.”Statement from Yamelsie Rodríguez, president and CEO, Reproductive Health Services of Planned Parenthood of the St. Louis Region:“For more than a year, Missouri’s health department has targeted Planned Parenthood. Missouri’s health department director, Randall Williams made false allegations about the high-quality care we provide and the dedicated, expert medical staff who provide it — all the while failing to tackle the real public health crises ravaging the state, including the COVID-19 crisis, rising infant and maternal mortality rates and skyrocketing rates of sexually transmitted infections like syphilis. Today’s ruling is vindication for Planned Parenthood and our patients who rely on us. But the reality is, abortion has essentially become a right in name only in Missouri. Missouri’s medically unnecessary requirements, two in-person trips to the health center at least 72 hours apart, a ban on using telehealth for an abortion and a needless invasive pelvic exam for medication abortion still make it extraordinarily difficult for people to access care in Missouri.“An abortion license, while critical to our ability to provide care, still cannot undo the harm that medically unnecessary policies in our state inflict on patients. It does not have to be this way. Gov. Parson could eliminate these medically unnecessary restrictions using the authority granted in his emergency order. We continue to keep our doors open, and can continue to care for all patients who choose to access reproductive health care, including safe and legal abortion, in Missouri and across the region.”… June June 1, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “California Department of Justice Issues Final CURES Regulations to Protect Patient Privacy, Combat the Abuse of Controlled Substances”. From the press release: The California Department of Justice today unveiled final regulations pertaining to the Controlled Substance Utilization Review and Evaluation System (CURES). CURES is California’s prescription drug monitoring program, a tool that assists healthcare practitioners in their efforts to ensure appropriate prescribing and dispensing of controlled substances and aids law enforcement and regulatory agencies in their efforts to control the diversion and resultant abuse of controlled substances.“At the California Department of Justice, it’s our job to safeguard the rights and interests of nearly forty million Californians,” said Attorney General Becerra. “These regulations make commonsense protections for patient privacy a top priority, while balancing the need for critical enforcement tools to protect public health and safety by combatting the abuse of controlled substances and aiding in public health interventions. We’re grateful to all the stakeholders and members of the public who contributed to the regulation process.” Under Assembly Bill 1751 enacted in January 1, 2019, the Department of Justice is required to adopt regulations by July 1, 2020, regarding certain processes, purposes, and conditions involving access and use of information within CURES. After consulting with stakeholders, the Department released proposed regulations on October 4, 2019. The Department received comments from the public on the proposed regulations, including at two public hearings in November 2019. The Department then released revisions on January 16, 2020 and sought additional comments. Today’s final regulations will become effective on July 1, 2020. The regulations address: The process for approving, denying, and disapproving individuals or entities seeking access to information in CURES;The purposes for which a healthcare practitioner may access information in CURES;The conditions under which a warrant, subpoena, or court order is required for a law enforcement agency to obtain information from CURES as part of a criminal investigation; andThe process by which information in CURES may be provided for educational, peer review, statistical, or research purposes. A copy of the final regulations is available here. Please view https://oag.ca.gov/bciis/regs for additional information. June 3, 2020: American Academy of Pediatrics posted news titled: “AAP urges insurers to extend telehealth payments during COVID-19 pandemic”. From the news: The AAP is urging insurance companies and Medicaid programs to continue paying for telehealth services during the COVID-19 pandemic.With expanded coverage and increased payment, telehealth has become a vital way for pediatricians to care for patients, but some carriers plan to stop coverage later this month.“Telemedicine has played a critical role in expanding access to care for many patients, including those who live in rural areas or in areas without access to reliable public transportation during the pandemic,” said AAP President Sara “Sally” H. Goza, M.D., FAAP. “Those needs will not end in June. Nor will the needs of children with complex medical conditions, for whom the ability to interact with pediatric subspecialists and pediatric surgeons to guide their follow-up care is critical for their long-term health.”A recent Kaiser Family Foundation study found that nearly 50% of families have skipped or put off health care during the pandemic. As the need for health care services builds, there likely will be a surge of patients seeking care. Telehealth will serve as a critical expansion of the pediatrician’s office to support this influx.“Even though states are starting to open up, families are still frightened to come out,” said Sandy L. Chung, M.D., FAAP, a pediatrician in Fairfax, Va., and president of the AAP Virginia Chapter. “In our area, the coverage for telehealth visits will expire for several of the insurance companies we work with, and we’re afraid this will lead to many families delaying health care even longer.” The AAP is calling for private insurance and Medicaid payments to continue for at least 90 days after the public health emergency declaration expires.“It is urgent that insurance companies recognize this need and continue the expansion of telemedicine policies that were established during this crisis, so all children can have access to the health care they need now,” Dr. Goza said. June 4, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Files Amicus Brief Challenging FDA’s Unnecessary Barriers to Abortion Medication in Light of COVID-19 Pandemic”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra joined a multistate amicus brief supporting the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists challenge to restrictions imposed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on Mifepristone, the medication abortion prescription drug. Currently, due to FDA restrictions, Mifepristone can only be dispensed by certified providers at a hospital, clinic, or medical office — and not via pharmacy or mail — requiring women to go in person for a prescription. In the brief, the attorneys general argue that these restrictions interfere unjustifiably with the states’ efforts to minimize transmission of the COVID-19 virus while providing essential healthcare.“As communities across the country — and HHS itself — work to promote telehealth to prevent the spread of coronavirus, women’s healthcare must not be excluded,” said Attorney General Becerra. “The FDA’s restrictive policy on Mifepristone targets women — and only women — forcing them to go in person to a doctor’s office to retrieve their prescription. During this unprecedented pandemic and stay-at-home orders, the FDA unnecessarily and irresponsibly puts women’s lives at risk. This is 2020, not 1920.”In the brief, the coalition argues that the FDA’s Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) designation impedes women’s access to the medication abortion prescription drug despite the fact that it has been proven safe and effective. Mifepristone has been approved by the FDA since 2000, and it remains the only drug approved in the United States for pregnancy termination. Since its approval, about three million women in the United States have used the medication to terminate a pregnancy. Indeed, according to the FDA, this medication “has been increasingly used as its efficacy and safety have become well-established by both research and experience.” However, under REMS, the FDA requires that: Healthcare providers must be registered with the drug manufacturer; Patients must sign a “Patient Agreement” form confirming that they received counseling on the risks associated with the medication; and Patients must be handed the medication at a clinic, medical office, or hospital under the supervision of a healthcare provider if the medication is prescribed for the purpose of terminating a pregnancy – yet the drug can be dispensed by mail in higher doses if prescribed for other purposes, such as ulcer relief. During this unprecedented crisis, it is essential that women across the country have access to critical healthcare services. Many states have already taken steps to increase telehealth care, at the federal government’s request. Yet, the current FDA REMS creates unnecessary barriers for women to access abortion care. In the brief, the coalition argues that these onerous and medically unnecessary requirements limit healthcare providers’ ability to assist their female patients, particularly during this global healthcare crisis. Furthermore, these requirements impose significant burdens on women in rural and medically underserved communities who would be required to travel long distances — sometimes up to 200 miles — for time-sensitive, in-person care. Forcing women to travel at a time when many states and the federal government are urging people to stay home to curb the spread of COVID-19 puts women across the country in harm’s way.In March, Attorney General Becerra led a multistate coalition in sending a letter to the FDA, asking them to remove REMS restrictions or waive enforcement of these requirements in light of the COVID-19 pandemic and nationwide stay-at-home orders.In filing the amicus brief, Attorney General Becerra joins the attorneys general of New York, Maryland, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and the District of Columbia. A copy of the brief is available here. June 4, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “NARAL Pro-Choice America Responds to Iowa Legislature Advancing Anti-Choice Constitutional Amendment”. From the press release: As thousands of Iowans march to demand the state take action to confront structural racism and entrenched white supremacy, Republican state legislators remain laser-focused on attacking reproductive freedom.Amid ongoing protests in support of the Movement for Black Lives and while more than 20,000 Iowans have been diagnosed with COVID-19, anti-choice politicians consumed by an extreme ideological agenda are trying to rush a vote on an extreme constitutional amendment to roll back access to abortion in the state. If implemented, the amendment would nullify a 2018 Iowa Supreme Court decision upholding the fundamental right to access abortion in Iowa.NARAL Pro-Choice America National Communications Director Kristin Ford released the following statement:“It’s appalling to see anti-choice Republicans in the state legislature exploiting this moment of national grieving and crisis to advance their extreme ideological agenda. Hundreds of Iowans have lost their lives to COVID-19 and thousands more are peacefully filling the streets to protest the violence, trauma, and racism Black people in the U.S. face every day. Right now our leaders should be doing everything in their power to overhaul systems that perpetuate racial disparities and to provide relief to communities still reeling from an unprecedented pandemic. Instead, these legislators are using women as political props as they attempt to eliminate the state’s constitutional right to abortion. Their actions are shameful. Now more than ever, NARAL Iowa members are committed to holding politicians accountable for failing to protect our fundamental freedoms — enough is enough.” June 5, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Leads Coalition Fighting for Abortion Access During Coronavirus Pandemic”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James has led a multistate coalition of 23 attorneys general in taking legal action against the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for increasing the risk that women nationwide will contract the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) as they seek abortions in their state. In an amicus brief filed in support of the plaintiffs in American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists et al. v. FDA et al. in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland,Attorney General James led the coalition in supporting the plaintiffs’ request for a preliminary injunction to halt an FDA requirement that forces women to appear in person in a clinical setting to receive a drug known as Mifepristone for an early abortion or for miscarriage care. The coalition argues that the drug should be readily accessible via telehealth, so as to not potentially expose women to COVID-19 by requiring unnecessary travel.“For years, the Trump Administration has done everything in its power to control women’s bodies,” said Attorney General James. “As much of the country continues to see the spread of the coronavirus and many residents are asked to stay at home or reduce travel, the federal government should be doing everything in its power to ensure women can maintain control of their reproductive choices without endangering their health and safety. Control over one’s reproductive freedom should not be limited to those who are able to leave their homes as we battle the coronavirus. We are fighting the Trump Administration’s continued assault on women’s reproductive freedoms and will fight to ensure Mifepristone is accessible via telehealth so that no woman is forced to risk her health while exercising her constitutional right to access an abortion.”Since the widespread onset of COVID-19 across the United States in March, nearly 1.9 million Americans have contracted the disease, resulting in more than 108,000 deaths, including more than 375,000 infections in New York and more than 24,000 deaths in the state. In response, legislators, officials, and agencies across the nation have been instituting various emergency measures to slow the spread of the virus by limiting face-to-face contact and reducing in-person social gatherings, such as by closing schools and requiring all nonessential employees to work from home, as limiting interpersonal contact is central to the ability to control the spread of the virus.But the FDA’s current policy requiring patients to appear in person in a clinical setting to receive Mifepristone heightens the risk of contracting and transmitting COVID-19 for everyone involved — including patients and health care providers. Forcing women to travel at a time when many states and the federal government are urging people to stay home to curb the spread of COVID-19 is shortsighted — not only putting women and their close contacts across the country in harm’s way, but also the public health more generally. Further, this policy undermines different states’ ability to effectively manage the pandemic.In the brief, Attorney General James and the coalition specifically argue that “many women will need to travel long distances in order to reach a clinic that dispenses” Mifepristone — sometimes up to 200 miles — “especially if they reside in rural and medically underserved locations.” Additionally, those women in more compact, urban cities may not have the option to practice social distancing outside the home, therefore increasing the likelihood of coming into contact with an individual who has contracted COVID-19. But “y using measures like telehealth to reduce unnecessary person-to-person contacts, can decrease their infection rate, as required to safely commence reopening even as the pandemic continues.” In fact, the coalition continues, “telehealth should be used wherever possible — even as phased reopening of the States occur — because it ‘maximize the number of capable health care workers’ providing necessary medical treatment, while protecting health care staff,” and “the counseling required prior to a medication abortion is routinely provided through telehealth in order to reduce in-clinic interactions.”Even another division of HHS and one of the FDA’s sister agencies — the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — has advocated for telehealth, stating, “everaging telemedicine whenever possible is the best way to protect patients and staff from COVID-19.” The coalition goes on to highlight that their states have already taken numerous steps to expand the use of telehealth during the current public health crisis, including the suspension “of existing statutes and regulations that limit the use of telehealth in order to allow the delivery of regulated services through telehealth to additional patient populations, including especially vulnerable ones. These suspension orders expand the types of practitioners who can use telehealth, the settings in which it can be provided, the modalities that can be used to deliver telehealth services, and the circumstances under which telehealth can be initiated.” Further, many states have also suspended existing rules that prohibit telehealth in the absence of an existing patient-provider relationship so that patients can receive care from new providers.The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has likewise championed telehealth as an effective substitute for in-clinic dispensing of Mifepristone that can improve patient safety and outcomes during the COVID-19 public health crisis. And even before the pandemic, in 2018, the American Medical Association passed a resolution urging the FDA to lift the requirement because it “impedes the provision of” Mifepristone and has no “demonstrated or even reasonably likely advantage.” … June 5, 2020: American college of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) posted a press release titled: “ACOG Discourages the Administration from Severing ties with the World Health Organization”. From the press release: ACOG is committed to improving and protecting the health of women around the world. We are concerned about the recent announcement that the President plans to terminate the United States’s relationship with the World Health Organization (WHO). We encourage the Administration to position the United States as a steadfast leader in global health, especially as we confront the ongoing global health crisis of COVID-19.It is clear that a unified response from around the world is required for the containment and eradication of COVID-19, thus saving millions of lives. To that end, severing our relationship with the WHO at this time is reckless and would represent a large step backward in the fight to contain COVID-19 worldwide. Our efforts to support vaccine development; protect maternal and child health gains; and to work with other countries to improve containment, testing, and treatment of COVID-19 should be done in solidarity with the global health community. There are no borders to this virus, and the United States has a moral imperative to help support and contribute to the efforts to reduce the harm from COVID-19 around the world and, in so doing, to protect the lives of those here in America. We strongly urge the Administration to participate constructively in the WHO and in the effort to find worldwide solutions to the grave global pandemic. June 5, 2020: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) posted a press release titled: “Fifteen Medical Organizations, 22 States, and the District of Columbia File Briefs in Support of ACOG’s Challenge to FDA Restrictions During the COVID-19 Pandemic”. From the press release: On Wednesday, two coalitions filed briefs in support of a suit filed by ACOG petitioning a federal court to lift requirements for in-person dispensing of mifepristone during the COVID-19 pandemic. Although mifepristone, which is used in miscarriage management and first trimester pregnancy termination, has been proven to be safe and effective when prescribed through telemedicine for patients to receive by mail and take at home, it is subject to an FDA requirement to be dispensed in-person at a hospital, clinic, or medical office. This requirement hinders access to this medical treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic and places both patients and medical staff at risk of unnecessary exposure during the pandemic.In a brief filed by a coalition of fifteen medical organizations (including, among others, the American Medical Association, American Academy of Family Physicians, and the American Academy of Pediatrics), the groups argued that FDA’s requirements for in-person dispensing are not only medically unnecessary, but do not allow clinicians to exercise their independent medical judgement. This lack of physician and clinician discretion harms patients and clinicians during the current public health emergency. As the brief states: “AMA policy provides that physicians individually and collectively share the obligation to ensure that the care patients receive is “safe, effective, patient centered, timely, efficient, and equitable.” Yet the REMS on mifepristone in the context of abortion and miscarriage care prevent physicians from carryingout this obligation. Rather than evaluating the concerns of each patient individually, clinicians are forced to schedule an in-person visit even when the clinician has determined that such a visit would be detrimental to the patient’s health and well-being. Because of SARS-CoV- 2, medically unnecessary in-person visits are particularly likely to negatively impact patients’ health and well-being.”Of particular concern, these negative impacts fall hardest on patients of color who as a result of systemic inequities already at higher risk of infection, hospitalization, and death from COVID-19, as well as by the nation’s maternal mortality crisis. The brief highlights for the court how the logistical burdens and risks inherent in the required travel to pick up these prescriptions fall inequitably on communities already facing disproportionate harm from the pandemic. “Due to lack of transportation, insufficient funds, and lack of childcare, low-income patients and patients of color are particularly likely to be exposed to unnecessary risks from the in-person dispensing requirement during the pandemic. Clinicians’ inability to exercise their judgment when providing miscarriage and abortion care thus particularly harms these populations.”In a brief filed by Attorneys General representing twenty-two states and the District of Columbia, the states argued that FDA’s restrictions erode states’ efforts to minimize transmission of COVID-19 through social distancing, while allowing access to essential reproductive health care. The brief states that using telehealth whenever medically appropriate helps limit social interaction which is “critical to maintaining health and safety and preventing a surge in infection rates… it is important for residents to avoid unnecessary travel and in-person contacts.” June 10, 2020: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) posted a press release titled: “ACOG Urges Payers to Make Expanded COVID-19 Telehealth Policies Permanent”. From the press release: Eva Chalas, MD, FACOG, FACS, president of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), released the following statement urging all health insurance carriers to continue broad coverage and payment parity of telehealth services through the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond:“As health care organizations across the country have quickly implemented changes to help meet the needs of patients during the COVID-19 pandemic, increasing the availability of covered telehealth services is one positive change that should be made permanent.“ACOG applauds the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services for its quick response to the need for telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic and for its recommendations that states lift restrictive policies, as these actions have improved patients’ access to telehealth and other remote management services. We also applaud national health plans that voluntarily made changes to policies, including coverage and payment parity of audio-only visits and remote patient monitoring. “ACOG now calls on all payers to maintain expanded telehealth coverage policies through 2020 and in all the plan years to come. We urge all payers to build upon recent successes by ensuring that patients can regularly access covered telehealth services.“The coverage and payment policies put in place during the COVID-19 pandemic have expanded access to evidence-based telehealth services and improved the ability of obstetrician–gynecologists to provide quality, patient-centered care. While states are in various stages of reopening, contracting COVID-19 remains a very real threat. Therefore, it is critical that insurance coverage policies allow patients to seek care in the safest possible way, including through telehealth and other remote services, and that payers inform enrollees about their telehealth coverage options. “ACOG requests that payers ensure coverage and payment parity for audio-only and audio-video visits so that patients across all communities can benefit from telehealth. Payers must also refrain from adding additional barriers that would limit patients’ ability to receive telehealth services from their typical in-network physician. “Additionally, the ability to receive durable medical equipment benefits by prescription should be expanded so that all patients can have the at-home equipment they need for remote prenatal and postpartum visits.“Research has shown the benefits of telehealth in obstetric and gynecologic care. In many cases, these visits are deemed to be as effective as, or without statistically significant differences in outcomes from, in-person visits. For certain conditions, telehealth helps address barriers to access, reduces the number of unscheduled office visits, decreases ER visits and readmissions to the hospital, and improves rates of adherence to treatment guidelines. Patients often prefer telehealth visits in place of some in-person visits.“Telehealth visits with in-network health care practitioners should be considered a standard benefit for all patients in perpetuity. We must maintain the progress we have made during this public health crisis and make telehealth more widely available, not just in times of national emergency.” June 11, 2020: WBEZ posted an article titled: “Undocumented, Low-Income Seniors in Illinois Can Soon Get Publicly Funded Health Coverage”. It was written by Odette Yousef. From the article: …As COVID-19 disproportionately harms communities of color in Illinois, the state has taken steps to increase access to testing and health care. On Wednesday, Gov. JB Pritzker put the ink on the latest of those, by signing the Fiscal Year 2021 budget that extends Medicaid-like health insurance coverage to low-income senior residents, regardless of immigration status. This makes Illinois the first state in the country to expand publicly funded health care coverage to undocumented seniors and seniors who have held green cards for less than five years, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Advocates of the measure say they expect it will impact up to 1,000 Illinois residents.“We’re thankful to the administration for that and are looking forward to aggressively working to figure out how we can quickly cover everyone else,” said Graciela Guzman, director at the Healthy Illinois Campaign, a coalition that seeks to extend health insurance access to all residents of the state. Guzman said her organization believes it will cost the state between $1.5 and $2.6 million to cover seniors in Fiscal Year 2021, which begins July 1.Guzman said her group and ally organizations initially pushed to extend access to state-funded health insurance to all adult Illinois residents below the federal poverty level, regardless of immigration status. She estimated this would capture 93,000 people, but said the state’s fiscal constraints forced proponents to winnow down the focus this year to a sliver of that group: just those aged 65 and older.“To even get our foot in the door on this was such a major win for us,” said Andrea Kovach, an attorney specializing in health care at the Shriver Center on Poverty Law. “And we have every intention of taking that foothold in the door and kicking it wide open for everyone.”According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, other states have considered expanding state-funded Medicaid-like coverage to seniors, though Illinois is the first to move forward. In 2019, California extended its public health eligibility to undocumented adults between 19 and 26 years of age and plans to expand it further to undocumented seniors in 2022… June 12, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Trump Administration Releases Final Rule Encouraging Health Care Discrimination Against LGBTQ+ People, Immigrants, Women, and More”. From the press release: Today, amid a global pandemic, and on the fourth anniversary of the mass shooting at Pulse nightclub, the Trump administration released a final rule intended to interpret the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) non-discrimination provision (Section 1557) in a way that scales back protections for transgender people, immigrants, and people who have had abortions — only compounding discrimination for those living at the intersections of these identities.Statement from Alexis McGill Johnson, acting president and CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America:“Regardless of your sexual orientation or gender identity, where you’re from, the language you speak, or whether you’ve had an abortion — every person deserves to access health care free from judgment and discrimination. But it seems that neither a global pandemic, nor national uprisings over racist violence, nor Pride month will stop the Trump administration from doing everything in its power to discriminate, divide, and reduce access to health care. This cruel and discriminatory rule will only make it harder for transgender people, immigrants, and people seeking sexual and reproductive services to get care, and could even prevent people from getting the care they need entirely. One in three transgender people have already faced discrimination with a health care provider, a rate even higher for people of color. We must confront and reduce the continued discrimination and systemic racism, transphobia, and homophobia that are so deeply rooted in our health care system. As we face the dual public health crises of the COVID-19 pandemic and systemic racism and violence, Planned Parenthood will continue fighting to break down the barriers keeping people from getting the health care they need.”Section 1557, the Health Care Rights Law, was a historic step toward achieving health equity for communities nationwide that have historically faced discrimination in access to health care services and coverage. Today’s rule strips that promise for people who already face discrimination in health care, including women, LGBTQ+ people, people who have had or will have abortions, those whose primary language is not English, and those at the intersections of these identities.The legal protections and coverage gained from the ACA have played a critical role in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic, as it protects people who get the virus from losing health coverage, facing higher premiums, or paying higher out-of-pocket costs. The ACA has substantially reduced the rate of uninsured in communities of color, important now more than ever as COVID-19 is disproportionately upending the health and economic stability of the Black and Latinx communities.Despite that, the Trump administration has advanced policy after policy that has damaged the nation’s public health infrastructure and undermined health care rights and access. The administration has: Refused to allow people to sign up for ACA coverage during the COVID-19 pandemic;Supported a lawsuit that would repeal the ACA entirely, despite the global pandemic;Pushed for Medicaid work requirements, proven to kick tens of thousands of people off their health care. Women, particularly women of color, are significantly more likely to lose coverage as a result of these work requirements;Issued and continued to defend up to the Supreme Court rules that would allow employers to deny birth control coverage to their employees;Tried to block people from getting care at Planned Parenthood health centers;Finalized a rule that removes protections for sexual assault survivors on campus;Deployed military troops in Washington, D.C., and around the country, and encouraged violence against protesters. June 12, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Slams Rollback of Section 1557 Protections: Discrimination Has No Place in Our Public Health System”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra today issued the following statement in response to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) decision to finalize its regulation, “Nondiscrimination in Health and Health Education Programs or Activities” (Section 1557 Rule). Section 1557 is an anti-discrimination law that prohibits discrimination in healthcare based on gender, race, ethnicity, sex, age, or disability. HHS’s changes to this rule would seriously undermine the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) critical anti-discrimination protections, hurt women and LGBTQ individuals, and come at a time when they are most needed to help address the COVID-19 pandemic.“In the midst of a pandemic, the Trump Administration chooses to make it more difficult for Americans to access lifesaving healthcare by weakening anti-discrimination provisions that protect equal access to care,” said Attorney General Becerra. “While HHS may be content to abandon its mission of protecting public health, California is not. Allowing discrimination against LGBTQ individuals, women and others goes against our public health goals and our values as a nation. We will do whatever is necessary to stand up for the Americans who would disproportionately bear the brunt of this foolish policy.” June 12, 2020: The Guardian posted an article titled: “Trump administration reverses health protections for transgender people”. From the article: The Trump administration has finalized a regulation rolling back Obama-era protections for transgender Americans against sex discrimination in health care.According to the new version of the policy, the Department of Health and Human Services will be “returning to the government’s interpretation of sex discrimination according to the plain meaning of the word ‘sex’ as male or female and as determined by biology”.The Obama regulation defined gender as a person’s internal sense of being male, female, neither or a combination.The policy shift, long sought by Donald Trump’s religious and socially conservative supporters, would allow healthcare providers and insurance companies that receive federal funding to refuse to provide or cover transition-related care for trans Americans.Several organizations have announced they will challenge the change. The Human Rights Campaign announced it would file a lawsuit. The ACLU has also said it would sue to overturn the Trump rule.Under the Obama-era federal rule, a hospital could be required to perform gender-transition procedures such as hysterectomies if the facility provided that kind of treatment for other medical conditions. The rule was meant to carry out the anti-discrimination section of the Affordable Care Act, which bars sex discrimination in healthcare but does not use the term “gender identity”.Roger Severino, head of the health department unit that enforces civil rights laws, has said trans people continue to be protected by other statutes that bar discrimination in healthcare on account of race, color, national origin, age, disability and other factors.But LGBTQ+ groups have long argued protections are needed for people seeking gender confirmation treatment, and for trans people who need medical care for common conditions such as diabetes or heart problems.Women’s groups say the new regulations also undermine access to abortion, which is a legal medical procedure.For the administration, it is the latest in a series of steps to revoke newly won protections for LGBTQ+ people in areas ranging from the military to housing and education.The administration also has moved to restrict military service by trans men and women, proposed allowing certain homeless shelters to take gender identity into account in offering someone a bed for the night, and concluded in a 2017 justice department memo that federal civil rights law does not protect trans people from discrimination at work. June 12, 2020: Senator Bernie Sanders (Independent – Vermont) tweeted: “It is outrageous that Trump, in the middle of a pandemic, is working to prevent LGBTQ+ Americans from getting health care they need. Discrimination of any kind has no place in our society. We must defeat Trump, guarantee health care as a right and protect all LGBTQ+ Americans.” June 12, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Assault on the Health of LGBTQ Women & Vulnerable Populations”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi released the following statement on the finalized Health and Human Services Department rule rolling back Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act to weaken anti-discrimination protections for LGBTQ Americans, women, communities of color and other vulnerable populations in health care:“The Trump Administration’s latest shameful rule is a shocking attack on the health and well-being of countless vulnerable communities, including women, LGBTQ individuals and people of color, at a time when access to quality health care is more important than ever. Undermining the Affordable Care Act’s anti-discrimination protections is a direct assault on basic health care services, from comprehensive reproductive care for women and families to life-saving care for communities of color, seniors, the disabled and the LGBTQ community. It is particularly disgraceful that the Trump Administration issued this new rule during LGBTQ Pride Month and on the day marking four years since the tragic Pulse Nightclub shooting.“Our nation is in the midst of a health and economic crisis of staggering proportions. Instead of working to ensure that every American, regardless of who they are or who they love, has access to the care they need to stay healthy and safe, the Administration is rolling back life-saving protections for some of the most vulnerable communities and enshrining discrimination into vital federal guidelines. Religious freedom is no justification for hatred or bigotry, and every American has the right to seek and recieve care without intimidation or fear. The Administration must immediately abandon this outrageous decision and give all Americans the reassurance that they will never be denied the health care they or their families need.“House Democrats will continue to hold this Administration accountable for their dangerous assault on our fundamental values of equality and justice, and we will never stop fighting to ensure all Americans are treated with the respect and dignity they deserve.” June 12, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “NARAL Pro-Choice America Condems Trump Administration’s Efforts to Roll Back Protections Against Discrimination in the Affordable Care Act”. From the press release: Today the Department of Health and Human Services gutted protections against healthcare discrimination provided by Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act.NARAL Pro-Choice America’s Chief Research and Communications Officer Adrienne Kimmell released the following statement in response:“It is unconscionable that this administration is attempting to strip away protections against healthcare discrimination for LGBTQ people, women, persons with disabilities, immigrants and non-native English speakers, and communities of color in the middle of the COVID-19 pandemic. Trump and his allies never fail to show that their extreme ideology comes before people’s health, safety, and lives. This rule will hurt Americans and fall hardest on people who already face barriers to accessing healthcare. The cruelty of this administration knows no bounds.”Discrimination has no place in healthcare and it should never be allowed to determine the care a patient receives. This rule, finalized today by HHS, undermines protections for individuals and could give the green light for healthcare providers and insurance companies to discriminate against LGBTQ+ people, people who have sought or may in the future seek abortion care, people whose first language is not English, immigrants, people of color, and people with disabilities.This administration continues to prioritize political gain over the wellbeing of Americans, even in the midst of a public health emergency. This ideologically-motivated rule is dangerous and runs counter to the Affordable Care Act’s promise of expanding healthcare coverage, free from discrimination. June 15, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “U.S. Supreme Court’s LGBTQ Anti-Discrimination Ruling Comes Only Days After Federal Rule Strips Protections”. From the press release: Today, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a landmark civil rights decision affirming that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects LGBTQ people from employment discrimination. This powerful ruling comes only four days after the Trump administration took a shameful and harmful step in the opposite direction – issuing a federal rule that restricts the rights of LGBTQ people to access health care services.In Bostock v. Clayton County, the Court affirmed that the Civil Rights Act’s prohibition on discrimination because of sex is both “straightforward” and “sweeping” and includes protections for LGBTQ people.In stark contrast, the rule issued by the Trump administration on June 12 weakens enforcement of key anti-discrimination protections advanced under the Affordable Care Act’s Health Care Rights Law (Section 1557), which specifically prohibits discrimination based on race, national origin, age, disability or sex, in health programs or in activities that recieve federal funding. The new rule defines discrimination on the bases of sex to eliminate explicit protections relating to termination of pregnancy, sex stereotyping, and gender identity.It is shamful that this cruel rule attempts to roll back protections against sex discrimination in health care. Health care is a human right and everyone deserves access to health care free from discrimination.Nancy Northup, President and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights June 15, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Harris Statement on Supreme Court Decision that Federal Civil Rights Law Protects LGBTQ Employees”. From the press release: U.S. Senator Kamala D. Harris (D-CA) on Monday released the following statement in response to the ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court that federal non-discrimination law protects LGBTQ workers.“The Supreme Court’s ruling today sent a clear message to all Americans: our federal civil rights law protects LGBTQ workers and requires that they be treated with the dignity and respect every person deserves. The Court held that the Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination in employment on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. Today’s decision will go a long way toward ensuring that LGBTQ people are protected in other critical areas, including education, health care, and housing.“Our work is far from over, but as we celebrate Pride Month, today’s ruling is a step in the right direction in the fight for full equality for the LGBTQ community in all of its diversity, and in every facet of life.” June 15, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement on Supreme Court Ruling on Anti-LGBTQ Workplace Discrimination”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi released this statement on the Supreme Cout’s 6-3 decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, ruling that federal employment non-discrimination laws protect all LGBTQ employees:“Today, the Supreme Court has unequivically affirmed that all Americans, regardless of who you are or whom you love, are protected from discrimination in the workplace under federal law. This momentous decision is a victory for the LGBTQ community, for our democracy and for our fundamental values of equality and justice for all.“Yet, the Trump Administration continues to advance an outrageous, hateful anti-LGBTQ agenda that risks the health and well-being of countless LGBTQ Americans and their families. And in too many places, LGBTQ individuals face continued persecution, harassment and violence, particularly trans women of color who face a disproportionately high rate of homelessness, HIV, sexual assault and murder. To finally and fully end LGBTQ discrimination, and not just in the workplace, but in every place, last year House Democrats passed the landmark Equality Act. Now, Leader McConnell must end his partisan obstruction and allow the Senate to vote on this critical legislation.“As we mark LGBTQ Pride Month and celebrate this great legal victory for freedom and equality, we take great pride in how far we’ve come. Now, we must rededicate ourselves to continue marching toward progress to combat the forces of hatred and bigotry that still undermine our communities and our nation. We will not rest until we have secured a brighter, more just and equal future for the LGBTQ community and all Americans.” June 15, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Lauds Supreme Court Decision Protecting LGBTQ+ Employees from Discrimination”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James today applauded the United States Supreme Court for ruling, in a 6-3 decision, that employers cannot fire LGBTQ+ employees based on their sexual orientation or gender identity. The court ruled that employment discrimination against members of the LGBTQ+ population violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The court’s decision resolved three cases considered together: Altitude Express v. Zarda; Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia; and R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes v. EEOC. Last summer, Attorney General James co-led a coalition of 22 attorneys general in filing an amicus brief with the Supreme Court arguing that federal anti-discrimination laws protect LGBTQ+ individuals in the workplace.“Whom you love or how you identify should have no impact on your employment,” said Attorney General James. “Today’s decision is a victory for millions of individuals who now can rest assured that they will not be fired or disciplined simply for being themselves. While we should celebrate this victory, the struggle is not over, so we will continue to fight for equal rights in every aspect of life for LGBTQ+ New Yorkers and Americans nationwide because no one should ever be singled out or discriminated against in this country — not for their race, their ethnicity, their religion, their gender identity, their sexual orientation, or any other reason.”In the amicus brief filed last year, Attorney General James and the coalition argued that the prohibition on discrimination based on sex in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employment discrimination based on sexual orientation, sex stereotyping, or gender identity. June 15, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “NARAL Pro-Choice America Responds to Iowa Legislature Passing Extreme Restrictions on Abortion Access”. From the press release: Late Saturday night the Iowa legislature surreptitiously passed an extreme measure that will force women to undergo a mandatory and medically unnecessary 24-hour delay prior to receiving abortion care.In a telling sign of misplaced priorities, Republicans in the Iowa House rushed to file the waiting period amendment prior to adjourning the legislative session early Sunday morning, prompting state Rep. Beth Wessel-Kroeschell to condemn her colleagues for “exploiting this moment of national pandemic to advance an ideological agenda that is out of touch with Iowans.”NARAL Pro-Choice America National Communications Director Kristin Ford released the following statement:“While the entire country grapples with the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and courageous Iowans call for racial justice in the midst of a national reckoning about entrenched white supremacy, the GOP in the Iowa statehouse chose to instead focus on blocking access to abortion care. Forced waiting periods simply shame women and create more roadblocks to essential care people need. They are unnecessary and politically motivated restrictions, part of a broader agenda of control.In the midst of an ongoing public health crisis, this measure will disproportionately hurt people with low incomes who are less likely to have the resources to overcome these barriers to accessing abortion care, such as finding transportation, taking time off of work to travel, and securing child care. This measure is the farthest thing from what Iowans need right now, and Republicans in the legislature should be ashamed of themselves.” June 16, 2020: EMILY’s List posted a statement titled: “EMILY’s List Statement on Rep. Mike Garcia Cosponsoring Anti-Choice Legislation”. From the statement: Today, Rep. Mike Garcia cosponsored the anti-choice “LIfe at Conception Act”. Stephanie Schriock, president of EMILY’s List, the nation’s largest resource for women in politics, released the following statement:“Just one month into his term in office, Congressman Garcia has chosen to cosponsor his first piece of dangerous legislation aiming to criminalize abortion and strip women of their fundamental reproductive freedom. Mike has made it clear that he will blindly support the current administration’s dangerous agenda, regardless of what it costs his constituents. Californians deserve better than an inexperienced legislator who lacks the ability to fight for their interests, and EMILY’s List looks forward to helping Christy Smith defeat him in November.” June 16, 2020: Representative Ayanna Pressley (Democrat – Massachusetts) posted a press release on her official website titled: “Rep. Pressley, Colleagues Lead More than 100 Members of Congress in Urging FDA to Ease Restrictions on Medication Abortion Drug”. From the press release: While the Trump administration has encouraged the use of telemedicine across the health care industry during the pandemic, it has refused to relax rules around medication abortion drugs, a move that experts warn may put both patients and providers at greater risk of contracting the coronavirus.Today, Congresswomen Ayanna Pressley (D-MA), Chair of the Pro-Choice Caucus Abortion Rights & Access Task Force, Diana DeGette (D-CO), Barbara Lee (D-CA), and Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) led a group of 109 lawmakers in urging the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to ease the dispensing restrictions on mifepristone – the first of two medications used in combination to safely and effectively induce an early abortion or treat an early miscarriage. While the pill has been used in the U.S. for more than 20 years, FDA has long subjected mifepristone, when used for early pregnancy termination, to a set of highly restrictive requirements, known as Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (REMS). These requirements make it unnecessarily difficult for patients to access care.One of those policies – the “in-person dispensing requirement” – requires patients to make a potentially unnecessary trip to a hospital, clinic, or medical office just to pick up the mifepristone pill. Out of more than 20,000 FDA-approved drugs, mifepristone is the only drug that FDA requires to be dispensed only in clinical settings while permitting patients to self-administer it at home.“The REMS in its current form creates an illogical situation in which a patient can meet with her doctor by telehealth from the safety of her home, take the pills at home, safely have her abortion at home, and follow up with her doctor after the abortion by telehealth again, but must first travel in the midst of a global pandemic just to pick up the pills from a registered facility or provider,” the lawmakers wrote to Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Stephen Hahn. “For many patients, this requirement can mean taking public transportation, riding in someone else’s car, or traveling hundreds of miles away from home to another county or state — significantly increasing their risk of exposure to the virus. It also means that some providers and clinic staff are forced to have unnecessary in-person interactions that increase their own exposure risks.”The United Kingdom has already issued guidance authorizing physicians to mail mifepristone to pregnant patients during the pandemic following a telephone or video consultation, and FDA itself has already suspended enforcement of other types of REMS restrictions necessitating in-person visits, noting that “patients may need to avoid public places and patients suspected of having COVID-19 may be self-isolating and/or subject to quarantine.”The lawmakers are urging FDA to take immediate action to allow certified prescribers to mail mifepristone to patients during the pandemic… June 18, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Lawsuit Asks FDA to Remove Medically Unnecessary Barriers to Reproductive Health Care During COVID-19”. From the press release: Tomorrow (June 19), a federal court in Maryland will hear arguments in a lawsuit asking the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to temporarily ease restrictions on on the medication mifepristone, in order to ensure patients can safely access abortion and miscarriage care during the COVID-19 pandemic. The suit was filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) on behalf of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), SisterSong Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective, and other leading medical organizations and reproductive health, rights, and justice advocates.Mifepristone is one of two medications used in a medication abortion and managing an early miscarriage. Research has shown that mifepristone is safe and effective when prescribed through telehealth and self-administered at home; however, the FDA’s Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) restrictions unnecessarily require patients to get mifepristone directly from a doctor’s office, hospital, or other health center — rather than from a pharmacy or mail-order as they would for other equally safe medications.Statement from Alexis McGill Johnson, Acting President, Planned Parenthood Federation of America:“During a public health crisis, we should be doing everything we can to make sexual and reproductive health care more accessible, not less — especially for Black people, Indigenous people, and other people of color who have long faced systemic racism and are now being disproportionately affected by COVID-19. While Planned Parenthood and other providers have worked to ensure patients can still access essential, time-sensitive care during the pandemic — while minimizing the risk of COVID-19 exposure for both patients and health center staff — the FDA’s restrictions on mifepristone undermine these efforts for patients seeking abortion and miscarriage care.“At odds with expert medical consensus, these restrictions are just another example of how reproductive health care, especially abortion, is treated differently than other kinds of health care in ways that only put patients’ health and lives at risk. It is critical that the FDA ease the restrictions around mifepristone access during this pandemic so patients can get the care they need as safely as possible.”Out of 20,000 prescription medications regulated by the FDA, mifepristone is the only one for home use currently required to be dispensed in person. Requiring patients to travel to pick up the medication significantly increases the risk of COVID-19 exposure for patients, providers, and health center staff.In response to the pandemic, federal agencies have encouraged the use of telehealth and allowed providers to forgo unnecessary in-person visits in order to mitigate the risk of COVID-19 exposure, with the exception of mifepristone. Mifepristone is safe, effective, and has been used by more than four million people since the FDA approved it twenty years ago. Leading medical associations have maintained that the FDA’s REMS restrictions on the distribution of mifepristone are not based on evidence and do not benefit patients.PPFA joined the American Medical Association (AMA), the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP), and the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), and other leading health care organizations in signing on to an amicus brief in support of the lawsuit. The brief highlights how removing the in-person requirement on mifepristone during the COVID-19 pandemic would especially benefit patients with low-incomes and patients of color, who already face heightened barriers to care.Planned Parenthood is proud to offer medication abortion via site-to-site telehealth in 18 states. As the nation’s leading sexual and reproductive health care provider, Planned Parenthood is committed to making sure all patients receive the high-quality health care they need, when they need it — including safe, legal abortion. By providing medication abortion safely and effectively via telehealth, we can keep patients, providers, and health center staff safer during the pandemic and expand access to abortion for people, no matter where they live. June 18, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement on Supreme Court Ruling on DACA”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued this statement on the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling that the Trump Administration acted capriciously and illegally in its effort to terminate the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) initiative:“Eight years ago, our nation took a momentous step to advance equality and opportunity in America when President Obama launched the DACA initiative, empowering courageous young Dreamers to come out of the shadows and pursue their American Dream. Our Dreamers are the pride and the constant reinvigoration of our nation.“Today is a joyous and proud day for our country, as the Supreme Court has rejected the Trump Administration’s illegal, immoral assault on young immigrants who make America more American, which the Court rightfully found to be ‘arbitrary and capricious.’ The Court’s decision upholds our values, the law and the will of the American people. Dreamers have the overwhelming support of the public, with more than three out of four voters saying Dreamers should be allowed to stay – including more than two-thirds of Republicans.“Our Dreamers need and deserve real, permanent action by the Congress to ensure that they can continue to bless, enrich and strengthen our nation. The House will continue to be relentless in demanding that the Senate take up H.R. 6, the American Dream and Promise Act, to provide a pathway to citizenship for Dreamers and TPS and DED recipients.“House Democrats will always work to fix our broken immigration system and to fight for our Dreamers, to ensure that Americn remains a nation of hope, freedom, and opportunity for all. June 18, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James’ Statement on DACA Victory”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James today released the following statement after the United States Supreme Court ruled that the Trump Administration’s attempts to cancel the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program violated the Administrative Procedure Act. Attorney General James and California Attorney General Becerra led a coalition arguing the case before the Supreme Court in November.“Today’s decision reaffirms that there is no question that home is here for more than 700,000 Dreamers across the country,” said Attorney General James. “The Supreme Court’s decision today sets aside an inhumane injustice by the Trump Administration and permits young people who go to school here, who work here, who pay taxes here, who raise families here, and who are vital members of our communities to continue to be able to live in their homes without fear of arrest or deportation. America is a country of immigrants; our culture made richer by their contributions and our economy made more prosperous because of their work. I am proud to have co-led the fight to protect this critical program and the more than 700,000 DACA recipients across the country, and more than 150,000 right here in New York. To our Dreamers, know that you are valued, that you are loved, and that we will always fight to protect you. Si se puede!“I want to thank Attorney General Becerra, the numerous additional state attorneys general, and all the other groups who fought by our side to tirelessly protect DACA.”The case was heard over the consolidated three cases of Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California, Trump v. NAACP, and McAleenan v. Vidal. June 18, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Harris Applauds Supreme Court Decision Preserving DACA Program”. From the press release: U.S. Senator Kamala D. Harris (D-CA) on Thursday released the following statement after the U.S. Supreme Court blocked the Trump Administration’s decision to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. President Trump terminated the DACA program on September 5, 2017, throwing the lives of over 600,000 DREAMers into chaos.“DACA has allowed young immigrants who were brought here by their parents to live and work in this country without fear that they would be deported. Dreamers are part of our communities. They are our classmates, our work colleagues, our role models, and our friends and neighbors.“The administration’s decision to break our promise to these young people was cruel and inhumane. Since day one of his administration, this president has repeatedly attacked immigrant communities and used them as political bargaining chips instead of treating them like human beings. This administration has, time and time again, used anti-immigrant sentiment to drum up fear. They have shamelessly pushed for a border wall, erected barriers to citizenship, and restricted due process for those seeking refuge in our country. This is all part of a reckless and cruel push to remake the demographics of our country using an anti-immigrant agenda.“Today’s ruling was important, but it is not a lasting solution. The House of Representatives has put forth strong legislation, the American Dream and Promise Act, which the Senate should vote on today. Every day that passes without protections for DACA recipients set forth in our laws, is another day that these young people must live in fear of being taken away from their families and communities. These young people should not continue to live in fear of one day being turned away from the only country they know as home.” June 18, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Applauds Landmark Supreme Court Decision on DACA”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra today applauded the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark decision upholding the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) policy. In November of 2019, the California Department of Justice led a coalition of 21 attorneys general in defense of DACA before the Supreme Court. In today’s decision, the Supreme Court held that the Trump Administration acted illegally when it attempted to end DACA. As a result, the policy remains in effect for now, protecting hundreds of thousands of Dreamers across the country.“Today, justice prevailed for every Dreamer who has worked hard to help build our country — our neighbors, teachers, doctors, and first responders. Today, America told the Dreamers that this is their home,” said Attorney General Becerra. “The highest court in our land saw through the Trump Administration’s illegal, baseless excuses. The Court agreed: If you work hard and play by the rules, you deserve a chance to get ahead. However, our fight doesn’t end here: Congress can permanently fix our broken immigration system and secure a pathway to citizenship. As a former lawmaker who launched bipartisan immigration talks on Capitol Hill, I know first-hand that bipartisan support can — and must — exist. It will take all of us working together to get it done.”“Justice and the rule of law won the day,” said University of California President Janet Napolitano, who helped create DACA when she served as Secretary of Homeland Security under President Barack Obama. “The Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the University of California and the California Attorney General’s challenge against the Trump Administration’s capricious action is a victory for hundreds of thousands of young people who are making vital contributions to their families, schools, employers, and the nation.”Currently, there are nearly 650,000 Dreamers who arrived in this country as children and were granted DACA protections. Dreamers come from almost every country in the world, but many have never known any home other than the United States. They are among our nation’s newest college graduates, soldiers, nurses, teachers, and first responders who are boosting the country’s economy and communities every day. For instance, there are approximately 29,000 doctors, nurses, dentists, physician assistants, and other healthcare workers who have benefitted from DACA and contribute to protecting the health of our communities across the country. In California alone, it is estimated that there are more than 8,500 DACA recipients who work in the healthcare industry. DACA recipients and their households are estimated to contribute nearly $9 billion in federal, state, and local taxes each year. Currently, more than a quarter of DACA recipients reside in California… June 18, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Remarks at Press Event Unveiling the Moving Forward Act”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi joined House Democrats for a press event unveiling H.R. 2, the Moving Forward Act, House Democrats’ bold legislation to rebuild America’s infrastructure. Below are the Speaker’s remarks:…”When we won in 2018, we said to the American people that, For The People, we would lower the cost of health care by lowering the cost of prescription drugs and preserving the pre-existing condition, lower health care costs. Bigger paychecks by building the infrastructre of America in a green and resiliant way. And third, we would have cleaner government. Cleaner government by improving, enhancing the voice of small donors and the grass roots political process.Between now and the Fourth of July, we will bring the ACA enhancement legislation to the Floor on June 29th. Next week, we will bring the Justice in Policing Act, part of our democratization bill – initiatives to the Floor. And then, before we leave for the Fourth of July, we’ll bring this imporant legislation we have, the Moving Forward Act……And, again, we have something for the Postal Service, the infrastructure piece of the Postal Service. Connective tissue of our country, the Postal Service. Over 90 percent of the medicines received by veterans are through the Postal Service. The list goes on… June 19, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Breaking: Tennessee Legislature Passes Sweeping Abortion Ban in the Middle of the Night”. From the press release: In an egregious move, the Tennessee legislature, in the dead of night and using police force to keep the public out of the Capitol building, passed a sweeping abortion ban. The bill, one of the most restrictive abortion bills in the country, bans abortion at nearly every stage of pregnancy, including before most people even know they’re pregnant. The bill also includes more medically unnecessary abortion restrictions and anti-science measures like forcing doctors to give patients the misinformation that they can reverse their abortion. It also bans abortion if the reason for the abortion is gender, race, or potential fetal diagnosis. Similar bans throughout the country have been struck down as unconstitutional.Just last week, the Iowa legislature pulled a similar move — waiting until the wee hours of the night to pass a harmful bill against abortion access. It’s becoming the new shameful playbook for anti-abortion politicians who are willfully ignoring police violence and COVID-19, both public health crises disproportionately killing Black people. Following suit, Tennessee politicians have now passed a deeply racist and discriminatory bill which preys upon inaccurate and offensive stereotypes of communities of color, including Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders, in order to ban abortion.Furthermore, this bill will do nothing to address actual discrimination against women and girls, and instead would open the door to interfere with doctor-patient relationships, open and honest doctor-patient conversations, and a patient’s right to make private medical decisions. Each and every one of these bans are part of a coordinated strategy to overturn Roe v. Wade and ban abortion outright.Statement from Alexis McGill Johnson, acting president and CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America:“It is a disgrace that in the face of a true public health crisis, Tennessee politicians wasted their time with this last-minute move to attack abortion access before closing up shop this session. We know that the goal of the politicians behind this bill is simple: a total ban on safe, legal abortion. Politicians know that this bill is blatantly unconstitutional. And they don’t care. Amidst protests against police violence and fear around COVID-19, politicians are doubling down — pushing racist stereotypes and ignoring public health to ban abortion. But we won’t let them. We’re going to do everything in our power to fight back and stand up for reproductive freedom.”Statement from Ashley Coffield, president & CEO, Planned Parenthood Tennessee and North Mississippi:“What happened tonight flies in the face of democracy. In the dead of night, Tennessee politicians hellbent on chipping away at abortion access blocked citizens from entering the state Capitol while they used this draconian abortion ban to pass the state budget. While Tennesseans are concerned about their health and safety during a pandemic, politicians used women’s lives as a bargaining chip to push their political agenda. This comes after weeks of Senate leadership making public statements that they would not take up this bill.“Gov. Lee already failed at trying to exploit the COVID-19 pandemic by banning abortion through an executive order, and now he is trying to use every restriction he can think of to strip patients of their reproductive rights. Tennessee is already grappling with a botched response by Gov. Lee to the pandemic, and the deep racial divide in the state that’s finally getting the attention it deserves. We’ll continue fighting these egregious attacks on our patients’ rights — no matter what.” June 19, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release on her official website titled: “Pelosi Statement on Amicus Brief in District Court ACA Special Enrollment Case”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued this statement after the House of Representatives filed an amicus brief in the District Court for D.C. in the case of City of Chicago v. Azar, supporting a challenge by the city regarding the failure of the Trump Administration to provide a special Affordable Care Act enrollment period in light of the coronavirus pandemic:“Across the country, communities are being devastated by the staggering impact of the coronavirus on Americans’ lives and livelihoods. As the threat from this crisis grows, the Administration has ignored the advice of health experts and the law, and refused to reopen Affordable Care Act enrollment to ensure millions of uninsured workers and their families get the affordable, lifesaving coverage they need.“Even in the midst of an unprecedented health crisis, the Trump Administration is doubling down on the outrageous Republican lawsuit to dismantle the entirety of the ACA, including essential protections for 130 million Americans with pre-existing conditions. As we combat this deadly virus and the Administration’s dangerous agenda, House Democrats will always fight to uphold the law and ensure the ACA can continue to provide its vital protections for all Americans.”The Amicus Brief can be found here. June 19, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Tennessee Abortion Ban Immediately Challenged in Court by Planned Parenthood, the Center for Reproductive Rights, and ACLU”. From the press release: A bill passed by the Tennessee legislature late last night banning abortion as early as six weeks of pregnancy was challenged in court today by the Center for Reproductive Rights, the American Civil Liberties Union, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, and the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee. The bill also prevents patients from obtaining an abortion depending on their reason for seeking the procedure, including the potential for a Down syndrome diagnosis or the sex or race of the fetus. These types of “reason bans” insinuate that pregnant people cannot be trusted to make their own medical decisions, and do nothing to address racism, sexism, ableism, or the serious health disparities faced by marginalized communities.If Governor Bill Lee signs the bill into law, it will take effect immediately. The emergency lawsuit being filed today asks the court to block the bill immediately.As the bill was being debated into the early hours of the morning, police officers kept the public out of the Capitol building and arrested some protestors. The passage of these abortion bans come just two months after Governor Lee attempted to ban abortion procedures during the COVID-19 pandemic by labeling abortion care as non-essential, despite opposition from leading national medical groups. That attempt was blocked in court in April after a lawsuit was filed by the same organizations filing today’s case.Statement from Alexis McGill Johnson, acting president and CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America:“Enough is enough. It is abhorrent that Gov. Lee and politicians in Tennessee are exploiting the fear and uncertainty of a global pandemic to push their cruel anti-abortion agenda. This opportunistic attack on our reproductive rights, passed in the middle of the night under the cover of darkness, will disproportionately impact Black Tennesseans due to systemic oppression and concerted efforts to stifle their most basic rights and freedoms. We won’t stand for this, and we are going to do everything possible to fight back against this extremely harmful law.”Statement from Ashley Coffield, president & CEO, Planned Parenthood Tennessee and North Mississippi:“This is blatantly unconstitutional, and I am confident that once challenged in court, this legislation will go on the same legal trash heap as the abortion bans that have been struck down in other states. Gov. Lee is wasting valuable taxpayer dollars to defend this unconstitutional law, while COVID-19 cases are rising and our state grapples with our history of systemic racism. Gov. Lee’s failed priorities will fall heaviest on people who already face systemic barriers to care including people of color, people with low incomes, and women. We’ll continue fighting these egregious attacks on our patients’ rights — no matter what.”… June 22, 2020: Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Xavier Becerra: California Will Restrict State-Funded Travel to Idaho”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra today announced that, effective July 1, 2020, California will restrict state-funded travel to Idaho as a result of two discriminatory bills signed into law in Idaho this year despite significant concerns raised by the Idaho Attorney General. The laws, House Bills 500 and 509, directly authorize discrimination against the transgender community. House Bill 500 repeals protections that enabled transgender students to compete on athletic teams consistent with their gender identity and House Bill 509 prohibits the amendment of birth certificates to be consistent with gender identity. The new restrictions on travel to Idaho are prescribed by law in California pursuant to Assembly Bill 1887 (AB 1887), which passed in 2016.“Where states legislate discrimination, California unambiguously speaks out,” said Attorney General Becerra. “The State of Idaho has taken drastic steps to undermine the rights of the transgender community, preventing people from playing sports in school or having documentation that reflects their identity. Let’s not beat around the bush: these laws are plain and simple discrimination. That’s why Idaho joins the list of AB 1887 discriminating states.” Both Idaho laws take active steps to enforce discriminatory regimes against transgender Idahoans. House Bills 500 and 509 were signed into law by Idaho Governor Brad Little on March 30, 2020. Idaho Attorney General Lawrence Wasden had raised concerns about the bills’ compliance with equal protection and privacy laws. House Bill 500, among other things, runs contrary to existing guidance by the National Collegiate Athletic Association that encourages equal opportunity for transgender students to participate in athletics. Dubiously named the “Fairness in Women’s Sports Act,” House Bill 500 overrules existing local school policies in Idaho and directly works to ban transgender girls and women from school sports. Similarly, House Bill 509 not only authorizes but actually requires discrimination by prohibiting the amendment of birth certificates consistent with gender identity, a right previously recognized by an Idaho federal court on equal protection grounds. The laws are currently set to go into effect in Idaho on July 1, 2020.AB 1887, which took effect beginning in 2017, restricts state-funded travel to states with laws that authorize or require discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression. AB 1887’s restriction on using state funds for travel applies to California state agencies, departments, boards, authorities, and commissions, including an agency, department, board, authority, or commission of the University of California, the Board of Regents of the University of California, and the California State University. Each applicable agency is responsible for consulting the AB 1887 list created by the California Department of Justice to comply with the travel and funding restrictions imposed by the law. For additional information on AB 1887, including the list of states subject to its provisions, visit: www.oag.ca.gov/ab1887. June 22, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Files Brief Challenging the Trump Administration’s Refusal to Open a Special Enrollment Period on HealthCare.Gov in Response to COVID-19”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra and Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel today led a coalition of 14 attorneys general in filing an amicus brief in support of the City of Chicago’s lawsuit challenging U.S. Health and Human Services (HHS) for failing to create a special enrollment period in response to COVID-19 for individuals in the 38 states that rely on the federal exchange, HealthCare.Gov, for health insurance. Millions of Americans have lost their job as a result of the pandemic. In the amicus brief, the coalition argues that there is both a critical need for and a legal obligation to create a special enrollment period on HealthCare.Gov to help these individuals obtain healthcare coverage. The 12 states that run their own exchanges, including California, have already instituted a special enrollment period in response to COVID-19, and thousands of individuals have benefited as a result.“As this country faces dueling economic and public health crises, HHS’s refusal to open enrollment on HealthCare.Gov is absolutely unconscionable,” said Attorney General Becerra. “This is a time when we need our leaders to step up. Yet the Trump Administration continues to ignore the realities of millions of Americans who find themselves without healthcare in the midst of a devastating pandemic — once again putting its animosity towards the ACA over people. Enough is enough. It‘s time to protect our communities from having to choose between their health and bankruptcy. It’s time to fight for their right to healthcare coverage.”The Affordable Care Act (ACA) provides HHS Secretary Alex Azar with the authority to create special enrollment periods outside of the normal enrollment period for hardships or special situations that may warrant it. HHS’s failure to open a special enrollment period means uninsured individuals in the 38 states that rely on the federal exchange for coverage may choose to avoid medical care or face massive bills as a result of seeking treatment. As a result of COVID-19, over 40 million Americans have lost their jobs, but under current regulations, only those Americans who already had health insurance with their job are eligible for a special enrollment period. Those Americans who did not have healthcare coverage through their employer, but experienced job loss, are left with no options. On April 3, 2020, Attorney General Becerra and North Carolina Attorney General Josh Stein led a coalition of 22 attorneys general in sending a letter to HHS urging it to reconsider its shortsighted decision to deny a special enrollment period on HealthCare.Gov during the pandemic. HHS has also ignored repeated calls from Congress, the healthcare industry, and others to open a special enrollment period.In the amicus brief, the coalition argues that HHS’s failure to open a special enrollment period violates the Administrative Procedure Act and is contrary to the text of the ACA and its regulations for opening special enrollment periods. The coalition urges the court to find HHS’s inaction unlawful and compel the agency to open a special enrollment period.Attorneys General Becerra and Nessel are joined by the attorneys general of Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maryland, Minnesota, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Virginia, and the District of Columbia in filing the brief. A copy of the brief can be found here. June 22, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “NARAL Pro-Choice America Denounces Overnight Passage of Extreme Anti-Choice, Anti-Freedom Bill in Tennessee”. From the press release: Just after midnight, anti-choice Republicans in Tennessee passed a sweeping set of anti-choice provisions meant to chip away at and ultimately end the right to abortion. Among the bill’s provisions were bans on abortion at almost every stage of pregnancy, including before many women even know they’re pregnant, a forced ultrasound mandate; a requirement to interrogate women about why they’re ending a pregnancy; and criminalizing doctors who provide abortion care.Rather than showing real leadership to address entrenched white supremacy and police violence or tackle the state’s public health crisis with over 32,000 reported cases of COVID-19, anti-choice Republicans in the legislature and Governor Bill Lee remain laser-focused on their dangerous agenda to ban abortion and roll back reproductive freedom.Kristin Ford, National Communications Director at NARAL Pro-Choice America, released the following statement in response:“Tennessee legislators jammed through this extreme bill under cover of darkness, making their priorities crystal-clear: control and punish women and families, rather than help them thrive at a time when our nation is reckoning with pernicious racial injustice and a crippling pandemic. This measure is a panoply of the cruelest restrictions designed to push abortion care out of reach and end the right to abortion once and for all. It is an affront to the values of the 7 in 10 Americans who believe everyone should be able to make their own decisions about pregnancy, without politicians meddling to impose an ideological agenda.”Anti-choice, anti-freedom politicians who introduced this legislation specifically said their goal was to give the state “multiple shots” at ending Roe v. Wade. Their objectives are clear: control women and restrict their freedom to make their own decisions about pregnancy, effectively outlawing abortion and threatening doctors who provide abortion care with criminal punishment. June 24, 2020: Center for American Progress posted an article titled: “The Health Care Repeal Lawsuit Could Strip Coverage from 23 Million Americans”. It was written by Nicole Rapfogel and Emily Gee. From the article: Tomorrow, the Trump administration and 18 Republican governors and attorneys general will file their opening briefs with the Supreme Court in California v. Texas—the health care repeal lawsuit. The lawsuit, criticized across the political spectrum as a “badly flawed” case, threatens to upend the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and strip 23.3 million Americans of their health coverage, according to new CAP analysis—about 3 million (15 percent) more than was forecast before the coronavirus pandemic. The anti-ACA agitators who initiated the health care repeal lawsuit, backed by the Trump administration, continue their attempts to dismantle the ACA, including its coverage expansions and consumer protections, amid the pandemic, during which comprehensive health coverage has never been more important. Millions of Americans who have lost their jobs and job-based insurance due to the current economic crisis are relying on the insurance options made possible by the ACA to keep themselves and their families covered…...Impact of the coronavirus pandemic on coverageAs the Trump administration and 18 Republican state leaders double down on their push to strip millions of their health coverage and encourage predatory insurance practices, a pandemic that has killed nearly 120,000 Americans and infected over 2.2 million continues to sweep the nation.Since the impact of the coronavirus pandemic began to unfold in mid-March, more than 44 million joblessness claims have been filed as of June 11. Millions of people have lost their employer-sponsored insurance (ESI)—millions of whom will be unable to replace it and will become uninsured. Thanks to the ACA, many of these newly unemployed Americans who previously were covered by employer-sponsored insurance are able to get health coverage, either through the ACA marketplaces, possibly with financial assistance to make their coverage more affordable, or via Medicaid expansion. The Urban Institute and the Kaiser Family Foundation have estimated that tens of millions of people could lose job-based coverage due to the economic crisis sparked by the pandemic and indicate that millions of people in this situation are eligible for the ACA coverage that is threatened by the health care repeal lawsuit.National and state level coverage lossesBecause the economic crisis stemming from the pandemic is driving millions of people onto coverage programs supported by the ACA, CAP estimates that approximately 3 million more people stand to lose coverage from the health care repeal lawsuit than the 20 million previously estimated. According to a March 2019 analysis by the Urban Institute, full repeal of the ACA would cause enrollment in Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) to fall by 22.4 percent and enrollment in individual market coverage, including for the ACA marketplaces and other insurance people purchase on their own, to drop by 35.4 percent.The economic stress of the pandemic has pushed the United States into a recession. The Congressional Budget Office projects that the unemployment rate in the second and third quarters of this year will average 15 percent — higher than it was during the Great Recession. At an unemployment rate of 15 percent, 17.7 million people would lose employment-based health insurance coverage, according to a recent report by the Urban Institute. With access to ACA coverage options, most of these people would find new forms of insurance. Urban estimates that 8.2 million would end up with Medicaid/CHIP coverage, and 4.3million would gain coverage through the ACA marketplaces or other private coverage. About 5.1 million would remain uninsured.If the ACA is repealed, however, many more people who lose job-based coverage will be without insurance. CAP estimates that because of the pandemic, about 3.4 million additional people are at risk of losing coverage because of the lawsuit. Combining two previous projections by the Urban Institute, CAP’s estimate assumes that 35.4 percent of the 4.3 million people who gain individual market insurance and 22.4 percent of the 8.2 million people who gain Medicaid/CHIP coverage would become uninsured under repeal.In total, 23.3 million people stand to lose coverage and become uninsured if the ACA is repealed during the pandemic. In Texas alone, the number of people without health coverage would rise by about 2 million……The Trump administration and its allied state leaders are attempting to undermine health care in the midst of one of the worst public health disasters in U.S. history. The ACA is crucial to helping families regain coverage and maintain some financial security against health care costs. A Supreme Court ruling against the ACA would take away health coverage from millions of Americans whose lives are already being disrupted by the economic distress and concerns about their health and well-being. June 24, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Remarks at Press Event Unveiling the Patient Protection & Affordable Care Enhancement Act”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi joined House Democrats for a press event unveiling the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Enhancement Act, House Democrats; For the People legislation to build on the Affordable Care Act to lower health costs and prescription drug prices. Below are the Speaker’s remarks:Speaker Pelosi: Good morning. Thank you all for being here and on time. My apologies. It is like the middle ofthe day, there is so much that has been going on already.But here we are to talk about something that is so important in the lives of the American people: their health. It is not only about their health, but about their financial health. And when we ran in 2018, we said we would do three things. For the People, we would lower the cost of health care by lowering the cost of prescription drugs and preserving the pre-existing condition . We would have – lower health care costs, bigger paychecks by building the infrastructure of America in a green way. And, cleaner government, with H.R. 1, which would make the first two possible by reducing the role of big, dark money in politics preventing us from accomplishing the other goals in the public interest, rather than the special interest.On the subject of health care, this was a reiteration of waht we had run on in 2006: ‘Six for ’06’. One of our six was to give the Secretary the authority to negotiate for lower prices. We knew then, right Frank? And we know now that was the only way we could take down these prices. Of those “Six for ’06’, five of them became law and one did not. And that was giving the Secretary authority to negotiate for lower prices. That is the heart of H.R. 3, which is very much part of the legislation you will hear very much about today.I am honored that we are here with Richie Neal by video; Mr. Pallone, whose Committee has so much jurisdiction in terms of health care; Mr. – Chairman of the Education and Labor Committee, Bobby Scott. These three were there from the start developing that, developing the Affordable Care Act. All of them were very much a part of shaping that. We want to enhance it so the leadership of these three committees are here today. Let me just say that we didn’t envision that when we were doing H.R. 3 in December, that we would be in the middle of a pandemic, but we are. All the more reason, all the more reason for us to remove all doubt of affordability of health care. This is about the lives, the livelihood of the American people……I could say a lot about each of the people who are here. Lauren underwood, Colin Allred, Andy Kim, Angie Craig; part of our Freshman class who, from day one – and that’s – where did he – from day one, have taken the lead on this and in terms of asserting Congress’s right to fight in court against the President’s repeal of the Affordable Care Act, repeal of the pre-existing benefits condition, the repeal of so many opportunities for people from day one and they will talk about their roles in that as they join our distinguished chairmen. In between it all, Mr. Ruiz, a physician, many degrees in public health and medicine, as well as a Member of Congress will speak to us about that juxtaposition of policy and good health in our country……Speaker Pelosi: …As Congressman Ruiz mentioned, and was alluded to, also, by Mr. Scott, tomorrow, the Supreme Court will hear the brief from the Administration as to taking down the Affordable Care Act, right in the heart of the time of the pandemic. It was wrong any time, now it is beyond stupid. Beyond stupid.I thank our colleagues and Freshman Members, each of whom has a piece of legislation from their own entrepreneurial thinking, from their experience, whether as a health care professional; the experience of New Jersey, as a person who had your family experience, but also works professionally; with Congresswoman Craig; and, of course, Mr. Allred who started all of this on the first day. That is tomorrow. Today, we will go to Rules Committee to make this legislation in order. Tomorrow, they will do their brief to take down the Affordable Care Act. And they will remove all, even semblance of reality when they say – I heard one on TV yesterday say, ‘We are all for the benefit of pre-existing condition not being an obstacle to health insurance and health care. We are all for that.’ Oh really? Then get off the case. Well, tell the President to get off the case. But nonetheless – that’s tomorrow – on Monday, this important legislation will come to the Floor of the House. We hope it will get bipartisan support. It certainly meets the needs of Democrats, Republicans, Independents and Decline To States, whatever they call themselves, across the country, because the issue of health care knows no party. And the issue of the pandemic certainly does not, as well……With that, I thank you all. Wash your hands, wear a mask, take care, keep your distance. Thank you all. June 25, 2020: Representative Charlie Crist (Democrat – Florida) posed a press release on his official website titled: “Crist: Dismantling Affordable Care Act would leave 1.75 Million Floridians Without Coverage”. From the press release: U.S. Representative Charlie Crist (D-St. Petersburg) released the following statement after the Trump Administration filed a brief with the U.S. Supreme Court asking the justices to strike down the Affordable Care Act.Amid a global public health crisis and economic emergency caused by the outbreak of COVID-19, Congressman Crist cites a newly released report finding that the number of Americans who would lose health coverage if the Administration’s lawsuit succeeds has grown to more than 23 million, including 1.75 million Floridians. The House of Representatives filed its brief with the Supreme Court in support of the Affordable Care Act in early May, and oral arguments in the case are expected this fall. “As our country continues to face the largest and most unprecedented public health crisis in modern history, the Trump Administration continues its heartless attack on the Affordable Care Act that would leave millions across America without the access to care they need,” said Rep. Crist. “In Florida, which sadly has become a COVID hot spot, striking down the ACA would mean 1.75 million of our neighbors and loved ones would lose their coverage. That’s unconscionable. The People’s House remains steadfast in our commitment to lowering the cost of care in this country, not raising it, and expanding access to affordable health care for all Americans. I’m calling on the Trump administration to end this attack on Americans’ care, and put the people first.”This week, House Democrats introduced the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Enhancement Act, legislation that builds on the Affordable Care Act to lower health costs and prescription drug prices while reducing the ranks of the uninsured. The bill will cap premiums at 8.5 percent of income, reducing costs for everyone. Should the Trump Administration succeed in striking down the Affordable Care Act, the following protections, coverage, and programs are at risk: Protections for 135 million Americans with pre-existing conditions.Medicaid expansion, which covers 17 million people.Reopening the Medicare donut hole, raising prescription drugs for nearly 12 million seniors.2.3 million adult children will no longer be able to stay on their parents’ insurance.Insurance companies will be able to charge women 50 percent more than men.Repealing premium subsidies that make marketplace coverage affordable for 9 million people.Reinstate lifetime caps on coverage.Allow insurance companies to deny prescription drugs and maternity coverage. June 25, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release on his official website titled: “Attorney General Becrra Files Opposition to Sutter Health’s Delay of Landmark Settlement of Anticompetitive Practices”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra today filed opposition to a motion by Sutter Health (Sutter) to delay final approval of the groundbreaking preliminary settlement agreement reached in December 2019. The settlement agreement resolves allegations by the Attorney General, the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union and Employers Benefit Trust (UEBT), and class action plaintiffs, that Sutter’s anticompetitive practices led to higher healthcare costs for consumers in Northern California compared to other places in the state. When approved, the settlement will require Sutter to pay $575 million in compensation, prohibit Sutter from anticompetitive conduct, and require Sutter to follow certain practices to restore competition in California’s healthcare markets. On June 12, Sutter filed a motion for continuance, attempting to delay final approval of this landmark settlement. In today’s opposition filing, Attorney General Becerra highlights that prompt approval of the settlement is in the public’s best interest, particularly in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic……This litigation began in 2014 when the UEBT and numerous individual plaintiffs — later consolidated into a class action — filed their lawsuit challenging Sutter’s practices in rendering services and setting prices. They sought compensation for what they alleged were unlawful, anticompetitive business practices, which caused them to pay more than necessary for healthcare services and products. In March of 2018, Attorney General Becerra filed a similar lawsuit against Sutter on behalf of the people of California, principally seeking injunctive relief to compel Sutter to correct its anticompetitive business practices moving forward. The separate lawsuits were combined by the court into one case. In October of 2019, on the eve of trial, the parties reached an agreement to settle. The final settlement was filed with the court on December 19, 2019 together with an unopposed motion for its preliminary approval. Since then, three different hearing dates for the settlement’s approval have been scheduled, with the latest being set on June 22, 2020. Shortly before that hearing date, on June 12, Sutter filed a motion for continuance, attempting to further delay approval of the settlement and implementation of the critical injunctive relief provisions that benefit consumers.In his opposition, Attorney General Becerra argues that approval of the settlement, now months old, is in the best interest of Californians. Further, the opposition calls into question Sutter’s arguments for delay of the settlement approval, including use of COVID-19 to delay the process. Until the settlement receives final approval, Sutter can continue its anticompetitive practices, which harm healthcare consumers and our State’s economy. Attorney General Becerra asserts that emergencies such as COVID-19 are not an excuse for Sutter, or any other healthcare entity, to skirt their obligations under antitrust law. Moreover, the settlement itself contains mechanisms by which material changes in the healthcare environment may be used to seek appropriate modifications. Sutter has received more material financial aid related to the pandemic from taxpayers – and is in a far better financial position to weather any ill effects of COVID-19 – than many other providers in the state. Thus, Sutter’s issues regarding COVID-19’s financial impact are better directed to the federal and state governments and not to the Court in seeking to delay this settlement. When approved, the settlement will require Sutter to: Pay $575 million to compensate employers, unions, and others covered under the class action and to cover costs and fees associated with the legal efforts;Limit what it charges patients for out-of-network services, helping ensure that patients visiting an out-of-network hospital do not face outsized, surprise medical bills;Increase transparency by permitting insurers, employers, and self-funded payers to provide plan members with access to pricing, quality, and cost information, which helps patients make better care decisions;Halt measures that deny patients access to lower-cost plans, thus allowing health insurers, employers, and self-funded payers to offer and direct patients to more affordable health plan options for networks or products;Stop all-or-nothing contracting deals, thus allowing insurers, employers, and self-funded payers to include some but not necessarily all of Sutter’s hospitals, clinics, or other commercial products in their plans’ network.Cease anticompetitive bundling of services and products which forced insurers, employers, and self-funded payers to purchase for their plan offerings more services or products from Sutter than were needed. Sutter must now offer a stand-alone price that must be lower than any bundled package price to give insurers, employers, and self-funded payers more choice;Cooperate with a court-approved compliance monitor to ensure that Sutter is following the terms of the settlement for at least 10 years. The monitor will receive and investigate complaints and may present evidence to the court; andClearly set definitions on clinical integration and patient access considerations. The settlement makes clear that for Sutter to claim it has clinically integrated a system, it must meet strict standards beyond regional similarities or the mere sharing of an electronic health record, and must be integrating care in a manner that takes into consideration the quality of care to the patient population. This is important because clinical integration can be used to mask market consolidation efforts by hospital systems, when in fact there is no true integration of a patient’s care. For example, saying that hospitals are regionally close or that hospitals are sharing electronic health records is not enough, there must be close coordination that will lead to less costly, higher quality care for local communities. …A copy of the opposition is available here. A copy of the settlement provided to the Court is available here. Additional declarations supporting plaintiff’s opposition are available on the electronic version of this release here. June 25, 2020: SCOTUSblog (which is NOT run by the Supreme Court of the United States) posted a thread that started with this tweet: “The United States just filed its brief in the major constitutional challenge to the Affordable Care Act that will be argued next term. The government says the entire ACA is invalid but leaves room for the court to leave in place certain provisions that don’t harm the plaintiffs.” That tweet included a screenshot from the brief: III. The individual mandate cannot be severed from the remained of the ACA. Congressional findings incorporated into the ACA’s text clearly indicate that Congress would not have adopted the guaranteed-issue and community-rating provisions absent the individual mandate’s requirement to purchase insurance. This court recognized the interrelatedness of these three provisions in NFIB and King v Burwell, 135 S. Ct. 2480 (2015). And Congress’s 2017 amendment does not alter the severability analysis because it left it intact in the critical statutory findings about the interconnectedness of these provisions – findings that were and remain the functional equivilante of an inseverability clause.The ACA’s remaining provisions are likewise inseverable, because it is evident that Congress would not have enacted them without the individual mandate and the guaranteed-issue and community-rating provisions .The NFIB joint dissent would have so held, and that conclusion is still equally valid today. Nothing the 2017 Congress did demonstrates it would have intended the rest of the ACA to continue to operate in the absence of these three integral provisions. The entire ACA thus must fall with the individual mandate, through the scope of relief entered in this case should be limited to provisions shown to injure the plaintiffs. NOTE: In 2017, there was a Republican president, with a Republican majority Senate and a Republican majority house. The decision to reduce the penality for not buying health insurance – the individual mandate – to $0 was done by the Republicans. If the Supreme Court decides the ACA must fall because of Republican shenanigans – the Republicans are entirely to blame for it. June 25, 2020: SCOTUSblog continued the thread with this tweet: “The case, California v. Texas, is the third direct challenge to the ACA to reach the Supreme Court and will likely be the blockbuster case of the term that begins in October. June 25, 2020: SCOTUSblog continued the thread with this tweet: “The federal government’s full brief is here: A separate brief — from a group of red states asking the court to strike down the entirety of the ACA — was filed earlier in the day. That brief is here:” June 25, 2020: SCOTUSblog ended the thread with this tweet: “A group of blue states filed a brief defending the law back in May. That brief is here: June 25, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) tweeted: “20M more Americans have health insurance because of the Affordable Care Act. 135M people with pre-existing conditions are now protected. 12M seniors now pay lower prescription drug costs. Yet Trump continued to advance his lawsuit to repeal the ACA. During a pandemic. June 25, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release on her official website titled: “Pelosi Statement on Trump Brief Asking Supreme Court to Strike Down Affordable Care Act Amid Coronavirus”. From the press release: Washington, D.C. – Speaker Nancy Pelosi released the following statement after the Trump Administration filed its brief in the health care lawsuit before the Supreme Court, asking the justices to strike down the entirety of the Affordable Care Act:“President Trump and the Republicans’ campaign to rip away the protections and benefits of the Affordable Care Act in the middle of the coronavirus crisis is an act of unfathomable cruelty.“If President Trump gets his way, 130 million Americans with pre-existing conditions will lose the ACA’s lifesaving protections and 23 million Americans will lose their health coverage entirely. There is no legal justification and no moral excuse for the Trump Administration’s disastrous efforts to take away Americans’ health care.“On Day One of this Congress, the House Democratic Majority voted to throw the full legal weight of the House of Representatives against this dangerous lawsuit. While President Trump tries to tear away protections for people with pre-existing conditions, Democrats are working to build on the Affordable Care Act to lower health costs and prescription drug prices For The People. Next week, the House will continue that effort by passing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Enhancement Act.” June 25, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra tweeted: “We’re in court today fighting the Trump Administration’s burdensome rule attacking safe, legal abortion care and threatening loss of health coverage over a $1 missed payment”. This tweet is the start of a thread. June 25, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra tweeted: “As we face a public health crisis, @HHSGov should be doing all it can to protect and streamline care, not fighting to take it away when we need it most.” June 25, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra tweeted: “The 1303 rule is a solution in search of a problem, and to finanize during #COVID19 shows this Admin’s prioritization of politics over people once again. Health policy should be based in science, not creating even more propaganda in the @RealDonaldTrump war on women’s health”. This tweet was the end of the thread. June 26, 2020: ABC News posted an article titled: “Amid pandemic, Trump administration asks Supreme Court to overturn Obamacare”. It was written by Devin Dwyer. From the article: In the midst of a pandemic and without an alternative health plan of its own, the Trump administration formally called on the U.S. Supreme Court to completely strike down the Affordable Care Act.The administration makes the case in a legal brief filed late Thursday in the case brought by 20 Republican-led states that want to completely invalidate the law.The justices will hear oral arguments as soon as October, which is just weeks before the general election.Two lower federal courts have ruled that the ACA’s individual mandate is unconstitutional after the GOP Congress in 2017 zeroed out the penalty for going without health insurance. The Supreme Court had previously upheld the mandate on the grounds that it was a tax.The lower courts also called into question the viability of the entire law without the mandate.“The individual mandate cannot be severed from the remainder of the ACA,” writes Trump solicitor general Noel Francisco in his brief to the Supreme Court. “The entire ACA thus must fall with the individual mandate.”California and 19 other Democrat-led states are defending the law.“The ACA has been life-changing and now through this pandemic, we can all see the value in having greater access to quality healthcare at affordable prices,” said California attorney general Xavier Becerra who is leading the defense. “Now is not the time to rip away our best tool to address very real and very deadly health disparities in our communities.”Nearly half a million Americans have signed up for health plans through the ACA so far in 2020, according to the Department of Health and Human Services — a surge of enrollment, up 46% from this time last year, from workers who lost their jobs and employer-based insurance coverage in the coronavirus pandemic.“We intend to win this,” Becerra added… June 26, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Harris Condems Trump’s Latest Attempt to Strip Health Care Away from Millions of Americans”. From the press release: U.S Senator Kamala D. Harris (D-CA) released a statement after the Trump administration demanded the Supreme Court to strike down the entire Affordable Health Care Act.“Donald Trump is trying to strip health coverage from millions of Americans just to spite President Obama. It’s cruel and dangerous,” said Harris. “People need health insurance that is affordable and covers what they need it to– especially during a pandemic.“By stalling COVID-19 testing and trying to rip health insurance away from people, the president is knowingly putting lives at risk for political gain. Republicans and Democrats have a moral responsibility to speak out against Trump’s unprecedented sabotage of Americans’ health,” Harris added. June 26, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Transcript of Pelosi Weekly Press Conference Today”. From the press release: Speaker Pelosi: Good morning……And what is really important about all of this right now is the health of the American people. Martin Luther King said, ‘Of all,’ he said exactly, ‘Of all forms of inequality, injustice in health is the most shocking and the most inhuman,’ he said, ‘and the most inhuman, because it also – it often results in physical death.’ Of all forms of injustice, inequality, health care, the most inhuman.So, it is unfathomable, unfathomable, that as we gathered here, late at night, last night, in the midst of a pandemic, the White House, the Administration, in the dark of night, filed their brief in the Supreme Court to overturn the Affordable Care Act, saying to the American people, million families, if you have a pre-existing condition, you will no longer have the benefit of access to quality care. And the list goes on of the benefits that it would overturn. Lifetime limits that they support, that we want to overturn; that, if you have a pre-existing condition, that there is no lifetime limit on the amount of coverage that you would receive. Midst of a pandemic, 130 million Americans with pre-existing conditions will lose ACA’s life‑saving protection, 23 million Americans will lose their health – access to quality, affordable health care. The ACA’s ban on annual lifetime limits, young people staying on other people’s – being a woman no longer a pre-existing condition. Forget about it. The Administration wants to do away with all of that. As bad as that is, they think they can get away with saying, ‘Oh, we support a benefit for a pre-existing condition,’ when they don’t. So, when they say that, understand they are in court to overturn that now. They continue to be, and now they have filed their briefs. And all of this as the ACA enrollment has increased by 46 percent by a similar period last year, showing an increased need during the coronavirus. So many people have lost their jobs, and, hence, in some cases, their insurance benefits. Therefore, they are turning to the Affordable Care Act. Again, in the middle of a pandemic, the President is saying, ‘We want to slow down the testing.’ The testing….…And, as I said, many more people are signing up for the Affordable Care Act. And, so, I am so pleased that on Monday we will be putting forth our Patient Protection and Affordable Care Enhancement Act. It will lower health care costs, negotiate lower prices, expand coverage and push hold-out states to adopt Medicaid expansion, combat inequity in health coverage, combat junk plans. The list goes on. Now, let me say this. As I said earlier, many people who have lost their jobs have turned to the Affordable Care Act because their job – their health care was tied to their job. So, hopefully, they will get their jobs back, but, in the meantime, they have that access. That’s what the President is trying to overturn in the courts. So, God-willing, the courts will do the right thing, but we just don’t know. So, we are getting prepared for what comes next in all of this – in all of this. But let me tell you this about the ACA enhancement. It has – why we have some things in it and some things aren’t that were saved for another day, because the President said he would support these things. He said he would support negotiating for lower prices. That is what he said during the campaign. That has been for years our – one of our priorities that we have never been able to get 60 votes in the Senate and get it passed into law. But the President said during the campaign he was going to, ‘Negotiate like crazy.’ Crazy, that is a good description of his actions throughout. But, ‘negotiate like crazy’ apparently means not negotiate at all. That is the only way you are going to get the prices – the lowered prices. And, in the bill – the Affordable Care Act – it brings down the cost of prescription drugs, which we are promising to the American people, and the savings to the Federal government from not having to pay those prices will go to expand, in a way – bigger expansion of Medicare since its inception. Benefits for hearing, for visual and for dental. It’s quite remarkable. It has other advantages for seniors in terms of cost of prescription drugs as well. But we are very, very proud of that aspect, very understandable about everyone… June 26, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “State Senate Advances Legislation to Avert Anticompetitive Health System Consolidation Which Increases Costs for Patients”. From the press release: California State Senator Bill Monning (D-Carmel) and Attorney General Xavier Becerra today applauded the passage in the State Senate of Senate Bill 977 (SB 977), legislation to avert anticompetitive behavior and over-consolidation in the healthcare sector. Decreased competition is a known driver of increased prices for consumers. SB 977 calls for California Department of Justice oversight when large healthcare systems, hedge funds or private equity groups seek to acquire or affiliate with other healthcare facilities or providers. The oversight serves as a check to ensure that these transactions targeting health facilities of critical importance to local communities improve care coordination or increase healthcare access for those communities. The bill provides new enforcement tools to reduce anticompetitive behavior. SB 977 now moves to the State Assembly. “With our communities battling the coronavirus pandemic, our healthcare system must operate at peak performance. That means all hands on deck. But we’ve learned the hard way that too often “consolidation” really means higher prices and a reduction of services which the surrounding community relies on,” said Attorney General Becerra. “Communities deserve to know that their local hospital won’t be treated like a commodity that’s up for sale but, instead, like the provider of critical health services that families in the area depend on. Under SB 977, the Department of Justice will provide the independent set of eyes that our communities need for them to know that consolidations targeting local hospitals or providers won’t result in anticompetitive, monopolistic operations that force our families to swallow higher prices and diminished services.” “The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed the disproportionate access to healthcare in California,” said Senator Monning. “SB 977 will hold unscrupulous healthcare systems accountable to ensure existing services are protected and patient health is the top priority of providers. We must do everything we can at the state level to guarantee Californians have access to affordable healthcare.”Anticompetitive behavior in the healthcare sector is a growing concern because large healthcare systems can flex their market power to raise prices for patients, employers, and insurers while limiting services and decreasing the quality of care offered to Californians. For example, average prices for hospital care are 35 percent higher in Northern California, where healthcare systems are more consolidated, than in Southern California. The impact of consolidation on prices was reinforced by a 2018 study by professor Richard Scheffler and the Petris Institute at the University of California, Berkeley, which found the percentage of physicians in practices owned by hospitals increased from about 25 percent in 2010 to more than 40 percent in 2016. This increased hospital ownership resulted in an estimated 12 percent increase in premiums from 2014 to 2016 and has led these physician groups to be less flexible and adaptable during the pandemic.SB 977 would work to improve healthcare affordability and limit anticompetitive behavior by requiring large healthcare systems to gain approval from the Attorney General’s Office before moving forward with any planned affiliation agreement or acquisition. The Attorney General’s determination to approve or deny a transaction will rely on two factors: Whether the transaction would truly increase care coordination and/or increase access and affordability of care to an underserved population; andWhether the transaction is substantially likely to result in anticompetitive effects that outweigh any benefits. In addition, SB 977 would declare that healthcare systems that exercise substantial market power may not engage in behavior that has a significant likelihood of anticompetitive effects. These behaviors include: raising market prices, diminishing the quality of care, reducing choice, increasing the total cost of care, and diminishing access or availability of healthcare services. Under SB 977, the Attorney General’s Office would have the ability to file civil actions to recover damages and obtain civil penalties against those that abuse market power. June 26, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra tweeted: “My bill w/Sen. Monning to crack down on anticompetitive behavior in the healthcare market & protect patients passed the Senate! With our communities battling the coronavirus pandemic, our healthcare must operate at peak performance.” This tweet was the start of a short thread. June 26, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra tweeted: “That means all hands on deck. But we’ve learned the hard way that too often “consolidation” reallly means higher prices and a reduction of services which the surrounding community relies on.” June 26, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra tweeted: “W/#SB977, CADOJ will provide the independent set of eyes that communities need to know that consolidations targeting local hospitals or providers won’t result in anticompetitive, monopolistic operations that force our families to swallow higher prices and diminished services.” This was the last tweet in the short thread. June 26, 2020: Los Angeles Times posted an opinion piece titled: “Opinion: Amid pandemic and recession, the Trump administration attacks 20 million Americans’ health coverage”. It was written by Los Angeles Times Deputy Editorial Editor Jon Healey. From the opinion piece: The COVID-19 pandemic caused a huge spike in layoffs, leaving tens of millions of Americans without the employer-sponsored health insurance that had protected their families. But the 2010 Affordable Care Act offered a safety net for them — laid-off workers can sign up for replacement coverage for themselves and their families through their state insurance exchanges. And according to the Kaiser Family Foundation’s estimates, nearly 80% of those who’d lost their coverage at work in the pandemic’s first two months were eligible for federal subsidies that lowered the cost of those new policies.Yet on Thursday, the Trump administration urged the Supreme Court to throw out the ACA because two self-employed Texans assert that the law injures them. In fact, the administration’s brief makes a wholly specious argument that the sections of the law it connects to the plaintiff’s injuries cannot be separated from the portions of the law that extend Medicaid to more poor Americans, improve the quality of care, cut prescription drug costs for the elderly, explore ways to slow the growth of healthcare costs, increase the supply of doctors and nurses, let young adults stay on their parents’ insurance policies, and make it cheaper for everyone to get preventive health services.Not to put too fine a point on it, but in the middle of a pandemic the administration is demanding the elimination of a law that has extended coverage to roughly 20 million Americans, and that protects some 50 million Americans with preexisting conditions from being gouged or dropped by their insurers……The notion that Obamacare does more harm than good has been central to the Republican argument against the law since the day it went into effect. And there’s no question that some people, like the two individual plaintiffs in California et al. vs. Texas et al., have been forced to pay more for coverage, even as millions of others benefited from the new federal subsidies. That’s because the law sought to rein in “junk” policies that didn’t cover many important forms of care and to spread individuals’ risks and costs more broadly. As a consequence, the comprehensive policies offered on the exchanges are costlier than the more limited ones that had typified the market for non-group coverage. And under the law’s individual mandate, every adult American was required to obtain healthcare coverage or pay a tax penalty (unless they qualify for an exemption, such as the one for financial hardship).The case before the Supreme Court uses that claim of injury to tee up a too clever by half attempt to kill the entire ACA, based on Congress’ decision to excise one small but important part of the law. Unable to repeal the entire act after they took complete control of Congress in 2017, Republicans settled for eliminating the widely disliked tax penalty for people who did not comply with the individual mandate, which remains on the books.That’s a problem, the plaintiffs in California vs. Texas argue, because the Supreme Court upheld the individual mandate in 2014 only as an exercise of Congress’ power to levy taxes. Removing the tax rendered the mandate unconstitutional, which upends the insurance reforms that are the heart and soul of the law. And if those insurance reforms are off the table, Congress wouldn’t have enacted any of the other provisions of the ACA. Or so the plaintiffs and the Trump administration argue.The administration is right about one thing here: Congress (and many analysts) viewed the individual mandate as an important stabilizing force for insurers once they were required to take all comers and ignore preexisting conditions. But it was hardly the only stabilizing force; as we’ve seen in the two years since the tax penalty was repealed, average insurance premiums have declined in the state exchanges. The facts on the ground are the strongest argument against the administration’s case.Oddly, the Trump brief argues most forcefully against the insurance reforms designed to protect people with preexisting conditions — the people Trump insists he cares about, despite Republicans’ multiple efforts to expose them to higher costs. Those provisions are the reason congressional Republicans ultimately abandoned their effort to repeal the ACA, which is why it makes no sense to argue, as the Trump brief does, that Congress wouldn’t want those protections to survive if the individual mandate dies. There’s no need for the court to guess lawmakers’ intent on that issue… June 27, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “Now that the very expensive, unpopular and unfair Individual Mandate provision has been terminated by us, many States & the U.S. are asking the Supreme Court that Obamacare itself be terminated so that it can be replaced with a FAR BETTER AND MUCH LESS EXPENSIVE ALTERNATIVE…” June 27, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “…Obamacare is a joke! Deductible is far too high and the overall cost is ridiculous. My Administration has gone out of its way to manage OC much better than previous, but it is still no good. I will ALWAYS PROTECT PEOPLE WITH PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS,ALWAYS!!!” June 27, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra responded to President Trump’s second tweet with a tweet of his own: “Bogus: It was just 2 days ago that the Admin. told #SCOTUS they think the ACA “must fall.” Here’s what Trump doesn’t say: The ACA has protected 133+ million people W/PREEXISTING CONDITIONS. We intend to win this fight as we won DACA: w/the facts, law & American people on our side” June 27, 2020: The Guardian posted an article titled: “Covid-19 survivors could lose health insurance if Trump wins bid to repeal Obamacare”. It was written by Dominic Rushe and Amanda Holpuch. From the article: Millions of Americans who have survived Covid-19 or face future infections could lose their insurance or be barred from getting coverage should the Trump administration successfully repeal Obamacare.The Trump administration asked the supreme court late Thursday to overturn the Affordable Care Act – a move that, if successful, would bring a permanent end to the health insurance reform law popularly known as Obamacare.Under the ACA, insurance companies cannot deny coverage for pre-existing conditions. Its abolition would mean millions of Americans who have had or have cancer, multiple sclerosis or other diseases would struggle to find insurance.Anyone applying for insurance who subsequently contracts Covid-19 could also find their insurance invalidated or be denied coverage in the future. If they were allowed to keep their insurance, they could still be charged higher premiums or have future treatment for coronavirus turned down.“Abolishing the ACA would cause tremendous damage and cause chaos throughout the country,” said Karen Pollitz, senior fellow at the Henry J Kaiser Family Foundation.Anyone buying health insurance who subsequently contracted the coronavirus would face loss of coverage, she said. “If you bought the insurance and then caught the virus, you would be out of luck,” she said.The abolition of pre-existing condition coverage is especially difficult for those who have Covid-19, because so little is known about the long-term health impact of the disease. There is evidence that the respiratory illness causes permanent damage in some patients. Those who have had the disease and recovered would have to disclose their status to apply for insurance, and could be turned down for coverage.“We could see tens of millions of people thrown out of coverage,” said Pollitz. “There would be an onslaught of un-insurance.”……The supreme court has not scheduled a date for oral arguments in the case, but it is expected to take place in the autumn and a decision would likely not arrive until after the November election… June 29, 2020: NPR posted an article titled: “Supreme Court Hands Abortion-Rights Advocates A Victory In Louisiana Case”. It was written by Nina Totenberg and Brian Naylor. From the article: As sharply divided U.S. Supreme Court stood by its most recent abortion-rights precedent Monday, delivering a major defeat to abortion opponents who had hoped for a reversal of fortunes at the court with the addition of two new Trump-appointed justices.By a 5-4 vote, the court struck down a Louisiana law that was virtually identical to a Texas law it invalidated just four years ago. Chief Justice John Roberts cast the fifth and decisive vote.Four years ago, the chief justice was among the dissenters when the court struck down a Texas law that required doctors performing clinic abortions to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital. But on Monday, Roberts joined the court’s liberals in striking down a nearly identical law in Louisiana, even as he stood by the reasoning in his earlier dissent.The chief justice justified the change in his vote by pointing to the doctrine of stare decisis, which says the court should usually stand by its precedents. It “instructs us to treat like cases alike,” he wrote, and “the Louisiana law burdens women seeking previability abortions to the same extent as the Texas law” did four years ago.The value of following precedent, he added, is that it “promotes the evenhanded, predictable, and consistent development of legal principles, fosters reliance on judicial principles, and contributes to the actual and perceived integrity of the judicial process.” While precedent is not an “inexorable demand,” simple disagreement with a previous decision is not enough to justify reversing course, he wrote.In this case, he observed, not only was the Louisiana law at issue virtually identical to the one the court struck down in 2016, but the District Court judge found after an extensive trial that if the law were to go into effect, at minimum two of the three abortion clinics in the state would be forced to close, women would have to wait longer and drive farther for abortions, and only one doctor would likely be left to fill the demand for 10,000 women seeking abortions in the state each year……The decision was also a particular repudiation of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which not only disregarded the Supreme Court’s earlier decision in the Texas case, but disregarded the factual findings of the District Court judge in the Louisiana case. As Roberts observed, the District Court judge, before his ruling, held a six-day trial in the case, and for 18 months monitored the attempts of clinic doctors, who, without success, sought in “good faith” to get the required admitting privileges.Leah Litman, a professor at the University of Michigan Law School, cautioned that Roberts’ opinion sets out a standard different from the one the court previously adopted.“The chief justice’s reasoning was actually quite permissive in what it would allow states do to restrict abortions,” she observed.That said, the decision does appear to send the signal that Roberts is not prepared to uphold state laws that, for instance, ban abortions at six, eight or 12 weeks, or any other time before fetal viability….…Meanwhile, former Vice President Joe Biden, the presumptive Democratic nominee for president, applauded the Supreme Court for ” that states cannot put in place laws that unduly burden a woman’s right to make her own health care decisions with her doctor.”… June 29, 2020: EMILY’s List posted a statement on U.S. Supreme Court Ruling in June Medical Services V. Russo”. From the statement: Today, Stephanie Schriock, president of EMILY’s List, the nation’s largest resource for women in politics, released the following statement on the United States Supreme Court’s ruling in June Medical Services v. Russo, which will protect access to abortion care in Louisiana.“Today’s Supreme Court decision is a victory for people in Louisiana, particularly communities of color and low-income people, and a blow to deceptive and political efforts to limit abortion access. Even though the Republican Party will stop at nothing to turn back the clock on our reproductive freedom, we’re proud to stand with our allies in the reproductive freedom and justice communities and the majority of Americans in supporting everyone’s ability to make their own health care decisions. While we are grateful for today’s decision, this case is yet another reminder how vital it is to have pro-choice majorities in the Senate and in state legislatures around the country. Voters will not forget that Senators like Susan Collins, John Cornyn, and Joni Ernst confirmed justices who put our reproductive freedom in danger. EMILY’s List won’t stop fighting to elect pro-choice Democratic women at every level of office who will protect essential abortion access.” June 29, 2020: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) posted a statement titled: “ACOG Statement on June Medical Services v. Russo”. From the statement: The following is a statement from Maureen G. Phipps, MD, MPH, FACOG, chief executive officer of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, on today’s decision from the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of June Medical Services, LLC, v. Russo:“Today, obstetrician-gynecologists from around the country celebrate the Supreme Court’s decision that will help protect the ability of their patients to receive essential care and that affirms physicians’ roles in advocating for their patients. Once again, just as in 2016, the Court has declared that placing onerous, unreasonable requirements on physicians and clinicians who provide abortion creates an unconstitutional burden on patients in violation of the U.S. Constitution.“ACOG is grateful that the Court continues to consider the expert views of the nation’s medical community, citing the brief we led with 13 other major medical organizations in recognizing that ‘local admitting-privileges requirements for abortion providers offer no medical benefit and do not meaningfully advance continuity of care.’ We are also encouraged that the Court appreciates the patient-physician relationship, which includes for the ability of physicians to advocate in all ways for the health and well-being of their patients, including in the courts. “ACOG has long led the medical community in opposing burdensome requirements on clinicians who provide essential care, including abortion. Such restrictions do nothing to protect or advance patient safety. As our brief explained, abortion is a very safe medical procedure, and restricting access only makes our patients less safe by forcing them to delay needed abortions or forego them altogether. “Today’s decision once again affirms that abortion access is a constitutionally protected right. While we celebrate the decision, we also know that access to care continues to be delayed or denied for many women due to systemic inequities and inequalities. We therefore urge legislators to build on the Court’s decision and drive policy solutions that will advance equitable care across the country. ACOG and its members will continue to advocate at every level to enhance our patients’ ability to access quality, essential care.” June 29, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “Supreme Court Follows Precedent in Victory for Abortion Rights”. From the press release: Today, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Center for Reproductive Rights, striking down a Louisiana law that would have closed all but one abortion clinic in the state. The medically unneccessary law would have banned doctors from providing abortion care unless they had admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles. The ruling in June Medical Services v. Russo–the first abortion rights case to be heard under the current makeup of the Supreme Court–allows the state’s three remaining clinics to stay open.Today’s ruling follows precedent from just four years ago in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt–a case also won by the Center–in which the Court struck down an identical law in Texas. In that case, the Court held that laws that create more burdens than benefits for people seeking abortion care are unconstitutional. Today’s ruling applies Whole Woman’s Health and reverses the lower court decision that would have upheld the law.Justice Breyer, delivering a plurality opinion, wrote, “Given the facts found, we must… uphold the District Court’s related factual and legal determinations. These include its determination that Louisiana’s law poses a ‘substantial obstacle’ to women seeking an abortion; its determination that the law offers no significant health-related benefits; and its determination that the law consequently imposes an ‘undue burden’ on a woman’s constitutional right to choose to have an abortion. We also agree with its ultimate legal conclusion that, in light of these findings and our precedents, Act 620 violates the Constitution.” Statement from Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, reacting to today’s pivotal ruling in favor of abortion providers:This is a big win that vindicates what we’ve said all along, which is that the Louisiana admitting privileges law is unconstitutional. This is a victory for the people of Louisiana and the rule of law, but this case never should have gotten this far. We won an identical case four years ago in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, and the fact that we had to fight so hard again goes to show that nothing should be taken for granted when it comes to protecting abortion rights. Indeed, the Court did not speak with a clear majority opinion which could muddy the waters when clarity is needed to protect abortion rights. As a result of this decision, the clinics in Louisiana can stay open to serve the one million women of reproductive age in the state. This is critical because access to abortion care has a profound impact on a person’s health and life. For this reason, the Constitution protects the most intimate decisions that a person makes about their body, their health, their life, and their future. Yet for decades, opponents of reproductive rights have relentlessly sought to deny the promise of Roe v. Wade with an avalanche of laws targeting providers, clinics, and patients. These laws disproportionately impact communities of color, young people, rural communities, and people living in poverty. In Louisiana, abortion restrictions disproportionately harm African Americans who already live under the weight of systemic racism that pervades every aspect of American life including housing, voting, education, employment, and health. Louisiana lawmakers should be addressing these ingrained inequities rather than taking people’s rights away. Unfortunately, the Court’s ruling today will not stop those hell-bent on banning abortion. We will be back in court tomorrow and will continue to fight state by state, law by law to protect our constitutional right to abortion. But we shouldn’t have to keep playing whack-a-mole. It’s time for Congress to pass The Women’s Health Protection Act, a federal bill that would ensure the promise of Roe v. Wade is realized in every state for every person. June 29, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Harris Statement on Supreme Court Striking Down Unconstitutional Restriction on Abortion”. From the press release: U.S. Senator Kamala D. Harris (D-CA) on Monday released the following statement in response to the ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in the case June Medical Services LLC v. Russo.“Today’s Supreme Court decision preserved access to abortion. Thanks to this ruling, health clinics in Louisiana will be able to remain open and continue providing safe, legal abortion care. The Court struck down a Louisiana law designed to shutter reproductive health clinics and make abortion virtually impossible to access for people in the state. This ruling is especially important for low-income people and people of color whose health and financial security are more likely to be impacted by barriers to comprehensive reproductive health care.“While the Court reached the right result today, we must nonetheless keep up the fight to protect access to abortion. That is why it is incumbent upon Congress to pass the Women’s Health Protection Act, which would prohibit states from enacting laws that impose burdensome requirements on access to abortion.” June 29, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement on June Medical Services v. Russo”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued this statement after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Louisiana’s draconian abortion restrictions:“Today, the Supreme Court issued a victory for women’s health and freedoms and for the Constitution. The highest court in the land has adhered to precedent as it maintains the constitutional right to women’s basic reproductive health care.“As Republicans continue their assault nationally on Roe v Wade, they are also fighting on a state by state basis. Louisiana’s draconian abortion ban was a clear and intentional violation of the Constitution, explicitely designed to permanently destroy women’s reproductive freedoms and dismantle their right to make their own decisions about their health, bodies and timing and size of their families. This ruling is a win for the people of Louisiana – but we must be ever-vigilant against the Republicans’ dangerous, nationwide assault against women’s reproductive health freedoms.“Democrats will continue to fight partisan attacks on women’s health and freedoms, as we defend the constitutional right to comprehensive health care and reproductive freedoms.” June 29, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Helps Win Supreme Court Case Guaranteeing Women’s Access to Abortion Coverage”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James today helped win a major victory at the U.S. Supreme Court that will protect the ability of women across the nation to maintain access to safe, legal abortions. Attorney General James led a coalition of 22 attorneys general in filing an amicus brief in support of the plaintiffs in the case of June Medical Services v. Gee, in which a medical provider sought to overturn a decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit that upheld a Louisiana law requiring abortion providers to maintain admitting privileges at local hospitals. The law at issue was identical to the Texas law that the Supreme Court invalidated in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellersedt, in 2016. The Supreme Court today reaffirmed its ruling in Whole Woman’s Health and held that the Louisiana law was unconstitutional, as it infringes on women’s reproductive freedoms and the right to access an abortion, enshrined in the landmark Supreme Court decision of Roe v. Wade in 1973.“More than 45 years after Roe v. Wade etched into law a woman’s right to access an abortion, states continue to look for ways to chip away at this constitutional guarantee and place burdensome restrictions on women’s reproductive freedoms,” said Attorney General James. “But today’s Supreme Court decision once again makes clear that this right and constitutional guarantee cannot be infringed upon and no roundabout law will push us back to a time of back alley abortions. Despite all the progress made in women’s freedoms over the last five decades, the state of Louisiana has continued to strive to regulate women’s bodies and deprive them of one of their most important constitutional rights. This law was simply about controlling women’s bodies, controlling their choices, and controlling their freedom, which is why we fought it every step of the way.”In 2014, Louisiana enacted a law that requires abortion providers to maintain admitting privileges at local hospitals. Had the Supreme Court not struck down this law today, Louisiana would be left with, at most, two physicians at only two clinics across the state who could provide abortion services, despite the fact that roughly 10,000 women obtain abortions in Louisiana each year. Louisiana’s admitting-privileges requirement was identical to a Texas statute that was invalidated and found to be unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt. Earlier in the case, the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana granted a permanent injunction against implementation of the Louisiana law, but, in 2018, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed that decision. June Medical Services and two physicians appealed the decision to the Supreme Court, which granted an emergency application to stay the law from taking effect, pending the outcome of the appeal.In December, Attorney General James led a coalition of attorneys general in filing an amicus brief in the case because states have an interest in ensuring the availability of safe, medically sound abortion services and in protecting the health and safety of women seeking abortion services, as well as defending the long-recognized, substantive due process right to choose to terminate a pregnancy and the undue-burden standard that governs review of regulations implicating that right. In the brief, the attorneys general argued that Louisiana’s law is an unnecessary and onerous burden that fails to promote women’s health and would end up further limiting the number of abortion providers available to women in Louisiana.This case was handled by Assistant Solicitor General Ester Murdukhayeva, Deputy Solicitor General Andrea Oser, and Solicitor General Barbara D. Underwood — all of the Division of Appeals and Opinions. June 29, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Floor Speech in Support of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Enhancement Act”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi delivered remarks on the Floor of the House of Representatives in support of H.R. 1425, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Enhancement Act, House Democrats’ For the People legislation to build on the Affordable Care Act to lower health costs and prescription drug prices. Below are the Speaker’s remarks:…But here, today, we are focused on that first For The People priority. Access to affordable care is a matter of life and death. That’s so self-evident as we see every day in the COVID-19 crisis, which has killed more than 125,000 Americans, infecting 2.5 million Americans and that has left tens of millions of people without jobs.As Dr. King once said, ‘Of all the forms of inequality, injustice in health is the most shocking and the most inhuman because it often results in physical death.’ Yes. As lives are shattered by the coronavirus, the protections of the Affordable Care Act are more important now, more than ever. And this is a health justice issue. Democrats, with this bill, will strengthen America’s health and financial security during this time of crisis and for years to come. It lowers Americans’ health care coverage, significantly increasing the Affordable Care Act’s affordability subsidies to be more generous and cover more middle-class families. It negotiates lower prescription drugs, drawing from our H.R. 3 legislation, to ensure that Americans no longer have to pay more for our medicines that big pharma charges for the same drugs overseas.This has been a long-term goal of Democrats in the Congress. In 2006, when we were running and won the Majority, our For The People agenda, that equivalent agenda was ‘A New Direction for America: Six for ’06,’ and we had six bills we said would pass immediately after obtaining the Majority. Well, we passed all six of them in the House of Representatives. Five of them became law. Only one of them did not: the law enabling the Secretary of HHS to negotiate for lower prescription drug prices.This has been a fight over the years that we continue to make it because it is central to not only to the health, but financial health and security of America’s working families. In addition, this legislation expands coverage and pushes hold-out states to adopt Medicaid expansion for the 4.8 million cruelly excluded from the coverage. It combats inequities in health coverage faced by communities of color, expanding more affordable coverage to vulnerable populations and fighting the maternal mortality epidemic. And it cuts down on junk plans. They are such a rip: ‘Let me just pay you every – all the time for my health insurance but you won’t be there for me when I need care.’ So, it cracks down on those junk plans and strengthens coverage for people with pre-existing conditions.What is interesting in this whole debate is to hear the President and Members on the other side of the aisle say, oh, they are all for protecting pre-existing conditions. Oh really? Then why are you in the United States Supreme Court to overturn them? And, now, just back to this bill, according to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, our legislation that we have on the Floor today would help well over – would lower the costs for well over 17 million more Americans and safeguard the Affordable Care Act’s life-saving protections for the 130 million Americans with pre-existing conditions. When they say they are for allowing people with pre-existing conditions to get coverage, they don’t say at what costs. This is one of the biggest differences – well, with stiff competition – but one of the biggest differences between Democrats and Republicans, we guarantee affordability and protect the pre-existing medical condition as not being an obstacle to access. They are in court trying to overturn it. Sadly, and this is a stark contrast as I pointed out, as Democrats unveiled our legislation last week, President Trump went to the Court doubling down on his lawsuit to tear down the ACA and dismantle every one of its protections, including the pre-existing medical condition benefit. At a time when families need health care more than ever, the President is trying to strip protections from about 130 million Americans with pre-existing conditions and take coverage away from 23 million Americans. That does not even go into what he is trying to do to the enhanced benefit that all Americans with health care enjoy.We need to build on the progress of the Patient Protection Affordable Care Act to lower health costs and prescription drug costs, not rip Americans’ health care in the middle of a pandemic. What sense does that make? One day – on day one of this Congress, led by Representative Allred, the House voted to throw our legal weight in this lawsuit. Yet, 190 Republicans voted against that Resolution, choosing to be fully complicit in the President’s attempt to tear away health protections. We continue to call on the President to abandon his lawsuit to destroy the Affordable Care Act and urge him, instead, to call on the fourteen states who have refused to expand Medicaid, to do so. Doesn’t it just make sense at a time of a pandemic? It’s always important. It would have been amusing if this were not deadly serious to hear Senator Cornyn say, ‘Well, these people who’ve lost their jobs because of this pandemic can always sign up for the Affordable Care Act.’ Really, but you’re trying to take it down? The Administration has a responsibility to defend the law of the land, not to tear it down. Today, Members of Congress have the choice: to strengthen America’s health care protections and lower health care costs or be complicit, once again I use that word, in President Trump’s campaign to dismantle families’ health care. Make no mistake, a vote against this bill is a vote to weaken Americans’ health and financial security during a pandemic……With this bill, Democrats in the House are offering our salute to good health to the American people, and we hope the Republicans would join us in that salute to good health to the American people.With that, I urge a strong vote for the Patient Protection Affordable Care Enhancement Act, for the people, for the children, for the future. With that, I yield back. June 29, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “NARAL President Ilyse Hogue Comments on Supreme Court Decision in June Medical Services v. Russo”. From the press release: The U.S. Supreme Court today issued its decision in June Medical Services LLC v. Russo, striking down a medically unnecessary clinic shutdown law in Louisiana as unconstitutional. The law threatened to decimate abortion access in Louisiana, where access is already extremely restricted. NARAL Pro-Choice America President Ilyse Hogue released the following statement in response to the decision:“Today’s decision is a win for women in Louisiana who will continue to have access to the time-sensitive abortion care they need. It’s a win for truth and fact-based decision making, as even a Court tilted so far right couldn’t ignore the concrete arguments and data showing that public health is compromised by these burdensome restrictions on abortion. Finally, today’s decision shows that advocates can make a difference. Support for Roe v. Wade is at an all-time high in this country and so many made their voices heard through this process. The Court’s legitimacy in the eyes of the public will be threatened if they follow through on Trump’s promise to end legal abortion.This win, however, doesn’t change the simple fact that reproductive freedom in the United States remains on the line thanks to anti-choice extremists who have shown time and again that they will stop at nothing to advance their dangerous ideological agenda and a Court still looking for ways to accommodate them.In this moment of turmoil for our country, fighting for the fundamental rights of every body is more important than ever. That’s why we cannot and will not back down in the face of these relentless attacks on our ability to determine our own destinies. We will fight with everything we have to make sure the politicians like Senators Susan Collins, Joni Ernst, Thom Tillis, and Cory Gardner, who rubber-stamped Trump and Mitch McConnell’s efforts to stack our courts with radical right ideologues, are held accountable for putting our freedom at risk. Anti-choice politicians be warned: The 77% of Americans who support the legal right to abortion care won’t forget what you did—and you’ll be answering to us this November.”June Medical Services LLC v. Russo challenged a dangerous Louisiana law that would have gutted abortion access in the state by requiring doctors to have medically unnecessary admitting privileges at a local hospital. The clinic shutdown law at issue in the case was identical to one blocked in another case, Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, decided by the Supreme Court in 2016 before Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch joined the Court. These restrictions are based on disinformation pushed by the anti-choice, anti-freedom movement that falsely claims restrictions like this help women, though there is no medical benefit to mandating admitting privileges and they do nothing to make women safer. In truth, the evidence overwhelmingly shows that abortion care is extremely safe and leading medical experts oppose restrictions like the one the Supreme Court considered in this case because they block “access to quality, evidence-based medicine.”Reproductive freedom is under attack in the United States like never before. Since Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation to the U.S. Supreme Court tipped the balance of the bench to an anti-choice, anti-freedom majority, lawmakers hostile to abortion have launched an all-out assault on reproductive rights in hopes that a challenge will make its way to the Court and end Roe v. Wade. Since Kavanaugh’s confirmation, emboldened anti-choice politicians have pounced on any and every opportunity to gut the landmark abortion rights case. Extreme bans on abortion were introduced, passed, or signed in 31 states in 2019 alone, and more than two dozen cases are in the pipeline that could completely overturn Roe.As NARAL has said from the beginning, we can’t forget who put Justices Kavanaugh and Gorsuch on the Court in the first place. Donald Trump’s judicial nominees are beholden to the anti-choice movement and with a majority on the Court hostile to reproductive freedom, our fundamental rights remain on the line.As the Trump administration and anti-choice extremists across the country target reproductive rights in their quest to maintain white patriarchy and control women, NARAL has embarked on its multi-faceted, largest-ever electoral program for the 2020 election. Key to NARAL’s strategy is reaching, persuading, and mobilizing key voter segments including soft-partisan persuadable women voters, and low-propensity pro-choice voters who are motivated by Trump and Republicans’ commitment to ending Roe v. Wade, criminalizing abortion, and punishing women. These critical voting blocs value reproductive freedom and align with the 77% of Americans who support Roe v. Wade.The anti-choice movement has spent decades working overtime to destroy access to abortion, state by state, law by law. This Louisiana law was just one part of a coordinated effort by the anti-choice radical right to gut Roe v. Wade and advance their agenda of power and control. Since 2011, anti-choice politicians have pushed nearly 450 laws restricting reproductive freedom through state legislatures.This case underscores the need for federal protections for abortion rights. Passing the Women’s Health Protection Act (WHPA) would guarantee the right to abortion and defend against the onslaught of abortion bans and restrictions from state legislatures across the country—even if the Supreme Court guts Roe or state governments pass legislation restricting reproductive freedom. June 29, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “STATEMENT: Supreme Court Rules in favor of Abortion Providers in June Medical v. Russo”. From the press release: Statement from Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, reacting to today’s pivotal ruling in favor of abortion providers:This is a big win that vindicates what we’ve said all along, which is that the Louisiana admitting privileges law is unconstitutional. This is a victory for the people of Louisiana and the rule of law, but this case never should have gotten this far. We won an identical case four years ago in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, and the fact that we had to fight so hard again goes to show that nothing should be taken for granted when it comes to protecting abortion rights. Indeed, the Court did not speak with a clear majority opinion which could muddy the waters when clarity is needed to protect abortion rights. As a result of this decision, the clinics in Louisiana can stay open to serve the one million women of reproductive age in the state. This is critical because access to abortion care has a profound impact on a person’s health and life. For this reason, the Constitution protects the most intimate decisions that a person makes about their body, their health, their life, and their future. Yet for decades, opponents of reproductive rights have relentlessly sought to deny the promise of Roe v. Wade with an avalanche of laws targeting providers, clinics, and patients. These laws disproportionately impact communities of color, young people, rural communities, and people living in poverty. In Louisiana, abortion restrictions disproportionately harm African Americans who already live under the weight of systemic racism that pervades every aspect of American life including housing, voting, education, employment, and health. Louisiana lawmakers should be addressing these ingrained inequities rather than taking people’s rights away. Unfortunately, the Court’s ruling today will not stop those hell-bent on banning abortion. We will be back in court tomorrow and will continue to fight state by state, law by law to protect our constitutional right to abortion. But we shouldn’t have to keep playing whack-a-mole. It’s time for Congress to pass The Women’s Health Protection Act, a federal bill that would ensure the promise of Roe v. Wade is realized in every state for every person. June 30, 2020: American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) posted news titled: “Study: Public charge rule having a chilling effect on immigrant families’ use of public programs”. It was written by Melissa Jenco. From the news: Nearly one-third of low-income immigrant families with children avoided using public benefits because of green card concerns, according to a new study.“Such chilling effects are very concerning given that access to nutritious food, affordable health insurance coverage and stable housing are essential to children’s healthy development and to families’ material well-being and psychological health, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic when the need for public assistance is high,” researchers from the Urban Institute wrote in their report.In 2018, the Trump administration proposed changing the public charge rule, expanding authorities’ ability to consider immigrants’ use or likely use of public programs when deciding whether they can enter the U.S. or advance through the immigration process. The rule went into effect earlier this year despite opposition from the Academy and other advocates who feared immigrant families would forgo essential health services.Urban Institute researchers measured this chilling effect through a nationally representative survey in December 2019 that included 949 adults from immigrant families living with children.They found 20% avoided a public health benefit such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, Medicaid or housing assistance that year. Among low-income families, 31.5% avoided these programs.Drilling down further, the data showed 11% of the families, including 17% of those who are low-income, avoided a nutrition program. Roughly 11% of the immigrant families and 16% of those who were low-income avoided a medical program. Authors said these figures may be even higher now that the rule has gone into effect.Some families avoided programs they may not have realized were not part of the public charge rule such as the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children and free or reduced-price school lunches. Many parents did not know the rule excludes benefits used by children.Some families avoided programs they may not have realized were not part of the public charge rule such as the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children and free or reduced-price school lunches. Many parents did not know the rule excludes benefits used by children.“Although the public charge rule excludes benefits used by children as a factor in their parents’ public charge determination, reluctance to participate in public programs out of fear or confusion about immigration consequences could make it even harder for immigrant families with children to address their basic needs,” authors wrote.The findings come just weeks after another Urban Institute report found the COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated hardships for low-income and minority families. Authors said Congress should include immigrant families in pandemic relief efforts and that community organizations should be prepared to provide additional assistance. Advocates also should ensure families know they can seek testing and treatment for COVID-19 without it being counted against their green card or visa application. June 30, 2020: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) posted a statement titled: “ACOG Statement on New Florida Law Requiring Written Consent for Pelvic Examinations”. From the statement: The following is a statement from Maureen G. Phipps, MD, MPH, FACOG, chief executive officer of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and Guy I. Benrubi, MD, FACOG, chair of ACOG District XII:“Government serves a valuable role in the protection of public health and safety and the provision of essential health services. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) supports this proper role of government. Laws that veer from these functions and unduly interfere with patient–physician relationships are not appropriate. Absent a substantial public health justification, government should not interfere with individual patient–physician encounters. The patient–physician relationship is essential to the provision of safe and quality medical care and should be protected from unnecessary governmental intrusion.“Doctors and patients weigh a variety of factors when making joint care decisions. A patient’s medical needs, history, symptoms, and personal values and preferences are all part of shared decision-making. When legislators dictate specific medical practices, it represents a gross intrusion in the patient–physician relationship.“On June 18, 2020, Governor Ron DeSantis signed a bill into law that imposes burdensome requirements on women’s health care through requiring written consent for any pelvic examination, whether it be done in a hospital setting, physician’s office, by a nurse practitioner, or otherwise. This law takes effect on July 1, 2020. While the goal of this bill was initially to protect patients in certain training contexts, the legislation was amended to contain broad-sweeping language that means that in Florida any health care practitioner is prohibited from providing any pelvic examination on a patient—a common, medically appropriate procedure—without the written consent of the patient.“All too often, legislators single out women’s health for regulations and mandates. This is not only another specific example but could set a dangerous a precedent for further efforts to single out women’s health, particularly their sexual health.“The ethical principle of informed consent requires a process defined by individualized conversations based on individual patients’ needs. Patient autonomy and informed consent cannot be realized by a state-mandated form or scripted conversation. Rather, it is achieved through mutual sharing of information and individualized conversations between health care professionals and their patients based on each patient’s unique needs. This fundamental principle guides our practices.“While this legislation may have been well intended in its original form, it was changed very late in the legislative session to broaden the original intended scope. The actual impact will be to interfere in the patient–physician relationship and to hold women’s health care to a different standard than other care. ACOG opposes this intrusion in the patient–physician relationship and will be working with other allied groups who are impacted by this new law to repeal this requirement.” June 30, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Florida governor signs abortion bill requiring parental consent for minors”. It was written by J. Edward Moreno. From the article: Florida Gov. Ron De Santis (R) on Tuesday signed a bill that requires anyone under 18 to receive parental consent for abortions.The bill, which was passed by the legislature earlier this year and goes into effect on July 1, would prohibit doctors from performing the procedure on minors unless they first get a notarized letter from a parent or guardian. Under previous law, people under the age of 18 needed to inform a parent or legal guardian before undergoing the procedure.Doctors who perform abortions without parental consent will face third-degree felony penalties.A minor is able to petition their corresponding circuit court and receive a judicial waiver of parental consent……Planned Parenthood of Florida said that the law passed Tuesday could put minors experiencing abuse in danger.“Even as other states like Massachusetts and Illinois are realizing the damage these forced parental consent laws are doing and working to reverse them, Florida is moving full speed to endanger young people who, in many cases, have experienced abuse at the hands of their own parents or guardians,” the organization said in a statement. June 30, 2020: Florida Alliance of Planned Parenthood Affiliates posted a press release titled: “DeSantis signs bill opening door to all out abortion ban”. From the press release: In spite of Florida still being in the thick of a pandemic, today Gov. Ron DeSantis signed HB 265/SB 404, forced parental consent for abortion, into law.“This law will put already at-risk young people in even greater danger at the worst possible time,” said Stephanie Fraim, President and CEO of Planned Parenthood of Southwest and Central Florida. “What’s worse, it could open the door to a reinterpretation of our constitutional right to privacy and the right to a safe and legal abortion in Florida.”Even as other states from Massachusetts to Illinois are realizing the damage these forced parental consent laws are doing and working to reverse them, Florida is moving full speed ahead to further endanger young people who, in many cases, have experienced abuse at the hands of their own parents and guardians.Throughout the legislative process, supporters of the bill argued it would keep young people safer but medical experts have concluded just the opposite.According to the American Academy of Pediatrics, in the best of times, “legislation mandating parental involvement does not achieve the intended benefit of promoting family communication, and it increases the risk of harm to the adolescent by delaying access to appropriate medical care.”The truth is, most young people already seek the advice of their parent or guardian in this situation. Too often, for the ones who don’t it’s because they fear retribution. It could even be that their parent or guardian is an abuser and the reason they’re pregnant in the first place.The bill sponsors point to a process where these young people can go to court to get a bypass allowing them to access abortion care without parental consent in certain cases. Unfortunately, research has shown more than half the county clerks of court in Florida could offer little to no information about this process when surveyed. And that was before the coronavirus pandemic that is overwhelming health care providers and has closed down not just hotels and restaurants, but many of our courts. Given the restricted access to our courts, we’re concerned this public health crisis may now make a difficult situation – accessing timely abortion care – nearly impossible for our most at risk young people, including Black and Latinx youth.Black and Latinx communities have had less access to health care and dramatic health care disparities. We see these results in the ravages of COVID-19.If Black and Latinx people do not have the right to bodily autonomy to live their daily lives — or protest the violence against their lives — without the fear of violence or murder, we can never achieve justice, let alone reproductive freedom.“We have opposed this legislation from the start as bad public policy,” said Lillian Tamayo, President and CEO of Planned Parenthood of South, East and North Florida. “But the truth is, it’s worse than that. When this law goes into effect on July 1 Florida will be a more dangerous place for our young people. And if this is used, as has been threatened, as a stepping stone to an all-out abortion ban, the last place in the southeast to access safe and legal abortion will be gone.” June 30, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Harris, Tester, Colleagues to Trump Administration: Don’t Rip Away Health Care for Millions During Public Health Crisis”. From the press release: As the Trump Administration moves full-steam ahead to dismantle the health care law that provides coverage for millions of Americans, U.S. Senator Kamala D. Harris (D-CA) on Tuesday joined Senator Jon Tester (D-MT) and 46 of their colleagues in introducing a resolution putting in the official Senate record their condemnation of that “reckless” effort and demanding the Department of Justice (DOJ) to defend existing law in court and halt its efforts to repeal the health care protections for millions – including 133 million Americans with pre-existing conditions— in the middle of a public health emergency.“The Trump administration’s latest attempt to rip health care away from millions of Americans in the midst of pandemic is cruel,” said Harris. “Without the Affordable Care Act, millions of people in California and across the nation would be denied quality health coverage. While the administration continues to attempt to dismantle the ACA, we must remain committed to ensuring that everyone has access to affordable health care.” “This reckless effort puts millions of Americans – and thousands of Montanans – at risk at a time when they can afford it least,” Tester said. “Ripping away health coverage during a public health crisis is as irresponsible as it is cruel, and jeopardizes lives, our economy, and the rural Montana hospitals that rely on it to keep their doors open. While the Affordable Care Act is not perfect, scrapping it with no replacement would mean putting millions out in the cold in the middle of a global health emergency, and I will keep fighting every day to make sure access to quality, affordable health care is there for the folks who rely on it most.”Last week, the DOJ and a group of Republican Attorneys General submitted a brief to the U.S. Supreme Court urging it to invalidate the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and pull the rug out from underneath the millions of Americans with pre-existing conditions who depend on the law for health care coverage. If the Supreme Court agrees and overturns the ACA, 112,000 Montanans could lose coverage, including the 85,000 Montanans enrolled through Medicaid expansion and 7,000 Montanans under the of age 26 who have stayed on their parents’ health coverage could lose their care.Additionally more than 425,000 Montanans who have a pre-existing conditions could once again face annual or lifetime caps, medical underwriting for their insurance coverage, or denials for the care they need. Across the board, the state would lose billions of dollars in federal funds, causing significant job losses and jeopardizing the viability of Montana’s rural and frontier hospitals. All of this would happen in the midst of a global health crisis that has already strapped providers across Montana.The resolution urges DOJ to reverse its position and instead protect the millions of people who rely on the ACA for health care coverage amid the COVID-19 pandemic that has infected more than 2.5 million Americans and killed more than 125,000.The resolution is also backed by Senators Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Joe Manchin (D-WV), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Mark Warner (D-VA), Doug Jones (D-AL), Tina Smith (D-MN), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Jack Reed (D-RI), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Tom Carper (D-DE), Dick Blumenthal (D-CT), Ed Markey (D-MA), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Ben Cardin (D-MD), Patty Murray (D-WA), Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Chris Murphy (D-CT), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Gary Peters (D-MI), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ), Angus King (I-ME), Tom Udall (D-NM), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Bob Menendez (D-NJ), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Brian Schatz (D-HI), Chris Coons (D-DE), Patrick Leahy (D-VT), and Bernie Sanders (I-VT). A copy of the resolution is available HERE. June 30, 2020: Planned Parenthood Advocates in Missouri posted a press release titled: “In the Midst of a Pandemic, Missouri Supreme Court Delivers a Victory for Patients Who Need Care”. From the press release: In a decision issued today, the Missouri Supreme Court ruled that the effort by politicians in the state legislature to prevent Medicaid patients from receiving care from Planned Parenthood was unlawful. The Missouri Legislature unlawfully used the budget to “defund” Planned Parenthood health centers, which provide thousands of Missouri safety-net patients with vital preventive care like birth control, cancer screenings, and STI testing and treatments. The decision came during a public health emergency amidst a worldwide pandemic. Despite this ruling, Gov. Parson today signed off on another unlawful budget that discriminates against patients.Statement from M’Evie Mead, director of policy and organizing at Planned Parenthood Advocates in Missouri:“Today is a victory for Planned Parenthood patients who rely on public health insurance programs to stay healthy. Planned Parenthood health centers across the state have protected our communities’ health care needs by providing preventive services to thousands of patients. It’s unconscionable for Gov. Parson to continue trying to defund safety-net providers like Planned Parenthood while Missouri is struggling to contain the COVID-19 pandemic.“At a time when our health care system is stretched to the brink and our state is in the middle of a public health crisis, Gov. Parson and the legislature should be doing everything they can to support safety-net providers and the patients they serve, not trying to score political points by cutting access to care.”This case underscores aggressive attacks from state lawmakers and Gov. Parson on all aspects of reproductive health care. Under Parson’s watch, public health outcomes are alarming. Maternal mortality rates in Missouri are more than one third higher than the national average. Black women are three to four times likelier than white women to die from pregnancy-related complications. A syphilis outbreak is sweeping the state. Gov. Parson says he values life, but his actions are endangering Missourians’ health and yes, their lives.Missouri’s 11 Planned Parenthood health centers are a crucial component of the safety net, providing comprehensive and accessible health care to thousands of patients each year. Planned Parenthood offers Pap tests and a full range of birth control options, including long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) — the most effective form of birth control. Additionally, each Planned Parenthood has evening or weekend hours, and offers patients same-day or next-day appointments in most cases. A report found that besides Planned Parenthood, only seven percent of more than 600 safety-net providers in the state offer comprehensive and accessible care. Missouri’s health care safety net is already strained — it needs more resources, not fewer providers. “Defunding” Planned Parenthood leaves many patients with nowhere to turn for the vital preventive care they need because the remaining health centers cannot absorb them. A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempts to Destroy Obamacare – Part Four: April, May, June is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... This is How it SpreadsJuly 8, 2020Out of Spoons / Public HealthImage by Adalhelma from Pixabay By now, everyone knows that COVID-19 can spread from person to person. There are ways to help stop the spread. Wash your hands often. Wear cloth masks when you are outside – especially in situations where social distancing isn’t possible. Stay home if you are sick. Failure to do so causes the virus to spread. To make that clear, I decided to track the rallies, conventions, and other large events that President Trump and/or Vice President Pence attended. Those events provided a vivid example of how COVID-19 spreads. February 28, 2020: WCBD News 2 tweeted: “Folks have been camped out here for over 24 hours at this point on the parking lot of the North Charleston Collosseum awaiting the Trump Rally.” The tweet included a wide-angle photo from behind a series of short barracades. Several tents are visible on the parking lot. February 28, 2020: Digital Reporter for @WCBD Count on 2 Cait Przetak tweeted: “People are continuing to join the crowd at the North Charleston Colosseum as they prepare for President Trump later today. The Rally begins at 7 but doors open a 3 p.m. Some individuals have been here camping out for over 24 hours! @WCBD”. February 28, 2020: US Editor of The Daily Telegraph Ben Riley Smith tweeted: “Sea of red hats in the queue for Trump’s rally at North Charleston, South Carolina”. The tweet included a photo that shows the backs of people, many of whom are wearing red hats, as they stand in line. February 28, 2020: North Charleston Coliseum and Performing Arts Center tweeted: “All on-site parking lots are full. If you are coming to the Trump rally tonight, use a rideshare service such as @Uber or @lift #NChasColiseum”. February 28, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Lindsey Graham thanks Trump, bemoans ‘never-ending bull—-‘ at South Carolina Rally”. It was written by J. Edward Moreno. From the article: Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C) on Friday praised President Trump for several accomplishments in his first term while bemoaning “bullshit” faced by the president.Graham made the remarks while appearing alongside Trump at a rally in his home state of South Carolina on the eve of Saturday’s Democratic primary in his state……Grahams remarks came moments after Trump lashed out at Democrats and the news media during the rally, accusing them of pursuing a “new hoax” with their criticism of his administration’s handling of the coronavirus… February 29, 2020: Heavy posted an article titled: “How Many Attended Trump’s South Carolina Rally? Crowd & Overflow Photos”. It was written by Stephanie Dube Dwilson. From the article: President Donald Trump visited North Charleston, South Carolina for a Friday night rally on February 28, 2020 – the day before the Democrats’ big primary for the 2020 Presidential nomination. The venue, which seats 13,295, was packed and overflow space was needed for a crowd that had to watch outside……Trump’s South Carolina “Keep America Great” rally started at 7 p.m. Eastern on February 28 at the North Charleston Coliseum & Performing Arts Center. This large venue has seating fro 13,000, according to the venue’s website. ABC 4 reported that the arena has a capacity of 13,295…. March 2, 2020: CBS News posted and article titled: “Trump rallies supporters in Charlotte, North Carolina.” From the article: …Earlier Monday, Mr. Trump said he had no qualms about attending a large stadium rally despite the coronavirus threat.“I think it’s very safe,” Mr. Trump said of campaign rallies, adding that the Democratic candidates are having plenty of rallies themselves.The threat of the virus didn’t deter fans of Mr. Trump from attending Monday’s rally in Charlotte, where people in the stands shared buckets of chicken fingers and dunked their hands into shared vats of popcorn while they awaited the president’s arrival.…The coronavirus outbreak has killed more than 3,000 globally and upended life for many around the globe. In the U.S., the number of infections has surpassed 100, with six dead. Federal officials have not advised against large gatherings in the U.S., leaving that to officials to address……Republicans have picked Charlotte to host the Republican National Convention. Mr. Trump also visited Charlotte last month as part of a series of revitalization and “opportunity now” summits, programs he and administrative officials have highlighted as he tries to chip away the Democrats’ electoral advantage in minority communities. March 7, 2020: Associated Press posted a live blog titled: “The Latest: US state of Missouri reports first virus case”. From the live blog: …Maryland officials say a person in New Jersey who tested positive for coronavirus attended the recent Conservative Political Action Conference in the Washington suburb of Oxon Hill, Maryland.That’s leading Maryland officials to warn that anyone who attended or worked at the conference may be at some risk for acquiring COVID-19.Among the political figures who attended CPAC converence were President Donald Trump and Vice President Mike Pence. The White House says there is no indication that either Trump or Pence was in close proximity to the attendee who tested positive… March 7, 2020: ACU (the official Twitter account of the American Conservative Union) tweeted: “Important Health Notification for CPAC 2020 participants and attendees”. The tweet included a screenshot with the following text:“The American Conservative Union has learned that one of our CPAC attendees has unfortunately tested positive today for coronavirus. The exposure occurred before the conference. A New Jersey hospital tested the person, and the CDC confirmed the positive result. The individual is under the care of medical professionals in the state of New Jersey, and has been quarantined.ACU has been in contact with the Health Department of the State of Maryland, and we will explicitly follow the guidance from government health experts.This attendee had no interaction with the President or the Vice President and never attended the events in the main hall.The health and safety of our attendees and participants is our top priority. Any attendee who has questions can contact ACU or the Department of Health for the State of Maryland.Our children, spouses, extended family, and friends attended CPAC. During this time, we need to remain calm, listen to our health care professionals, and support each other. We send this message in that spirit.The Trump Administration is aware of the situation, and we will continue regular communication with all appropriate government officials.” March 8, 2020: The Guardian posted an article titled: “Trump ‘not concerned at all’ after CPAC guest tests positive for coronavirus”. It was written by Johanna Walters. From the article: Donald Trump said he isn’t concerned at all about the coronavirus getting closed to the White House after it was revealed that an attendee at grassroots conservative conference CPAC had tested positive.On a day when it also emerged that the nation’s capital had recorded its first case, the American Conservative Union said on Saturday that a participant at CPAC, which was attended by both Trump and the U.S. vice-president Mike Pence, had tested positive for coronavirus.The White House said there was no indication that either Trump or Pence had been close to the infected attendee.Asked if he was concerned about the virus getting closer, Trump said: No, I’m not concerned at all. No, I’m not. We’ve done a great job.”When asked whether his thousand-person campaign rallies would … continue in light of the CPAC case, the president replied: “We’ll have tremendous rallies…” March 8, 2020: Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) said Sunday that he shook hands with a man now confirmed to be infected with the novel form of coronavirus during a recent interaction at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). In a news release Sunday evening, Cruz said that based on medical advice he had received, he did not believe there was any current risk of him developing the disease, that has already infected more than 100,000 people globally… …Nevertheless, Cruz said he will remain at his home in Texas this week “out of an abundance of caution”… …However, ACU chairman Matt Schlapp told the Washington Post he interacted with the patient at the event and that he then shook Trump’s hand on the stage on the last day of the conference. The organization did not provide any other details about the patient or what events at the conference they attended… The Hill March 8, 2020: Ted Cruz (Republican – Texas) tweeted: “Today I released the following statement.” The tweet included a screenshot of a statement. “Last night, I was informed that 10 days ago at CPAC I briefly interacted with an individual who is currently symptomatic and has tested positive for COVID-19. That interaction consisted of a brief conversation and a handshake.“I have consulted with medical authorities from the Houston Health Department, the Harris County Public Health Department, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the Department of Health and Human Services, as well as my personal physician. I have also spoken with Vice President Pence, Leader McConnell, and Mark Meadows.“I’m not experiencing any symptoms, and I feel fine and health. Given that the interaction was 10 days ago, that the average incubation period is 5-6 days, that the interaction was for less than a minute, and that I have no current symptoms, the medical authorities have advised that the odds of transmission from the other individual to me were extremely low.“The physicians further advised that testing is not effective before symptoms manifest, and my brief interaction with the individual does not meet the CDC criteria for self-quarantine.“The medical authorities explicitly advised me that, given the above criteria, the people who have interacted with me in the 10 days since CPAC should not be concerned about potential transmission.“Nevertheless, out of an abundance of caution, and because of how frequently I interact with my constituents as a part of my job and to give everyone peace of mind, I have decided to remain at my home in Texas this week, until a full 14 days have passed since the CPAC interaction.“Everyone should continue to treat this outbreak seriously and be driven by facts and medical science. We need to continue to be proactive in mobilizing resources to combat this outbreak – including the $8.3 billion in emergency funding we provided last week – and I encourage everyone to follow the recommendations of the CDC and other health professionals in protecting their own health and welfare, as well as the health and welfare of those around them.” March 8, 2020: Paul Gosar (Republican – Arizona) posted a statement on his website titled: “Gosar Statement on COVID-19”. From the press release: Today, U.S. Congressman Paul A. Gosar, D.D.S (AZ-04) issued the following statement:“I have been informed that during the CPAC conference members of my staff and I came into contact with an individual who has since tested positive for, and is hospitalized for, COVID-19. I was with the individual for an extended period of time, and we shook hands several times.I am not currently experiencing any symptoms, nor is any member of my staff. However, in order to prevent any potential transmission, I will remain at my home in Arizona until the conclusion of the 14 day period following my interaction with this individual. Additionally, out of an abundance of caution, I am closing my office in Washington D.C. for the week and my team will follow the previously approved Tele-commute plan.As we learn more about COVID-19, it is imperative to heed the advice and guidance from the CDC and medical professionals. President Trump and Vice President Pence have assembled an incredible team and I have been in contact with the CDC and the House Office of the Attending Physician.” March 8, 2020: Paul Gosar tweeted: “1. I am announcing that I, along with 3 of my senior staff, are officially under self-quarantine after sustained contact at CPAC with a person who has since been hospitalized with the Wuhan Virus. My office will be closed for the week.” This tweet was part of a short thread. The thread ended with this tweet: “2. We are all asymptomatic and feel great. But we are being proactive and cautious.” March 9, 2020: Congresswoman Julia Brownley (Democrat – California) posted a statement on her website titled: “Brownley Statement On Coronavirus Exposure”. From the press release: “Yesterday I was informed that an individual I met with last week in DC tested positive for COVID-19. I am told that individual is self-quarantining and has informed local public health officials.“I consulted with the Office of Attending Physician, the CDC, Ventura County Public Health, and a personal physician experienced in infectious diseases, all of whom said that the risk of exposure to me and my staff is considered very low.“However, given the significant number of constituents and other individuals that my staff and I normally have contact with each day when Congress is in session, I have decided to close our DC office for the week. My staff and I are working remotely to continue to serve the residents of Ventura County, and my district offices in Thousand Oaks and Oxnard remain open.“Out of an abundance of absolute caution, my DC staff and I are self-monitoring and maintaining social distancing practices. Neither I, nor my staff, are experiencing any symptoms at this time.” March 9, 2020: Representative Doug Collins (Republican – Georgia) tweeted: “This afternoon, I was notified by CPAC that they discovered a photo of myself and the patient who has tested positive for #COVID19. While I am not experiencing any symptoms, I have decided to self-quarantine out of an abundance of caution. Full statement →” The statement was attached to the tweet said: “This afternoon, I was notified by CPAC that they discovered a photo of myself and the patient who has tested positive for coronavirus. While I feel completely healthy and I am not experiencing any symptoms, I have decided to self-quarantine at my home for the remainder of the 14-day period out of an abundance of caution. I will follow the recommendations of the House Physician and my office will provide updates as appropriate.” March 9, 2020: Congressman Louie Gohmert (Republican – Texas) tweeted: “Congressman Gohmert’s full statement on #COVID-19”. It included the following statement: “Saturday night, I got a call from the House physician advising that I had possibly been exposed to the COVID-19 virus at CPAC on February 27th, and that a top CDC physician in Atlanta would call me to discuss what should be done going forward. After CDC physician called me Sunday evening, and we discussed all the specific circumstances of which he was aware along with my circumstance, including that I was asymptomatic, he said that all things considered, I was cleared to return to Washington. He said he would return if he were me and advised that my staff and I should just be careful to observe proper hygiene protocols. I took the advice of the expert and returned to work. No one is panicking and we are observing the recommended precautions.” March 9, 2020: Representative Josh Harder (Democrat – California) tweeted: “Folks, I’m canceling my planned town hall for next week – don’t want to gather a large crowd on the advice of health experts. Will hold a #coronavirus telephone town hall instead. More info to come.” March 9, 2020: NPR posted an article titled: “Meadows, Other Members of Congress Self-Quarantine After CPAC Coronavirus Exposure”. It was written by Bobby Allyn. From the article: Reps. Mark Meadows, Doug Collins, and Matt Gaetz said Monday that they are self-quarantining after learning they came in contact with a person infected with coronavirus while attending a conservative conference in the Washington area last month.Rep. Mark Meadows, who is the incoming White House chief of staff, is one of several members who attended last month’s Conservative Political Action Conference. At least one attendee has tested positive for coronavirus. Meadows says he has no symptoms and tested negative. But, his spokesperson said, “out of an abundance of caution… he’ll remain at home until the 14 day period expires this Wednesday.”That brings the number of congressional lawmakers who are self-quarantining over coronavirus concerns to six.Both Collin and Gaetz have been in close contact with Trump in recent days. Reporters traveling with the president saw Gaetz board Air Force One on Monday… March 9, 2020: The Guardian posted an article titled: “Coronavirus, quarantined congressman flew with Trump on Air Force One”. From the article: Two Republican congressmen who were in close contact with Donald Trump in recent days have self-quarantined over concerns that they were also in contact in the same period with a known carrier of the coronavirus.Republicans Matt Gaetz of Florida and Doug Collins of Georgia announced on Monday that they had begun two weeks of self-imposed isolation, as recommended by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for anyone who has come into contact with the virus. Both congressmen said they were asymptomatic.Gaetz flew with Trump on Air Force One from Orlando to Washington on Monday and was informed en route that he had come into contact with a virus carrier at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Maryland last month.“While the congressman is not experiencing symptoms, he received testing today and expects results soon,” said a message posted to Gaetz’s Twitter account.Collins greeted Trump with a handshake at an airport in Atlanta on Friday before the two visited the CDC headquarters for an update on coronavirus. Collins subsequently learned that he also had been potentially exposed at the conservative conference, held each year in Maryland……Gaetz had worn an enormous gas mask last week during a House floor vote on an emergency funding package for the coronavirus response, but he later faced widespread condemnation when one of his own constituents died from the illness… March 9, 2020: CNBC posted an article titled: “Trump had contact with congressmen Collins and Gaetz before they self-quarantined over coronavirus concerns”. It was written by Dan Mangan and Kevin Breuninger. From the article: President Donald Trump had contact with two Republican congressmen before their announcements Monday that they were entering self-quarantine after learning they had been previously exposed to someone since diagnosed with coronavirus.Rep. Doug Collins of Georgia shook hands with Trump last Friday when the president traveled to Atlanta to visit the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, where officials there briefed him on their response to coronavirus.Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida flew on Air Force One with Trump on Monday on a flight from Orlando, Fla., to Joint Base Andrews in Maryland.The New York Times, citing two people with knowledge of the situation, reported that Gaetz learned shortly after the plane was airborne that he, like Collins, had been in contact with a person at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Maryland in late February who has since been diagnosed with coronavirus. Gaetz then sat in a section of the plane by himself, the newspaper reported.Gaetz publicly revealed he was entering self-quarantining about an hour after he got off the plane with Trump……The White House said later Monday that Trump had not been tested for coronavirus…. March 10, 2020: Matt Gaetz (Republican – Florida) tweeted: “I’ve just been informed that my COVID-19 lab test was negative. In an abundance of caution, I will remain under self-quarantine at the advice of medical professionals through Thursday at 2pm. I continue to feel fine and show no symptoms.” March 11, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Trump travel to Nevada, Colorado called off due to coronavirus”. It was written by Brett Samuels. From the article: President Trump canceled events scheduled for this week in Nevada and Colorado due to the coronavirus, the White House announced Wednesday.“Out of an abundance of caution from the Coronavirus outbreak, the President has decided to cancel his upcoming events in Colorado and Nevada,” White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham said in a statement.The president was scheduled to fly to Nevada on Thursday to attend a fundraiser and speak at Saturday’s Republican Jewish Coalition conference in Las Vegas. He was expected to stop in Denver on Friday……The Trump campaign does not currently have any rallies scheduled… March 11, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Senate staffer tests positive for coronavirus”. It was written by Jordain Carney. From the article: A staffer in Sen. Maria Cantwell’s D.C. office has tested positive for the coronavirus, the Washington state Democratic senator announced on Wednesday night.The announcement marks the first known instance of a congressional staffer getting the virus and follows days of heightened anxiety on Capitol Hill.The staffer, according to a notice from Cantwell’s office, has been isolated since they started to have symptoms. Cantwell is closing her D.C. office for the remainder of the week for a deep cleaning.“The individual who tested positive for COVID-19 has had no known contact with the senator or other members of Congress. The senator is requesting that testing be done on any other staffers who have been in contact with the individual and show symptoms,” the notice continues.It marked the latest development in escalating stream of coronavirus news coming out of the nation’s Capitol on Wednesday, where Washington, D.C., Mayor Muriel Bowser declared a state of emergency after six additional cases of COVID-19 were confirmed.The House and Senate sergeants-at-arms are also preparing to announce the suspension of all tours in the Capitol in an effort to limit the potential spread of the virus on the hill… March 12, 2020: Business Insider posted an article titled: “Trump won’t self-quarantine despite potential coronavirus exposure from Bolsonaro aide that caused 2 Republican senators to do so”. It was written by Kayla Epstein. From the article: President Donald Trump has not been tested for coronavirus and has not entered self-quarantine, even after Republican Senators who had similar exposure to a reported COVID-19 patient this weekend chose to take these protective measures.Trump was at his West Palm Beach club in Mar-a-Lago earlier this week along with a group that included several other administration officials, Republican politicians, Fox News personalities, and other conservatives, according to 1100 Pennsylvania, a watchdog blog dedicated to documenting possible conflicts of interest and high-profile comings and goings at Trump’s properties.Also in attendance: Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, who was in Florida accompanied by a delegation this week. His spokesman Fabio Wajngarten, who accompanied the foreign leader on the trip and was at Mar-a-Lago, later tested positive for COVID-19 according to Brazilian media and CNN.Earlier this week, Wajngarten posted a photo of himself side by side with Trump and Vice President Mike Pence at Mar-a-Lago on Instagram. He sported a “Make Brazil Great Again” hat, a nod to the President’s own statement accessory.White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham said in a statement to Insider that “The White House is aware of public reports that a member of the Brazilian delegation’s visit to Mar-a-Lago last weekend tested positive for COVID-19; confirmatory testing is pending,”Despite concerns that Trump and Pence may have been subsequently exposed to the coronavirus by standing right next to Wajngarten, Grisham that they “had almost no interactions with the individual who tested positive and do not require being tested at this time.”… March 12, 2020: Senator Rick Scott (Republican – Florida) posted a press release titled: “Senator Rick Scott to Self-Quarantine Following Potential Contact with Brazilian Delegation Member Who Tested Positive for Coronavirus”. From the press release: Today, Senator Rick Scott released the following statement on his decision to self-quarantine following potential contact with a Brazilian delegation member who tested positive for Coronavirus.Senator Rick Scott said: “My office was altered today by the Brazilian Embassy that a member of President Bolsonaro’s delegation tested positive for Coronavirus. On Monday, I met with the President in Miami, and while I do not believe I interacted with the infected person, that individual was in the same room as me. The Embassy said the person had no symptoms leading up to or the day of the conference. After consulting with the Senate’s attending physician and my personal doctor, I have been told that my risk is low, and I don’t need to take a test or quarantine. However, the health and safety of the American people is my focus and I have made the decision to self-quarantine in an abundance of caution. I am feeling healthy and not experiencing any symptoms at this time. I will still be working on my plan to combat Coronavirus and protect American families, and my offices in D.C. and throughout the state will still be fully operational to help Floridians.”… March 12, 2020: Senator Lindsey Graham (Republican – South Carolina) tweeted: “Statement from the Office of Senator Lindsey Graham”. The tweet included a screenshot of the following statement: “Senator Graham was at Mar-a-Lago last weekend. He has no recollection of direct contact with the President of Brazil, who is awaiting results of a coronavirus test, or his spokesman who tested positive.“However, in an abundance of caution and upon advice from his doctor, Senator Graham has decided to self-quarantine awaiting the results of a coronavirus test. “This is a precautionary measure. He will continue to work from home.” Lindsey Graham’s self-quarantine comes almost two weeks after he attended the Trump rally in South Carolina on February 28, 2020. The CDC states that symptoms of COVID-19 may appear 2 to 4 days after exposure to the virus. It is unclear whether or not Lindsey Graham had symptoms. March 12, 2020: Eduardo Bolsonaro (third child of Jair Bolsonaro and Federal Deputy from São Paulo) posted a tweet in two languages. The English part said: “President @jairbolsonaro Bolsonaro has been tested for coronavirus and we are waiting for the results. However, he is not exhibiting any symptoms of the disease.” March 13, 2020: Business Insider posted an article titled: “Miami Mayor Francis Suarez confirms he tested positive for coronavius after meeting with Jair Bolsonaro’s delegation this week”. It was written by Kayla Epstein. From the article: Miami mayor Francis Suarez announced he has tested positive for the coronavirus, after he met with Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro and his delegation in Miami earlier this week.In a Friday video to supporters that appeared to be taken from isolation, Suarez confirmed the positive result for COVID-19, the disease cause by the coronavirus.“I feel completely healthy and strong,” Suarez said in the video. “However, I am doing the responsible thing by working with the county’s health department to take every precaution to ensure that not only my family’s healthy, but everyone I have come into contact with is healthy with as well.”Suarez urged anyone who had physical contact twith him to self-quarantine and said he could continue to work while recovering. “If we did not shake hands or you did not come into contact with me if I coughed or sneezed, there is no action you need to take whatsoever,” he said. “If we did, however, touch or shake hands, or if I sneezed or coughed near you since Monday, it is recommended that you self-isolate for 14 days, but you do not need to get tested. After speaking with medical professionals, I will continue to follow Department of Health protocol and remain isolated while I lead our government remotely.”Suarez told the Miami Herald in an interview on Friday that he was “concerned for people who have had some measure of contact with me.”……During Bolsonaro’s visit to Miami on Monday and Tuesday, Suarez said he was in the same room as the president and his infected staff member.Suarez said that he did not believe that he had personal contact with the infected individual, and was not experiecing symptoms. However, he chose to enter self-quarantine “out of an abundance of caution.” March 13, 2020: ABC News posted an article titled: “Donor recently at Mar-a-Lago tests positive for coronavirus, according to Trump Victory email”. It was written by Will Steakin. From the article: Trump Victory on Friday informed donors via email who attended a fundraiser at Mar-a-Lago on Sunday that a donor who also attended the event has tested positive for the coronavirus, according to an email obtained by ABC News.“We unfortunately write today to notify you that an attendee at the Trump Victory-sponsored event you attended at Mar-a-Lago on Sunday, March 8, has tested positive for the Coronavirus,” the joint committee between the Trump campaign and Republican National Committee wrote in an email sent today.The news was first reported by the New York Times.A senior campaign official tells ABC News the donor did not interact with the president. An RNC official told ABC News that the donor who tested positive for the coronavirus had “no direct contact with the first family” at the Mar-a-Lago event.“The attendee had no direct interaction with the president or the first family at this event and the VP did not attend this event,” RNC official said.A Trump campaign senior official also said “no known interaction with family.”The email adds that the group is “not aware if the individual had the virus. by the time of the event.”… March 13, 2020: Senator Ted Cruz posted a press release titled: “Sen. Cruz Announces Decision to Extend Self-Quarantine Until March 17 Out of Abundance of Caution”. From the press release: U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) today issued the following statement: My self-quarantine ended yesterday afternoon. I still have no symptoms and feel fine, and I was looking forward to taking my family out to dinner tonight. “Unfortunately, last night I was informed I had a second interaction with an individual who yesterday tested positive for COVID-19. “On March 3, I met in my D.C. office with Santiago Abascal, the leader of the Vox Party in Spain. We met for about 20 minutes, sitting together at a conference table. We shook hands twice and took pictures together. “My understanding is that Mr. Abascal tested positive for COVID-19 last night. His staff have informed us that he was asymptomatic at the time of our meeting and that several days after our meeting he had extended interactions with another individual who has also tested positive. “I’m still not feeling any symptoms. I’m consulting with medical officials. But, for the same reasons I initially self-quarantined-out of an abundance of caution and to give everyone peace of mind-I am extending the self-quarantine to March 17, a full fourteen days from my meeting with Mr. Abascal. “COVID-19 is a serious public health hazard. All of us should resist panic, and we should listen to the doctors and the science. Medical professionals tell us social distancing is one of the most effective ways to prevent the spread of this virus, and we should take every step possible to protect our health and be safe.” March 18, 2020: NBC News posted an article titled: “Two members of House test positive for COVID-19”. It was written by Phil Helsel. From the article: Two members of the House of Representatives have tested positive for the coronavirus illness COVID-19 and are self-quarantining, the lawmakers said Wednesday.Reps. Mario Diaz-Balart, R-Fla., and Ben McAdams, D-Utah, are the first two members of Congress who have said they tested positive for COVID-19.Diaz-Balart was the first to make the announcement Wednesday. His office said in a statement that after votes on Friday, he self-quarantined in Washington, D.C., and decided not to return home because his wife has a pre-existing condition.Saturday evening, Diaz-Balart “developed symptoms, including a fever and a headache,” and on Wednesday, he learned he had tested positive for COVID-19, his office said.“I want everyone to know that I am feeling much better,” Diaz-Balart said in a statement. “However, it is important that everyone take this extremely seriously and follow CDC guidelines in order to avoid getting sick and mitigate the spread of this virus.”McAdams is quarantining at home in Utah. He said that after he returned home from Washington on Saturday evening, he developed mild cold-like symptoms and isolated himself at home.“My symptoms got worse and I developed a fever, a dry cough and labored breathing,” McAdams said in a statement. He was tested Tuesday and learned Wednesday that he was positive……President Donald Trump was tested, and the test came back as negative, his doctor said Saturday.At least seven lawmakers said they will self-quarantine as a precaution following the news of two representatives testing positive for the virus, although they said they are not experiencing any symptoms.Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La., said in a statement Wednesday night that because he had an extended meeting with Diaz-Balart last week, he would self-quarantine. And on Thursday, Rep. Kendra Horn, D-Okla., tweeted that she will go into a “precautionary two-week self-quarantine” after having contact with McAdams last week.Rep. Drew Ferguson, R-Ga., also said that he will self-quarantine until March 27, after he was informed by the Attending Physician of the United States Congress that on March 13 he came into contact with a member who tested positive……Rep. Ann Wagner, R-Mo., said in a statement Wednesday night that she would self-quarantine because she participated in a small group meeting with a colleague who has since tested positive.Other House members who said Wednesday that they interacted with a person who tested positive and will self-quarantine include Reps. Kathleen Rice, D-N.Y., Matt Cartwright, D-Pa. and Stephanie Murphy, D-Fla. The lawmakers said that they are not experiencing symptoms but will stay at home for the next two weeks, which means they won’t be able to return to Washington when the House comes back into session next week… March 13, 2020: Embassy of Brazil in the USA tweeted: “Brazil’s Chargé d’Affaires Ambassador Nestor Forster has learned tonight that he has tested positive for COVID-19. Following medical advice, Amb. Forster will extend his self-quarantine, which he had already placed himself into as a precautionary measure, for another two weeks.” March 13, 2020: People posted an article titled: “Brazilian Diplomat Nestor Forster, Who Had Dinner with Donald Trump, Tests Positive for Coronavirus”. It was written by Gabrielle Chung. From the article: Brazilian diplomat Nestor Forster, who dined with Donald Trump last weekend, has tested positive for the coronavirus, according to a tweet from the Embassy of Brazil in Washington, D.C., on Friday……The ambassador dined with Trump, 73, and Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro during a visit to the Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Florida, on Saturday, according to the Palm Beach Daily News…. March 13, 2020: Reuters posted an article titled: “Brazil’s Bolsonaro to be tested again for coronavirus: report”. It was written by Debora Moreira and Pedro Fonseca. From the article: Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, who met with Donald Trump in the United States less than a week ago, will be retested for coronavirus following a negative test on Friday, Brazil’s Estado de S.Paulo newspaper reported.The test will be done early next week in order to rule out any chance the president has the virus, the newspaper said, without naming the source of the information. A representative for Bolsonaro’s press office declined to comment.Bolsonaro and a large Brazilian entourage, including cabinet ministers, met with Trump and other senior U.S. officials last weekend at Mar-a-Lago. One of the party, Bolsonaro’s communications secretary Fabio Wajngarten, tested positive for COVID-19 on Thursday and is in quarantine at his home.Charge d’Affairs Nestor Forster Jr. at the Brazilian Embassy in Washington, who was also present at the Trump dinner, has also now tested positive, GloboNews television channel reported late on Friday.Bolsonaro said earlier in the day that he had tested negative for coronavirus, in a post on his Facebook page.“Tests negative for COVID-19 Mr President of the Republic Jair Bolsonaro,” the post said, above an old image of Bolsonaro making an obscene local gesture in an apparent response to some media reports that a first test had been positive.Estado de S.Paulo said Bolsonaro would remain isolated in quarantine at his official residence until the beginning of next week, citing an unnamed member of the president’s medical staff who said Bolsonaro needed to be isolated for seven days from the time of being in contact with someone infected with the virus.Bolsonaro’s son Eduardo tweeted earlier on Friday that his test had come back negative. Defense Minister Fernando Azevedo e Silva tested negative as well, the ministry said in a statement.The results for others in the Brazilian delegation, including Bolsonaro’s wife Michelle and Foreign Minister Ernesto Araujo, have not yet been published.However, Bolsonaro’s lawyer, Karina Kufa, who was part of the delegation, tested positive, according to the O Globo newspaper. Senator Nelsinho Trad, who also formed part of the group, said late Friday that his test had also come back positive… March 14, 2020: CNN posted an article titled: “Trump tests negative for coronavirus, White House says”. It was written by Jason Hoffman and Veronica Stracqualursi. From the article: President Donald Trump has tested negative for the coronavirus, according to a statement from the White House.Trump took the test on Friday, he said during a Saturday news conference, after coming into recent contact with two individuals who have tested positive for the virus.“Last night after an in-depth discussion with the President regarding COVID-19 testing, he elected to proceed,” according to the statement about the results released by press secretary Stephanie Grisham with Trump’s permission. “One week after having dinner with the Brazilian delegation in Mar-a-Lago, the President remains symptom free. I have been in daily contact with the CDC and the White House Coronavirus Task Force, and we are encouraging the implementation of all their best practices for exposure reduction and transmission mitigation.”Trump said Saturday he also had his temperature taken Saturday before entering the White House briefing room. The President told reporters that his temperature was normal……Asked when he would announce the results of his coronavirus test, the President said that the test was sent to a lab and could take a day or two. Trump said he took the test “only because the press is going crazy.”… March 16, 2020: CNN posted an article titled: “Trump’s Mar-a-Lago getting a deep clean after confirmed coronavirus cases”. It was written by Betsy Klein. From the article: President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort is undergoing a deep clean after multiple cases of coronavirus were confirmed at the club, a member confirmed to CNN. Members were notified via email that the Palm Beach, Florida, club, including its grand ballroom, will be closed Monday for a cleaning, with the exception of the beach club, which is separate to the main area and will remain open. Members were told that dinner will be served as usual Tuesday through Saturday.The deep clean comes after multiple cases of the virus were reported by people who had been on the premises last week. The White House has said Trump has tested negative for the virus… March 15, 2020: Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-Fla.) tweeted: “I’m feeling much better. However, it’s important that everyone take this seriously and follow @CDCgov guidelines in order to avoid getting sick & mitigate the spread of this virus. We must continue to work together to emerge stronger as a country during these trying times.” The tweet included a screenshot of a press release titled: “Diaz-Balart Tests Positive for Coronavirus”. In an abundance of caution, after votes on Friday, March 13th, Congressman Mario Diaz-Balart decided to self-quarantine in Washington D.C., and not return to South Florida because of his wife Tia’s pre-existing conditions that put her at exceptionally high risk. On Saturday evening, Congressman Diaz-Balart developed symptoms, including a fever and a headache. Just a short while ago, he was notified that he has tested positive for COVID-19. While in quarantine, Diaz-Balart has been working from his apartment in Washington D.C.. The Congressman said in a statement:“I want everyone to know that I am feeling much better. However, it is important that everyone take this extremely seriously and follow CDC guidelines in order to avoid getting sick and mitigate the spread of this virus. We must continue to work together to emerge stronger as a country during these trying times.” March 18, 2020: Rep. Drew Ferguson (R-Ga.) tweeted: “(1/2) Today, the Attending Physician of the United States Congress informed me that I was in contact with a member of Congress on March 13th that has since tested positive for COVID-19. After heeding the advice of the President, Governor Kemp and at the direction of the House” Rep. Drew Ferguson followed that tweet with a second tweet: “(2/2) physician, I will self-quarantine until March 27th. I am asymptomatic and will continue to work from home in West Point, Ga.” March 18, 2020: Rep. Ben McAdams (D-Utah) tweeted: “Please read my statement on contracting #COVID19. I have self-quarantines since first having symptoms and consulted with my doctor. #utpol” The tweet includes a screenshot of Representative Ben McAdams statement: Mc Adams statement on COVID-19 illnessOn Saturday evening, after returning home from Washington, D.C., I developed mild cold-like symptoms. In consultation with my doctor on Sunday, I immediately isolated myself in my home. I have been conducting all meetings by telephone. My symptoms got worse and I developed a fever, a dry cough, and labored breathing and I remained self-quarantined. On Tuesday, my doctor instructed me to get tested for COVID-19 and following his referral, I went to the local testing clinic for the test. Today I learned that I tested positive. I am still working for Utahns and pursuing efforts to get Utahns the resources they need as I continue doing my job from home until I know it is safe to end my self-quarantine. I’m doing my part as all Americans are doing to contain the spread of the virus and mitigate the coronavirus outbreak. I urge Utahns to take this seriously and follow the health recommendations we’re getting from the CDC and other health experts so that we can recover from this public health threat. March 22, 2020: NBC News posted an article titled: “Rand Paul becomes first senator known to test positive for coronavirus”. It was written by Allan Smith. From the article: Rand Paul, R-Ky., on Sunday became the first senator known to have tested positive for COVID-19.“Senator Rand Paul has tested positive for COVID-19,” Paul’s account tweeted. “He is feeling fine and is in quarantine. He is asymptomatic and was tested out of an abundance of caution due to his extensive travel and events. He was not aware of any direct contact with any infected person.”“He expects to be back in the Senate after his quarantine period ends and will continue to work for the people of Kentucky at this difficult time,” the thread continued. “Ten days ago, our D.C. office began operating remotely, hence virtually no staff has had contact with Senator Rand Paul.”Paul’s chief of staff later clarified that he “decided to get tested after attending an event where two individuals subsequently tested positive for COVID-19, even though he wasn’t aware of any direct contact with either one of them.”……Paul’s diagnosis has triggered a discussion about whether senators, many of whom are in older age brackets, should go home immediately or self-quarantine, given their likely contact with Paul, who was on the Senate floor extensively over the last week.The news created fresh uncertainty about how Congress can finish and pass emergency coronavirus legislation, on which Democrats and Republicans are still struggling to reach a deal.Sens. Mike Lee and Mitt Romney, both Utah Republicans, were the first two lawmakers to say they would be self-quarantining for two weeks after having had “extended” interactions with Paul and would have to miss floor votes… March 24, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “White House press secretary to return to work after negative virus test”. It was written by Tal Axelrod. From the article: White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham will return to work on Wednesday after testing negative for the coronavirus, a spokesman said.“Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham, who has been quarantined since coming in contact with Brazilian officials almost two weeks ago and working from home, has received negative COVID-19 test results and will be back to work tomorrow,” White House spokesman Judd Deere said.Grisham, a top aide to President Trump, was with the president at his Mar-a-Lago club in Florida earlier this month when he hosted a Brazilian delegation, including President Jair Bolsonaro. A press aide in the delegation later tested positive for the coronavirus.It was later announced that Grisham would self-quarantine out of an abundance of caution, joining a number of lawmakers and administration officials who have self-quarantined in recent weeks after coming in contact with someone who had tested positive for the virus.The president and his coronavirus task force headed by Vice President Pence have launched a public relations blitz to tout the White House’s response to the burgeoning virus outbreak, which has infected more than 53,000 people in the U.S. March 27, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “South Carolina congressman tests positive for coronavirus”. It was written by Marty Johnson. From the article: Rep. Joe Cunningham (D-S.C.) announced Friday that he has tested positive for the coronavirus. The freshman lawmaker went into self-quarantine starting March 19 after learning he had been in contact with a member of Congres who had tested positive for COVID-19. Cunningham got tested Thursday, with the positive result coming back Friday.“While my symptoms have begun to improve, I will remain at home until I know it is safe to leave self-quarantine,” Cunningham said in the statement, adding he will continue to tele-work from home…. March 27, 2020: Anchor at WBTV in Charlotte Jamie Boll tweeted: “New information: SC Congressman Joe Cunningham tests positive for coronavirus. He’s from the Charleston area”. The tweet included a screenshot of Joe Cunningham’s statement: Cunningham Statement on COVID-19 Test Mt. Pleasant, S.C. – Rep. Joe Cunningham released the following statement after learning he had tested positive for COVID-19:“On March 19th, 2020, I entered self-quarantine after I recieved word from the Attending Physician of the U.S. Congress that I had been in contact with a member of Congress who had since tested positive for COVID-19. While I otherwise feel fine, since March 17th I have been unable to smell or taste, which I learned this week is a potential symptom of COVID-19, I have been in contact with my doctor since I entered self-quarantine. Yesterday, my doctor instructed me to get tested for COVID-19 and following a virtual consultation on MUSC.care, I went to my local testing clinic. Today, I learned that I tested positive.“While my symptoms have begun to improve, I will remain at home until I know it is safe to leave self-quarantine. I will continue to tele-work from home as Congress conducts its ongoing response to this public health crisis and my office will continue its urgent work of serving the people of the Lowcounty. Just now, the House passed bipartisan legislation that includes provisions I fought for and secured to deliver much-needed relief for South Carolina families and small businesses. I am grateful that my family remains in good health and urge South Carolinians to follow the guidance and recommendations from the CDC and other health experts so that we can recover from this public health threat.” March 27, 2020: Rep. Mark Kelley (R-PA) posted a press release on his official website titled: “Representative Kelly Tests Positive for COVID-19”. From the press release: Earlier, this week, U.S. Representative Mike Kelly began experiencing flu-like symptoms and consulted his doctor, who ordered a test for COVID-19. His test came back positive this afternoon. From his home, in Butler, Pennsylvania, Representative Kelly issued this statement:“When I started experiencing flu-like symptoms earlier this week, I consulted my primary care physician. My doctor ordered a test for COVID-19, which I obtained at the drive-through testing site at Butler Memorial Hospital. My test came back positive this afternoon. My symptoms remain mild, and I will serve the 16th district from home until I fully recover. Additionally, my staff is tele-working and still available to constituents who need assistance.”While awaiting his test results, Kelly was not in Washington for the House vote on the third coronavirus relief package. Had he been present, he would have voted in favor of the CARES Act… March 29, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Capitol Police officer tests positive for coronavirus”. It was written by Scott Wong. From the article: A United States Capitol Police (USCP) employee has tested positive for the coronavirus, a spokesperson confirmed to The Hill.The USCP employee has been self-quarantined since March 18.“The USCP has contacted employees in order to identify individuals who may have been in close contact with the affected employee. The Department has taken, and will continue to take, all the necessary steps to ensure tha any affected work areas or facilities were properly cleaned,” USCP spokeswoman Eva Malecki said in an email Sunday to The Hill.“The USCP is working closely with the Office of Attending Physician, Congressional leadership, and the Architect of the Capitol, and our focuse is on the health and well-being of our employees.”Malecki did not provide any details about the USCP employee. A Capitol source familiar with the case said the employee is an officer who had been assigned to the House chamber… April 9, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Florida Republican becomes sixth member of Congress to test positive for coronavirus”. It was written by Cristina Marcos. From the article: Rep. Neal Dunn (R-Fla.) said Thursday that he has tested positive for the coronavirus, becoming the sixth member of Congress to have the disease. Dunn’s office said in a statement that he went to the emergency room on Monday not feeling well and later tested positive for the coronavirus.Dunn, a former surgeon, is now self-quarantining at home and “expects a full recovery soon.”“Congressman Dunn emphasizes that we must continue to do what we can to target vulnerable places and populations to slow the spread of this disease. He is keenly interested in new and faster testing to help everyone understand their risks,” the statement added, according to WCTV… May 1, 2020: Phoenix New Times posted an article titled: “Two Arizona County Sheriffs Are Refusing to Enforce Coronavirus Emergency Orders”. It was written by Ray Stern. From the article: Two Arizona county sheriffs say they refuse to cite or arrest business owners or individuals for violating the state’s emergency coronavirus restrictions. In doing so, Pinal County Sheriff Mark Lamb and Mohave County Douglas Schuster – both of them elected officials – are tapping into a growing, mostly conservative-led sentiment in the state that the lockdown has gone far enough.But their refusals are also in clear opposition to Governor Doug Ducey’s two-week expansion of the stay-at-home order, as well as the advice of health officials and other people who think opening businesses too early would create dangerous conditions for rapid spread of the infection……On Friday, Lamb told Phoenix New Times that if he got a call about a business violating reopening restrictions, he’d send a deputy out to “educate and advise” the owners about Ducey’s executive orders. But his deputies won’t be writing citations or arresting anyone from this point on.“In tough times, tough decisions have to be made,” said Lamb, a Republican elected to office in 2016. “I’m looking at two laws in each hand going with the one that’s 200 years old rather than two days old”……Lamb said he gives condolences to people who have lost friends or family members because of the coronavirus, but somebody “has to have the guts” to stand up to the unconstitutional policies, which have created an “unsustainable” economic situation for the vast majority of Arizonans who haven’t gotten sick… May 7, 2020: CNN posted an article titled: “One of Trump’s personal valets has tested positive for coronavirus”. It was written by Kaitlan Collins and Peter Morris. From the article: A member of the US Navy who serves as one of President Trump’s personal valets has tested positive for coronavirus, CNN learned Thursday, raising concerns about the President’s possible exposure to the virus.The valets are members of an elite military unit dedicated to the White House and often work very close to the President and the first family. Trump was upset when he was informed Wednesday that the valet had tested positive, a source told CNN, and the President was subsequently tested again by the White House physician.In a statement, the White House confirmed CNN’s reporting that one of the President’s staffers had tested positive.“We were recently notified bu the White House Medical Unit that a member of the United States Military, who works on the White House campus, has tested positive for Coronavirus,” deputy White House press secretary Hogan Gidley said in a statement. “The President and the Vice President have since tested negative for the virus and they remain in great health.Valets assist the President and first family with a variety of personal tasks. They are responsible for the President’s food and beverage not only in the West Wing but also travel with him when he’s on the road or out of the country. Past presidents have relied on them not only for these matters, but also as confidants. The valets have an inside view to a president’s personal life like few others. A White House source said the valet, a man who has not been identified, exhibited “symptoms” Wednesday morning, and said the news that someone close to Trump had tested positive for coronavirus was “hitting the fan” in the West Wing……The White House is continuing to use the rapid Abbott Labs test, which provide results in about 15 minutes. Several officials who have received the test said it’s often administered in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, next door to the West Wing on the White House grounds. A medical official swabs the staffer’s nostrils and informs them that they’ll be notified within the next several minutes if it’s positive.Still, the White House has not enforced strict social distancing guidelines for staffers and few people inside the building wear masks during the day, including valets.Trump said before traveling aboard Air Force One earlier this week that he was not concerned about being in close quarters with other people since those around him are regularly tested… May 7, 2020: CNBC posted an article titled: “Trump says coronavirus tests are ‘overrated,’ but he will get tested daily”. It was written by Kevin Breuniger. From the article: President Donald Trump said Thursday that testing for the coronavirus is “somewhat overrated” shortly after announcing that he will be tested for the disease every single day.Daily tests will also be conducted for “everyone that comes into contact with the president,” Vice President Mike Pence added to reporters at the White House.The new daily testing policy for the president and those in his circle comes hours after the White House acknowledged that a personal valet for Trump tested positive for Covid-19.Trump and Pence have since been retested after coming into contact with the valet, who among things serves the president’s meals.Both Trump and Pence tested negative for the coronavirus, the White House said… May 7, 2020: CSPAN tweeted: “President Trump on White House military valet testing positive for COVID-19: “Testing is not a perfect art. So, we test once a week. Now we’re going to test once a day.. I’ve had very little contact, personal contect, with this gentleman”. The tweet included a video of President Donald Trump speaking. Next to him is Texas Governor Greg Abbot. May 8, 2020: USA Today posted an article titled: “White House staff to be tested daily for coronavirus after military aide tests positive”. It was written by David Jackson and Michael Collins. From the article: President Donald Trump’s his staff will be tested daily for coronavirus after a Navy valet who has been in close proximity to him tested positive for the disease.Trump told reporters on Thursday that he has had “very little contact” with the valet. But during an appearance Friday on the morning program “Fox & Friends,” Trump said the valet was in the same room with him on Tuesday, the day he began exhibiting symptoms.Trump said he doesn’t recall any direct contact with the ill employee, but that White House aides will be now tested daily for coronavirus instead of weekly. Officials would not say whether Trump himself will be tested daily……Both Trump and Vice President Mike Pence were given new tests after officials learned that the military aide had tested positive for the disease. Trump said he has been tested twice in recent days, with both tests coming back negative. Pence’s test also was negative, administration officials said. The White House did not identify the infected person.“We were recently notified by the White House Medical Unit that a member of the United States Military, who works on the White House campus, has tested positive for Coronavirus,” said White House spokesman Hogan Gidley in a statement. “The President and the Vice President have since tested negative for the virus and they remain in great health.”… May 8, 2020: Katie Miller, Vice President Pence’s spokesperson, tested positive for coronavirus. She is the wife of Stephen Miller, who works closely with President Trump. Politico May 8, 2020: Yahoo! News posted an article titled: “Document reveals Secret Service has 11 current virus cases, as concerns about Trump’s staff grow”. It was written by Jana Winter and Hunter Walker. From the article: Multiple members of the U.S. Secret Service have tested positive for COVID-19, the disease caused by the coronavirus, according to Department of Homeland Security documents reviewed by Yahoo News. In March, the Secret Service, which is responsible for the protection of President Trump and other leaders, acknowledged that a single employee tested positive in March. However the problem is currently far more widespread, with 11 active cases at the agency as of Thursday evening, according to a daily report compiled by the DHS. This report comes as a pair of cases among White House staffers close to Trump and Vice President Mike Pence have put the West Wing’s coronavirus security procedures in the spotlight.According to the DHS document, along with the 11 active cases there are 23 members of the Secret Service who have recovered from COVID-19 and an additional 60 employees who are self-quarantining. No details have been provided about which members of the Secret Service are infected or if any have recently been on detail with the president or vice president.The DHS, which oversees the agency, referred all requests for comment to the Secret Service, which in turn declined to comment on the number of coronavirus cases among its employees……On Monday, Yahoo News reported that there are regularly held large events with unmasked attendees in close quarters at the White House — including inside the Oval Office, which is the president’s inner sanctum. Many Secret Service employees on the White House grounds are among those who are not wearing masks. The agency did not respond to questions about why its employees are not wearing masks or whether personal protective equipment is being provided to members of the Secret Service who request it. Pence and Trump have also regularly opted not to wear masks… May 9, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “CDC director will self-quarantine after contact with COVID-19 positive case”. It was written by J. Edward Moreno. From the article: Robert Redfield, the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), will self-quarantine for two weeks after coming in contact with a person who tested positive for COVID-19 at the White House.“CDC Director Dr. Robert Redfield has been determined to have had a low risk exposure on May 6 to a person at the White House who has COVID-19. He is feeling fine, and has no symptoms. He will be teleworking for the next two weeks,” a CDC spokesperson told several media outlets. The spokesperson added that, “In the event Dr. Redfield must go to the White House to fulfill any responsibilities as part of White House Coronavirus Task Force work, he will follow the safety practices set out by the CDC for those who may have been exposed.”The CDC did not immediately respond to an inquiry from The Hill. Though the CDC did not specify who at the White House Redfield came into contact with, Katie Miller, Vice President Pence’s press secretary, tested positive for the virus on Friday, and one of President Trump’s personal valets tested positive on Thursday. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Stephen Hahn also said Saturday he will self-quarantine for the next two weeks after learning that he came in contact with someone who had tested positive for COVID-19.Like the CDC in the case of Redfield, the FDA did not disclose who Hahn came in contact with, but Politico, citing administration officials, reported that Hahn had come in contact with Miller. May 10, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Pence to work from White House after aide tests positive for COVID-19”. It was written by Brett Samuels. From the article: Vice President Pence will continue working from the White House this week after his press secretary tested positive for the coronavirus on Friday, a spokesman said Sunday.“Vice President Pence will continue to follow the advice of the White House Medical Unit and is not in quarantine. Additionally, Vice President Pence has tested negative every single day and plans to be at the White House tomorrow,” Pence spokesman Devin O’Malley said in a statement.Multiple news outlets reported that Pence was self-isolating after his press secretary, Katie Miller, tested positive for the coronavirus on Friday. One person familiar with the matter told The Hill that Pence may lay low for a few days and take extra precautions.Three of the government’s top health officials have since announced they are going into some form of self-quarantine after interacting with Miller in the days leading up to her positive test. Food and Drug Administration Administrator Stephen Hahn and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Robert Redfield both intend to self-quarantine, according to spokespeople. Anthony Fauci, the top infectious diseases expert at the National Institutes of Health, said he will go into a “modified” self-quarantine.All three are members of the White House coronavirus task force, which is led by Pence. Miller is said to have sat in on at least one of the group’s meetings last week.All three are members of the White House coronavirus task force, which is led by Pence. Miller is said to have sat in on at least one of the group’s meetings last week.The three health officials were also slated to testify before a Senate committee this week and will now do so via videoconference.Miller, who is married to senior White House adviser Stephen Miller, was one of two White House officials to test positive for the coronavirus last week. The other is a military member who works as a valet for President Trump.The two positive tests have raised concerns about the virus spreading within the building and forced officials to reckon with how best to protect the president and vice president.Trump and Pence have gone from being tested weekly to being tested daily, and officials have said they will institute additional procedures in the coming days to further limit their exposure to the virus. May 10, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Sen. Lamar Alexander to self-quarantine after staff member tests positive for COVID-19”. It was written by Jordain Carney. From the article: Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) will self-quarantine after a staff member tested positive for the coronavirus.David Cleary, Alexander’s chief of staff, said the GOP senator had no symptoms and had tested negative for the coronavirus on Thursday. The staff member, according to Cleary, tested positive for the coronavirus on Sunday.“After discussing this with the Senate’s attending physician, Senator Alexander, out of an abundance of caution, has decided not to return to Washington, D.C., and will self-quarantine in Tennessee for 14 days,” he said.No other staff in Alexander’s office is expected to self-quarantine and most of the GOP senator’s Washington, D.C., staff, like most offices on Capitol Hill, was already working remotely. Alexander is the latest senator who has had to self-quarantine after exposure to the virus. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) is the only senator known to have tested positive but others, including Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Rick Scott (R-Fla.) and Ted Cruz (R-Texas), have also self-quarantined in recent months. Alexander, who chairs the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, is expected to keep working remotely, including overseeing a hearing scheduled for Tuesday on the virus… May 11, 2020: The Guardian posted an article titled: “No quarantine for Mike Pence despite rash of Covid-19 cases in White House”. It was written by Tom McCarthy. From the article: Mike Pence will not enter quarantine despite a rash of coronavirus cases in the White House in recent days, including a positive test for the vice-president’s own press secretary.“Vice-President Pence has tested negative every single day and plans to be at the White House tomorrow,” Devin O’Malley, a backup spokesman for Pence, said on Sunday night.As the Trump administration urges Americans to return to workplaces and Donald Trump touts a “transition to greatness” ahead, the White House faces a delicate balancing act in projecting business as usual even as coronavirus cases spread through the halls of power.Three members of the White House coronavirus taskforce – Dr Anthony Fauci of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Dr Stephen Hahn, commissioner of the US Food and Drug Administration; and Dr Robert Redfield, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention – have entered two weeks of isolation, after having contact with someone who later tested positive.Senator Lamar Alexander, a Republican from Tennessee who chairs the health committee, is isolating himself after a member of staff tested positive. A senior admiral on Trump’s top military advisory committee, chief of naval operations Michael Gilday, is also isolating himself following contact with an infected relative, Bloomberg News reported. Gen Joseph Lengyel tested positive at the White House on Saturday in a spot check, before he was to meet Trump.A valet for Trump, who had served the president food without wearing a mask, also recently tested positive. The White House is considering new rules under which aides must maintain a distance of two metres (6ft) from the president, ABC News reported.Pence’s spokeswoman, Katie Miller, the wife of Stephen Miller, one of the president’s closest aides, who is in frequent close contact with the Trump family, tested positive last week. It was unclear if Stephen Miller had entered self-isolation……On Monday morning the number of recorded Covid-19 deaths in the US was close to 80,000, and while the rate of new cases appears to be slowing in the New York City area and other sites of major outbreaks, elsewhere new infections are rising.Nowhere is testing and contact-tracing for the virus as thoroughly as the White House, where aides and senior officials including Trump and Pence receive both spot checks and repeated testing in various forms, some on a daily basis. Without such testing, cases could go undetected, leading to a potentially wide outbreak… May 12, 2020: CNN posted an article titled: “Pence ‘maintaining distance’ from Trump ‘for the immediate future'”. It was written by Jeremy Diamond and Kevin Liptak. From the article: Vice President Mike Pence is taking some precautions, but stopping short of the recommended self-quarantine in the wake of his press secretary testing positive for coronavirus.Pence is “maintaining distance for the immediate future” from President Trump after consulting with the White House medical unit, a senior administration official said. It is not yet clear exactly how long Pence will stay away from Trump.Later, White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany said Pence had made the decision himself……Trump said Monday that he has not seen Pence since the vice president’s press secretary Katie Miller tested positive on Friday, a fact that was underscored by Pence’s absence from Trump’s news conference Monday. Trump said he could confer with Pence by telephone.Pence said during a call with governors on Monday that he was taking extra precautions, noting that he was “in a separate room on my own” during a videoconference while Dr. Deborah Birx was “in a situation room meeting with some staff,” according to audio of the call obtained by CNN’s Betsy Klein……While he arrived to the White House on Tuesday wearing a mask, Pence has shown up on other days without covering his face. And his very presence there — even if he is staying away from Trump — contravenes guidelines issued by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which advise those who have had “close contact” (within six feet of someone for a prolonged period of time) with someone who has tested positive to stay home for 14 days after their last interaction… June 6, 2020: Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms tweeted: “COVID-19 has literally hit home. I have had NO symptoms and have tested positive.” June 15, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “House GOP lawmaker tests positive for COVID-19”. It was written by Cristina Marcos. From the article: Rep. Tom Rice (R-S.C.) announced Monday that he and his family have tested positive for the coronavirus, becoming the eighth member of Congress to have a confirmed or presumed case of the disease.Rice said in a Facebook post that he, his wife, and his son had developed symptoms of COVID-19 – which he referred to as they “Wuhan flu” – in the last week but are now recovering.“We are all on the mend and doing fine,” Rice wrote. He noted that his son “had gotten really sick” with a fever and “really bad cough,” while his wife had a “slight” fever with a cough and aches.Rice said that he had milder symptoms but lamented that he had lost his sense of taste and smell – and expressed particular frustration that he is unable to enjoy bacon.“I was lucky, and it was not bad for me. I had a low fever and a mild cough. It was gone by Thursday. I never stopped eating or drinking or working or moving. The only bad thing is I have completely lost sense of taste and smell. CAN’T TASTE BACON!!!” Rice wrote.“We are finishing our quarantine and looking forward to seeing you all again. Friends, please wash your hands and take precautions,” Rice concluded… June 17, 2020: AZ Central posted an article titled: “Pinal County sheriff says he tested positive for COVID-19 before planned Trump meeting”. It was written by Perry Vandell. From the article: Pinal County Sheriff Mark Lamb announced on Wednesday afternoon that he tested positive for COVID-19, the disease caused by the new coronavirus.Lamb posted on the Pinal County Sheriff Office’s Facebook page that he had been invited on Tuesday to join President Donald Trump at the White House and was tested before the meeting as part of the protocol……Lamb said he believes he came into contact with an infected person during a campaign event he held on Saturday. Lamb didn’t say if he wore a mask or practiced social distancing at the event.“While still asymptomatic, I tested positive for the COVID-19,” Lamb wrote. “I will be self-quarantining for the next 14 days minimum. I alerted the Pinal County Public Health Dept. immediately after my positive test, and they are working to track all those I came in contact with following the Saturday event.”… June 18, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Oklahoma venue management asks Trump campaign for health plan ahead of rally”. It was written by Marina Pitofsky. From the article: The Bank of Oklahoma (BOK) Center in Tulsa, Okla., where President Trump is set to hold a campaign rally Saturday evening, requested Thursday that his campaign provide a plan for “health and safety” measures ahead of the event amid the ongoing coronavirus pandemic.“Given the Tulsa Health Department’s recent reports of increases in coronavirus cases and the State of Oklahoma’s encouragement for event organizers to follow CDC guidelines, we have requested that the Trump campaign, as the event organizer, provide BOK Center with a written plan detailing the steps the event will institute for health and safety, including those related to social distancing,” Meghan Blood, director of marketing for the BOK Center, said in a statement, CNN reported.“Once received, we will share the plan with local health officials.”The Trump campaign said that it will offer masks and temperature checks to all attendees.The statment from the facility said that all staffers will be tested for COVID-19, and the venue will be “cleaned and disinfected repeatedly throughout the event, with special emphasis on high-touch areas.”… June 19, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Trump to host 4th of July event despite pleas from lawmakers to cancel”. It was written by Tal Axelrod. From the article: President Trump will host a Fourth of July event despite pleas from lawmakers to cancel over concerns regarding the coronavirus pandemic.The White House announced Friday that Trump and first lady Melania Trump with the Interior Department, will host the “2020 Salute to America” on the South Lawn of the White House and Ellipse on July 4.The event will feature music, military demonstrations and flyovers to celebrate the nation’s service members and veterans, as well as an address from the president. The event comes despite pushback from lawmakers that holding a mass gathering could put people at risk of contracting the coronavirus… June 19, 2020: PBS posted an article titled: “Oklahoma Supreme Court says Trump rally attendees don’t have to wear masks”. From the article: The Oklahoma Supreme Court on Friday rejected a request to require everyone attending President Trump’s rally in Tulsa this weekend to wear a face mask and stay at least six feet apart from everyone else in the arena to guard against the spread of the coronavirus.The court ruled that the two local residents who asked that the thousands expected at the rally be required to take the precautions couldn’t establish that they have a clear legal right to the relief they sought. In a concurring opinion, two justices wrote that the state’s reopening plan is “permissive, suggestive and discretionary.”……The request was made by John Hope Franklin for Reconciliation, a nonprofit that promotes racial equality, and the Greenwood Centre, Ltd., which owns commercial real estate, and on behalf of the two locals, who are described as having compromised immune systems and being particularly vulnerable to COVID-19……Oklahoma has seen a recent spike in coronavirus cases, setting a daily high on Thursday of 450. Health officials on Friday reported 125 new confirmed cases of COVID-19 in Tulsa County, which is the most of any country in Oklahoma. Statewide, there were 352 new cases and one new coronavirus death reported Friday, raising the state’s new total number of confirmed cases since the pandemic began to 9,706 and its death toll to 367… June 20, 2020: NBC News Correspondent Carol Lee tweeted: “NEW: six staffers working on Trump campaign rally in Tulsa have tested positive for coronavirus – campaign stmt says “quarantine procedures were immediately implemented. No COVID-positive staffers or anyone in immediate contact will be at today’s rally.” June 20, 2020: …Before the rally Trump’s campaign revealed that six staff members who were helping set up for the event had tested positive for the coronavirus. Campaign communications director Tim Murtaugh said neither the affected staffers nor anyone who was in immediate contact with them would attend the event. Associated Press June 20, 2020: Herman Cain tweeted: “Here’s just a few of the #BlackVoicesForTrump at tonight’s rally! Having a fantastic time!” #TulsaRally2020 #Trumptulsa #TulsaTrumprally #MAGA #Trump2020 #Trump2020Landslide”. The tweet includes a photo of Herman Cain siting with a group of people he has identified in the tweet as part of #BlackVoicesForTrump. Some people in the group are leaning on each other while seated close together. No one is wearing a mask. June 20, 2020: CBS News posted an article titled: “6 Trump campaign staffers in Tulsa test positive for COVID-19”. It was written by Grace Segers. From the article: Six Trump campaign staffers on the advance team for the president’s rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma on Saturday have tested positive for the coronavirus, the Trump campaign confirmed to CBS News. According to the campaign, the staffers were immediately quarantined and will not have contact with any rally attendees.“Per safety protocols, campaign staff are tested for COVID-19 before events. Six members of the advance team tested positive out of hundreds of tests performed, and quarantine procedures were immediately implemented,” Trump campaign communications director Tim Murtaugh said in a statement. “No COVID-positive staffers or anyone in immediate contact will be at today’s rally or near attendees and elected officials. As previously announced, all rally attendees are given temperature checks before going through security, at which point they are given wristbands, facemasks and hand sanitizer.”The rally, Mr. Trump’s first since March, is taking place at the Bank of Oklahoma Center, which holds 19,000 people, with an additional stage in the outdoor area adjacent to the venue that can hold several thousand more. Health experts have raised concerns about having so many people gathered in one place, particularly as the number of coronavirus cases continues to rise in Oklahoma and several other states.Although the campaign will be providing masks for rally attendees, it will not be mandatory to wear them. Several people waiting outside the Bank of Oklahoma Center ahead of the rally told CBS News they would not be wearing masks at the event. The online registration page for the rally included a legal disclaimer for attendees to acknowledge “that an inherent risk of exposure to COVID-19 exists in any public place where people are present.” June 22, 2020: Two members of a campaign advance team who attended President Donald Trump’s rally in Oklahoma on Saturday have tested positive for the coronavirus, the campaign said. The new test results bring the tally of advance team members for the Tulsa event who have tested positive for Covid-19 up to eight The six earlier positive tests of advance members occurred just before the event, and those people did not attend the rally as a result. At least two of the earlier positive tests were of Secret Service agents. CNBC June 23, 2020: NBC News reported the following: The Dream City Church in Phoenix, where President Donald Trump is scheduled to attend a rally Tuesday, made a surprising claim Sunday: Its building has an air filtration system that can neutralize the coronavirus. Many experts found this startling, because there is little evidence such systems can stop the spread of the virus.The claim came in a video in which the senior pastor, Luke Barnett, and Chief Operations Officer Brendon Zastrow discussed the presidential visit and the air purification system from a local company, IONaer, which echoes the claim of its system’s effect on the virus on its website. IONaer does business as CleanAir EXP.“It was a technology developed by some members of our church,” Zastrow said. “And we’ve installed these units. And it kills 99 percent of COVID within 10 minutes.”It’s the kind of claim that has little basis in reality, experts say. Both the ionization technology on which the system is based, as well as the way it works, are of limited effectiveness.“When it comes to COVID-19 transmission, person-to-person transmission between those within 6 feet of each other is driving the majority of transmission,” Dr. Amesh Adalja, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins University Center for Health Security, said. “Any ‘air cleaning’ type of device would not be able to have an impact on this close range transmission and the video could give attendees a false sense of security.”The videos with the claim about the air purification system have since been removed from the church’s social media accounts……Tim Bender, the CEO and co-founder of IONaer, which makes the air purification systems, stressed that they had only been tested on “surrogates,” which are viruses similar to the coronavirus……Bender also clarified that the system is ineffective if people come into close contact with one another.“There is nothing we can do with someone who coughs or sneezes,” Bender said. “The words we try to use is we add an additional layer of protection from passing viruses and bacteria through the area inside buildings. It’s just an additional layer of protection. If you’re taking the particulates out, you’re taking away the magic carpet that they’re traveling on.”……Trump is scheduled to begin a trip through Arizona on Tuesday, putting him in the middle of a state that is dealing with one of the worst outbreaks of the coronavirus. He will visit the church Tuesday afternoon, with organizers expecting about 3,000 attendees, according to The Arizona Republic.Experts and even scientists in Trump’s own administration have warned against such events…. June 23, 2020: Several reporters who attended the Trump rally at the Dream City Church in Phoenix posted tweets about it. Here are a few: White House reporter for AP, political analyist for MSNBC and NBC News, Jonathan Lemire, tweeted: “The scene of President Trump’s appearance at a Phoenix mega-church. No social distancing. And the only masks I am seeing are being worn by the White House travel pool.” The tweet included a photo that shows that the church was packed with people, all sitting very close to each other.Former Newspaperman Sam Pye tweeted: “VIDEO: Crowds await the arrival of President Trump in #Phoenix. #TrumpRally #Trump2020 #PhoenixRally #PhoenixTrumpRally #Trump[American flag emoji”. The video shows a packed church, with people standing or sitting very close together. There were one or two people who were wearing masks.White House Correspondent for Bloomberg News, Jordan Fabian tweeted: “Inside Phoenix mega church for President Trump’s Turning Point speech, full house, no distancing and very few masks being worn.” The tweet included a photo that shows that the church was packed with people who were not social distancing. CBSNews White House Correspondent Ben Tracy tweeted: “At a Trump event in Phoenix where there is no social distancing and hardly anyone is wearing a mask. Arizona has one of the worst #covid issue in the country right now.” The tweet included a photo from above the crowd that was seated nearest the stage. Two people are wearing masks. Students For Trump tweeted: “ABSOLUTELY PACKED HOUSE for @matggaetz and @RichardGrennel’s speech today leading up to @DonaldJTrumpJr, @kimguifoyle, and President @realDonaldTrump”. The tweet included a short video of some of the crowd. Many are wearing red hats. No one in the video is wearing a mask. June 23, 2020: U.S. House Candidate Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) tweeted a thread that started with: “Last night, I learned my campaign team was potentially exposed to Coronavirus last week. Out of an abundance of caution and concern for my children and my team, I was tested for COVID-19. Today, my physician administered the Abbott Sars-Cov-2 RNA ID now nasal swab rapid test.” The second tweet said: “I tested positive for COVID-19 a few minutes later. I was feeling a little fatigued with a body ache this weekend but that is kind of normal on the campaign trail. I have a slightly stuffy nose and mild body ache, but I do not have a fever or cough.” The third tweet said: “I am concerned for my two children, the rest of my team, and volunteers, all of whom are like family. In consultation with my physician, I have personally contacted every individual, to the best of my knowledge, who has been in close proximity to me over the last week.” The fourth tweet said: “I have asked for and paid for my staff and volunteers to get tested immediately. All of my campaign staff and volunteers have been instructed to self-quarantine and work remotely. My children and I will be in quarantine for the next two weeks or until I test negative for COVID.” The thread continues from there. June 25, 2020: Oklahoma Watch reporter Paul Monies tweeted: “This won’t be painful, but it will be uncomfortable. We have this big Q-Tip that we’ll put up your nose for 10 seconds. I’ll count out loud.” Got my post #TulsaTrumpRally #COVID19 test. Called Monday for appointment & got one this morning. Results in 2-3 business days.” The tweet includes a short video from his car. He was wearing a mask. June 25, 2020: CNN posted an article titled: “Dozens of Secret Service agents will be quarantined after Trump’s Tulsa rally”. It was written by Jim Acosta and Paul LeBlanc. From the article: Dozens of Secret Service agents will be quarantined as a precaution following President Donald Trump’s rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma, a law enforcement official told CNN on Wednesday.The mass quarantine has led to the decision that Secret Service agents involved with presidential trips must be tested for coronavirus for the next couple of weeks, according to an email set to agency personnel. The email sent out Wednesday was confirmed by the law enforcement official. Agents must now be tested 24 to 48 hours before a presidential trip, the email said. The new testing mandate will be in place until July 4……Asked about the decision to test all agents on presidential trips for coronavirus, the Secret Service official said protecting agency personnel is critical during the COVID-19 pandemic……A US Secret Service source who worked advance for Saturday’s rally and is now quarantining told CNN that agents from Dallas and Houston worked the event as well, and they had been warned before the trip from those field offices that they would need quarantine when they got home.The steps come after two Secret Service agents who attended the rally tested positive for coronavirus, a person familiar with the matter previously told CNN……Still, news of the quarantined Secret Service staff will heighten scrutiny of the Tulsa rally, which has already been intensely watched after the Trump campaign announced that some advance team staffers who worked on the event had tested positive for the virus.Attendees were not required to wear masks or practice social distancing, despite the administration’s top health officials stressing the importance of both measures in preventing the spread of coronavirus.Several administration officials at the rally did not wear masks, though campaign manager Brad Parscale was seen in one.Those attending the rally had to agree not to sue the campaign if they contracted coronavirus, acknowledging the “inherent risk of exposure to COVID-19 exists in any public place where people are present.”… June 26, 2020: Oklahoma Watch reporter Paul Moines tweeted: “Friends, I tested positive for #COVID19. I’m pretty surprised. I have zero symptoms (so far) and I feel fine. In fact, I ran 5 miles this morning. I spent the last few hours calling people I know I’ve been in contact with in the last 14 days. Be safe out there.” June 26, 2020: President Donald Trump’s campaign manager, Brad Parscale, is “working from home” after Secret Service agents who attended last week’s campaign rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma, tested positive for the coronavirus. Trump campaign spokesman Tim Murtaugh, in a conference call with reporters, confirmed to The Daily Beast that Parscale was among the officials working remotely, and would return to work only after being tested for COVID-19… Business Insider June 26, 2020: Billboard reported the following: Hours before President Donald Trump took the stage last Saturday at the BOK Center in Tulsa, Oklahoma, for his first rally in the COVID-19 era, arena workers were busy labeling thousands of seats with “Do Not Sit Here Please!” stickers to promote social distancing, part of a new safety protocol at the arena known as VenueShield.Campaign staff quickly radioed over to an executive at ASM Global and asked the arena to stop labeling the seats. In fact, “they also told us that they didn’t want any signs posted saying we should social distance in the venue,” says Doug Thornton, executive vp for ASM Global, who oversees nearly 100 arenas across five continents for the venue management company created by the 2019 merger of AEG and SMG……A video created by a third party and reviewed by Billboard shows Trump staffers methodically walking the aisles of the BOK Center and peeling the three-inch square stickers from thousands of campaign chairs ahead of the “Make America Great Again” rally. (Trump’s campaign did not respond to Billboard’s request for comment)… June 26, 2020: MSN posted an article from Green Bay Press Gazette titled: “Trump, in stop at Green Bay Austin Staubel airport, tells Hannity that Biden ‘can’t speak,’ blames Evers for Madison unrest”. It was written by Kent Tempus, Sammy Gibbons and Haley BeMiller. From the article: President Donald Trump visited northeastern Wisconsin Thursday for the first of what are expected to be multiple campaign visits to the state by the president and his opponent, former Vice President Joe Biden.Trump arrived at Green Bay Austin Straubel International Airport on Air Force One just before 1 p.m. and immediately got into a black SUV that took him to the nearby Jet Air Group facility for a town hall with Fox News host Sean Hannity and about 50 supporters.During the interview with Hannity, which aired at 8 p.m., Trump discussed protests held in the wake of George Floyd’s death at the hands of Minneapolis police and accused some of wanting “to destabilize our country”. He blamed unrest in Madison and the assault of a state senator this week on Democratic Gov. Tony Evers, contending it wouldn’t have happened under former Republican Gov. Scott Walker……The president also directed much of his attention to Biden.“I don’t want to be nice or un-nice, but the man can’t speak, and he’s going to be a president because some people don’t love me maybe,” he said.Afterward. Trump left the airport just before 3 p.m. on the Marine One helicopter to fly to Fincantieri Marinette Marine in Marinette, where he toured the shipbuilding yard and spoke about a $5.5 billion contract recently awarded to the company….…Attendance at the town hall was limited to 50 people due to coronavirus concerns. All audience members had their temperatures checked are were required to wear a face covering – either their own or one provided by Fox News. No media other than Fox News were allowed inside during the taping… June 27, 2020: The Guardian posted an article titled: “Mike Pence postpones Florida campaign tour as push to reopen US stalls”. It was written by Edward Helmore. From the article: As reopening plans went into a dramatic reverse or stalled across the US in the face of a resurgent virus, Mike Pence called off a planned campaign bus tour in Florida amid a surge in confirmed Covid-19 cases.The vice-president had been set to appear in Lake Wales at an event next week organized by pro-Trump group America First Policies. The event was billed as part of the “Great American Comeback tour.”The group announced: “Out of an abundance of caution at this time, we are postponing the Great American Comeback tour stop in Florida. We look forward to rescheduling soon.” Pence was still traveling to the state, the White House confirmed, saying he would meet with Governor Ron DeSantis and his healthcare teams… June 27, 2020: USA Today posted an article titled: “Pence cancels campaign events in Florida and Arizona as coronavirus cases spike”. It was written by Nicholas Wu. From the article: Vice President Mike Pence has canceled campaign events in Florida and Arizona as coronavirus cases spike in those states.A spokesperson for President Donald Trump’s campaign confirmed to USA TODAY the events, which included stops as part of Pence’s “Faith in America” tour were canceled “out of an abundance of caution” as cases climb in Florida and Arizona.A representative for the vice president said Pence would still travel to Texas, Arizona, and Florida this week to meet with governors.On Tuesday, Pence was scheduled to give remarks at a Faith in America event in Tuscon and to meet with Gov. Doug Ducey about the COVID-19 response.Pence had planned to travel to Florida on July 2 for a bus tour, meeting with Gov. Ron DeSantis about the coronavirus pandemic, and to deliver remarks both at a Faith in America event in Sarasota after touring Oakley Transport Inc. in Lake Wales……Florida announced 9,585 cases Saturday, and Arizona announced 3,591 cases. June 28, 2020: The Texas Tribune posted an article titled: “Pence visits Dallas as Texas grapples with coronavirus spike”. It was written by Patrick Svitek. From the article: Vice President Mike Pence, during a trip to Dallas on Sunday, promised Texas would bounce back from a recent surge in cases of the new coronavirus while urging Americans to turn to their faith during a tumultuous period for the nation.“Working with your governor, we will put the health of the people of the Lone Star State first, and every single day we’ll continue to reclaim our freedom and our way of life, as each day we are one day closer to the day we put this pandemic in the past,” Pence said during an event at First Baptist Dallas….…After the event, Pence – who chairs the White House Coronavirus Task Force – Gov. Greg Abbott and his coronavirus response advisers briefed Pence on the dire situation in Texas. Speaking with reporters afterward, Abbott said the virus has taken a “very swift and very dangerous turn in Texas over just the past few weeks,” while Pence praised Abbott for his leadership – which has come under heavy fire from Democrats – and pledged the full support of the federal government.The vice president also emphasized the importance of wearing a mask to reduce further spread.The talk was a last-minute addition to Pence’s agenda. For over a week, the vice president had been scheduled to appear at First Baptist for its annual Celebrate Freedom Sunday, but he added meeting with Abbott in recent days as the state confronted its worst week yet in the pandemic.The number of daily new cases hit a record high Thursday of nearly 6,000, and the number of hospitalizations has reached new highs every day for the past 16 days……Pence doubled down on his praise for Abbott later in the day, telling reporters after the briefing at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center that the governor demonstrated “decisive action” in reopening the state……Pence’s trip coincided with a growing debate in Texas over requiring people to wear masks. Abbott has resisted calls to fine individuals who do not wear masks but has allowed local governments to order businesses to require customers to do so.Speaking to reporters after their meeting, Abbott, Pence, and Birx all urged Texans to wear masks. Birx was particularly emphatic, saying she was “appealing to every Texas to wear a mask… Every single one of them.”Pence, Birx and his two other high-profile travel companions, Texas Sen. John Cornyn and U.S. Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson, all had face coverings on when they disembarked Air Force Two in Dallas on Sunday morning, as did their greeters; Abbott, Texas House Speaker Dennis Bonnen and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. All appeared to remain masked while seated at the church, according to video broadcast by the church.Pence has made headlines for not wearing a face covering at other public appearances during the pandemic. President Donald Trump has also refused to wear a mask in front of cameras.First Baptist Dallas, led by pastor and ardent Trump supporter Robert Jeffress, had “strongly encouraged” attendees to wear masks and also socially distance. But the video of the ceremony showed most attendees sitting close together in pews, with only some donning masks. Most of the over 100 people in the choir and band sections on the stage were not wearing masks… June 30, 2020: Axios posted the following information: South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem (R) told Fox News’ Laura Ingraham on Monday that attendees at a July 3 event at Mount Rushmore where President Trump is set to speak will not be required to practice social distancing. What she is saying: “We will have a large event on July 3. We told those folks that have concerns that they can stay home, but those who want to come and join us, we’ll be giving out free face masks, if they choose to wear one. But we won’t be social distancing.”… June 30, 2020: CNN posted an article titled: “Trump campaign scraps rally ahead of Session-Tuberville primary amid pandemic”. It was written by Kaitlan Collins and Kevin Liptak. From the article: President Donald Trump’s campaign has scrapped plans to hold a rally in Alabama next weekend amid concerns about coronavirus infections rising in the US, CNN has learned.Trump was slated to travel to the state ahead of the Senate race between his former attorney general Jeff Sessions and the former Auburn University football coach Tommy Tuberville, but plans were called off as state officials voiced concerns about a mass gathering and campaign officials ultimately decided against it. A person close to the campaign said there are currently no rallies on the horizon, but aids are scoping out possible venues for when they decided to host them again……On Tuesday, Alabama Republican Gov. Kay Ivey announced an amended order, which will extend the current rules until the end of July. The order encourages minimizing travel outside the home and wearing face coverings when doing so. The order also states that “all non-work related gatherings of any size, including drive-in gatherings, that cannot maintain a consistent six-foot distance between persons from different households are prohibited.”… July 1, 2020: BuzzFeed News reported the following: At least five members of the choir and orchestra at the Dallas megachurch visited by Vice President Mike Pence this weekend tested positive for the coronavirus in June, according to Facebook posts and internal church emails reviewed by BuzzFeed News. An additional orchestra member had symptoms several days after being exposed and was awaiting a test result in mid-June, according to a call for prayers sent to the church’s musicians.None of those six people were at the First Baptist church in Dallas during Pence’s hour-and-a-half-hour visit on Sunday, but it is unclear how many of the musicians who performed for Pence may have been exposed during previous practices and performances with those who were infected……The choir and orchestra performed for Pence without masks, according to a video of the event reviewed by BuzzFeed News.One of the church’s music directors – who himself has been quarantined after testing positive for the virus – wrote an email informing the church’s musicians that choir members would not wear masks while singing……The event came just one day before the Texas Department of State Health Services reported more than 5,900 COVID-19 hospitalizations, an all-time high for the state, and as Dallas reported a record high day for cases. Gov. Greg Abbott, who aggressively pushed to reopen the state in May but rolled back his plan last week after cases surged, sat alongside Pence in the church’s pews… The BuzzFeed News article includes a photo of Vice President Pence standing behind a podium at the First Baptist Church. In the photo, Pence is taking off his mask right before speaking. July 2, 2020: Multiple Secret Service agents tasked with planning Vice President Pence’s trip to Arizona this week were reportedly removed from the trip after showing signs of coronavirus infection. As many as 10 Secret Service and other law enforcement agents working on the trip were replaced after showing symptoms of the virus and at least one tested positive for the disease. The Hill (who got this information from The Washington Post). July 2, 2020: Someone posted a tweet on Herman Cain’s Twitter account on his behalf. The tweet said: “We are sorry to announce that Herman Cain has tested positive for COVID-19, and is currently receiving treatment in an Atlanta-area hospital. Please keep him and all who are battling this virus, in your prayers.” The tweet included a full statement. Part of the statement said: “On Monday, June 29, Herman Cain was informed that he had tested positive for COVID-19. By Wednesday, July 1, Mr. Cain had developed symptoms serious enough that he required hospitalization. He spent the past night in the hospital and as of today, Thursday July 2, he is resting comfortably in an Atlanta-area hospital. Mr. Cain did not require a respirator, and he is awake and alert….” July 3, 2020: Kimberly Guilfoyle, the girlfriend of President Trump’s oldest son, has contracted the coronavirus. Sergio Gor, chief of staff to the Trump campaign’s finance committee, says Guilfoyle was immediately isolated after the positive result to limit exposure. He says she will be retested to confirm the diagnosis because she isn’t showing any signs of COVID-19, the disease the virus causes. Gor says Guilfoyle is doing well and canceling her public events. Gor says Donald Trump Jr. tested negative but is self-isolating as a precaution. He is also canceling his public events. The couple was in South Dakota to hold fundraisers for Trump’s reelection. Trump is giving a pre-Fourth of July speech at Mount Rushmore in South Dakota. Associated Press July 3, 2020: HuffPost posted an article titled: “Pence’s Arizona Trip was Delayed After Secret Service Agents Contracted Virus: Reports”. It was writen by Sara Boboltz. From the article: Vice President Mike Pence delayed his trip to Arizona this week due to several Secret Service agents contracting COVID-19 or displaying symptoms of the disease, according to multiple reports.Pence was originally scheduled to visit the state on Tuesday, but went on Wednesday instead so that other, healthier, Secret Service agents could accompany him.An unnamed official with knowledge of the matter told The Washington Post that the agency urged the vice president to delay his trip on Monday night. Eight to 10 people from sister agencies who were also helping to prepare for the trip displayed signs of the illness, as well, according to the Post……Arizona is among several states that have seen an alarming surge in COVID-19 infections over the past month. Currently, Arizona has had more than 87,000 reported cases with only around 10,000 recoveries – a figure that indicates the number still battling the virus. More than 1,700 people have died of the coronavirus in the state……Meanwhile, the U.S. passed another grim milestone on Thursday, soaring past 55,000 new coronavirus cases reported in a single day. July 4, 2020: AZ Central posted an article titled: “Reports: Secret Service agents at Pence, Trump events in Phoenix test positive for virus”. It was written by Kathy Tulumello. From the article: Secret Service agents who were preparing for Vice President Mike Pence’s visit to Phoenix earlier this week fell ill with COVID-19, as did agents working at the president’s rally eight days before, according to media reports.CNN reported Friday that several agents working on the Pence visit got sick, as did several agents who became infected while getting ready for President Donald Trump’s June 23 event in Phoenix.The crowd for Trump was mostly unmasked.The Washington Post reported Thursday that Pence’s visit to Arizona, originally scheduled for Tuesday, was postponed a day so that healthy agents could be available for his visit. The trip, which originally had called for public events, became a quick drop-in to support state officials battling a surge in COVID-19 cases.Both news agencies cited unnamed sources. Secret Service agents are sworn to protect the president, vice president and other high-profile officials. Agents also were on the ground in South Dakota preparing for Trump’s speech Friday at Mount Rushmore……Trump’s June 23 visit to the state, his third in five months, underscored the state’s status as a battleground state in the presidential election. In Phoenix, he spent fewer than 10 minutes of his 1½ hour speech discussing the new coronavirus, and the crowd of about 3,000 supporters appeared similarly disinterested in dwelling on the pandemic. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends wearing face masks to prevent the spread of COVID-19. Both Maricopa County and Phoenix have enacted ordinances requiring masks in public places.Most of the attendees who packed into Dream City Church in north Phoenix did not wear face coverings. Nor did any of the event speakers, including the president. During his speech, the president repeatedly assured his crowd that the U.S. was at “the end of the pandemic.” ……Kimberly Guilfoyle, a Trump campaign official and the girlfriend of Donald Trump Jr., tested positive for the coronavirus ahead of the president’s event at Mount Rushmore.Guilfoyle attended the Trump event in Phoenix, which was 10 days before her positive test. The incubation period for COVID-19 can be up to 14 days.Before coming to Arizona, Trump spoke at a June 20 rally in Tulsa, where Secret Service agents also reportedly tested positive for the virus. July 4, 2020: CNN posted an article titled: “National Park Service staff working Mount Rushmore event weren’t required to get tested, agency says.” It was written by Ali Main, Betsy Klein and Veronica Stracqualursi. From the article: The National Park Service says it did not require employees who worked the Independence Day celebration at Mount Rushmore on Friday to get tested for coronavirus, despite the record-high new cases in the US and President Donald Trump’s attendance at the event.“None of the Incident Management Team members for the event have reported exhibiting any symptoms or feeling unwell,” agency spokesperson Dana Soehn said in a statement Saturday. CNN reported that some Park Service staff were wearing masks and others were not at the Friday event in South Dakota. There was no social distancing at the event as attendees were clustered together in stadium seating. Soehn said face masks were available to all Park Service employees who worked the event and use was recommended at all times when social distancing could not be maintained.Soehn added that the agency is following US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidance for health monitoring of the work force and that Department of Interior “employees are encouraged to conduct daily self-monitoring for symptoms of COVID-19 using the CDC symptom webpage or the CDC Self-Checker, and to not report to the workplace if they exhibit any symptoms or feeling unwell.”,,,…The CDC says that outdoor spaces are less risky than indoor areas for Covid-19 spread, but still encourages standing 6 feet apart from others and to avoid crowded parks… July 4, 2020: Bozeman Daily Chronicle posted an article titled: “Multiple Republican candidates self-quarantining after possible COVID-19 exposure”. It was written by Melissa Loveridge. From the article: A Donald Trump campaign fundraising event last week in Gallatin County potentially exposed multiple Montana Republicans to COVID-19, including the wife and running mate of gubernatorial candidate and congressman Greg Gianforte.Gianforte himself did not attend the event, but his wife Susan Gianforte and lieutenant governor candidate Kristen Juras did. Republican congressional candidate and state auditor Matt Rosendale and state auditor candidate Troy Downing were also there.On July 1, Juras posted a photo on her campaign Facebook page posing less than 6 feet away and without masks with Susan, Donald Trump Jr. and his girlfriend Kimberly Guilfoyle. In the photo’s caption, Juras wrote that the photo was taken the night before, on June 30.Guilfoyle tested positive for the coronavirus on July 3, as reported by the New York Times. The Times reported she was not experiencing symptoms.A Gianforte campaign spokesperson confirmed that Juras and Susan attended the event, but that Gianforte was in Washington, D.C., because Congress was in session.“Since learning of their potential exposure, Greg, Susan, and Kristen have adhered to recommended guidelines. Out of an abundance of caution and for the health and safety of others, they will self-quarantine, be tested for COVID-19, and suspend in-person campaign events pending test results,” the spokesperson said.Downing’s campaign manager Sam Loveridge confirmed Downing attended the event. Loveridge said in an email that neither Downing nor his staff were ever in “close proximity” with Guilfoyle“Out of an abundance of caution, Troy Downing will be tested as soon as possible and will avoid personal contact and all public functions until a negative test result can be confirmed,” Loveridge said in an email…Rosendale’s campaign manager Shelby DeMars confirmed he had attended the event. DeMars said Rosendale and his wife both quarantined immediately after learning that Guilfoyle tested positive and are waiting for test results.Elsie Arntzen, Montana’s Superintendent of Public Instruction, tweeted that she had also been exposed to the illness and is quarantining and awaiting test results. July 4, 2020: Congressional candidate and Montana State Auditor Matt Rosendale tweeted: “STATEMENT FROM THE ROSENDALE CAMPAIGN: “On Tuesday Matt and Jean Rosendale attended an event where they were in contact with Kimberly Guilfoyle, who has tested positive for COVID-19. Immediately upon learning of their potential exposure both Matt and Jean self isolated and… The next tweet in the short thread said: “…are awaiting their results. While neither Matt nor Jean are experiencing any symptoms, out of an abundance of caution, they are self-quarantining for 14 days and will be suspending in-person campaign events during that period.” #mtpol #mtal” July 5, 2020: Houston Chronicle posted the following information: If President Donald Trump decides to hold a campaign rally in Arkansas, the state will insist that all participants are socially distanced and wear masks to prevent the spread of the coronavirus, Gov. Asa Hutchinson said Sunday.Hutchinson’s comments on NBC’s “Meet the Press” follow Trump rallies in Tulsa, Oklahoma, and at an Arizona megachurch, as well as an Independence Day celebration at Mount Rushmore, where most of the thousands of participants flouted public safety guidelines on maintaining a safe distance and wearing masks.“You can’t stop every activity, but you have to be in a controlled environment in which you do protect yourself and others and take it seriously,” the governor said, adding that a lot of public celebrations for the July Fourth holiday were cancelled in his state “to minimize that exposure.”“Obviously, I would like to have seen more face coverings there in order to set an example,” he said of Friday’s event in South Dakota.And if the president wanted to host a rally in Arkansas?“There would have to be social distancing and wearing of masks if you can’t social distance,” Hutchinson said. “You have to follow our guidelines and that’s what we would insist upon.”… July 6, 2020: President Donald Trump is set to hold an outdoor rally Saturday in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, according to the president’s campaign. The campaign rally at Portsmouth International Airport will come three weeks after an indoor rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma, the president’s first of the COVID-19 era, drew a smaller than expected crowd amid concerns of rising infections in the region. The Trump campaign’s announcement of the Portsmouth rally noted that “There will be ample hand sanitizer and all attendees will be provided a face mask that they are strongly encouraged to wear.” Many people at Trump’s rally in Tulsa skipped wearing masks, and relatively few masks were seen during his speech at South Dakota’s Mount Rushmore last Friday. Associated Press July 6, 2020: The Hill posted the following information: Mississippi House Speaker Philip Gunn (R) announced Sunday that he has tested positive for the coronavirus.Gunn said in a video posted on his Facebook page that he sought a test after coming into contact with another lawmaker who had also been diagnosed with the virus……The lawmaker, who did not identify the other House member who tested positive for the virus, said he had reached out to anyone he was in close contact with to tell them he had tested positive. He also called on anyone experiencing symptoms to also self-quarantine and notify anyone they’ve been in contact with if they test positive……Mississippi lawmakers met for much of June, sometimes wearing masks and sometimes not, and frequently sat together in close proximity in committee rooms while discussing the ultimately successful proposal to remove the Confederate battle flag from the state flag, The Associated Press reported… July 6, 2020: New Hampshire Governor Chris Sununu posted a press release titled: “Governor Chris Sununu Statement on President Trump Rally”. From the press release: Today, Governor Chris Sununu issued the following statement regarding the President’s upcoming rally in Portsmouth, New Hampshire.“As Governor I will always welcome the President of the United States to New Hampshire,” said Governor Chris Sununu. “I am pleased to see the campaign will be handing out face masks and hand sanitizer to all attendees, as has been true at all public gatherings in NH where social distancing is hard to maintain. It is imperative that folks attending the rally wear masks.”From the outset of this pandemic, the State has not stopped or prevented individuals from peacefully assembling, including marches led by Black Lives Matter and protests from Reopen NH.The Governor’s schedule is still being finalized. In the past, the Governor has greeted the President upon arrival at the airport. If the Governor greets the President at the airport, he will be wearing a mask. July 6, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “South Dakota governor flew with Trump on Air Force One after being exposed to coronavirus: report”. It was written by Aris Folley. From the article: South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem (R) flew with President Trump on Air Force One on Friday after having close interactions with Kimberly Guilfoyle, a senior advisor for the president’s campaign and the girlfriend of Donald Trump Jr., who has tested positive for COVID-19, The Associated Press reported on Monday.According to the news agency, the governor interacted with Guilfoyle, who tested positive for COVID-19 on Friday, during a campaign fundraiser in South Dakota on Thursday. The two had also reportedly been seen hugging at one point during Guilfoyle’s visit to the state last week. Noem’s office told to The Hill on Monday that the governor tested negative for COVID-19 on Friday after interacting with Guilfoyle at the fundraiser on Thursday……While on the plane to Washington, D.C., with Trump on Friday, Noem did not wear a mask, a spokeswoman for her office, Maggie Seidel, told the AP. Seidel was also reportedly asked about potential risks to the president from Noem’s presence on the plane on Friday. July 6, 2020: Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms, who is reportedly in the running to become the running mate to presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden, said Monday she has tested positive for the coronavirus… …She later said on CNN that one of her children has also tested positive. In the interview, Bottom said she had recently experienced symptoms similar to seasonal allergies, including a headache and a mild dry cough, and did not initially recognize them as signs of Covid-19″. “I don’t have any idea how we were exposed,” she said. “I’m stunned.”… CNBC July 6, 2020: Rep. Ben McAdams (D-Utah) tweeted: “I had to get a Covid test in advance of a medical checkup. I thought I’d share what it’s like. It’s been three months since I was in the hospital with Covid-19. As expected, the test was negative. If you have symptoms, please get tested. The test isn’t as bad as it looks #utpol”. The tweet included a video of Rep. Ben McAdams getting tested for coronavirus. July 7, 2020: CNN posted an article titled: “Brazil’s Jair Bolsonaro tests positive for Covid-19 after months of dismissing the seriousness of the virus”. It was written by Marcia Reverdosa, Rodrigo Pedroso, and Tara John. From the article: Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro has tested positive for Covid-19, following months of downplaying the virus. Bolsonaro himself announced the result, speaking on Brazilian TV channels Tuesday. “Everyone knew that it would reach a considerable part of the population sooner or later. It was positive for me,” he said, referring to the Covid-19 test he took Monday.”“On Sunday, I wasn’t feeling very well. On Monday, it got worse when I started feeling tired and some muscle pain. I also had a 38-degree fever. Given those symptoms, the presidential doctor said there was suspicion of Covid-19,” Bolsonaro said, adding that he then went to hospital to receive a lung scan.He said that his wife, First Lady Michelle Bolsonaro was also tested.In an interview with CNN Brasil following his diagnosis, Bolsonaro said he would steer clear of in-person meetings in the near future. “I’m not going to see anyone for meetings. Everything will be done via video conference and I will rarely meet people if I need to deal with more reserved matter,” he said……More than 65,000 people have now died of the virus in Brazil, according to figures released by the country’s health ministry on Monday. So far, 1,623,284 cases have been confirmed. With coronavirus tests hard to come by in the country, some local experts say the real number of people infected could be 12 to 16 times higher… July 8, 2020: ABC News posted an article titled: “Trump rally likely contributed to surge in COVID-19 cases, Tulsa health official says”. It was written by Will Steakin and Olivia Rubin. From the article: President Donald Trump’s campaign rally in late June, as well as the accompanying counterprotests, likely contributed to the area’s recent spike in coronavirus cases, Tulsa City-County Health Department Director Dr. Bruce Dart said Wednesday.“In the past few days, we’ve seen almost 500 new cases, and we had several large events just over two weeks ago, so I guess we just connect the dots,” Dart said at a press conference.Dart, who said prior to the rally he’d recommended it be postponed over health concerns, added on Wednesday that “significant events in the past few weeks” had “more than likely contributed” to Tulsa County’s surge in cases.Tulsa County reported 261 new cases on Tuesday, a new record high. The state also broke records this week with 858 new cases on Tuesday and 673 on Wednesday……Hospitals in the area are also beginning to report strain. Hillcrest HealthCare System, a major provider in Oklahoma with two hospitals in Tulsa, is nearly at capacity.“We are running at 90-95% inpatient capacity in our Hillcrest Tulsa metro hospitals and ICUs,” Dr. Guy Sneed, the chief medical officer at Hillcrest HealthCare System, told ABC News. “Many of our COVID patients are very sick and require ICU services, including mechanical ventilator support. Some are also requiring ECMO services.”“So, the strain on our existing hospital resources remains high, as it does for the other Tulsa area acute care hospitals,” he added.In the lead-up to last month’s event, health experts raised concerns that the president’s rally could end up being a dangerous event in terms of possible infections. “I’m really very concerned about this event being a superspreader-type event where there will be potentially many people coming out of this who were exposed and could become sick from COVID-19,” Dr. Lena Wen, an emergency physician and public health professor at George Washington University told ABC News… July 8, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Kimberly Guilfoyle reports being asymptomatic and ‘feeling really pretty good’ after COVID-19 diagnosis”. It was written by Marina Pitofsky. From the article: Kimberly Guilfoyle, a top fundraiser for President Trump’s reelection campaign and the girlfriend of Donald Trump Jr., revealed Wednesday event that she is feeling “really pretty good” after she tested positive for COVID-19 earlier this month. Guilfoyle told the Trump campaign’s online show “The Right View” that “I’m doing my best and following my doctor’s orders.”… July 10, 2020: Bloomberg posted an article titled: “Snack Food Executive to Host Trump Fundraiser With Virus Spreading”. It was written by Justin Sink, Jennifer Jacobs, and Mario Parker. President Donald Trump is heading to coronavirus-stricken Florida for a high-dollar campaign fundraiser hosted in Hillsboro Beach by Troy Link, chief executive of Link Snacks, Inc.The event is expected to bring in about $10 million for the president’s re-election, according to a person familiar with the event. A spokeswoman for the snack food company, known for offbeat ads pitching its beef-jerky, didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.The fundraiser — with tickets setting supporters back $580,600 per couple, according to the Washington Post, — comes after Trump was outraised by Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden for two consecutive months. The former vice president banked $141 million in June, according to his campaign, besting Trump’s $131 million haul.But the President’s visit to Florida also coincides with a surge in coronavirus cases in the state, where Republicans will gather for their party convention next month. On Thursday, Florida’s Department of Health announced 8,935 new cases, bringing the state’s total to over 230,000. In Miami-Dade, County some 92% of intensive care hospitals are full……Trump’s visit will also include a stop at U.S. Southern Command in Doral, where he’ll be briefed on recent efforts to intensify drug interdiction in the Caribbean Sea and east Pacific Coast… July 14, 2020: The NSC Twitter account posted a tweet: “Very productive meeting with my #French, #German, #Italian, and #UK counterparts. We discussed the major threats and challenges facing the United States and #Europe, as well as new ways to work together in the post-#COVID19 world”. The tweet included a photo of five men in suits standing close together for the photo. None of them are wearing masks. July 14, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “House GOP lawmaker tests positive for COVID-19”. It was written by Cristina Marcos. From the article: Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-Va.) revealed on Tuesday that he has tested positive for COVID-19, making him the ninth member of Congress with a confirmed or presumed case.Griffith’s office said in a statement that he took a coronavirus test over the weekend after “developing possible symptoms” and has since been self-isolating. “Although he does not currently have significant symptoms, he will continue to self-isolate as he performs his duties on behalf of Virginia’s Ninth Congressional District,” the statement said.Griffith’s diagnosis comes five days after he participated in a press conference on Capitol Hill with members of the conservative House Freedom Caucus to push for reopening schools in the fall amid the coronavirus pandemic despite safety concerns from educators and some parents.Griffith wore a mask for parts of the press conference, which was held outdoors, but took it off to speak before the cameras… July 14, 2020: Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-Va.) posted a press release on his official website titled: “Griffith Tests Positive for Coronavirus”. From the press release: Congressman Morgan Griffith (R-VA) today was informed that he tested positive for COVID-19. Upon developing possible symptoms, he took the test and has since been self-isolating. Although he does not currently have significant symptoms, he will continue to self-isolate as he performs his duties on behalf of Virginia’s Ninth Congressional District. July 15, 2020: ABC News posted an article titled: “Brazil’s Bolsonaro gets new positive coronavirus test result”. It was written by Mauricio Savarese. From the article: Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro said Wednesday he has tested positive for the new coronavirus for a second time, following his July 7 announcement that he had COVID-19.“I did the test yesterday, and at night the result came back that I am still positive for coronavirus,” Bolsonaro said. “I hope that in the coming days I will do another test and, God willing, everything will be all right to return soon to activity.”The far-right leader said he hasn’t experienced serious symptoms of the disease as he isolates at the presidential residence in capital of Brasilia.According to the World Health Organization, the median time from onset to clinical recovery for mild cases is approximately two weeks.Before his diagnosis, Bolsonaro had spent many of his weekends since the beginning of the pandemic mingling in crowds, sometimes without wearing a mask. He is treating his COVID-19 with the anti-malaria drug hydroxychloroquine, although it has not been proven effective against the virus.Brazil, the world’s sixth most-populous nation and home to 210 million people, is one of the outbreak’s epicenters. More than 75,000 Brazilians have died from COVID-19, and almost 2 million have been infected, according to government statistics. Both numbers are the world’s second-highest totals, behind those of the U.S… July 16, 2020: Tulsa World posted an article titled: “Watch Now: Kevin Stitt ‘pretty shocked’ to be first governor to test positive for COVID-19”. It was written by Barbara Hoberock. From the article: Gov. Kevin Stitt said Wednesday that he has tested positive for COVID-19, becoming the first nation’s governor to contract the virus but remaining steadfast against a mask mandate.The news comes the same day the state recorded 1,075 new cases, a record for a single day. Wednesday marked the first day that Oklahoma’s daily new case count exceeded 1,000. There have been 22,813 confirmed cases of the disease since early March……Stitt said he got his positive test result around 12:30 p.m. on Tuesday.Stitt earlier that day had chaired a meeting of the Commissioners of the Land Office.Three of the five members and Rep. Mark McBride, R-Moore, met in executive session to discuss a new leader for the agency.The governor was asked Wednesday about the meeting, where Stitt did not wear a mask. McBride on Wednesday said he has canceled his upcoming events and plans to get tested.The other two members were Lt. Gov. Matt Pinnell and Agriculture Secretary Blayne Arthur.In a Facebook post, Pinnell said he would be retested for COVID-19 and would continue quarantining and working from home until he has results. He reported having no symptoms currently.“No one in Oklahoma can say they don’t know anyone who has had it,” Pinnell said in his post. “We all know someone now and it should absolutely be taken seriously.”Arthur was notified Tuesday during the contact tracing process and is quarantining and working remotely, according to the Governor’s Office.Stitt’s office was asked for his schedule for the last two weeks. Baylee Lakey, a spokeswoman, said the request would have to be processed under the Oklahoma Open Records Act. Stitt’s office has been slow to respond to requests under the act……Stitt said he was “not thinking about a mask mandate at all.”“I am just hesitant to mandate something that is problematic to enforce,” the governor said.He said his wife and six children have tested negative for the virus.Stitt said he will be quarantining at home and conducting more meetings by videoconference.He said he does not second-guess his personal choices not to wear a mask despite testing positive.Stitt on June 20 attended a campaign rally in Tulsa at the BOK Center for President Donald Trump.The event attracted at least 6,200 people to the facility, which has 19,000 seats.The majority of people in attendance were not wearing masks. The state’s Republican Congressional delegation, some of whom wore masks, attended……Stitt also attended the funeral service last week for Tulsa police Sgt. Craig Johnson, who died after being shot during a traffic stop on June 30.Stitt was asked Wednesday whether his exposure likely came from the Trump rally, where he did not wear a mask. Stitt and Health Commissioner Lance Frye said the event was too long ago, adding that the exposure could have been at any point in the past two weeks… June 18, 2020: Media Matters posted an article titled: “Vice President Mike Pence lied about Oklahoma’s coronavirus cases to defend Trump’s rally. Local TV newscasts mostly ignored it.” It was written by Zachary Pleat. From the article: News programs broadcast in Oklahoma from dozens of television stations failed to cover a lie Vice President Mike Pence told about the state’s rising rate of coronavirus infections to defend a decision by President Donald Trump’s campaign to hold a rally in Tulsa on Saturday.On June 15, Pence said at a televised White House roundtable that Oklahoma has “flattened the curve. And today their hospital capacity is abundant, the number of cases in Oklahoma has declined precipitously and we feel very confident going forward with the rally this coming weekend.” The Daily Beast, citing a tweet from CNN reporter Daniel Dale which showed a recent surge in new coronavirus cases reported in the state, quickly explained that Pence “blatantly lied to reporters about the trajectory of COVID-19 cases in Oklahoma, where President Trump is scheduled to hold a large campaign rally on Saturday.” July 20, 2020: CNN posted an article titled: “Two Brazilian ministers test positive for coronavirus in a day”. It was written by Rodrigo Pedroso. From the article: Two Brazilian ministers have tested positive for the coronavirus in one day, following in the footsteps of President Jair Bolsonaro and three other high-ranking government officials.Brazil’s Minister of Citizenship Onyx Lorenzoni announced that he had tested positive for Covid-19 just hours before Milton Ribiero, Minister of Education, revealed that he was also infected.In a series of tweets, Lorenzoni wrote that he was tested after he began to show symptoms last Friday. He said he had started the so-called “Covid kit” treatment, a cocktail of drugs promoted by some medical doctors who back Bolsonaro’s claim that it’s an effective treatment in the early stages of the novel coronavirus……The Brazilian Society of Infectious Diseases (SBI), in a report published Friday, urged medical professionals to stop using hydroxychloroquine to treat coronavirus, because it has been proved ineffective and can cause collateral damage. A week earlier, Brazil’s National Health Surveillance Agency ANVISA, which regulates pharmaceuticals, released a statement saying there is no conclusive proof that ivermectin is effective as Covid-19 treatment.The other minister, Ribeiro tweeted on Monday: “I’ve just received a positive Covid-19 result this morning. I am already medicated, and I’ll work remotely,” but did not specify which medication he is taking. He is working from a hotel in the capital Brasília, the minister’s press officer told CNN Brasil.Brazil has now recorded more than two million cases and almost 80,000 deaths, more than any country except the United States, according to figures from Johns Hopkins University……In March, after returning from a trip to the US for meetings between Bolsonaro and US President Donald Trump, Brazil’s Mines and Energy Minister Bento Albuquerque and Institutional Security Minister General Augusto Heleno both tested positive for the coronavirus, along with Bolsonaro’s communication secretary Fabio Wajngarten, and another 15 members of the Brazilian delegation… July 22, 2020: NBC News posted an article titled: “White House executive office cafeteria closed after positive coronavirus test”. It was written by Josh Lederman. From the article: The White House is conducting contact tracing after a cafeteria worker tested positive for coronavirus, three Trump administration officials tell NBC News.The cafeteria and an eatery in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, or EEOB, were both closed this week after the case was discovered, officials said. It was unclear how long the facility will remain closed, although some staffers were told it could remain shuttered for two weeks……Part of the White House complex, the Eisenhower Executive Office Building sits just across West Executive Ave. from the West Wing. It houses the offices of much of the senior White House staff, including officials from the coronavirus task force, the vice president’s office, the National Security Council and several economic policy shops.Unlike the White House Mess, which is located inside the West Wing and run by the U.S. Navy, the cafeteria and an Ike’s Eatery in the neighboring EEOB are run by a government contractor. The White House referred questions about the situation to the General Services Administration, which maintains the building.“All proper protocols were in place by the vendor including masks, gloves, plastic shielding at check out, and no dine-in service,” a GSA spokesperson said. “The White House Medical Unit has done contact tracing and determined that the risk of retransmission is low.”The GSA did not say how many staffers might have been potentially exposed at the commissary or how long it will remain closed……Several White House officials and others in close proximity to the president have previously tested positive for coronavirus, leading to contact tracing efforts by the White House in the past. Although the White House recently ended regular temperature checks for all those entering the White House grounds, those coming into close proximity to the president are still given COVID-19 rapid tests at the White House. July 23, 2020: CNN posted an article titled: “DC investigator finds no Covid-related violations at Trump International Hotel”. It was written by Katelyn Polantz and Caroline Kelly. From the article: A Washington, DC, investigator inspected President Donald Trump’s Washington hotel on Wednesday and found no violations of Covid-related regulations after images emerged of the President and others not wearing masks in the hotel’s lobby earlier in the week.The agency says it will continue to monitor the Trump International Hotel’s compliance with Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser’s regulations, which include the mandatory wearing of masks when inside businesses or the common areas of hotels……Jared Powell, spokesman for DC’s Alcoholic Beverage Regulation Administration, which investigates complaints about businesses not following the Covid-19 protection policy, told CNN that “during the inspection, guests and staff were observed to be wearing face masks and coverings in compliance with the Mayor’s Order.”“Reports are only generated when violations are observed in person by an investigator,” Powell added. ABRA will continue to monitor the establishment for compliance.”……The President attended “a roundtable with supporters of a joint fundraising committee,” according to the White House, at the hotel on Monday night. Footage later surfaced of Trump not wearing a mask in the hotel’s lobby.”……Per a Republican National Committee spokesperson prior to the fundraiser, it was slated to raise $5 million for Trump Victory, his joint fundraising operation with the RNC and state party committees. July 23, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Two cafeterias used by White House staff closed after positive coronavirus test”. It was written by Justin Wise. From the article: A pair of cafeterias regularly used by White House staff members were reportedly closed this week after an employee tested positive for COVID-19, the disease caused by the novel coronavirus. An anonymous Trump administration official told The New York Times on Wednesday that the White House notified staffers about the closures, but said there wasn’t any reason for them to self-quarantine. The cafeterias were in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building and the New Executive Office Building, neither of which are located next to the West Wing. The worker who contracted the coronavirus is said to be a cafeteria employee, according to reports from NBC News and CNN. The White House did not immediately return a request for comment from The Hill. In addition to the closures, the White House reportedly conducted contact tracing for staffers who may have been in contact with the employee. Staff have reportedly been advised to monitor themselves for possible symptoms and remain home if they feel sick… July 27, 2020: CNBC posted an article titled: “Trump national security advisor Robert O’Brien tests positive for coronavirus”. It was written by Kevin Breuniger. From the article: President Donald Trump’s national security advisor, Robert O’Brien, has tested positive for coronavirus. O’Brien has “mild symptoms and has been self-isolating and working from a secure location off site,” the White House said in a statement Monday.“There is no risk of exposure to the President or the Vice President. The work of the National Security Council continues uninterrupted,” the White House said.O’Brien, 54, is among the highest-ranking members in Trump’s orbit reported to have come down with the virus……The White House has said that Trump is regularly tested, as are all officials who come into close contact with the president and vice president.O’Brien earlier this month had traveled to Europe to meet with officials from the United Kingdom, France, Germany and Italy. He was photographed on that trip in close proximity with his European counterparts, none of whom appeared to be wearing masks during meetings, photos from the NCS’s official Twitter account show… July 27, 2020: The Guardian posted an article titled: “Trump’s national security adviser tests positive for coronavirus”. It was written by Joan E. Greve, Julian Borger, and Ed Pilkington. From the article: The national security adviser, Robert O’Brien, has tested positive for the coronavirus, but the White House insisted there was “no risk” of Donald Trump being exposed.However, O’Brien recently returned from a trip to Europe where he was photographed without wearing a mask or social distancing, with several foreign officials, including his UK counterpart, Mark Sedwill; the UK ambassador to France, Edward Llewellyn; and the French national security adviser, Emmanuel Bonne… The photographs referred to in the article from The Guardian were posted on the NSC twitter account on July 15, 2020. The tweet said: “Great to see #UK NSA @marksedwill today. We discussed important bilateral and global topics, including #HongKong, #China, #5G security, and #Iran. The U.S.-UK Special Relationship endures”. The tweet included two photos. One was a group of eight people sitting around a table and having a meal together indoors. The other was a photo of standing close two four other people, some of whom appears to be in the photo with O’Brien that was posted by the NSC Twitter account on July 14, 2020. July 27 2020: Tulsa World posted an article titled: “Oklahoma Gov. Kivin Stitt says he has recovered from COVID-19”. It was written by Harrison Grimwood. From the article: Oklahoma’s chief executive reported Monday that he has returned to work about 12 days after testing positive for the new coronavirus.Gov. Kevin Stitt announced on July 15 that he tested positive for COVID-19……Stitt said he quickly quarantined and sought testing and recommended that Oklahomans react similarly should they see symptoms set in.He announced his positive test result on the same day Oklahoma first reported more than a thousand new cases of COVID-19 in any given day. And Stitt announced his return to work Monday, the highest day yet for case counts in Oklahoma at 1,401 new cases.The disease can be deadly, with 496 Oklahomans having died from it thus far, Stitt’s only symptoms, he said, were fatigue and achiness.Public health officials recommend that patients isolate for 10 days from the onset of symptoms and quarantine until they are without a fever for 24 hours without the use of fever-reducing medicines… July 29, 2020: Politico posted an article titled: “Louie Gohmert, who refused to wear a mask, tests positive for coronavirus”. It was written by Jake Sherman. Rep. Louis Gohmert – a Texas Republican who has been walking around the Capitol without a mask – he tested positive for the coronavirus, according to multiple sources.Gohmert was scheduled to fly to Texas on Wednesday morning with President Donald Trump and tested positive in a pre-screen at the White House. The eight-term Republican told CNN last month that he was not wearing a mask because he was being tested regularly for the coronavirus.“f I get it,” he told CNN in June, “you’ll never see me without a mask.”……Gohmert attended Tuesday’s blockbuster House Judiciary Committee hearing with Attorney General William Barr in person, where lawmakers were seated at some distance from one another.But footage from before the hearing shows Gohmert and Barr walking together in close contact, with neither wearing a mask.Justice Department spokeswoman Kerri Kupec said Barr will be tested for coronavirus on Wednesday.At one point in Tuesday’s hearing, Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) chastised several Republicans for taking off their masks, though Gohmert was not among those he scolded……Connie Hair, Gohmert’s chief of staff, declined comment. But after this article was published, Gohmert told his aides in person that he had been infected… July 29, 2020: Representative Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) tweeted: “I want to wish @replouiegohmert a full & speedy recovery. When individuals refuse to take the necessary precautions it puts everyone at risk. I’ve regularly instructed all Members to wear their masks had hope this is a lesson by all my colleagues.” The tweet included a link to the Politico article. July 29, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Multiple lawmakers self-quarantine after exposure to Gohmert”. From the article: At least two lawmakers said Wednesday that they will self-quarantine after recently being around Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas), who has tested positive for COVID-19.Rep. Kay Granger (R-Texas) said her decision to self-quarantine came after she sat next to Gohmert on a flight from their home state over the weekend. Rep Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.) chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, also said he will self quarantine after chairing a hearing that Gohmert attended on Tuesday.Gohmert tested positive for coronavirus while he was being screened at the White House ahead of a planned trip to Texas with President Trump on Wednesday.The Texas Republican had attended multiple hearings on Capitol Hill the previous day, including the Natural Resources Committee hearing about the Park Police’s handling of protesters at Lafayette Square last month and a Judiciary hearing with Attorney General William Barr……A spokesperson for Granger said she was “seated next to Representative Gohmert on a flight from Texas Sunday evening. At the direction of the Attending Physician, and out of an abundance of caution, she is self-quarantining.”..…A spokesperson for Barr said earlier Wednesday that the attorney general will be tested for COVID-19 after being near Gohmert.And at least one member of the Capitol press corps, a reporter for Bloomberg News, also got tested on Wednesday after an encounter with Gohmert… July 29, 2020: Reporter for Bloomberg Erik Wasson tweeted: “In line for covid testing after Gohmert encounter”. The tweet included a photo of himself outside, wearing a mask, and standing in a socially-distanced line of people who were all waiting for a coronavirus test. July 29, 2020: Rep. Mike Johnson (R-La.) tweeted a thread that started with this tweet: “On Monday, I had dinner with my good friend, Rep. Gohmert. While I feel healthy, exhibit no symptoms, and have otherwise followed mask and social distancing guidelines, the attending physician has advised that I should self-quarantine for 14 days out of an abundance of caution.” The tweet included a three-minute and fourty-four second video from Fox News of Rep. Mike Johnson speaking at the House Judiciary Committee hearing on “Big Tech Executives on Alleged Bias Against Conservatives.” Rep. Mike Johnson is not wearing a mask in that video. The majority of the video is two other people talking about the hearing. The second tweet said: “Recognizing the seriousness of this virus & the danger it poses to high-risk individuals I began following the attending physician’s recommendation immediately. Should the attending physician recommend at any point that I take a COVID-19 test, I will follow that guideance as well.” The third tweet in the thread said: “In the meantime, I plan to continue my work on behalf of the people of Louisiana’s Fourth Congressional District while in isolation and, as always, I encourage constituents to reach out to my office if they need anything.” July 29, 2020: Politico posted an article titled: “Turning Point USA co-founder dies of coronavirus-related complications”. It was written by Daniel Lippman and Tina Nguyen. From the article: The co-founder of conservative student group Turning Point USA, Bill Montgomery, has died from complications of the coronavirus, according to two friends of his.Montgomery, who started it in 2012 with young conservative star Charlie Kirk, died at the age of 80 on Tuesday from Covid-19, according to pro-Trump conservative strategist Caleb Hull, who posted about the death on Twitter and his personal Facebook page, and Chicago-based citizen journalist Vic Maggio……Montgomery is survived by his widow, Edie, a son and a daughter.Over the course of the pandemic, Turning Point USA representative have downplayed the impact of the coronavirus on public life……In late June, Trump spoke to a packed audience of young Turning Point supporters at a megachurch in Phoenix where he was introduced by Kirk. Few people in the audience practiced social distancing or wore masks, although the organization gave masks to everyone who wanted one and provided socially distanced seating in the upper tier of the church… June 29, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Tuberville breaks DC self-quarantine policy to campaign”. It was written by Rebecca Klar. From the article: Alabama Republican State candidate Tommy Tuberville appears to have broken the D.C. policy requiring visitors from states with high coronavirus case counts to self-quarantine for 14 days.Tuberville defied the District’s requirement during a fundraising trip in D.C. this week, The Washington Post reported Wednesday.The Post cited a photo Rep. Bruce Westerman (R-Ark.) posted to Facebook on Tuesday of the two men, neither in a mask, in the lobby of the Trump International Hotel……D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser (D) last week announced visitors arriving to the District on nonessential business from hot spot areas will need to quarantine for 14 days. Alabama is one of more than two dozen states on the list……Tuberville, the former Auburn University football coach, beat Sessions in a runoff earlier this month. Sessions was running to reclaim his old seat.…Tuberville will face Sen. Doug Jones (D-Ala.) in November. Joes is considered the most vulnerable Democrat in facing reelection in 2020. The Cook Political Report rates the race as “Lean Republican”……The outlet noted that Tuberville wore a maks during his watch party early on the night of his win when he spoke to supporters but did not wear one when he gave his victory speech or when he went into the crowd and posed for photos and for hugs, handshakes and high-fives… July 29, 2020: Vice President Mike Pence tweeted: “Thank you to Mrs. Combs’ 4th Grade Class! We are so proud and happy to see you all back in school! @Thales_Academy has taken careful steps to keep everyone healthy and we are grateful for the countless hours put in to open the academy and get kids back in the classroom!” The tweet included four photos from the visit. In the first photo, the teacher is sitting at the front of the classroom with Mike Pence and Betsy DeVos each seated several feet away from each other. The teacher is wearing a mask. Mike Pence and Betsy DeVos are not. The second photo shows some of the students in the classroom. three are wearing masks. The photographer focused on a child who is incorrectly wearing a mask around his neck. Behind the students are a row of photographers all of whm are wearing masks. The third photo is very similar to the first one. The fourth photo is centered on Mike Pence, who is not wearing a mask. He is seated in front of a whiteboard that says “Welcome Vice President Pence!” July 30, 2020: CBS News posted an article titled: “Herman Cain, former presidential candidate, dies from coronavirus”. It was written by Grace Segers. From the article: Former Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain has died from coronavirus, according to a post on his website. The businessman and right-wing media personality was 74 years old……Cain was hospitalized with COVID-19 on June 29……Although perhaps most famous for his 2011 presidential campaign, Cain had a long career as a prominent businessman. Cain received his undergraduate degree from Morehouse College and his graduate degree from Purdue University, and worked as a ballistic analyst for the U.S. Department of the Navy. He was a business executive at Burger King before he served as chairman and CEO of Godfather’s Pizza from 1986 to 1996. He also served as president and CEO of the National Restaurant Association from 1996 to 1999……Cain attended President Trump’s rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma, on June 20. The 2012 presidential candidate posted a photo of himself and other rally attendees, none of whom were wearing masks. Although masks were provided to attendees at the rally, wearing them was not mandatory.Trump campaign officials told CBS News that Cain sat with members of the president’s “Black Voices for Trump” advisory board, as seen in the photo he posted to Twitter, but he did not come in contact with Mr. Trump. The statement posted to Cain’s Twitter account upon his hospitalization said that “there is no way of knowing for sure how or where Mr. Cain contracted the coronavirus.” Calabrese also wrote in a column in early July that Cain had also traveled to Arizona, which is dealing with a serious outbreak, in the days after the rally… July 30, 2020: President Trump tweeted: “My friend Herman Cain, a Powerful Voice of Freedom and all that is good, passed away this morning. Herman had an incredible career and was adored by everyone that ever met him, especially me. He was a very special man, an American Patriot, and great friend. I just got off…” That tweet was followed by a second tweet: “….the phone with his amazing wife Gloria, daughter Melanie, and son Vincent to express my deepest condolences to the entire family. @FLOTUS Melania and I love Herman Cain, a great man. Herman, Rest In Peace!” August 3, 2020: WKYC Studios posted an article titled: “People attending President Trump’s fundraiser at Bratenahl’s Shoreby Club will get rapid COVID-19 test: Mark Nayamik Reports”. It was written by Mark Naymik. From the article: The Shorby Club, the private waterfront haven in Bratenahl, told its members in an email newsletter Sunday that anyone working or attending the fundraiser for President Trump on Aug. 6th will recieve a rapid COVID-19 test.They must test negative to attend the event, the email reads. The email did not specifically identify the event as the president’s fundraiser. But 3News and others reported last week that Trump is holding a fundraiser at the club on Thursday, though the exact time has not been revealed.The Shoreby Club email acknowledges members raised health safety concerns over holding such an event.Though rapid testing is not widely available, the White House has been using such tests to regularly screen those around the president, including the press. In March, Trump showed off a rapid-testing device made by Abbott Labs, which is about the size of a toaster and can produce results in about 15 minutes. It’s unclear what test will be used or what protocol is place for testing guests. The Shoreby Club, which features a large outdoor event space overlooking the water, has not returned a call for comment on the event.Thursday’s event is a joint fundraiser for Trump’s re-election campaign and the Republican National Committee. Tickets cost a minimum of $5,600. Guests who contribute $100,000 will have more exclusive access to the president and other GOP officials.RNC Chair Ronna McDaniel and RNC Co-Chairman Tommy Hicks are expected to attend the event. Among the Ohio business and civic leaders hosting the event are Debbie and Matt Crawford, Mike Gibbons, Catherine and James Kassouf, Kelly and Mel Kurtz, Lanee and Jason Lucarelli, Jenny and Tim Smucker, Pam and Bill Summers and Tim Timken, according to a copy of the invitation to the event. August 5, 2020: ABC News posted an article titled: “Students at school touted by Pence for reopening must quarantine due to COVID-19”. It was written by Ella Torres. From the article: Fourth graders at a school in North Carolina have been asked to quarantine for 14 days after a student there tested positive for COVID-19.The school, Thales Academy in Wake Forest, said it was notified on Monday that the student became infected after having contact with an infected family member. The student was asymptomatic and was last at school on Friday. Teachers who were exposed also will be quarantined.Thales Academy, a network of private non-sectarian community schools with eight locations in North Carolina, made the news last week after Vice President Mike Pence and Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos visited a classroom and applauded the school for reopening.Pence and DeVos visited a campus in Apex, not Wake Forest……Thales welcomed students back July 20. It offered parents two options: fully online or fully in-person, according to ABC Durham affiliate WTVD. Students had their temperatures taken and completed a medical questionnaire after they were dropped off, according to WTVD. Staff and faculty also reminded students to wear masks.Because the school network is private, it doesn’t have to adhere to North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper’s school reopening guidelines… August 5, 2020: WKYC Studios posted an article titled: “Gov. Mike DeWine moves coronavirus briefing to Friday due to President Trump’s planned Ohio visit”. From the article: Governor Mike DeWine’s office announced the next coronavirus briefing has been delayed a day due to a visit by the president. President Donald J. Trump is scheduled to visit the Whirlpool plant in Clyde and hold a fundraiser in Bratenahl on Thursday. The Shoreby Club, the private waterfront haven in Bratenahl, told its members in an email newsletter Sunday that anyone working or attending the fundraiser for President Trump on Aug. 6th will receive a rapid COVID-19 test. They must test negative in order to attend the event. Thursday’s event is a joint fundraiser for Trump’s re-election campaign and the Republican National Committee. Tickets cost a minimum of $5,600. Guests who contribute $100,000 will have more exclusive access to the president and other GOP officials. RNC Chair Ronna McDaniel and RNC Co-Chairman Tommy Hicks are expected to attend the event. During his visit to the Whirlpool plant, President Trump will tour the plant and speak regarding his administration’s dedication to assist in supporting the manufacturing industry and American-made products. The governor will greet President Trump when he lands in Ohio… August 6, 2020: Ohio Governor Mike DeWine (Republican) tweeted: “As part of the standard protocal to greet President Trump on the tarmac in Cleveland, I took a COVID test. I tested positive. I have no symptoms at this time. I’m following protocal and will quarantine at home for the next 14 days”. The tweet was posted at 9:34 AM. August 6, 2020: Ohio Governor Mike DeWine (Republican) tweeted: “I tested negative in second test I took today for COVID-19. First Lady Fran DeWine and staff members have also all tested negative for COVID-19. Thanks to all for the well wishes.” This tweet was posted a 7:00 PM. August 7, 2020: Cleveland.com posted an article titled: “Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine tests positive for coronavirus”. It was written by Andrew J. Tobias. From the article: Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine announced Thursday he has tested positive for COVID-19, the disease caused by the new coronavirus.DeWine was tested Thursday as part of a standard protocol as he prepared to greet President Donald Trump at the tarmac in at Burke Lakefront Airport in Cleveland, according to a news release issued Thursday afternoon by the governor’s office.Less than 10 hours after the initial announcement, DeWine announced he tested negative for coronavirus. The second round of testing was performed through a more sensitive test called a polymerase chain reaction, or PCR test, which detects genetic material from the new coronavirus, the governor’s office said. The earlier test delivers rapid results by testing the blood for antigens, but is a relatively unproven technology…Lt. Gov. Jon Husted, who also was in Cleveland to greet the president, tested negative, according to the governor’s office. Trump is in Ohio to visit the Whirlpool manufacturing plant in Sandusky County and has a fundraiser planned later in Bratenahl.DeWine has no symptoms, and is returning to Columbus where he will be tested again, as will Ohio First Lady Fran DeWine, the governor’s office said. He then will head to his home in Cedarville where he plans to self-quarantine for 14 days.Husted, meanwhile, continued with his plans to meet the president on the runway……DeWine becomes the second U.S. governor to test positive for COVID-19. Republican Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt tested positive on July 15. He reported to work 12 days later and has declared himself recovered, according to the Tulsa World.DeWine, a Republican, has become nationally prominent for his cautious approach to dealing with the coronavirus, including being an early advocate for the wearing of facial masks……Officials in the governor’s office said it’s unlikely that many other staffers will have to quarantine as a result of the governor’s positive test. DeWine heads to Columbus twice a week for his coronavirus briefings, but generally works from his home in Cedarville. Most of his staff also work from home. So the only other state officials DeWine likely would come in close contact with include Husted, his security detail and staffers who help with the briefings, Tierney said… August 7, 2020: Cleveland.com (via MSN.com) posted an article titled: “6 workers at Bratenahl club where Donald Trump appeared test positive for coronavirus, but didn’t encounter the president”. It was written by Robert Higgs. From the article: Six people who work at the Bratenahl club that hosted President Donald Trump on Thursday tested positive for COVID-19 coronavirus but were not at the clube to encounter the president.The Cuyahoga County Board of Health and the Shoreby Club each confirmed the positive tests on Friday and offered assurances that the workers posed no hazard to the president.Any food with which they might have come in contact was discarded, club General Manager Buddy Kane said in a letter to members. The club, meanwhile, was closed Friday and will be sanitized.The employees were tested Thursday morning off-site as part of preparations for the event. All were asymptomatic, Kane said in the letter to members.It is unclear yet, though, how many of the employees actually did contract the virus, Dr. Heidi Gullett, medical director for the county Board of Health, said during a Friday media briefing.The employees were given a rapid positive antigen test, which yields results quickly, but also can yield false positives.That was the case for Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine, who was scheduled to welcome the president to Cleveland, but instead returned to his home in Cedarville after getting a positive result from that test… August 7, 2020: HuffPost posted an article titled: “Trump Calls Maskless Country Club Audience At Press Conference A “Peaceful Protest”. It was written by Sara Ruiz-Grossman. From the article: President Donald Trump had dozens of guests at a press conference at his club in New Jersey, most of whom didn’t socially distance and some who didn’t wear masks for a time — appearing to flout state rules limiting indoor gatherings amid the pandemic and putting at risk the health of members of the media. At the news conference held at Trump’s private golf club in Bedminster, which Trump announced late Friday, a reporter noted that Americans continue to die of COVID-19 nationwide, and yet, “in this room, you have dozens of people, you’re not following the guidelines of New Jersey.” New Jersey’s latest order limits indoor gatherings to 25 people in an effort to curb the spread of the virus. More than 40 people can be counted in photos from the news conference.As the guests booed the reporter, Trump responded: “This is a political activity. You’re wrong on that. They have exceptions, political activity. And it’s also a peaceful protest.” Under the state’s order, there are exceptions for funerals, religious services and political activity, which can have up to 100 people. Yet Trump had announced this as a news conference, not a campaign rally……As reporters waited for the news conference to start, photos showed guests standing close together, many of them without masks on. Later, staff apparently handed out masks to Trump’s guests. The guests reportedly had their temperatures taken prior to the event… August 7, 2020: White House Correspondent for Bloomberg, Justin Sink tweeted: “there’s currently dozens of unmasked bedminster patrons the president has invited to the bedminster ballroom where he’s scheduled to hold his press conference – a number drinking wine. btw here’s the NJ regulations for golf courses.” The tweet included a screenshot of the New Jersey regulations for golf courses. From the regulations: Limiting the number of patrons in any indoor premises to 25 percent capacity – excluding employeesRequiring workers and customers to wear cloth face coverings while indoors, except where doing so would inhibit that individual’s health or where the individual is under two years of ageIf a customer refuses to wear a cloth face covering for non-medical reasons then the business must decline the individual entry into the indoor premises August 7, 2020: White House Correspondent for Bloomberg, Justin Sink tweeted: “this is the scene”. The tweet showed a photo of a group of people, some of whom are children, standing behind a temporary barracade of chairs. They are all closely packed together. Four people in the crowd are wearing masks. The rest are not. August 7, 2020: White House Correspondent for Bloomberg, Justin Sink tweeted: “after the press corps’ tweets, staffers asked audience members to distance more and handed out masks” August 8, 2020: The Denver Channel posted an article titled: “President Trump signs 4 executive orders aimed at pandemic relief”. From the article: President Trump signed four executive orders Saturday at his golf resort in Bedminster, New Jersey aimed at helping both working and unemployed Americans during the ongoing pandemic……Saturday’s event had the feeling of a political rally by the end, as members of the president’s golf club were able to attend the press briefing. As the president answered some questions from the media, audience members cheered…. August 22, 2020: HuffPost posted an article titled: “QAnon Cultists, Emboldened by Trump, Rally in Hollywood To Spread Dangerous Conspiracies”. It was written by Sebastian Murdock and Jesselyn Cook. From the article: Hundreds of believers of the dangerous conspiracy theory QAnon rallied in Hollywood on Saturday, just days after President Donald Trump praised the cult-like group.The demonstration, purported to be about bringing awareness to child sex trafficking, was largely an opportunity for supporters of QAnon to spread various unfounded conspiracy theories; the group has co-opted anti-traffiking messaging to draw more people into its conspiratorial web. Most demonstrators did not wear masks as they marched through Los Angeles, where thousands of people have died from COVID-19……Protestors gathered next to an In-N-Out Burger on Sunset Boulevard, where they held a 20-second moment of silence, followed by a rendition of “Amazing Grace.”……Multiple protestors who declined to be interviewed by HuffPost later took part in a change of, “Where is the media?”……Days later, when asked by a reporter if he supports QAnon, Trump outright embraced the group.“I don’t know much about the movement, other than I understand they like me very much, which I appreciate,” Trump said on Wednesday. “I have heard that it is gaining in popularity… I’ve heard these are people who love our country.” August 26, 2020: CNN posted an article titled: “Melania Trump Rose Garden speech attendees not all required to get coronavirus tests”. It was written by Jeff Zeleny, Kate Sullivan and Kate Bennet. From the article: Those who attended first lady Melania Trump’s speech in the White House Rose Garden that capped the second night of the Republican National Convention were not required to get tested for coronavirus, a person who attended the speech told CNN. There were screening questions on the form to RSVP, but no coronavirus tests or temperature checks were done at the White House, the person said. The Trump campaign said earlier in the day that about 70 people would be attending the speech, which was the first one with an in-person audience at the Republican convention. Early Wednesday morning, the first lady’s chief of staff Stephanie Grisham told CNN that the audience members “in the rows near the President and vice president” were tested for coronavirus before the speech. Grisham said most of the guests were not tested, especially those “in the last five or six rows,” but she claims anyone who came into close contact with Trump or Pence — including senior aides, staffers and Melania Trump’s parents — were tested.The vast majority of those attending did not wear masks, and the chairs provided for attendees did not appear to be placed six feet apart. The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention advises keeping at least six feet apart from others if possible in order to prevent the spread of the virus, and the agency also advocates for face coverings, especially if it is difficult to keep six feet apart from another person……The first lady’s speech was attended by President Donald Trump, Vice President Mike Pence, second lady Karen Pence and members of Trump’s Cabinet, among others… August 26, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Democrats press Esper on ‘concerning’ rise in Pentagon’s COVID-19 cases”. It was written by Rebecca Kheel. From the article: A group of Senate Democrats is reviving its concerns about the Pentagon’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic, citing a spike in cases in July.In a letter to Defense Secretary Mark Esper, the nine senators called reports of a rise in cases among service members “concerning”.“We are pleased to see that the department is taking some precautionary measures to address the spread of the virus, but are concerned that the department is still not properly prioritizing the health and well-being of our service members,” they wrote in the letter, dated Wednesday.As of Wednesday, the Pentagon has reported a total of 53,033 coronavirus cases connected to the department, including 36,600 cases on the military.There have been a total of 80 deaths reported across the department, including six service members. Of the troops who have died, one was an active-duty sailor, while the others were reservists or National Guardsmen.The senators specifically highlighted that the number of COVID-19 cases connected to the Pentagon gtrew by more than 21,000 in July, a more than 100 percent increase… August 27, 2020: Senator Thom Tillis (Republican – North Carolina) tweeted: “I am honored to be in Washington for President @realDonaldTrump’s acceptance speech for the @GOP nomination, where he will share with America our continued vision of freedom, prosperity, and opportunity to live the American Dream. #RNC2020”. The tweet included a photo of Senator Tillis looking directly into a camera, giving a “thumbs up” and wearing a face mask. Right behind him is a crowd of people, all sitting extremely close together. None of them appear to be wearing masks. A large sign that says “Trump Pence” is in the distance. August 28, 2020: The Charlotte Observer posted an article titled: “4 people at RNC in Charlotte test positive for COVID, as GOP defends safety measures”. It was written by Alison Kuznitz and Austin Weinstein. From the article: Two attendees and two local support staff at the Republican National Convention in Charlotte tested positive for COVID-19, Mecklenburg County and GOP officials announced Friday.The disclosures come after county health officials raised concerns about a lack of social distancing and mask wearing during the roll-call vote to renominate President Donald Trump for a second term on Monday – despite strict health protocols that were supposed to be followed. The GOP is defending the safety procedures it had in place.Local health officials said the county instructed those who were infected to isolate immediately, and people who came in close contact with them should also quarantine themselves. A county spokeswoman did not respond to questions on whether the orders were followed.It is not clear how many people at the RNC might have been exposed to the coronavirus. Almost 800 people were tested by the local hospital systems for the event.The two infected attendees drove themselves home while self-isolating, GOP spokeswoman Blair Ellis said. That action aligns with the joint guidelines from the RNC, the county and local hospitals……Ultimately, infections were to be expected when bring that many people together from across the country, according to Dana Rice, a public health professor at UNC Chapel Hill.“I’m not sure it could’ve been avoided, unless you didn’t bring people together in a room,” she said. “That was a decision that the RNC made not taking into consideration all of the public health warnings and messaging that has been out there.”The public may need to wait weeks for an “after-action” report detailing the true scope of infections linked to the RNC……The Charlotte region has been North Carolina’s epicenter for the novel coronavirus since March when the pandemic began.There have been almost 25,000 confirmed cases and 290 related deaths of county residents as of Thursday afternoon.When delegates arrived in Charlotte last week, they were tested for the virus upon registration and had regular symptom checks. Support staff from the surrounding community were also tested, Mecklenburg officials said.The RNC also used a rapid antigen testing system for other people at the convention, county spokeswoman Rebecca Carter said. “We did not manage those tests and the antigen tests do not confirm infection,” she said. Delegates also wore special badges that recorded who they came into contact with and for how long — making it easier for health officials to quell possible outbreaks.Once in town, attendees were free to move about the city, eating at restaurants and attending events. That opened up the possibility that the virus could be picked up after their Charlotte-based test, and before the convention in person. Additionally, delegates were free to travel between their test in Charlotte and when they received their results.Over the weekend ahead of the Monday renomination, delegates gathered for business meetings in a ballroom in the Westin Charlotte and mingled at a handful of events in the city, where mask wearing was not absolute……The delegates were seated at individual 6-foot tables for most of the official business of the convention.Midway through Monday’s events, Harris reached out to RNC organizers with concerns about adherence to public health guidelines. She said she was assured that RNC staff would enforce them.Shortly after, delegates swiftly converged near the stage of the Richardson Ballroom as President Donald Trump came to the podium for a surprise speech. Attendees, packed close to one another, danced the YMCA after the speech concluded — with many still not wearing face coverings.When asked why they allowed delegates to do this, an RNC staff member said that that was the purview of the U.S. Secret Service. The Secret Service did not reply to a request for comment… August 28, 2020: The News&Observer posted an article titled: “Maskless at Trump acceptance speech, Tillis says: ‘I fell short of my own standard'”. It was written by Brian Murphy. From the article: Throughout the coronavirus pandemic, U.S. Sen. Thom Tillis has been adamant about the need to wear face coverings and be socially distant from others, repeatedly highlighting those precautions as keys to defeating COVID-19.Tillis, a Republican facing re-election in 2020, attended President Donald Trump’s Republican National Convention acceptance speech Thursday night on the White House’s South lawn. More than 1,000 people were there, sitting shoulder to shoulder with few wearing face coverings. There was not universal testing for attendees.“I’ve stressed the importance of mask wearing throughout this pandemic and have tried to lead by example on this issue, but last night I fell short of my own standard,” Tillis said in a statement Friday.The speech originally was scheduled for Charlotte, but Trump moved the signature event after disagreements with Gov. Roy Cooper over social distancing and limited capacity in the arena. Four people at Monday’s limited RNC event tested positive for the coronavirus…Tillis posted a photo of himself wearing a face mask before Thursday’s event started, but was captured on camera not wearing a face mask in the middle of the crowd later on… THIS BLOG POST WILL BE UPDATED WHEN MORE INFORMATION IS FOUND. This is How it Spreads is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Dental Care During a PandemicJune 30, 2020Doctor Appointments / Out of SpoonsImage by LoveYouAll from Pixabay The COVID-19 pandemic has affected people in many ways. For me, the biggest problem wasn’t running out of toilet paper, or losing my job. What I needed, and could not immediately get, was a dental appointment. In February of 2020, I unexpectedly cracked a permanent cap. I wasn’t eating anything crunchy at the time. It didn’t hurt, because that particular tooth had a root canal done on it several years ago. Knowing that I had a dentist appointment – for a checkup and cleaning – scheduled in March, I decided to wait. The dental assistant could clean my teeth, and the dentist could take a look at the cracked permanent cap, on the same visit. About a week before my “check up and cleaning” dental appointment, I started getting what seemed like two of the three symptoms of COVID-19. I called the dentist’s office and explained the situation to the receptionist. We decided that it was best that I NOT go to my March appointment. The receptionist scheduled me a new appointment – in May. The symptoms I was experiencing turned out not to be COVID-19. The third one (of the three that were known at the time) never appeared. Meanwhile, the cracked permanent cap started separating. There was an obvious crack down the center of it that I could see when I looked in the mirror (and moved my head around enough to get some light cast on it). I was starting to get a bit nervous. Maybe this was more serious than I thought? But, I had a dentist appointment coming up at the beginning of May. I could wait until then. In the middle of March, my county issued “stay at home” orders, followed by my State doing the same. There was no information on when those orders would be lifted. It all depended on whether or not people followed the order, stayed home, and helped to stop the spread of COVID-19. On April 30, my dentist’s office sent me an email. They had decided to close “for now”. I wasn’t entirely surprised, because the “stay at home” order included the requirement that only “essential services” stay open. Dentists were not considered to be providing “essential services”, apparently. Based on the email, it was clear that all scheduled “checkup and cleaning” appointments had been canceled. The dentist’s office would reschedule patients whenever they were allowed to do that again. Those who felt that they were having a “dental emergency” could call the dentist himself (on a separate phone number), and he would determine whether or not it was really an emergency. The permanent cap I cracked was getting worse. It was now hard to eat on that side of my mouth. Of course, this tooth was a molar, which people need if they want to chew food. To me, it looked like the crack was widening. Eventually, I called the dentist’s office, and left a message in which I explained the situation. I left it up to the receptionist whether or not what I was experiencing was a dental emergency. This resulted in a dentist appointment on May 19th My hope was that the dentist would take a quick look at the broken permanent cap, perhaps remove it, and set me up with a temporary cap. My husband and I took a Lyft to the dentist’s office. Both of us wore masks, and the driver did, too. This was the first time I’d gone outside since March 5th. The front door of the dentist’s office was closed, which was confusing, because that’s the only entrance we knew about. The receptionist, who was wearing a mask, opened the door and came outside. She explained that they had closed off the waiting room, and that we could wait in our car until it was time for my appointment. We explained that we don’t have a car. The compromise was to go sit on a nearby bench and wait for the receptionist to appear at the back door and wave me over. It was very windy outside. I learned that the cloth mask I was wearing functioned quite well at filtering out dust and pollen. To my surprise, my mask was helping me to breathe better than before the pandemic started, when no one here was wearing masks. I’m going to start wearing masks on days when the pollen is too high for me to safely go outside. So far, this is the one incredibly positive thing I’ve had happen as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. The receptionist came out the back door of the office and waved at me. She made it clear that my husband could not come inside. I was quickly escorted to one of the three “rooms” in the dentist office. It took less than a minute for the dentist to take a look at the cracked permanent cap – poke it with a dental tool – and listen to me make an unhappy noise. He informed me that not only did I crack the permanent cap, but I also had destroyed what was left of the tooth underneath it. I was going to need an extraction, something I was not at all prepared to experience that day. The dentist explained he would not do it today, but would schedule another appointment for it. “It was such a beautiful cap,” the dentist lamented. I vaguely remember trying to explain that when I first cracked the cap, I had an appointment scheduled. But, that appointment didn’t happen. It was shocking to realize how much damage I had done to myself. The dentist said that there was only a tiny percentage of a chance that what happened to me could happen. I was just unlucky. The dentist prescribed an antibiotic – since I had a gum/tooth infection that I wasn’t even aware of. He also prescribed a painkiller. The receptionist gave me the prescriptions, urged me to start taking the antibiotic right away – tonight. She gave me a new appointment for the extraction, and what I later realized was also for a bone graft. The receptionist also handed me a paper that itemized the amount of money each part of the upcoming procedures would cost. It was astounding. I’m not good with numbers, but even I could tell that this was going to wipe out all of our savings. This appointment, however, was free of charge. As my husband and I waited for another car to pick us up, I explained to him the situation. We needed to go to our regular pharmacy and get the prescriptions. The driver was wearing a mask, and was very nice. Even with the mask on, it was obvious that I had been through some sort of dental thing. He dropped us off right at the door of the pharmacy. Everyone in the pharmacy was wearing masks. Everyone seemed to be taking great care to engage in social distancing. Unfortunately, the pharmacist didn’t have what I needed. He explained that he could give me the antibiotic – they had plenty of it – but they were out of the painkiller I had been prescribed. He suggested we go to a different pharmacy – a different company – who might have the painkiller. This was disappointing. A second pharmacist joined the conversation, and recommended that we take these prescriptions to the pharmacy downtown (which was the same company as this one). She was certain they had everything I needed. This time, my husband and I took the bus. The buses were running for free while the “stay at home” order was in place. The purpose was to ensure that people who were working in “essential services” could get to and from work. The second pharmacy had everything I needed – but couldn’t get it for me immediately. We were told to come back in half an hour or so. This resulted in my husband and I aimlessly wandering around downtown, killing time. The weather was nice. Most of the people we passed by were wearing masks. Some were in groups of two, with their masks under their chin. They immediately put the masks back in place when they saw other people coming. We ended up sitting on a bench near a big Catholic church. I was exhausted both physically and mentally. My best guess was that the reason I’d been exceptionally tired lately was due to the infection. When the pharmacy called, we walked back over to pick it up. The antibiotic cost $2.00. The pain killer cost $1.27. I think we took another bus back home, but am not sure. I was “out of spoons” by then. As instructed, I took the first antibiotic immediately after I got home (and ate some food). The pain killer would wait until I needed it. The dentist said it was an opioid, and that made me not want to take it. The antibiotic kicked in, and I ended up taking a long nap. A decision needed be made. My options were to do a bridge – where a fake tooth is connected to two real teeth, or to have a titanium implant placed in my jaw (with a fake tooth on top of it). The dentist suggested the implant was better. “With a bridge, you have to damage two healthy teeth,” he explained. After my nap, I did some research, and decided I agreed with his assessment. The next day, I called the dentist’s office to let them know I wanted the implant. The cost for the next appointment was $715. My husband said we had the money for that part of the bill. The rest? Was going to be a struggle. The first step of the process would begin with an appointment two days from the quick one. I wasn’t especially worried about it because I have a really good dentist and a very high pain tolerance. The receptionist sent me a text that morning, asking if I could come in fifteen minutes earlier than the time the appointment was scheduled for. My husband and were able to summon an Uber, and I texted back and forth with the receptionist to let her know we were on the way. At the dentist appointment I was given novocaine. The dentist and I had a conversation about video games as we waited for it to kick in. Unfortunately, it quickly became apparent that the novocaine had epinephrine in it. It makes me shake. The dentist said the “cure” for this problem was to have something with sugar in it. The sugar stops the shaking. He left and returned with a sealed bottle of juice. The first two ingredients, I could tolerate. The third one was something I was allergic to, and I handed the bottle back to him. He did not seem to know what to do next. I suggested he hand me my purse, where I had a tin box of mints that had sugar in them. We talked more about video games as we waited for the mint to melt and take away the shaking. Without going into too many details, today’s appointment was specifically for the extraction of whatever was left of the tooth I destroyed. The cracked permanent cap was easily removed. I didn’t feel anything at all while the extraction was happening. I was too out of it to realize at the time, but this appointment was when a bone graft was placed in my jaw. I remember the dentist saying, “Don’t swallow, this is gonna taste real bad.” I assumed it was an antibiotic, but no. The dentist was able to “remove the infection” and reshape another tooth that I didn’t know had become infected. There were sutures done to put things back together, and that was that. I remember the dental assistant (not the one who does the checkups and cleanings) wiping off my face with a wet wipe before letting me move from the chair. I have borderline anemia, and it takes a while for me to clot. The dentist recommended that I take one painkiller after I go home and the novocaine wears off. He said to take one more before going to bed so I could get some good sleep. I was shown a video about what NOT to do, and given a handout with the same instructions. As before, Shawn could not come into the dentist’s office while I was there. The waiting room was still closed off. I remember texting him to say I was all done, and to ask which credit card to use. The bill for today’s work was $715. (That’s with dental insurance coverage, by the way). I was given an appointment for June 1st, to take the sutures out. There is a thing called “fibro fog”. It happens when a person who has fibromyalgia does too much or experiences trauma. Everything from this point on was a blur. My husband summoned a Uber while I explained what happened at this dental appointment and when the next one would be. For some reason, there weren’t any Lyft drivers available at that moment. While waiting, I tried to use my phone to post on social media that I was finished with the dental work of the day. Looking back upon those posts as I write this blog, I realize that I barely made any sense. This experience made me realize just how important a molar is. Now that one was missing, it had become difficult to eat food. Soft foods were recommended, and I think the first thing I tried to eat was a banana. The trick was to find ways to eat it without letting the food touch the newly placed sutures. The novocaine was starting to wear off, so I started doing some research about the opioid I had been prescribed. It turned out that I had been prescribed a generic form of the same pain killer I was prescribed years ago, when that tooth had a root canal. This eased my mind because it meant I was not a person who becomes addicted to this particular opioid. If I remember correctly, the previous time I was prescribed this particular pain killer for dental work, it was fine. The “worst” thing that happened as a result of taking this type of pain killer was that I spent hours playing World of Warcraft and leveling up my fishing skill. This time, when the novocaine wore off to the point where I was really uncomfortable – I took a pain killer. It helped. As directed, I took one more before going to sleep that night. The instructions I was given stated that I should sleep with extra pillows, so I would be propped up. The pain killer made falling asleep incredibly easy, and that’s coming from me, a person who is always exhausted due to chronic illnesses! Days went by, and I was starting to lose track of time passing. Between the antibiotics that made me super sleepy, and the pain killers that made the world more foggy than “fibro fog” does, things got surreal. One of the things I posted on social media that day was: “I am awake right now waiting for when I can take my next antibiotic. Could feel the previous one wearing off a while ago. This means I will have to eat again, which is difficult, due to dental surgery (part 1). Antibiotics make me super sleepy, and I will lose much of the day due to being asleep. Also, talking kinda hurts right now, due to dental surgery.” Later on, I posted this: “eight more antibiotics to go, eight hours apart from each other. social distancing antibiotics” And not long after that, I posted: “Antibiotic is kicking in. Gonna take a nap now.” Sometime the next day, I posted: “four more antibiotics to go!” followed by: “3 antibiotics left!” The next day, I posted: “2 antibiotics left” followed by: “one more antibiotic to go!” The day after that I posted: “Finished the antibiotics” The only one of these I vaguely remember posting was the one with the phrase “social distancing antibiotics”. On May 27th, I appeared to have had a moment of clarity. I mean, the thing I posted did include some information regarding the dental work that I’d already posted about on social media (probably more than once). But, I didn’t realize it at the time. The point of that post was to say that my next appointment was scheduled for June 1st. It would be a quick appointment where the dentist removes the sutures. That appointment was free of charge. After that appointment, I was told they would check up on me monthly, for four months, to see how I was healing. At some point, the dentist would declare that I had healed enough to get the titanium implant placed. This gave my husband and I some time to gather up enough money to at least pay for for part 2 of the dental work. On May 29th, I made what I think of as a “note to self” post on social media. The purpose was to keep track of how many opioids I had taken. “I have been prescribed a painkiller. Here’s how many I’ve taken: (as of May 21) 1 when the novocaine wore off (as directed by my dentist) 1 to sleep that night (as directed by my dentist) 1 to sleep the next night 1 a few days after that because it turns out having a bone graft in my jaw around the now extracted tooth can cause pain 1 right now – same reason (and I want to sleep) 5 total Next appointment June 1 – to get stitches removes On June 1st, I once again attempted to “live blog” on social media about my experience at the dentist. This time, the front door of the office was open, and the waiting room was accessible. Once again, I was wearing a mask, which I did not intend to remove until the dentist needed me to. I stood in front of the receptionist’s desk, and waited. She wasn’t there, and I figured that maybe she was on a break. I moved away from the desk, and kept typing into my phone. A man who looked to be about my age, came into the waiting room. He stood and stared at the empty receptionist desk for a while. This man was not wearing a mask, so I backed away from him. A little while later, the man leaned over the desk, and looked both ways. The receptionist wasn’t there. He then walked into the open door that separates the waiting room and the area where the dentistry happens. No one back there immediately responded to the man, so he turned around and looked at me. He asked if there was a receptionist today. I shrugged. The woman who does the cleaning and checkups – which the dentist office was once again able to offer, took a second to talk to the unmasked man. She explained that they were short handed today, and that he could wait in the waiting room. He pointed at her, and she raised her arms and nodded her head. The dental assistant was covered from head to toe in PPE. She even had a face shield. The man then went and sat in a chair. I picked a place to sit that looked about six feet away from him. He decided to talk to me. He asked if I was there for a checkup. He was there for a checkup. I explained that no, I was not here for a checkup. The man didn’t seem to be able to hear me, possibly because of the mask I was wearing. Instead of taking it off, I just used my voice-work skill to project my voice farther. I told him I was there to get sutures removed. He said he took out his own sutures. This was something he seemed proud of. I responded that I’d rather have the dentist do mine for me, and went back to looking at my phone. The dentist came to get me, and we went to the first “room” (when I had the extraction done). No novocaine was needed. It only took a couple of minutes for him to remove the sutures. The dentist said I was healing well, and there were no signs of infection. He was pleased. I’m writing this blog post on June 30th, 2020. In between then and now, I called the dentist’s office to see when they wanted to schedule me for my next appointment. No one has responded yet. Dental Care During a Pandemic is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Other Video GamesAnimal Crossing Pocket Camp: Mitzi’s Mystery FriendSeptember 14, 2020Animal Crossing Pocket Camp / Other Video GamesMitzi’s Mystery Friend is an event that can be unlocked when a player obtains a specific items from Mitzy’s Aviary Cookie. This type of Fortune Cookie was available in May 2020. This was the first time I found myself interested in spending Leaf Tickets to buy Fortune Cookies – Animal Crossing: Pocket Camp’s version of “loot boxes”. Unlike in other games, the only advantage of Fortune Cookies is that the player gets some interesting stuff to put in their campsite or cabin. I kept finding players who were wearing cockatiels on their heads. The bird looked just like one of my cockatiels, and I really wanted one. But, it took me a while before I learned that I had a chance to get the item from the Mitzi’s Aviary Cookies. Every time I gathered 50 Leaf Tickets, I spent them on a Mitzi’s Aviary Cookie. My hope was the one of them would give me the cockatiel that sits on your head as if it were a hat. little birds’ sofa The best thing about this item is that it has not one, but two, parakeets sitting on it! There was a time why my husband and I had three parakeets. Two of them look just like the parakeets on this item. birdcage hanging chair There aren’t any birds sitting on the birdcage hanging chair. It is large enough for my Pocket Camp character to sit in it. Players can end up getting an item more than once from a cookie. I ended up with two of them. I put them both in my cabin, along with the little birds’ sofa. The birdcage hanging chairs are big, but the lily valley terrarium, from the Terrarium Fishing Tourney, is much larger. Here is my Pocket Camp character, sitting on the couch, waiting for the parakeets to toddle over and sit on her. These birds do not move from where they are sitting, but move their heads once in a while. little birds’ square rug My Pocket Camp character is looking at a small, red, birdcage. Inside is a red and green parrot. The item didn’t come from a Mitzy’s Aviary Cookie, but I added it to my cabin anyway because it fit the theme. little birds’ stylish dress The little birds’ stylish dress includes a necklace and a sweater. My character is wearing a sakura hairpin from the Sakura Festival. The shoes were a reissued item that I bought with Leaf Tickets. I decided to save this outfit. birdcage tree stand One of those cages has a green and yellow parakeet inside it. To me, it looks like the cage has an opening that is large enough for the parakeet to escape if it wanted to. The other cage has some multicolored candles in it. If your Pocket Camp character gets super happy before eating a Fortune Cookie it means there is something special inside it. little birds’ playground If you look closely, you will see a yellow and green parakeet sitting on the highest perch that this item offers. A bit lower, there is a yellow cockatiel, with orange cheek spots, sitting on a swing. Another yellow and green parakeet is sitting on a hanging water dish. It either wants to take a drink, or a bath, or maybe both. You got new furniture that unlocks a new memory! How does a player unlock a memory? I couldn’t figure it out. All of my little birds’ collection was inside my cabin. To me, it looked like the memory needs to happen at my campsite. There didn’t seem to be anything on the little birds’ playground item that would start the memory. Maybe I could find more detailed information within the game? Eventually, I found the screenshot you see above. There is some information there, but not what I needed. Carmen and Opal heard a rumor that Mitzi has a friend staying over. The investigation begins! To view this Scrapbook memory, get the little bird’s playground! Maybe the little birds’ playground needed to be in my campsite, instead of in my cabin? I moved some of the stuff that came from Mitzi’s Aviary Cookie to my campsite. Rosie and Muffy decided to use it. This was a good sign! It indicated that the animal people in Animal Crossing Pocket Camp could interact with this item. Ava and Goldie also used the little birds’ playground. Eugene is on the swing. Muffy has fallen asleep on the platform. It didn’t take long for the animal people at my campsite to flock to the little birds’ items. Eugene is still on the swing. Muffy, now awake, is on the platform. Rosie is on the little birds’ sofa. Egbert is on the birdcage hanging chair. Ava is now sitting on the platform, looking very pleased. Muffy has moved to the swing and decided to take another nap. At first, I thought that the way to unlock the memory was to craft all the things that the three animal people who are participating in it want. In other words, I’d need to do that so I could invite all three of them to my campsite. This would mean kicking out the current guests, at least temporarily. I started working on this, but quickly realized that it was too much effort. Back to poking around on the app in the hopes of stumbling upon something useful. Eventually, I found out how to unlock this memory. Carmen and Opal heard a rumor that Mitzi has a friend staying over. The investigation begins! At the bottom of the screen, there was a button called “Watch Memory”. All I had to do was click it to get this memory started. At the time I am writing this blog post, I have forgotten how I found this. Carmen: Ohmigosh! Did you hear Mitzi has a new friend staying over? I wonder who it could be, nougat! Carmen: I didn’t want to be super obvi, so I tried to listen in from a ways away. But I could only hear Mitzi chatting. Opal: Snoot! Gossip! I have been preparing for this moment all my life! Let’s procure a sneak peek! Carmen: Hi, Mitzi! We, like, came to see your um… books. Yeah, your books! To, like…borrow? And nothing else? Mitzi: Hi Opal! Of course, Carmen, if books are really what you’re after… feel free to browse. Mitzi: I’ll make some tea. In the meantime, you, um…decide if there was something else you wanted. Carmen: Phew! That went over amazingly. And you said I should take “acting lessons,” nougat. Opal: Yes, it certainly was an… inspired performance. Now, to begin our investigation, snoot! Opal: Observe, for instance, this sofa. Clearly designed to seat two. Why, just look how cozy these birds are! Carmen: Look at this! Did she have this cute seat before? Maybe her new friend brought it along… Opal: How intriguing! This would make a prime spot for some… CUDDLING, wouldn’t you say? Snoot! Carmen: Oh. My. Gosh. What is THIS thing? It’s like a trapeze! Opal: Some sort of… exercise device, it seems? Perhaps our mystery guest is a fitness enthusiast. Carmen: This is so cool! I have no idea what is going on, but I totes feel like a secret agent or something! Mitzi: Sorry for the wait! I hope the tea is to your liking. Carmen: Mitzi, the suspense is, like, super intense. I can’t take it! I must know! Who’s your new friend? Mitzi: New…friend? Oh, you mean THEM! Hahahah! Why, they’re right over there. Haven’t you seen them? Carmen: What?! I don’t get it! Are they invisible?! Are they a ghost?! Are they… ooh… You mean… Mitzi: Yep! I took in a couple of birds. They seem to be enjoying their new home so far! Opal: So it was these little ones all along? We were sure you were conversing with someone earlier! Mitzi: I was talking to them! They’re quite smart, you know. We’re getting to be great friends! Carmen: Hahaha! Mystery solved, I guess. Mitzi: Shall I make introductions? I’m sure they’d love to get to know you! Mitzi: Settle in! Stay awhile! I’ll show you some of the tricks I’ve been teaching them… So, Mitzi does have new friends staying over. They’re just a little smaller than expected! This was the first memory I was able to unlock in Animal Crossing Pocket Camp. I have mixed feelings about the story it told. Mitzi, who seems to like birds as much as I do, seems like a character I might want to invite to my campsite. As for Carmen and Opal, the remind me of the worst gossipy teenagers that I went to high school with. I won’t be inviting either of them to my campsite. little birds’ coffee table It is a very cute coffee table, and went very well with the rest of the items that came from Mitzi’s Aviary Cookies. My hope was that, eventually, I would get the cockatiel that sits on the player’s head, but that did not happen. Animal Crossing Pocket Camp reissues older item sets from time to time. Maybe someday I’ll get another opportunity to get it. Animal Crossing Pocket Camp: Mitzi’s Mystery Friend is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Animal Crossing Pocket Camp: Rainy SkySeptember 11, 2020Animal Crossing Pocket Camp / Other Video GamesThe Rainy Sky event in Animal Crossing: Pocket Camp took place in May of 2020. It appeared to be connected to the Daisy Mae’s Pickin’ Patch event. Both rewarded players with a dewdrop leaf after they completed certain tasks. At the time this event was live, it seemed to me that the majority of it required Leaf Tickets. There were plenty of items connected to this event that were out of my price range. Instead, I focused on crafting the items that were affordable. rain-dew shrub small rain puddle slippery-stones floor I put the slippery-stones floor in my cabin. It made a nice decorative floor for the bathroom area. misty wall misty garden buckets Isabelle: You’ve done such a wonderful job gathering those dewdrop leaves, Jen! Thank you! Isabelle: Let’s get everyone together so they can enjoy the greenery, shall we? Goal complete! Isabelle: The glistening dew really brings out the natural color of the leaves, doesn’t it? And that fresh smell… Isabelle: Ah, there I go, geeking out again. Sorry, I can’t help it. Spring is just such an exciting time! Isabelle: Thank you again for the help. I appreciate it, Jen! Animal Crossing Pocket Camp: Rainy Sky is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Tell Us 5 Facts About YourselfAugust 12, 2020Other Video GamesImage by Manfred Antranias Zimmer from Pixabay I am participating in Promptapalooza, this year’s version of Blaugust. Each blogger who is participating is assigned a prompt to write about. SDWeasel described it as “a blogging relay race” in a blog post focused on the prompt: “What’s something you’ve lost along the way that you would love to have back?” You can find that blog post on Unidentified Signal Source. Today, it is my turn to complete a portion of the Promptapalozza relay race by writing about the prompt: “Tell us 5 Facts About Yourself”. Just for fun, I decided to tell you about five facts about myself that relate to video games. The next blogger in the relay race is Heather whose blog is called Just Geeking By. The prompt I am sending to her is: “What are some of the things that get you excited in life?” Be sure to check out her blog tomorrow to see what she will write about that prompt. My First Video Game was Pong Pong is described as a “tennis like” video game. It was made by Atari, who released a home version of the game in 1975. My father brought home Pong sometime after the release date. I was in elementary school at the time, so my best guess is that my family was playing it in the early 1980s. I remember watching my father hook up Pong to our TV. It seemed magical that the TV screen we spent so many hours passively watching could become something we could actively play a game on. The controllers were stiff, and designed for hands much bigger than mine, but I was still able to play. Looking back, I realize that Pong was what sparked an interest in video games in a very young me. I’m still playing video games all these years later, thanks to a random decision by my father to bring Pong home. Super Mario Brothers Helped Me Bond with My Brother One of my brothers is autistic. When he was little, he had a very difficult time expressing himself in a way that made sense to others. Somehow, I understood what he was trying to say. I became his translator. His primary focus was video games and he loved Super Mario Brothers, which was released on the Nintendo Entertainment System in 1985. He was really good at finding patterns in video games, and it wasn’t long before he could sit down and play through the entire game without losing a life. My parents decided that he needed to take turns. To their surprise, he happily handed over the controller to me or my sister after he finished a game. My best guess is that he knew that we would burn though three lives very quickly, and he wouldn’t have to wait long before he could play again. My sister eventually grew tired of the game, in part, because my brother liked to give advice to whoever was playing. She seemed annoyed by this. As for me, I saw this as an opportunity to encourage my brother to practice his “speaking to other people in an understandable way” skills. When it was my turn, I let him give me whatever advice he had. I’d ask questions about when I should jump, or which monster to attack first. It turned out he was surprisingly good at instructing people how to play this game. When I messed up and died, he patiently re-explained what I should have done. He never got frustrated by my mistakes. He never made fun of me. I think he honestly wanted to teach me how to be a better player. Super Mario Brothers gave me the opportunity to bond more with my awkward, brilliant, brother. He later used the skills that he didn’t know he was practicing while we played video games to make friends. My First MMO was Meridian 59 Meridian 59 (now available on Steam) was released in 1996. It was the first 3D massively multiplayer online game, which means the graphics were better than many other games at the time. The first thing I noticed was that the player characters, the monsters, and the environment, looked dimensional. All of it was much more solid looking than anything in I’d played before. In 1996, I was almost, but not quite, done with college. I was living with a group of friends, one of whom was a boyfriend I was in a long-term relationship with. A few of them started playing Meridian 59. Eventually, my boyfriend suggested that I start playing it, too. My computer at the time was a Frankenstein of a PC. It was made of leftover parts after someone upgraded their computer, and scavenged parts from the IT rooms some of my friends were working in. It worked just well enough to run Meridian 59. When I first started playing, I ended up on a different server than the one my boyfriend played on – and he was really angry about that. At the time, I assumed that players were just randomly stuck on whatever server had room. Maybe that was how it worked. The game was fun. It allowed for a little bit of character customization, had guilds that each got their own guild hall, and quests that sometimes involved a puzzle-solving strategy. I kind of want to start playing it again, but it won’t run on the Mac I use today. Diablo was the First Game I Played Until the Sun Came Up I wasn’t in a good place after finishing college. In a short span of time, I experienced a break-up with my boyfriend, a move to a new apartment where I lived alone for the first time, a job change, and a second move to accommodate it. My grandmother, whom I loved dearly, passed away shortly after that second move. Living alone gave me the opportunity to play video games whenever I wanted to. Diablo was released in 1997. It was the first game that I played for several hours at a time. It always came as a surprise when I looked up from the screen to see that the sun was coming up. I remember feeling terrified the first time I opened the door and The Butcher ran out. That fear appeared on my second play-through and all the ones after that. My favorite memory was when I found a bow that had knockback on it and used it to kill The Skeleton King. He couldn’t get close enough to hit me. Part of what attracted me to this game was its dark, scary, aesthetic. At the time, I felt like everything around me had crashed and burned. I couldn’t change anything in the real world to make it better. Diablo gave me the illusion that I could fight against the evils of the world. There was something cathartic about slaying an entire level’s worth of skeletons and demons and making that virtual space calmer and safer than what my real world felt like. World of Warcraft My favorite memories of World of Warcraft come from when my husband Shawn and I were playing the game together on a regular basis. I was playing a Dwarven Priest named Bradanna, and he was playing a Dwarven Hunter named Hansbrix (with a bear pet named Fridge). The screenshot above was taken during the Invasions before the Legion expansion was released. We both found these to be really fun, and spent a lot of time going from one location where an invasion was happening to the next one. Shawn is legally blind, but could still see well enough to play video games for a while back then. I would read the quest text to him, sometimes trying to do the accent of the quest giver. We would stop playing when he started to get eye-strain, and pick up where we left off another time. You can find many blogs about The Dwarves and their adventures on this website. It is a partial record from when Shawn and I could play the game together. I intend to find time to make blog posts out of the rest of them. Tell Us 5 Facts About Yourself is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... CockatielsHot BirdSeptember 22, 2020CockatielsCalifornia had a heat wave. Cockatiels are tropical birds, so they usually enjoy that kind of weather. But, then it got a bit too hot for them. Marvin is doing what we call “hot bird”. He is sticking out his folded wings, in an effort to cool his body. Technically, he’s doing “warm bird”. Birds that get too hot become very skinny and they push their folded wings out a lot farther. They also pant. Don’t worry. Our birds always have access to plenty of nice, clean, cool water. Marvin (and Pepper and Pinky) were not in any danger. Photo by Shawn Thorpe. Hot Bird is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Pinky Climbed to the TopSeptember 18, 2020CockatielsAfter sharing the top of the cage with Marvin the other day, Pinky decided to climb up to the top of the cage all by himself. Marvin and Pepper were not yet ready to start the day. Pinky Climbed to the Top is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Two Birds On Top of CageSeptember 16, 2020CockatielsThe cockatiels decided to be active. Pinky climbed up to the top of the cage for the first time. Marvin climbed up there, too. Pepper is looking out the window. Pinky and Marvin were happy to share the top of the cage together. Their very tall head crests show how they feel. Meanwhile, Pepper is inside the cage and picking at the blanket that covers it. Cockatiels find joy in destroying things when they think the humans aren’t looking. It’s ok. He can’t do much harm to the blanket. Two Birds On Top of Cage is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... TV & Movie ReviewsMy Favorite Star Wars AntagonistsAugust 29, 2020TV and Movie ReviewsIn a galaxy far, far, away, there are two paths that force-sensitive people can choose from: the light side, or the dark side. While there are many wonderful reasons for fans to favor the protagonists, I find that the antagonists can also be very complex and interesting. I am participating in Promptapalooza, this year’s version of Blaugust. Each blogger is assigned one prompt to respond to – and an additional one to pass on to the next blogger. Participating bloggers can also write about any or all of the other prompts. The prompt I’m responding to in this post is: “Tell us about some of your favorite antagonists and explain why.” It was originally assigned to Naithin on the Time to Loot blog. Thrawn The most impressive thing about Thrawn is his ability to carefully calculate every step in his plans. He is a brilliant strategist who is able to make quick changes as the situation allows. Thrawn is the type of person who has the ability to always be several steps ahead of his opponents. Thrawn finds the art and culture of other species interesting. The more he learns about them, the more he can use that information to his advantage. He is the rare Star Wars antagonist who not only understands why that knowledge is useful, but also appears to enjoy the scholarly aspect of learning such things. Unlike several other Star Wars antagonists, Thrawn is able to keep his cool when a situation goes differently than he had planned. This gives him the ability to seem very reasonable to whomever he is trying to persuade. An example of Thrawn’s ability to change tactics and adopt an alternate strategy are in what has been called “The Thrawn Trilogy” by Timothy Zahn. This trilogy is no longer considered to be canon, so I’m thrilled that Timothy Zahn has written new Thrawn books that are canon. In the first book in the original “Thrawn Trilogy”, Grand Admiral Thrawn seeks out the strange and powerful Jedi Master Joruus C’baoth. It becomes clear that C’baoth believes he is the last Jedi (until Thrawn mentions Luke and Leia). Thrawn convinces C’baoth to work with him by striking a bargain. Thrawn makes C’baoth believe that he would be in charge of a quest that C’baoth is intensely interested in. C’baoth insists that Thrawn is the one who should be in charge, and agrees to go with him. This relationship eventually unravels, as it becomes clear that C’baoth has lost his mind. Thrawn switches tactics to make things go in his favor. Timothy Zahn puts the reader inside many of the character’s heads in this trilogy, and that allows the reader to experience what Thrawn is thinking. Ben Solo / Kylo Ren I am well aware that Ben Solo / Kylo Ren is a character that has evoked a lot of emotion from Star Wars fans. Some dislike him because he throws tantrums. Others seem to have fallen in love with Kylo Ren for reasons I do not understand. Both groups are missing the complexity of this character. Adam Driver did a fantastic job of bringing out both sides of this broken, force-sensitive, person. Ben Solo is the child of Han Solo and Leia Skywalker Organa Solo. Two parents with strong personalities and plenty of resources with which to raise a child. Things should have gone well. Unfortunately, it was not enough. Something was very wrong with Ben Solo. After learning who his grandfather was, Ben Solo became obsessed with him. There are scenes in the movies where he is talking to the crushed and burned helmet that Darth Vader used to wear. Han and Leia decided that the best thing to do would be to send Ben to train with Luke, who had begun training Jedi. The hope was that the experience would move Ben Solo towards the light side of the force. While training, Luke realizes that he could feel the darkness within Ben Solo, and feared that Snoke had already corrupted him. He decided to speak with Ben about it, but found him sleeping. Using the force, Luke reached out and saw the death and destruction that Ben Solo would eventually bring to everything Luke loved. He learned that his nephew had already been turned by Snoke. It was too late. On instinct, Luke drew his lightsaber, briefly intending to kill his nephew, but stopping himself from doing so. Ben woke up, saw his uncle with his lightsaber raised, and believed Luke was about to kill him. In short, Ben Solo used the force to drop the ceiling on his uncle. He then killed the rest of Luke Skywalker’s students. After Han Solo and Leia Skywalker Organa Solo learned what happened, they decided to separate. Each blamed themselves for what their son had done. Eventually, Ben Solo realizes that Snoke had been “the voices in his head” since early childhood. Snoke saw Ben as “a focal point between the light side and the dark side” and wanted him for an apprentice. Ben Solo eventually decided to drop his name in favor of a new one that didn’t connect him to his parents. He was now Kylo Ren, and became part of the Knights of Ren. Later, he moved up the ranks of the Empire. And through all of this is a very confused young man who feels torn between the light and the dark. He feels betrayed by his uncle Luke, and has become convinced that his parents don’t love him anymore. All that is left is Snoke. In other words, Ben Solo / Kylo Ren never really had the opportunity to make his own decisions. He doesn’t understand why he behaves the way he does. There is a scene in one of the movies where Han Solo confronts his son. He calls him by name, Ben Solo, and asks him to remove his mask so he could see his son’s face. Ben takes off the mask, but insists that he “destroyed Ben.” Han insists that his son, Ben, was very much alive. He pleads with his son to come home to his true family, and insists that Snoke is only using him. Ben starts crying. “I’m being torn apart. I want to be free of this pain. And I know what I have to do, but I don’t know if I have the strength to do it. Will you help me?” Ben asks his father. Han replies, “Yes. anything.” In that moment, Han Solo may have believed that he was about to get his son back. Instead, Ben Solo / Kylo Ren murders his father. He probably thought that killing his father would make him stronger. It did not. Instead, it made him weaker and more unbalanced. So, why do I like Ben Solo / Kylo Ren? Part of it is the “Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde” aspect of this character. He has a split personality, with dueling motivations and interests. The viewer cannot know, for certain, what he will do next and that makes the story more intense and exciting. Ben Solo / Kylo Ren is a character who believes that he is doing the right thing. He doesn’t see himself as the “bad guy”. He is able to find reasons to justify the things he has done. Kylo Ren identifies as the protagonist in his own story – which makes him a complex and interesting character. My Favorite Star Wars Antagonists is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... They Started Out FriendsAugust 10, 2020TV and Movie ReviewsI recently watched Star Wars: Episode I – The Phantom Menace for the second time. The first time was in the theater when it was released. There’s a lot going on in this movie that I missed the first time around. What I want to focus on in this blog post (and the upcoming ones) is the relationship between Padmé Amidala and Anakin Skywalker. They started out as friends, despite their age difference and the imbalance of power between them. Anakin Skywaker lives with his mother, Shmi Skywalker. Both of them are slaves on Tatooine. They are owned by Watto, a cantankerous Toydarian junk dealer with a gambling problem. When Anakin and Padmé first meet, he asks her if she is an angel. He tells her she is one of the most beautiful beings he has ever seen. This question immediately catches Padmé’s attention, and the two have a conversation. Anakin reveals that he and his mother are slaves. Padmé is shocked by this. “I can’t believe there is slavery out here! The Republic banned slavery some time ago.” She learns that the Republic pretty much doesn’t exist on Tatooine. Anakin vehemently responds that he is not a slave. “I’m a person!”, he shouts. It is a show of defiance and refusal to accept his current status and reality. From there, Anakin tells Padmé that he is a Pod Racer, something he obviously is excited about. His thought process is pretty typical for a nine-year-old, quickly changing subjects in an effort to talk about something he is intensely interested in. Padmé asks Anakin how long he has lived there. He thinks about it for a minute, trying to remember, then says he was “just a little kid” when his mom brought him here. About three-years-old, he figures. Anakin has lived the majority of his life as a slave. Anakin tells Padmé that he had a dream that he was a Jedi who came back to free the slaves. This moment of vulnerability is not unusual for kids his age who believe they are talking with a friend. It also shows that Anakin is very innocent, and genuinely wants to make life better for those who are in bad situations. Padmé arrived on Tatooine under a false persona. She is actually Queen Amidala, but has been disguised as one of her handmaidens. In her place, pretending to be Queen, is Padmé’s bodyguard. Padmé is fourteen-years-old and one of the youngest queens Naboo has elected. When Qui-Gon Gin and Obi-Won Kenobi are preparing to leave Naboo, they are told that the Queen insists that her handmaiden accompany them. The two Jedi are not at all interested in taking her along, but eventually give in to the Queen’s demands. They have no idea who she really is, and neither does Anakin. I think the reason why Padmé finds this nine-year-old interesting is because he is someone she can be herself with. When she talks with Anakin, she doesn’t have to be super careful about what she says – for fear of starting a war. I’m not sure how Naboo elects its queens, but it says something that Padmé is one of the youngest. I suspect that those who want to become queen must go through some kind of instruction and training before they run for that office. She is only fourteen-years-old as queen, which means she likely spent years of her childhood practicing the skills she would need to use if she is elected. There is no doubt in my mind that it is the daughters of the elite and wealthy who are considered eligible to become queen, because that’s how it goes in the real world. Padmé has a group of handmaidens, and a bodyguard, who surround her. They appear to be about the same age as she is. But, they cannot truly be friends because a queen has more power than her handmaidens do. There is no room for any of them to paint each other’s nails while talking about whomever they have a crush on. Anakin, however, doesn’t know he is talking to the Queen of Naboo. He starts a conversation with her as though she’s just a regular person. This must be refreshing for Padmé, who doesn’t have to carefully calculate her responses to Anakin. She can simply be herself. Right before the Pod Race, Anakin and Padmé ride in on a large lizard, alongside Shmi and a friend of Anakin’s who are riding another lizard. Anakin and Padmé are laughing and having fun. They get a moment to be kids – despite their age difference. Qui-Gon Gin made a bet with Watto before the race started. Under the pretense that the Pod Racer Anakin had been building belonged to Qui-Gon, he makes a deal. If Anakin wins the race, Watto gets the profits – minus the cost of the parts that Qui-Gon needs to fix his ship. If Anakin loses the race, Watto gets to keep both the Pod Racer and Qui-Gon’s ship. Watto accepts. Shortly before the race begins, a second bet is made. If Anakin wins, Qui-Gon wants the boy and his mother. Watto refuses, saying he won’t give both of them. Watto throws a chance dice that has red and blue sides. If it lands on blue, its the boy. If it lands on red, its his mother. Qui-Gon uses the force to make sure the chance dies lands on blue. Anakin wins the Pod Race, in part because of Qui-Gon Gin’s instructions to use his emotions to solve problems while racing. By this point, Qui-Gon is aware that Anakin doesn’t have a father and that he is unusually strong with the force. The bets are settled, and Anakin happily returns home to his mother, with Qui-Gon accompanying him. Anakin thought that both he and his mother were now free, and becomes upset when he learns that he has been freed – but she is still a slave. This entire scene is heartbreaking. Anakin wants to become a Jedi, and Qui-Gon Gin is willing train him (if the Jedi Council allows it). But, Anakin also doesn’t want things to change. His mother gently talks him into following his heart. Anakin leaves, with his mother standing in the doorway of their home. All of a sudden, he rushes back to her arms. “I can’t do it,” he says. He asks if he will ever see her again. “What does your heart tell you?”, Shmi asks. Anakin focuses for a moment, and responds, “I hope so. Yes. I guess so”. He promises to come back to Tatooine to free his mother. This scene emphasizes that Anakin is still just a little boy. He still needs his mother. He is about to embark upon a journey with people he doesn’t know very well to places he’s never been. It makes sense that he is scared. Qui-Gon Gin’s ship takes off, and Anakin becomes uncomfortably cold. He sits in a corner, shivering and looking miserable. Padmé doesn’t notice him at first because she is making a call to Naboo to learn about what is happening there. “You seem sad,” Anakin says after she finishes her call. Padmé walks over to Anakin and covers him with the cloak she had been wearing, as if it was a blanket. She explains that space is cold, and that he is used to being on a very warm planet. “The Queen is worried because people are dying. Suffering.” Padmé explains. “She must convince the Senate to intervene. I’m not sure what will happen.” Padmé intentionally does not tell Anakin that she is Queen Amidala. Anakin hands her a bead he carved, to remember him by. She accepts the bead, smiles, and tells him she doesn’t need a bead to remember him. Padmé tries to prepare Anakin for what might be coming. She tells him that a lot of things are going to change, but her caring about him is not one of them. Anakin says, “I care about you, too. It’s just…” “You miss your mother,” Padmé responds. He nods. To me, it looks like the two of them have begun seeing each other as siblings. She is mothering him, making sure he stays warm, and trying to prepare him for things to come. He lets her know that he sees that she seems sad, and hands her something he made by hand so she won’t forget about him. Their age difference, and differences in power, prevent them from truly becoming friends. Instead, they sort of adopt each other as family. Upon landing, Padmé returns to her handmaidens. Anakin is questioned by the Jedi Council, who think he is too old to start training as a Jedi. Typically, Jedi are taken from their families (hopefully with the parent’s permission) when they are toddlers. Eventually, the council allows Qui-Gon Gin to train Anakin. Anakin tries to visit Padmé to let her know he is going away to become a Jedi. He asks Queen Amidala where Padmé is. Queen Amidala tells Anakin that Padmé is not there now, and pretty much implies that she will be given his message when she comes back. It is unclear if the Queen Amidala Anakin was speaking to was Padmé or her bodyguard. Based on later events in the movie, I suspect it was the bodyguard, who did not seem prepared to have a nine-year-old come by and ask for the real Queen Amidala by her first name. Anakin simply trusts that his message will be sent to Padmé. He leaves the room and walks away, presumably to begin training. There are a lot of other plot points weaving through The Phantom Menace, and an entire blog post could be written about several of them. I’ve left out large pieces of the story specifically so I could focus on this part of it. They Started Out Friends is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Grace and Frankie – Season OneJune 2, 2017TV and Movie ReviewsGrace and Frankie is a show on Netflix. It is a Netflix Original. Grace (Jane Fonda) is married to Robert (Martin Sheen). Frankie (Lilly Tomlin) is married to Sol (Sam Waterson). In the very first episode, right at the start, the husbands announce they want to divorce their wives. The reasons why the men want divorces is because they have fallen in love… with each other. And they want to get married. Warning: There are tons of spoilers. Episode 1: The husbands announce they want to divorce their wives because they have fallen in love with each other and want to get married. Robert: “We can do that now.” When Robert married Grace, and Sol married Frankie, same-sex marriage wasn’t legal anywhere in the United States. Robert and Sol have been having a secret love affair for the past 20 years. Later, Sol and Frankie are alone back at their home. Frankie asks Sol if that is why he got Cialis. Sol answers: “Everyone gets Cialis at my age.” Robert and Grace are alone at their home. She is sad. Robert tries to console her. “Were you ever really happy with me?” he asks. Grace thinks about it. She says they didn’t have the most romantic life. “But I thought we were normal”. This indicates that Grace and Robert hadn’t had a sex life together in a very long time. Grace thought the end of their sex life was a normal part of being a couple, or maybe because of their age. Now, she discovers that wasn’t so. She DOES NOT say she was happy with Robert. Robert says that he “wanted more.” The implication is that he wasn’t happy in his marriage with Grace, and found what he needed with Sol. * Both couples have children who are now adults. Sol and Frankie’s sons (Coyote and Nwabudike) try and console their mother. They repeat a lot of the positive encouraging phrases she must have told them. She tells them all that is “bullshit”. Grace and Robert’s daughters, (Brianna and Mallory) are angry about what happened. They immediately take their mother’s side, and don’t want to talk to their father right then. Mallory has kids. She asks “How am I going to explain this to my kids?” I don’t think this question is entirely about her father’s relationship with Sol. It’s also about the sudden divorce. * A chair is delivered to Robert and Grace’s house. She opens the box, and finds a chair that has a photo of Ryan Gosling’s face on the seat. Robert is delighted that the chair arrived so quickly and explains it is a joke between him and Sol. * For the first time, Grace notices that Robert’s office has a framed drawing of a nude man. She notices a small frame on the shelf that contains a old photo of two men, one of whom has taken the arm of the other (as a man might do with a woman). She sees books on the shelf, one of which is called “The Male Member”. And suddenly, she realizes she’s missed all these signs. * Grace and Frankie get into an argument over which one of them is more upset. Frankie says “I lost my best friend. You never liked Robert.” * Robert says he can finally breathe again – now that he’s divorcing Grace to be with Sol. Sol says he feels really guilty because he devastated someone he loves very much. It’s clear that Sol and Frankie were not just spouses, but also good friends. Grace and Robert were not friends. * Grace freaks out about the divorce. “I did everything right. I played by the rules.” She is angry. Grace asks Frankie why she isn’t angry. Frankie says she is heartbroken. * Later, Frankie acknowledges that there were times she “knew” but ignored it. She says Sol once asked her to wear a dildo. She and Grace think that could only mean that Sol was gay. Episode 2: * Sol and Robert spent the night together and are still snuggling in bed. Sol says he wants to go up on the roof and shout: “I am a homosexual and I am in love with Robert Hanson, who is also a homosexual.” Robert smiles, and jokingly talks him out of it. * As the men are getting ready to go to work, Robert says “Just because we’re out now doesn’t mean we’re gonna be gay with a vengeance.” * Two of Frankie’s friends come over to console her and take her to lunch. One of the friends is gay. Sol and Robert aren’t the only gay men in Frankie’s life. Sol sent the two friends over because Frankie won’t answer her phone when he calls her and he was worried about her. * Robert cuts off Grace’s credit card (which she discovers while trying to pay for lunch). It turns out Sol cut off Frankie’s credit card, too. Robert feels absolutely nothing about doing this to Grace – citing that he and Sol are divorce lawyers and that’s what people who are divorcing are supposed to do. Sol feels terrible about it and is upset that he knows Frankie will be upset when she finds out. * Robert asks Sol, “Which is better, feeling terrible with me, or without me.” Sal says “with you.” * Grace sends her daughters to her (and Robert’s) home to get some of her things. (She’s staying at the beach house). The daughters notice the remains of breakfast on the table and realize that Sol spent the night there. They look sad. * Frankie has a fight with Sol and kicks him out of their house. She tells him to go live with Robert. Sol says they weren’t ready to move in together yet. * Later, Frankie asks: “Was any of it real?” That’s a normal question people ask after a breakup. But, Frankie is also asking if her marriage to Sol, who had been having an affair with Robert for 20 years, was ever real. Episode 3: * Robert and Sol are having their children over for dinner. Sol is nervous. Robert tries to calm him by saying they’ve already had lots of dinners together. Sol responds: “That was before I became their new stepmother.” * Mallory and Brianna arrive together for dinner. They wait at the door of the house they grew up in. Brianna wants to just walk in. Mallory stops her and says they can’t do that because it’s not their house anymore. Brianna responds “I’ve lost both of my virginities in that house” and proceeds to just walk right in. * During dinner, Robert and Sol hold hands for a brief moment. Robert’s daughters and Sol’s sons stare at them – not really knowing how to feel about that. * Coyote tells Mallory (who is mad at him) “We’re step people now.” * Brianna and Bud have a conversation in the kitchen. Bud is preparing a cake. Brianna mentions something about how Bud seems fine with what their dad’s are doing. She asks “Would you be cool with it if they had cheated with women?” * After returning to the table, after everyone starts eating cake, an argument ensues where the kids let out some of their anger and frustration. Bud says he is “not allowed to be mad”. When Sol asks why not, Bud answers “because you’re gay.” Episode 4: * Someone who worked with Robert and Sol has died. They are going to the funeral. Sol says that this will be the first time people see him without his wife by his side. Robert says the funeral “is not our coming out party.” * Meanwhile, Grace is pushing Frankie to get ready to go to the funeral early – so they can leave before it becomes Robert and Sol’s coming out party. * Grace and Frankie see Robert and Sol – as a couple – for the first time at the funeral reception. It makes Grace and Frankie sad. * Grace notices that Sol is wearing a tie that she gave to Robert as a Father’s Day present. This makes her angry. Frankie is angry too. “They can’t leave us AND share clothes!” * Robert and Sol haven’t decided what to call each other. Robert think’s they’re too old for boyfriend. “Soulmate?” Sol asks. Robert responds, “No! I don’t even like that one with straight people.” At the funeral reception, Sol tries to use the word partner, but then awkwardly explains that they are business partners at the law firm, but also partners with each other. He confuses the people he was speaking to. * A very old man who must have worked at the same company as the deceased tells Robert and Sol that he knows they are a couple – and that they are brave. He then asks: “When did you know you were attracted to men?” He goes on to say that he had “an experience” when he was in Korea. Sol kindly walks away with him and answers the man’s question. * Robert’s sister tells Grace that she had no idea that her brother was gay. * Later, Robert’s sister accidentally mentions that her daughter is having a baby shower. It becomes clear that Grace was not invited. Robert’s sister explains that the aunties would be there (Robert’s family is Irish) and that there would be drama and it was the daughter’s day. She asks if Grace understands. Grace says of course she understands, it’s for family. After Robert’s sister walks away, Grace looks sad. * Robert gets frustrated with Sol and yells at him for talking to the widow for too long. He yells at Sol about his shoes (that Robert doesn’t like). Robert yells “You’re just not doing anything right.” Sol responds: “Oh my god. You’re angry that I’m not Grace.” Robert sits down and starts to sob. It’s probably the first time he’s cried about the divorce. Sol consoles him, saying something like he “has one, too”. Robert apologizes, and they start using the word “boyfriend”. * Frankie speaks with the widow. The widow says to her: “Oh, I think your situation is much worse than mine.” The widow points out that Frankie might live another 20 years. The implication is that Frankie will be spending those 20 years alone. * As they are leaving the funeral reception, Grace tells Robert she is so mad at him. “I’ve lost everything,” she says. She lost her husband, her house, her family… * Frankie, upset by what the widow said, and by an unfortunate comment Grace said to Robert about Frankie when Grace was expressing her anger at Robert, leaves the funeral with Grace trailing behind her. Sol drives up in his car – to pick up Robert. Frankie gets into the passenger seat out of habit. She quickly realizes what she has done, gets out, and tells Robert “I think this is for you.” Episode 5: * Brianna tells her mother, Grace, that Grace needs a boyfriend. Grace tells her daughter, Brianna “I’m sending that sentence right back to you.” Brianna is single. Her sister, Mallory, is married with two kids. * Brianna shows Grace a profile of a handsome doctor on a dating website, in an effort to convince Grace to make a profile there. Brianna says she has used dating websites and has met some “passable” guys. Brianna mentions that one of the guys had a micropenis. Apparently, Brianna still considered him “passable”. * Grace tries to make a profile on the dating site. She struggles to describe herself. Brianna sees that Grace listed her age as 70 – which is her age. Brianna argues that Grace should say she is 65, because she looks 65. Grace says that wouldn’t be honest. Brianna says it is honest because that’s the age Grace looks. * Grace doesn’t know what to put in the section of the profile marked “turn-ons”. Frankie walks past the couch Grace and Brianna are sitting on and suggests: “That he’s NOT gay!” Brianna tells her mother to say she is “open minded”. Grace hesitates, concerned that it might mean some “weird sex thing”. * Later in the episode, Grace apologizes for saying something unkind about Frankie at the funeral. Frankie accepts her apology, but wants Grace to treat her better. Frankie points out that she is Grace’s friend. Frankie also says “I’m the other person this happened to” – meaning both she and Grace are going through divorces because their husbands are gay and their husbands want to marry each other. * Grace eventually finished filling out her dating profile and posting it. * During the episode, Grace drives Brianna and Frankie to the frozen yogurt shop (at their request). Both Brianna and Frankie are high. Brianna notices that the cashier is named Brian, and that he and her have the same name – except for the “na”. Later, Brianna tells Grace and Frankie that Brian sent her friend request on Facebook. She says “That must have taken a lot of stalking,” followed by “That was sweet.” She smiles. Episode 6: * Someone on the dating website wants to have lunch with Grace. The two of them have been briefly talking on the website for a while. The man wants to have lunch with Grace today – and she doesn’t want to go because she thinks she isn’t ready for that yet. She tells Frankie she likes the attention she gets on the dating website – and likes that she can get that attention and stay home. Frankie encourages her to go to lunch with the man from the dating website. Grace says she doesn’t know him. Frankie informs her that this is what going to lunch is for – to get to know him and to get laid. * Grace realizes that this will be her first date in 40 years. * Frankie gives Grace some condoms. Grace says she doesn’t need them because she’s well past being able to get pregnant. Frankie tells Grace that because of the “penis drugs”, older people are having sex and aren’t using condoms – and are spreading STDs. Frankie says she read that in an AARP article. There is, in fact, an AARP article from 2010 that explains why older people should use condoms. The article is written by Dr. Pepper Schwartz. * An earthquake happens, and Frankie freaks out. Robert and Sol had just made plans for dinner. (They plan to order paella from a restaurant). Immediately after the earthquake is over, Sol tells Robert that Frankie is terrified of earthquakes and that he needs to go help her calm down. Sol says: “It’s her first quake alone, and she only has Grace to comfort her.” Robert immediately responds: “Go!” * Coyote rides his bike over to Mallory’s house to deliver a children’s book called And Tango Makes Three. The book was written by Justin Richardson and Peter Parnell and was published in 2005. The story is about three Chinstrap penguins at the Central Park Zoo, and is based on something that really happened. Roy and Silo were two male penguins in the zoo’s penguin exhibit. Roy and Silo liked to do everything together. A zookeeper noticed that they built a nest together, just like the other penguins couples do. But, Roy and Silo could not lay an egg. One day, the zoo had an extra Chinstrap penguin egg that was produced by another penguin couple who could not care for it. The zookeeper gave the egg to Roy and Silo, who took turns keeping it warm until the egg hatched. The zookeeper named the baby penguin Tango because “it takes two to tango”. Tango is a girl. Coyote takes the book to Mallory because he remembered that Mallory said that her kids were having a difficult time understanding what was happening with their grandfather and Sol. Coyote is working as a substitute teacher, so it makes sense that he had heard of this children’s book. * Grace’s date does not go well. After they are seated, she asks Charles if he’s “done it a lot”. He gives her a funny look. She clarifies that she means “this” and gestures at the table. She wanted to know if he goes to lunch with women he met on the dating website a lot. He obviously thought she was asking him if he had a lot of sex. * Charles tells Grace to watch out for liars on the dating website. It’s an odd comment to start out a new (potential) relationship with. He gives the example of someone who said she loved to play tennis – but he later learned that she was in a wheelchair. It’s hard to know if Charles was making up that example, or if he met someone like that. As the lunch date goes on, Charles gets stranger and stranger. He doesn’t seem to understand the subtle social cues Grace gives him indicating she doesn’t think he’s funny. He tells her if he’s too much to say: “Charlie it’s too much.” Grace immediate responds: “Charlie, it’s too much.” Charlie laughs and doesn’t take her seriously. Not long after that, Charlie starts making inappropriate, and gross, comments about Grace’s mouth and the steak she is eating, and this makes Grace so uncomfortable that she quickly ends the lunch date. * After helping Frankie calm down, Sol asks if she would like to get a bite to eat. They go to lunch. Sol texts Robert that he is going to be late (which leads to a misunderstanding – more on that in a bit). During lunch, Frankie asks Sol how it started with Robert. Sol is a bit taken aback. He didn’t expect to be sharing that today. Frankie honestly wants to know, so Sol tells her. Robert and Sol were at a law conference together, and later got drunk together at the hotel bar. They rode the elevator together. Sol says Robert gave him this look that scared him. The look gave him a feeling. Robert kissed Sol. Frankie asked if it was a big kiss. Sol says they kept kissing until the elevator stopped at their floor – the 26th floor. Sol says his whole body became alive. Frankie asks if that’s when their relationship started. Sol says no, that he and Robert didn’t talk about what happened. Frankie asks: “Why not?” Sol says they couldn’t talk about it – they didn’t know how to talk about it. The relationship between Robert and Sol evolved from sex to love. Sol didn’t want to tell Frankie about it because he loved her, and he loved their family, and he didn’t want to hurt them or lose them. * Grace returns home after the awful lunch date and finds one of Frankie’s art students in the kitchen, eating a ham sandwich. Grace has seen all three of Frankie’s students once before, the day she was trying to rush Frankie to get ready for the funeral. Grace knows the men in Frankie’s art class are all “ex-cons.” Grace is surprised and asks how he got in there. She tells him Frankie wasn’t home. The man says he found the studio empty so he went inside the house to make sure Frankie was ok. The man starts flirting with Grace. She is so surprised, she drops her purse. The condoms Frankie gave her fall out, and the man sees them. He makes a comment, and Grace clarifies that Frankie put those into her purse. It is clear that Grace is attracted to the man. She is a bit flustered. He tells her that he knows about her husband and Frankie’s husband. He says: “Please tell me that if he wasn’t fucking you somebody else was.” Another earthquake tremor happens, and Grace and the man end up passionately kissing in the kitchen (which leads to them making out for a little while before Grace stops it). The man leaves. Grace is smiling. * Later, Grace tells Frankie that one of her students was in the kitchen, eating a ham sandwich. Frankie says “That must be Byron. He loves ham.” Grace doesn’t mention the kissing. * Sol comes home to Robert three hours late. Robert invited some friends over (Al and Eddie, who are a couple). They are eating Paella. Robert and Sol start bickering, and Al and Eddie run away. Robert and Sol have an argument. Robert asks “Why did we blow up our lives if you are just going to go running back to her?” Sol said he texted Robert that he would be late, and thought Robert said it was ok. It turned out there was a miscommunication. The two make up. Robert goes to get some food for Sol. While he isn’t looking, Sol texts Frankie “goodnight”. Episode 7: * Grace comes home from an awful date. Grace tells Frankie that she took her anecdote (about saving a little bird). Frankie isn’t thrilled with that. Grace goes on to say that her date’s anecdote was about his fatty lipoma. He had a tumor that he named Farley – and it had teeth. A lipoma is a slow-growing fatty lump that’s most often situated between your skin and the underlying muscle tissue. It can feel doughy. It is not cancer. * Grace says she has another date tomorrow. Frankie points out that would be three dates in one week. * Brianna is cooking because she has a date coming over. She calls Bud to help her. Bud points out that she destroyed the Brisket, so he’s going to help her make stew out if it. Brianna says stew isn’t a second date food. Bud infers her date is with “Racist Dave”. Brianna corrects Bud – “Border Patrol Dave”. Dave sends Brianna a text, in which he cancels the date. Brianna now calls him “Racist Dave”. Brianna says that she doesn’t know what she wants (meaning in a relationship). Bud says she wants what everyone wants “Someone you can come home to at the end of the day who is happy to see you.” Brianna says she is getting a dog. * A big part of this episode focuses on the Spelling Bee, which is televised. Frankie and Sol watch it every year (it’s one of their rituals). Frankie can’t get Grace interested in the Spelling Bee, and Sol can’t get Robert interested in it. Sol unexpectedly brings Frankie a bread maker and some laser discs. Frankie sees that as an excuse to come over. Sol asks her to come over and watch the Spelling Bee with him. Frankie hesitates, unsure if that’s a good idea now that they are getting a divorce. Sol wants to continue their rituals, like watching the Spelling Bee together. Frankie says that she will be strong and say “no”. * Brianna adopts a foster dog she saw on the internet. The man who is fostering the dog brings him over. The man is cute and near Brianna’s age. She flirts with him – badly. He doesn’t appear to be interested in her, but is excited to give this great dog a forever home. Brianna is not so enthused about the dog. The dog is shy, at first. Brianna says the dog is ugly, and asks if it is the dog she saw on the internet. The foster dog “dad” gives Brianna the food the dog has been eating, and his toys. He makes a joke (about the dog leaving his patio furniture and grill so the other dogs could use it) – which Brianna doesn’t get. Foster dog man says she can call him if she has any trouble. Brianna spends hours trying to get the dog to love her. She fails at it. So, she calls the Foster dog guy, who comes over. He doesn’t see any problem with the dog (who is happily waltzing down the hallway and checking out other rooms.). The Foster dog guy makes a comment implying he thinks Brianna called to get HIM to come over. She basically agrees. They have sex. He leaves right after. Brianna is sad – until the dog leaps into her arms and starts loving her. * Frankie ends up going over to Sol and Robert’s to watch the Spelling Bee with Sol. She brought popcorn and tea. He is thrilled! They have a great time until Robert comes home and looks upset. Frankie leaves. Robert is miffed about Sol hanging out with Frankie. Robert admits that he is scared about Sol’s relationship with Frankie. He didn’t like that Sol didn’t tell him Frankie was coming over. Sol said he didn’t know she was coming over. Sol tells Robert that Frankie will always be part of his life, and that Robert has nothing to worry about. Robert agrees to watch the Spelling Bee with Sol – and they both have fun! * Grace goes on date three (of the week). It is with a man who owns a yacht and is an architect. His “name” on the dating website is “yachtcatect”. Grace thinks that is clever. She gets a table where they are supposed to meet. Unexpectedly, she sees a friend whom she hasn’t seen in years. His name is Guy, and he is a world traveler. But now, he wants to settle down. The yacht guy shows up, but hasn’t seen Grace yet. He is dressed like a television captain – hat, coat, and all. Guy asks Grace if she wants to meet that man. She doesn’t. Guy offers to sneak her out of the restaurant if she will have ice cream with him. They have ice cream together. Guy says he thinks there has always been a spark between them. They slowly start a relationship. He takes Grace to her door, and Grace kisses him. Neither expected that. Frankie sees Grace kiss Guy through the window. She leaves the television on – and the Spelling Bee – and goes upstairs. Episode 8: * Grace lets Frankie know that Guy is coming over for dinner (and she wants Frankie to either leave or stay in her room). Frankie says that Grace and Guy are gonna have sex. Frankie asks Grace if she is worried “because it’s the first time a straight man has seen you naked in 40 years.” Grace says she isn’t worried because she will turn the lights out (and he won’t see her naked). Frankie asks Grace if she is worried about vaginal dryness. Grace responds: “I am now.” * Frankie gives Grace something Frankie refers to as her “secret weapon”. It is a jar of “Frankie’s homemade yam lube.” Frankie calls it “Vag-a-kadabra.” She keeps it in the refrigerator. Grace is disturbed because she’s been eating the yam lube on toast. Frankie reassures Grace that that is good, and that her gynecologist says “You shouldn’t put anything in your vagina that you wouldn’t put in your mouth.” Overall, this advice is not a bad idea. * Grace doesn’t want to hear about the yam lube. Frankie says “It’s not a dildo. It’s a facilitator!” Frankie also says that she makes dildos. * Grace tells Frankie that men and women cannot be friends. Frankie disagrees. She is friends with Sol, and several other men, including Jacob (who grows the yams Frankie uses in her lube). Grace later informs Frankie that Jacob was flirting with Frankie. This takes Frankie by surprise. * Guy comes over for dinner with Grace. They sit on the couch afterward making boring small talk. Eventually, Grace asks: “Do you want to have sex?” Guy responds: “Oh boy yes.” Grace does, in fact, keep the lights out and does not let Guy see her naked. * The next day, Frankie asks Grace how the sex was, and wants to hear details. Grace says Guy “was no slouch in the boudoir.” Cut scenes make it clear that Grace and Guy had sex, but it was far from being good sex. Frankie asks if the sex was bad. Grace doesn’t really answer. Frankie asks Grace if she had an orgasm. Grace angrily responds: “You’re a child!” Frankie concludes, “So, that’s a no.” * Later, Frankie tries to encourage Grace to tell Guy what she likes in bed. She asks if he knows that clitoral stimulation is important. Grace is mortified – and it’s only her and Frankie who can hear this conversation. Grace says she has never talked about her clitoris. * The next day, Grace gets off the phone and tells Frankie “Well, Guy and I made plans for him to have another orgasm tonight.” * Frankie realizes that Jacob is flirting with her. She tells Grace, who gives Frankie some advice – but Frankie isn’t skilled at flirting. Eventually, she let’s Jacob know that Grace thought he was flirting with her, and so she tried to flirt with him – but is bad at it. Jacob says he thought Frankie was having a heart attack. The two of them smoke pot together. Right before Jacob leaves, he tells Frankie that he WAS flirting with her. * Guy comes over. He says he brought a flashlight. (He injured himself trying to find the bed in the dark the other night). He wants to take Grace upstairs. She stops, plays some music, and guides Guy through dancing with her. This is the closest Grace has probably ever gotten to telling a sexual partner what she likes. The dance becomes a metaphor for sex. Episode 9: * Grace got an invite to Robert and Sol’s wedding. She and Frankie make fun of the script (which is florid and loopy and overdone). Frankie asks: “I wonder how they decided whose name goes on top.” That conversation quickly ends. Typically, wedding invitations go one of two ways: (1) The parents who are hosting the wedding are listed, followed by the parents who are not hosting the wedding – and then it states that the parents are inviting people to the wedding. (2) If the couple us hosting the wedding themselves, the name of the bride always appears first (or “on top”). Neither Grace nor Frankie want to consider which of their husbands is “on top” in the bedroom, or to wonder if the order of names on the invitation match that situation. * Frankie, after seeing the wedding invitation, asks Grace to pull her finger, which Grace refuses. Frankie was asking for help – because she tried to remove her wedding ring the day of the funeral but it was stuck on her hand. Grace helps Frankie take off the wedding ring. * Frankie is making another batch of her “Vag-a-kadabra” homemade yam lube. Brianna comes over (to pick up her dog that Frankie was babysitting). Brianna asks what Frankie is making, and Frankie tells her. Brianna responds: “Mom, Frankie verbally molested me!” Surprisingly, it is Grace who explains the virtues of the lube that Frankie is making. The reason is because Brianna took over Grace’s company when she retired. Grace thinks Brianna could sell the lube because it works, and cites a statistic of how many women have dry vaginas (especially older women). This, of course, grosses out Brianna. Grace says: “It’s all natural – from farm to vagina.” Frankie says: “Personal lubricant is for everyone.” Grace makes Brianna take a jar of the lube with her to work. * Frankie calls out Grace for lying. Guy likes golf, and hoagies, and Grace is pretending to like those things too – but she really doesn’t like those things. Frankie keeps insisting that Grace needs to tell Guy the truth. Eventually, Grace says that when you are in a new relationship you lie and pretend to like things that you don’t like. Grace is worried that Guy will break up with her if he learns that they don’t like the same things. Grace is afraid of losing Guy if she is honest with him. Frankie encourages her to be honest with Guy, anyway. * Grace takes a small revenge on Robert by asking him to come over while Guy is there. Robert is coming over to borrow Grace’s wedding book – a huge binder that apparently has tons of information that is useful for people who are planning huge weddings. Grace wants Robert to know that she has a boyfriend. Robert comes over to get the wedding book and sees that Guy is there – and is overjoyed! They are friends. They are happy to see one another. Grace makes it clear that she and Guy are in a relationship. Robert is surprised, but seems ok with that. Guy says that he and Robert should get together – and Robert agrees and says he will call Guy. Grace says the she will attend Robert’s wedding – with Guy as her date. Later, Grace goes golfing with Guy, and Robert shows up. Guy says he invited Robert. The three go golfing, with Grace trying to quietly tell Robert that she doesn’t want him there. She accuses him of trying to flirt with Guy. Guy hits the ball very far, and Robert congratulates him. The two men put their arms around each other, and Guy recites part of a poem (written by Rumi) It turns out that Robert said he had no one to officiate the wedding, and Guy, who is an officiant, volunteered. He hoped Robert liked the poem so he could use it at the wedding. Robert later tells Grace that he thought having Guy officiate was perfect because Sol wanted a multicultural wedding and Guy has been around the world. * Brianna takes the yam lube to work and repeats what Grace said about it, and the “personal lubricant is for everyone” statement that Frankie told her. She puts some yam lube into small containers and asks her team to try it for themselves, and then come back the next day to talk about it how it made them feel. Brianna wants to move the company in a new direction with this product. Brianna mentions dry vaginas a lot – grossing out one of her team members. The team is made up of a woman (who just broke up with her boyfriend) a guy who is straight and may or may not be single, and a guy who is gay. The guy who is gay does not want to hear about vaginas. Brianna ends up using the yam lube with a co-worker – Barry, who is an accountant. She has sex with someone she not only works with but also is one of her employees. The next day, when the team is sharing their experiences with the yam lube, Brianna insists she used the lube “with herself”. * Frankie gets upset because Grace got an invitation to Robert and Sol’s wedding, but she did not. She makes an unexpected visit to Sol, who is living with Robert. Frankie brings him a chip and dip plate shaped like a sombrero. She also used the bread maker Sol brought her to make bread – which she brought to Sol – along with “better” (a non-dairy form of butter she hand made.) Sol asks why she brought him those things. She said she was there to remind him to get a flu shot – and that this is the last time she will remind him – because they need to have boundaries. He agrees, and the two try and work on that. Before she leaves, she tells Sol she is upset that Grace got an invite and she did not. Sol insists that Robert mailed Frankie an invite. This leads to a big, confusing, fight between Sol and Robert about why Frankie’s invite didn’t arrive. (Which gets resolved later.) Later, Sol visits Frankie (who is still living at the beach house with Grace). Frankie is in her studio, working on some art. Sol hands Frankie her invitation. She sets it aside – with a pile of mail, which has Frankie’s invitation. She made some art on the envelope, and forgot about it. Sol and Frankie get serious and ask their subconsciouses (which they have given names to) if Frankie really wants to go to Sol’s wedding. She discovers that she doesn’t want to go because it would be too painful. Sol is sad, but understands. They start acknowledging that they need to work on “divorce stuff”. * Frankie got so caught up with Sol that she accidentally blows off Jacob (the yam man). She stands him up on a lunch date, and he sends her a text. They reschedule, and she stands him up again (before rushing over to meet with him.) Jacob gently breaks up with her. She’s not ready to date yet. * Eventually, Grace starts being honest. She tells Guy that she doesn’t like golf, or hoagies (and adds some other things she doesn’t like). He accepts it. She tells him she was afraid that he would walk away if she told him, and that was scary, especially since she really likes him. Being honest solidified their relationship. Grace them goes over to Robert’s to tell him that Guy can’t be his officiant because Guy is her boyfriend. Robert shrugs that off and accepts. He tells Grace that he and Sol are getting into big fights about planning the wedding and maybe they should just elope like Sol wanted. Sol didn’t want a big wedding. Grace asks Robert what he wants. Robert wants the big wedding. He wants to tell the world that he loves Sol. Grace encourages Robert to keep planning the wedding, and points out that wedding planning is stressful. Grace says Robert would know that if he helped plan their wedding or the wedding of his daughter. There is a moment where they wonder if things would have gone differently if they had both been honest with each other about how they were feeling years ago. They decide that things would have gone the way they did anyway, but might have been less bad. Episode 10: * The episode starts with Robert and Sol, and Grace, and Frankie, and Bud in an elevator. They had just signed divorce papers. The elevator gets stuck, and Grace freaks out because she is claustrophobic. The episode is a “flashback” episode to events that took place long before the events in Episode 1 did. * The “flashback” takes place at the beach house where Grace and Robert, and Frankie and Sol, are spending the Labor Day weekend. Bud, Coyote, and Brianna are also there. Robert and Sol planned to tell their wives that they had become a couple and wanted a divorce. * Robert and Sol start trying to tell Grace and Frankie – when Mallory walks in with her husband. Mallory is super pregnant, and therefore, was not expected to arrive at all. This interrupts what Robert and Sol were trying to say – so it doesn’t get said. * Frankie is over the moon about Mallory’s pregnancy. Mallory’s husband says he sees pregnant women at work all the time, but none of them are as excited as Frankie is. Sol explains that Frankie “never got to do it herself.” Both Coyote and Bud are adopted. It has been established before this episode that Sol and Frankie are both Jewish. This makes me wonder if they chose not have biological children because they both carry a recessive gene for Tay-Sachs. * Mallory spends a lot of time in the pool. She asks Coyote to come over so she could talk to him. She asks Coyote how much cocaine he is on. He says he is naturally energetic. (Shortly before that, Coyote and Mallory’s husband smoked pot together, and Coyote snorted cocaine.) They talk a little about her pregnancy. Coyote starts to say something, that Mallory stops him from saying. She says something about “the thing we agreed never to talk about.” Coyote says “Imagine me with a 9 year old.” I think this means that Mallory and Coyote were a couple nine years ago and they either had a pregnancy scare (that turned out not to be a pregnancy) or Mallory had an abortion. Based on the timeline – Coyote and Mallory probably were in high school when the pregnancy (or pregnancy scare) happened. * Grace makes a mean comment about Frankie not knowing anything about pregnancy because she hasn’t been pregnant. Later, after Mallory unexpectedly gives birth at the beach house, fully clothed, while the family watches, Grace apologizes. She tells Frankie something like that she didn’t feel like a mother until she held her baby in her arms. Frankie says “Me too.” * Grace, who has been on the phone handling work related things for most of the day, later tells Robert that she wants to retire and give the business to Brianna. Grace says she hopes that her retiring will rekindle the relationship between her and Robert. * Fast forward to them all stuck in the elevator, and Robert explains why he stayed with Grace. “My heart broke for you, and I had to give you what you wanted.” * Bud reveals something he feels guilty about. That weekend in the beach house, he was sleeping on the couch. Robert and Sol were on the porch outside that room. Bud woke up and saw Robert and Sol kissing. Bud felt guilty about not telling his mom about that. Frankie and Grace reassure Bud that even if he had told – they wouldn’t have believed him. Frankie says “You gave me five more years with your father.” Episode 11: * Guy has been spending a lot of time at the beach house. Today, he admits that he “ambien eats” after Frankie notices more food missing from the refrigerator. Guy goes shopping to replace what he ate while he was asleep. He also says he “ambian orders” on Amazon, and has purchased the same pair of shoes, while sleeping, four times. * Frankie tells Grace she thinks Grace is going too fast with Guy. Grace says she is lucky to have him. She points out most men their age date younger women “who don’t have sagging breasts and chin hair.” * Frankie’s art student, (the one that kissed Grace during the earthquake), comes in the house to say goodbye. He is going to Mexico. (All of Frankie’s art students are ex-cons and all are adults.) Grace is flustered. He kisses her. Frankie comes in with the student’s painting – and sees them kiss. Grace says it was a goodbye kiss, to which Frankie points out that means there was a hello. Grace ends up telling Frankie about the day of the earthquake when the student first kissed Grace. * Robert and Sol are tasting food so they can pick a caterer for their wedding. The caterers have come over and are preparing food. Frankie calls Sol and tells him “Grace kissed a convict”. When Sol gets off the phone, he tells Robert about Grace kissing a convict. Robert smiles and says: “Good. She deserves some fun.” Sol is surprised by that response, and points out “but Grace is dating your friend Guy.” Robert says something like “but they aren’t married”. Long story short, Sol asks Robert if he kissed anyone else while they were together. Robert does not immediately respond – and Sol gets very upset. Later, Robert admits he slept with someone. Sol demands to know who. This conversation is happening while the caterers (who are a gay couple) are there. Sol says “We know five gay people in the world and two are in the kitchen.” It turns out Robert slept with one of the caterers, 12 years ago, when Robert and Sol were broken up. The caterer tries to console Sol by saying that he and Robert were incompatible. This does not make Sol feel any better. The caterer mentions something about how gay couples don’t have to fit into heterosexual norms. Later, Sol asks Robert “Are we doing this wrong?” He is referring to their upcoming wedding. He is worried they are getting out of one box and going into another. Eventually, Robert and Sol make up after talking things out. They end up choosing these caterers because their food is delicious. * Grace discovers that Frankie told Sol about her “kissing a convict” – and that Sol told Robert. She is absolutely livid! She tells Frankie that she is a private person and expected her to keep what she shared a secret. They argue, and Frankie tries to apologize. At this moment, Guy returns with the food he bought for Frankie. He overhears that Grace kissed a convict – that day – shortly after he left. Guy leaves, but comes back hours later. When Guy returns, he tells Grace that he is in love with her. Grace gives him a hug, but doesn’t say anything. She looks troubled by this news. * Later, Frankie tries to make amends by giving Grace one of her most embarrassing secrets. It is a VHS tape. The tape is a sex tape that she and Sol recorded in the 80′s, while wearing gladiator costumes. Frankie tells Grace she can watch it, laugh at it, tell the kids, put it on the six-o’clock news, do whatever she wants with it. Grace asks: “Can I burn it?” Frankie responds: “Please do.” Frankie says that the idea of watching yourself have sex is much better than actually watching yourself have sex. Frankie offers to give Grace $50 and another one of her secrets. Grace accepts. Frankie says: “I once made out with a monkey.” It turns out she made out with Mickey Dolenz from The Monkees. Episode 12: * Frankie makes a video on her phone saying she is moving on from Sol. She takes off her wedding ring (forever) and puts it into a box. * Bud and Coyote are tasked with throwing their father, and Brianna and Mallory’s father, a bachelor party. Bud and Coyote don’t know what to do. Mallory quickly puts together ideas for food and drinks, gets supplies, etc. Brianna thinks the Dads need to have a tacky bachelor party with jokes about balls. Bud and Coyote think the Dads want a classy party. Coyote sent invitations that had a cowboy in “assless chaps” on them. A friend of the Dads, named Nelson, arrives unexpectedly. Nelson is from Utah and doesn’t really approve of same-sex marriage. This makes the Dads feel like they HAVE TO keep the party very classy. The party is boring, so Bud and Coyote call Brianna for help. She orders a huge, pink, penis – that functions like a mechanical bull – and has it placed on the front lawn of the Dad’s home. Robert and Sol freak out. Nelson gets mean – telling Robert and Sol he doesn’t mind that they are homosexuals, but doesn’t want them to “throw it” into his face. Robert nearly punches Nelson, but Sol stops him. Meanwhile, the rest of the guests – all men (most of whom are heterosexual) are lined up around the penis/mechanical bull, waiting for their turn. Brianna’s idea made the party fun. Robert and Sol choose to stay inside – and do not want to ride the mechanical penis that is on their front lawn. * Frankie is sad – and Grace tries to cheer her up. They end up doing a “Say Yes” night. It is something that Frankie and Sol used to do. You have to say “yes” to everything that is offered the whole night – until you go home or get arrested. Frankie and Grace end up having fun. The fun includes accepting whiskey flights from two men at the bar Frankie selected. The two men are around the same age as Frankie and Grace. Frankie and Grace end up dancing on the bar and get kicked out. Meanwhile, Frankie’s car got towed. Frankie decides that, for those reasons, this “Say Yes” night is at least in “the top five”. * Grace admits to Frankie that when Guy told her that he was falling in love with her, Grace didn’t say it back. Episode 13: * Inside Frankie’s studio, near the door, there is a bumper sticker that has been posted sideways. It says “Viva Gore Lieberman 2000”. It is a political bumper sticker that was promoting Al Gore for President and Joe Lieberman for Vice President. The bumper sticker was for the 2000 election. * Grace wants to break up with Guy, but has been avoiding it. She says she is afraid that if she breaks up with him she might be alone forever. Frankie says that Grace needs to vlog about it. That evening, Grace had dinner with Guy and they watched two movies together. Grace didn’t break up with Guy, but still wants to. Guy comes downstairs and starts eating lasagna. Grace breaks up with him, and he takes it quite well. He offers to leave, but Grace insists that he stay because it was the middle of the night. She sleeps on the couch. The next morning, Frankie finds Grace on the couch and asks about Guy. Grace says she broke up with him. Guy comes downstairs and, based on his mood and words, doesn’t seem to be aware that Grace broke up with him. Frankie figures out the problem. “It was an Ambien breakup”. Guy was sleep-eating when Grace broke up with him. Grace eventually takes Frankie’s advice and vlogs (using FaceTime). She mentions Guy, and Robert, and then unexpectedly mentions a man named Phil whom she was in a relationship with. She discovers what she wants in a relationship, and that she isn’t getting it with Guy. Later, Grace tells Frankie that she has broken up with Guy (for real this time). * Robert is trying to write his vows but is having difficulty. It is important to Sol that they both write their own vows. Sol has already written his. Robert’s daughters find them and feel all kinds of emotions – so what Sol wrote must have been really good. Robert eventually writes a ridiculously long thing that was supposed to be vows but sounds like something written for a court case. Brianna asks her dad “Are you suing Sol for his love?” Brianna and Mallory take away the legal brief and edit it into something beautiful (and very appropriate as wedding vows). * Frankie goes to the home she and Sol once shared because it is moving day. They sold the house and need to pack up things and take them away. Frankie, Sol, Coyote, and Bud are going through boxes and sharing memories. They have a big, family hug. Sol says they should light the Shabbat candles one more time. The family agrees. Sol lights the candles and begins a prayer, but then gets too emotional and starts crying. Frankie sends their sons to go do the plans they had that night, and consoles Sol. Sol says “I have so much love for all of you my heart….” Frankie finishes “Hurts?” Sol nods. Frankie and Sol kiss, and they end up having sex. Both of them look quite distressed about that afterwards. * Grace comes home and finds Sol in the beach house. Frankie is not there. Sol looks extremely upset, and he’s not making a lot of sense. He says he wanted to make sure Frankie was ok. Grace eventually figures out that they slept together. She yells at Sol and tells him to go away, and that she will take care of Frankie. Sol is afraid to go home. To summarize, Grace convinces Sol that he has to tell Robert about what happened between him and Frankie, “or live the rest of your life the way you spent the past 20 years.” Sol goes home, still visibly upset. The viewer can hear Robert practicing his vows by reading them out loud as Sol stands at the front door, gathering courage to go inside. It doesn’t appear that Sol can hear Robert. Frankie was out on the beach. Frankie says something about not realizing it was over until now, and that Grace figured out it was over right away. Frankie says that sleeping with Sol “didn’t feel right”. She explains, “It felt like we don’t go together anymore.” This review of Grace and Frankie – Season One is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on Patreon or at PayPal.me. Thank you!... ColoringJohanna Basford 2019 Coloring Calendar – DecemberJanuary 17, 2020ColoringI was able to complete all of the December coloring pages in the Johanna Basford 2019 coloring calendar. The last few were finished in January of 2020, but I’m ok with that. The world moves too fast for me, due to my chronic illnesses. In general, I’m not a big fan of Christmas. That said, I had fun coloring these pages. Some were extremely detailed, and I enjoyed the challenge. As you may have noticed, I was unable to finish coloring some of the months in 2019. I did start all of them… and then either got too busy with work or too sick to care. My plan is to get back to them when I can. November 30 and December 1 December 2 December 3 December 4 December 5 December 6 December 7 and 8 December 9 December 10 December 11 December 12 December 13 December 14 and 15 December 16 December 17 December 18 December 19 December 20 December 21 and 22 December 23 December 24 December 25 December 26 December 27 December 28 and 29 December 30 December 31 A friend of mine gave me the Johanna Basford 2020 coloring calendar as a Christmas gift. I have started coloring its pages, and hope to be able to create a blog post of the finished month of January 2020 as soon as I can. Johanna Basford 2019 Coloring Calendar – December is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Johanna Basford 2019 Coloring Calendar – SeptemberNovember 21, 2019ColoringI have learned that my chronic illnesses make it extremely difficult, if not impossible, to complete a “do one every day” project. I end up finishing some, but not all, of the pages in a month before the calendar flips. As such, I have fallen behind. That said, I did manage to complete all of the coloring pages for September 2019, so here they are! August 31 and September 1 September 2 September 3 September 4 September 5 September 6 September 7 and 8 September 9 September 10 September 11 September 12 September 13 September 14 and 15 September 16 September 17 September 18 September 19 September 20 September 21 and 22 September 23 September 24 September 25 September 26 September 27 September 28 and 29 September 30 Johanna Basford 2019 Coloring Calendar – September is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Johanna Basford 2019 Coloring Calendar – MayJune 27, 2019ColoringI’ve been coloring through the 2019 Johanna Basford coloring calendar. It is fun and relaxing. I fell a little bit behind in May because it was a busy month. Still got it done, though. May 1 May 2 May 3 May 4 and 5 May 6 May 7 May 8 May 9 May 10 May 11 and 12 May 13 May 14 May 15 May 16 May 17 May 18 and 19 May 20 May 21 May 22 May 23 May 24 May 25 and 26 May 27 May 28 May 29 May 30 May 31 Johanna Basford 2019 Coloring Calendar – May is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... MediumChanges to California’s AB5 Protect Freelance WorkersSeptember 6, 2020MediumPhoto by Kaitlyn Baker on Unsplash AB5 went into effect in California on January 1, 2020. The purpose was to require employers to provide “gig workers” the same benefits that they offer to their employees. At first glance, it sounded like it had the potential to provide protections to freelance writers. Unfortunately, there were some problems with this law. On September 4, 2020, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed AB2257 to fix some of the problems with AB5. The changes made by AB2257 took effect immediately. I am a freelance writer who lives in California. When AB5 went into affect, I was scared. The law placed a limit of 35 “content submissions” per year. It was unclear to me whether that meant 35 submissions to one client – or 35 submissions total for the year. I’ve been working as a freelance writer since 2010. It is how I make my living. It felt like AB5 was going to take away my ability to continue working as a freelance writer. Fortunately, as I read more about what AB5 included, I realized my fears were unfounded. The reason is because the law makes it clear the conditions in which an employer must classify a “gig worker” as an employee. 1. The worker is free to perform services without the control or direction of the company. 2. The worker is performing work tasks that are outside the usual course of the company’s business activities. 3. The worker is customarily engaged in an independent established trade, occupation, or business of the same nature as that involved in the work performed. Based on these rules, the freelance writing work I did was exempt from the effects of AB5. All of my clients could, if required to, prove that I was “performing work tasks that are outside of the usual course of the company’s business activities.” I was one of the lucky ones who was able to continue to earn a living despite AB5. That wasn’t true for all California writers who are freelancers or contract workers, though. SB Nation wrote that it would end contracts with most of their California-based writers because of the 35 written content submissions part of AB5. A few of those contractors were going to be offered full or part-time employment, but the rest were let go. The American Society of Journalists and Authors sued the State of California in federal court in an effort to stop AB5 from “violating the Constitution and devastating the careers of freelance journalists such as writers and photographers”. The National Press Photographers Association joined this lawsuit. On September 4, 2020, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed AB2257 into law. It took effect immediately. The main purpose of this law was to function as a cleanup measure to address criticisms about how AB5 treated contractors and freelancers. Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez, a Democrat who represents California’s District 80, authored AB2257. A quote by her was posted in an press release on her official website about AB2257 becoming a law: “Workers shouldn’t have to be tied up in litigation for years on end before they can access their basic labor rights,” Assemblywoman Gonzales said. “AB 2257 strikes a balance and continues to provide protections for workers against misclassification that had previously gone unchecked for decades under the old rules.” AB2257 passed the California Senate floor with 39 AYES and 0 NAYS. It passed the Assembly Floor with 74 AYES and 0 NAYS. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, AB2557 includes major exemptions (from AB5) for the music industry, as well as freelance writers and photographers. The new law eliminates the “35 submissions a year” cap for any publication. In addition, the new law protects musicians (with some exceptions), translators and interpreters, still photographers, photojournalists, videographers (with some exceptions), photo editors, graphic designers, web designers, tutors, consultants, youth sports coaches, caddies, wedding or event planners and vendors, handypeople, movers, dog walkers and groomers, pool cleaners, insurance underwriters, manufactured housing salespeople, competition judges, landscape architects, performers teaching master classes, foresters, real estate appraisers and home inspectors, and feedback aggregators. As for me, I’m happy that AB2257 has become a law. I no longer have to worry that my freelance gigs could suddenly end through no fault of my own – but due to the restrictions in AB5. Some of you, who are also freelance workers in California might feel the same way. Changes to California’s AB5 Protect Freelance Workers is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Trump Must Pay $44,100 to Stormy DanielsAugust 28, 2020MediumImage by succo from Pixabay Judge Robert Broadbelt III, of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County in California, has ordered Donald Trump to pay Stormy Daniels $44,100 to cover legal fees in the battle over her nondisclosure (NDA) agreement. This was reported by The Guardian, as well as several other news outlets. Former Governor of California, Jerry Brown, appointed Judge Robert Broadbelt III to the Superior Court of Los Angeles in 2012. Judge Broadbelt III ran for re-election for judge of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County in 2014. No one decided to run against him, so he was automatically re-elected. In 2020, Judge Broadbelt III was the only candidate to file. He won the position by default when the election was canceled. His current term ends in 2027. Stormy Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, is a pornographic film producer, director, and actor. She has claimed that she had an affair with Donald Trump from 2006 until 2007. To put this in perspective, Donald Trump married his third wife, Melania Knauss, in January of 2005. Melania gave birth to Barron Trump (the only child of Donald and Melania) in March of 2006. Donald Trump’s affair with Stormy Daniels reportedly started four months later, in July of 2006. She has claimed the affair continued into 2007. Donald Trump denies it. This most recent court battle is, in part, about the non-disclosure agreement that Stormy Daniels signed in October of 2016. It was titled: “Confidential Settlement Agreement and Mutual Release; Assignment of Copyright and Non-Disparagement Agreement” in Judge Broadbelt III’s ruling. Strangely, Stormy Daniels is referred to by the pseudonym “Peggy Peterson” in the NDA, but the person referred to by the pseudonym “David Dennison” is redacted in the copy the judge was given. The ruling clarifies that Stormy Daniels alleges that “David Dennison” is Donald Trump. This appears to be backed up by Michael Cohen, who was Trump’s personal attorney at the time. Both Stormy Daniels and Michael Cohen signed the NDA. But, “David Dennison” did not. Judge Broadbelt III wrote that there was a large amount of evidence showing that Michael Cohen chose “David Dennison” as a pseudonym for Trump. This case has gone back and forth in court for a while. On August 14, 2020, the Superior Court of Los Angeles held a hearing on Stormy Daniels’ motion for an award of attorney’s fees and costs in the amount of $64,440.65, pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 1717 and 28 United States Code section 1447, subdivision (c). Defendant Donald Trump, and his lawyers, opposed that motion. In short, Judge Broadbelt III reviewed the claims made by Stormy Daniels, and the claims made by Donald Trump, and came to a conclusion. He ruled that Plaintiff Stormy Daniels achieved her main litigation objective when Defendant Donald Trump (and presumably his lawyers) filed their Covenants Not to Sue. Judge Broadbelt III noted that the District Court also stated that Plantiff Stormy Daniels “primarily sought declaratory relief stating that the Agreement should be declared unenforceable against her”. It also declared that “Because Plaintiff received this relief through Defendants’ Covenants, there is no further controversy for the Court to address.” There is a lengthy explanation by Judge Broadbelt III that can be summarized in a few sentences. First, the judge stated that Defendant Donald Trump would have to be either a party to the Agreement, or a third party beneficiary of the Agreement. Second, the judge determined that there is support that the parties to the agreement intended Defendant Donald Trump to be the person referred to as “David Dennison” in the agreement. “Based on the evidence discussed above and the reasonable inferences the court has drawn from that evidence, the court finds that Defendant is the intended third-party beneficiary of the Agreement.” On August 17, 2020, Judge Broadbelt III ruled that Plaintiff Stormy Daniels (Stephanie Clifford) would be granted her motion for attorney’s fees – but not for her request for costs. In addition, Judge Broadbelt III ordered that Plaintiff Stormy Daniels “shall recover $44,100 in attorney’s fees against defendant Donald J. Trump in this action.” All of this could have been avoided if Donald Trump simply chose not to have an affair with Stormy Daniels. It is clear that Trump did not want that affair to become public knowledge. He brought this problem upon himself, and it makes sense that the court decided he is financially obligated to pay $44,100 to Stormy Daniels. Trump Must Pay $44,100 to Stormy Daniels is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... The NRA is in TroubleAugust 24, 2020MediumImage by 3D Animation Production Company from Pixabay New York Attorney General Letitia James has filed a lawsuit against the National Rifle Association (NRA). The lawsuit has absolutely nothing to do with the second amendment. This isn’t about taking away people’s guns. Instead, the NRA is in trouble because, according to Attorney General James, the charitable organization has been diverting the money it receives from donations to personal use by senior leadership of the NRA. James also states that the organization used that money for the financial gain of close associations and family. The lawsuit is called People of the State of New York, by Letitia James, Attorney General of the State of New York v The National Rifle Association of America, Inc., Wayne LaPierre, Wilson Phillips, John Frazer, and Joshua Powell. A copy of a summons, and the complaint, can be found here. (PDF) “The NRA’s influence has been so powerful that the organization went unchecked for decades while top executives funneled millions into their own pockets,” said Attorney General James. “The NRA is fraught with fraud and abuse, which is why today, we seek to dissolve the NRA, because no organization is above the law.” One of the reasons why the NRA is in trouble is because it is registered as a 501(c)(4) not-for-profit charitable organization. The lawsuit alleges that mismanagement led to the waste and loss of millions of assets and contributed to the NRA reaching a deteriorated financial state. In addition, the lawsuit alleges that NRA board’s audit committee was negligent in its duty to ensure appropriate, competent, and judicious stewardship of assets by NRA leadership. In short, the lawsuit alleges that four men “overrode and evaded internal controls to allow themselves, their families, favored board members, employees, and vendors to benefit through reimbursed expenses, related party transactions, excess compensation, side deals, and waste of charitable assets without regard to the NRA’s best interests”. Wayne LaPierre was Executive Vice-President of the NRA for about three decades. Here are some of the things he allegedly did: Spent hundreds of thousands of dollars of the NRA’s charitable assets for private plane trips for himself and his family, including extended family when he was not present. He and his family allegedly also took trips to the Bahamas by private air charter during a three-year period. This cost the NRA $500,000. On many of those trips, LaPierre and his family were allegedly gifted the use of a 107-foot yacht owned by an NRA vendor. LaPierre also allegedly traveled to Africa with his wife for all-expense paid safaris, gifted by an NRA vendor. LaPierre allegedly secured a post-employment contract for himself with the NRA, without board approval. The contract, according to Attorney General James, is currently valued at more than $17 million. He also allegedly received more than $1.2 million in expense reimbursements in a four-year period for expenditures that “included gifts for favored friends and vendors; travel expenses for himself and his family; and membership fees at golf clubs, hotels, and other member clubs.” Wilson “Woody” Phillips was the former treasurer and CFO and managed the books and financial operations of the NRA. He allegedly lied on financial disclosure forms, and set up a deal worth more than $1 million that benefited his girlfriend. Phillips also allegedly obtained a contract for himself worth $1.8 million, “purportedly for monthly consulting services to the incoming treasurer.” (The current treasurer knew nothing about the contract and said that Phillips never consulted for him). Joshua Powell was former Chief of Staff and Executive Director of General Operations of the NRA. He was terminated after 3.5 years for “misappropriating NRA funds during his tenure” (among other things). He allegedly had his salary doubled retroactively to the beginning of his tenure with the NRA to $500,000. It increased again to $650,000 less than a year later. After two years on the job his salary was $800,000. He also allegedly “abused the NRA’s policy on housing and relocation reimbursements, pocketing excess of $100,000 more than NRA rules allowed.” John Frazer was chosen by LaPierre to serve as general counsel and corporate secretary at the NRA. Between 2014 and 2018, he allegedly “failed to comply with governance procedures, make necessary changes, or advise others that governance changes had to be made.” He also allegedly “failed to ensure the NRA was in compliance with laws and policies governing whistleblowers.” Ackerman McQueen was the NRA’s Public Relations and Advertising firm. The lawsuit alleges that a practice began between LaPierre and Ackerman McQueen’s co-founder. What it was being used for is shocking. Ackerman McQueen allegedly paid for a variety of non-contractual, out-of-pocket expenses for LaPierre and other NRA executives, and passed those expenses to the NRA. This appears to be a way to hide the payment of personal expensive for NRA executives from the NRA itself. After this lawsuit was announced, it appears that President Donald Trump (and others) suggested that the NRA could get out of trouble if it relocated to another state. Attorney General James responded by reminding the NRA and President Trump that her office “shut down the president’s own foundation, recouped millions in diverted funds after unearthing the illegal use of charitable funds, and directed those funds to lawful organizations for legitimate charity purposes.” She also stated: “…To be clear, no charity registered in New York state, including the NRA, can dissolve and relocate to another state without approval from my office or from the Supreme Court of New York. As long as our lawsuit continues, the NRA must stay right where it is and answer for their deep-rooted fraud. The facts speak for themselves and our lawsuit will continue undeterred.” Attorney General James has a proposed resolution of this case. It involves dissolving the NRA, and asking the court to order LaPierre, Phillips, Powell and Frazier to “make full resolutions for the funds they unlawfully profited and salaries earned while employees”. Personally, I don’t like the NRA. To me, it feels like the organization uses scare tactics as a means of influencing people to donate money to it. I expect that people who donated money to the NRA would be upset to learn that the money they donated wasn’t used in the way it was supposed to. It is worth noting that there are plenty of gun owners who don’t like the National Rifle Association. In 2018, HuffPost posted the results of a HuffPost/YouGov poll in which nearly half of the gun owners who took the poll said they didn’t think NRA membership would benefit them personally. The poll showed that one in four respondents indicated that a reason they chose not to join the NRA was because the disagreed with the NRA’s political beliefs. Another 22 percent said they didn’t feel the NRA represented people like them. A total of 23 percent of respondents said NRA membership was “too expensive”. On August 6, 2020, Attorney General Karl A. Racine tweeted: “#BREAKING: We are suing the NRA Foundation for misusing charitable funds. Donors gave money to fund firearms safety, firearms education and marksmanship training. Instead, that money was diverted to support wasteful spending by the NRA and its executives.” The District of Columbia Attorney General Karl A. Racine. has also filed a lawsuit against the NRA for misusing charitable funds to support wasteful spending by the NRA and its executives. This lawsuit alleges that the NRA Foundation violated District laws by allowing charitable funds to be used for non charitable purposes, failing to operate independently, and placing the NRA’s interests ahead of its own charitable purposes. The part about failing to operate independently refers to the NRA Foundation’s Board of Directors, which was allegedly controlled by the NRA. That’s not supposed to happen because the Board of Directors was supposed to provide oversight. Instead, the Board allegedly allowed the NRA to exploit the NRA Foundation through multi-million-dollar loans. One of those loans was $5 million – that the NRA has never paid back to the NRA Foundation. A copy of the complaint can be found here. (PDF) It will be interesting to see what happens as a result of these lawsuits. Do not expect that the outcome will be revealed soon. These lawsuits could end up working their way though the system and to the Supreme Court. I’m unconvinced the NRA and/or the NRA Foundation will have the money to fight against these lawsuits for that long. The NRA is in Trouble is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... 2020 Presidential CampaignWhat Happened in the 2020 California PrimaryJuly 29, 20202020 Presidential CampaignImage by OpenClipart-Vectors from Pixabay For the first time ever, California participated in Super Tuesday. It is the date when the largest number of states and territories hold a presidential preference primary or caucus. In 2020, Super Tuesday was held on March 3. The following states and territories participated in Super Tuesday 2020: Alabama, American Samoa, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, and Virginia. Why did California vote on Super Tuesday? On September, 27, 2017, The Hill reported that California Governor Jerry Brown signed a measure moving California’s presidential primary to March. The Hill reported that this was “a move likely to give the nation’s most populous state more sway in the nominating contest”. California has typically held its primary in June, often weeks after the eventual Republican and Democratic presidential nominees have rounded up the delegates to secure their party’s nomination. But under the legislation signed Wednesday, California’s primary would fall on Super Tuesday, when several other states hold their primaries, forcing candidates to compete more aggressively in the Golden State.Brown did not issue a statement with his signature. But California Secretary of State Alex Padilla, who backed the move, said that the new date would prompt candidates to focus on issues relevant to his state’s voters……State lawmakers passed their primary measure earlier this month in the final hours of their legislative session.They also approved a bill that would require presidential candidates to release their income tax returns before they can appear on the ballot in the state. Voting Information The California Secretary of State website has plenty of information about voting and elections. Qualifications to register to vote in California require a person to: Be a United States citizen and resident of California18-years-old on Election DayNot currently in a federal prison or on parole for the conviction of a felonyNot currently found mentally incompetent to vote by a court California has made it easier for eligible voters to vote. Here is a quick look at some of those opportunities: People who are 16-years-old, or 17-years-old, can pre-register to vote. They still cannot vote until they turn 18-years-old. When they reach that age, they are automatically eligible to vote.California allows same day voter registration. It is a safety net for Californian’s who miss the deadline to register to vote or update their voter registration information for an election. Eligible citizens who need to register or re-register to vote within 14-days of an election can complete the process at their county elections office, polling place, or vote center. Their ballots will be processed and counted once the county elections office has completed the voter registration verification process.College students, and Californians who are living abroad, can vote. Students need to choose if they want to register to vote using their “home away from home” address that they use at school, or if they want to register at their traditional home address. They must pick one or the other – not both. California voters who are living abroad can vote by mail.The California Motor Voter program makes registering to vote at the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) more convenient. Eligible applicants who complete a drivers license, identification (ID) card or change of address transaction online, by mail, or in person at the DMV will automatically be registered to vote.All eligible California voters can register to vote online.California allows eligible voters to vote early. Or, a voter can choose to vote on Election Day.All eligible voters can request a paper ballot that will be sent to them by mail – and that can be mailed to the County Clerk’s office by mail (without requiring a stamp). It is also acceptable to bring your completed ballot to the County Clerk’s office and return it in person. California does not limit voting by mail to those who can show proof of disability, or those who are past a certain age.In California, individuals convicted of a felony have their right to vote automatically restored once they have completed prison time and parole. Individuals serving sentences in state or federal prisons cannot vote, while those in county jail, as a condition of probation and those serving a felony jail sentence retain the right to vote as of 2016. California has 415 pledged delegates in California’s Democratic presidential primary vote on Super Tuesday, more than any other state, The Guardian reported. March 3, 2020: California correspondent for California Healthline and Kaiser Health News Angela Hart tweeted: “.@GavinNewsom & @JenSeibelNewsom voting today. The governor has not endorsed again since @KamalaHarris dropped out. The first partner has endorsed @ewarren”. The tweet included a photo of Governor Gavin Newsom and First Partner Jen Seibel Newsom surrounded by reporters holding cameras, lights, microphones, and phones. California Endorsements Bernie Sanders American Federation of Musicians Local 47 Endorses Bernie Sanders for President Los Angeles, CA (February 12, 2020) – The American Federation of Musicians Local 47 is proud to endorse Bernie Sanders for President of the United States in the 2020 Primary Election.Members of the Los Angeles musicians union’s political action committee voted unanimously to recommend that the AFM Local 47 executive board – the elected leadership body of the 7,000-member union – endorse Sen. Sanders as the candidate who best represents the interests of musicians. On Tuesday, the board in turn voted unanimously to endorse Sanders in an unprecedented move for a union historically removed from taking official stances in presidential elections.“Today, more than ever, unions and workers are under attack by exploitative forces that are eroding our middle class. Immediately action and activism is crucial,” said AFL Local 47 President John Acosta. “Bernie Sanders is the best presidential candidate to defend musicians and all workers by protecting jobs and workers’ rights.”AFM Local 47 is the first musicians union in the country to take a position in the 2020 Democratic Primary. The decision to support Sen. Sanders arrived from a member-driven process in which AFM Local 47 musicians organized a political forum to hear from and speak directly with senior campaign officials. Musicians found Sanders to be the candidate best able to champion the priorities and values of the musicians union: Protecting Pensions: Sanders has committed to halt further cuts to workers’ pensions and to make whole those workers whose pension benefits have been cut, while working toward a long-term solution to restore troubled pension plans to solvency.Union Support: Sanders has supported working people throughout his career, which has garnered him the most union endorsements of all candidates, and Local 47 is proud to join some of our closest allies with its support.Tax Credit Accountability: Sanders supports our calls to ensure that tax credit dollars are promoting good jobs for musicians in the U.S., not allowing taxpayer-subsidized music jobs to be sent overseas.Labor Rights/Worker Power: Sanders has committed to doubling union membership, allowing sectoral bargaining, requiring worker representation on corporate boards, and repealing harmful provisions of the Taft-Hartley Act. Additionally, Sanders’ strong and unwavering support of union workers throughout his political career and his ambitious plan for strengthening labor power throughout the nation fully aligns with AFM Local 47’s commitment to building a national movement for real and lasting change… Kamala Harris February 14, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Barbara Lee endorses Kamala Harris’s 2020 bid”. It was written by Michael Burke. From the article: Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) on Thursday endorsed Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) for president, saying that Harris will be a “president truly of the people, by the people, and for the people.”“As just the third African American woman from a major party to run for President, I am so proud to endorse her candidacy as she continues to fight for equality, fairness, and dignity for all Americans,” the former head of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) said in a statement.“Watching Kamala’s career in the East Bay and San Francisco for 20 years, I’ve witnessed her deep passion for justice and opportunity, and I know she will be a president truly of the people, by the people, and for the people,” Lee added.With the endorsement, Lee became the first member of the CBC to pick a side in the 2020 race, according to CNN… February 15, 2020: Politico posted an article titled: “Gavin Newsom endorses Kamala Harris for president”. It was written by Christopher Cadelago. From the article: Kamala Harris won the endorsement of California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who announced to a national television audience on Friday that hew as backing his home-state senator for president.“I’m very enthusiastic about Kamala Harris,” Newsom said in an interview with MSNBC’s Chris Hayes. “I’ve known her for decades, not only as district attorney where she did an extraordinary job with a very progressive record, but I watched her up close as lieutenant governor, when she served as attorney general, and I have the privilege of working with her as a U.S. senator.”“I think the American people could not do better,” Newsom added… Elizabeth Warren February 28, 2020: San Francisco Chronicle posted an article titled: “Jennifer Seibel Newsom endorses Elizabeth Warren for president”. It was written by Alexi Koseff. From the article: Jennifer Seibel Newsom, wife of California Gov. Gavin Newsom, endorsed Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren for president on Friday.In a video posted to social media, Seibel Newsom, a documentary filmmaker who has adopted the gender-neutral title of “first partner” and established a public agenda around issues like pay equity, asked voters to make Warren the first woman president.“Sen. Elizabeth Warren is the brightest person in the room and she actually cares about each and every one of you, especially our women, our children, and the nation’s most vulnerable,” Seibel Newsom said. “She knows you can’t live a good life in an unjust society, and she will revive the American dream for all of you who call this country home.”……”Please think about your wives, your mothers, your sisters and your daughters,” Seibel Newsom said. “Vote your conscience, not what the pundits and the billionaires are telling you to do. Because Sen. Elizabeth Warren is electable.” Joe Biden January 9, 2020: Times of San Diego posted an article titled: “Mayors of LA, Long Beach Endorse Biden During Southern Carolina Visit”. It was written by Chris Jennewein. From the article: As he returned to Southern California for a presidential fundraiser, former Vice President Joe Biden picked up endorsements Thursday from the mayors of Los Angeles and Long Beach.“Joe Biden is a close personal friend who has been an incredible partner in delivering progress for L.A.,” Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti said in a statement released by the Biden campaign. “He came to L.A., and stood shoulder-to-shoulder with me to make us the first big city to enact a $15 minimum wage, and he brought leaders from all over the world to our city to forge the most sweeping climate agreement prior to the Paris accords.”……Long Beach Mayor Robert Garcia, who had supported the candidacy of California Sen. Kamala Harris until she dropped out of the race, also issued a statement Thursday endorsing Biden.“As the mayor of a growing, vibrant and diverse city, Donald Trump’s reckless attacks on immigrants, health care and the LGBTQ community are deeply personal,” Garcia said. “Joe is a candidate that has both the experience an the ability to build a broad-based coalition needed to beat Donald Trump – not just here in California, but across the country. We’ve seen Joe bring people together time and time again to deliver results for working families, including right her in California”… May 8, 2020: Politico posted an article titled: “Newsom finally endorses Biden at virtual campaign event for top-dollar donors”. It was written by Carla Marinucci. From the article: Saying America is desperately in need of healing and “a sense of hopefulness” during the Covid-19 pandemic, California Gov. Gavin Newsom on Friday formally endorsed Joe Biden as the Democratic candidate who can “bring people together and unite this nation.”“I’m so honored to be here with you and supporting your presidency,” Newsom told Biden as he starred at a virtual campaign event for the former vice president where tickets went for as high as $100,000. “I just couldn’t be more proud of you, and the prospect of your presidency.”“You’re willing to reach out to people — never talk down to people, regardless of their political stripes regardless, their lot in life,’’ Newsom told Biden on the Zoom call with hundreds of deep-pocketed Democratic donors. “That’s about character. It’s about decency. It’s about honor.”“You get it, and you’ve gotten it done over the course of decades,’’ Newsom told Biden. “You’ve been on the front lines of fighting against poverty, ignorance and disease. You have a deep compassion and empathy, you see the world from other people’s eyes.’’Biden appeared emotional at the end of Newsom’s address. “Gov, if I get elected, I’m going to need you badly,” Biden responded……Until Friday, Newsom – who had earlier endorsed Sen. Kamala Harris for president – hadn’t yet formally endorsed the former vice president. And he recently sidestepped questions from reporters about whether he would make a formal endorsement of Biden, saying he has been focused on his response to the Covid-19 crisis… Controversies January 23, 2020: The City of Beverly Hills posted a press release titled: “City of Beverly Hills Files Lawsuit Regarding LA County’s Ballot Marking Devices”. From the press release: The City of Beverly Hills has filed a lawsuit in Los Angeles County Superior Court over concerns regarding Los Angeles County’s new VSAP (Voting Solutions for All People) touchscreen electronic voting system.As voters prepare to cast their ballots in-person at the new Vote Centers countywide, only four candidates will appear on the first screen of the ballot marking device. To view additional candidates, the voter must select the MORE button. However, if the voter instead presses the NEXT button, they will not see all the candidates in that particular race.“We are deeply troubled that voters will be disenfranchised by the new VSAP system,” said Beverly Hills City Attorney Laurence S. Wiener. “All candidates should be presented in an equitable and transparent way to the voters. As the system is currently designed, a voter may not realize they are bypassing additional candidates. We believe this issue can be easily resolved.”The City is asking LA County to gray out the NEXT button until the voter has moved to the last page of that individual race and viewed all candidates. Alternatively, the City is asking that instructions be included on the first screen indicating there may be additional candidates than the first four names listed and to select MORE to view all choices. February 4, 2020: U.S. Representative Ted Lieu (Democrat – CA-33) tweeted: “There is a big ballot flaw in LA County ballots. Half the voters in my district won’t see my name or other candidates unless they hit “more” button because only 4 names are shown. Voters could skip to the next race without knowing there are more candidates”. Ted Lieu’s tweet included a link to an Los Angeles Times article. February 28, 2020: Representative Jimmy Gomez posted a press release titled: “Reps Roybal-Allard, Gomez, and Lieu Joint Statement On Flawed Electronic Ballot Design”. From the joint statement: Today, Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.), Rep. Jimmy Gomez (D-Calif.) and Rep Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-Calif.) issued the following statement regarding the flawed electronic ballot design in Los Angeles County:“As a result of a faulty electronic ballot design, many voters in Los Angeles County, including in parts of our congressional districts, will not see our names or the names of other candidates unless they specifically hit the ‘more’ button when voting. The electronic ballot only shows four candidates on each page regardless of the number of candidates listed without knowing there are additional candidates, and then skip to the next race on the ballot. We urge all voters who vote electronically to always hit the ‘more’ button before they finish voting in any particular race.The current situation is not acceptable and inadequate measures have been taken to remedy this serious flaw. We call on Los Angeles Registrar-Recorder Dean Logan to (1) take whatever steps are necessary to ensure voters are educated fully about the ‘more’ button, and (2) to fix this situation for future primary elections.” March 4, 2020: ABC 8 News posted an article about the Super Tuesday elections. Part of the article included information about California. From the article: …Voter file databases were down or excruciatingly slow in some counties in California and Texas. In Los Angeles County, electronic pollbooks that are connected to the state’s voter database were operating slowly because of the high number of voters, County Registrar-Recorder spokesman Mike Sanchez said. The county brought in technicians and added devices in some polling places to move lines along.Even so, delays were two hours or longer in some locations. Beverly Hills City Councilman Julian Gold said waiting times there were 2 1/2 to 3 hours. He said he was told the delays were related to voter check-in……At a vote center in Silver Lake, near downtown Los Angeles, poll workers said computer network issues slowed the voter check-in process and made some machines unusable. About one-third of the approximately 40 machines were being used, and some had “out of order” signs taped to them. The resulting line meant it took about an hour for voters to cast their ballots… March 4, 2020: Vox’s Recode posted an article titled: “Voters struggled with LA’s fancy new voting machines on Super Tuesday”. It was written by Rebecca Heilweil. From the article: …On Tuesday, the Los Angeles Times reported election officials were having issues with their systems linking up with California’s voter database, which meant that the registration information. The is a big problem, since California passed a law last year that allows for voter registration on Election Day in an effort to enfranchise more voters.Meanwhile, many voters complained on Twitter that their voting machines weren’t working, with some reaching out to election officials on the platform for help. There were also complaints that the machines were not taking voters’ paper ballots, which need to be inserted back into the machine. Several people also said that the e-poll books weren’t working.Dale Robinson, a Los Angeles voter, confirmed to Recode in an email that one voting machine was “down completely” and the other was working “very slowly” at the first voting center he visited in Highland Park. A volunteer recommended he vote at a nearby location, which he did. Similarly, voter Michael Connor told Recode that when he inserted his printed ballot into the machine’s scanner at the voting center he visited in Reseda, it displayed a loading, swirling icon for five minutes. A technician ultimately helped him insert the ballot into another machine……The reported failures are especially discouraging because they represent a $280 million effort to modernize LA’s elections. The new voting machines are part of LA’s Voting Solutions for All People (VSAP) and come equipped with touchscreens and futuristic-looking yellow-and-black stands. The system even allows voters to fill out their ballots ahead of time on other devices and then send that information to the voting machines through a QR code. Importantly, all votes are meant to be backed up with a paper record, which is designed to be a fail-safe should something go technically awry with the system.VSAP is publicly owned and was designed to use open-source technology, making the program the first of its kind in the nation. The machines themselves arrive with another new change in LA: Instead of local polling stations, people can now vote from anywhere in the county, thanks to a centralized voter database. Some voting machines are even being moved around the Los Angeles area, which should make it easier for less-mobile populations to vote… March 26, 2020: Smartmatic, creator of the Voting Solutions for All People (VSAP) electronic voting machines, posted a blog titled: “Early Takeaways from Los Angeles”. From the blog: …The election event in LA was hugely beneficial to the citizens of Los Angeles. VSAP is an incredible step forward, but its rollout was not without challenges. County Registrar Dean Logan acknowledged this in his Election Night press conference. That the election was imperfect shouldn’t surprise anyone given the scope of the changes. Implementing the new system meant engaging and collaborating with a vast number of organizations, departments, service providers and groups from the state level all the way to the local level. There were also multiple outside providers.Let’s not forget that voters, vote center workers, and County officials were learning a whole new voting system that bears little resemblance to the obsolete system, launched in the late 60s, they just abandoned.As stated by Logan, vote centers had to be strategically sized and located based on population densities and travel patterns. This election saw most in-person voting occur on the last two days of the voting period at sites near residents’ homes. The County will examine voter-turnout patterns and work to better ensure adequate coverage at vote centers for future elections. The number of poll workers can be increased with little effort. As voters become acclimated to the new system, their behavior will also change. More voters will take advantage of the geographic and time conveniences available to them over the full 11-day voting period.Training for all vote center workers will be expanded and the lessons learned during the rollout will enable them to manage all aspects of the system more confidently, including onsite troubleshooting. All involved will, no doubt, be more comfortable with the new system when the general election rolls around in November… April 27, 2020: Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk posted its findings about the March 2020 primary. Here are key points from the executive summary: During the Presidential Primary Election in March, Los Angeles County introduced a new voting system that served nearly 1 million voters at more than 970 vote centers throughout the County.Post-election surveys and voter exit polls indicate that most voters (70%) had a positive experience, while 20% reported a negative experience. Overall, 15% of voters reported waiting more than 2 hours to vote. RR/CC acknowledges that not all voters were properly supported on Election Day, resulting in long waits and great frustration for many voters.At the request of the Board of Supervisors, the RR/CC, with a team of experts, examined the issues and analyzed the causes behind those failures, which relate primarily to technology, training, and capacity issues.As a result, RR/CC already has started to improve training and procedures and to refinine its systems to ensure a better experience for ALL voters in future elections.Los Angeles County introduced new Ballot Marking Devices (BMDs) in the March 2020 Presidential Primary Election. Voters reported that their experience with BMDs was positive. The BMDs are new and, as with anything new, it will take some time for voters to become accustomed to using them, including features that ensure ballot security and voter privacy.RR/CC looked carefully into the root causes of the issues experienced by voters. Here are some key findings: Vote Centers were open for 10 days before Election Day. 27% of voters cast ballots in the first 10 days: 73% on Election Day. RR/CC also received and processed 1,141,594 Vote By Mail (VBM) ballots.Longer wait times primarily resulted from technical issues with the electronic pollbooks (PollPads) that are used to check-in voters as they arrive at the Vote Centers. Even though ample network bandwidth was available, the PollPads had issues synchronizing data with the voter database and the voter search function was too limited for the size of the County’s electorate. This resulted in delays as voters checked in. Also, some Vote Centers had fewer PollPads than needed to handle voter turnout on Election Day.While there was a perception among voters and the media that BMDs were not operable and contributed to wait times, generally this was not the case. Based on the data, BMD availability did not contribute to wait times, but some BMDs were unavailable for two reasons: 1 While not intended, Election Workers did not make all BMDs available at the Vote Centers. Some BMDs were not turned on in larger Vote Centers because they were not identified as necessary to meet voter needs during the election. Had all BMDs been needed, Election Workers would have powered them on.2 There was a known issue with a printer gear that affected more BMDs than originally identified, causing 1,297 to be taken out of service because of paper jams. This affected 5.6% of the BMDs in the field. Network bandwidth between the PollPads and the voter database was sufficient and was not a constraint on Election Day.While RR/CC recruited the overall number of Election Workers needed, delays in Vote Center selection and late assignment of Election Workers caused some Vote Centers to be overstaffed and some to be understaffed because either too many Election Workers were assigned to a Vote Center or the Election Workers did not report as scheduled or at all. In most cases, multilingual Election Workers were stationed where needed, but the under/overstaffing issue applied to them as well. The need to have Vote Center Leads work 11 consecutive days proved to create difficulties for Vote Center Lead attendance and also caused difficulties filling those critical roles.Election Worker training started while many elements were still charging – procedures being finalized and new legislation being passed (Senate Bill 207) – which caused differences between training conducted earlier vs. later in the cycle. This represented a lot of change – new technology and procedures – for Election Workers to absorb.There were challenges and constraints in gaining access to and setting up Vote Centers, with some closing early or opening late, and some not opening at all on some days.The Help Desks where Election Workers and voters call to get help did not have adequate staff needed to respond to incoming call volume promptly. Technical issues with the telephone system also led to excessive wait times… …ConclusionThese results – and the findings derived from the Board’s motion – will assist the Department in continuing to improve the voter experience for Los Angeles County voters. RR/CC is engaged with the Secretary of State and a broad range of community stakeholders to prepare for the November 2020 Presidential General Election considering the effects of COVID-19 on the voting experience. July 13, 2020: CBS Sacramento posted an article titled: “100,000 Mail-In Votes Went Uncounted In California’s Primary”. From the article: More than 100,000 mail-in ballots were rejected by California election officials during the March presidential primary, according to data obtained by The Associated Press that highlights a glaring gap in the state’s effort to ensure every vote is counted……The California secretary of state’s election data obtained by the AP showed that 102,428 mail-in-ballots were disqualified in the state’s 58 counties, about 1.5% of the nearly 7 million mail-in ballots returned. That percentage is the highest in a primary since 2014, and the overall number is the highest in a statewide election since 2010.Two years ago, the national average of rejected mail ballots in the general election was about 1.4% and in the 2016 presidential election year it was 1%, according to a U.S. Election Assistance Commission study.The most common problem, by far, in California was missing the deadline for the ballot to be mailed and arrive. To count in the election, ballots must be postmarked on or before Election Day and received within three days afterward. Statewide, 70,330 ballots missed those marks.Another 27,525 either didn’t have a signature, or the signature didn’t match the one on record for the voter……The data didn’t break down the uncounted ballots by party registration. While the overall number was large in March, if it’s the same in November it’s unlikely to affect the presidential race — Trump lost to Democrat Hillary Clinton in 2016 by 4.3 million votes.But there are expected to be at least several tightly contested U.S. House races where a relatively few votes could tip the balance. In 2018, Democrat TJ Cox upset Republican David Valadao by less than 1,000 votes in a Central Valley district. They have a rematch in November.Local races sometimes are decided by a handful of votes.California traditionally has offered mail-in voting only to those who request ballots. Over time the number has grown to represent more than half of all cast ballots. In response to the coronavirus outbreak, Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom in June signed a law requiring county election officials to mail a ballot to all the state’s nearly 21 million registered voters for the November election.He called mail-in voting safe and secure, pointing to a series of studies that found no evidence of significant fraud. States across the political spectrum rely solely on mail ballots, including Colorado, Utah and Washington.In preparation for November, the state is launching a ballot-tracking tool that will quickly alert voters if they need to take action, such as adding a missing signature. Another change: The state is extending the window for mail ballots to arrive to 17 days after Election Day…Last March, the highest rejection rate in California was in San Francisco, where 9,407 ballots, or nearly 5% of the total, were set aside, mostly because they did not arrive on time. By contrast, in rural Plumas County northeast of Sacramento, all of the 8,207 mail-in ballots received were accepted.…In Los Angeles County, nearly 2,800 ballots were nullified because the voter forgot to sign it, then couldn’t be found to fix the error. Statewide, that careless mistake spiked nearly 13,000 ballots.More than 1,000 ballots were disqualified in Fresno County because the signature didn’t match the one on file with election officials. The same problem nixed over 1,300 ballots in San Diego County — and over 14,000 statewide. In some of those cases, voting experts say, a family member might have signed for others in the household, which is illegal.Some voters apparently filled out their ballots then left them on the kitchen table: In more than 800 instances, envelopes were returned to election officials without the marked ballot inside. Results 2020 California Democratic Presidential Preference Primary On March 3, 2020, the Associated Press tweeted: “BREAKING: Bernie Sanders wins Democratic presidential primary in California, claiming biggest prize on Super Tuesday”. The tweet includes a graphic that said “ELECTION 2020”. The Guardian posted the following results (updated March 30, 2020): Bernie Sanders: 2,002,521 votes – 35.54%Joe Biden: 1,575,886 votes – 27.97%Elizabeth Warren: 748,687 votes – 13.29%Michael Bloomberg: 689,713 votes – 12.24%Pete Buttigieg: 247,382 votes – 4.39%Amy Klobuchar: 126,031 votes – 2.24%Tom Steyer: 111,707 votes – 1.98%Andrew Yang: 42,816 votes – 0.76%Tulsi Gabbard: 33,027 votes – 0.59%Julian Castro: 13,449 votes – 0.24%Michael Bennet: 7,113 votes – 0.13%Marianne Williamson: 6,093 votes – 0.12%Roque De La Fuente III: 6,011 votes – 0.11%Cory Booker: 5,853 votes – 0.10%John Delaney: 4,484 votes – 0.08%Michael Ellinger: 3,319 votes – 0.06%Joe Sestak: 3,178 votes – 0.06%Mark Greenstein: 3,082 votes – 0.05%Deval Patrick: 1,977 votes – 0.04%Moise Boyd: 1,592 votes – 0.03% 2020 California Republican Presidential Preference Primary The Guardian posted the following results (updated March 30, 2020): Donald Trump: 2,241,786 votes – 92.19%Bill Weld: 66,267 votes – 2.71%Joe Walsh: 63,881 votes – 2.64%Roque De La Fuente: 23,944 votes – 0.98%Matthew Matern: 15,235 votes – 0.63%Robert Ardini: 12,691 votes – 0.52%Zoltan Istvan: 8,013 votes – 0.33%... What Happened in the 2020 Tennessee PrimaryMarch 15, 20202020 Presidential CampaignImage by Clker-Free-Vector-Images from Pixabay Tennessee is one of the states (and one territory) that voted on “Super Tuesday”. This was the state the endured tornadoes the night before the primary. Voting Information Be a citizen of the United StatesBe 18 years of age or older on or before the date of the next electionMust be a resident of Tennessee The Tennessee Secretary of State’s website has information about voting in Tennessee. In order to be eligible to vote in Tennessee, you must: There are some guidelines for determining residency: The residence of a person is the place where the person’s habitation is fixed and is where, during periods of absence, the person definitely intends to return.A person can have only one residenceA change of residence is made not only by relocation, but also by intent to remain in the new location permanently, and by demonstrating actions consistent with that intention.The place where a married person’s spouse and family live is presumed to be that person’s residence, unless that person takes up or continues to abode with the intention of remaining in a place other than where the spouse and family live.No person gains or loses residency solely by presence in or absence from the state, or while a student at an institution of higher learning, or while kept in an institution at public expense. If I’m understanding that last part correctly, it means that the State of Tennessee does not consider college or university students to be residents. I’m assuming this means the student must register to vote at their home address (which is likely their parent’s house). Students who came to Tennessee from out of state might not be eligible to vote in Tennessee. Tennessee requires voters to present federal or Tennessee state ID containing the voter’s name and photograph when voting at the polls. The following IDs may be used, even if expired: Tennessee driver license with your photoUnited States PassportPhoto ID issued by the Tennessee Department of Safety and Homeland SecurityPhoto ID issued by the federal or Tennessee state governmentUnited States Military photo IDTennessee handgun carry permit with your photo What IDs are not acceptable? College student IDs and photo IDs not issued by the federal of Tennessee state government are NOT acceptable. This includes county or city issued photo IDs, such as library cards and photo IDs issued by other states. Put that together with the residency requirements, and I’m getting the feeling that the State of Tennessee really doesn’t want college or university students to be able to vote. College IDs are not acceptable. A Tennessee handgun carry permit with your photo is acceptable – even if that permit has expired. Tennessee has guidelines regarding Homeless Persons Residency. In order to vote in Tennessee, a person does not have to live in a building. Instead, a person who finds himself or herself homeless must describe where the person usually stays or returns to when absent. This location may be the address of a shelter where the person stays or frequents, or it may be the description of a street corner where the person may often rest. A physical description of the location must be given so that the election commission knows in which voting precinct to place the person… There is a potential problem that homeless people in Tennessee may face when trying to register to vote: The election commission must mail voter registration cards to people who register to vote by mail. Therefore, if a homeless person tries to register by mail using an address where the person does not get the mail, the person will have to give a mailing address where he or she can receive mail. For example, a homeless voter may be able to use a shelter as a mailing address or the address of a family member or friend who agrees to receive the mail. Another option is to use General Delivery as a mailing address. However, please not that absentee ballot materials may not be mailed to “general delivery.”… If a voter registration card is returned as undeliverable to the election commission, the voter will be mailed a confirmation notice and be placed on inactive status. Fortunately, Tennessee gives residents who are eligible voters several ways to fill out a voter registration card. These options include: online voter registrationdownload and complete the Voter Registration Application and mail the application to your county election commissionPick up voter registration applications in person at: County Election Commission Offices, County Clerk’s Offices, Public Libraries, or Register of Deeds OfficesRegister with one of the following agencies: Department of Health (WIC program); Department of Health and Human Services; Department of Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities; Department of Mental Health; Department of Safety (motor vehicles division); Department of Veteran’s Affairs. The Tennessee Secretary of State website also provides very detailed information about whether or not a person who has a felony conviction can vote: The Tennessee Constitution provides that the Tennessee legislation may deny the right to vote to persons who are convicted of “infamous” crimes. Pursuant to this provision in the Tennessee Constitution, the Tennessee legislature has excluded individuals convicted of various felonies from the right of suffrage.However, the legislature has also established conditions with procedures through which individuals who have lost their voting rights may regain them. The manner in which a person may restore a lost voting right depends upon the crime committed and the year in which the conviction occurred. If your conviction has been expunged, you may answer “No” when asked if you have a felony conviction on the voter registration form. The GoVoteTN App enables Tennessee voters to find their Election Day polling locations, view and mark sample ballots, see their elected officials, districts, and county election commission information as well as access online election results through the GoVoteTN app. It can be downloaded for free. It is not possible to actually cast a vote through the app. Eligible voters in Tennessee have the option to vote early. For the 2020 Presidential Preference Primary, early voting started on Wednesday, February 12, 2020 to Tuesday, February 25, 2020. Unexpected Things On March 3, 2020, The Weather Channel posted an article titled: “Tennessee Tornado Death Toll Jumps to 19; Widespread Damage in Nashville, Middle Tennessee”. It was written by Roy Brackett. From the article: At least 19 people have been killed and more than 20 hospitalized after multiple tornadoes touched down early Tuesday in Middle Tennessee, including one that shredded 40 buildings near downtown Nashville.Tennessee Emergency Management Community Relations Officer Maggie Hannan confirmed that 19 people are dead across four countries, The Tennessean reported.Nearly 20,000 homes and businesses remained without power as of 7:45 a.m. local time, according to poweroutage.us. That number was about 50,000 earlier. Nashville Electric tweeted that four substations and 15 primary distribution lines were damaged.Overturned tractor-trailers blocked stretches of Interstate 24 near Antioch, Tennessee, and Interstate 40 near Mt. Juliet, Tennessee……At the news conference later with the governor, Cooper said the city had responded to 400 calls for help overnight and treated 156 people at the hospital, WTVF reported. Almost 50 buildings collapsed, but many more are damaged……The Nashville Fire Department said it was responding to reports of about 50 collapsed structures in and around Nashville.Some of the hardest-hit areas in the storm include West Nashville where there were reports of damage to planes as well as overturned tractor-trailers, according to ABC affiliate WKRN……A gas leak was reported in Germantown forcing an evacuation… In addition, the tornadoes affected Wilson County, Putnam County, and Benton County. The Weather Channel has more information about that, and 108 photos of the damage the tornadoes caused. How the Tornadoes Affected Voting The Tennessee Republican Party had nothing to say about the tornadoes. The blog and press releases sections on its website had not been updated since 2019, with the exception of a press release posted on January 3, 2020, about Dr. Phil Roe’s retirement. On March 3, 2020, the Tennessee Democratic Party posted information on its website titled: “Update and Specifics on Primary Voting in Wake of Middle Tennessee Tornado Tragedy”. From the information: Last night was devastating for our Middle Tennessee communities, and the devastation will continue for hours and days to come. Our hearts and thoughts are with all those affected, responders as they survey the damage, and the entire community.Many communities in Middle Tennessee have had polling location damage. Polls opened at 8AM and will stay open until 7PM. Some voters will need to change poling locations in Putnam, Davidson, and Wilson Counties. Please find voting locations changes below… Later on March 3, 2020, the Tennessee Democratic Party posted press release titled: “Tennessee Democratic Party files lawsuit against Davidson County Election Commission and Secretary of State”. From the press release: Following the destruction of the Middle Tennessee Tornado in the early morning hours of Super Tuesday, hundreds of voters’ ability to cast their vote across Davidson County was obstructed. More than 15 polling stations suffered electrical and structural damages and many polls were delayed from opening until 8:00 AM. Hundreds of voters arrived at 7:00 AM and were not able to cast their vote, and furthermore, many arriving throughout the day found their polling place closed.The Tennessee Democratic Party has filed a lawsuit seeking legal injunction against the Davidson County Election Commission and Tennessee Secretary of State, Tre Hargett, to extend the time polling locations are open by 3 hours. Extending the poll close time from 7:00 PM to 10:00 PM would provide sufficient time for voters across the county to exercise their right and cast their vote. Failing to extend polling hours would cause irreparable harm to our democratic process. Later on March 3, 2020, The Tennessee Democratic Party tweeted: “A victory for voters – Judge says all polling sites in Nashville can remain open until 8 pm CT & 5 “super sites” will remain open until 10 pm: Cleveland Community, Pearl Cohn, Donelson Presbyterian, Howard School & Davidson County Election Commission.” On March 3, 2020, The Hill posted an article titled: “Democrats successfully sue to extend voting hours in areas affected by Tennessee tornadoes”. It was written by Justin Wise. From the article: A Tennessee county judge has ruled that several polling sites in areas that were hit by deadly tornadoes in the state can remain open longer than previously permitted during Super Tuesday.Davidson County Chancellor Ellen Hobbs Lyle ruled that five polling sites in areas surrounding Nashville would be allowed to remain open until 10 p.m. CT and that other places would be permitted to accept ballots until 8 p.m. CT.The ruling came after the Tennessee Democratic Party and four Democratic presidential campaigns filed a lawsuit in Davidson County seeking a legal injunction to extend the time polling locations remained open, The Tennessean reported.The candidates – Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), former Vice President Joe Biden, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and former New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg – reportedly argued that voters’ constitutional rights would have been violated if they weren’t granted more time to vote after the tornadoes… March 3, 2020: Tennessean posted an article titled: “Judge rules Nashville polls open until 8. p.m. at all Davidson County locations, five sites open until 10 p.m.”. It was written by Adam Tamburin, Brett Kelman, and Natalie Allison. From the article: As Tennessee reeled from a deadly tornado that has claimed lives and crushed buildings, a Nashville judge issued an eleventh-hour order extending all Davidson County polling sites to ensure that storm-ravaged families have a chance to vote. Polls that were initially planned to close at 7 p.m. will now stay open until at least 8 p.m. CT, ordered Davidson County Chancellor Ellen Hobbs Lyle. Five large polling sites will remain open until 10 p.m. CT.Those five sites are: Election commission office, 1417 Murfreesboro PikeHoward Office Building, 700 Second Ave. S.Cleveland Community Center, 610 Vernon Winfrey Ave.Donelson Presbyterian Church, 2305 Lebanon PikePearl Cohn High School, 904 26th Ave. N. The ruling came at the request of four of the top Democratic presidential campaigns, along with the Tennessee Democratic Party. The groups filed suit in a Nashville court on Tuesday to extend poll times amid heavy tornado damage throughout the city.On Super Tuesday afternoon, lawyers representing the campaigns of Joe Biden, Mike Bloomberg, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren filed for a temporary restraining order in Davidson County Chancery Court, said attorney Stephen Zralek.The lawsuit was against Tennessee Secretary of State Tre Hargett and the Davidson County Election Commission, said attorney Dave Garrison, working on behalf of the state Democratic Party… Controversies On February 12, 2020, WREG News Channel 3 posted an article titled: “Tennessee Rep. files resolution to declare CNN, Washington Post ‘fake news'” It was written by Mitchell Koch. From the article: A Tennessee representative proposed legislation to designate CNN and The Washington Post as “fake news” in the state.Resolution HJR 0079, proposed by Rep. Micah Van Huss (R-Jonesborough) calls for the state “to recognize CNN and The Washington Post as fake news and condemn them for denigrating our citizens.”The resolution recalls incidents from each news outlet in 2019 where a host or editor referred to supporters of President of Donald Trump as “belonging to a cult” or “cult-like”.“To describe the entire Republican Party as a cult led by President Trump is problematic: If journalists are going to refer to the party as a cult and its supporters as cultists, they must define what “cult” means; otherwise, they are assuming that a cult is some obvious phenomenon and everyone knows what that word means,” reads a portion of the resolution.It also calls for recognizing both outlets as “part of the media wing of the Democratic Party”.“We condemn them for denigrating our citizens and implying that they are weak-minded followers instead of people exercising their rights that our veterans paid for with their blood,” another portion says.The resolution currently does not have a co-sponsor. It was introduced in the House on Wednesday… The full text of HJ 779 is here. On February 12, 2020, The Guardian posted an article titled: “Tennessee Republican bids to classify CNN and Washington Post as ‘fake news’. It was written by Kenya Evelyn. From the article. A Tennessee lawmaker has introduced an amendment to a resolution that would recognize CNN and the Washington Post as “fake news” that is “part of the media wing of the Democratic party.” The amendment read: “We recognize that fake news outlets suggest ideas without directly making accusations so that they can claim innocence from their ivory towers.”Republican state representative Micah Van Huss of Jonesboro introduced the measure Tuesday at the state’s capital. According to local station WREG, it amends a previous joint house resolution filed last month……Lawmakers behind the resolution also criticized the notion of “a spell Trump has cast on the Republican party” as Washington Post editor, Marc Fisher, suggested in an October editorial.The resolution will now be debated within the state house’s subcommittee on sentencing and protections before a vote is scheduled……While the resolution currently has 13 co-sponsors, some fellow Republican lawmakers have called it “unnecessary” and questioned its purpose… A quick internet search revealed that Tennessee has a long history of controversies that appear to be designed to cause voter suppression. On October 25, 2018, The Daily Memphian posted an article titled: “Jenkins rules against election commission, orders immediate voter registration remedies”. It was written by Bill Dries. From the article: Shelby County Chancellor JoeDae Jenkins ruled Thursday in favor of the Memphis Branch NAACP and the Tennessee Black Voters Project in a lawsuit that will require the Shelby County Election Commission to give potential voters a chance to fix their voter registration applications so they can cast ballots on the Nov. 6 election day.Jenkins ordered the election commission to keep in place a system it is using now during early voting for rectifying voter registration application problems through Election Day. He also ordered election officials to immediately notify potential voters whose applications are incomplete of problems with their applications, giving them a chance to rectify the problems, and to begin providing daily updates of its progress on the backlog of 4,000 to 6,000 potential voters whose forms remain unprocessed since the Oct. 9 deadline to register to vote.The Memphis Branch NAACP and the Tennessee Black Voters Project lawsuit argued that voters should be notified of problems with their registration applications and given a chance to correct them and participate as voters. Election commission attorney John Ryder said he will appeal the ruling immediately including seeking a stay on the ruling taking effect……The ruling is the second by Jenkins since July affecting the conduct of elections in Shelby County. In July, Jenkins ordered the election commission to add early voting sites and change the hours so that more sites were open from the outset of the early voting period in advance of the Aug. 2 election day. On November 5, 2018, The Tennessean posted an article titled: “College students are running into problems voting absentee. Two lawmakers plan to address it.” It was written by Natalie Allison. From the article: …Ben Stocksdale, who is taking a gap year to work for YMCA of the Rockies in Granby, Colorado, opened his mail from the Hamilton County Election Commission – what he assumed to be his absentee ballot – but found notice that his request to vote by mail had been denied.Since the 18-year-old had never before voted in person, the rejection letter stated, he was ineligible to vote in Tennessee by absentee ballot.It’s a problem that college-aged students moving away from home are facing in light of state law, which requires a voter to have previously cast a ballot in person or register in the presence of an election commission official – not merely online, by mail or at a registration drive – in order to request an absentee ballot.“The result of the law is that it makes it really difficult for college students, ” said Lisa Quigley, chief of staff for U.S. Rep. Jim Cooper, D-Nashville, who has made voting rights her area of expertise.Despite the Secretary of State’s website providing information on requirements for absentee voting, new voters like Ben Stocksdale are often unaware of the requirement when they attempt to request an absentee ballot.Tennessee pa
