Connect with us

News

Oregon Ends Residency Requirement for Medically Assisted Deaths

Published

on

Oregon Ends Residency Requirement for Medically Assisted Deaths

Oregon will not require terminally unwell individuals looking for to finish their lives with doctor-prescribed deadly medication to be residents of the state, in keeping with the settlement of a federal lawsuit that had claimed the requirement was unconstitutional.

The Oregon Well being Authority, the Oregon Medical Board and the Multnomah County District Legal professional’s Workplace agreed that they “wouldn’t apply or in any other case implement” the residency requirement, in keeping with the settlement, which was filed on Monday in Federal District Courtroom in Portland.

The settlement resolves a lawsuit that Compassion & Decisions, an advocacy group that helps increasing entry to end-of-life drugs, filed in October to problem the Oregon residency requirement, which the group mentioned violated the Structure’s prohibition in opposition to states that favor their very own residents over noncitizens.

The group sued on behalf of Dr. Nicholas Gideonse, a Portland doctor and assistant professor of household drugs at Oregon Well being & Science College.

In impact since 1997, the Oregon Demise With Dignity Act empowers medical doctors to prescribe deadly remedy for dying sufferers who’ve accomplished a posh technique of requests and ready durations.

Advertisement

Dr. Gideonse, a supporter of such legal guidelines, mentioned within the lawsuit that he had been unable to put in writing terminal prescriptions for sufferers who dwell in close by Washington State. (Dr. Gideonse is licensed to observe drugs in Oregon, however not in Washington.)

“Regardless of the probability that these people had been in any other case eligible for medical help in dying, he was unable to contemplate these requests solely on the idea of residency,” Compassion & Decisions mentioned in a press release on Tuesday.

The legal guidelines within the eight different states apart from Oregon that let physician-assisted dying — Washington, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, New Jersey, New Mexico and Vermont — all embody comparable residency necessities, in keeping with the group.

After the announcement of the settlement, Dr. Gideonse mentioned that he and his sufferers had been deeply relieved that Oregon would not implement its residency requirement for medical help.

“I actually really feel very, excellent about this decision,” he mentioned in a cellphone interview on Tuesday, including that he was “pleasantly stunned that it occurred so rapidly.”

Advertisement

He mentioned that other than end-of-life drugs, “no different side of my medical care is restricted by the state line.”

Though the settlement nonetheless requires the Oregon medical authorities to ask the State Legislature to formally strike the residency language from the legislation, Dr. Gideonse mentioned that he felt assured continuing as if the requirement had been lifted.

“I really feel protected to speak to my sufferers in Washington,” he mentioned.

Kevin Díaz, the chief authorized advocacy officer for Compassion & Decisions, mentioned in a press release that Oregon “has lengthy been the chief in respecting the rights of dying individuals and state officers’ swift decision of this swimsuit could be very a lot in keeping with these values.”

The Oregon Medical Board declined to remark past the settlement within the courtroom paperwork, a board spokeswoman mentioned. The Multnomah County District Legal professional’s Workplace declined to remark. The Oregon Well being Authority didn’t instantly reply to an inquiry on Tuesday.

Advertisement

Because the Oregon Demise With Dignity Act was enacted, 2,159 individuals have died from ingesting terminal medication, in accordance a report from the Oregon Well being Authority.

To be eligible for life-ending remedy, the Oregon legislation requires {that a} affected person have to be no less than 18 years previous, be “able to making and speaking well being care choices to well being care practitioners” and have a identified terminal sickness that can result in dying inside six months.

Laura Echevarria, a spokeswoman for Nationwide Proper to Life, which opposes such legal guidelines, mentioned in a press release that the change on this legislation “permits for anybody touring to Oregon to hunt assisted suicide.”

“We do consider Oregon will turn out to be the assisted suicide tourism state,” she mentioned in an electronic mail on Tuesday.

However Mr. Díaz mentioned such an end result was extremely unlikely.

Advertisement

“The truth is most terminally unwell persons are too unwell to journey lengthy distance to Oregon,” he mentioned, including that it will be troublesome for them “to finish the multistep course of that the legislation requires.”

In case you are having ideas of suicide, name the Nationwide Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 800-273-8255 (TALK) or go to SpeakingOfSuicide.com/assets for an inventory of extra assets.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

News

TikTok says it will ‘go dark’ without US government action

Published

on

TikTok says it will ‘go dark’ without US government action

TikTok on Friday warned of an imminent blackout for its 170mn US users after the Supreme Court upheld a divest-or-ban law targeting the video app.

The law compels TikTok’s Chinese parent ByteDance to sell the platform by January 19 — the day before Donald Trump returns as US president — or face a nationwide ban.

“There is no doubt that, for more than 170mn Americans, TikTok offers a distinctive and expansive outlet for expression, means of engagement, and source of community,” the Supreme Court wrote in a unanimous opinion published on Friday.

“But Congress has determined that divestiture is necessary to address its well-supported national security concerns regarding TikTok’s data collection practices and relationship with a foreign adversary,” it added.

Following the ruling, Joe Biden’s administration said the outgoing president would not enforce the ban during his remaining days in office.

Advertisement

“Given the sheer fact of timing, this administration recognises that actions to implement the law simply must fall to the next administration, which takes office on Monday,” the White House said.

But TikTok late on Friday said statements from the White House as well as from the Department of Justice had “failed to provide the necessary clarity and assurance to the service providers that are integral to maintaining TikTok’s availability” in the US.

It added: “Unless the Biden administration immediately provides a definitive statement to satisfy the most critical service providers assuring non-enforcement, unfortunately TikTok will be forced to go dark on January 19.”

Under the terms of the law, without a sale, it will be unlawful for companies to provide services to distribute or host the video app, or they will face fines of $5,000 per user.

It remains unclear whether tech groups such as Apple, Google and Oracle, which offer such services to TikTok in the US, would take the risk of continuing to partner with the company over the weekend. It is also unclear whether the app could also take itself offline deliberately, to protect its partners.

Advertisement

Apple, Google and Oracle did not respond to requests for comment.

Trump said in a post on Truth Social after the ruling that his “decision on TikTok will be made in the not too distant future, but I must have time to review the situation”, adding that the court’s decision was “expected, and everyone must respect it”.

In a video posted on TikTok following the court’s decision, the group’s chief executive Shou Zi Chew gave no reassurances on whether the app would continue to function in the US on Sunday, but lavished Trump with praise.

“I want to thank president Trump for his commitment to work with us to find a solution that keeps TikTok available in the United States. This is a strong stand for the First Amendment and against arbitrary censorship,” he said, adding the president-elect “truly understands” the platform.

US attorney-general Merrick Garland said the court’s decision “enables the justice department to prevent the Chinese government from weaponising TikTok to undermine America’s national security”.

Advertisement

Deputy US attorney-general Lisa Monaco said the “next phase of this effort — implementing and ensuring compliance with the law after it goes into effect on January 19 — will be a process that plays out over time”.

TikTok has said any spin-off would be technologically unfeasible, while Beijing has indicated it would oppose any sale.

The court’s ruling was handed down shortly after Trump on Friday said he had discussed TikTok on a call with China’s President Xi Jinping. It was the first call between the leaders in four years.

The Supreme Court’s ruling upholds one of the boldest legislative moves of Biden’s term just days before the Democratic president leaves the White House.

On Thursday, Trump’s incoming national security adviser Mike Waltz said the legislation “allows for an extension as long as a viable deal is on the table. Essentially that buys president Trump time to keep TikTok going”.

Advertisement

Chinese officials have held preliminary discussions about whether billionaire Elon Musk — now a close ally of Trump — could broker a deal for the app’s sale, the Financial Times reported this week.

Some potential buyers and partners have been circling and lobbying Trump. These include Frank McCourt, an American media and sports businessman, who has established a consortium of investors that would bid for TikTok through his non-profit entity, Project Liberty.

TikTok chief Chew has mounted a charm offensive to cement Trump’s backing, including plans to attend a “victory rally” for the president-elect in Washington on Sunday and his inauguration on Monday, said two people familiar with the matter.

Concerns Beijing could use the app for espionage or to spread propaganda spurred the law, which was passed with strong bipartisan support last year.

Even though China “has not yet leveraged its relationship with ByteDance Ltd to access US TikTok users’ data”, the top court said, there was “no basis for concluding that the government’s determination that China might do so is not at least a ‘reasonable inferenc[e] based on substantial evidence’.”

Advertisement

TikTok asked the Supreme Court to hear its case after a US appeals court rejected its challenge to the law, as well as its subsequent request to halt the measure pending further court proceedings.

The company sought to throw out the law by arguing it was unconstitutional and it violated First Amendment protections for free speech.

Additional reporting by Aime Williams in Washington and Stephen Morris and Michael Acton in San Francisco

Continue Reading

News

FAQ: As Trump inauguration moves inside, what to know on the last-minute changes

Published

on

FAQ: As Trump inauguration moves inside, what to know on the last-minute changes

President-elect Donald Trump’s inauguration ceremony is moving indoors to the Capitol rotunda due to a freezing blast of artic temps expected in D.C., he announced Friday.

In a post on his social media platform, Truth Social, Trump said he ordered Monday’s inauguration to be moved inside. The Joint Congressional Committee on Inauguration Ceremonies said in a statement that they’ll honor his request.

Of course, this last-minute change is having a major impact on everything from security to the thousands of spectators who booked hotel rooms and bought tickets to inaugural events.

Why is Trump’s second inauguration being held inside?

The D.C. area will be plunged into extreme cold as a piece of the polar vortex — an area of cold air that swirls around the Earth’s poles — brushes by the region.

Following some fresh snow during the day on Sunday, this extra-frigid air will move in Sunday night into Monday morning. Inauguration Day is often cold, but Monday looks to be especially brisk. The high is expected to be roughly 20°, with a low of 6°.

Advertisement

“There is an Arctic blast sweeping the Country,” Trump posted on Truth Social. “I don’t want to see people hurt, or injured, in any way. It is dangerous conditions for the tens of thousands of Law Enforcement, First Responders, Police K9s and even horses, and hundreds of thousands of supporters that will be outside for many hours on the 20th (In any event, if you decide to come, dress warmly!).”

What parts of the 2025 inauguration will be inside?

Trump’s swearing-in ceremony will be conducted in the rotunda, where he will also deliver his inaugural address.

“The various Dignitaries and Guests will be brought into the Capitol. This will be a very beautiful experience for all, and especially for the large TV audience!” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

Capital One Arena in downtown D.C. will open for people to watch the ceremony and inaugural address on live video.

Then, instead of the traditional parade down Pennsylvania Avenue, the president will join supporters at Capital One Arena after his speech.

Advertisement

“We will open Capital One Arena on Monday for LIVE viewing of this Historic event, and to host the Presidential Parade,” Trump posted on social media. “I will join the crowd at Capital One, after my Swearing In.”

Outdoor areas on the West Front of the U.S. Capitol, which were intended for tickets guests, will now be closed to those guests Monday, Capitol police said in a statement.

What’s staying the same?

Trump said in his post that other events would stay the same, including the victory rally at Capital One Arena scheduled for Sunday at 3 p.m.

He is still expected to attend three official inaugural balls Monday night.

If people had tickets to the inauguration, will they be able to use them at Capital One Arena?

Some 240,000 people hold tickets to attend inauguration on Monday. However, Capital One arena only can hold 20,000 people.

Advertisement

News4 is still waiting for information as to what’s going to happen with those ticket holders. As of late Friday afternoon, several congressional social media accounts said they didn’t yet know and that ticket holders should keep checking back.

Will the inauguration security perimeter change?

That’s not yet clear. The U.S. Secret Service tells News4 they have contingency plans for matters like this. They said they may hold a news conference later Friday night or Saturday to go over the changes.

Trump is holding a rally at Capital One Arena on Sunday afternoon, the day before inauguration. As of late Friday afternoon, there was limited fencing set up around the arena. It’s unclear if that will now change.

There may also be a contingency plan being worked on, in case protesters go to the arena after Trump is sworn into office.

Are the planned Metro station closures still happening?

As of late Friday afternoon, Metro officials couldn’t say yet if there were any plans to change the number of Metro stations to be closed or to cancel those closures now that there won’t be a parade.

Advertisement

The Gallery Place station next to Capital One Arena has entrances on H and F streets NW. Up until now, there were no plans to close those entrances outside the arena.

What other changes will have to happen?

It’s not just Metro and the Trump team that have to change everything. City leaders in D.C. have a lot of things that they have to now figure out.

There are 4,000 police officers coming in from around the country to line the parade route. Those officers will still be used because they still have to help watch the District to ensure everything is safe and to secure the areas around the inaugural balls.

When was the last time the inauguration was held inside?

President Ronald Reagan’s second inauguration in 1985 was held indoors due to a wind chill of -20°. It remains the coldest inauguration on record, with a high temperature of just 7°. The parade was also canceled that year, according to NBC News.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

As California Burns, ‘Octavia Tried to Tell Us’ Has New Meaning

Published

on

As California Burns, ‘Octavia Tried to Tell Us’ Has New Meaning

This article is also a weekly newsletter. Sign up for Race/Related here.

In the wake of the devastating fires in Los Angeles, many people are referencing the work of the science fiction writer Octavia Butler. Butler, who grew up in Pasadena, was the daughter of a housekeeper and a father who was a shoeshiner. She went on to become the first science fiction writer to win a MacArthur “genius” award. Her book “Parable of the Sower,” published in 1993, paints a picture of a California ravished by the effects of climate change, income inequality, political divisiveness and centers on a young woman struggling to find faith and the community to build a new future.

The phrase “Octavia tried to tell us,” which began to gain momentum in 2020 during the pandemic, has once again resurfaced, in part because Butler studied science and history so deeply. The accuracy with which she read the shifts in America can, at times, seem eerily prophetic. One entry in “Parable of the Sower,” which is structured as a journal, dated on “February 1, 2025” begins, “We had a fire today.” It goes on to describe how the fear of fires plague Robledo, a fictional town that feels much like Altadena, a haven for the Black middle class for more than 50 years, where Butler lived in the late ’90s.

In 2000, Butler wrote a piece for Essence magazine titled, “A Few Rules for Predicting the Future.” She wrote: “Of course, writing novels about the future doesn’t give me any special ability to foretell the future. But it does encourage me to use our past and present behaviors as guides to the kind of world we seem to be creating. The past, for example, is filled with repeating cycles of strength and weakness, wisdom and stupidity, empire and ashes.”

In one of the last interviews before she died in 2006, Butler spoke to Democracy Now!, an independent news organization, about how she’d been worried about how climate could devastate California . “I wrote the two ‘Parable’ books back in the ’90s,” she said, referring to “Parable of the Sower” and her 1998 follow-up, “Parable of the Talents.” These books, she explained, were about what happens when “we don’t trouble to correct some of the problems we are brewing for ourselves right now. Global warming is one of those problems. And I was aware of it back in the ’80s.” She continued: “A lot of people were seeing it as politics, as something very iffy, as something they could ignore because nothing was going to come of it tomorrow.

Advertisement

Lynell George, a writer who lives in Los Angeles and the author of a book on Butler and her creative journey, has spent many years studying Butler’s archives at the Huntington Library in Pasadena. In 2022, we asked George to write about how Butler predicted the world we live in. As so many people are turning to her work during this time of tremendous loss, we wanted to share that story with our readers again.

In her piece, “The Visions of Octavia Butler,” George wrote: “In ‘Parable of the Sower,’ Earth is tipping toward climate disaster: A catastrophic drought has led to social upheaval and violent class wars. Butler, a fervent environmentalist, researched the novel by clipping articles, taking notes and monitoring rain and growth in her Southern California neighborhood. She couldn’t help but wonder, she later wrote, what ‘environmental and economic stupidities’ might lead to. She often called herself a pessimist, but threaded into the bleak landscape of her ‘Parable’ novels are strands of glimmering hope — ribbons of blue at the edges of the fictional fiery skies.”

Invite your friends.
Invite someone to subscribe to the Race/Related newsletter. Or email your thoughts and suggestions to racerelated@nytimes.com.

Continue Reading

Trending