Politics
Opinion: If you were relieved by the Supreme Court's abortion rulings this term, think again
Emergency access to abortion has been a flashpoint in the chaotic aftermath of the Supreme Court’s overturning of the right to terminate a pregnancy in Dobbs vs. Jackson Women’s Health Organization in 2022.
Can states deny women the care they need to preserve their health in the aftermath of Dobbs, or does federal law provide some protection for patients?
In January, the Supreme Court agreed to hear two cases testing whether the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act — or EMTALA — could override Idaho’s strict state abortion ban. Idaho has some of the narrowest exceptions to its ban in the nation — allowing doctors to intervene only when there was a threat to the life, not health, of the patient. The Biden administration argued that the federal law provided broader protection — and trumped the state’s ban. But on Thursday, the justices decided they had taken up the issue too soon, dismissing the cases as “improvidently granted” and sending them back to the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.
In practical terms, Thursday’s ruling means that a district court order in Idaho that agreed with the administration about EMTALA went back into effect: Emergency access to abortion will be protected in the state, at least for the time being.
It may seem at first that abortion supporters should be happy. The Supreme Court’s conservative supermajority agreed to hear two major abortion cases in a single term. And yet with Thursday’s ruling, and the court’s earlier decision that maintained wide access to mifepristone, a drug used in more than half of abortions nationwide, things didn’t get worse for reproductive rights.
The truth is that the court’s Idaho ruling is its own kind of disaster. It will increase the confusion and chaos women face when they need an emergency termination in states that ban all or most abortions. And the decision contains important clues about what could happen when or if the justices get another chance at these issues. The bottom line is simple: Don’t expect the Supreme Court to come to the rescue of women who find themselves in dire need of an abortion.
In theory, every state that severely limits or bans abortion has some kind of exception for threats to the life or health of the patient, but many of those exceptions are narrowly drawn and hard to understand. In addition, states impose unprecedented penalties on physicians who perform abortions that don’t fall under an exception — including, in some cases, life in prison. For these reasons, physicians have been reluctant to intervene, even when a patient may qualify under an exception.
States have scrambled to offer clarity, with some legislatures or medical boards adding explicit examples of when certain abortions may be performed, but these moves have only amplified the confusion. If an emergency condition doesn’t appear on a state’s list, does that automatically mean that a physician can’t act? Are there state or federal constitutional limits on denying access to patients who may die or suffer severe and permanent health damage? And what role, if any, does EMTALA play? The Supreme Court’s ruling ensures that none of these questions will be fully answered in the short term, and patients will be the ones to pay the price.
The “improvidently granted” ruling split the court into three three-justice factions, with a center-right bloc agreeing with the liberals to dismiss the case, and the most conservative justices, led by Samuel A. Alito Jr., prepared to hold that EMTALA does absolutely nothing to limit strict abortion bans.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett, joined by Brett M. Kavanaugh and Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., agreed that it was too early for the court to intervene, but they didn’t seem averse to accepting Idaho’s arguments against EMTALA. Even if the center-right justices could find some rationale for providing patients with protection under EMTALA, they suggested a Faustian bargain: The court would interpret EMTALA to apply only to physical, not mental, health — and would conclude that the law does nothing to stop doctors with conscience-based objections from turning patients away, even when they face life-threatening emergencies.
The opinion Barrett penned clearly reflects suspicions about patients who invoke mental health as a justification for terminating a pregnancy, a long-standing talking point for those who consider psychological struggles during pregnancy to be a mere excuse for “abortion on demand.”
As for conscience-based denials of care, we can guess what Barrett has in mind because Kavanaugh’s majority opinion in the mifepristone case already spelled it out: Instead of the law having to balance doctors’ conscience-based objections with patients’ safety, the objecting doctors would be able to just say no, even in healthcare deserts where other providers may be unavailable.
The most concerning signal about what could be in store for those who get pregnant came in Alito’s dissent in the decision to send the Idaho case back to the lower court. Joined by Justices Neil M. Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas, he suggested that EMTALA, rather than protecting a pregnant patient with a life-threatening emergency, protects the unborn patient instead.
Antiabortion groups have long argued that the 14th Amendment of the Constitution guarantees constitutional fetal rights. Alito did not explicitly take up that question, but his reading of the statute aligns with so-called fetal personhood views. He reasoned that because the wording in EMTALA includes the term “unborn child,” its framers must have prioritized the fetus over the mother, even when the mother’s life or health is in jeopardy.
As EMTALA litigation moves back into the federal courts, the 2024 election could make the whole thing moot. A second Trump administration would almost certainly withdraw President Biden’s guidance on EMTALA and let the states make their own decisions about when to withhold emergency care from patients. That is precisely what conservatives, led by the Heritage Foundation, have recommended in Project 2025, a proposed blueprint for another Trump presidency.
Abortion rights advocates may have been relieved on Thursday that the conservative majority on the Supreme Court punted on the Idaho abortion cases, but any celebration will be short-lived. In reality, there is no relief in sight for pregnant patients facing the dangers of a post-Roe America.
Mary Ziegler is a law professor at UC Davis and the author of “Roe: The History of a National Obsession.”
Politics
Trump Energy Sec pick to share American 'energy dominance' vision at confirmation hearing: 'Agent for change'
Chris Wright, President-elect Trump’s nominee to lead the U.S. Department of Energy, is planning to tell senators in charge of his confirmation that he will focus on restoring American “energy dominance” at home and abroad.
Wright, a fossil fuel executive who in the past has been critical of the media blaming climate change for repeated wildfires, is expected to deliver his opening statement before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee on Wednesday morning. Fox News Digital obtained a copy of the statement in advance ahead of the hearing scheduled to start at 10 a.m. ET.
“I am humbled by the great responsibility this position holds,” Wright is expected to say in his opening statement. “America has a historic opportunity to secure our energy systems, deliver leadership in scientific and technological innovation, steward our weapons stockpiles, and meet Cold War legacy waste commitments.”
Describing himself as a “science geek, turned tech nerd, turned lifelong energy entrepreneur,” Wright will tell the committee how his “fascination with energy started at a young age in Denver, Colorado.” His opening statement discusses how he enrolled at MIT “specifically to work on fusion energy” and later started graduate school at the University of California at Berkeley where he worked “on solar energy as well as power electronics.”
TRUMP EYES AN END TO NEW WINDMILL PRODUCTION UNDER SECOND TERM, SAYS THEY ARE ‘DRIVING THE WHALES CRAZY’
“Energy is the essential agent of change that enables everything that we do. A low energy society is poor. A highly energized society can bring health, wealth, and opportunity for all,” Wright will say. “The stated mission of the company that I founded – Liberty Energy – is to better human lives through energy. Liberty works directly in oil, natural gas, next generation geothermal and has partnerships in next-generation nuclear energy and new battery technology.”
“Energy has been a lifelong passion of mine, and I have never been shy about that fact,” Wright plans to tell the committee. “Then again, I have never been shy about much. President Trump shares my passion for energy and, if confirmed, I will work tirelessly to implement his bold agenda as an unabashed steward for all sources of affordable, reliable and secure American energy.”
On Tuesday, committee Democrats led by Sen. Martin Heinrich of New Mexico called for Wright’s confirmation hearing to be delayed by at least a week, citing how they had not yet received “the standard financial disclosure report, ethics agreement, or the opinions from the designated agency ethics officer and the Office of Government Ethics stating that the nominee is in compliance with the ethics laws.”
Chairman Mike Lee, R-Utah, has already pushed back the confirmation hearing for Doug Burgum, Trump’s pick for interior secretary, by two days until Thursday due to an OGE paperwork delay, but Wright’s remained on the schedule Wednesday.
If approved as secretary, Wright would manage energy policy and production in the United States, as well as the nation’s nuclear weapon stockpile. He would also work with Burgum on the National Energy Council, where they would develop Trump’s energy dominance policy involving increased production of U.S. oil and gas.
Wright has indicated that he plans to resign as CEO and chairman of his fracking company, Liberty Energy, if approved.
DEMS BLAME LA FIRE ON ‘CLIMATE CHANGE’ DESPITE CITY CUTTING FIRE DEPARTMENT BUDGET
In his opening statement, Wright identifies three “immediate” tasks that he would focus his attention on if confirmed.
“The first is to unleash American energy at home and abroad to restore energy dominance,” Wright will say. “The security of our nation begins with energy. Previous administrations have viewed energy as a liability instead of the immense national asset that it is. To compete globally, we must expand energy production, including commercial nuclear and liquified natural gas, and cut the cost of energy.”
“Second, we must lead the world in innovation and technology breakthroughs,” the statement continues. “Throughout my lifetime, technology and innovation have immeasurably enhanced the human condition. We must protect and accelerate the work of the Department’s national laboratory network to secure America’s competitive edge and its security. I commit to working with Congress on the important missions of the national laboratories.”
“Third, we must build things in America again and remove barriers to progress,” Wright will say. “Federal policies today make it too easy to stop projects and very hard to start and complete projects. This makes energy more expensive and less reliable. President Trump is committed to lowering energy costs and to do so, we must prioritize cutting red tape, enabling private sector investments, and building the infrastructure we need to make energy more affordable for families and businesses.”
Politics
Column: He lost everything in a wildfire. Here's one city councilman's practical advice
SANTA ROSA, Calif. — Jeff Okrepkie wants to make one thing perfectly clear.
Yes, his home burned to the ground after he fled a galloping wall of flames with his wife, their toddler, two dogs and the few items they managed to cram into their cars. But no, Okrepkie insisted, he is not a fire victim.
“I’m a survivor,” he said. “It seems kind of ticky-tacky, but it helps with my mental state to think of myself that way … I survived something that many people haven’t.”
Okrepkie and his wife lost their home and virtually everything they owned in the 2017 Tubbs fire, which turned a wide swath of the Wine Country — including Santa Rosa’s middle-class Coffey Park neighborhood — into a heap of cinder and ash. At the time, it was the most destructive wildfire in California history. Soon, it may rank a mere third, with the still-blazing Los Angeles County inferno topping the list.
Okrepkie, 45, a commercial real estate agent, was displaced through ill fortune. He was elected years later to the Santa Rosa City Council by popular vote. He became an advocate for wildfire survivors, their champion and a clearinghouse of recovery tips by choice and his lived experience.
“How can you have all this information and not share it?” he said during a conversation this week a few blocks from City Hall and a short drive from the subdivision where he returned nearly 2½ years after fire chased him out. “It’s almost seems selfish not to.”
The October weekend that forever changed Okrepkie’s life began in what now seems like blessed normalcy.
He and his wife, Stephanie, attended a wedding on Saturday, a welcome bit of alone time in adult company. Their son was nearly 2 years old and had lately “started scaling the walls,” so Sunday was spent converting his crib into “a big-boy bed.” After it was made up, Okrelie took a picture because they were all so excited.
The rest transpired in a flash.
Reports of a fire breaking out in Napa, 40 miles away. His wife nodding off in front of the TV news. Okrepkie falling asleep. His sister calling and waking him with word of another fire, in Calistoga, 16 miles distant and spreading on powerful winds.
Not much later, the flames leapt Highway 101 and its six lanes and bore down on Coffey Park. Stephanie Okrepkie drove away with her son, the family’s black Lab mix and their Cavalier King Charles Spaniel. Jeff stayed behind, grabbing what he could, until a giant ember landed at his feet, spitting sparks. He took off.
He dispenses his wildfire wisdom in two parts, before and after disaster strikes.
Okrepkie suggested starting with a list of things to grab before you’re forced to go. Figure out what you can get your hands on in five minutes or less and start there, beginning with “the things that are crucial to your life” — passports, birth certificates, marriage certificates, insurance policies, wills, trusts. Expand the list to items you can conceivably gather in 10, 15 and 30 minutes.
Focus, Okrepkie said, on things that are irreplaceable — “an urn with your parents remains, wedding rings” — or that have sentimental value. Clothes, shoes, underwear, pet food; those types of things can be purchased later.
Okrepkie particularly regrets leaving behind a photo of his grandparents, which his late grandmother carried with her everywhere. His wife lost the military fatigues her father wore when he was killed in Iraq, though the couple recovered his dog tags and “challenge coin.”
If you lose your home, Okrepkie went on, don’t wait to find temporary housing. “As soon as you get stabilized somewhere,” he advised, “start calling apartments.” And if it’s unfurnished, make do with used or donated items. “When you get back into your house,” Okrepke said, “that’s when you start spending on the dining room table … that looks nice in your home.”
Beyond that, he counseled patience.
Take as much time as you need to catalog your losses for insurance purposes. If you can collect, say, up to $700,000 and devote 10 hours to compiling a thorough list, that works out to $70,000-an-hour. “That’s a pretty well-paying job,” Okrepkie said. “Think of it that way.”
Also, he said, carefully document every interaction with your insurance company. You’re likely to deal with a number of adjusters, some of whom will move on before your claim is settled. It’s important to have written proof of what was said or promised, so you don’t have to start each time with someone new.
When it comes to rebuilding — if that’s your plan — don’t hurry. Yes, Okrepkie said, there’s an understandable urge to return home as quickly as possible. But he warned against making decisions in haste — in part because rules and regulations can change, affecting what and how you’re able to rebuild. “If you’re rushing, you could be doing something to fit into a box that all of a sudden just became bigger three weeks later.”
He was glad he purchased his new home from a “mass builder” — a developer that goes through the permitting and legal process, then offers buyers a range of floor plans and options — rather than going it alone with an individual architect and builder.
“Most people have never built a house,” Okrepkie said. “They just bought a house that already exists. And so they don’t know what goes together” — carpets, countertops, cabinets, tiles and on. “Whereas these guys were like, ‘Yep, we have this and this and this and this and this.’ It’s a lot easier to comprehend when you have limited choices.”
Through it all, Okrepkie said, building and nurturing a sense of community was vital.
“I can sit here and tell you my entire fire story,” he said over lunch at a cantina in downtown Santa Rosa, “and you’ll empathize with it.” But even the most caring and compassionate person can’t relate “in the same way as someone who’s going through what you’re going though.”
A friend started a gathering that jokingly came to be called “Whine Wednesdays,” where survivors got together — at first on camping chairs set amid the ruins — to drink beer and wine “and just talk to each other,” Okrepkie said. “Not bitching and complaining. Just having conversations.”
His activism on behalf of the burned-out neighborhood led to a seat on the city Planning Commission, which in turn led to Okrepkie’s election in 2022 to the Santa Rosa City Council.
As someone with experience on both sides of disaster — as a wildfire survivor as well as a government official dealing with its aftermath — he offered several suggestions for those in public office.
“Be careful with your messaging, because people can take things very personally,” Okrepkie said. “Don’t call people homeless … We have a home. It burnt.”
Be patient. Very patient. Even as months and years pass and the initial trauma has faded, you’re facing people still grappling with perhaps the worst experience of their life. “Be careful about being too dismissive,” Okrepie said, or coming across as unfeeling.
Don’t be afraid to act boldly if your action can hasten the recovery, he continued. “With electeds there’s always a fear of, ‘Am I going to piss off too many people?’ I don’t think there’s a more altruistic thing you can do than put your neck on the line for people that lost everything.”
Not least, don’t treat survivors as though they’re seeking anything more than they had before.
“We’re not asking to build mansions,” Okrepkie said over his taco salad. “If you have a car you really like and someone hits it, you’re not going to be like, ‘I want a Maserati.’ Just give me what I had … I’m not trying to game the system. There always bad apples that will try to. But most are good people in a crap situation.”
It’s pretty straightforward, he suggested. Be caring. Be kind.
Politics
Video: Democrats Question Hegseth About Misconduct Allegations
new video loaded: Democrats Question Hegseth About Misconduct Allegations
transcript
transcript
Democrats Question Hegseth About Misconduct Allegations
Democrats on the Senate Armed Services Committee called Pete Hegseth, President-elect Donald J. Trump’s pick for secretary of defense, unfit to serve. Meanwhile, Republicans praised Mr. Hegseth’s record and performance.
-
“The totality of your own writings and alleged conduct would disqualify any service member from holding any leadership position in the military, much less being confirmed as the secretary of defense.” “Have you ever made unwanted requests for sexual favors or committed any verbal or physical harassment or assault of a sexual nature? The fact is that your own lawyer said that you entered into an N.D.A. and paid a person who accused you of raping her a sum of money to make sure that she did not file a complaint. I have read multiple reports of your regularly being drunk at work. Will you resign as secretary of defense if you drink on the job, which is a 24/7 position?” “I’ve made this commitment on behalf of —” “Will you resign as secretary of defense?” “I’ve made this commitment on behalf of the men and women I’m serving —” “I’m not hearing an answer to my question. So I’m going to move on.” “You claim that this was all anonymous. We have seen records with names attached to all of these, including the name of your own mother. So don’t make this into some anonymous press thing.” “I’m quoting you from the podcast. ‘Women shouldn’t be in combat at all.’ What I see is that there’s a 32-day period in which you suddenly have another description about your views of women in the military, and I just want to know what changed in the 32 days that the song you sang is not the song you come in here today to sing?” “Senator, the concerns I have and the concerns of many have had, especially in ground combat units, is that in pursuit of certain percentages or quotas, standards have been changed.” “Our adversaries watch closely during times of transition, and any sense that the Department of Defense that keeps us safe is being steered by someone who is wholly unprepared for the job, puts America at risk. And I am not willing to do that.” “I know what I don’t know. I know I’ve never run an organization of three million people with a budget of $850 billion.” “Why do you want to do this job? What’s your, what drives you?” “Because I love my country, Senator. And I’ve dedicated my life to the warfighters.” “He is a decorated post-9/11 combat veteran. He will inject a new warrior ethos into the Pentagon, a spirit that can cascade from the top down.”
Recent episodes in U.S.
-
Health1 week ago
Ozempic ‘microdosing’ is the new weight-loss trend: Should you try it?
-
Technology6 days ago
Meta is highlighting a splintering global approach to online speech
-
Science4 days ago
Metro will offer free rides in L.A. through Sunday due to fires
-
Technology1 week ago
Las Vegas police release ChatGPT logs from the suspect in the Cybertruck explosion
-
Movie Reviews1 week ago
‘How to Make Millions Before Grandma Dies’ Review: Thai Oscar Entry Is a Disarmingly Sentimental Tear-Jerker
-
Health1 week ago
Michael J. Fox honored with Presidential Medal of Freedom for Parkinson’s research efforts
-
Movie Reviews1 week ago
Movie Review: Millennials try to buy-in or opt-out of the “American Meltdown”
-
News1 week ago
Photos: Pacific Palisades Wildfire Engulfs Homes in an L.A. Neighborhood