Connect with us

Politics

Opinion: If you were relieved by the Supreme Court's abortion rulings this term, think again

Published

on

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.

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement

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

How President Trump’s Image Permeates the White House and Beyond

Published

on

How President Trump’s Image Permeates the White House and Beyond

Since moving back in, President Trump has significantly altered the “People’s House.” East Wing: gone. Oval Office: maximalized. Rose Garden: Mar-a-lago-ified. And the art? Lots of Trump.

Advertisement

Over the last year, The New York Times has captured at least nine paintings, posters, memes, and even a mugshot outside the Oval Office, that Mr. Trump added throughout the historic space.

Many of the selections are gifts from his supporters that highlight his political stature and reinforce the idea that Mr. Trump is invincible.

Advertisement

All presidents or first ladies add to and shuffle the art in the White House.

Barack Obama brought in abstract paintings.

Advertisement

Family Dining Room, 2015. Gabriella Demczuk for The New York Times

George W. Bush decorated with images from his Texas roots.

Advertisement

Oval Office, 2007. Doug Mills/The New York Times

Advertisement

In Mr. Trump’s first term, Melania Trump added a sculpture by Isamu Noguchi to the Rose Garden.

Rose Garden, 2020. Pool photo by Chris Kleponis

Advertisement

But never before has a sitting president displayed so much of his own image on the White House walls.

There is an “assertion of symbolic power that he wants to be on view essentially everywhere in that space,” said Cara Finnegan, a communication professor at the University of Illinois and author of “Photographic Presidents: Making History from Daguerreotype to Digital.”

Advertisement

Even outside his current residence, Mr. Trump’s visage has proliferated in unexpected places — on banners hanging from government buildings, on National Parks passes and on social media, where he has been likened to a king. There has also been talk of a U.S. Treasury-minted coin with Mr. Trump on both sides.

Break with tradition

In recent decades, each president’s official White House portrait has been unveiled in a ceremony hosted by his successor.

Advertisement

The Carters hosted the Fords:

Advertisement

East Room, 1978. Associated Press

The Clintons hosted the Bushes:

Advertisement

East Room, 1995. Stephen Crowley/The New York Times

And the Bushes hosted the Clintons:

Advertisement

East Room, 2004. Tim Sloan/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

The mood has often been lighthearted, with political party tensions melting away.

Advertisement

“I am pleased that my portrait brings an interesting symmetry to the White House collection,” George W. Bush joked in a ceremony hosted by the Obamas. “It now starts and ends with a George W.”

In a break with tradition, Mr. Trump did not schedule a ceremony for the unveiling of the Obamas’ portraits during his first term. Joe Biden later did, in a ceremony with a “Welcome Home!” vibe.

Advertisement

Typically, the latest available presidential portrait — often a realistic oil painting — hangs in the main entrance hall, where heads of state are welcomed.

The Obama portrait was in the spot until April …

Advertisement

Cross Hall in the Executive Residence, 2024. Tom Brenner for The New York Times

… when Mr. Trump replaced it with this painting by Marc Lipp, a Florida pop artist, last April.

Advertisement

Cross Hall in the Executive Residence, 2025. Doug Mills/The New York Times

It depicts a striking moment in 2024 when a bloodied Mr. Trump pumped his fist in defiance, soon after being shot at by a would-be assassin during a campaign event.

Advertisement

Presidential historians have criticized the departure from convention.

Though Mr. Trump had a portrait commissioned for the Smithsonian’s American Presidents collection after his first term, none was confirmed for the permanent White House collection, and the White House said that this is where that portrait would have hung.

Advertisement

It is not totally unprecedented for a president to hang a painting of himself in the White House during his term. Theodore Roosevelt, William Howard Taft and Grover Cleveland all did, according to the White House Historical Association. But more often than not, paintings of presidents and first ladies are hung after they have left office, historians said.

Flags, fists and faith from fans

In what has become something of a muse for many of the president’s artistic supporters, there are at least three other depictions of the fist-pumping scene in the White House.

Advertisement

The image “is in people’s garages when I walk around my neighborhood,” said Leslie Hahner, a Texas resident and communication professor at Baylor University, who studies visual political culture. “People love that image.”

Behind the Oval Office, one is in a small room that houses Trump merchandise:

Advertisement

Oval Office study, 2025. Doug Mills/The New York Times

Another was seen in the West Wing next to a “Still Life with Fruit” painting from 1850:

Advertisement

West Wing, 2025. Doug Mills/The New York Times

Advertisement

A statue form was spotted in the Oval Office:

Oval Office, 2025. Haiyun Jiang for The New York Times

Advertisement

The sculptor, Stan Watts, told a Utah TV station last year that he believes the president was saved by God that day. Many of Mr. Trump’s Christian supporters have echoed that sentiment.

At least two works by a self-described “Christian worship artist,” Vanessa Horabuena, are among Mr. Trump’s White House collection. He has called Ms. Horabuena, who often paints live in front of an audience, “one of the greatest artists anywhere in the world.”

Advertisement

In 2022, she painted a portrait of Mr. Trump at a booth at the Conservative Political Action Conference. When he saw it, he asked to meet her, Ms. Horabuena’s representative said. She most recently painted Mr. Trump live at a New Year’s Eve party at Mar-A-Lago.

One of her portraits was spotted in the Cabinet room in January.

It shows Mr. Trump, his eyes closed, in front of a mountain with a small cross on the top:

Advertisement

Cabinet Room, 2026. Doug Mills/The New York Times

Advertisement

Ms. Horabuena hand-delivered it to the White House, according to her website.

Her other painting shows the president walking through a phalanx of flags. It was seen hanging prominently in a hallway leading to the Cabinet Room and the Oval Office:

Advertisement

West Wing, 2025. Doug Mills/The New York Times

“He’s positioned as this embattled warrior in a lot of these images,” Dr. Hahner said.

Advertisement

Historical figures Mr. Trump adulates are co-stars in some of the art he has chosen.

In an image created by the team of White House trade adviser Peter Navarro, Mr. Trump is pictured with William McKinley and Henry Clay, who, like the president, championed the use of tariffs:

Advertisement

West Wing, 2025. Doug Mills/The New York Times

Here, Mr. Trump is with two other Republican presidents, Abraham Lincoln (to whom he has compared himself) and Ronald Reagan (whom he is a fan of):

Advertisement

West Wing, 2025. Doug Mills/The New York Times

Titled “Great American Patriots,” the piece was painted by Dick Bobnick, an illustrator and Trump supporter from Minnesota. He said he mailed several prints to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, but he had no idea his work was on the White House walls until a USA Today reporter called him about it.

Advertisement

“I could hardly believe it,” said Mr. Bobnick. (He said the print is now his best-seller.)

If not in portraits, Mr. Trump’s image is reflected on mirrors that he has added to the White House complex.

Advertisement

Two are in the Oval Office …

Oval Office, 2025. Doug Mills/The New York Times

Advertisement

… making his image visible from the Resolute Desk.

Advertisement

Oval Office, 2025. Doug Mills/The New York Times

The mirrors, the portraits and the gilding mimic the look of his properties, like Mar-a-Lago, his Florida estate.

Advertisement

Mar-a-Lago, 2016. Eric Thayer for The New York Times

“Trump is obsessed with his image,” Dr. Hahner said. “And he is so controlling of his image.”

Advertisement

Trump everywhere, all the time

One portrait seen in the White House has become a communication tool between Mr. Trump and his supporters in the real world.

This is his social media profile picture.

Advertisement

Trump’s Truth Social account, 2025.

Advertisement

It was seen last October hanging between former first ladies Laura Bush and Barbara Bush in the now-demolished East Wing:

Booksellers Hall in the now-demolished East Wing, 2025. Cheriss May for The New York Times

Advertisement

The portrait was painted by Lena Ruseva, an immigrant from the former Soviet Union, who goes by the name MAGALANGELO. Mr. Trump invited her to his Bedminster golf club in 2022, and she gave it to him as a birthday gift.

“Every time social media or the news quotes the president and I see my artwork alongside it, I feel proud and grateful,” she said.

Advertisement

For a time, the same portrait hung next to Hillary Clinton, his political rival and a former first lady.

Booksellers Hall in the now-demolished East Wing, 2025. Alex Brandon/Associated Press

Advertisement

Supporters at that time lauded the placement on social media:

This example of a positive feedback loop demonstrates how Mr. Trump has used social media to redefine the presidency and presidential communication. Ms. Ruseva’s portrait was used on social media, hung up in the real world, then photographed and put back on social media by supporters who praised the president.

Advertisement

When Mr. Trump was elected to his first term in 2016, Dr. Hahner said that scholars referred to him as the first “meme president.”

Mr. Trump and his internet fans are used to a meme culture based on irony, and rehashing, repurposing and remixing existing images. The collection of White House artwork — much of it originating from his supporters — sits in an uncanny valley between realism and meme-ism, Dr. Hahner said.

Advertisement

Like memes that multiply, Mr. Trump’s image has been reproduced in other ways, outside the White House.

Last month, a huge banner with Mr. Trump’s face was draped outside the Justice Department headquarters …

Advertisement

Justice Department headquarters, 2026. Eric Lee for The New York Times

Last year, similar signage was strung over the Labor Department building …

Advertisement

Labor Department building, 2025. Eric Lee for The New York Times

… and the Agriculture Department building (this one, alongside Lincoln).

Advertisement

Agriculture Department building, 2025. Eric Lee for The New York Times

Advertisement

At his request, Mr. Trump’s portrait was recently updated at the Smithsonian’s National Portrait Gallery:

National Portrait Gallery, 2026. Alyssa Schukar for The New York Times

Advertisement

Still, Mr. Trump wants more. The White House has suggested that the National Portrait Gallery add a separate section for Trump-related art.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Trump sends official notification to Congress on strikes against Iran

Published

on

Trump sends official notification to Congress on strikes against Iran

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

President Donald Trump on Monday sent an official notification to Congress about the U.S. strikes against Iran, in which he attempted to justify the military action in the now expanding conflict in the Middle East.

In a letter obtained by FOX News, Trump told Senate President Pro Tempore Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, that “no U.S. ground forces were used in these strikes” and that the mission “was planned and executed in a manner designed to minimize civilian casualties, deter future attacks, and neutralize Iran’s malign activities.”

This comes after joint U.S.-Israeli strikes against Iran on Saturday as part of Operation Epic Fury, triggering a response from Tehran and a wider conflict in the region. The strikes killed the Islamic Republic’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and other military leaders.

President Donald Trump on Monday sent an official notification to Congress about the U.S. strikes against Iran. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

Advertisement

Trump wrote that it is not yet possible to know the full scope of military operations against Iran and that U.S. forces are prepared to take potential further action.

“Although the United States desires a quick and enduring peace, not possible at this time to know the full scope and duration of military operations that may be necessary,” Trump wrote. “As such, United States forces remain postured to take further action, as necessary and appropriate, to address further threats and attacks upon the United States or its allies and partners, and ensure the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran ceases being a threat to the United States, its allies, and the international community.”

“I directed this military action consistent with my responsibility to protect Americans and United States interests both at home and abroad and in furtherance of United States national security and foreign policy interests,” he added. “I acted pursuant to my constitutional authority as Commander in Chief and Chief Executive to conduct United States foreign relations.”

A general view of Tehran with smoke visible in the distance after explosions were reported in the city, on March 2, 2026, in Tehran, Iran. (Contributor/Getty Images)

Trump said he was “providing this report as part of my efforts to keep the Congress fully informed, consistent with the War Powers Resolution,” as some Republican and Democrat lawmakers attempt to restrain the president’s military action, which they affirm is unconstitutional without congressional approval.

Advertisement

The president also accused Iran of being among the largest state sponsors of terrorism in the world and purported that the “Iranian regime continues to seek the means to possess and employ nuclear weapons,” even after the White House said in June that precision strikes at the time “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear enrichment facilities.

US SURGES FORCES TO MIDDLE EAST AS PENTAGON WARNS IRAN FIGHT ‘WILL TAKE SOME TIME’

A person holds an image of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei as Iranian demonstrators protest against the U.S.-Israeli strikes, in Tehran, Iran, Feb. 28, 2026.  (Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via Reuters)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“As I previously communicated to the Congress, Iran remains one of the largest, if not the largest, state-sponsors of terrorism in the world,” Trump said in the letter on Monday. “Despite the success of Operation MIDNIGHT HAMMER, the Iranian regime continues to seek the means to possess and employ nuclear weapons. Its array of ballistic, cruise, anti-ship, and other missiles pose a direct threat to and are attacking United States forces, commercial vessels, and civilians, as well as those of our allies and partners.”

Advertisement

“Despite my Administration’s repeated efforts to achieve a diplomatic solution to Iran’s malign behavior, the threat to the United States and its allies and partners became untenable,” he continued.

Fox News’ Tyler Olson contributed to this report.

Related Article

Trump admin warned lawmakers Israel was 'determined to act with or without us' before massive Iran strikes
Continue Reading

Politics

Rep. Kevin Kiley opts against challenging fellow Republican Tom McClintock

Published

on

Rep. Kevin Kiley opts against challenging fellow Republican Tom McClintock

Northern California Rep. Kevin Kiley (R-Rocklin), whose congressional district was carved up in the redistricting ballot measures approved by voters last year, announced Monday that he would not challenge fellow Republican Rep. Tom McClintock of Elk Grove. Instead, he plans to run in the Democratic-leaning district where he resides.

“It’s true that I was fully prepared to run in [McClintock’s district], having tested the waters and with polls showing a favorable outlook in a ‘safe’ district. But doing what’s easy and what’s right are often not the same,” Kiley posted on the social media site X. “And at the end of the day, as much as I love the communities in [that] District that I represent now – and as excited as I was about the new ones – seeking office in a district that doesn’t include my hometown didn’t feel right.”

Kiley, 41, currently represents a congressional district that spans Lake Tahoe to Sacramento. He did not respond to requests for comment.

But after California voters in November passed Proposition 50 — a ballot measure to redraw the state’s congressional districts in an effort to counter Trump’s moves to increase the numbers of Republicans in Congress — Kiley’s district was sliced up into other districts.

As the filing deadline approaches, Kiley pondered his path forward in a decision that was compared by political insiders to the reality television show “The Bachelor.” Who would receive the final rose? McClintock’s new sprawling congressional district includes swaths of gold country, the Central Valley and Death Valley. The district Kiley opted to run in includes the city of Sacramento and the suburbs of Roseville and Rocklin in Placer County.

Advertisement

Kiley was facing headwinds because of the Republican institutional support that lined up behind McClintock, 69, who has been in Congress since 2009 and served in the state Legislature for 26 years previously. President Trump, the California Republican Party and the Club for Growth’s political action committee are among the people and groups who have endorsed McClintock.

Conservative strategist Jon Fleischman, a former executive director of the state GOP, said he was thrilled by Kiley’s decision, which avoids a divisive intraparty battle.

“If you open up the dictionary and look for the word conservative, it’s a photo of Tom McClintock. He is the ideological leader of conservatives, not only in California but in Congress for many, many years,” Fleischman said, adding that the endorsements for McClintock purposefully came because Kiley was considering challenging him.

Kiley, who grew up near Sacramento, attended Harvard University and Yale Law School. A former Teach for America member, he served in the state Assembly for six years before being elected to Congress in 2022 with Trump’s backing. But he has bucked the president, notably on tariffs. He also unsuccessfully ran to replace Gov. Gavin Newsom during the 2021 recall, and has been a constant critic of the governor.

Kiley is now running in a Sacramento-area district represented by Rep. Ami Bera (D-Elk Grove). Democrats in the newly drawn district had a nearly 9-point voter registration edge in 2024. Bera is now running in the new version of Kiley’s district.

Advertisement

In Kiley’s new race, his top rival is Dr. Richard Pan of Sacramento, a former state senator and staunch supporter of vaccinations.

“Kevin Kiley can try to rebrand himself, but voters know his extreme record,” Pan said in a statement. “He has stood with Donald Trump 98% of the time and was named a ‘MAGA Champion.’ The people of this district deserve better than political opportunism disguised as moderation. This race is about who will actually fight for healthcare, public health, and working families. I’ve done that my entire career. Kevin Kiley has not.”

Continue Reading

Trending