5
#000000
#FFFFFF
For Immediate Release
October, 01 2009, 08:58am EDT
Contact:
Joanne Doroshow, Center for Justice & Democracy
212/267-2801
National Consumer Groups Announce Urgent New Ads Asking Congress to Oppose Medical Malpractice Limits
WASHINGTON
Seven national consumer and health organizations announced today they
have placed ads in opinion-leading Washington D.C. publications
declaring strong opposition to any provisions in the health care bill
that would limit the legal rights of patients injured by medical
malpractice, including measures that would force them into unfair
"alternative" legal systems. The ads run October 1, 2009.
The advertisements, on behalf of Alliance for Justice,
ConsumerWatchdog, Center for Justice & Democracy, National
Consumers League, National Research Center for Women & Families,
National Women's Health Network and Public Citizen, point out that up
to 98,000 people die every year from medical errors in U.S. hospitals.
They state, "Congress should focus on improving patients safety and
reducing deaths and injuries, not insulating negligent providers from
accountability and saddling taxpayers with the cost.... Health care
reform cannot be accomplished by taking away the legal rights of
patients who are injured through no fault of their own, or reducing the
accountability of those who commit wrongdoing."
The current Senate Finance Committee health care bill contains language
encouraging states to explore alternative litigation systems. Moreover,
some conservative members of Congress have stated they will try to
further limit the legal rights of patients with "caps" on compensation
and other "tort reforms." In a September 22 letter to the Senate
Finance Committee, the groups wrote "schemes that place undue burdens
on injured patients, or require that cases be heard in informal
settings, tilt the legal playing field heavily in favor of insurers
that represent health care providers. These measures are fundamentally
unfair to patients."
Joanne Doroshow, Executive Director of the Center for Justice &
Democracy, said, "The arguments used to support liability restrictions
are unfounded. Medical malpractice insurance claims and premiums have
both been trending downward for years. Premiums and claims are each
less than one percent of health care costs. The best way to reduce
malpractice deaths, injuries, claims and lawsuits is to reduce medical
malpractice."
"America is suffering from an epidemic of medical errors," said David
Arkush, a program director at Public Citizen. "Reducing medical errors
is not difficult, and it would save scores of thousands of lives and
billions of dollars. If Congress wants to serve the American public
rather than special interest groups like doctors and insurance
companies, then it should focus on improving patient safety, not
stripping patients of their legal rights."
"Innocent Americans injured by cost-cutting hospitals and negligent
doctors should not be a political sacrifice in the quest for health
care reform," said Carmen Balber, Washington Director for Consumer
Watchdog. "State malpractice damage caps and other limits on liability
for negligent health care providers have locked injured patients out of
court, degraded the quality of health care and denied justice to too
many families."
A copy of the ad can be found at https://centerjd.org or https://centerjd.org/archives/spotlight/jpg/ConsumerGroupAd.jpg
LATEST NEWS
Democrats File Sweeping Lawsuit to Stop 'Unlawful' Trump Attack on Mail-In Voting
"Our Constitution’s framers anticipated this kind of desire for absolute power."
Apr 02, 2026
President Donald Trump's executive order placing restrictions on mail-in voting in the US is now facing a sweeping lawsuit from the Democratic Party.
In a complaint filed Wednesday with the US District Court for the District of Columbia, the Democrats argued that Trump "has tried again and again to rewrite election rules for his own perceived partisan advantage," this time going after mail voting, which he has baselessly claimed cost him the 2020 presidential election.
The Democrats contended, however, that Trump has no constitutional authority to single-handedly rewrite election laws, noting that the US Constitution explicitly gave states the power to administer their own elections.
"Our Constitution’s framers anticipated this kind of desire for absolute power," the complaint states. "They recognized the menace it would pose to ordered liberty and the ways in which it would corrode self-government like an acid... They left most election authority with the states, permitted state regulations to be displaced only upon the agreement of both chambers of Congress, and established an independent judiciary to repel threats to individual rights."
The complaint then dives into the contents of Trump's order, which it says "seeks to impose radical changes to the manner and conditions under which citizens may cast absentee or mail-in ballots," and would "imminently threaten to disenfranchise lawful voters."
Specifically, the lawsuit argues that Trump is asking the US Postal Service to "take actions unrelated to the agency's statutory mandate that run roughshod over established protections for voters who rely on the mail to exercise their fundamental right" to vote in US elections.
Given that the order doesn't "stem either from an act of Congress or from the Constitution itself," the complaint continues, "it is an unlawful exercise of authority that must be declared invalid."
A joint statement released by Democratic leaders, including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), accused Trump of trying to restrict mail-in voting as a last-ditch effort to stop voters from ousting his Republican congressional allies.
"The American people are fed up with Republicans’ price-spiking, healthcare-gutting agenda and are ready to vote them out," they said. "That’s why Donald Trump is desperately trying to rig our elections by making it harder to vote for seniors, Americans with disabilities, members of the military, rural communities, and other working families who rely on vote-by-mail. This move is blatantly unconstitutional, and we will fight against it."
Shortly after the Democrats filed their lawsuit, the Campaign Legal Center and Democracy Defenders Fund filed a complaint against the Trump executive order on behalf of the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), Secure Families Initiative, and Arizona Students’ Association.
Danielle Lang, vice president of voting rights and the rule of law at the Campaign Legal Center, said that the suit was necessary to block Trump's "unprecedented" effort to "unconstitutionally assert total authority over our elections."
"Attempts to command the US Department of Homeland Security to work with independent agencies on efforts to disenfranchise eligible voters... are simply unconstitutional and violate long-standing protections for Americans," Lang added.
Elections expert Rick Hasen, a law professor at the University of California, argued in a Wednesday op-ed for Slate that lawsuits against Trump's executive order would probably prove successful and that it "likely will be found unconstitutional by courts."
However, Hasen also warned that the order could still create enough chaos and uncertainty to throw the outcome of close elections into doubt.
"Trump is engaging in election denialism theater," Hasen explained. "It makes voters of all sides mistrust the election process and the virtues of democracy. It convinces his supporters that Democrats have to cheat to win, something that will come in handy should Democrats take back control of the House in November with the intent of beginning investigations and potentially impeachment."
Keep Reading
Show Less
Death of Nearly Blind Man Abandoned in Freezing Temps by Trump Border Agents Ruled 'Homicide'
"The absolute disregard for his well-being by the DHS agents is ghastly. He should be alive today," said one advocate for refugees.
Apr 02, 2026
The Trump administration's response was swift following the news that the death of a nearly blind New York man who was left by US Border Patrol agents in the freezing cold was ruled a homicide—and it made clear that the Department of Homeland Security has no intention of taking accountability for the agents' actions that preceded the 56-year-old's death.
But state Attorney General Letitia James warned that despite the deflections of the administration, her office would continue to review "the circumstances and treatment that led" to the death of Nurul Amin Shah Alam, a Rohingya refugee, in February.
"Mr. Shah Alam fled genocide to build a life in this country," James said. “Instead, he was abandoned and left to suffer alone in his final hours. No New Yorker should be treated this way.”
As Common Dreams reported, Shah Alam was found dead on a Buffalo, New York street five days after Border Patrol agents dropped him off at a closed coffee shop. They had not informed Shah Alam's family or lawyer where he was, making it impossible for him to find his way home as extreme winter weather hit Buffalo. In addition to being visually impaired, Shah Alam was unable to speak or read English.
The "manner of death," said the county medical examiner's office, "was homicide."
The medical examiner emphasized that on death certificates, "homicide" refers to "death resulting from the volitional act of another, which may include negligent acts or omissions," and does not imply the intent to cause someone's death.
The designation does "not indicate criminality, which is the purview of the judicial system," said the office.
Dr. Gale Burstein, the Erie County Department of Health commissioner, announced Wednesday that Shah Alam's death had been directly caused by complications from a perforated ulcer that had formed when hypothermia decreased blood flow and weakened the lining of his intestines.
Shah Alam experienced “severe stress” and that “stress was felt to be hypothermia, being in very cold temperatures, and dehydration, so no access to liquids," said Burstein.
The perforated ulcer doubtlessly caused "severe pain," the health commissioner added at a news conference.
“If that is not repaired in a short period of time, it can cause death, which is what we have, we felt we’ve seen in this instance,” said Burstein. “It’s a medical emergency.”
On Thursday morning, hours after the officials announced the homicide determination and described the health crisis Shah Alam experienced in his last days as he walked through the streets of Buffalo in subfreezing temperatures, DHS said on social media that the account of Shah Alam's death was "another hoax being peddled by the media and sanctuary politicians to demonize our law enforcement."
“This death had NOTHING to do with Border Patrol. Mr. Shah Alam passed almost A WEEK AFTER he was released by Border Patrol," said the agency before listing a number of allegations regarding the man's "serial violent criminal rap sheet."
The charges DHS referred to were related to an incident in February 2025, when Shah Alam was detained after getting lost on the way home from a store where he had purchased two curtain rods to use as walking sticks. He ended up on the porch of a woman who called the police, who later accused him of swinging a rod “in a menacing manner," which his lawyer denies.
Police body camera footage shows him saying, “OK” and dropping one end of the curtain rod when an officer told him to put it on the ground.
Shah Alam was charged with assault, trespassing, and possession of a weapon and taken to Erie County Holding Center, where he was held for a year.
He was released in late February after his family posted bail. The local police alerted Border Patrol, which sent two agents to pick Shah Alam up from jail. His son was waiting outside the jail to take him home, The New York Times reported, but the agents took him to a closed Tim Hortons location instead and left him there, describing their actions as giving Shah Alam a "courtesy ride."
The agency claimed after Shah Alam's death was reported in February that he had shown “no signs of distress, mobility issues, or disabilities requiring special assistance."
After officials announced their findings regarding Shah Alam's death on Wednesday, his son, Mohamad Faisal Nurul Amin, told The Guardian: “When I got the call from the medical examiner, my body went into shock. I felt like I was going to throw up. I couldn’t move. Someone told my mother, and she was devastated. I am still depressed.”
Jeremy Konyndyk, president of Refugees International, said Shah Alam's fate amounted to "death-by-policy."
"In Minnesota, DHS often released detainees in secluded areas in freezing evening conditions with no alert to family. It seemed calculated to endanger people. Very similar to what they did here," he said.
Afaf Nasher, executive director of the New York chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, said the medical examiner's ruling confirms what Shah Alam's "family and community feared from the beginning: This was not a tragic accident, but a preventable and deeply disturbing loss of life."
“We call for an immediate, independent criminal investigation into the actions of the US Border Patrol agents who abandoned a nearly blind refugee miles away from his home in freezing conditions," said Nasher. "No one, regardless of immigration status, should ever be treated with such disregard for their safety and basic human dignity.”
The Erie County district attorney's office told The Guardian it had requested the autopsy report regarding Shah Alam's death.
“We are committed to seeking the truth and upholding justice,” the office said.
Gov. Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, said in a statement that "the cruelty and inhumanity" of the actions that preceded Shah Alam's death "should shock the conscience of every American."
“As more details of this case emerge, I want to be crystal clear: Every individual involved in the death of Mr. Shah Alam must be held fully accountable," said Hochul. "To ensure a fair and impartial investigation, the Erie County district attorney must continue his investigation and, if warranted by the evidence, prosecute to the fullest extent of the law.”
Keep Reading
Show Less
Trump Economy Called a ‘Complete Failure’ One Year After ‘Liberation Day’ Tariffs
"If it was possible for Trump to have spent the last 14 months on the golf course, we would be in a better place," said one expert.
Apr 02, 2026
Thursday marks the one-year anniversary of President Donald Trump unleashing a sweeping package of global tariffs on imported products, which has prompted many critics to reflect on how much economic damage the president has caused.
The Tax Foundation on Monday published an analysis examining the promises Trump made about the benefits of the tariffs, including a claim that "jobs and factories will come roaring back," as foreign investments would pour in.
This particular promise, the Tax Foundation found, has completely failed to materialize.
"Foreign direct investment (FDI) into the United States has seen no such dramatic spikes," the Tax Foundation explained. "In 2025, FDI totaled $288.4 billion—more than an order of magnitude smaller than President Trump’s claims. Total FDI in 2025 was below the prior 10 years’ average of $320.7 billion and lower than the annual totals in 2021, 2022, 2023, and 2024 ($405.5 billion, $338.4 billion, $297.4 billion, and $292.3 billion, respectively)."
The analysis also found manufacturing jobs continued to decline after the tariffs went into effect, with a net 89,000 jobs lost between April 2025 and February 2026.
Dario Perkins, head of global research at the consultancy TS Lombard, said in an interview with The Guardian that Trump's chaotic tariff scheme, which was ruled unconstitutional by the US Supreme Court in February, was a signal to foreign firms that they should avoid making investments in the country for the foreseeable future.
"If you think that discouraging investors from buying assets in the US is a victory, then you don’t believe in a growing economy," Perkins explained. "If it was possible for Trump to have spent the last 14 months on the golf course, we would be in a better place."
Russ Mould, investment director of the British stockbroker AJ Bell, wrote in a Monday research note flagged by CNBC that Trump's tariffs have caused global investors to shy away from pouring money into the US, instead seeking nations with more stable economic policies.
"Investors do seem to have thought carefully about where to allocate capital in a post-liberation day world, and one where presidential social media posts carry heft politically, economically and militarily,” Mould wrote. "The US stock market may have bounced back strongly from the liberation day low, but it has not been the first destination of choice... In other words, it is no longer a case of America first and the rest nowhere."
Nigel Green, CEO of deVere Group, told CNBC that Trump's trade war chaos had dented America's image as a financial safe haven.
"Investors are no longer treating the US as a uniform opportunity; they’re picking sectors that align with policy tailwinds and avoiding those exposed to trade disruption,” Green explained. "Liberation day accelerated a bifurcation in markets. On one side, companies aligned with domestic production, AI and energy security are attracting capital. On the other, globally exposed firms with complex supply chains are facing higher scrutiny and, in some cases, valuation compression."
Groundwork Collaborative on Thursday released a fact sheet about the Trump tariffs that highlighted how the president has used international trade policy to boost his own finances.
"Tariff policy has been used as leverage to secure favorable treatment for Trump’s personal business interests, such as a Trump-linked golf development," explained Groundwork Collaborative. "Trump turned U.S. trade policy into a transactional system, using tariff leverage to help Trump-linked and -favored business ventures win special treatment from foreign governments rather than prioritizing fixes to help balance US trade and help US workers."
In a Thursday social media post, the Democratic Party marked the one-year anniversary of Trump's tariffs by counting ways they had made the US economy weaker.
"One year ago, Trump announced sweeping tariffs that completely fucked the economy," the party wrote. "Since then: Americans have faced 1+ million layoffs; inflation has soared; the job market is the weakest it’s been in decades. Trump's economy is a complete failure."
Keep Reading
Show Less
Most Popular