

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

A federal district court ruled today that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) must temporarily suspend enforcement of a restriction on a medication used for early abortion that subjects patients to COVID-19 risks by forcing them to make an unnecessary trip to their health care provider just to pick up the medication and sign a form. The ruling comes in response to a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of a coalition of medical experts and reproductive justice advocates, led by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG).
At issue in this case is a restriction on an FDA-approved prescription drug, mifepristone, which is used in combination with another drug, misoprostol, to safely and effectively end early pregnancies and treat early miscarriage. Even during the pandemic, the FDA continued to require patients to travel to a hospital, clinic, or medical office to pick up the mifepristone, prohibiting patients who had already been evaluated by a clinician (using telehealth or at a prior in-person visit) from filling their mifepristone prescription by mail. The requirement imposes unnecessary COVID-19 risks and other burdens by forcing patients to travel to one of these clinical settings solely to pick up the medication and sign a form, even though, based on safety data, the FDA already permits patients to swallow the pill later at home.
The court issued a preliminary injunction today that blocks the FDA from enforcing this requirement when mifepristone is used for early abortion care, though the court did not suspend the restriction in cases where the medication is used as part of miscarriage treatment. The injunction will remain in place until at least 30 days after the end of the federal government's declared public health emergency, which the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has indicated it intends to renew later this month.
The court's ruling is particularly important for communities of color and low-income communities, who make up the majority of impacted patients and who are suffering severe complications and dying from COVID-19 at disproportionately high rates.
"Today's decision means that the Trump administration can no longer force patients to incur unnecessary COVID-19 risks as the price of getting abortion care." said Julia Kaye, staff attorney at the ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project. "Like so many of the administration's actions, its refusal to suspend this irrational restriction during the pandemic -- despite urgent requests from the nation's leading medical authorities -- was particularly dangerous for people of color and low-income communities, who are disproportionately suffering severe harm from COVID-19. We look forward to a day when federal reproductive health care policy is grounded in science, not animus, and this medically baseless requirement is lifted once and for all."
The ruling comes after the FDA ignored requests from leading medical authorities, including ACOG, asking the agency to lift this restriction. By contrast, the FDA and other federal agencies have suspended in-person requirements for other medications during the pandemic. In addition to the plaintiffs in this case, which represent more than 60,000 obstetricians-gynecologists as well as the chairs of obstetrics and gynecology departments at nearly 150 universities, other leading medical groups, including the American Medical Association, filed a brief in support of plaintiffs' request to lift the restriction.
Of the more than 20,000 drug products the FDA regulates, the mifepristone product used to end an early pregnancy or provide miscarriage care is the only medication the FDA requires patients to pick up in-person even though they may self-administer it at home without clinical supervision. When used for purposes other than pregnancy termination, the FDA permits mifepristone to be mailed directly to a patient's home in higher doses and quantities.
The medical community has opposed these restrictions on mifepristone for years, as they have no medical basis. In addition to the case decided today, the ACLU has another case challenging a broader range of FDA restrictions on medication abortion care that was filed prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. More information on that challenge can be found here.
The following are statements from the plaintiffs in this case:
Eva Chalas, M.D., FACOG, FACS, president of ACOG:
"Suspending the REMS requirement for mifepristone for early pregnancy termination represents a necessary step forward in our collective work toward health equity during this unprecedented time of pandemic. Today's ruling represents a victory for patients, who should not have to face the additional burden of increased COVID-19 exposure as a condition of receiving their prescribed mifepristone. It also represents a victory for the dedicated clinicians who are working to provide needed care without unnecessary exposure of patients, their families and the members of the healthcare team, to the novel coronavirus. Nonetheless, we are disappointed that the injunction issued by the Court does not apply to women experiencing miscarriage and the clinicians treating them. We will continue our advocacy to seek removal of these restrictions during the pandemic."
Monica Simpson, executive director of SisterSong Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective:
"The FDA's medically unjustified requirement has long stood in the way of communities of color getting the reproductive health care we need -- and now, during the pandemic, it is putting us at unnecessary risk for COVID-19. Today's ruling recognized the simple truth that people should not be forced to choose between getting the care they need and protecting their health. This Administration should stop spending its time trying to make it harder for people of color to get the medical care we need, and instead trust us to make our own reproductive decisions and remove barriers that violate or prohibit our human right to self-determination."
David Chelmow, M.D., president of the Council of University Chairs of Obstetrics and Gynecology:
"As Chairs of Ob-Gyn departments at medical schools and hospitals across the country, we know how critical it is for patients to get the care they need without making unnecessary trips to their medical providers. Today, science prevailed over politics and the federal court ruled that patients are now able to access early abortion care during the pandemic without unnecessary risk. We are disappointed that the Court did not grant the same access to patients needing mifepristone for miscarriage care. We ask the FDA to listen to the medical experts and lift these baseless restrictions once and for all."
Jason Matuszak, M.D., FAAFP, President of New York State Academy of Family Physicians:
"In New York, we learned early on how critical it is to avoid unnecessary travel. Yet the FDA has insisted, with no medical justification, on requiring patients to come in person to a physician's office just to pick up a pill they are already permitted to self-administer at home. We are grateful that, as a result of today's ruling, medication abortion patients will no longer have to expose themselves to unnecessary medical risk just to get the care they need."
The American Civil Liberties Union was founded in 1920 and is our nation's guardian of liberty. The ACLU works in the courts, legislatures and communities to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to all people in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States.
(212) 549-2666"The images out of Bondi Beach in Australia this morning of a vile, antisemitic massacre at a Hanukkah celebration are shocking, disgusting, and heartbreaking," said Dr. Abdul El-Sayed, a US Senate candidate.
This is a developing story… Please check back for updates…
At least a dozen people are dead, including a gunman, and dozens of others were transported to various hospitals for injuries after shooters attacked a Hanukkah celebration at the iconic Bondi Beach in Sydney, Australia.
New South Wales Police confirmed that one suspect was killed and another is in custody, and a suspected improvised explosive device (IED) was found in a nearby vehicle, according to the Australian Broadcasting Corporation.
"One of the gunmen has been identified as Naveed Akram from Bonnyrigg in Sydney's southwest," ABC also reported. "An official, speaking on condition of anonymity, says Mr Akram's home in Bonnyrigg is being raided by police."
Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese called the shooting "a targeted attack on Jewish Australians on the first day of Hanukkah, which should be a day of joy, a celebration of faith," and "an act of evil, antisemitism, terrorism, that has struck the heart of our nation."
"There is no place for this hate, violence, and terrorism in our nation," he continued, noting that many people remain alive "because of the courage and quick action of the New South Wales Police, and the first responders who rushed to their aid, as well as the courage of everyday Australians who, without hesitating, put themselves in danger in order to keep their fellow Australians safe."
A video of one such bystander has swiftly circulated online: A man identified as Ahmed al Ahmed tackled one gunman and took his weapon. A 7NEWS reporter spoke with a cousin of the 43-year-old Muslim fruit shop owner and father of two at the hospital. The "hero," as his cousin and many others have called him, was shot twice and had surgery, but should be OK.
The video garnered attention around the world. Democratic congressional candidate and outgoing New York City Comptroller Brad Lander, who is Jewish, acknowledged the "extraordinary courage" of the man who "bravely risked his life to save his neighbors celebrating Hanukkah." Lander added: "Praying for his full and speedy recovery. And so deeply inspired by his example."
As the Associated Press noted Sunday:
Mass shootings in Australia are extremely rare. A 1996 massacre in the Tasmanian town of Port Arthur, where a lone gunman killed 35 people, prompted the government to drastically tighten gun laws and made it much more difficult for Australians to acquire firearms.
Significant mass shootings this century included two murder-suicides with death tolls of five people in 2014, and seven in 2018, in which gunmen killed their own families and themselves.
In 2022, six people were killed in a shootout between police and Christian extremists at a rural property in Queensland state.
The attack in Australia followed a deadly shooting Saturday at Brown University in Providence, Rhode Island in the United States, where such incidents are far more common.
In the largest US city, the New York Police Department said Sunday that "we are in touch with our Australian partners, and at this time we see no nexus to NYC. We are deploying additional resources to public Hanukkah celebrations and synagogues out of an abundance of caution."
American leaders and political candidates also condemned the Sunday attack, including Dr. Abdul El-Sayed, a Democratic US Senate candidate in Michigan who said that "the images out of Bondi Beach in Australia this morning of a vile, antisemitic massacre at a Hanukkah celebration are shocking, disgusting, and heartbreaking. The shooters deliberately attacked families celebrating a holiday because of their faith. There is no justification for such a cowardly act of terrorism."
"Our family is praying for the victims and their families—and for Jewish communities in Australia and around the world," added El-Sayed, who is Muslim. "I join my Jewish sisters and brothers grieving these attacks. And we stand resolved to stamp out antisemitism and hate in all its forms."
With at least two people dead, several others in critical but stable condition at Rhode Island Hospital, and a suspect at large after a Saturday shooting at Brown University in Providence, gun violence prevention advocates and some US lawmakers renewed calls for swift action to take on what the nonprofit Brady called "a uniquely American problem" that "is completely preventable."
"Our hearts are with the victims, survivors, their families, and the entire community of Brown University and the surrounding Providence area in this horrific time," said Brady president Kris Brown in a statement. "As students prepare for finals and then head home to loved ones for the holidays, our all-too-American gun violence crisis has shattered their safety."
"Guns are the leading cause of death for youth in this nation. Only in America do we live in fear of being shot and killed in our schools, places of worship, and grocery stores," she continued. "Now, as students, faculty, and staff hide and barricade themselves in immense fear, we once again call on lawmakers in Congress and around the country to take action against this uniquely American public health crisis. We cannot continue to allow politics and special interests to take priority over our lives and safety."
Despite some early misinformation, no suspects are in custody, and authorities are searching for a man in dark clothing. The law enforcement response is ongoing and Brown remains in lockdown, according to a 9:29 pm Eastern update on the university's website. Everyone is urged to shelter in place, which "means keeping all doors locked and ensuring no movement across campus."
The Ivy League university's president, Christina H. Paxson, said in a public message that "this is a deeply tragic day for Brown, our families, and our local community. There are truly no words that can express the deep sorrow we are feeling for the victims of the shooting that took place today at the Barus & Holley engineering and physics building."
US Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) said on social media that he was "praying for the victims and their families," and thanked the first responders who "put themselves in harm’s way to protect all of us." He also echoed the city's mayor, Brett Smiley, "in urging Rhode Islanders to heed only official updates from Brown University and the Providence Police."
In a statement, US Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI) also acknowledged everyone impacted by "this horrific, active, and unfolding tragedy," and stressed the importance of everyone listening to law enforcement "as they continue working to ensure the entire campus and surrounding community is safe, and the threat is neutralized."
The state's two Democratic congressmen, Brown alumnus Seth Magaziner and Gabe Amo, released similar statements. Amo also said that "the scourge of mass shootings is a horrific stain on our nation. We must seek policies to ensure that these tragedies do not strike yet another community and no more lives are needlessly taken from us."
Elected officials at various levels of government across the country sent their condolences to the Brown community. Some also used the 389th US mass shooting this year and the 230th gun incident on school grounds—according to Brady's president—to argue that, as US House Democratic Whip Katherine Clark (Mass.) put it, "it's past time for us to act and stop senseless gun violence from happening again."
Both Democratic US senators from Massachusetts also emphasized on Saturday that, in Sen. Elizabeth Warren's words, "students should be able to learn in peace, not fear gun violence." Her colleague Sen. Ed Markey said that "we must act now to end this painful epidemic of gun violence. Our children should be safe at school."
New York City's democratic socialist mayor-elect, Zohran Mamdani, noted that this shooting occurred just before the anniversary of the 2012 massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut:
This senseless violence—once considered unfathomable—has become nauseatingly normal to all of us across our nation. Tonight, on the eve of the anniversary of the Sandy Hook shooting, we find ourselves in mourning once again.
The epidemic of gun violence stretches across America. We reckon with it when we step into our houses of worship and out onto our streets, when we drop our children off at kindergarten and when we fear if those children, now grown, will be safe on campus. But unlike so many other epidemics, we possess the cure. We have the power to eradicate this suffering from our lives if we so choose.
I send my deepest condolences to the families of the victims, and to the Brown and Providence communities, who are wrestling with a grief that will feel familiar to far too many others. May we never allow ourselves to grow numb to this pain, and let us rededicate ourselves to the enduring work of ending the scourge of gun violence in our nation.
Fred Guttenberg has been advocating against gun violence since his 14-year-old daughter was among those murdered at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida nearly eight years ago. He said on social media that he knows two current students at Brown and asserted that "IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE THIS WAY!!!"
Students Demand Action similarly declared: "Make no mistake: We DO NOT have to live and die like this. Our lawmakers fail us every day that they refuse to take action on gun violence."
Gabby Giffords, a former Democratic congresswoman from Arizona who became an activist after surviving a 2011 assassination attempt, said that "my heart breaks for Brown University. Students should only have to worry about studying for finals right now, not hiding from gunfire. Guns are the leading cause of death for young people in America—this is a five-alarm fire and our leaders in Washington have ignored it for too long. Americans are tired of waiting around for Congress to decide that protecting kids matters."
John Feinblatt, president of Everytown for Gun Safety, warned that "we either take action, or we bury more of our kids."
The Associated Press noted that "Rhode Island has some of the strictest gun laws in the US. Last spring the Democratic-controlled Legislature passed an assault weapon ban that will prohibit the sale and manufacturing of certain high-powered firearms, but not their possession, starting next July."
Gun violence prevention advocates often argue for federal restrictions, given that, as Everytown's latest analysis of state-level policies points out, "even the strongest system can't protect a state from its neighbors' weak laws."
US Central Command said that the "lone ISIS gunman" who targeted the Americans "was engaged and killed."
Despite publicly seeking a Nobel Peace Prize, President Donald Trump on Saturday told reporters that "we will retaliate" after US Central Command announced that a solo Islamic State gunman killed three Americans—two service members and one civilian—and wounded three other members of the military.
"This is an ISIS attack," Trump said before departing the White House for the Army-Navy football game in Baltimore, according to the Associated Press. He also said the three unidentified American survivors of the ambush "seem to be doing pretty well."
US Central Command said that the "lone ISIS gunman" who targeted the Americans "was engaged and killed," and that in accordance with Department of Defense policy, "the identities of the service members will be withheld until 24 hours after their next of kin have been notified."
Citing three local officials, Reuters reported that the attacker "was a member of the Syrian security forces."
The news agency also noted that a Syrian Interior Ministry spokesperson, Noureddine el-Baba, told the state-run television channel Al-Ikhbariya that the man did not have a leadership role.
"On December 10, an evaluation was issued indicating that this attacker might hold extremist ideas, and a decision regarding him was due to be issued tomorrow, on Sunday," the spokesperson said.
Meanwhile, Rosemary Kelanic, director of the Middle East Program at the think tank Defense Priorities, said in a statement that "the deaths and injuries of US personnel in Syria today are tragic reminders that foreign military deployments are risky, costly, and should only be undertaken when vital national security interests are at stake. Sadly, Syria doesn't pass that test."
"The US military destroyed ISIS as a territorial entity more than five years ago, and its fighters pose no threat to the US homeland," Kelanic continued. "The only reason ISIS was able to strike US troops in Syria is because we senselessly left them in harm's way, long after their mission was completed. We must not compound this tragedy by allowing US troops to remain vulnerable to attack on a nebulous mission with no end date. The US should withdraw all forces from Syria and Iraq and let those countries manage their own problems."