logo
#

Latest news with #The19th

$6 billion school funding freeze sparks outcry over ‘cruel betrayal' of students
$6 billion school funding freeze sparks outcry over ‘cruel betrayal' of students

Miami Herald

time04-07-2025

  • Politics
  • Miami Herald

$6 billion school funding freeze sparks outcry over ‘cruel betrayal' of students

This story was published by The 19th and reprinted with permission. State officials and teacher union leaders are reeling after President Donald Trump's decision Tuesday to freeze more than $6 billion in federal K-12 education funding for the upcoming school year - a move critics say will further kneecap schools after mass cuts and layoffs at the Department of Education earlier this year raised widespread fears about the future of public education in the United States. The Trump administration told school officials that it is withholding funding typically released July 1 for services such as reading and math support, summer and after-school programs and assistance for migrant students and English learners. The nation's two largest states, California and Texas, stand to lose the most funding due to the freeze, but no state will go unaffected if the funds aren't released imminently. The National Education Association (NEA), the nation's largest labor union, said that schools could be forced to slash the salaries of educators or begin layoffs, both moves that could cause classroom sizes to balloon and destabilize this woman-dominated profession. NEA President Becky Pringle called the freeze "outrageous and unconscionable." "Withholding billions in promised federal education funding that students need and states had planned to use to support children in their states is a cruel betrayal of students, especially those who rely on critical support services," Pringle said in a statement. "Schools are already grappling with severe teacher shortages, burnout, and under-resourced classrooms, and here comes the federal government ripping resources away from public schools." Related: A lot goes on in classrooms from kindergarten to high school. Keep up with our free weekly newsletter on K-12 education. Pringle said that withholding federal funding is part of the Trump administration's pattern of hobbling public education by starving it of key resources in an effort to champion private and religious schools that aren't obligated to admit the most vulnerable students, particularly those with learning disabilities or special needs or who belong to marginalized groups based on their race, religion or gender identity. Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), said in a statement that Trump has attacked public education since the day he took office, describing his funding freeze as an "illegal" and ideologically-driven ploy to defund education. The programs affected, she pointed out, are congressionally approved. The Trump administration "has delayed disbursements of billions in desperately needed federal funds for student services and instruction, as the Education Department weighs whether the money will be spent according to Trump's 'priorities,'" Weingarten said. "This is another illegal usurpation of the authority of the Congress. Plus, it directly harms the children in our nation." Instead of planning for the upcoming school year, K-12 public school leaders across the country are left uncertain about what services they can provide or even who they can hire, Weingarten said. Tony Thurmond, California's superintendent of public instruction, estimated that the Trump administration is denying roughly $1 billion to the Golden State. He said in a statement that the administration did not legally justify why they're withholding the funds. "The administration is punishing children for the sole reason that states refuse to cater to Trump's political ideology," Thurmond said. "The administration is withholding funds that employ vital school staff who provide critical resources and supports for learning for all students. Every child will feel the impact of this disruption delivered shortly before the start of the school year, when our students, educators, and families should be anticipating the year ahead and making plans to support our children's learning and growth." Related: Tracking Trump: His actions to dismantle the Education Department, and more He noted that California has previously taken legal action against the Trump administration and is prepared to do the same now to ensure that it can serve public school students in the state. Using an analysis from the Learning Policy Institute, the Texas AFT estimates that the Lone Star State will lose $660.8 million unless the federal funds are released soon. As Texas endures a severe teacher shortage, the program that will be most affected supports effective instruction, or professional development and recruitment/retention efforts for educators in the state. "It wasn't enough for DOGE [the federal Department of Government Efficiency] to cut the Department of Education staff and programming that protect the rights of our most vulnerable students," said Zeph Capo, president of Texas AFT, in a statement. "It wasn't enough for Texas special education classrooms to lose over half a million in needed federal funds. And it apparently wasn't enough for Gov. Greg Abbott to veto a program that feeds the poorest kids in our state over summer break. No, Trump had to take hundreds of millions more from Texas schools already struggling amid rising costs and chronic underfunding." Capo was especially outraged that the freeze takes aim at programs in the state to boost student achievement, given Texas leaders' emphasis on academic performance when they threaten government takeovers of school districts, which the Houston Independent School District has experienced. He asked why Texas lawmakers aren't speaking up about Trump's impoundment of the funding. "If they won't say a word to challenge Trump's cuts, it's an admission that they share his goal of undermining and ultimately privatizing public education in this country," Capo said. "Texas students deserve classrooms that are fully funded and talented teachers who are paid what they're worth. Texas voters deserve leaders who will fight tooth and nail for our schools." National education leaders noted that the funding freeze coincides with the Senate's recent passage of Trump's so-called One Big Beautiful Bill, which they argue will also hurt children in this country. The bill has moved to the House for a vote. Weingarten characterized the legislation as the "big, ugly betrayal of a bill." The bill, she said "will kick millions off healthcare and snatch food away from children, all while handing massive tax cuts to Trump's billionaire friends." The post $6 billion school funding freeze sparks outcry over 'cruel betrayal' of students appeared first on The Hechinger Report.

On two coasts, a show of force — and a test of ours
On two coasts, a show of force — and a test of ours

Yahoo

time12-06-2025

  • Politics
  • Yahoo

On two coasts, a show of force — and a test of ours

This column first appeared in The Amendment, a biweekly newsletter by Errin Haines, The 19th's editor-at-large. Subscribe today to get early access to her analysis. On two separate coasts this week, Donald Trump is wielding the military as a signal of his dominance and a hypermasculine display of leadership that is at odds with how many Americans think of the role of a commander-in-chief in a civilian-led democracy. In Los Angeles, Trump has deployed thousands of members of the National Guard in an outsized response to protesters who took to the streets to oppose his immigration crackdown in the city. This was over the objections and without the cooperation of California's governor, in the absence of a national emergency. There were incidents of violence, but the protests were overwhelmingly peaceful and in response to the administration's own actions in sweeping up immigrants who were working, not specifically targeting violent criminals. In Washington, dozens of tanks, thousands of soldiers, a parachute team and more than 50 types of aircraft will descend Saturday in a military parade to celebrate the Army's 250th anniversary — a celebration that, coincidentally, falls on Trump's 79th birthday. Both scenes are the latest in Trump's reality show presidency, where strength and power are defined by a public and excessive show of force and pageantry is a means of reinforcing control. For Trump, the military is the ultimate masculine accessory, said presidential historian Alexis Coe. 'Historically, war-making was seen as the most 'masculine' presidential duty,' Coe said. What if the country isn't at war, and the threat doesn't rise to the level of crisis? For this president, patriotism still needs to be performed — and the perception, not reality, is the point. But many Americans are also exercising their power in this moment. It's a reminder that military might isn't the only definition of strength, particularly in a democracy. The last time an American president deployed the National Guard without a governor's permission was 60 years ago. Then, it was to protect the civil and First Amendment rights of Black citizens in Alabama peacefully marching from Selma to Montgomery pushing for voting rights and a freer and fairer America. Now, it is a president's actions that are raising questions about whose freedoms and rights matter in a democracy. Unlike then-President Lyndon Johnson's actions in Selma, Trump's use of the military in Los Angeles is a counter to the protesters attempting to protect rights, said Maya Wiley, president of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights. He's protecting the rights of armed law enforcement — not protesters or immigrants as his government faces rebukes in court for ignoring constitutionally-guaranteed due process rights. 'It demonstrates that he can use 'his military' as law enforcement, which is the ultimate strongman stereotype,' Wiley said. 'It's intended to say, 'I dominate you and the people you elected to office to enforce public safety and I can take their power.' It suggests that what power is, is hurting people.' Trump villainized protesters as a threat to his authority in his first term, from Charlottesville to the racial reckoning of 2020. He has suggested shooting protesters in Washington, to the alarm of military officials in his administration. But guardrails in official Washington seem to be largely gone: His current defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, has deployed 700 active duty Marines to Los Angeles and is backing Trump's decision to send troops to any American city to enforce his immigration policy. This week's two-part performance points back to the administration's larger project of the erasure and exclusion of marginalized people in Trump's America. The president took office decrying diversity in the military and nominated a defense secretary who pledged to eliminate 'wokeness' from the country's armed forces. The administration has attempted to ban transgender troops, ended programs to boost women's leadership and participation in the national security sector, erased references to the historical contributions of women, Black and Hispanic Americans from military websites and banned books in military libraries they deemed as promoting 'anti-racism.' Trump has long coveted a large-scale military parade — he openly lobbied for one after attending France's Bastille Day festivities in 2017 — but such events are rare as displays of democracy and more common in authoritarian-led countries like China, North Korea and Russia. Trump, who has not served in the military, sees himself in the mold of former presidents like Andrew Jackson, who built his presidency and reputation as a military hero who would crush his opposition, or Teddy Roosevelt, who served in the Army Reserves, and his 'speak softly and carry a big stick' mantra. (Even if the first part of that mantra clearly holds less resonance.) It's worth noting that the leaders he admires, here and abroad, are men. 'This kind of performative force has always targeted anyone challenging traditional power structures,' Coe said. 'It's not always deployed by men, but in America, it seems to be.' Coe said Trump's style of leadership is less like that of many of his predecessors and more like those she has studied in fascist history. 'He rules by spectacle. He speaks mostly of intimidation. He equates dissent with insurrection,' Coe said. 'Trump is always going to see how far a president can stretch power in order to transform the office into that of an authoritarian — and that depends on weaponizing fear.' Amid Trump's show of force, Americans have taken to the streets to send a message that this is a moment they neither recognize or accept. As the military occupation of Los Angeles continues, protests have spread to cities including Chicago, Washington, San Francisco, New York and Austin. On Saturday, millions of Americans in more than 1,500 cities nationwide are expected to join the 'No Kings' protests in opposition to Trump's military parade. Many in the crowds will likely be people who have historically been marginalized in our democracy, raising their voices in support of the vulnerable being targeted by the administration. Collectively, theirs will be a different public display of strength. Much of the events of the first five months of Trump's second presidency have reinforced who he is, as he has attacked American institutions, values and norms. The current moment is another opportunity for Americans to consider who we are. The post On two coasts, a show of force — and a test of ours appeared first on The 19th. News that represents you, in your inbox every weekday. Subscribe to our free, daily newsletter.

Harvey Weinstein convicted in retrial as push for #MeToo accountability continues
Harvey Weinstein convicted in retrial as push for #MeToo accountability continues

Yahoo

time11-06-2025

  • Entertainment
  • Yahoo

Harvey Weinstein convicted in retrial as push for #MeToo accountability continues

Harvey Weinstein was convicted Wednesday in a New York City retrial on one charge of committing a criminal sexual act. The former Hollywood studio head, who has also been convicted of rape in a California court, was acquitted on a second charge. The jury was unable to reach a unanimous verdict on a third charge and have been told to continue their deliberations. Wednesday's partial verdict is a major milestone in the ongoing push for legal accountability for Weinstein. In the fall of 2017, news of long-standing and rampant sexual misconduct perpetrated by the one-time influential studio head broke in a series of stories reported by both The New Yorker and The New York Times, spurring a new wave of attention to the #MeToo movement. The one guilty conviction Wednesday came in relation to accusations made by Miriam Haley, a former production assistant on the reality television show, 'Project Runway,' who alleged that Weinstein forcibly performed oral sex on her in his home in downtown New York City in 2006. She also accused Weinstein of raping her in a hotel room in New York City weeks later. Haley's testimony during the retrial garnered media attention as a result of an exchange she had with Weinstein's attorney, Jennifer Bonjean, during cross-examination. Bonjean repeatedly asked Haley about what she was wearing when she was assaulted by Weinstein and whether she had been the one to remove her clothing when with him. Haley cried on the stand, at one point shouting, 'Don't tell me I wasn't raped by that f––ing a––hole!' In testimony days later, she repeatedly insisted that Weinstein was the one who had been the perpetrator of all sexual activity, detailing that he was the one who had removed her clothing, had removed her tampon and had placed his mouth on her genitals. It was the second time Haley had to recount these details in a courtroom. Weinstein first faced criminal trial in New York City in 2020 and was found guilty on two charges and sentenced to 23 years in prison. He was serving that sentence when those convictions were overturned in April 2024 after a judge ruled that the choice of prosecutors to allow for testimony by women who claimed they had been assaulted by Weinstein — but who were not part of the suit against him — was in fact inadmissible and prejudicial. At the retrial, which began April 23, Weinstein pleaded not guilty to all charges. Weinstein is currently serving a 16-year sentence related to his 2022 conviction for rape after a trial in Los Angeles. The #MeToo movement has faced increasing and coordinated backlash, which has picked up following President Donald Trump's return to office. Haley, for example, was one of the subjects of a recent podcast series by far-right wing influencer Candace Owens, during which Owens alleged that Weinstein was innocent and had been framed. The post Harvey Weinstein convicted in retrial as push for #MeToo accountability continues appeared first on The 19th. News that represents you, in your inbox every weekday. Subscribe to our free, daily newsletter.

Naval Academy Reinstates Hundreds of ‘DEI' Books
Naval Academy Reinstates Hundreds of ‘DEI' Books

Yahoo

time08-06-2025

  • Politics
  • Yahoo

Naval Academy Reinstates Hundreds of ‘DEI' Books

This article was originally published in The 19th. This story was originally reported by Nadra Nittle and Mariel Padilla of The 19th. When the U.S. Naval Academy stripped 381 books tied to diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) from its library, retired Commander William Marks saw more than censorship — he saw a threat to the Navy's future. But last week, after immense public outcry, most of those books returned to Nimitz Library shelves. 'Do you believe it?' asked Marks, a 1996 alum who spearheaded a campaign to maintain student access to the books. 'What great news. We're thrilled.' Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter All the books the academy removed in early April had one thing in common: Officials flagged them for DEI themes. They include Maya Angelou's 'I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings,' Harper Lee's 'To Kill a Mockingbird' and Elizabeth Reis' 'Bodies in Doubt: An American History of Intersex.' The purge followed directives from Trump-appointed Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who has called DEI initiatives 'divisive.' Determined to ensure that students could still read the works, Marks began crowdfunding to replace them on April 5. 'The motto of the Naval Academy is 'from knowledge, seapower,'' said Marks, who served as a Navy commander for 22 years. 'What we mean is without knowledge, education and intellectual growth, we will never become a strong Navy. So this contradiction really struck me, that instead of encouraging knowledge and encouraging discussion, the Pentagon was actually suppressing knowledge and limiting discussion.' About 4,400 students, members of the Brigade of Midshipmen, attend the Naval Academy while on active duty in the U.S. Navy. After graduation, they are required to serve in the Navy or Marine Corps for at least five years. Women represent more than a quarter of the student body, while men make up over 70 percent of midshipmen. Initially, Marks hoped to fundraise $3,810, which he figured would be enough to cover the cost of the books pulled from Nimitz Library. Since Marks lives in Arlington, Texas, he tapped Old Fox Books & Coffeehouse in Annapolis, Maryland, home to the academy, to be his local partner. Donations have far exceeded his goal, topping $70,000. Jinny Amundson, an owner of Old Fox Books, said by the time she got the call from Marks, she had already heard about the books removed and had started compiling a list of them to purchase for the store's inventory. 'For a bookseller, the idea of censoring any kind of books just gives us heart palpitations,' Amundson said. 'And it's our community. The [midshipmen] think of our shop as a place that they love and one of their sort of unofficial bookstores. We have the mids, the faculty, the administration that come in and think of our space as their own.' Amundson said she understood that the removal of books was an order, which has to be followed within the military. But she found the loophole: Her bookshop could store the titles targeted. It is conveniently located about a block away from the Naval Academy gates. The day before the institution's May 23 graduation, Amundson learned that most of the pulled books were back on the library's shelves. She went to see for herself, took pictures of the books and sent them to many of the authors, who had personally contacted her when the restrictions on the works took effect. Now, just 20 books are being sequestered pending a formal compliance review, according to the Department of Defense. A Navy spokesperson did not provide details to The 19th about those titles. Ultimately, a narrowing of the search terms used to flag books for review resulted in the return of hundreds of books to the Nimitz Library, as the Department of Defense first issued broad guidance about book removals to the military services. 'What struck me was the very arbitrary and even cruel nature of the books that got removed,' Marks said. 'These books were a cross-section of American culture. They were important to the discussion of American history.' In an updated May 9 memo, the Pentagon instructed the military services to use 20 search terms to pinpoint books in their academic libraries that might need to be set aside because of how they engage race or gender. Among those terms were affirmative action; critical race theory; gender-affirming care; transgender people; and diversity, equity and inclusion. People across the political spectrum expressed alarm about the book restrictions, which have been widely opposed, according to Marks. 'We really shouldn't be banning any books,' he said. That includes those with unpopular, or even offensive, ideas like Adolf Hitler's 'Mein Kampf,' which managed to evade the Naval Academy's book purge, he noted. He calls his effort to maintain the midshipmen's access to all books in the Nimitz Library Operation Caged Bird, after the 1969 Angelou memoir that was likely targeted because it describes racial segregation and child abuse. The name Operation Caged Bird also alludes to the feeling of being restrained by censorship. 'I almost felt like I could feel the bars closing in on me in terms of what I can read and can't read,' Marks said. 'That didn't sit right.' Marks' GoFundMe campaign has raised enough money to supply 1,000 books in 2025 and fund a three-year initiative at Old Fox, ensuring midshipmen can access any contested title for free. 'If you're a midshipman and you're writing an essay paper and there's a book you can't find, maybe it's been removed or banned, you can call them, and they'll order it for you, and then you just pick it up free of charge,' Marks said. He's also coordinating with other service academies, anticipating similar battles. At the Navy's three other educational institutions, fewer than 20 books have been flagged as potentially incompatible with the military's mission, as have a few dozen at the Air Force Academy and other Air Force academic institutions. The Army has also been ordered to assess library books at its educational institutions, but a spokesperson from West Point told The 19th that no books have been pulled at this time, as its compliance review is still underway. The return of nearly 400 books to the Naval Academy library coincides with a pending lawsuit accusing Department of Defense-run schools of violating K-12 students' constitutional rights for limiting books and subject matter related to gender, race and sexuality. The American Civil Liberties Union filed E.K. v. Department of Defense Education Activity in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia on behalf of 12 students. A hearing will take place June 3. The ACLU seeks a preliminary injunction to give the youth access to materials it argues have been restricted to align with President Donald Trump's executive orders and political agenda. Amundson said she was pleasantly surprised that it took just weeks for the books to be returned to the Naval Academy. 'I believe that what happened and the response that was given in Annapolis — I think that made the administration be much more careful this time around as they're going for these other libraries, the other Department of Defense libraries around the world,' she said. Amundson said using the funds raised from the GoFundMe campaign, the bookstore was able to give away nearly 500 books in the days leading up to the Naval Academy graduation. For weeks, letters of support piled up and people stopped by the bookstore with gratitude, some even driving from hours away to show their support in person. In addition to Operation Caged Bird, Amundson said there were 'powerful arms at work.' There was pushback on the book removals from members of Congress, the Naval Academy's Board of Visitors and the superintendent — who wrote an open letter signed by hundreds of alumni. 'For right now, this was a huge win for us,' Amundson said.

Abortion opponents are coming for mifepristone using what medical experts call ‘junk science'
Abortion opponents are coming for mifepristone using what medical experts call ‘junk science'

Yahoo

time31-05-2025

  • General
  • Yahoo

Abortion opponents are coming for mifepristone using what medical experts call ‘junk science'

Packages of Mifepristone tablets are displayed at a family planning clinic on April 13, 2023, in Rockville, Maryland. (Photo illustration by) Using flawed studies and scientific journal publications, abortion opponents are building a body of research meant to question the safety of the abortion pill mifepristone, a key target for the movement. The effort comes as federal officials have expressed a willingness to revisit the drug's approval — and potentially impose new restrictions on a medication used in the vast majority of abortions. This report was originally published by The 19th. The Illuminator is a founding member of the 19th News Network. Mainstream medical researchers have criticized the studies, highlighting flaws in their methodology and — in the case of one paper published by the conservative think tank Ethics and Public Policy Center (EPPC) — lack of transparency about the data used to suggest mifepristone is unsafe. The vast body of research shows that the drugs used in medication abortion, mifepristone and misoprostol, are safe and effective in terminating a pregnancy. 'There's a proliferation of anti-abortion propaganda right now. I think it is a coordinated attack on mifepristone,' said Ushma Upadhyay, an associate professor at the University of California, San Francisco who studies medication abortion. Released in April, the EPPC paper suggests that mifepristone results in serious adverse events for 1 in 10 patients — substantially higher than the widely accepted figure of .3 percent complication rate most research has attributed to the pill. The paper appears to count what other researchers say are non-threatening events, such as requiring follow-up care to complete the abortion, or visiting an emergency room within 45 days of an abortion — even if the patient did not end up requiring emergency care — as serious adverse effects. That paper also did not go through peer review, a standard process for scientific research in which other scholars review a study's findings and methodology before it can be published. Another paper, a commentary piece published this week in the journal BioTech, challenges the commonly cited statistic that mifepristone has a lower complication rate than acetaminophen, or Tylenol, tracing the history of the comparison and arguing that it is mathematically flawed. The paper's author, Cameron Loutitt, is a biomedical engineer by training and director of life sciences at the Charlotte Lozier Institute, a research arm of the anti-abortion group SBA Pro-Life America. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX 'My hope is that this paper sparks action in my peers in the research and medical community to more critically evaluate these unfounded claims regarding abortion drug safety,' Loutitt said in a statement. Days later, a group of researchers from the institute published another study, this one arguing that emergency rooms are likely to identify medication abortions as miscarriages, which they say increases the risk of needing hospital care. A miscarriage and a medication abortion are medically indistinguishable, and patients will sometimes visit an emergency room to ensure the drugs worked, or if they suspect possible complications. In places where abortion is illegal, patients may also tell health care providers they experienced a miscarriage to minimize their legal risk. Studies like the Lozier Institute paper suggest complications from medication abortions are being undercounted. That study was rejected by another journal on April 12 before being published this week, noted Upadhyay, who had served as a peer reviewer in that rejection process. A similar paper written by many of the same researchers behind the Lozier Institute's was retracted a year ago by the journal that published it, along with two others suggesting mifepristone was unsafe. 'They keep trying to publish the same junk science,' Upadhyay said. James Studnicki, the Charlotte Lozier Institute's director of data analytics, who led the second of its new anti-abortion papers and the study retracted last year, did not respond to a request for comment. But a spokesperson for the institute said the organization is challenging last year's retraction through an arbitration process. This March, Studnicki said in a statement that the retraction placed 'politics over publication ethics.' These studies and papers all fall outside the scientific consensus. More than 100 studies over decades of research have found that mifepristone — and the medication abortion regimen as a whole — has a low complication rate and is very safe to use for abortions. Papers like these aren't new, and their scientific accuracy has long been questioned. But the bevy of new reports and analyses comes at a moment when abortion opponents may have more influence in shaping public policy. Mifepristone restrictions are a top priority for the anti-abortion movement. About two-thirds of all abortions in the United States are now done using medication. Even in states with abortion bans, pregnant people have increasingly turned to abortion medication, which they receive from health providers in states with laws protecting abortion. Nationwide, about 1 in 5 abortions are now performed using telehealth; almost half of those are for people in states with bans or restrictions. Mifepristone is currently approved for use through 10 weeks of pregnancy. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. testified before a Senate committee that he has directed the Food and Drug Administration to review the approval of mifepristone, citing the EPPC paper specifically. Jim O'Neill, who is nominated for a deputy secretary role, has also said he is in favor of a 'safety review' of the drug — a move that could result in new restrictions on how it is prescribed. Meanwhile, physicians and researchers are highlighting the rigor of the FDA approval process. 'FDA approval of mifepristone must reflect the rigorous clinical evidence that has proven unequivocally that it is safe and effective for use in medication,' 13 reproductive medical organizations, including the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, said in a statement after Kennedy indicated the drug may undergo a new FDA review. 'Mifepristone has been used for decades for abortion and miscarriage management by millions of patients, and complications are exceedingly rare, minor, and most often easily treatable.' The International Institute for Reproductive Loss, an anti-abortion nonprofit, has explicitly prioritized the publication of research that supports restrictions on medication abortion. Presenting at an anti-abortion conference last September, that organization's science director, Priscilla Coleman, highlighted strategies that she said could help result in the retraction of studies showing mifepristone's safety, such as finding 'agenda-driven, poorly developed and conducted studies published in peer-reviewed journals' and writing to journal editors. Coleman did not respond to a request for comment. Though no scientific consensus has changed, anti-abortion lawmakers have rallied around the suggestion that complications are common. In a private Zoom meeting reported on by Politico, abortion opponents cited the EPPC paper as a potential tool to justify further restrictions on mifepristone — even while acknowledging that the report is 'not a study in the traditional sense' and 'not conclusive proof of anything.' Sen. Josh Hawley, a Republican from Missouri, cited the EPPC paper in a letter to FDA Commissioner Marty Makary, who had only a day before the report's publication indicated openness to reviewing mifepristone's approval if new evidence emerged. 'The time to act is now. It is time to revisit and restore the FDA's longstanding safety measures governing mifepristone,' Hawley wrote. His office did not reply to a request for further comment. 'They're producing this terrible 'science' because they don't have any real science that backs them up. And all they've gotten from the administration is, 'Yeah, we'll study it,'' said David Cohen, a law professor at Drexel University who has advised state legislatures on crafting abortion-protetctive laws. Through the courts and Trump administration, abortion opponents have pushed to reverse a 2021 FDA decision allowing mifepristone to be distributed via telehealth. In addition to calling for the in-person requirement to be reinstated, abortion opponents are asking for restrictions such as the dispensation of the drug to require three in-person visits, and for mifepristone to only be approved for use only in the first seven weeks of pregnancy. Many have also argued the drug should be taken off the market entirely. The Trump administration said on the campaign trail that it would leave abortion policy up to the states. So far, there has been little indication from the federal government that such changes are imminent. 'Pills are kind of just spreading, as we predicted, without almost any restriction and so far the anti-abortion movement hasn't figured out what to do,' Cohen said. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE This story was originally reported by Shefali Luthra of The 19th. Meet Shefali and read more of her reporting on gender, politics and policy.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store