Noted thumb resembler Tucker Carlson, erstwhile Fox host, defender of white boys’ honor in battle, television’s largest baby, the guy with a fixed look you can only call “constiperplexed”—they say he’s smart. I have things to do, so I don’t watch his vlog, but I’ve read enough YouTube titles like “Tucker Carlson DEMOLISHES Antifa Ukraine Supporter” to get the deal: Tuck shreds the lies of the Judeo-Bolshevik deep state by saying what others won’t, plus Kate Middleton updates.

Tucker just got got. Bad. It was the Kate Middleton updates.

Background: Kate Mid-Vibes, daughter-in-law of Charles from The Crown, is missing, dead, or on strike; theories abound, especially after wire services pulled an “infamous edited photo” of a studiously normal Kate gilded by her three kids. My colleague Julianne McShane:

It all began when Kensington Palace announced in January that Catherine, the Princess of Wales, had undergone “planned abdominal surgery,” would be in the hospital for up to two weeks, and was “unlikely to return to public duties until after Easter.” As the weeks ticked by and she wasn’t spotted in public, various theories on her whereabouts—and her well-being—began to percolate: Was she getting treatment for an eating disorder? Had she been a victim of domestic abuse? Were she and William on the brink of divorce? Is she even alive? Or is she simply recovering from a Brazilian butt lift? (Yes, really.)

Tucker TV was minding its own business exposing white genocide when two whistleblowers wrote to say they knew how the Middleton pic was edited—because they’d done it. They had proof: one offered a royal job contract with “a clause stating that the palace had a right to amputate one of his limbs should he fail his probation period.” In principle, UK labor law discourages this. But Tucker promptly put them on his show, which runs on X, Elon Musk’s Great Replacement blog.

Since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade nearly two years ago, supporters of the right to choose have won every ballot initiative, in every state, in which an abortion-related measure has been put before voters. The trend is as true in red states like Kansas and Kentucky as it is in blue California and Vermont, and the in-between battlegrounds.

And so, as the 2024 election approaches, with reproductive rights activists pushing to get abortion-rights amendments on ballots in almost a dozen states, Republican politicians have been throwing spaghetti at the wall to find a way to stop them. The most recent example comes from South Dakota, where state law currently prohibits all abortions, except those needed to save a pregnant person’s life. There, a group called Dakotans for Health is collecting signatures to get a limited right to abortion enshrined in the state constitution.

As they’ve done in other states, Republicans are trying to stop the amendment from going before voters: On Friday, Republican Gov. Krisiti Noem signed a bill to allow people to revoke their signatures from ballot initiative petitions.

The campaign needs to collect 35,017 signatures by May 7 to qualify for the ballot. Dakotans for Health co-founder Rick Weiland says they’re already there, with 50,000 signatures in the bag. Based on history, the prognosis is good if the amendment does get to the ballot: South Dakota voters rejected abortion-ban measures in 2006 and 2008, long before the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision sent support for abortion rights soaring. 

To South Dakota’s anti-abortion Republicans, this an emergency. Literally: The new signature revocation law includes an emergency clause allowing it to take effect immediately. Under the new law, voters who want to revoke their signature from a ballot initiative petition have to send a notarized letter using registered mail to the secretary of state. The bill is transparently targeting the abortion-rights initiative. Its main sponsor, Republican Rep. Jon Hansen—who sits on the board of directors for South Dakota Right to Life—claimed to South Dakota Searchlight that people had been “misled, or frankly, fraudulently induced,” into signing Dakotans for Health’s abortion rights petition. “People have approached me and they said, ‘Hey, I signed that abortion petition because I thought it was pro-life. That’s what they led me to believe,’” Hansen alleged.

It was 2018 when Mateo Jaime was admitted to North Star Behavioral Health, a psychiatric hospital in Anchorage, Alaska. He didn’t need acute psychiatric care, he says. Rather, Jaime was a teenager in the foster system, and Alaska’s Office of Children’s Services didn’t have a foster home for him. Jaime would spend two months at the facility, during which time he was held in seclusion and witnessed the forcible injection and physical restraint of other patients. He still has PTSD from the experience.

Jaime wasn’t alone. A yearlong Mother Jones investigation found that foster kids have been admitted hundreds of times to North Star, where some spend months or even years. Despite the facility’s troubling track record of assaults, escapes, and improper use of seclusion, state officials have admitted what foster youth have long suspected: Foster children are warehoused at North Star when there’s nowhere else for them to go. 

Now, two bills introduced in the state legislature aim to reform psychiatric treatment for vulnerable youth in Alaska. Though neither bill mentions North Star by name, it looms large as the state’s only private psychiatric hospital for children.

HB 363 would require a court to review a foster child’s placement at a psychiatric hospital within 72 hours to determine if that child meets medical criteria for hospitalization. (There’s no statute on when an initial hearing should take place, though a preliminary injunction requires a hearing within 30 days.) 

Jaime was among those who testified at an emotional hearing on Thursday. “I felt like a zombie for two months,” he said. “I had no control and no voice over the situation.”

On Wednesday, CNN’s Pamela Brown and Jake Tapper reported that New York Jets quarterback Aaron Rodgers—who is (or at least was) reportedly being considered as independent candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s presidential running mate—had told at least two people that the 2012 mass murder at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, never happened. One of those two people was Brown herself, who recounted how Rodgers approached her at a Kentucky Derby after-party in 2013 to complain about the media’s coverage of the shooting:

Brown recalls Rodgers asking her if she thought it was off that there were men in black in the woods by the school, falsely claiming those men were actually government operatives. Brown found the encounter disturbing.

CNN has spoken to another person with a similar story. This person, to whom CNN has granted anonymity so as to avoid harassment, recalled that several years ago, Rodgers claimed, “Sandy Hook never happened…All those children never existed. They were all actors.”

Rodgers responded on Thursday in a manner that, viewed within a narrow context, could be considered to be a denial: “As I’m on the record saying in the past, what happened in Sandy Hook was an absolute tragedy,” he wrote on X, the emaciated husk of a social-media platform formerly known as Twitter. “I am not and have never been of the opinion that the events did not take place. Again, I hope that we learn from this and other tragedies to identify the signs that will allow us to prevent unnecessary loss of life.”

It feels strange to parse the statements of a Super Bowl-winning quarterback as if they are from a candidate for a constitutional office, but under the circumstances, apparently, we must. So I’ll just note the obvious: Rodgers did not deny the substance of the story, which reported that he said these things in 2013. Given that Alex Jones was recently handed a $1.5 billion judgment for his years-long campaign to defame grieving Sandy Hook parents—spreading false conspiracies that bear a strong resemblance to what Rodgers is reported to have said—it’s not surprising that a guy who maybe wants to be vice president, and definitely does not want to be bankrupt, is not repeating them now. 

On Wednesday, the Dwight D. Opperman Foundation announced the 2024 recipients of the Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Leadership Award. The winners: businessman Elon Musk, right-wing media kingpin Rupert Murdoch, lifestyle guru Martha Stewart, felonious Wall Streeter turned philanthropist Mike Milken, and actor Sylvester Stallone. The Foundation hailed these “iconic individuals” for their “extraordinary achievements.”

Veteran corporate lawyer Brendan Sullivan, who was Oliver North’s attorney during the Iran-contra scandal and who now chairs the RBG Award, noted, “The honorees reflect the integrity and achievement that defined Justice Ginsburg’s career and legend.” And the chair of the foundation, Julie Opperman, a big Republican donor and the widow of publishing titan Dwight Opperman, who once was CEO of Thomson Reuters, remarked that the award embraces “the fullness of Justice Ginsburg’s legacy.”

Attaching Ginsburg’s name to Musk, who has amplified racist and antisemitic posts and ideas on X, and Murdoch, whose Fox News purposefully spread Trump’s disinformation about the 2020 election and has repeatedly deployed falsehoods to challenge and undermine the values that Ginsburg fought for her entire life, seemed an odd and inappropriate choice. That’s what Ginsburg’s family believes. 

It has released a statement denouncing the awards:

The decision of the Opperman Foundation to bestow the RBG Women’s Leadership Award on this year’s slate of awardees is an affront to the memory of our mother and grandmother, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Her legacy is one of deep commitment to justice and to the proposition that all persons deserve what she called “equal citizenship stature” under the Constitution. She was a singularly powerful voice for the equality and empowerment of women, including their ability to control their own bodies. As it was originally conceived and named, the Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Woman of Leadership Award honored that legacy by recognizing “an extraordinary woman who has exercised a positive and notable influence on society and served as an exemplary role model in both principles and practice.” This year, the Opperman Foundation has strayed far from the original mission of the award and from what Justice Ginsburg stood for.

A prominent election denier who wore multiple hats while aiding GOP efforts to overturn the 2020 election will serve as a top lawyer at the Republican National Committee. Christina Bobb, a former reporter for the fringe pro-Trump broadcaster One America News, will oversee the party’s “election integrity” operations. In Trumpworld, what puts a person in line for such a role is having worked tirelessly to subvert an election—and “election integrity” simply means anything needed to help Trump win.

Bobb has the necessary qualifications in spades. As the New York Times reported in 2022, Bobb embraced “conspiracy theories with a fervor that has at times seemed over the top even to her colleagues.” Indeed, she promoted the Big Lie with such zeal that she was sued for defamation. And not only does she appear to be a true believer, she’s been willing to sacrifice herself for the Trump cause, such as when she signed an affidavit to the Justice Department related to his stolen documents case that protected Trump and that she knew might be false. Such loyalty seems to have landed her this new job.

Last week, the RNC elected Trump’s picks to run the party ahead of the 2024 elections, including installing his daughter-in-law, Lara Trump, as co-chair, ally Michael Whatley as chair, and campaign adviser Chris LaCivita as chief of staff. The new leadership is moving swiftly to remove a significant number of staff, including those in top leadership roles, and hire new people more aligned with Trump. Enter Bobb. 

As a correspondent for OAN, Bobb promoted the Big Lie—enough that she was a named a defendant in Dominion Voting Systems’ defamation suit against the network. But Bobb was not just a purveyor of the Big Lie—she was also part of the operation. Weeks after the 2020 election, Trump brought in a new team of lawyers, including Rudy Giuliani, to help him subvert the results and remain in office. Though Bobb has not been charged with any crimes, she worked with that team to help coordinate the scheme to certify fake slates of electors in states Biden won, a plot that is part of both the criminal indictment against Trump in Georgia and the federal charges brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith.

After Biden was certified the winner on January 6, Bobb remained a pro-Trump activist, raising money for bogus election audits while also touting the Big Lie in her on-air role at OAN. In Arizona, Bobb played a significant part in  the GOP-controlled state senate’s audit of Maricopa County’s votes, all while covering it as a reporter. As the Arizona Republic‘s Laurie Roberts recently recounted, Bobb helped orchestrate the audit, raised money for it, and then surreptitiously advised the auditor, Cyber Ninjas, throughout the process. Ultimately, the audit confirmed that Biden had won Arizona. It’s the upside down version of journalistic ethics.

Amid a surge of support for organized labor and the general realization that work sucks, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) is leading a renewed push to make the 32-hour workweek, without a loss in wages or benefits, an American reality.

The Vermont senator on Thursday unveiled a bill that seeks to establish a four-day workweek over the next four years, a proposal Sanders’ office described as critical to reducing workers’ toil, as well as timely considering the advancements workplaces will see thanks to artificial intelligence and automation.

“It is time to reduce the stress level in our country and allow Americans to enjoy a better quality of life,” a statement read. “It is time for a 32-hour workweek with no loss in pay.”

The four-day workweek enjoys overwhelming public support. Studies have shown that it can vastly improve job satisfaction and often does not lead to a loss in productivity (but actual implementation plans are vital). The United Auto Workers called for a 32-hour work week during their historic 2023 strike. Though it was ultimately cut at the bargaining table, UAW President Shawn Fein made a fresh call to enact the measure at Thursday’s hearing.

Bernie Sanders is holding a Senate hearing today on making a 32-hour workweek with no reduction in pay the standard in America.

This story was originally published by the Guardian and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

Just a week after saying that “embryos, to me, are babies,” Nikki Haley is now joining other Republicans in suddenly claiming to support IVF access in the wake of rising abortion restrictions and the Alabama Supreme Court’s ruling that frozen embryos can now be considered children under state law.

“I think there should be federal protection that we allow for IVF places to be able to function…I think the only thing the federal government should do is make sure IVF places are protected or available,” Haley said in an interview on CNN on Friday after host Dana Bash asked if she thought there should be federal protections for IVF and doctors who perform the procedure.  

“We don’t need government getting involved in an issue where we don’t have a problem,” Haley added. “We don’t have a problem with IVF facilities. If you have a certain case, let that case play out the way it’s supposed to, but don’t create issues, and that’s what I feel like has happened with this IVF.” 

Nikki Haley on IVF: "We don't need government getting involved in an issue where we don't have a problem. We don't have a problem with IVF facilities. If you have a certain case, let that case play out the way it's supposed to, but don't create issues" @nikkihaley @InsidePolitics pic.twitter.com/HKexTJTSWn

— Dana Bash (@DanaBashCNN) March 1, 2024

Editor’s note: The below article first appeared in David Corn’s newsletter, Our Land. The newsletter comes out twice a week (most of the time) and provides behind-the-scenes stories and articles about politics, media, and culture. Subscribing costs just $5 a month—but you can sign up for a free 30-day trial of Our Land here.

In 1935, Sinclair Lewis published the novel It Can’t Happen Here, which told the story of fascism triumphing in the United States. The book was a reaction to the rise of Hitler and Mussolini in Europe and the spread of demagogic populism in the United States by Huey Long, the strongman governor of Louisiana, and Father Charles Coughlin, the wildly popular antisemitic radio preacher. In Lewis’ alternative universe, a politician named Buzz Windrip, who champions “traditional” values and who promises to restore America to greatness, defeats FDR in the presidential election of 1936 and then through a self-coup seizes dictatorial powers. He establishes a paramilitary force to do his bidding, curtails the rights of women and minorities, and locks up dissidents and political foes in concentration camps. Eventually, his reign leads to civil war. It’s a grim tale.

The title of his book was the proper use of irony (the expression of an idea through language that normally means the opposite). While many Americans at the time looked at the failure of democracy in Europe and thought that the United States would be immune to such retrograde forces, Lewis, whose wife, journalist Dorothy Thompson, had reported on developments in Germany (and was the first American journalist to be expelled from the Nazi state), believed otherwise.

America did not succumb to the fascist wave. Long was assassinated. Coughlin was forced off the air. The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor and the United States’ entry into World War II led to the end of the America First movement that might have produced a demagogic alternative to Roosevelt. No Buzz Windrip emerged.

Over eight decades later, the ghost of It Can’t Happen Here haunts American politics. Donald Trump has often been compared to Windrip, and various commentators have harkened back to Lewis’ novel to explain the threat Trumpism poses to American democracy.

Trump is considering Texas Gov. Greg Abbott as a potential running mate, he told Fox News host Sean Hannity on Thursday—even though Abbott has said that he doesn’t want the job. 

When Hannity asked Trump if Abbott was on his short list during a joint interview with the two politicians in Eagle Pass, Texas—the epicenter of the fight between Texas and the feds over control of the border—the former president said yes.

“He’s a spectacular man,” Trump said of Abbott, praising him for endorsing his reelection campaign. 

“Certainly he would be somebody that I would very much consider,” Trump added later. 

Abbott, meanwhile, sat there nodding and smiling and presumably feeling awkward given that just last week he told CNN that “there’s so many people other than myself who are best situated” to the role. 

Trans teen Nex Benedict died after an altercation in the girl’s bathroom of his public high school in Owasso, Oklahoma a bathroom he was required to use because of the state’s 2023 legislation forcing students at public and charter schools to use bathroom and changing facilities that match their biological, sex rather than their identity.

The exact cause of Benedict’s death—which occurred less than 24 hours after he was “jumped” by three other students who, in Benedict’s words, were “beating the shit out of me”—remains under investigation. The latest update from police confirmed that the fight has not been ruled out as Benedict’s cause of death. 

Benedict’s grandmother and guardian told the Independent that Benedict had been bullied over the past year for being transgender. Since Benedict’s death, calls to LGBTQ crisis centers from Oklahoma youth have increased by 300 percent. Eighty-five percent of those callers said they had faced bullying and 79 percent feared for their physical safety.

Benedict’s death also highlights the unique struggles that trans youth face under anti-trans policies and laws. In 2023, in addition to the bathroom ban, the Oklahoma legislature stopped trans kids from playing on sports teams that align with their gender and banned gender-affirming care for minors. The Oklahoma education department appointed far-right TikToker Chaya Raichik—of “Libs of TikTok”—to sit on the statewide library advisory board. Raichick promotes the “eradication of transgenderism.”

Many of these same politicians have used Benedict’s death as an opportunity to double down on their anti-trans rhetoric. During a public forum last week, state Sen. Tom Woods (R) said, “I represent a constituency that doesn’t want that filth in Oklahoma. We are going to fight to keep that filth out of the state of Oklahoma, because we’re a Christian state.” When pressed on if he was referring to the LGBTQ community when he said “filth” he said “no comment.”

Lawyers for E. Jean Carroll are urging the judge in her defamation case against Donald Trump to reject the former president’s last-minute request to avoid paying the $83.3 million Carroll had been awarded as he appeals the ruling.

In a new filing on Thursday, Carroll’s lawyers blasted the request, arguing that it amounted to little more than a “trust me” written on a “paper napkin” by a cash-poor man with a long record of stiffing legal bills, incurring enormous debts, flouting financial deadlines, and inflating his wealth. They also pointed to the other legal battles Trump is mired in—including the civil fraud case in which Trump has been ordered to pay a $454 million penalty—as reason to deeply question his cash position.

“Trump does not even mention, much less address, these developments, which are obviously highly relevant to his ability to satisfy the judgment here,” Carroll’s lawyers wrote in their filing. “Nor does Trump mention the four criminal cases he is currently facing, including one set to go to trial on March 25, 2024.”

Since winning her defamation case against Trump, Carroll has since publicly vowed to use the $83.3 million award for “something good,” hinting that she may dedicate the money to assisting other women who have accused Trump of sexual assault. “If it’ll cause him pain for me to give money to certain things, that’s my intent,” Carroll told George Stephanopoulos in January.

So what happens next? If the judge denies Trump’s request to delay payment, the former president is hoping that he’ll be allowed to post a bond to only partially cover the $83.3 million award. But as the New York Times reports, posting a bond poses its own challenges as that option would require the company providing one to pay up if Trump ends up dodging responsibility. It’s unclear what would happen if Trump simply refuses to pay. But in the situation of his civil fraud case, New York Attorney General Letitia James has already signaled that she is coming for his properties. 

This story was reported by Floodlight, a nonprofit newsroom that investigates the powerful interests stalling climate action.

At a press conference last month, flanked by sheriffs and attorneys, Ohio Attorney General David Yost announced the indictments of two utility executives who allegedly tried to “hijack” state electricity policy for their own corrupt ends by paying $4.3 million in bribes to Sam Randazzo, then chair of the state Public Utilities Commission. The two men stand accused of trying to bilk taxpayers out of $1.2 billion on behalf of their former employer, FirstEnergy.

This was just the latest in an ongoing criminal probe of utility corruption that reached deep into the Ohio statehouse. Randazzo had been indicted previously by the Department of Justice, accused of working secretly with executives for more than a decade to secure favorable regulations for FirstEnergy—which pleaded guilty to federal fraud charges in 2021 for its role in the scandal. Last year, three lobbyists, along with former Ohio House Speaker Larry Householder, pleaded guilty to or were convicted of federal racketeering charges. (Faced with the prospect of years in prison, one of the lobbyists took his own life.) Another utility operating in Ohio, American Electric Power, is under investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission. “Power is inherently seductive and corrosive,” noted a somber Yost, after laying out the latest alleged plot.

The Ohio scandals are no fluke. They are part of a generational resurgence of fraud and corruption in the utility sector, according to a Floodlight analysis of 30 years of corporate prosecutions and federal lawsuits. And they come at a time when trillions of dollars and the health of the planet are at stake as some power companies embrace—while others seek to block—the transition from fossil fuels to wind, solar, and battery storage.

Over the past five years, at least seven power companies have been accused of fraud or corruption. Seven industry executives have pleaded guilty or been federally indicted, along with a handful of appointed and elected officials. And a growing number of industry shareholders have sued the companies, claiming executives lied about their alleged misdeeds.

Washington state’s largest private-sector labor union has followed Michigan voters‘ lead, urging its 50,000 members to vote “uncommitted” rather than for Joe Biden in the state’s March 12 primary.

The news, first reported by NBC today, comes as Biden faces growing protests from voters on the left about his support for Israel in its war in Gaza, and concerns about his ability to defeat Trump, the GOP’s all-but-certain nominee, in November.

The executive board for the Washington chapter of the United Food and Commercial Workers—which represents more than 50,000 of the union’s more than one million workers, including some in parts of Oregon and Idaho—unanimously voted for the endorsement Wednesday night, just one day after more than 100,000 voters in Michigan, or 13 percent overall, opted to vote “uncommitted” as a protest vote, as my colleague Noah Lanard reported. Enough uncommitted votes can mean some state delegates at the party’s national convention are uncommitted, and can vote for the nominee of their choosing. 

“While Biden has been an ally to workers over the last four years, low-wage workers cannot afford setbacks when it comes to the right to organize and the protections we’ve won during Biden’s time in office,” UFCW 3000’s statement said. 

The Washington union also said it’s “in solidarity with our partners in Michigan who sent a clear message in their primary that Biden must do more to address the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. Biden must push for a lasting ceasefire and ending US funding toward this reckless war.” As I wrote on Tuesday about the effort in Michigan, a state with large Arab and Muslim populations: 

This story was originally published by Grist and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

Ariana Tibon was in college at the University of Hawaiʻi in 2017 when she saw the photo online: a black-and-white picture of a man holding a baby. The caption said: “Nelson Anjain getting his baby monitored on March 2, 1954, by an AEC RadSafe team member on Rongelap two days after ʻBravo.’” 

Tibon had never seen the man before. But she recognized the name as her great-grandfather’s. At the time, he was living on Rongelap in the Marshall Islands when the US conducted Castle Bravo, the largest of 67 nuclear weapon tests there during the Cold War. The tests displaced and sickened Indigenous people, poisoned fish, upended traditional food practices, and caused cancers and other negative health repercussions that continue to reverberate today. 

A federal report by the Government Accountability Office published last month examines what’s left of that nuclear contamination, not only in the Pacific but also in Greenland and Spain. The authors conclude that climate change could disturb nuclear waste left in Greenland and the Marshall Islands. “Rising sea levels could spread contamination in RMI, and conflicting risk assessments cause residents to distrust radiological information from the US Department of Energy,” the report says. 

In Greenland, chemical pollution and radioactive liquid are frozen in ice sheets, left over from a nuclear power plant on a US military research base where scientists studied the potential to install nuclear missiles. The report didn’t specify how or where nuclear contamination could migrate in the Pacific or Greenland, or what if any health risks that might pose to people living nearby. However, the authors did note that in Greenland, frozen waste could be exposed by 2100. 

Telehealth abortions continue to grow in popularity, even in states where anti-abortion activists try to ban them, according to new data published today.

Abortions obtained through virtual providers accounted for 15 to 16 percent of all abortions conducted between July and September of last year—amounting to about 14,000 abortions each month—up from 11 percent of abortions, or about 8,500, in December of 2022, according to the report, prepared by researchers from Ohio State University, the University of California, San Francisco, and the Society of Family Planning. The increase is partly thanks to the rise of shield laws, which protect providers who virtually prescribe and mail abortion pills to people in states with abortion bans, according to one of the report’s co-authors, Ushma Upadhyay, a researcher at the University of California, San Francisco. 

Five states—Massachusetts, Colorado, Washington, New York, and Vermont—passed laws last year that protect telehealth providers who help people elsewhere in the country get abortions, according to Upadhyay. California enacted its shield law last month. As the New York Times reported last week, while these laws have not yet faced legal challenges, many expect them to. But in the meantime, they’re serving as the key to abortion access for people across the country: The Times reports that Aid Access, one of three main organizations providing telehealth abortions, serves about 7,000 patients a month, about 90 percent of whom are in states with abortion bans or severe restrictions. Advocates say telehealth abortion can also be particularly significant for low-income people and those in rural areas who may otherwise have difficulty accessing abortion clinics. 

The new data from Upadhyay and her colleagues—part of a recurring study known as #WeCount, aimed at providing quarterly updates on abortion access post-Dobbs—comes just weeks before the Supreme Court is slated to hear oral arguments in a case brought by anti-abortion activists arguing against the FDA approval of mifepristone, one of two pills taken in a medication abortion. That case—billed as the biggest abortion case since Dobbs, since medication abortions account for more than half of all abortions nationwide, according to the Guttmacher Institute—will go before the high court despite the fact that more than 100 studies have shown that medication abortion is safe and effective. One of those studies was also conducted by Upadhyay, and was published in the journal Nature Medicine this month; it showed the pills are just as safe when prescribed virtually and mailed as when they’re prescribed and obtained in-person, as I previously reported. As I wrote then: 

If the court restricts the accessibility of mifepristone through telehealth, it could have a significant effect. With abortion restrictions on the rise, obtaining abortion pills from virtual clinics has continued to grow in popularity. After the Supreme Court handed down the Dobbs decision in June 2022, abortions obtained through telehealth increased drastically—from 3,610 in April 2022 to 8,540 by December of that year, according to research published last year by the Society of Family Planning. And as I reported last month, a study published in the journal JAMA Internal Medicine shows that more Americans are using telehealth to stockpile abortion pills in case they need them in the future. 

This week’s episode of Reveal features WNYC’s Kai Wright and the Nation‘s Lizzy Ratner, hosts of New York Public Radio and the History Channel’s Blindspot: The Plague in the Shadows. Wright and Ratner take on the history and politics of the early AIDS crisis, surveying contemporary media coverage, community responses, and the enduring waves of activism that followed the dawn of HIV.

Wright’s look at some of the first reporting on HIV and AIDS brings him into conversation with Lawrence Altman, physician and author of a groundbreaking 1981 New York Times article that brought the little then known about HIV to wider attention; veteran AIDS activist Phil Wilson, and Anthony Fauci, then head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infections Diseases and a leading HIV researcher. Then, through interviews and archival recordings, Ratner sketches the life of Katrina Haslip, whose activism and educational work around AIDS began in the 1980s at New York’s Bedford Hills women’s prison and continued, in conjunction with ACT UP, until her death in 1992 at the age of 33. 

Special thanks to Blindspot, all three seasons of which can be heard at WNYC.

A Democratic candidate for the Ohio Senate is a transgender man who has long gone by the name Ari Faber, but a 1995 law will require the state’s upcoming March primary ballots to use the name he was given at birth: Iva Faber.

Title 35, Section 3513.271 of Ohio Revised Code requires that “[i]f any person desiring to become a candidate for public office has had a change of name within five years immediately preceding the filing of his statement of candidacy, both his statement of candidacy and nominating petition must contain, immediately following the person’s present name, the person’s former names.”

Additionally, the statute says, people who are “elected under the person’s changed name, without submission of the person’s former name, shall be immediately suspended from the office and the office declared vacated.”

According to the New York Times, which published a feature story on Faber and the Ohio law on Saturday morning, the law originated to prevent candidates from deceiving voters. There is an exception to the law for candidates who changed their names through marriage.

Faber, who is running for a state senate seat in southeast Ohio and has not legally changed his name, told the Times he is “concerned that supporters might be confused when they see my deadname on the ballot.”

Who among us has not handed $50,000 cash in a shoebox to a purported undercover CIA agent in an SUV with tinted windows because a fake FTC investigator told us to?

Well, I haven’t. Nor do I have a stray $50,000 to give. Still, a February 9 report from the real Federal Trade Commission reveals that the saga Charlotte Cowles describes with painstaking detail in her recent viral essay isn’t entirely unique. 

In fact, consumers reported losing more than $10 billion to fraud last year, the FTC said. It’s the first time fraud losses have reached the double digit billions, and marks a 14 percent hike over losses in 2022.

Investment scams made the top category of fraud, with people reporting losses exceeding $4.6 billion. Imposter scams, such as the one Cowles fell victim to, was the second-highest money loser with reported losses nearing $2.7 billion.

To summarize Cowles’ experience—which you really should read for yourself—the financial-advice columnist lost $50,000 to an elaborate con in which a phony Amazon customer service imposter called her about fraudulent charges for iPads on her non-existent business account. After clearing up that she didn’t purchase tech products, the faux-Amazon employee offered to connect Cowles to a supposed FTC investigator, who informed her that her identity was connected to bank accounts that had wired more than $3 million overseas, and that a car rented under her name was found with blood and drugs inside. He said there were warrants out for her arrest. Cowles would need to immediately give a CIA officer $50,000 cash from her compromised bank account, which the government would kindly convert into a Treasury check that her family could live on for up to a year until all of this identity fraud nonsense was sorted out.