By KONSTANTIN TOROPIN

WASHINGTON (AP) — Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has ordered that troops who need an exemption from shaving their facial hair for longer than a year should get kicked out of the service.

While commanders are still able to issue service members exemptions from shaving — a policy that has existed for decades — they will now have to come with a medical treatment plan, Hegseth said in an Aug. 20 memo made public Monday. Troops who still need treatment after a year will be separated from service, the memo says.

“The Department must remain vigilant in maintaining the grooming standards which underpin the warrior ethos,” Hegseth wrote in his memo.

Most shaving waivers are for troops diagnosed with pseudofolliculitis barbae, or PFB, a condition in which hair curls back into the skin after shaving and causes irritation. It is a condition that disproportionately affects Black men.

The memo is silent on what treatments the military would offer for troops affected by the new policy or if it will front the cost for those treatments.

It is also unclear if policies like broad exemptions from shaving for special forces troops who are in operational settings or soldiers stationed in the Arctic climates of Alaska where shaving can pose a medical hazard in the extreme cold will be affected by the change.

The announcement applies to all the military services. The Army this week announced its own grooming standard update, which significantly changes acceptable appearance standards for soldiers, especially for women, including revisions for nails, hairstyles, earrings and makeup.

By Jackie Fortiér, KFF Health News

A key federal vaccine advisory panel whose members were recently replaced by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is expected to vote to recommend delaying until age 4 the hepatitis B vaccine that’s currently given to newborns, according to two former senior Centers for Disease Control and Prevention officials.

“There is going to likely be a discussion about hepatitis B vaccine, very specifically trying to dislodge the birth dose of hepatitis B vaccine and to push it later in life,” said Demetre Daskalakis, former director of the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases. “Apparently this is a priority of the secretary’s.”

The vote is expected to take place during the next meeting of the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, scheduled for Sept. 18-19.

For more than 30 years, the first of three shots of hepatitis B vaccine has been recommended for infants shortly after birth. In that time, the potentially fatal disease has been virtually eradicated among American children. Pediatricians warn that waiting four years for the vaccine opens the door to more children contracting the virus.

“Age 4 makes zero sense,” pediatrician Eric Ball said. “We recommend a universal approach to prevent those cases where a test might be incorrect or a mother might have unknowingly contracted hepatitis. It’s really the best way to keep our entire population healthy.”

In addition to the hepatitis B vaccine, the panel will also discuss and vote on recommendations for the combined measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella vaccine and covid-19 vaccines. Pediatricians worry changes to the schedules of these vaccines will limit access for many families, leaving them vulnerable to vaccine-preventable diseases.

Typically, ACIP would undertake an analysis of the data before recommending a change to vaccine guidelines. As of the end of August, this process had not begun for the hepatitis B vaccines, Daskalakis and another former official said.

“This is an atypical situation. There’s been no work group to discuss it,” Daskalakis said.

The second former senior official spoke to NPR and KFF Health News on the condition of anonymity.

In response to questions from KFF Health News, HHS spokesperson Andrew Nixon wrote, “ACIP exists to ensure that vaccine policy is guided by the best available evidence and open scientific deliberation. Any updates to recommendations will be made transparently with gold standard science.”

The draft agenda for the upcoming ACIP meeting was released to the public less than a week before it is scheduled to begin.

At the last ACIP meeting, in June, Martin Kulldorff, the chair and one of seven new members handpicked by Kennedy, questioned the need to vaccinate every newborn, citing only two of the many ways the virus can spread. Kulldorff is a former Harvard Medical School professor who became known for opposing some public health measures during the pandemic.

“Unless the mother is hepatitis B positive, an argument could be made to delay the vaccine for this infection, which is primarily spread by sexual activity and intravenous drug use,” he said.

The virus spreads via direct exposure to an infected bodily fluid like blood or semen. The disease has no cure and can lead to serious conditions like cirrhosis and liver cancer later in life. The CDC advisory panel may maintain the recommendation to inoculate newborns whose mothers have hepatitis B or are considered at high risk of the disease, the former officials said.

Protection from birth

In 1991, federal health officials determined it was advisable for newborns to receive their first dose of the hepatitis B vaccine within 24 hours of birth, which blocks the virus from taking hold if transmitted during delivery. While parents may opt out of the shots, many day care centers and school districts require proof of hepatitis B vaccination for enrollment.

The prospect of ACIP’s altering the recommendation has left some people living with the virus deeply unsettled.

“I am goddamn frustrated,” said Wendy Lo, who has lived with the liver disease, likely since birth. Years of navigating the psychological, monetary, medical, and social aspects of chronic hepatitis B has touched almost every aspect of her life.

“I would not want anyone to have to experience that if it can be prevented,” she said. Lo learned she had the disease due to a routine screening to study abroad in college.

Lo credits the vaccines with protecting her close family members from infection.

“I shared with my partner, ‘If you get vaccinated, we can be together,’” she said. He got the vaccine, which protects him from infection, “so I’m grateful for that,” she said.

The CDC estimates half of people with hepatitis B do not know they are infected. It can range from an acute, mild infection to a chronic infection, often with few to no symptoms. Most people with chronic hepatitis B were born outside of the U.S., and Asians and Pacific Islanders followed by Black people have the highest rates of newly reported chronic infections.

When her children were born, Lo was adamant that they receive the newborn dose, a decision she says prevented them from contracting the virus.

The earlier an infection occurs, the worse the consequences, according to the CDC. When contracted in infancy or early childhood, hepatitis B is far more likely to become a chronic infection, silently damaging the liver over decades.

Those who become chronic carriers can also unknowingly spread the virus to others and face an increased risk of long-term complications including cirrhosis and liver cancer, which may not become evident until much later in life.

“Now I’m in my 50s, one of my big concerns is liver cancer. The vaccine is safe and effective, it’s lifesaving, and it protects you against cancer. How many vaccines do that?” Lo said.

Thirty years of universal vaccination

Treatments like the antivirals Lo now takes weren’t available until the 1990s. Decades of the virus’s replicating unchecked damaged her liver. Every six months she gets scared of what her blood tests may reveal.

After a vaccine was approved in the 1980s, public health officials initially focused vaccination efforts on people thought to be at highest risk of infection.

“I, and every other doctor, had been trained in medical school to think of hepatitis B as an infection you acquired as an adult. It was the pimps, the prostitutes, the prisoners, and the health care practitioners who got hepatitis B infection. But we’ve learned so much more,” said William Schaffner, a professor of infectious diseases at the Vanderbilt University School of Medicine and a former voting member of ACIP.

As hepatitis B rates remained stubbornly high in the 1980s, scientists realized an entire vulnerable group was missing from the vaccination regime — newborns. The virus is often transmitted from an infected mother to baby in late pregnancy or during birth.

“We may soon hear, ‘Let’s just do a blood test on all pregnant women.’ We tried that. That doesn’t work perfectly either,” Schaffner said.

Some doctors didn’t test, he said, and some pregnant women falsely tested negative while others acquired hepatitis B after they had been tested earlier in their pregnancies.

In 1991, Schaffner was a liaison representative to ACIP when it voted to advise universal vaccination for hepatitis B before an infant leaves the hospital.

“We want no babies infected. Therefore, we’ll just vaccinate every mom and every baby at birth. Problem solved. It has been brilliantly successful in virtually eliminating hepatitis B in children,” he said.

In 1990, there were 3.03 cases of hepatitis B per 100,000 people 19 years old or under in the U.S., according to the CDC.

Since the federal recommendation to vaccinate all infants, cases have dramatically decreased. CDC data shows that in 2022 the rate among those 19 or under was less than 0.1 per 100,000.

While hepatitis B is often associated with high-risk behaviors such as injection drug use or having multiple sexual partners, health experts note that it is possible for the virus to be transmitted in ordinary situations too, including among young children.

The virus can survive for up to seven days outside the body. During that time, even microscopic traces of infected blood on a school desk or playground equipment can pose a risk. If the virus comes into contact with an open wound or the mucous membranes of the eyes, an infection can occur. This means that unvaccinated children not considered at high risk can still be exposed in everyday environments.

Future access uncertain

If the CDC significantly alters its recommendation, health insurers would no longer be required to cover the cost of the shots. That could leave parents to pay out-of-pocket for a vaccine that has long been provided at no charge. Children who get immunizations through the federal Vaccines for Children program would lose free access to the shot as soon as any new ACIP recommendations get approved by the acting CDC director.

The two former CDC officials said that plans were underway to push back the official recommendation for the vaccine as of August, when they both left the agency, but may have changed.

Schaffner is still an alternate liaison member of ACIP, and hopes to express his support for universal newborn vaccination at the next meeting.

“The liaisons have now been excluded from the vaccine work groups. They are still permitted to attend the full meetings,” he said.

Schaffner is worried about the next generation of babies and the doctors who care for them.

“We’ll see cases of hepatitis B once again occur. We’ll see transmission into the next generation,” he said, “and the next generation of people who wear white coats will have to deal with hepatitis B, when we could have cut it off at the pass.”

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs of KFF — the independent source for health policy research, polling and journalism.

©2025 KFF Health News. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

By LARRY NEUMEISTER, Associated Press

NEW YORK (AP) — Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor, questioning whether Americans understand the difference between a king and a president, told a New York Law School crowd Tuesday that improved civic education across the country would help people make better decisions.

Sotomayor, speaking at a panel discussion during a “Constitution and Citizenship Day Summit,” did not make comments that were overtly political and did not directly address any controversies of the moment. President Donald Trump was not mentioned.

At one point, though, she raised doubts about how much Americans are being taught about civics in schools.

“Do we understand what the difference is between a king and a president? And I think if people understood these things from the beginning, they would be more informed as to what would be important in a democracy in terms of what people can or shouldn’t do,” she said.

She decried the lack of education about civics and how democracy works, even giving her version of Ben Franklin’s famous anecdote at the end of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia when he was asked whether the nation would have a republic or a monarchy.

“We have a republic, madam, if we can keep it,” she recalled that Franklin said.

Sotomayor called social media “one of the largest causes of misinformation on the internet.”

“If you are only hearing one side of the story, you are not making an informed decision,” Sotomayor said. “The world is a complex place and issues are always difficult.”

The Bronx-born justice said she became interested in civics in grammar school, where she began debating issues, and improved those skills when she learned to debate both sides of a single issue.

At the end of her remarks, she urged students who watched in a large auditorium or saw her on video screens in overflow rooms to think about everything in the world that is wrong and “everything that’s happening in the United States” and realize ”we adults have really messed this up.”

She said she’s counting on today’s students to find solutions.

By DARLENE SUPERVILLE and JOSH BOAK, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump formally extended the deadline to keep the social media app TikTok available in the United States until Dec. 16, giving time to complete the framework of the deal announced Monday after talks between American and Chinese government officials.

The executive order signed on Tuesday by Trump was the fourth time he has bypassed federal law to prolong the deadline for the China-associated TikTok to sell its assets to an American company or face a ban. The original deadline was Jan. 19 of this year, a day before Trump took the oath of office for his second term.

Trump was asked Tuesday about the framework deal he announced a day earlier and repeated that he would discuss TikTok with Chinese President Xi Jinping on Friday. He has said there are companies that want to buy the social media app owned by ByteDance and that details about its potential suitors would be announced soon.

“I hate to see value like that thrown out the window,” Trump said as he departed the White House, with his wife, first lady Melania Trump, for a state visit to the United Kingdom.

The framework came out of a meeting in Madrid that concluded Monday between U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng, among other officials.

Bessent told reporters that the goal was to switch TikTok’s assets to U.S. ownership for its operations in America, though he declined to discuss the details of the framework.

Li Chenggang, China’s international trade representative, told reporters the sides have reached “basic framework consensus” to cooperatively resolve TikTok-related issues, reduce investment barriers and promote related economic and trade cooperation.

The U.S. president warmed to TikTok and the prospect of keeping it alive under the belief that it helped him to win younger voters in the 2024 presidential election. Still, the law mandating its sale in the U.S. was premised on the possible security risks the app poses in its collection of data.

The prolonged negotiations between the U.S. and China over TikTok might ultimately mean little as its novelty has “slowly faded,” said Syracuse University political science professor Dimitar Gueorguiev in a statement.

“The U.S.–China deal on TikTok may look like a breakthrough, but it risks being a Pyrrhic victory,” Gueorguiev said. “Its famous algorithm, once seen as uniquely powerful, has lost much of its mystique—copycat efforts show that the secret was not the code itself but TikTok’s early-mover advantage and network effects. Any U.S. buyer is therefore purchasing market share and user base, not transformative technology.”

By KEVIN FREKING, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — Democratic leaders lashed out Tuesday at a short-term spending bill to avoid a partial government shutdown at the end of the month, warning Republicans they will not support a measure that doesn’t address their concerns on the soaring cost of health insurance coverage for millions of Americans.

House Republicans unveiled the spending bill Tuesday. It would keep federal agencies funded through Nov. 21, buying lawmakers more time to work out their differences on spending levels and policy for the coming fiscal year that begins Oct. 1. Republicans said that they were providing exactly what Democrats have insisted upon in past government shutdown battles — a clean funding bill free of partisan policy riders.

“It’ll be a clean, short-term continuing resolution, end of story,” House Speaker Mike Johnson told reporters. “And it’s interesting to me that some of the same Democrats who decried government shutdowns under President Biden appear to have no heartache whatsoever at walking our nation off that cliff right now. I hope they don’t.”

The bill would generally fund agencies at current levels, with a few limited exceptions, including an extra $88 million to boost security for lawmakers and members of the Supreme Court and the executive branch. The proposed boost comes as lawmakers face an increasing number of personal threats, with their concerns heightened by last week’s assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk.

Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer and House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries have been asking their Republican counterparts for weeks for a meeting to negotiate on the bill, but they say that Republicans have refused. Any bill needs help from at least seven Democrats in the Senate to overcome procedural hurdles and advance to a final vote.

The two Democratic leaders issued a joint statement Tuesday after Republicans unveiled the short-term funding bill, saying that by “refusing to work with Democrats, Republicans are steering our country toward a shutdown.”

“The House Republican-only spending bill fails to meet the needs of the American people and does nothing to stop the looming healthcare crisis,” Schumer and Jeffries said. “At a time when families are already being squeezed by higher costs, Republicans refuse to stop Americans from facing double-digit hikes in their health insurance premiums.”

The House is expected to vote on the measure by Friday. Senate Majority Leader John Thune said he would prefer the Senate take it up this week as well. But any bill will need some Democratic support and it’s unclear whether that will happen.

In past budget battles, it has generally been Republicans who’ve been willing to engage in shutdown threats as a way to focus attention on their priority demands. That was the situation during the nation’s longest shutdown in the winter of 2018-19, when President Donald Trump insisted on money to build the U.S.-Mexico border wall. A 16-day shutdown in 2013 occurred as Republicans demanded significant changes to then-President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul in exchange for funding the government and permitting Treasury the borrowing latitude to pay the nation’s bills.

This time, however, Democrats are facing intense pressure from their base of supporters to stand up to Trump. They have particularly focused on the potential for skyrocketing health care premiums for millions of Americans if Congress fails to extend enhanced subsidies, which many people use to buy insurance on the Affordable Care Act exchange. Those subsidies were put in place during the COVID crisis, but are set to expire.

Some people have already received notices that their premiums — the monthly fee paid for insurance coverage — are poised to spike next year. Insurers have sent out notices in nearly every state, with some proposing premium increases of as much as 50%. The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the number of people without insurance would rise by 2.2 million in 2026, and by 3.7 million the following year, if Congress does not extend the enhanced tax credits.

Johnson called the debate over health insurance tax credits a December policy issue, not something that needs to be solved in September. And Thune said that almost every Democratic lawmaker voted for the short-term continuing resolutions when Joe Biden was president and Schumer was majority leader.

“I’m sure you’re all asking the question, are we or are we not going to have a Schumer shutdown?” Thune asked reporters Tuesday. “And it sounds like, from what he is indicating, that very well may happen.”

By GARY FIELDS and CHRIS MEGERIAN, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump on Monday threatened to once again federalize Washington, D.C.’s police force, in what he suggested could come in response to the city’s mayor’s stated refusal to cooperate with immigration enforcement.

Trump’s emergency order, which took over the local police force, expired last week. Hours before it elapsed, Mayor Muriel Bowser said that the city would not cooperate with Immigration, Customs and Enforcement in their continued operations in the nation’s capital. Earlier, she had said the city would work with other federal agencies even after the emergency order expired.

In an early-morning social media post on Monday, Trump said his intervention into the D.C.’s law enforcement had improved crime in the city, a claim Bowser has backed up, though, data shows crime was already falling in Washington before the law enforcement surge began.

Trump said crime could increase if cooperation on immigration enforcement ceases, in which case he would “call a National Emergency, and Federalize, if necessary!!!”

The mayor’s office declined to comment.

The White House did not say if Trump would follow through on his threat. It also did not say whether the president had considered trying to extend his previous order that placed the city’s police force under federal control. The order was not renewed by Congress and lapsed Sept. 11.

Bowser issued an order Sept. 2, setting up how the local police will continue working with the federal law enforcement agencies that continue working in the city. The order listed a number of federal agencies she anticipated working cooperatively with the MPD, the local police, including the FBI, the Drug Enforcement Administration and the Secret Service, among other agencies. Absent was ICE.

Speaking Sept. 10 at a ribbon cutting ceremony, the mayor said “immigration enforcement is not what MPD does,” referring to the local police department. She added that when the emergency order ends, “it won’t be what MPD does in the future.”

Data analyzed by the Associated Press during the emergency period showed that more than 40% of arrests were immigration related, highlighting that the Trump administration continued to advance its hardline immigration policies as it sought to fight crime in the nation’s capital.

Federal law enforcement agencies and National Guard units from D.C. and seven states are continuing operations in the city.

Trump’s threat comes the same day that the House Committee on Rules is taking up several D.C.-related bills, including a proposal to lower the age at which juveniles can be tried to 14 from 16 for certain serious crimes, as well as restricting the district’s authority over its sentencing laws and its role in selecting judges.

The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform held a similar hearing last week.

The district is granted autonomy through a limited home rule agreement passed in 1973, but federal political leaders retain significant control over local affairs, including the approval of the budget and laws passed by the D.C council.

By DARLENE SUPERVILLE, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — Vice President JD Vance on Monday hosted the radio program of Charlie Kirk, the influential conservative activist who was assassinated last week, telling listeners that the best way he knows how to honor his friend is to be a better husband and father.

Vance hosted “The Charlie Kirk Show” from his ceremonial office in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building next to the White House. The livestream of the two-hour program was broadcast in the White House press briefing room and featured a series of appearances by White House and administration officials who knew the 31-year-old Kirk.

Vance, who transported Kirk’s body home to Arizona aboard Air Force Two last week, opened by saying he was “filling in for somebody who cannot be filled in for, but I’ll do my best.”

The Republican vice president, 41, was especially close to Kirk, founder of Turning Point USA, one of the nation’s largest political organizations with chapters on high school and college campuses. The two began a friendship nearly a decade ago, and Kirk advocated for Vance to be Republican Donald Trump’s choice for vice president last year.

Vance spoke Monday about sitting with Kirk’s widow, Erika Kirk, and being at a loss for words. But he said she told him something he’ll never forget, which was that her husband had never raised his voice to her and was never “cross or mean-spirited to her.”

Vance allowed that he could not say the same about himself.

“I took from that moment that I needed to be a better husband and I needed to be a better father,” the vice president said on the program, which was streamed on Rumble. “That is the way I’m going to honor my friend.”

After Kirk was fatally shot last Wednesday at Utah Valley University, Vance tore up his schedule for the next day — he was scheduled Thursday to attend the 24th annual observance in New York of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks — to fly instead to Orem, Utah, with his wife, second lady Usha Vance.

The two accompanied Erika Kirk and Charlie Kirk’s casket to Arizona aboard Air Force Two.

By LARRY NEUMEISTER, Associated Press

NEW YORK (AP) — Former federal prosecutor Maurene Comey sued the U.S. government Monday to get her job back, saying her firing was for political reasons and was unconstitutional.

Her lawsuit in Manhattan federal court blamed the firing on the fact that her father is James Comey, a former F.B.I. director, “or because of her perceived political affiliation and beliefs, or both.”

Comey is seeking to be reinstated as well as a declaration that her firing was unlawful and a violation of the “Separation of Powers” clause in the U.S. Constitution.

“Defendants have not provided any explanation whatsoever for terminating Ms. Comey. In truth, there is no legitimate explanation,” the lawsuit said.

Comey, who successfully prosecuted hundreds of cases since becoming an assistant U.S. attorney in 2015, was notified of her dismissal in an email with an attachment saying she was being fired “(p)ursuant to Article II of the United States Constitution and the laws of the United States,” the lawsuit said.

James Comey was fired as FBI director by President Donald Trump in 2017. The lawsuit noted that he has since written a memoir critical of Trump and has continued to publicly criticize Trump and his administration, including a social media post in May that Trump and others perceived as threatening.

The lawsuit noted that Maurene Comey’s firing in July came the day after her supervisors had asked her to take the lead on a major public corruption case and three months after she’d received her latest “Outstanding” review.

“The politically motivated termination of Ms. Comey — ostensibly under ‘Article II of the Constitution’ — upends bedrock principles of our democracy and justice system,” the lawsuit said. “Assistant United States Attorneys like Ms. Comey must do their jobs without fearing or favoring any political party or perspective, guided solely by the law, the facts, and the pursuit of justice.”

Named as defendants in the lawsuit were, among others, the Justice Department, the Executive Office of the President, U.S. Attorney General Pamela Bondi, the Office of Personnel Management and the United States.

A message for comment from the Justice Department was not immediately returned.

Comey’s July 16 firing came amid a spate of dismissals of prosecutors by the Justice Department without explanation, raising alarm that civil service protections meant to prevent terminations for political reasons were being overlooked.

Comey’s lawsuit noted that she was employed with protections under the Civil Service Reform Act governing how and why she could be terminated, including specific prohibitions against termination for discriminatory reasons such as political affiliation.

“Her termination violated every one of those protections,” the lawsuit said.

The Justice Department also has fired some prosecutors who worked on cases that have provoked Trump’s ire, including some who handled U.S. Capitol riot cases and lawyers and support staff who worked on special counsel Jack Smith’s prosecutions of Trump.

She became a rising star in her office for her work on the case against financier Jeffrey Epstein and his onetime girlfriend, British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell, and the recent prosecution of music mogul Sean “Diddy” Combs.

Maxwell is serving a 20-year prison sentence after her December 2021 conviction on sex trafficking charges. She was recently transferred from a prison in Florida to a prison camp in Texas.

Epstein took his own life in a federal jail in August 2019 as he awaited trial on sex trafficking charges. Combs is awaiting sentencing next month after his conviction on prostitution-related charges after he was exonerated in July of more serious sex trafficking and racketeering conspiracy charges.

By GEOFF MULVIHILL, Associated Press

The governors of Arizona and Maine on Friday joined the growing list of Democratic officials who have signed orders intended to ensure most residents can receive COVID-19 vaccines at pharmacies without individual prescriptions.

Unlike past years, access to COVID-19 vaccines has become complicated in 2025, largely because federal guidance does not recommend them for nearly everyone this year as it had in the past.

Here’s a look at where things stand.

Pharmacy chain says the shots are available in most states without individual prescriptions

CVS Health, the biggest pharmacy chain in the U.S., says its stores are offering the shots without an individual prescription in 41 states as of midday Friday.

But the remaining states — Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Maine, North Carolina, Oregon, Utah and West Virginia, plus the District of Columbia — require individual prescriptions under the company’s interpretation of state policies.

Arizona and Maine are likely to come off that list as the new orders take effect there.

“I will not stand idly by while the Trump Administration makes it harder for Maine people to get a vaccine that protects their health and could very well save their life,” Maine Gov. Janet Mills said in the statement. “Through this standing order, we are stepping up to knock down the barriers the Trump Administration is putting in the way of the health and welfare of Maine people.”

Democratic governors have been taking action

At least 14 states — 12 with Democratic governors, plus Virginia, where Republican Glenn Youngkin is governor — have announced policies this month to ease access.

In some of the states that have expanded access — including Delaware and New Jersey this week — at least some pharmacies were already providing the shots broadly.

But in Arizona and Maine, Friday’s orders are expected to change the policy.

While most Republican-controlled states have not changed vaccine policy this month, the inoculations are still available there under existing policies.

In addition to the round of orders from governors, boards of pharmacy and other officials, four states — California, Hawaii, Oregon and Washington — have announced an alliance to make their own vaccine recommendations. Of those, only Oregon doesn’t currently allow the shots in pharmacies without individual prescriptions.

Vaccines have become politically contentious

In past years, the federal government has recommended the vaccines to all Americans above the age of 6 months.

This year, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved them for people age 65 and over but said they should be used only for children and younger adults who have a risk factor such as asthma or obesity.

That change came as U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy fired the entire Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices in June, accusing of them of being too closely aligned with the companies that make the vaccines. The replacements include vaccine skeptics.

Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs, a Democrat, framed her order Friday as “protecting the health care freedom” of people in the state.

One state has taken another stance on vaccines

Florida’s surgeon general, Dr. Joseph Ladapo, announced this month that the state could become the first to eliminate requirements that children have a list of vaccinations.

Since then, though, the state health department said that the change likely wouldn’t take effect until December and that without legislative action, only some vaccines — including for chickenpox — would become optional. The measles and polio shots would remain mandatory.

Associated Press writer Patrick Whittle in Maine contributed to this report.

By DAVID A. LIEB, Associated Press

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (AP) — Missouri Republicans handed President Donald Trump a political victory Friday, giving final legislative approval to a redistricting plan that could help Republicans win an additional U.S. House seat in next year’s elections.

The Senate vote sends the redistricting plan to Republican Gov. Mike Kehoe for his expected signature to make it law. But opponents immediately announced a referendum petition that, if successful, could force a statewide vote on the new map.

Missouri is the third state to take up mid-decade redistricting in an emerging national battle for partisan advantage ahead of the midterm elections. Republican lawmakers in Texas passed a new U.S. House map last month aimed at helping their party win five additional seats. Democratic lawmakers in California countered with their own redistricting plan aimed at winning five more seats, but it still needs voter approval.

Each seat could be critical, because Democrats need to gain just three seats to win control of the House, which would allow them to obstruct Trump’s agenda and launch investigations into him. Trump is trying to stave off a historic trend in which the president’s party typically loses seats in midterm elections.

Republicans currently hold six of Missouri’s eight U.S. House seats. The revised map passed the state House earlier this week as the focal point of a special session called by Kehoe.

Missouri’s revised map targets a seat held by Democratic U.S. Rep. Emanuel Cleaver by shaving off portions of his Kansas City district and stretching the rest of it into Republican-heavy rural areas. The plan reduces the number of Black and minority residents in Cleaver’s district, partly by creating a dividing line along a street that Cleaver said had been a historical segregation line between Black and white residents.

Cleaver, who was Kansas City’s first Black mayor, has served in Congress for over 20 years. He won reelection with over 60% of the vote in both 2024 and 2022 under districts adopted by the Republican-led state Legislature after the 2020 census.

By DAVID A. LIEB and M.K. WILDEMAN, Associated Press

President Donald Trump has approved federal disaster aid for six states and tribes following storms and floods that occurred this spring and summer.

The disaster declarations, announced Thursday, will allow federal funding to flow to Kansas, North Carolina, North Dakota and Wisconsin, and for tribes in Montana and South Dakota. In each case except Wisconsin, it took Trump more than a month to approve the aid requests from local officials, continuing a trend of longer waits for disaster relief noted by a recent Associated Press analysis.

Trump has now approved more than 30 major natural disaster declarations since taking office in January. Before the latest batch, his approvals had averaged a 34-day wait from the time the relief was requested. For his most recent declarations, that wait ranged from just 15 days following an aid request for Wisconsin flooding in August to 56 days following a tribal request for Montana flooding that occurred in May.

The AP’s analysis showed that delays in approving federal disaster aid have grown over time, regardless of the party in power. On average, it took less than two weeks for requests for a presidential disaster declaration to be granted in the 1990s and early 2000s. That rose to about three weeks during the past decade under presidents from both major parties. During Trump’s first term in office, it took him an average of 24 days to approve requests.

White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson told the AP that Trump is providing “a more thorough review of disaster declaration requests than any Administration has before him” to make sure that federal tax dollars are spent wisely.

But delays mean individuals must wait to receive federal aid for daily living expenses, temporary lodging and home repairs. Delays in disaster declarations also can hamper recovery efforts by local officials uncertain whether they will receive federal reimbursement for cleaning up debris and rebuilding infrastructure.

Trump’s latest declarations approved public assistance for local governments and nonprofits in all cases except Wisconsin, where assistance for individuals was approved. But that doesn’t preclude the federal government from later also approving public assistance for Wisconsin.

Preliminary estimates from Democratic Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers’ administration said more than 1,500 residential structures were destroyed or suffered major damage in August flooding at a cost of more than $33 million. There was also more than $43 million in public sector damage over six counties, according to the Evers administration.

Evers requested aid for residents in six counties, but Trump approved it only for three.

“I will continue to urge the Trump Administration to approve the remainder of my request, and I will keep fighting to make sure Wisconsin receives every resource that is needed and available,” Evers said in a statement in which he thanked Democratic officeholders for their efforts, but not Trump or any Republicans.

Trump had announced several of the disaster declarations — including Wisconsin’s — on his social media site while noting his victories in those states and highlighting their Republican officials. He received thanks from Democratic North Carolina Gov. Josh Stein and Republican officials elsewhere.

Trump’s approval of six major disaster declarations in one day would have been unusual for some presidents but not for him. Trump approved seven disaster requests on July 22 and nine on May 21.

But Trump has not approved requests for hazard mitigation assistance — a once-typical add-on that helps recipients build back with resilience — since February.

Associated Press writers Gabriela Aoun Angueira, Scott Bauer, Jack Dura and Gary D. Robertson contributed to this report.

By Nada Hassanein, Stateline.org

Pharmacies in Black and Latino neighborhoods are less likely to dispense buprenorphine — one of the main treatments for opioid use disorder — even though people of color are more likely to die from opioid overdoses.

The drug helps reduce cravings for opioids and the likelihood of a fatal overdose.

While the nation as a whole has seen decreases in opioid overdose deaths in recent years, overdose deaths among Black, Latino and Indigenous people have continued to increase.

Many medical and health policy experts fear the broad domestic policy law President Donald Trump signed in July will worsen the problem by increasing the number of people without health insurance. As a result of the law, the number of people without coverage will increase by about 10 million by 2034, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

About 7.5 million of the people who will lose coverage under the new law are covered by Medicaid. Shortly before Trump signed the bill into law, researchers from the University of Pennsylvania and Boston University estimated that roughly 156,000 Medicaid recipients will lose access to medications for opioid addiction because of the cuts, resulting in approximately 1,000 more overdose deaths annually.

Because Black and Hispanic people are overrepresented on the rolls, the Medicaid cuts will have a disproportionate effect on communities that already face higher barriers to getting medications to treat addiction.

From 2017 to 2023, the percentage of U.S. retail pharmacies regularly dispensing buprenorphine increased from 33% to 39%, according to a study published last week in Health Affairs.

But researchers found the drug was much less likely to be available in pharmacies in mostly Black (18% of pharmacies) and Hispanic neighborhoods (17%), compared with mostly white ones (46%).

In some states, the disparity was even worse. In California, for example, only about 9% of pharmacies in Black neighborhoods dispensed buprenorphine, compared with 52% in white neighborhoods.

The researchers found buprenorphine was least available in Black and Latino neighborhoods across nearly all states.

Barriers to treatment

Dr. Rebecca Trotzky-Sirr, a family physician who specializes in addiction medicine, said many communities of color are “pharmacy deserts.” Even the pharmacies that do exist in those neighborhoods tend to “have additional barriers to obtain buprenorphine and other controlled substances out of a concern for historic overuse of some treatments,” said Trotzky-Sirr, who wasn’t involved in the study.

In addition to its federal classification as a controlled substance, buprenorphine is also subject to state regulations to prevent illegal use. Pharmacies that carry it know that wholesalers and distributors audit their orders, which dissuades some from stocking or dispensing it.

Dima Qato, associate professor of clinical pharmacy at the University of Southern California and an author of the Health Affairs study, said that without changes in policy, Black and Hispanic people will continue to have an especially hard time getting buprenorphine.

“If you don’t address these dispensing regulations, or regulate buprenorphine from the aspect of pharmacy regulations, people are still going to encounter barriers accessing it,” she said.

In neighborhoods where at least a fifth of the population is on Medicaid, just 35% of pharmacies dispensed buprenorphine, Qato and her team found. But in neighborhoods with fewer residents on Medicaid, about 42% of pharmacies carried the drug.

Medicaid covers nearly half— 47% — of nonelderly adults who suffer from opioid use disorder. In states that expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act, another recent study found an increase in people getting prescriptions for buprenorphine.

“Medicaid is the backbone of care for people struggling with opioid use disorder,” said Cherlette McCullough, a Florida-based mental health therapist. “We’re going to see people in relapse. We’re going to see more overdoses. We’re going to see more people in the ER.”

Qato said the shortage of pharmacies in minority communities is likely to get worse, as many independent pharmacists are already struggling to stay open.

“We know they’re more likely to close in neighborhoods of color, so there’s going to be even fewer pharmacies that carry it in the neighborhoods that really need it,” she said.

‘There needs to be urgency’

Qato and her colleagues say states and local governments should mandate that pharmacies carry a minimum stock of buprenorphine and dispense it to anyone coming in with a legitimate prescription. As examples, they point to a Philadelphia ordinance mandating that pharmacies carry the opioid overdose-reversal drug naloxone and similar emergency contraception requirements in Massachusetts.

“We need to create expectations. We need to encourage our pharmacies to carry this to make it accessible, same day, and there needs to be urgency,” said Arianna Campbell, a physician assistant and co-founder of the Bridge Center, a California-based organization that aims to help increase addiction treatment in emergency rooms.

“In many of the conversations I have with pharmacies, when I’m getting some pushback, I have to say: ‘Hey, this person’s at the highest risk of dying right now. They need this medication right now.’”

She said patients frequently become discouraged due to barriers they face in getting prescriptions filled. The Bridge Center has been expanding its patient navigator program across the state, and helping other states start their own. The program helps patients identify pharmacies where they can fill their prescription fastest.

“There’s a medication that can help you, but at every turn it’s really hard to get it,” she said, calling the disparities in access to medication treatment “unacceptable.”

Trotzky-Sirr, the California doctor, fears the looming Medicaid cuts will cause many of her patients to discontinue treatment and relapse. Many of her patients are covered by Medi-Cal, the state’s Medicaid program.

“A lot of our patients are able to obtain medications for treatment of addiction like buprenorphine, because of the state covering the cost of the medication,” said Trotzky-Sirr, who also is a regional coordinator at the Bridge Center.

“They don’t have the resources to pay for it, cash, out of pocket.”

Some low-income patients switch between multiple providers or clinics as they try to find care and coverage, she added. These could be interpreted as red flags to a pharmacy.

Trotzky-Sirr argued buprenorphine does not need to be monitored as carefully as opioids and other drugs that are easier to misuse or overuse.

“Buprenorphine does not have those features and really needs to be in a class by itself,” she said. “Unfortunately, it’s hard to explain that to a pharmacist in 30 seconds over the phone.”

More is known about the medication now than when it was placed on the controlled substances list about two decades ago, said Brendan Saloner, a Bloomberg Professor of American Health in Addiction and Overdose at Johns Hopkins University.

Pharmacies are fearful of regulatory scrutiny and don’t have “countervailing pressure” to ensure patients get the treatments, he said.

On top of that fear, Medicaid managed care plans’ prior authorization processes may also be adding to the pharmacy bottleneck, he said.

“Black and Latino communities have higher rates of Medicaid enrollment, so to the extent that Medicaid prior authorization techniques are a hassle to pharmacies, that may also kind of discourage them [pharmacies] from stocking buprenorphine,” he said.

In some states, buprenorphine is much more readily available. In Maine, New Hampshire, Oregon, Rhode Island, Utah and Vermont, more than 70% of pharmacies carried the drug, according to the study. Buprenorphine availability was highest in states such as Oregon that have the least restrictive regulations for dispensing it.

In contrast, less than a quarter of pharmacies in Iowa, North Dakota, Texas, Virginia and Washington, D.C., carried the medication.

“We’re going to see more people becoming unhoused, because without treatment, they’re going to go back to those old habits,” McCullough, the Florida therapist, said. “When we talk about marginalized communities, these are the populations that are going to suffer the most because they already have challenges with access to care.”

Stateline reporter Nada Hassanein can be reached at nhassanein@stateline.org.

©2025 States Newsroom. Visit at stateline.org. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

By MICHELLE L. PRICE, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — Utah Gov. Spencer Cox, long an advocate for civility, made an impassioned plea on Friday for Americans and young people in particular to use the horror of conservative activist Charlie Kirk’s public assassination as an inflection point to turn the country away from political violence and division.

“This is our moment: Do we escalate or do we find an off-ramp?” Cox told a news conference in Utah as he announced authorities had a suspect in Kirk’s killing in custody. “It’s a choice.”

Throughout his political career, Cox, a two-term Republican governor, has issued pleas for bipartisan cooperation and at times drawn national attention for his empathetic remarks.

His speech on Friday was his most emotional and prominent example yet, as he urged an appeal to common ground and humanity to forge a better society. It was a marked departure from the bellicose rhetoric often employed in recent years by U.S. politicians, especially President Donald Trump, who is known for provocative language and has blamed Kirk’s killing on “radical left” rhetoric.

‘Politics feels like rage’

On Wednesday, after Kirk’s killing, Cox made an initial plea. On Friday, acknowledging he was running on only 90 minutes of sleep after days of the manhunt for Kirk’s killer and heated rhetoric unfurling online, he went further.

His voice appearing to break at times, Cox said that the response to violence and hate can be more violence and hate. “And that’s the problem with political violence,” he said. “It metastasizes because we can always point the finger at the other side. And at some point we have to find an off-ramp or it’s going to get much much worse.”

“History will dictate if this is a turning point for our country,” he said. “But every single one of us gets to choose right now if this is a turning point for us.”

The 50-year-old governor, who has four children who are teenagers and young adults, directed some of his remarks to young people: “You are inheriting a country where politics feels like rage. It feels like rage is the only option.”

But, Cox said, a different path is possible: “Your generation has an opportunity to build a culture that is very different than what we are suffering through right now.”

He said the 22-year-old suspect in Kirk’s killing had become “more political” in the run-up to Wednesday’s shooting on a university campus.

Cox also spoke of the harms of social media and said it was terrible that Kirk’s slaying was “so gruesomely displayed” for everyone to watch online.

“We are not wired as human beings biologically, historically we have not evolved in a way that we are capable of processing those types of violent imagery,” Cox said. “This is not good for us. It is not good to consume. Social media is a cancer on our society right now.”

These approaches are not new for Cox

As governor, Cox has sought to curb the harms of social media on young people, signing laws that require social media companies to verify the ages of their users and disable certain features on accounts of minors.

Though he lives in heavily Republican Utah, where little bipartisan action is needed for his party to enact its agenda, Cox has for years emphasized respect and unity. As governor, he has consistently invoked a need for civility — a trait that’s at home in the culture of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, a faith to which Cox and many in the state belong.

His more moderate tone became rarer as Utah’s politics drifted rightward in the Trump era. At a statewide convention of Utah Republicans in April 2024, Cox was booed. “Maybe you hate that I don’t hate enough,” Cox told the crowd. He still won his state’s GOP primary and reelection in November.

In 2016, Cox drew national attention for his remarks after a mass shooting at a gay nightclub in Orlando, Florida. Then, he called for people to come together and appealed to their “better angels.” He also apologized for having been unkind while in high school to students he later learned were gay.

He also drew attention during his 2020 campaign for governor in which he appeared in television ads with his Democratic opponent as they pledged to “disagree without hating each other.”

Cox was openly critical of Trump and did not support him until after the president survived an assassination attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania, last year. The governor wrote then-candidate Trump a letter expressing admiration for his defiant response to being struck by a bullet.

In that letter, Cox told Trump he believed “God had a hand in saving you” and that “miracle” gave him the opportunity to unify the country.

“We need to turn down the temperature and find ways to come together again before it’s too late,” Cox wrote.

Minutes before Cox took the stage Friday, Trump had that opportunity as he sat for a live interview on Fox News Channel. He was asked how the country can be brought back together. Trump said his response would “get me in trouble, but I couldn’t care less.”

Before he launched into a list of grievances with his Democratic opponents, the president said: “The radicals on the left are the problem.”

Associated Press writer Chris Megerian contributed to this report.

By DIDI TANG and PAUL WISEMAN, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump’s push to revitalize American manufacturing by luring foreign investment into the U.S. has run smack into one of his other priorities: cracking down on illegal immigration.

Hardly a week after immigration authorities raided a sprawling Hyundai battery plant in Georgia, detained more than 300 South Korean workers and showed video of some of them shackled in chains, South Korean President Lee Jae Myung warned that the country’s other companies may be reluctant to take up Trump’s invitation to pour money into the United States.

The detained South Koreans were released Thursday and most were flown home.

If the U.S. can’t promptly issue visas to the technicians and other skilled workers needed to launch plants, then “establishing a local factory in the United States will either come with severe disadvantages or become very difficult for our companies,” Lee said Thursday. “They will wonder whether they should even do it.”

The raid and subsequent diplomatic crisis show how the Trump administration’s mass deportation goals are running up against its efforts to bring in money from abroad to drive the U.S. economy and create more jobs. Moves like workplace immigration enforcement and visa restrictions could risk alienating allies that are pledging to invest hundreds of billions of dollars in the U.S. to avoid high tariffs.

South Korea is already a big investor in the US

Trump’s economic agenda is built around using hefty tariffs on imports, including a 15% levy on South Korean products, as a cudgel to force manufacturing to return to the U.S. He’s repeatedly said foreign companies can escape his tariffs if they produce in America. South Korea, already a top investor, pledged to invest $350 billion in the U.S. when the two sides announced a trade deal in July.

It made more investments in new construction, such as factories, on previously undeveloped land than any other country in 2022. Last year, it ranked 12th in the world with $93 billion in total American investment — including acquisitions of existing companies, according to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis.

But the dramatic roundup of South Koreans and others working to set up the battery plant threatens to put a chill on the investment push. Indeed, Trump seems to be trying to undo the damage.

While demanding that foreign investors “LEGALLY bring your very smart people,” Trump also promised to “make it quickly and legally possible for you to do so.”

“President Trump will continue delivering on his promise to make the United States the best place in the world to do business, while also enforcing federal immigration laws,” White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said in a statement Thursday.

For now, the South Koreans are furious and immigration experts are puzzled. It’s been common practice for decades for foreign companies — such as the Japanese and German carmakers that have built factories in the American Midwest and South — to send technical specialists from their home countries to help open plants in the United States. Most of them train U.S. workers, then go home.

“Japanese managers, senior engineers, other technical experts had to come to the United States to set this stuff up,” said Lee Branstetter, a professor of economics and public policy at Carnegie Mellon University who’s studied Japanese auto plants in the U.S.

American companies do the same thing, sending U.S. workers overseas temporarily to get operations started.

Some experts call it a baffling, ‘performative’ raid

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement launched the roundup last week at a manufacturing site that state officials have touted as Georgia’s largest economic development project.

“It’s really baffling to me why this raid would have occurred,” said Ben Armstrong, executive director of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Industrial Performance Center. “The existence of these workers shouldn’t have been a surprise.”

U.S. immigration officials could have audited the workers’ documents without the drama, retired immigration lawyer Dan Kowalski said, adding that “raiding and arresting and putting them in chains and shackles is 100% performative.”

It had to do with “wanting to look tough — arresting as many foreigners as possible for the photo-op,” said Kowalski, who is now a writer and editor.

U.S. work visa categories make it a challenge to bring in foreign workers quickly and easily, said Kevin Miner, an immigration lawyer in Atlanta.

Some run on a highly competitive lottery system, are for seasonal workers and have a cap, or are restricted to managers and executives. Other short-term visas have strict limits on employment.

After meeting with Secretary of State Marco Rubio this week in Washington, South Korean Foreign Minister Cho Hyun said they agreed to set up a joint working group for discussions on creating a new visa category to make it easier for South Korean companies to send their staff to work in the United States.

Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau also plans to visit Seoul this weekend.

Calls for fixes to the US visa system

Hyundai’s “desire to get this thing up and running as quickly as possible ran head-on into the often time-consuming processes that the U.S. government requires in order to issue business visas,” said Branstetter of Carnegie Mellon.

U.S. authorities say those detained were “unlawfully working” at the plant. Charles Kuck, a lawyer representing several of the South Koreans who were detained, said the “vast majority” of the workers from South Korea were doing work authorized under a visa program.

Julia Gelatt, associate director of the U.S. immigration policy program at the Migration Policy Institute, said work visas — like nearly all other aspects of the U.S. immigration system — need reform.

“Our visa system does not envision this kind of scenario,” Gelatt said, of bringing in skilled foreign workers needed for the initial setup of factories. The U.S. has a few country-specific visa categories that make it easier to bring in certain foreign workers, like those from Mexico, Australia or Singapore.

“The goal,” said MIT’s Armstrong, “should be to make foreign direct investment as streamlined as possible.”

By MARY CLARE JALONICK, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer weathered backlash from Democrats earlier this year when he voted with Republicans to keep the government open. But he’s now willing to risk a shutdown at the end of the month if Republicans don’t accede to Democratic demands.

Schumer says he and House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries are united in opposing any legislation that doesn’t include key health care provisions and a commitment not to roll them back. He argues that the country is in a different place than it was in March, when he vigorously argued against a shutdown, and he says he believes Republicans and President Donald Trump will be held responsible if they don’t negotiate a bipartisan deal.

“Things have changed” since the March vote, Schumer said in an interview with The Associated Press on Thursday. He said Republicans have since passed Trump’s massive tax breaks and spending cuts legislation, which trimmed Medicaid and other government programs, and Democrats are now unified — unlike in March, when he voted with Republicans and Jeffries voted against the legislation to fund the government.

A shutdown, Schumer said, wouldn’t necessarily worsen an environment in which Trump is already challenging the authority of Congress. “It will get worse with or without it, because Trump is lawless,” Schumer said.

Democrats’ consequential decision

Schumer’s threat comes as Republicans are considering a short-term stopgap spending measure to avoid a Sept. 30 shutdown and as Democrats face what most see as two tough choices if the parties can’t negotiate a deal — vote with Republicans to keep the government open or let it close indefinitely with no clear exit plan.

It also comes amid worsening partisan tensions in the Senate, where negotiations between the two parties over the confirmation process broke down for a second time on Thursday and Republicans are changing Senate rules to get around Democratic objections to almost all of Trump’s nominees. Democrats are also fuming over the Trump administration’s decision to unilaterally claw back $4.9 billion in congressionally approved foreign aid just as negotiations over the spending deadline were getting underway in late August.

Republicans move ahead

Republicans say that Democrats clearly will be to blame if they don’t vote to keep the government open.

Trump said Friday to not “even bother” negotiating with Democrats. He said Republicans will likely put together a continuing resolution to keep funding the federal government.

“If you gave them every dream, they would not vote for it,” Trump said, adding “we will get it through because the Republicans are sticking together.”

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said in an interview with Punchbowl News on Thursday that he believes Democrats see it as “politically advantageous” to have a shutdown.

“But they don’t have a good reason to do it,” Thune said in the interview. “And I don’t intend to give them a good reason to do it.”

Thune has repeatedly said that Schumer needs to approach Republicans with a specific proposal on health care, including an extension of expanded government tax credits for many Americans who get their health insurance through the Affordable Care Act. Some Republicans are open to extending those credits before they expire at the end of the year, but Thune has indicated that he is unlikely to add an extension to a short-term spending bill, instead favoring a “clean” stopgap for several weeks without any divisive issues while Congress finishes its budget legislation.

Schumer said he believes his caucus is ready to oppose the stopgap measure if Republicans don’t negotiate it with Democrats. “I think the overwhelming majority of our caucus, with a few exceptions, and same with the House, would vote against that,” he said.

Less realistic is Democrats’ demand that Republicans roll back Medicaid cuts enacted in their tax breaks and spending cuts legislation this summer, what Trump called his “big, beautiful bill.”

Escalating partisan tensions over spending

Schumer said Democrats also want Republicans to commit that the White House won’t take back money they have negotiated and Congress has approved after Republicans pushed through a $9 billion cut requested by the White House in July and Trump blocked the additional foreign aid money in August. “How do you pass an appropriations bill and let them undo it down the road?” Schumer said.

Congress is facing the funding deadline Sept. 30 because Republicans and Democrats are still working out their differences on several annual budget bills. Intractable partisan differences on an increasing number of issues have stalled those individual bills in recent years, forcing lawmakers to pass one large omnibus package at the end of the year or simply vote to continue current spending.

A shutdown means federal agencies will stop all actions deemed non-essential, and millions of federal employees, including members of the military, won’t receive paychecks. The most recent shutdown — and the longest ever — was during Trump’s first term in 2018 and into 2019, when he demanded money for his U.S.-Mexico border wall. It lasted 35 days.

Schumer’s March vote

Schumer’s move to support the spending legislation in March put him in the rare position of bucking his party’s base. He said then that of two bad options, a partial government shutdown was worse because it would give Trump even more control to lay off workers and there would be “no off-ramp” to get out of it. “I think people realize it’s a tough choice,” he said.

He faced massive backlash from within the party after the vote, with some activists calling on him to resign. Jeffries temporarily distanced himself from his New York colleague, saying in a statement immediately after Schumer’s vote that House Democrats “will not be complicit.” The majority of Senate Democrats also voted against the GOP spending legislation.

This time, though, Schumer is in lockstep with Jeffries and in messaging within his caucus. In Democrats’ closed-door lunch Wednesday, he shared polling that he said suggested most Americans would blame Trump, not Democrats, for a shutdown.

“I did what I thought was right” in March, Schumer said. “It’s a different situation now than then.”

Associated Press writer Christopher Megerian contributed to this report.

BOSTON (AP) — A U.S. appeals court panel on Thursday allowed President Donald Trump’s administration to block Medicaid funds to Planned Parenthood while legal challenges continue.

A federal judge in July ruled Planned Parenthood clinics nationwide must continue to be reimbursed for Medicaid funding as the nation’s largest abortion provider fights Trump’s administration over efforts to defund the organization in his signature tax legislation.

Medicaid is a government health care program that serves millions of low-income and disabled Americans. Nearly half of Planned Parenthood’s patients rely on Medicaid.

A provision in Trump’s tax bill instructed the federal government to end Medicaid payments for one year to abortion providers that received more than $800,000 from Medicaid in 2023, even to those like Planned Parenthood that also offer medical services like contraception, pregnancy tests and STD testing.

Planned Parenthood Federation of America and its member organizations in Massachusetts and Utah filed a lawsuit in July against Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

“While the Trump administration wants to rip away reproductive freedom, we’re here to say loud and clear: we will not back down,” Dominique Lee, President and CEO of Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts said in a statement. “This is not over.”

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services didn’t immediately respond to an online request for comment.

Planned Parenthood said Thursday’s ruling means that more than 1.1 million patients can’t use their Medicaid insurance at its health centers. That also puts as many as 200 of those health centers at risk of closure, Planned Parenthood said in a statement.

Planned Parenthood says it is the nation’s leading provider and advocate of affordable sexual and reproductive health care, as well as the nation’s largest provider of sex education.

By MATTHEW PERRONE

WASHINGTON (AP) — Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and other administration officials are vowing a crackdown on deceptive drug ads, but the effort is likely to face multiple headwinds, including pushback from industry and layoffs among regulators tasked with leading the effort.

President Donald Trump signed a memo Tuesday that directs the Food and Drug Administration and other agencies to step up enforcement against ubiquitous prescription drug ads on TV, websites and social media.

The industry’s multibillion-dollar marketing efforts have long been a target for Kennedy, who previously suggested banning all pharmaceutical ads from TV. That step would have almost certainly been struck down by federal judges, who have long accepted advertising as a First Amendment-protected form of speech.

Instead, Trump’s directive tells the FDA to use current laws to ensure “transparency and accuracy” in all ads.

But the FDA has long struggled to defend its actions against drug promotions in court. And reworking some of its key regulations — including those governing TV advertising — could take years.

Here’s a look at the administration’s plans and some of the hurdles that may lie ahead.

A promise for more FDA warnings after years of legal setbacks

The FDA kicked off its effort Tuesday evening saying it was issuing “thousands” of warnings to drugmakers over inaccurate or misleading ads.

But rather than individual notices citing specific violations, the FDA shared a generic letter that it sent to drugmakers, instructing them to bring “all promotional communications into compliance.”

The form letter is different from typical FDA warning letters, which usually cite specific issues with company advertisements that run afoul of FDA rules and lay the groundwork for future legal action.

The FDA’s press release noted that such warnings have fallen dramatically in recent years, with only one issued in 2023 and none in 2024.

Former FDA officials say that reflects two trends. First, the drug industry has abandoned many of the most egregious tactics deployed in the early 2000s, including the use of distracting sounds and visuals that often drew attention away from drug warnings and side effect information.

Additionally, the FDA has repeatedly settled legal cases challenging its authority to police drug promotions. The agency often declines to pursue such cases due to the risks of losing in court, which could create legal precedent eroding its power.

Looking ahead, recent Trump administration job cuts have slashed staffing in the FDA’s drug advertising division, which handles warning letters.

A plan to curb TV ads could take a very long time

One major proposal by the administration involves reversing a nearly 30-year-old FDA rule.

Until the late 1990s, TV drug advertisements were impractical and prohibitively expensive because FDA regulations required drugmakers to list each medication’s risks and side effects. A 1997 shift allowed companies to briefly summarize that information and point viewers to more complete information on websites, in print ads or elsewhere.

The FDA said this week it will begin the process to eliminate that practice, calling it a “loophole” used to “conceal critical safety risks.”

But the FDA rulemaking process usually takes years — sometimes more than a decade — with multiple opportunities for public comment and revision.

For example, new guidelines finalized last year that require clearer and simpler language in drug ads took more than 15 years to develop and implement.

If the FDA tried to skip steps or rush, drugmakers could challenge the process in court.

For its part, the industry maintains that TV ads are a way to educate and empower consumers.

“Truthful and nonmisleading DTC advertising is protected under the First Amendment and has documented evidence of advancing patient awareness and engagement,” PhRMA, the industry’s leading trade group, said in a statement Wednesday.

Influencers and other newer promoters may be beyond FDA’s reach

FDA Commissioner Marty Makary also suggested his agency will be more aggressive about policing ads on social media platforms like Instagram, where drugmakers often partner with patient influencers or doctors.

The agency has long struggled to oversee those promotions, because FDA advertising rules only apply to drug companies.

Social media influencers who are paid to endorse or promote products are supposed to clearly disclose that relationship. But that requirement is overseen by the Federal Trade Commission.

And in some cases, influencers aren’t being paid by anyone: They promote products in hopes of landing future endorsement deals.

The FDA has also been under pressure to crack down on advertisements from newer specialty pharmacies and telehealth companies. A Super Bowl ad from one company drew scrutiny earlier this year for promoting unofficial versions of weight loss drugs, touting their benefits without listing any of the risks or side effects. Disclosing that information is an FDA requirement.

Companies that connect patients to so-called compounded drugs say they are not subject to FDA rules because they are not traditional drug manufacturers.

A Senate bill introduced last year would bring influencers and telehealth companies clearly under FDA’s jurisdiction, requiring them to disclose risk and side effect information. But the legislation has not advanced or received a hearing.

The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

By COLLIN BINKLEY, AP Education Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration is ending several grant programs reserved for colleges that have large numbers of minority students, saying they amount to illegal discrimination by tying federal money to racial quotas.

In a shift upending decades of precedent, the Education Department said Wednesday it now believes it’s unconstitutional to award federal grants using eligibility requirements based on racial or ethnic enrollment levels. The agency said it’s holding back a total of $350 million in grants budgeted for this year and called on Congress to “reenvision” the programs for future years.

More than $250 million of that figure was budgeted for the government’s Hispanic-Serving Institution program, which offers grants to colleges and universities where at least a quarter of undergraduates are Hispanic. Congress created the program in 1998 after finding that Latino students were going to college and graduating at far lower rates than white students.

Several smaller programs are also being cut, including $22 million for schools where at least 40% of students are Black, along with programs reserved for schools with certain enrollment levels of Asian American, Pacific Islander or Native American students. The programs have traditionally received bipartisan support in Congress and were created to address longstanding racial disparities in education.

Not included in the cuts is federal funding for Historically Black Colleges and Universities, which are open to all students regardless of race.

“Diversity is not merely the presence of a skin color,” Education Secretary Linda McMahon said in a statement Wednesday. “Stereotyping an individual based on immutable characteristics diminishes the full picture of that person’s life and contributions, including their character, resiliency, and merit.”

McMahon added that she aims to work with Congress to repurpose the funding for institutions that serve “underprepared or under-resourced” students without using quotas. She did not elaborate on plans to repurpose the $350 million.

The government’s grants for Hispanic-Serving Institutions are being challenged in a federal lawsuit brought by the state of Tennessee and the anti-affirmative action group Students for Fair Admissions. Tennessee argues that all of its public universities serve Hispanic students, but none meet the “arbitrary ethnic threshold” to be eligible for the grants.

The Justice Department declined to defend the grants in the lawsuit, saying in a July memo that the 25% enrollment requirement violates the Constitution.

In court filings, a national association of Hispanic-Serving Institutions said the grants are legal and help put its members on an even playing field.

More than 500 colleges and universities are designated as Hispanic-Serving Institutions, making them eligible for the grants. It includes flagship campuses like the University of Texas at Austin and the University of Arizona, along with many community colleges and smaller institutions.

The new cuts drew backlash from Democrats in Congress.

Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., said Trump is “putting politics ahead of students simply looking to get ahead.” She drew attention to the government’s current funding bill, a stopgap measure passed in March that gives the administration more flexibility to redirect federal funding.

“This is another important reminder of why Congress needs to pass funding bills, like the one the Senate marked up this summer, that ensure Congress — not Donald Trump or Linda McMahon — decides how limited taxpayer dollars are spent,” Murray said in a statement.

The Education Department said it will still release about $132 million for similar grant programs that are considered mandatory, meaning their levels are dictated by existing laws. Even so, the department said it “continues to consider the underlying legal issues associated with the mandatory funding mechanism in these programs.”

Former President Joe Biden made Hispanic universities a priority, signing an executive action last year that promised a new presidential advisory board and increased funding. President Donald Trump revoked the order on his first day back in office earlier this year.

The Associated Press’ education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.

Current and former elected officials who have experienced political violence directly in the United States reacted with sympathy and horror Wednesday to the fatal shooting of conservative activist Charlie Kirk at an event in Utah. Kirk served as chief executive and cofounder of the youth organization Turning Point USA.

Nancy Pelosi

Former U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat, posted that “the horrific shooting today at Utah Valley University is reprehensible. Political violence has absolutely no place in our nation.” Pelosi’s husband was seriously injured at their California home in 2022 by a man wielding a hammer, who authorities said was a believer in conspiracy theories.

Donald Trump

President Donald Trump, who suffered a minor ear injury when he was shot at a campaign event last year, posted on Truth Social describing Kirk as a “great guy from top to bottom. GOD BLESS HIM!” He also posted, “No one understood or had the Heart of the Youth in the United States of America better than Charlie.”

Gabrielle Giffords

Former U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, a Democrat who suffered a serious brain injury from a 2011 shooting in Arizona, said she was “horrified” to hear of Kirk’s shooting. “Democratic societies will always have political disagreements, but we must never allow America to become a country that confronts those disagreements with violence,” she said on social media.

Steve Scalise

House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, a Louisiana Republican who was shot at practice for a charity baseball game in the Virginia suburbs in 2017, asked people on the social media platform X to “please join me in praying for Charlie Kirk after this senseless act.” The man who attacked Scalise had grievances against Trump and Republicans and was later fatally shot by police.

Josh Shapiro

Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, a Democrat and potential national candidate, said on X, “We must speak with moral clarity. The attack on Charlie Kirk is horrifying and this growing type of unconscionable violence cannot be allowed in our society.” A fire was set at his house earlier this year while Shapiro and family members were asleep.

Gretchen Whitmer

Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, a Democrat who was the subject of a kidnapping plot, said on social media that “we should all come together to stand up against any and all forms of political violence.” Two men were imprisoned for their 2020 plot to kidnap the governor during her first term.