Tools
Change country:

What Would Trump Really Do on Abortion?

Donald Trump has been talking differently about abortion lately. The former president, who once promised to sign a federal ban into law, now insists that, if reelected, he would let each state chart its own course on the issue. Some states might ban all abortions, try to restrict pregnant women’s out-of-state travel, or perhaps even monitor their pregnancies. Others would allow abortions for almost any reason up to viability. Trump says he would let it all happen. As he told Time magazine, “I’m leaving everything up to the states.”

The phrasing suggests that a second Trump presidency would take the federal government out of the abortion debate, an approach that evokes restraint and polls pretty well. But almost no one who works on either side of the issue believes that Trump will be so passive. If elected in November, Trump would reenter office with broad executive authority to restrict abortion access. Both his loyal anti-abortion supporters and his staunch pro-abortion-rights opponents agree that he would use at least some of those powers. The only real questions are which ones, and to what extent?

“Essentially, states’ rights is Trump’s way of saying, ‘If you don’t like the GOP’s position on abortion, you can ignore it when it comes to me, because my being in office is not going to make a difference,’” Mary Ziegler, a UC Davis law professor who supports abortion rights, told me. “He’s been pretty explicit at various points that that’s what he thinks Republicans should say to win, and that their primary goal right now, when it comes to abortion, should be winning.”

[From the January/February 2024 issue: A plan to outlaw abortion everywhere]

Trump’s position on abortion has long appeared to track his political instincts rather than any fixed personal conviction. In 1999, he described himself as “very pro-choice.” During the 2016 presidential campaign, courting evangelical support, he recast himself as strictly anti-abortion. He vowed to sign a 20-week abortion ban, defund Planned Parenthood, and nominate Supreme Court justices who would overturn Roe v. Wade. Since Roe fell, he has been eager to take credit—he declared last summer that he was “proud to be the most pro-life president in American history”—while distancing himself from actual anti-abortion policies, which are broadly unpopular. Earlier this year, after criticizing Governor Ron DeSantis for signing a six-week ban into law in Florida, he toyed with endorsing a 15- or 16-week national ban, but has backed away since clinching the Republican nomination. A federal ban, Trump told Time, would “never happen” anyway, because even a Republican-controlled Congress wouldn’t have the votes.

He’s right about that. A national 15-week ban would have almost no chance in Congress, and Trump therefore has no reason to alienate moderate voters by supporting one—especially given that he would have the tools to set even stricter policy without congressional buy-in.

At a minimum, a second Trump administration is likely to reverse the steps that the Biden administration has taken to shore up abortion access. These include instructing hospitals in abortion-ban states that they must perform abortions in cases of medical emergencies, making it harder for law enforcement to access the medical records of women who travel out of state to receive an abortion, and, most significant, allowing abortion pills to be prescribed without an in-person doctor visit. The change was a major factor in abortion numbers going up after the Dobbs decision, in large part because women in states that have banned the procedure can still obtain abortion drugs from out of state. From July to September last year, at least one of every six abortions nationwide, about 14,000 a month, was completed via telehealth, according to research by the Society of Family Planning.

Roger Severino, who served as a Health and Human Services official during Trump’s first term, told me that he expects a second Trump administration to immediately reverse these executive actions. Severino, who is not affiliated with the Trump campaign, said that the best evidence for what a second Trump term would look like is what Trump did during his first four years in office. “It was the most pro-life administration in history,” he said.

If Trump stopped at rolling back Biden’s abortion policies, that would arguably fit the definition of leaving the issue to the states. But it would also represent a radical change from the status quo because states that prohibit abortion would have far more power to make sure that women who live within their borders cannot access the procedure. The effect on abortion numbers would be “enormous,” Greer Donley, a law professor at the University of Pittsburgh, told me. “All of a sudden, you would be back in a world where people would have to use brick-and-mortar clinics to get abortion care.”

And Trump could go much further. He could appoint Food and Drug Administration officials who decide to revisit the approval of mifepristone, the first pill in a two-drug medication-abortion regimen. (The second drug is misoprostol.) Many members of the anti-abortion movement have argued that abortion pills are more dangerous than surgical abortions. (Some women have faced serious complications, though studies show the risks are far lower than those associated with most common drugs, or with giving birth.) In “Project 2025,” a blueprint for a second Trump term organized by the Heritage Foundation, Severino wrote that the FDA is “ethically and legally obliged to revisit and withdraw its initial approval of abortion pills.”

If the FDA reversed its approval of mifepristone, women could still get misoprostol-only abortions, which are broadly considered to be safe and effective but tend to involve worse side effects, such as vomiting and diarrhea. The Alliance Defending Freedom, an influential conservative Christian legal organization that has challenged mifepristone’s approval in court, wants to go even further. Ryan Bangert, a senior vice president at ADF, told me that the group intends to limit misoprostol access as well. A victory could effectively stop all medication abortion, which currently accounts for nearly two-thirds of the country’s abortions.

Trump could achieve similar results in other ways. The Comstock Act, a 19th-century statute, prohibits mailing “every article, instrument, substance, drug, medicine, or thing” intended to be used for abortion. It applies to the U.S. Postal Service and private carriers. The law sat mostly dormant for the past half-century, as Roe v. Wade rendered it a dead letter. Opinions differ as to the exact scope of its prohibitions. When the Dobbs decision came out, Biden’s Department of Justice announced that Comstock would apply only to illegal abortions. But Trump’s DOJ could interpret the law more expansively. “Project 2025,” which was written by a group that included some of Trump’s most loyal former officials, explicitly recommends enforcing the law against providers who send abortion pills through the mail. James Bopp Jr., the general counsel of the National Right to Life Committee, a prominent anti-abortion group, expects a Trump DOJ to use Comstock that way. And, he told me, the lobbyists he works with will be doing what they can to make sure that happens. Whether it does will likely come down to whom Trump appoints to key administration positions.

Some experts believe that the Comstock Act can be read to prohibit the delivery of any medical equipment used in surgical abortions. At the broadest level, that interpretation would shut down an implausibly huge swath of non-abortion-related health care. But the next administration could engage in selective enforcement with the aim of imposing a de facto nationwide abortion ban. “Everything you use to produce an abortion is somehow sent through the mail,” David S. Cohen, a Drexel University law professor and abortion-rights supporter, told me. Trump’s administration wouldn’t need congressional approval to enforce the Comstock Act this way. “Trump might even be able to say, ‘Oh, that’s not what I want, but the attorney general is doing it, and who am I to stop the attorney general?’”

Trump has so far refused to clarify his stance on the Comstock Act, telling Time that he would soon be “making a statement” on it. As my colleague Elaine Godfrey has written, many of Trump’s supporters in the anti-abortion movement hope he keeps quiet about the law until he’s safely in office—at which point, they seem confident, he’ll fulfill their hopes. “We don’t need a federal ban when we have Comstock on the books,” Jonathan Mitchell, a lawyer who has argued on Trump’s behalf before the Supreme Court, toldThe New York Times. But, he added, “I think the pro-life groups should keep their mouths shut as much as possible until the election.”

Some lawyers close to Trump aren’t keeping their mouths shut. Jay Sekulow, one of Trump’s lead attorneys in his first impeachment trial, wrote in a brief to the Supreme Court that mailing abortion drugs, devices, or equipment is a federal offense under the Comstock Act. “The prohibition is simple, complete, and categorical,” Sekulow wrote.

[Elaine Godfrey: The pro-life movement’s not-so-secret plan for Trump]

Where will Trump’s political instincts lead him? With no reelection to worry about, he will have less to fear from any backlash. But, by the same token, he will have little reason to pander to the religious right. Severino, the former Trump official, argued that it would be impractical for law enforcement to intercept misoprostol, which has uses besides abortion, and medical tools. “The reach of Comstock has been exaggerated by the left for political purposes,” he told me.

Abortion-rights advocates have heard this accusation before. They were told they were exaggerating the threat of a Trump presidency before the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, given that the justices publicly insisted it was settled law, Greer Donley told me. And the anti-abortion movement isn’t hiding its wish list for a second Trump term. “Every single thing that people who support abortion rights have been worried about has been coming to pass,” Donley said. “It’s hard to argue that there’s any sort of hyperbole anymore.”


Read full article on: theatlantic.com
Caitlin Clark marketing boom is celebrated but also draws questions of race and equity
Caitlin Clark has attracted a new wave of support for WNBA players, but some question why veteran Black WNBA stars didn't get the same boost.
8 m
latimes.com
Arizona man learns his fate 7 years after wife was buried alive
"Sandra was kidnapped from her home while her children slept nearby, bound in packing tape, driven to a remote location and buried alive," prosecutors said.
cbsnews.com
Why are whole-body deodorants suddenly everywhere?
Getty Images Maybe you actually smell fine. Whole-body deodorants are upon us. They’re not an entirely new concept: Axe Body Spray, Unilever’s fusion of fragrance and deodorant, has been singeing nostrils since 1983, and in 2018, Lumé, created by an OB/GYN, came on the scene for “pits, privates, and beyond.” This spring, legacy brands jumped on board en masse: Since the start of 2024 alone, Secret, Dove, Old Spice, and Native launched whole-body products consumers can apply as sticks, sprays, and creams. What the funk is going on? “It is either, at best, an absurd, comical money grab — and at worst, a concerning phenomenon for your health,” says Sarah Everts, author of The Joy of Sweat. Sweating is a human superpower, she says; few other species can use sweat to avoid overheating. To Everts and other critics, the existence of whole-body deodorants should raise our curiosity about why we feel the need to smell a certain way — or not. They should also make us wonder who stands to profit by changing social norms about sweat, hygiene, and odor. Sweat and the strategies for managing it might seem relatively simple, but they’re not. The market for deodorants, especially the kind intended for application everywhere, rests on a foundation of collective confusion about how these products and our bodies actually work. Different parts of the body make different kinds of sweat — and different kinds of smells Not all sweat is created equal: Human bodies have two kinds of sweat glands, and their products are not exactly the same. Apocrine sweat glands are typically concentrated in the places where hair grows during puberty — the armpits, the groin, and the butt. These glands make a waxy substance that certain bacteria love to eat, and it’s the byproducts of that microbial banquet that create the musky aromas most commonly associated with body odor. “The sweat in our armpits is different — quite different — from the sweat that covers your body,” says Andrew Best, a biological anthropologist who studies sweat at the Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts. That’s because the rest of your body is covered with eccrine sweat glands, whose product is a more watery, salty liquid that’s less appealing to bacteria but does a bang-up job of keeping us cool. Eccrine sweat is what covers most of our body during exercise. It might occasionally evoke recently ingested food and drink, with particularly piquant notes after a garlic bread binge or a very boozy night. Still, because it’s not well-suited for bacterial consumption, eccrine sweat just doesn’t usually generate the odors that apocrine sweat does. There is such a thing as dysfunctional sweating: About 10 million Americans produce way more sweat than their body’s temperature-regulating needs, either as a consequence of certain medical conditions or medications, or just because it’s the way they’re wired — a condition called hyperhidrosis. Other, less common medical conditions produce particularly pungent sweat. But most of the sweat most people produce serves a positive biological function: “Sweating is almost always good,” says Best. Deodorants and antiperspirants aren’t the same The over-the-counter products available to combat sweat typically do one of two things: They either prevent sweat glands from producing sweat to begin with (antiperspirants), or they change the smell of the sweat (deodorants). Antiperspirants block sweat pores using one of several aluminum-containing compounds. In the Food and Drug Administration’s book, the fact that antiperspirants change the way a body part functions — in this case, a sweat gland — makes them over-the-counter drugs. That classification means companies face more restrictions if they want to include these aluminum compounds in products. (A rumor literally spread by an email chain letter in the 1990s and a long-abandoned 1960s-era hypothesis have led many people to avoid using aluminum-based odor control products due to fears about breast cancer and Alzheimer’s disease, respectively; heaps of science have since shown these fears are unfounded.) Although many products intended for underarm application combine an antiperspirant with a deodorant in one, products labeled as deodorants alone aren’t supposed to contain these aluminum compounds. They’re not intended to block your sweat pores; rather, they aim to change the odors that result from the sweat once it’s already on your skin. Distinguishing between antiperspirants and deodorants is important because sweat actually plays a huge role in keeping us cool when we’re overheating, and blocking too much of it could threaten a person’s ability to regulate their temperature. In part for that reason, antiperspirants are typically labeled for use only under the arms (conveniently, the origins of most of the smells people using these products are trying to control). Deodorants, on the other hand, can use a range of approaches to reduce the smell of sweat all over the body without interfering with its cooling function, says Kelly Dobos, a cosmetic chemist in Cincinnati. (Dobos has never worked for any of the companies now marketing full-body deodorants, although she has in the past done non-deodorant-related work for the parent company of Ban, which now makes a deodorizing lotion for private parts.) Dobos reviewed the ingredient lists of a range of whole-body deodorants, including legacy brands and newer brands. The spray products typically contained little more than alcohol and fragrance — they’re basically perfumes, she says, and the alcohol concentration in these products probably isn’t high enough to kill the good bacteria living on your skin, which have a staggering range of protective functions. Meanwhile, several of the creams contained lactic or mandelic acids, whose low pH creates an environment that favors the growth of those good, non-stinky bacteria, crowding out odor-causing germs. A handful of sticks and creams contained starch, aimed at absorbing wetness. Some brands’ entire ranges contained zinc compounds known to neutralize stinky molecules; other active ingredients include compounds called cyclodextrins intended to absorb odor, and enzymes called microbial ferments that purportedly degrade odor-causing molecules. Many of these ingredients also turn up in standalone deodorants intended for underarm application. One product, a Lumé “sweat control” deodorant cream, contained an aluminum compound that’s actually an antiperspirant, which raises concerns about a problem with the product’s labeling, says Dobos. “​​I have a feeling the FDA will give them a call.” Do most people actually need full-body deodorant? With the exception of improperly labeled products, most whole-body deodorants can do …whatever it is they do without hijacking the body’s cooling system. Still, before people decide to fork over the money for yet another cosmetic product, it’s worth thinking about whether sweat from behind your knees, your skin folds, or even your nether regions is actually a problem in need of a solution. After all, these products are not meant to target odors from underarm sweat. Rather, they take aim at odors due to apocrine sweat in the groin — not something casual contacts typically perceive because groins are (usually) under a few layers of fabric and a few feet away from others’ noses — and eccrine sweat elsewhere on the body, which is largely inoffensive to most noses, even when there’s a lot of it. “Just bathing should take care of whatever quote-unquote ‘problem’ you think you have. And if you need to be throwing more at your microbiome than a simple daily shower,” Best says, “it’s probably your perceptions of your smell that are the problem, not actually the smell.” “Nobody’s being fooled into thinking that you’re a citrus fruit,” added Everts. Because deodorants qualify as cosmetics and not as drugs, the companies that produce them don’t have to do safety or effectiveness testing before selling them to the public. That means products that could cause skin irritation or allergic reactions — especially in the more sensitive skin of the groin — can still be freely marketed for whole-body use. “It is the Wild West,” says Adam Friedman, a dermatologist at George Washington University who is also a faculty member of the International Hyperhidrosis Society. Sweat itself can irritate the skin, and for people with pathologic sweating such as those with hyperhidrosis, whole-body deodorants are likely to disappoint because they don’t actually reduce sweat output. “[They’ll] have no effect on excessive sweating and may even cause harm,” says Friedman — but because people with these conditions are so desperate for help, it’s a marketing no-brainer to try to sell them solutions. When it comes to skin conditions, he says, it’s “very easy to take advantage of those suffering.” If you try a whole-body deodorant, avoid applying it to mucous membranes (the wet surfaces beyond labial folds and anuses) and use it only on select portions of intact, non-irritated skin to lower the chances the product causes more problems than it solves. Dobos noted the ingredients in most whole-body deodorants are largely benign and probably won’t disrupt your skin’s microbiome too much if used in moderation. In her view, these products are unlikely to be biologically problematic. “But they’re probably still culturally problematic [in that they set] the wrong expectations for young people regarding how their body should smell,” says Best. Hygiene norms can be manipulated to make money (off of you) Body odor exists on a spectrum, and one end of that spectrum includes smells that are globally recognized as gnarly, much as there’s broad human consensus that sewage and dead animals have offensive aromas. So yes, human sweat can smell quite bad. As early as the first century BCE, the Roman poet Catullus dissed a male contemporary for the “grim goat” housed in his armpits, saying (poetically) it was the reason he never got laid. But it’s also true that a lot of American norms around body odor originated with people who had a financial stake in creating them. The inventors of the first modern antiperspirant couldn’t get people to buy it for the first decade after they developed it; sales only took off after a 1919 ad in Ladies’ Home Journal hinted that women with insufficiently “dainty and sweet” underarms would never land a husband. Americans may be particularly easy marks for advertising campaigns that promise conspicuous hygiene. The nation’s peculiar association between cleanliness and godliness, imported by Puritans and Quakers centuries ago, helped personal odor become a particularly strong signifier of moral, physical, and racial purity in the US early in the nation’s history, writes anthropologist Marybeth MacPhee. These ideas led to olfactory discrimination against Black Americans, creating a particularly strong incentive to “smell clean” as a strategy for acceptance into (or protection from) white society; they have also been used to disparage immigrants with different diets and fragrance norms as diseased or low status over the years. Such concepts clearly have commercial utility, as well: They’ve helped create a lucrative market for dubiously necessary hygiene products in the US — especially among women and sometimes to their detriment, as in the cases of douching and talcum powder. If you have a problem with smells coming from your groin, “you need to be going to a doctor, not a store,” says Everts. But with whole-body deodorants, companies are urging consumers to sanitize all body aromas — not just the goat-y ones. Among the experts I spoke to, there was strong consensus that whole-body deodorants exist largely to make money for the companies that sell them. Deodorant and antiperspirant sales have been pretty steady for the past few years, says Dobos; adding a new product with new uses potentially increases the amount of money both manufacturers and retailers can make. “They’ve manufactured a problem so they can sell us a product to fix it,” says Best. Whether you’re buying or not, it’s worth thinking about what it means to reject all of your body’s natural smells, not just its most offensive ones. The fundamental odor unique to each of us — not the stuff coming out of our armpits, but the rest of the aromas our bodies make — is part of our identity, says Everts. “It’s a symphony of subtle smells that make you who you are and help the people who love you and spend time with you identify you,” she says. “Why would you mess with that?”
vox.com
Adele shares update on major life plans during Las Vegas residency show: ‘I want a girl’
The singer, 36, has been open about her desire to have more children -- and it seems as though she and boyfriend Rich Paul will be prioritizing that very soon.
nypost.com
SNAP June Payment Dates for Each State
Food stamps are paid for by the federal government, but each state has different payment dates.
newsweek.com
Meta, Google leading nearly $1M lobbying fight to kill NY online child safety bills
“This is an astonishing amount of money to be spent to kill two reasonable bills,” said one longtime Albany insider who requested anonymity to discuss the lobbying push.
nypost.com
Meeting between Trump ‘envoy’ and Arab American activists should worry Biden
At a meeting in Michigan, an “envoy” will pitch disaffected Arab American leaders on backing Trump outright.
washingtonpost.com
Georgia's parliament speaker vows to override presidential veto on divisive law
Georgia’s parliament speaker on Monday vowed to override a presidential veto on divisive legislation that sparked weeks of mass protests by critics who see it as a threat to democratic freedoms and the country’s aspirations to join the European Union
abcnews.go.com
Erin Foster welcomes first baby at home ‘like a beast’ with husband Simon Tikhman
Foster debuted her baby bump in November 2023, writing, "It feels like we need something positive right now, so I’d like to offer something."
nypost.com
9 more people killed in attacks on political candidates in Mexico
Photos shared by local media showed a red truck dotted by bullet holes, and bloodied bodies lying in the trunk and on the ground.
1 h
cbsnews.com
Iran’s President Dies in Crash, and Trump Trial Enters Final Days
Plus, Baltimore bridge ship to be moved.
1 h
nytimes.com
Marco Rubio spars with NBC host over 2024 election: Democrats have 'opposed every Republican victory'
Sen. Marco Rubio went toe to toe with NBC host Kristen Welker when she questioned him about conceding to the 2024 election results, ‘no matter who wins.'
1 h
foxnews.com
New 9/11 Evidence Points to Deep Saudi Complicity
Two decades of U.S. policy appear to be rooted in a mistaken understanding of what happened that day.
1 h
theatlantic.com
How to Live in a Digital City
What we can learn from real-life urbanization to improve online living
1 h
theatlantic.com
No, the Israeli-Palestinian divide is not unbridgeable. Here's how I know
The Hamas attack and the war in Gaza have heightened a sense of hopeless polarization and extremism. But the fates of both peoples depend on finding the center.
1 h
latimes.com
Letters to the Editor: Why the L.A. City Council's redistricting commission isn't true reform
A truly independent L.A. city redistricting commission would have a secure budget and its own legal counsel. The current proposal lacks those.
1 h
latimes.com
Was the 1964 Venice Biennale rigged? The documentary 'Taking Venice' looks at conspiratorial claims
When Robert Rauschenberg was named grand prize winner at the esteemed Venice Biennale, a furor erupted — and the conspiracy theories took flight.
1 h
latimes.com
Letters to the Editor: Why standardized testing for 4-year-old students makes no sense
Teachers say testing 4-year-olds is developmentally inappropriate for transitional kindergarteners and doesn't inform their instruction.
1 h
latimes.com
News business needs help in California. Is government the answer?
Newspapers are dying. That’s old news. What’s new is that in California, they may get some state government life support.
1 h
latimes.com
Is print dead? Not at this indie bookstore publishing L.A.'s untold stories
A local electrical engineer with a passion for literature is on a mission to share the stories of local authors who have struggled to break into the mainstream publishing industry.
1 h
latimes.com
Ricky Martin and 'Livin' La Vida Loca' ushered in pop's 'Latin explosion' in 1999. Too bad it wasn't real.
In summer 1999, Ricky Martin's 'Livin' La Vida Loca' took over Top 40 radio, ushering the so-called Latin explosion in pop music.
1 h
latimes.com
Daniel Stern almost lost role of Marv in 'Home Alone': 'One of the stupidest decisions in my showbusiness life'
Daniel Stern almost wasn't cast in the role of Marv in 'Home Alone' -- a recurring theme throughout his career and memoir, 'Home and Alone.'
1 h
latimes.com
What happened to Silicon Beach? Why L.A.'s tech sector hasn't lived up to the hype
Investment in tech startups in the Los Angeles region were down 63% last year from 2021, as the city has struggled to promote itself as an alternative to Silicon Valley and New York.
1 h
latimes.com
A felony conviction should not come with a life sentence on voting rights
Once you do your time for a criminal conviction, you deserve to have your voting rights restored. A bill by California Sen. Laphonza Butler is a small step in that direction.
1 h
latimes.com
UC Santa Cruz academic workers to strike over handling of pro-Palestinian protests
Academic workers walk out to support participants in pro-Palestinian protests. UC officials call strike illegal. It could spread to other campuses.
1 h
latimes.com
Letters to the Editor: Newsom's in no position to pontificate at the Vatican on climate change
Gov. Newsom's CPUC appointees have gutted rooftop solar. His forest policies are timber industry giveaways. This is not the work of a "climate governor."
1 h
latimes.com
The magical California state park that doesn't allow visitors
For the last two decades, the Sutter Buttes have been home to a California state park that almost no one is allowed to visit.
1 h
latimes.com
Michael Cohen set to wrap up Trump trial testimony as case shifts
Michael Cohen is returning to the stand for a fourth day of testimony on Monday, the last appearance he is expected to make.
1 h
cbsnews.com
I’m a photojournalist. ‘Civil War’ gets war photography dangerously wrong.
In Alex Garland’s film, war photographers are just there to compete for the bloodiest shot.
1 h
washingtonpost.com
AI and privacy rules meant for Big Tech could hurt small businesses most
Knee-jerk regulations of AI and privacy issues could end up serving the biggest companies and hurting consumers by stifling future competition.
1 h
latimes.com
How Kevin McCarthy is influencing this congressional race — without being on the ballot
Rep. Kevin McCarthy resigned from Congress last year after being voted out as House speaker. But McCarthy's political influence is still a major factor in this race.
1 h
latimes.com
County sheriffs wield lethal power, face little accountability
More people were killed by U.S. law enforcement in 2023 than any other year in the past decade — and it's increasingly happening in small towns and rural areas.
1 h
cbsnews.com
Jasmine Crockett Mocked Over Apparent Mistake on 'Clapback' Merchandise
The congresswoman wants to turn her implied insult of Marjorie Taylor Greene into a slogan T-shirt but seems to have misspelled her surname in the design.
1 h
newsweek.com
Trump's resilience gives California GOP dreams of payback in a state that has long been blue
Members of the California Republican and Democratic parties met this weekend to hone their stratgies for the 2024 election.
1 h
latimes.com
The scandal that brought down Donald Sterling finally gets the Hollywood treatment
The cast and crew of the series, premiering June 4 on Hulu, explain how their telling of the Clippers owner’s ban from the NBA took on 'Shakespearean' proportions.
1 h
latimes.com
Senate Inquiry Finds BMW Imported Cars Tied to Forced Labor in China
The report also found that Jaguar Land Rover and Volkswagen bought parts from a supplier the U.S. government had singled out for its practices in Xinjiang.
1 h
nytimes.com
L.A. is one of the best places on the planet to grow weed outdoors. Here's how
Southern California is one of the best places on the planet to grow cannabis. Here's what you need to know before planting it in your backyard.
1 h
latimes.com
Trump and Biden both think they can land a knockout in the debates. They can't both be right
President Biden and Donald Trump both think they can win debates, and the 2024 election, by spotlighting each other's flaws. They can't both be right.
1 h
latimes.com
Donald Trump Has No Plausible Response to Michael Cohen Evidence: Attorney
As Michael Cohen enters a third day of cross-examination, both he and Trump look sleazy, a law professor told Newsweek.
1 h
newsweek.com
Letters to the Editor: 'Making Metro safer isn't rocket science' -- a transit rider's 7-point safety plan
Elevators are down. Lighting is often poor. No one kicks unruly passengers off. Fix these to make Metro safer and more appealing.
1 h
latimes.com
A UCLA doctor is on a quest to free modern medicine from a Nazi-tainted anatomy book
Dr. Kalyanam Shivkumar wants to surpass the anatomical atlas created by a fervent supporter of the Nazi regime whose work was fueled by the dead bodies of its victims.
1 h
latimes.com
Ukraine Aid Packages Leave Many Unanswered Questions | Opinion
Leaders in Washington should have answered all these questions, and more, before sending billions to Ukraine. The truth is, though, few have even considered them.
1 h
newsweek.com
I’m a Paramedic. My Neighbor Is Endangering Her Kid in a Way That Haunts Me.
She told me it was none of my business.
1 h
slate.com
Should My Kid Stop Wandering Around Naked?
1 h
slate.com
Trump’s immigration plans could deal a major blow to the job market
Immigration is a major reason the job market rebounded so strongly from the pandemic. That could be in jeopardy, economists say.
1 h
washingtonpost.com
Boy Scouts love this scenic Va. river. Locals say they’re ruining it.
Three hours southwest of the District, the Maury River suffers as sediment flows from a dam at a reservation owned by a Scouting organization based in Bethesda.
1 h
washingtonpost.com
In D.C.’s Ward 8, election centers on experience versus new leadership
The three-way battle for the future of the ward has centered on many of its intractable issues, such as poverty and fears about gentrification.
1 h
washingtonpost.com
Fat Leonard bribery cases fall apart because of prosecution blunders
One Navy officer confessed to leaking military secrets for $105,000 in bribes and prostitutes. But instead of going to prison, he may get away with his crimes.
1 h
washingtonpost.com