Category: Health

(OHIO) — Republican lawmakers in Ohio are planning on introducing a bill on Wednesday that would ban almost all abortions and criminalize the procedure.

The “Ohio Prenatal Equal Protection Act” would overturn the amendment to the Ohio constitution, voted on in 2023, that establishes “an individual right to one’s own reproductive medical treatment, including but not limited to abortion” before viability.

Reproductive medical treatment includes contraception, fertility treatments and miscarriage care.

Abortions are currently allowed up to 20 weeks since fertilization, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a research group that studies sexual and reproductive rights.

“[It] is a very, very simple and beautiful piece of legislation in that all it does is identify all human beings as persons deserving equal protection of the law, both born humans and pre-born humans,” anti-abortion advocate Austin Beigel, with End Abortion Ohio, told ABC News. “So, it identifies those personhood rights starting at the moment of fertilization, when the new distinct organism is formed, the new human life that being that person now has equal protection under the law.”

Kellie Copeland, executive director of Abortion Forward, which helped pass the 2023 amendment in Ohio, said the bill goes against the will of voters.

“This is the most extreme and anti-life legislation that you can imagine,” she told ABC News. “It would strip Ohioans of their constitutionally guaranteed right to bodily autonomy, and that’s the goal of this legislation.”

When Beigel was asked if he was concerned that the bill may go against the will of the voters, he said he was not because “the will of the voters was evil.”

“In many times in our country’s history, the majority of people have desired evil things. We have discriminated horribly against the Black man and woman, and people wanted that,” he continued. “So, I have no qualms about saying I oppose the majority of the will of the people when the people desire something that is evil.”

Copeland replied that “subjecting people to the loss of bodily autonomy, taking basic human rights away from Ohioans is the real evil that we’re talking about here.”

Beigel said he has been working with Republican state Reps. Levi Dean and Jonathan Newman on the bill, which uses the U.S. Constitution’s equal protection clause — part of the Fourteenth Amendment — to override Ohio’s constitutional amendment. Beigel said the co-sponsors will be announced on Wednesday.

Dean’s and Newman’s offices did not immediately return ABC News’ request for comment.

The bill would ban abortion with no exceptions for rape or incest. The only exceptions would be for a spontaneous miscarriage or to save the life of the pregnant woman.

The bill would also criminalize those who have abortions, not just the providers who perform the procedure.

Copeland she is worried the bill could lead to attacks on people who support abortion rights or who underwent abortions.

“When people equate reproductive health care with murder, that kind of rhetoric invites violence,” Copeland said. “It invites violence that we have seen at abortion clinics that we have seen perpetrated against abortion providers.”

Beigel said the bill does not outlaw contraception and is not designed to outlaw in-vitro fertilization (IVF).

However, he did say that IVF may not be able to function the way that it does now if the bill is passed because it would apply equal protection to “pre-born humans.”

“The courts are going to have to debate the implications of this,” he said. “Is it actually moral to freeze a young human being in a cryochamber and preserve them at the age they are and not let them grow?”

Ohio’s history of abortion bills

In 2019, Ohio lawmakers passed a so-called heartbeat bill that bans abortions after cardiac activity can be detected, which occurs as early as six weeks of pregnancy, before many women know they’re pregnant. It was signed into law by Gov. Mike DeWine.

The ban had no exceptions for rape or incest. The only exceptions were cases of ectopic pregnancies and to prevent the mother’s death or impairment of a major bodily function.

A federal judge blocked the ban in 2019, but it was reinstated just hours after the Supreme Court decision to overrule Roe v. Wade.

In September 2022, an Ohio lower court granted a temporary restraining order before granting a preliminary injunction a few weeks later. In December 2023, the state’s Supreme Court dismissed the state’s appeal and sent the case back to the lower courts.

In November 2023, 57% of voters approved the passing of the amendment, adding abortion protections to the state constitution.

Much of the six-week ban was rendered unconstitutional after the amendment went into effect in December 2023, Ohio’s Attorney General Dave Yost said earlier this year.

However, some lawmakers have tried to maintain other parts of the ban, including reporting requirements and a 24-hour waiting period before an abortion can be administered. An Ohio judge temporarily blocked the 24-hour waiting period in August 2024.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — Kraft Heinz announced on Tuesday that it would be removing artificial food dyes from its products within the next two years.

The company said 10% of its products currently contain FD&C color additives, which are approved for use in food by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), including brands such as Crystal Light, Jell-O and Kool Aid.

Pedro Navio, North America president at Kraft Heinz, said in a statement that the company removed artificial colors, preservatives and flavors from its Kraft macaroni and cheese in 2016 and that its Heinz tomato ketchup has never had artificial dyes.

“As a food company with a 150+ year heritage, we are continuously evolving our recipes, products, and portfolio to deliver superiority to consumers and customers,” Navio’s statement read, in part. “The vast majority of our products use natural or no colors, and we’ve been on a journey to reduce our use of FD&C colors across the remainder of our portfolio. … Above all, we are focused on providing nutritious, affordable, and great-tasting food for Americans and this is a privilege we don’t take lightly.”

It comes after Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. unveiled a plan in April to start phasing out eight synthetic food dyes in the American food supply.

At a news conference announcing the plan, FDA Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary said health agencies were looking to revoke authorization for two synthetic food colorings and to work with the food industry to eliminate six remaining synthetic dyes used in a variety of food products.

Kennedy said the agencies had reached an “understanding” with major food companies to voluntarily remove artificial food dyes from their products. It’s unclear what action Kennedy could take if the companies don’t comply.

Shortly after Kennedy’s announcement, PepsiCo’s CEO said on an earnings call that the company had already begun phasing out artificial colors. In-N-Out also announced in May it was removing artificial food dyes from menu items.

Other companies, like Kellogg’s, have previously stated their products are safe for consumption, and they are following federal standards set by the FDA.

Last month, the FDA approved two dyes and expanded approval of a third, meaning it can now be used in a wider range of food products.

Some studies have linked dyes to behavioral changes in children as well as to cancer in animals, suggesting this could extend to humans.

Some nutritionists and dietitians say that it’s best to avoid artificial food dyes, while others say more research needs to be done and the potential negative effects are still unclear.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — A federal judge in Massachusetts ruled on Monday that directives from the Trump administration that led to the cancellations of several research grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) were “void” and “illegal.”

U.S. District Judge William Young said the cancellation of the grants — related to studies involving LGBTQ+ issues, gender identity and diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) — violated federal law, saying it was a case of racial discrimination and discrimination against the LGBTQ+ community, according to the plaintiffs in the case.

Two lawsuits had been filed against the administration: One led by the American Public Health Association and the other filed by a group of 16 states. Some estimates have suggested that up to $1.8 billion in research funding had been cut.
Young, an appointee of President Ronald Reagan, said he was ordering the NIH to restore the grants that were terminated.

In a statement, Andrew Nixon, the director of communications for the Department of Health and Human Services, said the agency stands by its decision to end funding for research “that prioritized ideological agendas over scientific rigor and meaningful outcomes for the American people. Under the leadership of Secretary Kennedy and the Trump administration, HHS is committed to ensuring that taxpayer dollars support programs rooted in evidence-based practices and gold standard science – not driven by divisive DEI mandates or gender ideology.”
Nixon said HHS is “exploring all legal options, including filing an appeal and moving to stay the order.”

Among the plaintiffs is Dr. Brittany Charlton, an associate professor at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, who had all her grants terminated by the NIH.

One of the terminated grants focused on documenting obstetrical outcomes for lesbian, gay and bisexual women and another focused on how discriminatory laws impact mental health among LGBTQ+ teens.

“As a plaintiff, I felt truly seen — it was a rare moment when the deep harm caused to researchers and the communities we serve was acknowledged out loud, in front of the world,” Charlton told ABC News in a statement.

“Sitting there, I felt a wave of relief and hope as the judge condemned the government’s actions and ordered the grants to be reinstated,” the statement continued. “After so much uncertainty and disruption, it finally felt like justice and the value of our research — and the communities at its heart — were being affirmed.”

The terminations came after President Donald Trump passed a flurry of executive orders including vowing to “defend women from gender ideology extremism” and aiming to dismantle DEI initiatives.

According to termination letters sent to researchers at various universities that were reviewed by ABC News, the administration said the canceled projects do not serve the “priorities” of the current administration.

“Research programs based on gender identity are often unscientific, have little identifiable return on investment, and do nothing to enhance the health of many Americans. Many such studies ignore, rather than seriously examine, biological realities. It is the policy of NIH not to prioritize these research programs,” some of the termination letters read.

“The premise…is incompatible with agency priorities, and no modification of the project could align the project with agency priorities,” the letters continued.

ABC News’ Sony Salzman contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — The U.S. Food and Drug Administration expanded its approval of Moderna’s respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccine on Thursday to include adults under the age of 60 at increased risk of the disease.

Previously, the vaccine, known as mRESVIA, had been licensed for use for those aged 60 and older.

Approval for mRESVIA came after Moderna conducted a late-stage clinical trial showing the vaccine helped boost immune responses in younger adults.

More than one-third of adults between ages 18 and 59 have at least one underlying condition that puts them at increased risk of RSV, according to Moderna.

“RSV poses a serious health risk to adults with certain chronic conditions, and today’s approval marks an important step forward in our ability to protect additional populations from severe illness from RSV,” Stéphane Bancel, CEO of Moderna, said in a press release. “We appreciate the FDA’s review and thank all the participants in our clinical trial as well as the Moderna team for their dedication to protecting people against RSV.”

Although the FDA approves vaccines and may expand approvals for certain age groups, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention sets recommendations regarding who should get vaccines and when.

Currently, the CDC recommends RSV vaccination only for those aged 75 and older and for those aged 60 and over at increased risk.

The CDC’s independent vaccine advisory committee will need to vote to recommend that the new age group be eligible for the shot, followed by a final recommendation from the director of the CDC.

Earlier this week, Kennedy removed all 17 sitting members of the committee and replaced them with eight new members. It remains unclear how the new members of the panel will decide to approach recommendations for the RSV vaccine.

As of Friday, the CDC director role remains vacant and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has been making final recommendations. In an April meeting, the prior advisory committee voted to recommend RSV vaccination for those aged 50 to 59 with increased risk of disease, but Kennedy did not adopt the recommendations.

Instead, it appears Kennedy plans to have the new committee re-discuss the recommendations for RSV vaccination as well as discuss HPV and COVID vaccinations in their meeting scheduled to be held between June 25 and June 27

Moderna’s RSV vaccine is based on mRNA technology, which some of the new members have expressed skepticism about, especially in relation to COVID-19 vaccines.

Despite availability, RSV vaccination has been lagging. As of April 26, the latest date for which CDC data is available, an estimated 47.5% of adults aged 75 and older and 38.1% of adults aged 60 to 74 with a high-risk condition reported ever having received an RSV vaccine.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — Prior to becoming Health and Human Services Secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. had espoused the idea of “medical freedom,” the ability of people to make personal health decisions for themselves and their families without corporate or government coercion.

It’s an idea supported under Kennedy’s Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement to reduce the prevalence of chronic disease in the U.S. by making healthier lifestyle choices.

On topics, such as vaccines, Kennedy has said he wouldn’t prevent children from being able to receive vaccines but would leave the choice up to parents.

“I’m a freedom-of-choice person,” Kennedy told Fox News host Sean Hannity during an interview in March. “We should have transparency. We should have informed choice, and if people don’t want it, the government shouldn’t force them to do it.”

Some public health experts told ABC News, however, that the HHS has been limiting choices on some products for many Americans despite Kennedy’s talk about “freedom of choice.”

Just last week, Kennedy announced the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention would no longer recommend the COVID-19 vaccine for certain groups.

Additionally, Kennedy has called on states to ban recipients of food stamps from being able to use them to purchase soda. He has also praised states for banning fluoride from public drinking water and indicated he will change federal guidance on recommending adding fluoride.

The public health experts said Kennedy’s actions are setting up a dichotomy on public health.

“I think that RFK Jr. has done a really good job of identifying some of the problems [in public health], but it’s the solutions that are problematic,” Dr. Craig Spencer, an associate professor of the practice of health services, policy and practice at Brown University School of Public Health, told ABC News. “What you’re seeing with RFK Jr. and his approach to health is an individualization of public health. It’s this idea that you can make decisions for your health, and that’s always been true.”

He went on, “We need to be able to follow their guidance, not just have them tell us, ‘Follow your own science.’ As the focus shifts from community to individuals, we’re losing a lot of that underpinning, which has led to a lot of the gains in public health.”

Limiting access to COVID-19 vaccines

Kennedy has repeatedly stated that he is not anti-vaccine and that he supports vaccination.

Shortly after Trump’s election, Kennedy said in an interview with NBC News that “if vaccines are working for somebody, I’m not going to take them away. People ought to have choice, and that choice ought to be informed by the best information.”

During his confirmation hearings, Kennedy said he supported the childhood vaccination schedule and that he would not do anything as head of HHS that “makes it difficult or discourages people from taking vaccines.”

Separately, in an opinion piece Kennedy wrote for Fox News in March on the nationwide measles outbreak, he said the measles vaccine helps protect individuals and provides “community immunity” but also called the decision to vaccinate a “personal one.”

However, last week, Kennedy announced the removal of the COVID-19 vaccine from the CDC’s immunization schedule for “healthy children and healthy pregnant women.”

The CDC’s immunization schedule is not just a guide for doctors but also determines insurance coverage for most major private plans and Medicaid expansion programs. Following Kennedy’s announcement, the schedule was updated noting all children would be eligible for COVID vaccines, but now under a shared-clinical decision-making model — allowing parents to choose whether their children are vaccinated alongside advice from a doctor.

“Regarding the vaccines, HHS is restoring the doctor-patient relationship,” HHS spokesperson Andrew Nixon told ABC News in a statement. “We are encouraging those groups to consult with their health care provider to help them make an informed decision. This is freedom of choice.”

“If you restrict access, you necessarily restrict choice,” Dr. Matthew Ferrari, a professor of biology and director of the Center for Infectious Disease Dynamics at Pennsylvania State University, told ABC News. “Those two things are antithetical. You can’t do both. You can’t say you’re allowing choice if you’re restricting access.”

Ferrari said the idea of “medical freedom” is catchy, but public health recommendations are made based on how to protect the most vulnerable individuals.

“If you look at the outcomes, if you look at the consequences of that movement, it has been to disproportionately restrict access to — and restrict support and infrastructure to allow people to access — preventive medicine,” he said. “It’s sort of easy to say, ‘Well, take the vaccine away. But [vaccines] prevent a future outcome of illness for yourself and for others in the community.”

Traditionally, the CDC’s Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices decides if there is a benefit to a yearly vaccine and who should get it. The independent advisory committee then makes recommendations to the CDC, which has the final say. The committee was set to meet in late June to vote on potential changes to COVID vaccine recommendations.

Spencer said Kennedy’s bypassing of traditional avenues when it comes to changing vaccine recommendations is also taking away choice from people.

“This did not go through the normal process that it should have, and he basically just made a decision for people while at the same time saying that he’s going to let people make a decision,” Spencer said.

Restricting foods under SNAP

Kennedy has also campaigned to prevent Americans from using food stamps — provided under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program — to buy candy and soda.

“It’s nonsensical for U.S. taxpayers to spend tens of billions of dollars subsidizing junk that harms the health of low-income Americans,” Kennedy wrote in an opinion piece for The Wall Street Journal last September.

At a MAHA event in late May, Kennedy said the governors of 10 states have submitted waivers to the United States Department of Agriculture requesting permission to ban SNAP recipients from using benefits to buy candy and soft drinks.

“The U.S. government spends over $4 trillion a year on health care,” Nixon said in a statement. “That’s not freedom — it’s failure. Secretary Kennedy is unapologetically taking action to reverse the chronic disease epidemic, not subsidize it with taxpayer dollars. Warning Americans about the dangers of ultra-processed food isn’t an attack on choice — it’s the first step in restoring it.”

Nutrition experts agree that sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) are unhealthy. Frequent consumption of SSBs is linked to health issues such as weight gain, obesity, type 2 diabetes, tooth decay, heart disease and kidney diseases, according to the CDC.

Kristina Petersen, an associate professor in the department of nutritional sciences at Pennsylvania State University, told ABC News there is a crisis of diet-related diseases in the U.S., which increase the risk of disability and reduces lifespan.

However, she said there needs to be strong evidence of the benefits of restrictive policies if they are to be put in place.

“In terms of limiting people’s choices, it is important to consider all the different roles that food plays in someone’s life, and so obviously we want people eating nutritious foods, but also we need to acknowledge that food is a source of enjoyment,” Petersen said. “A lot of social situations revolve around food. So, when we’re thinking about reducing people’s access to given foods, we need to think about the consequences of that.”

One unintended consequence could be an eligible family not signing up for SNAP benefits because of the restrictions, she said.

Even if a ban on buying candy and soda with SNAP benefits does occur, Petersen said she is not aware of any evidence that shows banning certain foods leads to healthier diets.

She added that the nation’s dietary guidelines are written to emphasize healthy foods like fruits and vegetable rather than telling people to avoid or restrict less healthy foods.

“All foods can be consumed as part of a healthy dietary pattern. It’s really just the amount and the frequency that determines whether that pattern is helpful overall or less helpful,” Petersen said. “People can have small indulgences, but really, we’re interested in what is their pattern over a period of time.”

Providing incentives for purchasing healthier foods may be more effective and still allow people to have choice, Petersen said.

A 2018 study used a model simulation to study the effects of food incentives, disincentives or restrictions in SNAP.

One of the simulations involving incentives for foods such as fruits, vegetables, nuts, whole grains, fish and plant-based oils found to have the most substantial health benefits and be the most cost-effective.

“Things like fruits and vegetables, they do tend to be more expensive, so if you incentivize them by providing more benefits … that’s making the dollar go further, and it’s kind of making the economic piece of this a bit stronger,” Petersen said. “A lot of this is framed around personal choice. Rather than restricting access to, how can we give people more access to healthy foods? I think that’s going to have the greatest benefit here.”

ABC News’ Youri Benadjaoud and Cheyenne Haslett contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(PHILADELPHIA) — KJ Muldoon, a 10-month-old baby who sparked nationwide headlines after receiving a first-of-its kind gene-editing treatment, was released from the hospital this week.

KJ has spent the majority of his life at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia after being diagnosed with a one-in-a-million, deadly genetic disease shortly after birth. Working quickly, his doctors were able to use new gene-editing technology called CRISPR, designing a bespoke treatment just for him.

The treatment, first infused into his body at seven months old, seems to have worked. KJ’s body, which was fighting a toxic buildup of ammonia, began to thrive and he quickly gained weight appropriate for a baby of his age.

Wearing a cap and gown to symbolize his “graduation” from the hospital, baby KJ was discharged home to his parents and siblings on Tuesday after spending 307 days at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. Doctors and nurses gathered for a “clap out” on his way out the hospital doors, and he was escorted home by local law enforcement.

KJ’s metabolic condition, called carbamoyl-phosphate synthetase 1 deficiency, affects about 1 in 1.3 million people. The disease kills 50% of babies by early infancy.

KJ “had the most severe variant,” Dr. Ahrens-Nicklas, one of KJ’s doctors at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, told ABC News.

“This meant that we had to expedite the pathway for personalized therapy we were already working on,” he said.

Gene therapy treatments have already been approved for more common genetic diseases, including the blood disorders sickle cell disease and beta thalassemia, which affect tens of thousands of patients in the U.S. Those treatments are sold by major pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies.

KJ’s disease is so rare that his doctors were on their own. But thanks to the technology available at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, his doctors believed they could use a streamlined approach to make their own bespoke therapy, in-house.

CRISPR gene-editing technology was the perfect tool for a rare genetic disease like KJ’s, and potentially future babies born with slightly different genetic errors.

“Think of it like a GPS signal,” Dr. Kiran Musunuru, director of the Penn Cardiovascular Institute’s Genetic and Epigenetic Origins of Disease Program, told ABC News. “You can change where the GPS is going depending on what specific sequence of genes you want to change.”

Musunuru says there is still a lot of work to be done on this bespoke treatment to make it feasible, but he is hopeful that more babies with ultra-rare conditions can be treated this way.

ABC’s Dr. Keerthana Pakanati contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(BAKERSFIELD, CA) — A 4-year-old girl receiving “lifesaving medical treatment” in the United States was granted humanitarian parole for one year, allowing her and her mother to remain in the country, the child’s attorneys announced on Tuesday.

The child and her mother, Deysi Vargas, have been living in the U.S. since 2023, but received three letters from the Department of Homeland Security in April saying their humanitarian parole was being terminated.

The young girl — who is identified by her lawyers under the pseudonym “Sofia” — suffers from “short bowel syndrome,” which prevents her from being able to properly absorb nutrients and fluid from food on her own.

Vargas received official notice from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) on Tuesday that she and her daughter were granted humanitarian parole. The parole period will last for exactly one year, expiring on June 1, 2026.

The legal victory came after Vargas brought Sofia for a biometrics appointment at a USCIS field office in Bakersfield, California, on May 30.

“We are profoundly grateful that USCIS acted swiftly to grant Sofia and her mother one year of humanitarian parole. By moving quickly, the agency has ensured that a four‑year‑old girl can continue receiving her life-saving medical treatment. We commend USCIS for its responsiveness and for recognizing the urgency of this situation,” her lawyers at Public Counsel said in a statement.

Sofia began receiving life-saving medical treatment for this condition at Children’s Hospital Los Angeles when she and her parents crossed the border from Mexico in 2023 on humanitarian parole, Sofia’s lawyers said during a press conference in May.

Sofia’s medical care, which consists of her receiving specialized IV treatments for up to 14 hours a day, can only be administered in the United States, per the equipment manufacturer, her lawyers said.

Vargas said the treatment in the U.S. has allowed Sofia to “live her life” with her family, but if she and her daughter were forced to return back to Mexico, Sofia “will be at the hospital day and night,” she said during the press conference.

In their statement on Tuesday, Sofia’s attorneys said, “While we celebrate this victory, we cannot ignore the systemic challenges that brought Sofia to the brink. Her parole was terminated without warning, and for weeks there was no functional avenue to alert USCIS that a child’s life was in danger. It took an international outcry and pressure from elected officials to get a response — something that used to take a single phone call.”

“Our immigration system must protect everyone facing life‑threatening harm. We cannot let this country turn its back on our immigrant neighbors seeking safety, justice, and a fair chance at life,” her attorneys said.

ABC News’ Matt Claiborne and Megan Forrester contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The Trump administration announced on Tuesday it is rescinding Biden-era guidance that uses a federal law to require hospitals to stabilize patients in need of emergency care — including by providing an abortion.

In July 2022, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued guidance that, under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), doctors must perform abortions in emergency departments — even in states where the procedure is illegal — particularly if it serves as a “stabilizing medical treatment” for an emergency medical condition.

Emergency medical conditions included, but were not limited to, “ectopic pregnancy, complications of pregnancy loss, or emergent hypertensive disorders, such as preeclampsia with severe features.”

EMTALA, which was passed in 1986, ensures that emergency patients receive services and treatment regardless of ability to pay. Hospitals that refuse to provide “necessary stabilizing care” or “an appropriate transfer” can face civil monetary penalties.

The HHS guidance was one of the attempts of the Biden administration to preserve abortion access after the U.S. Supreme Court overruled Roe v. Wade, ending federal protections for abortion rights.

However, HHS and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) rescinded the guidance, as well as an accompanying letter from former HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra, saying they “do not reflect the policy of this Administration.”

“CMS will continue to enforce EMTALA, which protects all individuals who present to a hospital emergency department seeking examination or treatment, including for identified emergency medical conditions that place the health of a pregnant woman or her unborn child in serious jeopardy,” a press release from the agency read.

“CMS will work to rectify any perceived legal confusion and instability created by the former administration’s actions,” the press release continued.

Abortion rights groups, such as the American Civil Liberties Union, criticized the administration and accused President Donald Trump of walking back on a campaign promise not to interfere with abortion access.

“By rescinding this guidance, the Trump administration has sent a clear signal that it is siding not with the majority, but with its anti-abortion allies — and that will come at the expense of women’s lives,” Alexa Kolbi-Molinas, deputy director of the ACLU’s Reproductive Freedom Project, said in a statement. “The ACLU will use every lever we have to keep President Trump and his administration from endangering our health and lives.”

The Biden administration’s guidance has faced legal challenges in the past. In January 2024, a federal appeals court ruled that Texas hospitals and doctors are not required to perform emergency abortions despite the guidance.

Meanwhile, earlier this year, the Department of Justice dismissed a lawsuit brought by the Biden administration against the state of Idaho, claiming its near-total abortion ban violated EMTALA.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(MEADE COUNTY, SD) — South Dakota has reported its first case of measles this year. The state is now the 33rd in the country to confirm a measles case, with at least 1,088 cases reported nationally so far this year.

An adult who recently traveled outside the country tested positive for measles in Meade County, South Dakota, according to the South Dakota Department of Health.

It comes as federal officials are urging all Americans to get vaccinated against measles before traveling abroad, according to guidance updated last week from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Previously, the guidance stated that those traveling to countries with an ongoing outbreak should be vaccinated before leaving.

The measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine is part of the routine immunization schedule and has been shown to be up to 97% effective after two doses, the CDC says. Adults without immunity through vaccination or infection should also get vaccinated, the agency notes.

At least 62 people in the U.S. were infected with measles while traveling on an airplane this year, a CDC spokesperson told ABC News in part of a statement. “There has been only one situation during this period in which measles appeared to have been transmitted during air travel, ” the spokesperson added.

In South Dakota, the person infected with measles visited two medical centers where others may have been exposed to the virus.

The Department of Health says anyone who was at the Rapid City Medical Center Urgent Care waiting room on May 28 between 7:15 a.m. and 10 a.m., or at Monument Health Sturgis Urgent Care waiting room on May 29 between 9:45 a.m. and 3 p.m., should watch for signs of illness.

Health officials explain that the early signs of measles appear in two stages. In the first stage, symptoms include a runny nose, cough and slight fever. The eyes may become red and sensitive to light while the fever rises each day. The second stage begins between three and seven days after symptoms start, with temperatures reaching 103 to 105 degrees Fahrenheit and a red blotchy rash that lasts between four to seven days. The rash typically starts on the face before spreading to the shoulders, arms and legs.

“Measles is a highly contagious viral disease and spreads through the air from an infected person,” Dr. Joshua Clayton, state epidemiologist, told ABC News. “Individuals who lack immunity from vaccination or past infection are at high risk of measles infection if they have contact with an infected person.”

According to state health officials, the measles vaccine offers the best protection against infection. People are considered immune to measles if they were born before 1957, received one dose of the measles vaccine (MMR) as an adult, received two doses of the measles vaccine (MMR) as a child or high-risk adult, have measles antibodies shown by a lab test, or had a previous measles infection confirmed by a lab test.

The Department of Health notes that the MMR vaccine is typically given at 12 to 15 months of age, with a second dose at four to six years. For international travel with children, MMR vaccines can be given starting at 6 months of age.

Learn more about measles on the Department of Health website, where information includes fact sheets, frequently asked questions, and a webinar for healthcare providers.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — Most counties in the United States have seen a decline in childhood measles, mumps and rubella vaccination rates over the last five years, according to a new report published Monday.

Researchers from Johns Hopkins University looked at data from 2,066 counties across 33 states between 2019 and 2024. They found that 78% of the counties, or 1,614, reported a decrease in vaccination rates over that period.

What’s more, the average vaccination rate fell from 93.92% pre-pandemic to 91.26% post-pandemic, according to the report. This represents a decline of about 3%.

Researchers also found that just four states — California, Connecticut, Maine and New York — had an increase in county-level vaccination rates.

“Measles outbreaks happen within a community, and so it’s really important to understand vaccination coverage at a higher resolution than the state level,” senior author Lauren Gardner, director of Johns Hopkins University’s Center for Systems Science and Engineering, told ABC News.

“You could have a state level average that is around 95%, which looks pretty good and makes it seem like that state is protected but, in reality, you may have a situation where you have a group of counties with coverage around 100% and another group of counties with coverage that’s 90% or below. So, you actually really have a lot at risk,” she continued.

Gardner said this report is the first to examine counties to identify trends in vaccination rates using such a comprehensive dataset, and it mirrors national trends, showing a lag in MMR vaccinations.

During the 2023 to 2024 school year, 92.7% of kindergartners received the MMR vaccine, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). This is lower than the 93.1% seen in the previous school year and the 95.2% seen in the 2019 to 2020 school year, prior to the COVID-19 pandemic.

It comes as the U.S. has been facing a rise in measles cases across the country amid outbreaks in states such as Texas and New Mexico.

As of Friday, a total of 1,088 cases have been confirmed in 32 states this year, according to the CDC. This marks the first time the U.S. has surpassed 1,000 cases in five years.

Among the nationally confirmed cases, CDC says about 96% are among people who are unvaccinated or whose vaccination status is unknown.

Three measles deaths have occurred so far this year, two among children and one in an adult, all of whom were unvaccinated.

Measles was declared eliminated from the U.S. in 2000, but declining vaccination rates have led to outbreaks over the last several years.

The Johns Hopkins researchers noted that if vaccination rates continue to decline, the U.S. could be at risk of measles becoming endemic.

“I hope that [the report] sheds light on the importance of vaccination and the fact that we have a problem in this country right now with vaccination rates dropping in a lot of locations, and that this poses a risk to a lot of communities, but that it’s a recoverable problem and something that we can fix,” Gardner said.

The CDC currently recommends that people receive two vaccine doses — the first at 12 to 15 months and the second between 4 and 6 years old. One dose is 93% effective, and two doses are 97% effective against measles, the CDC says.

Previous studies have shown that even a small uptick in vaccination could prevent millions of measles cases in the U.S.

“It’s a very preventable problem,” Gardner said. “We have a very safe and very effective vaccine that is available, and so I think I would like people to take away that this is a problem right now, but it’s a problem that we can overcome.”

The report did not look at why MMR vaccination rates are declining, but Dr. Whitney Harrington, an associate professor of pediatric infectious diseases at the University of Washington, who was not involved in the study, said there are likely a couple of reasons, including less exposure to the disease.

“In the case of MMR, historically, we’ve been very close to elimination within the United States, and that makes it hard to understand the rationale for being vaccinated or getting your children vaccinated,” she told ABC News. “And then I think, in combination, as we’ve seen less exposure to these diseases, at the same time, there’s been rising concern about safety of vaccines, and more vaccine hesitancy among parents and families.”

She said that any parents who are vaccine-hesitant should speak with their health care provider about the benefits of vaccination.

“I ask families, ‘What questions do you have?” rather than ‘Do you have questions?'” she said. “I think it’s much more effective to say, ‘Are there concerns that you have, or there are questions that I can answer for you about the safety of this vaccine, or about the disease that that were preventing’ and I think being able to share with family what its he disease that we’re trying to prevent can be really helpful.”

Dr. Keerthana Pakanati is a cardiovascular disease fellow at Virginia Mason Franciscan Health and a member of the ABC News Medical Unit.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.