Midwives sue to challenge Georgia laws restricting their ability to practice

Twice a month, Sarah Stokely travels 4½ hours from her home in Rome, Georgia, to work for a week at a birth center in Blountville, Tennessee.

NBC Universal Justine Goode / NBC News; Getty Images

Stokely is a certified nurse-midwife — the title for registered nurses who specialize in midwifery. But Georgia laws make it difficult for her to practice there.

The state requires all nurse-midwives to have formal, written agreements with physicians that describe when physicians must intervene in evaluating or treating patients. Stokely said the agreement, which often requires midwives to pay physicians for their time and liability insurance, was too expensive. She was quoted around $500 per month, she said.

Midwives who don't have nursing degrees, meanwhile, aren't allowed to practice in Georgia at all. The laws make Georgia one of the country's most restrictive states for midwives.

Stokely and two other midwives sued the state Thursday, alleging that Georgia's policies violate the state constitution and don't ensure patients' safety.

Sarah Stokely. (Starbuck Photography)

In the suit, a draft version of which was shared exclusively with NBC News, the plaintiffs argue that their midwifery services are essential in Georgia. More than one‑third of the state's counties are consideredmaternity care deserts, meaning there are no obstetric providers or birthing facilities, according to the nonprofit group March of Dimes. The plaintiffs also say making it easier for midwives to practice could lower Georgia's high maternal mortality rate. For every 100,000 births in the state,30 mothers die from complicationsduring pregnancy or within six weeks afterward, according to March of Dimes.

"There are some places in the state where there's nowhere to give birth or access pregnancy care nearby. We have midwives, including our clients, who are ready and willing to fill that gap to serve those families, and the state is treating them like criminals," said the lead attorney for the plaintiffs, Hillary Schneller, senior counsel at the Center for Reproductive Rights.

Representatives for the state didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.

The lawsuit is one of several filed in recent years to challenge state restrictions on the practice of midwifery. The cases argue that midwives play an important role in addressing provider shortages, which have become more acute ashospitals close obstetric units.

In January, the American College of Nurse-Midwives sued the medical licensure board of Mississippi, where midwives are also required to have collaborative agreements with physicians to practice. The lawsuit says the rule is "a major barrier to closing Mississippi's gaps in prenatal and postpartum care." In a court filing, the state disputed that assertion and said the regulations "speak for themselves."

In Alabama, meanwhile, a lawsuit that has been ongoing since 2023 challenges a regulation requiring birth centers — facilities where midwives oversee deliveries and administer pre- and postnatal care — to be licensed as hospitals. The lawsuit argues that the restriction (which isn't being enforced while the suit plays out) would make it difficult, if not impossible, for birth centers to operate. An Alabama court sided with the birth centers last year, but an appeals court reversed the decision in January. The American Civil Liberties Union, which is representing the birth centers, has asked the state Supreme Court to review the case.

"Georgia is not unique in the maternity care shortage it is facing and restrictions on midwives," Schneller said. "We've been in this broken system for a long time, and it's not like we don't know how to get out of it."

Midwives say physician agreements create barriers

Sixteen statesrequire some form of collaborative agreement with a physicianfor a nurse-midwife to practice.

Advertisement

Proponents of the agreements argue that they're necessary for patient safety. Because midwives are trained to oversee low-risk pregnancies and usuallysend patients to hospitals if complications arise, agreements with physicians in theory should give midwives someone to consult or transfer patients to in such scenarios. But in practice, it's not guaranteed that physicians will be on call when midwives need them, and many midwives say the agreement implies they're incapable of making sound decisions on their own.

"There is a bit of mistrust that we can do things independently," Stokely said.

The plaintiffs in the new lawsuit also allege that it can be difficult to find doctors in Georgia willing to enter into the agreement.

"I don't think I've met a midwife yet that is opposed to working collaboratively with obstetricians, but I have met many OBs that are opposed to working with midwives," said Jamarah Amani, another plaintiff.

Jamarah Amani caring for a newborn (Mint & Cocoa Photography)

A patchwork of state regulations for midwives

Georgia is one of 38 states that don't allow licenses for certified midwives, who have master's degrees in midwifery. It's also one of 13 states that don't offer paths to licensure for certified professional midwives, who complete training and exams but don't have degrees. All 50 states recognize nurse-midwives.

Tamara Taitt, the third plaintiff in the Georgia lawsuit, said the restriction has led to staffing issues at the birth center she runs in Atlanta.

Because she can't hire midwives who aren't nurses, Taitt said, her pool of applicants is limited. As a result, she said, the practice is sometimes unable to take new patients, and midwives are sometimes stretched too thin to accompany their patients to the hospital when they need transfers.

Tamara Taitt. (Jason Walker)

"If you are invested in solving the problem of maternal mortality and infant mortality, it doesn't really make any sense that you're not leveraging all of the providers that you can," Taitt said.

Some states have also imposed regulations on home births, which have become increasingly popular in the U.S. In Nebraska, for instance, it's a felony for nurse-midwives to attend home births. A pregnant mother sued the state in January to challenge the law; the case was settled last month, with the state carving out a religious exemption to the ban.

Taitt and her fellow plaintiffs argue in their suit that Georgia's regulations limit pregnant women's options for their deliveries.

"The state needs to listen to its own citizens that are saying: 'We demand access to midwife care. We want to have our home births. We want to birth in birth centers,'" said Amani, who previously owned a home in Georgia.

She moved to Florida more than a decade ago and had planned to move her family back to Georgia eventually. But she never did because of Georgia's restrictions on midwives.

Years ago, Amani said, she and her family temporarily evacuated Florida because of Hurricane Irma and stayed briefly in Georgia. One of her patients fled there, as well, then called Amani after she experienced contractions. Amani was forced to tell the woman that she couldn't oversee the birth if it happened in Georgia.

"I remember her being so shocked and appalled," Amani said. "Her trusted care provider is down the street but can't legally attend her."

Midwives sue to challenge Georgia laws restricting their ability to practice

Twice a month, Sarah Stokely travels 4½ hours from her home in Rome, Georgia, to work for a week at a birth center in Blo...
Leo, the first US pope, emerges as pointed Trump critic

By Joshua McElwee

Reuters

VATICAN CITY, April 2 (Reuters) - Pope Leo last May became the first U.S. leader of the global Catholic Church, but for the initial 10 months of his tenure he mostly avoided comment about his home country and never once mentioned President Donald Trump publicly.

That era has ‌come to an end.

In recent weeks the pope has emerged as a sharp critic of the Iran war. He named Trump, for the first time ‌publicly, on Tuesday in a direct appeal urging the president to end the expanding conflict.

It is a significant shift in tone and approach that experts said indicated that the pope wanted to serve as a ​counterweight on the world stage to Trump and his foreign policy aims.

"I don't think he wants the Vatican to be accused of being soft on Trumpism because he's an American," said Massimo Faggioli, an Italian academic who follows the Vatican closely.

Leo, known for choosing his words carefully, urged Trump to find an "off-ramp" to end the war, using an American colloquialism the president and administration officials would understand.

"When (Leo) speaks, he's always careful," said Faggioli, a professor at Trinity College Dublin. "I don't think that was an accident."

Chicago Cardinal Blase Cupich, a close ‌ally of Leo, told Reuters the pope was taking up ⁠the mantle of a long line of pontiffs who have urged world leaders to turn away from war.

"What is different ... is the voice of the messenger, for now Americans and the entire English-speaking world are hearing the message in an idiom familiar to them," said ⁠the cardinal.

POPE SAYS GOD REJECTS PRAYERS OF WAR LEADERS

Two days before appealing to Trump directly, Leo said God rejected the prayers of leaders who start wars and have "hands full of blood", in unusually forceful remarks for a Catholic pontiff.

Those comments were interpreted by conservative Catholic commentators as aimed at U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who has invoked Christian language to justify the joint ​U.S.-Israeli ​strikes on Iran that initiated the war.

Advertisement

They also led to one of the Trump administration's first ​direct responses to a comment by Leo.

"I don't think there is ‌anything wrong with our military leaders or with the president calling on the American people to pray for our service members," White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt said, when asked about the pope's remarks.

Marie Dennis, a former leader of the international Catholic peace movement Pax Christi, said Leo's most recent comments and his direct appeal to Trump "reflect a heart broken by unrelenting violence.

"He is reaching out to all who are exhausted by this unrelenting violence and are hungry for courageous leadership," she said.

POPE RAMPING UP CRITICISM FOR WEEKS

Leo had previously taken aim at Trump's hardline immigration policies, questioning whether they were in line with the Church's pro-life teachings. In those comments, which drew backlash from conservative Catholics, ‌he refrained from naming Trump or any administration official directly.

The pope also carried out a major ​shake-up of U.S. Catholic leadership in December, removing Cardinal Timothy Dolan as archbishop of New York. Dolan, ​seen as a leading conservative among the U.S. bishops, was replaced by ​a relatively unknown cleric from Illinois, Archbishop Ronald Hicks.

Leo has been ramping up his criticism of the Iran war for weeks.

He said on ‌March 13 that Christian political leaders who start wars should go ​to confession and assess whether they are ​following the teachings of Jesus. On March 23, Leo said military airstrikes were indiscriminate and should be banned.

Cardinal Michael Czerny, a senior Vatican official, said the pope's voice would carry weight globally because "everyone can perceive that he speaks ... for the common good, for all people and especially the vulnerable."

"Pope Leo's moral voice is ​credible, and the world wants desperately to believe that peace ‌is possible," said the cardinal.

Leo on Thursday began four days of Vatican events leading up to Easter Sunday when he will deliver a special ​blessing and message from the balcony of St. Peter's Basilica.

One of the most closely watched appointments on the Vatican's calendar, the Easter speech is ​usually a time when the pope makes a major international appeal.

(Editing by Janet Lawrence)

Leo, the first US pope, emerges as pointed Trump critic

By Joshua McElwee VATICAN CITY, April 2 (Reuters) - Pope Leo last May became the first U.S. leader of the glob...
Is Trump citizenship order doomed? 6 takeaways from birthright debate

WASHINGTON −President Donald Trump'seffort to redefine who is an American did not get the quick rejection from theSupreme Courtthat manyexpected going into the April 1 oral arguments, but key conservative justices seemed skeptical of the administration's arguments for its legality.

USA TODAY

Every other court that has reviewed Trump's executive order severely restricting birthright citizenship ruled against it.

But the conservative justices, who have a 6-3 majority, also had probing questions for the other side, particularly about how to understand the court'slandmark 1898 rulingupholding the citizenship of a San Francisco-born man whose Chinese parents were barred from becoming citizens under the laws of the time.

People demonstrate outside the Supreme Court ahead of President Donald Trump's expected arrival on April 1, 2026 in Washington, DC. The Supreme Court is hearing oral arguments in Trump v. Barbara to determine if President Trump's executive order ending birthright citizenship is constitutional. According to historians and the Court, this is the first time a sitting president has attended oral arguments at the nation's highest court. Protester Michael Martinez demonstrates outside the Supreme Court on April 1, 2026 in Washington, DC. The Supreme Court is hearing oral arguments in Trump v. Barbara to determine if President Trump's executive order ending birthright citizenship is constitutional. Demonstrators rally outside the Supreme Court as the court hears Trump v. Barbara in Washington, DC, on April 1, 2026. People demonstrate outside the Supreme Court on April 1, 2026 in Washington, DC. The Supreme Court is hearing oral arguments in Trump v. Barbara to determine if President Trump's executive order ending birthright citizenship is constitutional. People demonstrate outside the Supreme Court ahead of President Donald Trump's expected arrival on April 1, 2026 in Washington, DC. The Supreme Court is hearing oral arguments in Trump v. Barbara to determine if President Trump's executive order ending birthright citizenship is constitutional. According to historians and the Court, this is the first time a sitting president has attended oral arguments at the nation's highest court. President Donald Trump arrives in his motorcade at the Supreme Court building to attend oral arguments on the legality of his administration's effort to limit birthright citizenship for the children of immigrants, in Washington, D.C., April 1, 2026. People demonstrate outside the U.S. Supreme Court ahead of U.S. President Donald Trump's expected arrival on April 1, 2026 in Washington, DC. The Supreme Court is hearing oral arguments in Trump v. Barbara to determine if President Trump's executive order ending birthright citizenship is constitutional. According to historians and the Court, this is the first time a sitting president has attended oral arguments at the nation's highest court. Demonstrators gather outside the U.S. Supreme Court building on the day the court is expected to hear oral arguments on the legality of the Trump administration's effort to limit birthright citizenship for the children of immigrants, in Washington, D.C., U.S., April 1, 2026. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

Protests outside Supreme Court as birthright fight reaches justices

Still, the court can rule against Trump without agreeing what that ruling meant. That would be a major blow to the president, who attended part of the arguments in ahistoric first for a sitting president.

Here are six takeaways from the arguments:

Demonstrators hold letters making up the slogan "Born in the USA = citizen!" outside the U.S. Supreme Court building as the court hears oral arguments on the legality of the Trump administration's effort to limit birthright citizenship for the children of immigrants, in Washington, D.C., on April 1, 2026.

Justices have more than one way to rule against Trump

The 14th Amendment grants automatic citizenship to "all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof."

Trump argues that doesn't apply to the children of people who are in the country illegally or temporarily.

While the justices spent much time debating the original meaning of that clause and how to interpret the court's 1898 landmark ruling about it, there's another potential way for the court to decide the case.

A citizenship law passed in 1952 uses similar language that was well understood at the time to be different than Trump's interpretation of the 14th Amendment, meaning the court could reject Trump's order without settling every question about the amendment's intent or the 19th Century ruling.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh, a Trump appointee, noted that the court's usual practice is to resolve issues on a statutory – not constitutional – basis when possible.

But Cecillia Wang, the ACLU attorney representing the challengers, said it's important for the court to back its landmark 1898 ruling about birthright citizenship.

"I just think it would be prudent for the court to go ahead and reaffirm that," Wang said, "but, of course, we'd be happy to take a win on any ground."

For his part, Solicitor General John Sauer argued that if the lawmakers who wrote the 1952 law misunderstood the 14th Amendment, theSupreme Courtcan correct that at the same time by upholding Trump's order.

But if the court is going to rule against Trump, Sauer added, the administration would prefer to lose based on the 1952 law and not on the Constitution. If that happens, Congress could still revoke birthright citizenship by changing the law, although that's extremely unlikely without large Republican majorities in both chambers. That would surely draw another legal challenge, likely sending the constitutional question back to the high court.

Demonstrators rally outside the Supreme Court as the court hears Trump v. Barbara in Washington, DC, on April 1, 2026.

What does 'domiciled' mean?

A fierce point of contention is whether parents have to be "domiciled" in the United States, meaning that they are lawfully in the country and intend to remain, for their children to be considered citizens. The word "domiciled" appeared numerous times in the landmark 1898 decision upholding birthright citizenship but lawyers challenging Trump's order contend it isn't required for citizenship.

Sauer argued that domiciled means people who are lawfully in the country and have an intent to remain permanently. His position ruled out the children of undocumented immigrants or people visiting the country temporarily who wouldn't automatically be granted citizenship.

But Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a Trump appointee, suggested that definition of birthright citizenship could be difficult to apply.

"You're not going to know at the time of birth, for some people, whether they have the intent to stay or not," Barrett said.

Chief Justice John Roberts noted that word "domiciled" appeared 20 times in the court's 1898 decision that confirmed birthright citizenship for nearly everyone born in the country.

"Isn't it at least something to be concerned about, to say since it was discussed 20 different times, and it has that significant role in the opinion, that you can just dismiss it as irrelevant?" Roberts asked Wang, the ACLU attorney.

Wang said birthright citizenship came from English common law that didn't require parents to be domiciled.

Justice Neil Gorsuch, a Trump appointee, suggested the purpose of the word "domiciled" in the 1898 decision is uncertain.

"It seems to me it's a mess," he said. "Maybe you can persuade me otherwise."

Birth tourism: Justices say Trump's policy concerns are irrelevant

Trump has hammered away at "birth tourism" – the practice of pregnant women coming to the United States to give birth so their babies will be citizens – as a main justification for curtailing birthright citizenship.

"It has spawned a sprawling industry of birth tourism as uncounted thousands of foreigners from potentially hostile nations have flocked to give birth in the United States in recent decades, creating a whole generation of American citizens abroad with no meaningful ties to the United States," Sauer told the court.

But the extent of birth tourism – and its threat to national security – is hotly contested. Estimates range from a "marginal" 2,000 babies a year to disputed allegations of100,000 per year during a 15-year span.

Pressed on the statistics by Roberts, Sauer acknowledged it's unclear how common the practice is.

Advertisement

"No one knows for sure," Sauer responded.

More:USA Happy Baby, birth tourism and a blockbuster Supreme Court case

Regardless of its impact, Roberts made the point that policy considerations "have no impact on the legal analysis before us."

Kavanaugh, another conservative justice whose vote is often key to decisions, made the same point about the administration's complaint that most countries do not have birthright citizenship.

"You've mentioned several times the practices of other countries, and that obviously, as a policy matter, supports what you're arguing here," Kavanaugh told Sauer. "But obviously we try to interpret American law with American precedent, based on American history."

Demonstrators rally outside the US Supreme Court as the court hears Trump v. Barbara in Washington, DC, on April 1, 2026. The court is reviewing a lower court's rejection of Trump’s argument that children of parents who are in the country illegally or temporarily are not entitled to citizenship.

Some conservatives press Trump administration's argument

Some of the court's conservative justices appeared concerned with the breadth of the Trump administration's argument, or with the practicalities of how it may be applied.

Roberts, who was appointed by President George W. Bush, said examples the Trump administration used to argue that children born in the United States to unauthorized immigrants aren't automatically citizensstruck him "as very quirky."

The administration pointed to children of ambassadors and children of enemies invading the country, suggesting that because those children weren't historically understood to be entitled to citizenship, children of unauthorized immigrants aren't, either.

"I'm not quite sure how you can get to that big group from such tiny and sort of idiosyncratic examples," Roberts said.

Sauer said there is historical evidence to support understanding birthright citizenship as going to people who don't owe allegiance to any other country.

Barrett suggested that the Trump administration's definition of birthright citizenship – whether the parent of a child born in the United States is "domiciled" in the country, meaning has a permanent intent to stay here –is tricky to apply.

Sauer said, as a practical matter, the president's executive order looks at the legal immigration status of a child's parents, so it doesn't require courts to evaluate a parent's intent.

President Donald Trump greats Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Elena Kagan, Brett Kavanaugh and Justice Amy Coney Barrett as he arrives for the State of the Union address during a Joint Session of Congress at the U.S. Capitol on February 24, 2026, in Washington, DC. Trump delivered his address days after the Supreme Court struck down the administration's tariff strategy and amid a U.S. military buildup in the Persian Gulf threatening Iran.

Liberals skeptical of Trump stance on birthright citizenship

It was already clear ahead of the arguments that the court's three liberal justices were highly skeptical of the Trump administration's stance on birthright citizenship.

Ina June dissenting opinionin a case dealing with the power of lower court judges to halt Trump's citizenship order nationwide, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that the order is "patently unconstitutional under settled law." Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson and Elena Kagan joined that opinion.

None of the three Democratic-appointed justices has changed her mind, judging by the April 1 arguments.

Kagan, an appointee of President Barack Obama, said "everybody has believed" the rationale backing birthright citizenship"for a long, long time."

Jackson suggested that a win for the Trump administration could fundamentally destabilize citizenship, because Congress could continually upend birthright citizenship simply by redefining what it means to be "domiciled" in the United States. (The Trump administration says a parent's place of "domicile" is key to whether a child has birthright citizenship.)

Sotomayor argued that, if the Trump administration wins, it could startstripping people of the citizenship they already havethrough a new executive order, even if the order at issue only applied to future children born in the United States.

"The government could move to unnaturalize people who were born here of illegal residents," she said.

Sauer argued that there have long been disputes about who has birthright citizenship, and the Trump administration isn't asking to undo birthright citizenship going back in time.

President Donald Trump departs the Supreme Court building in his motorcade after attending oral arguments on the legality of his administration's effort to limit birthright citizenship for the children of immigrants, in Washington, D.C., on April 1, 2026.

In unprecedented move, Trump attends Supreme Court argument

Trump demonstrated the importance of the case to him by taking the unprecedented step for a sitting president of attending the April 1 argument in person.

Trump's motorcade arrived at the court about 9:40 a.m., after passing school groups touring the National Mall on his way from the White House to the court across the street from the Capitol. He entered through a back entrance.

Trump's presence wasn't acknowledged by the justices or lawyers, but a few quiet gasps echoed through the room when he entered. He sat in the front row of public seats behind the counsel tables.

President Donald Trump sits in a car as he departs the Supreme Court after attending oral arguments on the legality of his administration's effort to limit birthright citizenship for the children of immigrants, in Washington, D.C., on April 1, 2026.

Trump left the argument after Sauer's main presentation ended, after a little more than an hour.

"We are the only Country in the World STUPID enough to allow "Birthright" Citizenship!"Trump said on social mediaafter the argument ended.

According to the Pew Research Center, there are32 other countries that offer birthright citizenshipwith essentially the same terms as the United States, including Canada, Mexico and Brazil.

Contributing: Karissa Waddick

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY:6 takeaways as Trump's citizenship order takes heat at Supreme Court

Is Trump citizenship order doomed? 6 takeaways from birthright debate

WASHINGTON −President Donald Trump'seffort to redefine who is an American did not get the quick rejection from theSup...
Kennedy sidelining of US advisory panel delays updates to cancer screening guidelines

By Deena Beasley

Reuters

April 2 (Reuters) - The sidelining by U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. of the advisory panel that decides access to free preventive healthcare is delaying updates to screening guidelines for cancer, heart disease and other conditions, medical experts say.

The 16-member U.S. Preventive ‌Services Task Force last met over a year ago. Three successive planned meetings were canceled and new members have not been named to replace ‌the five volunteers whose terms expired in December.

The panel, established in 1984, determines which medical tests and treatments, such as routine cancer screening or HIV prevention, are provided cost-free under health insurance plans. It ​can also decide that a test or treatment should not be routine.

Without the task force "commercial insurances can choose or not choose to cover these new preventive services," said Dr. Alex Krist, a family practice physician at Virginia Commonwealth University and a former chair of the preventive care panel.

Early cancer detection saves lives and money, according to the American Cancer Society, but there are upfront costs. A recent study calculated the lifetime cost of mammograms for an average-risk U.S. woman at around $7,000.

The task force, which usually issues ‌around 22 draft and final recommendations annually, last year posted ⁠seven and none have been issued so far this year.

The panel was in the earlier stages of updating guidelines including for prostate cancer screening, genetic testing for a mutation linked to breast cancer, and the use of drugs to prevent people at ⁠high risk from developing breast cancer.

TRUSTED EXPERTS

"We have to rely on a trusted group of experts who have really weighed the benefits and risks and are looking at overall population health and doing no harm," said Dr. Julie Gralow, chief medical officer at the American Society of Clinical Oncology. "Patients do trust these as well."

Medical groups, which don't always agree with ​the ​panel's guidelines, have called on Congress "to protect the integrity" of the task force. Last month, 19 ​U.S. senators sent a letter to Kennedy urging him to ‌support the work of the panel.

Advertisement

Sidelining the task force aligns with broader goals outlined by President Donald Trump to reshape federal health regulation.

"The current administration would not only like to cut back on regulation, they would definitely like to cut back on required benefits under the Affordable Care Act," said Joseph Antos, senior fellow emeritus at conservative think tank the American Enterprise Institute.

The U.S. Supreme Court in a 2025 ruling involving insurance coverage for HIV prevention, affirmed that the Health Secretary has authority over the preventive care panel.

The panel in 2023 recommended that people at high risk be treated with drugs to prevent HIV infection, but that has not been ‌updated to include Gilead Sciences' newer twice-yearly injection, Yeztugo.

As a result, patient costs for Yeztugo are ​set by individual plans, UnitedHealthcare, the largest U.S. health insurer, said in an email. The insurer ​said its commercial plans cover older HIV prevention medications at zero cost ​to patients.

An update to cervical cancer screening remains in the draft stage. After the first at-home pap smear was approved by ‌regulators last year, a different federal agency stepped in to require ​that it be covered by insurers starting ​in 2027.

Other recommendations under review involve screening for unhealthy alcohol use or depression and whether vitamin D prevents fractures and falls in older people.

Cardiovascular medical groups recently advised that adults at high long-term risk of heart disease start cholesterol-lowering treatment as early as age 30 instead of the current 40.

The ​guidelines are expected to affect millions, but unless the ‌federal task force matches them, insurers are not required to cover wider testing or treatment, the trade group America's Health Insurance Plans and UnitedHealthcare ​said in emails.

"Primary care is kind of struggling with what we should do," Virginia Commonwealth's Krist said. "The task force is meant to ​be objective."

(Reporting By Deena Beasley in Los AngelesEditing by Caroline Humer and Bill Berkrot)

Kennedy sidelining of US advisory panel delays updates to cancer screening guidelines

By Deena Beasley April 2 (Reuters) - The sidelining by U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. of the advi...
What is Good Friday? What to know about holy day ahead of Easter.

One of the most somber days of the Christian calendar has arrived:Good Friday.

USA TODAY

The holy day,which takes place a couple of days before Easter, commemorates Jesus Christ's sacrifice, more specifically the suffering and agony he faced leading up to his Crucifixion.

Good Fridayis a day for "sorrow, penance, and fasting," according toBritannica.

It is one of several Christian celebrations that pay homage to the events leading up to the Crucifixion and Christ's miraculous resurrection on Easter Sunday. The time period is known as Holy Week.

"Good Friday has been, for centuries now, the heart of the Christian message because it is through the death of Jesus Christ that Christians believe that we have been forgiven of our sins," Daniel Alvarez, an associate teaching professor of religious studies at Florida International University,previously told USA TODAY.

Here's what to know about Good Friday, including what date it falls on in 2026.

What is Good Friday? And when is it this year?

Good Friday commemorates "Jesus' trial before Pontius Pilate, his sentence of death, his torture, and his crucifixion and burial," according to theUniversity of Melbourne's Trinity College. The second-to-last day of Holy Week falls on Friday, April 3, this year.

Good Friday, for many Christians, is a "day of fasting, with the faithful attending a church service where they will meditate on and venerate the cross of Christ," Trinity College explains.

The Rev. Dustin Dought, executive director of the Secretariat of Divine Worship for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, previously told USA TODAY that fasting is "a way of emptying ourselves so that we can be filled with God."

Members of the Santa Maria de la Montana Catholic Church in Ciudad Juárez reenact "The Way of the Cross" in an annual procession designed to honor Jesus' final walk to the Cavalry.

Catholics generally abstain from all forms of meat (sans fish) for Lent, a 40-day period, in the time leading up to Holy Week, including Good Friday.

Advertisement

The Good Friday tradition is designed to honor the way Christ sacrificed his flesh.

Are Good Friday and Passover related?

Alvarez previously told USA TODAY that there was a "direction connection" between Good Friday andPassover, one of the most widely celebrated Jewish holidays.

"The whole Christian idea of atoning for sin, that Jesus is our atonement, is strictly derived from the Jewish Passover tradition," Alvarez said.

While Good Friday commemorates Christ's sacrifice and Passover celebrates the day the "Angel of Death" passed over the homes of Israelites, the "blood of the lamb" is a symbol and theme present in both stories.

In the Christian faith, Jesus is referred to as the "Lamb of God" and is believed to be the "Son of God."

According to Alvarez, the stories of the exodus and the crucifixion not only further tie the stories together but also emphasize how powerful sacrifice, specifically of a firstborn child, and bloodshed are in religion.

"Jesus is the firstborn, so the whole idea of the death of the firstborn is crucial," Alvarez said.

The sacrifice itself is important because it is believed to unleash "tremendous power that is able to fend off any kind of force, including the wrath of God," Alvarez said. Humanity is protected from the "wrath of a righteous God that cannot tolerate sin" because of Jesus' sacrifice.

Contributing: Jordan Mendoza and Julie Gomez, USA TODAY

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY:What is Good Friday? What to know about holy day.

What is Good Friday? What to know about holy day ahead of Easter.

One of the most somber days of the Christian calendar has arrived:Good Friday. The holy day,which takes place a...
International groups warn of 'spiral of violence' against journalists in Serbia

BELGRADE, Serbia (AP) — International media organizations have joined Serbian journalists in raising the alarm about worsening press freedoms in theBalkan country, including "record levels" of physical violence, online smear campaigns and death threats against reporters.

Associated Press Serbian journalists block the traffic outside the offices of Serbia's President Aleksandar Vucic in Belgrade, Serbia, Wednesday, April 1, 2026, in protest of mounting attacks and pressure on the media. (AP Photo/Darko Vojinovic) Serbian journalists block the traffic outside the offices of Serbia's President Aleksandar Vucic in Belgrade, Serbia, Wednesday, April 1, 2026, in protest of mounting attacks and pressure on the media. (AP Photo/Darko Vojinovic) Serbian journalists block the traffic outside the offices of Serbia's President Aleksandar Vucic in Belgrade, Serbia, Wednesday, April 1, 2026, in protest of mounting attacks and pressure on the media. (AP Photo/Darko Vojinovic)

Serbia Tensions Media

The partner organizations of the Council of Europe's Platform for the Safety of Journalists and the Media Freedom Rapid Response groups said in a statement released this week that "the past year had seen a continued deterioration, leaving the country in a prolonged and worsening press freedom crisis."

The statement warned that "chances of further escalation in the severity of attacks against journalists remain dangerously high."

A delegation visited Serbiaon March 26-27, holding meetings with both the media and government representatives.

"The mission came at a time of unprecedented physical attacks on journalists and rampant online smear campaigns, led or amplified by influential members of the ruling party," the statement said. "The delegation is fearful that journalists are caught in a spiral of violence with few protections in place."

There was no immediate response from the government's information ministry to a request for comment for The Associated Press.

Advertisement

Dozens of Serbian journalistson Wednesday blocked traffic outside the office of Serbia's populistPresident Aleksandar Vucicto protest the latest spate of attacks recorded during violence-marred local elections on Sunday.

The Independent Journalists' Association of Serbia said that 20 reporters were attacked on Sunday, while around 100 attacks have been recorded so far this year.

International election observersat the balloting said they witnessed violence and irregularities. The vote was held in 10 municipalities throughout Serbia. It was seen as a test for Vucic after more than a year of youth-led protests that first erupted aftera train station tragedyin Nov. 2024 that killed 16 people.

While he formally seeks EU membership for Serbia, the increasingly authoritarian Vucic and his government have been accused by rights groups ofclamping down on democracy, including media freedoms.

International media groups said in their statement that pressure and attacks on media workers surged since the station canopy collapse in Novi Sad and the start of the student-ledmass demonstrations. The group cited "alarming levels of impunity" with hardly any of the perpetrators being held accountable.

"Clear political will is needed to break the downward spiral and ensure all attacks on the media are properly sanctioned under the law," the statement said.

International groups warn of 'spiral of violence' against journalists in Serbia

BELGRADE, Serbia (AP) — International media organizations have joined Serbian journalists in raising the alarm about wors...
A deadly bacterial disease is making a comeback as vaccine rates fall

A scar that runs along the base of Dr. Lara Johnson's neck serves as a permanent reminder of the devastating effects of a vaccine-preventable disease.

NBC Universal A detail of a syringe containing an Hib vaccine. (Joe Amon / The Denver Post via Getty Images file)

When Johnson was 4 years old, she caught a dangerous, potentially deadly bacterial infection: Haemophilus influenzae type b, commonly called Hib.

The bacteria attacked her epiglottis, the piece of cartilage that covers the windpipe when eating so food doesn't get into the lungs. Her airway was closing up and she couldn't swallow.

"I had a fever and felt like I was choking," recalls Johnson. "I thought I needed to throw up." She was taken to Covenant Children's Hospital in Lubbock, Texas, where she now serves as chief medical officer, for an emergency tracheostomy. Doctors had to cut through her neck and into her windpipe so she could breathe. Antibiotics treated her infection, the plastic airway was removed and she recovered.

It was 1980. A Hib vaccine wasn't available until seven years later.

Prior to the vaccine, about 20,000 children in the United States — mostly babies and toddlers — developed severe forms of Hib every year, according to theCenters for Disease Control and Prevention. Many children were left with permanent brain damage. About 1,000 children died each year.

After vaccinations began, the number of Hib infections dropped to fewer than 50 a year. Many doctors who've trained in the past 40 years have never seen a case.

Now, parents who haven't experienced the frightening effects of the highly contagious and fast-moving infection are increasingly opting out of vaccinating their kids against Hib. Last week, the CDC reported that the percentage of babies who got thefull series of Hib shotsfell slightly from 2019 to 2021, from 78.8% to 77.6%.

Doctors like Johnson, who a year ago was treating children hospitalized withmeasles during the West Texas outbreak, are sounding the alarm on Hib, fearing it could be the next vaccine-preventable disease to make a comeback.

"Measles is the beginning," said Utah's state epidemiologist, Dr. Leisha Nolen. The state is in the middle of an accelerating measles outbreak, with559 cases as of Tuesday.

As more people stop vaccinating children against diseases, Hib "is something that we might see soon," Nolen said. "It's really tragic to think we're going to have to go back to having emergency rooms filled with little babies who have this highly, highly deadly and dangerous disease."

A 'changing world of medicine'

The CDC does track Hib cases, but the numbers can lag for a year or more because states don't report cases quickly as they would during acute outbreaks like flu or measles.

As of March 21, the CDC had logged eight cases so far this year: two each in Ohio and New York, plus one case each in Kansas, North Carolina and Tennessee.

Conversations with pediatricians suggest additional Hib cases are occurring and causing severe illness.

Dr. Kathryn Edwards, a vaccine safety expert and professor of pediatrics at Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, Tennessee, said her colleagues recently treated two cases of Hib-related meningitis. Previously, Vanderbilt hadn't had such a case for "a number of years," she said.

Dr. Eehab Kenawy, a pediatrician in Panama City, Florida, said that in December, the local hospital's intensive care unit treated two young children with Hib who were visiting the area from other states. One was a 2-year-old, he said. The other was a 4-month-old who died. "Both were unvaccinated," he said.

Kenawy didn't personally treat either child but was on call at the time the patients were there. "I'd never seen a case of Hib for years and years. Now I'm hearing about it."

The possibility that Hib could make a comeback means that doctors have to start thinking differently — and possibly more aggressively — when a young, unvaccinated patient comes in with what looks like a typical bacterial infection.

"Now I'm not just thinking 'strep throat, ear infection, upper respiratory infection.' We have to start thinking about these things as a differential diagnosis in our workup," Kenawy said. "It puts us in a situation where we may have to do more close observation, possibly more admissions, maybe some unnecessary workup at times. It's the changing world of medicine."

Advertisement

What is Hib?

Despite the name, haemophilus influenzae bacteria don't cause the flu that circulates every winter. They're bacteria that can live in noses and throats without necessarily causing trouble. Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) is one of several types of the bacteria.

Even people who aren't sick can spread Hib to others through coughs and sneezes. Sometimes the bacteria cause problems that are relatively easy to treat, like ear infections. They can also cause serious, invasive infections in the lungs, blood stream and joints, as well as the epiglottis like in Johnson's situation.

It's Hib's ability to cause inflammation of the brain and spinal cord — meningitis — that still frightens doctors who remember what it was like treating kids before the vaccine was available. Doctors diagnosed it by doing a lumbar puncture, or spinal tap, to analyze their cerebrospinal fluid.

"When I trained between 1977 and 1980, I would do two to three spinal taps a night," said Dr. Paul Offit, a pediatrician and director of the Vaccine Education Center at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. Hib was a leading cause of bacterial meningitis in kids under age 5 at the time. "Now pediatric residents in our hospital don't do spinal taps, which tells you the power of vaccines."

The CDC recommends three to four Hib shots (depending on which brand they get) for all kids under age 5. Studies have shown the full series is at least 93% effective inpreventing the bacterial illness.

It's not just Hib vaccines that are on the decline. A 2025NBC News investigationwith Stanford University found that childhood vaccination rates overall have fallen in at least 77% of U.S. counties and jurisdictions since 2019.

The number of parents hesitant about vaccines and medicine in general has risen in recent years.

"You're always going to see people who will 'no' to anything, but it's increasing," said Dr. Rana Alissa, president of the Florida chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics. "Now we're almost seeing a free fall."

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has fueled anti-vaccine sentiments further since becoming health and human services secretary. He's downplayed measles outbreaks, even after two young girls died last year in Texas. And he led theoverhaul of the childhood vaccine schedule— a move that was recentlyblocked by a federal judge.

Doctors are desperate to undo the damage so that vaccine-preventable diseases remain in the past as much as possible.

"The last night I was a pediatric resident, a child came in with Hib and promptly died by the next day," said Vanderbilt's Edwards, whose residency was in the 1970s. "I didn't work for 50 years to have everything destroyed by one man."

A diptych image showing a mother and son, and the same boy on life support in a second photo. (Courtesy of Ashlee Dahlberg)

It's been almost a year since Ashlee Dahlberg lost her 8-year-old son, Liam, to Hib. On April 24 last year, Liam came home from school complaining of a headache. She said she gave him some ibuprofen, which perked him up temporarily.

When he woke up for school the next day, she said, Liam had spiked a 103 degree fever and "seemed off."

"He was dizzy and couldn't stand," she said. "He was very delirious but he was still able to answer questions correctly." Doctors at the hospital near their home in Lowell, Indiana, ran tests that suggested Liam might have meningitis and transferred the boy about an hour north to a larger hospital in Chicago.

Liam needed to be sedated so that doctors could do a lumbar puncture for a clear diagnosis. Testing revealed Liam's body had been invaded by Hib and that it had turned into bacterial meningitis.

By April 26, Dahlberg said, MRI scans showed that her son's brain had swollen so much that the damage was irreversible. They took him off life support two days later.

Liam and his two sisters had been vaccinated. But his immune system was susceptible to illnesses like Hib, Dahlberg said, because he'd been on an inhaled steroid to treat asthma. She is speaking out about her family's loss to encourage other families to vaccinate their children to protect kids like Liam — as well as his younger sister who also has asthma.

"What I would really love for other people to understand is that there are people out there who are like my son, who have weakened immune systems," Dahlberg said. "What may be a cold for your child is a death sentence or a hospitalization for another."

"I don't want my youngest to follow in the same footsteps with her health issues that Liam did," she said. "I would not be able to survive the loss of another child."

A deadly bacterial disease is making a comeback as vaccine rates fall

A scar that runs along the base of Dr. Lara Johnson's neck serves as a permanent reminder of the devastating effects ...

 

VINCE JRNL © 2015 | Distributed By My Blogger Themes | Designed By Templateism.com