Tessera
Folgen

Lindsay Wiley

@lindsaywiley.bsky.social

Law prof at UCLA. Posting about health law, policy & ethics, public health, global health, social & legal epidemiology

718 Posts15006 Follower1424 Folgt
Mark Joseph Stern@mjsdc.bsky.social · 8mo ago

The Supreme Court just set aside a 2nd Circuit decision upholding New York's requirement that all school students, public and private, obtain certain vaccinations, without any religious exemptions. It orders the 2nd Circuit to reconsider the ruling in light of SCOTUS' LGBTQ school books decision.

CERTIORARI -- SUMMARY DISPOSITION 25-133 MILLER, JOSEPH, ET AL. V. McDONALD, COMM'R, ET AL. The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment is vacated, and the case is remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit for further consideration in light of Mahmoud v. Taylor, 606 U. S. 522 (2025).
Daniel S. Goldberg@profgoldberg.bsky.social · 8mo ago

If only someone had spent the last decade writing about unreasonable demands for proof of causation as a key component in the #ManufactureOfDoubt. muse.jhu.edu/article/627259

Project MUSE - On Physician–Industry Relationships and Unreasonable Standards of Proof for Harm: A Population-Level Bioethics Approach

muse.jhu.edu

Seth Trueger@mdaware.org · 8mo ago

perfect is the enemy of good and demanding perfect RCTs for annual flu shots = no flu shots

Joey Fishkin@fishkin.bsky.social · 9mo ago

I mean, the first paragraph lays it all out. The President, VP, and Agency officials, including the head of the Task Force to Combat Antisemitism, told us exactly what they intended to do & then did, which was use pretextual civil rights claims to impose ideological control on universities.

Plaintiffs have submitted overwhelming evidence. Across 74 declarations and more than 700 pages of supporting documents, Plaintiffs show that the Administration and its executive agencies are engaged in a concerted campaign to purge “woke,” “left,” and “socialist” viewpoints from our country’s leading universities. Agency officials, as well as the President and Vice President, have repeatedly and publicly announced a playbook of initiating civil rights investigations of preeminent universities to justify cutting off federal funding, with the goal of bringing universities to their knees and forcing them to change their ideological tune. Universities are then presented with agreements to restore federal funding under which they must change what they teach, restrict student anonymity in protests, and endorse the Administration’s view of gender, among other things. Defendants submit nothing to refute this. It is undisputed that this precise playbook is now being executed at the University of California. Defendant Leo Terrell, who heads the Administration’s Task Force to Combat AntiSemitism, publicly stated in a news interview that the UC had been “hijacked by the left” and vowed to begin investigations. The Department of Justice and Department of Education have
M
Michael C. Dorf@dorfonlaw.bsky.social · 9mo ago

On the blog: In approving Trump's transphobic policy of listing sex assigned at birth on passports, SCOTUS said govt was "merely attesting to a historical fact," thus echoing the obtuseness of Plessy v Ferguson's statement that Black folks were only choosing to see segregation as white supremacy. 👇

SCOTUS Echoes Plessy v Ferguson in Greenlighting Trump's Transphobic Passport Policy

Repeating a pattern that has become all too familiar, late last week the Roberts Court issued a per curiam order staying a lower court rulin...

dorfonlaw.org

Joanna Schwartz@jcschwartzprof.bsky.social · 9mo ago

The Illinois legislature had passed the “Illinois Bivens Act,” allowing people to sue ICE agents in state court. Just waiting for Pritzker’s signature. dailynorthwestern.com/2025/11/03/c...

Illinois lawmakers pass legislation in response to ICE activity

After weeks of heightened federal immigration enforcement in the greater Chicago area, the Illinois General Assembly approved House Bill 1312 on Oct. 31, strengthening immigration enforcement protecti...

dailynorthwestern.com

Joanna Schwartz@jcschwartzprof.bsky.social · last yr.

There will now be 10,000 new ICE agents & 100,000 new detention beds--and few safeguards protecting people from constitutional violations by the feds. Time for states to pass laws allowing people to sue fed agents. Read about it these "converse-1983" statutes here: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....

Chris Geidner@chrisgeidner.bsky.social · 10mo ago

BREAKING: Federal judge rules that the Trump administration likely illegally suspended SNAP benefits, ruling that at least reduced distribution is required to go forward under law using the $6 billion reserve fund. Judge gives the Trump admin until Monday to respond as to whether it will act.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS ET AL., Plaintiffs, V. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE ET AL., Defendants. * * * * * * * * * * * Civil Action No. 1:25-cv-13165-IT MEMORANDUM AND ORDER October 31, 2025 TALWANI, D.J. Pending before the court is Plaintiffs' Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order [Doc. No. 3] seeking to enjoin, on an emergency basis, Defendants' November 1, 2025 suspension of benefits under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program ("SNAP"). For the reasons stated below, Plaintiffs have standing to bring this action and are likely to succeed on their claim that Defendants' suspension of SNAP benefits is unlawful. Where that suspension of benefits rested on an erroneous construction of the relevant statutory provisions, the court will allow Defendants to consider whether they will authorize at least reduced SNAP benefits for November, and report back to the court no later than Monday, November 3, 2025.A. Likelihood of Success on the Merits Plaintiffs have demonstrated a strong likelihood of success on the merits of their claim under the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(A), (C), that Defendants' suspension of SNAP benefits is contrary to law. At core, Defendants' conclusion that USDA is statutorily prohibited from funding SNAP because Congress has not enacted new appropriations for the current fiscal year is erroneous. To the contrary, Defendants are statutorily mandated to use the previously appropriated SNAP contingency reserve when necessary and also have discretion to use other previously appropriated funds as detailed below.As both parties acknowledge, Congress has not yet appropriated any new funds for SNAP benefits for Fiscal Year 2026, which began on October 1, 2025. Pls.' Mem. 6 [Doc. No. 4]; Defs.' Opp'n 7 [Doc. No. 18]. But Congress took steps to protect against the deprivation of SNAP assistance. In the 2024 Consolidated Appropriations Act, Pub. L. No. 118-42, § 6, 138 Stat. 25, 93-94, Congress separately appropriated $6 billion to the SNAP program "to remain available through September 30, 2026" and "be placed in reserve for use only in such amounts and at such times as may become necessary to carry out program operations." See also Pub. L. No. 119-4, § 1101(a), 139 Stat. 9, 10 (2025). As Plaintiffs point out, given the mandatory nature of SNAP benefits under 7 U.S.C. § 2014(a) and the appropriation of these funds to be available 10 Case 1:25-cv-13165-IT Document 26 Filed 10/31/25 Page 11 of 15 through this current fiscal year, the government is obligated to use this contingent reserve account to fund SNAP "as may become necessary to carry out program operations." 138 Stat. at 93-94; Pls.' Mem. 11 [Doc. No. 4].Defendants argue out that a "suspension" is permitted under USDA's regulations, and that USDA "has consistently interpreted its authority to allow for the suspension or cancellation of benefits when necessary." Defs. Opp'n 6 [Doc. No. 18). The regulation at issue, 7 C.F.R. $ 271.7(a), sets forth procedures to be followed if monthly SNAP allowances "must be reduced, suspended, or cancelled to comply with section 18 of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008" (emphasis added). But that the regulation allows for a suspension when there are no funds does not mean that Defendants may choose a suspension over a reduction while funds do remain. If the regulation did authorize such discretion, it would be inconsistent with the statutory mandate that benefits "shall" be paid unless funding is no longer available.
Greer Donley@greerdonley.bsky.social · 10mo ago

Good News that sounds like bad news: The District of Hawaii just found the FDA's 2023 mifepristone REMS modification unlawful and arbitrary & capricious! It's good news b/c the case was brought by medical orgs & docs arguing that FDA failed to justify why it kept strict & unnecessary REMS elements.

Charlotte Garden@charlottegarden.bsky.social · 10mo ago

1. This will be a forced labor camp; 2. Utah is already planning to make it easier to commit people to it.

Brian Goldstone@brian-goldstone.bsky.social · 10mo ago

Under Trump, the draconian future of homelessness policy is coming into focus: mass internment. Utah is building a 16-acre site to detain up to 1,300 homeless people inside locked "accountability centers." This is profoundly alarming. Vital reporting from @ellenbarry.bsky.social and Jason DeParle:

Daniel S. Goldberg@profgoldberg.bsky.social · 10mo ago

It took over 4 years, but the paper is finally published. In this study, we developed novel methods drawn from #LegalEpidemiology to map addiction #stigma in California law. This #interdisciplinary work was conceptually and methodologically difficult!⤵️ #PaperSky #EpiSky #AcademicSky 1/

Targeting Addiction Structural Stigma Embodied in Law (“TASSEL”): Findings from an intrastate legal mapping study

Stigma is a fundamental cause of disease that reflects and intensifies health inequalities. Laws are powerful mediators for stigma; to correct them, i…

sciencedirect.com

Joey Fishkin@fishkin.bsky.social · 10mo ago

The UC Regents finally released the “settlement agreement” the Trump administration proposed in August. It’s a doozy. UC alumni, faculty, staff, students, parents, donors—and all citizens of California: Now is the time to let the UC Regents know you do not want them to sign this bad deal.

ucop.edu

This is an archive of https://ucop.edu/communications/_files/confidential-rule-408-communication-ucla-08-08-25.pdf from Saturday 25, October 2025

perma.cc

Post nicht verfügbar.
Lindsay Wiley@lindsaywiley.bsky.social · 10mo ago

Not only is it harmful, dishonest & unethical, in many cases it may also be illegal, as Craig Konnoth argues here: www.uclalawreview.org/11626-2/

The National Termination of Pediatric Gender Affirming Care: A Study in Illegal, Anticipatory Compliance - UCLA Law Review

Abstract Prohibitions on gender-affirming care for minors in the United States came to a head in the last few months, with the issuance of an Executive Order by the Trump Administration that threatens...

uclalawreview.org

Alejandra Caraballo@esqueer.net · 10mo ago

Fenway Health just sent this message to all of their patients. They are lying to their patients telling them that cessation of gender affirming care to trans youth was due to a change in federal regulations. This is a lie. No such change was made to regulations. This was Fenway complying in advance.

A letter from Jordina Shanks, CEO of Fenway Health, addressed to the Fenway Health community. It announces that due to new federal requirements effective October 1, 2025, Fenway Health will no longer provide medical gender-affirming care (hormones and puberty blockers) for patients under 19. The letter explains that this change follows a revised U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Grants Policy, which allows termination of grants that “no longer effectuate program goals or agency priorities.” Continuing the service would jeopardize Fenway’s status as a Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC). The message emphasizes that this decision was made with great difficulty and does not reflect a change in Fenway’s values or commitment to the transgender and gender-diverse community. It details how staff have worked to support affected patients and families and reaffirms Fenway’s ongoing advocacy and inclusive mission. Highlighted portions stress the HHS policy change, the risk to FQHC status, and Fenway’s continued belief in and support for gender-affirming care.
Amy Kapczynski@akapczynski.bsky.social · 10mo ago

Wow - California's public insulin will be on the market in Jan! Big milestone for public pharma efforts. Could help millions of diabetics, esp if they can build a more public supply chain too. We describe why public pharma is important in this paper ... www.politico.com/news/2025/10...

In shot across Big Pharma's bow, California will sell its own insulin

Delivery of the state-branded drug makes good on a longstanding promise by Gov. Gavin Newsom.

politico.com