- Texas has announced that non-urgent medical procedures and surgeries must be halted as hospitals respond to the coronavirus, including abortion as one of the impacted medical services.
- Ohio leaders made the same call, but providers like Planned Parenthood believed the wording in letters they received still allow them to provide the procedure.
- Pro-choice advocates believe that abortion should be considered essential because it is a time-sensitive and non-elective procedure.
- But those in favor of the mandates in Texas and Ohio believe this is necessary to help increase care capacity for coronavirus patients.
Texas Pauses Abortion Access
States like Texas and Ohio are listing abortion as one of the non essential medical procedures and surgeries that must be delayed while hospitals respond to the coronavirus outbreak.
On Sunday, Texas Governor Greg Abbott issued an order to postpone medical procedures that were not immediately necessary in order to increase hospital bed capacity. The following day, the office of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton released a statement saying that this includes “procedures that are not immediately medically necessary such as orthopedic surgeries or any type of abortion that is not medically necessary to preserve the life or health of the mother.”
“The COVID-19 pandemic has increased demands for hospital beds and has created a shortage of personal protective equipment needed to protect health care professionals and stop transmission of the virus,” the statement further explained. According to Paxton’s office, postponing these procedures will free up these tools so they can be used for doctors and patients facing problems created by COVID-19. Any failure to comply with this order can lead to penalties of up to $1,000 or 180 days of jail time.
Texas is not the only state to make a mandate of this nature. Over the weekend, Ohio’s Attorney General Dave Yost sent a letter to Women’s Med Center and a Planned Parenthood chapter saying they, too, had to stop abortions for the time being.
“You and your facility are ordered to immediately stop performing non-essential and elective surgical abortions,” the letter said, according to CBS News, which obtained a copy. “Non-essential surgical abortions are those that can be delayed without undue risk to the current or future health of a patient.”
Yost’s letter did not state specific punishments but did say that if facilities do not follow these instructions, “the Department of Health will take all appropriate measures.”
However, some providers found the language in Yost’s mandate flexible enough for them to still be able to carry out abortions. Planned Parenthood’s Southwest Ohio Region chapter released a statement saying they would still be providing the service.
“We are complying with the Ohio Department of Health’s order regarding personal protective equipment, which requires hospitals and surgical facilities to stop providing non-essential surgeries and procedures and take other steps to reduce the use of equipment,” they wrote. “Under that order, Planned Parenthood can still continue providing essential procedures, including surgical abortion.”
Uncertainty in Other States
Other states have taken measure to pause non essential healthcare, including Maryland. In terms of abortion, Maryland did not make it clear if abortion was deemed non essential or not. According to a Washington Post reporter, when Governor Larry Hogan was questioned about whether or not it did, he “appeared to say yes.”
There have been no specific clarifications on this, though. His office also made remarks suggesting that he would not be the deciding factor on whether or not this measure includes abortion.
Louisiana was also among the many states putting a hold on non emergency procedures, and a pro-life organization in the state said this would stop abortions at one of the few remaining providers in the state. The Center for Reproductive rights denied this and said that clinic was in fact still open.
Putting abortion access on the chopping block during an already politically tense moment has led to frustration for many. Some believe that cutting back on the procedure is an unproductive solution to helping care core COVID-19 because only 4% of abortions are done at hospitals, according to the Abortion Care Network.
The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology also released a joint statement defending access to abortion during these times. Their message was put out before states like Texas and Ohio announced their plans in hopes of preventing states from taking these measures.
“Abortion is an essential component of comprehensive health care,” the joint statement read. “It is also a time-sensitive service for which a delay of several weeks, or in some cases days, may increase the risks or potentially make it completely inaccessible. The consequences of being unable to obtain an abortion profoundly impact a person’s life, health, and well-being.”
Amy Hagstrom Miller, president of Whole Woman’s Health, an organization at the center of a major ongoing Supreme Court case, also released a statement condemning these kinds of rules.
“Emergency actions during a global pandemic should advance health and safety for us all, not force people to delay much-needed care and possibly exacerbate their health situations by doing so,” Miller wrote. “Patients cannot wait until this pandemic is over to receive safe abortion care.”
On the other side, some pro-life advocates think temporarily banning the procedure is necessary to help treat coronavirus patients. Joe Pojman, executive director of Texas Alliance for Life told the New York Times that when Texas made this mandate, leaders were not “singling out any particular procedure or any segment of the health care industry.”
“The bottom line is, these abortions must be delayed,” he said.
Pro-Life Louisiana released a statement of their own, encouraging abortion providers to not give the service.
“We suggest that instead of fighting Louisiana emergency health and safety regulations, the abortion facilities pitch in to fight COVID-19 and its effects by donating much-needed personal protection equipment to local emergency rooms,” it wrote.
See what others are saying: (CBS News) (New York Times) (The Hill)
Texas Supreme Court Sides With Gov. Abbott’s Order Limiting Counties to One Ballot Drop Box Each
- The Texas Supreme Court sided with Governor Greg Abbott’s order limiting counties to just one ballot drop off box each, arguing that the state has provided voters with plenty of options for the 2020 election.
- Also in Texas, a judge ruled against Abbott’s choice to exclude polling locations from the list of places where mask-wearing is mandatory. The judge agreed with critics, who said this discriminates against Black and Latino Texans who are more likely to be harmed by the pandemic.
- In other election news, the USPS was ordered to rescind rules limiting mail collection, with a judge saying late and extra trips should be performed to the maximum extent to ensure on-time election deliveries.
Texas Supreme Court Sides with Abbott
The Texas Supreme Court sided with Governor Greg Abbott on Tuesday, ruling in favor of his order that limited counties to just one absentee ballot drop-off location each.
Abbott’s order was criticized by Democrats and others who said restricting the number of places voters can drop their ballots off, especially in the midst of a worsening pandemic, amounts to voter suppression.
A judge initially overturned Abbott’s order, saying the limit could confuse voters. Shortly after, a federal judge halted their decision and sided with Abbott.
The state’s Supreme Court concluded that the order “provides Texas voters more ways to vote in the November 3 election than does the Election Code. It does not disenfranchise anyone.”
While the plaintiffs argued that it will require some voters to travel for a longer period of time, the court said that these voters do have other voting options, including sending their ballot via post. The court acknowledged that some fear the United States Postal Service may not deliver their ballot on time, but said that risk is “small.”
“In any event, the Constitution does not require a state to ‘afford every voter multiple infallible ways to vote,’ nor would it be possible for a state to foresee and eliminate every possible contingency that might prevent a given voter from casting a ballot,” the court said.
The stakes in Texas are growing as polling between President Donald Trump and his opponent, former Vice President Joe Biden, are getting tighter. The Cook Political Report moved Texas to its list of toss-up states on Wednesday morning, joining the likes of Florida and Georgia.
Judge Rules in Favor of Mask Wearing at Polls
This was not the only election-related decision handed out in Texas on Tuesday. A federal judge ruled that voters in the state should have to wear masks at polling locations, despite Abbott’s mandate making an exception for them.
Abbott’s decision to not include polling places on the list of locations where mask wearing is mandatory left a lot of voters in the state feeling uneasy, especially Black and Latino voters. Throughout the country, Black and Latino communities have been disproportionately impacted by the pandemic.
In Texas, according to the Texas Tribune, Hispanic Texans made up almost 49% of COVID-19 deaths in the state as of July 30, despite being just under 40% of the population. Black Texans made up 14% of deaths, despite being around 12% of the population. Meanwhile, white Texans have been dying from the disease at a lower rate.
Because of this, Abbott’s exception was challenged for discriminating against Black and Latino voters. The judge agreed and said that the clause that provided the exception “violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act because it creates a discriminatory burden on Black and Latino voters..
“For this reason, exemption 8 is invalid and void,” the judge wrote.
Other Election News
Other states have also seen significant rulings when it comes to voting. In Michigan, a judge struck down the Secretary of State’s ban on open carry at the polls on Election Day. The judge argued that Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson did not follow the proper procedure to create an administrative rule when enacting the ban, which the judge believes should be necessary in this case. Benson already plans to overturn it.
“As the state’s chief elections officer, I have the sworn duty to protect every voter and their right to cast the ballot free from intimidation and harassment,” she said to the Detroit Free Press. “I will continue to protect that right in Michigan.”
In South Carolina, a federal judge ruled that ballots in the state cannot be thrown out over mismatched signatures, claiming that the state does not have a consistent process for matching signatures. According to the Washington Post, the judge said that some counties had already disqualified ballots on signature issues without organization. He said that this is “obviously a significant burden” on voting rights.
On a federal level, a judge made a decision in hopes of getting more absentee ballots delivered and counted for the election. Judge Emmet Sullivan of the District Court for the District of Columbia ordered that as of Wednesday morning, the USPS must reverse its limitations on mail collection, which were enacted by Postmaster General Louis DeJoy, an ardent supporter of President Trump. Those limitations went in place over the summer and limited late or extra trips, significantly slowing down down mail delivery time. These mail lags prompted Sullivan to order that they be rescinded.
“USPS personnel are instructed to perform late and extra trips to the maximum extent necessary to increase on-time mail deliveries, particularly for Election Mail,” Sullivan wrote.
“To be clear, late and extra trips should be performed to the same or greater degree than they were performed prior to July 2020 when doing so would increase on-time mail deliveries. Any prior communication that is inconsistent with this instruction should be disregarded.”
See what others are saying: (Texas Tribune) (Detroit Free Press) (Washington Post)
Increased COVID-19 Hospitalizations Are Straining Medical Resources in the U.S.
- COVID-19 hospitalizations reached almost 43,000 on Monday, their highest point since August 19. A total of 36 states have seen at least a 5% increase in hospitalizations compared to last week.
- In Utah, ICU occupancy hit nearly 70% and hospitals are prepared to start rationing ICU space this week or next. In El Paso, Texas, occupancy hit 100% and medical workers are taking patients to field or mobile units for care.
- On top of this, some hospitals, including ones in Utah, are understaffed right now. Many hospital staffers are battling physical and emotional exhaustiong from dealing with the pandemic for seven months with no end in sight.
Hospitalizations Go Up
As coronavirus cases inch upwards across the country, hospitalizations are following, setting a trend that worries health experts heading into the winter.
Over the past week, the United States has set its record for the highest single day of cases reported and the highest seven-day average of new cases. Nearly 43,000 hospitalizations were reported on Monday, the highest number since August 19. It is a staggering jump upward from the start of the month when hospitalizations were at 30,700.
CNBC reported that in 36 states, hospitalizations have risen by at least 5% compared to where they were just last week. The caseload is straining hospitals across the country, which are bracing for these spikes to get even worse.
According to the Philadelphia Inquirer, there has been a 157% increase in hospitalizations in Pennsylvania compared to this time last month. New Jersey has seen a 125% jump while Delaware saw 69% growth.
Hospitals and Local Governments Respond to Increases
In Utah, according to the Salt Lake Tribune, 771 people have been hospitalized for the virus in the past two weeks, the highest number of any 14 day period since the start of the pandemic. There, the ICU occupancy hit 68.9% on Monday and state officials and hospital administrators are prepared to ration ICU space this week or next week. This means some ICU patients whose condition is worsening might be forced out of the unit. Older patients, who are more likely to die, will likely be forced out before younger ones. One doctor said capacity is being assessed “on a minute to minute basis, almost.”
The Texas Tribune reported that there has been a 300% increase in hospitalizations in El Paso over the last three weeks. ICU beds have reached 100% capacity and patients are now being taken to mobile and field units to be cared for. The city has put in place a 10:00 p.m. curfew to curb the spread. City officials are also encouraging citizens to stay home as much as possible over the next two weeks.
Impact on Hospitals and Staff
Experts have long predicted that the virus would pick up in the colder months of the year. With such a steep case increase before winter has even arrived, health officials are worried about this trend. But with all these numbers trending upwards at alarming rates, there are a lot of health officials concerned.
“This is a harbinger of a very tough winter that’s coming. I think hospitals are going to be very, very stressed this fall and winter,” Dr. Bill Schaffner, an epidemiologist at Vanderbilt University told CNBC.
On top of this, hospital staffers are suffering from COVID fatigue. Doctors and nurses have been dealing with the pandemic for the majority of the year with no end in sight. This has led to physical and emotional exhaustion. Some hospitals are also understaffed.
“We’re down 20% to 30%,” Greg Bell, the president of the Utah Hospital Association told the Tribune. “Hundreds and hundreds of nurses are not able to work as they were [before] because of their own disease or infection in the family, or they’re moms and dads with school issues. Some are worn out, some are on leave because they’ve been doing this for seven months.”
See what others are saying: (CNBC) (Salt Lake Tribune) (Vox)
Protests Erupt in Philadelphia After the Fatal Police Shooting of Walter Wallace Jr
- Officers in West Philadelphia repeatedly fired at a Black man who approached them while armed with a knife Monday afternoon. Shortly thereafter, the man was pronounced dead.
- During that incident, multiple witnesses reportedly told police that the man, 27-year-old Walter Wallace Jr., struggled with mental health issues.
- Following Wallace’s death, many people were outraged that police didn’t use more nonlethal tactics to subdue him.
- That outrage prompted a night of protests that became violent, with demonstrators hurling objects at police, police rushing demonstrators with shields and batons, and looters taking advantage of the unrest.
Police Shooting of Walter Wallace Jr.
Protests rocked Philadelphia Monday night following the fatal police shooting of a Black man who had been wielding a knife in the street earlier in the day.
The man has been identified as 27-year-old Walter Wallace Jr. According to his family, he struggled with mental health issues. Because of that, Monday night’s protests were mainly geared toward the fact that officers used lethal force instead of a less-lethal method to subdue him.
The situation began Monday afternoon around 4 p.m. when two still-unnamed officers in West Philadelphia responded to a report of a man wielding a knife in the street. According to police spokesperson Eric Gripp, the two officers ordered Wallace to drop the knife but he refused.
In a video captured at the scene by a witness, Wallace can be seen walking on the street. The two officers have their guns drawn. Meanwhile, a woman later identified as Wallace’s mother appears to be pleading with Wallace as she follows him.
At one point, Wallace raises his hand and approaches the officers, who back away. The video then moves out of view, but multiple shots can be heard. When it swings back into frame, Wallace can be seen falling to the ground. A group of people, including the officers, swarm around him.
“Y’all didn’t have to give him that many fucking shots!” one witness, presumably the person filming, yells at the police.
Following the shooting, one of the officers reportedly drove Wallace to the hospital, where he then died.
Within hours, more details around the incident began to come out. In an interview with The Philadelphia Inquirer, Wallace’s father said his son struggled with mental health issues and that he was on medication.
“Why didn’t they use a Taser?” he said. “His mother was trying to defuse the situation.”
That claim was backed up by a witness who also told The Inquirer that, in the beginning, Wallace was standing on the porch of his home, knife drawn. When police arrived, that witness — Maurice Holloway — said they immediately drew their guns.
From there, Holloway said Wallace started walking down the steps of the porch and into the street. At the same time, Holloway noted that Wallace’s mother was attempting to shield him from the police and tell them that he was her son.
“I’m yelling, ‘Put down the gun, put down the gun,’” Holloway told The Inquirier, “and everyone is saying, ‘Don’t shoot him, he’s gonna put it down, we know him.’”
While Gripp said it was unclear how many times Wallace was shot, Wallace’s father believes he was shot 10 times. The Inquirer currently estimates that the officers could have fired more than a dozen rounds, and the newspaper noted that police later marked the scene with at least 13 evidence markers.
Protests Erupt in Philadelphia
Much like Wallace’s father and Holloway, many were furious that officers repeatedly shot Wallace, arguing that they could have subdued him with much less-lethal force.
Arnett Woodall, a community organizer who lives a several blocks away, told The Inquirer that the number of evidence markers at the scene showed this was “a textbook example of excessive force.”
“Why not a warning shot?” Woodall asked. “Why not a Taser? Why not a shot in the leg?”
Reggie Shuford, executive director of the Pennsylvania ACLU, said in statement that Wallace’s death proves the need for more mental health initiatives.
“It is time to divest in police and invest in community programs, including the kind of mental health services that allow intervention that may have prevented Mr. Wallace’s killing,” he said.
According to reports, more than 300 protesters gathered on the streets of Philadelphia Monday night, many of them chanting “Black Lives Matter” and “Say his name: Walter Wallace.”
Those protesters originally marched to a police station, where they met officers in riot gear. Officers then pushed the crowd back with shields before rushing them and beating some people with batons.
Some people also engaged in violent tactics by throwing objects at the officers. Others started multiple fires, including one situation where a police vehicle was set on fire. At least five more police vehicles were vandalized over the course of the night.
As the night went on, looters capitalized on the unrest, breaking into multiple businesses. Police later said they ultimately arrested around 30 people for throwing objects or looting — including some in areas not near the protest.
According to local outlets, at least 30 Philly police officers were hospitalized with various injuries Tuesday morning, though all but one have since been treated and released. The lone remaining officer is a 56-year-old female sergeant who suffered a broken leg after being hit by a black pickup truck during the night.
Alongside these protests, John McNesby, president of the Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 5, has stood by the two officers involved in the incident.
“Our police officers are being vilified this evening for doing their job and keeping the community safe, after being confronted by a man with a knife,” he said. “We support and defend these officers, as they too are traumatized by being involved in a fatal shooting.”
Several Philadelphia officials have called for a full investigation into the shooting, including Mayor Jim Kenney who said in a statement, “My prayers are with the family and friends of Walter Wallace. I have watched the video of this tragic incident and it presents difficult questions that must be answered.”
Police Commissioner Danielle Outlaw has announced an investigation into the shooting by the Officer Involved Shooting Investigation Unit. While that investigation is ongoing, both officers have been pulled from street-duty. Reportedly, both officers had their body cams turned on, and that footage will play a role in the investigation.
“I recognize that the video of the incident raises many questions,” Outlaw said in a statement. “Residents have my assurance that those questions will be fully addressed by the investigation. While at the scene this evening, I heard and felt the anger of the community. Everyone involved will forever be impacted.”
Outlaw also noted that she plans to meet with members of the community, as well as Wallace’s family, “to hear their concerns.”
While this investigation is underway, Philly District Attorney Larry Krasner has called for an end to the violence.
“In the hours and days following this shooting, we ask Philadelphians to come together to uphold people’s freedom to express themselves peacefully and to reject violence of any kind,” he said.