Indiana case before U.S. Supreme Court could help red states defund Planned Parenthood


Tony Cook and Johnny Magdaleno, Indianapolis Star
Mon, October 17, 2022 

A controversial U.S. Supreme Court case that Marion County’s public health agency is pursuing could make it easier for red states across the country to cut off funding for Planned Parenthood.

Although the case began as a dispute over alleged poor nursing home care, the sweeping nature of what the Health & Hospital Corp. of Marion County is asking the Supreme Court to do would have far-reaching repercussions.

Among them: Taking away a key legal tool that Planned Parenthood has used to beat back efforts to defund the organization in Republican-led states, including Indiana.

Health & Hospital, the public agency that operates the Marion County Health Department and the Sidney & Lois Eskenazi Hospital, wants the high court to ban private lawsuits over federal safety net programs like Medicaid. If justices agree, millions of beneficiaries would lose their ability to sue when state and local governments violate their federal rights or improperly withhold benefits.

More:Marion County agency wants SCOTUS to strip protections for millions of vulnerable Americans

But it’s not just individual recipients who would be prohibited from suing. Providers such as Planned Parenthood also would be barred from bringing lawsuits.

That prospect has led Republican states across the country to latch onto Health & Hospital’s case.

A successful legal strategy

For years, Planned Parenthood has successfully used a federal law passed after the Civil War to block efforts to ban the reproductive health care provider from receiving Medicaid funds because it provides abortions.

The law, known as Section 1983, allows citizens to sue when a state or local government violates their rights under federal law. Planned Parenthood has successfully used the law to file lawsuits against states that withhold Medicaid funds, arguing such bans violate the Medicaid Act’s guarantee that recipients can receive care from any qualified provider of their choice.

The first of those cases took place in Indiana.

Although Planned Parenthood was already barred from using federal funds to pay for abortions except in rare cases, Indiana lawmakers wanted to go further. In 2011, they passed a law preventing Medicaid recipients from accessing any health care services at Planned Parenthood clinics.

Planned Parenthood sued to stop the ban and won.

The lawsuit preserved access to Planned Parenthood’s health care services for about 9,000 patients who depend on Medicaid, said Rebecca Gibron, CEO for Planned Parenthood Great Northwest, Hawai‘i, Alaska, Indiana, Kentucky. Those services include cancer screenings, contraception and STD testing.

More:Law banning Planned Parenthood funding is invalidated

“Indiana’s previous attempt to block these patients from accessing family planning services at our health centers was not only rightly found to be unlawful by the courts but also dangerous and cruel, putting at risk our already underserved communities,” Gibron said in an emailed statement.

A ‘perfect opportunity’ to prohibit Planned Parenthood lawsuits

Indiana’s defeat didn’t deter other Republican-led states from trying to implement their own bans. With a few exceptions, courts have sided with Planned Parenthood.

Health & Hospital’s case now pending before the Supreme Court could change that dynamic. A ruling in its favor could prevent lawsuits like the one Planned Parenthood filed in Indiana.

That’s one reason why Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita and 21 other Republican attorneys general have intervened.

Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita speaks to about 100 supporters at the Indiana Statehouse who are against government mask mandates, Tuesday, Nov. 16, 2021, during Organization Day.

In a brief submitted to the Supreme Court, Rokita argues that Planned Parenthood’s lawsuit in 2011 interfered in a matter that should have been worked out between the state and federal health officials.

“Political accountability demands … that the federal government be the one to decide in the first instance both whether a material breach has occurred and what the proper remedy is — in short, to put its money where its mouth is,” the brief says.

Rokita’s views are likely to feature prominently in the case because Health & Hospital has granted part of its oral argument time to his office.

State officials from South Carolina have also filed a brief in support of Health & Hospital. That state’s governor, Henry McMaster, issued an executive order to cease any state payments for services provided at abortion clinics. The order was blocked, though, after Planned Parenthood successfully challenged it in court.

Health & Hospital’s case “presents the perfect opportunity” for the Supreme Court to clarify that lawsuits like the one Planned Parenthood filed against South Carolina should not be allowed because Congress has not explicitly authorized them, South Carolina argues in its brief.

Millions of dollars at stake

Even if the Supreme Court bans such lawsuits, Planned Parenthood could still try to sue based on other constitutional claims. The federal government could also intervene. But the organization’s most accessible and successful legal strategy for preserving access to its services for Medicaid patients would be thwarted.

Given that Indiana was the first state to ban Medicaid patients from using Planned Parenthood’s services — and the first state Planned Parenthood defeated in court — it is not surprising that Rokita and other Republican leaders have glommed onto the Health & Hospital case, said Sara Rosenbaum, a health law and policy professor at George Washington University.

“The state has been smarting from that ever since,” she said. “This is their retribution I suppose.”

More:Here's why Nancy Pelosi, Todd Rokita, Biden administration care about Indiana nursing home case

Federal health care programs are a key source of funding for Planned Parenthood. Last year, the organization received $633 million in government funding, according to the organization’s latest annual report. That’s about 37 percent of its total revenue. Most of that government funding comes from Medicaid and the Title X family planning program.

In Indiana, Planned Parenthood received about $1.68 million in Medicaid payments during the last fiscal year, according to the Indiana Family and Social Services Administration.

“If they can get the Supreme Court to knock out (Section) 1983 not just for nursing home beneficiaries, but more generally, then they can eliminate Planned Parenthood tomorrow,” Rosenbaum said.

Planned Parenthood isn’t the only provider who would be affected. For example, lawsuits from hospitals or other health care providers who claim their state governments improperly denied or delayed Medicaid payments would also be barred from suing in federal court for alleged violations of the Medicaid Act.

What’s next

The Supreme Court has scheduled oral arguments in Health & Hospital’s case for Nov. 8.

In the meantime, a coalition of liberal activists and advocates for low-income, elderly and disabled people are putting pressure on Health & Hospital to withdraw the case.

They are outraged that Health & Hospital, a Democrat-led public health agency, is teaming up with staunch anti-abortion opponents such as Rokita to scrap the legal rights of millions of vulnerable Americans, along with providers like Planned Parenthood.

The pressure has led several members of the Indianapolis City-County Council, which appoints two of Health & Hospital’s board members, to call on the agency to withdraw its Supreme Court case. At least two Democrats in the General Assembly ― Sen. Fady Qaddoura and Rep. Cherrish Pryor ― have also publicly called for a withdrawal.

Others in their party have criticized Health & Hospital’s pursuit of the case, but stopped short of demanding it retreat from the high court.

In a statement posted to Twitter, Congressman André Carson of Indianapolis said on Thursday he was “very concerned and disappointed to see a lawsuit filed that could make it harder for low-income patients to exercise their rights if they’ve been mistreated.”

Andre Carson, U.S. House of Representatives member, speaks at the national convention for the Young Democrats of America, held in Indianapolis, Friday, July 19, 2019.

“I am also concerned about the lack of community input, which is critical when a public agency is making such a critical decision,” he said.

Indianapolis Mayor Joe Hogsett, who appoints three of Health & Hospital's board members, broke his silence on the case last week when he told IndyStar the agency's Supreme Court petition was “a step too far.”

More:Mayor Hogsett says health agency went 'a step too far' with SCOTUS case, calls for change

So far, Health & Hospital has refused to comment publicly on the sweeping nature of its request. The agency’s board never held a public meeting or vote regarding the decision to petition the Supreme Court.

A spokesman for the agency did not respond to an interview request for this story. Nor did Rokita’s office.

Instead, he doubled down on his support for the case in a lengthy news release Friday.

“When individual beneficiaries bring unauthorized lawsuits to enforce federal grant conditions, they invite unelected federal judges to interfere with how state and federal officials carry out the jobs the public expects them to perform," he said. "The proper functioning of democracy requires that such judicial interference not occur unless Congress has expressly authorized it."

He concluded: “Our office is proud to fight for the fiscal integrity of the state when administering federal programs. We look forward to combining forces with the Marion County Health and Hospital Corporation to argue this case in the U.S. Supreme Court next month.”

Health & Hospital’s next board meeting is scheduled for Tuesday at 2 p.m. at Eskenazi Hospital. The board plans to discuss the case in an executive session prior to the meeting, but it’s unclear if it will discuss the case publicly or take any action.

Contact IndyStar reporter Tony Cook at 317-444-6081 or tony.cook@indystar.com. Follow him on Twitter: @IndyStarTony.

Call IndyStar courts reporter Johnny Magdaleno at 317-273-3188 or email him at jmagdaleno@indystar.com. Follow him on Twitter: @IndyStarJohnny.

This article originally appeared on Indianapolis Star: Supreme Court case could help red states defund Planned Parenthood

U$ Supreme Court Declines 

To Take Case Aimed At Overturning

100-Year-Old Racist Precedents

Paul Blumenthal

Mon, October 17, 2022 a

The Supreme Court declined to take a case challenging its 100-year-old racist precedents that continue to deny equal rights to the 3.6 million residents of overseas U.S. territories on Monday.

Three American Samoans living in Utah and a Samoan nonprofit petitioned the court in Fitisemanu v. U.S. to overturn the Insular Cases, the court’s early 20th-century precedents that enabled the country’s colonial expansion by allowing it to absorb overseas territories populated by non-white peoples while denying them equal rights or a path to statehood.

“It’s a punch in the gut for the Justices to leave in place a ruling that says I am not equal to other Americans simply because I was born in a U.S. territory,” John Fitisemanu, the lead plaintiff in the case, said in a statement. “I was born on U.S. soil, have a U.S. passport, and pay my taxes like everyone else. But because of a discriminatory federal law, I am not recognized as a U.S. citizen.”

The Insular Cases that deny people like Fitisemanu equal rights as citizens were explicitly founded on racist premises. The cases, which occurred from 1901 to 1922, claimed that the people of the overseas territories the U.S. conquered in the Spanish-American War came from “savage tribes” and “alien” and “uncivilized race[s]” who were “absolutely unfit to receive” the rights provided by the Constitution. The court invented a new legal class of “unincorporated territory” for the colonial possessions taken from Spain that denied them equal rights and statehood.

Today, the Insular Cases still govern the U.S. overseas territories of American Samoa, Guam, Northern Marianas Islands, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. In each territory, Congress has negotiated different rules for people’s access to their rights as Americans.

For example, unlike other territorial inhabitants, American Samoans are not officially U.S. citizens, but American nationals. This means that even if they move to a state or the District of Columbia, they will be denied the right to vote. This was one of the chief complaints made by Fitisemanu and the other plaintiffs in the case.

Supreme Court Justices Neil Gorsuch (standing second from the left) and Sonia Sotomayor (seated furthest left) are the only justices known to support overturning the Insular Cases. (Photo: Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images)

Supreme Court Justices Neil Gorsuch (standing second from the left) and Sonia Sotomayor (seated furthest left) are the only justices known to support overturning the Insular Cases. (Photo: Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images)

Fitisemanu v. U.S. challenged the constitutionality of the Insular Cases by arguing that the 14th Amendment’s citizenship clause grants U.S. citizenship to all people “born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” As these territories are both a part of the U.S. and subject to its jurisdiction, the residents of the territories ought to be granted full access to that citizenship, the plaintiffs argued.

For years now, territorial residents have sought to loosen the grip of the Insular Cases or overturn them entirely through the courts. In each case, the courts have refused to do so.

There was some expectation that the Supreme Court may act differently on Fitisemanu after Justices Neil Gorsuch and Sonia Sotomayor declared in the case of Vaello-Madero v. U.S. that they would like to see the Insular Cases overturned.

“[It is] past time to acknowledge the gravity of this error and admit what we know to be true: The Insular Cases have no foundation in the Constitution and rest instead on racial stereotypes. They deserve no place in our law,” Gorsuch wrote in a concurrence in Vaello-Madero.

In agreeing with Gorsuch that the Insular Cases should be overturned, Sotomayor called them “both odious and wrong” in her Vaello-Madero dissent.

But four of the nine Supreme Court justices must vote to take up a case. Clearly, there were not four votes to take up Fitisemanu. There were also no written dissents from the denial of the case.

This article originally appeared on HuffPost and has been updated.

COLONY

US Supreme Court rejects appeal to give American Samoans citizenship


The U.S Supreme Court is seen, Tuesday, Oct. 11, 2022 in Washington. 

(AP Photo/Mariam Zuhaib) 

MARK SHERMAN
Mon, October 17, 2022 

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Monday rejected an appeal seeking to give people born in American Samoa U.S. citizenship.

In leaving in place an appeals court decision, the court also passed up an invitation to overturn a series of decisions dating back to 1901 known as the Insular Cases, replete with racist and anti-foreign rhetoric. Justice Neil Gorsuch had called for the cases to be overturned in April.

But the justices refused to take up an appeal from people born in American Samoa, and living in Utah, who argued that a federal law declaring that they are “nationals, but not citizens, of the United States at birth” is unconstitutional.

A trial judge in Utah ruled in their favor, but the federal appeals court in Denver said Congress, not courts, should decide the citizenship issue. The appeals court also noted that American Samoa's elected leaders opposed the lawsuit for fear that it might disrupt their cultural traditions.

“It’s a punch in the gut for the Justices to leave in place a ruling that says I am not equal to other Americans simply because I was born in a U.S. territory," John Fitisemanu, the lead plaintiff, said in a statement. “I was born on U.S. soil, have a U.S. passport and pay my taxes like everyone else. But because of a discriminatory federal law, I am not recognized as a U.S. citizen.”

American Samoa is the only unincorporated territory of the United States where the inhabitants are not American citizens at birth.

Instead, those born in the cluster of islands some 2,600 miles (4,184 kilometers) southwest of Hawaii are granted “U.S. national” status, meaning they can’t vote for U.S. president, run for office outside American Samoa or apply for certain jobs. The only federal election they can cast a vote in is the race for American Samoa’s nonvoting U.S. House seat.

Not taking up the case “helps preserve American Samoa’s cultural priorities and right of self-determination,” said Amata Coleman Radewagen, American Samoa’s U.S. House delegate.

“Our people value American Samoa’s right of self-determination, with great love for the United States as expressed in our people’s high rate of service to the country,” she said in a statement. “The issue of the Insular Cases can be addressed by Congress, based on self-determination by the people of each territory."

The Insular Cases, which arose following the Spanish-American War, dealt with the administration of overseas territories.

In their conclusion that residents of territories had some, but not all, rights under the Constitution, justices wrote in stark racial and xenophobic terms. Citizenship could not be automatically given to “those absolutely unfit to receive it,” one justice wrote.

That history prompted Gorsuch to comment in a case involving benefits denied to people who live in Puerto Rico, decided in April. He wrote that the Insular Cases were wrongly decided because they deprived residents of U.S. territories of some constitutional rights.

“It is past time to acknowledge the gravity of this error and admit what we know to be true: The Insular Cases have no foundation in the Constitution and rest instead on racial stereotypes. They have no place in our law,” Gorsuch wrote.

The case stems from a lawsuit filed by three American Samoa natives now living in Utah, where they are prohibited from voting or becoming police officers.

The Biden administration joined the American Samoa government in calling for the court to reject the appeal. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, the administration's top Supreme Court lawyer, wrote that “the government in no way relies on the indefensible and discredited aspects of the Insular Cases’ reasoning and rhetoric” that was highlighted in the appeal. __

AP journalist Jennifer Sinco Kelleher in Honolulu contributed to this report.

Faith must be kept to counter uncaring conservative Christians who support Walker, Trump


Michael Conroy/AP


Issac Bailey
Sun, October 16, 2022 

And to think, I was going to give up the faith Mama instilled in me when I was old enough to walk.

Self-proclaimed conservative Christians and other people of faith have spent the past six years making excuses for Donald Trump and are now doing the same for Herschel Walker.

They cared not that Trump was the personification of everything Jesus taught us to resist. They didn’t care about his grab em’ by the genitals rhetoric, didn’t care about his open and pervasive racism. They didn’t care that he implemented a policy whose objective was to curb immigration by essentially kidnapping the children of brown immigrants. They didn’t care about his penchant to lie about things big and small, that he viewed them with such disdain he bragged he could murder someone and not lose their support.

They’re doing the same in Georgia for U.S. Senate candidate Herschel Walker. Make no mistake, though. This isn’t about one race; it’s about the message the GOP’s largely white conservative Christian base is sending about what it believes across the country. For Walker, they initially overlooked the gaggle of secret children he did not make known to the public until forced to despite his preaching against what he says is a scourge of fatherless homes. It’s worse this time because the latest revelations go to the heart of what they claim to believe in more passionately than anything else, the sanctity of life itself. Walker reportedly paid for an abortion of a former girlfriend and wanted her to have a second one – all while being the most extreme anti-abortion candidate during this election cycle. He is against all abortions, against any exceptions for things such as rape, incest or even the health of the mother.


The National Right to Life Committee quickly said it was going to stand behind Walker, calling it just another “Democratic character assassination attempt.” The funders aligned with Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America said “We stand firmly alongside him.” Each of those “pro-life” groups say they believe Walker’s denials – even though the woman provided receipts from the abortion to the media to back up her claims. Others claim it’s because though Walker may have paid for one abortion, his Democratic opponent supports thousands or millions of them. Never mind that the abortion rate has routinely decreased faster and more steeply under Democratic administrations than Republican ones. Never mind that it increased for two consecutive years for the first time in decades when Trump was in office.

This isn’t about them. Not anymore. It’s about a mistake I was about to make I was so caught up in not wanting to be associated with them, I had second thoughts about calling myself Christian. I thought it might be better to leave behind a faith legacy that began in little ole White Chapel Holiness Church in St. Stephen, S.C., nearly five decades ago when Mama made sure we were on time to Sunday school even if she had to usher us out of the house and down the road with one shoe on our feet and unbuttoned shirts on our backs. I know now I don’t have to leave all of that behind, that I instead must be more willing to provide a counter voice. I don’t want others to believe the faith that provided guidance and clarity for my family through the toughest moments is as uncaring and unprincipled as those who have vowed to support the likes of Walker and Trump.

They are Christians. So am I. It’s just that we don’t worship the same God.

Issac Bailey is a McClatchy Opinion writer based in Myrtle Beach.

Exclusive: India's ONGC eyes stake in Russian entity managing Sakhalin 1 - sources


Technicians walk inside the Oil and Natural Gas Corp (ONGC) 

group gathering station on the outskirts of Ahmedabad


Mon, October 17, 2022 
By Nidhi Verma

NEW DELHI (Reuters) - India's Oil and Natural Gas Corp plans to take a stake in the new Russian entity that will manage the Sakhalin 1 project in the far east as it seeks to retain a 20% share in the asset, three sources familiar with the matter said.

Russian President Vladimir Putin earlier this month issued a decree to establish a new operator for the ExxonMobil-led project and authorised the Kremlin to decide whether foreign shareholders could retain stakes in Sakhalin 1.

"ONGC Videsh will protect its share in the project, which means it will take a stake in the new entity," said one of the sources.


ONGC holds a stake in the project through its overseas investment arm ONGC Videsh.

The new Russian entity, managed by Rosneft subsidiary Sakhalinmorneftegaz-shelf, will own investors' rights in Sakhalin 1. Foreign shareholders have one month to decide on retaining stakes in the project.

Exxon has fully exited Russia after Moscow this month "unilaterally terminated" its interests in the Sakhalin-1 oil and gas project.

Output of Sakhalin 1 collapsed after Exxon declared force majeure in April and refused to accept Russian insurance cover for the tankers as western insurers pulled out due to the sanctions, sources said.

Sakhlin 1 was producing 220,000 bpd before Russia launched its so-called "special military operations" in Ukraine.

Operatorship of the project by a Russian entity will lead to smooth functioning of Sakhalin 1 and would ensure shipping of oil, the sources said.

Two Indian refiners could not lift oil cargoes, sold by ONGC Videsh, due to insurance problems.

The Sakhalin 1 project has turned out to be a money spinner for ONGC Videsh, and accounted for about a quarter of its proved reserves of 124.7 million tonnes in the year ended March 31, 2022.

Sources said ONGC would consider taking additional stake in the project if that makes "commercial sense".

The sources declined to be named citing confidentiality and ONGC Videsh did not respond to Reuters' email seeking comments.

Sakhalin Oil and Gas Development Co (SODECO), a consortium of Japanese firms, holds a 30% stake in the project while Russian oil major Rosneft through Sakhalinmorneftegaz-shelf and R N Astra own the remaining 20% share.

While the Indian company is keen to retain its stake in the project, SODECO said it was still gathering information about the decree.

"We are gathering information about the decree and plan to make a decision by Nov. 12 whether or not we will apply for a stake in the new entity after consulting with our stakeholders, including the Japanese industry ministry", a spokesperson at SODECO said on Monday.

(Reporting by Nidhi Verma; Editing by Bernadette Baum)

Exclusive-Exxon exits Russia empty-handed with oil project 'unilaterally terminated'


Logo of the Exxon Mobil Corp is seen at the Rio Oil and Gas Expo and Conference in Rio de Janeiro

Mon, October 17, 2022
By Sabrina Valle

HOUSTON (Reuters) - Exxon Mobil Corp said on Monday that it left Russia completely after President Vladimir Putin expropriated its properties following seven months of discussions over an orderly transfer of its 30% stake in a major oil project.

Exxon did not say if it received any compensation for the assets, which it had valued at more than $4 billion. An Exxon spokesperson declined to comment on whether it will proceed to contest the seizure through an international arbitration process, a possibility flagged in August.

Its departure illustrates the clash between the West and Russia over energy following Moscow's invasion of Ukraine in late February and threats of using nuclear weapons against the country and its supporters. BP, TotalEnergies, Equinor, and Shell have all transferred properties to Russian partners or left operations behind.

"We made every effort to engage with the Russian government and other stakeholders," the Exxon spokesperson said.

The company said it "safely exited" Russia after the government earlier this month "unilaterally terminated" its interests in the Sakhalin-1 oil and gas project, its largest in the country.

Exxon has been trying to relinquish operation of Sakhalin-1 since March 1, when it announced it would abandon all of its more than $4 billion in assets, leaving open the possibility to sell Sakhalin-1. It said it would "closely coordinate" the transfer of operation with its partners - Russian company Rosneft, India's ONGC Videsh and Japan's SODECO to ensure it would be done in a secure way.

In April, Exxon disclosed a $3.4 billion write down on the Russia exit and this month signaled a third-quarter $600 million impairment charge for unidentified assets. Exxon had valued its Russia holdings at more than $4 billion.

On Oct. 7 Putin seized Exxon shares in the oil production joint venture and transferred them to a government-controlled company. In August, Putin had signed a first decree that Exxon said made a secure and environmentally safe exit from Sakhalin-1 difficult. The U.S. producer reacted to August's decree by issuing a "note of difference," a legal step before arbitration.

The harsh language of Exxon's formal exit shows a desired outcome for Exxon - leaving Russia - but in unamicable terms that could translate in multi-year legal disputes, starting with arbitration in European courts.

PHASING OUT

Exxon has been reducing its presence in Russia since 2014, following sanctions against Moscow after it annexed the Crimean peninsula from Ukraine.

The U.S. company had removed earlier this year its expatriate workers and closed its lubricant and chemical businesses in Russia. By July, output at the Sakhalin-1 project fell 10,000 barrels per day (bpd), from 220,000 bpd before Russia invaded Ukraine.

The volume was just enough to provide natural gas to keep the lights on in the Russian cites of Khabarovsk and Vladivostok. About 700 Russia-based employees that kept operations running will be transferred to the new Russia company taking over the asset, Exxon said.

"We are thankful for the professionalism, expertise and commitment demonstrated by ENL’s employees during these difficult circumstances," the Exxon spokesperson said.

Exxon had pledged to take its time and provide for a safe transfer to a new operator to avoid spills, environmental accidents or shutting down the lights of cities supplied by the project.

Russian terms blocked it from transferring operations or negotiating a potential sale to Indian or Japanese partners, which indicated interest in keeping Sakhalin-1's supply.

India's Oil and Natural Gas Corp plans to take a stake in the new Russian entity that will manage the Sakhalin-1 project as it seeks to retain a 20% share in the asset, three sources familiar with the matter said.

Japan will decide what to do about the Sakhalin-1 oil and gas project in Russia's Far East in consultation with its partners as it reviews details of a decree by Moscow, Industry minister Yasutoshi Nishimura said last week.

According to Putin's Oct. 7 decree, Sakhalin-1's foreign partners will have one month after the new Russian company is created to ask the Russian government for shares in the new entity.

Equinor last month agreed to sell Russian assets value at $1 billion for 1 euro. The formal sale allowed Norway's Equinor to forgo future liabilities and investment commitments. On Friday, Danone also sold its assets but kept a minority stake.

(Reporting by Sabrina Valle; editing by Grant McCool)

Latino media grapples with how to cover the Nury Martinez scandal


Matt Pearce, Dorany Pineda, Melissa Gomez
Mon, October 17, 2022 


Portrait of L.A. Taco editor, Javier Cabral in the alleyway behind the Highland 

Theatres on Sept. 30, 2020. (Mariah Tauger / Los Angeles Times)

Javier Cabral had never been tested as L.A. Taco’s editor in chief like he was after audio leaked Oct. 9 of then-L.A. City Council President Nury Martinez making racist remarks.

As a tiny publication, there was no way L.A. Taco could overpower the larger media outlets covering the Latino civic leaders who had trashed a colleague's Black toddler, Oaxacans and others in a secretly recorded 2021 meeting about redistricting.

But the “street-level angle” that has made L.A. Taco a beloved media underdog became apparent when investigative reporter Lexis-Olivier Ray saw a tweet asking for a list of Oaxacan restaurants to support in Koreatown.

“As soon as he said it, I was like, 'Bam!' That was it," Cabral said. "That was our story."

In podcasts, newspaper columns and on indie sites over the past week, Latino journalists have been dissecting the audio's Spanglish, exploring niche angles and trying to promote solidarity after L.A. Councilmembers Martinez, Gil Cedillo and Kevin de León were caught candidly discussing redistricting as a zero-sum racial struggle for power.

This wasn't just a Watergate moment for a slice of L.A.'s political elite. For some Latino-centered media outlets, the recordings were an MRI that revealed some ugly masses long festering in the body politic: anti-Blackness and anti-Indigenous racism.

In addition to denouncing the politicians and demanding their resignations, it's been a time for them to look inward and elevate the voices of Black Latino and Indigenous voices long ignored by mainstream Latino media.

“To remedy the situation, the Latino political class in our city has to renew its bond with the people," the editorial board of La Opinión, a Spanish-language newspaper in Los Angeles, wrote in an editorial denouncing the remarks by all three City Council members a day after the audio was published.

"We must be aware of this casual racism that is widespread in our own community, which seems harmless but is not and must be firmly condemned," the board wrote.

Zoe "Mala" Muñoz, left, and Ariana "Diosa" Rodriguez, right, the L.A.-based podcast hosts of "Locatora Radio: A Radiophonic Novela," together on Sept. 18, 2020, in Rodriguez's backyard in Downey. (Josie Norris / Los Angeles Times)

In an Oct. 12 episode titled “Latinidad is dangerous,” L.A.-based podcast hosts Zoe “Mala” Muñoz and Ariana “Diosa” Rodriguez of “Locatora Radio” reacted to the leaked recordings with horror and reflected on their own responsibilities to fight racism.

Muñoz surveyed the political surroundings: Half the city is Latino. Los Angeles County Sheriff Alex Villanueva is Latino. Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, whose grandfather was born in Mexico, "is some kind of a Latino." The three City Council members caught on the recordings — Martinez, Cedillo and de León — were Latinos.

"As non-Black Latinos who speak Spanish or English or have citizenship or what have you, we have got to recognize our power, politically, economically, numbers-wise," Muñoz said on the episode. "Our folks, who we’re related to, who look like us and have our last names and speak our language, are making horrifying decisions at the highest level. That’s where we need to be focusing.”

Rodriguez agreed.

“There have been so many instances — but this is obviously the current, most recent one — where it’s like, Latinos get a little bit of power, and they quickly act like the oppressor and quickly want to wield and hoard all the power,” Rodriguez said. “It’s not good. We should be coalescing, we should be coalition-building with our Black community in Los Angeles, the very large indigenous community in Los Angeles.”

The pair decried Martinez and the “chingona industrial complex” and invited Odilia Romero, director and co-founder of Comunidades Indígenas en Liderazgo (Indigenous Communities in Leadership), onto the show to talk about how to stand up to anti-Indigenous racism.

Much like English-language media, Spanish-language media has historically mistreated marginalized communities, said José Luis Benavides, a professor of journalism at Cal State Northridge.

“It has a record, especially with those communities that were vilified by these City Council members,” Benavides said.

But this time, Latino and Spanish-language media have used the moment to help the Latino community reflect on Martinez's remarks, which unfortunately reflect not-uncommon sentiments, he said.

The moment has given visibility for Indigenous communities that have fought to be recognized for years, said Mireya Olivera, editor of Impulso, an L.A.-based publication that covers the Oaxacan community.

The staff of eight reporters and editors, two of whom are based in Oaxaca, Mexico, has been closely covering the fallout of the audio leak.

Since 2004, they’ve covered the Oaxacan community as a hyperlocal news organization, covering high school graduations and basketball tournaments, Olivera said. They fill the gap often left by traditional Latino media, she added, which has long ignored communities like theirs.

Olivera has been surprised to see the degree to which Oaxacans are being highlighted in national news outlets and on broadcast television.

“Before, I wouldn't have imagined this level of coverage,” Olivera said, but it is welcomed. “It is necessary and vital that mass media cover ethnic communities and see what is happening on the ground.”

Before, Latino media likely would’ve ignored the insults to Indigenous Oaxacans because they wouldn’t have cared about covering the community, said Laura Martínez, a Mexico-born blogger who has followed U.S. Latino media closely over the years.

But there has been a shift recently, reflected in how they are closely covering the story today. Martínez (who is not related to Nury Martinez) points to the generational shift, with younger Latinos being more willing to call out colorism in their communities than their parents, who may have grown up with racist language being normalized.

“When you’re born and raised in Mexico, you are raised listening to things like ‘el negrito,’ ‘la chinita.’ We think by making it diminutive it’s not going to sound as bad,” Martínez said.

Not everyone in Latino-centered media was united in denunciation.

In an Oct. 12 episode of "Rick Sanchez News," host Sanchez, a former CNN correspondent once based in Southern California, defended Martinez as the victim of “cancel culture” who he felt was unfairly recorded without her consent and taken out of context as a Latina.

“Words in the Latino culture have a different meaning than they do in the English culture,” Sanchez, who is now based in south Florida, said in an interview with The Times. Sanchez's show bills itself as “a podcast that shatters the stereotypes and misconceptions about Latinos in America.”

Martinez had referred to a fellow council member's Black son with the Spanish word for "little monkey," changuito, which many Spanish speakers have interpreted as racist. Sanchez, however, said the term "has a secondary meaning to describe a hyperactive child."

"It comes down to context," Sanchez said. "I never heard her disparage the child's race. She was directly referring to his behavior, which leads to the possible if not reasonable conclusion that she used the term to describe his hyperactive nature." Sanchez added, "If he was a Latino kid, she would have used the same word."

Sanchez said that Martinez was "out of line in much of what she said" and that she said "stupid" things.

"But this onslaught, this woman is being crucified," Sanchez said. "She probably will never be able to work again, at least not in that town. I think it’s a bridge too far.”

Sanchez said, “I may be the only Latino in the United States standing by this woman,” but he argued that Latinos were often quick to tear each other down. He cited an old-school political parable among Latinos about crabs trapped in a bucket that prevent each other from escaping.

“I stand by my defense, because I know who we are as Latinos,” Sanchez said. “No one is going to come to this woman’s defense.”

Since the story broke, Cabral, the L.A. Taco editor, has experienced a range of emotions. First it was outrage. Then, embarrassment. Now, it's sadness.

“Whether I want to admit it or not, I hear my L.A. accent in Nury Martinez and the way she was talking,” said Cabral.

Cabral has no doubt this will be one of the most defining scandals of L.A. political history. But there is a silver lining.

"Now we’ve had that moment to reflect, and we can call it out next time," Cabral said. "Even when it's somebody in your family table who uses a racist term casually. It's just understanding that it's not OK.”

This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.

Climate change, drought, and death

Hunger in Somalia is putting "a child per minute" into hospitals

Sarah Carter
Tue, October 18, 2022 

Hamdi Yusuf, a malnourished child, is held by her mother in Dollow, 

Somalia, September 21, 2022. / Credit: Jerome Delay/AP

Johannesburg — Aid workers are sounding the alarm over an intensifying humanitarian catastrophe in Somalia, where officials are expected to soon declare the second famine in just over a decade. Aid workers tell CBS News that rampant drought in the east African nation has already sparked a mass-migration of desperate families who can't feed their children. Many are showing up too late at makeshift camps for help, and the conditions are expected to get worse over the winter.

In early October, United Nations humanitarian chief Martin Griffiths said he had "no doubt that we are seeing famine on our watch in Somalia."

A formal famine declaration comes when a region or nation meets certain proscribed criteria on mortality rates, insecurity and other metrics. It doesn't trigger any legal response, but it will often galvanize the international community to help more urgently.

Doctors on the ground tell CBS News they're expecting a formal declaration of famine in some Somali regions next month, but they say for millions of starving people, that will be too late.

The U.N. has ominously forecast that more than 40% of the country's 16 million people will face acute hunger between now and December.

Addressing U.N. representatives at the global body's European headquarters in Geneva on Tuesday, UNICEF spokesperson James Elder warned that Somalia was "on the brink of a tragedy at a scale not seen in decades."

Climate change, drought, and death

The security situation in Somalia, where the al Qaeda-linked al-Shabaab terror group holds significant ground, blocking humanitarian work, is contributing to the building catastrophe, but other human actions are also to blame. A 2020 survey ranked Somalia as the second-most vulnerable nation to the impacts of climate change in the world, behind only Niger.

Pervasive drought after a fifth consecutive failed rainy season has prompted a massive exodus from southern Somali regions. Families watched earlier this year as their crops and livestock died and their children slid into even more dire hunger. Many waited too long, hoping the rain was just about to arrive, but climate change has upended what were once much more predictable weather patterns.

Medical workers at camps for internally displaced people (IDPs) say families are arriving without any food or water, often with the most vulnerable — the elderly and children under five — already past the point of medical intervention. Regional hospitals' stabilization wards are filling up with tiny children clinging to life. Many have spent their entire lives in hunger.

"Today in Somalia, every single minute of every single day, a child is admitted to a health facility for treatment of severe acute malnutrition," UNICEF's Elder told delegations in Geneva on Tuesday. "The latest admission rates from August show 44,000 children admitted with severe acute malnutrition. That is a child per minute."

The last time a famine was declared in Somalia, in 2011, more than 250,000 people died for lack of nutrition, half of them under the age of five. The world vowed never to let it happen again. Later that year, United Nations member states and non-governmental organizations backed a charter to end extreme hunger, a campaign laying out five steps to avoid famines.

But if the U.N. agencies' own predictions are correct, that more than 300,000 people will be living under famine conditions by December in Somalia, this time could be far worse.

"The affected population is twice the size of 2011," Elder said Tuesday. "Things are bad and every sign indicates that they are going to get worse."

Pain that "haunts"

Victor Chinyama of the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) told CBS News he recently saw a mother at an IDP camp just outside the city of Baidoa in southern central Somalia with five children. She told him her 10-year-old son died of hunger two weeks earlier, and she showed him his grave.

"As I was talking to the mom, I noticed the 10-year-old brother crying," he said. "He clearly missed his brother. That haunts me. We often talk to parents, but seeing a sibling in such trauma, I will never forget that."

"We are so focused on lifesaving and raising funds just to keep people alive, you can lose sight of the fact there are so many kids in the IDP camps, not at school. They wake up and do nothing. They have nothing, no future prospects, and they are having to deal with immense loss," Chinyama said. "We have no capacity, because we are in life-saving mode and it is our priority to save lives, but I find that so hard — not to be able to offer them any support."

"It will be too late"

Chinyama said the U.N. aid agency's urgent efforts were focused on finding and treating children suffering from severe malnutrition, as well as providing vaccinations and treatment for cholera and measles.

"We are worried about water, too," said Chinyama, noting that in some of the drought-ravaged areas where the agency is working, it has to dig deeper and deeper as the water table has sunk ever lower. In many cases, he said they simply can't drill deep enough to find ground water, so they have to truck in clean water — a costly alternative.

A Somali woman and children carry water at a camp for displaced people on the outskirts of Dollow, Somalia, September 20, 2022. / Credit: Jerome Delay/AP

Localized outbreaks of measles and cholera since January have prompted UNICEF to launch a new measles vaccination campaign. Without access to clean water, both diseases could quickly tear through the already vulnerable populations in the IDP camps.

As Elder noted in Geneva, twice as many children are already being admitted to regional hospitals than has typically been seen since the last famine.

"We simply cannot wait for famine to be declared, or it will be too late," Chinyama told CBS News.

The international community has recently rallied and started donating money to help Somalia, but the U.N. says there's still a massive $409 million shortfall in the $1.5 billion needed to head off this brewing disaster.

Aid organizations tell CBS News there's a push now to collect the specific data in Somalia on mortality rates and other metrics that will be needed for a formal famine declaration. But with so many people in the country on the move, and those who succumb to the catastrophe often being buried quickly, without formal documentation, it's proving difficult.

"We expect that the data being gathered will show us some areas are already in famine," said Chinyama.

Salvador court orders arrests in Dutch journalist killings


The former defense minister of El Salvador, Jose Guillermo Garcia-Merino is surrounded by the press as he arrives at the ''Oscar Arnulfo Romero'' international airport in San Luis Talpa, El Salvador, Friday, Jan. 8, 2016. Salvadoran judge has ordered the provisional arrest of several retired high-ranking members of the armed forces accused of having participated in the killings of four Dutch journalists in 1982 while they were covering the Central American nation’s civil war. 

(AP Photo/Salvador Melendez, File)

MARCOS ALEMÁN
Sun, October 16, 2022 

SAN SALVADOR, El Salvador (AP) — A Salvadoran judge has ordered the provisional arrest of several retired high-ranking members of the armed forces accused of having participated in the killings of four Dutch journalists in 1982 while they were covering the Central American nation’s civil war.

Among those facing arrest orders are former defense minister Gen. José Guillermo García and Col. Francisco Antonio Morán, former director of the now-defunct treasury police, according to the judge's ruling, a copy of which was seen on Sunday by The Associated Press.

Neither the National Civil Police, which is charged with carrying out the court order, nor the Public Ministry have confirmed the arrest warrants or whether they have been carried out. Neither agency immediately responded to requests for comment.

The ruling by Judge María Mercedes Arguello in Chalatenango province also mentions Col. Mario Adalberto Reyes Mena, former commander of El Salvador’s Fourth Infantry Brigade, who currently resides in the United States. The judge ordered that authorities begin an extradition process against him.

Also included in the ruling are Gen. Rafael Flores Lima, former chief of staff of the armed forces, who died on June 29, 2020, and Sgt. Mario Canizales, who has also died. Canizales allegedly led the patrol that carried out the massacre of the journalists.

Morán and Reyes Mena, as well as Canizales, are identified as the perpetrators of the massacre, while generals García and Flores Lima were accused of crimes of omission.

In March, relatives of the victims, and representatives of the Dutch government and the European Union demanded that El Salvador bring to justice those responsible for the murders of Dutch television journalists Jan Kuiper, Koos Koster, Hans ter Laag and Joop Willemsen.

Oscar Pérez of the Comunicandonos Foundation, which represents victims' families, said that in March 2018 the foundation filed a criminal complaint with the El Salvador’s Attorney General’s Office to investigate the murders of the Dutch journalists.

In response, the Prosecutor’s Office prosecuted the case and sent the file to a court in the municipality of Dulce Nombre de María in Chalatenango province, where in the case was opened in 1982.

The killings took place during the height of El Salvador's civil war between the government and the Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front, or FMLN, guerrillas.

The Dutch TV journalists had linked up with leftist rebels and planned to spend several days behind rebel lines reporting. But Salvadoran soldiers armed with assault rifles and machine guns ambushed them and the guerrillas.

The United Nations Truth Commission for El Salvador, which was set up as part of a U.N.-brokered peace agreement in 1992, said in a report on wartime human rights violations that the ambush was set up to kill the journalists, and was ordered by Col. Mario Reyes Mena.

An estimated 75,000 civilians were killed during El Salvador's civil war, mostly by U.S.-backed government security forces.

Torn Apart: 13 Year Old Author Estela Juarez on New Book & Mother’s Deportation



Joshua Bay
Mon, October 17, 2022 


Estela Juarez clearly remembers the night an immigration officer knocked on her family’s Florida front door and revealed her mother’s secret.

After a 2013 traffic stop exposed her undocumented status, Alejandra Juarez, 43, was confronted by the officer, and eventually deported to Mexico in August 2018 in the wake of the Trump administration’s strict immigration policies.

“Despite my mom being a military wife and having no criminal record she was deported,” Estela, 13, told The 74. “I think it’s very important for people to understand how our immigration laws not only hurt undocumented immigrants, but also the whole family.”

Estela Juarez with her mother Alejandra. (Juarez Family)

Transforming her childhood love of journal writing, Estela is now sharing her story as the daughter of an undocumented immigrant in “Until Someone Listens,” a children’s book co-written with Lissette Norman.

With illustrations by Teresa Martínez, Estela recalls her mother’s journey to permanently reside in the United States.

After living apart from her family for over three years, the Biden administration granted Alejandra a one-year humanitarian parole, which was recently extended until May 2023.

In the interim, Alejandra has joined Estela’s book tour to not only advocate for her own U.S. residency but also comprehensive immigration reform.

“The feedback we got from a lot of hardcore Republicans and former Donald Trump supporters is that when they hear our story from the perspective of a child, it makes them change their mind,” Alejandra told The 74. “And that’s my hope – by Estela telling her story, immigration rules can change.”

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

The 74: For Estela, tell me more about “Until Someone Listens” and why writing a book was the best way to capture your story.

Estela: I know that there are many kids out there with a similar situation as me. I wanted to create a book in a way where it could inspire other children and let them know there’s somebody out there that’s going through the same situation as you.

What is the key takeaway you would want someone reading “Until Someone Listens” to understand about your story?

Estela: I would like them to know that my story is one of many. And by reading the book, I hope they understand how our immigration laws really, really hurt families.

You write in your book “Some see people like my mom as ugly weeds that need to be plucked out of the dirt. But they’re not weeds. They’re wildflowers, all with pretty shapes and colors, each one a different kind of beauty.” What were your thoughts as you wrote this?

Estela: I know many people think my mom doesn’t deserve to live in this country and be with her family over here. She contributes so much to this country yet most people see her as a criminal – but she’s not a criminal and she’s not causing any harm.

Teresa Martínez / Macmillan Children’s Publishing Group

After his election in 2016, former President Donald Trump adopted a “zero-tolerance” policy on undocumented immigrants which placed Alejandra on a high priority deportation list. For Alejandra, tell me more about what was going through your mind when this happened.

Alejandra: The best way to explain to you is that I couldn’t believe it. Even when I got deported, I thought that they were going to bring me back. I thought that they were going to say we made a mistake. It took me a year and a half to realize that it really happened. I just couldn’t believe it. The cruelty of the Trump administration to do that to a stay-at-home mom with no criminal record and, on top of that, a military wife. I couldn’t comprehend it. So much evilness and cruelty.

Your story has been shared through not just a book tour, but also a Netflix documentary and even the Democratic National Convention. With that in mind, what’s something about your story either no one asks or no one realizes it’s important to ask?

Estela: Most people should know that my dad is a military veteran. Despite my mom being a military wife and having no criminal record she was deported. And I think it’s very important for people to understand how our immigration laws not only hurt undocumented immigrants, but also the whole family.

Alejandra: What nobody asks is how many more people like us are out there. People want to believe that there are only a few of us. There are more than a million undocumented people with an American child. So like Estela mentioned before, our story is the same story of too many.

Teresa Martínez / Macmillan Children’s Publishing Group

On the topic of your dad Estela and husband Alejandra, I understand that he is a naturalized U.S. citizen, served in the Marines and voted for Trump in 2016 because he thought he would protect military families. What is your hope for the Biden administration in regards to U.S. immigration policies?

Estela: I know this administration has a good heart and I know that they care about military families. I hope that by hearing my story, they can change those broken immigration laws because that’s the only way my mother will be able to stay here permanently. It’s not just important for us but many other families to be reunited again.

Alejandra: I have hope for this administration. I believe that they have the heart and the intention to change their broken immigration laws. I know that Congress needs to act. We did Estela’s first book tour at two schools and we just came back. The feedback we got from a lot of hardcore Republicans and former Donald Trump supporters is that when they hear our story from the perspective of a child, it makes them change their mind. And that’s my hope – by Estela telling her story, immigration rules can change.

From left to right, Estela’s sister Pamela, Estela, Alejandra and Alejandra’s husband Temo. (Juarez Family)

You speak about your experiences with so much courage and conviction. Where does your strength come from?

Estela: For me, I started to really use my voice and spread the message about my mom’s story when she was getting deported. I saw how, even after she came back, the trauma she had. It always stays in my mind and really burns my fire to want to continue sharing my story.

Alejandra: I am a very spiritual person and my strength comes from God. There’s no way to fix this unless immigration laws change. I was told by 32 lawyers that there was no way I was going to be able to come back. So the fact that I am back and that I am here thanks to Estela’s video that was featured in the Democratic Convention makes me think that things can change. I mean, if I was able to come back even temporarily then maybe there’s a way we can fix immigration laws permanently. So that gives me the strength and the courage to know that it can be done.

What advice would you give someone in a similar circumstance that’s too scared to share their story?

Estela: If you’re too scared to fight, just know that I am over here fighting for you and I won’t stop until I see more families reunited. Even if by some miracle my mom is allowed to stay here permanently, I will never stop fighting until immigration laws are changed.

Alejandra: The first thing I’d tell them is nothing comes out of being silent. So you have to keep talking. You have to keep writing. One of the things that I have talked to a few kids about when we did school visits is to Google who your local legislator is and send them a letter. By sending them letters we put pressure on legislators to change the laws. The only way you can make sure the laws are going to change is if we put enough pressure and get people to talk.

Teresa Martínez / Macmillan Children’s Publishing Group

What do next steps look like as you continue pushing for comprehensive immigration reform?

Estela: I’m currently writing another book for the adult and teenage audience that goes into even more detail about my experience being the daughter of an undocumented immigrant. I also hope to see more child authors sharing their story and to see other people get inspired by my story.

Alejandra: I want Hispanic kids to write and read. That’s the main thing. We need to get more educated. I want first and second generation Hispanic kids to be like “if she could do it, I can do it too.” The fact that we went to a book fair with 50 other authors, only five of them were minorities and Estela was the only child. For me, we need to be an example for kids. And then of course inspire kids to push for immigration laws to change. But the main thing is, we as Hispanic people and as a minority need to get educated and start reading more.

The Nightmare COVID Variant That Beats Our Immunity Is Finally Here

David Axe
Sat, October 15, 2022 

Photo Illustration by Erin O'Flynn/The Daily Beast/Getty

A new subvariant of the novel-coronavirus called XBB dramatically announced itself earlier this week, in Singapore. New COVID-19 cases more than doubled in a day, from 4,700 on Monday to 11,700 on Tuesday—and XBB is almost certainly why. The same subvariant just appeared in Hong Kong, too.

A highly mutated descendant of the Omicron variant of the SARS-CoV-2 virus that drove a record wave of infections starting around a year ago, XBB is in many ways the worst form of the virus so far. It’s more contagious than any previous variant or subvariant. It also evades the antibodies from monoclonal therapies, potentially rendering a whole category of drugs ineffective as COVID treatments.

“It is likely the most immune-evasive and poses problems for current monoclonal antibody-based treatments and prevention strategy,” Amesh Adalja, a public-health expert at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, told The Daily Beast.


That’s the bad news. The good news is that the new “bivalent” vaccine boosters from Pfizer and Moderna seem to work just fine against XBB, even though the original vaccines are less effective against XBB. They won’t prevent all infections and reinfections, but they should significantly reduce the chance of severe infection potentially leading to hospitalization or death. “Even with immune-evasive variants, vaccine protection against what matters most—severe disease—remains intact,” Adalja said.

As the novel-coronavirus evolves to become more contagious and more resistant to certain types of drugs, keeping current on your boosters is “the most impactful thing you can do in preparation for what might come,” Peter Hotez, an expert in vaccine development at Baylor College, told The Daily Beast.

Scientists first identified XBB in August. It’s one of several major subvariants that have evolved from the basic Omicron variant, piling on more and more mutations on key parts of the virus—especially the spike protein, the part of the virus that helps it grab onto and infect our cells.

XBB has at least seven new mutations along the spike. Mutations that, taken together, make the subvariant harder for our immune systems to recognize—and thus more likely to evade our antibodies and enter our cells to cause infection.

This Deadly COVID Twist Is Like Nothing We’ve Seen Before

This accumulation of mutations isn’t surprising. Changes along the spike protein have characterized most of the major new variants and subvariants of SARS-CoV-2 as the pandemic grinds toward its fourth year.

What is surprising is how much competition XBB has as it fights to become the next dominant form of the novel-coronavirus. Several other Omicron subvariants are also in circulation. All of them are highly evolved. Many of them actually share a subset of key mutations, especially on the spike.

So while XBB appears to be gaining traction in Asia, a close cousin of XBB called BQ.1.1 is spreading fast in Europe and some U.S. states. There are others in contention, too, including BA.2.75.2. Hotez calls these viral cousins the “Scrabble” subvariants, a nod to the classic word game and the jumble of scientific designations of closely related viruses.

The Scrabble variants are indicative of what scientists call “convergent evolution.” That is, separate viral sublineages that are picking up more and more of the same mutations. It’s as though Omicron’s children are all separately learning how to be a better virus than their parent, and becoming more like each other in the process.

Immune-escape is the common quality. At least two of the Scrabble subvariants—XBB and BQ.1.1—are pretty much unrecognizable to existing antibody therapies and somewhat less recognizable to the antibodies produced by the prime doses of the leading messenger-RNA vaccines.

In evading some of our therapies and, to a lesser extent, our original vaccines, XBB and its cousins are showing us where the novel-coronavirus is heading, genetically speaking. The current surge in infections in places like Singapore is a preview of a potential global surge, this coming winter or spring, as XBB or one of its relatives becomes dominant everywhere.

It’s possible to mitigate the worst outcomes. Natural antibodies from past infection are still the best and most durable antibodies. They don’t last forever. But while they do last—a few months or potentially a whole year—the chance of catching a bad case of COVID is pretty low.

So if you had an earlier form of Omicron—say, during the wave of infections that started last Thanksgiving and peaked around February—you might still have good antibodies for a few months. More than enough time to reinforce those fading natural antibodies with a dose of the latest mRNA boosters.

Pfizer and Moderna formulated these new boosters to include some genetic instructions specifically for attacking the BA.5 subvariant of Omicron, which is still the dominant form of SARS-CoV-2 but is disappearing fast as XBB and the other Scrabble subvariants outcompete it.

A pharmacist gives a COVID-19 vaccine booster shot during an event hosted by the Chicago Department of Public Health at the Southwest Senior Center on Sept. 9, 2022 in Chicago, Illinois. The recently authorized booster vaccine protects against the original SARS-CoV-2 virus and the more recent omicron variants, BA.4 and BA.5.
Scott Olson/Getty ImagesMore

The bivalent boosters should work pretty well against forms of the virus that are closely related to BA.5, including the Scrabbles. “That is because one of the two components [in the boosters] induces an immune response to BA.5, and most of the new Scrabble variants look more BA.5 like than [the] original China lineage,” Hotez told The Daily Beast.

The implication, of course, is that we’re eventually going to need another new booster in order to keep pace with the fast-evolving virus. Sure, the bivalent boosters work against BA.5 and BA.5’s immediate descendants. But what about the next generation of Omicron subvariants, the one after XBB and its cousins?

More and more health officials are coming around to the idea of an annual COVID booster. U.S. president Joe Biden even endorsed the idea in a statement last month. “As the virus continues to change, we will now be able to update our vaccines annually to target the dominant variant,” Biden said. “Just like your annual flu shot, you should get it sometime between Labor Day and Halloween.”

But one booster a year might not be enough if, as some epidemiologists fear, natural antibodies fade faster and the novel-coronavirus mutates at an accelerating rate. One concern, if it turns out we need twice-a-year new boosters, is whether industry can develop fresh jabs fast enough and health agencies can swiftly approve them.

There’s an even bigger question, however. “The more important factor is just having folks get a more recent booster,” James Lawler, an infectious disease expert at the University of Nebraska Medical Center, told The Daily Beast.

Even if a new booster is available every six months or so, will enough people get it to make a difference in the overall rates of severe illness and death? Booster uptake is declining globally, but especially in the United States, where just 10 percent of people have gotten the bivalent booster since federal regulators approved them in August.

XBB is a nasty little subvariant. But it’s not the final word on COVID. The novel-coronavirus will keep mutating, and finding new ways to evade our antibodies, whether or not many people are paying attention.

The virus isn’t done with us. Which means we can’t be done with it. Get boosted. And be prepared to get boosted again in 2023.