buzzfeed--2020-02-04--Pete Buttigieg Declared Victory In Iowa, But He’s Not Talking About It In New Hampshire

MANCHESTER , New Hampshire — Last night in Iowa , Pete Buttigieg declared victory in the nation ’ s first caucuses , a race on whose results he had built the entirety of his unlikely presidential campaign .
This morning , in New Hampshire , Buttigieg did not mention it .
In fact , he didn ’ t say the word “ Iowa ” when he took the stage here .
It was as if it hadn ’ t happened .
Because — well , no one was really sure what had happened .
“ I ’ m so glad @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Buttigieg said to the crowd in New Hampshire .
“ I think it ’ s morning .
I took a little nap somewhere in between sundown and sunup.
” It was a surreal scene Tuesday , the day after a technological debacle delayed the results in Iowa — a state where the Democratic presidential hopeful sank tens of millions of dollars , countless hours , and sky-high hopes .
In the past , candidates have arrived in New Hampshire in the early hours of the morning after the Iowa caucuses with a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , failure .
So far , there ’ s only been confusion .
The Iowa Democratic Party has only said that it hopes to release a majority of the results later on Tuesday .
But even those results may not produce a clear winner : The complex caucus system in Iowa means that one candidate , like Bernie Sanders , could pull in more votes , but another could end up with more state delegate equivalents , and the mess of Monday night does not help .
Traditionally , the candidate with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ winner in Iowa — but the party agreed for the first time to release raw vote totals , muddying the results even further .
Around midnight after the caucuses , Buttigieg declared victory in Des Moines , releasing a set of numbers that he said proved he would win the caucuses .
“ So we don ’ t know all the results , ” Buttigieg said .
“ But we know , by the time it ’ s all said and done : Iowa , you have shocked the nation .
Because , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on to New Hampshire victorious.
” But Sanders ’ campaign had suggested they were pretty sure that he had won and produced its own numbers .
And Buttigieg later seemed to backtrack , noting the lack of official results in a TV interview and saying he considered any result in Iowa a victory .
Elizabeth Warren , who by many counts seemed to have come in third in the state , was simply calling the results “ too close to call ” — while her campaign took shots at Joe Biden , who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ distant fourth.
” Some Biden allies seemed to imply that they didn ’ t trust the results at all .
The Iowa caucuses had already come under criticism before last night ’ s mess .
The system is complicated : Voters have to remain in a caucus site , sometimes for hours , as they align themselves with candidates , redistributing themselves if their preferred candidate doesn ’ t earn enough votes .
New Hampshire has a different system : a primary , where voters simply cast their ballots for their first-choice candidate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ expressed confusion and anxiety at what had just happened in Iowa — it had the potential , they thought , to undermine faith not just in the caucus system but in voting as a whole .
“ This will be a bullet for Trump , ” said Kim , a Manchester resident who has a disability and had worked as a pharmacist , of the Iowa chaos .
Scott Antonucci , a retired construction industry employee in Manchester who came to see Buttigieg , said he was deciding between the former South Bend @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also considering former New York City mayor Mike Bloomberg .
Asked if it would influence his vote if Buttigieg beat Warren in Iowa , Antonucci said , “ Yes .
It would.
” “ Good question , ” he said .
“ Huh , good question.
” He didn ’ t have an answer .

MANCHESTER, New Hampshire — Last night in Iowa, Pete Buttigieg declared victory in the nation’s first caucuses, a race on whose results he had built the entirety of his unlikely presidential campaign.
This morning, in New Hampshire, Buttigieg did not mention it. In fact, he didn’t say the word “Iowa” when he took the stage here.
It was as if it hadn’t happened. Because — well, no one was really sure what had happened.
“I’m so glad to be with you this morning,” Buttigieg said to the crowd in New Hampshire. “I think it’s morning. I took a little nap somewhere in between sundown and sunup.”
It was a surreal scene Tuesday, the day after a technological debacle delayed the results in Iowa — a state where the Democratic presidential hopeful sank tens of millions of dollars, countless hours, and sky-high hopes. In the past, candidates have arrived in New Hampshire in the early hours of the morning after the Iowa caucuses with a narrative: victory, momentum, potential, failure.
So far, there’s only been confusion. The Iowa Democratic Party has only said that it hopes to release a majority of the results later on Tuesday.
But even those results may not produce a clear winner: The complex caucus system in Iowa means that one candidate, like Bernie Sanders, could pull in more votes, but another could end up with more state delegate equivalents, and the mess of Monday night does not help. Traditionally, the candidate with the most state delegate equivalents is declared the winner in Iowa — but the party agreed for the first time to release raw vote totals, muddying the results even further.
Around midnight after the caucuses, Buttigieg declared victory in Des Moines, releasing a set of numbers that he said proved he would win the caucuses.
“So we don’t know all the results,” Buttigieg said. “But we know, by the time it’s all said and done: Iowa, you have shocked the nation. Because, by all indications, we are going on to New Hampshire victorious.”
But Sanders’ campaign had suggested they were pretty sure that he had won and produced its own numbers. And Buttigieg later seemed to backtrack, noting the lack of official results in a TV interview and saying he considered any result in Iowa a victory.
Elizabeth Warren, who by many counts seemed to have come in third in the state, was simply calling the results “too close to call” — while her campaign took shots at Joe Biden, who it declared had finished in “a distant fourth.” Some Biden allies seemed to imply that they didn’t trust the results at all.
The Iowa caucuses had already come under criticism before last night’s mess. The system is complicated: Voters have to remain in a caucus site, sometimes for hours, as they align themselves with candidates, redistributing themselves if their preferred candidate doesn’t earn enough votes.
New Hampshire has a different system: a primary, where voters simply cast their ballots for their first-choice candidate. Voters at Buttigieg’s event expressed confusion and anxiety at what had just happened in Iowa — it had the potential, they thought, to undermine faith not just in the caucus system but in voting as a whole.
“This will be a bullet for Trump,” said Kim, a Manchester resident who has a disability and had worked as a pharmacist, of the Iowa chaos.
Scott Antonucci, a retired construction industry employee in Manchester who came to see Buttigieg, said he was deciding between the former South Bend mayor and Warren, though he was also considering former New York City mayor Mike Bloomberg.
Asked if it would influence his vote if Buttigieg beat Warren in Iowa, Antonucci said, “Yes. It would.”
Why?
“Good question,” he said. “Huh, good question.” He didn’t have an answer.


buzzfeed--2020-02-04--Iowa Democrats Plan To Release The “Majority” Of Caucus Results This Afternoon

DES MOINES — Iowa Democratic officials told campaigns they plan to release the “ majority ” of the state ’ s caucus results by this afternoon , sparking concerns and complaints across the crowded field in what has been a remarkable false start to the nominating process .
The results in Iowa , the state that kicks off the Democratic primary every four years with its own complicated system of voting , have been a continued catastrophe for Democrats after the party promised to reform the caucus process following the 2016 election .
Because of a “ coding issue ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ used to report results on Monday , Democrats still have no winner in the first nominating contest , stunting three leading campaigns that had each declared some form of victory by late evening .
On a conference call with presidential campaigns on Tuesday morning , Iowa Democratic Party Chair Troy Price estimated that this afternoon 's release will reflect more than 50 % of the results .
`` We want to get some results out there , and so we will be doing that at 4 p.m. [ CT ] today , '' @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t want to put a number on it , but it ’ s more than 50 % of results.
” Price , a lifelong Iowa Democrat who has worked for two years to try to make the complex caucus system here fairer and more transparent , said his team has been working through the night to try to gather results and secure “ paper verification ” from every precinct to clarify data inconsistencies .
On the call , which BuzzFeed News listened to , campaign aides expressed concern that people would take the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the `` final number . ''
Campaigns are also worried about a future issue : The same reporting app that led to user errors and data inconsistencies in Iowa on Monday was due to be used in Nevada caucuses in three weeks , multiple campaigns said .
But in a statement today , Nevada Democratic Party Chair William McCurdy II said the state “ will not be employing the same app or vendor used in the Iowa caucus , ” and that it had developed “ a series of backups and redundant reporting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ adviser to Bernie Sanders , said the campaign hasn ’ t yet contacted Nevada officials about the app .
“ But we will shortly be turning our attention to the potential use of this app , which would be completely off the table from our point of view , ” he said .
`` We have to find out more information , ” he added , “ but clearly if they 're using this app or any variation of this app , that can not be allowed to happen .
There are things @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that can be used as a reporting tool . ''
Still , Weaver — a critic of the 2016 Iowa caucus , which resulted in a virtual statistical tie between the candidates — said he believed Iowa Democrats would get the results correct .
`` I 'm confident this time around , ” he said , “ because of the fact that they have to show the math and have a hard copy receipt from every caucusgoer , that eventually we will get the results and they 're going to be the correct @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reporting process created the nightmare scenario .
By the end of caucus day in Iowa , the state ’ s Democratic Party had still not released any official data about the results .
And during a late-night conference call with campaigns , the party said it won ’ t release results until Tuesday .
A major cause : Due to “ user error ” with the reporting app , there were some slight “ inconsistencies , ” according to participants on the call .
Some numbers , the party said , “ didn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ told campaigns it was comparing the app results with cellphone pictures of the caucus paper worksheets , on which results are recorded by hand .
At 10 p.m. CT on Monday , a time the party has usually released the majority of results , officials told campaigns they had just 35 % but did not release any .
Caucuses are notoriously complicated , requiring time and math on the part of local volunteers .
Largely because of the demands they place on people to access the events , state parties have worked to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ years .
Still , the caucuses in Iowa and Nevada remain the principal nominating events in the presidential nominating process .
In 2016 , the Clinton campaign tried to collect results with its own version of a reporting app ( called “ Reporter ” ) .
In the end , the experiment yielded a bunch of iffy numbers simply because of human error .
Without results , a few campaigns essentially claimed victory late Monday , and almost all candidates gave pseudo victory speeches .
`` By all indications , we are going @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pete Buttigieg said .
The Sanders campaign released its internal data , pointing out that while it did not have 100 % of precincts , it believed it led on both the first and final alignment , with Buttigieg in second place and Elizabeth Warren in third .
Warren ’ s campaign manager said , “ We ’ re confident that it ’ s close at the top between Warren , Sanders , Buttigieg .
I believe the vice president is a distant fourth.
” As of Tuesday morning , the Sanders campaign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Buttigieg , based on data from about 50 % of precincts , Weaver said .
The general counsel for Joe Biden ’ s campaign , meanwhile , sent a letter to the Iowa Democratic Party , raising concerns about the reporting process and requesting more information about the “ quality control ” program the party had put in place .
“ Last night was an extremely bad night for Joe Biden 's campaign , ” Weaver said .
“ He wildly underperformed , and so I can understand why they ’ d be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ''

DES MOINES — Iowa Democratic officials told campaigns they plan to release the “majority” of the state’s caucus results by this afternoon, sparking concerns and complaints across the crowded field in what has been a remarkable false start to the nominating process.
The results in Iowa, the state that kicks off the Democratic primary every four years with its own complicated system of voting, have been a continued catastrophe for Democrats after the party promised to reform the caucus process following the 2016 election.
Because of a “coding issue” with the app-driven system that party officials used to report results on Monday, Democrats still have no winner in the first nominating contest, stunting three leading campaigns that had each declared some form of victory by late evening.
On a conference call with presidential campaigns on Tuesday morning, Iowa Democratic Party Chair Troy Price estimated that this afternoon's release will reflect more than 50% of the results.
"We want to get some results out there, and so we will be doing that at 4 p.m. [CT] today," he said. “I don’t want to put a number on it, but it’s more than 50% of results.”
Price, a lifelong Iowa Democrat who has worked for two years to try to make the complex caucus system here fairer and more transparent, said his team has been working through the night to try to gather results and secure “paper verification” from every precinct to clarify data inconsistencies.
On the call, which BuzzFeed News listened to, campaign aides expressed concern that people would take the initial and sole release so far as the "final number."
Campaigns are also worried about a future issue: The same reporting app that led to user errors and data inconsistencies in Iowa on Monday was due to be used in Nevada caucuses in three weeks, multiple campaigns said.
But in a statement today, Nevada Democratic Party Chair William McCurdy II said the state “will not be employing the same app or vendor used in the Iowa caucus,” and that it had developed “a series of backups and redundant reporting systems.”
Jeff Weaver, a senior adviser to Bernie Sanders, said the campaign hasn’t yet contacted Nevada officials about the app. “But we will shortly be turning our attention to the potential use of this app, which would be completely off the table from our point of view,” he said.
"We have to find out more information,” he added, “but clearly if they're using this app or any variation of this app, that cannot be allowed to happen. There are things called texts, emails, and telephones that can be used as a reporting tool."
Still, Weaver — a critic of the 2016 Iowa caucus, which resulted in a virtual statistical tie between the candidates — said he believed Iowa Democrats would get the results correct.
"I'm confident this time around,” he said, “because of the fact that they have to show the math and have a hard copy receipt from every caucusgoer, that eventually we will get the results and they're going to be the correct results."
The failures with the reporting process created the nightmare scenario.
By the end of caucus day in Iowa, the state’s Democratic Party had still not released any official data about the results. And during a late-night conference call with campaigns, the party said it won’t release results until Tuesday.
A major cause: Due to “user error” with the reporting app, there were some slight “inconsistencies,” according to participants on the call. Some numbers, the party said, “didn’t add up.”
The party told campaigns it was comparing the app results with cellphone pictures of the caucus paper worksheets, on which results are recorded by hand. At 10 p.m. CT on Monday, a time the party has usually released the majority of results, officials told campaigns they had just 35% but did not release any.
Caucuses are notoriously complicated, requiring time and math on the part of local volunteers. Largely because of the demands they place on people to access the events, state parties have worked to limit the number of caucuses in recent years.
Still, the caucuses in Iowa and Nevada remain the principal nominating events in the presidential nominating process. In 2016, the Clinton campaign tried to collect results with its own version of a reporting app (called “Reporter”). In the end, the experiment yielded a bunch of iffy numbers simply because of human error.
Without results, a few campaigns essentially claimed victory late Monday, and almost all candidates gave pseudo victory speeches.
"By all indications, we are going on to New Hampshire victorious,” Pete Buttigieg said.
The Sanders campaign released its internal data, pointing out that while it did not have 100% of precincts, it believed it led on both the first and final alignment, with Buttigieg in second place and Elizabeth Warren in third. Warren’s campaign manager said, “We’re confident that it’s close at the top between Warren, Sanders, Buttigieg. I believe the vice president is a distant fourth.”
As of Tuesday morning, the Sanders campaign's internal reporting system showed him leading Buttigieg, based on data from about 50% of precincts, Weaver said.
The general counsel for Joe Biden’s campaign, meanwhile, sent a letter to the Iowa Democratic Party, raising concerns about the reporting process and requesting more information about the “quality control” program the party had put in place.
“Last night was an extremely bad night for Joe Biden's campaign,” Weaver said. “He wildly underperformed, and so I can understand why they’d be upset about having the results released."


buzzfeed--2020-02-04--Without Iowa Results, Everybody’s Onstage And A Winner On Caucus Night

DES MOINES — Elizabeth Warren stepped out onstage to supporters ’ cheers and began , “ So it is too close to call , so I ’ m just going to tell you what I do know— ” “ YOU WON !
” a supporter screamed from the crowd , to cheers .
But on caucus day itself , nobody won .
As Feb. 3 ended on the East Coast , there still weren ’ t results .
But the candidates all took the stage , and according to them , they all look strong in Iowa .
Pete Buttigieg @ @ @ @ @ @ @ predicted that whenever the results came in , they ’ d look good for his campaign .
Joe Biden thinks he ’ s “ going to walk out of here with our share of delegates.
” Amy Klobuchar ’ s campaign is “ punching above ” its weight .
Massive reporting delays in Iowa created a total vacuum in results on Monday night , and cable news hosts and reporters on Twitter struggled to fill the dead air while local officials complained about reporting problems .
Klobuchar was the first candidate to speak @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the confusion caused by the delayed results to benefit from TV airtime — networks carried her speech in full — and to set a narrative that she had performed well , in the absence of solid results .
Klobuchar ’ s campaign began filling the stage at her caucus night party at the Des Moines Marriott around 10 p.m. , and Klobuchar came on shortly after in all red .
“ You ’ ve probably heard we don ’ t know the results , ” Klobuchar said .
“ But I did @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by without thanking all of you .
We know there ’ s delays , but we know one thing : We ’ re punching above our weight.
” “ We are feeling so good tonight , and I can not wait — somehow , someway , I ’ m gon na get on a plane tonight to New Hampshire , ” Klobuchar said .
“ We are bringing this ticket to New Hampshire .
Even in a crowded field of candidates , even during the well-earned impeachment hearing of Donald J. Trump , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ desk for the last two weeks , we kept fighting , and you kept fighting for me.
” Next up were Biden and Warren .
Warren gave what sounded , effectively , like her victory speech — with a brief acknowledgment of the uncertainty tacked on .
She positioned herself as a general-election candidate , moving quickly to compare herself — her political career , her upbringing in Oklahoma — to Donald Trump .
“ We don ’ t know all the results tonight , but tonight has already showed that Americans have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ change to make our economy and our democracy work for everyone , ” she said .
“ Tonight showed that our path to victory is to fight hard for the changes that everyone is demanding.
” Warren ’ s campaign manager , Roger Lau , seemed in the face of uncertainty to shrug off the details of who actually emerged victorious from Iowa .
“ We ’ re confident that it ’ s close at the top between Warren , Sanders , Buttigieg , ” he said .
“ I believe the vice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , meanwhile , was carrying Biden ’ s speech .
He and Jill Biden appeared , and he paced the stage , giving a version of his stump speech , and though he too proclaimed good results were on the way , he slightly tempered expectations .
`` Indications are ... From all indications , it ’ s going to be close .
We ’ re going to walk out of here with our share of delegates .
We don ’ t know exactly what it is yet , but we feel good @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said , before pivoting to parts of his stump speech .
Then Sanders was up next .
He joked about the results not coming in — then talked at length about inequality and injustice in America that will be corrected .
His victory party remained wild , with the crowd maybe even growing as the night went on , one reporter noted .
Off-camera , away from the big-time coverage , even Andrew Yang told a crowd of around 50 that what they saw tonight — even without actual results — showed “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state realized that the economy is transforming around them in profound ways.
” “ That message rang loud and clear here in Iowa tonight thanks to each and every one of you , ” he said .
“ And now we ’ re going to take that message to New Hampshire to you and the rest of the country.
” Of the five top candidates , Buttigieg took the stage last .
He briefly acknowledged the fact that the results were not known but then straight-up declared victory — to the earsplitting delight @ @ @ @ @ @ @ University gymnasium .
`` By all indications , we are going on to New Hampshire victorious , '' Buttigieg said .
The crowd soon began chanting at the former South Bend , Indiana , mayor , who a year ago began introducing himself to unfamiliar voters as “ Mayor Pete ” as a means of navigating around his tricky last name : `` President Pete !
President Pete ! ''
By that point in the night , the lights were already back on at Klobuchar HQ , and they were breaking down the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the airport .

DES MOINES — Elizabeth Warren stepped out onstage to supporters’ cheers and began, “So it is too close to call, so I’m just going to tell you what I do know—”
“YOU WON!” a supporter screamed from the crowd, to cheers.
But on caucus day itself, nobody won. As Feb. 3 ended on the East Coast, there still weren’t results. But the candidates all took the stage, and according to them, they all look strong in Iowa.
Pete Buttigieg is already claiming victory. Bernie Sanders predicted that whenever the results came in, they’d look good for his campaign. Joe Biden thinks he’s “going to walk out of here with our share of delegates.” Amy Klobuchar’s campaign is “punching above” its weight.
Massive reporting delays in Iowa created a total vacuum in results on Monday night, and cable news hosts and reporters on Twitter struggled to fill the dead air while local officials complained about reporting problems.
Enter: the live speech.
Klobuchar was the first candidate to speak publicly on caucus night, taking advantage of the confusion caused by the delayed results to benefit from TV airtime — networks carried her speech in full — and to set a narrative that she had performed well, in the absence of solid results.
Klobuchar’s campaign began filling the stage at her caucus night party at the Des Moines Marriott around 10 p.m., and Klobuchar came on shortly after in all red.
“You’ve probably heard we don’t know the results,” Klobuchar said. “But I did not want to let another minute go by without thanking all of you. We know there’s delays, but we know one thing: We’re punching above our weight.”
“We are feeling so good tonight, and I cannot wait — somehow, someway, I’m gonna get on a plane tonight to New Hampshire,” Klobuchar said. “We are bringing this ticket to New Hampshire. Even in a crowded field of candidates, even during the well-earned impeachment hearing of Donald J. Trump, which had me bolted to my Senate desk for the last two weeks, we kept fighting, and you kept fighting for me.”
Next up were Biden and Warren.
Warren gave what sounded, effectively, like her victory speech — with a brief acknowledgment of the uncertainty tacked on. She positioned herself as a general-election candidate, moving quickly to compare herself — her political career, her upbringing in Oklahoma — to Donald Trump.
“We don’t know all the results tonight, but tonight has already showed that Americans have a deep hunger for big, structural change to make our economy and our democracy work for everyone,” she said. “Tonight showed that our path to victory is to fight hard for the changes that everyone is demanding.”
Warren’s campaign manager, Roger Lau, seemed in the face of uncertainty to shrug off the details of who actually emerged victorious from Iowa.
“We’re confident that it’s close at the top between Warren, Sanders, Buttigieg,” he said. “I believe the vice president is a distant fourth.”
CNN, meanwhile, was carrying Biden’s speech. He and Jill Biden appeared, and he paced the stage, giving a version of his stump speech, and though he too proclaimed good results were on the way, he slightly tempered expectations. "Indications are... From all indications, it’s going to be close. We’re going to walk out of here with our share of delegates. We don’t know exactly what it is yet, but we feel good about where we are," Biden said, before pivoting to parts of his stump speech.
Then Sanders was up next. He joked about the results not coming in — then talked at length about inequality and injustice in America that will be corrected.
His victory party remained wild, with the crowd maybe even growing as the night went on, one reporter noted.
Off-camera, away from the big-time coverage, even Andrew Yang told a crowd of around 50 that what they saw tonight — even without actual results — showed “tens of thousands of Iowans around the state realized that the economy is transforming around them in profound ways.” “That message rang loud and clear here in Iowa tonight thanks to each and every one of you,” he said. “And now we’re going to take that message to New Hampshire to you and the rest of the country.”
Of the five top candidates, Buttigieg took the stage last. He briefly acknowledged the fact that the results were not known but then straight-up declared victory — to the earsplitting delight of about 2,000 supporters inside a Drake University gymnasium.
"By all indications, we are going on to New Hampshire victorious," Buttigieg said.
The crowd soon began chanting at the former South Bend, Indiana, mayor, who a year ago began introducing himself to unfamiliar voters as “Mayor Pete” as a means of navigating around his tricky last name: "President Pete! President Pete!"
By that point in the night, the lights were already back on at Klobuchar HQ, and they were breaking down the stage, as the candidate headed to the airport.


buzzfeed--2020-03-30--Coronavirus Cases Have Surged, But The US Is Refusing To Take The World’s Most Available Masks

The journalists at BuzzFeed News are proud to bring you trustworthy and relevant reporting about the coronavirus .
To help keep this news free , become a member and sign up for our newsletter , Outbreak Today .
As hospitals around the country desperately seek N95 respirator masks to protect health care workers treating COVID-19 patients , the federal government has blocked imports of what might be the world ’ s most abundant alternative .
That mask is designed to filter out at least 95 % of particles that are 0.3 microns or larger in size — the same measure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Like the N95 , it fits closely around the nose and mouth , creating a seal that decreases the risk of infection .
And the Centers for Disease Control has said it ’ s as effective as N95 , which is certified under US testing standards .
But this second type of mask , called the KN95 , complies with slightly different norms and is made in factories that have not been certified by the US government .
By law , masks , along with most medical devices , can ’ t be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ without the Food and Drug Administration ’ s say-so .
Last week , to ease the national shortfall of protective gear , the FDA issued an emergency authorization for non-N95 respirators that had been certified by five foreign countries as well as the European Union .
It conspicuously left the KN95 masks out of the emergency authorization .
The omission was all the more startling because in late February the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said that KN95 masks were one of numerous “ suitable alternatives ” to N95 masks “ when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not respond to multiple requests for comment .
A significant majority of all respirator masks , including both the N95 and KN95 , are manufactured in China .
During the height of that country ’ s outbreak , China restricted exports of virtually all respirator masks , keeping them for domestic use .
As that country ’ s infection numbers have slowed it has eased those restrictions , but now the US must compete with dozens of other countries desperate to acquire masks .
Allowing the importation and use of KN95 could help @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The KN95 masks are far more readily available , ” said Bob Tilton , who owns a New Jersey–based cosmetics packaging importer and earlier this month decided to use his familiarity with Chinese supply chains to bring in masks and other personal protective equipment to sell to hospitals .
“ The N95s are much harder to grab.
” Yet without the FDA ’ s seal of approval , importers are hesitant to order KN95 masks because they worry they ’ ll get held up at customs .
Many hospitals are refusing to accept @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because they fear legal liability should a health care worker get ill while using a nonpermitted device .
Under ordinary circumstances , N95 masks — which are certified by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health — are abundant , available at hardware stores and pharmacies for around $ 1 apiece and for as little as 35 cents apiece wholesale .
But in just two months , the coronavirus pandemic has depleted the world ’ s supply , creating a gray market that has driven prices for a single mask as high @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , in turn , has opened the door to unscrupulous actors running internet scams that take payment for N95 masks they never deliver , and to others selling counterfeit or mislabeled N95 masks , which could put health care workers at serious risk of infection .
Meanwhile , masks made under the newly permitted US standards — Australia , Brazil , Japan , Korea , Mexico , and the EU — are not made in as great quantities as the N95 or KN95 , according to industry experts .

As hospitals around the country desperately seek N95 respirator masks to protect health care workers treating COVID-19 patients, the federal government has blocked imports of what might be the world’s most abundant alternative.
That mask is designed to filter out at least 95% of particles that are 0.3 microns or larger in size — the same measure used for the scarce N95 mask. Like the N95, it fits closely around the nose and mouth, creating a seal that decreases the risk of infection. And the Centers for Disease Control has said it’s as effective as N95, which is certified under US testing standards. But this second type of mask, called the KN95, complies with slightly different norms and is made in factories that have not been certified by the US government.
By law, masks, along with most medical devices, can’t be imported or sold in the United States without the Food and Drug Administration’s say-so. Last week, to ease the national shortfall of protective gear, the FDA issued an emergency authorization for non-N95 respirators that had been certified by five foreign countries as well as the European Union. It conspicuously left the KN95 masks out of the emergency authorization.
The omission was all the more startling because in late February the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said that KN95 masks were one of numerous “suitable alternatives” to N95 masks “when supplies are short.”
The FDA did not respond to multiple requests for comment.
A significant majority of all respirator masks, including both the N95 and KN95, are manufactured in China. During the height of that country’s outbreak, China restricted exports of virtually all respirator masks, keeping them for domestic use. As that country’s infection numbers have slowed it has eased those restrictions, but now the US must compete with dozens of other countries desperate to acquire masks.
Allowing the importation and use of KN95 could help to greatly alleviate the scarcity.
“The KN95 masks are far more readily available,” said Bob Tilton, who owns a New Jersey–based cosmetics packaging importer and earlier this month decided to use his familiarity with Chinese supply chains to bring in masks and other personal protective equipment to sell to hospitals. “The N95s are much harder to grab.”
Yet without the FDA’s seal of approval, importers are hesitant to order KN95 masks because they worry they’ll get held up at customs. Many hospitals are refusing to accept them, even as free donations, because they fear legal liability should a health care worker get ill while using a nonpermitted device.
Under ordinary circumstances, N95 masks — which are certified by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health — are abundant, available at hardware stores and pharmacies for around $1 apiece and for as little as 35 cents apiece wholesale. But in just two months, the coronavirus pandemic has depleted the world’s supply, creating a gray market that has driven prices for a single mask as high as $12 or more. That, in turn, has opened the door to unscrupulous actors running internet scams that take payment for N95 masks they never deliver, and to others selling counterfeit or mislabeled N95 masks, which could put health care workers at serious risk of infection.
Meanwhile, masks made under the newly permitted US standards — Australia, Brazil, Japan, Korea, Mexico, and the EU — are not made in as great quantities as the N95 or KN95, according to industry experts.


buzzfeed--2020-03-29--Federal Student Loan Payments Will Be Suspended Through Sept. 30 Due To The Coronavirus

The journalists at BuzzFeed News are proud to bring you trustworthy and relevant reporting about the coronavirus .
To help keep this news free , become a member and sign up for our newsletter , Outbreak Today .
WASHINGTON — Americans will get a six-month reprieve from federal student loan payments as the coronavirus pandemic leads to job losses and economic turmoil nationwide .
As part of the coronavirus relief bill passed through Congress and signed by President Donald Trump on Friday , lenders must stop all payments for federally held student loans through Sept. 30 .
During that time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ loans and nonpayment during that period can not be used to affect credit scores or a person ’ s qualification for loan forgiveness .
According to the bill ’ s text , “ each month for which a loan payment was suspended ” will be treated as if “ the borrower of the loan had made a payment.
” The bill also suspends any wage garnishment or tax refund reduction for people who have defaulted on their federal student loans .
It does not , however , have any effect on private student @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the $ 1.64 trillion in student debt in the US is federal .
Private loans made up about 12 % of all education loans in 2018–2019 , according to the College Board .
The student loan provisions will take effect immediately , according to a staffer on the House Education and Labor Committee .
However , the staffer later confirmed that borrowers with Perkins and commercially held Federal Family Education Loans will not qualify for suspended payments .
Insider Higher Education reported Friday that some 1.2 million borrowers will not qualify , though @ @ @ @ @ @ @ closer to 9 million .
Lenders will have to notify borrowers that their federal student loan payments were suspended within 15 days of Trump signing the bill , which he did Friday evening .
Beginning Aug. 1 , lenders are also required to notify borrowers when their student loan payments will start up again with at least six notices .
Over the next six months , borrowers will still have the opportunity to continue paying down the principal on their loans , should they choose to do so .
The Department of Education @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rates at 0 % for a 60-day period beginning March 20 .
The House had proposed legislation that would go even further in providing relief to federal student loan borrowers but instead passed the Senate ’ s bill Friday in order to release $ 2 trillion in coronavirus relief to American individuals and businesses more quickly .
In addition to ceasing federal student loan payments and interest , the House bill would have required the Department of Education to make monthly payments for all federal student loan borrowers during the coronavirus national emergency @ @ @ @ @ @ @ loan .
If the total monthly payments did not reach $ 10,000 by the end of the national emergency , the department would have been required to pay down the remainder toward the borrower ’ s remaining balance , the committee aide told BuzzFeed News .
That provision has not passed Congress , though the House could try to pass it later on .
Congress is now in recess , and members are heading back to their districts .
The Senate is not planning to return until April 20 , and it ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ back .
But both chambers have said they are likely to pass more coronavirus relief legislation in the future , when House Democrats hope to pass at least some of the plans from their bill through both chambers .

WASHINGTON — Americans will get a six-month reprieve from federal student loan payments as the coronavirus pandemic leads to job losses and economic turmoil nationwide.
As part of the coronavirus relief bill passed through Congress and signed by President Donald Trump on Friday, lenders must stop all payments for federally held student loans through Sept. 30. During that time, interest will not accrue on the loans and nonpayment during that period cannot be used to affect credit scores or a person’s qualification for loan forgiveness. According to the bill’s text, “each month for which a loan payment was suspended” will be treated as if “the borrower of the loan had made a payment.”
The bill also suspends any wage garnishment or tax refund reduction for people who have defaulted on their federal student loans. It does not, however, have any effect on private student loans, though the vast majority of the $1.64 trillion in student debt in the US is federal. Private loans made up about 12% of all education loans in 2018–2019, according to the College Board.
The student loan provisions will take effect immediately, according to a staffer on the House Education and Labor Committee. However, the staffer later confirmed that borrowers with Perkins and commercially held Federal Family Education Loans will not qualify for suspended payments. Insider Higher Education reported Friday that some 1.2 million borrowers will not qualify, though some advocacy groups believe the number is closer to 9 million.
Lenders will have to notify borrowers that their federal student loan payments were suspended within 15 days of Trump signing the bill, which he did Friday evening. Beginning Aug. 1, lenders are also required to notify borrowers when their student loan payments will start up again with at least six notices.
Over the next six months, borrowers will still have the opportunity to continue making payments on their loans (such as making payments on the principal), should they choose to do so. The Department of Education had already set federal student loan interest rates at 0% for a 60-day period beginning March 20.
The House had proposed legislation that would go even further in providing relief to federal student loan borrowers but instead passed the Senate’s bill Friday in order to release $2 trillion in coronavirus relief to American individuals and businesses more quickly.
In addition to ceasing federal student loan payments and interest, the House bill would have required the Department of Education to make monthly payments for all federal student loan borrowers during the coronavirus national emergency for a minimum of $10,000 per loan. If the total monthly payments did not reach $10,000 by the end of the national emergency, the department would have been required to pay down the remainder toward the borrower’s remaining balance, the committee aide told BuzzFeed News. That provision has not passed Congress, though the House could try to pass it later on.
Congress is now in recess, and members are heading back to their districts. The Senate is not planning to return until April 20, and it’s unclear when the House will come back. But both chambers have said they are likely to pass more coronavirus relief legislation in the future, when House Democrats hope to pass at least some of the plans from their bill through both chambers.


buzzfeed--2020-03-27--This Southern County Is Blocking All Visitors — Even Part-Time Residents — During The Coronavirus Pa

This Southern County Is Blocking All Visitors — Even Part-Time Residents — During The Coronavirus Pandemic

The journalists at BuzzFeed News are proud to bring you trustworthy and relevant reporting about the coronavirus .
To help keep this news free , become a member and sign up for our newsletter , Outbreak Today .
As some Americans flee crowded urban centers like New York City to ride out the coronavirus pandemic , rural residents have urged them to stay away .
Now , at least a few jurisdictions are enacting severe new rules to keep them out .
Counties in North Carolina and Florida told BuzzFeed News they will soon set up roadblocks to barricade against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a home , job , or other necessity inside the county .
The standout is Dare County , North Carolina , where officials have implemented what may be the strictest ban of its type in the nation : Police have set up roadblocks to stop visitors from entering the coastal beach haven — even people who own vacation homes there .
“ We have basically two roads leading in and have deputies stationed at checkpoints , ” Dorothy Hester , a spokesperson for Dare County , told BuzzFeed News .
Officials are granting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and those who prove a need to enter .
But she said police have been turning away anyone trying to reach the county ’ s 25,000 empty properties used as secondary vacation homes or rentals — violators can be charged with a misdemeanor .
“ With each of those owners , you bring family , extended family , ” said Hester , who noted that there ’ s no expiration date on the ban .
“ We are just not set up to sustain that , especially if we were to get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coronavirus.
” One case of coronavirus had been reported in Dare County , population 35,000 , as of Wednesday evening .
With tens of thousands of vacation homes dotting the county ’ s barrier islands along the Atlantic Ocean , visitors can easily outnumber the year-round residents .
“ Many of our visitors come from New York and Virginia , ” said Bobby Outten , the Dare County manager , who noted that Outer Banks Hospital — the only hospital there — has just 20 beds and no intensive care unit .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ several hundred thousand people , and people cut their foot on the beach or get a fish hook in them , we can handle that , ” he said .
The county ’ s southern island is a three-hour drive to Norfolk , Virginia , which can take in seriously ill patients .
“ When you talk about coronavirus spreading here , we don ’ t have the capacity to treat them or transfer them , ” Outten said .
Civil liberties advocates have watched travel bans related to the coronavirus cautiously , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reasons to restrict access during emergencies , but in general , the orders must be temporary .
“ The constitutional right to travel is really important , and turning counties into gated communities is a dangerous precedent , ” Kristi Graunke , legal director of ACLU of North Carolina , told BuzzFeed News .
“ Not that you can ’ t restrict movement in times of emergency , but you have to be conscious of the long-term ramifications.
” The coronavirus pandemic has thrust the nation into fresh legal territory : This is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the country ’ s modern history , with shelter-in-place orders and shutdowns affecting hundreds of millions of Americans .
And yet , the government has rarely , if ever , had such a compelling interest to do so .
Outten compared the current travel ban to emergency measures during a hurricane .
“ When things are safe , ” he said , “ you open the county , and this is not a lot different than that.
” North Carolina emergency law extends particular power for cities and counties to shut down @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s or legislature ’ s approval — a useful tool for localities along the often storm-battered Atlantic Coast .
A March 17 declaration banning visitors and gatherings due to the coronavirus by the Dare County Control Group , which includes county officials and mayors of six towns , cited the “ unprecedented public health threat.
” In similar thinking , the island of North Haven , Maine , passed a resolution to “ strongly encourage ” visitors to steer clear .
In heavily forested Graham County , North Carolina , three checkpoints @ @ @ @ @ @ @ though travelers will be allowed to pass through on at least one highway and visit their vacation homes .
County Manager Rebecca Garland told BuzzFeed News the county of 8,500 can ’ t provide medical care : “ We have no hope of having a hospital .
And so far , we have not had a confirmed case of coronavirus , but we know it ’ s coming.
” .
While there are a few hospitals in the Florida Keys , an archipelago connected by a single highway , police will create a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sure , ” according to Kristen Livengood , the spokesperson for Monroe County , Florida .
Stationed near the top of Florida ’ s island chain , officers will allow entry to residents , including people who own secondary homes , and those with work — but not visitors who are simply trying to escape the densely populated cities to the north .
“ Miami-Dade County and Broward County are above us , ” Livengood said .
“ They have had an explosion of cases.
” She fears those travelers could usurp medical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 12 cases by Thursday morning .
“ So many people are not working , and their kids are not in school , so they come to the Keys to enjoy some time off , ” she said .
“ And it ’ s not safe for anyone to be traveling at this point.
” Livengood continued : “ We speak to the hospitals and urgent care , and everyone says they are adequately prepared , but we want to make sure if we have an outbreak , our residents need the hospitals — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in addition to the visitors.
” Daniel Tilley , legal director for the ACLU of Florida , said in a statement to BuzzFeed News that governments can restrict travel during an emergency , “ but they must ensure that any travel restrictions or prohibitions are no more restrictive than necessary .
Public officials must also provide adequate notice of the restrictions and provide a hearing process that allows individuals who are impacted by such policies a fair opportunity to explain why they should not be subjected to the policy.
” New Jersey Gov @ @ @ @ @ @ @ urged residents not to head to the Jersey Shore .
And the New York Times reported that residents of some popular tourist towns are trying to stave off city folk , saying the interlopers raid store shelves and bring “ bugs .
”

As some Americans flee crowded urban centers like New York City to ride out the coronavirus pandemic, rural residents have urged them to stay away. Now, at least a few jurisdictions are enacting severe new rules to keep them out.
Counties in North Carolina and Florida told BuzzFeed News they will soon set up roadblocks to barricade against visitors, unless they have evidence of a home, job, or other necessity inside the county.
The standout is Dare County, North Carolina, where officials have implemented what may be the strictest ban of its type in the nation: Police have set up roadblocks to stop visitors from entering the coastal beach haven — even people who own vacation homes there.
“We have basically two roads leading in and have deputies stationed at checkpoints,” Dorothy Hester, a spokesperson for Dare County, told BuzzFeed News. Officials are granting entry permits to workers, full-time residents, and those who prove a need to enter. But she said police have been turning away anyone trying to reach the county’s 25,000 empty properties used as secondary vacation homes or rentals — violators can be charged with a misdemeanor.
“With each of those owners, you bring family, extended family,” said Hester, who noted that there’s no expiration date on the ban. “We are just not set up to sustain that, especially if we were to get some type of community spread of the coronavirus.”
One case of coronavirus had been reported in Dare County, population 35,000, as of Wednesday evening. With tens of thousands of vacation homes dotting the county’s barrier islands along the Atlantic Ocean, visitors can easily outnumber the year-round residents.
“Many of our visitors come from New York and Virginia,” said Bobby Outten, the Dare County manager, who noted that Outer Banks Hospital — the only hospital there — has just 20 beds and no intensive care unit.
“In the summertime, when we have several hundred thousand people, and people cut their foot on the beach or get a fish hook in them, we can handle that,” he said. The county’s southern island is a three-hour drive to Norfolk, Virginia, which can take in seriously ill patients. “When you talk about coronavirus spreading here, we don’t have the capacity to treat them or transfer them,” Outten said.
Civil liberties advocates have watched travel bans related to the coronavirus cautiously, noting that the government can have legitimate reasons to restrict access during emergencies, but in general, the orders must be temporary.
“The constitutional right to travel is really important, and turning counties into gated communities is a dangerous precedent,” Kristi Graunke, legal director of ACLU of North Carolina, told BuzzFeed News. “Not that you can’t restrict movement in times of emergency, but you have to be conscious of the long-term ramifications.”
The coronavirus pandemic has thrust the nation into fresh legal territory: This is the most widespread infringement on civil liberties in the country’s modern history, with shelter-in-place orders and shutdowns affecting hundreds of millions of Americans. And yet, the government has rarely, if ever, had such a compelling interest to do so.
Outten compared the current travel ban to emergency measures during a hurricane. “When things are safe,” he said, “you open the county, and this is not a lot different than that.”
North Carolina emergency law extends particular power for cities and counties to shut down access during crises, without the governor’s or legislature’s approval — a useful tool for localities along the often storm-battered Atlantic Coast. A March 17 declaration banning visitors and gatherings due to the coronavirus by the Dare County Control Group, which includes county officials and mayors of six towns, cited the “unprecedented public health threat.”
In similar thinking, the island of North Haven, Maine, passed a resolution to “strongly encourage” visitors to steer clear.
In heavily forested Graham County, North Carolina, three checkpoints are planned for early next week, though travelers will be allowed to pass through on at least one highway and visit their vacation homes. County Manager Rebecca Garland told BuzzFeed News the county of 8,500 can’t provide medical care: “We have no hope of having a hospital. And so far, we have not had a confirmed case of coronavirus, but we know it’s coming.”.
While there are a few hospitals in the Florida Keys, an archipelago connected by a single highway, police will create a checkpoint there “by Friday morning for sure,” according to Kristen Livengood, the spokesperson for Monroe County, Florida.
Stationed near the top of Florida’s island chain, officers will allow entry to residents, including people who own secondary homes, and those with work — but not visitors who are simply trying to escape the densely populated cities to the north.
“Miami-Dade County and Broward County are above us,” Livengood said. “They have had an explosion of cases.”
She fears those travelers could usurp medical resources in Monroe County, which had 12 cases by Thursday morning. “So many people are not working, and their kids are not in school, so they come to the Keys to enjoy some time off,” she said. “And it’s not safe for anyone to be traveling at this point.”
Livengood continued: “We speak to the hospitals and urgent care, and everyone says they are adequately prepared, but we want to make sure if we have an outbreak, our residents need the hospitals — that there are enough beds, not in addition to the visitors.”
Daniel Tilley, legal director for the ACLU of Florida, said in a statement to BuzzFeed News that governments can restrict travel during an emergency, “but they must ensure that any travel restrictions or prohibitions are no more restrictive than necessary. Public officials must also provide adequate notice of the restrictions and provide a hearing process that allows individuals who are impacted by such policies a fair opportunity to explain why they should not be subjected to the policy.”
New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy on Twitter this week urged residents not to head to the Jersey Shore. And the New York Times reported that residents of some popular tourist towns are trying to stave off city folk, saying the interlopers raid store shelves and bring “bugs.”


buzzfeed--2020-03-30--Judges Struck Down Bans On Abortions During The Coronavirus Outbreak In Texas And Ohio

An abortion rights activist holds placards outside of the US Supreme Court in 2016 before the Court struck down a Texas law placing restrictions on abortion clinics .
The journalists at BuzzFeed News are proud to bring you trustworthy and relevant reporting about the coronavirus .
To help keep this news free , become a member and sign up for our newsletter , Outbreak Today .
Two federal judges issued orders on requiring Texas and Ohio to allow abortion clinics to stay open and keep providing services in the states Monday .
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton had ordered a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it did not qualify as “ essential ” health care ( except in cases of a threat to the life of the pregnant person ) and any scheduled procedures to be postponed amid the coronavirus outbreak in order to mitigate the spread of the virus and devote any medical resources to treating it .
Ohio ’ s Department of Health had issued the same interpretation .
Planned Parenthood and the American Civil Liberties Union quickly filed emergency lawsuits , arguing that the orders were unconstitutional , and demanding they be halted and clinics @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their work .
Judges granted their request for temporary restraining orders to keep clinics open in both states on Monday evening .
In his decision , US District Court Judge for the Western District of Texas Lee Yeakel , said that Texas ’ order would cause “ irreparable harm ” to abortion clinics and their patients , and that this harm “ outweighs ” Texas ’ reason for the order .
“ Regarding a woman 's right to a pre-fetal-viability abortion , the Supreme Court has spoken clearly .
There can be no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Yeakel wrote .
“ This court will not speculate on whether the Supreme Court included a silent ‘ except-in-a-national-emergency clause ’ in its previous writings on the issue.
” Yeakel said that only the Supreme Court can clarify if a ban on abortion can be applied during a national crisis , and that he will not try to predict what the Supreme Court will decide if the case against Texas ’ ban reaches the justices .
His temporary restraining order will prevent the ban from affecting clinics in Texas while the case @ @ @ @ @ @ @ though it could be extended ) .
The decisions in Texas and Ohio comes hours after Planned Parenthood , alongside a coalition of abortion rights organizations , filed a series of lawsuits in three other states as well , seeking similar judgements preventing Oklahoma , Iowa , and Alabama from temporarily banning abortion as part of their plans to mitigate the coronavirus pandemic .
Over the past week , all five states had issued similar interpretations of state executive orders suspending all “ nonessential medical procedures , ” saying abortion services were not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ threatening criminal action against medical workers who violated the order .
Planned Parenthood , the American Civil Liberties Union , and the Center for Reproductive Rights quickly joined together to respond , arguing that the conservative states with anti-abortion legislative histories were “ taking advantage ” of the coronavirus crisis to effectively ban abortion in their states , and that the orders were unconstitutional .
Each of the lawsuits demand an “ emergency stay ” on the orders so that the clinics in those states can reopen or stay open and continue to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ joined in the press conference by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists ( ACOG ) and the Abortion Care Network .
“ It 's not surprising that the states that are now using the COVID crisis to stop people from getting abortion care are the very same states that have a history of passing laws to ban abortions or using sham rationale to shut down clinics , ” Jennifer Dalven , the director of the Reproductive Freedom Project with the ACLU said on a call with the press Monday .
Since coronavirus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ breakneck speed — by Monday there were around 159,000 confirmed cases , and nearly 3,000 deaths in the US , according to the latest data compiled by Johns Hopkins — governors across the country have been issuing order after order to help enforce social distancing , prevent large gatherings , and limit the spread of the virus .
Over the past week , each of the governors in the five states ordered “ nonessential ” medical procedures to be postponed for several weeks , stating that this measure would help dedicate as many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ treating the virus .
Following this order , each of those states then specified that they considered abortion services “ nonessential ” and instructed Planned Parenthood and other abortion clinics in the states to shutter .
In Texas , which issued its ban last Monday , state Attorney General Ken Paxton followed up on Gov .
Greg Abbott ’ s order , specifying that any medical worker providing abortion care before the order ’ s expiration date of April 21 could be fined $ 1,000 or face jail time of up to 180 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stop issuing medication abortion to patients , which can be provided outside of the clinic via telemedicine .
Ohio ’ s order caused much confusion among clinics and reproductive rights organizations .
On March 17 , Gov .
Mike DeWine ordered the cancellation of all nonessential medical procedures and shortly thereafter , Ohio ’ s deputy attorney general , Jonathan Fulkerson , sent letters to several abortion clinics in the state , accusing them of being in violation of the order .
The clinics ’ lawyers quickly responded assuring Fulkerson ’ s office @ @ @ @ @ @ @ order and were taking all necessary precautions .
After some back and forth , Ohio ’ s Department of Health eventually issued further guidance saying that the ban applied to abortion clinics .
Alabama , which passed a near-total ban on abortion over the summer which was blocked in court , issued its own order calling for the close of abortion clinics Saturday night .
The order threatened criminal penalties for doctors who violated it , but was vague about exactly what services or actions would violate the order .
This vagueness “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ being forced to risk their licenses and risk prosecution in order to provide care , ” Dalven said .
Planned Parenthood quickly filed a lawsuit in Texas Thursday — the first of the five suits — arguing that the order was in violation of Roe v. Wade .
Each of the ensuing lawsuits used similar language and arguments .
The organizations have requested emergency rulings in each of the cases for Monday evening , but it is unclear when those rulings might actually occur .
Hundreds of patients seeking reproductive healthcare have already @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coalition said .
In Alabama , when the clinics had to call patients to cancel their abortion appointments by phone , many of the patients cried , Dalven said .
Many patients seeking abortions in Texas had been traveling to Oklahoma for care since the ban came down last week , but now that Oklahoma has issued a ban as well , many people are stuck and unsure of what to do , Nancy Northup , the head of the Center for Reproductive Rights ( which is leading the Oklahoma lawsuit ) said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stopped needing sexual and reproductive health care in a public health crisis , ” acting Planned Parenthood president Alexis McGill Johnson said during the press conference .
“ People still have sex .
They still need birth control , STI testing and treatment and access to safe and legal abortion.
” Each representative of the five groups joining and supporting the lawsuits argued that abortion is in fact essential health care , and that halting that care does not help to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 .
“ Stopping [ patients ] from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ risk of transmitting the virus , ” Dalven said .
“ It just forces people to stay pregnant and have children against their will.
” Planned Parenthood clinics around the country that remain open are taking extensive measures to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 at their clinics , Planned Parenthood assured press on the call .
They are spacing out patients to limit the number of people in the office , encouraging telemedicine and medication abortion , and making sure their staff has protective equipment .
However , even in states that are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ precautions are beginning to cause barriers to access , as some clinics stop taking new appointments or delay patients ’ appointments in order not to overwhelm and crowd the clinics .
On Monday California ’ s attorney general Xavier Becerra sent a letter to the US Department of Health signed by 21 state attorney attorneys general demanding increased access to telemedicine reproductive care .
The attorneys general asked the Trump administration to remove the regulation of Mifepristone — a drug used in medication abortion — so that it could be prescribed in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of requiring clinics to give it directly to patients , forcing them to come in and expose themselves and others to increased risk of COVID-19 .

Over the past week, federal judges have issued orders requiring Texas, Ohio, Alabama, and Oklahoma to allow abortion clinics to stay open and keep providing services, responding to a series of lawsuits filed by a coalition of reproductive rights groups to prevent states from banning abortion due to the coronavirus outbreak.
Three of the decisions came only hours after the lawsuits were filed on Monday March 30, though the decision about Oklahoma's ban came a week later, on April 6, when a judge ordered a temporary restraining order preventing the ban from going into effect until April 20.
Texas, Ohio, and Alabama quickly appealed the judges' decisions in an attempt to continue to enforce their bans on abortion during the outbreak. An appeals court reversed the Texas decision on Tuesday, allowing that state's ban to move forward temporarily as the case makes it way through the courts, but an appeals court made the opposite decision about Ohio's laws Friday, allowing the restraining order to stand.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton ordered a ban on abortions in late March, saying the procedure did not qualify as “essential” health care (except in cases of a threat to the life of the pregnant person). Paxton ordered any scheduled procedures to be postponed amid the coronavirus outbreak in order to mitigate the spread of the virus and devote any medical resources to treating it. Ohio's and Alabama's health departments issued the same interpretation of their states' orders to cease non-essential medical services during the pandemic.
Planned Parenthood, the American Civil Liberties Union, and the Center for Reproductive Rights quickly filed emergency lawsuits, arguing that the orders were unconstitutional and demanding they be halted and clinics in the state be allowed to continue their work. Judges granted their request for temporary restraining orders to keep clinics open in all three states last week.
In his decision, US District Court for the Western District of Texas Judge Lee Yeakel said that Texas’s order would cause “irreparable harm” to abortion clinics and their patients, and that this harm “outweighs” Texas’s reason for the order.
“Regarding a woman's right to a pre-fetal-viability abortion, the Supreme Court has spoken clearly. There can be no outright ban on such a procedure,” Yeakel wrote. “This court will not speculate on whether the Supreme Court included a silent ‘except-in-a-national-emergency clause’ in its previous writings on the issue.”
Yeakel said that only the Supreme Court can clarify if a ban on abortion can be applied during a national crisis, and that he will not try to predict what the Supreme Court will decide if the case against Texas’s ban reaches the justices. His temporary restraining order will prevent the ban from affecting clinics in Texas while the case moves forward and expires April 13 (though it could be extended).
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned Yeakel's decision Tuesday afternoon, placing a stay on his temporary restraining order and allowing the ban to move forward as the case continues.
US District Court Judge for the Western District of Oklahoma, Charles Goodwin made reference to similar concerns about Supreme Court precedent on abortion in his decision, and cited the potential of irreparable harm to women in the state. He also addressed a difficulty facing judges during the coronavirus outbreak.
"This case raises an issue that has long been a source of struggle for the courts: the proper use of the judicial power in reviewing laws and executive orders or actions taken in response to a public health emergency," Goodwin wrote in his decision issued Monday.
During states of emergency, state governments have the power to impose requirements that may temporarily "intrude upon the liberty of its citizens," he continued. "That power is not unfettered, however, and courts should carefully guard against 'unreasonable,' 'arbitrary,' or 'oppressive' exercises of it," the judge continued, before stating his decision to block Oklahoma's ban on abortion during coronavirus.
Over the last week, each of the governors in the five states ordered “nonessential” medical procedures to be postponed for several weeks, stating that this measure would help dedicate as many medical personnel and resources as possible toward treating the virus. Following this order, each of those states then specified that they considered abortion services “nonessential” and instructed Planned Parenthood and other abortion clinics in the states to shutter. In some cases, the orders threatened criminal action against medical workers who violated the order.
Planned Parenthood, the American Civil Liberties Union, and the Center for Reproductive Rights quickly joined together to respond, arguing that the conservative states with anti-abortion legislative histories were “taking advantage” of the coronavirus crisis to effectively ban abortion in their states, and that the orders were unconstitutional. Each of the lawsuits demand an “emergency stay” on the orders so that the clinics in those states can reopen or stay open and continue to provide abortion care. The groups were joined in the press conference by the Center for Reproductive Rights, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the Abortion Care Network.
“It's not surprising that the states that are now using the COVID crisis to stop people from getting abortion care are the very same states that have a history of passing laws to ban abortions or using sham rationale to shut down clinics,” Jennifer Dalven, the director of the Reproductive Freedom Project with the ACLU, said on a call with the press Monday.
Since the coronavirus reached the US and started spreading at breakneck speed — by Monday there were around 159,000 confirmed cases and nearly 3,000 deaths in the US, according to the latest data compiled by Johns Hopkins — governors across the country have been issuing order after order to help enforce social distancing, prevent large gatherings, and limit the spread of the virus.
In Texas, which issued its ban last Monday, state Attorney General Ken Paxton followed up on Gov. Greg Abbott’s order, specifying that any medical worker providing abortion care before the order’s expiration date of April 21 could be fined $1,000 or face jail time of up to 180 days. Paxton even ordered clinics to stop issuing medication abortion to patients, which can be provided outside of the clinic via telemedicine.
Ohio’s order caused much confusion among clinics and reproductive rights organizations. On March 17, Gov. Mike DeWine ordered the cancellation of all nonessential medical procedures, and shortly thereafter, Ohio’s deputy attorney general, Jonathan Fulkerson, sent letters to several abortion clinics in the state, accusing them of being in violation of the order. The clinics’ lawyers quickly responded, assuring Fulkerson’s office that they were in compliance with the order and were taking all necessary precautions. After some back and forth, Ohio’s Department of Health eventually issued further guidance saying that the ban applied to abortion clinics. After a federal judge put a restraining order on this guidance, Ohio appealed.
On Friday, the US District Court of Appeals for the Sixth District in Cincinnati, Ohio rejected the state's appeal, upholding the restraining order and continuing to block the ban on abortion. As in the other cases, the sixth circuit court said the order would cause irreparable harm to women seeking abortions in the state and it was unconstitutional. However, the court also wrote in its decision that it "could be argued" that the amount of protective equipment being used for abortion instead of treating COVID-19 patients is "negligible."
Alabama, which passed a near total ban on abortion over the summer that was blocked in court, issued its own order calling for the close of abortion clinics Saturday night. The order threatened criminal penalties for doctors who violated it, but was vague about exactly what services or actions would violate the order.
This vagueness “puts doctors in a terrible position of being forced to risk their licenses and risk prosecution in order to provide care,” Dalven said.
Planned Parenthood quickly filed a lawsuit in Texas on Thursday — the first of the five suits — arguing that the state's order was in violation of Roe v. Wade. Each of the ensuing lawsuits used similar language and arguments, and each of the three judges said in their orders that the bans constitute an "undue burden" on abortion access, the metric by which previous Supreme Court decisions measure whether a law regulating abortion is unconstitutional.
Hundreds of patients seeking reproductive health care have already been affected by the orders, the coalition said. In Alabama, when the clinics had to call patients to cancel their abortion appointments by phone, many of the patients cried, Dalven said.
Many patients seeking abortions in Texas had been traveling to Oklahoma for care since the ban came down last week, but when Oklahoma issued a ban as well, many people were stuck and unsure of what to do, Nancy Northup, the head of the Center for Reproductive Rights (which is leading the Oklahoma lawsuit), said on the call.
“No one stopped needing sexual and reproductive health care in a public health crisis,” acting Planned Parenthood president Alexis McGill Johnson said during the press conference. “People still have sex. They still need birth control, STI testing and treatment, and access to safe and legal abortion.”
Each representative of the five groups joining and supporting the lawsuits argued that abortion is in fact essential health care, and that halting that care does not help to mitigate the spread of COVID-19.
“Stopping [patients] from getting an abortion doesn't lower the risk of transmitting the virus,” Dalven said. “It just forces people to stay pregnant and have children against their will.”
Planned Parenthood clinics around the country that remain open are taking extensive measures to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 at their clinics, Planned Parenthood assured press on the call. They are spacing out patients to limit the number of people in the office, encouraging telemedicine and medication abortion, and making sure their staff has protective equipment.
However, even in states that are not forcing clinics to close, the precautions are beginning to cause barriers to access, as some clinics stop taking new appointments or delay patients’ appointments in order to not overwhelm and crowd the clinics.
Last week, California’s attorney general, Xavier Becerra, sent a letter to the US Department of Health signed by 21 state attorneys general demanding increased access to telemedicine reproductive care. The attorneys general asked the Trump administration to remove the regulation of mifepristone — a drug used in medication abortion — so that it could be prescribed in a pharmacy like a normal drug, instead of requiring clinics to give it directly to patients, forcing them to come in and expose themselves and others to increased risk of COVID-19.


buzzfeed--2020-03-30--They Were Opposed To Government Surveillance. Then The Coronavirus Pandemic Began.

As nations around the world take on sweeping new powers to fight the disease , critics are n't sure what 's necessary and what 's too far .
The coronavirus pandemic , which has grown to over 740,000 cases and 35,000 deaths around the world , has been so singular an event that even some staunch advocates for civil liberties say they ’ re willing to accept previously unthinkable surveillance measures .
“ I ’ m very concerned ” about civil liberties , writer Glenn Greenwald , cofounder of the Intercept , who built his career as a critic of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ But at the same time , I 'm also much more receptive to proposals that in my entire life I never expected I would be , because of the gravity of the threat.
” Greenwald won a Pulitzer Prize in 2014 for his reporting on the disclosures by NSA contractor Edward Snowden , who revealed a vast secret infrastructure of US government surveillance .
But like others who have spent years raising concerns about government overreach , he now accepts the idea that surveilling people who have contracted the coronavirus could be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ The kind of digital surveillance that I spent a lot of years — even before Snowden , and then obviously , the two or three years during Snowden — advocating against is now something I think could be warranted principally to stave off the more brute solutions that were used in China , ” Greenwald said .
Greenwald said he was still trying to understand how to balance his own views on privacy against the current unprecedented situation .
“ We have to be very careful not to get into that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hey , because your actions affect the society collectively , we have the right now to restrict it in every single way.
’ We 're in this early stage where our survival instincts are guiding our thinking , and that can be really dangerous .
And I ’ m trying myself to calibrate that.
” And he is far from the only prominent civil libertarian and opponent of surveillance trying to calibrate their response as governments around the world are planning or have already implemented location-tracking programs to monitor coronavirus transmission , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ keeping people indoors .
Broad expansions of surveillance power that would have been unimaginable in February are being presented as fait accompli in March .
That has split an international community that would have otherwise been staunchly opposed to such measures .
Is the coronavirus the kind of emergency that requires setting aside otherwise sacrosanct commitments to privacy and civil liberties ?
Or like the 9/11 attacks before it , does it mark a moment in which panicked Americans will accept new erosions on their freedoms , only to regret it when the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ circumstances ?
Yeah , go for it , Facebook .
You know , go for it , Google , ” Gary Johnson , the former governor of New Mexico and 2016 Libertarian Party presidential candidate , told BuzzFeed News .
“ But then , when the crisis goes away , how is that going to apply given that it 's in place ?
I mean , these are the obvious questions , and no , that would not be a good thing.
” `` My fear is that , historically , in any @ @ @ @ @ @ @ want massive surveillance powers will finally have an avenue and an excuse to get them , ” Matthew Guariglia , an analyst at the Electronic Frontier Foundation , told BuzzFeed News .
Marc Rotenberg , president and executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center ( EPIC ) , told BuzzFeed News that it ’ s possible to find a solution that protects privacy and prevents the spread of the virus .
“ People like to say , 'well , we need to strike a balance between protecting public health and safeguarding privacy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wrong way to think about it , ” Rotenberg said .
“ You really want both .
And if you 're not getting both , there 's a problem with the policy proposal.
” Beyond the sick and dead , the most immediate effects that the pandemic has visited upon the United States have been broad constraints that state and local governments have imposed on day-to-day movement .
Those are in keeping with public health experts ’ recommendations to practice social distancing to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 , the disease caused by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hasn ’ t announced a nationwide stay-at-home order like France and Italy have , large parts of the US are under some degree of lockdown , with nonessential businesses shuttered and nonessential activities outside the home either banned or discouraged .
And while President Trump and his allies have focused on the economic devastation wrought by this shutdown , some libertarians have raised concerns about the damage those decrees have done to people 's freedoms .
Appearing on libertarian former Texas lawmaker and two-time Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul ’ s YouTube show @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Massie pointed to a Kentucky man who , after testing positive for the coronavirus , refused to self-isolate , and whom sheriff 's deputies forced to stay home .
( Massie later came under bipartisan criticism for attempting to hold up the coronavirus stimulus bill in the House . )
“ What would they do if that man walked out and got in his car ?
Would they shoot him ?
Would they suit up in hazmat uniforms and drag him off ?
” Massie said .
“ Those are the images we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ everybody was appalled at those images .
And now we ’ re literally , we could be five minutes away from that happening in the United States , here in Kentucky.
” “ It ’ s crazy , and what concerns me the most is that once people start accepting that , in our own country , the fact that somebody could immobilize you without due process , that when this virus is over people will have a more paternalistic view of government and more tolerance for ignoring the Constitution , ” Massie @ @ @ @ @ @ @ son , Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul , announced that he had tested positive for the disease , only a few days after Ron Paul wrote in his online column that the pandemic could be a “ big hoax ” pushed by “ fearmongers ” to put more power in government hands .
But the elder Paul 's concerns are not shared among some of his fellow former Libertarian Party nominees for president .
Johnson said measures to encourage people to stay in their homes and temporarily shutter businesses taken by states like New @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have to believe that they 're dealing with [ this ] in the best way that they possibly can , ” he told BuzzFeed News .
“ And I think it 's also telling that most of them are following the same route.
” Johnson added that although it was easy to raise criticisms , as a former governor , he saw few other options .
“ You 're just not hearing it : What are the alternatives ?
” Johnson said .
“ I do n't know , not having [ currently @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , what the options were .
And given that every state appears to be doing the same thing , I have to believe that everything is based on the best available information.
” Gaming out the role of intense surveillance during a pandemic isn ’ t just a theoretical political debate on YouTube .
Surveillance at previously politically unimaginable scales has reached countries around the world .
Imagine opening an app , scanning a QR code , and creating a profile that ’ s instantly linked with information about your health and where @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you if you ’ ve been in close contact with someone sick with the coronavirus .
This software already exists in China .
Developed by the Electronics Technology Group Corporation and the Chinese government , it works by tapping into massive troves of data collected by the private sector and the Chinese government .
In South Korea , the government is mapping the movements of COVID-19 patients using data from mobile carriers , credit card companies , and the Institute of Public Health and Environment .
In Israel , Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to tap into a previously undisclosed cache of cellphone data to trace the movements of infected persons in that country and in the West Bank .
And in the Indian state of Karnataka , the government is requiring people in lockdown to send it selfies every hour to prove they are staying home .
No such tools currently exist in the United States — but some in the tech community who might have been expected to oppose such capacities have found themselves favoring these previously unthinkable steps .
Maciej Cegłowski , the founder @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tech companies ’ intrusions into privacy , wrote a blog post arguing for a “ massive surveillance program ” to fight the virus .
“ My frustration is that we have this giant surveillance network deployed and working , '' Cegłowski told BuzzFeed News .
`` We have location tracking .
We have people carrying tracking devices on them all the time .
But we ’ re using it to sell skin cream — you know , advertising .
And we ’ re using it to try to persuade investors to put more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and we have this crisis right now , let ’ s put it to use to save lives.
” This position is a major departure for Ceglowski , who has warned of how tech companies have invaded our “ ambient privacy ” and argued that tech giants ’ reach into our lives is as pernicious a force as government surveillance .
“ We put up with the fire department breaking down our door if there ’ s a fire at our neighbor ’ s house or in our house because we know that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” Cegłowski said .
“ I think similarly if we can have a sense that we ’ ll have real privacy regulation , then in emergency situations like this we can decide , hey , we ’ re going to change some things.
” Those doors are already being broken down .
The COVID-19 Mobility Data Network — a collaboration between Facebook , Camber Systems , Cuebiq , and health researchers from 13 universities — will use corporate location data from mobile devices to give local officials `` consolidated daily situation reports @ @ @ @ @ @ @ '' Representatives from the COVID-19 Mobility Data Network did not respond to requests for comment .
Lots of companies claim that they have the technology to save people ’ s lives .
But critics worry that they are taking advantage of a vulnerable time in American society to sign contracts that wo n't easily be backed out of when the threat passes .
“ Sometimes people have an almost sacrificial sense about their privacy , ” Rotenberg told BuzzFeed News .
“ They say things like , ‘ Well , if it 'll @ @ @ @ @ @ @ my data , of course , I should do that.
’ But that 's actually not the right way to solve a problem .
Particularly if asking people to sacrifice their privacy is not part of an effective plan to save lives.
” In response to the pandemic , some data analytics and facial recognition companies have offered new uses for existing services .
Representatives from data analytics company have reportedly been working with the CDC on collecting and integrating data about COVID-19 , while Clearview AI has reportedly been in talks with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the virus .
Neither Palantir nor Clearview AI responded to requests for comment , but the appearance of these controversial companies has raised alarms among those in the privacy community .
“ The deployment of face recognition , as a way of preventing the spread of virus , is something that does not pass the sniff test at all , ” Guariglia said .
“ Even the companies themselves , I do n't think , can put out a logical explanation as to how face recognition , especially Clearview , would help.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ design tools for law enforcement have tried to offer tools to combat COVID-19 as well .
Banjo , which combines social media and satellite data with public information , like CCTV camera footage , 911 calls , and vehicle location , to detect criminal or suspicious activity , will be releasing a tool designed to respond to the outbreak .
“ We are working with our partners to finalize a new tool that would provide public health agencies and hospitals with HIPAA-compliant information that helps identify potential outbreaks and more efficiently apply resources @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spokesperson told BuzzFeed News .
Those efforts cause concerns for people like Evan Greer , the deputy director of digital rights activist group Fight for the Future , who told BuzzFeed News that such tools , once deployed , would inevitably be used for more purposes than to fight the pandemic .
“ We have so much history that shows us that mass surveillance generally is n't very effective , and mission creep is inevitable , ” she said .
“ It 's not necessarily a question of if data that was handed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crisis would be repurposed .
It 's a matter of when.
” In addition to those companies , many camera makers have been making a bold claim : Using just an infrared sensor , they can detect fevers , helping venues filter out the sick from the healthy .
These firms include Dahua Technology in Israel , Guide Infrared in China , Diycam in India , Rapid-Tech Equipment in Australia , and Athena Security in the US .
In late February , Guide Infrared announced that it had donated about $ 144,000 worth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when fever is detected ” to Japan .
The company said its devices would be used in Japanese “ hospitals and epidemic prevention stations.
” Although Guide Infrared claimed that its “ temperature measurement solutions ” have helped in emergencies including SARS , H1N1 , and Ebola , the Chinese army and government authorities are “ some of its major customers , ” according to the South China Morning Post .
It ’ s been used in railway stations and airports in major Chinese regions .
It ’ s also partnered with Hikvision @ @ @ @ @ @ @ US over its work outfitting Chinese detention centers with surveillance cameras .
Australian company Rapid-Tech Equipment claims that its fever-detection cameras can be used in `` minimizing the spread [ of ] coronavirus infections . ''
Its cameras are being used in Algeria , France , Egypt , Greece , Morocco , Saudi Arabia , Turkey , and “ many more ” countries , according to its website .
UK camera maker Westminster International said that it has a `` supply range of Fever Detection Systems for Coronavirus , Ebola & Flu .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ two cameras with a “ FeverDetection assistant.
” A section of its website titled “ Why fever detection ?
” argues that managers of high-traffic venues have a responsibility to filter for fevers : “ Whether ebola , SARS or coronavirus : no-one wants to imagine the consequences of an epidemic or even a pandemic.
” A Testo spokesperson told BuzzFeed News that the company has seen a “ massive increase in demand ” for its products in response to the coronavirus and that its cameras are being used “ worldwide.
” The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ name specific countries .
While the appetite for fever-detecting cameras is clearly there , civil liberties advocates have concerns .
Guariglia said that , regardless of their thermal imaging capabilities , surveillance cameras are surveillance cameras .
“ More surveillance cameras always have dubious implications for civil liberties .
Even if their contract with thermal imaging ends at the end of six months , ” Guariglia said , “ I bet those cameras are gon na stay up.
” Julian Sanchez , an analyst with the Cato Institute and commentator on digital surveillance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he was willing to accept measures he might otherwise have concerns about to limit the spread of the virus .
“ I ’ m about as staunch a privacy guy as it gets , ” Sanchez said .
“ In the middle of an epidemic outbreak , there are a number of things I ’ m willing to countenance that I would normally object to , on the premise that they are temporary and will save a lot of lives.
” But he still questioned the efficacy of some of the current proposals @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of snake oil being pitched by surveillance vendors , ” he said .
More than that , he had concerns about what would happen to civil liberties after the pandemic passed , but the measure put in place to combat it did not .
“ I think a lot of civil liberties advocates would say , ‘ Well , if this is very tightly restricted , and only for this purpose , and it 's temporary , then , you know , maybe that 's all right .
Maybe we ’ re able @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re confident it 's for this purpose , and then it ends , ’ ” Sanchez said .
“ The question is whether that 's the case.
” Sanchez worried that the coronavirus , like the war on terror , is an open-ended threat with no clear end — inviting opportunities for those surveillance measures to be abused long after the threat has passed .
In the same week that he spoke , the US Senate voted to extend until June the FBI 's expanded powers under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 9/11 terrorist attacks 19 years ago .
●

Beyond the sick and dead, the most immediate effects that the pandemic has visited upon the United States have been broad constraints that state and local governments have imposed on day-to-day movement. Those are in keeping with public health experts’ recommendations to practice social distancing to mitigate the spread of COVID-19, the disease caused by the novel coronavirus.
While the US hasn’t announced a nationwide stay-at-home order like France and Italy have, large parts of the US are under some degree of lockdown, with nonessential businesses shuttered and nonessential activities outside the home either banned or discouraged. And while President Trump and his allies have focused on the economic devastation wrought by this shutdown, some libertarians have raised concerns about the damage those decrees have done to people's freedoms.
Appearing on libertarian former Texas lawmaker and two-time Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul’s YouTube show on March 19, Kentucky Rep. Thomas Massie pointed to a Kentucky man who, after testing positive for the coronavirus, refused to self-isolate, and whom sheriff's deputies forced to stay home. (Massie later came under bipartisan criticism for attempting to hold up the coronavirus stimulus bill in the House.)
“What would they do if that man walked out and got in his car? Would they shoot him? Would they suit up in hazmat uniforms and drag him off?” Massie said. “Those are the images we saw in China two months ago and everybody was appalled at those images. And now we’re literally, we could be five minutes away from that happening in the United States, here in Kentucky.”
“It’s crazy, and what concerns me the most is that once people start accepting that, in our own country, the fact that somebody could immobilize you without due process, that when this virus is over people will have a more paternalistic view of government and more tolerance for ignoring the Constitution,” Massie said.
Last Monday, Paul's son, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, announced that he had tested positive for the disease, only a few days after Ron Paul wrote in his online column that the pandemic could be a “big hoax” pushed by “fearmongers” to put more power in government hands.
But the elder Paul's concerns are not shared among some of his fellow former Libertarian Party nominees for president.
Johnson said measures to encourage people to stay in their homes and temporarily shutter businesses taken by states like New York were appropriate. “I really have to believe that they're dealing with [this] in the best way that they possibly can,” he told BuzzFeed News. “And I think it's also telling that most of them are following the same route.”
Johnson added that although it was easy to raise criticisms, as a former governor, he saw few other options.
“You're just not hearing it: What are the alternatives?” Johnson said. “I don't know, not having [currently] sat at the table as governor, what the options were. And given that every state appears to be doing the same thing, I have to believe that everything is based on the best available information.”