By DEVNA BOSE

A federal judge will temporarily block President Donald Trump’s administration from cutting billions in federal dollars that support COVID-19 initiatives and public health projects throughout the country.

Related Articles

Senate confirms Mehmet Oz to take lead of Medicare and Medicaid agency

Judge says US government may have ‘acted in bad faith’ as he weighs contempt over deportation order

Pentagon watchdog to review Hegseth’s use of Signal app to convey plans for Houthi strike

Trump’s tariffs aren’t strictly reciprocal. Here’s how he calculated them

These are the places affected by Trump’s tariffs

U.S. District Judge Mary McElroy, appointed by Trump in 2019 but first nominated by former President Barack Obama, in Rhode Island said Thursday that she plans to grant the court order sought by 23 states and the District of Columbia.

“They make a case, a strong case, for the fact that they will succeed on the merits, so I’m going to grant the temporary restraining order,” said McElroy, who plans to issue a written ruling later.

New York Attorney General Letitia James tweeted about the judge’s decision immediately after the hearing, saying: “We’re going to continue our lawsuit and fight to ensure states can provide the medical services Americans need.”

Assistant U.S. Attorney Leslie Kane objected to the temporary restraining order in court but she said she was limited in the argument she could make against it, adding that her office was unable to thoroughly review the thousands of documents under the time limitation.

The states’ lawsuit, filed Tuesday, sought to immediately stop the $11 billion in cuts. The money was allocated by Congress during the pandemic and mostly used for COVID-related initiatives, as well as for mental health and substance use efforts. The lawsuit said losing the money would devastate U.S. public health infrastructure, putting states “at greater risk for future pandemics and the spread of otherwise preventable disease and cutting off vital public health services.”

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has defended the decision, saying that the money was being wasted since the pandemic is over.

State and local public health departments already have laid off people, including nearly 200 employees at the Minnesota Department of Health. North Carolina says it stands to lose about $230 million, and California officials put their potential losses at $1 billion.

Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, who is also part of the lawsuit, said half a billion dollars in public health grants that support long-term care for the elderly and immunizations for children were at stake in his state.

“As a result of taking the Administration to court, these dollars will now start flowing again,” he wrote on X.

The temporary block on chopping health funding is the latest legal setback for the Trump administration, which is facing some 150 lawsuits on issues ranging from immigration to deep financial and job cuts at federal agencies to transgender rights. Federal judges have issued dozens of orders slowing — at least for now — the president’s ambitious conservative agenda.

AP reporter Lindsay Whitehurst in Washington contributed to this report.

The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Science and Educational Media Group and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

“When polls only ask people how they feel about ‘tough-on-crime’ solutions, they receive only validation for those very solutions.”

A rally last year in support of the city’s mental health clubhouses. (Gerardo Romo/NYC Council Media Unit)

As budget negotiations continue in Albany and the mayoral primary heats up in New York City, more and more polls are coming out focused on ways to improve safety on our streets and subways. Accurate polling, particularly when it comes to safety, requires actually giving respondents a choice.

When polls only ask people how they feel about “tough-on-crime” solutions, they receive only validation for those very solutions. When presented with a choice, however, people prefer comprehensive, community-based solutions over ones focused on police, incarceration, and punishment.

Recent polls have asked New Yorkers in broad terms about complex issues like involuntary hospitalization or surging police presence on the subway. Although the headlines sound compelling, these polls failed to offer alternative solutions. Therefore, it’s no surprise that the findings support those punitive approaches to safety.

The polling, while flawed, reflects an unfortunate truth: many New Yorkers only hear from their leaders about “tough-on-crime” policies. However, the evidence shows that community-based programs and services work at making the city safer. New York City’s crisis respite centers, clubhouses, and stabilization centers keep people safe in their communities, saving money and avoiding psychiatric admissions.

The city’s Crisis Management System has contributed to a 40 percent reduction in shootings in the neighborhoods with community-based programming that addresses essential needs like education, healthcare, and employment. Bail reform initially reduced the city’s jail population by 31 percent and led to less recidivism overall. And supportive housing has been proven to reduce incarceration, homeless shelter stays, and emergency hospitalizations.

Ask a New Yorker how the city invests in safety, and you’ll likely hear only about police and corrections. But when you ask what makes them feel safe, the answer is more nuanced: according to Vera Action’s December 2024 poll of likely New York City voters, gun control (36 percent) and affordable housing (28 percent) topped the list, ahead of more police (26 percent) and strict criminal laws (18 percent).

Eighty-four percent of respondents were in favor of expanding supportive housing, mental health treatment, and drug treatment so New Yorkers can await trial in their homes instead of on Rikers, and 60 percent supported “more healthcare clinics and mobile crisis response teams so that people with mental illness don’t wait months, or even years, to get help.”

New Yorkers are hungry for policy solutions; present them anything with the promise of improving safety, and they are likely to support it. But when faced with a choice between doubling down on punishment or investing in community-based, evidence-backed solutions, New Yorkers choose policies rooted in what actually works.

According to Vera Action’s December poll, 58 percent of New Yorkers prefer a comprehensive approach to safety—funding “good schools, jobs, and affordable housing”—over increasing our reliance on harsh sentences, strong bail laws, incarceration, and policing.

On policing, the idea that we must either expand the NYPD or dismantle it is a false choice—and one that New Yorkers see through. When asked for their thoughts on law enforcement, 38 percent of respondents said they wanted to support the police while holding them accountable if they use excessive force or abuse their power.

More funding for police lagged behind by 28 percentage points. And 59 percent of respondents agreed that “police should focus on investigating and solving serious crimes and send trained experts to help New Yorkers who are homeless or in crisis,” compared to 33 percent who supported even limited use of stop-and-frisk.

Ultimately, New Yorkers want better policing, not more of it, and they support sending the right first responder to the right crisis. In many cases, armed police are not well-suited to address people’s underlying needs or de-escalate tense situations. Social workers, healthcare clinicians, substance use counselors, peer specialists, and other trained experts can better support people in ways that break cycles of instability and crime, making us all safer.

Rather than jumping straight to involuntary hospitalization, more police, and putting more people in jail, we need our leaders to look at the evidence and invest in solutions that address root causes and prevent future crime. Not only is it good policy—it’s also overwhelmingly popular with New Yorkers, provided they’re given the option.

Alana Sivin is the director of the Vera Institute of Justice’s Greater Justice New York initiative, leading efforts to advance criminal legal reform across the Empire State.

The post Opinion: New Yorkers Support Community-Based Safety Solutions. You Just Have to Ask. appeared first on City Limits.

NEW YORK — All season the Minnesota Wild’s penalty killers have been a topic of conversation, and until recently, for all the wrong reasons. For much of the winter, the surest way to see a Wild opponent score was to wait until a player in green and red went to the penalty box.

After that, it generally wouldn’t take long.

While the NHL’s league-wide statistics still show the Wild owning the worst penalty kill in the Western Conference, the unit has been notably effective recently. On Wednesday in Manhattan, with the game tied 4-4 in the third period, the Wild killed off a trio of Rangers power plays and earned the point that comes with overtime.

In the past dozen games, the Wild have killed 24 of the opponents’ 28 man advantage situations after going 4 for 4 versus the Rangers (83.3 percent).

Marco Rossi, who scored the tying goal for Minnesota early in the third period of a back-and-forth game, was already looking beyond the regular season when talking about the penalty kill and what it means.

“That was huge,” he said. “I know at that time of year, even in the playoffs, the special teams have to be really good if you want to win. So, they did a really good job.”

Part of the difference has been a simple solution that coach John Hynes stressed when the penalty kill was struggling. You don’t need to kill penalties if you don’t take penalties. And in eight of the last 12 games, the Wild have been whistled two times or fewer.

As the penalties started piling up at Madison Square Garden, Hynes said the key for his team was keeping their cool and getting the job done.

“You do feel those emotions, but I think it’s important that you’ve got to stay on task,” Hynes said following the Rangers’ 5-4 overtime win. “It’s about if you can stay focused and have the team stay focused. We had to kill the penalties, right? We couldn’t do anything about the situation we were in, and why we were in them. It was more making sure we were focused on what we needed to do to get out of it.”

On Wednesday, the Wild penalty killers also took advantage of a Rangers turnover to score Minnesota’s first shorthanded goal of the season, and they nearly had a second one when Matt Boldy was thwarted on a shorthanded breakaway.

For the Wild, figuring out the best path to penalty kill success, with the playoffs looming, may be some perfect timing.

Zeev Buium a Hobey finalist

The first goal in Minnesota Wild regular season history was scored by Marian Gaborik on October 6, 2000. But the first goal ever scored by a Wild player in a preseason game came a few days earlier off the stick of Scott Pellerin, who in 1992 won the Hobey Baker Award given annually to college hockey’s top player while skating for Maine.

Brian Bonin, who played a handful of games for the Wild in his career, also won the Hobey as a senior for the Gophers in 1996. Now, the Wild have at least a 33 percent chance of grabbing another Hobey winner as Denver defenseman Zeev Buium was announced on Thursday as one of the three Hobey Hat Trick finalists.

As a sophomore for the defending national champions, Buium — the Wild’s first round pick in the 2024 NHL Draft — was named the top player in his conference and the most outstanding player at last weekend Manchester Regional as the Pioneers earned a return trip to the Frozen Four.

That’s where Buium will be on Friday, April 11, when the 2025 Hobey Baker winner is named. Boston College forward Ryan Leonard and Michigan State forward Isaac Howard, who is from Hudson, Wis., are the other two finalists. Leonard signed a contract with the NHL’s Washington Capitals a short time after BC’s season ended.

Among the hockey history on display at Xcel Energy Center is a showcase of past Hobey winners, and the jersey from the most recent recipient: Boston University forward Macklin Celebrini, now a frontrunner for the Calder Trophy skating for the NHL’s San Jose Sharks.

Related Articles

Not pointless, as Wild fall in OT to Rangers

Busy schedule suits the Wild just fine at this time of the season

No pouting allowed, as getting to three goals is elusive for Wild lately

Matt Boldy’s late goal salvages a point for Wild in New Jersey

Newark is where it all began for Wild coach John Hynes

By AMANDA SEITZ

WASHINGTON (AP) — Former heart surgeon and TV pitchman Dr. Mehmet Oz was confirmed Thursday to lead the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

Related Articles

Pentagon watchdog to review Hegseth’s use of Signal app to convey plans for Houthi strike

Trump’s tariffs aren’t strictly reciprocal. Here’s how he calculated them

These are the places affected by Trump’s tariffs

Trump’s tariff push is a race against time, and potential voter backlash

Trump’s changes to the federal government aren’t yet a clear political winner or loser: AP-NORC poll

Oz became the agency’s administrator in a party line 53-45 vote.

The 64-year-old will manage health insurance programs for roughly half the country, with oversight of Medicare, Medicaid or Affordable Care Act coverage. He steps into the new role as Congress is debating cuts to the Medicaid program, which provides coverage to millions of poor and disabled Americans.

Oz has not said yet whether he would oppose such cuts to the government-funded program, instead offering a vision of promoting healthier lifestyles, integrating artificial intelligence and telehealth into the system, and rethinking rural health care delivery.

During a hearing last month, he told senators that he did favor work requirements for Medicaid recipients, but paperwork shouldn’t be used to reaffirm that they are working or to block people from staying enrolled.

Oz, who worked for years a respected heart surgeon at Columbia University, also noted that doctors dislike Medicaid for its relatively low payments and some don’t want to take those patients.

He said that when Medicaid eligibility was expanded without improving resources for doctors, that made care options even thinner for the program’s core patients, which include children, pregnant women and people with disabilities.

“We have to make some important decisions to improve the quality of care,” he said.

Oz has formed a close relationship with his new boss, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. He’s hosted the health secretary and his inner circle regularly at his home in Florida. He’s leaned into Kennedy’s campaign to “Make America Healthy Again,” an effort to redesign the nation’s food supply, reject vaccine mandates and cast doubt on some long-established scientific research.

The former TV show host talks often about the importance of a healthy diet, aligning closely with Kennedy’s views.

While has has faced some criticism for promoting unproven vitamin supplements and holistic treatments — staples of the “MAHA movement” — he’s regularly encouraged Americans to get vaccinated.

Oz will take over CMS days after the agency was spared from the type of deep cuts that Kennedy ordered at other public health agencies. Thousands of staffers at the Food and Drug Administration, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, as well as the National Institutes for Health are out of a job after mass layoffs that started Tuesday.

CMS is expected to lose about 300 staffers, including those who worked on minority health and to shrink the cost of health care delivery.