How climate change could force FIFA to rethink the World Cup calendar

posted in: All news | 0

By GRAHAM DUNBAR and SETH BORENSTEIN

GENEVA (AP) — Soccer had a fierce reckoning with heat at the recently concluded FIFA Club World Cup in the United States — a sweltering preview of what players and fans may face when the U.S. co-hosts the World Cup with Mexico and Canada next summer.

Related Articles


Before it was Alligator Alcatraz, this airstrip sparked fury and changed America’s landscape


Wildfires can harm water quality up to eight years later, study finds


Trump administration says it won’t publish major climate change report on NASA website as promised


Vietnam will ban fossil-fuel motorcycles from central Hanoi over pollution concerns


Hudson RiverFest will celebrate conservation

With temperatures rising worldwide, scientists warn that staging the World Cup and other soccer tournaments in the Northern Hemisphere summer is getting increasingly dangerous for both players and spectators. Some suggest that FIFA may have to consider adjusting the soccer calendar to reduce the risk of heat-related illnesses.

“The deeper we go in the decade, the greater the risk without considering more dramatic measures, such as playing in the winter months and/or cooler latitudes,” said Prof. Piers Forster, director of the Priestley Centre for Climate Futures in Leeds, England. “I’m getting increasingly worried that we are only one heatwave away from a sporting tragedy and I would like to see governing bodies lean into the climate and health science.”

Tournament soccer in June and July is a tradition going back to the first World Cup in 1930.

Since then, the three-month period of June, July and August globally has warmed by 1.89 degrees Fahrenheit, according to the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Meanwhile, European summer temperatures have increased by 1.81 degrees C. The rate of warming has accelerated since the 1990’s.

Summer temperatures in the northern hemisphere are heating up. (AP Digital Embed)

Climate scientists say that’s a factor that needs to be considered when playing high-intensity outdoor sports like soccer.

“If you want to play football for 10 hours a day, they’ll have to be the hours of the early morning and late evening,” climatologist Friederike Otto from Imperial College, London, told The Associated Press in an email, “if you don’t want to have players and fans die from heatstroke or get severely ill with heat exhaustion.”

FIFA adapts

Extreme heat and thunderstorms made an impact on FIFA’s newly expanded tournament for club teams. The Club World Cup was held in 11 American cities from June 14 to July 13.

FIFA adapted by tweaking its extreme heat protocol to include extra breaks in play, more field-side water, and cooling the team benches with air fans and more shade.

FILE – Palmeiras’ Vitor Roque sits on the side of the pitch in a cooling mist after being substituted during the Club World Cup round of 16 soccer match between Palmeiras and Botafogo in Philadelphia, Sunday, June 29, 2025. (AP Photo/Matt Slocum, File)

Still, Chelsea midfielder Enzo Fernández said the heat made him dizzy and urged FIFA to avoid afternoon kickoffs at the World Cup next year.

The global soccer players union, FIFPRO, has warned that six of the 16 World Cup cities next year are at “extremely high risk” for heat stress.

FIFA President Gianni Infantino addressed the heat concerns on Saturday, saying the handful of World Cup stadiums that are covered would be used for day-time games next year.

Extreme heat could become an even bigger challenge at the following World Cup in 2030, which will be co-hosted by Spain, Portugal and Morocco. Games are scheduled to be played in afternoons and early evenings from mid-June to mid-July. All three countries have already seen temperatures rise well above 100 Fahrenheit this summer.

FIFA downplayed the heat risk in its in-house evaluation of the 2030 World Cup bid, saying “weather conditions are difficult to predict with the current development in global and local climate, but are unlikely to affect the health of players or other participants.”

Heat exhaustion

The physical effects of playing 90 minutes of soccer in direct sunshine during the hottest part of the day can be severe and potentially result in hyperthermia – abnormally high body temperatures.

FILE – Al-Hilal manager Simone Inzaghi, left, uses water to cool down his player Renan Lodi during the Club World Cup group H soccer match between Real Madrid and Al Hilal in Miami, Fla., Wednesday, June 18, 2025. (AP Photo/Lynne Sladky, File)

“When players experience hyperthermia, they also experience an increase in cardiovascular strain,” said Julien Périard of the University of Canberra.

“If core temperature increases excessively, exertional heat illness can occur,” leading to muscle cramping, heat exhaustion, and even life-threatening heat stroke, he said.

Many sports events held in the summer adjust their start times to early morning or late night to minimize the risk heat-related illness, including marathons at the Olympics or track world championships. Morning kickoffs, however, are rare in soccer, where World Cup match schedules are often set with European TV audiences in mind.

It would be hard for FIFA to avoid day-time World Cup kickoffs given the packed match schedule as the number of participating teams increases from 32 to 48 in 2026.

Calendar rethink

Heat mainly becomes an issue when the World Cup is held in the Northern Hemisphere, because June and July are winter months in the Southern Hemisphere.

FILE – Soccer fans wait in line to enter Bank of America Stadium for a Club World Cup game, June 24, 2025, in Charlotte, N.C. (AP Photo/Erik Verduzco, File)

FIFA has stuck to its traditional June-July schedule for the men’s World Cup except in 2022 when it moved the tournament to November-December to avoid the summer heat in Qatar. Something similar is expected when neighboring Saudi Arabia hosts the tournament in 2034.

However, moving the World Cup to another part of the year is complicated because it means Europe’s powerful soccer leagues must interrupt their season, affecting both domestic leagues and the Champions League.

FIFA didn’t respond to questions from AP about whether alternate dates for the 2030 and 2034 World Cups were being considered.

When and where to schedule the World Cup and other outdoor sports events is likely to become more pressing as the world continues to warm.

Athletes and even everyday people doing basic physical activities are now exposed to 28% more of moderate or higher heat risk in 2023 than they were in the 1990s, said Ollie Jay, a professor at the University of Sydney who has helped shape policy for the Australian Open in tennis.

FILE – Auckland City’s Gerard Garriga cools off under the sprinklers during a water break in the Club World Cup Group C soccer match between Auckland City and Boca Juniors in Nashville, Tenn., Tuesday, June 24, 2025. (AP Photo/George Walker IV, File)

“This is symbolic of something bigger,” said Michael Mann, a University of Pennsylvania climate scientist. “Not just the danger and inconvenience to fans and players, but the fundamentally disruptive nature of climate change when it comes our current way of life.”

Borenstein contributed from Washington, D.C.

AP soccer: https://apnews.com/hub/soccer

Before it was Alligator Alcatraz, this airstrip sparked fury and changed America’s landscape

posted in: All news | 0

Alligator Alcatraz has triggered pride in the MAGA world — and fury in an unlikely bipartisan mix of South Floridians.

In fact, the land where Gov. Ron DeSantis’ administration quickly erected the new immigrant detention center, which is expected to eventually hold 3,000 or more people, has been deeply controversial since the 1960s.

It was supposed to be the planet’s largest jetport and inspire a new city in the middle of the Everglades.

Bipartisan outrage over those dreams (or nightmares) united an odd cross section of Floridians: birder watchers, hunters, native tribes, blue-collar plumbers and Republican advisers.

This David-and-Goliath battle pitted them against heavy hitters: the Dade County Port Authority, the Federal Aviation Administration, the state of Florida, the air transport industry and eager chambers of commerce.

The ensuing fight over the jetport, which eventually drew in then-President Richard Nixon’s administration, was the catalyst for creating Big Cypress National Preserve, and helped shape the environmental movement we know today.

And the bipartisan outrage of the 1960s echoes through today’s protests about that same piece of land.

Heady times and jetport dreams

The 1960s were heady times for Florida. The population jumped by 40%, ramping from about five million in 1960 to nearly seven million by 1970.

As the population (and real estate values) boomed, the Dade County Port Authority started buying up 39 square miles of cypress swamp and Miccosukee ceremonial sites that sat a few miles from both Everglades National Park and Miccosukee tribal land.

They had a dream of building the world’s largest jetport. It would be five times the size of JFK International Airport, big enough to welcome 50 million passengers and one million flights a year, and would serve both the east and west coasts of the state.

The Port Authority had “Jetsons”-esque ambitions — South Florida was poised for global greatness, and the Everglades were in the way.

They claimed Miami’s existing airport would reach capacity by 1973: South Florida needed the jetport!

According to the National Park Service, the plan called for a corridor three football fields wide to span across the Everglades from Miami to the jetport, and then on through the Big Cypress Swamp to the west coast. There’d be both an interstate highway and a train shuttle ripping through at 200 mph.

The maximalist vision of the jetport supporters was that Miami would sprawl 40 miles out into the Everglades and eventually envelop the jetport.

Historian Jack Davis, of the University of Florida, has devoted his studies to the state’s history. He wrote extensively about the battle over the jetport in his 2009 Marjory Stoneman Douglas biography, “An Everglades Providence: Marjory Stoneman Douglas and the American Environmental Century.”

Davis writes that Port Authority director Alan Stewart “envisioned an industrial center congealing around the jetport and the city of Miami expanding toward it. … A new city is going to rise up in the middle of Florida, whether you like it or not.”

The assumption was that development, by definition, brought benefits to the region.

The benefits of saving the only Everglades in the world, and the region’s water supply, were not part of the equation. What harm could come from jet fuel?

Photographed from the eastern edge of Big Cypress Preserve, looking west toward the Dade-Collier Training and Transition Airport a few miles away on Tamiami Trail E, Ochopee, on Tuesday, June 24, 2025. (Mike Stocker/South Florida Sun Sentinel)

‘We thought it was a done deal’

According to Davis, the Port Authority and Federal Aviation Administration did not consult with the national park when selecting the site for the jetport, even though the jetport was upstream from the park and would either flow pollution in or dry it out.

A reporter turned president of the local chapter of the Audubon Society, the late Joe Browder, had the reputation of being a “tenacious bulldog” and a “brash militant.” Those tendencies would come in handy during the impending fight, in which he would pull together an oddball team of conservationists and change the fate of South Florida.

The jetport broke ground in 1968. Much like the DeSantis administration’s rapid-fire build-out of Alligator Alcatraz, which relied on emergency declarations, the Port Authority’s strategy was to build as quickly as possible.

“DeSantis’ position is that illegal immigration is an emergency. … One might say it stretches the definition of an emergency,” said Aubrey Jewett, professor of political science at the University of Central Florida. “An emergency is something that happens very quickly and requires an immediate response.”

Jewett uses the 1980 Mariel boatlift as an example of something that was an immigration emergency. “With little notice, Fidel Castro allowed Cubans to leave the island, and it happened in a brief window of time, and involved hundreds of thousands of people coming to one area — Miami. Literally local communities were overwhelmed.”

“You know, it was just like the Alligator Alcatraz thing — the public didn’t know about the jetport, and the Port Authority was quietly buying up all that land behind the scenes, and we were caught off guard,” said Franklin Adams, who was a crucial part of the jetport battle.

The new migrant detention facility, Alligator Alcatraz, is located at Dade-Collier Training and Transition facility in the Florida Everglades, shown July 4, 2025, in Ochopee, Fla. (AP Photo/Rebecca Blackwell)

He was in his 20s in the late 1960s when he joined Browder in the fight as a member of the sportsman’s group the Izaak Walton League. He fell in love with Florida wilderness while tagging along as a teen with his father, a land surveyor. “I started seeing some of these incredible places that he surveyed get destroyed, diked. With us going out and roaming the Big Cypress and Everglades, we saw beautiful tree islands inundated and destroyed.”

By the time Browder, Adams and other conservationists became organized, some of the runways were already built, and real estate signs started popping up. “We thought it was a done deal,” Adams said. Adams is now 87 and lives in a rural area not far from Big Cypress National Preserve.

As the bulldozers were prepping the swamp for pending runways, Adams and friend Charles Garrett managed to get a meeting with one of the heavy hitters: Port Authority deputy chief Richard Judy. Adams and Garrett implored Judy to reconsider the jetport location. “It was in the watershed of Everglades National Park, (I explained) all the problems it would cause.”

The meeting did not last long. Judy listened briefly, then abruptly ended the meeting, saying that the men had wasted their time and his, Adams recalled. “Well, after that happened, it made us more determined than ever to fight that thing and stop it,” Adams said.

Once the cat was out of the bag, developers on both coasts grew frothy at the mouth. An advertisement of the day read, “Mammoth jetport to whisk community into the future: The future development of Marco Island received a tremendous boost recently with the start of construction of a mammoth jetport, the biggest ever, anywhere just 48 miles away.”

The Collier family and the JC Turner Lumber Company owned much of the land in Big Cypress swamp, and started selling it off at $10 an acre. “People were buying it from all over the world,” Adams said.

According to the Florida National Park Association, real estate billboards were popping up all along the Tamiami Trail at the time the airport was planned. “$10.00 down, $10.00 a month, buy land, get rich,” one read.

“Airport in Glades Could Bring in $$” read a 1967 Miami Herald headline. A local politician at the time predicted it would be the most important airport in the region by 1990.

The entrance sign to Big Cypress National Preserve on Tuesday, June 24, 2025. (Mike Stocker/South Florida Sun Sentinel)

An unlikely coalition

Browder knew the local Audubon Society couldn’t take this fight on alone. He would need to build a coalition.

Florida Gov. Claude Kirk had shoveled dirt at the jetport groundbreaking with a grin on his face, but his special assistant on the environment, Republican Nathaniel Reed, was troubled by what he considered runaway development in Florida.

Reed grew up exploring and fishing around Jupiter Island. He was disgusted by the slash-and-burn development mentality in Florida, and felt that the “Great God of Growth” was decimating his state. Reed imagined what the land he loved would look like if the jetport dreams came true, and took a stance against it. He had the governor’s ear, as well as some in Washington, D.C.

Browder also connected with famed environmentalist Marjory Stoneman Douglas, who then founded the nonprofit Friends of the Everglades in order to fight the jetport.

Browder pulled in other potential allies as well. “Astute in ways other environmentalists were not, he recognized that environmental concerns were not the sole province of the middle class or the social elite,” wrote Davis in his book. Browder set up meetings with those who actually used Big Cypress Swamp — hunters and gladesmen, and Native American tribes.

Browder met with Buffalo Tiger, leader of the Miccosukee Tribe of Florida. According to Davis, the Port Authority had told Tiger that the jetport would be environmentally benign and would not damage their way of life. Besides, any development would bring jobs to the tribe.

But Tiger was skeptical. “It happens to Indians year after year: Progress wasting the hunting grounds,” Tiger told a New York Times reporter at the time.

His skepticism was warranted. At some point during the build, construction equipment had leveled the ceremonial site of the Miccosukee’s Green Corn dance, where every new year, the tribe inducted boys into manhood in a ceremony.

There was one glaring problem with what Browder was bringing to the tribes and the closely linked hunters and gladesmen. The jetport fight was explicitly tied to the protection of Big Cypress Swamp by making it a national park.

But most of the coalition hated the idea. Many felt abused by the creation of Everglades National Park in 1947, which had displaced a fishing village in Flamingo, at the southern tip of the park, and had caused resentment among the Miccosukee, some of whom lived south of Tamiami Trail, in what would become the park.

A national park also would mean the end of hunting and private property in Big Cypress. “These people were from old, old families, some of them going back to the 1860s after the Civil War, when they came down to this country,” Adams said. “They said, ‘You know, we’ve got our family cabins, retreats on the Big Cypress now, and if it becomes a national park, we’re going to lose all those.”

The parties came up with a solution; Big Cypress could be a preserve, not a national park. A preserve — the first ever in the U.S. — meant hunters could still hunt, swamp buggies could still roll through the sawgrass prairies and airboats could still zip over sawgrass.

Those with hunting camps could keep them. It also meant its mineral rights could still be sold by the Collier family, which is why there are several active oil rigs in the preserve.

“Nat Reed and Joe Browder got with them,” said Adams, with Browder arguing that if you don’t push back on the jetport, “there’ll be a Kmart out there where you park your swamp buggy. You’re going to lose one way or the other.”

But they needed a guarantee that they’d be able to keep their hunting camps and the right to hunt and use swamp buggies and air boats. They got it, and eventually began to see the light, said Adams.

Not everyone was on board. Adams said advocates for Big Cypress National Preserve had their tires slashed, and he and a friend had to sneak out the back door of a bar near Everglades City when a pack of locals threatened them.

Johnny Jones, a plumber and hunter from Hialeah, would become a cultural connector and savvy teammate. He led the 50,000-member Florida Wildlife Federation, which was filled with hunters. Airboat and swamp buggy groups also joined in. A jetport alone might not ruin their hunting grounds, but the ensuing development would end the world they loved so much.

“Like many of us, he started seeing a lot of these special places ditched and diked and drained by the Army Corps of Engineers, the water management districts, so he got involved,” Adams said.

Jones’ involvement, his connections in Tallahassee and his ability to cajole, became invaluable, Adams said. “Big Cypress and stopping the jetport wouldn’t have happened if they hadn’t come around.”

Beers, gators and an unexpected friend

Even with Reed at the governor’s ear, it became clear that to overcome the Goliaths, Browder, Reed, Adams and Jones would need friends in higher places than Miami or Tallahassee. Alligators, fittingly, were the conduit.

Florida outlawed alligator hunting in 1962, but poaching was still a livelihood in the swamps. Enforcement was tough. The plight of the reptiles garnered national attention, and when the Nixon administration put their finger to the wind of public opinion, it caught their attention, too.

The new interior secretary, an Alaskan car dealer named Walter Hickel, made an “on-the-spot investigation” into poaching a priority.

While on his Florida adventure in 1969, Hickel voyaged deep into the Ten Thousand Islands section of Everglades National Park with Gov. Kirk and others, and played “poacher” as rangers chased him by boat through the mangroves. Amid the camaraderie, Hickel promised to beef up alligator protection, and he and Kirk talked about the jetport.

In spring of 1969, Hickel was “determined not to lose a park to the roughshod behavior of another agency or department, local or federal, and they had powerful allies in Congress,” wrote Davis.

The Senate held hearings to reconcile the jetport conflict, and commissioned a study on how the jetport would impact Everglades National Park, which was downstream. Environmental impact studies are normal today, but it was a relatively new concept at the time.

At the June 1969 hearings on Capitol Hill, the study stated, “Development of the proposed jetport and its attendant facilities will lead to land drainage and development for agriculture, transportation, and services in the Big Cypress Swamp, which will inexorably destroy the south Florida ecosystem and thus the Everglades National Park.”

Boom. Committee members came out against the jetport, with scientific backing for their stance.

“Once that report came out … I think that was the major turning point,” Adams said. “Because that was pure science, peer-reviewed. It was irrefutable, and that’s when the Port Authority got nervous.”

Davis wrote that the deputy director of the Port Authority, Richard Judy, was defiant, though, stating that regardless of what the study reported, “We’re going to build the jetport.”

But then Gov. Kirk, relying heavily on Reed’s advice, decided against the jetport as well, recommending an alternative site in Palm Beach County. With nowhere to turn, the Port Authority relented.

Two years later, Big Cypress National Preserve was established and the larger Everglades system as we know it today was protected.

This was a period where the U.S. was essentially inventing environmental regulation as we know it. President Nixon, as ethically challenged as he was, signed the Endangered Species Act into law on Dec. 28, 1973. The jetport study became a model for federal requirements, according to Davis, and the newly formed Environmental Protection Agency started enforcing the equally new Clean Air Act.

“That was kind of the tail end of the development-at-any-cost mentality in Florida, coming off the post-war boom and the invention of air conditioning,” Jewett said.

“Much of the environmental protection of America came about in the 1960s and ’70s,” Jewett said. “It wasn’t easy. We had pitched political battles.”

The fight over the jetport was one of those battles, and it drastically altered what South Florida looks like today.

The fight today

While recently visiting the detention site, President Donald Trump raved about Alligator Alcatraz. Wilton Simpson, Florida’s agriculture commissioner, accompanied Trump on the tour and lavished him with praise, stating, “We are grateful for your leadership. … God had a plan for us, and it was Donald Trump.”

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has advised other states to follow Florida’s model. And the Florida GOP is so pleased with the site that they’ve got “Alligator Alcatraz” merchandise for sale online.

President Donald Trump speaks with reporters as he tours Alligator Alcatraz, a new migrant detention facility at Dade-Collier Training and Transition facility, on July 1, 2025, in Ochopee, Fla. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

DeSantis has painted protests over Alligator Alcatraz as partisan nonsense, dismissing environmental concerns by saying there will be “zero” impact, and implying that those opposed are merely left-wingers using the Everglades “as a pretext just for the fact that they oppose immigration enforcement.”

Outdoorsman Mike Elfenbein would beg to differ. He’s the executive director for the Cypress Chapter of the Izaak Walton League and has been hunting deer and turkey, fishing, off-roading and camping in the Big Cypress for most of his life. He praised both Trump and DeSantis for their work on Everglades restoration, which is why the detention center makes no sense to him.

“I think it’s in a really bad place (for the detention center),” he said. “The Cypress chapter of the Izaak Walton League was created with the express purpose of advocating for the creation of Big Cypress National Preserve and not developing the jetport.

“The agreement back then in the ’70s was that that land was not going to be used or impacted beyond what had already happened, and it would be open for recreational use and for its ecological value … forever. This is contrary to that agreement.” Elfenbein said the center needs to be in a different place, and suggested Homestead Air Reserve Base.

“Alligator” Ron Bergeron, the colorful conservationist who sits on the board of the South Florida Water Management District and who once considered running for governor as a Republican, is also against the detention center.

His foundation released a statement that looked back to the jetport fight. “Our founder, Alligator Ron Bergeron, was one of the original Gladesmen in the 1970s who joined with Tribal leaders, conservationists, hunters, anglers, and scientists to fight the original jetport proposal and protect this sacred landscape.”

The Bergeron statement suggested alternative sites such as Camp Blanding or the Homestead Air Reserve Base. “These locations offer existing infrastructure, greater security, and far less ecological risk. Unlike the proposed site, these alternatives would not threaten imperiled wildlife … or directly impact the Miccosukee Tribe, who live on this land and depend on its health for their way of life.”

Protesters converge outside the Dade-Collier Training and Transition Airport on Tamiami Trail E, Ochopee, on July 1, 2025, site of the new immigration detention center, Alligator Alcatraz. (Joe Cavaretta/South Florida Sun Sentinel)

Elfenbein attended the first protest of the then-pending detention center. “There were all kinds of people there; there were hunters, there were sportsmen, there were MAGA guys, there were, you know, ultra-liberal folks. There was every walk of life.”

He said the upset over the detention center is much like what happened in the late ’60s and early ’70s. “People from all walks of life, from all political persuasions and cultural lineage and race and creed or color, everybody agreed on one thing, that this place was too important to destroy. … This (detention center) is the opposite of that.”

As for DeSantis’ idea that those opposed to the center are merely opposed to immigration enforcement, “I don’t agree with that,” Elfenbein said. “I would tell you this is not a left-wing or a right-wing (issue). This is every wing.”

On June 27, environmental groups, including Friends of the Everglades, the nonprofit founded by Marjory Stoneman Douglas during the fight to stop the original jetport, filed a federal lawsuit to halt activity at the site to allow time for an environmental impact study, something required by federal law.

“Lawsuits could slow it down or stop it,” said Jewett. “Whether they will is another story. It depends on which court it goes to. On the state level it seems unlikely. Ideologically they lean to DeSantis.”

Then there’s public opinion. “Public opinion is something that politicians still care about. If there was a big uprising in public opinion and it became more clear that a strong majority of Floridians, including a healthy percentage of Republicans, were against this, then maybe it would be rethought.”

Jewett said one example was the “state park fiasco” of 2025, in which a plan, backed by the DeSantis administration, to build golf courses and large hotels in state parks was leaked to the news media. Social media drove a bipartisan resistance so vocal that the plan blew up in the DeSantis administration’s face, and a bill, signed by DeSantis in May, was passed to make such developments illegal in state parks.

“Alligator Alcatraz is a travesty,” Adams said. “It’s going to do damage — if we have a major hurricane this summer, that thing is not going to stand there and all, with the sewage and chemicals. And they’re going to have to spray for mosquitoes, which is not allowed in the Big Cypress or the National Park.” (State officials have said structures at Alligator Alcatraz can withstand a hurricane of up to Category 2, and if an approaching storm were stronger, then the site would be evacuated.)

Davis’ research revealed that in a 1970 New York Times article about the end of the jetport saga, Buffalo Tiger said, “You can’t make it. You can’t buy it. And when it’s gone, it’s gone forever.”

Adams said he knows younger conservationists who are despondent over the current state of environmental fights: The Trump administration recently declared that the new purpose of the Environmental Protection Agency is to “lower the cost of buying a car, heating a home and running a business.” And the administration has worked to weaken the Clean Water Act and neuter the habitat protection powers of the Endangered Species Act.

Adams said his experience with the jetport taught him lessons. “Don’t let go,” he said. “Don’t stop. What’s worse, picking up the morning paper and seeing what the bastards are doing, and just complaining and bitching about it? Or getting involved? If we don’t, we’ll be overrun.”

Bill Kearney covers the environment, the outdoors and tropical weather. He can be reached at bkearney@sunsentinel.com. Follow him on Instagram @billkearney or on X @billkearney6

The push to defund Planned Parenthood hit other clinics in Maine. Now their group is suing

posted in: All news | 0

By PATRICK WHITTLE and GEOFF MULVIHILL

PORTLAND, Maine (AP) — An item in Republicans’ sweeping policy and tax bill intended to block Medicaid dollars from flowing to Planned Parenthood, the nation’s biggest abortion provider, is also hitting a major medical provider in Maine.

Related Articles


RFK Jr. and other Trump officials embrace psychedelics after FDA setback


Bipartisan support helps foundations avoid tax increase in new Trump legislation


How Trump could use a building renovation to oust Fed Chair Powell


Adelita Grijalva wins Democratic primary for Arizona US House seat held by her late father


US deports migrants from Jamaica, Cuba, and other countries to the small African kingdom of Eswatini

Maine Family Planning filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration Wednesday seeking to restore the reimbursements.

Accessing health care in Maine — one of the Northeast’s poorest states and its most rural — is a challenge in areas far from population centers such as Portland and Bangor.

Vanessa Shields-Haas, a nurse practitioner, said the organization’s clinics have been seeing all patients as usual and completing Medicaid paperwork for visits — but not submitting it because it appears the provision took effect as soon as the law was signed.

“Knowing how hard it is to access care in this state, not allowing these community members to access their care, it’s cruel,” Shields-Haas said.

Maine clinics appear to be only others included in cuts

Republican lawmakers targeted Planned Parenthood in one piece of what President Donald Trump dubbed the “big beautiful” bill that Congress passed and the president signed earlier this month.

While advocates focused on Planned Parenthood, the bill did not mention it by name. Instead, it cut off reimbursements for organizations that are primarily engaged in family planning services — which generally include things such as contraception, abortion and pregnancy tests — and received more than $800,000 from Medicaid in 2023.

The U.S. Senate’s parliamentarian rejected a 2017 effort to defund Planned Parenthood because it was written to exclude all other providers by barring payments only to groups that received more than $350 million a year in Medicaid funds. The not-for-profit Maine organization asserts in its legal challenge that the threshold was lowered to $800,000 this time around to make sure Planned Parenthood would not be the only affected entity.

It is the only other organization that has come forward publicly to say that its funding is at risk, too.

Federal law already bars taxpayer money from covering most abortions. Instead, the money in question involves other health services, such as cancer screenings and tests, and treatment for sexually transmitted infections.

Proponents of that wrinkle in the law say abortion providers use Medicaid money for other services to subsidize abortion.

“This has never been just about Planned Parenthood,” Autumn Christensen, vice president of public policy for Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, said in a statement. “It’s about any Big Abortion business or network that performs abortions. Taxpayers should never be forced to prop up an industry that profits from ending human lives.”

The Associated Press has sought comment from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which is named in the lawsuit.

Maine Family Planning goes beyond abortion

Maine Family Planning operates 18 clinics across the state.

In 2024, it had about 7,200 family planning patients, including 645 who obtained abortions. Services include pregnancy testing, contraception, family planning counseling, breast exams, cancer screenings and treatment of sexually transmitted infections.

Some of the sites also offer primary care services, where there are another 600 or so patients. There are about 800 gender-affirming care patients and about 200 who use its upstart mobile clinic, said George Hill, the president and CEO of the organization.

Hill said that for about two-thirds of its patients, Maine Family Planning is the only place they get medical care in a typical year.

About half of the patients not seeking abortions are enrolled in Medicaid, and the clinics have been receiving about $1.9 million a year in reimbursements, which accounts for about one-fourth of the organization’s budget.

“It’s a difficult state to provide care in and now we’re facing this,” Hill said. In its lawsuit, the group says it has enough reserves to keep seeing patients covered by Medicaid without reimbursement only through October.

Finding health care can be a struggle in this rural state

Maine Family Planning says that if it had to turn away patients, it would be more complicated for them than simply finding another provider. There aren’t enough in rural areas, the group notes — and many don’t accept Medicaid.

One patient, Ashley Smith, said she started going to Maine Family Planning about five years ago when she could not find other health care she could afford. While she’s not enrolled in Medicaid, she fears clinics could be shuttered because of cuts.

“I am so worried that if my clinic closes, I don’t know what I’ll do or if I’ll be able to see another provider,” Smith said.

Maine Family Planning also supports care at more than 40 other health care facilities. Other than the Planned Parenthood locations that receive money from Maine Family Planning, those other providers don’t stand to lose their Medicaid reimbursements.

But, Hill said, the loss of Medicaid funding for Maine Family Planning would mean the group would have less to send to partners.

The Maine clinics say the law violates their right to equal protection

The Center for Reproductive Rights, which is representing Maine Family Planning in the challenge, says in its legal filing that the defunding denies it equal protection under the law because it would have funding cut off, but organizations that provide similar services would not.

“The administration would rather topple a statewide safety network than let a patient get a cancer screening at a facility that also offers abortion care,” Meetra Mehdizadeh, a Center for Reproductive Rights lawyer, said in an interview.

Planned Parenthood already sued and won a reprieve from a judge, preventing its Medicaid payments cutoff — at least until July 21 — while a court considers that case.

Planned Parenthood has warned that the law could put 200 of its affiliates’ roughly 600 clinics across the U.S. at risk of closing.

Mulvihill reported from Cherry Hill, New Jersey.

Trump slams his own supporters as ‘weaklings’ for falling for what he now calls the Epstein ‘hoax’

posted in: All news | 0

By JILL COLVIN

NEW YORK (AP) — President Donald Trump is lashing out at his own supporters as he tries to clamp down on criticism over his administration’s handling of much-hyped records in the Jeffrey Epstein sex trafficking investigation, which Trump now calls a “Hoax.”

“Their new SCAM is what we will forever call the Jeffrey Epstein Hoax, and my PAST supporters have bought into this “bull——,” hook, line, and sinker,” Trump wrote Wednesday on his Truth Social site, using an expletive in his post. “They haven’t learned their lesson, and probably never will, even after being conned by the Lunatic Left for 8 long years.”

“Let these weaklings continue forward and do the Democrats work, don’t even think about talking of our incredible and unprecedented success, because I don’t want their support anymore! Thank you for your attention to this matter,” he went on.

The rhetoric marks a dramatic escalation for the Republican president, who has broken with some of his most loyal backers in the past, but never with such fervor.

The schism centers on his administration’s handling of the Epstein, who was found dead in his New York jail cell in August 2019, weeks after his arrest on sex trafficking charges. Last week, the Justice Department and the FBI acknowledged that Epstein did not maintain a “client list” to whom underage girls were trafficked, and they said no more files related to the investigation would be made public, despite past promises from Attorney General Pam Bondi that had raised the expectations of conservative influencers and conspiracy theorists.

Bondi had suggested in February such a document was sitting on her desk waiting for review. Last week, however, she said she had been referring generally to the Epstein case file, not a client list.

“It’s a new administration and everything is going to come out to the public,” she had said at one point.

Trump has since defended Bondi and chided a reporter for asking about the documents.

“I don’t understand what the interest or what the fascination is,” he said Tuesday.

Related Articles


RFK Jr. and other Trump officials embrace psychedelics after FDA setback


Bipartisan support helps foundations avoid tax increase in new Trump legislation


How Trump could use a building renovation to oust Fed Chair Powell


Adelita Grijalva wins Democratic primary for Arizona US House seat held by her late father


US deports migrants from Jamaica, Cuba, and other countries to the small African kingdom of Eswatini

The blowup comes after Trump and many figures in his administration, including FBI Director Kash Patel and his deputy, Dan Bongino, have spent years stoking dark and disproved conspiracy theories, including embracing QAnon-tinged propaganda that casts Trump as a savior sent to demolish the “deep state.”

Trump’s comments so far have not been enough to quell those who are still demanding answers.

“For this to go away, you’re going to lose 10%” of the “Make America Great Again” movement, former adviser and Steve Bannon said during a gathering of young conservatives recently.

Far-right commentator Jack Posobiec has said he will not rest “until we go full Jan. 6 committee on the Jeffrey Epstein files.”

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., also appeared to break with Trump, calling for the Justice Department to “put everything out there and let the people decide.”

“The White House and the White House team are privy to facts that I don’t know. This isn’t my lane. I haven’t been involved in that, but I agree with the sentiment to put it out there,” Johnson told conservative podcaster Benny Johnson.