travel ban news 4

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

The U.S. restricts travel from 8 countries as omicron variant spreads

Travelers exit the International Arrivals area at Dulles International Airport in Dulles, Virginia, on Monday. The Biden administration is banning travel for non-U.S. citizens from several African countries over concerns about the omicron variant. Jim Watson/AFP via Getty Images hide caption

Travelers exit the International Arrivals area at Dulles International Airport in Dulles, Virginia, on Monday. The Biden administration is banning travel for non-U.S. citizens from several African countries over concerns about the omicron variant.

The U.S. is enacting travel bans in an effort to limit the spread of the new omicron variant of the coronavirus, which the World Health Organization warns poses a "very high" global risk .

Coronavirus Updates

As omicron spreads, studies suggest that travel bans alone don't do much good.

Starting Monday, President Biden has imposed travel restrictions for non-U.S. citizens from the following eight countries:

• South Africa

The Coronavirus Crisis

Biden says omicron variant is cause for concern but not panic.

The European Union , Canada, United Kingdom, and Israel have announced travel restrictions from southern African countries as well.

Some health officials and public health experts caution that travel restrictions alone may not be effective in controlling the spread of infectious disease , and could even have harmful effects, like exacerbating xenophobia and deterring countries from being transparent about the state of the virus in the future.

The variant was first reported last week in South Africa, where vaccination rates are about 24% .

Cases of the omicron variant have since been confirmed in Botswana, the United Kingdom, Italy, Germany, Belgium, Israel, the Netherlands, Australia and Hong Kong.

Biden is encouraging children and adults to get vaccinated against COVID-19.

"This pandemic will not end until we have global vaccinations," he said last week in a statement .

In an address on Monday, he said the variant is "a cause for concern — not a cause for panic."

Tien Le is an intern on NPR's News Desk.

This story originally appeared on the Morning Edition live blog .

• president biden
• coronavirus
• World Health Organization

clock This article was published more than  2 years ago

Travel ban will end Nov. 8 for international visitors who show proof of vaccination, negative coronavirus test

Children under 18 do not have to show proof of vaccination but will be required to show proof of a negative test.

Vaccination will not be required for children under age 18 to travel to the United States once officials lift a ban on international visitors, but they will have to show proof of a negative coronavirus test before boarding a flight, according to rules outlined Monday by the Biden administration.

With about two weeks to go before the United States lifts a travel ban on visitors from 33 countries, federal health officials offered more specifics for travelers and airlines before restrictions are lifted Nov. 8. Although vaccination won’t be required for children, most non-U.S. citizens and nonimmigrants arriving by air will have to show both proof of vaccination and proof of a negative coronavirus test taken within three days of departure.

“With science and public health as our guide, the United States has developed a new international air travel system that both enhances the safety of Americans here at home and enhances the safety of international air travel,” the White House said in a statement.

Federal health officials said the exception was made for children because many do not have access to or are not yet eligible for the vaccines. However, children must still be tested before traveling to the United States. Those traveling with vaccinated adults must be tested within the previous three days, while those traveling with unvaccinated adults or who are traveling alone must show proof of a negative test taken one day before their flight.

The new rules don’t require U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents to be vaccinated but do outline different testing requirements depending on their vaccine status. Those who have been vaccinated must show proof of a negative test taken within of their departure. Those who are unvaccinated must show proof of a test taken one day before their departure.

It will be up to airlines to verify a person’s vaccination and testing status, officials said. Many airlines already have systems that allow travelers to upload proof of a negative test and vaccine status. In addition, international visitors will have to provide information for how they can be reached in the United States for contact-tracing efforts.

“These are strict safety protocols that follow the science and public health to advance the safety of Americans here at home and the safety of international air travel,” a senior White House official said in a briefing with reporters.

The Biden administration announced in September that it was replacing the travel ban on international visitors with a system that would rely on vaccination, testing and contact tracing for visitors wishing to come to the United States.

U.S. announces end to travel ban on international visitors

The announcement was welcomed by the travel industry, which has been pushing the government for more than a year to lift the travel ban on travelers from 33 countries. With the ban in place, industry representatives feared the United States was losing ground to Europe, which began to ease travel restrictions for Americans this summer. Canada opened its borders on Aug. 9 to visitors from the United States who had been vaccinated.

Kevin M. Burke, president of Airports Council International-North America, said the new protocols will help the nation safely and securely reopen its borders.

“We appreciate the Biden administration’s commitment to working with industry on these complex challenges and we look forward to our ongoing work as the November 8 reopen date nears,” he said in a statement.

Since the announcement in September, the administration has slowly been laying the groundwork for lifting the ban. That included the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention deciding which vaccines would be accepted, specifying that travelers must have received those with full or emergency approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration or the World Health Organization.

Fully vaccinated travelers can come to the U.S. even if their doses are mixed

In January, President Donald Trump announced a plan to end the travel ban, saying it was unnecessary because of his administration’s policy that required international travelers to provide proof of a negative test before boarding U.S.-bound flights. But within days of taking office, the Biden administration reinstated the ban and added South Africa, and later India, to the list, citing the need to control the spread of coronavirus variants.

In June, the White House formed working groups to help determine when to lift rules that banned international visitors from certain countries.

Under the restrictions, most foreign nationals who have been in the United Kingdom, several European Union countries, Brazil or China in the previous 14 days are not permitted to enter the United States. India was added to the list in May.

The White House also announced this month it was easing pandemic-related restrictions on overland border crossings from Canada and Mexico. Officials said Monday they would release additional information about requirements that people coming to the United States via land borders must follow.

The updated policy offers limited exceptions for individuals enrolled in certain coronavirus vaccine clinical trials and those who shouldn’t get vaccinated for medical reasons. Those who need to travel for emergency or humanitarian reasons and have a letter issued by the U.S. government verifying their need to travel also may be exempted.

In addition, those with non-tourist visas coming to the United States from countries where there is low vaccine availability as determined by the CDC may be allowed to travel to the United States. Those who receive exemptions but intend to stay for more than 60 days may be required to get vaccinated once in the United States.

More coverage: Air travel, transit, railroads

High-speed rail: Las Vegas-S. California project gets $3 billion federal grant

Merger: JetBlue, Spirit case in the hands of a federal judge

Air travel: Alaska Airlines reaches deal to buy Hawaiian Airlines for $1.9 billion

Maryland: Moore administration targets $2 billion cut to transportation projects

Air safety: Air traffic controller’s decision-making spotlighted in near-miss files

Situation in Haiti April 5, 2024

U.s. citizens in haiti, update january 10, 2024, information for u.s. citizens in the middle east.

• Travel Advisories |
• Contact Us |
• MyTravelGov |

Find U.S. Embassies & Consulates

Travel.state.gov, congressional liaison, special issuance agency, u.s. passports, international travel, intercountry adoption, international parental child abduction, records and authentications, popular links, travel advisories, mytravelgov, stay connected, legal resources, legal information, info for u.s. law enforcement, replace or certify documents.

Share this page:

Learn about your destination

Take 90 seconds for safer travel.

Travel Advisory Levels

Enroll in step.

Subscribe to get up-to-date safety and security information and help us reach you in an emergency abroad.

Recommended Web Browsers: Microsoft Edge or Google Chrome.

External Link

You are about to leave travel.state.gov for an external website that is not maintained by the U.S. Department of State.

Links to external websites are provided as a convenience and should not be construed as an endorsement by the U.S. Department of State of the views or products contained therein. If you wish to remain on travel.state.gov, click the "cancel" message.

You are about to visit:

What Does the US State Department’s Worldwide Travel Advisory Actually Mean?

By Matt Ortile

On Thursday, October 19, the US State Department issued a worldwide travel advisory urging American citizens to “exercise increased caution” while overseas, “due to increased tensions in various locations around the world, the potential for terrorist attacks, [and] demonstrations or violent actions against U.S. citizens and interests.”

The alert comes as the ongoing war between Israel and Hamas escalates in the Middle East. According to the New York Times , the advisory is also in response to protests worldwide that have, in some cases, led to “violent clashes at U.S. diplomatic compounds.” Throughout this week, protesters all over the world have held demonstrations in solidarity with Palestinian civilians in the Gaza Strip, calling for an end to Israel’s airstrikes and blockade of the territory, according to the AP . There are also protests in New York City calling for the release of Israeli hostages held by Hamas, and in Washington, DC calling for President Biden to press for an Israel-Hamas war cease-fire.

But what does the State Department's warning mean for anyone currently traveling, or with an upcoming trip? And does it actually suggest that you shouldn't travel… at all?

The short answer is no. But the advisory is a fair reminder to do exactly as it instructs, which is, for the time being, to be cautious while in environments unfamiliar to you.

“I don’t think the advisory is asking people to cancel their planned travel, but it is asking us all to be more alert when we are traveling,” says Mei Zhang, founder of the travel company WildChina and a member of Condé Nast Traveler ’s Global Advisory Board . “To me, that means being more alert in airports, avoiding super crowded iconic tourist places, not having your eyes glued to your phone while traveling. Look around.” As a precaution, Zhang recommends signing up for the State Department’s STEP program , as well as keeping your friends and family informed of your travel plans. “Just take a little extra caution,” she says. “This is a good idea regardless of the warning.”

As for changing travel plans, Catherine Heald, the co-founder and CEO of the travel company Remote Lands , says that many of her clients have canceled their upcoming travel plans to Israel, Egypt, Lebanon, and Jordan, among others, and pivoted their trips toward destinations geographically far away from active conflict zones. (Read more about navigating upcoming travel to countries bordering Israel and Gaza here .)

While reconsidering itineraries, Heald advises all travelers to not panic: “Look at the facts,” Heald says. “Study a map and avoid the danger zones. Buy travel insurance so if the situation spreads or escalates—and we all sincerely hope it won’t—you are covered.”

Luis Vargas, CEO and founder of travel operator Modern Adventure , recommends equipping yourself with information. Read up on the local news in the area of your intended destination to get a better sense of what’s actually happening on the ground. “In many cases, major events—both political and natural—are locally or regionally concentrated, meaning nearby areas can be unaffected,” Vargas says. For example, during and in the aftermath of the earthquake in Morocco in September , some communities experienced the worst of it, while Marrakech and other parts of the country were largely unaffected. An event in one part of a country or region does not mean it is happening everywhere in that country or region.

The last time the State Department issued a similar worldwide travel advisory was on August 2, 2022 , due to a "higher potential for anti-American violence given the death of Ayman al-Zawahiri,” the al-Qaeda leader killed on July 31 in a US drone strike in Afghanistan .

The US State Department’s travel advisories are most often specified by country. This month, the State Department has raised the travel advisory for Lebanon to the highest level, “Level 4: Do not travel;” the travel advisory for Israel and the West Bank has been raised to “Level 3: Reconsider travel.” Jordan and Egypt, which share borders with Israel, are at Level 2 and Level 3, respectively.

Wherever you are headed, take stock of a number of factors before you cancel or reschedule any travel plans: Consider your destination’s relative risk and your own personal risk tolerance—and that of your travel companions. Evaluate the level of access you will have to consulate services and information, as well as to your own personal safety network; if you have friends and family in the area of your destination, ask them for tips on how to stay safe and up-to-date on local news developments.

From there, make an informed decision about your travel plans that you—and your travel companions, if you have them—will be comfortable with. Traveling is an exercise in preparedness. As with all trips, make sure you feel ready to navigate whatever may come your way, no matter where you go. And of course, follow the worldwide travel advisory’s directive, brief and broad as it may be, to “stay alert in locations frequented by tourists” and to “enroll in the Smart Traveler Enrollment Program (STEP) to receive information and alerts and make it easier to locate you in an emergency overseas.”

Taking a long-term view, Vargas offers a reminder that tourism is an integral part of many economies—in the Middle East and all over the world. "When travel advisories are adopted, more broadly than intended, the effects can also be devastating over time,” says Vargas. If you aren't comfortable traveling now, consider postponing your trip rather than canceling it; and, if you must cancel, see if you can redirect some of your financial resources to organizations offering aid to people who need it most.

At the end of the day, “trust your gut,” Vargas says. “If you are feeling uneasy to the point where enjoyment of the trip is compromised, postponing may be the right choice for you.”

This is a developing story and will be updated with more information.

By signing up you agree to our User Agreement (including the class action waiver and arbitration provisions ), our Privacy Policy & Cookie Statement and to receive marketing and account-related emails from Traveller. You can unsubscribe at any time. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

• International

Severe storms in the South

Israel wages war on Hamas

America's immigration crisis

By Meg Wagner , Brian Ries and Veronica Rocha , CNN

BREAKING: Supreme Court upholds the Trump travel ban

The Supreme Court has  upheld the legality  of the latest version of President Trump’s travel ban holding that  the President was within his authority  when he blocked travel from certain Muslim Majority countries.

The ruling was 5-4 along partisan lines, with Chief Justice John Roberts writing for the conservative majority.

We're reading through it and gathering reactions here .

House Republicans aren't sure what's going on with their party's immigration plan

CNN's Lauren Fox and Maeve O'Brien

Walking into the House Republican closed-door conference this morning, members are genuinely unsure what is going on with the Republican compromise bill . 

Rep. Steve Stivers, the head of the GOP's congressional campaign arm, told CNN that he's not sure what will happen next.

Rep. Mark Walker said the point of conference is to see if it makes sense to add E-Verify and a guest worker amendment. ( Read more about that amendment here. )

Rep. Leonard Lance, a New Jersey moderate, said he has concerns about adding the amendment so last minute. Lance was already in the fence about the underlying bill. 

An important reminder: The bill is expected to fail.

What it's like to legally represent a 6-year-old who's crying over the phone for her father

A managing attorney at RAICES, the legal non-profit that's representing immigrants affected by President Trump's "zero-tolerance" immigration policy, just told CNN's Poppy Harlow what it's like to represent young children who have been separated from their parents.

"It is very challenging to deal with someone so tender-aged who's so scared in this system," Mayra Jimenez said. She described a system used by the group's attorneys “to provide very complicated legal information in a very basic way.”

Jimenez added that there are thousands of families that don't have representation, but badly need it.

"There is no right to court appointed council in immigration proceedings," she told CNN . "There are thousands of families, of kids...who are completely unrepresented because they do not have the resources to get council."

Congresswoman who visited detained children has a message for President Trump: "Not on our watch"

Rep. Jackie Speier, a Democrat from California, visited the border over the weekend, touring a US Customs Border Protection Facility on Saturday and meeting detained children .

Now, she has a message for President Trump :

"Not on our watch. Not on our watch will we stand by and allow you to rip children from the arms of their parents. Not on our watch will we allow you to stop on the constitution you swore to uphold."

Speier went on to list actions she'd like to see the President take, including...

• Rescinding the "zero-tolerance" policy.
• Providing reunification for families that have already been separated.
• Finding and using the least costly and least restively confinement.

Watch more:

House Republican are still working on an immigration bill. It will probably fail.

From CNN's Phil Mattingly

The House GOP’s broader immigration bill has completely fallen apart. We’ve reported it will fail. At this point, it looks like it will fail badly .

But we're still expecting the House to vote on it: That could happen on Wednesday, but the day is not firm. The Timeline and decision making for the bill will finalized in this morning’s closed-door conference meeting.

What's changed since yesterday: Republicans posted a 116-page amendment to the bill late last night, encompassing changes and additions to the bill on E-Verify and agriculture worker visas. These were the issues negotiated over the weekend. But note: The amendment does not mean they are any closer to the votes — it may not even be considered, aides say. 

What happens next: House GOP leaders still want to pivot to a targeted family separation bill before they leave for recess at the end of that week. They will discuss that this morning at their conference meeting as well to see if there’s a path forward there.

Senate efforts to move on a targeted bill are not advancing quickly. There is still a push to do something this week, but if anything happens (and this remains, at least on a bipartisan basis, still somewhat unlikely at this point, aides say), it’s far more likely it will be after he July 4 recess.

Commander of Texas facility for migrant children says family separation is an "incredibly dumb stupid decision"

From CNN's Dianne Gallagher

An incident commander of a tent city for migrant children in Tornillo, Texas , called the Trump administration's practice of separating children and parents at the border "an incredibly dumb stupid decision."

“Look, this operation would not be here if it weren’t for the separation," said the commander, who did not want to identified.

The facility houses 326 children, 26 of them were separated from their parents at the border under the administration's "zero-tolerance" policy. Three children have been reunited with their family.

The commander, who works for BCFS Health and Human Services, a nonprofit that operates the facility, oversees operations at the tent facility . He said he thinks the facility will likely close by July 13 because the numbers of children are going down daily.

The administration opened the  temporary shelter  in June on federal land to accommodate the influx of children. The shelter consists of what an HHS spokesman called "soft-sided structures" resembling tents equipped with air-conditioning to withstand the high temperatures.

Homeland Security seeking to house thousands of unaccompanied children and families on 2 Texas bases

From CNN's Barbara Starr

The Department of Homeland Security will ask the Pentagon this week to approve proposed plans to potentially house more than 7,000 unaccompanied children at Goodfellow Air Force Base and 4,000 additional migrant family members at Fort Bliss in Texas, according to an administration official.

The plan must be signed off by Defense Secretary James Mattis. The official emphasized these are planning numbers, and it’s not yet clear those numbers of people will actually need to be housed.

Mattis confirmed earlier Monday that Fort Bliss and Goodfellow Air Force base in Texas will be used to house migrants. Mattis would not offer any specifics and said that the military is not involved in the political aspect of the matter, saying “for us, it is a logistics support effort.”

After Mattis approves the DHS plan , the Pentagon will hire contractors to build temporary structures, including some that could be tents. Bliss is expected to be all tents, and Goodfellow may have a combination of tents and hardened structures.

The official noted it could be another four to six weeks before either base would have facilities built and have contractors on site to handles services such as food, and medical care. There is still significant discussion inside the administration about how to house such large numbers of migrants, including children the official said.

If unaccompanied children are housed on the installations, the Department of Health and Human Services would control those operations.

New lawsuit challenges family separations in Washington

From CNN's Laura Jarrett

An immigrant rights group in Seattle has filed a new lawsuit against the Trump administration seeking to reunite three parents with their children and represent a class of those in similar situations.

The complaint says that the parents entered the US seeking asylum with their children, ages 5, 8, and 6, and were separated in May 2018. The parents were then transferred to an immigration detention in Washington, and have not been allowed to visit their children since that time, according to the complaint. 

The group asked the judge for an order that would force Trump administration officials to immediately reunite the parents with their children in a facility, where they may remain together. They are also seeking interviews for their asylum claims.

New York governor pledges to help migrant children who are sent to his state

From CNN’s Lauren del Valle

New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo pledged Monday to support unaccompanied and undocumented children who are sent to his state.

Cuomo says he is requesting that the Department Health and Human Services notify the state when it sends children so they can offer assistance. He said the Department of Health and Human Services told him that 1,292 unaccompanied minors are currently being cared for in New York. 

However, Cuomo went on to say that this information is “not comprehensive and remains unverified,” according to a news release from his office.

Cuomo said the state will provide public safety and other resources to families.

State departments will also help foster care agencies with children until they can be reunited with their parents, he said.

Please enable JavaScript for a better experience.

US issues Mexico 'increased caution' warning for spring break travelers

The U.S. Embassy and Consulates in Mexico has issued a spring break travel warning for Americans planning to visit the country. The message posted on Monday highlighted a range of potential safety threats in the popular destination like crime.

“U.S. citizens should exercise increased caution in the downtown areas of popular spring break locations including Cancun, Playa del Carmen, and Tulum, especially after dark,” the advisory said, though it noted that crime can occur anywhere in Mexico. The U.S. State Department's travel advisory for the country notes various warning levels for different states, ranging from Level 1 (“exercise normal precautions") through 4 (“do not travel”).

The message also warned of other potential hazards like unregulated alcohol and pharmaceuticals. “Unregulated alcohol may be contaminated, and U.S. citizens have reported losing consciousness or becoming injured after consuming alcohol that was possibly tainted,” the advisory said. 

The U.S. Embassy and Consulates noted that counterfeit medication is “common” and could be ineffective or an incorrect strength. Those products may also have dangerous ingredients. “Medication should be purchased in consultation with a medical professional and from reputable establishments,” the message said.

Why some travelers are skipping the US: 'You guys are not afraid of this?'

Learn more: Best travel insurance

The advisory warned of drowning and high private hospital prices, as well, among other risks. The message urged travelers to take precautions like keeping an eye on their drinks; staying with a group of friends in bars and clubs, while walking in dark areas or in taxis at night; and letting family and friends know about their travel plans.

Despite the warning, however, it noted that “the vast majority” of U.S. citizens visiting Mexico at spring break each year do so safely.

Nathan Diller is a consumer travel reporter for USA TODAY based in Nashville. You can reach him at [email protected].

Brazil again extends visa exemptions for US, Canada and Australia, this time until 2025

Brazil’s government has extended exemptions to tourist visa requirements for citizens of the U.S., Australia and Canada until April 2025, extending a program aimed at boosting tourism that had been scheduled to end Wednesday

RIO DE JANEIRO -- Brazil’s government extended exemptions to tourist visa requirements for citizens of the U.S., Australia and Canada until April 2025, extending a program aimed at boosting tourism that had been scheduled to end Wednesday.

The decision, issued by Brazilian presidency and the Ministry of Foreign Relations late Tuesday, marks the third time Brazil has delayed the visa requirement since President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva took office in 2023.

His predecessor, Jair Bolsonaro, exempted the countries from visas as a means to boost tourism — although all three countries continued to demand visas from Brazilians.

That went against the South American country’s tradition of requiring visas from travelers based on the principle of reciprocity and equal treatment, and prompted Lula’s Foreign Ministry to say it would scrap the exemptions.

“Brazil does not grant unilateral exemption from visiting visas, without reciprocity, to other countries,” the ministry said at the time, while noting that the government stood ready to negotiate visa waiver agreements on a reciprocal basis. It did reach a deal with Japan to ease travel provisions.

The decision to maintain exemptions for the three countries is important for boosting tourism in Brazil, notably from the U.S., Brazil’s official tourism board Embratur said in a statement Tuesday.

Official data shows that nearly 670,000 Americans visited Brazil in 2023, making the U.S. the second largest country of origin after neighboring Argentina.

The government initially postponed the reinstatement of the visa requirement in October, then again in January. At the time, the government said it was still finalizing a new visa system and wanted to avoid implementing it close to the high season, mainly during the New Year’s celebrations and Carnival festivities in February, which attract tens of thousands of tourists.

Top Stories

Father sentenced for injecting mercury into his daughter's foot

• Apr 10, 11:05 AM

Mom gives celestial name to baby born during total solar eclipse

• Apr 9, 12:21 PM

'I don't have any files,' man tells Trump's lawyers after they subpoena wrong person

• Apr 10, 12:53 PM

More than half of foreign-born people in US live in just 4 states and half are naturalized citizens

• Apr 9, 3:42 PM

Appellate judge again denies Trump's bid to delay upcoming hush money trial

• 36 minutes ago

ABC News Live

24/7 coverage of breaking news and live events

Train strikes in April and May 2024: Full list of dates and lines affected

Overtime bans, an action short of a strike, also mean some services may not be running or may be reduced as drivers refuse to work their rest days.

Monday 8 April 2024 06:40, UK

Drivers at 16 rail companies have started a fresh wave of strikes, plus overtime bans, causing disruption to the rail network.

The strikes are part of a long-running dispute over pay and will take place across April and May.

Tube strikes planned for April and May have been called off.

In an "entirely separate dispute", ASLEF members will also strike and refuse to do overtime at LNER on specific dates in April "because of the company's failure to adhere to the agreed bargaining machinery", the union said.

LNER's alleged failure to adhere to bargaining machinery refers to it using managers to drive trains on strike days.

People are advised to check before they travel.

Here's what's happening when:

Rail strike dates

Friday 5 April

Strikes will affect Avanti West Coast, East Midlands Railway, West Midlands Trains, and CrossCountry.

Saturday 6 April

Strikes will affect Chiltern, GWR, LNER, Northern, and TransPennine Trains.

Monday 8 April

Strikes will affect Greater Anglia, c2c, GTR Great Northern Thameslink, Southeastern, Southern/Gatwick Express, South Western Railway main line and depot drivers, and SWR Island Line.

Overtime ban dates

Thursday 4 April

Tuesday 9 April

People are advised to check before they travel, as some areas may have no service.

LNER action dates

Members will strike on Saturday 20 April and refuse to work non-contractual overtime from Friday 19 to Sunday 21 April .

Why are the strikes happening?

ASLEF says the LNER strikes are because of "the company's persistent failure to comply with existing agreements".

Nigel Roebuck, an ASLEF organiser in the northeast, said the operator had been trying to get "every driver manager and driver instructor to work on strike days".

A spokesperson said: "LNER has used managers - paid £500 a shift - to drive trains on strike days and, after the expiry of the last non-contractual overtime agreement, on most days of the week now.

"There is no agreement in place for management to drive services on mainline infrastructure.

"It results in branch line services - such as Lincoln, Skipton, and Harrogate - being cancelled because of a lack of route knowledge and means virtually no driver training is being done."

Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News

Mick Whelan, ASLEF general secretary, said of the rail strikes : "Last month, when we announced renewed mandates for industrial action, because under the Tories' draconian anti-union laws we have to ballot our members every six months, we called on the train companies, and the government, to come to the table for meaningful talks to negotiate a new pay deal for train drivers who have not had an increase in salary since 2019.

"Our members voted overwhelmingly - yet again - for strike action."

Be the first to get Breaking News

Install the Sky News app for free

A Rail Delivery Group spokesperson said: "Nobody wins when industrial action impacts people's lives and livelihoods, and we will work hard to minimise any disruption to our passengers.

"We want to resolve this dispute, but the ASLEF leadership need to recognise that hard-pressed taxpayers are continuing to contribute an extra £54m a week just to keep services running post-COVID.

"We continue to seek an agreement with the ASLEF leadership and remain open to talks to find a solution to this dispute."

When the strikes on the London Underground were announced, Finn Brennan, ASLEF's full-time organiser on the network, said in a statement: "ASLEF Tube train drivers will strike in April and May in a long-running dispute over London Underground's failure to give assurances that changes to our members' terms and conditions will not be imposed without agreement and that all existing agreements will be honoured.

"Despite a previous commitment to withdraw plans for massive changes to drivers' working conditions, London Underground management has established a full-time team of managers preparing to impose their plans.

Sadiq Khan said they had been called off after "talking and engaging with transport staff and trade unions rather than working against them".

Related Topics

• London Underground
• Rail strikes

Delta Air Lines Posts a Narrow Q1 Profit and Says Travel Demand Remains Strong Despite Flight Scares

Delta Air Lines has reported a small first-quarter profit and says travel demand is strong heading into summer

Michael Dwyer

FILE - A Delta Air Lines plane lands at Logan International Airport, Jan. 26, 2023, in Boston. Delta reports earnings on Wednesday, April 10, 2024. (AP Photo/Michael Dwyer, File)

Delta Air Lines eked out a narrow first-quarter profit and said Wednesday that demand for travel is strong heading into the summer vacation season, with travelers seemingly unfazed by recent incidents in the industry that ranged from a panel blowing off a jetliner in flight to a tire falling off another plane during takeoff.

Delta reported the highest revenue for any first quarter in its history and a $37 million profit. It expects record-breaking revenue in the current quarter as well. The airline said that second-quarter earnings will likely beat Wall Street expectations.

CEO Ed Bastian said Delta's best 11 days ever for ticket sales occurred during the early weeks of 2024.

If travelers are worried about a spate of problem flights and increased scrutiny of plane maker Boeing , “I haven't seen it,” Bastian said in an interview. “I only look at my numbers. Demand is the healthiest I've ever seen.”

A slight majority of Delta's fleet of more than 950 planes are Boeing models, but in recent years it has bought primarily from Airbus , including a January order for 20 big Airbus A350s. As a result, Delta will avoid the dilemma facing rivals United Airlines and American Airlines, which can't get all the Boeing planes they ordered. United is even asking pilots to take unpaid time off in May because of a plane shortage.

“Airbus has been consistent throughout these last five years (at) meeting their delivery targets,” Bastian said.

Photos You Should See - April 2024

Delta does not operate any Boeing 737 Max jets, the plane that was grounded worldwide after two fatal crashes in 2018 and 2019, and which suffered the panel blowout on an Alaska Airlines flight this year. However, the Atlanta-based airline has ordered a new, larger version of the Max that still hasn't been approved by regulators. Bastian said Delta will be happy to use the Max 10 when they arrive.

While Delta has largely dodged headaches caused by Boeing, it faces other obstacles in handling this summer's crowds.

Delta is lobbying the federal government to again allow it to operate fewer flights into the New York City area. Otherwise, Delta could lose valuable takeoff and landing slots.

The Federal Aviation Administration granted a similar request last summer and even extended it until late October . The FAA said the relief helped airlines reduce canceled flights at the region's busy three main airports by 40%.

Peter Carter, an executive vice president who oversees government affairs, said Delta and other airlines need another waiver permitting fewer flights this summer because the FAA still doesn't have enough air traffic controllers.

“Absent the waiver, I think we would have, as an industry, some real challenges in New York ,” Carter said.

Airlines for America, a trade group of the major U.S. carriers, is also pushing for a waiver from rules on minimum flights in New York. The FAA said it would review the request.

Delta customers will see another change — a new system for boarding planes . Instead of boarding by groups with names such as Diamond Medallions, Delta Premium Select and Sky Priority, passengers will board in groups numbered one through eight. The airline says it will be less confusing.

“When you have a number and you're standing in line, we are all trained to know when it's our turn,” Bastian said.

The change won't alter the pecking order of when each type of customer gets to board. Those with the cheapest tickets, Basic Economy, will still board last.

Delta's first-quarter profit follows a $363 million loss a year ago, when the results were weighed down by spending on a new labor contract with pilots.

“We expect Delta to be one of the few airlines to report a profit in the March quarter,” TD Cowen analyst Helane Becker said even before Delta’s results were released.

Delta said that excluding special items, it earned 45 cents per share. Analysts were expecting 36 cents per share, according to a FactSet survey.

The airline forecast second-quarter earnings of $2.20 to $2.50 per share. The Wall Street consensus was $2.22 per share. The company stood by its forecast of full-year earnings between $6 and $7 per share.

First-quarter revenue rose 8%, to $13.75 billion. Putting Delta's Pennsylvania refinery aside, operating revenue was slightly more than analysts predicted. The airline said second-quarter revenue will be 5% to 7% higher than a year ago.

The airline reported that large corporate customers — who were slower than leisure travelers to resume flying after the coronavirus pandemic — are spending more on travel, including firms in technology and financial services.

Delta has boosted profit by focusing more on premium passengers who pay the highest fares, and raking in money from a credit-card partnership with American Express.

Costs could rise too, however. Jet fuel is higher than it was a year ago, following a run-up in oil prices, and Delta is spending more on aircraft maintenance this year.

Shares of Delta Air Lines Inc. fell 2.3% by the end of regular trading Wednesday.

Copyright 2024 The  Associated Press . All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Join the Conversation

Tags: Associated Press , business , Georgia

Related Articles

America 2024

Best States

Best States Rankings

• # 2 Washington
• # 4 Nebraska
• # 5 Minnesota

Health News Bulletin

Stay informed daily on the latest news and advice on health and COVID-19 from the editors at U.S. News & World Report.

You May Also Like

Why utah is the best state.

Elliott Davis Jr. May 2, 2023

The 10 Best States in America

Rescuers Search off Northern California Coast for Young Gray Whale Entangled in Gill Net

Associated Press April 10, 2024

Arizona Abortion Ruling Upends Legal and Political Landscape From Phoenix to Washington

Iowa Governor Signs Bill That Gives State Authority to Arrest and Deport Some Migrants

Assistant Principal Ignored Warnings That 6-Year-Old Boy Had Gun Before He Shot Teacher, Report Says

Agency Probes Philadelphia Fatal Crash Involving Ford That May Have Been Running on Automated System

Man Pleads Not Guilty to Terrorism Charge in Alleged Church Attack Plan in Support of Islamic State

South Carolina's Top Officer Not Releasing Details on 2012 Hack That Stole Millions of Tax Returns

Iowa Puts $1 Million Toward Summer Meal Sites, Still Faces Criticism for Rejecting Federal Funds

BREAKING: Trump's efforts to delay his criminal hush money trial are rejected for third time in three days

Florida abortion ban prompts two Southern states to prep for an influx of patients

After the Florida Supreme Court cleared the way for a state ban on abortions after six weeks , clinics in North Carolina and Virginia say they are gearing up for an influx of patients.

Once the law takes effect on May 1, Florida will no longer be a refuge for people seeking abortions across the South. The state currently allows abortions up to 15 weeks of pregnancy — a far less restrictive policy than those implemented in many nearby states , including Alabama, Georgia and Mississippi, since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022.

More than 9,300 people traveled to Florida from other states to get abortion care last year — more than double the number in 2020, according to data from the Guttmacher Institute, a research organization that supports abortion access.

Around 84,000 abortions were performed in Florida in 2023, representing around 1 in 12 abortions nationwide.

Come May, the closest option for Floridians and some others in the South who seek abortions will be in North Carolina, which allows abortions up to 15 weeks but requires people to receive in-person counseling at least 72 hours in advance. The next-closest option is Virginia.

Abortion clinics in both states are preparing to accommodate more patients by adding staff or extending hours of operation. Providers have had time to get ready, since Gov. Ron DeSantis signed Florida's six-week ban in April 2023. Its implementation was on hold pending the state Supreme Court decision, which came on Monday.

The Bristol Women’s Health Center, which offers abortions in southwestern Virginia, expanded its hours a few months ago to accommodate people from Florida and other Southern states. It has also started offering services in the evenings and sometimes on weekends.

“It is already hard enough for somebody who’s driving 12 hours away,” said Karolina Ogorek, the center's administrative director. “While their reproductive health choices are being taken away by their state, as an abortion provider and a clinic, we want to give them as many choices as possible to be able to access the care that they need.”

The center also plans to work with funding agencies such as The Pink House Fund in Mississippi to help cover travel and lodging costs for patients coming from far away. 

A Woman’s Choice, a network of clinics with a location in Jacksonville, Florida, opened a new clinic in Virginia last month in anticipation of Florida's ban. That clinic is working to add doctors, according to Amber Gavin, the organization’s vice president of advocacy and operations.

But even so, she said, demand could be quite high.

“Florida was seeing a huge influx of patients from the Southeast, and I’m very concerned that the neighboring states aren’t going to be able to accommodate all the Floridians and folks in the Southeast,” Gavin said.

Jenny Black, president of Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, similarly said that the organization’s North Carolina clinics are making more appointments available. But those clinics already have a two-week wait time for abortions. 

“Planned Parenthood health center staff in North Carolina are doing their level best to quickly expand capacity and increase appointment availability ahead of the near total ban in Florida taking effect, but it will not be enough to stem the tide of patients from across the South who have few options left," Black said in a statement.

For many women, traveling to get an abortion isn't an option because of a lack of resources or other circumstances.

Florida clinics anticipated the state's new law so have already trained additional staff to perform ultrasounds and confirm pregnancies. They are trying to see as many patients as possible before the end of the month.

“We’re opening up more ultrasound appointments scheduled for the next 30 days to get people in,” said Michelle Quesada, vice president of communications and marketing for Planned Parenthood of South, East and North Florida.

Quesada cautioned that, starting in May, patients will need to show up before the six-week mark, since Florida law requires two in-person visits to a clinic, 24 hours apart, ahead of an abortion.

“You’d have to find out you’re pregnant in your fifth week of pregnancy, which is one week after a missed period for someone with a perfect 28-day cycle,” Quesada said.

“I can only imagine in 30 days the sheer volume of patients that are going to be confused, scared, feel like they have no other option when they learn that they’re beyond six weeks,” she added.

Florida’s law allows exceptions for rape, incest and the life of the mother.

"I would think that it’s OK to have an abortion if the mother’s life is in danger. This particular law, this six-week bill, does have that — so there wouldn’t be any reason to have to travel," said Ingrid Duran, the state legislative director for the National Right to Life Committee, an anti-abortion organization.

Duran noted that Florida's ban sets aside $25 million to expand the Florida Pregnancy Care Network, a group of centers that aim to convince women not to have abortions. Such centers offer pregnant women counseling and supplies like car seats and diapers, but some have been known to provide inaccurate or misleading information .

Duran said the funding may help address a lack of access to health care, counseling and support that she believes could be "some of the reasons why women choose to have abortions."

The fate of abortion access in Florida isn’t set in stone, however: The state Supreme Court also decided that a proposed amendment to its constitution that would enshrine abortion protections can be on the November ballot.

“ What we’ve seen in other states is that when abortion is on the ballot, it wins,” Gavin said.

Aria Bendix is the breaking health reporter for NBC News Digital.

Katie Mogg is an intern at NBC News.

Watch CBS News

Arizona Supreme Court rules abortion ban from 1864 can be enforced

By Shawna Mizelle

Updated on: April 10, 2024 / 2:06 PM EDT / CBS News

The Arizona Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that a  160-year-old abortion ban may be enforced,   clearing the way for a ban on almost all abortions in the state.

The 1864 ban has exceptions only to save the life of the mother but none in cases of rape or incest. 

The old law supersedes Arizona's  15-week abortion ban , which was passed by the legislature and signed in 2022 by then-Gov. Doug Ducey, a Republican. The 2022 ban included exceptions in cases of medical emergencies and restrictions on medication abortion, and it requires an ultrasound before an abortion and parental consent for minors. But the 15-week ban did not repeal the 1864 law, the state Supreme Court found, and "is predicated entirely on the existence of a federal constitutional right to an abortion," which was struck down with the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2022.

"Absent the federal constitutional abortion right, and because [the 15-week abortion ban] does not independently authorize abortion, there is no provision in federal or state law prohibiting [the 1864 abortion ban's] operation. Accordingly, [the 1864 ban] is now enforceable," the Arizona Supreme Court Justice John Lopez wrote in the opinion.

The Arizona Supreme Court concluded that abortion policy is a matter to be decided either by the legislature or by citizens in the ballot initiative process. The court said it would not "make this weighty policy decision because such judgments are reserved for our citizens."

"[W]e merely follow our limited constitutional role and duty to interpret the law as written," Lopez wrote. 

The court also stayed the enforcement of the 1864 ban for 14 days, to enable the parties to return to the trial court to pursue other matters in the case. Beyond the stay, there is also a delayed enforcement agreement in place that was signed by former Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich that effectively extends the stay for another 45 days beyond the 14-day period.

On Wednesday, former President Donald Trump said the state Supreme Court went too far in its ruling. "It's all about state's rights, and that'll be straightened out," Trump said. "I'm sure that the governor and everybody else are going to bring it back into reason and that'll be taken care of, I think very quickly." Gov. Katie Hobbs is a Democrat, and both chambers of the Arizona Legislature are controlled by Republicans.

Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes, also a Democrat, issued a statement Tuesday calling the ruling "unconscionable and an affront to freedom" and said that "as long as I am Attorney General, no woman or doctor will be prosecuted under this draconian law in this state."

The law says that "a person who provides, supplies or administers to a pregnant woman, or procures such woman to take any medicine, drugs or substance, or uses or employs any instrument or other means whatever, with intent thereby to procure the miscarriage of such woman, unless it is necessary to save her life, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for not less than two years nor more than five years."

It dates to before Arizona became a state. 

The decision has already garnered criticism from both Democrats and Republicans. 

"I signed the 15-week law as Governor because it is thoughtful conservative policy, and an approach to this very sensitive issue that Arizonans can actually agree on. The ruling today is not the outcome I would have preferred, and I call on our elected leaders to heed the will of the people and address this issue with a policy that is workable and reflective of our electorate," Doug Ducey, Arizona's former Republican governor,  posted on X.

Republican Senate candidate Kari Lake issued a statement opposing the ruling, and she called on Hobbs and the state legislature "to come up with an immediate common sense solution that Arizonans can support." Lake's statement shows how fraught the issue has become for Republicans, since Lake had in the past referred to abortion as the "ultimate sin" and when Texas passed its restrictive abortion law, Lake posted on social media "well done Texas. Arizona is next." 

Her challenger, state Sen. Ruben Gallego, called the ruling "devastating for Arizona women and their families" and sought to tie the decision to Lake and Republicans. 

There are currently efforts underway to enshrine abortion rights into the Arizona state constitution. Arizona for Abortion Access announced last week that they had enough signatures to put their amendment on the ballot.

"And so you know, there are opportunities for voters to correct this and you've seen every state since Dobbs that when voters have an opportunity to weigh in they vote in favor of abortion," Jill Habig, President of Public Rights Project, which represented one of the parties in the case from Tuesday's ruling  told CBS News. "But in the meantime, you have tens of thousands of people who are pregnant or will become pregnant who will either need to drive or fly or get sick in order to receive care and their health will be very much at risk." 

The Arizona ruling comes on the heels of a decision from the Florida Supreme Court allowing a six-week abortion ban to go into effect and underscores the increased politicization of abortion rights since the Supreme Court overturned Roe versus Wade, effectively handing the issue back to the states.

President Biden's reelection campaign already denounced the decision, as his campaign has pushed to make abortion rights a central part of their administration and reelection bid.

In a reaction to the ruling, the Biden campaign posted on X that it was "made possible by Trump ending Roe v. Wade," a reference to Trump's nomination of three conservative justices to the Supreme Court during his presidency. 

Shawna Mizelle is a 2024 campaign reporter for CBS News.

More from CBS News

Justice Neil Gorsuch is not pleased with judges setting nationwide policy. But how common is it?

Special counsel pushes Supreme Court to reject Trump's immunity bid

Former "Goon Squad" officers sentenced to prison in state court

Rep. Ro Khanna calls on RFK Jr.'s running mate to step down

Advertisement

Supported by

Arizona Reinstates 160-Year-Old Abortion Ban

The state’s highest court said the law, moribund for decades under Roe v. Wade, was now enforceable, but it put its decision on hold for a lower court to hear other challenges to the law.

• Share full article

By Jack Healy and Kellen Browning

Jack Healy reported from Phoenix and Kellen Browning from San Francisco.

Arizona’s highest court on Tuesday upheld an 1864 law that bans nearly all abortions, a decision that could have far-reaching consequences for women’s health care and election-year politics in a critical battleground state.

“Physicians are now on notice that all abortions, except those necessary to save a woman’s life, are illegal,” the court said in a 4-to-2 decision.

But the court, whose justices are all Republican appointees, also put its ruling on hold for the moment and sent the matter back to a lower court for additional arguments about the law’s constitutionality. Abortion providers said they expected to continue performing abortions through May as their lawyers and Democratic lawmakers searched for new legal arguments and additional tactics to delay the ruling.

The ruling immediately set off a political earthquake. Democrats condemned it as a “stain” on Arizona that would put women’s lives at risk. Several Republicans, sensing political peril, also criticized the ruling and called for the Republican-controlled Legislature to repeal it.

Read the Arizona Supreme Court’s Abortion Ruling

The state’s highest court on Tuesday upheld an 1864 law that bans nearly all abortions.

The decision from the Arizona Supreme Court concerned a law that was on the books long before Arizona achieved statehood. It outlaws abortion from the moment of conception, except when necessary to save the life of the mother, and it makes no exceptions for rape or incest. Doctors prosecuted under the law could face fines and prison terms of two to five years.

Planned Parenthood Arizona, the plaintiff, and other abortion-rights supporters argued that the 1864 ban, which had sat dormant for decades, had essentially been overtaken by years of subsequent Arizona laws regulating and limiting abortion — primarily, a 2022 law banning abortion after the 15th week of pregnancy.

But the territorial-era ban was never repealed. And the Arizona Supreme Court said Arizona’s Legislature had not created a right to abortion when it passed the 15-week ban. Because the federal right to abortion in Roe v. Wade had now been overturned, nothing in federal or state law prevented Arizona from enforcing the near-total ban, the court wrote.

“Because the federal constitutional right to abortion that overrode § 13-3603 no longer exists, the statute is now enforceable,” the court’s four-person majority wrote, using the statutory number of the 1864 ban.

Justice Bill Montgomery recused himself from the case after the publication of news reports that he had written a Facebook post saying that Planned Parenthood had participated in “the greatest generational genocide known to man.”

The court’s ruling was a stinging loss for abortion-rights supporters, who said it would put doctors in legal jeopardy, prompt clinics in Arizona to stop providing abortions and force women to travel to nearby states like California, New Mexico or Colorado to end their pregnancies.

At a news conference on Tuesday, Dr. Atsuko Koyama, an abortion provider in Phoenix, said she had recently provided abortions to one woman trying to flee an abusive partner and another whose pregnancy had endangered her health. She said that the court’s ruling would end that kind of care and that it “criminalizes me.”

President Biden called the ban “cruel,” and said that it was a result of “the extreme agenda of Republican elected officials who are committed to ripping away women’s freedom.”

“Millions of Arizonans will soon live under an even more extreme and dangerous abortion ban, which fails to protect women even when their health is at risk or in tragic cases of rape or incest,” he said in a statement.

Arizona’s attorney general, Kris Mayes, a Democrat, called the ruling “unconscionable and an affront to freedom.” She promised to mount a legal effort to fight off implementation of the law and said she would not prosecute doctors for providing abortions.

It is unclear whether other Arizona prosecutors will follow suit.

Gov. Katie Hobbs, a Democrat, issued an executive order putting authority to prosecute abortion-related cases under the attorney general. Ms. Mayes said on Tuesday that she would refuse to allow Arizona’s elected county attorneys to bring cases under the 1864 ban, potentially opening a new legal fight with Republican prosecutors and abortion opponents.

Jake Warner, a senior counsel for the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative Christian advocacy group that argued to reinstate the near-total ban, said at a news conference that he believed county prosecutors had the authority “to enforce the law as written, and so protect unborn life here in Arizona.”

At a news conference on Tuesday, Ms. Hobbs and other Democratic politicians decried the decision as “a stain on our state” that would energize abortion-rights supporters to vote in November’s elections.

Anti-abortion groups cheered the ruling.

“Life is a human right, and today’s decision allows the state to respect that right and fully protect life again — just as the Legislature intended,” Mr. Warner said. “We celebrate the Arizona Supreme Court’s decision that allows the state’s pro-life law to again protect the lives of countless, innocent, unborn children.”

Republicans control both chambers of the Legislature. The governor, Ms. Hobbs, is a first-term Democrat who campaigned on supporting abortion rights.

State Senator T.J. Shope, a Republican who represents a suburban and rural area south of Phoenix, said he would work to repeal the 1864 ban but leave in place a 15-week prohibition on abortions that was passed two years ago and signed into law by the previous governor, Doug Ducey, a Republican.

The stakes could also be significant for races up and down the ballot in Arizona this fall, after former President Donald J. Trump said this week that he thought abortion rights should be left up to the states to decide.

Political scientists in Arizona said the court’s abortion ruling was far out of step with public opinion. Only 7 percent of Arizona voters said they supported an outright abortion ban with no exceptions, according to a poll conducted last month by YouGov and Samara Klar, a political science professor at the University of Arizona.

Democrats, who seized on abortion to win campaigns for governor and attorney general in midterm elections two years ago, said it would galvanize their supporters , who were already pushing for a state constitutional right to abortion as a ballot initiative in November. In other states where abortion has been at risk of being curtailed, voters have turned out in force to protect it.

Representative Ruben Gallego, running unopposed in the Democratic primary for Senate, criticized the ruling and tied it to his opponent, Kari Lake, who called the near-total ban a “great law” when she was running for governor in 2022.

“Yet again, extremist politicians like Kari Lake are forcing themselves into doctors’ offices and ripping away the right for women to make their own health care decisions,” Mr. Gallego said, adding that he would do “whatever it takes to protect abortion rights at the federal level.”

Ms. Lake has been emblematic of a Republican shift on abortion . She came out against a federal ban last year while still backing the 15-week restriction that was in effect in Arizona, and she said on Tuesday that it was “abundantly clear that the pre-statehood law is out of step with Arizonans.” Ms. Lake called on the Legislature and Ms. Hobbs, her 2022 opponent in the governor’s race, to “come up with an immediate common sense solution.”

Representatives Juan Ciscomani and David Schweikert, two Republicans facing re-election challenges in closely divided districts, also criticized the ruling and urged state lawmakers to address it.

Tracking Abortion Bans Across the Country

The New York Times is tracking the status of abortion laws in each state following the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.

For nearly two years, supporters and opponents of abortion rights in Arizona have been fighting in court over whether the 1864 law could still be enforced, or whether it had been effectively overtaken and neutered by decades of other state laws that regulate and restrict abortion but stop short of banning it entirely.

The 1864 ban had sat mothballed for decades, one of several sweeping state abortion-ban laws that were moribund while Roe v. Wade was in effect but became the focus of intense political and legal action after Roe fell.

Abortions in Wisconsin were largely halted because of an 1849 ban, but resumed last September after a judge said the law did not make abortions illegal. In Michigan, Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, a Democrat, signed a repeal of a 1931 ban on abortion last spring after voters added abortion-rights protections to the state constitution.

Elizabeth Dias contributed reporting.

Jack Healy is a Phoenix-based national correspondent who focuses on the fast-changing politics and climate of the Southwest. He has worked in Iraq and Afghanistan and is a graduate of the University of Missouri’s journalism school. More about Jack Healy

Kellen Browning is a Times reporter covering the 2024 election, with a focus on the swing states of Nevada and Arizona. More about Kellen Browning