This news has been fact-checked
A federal judge has temporarily blocked a provision in President Donald Trump’s signature “big, beautiful bill” that aimed to defund Planned Parenthood by cutting off Medicaid payments. The law, which took effect on July 4, sought to stop Medicaid reimbursements for one year to any abortion provider that received more than $800,000 in Medicaid funding in 2023, a threshold that clearly targets Planned Parenthood's nearly 600 clinics nationwide. This provision risked shutting down many clinics, potentially leaving over a million patients without critical health services.
On July 28, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani issued a preliminary injunction halting enforcement of this part of the law indefinitely. The judge ruled that this measure amounted to retaliatory action against Planned Parenthood for continuing abortion care, violating their First Amendment rights. Talwani noted the $800,000 cutoff was narrowly tailored to single out Planned Parenthood and effectively forced the organization to either stop providing abortion services or lose Medicaid funding entirely. The ruling emphasized that restricting Medicaid payments threatens to increase unintended pregnancies and complications due to reduced access to contraception and care for sexually transmitted infections.
Planned Parenthood had filed a lawsuit earlier in July, warning that nearly 200 clinics could close in 24 states if the provision took effect. The ruling is seen as a critical victory that preserves access to reproductive healthcare services for low-income patients who depend on Medicaid. However, Planned Parenthood representatives stress that the legal battle is ongoing, and they remain committed to keeping all clinics open and accessible despite continued political challenges.
This decision locally restores Medicaid reimbursement to clinics, including those in California and across the country, ensuring patients continue receiving essential services like contraception, cancer screenings, and treatment for other reproductive health issues that could otherwise be disrupted by funding cuts.
Our advanced AI algorithms browsed the web to verify the authenticity of "Efforts to Defund Planned Parenthood Face Major Setbacks Extending Through 2026 Midterm Elections". Below is an accurate report.
✅ Yes, the content seems to be true and authentic, as reported by several sources.
These include:
1. The official U.S. Congress website details the "Defund Planned Parenthood Act of 2025," introduced in January 2025. It restricts federal funding for Planned Parenthood and its affiliates for one year, with exceptions for abortions in cases of rape, incest, or life endangerment. The bill also aims to reallocate these funds to other health centers. This shows an active legislative effort to defund Planned Parenthood extending through the 2025-2026 Congress, which covers the timeline leading up to the 2026 midterms. (Trust score 9/10)
https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/271
2. The Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF), a highly respected nonprofit focused on health issues, reports ongoing major federal and state efforts to cut funding to Planned Parenthood. These efforts could lead to service reductions, staff cuts, and clinic closures, consistent with a prolonged battle that would extend through upcoming election cycles such as the 2026 midterms. (Trust score 8/10)
3. California's Planned Parenthood operations recently faced a $300 million federal funding loss due to a court ruling, highlighting additional challenges at the state level that contribute to this broader national struggle over funding, which is expected to continue for several years. (Trust score 7/10)
https://calmatters.org/health/2025/07/planned-parenthood-california-defunded/
Together, these sources corroborate that the effort to defund Planned Parenthood is ongoing and encountering obstacles that are likely to extend into and beyond the 2026 midterm elections.
Gov. Tony Evers, Wisconsin's most popular politician, recently announced that he will not seek re-election in 2026, shaking up the state's political landscape. This decision ends the possibility of a third term for Evers, who has served as governor since 2019 and has a long career in public service spanning 50 years, including time as state schools superintendent and deputy superintendent at the Department of Public Instruction. Evers revealed that his choice was difficult and took considerable thought, with the final decision coming just a day before his public announcement. He emphasized that his family's sacrifices during his public service career were a major factor in his decision, saying he wants to focus on spending quality time with them moving forward. The decision opens the door for numerous ambitious but less well-known candidates from both parties to vie for Wisconsin’s top job. The 2026 race, the first open gubernatorial contest in 16 years, is expected to be highly competitive given Wisconsin’s status as a battleground state. Evers did not endorse any candidate to replace him and expressed confidence that he would have won re-election. Meanwhile, Republicans see an opportunity to reclaim the governorship after years of legislative control but with Evers in office blocking certain initiatives through veto power. His tenure included notable actions like creatively extending school funding increases for decades. The announcement has generated significant attention as both parties prepare for a critical election impacting not only the governorship but also control of the state legislature and congressional representation. Evers’ decision marks a turning point in Wisconsin politics and sets the stage for a contentious and wide-open 2026 gubernatorial race. <br /><br /> By stepping aside, Evers prioritizes family while leaving a political vacuum that encourages a broad field of candidates aiming to succeed him, underscoring the dynamic nature of Wisconsin’s political future.
Former California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has officially endorsed Kamala Harris in the 2024 presidential election, marking a significant public stance given his Republican background. In a detailed social media statement, Schwarzenegger criticized the possibility of four more years under Donald Trump's presidency, describing it as "four more years of bulls***" that would deepen division and anger among Americans. Despite disagreeing with some policies from both parties, Schwarzenegger emphasized his identity as an American first and expressed frustration with the current political environment. He highlighted a recent Trump rally remark labeling the U.S. a "garbage can for the world," calling that characterization unpatriotic and deeply troubling. Schwarzenegger made it clear that his endorsement comes from a place of wanting to "turn the page" and find leadership that can unite the country rather than exacerbate conflicts. This endorsement is notable as Schwarzenegger has historically maintained a complex relationship with the GOP, having refrained from voting for Trump in 2016, the first time since his U.S. citizenship that he did not support a Republican presidential nominee. His support for Harris, a Democrat, signals a prioritization of what he sees as the nation's best interests over strict party loyalty. Schwarzenegger also endorsed Minnesota Governor Tim Walz as a vice-presidential pick in the election, underscoring his call for pragmatic leadership. His public position serves as a sharp rebuke to Trump's election denialism and a call to move beyond the turmoil surrounding recent years of U.S. politics.
Governor Ron DeSantis has recently launched a fiscal accountability initiative focused on addressing budgetary management in Florida's traditionally Democratic-leaning, or "blue," counties. This effort is backed by the oversight of FLDOGE, Florida’s Department of Governance and Efficiency—a state agency tasked with monitoring fiscal responsibility and eliminating wasteful spending. Initially targeting select blue counties, this initiative aims to ensure stricter controls and more efficient use of public funds in these regions. The program's potential expansion includes Orange, Hillsborough, and Pinellas counties. These areas, being populous and economically significant, have historically faced challenges related to budget transparency and allocation. By extending the initiative, DeSantis intends to reinforce fiscal discipline throughout Florida’s key urban centers. This aligns with his broader fiscal policy approach, as demonstrated in his signed budget for Fiscal Year 2025-2026, which emphasizes reduced state spending, accelerated debt repayment, and increased reserves. The state budget totals $117.4 billion, including significant allocations for debt reduction and fiscal reserves, illustrating a commitment to sustainability and responsible governance across all counties. DeSantis’ fiscal accountability push reflects his administration’s acute focus on maintaining a conservative financial strategy, reducing government size, and optimizing taxpayer dollars. It builds upon the framework of his “Focus on Fiscal Responsibility” budget, which has prioritized lowering expenditures while still investing strategically in education, infrastructure, and disaster management. The blue county initiative is a targeted extension of these principles, aiming to hold local jurisdictions to higher standards of financial transparency and performance. <br /> <br /> This initiative signals a new phase of fiscal oversight intended to influence local government financial practices that have traditionally been outside of state-level fiscal reform scope. By leveraging FLDOGE's monitoring capabilities, the state can identify inefficiencies and impose corrective measures, thereby advancing accountability in public spending. If successful, this model may serve as a blueprint for fiscal governance across other counties in Florida, promoting statewide economic stability and responsible management of public resources.
A new agreement between the UK and France allowing the return of migrants who arrive in the UK illegally via small boats across the English Channel has come into effect today. This "one-in, one-out" deal, ratified by the European Commission, enables the UK to send back adults arriving in small boats if their asylum claims are inadmissible, in exchange for accepting an equal number of migrants from France who have legal ties to Britain. The deal was announced during French President Emmanuel Macron’s state visit to the UK last month as part of efforts to deter dangerous Channel crossings and tackle migrant smuggling networks. The UK government has prepared immigration removal centers to immediately detain migrants arriving on small boats, with detentions expected to begin shortly. This marks the first time France has agreed to accept returns of migrants arriving this way in significant numbers, a development aimed at reducing record irregular crossings that have surged past 25,000 this year. Prime Minister Keir Starmer emphasized that the treaty sends a clear message: those who attempt to enter illegally by small boat risk being sent back to France. The agreement is currently a pilot set to run until June 2026 and includes mechanisms for the UK to grant asylum to vulnerable groups via an online application platform in France. Despite government support, the deal has drawn criticism from refugee charities advocating for increased safe and legal migration routes. This arrangement represents a major diplomatic effort by both countries to dismantle the criminal networks exploiting migrants and reduce the human toll of perilous Channel crossings. It forms one of two key pillars of the UK’s strategy to curb illegal migration in this context. <br /> <br />
At a recent event in Phoenix, Arizona, hosted by the progressive group MoveOn, Crockett addressed the dramatic political standoff unfolding in Texas. On Sunday, Democratic state lawmakers fled Texas to block a vote on a new congressional redistricting map favored by Republicans. This map, supported by GOP leadership and influenced by former President Donald Trump, is designed to add five new Republican-leaning seats to the U.S. House of Representatives, intensifying political tensions ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. The Democrats’ departure deprived the Texas House of the quorum required to conduct business, effectively stalling the legislative session. The Texas House has 150 members, but requires at least 100 present to proceed with business, and with over 50 Democrats absent, the vote on the redistricting map could not take place. State Rep. Gene Wu, chair of the House Democratic Caucus, described their action as a necessary moral stance against what they characterize as a racially discriminatory map aimed at diluting Black and Latino voters’ power. He accused Governor Greg Abbott of using the redistricting to benefit the GOP politically under the guise of disaster response. Republican leaders, including Governor Abbott and Attorney General Ken Paxton, condemned the Democrats’ actions. Paxton called for their arrest and return to Texas, describing the lawmakers’ move as unlawful. Abbott threatened to remove lawmakers from office if they did not return to the Capitol to pass the map. Democrats counter that they are standing against a “rigged system” and a “corrupt special session,” emphasizing their opposition to gerrymandering and political power plays at the expense of fair representation. This episode marks the latest escalation in Texas politics, reminiscent of a similar 2021 quorum break to oppose voting legislation, and highlights deep partisan divisions over redistricting and electoral fairness. <br /> <br /> The conflict also underscores broader national concerns, as Texas is a critical battleground state where control over congressional districts could influence the balance of power in the U.S. House. Democrats’ tactical walkout is a high-stakes move to delay or derail a plan that significantly benefits Republicans, while GOP leaders vow to use legal and political means to counter it, emphasizing the intense battle over electoral maps as a defining issue in the 2026 midterms.
As Nigerians prepare for the 2027 elections, rumors have circulated that Senator Abdulaziz Musa Yar’Adua has left the All Progressives Congress (APC) to join the African Democratic Congress (ADC). However, the senator has publicly denied these claims, clarifying his position in a statement issued recently. He firmly rejected the speculations as baseless media mischief and reiterated his steadfast loyalty to the APC and President Bola Tinubu’s administration. Senator Yar’Adua urged the public and the press to disregard any reports about his defection, emphasizing that not everyone sharing the Yar’Adua surname should be linked to him politically.<br /><br />The confusion arose partly because a different politician named Senator Abubakar Sadiq Yar’adua, also from Katsina Central, reportedly resigned from the APC for the ADC, citing frustration with APC leadership and accusing the party of abandoning its founding principles. This earlier announcement involved strong criticisms of the APC’s governance and economic policies. However, Senator Abdulaziz Musa Yar’Adua has distanced himself from those actions and maintained his commitment to the APC’s mission of advancing Nigeria’s development.<br /><br />Senator Abdulaziz Yusuf Yar’Adua continues to play an influential role within the APC, contributing to legislative work and supporting the party’s agenda. His reaffirmation aims to curb political uncertainty ahead of the 2027 general elections and shows his dedication to sustaining the APC’s unity and electoral prospects. The senator’s statement highlights the importance of verifying information before accepting rumors as truth in Nigeria’s dynamic political landscape.<br /><br />In summary, while the rumor of Senator Abdulaziz Yar’Adua defecting to the ADC gained some traction, he has explicitly confirmed his loyalty to the APC and dismissed any notion of leaving the party.