Latest news with #Bondi

Los Angeles Times
a day ago
- Health
- Los Angeles Times
Courts can protect trans healthcare by recognizing patient-physician privilege
Information, in the second Trump administration, is a currency of power and fear. Last week, Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi announced sweeping subpoenas targeting physicians and medical providers who offer care for transgender youth. The aim is not to initiate prosecutions: Indeed, the legal theories upon which such prosecutions might rest are tenuous at best. By filing these investigative demands, the government plainly hopes to chill medical providers from offering expert care. This strategy can work even if, at the end of the day, the government's threats are hollow as a matter of law. The White House's plainly unconstitutional attacks on law firms, for example, have substantially worked — even though the minority of firms to challenge the orders rapidly won relief. Fortunately, the legal system is not powerless in the face of such overreaching: Federal district courts have the authority, and the obligation, to recognize that patient-physician dealings are akin to attorney-client and spousal discussions. Both of the latter benefit from judicially created privileges — or legal shields that individuals can invoke against the state's probing. At a moment when not just gender medicine but also reproductive care more generally is in peril, federal courts can and should step in and shield intimately private medical data as well. We suspect that many people believe that what they tell their doctors is already private. They're right, but only sort of. There's a federal law called HIPAA that limits what your doctor can do with the information. It says that your doctor can't, for instance, sell your medical records to the newspaper. In 2024, the Department of Health and Human Services also issued a HIPAA 'privacy rule' that heightened protections for reproductive healthcare information. (Last month, a federal district court in Texas declared the rule unconstitutional — so its future is uncertain.) Even with the privacy rule, however, HIPAA hides a gaping hole: It allows disclosures 'required by law.' And the law explicitly permits disclosures pursuant to subpoenas of all kinds — judicial, grand jury or administrative — including those issued by Bondi. So if the Justice Department subpoenas your intimate and sensitive healthcare information, HIPAA won't stop that. In previous academic work, we've urged Congress and state legislatures to fill this gap. Blue states have acted to curtail cooperation with other states — but there's a limit to what states can do when the federal government demands information. Yet there remains one entity that can, and should, act immediately to shield reproductive healthcare information: the same federal district courts that have been at the forefront of pushing back on the Trump administration's many illegal and constitutional actions. We think federal courts should extend existing 'privileges,' as evidentiary shields are called, to encompass both records of gender-affirming and transgender medical care, and also records of reproductive care more generally. A privilege not only bars protected information from being admitted into evidence at trial, but also blocks subpoenas, warrants and other court orders. Federal district courts have a general power to create privileges, and they often do so when people already have a reasonable expectation that their conversations will not be disclosed. Most people have heard of the attorney-client privilege, which means that you can confide in your lawyer without worrying that what you say will end up being used in court. But privileges can apply to all sorts of other information as well: what you tell your spouse, what you tell your spiritual advisor and even highway safety data that your state reports to the feds in exchange for funding. Existing court-created privileges protect not only attorney-client but also executive-branch communications. Federal courts should recognize a privilege for doctor-patient communications in gender and reproductive medicine. They could do so if one of the physicians subpoenaed recently goes to court. The protection they seek is simply an extension of widely recognized legal principles and expectations of privacy. Federal courts already have recognized a privilege for patient communications with psychotherapists, and many state courts also offer privilege protections for broader doctor-patient communications. Importantly, it is the job of federal district courts to craft evidence-related rules. After all, these are the judges who are closest to litigants and the mechanics of evidence protection. District courts don't need to wait around for the Supreme Court to act on this, because the Federal Rules of Evidence left privileges to common law development in the district courts. And under the well-established balancing test that lower federal courts should follow when they create new privileges, we think our proposed privilege is an easy case: It serves a public purpose and protects what should be recognized as a valued interest of 'transcendent importance' — privacy for our most intimate medical care. The case for recognizing the privilege in respect to the recent subpoenas is especially strong: The attorney general is seeking to chill physicians from providing advice that is protected by the 1st Amendment and care that is guaranteed by federal statutes. Such subpoenas are directly at odds with the rule of law. Today, it is trans kids; tomorrow, it will be people seeking an abortion or contraception. We should not have to wait for the federal government to go this far before our privacy gets the shield that it deserves. Aziz Huq and Rebecca Wexler are professors of law at the University of Chicago Law School and Columbia Law School, respectively.

USA Today
a day ago
- Politics
- USA Today
Pam Bondi's handling of the Epstein files makes it clear she's in over her head
Attorney General Pam Bondi has woefully mishandled the Jeffrey Epstein files controversy. It's clear she should not be America's chief law enforcement officer. The second Trump administration has been dealing with a scandal for days following its handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case and the file that has turned into a sticking point with the MAGA base. Conspiracy theorists are frustrated that they haven't gotten the information they claim exists, and ordinary Americans are likely frustrated that the Trump administration has spent its time appealing to conspiracy theorists in the first place. But nobody is feeling the heat from both sides more than Attorney General Pam Bondi. The depth of Bondi's mishandling of the Epstein files is not completely clear yet. What is clear is that she is not up to the job of attorney general and the weight of responsibility that comes with it. President Donald Trump may not fire her, but it's obvious she should never have been appointed to the position in the first place. Pam Bondi's Epstein blunder is concerning, no matter how you look at it There are two possible storylines for Bondi's role in the Epstein list scandal. The first, less likely option, is that upon reviewing the Epstein documents, Bondi decided that the information needed to be covered up. This would immediately disqualify her from remaining the attorney general. But that's not what I believe happened. The alternative option, which I think is what actually happened, is that Bondi made overzealous promises to the right-wing conspiracy crowd and could not deliver on her conspiratorial claims. Your Turn: President Trump, I supported you. Release the Epstein list – or resign. | Opinion Forum Conspiracy theorists often end up eating their own. Once the amount of evidence coming to light is less than satisfactory, they inevitably have to find who is covering up the rest of the information that would ultimately prove the conspiracy true. Bondi screwed up by making promises that she could not keep, such as stating in an interview that the Epstein list was on her desk. Overextending her position on the Epstein files only strengthened the idea of a conspiracy. The administration mistakenly assumed that MAGA would just provide cover fire for them without consequence, as has happened in the past. The difference is that their base is actually holding them accountable. They believed the administration when it promised to release everything on Epstein. This means they won't sit by and let Trump off the hook the way they might for other stuff. Opinion: Trump wants you to forget the Epstein files. But he started the conversation. Regardless of what the truth ultimately is, Bondi is unfit for the position of attorney general. Her behavior has made it clear that she should not be America's chief law enforcement officer. Bondi is testing Trump's loyalty to his Cabinet members Bondi's tenure will only last as long as she isn't creating additional problems for her boss. But while she's running out of space, it's not all that clear that Trump will fire her as of right now. If he doesn't fire her, it shows he cares more about escaping responsibility and accountability than he does the negative news coverage or a possible MAGA uprising. The Epstein story is particularly embarrassing for Trump, both politically and personally. Even if Trump had no involvement in Epstein's crimes, it is still bad for the president to be in this conversation and for pictures of the two men to be constantly in news coverage. Trump is now in a bind. He can't fire Bondi because it would require acknowledging that his administration screwed up in their handling of the Epstein files, but her ongoing presence in the administration continues to stain his administration. Trump doesn't have many good options, but the reality is that Bondi can't handle the job, regardless of what the truth ultimately reveals in the Epstein saga. Dace Potas is an opinion columnist for USA TODAY and a graduate of DePaul University with a degree in political science.


Fox News
2 days ago
- Politics
- Fox News
Jeffrey Epstein Saga Takes Dramatic Twist with Trump Ordering Twist with Trump Ordering Grand Jury Material Released
Howie Kurtz on Trump directing AG Bondi to work on unsealing Epstein files, doxxing and assaults on ICE agents surging and Trump ordering the Washington Commanders to change name back to Redskins. Follow Howie on Twitter: @HowardKurtz For more #MediaBuzz click here


The Hindu
4 days ago
- Politics
- The Hindu
Bonding for cover
MAGA, or Make America Great Again, believers are driven by faith. A core tenet of their faith is that there is a 'deep state' in America that controls power for the benefit of an elite, and it is not accountable to the people or the law. MAGA voters are the wind behind the sails of President Donald Trump. A part of MAGA has now turned on itself, suspecting that some members of the Trump administration have enlisted in the deep state. In the eye of this new MAGA storm is Pam Bondi — the U.S. Attorney-General, a long-time ally of Mr. Trump and until she ceased to be, a darling of his voter base. MAGA believers do not want to question their own faith in the 'supreme leader', and instead turned their ire on Ms. Bondi. Mr. Trump has thrown his weight behind Ms. Bondi, who stands between him and the fury of the faithful. He has also asked her to heed to their clamour and release more information related to Jeffrey Epstein, an ultra rich, influential sex offender who died in jail allegedly by suicide in 2019. Rumours that Epstein kept a 'client list' of his trafficking network have swirled in the MAGA universe for long, and Ms. Bondi herself seemed to vouch for it. 'It's sitting on my desk right now to review. That's been a directive by President Trump,' she had said in February 2025, during an interview to Fox News, when asked if the Justice Department would release the alleged list of clients. Revolt in the base But the Justice Department and the FBI that comes under it declared in early July that Epstein indeed died by suicide, and there was no client list and no further investigation into his activities was required. The MAGA base rose in revolt. That this came as unsigned memo into public domain itself points to the importance of the whole affair for the MAGA base. Not signing off the memo did not shield Ms. Bondi, however. Commentators that shape the MAGA world blamed her for what they saw as a new cover-up. Steve Bannon, Tucker Carlson, Laura Loomer, Megyn Kelly, and Glenn Beck, all influential voices in the Trump universe blamed Ms. Bondi for the mess. Many are calling for her resignation. She was one of the early converts into the MAGA camp and Mr. Trump found in her an extremely valuable ally in the key Republican State of Florida where was elected Attorney-General in 2011. She was a member of Mr. Trump's defence team in an impeachment proceeding in his first term as President. Just as the MAGA world was broiling in speculation that they had been sold out, a report in the Wall Street Journal alleged Mr. Trump had sent a note to Epstein on his 50th birthday, before his conviction in the sex case. Mr. Trump had a public association with Epstein but has denied any wrongdoing. He has also denied the latest WSJ story. Though both Democrats and a section of his MAGA supporters cry foul, it is the reaction of the latter that worries Mr. Trump more. His initial response was to disown his own supporters and call the entire Epstein saga a hoax. '….'new SCAM is what we will forever call the Jeffrey Epstein Hoax, and my PAST supporters have bought into this 'bullshit,' hook, line, and sinker…. They haven't learned their lesson, and probably never will, even after being conned by the Lunatic Left for 8 long years,' he said. But when the storm continued and threatened to scatter his base, he made another turn, directing Ms. Bondi to release more information related to the Epstein case. The Justice Department has pleaded a federal court in New York to unseal the records of a grand jury trial, including the testimony of Epstein. That will not happen easily, if at all, as the laws that regulate information related to jury trials take into account the privacy of crime victims and other factors. As of now, Mr. Trump and Ms. Bondi, who have bonded more to shield each another, hope the storm will blow over. The Epstein episode is, in a twisted way, the validation of the conspiracy theory that deep state is always at work. It threatens and consolidates the MAGA rationale at once, hence.


Daily Mail
4 days ago
- Business
- Daily Mail
More Mark Latham texts revealed, this time involving a well-known billionaire and his ex-partner
Former Labor leader Mark Latham joked with an ex-lover that tech billionaire Richard White owed her 'big money' and that she should seek compensation. Latham made the remarks to his former partner Nathalie Matthews in a series of text exchanges reported by The Australian on Friday. The NSW Upper House member also joked Ms Matthews should perform oral sex on the 70-year-old founder of Wisetech Global to 'celebrate', after four board members left the firm and he was appointed executive chairman in February. Latham sent Ms Matthews a news article about the latest development and joked she was owed 'big money' by Mr White and that she should 'get that compo DNA!!!!' Ms Matthews' past as an OnlyFans content creator was revealed by Daily Mail Australia on Friday, where she posted graphic images and videos of herself under the suggestive name Bondi C** Sl** from 2019 to 2023. Ms Matthews replied that there were 'not really grounds' to support such a claim. 'I could kill my professional career. Remember, I don't have a secure job,' she said. But Latham persisted, saying the company 'will pay big time'. The revelations come after Mr White was dragged into a messy row between the former partners, after Latham's lawyer Zali Burrows served a subpoena on both the Wisetech founder and Ms Matthews. The subpoena requested emails, text messages, and OnlyFans direct messages between Mr White and Ms Matthews, who connected on LinkedIn in 2023. Mr White is not accused of any wrongdoing and Daily Mail Australia is not suggesting Mr White and Ms Matthews engaged in a sexual relationship, only that Latham joked about her performing a sex act on the tech billionaire. Mr White resigned as chief executive of Wisetech last October but was appointed executive chairman in February, after four board members stepped down. On February 24, Mr Latham sent Ms Matthews a news article about the latest development at the billionaire's company. 'He will want you to suck his c*** to celebrate,' Mr Latham wrote. 'What an honour!' he added, along with an emoji of a shocked expression. He later suggested Mr White would soon be 'back as CEO', adding it would 'increase share price'. 'So buy 30k at 2pm today,' he urged Ms Matthews. Ms Matthews then jokingly asked whether this was 'insider trading' to which Latham replied: 'Insider f***-ing.' The former OnlyFans creator is seeking an apprehended violence order against Mr Latham, claiming he inflicted 'a sustained pattern' of psychological, financial and emotional abuse against her for almost three years. She alleged vile acts 'including defecating on me before sex and refusing to let me wash'. Ms Matthews has further alleged his behaviour involved 'pressuring me to engage in sexual acts with others, demanding I call him "master", telling me I was his property, and repeatedly telling me that my only value to him was for sex to demean and control me'. Latham noted the AVO case against him was being brought privately after NSW Police chose not to pursue the allegations. The MP has categorically denied he 'abuses women' and insisted all his dealings with Ms Matthews were entirely consensual. It is not suggested the claims of abusive behaviour are substantiated, only that the allegations have been made. Ms Matthews runs an e-commerce global logistics firm based in Dubai, Perth and Sydney. Ms Matthews now runs an e-commerce global logistics firm based in Dubai, Perth and Sydney. A spokesperson for Ms Matthews told Daily Mail Australia her client had 'no comment to make at this point in time.' 'Domestic violence is a serious issue in our society,' they said. 'Any individual in genuine fear should have the right to seek protection without vilification.' Mr Latham and Mr White were contacted by Daily Mail Australia.