The Brief

NEW YORK — A federal judge has ordered the Trump administration to restore nearly $12 million in funding to the American Academy of Pediatrics, including money for rural health care and the early identification of disabilities in young children.

U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell in Washington, D.C., awarded the preliminary injunction late Sunday, siding with AAP in saying evidence showed the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services likely had a "retaliatory motive" when it terminated grants to the pediatric group in December.

"This is not a case about whether AAP or HHS is right or even has the better position on vaccinations and gender-affirming care for children, or any other public health policy," Howell wrote in her decision. "This is a case about whether the federal government has exercised power in a manner designed to chill public health policy debate by retaliating against a leading and generally trusted pediatrician member professional organization focused on improving the health of children."

The seven grants terminated in December supported numerous public health programs, including efforts to prevent sudden unexpected infant death, strengthen pediatric care in rural communities and support teens facing substance use and mental health challenges.

AAP alleged the cuts were made in retaliation for the group speaking out against the Trump administration's positions and actions. HHS said in letters to AAP that the grants were cut because they no longer aligned with the department's priorities. The department has denied AAP's allegations of retaliation.

AAP has been vocal about its support for pediatric vaccines and has publicly opposed HHS positions. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. — who helped lead the anti-vaccine movement for years — has made sweeping changes to childhood vaccine recommendations. Last year, the pediatrics group released its own recommendations on COVID-19 vaccines, which substantially diverged from the government's guidance.

The group also supports access to gender-affirming care and has publicly criticized HHS positions on the topic, saying it opposes what it calls the government's infringements on the doctor-patient relationship.

Explaining her decision, Howell said that AAP had shown it would likely suffer irreparable harm from the cuts. She also said the group had shown the public interest was in its favor in allowing the programs to continue as the lawsuit plays out.

Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, which is representing AAP in the lawsuit, said the ruling shows that "no administration gets to silence doctors, undermine public health, or put kids at risk, and we will not stop fighting until this unlawful retaliation is fully ended."

A spokesperson for HHS and attorneys representing the department declined comment.
Copyright 2026 NPR

Metro will run buses to and from SoFi Stadium for World Cup matches this summer, the agency announced Wednesday.

Fans can catch a direct bus to and from the games from nine locations around Los Angeles for $1.75 —the fare for a regular bus ride. Those are:

• Hawthorne/Lennox Station
• Crenshaw Station
• LAX/Metro Transit Center 
• El Camino College in the city of Torrance 
• Harbor Gateway Transit Center in the city of Gardena
• Downtown Long Beach 
• Union Station
• North Hollywood Station
• Pierce College Station

Metro releases its map for enhanced service during the 2026 World Cup in Los Angeles.

(

Courtesy of Metro

)

The bus service will start four hours before each game, and end 90 minutes after matches end. Metro is working with regional transit providers in the region and charter bus companies to provide the service.

The locations are all accessible via Metro public transit. Fans that drive to the bus stations can pay Metro to park at most of nine locations, excluding LAX/Metro Transit Center. Parking reservations range from around $60 to $120 — and can be made now.

The U.S. Men's National Team will play its first game at SoFi Stadium in Inglewood on June 12, with a 6 p.m. kickoff. L.A.'s last match will be a quarterfinal on July 10.

In between, the city will host six more games and be the site of World Cup celebrations and viewings.

Advocates for transgender youth vowed to keep fighting Wednesday after the U.S. Supreme Court blocked — at least temporarily — a California policy protecting the privacy of transgender students in K-12 schools.

The court ruled in favor of a group of parents near San Diego who argued that the state’s policy violates their right to religious freedom and due process. The policy barred school districts from requiring teachers to “out” transgender students to their parents, unless the students gave permission.

“The court’s ruling is shocking and alarming,” said Shannon Minter, legal director of the National Center for LGBTQ Rights, which is based in Sacramento. “It’s part of a larger effort by this court and the administration to eliminate any protection for transgender people.”

The case was originally filed in 2023 by the Thomas More Society, a public interest law firm that focuses on religious issues. It stems from a state policy related to students’ privacy rights.

A federal district court judge initially ruled in favor of the parents with children in the Escondido Union School District in north San Diego County, and then the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals paused the ruling while the state prepared an appeal. The parents asked the Supreme Court to lift the pause, which it did on Tuesday. The appeal is still pending before the Ninth Circuit.

‘A watershed moment’

Attorneys for the Thomas More Society called it the greatest victory for parental rights in a generation.

“This is a watershed moment for parental rights in America,” said Paul Jonna, special counsel at the Thomas More Society. “The Supreme Court has told California and every state in the nation in no uncertain terms: you cannot secretly transition a child behind a parent’s back.”

The ruling undermines California’s Safety Act, which bars school districts from adopting “forced outing” policies and was hailed as a major victory for transgender rights when Newsom signed it in 2024.

Sonja Shaw, president of the Chino Valley Unified school board, described the Supreme Court’s ruling as “a massive victory.” Chino Valley was among a handful of districts in 2023 that enacted policies requiring teachers to divulge to parents if a student changes their gender identity.

“The Supreme Court has affirmed what we’ve always known to be true: policies deceiving parents are wrong, and they can not be allowed to stand,” said Shaw, a candidate for state superintendent of public instruction. “This win came from brave teachers and parents who refused to stay silent.”

California Attorney General Rob Bonta acknowledged the ruling was a setback.

“We are disappointed with the Supreme Court’s decision,” Jordan Blue, a spokesperson for Bonta, said. “We remain committed to ensuring a safe, welcoming school environment for all students while respecting the crucial role parents play in students’ lives.”

California has been on the forefront of transgender rights, especially for young people. The state has existing laws requiring teachers to use students’ preferred pronouns; schools are required to offer gender-neutral bathrooms; and sports teams and clubs must be open to all students. Those policies remain in place.

Still, this week’s ruling was significant, said Jorge Reyes Salinas, spokesperson for Equality California, the state’s largest LGBTQ advocacy organization.

“Everyone is heartbroken,” Reyes Salinas said. “Although it’s not surprising. It’s just a continuation of the vile attacks we’ve seen on transgender youth. It’s even more important now that California strengthens its laws protecting trans people.”

Minter, at the National Center for LGBTQ Rights, said that the ruling may have a narrow focus, but it sends a chilling message to transgender young people, who already face higher rates of anxiety and depression than their peers.

Minter said the transgender community will continue fighting for their rights.

“Most people in this country do not support what’s happening to transgender people,” Minter said. “We will fight every inch of the way until all people are treated with the basic decency they deserve.”

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.

A Carson couple was on suspicion of elder abuse and fraud Wednesday after raiding four unlicensed care homes they say are operated by the pair, according to authorities.

Gary Hogg, 80, and Alicia Hogg, 72, are suspected of operating a network of care homes without proper licenses or training, where residents faced physical and financial abuse, according to the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department.

The department and other agencies served search warrants at four locations in the city that they said were believed to be unlicensed care homes. Deputies rescued at least three people believed to have been neglected.

Acting on a tip received last month, investigators with the Sheriff’s Department conducted the operation with Los Angeles County Fire Department, California Department of Justice, California Department of Social Services, Los Angeles County Adult and Protective Services and the city of Carson.

“I want to personally thank all the personnel and partner agencies who worked diligently and quickly to locate the elderly patients,” Sheriff's Capt. Alise Norman said in a statement. “Their professionalism and teamwork ensured each individual was safely treated, cared for, and transported to more appropriate locations where they could receive the attention they needed."

Some were transferred to local hospitals and others are being moved into licensed care facilities.

Last week, authorities served a search warrant at an alleged unlicensed care home on the 200 block of W. 234th Street in Carson. During that search, officials rescued seven other residents who they say were malnourished and neglected, according to the Sheriff’s Department.

Some were transferred to local hospitals and others are being moved into licensed care facilities.

It’s unclear how many unlicensed care homes the pair are suspected of operating or how many people, if any, still reside in those homes.