TIME Chris Christie

Chris Christie Criticizes Supreme Court’s Chief Justice

Gov. Chris Christie announces his presidential campaign on June 30, 2015 at Livingston High School in Livingston, New Jersey.
Steve Sands—WireImage Gov. Chris Christie announces his presidential campaign on June 30, 2015 at Livingston High School in Livingston, New Jersey.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie says he is “incredibly disappointed” with Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts after his opinion last week on Affordable Care Act subsidies, suggesting the jurist acted inconsistently with his opinion the following day when he opposed legalizing same-sex marriages.

Meeting New Hampshire voters at his first town hall since declaring his presidential campaign early Tuesday, Christie was asked what type of justices he would nominate to the Supreme Court. He replied that he was partial to the legal reasoning of fellow New Jerseyan, Associate Justice Samuel Alito, one of the court’s most conservative members.

“Every opinion that I’ve seen Justice Alito put out has been consistent and reasoned, and if I became President of the United States, I’d be out there looking for Sam Alitos to put on the Court,” Christie said.

“Those are the kind of justices I’m looking for,” Christie said. “If you read Justice Alito’s decisions, what they are is an absolute tribute to what the role of the court should be in my view. Which is they are not there to make laws, they are not there to make social policy, they are there to interpret the laws passed by the Congress and signed by the president, and that’s it.”

Christie continued that he was upset with Roberts, who is a member of the conservative wing of the Court but has twice ruled to save central components of the controversial healthcare law.

“I’m incredibly disappointed in Chief Justice Roberts. In two days in a row, he had two opinions that you couldn’t square with each other,” Christie said. “On Thursday, he writes an opinion on Obamacare that basically says ‘I know the words don’t say this, but I think they mean it, so I’m going to vote to keep Obamacare.’ The next day, he votes against same-sex marriage by saying the Court has no role in second-guessing the people and their legislature. Well, man, you just did it yesterday.”

Roberts authored a 6-3 decision in King v. Burwell in which he argued that a typographical error should not override the legislature’s intent to make health insurance subsidies available to those on federal exchanges. Roberts called the mistake one of “more than a few examples of inartful drafting,” but said, “A fair reading of legislation demands a fair understanding of the legislative plan.”

“Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them,” he continued. “If at all possible, we must interpret the Act in a way that is consistent with the former, and avoids the latter.”

The following day, Robert’s decried the majority’s ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges in favor of nation-wide same-sex-marriage, arguing the Court was usurping the role of the legislature.

“Understand well what this dissent is about: It is not about whether, in my judgment, the institution of marriage should be changed to include same-sex couples,” he wrote. “It is instead about whether, in our democratic republic, that decision should rest with the people acting through representatives, or with five lawyers who happen to hold commissions authorizing them to resolve legal disputes according to law. The Constitution leaves no doubt about the answer.”

Alito voted with the minority in both cases.

TIME Cuba

U.S., Cuba to Announce Plan to Open Embassies

File photo of U.S. President Obama greeting Cuban President Castro during the Summit of the Americas in Panama City,
Jonathan Ernst—Reuters President Barack Obama shakes hands with Cuba's President Raul Castro as they hold a bilateral meeting during the Summit of the Americas in Panama City, Panama on April 11, 2015.

Another major milestone in the U.S.-Cuban thaw

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama will announce Wednesday that the U.S. and Cuba have finalized an agreement to reopen embassies in each other’s capitals, a major step in ending hostilities between the Cold War foes, a senior administration official said.

The U.S. and Cuba have been negotiating the reestablishment of embassies following the historic December announcement that they would move to restore ties after a half-century of animosity.

For Obama, ending the U.S. freeze with Cuba is central to his foreign policy legacy as he nears the end of his presidency. Obama has long touted the value of direct engagement with global foes and has argued that the U.S. embargo on the communist island just 90 miles south of Florida was ineffective.

Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry are expected to speak Wednesday morning about the embassy openings. The official insisted on anonymity because the official was not authorized to speak publicly about the matter ahead of the president.

Since the late 1970s, the United States and Cuba have operated diplomatic missions called interests sections in each other’s capitals. The missions are technically under the protection of Switzerland, and do not enjoy the same status as full embassies.

While the opening of embassies marks a major milestone in the thaw between the U.S. and Cuba, significant issues remain as the countries look to normalize relations. Among them: talks on human rights; demands for compensation for confiscated American properties in Havana and damages to Cuba from the embargo; and possible cooperation on law enforcement, including the touchy topic of U.S. fugitives sheltering in Havana.

Obama also wants Congress to repeal the economic embargo on Cuba, though he faces resistance from Republicans and some Democrats. Those opposed to normalizing relations with Cuba say Obama is prematurely rewarding a regime that engages in serious human rights abuses.

Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla., said in a statement that opening a U.S. embassy in Cuba “will do nothing to help the Cuban people and is just another trivial attempt for President Obama to go legacy shopping.”

Sen. Ben Cardin of Maryland, the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said the opening of embassies was part of the administration’s “common sense approach to Cuba.” However, he called for Cuba to recognize that it is out of step with the international community on human rights.

“Arrests and detentions of dissidents must cease and genuine political pluralism is long overdue,” Cardin said in a statement.

Obama and Cuban President Raul Castro met in April during a regional summit, marking the first time U.S. and Cuban leaders have met in person since 1958.

TIME jeb bush

Tax Returns Show Jeb Bush Did Well After Being Governor

Republican presidential candidate and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush answers questions from employees of Nephron Pharmaceutical Company June 29, 2015 in West Columbia, South Carolina.
Sean Rayford—Getty Images Republican presidential candidate and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush answers questions from employees of Nephron Pharmaceutical Company June 29, 2015 in West Columbia, South Carolina.

The 2016 White House hopeful made hefty paychecks—and has tax bills to match.

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush is trying to make history. No, not as the third member of the Bush clan to win the Presidency. He is going for something easier: releasing his taxes, and more of them than any other White House hopeful ever.

The 2016 contender for the Republican Party’s White House nomination on Tuesday released 33 years of his tax returns, a move his campaign touted as a demonstration of his transparency with voters. It follows a trove of emails he released from his time as Florida’s Governor, between 1999 and 2007.

“This release will show voters how I earned a living over the past three decades and how much of that living I had to give back to Uncle Sam. Spoiler alert: a lot,” Bush wrote. He added: “In my case, I paid the government more than one in three dollars that I earned in my career. Astounding.”

Yet the motive behind the release was not as simple as promising a first-hand reasoning why he wants to lower taxes, or as pure as letting Americans look under the hood at his family’s income. Throughout the commentary that accompanied the release, he continued to criticize the Democrats’ front-runner for the nomination, Hillary Clinton. She and former President Bill Clinton, too, have made millions as members of another well-connected family dynasty. “I have paid a higher tax rate than the Clintons even though I earned less income,” Bush wrote in a blog post about his tax returns.

A complete picture of Bush’s 2014 income was not included in those documents, however. He requested an extension on his federal 2014 tax returns, which are due by October 15, 2015. He also received a 45-day extension on the required personal financial disclosure required of presidential candidates.

Hillary Clinton released eight years of returns in 2008, but has yet to release her latest financial figures beyond the mandated filing of her assets with the Office of Government Ethics, but her campaign says she will release both in due time.

Bush’s 33-year release is a new record in American politics, topping the one set in 1996 by then-Sen. Bob Dole, who released 30 years of returns. Then-Gov. George Romney of Michigan released 12 years’ worth in 1968. More common has been to release just a few years. In 2012, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney only released two years of returns, totaling hundreds of documents detailing complicated financial positions lingering from his time as a private equity executive. Sen. John McCain also released two years of returns in 2008. Romney and McCain each had other disclosures available through forms they had to complete as state- and federal-level officeholder.

Since leaving office in 2007, Bush has earned about $23.6 million from speaking fees, board memberships, and a range of consulting and business ventures. His net worth is somewhere between $19 million and $22 million. Both sums are substantially lower than what the Clintons have earned, but not so low as to distract from the fact that they’re both very well off. Most people seeking the White House are, after all.

Bush took care to emphasize that his average tax rate, 36 percent, was greater than Bill and Hillary Clinton’s 30 percent in 2014. (By comparison, the Congressional Budget Office says the average American pays 17.6 percent of income in federal taxes.) Yet there were four years, 1985-88, when he had a tax rate of zero because he took such a loss on investments. In two years, he had no tax liability. In three years, he had net negative income. “Over those years my income fluctuated based on our successes, failures and the bumpy Miami real estate market,” Bush wrote.

Bush donated $739,511 to charity from 2007-13, for a charitable contribution rate of 3.1 percent. But Bush claims to have helped raise tens of millions more as a board member of several charitable organizations, including the Barbara Bush Foundation Celebration of Reading foundation.`

According to Bush spokesman Tim Miller, Bush earned $2 million annually from Barclays Capital, where he served as an adviser from 2009-2014, and $1.3 annually million from Lehman Brothers for his work there in 2007-08.

During the window the documents cover, Bush earned roughly $38 million net income. He also paid almost $13 million in taxes—more than 250 times what the average American worker earns this year.

TIME Rand Paul

Rand Paul Becomes First Major-Party Candidate to Court Pot Donors

Republican presidential candidate U.S. Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) speaks during a campaign stop at an Embassy Suites hotel on June 29, 2015 in Las Vegas, Nevada.
Ethan Miller—Getty Images Republican presidential candidate U.S. Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) speaks during a campaign stop at an Embassy Suites hotel on June 29, 2015 in Las Vegas, Nevada.

DENVER (AP) — Republican presidential candidate Rand Paul courted donors from the new marijuana industry Tuesday, making the Kentucky senator the first major-party presidential candidate to publicly seek support from the legal weed business.

Paul’s fundraiser at the Cannabis Business Summit — tickets started at $2,700, the maximum donation allowed for the primary contest — came as the marijuana industry approached its first presidential campaign as a legal enterprise.

The candidate entered the closed-door fundraiser through a private hallway, instead of visiting the convention floor or meeting pot business owners who weren’t donating to him.

But many of the 40 or so people who attended the fundraiser called his appearance at the summit a milestone. The campaign did not release fundraising totals.

“This is a historical moment, that our industry is now working together with a presidential candidate,” said Tripp Keber, owner of Denver-based Dixie Elixirs, which makes cannabis-infused sodas and sweets.

Another fundraiser attendee, Mitzi Vaughn of Seattle, managing attorney for a law firm that caters to pot businesses, said Paul criticized drug war-era policies but didn’t specifically say what would change if he were elected.

“Most of us, despite what others think, are in this to end the drug war,” Vaughn said.

Though legal weed business owners have been active political donors for years, presidential candidates have so far shied away from holding fundraisers made up entirely of marijuana-related entrepreneurs.

Former Republican New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson held a fundraiser with the Drug Policy Alliance in 2012 before leaving the GOP and running as a third-party candidate. But that event came before recreational pot was legal in any state.

“It really speaks to how important this issue is and how far it’s come,” said Mason Tvert, a spokesman for the Marijuana Policy Project, a major sponsor of legalization campaigns in Colorado, Washington and other states.

“We’re seeing officials at the local, state and now federal level recognize this is now a legitimate industry, just like any other legal industry in many facets,” Tvert said.

Paul has embraced state marijuana experiments, while other candidates have either taken a wait-and-see approach or expressly vowed to challenge state legalization efforts.

Paul has joined Democrats in the Senate to sponsor a bill to end the federal prohibition on the use of medical marijuana. He also backs an overhaul of federal drug-sentencing guidelines, along with a measure to allow marijuana businesses to access banking services.

Asked last year whether marijuana should be legal, Paul said, “I haven’t really taken a stand on that, but I’m against the federal government telling (states) they can’t.”

TIME Girl Scouts

Here’s Why Girl Scouts Are Camping Outside the White House

Michelle Obama Girl Scouts White House
Evan Vucci—AP First lady Michelle Obama participates in a knot tying station during a Lets Move! event with Girl Scouts on the South Lawn of the White House in Washington, on June 30, 2015.

It's part of the First Lady's anti-childhood obesity campaign

The White House South Lawn might not be the epitome of American wilderness, but it’s where the First Lady and several dozen Girl Scouts are camping out on Tuesday.

Michelle Obama, the honorary national president of Girl Scouts of the USA, has invited 45 Girl Scouts to pitch tents in the presidential backyard to raise awareness on the benefits of outdoor activity. The campout is part of the First Lady’s Let’s Move! Outside campaign, a branch of the larger anti-childhood obesity campaign she launched in 2010.

The lucky Girl Scouts, who hail from Maryland, Oklahoma, Virginia, West Virginia and D.C., will participate in a range of outdoor activities to encourage their fellow youth to take advantage of America’s outdoors. In the evening, they’ll lay out on the South Lawn for a stargazing session led by NASA astronaut Cady Coleman.

It’s been a high-profile week for the Girl Scouts, who also made news on Monday when a regional chapter’s CEO declined a $100,000 gift after the donor requested the funds not to be used to support transgender Girl Scouts.

TIME 2016 Election

Why 2016 Campaign Spending Is Heating Up Now

Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal announces his candidacy for the 2016 Presidential nomination during a rally a he Pontchartrain Center on June 24, 2015 in Kenner, Louisiana.
Sean Gardner—Getty Images Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal announces his candidacy for the 2016 Presidential nomination during a rally a he Pontchartrain Center on June 24, 2015 in Kenner, Louisiana.

As candidates struggle to build national name recognition, their independent friends step in.

If you were running for president at this point in previous presidential races, your instinct was to stockpile cash. With many voters still tuned out, spending money trying to reach them this early in the cycle was wasteful, while building a large campaign war chest was a good way to scare the competition and signal to voters, the press and potential donors that you were a viable candidate. Then, when the race started in earnest in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, you’d burn through a lot of that money on TV ads, automated phone calls and mailers in an attempt to win the nomination quickly.

That’s all changed. With outside groups now able to raise and spend unlimited sums of money, crunch time is coming now, midway through the summer the year before the election. And with an ever-larger cast of characters running for the Republican nomination, candidates are having to work harder than ever to punch through the noise and make the cut for the all-important first debate.

Far from a sleepy time to build up a war chest, the coming month is do-or-die time, especially for candidates near the bottom of the crowded field of GOP hopefuls. That is why so many of the independent groups backing them are willing to spend heavily now, even if it depletes their cash on hand.

For instance, the super PAC supporting Bobby Jindal reported $461,000 going out the door on Tuesday alone to bolster his chances. The Louisiana Governor just last week joined the crowded field and has little name recognition outside of his home state. If he doesn’t improve soon, he could be shut out of the first debate, which is limited to the top 10 contenders based on an average of recent polls.

A TIME review of documents filed between June 1 and midday June 30 shows candidate-specific super PACs shelled out $1.3 million on digital ads, automated phone calls, mail pieces and telephone lines. Spending against Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton from just four outside groups totaled almost three-quarters of $1 million in June alone—a potential sign how much tea party-style Republicans despise her and establishment-minded ones fear her.

While June’s tally pales in comparison to the billions the 2016 White House race will eventually cost, it is unusual to see the outside groups spending so heavily, so soon. After all, the first chance to officially weigh-in on the GOP nominee is the Iowa caucuses scheduled for Feb. 1, 2016.

Yet these super PACs aren’t necessarily targeting the conservative activists in Iowa or New Hampshire. While a good chunk of the change spent in the last month has been there, just as much is going to boost the candidates’ profiles nationally. The super PACs give anyone with a patron with deep pockets a shot, yielding a larger field than during the pre-super PAC era. And that means the television networks hosting the coming debates needed to cull the list of participants.

Enter the super PACs, trying to remedy a problem of their own creation. Their goal is to raise familiarity with each’s preferred contender enough so that he or she qualifies for the first debate. Under the current rules, only the top 10 contenders in national polls—in a crowded field now numbering 14 and expected to climb—will make the stage on Aug. 6 in Cleveland.

It’s why boosters for Jindal, who entered the race last week, are sending cash to his main advertising firms. At the same time, supporters of Rick Perry told the FEC they accounted for $578,000 in June spending; they are trying to make sure the former Texas Governor qualifies for the debates during his second White House bid. Boosters for Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas spent $13,126 during the last four weeks, too.

For others, it’s about maintaining a lead. Allies of Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky reported spending $240,000 last month on 40 staffers in Iowa, $17,500 for voter contact information and phone calls, and another $3,000 on fliers to leave at potential supporters front doors.

And these totals only account for spending by super PACs, the independent groups that can raise and spend unlimited sums of cash as long as they don’t coordinate strategy with the official campaigns. A network of nonprofit, politically-minded groups are also engaged at this point. For instance, a nonprofit backing Republican Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida is running more than $1 million in ads promoting his opposition to the Obama Administration’s emerging deal with Iran on its nuclear program. Because the Conservative Solutions Project doesn’t specifically advocate for Rubio’s election, that group does not face an FEC reporting requirement.

While the race is most dynamic among the Republicans, Democrats are spending cash, too. A group backing former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley reported spending almost $56,000 on Internet ads criticizing a rival for the Democratic nomination, Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, and promoting his own record.

Yet the biggest target of all the outside groups is, not surprisingly, Clinton. The former Secretary of State faced roughly $753,000 in spending against her from just four outside groups. The Tea Party Majority Fund reported $400,000 in automated phone calls from Hawaii to Maine to criticize her. The Stop Hillary PAC spent $145,000 to find potential supporters and to send them mail and online ads. The Freedom Defense Fund spent more than $130,000 in June on a national direct-mail campaign. And the Republican National Committee reported $78,000 in spending on an advertising campaign in voters’ mailboxes, as well as on Yahoo, Facebook and Twitter.

In all, June was at least a $3 million investment for the outside groups. And that number does not account for a single dime that the candidates—the folks whose names are actually on the ballot—spent.

TIME

Mexico Pulls Out of Donald Trump’s Miss Universe Pageant

Trump's beauty pageants are in deep trouble

Donald Trump called Mexican immigrants “rapists” and “drug dealers.” Now, the country’s pageant organizers have decided they won’t send contestants to Trump’s Miss Universe pageant.

Two weeks after the real estate mogul angered many Mexicans with inflammatory remarks about immigrants to the United States, Mexican media conglomerate Televisa, which sends contestants to the pageant for the country, said in a statement that it would not be taking part in Miss Universe.

But that’s not the only Trump beauty contest losing support from its participants. The hosts of the Miss USA pageant, Thomas Roberts and Cheryl Burke, quit on Tuesday. Burke, a former contestant on Dancing with the Stars, singled out Trump’s comments in a Facebook post:

The latest double blow to Trump’s beauty pageant franchise comes a day after NBC announced it was not going to air Miss USA “due to the recent derogatory statements by Donald Trump regarding immigrants.” Spanish language network Univision announced earlier it too would not air the pageant, for the same reasons.

Trump is now suing Univision for $500 million under the First Amendment for, the suit said, a “politically motivated attempt to suppress Mr. Trump’s freedom of speech … as he begins to campaign for the nation’s presidency.”

Trump said at his campaign launch for the Republican presidential nomination that immigrants coming across the Mexican border were “rapists” and insinuated immigrants were drug dealers; he has proposed building a wall along the U.S.-Mexican border that he would make the Mexican government pay for.

And the outspoken entrepreneur does not seem eager to back down. On Tuesday, he took to his Twitter account to reiterate his claims about the country south of the border:

The pageant is set to continue in Baton Rouge, Louisiana on July 12.

TIME Economy

What to Know About Obama’s Overtime Pay Announcement

The President announced that he's expanding overtime pay for a large swath of Americans

Wait, when did this happen?

In an op-ed titled “A Hard Day’s Work Deserves a Fair Day’s Pay,” which appeared on Huffington Post on Monday night, the President outlined the as-yet-unnamed overtime pay rule.

Set to take effect in 2016, the rule—which follows a Presidential directive in March to the Department of Labor to revise standards—would more than double the salary range for workers who are required to receive overtime pay, regardless of whether they are paid hourly or in salary.

Does this mean I’ll get more overtime?

Quite possibly: Obama’s op-ed notes that “nearly 5 million workers” would be affected by this change in 2016.

Current overtime-eligible salaries top off at $23,660, but the new rule would allow workers earning up to $50,440 to demand time-and-a-half for each hour of work beyond 40 hours.

The new salary cap reflects the average, middle-class American household’s income, which has stagnated at just under $52,000 for the past 15 years.

“That’s good for workers who want fair pay, and it’s good for business owners who are already paying their employees what they deserve—since those who are doing right by their employees are undercut by competitors who aren’t,” Obama wrote.

But why now?

The push for overtime pay moved up the President’s priority list after a scathing 2013 report by economists Jared Bernstein and Ross Eisenbray, which argued that the economy would actually be better off if employers built in overtime pay that was indexed to real salary levels instead of those from 1975, as under the current rule.

In other words, the President is seeking to make overtime pay more responsive to how we live in 2015 as opposed to how we lived in 40 years ago.

Who benefits from this proposal the most?

In a post-recession economy that has seen men struggle to recover their pre-recession earnings and employment levels, the rule promises to be a boost to men whose income is above the current overtime threshold.

Single women, however, stand to gain the most: With average income hovering around $35,154, unmarried women previously experienced the double whammy of earning less income than their single male counterparts (single men earned an average of $50,625 in 2013), and being unable to earn overtime pay.

Is anyone opposed to it?

Yes—much of the Republican Party. Some Republicans in Congress have already raised concerns about the rule, saying companies will have a reduced incentive to hire people now that they will have to pay them more.

The National Retail Federation has made a similar argument, previously citing an Oxford Economics study that argues employers would have less of a reason to hire workers, thereby nullifying any advantages to take-home pay for employees.

The rule would “add to employers’ costs, undermine customer service, hinder productivity, generate more litigation opportunities for trial lawyers and ultimately harm job creation,” the NRF said.

Both supporters (like the AFL-CIO) and opponents expect the rule, which would likely be enacted by the end of next year, to go to court and face Congressional challenge.

TIME 2016 Election

Jon Bon Jovi Happy for Chris Christie to Use Songs in Campaign Launch

"My friendships are apolitical," the Democrat rocker says.

Though Governor Chris Christie has been a lifelong Bruce Springsteen fan, the presidential hopeful used the music of another New Jersey native Tuesday when he announced his bid for the Republican ticket: Jon Bon Jovi.

Christie likely opted not use a Springsteen song fearing that the lifelong Democrat and critic of the Bridgegate scandal might disavow him as Neil Young did to Donald Trump earlier in June. But Bon Jovi is also an avowed Democrat; his wife even hosted a fundraiser for Hillary Clinton on Monday night, during which the rocker sang his biggest hit, “Livin’ on a Prayer.”

However, despite their political differences, Bon Jovi gave Christie his blessing to use songs like “We Weren’t Born to Follow” for his campaign, Mother Jones reports. The two met while Bon Jovi was helping with Hurricane Sandy relief. “My friendships are apolitical. And, yes, I absolutely gave him permission to use my songs,” he said.

[Mother Jones]

TIME public health

California Governor Jerry Brown Signs Mandatory Vaccine Law

Law abolishes exemptions for personal beliefs

California Governor Jerry Brown signed a mandatory school vaccination bill into law Tuesday, abolishing the “personal belief” exemption that many parents use as a loophole to avoid vaccinating their children.

Now, under California law, which is among the strictest in the country, children would not be able to enroll in public school unless they have been vaccinated against diseases like measles and whooping cough. The law includes an exemption for children who have a medical reason to remain unvaccinated (like an immune system disorder) and can prove it with a doctor’s note. Parents who decline to vaccinate their children for personal or religious reasons will have to home-school them or send them to a public independent study program off school grounds.

Students who are unvaccinated because of “personal belief” who are already in public elementary school can stay until they’re in 7th grade, and then the parents will either have to vaccinate them or home-school them. Daycare students can stay until kindergarten, when they have to be either vaccinated or home-schooled. In the fall of 2014, almost 3% of California kindergartners were unvaccinated because of personal belief. Preschools in the most affluent areas are also the least likely to vaccinate, according to the Los Angeles Times.

The bill was proposed after a measles outbreak at Disneyland infected more 150 people, and many needed to be hospitalized. Supporters of the law argue that it is based on medical consensus that vaccinations improve public health. Opponents—who have been picketing outside the California legislature—argue that it’s an attack on personal freedom.

Your browser is out of date. Please update your browser at http://update.microsoft.com