travel ban article

The Latest on U.S. Travel Restrictions

By Lauren Hard Oct. 19, 2021

• Share full article

What to Know: U.S. Travel Restrictions

Beginning today, international visitors who are fully vaccinated against the coronavirus can enter the United States by air or across the land borders with Canada and Mexico.

Here’s the latest →

The new policy ends an 18-month ban on nonessential travel from 33 countries, including China, Brazil and European Union members. The ban had affected tourists and those hoping to visit family and friends in the U.S.

The rules reorient the U.S. approach to vetting its visitors during the pandemic.

Instead of basing entry decisions on travelers’ countries of origin, the U.S. is focusing on vaccination status.

International visitors flying into the U.S. now need to show proof of vaccination before boarding and a negative coronavirus test taken within three days of their flight.

The three vaccines available in the U.S. — Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson — are accepted, as are vaccines cleared for emergency use by the W.H.O., including AstraZeneca and Covaxin.

Unvaccinated foreign visitors cannot enter the country, with limited exemptions.

Unvaccinated Americans returning home need to test negative for the coronavirus within one day of their flight and show proof they have purchased another test to take after arriving.

The hope is with these longstanding bans being lifted, the U.S. tourism industry will start to recover. The halt on travel caused a loss of nearly $300 billion in visitor spending, according to the U.S. Travel Association.

Keep up with the latest travel news, trends and feature stories.

Advertisement

U.S. imposes travel ban from eight African countries over Omicron variant

• Medium Text

PUSH ON WTO

Sign up here.

Reporting by David Shepardson and Nandita Bose; Additional reporting by Dan Whitcomb and Maria Ponnezhath in Bengaluru; Editing by Leslie Adler, Heather Timmons and Sandra Maler

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. New Tab , opens new tab

World Chevron

Ben & Jerry's board says pro-Palestinian campus protests are 'essential' to democracy

The board of Ben & Jerry's ice cream, a brand owned by Unilever , said that the pro-Palestinian protests sweeping U.S. college campuses and graduation ceremonies are "essential" to democracy.

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

The travel ban, the law, and what’s “right”

Subscribe to the center for middle east policy newsletter, shadi hamid shadi hamid senior fellow - foreign policy , center for middle east policy @shadihamid.

June 28, 2018

The Supreme Court’s ruling on the travel ban contributes to the legitimization and mainstreaming of anti-Muslim bigotry. But the court isn’t tasked to make moral judgments about the law writes Shadi Hamid. This piece originally appeared on The Atlantic .

In January 2017, when President Donald Trump’s so-called Muslim ban was first announced, I  was passionately against it . It was one of the most frightening  texts  I’ve read from U.S. government officials in my lifetime. The Supreme Court just upheld the third iteration of the travel ban in Trump v. Hawaii, and I find myself in the odd position of opposing the court’s ruling on personal and moral grounds, while also thinking it was a legally plausible interpretation.

Like most political developments of the Trump era, there is a tension between having the “right” position and having the “correct” position. A pure anti-Trump position would entail opposing the court’s ruling regardless of its substantive content. This feels morally right—and it may even be the morally right—but that doesn’t necessarily make it correct. The Supreme Court, unlike Congress, is not tasked to make moral judgments about the law, at least not explicitly.The first version of the travel ban, which, among other things, appears to have been intended to troll liberals, explicitly discriminated based on religion. The very fact of being Muslim was grounds for scrutiny. One clause, in particular,  effectively imposed  a religious test. Refugees facing religious persecution could be admitted but only if “the religion of the individual is a minority religion in the individual’s country of nationality.” The revised version, issued in September 2017, omits such language, and incorporates two non-Muslim countries, North Korea and Venezuela. Regarding Syrian refugees, this means that, in theory if not necessarily in practice, entry restrictions on Syrian refugees would apply equally to Muslims and Christians alike. Accordingly, Chief Justice John Roberts  wrote  that the president’s directive was “neutral on its face.”

Related Content

Shadi Hamid

June 18, 2016

January 31, 2017

William McCants

December 15, 2016

Of course, the president’s directive is probably not neutral in intent. Trump and many of his senior aides bear an avowed animus toward Muslims or Islam, or both. Trump himself said during the 2016 campaign that he thinks “ Islam hates us .” How much should intent matter? Constitutional law scholars—and of course the Supreme Court itself— are divided . In her dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor  cited  Trump’s rather long paper (or tweet) trail to argue that “taking all the relevant evidence together, a reasonable observer would conclude that the Proclamation was driven primarily by anti-Muslim animus.” But the extent to which certain motivations figure more than others is always difficult to divine. It’s also possible that someone’s intent changes over time, and it’s not necessarily the easiest task to discern what Trump’s “primary” versus “secondary” motivations might be on any specific matter.  What we do know is that the discriminatory nature of the text of the order itself is no longer self-evident, so what might have initially been an unequivocally discriminatory “Muslim ban” is now something else.

I am still deeply uncomfortable with the Supreme Court’s ruling. It contributes to the legitimization and mainstreaming of anti-Muslim bigotry. That’s certainly how it will be interpreted by millions of Americans. But that doesn’t mean the ruling itself, in narrow terms, rises to the level of one of the great moral questions of our time. The decision does not turn American Muslims like myself into “second-class citizens,” and to insist that it does will make it impossible for us to claim that we have actually become second-class citizens, if such a thing ever happens. To claim that Jim Crow or the Holocaust were similarly “legal” diminishes the moral seriousness of crimes that nearly all Americans, today, agree were unequivocally wrong. (No such consensus exists on Trump v. Hawaii and to assume that it will exist at some point in the future is to assume that morality will always necessarily be progressive and retroactive.) To use a less incendiary comparison, it is also difficult to argue that Trump v. Hawaii is comparable to the 1944  Korematsu v. U.S.  decision permitting the internment of Japanese Americans. Nation-states generally have wide latitude in determining which non-citizens can enter their borders, where Korematsu targeted U.S. citizens.

Related Books

Akbar Ahmed

November 18, 2011

Christopher H. Foreman

May 1, 2000

Arthur M. Okun

May 1, 1975

Voters should be able to debate which entry and immigration policies are most appropriate, effective, and, yes, moral as it relates to non-citizens outside of our borders. To insist that such questions should be decided outside the confines of normal democratic deliberation undermines democratic responsiveness and accountability. This is particularly a risk at a time when immigration, rightly or wrongly, has become a top concern of voters in most Western democracies. To think that such questions can be resolved by dismissing or bypassing the views of your fellow citizens is a “long term recipe for public disillusionment and alienation,”  writes  Tablet’s Yair Rosenberg. The courts may be great places to bend the arc of history toward justice, but they’re only great places for that when they agree with whatever we already think is just.

As The New York Times  notes , those who feel uncomfortable (or disgusted) with recent Supreme Court decisions must “look somewhere else. That place is the ballot box.” Moral judgments on constitutionally and legally muddy debates can be rendered, but they’re best rendered by persuading as many of our fellow citizens that they should stop voting for anti-Muslim presidents.

Foreign Policy

Center for Middle East Policy

The Brookings Institution, Washington DC

10:00 am - 11:30 am EDT

Nicol Turner Lee, John Villasenor, Mark Brennan

May 6, 2024

Richard Lempert

April 24, 2024

Japan blocks overcrowded selfie spot, bans tourists from traditional areas to cope with explosion of travellers

After fears that tourist numbers would never return to pre-pandemic levels, it may now be a case of too much of a good thing for Japan.

A combination of a weak yen, more affordable airfares, the relaxation of coronavirus restrictions and "revenge travel" has led to monthly visitors to Japan hitting a record high.

Over-tourism is now such a problem for one Japanese town it has erected a barrier to block snow-capped views of Mount Fuji, after locals complained about the bad behaviour of selfie-seeking visitors.

So, what measures have been implemented to curb over-tourism?

How is Japan handling over-tourism?

Over-tourism happens when so many visitors are attracted to an area that life becomes unpleasant for the locals, despite any economic or other ostensible benefits.

One of Japan's busiest tourist periods of the year ended on Monday.

Golden Week — which ran from April 27 to May 5 — coincided with multiple public holidays and near-perfect spring weather.

To help deal with all the international tourists in the country during one of Japan's busiest periods, authorities have tried a range of measures.

In Kamakura, a popular temple city, English-speaking guides have been helping to direct tourists to stop them obstructing busy train stations, according to Nikkei.

Kyoto's traditional neighbourhood, Gion, recently banned visitors from its small private alleys. 

Locals had complained of snap-happy tourists harassing the city's immaculately attired geisha, who had to remind them it was "not a theme park".

Authorities in Kyoto have also reportedly installed screens at the main train station showing live feeds of tourist areas so visitors can assess crowds and plan their trips better.

Many people visit the small, scenic Japanese town of Fujikawaguchiko in Yamanashi Prefecture, causing chaos on local streets while trying to photograph Mount Fuji.

Authorities said they had had enough of the excessive number of foreigners littering, ignoring traffic regulations and even climbing on roofs of office buildings in search of the perfect selfie spot.

Exasperated town officials eventually blocked the view of Mount Fuji with a 2.5-metre-high black barrier.

"It's regrettable we have to do this because of some tourists who can't respect rules," a town official said.

Hikers using the most popular route to climb Mount Fuji, where the climbing season begins in July, will be charged 2,000 yen ($19.50).

Numbers will be capped.

Where are Japan's visitors from?

The January earthquake in the western prefecture of Ishikawa had minimal impact on 2024 arrivals, according to the Japan National Tourism Organisation (JNTO).

Tourist numbers have quickly rebounded, and apart from Australia, Japan has had a large influx of visitors from South Korea, Taiwan and Hong Kong.

Street Kart, which offers rides for tourists in Tokyo, Okinawa and Osaka, said most were from Australia, the US, Canada and the UK — with decent numbers from Europe and Asia.

"The demand for our activity has risen significantly [this year] in conjunction with the increase of visitors to Japan," Street Kart spokesperson Mai Ishido told the ABC. 

However, tourism from China has stayed well below pre-pandemic levels.

The JNTO said visitors from China, which had made up nearly a third of all visitors and 40 per cent of tourist spending, were slowly returning.

The April numbers aren't out yet, but in March, visitors to Japan hit a record high of 3.08 million visitors, according to the JNTO.

The previous record of 2.99 million was set in July 2019 during a year that Japan welcomed a record 31.9 million visitors.

It's a stark contrast from the early days of the pandemic, when Tokyo banned spectators from the postponed Olympics in 2021 .

Tourists have been making the most of Japan's weak yen, which fell to a three-decade low against the US dollar last month. 

Even Australia's faltering currency still has buying power in Japan, with one dollar converting to almost 102 yen, up more than 10 per cent from a year ago.

A hearty dinner on Tokyo's famous Ramen Street will set you back around 1,080 yen ($10.55) while a bus ride in Kyoto costs 230 yen ($2.25) — both cheaper than Australia's capital cities.

What have other countries done?

Over-tourism has also affected other popular Asian destinations, like Bali and Thailand, with international travel returning to normal after the pandemic.

A new $15 tourism tax was introduced to Bail in February, after a series of incidents involving visitors desecrating holy sites and behaving badly.

In Thailand's Maya Bay, which was made famous by The Beach, starring Leonardo DiCaprio, a maximum of 375 visitors are allowed at one time.

Even though access had earlier been restricted and it was later closed for three years, an estimated 80 per cent of the coral reefs there died due to over-tourism.

While there are plenty of plans to restrict and control tourist numbers, not everyone in Japan is sick of all the foreign visitors.

Ms Ishido from Street Kart said there was no such thing as having too many tourists and that everyone was welcome.

"We hope to see many more happy smiling faces coming to and from our shops," spokeswoman Ms Ishido told the ABC.

• X (formerly Twitter)

Related Stories

Four years after covid shuttered borders, millions of international tourists are nowhere to be seen.

The surprise group of people driving a resurgence of the cruise industry

'Egregious and unacceptable': Qantas agrees to $120 million settlement for selling tickets on cancelled flights

Fed up with badly behaved tourists and obnoxious influencers, Bali has a new tax and a new list of rules

• Air Transport Industry
• Government and Politics
• Human Interest
• Lifestyle and Leisure
• Tourism and Leisure Industry
• Travel and Tourism (Lifestyle and Leisure)
• World Politics

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

Morning Edition

• Latest Show
• About The Program
• Contact The Program
• Corrections

Listen to the featured story from this episode.

Álvaro Enciso places crosses at sites where migrants are known to have died in the borderland, this cross represents the death of Nolberto Torres-Zayas just east of Arivaca, Arizona on Wednesday, March 27, 2024. Torres-Zayas died of hyperthermia in 2009, not far from a Humane Borders water cache that had been vandalized and drained. Ash Ponders for NPR hide caption

We, The Voters

Is it easy for migrants to enter the u.s. we went to the border to find out.

Morning Edition spoke to migrants hoping to enter the U.S. and the border agents tasked with keeping them out.

Middle East

Morning news brief.

by  Michel Martin ,  Steve Inskeep

Author Interviews

'washington post' columnist david ignatius releases 12th novel: 'phantom orbit'.

Ammer Qudummi was arrested at a UT Austin protest on April 26, but all charges have been dropped. Michael Minasi/KUT hide caption

Campus protests over the Gaza war

How these university of texas-austin students view gaza war protests on their campus.

by  Mansee Khurana

Why more than 1,000 sea lions are lounging at Pier 39 in San Francisco

Republican Sen. Bill Hagerty of Tennessee speaks about the Senate version of the Equal Representation Act during a January press conference in Washington, D.C. The bill is one of at least a dozen GOP proposals to exclude some or all non-U.S. citizens from a special census count that the 14th Amendment says must include the "whole number of persons in each state." Mariam Zuhaib/AP hide caption

Republicans in Congress are trying to reshape election maps by excluding noncitizens

by  Hansi Lo Wang

Miguel Divo shows his patient, Joel Rubinstein, a dry powder inhaler. It's an alternative to some puff inhalers that emit potent greenhouse gases, but is equally effective for many patients with asthma. Jesse Costa/WBUR hide caption

Shots - Health News

Could better asthma inhalers help patients, and the planet too.

by  Martha Bebinger

Internet connectivity — even in 2024 — is vulnerable at a number of levels

by  Jenna McLaughlin

by  Steve Inskeep ,  Ally Schweitzer ,  Lilly Quiroz

After some setbacks, Boeing prepares for Starliner's first crewed launch into space

by  Steve Inskeep ,  Brendan Bryrne

Week 4 of the Trump hush money case is about to get underway

by  Michel Martin ,  Ximena Bustillo

China's President Xi Jinping begins a 5-day tour in Europe

by  Steve Inskeep ,  Eleanor Beardsley

Woman denies being an 'outside agitator' in Columbia University protests

Madonna just gave the biggest live performance of her career, lou reed issued one of the most puzzling albums in rock history in 1975.

by  Phil Harrell

GOP effort started by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Green will try to oust Speaker Johnson

Cease-fire negotiations between israel and hamas appear to have broken down.

by  Steve Inskeep ,  Lauren Frayer

Women no longer have to make the first move on Bumble, the dating app that was launched in 2014 with the goal of putting more power in the hands of women. Nikos Pekiaridis/Getty Images hide caption

Women no longer have to make the first move on Bumble. Will it make the app better?

by  Claire Murashima

Searching for a song you heard between stories? We've retired music buttons on these pages. Learn more here.

• International edition
• Australia edition
• Europe edition

Gaza war surgeon feels ‘criminalised’ after being denied entry to France

Prof Ghassan Abu-Sitta says Schengen-wide ban imposed by Germany appears to be attempt to silence witness testimony

A London surgeon who provided testimony on Israel’s war in Gaza after operating during the conflict has said he feels criminalised after being denied entry to France over the weekend.

Prof Ghassan Abu-Sitta , a plastic and reconstructive surgeon was due to speak about the war to the French parliament’s upper house on Saturday. However, after arriving at Charles de Gaulle airport north of Paris on a morning flight from London, he was informed by French authorities that Germany had enforced a Schengen-wide ban on his entry to Europe.

Abu-Sitta said he had no knowledge that German authorities, who had previously refused his entry to Berlin in April, had put an administrative visa ban on him for a year, meaning he was banned from entering any Schengen country.

“What I find most difficult to accept is this complete criminalisation,” Abu-Sitta said on Sunday, adding that he was previously told by authorities he would be unable to enter Germany for the month of April.

“I was put in a holding cell and marched in front of people at Charles de Gaulle with armed guards and then handed over to the staff in the plane, all so that I’m unable to give evidence,” he said.

Instead of taking part in a conference at the French senate to speak about Gaza , on invitation from Green party parliamentarians, Abu-Sitta was stripped of his possessions and taken to a holding cell. Before being deported to the UK, he was able to attend the conference via video on his lawyer’s phone from the detention centre.

“It was critical for me that we do this, that they’re unable to silence us,” said Abu-Sitta, who has worked in Gaza since 2009, as well as in wars in Yemen, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon.

During October and November 2023, at the beginning of Israel’s war in Gaza, which has since killed more than 34,000 Palestinians, Abu-Sitta operated from al-Shifa and al-Ahli hospitals. During his 43 days, he described witnessing a “ massacre unfold ” in Gaza and the use of white phosphorus munitions, which Israel has denied.

Abu-Sitta has since provided evidence to Scotland Yard and the international criminal court (ICC) in The Hague. He intends to challenge his entry ban in the German courts and is considering going to the European court of human rights.

In April, Abu-Sitta travelled to Berlin to participate in the Palestine Congress forum, where he was denied entry by authorities because they “could not ensure the safety of attendees in the conference”, he said. The German federal police have been approached for comment.

His lawyer, Tayab Ali, said the German government issued the Schengen-wide ban without any consultation with Abu-Sitta, and without disclosing the information the ban is based on.

“It is clear to us that there is an organised attempt to discredit medical witnesses and in particular Prof Ghassan from providing details about the consequences of Israel’s military action in Gaza,” said Ali, who is also the director of the International Centre of Justice for Palestinians (ICJP).

“The ban appears to be a cynical attempt to silence eyewitnesses giving testimony to parliamentarians and law enforcement agencies.”

The incident comes after diplomats from G7 nations urged officials at the ICC not to announce war crimes charges against Israel or Hamas officials, amid concerns that such a move could disrupt the chances of a breakthrough in ceasefire talks.

Germany, widely seen as the second largest arms exporter to Israel behind the US, is facing a domestic lawsuit over weapons sales to Israel. Last week, the international court of justice (ICJ) rejected a request by Nicaragua to issue Germany emergency orders to desist selling arms to Israel, but declined to throw out the case altogether.

“The only reason the Germans would want a European-wide ban is to stop me from getting to The Hague,” said Abu-Sitta.

“It communicates to me the complete complicity of the German government in the genocidal war.”

• Israel-Gaza war
• Palestinian territories

Most viewed

• Election 2024
• Entertainment
• Newsletters
• Photography
• Personal Finance
• AP Investigations
• AP Buyline Personal Finance
• AP Buyline Shopping
• Press Releases
• Israel-Hamas War
• Russia-Ukraine War
• Global elections
• Asia Pacific
• Latin America
• Middle East
• Election Results
• Delegate Tracker
• AP & Elections
• Auto Racing
• 2024 Paris Olympic Games
• Movie reviews
• Book reviews
• Personal finance
• Financial Markets
• Business Highlights
• Financial wellness
• Artificial Intelligence
• Social Media

Colorado-based abortion fund sees rising demand. Many are from Texas, where procedure is restricted

FILE - Attendees protest the one-year anniversary of Colorado’s abortion law, the Reproductive Health Equity Act, Tuesday, April 4, 2023, outside the State Capitol in downtown Denver. A Colorado abortion fund said Thursday, May 9, 2024, it’s helped hundreds access abortion in the first months of 2024, many arriving from Texas and other states where abortion is restricted, showing a continued increase in demand since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022. (AP Photo/David Zalubowski, File)

FILE - People march through downtown Amarillo to protest a lawsuit to ban the abortion drug mifepristone, Feb. 11, 2023, in Amarillo, Texas. A Colorado abortion fund said Thursday, May 9, 2024, it’s helped hundreds access abortion in the first months of 2024, many arriving from Texas and other states where abortion is restricted, showing a continued increase in demand since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022. (AP Photo/Justin Rex, File)

Former President Donald Trump speaks to the press with attorney Todd Blanche at his trial at the Manhattan Criminal court, Tuesday, May 7, 2024 in New York. (Win McNamee/Pool Photo via AP)

FILE - Abortion-rights protesters march down Congress Avenue in downtown Austin, Texas following the Supreme Court decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, Friday, June 24, 2022. A Colorado abortion fund said Thursday, May 9, 2024, it’s helped hundreds access abortion in the first months of 2024, many arriving from Texas and other states where abortion is restricted, showing a continued increase in demand since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022. (Sara Diggins/Austin American-Statesman via AP, File)

• Copy Link copied

DENVER (AP) — A Colorado abortion fund said Thursday it’s helped hundreds access abortion in the first months of 2024, many arriving from Texas where abortion is restricted, showing a steady increase in need each year since Roe v. Wade was overturned in 2022.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision left a patchwork of state bans , restrictions and protections across the country. In response, a national makeshift network of individuals and organizations help those seeking abortions in states where it’s restricted, including the Colorado-based Cobalt Abortion Fund.

Cobalt provides financial support for both practical expenses, such as travel and lodging, and abortion procedures, and they operate from the Democratic-led state that has staunchly protected access to abortion, including for nonresidents.

Cobalt’s aid has already jumped since Roe was overturned, from $212,00 in 2021 to $1.25 million by 2023. In Cobalt’s latest numbers, the group spent $500,000 in the first three months of 2024 and predict spending around $2.4 million by the end of the year to help people access abortions. That would nearly double last year’s support.

Over half of that 2024 spending went to some 350 people for practical support, not the procedure, and the vast majority of the clients were from Texas.

“There is this idea that the Dobbs decision and subsequent bans, due to trigger bans, created an increase in volume, and now maybe that volume has decreased or kind of stabilized. That is not the case,” said Melisa Hidalgo-Cuellar, Cobalt’s director.

“The volumes continue to increase every single month,” she said.

Hidalgo-Cuellar says the steady rise is partly due to more access to information on social media and new restrictions. Florida’s restriction went into effect last week and bans most abortions after six weeks of pregnancy, before many women even know they are pregnant.

Colorado has pulled in the opposite direction, becoming a haven for abortion in a region of largely conservative states. Last year, the state passed a law that shields those seeking abortions , and those providing them, from prosecution in other states where it’s restricted, such as Florida.

Now, antiabortion activists are testing the boundaries of those bans in court. That includes a Texas man who is petitioning a court to authorize an obscure legal action to find out who allegedly helped his former partner obtain an out-of-state abortion.

Those out-of-state abortions are in part why Cobalt’s funding for practical support — mainly travel expenses — exceeded it’s aid for the procedure itself.

Bedayn is a corps member for the Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues.

Inoue vs Nery: Japanese champ defends super bantamweight titles in Tokyo

Naoya Inoue survives a first-round knockdown to knock out challenger Luis Nery in the sixth round in front of 45,000 fans.

Japan’s undisputed super bantamweight world champion, Naoya Inoue, has survived an early scare to stop Mexico’s Luis Nery in the sixth round at the Tokyo Dome and defend his titles.

Fans at the famous venue, which seats more than 45,000 people, were stunned on Monday when Nery floored the unbeaten “Monster” in the first round with a huge left.

Keep reading

Photos: in myanmar’s more peaceful ayeyarwady, lethwei makes violent return, joshua buatsi: ‘the nicest, most dangerous boxer in the world’, ‘mma brought me closer to god’: biaggio ali walsh, muhammad ali’s grandson, nikhat zareen becomes fifth indian woman to win world boxing gold.

But Inoue got up and knocked his Mexican opponent down in the following round and sent him to the canvas again in the fifth before finishing him off with a right hook in the sixth.

“It was a great feeling to knock him down, but how about that surprise in the first round?” the 31-year-old Inoue asked.

“As a boxer, when that happens to you, it fires you up. It gave me a lot of energy.”

It was the first boxing event to be held at the Tokyo Dome since 42-1 underdog James “Buster” Douglas knocked out unbeaten heavyweight champion Mike Tyson in February 1990 in one of the sport’s biggest upsets.

“There was a lot of pressure on me as the main event in the first boxing at Tokyo Dome in 34 years, but it gave me strength,” Inoue said.

Inoue took his record to 27-0 with 24 wins by knockout.

It was his first fight since becoming the undisputed super bantamweight world champion in December.

He is just the second man to become undisputed world champion at two different weights since the four-belt era began in 2004. American Terence Crawford was the first.

Fans at the Tokyo Dome gave the 31-year-old a rapturous welcome as he entered the cavernous venue with all four world championship belts up for grabs.

A huge upset looked like it could be on the cards when Nery sent the champion sprawling.

But it seemed to energise Inoue, and he came flying out of his corner to send Nery down in the second round.

Inoue continued to land ferocious blows, and he sent his opponent to the canvas again with a left hook in the fifth round.

The referee stopped the fight after Inoue downed Nery for a third time in the sixth round.

Nery, a former two-division world champion, was fighting in Japan for the first time since he was stripped of his bantamweight world title in 2018 after failing to make weight for a bout there.

He was subsequently banned from fighting in Japan, but the country’s Boxing Commission gave him the green light to compete against Inoue.

Nery was booed when he was introduced to the Tokyo Dome crowd.

The 29-year-old’s record fell to 35-2 with 27 KOs.

Inoue was fighting at super bantamweight for only the third time after beating American Stephen Fulton and Marlon Tapales of the Philippines last year for a clean sweep of the titles.

He moved up in weight class after becoming the first undisputed bantamweight world champion since Panama’s Enrique Pinder in 1972.

Earlier, fighting on the undercard, Japan’s Yoshiki Takei beat Australian defending champion Jason Moloney by unanimous decision to win the WBO bantamweight world title.

Takei started strongly before Moloney came back into the bout in his second title defence.

But the Japanese fighter, a former kickboxer who had won all eight of his previous boxing matches by knockout, took the title in front of a raucous crowd .