Massachusetts
Guilty! Law school sends out erroneous admissions emails
BOSTON (AP) — A Massachusetts law school says it’s guilty of accidentally sending acceptance emails to thousands of former and current applicants.
The Northeastern University School of Law in a statement Wednesday blamed a “technical error” for the glitch, saying the erroneous emails went to more than 200 people who applied for admission starting next fall, as well as to nearly 4,000 former applicants, some of whom are already enrolled.
“The School of Law quickly sent a clarifying email explaining the error. Individual outreach is also taking place to applicants with concerns,” the Boston school said.
Final admissions decisions will not be made until later in the academic year.
“The School of Law deeply regrets this unintended mistake and is taking steps to ensure that it will not happen in the future,” the school said.
Lakisha Papoutsakis, a single mother from Northborough, Massachusetts, who received the acceptance email, told NBC10 Boston that she has dreamed of going to law school since she was a child.
She shared the good news with her loved ones before noticing the follow-up email.
“I was like, ‘Oh my God this is so amazing,’ and then it was like, ‘Oh no, sorry, April Fool’s Day,’” she said.
This fall’s law school class has 234 members out of 3,877 applicants, according to Northeastern’s website.
Nation
At least 66 U.S. clinics have halted abortions, institute says
At least 66 clinics in 15 states have stopped providing abortions since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, according to an analysis released Thursday.
The number of clinics providing abortions in the 15 states dropped from 79 before the June 24 decision to 13 as of Oct. 2, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a research group that supports abortion rights.
All 13 of the remaining clinics are in Georgia. The other states have no providers offering abortions, though some of their clinics are offering care other than abortions.
Nationally, there were more than 800 abortion clinics in 2020, the institute said.
“Much more research will need to be conducted to grasp the full extent of the chaos, confusion and harm that the U.S. Supreme Court has unleashed on people needing abortions, but the picture that is starting to emerge should alarm anyone who supports reproductive freedom and the right to bodily autonomy,” said Rachel Jones, a Guttmacher researcher.
The new report does not include data on hospitals and physician offices that provided abortion and stopped them after the court ruling, but Jones noted that clinics provide most U.S. abortions, including procedures and dispensing abortion medication. Recent Guttmacher data show just over half of U.S. abortions are done with medication.
States without abortion providers are concentrated in the South. In some of those places, many women seeking abortions would need to travel so far that the journey will be impossible, Jones said.
Dr. Jeanne Corwin, who provides abortions in Indiana and Ohio, said clinic closures “will result in immeasurable harm to women’s physical health, mental health and financial health.’’
In several states, access is under threat because bans were put on hold only temporarily by court injunctions. These include Indiana, Ohio and South Carolina, the analysis found.
“It is precarious from a medical standpoint and certainly from a business standpoint,’’ said Dr. Katie McHugh, an OB-GYN who provides abortions in Indiana. “It’s difficult to keep the doors open and the lights on when you don’t know if you’re going to be a felon tomorrow.”
New York
Federal judge halts key parts of state’s new gun law
ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) — A federal judge halted key provisions Thursday of New York’s latest attempt to restrict who can carry a handgun in public and where firearms can be brought, saying multiple parts of a law the state passed this year are unconstitutional.
U.S. District Judge Glenn Suddaby focused on multiple parts of the law, saying licensing requirements — like a rule requiring applicants to turn over information about their social media accounts — went too far.
“Simply stated, instead of moving toward becoming a shall-issue jurisdiction, New York State has further entrenched itself as a shall-not-issue jurisdiction. And, by doing so, it has further reduced a first-class constitutional right to bear arms in public for self defense ... into a mere request,” wrote Suddaby, who sits in Syracuse.
The ruling would keep restrictions in place that bar firearms from being carried into schools, government buildings and places of worship, but the judge said the state couldn’t ban guns from other sensitive locations, such as Times Square.
The judge gave the state three business days to seek emergency relief before a federal appeals court.
The rules were part of a sweeping gun law that went into effect Sept. 1 designed to protect public safety while adhering to a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that invalidated New York’s old system for granting permits to carry handguns outside the home.
The law increased training requirements for applicants and requires them to turn over more private information, including a list of everyone living in their home. Suddaby said the law’s requirement that a license applicant be of “good moral character” is unconstitutional, as currently written.
Gov. Kathy Hochul and the state Legislature approved the law this summer shortly after the high court struck down a state law that required people to demonstrate an unusual threat to their safety to qualify for a license to carry a handgun outside their homes.
There have been several federal challenges to the law from gun rights advocates who argue the legislation violates the Second Amendment and free speech rights.
This lawsuit was bought by six gun owners from upstate New York who claim the law infringes on their constitutional rights. Most of the plaintiffs have licenses to carry and argue the law keeps them from holding a weapon in designated sensitive places like state parks or church.
One plaintiff intends to apply for a carry permit but is unwilling to share social media posts or character references with investigators, according to the federal complaint.
New York is among a half-dozen states that had provisions of their gun laws invalidated by the Supreme Court.
