(CHICAGO) — The search has expanded for a Chicago woman who went missing while on a yoga retreat in the Bahamas last week, police said.
Taylor Casey, 41, was last seen on June 19 in Paradise Island at the Sivananda Ashram Yoga Retreat, which reported her missing the following day when she didn’t show up for morning classes, the organization and police said.
The search for Casey — which has involved drones, canines and divers — has extended beyond the immediate area of the retreat to other parts of the island, Royal Bahamas Police Force Chief Superintendent Chrislyn Skippings told reporters Wednesday afternoon. Investigators are also checking surveillance cameras, she said.
“Let me say that our priority is to find Taylor … in good health,” Skippings said during the briefing.
Skippings said it is too early in the investigation to say if any foul play is suspected.
Casey’s cellphone was found “in waters,” Skippings confirmed to reporters on Wednesday, though she did not specify where it was found due to the ongoing investigation.
Police also have Casey’s journal, Skippings confirmed to ABC News on Thursday.
Asked if police have any specific leads amid the ongoing search, Skippings told ABC News they are “still investigating.”
Casey was attending a yoga certification retreat when she went missing, the yoga retreat said. Skippings was unable to say when Casey arrived in the Bahamas for the retreat, though said it was taking place over four to five weeks.
Sivananda Ashram Yoga Retreat told ABC News it is cooperating with authorities on the investigation.
“The Ashram is asking anyone with information on Ms. Casey to contact the local police,” the Sivananda Ashram Yoga Retreat Bahamas said in a statement on Tuesday.
Casey’s family has traveled to the Bahamas amid the investigation and met with police on Wednesday, Skippings said.
Her mother, Colette Seymore, said it is unlike Casey to disappear like this and she is concerned for her safety.
“Taylor always calls me, keeps in touch. Taylor sent me beautiful pictures from the Bahamas, Taylor in the ocean,” Seymore told ABC News. “We want Taylor home. We need Taylor in our lives. We miss Taylor.”
A State Department spokesperson told ABC News that they are aware of reports of a U.S. citizen missing in the Bahamas.
“When a U.S. citizen is missing, we work closely with local authorities as they carry out their search efforts, and we share information with families however we can,” the spokesperson said. “The Department of State has no higher priority than the welfare and safety of U.S. citizens abroad. We stand ready to provide assistance to U.S. citizens in need and to their families.”
The spokesperson said the State Department had no further comment due to privacy concerns.
ABC News’ Anselm Gibbs contributed to this report.
(WASHINGTON) — Despite the U.S. Supreme Court issuing a decision allowing emergency abortions in Idaho, many pro-abortion groups criticized Thursday’s ruling and said it was far from a win for abortion rights.
“This is not a time for applause for the way that the court has functioned,” Fatima Goss Graves, the CEO of the National Women’s Law Center, said in a briefing with reporters. “This is a crisis of the court’s making.”
“We definitely deserve better from our court,” Goss Graves said.
The decision was the first time the court weighed in on abortion since it overturned Roe v. Wade two years ago, ending federal protections for abortion rights. Since then, at least 14 states have ceased nearly all abortions and seven other states have imposed restrictions on care.
While the ruling will allow abortions to resume in cases of medical emergencies, abortion rights advocates criticized the court opinion, saying the ruling did not address the merits of the case and failed to find that patients are entitled to emergency abortion care to protect their health and lives.
“While the opinion temporarily restores the ability of doctors in Idaho to provide emergency abortions required under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), by dismissing Idaho’s appeal without resolving the core issues in the case, SCOTUS will only continue to put pregnant patients at unnecessary risk,” the American Civil Liberties Union said in a statement.
Advocates also argued that the decision is “the bare minimum” and the court should have been more clear in ruling that EMTALA protects abortion in emergency situations across all states.
“The fact that this case was before the Court and remains open to further litigation tells us everything we need to know about the anti-abortion movement: They would rather let pregnant people suffer life-threatening health consequences than allow them to receive stabilizing abortion care,” Destiny Lopez, the acting co-CEO of the Guttmacher Institute, said in a statement.
“This outcome does not remedy the harm that the Court’s anti-abortion justices inflicted with the Dobbs decision two years ago,” Lopez said.
Of the states restricting abortion, at least seven do not have clear exceptions for emergency care.
“The courts caused a months-long catastrophe that was completely unnecessary,” President of Planned Parenthood Alexis McGill Johnson told reporters.
“They had the opportunity to bring clarity to the chaos they caused … but they missed the mark,” McGill Johnson said.
The case now returns to the Ninth Circuit where it will be further litigated.
“The Court could have upheld this basic right, but they refused to. Instead, the conservative majority kicked the case back to a lower court, punting so that they didn’t need to weigh in before an election where attacks on abortion access are already top of mind for voters,” Reproductive Freedom for All, a pro-abortion group, said in a statement Thursday.
The Center for Reproductive Rights told reporters that the Thursday decision does not impact access to abortion in the 20 other states with restrictions or bans in effect — and a case over EMTALA could be back before the court next session.
Texas sued the U.S. government over EMTALA guidance, and the Fifth Circuit court successfully blocked the guidance.
Advocates issued warnings that echoed reactions to the court’s decision striking down an abortion pill ruling this month.
“Several justices provided a roadmap for just how they would strip pregnant people of this basic right when this case comes back to the Court,” Alexa Kolbi-Molinas, deputy director of the ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project, said in a statement.
Anti-abortion group Americans United for Life, meanwhile, called the ruling “highly fractured.”
“The Court recognized based on representations by the Biden administration that Idaho may continue to enforce its pro-life law, and the rights of pro-life doctors and nurses will be respected in all circumstances as federal law requires. The case will develop further in the lower courts and the Supreme Court seems ready, willing, and able to review the case again once an appropriate factual record based upon the Biden administration’s actual position is developed,” said Steven Aden, chief legal officer and general counsel.
Another anti-abortion group called the decision “a setback.”
“Today’s Supreme Court decision is a setback, but our fight for babies and moms continues,” National Right to Life said in a statement. “With its sound ‘life of the mother’ provision that allows pregnant women to receive emergency care, Idaho’s pro-life law is consistent with EMTALA which requires hospitals to provide stabilizing treatment to both mothers and unborn children. Under Attorney General Raul Labrador’s leadership, we are confident Idaho will eventually prevail on the merits of this case.”
(WASHINGTON) — A coalition of racial justice and civil rights nonprofit advocacy organizations are formally joining the fight to prevent a ban on TikTok.
The Asian American Federation, Asian Americans Advancing Justice Southern California, Calos Coalition and Hispanic Heritage Foundation are among the 13 groups arguing that TikTok serves as an essential platform for communities of color and other marginalized groups.
“TikTok is a modern-day digital town square that empowers diverse communities, often neglected by traditional media outlets, to share their underrepresented voices with people across America and the world,” lawyers from the firm Cooley LLP wrote in a court filing expected to be filed Thursday on behalf of the coalition.
The Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act, which President Joe Biden signed into law as part of a larger spending package, could potentially make the app unavailable in the U.S. TikTok and its parent company ByteDance filed a lawsuit against the law, which is now formally supported by the civil rights nonprofits.
Supporters of company’s lawsuit argue the legislation threatens the First Amendment rights of 170 million U.S. users and would effectively ban the app. The groups argue the legislation is unconstitutional and they also expressed “grave concerns about anti-Asian animus undergirding the TikTok Ban.”
“The TikTok Ban imposes an unprecedented prior restraint on free speech, silencing countless voices, while also discriminating on content and viewpoint,” the Cooley lawyers wrote.
Congressional leaders and President Biden have argued that restricting the app is necessary due to security concerns with the Chinese government.
ByteDance refuted those allegations in its lawsuit, arguing there has been no tangible evidence that the app poses any security risk.
Roddy Ricch calls 911 in his latest single and video, directed by Spike Jordan.
In it, he takes on the role of a man who saves people from danger, including a woman who almost got hit by a train.
“Shake my hand, and I might take you on a trip/ Pretty, smooth skin, nice toes, you just my type/ Usually I don’t take her home first night/ But for you, I just might/ I know you know, these b****** can’t f*** with you/ On your worst day when you come around my way,” Roddy sang.
“911” follows Ricch’s “Survivor’s Remorse” and appears on his upcoming third studio album, The Navy Album.
(WASHINGTON) — The first presidential debate of the 2024 election will be the first ever to feature two former presidents, but that isn’t the only thing that makes it unprecedented: It’s also the earliest general election debate ever.
When President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump take the stage at the CNN-hosted contest on Thursday — it will be 131 days ahead of the Nov. 5 Election Day — months ahead of the usual fall timeline.
Since 1960, Debates have been sanctioned — and scheduled — by the nonpartisan Commission on Presidential Debates, with the previous earliest one taking place when Ronald Reagan faced off against Independent candidate John Anderson during the 1980 election cycle. That occurred on Sept. 21, 44 days ahead of that year’s general election.
Since 1976, the average length of time between the first general election debate and election date has been about 35 days, according to CPD records. The shortest interval was in 1992, when there were only 23 days between a debate an Election Day — when Democrat Bill Clinton debated Republican George H. W. Bush.
Biden and Trump will have about three extra months on the campaign trail following their first public faceoff — and experts ABC News spoke with said the early timing could have a significant impact on the race.
“The combination of having so many people with doubts about both candidates, coupled with the first debate occurring before either convention, heightens its potential importance,” said Republican political strategist Whit Ayres. “I don’t know that it will be actually important. But it certainly heightens the potential for importance.”
But Mitchell McKinney, a professor at the University of Akron and noted political communication scholar, took a different view, predicting that this early debate may not matter as much.
First, he said, at this stage in the cycle, voters aren’t as tuned in as they would be in early fall, when the debates are usually held.
“Our most recent general election presidential debates, which typically occur in late September into October, have continued to be big draws, as in 75 to 80 million” viewers, said McKinney. This time around, he continued, “It could be half that.”
The New York Times has reported that TV industry observers expect the debate to draw between 30 and 70 million viewers. For comparison, the first debate between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump — in September 2016 — topped 84 million viewers, according to Nielsen ratings.
Second, regardless of whether CNN’s debate exceeds ratings expectations Thursday night, the extra months between the first debate and election debate allow the candidates time to recover from a poor performance.
“If there is for a candidate — one or both of these candidates — some sort of gaffe or blunder,” McKinney said, “there is plenty of time for other events to take over … the candidate or candidates can recover,” he added.
But with Biden and Trump barreling toward a November rematch that voters are broadly unenthusiastic about, veteran Democratic strategist James Carville told ABC News that any new information about the two presidents on debate stage could make a difference for some key voters.
“People’s attitudes are very fixed and voters tend to be pretty entrenched. The person that ‘wins’ — I don’t know how you determine that — in this debate is going to be the one that provides voters with some new information, something they thought about before,” said Carville, who ran Bill Clinton’s 1992 campaign.
“I guess this seems to be pretty, kind of hard to move a lot of people in this election, but if you move a few, it makes a big difference,” he added.
The decision to move up the timing followed disputes between the campaigns and the Committee on Presidential Debates — partially over scheduling.
Before the Biden and Trump campaigns declared their participation in a non-Commission for Presidential Debates-sanctioned broadcast, the candidates were planning on appearing on stage for the first time together this fall, on Sept. 16.
The Trump campaign urged the commission in May to move up its debate schedule, arguing that early voting would have already begun in some places by the time Trump and Biden debated at that date.
“As it always does, the CPD considered multiple factors in selecting debate dates in order to make them accessible by the American public. These factors include religious and federal holidays, early voting, and the dates on which individual states close their ballots,” the commission wrote in a statement.
Kendrick Lamar‘s Pop Out event turned out to be more than a Juneteenth celebration. It was also a win for Kendrick and many of the artists who performed onstage.
Kendrick earned almost 61 million combined official on-demand U.S. streams in the three days after the event (June 20-22), a 31% increase over the three-day period before the show (June 16-18), Billboard reports. His song “Not Like Us,” which he performed a few times at the event, garnered 21 million combined streams in the three-day period following the concert, a 62% jump.
ScHoolboy Q, Jay Rock and Ab-Soul also saw some bumps in their streams in the three days after their onstage reunion with K.Dot, their fellow Black Hippy crew member.
ScHoolboy earned 4.3 million streams, a 31% increase. Jay Rock acquired a little over 1 million streams, up 45%, and Ab-Soul garnered 291,000 streams, up 44%.
Even Dr. Dre, who appeared onstage, saw his song “Still D.R.E.” jump 19% after the event.
Also seeing bumps in streams are Tyler, The Creator, Dom Kennedy and YG, who all took the stage during Mustard‘s part of the show: Tyler for “Wusyaname” and “Earfquake,” which he performed that day; Dom Kennedy for “When I Come Around” and “My Type of Party”; and YG, whose whole catalog saw a 35% increase in streams over the three-day period.
Mustard’s song “Perfect Ten,” featuring the late Nipsey Hussle, also saw a 127% rise in streams over the three-day period, up to 123,000.
