The State of the World as I See It on the Eve of Rosh Hashana

 

Rosh Hashana arrives this year with the world looking less like a civilization governed by wisdom and more like a civilization conducting an experiment in collective insanity. Nations threaten one another while pretending to seek peace. Leaders confuse self-interest with statesmanship. Millions of people consume information designed not to enlighten them but to inflame them. Religious leaders who once understood that their sacred responsibility was to challenge power increasingly appear more interested in proximity to it. And everywhere one looks, truth has become negotiable. We have entered an age in which people no longer ask, “Is it true?” They ask, “Does it serve my side?” That may be the defining moral failure of our generation.

Rosh Hashana, however, is not merely the Jewish New Year. It is the day on which the Jew is supposed to confront a terrifying proposition: that the universe is not governed by political fashion, public relations, polling numbers, or the latest outrage on social media. It is governed by judgment. “Hayom harat olam,” today the world is conceived. The liturgy does not invite us to congratulate ourselves on surviving another year. It places the individual, the community, and ultimately humanity itself before a Judge. The great question is not whether we have won the argument. It is whether we have lived truthfully.

And this is precisely where the modern world is failing.

We have become extraordinarily sophisticated technologically and remarkably primitive morally. We can communicate across continents instantaneously, manipulate genetic material, send machines into space, and construct artificial intelligence capable of astonishing feats. Yet we remain incapable of mastering the oldest human impulses: greed, vanity, tribalism, hatred, dishonesty, and the lust for power. We have built a civilization capable of extraordinary achievements without building human beings capable of responsibly using them.

The Jewish tradition should make us particularly uncomfortable with this spectacle. Torah never promised that Jews would be the most powerful people in the world. It demanded that we be among the people most committed to truth. “Midvar sheker tirchak,” distance yourself from falsehood. Not merely, “Do not lie.” Distance yourself from it. Do not build a society in which falsehood becomes so common that everyone eventually becomes comfortable living inside it.

Yet look around.

Political leaders lie with astonishing confidence. Their supporters defend them with astonishing creativity. Facts become partisan. Institutions become tribal. The powerful demand accountability for their opponents while demanding understanding for themselves. The language of morality has become a weapon rather than a standard. And the most frightening development is not that politicians behave this way. Politicians have always been politicians. The frightening development is that ordinary citizens increasingly expect nothing better from them.

We have lowered the moral standard and then congratulated ourselves for clearing it.

America, Israel, Europe, Russia, China, Iran, and the rest of the world are all confronting different versions of the same crisis: power without wisdom. Military strength without political vision. Wealth without responsibility. Religion without introspection. Education without intellectual courage. And leadership without the humility to admit, “I may be wrong.”

That last sentence may be the most endangered sentence in public life.

The rabbis, of all people, should understand this. Judaism does not worship certainty. The Talmud is filled with arguments, contradictions, questions, qualifications, and competing interpretations. Beit Hillel and Beit Shammai disagree repeatedly, yet the tradition preserves the arguments of both. The Torah scholar is not the person who has eliminated every question. He is the person who has learned how to ask the right questions.

And yet, increasingly, some of our religious leadership seems terrified of questions.

We have created a culture in which challenging a rabbinic pronouncement can be treated as challenging Torah itself. We have elevated personalities into institutions and institutions into unquestionable authorities. We have sometimes confused kavod haTorah with protecting rabbis from criticism. But genuine respect for Torah cannot require intellectual surrender. A rabbi who fears an honest question is not demonstrating the strength of Torah. He is demonstrating the weakness of his own confidence.

Rosh Hashana should therefore be uncomfortable for the rabbinate as well as for the rest of us.

The shofar is not a musical instrument designed to make us feel religious. It is a summons. Wake up. Stop pretending. Stop hiding behind titles, institutions, political alliances, and communal etiquette. The shofar does not ask whether we belong to the right camp. It asks whether we are awake.

And perhaps nowhere is that question more urgent than in the relationship between religion and political power.

A president can support Israel and still be morally wrong. A prime minister can advance Jewish interests and still behave disgracefully. A billionaire can donate millions to Jewish causes and still deserve criticism. A rabbi can be enormously respected and still make a terrible mistake. These propositions should not be controversial among Jews. They are the essence of Jewish moral thought.

The greatest danger to religion is not always hostility from the outside. Sometimes it is the seduction of power from within.

When rabbis become too comfortable around politicians, billionaires, and communal power brokers, the question becomes whether they are still capable of speaking truth to power. The Jewish leader who can only speak courageously to the powerless is not a prophet.

Meanwhile, antisemitism continues to mutate and spread, sometimes from the political extremes and sometimes from supposedly respectable institutions. Jews are once again discovering an ancient lesson: civilization can become civilized very quickly until it isn’t. The Jew who assumes that yesterday’s tolerance guarantees tomorrow’s safety has forgotten Jewish history.

But there is another danger, and it comes from within.

We cannot respond to antisemitism by abandoning the moral standards that Judaism itself taught us. We cannot demand justice for religious Jews while becoming indifferent to justice for everyone else. We cannot demand that the world distinguish between secular Jews and the actions of Haredi Jews, while simultaneously treating every political and existential disagreement as a referendum on someone’s Jewishness.

Jewish survival requires strength. It also requires moral credibility.

Israel, too, stands at a historic crossroads. The Jewish state faces enemies who genuinely seek its destruction. Anyone who denies that reality is living in fantasy. Israel must defend itself. It must maintain overwhelming military strength. It must never again permit its enemies to believe that Jewish life can be destroyed without catastrophic consequences. It needs religious leaders who can speak honestly to the Israeli public without calculating every sentence according to which political faction will applaud.

The same is true of the Jewish diaspora.

We have built extraordinary institutions, enormous communities, magnificent schools, synagogues, charities, and Torah centers. Yet institutions can survive long after the ideas that created them have weakened. A community can be wealthy and still spiritually impoverished. It can be observant and still intellectually dishonest. It can produce thousands of graduates and still fail to teach them how to think.

That is the uncomfortable question of this Rosh Hashana: Are we producing Jews who know how to obey, or Jews who know how to think?

Judaism requires both.

The Torah does not ask us to become human computers programmed to repeat yesterday’s answers. It asks us to wrestle, to inquire, to remember, to judge, to distinguish between good and evil, and ultimately to choose. “U’vacharta bachaim,” choose life. Choice requires judgment. Judgment requires thought. Thought requires intellectual freedom.

The world desperately needs that Jewish tradition now.

We are living through an age of information without wisdom, outrage without reflection, leadership without restraint, religion without sufficient self-criticism, and political power without enough fear of consequences. The antidote is not another slogan. It is character.

Perhaps that is what I hear when the shofar sounds.

I hear a warning that civilization itself can become spiritually bankrupt while continuing to function. I hear a warning that institutions can remain standing while their moral foundations crumble. I hear a warning that religious communities can become obsessed with appearances while neglecting substance. I hear a warning that Jews can become so concerned with defending their leaders that they forget that Judaism never taught us to worship leaders.

And I hear something else. I hear hope.

Because Rosh Hashana assumes that human beings can change. Otherwise there would be no point in judgment. Teshuva would be meaningless. The shofar would be nothing more than noise.

The world does not need perfect leaders this Rosh Hashana. It needs leaders capable of admitting imperfection. It does not need rabbis who know everything. It needs rabbis humble enough to say, “I don’t know.” It does not need politicians who promise salvation. It needs citizens courageous enough to reject political idolatry. It does not need Jews who merely defend Judaism. It needs Jews who embody it.

On the eve of Rosh Hashana, I look at the world and I do not see a civilization at peace. I see a civilization at war with itself, with truth, with history, and often with its own conscience.

But I also see the possibility of something better.

The Jewish answer has never been to wait for the world to become sane. It has been to become sane ourselves.

So before we ask God to judge the world, perhaps we should ask Him to judge us. Before we demand that politicians behave better, perhaps we should examine the compromises we make with truth. Before we criticize the rabbis, perhaps we should ask whether we have made them too powerful by surrendering our own judgment. Before we complain about the darkness outside, perhaps we should ask whether we have allowed darkness inside.

Rosh Hashana is not fundamentally about turning the page on the calendar. It is about turning the mirror toward ourselves.

And if the shofar has any message for this extraordinary moment in Jewish and human history, it is brutally simple: Wake up. Think. Remember who you are. Tell the truth. Fear God more than you fear politicians. Fear moral failure more than you fear criticism. And never confuse power with righteousness.

The world may be losing its way. The Jew cannot afford to lose his.

May we merit a year of blessings.

Paul Mendlowitz 

 

 

REPUBLISHED

 

https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/the-state-of-the-world-as-i-see-it-on-the-eve-of-rosh-hashana/

Inside the fight to change Haredi politics, with Rabbi Yehoshua Pfeffer (Caution: Do not be fooled by his black yarmulke, he's wearing a blue suit)

 

Jewish law sharply distinguishes honoring an office from honoring the moral character of the person occupying it

'Teaching Jews that principles are absolute until principles become inconvenient'

 

Anyone Can Get A Photo With Trump - Photo Credit: Stormy Daniels

Credit: Molly Riley/Official White House Photo

There is something deeply disturbing about watching rabbis rush to demonstrate reverence before a president whose conduct they would condemn in almost anyone else. The problem is not that they meet with the President of the United States. Of course they should. The Jewish community has every right to advocate for itself, cultivate relationships with government, and thank a president for policies that protect Jewish lives and Jewish interests. The problem begins when political access becomes moral surrender, when kavod ha-malchut, respect for government, is transformed into kavod ha-rasha, reverence for the powerful regardless of character. At that point the rabbi is no longer representing Torah to power. He is representing power to the Jews.

The same distinction appears in the principle of dina de-malkhuta dina, the law of the kingdom is law. Jewish law recognizes the legitimacy of civil authority and, within its proper boundaries, requires Jews to respect the laws of the country in which they live. But notice what the doctrine actually does. It recognizes the government's legal authority. It does not certify the ruler's righteousness. It does not declare his every word wise. It does not transform political expediency into Torah morality. It certainly does not instruct rabbis to become public-relations agents for the occupant of the White House.

This is where some contemporary rabbis appear to have forgotten the difference between kavod and chanifah. Respect is one thing. Flattery is another. Jewish tradition has a word for excessive deference to powerful people when truth is sacrificed for personal or communal advantage: chanifah, the corruption that occurs when moral truth is compromised in order to please the powerful. A rabbi's job is not to make the powerful feel holy. His job is to tell the truth, especially when telling the truth is uncomfortable.

That is why the image of rabbis surrounding a president deserves more scrutiny than another round of ceremonial photographs. If the president is a decent man, treat him with dignity. If he is a flawed man, treat him with dignity. If he has done something admirable, acknowledge it. If he has done something destructive, say so. If he protects Jewish interests, thank him. If he harms the interests of the country, Israel, minorities, immigrants, the poor, or the principles of democratic government, a rabbi does not receive a dispensation from truth merely because the offending politician happens to be useful to the Jewish community.

And there is an even deeper problem. When rabbis publicly lavish praise on a political leader whose conduct they would condemn in almost any other human being, they teach their followers a terrible lesson: morality is negotiable when power is useful.

The Torah did not create a religion in which Jews ask, "Is he good for us?" and then determine whether he is good. Judaism asks a prior question: "Is what he is doing right?" Those are not the same question. A ruler can be politically beneficial and morally reprehensible. He can employ Jews and still behave disgracefully toward other human beings. He can appoint judges favorable to Jewish interests and still possess serious character defects. He can give speeches containing language Jews appreciate while simultaneously displaying qualities that Judaism itself teaches us to despise.

A Jewish leader must have the intellectual courage to hold both truths simultaneously.

Ben Zoma asks in Pirkei Avot, "Who is honored?" and answers with a principle centered on honoring others. The Jewish conception of honor is therefore not simply about receiving honor from powerful people. It is about possessing the character that makes honor meaningful. A president does not become morally elevated because rabbis honor him. If anything, the rabbi risks lowering the meaning of honor by distributing it without moral discrimination.

There is also a fundamental Jewish principle that must never be forgotten: kavod ha-briyot, human dignity. The dignity of another human being does not disappear because that person is politically inconvenient. Nor does the dignity of the vulnerable become less important because the person violating it happens to be powerful. Jewish ethics cannot be reduced to the proposition that whatever helps Jews politically is therefore morally acceptable. The president enters and, mysteriously, ordinary standards of judgment begin disappearing. Suddenly arrogance becomes strength. Cruelty becomes toughness. Recklessness becomes courage. Vanity becomes charisma. Insults become authenticity. Lies become strategy.

When rabbis publicly sanctify a politician's character because they want something from his administration, they are teaching their congregants that morality has a price. They are teaching young Jews that principles are absolute until principles become inconvenient. They are teaching that power deserves more courtesy than truth. They are teaching that if a man can help Jews, then his treatment of other people is somehow none of our business. 

A rabbi may meet with a president. He may advise him. He may thank him. He may advocate for American Jews. He may participate in a public ceremony. There is nothing inherently improper about any of this. In fact, Jewish history provides ample precedent for Jewish leaders dealing pragmatically with rulers. The principle of dina de-malkhuta dina itself emerged in a world where Jews had to navigate powerful governments while preserving Jewish life and communal autonomy.

The most disturbing possibility is not that rabbis show respect to a president. The disturbing possibility is that they might allow proximity to power to influence their definition of right and wrong. Once that happens, the rabbi ceases to function as a moral counterweight to political authority and becomes another ornament of political authority.

A Jew should never be so impressed by the man sitting in the White House that he forgets Who sits above it.

 

REPUBLISHED

 

https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/teaching-jews-that-principles-are-absolute-until-principles-become-inconvenient/
 

The charedi claim of being as entitled to exemptions as US clergy is a double fraud that needs to be exposed.

 

The Charedim Go to Trump

And invoke a uniquely American argument to be exempt from army service

Natan Slifkin Sep 5

READ IN APP

Credit: Molly Riley/Official White House Photo

This past Thursday, several leading Chassidic Rebbes, along with R. Malkiel Kotler of BMG Lakewood, met with President Trump. The chassidic rebbes included the Satmar Rebbes of both Kiryas Yoel, Aaron Teitelbaum, and that of Williamsburg, his brother Zalman Teitelbaum. They have been estranged and have fought bitterly for decades, but they put their differences aside for this occasion. Achdus!

The meeting opened with the Kiryas Yoel Rebbe reciting the Hanosein Teshuah prayer for Trump. This of course the traditional weekly Jewish prayer for the ruling powers of whatever country the Jews happen to be in. However, note that charedi rabbis, including these chassidic rabbis, generally do not recite it anymore on Shabbos, neither for the USA nor for Israel.

What was so important about this meeting with Trump that it brought these Chassidic rebbes for their first face-to-face meeting in two decades, along with the Rosh Yeshiva of Lakewood? Well, they discussed several things, including increasing welfare assistance for the undereducated and impoverished US charedi communities that they seek to keep undereducated and impoverished, and improving conditions for charedim in US prisons (consistent with the prevalent charedi approach of treating criminals as martyrs and heroes).

But the main topic of discussion was apparently something else, which does not quite tie in to the achdus theme (unless you define Klal Yisrael as referring strictly to charedim, which of course they effectively do). Here is a letter that was delivered to Trump:

“September 3, 2026

“The Honorable Donald J. Trump
President of the United States
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20500

“Dear Mr. President,

“On behalf of tens of thousands of Jews currently living in Israel, we are writing to you to request your assistance regarding a matter of the utmost importance to us.

“Long before you first ran for public office, you demonstrated great kindness toward the Jews whom you encountered. After you assumed the presidency, you extended that kindness to the Jewish people throughout the world. We will be forever grateful.

“In light of this longstanding relationship, we implore your intervention on behalf of the 100,000 students studying in Haredi yeshivas and seminaries in Israel. There is no need for us to explain to you the unique way of life of Haredi Judaism, generally known here in the United States as the ultra-Orthodox community.

“For nearly two hundred years, students attending recognized religious schools and training themselves to become ordained clergy have been exempt from conscription into the United States military. For more than seventy-five years, a similar exemption existed in Israel. Recently, it was abolished, a step that has had a devastating impact on the Haredi community.

“For many reasons, it is not practical for the IDF to accommodate the religious and cultural needs of the Haredi community. It would be almost impossible for Haredim to serve in a secular Israeli army without sacrificing their unique identity and relinquishing essential religious freedoms. Here in the United States, we enjoy the protections afforded by the First Amendment to the Constitution, protections that do not exist in Israel.

“It seems inconceivable that in the Land of Israel Jews are being deprived of their religious freedoms. Yet, tragically, this is the situation. Tens of thousands of God-fearing students, whose only desire is to continue living according to the tradition of their forefathers—a tradition reaching all the way back to the patriarchs of the nation—are living in genuine fear.

“As we write these words, dozens of students are imprisoned in military prisons because of their refusal to enlist. Every Haredi Jew of draft age walks the streets in fear and goes to sleep at night knowing that he may be arrested at any time, solely because of his religious faith.

“They are unable to leave the country for any reason, including in order to seek refuge elsewhere. As we understand it, thousands of American citizens who hold dual citizenship are unable to return to their homes.

“Mr. President: Since the days of the Founding Fathers, the world has not seen a leader so determined to defend religious freedom. You will be recorded in history alongside Thomas Jefferson and George Washington because of your courageous efforts to assist Jews throughout the world in practicing their faith in peace.

“We respectfully ask you to instruct your administration to raise this matter at the highest levels of the Israeli government, and to urge its leaders to follow your example by protecting the religious freedoms of ultra-Orthodox Jews instead of persecuting them.”

So finishes the letter.

Now, the most obvious horror with this letter is charedi Jews trying to recruit the US administration’s help to harm Israel. We saw this previously with Rabbi Dovid Hofstedter of Toronto (Dirshu), and now we’re seeing it with American charedi rabbis. Historically, it’s reminiscent of when Jews asked Rome to intervene in Jerusalem.

But it’s not just the effort that is a terrible thing. The lies in this letter are numerous. There was no seventy-five year exemption from the IDF for students in religious schools. Rather, there was an initial exemption for 400 students, to rebuild the losses of the Holocaust, which was gradually increased until Begin removed the cap, and successive charedi religious and political leaders then extended it to include even charedim who are not in yeshiva.

Likewise, it is a sheker on numerous levels to state that the only desire of charedim is to continue living according to a tradition, reaching all the way back to the patriarchs. First of all, there was no ancient tradition not to help with a defensive war! Second, there was not even a recent tradition to refuse to be economically self-sufficient. Charedim do not only desire an army exemption, they also demand a multitude of tax exemptions, welfare benefits, and additional funding.

But I also want to point out an additional distortion in this letter - the appeal to there being a similar exemption from the military in US history. This is something often voiced by charedim arguing for a draft exemption. But it is an utterly fraudulent comparison, for two reasons.

First is that the primary (and single most frequently cited legal) reason for the US exemption is that removing ministers from communities would damage civilian morale during a time of crisis. In a 1944 ruling against Isaac Trainin, an Orthodox Jew who was denied an exemption as being a rabbi, a U.S. Federal Appeals Court explained that ministers are exempt “not so much for their personal religious training and beliefs, but for the disruption of public worship and religious solace to the people at large which would be caused by their induction,” which accordingly did not apply to Trainin since he was only a part-time rabbi. Congress believed that keeping the home front spiritually stable was vital to national well-being. If the government drafted practicing clergy and stopped the training of future religious leaders (divinity students), entire communities would be left without spiritual guidance, funeral officiants, or counseling when they needed it most.

The exact opposite is the case with the vast majority of the 100,000 charedim seeking exemptions today. They are neither clergy nor divinity students training to be clergy - indeed, the goals of charedi yeshivos today are not at all for their students to enter the rabbinate, and are often specifically for them not to enter it. And unlike the situation with Christian clergy in the 1940s, it is their refusal to enlist which harms national morale and disrupts religious solace! (Dati-leumi rabbis and yeshiva students who enlist, in contrast, help national morale and inspire people with religious solace.)

The second critical difference between the US military exemption and the Israeli charedi desire for exemption is that the United States is a gigantic powerful country that has never suffered an existential threat. It is surrounded by oceans, Mexicans and Canadians. It has always had far more manpower available than it requires, and has accordingly historically been extremely generous with its exemptions. And, of course, it’s also important to keep the economy strong and society healthy during a war, as much as possible. Thus, the US historically gave broad exemptions to people merely on the basis of such things as their being in higher education and/or being married breadwinners.

Again, the exact opposite is the case with Israel. It is a tiny country facing constant immense threats. It needs to have a strict mandatory universal draft policy in order to survive. It cannot repeatedly deploy all its older reservists in a long conflict without suffering enormous domestic damage in all kinds of ways - which is what has been happening. Careers have crashed, emotional health problems have exploded, family lives have collapsed, marriages have broken, suicides have soared. The very broad exemptions that are possible and helpful for the US are devastating for Israel. And charedi isolation neither helps with the economy or society healthy - in fact it dramatically harms both.

The charedi claim of being as entitled to exemptions as US clergy is a double fraud that needs to be exposed. Please share this post with others.

סליחות ראשונות עם יצחק מאיר | אלול תשפ"ו | שידור חי מבנייני-האומה ירושלים

 

Hakdoma -"THE GREAT SELICHOT MUSIC CRISIS, GUITAR OR KEYBOARD" ---- Selichot at Slabodka -12 Harav Sher St., Bnei Brak, Israel : Contact: 972-3-5703358 - Limited Tickets Available

SLABODKA SELICHOT - KIPA SRUGOTS & BTs WILL BE EJECTED

 

SOME GEDOLIM AVAILABLE FOR YESHIVESHE SELICHOT IN THE USA - TZITZIS WEARING CHECKERS WILL BE AT THE DOOR  BEFORE ALLOWED ENTRY - YOUNG ISRAEL JEWS  "fuggetaboutit"

A few days later, in response to several days of reporters trying to get a straight story from the coroner, Diamantoni acknowledged that measles was documented as a contributing factor in the death.

 

Coroner Says Measles Wasn't the Cause of Infant's Death. Is He Right?

— Pennsylvania's health department and Lancaster County coroner have offered contradictory info

by Paul Offit, MD

August 31, 2026 • 4 min read

13

Stephen Diamantoni, MD

Paul Offit, MD, is director of the Vaccine Education Center at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, and author of the Beyond the Noise Substack.

On Aug. 25, the Pennsylvania Department of Health reported 393 measles cases and two associated deaths from an outbreak that centered on Lancaster County. One death was in a newborn infant. Within a couple of days, HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said the deaths may have been fabricated. This wasn't surprising. Just a year ago, when two little girls in West Texas died from measles, anti-vaccine activists -- who don't want us to believe that their anti-vaccine advocacy is killing children -- also claimed that poor medical care, not measles, had caused the deaths.

This time it's different. Anti-vaccine activists' claims were supported by a Lancaster County coroner named Stephen Diamantoni, MD, a board-certified family medicine practitioner, who said that measles was not the cause of the newborn's death. Diamantoni said that he had detected "measles virus in the infant's lung tissue," and that the baby had died from an internal hemorrhage and "traumatic rupture" of the spleen. Because measles virus can cause enlargement of the spleen and thinning of the splenic capsule, it is plausible that the child's splenic rupture occurred during the birth process, which can be traumatic. Nonetheless, the coroner stated that because "there was no swelling or enlargement [of the spleen] whatsoever," that he does not consider measles to be the cause of death.

Diamantoni is in a tough spot. Splenic ruptures are extremely rare in neonates. He is dealing with an unusual case. So, it's easy to understand his caution in assigning a cause. However, it's hard to make sense of what he is saying.

First, Diamantoni put a lot of emphasis on his finding of a normal-sized spleen, emphasizing it with the word "whatsoever." To him, this meant that measles virus didn't affect the spleen so it couldn't be the cause of death. However, once a spleen is ruptured, it's difficult to tell whether it was enlarged. For example, if you find a balloon on the ground that has burst, it's hard to know how big it was before it burst.

Second, Diamantoni might have found that the spleen was vulnerable because the child had suffered from something other than measles that had caused splenic fragility before birth; specifically, infections like congenital cytomegalovirus and rubella, hemolytic disorders, or certain inborn errors of metabolism. If Diamantoni had found any of these other problems, then he could confidently say that measles wasn't the cause. But if he hasn't, the only obvious cause left would be measles.

Third, Diamantoni is wrong to believe that a spleen must be quite enlarged to be fragile and at risk for rupture. Even mild or moderate enlargement of the spleen due to measles can still make the organ vulnerable to rupture. Also, a fragile splenic capsule can be difficult to determine post-mortem. It would have been of value here to look at the remaining splenic tissue to determine the presence of cells typically found during measles infection, such as multi-nucleated lymphocytes. This would have further solidified the case for measles virus as the cause of the splenic fragility. Perhaps this was done; if so, it should be reported to the public.

A few days later, in response to several days of reporters trying to get a straight story from the coroner, Diamantoni acknowledged that measles was documented as a contributing factor in the death. Diamantoni further explained that measles was listed under Part II of the infant's death certificate, which reports "other contributing conditions contributing to death but not resulting in the underlying cause." He said that this was listed on the death certificate to offer "a broader view of the general health of the child."

Diamantoni's clarification only caused more confusion. The critical question is clear: Would this infant have died if he hadn't been infected with measles? Although the press and public have grown increasingly frustrated with Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro (D) and the state's department of health for failing to make the cause of this child's death clear, the confusion lies with Diamantoni.

What do we know? We know that this infant was infected with measles while in the womb; we know that the infant died of splenic rupture; we know that measles infections can increase splenic fragility leading to rupture; and we know that splenic rupture is extraordinarily rare in newborns. It's understandable that Diamantoni is cautious about determining why this child died of splenic rupture given its rarity. Nonetheless, if Diamantoni is going to claim that measles wasn't the precipitating cause of this child's death, he is going to have to do a much better job of explaining why it wasn't.

A version of this post originally appeared in the Beyond the Noise Substack.

Dr. Zink said she could not remember a time when the C.D.C. publicly questioned a state’s determination of cause of death. State officials are increasingly “choosing not to share data with the C.D.C. because of mistrust how it might be used,” she said.

 

C.D.C. Director Challenges Pennsylvania’s Report of Two Measles Deaths

 

Questioning a state’s investigation is highly unusual for the public health agency, but reflects tensions between the Trump administration and many states over health issues.

Dr. Erica Schwartz, who has expressed strong support of childhood vaccines, was confirmed as C.D.C. director this month, despite persistent questions during her confirmation hearing about her willingness and ability to push back against Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s actions.

 

The new director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ordered agency officials to challenge two measles deaths reported by Pennsylvania, shunning the agency’s normal procedure of accepting data shared by states and amplifying comments made by her boss, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

The incident draws the C.D.C. into a highly political disagreement about whether the deaths were a result of measles or merely coincided with the infection, echoing similar disputes over causes of death during the coronavirus pandemic.

It also pits the agency against a state health department, an extraordinary move for the C.D.C. But the episode is emblematic of the Trump administration’s continuing tussle with states, particularly those led by Democrats, over health policies and priorities.

“This week’s measles outbreaks update will not include the two measles-associated deaths reported by the Pennsylvania Department of Health on Aug. 25,” the C.D.C. posted on its website, after Mr. Kennedy, in a social media post, accused the state’s Democratic governor of “manipulating” the truth.

One of the two deaths involved a newborn with a ruptured spleen. Details of the second case have not been disclosed, but both people were unvaccinated and both tested positive for the measles virus, according to the Pennsylvania Health Department.

Dr. Erica Schwartz, who has expressed strong, public support of childhood vaccines, was confirmed as C.D.C. director this month, despite persistent questions during her confirmation hearing about her willingness and ability to push back against Mr. Kennedy’s actions. She has repeatedly promised to “follow the science” and promised the agency’s staff that she was prepared to disagree with her superiors when needed, and that she would work to build trust with state partners.

But the current incident threatens to do the opposite, some public health experts cautioned.

“Having the C.D.C. question what the state is sharing will only lead to a further erosion of what is a really critical partnership between states and the federal government,” said Dr. Anne Zink, a public health expert at Yale University and a former chief medical officer for Alaska.

Dr. Schwartz did not respond to a request for comment.

The Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees the C.D.C., said the agency “has a responsibility to ensure its reporting accurately and transparently reflects what is known and what remains unconfirmed.”

“The two measles-associated deaths announced by Pennsylvania have not been confirmed based on the information currently available to C.D.C.,” the department said in a statement. “The information currently posted reflects the best available information and our commitment to transparency and telling the American people the truth — a foundational principle of the Trump administration.”

Pennsylvania is in the midst of a rapidly expanding measles outbreak that had sickened 497 people and hospitalized 87 as of Monday. Following the standard process for reporting cases of notifiable diseases like measles, the state’s Health Department reported two deaths to the C.D.C. last week, saying two people had tested positive for measles.

At a news conference last Tuesday, Gov. Josh Shapiro said the federal government was partly to blame for the hesitancy surrounding measles vaccinations.

“When the information we see coming from the federal government in some cases isn’t driven by facts and by science,” he said, “it makes it even more confusing for parents, and that has a serious impact.”

In a social media post on Wednesday, Mr. Kennedy accused the governor of taking “giddy delight in announcing two measles deaths” and suggested the deaths may have been “fabricated by one of the Governor’s hopeful staffers.” He added, “The Lancaster County Coroner says that it has no record of any measles deaths.” Contrary to Mr. Kennedy’s assertion, however, the state is not required to inform the county coroner of all deaths.

The state’s Health Department characterized the deaths as “measles-associated.” It uses that term “when laboratory or epidemiologic evidence of measles is present, but the disease may not be assessed by the medical certifier or coroner to be the immediate cause of death,” the department clarified in a social media post.

The disagreement involves in part the report of a newborn, whose mother was sick with measles, and who died shortly after birth. Although the newborn tested positive for the virus as well, the immediate cause of death was a ruptured spleen, Dr. Stephen Diamantoni, the Lancaster County coroner, said in an interview. Measles is more typically associated with complications such as pneumonia and encephalitis, but infection can lead to an enlarged spleen, which may make the organ more vulnerable to rupture.

On Friday, the C.D.C. did not update its weekly tally for measles cases and deaths as it was expected to, saying only that the update had been “delayed.” Staff members then updated the site on Sunday, appending an asterisked explanation about the Pennsylvania deaths that the “available information does not establish whether measles caused or contributed to the deaths or whether the individuals died from other causes while infected with measles.”

Dr. Schwartz ordered that highly unusual statement be added to the website, according to officials with knowledge of the events, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to talk about the matter.

“C.D.C. has historically relied on expertise of state and local health departments,” said Dr. Debra Houry, who served as the agency’s chief medical officer until she resigned a year ago.

“This is a moment for the C.D.C. director to speak publicly about the outbreak,” Dr. Houry said. “Delays in reporting of data further erode trust and create confusion.”

Neil Ruhland, a spokesman for the Pennsylvania Department of Health, said the state had meticulously investigated the deaths. “Every reported measles case is thoroughly reviewed to confirm it meets the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (C.D.C.) case definition for a measles case. To date, D.O.H. has provided all required epidemiological data to the C.D.C.”

Dr. Zink said she could not remember a time when the C.D.C. publicly questioned a state’s determination of cause of death. State officials are increasingly “choosing not to share data with the C.D.C. because of mistrust how it might be used,” she said.

“It’s definitely unusual, tragic and frustrating to see publicly this sort of back-and-forth disagreement with counties, states and the federal government over the cause of death,” she added.

Having a lacerated spleen may not be a well-known complication in part because experts know little about how measles affects a fetus, said Dr. William Moss, a measles expert at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Congenital measles has been exceptionally rare since the virus was declared eliminated in 2000, and measles infection in pregnancy significantly increases the risk of miscarriage or stillbirth.

It is possible that the C.D.C. is hesitating to document the deaths in order to further investigate the exact cause, Dr. Moss said. But that does not explain why the agency failed to log the second death reported by Pennsylvania health officials as related to measles, he said.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/31/health/measles-deaths-pennsylvania-schwartz-kennedy-shapiro.html

California lawmakers vote to change childhood sex abuse law

 

SACRAMENTO — The California state Legislature voted Sunday to amend a 2019 law that extended the statute of limitations for childhood sexual abuse claims but was blamed for draining the coffers of municipalities and school districts.

Senate Bill 577 by John Laird (D-Santa Cruz) follows years of heated debate over the state law, which resulted in scores of lawsuits against cities, counties and schools.

Since the law was enacted, L.A. County has agreed to pay nearly $5 billion to settle more than 12,000 claims stemming from alleged sexual abuse committed by government employees in foster homes and juvenile halls.

Advertisement

Paid Content

Is your car always in the repair shop?

By Quill & Arrow

The bill passed by the Legislature on Sunday requires victims older than 40 to provide evidence that the public entity was aware of the misconduct that resulted in the assault and failed to take reasonable steps to avoid it.

It also states that attorneys who file fraudulent sex abuse lawsuits can be fined $25,000 per violation. The Times reported last year on nine plaintiffs who said they were paid to sue the county over sex abuse, some of whom said they were told to fabricate their claims.

Consumer attorneys, counties and victims rights groups jostled over the elements of the proposed bill over the last few months.

Advertisement

Paid Content

Free Case Review for Defective Vehicles

By Quill & Arrow

Lawmakers stopped short of capping payouts in the bill, a change sought by some local governments and school districts.

The legislation follows multiple attempts to change the law in recent years. Sen. Benjamin Allen (D-Santa Monica) tried last year to increase the burden of proof for sex abuse cases, but pulled the bill after outrage from victims rights groups.

Some of the groups blasted the bill this week, arguing it would shield rapists and deny justice to survivors.

Speaking on the floor of the state Senate on Sunday, Laird said that he tried to balance the needs of all parties.

The bill now goes to Gov. Gavin Newsom for his consideration.

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2026-08-30/california-lawmakers-vote-to-change-childhood-sex-abuse-law