(COLCHESTER, Vt.) — A federal judge issued a temporary restraining order to keep Mohsen Mahdawi, the Columbia student who was arrested during his citizenship interview last week, in Vermont while his case proceeds.
In the written order filed on Thursday morning, U.S. District Judge Geoffrey Crawford said the order was necessary to “prevent disputes” about jurisdiction “or any other issues that may arise in the case of involuntary movement of a petitioner between states.”
On Wednesday, Judge Crawford said he was going to issue the temporary restraining order and ordered a hearing for next week to decide whether Mahdawi should be released while the case continues.
Mahdawi, who co-founded a university organization called the Palestinian Student Union with detained Columbia student Mahmoud Khalil, is a permanent resident of the U.S. and was taking his last step in the process for him to become a U.S. citizen before his arrest, his attorneys said.
During the hearing Wednesday, attorneys for Mahdawi argued that the federal judge in Vermont should preserve the court’s jurisdiction in the case and said that an immigration court “does not have the authority to address the egregious violation of his First Amendment.”
The judge seemed to agree with Mahdawi’s attorneys and pointed out that Mahdawi is a Vermont resident and that he was arrested in the state.
Judge Crawford said that he will give the government until Monday to reply to Mahdawi’s attorneys’ motion for release.
Michael Drescher, the acting U.S. attorney for the District of Vermont, said Wednesday he was not authorized to “justify” the extension of the TRO to keep Mahdawi in Vermont. Drescher also requested an opportunity to respond to Mahdawi’s attorney’s motion from Tuesday requesting his release.
“It is a privilege to be granted a visa or green card to live and study in the United States of America,” Tricia McLaughlin, assistant secretary for public affairs at the Department of Homeland Security, told ABC News in a statement. “When you advocate for violence, glorify and support terrorists that relish the killing of Americans, and harass Jews, that privilege should be revoked, and you should not be in this country.”
(TOPSFIELD, Mass.) — A 49-year-old mother of four died on Wednesday after she fell about 50 to 75 feet from a cliff while hiking at Purgatory Chasm in Massachusetts.
The woman, who was from Topsfield, Massachusetts, was hiking at the Purgatory Chasm State Reservation in Sutton just before 2 p.m. when the incident took place, according to local police. She was hiking with three of her children and other family members when she fell, authorities said.
“There were multiple medical professionals in the area hiking the chasm at the same time, and were able to provide medical attention right away,” Sutton police said. “However, she had succumbed to the injuries sustained during the fall, and was pronounced deceased a short time later.”
The chasm, a popular hiking destination about 20 minutes south of Worcester, is closed in the winter due to slippery conditions. However, the weather was warm and dry on Wednesday.
The fall remains under investigation, but appears to be accidental, police said.
The Sutton Fire Department, Massachusetts State Police, Northbridge Police Department, LifeStar and others were involved in the rescue efforts, according to Sutton police.
“There are trails above the chasm you can go along, [and] dangerous overhangs if you’re going to the edge to look down,” hiker Andy Spears told Boston ABC affiliate WCVB. “It’s really sad that it had to happen at a place like this.”
The woman was not identified, out of respect to the family, according to Sutton police.
“Lastly, the Sutton Police Department would like to extend our condolences to the family during this very difficult time,” the department said.
(WASHINGTON) — The Trump administration is acknowledging it deported four noncitizens to El Salvador despite a court order barring the removal of people to countries other than their place of origin without an opportunity to raise concerns about their safety.
In a series of court filings overnight, Justice Department lawyers argued that the court order was not violated because the removal of four alleged members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua was carried out by the Department of Defense — not the Department of Homeland Security, which is a defendant in the lawsuit.
U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy issued a court order on March 28 requiring that anyone with a final order of removal must have an opportunity to raise concerns about their safety before they are deported to a so-called “third country” that is not on their order of removal or their country of origin.
Three days after Judge Murphy’s order, the four men — who are originally from Venezuela — were flown from U.S. Naval Station Guantanamo Bay to El Salvador, according to a sworn declaration from Tracey Huettl, a unit chief for field operations with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Huettl said that each of the four men were identified as members of Tren de Aragua by federal law enforcement, and had extensive criminal records.
According to her declaration, one man admitted he was a member of the gang and that he recruited prostitutes for the organization, and another was charged with multiple crimes including discharge of a firearm and theft.
Another man is allegedly a sex offender who was charged with human smuggling and convicted for domestic assault, and the last was arrested for possession and use of drug-related objects.
None of the men had orders of removal to El Salvador before they were deported to that country on March 31, according to the filings.
Judge Murphy set an April 28 conference earlier this month to learn more about what he described as the “potential violations of the temporary restraining order.”
Last Friday, the judge issued a preliminary injunction requiring the Trump administration to give noncitizens the chance to raise concerns about their safety before they are removed to third countries.
(LONDON) — At least nine people were killed and dozens more were injured in an overnight Russian attack on several districts and residential areas in Kyiv, Ukrainian officials said on Thursday, prompting President Donald Trump to issue a directive to Russian President Vladimir Putin: “Vladimir, STOP!”
“I am not happy with the Russian strikes on KYIV. Not necessary, and very bad timing,” Trump said on social media on Thursday. “Vladimir, STOP! 5000 soldiers a week are dying. Lets get the Peace Deal DONE!”
President Volodymyr Zelenskyy of Ukraine, who is traveling in South Africa, said Thursday he would cancel part of his planned visit and return to Ukraine earlier than expected.
“It is extremely important that everyone around the world sees and understands what is really happening,” he said. “Nearly 70 missiles, including ballistic ones. And about 150 attack drones.”
The Russian attack came amid intensifying negotiations to end the war, with White House officials pressuring Zelenskyy and Ukraine to accept a potential peace plan that may include ceding land to Russia, according to a senior Ukrainian official. Trump on Wednesday accused Zelenskyy of prolonging “the ‘killing field.'”
At least 70 people were injured overnight, including 42 who were hospitalized, Ukraine’s State Emergency Service said in a post on the Telegram messaging app. Zelenskyy a few hours later said more than 80 people had been injured.
Six children were among the injured, the emergency service said.
“Overnight, Russia held a massive attack on Ukraine,”the Ministry of Defense said. “Cruise missiles, drones, ballistic weapons — yet another strike on peaceful cities and Ukrainian homes.”
Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov confirmed the strike, saying the Russian “military continues to fulfill its tasks, which are set by the supreme commander-in-chief.” He added that military orders from Moscow include striking “military and near-military targets.”
Rescue operations were continuing early on Thursday in the capital, where first responders were digging through the rubble of residential buildings for survivors, defense officials said.
“These attacks are yet another confirmation — Russia is not seeking peace. It continues to kill Ukrainians,” the ministry said on social media.
Outside of Kyiv, Russia also targeted the Zhytomyr, Dnipropetrovsk, Kharkiv, Poltava, Khmelnytskyi, Sumy and Zaporizhzhia regions overnight into Thursday, the ministry said.
“While claiming to seek peace, Russia launched a deadly airstrike on Kyiv,” Kaja Kallas, the European Union’s high representative for Foreign Affairs, said on social media. “This isn’t a pursuit of peace, it’s a mockery of it. The real obstacle is not Ukraine but Russia, whose war aims have not changed.”
(BALTIMORE) — A federal judge in Maryland has ordered the Trump administration to facilitate the return of a 20-year-old Venezuelan man deported to El Salvador, whose removal violated a previous court settlement, according to an order issued on Wednesday.
U.S. District Judge Stephanie Gallagher, a Trump appointee, also ordered the government not to remove other individuals covered by the settlement.
The class action case from 2019 was filed on behalf of individuals who entered the U.S. as unaccompanied minors and later sought asylum.
The group sued the government to be able to have their asylum applications adjudicated while they remained in the United States. The parties settled in 2024.
Attorneys for the plaintiffs say the Trump administration, in breach of the settlement agreement, removed one of the class members — referred to using the pseudonym “Cristian” in court records — to El Salvador on March 15 when it deported three planeloads of alleged migrant gang members to the CECOT mega-prison there.
In an opinion filed Wednesday, Judge Gallagher referenced the case of wrongly deported Kilmar Abrego Garcia, and said that “like Judge [Paula] Xinis in the Abrego Garcia matter, this court will order Defendants to facilitate Cristian’s return to the United States so that he can receive the process he was entitled to under the parties’ binding Settlement Agreement.”
The judge’s order was first reported by ABC News. Judge Gallagher said that facilitating Cristian’s return requires the defendants “making a good faith request to the government of El Salvador and to release Cristian to U.S. custody for transport back to the United States to await the adjudication of his asylum application on the merits by USCIS.”
Gallagher called the deportation a “breach of contract.”
“At bottom, this case, unlike other cases involving the government’s removal of individuals under the Alien Enemies Act, is a contractual dispute because of the Settlement Agreement,” attorneys for the plaintiff said, referring to the 18th century wartime authority used to remove noncitizens with little-to-no due process.
The Trump administration, according to the order, contends that the removal of Cristian did not violate the settlement because “his designation as an alien enemy pursuant to the AEA results in him ceasing to be a member.”
In a sworn declaration, an official for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement said that Cristian was arrested in January for possession of cocaine.
“On January 6, 2025, [“Cristian”] was convicted in the 482nd District Court at Harris County, Texas for the offense of possession of cocaine, a Texas state jail felony,” said Robert Cerna, the Acting Field Office Director for Enforcement and Removal Operations.
Cerna said that following the invocation of the AEA, ICE determined that Cristian was subject to removal.
“On March 15, 2025, [“Cristian”] was removed under the Alien Enemies Act, 50 U.S.C. Ch. 3, pursuant to Presidential Proclamation 10,903, as a Venezuelan citizen 14 years of age or older who is a member of TdA,” Cerna said, referring to the Venezuelan criminal gang Tren de Aragua.
“Allegations that Class Members, like Cristian, are subject to the AEA do not exclude those individuals from the Class under the plain terms of the Settlement Agreement,” attorneys for the plaintiff argued.
Counsel for the class of migrants also alleged in court filings that another Venezuelan man, identified as an 18-year-old named Javier in the court records, was in imminent danger of being deported earlier this month.
Judge Gallagher determined that Javier was covered by the settlement agreement and entered a temporary restraining order prohibiting the government from removing him from the United States.
Dr. Pinsak Suraswadi, the Director General of the Department of Marine and Coastal Resources conducts a survey on reefs affected by coral bleaching on May 07, 2024 in Trat, Thailand. (Photo by Sirachai Arunrugstichai/Getty Images)
(NEW YORK) — The world’s coral reefs are in the midst of the fourth and largest global bleaching event in recorded history, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration announced this week.
The grim milestone was recorded between January 2023 and April 2025, with the agency documenting that bleaching-level heat stress has impacted 83.7% of the world’s coral reef area.
The impacted reefs span at least 83 countries and territories, the agency said.
Since early 2023, mass bleaching of coral reefs has been confirmed in the Atlantic, Pacific and Indian ocean basins, including parts of Florida and the coastline of the United States, the Caribbean, Central America, South America, Australia, the South Pacific, the Persian Gulf, coasts of East Africa and Indonesia, according to NOAA.
The agency deemed this ongoing bleaching event “the biggest to date,” noting that the previous record was set with 68.2% of reefs affected during the third-largest bleaching period, between 2014 and 2017.
The first and second global coral bleaching events occurred in 1998 and 2010, respectively, according to the agency.
Bleaching occurs when warmer ocean temperatures cause the expulsion of algae that live in the coral tissue. This leaves the coral completely white, known as coral bleaching. Coral bleaching does not necessarily mean corals will die, according to NOAA, which noted that corals can recuperate if the strain on their ecosystems is reduced.
At a local level, storms, disease, sediments and changes in salinity can cause corals to bleach; however, mass bleaching, when several varieties of coral reefs are bleached, is largely caused by increased sea temperatures, according to the Australian Institute of Marine Science.
(WASHINGTON) — Democratic lawmakers sent a series of letters early Thursday morning to nine separate law firms that have struck agreements this spring with the Trump administration, questioning whether the deals for pro bono work in exchange for the reversal of executive orders issued by President Donald Trump or to avoid being targeted in future missives may violate federal bribery, extortion, honest services fraud or racketeering laws.
In correspondence, shared exclusively with ABC News, California Democratic Rep. Dave Min and Maryland Democratic Rep. April Delaney are leading 15 Democratic colleagues in demanding details of the arrangements from the leadership of some of the country’s most elite law firms from Washington to New York.
The firms included in the letter are: Kirkland & Ellis LLP, Latham & Watkins LLP, Allen Overy Shearman Sterling LLP, Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP, and Milbank LLP.
Throughout the spring, Trump announced in posts on his social media platform, fresh agreements with the firms — totaling nearly $1 billion in pro-bono work. Trump’s posts also show that firms agreed to strike Diversity, Equity and Inclusion considerations from their hiring practices — committing to “Merit-Based Hiring, Promotion, and Retention” while also pledging that they would not deny representation to clients based on political views.
The agreements worry the Democratic lawmakers, who believe the deals “capitulate to clear abuse of the law by the Trump administration.”
On April 10, during a Cabinet meeting, Trump floated the idea that the pro-bono commitments could be used to “help” the United States with trade negotiations as he imposes tariffs across the globe.
“So I think we’re going to and trying to use these, these very prestigious firms to help us out with the trade because, you know, we have a lot of countries, but we want to make deals that are proper for the United States,” Trump told reporters.
“By entering into an agreement that appears to be in response to the threat of illegal economic coercion against your firm from the Trump administration, your firm is not simply agreeing to provide certain pro bono services or end certain personnel hiring and retention practices,” the lawmakers caution in their letter. “Agreements of this kind also signal acquiescence to an abuse of federal power, raising serious questions about how or whether your firm would represent clients or take on matters that might be seen as antagonistic to President Trump or his agenda.”
On April 11, the president announced that Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft — a famed Wall Street powerhouse — is among the firms that struck a deal, committing $100 million dollars in pro-bono services itself. Cadwalader is the former law firm of Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, who served as the president’s former criminal defense attorney in 2024 before joining the current administration.
“Law firms are just saying: ‘Where do I sign? Where do I sign?'” Trump said March 26. “Nobody can believe it.”
“We do not wish to prematurely judge or assess guilt,” the letter states. “Our aim however, is to gather comprehensive information with respect to the formation and implementation of the…agreement and resulting legal and ethical quandaries.”
The letters request details from each firm on its “motivations for entering into this agreement, how was an agreement reached, and what specific terms or promises were made.” The lawmakers also inquire whether the deals comply with state bar ethics requirements, contending that the agreements may raise issues with state bar professional codes of conduct rules for lawyers.
“We are sympathetic to the circumstances in which your firm finds itself, with the Administration using coercive and illegal measures to target certain law firms and threaten their ability to represent and retain their clients,” the letter states, requesting a response from each firm by May 8.
ABC News’ Michelle Stoddart & Katherine Faulders contributed to this report
(WASHINGTON) — A federal judge is temporarily pausing discovery in the case of the wrongful deportation of Kilmar Abrego Garcia.
U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis issued an order Wednesday evening pausing expedited discovery in the case for seven days. The move came after the Trump administration, in a sealed motion earlier in the day, asked the judge for the pause.
The judge’s order said the pause was made with the agreement of both the government and attorneys representing Abrego Garcia.
On Tuesday, Xinis had ordered the government to more fully answer questions about the wrongful deportation and to respond by Wednesday evening to discovery requests from Abrego Garcia’s attorneys.
Last week, Xinis slammed Justice Department attorneys over their inaction in the case and ordered government officials to testify under oath through expedited discovery.
“Given that this Court expressly warned Defendants and their counsel to adhere strictly to their discovery obligations … their boilerplate, non-particularized objections are presumptively invalid and reflect a willful refusal to comply with this Court’s Discovery Order and governing rules,” Xinis wrote Tuesday.
Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran native who has been living with his wife and children in Maryland, was deported in March to El Salvador’s CECOT mega-prison — despite a 2019 court order barring his deportation to that country due to fear of persecution — after the Trump administration claimed he was a member of the criminal gang MS-13.
The Trump administration, while acknowledging that Abrego Garcia was deported to El Salvador in error, has said that his alleged MS-13 affiliation makes him ineligible to return to the United States. His wife and attorney have denied that he is an MS-13 member.
Judge Xinis early this month ruled that the Trump administration must “facilitate” Abrego Garcia’s return, and the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously affirmed that ruling, “with due regard for the deference owed to the Executive Branch in the conduct of foreign affairs.”
Earlier Tuesday, government attorneys asserted that providing detailed information on the legal basis for Abrego Garcia’s confinement would be “wholly inappropriate and an invasion of diplomatic discussions,” according to a joint letter outlining the discovery disputes between the parties.
“Upon Abrego’s repatriation to El Salvador, his detention was no longer a matter of the United States’ confinement, but a matter belonging to the government of El Salvador — which has been explained to the Plaintiffs repeatedly,” the government said.
Attorneys for Abrego Garcia in the letter accused the Trump administration of responding to their discovery requests by producing “nothing of substance” and providing interrogatory responses that are “non-responsive.”
(LITTLE ROCK, Ark.) — Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders and the state’s entire GOP congressional delegation are urging President Donald Trump to reconsider after the Federal Emergency Management denied the state’s request for federal disaster relief following a series of deadly storms last month.
After severe storms hit the state in mid-March, Sanders applied for disaster relief through FEMA, under what’s known as a major disaster declaration. The request was denied.
“As Governor Sanders noted in her request, these storms caused catastrophic damage across the state, resulting in disastrous amounts of debris, widespread destruction to homes and businesses, the deaths of three Arkansans, and injuries to many more,” the state’s two Republican senators and four GOP House members wrote in an April 21 letter to Trump. “Given the cumulative impact and sheer magnitude of destruction from these severe weather events, federal assistance is vital to ensure that state and local communities have the capabilities needed to rebuild.”
This isn’t the first time FEMA has denied state requests recently. Earlier this month, Democratic Gov. Bob Ferguson, of Washington, said FEMA had denied his state’s application for federal disaster relief stemming from a “bomb cyclone” that slammed the state last November.
“This is another troubling example of the federal government withholding funding,” Ferguson said in a statement. “Washington communities have been waiting for months for the resources they need to fully recover from last winter’s devastating storms, and this decision will cause further delay. We will appeal.”
FEMA also denied a request from North Carolina’s Democratic Gov. Josh Stein to extend 100% federal funding for debris removal related to last fall’s devastating Hurricane Helene beyond an initial 180-day timeline.
However, the situation in Arkansas marks the first time that Republicans have publicly pushed back on a denial of FEMA relief requests.
Sanders served as the White House press secretary during Trump’s first term.
ABC News has requested comment from FEMA about why Arkansas’ request was denied.
During a visit in January to parts of North Carolina still left battered by Helene, Trump sharply criticized FEMA and suggested states could manage disaster relief better than the federal government.
“You want to use your state to fix it and not waste time calling FEMA,” he said. “And then FEMA gets here and they don’t know the area. They’ve never been to the area, and they want to give you rules that you’ve never heard about. They want to bring people that aren’t as good as the people you already have. And FEMA has turned out to be a disaster.”
In January, Trump issued an executive order creating a review council to examine the agency and make recommendations for overhauling it.
(NEW YORK) — During a press conference on Tuesday, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. unveiled a plan to start phasing out eight synthetic food dyes in the American food supply.
HHS and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration are looking to revoke authorization for two synthetic food colorings and to work with food manufacturers to eliminate six remaining synthetic dyes used in foods such as cereal, snacks, ice creams and yogurts.
Kennedy has previously been vocal about his opposition to artificial dyes, claiming they are harmful and calling for them to be removed from foods and beverages.
Studies have linked dyes to behavioral changes as well as to cancer in animals, suggesting this may extend to humans.
Some nutritionists and dietitians say that it’s best to avoid artificial food dyes, while others say more research needs to be done and the potential negative effects are still unclear.
What are synthetic dyes and where are they found?
Many years ago, some synthetic dyes were produced from by-products of coal processing, according to the FDA. Today, many dyes are petroleum-based and made through chemical processes.
They appear in many different types of foods including candies, ice cream, frozen desserts, crackers, chips, energy bars, cereals, beverages and more.
Halle Saperstein, a clinical dietitian at Henry Ford Health in Detroit, told ABC News her research has found there are about 36,000 products with Red No. 40, about 8,000 products that contain Red No. 3 and about one in 10 products that contain another type of synthetic food dye.
“The other thing to note is that many products contain multiple petroleum food dyes, not just one specific one,” she said.
Sandra Zhang, a registered dietician nutritionist and pediatric dietitian at the Frances Stern Nutrition Center at Tufts Medical Center in Boston, said synthetic dyes are very prevalent and are mostly used in packaged, processed foods that can be found in supermarkets and grocery stores.
“Synthetic food dyes are not found in nature, so they are man-made entirely,” Zhang said. “And so, they have no nutritional properties or benefits whatsoever. They are made only to enhance the appearance of foods.”
What have studies shown?
Research has suggested that some synthetic food dyes may be associated with behavioral issues in children and teenagers.
A 2012 meta-analysis from Oregon Health and Science University found artificial food colors may affect children’s behavior and exacerbate symptoms of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.
Another 2012 study found artificial food coloring is not a major cause of ADHD but can affect children whether or not they are diagnosed with the condition.
Additionally, a 2022 analysis from the California Environmental Protection Agency and two California universities found that there may be an association between synthetic food dyes and behavioral issues even in children without a diagnosed behavioral disorder.
In 2019, the FDA said an advisory committee did not establish a “causal link” between synthetic color additives and behavioral effects, but did recommend further research on the issue.
Are synthetic food dyes safe?
Experts are divided on the issue. Saperstein said she sees a credible link between behavior and synthetic food dye consumption based on the studies she’s read.
Zhang said she’s not sure if there’s a link between behavioral issues and synthetic food dyes and that more research needs to be done.
“At least from my patient care experience, I’m not observing … a kid consuming Gatorade every day makes a huge difference” in their behavior, she said.
She added, however, that scientific research linking dyes to neurobehavioral changes was done on animals.
Whether or not synthetic dyes are safe to consume, experts agree it is best to limit artificial food coloring consumption when possible.
Jennifer Pomeranz, an associate professor of public health policy and management at NYU School of Global Public Health, said she believes there is no need for artificial food dyes in the food supply because they don’t act as preservatives and they don’t have any nutritional benefits.
“There are natural dyes that [companies] can use,” she said. “And frankly, there’s really no need for such a brightly colored food supply.”
Earlier this year, under the administration of former President Joe Biden, the FDA said it was moving to ban the use of Red No. 3 in foods, beverages and medications after it was found to cause cancer in rats.
On the heels of Kennedy’s Tuesday announcement about eliminating other synthetic dyes, the International Association of Color Manufacturers, the trade association for the color additives industry, released a statement criticizing the HHS decision.
“Color additives have been rigorously reviewed by global health authorities, such as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the European Food Safety Authority, and the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives, with no safety concerns,” the statement read. “Requiring reformulation by the end of 2026 ignores scientific evidence and underestimates the complexity of food production”
What about natural alternatives?
During Tuesday’s press conference, FDA Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary mentioned watermelon juice and carrot juice as natural alternatives to synthetic dyes.
Some food manufacturers use concentrated forms of natural pigments found in fruits and plants — such as beets, blackberries, paprika, saffron, tamarind and turmeric — as dyes.
As the food industry shifts to natural dyes, more research should be done to study their safety and to formulate regulations on the concentration levels, Zhang said.
The FDA said on Tuesday it is fast-tracking the review of four new natural color additives: calcium phosphate, Galdieria extract blue, gardenia blue and butterfly pea flower extract.
Gardenia blue and butterfly pea flower extract come from plants, Galdieria extract blue comes from algae and calcium phosphate is a chemical compound.
Expert say food companies use synthetic dyes to color their products because they are cheaper compared to natural dyes. Some companies have stated their products are safe for consumption, and they are following federal standards set by the FDA.
Saperstein said another reason companies might use synthetic dyes is psychological, because people are more drawn to brightly colored foods than foods with muted colors.
“We’ve seen stories of companies switching [to natural dyes] and they feel it’s not bright enough, so they switch back,” Pomeranz said.
