Lil Tjay is thankful for those who’ve sent him well wishes as he recovers from a near-fatal shooting. Taking to Instagram Wednesday, the rapper spoke up for the first time since being shot at a New Jersey shopping center.
“Hey, what’s going on, y’all, it’s your boy Tjay, man. I’m just checking in with y’all,” he said in a video shared on Instagram. “I just wanna say thanks for the love, thanks for the support. I been looking at the DMs … the comments and everything else, and I feel love.”
Tjay was shot in the thoracic cavity during an attempted robbery in June. He underwent emergency surgery and was unconscious but survived despite concerns he wouldn’t make it.
“Seven shots, it was tough, you know?” the rapper said to his fans. “Most people don’t survive it, but I’m here. Here for a reason, and new music coming soon. We gonna come back stronger than ever. Love y’all.”
Suspect Mohamed Konate faces three counts of first-degree attempted murder, three counts of first-degree armed robbery and multiple weapons-related charges for his role in the attempted robbery-turned-shooting. Tjay’s friends Antoine Boyd and Jeffrey Valdez, who were present at the time, were also arrested on a second-degree unlawful possession of a weapon charge.
Tjay’s message follows reports of a New York City billboard announcing his imminent return.
(NEW YORK) — As alarms over inflation and a possible recession sounded in recent months, a stock market rally offered a source of optimism — until this week.
The S&P 500 fell 2.1% on Monday, its worst day in more than two months. As of trading on Wednesday afternoon, the index had recovered some of its losses but remained down for the week.
The recent drop marks the latest swing of this year’s market seesaw. Bouncing back from a historic plunge over the first half of 2022, the S&P 500 rose more than 15% during a two-month period beginning in mid-June. Over that same period, the tech-heavy Nasdaq spiked more than 17% and the Dow Jones Industrial Average rose nearly 14%.
In fact, that rally makes up a key reason for the downturn in recent days, as investors determined that stocks became overpriced, market analysts said. The plunge also stems from fear that the Federal Reserve will continue a series of aggressive rate hikes, which aim to slash inflation by slowing the economy but risk tipping the U.S. into a recession, they added.
But analysts differed over whether this week’s downturn marks a brief hiccup or a sign of more losses to come, suggesting that murky economic data supports varied interpretations about the outlook of the economy and in turn corporate profits, the key focus for stock forecasters.
“Markets don’t go up or down forever,” Ed Yardeni, the president of market advisory firm Yardeni Research and former chief investment strategist at Deutsche Bank’s U.S. equities division, told ABC News. “At some point, buyers get exhausted and new buyers think things have gotten expensive and are waiting for a pullback.”
“It’s a tug of war between the bulls and the bears,” he added. “For a while, the bears were gaining ground. Over the last couple months, the bulls gained ground and now we may be at a standoff for a while.”
The volatility in markets owes in large part to looming concern that sky-high inflation will require the Fed to pursue ongoing, sizable hikes to interest rates, which would slow the economy and risk a recession, the analysts said.
Typically, the market has climbed in response to news about slowing inflation and a potential softening of rate increases; inflation spikes and rate moves are a common cause of selloffs.
For instance, lower-than-expected inflation data released earlier this month sent the S&P 500 soaring to its highest level in three months, reflecting optimism that price increases have peaked.
At meetings in each of the past two months, the central bank has increased its benchmark interest rate 0.75% — dramatic hikes last matched in 1994.
The rate increases may have contributed to a slowdown in price hikes. While still elevated, price increases last month waned from the near-historic pace reached in June, according to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The consumer price index, or CPI, rose 8.5% over the past year as of July, a marked slowdown from a 9.1% year-over-year rate measured in June, the bureau said.
Still, Fed officials have signaled in recent days that the central bank intends to continue a series of rate hikes, aiming to bring inflation back down to its target of 2%. Last Thursday, San Francisco Federal Reserve President Mary Daly told CNN that a 50- or 75-point basis hike at the central bank’s meeting next month would be “reasonable” and that rate hikes would continue into at least 2023.
Such signals from the Fed have contributed to the market decline this week, Ivan Feinseth, a market analyst at Tigress Financial, told ABC News.
“There’s fear that the Fed will have to raise rates aggressively to fend off inflation, but also fear of overreaching and the Fed in and of itself decimating the economy,” he said.
Market forecasters also face the challenge of murky economic data, Guggenheim analyst John DiFucci told ABC News.
Inflation remains near a 40-year high and GDP has slowed, raising the specter of stagflation, a damaging combination of high prices and anemic growth. But observers can take solace in employment data, which persists at robust levels, as the economy added a blockbuster 528,000 jobs last month and the unemployment rate stands at 3.5%.
“Things look pretty strong in certain indicators of the macro economy, whereas things look pretty weak in other indicators,” he said. “That’s the schizophrenic behavior of the market.”
Analysts offered conflicting assessments of the market outlook, in part because the murky market data sets an uncertain future for the economy.
The Fed may ease off of its aggressive rate hikes if inflation continues to fall, which could send stocks higher toward the end of the year, said Feinseth of Tigress Financial.
“We could see a new all-time high in the stock market by the end of year,” he said.
A potential recession, however, would hammer corporate profits, causing a prolonged downturn in the market, said DiFucci of Guggenheim.
“If we’re going to go through a longer period of weakness, stocks that typically trade at higher multiples are likely to moderate or come down,” he said. “It’s as simple as that.”
Yardeni, who identifies as “right in the middle” on the spectrum between market bears and bulls, predicted that stocks would move “sideways.”
“Everyone is asking these days if the market will be up or down,” he said. “The third option is nowhere fast.”
(Note Language) Offset is reportedly suing Migos’ record label for their failure to honor a deal made in 2021.
In court documents obtained by TMZ, the rapper claimed he negotiated a deal with Quality Control Records in which he “paid handsomely” for his artist rights, but in spite of that, the label is claiming credit for his newest single.
“54321,” produced by Baby Keem, was released under Motown Records’ Universal Music Group. According to Offset, QC is claiming ownership of the song. The rapper is calling out the “hostile” act and asking the court to declare that he owns all rights to solo projects recorded from January 15, 2021, onward — including his upcoming single featuring Moneybagg Yo.
Getting wind of the suit, Quality Control CEO Pierre “P” Thomas responded to the allegations, seemingly alluding to Offset as the “problem.” “The last lawsuit was filed publicly and dismissed quietly,” he penned in a tweet. “Let’s see how this one go. Been to real for all this lame s***. Everyone know the real problem.”
Offset then replied, calling P out for attempting to take credit on his track after he bought himself out of his solo deal with the label.
“N**gas act like im the problem I paid millions to get my rights back,” the “Clout” rapper wrote. “N**ga you black balled me I ain’t said S*** one time homie I ain’t spoke to you in 2 years now I drop and you want ya name on my credit?”
(LONDON) — The internet personality and former kickboxer Andrew Tate has spoken out after being banned from Facebook, Instagram, YouTube and TikTok this week, accused of misogyny.
Tate, who first came into the public eye when he was ejected from the U.K. reality show Big Brother in 2016, has gone viral across these platforms over the last few months, amassing hundreds of thousands of followers in the process.
The ban comes after the 35-year-old’s comments were branded to be “wildly misogynistic” by activist groups.
In videos originally uploaded to YouTube, Tate appeared to claim that women should “stay at home” and that women “belong” to their male partners.
He was banned from Twitter in 2017, after allegedly saying that victims of sexual assault must ‘bear some responsibility’ in response to the rise of the #MeToo movement.
Before being banned from Instagram, Tate had managed to acquire 4.7 million followers on his Instagram and over 760,000 subscribers on YouTube, according to HypeAuditor, an analytics website.
As well as his popularity on his social media accounts, Tate has amassed over 100,000 subscribers on his website ‘Hustler’s University.’
The online platform gives subscribers classes on topics such as cryptocurrency and personal finance for a $49 monthly fee.
Users were encouraged to share Tate’s controversial content in order to get more sign-ups for Hustler’s University through their personal affiliate links, earning them a commission. The affiliate system was shut down this week after Tate’s ban from Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram.
A spokesperson from Meta told ABC News that he had ‘violated [their] policies’ which resulted in the ban.
Although his official account is banned, the hashtag #AndrewTate on TikTok has 14.1 billion views.
Some of these videos are clips of Tate shared by his supporters, however many of them are individuals’ reactions to Tate’s controversial views, which in turn has amplified his messaging.
“Misogyny is a hateful ideology that is not tolerated on TikTok,” a spokesperson for the social platform told ABC News. “Our investigation into this content is ongoing, as we continue to remove violative accounts and videos, and pursue measures to strengthen our enforcement, including our detection models, against this type of content.”
YouTube did not immediately respond to a request for comment from ABC News. The video platform told the Independent, “We terminated channels associated with Andrew Tate for multiple violations of our community guidelines and terms of service, including our hate speech policy. If a channel is terminated, the uploader is unable to use, own or create any other YouTube channels.”
In a video shared on Vimeo on Wednesday, Tate discusses how he believes that other creators edited videos of him out of context in order to get views.
“They understood that if they can make a YouTube video purporting a lie about me or saying bad things about me, it’s more likely to get clicks,” he said. “People, through their own selfish desires of trying to piggyback off the back of my massive fame and becoming the most famous man on the planet, have decided that making a bunch of negative videos is a fantastic way for them to personally gain clout.”
Despite denying the allegations, Tate states that he does have “some responsibility to bear.”
Asked about the decision to ban Tate, Michael Bronski, a professor in women and gender studies at Harvard University, told ABC News: “I’m less worried about banning people than I am about thinking of ways to make people act better.”
“The real problem comes from the normalisation of it, where this behaviour simply becomes acceptable because it’s so common,” she added. “Even though it’s been contested by some people, the prevalence of It makes it acceptable.”
HOPE Not Hate, a charity which aims to ‘oppose far right extremism’ had campaigned for Tate’s de-platforming. In a statement on their website, they have stated that their campaign had been “hugely successful, but it’s not over yet.”
“Tate is a symptom of wider societal misogyny, and we all have to do more to combat its corrosive impact on society and the very real dangers it poses to women,” the organization said in a statement.
(HOMELAND, Md.) — A Black couple whose home valuation increased nearly $300,000 after their Homeland, Maryland, property was re-appraised with a white colleague serving as the homeowner is suing two firms alleging racial discrimination.
Nathan Connolly and Shani Mott, who are both professors at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, allege that Shane Lanham of 20/20 Valuations racially discriminated against them by undervaluing their 2,600-square-foot home at $472,000. That’s just over the $450,000 they paid for the home in 2017, according to the lawsuit. Their complaint states that they invested more than $50,000 in renovations and improvements between 2020 and 2021.
The couple is also suing loanDepot, alleging the company discriminated against them by using the 20/20 Valuations appraisal to deny them a refinance loan.
“My jaw dropped. I was like, this is racism. Because we had done the research, right?” said Mott, during an interview with ABC News Live. “We didn’t go into this process, this refinance process, blindly.”
A spokesperson for loanDepot issued a statement to ABC News.
“We strongly oppose bias in the home finance process and support the plans to combat appraisal bias and promote more sustainable, affordable housing for minority and low- to moderate-income families and communities put forth by the Interagency Task Force on Property Appraisal and Valuation Equity and by the Mortgage Bankers Association. While appraisals are performed independently by outside expert appraisal firms, all participants in the home finance process must work to find ways to contribute to eradicating bias.”
Lanham declined a request for comment.
Mott, an Africana Studies lecturer, said she and Connolly, a professor of history focusing on racism, capitalism and notions of property, had reviewed several comparable homes and educated themselves on what to expect. Based in their research, the couple found the $472,000 valuation “impossible.” Earlier this year, they looked to another lender for an appraisal, this time removing their children’s artwork, artifacts and other signs that indicated a Black family resided in the home. Then, Connolly and Mott had a white colleague answer the door when the new appraiser arrived.
The new home appraisal was $750,000.
“We were aware that there were examples of whitewashing being effective in helping Black families get the value that they were entitled to,” Connolly said of how the couple came to “curate” the house to appeal to appraisers’ potential expectations of a more valuable home.
Paige Glotzer, the author of “How the Suburbs Were Segregated: Developers and the Business of Exclusionary Housing – 1890-1960,” told ABC News that they see a deeply rooted connection in Connolly and Mott’s lawsuit to racially exclusive housing covenants that once prohibited Black residents from living in Homeland, a still predominantly white neighborhood. Glotzer is also an assistant professor and the John W. and Jeanne M. Rowe Chair in the History of American Politics, Institutions, and Political Economy at University of Wisconsin-Madison. Glotzer is also Connolly’s former Ph.D. advisee.
“The creation of Homeland was so bound up with the codification of discrimination in a national real estate industry,” Glotzer said. “That was a moment where you really had everyone, both consumers and home buyers, acknowledging that race was a part of property value.”
According to Glotzer, signs of Blackness in the home from books, art, and decorations are as significant in marking a ‘Black home’ as the physical presence of Black homeowners.
“And part of this process, it really did require us to think about what whiteness represents. Right? If you whitewash your house, you’re going in with historical awareness of what is it that your average kind of white appraiser would want to see,” Mott said. “We kind of tapped into our historical imagination, but also our historical knowledge and kind of set out on a course to do that.”
Gabriel Diaz, an attorney at civil rights law firm Relman Colfax PLLC who is representing the family, told ABC News that his clients’ case “illustrates how pervasive this issue is” and highlights the emotional and financial harm it may cause. He said this lawsuit is about making sure people understand how disparate appraisals like Connolly and Mott’s happen so that they don’t happen again.
ABC News’ Victoria Moll-Ramirez and Milan Miller contributed to this report.
(NEW YORK) — A worldwide drought has devastated communities across the globe, but it also has fascinated millions as historic artifacts have come to the surface, igniting memories from decades to centuries before.
Let’s go prehistoric…
This August, Texas’ Dinosaur Valley State Park saw rare dinosaur tracks that are usually covered by water and sediment. With the Paluxy River running through only a portion of its usual berth, tracks from Acrocanthosaurus dinosaurs have come to the light.
Jeff Davis, parks superintendent at Dinosaur Valley, told ABC News these tracks could date back millions of years. Davis added that Sauroposeidon tracks have become visible on the opposite side of the park, adding to the season’s remarkable attractions.
With heavy rainfall hitting Texas, Davis says these tracks will likely be covered by water again soon. However, that might be best for their livelihood.
“It’s the river that will bring in silt and sediment and pile those on top of the tracks. That’s what preserves them, that’s why they’re still here after 113 million years or so,” Davis said.
A masterpiece with an unknown creator
Amid a devastating drought in the country, a Spanish ‘stonehenge’ has become fully visible for the second time since it became covered in water in the 1960s.
The striking circle of dozens of megalithic stones, officially called the Dolmen of Guadalperal, has existed since 5000 BC.
However, it was first discovered by German archaeologist Hugo Obermaier in 1926 before it became flooded in 1963 due to a rural development project under Francisco Franco’s dictatorship.
No one knows who created the dolmen.
Now, the structure sits in a corner of the Valdecanas reservoir located in the country’s central province of Caceres.
As Spain faces its worst drought in 60 years, officials say the water level in the reservoir has dropped to 28% capacity.
Remnants of WWII surface
Going east, Europe’s sizzling summer drought left over a dozen Nazi ships surfacing on the drying Danube River near Prahavo, Serbia.
The ships were part of Nazi Germany’s Black Sea fleet in 1944 as they retreated from advancing Soviet forces, officials said.
Many of the ships still hold ammunition and explosives, posing a risk to shipping on the river, officials said.
The vessels have limited the navigable section of the stretch near Prahova to 100 meters, significantly slimmer than the prior 180 meters ships had access to. Serbian officials have taken to dredging along the river to salvage the usable navigation lanes, authorities said.
The Danube levels near Prahovo are less than half their average for this time of the summer, experts say.
Buddhist relics emerge in China
The Far East isn’t escaping the scorching season. On China’s Yangtze River, a formerly submerged island has emerged with a trio of Buddhist statues believed to be 600 years old.
Officials believe the statues were built during the Ming and Qing dynasties, state media Xinhua reported. One statue depicts a monk sitting on a lotus pedestal.
The statues have emerged on the river near the southwestern city of Chongqing.
Experts say the Yangtze is about 45% lower than its normal height. The state broadcaster CCTV said that as many as 66 rivers across 34 counties in Chongqing have dried up.
A bridge once traveled…
An ancient bridge in Yorkshire, England, has risen back over the water that has covered it since the 1950s.
Members of the public were seen crossing what was an ancient packhorse bridge in August. The bridge has been invisible since it was flooded to build the Baitings Reservoir in the 1950s.
Now, record high temperatures and low water levels at the reservoir have revealed the remains of the ancient road.
Experts say the Baitings settlement expanded rapidly in the Industrial Revolution, but had been long in decline by the time it was flooded.
Reminders from droughts come before
“Hunger stones” have become revealed in Germany on Rhine River, rekindling memories of past droughts.
The stones bear dates and people’s initials. Dates visible on stones seen in Worms, south of Frankfurt, and Rheindorf, near Leverkusen, included 1947, 1959, 2003 and 2018, Reuters reports.
The tradition of hunger stones dates back to the 15th century, experts say. They were embedded into dried-up riverbeds to warn people in the future that hard times were near.
A 2013 study about droughts in Czech history explains the phenomenon through one of the most famous hunger stones.
“It expressed that drought had brought a bad harvest, lack of food, high prices, and hunger for poor people. Before 1900, the following droughts are commemorated on the stone: 1417, 1616, 1707, 1746, 1790, 1800, 1811, 1830, 1842, 1868, 1892, and 1893,” the study read.
The ever-alarming Lake Mead
The U.S.’s largest reservoir has raised concern as its water levels have reached record lows to reveal alarming remnants. Since May, officials have found five sets of human remains in Lake Mead.
The fifth set of remains were found on Aug. 15 at Swim Beach in the Lake Mead National Recreation Area around 8:00 p.m., according to the National Park Service.
Along with the shocking collection of human remains found amid the shrinking water levels, officials reported a sunken WWII era vessel to have emerged from the reservoir.
The vessel, a Higgins boat used for beach landings during WWII, comes to the surface after the same receding waters have revealed multiple bodies, sunken pleasure boats and a myriad of previously-submerged items.
Officials said the water levels are so depleted in the lake, they could soon reach “dead pool” status, in which the water is too low to flow downstream to the Hoover Dam. According to the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, the minimum water surface level needed to generate power at the dam is 1,050 feet.
(WASHINGTON) — Under order from the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, the Justice Department on Wednesday released a 2019 memo used by former Attorney General William Barr to justify his decision not to prosecute then-President Donald Trump for obstruction of justice arising from Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation.
The department initially released a redacted version of the memo in May 2021, stemming from a Freedom of Information Act suit brought by the watchdog group the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW). That version fully redacted more than six out of the memo’s 10 pages.
On Friday, however, a panel of judges in the D.C. Circuit ordered the release of the full memo, affirming a district court decision that had found Barr and other DOJ officials were not candid in their statements about the role the memo played in their decision to not charge Trump.
DOJ officials previously told the court that the memo should be kept from the public because it involved internal department deliberations and the advice given to Barr about whether Trump should face prosecution.
But a district judge ruled that Barr was never engaged in such a process and had already made up his mind to not charge Trump.
The full memo released Wednesday outlines the rationale given to Barr from Steven Engel, the former head of DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel, and Ed O’Callaghan, the then-principal associate deputy attorney general.
Both write that former special counsel Mueller’s report on his investigation of Trump and Russia “identifies no actions that, in our judgment, constituted obstructive acts, done with a nexus to a pending proceeding, with the corrupt intent necessary to warrant prosecution under obstruction-of-justice statutes.”
In the March 2019 memo, they said their determination was reached separate from considering whether Trump was already immune from prosecution because of his status as a sitting president.
“The memorandum advised Attorney General Barr on what, if any, determination he should make regarding whether the facts articulated in Special Counsel Mueller’s report were sufficient under the Principles of Federal Prosecution to establish that the President of the United States had committed obstruction of justice,” a Justice Department spokesperson said in a statement Wednesday.
“The suit was filed under the Freedom of Information Act seeking public disclosure of this internal memo,” the spokesperson said. “The litigation involved only whether the government had properly withheld from disclosure portions of the memo under FOIA – it did not involve the merits of the advice provided in the memo.”
In the 2019 document, Engel and O’Callaghan detailed multiple justifications for declining a prosecution of Trump for actions stemming from the Mueller report, which laid out 10 possible instances of obstruction of justice investigated by the special counsel’s team.
They wrote that the instances in Mueller’s report were not similar to “any reported case” DOJ had previously charged under obstruction-of-justice statutes and described Mueller’s obstruction theory as “novel” and “unusual” because of the conclusion he reached in the first volume of his report — that evidence developed “was not sufficient to charge that any member of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with representative of the Russian government to interfere in the 2016 election.”
“It would be rare for federal prosecutors to bring an obstruction prosecution that did not itself arise out of a proceeding related to a separate crime,” the memo states.
Engel and O’Callaghan wrote that “much of” Trump’s conduct in the report instead “amounted to attempts to modify the process under which the Special Counsel investigation progressed, rather than efforts to impair or intentionally alter evidence… that would negatively impact the special counsel’s ability to obtain and develop evidence.”
(WASHINGTON) — A federal judge is expected to rule Wednesday on the Biden administration’s lawsuit against a near-total ban on abortions in Idaho.
The U.S. Department of Justice sued the state over the ban, which goes into effect on Thursday, arguing that it violates a federal law guaranteeing access to emergency medical care.
The Idaho abortion law would make it a felony to perform an abortion in all but extremely narrow circumstances. There are exceptions for cases of rape or incest that have been reported. To avoid criminal liability, a doctor must prove that the abortion was necessary to prevent the death of the pregnant woman, though there is no defense for an abortion to protect the woman’s health, according to the DOJ.
In its complaint, filed on Aug. 2, the Justice Department claimed that the Idaho law violates the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, which states that hospitals that receive Medicare funds are required to provide necessary treatment to women who arrive at their emergency departments while experiencing a medical emergency. That medical care could include providing an abortion, according to the DOJ.
The Justice Department is seeking a declaratory judgment that the Idaho law is preempted by the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act in emergency situations, as well as an order permanently barring the law to the extent that it conflicts with the federal act.
U.S. District Judge B. Lynn Winmill in Boise said he plans to issue a decision in the case on Wednesday.
The lawsuit marked the Biden administration’s first legal challenge to a state abortion ban after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade in June, ending the constitutional right to an abortion.
Prosecutors argued that the Idaho law would prevent doctors from performing medically necessary abortions, as required by federal law.
Idaho Attorney General Lawrence Wasden called the lawsuit “politically motivated” and charged that the DOJ did not attempt to “engage Idaho in a meaningful dialogue on the issue” prior to filing its complaint.
A case involving the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act as it pertains to abortion care is also ongoing in Texas.
Last month, the state of Texas sued the Biden administration on its guidance to hospitals that doctors should perform an abortion if doing so would protect a woman’s health. The complaint was filed days after Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra instructed hospitals to follow the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act when determining whether to provide an abortion in emergency cases “regardless of the restrictions in the state where you practice.”
On Tuesday, a federal judge temporarily blocked the federal government from enforcing the guidance, saying the federal law is “silent as to abortion.”
Attorneys for the state of Idaho drew attention to that case in a court filing on Wednesday, stating that the state “has not yet had a full opportunity to consider how the Texas court’s decision should be persuasive in aspects of this current lawsuit, or in the pending preliminary injunction motion.”
Idaho’s so-called trigger law would be even more restrictive than an abortion ban that went into effect in the state earlier this month. That law, modeled after a similar “heartbeat law” in Texas, bans abortion at about six weeks and also allows civil lawsuits against medical providers who perform the procedure.
Amid legal challenges from abortion providers, the Idaho Supreme Court upheld both abortion laws in a ruling issued on Aug. 12, allowing them to go into effect.
Another trigger law that would make it a felony for doctors to perform an abortion after about six weeks of pregnancy went into effect on Aug. 19 in the state. That law, which has exceptions for rape, incest and medical emergencies, is also currently being challenged by abortion providers.
ABC News’ Alexander Mallin contributed to this report.
(WASHINGTON) — First lady Jill Biden tested positive for COVID-19 on Wednesday in a “rebound” case, her office said.
The first lady — who first tested positive on Aug. 16 — received her second negative test on Sunday and joined the president in Delaware, coming out of her isolation period spent in South Carolina. She again tested negative on Tuesday, her deputy communications director Kelsey Donohue said.
The president tested negative for COVID-19 on Wednesday, according to the White House.
“The First Lady has experienced no reemergence of symptoms, and will remain in Delaware where she has reinitiated isolation procedures,” Donohue said in a statement on Wednesday. “The White House Medical Unit has conducted contact tracing and close contacts have been notified.”
The president returned to the White House from Delaware on Wednesday morning. The first lady was supposed to accompany her husband to a Democratic National Committee event in Maryland on Thursday but will now remain isolated in Delaware.
The president “will mask for 10 days when indoors and in close proximity to others,” a White House official said. “We will also keep the President’s testing cadence increased and continue to report those results.”
Jill Biden, who is double vaccinated and twice boosted, was prescribed the antiviral treatment Paxlovid, which President Biden also took after testing positive last month. Like his wife, the president also suffered a rebound COVID-19 case.
Paxlovid is authorized under emergency use by the Food and Drug Administration for Americans ages 12 and older who are at high-risk for severe illness from COVID-19. Preliminary estimates suggested that the drug provided an 89% reduction in virus-related hospitalizations and deaths.
However, in recent months, as use of the drug ramped up, there was an increasing number of anecdotal reports of rebound cases, where individuals test positive for COVID-19, after testing negative, following completion of the treatment course. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, a COVID-19 rebound has been reported to occur between two and eight days after initial recovery.
Although experts say preliminary estimates of Paxlovid rebounds are likely undercounted, White House COVID-19 Response Coordinator Dr. Ashish Jha suggested after President Biden’s Paxlovid rebound that the phenomenon may happen in 5% to 8% of patients.
Federal officials report that a rebound infection can also occur in patients receiving no treatment or in patients receiving other COVID-19 therapeutics.
ABC’s Karen Travers reports:
ABC News’ Molly Nagle, Arielle Mitropoulos and Sarah Kolinovsky contributed to this report.
Taylor Swift is trying to shake off yet another legal battle — this time over the designs she used for her Lover era.
Billboardreports author Teresa La Dart filed a complaint in Tennessee federal court on Tuesday and accused the Grammy-winning singer of stealing “a number of creative elements” from her 2010 self-published book, also titled Lover.
An attorney for La Dart takes issue with the book that accompanied the 2019 special-edition Lover CD. The lawyer, William S. Parks, says his client’s copyright has been infringed because the 2010 work featured “pastel pinks and blues” and the author depicted herself “photographed in a downward pose” on the cover.
La Dart alleges Taylor copied the “format” of her book, adding her 2010 collection of poems featured “a recollection of past years memorialized in a combination of written and pictorial components” — and Taylor’s did the same.
“The defendants to this day have neither sought, nor obtained, a license from TLD of her creative design element rights, nor have they given any credit to TLD … let alone provided any monetary payments,” the complaint reads. They are seeking damages in “excess of one million dollars.”
Legal experts have weighed in on Billboard and say the case is “unlikely to succeed.”
Litigator Aaron Moss told the outlet, “The idea of memorializing a series of recollections over a number of years by interspersing ‘written and pictorial components’ isn’t protectable … This lawsuit should be thrown out on a motion to dismiss.”
Taylor is facing a separate case where she stands accused of copying lyrics for her 2014 hit “Shake It Off” from 3LW‘s 2001 song “Playas Gon’ Play.” Her team is asking for a judge to rule without a trial.
