Republicans scramble as backlash over IVF ruling continues

Good morning! It's Thursday, February 29th. I'm Mark Garrison in for Shumita Basu. This is "Apple News Today." Coming up, lawmakers attempt to protect IVF after Alabama's court ruling, why elite colleges are bringing the SAT back into the admissions process, and the 10 to 20-million-dollar question behind a pro golfer's long-awaited return.

But first, let's take a quick look at some major stories in the news, starting with several big developments in former President Donald Trump's legal cases. The Supreme Court says it'll hear a case on Trump's claim that he's immune from prosecution for attempting to overturn his 2020 election loss. A lower court ruled against him on this. The move delays the federal criminal case against Trump. Supreme Court arguments are scheduled for April.

This will be my last term as Republican leader of the Senate. I'm not going anywhere anytime soon. However, I'll complete my job. My colleagues have given me until we select a new leader in November and they take the helm next January.

There's been speculation for a while that the 82-year-old would leave the leadership, given his recent health issues and disagreements with Trump. In the Middle East, the death toll in Gaza is now more than 30,000 people, health officials there say. And there are growing concerns about malnutrition and dehydration. USAID head Samantha Power talked about the need for more humanitarian aid.

As conditions continue to deteriorate in Gaza for the Gazan people, two crossings is not enough. We are talking to Israeli officials about the need to open up far more crossings, far more passages into Gaza, so that vitally-needed humanitarian assistance can be dramatically surged. This is a matter of life and death.

In Europe, France took a key step toward becoming the first country in the world to guarantee access to abortion in its constitution. Yesterday's Senate vote cleared the way for the constitutional change to be finalized on Monday.

In the U.S., a major issue around reproductive health right now is the Alabama Supreme Court ruling that frozen embryos are children. Several IVF providers in the state have halted services as a result. That leaves people there trying to have children through IVF facing painful uncertainty, and those in other states worried about the ripple effects. In the wake of the ruling, Republican lawmakers at the state and national level are trying to show

We need to have more kids. We need to have an opportunity to do that and I thought this was the right thing to do.

But IVF is used to have more children. And right now, IVF services are paused at some of the clinics in Alabama. Aren't you concerned that this could impact people who are trying to have kids?

Well, that's for that's for another conversation. I think the big thing is right now you protect, you go back to the situation and try to work it out to where it's best for everybody.

Critics pounced on that response, saying Tuberville didn't seem to understand the massive impact of a ruling on families wanting children in his own state. He and other Senators had a chance to take action protecting IVF yesterday. Democrats brought a bill to the floor to preserve access to IVF. But a Republican Senator blocked it, saying it went too far on issues unrelated to IVF. The bill was introduced by Democratic Senator Tammy Duckworth,

It's a little personal to me when a majority male court suggests that people like me who are not able to have kids without the help of modern medicine should be in jail cells and not taking care of their babies in nurseries. I know I'm not alone when I struggle to understand how politicians who support this kind of policy can possibly call themselves pro-life.

And there could be more complications at the state level. Previously, more than a dozen states have been considering so-called fetal personhood bills, which aim to define life as beginning at fertilization. Reproductive-rights advocates have been talking about the potential consequences of these kinds of laws for a long time. And now the Alabama ruling that's blocking IVF for so many families is bringing that point home in a way that's starting to change the debate.

This month, Yale became the latest elite college to announce that it's bringing standardized test scores back into the admissions process, after making them optional during the pandemic. Dartmouth and MIT have brought them back, too. "Washington Post" higher ed reporter Susan Svrluga talked to us about why Yale wanted to mandate test scores again.

The applicant's SAT scores or ACT scores were better predictors of students' performance at Yale than any other indicator that they had. So they were very effective at predicting whether a student could be successful at the college.

And Yale argues that including test scores can actually help diversify its student body. It's enrolled more than 1,000 students who did not submit scores. But data shows that students who withheld scores were less likely to be admitted, especially those from lower-income families and high schools with fewer college-prep classes. Svrluga explains that moves to bring back test scores have drawn criticism.

There have been concerns about students access to preparation for the test and wealthier students are able to afford tutors in some cases, or SAT prep classes, those kinds of intensive practice classes.

Over the years, concerns have grown that standardized tests amplify inequities in society. Research shows that students from low-income backgrounds have lower tests scores and are less likely to test.

There are people who are concerned still that the tests are unfair, that it can

further disadvantage disadvantaged students. As another major school requires test scores, Svrluga says that'll likely influence other universities. But it's likely the majority of colleges will remain test-optional. A testing watchdog group says more than 80 percent of four-year schools don't plan on requiring SAT or ACT scores for fall 2025 admissions.

If you picture a student who's maybe first in their family to ever attend college and they're trying to figure out the whole application process, there's a lot of steps. And they would argue that realizing what tests you need to take and signing up for it on time and paying for it, that's just another barrier that can keep students who are really bright but don't have all the resources that other students might have that might just keep them from implying and applying entirely.

Let's say you could get 10, maybe 20 million to stop doing something you're great at, forever. What would you do? It's not a hypothetical question for professional golfer Anthony Kim. Years ago, golfers said he had the potential of Tiger Woods. But he left the sport before getting the chance to really show what he could do. A key reason was injuries, and an insurance policy that reportedly paid him as much as 20 million dollars, if he stopped playing golf. But as of tomorrow, he's back,

I've been playing great. I've been swinging great. And fortunately, I'm making some putts. So, if I can keep that up, I'll have fun tomorrow as well.

Then came the injuries, and his exit from pro golf in 2012. There are still questions about why he left and stayed away for so long. But that insurance payout was a big part. There's been lots of speculation over the years about whether he'd ever return, and if he did, whether he could still play at the highest levels. Tomorrow, the world will find out.

You can find all these stories and more in the Apple News app. And if you're already listening in the News app right now, we've got a Narrated Article from "GQ" coming up next. It's also about Saudi money in sports, in this case, soccer. It looks at the potential impact of getting so much cash from a Kingdom that's funded by fossil fuels,