On December 12, 2023, U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem announced the termination of the collective bargaining agreement that covered 47,000 Transportation Security Administration (TSA) officers. The Department of Homeland Security stated that a new labor framework would be implemented on January 11, 2024, which will cease the collection of union dues from TSA officers' paychecks.

The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), which represents TSA officers, plans to file a lawsuit challenging this decision. In June 2023, a U.S. judge had issued a preliminary injunction against Noem’s earlier attempt to end the collective bargaining agreement. On the same day, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to restore collective bargaining rights to approximately 1 million unionized federal employees, including TSA officers, in an effort to repeal an executive order from March 2023 that sought to limit these rights for a significant portion of federal workers. Currently, federal employees face restrictions in labor rights, including prohibitions on bargaining over wages, benefits, or job classifications, and are not allowed to strike.

AFGE National President Everett Kelley criticized Noem’s action as retaliatory union-busting, expressing concern for the implications this has for airport security and the rights of workers. The TSA claimed that the new labor framework would refocus the agency on security priorities, resource allocation, and effective management of taxpayer funds. In January 2023, former President Donald Trump dismissed TSA administrator David Pekoske, who had been appointed in 2017 and reappointed by President Joe Biden. As of now, Trump has not nominated a replacement for Pekoske. In May 2024, the TSA reached a new seven-year labor agreement with AFGE after extensive negotiations, which included expanded bargaining rights and additional benefits for workers.

In Ohio, whistleblower attorney Mehek Cooke has alleged that the Somali migrant community is involved in significant social services funding fraud, similar to findings in Minnesota. Cooke claims that this fraudulent activity has persisted for over a decade, with some local doctors allegedly complicit in failing to conduct proper assessments of individuals applying for aid. She points out that individuals who are purportedly bedridden are often seen engaging in activities on social media, raising concerns about the legitimacy of their claims. Cooke highlights a loophole in Ohio's Medicaid program that allows individuals to receive up to $91,000 annually for the care of elderly or infirm family members, which is reportedly being exploited.

The allegations also suggest that some doctors may be receiving kickbacks from those committing fraud. Cooke argues that individuals can become home health providers to care for family members, even when such care is unnecessary, by navigating the state's regulations. She emphasizes that the system lacks independent assessments from both medical professionals and Medicaid officials. Cooke advocates for audits of Medicaid systems nationwide, arguing that taxpayers are adversely affected by these fraudulent activities, which undermine the integrity of social services designed to support vulnerable populations.

In Illinois, Governor J.B. Pritzker recently signed legislation permitting physicians to prescribe lethal medication to terminally ill patients aged 18 and older, effective September 2026. This law positions Illinois as the 12th state in the U.S. to legalize assisted suicide. The legislation has sparked significant debate, with critics arguing that it may lead to undue pressure on patients to choose death over care. State Senator Linda Holmes, a proponent of the bill, cited personal experiences with her parents' cancer battles as motivation for supporting the measure, emphasizing the need for options in end-of-life care. However, her comments have raised concerns about potential external pressures influencing patients' decisions.

Opponents, including Republican House Minority Leader Tony McCombie and advocacy group Access Living, have expressed fears that the law could create a culture where vulnerable individuals feel compelled to opt for assisted suicide rather than receive necessary medical care. The Illinois Catholic Conference has also criticized the legislation, advocating for enhanced palliative care services instead. Under the new law, patients must be diagnosed by two physicians with a prognosis of six months or less to live and must make multiple requests for the medication, which must be witnessed. The law does not allow for proxies to make requests on behalf of patients, and healthcare providers are not mandated to participate in the process.

The passage of this law follows a broader trend in the U.S. regarding assisted suicide, influenced by changing societal attitudes towards death and suffering. Critics warn that, similar to experiences observed in Canada, where the medical assistance in dying (MAID) program has faced scrutiny for allegedly pressuring patients into choosing death, Illinois could see a similar trajectory if safeguards are not maintained. The Illinois Catholic Conference has urged the governor to reconsider the law, highlighting the contradiction of promoting suicide prevention initiatives while enacting legislation that could lead to increased suicides. The law's implications for healthcare practices and the ethical considerations surrounding assisted suicide continue to be a contentious topic in the state and beyond.