Arizona Abortion Ban, PFAS In Drinking Water, Japan's Awkward State Dinner

the mother.

Why now?

And what will voters say about it this fall?

The EPA limits so-called forever chemicals in drinking water, chemicals that carry health

and environmental risks.

How much will it cost to comply?

business deal.

He opposes a Japanese company's bid to take over U.S. steel and is drawing some criticism.

A ruling by Arizona's state Supreme Court just put abortion back into national politics.

today.

It bans abortion in all cases except a threat to a woman's life.

An Arizona doctor who runs an anti-abortion pregnancy center asked the court to clarify

that the law was still in effect.

The ruling drew this reaction from Arizona's Democratic Attorney General, Chris Mays.

160 years ago, the court has risked the health and lives of Arizonans.

NPR political reporter Jimena Bustillo joins us now.

Good morning.

allowed Arizona doctors to provide abortion up to 15 weeks into a pregnancy based on a

lower court's interpretation of those state laws.

But the state Supreme Court now says Arizona should follow a law banning abortion in almost

all cases.

Like how does the newer law not supersede the old one?

But then I looked into it and realized the state law from 2022 prohibited abortions after

15 weeks, but didn't guarantee a right to abortion earlier.

So the court finds this older law applies passed in 1864 by something called the First

Territorial Legislature.

Is that right?

So this is now one of the oldest abortion laws on the books, older than even Arizona

itself.

Arizona didn't become a state until 1912.

And it makes no exceptions for rape or incest and makes performing an abortion punishable

by two to five years in prison.

But the Arizona Supreme Court has stayed the ruling for 14 business days.

That means that abortions can continue for about two more weeks.

And groups like Planned Parenthood, the state's biggest abortion provider, say that they plan

to continue providing abortion until the ruling takes full effect.

How does this affect this election year?

There is an effort to place a measure on the November ballot in the state that, if passed,

would also overrule the state Supreme Court decision.

The amendment would establish a fundamental right to abortion and protect access to abortion

up to the point of viability and to protect the patient's health and life as determined

by the treating health care provider.

already, which is far more than they need.

And they plan to keep collecting until July.

way, as well.

How are the presidential campaigns reacting?

Harris announced that she would be back in Arizona this week on Friday.

She's already campaigned on abortion in Arizona recently.

From the Trump campaign side earlier this week, he came out with his own official stance

on abortion.

He said he didn't advocate for a national ban and instead said he would leave it up

to the states to decide.

this 1864 law in the past, hadn't they?

In Arizona's U.S. Senate race, Republican Carrie Lake said that she opposes the decision

recently come down from the state Supreme Court, adding that ultimately voters will

get their chance to decide in November.

That's a new position for Lake.

She previously praised the 1864 law when she was running for governor two years ago.

Some other Republican elected officials have also criticized the ruling.

And Peirce, Amanda Bastillo, thanks so much.

PFAS in drinking water.

They're useful.

They're often used to waterproof and stain proof products, but that comes at a cost to

human health.

Good morning.

Here's EPA Administrator Michael Regan.

our environment.

doing.

But it's the first time that it's happening on the federal level.

The EPA is now putting limits on six of these chemicals in the drinking water, saying that

every water system now needs to look for them.

And if they're found over a certain amount, they have to be taken out.

since the 1940s.

They were manufactured by companies like DuPont and 3M.

And they're used to make things resistant to stains, to water and to grease.

You know, everything from clothing, furniture to firefighting foam and electronics and semiconductors.

I've sometimes had pants that the water rolls off the pants.

They might have those chemicals in them.

Is that right?

Although, there are a few brands now that have committed to not using PFAS in their

clothing, but probably Steve.

Okay.

What makes these so effective?

Well, the thing about them is that they have these really strong molecular bonds, which

means that they really don't break down for a long, long time.

You know, PFAS from the 1940s, it's still around today.

And that's where they get the name forever chemicals.

But as they've accumulated, so has evidence for how they can harm human health.

You know, there are now links between PFAS and certain cancers, liver damage, high cholesterol,

immune problems.

And now there are more than 12,000 PFAS chemicals out there.

And the EPA is putting limits on six of them in the drinking water.

much.

But experts like Elizabeth Southerland, who's a former EPA official, says that it is a strong

first step.

cases so that they feel confident that they have estimated the safe level of these chemicals.

And she also says that the filters or chemical treatments that water utilities are going

to have to use to deal with these six chemicals are also going to remove a lot of other chemicals

that people are concerned about.

systems will need to take?

companies to comply.

And Steve, that's $1.5 billion every year until these chemicals stop showing up in the

drinking water.

The EPA does say that the benefits will exceed that cost.

They say about 100 million people are affected.

And in that population, there will be less cancer, fewer heart attacks and fewer birth

complications.

So the bipartisan infrastructure law includes billions of dollars for PFAS removal and companies

that made these chemicals are also on the hook for more than $10 billion from a class

action lawsuit.

But if water systems can't access those funds, or if those funds run out, then some of those

costs might eventually get passed on to consumers.

today for a coveted state visit.

their cooperation on global security issues, including on China.

But those shared interests could be overshadowed by a crack in the economic relationship.

We're talking about a takeover bid for the iconic company, U.S. Steel.

Franco, it's not a state dinner, but it's good to have you at our table.

Okay, so there's this Japanese company, Nippon Steel, that wants to buy U.S. Steel.

President Biden has raised concerns about this.

How does this make the visit awkward?

I mean, U.S. Steel late last year reached a nearly $15 billion deal with Nippon Steel,

but there are a lot of forces trying to block the stale.

You know, the United Steel Workers Union, which represents thousands of U.S. Steel workers

across the country, and several influential lawmakers.

Former President Donald Trump has said he'd block it if he were back in office, and Biden,

who is counting on the union vote, announced last month that he opposes the deal too.

Now, Biden's intervention has caused some waves in diplomatic and trade circles because

this is a private deal from a company in a country that is a very close ally to the

United States.

You can just feel the echoes of this from many decades past.

Is this actually going to be a subject of the summit?

meetings, but reporters are very likely to raise it in the press conference.

This is a very sensitive issue.

As you can hear, even from Jake Sullivan, the national security advisor, when he was

pressed about it yesterday during the briefing.

You guys all know Joe Biden.

You've seen Joe Biden.

He's been very clear that he's going to stand up for American workers.

is the strongest it's ever been.

He's going to accomplish both of those things.

Is it normal that he would be doing this?

I mean, and there has been a lot of pushback from groups like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce,

who said this could discourage foreign investment.

Scott Lincecum, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, he told me that this contradicts

the idea that the U.S. is open for business.

not driving the bus.

The reality is that U.S. steel has been around for more than 100 years.

It's based in a critical swing state, Pennsylvania.

And Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio, an important ally of Biden, he's opposed this, and he's

in a very tight race of his own this fall.

So if this is not part of the official agenda of this state visit, what is?

Officials told us there is a long list of deliverables, more than 70.

You know, that's a lot.

So they're trying to show that the relationship is much bigger than just one deal.

There are defense projects, space cooperation, AI research with major U.S. companies.

You know, they're going to focus on their work countering China in the Indo-Pacific.

And of course, they'll have the Black Tie Dinner, where the leaders will be entertained

by singer Paul Simon.

We'll try not to think too much.

Franco, thanks so much.

And that's a first for this Wednesday, April 10th.

I'm Steve Inskeep.

Your next listen is Consider This from NPR.

In 1994, in the midst of a brutal civil war in Rwanda, neighbor killed neighbor.

Ultimately, a million people were killed.

Thirty years later, former enemies live side by side in reconciliation villages.

Listen to Consider This.

It's really great.

Now, today's episode of Up First was edited by Megan Pratz, Scott Hensley, Roberta Rampton,

Lisa Thompson, and Ben Adler.

It was produced by Ziad Butch, Ben Abrams, and Nina Kravinsky.

We get engineering support from Stacey Abbott, and our technical director is Josephine Neonay.

Join us here tomorrow.