Mary Ziegler

Mary Ziegler is a journalist covering law and policy for The New York Times. She focuses on reproductive rights, constitutional law and the Supreme Court. Before joining The Times in 2019, she was a staff writer at Slate covering the Supreme Court and reproductive rights.

Biography:  https://www.nytimes.com/by/mary-ziegler

90%

The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermines the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
Analysis.OverallConflictOfInterestScore * 0.3F + Analysis.OverallBiasScore * 0.3F + Analysis.DeceptivenessScore * 0.3F + Analysis.ReadabilityScore * 0.1F

A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

The Daily's Verdict

This author is known for its high journalistic standards. The author strives to maintain neutrality and transparency in its reporting, and avoids conflicts of interest. The author has a reputation for accuracy and rarely gets contradicted on major discrepancies in its reporting.

Bias

100%

Examples:

No current examples available.

Conflicts of Interest

100%

Examples:

No current examples available.

Contradictions

100%

Examples:

No current examples available.

Deceptions

75%

Examples:

  • The decision will affect more than people seeking abortions...In such states, emergency rooms ‘are so scared of a pregnant patient, that the emergency medicine staff won’t even look. They just want these people gone.’
  • This move was a gamble, and not one the administration takes very often: Sooner or later, the case was likely to land the administration before the Supreme Court’s conservative supermajority, with its demonstrated hostility to abortion rights.

Recent Articles

Supreme Court Skepticism Towards Idaho's Abortion Ban and EMTALA Conflict: Implications for Women's Emergency Healthcare

Supreme Court Skepticism Towards Idaho's Abortion Ban and EMTALA Conflict: Implications for Women's Emergency Healthcare

Broke On: Thursday, 25 April 2024 The Supreme Court is set to rule on Idaho's strict abortion ban and its conflict with federal emergency care laws, specifically the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA). The Biden administration has sued Idaho over this issue, arguing that EMTALA requires federally funded hospitals to provide stabilizing care for emergency abortions. The case could have significant implications for women's access to emergency healthcare and the interpretation of federal laws in relation to state laws.