News

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Congressman Brett Guthrie (KY-02), Chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, along with Reps. Palmer (AL-06), Carter (GA-01), Bilirakis (FL-12), and Obernolte (CA-23), penned a letter to the Executive Director of Covered California (CoveredCA), Jessica Altman, to request further information related to the potentially unauthorized transmission of sensitive personal health information involving Covered California’s website. Key Letter Excerpt: “According to public reports and agency statements, tracking technology was embedded on Covered California's website beginning in February 2024, as part of a broader digital advertising effort, and in direct contravention of the tracking platform’s user agreement, which prohibits the use of such tools on pages that collect sensitive health information. Although the tags were reportedly removed in April 2025, following external scrutiny and a vendor transition, the extended period of data exposure raises serious questions about the adequacy of safeguards that Covered California had in place. Forensic testing by investigative reporters identified the trackers in operation and confirmed that user-entered health information was being transmitted to third parties without consent. These circumstances warrant examination of Covered California’s actions under federal privacy standards.” “Ensuring the confidentiality of health information is a foundational obligation for entities operating within the health insurance ecosystem. Federal privacy protections, particularly the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), establish expectations for how covered organizations handle sensitive data. Recent reports and public filings raised questions about whether those expectations were met in this case, and whether existing oversight mechanisms are sufficient to detect and prevent improper disclosures.” Background: Forensic testing shows Covered California —the State of California’s official health insurance marketplace—has been sending sensitive user health data to third-party websites through several online data trackers. Prior to removal of the trackers, CoveredCA had more than 60 trackers active on its website; the average number of trackers on a government website is three. Some types of information sent to such websites include: Searches for doctors in network with specific plans/specializations Demographic information, including gender, ethnicity, and marital status Length of treatment a patent received by a provider Frequency of doctor visits If the user indicated they were blind, pregnant, a victim of domestic abuse, or used prescription medications. The State of California independently operates CoveredCA. As the state’s official ACA marketplace, CoveredCA falls under the purview of Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). The disclosure of information such as pregnancy or prescription drug use without proper consent—even for “marketing purposes”—may violate HIPAA. This Congress, the Committee has sent letters to 23andMe and DeepSeek over potential data privacy concerns: The Committee also held a hearing last Congress on the Change Healthcare hack, where personal health information was also jeopardized. CLICK HERE to read Fox News coverage of the letter. CLICK HERE to view the full letter. ###

Washington, D.C. — In a new letter to Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Inspector General Christi Grimm, House Energy and Commerce Committee Republicans requested an investigation into the strength, quality, and types of evidence-based scientific and pediatric medical literature relied on by the department to promote gender transition procedures for children.  KEY LETTER EXCERPT:  “As the agency responsible for safeguarding the health and well-being of Americans, all of HHS’s medical treatment recommendations, especially medical treatment recommendations for children, should be based on rigorous and well-established research, such as randomized controlled trials, that have definitively illustrated the long-term benefits of gender affirming care treatments.”  BACKGROUND:  Under the Biden administration, HHS has advocated for sex reassignment procedures on minors, including the use of serum puberty blockers, which have historically been used to treat children with precocious puberty (i.e., early onset puberty affecting about one percent of U.S. children) and sex offenders.   Puberty blockers, however, are known to stunt normal childhood development in children unaffected by precocious puberty.  HHS officials contend that sex reassignment procedures on minors are an unanimously accepted medical practice.  HHS Secretary Becerra testified before Congress that “every major medical association,” “medical journals,” and “scientific and medical evidence” has demonstrated the benefits of transitioning children’s biological sex.  When asked, via a Freedom of Information Act request, for the underlying scientific or medical basis for its position, HHS was only able to produce a two-page brochure that was already publicly available.  In contrast to HHS, a growing body of literature from medical experts and authorities around the world, including those in Europe, caution against performing such procedures on minors.   Courts and government health agencies responsible for determining child welfare have sought to limit child sex reassignment procedures.   Other countries have banned these interventions and surgeries on minors altogether.  An article published in the British Journal of Medicine found “there is great uncertainty about the effects of puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgeries in young people.”   A court in the United Kingdom noted the obvious about administering puberty blocking chemicals onto children: “[i]t is highly unlikely that a child aged 13 or under would be competent to give consent to the administration of puberty blockers. It is doubtful that a child aged 14 or 15 could understand and weigh the long-term risks and consequences of the administration of puberty blockers.”  In April 2024, the Cass Review , an independent review of gender identity services for children and young people, commissioned by the National Health Service England, found “[w]hile a considerable amount of research has been published in this field, systematic evidence reviews demonstrated the poor quality of the published studies, meaning there is not a reliable evidence base upon which to make clinical decisions, or for children and their families to make informed choices.”   The Cass Review also found that “[t]he rationale for early puberty suppression remains unclear, with weak evidence regarding the impact on gender dysphoria, mental or psychosocial health,” as well as unknown effects on cognitive and psychosexual development.  In August 2024, the American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS) became the first major U.S. medical association to express caution on the use of gender surgery for gender dysphoria in adolescents. In its formal statement, the association stated: “ASPS currently understands that there is considerable uncertainty as to the long-term efficacy for the use of chest and genital surgical interventions for the treatment of adolescents with gender dysphoria, and the existing evidence base is viewed as low quality/low certainty. This patient population requires specific considerations.”   The letter was signed by Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), Subcommittee on Health Chair Brett Guthrie (R-KY), Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chair Morgan Griffith (R-VA), Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX), Rep. Gus Bilirakis (R-FL), Rep. Buddy Carter (R-GA), Rep. Gary Palmer (R-AL), Rep. Neal Dunn (R-FL), Rep. Randy Weber (R-TX), Rep. Troy Balderson (R-OH), Rep. August Pfluger (R-TX), Rep. Diana Harshbarger (R-TN), and Rep. Kat Cammack (R-FL).  CLICK HERE to read the letter.

Letter comes on the eve of athletes competing in the Paris Olympics and after WADA’s President refused to attend an Energy and Commerce Committee oversight hearing Washington, D.C. — In a new letter to World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) President Witold Banka, bipartisan House Energy and Commerce Committee leaders pressed for answers regarding WADA’s handling of positive doping cases within China’s national swimming team ahead of the Tokyo Olympics. The letter contains questions that bipartisan Committee Members would have asked during a recent Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations hearing , which Mr. Banka was invited to attend but refused to appear. Witnesses that did testify at the hearing included: Michael Phelps, American swimmer and Olympic gold medalist   Allison Schmitt, American swimmer and Olympic gold medalist   Travis Tygart , Chief Executive Officer, United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) KEY EXCERPTS:   “We write today to express our sincere disappointment at your refusal to accept our invitation to attend and provide testimony at our recent Subcommittee hearing. Members of Congress have important questions for the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and are especially concerned about recent reports of your handling of dozens of cases of doping within the Chinese swimming team.  “WADA purports to maintain the integrity of sports by creating a fair and competitive sporting environment free from doping. As a U.S. taxpayer supported entity, WADA has a responsibility to the American people to ensure this integrity by enforcing international testing requirements. We believe WADA has fallen short of this important mission. ”  [...]   “ We are particularly concerned with the excessive deference being extended toward CHINADA—a state-funded operation with leadership deeply intertwined with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), as current [Chinese Anti-Doping Agency] CHINADA director Li Zhiquan also serves as a Committee Secretary for the CCP. At a meeting in 2023, Zhiquan called on CHINADA employees to be 'loyal to the party' and to 'hold high the great banner of Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era.' Furthermore, WADA’s reported sponsorship arrangement with ANTA Sports—the Chinese athletic company sponsoring the Chinese Olympic Committee and China’s national swimming federation—could be perceived as a conflict of interest. Since WADA is expected to uphold and maintain international anti-doping standards, WADA’s apparent lack of skepticism and failure to enforce the rules against CHINADA is troubling. While we are aware that WADA has opened an investigation, we are concerned that international scrutiny was necessary to force due diligence that should be routine .”  [...]  “This incident unfortunately reinforces our concern that WADA appears to be reverting to its previous poor management practices.”  [...]  “With the Paris Summer Olympic Games Opening Ceremony just a day away , the Committee seeks to better understand the circumstances surrounding WADA’s decision not to appeal the decision to clear the twenty-three swimmers who tested positive for trimetazidine.”   BACKGROUND :  In January 2021, 23 Chinese swimmers (“23 swimmers”) tested positive for trimetazidine, or TMZ, a banned substance improperly used to increase stamina and hasten recovery times.  Three months after the positive tests, CHINADA initiated an investigation into the source of the TMZ and by June 2021 claimed the athletes ingested the banned substance through food tainted in a hotel kitchen.  According to reporting, Chinese investigators “offered no explanation […] for how a prescription drug available only in pill form had contaminated an entire kitchen.”  In reliance on “external legal advice” and its science department, WADA determined that CHINADA’s claims were “plausible” and chose not to appeal the decision or further investigate the matter.  Three of these Chinese swimmers went on to win gold medals at the Tokyo Olympic Games in July of 2021.  China has selected 11 swimmers that tested positive for TMZ before the Tokyo Games to compete in the upcoming Paris Games.  In a strikingly similar case, Kamila Valieva, a Russian figure skater, also tested positive for the banned substance TMZ during the 2022 Beijing Olympics.  The Russian Anti-Doping Agency (RUSADA) issued a provisional suspension but was quickly cleared by RUSADA’s discipline board, since Valieva claimed she ingested the substance by mistake through a contaminated source.  Rather than simply accept RUSADA’s contamination explanation, WADA appealed the decision and ultimately, Valieva received a four-year ban from competition and was retroactively stripped of her gold medal. The letter was signed by Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) and Committee Ranking Member Frank Pallone, Jr., (D-NJ), Subcommittee on Innovation, Data, and Commerce Chair Gus Bilirakis (R-FL) and Ranking Member Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), and Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chair Morgan Griffith (R-VA) and Ranking Member Kathy Castor (D-FL). CLICK HERE to read the full letter.

Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), Subcommittee on Health Chair Brett Guthrie (R-KY), and Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chair Morgan Griffith (R-VA), on behalf of the Health and Oversight Subcommittee Republicans, wrote to National Institutes of Health (NIH) Director Monica Bertagnolli. In the letter, the Chairs ask the NIH to confirm by May 14, 2024, whether the agency has complied with White House guidance to stop funding projects led by researchers and entities in Russia.  BACKGROUND :  On June 11, 2022, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) issued guidance stating such projects and programs that commenced and/or were funded prior to Russia’s further invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 may be concluded, but new projects in affected subject areas will not be initiated.   The OSTP advised applicable departments and agencies to curtail interaction with the leadership of Russian government-affiliated universities and research institutions, as well as those who have publicly expressed support for the invasion of Ukraine.  In a statement in an April 9, 2023, article in The Washington Times , the NIH’s Office of Extramural Research claimed that “NIH currently does not fund any research in Russia.”  However, the Data Abyss tracker for the OSTP Russia guidance on federal funding agencies indicates that, as of April 5, 2024, the NIH has potentially 240 instances of problematic research collaborations since June 2022 that do not comply with the guidance. CLICK HERE to read the letter.

Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), Subcommittee on Health Chair Brett Guthrie (R-KY), and Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chair Morgan Griffith (R-VA), on behalf of the Health and Oversight Subcommittee Republicans, wrote to Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Xavier Becerra.  The letter outlines concerns with the role HHS Office of Civil Rights (OCR) plays—or fails to play—in investigating instances of sexual harassment that occurs at research institutions which receive grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH).  KEY EXCERPTS :  “There have been several public reports of sexual harassment occurring on NIH-funded research or NIH-supported activities over the last decade, and it raises concerns about what, if any, actions the NIH has taken to resolve these issues. The NIH’s own statistics show a significant problem with more than 300 cases related to sexual or gender harassment since 2018—with about a third of those allegations being substantiated. This also represents hundreds of men and women who may be forced to operate in a hostile or unsafe research environment.”  [...]  “According to the HHS website, OCR does investigate and resolve complaints of sexual harassment in the education and health programs of recipients of grants or other federal financial assistance from HHS—including the NIH. Moreover, HHS OCR is required to conduct periodic compliance reviews of institutional Title IX programs to ensure compliance with the law—including examining the way in which complaints are handled by the institution.”  The Chairs have requested answers to questions about HHS OCR’s role by April 30, 2024.  BACKGROUND :  Based on a recommendation from the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), HHS OCR and the NIH adopted a memorandum of understanding (MOU) to facilitate communication between the two components of HHS as it relates to sexual harassment.   This MOU was intended to clarify procedures on how the enforcement arm of HHS and the grant-making arm share valuable information with one another in an effort to respond appropriately to complaints of sexual harassment and prevent federal grant money from going to those with a history of sexual misconduct.   TIMELINE OF INVESTIGATION :  August 10, 2021 : E&C Republican Leaders Question NIH’s Handling of Sexual Harassment Complaints  August 11, 2022 : E&C Republican Leaders follow up with NIH on Insufficient Response to its Letter on the NIH’s handling of Sexual Harassment  November 30, 2022 : E&C Republicans to NIH: Turn Over Previously Requested Information Ahead of New Congress  March 14, 2023 : E&C Republicans Press NIH for Information on Handling of Sexual Harassment Complaints  October 6, 2023 : E&C Republicans Signal Intent to Issue Subpoenas to Obtain Information on NIH’s Handling of Sexual Harassment if Questions Go Unanswered  January 26, 2024 : Chair Rogers notifies NIH of Imminent Subpoena  February 5, 2024 : Chair Rodgers Subpoenas NIH for Documents Related to Investigation into Sexual Harassment at NIH and NIH Grantee Institutions February 20, 2024: HHS Responds on behalf of NIH to offer a rolling in camera document review to the Committee. Documents produced in the review have been highly redacted, including the redaction of the names of individuals convicted of criminal offenses, public news articles about individuals who have been found guilty of harassment, and redaction of the names of the institutions where the abuse occurred—effectively preventing the Committee from understanding if NIH continues to fund work performed by substantiated abusers at other institutions—a practice known as “pass the harasser.”

Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee (E&C) Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), E&C Subcommittee on Communications and Technology Chair Bob Latta (R-OH), E&C Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chair Morgan Griffith (R-VA), E&C Subcommittee on Innovation, Data, and Commerce Chair Gus Bilirakis (R-FL), and House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party, launched an investigation into grants made to an AI scientist at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) with ties to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).  The Chairs made requests for documents to UCLA, the National Science Foundation (NSF), and the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD).  BACKGROUND :  On November 1, 2023, a Newsweek investigation found that the federal government awarded at least $30 million in federal research grants led by Mr. Song-Chun Zhu, who is now “at the forefront of China's race to develop the most advanced artificial intelligence.”  The investigation further revealed the NSF and DOD continued funding Mr. Zhu even as he “set up a parallel institute near Wuhan, took a position at a Beijing university whose primary goal is to support Chinese military research, and joined a CCP ‘talent plan’ whose members are tasked with transferring knowledge and technology to China.”  In particular, Newsweek found that the project once led by Mr. Zhu received $1.2 million in two grants from the Office of Naval Research in 2021, the year following his departure to China.  KEY LETTER EXCERPT:   “Mr. Zhu has openly discussed how if China takes the lead in developing a ‘truly universal intelligence,’ then it will ‘become the winner of the international technology competition.’ He has also referred to the AI race as being equivalent in military importance to the race for the atomic bomb. In a period of intensifying geopolitical competition with the CCP, ceasing federal government support for Chinese AI development is a critical national security imperative.”  CLICK HERE to read the letter to UCLA Chancellor Gener Block.  CLICK HERE to read the letter to NSF Director Sethuraman Panchanathan.  CLICK HERE to read the letter to Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin. 

Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), Subcommittee on Health Chair Brett Guthrie (R-KY), and Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chair Morgan Griffith (R-VA), on behalf of the Health and Oversight subcommittee Republicans, wrote to Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Robert Califf regarding how the agency handles internal scientific disagreements. Of particular concern to the Committee is whether FDA scientists face possible retaliation for expressing differing scientific views. In the letter, the Chairs note they are prepared to pursue compulsory measures should the FDA fail to respond in a timely, good-faith manner. KEY LETTER EXCERPTS : “ [I]n August 2021, the FDA announced two top vaccine regulators were leaving the agency. One reason cited for the departures was that they were upset about the Biden administration’s announcement that adults should get a coronavirus booster vaccination eight months after they received their second shot. Neither reportedly believed there was enough data to justify offering booster shots yet, and both viewed the announcement by President Biden as pressure on the FDA to authorize the shots quickly. It is unknown whether the FDA dispute resolution process was used, and if not, why not. We are concerned that the FDA may have retaliated against career FDA regulators who were viewed as insufficiently cooperative with the Biden administration’s agenda. ” […] “Given the renewed interest in updated scientific integrity policy, the Committee seeks information on the adequacy of the FDA’s existing policies for handling scientific disagreements, and whether FDA leadership has taken retaliatory actions against dissenting FDA officials." BACKGROUND : A September 2023 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report highlighted the Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) interest in developing processes for differing scientific opinions. The GAO also noted that the FDA has existing dispute resolution policies and may continue to use them when the updated scientific integrity policy is finalized. In addition, the GAO has issued two other recent reports that are pertinent to the FDA’s handling of internal scientific disagreements. In June 2012, the HHS Office of Inspector General (OIG) issued a study, Scientific Disagreements Regarding Medical Device Regulatory Decisions . The OIG found that accountability for the completeness of administrative files related to scientific disagreements was unclear as Not all Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) managers and reviewers received training on the new procedures CDRH faced broader challenges in identifying and resolving scientific disagreements because of uncertainty about regulatory definitions and processes and staff perceptions about expressing differences of opinion Further, the OIG recommended that the FDA: (1) define more clearly its requirements for documenting and resolving scientific disagreements (2) train all reviewers and managers on the new policies and procedures for resolving scientific disagreements (3) more clearly assign accountability for the contents of the administrative files of all submissions The FDA concurred with all three recommendations. The Chairs requested a response with the following information by January 17, 2024:  Copies of the administrative files related to all internal scientific disagreements at the FDA since January 1, 2018, documenting whether and/or how the resolution was reached and the basis, including any joint memoranda. All documents since January 1, 2018, related to the Office of Chief Scientist handling of appeals of internal scientific disagreements at the FDA. All documents related to the scientific disagreement within the FDA over coronavirus booster vaccination during summer 2021. If the internal process was not used, please provide all documents related to any changes in decision-making authority on the coronavirus booster vaccination during summer 2021 (e.g., authority removed from the director and deputy director of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) vaccines office and reassigned to the CBER director). All documents since January 1, 2018, related to all instances where decision-making authority was removed from FDA officials involved in regulatory decisions. CLICK HERE to view the full letter.

Chairs signal intent to subpoena if FDA continues stonewalling crucial request Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), Subcommittee on Health Chair Brett Guthrie (R-KY), and Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chair Morgan Griffth (R-VA), on behalf of the Health and Oversight Republicans, sent a letter to Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Robert Califf. The letter follows up on a previous request for information related to the agency’s foreign drug inspection program and comes amid the Committee’s work to address drug shortages . To date, the FDA has not provided any response to the Committee.  KEY LETTER EXCERPT :  “The U.S. cannot afford additional disruptions to the drug supply chain that reduce the availability of essential medications and force doctors and patients to make difficult treatment decisions. Members of this Committee have repeatedly expressed concern regarding the effectiveness of the FDA’s foreign drug inspection program, including at two separate hearings this Congress before the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations and the Subcommittee on Health. Addressing drug shortages remains a top priority for the Committee.”  BACKGROUND :  Since the Committee’s July letter to the FDA, there have been additional drug recalls from Indian manufacturers and plant closures in the United States.   In August, Indian drug manufacturers, Alembic and Aurobindo Pharma, issued voluntary drug recalls citing quality and manufacturing deficiencies, respectively.   Alembic recalled over 80,000 bottles of tobramycin, used to treat bacterial eye infections, due to “failed impurities/degradation specifications.”  Aurobindo recalled rufinamide tablets used to treat seizure disorders.  Both companies have a history of drug recalls and quality control failures.   Last year, the FDA issued Alembic a Form 483, which cited its manufacturing plant in Panelav, Gujarat with four observations following a 10-day inspection.  It has come to light that the FDA ended its unannounced foreign inspection program out because the agency believed it was an obstacle to deeper collaboration with India.   The reporting also alleges that the FDA undermined a Department of Defense initiative to independently test the quality of imported drugs used by the military out of fear that it would undermine the FDA’s credibility.   In addition, a newly published study has confirmed that FDA foreign inspections in 2022 were down 79 percent compared to 2019 while at the same time the number of “citations rose dramatically, despite all establishments being given advance notice of inspections.”   ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND :  Domestic production of vital medicines continues to be under stress.   In early August, Pfizer announced it would limit the distribution of injectable drugs manufactured at its North Carolina plant after the facility suffered damage in the aftermath of a tornado.   In September, autoinjector maker Aktiv Pharma Group (“AktiVax, Inc.”), which produces autoinjectors to treat life threating conditions, announced the closure of three manufacturing facilities.   Just last year, the company w as awarded over $45 million to supply a nerve agent antidote to the Strategic National Stockpile. While shortages of cancer drugs appear to have eased slightly in recent months, demand continues to outstrip supply .  The Chairs are prepared to issue a subpoena if the FDA does not produce the requested documents January 5, 2024. CLICK HERE to read the letter.

Letter comes after Eventbrite censored conservative event while permitting pro-Hamas events Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), Subcommittee on Communications and Technology Chair Bob Latta (R-OH), Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chair Morgan Griffith (R-VA), and Subcommittee on Innovation, Data, & Commerce Chair Gus Bilirakis (R-FL), along with Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee Ranking Member Ted Cruz (R-TX) today wrote Eventbrite President and CEO Julia Hartz. The letter raises concerns over Eventbrite’s enforcement practices. BACKGROUND :  On October 23, 2023, Eventbrite removed an event listing titled, “Protecting Women’s Sports with Riley Gaines,” from its platform.    This event was intended to be a public forum for participants, including female athletes, to express issues, experiences, and consequences of biological males competing in their competitions.  Eventbrite listed “Rahm 4 Palestine (GAZA): Talk & Dinner,” scheduled for October 27, featuring a headline speaker who, after the October 7 Israeli massacre, using his verified X account, publicly posted antisemitic messaging that was viewed more than 1 million times.  A sold-out conference scheduled for November 10 in Washington, D.C., “Palestine Center 2023 Annual Conference,” was promoted on Eventbrite.    In advertising this event, organizers referred to the country of Israel as “Israeli apartheid” under Eventbrite’s “About this event” tab.  KEY LETTER EXCERPTS :  “In the last few weeks, Eventbrite, it seems, has selectively enforced its terms of service by removing some events while allowing potentially violative events to remain on the site. We raise the issues below not to dictate or remove events and users from your marketplace, but to better understand your Community Guidelines enforcement process .”  […]  “We struggle to comprehend the rationale for removing this event, while other Eventbrite listings that seemingly violate several of Eventbrite’s Community Guidelines remain live, including some that feature speakers espousing allegiance to entities designated by the U.S. Government as foreign terrorist organizations.”  […]  “Because Gaines’s promotion of the widely held view to preserve women’s athletics starkly contrasts with events on Eventbrite featuring speakers sympathetic to mass murder, this leads us to wonder if pro-terrorist and antisemitic events and event speakers do not plainly violate Eventbrite’s prohibition of content that would ‘discriminate against, harass, disparage, threaten, incite violence against, or otherwise target individuals or groups based on their actual or perceived race, ethnicity, religion, national origin.’ We seek information on what metrics Eventbrite uses to enforce its Community Guidelines on selected issues such as women’s athletics versus terrorism and antisemitism .”    CLICK HERE to read the full letter.