Technologies

States and stores end mask mandates, as CDC weighs changing its advice

In the past week, 10 states have declared an end to mask mandates. The CDC still recommends indoor masking, but that position could change soon.

For the most up-to-date news and information about the coronavirus pandemic, visit the WHO and CDC websites.

On Monday, five states — California, Connecticut, Delaware, New Jersey and Oregon — announced that they would be ending mask mandates for indoor public spaces, schools or both. Throughout the week, governors in five more states — New York, Illinois, Massachusetts, Nevada and Rhode Island — followed suit, declaring the end of required masks immediately or in the near future.

And on Friday, the Wall St. Journal reported that Walmart will no longer require vaccinated employees to wear masks in stores. The retail giant was one of the first to enact mask mandates for employees back in April 2020.

The omicron variant, which now accounts for nearly 100% of all COVID-19 cases in the US, prompted some states and cities to reinstitute mask mandates during the winter holiday season. As COVID-19 infections and hospitalizations drop sharply, those local mandates are quickly ending.

The recent state decisions stand in contrast to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which continues to recommend everyone wear a face mask in crowded areas, regardless of vaccination status. In a briefing Wednesday, CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky reiterated, “We continue to recommend masking in areas of high and substantial transmission — that’s much of the country right now — in public indoor settings.”

However, Politico reported Wednesday that the CDC is considering changing its stance on indoor masking, “according to four people familiar with the matter.” The agency may shift the guidelines for mandating masks to be based on local hospitalization data, instead of the current metric of COVID-19 cases.

For more, get the latest on COVID-19 boosters, learn whether we’ll need a fourth shot and consider what the “new normal” might look like after COVID-19.

Which states are ending mask rules?

California’s indoor masking requirements for vaccinated people are set to expire on Feb. 15. On Monday on Twitter, Governor Gavin Newsom confirmed that the mandate would indeed end next Tuesday. Unvaccinated people will still be required to wear masks indoors. Also on Monday, Delaware Governor John Carney announced that the state’s universal mask requirement will end Feb. 11 and that the school mask requirement will end March 31.

On Wednesday, New York Governor Kathy Hochul announced that state is lifting its mask mandates for everyone starting Feb. 10. Patrons of indoor business were previously required to be vaccinated or wear masks indoors. Cities, counties and individual businesses can still opt in to the mask-or-vaccine requirement, but it’s no longer required by state law.

Illinois plans to end its statewide indoor mask mandate on Feb. 28, Governor Bill Pritzer declared Wednesday. Pritzker noted that the state has seen its sharpest drop in hospitalizations since the pandemic began. Illinois Department of Public Health Director Ngozi Ezike clarified, “While masks will no longer be required in most indoor locations beginning February 28, they are still recommended.”

Rhode Island also announced an immediate end to mask-or-vaccine requirements for indoor spaces on Wednesday, while Oregon declared an end to masking requirements “no later than March 31.” On Thursday, Nevada Governor Steve Sisolak announced that the state’s mask mandate was over, effective immediately.

Also this week, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Oregon, Rhode Island and Connecticut all announced ends to their states’ school masking requirements. The four states join Delaware in declaring end dates for masks in public schools. Fourteen states and the District of Columbia currently have mask requirements for schools, though several phase out depending on local COVID rates.

Which states currently require masks?

With mandates in Delaware, Nevada and New York ending this week, nine US states and territories currently require masks in indoor settings like restaurants, bars and gyms:

California
Connecticut
District of Columbia
Hawaii
Illinois
New Mexico
Oregon
Puerto Rico
Washington

As noted above, Illinois’ statewide mask rules end Feb. 28, and Oregon’s mandate ends March 31. Washington lifted its outdoor mask requirement this week, but rules for indoor and school masking still remain.

Connecticut requires masks indoors only for unvaccinated people. As of Feb. 15, California will join Connecticut in only requiring that unvaccinated people mask indoors.

The AARP has an excellent state-by-state rundown of mask mandates across the US.

What is the federal mask mandate?

In December, the Biden administration extended its mask mandate for those traveling by trains, buses and airplanes due to concerns around the new omicron variant. Originally intended to expire Jan. 18, the measure is now set to end March 18. The Biden administration has not said yet if it plans to extend the federal mask mandate.

What does the CDC recommend about masking?

The current CDC guidance for mask wearing says that everyone age 2 years and older, vaccinated and unvaccinated, should continue wearing masks indoors when in public places, especially if in a high COVID-19 transmission area, to help prevent spreading the disease to others.

The CDC also says that people outdoors generally do not need to wear masks, unless they are in extended close contact with other people.

In May 2021, the CDC stated that vaccinated people did not need to wear masks anywhere, but reversed course in July when the delta variant of COVID-19 created large numbers of infections, hospitalizations and deaths.

What is the World Health Organization’s position on masks?

The World Health Organization currently recommends masks strongly to mitigate the spread of COVID-19. The organization’s guidance is clear in its recommendation: “Where there is community or cluster transmission of SARS-CoV-2, irrespective of vaccination status or history of prior infection, wearing a well-fitting mask that covers the nose and mouth is recommended for the public when interacting with individuals who are not members of their household.”

At the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, the WHO originally said that there was not enough evidence to support the general public wearing masks and that masks should be reserved for health care workers and those infected with COVID-19. The group changed its position in July 2020, recommending masks for everyone to reduce infections and spread of the virus.

For more information, here’s what you need to know about “long COVID” and how it’s treated. Also, read up on these COVID-19 vaccine side effects and important dos and don’ts of getting your COVID-19 vaccine.

The information contained in this article is for educational and informational purposes only and is not intended as health or medical advice. Always consult a physician or other qualified health provider regarding any questions you may have about a medical condition or health objectives.

Technologies

Verum Exchange Launches a $10 Bonus for Online Mining of Verum Coin and Bitcoin

Verum Exchange is expanding its online mining capabilities, allowing users to earn a $10 bonus while continuing to mine cryptocurrency directly from their smartphones. The feature is available not only in the currency converter app but also within Verum Messenger.

Online mining has long been part of the Verum ecosystem. Now, the company has added a new incentive to the existing feature — a bonus for participating in online mining.

The concept of online mining is changing the traditional perception of cryptocurrency mining. Users do not need to set up specialized mining equipment at home or deal with complex technical configurations. The feature can be accessed directly through the Verum digital ecosystem.

Verum Exchange: https://exchange.verum.im
Verum Messenger: https://ios.verum.im

Technologies

Supreme Court permits certain Trump mail-in voting restrictions before midterm elections

The Supreme Court has temporarily blocked a lower court ruling that prevented the Trump administration from implementing new restrictions on mail-in voting, allowing the administration to proceed with its plan to impose new requirements on states ahead of the midterm elections.

The Supreme Court on Monday sided with President Donald Trump for now in his effort to impose sweeping new restrictions on distributing mail ballots, putting on hold a lower-court ruling that had blocked key parts of the plan ahead of November’s midterm elections.

The justices, over three dissents, paused a ruling by U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Boston that prevented the Trump administration from carrying out portions of a March executive order involving the U.S. Postal Service and voter eligibility lists. The court’s three liberal justices dissented.

But the decision does not immediately allow the Postal Service to put its new mail-ballot system into effect.

A separate nationwide injunction issued Aug. 11 by U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Boston still blocks USPS from implementing the new procedures for the Nov. 3 elections. The administration would have to overcome that order as well.

The distinction was central to the Supreme Court’s decision.

The majority said Trump’s executive order itself does not require states to change how they conduct elections. Instead, it directs federal agencies to develop policies that could later impose requirements on states. Because those policies had not yet been implemented when 23 states and Washington, D.C., challenged the order, the court said the challenge was premature.

The justices stressed they were not deciding whether Trump’s order or the policies developed under it are ultimately legal.

“The Court’s disposition of this application does not mean that any measure taken by the Government to implement the Order will necessarily be lawful,” the majority wrote. “On that score, time will tell.”

The Postal Service last week finalized rules intended to carry out part of Trump’s order, including new requirements involving ballot envelopes, barcodes and information states must provide USPS. Those rules remain blocked by Talwani’s separate injunction.

The case now returns to the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals as the underlying legal fight continues. Some states have already started preparing to send ballots to military and overseas voters in early September.

Technologies

Trump targets Iran’s trade lifelines — here are the countries most exposed

Washington’s threat of “economic D-Day” collides with a small group of governments that account for most of what remains of Iran’s foreign trade.

The U.S. announced an “economic D-Day” campaign Monday to isolate Iran from the global economy, threatening penalties against “enablers” that continue doing business with Tehran.

The move is part of Washington’s bid to sever the trade lifeline that has sustained Tehran’s economy through nearly six months of war.

While enforcement details are sketchy, the threat could still put the U.S. on a collision course with some of Tehran’s major trade partners.

China

China is the biggest buyer of Iranian oil and serves as a crucial link to the global economy for Tehran, accounting for about 90% of its oil exports, according to the U.S. government.

China reported $9.96 billion in bilateral trade with Iran in 2025, excluding the roughly $31.2 billion in unreported Iranian crude oil exports to China that year, according to the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission.

Independent Chinese refiners take in the bulk of it, often rebranded as Malaysian or Indonesian crude and settled through intermediaries outside the dollar system, according to Kpler. The U.S. Treasury has sanctioned several of those refineries this year for Iranian oil purchases, while sparing Chinese financial institutions.

Beijing has openly opposed U.S. sanctions against Iran, arguing that economic pressure will not resolve the disputes. In May, China ordered domestic firms to disregard U.S. sanctions on five refiners linked to the Iranian oil trade.

While Beijing is unlikely to push back directly on Washington’s sanctions push, it will “quietly step up compliance” among state banks and oil companies to avoid getting caught in the net, said Dan Wang, China director at Eurasia Group, pointing to “a dichotomy between the official statement and the private practice.”

“Chinese authorities care more about dollar access in financing and market entry to the U.S.,” she said.

United Arab Emirates

The Emirates, located just 50 miles from Iran across the Persian Gulf, has long been a major trading hub for Iran.

The bilateral trade amounted to around $28 billion in 2024, when the Emirates was its largest source of imports, contributing over 30%, according to the World Trade Organization data. The UAE was also Iran’s third-largest export destination, making up 12% of its shipments, totaling more than $7 billion.

That relationship hit a snag last week as the UAE moved to suspend all trade and financial transactions with Iran, following two ballistic missiles fired toward Emirati territory, one of which targeted UAE-owned tankers.

Iran has relied on UAE banks and its financial system to access the world economy through illicit, often murky transactions, and cutting off Iran would require more forceful actions from Emirati authorities to crack down on opaque financial and trading activity, according to U.S.-based think tank The Washington Institute.

“The majority of Iran’s transshipment, smuggling, and shadow banking activity takes place in Dubai, so Washington must do what it can to help the UAE’s national leaders in Abu Dhabi convince and cajole Dubai’s leaders to play ball,” Matthew Levitt, a former U.S. Treasury official, wrote in a note on Monday.

Turkey

Turkey maintains significant commercial ties with Tehran, importing Iranian natural gas and exporting manufactured goods south.

The Turkey-Iran bilateral trade reached $5.7 billion in 2024, according to the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, with Ankara exporting mostly machinery and parts, chemical and agricultural products, while importing energy products from Tehran.

Meanwhile, under a 25-year gas supply contract between the two countries that expired at the end of July, Turkey’s imports of Iranian gas spiked this year while Iran’s share of Turkey’s total natural gas imports rose to 18.6%, according to local media.

While Ankara has sought to diversify toward other suppliers, expanding pipeline imports from Azerbaijan and Russia, it has, so far, not signaled that it intends to cut Iran off.

Iraq

Iraq, dependent on Iranian electricity and gas, has historically traded billions with Tehran.

Iran renewed a five-year contract in March 2024 to supply Iraq with up to nearly 660 billion cubic feet of natural gas a year, and electricity imports from Iran accounted for more than 30% of its electricity generation in 2023, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

Iraq-Iran trade reached more than $10 billion in 2025, according to Reuters, with Tehran exporting food, consumer goods and other products to the Iraqi market. The trade has dwindled this year amid increased security risks in the region and intermittent disruptions along border crossings since the war started in late February.

Iraq reportedly pays Iran around $4 billion to $5 billion a year for natural gas for electricity generation. The fresh U.S. sanctions could curtail Baghdad’s payments for Iranian energy.

India

India, among Iran’s top five trading partners, has seen its bilateral trade with Iran fall in recent years to around $1.6 billion in the year ending March 2026, according to India’s Department of Commerce, down from $2.3 billion in the year through to March 2023.

New Delhi primarily exports rice, tea, sugar and pharmaceuticals to Iran, and imports dry and fresh fruits from Iran.

In April, India resumed importing crude oil from Iran following a seven-year halt, after the U.S. temporarily lifted sanctions on Iranian crude exports.

But those trades now will be tested if Washington makes good on its threat to sanction any entity, including Indian refiners, that have procured Iranian energy.