Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Youngkin responds to Spanberger on U.Va., blasting ‘hyperbole and factual errors’

Summary:

  • says Gov.-elect ‘s letter to U.Va. board is filled with “factual errors”
  • Governor’s letter alleges “evidence is compelling” that U.Va. under “repeatedly ignored the law.”
  • Tim Heaphy, U.Va.’s former legal counsel, says Youngkin’s assertion is “factually unfounded.”

Updated Nov. 17

Gov. Glenn Youngkin wrote a heavily critical letter this week to Gov.-elect Abigail Spanberger in response to her letter attempting to delay hiring of the University of Virginia’s next president until she takes office in January 2026.

Her Nov. 12 letter to the was “riddled with hyperbole and factual errors and impugns both the and the presidential search underway,” Youngkin wrote in his Nov. 13 letter to Spanberger, a U.Va. alumna.

“I am advised that this was likely the first time in the history of our commonwealth that a governor-elect attempted to interfere with the governance of a university and the fiduciary duties of individual board members,” Youngkin wrote. “Surprisingly, you have reached conclusions before you or your transition team have taken the time to learn all the facts surrounding the resignation of former U.Va. President Jim Ryan and the settlement agreement with the U.S. .”

Ryan resigned as president in late June, citing federal pressure in his decision to leave. The DOJ’s civil rights division had launched a probe of the university, alleging that Ryan was slow-walking the dismantling of U.Va.’s diversity, equity and inclusion programs after its board voted to dissolve such initiatives in March.

The governor wrote to Spanberger that the “DOJ did not randomly or without a predicate select U.Va. when it started its formal investigation. The evidence is compelling that the university had repeatedly ignored the law.”

Youngkin also wrote that a former general counsel for the university, whom he does not name, “confirmed in a public speech that the university ‘had some programs that crossed the legal line … we have, in certain schools or certain departments, numerical formulas and that was against the rules.'”

However, Youngkin received pushback Friday in the form of a letter from , who served as the university’s state-appointed legal counsel from 2018 to 2022. Heaphy wrote that Youngkin incorrectly cited part of Heaphy’s September presentation to U.Va. faculty members in Youngkin’s letter to Spanberger.

Obtained by WRIC 8 News, Heaphy’s letter says that Youngkin’s assertion that the university broke federal law “is both factually unfounded and legally incorrect.”

Heaphy continues, saying that Youngkin omits the word “historically” that precedes the line “had some programs that crossed the legal line.” Heaphy writes that these programs were established before he and Ryan were employed at U.Va., and “when we learned of those programs, we didn’t ignore them but rather took steps to ensure they were modified to comply with the law.”

Upon taking office in 2022, Attorney General Jason Miyares fired Heaphy, who also was lead investigator for the U.S. House of Representatives’ Jan. 6 committee.

University governance dispute

Youngkin’s three-page letter also alleges that “neither the DOJ nor the current board leadership made Jim resign. His resignation took place under the leadership of Rector Robert Hardie, who was appointed by Governors Kaine, McAuliffe and Northam, and his resignation was encouraged personally by Rector Rusty Conner, who was the rector during Jim’s hiring.”

The governor wrote that Conner and Hardie, who completed his term as rector July 1, days after Ryan’s resignation, “persuaded” the U.Va. president to “advance his previously planned resignation by several months,” referring to Ryan’s acknowledgement in his June 26 resignation letter that he planned to step down at the end of the 2026-27 academic year.

However, Ryan wrote in his own letter Friday to U.Va.’s Faculty Senate that Youngkin’s characterization of his resignation was “inaccurate,” saying the same about a recent letter from Rector Rachel Sheridan. Ryan also alleged that the governor and U.Va. board members appointed by Youngkin, including the current rector and vice rector, may have driven the push for his resignation, rather than the DOJ.

Conner, an attorney who served on the board from 2014 to 2022, wrote in an email Saturday that he advised Ryan just before his resignation. “I ultimately concluded that he had little choice but to resign because he had no support from the Board of Visitors (if they were even aware), no ability to retain counsel (those decisions are made by the attorney general), no funding to contest the actions of the DOJ, and thus no ability to prevail.

“He would be alone in fighting the DOJ,” Conner added. “And as a consequence, many dedicated university employees would likely lose their jobs if research funding were curtailed as was represented to be threatened.”

However, Conner denied any implications that he advised Ryan to resign over the meat of the DOJ’s complaints. “My reasoning had absolutely nothing to do with whether I thought he could conform the university’s policies to what the DOJ’s guidance would require, and any representation to that effect is simply fabrication,” he wrote. “One of the ironies in all of this which calls into question the events leading to his resignation is that the university has represented in entering into the agreement with the DOJ suspending the investigations that nothing in the university’s policies would need to be altered because all necessary changes had been made under Jim Ryan.

“One simply cannot have it both ways: Jim had to resign because he was incapable of making the necessary changes, and then claiming nothing has to change when entering into the DOJ agreement because all necessary policy changes had been implemented,” Conner wrote. “Moreover, it was also represented that the DOJ had agreed to seven conditions if Jim were to resign that were described as ‘extremely favorable,’ including no financial penalty and the termination of all investigations. So I was of the view that Jim should resign upon receipt of the acknowledgement by the DOJ to the seven conditions, which was also represented as being forthcoming.”

Hardie did not respond to a message seeking comment about the governor’s letter Friday.

U.Va.’s board is made up entirely of Republican Youngkin’s appointees, and Spanberger, a Democrat, wrote that its actions over the past six months have “severely undermined the public’s and the university community’s confidence in the board’s ability to govern productively, transparently and in the best interests of the university.”

She asked for the board’s presidential search committee, which is set to meet next week with a group of finalists for in-person interviews, to “refrain from rushing this search process and from selecting the finalists for the presidency or a president until the board is at full complement and in statutory compliance, meaning that I have appointed and the General Assembly has confirmed new board members.”

Youngkin’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment Friday.

Ex-U.Va. president alleges board members ‘complicit’ in exit

Summary:

  • Former U.Va. president says governor, board members may have driven resignation, not the
  • wrote letter alleging two former rectors “persuaded” Ryan to resign
  • BOV’s , Rachel Sheridan and Porter Wilkinson allegedly dealt directly with DOJ, Ryan writes

Former president Jim Ryan on Friday sent a 12-page letter to the university’s Faculty Senate detailing his sudden resignation, his first public accounting of the events leading up to his departure announcement June 26.

In the letter, he alleges that the push for him to resign as president may not have come directly from the U.S. Department of Justice but instead may have been driven by Gov. Glenn Youngkin, members of the university’s , the university’s lawyers “or some combination of that group,” he writes.

“It’s not as if the has been shy about calling for resignations,” Ryan writes. “Forcing university presidents to resign, moreover, has not been part of the playbook of the Trump administration; as far as I know, I am the only university president in the country who has been forced to resign as part of a supposed deal with the Trump administration. At the very least, we had board members who were apparently more complicit than other universities.”

Ryan also alleges that two recent letters by Youngkin and U.Va. Rector Rachel Sheridan addressing his resignation are “inaccurate” and that he released his own account to correct the record.

Youngkin wrote in a Nov. 13 letter to Gov.-elect Abigail Spanberger that “it’s clear that neither DOJ nor the current board leadership made Jim resign. His resignation took place under the leadership of [U.Va.] Rector Robert Hardie … and his resignation was encouraged personally by former Rector Rusty Conner, who was the rector during Jim’s hiring.”

Youngkin wrote that Hardie and Conner “persuaded” Ryan to “advance his previously planned resignation by several months because they believed he could not fully implement what they assumed would be included in the settlement agreement.”

However, Ryan’s letter alleges that three board members — Sheridan, the university’s rector as of July 1; Porter Wilkinson, vice rector as of July 1; and Paul Manning — kept Hardie, other board members and Ryan in the dark about specific negotiations, including the parameters of an external compliance review as part of the university’s agreement with the DOJ.

The governor’s office, Hardie, Conner and Manning did not immediately respond to requests for comment Friday. A U.Va. spokesperson declined to comment beyond Sheridan’s and Ryan’s letters.

Ryan writes that Sheridan, before becoming rector, advised Ryan to talk to an attorney friend, Beth Wilkinson, without telling Ryan that she had hired Wilkinson to advise the board, and that Hardie, still rector at the time, had not been informed of that decision.

On June 24, two days before he resigned, Wilkinson “told me that I was going to be kicked out one way or the other, and that if I didn’t resign, the board would fire me,” Ryan writes.

The former president notes that Harmeet Dhillon, associate attorney general for the DOJ’s civil rights division, “emphatically and publicly stated” twice that “neither she nor her DOJ colleagues demanded my resignation or offered some sort of quid pro quo,” Ryan writes. “This is not consistent with what I was told by [board members] Rachel [Sheridan] and Paul [Manning], but I was never in the room when these conversations took place.”

Ryan’s letter says he never spoke directly to the two DOJ attorneys conducting the civil rights investigation into U.Va., and that three members appointed by Youngkin — not including the then-rector, Robert Hardie — dealt directly with the federal prosecutors.

Hardie’s term as rector ended June 30, four days after Ryan’s resignation.

Spanberger’s transition team released her Nov. 12 letter to the U.Va. board, made up entirely of Youngkin appointees, asking them to delay the university’s hiring process for Ryan’s replacement as president until she takes office and has the opportunity to appoint members to the U.Va. board.

Ryan wrote that his letter, addressed to the faculty senators, is “not a direct response or a point-by-point rebuttal” of Sheridan’s and Youngkin’s letters, “which I do not think present an accurate accounting of my resignation.”

On the day that Ryan resigned, he writes, he received a call from Sheridan and two attorneys who attended a meeting with prosecutors and told him that “the only offer on the table was that I needed to resign by 5 p.m. that day or the DOJ would basically rain hell on U.Va.,” including that the DOJ “would extract/block hundreds of millions of dollars from U.Va. before they would even negotiate.”

In June, Manning shared with Ryan that he had heard from Youngkin and Sheridan “about the need for me to resign,” Ryan writes.

A few days earlier, Manning had “encouraged me to hang on,” Ryan’s letter says, but at a June 16 lunch, Manning “told me he had a different answer now and thought I should resign. He told me that, as a friend, he did not want me to go through the ordeal of trying to fight the federal government, and he was worried what the DOJ — and other agencies — might do to U.Va., especially with respect to research funding.

“He also told me that I would likely be blamed for the losses,” Ryan writes. “It was unclear to me whether this conversation was Paul’s idea, or whether he was carrying water for the governor and Rachel.”

Ryan concludes, “What is not clear to me … is whether the threat was real, or whether the idea came from the board members who spoke with the DOJ lawyers, our own lawyers, the governor, or some combination of that group.”

Rector Sheridan’s letter

Ryan’s letter comes a day after Sheridan sent a lengthy missive to the Faculty Senate about her and other officials’ roles in the university’s dealings with the U.S. Department of Justice, which under President Donald Trump has threatened pulling federal funding from universities it views as noncompliant with Trump’s executive order to dismantle diversity, equity and inclusion programs.

The bulk of Ryan’s letter was written over the summer “so I would have a record of the events while they were fresh in my mind. I was never sure if I would release it publicly, but I thought there might be a legislative hearing or inquiry that would require me to respond, and I wanted to make sure my memories were freshly recorded,” he added.

“I think it is time to set the record straight, which will hopefully enable U.Va. to make all necessary changes in order to end this chapter and begin a fresh, new chapter in the history of a remarkable university,” Ryan wrote.

Sheridan’s letter to the Faculty Senate says that she and Wilkinson, now the rector and vice rector of U.Va.’s board but at that time the chair and vice chair of the board’s Audit, Risk and Compliance Committee, were asked by Ryan in early June to speak directly with DOJ prosecutors investigating U.Va. — an assertion Ryan’s letter contradicts. He writes that he didn’t know why Sheridan and Wilkinson were tapped to deal directly with Justice Department attorneys.

Sheridan wrote that by mid-June, having received five letters from the DOJ’s civil rights division and hearing prosecutors’ statements at a June 3 meeting, “the gravity of the situation was apparent to everyone in U.Va. leadership.”

During the week of June 16, she added, “I received a call from fellow board member Paul Manning, who informed me that he had met with President Ryan, and that President Ryan had confidentially indicated that he was contemplating announcing that he would resign the presidency sooner than he had previously planned.”

Ryan, Sheridan noted, eventually stated in his departure letter that he planned to resign the presidency at the end of the 2025-26 academic year. Sheridan added that she and Manning met with Ryan on June 20 to discuss “the timing and consequences” of his resignation, and that they advised him to bring in an attorney to advise him.

“Following the conversation,” Sheridan wrote, “President Ryan called Mr. Manning to discuss the call and his potential resignation, and asked Mr. Manning to call the DOJ to confirm explicitly what [DOJ] officials had previously implied: that they did not trust President Ryan to faithfully implement any resolution of the pending investigations.”

She added that she and Manning told Ryan “multiple times that we would not be supportive of any potential efforts by the board to remove him.”

Ryan’s version of events

In Ryan’s Nov. 14 letter to faculty senators, he says that Sheridan reached out to him several days before the June 3 U.Va. Board of Visitors meeting and let Ryan know that she and Wilkinson were invited to attend a meeting with the DOJ attorneys.

“Why they alone were asked to meet with the DOJ remains unclear to me; it also remains unclear whether Rachel and Porter suggested that the current rector and vice rector should join them at the meeting,” Ryan wrote — differing from Sheridan’s version of events, in which she wrote that Ryan suggested that she and Wilkinson attend the meeting.

“I offered to join that meeting but was told I was not invited,” Ryan’s letter says. “I offered at a later time to go meet with the DOJ lawyers but was told by Rachel and Porter that that would be supremely unpleasant and would likely lead to a bad outcome. All of which means that I never once spoke directly with the DOJ lawyers; everything was communicated through Rachel, Porter and later another board member, Paul Manning.”

He added that Sheridan “reported to me after the meeting that the DOJ lawyers were very upset and that they basically insisted that I would need to resign in order to resolve the various inquiries and avoid the federal government inflicting a great deal of damage to U.Va. I found that a little shocking but also a little hard to believe.”

Ryan alleged in the letter that U.Va.’s deal with the DOJ was presented to him before his resignation as “blanket immunity,” but that after he submitted his resignation letter to Hardie, “that part of the agreement with the DOJ was that U.Va. would undertake an external compliance review … to ensure we were following the law.”

He added that “that piece of the agreement was not conveyed to me until after my resignation,” and that an external review shared with the DOJ “did not sound like blanket immunity to me, nor much different than the path we were headed down already,” before the board members told him that he was being pushed to resign.

“My chief of staff suggested to Robert Hardie that he should hold off on accepting my resignation until this was settled, but Robert indicated that the governor’s office was instructing him to accept the resignation on behalf of the board as soon as possible so that it would be irrevocable and the deal with the DOJ could be completed,” Ryan wrote.

 

Novo Nordisk chair touts OTC future for Wegovy as top investor tightens grip

Summary

  • New chair plans to add pharma and OTC expertise to ‘s board.
  • Governance overhaul gives the 77% of voting rights, prompting minority investor pushback.
  • Sorensen’s dual role as company chair and foundation chair raises concerns over concentrated power.
  • Restructuring follows resignations amid disputes over governance and comes as sales growth slows.

COPENHAGEN (Reuters) -Newly-elected chairman of Wegovy-maker Novo Nordisk, Lars Rebien Sorensen, said on Friday he plans to enhance the board’s pharmaceutical and over-the-counter experience following a board overhaul at an extraordinary shareholder meeting.

The shake-up, concluded on Friday, handed unprecedented power to the Novo Nordisk Foundation, sparking protests from some minority investors over governance concerns. The foundation wields 77% of Novo’s voting rights, despite owning only about 28% of its share capital.

Sorensen, who chairs the Foundation, was installed as new Novo Nordisk chair during the meeting, giving him a dual role unprecedented in the firm’s history and raising concerns about him amassing too much power.

“I would like to make myself redundant as quickly as possible,” said Sorensen, a former CEO of Novo Nordisk, adding that the foundation would resume operating at arm’s length from the company once a successor is elected. He plans to stay in the role no more than 2-3 years, he said.

The restructuring follows the abrupt resignation last month of former chairman Helge Lund and other independent board members, who stepped down citing disagreements with the foundation over governance principles. Sorensen said the Foundation sought greater changes to stabilize the company and ensure long-term growth.

While the revamped board secured over 90% approval at the meeting, some key minority shareholders either protested or abstained, citing fears of excessive consolidation of decision-making power under Sorensen’s dual role.

FOCUS ON PHARMA AND CONSUMER MODELS

Sorensen emphasized his desire to bring in board members with recent pharmaceutical or over-the-counter (OTC) experience, particularly as the company shifts toward a direct-to-consumer, cash-paying model.

“We would like to strengthen the board with some qualifications, preferably with recent pharma experience, perhaps even OTC experience,” he said.

The company has faced challenges, including slowing sales growth for Wegovy, its blockbuster obesity drug that last year helped Novo Nordisk become Europe’s most valuable firm.

Competition from Eli Lilly and compounding pharmacies, coupled with supply constraints, has eroded Novo’s first-mover advantage in the weight-loss market.

Sorensen has criticised the old board for not acting quickly enough to stem the decline in its key U.S. market. He pushed over the summer to speed up the naming of a new CEO, Mike Doustdar, who is spearheading a tough round of layoffs globally, and entered a dramatic bidding war for Metsera, though lost out to Pfizer.

“The new Novo is more raw. All the execution that has been lacking for many years is now happening in no time, and we should probably expect more to come,” said Lars Hytting, head of trading at Denmark-based ArthaScope, which holds Novo shares.

Sorensen’s dual role is seen as a test of the foundation-ownership model designed to provide stability and used by other big Danish firms like Maersk and Carlsberg.

(Reporting by Jacob Gronholt-Pedersen, Stine Jacobsen and Louise Rasmussen, editing by Terje Solsvik and Elaine Hardcastle and Louise Heavens)

 

Union Pacific, Norfolk Southern shareholders OK merger

Summary

  • Nearly 99% of both railroads’ shareholders approved the proposed $85 billion merger.
  • The deal would create the first coast-to-coast U.S. rail network with 50,000 miles of track.
  • The must still approve the merger after a rigorous review.
  • Supporters include major unions and shippers, while chemical makers and BNSF warn of competition risks.

OMAHA, Neb. (AP) — Shareholders of and backed the railroads’ proposed $85 billion merger to create the nation’s first coast-to-coast rail network.

Roughly 99% of both railroads’ shareholders voted to support the largest in history Friday, but the U.S. Surface Transportation Board must still approve it before the deal can be completed.

Union Pacific CEO said, “Our shareholders see the value and understand this merger will unlock new opportunities to enhance service, growth and innovation.”

Vena has said that he hopes to file the formal merger application either in late November or early December, and that will initiate the lengthy review process.

The merger has picked up the support of the largest rail union and hundreds of shippers, but chemical manufacturers and competing railroad BNSF have raised concerns about whether the merger would hurt competition and lead to higher rates. President Donald Trump said after meeting with Vena in the Oval Office that the deal sounds good to him.

Vena has argued that the merger is great for America because it would enable the railroad to deliver goods more quickly and help the companies that rely on its deliveries of raw materials and finished products.

The proposed merger announced this summer was designed to link Union Pacific’s vast rail network in the West with Norfolk’s rails that crisscross the Eastern United States. The combined railroad would include more than 50,000 miles of track in 43 states with connections to major ports on both coasts.

The railroads argued that this merger would streamline deliveries of raw materials and goods nationwide by eliminating delays when shipments are handed off between railroads.

The STB will closely scrutinize the merger to determine if it can meet the very high bar the board established for railroad deals after previous consolidation in the industry led to massive backups and snarled traffic.

Many investors believe that if the deal is approved, CSX will need to find a merger partner so it will be able to compete effectively. But the other major railroads — BNSF, CPKC and Canadian National — have all said they believe forging cooperative agreements between railroads makes more sense than a merger. But CSX still went out and hired a new CEO with a background in mergers this fall to lead their railroad.

Vena and Norfolk Southern CEO have both said they are optimistic that this deal will get approved under Trump’s pro-business administration. The Surface Transportation Board is supposed to be indenpendant, but Trump fired the only board member who opposed Canadian Pacific’s acquisition of Kansas City Southern railroad two years ago. That should allow Trump to appoint two new members of the five-person board although Robert Primus has sued to challenge his firing.

Union Pacific offered $20 billion cash and one share of its stock to complete the deal. Norfolk Southern shareholders would receive one UP share and $88.82 in cash for each one of their shares as part of the deal that values NS at roughly $320 per share. Norfolk Southern closed at just over $260 a share earlier this month before the first reports emerged speculating about the deal that includes a $2.5 billion breakup fee.

Texas judge weighs Paxton bid to block Kenvue dividend

Summary

  • Texas AG asks a judge to block ‘s $398 million dividend and restrict marketing.
  • Kenvue argues the request is unprecedented and lacks legal basis.
  • Paxton alleges Tylenol poses risks during pregnancy; medical groups dispute the claim.
  • Kenvue and J&J say the injunction would damage business operations and exceed Texas jurisdiction.

Carthage, Texas (Reuters) -A Texas judge on Friday began considering state Attorney General Ken Paxton’s bid to block Kenvue from paying a $398 million dividend to its shareholders and from marketing Tylenol as safe for pregnant women.

Paxton, a Republican who is running for a U.S. Senate seat in 2026, sued Kenvue on October 28, accusing it of concealing the risks to children when pregnant women use the popular medication.

Judge LeAnn Rafferty in the Panola County courthouse in Carthage, Texas, near the Louisiana border, opened the hearing by allowing Kenvue’s lawyer to present the first statement.

The lawsuit was filed five weeks after Republican President Donald Trump and U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. repeated the scientifically unproven claim that using Tylenol during pregnancy can cause autism.

It is unusual for a local court, applying state law, to exercise power over issues fundamental to a multinational company’s business model, including its ability to communicate with the public and pay shareholders.

Kenvue has repeatedly said Tylenol is safe. The dividend payout is scheduled for November 26.

A source familiar with the matter said Kenvue is preparing for the court to grant the temporary restraining order on the dividend and plans to seek a mandamus – an emergency appeal used to correct a “grievous error” – at an appellate court to stay it. He said the appeal could be granted in as little as 24 hours.

“The state is asking you to do something totally unprecedented today. What they’re asking you to do is something that no judge anywhere in the country has ever done before,” Kenvue lawyer Kim Bueno told the court.

PAXTON IS ALIGNED WITH TRUMP’S AGENDA

Paxton has aligned himself with Trump’s agenda, and is challenging incumbent John Cornyn in next year’s Republican primary for a U.S. Senate seat.

Republicans traditionally presented themselves as preferring smaller governments that were less likely to interfere in the decisions of businesses and consumers. That stance has shifted somewhat during the Trump era, with Republican officials wading more aggressively and regularly into decisions on health and tariffs, for instance.

Paxton is also suing , which made Tylenol for six decades, accusing it of spinning off Kenvue in 2023 to shield itself from liability.

J&J has also defended Tylenol’s safety, and doctors and medical societies view acetaminophen products such as Tylenol as the best option for treating fever and pain during pregnancy.

Concerns about Tylenol have been an overhang for Kimberly-Clark’s planned $40 billion takeover of Kenvue, which was announced six days after Paxton sued.

That merger would let the maker of Kleenex and Huggies diapers expand into higher-margin categories such as skin care and pain relief, by acquiring Kenvue brands including Band-Aid, Johnson’s Baby shampoo, Listerine and Neutrogena.

‘TSUNAMI OF ILLEGALITY’ IF PAXTON WINS

In court papers, Paxton said Kenvue must conserve cash because it risked insolvency if forced to pay billions of dollars in Tylenol cases and international lawsuits claiming that baby powder containing talc causes cancer.

Paxton said the public interest supports an injunction because of “the wealth of evidence demonstrating that prenatal Tylenol exposure causes autism and ADHD.”

He also said the U.S. Constitution supports restricting Kenvue from touting Tylenol’s safety, because the First Amendment lets states regulate “misleading” commercial speech.

In September, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration told doctors to alert patients to what it said was growing evidence linking Tylenol to autism. Medical societies dispute a Tylenol link to autism.

The agency is considering new labels for Tylenol and generic versions.

Kenvue and J&J contended in court filings that giving Paxton what he wants “would constitute a tsunami of illegality that would tarnish the credibility of .”

They said Rafferty has no jurisdiction over the spinoff because it occurred outside Texas and involved two New Jersey companies, and cited a May decision from the Texas Supreme Court that said state laws generally don’t apply elsewhere.

The companies also said paying a dividend would not irreparably harm Texas because Kenvue is not insolvent.

Paxton, they added, cited no court that ever blocked manufacturers from talking about and selling products the FDA deemed safe, or blocked public companies from paying regular dividends.

“The state’s motion is a thinly veiled attempt to prop up a politician’s unfounded claims that lie well outside the mainstream of scientific thought, resurrect the Tylenol product liability litigation, generate headlines and ultimately enrich private plaintiffs’ lawyers,” the companies said.

Kenvue and J&J were likely referring to Keller Postman, a law firm helping Paxton in the Tylenol case.

(Reporting by Jonathan Stempel and Sheila Dang; Additional reporting by Patrick Wingrove in New York and Tom Hals in Wilmington, Delaware; Editing by Noeleen Walder, Bill Berkrot and Paul Simao)

 

US House report accuses China of minerals market interference

Summary

  • alleges manipulates global prices.
  • Report recommends price controls, oversight of reporting agencies and a minerals czar.
  • Lawmakers cite risks to U.S. jobs, miners and .
  • China denies accusations, saying it supports stable global supply chains.

(Reuters) -China has sought to manipulate global critical minerals prices for decades, using its control as an economic weapon to expand its manufacturing sector and its geopolitical influence, a U.S. House of Representatives committee said on Wednesday.

The allegations, contained in a 50-page report from the bipartisan U.S. House Select Committee on China and reviewed by Reuters, add to a series of missives from Washington criticizing Beijing’s sway in critical minerals markets.

President Donald Trump and his predecessor, Joe Biden, have in recent years sought to crimp China’s dominance in the critical minerals sector.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS INCLUDE MINERALS PRICE CONTROLS

The committee’s legislative report aims to codify presidential orders into law with an array of recommendations including price controls and expanded government oversight of price reporting agencies.

In a statement to Reuters, the Chinese Embassy in Washington said “there is nothing credible about the committee,” adding that China is committed to “upholding the security and stability of global production and supply chains.”

“We hope the relevant U.S. politicians view China in an objective and reasonable light, proceed from the common interests of China and the U.S., head toward the same direction with China and promote the development of the China-U.S. relations based on mutual respect, peaceful coexistence and win-win cooperation,” said spokesperson Liu Pengyu.

China had previously accused the U.S. of distorting and exaggerating Beijing’s export controls and of stirring up panic over the issue.

“China has a loaded gun pointed at our economy, and we must act quickly,” said Congressman John Moolenaar, a Michigan Republican and chair of the committee.

A chemist by training who previously worked at Dow Chemical, Moolenaar added that Beijing’s practices had “caused American job losses, driven American miners out of business, and jeopardized national security.”

The report, compiled by committee staff, was also endorsed by the ranking Democrat, Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi of .

It alleges that China’s role as the world’s largest processor of many critical minerals has made it nearly impossible for the United States and allies to determine the true price of certain metals, including rare earths.

The report also suggests that the London Metal Exchange, where many minerals are traded, is susceptible to influence from Beijing, as it is owned by the Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing.

“The LME advertises itself as showing prices that ‘properly reflect global supply and demand.’ However, with the (Chinese government) looking over HKEC’s shoulder, it is difficult to determine whether the prices it publishes accurately reflect global supply and demand.”

The LME said it is subject to the laws and regulations of the United Kingdom, where it is based.

“All of the LME’s key prices are determined on the basis of transparent trading activity from an international participant base,” a spokesperson said.

REPORT ALLEGES CHINA TARGETS PRICING OF RARE EARTHS

The House committee’s report, based on published reports and data, also alleges that China has specifically targeted the lithium and rare earths industries, raising and lowering prices to bolster its own economy.

“Each time lithium prices rose, the PRC government took action to bring lithium prices back down,” the report said.

The cited issues with pricing in September when it sought an equity stake in Lithium Americas.

The report offers 13 policy recommendations, some of which Trump has already taken. It also aims to spark broader dialogue about China’s presence in the minerals markets rather than seek to address every concern.

“One single policy will not completely address the serious challenge the United States faces on critical minerals, so we must simultaneously pursue multiple policy prescriptions,” it said.

One of those recommendations, the creation of a “critical minerals czar,” was instituted by Trump earlier this year. The report also suggests the creation of a U.S. minerals stockpile, which the administration has indicated it is open to.

(Reporting by Ernest Scheyder in Houston and Pratima Desai in London; Editing by Veronica Brown and Edmund Klamann)

 

Walmart CEO Doug McMillon to Retire; John Furner to Lead

(Reuters) – CEO will retire next year after more than a decade at the helm, capping a period when he reshaped the big-box retailer into a technology-driven powerhouse whose shares have consistently outperformed the broader market.

McMillon, 59, will be replaced by U.S. division chief CEO , 51, a veteran with three decades at the company, Walmart said.

Walmart’s shares fell 1.7% in morning trading, in part due to concerns McMillon’s decision to step down came sooner than anticipated, though his tenure at the time of his expected Jan. 31 retirement makes him one of the longest-serving CEOs in company history.

“Given that Mr. McMillon was unequivocally Walmart’s best CEO since the company’s founder in Sam Walton … the announcement will likely cause some anxiety by shareholders, particularly since the change was a bit earlier-than-anticipated,” said Chuck Grom, an analyst with Gordon Haskett.

In a video on the company’s website, McMillon said, “this is the right time to retire because the company is in such great shape, and John is more than ready to lead this company through another set of transformations.”

Walmart said in a statement McMillon’s retirement was a planned transition.

McMillon took over from Mike Duke in February 2014, when the company was facing competition from online sales giant Amazon.com.

Since he took the job, Walmart’s value has more than tripled to its current $817 billion as he ramped up efforts. When he took over, the company’s global ecommerce sales had just surpassed $10 billion; in its most recent fiscal year ended in January, that figure had surpassed $120 billion.

“Walmart has performed very well under Doug’s tenure,” said Neil Saunders, Managing Director of Retail at GlobalData. “It has become a way more influential ecommerce player, has integrated new technologies to improve efficiency, and has pushed into new areas like retail media.”

McMillon, who joined Walmart in 1984 as an hourly associate, has served in leadership roles at all three Walmart divisions: U.S., International and Sam’s Club. He rose through the ranks to become CEO of Walmart in February 2014, replacing Mike Duke.

McMillon will continue as an adviser through Jan. 31, 2027. The Bentonville, Arkansas-based retailer’s stock has risen 323% since he took over, outperforming the S&P 500 index .

‘POWERHOUSE FUELED BY TECHNOLOGY’

The list of people who have held Walmart’s top job since its 1962 founding is a short one; Furner will be only the sixth person to lead the company, with each of the previous CEOs lasting six years or more.

“Doug McMillon has been a terrific CEO, leading Walmart’s transformation into an even bigger and stronger retail powerhouse fueled by technology,” said Joseph Feldman, an analyst with Telsey Advisory Group. “John Furner is the logical choice to be the next CEO. He is a lifer at Walmart who started as an hourly associate in 1993, so he is a good cultural fit.”

The move is the latest in a string of leadership changes sweeping through retail as companies tackle tariff pressures, an uncertain economy and choppy consumer spending. Kohl’s , Kroger, and Target have named new CEOs this year.

Furner has been CEO of Walmart U.S. since 2019. He joined as an hourly associate around three decades ago, and has held leadership roles across merchandising, operations and sourcing, the company said. He previously served as president and CEO of Sam’s Club.

Walmart reports quarterly results next week.

(Reporting by Juveria Tabassum and Savyata Mishra in Bengaluru and Siddharth Cavale in New York; Editing by Savio D’Souza, Anil D’Silva and Nick Zieminski)

 

SAIC shakes up leadership further after CEO’s departure

Reston-based Fortune 500 federal contractor () is consolidating its five business groups into three, and three of its executives are leaving, the company announced Thursday.

Following on the heels of former CEO Toni Townes-Whitley’s departure in October, SAIC’s executive vice presidents of its Army sector and its Space and Intelligence group, Josh Jackson and David Ray, as well as Chief Innovation Officer Lauren Knausenberger, will leave “to pursue other opportunities,” the company announced.

Effective Jan. 31, 2026, the current Army and Navy business groups will be combined as ANG, and the Air Force and Space and Intelligence (AFSI) business groups will be consolidated. Current Executive Vice President Barbara Supplee will lead the Army Navy group, while Executive Vice President Vinnie DeFronzo will lead AFSI. The civilian business group will stay the same, and Executive Vice President Srini Attili will remain its leader.

“We’re making these changes to ensure that we are well positioned to capitalize on opportunities for growth and value creation, and to align our investments more closely with those opportunities,” interim CEO Jim Reagan said in a statement. “By optimizing our organization for speed, flexibility and efficiency, we expect that we will be able to better serve our customers and accelerate growth.”

He thanked Jackson, Knausenberger and Ray for their work. According to a Securities and Exchange Commission filing Thursday, Ray will step down immediately from his post and depart from SAIC on Jan. 30, 2026. He will receive severance compensation, along with a two-year non-compete agreement.

Townes-Whitley’s departure was announced in October, after she joined the company in 2023 as its CEO. Before leaving, she was one of only two current Fortune 500 CEOs who are Black women. Reagan, Leidos’ former chief financial officer and an SAIC board member since 2023, was immediately installed as interim CEO.

Jackson, who led SAIC’s Army business group, which employs 3,500 people, joined SAIC in 2002 as a program manager. Before leading the Army group, he led SAIC’s Navy business, according to his company bio.

The Space and Intelligence group leader, Ray joined SAIC in 2021 after serving as president of thermal imaging systems manufacturer FLIR Systems’ government and defense business, as well as multiple roles in management and business development at Raytheon. CIO Knausenberger, also an executive vice president, was previously chief information officer of the U.S. Department of the Air Force before joining SAIC in 2023.

The company has annual revenues of $7.4 billion and about 24,000 employees.

30-year mortgage rate edges up to 6.24%

Summary

  • Average 30-year U.S. mortgage rate rises to 6.24%
  • Still near lowest level of 2025 after July decline
  • 15-year rate slips slightly to 5.49%
  • Lower rates spark uptick in homebuying, refinancing activity

The average rate on a 30-year U.S. mortgage edged higher for the second week in a row, though it remains near its low point so far this year.

The average long-term mortgage rate ticked up to 6.24% from 6.22% last week, mortgage buyer said Thursday. A year ago, the rate averaged 6.78%.

Just two weeks ago, the average rate was at 6.17%, its lowest level in more than a year.

Borrowing costs on 15-year fixed-rate mortgages, popular with homeowners refinancing their , edged lower this week. The rate averaged 5.49%, down from 5.5% last week. A year ago, it was 5.99%, Freddie Mac said.

are influenced by several factors, from the ‘s interest rate policy decisions to bond market investors’ expectations for the economy and . They generally follow the trajectory of the 10-year Treasury yield, which lenders use as a guide to pricing home loans.

The 10-year yield was at 4.10% at midday Thursday, up slightly from a week ago.

When mortgage rates rise they reduce homebuyers’ purchasing power. The average rate on a 30-year mortgage has been stuck above 6% since September 2022, the year mortgage rates began climbing from historic lows. The has been in a slump ever since.

Sales of previously occupied U.S. homes sank last year to their lowest level in nearly three decades. Sales have been sluggish this year, but accelerated in September to their fastest pace since February as mortgage rates eased.

“Lower rates could finally be prompting some buyers to get into the market, which could lead to a surprisingly busy November and December, a time of the year when activity usually slows,” said Lisa Sturtevant, chief economist at .

Applications for loans to buy a home jumped nearly 6% last week to their strongest pace since September, even as mortgage rates ticked higher, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association.

The late-summer pullback in mortgage rates has also benefited homeowners eager to refinance their current home loan to a lower rate. Applications for mortgage refinancing loans accounted for about 56% of all mortgage applications last week, down slightly from the previous week.

Mortgage rates began declining in July in the lead-up to the Federal Reserve’s decision in September to cut its main interest rate for the first time in a year amid growing concern over the U.S. labor market. The Fed lowered its key interest rate again last month, but Fed Chair Jerome Powell cautioned that further rate cuts weren’t guaranteed.

Wall Street traders have reduced their bets that the Fed will cut its main interest rate at its next meeting in December, now seeing a 53% of that, down from nearly 70% a week ago, according to data from CME Group.

The central bank doesn’t set mortgage rates, and even when it cuts its short-term rates that doesn’t necessarily mean rates on home loans will necessarily decline.

Last fall after the Fed cut its rate for the first time in more than four years, mortgage rates marched higher, eventually reaching just above 7% in January this year. At that time, the 10-year Treasury yield was climbing toward 5%.

Despite the pullback in mortgage rates from their 2025 highs at the start of the year, affordability remains a major hurdle for many aspiring homeowners following years of skyrocketing home prices. The recently said it is considering backing a 50-year mortgage to help alleviate the crisis, though the announcement drew swift criticism from many economists and policymakers.

Boeing defense workers ratify new contract to end 3-month strike in the Midwest

Summary

  • approve new five-year
  • Deal includes 24% wage hike and $6,000 signing bonus
  • Strike halted production at defense plants in ,
  • Workers to return Sunday to build fighter jets and weapons

Several thousand Boeing machinists in the Midwest who assemble military aircraft and weapons voted Thursday to approve a new contract, ending a three-month strike that saw them reject four earlier offers from the company.

The breakthrough five-year labor agreement includes a 24% wage hike across the life of the contract and a $6,000 signing bonus, according to the union representing the 3,200 workers who walked off the job on Aug. 4.

“We’re proud of what our members have fought for together and are ready to get back to building the world’s most advanced military aircraft,” the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers said in a statement.

With their new contract in hand, the machinists are set to return to work Sunday at manufacturing plants in the Missouri cities of St. Louis and St. Charles, as well as in Mascoutah, Illinois. The workers build fighter jets, weapons systems and the U.S. Navy’s first carrier-based unmanned aircraft at those facilities.

Boeing said in a statement that it looks forward to “bringing our full team back together.”

While the strike was smaller than last year’s walkout by 33,000 Boeing workers who build commercial jetliners, it still threatened to slow the aerospace company’s efforts to regain its financial footing. Boeing’s Defense, Space & Security division makes up more than a third of its revenue.

Union leaders said talks broke down over pay and retirement benefits, while Boeing argued workers’ demands went beyond the Midwest’s cost of living. The breakdown in negotiations prompted the Congressional Labor Caucus to send a letter to Boeing CEO Kelly Ortberg, urging the company to return to the bargaining table.

“Boeing Defense workers produce planes and other defense equipment that the United States government and our men and women in uniform rely upon,” the letter said. “These workers are essential to the success of your company, and they deserve a fair contract that reflects their hard work and sacrifices.”

Tensions rose long before the strike, with the workers rejecting a proposed 20% raise over the contract’s term and $5,000 ratification bonuses. Boeing responded with an offer that kept the same pay increases but dropped a scheduling rule that limited overtime opportunities. Workers turned that down as well and went on strike the next morning, later rejecting two other company offers.

Amid those failed votes, the union drafted its own four-year contract, which members quickly ratified. And in a move that flipped the script on traditional bargaining practices, the union sent the pre-approved contract to Boeing for its consideration. The company rebuffed the union’s terms.

Last year’s strike, meanwhile, shut down Boeing’s factories in Washington state for more than seven weeks at a bleak time for the company. Boeing was under several federal investigations last year after a door plug blew off a 737 Max plane during an Alaska Airlines flight, an incident that renewed safety concerns surrounding that particular plane.

Two 737 Max jetliners crashed off the coast of Indonesia and in Ethiopia less than five months apart in 2018 and 2019, killing 346 people.