Senate hearings with RFK Jr. put Cassidy's competing loyalties to Trump and science on display

The New Haven Register is an established regional newspaper, and the article includes an Associated Press writer contribution. It quotes named experts and political consultants, though the text does not describe the publisher’s corrections practices.

• ▸Source type — Established regional newspaper with a track record of local and national reporting.
• ▸Author attribution — The article names its author and credits an Associated Press writer with contributing.
• ▸Source diversity — The reporting includes named academics, legal experts and political consultants.

The article provides concrete details about the hearings and Cassidy’s political position, and includes perspectives from multiple named experts. It offers no direct response from Kennedy or the administration, limiting the range of views.

The article includes multiple expert perspectives, including criticism of Cassidy’s prior support for Kennedy, but does not include Kennedy’s or the administration’s account.

• ▸Source diversity — Quotes academics, a vaccine law expert and political consultants with differing views.
• ▸Counterarguments presented — A critic says Cassidy bears responsibility for supporting Kennedy, while another expert sees less political risk in Cassidy’s vaccine advocacy.
• ▸Omitted context — Kennedy and administration perspectives on the hearing questions are not presented.

The article uses a largely neutral reporting tone, attributes judgments to named experts and consultants, and describes both Cassidy’s criticism of Kennedy and his support for Kennedy’s nomination.

• ▸Language tone — Mostly descriptive language, with evaluative phrases attributed to sources.
• ▸Source selection — Includes multiple named experts and consultants, though not Kennedy or an administration representative.
• ▸Framing — Frames Cassidy’s actions as a political balancing act without endorsing a side.