<a href="https://newsroom.ap.org/home/search/?query=byline:%22MIKE%20STOBBE%20and%20GEOFF%20MULVIHILL%22&amp;mediaType=text&amp;st=keyword&amp;sortOrder=newest">By MIKE STOBBE and GEOFF MULVIHILL Associated Press</a>

There were 30,000 fewer U.S. drug overdose deaths in 2024 than the year before — the largest one-year decline ever recorded.

An estimated 80,000 people died from overdoses last year, according to provisional&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/drug-overdose-data.htm">Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data</a>&nbsp;released Wednesday. That’s down 27% from the 110,000 in 2023.

The CDC has been collecting comparable data for 45 years. The previous largest one-year drop was 4% in 2018, according to the agency’s National Center for Health Statistics.

All but two states saw declines last year, with Nevada and South Dakota experiencing small increases. Some of the biggest drops were in Ohio, West Virginia and other states that have been hard-hit in the nation's decades-long overdose epidemic.

Experts say more research needs to be done to understand what drove the reduction, but they mention several possible factors. Among the most cited:

— Increased availability of the overdose-reversing drug naloxone.

— Expanded addiction&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/methadone-opioids-addiction-treatment-6dc1634de4cdac06410149e6a1372e18">treatment</a>.

— Shifts in&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/smoking-injection-overdoses-fentanyl-cbaf9c258b4fdbcc93ac164902629c35">how people use</a>&nbsp;drugs.

— The growing impact of billions of dollars in opioid lawsuit settlement money.

— The number of at-risk Americans is shrinking, after waves of deaths in older adults and a&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/teen-drug-use-b5e877b4c7eecb5354c3b8214e7d8692">shift in teens</a>&nbsp;and younger adults away from the drugs that cause most deaths.

Still, annual overdose deaths are higher than they were before the COVID-19 pandemic. In a statement, the CDC noted that overdoses are still the leading cause of death for people 18-44 years old, “underscoring the need for ongoing efforts to maintain this progress.”

Some experts worry that the recent decline could be slowed or stopped by reductions in federal funding and the public health workforce, or a shift away from the strategies that seem to be working.

“Now is not the time to take the foot off the gas pedal,” said Dr. Daniel Ciccarone, a drug policy expert at the University of California, San Francisco.

The provisional numbers are estimates of everyone who died of overdoses in the U.S., including noncitizens. That data is still being processed, and the final numbers can sometimes differ a bit. But it’s clear that there was a huge drop last year.

Experts note that there have been past moments when U.S. overdose deaths&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/science-health-covid-opioids-death-rates-ba8af16246240aae4b044238ce19e6b6">seemed to have plateaued</a>&nbsp;or even started to go down,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/us-overdose-deaths-cdc-3c3848da5f8aa01d7b9f232ba5a34152">only to rise again</a>. That happened in 2018.

<a href="https://apnews.com/article/narcan-naloxone-overdose-opioids-9ad693795ce31e3a867a4dd4b65dbde8">Naloxone</a>&nbsp;has become more widely available, in part because of the introduction of over-the-counter versions that don’t require prescriptions.

Meanwhile, drug manufacturers, distributors, pharmacy chains and other businesses have settled lawsuits with state and local governments over the painkillers that were a main driver of overdose deaths in the past. The deals over the last decade or so have promised about&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/opioid-crisis-settlement-lived-experience-d7333af213cfaa90dc5ea7bad728fb13">$50 billion</a>&nbsp;over time, with most of it required to be used to&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/opioids-settlement-money-recovery-addiction-d186d72250f35056892bc9d70b5ab2c3">fight addiction</a>.

Another settlement that would be among the largest, with members of the Sackler family who own OxyContin maker Purdue Pharma agreeing to pay&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/oxycontin-purdue-sackler-settlement-bankruptcy-05531ffdbdfa86b0da83c621935ba8b4">up to $7 billion</a>, could be approved this year.

The money, along with federal taxpayer funding, is going to a variety of programs, including supportive housing and harm reduction efforts, such as providing materials to test&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/legalization-fentanyl-test-strips-opioid-overdoses-4a23f92b401c667381e84538fe5f1059">drugs for fentanyl</a>, the biggest driver of overdoses now.

But what each state will do with that money is currently at issue. “States can either say, ‘We won, we can walk away’” in the wake of the declines or they can use the lawsuit money on naloxone and other efforts, said Regina LaBelle, a former acting director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy. She now heads an addiction and public policy program at Georgetown University.

President Donald Trump’s administration views opioids as largely a law enforcement issue and as a reason to step up border security. It also has been reorganizing and downsizing federal health agencies.

Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said overdose prevention efforts will continue, but some public health experts say cuts mean the work will not go on at the same level.

U.S. Rep. Madeleine Dean, a Pennsylvania Democrat, asked Kennedy at a Wednesday hearing “why the hell” those changes are being made when the steep drop in deaths showed “we were getting somewhere.” Some advocates made a similar point in a call with reporters last week.

“We believe that taking a public health approach that seeks to support — not punish — people who use drugs is crucial to ending the overdose crisis,” said Dr. Tamara Olt, an Illinois woman whose 16-year-old son died of a heroin overdose in 2012. She is now executive director of Broken No Moore, an advocacy organization focused on substance use disorder.

Olt attributes recent declines to the growing availability of naloxone, work to make treatment available, and wider awareness of the problem.

Kimberly Douglas, an Illinois woman whose 17-year-old son died of an overdose in 2023, credited the growing chorus of grieving mothers.

“Eventually people are going to start listening," she said. "Unfortunately, it's taken 10-plus years.”

The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Science and Educational Media Group and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/5/1747410010033.png" alt="Naloxone vending machine in Kansas -Photo Courtesy DCCCA" />
 <figcaption>Naloxone vending machine in Kansas -Photo Courtesy DCCCA</figcaption>
 </figure><a href="https://newsroom.ap.org/home/search/?query=byline:%22MIKE%20STOBBE%20and%20GEOFF%20MULVIHILL%22&amp;mediaType=text&amp;st=keyword&amp;sortOrder=newest">By MIKE STOBBE and GEOFF MULVIHILL Associated Press</a>There were 30,000 fewer U.S. drug overdose deaths in 2024 than the year before — the largest one-year decline ever recorded.An estimated 80,000 people died from overdoses last year, according to provisional&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/drug-overdose-data.htm">Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data</a>&nbsp;released Wednesday. That’s down 27% from the 110,000 in 2023.The CDC has been collecting comparable data for 45 years. The previous largest one-year drop was 4% in 2018, according to the agency’s National Center for Health Statistics.All but two states saw declines last year, with Nevada and South Dakota experiencing small increases. Some of the biggest drops were in Ohio, West Virginia and other states that have been hard-hit in the nation's decades-long overdose epidemic.Experts say more research needs to be done to understand what drove the reduction, but they mention several possible factors. Among the most cited:— Increased availability of the overdose-reversing drug naloxone.— Expanded addiction&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/methadone-opioids-addiction-treatment-6dc1634de4cdac06410149e6a1372e18">treatment</a>.— Shifts in&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/smoking-injection-overdoses-fentanyl-cbaf9c258b4fdbcc93ac164902629c35">how people use</a>&nbsp;drugs.— The growing impact of billions of dollars in opioid lawsuit settlement money.— The number of at-risk Americans is shrinking, after waves of deaths in older adults and a&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/teen-drug-use-b5e877b4c7eecb5354c3b8214e7d8692">shift in teens</a>&nbsp;and younger adults away from the drugs that cause most deaths.Still, annual overdose deaths are higher than they were before the COVID-19 pandemic. In a statement, the CDC noted that overdoses are still the leading cause of death for people 18-44 years old, “underscoring the need for ongoing efforts to maintain this progress.”Some experts worry that the recent decline could be slowed or stopped by reductions in federal funding and the public health workforce, or a shift away from the strategies that seem to be working.“Now is not the time to take the foot off the gas pedal,” said Dr. Daniel Ciccarone, a drug policy expert at the University of California, San Francisco.The provisional numbers are estimates of everyone who died of overdoses in the U.S., including noncitizens. That data is still being processed, and the final numbers can sometimes differ a bit. But it’s clear that there was a huge drop last year.Experts note that there have been past moments when U.S. overdose deaths&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/science-health-covid-opioids-death-rates-ba8af16246240aae4b044238ce19e6b6">seemed to have plateaued</a>&nbsp;or even started to go down,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/us-overdose-deaths-cdc-3c3848da5f8aa01d7b9f232ba5a34152">only to rise again</a>. That happened in 2018.But there are reasons to be optimistic.<a href="https://apnews.com/article/narcan-naloxone-overdose-opioids-9ad693795ce31e3a867a4dd4b65dbde8">Naloxone</a>&nbsp;has become more widely available, in part because of the introduction of over-the-counter versions that don’t require prescriptions.Meanwhile, drug manufacturers, distributors, pharmacy chains and other businesses have settled lawsuits with state and local governments over the painkillers that were a main driver of overdose deaths in the past. The deals over the last decade or so have promised about&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/opioid-crisis-settlement-lived-experience-d7333af213cfaa90dc5ea7bad728fb13">$50 billion</a>&nbsp;over time, with most of it required to be used to&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/opioids-settlement-money-recovery-addiction-d186d72250f35056892bc9d70b5ab2c3">fight addiction</a>.Another settlement that would be among the largest, with members of the Sackler family who own OxyContin maker Purdue Pharma agreeing to pay&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/oxycontin-purdue-sackler-settlement-bankruptcy-05531ffdbdfa86b0da83c621935ba8b4">up to $7 billion</a>, could be approved this year.The money, along with federal taxpayer funding, is going to a variety of programs, including supportive housing and harm reduction efforts, such as providing materials to test&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/legalization-fentanyl-test-strips-opioid-overdoses-4a23f92b401c667381e84538fe5f1059">drugs for fentanyl</a>, the biggest driver of overdoses now.But what each state will do with that money is currently at issue. “States can either say, ‘We won, we can walk away’” in the wake of the declines or they can use the lawsuit money on naloxone and other efforts, said Regina LaBelle, a former acting director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy. She now heads an addiction and public policy program at Georgetown University.President Donald Trump’s administration views opioids as largely a law enforcement issue and as a reason to step up border security. It also has been reorganizing and downsizing federal health agencies.Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said overdose prevention efforts will continue, but some public health experts say cuts mean the work will not go on at the same level.U.S. Rep. Madeleine Dean, a Pennsylvania Democrat, asked Kennedy at a Wednesday hearing “why the hell” those changes are being made when the steep drop in deaths showed “we were getting somewhere.” Some advocates made a similar point in a call with reporters last week.“We believe that taking a public health approach that seeks to support — not punish — people who use drugs is crucial to ending the overdose crisis,” said Dr. Tamara Olt, an Illinois woman whose 16-year-old son died of a heroin overdose in 2012. She is now executive director of Broken No Moore, an advocacy organization focused on substance use disorder.Olt attributes recent declines to the growing availability of naloxone, work to make treatment available, and wider awareness of the problem.Kimberly Douglas, an Illinois woman whose 17-year-old son died of an overdose in 2023, credited the growing chorus of grieving mothers.“Eventually people are going to start listening," she said. "Unfortunately, it's taken 10-plus years.”___The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Science and Educational Media Group and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

US overdose deaths fell last year, the largest one-year decline ever 

<a href="https://newsroom.ap.org/home/search/?query=byline:%22MARK%20SHERMAN%20and%20LINDSAY%20WHITEHURST%22&amp;mediaType=text&amp;st=keyword&amp;sortOrder=newest">By MARK SHERMAN and LINDSAY WHITEHURST&nbsp;</a>

WASHINGTON (AP) —&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/us-supreme-court">The Supreme Court</a>&nbsp;seemed intent Thursday on keeping a block on President Donald Trump’s restrictions on&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/birthright-citizenship-immigration-trump-20919d26029cf0f98ecb0dc7f90a066b">birthright citizenship</a>&nbsp;while looking for a way to scale back nationwide court orders.

<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/audio/2024/24A884">Click here to listen to</a> a replay of the oral argument

It was unclear what such a decision might look like, but a majority of the court expressed concerns about would happen if the Trump administration were allowed, even temporarily, to deny citizenship to children born to people who are in the United States illegally.

The justices heard arguments in the Trump administration’s emergency appeals over lower court orders that have kept the citizenship restrictions on hold across the country. Nationwide, or universal, injunctions have emerged as an important check on Trump’s efforts to remake the government and a mounting frustration to the Republican president and his allies.

Judges have issued 40 nationwide injunctions since Trump&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-inauguration-swearing-capitol-b3549ebe5dae74a872502aa79def7a11">began his second term</a>&nbsp;in January, Solicitor General D. John Sauer told the court at the start of more than two hours of arguments.

Birthright citizenship is among several issues, many related to immigration, that the administration has asked the court to address on an emergency basis.

The justices are also considering the Trump administration’s pleas to&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-immigration-parole-supreme-court-6282e48ef9bf41bd5c77e8e2b0642e89">end humanitarian parole</a>&nbsp;for more than 500,000 people from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela and to&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-venezuela-immigrants-deportation-protection-80f61585197eaff8b254c9b621976780">strip other temporary legal protections</a>&nbsp;from another 350,000 Venezuelans. The administration remains&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/live/donald-trump-news-updates-4-7-2025">locked in legal battles</a>&nbsp;over its efforts to swiftly deport people accused of being gang members to a prison in El Salvador under an 18th century wartime law called the Alien Enemies Act.

Trump signed an executive order on the first day of his second term that would deny citizenship to children who are born to people who are in the country illegally or temporarily.

The order conflicts with&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-birthright-citizenship-trump-immigration-735d28a2572f623f199f97b3bc97644a">a Supreme Court decision from 1898</a>&nbsp;that held that the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment made citizens of all children born on U.S. with narrow exceptions that are not at issue in this case.

States, immigrants and rights group sued almost immediately, and lower courts quickly barred enforcement of the order while the lawsuits proceed.

The current fight is over the rules that apply while the lawsuits go forward.

The court's liberal justices seemed firmly in support of the lower court rulings that found the changes to citizenship that Trump wants to make would upset the settled understanding of birthright citizenship that has existed for more than 125 years.

Birthright citizenship is an odd case to use to scale back nationwide injunctions, Justice Elena Kagan said. "Every court has ruled against you,” she told Sauer.

But if the government wins on today’s arguments, it could still enforce the order against people who haven’t sued, Kagan said. “All of those individuals are going to win. And the ones who can’t afford to go to court, they’re the ones who are going to lose,” she said

Several conservative justices who might be open to limiting nationwide injunctions also wanted to know the practical effects of such a decision as well as how quickly the court could reach a final decision on the Trump executive order.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh pressed Sauer with a series of questions about how the federal government might enforce Trump’s order.

“What do hospitals do with a newborn? What do states do with a newborn?” he said.

Sauer said they wouldn’t necessarily do anything different, but the government might figure out ways to reject documentation with “the wrong designation of citizenship.”

Kavanaugh continued to press for clearer answers, pointing out the executive order gave the government only about 30 days to develop a policy. “You think they can get it together in time?” he said.

The Trump administration, like the Biden administration before it, has complained that judges are overreaching by issuing orders that apply to everyone instead of just the parties before the court.

Picking up on that theme, Justice Samuel Alito said he meant no disrespect the nation's district judges when he opined that they sometimes suffer from an “occupational disease ... 'I am right, and I can do whatever I want.'”

But Justice Sonia Sotomayor was among several justices who raised the confusing patchwork of rules that would result if the court orders were narrowed and new restrictions on citizenship could temporarily take effect in more than half the country.

Some children might be “stateless,” Sotomayor said, because they'd be denied citizenship in the U.S. as well as the countries their parents fled to avoid persecution.

New Jersey Solicitor General Jeremy Feigenbaum, representing 22 states that sued, said citizenship could “turn on and off” for children crossing the Delaware River between Camden, New Jersey, where affected children would be citizens, and Philadelphia, where they wouldn't be. Pennsylvania is not part of the lawsuit.

One possible solution for the court might be to find a way to replace nationwide injunctions with certification of a class action, a lawsuit in which individuals serve as representatives of a much larger group of similarly situated people.

Such a case could be filed and acted upon quickly and might even apply nationwide.

But under questioning from Justice Amy Coney Barrett and others, Sauer said the Trump administration could well oppose such a lawsuit or potentially try to slow down class actions.

Supreme Court arguments over emergency appeals are rare. The justices almost always deal with the underlying substance of a dispute.

But the administration didn't ask the court to take on the larger issue now and, if the court sides with the administration over nationwide injunctions, it's unclear how long inconsistent rules on citizenship would apply to children born in the United States.

A decision is expected by the end of June.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/5/1747336226952.png" alt="Protesters outside the Supreme Court Thursday-image courtesy CSPAN" />
 <figcaption>Protesters outside the Supreme Court Thursday-image courtesy CSPAN</figcaption>
 </figure><a href="https://newsroom.ap.org/home/search/?query=byline:%22MARK%20SHERMAN%20and%20LINDSAY%20WHITEHURST%22&amp;mediaType=text&amp;st=keyword&amp;sortOrder=newest">By MARK SHERMAN and LINDSAY WHITEHURST&nbsp;</a>WASHINGTON (AP) —&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/us-supreme-court">The Supreme Court</a>&nbsp;seemed intent Thursday on keeping a block on President Donald Trump’s restrictions on&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/birthright-citizenship-immigration-trump-20919d26029cf0f98ecb0dc7f90a066b">birthright citizenship</a>&nbsp;while looking for a way to scale back nationwide court orders.<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/audio/2024/24A884">Click here to listen to</a> a replay of the oral argumentIt was unclear what such a decision might look like, but a majority of the court expressed concerns about would happen if the Trump administration were allowed, even temporarily, to deny citizenship to children born to people who are in the United States illegally.The justices heard arguments in the Trump administration’s emergency appeals over lower court orders that have kept the citizenship restrictions on hold across the country. Nationwide, or universal, injunctions have emerged as an important check on Trump’s efforts to remake the government and a mounting frustration to the Republican president and his allies.Judges have issued 40 nationwide injunctions since Trump&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-inauguration-swearing-capitol-b3549ebe5dae74a872502aa79def7a11">began his second term</a>&nbsp;in January, Solicitor General D. John Sauer told the court at the start of more than two hours of arguments.Birthright citizenship is among several issues, many related to immigration, that the administration has asked the court to address on an emergency basis.The justices are also considering the Trump administration’s pleas to&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-immigration-parole-supreme-court-6282e48ef9bf41bd5c77e8e2b0642e89">end humanitarian parole</a>&nbsp;for more than 500,000 people from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela and to&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-venezuela-immigrants-deportation-protection-80f61585197eaff8b254c9b621976780">strip other temporary legal protections</a>&nbsp;from another 350,000 Venezuelans. The administration remains&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/live/donald-trump-news-updates-4-7-2025">locked in legal battles</a>&nbsp;over its efforts to swiftly deport people accused of being gang members to a prison in El Salvador under an 18th century wartime law called the Alien Enemies Act.Trump signed an executive order on the first day of his second term that would deny citizenship to children who are born to people who are in the country illegally or temporarily.The order conflicts with&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-birthright-citizenship-trump-immigration-735d28a2572f623f199f97b3bc97644a">a Supreme Court decision from 1898</a>&nbsp;that held that the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment made citizens of all children born on U.S. with narrow exceptions that are not at issue in this case.States, immigrants and rights group sued almost immediately, and lower courts quickly barred enforcement of the order while the lawsuits proceed.The current fight is over the rules that apply while the lawsuits go forward.The court's liberal justices seemed firmly in support of the lower court rulings that found the changes to citizenship that Trump wants to make would upset the settled understanding of birthright citizenship that has existed for more than 125 years.Birthright citizenship is an odd case to use to scale back nationwide injunctions, Justice Elena Kagan said. "Every court has ruled against you,” she told Sauer.But if the government wins on today’s arguments, it could still enforce the order against people who haven’t sued, Kagan said. “All of those individuals are going to win. And the ones who can’t afford to go to court, they’re the ones who are going to lose,” she saidSeveral conservative justices who might be open to limiting nationwide injunctions also wanted to know the practical effects of such a decision as well as how quickly the court could reach a final decision on the Trump executive order.Justice Brett Kavanaugh pressed Sauer with a series of questions about how the federal government might enforce Trump’s order.“What do hospitals do with a newborn? What do states do with a newborn?” he said.Sauer said they wouldn’t necessarily do anything different, but the government might figure out ways to reject documentation with “the wrong designation of citizenship.”Kavanaugh continued to press for clearer answers, pointing out the executive order gave the government only about 30 days to develop a policy. “You think they can get it together in time?” he said.The Trump administration, like the Biden administration before it, has complained that judges are overreaching by issuing orders that apply to everyone instead of just the parties before the court.Picking up on that theme, Justice Samuel Alito said he meant no disrespect the nation's district judges when he opined that they sometimes suffer from an “occupational disease ... 'I am right, and I can do whatever I want.'”But Justice Sonia Sotomayor was among several justices who raised the confusing patchwork of rules that would result if the court orders were narrowed and new restrictions on citizenship could temporarily take effect in more than half the country.Some children might be “stateless,” Sotomayor said, because they'd be denied citizenship in the U.S. as well as the countries their parents fled to avoid persecution.New Jersey Solicitor General Jeremy Feigenbaum, representing 22 states that sued, said citizenship could “turn on and off” for children crossing the Delaware River between Camden, New Jersey, where affected children would be citizens, and Philadelphia, where they wouldn't be. Pennsylvania is not part of the lawsuit.One possible solution for the court might be to find a way to replace nationwide injunctions with certification of a class action, a lawsuit in which individuals serve as representatives of a much larger group of similarly situated people.Such a case could be filed and acted upon quickly and might even apply nationwide.But under questioning from Justice Amy Coney Barrett and others, Sauer said the Trump administration could well oppose such a lawsuit or potentially try to slow down class actions.Supreme Court arguments over emergency appeals are rare. The justices almost always deal with the underlying substance of a dispute.But the administration didn't ask the court to take on the larger issue now and, if the court sides with the administration over nationwide injunctions, it's unclear how long inconsistent rules on citizenship would apply to children born in the United States.A decision is expected by the end of June.

🎧Supreme Court divided on judges’ power in birthright citizenship case 

The views and opinions expressed in this editorial article are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of Salina Post or Eagle Media.&nbsp;The&nbsp;editorial is intended to stimulate critical thinking and debate on issues of public interest and should be read with an open mind. Readers are encouraged to consider multiple sources of information and to form their own informed opinions.

By:&nbsp;DR. RICHARD A. FRENCH&nbsp;

As a former high school principal trained to be a teacher and administer before I earned my doctorate, I encourage everyone to stop listening to Trump and his enabler's cruel, ignorant propaganda that flies in the face of a solid, comprehensive public education that has served me and our country well!

Former President Obama emphasized, "And when it comes to developing the high standards we need, it's time to stop working against our teachers and start working with them. Teachers don't go into education to get rich. They don't go into education because they don't believe in their children. They want their children to succeed, but we've got to give them the tools. Invest in early childhood education. Invest in our teachers and our children will succeed."

White Christian Naturalists like Donald Trump, Elon Musk, Mike Johnson, Pete Hegseth and many others like those that wrote Project 2025 want to eliminate public education and substitute white Christian Naturalism Charter schools paid by the taxpayers!

They know 'nothing' about the learning 'needs of children', the 'stages of development' vital to teaching, the different 'learning styles,' the many 'learning disabilities' and how to treat them, the value of 'special education', 'Pupil Evaluation Teams,' teaching the disabled and the importance of well-rounded individuals who are taught to think and make good decisions.

Yet, Trump's authoritarianism movement wants to gut the Department of Education and replace all public education with voucher run white Christian Nationalism charter schools paid for by the elimination of public education.&nbsp;

'Christian Nationalism' is another form of 'white supremacy' and it is infiltrating our country. The Fascist's 2025 plan is to 'control' what you read, learn, your reproductive healthcare, your religion, your children and your private life.

This is a time for all of us — and every institution in America even law firms who profess to love democracy&nbsp;— to stand up to Trump’s tyranny supported by these self-serving congressional Republicans.

Dr. Richard A. French, President and business owner, a humanistic scholar, a former Executive Director of the American Cancer Society, High School Principal and Teacher, Pasadena, CA, 626-806-4596, prefer: drfrenchfds@yahoo.com&nbsp;to communicate.

You can send us your opinions/letters to the editor, along with your name, city and or county location to&nbsp;newstips@salinapost.com

The views and opinions expressed in this editorial article are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of Salina Post or Eagle Media.&nbsp;The&nbsp;editorial is intended to stimulate critical thinking and debate on issues of public interest and should be read with an open mind. Readers are encouraged to consider multiple sources of information and to form their own informed opinions.<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2020/2/1582312931775.png" alt=" " />
 <figcaption> </figcaption>
 </figure>By:&nbsp;DR. RICHARD A. FRENCH&nbsp;As a former high school principal trained to be a teacher and administer before I earned my doctorate, I encourage everyone to stop listening to Trump and his enabler's cruel, ignorant propaganda that flies in the face of a solid, comprehensive public education that has served me and our country well!Former President Obama emphasized, "And when it comes to developing the high standards we need, it's time to stop working against our teachers and start working with them. Teachers don't go into education to get rich. They don't go into education because they don't believe in their children. They want their children to succeed, but we've got to give them the tools. Invest in early childhood education. Invest in our teachers and our children will succeed."White Christian Naturalists like Donald Trump, Elon Musk, Mike Johnson, Pete Hegseth and many others like those that wrote Project 2025 want to eliminate public education and substitute white Christian Naturalism Charter schools paid by the taxpayers!They know 'nothing' about the learning 'needs of children', the 'stages of development' vital to teaching, the different 'learning styles,' the many 'learning disabilities' and how to treat them, the value of 'special education', 'Pupil Evaluation Teams,' teaching the disabled and the importance of well-rounded individuals who are taught to think and make good decisions.Yet, Trump's authoritarianism movement wants to gut the Department of Education and replace all public education with voucher run white Christian Nationalism charter schools paid for by the elimination of public education.&nbsp;'Christian Nationalism' is another form of 'white supremacy' and it is infiltrating our country. The Fascist's 2025 plan is to 'control' what you read, learn, your reproductive healthcare, your religion, your children and your private life.This is a time for all of us — and every institution in America even law firms who profess to love democracy&nbsp;— to stand up to Trump’s tyranny supported by these self-serving congressional Republicans.Dr. Richard A. French, President and business owner, a humanistic scholar, a former Executive Director of the American Cancer Society, High School Principal and Teacher, Pasadena, CA, 626-806-4596, prefer: drfrenchfds@yahoo.com&nbsp;to communicate.You can send us your opinions/letters to the editor, along with your name, city and or county location to&nbsp;newstips@salinapost.com

OPINION: Stop listening to Trump and fight for public education

<a href="https://newsroom.ap.org/home/search/?query=byline:%22JONATHAN%20J.%20COOPER%22&amp;mediaType=text&amp;st=keyword&amp;sortOrder=newest">By JONATHAN J. COOPER &nbsp;Associated Press</a>

&nbsp;Joe Biden’s time in public office is now behind him, but his&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-age-election-debate-trump-7c366fda83a697265d9ecc77e8a32fd1">age and mental acuity</a>&nbsp;have become a litmus test for the next leaders in his party.

<a href="https://www.axios.com/2025/05/16/biden-hur-tape-special-counsel-audio">Click here to listen to mor</a>e

<a href="https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/24476201/biden1-copy.pdf">Click here to read</a>&nbsp;transcript of&nbsp;day 1 interview with President Biden.

<a href="https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/24476203/biden-2-copy.pdf">Click here to read&nbsp;</a>&nbsp;transcript of day 2 interview with President Biden

Audio was published Friday from portions of interviews Biden gave to federal prosecutors in 2023, the latest in a stream of reports putting questions about Biden's health back in the spotlight. Months after former President Kamala Harris lost to President Donald Trump, a new book alleges that White House aides covered up Biden's physical and mental decline.

Several potential Democratic contenders for the 2028 nomination have been asked in recent days whether they believe Biden was declining in office or whether he should have sought reelection before a&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-2024-lawmakers-debate-2c426f98063ab30143a7675cba10a5b4">disastrous debate performance</a>&nbsp;led to his withdrawal.

Many Democrats would prefer to focus on Trump's second term. Trump has done his best to prevent that — mentioning Biden's name&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/first-100-days-trump-still-leans-old-foe-joe-biden-rcna201229">an average of six times per day</a>&nbsp;during his first 100 days in office, according to an NBC News analysis — and Republicans have followed his lead, betting that voters frustrated by Trump's policy moves will still prefer him over memories of an unpopular presidency.

In the race for Virginia governor, one of this year's highest-profile contests, Republican Winsome Earle-Sears is running a pair of digital ads tying Democrat Abigail Spanberger to Biden, with images of&nbsp;<a href="https://host2.adimpact.com/admo/viewer/28531e56-93cf-40f0-9baa-09e6722f885a/">the two hugging</a>&nbsp;and the former president calling her a friend.

“The stench of Joe Biden still lingers on the Democratic Party,” Democratic strategist Sawyer Hackett said. “We have to do the hard work of fixing that, and I think that includes telling the truth, frankly, about when we were wrong.”

Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut&nbsp;<a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2025/05/14/murphy-biden-cognitive-decline-2028-00349025">told Politico</a>&nbsp;this week that “there’s no doubt” that Biden, now 82, experienced cognitive decline as president.

<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/pete-buttigieg">Pete Buttigieg</a>, the former transportation secretary, wasn’t nearly as blunt but still stopped short of defending Biden’s decision to run. He responded “maybe” when asked Tuesday whether the Democratic Party would have been better off if Biden hadn’t tried to run for a second term.

“Right now, with the advantage of hindsight, I think most people would agree that that’s the case,” Buttigieg told reporters during a stop in Iowa.

Illinois Gov.&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/j-b-pritzker">JB Pritzker</a>&nbsp;said he didn't see signs of mental or physical decline in his meetings with Biden.

“I saw him a few times,” he told CNN this week. “I certainly went to the White House whenever there was an opportunity for me to make the case for something for people in my state. And I never had the experience of anything other than a guy who brought to the table a lot of good ideas about how to solve problems.”

The book “Original Sin,” by journalists Jake Tapper of CNN and Alex Thompson of Axios, revives a core controversy of Biden’s presidency: his decision to run for a second term despite voters, including Democrats, telling pollsters that he should not run again. Biden would have been 86 at the end of a second term had he won in November.

A spokesperson for Biden did not respond to a request for comment.

“We continue to await anything that shows where Joe Biden had to make a presidential decision or where national security was threatened or where he was unable to do his job,” the spokesperson has told many media outlets in response to the book.

Late Friday, Axios published portions from audio recordings of Biden's six hours of interviews with prosecutors investigating his handling of classified documents after his term as vice president ended in 2017.

The Biden administration had already released transcripts of the interviews, but the recordings shed light on special counsel Robert Hur's characterization of Biden as “a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory” and appeared to validate his claim that the then-president struggled to recall key dates, including the year his son Beau died of cancer in 2015.

Biden and his aides pushed back aggressively against Hur's report, which they characterized as a partisan hit. Biden was at that time — early 2024 — still planning to run for a second term and fending off accusations that he was too old for another four years in the job.

The recordings released by Axios include Biden's discussion of his son's death. His responses to some of the prosecutors' questions are punctuated by long pauses, and his lawyers at times stepped in to help him recall dates and timelines.

Before he dropped his reelection bid last summer, Biden faced widespread doubts within his own party, even as Democratic leaders dismissed both a series of verbal flubs and Republican allegations about his declining acuity.

In January 2022, just a year into Biden’s first term, an AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll found that only 48% of Democrats wanted him to seek reelection. That fell to 37% of Democrats in&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/ap-norc-poll-biden-2024-presidential-prospects-c843c5af6775b4c8a0cff8e2b1db03f6">an AP-NORC poll conducted in February 2023</a>. Three-quarters of Americans — and 69% of Democrats —&nbsp;<a href="https://apnorc.org/projects/bidens-age-is-a-significant-concern-for-voters/">said in August 2023</a>&nbsp;that they believed Biden was too old to serve as president for another four-year term.

And shortly after his debate flop,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-trump-poll-drop-out-debate-democrats-59eebaca6989985c2bfb">nearly two-thirds of Democrats</a>&nbsp;said Biden should withdraw from the race.

Biden and former first lady Jill Biden appeared on ABC’s “The View” in a preemptive defense of his health and decision-making before the first excerpts of “Original Sin” were published.

He said&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-view-president-trump-abc-interview-kamala-harris-0e7c4aba0b021e40540dcc68872ff0d1">he’s responsible for Trump’s victory</a>&nbsp;but attributed Harris’ loss, at least in part, to sexism and racism. He maintained that he would have won had he remained the Democratic nominee. Both Bidens rejected concerns about his cognitive decline.

Patricia McEnerney, a 74-year-old Democrat in Goodyear, Arizona, said Biden should not have tried to run again.

“I think it’s sad the way it ended,” she said.

She compared him to Douglas MacArthur, the World War II and Korean War general famously dismissed by President Harry Truman.

“I think he needs to stop giving interviews. I think that would help,” McEnerney said. “Like MacArthur said, generals just fade away.”

Janet Stumps, a 66-year-old Democrat also from Goodyear, a Phoenix suburb, had a different view.

“I don’t think it’s going to hurt the Democrats,” Stumps said. “I feel badly that he feels he has to defend himself. I don’t think he has to. Everybody ages. And the fact that he did what he did at his age, I think he should be commended for it.”

Hackett, the Democratic strategist, predicted Biden won’t be a major factor in the 2026 midterms or the 2028 presidential primaries. But he said Democrats who want voters to trust them would be well-served “by telling the truth about the mistakes that our party made in the run-up to 2024.”

“Those mistakes were largely driven by Joe Biden, and I think any Democrat not willing to say that is not really prepared to face the voters, who want the truth and they want authenticity,” Hackett said.

Rick Wilson, a former GOP strategist who co-founded the anti-Trump group the Lincoln Project, said Republicans want to talk about Biden to avoid defending Trump. But he said the strategy is folly.

Besides “political nerds,” he said, “no one else cares.”

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/3/1709338240853.png" alt="File photo Former President Biden&nbsp; White House image" />
 <figcaption>File photo Former President Biden&nbsp; White House image</figcaption>
 </figure><a href="https://newsroom.ap.org/home/search/?query=byline:%22JONATHAN%20J.%20COOPER%22&amp;mediaType=text&amp;st=keyword&amp;sortOrder=newest">By JONATHAN J. COOPER &nbsp;Associated Press</a>&nbsp;Joe Biden’s time in public office is now behind him, but his&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-age-election-debate-trump-7c366fda83a697265d9ecc77e8a32fd1">age and mental acuity</a>&nbsp;have become a litmus test for the next leaders in his party.A short clip of the audio is below.<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560">HUR TAPES: BIDEN RAMBLING ABOUT SHOOTING A BOW AND ARROW IN MONGOLIA “I went to Mongolia. They’re doing a 20-mile horse race. And there are sumo wrestlers. I get handed the bow and arrow - I’m not a bad archer. But pure luck, I hit the g**d*** target!” <a href="https://t.co/KWivG2a035">pic.twitter.com/KWivG2a035</a>&mdash; TheBlaze (@theblaze) <a href="https://twitter.com/theblaze/status/1923519657903792272?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 16, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div><a href="https://www.axios.com/2025/05/16/biden-hur-tape-special-counsel-audio">Click here to listen to mor</a>e<a href="https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/24476201/biden1-copy.pdf">Click here to read</a>&nbsp;transcript of&nbsp;day 1 interview with President Biden.<a href="https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/24476203/biden-2-copy.pdf">Click here to read&nbsp;</a>&nbsp;transcript of day 2 interview with President BidenAudio was published Friday from portions of interviews Biden gave to federal prosecutors in 2023, the latest in a stream of reports putting questions about Biden's health back in the spotlight. Months after former President Kamala Harris lost to President Donald Trump, a new book alleges that White House aides covered up Biden's physical and mental decline.Several potential Democratic contenders for the 2028 nomination have been asked in recent days whether they believe Biden was declining in office or whether he should have sought reelection before a&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-2024-lawmakers-debate-2c426f98063ab30143a7675cba10a5b4">disastrous debate performance</a>&nbsp;led to his withdrawal.Many Democrats would prefer to focus on Trump's second term. Trump has done his best to prevent that — mentioning Biden's name&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/first-100-days-trump-still-leans-old-foe-joe-biden-rcna201229">an average of six times per day</a>&nbsp;during his first 100 days in office, according to an NBC News analysis — and Republicans have followed his lead, betting that voters frustrated by Trump's policy moves will still prefer him over memories of an unpopular presidency.In the race for Virginia governor, one of this year's highest-profile contests, Republican Winsome Earle-Sears is running a pair of digital ads tying Democrat Abigail Spanberger to Biden, with images of&nbsp;<a href="https://host2.adimpact.com/admo/viewer/28531e56-93cf-40f0-9baa-09e6722f885a/">the two hugging</a>&nbsp;and the former president calling her a friend.“The stench of Joe Biden still lingers on the Democratic Party,” Democratic strategist Sawyer Hackett said. “We have to do the hard work of fixing that, and I think that includes telling the truth, frankly, about when we were wrong.”Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut&nbsp;<a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2025/05/14/murphy-biden-cognitive-decline-2028-00349025">told Politico</a>&nbsp;this week that “there’s no doubt” that Biden, now 82, experienced cognitive decline as president.<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/pete-buttigieg">Pete Buttigieg</a>, the former transportation secretary, wasn’t nearly as blunt but still stopped short of defending Biden’s decision to run. He responded “maybe” when asked Tuesday whether the Democratic Party would have been better off if Biden hadn’t tried to run for a second term.“Right now, with the advantage of hindsight, I think most people would agree that that’s the case,” Buttigieg told reporters during a stop in Iowa.Illinois Gov.&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/j-b-pritzker">JB Pritzker</a>&nbsp;said he didn't see signs of mental or physical decline in his meetings with Biden.“I saw him a few times,” he told CNN this week. “I certainly went to the White House whenever there was an opportunity for me to make the case for something for people in my state. And I never had the experience of anything other than a guy who brought to the table a lot of good ideas about how to solve problems.”The book “Original Sin,” by journalists Jake Tapper of CNN and Alex Thompson of Axios, revives a core controversy of Biden’s presidency: his decision to run for a second term despite voters, including Democrats, telling pollsters that he should not run again. Biden would have been 86 at the end of a second term had he won in November.A spokesperson for Biden did not respond to a request for comment.“We continue to await anything that shows where Joe Biden had to make a presidential decision or where national security was threatened or where he was unable to do his job,” the spokesperson has told many media outlets in response to the book.Late Friday, Axios published portions from audio recordings of Biden's six hours of interviews with prosecutors investigating his handling of classified documents after his term as vice president ended in 2017.The Biden administration had already released transcripts of the interviews, but the recordings shed light on special counsel Robert Hur's characterization of Biden as “a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory” and appeared to validate his claim that the then-president struggled to recall key dates, including the year his son Beau died of cancer in 2015.Biden and his aides pushed back aggressively against Hur's report, which they characterized as a partisan hit. Biden was at that time — early 2024 — still planning to run for a second term and fending off accusations that he was too old for another four years in the job.The recordings released by Axios include Biden's discussion of his son's death. His responses to some of the prosecutors' questions are punctuated by long pauses, and his lawyers at times stepped in to help him recall dates and timelines.Before he dropped his reelection bid last summer, Biden faced widespread doubts within his own party, even as Democratic leaders dismissed both a series of verbal flubs and Republican allegations about his declining acuity.In January 2022, just a year into Biden’s first term, an AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll found that only 48% of Democrats wanted him to seek reelection. That fell to 37% of Democrats in&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/ap-norc-poll-biden-2024-presidential-prospects-c843c5af6775b4c8a0cff8e2b1db03f6">an AP-NORC poll conducted in February 2023</a>. Three-quarters of Americans — and 69% of Democrats —&nbsp;<a href="https://apnorc.org/projects/bidens-age-is-a-significant-concern-for-voters/">said in August 2023</a>&nbsp;that they believed Biden was too old to serve as president for another four-year term.And shortly after his debate flop,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-trump-poll-drop-out-debate-democrats-59eebaca6989985c2bfb">nearly two-thirds of Democrats</a>&nbsp;said Biden should withdraw from the race.Biden and former first lady Jill Biden appeared on ABC’s “The View” in a preemptive defense of his health and decision-making before the first excerpts of “Original Sin” were published.He said&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-view-president-trump-abc-interview-kamala-harris-0e7c4aba0b021e40540dcc68872ff0d1">he’s responsible for Trump’s victory</a>&nbsp;but attributed Harris’ loss, at least in part, to sexism and racism. He maintained that he would have won had he remained the Democratic nominee. Both Bidens rejected concerns about his cognitive decline.Patricia McEnerney, a 74-year-old Democrat in Goodyear, Arizona, said Biden should not have tried to run again.“I think it’s sad the way it ended,” she said.She compared him to Douglas MacArthur, the World War II and Korean War general famously dismissed by President Harry Truman.“I think he needs to stop giving interviews. I think that would help,” McEnerney said. “Like MacArthur said, generals just fade away.”Janet Stumps, a 66-year-old Democrat also from Goodyear, a Phoenix suburb, had a different view.“I don’t think it’s going to hurt the Democrats,” Stumps said. “I feel badly that he feels he has to defend himself. I don’t think he has to. Everybody ages. And the fact that he did what he did at his age, I think he should be commended for it.”Hackett, the Democratic strategist, predicted Biden won’t be a major factor in the 2026 midterms or the 2028 presidential primaries. But he said Democrats who want voters to trust them would be well-served “by telling the truth about the mistakes that our party made in the run-up to 2024.”“Those mistakes were largely driven by Joe Biden, and I think any Democrat not willing to say that is not really prepared to face the voters, who want the truth and they want authenticity,” Hackett said.Rick Wilson, a former GOP strategist who co-founded the anti-Trump group the Lincoln Project, said Republicans want to talk about Biden to avoid defending Trump. But he said the strategy is folly.Besides “political nerds,” he said, “no one else cares.”

🎥Biden Special Counsel audio released; different from the transcript

Both teams face a deadline at the end of June on whether they will accept an offer from Kansas to pay 70% of the cost of building new stadiums across the state line

BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/rudi-keller/">RUDI KELLER</a>&nbsp; <a href="https://missouriindependent.com/briefs/missouri-senate-committee-advances-bill-to-ban-texting-while-driving/">Missouri Independent</a>

Missouri lawmakers will return to Jefferson City next month for a special session to debate providing tax breaks to keep the Kansas City Chiefs and Royals in the state, Gov. Mike Kehoe said in a news conference Friday morning.

The special session could also consider a $500 million spending bill for construction needs around the state, he said, but a final decision has not been made.

In the final days of the regular session, which ended Thursday, Kehoe unveiled a plan to use&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2025/05/13/new-stadium-funding-plan-for-chiefs-royals-clears-missouri-house/">tax revenue generated by the Chiefs and Royals</a>&nbsp;to finance bonds for their stadiums. The Chiefs would use the money to upgrade Arrowhead Stadium while the Royals would use it for a new stadium in Missouri.

Despite the late reveal, the Missouri House passed the proposal on a 108-40 vote. But the Senate balked at the deal, with many members saying they could not support it because a $513 million capital construction bill died when the Missouri House refused to allow it to come up for a vote.

Kehoe did not see the delay of the stadium proposal as a final defeat.

“We introduced that in the last week of the session to try to find what the feelings were,” he said.

The exact date for the special session has not been determined, Kehoe said.

The Chiefs and the Royals face a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.kansascity.com/news/local/article289372524.html" target="_blank">deadline at the end of June</a>&nbsp;on whether they will accept an offer from Kansas to pay 70% of the cost of building new stadiums in that state. The proposal floated by Kehoe would pay up to half the cost as well as up to $50 million in tax credits for any direct investments made by the teams.

Remodeling Arrowhead and building a new baseball stadium would cost up to $3 billion, Kehoe said.&nbsp;

“I would consider that significant economic development,” Kehoe said of the stadiums, comparing them to manufacturing projects that won incentives from lawmakers in the past

Missouri House Minority Leader Ashley Aune, a Kansas City Democrat, said she agrees that the state should work to keep the Chiefs and Royals from moving to Kansas but blamed Kehoe for the late introduction of his plan for the need to hold a special session.

“We are at this point because Governor Kehoe committed gross legislative malpractice by springing his stadium plan on lawmakers with no warning and just days left in the regular session without bothering to first build support for it,” Aune said.

The hurdles for a successful special session are both political and financial. The stadium plan died in the regular session when the Senate twice used a rare procedural rule to end debate on controversial bills on abortion and sick leave rights.

The move infuriated Democrats, who vowed the Senate will not function normally until they feel they can trust the GOP to work towards compromise.

“I’ve heard a long time, ‘well, nobody has ever made us pay.’” Senate Minority Leader Doug Beck, an Affton Democrat said at a news conference Wednesday. “You’ll find out now.”

Complicating the debate is lingering anger over the projects that were lost when the House sunk the capital improvements bill. The $513 million would have paid for projects at eight hospitals around the state, supported a new nuclear reactor at the University of Missouri to make cancer treatments and a new mental health hospital in Kansas City.

In all, more than 60 projects added by lawmakers, in addition to more than 20 sought by Kehoe, will not be funded.

One of the biggest boosters of the Chiefs and Royals, state Sen. Barbara Washington, a Kansas City Democrat, said she could not support a stadium funding bill if the capital improvements bill is not part of a special session.

“Those things are more important to me and to my colleagues than the Chiefs,” Washington said.

Kehoe did not rule out including the capital spending in a call for a special session, but did not commit to it, either.

“I’ve heard and listened to quite a few senators and representatives from both sides of the aisle on that very same issue, and I understand what their concerns are,” Kehoe said. “And I think it’s fair to say everything is on the table of what that special session might look like.”

Kehoe has a June 30 deadline for acting on the $53 billion in spending that was approved for the coming fiscal year. The budget spends $15.8 billion in general revenue, about $2.2 billion more than estimated revenue for the year, by dipping into the accumulated surplus that stood at $3.6 billion when the current fiscal year began.

Revenues are not keeping up with projections and Missouri House leaders cited a need to maintain a fund balance in excess of $1 billion for future years. Kehoe, who will be responsible for making sure spending does not exceed available funds, said he agrees with that approach.

“I don’t think it’s ever appropriate for some politician to think just because we have it, we have to spend it,” Kehoe said. “ It’s more appropriate for us to leave some reserves in the tank for the times when the budget does get tougher.”

Kehoe, who took office in January, had a successful session. Major items he asked for in his State of the State Address — a state takeover of the St. Louis Police Department, school safety legislation and a major tax cut eliminating income taxes on capital gains — all passed.

Kehoe took some defeats as well, with lawmakers spending more than he wanted on public schools, the failure of a bill reducing the top income tax rate and the defeat of legislation allowing parents to enroll their children in school districts other than the one they live in.

He said he looks favorably on the bill repealing the Proposition A sick leave law but stopped short of promising to sign it.&nbsp;

Kehoe also did not say whether he would put the constitutional amendment imposing a new ban on abortions on a special election ballot or let it wait for a November 2026 vote.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/2/1709142006045.jpeg" alt="Aerial view of newly renovated Arrowhead Stadium. Courtesy image." />
 <figcaption>Aerial view of newly renovated Arrowhead Stadium. Courtesy image.</figcaption>
 </figure><h2>Both teams face a deadline at the end of June on whether they will accept an offer from Kansas to pay 70% of the cost of building new stadiums across the state line</h2>BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/rudi-keller/">RUDI KELLER</a>&nbsp; <a href="https://missouriindependent.com/briefs/missouri-senate-committee-advances-bill-to-ban-texting-while-driving/">Missouri Independent</a>Missouri lawmakers will return to Jefferson City next month for a special session to debate providing tax breaks to keep the Kansas City Chiefs and Royals in the state, Gov. Mike Kehoe said in a news conference Friday morning.The special session could also consider a $500 million spending bill for construction needs around the state, he said, but a final decision has not been made.In the final days of the regular session, which ended Thursday, Kehoe unveiled a plan to use&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2025/05/13/new-stadium-funding-plan-for-chiefs-royals-clears-missouri-house/">tax revenue generated by the Chiefs and Royals</a>&nbsp;to finance bonds for their stadiums. The Chiefs would use the money to upgrade Arrowhead Stadium while the Royals would use it for a new stadium in Missouri.Despite the late reveal, the Missouri House passed the proposal on a 108-40 vote. But the Senate balked at the deal, with many members saying they could not support it because a $513 million capital construction bill died when the Missouri House refused to allow it to come up for a vote.Kehoe did not see the delay of the stadium proposal as a final defeat.“We introduced that in the last week of the session to try to find what the feelings were,” he said.The exact date for the special session has not been determined, Kehoe said.The Chiefs and the Royals face a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.kansascity.com/news/local/article289372524.html" target="_blank">deadline at the end of June</a>&nbsp;on whether they will accept an offer from Kansas to pay 70% of the cost of building new stadiums in that state. The proposal floated by Kehoe would pay up to half the cost as well as up to $50 million in tax credits for any direct investments made by the teams.Remodeling Arrowhead and building a new baseball stadium would cost up to $3 billion, Kehoe said.&nbsp;“I would consider that significant economic development,” Kehoe said of the stadiums, comparing them to manufacturing projects that won incentives from lawmakers in the pastMissouri House Minority Leader Ashley Aune, a Kansas City Democrat, said she agrees that the state should work to keep the Chiefs and Royals from moving to Kansas but blamed Kehoe for the late introduction of his plan for the need to hold a special session.“We are at this point because Governor Kehoe committed gross legislative malpractice by springing his stadium plan on lawmakers with no warning and just days left in the regular session without bothering to first build support for it,” Aune said.The hurdles for a successful special session are both political and financial. The stadium plan died in the regular session when the Senate twice used a rare procedural rule to end debate on controversial bills on abortion and sick leave rights.The move infuriated Democrats, who vowed the Senate will not function normally until they feel they can trust the GOP to work towards compromise.“I’ve heard a long time, ‘well, nobody has ever made us pay.’” Senate Minority Leader Doug Beck, an Affton Democrat said at a news conference Wednesday. “You’ll find out now.”Complicating the debate is lingering anger over the projects that were lost when the House sunk the capital improvements bill. The $513 million would have paid for projects at eight hospitals around the state, supported a new nuclear reactor at the University of Missouri to make cancer treatments and a new mental health hospital in Kansas City.In all, more than 60 projects added by lawmakers, in addition to more than 20 sought by Kehoe, will not be funded.One of the biggest boosters of the Chiefs and Royals, state Sen. Barbara Washington, a Kansas City Democrat, said she could not support a stadium funding bill if the capital improvements bill is not part of a special session.“Those things are more important to me and to my colleagues than the Chiefs,” Washington said.Kehoe did not rule out including the capital spending in a call for a special session, but did not commit to it, either.“I’ve heard and listened to quite a few senators and representatives from both sides of the aisle on that very same issue, and I understand what their concerns are,” Kehoe said. “And I think it’s fair to say everything is on the table of what that special session might look like.”Kehoe has a June 30 deadline for acting on the $53 billion in spending that was approved for the coming fiscal year. The budget spends $15.8 billion in general revenue, about $2.2 billion more than estimated revenue for the year, by dipping into the accumulated surplus that stood at $3.6 billion when the current fiscal year began.Revenues are not keeping up with projections and Missouri House leaders cited a need to maintain a fund balance in excess of $1 billion for future years. Kehoe, who will be responsible for making sure spending does not exceed available funds, said he agrees with that approach.“I don’t think it’s ever appropriate for some politician to think just because we have it, we have to spend it,” Kehoe said. “ It’s more appropriate for us to leave some reserves in the tank for the times when the budget does get tougher.”Kehoe, who took office in January, had a successful session. Major items he asked for in his State of the State Address — a state takeover of the St. Louis Police Department, school safety legislation and a major tax cut eliminating income taxes on capital gains — all passed.Kehoe took some defeats as well, with lawmakers spending more than he wanted on public schools, the failure of a bill reducing the top income tax rate and the defeat of legislation allowing parents to enroll their children in school districts other than the one they live in.He said he looks favorably on the bill repealing the Proposition A sick leave law but stopped short of promising to sign it.&nbsp;Kehoe also did not say whether he would put the constitutional amendment imposing a new ban on abortions on a special election ballot or let it wait for a November 2026 vote.

Mo. governor will call lawmakers back into session for Royals, Chiefs stadium funding

<a href="https://newsroom.ap.org/home/search/?query=byline:%22DEE-ANN%20DURBIN%22&amp;mediaType=text&amp;st=keyword&amp;sortOrder=newest">By DEE-ANN DURBIN AP Business Writer</a>

<a href="https://apnews.com/video/starbucks-imposes-new-limits-on-what-baristas-can-wear-under-their-green-aprons-d85d947832844f0b96bf4023757ee77f">A strike</a>&nbsp;by Starbucks baristas protesting the company's&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/starbucks-dress-code-black-shirt-union-b7dd93b93c6c13448606545fb3f1778f">new dress code</a>&nbsp;grew Thursday.

More than 2,000 Starbucks baristas at 120 U.S. stores have gone on strike since Sunday to protest the new dress code, according to&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/starbucks-union-workers-united-ef16b24b20d43a6addadf91c0067bd28">Starbucks Workers United</a>, a union representing the coffee giant's U.S. workers.

<a href="https://apnews.com/article/starbucks-earnings-quarter-niccol-084641cd0786394e93d87d59689b8806">Starbucks</a>&nbsp;put new limits starting Monday on what its baristas can wear under their green aprons. The dress code requires employees at company-operated and licensed stores in the U.S. and Canada to wear a solid black shirt and khaki, black or blue denim bottoms.

Under the previous dress code, baristas could wear a broader range of dark colors and patterned shirts. Starbucks said the new rules would make its green aprons stand out and create a sense of familiarity&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/starbucks-restrooms-policy-2d258bc61c55769bb2acaf15d1ed3b48">for customers</a>&nbsp;as it tries to establish a&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/starbucks-ceo-niccol-coffee-b547ab2141e194b30675ad8d1caff90d">warmer, more welcoming feeling</a>&nbsp;in its stores.

But&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/starbucks-strike-baristas-workers-united-7b2f6e5d7b039bc1909d646d84cd426d">Starbucks Workers United</a>, the union that represents workers at 570 of Starbucks’ 10,000 company-owned U.S. stores, said the dress code should be subject to collective bargaining.

“Starbucks has lost its way. Instead of listening to baristas who make the Starbucks experience what it is, they are focused on all the wrong things, like implementing a restrictive new dress code,” said Paige Summers, a Starbucks shift supervisor from Hanover, Maryland. “Customers don’t care what color our clothes are when they’re waiting 30 minutes for a latte.”

Summers and others also criticized the company for selling styles of Starbucks-branded clothing that employees no longer are allowed to wear to work on an internal website. Starbucks said it would give two free black T-shirts to each employee when it announced the new dress code.

On Wednesday, Starbucks Workers Union said a total of 1,000 workers had staged walkouts at 75 U.S. stores. Starbucks said at the time that the strike was having a limited impact on its 10,000 company-operated&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/starbucks-first-3d-printed-store-texas-552972e9df63796e42ede152747b9069">U.S. stores</a>. In some cases the strikes closed stores for less than an hour, the company said.

“It would be more productive if the union would put the same effort into coming back to the table that they’re putting into protesting wearing black shirts to work," Starbucks said in a statement. "More than 99% of our stores are open today serving customers — and have been all week.”

Associated Press readers who shared their opinions had mixed views of the dress code. Some said they didn’t think Starbucks’ baristas had much to complain about, noting that many retailers require their workers to dress a certain way. Others said they thought Starbucks should focus on improving the quality and prices of its beverages, and keeping workers happy instead of worrying about what its employees wear.

Starbucks Workers United has been unionizing U.S. stores since 2021. Starbucks and the union have yet to reach a contract agreement, despite agreeing to return to the bargaining table in February 2024.

The union said this week that it filed a complaint with the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-starbucks-union-fired-workers-tennessee-18547e128a14fae93a148383f48cb305">National Labor Relations Board</a>&nbsp;alleging Starbucks' failure to bargain over the new dress code.

<a href="https://newsroom.ap.org/home/search/?query=byline:%22DEE-ANN%20DURBIN%22&amp;mediaType=text&amp;st=keyword&amp;sortOrder=newest">By DEE-ANN DURBIN AP Business Writer</a><a href="https://apnews.com/video/starbucks-imposes-new-limits-on-what-baristas-can-wear-under-their-green-aprons-d85d947832844f0b96bf4023757ee77f">A strike</a>&nbsp;by Starbucks baristas protesting the company's&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/starbucks-dress-code-black-shirt-union-b7dd93b93c6c13448606545fb3f1778f">new dress code</a>&nbsp;grew Thursday.More than 2,000 Starbucks baristas at 120 U.S. stores have gone on strike since Sunday to protest the new dress code, according to&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/starbucks-union-workers-united-ef16b24b20d43a6addadf91c0067bd28">Starbucks Workers United</a>, a union representing the coffee giant's U.S. workers.<a href="https://apnews.com/article/starbucks-earnings-quarter-niccol-084641cd0786394e93d87d59689b8806">Starbucks</a>&nbsp;put new limits starting Monday on what its baristas can wear under their green aprons. The dress code requires employees at company-operated and licensed stores in the U.S. and Canada to wear a solid black shirt and khaki, black or blue denim bottoms.Under the previous dress code, baristas could wear a broader range of dark colors and patterned shirts. Starbucks said the new rules would make its green aprons stand out and create a sense of familiarity&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/starbucks-restrooms-policy-2d258bc61c55769bb2acaf15d1ed3b48">for customers</a>&nbsp;as it tries to establish a&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/starbucks-ceo-niccol-coffee-b547ab2141e194b30675ad8d1caff90d">warmer, more welcoming feeling</a>&nbsp;in its stores.But&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/starbucks-strike-baristas-workers-united-7b2f6e5d7b039bc1909d646d84cd426d">Starbucks Workers United</a>, the union that represents workers at 570 of Starbucks’ 10,000 company-owned U.S. stores, said the dress code should be subject to collective bargaining.“Starbucks has lost its way. Instead of listening to baristas who make the Starbucks experience what it is, they are focused on all the wrong things, like implementing a restrictive new dress code,” said Paige Summers, a Starbucks shift supervisor from Hanover, Maryland. “Customers don’t care what color our clothes are when they’re waiting 30 minutes for a latte.”Summers and others also criticized the company for selling styles of Starbucks-branded clothing that employees no longer are allowed to wear to work on an internal website. Starbucks said it would give two free black T-shirts to each employee when it announced the new dress code.On Wednesday, Starbucks Workers Union said a total of 1,000 workers had staged walkouts at 75 U.S. stores. Starbucks said at the time that the strike was having a limited impact on its 10,000 company-operated&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/starbucks-first-3d-printed-store-texas-552972e9df63796e42ede152747b9069">U.S. stores</a>. In some cases the strikes closed stores for less than an hour, the company said.“It would be more productive if the union would put the same effort into coming back to the table that they’re putting into protesting wearing black shirts to work," Starbucks said in a statement. "More than 99% of our stores are open today serving customers — and have been all week.”Associated Press readers who shared their opinions had mixed views of the dress code. Some said they didn’t think Starbucks’ baristas had much to complain about, noting that many retailers require their workers to dress a certain way. Others said they thought Starbucks should focus on improving the quality and prices of its beverages, and keeping workers happy instead of worrying about what its employees wear.Starbucks Workers United has been unionizing U.S. stores since 2021. Starbucks and the union have yet to reach a contract agreement, despite agreeing to return to the bargaining table in February 2024.The union said this week that it filed a complaint with the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-starbucks-union-fired-workers-tennessee-18547e128a14fae93a148383f48cb305">National Labor Relations Board</a>&nbsp;alleging Starbucks' failure to bargain over the new dress code.

More Starbucks baristas go on strike to protest new dress code

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court has heard its first set of Trump-related arguments in the second Trump presidency. 

<a href="https://www.c-span.org/program/public-affairs-event/supreme-court-hears-birthright-citizenship-case/659342">Click here to listen to a replay of the oral argument</a>

The case stems from the executive order President Donald Trump issued on his first day in office that would deny citizenship to children born on U.S. soil to parents who are in the country illegally or temporarily. The executive order marks a major change to the provision of the 14th Amendment that grants citizenship to people born in the United States, with just a couple of exceptions.

On Thursday, the high court heard from three attorneys: Solicitor General D. John Sauer, who represents the Trump administration; New Jersey Solicitor General Jeremy Feigenbaum is arguing against Trump’s order on behalf of several states; and Kelsi Corkran, who is representing pregnant women and immigrant rights groups.

Federal judges have uniformly cast doubt on Trump’s reading of the Citizenship Clause. Three judges have blocked the order from taking effect anywhere in the U.S., including U.S. District Judge John Coughenour. “I’ve been on the bench for over four decades. I can’t remember another case where the question presented was as clear as this one is. This is a blatantly unconstitutional order,” Coughenour said at a hearing in his Seattle courtroom.

The Supreme Court took up emergency appeals filed by the Trump administration asking to be able to enforce the executive order in most of the country, at least while lawsuits over the order proceed. The constitutionality of the order is not before the court just yet. Instead, the justices are looking at potentially limiting the authority of individual judges to issue rulings that apply throughout the United States. These are known as nationwide, or universal, injunctions.

<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/us-supreme-court">The Supreme Court</a>&nbsp;seemed intent on keeping a block on President Donald Trump’s restrictions on birthright citizenship Thursday while still looking for a way to scale back nationwide court orders. It was not immediately clear what such a decision might look like, but a majority of the court expressed concerns about what would happen if the administration were allowed, even temporarily, to deny citizenship to children born to parents who are in the country illegally.

Democratic attorneys general said Thursday that the case before the court goes beyond birthright citizenship.

“It’s about whether the rule of law and … whether the president can act like a king,” said New Jersey attorney general Matthew Platkin.

He spoke outside the Supreme Court accompanied by other Democratic attorneys general who have filed dozens of lawsuits challenging Trump’s policies in court. The Supreme Court will determine whether the Trump administration can partially enforce the president’s order on birthright citizenship.

The court could also narrow the power of other federal judges to make decisions that affect the entire country and potentially restrain the states’ ability to score victories against the administration court.

Would the Trump administration follow court rulings?

An underlying issue that did seem to be on the minds of several of the justices was judicial authority and whether the Trump administration would follow it. At least six of them questioned Sauer on the authority of the courts, including their own.

Justice Kavanaugh asked directly if the administration would follow an adverse ruling in the case while reading from government court filings on following Supreme Court precedents.

Sauer ran into another moment when he would not commit to respecting the decisions of a circuit court, saying administrations had generally followed rulings. Justice Coney Barrett responded tersely with, “Really?”

After a short rebuttal from Sauer, arguments are now complete after more than two hours. The Supreme Court typically rules in all its argued cases by the end of June and this one shouldn’t be any different. After oral arguments today,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/immigration-supreme-court-birthright-citizenship-nationwide-injunctions-2c495cddc1436e21a9fa976d295dc292">it’s not out of the question</a>&nbsp;that the court could make a decision on this quickly, but we can’t know for sure.

Although the Supreme Court case talked of birthright citizenship, a subject that could have huge implications for millions of people, the courtroom was sparse when it came to seeing anyone who might be impacted by the ruling. Most attendees appeared to be lawyers, with a few general visitors.

Despite the seriousness of the subject, the hearing had moments of laughter throughout the courtroom as justices quipped with attorneys or laughed with one another.

At one point, Justice Neil Gorsuch brought laughter when he responded to New Jersey Solicitor General Jeremy Feigenbaum’s offer of an amicus brief with “I need all the amici I can get.” More laughter came when Justice Kagan told U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer, “let’s just assume you’re dead wrong” as she set up a scenario for him to address. Justices Alito and Kagan also shared a private laugh when Alito began to ask a question but changed his mind and leaned back in his chair.

Kagan rolled over and whispered in his ear, and both laughed.

The attorney representing private individuals and immigrants makes their case

After the states finished their case, Kelsi Corkran, the attorney for pregnant women and immigrant-rights groups fighting Trump’s executive order, used her 15 minutes to make her case. Corkran said every judge who has considered the issue has found Trump’s order is “blatantly unlawful” and asked the justices to block the effort to begin enforcing it.

Kavanaugh suggested that people who want to challenge the birthright citizenship order might not need nationwide injunctions.

Instead, they could bind together and file class-action lawsuits. “That seems to solve the issue for preliminary relief,” he said. Corkran pushes back. “That is not actually addressing the court’s emergency docket. It’s just now we’re slapping a label of class certification on it,” she said.

A series of questions from Alito at one point seemed to hint at the many other cases the Trump administration is now appealing to the Supreme Court on an emergency basis. Lower-court judges can be “vulnerable to an occupational disease,” of believing they can do whatever they want, he said.

Even if their decisions are wrong, he said, appeals courts can be reluctant to act quickly to block them. He seemed to suggest that includes his own colleagues on the Supreme Court.

“How do we deal with that practical problem?” he said.

Corkran argues it wouldn’t. The government hasn’t said how they would enforce the order against everyone except the handful of people who sued, much less how they would filter out parents who are part of the groups that have sued, she argued.

Even if there were a way, it would likely mean the government would be able to identify the women as non-citizens. That would put many at risk for potential deportation, she said.

Trump's Solicitor General wraps up his opening and his challenger steps up

Justice Kavanaugh pressed Sauer with a series of questions about exactly how the federal government might enforce Trump’s order.

“What do hospitals do with a newborn? What do states do with a newborn?” he said. Sauer said they wouldn’t necessarily do anything different, but the government might figure out ways to reject documentation with “the wrong designation of citizenship.”

Kavanaugh continued to press for clearer answers, pointing out that the executive order only gave the government about 30 days to develop a policy. “You think they can get it together in time?” he said.

Justice Brown Jackson appeared deeply skeptical of Sauer's argument.

“Your argument seems to turn our justice system, in my view at least, into a catch me if you can kind of regime … where everybody has to have a lawyer and file a lawsuit in order for the government to stop violating people’s rights,” she said to Sauer.

New Jersey Solicitor General Jeremy Feigenbaum stepped up to make his case after justices peppered Sauer with questions. He is arguing on behalf of the states that say they’ll lose millions of dollars in benefits available to U.S. children and also have to overhaul identification systems. Feigenbaum asserted in his opening that the “post-Civil War nation wrote into our Constitution that citizens of the United States and of the States would be one and the same without variation across state lines.”

Feigenbaum told the justices that judges should be able to issue orders that affect the whole country, but only in narrow circumstances. Roberts jumps on that last point, asking him to elaborate on why they should only be used sparingly — a question that could be a clue as to how the chief justice is thinking about the issue.

Justices try to pin down Solicitor Sauer's argument