FINNEY COUNTY —As the investigation into the June 15, home explosion in Garden City continues, investigators determined that the explosion was caused by a natural gas leak, according to a media release from the Garden City fire department.

The gas leak was ignited when the 19-year-old victim turned on the stove. The issue was isolated to the gas line in the home.&nbsp; 

A friend established <a href="https://www.gofundme.com/f/support-milos-recovery-and-home-rebuild">an online fundraiser</a> to assist the family.&nbsp; <a href="https://www.gofundme.com/f/support-milos-recovery-and-home-rebuild">Click here</a> to view the fundraiser.

Just after 7p.m. on June 15, the Garden City Fire Department was dispatched to the report of an explosion at 802 West Fair Street, Garden City.

Upon arrival, fire personnel found one home that had significant damage due to an explosion with a large debris field surrounding the site. Finney County EMS transported the 19-year-old victim to St. Catherine Hospital.&nbsp; He remains in a Wichita hospital, according to the fire department. Officials have not release any&nbsp; updated information on his condition.

According to the GoFundMe page, "Our lives were shattered by a devastating house explosion that left Milo, our beloved Nephew, critically injured.&nbsp; The blast not only destroyed our home but also resulted in extensive medical bills as Milo fights for recovery in the hospital."

"The road to healing will be long and challenging, both emotionally and financially."

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/6/1719671268273.png" alt="Photo GoFundMe" />
 <figcaption>Photo GoFundMe</figcaption>
 </figure>FINNEY COUNTY —As the investigation into the June 15, home explosion in Garden City continues, investigators determined that the explosion was caused by a natural gas leak, according to a media release from the Garden City fire department.The gas leak was ignited when the 19-year-old victim turned on the stove. The issue was isolated to the gas line in the home.&nbsp; A friend established <a href="https://www.gofundme.com/f/support-milos-recovery-and-home-rebuild">an online fundraiser</a> to assist the family.&nbsp; <a href="https://www.gofundme.com/f/support-milos-recovery-and-home-rebuild">Click here</a> to view the fundraiser.Just after 7p.m. on June 15, the Garden City Fire Department was dispatched to the report of an explosion at 802 West Fair Street, Garden City.Upon arrival, fire personnel found one home that had significant damage due to an explosion with a large debris field surrounding the site. Finney County EMS transported the 19-year-old victim to St. Catherine Hospital.&nbsp; He remains in a Wichita hospital, according to the fire department. Officials have not release any&nbsp; updated information on his condition.According to the GoFundMe page, "Our lives were shattered by a devastating house explosion that left Milo, our beloved Nephew, critically injured.&nbsp; The blast not only destroyed our home but also resulted in extensive medical bills as Milo fights for recovery in the hospital.""The road to healing will be long and challenging, both emotionally and financially."

Teen continues recovery after SW Kansas home explosion

SEDGWICK COUNTY&nbsp; —Authorities investigating a fatal helicopter crash that occurred just after 8a.m. Friday have identified the man who died as 70-year-old Vincent Faber of Andale, according to Sedgwick County Sheriff Lt. Nathan Gibbs.

The National Transportation Safety Board continues investigating the&nbsp; crash of the RotorWay Scorpion 133 in the&nbsp;in the 5700 block of North 255th Street West.

An NTSB investigator&nbsp;arrived on scene Saturday, according to a statement from the agency. On scene, the investigator is documenting the scene and examining the&nbsp;wreckage.

NTSB investigations involve three primary areas: the pilot, the aircraft and the operating environment.

Witnesses to the accident or those who have surveillance video or other information that could be relevant to the investigation are asked to contact the NTSB at&nbsp;<a href="mailto:witness@ntsb.gov">witness@ntsb.gov</a>.&nbsp;

The NTSB will issue&nbsp; a preliminary report on the crash within 30 days.

The preliminary report will contain factual information gathered during the initial phase of the investigation. A probable cause of the crash along with any contributing factors will be detailed in the final report, which is expected in 12-24 months. &nbsp;&nbsp;

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/7/1720384018080.png" alt="First responders on the scene -photo courtesy KWCH" />
 <figcaption>First responders on the scene -photo courtesy KWCH</figcaption>
 </figure>SEDGWICK COUNTY&nbsp; —Authorities investigating a fatal helicopter crash that occurred just after 8a.m. Friday have identified the man who died as 70-year-old Vincent Faber of Andale, according to Sedgwick County Sheriff Lt. Nathan Gibbs.The National Transportation Safety Board continues investigating the&nbsp; crash of the RotorWay Scorpion 133 in the&nbsp;in the 5700 block of North 255th Street West.An NTSB investigator&nbsp;arrived on scene Saturday, according to a statement from the agency. On scene, the investigator is documenting the scene and examining the&nbsp;wreckage.<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/7/1720189143245.png" alt="Google map" />
 <figcaption>Google map</figcaption>
 </figure>NTSB investigations involve three primary areas: the pilot, the aircraft and the operating environment.Witnesses to the accident or those who have surveillance video or other information that could be relevant to the investigation are asked to contact the NTSB at&nbsp;<a href="mailto:witness@ntsb.gov">witness@ntsb.gov</a>.&nbsp;The NTSB will issue&nbsp; a preliminary report on the crash within 30 days.The preliminary report will contain factual information gathered during the initial phase of the investigation. A probable cause of the crash along with any contributing factors will be detailed in the final report, which is expected in 12-24 months. &nbsp;&nbsp;

Sheriff IDs Kansas pilot who died in helicopter crash

WASHINGTON (AP) — President&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/joe-biden">Joe Biden</a>&nbsp;wants Democrats in Congress to know he has&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-campaign-house-democrats-senate-16c222f825558db01609605b3ad9742a">no intention of exiting this year's election</a>, sending them a letter on Monday on his personal letterhead.

Here is&nbsp;<a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24794149-biden-letter-to-congressional-democrats">Biden's letter</a>&nbsp;to the congressional Democrats whose backing he likely needs:

Now that you have returned from the July 4th recess, I want you to know that despite all the speculation in the press and elsewhere, I am firmly committed to staying in this race, to running this race to the end, and to beating Donald Trump.

I have had extensive conversations with the leadership of the party, elected officials, rank and file members, and most importantly, Democratic voters over these past 10 days or so. I have heard the concerns that people have — their good faith fears and worries about what is at stake in this election. I am not blind to them. Believe me, I know better than anyone the responsibility and the burden the nominee of our party carries. I carried it in 2020 when the fate of our nation was at stake. I also know these concerns come from a place of real respect for my lifetime of public service and my record as President, and I have been moved by the expressions of affection for me from so many who have known me well and supported me over the course of my public life. I’ve been grateful for the rock-solid, steadfast support from so many elected Democrats in Congress and all across the country and taken great strength from the resolve and determination I’ve seen from so many voters and grassroots supporters even in the hardest of weeks.

I can respond to all this by saying clearly and unequivocally: I wouldn’t be running again if I did not absolutely believe I was the best person to beat Donald Trump in 2024.

We had a Democratic nomination process and the voters have spoken clearly and decisively. I received over 14 million votes, 87% of the votes cast across the entire nominating process. I have nearly 3,000 delegates, making me the presumptive nominee of our party by a wide margin.

This was a process open to anyone who wanted to run. Only three people chose to challenge me. One fared so badly that he left the primaries to run as an independent. Another attacked me for being too old and was soundly defeated. The voters of the Democratic Party have voted. They have chosen me to be the nominee of the party.

Do we now just say this process didn’t matter? That the voters don’t have a say?

I decline to do that. I feel a deep obligation to the faith and the trust the voters of the Democratic Party have placed in me to run this year. It was their decision to make. Not the press, not the pundits, not the big donors, not any selected group of individuals, no matter how well intentioned. The voters — and the voters alone — decide the nominee of the Democratic Party. How can we stand for democracy in our nation if we ignore it in our own party? I cannot do that. I will not do that.

I have no doubt that I — and we — can and will beat Donald Trump. We have an historic record of success to run on. From creating over 15 million jobs (including 200,000 just last month), reaching historic lows on unemployment, to revitalizing American manufacturing with 800,000 jobs, to protecting and expanding affordable health care, to rebuilding America’s roads, bridges, highways, ports and airports, and water systems, to beating Big Pharma and lowering the cost of prescription drugs, including $35 a month insulin for seniors, to providing student debt relief for nearly 5 million Americans to an historic investment in combatting climate change.

More importantly, we have an economic vision to run on that soundly beats Trump and the MAGA Republicans. They are siding with the wealthy and the big corporations and we are siding with the working people of America. It wasn’t an isolated moment for Trump to stand at Mar-A-Lago and tell the oil industry they should give him $1 billion and he will do whatever they want.

That’s whose side Trump and the MAGA Republicans are on. Trump and the MAGA Republicans want another $5 trillion in tax cuts for rich people so they can cut Social Security and Medicare. We will never let that happen. Its trickle-down economics on steroids. We know the way to build the economy is from the middle out and the bottom up, not the top down. We are finally going to make the rich and big corporations pay their fair share of taxes in this country. The MAGA party is also still determined to repeal the Affordable Care Act, which could throw 45 million Americans off their coverage. We will never let that happen either. Trump got rich denying rental housing to Black people. We have a plan to build 2 million new housing units in America. They want to let Big Pharma charge as much as they want again. What do you think America’s seniors will think when they know Trump and the MAGA Republicans want to take away their $35 insulin — as well as the $2,000 cap on out-of-pocket prescription costs we Democrats just got them? Or what do you think American families are going to think when they find out Trump and the MAGA Republicans want to hit them with a new $2,500 national sales tax on all the imported products they buy.

We are the ones lowering costs for families — from health care to prescription drugs to student debt to housing. We are the ones protecting Social Security and Medicare. Everything they're proposing raises costs for most Americans — except their tax cuts which will go to the rich.

We are protecting the freedoms of Americans. Trump and the MAGA Republicans are taking them away. They have already for the first time in history taken away a fundamental freedom from the American people by overturning Roe v. Wade. They have decided politicians should make the most personal of decisions that should be made by women and their doctors and those closest to them. They have already said they won’t stop there — and are going after everything from contraception to IVF to the right to marry who you love. And they have made it clear they will ban abortion nationwide. We will let none of that happen. I have made it clear that if Kamala and I are reelected, and the nation elects a Democratic House and Senate, we will make Roe v. Wade the law of the land again. We are the ones who will bring real Supreme Court reform; Donald Trump and his majority want more of the same from the Court, and the chance to add to the right-wing majority they built by subverting the norms and principles of the nomination and confirmation process.

And we are standing up for American democracy. After January 6th, Trump has proven that he is unfit to ever hold the office of President. We can never allow him anywhere near that office again. And we never will.

My fellow Democrats — we have the record, the vision, and the fundamental commitment to America’s freedoms and our Democracy to win.

The question of how to move forward has been well-aired for over a week now. And it’s time for it to end. We have one job. And that is to beat Donald Trump. We have 42 days to the Democratic Convention and 119 days to the general election. Any weakening of resolve or lack of clarity about the task ahead only helps Trump and hurts us. It is time to come together, move forward as a unified party, and defeat Donald Trump.

President of the United States of America

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden, in a letter to congressional Democrats, stood firm against calls for him to drop his candidacy and called for an “end” to the intraparty drama that has torn apart Democrats since his&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-campaigning-pennsylvania-democratic-doubts-election-77b050b1c5c39aec2ef633281d082566">dismal public debate performance</a>.

Biden's efforts to shore up a deeply anxious Democratic Party came Monday as lawmakers are returning to Washington and confronting a choice: decide whether to work to revive his campaign or edge out the party leader, a make-or-break time for his reelection and their own&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/election-2024">political futures</a>.

Biden wrote in the two-page letter that “the question of how to move forward has been well-aired for over a week now. And it’s time for it to end.” He stressed that the party has “one job,” which is to defeat presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump in November.

“We have 42 days to the Democratic Convention and 119 days to the general election,” Biden said in the letter, distributed by his reelection campaign. “Any weakening of resolve or lack of clarity about the task ahead only helps Trump and hurts us. It’s time to come together, move forward as a unified party, and defeat Donald Trump.”

He followed up the letter with a phone interview with MSNBC's “Morning Joe” show, on which he insisted that “average Democrats” want him to stay in the race and said he was “frustrated” by the calls from party officials for him to step aside.

“They’re big names, but I don't care what those big names think," Biden said.

He threw the gauntlet at his critics, saying if they're serious they ought to “announce for president, challenge me at the convention” or rally behind him against Trump.

Anxiety is running high as top-ranking Democratic lawmakers are joining calls for Biden to step aside despite his defiance. At the same time, some of the president’s most staunch supporters are redoubling the fight for Biden’s presidency, insisting there's no one better to beat Trump in what many see as among the most important elections of a lifetime.

As lawmakers weigh whether Biden should&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-2024-election-abc-debate-age-trump-25a863ba1ca3d6d01d8cc69a61274321">stay or go</a>, there appear to be no easy answers.

It’s a tenuous and highly volatile juncture for the president’s party. Democrats who have worked alongside Biden for years — if not decades — and cherished his life's work on policy priorities are now entertaining uncomfortable questions about his political future. And it's unfolding as Biden hosts world leaders for&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/nato-summit-trump-biden-europe-ukraine-e45273ef1bd408d72245f8f7fd1ec5c0">the NATO summit</a>&nbsp;this week in Washington.

Time is not on their side, almost a month from the Democratic National Convention and just a week before Republicans gather in Milwaukee to&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-project-2025-biden-9d372469033d23e1e3aef5cf0470a2e6">renominate Trump</a>&nbsp;as their presidential pick. Many Democrats are arguing the attention needs to be focused instead on the former president's felony conviction in the hush money case and pending&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-indicted-jan-6-investigation-special-counsel-debb59bb7a4d9f93f7e2dace01feccdc">federal charges</a>&nbsp;in his effort to&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/trump-election-2020-indictment">overturn the 2020 election</a>.

It's what Biden himself might call an inflection point. As he defiantly says he will only step aside if the Lord almighty comes and tells him to, Democrats in the House and Senate are deciding how hard they want to fight the president to change course, or if they want to change course at all.

In an effort to “get on the same page,” House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries is convening lawmakers for private meetings before he shows his own preference, according to a person familiar with the situation and granted anonymity to discuss it. He plans to gather Democrats on Monday whose bids for reelection are most vulnerable.

But a private call Sunday of some 15 top House committee members exposed the deepening divide as at least four more Democrats — Rep. Jerrold Nadler of New York, Rep. Jim Himes of Connecticut, Rep. Adam Smith of Washington state and Rep. Mark Takano of California — privately said Biden should step aside.

Nadler, as the most senior ranking member on the call, was the first person to speak up and say that Biden should step aside, according to a person familiar with the call who was granted anonymity to discuss it. He did so aware of his seniority and that it would allow others to join him.

Many others on the call raised concerns about Biden’s capability and chance of winning reelection, even if they stopped short of saying Biden should step out of the race.

Still other members, including Rep. Maxine Waters of California and Rep. Bobby Scott of Virginia, both leaders in the Congressional Black Caucus, spoke forcefully in support of Biden, as did Rep. Richard Neal of Massachusetts, the top Democrat on the powerful Ways and Means Committee.

And several lawmakers appeared frustrated that leadership was not providing direction or a path forward, according to people familiar with the call. One Democratic lawmaker said regardless of the decision, the situation has to “end now,” one of the people said.

Neal said afterward that the bottom line is Biden beat Trump in 2020 and “he’ll do it again in November.”

The upheaval also is testing a new generation of leaders, headed by Jeffries and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer. Both New Yorkers have refrained from publicly directing lawmakers on a path forward as they balance diverse opinions in their ranks.

Behind the scenes is Speaker Emerita&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/nancy-pelosi">Nancy Pelosi</a>, who continues to field calls from lawmakers seeking advice about the situation, and is widely viewed as the one to watch for any ultimate decision on Biden's future because of her proximity to the president and vote-counting skills in party politics.

Pelosi spoke up last week, saying Biden's debate performance raised “legitimate” questions he needed to answer, but she has remained supportive of the president. And Biden called her last week when he reached out to other party leaders.

When Biden's prime-time ABC interview on Friday appeared to do little to calm worried Democrats, and some said made the situation worse, Pelosi stepped forward to publicly praise Biden on social media as a “great President who continues to deliver for America’s kitchen table.” She added, "and we're not done yet!”

Schumer has kept a lower profile throughout the ordeal but will convene Democratic senators Tuesday for their weekly lunch when senators are certain to air many views.

One Democrat, Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia, had intended to gather senators Monday to discuss Biden privately, but a person familiar with his thinking said those conversations will take place in Tuesday’s regular caucus luncheon with all Democratic senators.

Another Democrat, Sen. Alex Padilla of California, said it was “time to quit the hand-wringing and get back to door knocking.”

Padilla spoke with Biden over the weekend, and urged his campaign to “let Joe be Joe.”

“Given the debate, I think the campaign has no choice,” Padilla said Sunday, explaining that Biden needs to hold town halls and unscripted events to show voters “the Joe Biden I know, and that most people in American have come to grow and love.”

While some deep-pocketed donors may be showing discomfort, strategists working on House and Senate races said they posted record fundraising as donors view congressional Democrats as a “firewall” and last line of defense against Trump.

House Democrats have had some of their better fundraising days yet, including a $3 million haul last Friday night after the debate at an event with former President Barack Obama and Jeffries in New York City. That’s on top of $1.3 million that rolled into the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee during the debate and its immediate aftermath.

Senate Democrats are also seeing a “surge” of support, according to a national Democrat with knowledge of Senate races.

As Democratic candidates campaign alongside Biden, the advice has been to focus on building their own brands and amplifying the way the work that’s done in Congress affects their local districts.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Deeply torn over President&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/joe-biden">Joe Biden’s</a>&nbsp;candidacy, Democratic lawmakers return to Washington at a pivotal moment as they decide whether to work to revive his campaign or edge out the party leader, a make-or-break time for his reelection and their own&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/election-2024">political futures</a>.

Anxiety is running high as top-ranking Democratic lawmakers are joining calls for Biden to step aside after his&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-campaigning-pennsylvania-democratic-doubts-election-77b050b1c5c39aec2ef633281d082566">dismal public debate performance</a>&nbsp;and defiant response to the uproar. At the same time, some of the president’s most staunch supporters are redoubling the fight for Biden’s presidency, insisting there is no one better to beat Republican&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/donald-trump">Donald Trump</a>&nbsp;in what many see as among the most important elections of a lifetime.

As lawmakers weigh whether Biden should&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-2024-election-abc-debate-age-trump-25a863ba1ca3d6d01d8cc69a61274321">stay or go</a>, there appear to be no easy answers in sight.

It’s a tenuous and highly volatile juncture for the president’s party. Democrats who have worked alongside Biden for years — if not decades — and cherished his life's work on policy priorities are now entertaining uncomfortable questions about his political future. And it's unfolding as Biden hosts world leaders for the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/nato-summit-trump-biden-europe-ukraine-e45273ef1bd408d72245f8f7fd1ec5c0">NATO summit</a>&nbsp;this week in Washington.

Read Biden's new letter to Hill Democrats: 'End the drama'

KANSAS CITY—Fire crews were busy with an unusual call early Sunday to rescue two people lost for over 5-hours in the cave system near Kansas City.

Just after 4 a.m. a man and woman became lost while exploring the caves off of Coalmine Road, according to KCFD Battalion Chief Michael Hopkins.

 They entered the caves just after 11 p.m. After becoming disoriented and unable to find their way out. They were able to find a spot with enough signal to call 911. 

KCFD rescue division responded. Using ropes for guidance the Rescue crews descended approximately 2000 to 2500 feet into the cave system where they located both victims. 

Both victims were removed unharmed and refused medical treatment.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/7/1720384593882.png" alt="Google map" />
 <figcaption>Google map</figcaption>
 </figure>KANSAS CITY—Fire crews were busy with an unusual call early Sunday to rescue two people lost for over 5-hours in the cave system near Kansas City.Just after 4 a.m. a man and woman became lost while exploring the caves off of Coalmine Road, according to KCFD Battalion Chief Michael Hopkins. They entered the caves just after 11 p.m. After becoming disoriented and unable to find their way out. They were able to find a spot with enough signal to call 911. KCFD rescue division responded. Using ropes for guidance the Rescue crews descended approximately 2000 to 2500 feet into the cave system where they located both victims. Both victims were removed unharmed and refused medical treatment.

Couple rescued after 5 hours in a cave near Kansas City

SHAWNEE COUNTY —Law enforcement authorities investigating a homicide&nbsp; are asking for the public’s help in locating 19-year-old Nassir Gill of Topeka, according to a media release from police.

 Gill is a person of interest in the homicide of Brian M. Wright Jr., 23, that occurred on June 21, in the 3100 block of SW Westover Road in Topeka.

Gill is described as 5-foot-6 and weighs approximately 160 pounds. He may no longer have blue/green hair, as seen in the photo released by police.

If you see or know where Gill may be, please call or email investigators at 785-368-9551 and telltpd@topeka.org. You can also report anonymously to Shawnee County Crime Stoppers at 785-234-0007 or online at www.p3tips.com/128.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/6/1719693545861.png" alt="Gill is described as 5-foot-6 and weighs approximately 160 pounds. He may no longer have blue/green hair, as seen in the photo released by police." />
 <figcaption>Gill is described as 5-foot-6 and weighs approximately 160 pounds. He may no longer have blue/green hair, as seen in the photo released by police.</figcaption>
 </figure>SHAWNEE COUNTY —Law enforcement authorities investigating a homicide&nbsp; are asking for the public’s help in locating 19-year-old Nassir Gill of Topeka, according to a media release from police. Gill is a person of interest in the homicide of Brian M. Wright Jr., 23, that occurred on June 21, in the 3100 block of SW Westover Road in Topeka.<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/6/1719001082126.png" alt="Police on the scene of the investigation -photo courtesy WIBW TV" />
 <figcaption>Police on the scene of the investigation -photo courtesy WIBW TV</figcaption>
 </figure>Gill is described as 5-foot-6 and weighs approximately 160 pounds. He may no longer have blue/green hair, as seen in the photo released by police.If you see or know where Gill may be, please call or email investigators at 785-368-9551 and telltpd@topeka.org. You can also report anonymously to Shawnee County Crime Stoppers at 785-234-0007 or online at www.p3tips.com/128.

Kansas teen homicide suspect still missing

WASHINGTON (AP) —Boeing will plead guilty to a criminal fraud charge stemming from two crashes of 737 Max jetliners that killed 346 people after the government determined the company&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/boeing-justice-department-737-max-82145b25ed988cd8cae0bce3de79ce9d">violated an agreement</a>&nbsp;that had protected it from prosecution for more than three years, the Justice Department said Sunday night.

Federal prosecutors gave Boeing&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/boeing-criminal-charges-plea-deal-861175435e04039112fde0ac6bdbf75a">the choice</a>&nbsp;last week of entering a guilty plea and paying a fine as part of its sentence or facing a trial on the felony criminal charge of conspiracy to defraud the United States.

Prosecutors accused the American aerospace giant of deceiving regulators who approved the airplane and pilot-training requirements for it.

The&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/boeing-crash-plea-deal-fraud-d0531d9e9858689bf0d572584dc36b83">plea deal</a>, which still must receive the approval of a federal judge to take effect, calls for Boeing to pay an additional $243.6 million fine. That was the same amount it paid under the 2021 settlement that the Justice Department said&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/boeing-justice-department-737-max-82145b25ed988cd8cae0bce3de79ce9d">the company breached</a>. An independent monitor would be named to oversee Boeing's safety and quality procedures for three years. The deal also requires Boeing to invest at least $455 million in its compliance and safety programs.

The plea deal covers only wrongdoing by Boeing before the crashes, which killed all 346 passengers and crew members aboard two new Max jets. It does not give Boeing immunity for other incidents, including a panel that&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/boeing-max-emergency-landing-alaska-airlines-79bc1ea98ee7fbc6edf46aff9319775b">blew off</a>&nbsp;a Max jetliner during an Alaska Airlines flight in January, a Justice Department official said.

The deal also does not cover any current or former Boeing officials, only the corporation. In a statement, Boeing confirmed it had reached the deal with the Justice Department but had no further comment.

In a court filing Sunday night, the Justice Department said it expected to file the written plea agreement with the court by July 19. Lawyers for some of the relatives of those who died in the two crashes have said they will ask the judge to reject the agreement.

“This sweetheart deal fails to recognize that because of Boeing’s conspiracy, 346 people died. Through crafty lawyering between Boeing and DOJ, the deadly consequences of Boeing’s crime are being hidden,” said Paul Cassell, a lawyer for some of the families.

Federal prosecutors alleged Boeing committed conspiracy to defraud the government by misleading regulators about a flight-control system that was implicated in the crashes, which took place&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/7c145dc3564045cea21cd387afebe5be">in Indonesia</a>&nbsp;in October 2018 and&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/1108708781ba46808a16843bda8cc079">in Ethiopia</a>&nbsp;less five months later.

As part of the January 2021 settlement, the Justice Department said it&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/politics-us-department-of-justice-texas-business-fraud-57db69f33fda9f62785e1fe5d3b2f538">would not prosecute</a>&nbsp;Boeing on the charge if the company complied with certain conditions for three years. Prosecutors last month alleged Boeing had breached the terms of that agreement.

The company’s guilty plea will be entered in U.S. District Court in Texas. The judge overseeing the case, who has criticized what he called&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/accidents-fort-worth-business-fraud-6c6e5e7de01c9b0b6f74db8057431627">“Boeing’s egregious criminal conduct,”</a>&nbsp;could accept the plea and the sentence that prosecutors offered with it or he could reject the agreement, likely leading to new negotiations between the Justice Department and Boeing.

The case goes back to the crashes in Indonesia and in Ethiopia. The Lion Air pilots in the first crash did not know about flight-control software that could push the nose of the plane down without their input. The pilots for Ethiopian Airlines knew about it but were unable to control the plane when the software activated based on information from a faulty sensor.

The Justice Department charged Boeing in 2021 with deceiving FAA regulators about the software, which did not exist in older 737s, and about how much training pilots would need to fly the plane safely. The department agreed not to prosecute Boeing at the time, however, if the company paid a $2.5 billion settlement, including the $243.6 million fine, and took steps to comply with anti-fraud laws for three years.

Boeing, which blamed&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/business-texas-fort-worth-federal-aviation-administration-boeing-co-db0e14a239e43406d34d7dde99022089">two low-level employees</a>&nbsp;for misleading the regulators, tried to put the crashes behind it. After grounding Max jets for 20 months, regulators let them fly again after the Boeing reduced the power of the flight software. Max jets logged thousands of safe flights and orders from airlines picked up, increasing to about 750 in 2021, about 700 more in 2022 and nearly 1,000 in 2023.

The company based in Arlington, Virginia, has dozens of airline customers spanning the globe. The best customers for the 737 Max include Southwest, United, American, Alaska, Ryanair and flydubai.

That changed in January, when a panel covering an unused emergency exit&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/boeing-max-emergency-landing-alaska-airlines-79bc1ea98ee7fbc6edf46aff9319775b">blew off</a>&nbsp;a Max during the Alaska Airlines flight over Oregon.

Pilots landed the 737 Max safely and no one was seriously injured, but the incident led to closer scrutiny of the company. The Justice Department opened a new investigation, the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/boeing-fbi-investigation-crime-lawsuit-oregon-a4ffddc43f2000dd9d9466a335df6a93">FBI told passengers</a>&nbsp;on the Alaska plane that they might be victims of a crime and the FAA said it was&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/boeing-investigation-faa-panel-blowout-monitoring-06b098e57a8c65bdb0ba377f99290d32">stepping up oversight</a>&nbsp;of Boeing.

A criminal conviction could jeopardize Boeing’s status as a federal contractor, according to some legal experts. The plea announced Sunday does not address that question, leaving it to each government agency whether to bar Boeing.

The Air Force cited “compelling national interest” in letting Boeing continue competing for contracts after the company paid a $615 million fine in 2006 to settle criminal and civil charges, including that it used information stolen from a rival to win a space-launch contract.

The company has 170,000 employees and 37% of its revenue last year came from U.S. government contracts. Most of it was defense work, including military sales that Washington arranged for other countries.

Boeing also makes a capsule for NASA. Two astronauts will remain at the International Space Station longer than expected while Boeing and NASA engineers troubleshoot&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/boeing-starliner-nasa-astronauts-space-station-2fe81a09bcd77563dadae2f86d4275fe">problems with the propulsion system</a>&nbsp;used to maneuver the capsule.

Even some Boeing critics have worried about crippling a key defense contractor.

“We want Boeing to succeed,” Richard Blumenthal, a Connecticut Democrat, said during a Senate hearing last month on what he termed the company’s broken safety culture. “Boeing needs to succeed for the sake of the jobs it provides, for the sake of local economies it supports, for the sake of the American traveling public, for the sake of our military.”

Relatives of the Max crash victims have pushed for a criminal trial that might illuminate what people inside Boeing knew about deceiving the FAA. They also want the Justice Department to prosecute top Boeing officials, not just the company.

“Boeing has paid fines many a time, and it doesn’t seem to make any change,” said Ike Riffel of Redding, California,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/boeing-plane-crashes-737-max-justice-department-da2977c487811e873be2d118b3c5e529">whose sons</a>&nbsp;Melvin and Bennett died in the Ethiopian Airlines crash. “When people start going to prison, that’s when you are going to see a change.”

At a recent&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/boeing-ceo-calhoun-safety-senate-investigations-de6a273e5ad69764f4e666cc4afda2c1">Senate hearing</a>, Boeing CEO David Calhoun defended the company’s safety record after turning and apologizing to Max crash victims’ relatives seated in the rows behind him “for the grief that we have caused.”

Hours before the hearing, the Senate investigations subcommittee released a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024.06.17-PSI-Majority-Staff-Memorandum.pdf">204-page report</a>&nbsp;with new allegations from a whistleblower who said he worried that defective parts could be going into&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/boeing-max-jet-incident-crashes-f73fb7b9eaff7f6549c88e958f7b8b38">737s</a>. The whistleblower was the latest in a string of current and former&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/boeing-whistleblower-death-apparent-suicide-south-carolina-f7c8b8a614b069942a5f2e4773b99487">Boeing employees</a>&nbsp;who have raised safety concerns about the company and claimed they faced retaliation as a result.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/6/1718741633288.png" alt="During a Senate hearing in June Boeing CEO Dave Calhoun apologized to families in the audience of Boeing's Lion Air Flight 610 and Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 crash victims.&nbsp;" />
 <figcaption>During a Senate hearing in June Boeing CEO Dave Calhoun apologized to families in the audience of Boeing's Lion Air Flight 610 and Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 crash victims.&nbsp;</figcaption>
 </figure>WASHINGTON (AP) —Boeing will plead guilty to a criminal fraud charge stemming from two crashes of 737 Max jetliners that killed 346 people after the government determined the company&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/boeing-justice-department-737-max-82145b25ed988cd8cae0bce3de79ce9d">violated an agreement</a>&nbsp;that had protected it from prosecution for more than three years, the Justice Department said Sunday night.Federal prosecutors gave Boeing&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/boeing-criminal-charges-plea-deal-861175435e04039112fde0ac6bdbf75a">the choice</a>&nbsp;last week of entering a guilty plea and paying a fine as part of its sentence or facing a trial on the felony criminal charge of conspiracy to defraud the United States.Prosecutors accused the American aerospace giant of deceiving regulators who approved the airplane and pilot-training requirements for it.<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Boeing CEO Dave Calhoun apologizes to families in the audience of Boeing&#39;s Lion Air Flight 610 and Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 crash victims. <a href="https://t.co/2PJphR051S">pic.twitter.com/2PJphR051S</a>&mdash; CSPAN (@cspan) <a href="https://twitter.com/cspan/status/1803140939575161269?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 18, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>The&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/boeing-crash-plea-deal-fraud-d0531d9e9858689bf0d572584dc36b83">plea deal</a>, which still must receive the approval of a federal judge to take effect, calls for Boeing to pay an additional $243.6 million fine. That was the same amount it paid under the 2021 settlement that the Justice Department said&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/boeing-justice-department-737-max-82145b25ed988cd8cae0bce3de79ce9d">the company breached</a>. An independent monitor would be named to oversee Boeing's safety and quality procedures for three years. The deal also requires Boeing to invest at least $455 million in its compliance and safety programs.<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/6/1718741575107.png" alt="Boeing CEO Dave Calhoun during testimony before a Senate Committee in June" />
 <figcaption>Boeing CEO Dave Calhoun during testimony before a Senate Committee in June</figcaption>
 </figure>The plea deal covers only wrongdoing by Boeing before the crashes, which killed all 346 passengers and crew members aboard two new Max jets. It does not give Boeing immunity for other incidents, including a panel that&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/boeing-max-emergency-landing-alaska-airlines-79bc1ea98ee7fbc6edf46aff9319775b">blew off</a>&nbsp;a Max jetliner during an Alaska Airlines flight in January, a Justice Department official said.The deal also does not cover any current or former Boeing officials, only the corporation. In a statement, Boeing confirmed it had reached the deal with the Justice Department but had no further comment.In a court filing Sunday night, the Justice Department said it expected to file the written plea agreement with the court by July 19. Lawyers for some of the relatives of those who died in the two crashes have said they will ask the judge to reject the agreement.“This sweetheart deal fails to recognize that because of Boeing’s conspiracy, 346 people died. Through crafty lawyering between Boeing and DOJ, the deadly consequences of Boeing’s crime are being hidden,” said Paul Cassell, a lawyer for some of the families.Federal prosecutors alleged Boeing committed conspiracy to defraud the government by misleading regulators about a flight-control system that was implicated in the crashes, which took place&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/7c145dc3564045cea21cd387afebe5be">in Indonesia</a>&nbsp;in October 2018 and&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/1108708781ba46808a16843bda8cc079">in Ethiopia</a>&nbsp;less five months later.As part of the January 2021 settlement, the Justice Department said it&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/politics-us-department-of-justice-texas-business-fraud-57db69f33fda9f62785e1fe5d3b2f538">would not prosecute</a>&nbsp;Boeing on the charge if the company complied with certain conditions for three years. Prosecutors last month alleged Boeing had breached the terms of that agreement.The company’s guilty plea will be entered in U.S. District Court in Texas. The judge overseeing the case, who has criticized what he called&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/accidents-fort-worth-business-fraud-6c6e5e7de01c9b0b6f74db8057431627">“Boeing’s egregious criminal conduct,”</a>&nbsp;could accept the plea and the sentence that prosecutors offered with it or he could reject the agreement, likely leading to new negotiations between the Justice Department and Boeing.The case goes back to the crashes in Indonesia and in Ethiopia. The Lion Air pilots in the first crash did not know about flight-control software that could push the nose of the plane down without their input. The pilots for Ethiopian Airlines knew about it but were unable to control the plane when the software activated based on information from a faulty sensor.The Justice Department charged Boeing in 2021 with deceiving FAA regulators about the software, which did not exist in older 737s, and about how much training pilots would need to fly the plane safely. The department agreed not to prosecute Boeing at the time, however, if the company paid a $2.5 billion settlement, including the $243.6 million fine, and took steps to comply with anti-fraud laws for three years.Boeing, which blamed&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/business-texas-fort-worth-federal-aviation-administration-boeing-co-db0e14a239e43406d34d7dde99022089">two low-level employees</a>&nbsp;for misleading the regulators, tried to put the crashes behind it. After grounding Max jets for 20 months, regulators let them fly again after the Boeing reduced the power of the flight software. Max jets logged thousands of safe flights and orders from airlines picked up, increasing to about 750 in 2021, about 700 more in 2022 and nearly 1,000 in 2023.The company based in Arlington, Virginia, has dozens of airline customers spanning the globe. The best customers for the 737 Max include Southwest, United, American, Alaska, Ryanair and flydubai.That changed in January, when a panel covering an unused emergency exit&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/boeing-max-emergency-landing-alaska-airlines-79bc1ea98ee7fbc6edf46aff9319775b">blew off</a>&nbsp;a Max during the Alaska Airlines flight over Oregon.Pilots landed the 737 Max safely and no one was seriously injured, but the incident led to closer scrutiny of the company. The Justice Department opened a new investigation, the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/boeing-fbi-investigation-crime-lawsuit-oregon-a4ffddc43f2000dd9d9466a335df6a93">FBI told passengers</a>&nbsp;on the Alaska plane that they might be victims of a crime and the FAA said it was&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/boeing-investigation-faa-panel-blowout-monitoring-06b098e57a8c65bdb0ba377f99290d32">stepping up oversight</a>&nbsp;of Boeing.A criminal conviction could jeopardize Boeing’s status as a federal contractor, according to some legal experts. The plea announced Sunday does not address that question, leaving it to each government agency whether to bar Boeing.The Air Force cited “compelling national interest” in letting Boeing continue competing for contracts after the company paid a $615 million fine in 2006 to settle criminal and civil charges, including that it used information stolen from a rival to win a space-launch contract.The company has 170,000 employees and 37% of its revenue last year came from U.S. government contracts. Most of it was defense work, including military sales that Washington arranged for other countries.Boeing also makes a capsule for NASA. Two astronauts will remain at the International Space Station longer than expected while Boeing and NASA engineers troubleshoot&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/boeing-starliner-nasa-astronauts-space-station-2fe81a09bcd77563dadae2f86d4275fe">problems with the propulsion system</a>&nbsp;used to maneuver the capsule.Even some Boeing critics have worried about crippling a key defense contractor.“We want Boeing to succeed,” Richard Blumenthal, a Connecticut Democrat, said during a Senate hearing last month on what he termed the company’s broken safety culture. “Boeing needs to succeed for the sake of the jobs it provides, for the sake of local economies it supports, for the sake of the American traveling public, for the sake of our military.”Relatives of the Max crash victims have pushed for a criminal trial that might illuminate what people inside Boeing knew about deceiving the FAA. They also want the Justice Department to prosecute top Boeing officials, not just the company.“Boeing has paid fines many a time, and it doesn’t seem to make any change,” said Ike Riffel of Redding, California,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/boeing-plane-crashes-737-max-justice-department-da2977c487811e873be2d118b3c5e529">whose sons</a>&nbsp;Melvin and Bennett died in the Ethiopian Airlines crash. “When people start going to prison, that’s when you are going to see a change.”At a recent&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/boeing-ceo-calhoun-safety-senate-investigations-de6a273e5ad69764f4e666cc4afda2c1">Senate hearing</a>, Boeing CEO David Calhoun defended the company’s safety record after turning and apologizing to Max crash victims’ relatives seated in the rows behind him “for the grief that we have caused.”Hours before the hearing, the Senate investigations subcommittee released a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024.06.17-PSI-Majority-Staff-Memorandum.pdf">204-page report</a>&nbsp;with new allegations from a whistleblower who said he worried that defective parts could be going into&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/boeing-max-jet-incident-crashes-f73fb7b9eaff7f6549c88e958f7b8b38">737s</a>. The whistleblower was the latest in a string of current and former&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/boeing-whistleblower-death-apparent-suicide-south-carolina-f7c8b8a614b069942a5f2e4773b99487">Boeing employees</a>&nbsp;who have raised safety concerns about the company and claimed they faced retaliation as a result.___

Boeing to plead guilty to criminal fraud charges over Max crashes

SUMNER COUNTY —Just before 9a.m. Monday, the Wellington Police Department reported that 67-year-old Ronald Cook was located and is now safe. The statewide silver alert is now canceled.&nbsp;

SUMNER COUNTY – The Wellington Police Department requested the Kansas Bureau of Investigation (KBI) issue a statewide Silver Alert for a missing Wichita man. The whereabouts of Ronald Cook, 67, are unknown, and the public’s assistance is requested to help locate him. 

Cook was last seen leaving his residence at 1:00 p.m. on Sunday July 8, wearing a beige shirt and dark gray sweat pants. Cook is believed to be driving a 2007 Ford Edge with Kansas license plate 2503ACZ.Cook is 5 feet 9 inches tall, 250 pounds, gray hair with brown eyes.If you see him, please call 911.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/7/1720433015564.png" alt="Ronald Cook-photo Wellington Police" />
 <figcaption>Ronald Cook-photo Wellington Police</figcaption>
 </figure>SUMNER COUNTY —Just before 9a.m. Monday, the Wellington Police Department reported that 67-year-old Ronald Cook was located and is now safe. The statewide silver alert is now canceled.&nbsp;----------SUMNER COUNTY – The Wellington Police Department requested the Kansas Bureau of Investigation (KBI) issue a statewide Silver Alert for a missing Wichita man. The whereabouts of Ronald Cook, 67, are unknown, and the public’s assistance is requested to help locate him. Cook was last seen leaving his residence at 1:00 p.m. on Sunday July 8, wearing a beige shirt and dark gray sweat pants. Cook is believed to be driving a 2007 Ford Edge with Kansas license plate 2503ACZ.Cook is 5 feet 9 inches tall, 250 pounds, gray hair with brown eyes.If you see him, please call 911.

KBI: Silver Alert canceled, missing Kansas man found safe

SEDGWICK COUNTY&nbsp; - A registered Kansas sex offender is going back to prison.

On July 1, 30-year-old Jeffrey Elam was sentenced to&nbsp;19 years in prison for a violent knife attack on a woman in Wichita in 2021, according to the Sedgwick County District attorney's office.

Just after 11:30p.m. November 28, 2021&nbsp; police responded to reports of a stabbing in the 100 block of North St. Francis in Wichita. When officers arrived, they located a 22-year-old woman with a stab wound to her abdomen.

EMS transported her to an area hospital for treatment of serious but non-life-threatening injuries. The investigation revealed the victim was walking to her vehicle and was approached and stabbed by a suspect later identified as Elam, who fled northbound through the alley. Police released a security camera video of him and made an arrest the following night.&nbsp;&nbsp;

In May, Elam was found guilty of attempted second-degree murder and aggravated battery for the attack.

Elam has previous convictions for aggravated indecent liberties with a child and is a registered Kansas sex offender, according to the KBI&nbsp;<a href="https://www.kbi.ks.gov/registeredoffender/OffenderDetails.aspx?Display=Main&amp;Id=28419">offender registry</a>. The&nbsp;crimes occurred in Wichita in 2012 and 2013 and included a 5-year-old victim.&nbsp; Elam is now also required to register as a violent offender, according to the district attorney's office.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/11/1637681991929.png" alt="Elam photo Sedgwick Co." />
 <figcaption>Elam photo Sedgwick Co.</figcaption>
 </figure>SEDGWICK COUNTY&nbsp; - A registered Kansas sex offender is going back to prison.On July 1, 30-year-old Jeffrey Elam was sentenced to&nbsp;19 years in prison for a violent knife attack on a woman in Wichita in 2021, according to the Sedgwick County District attorney's office.Just after 11:30p.m. November 28, 2021&nbsp; police responded to reports of a stabbing in the 100 block of North St. Francis in Wichita. When officers arrived, they located a 22-year-old woman with a stab wound to her abdomen.EMS transported her to an area hospital for treatment of serious but non-life-threatening injuries. The investigation revealed the victim was walking to her vehicle and was approached and stabbed by a suspect later identified as Elam, who fled northbound through the alley. Police released a security camera video of him and made an arrest the following night.&nbsp;&nbsp;In May, Elam was found guilty of attempted second-degree murder and aggravated battery for the attack.<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/7/1720037388052.png" alt="" />
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure>Elam has previous convictions for aggravated indecent liberties with a child and is a registered Kansas sex offender, according to the KBI&nbsp;<a href="https://www.kbi.ks.gov/registeredoffender/OffenderDetails.aspx?Display=Main&amp;Id=28419">offender registry</a>. The&nbsp;crimes occurred in Wichita in 2012 and 2013 and included a 5-year-old victim.&nbsp; Elam is now also required to register as a violent offender, according to the district attorney's office.

Kansas sex offender going to prison for knife attack on woman

LYON COUNTY—Law enforcement authorities are investigating two suspect after a 3-county chase in a stolen vehicle.

Just after 4a.m. Tuesday, sheriff's deputies, located a possible stolen black SUV at West 6th Avenue and Prairie Street in Emporia, according to Police&nbsp;Sgt. Zachary M. Shafer.

&nbsp; Deputies attempted to stop the&nbsp;SUV, and the driver failed to stop and a vehicle pursuit ensued. The pursuit was immediately terminated due to speeds being in excess of 102 mph. 

Lyon County Deputies and the Emporia Police Department lost sight of the black SUV, in the city limits of Emporia.

At approximately 5:40a.m., Lyon County Deputies located the same SUV traveling southbound on Interstate 35.&nbsp; Deputies attempted to stop the vehicle and the driver again failed to stop&nbsp;and a vehicle pursuit ensued. 

The SUV traveled through the center median of Interstate 35 and traveled northbound. The pursuit traveled through, Coffey, Osage, and Franklin Counties.

Tire deflation devices were deployed four separate times during the pursuit. The pursuit ended in Franklin County, approximately six and a half miles southeast of Ottawa, Kansas. 

&nbsp;The driver was later identified as Frederick Beecher Hogue, 37-years-old, from Hollister, Missouri.&nbsp;The passenger was identified as Sara Kay Rogers, 36-years-old, from Granby, Missouri.

They were arrested&nbsp;without incident, and transported to the Lyon County Detention Center.

Hogue is being held on requested charges of Felony Flee and Attempt to Elude, Felony Possession of Stolen Property, Felony Interference with Law Enforcement, numerous traffic infractions, and an out of state warrant through Jasper County, Missouri.

&nbsp;Rogers was jailed on requested charged of Possession of Methamphetamine and Possession of Drug Paraphernalia.&nbsp;

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/7/1720298558660.png" alt="Hogue photo Lyon Co." />
 <figcaption>Hogue photo Lyon Co.</figcaption>
 </figure>LYON COUNTY—Law enforcement authorities are investigating two suspect after a 3-county chase in a stolen vehicle.Just after 4a.m. Tuesday, sheriff's deputies, located a possible stolen black SUV at West 6th Avenue and Prairie Street in Emporia, according to Police&nbsp;Sgt. Zachary M. Shafer.&nbsp; Deputies attempted to stop the&nbsp;SUV, and the driver failed to stop and a vehicle pursuit ensued. The pursuit was immediately terminated due to speeds being in excess of 102 mph. Lyon County Deputies and the Emporia Police Department lost sight of the black SUV, in the city limits of Emporia.At approximately 5:40a.m., Lyon County Deputies located the same SUV traveling southbound on Interstate 35.&nbsp; Deputies attempted to stop the vehicle and the driver again failed to stop&nbsp;and a vehicle pursuit ensued. The SUV traveled through the center median of Interstate 35 and traveled northbound. The pursuit traveled through, Coffey, Osage, and Franklin Counties.Tire deflation devices were deployed four separate times during the pursuit. The pursuit ended in Franklin County, approximately six and a half miles southeast of Ottawa, Kansas. &nbsp;The driver was later identified as Frederick Beecher Hogue, 37-years-old, from Hollister, Missouri.&nbsp;The passenger was identified as Sara Kay Rogers, 36-years-old, from Granby, Missouri.They were arrested&nbsp;without incident, and transported to the Lyon County Detention Center.Hogue is being held on requested charges of Felony Flee and Attempt to Elude, Felony Possession of Stolen Property, Felony Interference with Law Enforcement, numerous traffic infractions, and an out of state warrant through Jasper County, Missouri.&nbsp;Rogers was jailed on requested charged of Possession of Methamphetamine and Possession of Drug Paraphernalia.&nbsp;

Suspect jailed after 102mph Kan. chase in stolen SUV

BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://kansasreflector.com/author/allison-winter/">ALLISON WINTER</a>

WASHINGTON — The stalemate over the current farm bill may be solidifying a new era in farm politics as it joins the last three farm bills in a trend of delays and partisan division — a contrast from the legislation’s history of bipartisanship.

Every five years, Congress is tasked with drafting a new federal farm bill. The omnibus law that began 90 years ago as various kinds of payments to support farmers now has an impact far beyond the farm, with programs to create wildlife habitat, address climate change and provide the nation’s largest federal nutrition program.

The current farm bill process, already nearly a year behind schedule, is at an impasse as Democrats and Republicans clash over how to pay for the bill and whether to place limits on nutrition and climate programs. The previous farm bill expired in September 2023 and has been extended through the end of this September.

Historically, farm bills were completed within a few months of their expiration date. Ten of the 13 farm bills since 1965 were enacted by December 31 in the year of their expirations. But three of the four farm bills since 2008 went beyond that date.

The last three bills — including the 2018 bill, which is the one recent version that passed on time — each had partisan disagreements about spending.

The trend represents a change in how the once-bipartisan legislation is viewed.

“The last two farm bills were the anomaly,” said Jonathan Coppess, a professor of Agricultural Law and Policy at the University of Illinois who has written a history of the farm bill. “Now that it has been three in a row, I’m not sure that holds.”

A recent&nbsp;<a href="https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R45210.pdf" target="_blank">report</a>&nbsp;from the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service notes that starting in 2008, farm bills have been subject to delays, vetoes and insufficient votes to pass on the floor.

The report concluded: “Over time, farm bills have tended to become more complicated and politically sensitive. As a result, the timeline for reauthorization has become less certain.”

That uncertainty is true of the current farm bill, as Republicans in the House and Senate push for spending limits that Democrats say are non-starters.

“I don’t think we’re close to getting a farm bill done until the folks who are negotiating the farm bill are realistic about what’s doable within a constrained resource environment,” Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said in an interview on the radio program&nbsp;<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DjdcUT0r3o" target="_blank">AgriTalk</a>&nbsp;June 21.

The Republican-led House Agriculture Committee approved its farm bill proposal&nbsp;<a href="https://idahocapitalsun.com/2024/05/24/farm-bill-advances-from-u-s-house-panel-but-faces-a-tough-row-to-hoe/" target="_blank">largely on party lines</a>&nbsp;at the end of May, after hours of debate and complaints from Democrats that the process had not been as bipartisan as in years past.

Four Democrats voted for the bill in committee, but they joined 20 other Democrats on the committee in a “dissenting views” letter expressing “genuine concern over the trajectory of the Majority’s partisan farm bill” — which they predicted would be stuck in delay and dysfunction without significant changes.

The Senate Agriculture Committee has yet to vote. The Republican and Democratic leaders of the committee have each put forward contrasting bills and expressed their frustration.

Senate Agriculture Committee Chairwoman Debbie&nbsp; Stabenow, a Michigan Democrat who is retiring after this term, has called the process the “most frustrating” of her career and said she would not let the Republican approach for the farm bill be her legacy.

“I’ve actually been involved in six farm bills and led on three of them, and this has been the most frustrating time,” said Stabenow&nbsp;<a href="https://michiganadvance.com/2024/06/26/stabenow-says-gop-farm-bill-is-not-balanced-and-wont-pass-through-the-us-senate/" target="_blank">in an interview with&nbsp;Michigan Advance</a>&nbsp;at the end of June. “Because it’s so much more partisan than usual and particularly around food assistance.”

Partisan division is not uncommon in today’s Congress but is notable on the farm bill, which had historically brought together lawmakers from both sides of the aisle. Bipartisan support can be necessary for final passage because the size of the $1.5 trillion farm bill means it inevitably loses some votes from fiscal conservatives and others.

“If you don’t have a bipartisan bill, this is not going to happen, and that is no matter who’s in charge. The margins are too close to be able to get this done without bipartisan support,” said Collin Peterson, a former Democratic House member from Minnesota and Agriculture Committee Chairman.

The&nbsp;<a href="https://utahnewsdispatch.com/2024/05/24/u-s-house-panel-debates-nutrition-benefit-changes-farm-bill/" target="_blank">key dispute</a>&nbsp;for Democrats this year is a funding calculation that would place limits on the “Thrifty Food Plan” formula that calculates benefits for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, SNAP.

Republicans are using the limits to offset other spending in the bill on crop subsidies. The top Republican on the Senate Agriculture Committee, Arkansas Sen. John Boozman, said he wants to put “more farm in the farm bill.”

Peterson, who is now the head of an eponymous consulting firm, said in an interview with States Newsroom that Republicans would likely have to make changes to the nutrition title to get a bill to final passage.

“It is unrealistic to think they are going to get this done without significant changes in that part of the bill,” he said.

The nutrition program that is at the center of the impasse was added to the legislation 50 years ago to help build a coalition of wide-ranging bipartisan support.

Lawmakers added the nutrition title to the farm bill in 1973, a move that widened the vested interest in the bill in the House. Lawmakers who wanted to increase payments for cotton and wheat farmers in their districts were able to bring in support from representatives from districts whose citizens could benefit from food aid.

“That was the first coalition building between the two interests,” Coppess said. “But it was pretty intense. And it was an uneasy alliance from the start.”

Since then, the farm bill in many ways has become a food bill. Three-quarters of the mandatory spending in the bill falls under the nutrition title, which includes SNAP, the largest U.S. program that addresses hunger.

The program, formerly called food stamps, supplements food budgets for low-income households. Anti-hunger groups have joined the outside interests pushing for the bill every five years.

But with such a large funding line, the nutrition program has become a target for Republicans who want to cut it to offset other spending in the bill.

“The dispute is all the pay-fors,” Peterson said. “And that has been the issue for the last three farm bills and issue on this one as well.”

Peterson, who was chairman of the House Agriculture Committee for the 2008 farm bill and was the top Democrat on the committee for the 2013 and 2018 bills, said partisan division on the committee is not unfamiliar at this phase of the process.

The farm bills he worked on also had partisan votes in the House but eventually found support from both sides after conferencing with the Senate.

“At the end of the day, every one of those bills was partisan, until we got through the conference committee, and then at that point it was bipartisan, because the Senate brought some of that to the table,” Peterson said. “So, kind of, what’s going on here went on the last three farm bills.”

The most recent farm bill in 2018 was marked by contentious partisan debate centered on SNAP’s work requirements and other eligibility rules.

The House Agriculture Committee’s bill that year initially failed on the House floor and later squeaked through on a 213-211 vote. Twenty Republicans joined all House Democrats in voting against that bill.

After reconciling with the Senate bill and the removal of some of the contentious changes to SNAP, most Democrats flipped their votes in support and the House agreed to the final conference report in a bipartisan vote of 369-47. The dissenting votes included 44 Republicans and three Democrats.

The partisan division over the nutrition title creates new fault lines for the farm bill.

Historically, farm bill alliances were more regional than partisan. They were built on a common ground of support for shared crops or producers: cotton in the South, corn in the Midwest and wheat in the Western Plains.

“What was our biggest issue back in the four farm bills that I wrote was not Republican versus Democrat. It was usually Midwest against the Southeast or the Northeast or the Southwest from a crop standpoint,” former Senator Saxby Chambliss said in an interview.

Chambliss, a Republican from Georgia, was on the House Agriculture Committee from 1995 to 2002 and the Senate Agriculture Committee 2005 to 2011, which included a stint as chairman and ranking member.

“There’s a different political dynamic that exists in the Senate today that did not exist when I was there,”&nbsp; Chambliss said. “How much of that bleeds into the farm bill? I don’t know the answer to that, but obviously it’s a little more acrimonious than what I ever experienced.”

As partisan politics have become more entrenched in regions of the country, with the South becoming more closely aligned with the Republican Party, it has played out in farm-bill politics.

“You see a staunch realignment around where the regional and the partisan are now very similar,” said Coppess.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/7/1625596705829.png" alt="Partisan gridlock in Congress has led to a stalemate on the current farm bill, which provides crop subsidies and nutrition assistance. Hays Post photo" />
 <figcaption>Partisan gridlock in Congress has led to a stalemate on the current farm bill, which provides crop subsidies and nutrition assistance. Hays Post photo</figcaption>
 </figure>BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://kansasreflector.com/author/allison-winter/">ALLISON WINTER</a>WASHINGTON — The stalemate over the current farm bill may be solidifying a new era in farm politics as it joins the last three farm bills in a trend of delays and partisan division — a contrast from the legislation’s history of bipartisanship.Every five years, Congress is tasked with drafting a new federal farm bill. The omnibus law that began 90 years ago as various kinds of payments to support farmers now has an impact far beyond the farm, with programs to create wildlife habitat, address climate change and provide the nation’s largest federal nutrition program.The current farm bill process, already nearly a year behind schedule, is at an impasse as Democrats and Republicans clash over how to pay for the bill and whether to place limits on nutrition and climate programs. The previous farm bill expired in September 2023 and has been extended through the end of this September.Historically, farm bills were completed within a few months of their expiration date. Ten of the 13 farm bills since 1965 were enacted by December 31 in the year of their expirations. But three of the four farm bills since 2008 went beyond that date.The last three bills — including the 2018 bill, which is the one recent version that passed on time — each had partisan disagreements about spending.The trend represents a change in how the once-bipartisan legislation is viewed.“The last two farm bills were the anomaly,” said Jonathan Coppess, a professor of Agricultural Law and Policy at the University of Illinois who has written a history of the farm bill. “Now that it has been three in a row, I’m not sure that holds.”A recent&nbsp;<a href="https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R45210.pdf" target="_blank">report</a>&nbsp;from the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service notes that starting in 2008, farm bills have been subject to delays, vetoes and insufficient votes to pass on the floor.The report concluded: “Over time, farm bills have tended to become more complicated and politically sensitive. As a result, the timeline for reauthorization has become less certain.”<h2>Spending debate</h2>That uncertainty is true of the current farm bill, as Republicans in the House and Senate push for spending limits that Democrats say are non-starters.“I don’t think we’re close to getting a farm bill done until the folks who are negotiating the farm bill are realistic about what’s doable within a constrained resource environment,” Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said in an interview on the radio program&nbsp;<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DjdcUT0r3o" target="_blank">AgriTalk</a>&nbsp;June 21.The Republican-led House Agriculture Committee approved its farm bill proposal&nbsp;<a href="https://idahocapitalsun.com/2024/05/24/farm-bill-advances-from-u-s-house-panel-but-faces-a-tough-row-to-hoe/" target="_blank">largely on party lines</a>&nbsp;at the end of May, after hours of debate and complaints from Democrats that the process had not been as bipartisan as in years past.Four Democrats voted for the bill in committee, but they joined 20 other Democrats on the committee in a “dissenting views” letter expressing “genuine concern over the trajectory of the Majority’s partisan farm bill” — which they predicted would be stuck in delay and dysfunction without significant changes.The Senate Agriculture Committee has yet to vote. The Republican and Democratic leaders of the committee have each put forward contrasting bills and expressed their frustration.<h2>‘The most frustrating time’</h2>Senate Agriculture Committee Chairwoman Debbie&nbsp; Stabenow, a Michigan Democrat who is retiring after this term, has called the process the “most frustrating” of her career and said she would not let the Republican approach for the farm bill be her legacy.“I’ve actually been involved in six farm bills and led on three of them, and this has been the most frustrating time,” said Stabenow&nbsp;<a href="https://michiganadvance.com/2024/06/26/stabenow-says-gop-farm-bill-is-not-balanced-and-wont-pass-through-the-us-senate/" target="_blank">in an interview with&nbsp;Michigan Advance</a>&nbsp;at the end of June. “Because it’s so much more partisan than usual and particularly around food assistance.”Partisan division is not uncommon in today’s Congress but is notable on the farm bill, which had historically brought together lawmakers from both sides of the aisle. Bipartisan support can be necessary for final passage because the size of the $1.5 trillion farm bill means it inevitably loses some votes from fiscal conservatives and others.“If you don’t have a bipartisan bill, this is not going to happen, and that is no matter who’s in charge. The margins are too close to be able to get this done without bipartisan support,” said Collin Peterson, a former Democratic House member from Minnesota and Agriculture Committee Chairman.The&nbsp;<a href="https://utahnewsdispatch.com/2024/05/24/u-s-house-panel-debates-nutrition-benefit-changes-farm-bill/" target="_blank">key dispute</a>&nbsp;for Democrats this year is a funding calculation that would place limits on the “Thrifty Food Plan” formula that calculates benefits for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, SNAP.Republicans are using the limits to offset other spending in the bill on crop subsidies. The top Republican on the Senate Agriculture Committee, Arkansas Sen. John Boozman, said he wants to put “more farm in the farm bill.”Peterson, who is now the head of an eponymous consulting firm, said in an interview with States Newsroom that Republicans would likely have to make changes to the nutrition title to get a bill to final passage.“It is unrealistic to think they are going to get this done without significant changes in that part of the bill,” he said.<h2>‘An uneasy alliance’ from the start</h2>The nutrition program that is at the center of the impasse was added to the legislation 50 years ago to help build a coalition of wide-ranging bipartisan support.Lawmakers added the nutrition title to the farm bill in 1973, a move that widened the vested interest in the bill in the House. Lawmakers who wanted to increase payments for cotton and wheat farmers in their districts were able to bring in support from representatives from districts whose citizens could benefit from food aid.“That was the first coalition building between the two interests,” Coppess said. “But it was pretty intense. And it was an uneasy alliance from the start.”Since then, the farm bill in many ways has become a food bill. Three-quarters of the mandatory spending in the bill falls under the nutrition title, which includes SNAP, the largest U.S. program that addresses hunger.The program, formerly called food stamps, supplements food budgets for low-income households. Anti-hunger groups have joined the outside interests pushing for the bill every five years.But with such a large funding line, the nutrition program has become a target for Republicans who want to cut it to offset other spending in the bill.“The dispute is all the pay-fors,” Peterson said. “And that has been the issue for the last three farm bills and issue on this one as well.”Peterson, who was chairman of the House Agriculture Committee for the 2008 farm bill and was the top Democrat on the committee for the 2013 and 2018 bills, said partisan division on the committee is not unfamiliar at this phase of the process.The farm bills he worked on also had partisan votes in the House but eventually found support from both sides after conferencing with the Senate.“At the end of the day, every one of those bills was partisan, until we got through the conference committee, and then at that point it was bipartisan, because the Senate brought some of that to the table,” Peterson said. “So, kind of, what’s going on here went on the last three farm bills.”The most recent farm bill in 2018 was marked by contentious partisan debate centered on SNAP’s work requirements and other eligibility rules.The House Agriculture Committee’s bill that year initially failed on the House floor and later squeaked through on a 213-211 vote. Twenty Republicans joined all House Democrats in voting against that bill.After reconciling with the Senate bill and the removal of some of the contentious changes to SNAP, most Democrats flipped their votes in support and the House agreed to the final conference report in a bipartisan vote of 369-47. The dissenting votes included 44 Republicans and three Democrats.<h2>A trend toward fracture</h2>The partisan division over the nutrition title creates new fault lines for the farm bill.Historically, farm bill alliances were more regional than partisan. They were built on a common ground of support for shared crops or producers: cotton in the South, corn in the Midwest and wheat in the Western Plains.“What was our biggest issue back in the four farm bills that I wrote was not Republican versus Democrat. It was usually Midwest against the Southeast or the Northeast or the Southwest from a crop standpoint,” former Senator Saxby Chambliss said in an interview.Chambliss, a Republican from Georgia, was on the House Agriculture Committee from 1995 to 2002 and the Senate Agriculture Committee 2005 to 2011, which included a stint as chairman and ranking member.“There’s a different political dynamic that exists in the Senate today that did not exist when I was there,”&nbsp; Chambliss said. “How much of that bleeds into the farm bill? I don’t know the answer to that, but obviously it’s a little more acrimonious than what I ever experienced.”As partisan politics have become more entrenched in regions of the country, with the South becoming more closely aligned with the Republican Party, it has played out in farm-bill politics.“You see a staunch realignment around where the regional and the partisan are now very similar,” said Coppess.

‘Frustrating’ partisan stalemate: the new normal for farm bills?

WASHINGTON (AP) — The&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/us-supreme-court">Supreme Court</a>&nbsp;ended its term by ruling for the first time that former presidents have broad immunity from prosecution, a decision that almost certainly means Donald Trump won't stand trial before the November election. That closely watched ruling, which drew sharp dissent from the minority justices, was among a cluster of consequential opinions handed down in the court's busy final few weeks.

Here's a look at the major cases the court decided this year.

Ruled for the first time that former presidents have broad immunity from prosecution in a decision that extends the delay in Donald Trump's trial in Washington on charges of election interference and all but rules out a trial before the November election. The justices returned the case to U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who would preside over a trial. She must now sort out what is left of special counsel Jack Smith's indictment of the former president.

Majority: Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Clarence Thomas, Justice Samuel Alito, Justice Neil Gorsuch, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, Justice Amy Coney Barrett

Dissent: Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Justice Elena Kagan, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson

Ruled unanimously that states cannot invoke the post-Civil War “insurrection clause” to keep candidates for president and Congress off the ballot. The justices reversed a ruling by the Colorado Supreme Court finding that former President Donald Trump, as part of his effort to overturn his election loss in 2020, intentionally organized and incited the crowd of supporters who violently attacked the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, to prevent the peaceful transfer of power.

Majority (unsigned opinion): Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Barrett (in part)

Concurring in judgment: Sotomayor, Kagan, Jackson, Barrett

Narrowed a federal obstruction charge that has been used against hundreds of people who took part in the violent assault on the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, as well as Trump. The court ruled in the case of a former Pennsylvania police officer and returned it to a lower court to determine if the obstruction charge, enacted in 2002 and meant to discourage tampering with documents sought in investigations, can be used against him. The decision also could have implications for Trump's prosecution on election interference charges.

Majority: Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Jackson

Unanimously threw out a legal challenge from anti-abortion doctors to the FDA's initial approval of mifepristone in 2000 and more recent decisions easing access to the medication, one of two pills used in medication abortions. The justices determined that the doctors did not have the legal right, or standing, to sue, reversing an appellate ruling that would have rolled back some FDA decisions that make mifepristone easier to obtain, including receiving the drug by mail, and allow it to be used for longer in pregnancy.

Majority: Kavanaugh, Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, Barrett, Jackson

Overturned a&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-chevron-regulations-environment-fish-e0c83212c892887860f7800c1ae1e02b">40-year-old decision</a>&nbsp;that has been cited thousands of times in federal court cases and used to uphold regulations on the environment, public health, workplace safety and consumer protections. The court decision colloquially known as Chevron, long targeted by conservative and business interests, called on judges to defer to federal regulators when the words of a statute are not crystal clear. The Supreme Court held that judges, not regulators, should decide the meaning of federal laws.

Majority: Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Barrett

Upheld a 1994 law intended to protect victims of domestic violence. The law prohibits people who are under domestic violence restraining orders from having guns. The 8-1 decision reversed an appellate ruling striking down the law based on the Supreme Court's 2022 decision expanding gun rights.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/12/1672235865420.png" alt="Supreme Court Credit: Fred Schilling, Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States" />
 <figcaption>Supreme Court Credit: Fred Schilling, Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States</figcaption>
 </figure>WASHINGTON (AP) — The&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/us-supreme-court">Supreme Court</a>&nbsp;ended its term by ruling for the first time that former presidents have broad immunity from prosecution, a decision that almost certainly means Donald Trump won't stand trial before the November election. That closely watched ruling, which drew sharp dissent from the minority justices, was among a cluster of consequential opinions handed down in the court's busy final few weeks.Here's a look at the major cases the court decided this year.<h2>Presidential immunity</h2>Ruled for the first time that former presidents have broad immunity from prosecution in a decision that extends the delay in Donald Trump's trial in Washington on charges of election interference and all but rules out a trial before the November election. The justices returned the case to U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who would preside over a trial. She must now sort out what is left of special counsel Jack Smith's indictment of the former president.Majority: Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Clarence Thomas, Justice Samuel Alito, Justice Neil Gorsuch, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, Justice Amy Coney BarrettDissent: Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Justice Elena Kagan, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson<h2>Insurrection clause</h2>Ruled unanimously that states cannot invoke the post-Civil War “insurrection clause” to keep candidates for president and Congress off the ballot. The justices reversed a ruling by the Colorado Supreme Court finding that former President Donald Trump, as part of his effort to overturn his election loss in 2020, intentionally organized and incited the crowd of supporters who violently attacked the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, to prevent the peaceful transfer of power.Majority (unsigned opinion): Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Barrett (in part)Concurring in judgment: Sotomayor, Kagan, Jackson, Barrett<h2>Jan. 6</h2>Narrowed a federal obstruction charge that has been used against hundreds of people who took part in the violent assault on the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, as well as Trump. The court ruled in the case of a former Pennsylvania police officer and returned it to a lower court to determine if the obstruction charge, enacted in 2002 and meant to discourage tampering with documents sought in investigations, can be used against him. The decision also could have implications for Trump's prosecution on election interference charges.Majority: Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, JacksonDissent: Barrett, Sotomayor, Kagan<h2>Abortion pill</h2>Unanimously threw out a legal challenge from anti-abortion doctors to the FDA's initial approval of mifepristone in 2000 and more recent decisions easing access to the medication, one of two pills used in medication abortions. The justices determined that the doctors did not have the legal right, or standing, to sue, reversing an appellate ruling that would have rolled back some FDA decisions that make mifepristone easier to obtain, including receiving the drug by mail, and allow it to be used for longer in pregnancy.Majority: Kavanaugh, Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, Barrett, Jackson<h2>Chevron</h2>Overturned a&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-chevron-regulations-environment-fish-e0c83212c892887860f7800c1ae1e02b">40-year-old decision</a>&nbsp;that has been cited thousands of times in federal court cases and used to uphold regulations on the environment, public health, workplace safety and consumer protections. The court decision colloquially known as Chevron, long targeted by conservative and business interests, called on judges to defer to federal regulators when the words of a statute are not crystal clear. The Supreme Court held that judges, not regulators, should decide the meaning of federal laws.Majority: Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, BarrettDissent: Kagan, Sotomayor, Jackson<h2>Guns</h2>Upheld a 1994 law intended to protect victims of domestic violence. The law prohibits people who are under domestic violence restraining orders from having guns. The 8-1 decision reversed an appellate ruling striking down the law based on the Supreme Court's 2022 decision expanding gun rights.Majority: Roberts, Alito, Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Barrett, JacksonDissent: Thomas<h2>Wealth tax</h2>Upheld a tax on foreign income that was enacted by a Republican-controlled Congress and signed into law by Trump. By a 7-2 vote, the justices rejected an effort by conservative and business interests to strike down the tax as a violation of the Constitution, which might have doomed a much-discussed but never-enacted wealth tax on billionaires.Majority: Kavanaugh, Roberts, Sotomayor, Kagan, JacksonConcurring in judgment: Barrett, AlitoDissent: Thomas, Gorsuch<h2>Redistricting</h2>Preserved a Republican-held South Carolina congressional district in a 6-3 decision, reversing a lower court ruling that found the state Legislature discriminated against Black voters. Dissenting liberal justices warned the court was insulating states from claims of unconstitutional racial gerrymandering. State lawmakers moved 30,000 Black residents out of the district to strengthen Rep. Nancy Mace's hold on it.Majority: Alito, Roberts, Thomas, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, BarrettDissent: Kagan, Sotomayor, Jackson<h2>Bump stocks</h2>Struck down a ban on&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-guns-bump-stocks-b3bd1b4163d78514a6d5acc5b44c8b3d">bump stocks</a>, rapid-fire gun accessories used in the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/las-vegas-mass-shooting">deadliest mass shooting</a>&nbsp;in modern U.S. history. The 6-3 decision found that the Trump administration overstepped when it changed course from predecessors and banned bump stocks, which allow a rate of fire comparable to machine guns. In a dissent, liberal justices warned the decision could have “deadly consequences."Majority: Thomas, Roberts, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, BarrettDissent: Sotomayor, Kagan, Jackson<h2>Consumer Protection</h2>Upheld the method of funding for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which does not depend on yearly appropriations from Congress. By a 7-2 vote, the court reversed a ruling by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that found the funding structure violated the Constitution.Majority: Thomas, Roberts, Sotomayor, Kagan, Kavanaugh, Barrett, JacksonDissent: Alito, Gorsuch<h2>NRA and free speech</h2>The court unanimously cleared the way for the National Rifle Association to sue a former New York state official. Backed in part by the Biden administration and represented by the ACLU, the gun-rights group said Maria Vullo pressured companies to blacklist it following the mass shooting at a high school in Parkland, Florida. The opinion said the First Amendment prohibits government officials from using their power to punish or suppress speech.Majority: Sotomayor, Thomas, Roberts, Alito, Kagan, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Barrett, Jackson<h2>Purdue Pharma</h2>By a 5-4 vote, rejected a&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/purdue-pharma-trustee-bankruptcy-sackler-opioid-oxycontin-713134927e34ef071803b3983ddd01ac">nationwide settlement with OxyContin maker Purdue Pharma</a>&nbsp;that would have allocated billions of dollars to combat&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/opioids">the opioid epidemic</a>, but also provided a legal shield for members of the Sackler family who own the company. The settlement had been on hold since last summer after the Supreme Court agreed to weigh in.Majority: Gorsuch, Thomas, Alito, Barrett, JacksonDissent: Kavanaugh, Roberts, Sotomayor, Kagan<h2>Air pollution</h2>Voted 5-4 to pause the Environmental Protection Agency’s&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-epa-good-neighbor-air-pollution-rules-9d29c120d276f4bad5b3ea2c75d107ff">air pollution-fighting “good neighbor” plan</a>&nbsp;while legal challenges continue, in response to a plea from Republican-led, energy-producing states and the steel industry.Majority: Gorsuch, Roberts, Thomas, Alito, KavanaughDissent: Barrett, Sotomayor, Kagan, Jackson<h2>SEC</h2>Ruled 6-3 that people facing civil fraud complaints from the Securities and Exchange Commission have the right to a jury trial in federal court, rather than be limited to an in-house proceeding. The decision stripped the agency of a major tool in fighting securities fraud and could have far-reaching effects on other regulatory agencies.Majority: Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, BarrettDissent: Sotomayor, Kagan, Jackson<h2>Social media and governmental coercion</h2>Threw out a lawsuit by Republican-led states that claimed federal officials unconstitutionally coerced social media platforms to take down controversial social media posts on topics including COVID-19 and election security. The court voted 6-3 that the states and other parties had no legal right, or standing, to sue over their claim that the government leaned on the platforms to limit conservative points of view.Majority: Barrett, Roberts, Sotomayor, Kagan, Kavanaugh, JacksonDissent: Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch<h2>Social media and state regulation</h2>In a limited ruling, the court kept on hold&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-social-media-florida-texas-19180ad0a9bdf48ddb77f14a5e335545">social media laws in Texas and Florida</a>&nbsp;that would limit how Facebook, TikTok, X, YouTube and other social media platforms regulate content posted by their users. But the court's majority recognized that the platforms are much like newspapers and have a constitutional right to make choices about what to include and exclude from their space. The cases will continue in federal appeals courts: One court had upheld the Texas' law; another found the Florida law probably is unconstitutional.Majority: Kagan, Roberts, Sotomayor, Kavanaugh, Barrett, JacksonConcurring in the judgment: Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch<h2>Emergency abortions</h2>The Supreme Court cleared the way for Idaho hospitals to provide emergency abortions, for now. In a limited order, the court found it should not have gotten involved in the case over Idaho’s strict abortion ban so quickly. By a 6-3 vote it reinstated a lower court order that had allowed hospitals in the state to perform emergency abortions to protect a pregnant patient’s health.Majority: Roberts, Sotomayor, Kagan, Kavanaugh, Barrett, JacksonDissent: Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch<h2>Homelessness</h2>The justices found that cities can enforce bans on homeless people sleeping outside in public places. The majority found such laws don't violate the constitutional prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment when shelter space is lacking. The opinion overturned an appeals court ruling that applied to nine states in the West, including California, which is home to one-third of the nation's homeless population.Majority: Gorsuch, Thomas, Alito, Roberts, Kavanaugh, BarrettDissent: Sotomayor, Kagan, Jackson