Jury awards former California cop $10M for harassment claims
Former police officer Ashley Cummins was awarded $10 million in damages after suing the National City Police Department for harassment and discrimination. She claimed the department denied her opportunities due to her gender and sexual orientation.
During the six-week trial, evidence showed Cummins was targeted for harassment by male officers between 2020 and 2021.
After leaving the department, Cummins struggled to find work with another police agency.
Full Story
A former California police officer who sued the National City Police Department for gender-based harassment and discrimination in 2022 has been awarded $10 million in damages.
Claims of discrimination
Ashley Cummins filed a complaint in San Diego County, which she later amended in 2023. Cummins, who is openly gay, claimed she was denied opportunities due to both her gender and sexual orientation.
The civil lawsuit detailed how Cummins joined the National City Police Department in 2018 as an 8-year police veteran. In court documents, Cummins described her experience at NCPD, alleging male colleagues told her that women were only welcomed if they were either submissive or slept with them.
During the six-week trial, her legal team presented evidence from 2020 and 2021 showing Cummins was repeatedly targeted and harassed by fellow officers. Her attorneys also highlighted an incident in which a K-9 position, for which Cummins was qualified, was given to a male officer who lacked the necessary experience for the job.
After leaving the department, Cummins struggled to find employment with another police agency, as her former supervisor actively reached out to prevent her from being hired, labeling her as “trouble.”
National City considers legal options
In a statement to NBC News, the city’s attorney expressed disappointment over the outcome but reaffirmed the city’s commitment “to ensuring a fair and inclusive workplace for all employees.”
National City and its police department can file an appeal or pursue additional legal options.
Maryland bill to address slavery and reparations awaits governor’s decision
Maryland’s Senate Bill 587, which passed with a majority vote of 101-36, would create a reparations commission to address the lasting impacts of slavery. The commission’s plan will be presented to Gov. Wes Moore by the summer of 2027.
The bill proposes multiple forms of reparations, including financial compensation, social services, homeownership support and educational aid.
While many lawmakers support the bill, opposition exists, with some arguing for a reduction in reparations and restrictions on funding to Maryland residents only.
Full Story
The abolition of slavery was ratified into the U.S. Constitution in 1865 through the 13th Amendment. Now, the governor of Maryland will consider a new bill to address the lasting impacts of this period on within the state.
SB 587 would create a state commission
Through Senate Bill 587, the state of Maryland would create a reparations commission. On Wednesday, April 2, the bill passed with a majority vote of 101 in favor and 36 against.
Many Maryland lawmakers want to correct historical wrongs, as history shows slaves played a crucial role in building the state’s economy and society. However, Maryland also served as a model for other states on the systematic practice of enslaving people, later adopted and called “the slave codes.”
Support for the bill
Delegate Robin L. Grammer Jr., R-District 6, voiced his support for the bill while expressing concern for the lawmakers opposed to the legislation.
“I can’t understand why we would stand to talk about people who lived between 1877 and 1965 and not think about the group of people who came this year, came to see us in committee to tell us their horrific stories about how they were enslaved and raped at the hands of employees at the state of Maryland,” Grammer said.
The bill proposes several ways to make amends, including official apologies, financial compensation and rebates on property taxes. It also offers social services, waivers for licensing and permit fees.
It may also assist with down payments on homes, give incentives for starting businesses, provide child care assistance, debt relief and tuition waivers for those seeking higher education, suggestions that officials say will help address racial discrimination still present within Maryland.
Delegate Stephanie Smith, D-District 45, emphasized the historical injustice to be addressed.
“I think we’ve forgotten there were taxpayers in the late 1800s, in the early 1900s through the mid-20th century who did not get the benefit of the taxes they paid,” Smith said. “There were roads they paid for they could not drive down. There were schools they paid for they could not enter. There were colleges they paid for they could not gain admission to.”
Committee must present findings by 2027
The Legislative Black Caucus of Maryland made the bill a top priority this session, stressing that it’s not just about money. When the bill was introduced in January, they pushed that the bill was about creating change.
The committee will study ways to support and uplift communities across Maryland. A detailed plan is expected to be presented to Gov. Wes Moore, D, by the summer of 2027.
Opposition to the bill
House lawmakers who opposed the bill argued to reduce the proposed reparations by half, or restrict the funds to Maryland residents only, insisting that descendants of slaves who live outside the state should not be included.
Delegate Jason C. Buckel, R-District 1B, opposed the bill, stating that the issue of reparations could not address the nation’s entire history.
“We cannot remedy the entire problem of the United States of America,” Buckel said.
Opposing lawmakers debated that the bill would split the community and create a racial divide.
Delegate Matthew Morgan, R-District 29A, argued against the bill, saying, “You’re either in the oppressor class or you’re the oppressed class. In America you don’t get equity, you get equality, meaning equal rules for everyone.”
The bill is now awaiting Gov. Moore’s decision. He could approve it or turn it down. The Associated Press reports that Moore has shown willingness to consider the legislation but has also acknowledged the budget challenges Maryland is facing right now.
If Gov. Moore signs the bill in Maryland, it will go into effect on July 1.
Other states with reparations for Black residents
California was one of the first states to allocate millions of dollars for reparations, aimed at supporting Black residents who have endured systemic challenges and racial injustices. In the District of Columbia, the 2025 budget proposal includes $1.5 million to study whether reparations are feasible and to explore solutions to address the long-lasting impacts of slavery.
In Chicago, residents are making efforts to close the wealth, opportunity and housing gaps for African Americans through reparations. Most of the individuals receiving payments are elderly residents who suffered the most harm between 1919 and 1969.
Texas investigating ‘EPIC City,’ a proposed Muslim-centric community
A proposed Muslim-centric housing development, “EPIC City,” has drawn opposition in Texas, facing criticism from local residents and state officials. The project is under multiple state investigations, with concerns over religious influence and fair housing laws.
Gov. Greg Abbott spoke out against the project, and Texas agencies are investigating potential legal violations, including discrimination and financial harm.
Supporters argue that the development is inclusive and lawful, but no official plans have been submitted, leaving the project’s future uncertain.
Full Story
A proposed Muslim-centric housing development near Dallas, Texas, faced significant opposition during a Collin County Commissioner’s meeting this week and is now under multiple state investigations.
The project, known as “EPIC City,” is still in its early stages, with no official builder plans submitted to the county. However, the East Plano Islamic Center (EPIC), the mosque behind the initiative, has a promotional video outlining its vision that has garnered attention.
What’s in the video?
According to the video, EPIC City aims to be a diverse and inclusive housing community.
“EPIC City — a housing community where we celebrate diversity and promote unity. Our community is designed to foster a sense of belonging and inclusivity for all residents, regardless of their background.”
EPIC City Promotional Video
Despite this message of inclusivity, the project emphasizes Islam as a central aspect of its 400-acre development, which is planned to include homes, businesses and religious centers.
“EPIC City is more than just a neighborhood. It’s a way of life, a meticulously designed community that brings Islam to the forefront,” the video states.
“We look forward to welcoming everyone there. We ask Allah to help us complete this project.”
Gov. Abbott responds
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, took to social media platform X to express his disapproval of the project, stating:
“To be clear, Sharia law is not allowed in Texas. Nor are Sharia cities. Nor are ‘no-go zones,’ which this project seems to imply. Bottom line. The project as proposed in the video is not allowed in Texas.”
To be clear, Sharia law is not allowed in Texas.
Nor are Sharia cities.
Nor are “no go zones“ which this project seems to imply.
Bottom line. The project as proposed in the video is not allowed in Texas. https://t.co/5Sw5VdXD31
For the first time, residents were given the opportunity to voice their opinions on EPIC City at a recent county commissioner’s meeting. The overwhelming majority spoke against the project.
“We all want safe, inclusive communities that require transparency, accountability and respect for the rule of law. EPIC City fails on all three,” one resident said.
Another speaker expressed concerns over the potential for segregation.
“Our country has relentlessly fought against segregation. To allow a new group to claim and execute a 400-acre segregated city is the height of insanity. It is a violation of our fair housing laws,” they said.
Concerns about religious law were also raised.
“This Sharia law is so far away from our Constitution’s protection of inalienable rights and freedom of speech that it is totally incongruent with anything we can allow in the state of Texas,” one speaker said.
During the hours-long public comment session, only two residents spoke in support of the project.
“These individuals deserve fair treatment and real representation,” one resident said. “We must advocate for an inclusive Texas where everyone, regardless of race, religion and background, can thrive. It’s disappointing that these so-called Christians with American values are quick to abandon those values and the Constitution.”
State investigations launched
The state of Texas has initiated five separate investigations into EPIC City, the East Plano Islamic Center and the investment group “Community Capital Partners” (CCP), which was established by EPIC.
Abbott addressed these investigations, stating:
“The proposed EPIC compound in Collin County has serious legal issues. A dozen state agencies are investigating it, the Attorney General will look into it, and legislators are considering laws to restrict it, as well as laws to prevent foreign adversaries from buying land in Texas.”
The proposed EPIC compound in Collin Co. has serious legal issues.
A dozen state agencies are investigating it, the Attorney General will look into it, and legislators are considering laws to restrict it, as well as laws to prevent foreign adversaries from buying land in Texas.
The Texas Rangers are investigating potential criminal activities linked to the project. Other agencies involved include:
Texas Workforce Commission: Investigating potential discrimination violations of the Texas Fair Housing Act.
Texas State Securities Board: Looking into potential financial harm to Texans.
Texas Funeral Services Commission: Alleging that EPIC has been running illegal funeral service operations.
Support for EPIC City
Texas Democratic Rep. Salman Bhojani, the first Muslim elected official in Texas history, voiced support for the project and criticized the investigations.
Speaking to CBS News, he said, “I think this is just adding more fuel to the fire. I know a lot of developments in north Texas that exactly mimic [EPIC City]. So, there’s nothing illegal about that. This is something that we should be protecting in the state of Texas, not demonizing it.”
Developers reaffirm inclusivity
During the commissioner’s meeting, EPIC’s public relations representative, Erin Ragsdale, assured county leaders that the development would be open to everyone and comply with all legal requirements.
“The idea for EPIC City came from the vision of building a master-planned neighborhood for all generations,” Ragsdale said.Their vision is to build an inclusive community for everyone. I don’t think that we would be here today at this early stage if there were plans floating around for a master-planned community with a place of worship that was Christian.”
Community Capital Partners also released a statement to local news outlets, stating, “The project is still in the early planning phase, and no plans have been submitted to the county. CCP intends to follow all applicable rules, regulations and laws and intends to develop an inclusive community that all citizens can be proud of.”
No decisions made
Since no official plans for EPIC City have been submitted, the commissioners did not make any decisions regarding the project’s future. No additional hearings have been scheduled to discuss the development further.
For now, EPIC City remains an idea, and the organizations behind it remain under investigation.
Wisconsin school district settles lawsuit with former teacher for $20,000
A Wisconsin school district settled a lawsuit with former teacher Jordan Cernek for $20,000. The settlement comes after his contract was not renewed when he refused to refer to students using their preferred names or pronouns, citing his religious beliefs.
Cernek’s lawsuit, filed in May 2023, argued that the school violated his First Amendment rights to free speech and religion, as well as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits employment discrimination.
The settlement follows a similar case in Virginia. The West Point Public School Board agreed to pay a former teacher $575,000 in 2024. The teacher was fired for not using a transgender student’s preferred pronouns.
Full Story
A Wisconsin school district settled a lawsuit with a former teacher for $20,000. His contract was not renewed when he refused to refer to students using their preferred names or pronouns, citing his religion.
“It was told to us at a staff meeting there that we had to address students by their preferred names and their preferred pronouns because of Title IX and gender identity,” Cernek said. “A push that was coming from the federal government, I think, at that point.”
What’s the background of the lawsuit?
Cernek’s attorneys said he informed the Argyle School District in southern Wisconsin of his religious objection to the new policy. He agreed not to use any names when referring to students. The school warned him that failure to use preferred names or pronouns would result in disciplinary action.
Six months later, the school district did not renew Cernek’s contract.
What laws did the school system allegedly break?
Jordan Cernek filed a lawsuit against the Argyle School District in May 2023 after the school let him go, according to his law firm, the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty (WILL). The lawsuit argued that the school violated his First Amendment rights to free speech and religion. The group also claimed the school violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits employment discrimination.
The superintendent confirmed to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that the district’s insurance company decided to settle with Cernek for $20,000.
A similar case in Virginia resulted in the West Point Public School Board agreeing to pay a former teacher $575,000. The teacher sued the school after they were fired for not using a transgender student’s preferred pronouns.
New Dept. of Education website accepts DEI complaints about schools
The U.S. Department of Education has launched a new website called enddei.ed.gov. The launch came Thursday, just hours ahead of a deadline by the Trump administration ordering institutions to end discrimination or their federal funding could be jeopardized.
The first-of-its-kind online portal is for people to submit discrimination complaints.
The department said that submissions will be used in potential investigations, with a promise to those who submit that the complaints will maintain confidentiality.
Full Story
The U.S. Department of Education under President Donald Trump has launched a new website. It came online on Thursday, Feb. 27, ahead of a deadline by the Trump administration, which ordered academic institutions to end discrimination or their federal funding could be jeopardized.
The department said that submissions will be used in potential investigations, with a promise to those who submit that the complaints will maintain confidentiality.
Who is behind the effort?
Moms of Liberty cofounder Tiffany Justice, who worked to launch the website, told ABC News in a statement, “DEI needs to go. DEI has re-segregated our schools in many ways, and our children are forced to see race in ways that they never did.”
Justice added that the website shows President Donald Trump’s Department of Education giving power back to parents.
Justice said that parents want schools to focus on basic subjects like reading, writing and math, rather than “pushing critical race theory, rogue sex education and divisive ideologies.”
The new website echoes Justice’s concerns, stating, “Schools should focus on learning,” and features four boxes to fill out, including email, school district, ZIP code and the complaint itself.
How is it connected to a ‘Dear Colleague’ memo?
The website’s launch comes after a “Dear Colleague” letter from acting Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Craig Trainor, who said that Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 will be strictly enforced and racial discrimination is “illegal.”
The letter also criticizes diversity, equity and inclusion programs.
Education groups opposing the memo are also suing the department, its acting secretary Denise Carter, as well as Trainor. The lawsuit states that the request “irreparably” harms students and teachers, and it violates free speech rights. The groups argue the letter is too vague and not enforceable.
The memo gave agencies until Friday, Feb. 28, to comply with the Department of Education’s request.
SCOTUS signals support for straight woman’s reverse discrimination case
The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in a case that may redefine reverse discrimination claims, with justices appearing likely to side with Marlean Ames. A ruling is expected by the end of June.
The case questions whether majority group members should have a higher burden of proof in discrimination claims, with justices suggesting that Title VII should apply equally to all employees.
A ruling in Ames’ favor could impact workplace discrimination claims, including lawsuits alleging racial bias due to DEI policies, while some Democratic lawmakers oppose the court’s potential decision.
Full Story
The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments Wednesday, Feb. 26, in a case that could reshape how reverse discrimination claims are handled under federal law. The justices appeared likely to side with Marlean Ames, a 60-year-old straight woman who alleges she was demoted and denied a promotion due to her sexual orientation, leading to a significant pay cut.
Justices suggest favorable ruling for Ames
During oral arguments, Justice Brett Kavanaugh suggested that the case could be resolved with “a really short opinion that says discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, whether it’s because you’re gay or because you’re straight, is prohibited, and the rules are the same whichever way that goes.”
“I entirely agree,” said the woman’s attorney, Xiao Wang.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett reinforced this interpretation of Title VII, stating, “It doesn’t matter if she was gay or whether she was straight; she would have the exact same burden and be treated the exact same way under Title VII.”
Justice Neil Gorsuch noted the unusual level of agreement in the case, calling a ruling in Ames’ favor a “wise course” and observing that there was “radical agreement” in the courtroom.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor also suggested Ames may have a valid claim, remarking that there was “something suspicious” about what happened.
Potential impact on workplace discrimination cases
If the court rules in Ames’ favor, the decision could significantly impact workplace discrimination claims. It may make it easier for majority group members to file lawsuits under Title VII, including claims from white employees who allege racial discrimination due to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies.
Some Democratic lawmakers have voiced opposition to the potential outcome.
Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Texas, wrote on X, “To have the Supreme Court lowering the bar for ‘reverse discrimination’ suits is nothing more than privilege and a straight-up slap in the face!”
To have the Supreme Court lowering the bar for 'reverse discrimination' suits is nothing more than privilege and a straight-up slap in the face! https://t.co/HETyzjDibn
Ames sued the Ohio Department of Youth Services, arguing that she faced discrimination because she is straight. She was passed over for a promotion to bureau chief in favor of a gay woman and was later demoted, with her former role being filled by a gay man.
Ames contended that both candidates were less qualified than she was.
A lower appeals court dismissed Ames’ case, ruling that she needed to show “background circumstances” proving that her employer discriminates against majority group members — a standard not applied to minority discrimination claims. Ames challenged this additional burden, arguing that it violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.
Biden and Trump admins showed support for Ames
The Biden administration backed Ames, arguing that Title VII applies equally to all employees and should not impose additional hurdles for majority group members. The Department of Justice, under both the Biden and Trump administrations, has maintained that Title VII protections apply equally to all workers.
The Ohio Department of Youth Services contends that Ames failed to prove her sexual orientation influenced employment decisions, emphasizing that the supervisor responsible for hiring and demotions was straight.
In arguments before the high court, Ohio attorneys acknowledged that “everyone here agrees everyone should be treated equally.”
A decision in the case is expected by the end of June. If the Supreme Court rules in Ames’ favor, it could expand workplace bias lawsuits and reshape how discrimination cases are handled nationwide.
SCOTUS to hear reverse discrimination case on high burden for majority groups
The U.S. Supreme Court will hear a case that could reshape how reverse discrimination claims are handled under federal law. The decision may equal the standards for minority and majority groups to file discrimination lawsuits.
Marlean Ames alleges she was demoted and denied a promotion due to her straight sexual orientation, leading to a significant pay cut.
The Biden administration had supported Ames’ case.
Full Story
The U.S. Supreme Court will hear a case next week that could redefine how so-called “reverse discrimination” claims are handled under federal law. Reverse discrimination refers to bias against majority groups, such as white people and heterosexuals.
Marlean Ames, a 60-year-old straight woman, alleges she was denied a promotion and demoted due to her sexual orientation while working at the Ohio Department of Youth Services. Ames sued her employer, but the case was dismissed by an appeals court.
The panel of judges acknowledged that Ames had standing. However, the panel ruled she failed to show “background circumstances,” additional proof suggesting her employer discriminates against majority groups, to advance her claim.
The judges concluded Ames could not provide this evidence and dismissed the case.
Supreme Court to review appeals court decision
The Supreme Court will now hear arguments and decide whether the appellate court was wrong to require “background circumstances” from Ames, something not needed in discrimination claims from minority groups.
Ames began working at the Ohio Department of Youth Services in 2004 and was promoted to Program Administrator in 2014. In 2019, after being passed over for a Bureau Chief role, she was demoted, leading to a significant pay cut from $47 an hour to $28 an hour.
According to Ames’ suit, the Bureau Chief position she sought was filled by a gay woman, and her former Program Administrator role was filled by a gay man.
Ames argued that both candidates were less qualified than she was for the positions.
Although Ames’ case might seem to align with these conservative efforts, the Biden administration filed a brief supporting Ames.
The federal government argued that Title VII applies equally to all employees without additional hurdles for majority group members.
The Ohio Department of Youth Services maintains that Ames failed to prove her sexual orientation influenced employment decisions, noting that the supervisor responsible for the promotion and demotion decisions was straight.
The Supreme Court will hear the case Wednesday, Feb. 26.
The ruling could make it easier for majority group members to bring reverse discrimination claims under Title VII, potentially expanding the scope of workplace bias lawsuits.
Missouri AG sues Starbucks, alleges discriminatory race and gender policies
Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey filed a lawsuit against Starbucks, alleging the company discriminates based on race and gender. He argues these practices violate federal and state laws.
The lawsuit references the 2023 Supreme Court ruling on race and college admissions.
Bailey’s complaint targets Starbucks’ diversity programs, claiming they create segregation by excluding white men from certain opportunities.
Full Story
Missouri’s top prosecutor has filed a lawsuit against Starbucks, accusing the coffee giant of discriminatory practices based on race and gender within its workforce. Attorney General Andrew Bailey claims the company’s policies violate both federal and state laws.
Allegations of discrimination in pay and promotions
Bailey filed the lawsuit Tuesday, Feb. 11, accusing Starbucks of using race and gender as criteria in both pay and promotions and in its leadership selection. The complaint argues these practices are discriminatory and unlawful under both federal and state law.
In response to the lawsuit’s claims, a Starbucks spokesperson said, “We are deeply committed to creating opportunity for every single one of our partners (employees).”
Reference to 2023 Supreme Court ruling
Bailey’s legal argument references the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2023ruling, which declared individuals must be treated equally when applying to college, regardless of race. Bailey contends the same principle should apply to employers, arguing race should not be a factor in hiring or promotions.
Court documents also reference the Civil Rights Act of 1964, stating, “Congress outlawed all racial discrimination, recognizing that no discrimination based on race is benign, that no action disadvantaging a person because of his color is affirmative.”
Starbucks’ DEI programs
The lawsuit also examines Starbucks’ diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives launched in 2020. The company set goals to diversify its staff by reaching marginalized communities and investing in talent development through training and programs. Bailey argues these initiatives have caused segregation within the company, as white men are excluded from certain opportunities.
Starbucks data reveals nearly 48% of its workforce is white, with less than 5% Asian, 32% Hispanic, and 8% Black. Regarding gender, women make up nearly 71% of the workforce, while men represent just over 28%.
Litigation against IBM
Bailey filed a similar complaint against IBM in 2024, accusing the tech company of violating laws by imposing hiring quotas based on race. That litigation is ongoing, according to Bailey’s office.
Bailey’s lawsuit against Starbucks includes multiple demands, including financial compensation, an acknowledgment from the company that its diversity programs are discriminatory, and a revision of its policies.
Trump bans transgender athletes from women’s sports
President Donald Trump signs an executive order prohibiting transgender women and girls from competing in female sports, claiming the war on women’s sports is over. And the State Department claims Panama is willing to waive fees on American ships using the Panama Canal, despite the Panamanian government saying otherwise. These stories and more highlight your Unbiased Updates for Thursday, Feb. 6, 2025.
Trump bans transgender athletes from women’s, girls’ sports
President Donald Trump followed through on another campaign promise Wednesday, Feb. 5. He signed an executive order banning transgender athletes from participating in girls’ and women’s sports.
“With this executive order, the war on women’s sports is over,” Trump said.
He added, “This will effectively end the attack on female athletes at public K-12 schools and virtually all U.S. colleges and universities. I don’t think we missed anything, but if we do, we’ll make it up very quickly with an order.”
The order rolls back Biden administration guidance on Title IX, a civil rights law that prevents sex-based discrimination in education programs and activities that receive federal funding
“We're putting every school receiving taxpayer dollars on notice that if you let men take over women's sports teams or invade your locker rooms, you will be investigated for violations of Title IX and risk your federal funding.” –President Donald J. Trump 🇺🇸 pic.twitter.com/MUd6FAetWr
The current measure, dubbed “No Men in Women’s Sports,” is the fourth executive order Trump has signed involving transgender people since taking office just over two weeks ago. Critics said the order addresses a problem that simply is not there.
“First of all, the numbers, they don’t exist,” said activist and former professional cyclist Kristen Worley. “Understand that there’s 0.01% gender variant people living in our society as a whole, so it’s a very tiny, tiny group of people that he’s actually targeting, and certainly the numbers in terms of gender performance are filled with inaccuracies as well.”
However, supporters of the order pointed to a trans swimmer at the University of Pennsylvania and a trans volleyball player at San Jose State as examples of men who transitioned to women and then dominated women’s sports.
The executive order also stipulates that the Trump administration will work with sports governing bodies, including the International Olympic Committee, to ensure that guidance is followed in noneducational settings.
Democratic senators protest Vought’s nomination with overnight speech marathon
Democratic senators held the floor overnight Wednesday into Thursday to protest Russell Vought’s nomination to lead the Office of Management and Budget.
Republicans have the majority in the Senate, so they have consistently confirmed Trump’s nominees, even without Democratic approval. Vought was set to be confirmed for the job Wednesday night, but Democrats vowed to slow the process dramatically.
Democrats have warned about Vought’s ties to Project 2025, a conservative push to reshape the federal government. Trump has denied following its guidelines.
We're holding the Senate floor all night to fight back against Trump’s nomination of Russell Vought.
America saw how bad OMB’s illegal, incompetent funding freeze was.
We want Americans to hear EVERY HOUR how bad the dangers are that he poses to their daily lives as OMB head. pic.twitter.com/ksJ2VG7nJX
Things came to a head after the OMB released a memo last week freezing federal funding. While the memo was rescinded not long after, Democrats said it was a warning sign for how Vought, who at least one Democratic senator has called Trump’s “most dangerous nominee,” would run the office, which plays a key role in enacting the president’s agenda.
Senate Democrats began what they said would be a 30-hour protest Wednesday afternoon. Despite the protest, the full Senate will vote to confirm Vought as budget director Thursday evening.
Vought previously held this position during Trump’s first term. Republican Sen. John Hoeven of North Dakota said he has a good working relationship with Vought and expects it to continue.
Panama denies US claim government vessels can transit canal for free
Hours after the State Department announced that American ships would be allowed to sail through the Panama Canal for free, Panama said that was not true.
In a post on Wednesday, the State Department said Secretary Marco Rubio had agreed with Panamanian leadership to allow the move, saving the federal government millions of dollars a year. Rubio had visited Panama this week.
The Panama Canal Authority said it sets the tolls and other fees for crossing the canal and “has not made any adjustments to them.” The authority added that it is open to dialogue with the U.S.
Before taking office, Trump demanded that Panamanian authorities either lower fees for American ships using the Panama Canal or return its control to the U.S.
‘Sanctuary city’ mayors to testify before House committee
“Sanctuary city” mayors will testify before House lawmakers in an upcoming hearing on immigration policies, according to House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chair James Comer, R-Ky.
Comer launched a probe into sanctuary policies, which allow a jurisdiction to limit its cooperation with federal immigration enforcement officials when it comes to the Trump crackdown on illegal immigration. Mayors in major cities such as Chicago, Boston and Philadelphia have said they will not help.
This comes as newly confirmed Attorney General Pam Bondi hit the ground running on her first day in office Wednesday, ordering a pause in federal funding from the Justice Department for sanctuary cities. Straight Arrow News reporter Lauren Taylor has the details here.
The mayors of Boston, Chicago, Denver and New York City, among others, will appear before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee on March 5 to discuss sanctuary policies.
New bird flu variation found in US dairy cattle
Testers have discovered a second bird flu variation in American dairy cows for the first time.
The Department of Agriculture announced the new strain on Wednesday, Feb. 5. Until recently, all dairy herd detections in the U.S. had been infected with a form of bird flu known as B3.13.
This new version, D1.1, was previously detected only in wild birds and poultry, but has now spread to cows.
It’s also the strain that’s been linked to a deadly human case in Louisiana last year after the victim was exposed to infected birds.
Humans infected with D1.1 have experienced more severe symptoms than those with the previous bird flu strain. However, the CDC said the risk to the general public remains low, and there is no evidence of the spread of D1.1 from human to human.
AI ‘digitally unrolls’ 2,000-year-old scrolls burned in Vesuvius eruption
Using artificial intelligence, X-rays and CT scans, researchers have deciphered some words on an ancient scroll burned by lava from Mount Vesuvius in 79 A.D.
The rolled-up papyrus scrolls were found in a mansion in Herculaneum, an ancient town near Pompeii, in the mid-1700s. Researchers attempted to unfurl them for more than two centuries to see what was inside and what they said.
The few scrolls they could open contained philosophical writing in ancient Greek. Others were so severely damaged by the lava that they were illegible — until now.
On Wednesday, specialists at Oxford University in London announced a significant breakthrough. Technicians used a massive machine called a synchrotron to create a powerful X-ray beam that could look inside a fragile scroll without damaging it. The Oxford scholars are now continuing to decipher the text on this scroll.
Lawsuit accuses University of Calif. of racial discrimination in admissions
A student group is suing the University of California, alleging racial discrimination in admissions. The place of learning also recently announced the “most diverse student body” ever in the fall of 2024.
The lawsuit was filed Monday, Feb. 3.
The lawsuit comes after the Supreme Court ruled in 2023 that affirmative action could not be used in higher education.
University of California officials boosted campus diversity to record levels for the current school year, which started in the fall of 2024. Now, the school system is being sued over accusations of racial discrimination in admissions.
The university group, “Students Against Racial Discrimination,” filed a lawsuit Monday, Feb. 3, that claims Asian American and white applicants are turned away, while African American and Hispanic students get unfair preference.
The group wants the school system to change its policies to comply with federal anti-discrimination laws.
The suit comes after the Supreme Court ruled in 2023 that affirmative action could not be used in higher education. This decision reversed a decades-long effort to boost the enrollment of racial minorities at universities.
What are enrollment stats at the University of California?
According to statistics from UC’s fall undergraduate 2024 enrollment, Asian American students made up 33.1%, while white students accounted for 21%. African American students accounted for 4.8%, while Hispanic students made up 23.7%.
Since a state referendum was passed in 1996, the nine University of California schools, including UCLA and UC Berkeley, have been prohibited from considering race in admissions decisions.
However, the student group claims that, in the years after, the UC system spent hundreds of millions of dollars to strengthen the path from high school to college for students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds, leading to an increase in African American and Hispanic applicants and enrollments.
How is UC responding?
UC told the New York Times that racial and ethnic data collected in undergraduate applications is for “statistical purposes only, and they are not used for admission.”