KEARNEY, Neb. — Authorities are investigating the death of a 38-year-old inmate who was found unresponsive in his cell at the Buffalo County Jail on Tuesday afternoon.

According to a statement from the Buffalo County Sheriff’s Office, Jhett Henderson of Kearney, Nebraska, was discovered at approximately 4:13 p.m. Jail staff called for medical assistance and initiated life-saving measures before paramedics transported Henderson to CHI Good Samaritan Hospital, where he was pronounced dead.

Henderson had been in custody on six charges of terroristic threats, officials said. His next of kin have been notified.

The South Central Area Law Enforcement Services (SCALES), a coalition of 17 law enforcement agencies in the region, has been called in to conduct an independent investigation. The Dawson County Sheriff’s Office is leading the probe with assistance from investigators with the Grand Island and Kearney police departments.

In accordance with Nebraska state law, a grand jury will be convened to review the circumstances surrounding the death since it occurred while Henderson was in custody. An autopsy has been requested by the Buffalo County Attorney’s Office.

KEARNEY, Neb. — Authorities are investigating the death of a 38-year-old inmate who was found unresponsive in his cell at the Buffalo County Jail on Tuesday afternoon.According to a statement from the Buffalo County Sheriff’s Office, Jhett Henderson of Kearney, Nebraska, was discovered at approximately 4:13 p.m. Jail staff called for medical assistance and initiated life-saving measures before paramedics transported Henderson to CHI Good Samaritan Hospital, where he was pronounced dead.Henderson had been in custody on six charges of terroristic threats, officials said. His next of kin have been notified.The South Central Area Law Enforcement Services (SCALES), a coalition of 17 law enforcement agencies in the region, has been called in to conduct an independent investigation. The Dawson County Sheriff’s Office is leading the probe with assistance from investigators with the Grand Island and Kearney police departments.In accordance with Nebraska state law, a grand jury will be convened to review the circumstances surrounding the death since it occurred while Henderson was in custody. An autopsy has been requested by the Buffalo County Attorney’s Office.The investigation remains ongoing.

Inmate Dies in Buffalo County Jail; SCALES Launches Investigation

Senator Dick Durbin announced Wednesday that he will not seek reelection in 2026, ending his more than four-decade career representing Illinois.

Senator Dick Durbin announced Wednesday that he will not seek reelection in 2026, ending his more than four-decade career representing Illinois.<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">The decision of whether to run for re-election has not been easy. I truly love the job of being a United States Senator. But in my heart, I know it’s time to pass the torch. So, I am announcing today that I will not be seeking re-election at the end of my term. <a href="https://t.co/eiBTPjToFT">pic.twitter.com/eiBTPjToFT</a>&mdash; Senator Dick Durbin (@SenatorDurbin) <a href="https://twitter.com/SenatorDurbin/status/1915062730580427059?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 23, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>

U.S. Senate’s No. 2 Democrat won't seek reelection to a 6th term

BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://kansasreflector.com/author/ashley-murray/">ASHLEY MURRAY</a>

WASHINGTON — A three-judge panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on Tuesday grilled the Trump administration and the attorney for transgender service members who won a lower court order reversing President Donald Trump’s ban on transgender troops.

One judge on the panel voiced serious concerns about the lack of evidence the Defense Department cited when instituting the ban, while another expressed skepticism that the lower court’s nationwide order —&nbsp;instead of applying only to the transgender individuals who brought the case —&nbsp;was appropriate.

Administration officials appealed the case to the D.C. Circuit after district Judge Ana Reyes, appointed by former President Joe Biden, granted a broad preliminary injunction blocking Trump’s Jan. 27 executive order.

Eight active-duty service members and transgender individuals who are actively pursuing enlistment in the armed forces brought the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69583866/talbott-v-trump/?filed_after=&amp;filed_before=&amp;entry_gte=&amp;entry_lte=&amp;order_by=desc" target="_blank">case</a>&nbsp;against Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, among other officials and three branches of the U.S. military.

Trump’s January order&nbsp;asserted the “adoption of a gender identity inconsistent with an individual’s sex conflicts with a soldier’s commitment to an honorable, truthful, and disciplined lifestyle, even in one’s personal life.” Further, the order said that being transgender is “not consistent with the humility and selflessness required of a service member.”

The Trump administration is expected to “imminently” escalate a separate case on the same issue to the Supreme Court, U.S. Department of Justice attorney Jason Manion said in court Tuesday.

Judges on the appeals bench queried both sides on whether the government has evidence to prove transgender individuals cannot fulfill military duties, and if the order bans all trans troops or only those diagnosed with gender dysphoria, a clinical diagnosis involving distress when a person’s gender identity differs from their sex at birth.

“If the military said people with red hair are just too fragile and vulnerable, we are going to kick them all out of the military, and we are going to not allow any of them ever to join, and we have no evidence of that, but we think they’re a threat to military preparedness, to unit cohesion, and too costly, and so we’re just going to kick them out?” asked Judge Cornelia Pillard, who was appointed during President Barack Obama’s second term.

Manion replied the transgender ban “policy relies on a condition that is marked by severe clinical distress.”

Under military deference — meaning the courts generally defer to the president and military on national security questions — the judges should accept Trump’s and Hegseth’s word on the policy, Manion said.

“If there are mental conditions that will impair someone’s ability to function in the military, or that the military could rationally judge would impair that, then that’s more than enough to satisfy rational basis review,” he said.

Pillard pushed back: Isn’t that the case for all people wanting to join the military, not just transgender individuals? Thousands of transgender troops are already serving, she said.

“If the concerns are with depression or suicidality, there already are standards that would screen someone out for those things, right?” Pillard said.

Judge Neomi Rao challenged the plaintiffs’ likelihood to succeed, highlighting that the Supreme Court generally views broad orders from district judges as “overreach.”

Reyes’&nbsp;<a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.276845/gov.uscourts.dcd.276845.89.0.pdf" target="_blank">order</a>&nbsp;covers all transgender troops and those seeking to enlist, not just the eight plaintiffs who brought the case.

“The district court imposed effectively a universal injunction on this policy, going beyond any relief to these particular plaintiffs. So even putting aside the constitutional question, isn’t the government likely to succeed on challenging this remedy?” asked Rao, who was appointed during Trump’s first term.

Shannon Minter, civil rights attorney for the plaintiffs, said “the very nature of the injury” justifies far-reaching court protection.

“This is one of those cases where the injury alleged resides directly in the categorical nature of the policy itself, which declares that transgender people as a group lack the virtues of honesty, discipline, selflessness, integrity, that as such, they have to be purged from the military because they’re transgender, and because the government has this very negative view of what it means to be a transgender person,” Minter said.

In a separate case, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals&nbsp;<a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca9.afaa7f8c-a307-4e35-a174-cf2fa59424fe/gov.uscourts.ca9.afaa7f8c-a307-4e35-a174-cf2fa59424fe.31.0.pdf" target="_blank">upheld</a>&nbsp;a lower court’s ruling that allowed transgender troops to continue serving, denying the government’s appeal.

Judge Gregory Katsas, appointed during Trump’s first term, asked Manion, “Can you tell us anything about the government’s plans for seeking Supreme Court (review)?”

“I can’t give you an exact date, but it will be very, very quickly, very soon, and I think that may well be quite relevant to this court’s analysis as well,” Manion said.

Lambda Legal and the Human Rights Foundation, who are representing plaintiffs in the 9th Circuit case, released a statement Tuesday afternoon saying they “stand ready to continue to zealously represent our clients as we have at every juncture.”

“Transgender service members have been openly serving our country with honor and distinction for almost a decade and have met and are meeting every neutral service-based standard. The U.S. Supreme Court should reject the invitation to stay the district court’s injunction so that they can impose their discriminatory ban while the litigation proceeds,” the statement said.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/4/1745411733333.png" alt="A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit heard arguments at the E. Barrett Prettyman Federal Courthouse on Tuesday over President Donald Trump’s ban on transgender people serving in the military (U.S. General Services Administration photo)." />
 <figcaption>A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit heard arguments at the E. Barrett Prettyman Federal Courthouse on Tuesday over President Donald Trump’s ban on transgender people serving in the military (U.S. General Services Administration photo).</figcaption>
 </figure>BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://kansasreflector.com/author/ashley-murray/">ASHLEY MURRAY</a>WASHINGTON — A three-judge panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on Tuesday grilled the Trump administration and the attorney for transgender service members who won a lower court order reversing President Donald Trump’s ban on transgender troops.One judge on the panel voiced serious concerns about the lack of evidence the Defense Department cited when instituting the ban, while another expressed skepticism that the lower court’s nationwide order —&nbsp;instead of applying only to the transgender individuals who brought the case —&nbsp;was appropriate.Administration officials appealed the case to the D.C. Circuit after district Judge Ana Reyes, appointed by former President Joe Biden, granted a broad preliminary injunction blocking Trump’s Jan. 27 executive order.Eight active-duty service members and transgender individuals who are actively pursuing enlistment in the armed forces brought the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69583866/talbott-v-trump/?filed_after=&amp;filed_before=&amp;entry_gte=&amp;entry_lte=&amp;order_by=desc" target="_blank">case</a>&nbsp;against Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, among other officials and three branches of the U.S. military.Trump’s January order&nbsp;asserted the “adoption of a gender identity inconsistent with an individual’s sex conflicts with a soldier’s commitment to an honorable, truthful, and disciplined lifestyle, even in one’s personal life.” Further, the order said that being transgender is “not consistent with the humility and selflessness required of a service member.”The Trump administration is expected to “imminently” escalate a separate case on the same issue to the Supreme Court, U.S. Department of Justice attorney Jason Manion said in court Tuesday.<h2>Evidence</h2>Judges on the appeals bench queried both sides on whether the government has evidence to prove transgender individuals cannot fulfill military duties, and if the order bans all trans troops or only those diagnosed with gender dysphoria, a clinical diagnosis involving distress when a person’s gender identity differs from their sex at birth.“If the military said people with red hair are just too fragile and vulnerable, we are going to kick them all out of the military, and we are going to not allow any of them ever to join, and we have no evidence of that, but we think they’re a threat to military preparedness, to unit cohesion, and too costly, and so we’re just going to kick them out?” asked Judge Cornelia Pillard, who was appointed during President Barack Obama’s second term.Manion replied the transgender ban “policy relies on a condition that is marked by severe clinical distress.”Under military deference — meaning the courts generally defer to the president and military on national security questions — the judges should accept Trump’s and Hegseth’s word on the policy, Manion said.“If there are mental conditions that will impair someone’s ability to function in the military, or that the military could rationally judge would impair that, then that’s more than enough to satisfy rational basis review,” he said.Pillard pushed back: Isn’t that the case for all people wanting to join the military, not just transgender individuals? Thousands of transgender troops are already serving, she said.“If the concerns are with depression or suicidality, there already are standards that would screen someone out for those things, right?” Pillard said.<h2>Trial court ‘overreach’?</h2>Judge Neomi Rao challenged the plaintiffs’ likelihood to succeed, highlighting that the Supreme Court generally views broad orders from district judges as “overreach.”Reyes’&nbsp;<a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.276845/gov.uscourts.dcd.276845.89.0.pdf" target="_blank">order</a>&nbsp;covers all transgender troops and those seeking to enlist, not just the eight plaintiffs who brought the case.“The district court imposed effectively a universal injunction on this policy, going beyond any relief to these particular plaintiffs. So even putting aside the constitutional question, isn’t the government likely to succeed on challenging this remedy?” asked Rao, who was appointed during Trump’s first term.Shannon Minter, civil rights attorney for the plaintiffs, said “the very nature of the injury” justifies far-reaching court protection.“This is one of those cases where the injury alleged resides directly in the categorical nature of the policy itself, which declares that transgender people as a group lack the virtues of honesty, discipline, selflessness, integrity, that as such, they have to be purged from the military because they’re transgender, and because the government has this very negative view of what it means to be a transgender person,” Minter said.In a separate case, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals&nbsp;<a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca9.afaa7f8c-a307-4e35-a174-cf2fa59424fe/gov.uscourts.ca9.afaa7f8c-a307-4e35-a174-cf2fa59424fe.31.0.pdf" target="_blank">upheld</a>&nbsp;a lower court’s ruling that allowed transgender troops to continue serving, denying the government’s appeal.<h2>U.S. Supreme Court case upcoming</h2>Judge Gregory Katsas, appointed during Trump’s first term, asked Manion, “Can you tell us anything about the government’s plans for seeking Supreme Court (review)?”“I can’t give you an exact date, but it will be very, very quickly, very soon, and I think that may well be quite relevant to this court’s analysis as well,” Manion said.Lambda Legal and the Human Rights Foundation, who are representing plaintiffs in the 9th Circuit case, released a statement Tuesday afternoon saying they “stand ready to continue to zealously represent our clients as we have at every juncture.”“Transgender service members have been openly serving our country with honor and distinction for almost a decade and have met and are meeting every neutral service-based standard. The U.S. Supreme Court should reject the invitation to stay the district court’s injunction so that they can impose their discriminatory ban while the litigation proceeds,” the statement said.

Transgender troops ban, nationwide freeze argued in U.S. appeals court

&nbsp;Attorney General Pamela Bondi hosted members of the President’s Cabinet on Tuesday for the inaugural meeting of the Task Force to Eradicate Anti-Christian Bias in the federal government, according to a statement from the U.S. Department of Justice.

The Task Force, which was established by President Trump under&nbsp; &nbsp;<a href="https://links-1.govdelivery.com/CL0/https:%2F%2Fwww.whitehouse.gov%2Fpresidential-actions%2F2025%2F02%2Feradicating-anti-christian-bias%2F%3Futm_medium=email%26utm_source=govdelivery/1/010001965f6b474d-310a9e22-2d38-416b-b2a0-fca271d37cc0-000000/bl7ZQLF3nf4Tl7J4pFSFrvf-gjwRutYBIUp9J4NtfXk=401" target="_blank">Executive Order 14202</a>, was joined by peaceful Christian Americans who were unfairly targeted by the Biden Administration for their religious beliefs.&nbsp; Click&nbsp;<a href="https://links-1.govdelivery.com/CL0/https:%2F%2Fwww.whitehouse.gov%2Fpresidential-actions%2F2025%2F02%2Feradicating-anti-christian-bias%2F%3Futm_medium=email%26utm_source=govdelivery/2/010001965f6b474d-310a9e22-2d38-416b-b2a0-fca271d37cc0-000000/ksl7GbMsig7eTnD8ns9hJyk4vlnfNeduww5EY8J-6as=401" target="_blank">HERE</a>&nbsp;to read the&nbsp;Eradicating Anti-Christian Bias Executive Order.

Michael Farris:&nbsp;First Amendment Litigator and Founding President of Patrick Henry College

Dr. Scott Hicks:&nbsp;Provost and Chief Academic Officer, Liberty University

“As shown by our victims’ stories today, Biden’s Department of Justice abused and targeted peaceful Christians while ignoring violent, anti-Christian offenses,” said Attorney General Pamela Bondi. “Thanks to President Trump, we have ended those abuses, and we will continue to work closely with every member of this Task Force to protect every American’s right to speak and worship freely.”

Additionally, members of the Task Force highlighted specific cases within their own agencies where the Biden Administration unfairly and harshly punished Christian Americans for their religious beliefs. &nbsp;

FBI Director Kash Patel&nbsp;discussed the impact of the anti-Catholic memo issued by FBI Richmond and reiterated the FBI’s commitment to rooting out any anti-Christian bias that could be directing decisions or investigations.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio&nbsp;raised several concerning allegations of bias, including some against Christian Foreign Service Officers who preferred to homeschool their children.&nbsp;In one case, a family was threatened with an investigation for child abuse and curtailment if they insisted on homeschooling. In another case, a family was referred to the IRS, threatened with prosecution, and investigated by Biden’s Inspector General for insisting they homeschool their son.

He shared how State Department employees were stigmatized for opposing the COVID-19 vaccine mandate on religious grounds, including being called “murderers” and “troublemakers.” In one instance, an ambassador yelled at an employee, accusing the employee of wanting to kill the ambassador’s mother despite her being back in the States.

Other reports alleged retaliation against employees for opposing DEI/LGBT ideology that violated their religious conscience.&nbsp;Employees recounted being required to push LGBT agendas while serving overseas, even in countries where such activity constituted a blatant violation of the acceptable religious beliefs and practices. He also detailed allegations that that religious freedom policy offices and programs were sidelined unless they were promoting DEI-related programs.

He also highlighted how Christian holidays at American embassies under the Biden Administration were frequently stripped of any religious overtones, but non-Christian religious holidays like Losar, Eid, or Ramadan, used proper names and appropriate celebratory greetings.

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.&nbsp;discussed how the previous administration ordered St. Francis Health System in Oklahoma to extinguish its sanctuary candle or lose its ability to treat patients covered by Medicare, Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program. He also discussed progressive rules put in place under the Biden Administration that would make it harder for Christians to become foster parents.

Secretary of Education Linda McMahon&nbsp;discussed how Oregon educators Katie Medart and Rachel Sager were suspended and terminated for starting the movement, “I Resolve.” The movement spoke about gender identity education policy and offered solutions for how educators could teach without violating their conscience and also respect the rights of parents.

Additionally, officials at the Skaneateles Central School District in New York began treating a middle-school girl as a boy without her mother’s knowledge or consent – violating their religious liberties as parents.

Deputy Treasury Secretary Michael Faulkender&nbsp;discussed financial surveillance under the Biden Administration, including the previous removal of certain tax classifications of Christian and pro-life organizations by the IRS, the lack of involvement within Treasury to protect organizations from the issue of debanking, and FinCEN’s identification of certain pro-Christian groups as “hate groups.”

Secretary of Veterans Affairs Doug Collins&nbsp;discussed actions the VA took to stop the speech code that the previous administration used to punish Chaplain Trubey of the Coatesville VA Medical Center for fulfilling his duties and preaching a sermon from the Bible.

Director of the Domestic Policy Council, Vince Haley,&nbsp;discussed how the previous DPC Director Neera Tanden helped lead and coordinate the Biden Administration’s efforts to push radical and anti-Christian gender ideology on kids in classrooms, foster care, sports, and healthcare.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/4/1745411952674.png" alt="AG Pam Bondi, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Heath Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. were among the top federal officials at Justice Department headquarters Tuesday for the first meeting of the task force.-Photo Department of Justice" />
 <figcaption>AG Pam Bondi, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Heath Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. were among the top federal officials at Justice Department headquarters Tuesday for the first meeting of the task force.-Photo Department of Justice</figcaption>
 </figure>&nbsp;Attorney General Pamela Bondi hosted members of the President’s Cabinet on Tuesday for the inaugural meeting of the Task Force to Eradicate Anti-Christian Bias in the federal government, according to a statement from the U.S. Department of Justice.<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">🚨 BREAKING: First Meeting of the Task Force to Eradicate Anti-Christian Bias. <a href="https://t.co/PRlqJO48MD">pic.twitter.com/PRlqJO48MD</a>&mdash; Attorney General Pamela Bondi (@AGPamBondi) <a href="https://twitter.com/AGPamBondi/status/1914748203552932185?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 22, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>The Task Force, which was established by President Trump under&nbsp; &nbsp;<a href="https://links-1.govdelivery.com/CL0/https:%2F%2Fwww.whitehouse.gov%2Fpresidential-actions%2F2025%2F02%2Feradicating-anti-christian-bias%2F%3Futm_medium=email%26utm_source=govdelivery/1/010001965f6b474d-310a9e22-2d38-416b-b2a0-fca271d37cc0-000000/bl7ZQLF3nf4Tl7J4pFSFrvf-gjwRutYBIUp9J4NtfXk=401" target="_blank">Executive Order 14202</a>, was joined by peaceful Christian Americans who were unfairly targeted by the Biden Administration for their religious beliefs.&nbsp; Click&nbsp;<a href="https://links-1.govdelivery.com/CL0/https:%2F%2Fwww.whitehouse.gov%2Fpresidential-actions%2F2025%2F02%2Feradicating-anti-christian-bias%2F%3Futm_medium=email%26utm_source=govdelivery/2/010001965f6b474d-310a9e22-2d38-416b-b2a0-fca271d37cc0-000000/ksl7GbMsig7eTnD8ns9hJyk4vlnfNeduww5EY8J-6as=401" target="_blank">HERE</a>&nbsp;to read the&nbsp;Eradicating Anti-Christian Bias Executive Order.The witnesses included:Michael Farris:&nbsp;First Amendment Litigator and Founding President of Patrick Henry College<ul>
 <li>Farris spoke on behalf of Senior Pastor Gary Hamrick to discuss how Cornerstone Church was under investigation and charged by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) for so-called Johnson Amendment violations. Farris is an elder at the church, previously led Alliance Defending Freedom, and served as counsel on this case.</li>
 </ul>Dr. Scott Hicks:&nbsp;Provost and Chief Academic Officer, Liberty University<ul>
 <li>Hicks described how Liberty University and Grand Canyon University were singled out by the Biden Administration for fines due to the schools’ Christian worldview.</li>
 </ul>Phil Mendes: Navy Seal<ul>
 <li>Mendes was relieved of duty during Biden Administration for not taking the COVID-19 vaccine due to religious exemption requests that were denied by the Department of Defense.</li>
 </ul>“As shown by our victims’ stories today, Biden’s Department of Justice abused and targeted peaceful Christians while ignoring violent, anti-Christian offenses,” said Attorney General Pamela Bondi. “Thanks to President Trump, we have ended those abuses, and we will continue to work closely with every member of this Task Force to protect every American’s right to speak and worship freely.”Additionally, members of the Task Force highlighted specific cases within their own agencies where the Biden Administration unfairly and harshly punished Christian Americans for their religious beliefs. &nbsp;FBI Director Kash Patel&nbsp;discussed the impact of the anti-Catholic memo issued by FBI Richmond and reiterated the FBI’s commitment to rooting out any anti-Christian bias that could be directing decisions or investigations.Secretary of State Marco Rubio&nbsp;raised several concerning allegations of bias, including some against Christian Foreign Service Officers who preferred to homeschool their children.&nbsp;In one case, a family was threatened with an investigation for child abuse and curtailment if they insisted on homeschooling. In another case, a family was referred to the IRS, threatened with prosecution, and investigated by Biden’s Inspector General for insisting they homeschool their son.He shared how State Department employees were stigmatized for opposing the COVID-19 vaccine mandate on religious grounds, including being called “murderers” and “troublemakers.” In one instance, an ambassador yelled at an employee, accusing the employee of wanting to kill the ambassador’s mother despite her being back in the States.Other reports alleged retaliation against employees for opposing DEI/LGBT ideology that violated their religious conscience.&nbsp;Employees recounted being required to push LGBT agendas while serving overseas, even in countries where such activity constituted a blatant violation of the acceptable religious beliefs and practices. He also detailed allegations that that religious freedom policy offices and programs were sidelined unless they were promoting DEI-related programs.He also highlighted how Christian holidays at American embassies under the Biden Administration were frequently stripped of any religious overtones, but non-Christian religious holidays like Losar, Eid, or Ramadan, used proper names and appropriate celebratory greetings.Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.&nbsp;discussed how the previous administration ordered St. Francis Health System in Oklahoma to extinguish its sanctuary candle or lose its ability to treat patients covered by Medicare, Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program. He also discussed progressive rules put in place under the Biden Administration that would make it harder for Christians to become foster parents.Secretary of Education Linda McMahon&nbsp;discussed how Oregon educators Katie Medart and Rachel Sager were suspended and terminated for starting the movement, “I Resolve.” The movement spoke about gender identity education policy and offered solutions for how educators could teach without violating their conscience and also respect the rights of parents.Additionally, officials at the Skaneateles Central School District in New York began treating a middle-school girl as a boy without her mother’s knowledge or consent – violating their religious liberties as parents.Deputy Treasury Secretary Michael Faulkender&nbsp;discussed financial surveillance under the Biden Administration, including the previous removal of certain tax classifications of Christian and pro-life organizations by the IRS, the lack of involvement within Treasury to protect organizations from the issue of debanking, and FinCEN’s identification of certain pro-Christian groups as “hate groups.”Secretary of Veterans Affairs Doug Collins&nbsp;discussed actions the VA took to stop the speech code that the previous administration used to punish Chaplain Trubey of the Coatesville VA Medical Center for fulfilling his duties and preaching a sermon from the Bible.Director of the Domestic Policy Council, Vince Haley,&nbsp;discussed how the previous DPC Director Neera Tanden helped lead and coordinate the Biden Administration’s efforts to push radical and anti-Christian gender ideology on kids in classrooms, foster care, sports, and healthcare.Additional attendees included:<ul>
 <li>Todd Blanche, Deputy Attorney General</li><li>Emil Bove, Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General</li><li>Stanley Woodward, Nominee to be Associate Attorney General</li><li>Harmeet Dhillon, Assistant Attorney General</li><li>Pete Hegseth, U.S. Secretary of Defense</li><li>Kristi Noem, U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security</li><li>Andrew Hughes, Chief of Staff (Dep. Sec. Nom.) at the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development</li><li>Lori Chavez DeRemer, U.S. Secretary of Labor</li><li>Andrea Lucas, Acting Chair of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission</li><li>Cameron Hamilton, Acting Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency</li><li>Dan Bishop, Deputy Director of the Office of Management and Budget</li><li>Kelly Loeffler, Administrator of the U.S. Small Business Administration</li><li>Pastor Paula White-Cain, Senior Advisor, White House Faith Office</li><li>Jennifer Korn, Faith Director, White House Faith Office</li>
 </ul>

Attorney General convenes task force to root out ‘anti-Christian Bias’

By Devin Watkins Vatican News Service

The Holy See Press Office announced on Tuesday that Pope Francis’ funeral Mass will take place on Saturday, April 26, 2025, at 10:00 AM in St. Peter’s Square.

Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, Dean of the College of Cardinals, will preside at the Mass, which will be concelebrated by Patriarchs, Cardinals, Archbishops, Bishops, and priests from across the globe.

The Eucharistic celebration will conclude with the&nbsp;Ultima commendatio&nbsp;and the&nbsp;Valedictio, marking the beginning of the Novemdiales, or nine days of mourning and Masses for the repose of Pope Francis' soul.

The late Pope's body will then be taken into St. Peter’s Basilica and then to the Basilica of St. Mary Major for entombment.

Earlier, on Wednesday, the coffin containing the Pope’s body will be carried from the chapel of the Casa Santa Marta to St. Peter’s Basilica, so that the faithful may pay their respects.

Cardinal Kevin Farrell, Camerlengo of the Holy Roman Church, will preside over the rite of translation on April 23, which will begin at 9:00 AM with a moment of prayer.

The procession will pass through Santa Marta Square and the Square of the Roman Protomartyrs, according to the Holy See Press Office.

The procession will then exit through the Arch of the Bells into St. Peter’s Square and enter the Vatican Basilica through the central door.

At the Altar of the Confession, the Cardinal Camerlengo will preside over the Liturgy of the Word, at the conclusion of which the visits to the body of the Roman Pontiff will commence.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/4/1745322565144.png" alt="The late Pope Francis' body lies in the chapel of the Casa Santa Marta photo Vatican News Service" />
 <figcaption>The late Pope Francis' body lies in the chapel of the Casa Santa Marta photo Vatican News Service</figcaption>
 </figure>By Devin Watkins Vatican News ServiceThe Holy See Press Office announced on Tuesday that Pope Francis’ funeral Mass will take place on Saturday, April 26, 2025, at 10:00 AM in St. Peter’s Square.Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, Dean of the College of Cardinals, will preside at the Mass, which will be concelebrated by Patriarchs, Cardinals, Archbishops, Bishops, and priests from across the globe.The Eucharistic celebration will conclude with the&nbsp;Ultima commendatio&nbsp;and the&nbsp;Valedictio, marking the beginning of the Novemdiales, or nine days of mourning and Masses for the repose of Pope Francis' soul.The late Pope's body will then be taken into St. Peter’s Basilica and then to the Basilica of St. Mary Major for entombment.Earlier, on Wednesday, the coffin containing the Pope’s body will be carried from the chapel of the Casa Santa Marta to St. Peter’s Basilica, so that the faithful may pay their respects.Cardinal Kevin Farrell, Camerlengo of the Holy Roman Church, will preside over the rite of translation on April 23, which will begin at 9:00 AM with a moment of prayer.The procession will pass through Santa Marta Square and the Square of the Roman Protomartyrs, according to the Holy See Press Office.The procession will then exit through the Arch of the Bells into St. Peter’s Square and enter the Vatican Basilica through the central door.At the Altar of the Confession, the Cardinal Camerlengo will preside over the Liturgy of the Word, at the conclusion of which the visits to the body of the Roman Pontiff will commence.

Cardinals set date for Pope Francis’ funeral, public viewing

U.S. Representatives Maxine Dexter (Oregon), Robert Garcia(Calif.), Maxwell Frost (Fla), and Yassamin Ansari(Ariz) arrived in El Salvador Monday to pressure the Trump Administration to abide by a Supreme Court order to facilitate the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Maryland man with "protected legal status" who was unlawfully deported by the Trump Administration, according to a statement from Dexter's office.

Abrego Garcia is currently detained in El Salvador despite having no criminal conviction in the United States, a direct violation of due process protected by the Constitution.&nbsp;&nbsp;

The Congressional members are in El Salvador to bring attention to President Trump’s illegal defiance of the binding and unanimous Supreme Court decision in Noem v. Abrego Garcia that demands the Administration facilitate Abrego Garcia’s return and due process in the United States. This visit comes after the Trump Administration admitted that Mr. Abrego Garcia’s detention was an “error” but refused to abide by a federal judge and the Supreme Court’s orders to facilitate Mr. Abrego Garcia’s return home. Members will also advocate for other detainees who are being held without due process.&nbsp;

This trip is not being financed by taxpayer dollars and comes after Chairman James Comer refused to approve Garcia and Frost’s&nbsp;<a href="https://robertgarcia.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/robertgarcia.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/garcia-frost-letter.pdf" target="_blank">request&nbsp;</a>for an official CODEL.

“What happened to Kilmar Abrego Garcia is not just one family’s nightmare—it is a constitutional crisis that should outrage every single one of us,” said&nbsp;Congresswoman&nbsp; Dexter. “We will not rest while due process is discarded, and our constitutional rights are ignored. We will be loud in demanding that the Trump Administration abide by the Supreme Court’s decision and uphold the rule of law. Because if this can happen to Mr. Abrego Garcia, it can happen to anyone.”

“While Donald Trump continues to defy the Supreme Court, Kilmar Abrego Garcia is being held illegally in El Salvador after being wrongfully deported,” said&nbsp;Congressman Robert Garcia.&nbsp;“That is why we’re here– to remind the American people that kidnapping immigrants and deporting them without due process is not how we do things in America. We are demanding the Trump Administration abide by the Supreme Court decision and give Kilmar and the other migrants mistakenly sent to El Salvador due process in the United States.”

“Donald Trump and his Administration are running a government-funded kidnapping program– illegally arresting, jailing, and deporting innocent people with zero due process. Kilmar Abrego Garcia is Trump’s latest victim,”&nbsp;said Congressman Maxwell Frost. “As Members of Congress it is our responsibility to hold the President and Administration accountable for defying the constitution of the United States. Donald Trump and ICE are not above the law. Today it’s Kilmar, but tomorrow it could be anyone else. We cannot and will not let Donald Trump get away with this."&nbsp;

“My parents fled an authoritarian regime in Iran where people were ‘disappeared’ – I refuse to sit back and watch it happen here, too. Kilmar Abrego Garcia’s illegal abduction and President Trump’s complete disregard of due process and a unanimous Supreme Court ruling are deeply disturbing. We should all be appalled by this treatment by the United States government,” said&nbsp;Congresswoman Yassamin Ansari. “I’m in El Salvador to advocate for the Trump Administration to facilitate his safe return home, and make sure Trump’s attack on our Constitution and due process stops now. Trump has already threatened to illegally deport ‘home-growns’ and American citizens. If this can happen to Mr. Abrego Garcia, it can happen to any of us. This is a constitutional crisis. ”

U.S. Representatives Maxine Dexter (Oregon), Robert Garcia(Calif.), Maxwell Frost (Fla), and Yassamin Ansari(Ariz) arrived in El Salvador Monday to pressure the Trump Administration to abide by a Supreme Court order to facilitate the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Maryland man with "protected legal status" who was unlawfully deported by the Trump Administration, according to a statement from Dexter's office.<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">I am in El Salvador because I will not stand by while our country is thrown into a constitutional crisis. This is a moment to act. I will not rest until due process is upheld for all. <a href="https://t.co/q5b4cZg3iV">pic.twitter.com/q5b4cZg3iV</a>&mdash; Congresswoman Maxine Dexter (@RepDexterOR) <a href="https://twitter.com/RepDexterOR/status/1914346370841903519?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 21, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>Abrego Garcia is currently detained in El Salvador despite having no criminal conviction in the United States, a direct violation of due process protected by the Constitution.&nbsp;&nbsp;The Congressional members are in El Salvador to bring attention to President Trump’s illegal defiance of the binding and unanimous Supreme Court decision in Noem v. Abrego Garcia that demands the Administration facilitate Abrego Garcia’s return and due process in the United States. This visit comes after the Trump Administration admitted that Mr. Abrego Garcia’s detention was an “error” but refused to abide by a federal judge and the Supreme Court’s orders to facilitate Mr. Abrego Garcia’s return home. Members will also advocate for other detainees who are being held without due process.&nbsp;This trip is not being financed by taxpayer dollars and comes after Chairman James Comer refused to approve Garcia and Frost’s&nbsp;<a href="https://robertgarcia.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/robertgarcia.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/garcia-frost-letter.pdf" target="_blank">request&nbsp;</a>for an official CODEL.“What happened to Kilmar Abrego Garcia is not just one family’s nightmare—it is a constitutional crisis that should outrage every single one of us,” said&nbsp;Congresswoman&nbsp; Dexter. “We will not rest while due process is discarded, and our constitutional rights are ignored. We will be loud in demanding that the Trump Administration abide by the Supreme Court’s decision and uphold the rule of law. Because if this can happen to Mr. Abrego Garcia, it can happen to anyone.”“While Donald Trump continues to defy the Supreme Court, Kilmar Abrego Garcia is being held illegally in El Salvador after being wrongfully deported,” said&nbsp;Congressman Robert Garcia.&nbsp;“That is why we’re here– to remind the American people that kidnapping immigrants and deporting them without due process is not how we do things in America. We are demanding the Trump Administration abide by the Supreme Court decision and give Kilmar and the other migrants mistakenly sent to El Salvador due process in the United States.”“Donald Trump and his Administration are running a government-funded kidnapping program– illegally arresting, jailing, and deporting innocent people with zero due process. Kilmar Abrego Garcia is Trump’s latest victim,”&nbsp;said Congressman Maxwell Frost. “As Members of Congress it is our responsibility to hold the President and Administration accountable for defying the constitution of the United States. Donald Trump and ICE are not above the law. Today it’s Kilmar, but tomorrow it could be anyone else. We cannot and will not let Donald Trump get away with this."&nbsp;“My parents fled an authoritarian regime in Iran where people were ‘disappeared’ – I refuse to sit back and watch it happen here, too. Kilmar Abrego Garcia’s illegal abduction and President Trump’s complete disregard of due process and a unanimous Supreme Court ruling are deeply disturbing. We should all be appalled by this treatment by the United States government,” said&nbsp;Congresswoman Yassamin Ansari. “I’m in El Salvador to advocate for the Trump Administration to facilitate his safe return home, and make sure Trump’s attack on our Constitution and due process stops now. Trump has already threatened to illegally deport ‘home-growns’ and American citizens. If this can happen to Mr. Abrego Garcia, it can happen to any of us. This is a constitutional crisis. ”

🎥More lawmakers visit El Salvador on Abrego Garcia's behalf

By:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/shauneen-miranda/">Shauneen Miranda</a>

WASHINGTON — The&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/surprise-guest-shows-us-house-dems-slam-education-cuts-education-secretary" target="_blank">U.S. Department of Education</a>&nbsp;said Monday that it will&nbsp;resume collections May 5 for defaulted federal student loans.

After pausing during the early weeks of the COVID-19 pandemic, the agency has not collected on defaulted loans in over five years. More than 5 million borrowers sit in default on their federal student loans, and just 38% of borrowers are current on their payments, the department said.

“American taxpayers will no longer be forced to serve as collateral for irresponsible student loan policies,” U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon said in&nbsp;<a href="https://www.ed.gov/about/news/press-release/us-department-of-education-begin-federal-student-loan-collections-other-actions-help-borrowers-get-back-repayment" target="_blank">a statement</a>&nbsp;Monday.

During last year’s presidential campaign, President Donald Trump criticized his predecessor and successor, President Joe Biden, for his efforts to erase student debt. McMahon resumed that line of attack Monday, blaming Biden’s administration for unreasonably raising borrowers’ expectations of forgiveness.

“The Biden Administration misled borrowers: the executive branch does not have the constitutional authority to wipe debt away, nor do the loan balances simply disappear. Hundreds of billions have already been transferred to taxpayers,” McMahon said.

She added that “going forward, the Department of Education, in conjunction with the Department of Treasury, will shepherd the student loan program responsibly and according to the law, which means helping borrowers return to repayment — both for the sake of their own financial health and our nation’s economic outlook.”

The department said the Office of Federal Student Aid will restart the Treasury Offset Program, which the U.S. Treasury Department administers, on May 5.

The Education Department statement said all borrowers who are in default will get emails over the next two weeks “making them aware of these developments and urging them to contact the Default Resolution Group to make a monthly payment, enroll in an income-driven repayment plan, or sign up for loan rehabilitation.”

The department said the Office of Federal Student Aid will “send required notices beginning administrative wage garnishment” later this summer.

More than 42.7 million borrowers owe more than $1.6 trillion in student debt, according to the department.&nbsp;

The administration claims that “instead of protecting responsible taxpayers, the Biden-Harris Administration put them on the hook for irresponsible lending, pushing the federal student loan portfolio toward a fiscal cliff.”&nbsp;

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/4/1745271542976.png" alt=" U.S. Education Secretary Linda McMahon speaks at a press conference outside the U.S. Department of Education headquarters in Washington, D.C., on April 2 (Shauneen Miranda/States Newsroom)." />
 <figcaption> U.S. Education Secretary Linda McMahon speaks at a press conference outside the U.S. Department of Education headquarters in Washington, D.C., on April 2 (Shauneen Miranda/States Newsroom).</figcaption>
 </figure>By:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/shauneen-miranda/">Shauneen Miranda</a>WASHINGTON — The&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/surprise-guest-shows-us-house-dems-slam-education-cuts-education-secretary" target="_blank">U.S. Department of Education</a>&nbsp;said Monday that it will&nbsp;resume collections May 5 for defaulted federal student loans.After pausing during the early weeks of the COVID-19 pandemic, the agency has not collected on defaulted loans in over five years. More than 5 million borrowers sit in default on their federal student loans, and just 38% of borrowers are current on their payments, the department said.“American taxpayers will no longer be forced to serve as collateral for irresponsible student loan policies,” U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon said in&nbsp;<a href="https://www.ed.gov/about/news/press-release/us-department-of-education-begin-federal-student-loan-collections-other-actions-help-borrowers-get-back-repayment" target="_blank">a statement</a>&nbsp;Monday.During last year’s presidential campaign, President Donald Trump criticized his predecessor and successor, President Joe Biden, for his efforts to erase student debt. McMahon resumed that line of attack Monday, blaming Biden’s administration for unreasonably raising borrowers’ expectations of forgiveness.“The Biden Administration misled borrowers: the executive branch does not have the constitutional authority to wipe debt away, nor do the loan balances simply disappear. Hundreds of billions have already been transferred to taxpayers,” McMahon said.She added that “going forward, the Department of Education, in conjunction with the Department of Treasury, will shepherd the student loan program responsibly and according to the law, which means helping borrowers return to repayment — both for the sake of their own financial health and our nation’s economic outlook.”The department said the Office of Federal Student Aid will restart the Treasury Offset Program, which the U.S. Treasury Department administers, on May 5.The Education Department statement said all borrowers who are in default will get emails over the next two weeks “making them aware of these developments and urging them to contact the Default Resolution Group to make a monthly payment, enroll in an income-driven repayment plan, or sign up for loan rehabilitation.”The department said the Office of Federal Student Aid will “send required notices beginning administrative wage garnishment” later this summer.More than 42.7 million borrowers owe more than $1.6 trillion in student debt, according to the department.&nbsp;The administration claims that “instead of protecting responsible taxpayers, the Biden-Harris Administration put them on the hook for irresponsible lending, pushing the federal student loan portfolio toward a fiscal cliff.”&nbsp;

U.S. Education Dept. to restart defaulted student loan collections

BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/jason-hancock/">JASON HANCOCK</a> <a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2023/02/20/state-senator-throws-first-punches-of-2024-missouri-governors-campaign/">Missouri Independent</a>

Former Missouri Congressman Billy Long received $137,000 in campaign contributions — just enough to pay off a personal loan to his campaign — soon after he was tapped to lead the Internal Revenue Service.

Some of the donations are connected to companies that will be policed by the agency Long has been nominated to run.

According to recently filed financial disclosures, which were first reported on by the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.levernews.com/trump-irs-pick-was-just-enriched-by-tax-schemers/" target="_blank">investigative journalism site The Lever</a>, Long only raised roughly $36,000 in the last two years.&nbsp;

He was named as&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/briefs/donald-trump-picks-missouris-billy-long-to-lead-the-irs/">President Donald Trump’s pick to lead the IRS</a>&nbsp;in December, and in January received $137,000 in donations. He then paid back the remaining&nbsp;<a href="https://www.fec.gov/data/committee/C00460063/?tab=summary" target="_blank">$130,000 in debt from a $250,000 loan</a>&nbsp;he made to his unsuccessful 2022 U.S. Senate campaign.

The donations, and their timing, have renewed criticism of Long’s appointment, which still awaits Senate confirmation. Senate Democrats have already called for a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.finance.senate.gov/chairmans-news/wyden-cortez-masto-call-for-criminal-investigation-into-evidence-of-fraud-by-promoters-affiliated-with-irs-nominee-billy-long" target="_blank">criminal investigation of firms with ties to Long</a>&nbsp;that they allege are involved in fraudulent tax credit schemes.&nbsp;

Among the donors to Long’s campaign are financial advisers from some of those firms.

“When they told Billy he’d be in charge of revenue collection, did they forget to tell him that meant for the American people, not his own bank account?” said Sean Nicholson, a longtime progressive activist and campaign consultant in Missouri.&nbsp;

Jordan Libowitz, vice president of communications for the liberal watchdog Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, said the timing of the donations and the “explicit knowledge that they’d end up directly in Long’s bank account, it’s hard to see them as anything other than an attempt to curry favor with the future head of the IRS.”

Long did not respond to a request for comment.&nbsp;

After a career as an auctioneer and conservative radio host, Long served six terms representing a Southwest Missouri congressional district. He gave up his seat to&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2022/07/21/billy-longs-chances-in-missouri-gop-senate-primary-depend-on-donald-trump/">run for U.S. Senate in 2022</a>, losing in the GOP primary to now-Sen. Eric Schmitt.&nbsp;

Long then worked for&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/24/business/billy-long-irs-tax-credit.html" target="_blank">Lifetime Advisors</a>&nbsp;and earned at least $5,000 in income from&nbsp;<a href="https://news.bloombergtax.com/daily-tax-report/trump-irs-pick-has-ties-to-group-that-pushed-dubious-tax-credits" target="_blank">White River Energy</a>. Both companies have drawn&nbsp;<a href="https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/warren-presses-irs-nominee-billy-long-on-questionable-record-of-pushing-fraud-ridden-tax-credit" target="_blank">scorn from Senate Democrats</a>, and intense media scrutiny, over their involvement in controversial tax credit programs.&nbsp;

In 2022, the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.texastribune.org/2022/05/16/ted-cruz-supreme-court-campaign-finance/" target="_blank">U.S. Supreme Court struck down a limit&nbsp;</a>on the amount of post-election funds a candidate can use to pay back personal loans. The majority found the limit an unconstitutional restriction on the freedom of speech, while the dissenting justices argued removing it would pave the way for political corruption.&nbsp;&nbsp;

“Even if our broken campaign finance system allows this behavior,” Libowitz said, “it raises serious questions about future conflicts of interest and needs to be addressed in any hearings (Billy Long) has before Congress.”&nbsp;

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/12/1734986359615.png" alt="- Billy Long speaks during a press conference before filing for to be on the ballot in the Missouri GOP Senate primary on Feb. 22, 2022, in Jefferson City (Madeline Carter/Missouri Independent)." />
 <figcaption>- Billy Long speaks during a press conference before filing for to be on the ballot in the Missouri GOP Senate primary on Feb. 22, 2022, in Jefferson City (Madeline Carter/Missouri Independent).</figcaption>
 </figure>BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/jason-hancock/">JASON HANCOCK</a> <a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2023/02/20/state-senator-throws-first-punches-of-2024-missouri-governors-campaign/">Missouri Independent</a>Former Missouri Congressman Billy Long received $137,000 in campaign contributions — just enough to pay off a personal loan to his campaign — soon after he was tapped to lead the Internal Revenue Service.Some of the donations are connected to companies that will be policed by the agency Long has been nominated to run.According to recently filed financial disclosures, which were first reported on by the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.levernews.com/trump-irs-pick-was-just-enriched-by-tax-schemers/" target="_blank">investigative journalism site The Lever</a>, Long only raised roughly $36,000 in the last two years.&nbsp;He was named as&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/briefs/donald-trump-picks-missouris-billy-long-to-lead-the-irs/">President Donald Trump’s pick to lead the IRS</a>&nbsp;in December, and in January received $137,000 in donations. He then paid back the remaining&nbsp;<a href="https://www.fec.gov/data/committee/C00460063/?tab=summary" target="_blank">$130,000 in debt from a $250,000 loan</a>&nbsp;he made to his unsuccessful 2022 U.S. Senate campaign.The donations, and their timing, have renewed criticism of Long’s appointment, which still awaits Senate confirmation. Senate Democrats have already called for a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.finance.senate.gov/chairmans-news/wyden-cortez-masto-call-for-criminal-investigation-into-evidence-of-fraud-by-promoters-affiliated-with-irs-nominee-billy-long" target="_blank">criminal investigation of firms with ties to Long</a>&nbsp;that they allege are involved in fraudulent tax credit schemes.&nbsp;Among the donors to Long’s campaign are financial advisers from some of those firms.“When they told Billy he’d be in charge of revenue collection, did they forget to tell him that meant for the American people, not his own bank account?” said Sean Nicholson, a longtime progressive activist and campaign consultant in Missouri.&nbsp;Jordan Libowitz, vice president of communications for the liberal watchdog Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, said the timing of the donations and the “explicit knowledge that they’d end up directly in Long’s bank account, it’s hard to see them as anything other than an attempt to curry favor with the future head of the IRS.”Long did not respond to a request for comment.&nbsp;After a career as an auctioneer and conservative radio host, Long served six terms representing a Southwest Missouri congressional district. He gave up his seat to&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2022/07/21/billy-longs-chances-in-missouri-gop-senate-primary-depend-on-donald-trump/">run for U.S. Senate in 2022</a>, losing in the GOP primary to now-Sen. Eric Schmitt.&nbsp;Long then worked for&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/24/business/billy-long-irs-tax-credit.html" target="_blank">Lifetime Advisors</a>&nbsp;and earned at least $5,000 in income from&nbsp;<a href="https://news.bloombergtax.com/daily-tax-report/trump-irs-pick-has-ties-to-group-that-pushed-dubious-tax-credits" target="_blank">White River Energy</a>. Both companies have drawn&nbsp;<a href="https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/warren-presses-irs-nominee-billy-long-on-questionable-record-of-pushing-fraud-ridden-tax-credit" target="_blank">scorn from Senate Democrats</a>, and intense media scrutiny, over their involvement in controversial tax credit programs.&nbsp;In 2022, the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.texastribune.org/2022/05/16/ted-cruz-supreme-court-campaign-finance/" target="_blank">U.S. Supreme Court struck down a limit&nbsp;</a>on the amount of post-election funds a candidate can use to pay back personal loans. The majority found the limit an unconstitutional restriction on the freedom of speech, while the dissenting justices argued removing it would pave the way for political corruption.&nbsp;&nbsp;“Even if our broken campaign finance system allows this behavior,” Libowitz said, “it raises serious questions about future conflicts of interest and needs to be addressed in any hearings (Billy Long) has before Congress.”&nbsp;Last updated 5:57 a.m., Apr. 19, 2025

Billy Long’s bid to lead IRS under scrutiny over donations that paid off personal debt

By:&nbsp;ZACH WENDLING/NEBRASKA EXAMINER&nbsp;

LINCOLN —&nbsp;State lawmakers seeking to slow down annual minimum wage increases that Nebraska voters approved in 2022 have reached a new deal to avoid the law’s inflationary increases.&nbsp;

State Sens. Jane Raybould of Lincoln and Stan Clouse of Kearney said they have found a “compromise” for Raybould’s&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=59447&amp;docnum=LB258&amp;leg=109" target="_blank">Legislative Bill 258</a>&nbsp;that would completely remove permanent annual cost-of-living increases to the state minimum wage, beginning in 2027.&nbsp;&nbsp;

Under the&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/FloorDocs/109/PDF/AM/AM1077.pdf" target="_blank">Clouse amendment</a>, the wage would increase instead by 1.75% annually in perpetuity.&nbsp;Under the current law, workers could see much larger increases. Average inflation for the past five years was 4.18%. Over the past 10 years, it was 2.63%. And over the past 25 years, it was 2.39%, according to&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/25-year-CPI-U-Midwest_Aug2000-2025-1.pdf" target="_blank">data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics for the Midwest</a>.&nbsp;

“It’s certainty, and I like certainty, and I like minimizing the risk,” Clouse said at the beginning of April, when he pitched a fixed annual increase rather than a sliding scale&nbsp;tied to inflation.&nbsp;

Raybould said her motivation and why she keeps pushing “passionately” for her measure is to help small businesses and others who might not be able to absorb the cost of rising wages that she said could pass on costs to consumers.&nbsp;

“I know that this is the right thing to do, to create a balance,” Raybould said this week. “You have to always balance it out to make sure that we maintain the economic vitality and vibrancy and economic growth in our state without falling off and creating a cycle of cost increases that are so much harder for Nebraska families to be able to afford.”&nbsp;

Clouse has said that unless his amendment has been attached to LB 258 before the end of the next four-hour debate on LB 258,&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/04/01/conflict-boils-over-as-legislature-advances-changes-to-voter-approved-minimum-wage-increases/" target="_blank">he will not vote for the measure</a>. His vote matters because overcoming a filibuster requires 33 votes, and Clouse is likely Raybould’s 33rd vote.&nbsp;&nbsp;

State Sen. Danielle Conrad of Lincoln has filed multiple motions and amendments to try to prevent his amendment from being attached, one of the<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/04/01/conflict-boils-over-as-legislature-advances-changes-to-voter-approved-minimum-wage-increases/" target="_blank">&nbsp;opponents who say Raybould’s bill goes against voters</a>.&nbsp;

Nebraska first enacted a state minimum wage of $1 in October 1967, 29 years after Congress passed a federal minimum wage, first at 25 cents for select workers. The federal minimum wage sets a floor for workers’ pay when state wages don’t keep up.&nbsp;

The Nebraska minimum wage did not overtake the federal minimum wage until voters acted in 2014, increasing it to $9 by January 2016.&nbsp;

In 2022, voters acted again and decided to permanently go around the Legislature, opting for annual $1.50 increases through 2026, up to $15, before shifting to annual cost-of-living adjustments.&nbsp;

Raybould, a longtime grocery store executive who was elected to the Legislature in 2022, first proposed capping annual minimum wage increases to up to 1.5% in 2023. Former State Sen. Tom Briese of Albion, now the state treasurer, had a separate measure seeking to amend the state training wage for teen workers, while also seeking to create a “youth minimum wage” for 14 or 15 year olds.&nbsp;

The training wage was first established in July 1991, allowing employers to pay workers younger than 20 a lower wage for up to the first 90 days of employment. The wage expired after March 1993 but returned in September 1997.&nbsp;

LB 258 would exempt 14 or 15 year olds from the training wage but create a subminimum wage for the youngest workers that could stay in place until they age out.&nbsp;

Raybould’s version of the original Briese proposal, in LB 258, includes the following:&nbsp;

The state minimum wage for adults and older teens would rise by 2065 to $29.51 under Clouse’s amendment. That’s the same point at which the new youth minimum wage would finally catch up to the $15 baseline wage that voters approved for all Nebraska workers in 2022, starting next year, based on an analysis by the Nebraska Examiner of the impact of the Clouse and Raybould language.&nbsp;

The disparity between the state minimum wage and the youth wage would grow over time, from about 90% of the state wage in 2026 to about half of the Nebraska rate by 2065. That’s young workers born after 2050.&nbsp;

The training wage would be $24.13 in 2065, or about 82% of the state minimum wage. Raybould said it’s critical to correct an “oversight” from past legislation and ballot measures that left out increases to the training wage and sever that wage from the stagnant federal rate.&nbsp;

Emancipated minors would be paid the full state minimum wage as older workers, which Raybould and supporters have said would help some young parents or youths who need the most support.&nbsp;

However, very few minors are granted emancipation, according to court data that Conrad requested and shared with the Examiner. In the report, 143 emancipation cases were filed with the judicial system, dating back to 2019 and including the early part of 2025.&nbsp;

Over that period, the court system granted 65 youths emancipation, and eight more cases were pending. It’s unclear how many of those minors were 14 or 15 years old.&nbsp;&nbsp;

Local businesses sought to employ 2,874 teens aged 14 or 15 in 2022, according to a&nbsp;<a href="https://dol.nebraska.gov/webdocs/Resources/Trends/May%202023/Trends%20May%202023.pdf" target="_blank">March 2023 Nebraska Department of Labor report</a>.&nbsp;

Raybould said she continues pushing for the youth minimum wage partly because of child labor laws that the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.oshaeducationcenter.com/articles/child-labor-laws/#:~:text=Federal%20law%20states%20that%2014,per%20week%20while%20in%20school." target="_blank">Occupational Safety and Health Administration</a>&nbsp;helps&nbsp;<a href="https://www.oshaeducationcenter.com/" target="_blank">enforce</a>. Under the requirements, a 14- or 15-year-old can only perform certain non-hazardous or non-manufacturing duties or&nbsp;<a href="https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/YouthRules/young-workers/non-ag-14-15" target="_blank">work certain hours</a>. Businesses face severe penalties for noncompliance.&nbsp;

These teen workers can’t work more than three hours on a school day or more than 18 hours during a school week. Work hours are restricted between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m., except around the summer when night hours are extended to 9 p.m.&nbsp;

Raybould said she’s heard from many business leaders who say they would hire 14- or 15-year-old workers but that the same minimum wage coupled with OSHA restrictions is a disincentive for doing so.&nbsp;

She said her family, which operates B&amp;R Stores, Inc., the parent company of Super Saver, Russ’s Market and other local grocery stores, hasn’t hired those youngest workers for about 20 years “for the very reason of the equipment and things they are not permitted to do.”&nbsp;

If the youth wage were established, she said some businesses might reconsider hiring young workers. However, she said her grocery stores wouldn’t because of “too many restrictions.”&nbsp;

Raybould retired as vice president of her family company, founded in 1964, at the end of March. She continues to serve as vice chair of the company board and has filed a&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/jane-raybould-conflict-of-interest-min-wage.pdf" target="_blank">conflict of interest statement</a>&nbsp;on her measure.&nbsp;

LB 258 would not be the final say on minimum wage, Raybould added, as future lawmakers or voters could still act. She noted employers also would not be prohibited from paying more than the minimum wage or from not adopting training or youth wages. She said she realizes workers, during a workforce shortage, are looking for competitive wages, benefits and hours.&nbsp;

Raybould’s bill would not change the $2.13 minimum hourly wage paid to workers earning tips or gratuities, which hasn’t changed since 1991.&nbsp;

Conrad, who helped run the 2014 ballot measure that brought the state minimum wage above the federal rate, and State Sen. Terrell McKinney of North Omaha, who helped lead the 2022 measure, have led opposition to Raybould this spring. All three are Democrats, with Raybould standing alone among her progressive colleagues in the officially nonpartisan Legislature.&nbsp;

Much of the opposition cites the “<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/will-of-the-voters-recent-election-results-by-nebraska-legislative-congressional-districts/" target="_blank">will of the voters</a>” in 2022, when the McKinney-backed measure secured about&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/will-of-the-voters-recent-election-results-by-nebraska-legislative-congressional-districts/" target="_blank">59% support statewide and majority support in 38 of 49 legislative districts</a>.&nbsp;

Conrad blasted the creation of a youth wage as viewing young workers as “subhuman” and urged Raybould to show where in her campaign she said she would “stick it to low-income working families.”&nbsp;

“The frustration is that you shouldn’t have to explain basic civics to adult state senators,” Conrad said during the earlier debate.&nbsp;

As a freshman lawmaker in 2007, Conrad helped keep the state minimum wage on track with the federal minimum wage after a last-minute&nbsp;<a href="https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-110publ28/pdf/PLAW-110publ28.pdf" target="_blank">emergency congressional spending bill</a>, focused on disaster relief for Hurricane Katrina and funding for wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, passed with minimum wage increases.&nbsp;

The&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/search_by_date.php?SessionDay=2007-01-04" target="_blank">first bill Conrad ever introduced</a>, in 2007, sought to&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=350" target="_blank">increase the state minimum wage</a>&nbsp;and seek regular inflationary changes, while also increasing and narrowing the state training wage and tying the tipped-worker wage to 50% of the state minimum wage.&nbsp;&nbsp;

One of the lobbyists opposing that bill is now a freshman senator, State Sen. Bob Hallstrom of Syracuse. He was representing the National Federation of Independent Business.&nbsp;

A much-narrowed version of Conrad’s bill came to fruition at the tail-end of the 2007 legislative session, which inadvertently led to a temporary 53-day decrease in the state training wage because of differences in the timing of the state and federal laws taking effect, a hiccup that was added when Conrad’s bill was amended into a similar bill.&nbsp;

Speaking with the Examiner this week, Conrad said the debate needs to remain focused on voters and low-income families or low-income working young people, who she said would be most hurt by LB 258.&nbsp;

“Anything that has caused us to lose sight of the true impacts of these harmful measures is a distraction, and if Senator Raybould wants to perpetuate some sort of personal attacks or can’t defend her own position in financial conflict, that’s on her,” Conrad said. “Senator Raybould is not a victim.”&nbsp;

Conrad said she and Raybould have been friends for a long time and agree on more than they disagree. While this “sharp disagreement … is painful for both of us,” Conrad said she continues to consider Raybould a friend.&nbsp;

McKinney has said a “common theme” of the 2025 session so far has been to go against voters, whether it be weakening paid sick leave, medical cannabis or minimum wage measures. He called it “sad, to say the least.” He unsuccessfully tried to raise the state minimum wage with legislation in 2021, before leading the 2022 ballot measure.&nbsp;

“When you have stagnant wages, you have people stuck in a cycle,” McKinney said during the previous debate. “And then you have people telling people to pull yourselves up by your bootstraps, do all these things, but we have stagnant wages.”&nbsp;

Raybould has described her bill as exercising the Legislature’s referendum power to modify, amend or repeal voter-enacted laws.&nbsp;&nbsp;

State Sen. Kathleen Kauth of the Millard area, who chairs the Business and Labor Committee that advanced Raybould’s bill, said she was very much against the Raybould and Briese ideas when the youth minimum wage would have applied to 16 or 17 year olds.&nbsp;

Once Raybould limited the youth minimum wage to 14 or 15 year olds, citing the federal restrictions, Kauth came on board.&nbsp;

“Raising the minimum wage does nothing more than a very temporary measure to make you feel good for a little bit,” Kauth said.&nbsp;

She continued: “If you have not improved your skills, you haven’t taken on more responsibility, got more education, or done something to differentiate yourself and improve, then everybody’s going to just kind of float at that same level and everything becomes more expensive.”&nbsp;

Next year, Raybould will have a choice to make on whether she runs for reelection, but she said she has “never cared, not ever” about whether she is reelected. Instead, she said she cares about “doing the right thing every day for the right reasons that help the most Nebraskans.”&nbsp;

She said she’s heard from constituents who have thanked her for the measure, as well as others who have called her self-serving, self-centered and selfish. Of the hits, she said, “I just have to take those.”&nbsp;

Raybould said her constituents know her, that she is informed and does her “homework,” and that her 2026 reelection decision is up to central Lincoln voters. She previously served four years as a Lancaster County commissioner and eight years as a member of the Lincoln City Council, and she was the Democratic candidate in 2018 against U.S. Sen. Deb Fischer, R-Neb.&nbsp;

“It’s really up to them to make that decision if they want me to run again or if they want someone else,” Raybould said. “And if they want someone else, I would support that too.”&nbsp;

By:&nbsp;ZACH WENDLING/NEBRASKA EXAMINER&nbsp;LINCOLN —&nbsp;State lawmakers seeking to slow down annual minimum wage increases that Nebraska voters approved in 2022 have reached a new deal to avoid the law’s inflationary increases.&nbsp;State Sens. Jane Raybould of Lincoln and Stan Clouse of Kearney said they have found a “compromise” for Raybould’s&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=59447&amp;docnum=LB258&amp;leg=109" target="_blank">Legislative Bill 258</a>&nbsp;that would completely remove permanent annual cost-of-living increases to the state minimum wage, beginning in 2027.&nbsp;&nbsp;<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/4/1745260259818.jpeg" alt="State Sen. Jane Raybould of Lincoln talks with State Sen. Rick Holdcroft of Bellevue during debate on her priority bill to alter voter-approved annual increases to the state’s minimum wage. March 31, 2025. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner)" />
 <figcaption>State Sen. Jane Raybould of Lincoln talks with State Sen. Rick Holdcroft of Bellevue during debate on her priority bill to alter voter-approved annual increases to the state’s minimum wage. March 31, 2025. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner)</figcaption>
 </figure>Under the&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/FloorDocs/109/PDF/AM/AM1077.pdf" target="_blank">Clouse amendment</a>, the wage would increase instead by 1.75% annually in perpetuity.&nbsp;Under the current law, workers could see much larger increases. Average inflation for the past five years was 4.18%. Over the past 10 years, it was 2.63%. And over the past 25 years, it was 2.39%, according to&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/25-year-CPI-U-Midwest_Aug2000-2025-1.pdf" target="_blank">data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics for the Midwest</a>.&nbsp;“It’s certainty, and I like certainty, and I like minimizing the risk,” Clouse said at the beginning of April, when he pitched a fixed annual increase rather than a sliding scale&nbsp;tied to inflation.&nbsp;Raybould said her motivation and why she keeps pushing “passionately” for her measure is to help small businesses and others who might not be able to absorb the cost of rising wages that she said could pass on costs to consumers.&nbsp;“I know that this is the right thing to do, to create a balance,” Raybould said this week. “You have to always balance it out to make sure that we maintain the economic vitality and vibrancy and economic growth in our state without falling off and creating a cycle of cost increases that are so much harder for Nebraska families to be able to afford.”&nbsp;Clouse has said that unless his amendment has been attached to LB 258 before the end of the next four-hour debate on LB 258,&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/04/01/conflict-boils-over-as-legislature-advances-changes-to-voter-approved-minimum-wage-increases/" target="_blank">he will not vote for the measure</a>. His vote matters because overcoming a filibuster requires 33 votes, and Clouse is likely Raybould’s 33rd vote.&nbsp;&nbsp;State Sen. Danielle Conrad of Lincoln has filed multiple motions and amendments to try to prevent his amendment from being attached, one of the<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/04/01/conflict-boils-over-as-legislature-advances-changes-to-voter-approved-minimum-wage-increases/" target="_blank">&nbsp;opponents who say Raybould’s bill goes against voters</a>.&nbsp;Nebraska first enacted a state minimum wage of $1 in October 1967, 29 years after Congress passed a federal minimum wage, first at 25 cents for select workers. The federal minimum wage sets a floor for workers’ pay when state wages don’t keep up.&nbsp;The Nebraska minimum wage did not overtake the federal minimum wage until voters acted in 2014, increasing it to $9 by January 2016.&nbsp;In 2022, voters acted again and decided to permanently go around the Legislature, opting for annual $1.50 increases through 2026, up to $15, before shifting to annual cost-of-living adjustments.&nbsp;Raybould, a longtime grocery store executive who was elected to the Legislature in 2022, first proposed capping annual minimum wage increases to up to 1.5% in 2023. Former State Sen. Tom Briese of Albion, now the state treasurer, had a separate measure seeking to amend the state training wage for teen workers, while also seeking to create a “youth minimum wage” for 14 or 15 year olds.&nbsp;The training wage was first established in July 1991, allowing employers to pay workers younger than 20 a lower wage for up to the first 90 days of employment. The wage expired after March 1993 but returned in September 1997.&nbsp;LB 258 would exempt 14 or 15 year olds from the training wage but create a subminimum wage for the youngest workers that could stay in place until they age out.&nbsp;Raybould’s version of the original Briese proposal, in LB 258, includes the following:&nbsp;<ul>
 <li>The training wage would be limited to teen workers ages 16 to 19. It would rise to $13.50 this September and, beginning in 2027, increase by 1.5% each year. The training wage in Nebraska has been tied to 75% of the federal minimum wage since 2007. With the $7.25 federal wage not increasing since 2009, the training wage has been locked at $5.44.&nbsp;</li>
 </ul><ul>
 <li>The youth minimum wage would be created for 14 or 15 year olds, exempting them from the training wage. It would start at $13.50 in January 2026 and increase every fifth year by 1.5%.&nbsp;</li>
 </ul>The state minimum wage for adults and older teens would rise by 2065 to $29.51 under Clouse’s amendment. That’s the same point at which the new youth minimum wage would finally catch up to the $15 baseline wage that voters approved for all Nebraska workers in 2022, starting next year, based on an analysis by the Nebraska Examiner of the impact of the Clouse and Raybould language.&nbsp;The disparity between the state minimum wage and the youth wage would grow over time, from about 90% of the state wage in 2026 to about half of the Nebraska rate by 2065. That’s young workers born after 2050.&nbsp;The training wage would be $24.13 in 2065, or about 82% of the state minimum wage. Raybould said it’s critical to correct an “oversight” from past legislation and ballot measures that left out increases to the training wage and sever that wage from the stagnant federal rate.&nbsp;Emancipated minors would be paid the full state minimum wage as older workers, which Raybould and supporters have said would help some young parents or youths who need the most support.&nbsp;However, very few minors are granted emancipation, according to court data that Conrad requested and shared with the Examiner. In the report, 143 emancipation cases were filed with the judicial system, dating back to 2019 and including the early part of 2025.&nbsp;Over that period, the court system granted 65 youths emancipation, and eight more cases were pending. It’s unclear how many of those minors were 14 or 15 years old.&nbsp;&nbsp;Local businesses sought to employ 2,874 teens aged 14 or 15 in 2022, according to a&nbsp;<a href="https://dol.nebraska.gov/webdocs/Resources/Trends/May%202023/Trends%20May%202023.pdf" target="_blank">March 2023 Nebraska Department of Labor report</a>.&nbsp;Raybould said she continues pushing for the youth minimum wage partly because of child labor laws that the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.oshaeducationcenter.com/articles/child-labor-laws/#:~:text=Federal%20law%20states%20that%2014,per%20week%20while%20in%20school." target="_blank">Occupational Safety and Health Administration</a>&nbsp;helps&nbsp;<a href="https://www.oshaeducationcenter.com/" target="_blank">enforce</a>. Under the requirements, a 14- or 15-year-old can only perform certain non-hazardous or non-manufacturing duties or&nbsp;<a href="https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/YouthRules/young-workers/non-ag-14-15" target="_blank">work certain hours</a>. Businesses face severe penalties for noncompliance.&nbsp;These teen workers can’t work more than three hours on a school day or more than 18 hours during a school week. Work hours are restricted between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m., except around the summer when night hours are extended to 9 p.m.&nbsp;Raybould said she’s heard from many business leaders who say they would hire 14- or 15-year-old workers but that the same minimum wage coupled with OSHA restrictions is a disincentive for doing so.&nbsp;She said her family, which operates B&amp;R Stores, Inc., the parent company of Super Saver, Russ’s Market and other local grocery stores, hasn’t hired those youngest workers for about 20 years “for the very reason of the equipment and things they are not permitted to do.”&nbsp;If the youth wage were established, she said some businesses might reconsider hiring young workers. However, she said her grocery stores wouldn’t because of “too many restrictions.”&nbsp;Raybould retired as vice president of her family company, founded in 1964, at the end of March. She continues to serve as vice chair of the company board and has filed a&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/jane-raybould-conflict-of-interest-min-wage.pdf" target="_blank">conflict of interest statement</a>&nbsp;on her measure.&nbsp;LB 258 would not be the final say on minimum wage, Raybould added, as future lawmakers or voters could still act. She noted employers also would not be prohibited from paying more than the minimum wage or from not adopting training or youth wages. She said she realizes workers, during a workforce shortage, are looking for competitive wages, benefits and hours.&nbsp;Raybould’s bill would not change the $2.13 minimum hourly wage paid to workers earning tips or gratuities, which hasn’t changed since 1991.&nbsp;Conrad, who helped run the 2014 ballot measure that brought the state minimum wage above the federal rate, and State Sen. Terrell McKinney of North Omaha, who helped lead the 2022 measure, have led opposition to Raybould this spring. All three are Democrats, with Raybould standing alone among her progressive colleagues in the officially nonpartisan Legislature.&nbsp;Much of the opposition cites the “<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/will-of-the-voters-recent-election-results-by-nebraska-legislative-congressional-districts/" target="_blank">will of the voters</a>” in 2022, when the McKinney-backed measure secured about&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/will-of-the-voters-recent-election-results-by-nebraska-legislative-congressional-districts/" target="_blank">59% support statewide and majority support in 38 of 49 legislative districts</a>.&nbsp;Conrad blasted the creation of a youth wage as viewing young workers as “subhuman” and urged Raybould to show where in her campaign she said she would “stick it to low-income working families.”&nbsp;“The frustration is that you shouldn’t have to explain basic civics to adult state senators,” Conrad said during the earlier debate.&nbsp;As a freshman lawmaker in 2007, Conrad helped keep the state minimum wage on track with the federal minimum wage after a last-minute&nbsp;<a href="https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-110publ28/pdf/PLAW-110publ28.pdf" target="_blank">emergency congressional spending bill</a>, focused on disaster relief for Hurricane Katrina and funding for wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, passed with minimum wage increases.&nbsp;The&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/search_by_date.php?SessionDay=2007-01-04" target="_blank">first bill Conrad ever introduced</a>, in 2007, sought to&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=350" target="_blank">increase the state minimum wage</a>&nbsp;and seek regular inflationary changes, while also increasing and narrowing the state training wage and tying the tipped-worker wage to 50% of the state minimum wage.&nbsp;&nbsp;One of the lobbyists opposing that bill is now a freshman senator, State Sen. Bob Hallstrom of Syracuse. He was representing the National Federation of Independent Business.&nbsp;A much-narrowed version of Conrad’s bill came to fruition at the tail-end of the 2007 legislative session, which inadvertently led to a temporary 53-day decrease in the state training wage because of differences in the timing of the state and federal laws taking effect, a hiccup that was added when Conrad’s bill was amended into a similar bill.&nbsp;Speaking with the Examiner this week, Conrad said the debate needs to remain focused on voters and low-income families or low-income working young people, who she said would be most hurt by LB 258.&nbsp;“Anything that has caused us to lose sight of the true impacts of these harmful measures is a distraction, and if Senator Raybould wants to perpetuate some sort of personal attacks or can’t defend her own position in financial conflict, that’s on her,” Conrad said. “Senator Raybould is not a victim.”&nbsp;Conrad said she and Raybould have been friends for a long time and agree on more than they disagree. While this “sharp disagreement … is painful for both of us,” Conrad said she continues to consider Raybould a friend.&nbsp;McKinney has said a “common theme” of the 2025 session so far has been to go against voters, whether it be weakening paid sick leave, medical cannabis or minimum wage measures. He called it “sad, to say the least.” He unsuccessfully tried to raise the state minimum wage with legislation in 2021, before leading the 2022 ballot measure.&nbsp;“When you have stagnant wages, you have people stuck in a cycle,” McKinney said during the previous debate. “And then you have people telling people to pull yourselves up by your bootstraps, do all these things, but we have stagnant wages.”&nbsp;Raybould has described her bill as exercising the Legislature’s referendum power to modify, amend or repeal voter-enacted laws.&nbsp;&nbsp;State Sen. Kathleen Kauth of the Millard area, who chairs the Business and Labor Committee that advanced Raybould’s bill, said she was very much against the Raybould and Briese ideas when the youth minimum wage would have applied to 16 or 17 year olds.&nbsp;Once Raybould limited the youth minimum wage to 14 or 15 year olds, citing the federal restrictions, Kauth came on board.&nbsp;“Raising the minimum wage does nothing more than a very temporary measure to make you feel good for a little bit,” Kauth said.&nbsp;She continued: “If you have not improved your skills, you haven’t taken on more responsibility, got more education, or done something to differentiate yourself and improve, then everybody’s going to just kind of float at that same level and everything becomes more expensive.”&nbsp;Next year, Raybould will have a choice to make on whether she runs for reelection, but she said she has “never cared, not ever” about whether she is reelected. Instead, she said she cares about “doing the right thing every day for the right reasons that help the most Nebraskans.”&nbsp;She said she’s heard from constituents who have thanked her for the measure, as well as others who have called her self-serving, self-centered and selfish. Of the hits, she said, “I just have to take those.”&nbsp;Raybould said her constituents know her, that she is informed and does her “homework,” and that her 2026 reelection decision is up to central Lincoln voters. She previously served four years as a Lancaster County commissioner and eight years as a member of the Lincoln City Council, and she was the Democratic candidate in 2018 against U.S. Sen. Deb Fischer, R-Neb.&nbsp;“It’s really up to them to make that decision if they want me to run again or if they want someone else,” Raybould said. “And if they want someone else, I would support that too.”&nbsp;

Nebraska minimum wage would see fixed annual increases under new ‘compromise’ amendment

At 9:45 AM, Cardinal Kevin Farrell, Camerlengo of the&nbsp;Apostolic Chamber, announced the death of Pope Francis from the Casa Santa Marta with these words:

"Dearest brothers and sisters, with deep sorrow I must announce the death of our Holy Father Francis. At 7:35 this morning, the Bishop of Rome, Francis, returned to the house of the Father. His entire life was dedicated to the service of the Lord and of His Church. He taught us to live the values of the Gospel with fidelity, courage, and universal love, especially in favor of the poorest and most marginalized. With immense gratitude for his example as a true disciple of the Lord Jesus, we commend the soul of Pope Francis to the infinite merciful love of the One and Triune God."

The Pope was admitted to the Agostino Gemelli Polyclinic Hospital on Friday, February 14, 2025, after suffering from a bout of bronchitis for several days.

Pope Francis’ clinical situation gradually worsened, and his doctors diagnosed bilateral pneumonia on Tuesday, February 18.

After 38 days in hospital, the late Pope returned to his Vatican residence at the Casa Santa Marta to continue his recovery.

In 1957, in his early 20s, Jorge Mario Bergoglio underwent surgery in his native Argentina to remove a portion of his lung that had been affected by a severe respiratory infection.

As he aged, Pope Francis frequently suffered bouts of respiratory illnesses, even cancelling a planned visit to the United Arab Emirates in November 2023 due to influenza and lung inflammation.

In April 2024, the late Pope Francis approved an updated edition of the liturgical book for papal funeral rites, which will guide the funeral Mass which has yet to be announced.

The second edition of the&nbsp;Ordo Exsequiarum Romani Pontificis&nbsp;introduces several new elements, including how the Pope’s mortal remains are to be handled after death.

The ascertainment of death takes place in the chapel, rather than in the room where he died, and his body is immediately placed inside the coffin.

According to Archbishop Diego Ravelli, Master of Apostolic Ceremonies, the late Pope Francis had requested that the funeral rites be simplified and focused on expressing the faith of the Church in the Risen Body of Christ.

“The renewed rite,” said Archbishop Ravelli, “seeks to emphasise even more that the funeral of the Roman Pontiff is that of a pastor and disciple of Christ and not of a powerful person of this world.”

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/6/1718390118058.png" alt="Pope Francis image courtesy CSPAN" />
 <figcaption>Pope Francis image courtesy CSPAN</figcaption>
 </figure>By Devin Watkins Vatican News ServiceAt 9:45 AM, Cardinal Kevin Farrell, Camerlengo of the&nbsp;Apostolic Chamber, announced the death of Pope Francis from the Casa Santa Marta with these words:"Dearest brothers and sisters, with deep sorrow I must announce the death of our Holy Father Francis. At 7:35 this morning, the Bishop of Rome, Francis, returned to the house of the Father. His entire life was dedicated to the service of the Lord and of His Church. He taught us to live the values of the Gospel with fidelity, courage, and universal love, especially in favor of the poorest and most marginalized. With immense gratitude for his example as a true disciple of the Lord Jesus, we commend the soul of Pope Francis to the infinite merciful love of the One and Triune God."<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Pope Francis died on Easter Monday, April 21, 2025, at the age of 88 at his residence in the Vatican&#39;s Casa Santa Marta. <a href="https://t.co/jUIkbplVi2">pic.twitter.com/jUIkbplVi2</a>&mdash; Vatican News (@VaticanNews) <a href="https://twitter.com/VaticanNews/status/1914226689065865254?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 21, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>The Pope was admitted to the Agostino Gemelli Polyclinic Hospital on Friday, February 14, 2025, after suffering from a bout of bronchitis for several days.Pope Francis’ clinical situation gradually worsened, and his doctors diagnosed bilateral pneumonia on Tuesday, February 18.After 38 days in hospital, the late Pope returned to his Vatican residence at the Casa Santa Marta to continue his recovery.In 1957, in his early 20s, Jorge Mario Bergoglio underwent surgery in his native Argentina to remove a portion of his lung that had been affected by a severe respiratory infection.As he aged, Pope Francis frequently suffered bouts of respiratory illnesses, even cancelling a planned visit to the United Arab Emirates in November 2023 due to influenza and lung inflammation.In April 2024, the late Pope Francis approved an updated edition of the liturgical book for papal funeral rites, which will guide the funeral Mass which has yet to be announced.The second edition of the&nbsp;Ordo Exsequiarum Romani Pontificis&nbsp;introduces several new elements, including how the Pope’s mortal remains are to be handled after death.The ascertainment of death takes place in the chapel, rather than in the room where he died, and his body is immediately placed inside the coffin.According to Archbishop Diego Ravelli, Master of Apostolic Ceremonies, the late Pope Francis had requested that the funeral rites be simplified and focused on expressing the faith of the Church in the Risen Body of Christ.“The renewed rite,” said Archbishop Ravelli, “seeks to emphasise even more that the funeral of the Roman Pontiff is that of a pastor and disciple of Christ and not of a powerful person of this world.”

Pope Francis, Latin America's first pontiff, dies at 88

By:&nbsp;<a href="https://stateline.org/author/rsequeira/">Robbie Sequeira</a>&nbsp;

Many conservative-led states rely heavily on dollars from Washington.

Early this month, the U.S. Department of Education issued an ultimatum to K-12 public schools and state education agencies: Certify that you are not engaging in discrimination under the banner of diversity, equity and inclusion, or risk losing federal funding — including billions in support for low-income students.

The backlash was immediate. Some states with Democratic governors refused to comply, arguing that the directive lacks legal basis, fails to clearly define what constitutes “<a href="https://www.ed.gov/media/document/reminder-of-legal-obligations-undertaken-exchange-receiving-federal-financial-assistance-and-request-certification-under-title-vi-and-sffa-v-harvard-april-3" target="_blank">illegal DEI practices</a>,” and threatens vital equity-based initiatives in their schools.

After lawsuits from the National Education Association teachers union and the American Civil Liberties Union, the Department of Education agreed to delay enforcement until&nbsp;<a href="https://www.aclu.org/cases/national-education-association-et-al-v-us-department-of-education-et-al?document=Agreement" target="_blank">after April 24</a>.

But states across the country, both liberal- and conservative-led, are worried about losing other aid: the pandemic-era money that in some cases they’ve already spent or committed to spending.

The Department of Education has long played a critical role in distributing federal funds to states for K-12 education, including Title I grants to boost staffing in schools with high percentages of low-income students, and emergency relief like that provided during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Conservative-led states — particularly Mississippi, South Dakota and Arkansas — rely the most heavily on these funds to sustain services in high-need districts.

The 15 states with the highest percentage of their K-12 budget coming from federal funding in fiscal year 2022 — the latest year with data available from the National Center for Education Statistics — voted for Trump in the 2024 presidential election. Similarly, 10 of the 15 states receiving the highest amounts of Title I funding in fiscal year 2024 also voted for Trump.

Mississippi and Kentucky have sent letters to the Department of Education expressing concern over halted pandemic aid.

The clash over federal funding comes even as the future of the Department of Education is murky, given President Donald Trump’s pledge to dismantle the department.

<a href="https://www.datawrapper.de/_/H69Mw/">Click here to see K-12 funding in all states</a>

In letters to the Department of Education, state officials and superintendents in Illinois, New York and Wisconsin pushed back against the DEI directive.

<a href="https://www.nyssba.org/clientuploads/nyssba_pdf/titlevi-040525.pdf#:~:text=The%20certification%20remains%20in%20effect%2C%20as%20do,judicial%20decision%20or%20change%20the%20terms%20and" target="_blank">New York officials</a>&nbsp;said they would not provide additional certification beyond what the state already has done, asserting that there “are no federal or State laws prohibiting the principles of DEI.” Illinois Superintendent Tony Sanders&nbsp;<a href="https://www.isbe.net/Documents/ISBE-Response-Title-VI-Certification.pdf" target="_blank">wrote that</a>&nbsp;he was concerned that the Department of Education was changing the conditions of federal funding without a formal administrative process. Wisconsin Superintendent Jill Underly&nbsp;<a href="https://dpi.wi.gov/sites/default/files/imce/news/4.9.25_-_DPI_Letter_to_USDE.pdf" target="_blank">questioned the legality of the order</a>.

New York State Department of Education Counsel and Deputy Commissioner Daniel Morton-Bentley noted that the federal department’s current stance on DEI starkly contrasts with its position during Trump’s first term, when then-Education Secretary Betsy DeVos supported such efforts.

<a href="https://www.denverpost.com/2025/04/10/colorado-trump-dei-order-state-education-board/" target="_blank">Colorado</a>&nbsp;and<a href="https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2025-04-11/california-defies-trump-education-order-certify-school-districts-eliminate-dei" target="_blank">&nbsp;California</a>&nbsp;also confirmed they would not comply with the Department of Education’s order.

While some states with liberal leaders are gearing up for legal battles and possible revocation of funding, conservative-led states such as Florida have embraced the federal directive as part of a broader push to reshape public education.

In Florida,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2023/266" target="_blank">anti-DEI laws</a>&nbsp;have been in place dating back to 2023. In fact,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.tampabay.com/news/education/2025/03/03/florida-schools-say-theyll-comply-with-federal-push-eliminate-dei/" target="_blank">many&nbsp;</a><a href="https://www.tampabay.com/news/education/2025/03/03/florida-schools-say-theyll-comply-with-federal-push-eliminate-dei/" target="_blank">school&nbsp;</a><a href="https://www.tampabay.com/news/education/2025/03/03/florida-schools-say-theyll-comply-with-federal-push-eliminate-dei/" target="_blank">districts&nbsp;</a><a href="https://www.tampabay.com/news/education/2025/03/03/florida-schools-say-theyll-comply-with-federal-push-eliminate-dei/" target="_blank">and the state education department</a>&nbsp;say they plan to follow the federal department’s directives, noting the similar state laws.

In March, the Department of Education abruptly rescinded previously approved extensions of pandemic-era aid, ending access to funds months ahead of the original March 2026 deadline.

When the Massachusetts governor’s office voiced concern over that decision, the federal department’s reply on social media was blunt: “<a href="https://x.com/i/flow/login?redirect_after_login=%2Fexplore%3Fref_src%3Dtwsrc%255Etfw%257Ctwcamp%255Etweetembed%257Ctwterm%255E1907126614107816273%257Ctwgr%255E13023b2f184f133a77dd7478cf0809d5afc7e4bf%257Ctwcon%255Es1_%26ref_url%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.k12dive.com%252Fnews%252Fstates-lawmakers-pushback-on-covid-fund-spending-extensions%252F744811%252F" target="_blank">COVID is over.</a>”

Sixteen&nbsp;<a href="https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/state-covid-schools-funding-complaint.pdf" target="_blank">mostly Democratic-led&nbsp;</a><a href="https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/state-covid-schools-funding-complaint.pdf" target="_blank">states</a>&nbsp;and the District of Columbia filed a federal lawsuit against the Department of Education and Secretary Linda McMahon, challenging the abrupt rescission of previously approved extensions for spending COVID-19 education relief funds.

But backlash against abrupt federal cuts to education has not been limited to blue states.

Mississippi’s Department of Education warned the cuts would jeopardize more than $137 million in already obligated funds, slated for literacy initiatives, mental health services and infrastructure repairs. “The impact of this sudden reversal is detrimental to Mississippi students,” state Superintendent Lance Evans wrote in&nbsp;<a href="https://mdek12.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/59/2025/04/MS-ESSER-Letter-04.02.25-FINAL.pdf" target="_blank">a letter</a>&nbsp;to McMahon.

The letter also outlines the state’s repeated — but unsuccessful — efforts to draw down millions in approved funds since February.

Shanderia Minor, a spokesperson for the Mississippi education department, told Stateline the agency is awaiting next steps and direction about the funds and federal directives.

By:&nbsp;<a href="https://stateline.org/author/rsequeira/">Robbie Sequeira</a>&nbsp;<h2>Many conservative-led states rely heavily on dollars from Washington.</h2>Early this month, the U.S. Department of Education issued an ultimatum to K-12 public schools and state education agencies: Certify that you are not engaging in discrimination under the banner of diversity, equity and inclusion, or risk losing federal funding — including billions in support for low-income students.The backlash was immediate. Some states with Democratic governors refused to comply, arguing that the directive lacks legal basis, fails to clearly define what constitutes “<a href="https://www.ed.gov/media/document/reminder-of-legal-obligations-undertaken-exchange-receiving-federal-financial-assistance-and-request-certification-under-title-vi-and-sffa-v-harvard-april-3" target="_blank">illegal DEI practices</a>,” and threatens vital equity-based initiatives in their schools.After lawsuits from the National Education Association teachers union and the American Civil Liberties Union, the Department of Education agreed to delay enforcement until&nbsp;<a href="https://www.aclu.org/cases/national-education-association-et-al-v-us-department-of-education-et-al?document=Agreement" target="_blank">after April 24</a>.But states across the country, both liberal- and conservative-led, are worried about losing other aid: the pandemic-era money that in some cases they’ve already spent or committed to spending.The Department of Education has long played a critical role in distributing federal funds to states for K-12 education, including Title I grants to boost staffing in schools with high percentages of low-income students, and emergency relief like that provided during the COVID-19 pandemic.Conservative-led states — particularly Mississippi, South Dakota and Arkansas — rely the most heavily on these funds to sustain services in high-need districts.The 15 states with the highest percentage of their K-12 budget coming from federal funding in fiscal year 2022 — the latest year with data available from the National Center for Education Statistics — voted for Trump in the 2024 presidential election. Similarly, 10 of the 15 states receiving the highest amounts of Title I funding in fiscal year 2024 also voted for Trump.Mississippi and Kentucky have sent letters to the Department of Education expressing concern over halted pandemic aid.The clash over federal funding comes even as the future of the Department of Education is murky, given President Donald Trump’s pledge to dismantle the department.<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/4/1745177419068.png" alt="" />
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure><a href="https://www.datawrapper.de/_/H69Mw/">Click here to see K-12 funding in all states</a><h2>DEI-related cuts</h2>In letters to the Department of Education, state officials and superintendents in Illinois, New York and Wisconsin pushed back against the DEI directive.<a href="https://www.nyssba.org/clientuploads/nyssba_pdf/titlevi-040525.pdf#:~:text=The%20certification%20remains%20in%20effect%2C%20as%20do,judicial%20decision%20or%20change%20the%20terms%20and" target="_blank">New York officials</a>&nbsp;said they would not provide additional certification beyond what the state already has done, asserting that there “are no federal or State laws prohibiting the principles of DEI.” Illinois Superintendent Tony Sanders&nbsp;<a href="https://www.isbe.net/Documents/ISBE-Response-Title-VI-Certification.pdf" target="_blank">wrote that</a>&nbsp;he was concerned that the Department of Education was changing the conditions of federal funding without a formal administrative process. Wisconsin Superintendent Jill Underly&nbsp;<a href="https://dpi.wi.gov/sites/default/files/imce/news/4.9.25_-_DPI_Letter_to_USDE.pdf" target="_blank">questioned the legality of the order</a>.New York State Department of Education Counsel and Deputy Commissioner Daniel Morton-Bentley noted that the federal department’s current stance on DEI starkly contrasts with its position during Trump’s first term, when then-Education Secretary Betsy DeVos supported such efforts.<a href="https://www.denverpost.com/2025/04/10/colorado-trump-dei-order-state-education-board/" target="_blank">Colorado</a>&nbsp;and<a href="https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2025-04-11/california-defies-trump-education-order-certify-school-districts-eliminate-dei" target="_blank">&nbsp;California</a>&nbsp;also confirmed they would not comply with the Department of Education’s order.While some states with liberal leaders are gearing up for legal battles and possible revocation of funding, conservative-led states such as Florida have embraced the federal directive as part of a broader push to reshape public education.In Florida,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2023/266" target="_blank">anti-DEI laws</a>&nbsp;have been in place dating back to 2023. In fact,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.tampabay.com/news/education/2025/03/03/florida-schools-say-theyll-comply-with-federal-push-eliminate-dei/" target="_blank">many&nbsp;</a><a href="https://www.tampabay.com/news/education/2025/03/03/florida-schools-say-theyll-comply-with-federal-push-eliminate-dei/" target="_blank">school&nbsp;</a><a href="https://www.tampabay.com/news/education/2025/03/03/florida-schools-say-theyll-comply-with-federal-push-eliminate-dei/" target="_blank">districts&nbsp;</a><a href="https://www.tampabay.com/news/education/2025/03/03/florida-schools-say-theyll-comply-with-federal-push-eliminate-dei/" target="_blank">and the state education department</a>&nbsp;say they plan to follow the federal department’s directives, noting the similar state laws.<h2>Pandemic aid cancellations</h2>In March, the Department of Education abruptly rescinded previously approved extensions of pandemic-era aid, ending access to funds months ahead of the original March 2026 deadline.When the Massachusetts governor’s office voiced concern over that decision, the federal department’s reply on social media was blunt: “<a href="https://x.com/i/flow/login?redirect_after_login=%2Fexplore%3Fref_src%3Dtwsrc%255Etfw%257Ctwcamp%255Etweetembed%257Ctwterm%255E1907126614107816273%257Ctwgr%255E13023b2f184f133a77dd7478cf0809d5afc7e4bf%257Ctwcon%255Es1_%26ref_url%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.k12dive.com%252Fnews%252Fstates-lawmakers-pushback-on-covid-fund-spending-extensions%252F744811%252F" target="_blank">COVID is over.</a>”Sixteen&nbsp;<a href="https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/state-covid-schools-funding-complaint.pdf" target="_blank">mostly Democratic-led&nbsp;</a><a href="https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/state-covid-schools-funding-complaint.pdf" target="_blank">states</a>&nbsp;and the District of Columbia filed a federal lawsuit against the Department of Education and Secretary Linda McMahon, challenging the abrupt rescission of previously approved extensions for spending COVID-19 education relief funds.But backlash against abrupt federal cuts to education has not been limited to blue states.Mississippi’s Department of Education warned the cuts would jeopardize more than $137 million in already obligated funds, slated for literacy initiatives, mental health services and infrastructure repairs. “The impact of this sudden reversal is detrimental to Mississippi students,” state Superintendent Lance Evans wrote in&nbsp;<a href="https://mdek12.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/59/2025/04/MS-ESSER-Letter-04.02.25-FINAL.pdf" target="_blank">a letter</a>&nbsp;to McMahon.The letter also outlines the state’s repeated — but unsuccessful — efforts to draw down millions in approved funds since February.Shanderia Minor, a spokesperson for the Mississippi education department, told Stateline the agency is awaiting next steps and direction about the funds and federal directives.In Kentucky, state Education Commissioner Robbie Fletcher&nbsp;<a href="https://kentuckylantern.com/briefs/ky-education-commissioner-sounds-alarm-about-sudden-halt-to-federal-covid-payments-to-schools/" target="_blank">told districts</a>&nbsp;— which stand to lose tens of millions in pandemic aid — that abrupt federal changes leave them “in a difficult position,” with schools already having committed funds to teacher training and facility upgrades.According to Kentucky Department of Education spokesperson Jennifer Ginn, the state has about $18 million in unspent pandemic aid funds left to distribute to districts. And districts have about $38 million in unspent funds, for a total $56 million that could be lost.Lauren Farrow, a former Florida public school teacher, told Stateline that schools that receive Title I money are already underfunded — and the federal threat only widens the gap.“Florida is pouring billions into education — but where is it going? Because we’re not seeing it in schools, especially not in Title I schools,” said Farrow. “I taught five minutes away from a wealthier school, and we didn’t even have pencils. Teachers were buying shoes for students. Why is that still happening?”<h2>Effects in the classroom</h2>Tafshier Cosby, senior director of the Center for Organizing and Partnerships at the National Parents Union, a parents advocacy group, told Stateline that while most families don’t fully understand the various school funding systems, they feel the impact of cuts in the classroom.Cosby said parents are worried about the loss of support services for students with disabilities, Title I impacts, and how debates about DEI may deflect from more urgent needs like literacy and teacher support.“We’ve been clear: DEI isn’t the federal government’s role — it’s up to states,” she said. “But the confusion is real. And the impact could be devastating.”Today, as a consultant working with teachers across Florida’s Orange County Public Schools — one of the largest districts in the country — Farrow says many educators are fearful and confused about how to support their students under changing DEI laws.“Teachers are asking, ‘Does this mean I can’t seat a student with glasses at the front of the room anymore?’ There’s so much fear around what we’re allowed to do now.”“There’s no one giving teachers guidance or even basic acknowledgment. We’re just left wondering what we’re allowed to say or do — and that’s dangerous.”Amanda Hernández contributed to this report. Stateline reporter Robbie Sequeira can be reached at&nbsp;<a href="mailto:rsequeira@stateline.org">rsequeira@stateline.org</a>.