Washington D.C. - President Donald J. Trump is calling on Congress to enact what he describes as the Great Healthcare Plan, a sweeping healthcare proposal aimed at lowering prescription drug prices, reducing insurance premiums, increasing transparency, and holding large insurance companies accountable.

According to the administration, the plan is designed to shift the healthcare system away from insurance companies, pharmaceutical manufacturers, and intermediaries, while placing greater control and purchasing power directly in the hands of American patients.

Trump has framed the proposal as an extension of healthcare policies from his first term, combined with new reforms intended to provide immediate cost relief for individuals and families struggling with rising healthcare expenses.

A major pillar of the Great Healthcare Plan is lowering prescription drug prices by codifying the Trump administration’s Most-Favored-Nation pricing agreements, which would require Americans to pay the same prices for prescription drugs as consumers in other countries.

The administration says this builds on actions taken during Trump’s first term to lower insulin prices, as well as more recent voluntary negotiations following an executive order aimed at reducing drug costs. According to the plan, any voluntarily negotiated agreements with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services or the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services would be grandfathered in.

In addition, the plan would expand access to verified, safe pharmaceutical drugs by making more medications available for over-the-counter purchase. The administration says this change would lower healthcare costs by increasing competition, improving price transparency, and reducing the need for doctor visits for routine prescriptions.

The proposal also seeks to reduce insurance premiums by restructuring how federal healthcare subsidies are distributed. Under the Great Healthcare Plan, billions of dollars currently paid to insurance companies through taxpayer-funded subsidies would instead be sent directly to eligible Americans, allowing them to purchase health insurance of their choice.

The plan also includes funding for a cost-sharing reduction program for healthcare plans. According to the administration, this would save taxpayers at least $36 billion and reduce premiums for the most common Affordable Care Act plans by more than 10 percent, based on estimates from the Congressional Budget Office.

Another provision would eliminate what the administration describes as kickbacks paid by pharmacy benefit managers, or PBMs, to large brokerage middlemen. The plan argues these payments artificially inflate insurance costs and contribute to higher premiums for consumers.

To increase accountability, the Great Healthcare Plan would establish a “Plain English Insurance” standard, requiring health insurance companies to clearly publish rate and coverage comparisons on their websites in language that is easily understood by consumers.

Insurance companies would also be required to disclose how much of their revenue is spent on patient care compared to overhead and profits. Additional reporting requirements would include publishing the percentage of insurance claims that are denied and average wait times for routine care.

The administration says these disclosures would allow consumers to more easily compare insurance plans and make informed decisions when selecting coverage.

The plan further calls for broad price transparency requirements across the healthcare system. Under the proposal, any healthcare provider or insurer that accepts Medicare or Medicaid would be required to prominently post pricing and fees at their place of business.

The administration says this would help eliminate surprise medical bills and allow patients to shop for care based on both cost and quality.

Trump has urged Congress to act quickly on the proposal, arguing that immediate legislative action is necessary to deliver relief to Americans facing high healthcare costs.

The administration describes the Great Healthcare Plan as a comprehensive framework designed to lower costs, increase competition, reduce wasteful spending, and place patients — rather than insurance companies or pharmaceutical interests — at the center of the healthcare system.

If passed, the plan would represent a significant restructuring of how healthcare is priced, purchased, and regulated in the United States.

More information on the proposal is available through the administration’s healthcare policy materials.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2026/1/1768510373593.png" alt="Trump.png" />
 <figcaption>Trump.png</figcaption>
 </figure><div><iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/fUzNupJidq4?si=1OhAovp61ciA1f-L" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe></div>Washington D.C. - President Donald J. Trump is calling on Congress to enact what he describes as the Great Healthcare Plan, a sweeping healthcare proposal aimed at lowering prescription drug prices, reducing insurance premiums, increasing transparency, and holding large insurance companies accountable.According to the administration, the plan is designed to shift the healthcare system away from insurance companies, pharmaceutical manufacturers, and intermediaries, while placing greater control and purchasing power directly in the hands of American patients.Trump has framed the proposal as an extension of healthcare policies from his first term, combined with new reforms intended to provide immediate cost relief for individuals and families struggling with rising healthcare expenses.<h2>Codifying lower drug prices</h2>A major pillar of the Great Healthcare Plan is lowering prescription drug prices by codifying the Trump administration’s Most-Favored-Nation pricing agreements, which would require Americans to pay the same prices for prescription drugs as consumers in other countries.The administration says this builds on actions taken during Trump’s first term to lower insulin prices, as well as more recent voluntary negotiations following an executive order aimed at reducing drug costs. According to the plan, any voluntarily negotiated agreements with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services or the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services would be grandfathered in.In addition, the plan would expand access to verified, safe pharmaceutical drugs by making more medications available for over-the-counter purchase. The administration says this change would lower healthcare costs by increasing competition, improving price transparency, and reducing the need for doctor visits for routine prescriptions.<h2>Lowering insurance premiums</h2>The proposal also seeks to reduce insurance premiums by restructuring how federal healthcare subsidies are distributed. Under the Great Healthcare Plan, billions of dollars currently paid to insurance companies through taxpayer-funded subsidies would instead be sent directly to eligible Americans, allowing them to purchase health insurance of their choice.The plan also includes funding for a cost-sharing reduction program for healthcare plans. According to the administration, this would save taxpayers at least $36 billion and reduce premiums for the most common Affordable Care Act plans by more than 10 percent, based on estimates from the Congressional Budget Office.Another provision would eliminate what the administration describes as kickbacks paid by pharmacy benefit managers, or PBMs, to large brokerage middlemen. The plan argues these payments artificially inflate insurance costs and contribute to higher premiums for consumers.<h2>Holding insurance companies accountable</h2>To increase accountability, the Great Healthcare Plan would establish a “Plain English Insurance” standard, requiring health insurance companies to clearly publish rate and coverage comparisons on their websites in language that is easily understood by consumers.Insurance companies would also be required to disclose how much of their revenue is spent on patient care compared to overhead and profits. Additional reporting requirements would include publishing the percentage of insurance claims that are denied and average wait times for routine care.The administration says these disclosures would allow consumers to more easily compare insurance plans and make informed decisions when selecting coverage.<h2>Expanding price transparency</h2>The plan further calls for broad price transparency requirements across the healthcare system. Under the proposal, any healthcare provider or insurer that accepts Medicare or Medicaid would be required to prominently post pricing and fees at their place of business.The administration says this would help eliminate surprise medical bills and allow patients to shop for care based on both cost and quality.<h2>Call for congressional action</h2>Trump has urged Congress to act quickly on the proposal, arguing that immediate legislative action is necessary to deliver relief to Americans facing high healthcare costs.The administration describes the Great Healthcare Plan as a comprehensive framework designed to lower costs, increase competition, reduce wasteful spending, and place patients — rather than insurance companies or pharmaceutical interests — at the center of the healthcare system.If passed, the plan would represent a significant restructuring of how healthcare is priced, purchased, and regulated in the United States.More information on the proposal is available through the administration’s healthcare policy materials.

🎥Trump Urges Congress to Pass ‘Great Healthcare Plan,’ Citing Drug Prices, Premium Relief, and Transparency

By:<a href="https://minnesotareformer.com/author/max-nesterak/">Max Nesterak</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="https://minnesotareformer.com/author/alyssachen/">Alyssa Chen</a> <a href="https://minnesotareformer.com/">Minnesota Reformer</a>

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump threatened on Thursday morning to send the military into Minnesota to stop protests, following another shooting by immigration agents that injured one person, seven days after an agent fatally shot a woman in Minneapolis.

Writing on his own social media platform, Trump said he would invoke the Insurrection Act, a 19th-century law empowering the government to deploy the military domestically to “repress insurrections and repel invasions.”

“If the corrupt politicians of Minnesota don’t obey the law and stop the professional agitators and insurrectionists from attacking the Patriots of I.C.E., who are only trying to do their job, I will institute the INSURRECTION ACT, which many Presidents have done before me, and quickly put an end to the travesty that is taking place in that once great State. Thank you for you attention to this matter! President DJT,” Trump&nbsp;<a href="https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/115899252938886431" target="_blank">wrote</a>&nbsp;on Truth Social.

The law grants an exception to the Posse Comitatus Act, which prohibits the military from performing domestic law enforcement.

The Insurrection Act was last invoked in 1992 under President George H. W. Bush in response to civil unrest that included the deaths of 63 people, following the acquittal of four white police officers charged with beating to death Black driver Rodney King. The statute has been used about 30 times since the country’s founding, according to records kept by the Brennan Center for Justice.

Protests erupted across the Twin Cities after Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent Jonathan Ross&nbsp;<a href="https://minnesotareformer.com/2026/01/07/ice-officer-fatally-shoots-driver-through-car-window-in-minneapolis/">shot and killed</a>&nbsp;37-year-old Renee Good in south Minneapolis on Jan. 7.

The demonstrations escalated Wednesday night after a federal immigration agent shot and injured a man in north Minneapolis.&nbsp;

According to a statement issued by the Department of Homeland Security, a man crashed his vehicle and ran away as agents were “conducting a targeted traffic stop” at 6:50 p.m. Central time. An agent fired “a defensive shot to defend his life” after the man and two bystanders “attacked the law enforcement officer with a snow shovel and broom handle,” according to the statement.&nbsp;

The agent shot the man in the leg, according to the department. The statement described the man as “an illegal alien from Venezuela who was released into the country by Joe Biden in 2022.”

States Newsroom’s Minnesota Reformer was unable to confirm the account.&nbsp;

Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O’Hara said in a late-night press conference that the man was transported to a hospital with non-life-threatening injuries.

The Reformer&nbsp;<a href="https://minnesotareformer.com/2026/01/14/second-person-in-a-week-shot-by-federal-immigration-agent-in-minneapolis/">reported</a>&nbsp;that scores of demonstrators arrived at the scene, sparking a back-and-forth with agents, who deployed tear gas and flash bangs. Agents detained at least two people after someone threw fireworks at the agents. At least two vehicles believed to be used by federal officers were vandalized. The clashes largely stopped by 11:30 p.m., according to the Reformer.

Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey asked for calm and reiterated his call for the Trump administration to remove ICE from the city.

Trump surged more ICE agents to Minneapolis following the fatal shooting of Good, bringing the total to roughly 3,000 — far outnumbering the city’s 600 local police officers.&nbsp;

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2026/1/1768497897095.jpeg" alt="Federal Bureau of Prisons officers on the scene where a federal immigration agent shot a man Wednesday, Jan. 14, 2026, in north Minneapolis. (Photo by Max Nesterak/Minnesota Reformer)" />
 <figcaption>Federal Bureau of Prisons officers on the scene where a federal immigration agent shot a man Wednesday, Jan. 14, 2026, in north Minneapolis. (Photo by Max Nesterak/Minnesota Reformer)</figcaption>
 </figure>By:<a href="https://minnesotareformer.com/author/max-nesterak/">Max Nesterak</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="https://minnesotareformer.com/author/alyssachen/">Alyssa Chen</a> <a href="https://minnesotareformer.com/">Minnesota Reformer</a>WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump threatened on Thursday morning to send the military into Minnesota to stop protests, following another shooting by immigration agents that injured one person, seven days after an agent fatally shot a woman in Minneapolis.<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2026/1/1768498113412.png" alt=" " />
 <figcaption> </figcaption>
 </figure>Writing on his own social media platform, Trump said he would invoke the Insurrection Act, a 19th-century law empowering the government to deploy the military domestically to “repress insurrections and repel invasions.”“If the corrupt politicians of Minnesota don’t obey the law and stop the professional agitators and insurrectionists from attacking the Patriots of I.C.E., who are only trying to do their job, I will institute the INSURRECTION ACT, which many Presidents have done before me, and quickly put an end to the travesty that is taking place in that once great State. Thank you for you attention to this matter! President DJT,” Trump&nbsp;<a href="https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/115899252938886431" target="_blank">wrote</a>&nbsp;on Truth Social.<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><a href="https://t.co/EFBOPpNluy">pic.twitter.com/EFBOPpNluy</a>&mdash; Governor Tim Walz (@GovTimWalz) <a href="https://twitter.com/GovTimWalz/status/2011832759522615367?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 15, 2026</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>The law grants an exception to the Posse Comitatus Act, which prohibits the military from performing domestic law enforcement.The Insurrection Act was last invoked in 1992 under President George H. W. Bush in response to civil unrest that included the deaths of 63 people, following the acquittal of four white police officers charged with beating to death Black driver Rodney King. The statute has been used about 30 times since the country’s founding, according to records kept by the Brennan Center for Justice.Protests erupted across the Twin Cities after Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent Jonathan Ross&nbsp;<a href="https://minnesotareformer.com/2026/01/07/ice-officer-fatally-shoots-driver-through-car-window-in-minneapolis/">shot and killed</a>&nbsp;37-year-old Renee Good in south Minneapolis on Jan. 7.The demonstrations escalated Wednesday night after a federal immigration agent shot and injured a man in north Minneapolis.&nbsp;According to a statement issued by the Department of Homeland Security, a man crashed his vehicle and ran away as agents were “conducting a targeted traffic stop” at 6:50 p.m. Central time. An agent fired “a defensive shot to defend his life” after the man and two bystanders “attacked the law enforcement officer with a snow shovel and broom handle,” according to the statement.&nbsp;The agent shot the man in the leg, according to the department. The statement described the man as “an illegal alien from Venezuela who was released into the country by Joe Biden in 2022.”States Newsroom’s Minnesota Reformer was unable to confirm the account.&nbsp;Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O’Hara said in a late-night press conference that the man was transported to a hospital with non-life-threatening injuries.The Reformer&nbsp;<a href="https://minnesotareformer.com/2026/01/14/second-person-in-a-week-shot-by-federal-immigration-agent-in-minneapolis/">reported</a>&nbsp;that scores of demonstrators arrived at the scene, sparking a back-and-forth with agents, who deployed tear gas and flash bangs. Agents detained at least two people after someone threw fireworks at the agents. At least two vehicles believed to be used by federal officers were vandalized. The clashes largely stopped by 11:30 p.m., according to the Reformer.Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey asked for calm and reiterated his call for the Trump administration to remove ICE from the city.Trump surged more ICE agents to Minneapolis following the fatal shooting of Good, bringing the total to roughly 3,000 — far outnumbering the city’s 600 local police officers.&nbsp;

President Trump threatens to use Insurrection Act, deploy military in Minnesota

&nbsp;In another pre-dawn action Thursday, Marines and Sailors from Joint Task Force Southern Spear, in support of the Department of Homeland Security, launched from USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78) and apprehended Motor/Tanker Veronica without incident, according to a statement from the U.S. Southern Command.

The Veronica is the latest tanker operating in defiance of President Trump’s established quarantine of sanctioned vessels in the Caribbean, proving the effectiveness of Operation Southern Spear yet again.  

These operations are backed by the full power of the U.S. Navy’s Amphibious Ready Group, including the ready and lethal platforms of USS Iwo Jima (LHD 7), USS San Antonio (LPD 17), and USS Fort Lauderdale (LPD 28). 

"The only oil leaving Venezuela will be oil that is coordinated properly and lawfully. The Department of War in coordination with interagency partners, will defend our homeland by ending illicit activity and restoring security in the Western Hemisphere."

&nbsp;In another pre-dawn action Thursday, Marines and Sailors from Joint Task Force Southern Spear, in support of the Department of Homeland Security, launched from USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78) and apprehended Motor/Tanker Veronica without incident, according to a statement from the U.S. Southern Command.<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560">Through <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/OpSouthernSpear?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#OpSouthernSpear</a>, the Department of War is unwavering in its mission to crush illicit activity in the Western Hemisphere in partnership with <a href="https://twitter.com/USCG?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@USCG</a> through <a href="https://twitter.com/DHSgov?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@DHSgov</a> and <a href="https://twitter.com/TheJusticeDept?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@TheJusticeDept</a>. In another pre-dawn action, Marines and Sailors from Joint Task Force Southern Spear,… <a href="https://t.co/brxO9xXUu3">pic.twitter.com/brxO9xXUu3</a>&mdash; U.S. Southern Command (@Southcom) <a href="https://twitter.com/Southcom/status/2011798070816612578?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 15, 2026</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>The Veronica is the latest tanker operating in defiance of President Trump’s established quarantine of sanctioned vessels in the Caribbean, proving the effectiveness of Operation Southern Spear yet again. 

These operations are backed by the full power of the U.S. Navy’s Amphibious Ready Group, including the ready and lethal platforms of USS Iwo Jima (LHD 7), USS San Antonio (LPD 17), and USS Fort Lauderdale (LPD 28). "The only oil leaving Venezuela will be oil that is coordinated properly and lawfully. The Department of War in coordination with interagency partners, will defend our homeland by ending illicit activity and restoring security in the Western Hemisphere."

🎥  US seizes in Caribbean Sea another sanctioned oil tanker

By:<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/ashley-murray/">Ashley Murray</a>

WASHINGTON — Vice President JD Vance broke a tied Senate vote to block advancement of a war powers resolution that would have stopped President Donald Trump from taking further military action against Venezuela without congressional authorization.

Senate Republicans used a procedural maneuver Wednesday night to halt debate on the Vietnam War-era&nbsp;<a href="https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R47603" target="_blank">statute</a>&nbsp;that gives Congress a check on the president’s deployments abroad.&nbsp;

Sens. Todd Young of Indiana and Josh Hawley of Missouri flipped on their previous votes to advance the resolution, splitting support at 50-50 — and delivering a victory to Trump, who had strongly criticized Republican senators who earlier defected from the administration.

Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Susan Collins of Maine and Rand Paul of Kentucky voted to keep the effort alive in the Senate. Paul is the only Republican co-sponsor of the bill. Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia was the leading Democratic co-sponsor.

Young said while he “strongly” believes Congress must be involved in any decisions about the commitment of U.S. troops, administration officials assured him that is not the state of play in Venezuela.

“After numerous conversations with senior national security officials, I have received assurances that there are no American troops in Venezuela. I’ve also received a commitment that if President Trump were to determine American forces are needed in major military operations in Venezuela, the Administration will come to Congress in advance to ask for an authorization of force,” Young said in a written statement after he cast his vote.

The vote came less than a week after Young and Hawley were among the&nbsp; five Senate Republicans who broke with party ranks to move the resolution across an initial procedural hurdle — a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/us-senate-gop-support-advances-war-powers-resolution-rebuking-trump-venezuela" target="_blank">rare rebuke</a>&nbsp;of Trump from some in his own party.

Trump pointedly attacked the five GOP senators after they voted, writing on his Truth Social platform that the lawmakers “should never be elected to office again.”&nbsp;

Senate Republicans argued a resolution to rein in Trump’s military actions against Venezuela is not relevant because “there’s no troops there, there is nothing to terminate,” as Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chair Jim Risch said on the floor ahead of the vote.

“Now, I know some of my colleagues will argue that a vote for this resolution is a prospective statement about limiting future action in Venezuela. That’s not what it says. They argue, ‘we still have ships in the Caribbean, and clearly the president is ready to invade again,’ they say. But again, that is not what the resolution says. … No language in this resolution addresses future action,” said Risch, R-Idaho, who moved to table the measure.

The vote came 11 days after U.S. special forces apprehended Venezuela’s president, Nicolás Maduro, and his wife, Cilia Flores, from their bedroom during a surprise overnight raid. The couple was wanted by U.S. authorities on federal drug and conspiracy charges.

The vote also comes after a monthslong bombing campaign on small boats in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean in which U.S. strikes killed more than 115 alleged “narco-terrorists,” according to U.S. Southern Command.

Within an hour before senators voted to block any advancement of the war powers resolution, Trump posted on social media that he “had a very good call” Thursday morning with Venezuela’s interim President Delcy Rodríguez.

“We are making tremendous progress, as we help Venezuela stabilize and recover. Many topics were discussed, including Oil, Minerals, Trade and, of course, National Security. This partnership between the United States of America and Venezuela will be a spectacular one FOR ALL. Venezuela will soon be great and prosperous again, perhaps more so than ever before!” Trump wrote on his own platform, Truth Social.

Trump hosted oil executives at the White House Friday for a meeting on potential investment in Venezuela’s oil industry. Prior to the meeting, the president announced the South American nation had already agreed to give the U.S. between 30 million and 50 million barrels of oil. Trump said he would control the money made from the sale.

Paul and Democratic sponsors of the war powers resolution vehemently disagreed with the GOP statements about the U.S. presence in and around Venezuela.

“You don’t have to be a great expert in military affairs to know that we are heavily engaged,” said Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, a New York Democrat, ahead of the vote.

“Donald Trump says we’re not engaged in hostilities? Tell that to the 16,000 U.S. service members currently deployed in the Caribbean. Tell that to our service members on the Ford carrier strike force. Look at the Marine expeditionary unit operating in the region,” Schumer said. “Donald Trump is turning the Caribbean into a dangerous powder keg — and Congress must rein him in before one mistake ignites a larger, more unstable conflict.”

Kaine likened the Republicans’ procedural move to “a parliamentary gag rule on discussion of this military operation.”

“If this cause and if this legal basis were so righteous and so lawful, the administration and its supporters would not be so afraid to have this debate before the public and the United States Senate,” Kaine said on the floor ahead of the vote.

Paul said the administration’s claim that Venezuela is not an official war is “an absurdity.”

“The invasion of another country, blockading of a country and removing another country’s leader, to my mind, clearly, is war,” Paul said on the floor ahead of the vote.

U.S. Southern Command declined to confirm Wednesday the exact number of troops and warships present in the region.

Venezuelan Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello said more than 100 were killed in the raid, according to numerous media outlets that posted a&nbsp;<a href="https://cnnespanol.cnn.com/2026/01/07/venezuela/video/venezuela-ataques-muertos-estados-unidos-diosdado-cabello" target="_blank">video</a>&nbsp;of his statement. The Cuban government announced on&nbsp;<a href="https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1JzbcBUyHz/" target="_blank">Facebook</a>&nbsp;32 of its citizens were among the dead.

Seven U.S. troops were injured in the incursion, according to the Pentagon. Five returned to work within days after the attack, while two were still recovering as of Jan. 8. Pentagon officials declined to comment further on their conditions Wednesday.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2026/1/1768445947287.png" alt=" U.S. Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., talks to reporters at the U.S. Capitol on June 28, 2025 (Ashley Murray/States Newsroom)." />
 <figcaption> U.S. Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., talks to reporters at the U.S. Capitol on June 28, 2025 (Ashley Murray/States Newsroom).</figcaption>
 </figure>By:<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/ashley-murray/">Ashley Murray</a>WASHINGTON — Vice President JD Vance broke a tied Senate vote to block advancement of a war powers resolution that would have stopped President Donald Trump from taking further military action against Venezuela without congressional authorization.Senate Republicans used a procedural maneuver Wednesday night to halt debate on the Vietnam War-era&nbsp;<a href="https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R47603" target="_blank">statute</a>&nbsp;that gives Congress a check on the president’s deployments abroad.&nbsp;Sens. Todd Young of Indiana and Josh Hawley of Missouri flipped on their previous votes to advance the resolution, splitting support at 50-50 — and delivering a victory to Trump, who had strongly criticized Republican senators who earlier defected from the administration.Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Susan Collins of Maine and Rand Paul of Kentucky voted to keep the effort alive in the Senate. Paul is the only Republican co-sponsor of the bill. Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia was the leading Democratic co-sponsor.Young said while he “strongly” believes Congress must be involved in any decisions about the commitment of U.S. troops, administration officials assured him that is not the state of play in Venezuela.“After numerous conversations with senior national security officials, I have received assurances that there are no American troops in Venezuela. I’ve also received a commitment that if President Trump were to determine American forces are needed in major military operations in Venezuela, the Administration will come to Congress in advance to ask for an authorization of force,” Young said in a written statement after he cast his vote.<h2>Rare rebuke doesn’t last</h2>The vote came less than a week after Young and Hawley were among the&nbsp; five Senate Republicans who broke with party ranks to move the resolution across an initial procedural hurdle — a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/us-senate-gop-support-advances-war-powers-resolution-rebuking-trump-venezuela" target="_blank">rare rebuke</a>&nbsp;of Trump from some in his own party.Trump pointedly attacked the five GOP senators after they voted, writing on his Truth Social platform that the lawmakers “should never be elected to office again.”&nbsp;Senate Republicans argued a resolution to rein in Trump’s military actions against Venezuela is not relevant because “there’s no troops there, there is nothing to terminate,” as Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chair Jim Risch said on the floor ahead of the vote.“Now, I know some of my colleagues will argue that a vote for this resolution is a prospective statement about limiting future action in Venezuela. That’s not what it says. They argue, ‘we still have ships in the Caribbean, and clearly the president is ready to invade again,’ they say. But again, that is not what the resolution says. … No language in this resolution addresses future action,” said Risch, R-Idaho, who moved to table the measure.The vote came 11 days after U.S. special forces apprehended Venezuela’s president, Nicolás Maduro, and his wife, Cilia Flores, from their bedroom during a surprise overnight raid. The couple was wanted by U.S. authorities on federal drug and conspiracy charges.The vote also comes after a monthslong bombing campaign on small boats in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean in which U.S. strikes killed more than 115 alleged “narco-terrorists,” according to U.S. Southern Command.Within an hour before senators voted to block any advancement of the war powers resolution, Trump posted on social media that he “had a very good call” Thursday morning with Venezuela’s interim President Delcy Rodríguez.“We are making tremendous progress, as we help Venezuela stabilize and recover. Many topics were discussed, including Oil, Minerals, Trade and, of course, National Security. This partnership between the United States of America and Venezuela will be a spectacular one FOR ALL. Venezuela will soon be great and prosperous again, perhaps more so than ever before!” Trump wrote on his own platform, Truth Social.Trump hosted oil executives at the White House Friday for a meeting on potential investment in Venezuela’s oil industry. Prior to the meeting, the president announced the South American nation had already agreed to give the U.S. between 30 million and 50 million barrels of oil. Trump said he would control the money made from the sale.<h2>‘We are heavily engaged’</h2>Paul and Democratic sponsors of the war powers resolution vehemently disagreed with the GOP statements about the U.S. presence in and around Venezuela.“You don’t have to be a great expert in military affairs to know that we are heavily engaged,” said Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, a New York Democrat, ahead of the vote.“Donald Trump says we’re not engaged in hostilities? Tell that to the 16,000 U.S. service members currently deployed in the Caribbean. Tell that to our service members on the Ford carrier strike force. Look at the Marine expeditionary unit operating in the region,” Schumer said. “Donald Trump is turning the Caribbean into a dangerous powder keg — and Congress must rein him in before one mistake ignites a larger, more unstable conflict.”Kaine likened the Republicans’ procedural move to “a parliamentary gag rule on discussion of this military operation.”“If this cause and if this legal basis were so righteous and so lawful, the administration and its supporters would not be so afraid to have this debate before the public and the United States Senate,” Kaine said on the floor ahead of the vote.Paul said the administration’s claim that Venezuela is not an official war is “an absurdity.”“The invasion of another country, blockading of a country and removing another country’s leader, to my mind, clearly, is war,” Paul said on the floor ahead of the vote.U.S. Southern Command declined to confirm Wednesday the exact number of troops and warships present in the region.Venezuelan Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello said more than 100 were killed in the raid, according to numerous media outlets that posted a&nbsp;<a href="https://cnnespanol.cnn.com/2026/01/07/venezuela/video/venezuela-ataques-muertos-estados-unidos-diosdado-cabello" target="_blank">video</a>&nbsp;of his statement. The Cuban government announced on&nbsp;<a href="https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1JzbcBUyHz/" target="_blank">Facebook</a>&nbsp;32 of its citizens were among the dead.Seven U.S. troops were injured in the incursion, according to the Pentagon. Five returned to work within days after the attack, while two were still recovering as of Jan. 8. Pentagon officials declined to comment further on their conditions Wednesday.

War powers resolution fails after Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley flips his vote

At&nbsp;3:41&nbsp;a.m.&nbsp;EST,&nbsp;the SpaceX Dragon spacecraft, carrying&nbsp;NASA astronauts <a href="https://www.nasa.gov/people/zena-cardman/" target="_blank">Zena&nbsp;Cardman</a> and&nbsp;Mike Fincke, JAXA (Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency)&nbsp;astronaut Kimiya Yui, and Roscosmos cosmonaut Oleg Platonov&nbsp;splashed down&nbsp;off the coast of&nbsp;San Diego, California, according to a statement from NASA.

This completes a stay&nbsp;in space&nbsp;of&nbsp;167&nbsp;days&nbsp;for&nbsp;the four-person crew.&nbsp;The mission returned to Earth&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nasa.gov/blogs/spacestation/2026/01/08/nasa-shares-latest-update-on-international-space-station-operations-2/" target="_blank">earlier than originally planned</a>&nbsp;as teams&nbsp;monitored&nbsp;a medical concern with a crew member living and working aboard the orbital laboratory. The crew member is stable.&nbsp;&nbsp;

Teams&nbsp;aboard&nbsp;the recovery ship, including two fast boats, are securing the SpaceX Dragon and ensuring the spacecraft is safe for the recovery effort. As the fast boat teams complete their work, the recovery ship will move into position to hoist Dragon onto the main deck with the astronauts inside. Once on the main deck, the crew will egress the spacecraft.&nbsp;&nbsp;

NASA previously announced all four crew members will be transported to a local hospital for&nbsp;additional&nbsp;evaluation, taking advantage of medical resources on Earth to provide the best care possible.&nbsp;

Following a planned overnight hospital stay, the crew will return to NASA’s Johnson Space Center in Houston, where they will reunite with their families and undergo standard post-flight reconditioning and evaluations. Due to medical privacy, it is not&nbsp;appropriate for&nbsp;NASA to share more details about the crew member.&nbsp;

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2026/1/1768444979570.png" alt="The official portrait of the four members of NASA’s SpaceX Crew-11 mission aboard the International Space Station. From left, are Roscosmos cosmonaut Oleg Platonov, NASA astronaut Mike Fincke, JAXA (Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency) astronaut Kimiya Yui, and NASA astronaut Zena Cardman. NASA/Robert Markowitz" />
 <figcaption>The official portrait of the four members of NASA’s SpaceX Crew-11 mission aboard the International Space Station. From left, are Roscosmos cosmonaut Oleg Platonov, NASA astronaut Mike Fincke, JAXA (Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency) astronaut Kimiya Yui, and NASA astronaut Zena Cardman. NASA/Robert Markowitz</figcaption>
 </figure>At&nbsp;3:41&nbsp;a.m.&nbsp;EST,&nbsp;the SpaceX Dragon spacecraft, carrying&nbsp;NASA astronauts <a href="https://www.nasa.gov/people/zena-cardman/" target="_blank">Zena&nbsp;Cardman</a> and&nbsp;Mike Fincke, JAXA (Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency)&nbsp;astronaut Kimiya Yui, and Roscosmos cosmonaut Oleg Platonov&nbsp;splashed down&nbsp;off the coast of&nbsp;San Diego, California, according to a statement from NASA.<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2026/1/1768445083052.png" alt="This photo provided by NASA shows clockwise from bottom left are, NASA astronaut Mike Fincke, Roscosmos cosmonaut Oleg Platonov, NASA astronaut Zena Cardman, and JAXA (Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency) astronaut Kimiya Yui gathering for a crew portrait wearing their Dragon pressure suits during a suit verification check inside the International Space Station’s Kibo laboratory module, Wednesday, Jan. 14, 2026." />
 <figcaption>This photo provided by NASA shows clockwise from bottom left are, NASA astronaut Mike Fincke, Roscosmos cosmonaut Oleg Platonov, NASA astronaut Zena Cardman, and JAXA (Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency) astronaut Kimiya Yui gathering for a crew portrait wearing their Dragon pressure suits during a suit verification check inside the International Space Station’s Kibo laboratory module, Wednesday, Jan. 14, 2026.</figcaption>
 </figure>This completes a stay&nbsp;in space&nbsp;of&nbsp;167&nbsp;days&nbsp;for&nbsp;the four-person crew.&nbsp;The mission returned to Earth&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nasa.gov/blogs/spacestation/2026/01/08/nasa-shares-latest-update-on-international-space-station-operations-2/" target="_blank">earlier than originally planned</a>&nbsp;as teams&nbsp;monitored&nbsp;a medical concern with a crew member living and working aboard the orbital laboratory. The crew member is stable.&nbsp;&nbsp;Teams&nbsp;aboard&nbsp;the recovery ship, including two fast boats, are securing the SpaceX Dragon and ensuring the spacecraft is safe for the recovery effort. As the fast boat teams complete their work, the recovery ship will move into position to hoist Dragon onto the main deck with the astronauts inside. Once on the main deck, the crew will egress the spacecraft.&nbsp;&nbsp;NASA previously announced all four crew members will be transported to a local hospital for&nbsp;additional&nbsp;evaluation, taking advantage of medical resources on Earth to provide the best care possible.&nbsp;Following a planned overnight hospital stay, the crew will return to NASA’s Johnson Space Center in Houston, where they will reunite with their families and undergo standard post-flight reconditioning and evaluations. Due to medical privacy, it is not&nbsp;appropriate for&nbsp;NASA to share more details about the crew member.&nbsp;

NASA's first medical evacuation: Ailing astronaut returns to Earth early 

Women in nearby states with abortion bans might not have to travel so far for the procedure.

BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://stateline.org/author/khardy/">Kevin Hardy</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/annaspoerre/">ANNA SPOERRE</a> <a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/annaspoerre/"></a><a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2023/02/20/state-senator-throws-first-punches-of-2024-missouri-governors-campaign/">Missouri Independent</a>

KANSAS CITY, Mo. — The outcome of a trial over Missouri’s abortion regulations could ripple far beyond the state, potentially creating new availability for women in the Midwest and South who can’t access abortion close to home.

As a judge&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2026/01/12/missouri-abortion-rights-trial-focuses-on-two-decades-of-state-restrictions/" target="_blank">weighs the constitutionality</a>&nbsp;of a litany of state restrictions on abortion, the stakes are clear for Missouri women: The decision could hamper access for nearly everyone in the state — or greatly broaden it in ways not seen in decades. That would allow women in a dozen nearby states with abortion bans to travel a shorter distance to access the procedure.

“Opening and reestablishing rights in the state of Missouri would help to alleviate some of the pressure that other states have since so many Southern states have banned abortion,” said Julie Burkhart, the co-owner of Hope Clinic in Granite City, Illinois. “It just seems logical that we would see a shift in migration patterns of patients in the country.”

At her clinic, about a 15-minute drive from downtown St. Louis, Missourians account for about half of all patients, Burkhart said. Though Missouri voters in 2024 enshrined a right to abortion in the state constitution, access has remained&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2025/12/05/missouri-abortion-legal-access-hinges-courts-rebuilding/" target="_blank">highly limited because of restrictive state laws</a>. Only procedural abortions are available on a limited basis across three Planned Parenthood clinics in the state.

Many of those state laws face legal scrutiny this week as a Missouri judge weighs the constitutionality of regulations targeting abortion providers. Those include a 72-hour waiting period between initial appointments and procedures, mandatory pelvic exams for medication abortions and a ban on telemedicine appointments for medication abortions.

Planned Parenthood affiliates in Missouri argue state restrictions are unconstitutional under 2024’s voter-approved constitutional amendment. Over decades, state restrictions have gutted Missouri’s provider networks, limited appointment availability and ultimately forced abortions to a halt in 2022, before a limited number resumed after the 2024 vote.

Experts and advocates are closely monitoring the Missouri case, which is expected to be appealed regardless of the outcome, because of its practical implications on access in the region. While many women now rely on abortion medication, procedural abortion is still crucial for those seeking later-term abortions or who prefer an in-clinic procedure.

But the two-week bench trial in downtown Kansas City also tests lawmakers’ ability to put in place rules so restrictive that they effectively ban abortion — a practice used by anti-abortion lawmakers in other states looking to limit access to the procedure.

“Judges do not operate in a vacuum,” Burkhart said, “ … and we know for a fact that judges look outside the borders of their state for information and for guidance. I do see this as having national importance.”

That’s especially true in other states also litigating abortion access, including Arizona, Michigan and Ohio, said Rebecca Reingold, an associate director at Georgetown University’s O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law.

While state judges are not bound by the decisions of judges in other states, their deliberations can be informed by court rulings, particularly involving novel legal questions or areas of the law that are evolving.

“There is little doubt that advocates and decision-makers in other states navigating similar legal challenges are closely monitoring the litigation over Missouri’s abortion regulations,” Reingold said.

In the first days of the trial, Planned Parenthood leaders argued that ever-changing state laws and agency regulations have drastically limited access, caused needless red tape and posed privacy risk for their patients.

Dr. Margaret Baum, chief medical officer with St. Louis-based Planned Parenthood Great Rivers, said the Missouri requirements specifically target abortion rather than all other kinds of medical care.

“I provide vasectomies routinely. … And I am not required to have a complication plan, contact a primary care physician, even ask the patient how many miles they live from the health center.”

Baum said state-mandated reporting rules unique to abortion require clinicians to ask the race, education level, marital status and specific location of each patient — none of which is relevant to their care.

Planned Parenthood Great Rivers would like to offer abortion services in Springfield, Baum testified. Access in that region would provide an option for rural Missourians, and also could help serve residents in nearby Arkansas, Oklahoma and Texas, where abortion is almost universally banned.

But the organization’s facilities there do not meet state abortion regulations for physical attributes, including hallway size, doorway size and the number of recliners in recovery rooms, Baum testified.

Lawyers for the state defended Missouri’s restrictions as commonsense safeguards aimed at protecting vulnerable women. The attorney general’s office argued that complication risks of abortion justify additional state regulation — despite professional medical associations saying it’s generally safe. The AG’s office also maintained that Planned Parenthood faced a conflict of interest because of its financial motivations.

“Abortion is a business,” Deputy Solicitor General Peter Donohue said during a procedural argument on Monday. “Your Honor, the plaintiffs are asking to deregulate their profession in order to make more money.”

The state was expected to call as witnesses anti-abortion doctors and activists later in the trial.

Since the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling that overturned federal constitutional protections for abortion in June 2022, the number of abortions has increased slightly across the country, according to the health research nonprofit&nbsp;<a href="https://www.kff.org/womens-health-policy/abortion-trends-before-and-after-dobbs/" target="_blank">KFF</a>.

The group points to expanded telehealth, which can offer medication abortion more affordably through virtual appointments.

Since the 2022 ruling and subsequent state abortion bans, patients have experienced higher travel costs for abortions and delays in care, according to&nbsp;<a href="https://stateline.org/2025/07/16/travel-time-costs-for-abortions-increased-after-state-bans-researchers-find/">research</a>&nbsp;published in the American Journal of Public Health in July.

Researchers from the University of California, San Francisco found that travel time to access abortion increased from 2.8 hours to 11.3 hours for residents in states with abortion bans. Travel costs increased from $179 to $372. And more than half of survey respondents said their abortion care required an overnight hotel stay, compared with 5% before an abortion ban.

In 2024, an estimated 7,880 Missourians traveled to Illinois and 3,960 traveled to Kansas to access abortion, according to the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.guttmacher.org/monthly-abortion-provision-study" target="_blank">Guttmacher Institute</a>, a research and policy organization focused on advancing reproductive rights.

Those Missourians were among the approximate 155,000 people who crossed state lines to access abortion care that year, representing 15% of all abortions provided in states without total bans.

Regardless of its outcome, the Missouri case is expected to be appealed. Even if the plaintiffs are ultimately successful, it may take a long time to restore care networks across the state, said Isaac Maddow-Zimet, a data scientist at the Guttmacher Institute.

“And that’s particularly the case when there are states that have a lot of legal uncertainty or restrictions coming into effect and then coming out of effect,” he said. “It’s not quick to open up a clinic. It’s not quick to even necessarily expand the kinds of services, or the kinds of the number of people that a clinic can see.”

Kimya Forouzan, the organization’s principal state policy adviser, said Missouri’s landscape is evidence that lawmakers can drastically curb abortion access without total bans. And despite an overwhelming vote to amend the constitution, legal battles can follow.

Even if the state’s laws are found unconstitutional, Forouzan said, lawmakers will likely still push anti-abortion measures. She noted that several bills have already been introduced in this year’s just-convened legislative session, and that Republican lawmakers are pushing a ballot&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2025/12/04/missouri-appeals-court-rejects-abortion-ban-ballot-language/" target="_blank">measure to repeal</a>&nbsp;2024’s reproductive rights amendment.

“There’s very much a push to pass as many restrictions as possible and kind of see what happens later and how things shape up later. … Time will tell, but we do know that they’re still pushing forth restrictions,” she said.

Stateline reporter Kevin Hardy can be reached at&nbsp;<a href="mailto:khardy@stateline.org">khardy@stateline.org</a>. Missouri Independent reporter Anna Spoerre can be reached at&nbsp;<a href="mailto:aspoerre@missouriindependent.com">aspoerre@missouriindependent.com</a>.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2026/1/1768404776458.png" alt="A trial over Missouri’s abortion regulations began Monday at the Jackson County Courthouse in Kansas City, Mo. Experts are watching the case, which could impact abortion access across the Midwest and South. (Photo by Kevin Hardy/Stateline)" />
 <figcaption>A trial over Missouri’s abortion regulations began Monday at the Jackson County Courthouse in Kansas City, Mo. Experts are watching the case, which could impact abortion access across the Midwest and South. (Photo by Kevin Hardy/Stateline)</figcaption>
 </figure><h2>Women in nearby states with abortion bans might not have to travel so far for the procedure.</h2>BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://stateline.org/author/khardy/">Kevin Hardy</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/annaspoerre/">ANNA SPOERRE</a> <a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/annaspoerre/"></a><a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2023/02/20/state-senator-throws-first-punches-of-2024-missouri-governors-campaign/">Missouri Independent</a>KANSAS CITY, Mo. — The outcome of a trial over Missouri’s abortion regulations could ripple far beyond the state, potentially creating new availability for women in the Midwest and South who can’t access abortion close to home.As a judge&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2026/01/12/missouri-abortion-rights-trial-focuses-on-two-decades-of-state-restrictions/" target="_blank">weighs the constitutionality</a>&nbsp;of a litany of state restrictions on abortion, the stakes are clear for Missouri women: The decision could hamper access for nearly everyone in the state — or greatly broaden it in ways not seen in decades. That would allow women in a dozen nearby states with abortion bans to travel a shorter distance to access the procedure.“Opening and reestablishing rights in the state of Missouri would help to alleviate some of the pressure that other states have since so many Southern states have banned abortion,” said Julie Burkhart, the co-owner of Hope Clinic in Granite City, Illinois. “It just seems logical that we would see a shift in migration patterns of patients in the country.”At her clinic, about a 15-minute drive from downtown St. Louis, Missourians account for about half of all patients, Burkhart said. Though Missouri voters in 2024 enshrined a right to abortion in the state constitution, access has remained&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2025/12/05/missouri-abortion-legal-access-hinges-courts-rebuilding/" target="_blank">highly limited because of restrictive state laws</a>. Only procedural abortions are available on a limited basis across three Planned Parenthood clinics in the state.Many of those state laws face legal scrutiny this week as a Missouri judge weighs the constitutionality of regulations targeting abortion providers. Those include a 72-hour waiting period between initial appointments and procedures, mandatory pelvic exams for medication abortions and a ban on telemedicine appointments for medication abortions.Planned Parenthood affiliates in Missouri argue state restrictions are unconstitutional under 2024’s voter-approved constitutional amendment. Over decades, state restrictions have gutted Missouri’s provider networks, limited appointment availability and ultimately forced abortions to a halt in 2022, before a limited number resumed after the 2024 vote.Experts and advocates are closely monitoring the Missouri case, which is expected to be appealed regardless of the outcome, because of its practical implications on access in the region. While many women now rely on abortion medication, procedural abortion is still crucial for those seeking later-term abortions or who prefer an in-clinic procedure.But the two-week bench trial in downtown Kansas City also tests lawmakers’ ability to put in place rules so restrictive that they effectively ban abortion — a practice used by anti-abortion lawmakers in other states looking to limit access to the procedure.“Judges do not operate in a vacuum,” Burkhart said, “ … and we know for a fact that judges look outside the borders of their state for information and for guidance. I do see this as having national importance.”That’s especially true in other states also litigating abortion access, including Arizona, Michigan and Ohio, said Rebecca Reingold, an associate director at Georgetown University’s O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law.While state judges are not bound by the decisions of judges in other states, their deliberations can be informed by court rulings, particularly involving novel legal questions or areas of the law that are evolving.“There is little doubt that advocates and decision-makers in other states navigating similar legal challenges are closely monitoring the litigation over Missouri’s abortion regulations,” Reingold said.<h2>Restrictions targeting abortion</h2>In the first days of the trial, Planned Parenthood leaders argued that ever-changing state laws and agency regulations have drastically limited access, caused needless red tape and posed privacy risk for their patients.Dr. Margaret Baum, chief medical officer with St. Louis-based Planned Parenthood Great Rivers, said the Missouri requirements specifically target abortion rather than all other kinds of medical care.“I provide vasectomies routinely. … And I am not required to have a complication plan, contact a primary care physician, even ask the patient how many miles they live from the health center.”Baum said state-mandated reporting rules unique to abortion require clinicians to ask the race, education level, marital status and specific location of each patient — none of which is relevant to their care.Planned Parenthood Great Rivers would like to offer abortion services in Springfield, Baum testified. Access in that region would provide an option for rural Missourians, and also could help serve residents in nearby Arkansas, Oklahoma and Texas, where abortion is almost universally banned.But the organization’s facilities there do not meet state abortion regulations for physical attributes, including hallway size, doorway size and the number of recliners in recovery rooms, Baum testified.Lawyers for the state defended Missouri’s restrictions as commonsense safeguards aimed at protecting vulnerable women. The attorney general’s office argued that complication risks of abortion justify additional state regulation — despite professional medical associations saying it’s generally safe. The AG’s office also maintained that Planned Parenthood faced a conflict of interest because of its financial motivations.“Abortion is a business,” Deputy Solicitor General Peter Donohue said during a procedural argument on Monday. “Your Honor, the plaintiffs are asking to deregulate their profession in order to make more money.”The state was expected to call as witnesses anti-abortion doctors and activists later in the trial.<h2>Patients traveling for care</h2>Since the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling that overturned federal constitutional protections for abortion in June 2022, the number of abortions has increased slightly across the country, according to the health research nonprofit&nbsp;<a href="https://www.kff.org/womens-health-policy/abortion-trends-before-and-after-dobbs/" target="_blank">KFF</a>.The group points to expanded telehealth, which can offer medication abortion more affordably through virtual appointments.Since the 2022 ruling and subsequent state abortion bans, patients have experienced higher travel costs for abortions and delays in care, according to&nbsp;<a href="https://stateline.org/2025/07/16/travel-time-costs-for-abortions-increased-after-state-bans-researchers-find/">research</a>&nbsp;published in the American Journal of Public Health in July.Researchers from the University of California, San Francisco found that travel time to access abortion increased from 2.8 hours to 11.3 hours for residents in states with abortion bans. Travel costs increased from $179 to $372. And more than half of survey respondents said their abortion care required an overnight hotel stay, compared with 5% before an abortion ban.In 2024, an estimated 7,880 Missourians traveled to Illinois and 3,960 traveled to Kansas to access abortion, according to the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.guttmacher.org/monthly-abortion-provision-study" target="_blank">Guttmacher Institute</a>, a research and policy organization focused on advancing reproductive rights.Those Missourians were among the approximate 155,000 people who crossed state lines to access abortion care that year, representing 15% of all abortions provided in states without total bans.<h2>Ongoing uncertainty</h2>Regardless of its outcome, the Missouri case is expected to be appealed. Even if the plaintiffs are ultimately successful, it may take a long time to restore care networks across the state, said Isaac Maddow-Zimet, a data scientist at the Guttmacher Institute.“And that’s particularly the case when there are states that have a lot of legal uncertainty or restrictions coming into effect and then coming out of effect,” he said. “It’s not quick to open up a clinic. It’s not quick to even necessarily expand the kinds of services, or the kinds of the number of people that a clinic can see.”Kimya Forouzan, the organization’s principal state policy adviser, said Missouri’s landscape is evidence that lawmakers can drastically curb abortion access without total bans. And despite an overwhelming vote to amend the constitution, legal battles can follow.Even if the state’s laws are found unconstitutional, Forouzan said, lawmakers will likely still push anti-abortion measures. She noted that several bills have already been introduced in this year’s just-convened legislative session, and that Republican lawmakers are pushing a ballot&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2025/12/04/missouri-appeals-court-rejects-abortion-ban-ballot-language/" target="_blank">measure to repeal</a>&nbsp;2024’s reproductive rights amendment.“There’s very much a push to pass as many restrictions as possible and kind of see what happens later and how things shape up later. … Time will tell, but we do know that they’re still pushing forth restrictions,” she said.Stateline reporter Kevin Hardy can be reached at&nbsp;<a href="mailto:khardy@stateline.org">khardy@stateline.org</a>. Missouri Independent reporter Anna Spoerre can be reached at&nbsp;<a href="mailto:aspoerre@missouriindependent.com">aspoerre@missouriindependent.com</a>.

Missouri trial could affect abortion access across the Midwest and South

By Allison Peck | North Platte Post/Sandhills Post

NEST 529-sponsored event to be held during Nebraska vs. Penn State basketball game

LINCOLN, Neb. — Nebraska families still have time to enter their “future Husker” in the annual Husker Athletics Baby Race, set for Saturday, Feb. 21, during halftime of the University of Nebraska men’s basketball game against Penn State at Pinnacle Bank Arena.

State Treasurer Joey Spellerberg said interest in the baby races continues to grow alongside the popularity of Husker basketball.

“The Husker baby races are soaring in popularity — just like University of Nebraska basketball,” Spellerberg said. “This contest is a fantastic way to spotlight Nebraska’s educational savings program, as well as the critical mission of the University of Nebraska — a leader of innovation — as it trains the next generation to grow our state and the 21st century economy.”

Parents can submit entries online through Feb. 12 at huskers.com/babyraces. Contestants will be selected at random, with parents given 24 hours to confirm participation. Six babies will compete in the Feb. 21 race. Eligible participants must be at the crawling stage and not yet walking.

The event is sponsored by the Nebraska Educational Savings Trust, also known as NEST 529, which is overseen by the State Treasurer’s Office. The program offers tax-advantaged savings options for education after high school.

“Whether a child eventually wears the scarlet and cream, attends another institution, or pursues a trade, NEST 529 helps make that path possible,” Spellerberg said.

Nebraska allows an income tax deduction of up to $10,000 per year for contributions made by a NEST 529 account owner, or up to $5,000 for married individuals filing separately. Funds in a NEST 529 account grow tax-deferred and can be withdrawn tax-free when used for qualified education expenses.

NEST 529 funds may be used at accredited universities, graduate schools, community colleges, trade and vocational schools, and registered apprenticeship programs. More information is available at nest529.com.

By Allison Peck | North Platte Post/Sandhills Post<h2>NEST 529-sponsored event to be held during Nebraska vs. Penn State basketball game</h2><figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2026/1/1768406793583.jpeg" alt=" " />
 <figcaption> </figcaption>
 </figure>LINCOLN, Neb. — Nebraska families still have time to enter their “future Husker” in the annual Husker Athletics Baby Race, set for Saturday, Feb. 21, during halftime of the University of Nebraska men’s basketball game against Penn State at Pinnacle Bank Arena.State Treasurer Joey Spellerberg said interest in the baby races continues to grow alongside the popularity of Husker basketball.“The Husker baby races are soaring in popularity — just like University of Nebraska basketball,” Spellerberg said. “This contest is a fantastic way to spotlight Nebraska’s educational savings program, as well as the critical mission of the University of Nebraska — a leader of innovation — as it trains the next generation to grow our state and the 21st century economy.”Parents can submit entries online through Feb. 12 at huskers.com/babyraces. Contestants will be selected at random, with parents given 24 hours to confirm participation. Six babies will compete in the Feb. 21 race. Eligible participants must be at the crawling stage and not yet walking.The event is sponsored by the Nebraska Educational Savings Trust, also known as NEST 529, which is overseen by the State Treasurer’s Office. The program offers tax-advantaged savings options for education after high school.“Whether a child eventually wears the scarlet and cream, attends another institution, or pursues a trade, NEST 529 helps make that path possible,” Spellerberg said.Nebraska allows an income tax deduction of up to $10,000 per year for contributions made by a NEST 529 account owner, or up to $5,000 for married individuals filing separately. Funds in a NEST 529 account grow tax-deferred and can be withdrawn tax-free when used for qualified education expenses.NEST 529 funds may be used at accredited universities, graduate schools, community colleges, trade and vocational schools, and registered apprenticeship programs. More information is available at nest529.com.

State Treasurer: Husker Athletics Baby Race Set for Feb. 21

If you’re renting farmland in Nebraska, there are a few lease options to think about. A lot of folks still use a verbal or handshake agreement and that’s fine however it’s good to know what happens when it’s time to end one. For cropland, the Nebraska Supreme Court says the lease year starts on March first. If a landowner wants to end a year-to-year verbal cropland lease, they need to give notice six months ahead that means by September first. Most people recommend that people send notice by Registered Mail, so you’ve got proof it was received.

&nbsp;Pasture leases are a little simpler. They usually line up with the grazing season for about five or six months and most end automatically when the grazing’s done, unless there’s something different written in an agreement.

Even though handshake deals are common, putting it in writing is always the best route. A written lease keeps things clear, protects everyone involved, and helps avoid misunderstandings.

Want to learn more or see an example of a sample lease? Check out the Ag Lease 101 Document Library online.

By Shannon Sand<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/4/1745851907586.png" alt=" " />
 <figcaption> </figcaption>
 </figure>If you’re renting farmland in Nebraska, there are a few lease options to think about. A lot of folks still use a verbal or handshake agreement and that’s fine however it’s good to know what happens when it’s time to end one. For cropland, the Nebraska Supreme Court says the lease year starts on March first. If a landowner wants to end a year-to-year verbal cropland lease, they need to give notice six months ahead that means by September first. Most people recommend that people send notice by Registered Mail, so you’ve got proof it was received.&nbsp;Pasture leases are a little simpler. They usually line up with the grazing season for about five or six months and most end automatically when the grazing’s done, unless there’s something different written in an agreement.Even though handshake deals are common, putting it in writing is always the best route. A written lease keeps things clear, protects everyone involved, and helps avoid misunderstandings.Want to learn more or see an example of a sample lease? Check out the Ag Lease 101 Document Library online.

Forage Minute: Lease Agreements Verbal Vs. Written

By<a href="https://news.unl.edu/author/troy-fedderson-university-communication-and-marketing">Troy Fedderson | University Communication and Marketing</a>

Katherine S. Ankerson began work Jan. 12 as interim chancellor of the University of Nebraska–Lincoln, opening her tenure with a call for collaboration, dialogue and a shared focus on the university’s future.

Ankerson, a longtime campus leader and educator, was appointed Jan. 5 by Dr. Jeffrey P. Gold, president of the University of Nebraska system. She steps into the role with a focus on engaging students, faculty and staff as the university navigates a period of transition and planning for the future.

In a&nbsp;<a href="https://chancellor.unl.edu/welcome-interim-chancellor-katherine-ankerson/">message to the campus community</a>, Ankerson emphasized resilience and the importance of working together.

“How we respond to challenges defines us and builds resilience,” Ankerson wrote. “We are strongest when we face obstacles together — working with humility and purpose to build a positive future.”

Katherine S. Ankerson, interim chancellor, welcomes students, faculty and staff back in this video.

She encouraged the university community to engage openly in shaping the institution’s next chapter and highlighted upcoming events, including a Charter Day observance in February, as opportunities to celebrate UNL’s work and look ahead together.

Listening and dialogue will also be central to her leadership. A campus listening session with Ankerson and Gold is 4 to 5 p.m. Jan. 15 in the Nebraska East Union.&nbsp;<a href="https://news.unl.edu/article/listening-session-set-with-interim-chancellor">Learn more about the listening session</a>.

Ankerson previously served as the university's executive vice chancellor from January 2022 until retiring in December 2024. Her 35-year career in higher education includes 24 years at UNL, where she has also served as dean, associate dean and professor in the College of Architecture.

As dean from 2016 to 2022, Ankerson led a revitalization of the College of Architecture, producing gains in faculty distinction and student success. During that period, the college’s six-year graduation rate increased from about 51% to nearly 72% and post-graduation employment rates consistently ranged from 95% to 100%.

Before joining UNL in 1996, Ankerson held academic appointments at Radford University, Washington State University and Kansas State University, and worked in private architectural practice and design. She was named the International Interior Design Association’s Educator of the Year in 2020.

Gold said Ankerson’s deep knowledge of the campus and years of leadership experience make her well-positioned to guide UNL toward the future.&nbsp;

“I appreciate Kathy’s willingness to step into this role at an important moment for the campus,” Gold said. “I am confident she will lead with purpose and care.”

In her message, Ankerson said she is committed to fostering transformative learning experiences, strengthening community and guiding the university as it looks to the future.

“I am honored to lead UNL as we boldly contribute to Nebraska’s tomorrow of limitless promise and potential,” Ankerson said.

Ankerson is the second woman to serve as the leader of the University of Nebraska–Lincoln. Joan Leitzel, a mathematics professor and university administrator, served as the university's interim chancellor for six months, from July 22, 1995 to Jan. 31, 1996.

Read Ankerson’s full message&nbsp;<a href="https://chancellor.unl.edu/welcome-interim-chancellor-katherine-ankerson/">here</a>.

By<a href="https://news.unl.edu/author/troy-fedderson-university-communication-and-marketing">Troy Fedderson | University Communication and Marketing</a><figure>
 <img src="https://news.unl.edu/sites/default/files/styles/wide/public/media/images/260107_Ankerson_007.JPG?itok=PzL_Fvk6" alt="Jordan Opp | University Communication and MarketingKatherine S. Ankerson started her new role as the University of Nebraska–Lincoln's interim chancellor on Jan. 12." />
 <figcaption>Jordan Opp | University Communication and MarketingKatherine S. Ankerson started her new role as the University of Nebraska–Lincoln's interim chancellor on Jan. 12.</figcaption>
 </figure>Katherine S. Ankerson began work Jan. 12 as interim chancellor of the University of Nebraska–Lincoln, opening her tenure with a call for collaboration, dialogue and a shared focus on the university’s future.Ankerson, a longtime campus leader and educator, was appointed Jan. 5 by Dr. Jeffrey P. Gold, president of the University of Nebraska system. She steps into the role with a focus on engaging students, faculty and staff as the university navigates a period of transition and planning for the future.In a&nbsp;<a href="https://chancellor.unl.edu/welcome-interim-chancellor-katherine-ankerson/">message to the campus community</a>, Ankerson emphasized resilience and the importance of working together.“How we respond to challenges defines us and builds resilience,” Ankerson wrote. “We are strongest when we face obstacles together — working with humility and purpose to build a positive future.”Katherine S. Ankerson, interim chancellor, welcomes students, faculty and staff back in this video.She encouraged the university community to engage openly in shaping the institution’s next chapter and highlighted upcoming events, including a Charter Day observance in February, as opportunities to celebrate UNL’s work and look ahead together.Listening and dialogue will also be central to her leadership. A campus listening session with Ankerson and Gold is 4 to 5 p.m. Jan. 15 in the Nebraska East Union.&nbsp;<a href="https://news.unl.edu/article/listening-session-set-with-interim-chancellor">Learn more about the listening session</a>.Ankerson previously served as the university's executive vice chancellor from January 2022 until retiring in December 2024. Her 35-year career in higher education includes 24 years at UNL, where she has also served as dean, associate dean and professor in the College of Architecture.As dean from 2016 to 2022, Ankerson led a revitalization of the College of Architecture, producing gains in faculty distinction and student success. During that period, the college’s six-year graduation rate increased from about 51% to nearly 72% and post-graduation employment rates consistently ranged from 95% to 100%.Before joining UNL in 1996, Ankerson held academic appointments at Radford University, Washington State University and Kansas State University, and worked in private architectural practice and design. She was named the International Interior Design Association’s Educator of the Year in 2020.Gold said Ankerson’s deep knowledge of the campus and years of leadership experience make her well-positioned to guide UNL toward the future.&nbsp;“I appreciate Kathy’s willingness to step into this role at an important moment for the campus,” Gold said. “I am confident she will lead with purpose and care.”In her message, Ankerson said she is committed to fostering transformative learning experiences, strengthening community and guiding the university as it looks to the future.“I am honored to lead UNL as we boldly contribute to Nebraska’s tomorrow of limitless promise and potential,” Ankerson said.Ankerson is the second woman to serve as the leader of the University of Nebraska–Lincoln. Joan Leitzel, a mathematics professor and university administrator, served as the university's interim chancellor for six months, from July 22, 1995 to Jan. 31, 1996.Read Ankerson’s full message&nbsp;<a href="https://chancellor.unl.edu/welcome-interim-chancellor-katherine-ankerson/">here</a>.

Ankerson takes helm At UNL; pledges bold, forward-focused leadership

By:<a href="https://stateline.org/author/shauneen-miranda/">Shauneen Miranda</a>

WASHINGTON — A pair of blockbuster cases to be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court could carry far-reaching implications for transgender rights, even as the Trump administration during the past year has rolled out a broad anti-trans agenda targeting everything from sports to military service.

<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/audio/2025/24-38">Click here to listen to a replay of the argument in Little vs. Hecox</a>

<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/audio/2025/24-43">Click here to listen to a replay of the argument in West Virginia vs. B.P.J.</a>

The court on Jan. 13 will hear challenges to laws in&nbsp;<a href="https://idahocapitalsun.com/2025/07/03/u-s-supreme-court-takes-up-trans-athlete-ban-in-idaho-west-virginia/" target="_blank">Idaho</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="https://westvirginiawatch.com/2025/07/03/scotus-to-take-up-west-virginias-transgender-athlete-ban/" target="_blank">West Virginia</a>&nbsp;banning transgender athletes from participating in women’s sports. Both cases center on whether the laws violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

The West Virginia case before the Supreme Court also questions whether the state’s law violates Title IX — a landmark federal civil rights law that bars schools that receive federal funding from practicing sex-based discrimination.&nbsp;

Lower court rulings have temporarily blocked the states from implementing the bans, to varying extents, and Republican attorneys general in Idaho and West Virginia have asked the Supreme Court to intervene.&nbsp;

“We know we have an uphill fight, and our hope is certainly that we prevail,” Joshua Block, senior counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union’s LGBT &amp; HIV Project, who will be presenting oral arguments in the West Virginia case, said at a Jan. 8 ACLU press briefing.&nbsp;

“But we also hope that regardless of what happens, this case isn’t successfully used as a tool to undermine the rights of transgender folks more generally in areas far beyond just athletics.”&nbsp;

The outcome of the oral arguments before a court dominated 6-3 by conservative justices will be closely watched. Nearly 30 states have laws that ban trans students’ participation in sports consistent with their gender identity, according to the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.lgbtmap.org/equality-maps/youth/sports_participation_bans" target="_blank">Movement Advancement Project</a>, an independent think tank.

The justices are taking up both cases in one day. First will be&nbsp;<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/public/24-38.html" target="_blank">Little v. Hecox,&nbsp;</a>which contests a 2020 Idaho law that categorically bans trans athletes from competing on women’s and girls’ sports teams.&nbsp;

Lindsay Hecox sued over the ban in 2020, just months before the law was set to take effect.&nbsp;

Though Hecox wanted to try out for the women’s track and cross-country teams at Boise State University, the Idaho law — the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/01/sports/transgender-idaho-ban-sports.html" target="_blank">first of its kind</a>&nbsp;in the nation — would have prevented her from doing so because she is transgender.&nbsp;

A federal court in Idaho halted the law from taking effect later that year. A federal appeals court initially upheld the ruling in 2023 but later adjusted the scope of it in 2024 to only apply to Hecox, not other athletes.&nbsp;

Idaho appealed to the Supreme Court in July 2024.

Since that time, Hecox has asked both an Idaho federal court and the Supreme Court to drop the case.&nbsp;

An&nbsp;<a href="https://idahocapitalsun.com/2025/10/15/idaho-federal-judge-keeps-transgender-athletics-lawsuit-open/" target="_blank">Idaho federal judge</a>&nbsp;in October rejected that attempt, but the Supreme Court deferred the request until after oral argument — meaning justices could still dismiss the case.

“The Supreme Court is trying to decide whether Idaho can preserve women’s sports based on biological sex, or must female be redefined based on gender identity,” Idaho Attorney General Raúl Labrador said at a Jan. 8 press briefing ahead of the oral arguments.

“I think Idaho is just trying to protect fairness, safety and equal protection for girls and women in sports,” Labrador said at the briefing alongside West Virginia Attorney General John McCuskey, hosted by the conservative legal advocacy group Alliance Defending Freedom.&nbsp;&nbsp;

After the Idaho case, the justices will hear arguments in&nbsp;<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/public/24-43.html" target="_blank">West Virginia v. B.P.J.</a>, which centers on a 2021 Mountain State law that also bans trans athletes from participating on women’s and girls’ sports teams.&nbsp;

McCuskey argued that his state’s law “supports and bolsters the original intent and the continuing intent and purpose of Title IX.”&nbsp;

McCuskey said the law complies with the Equal Protection Clause because it “treats all biological males and all biological females identically” and “doesn’t ban anyone from playing sports.”&nbsp;

Becky Pepper-Jackson, who was 11 at the time, wanted to try out for the girls’ cross-country team when starting middle school, but would have been prevented from doing so under the West Virginia law because she is transgender.&nbsp;

A federal appeals court in 2024 barred West Virginia from enforcing the ban, prompting the state to ask the nation’s highest court to intervene.&nbsp;&nbsp;

White House, Congress zero in on trans athletes

Meanwhile, President Donald Trump’s administration has taken steps at the federal level to prohibit trans athletes’ participation in women’s sports teams aligning with their gender identity.&nbsp;

Trump&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/trump-signs-executive-order-banning-transgender-athletes-womens-school-sports" target="_blank">signed an executive order</a>&nbsp;in February 2025 that banned such participation and made it the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/02/keeping-men-out-of-womens-sports/" target="_blank">policy</a>&nbsp;of the United States to “rescind all funds from educational programs that deprive women and girls of fair athletic opportunities, which results in the endangerment, humiliation, and silencing of women and girls and deprives them of privacy.”

The&nbsp;<a href="https://www.ncaa.org/news/2025/2/6/media-center-ncaa-announces-transgender-student-athlete-participation-policy-change.aspx" target="_blank">NCAA promptly changed its policy</a>&nbsp;to comply with the order, limiting “competition in women’s sports to student-athletes assigned female at birth only.”&nbsp;

In late 2024, prior to the policy shift, NCAA President Charlie Baker&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6062855/2025/01/14/ncaa-transgender-athlete-policy-charlie-baker/" target="_blank">told Congress</a>&nbsp;that of the more than half-million total athletes in NCAA schools, he knew of fewer than 10 who were transgender.&nbsp;

The&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/us-house-passes-bill-banning-trans-athletes-competing-womens-school-sports" target="_blank">GOP-led House</a>&nbsp;passed a measure in January 2025 that would bar transgender students from participating on women’s school sports teams consistent with their gender identity.&nbsp;

But Senate Democrats in March&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/us-senate-democrats-block-bill-banning-transgender-athletes-womens-school-sports" target="_blank">blocked an attempt</a>&nbsp;at imposing such a ban and codifying Trump’s executive order.&nbsp;

Forty-eight GOP members of Congress argued in a September&nbsp;<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/24/24-38/375168/20250919112943701_CongressIdaho_Amicus%20Document%20September%2019%202025%20EFile.pdf" target="_blank">amicus brief</a>&nbsp;supporting Idaho and West Virginia that “if allowed to stand, the interpretation of the lower courts will unsettle the very promises that Congress made to generations of young women and men through Title IX.”&nbsp;

On the flip side,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/24/24-43/384769/20251117150239241_MembersofCongressAmici.pdf" target="_blank">130 congressional Democrats</a>&nbsp;stood behind the two transgender athletes in a November amicus brief, noting that “categorical bans preventing transgender students from participating on sports teams consistent with their gender identity impose significant harm on all children — especially girls.”&nbsp;

The group argued that such bans “do not meet the standards this Court has put in place to assess discrimination based on sex — whether as a matter of Title IX or under the Equal Protection Clause.”&nbsp;

Trump’s broader anti-trans agenda has extended beyond athletic participation in the nearly one year since he took office.&nbsp;

He signed executive orders that:<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/defending-women-from-gender-ideology-extremism-and-restoring-biological-truth-to-the-federal-government/" target="_blank">&nbsp;make it</a>&nbsp;the “policy of the United States to recognize two sexes, male and female;” restrict access to<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/newest-round-trump-moves-targets-federal-employees-care-transgender-kids" target="_blank">&nbsp;gender-affirming care</a>&nbsp;for kids; and aim to bar openly<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/trump-issues-order-prohibiting-openly-transgender-service-members-military" target="_blank">&nbsp;transgender service members</a>&nbsp;from the U.S. military.&nbsp;

The&nbsp;<a href="https://www.hrc.org/resources/get-the-facts-about-transgender-non-binary-athletes" target="_blank">Human Rights Campaign</a>, an LGBTQ+ advocacy group, has noted that there has been “considerable disinformation and misinformation about what the inclusion of transgender youth in sports entails” and that trans students’ sports participation “has been a non-issue.”

In a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.hrc.org/press-releases/backgrounder-supreme-court-to-hear-oral-arguments-for-west-virginia-v-bpj-and-little-v-hecox-key-cases-on-the-inclusion-of-transgender-youth-in-sports" target="_blank">statement</a>&nbsp;ahead of oral arguments, HRC’s senior director of legal policy Cathryn Oakley said “every child, no matter their background, race, or gender, should have access to a quality education where they can feel safe to learn and grow — and for many kids that involves being a part of a school sports team.”

Oakley added that “to deny transgender kids the chance to participate in school sports alongside their peers simply because of who they are is textbook discrimination — and it’s unconstitutional.”&nbsp;

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2026/1/1768315435044.png" alt="Image courtesy CSPAN" />
 <figcaption>Image courtesy CSPAN</figcaption>
 </figure>By:<a href="https://stateline.org/author/shauneen-miranda/">Shauneen Miranda</a>WASHINGTON — A pair of blockbuster cases to be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court could carry far-reaching implications for transgender rights, even as the Trump administration during the past year has rolled out a broad anti-trans agenda targeting everything from sports to military service.<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/audio/2025/24-38">Click here to listen to a replay of the argument in Little vs. Hecox</a><a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/audio/2025/24-43">Click here to listen to a replay of the argument in West Virginia vs. B.P.J.</a>The court on Jan. 13 will hear challenges to laws in&nbsp;<a href="https://idahocapitalsun.com/2025/07/03/u-s-supreme-court-takes-up-trans-athlete-ban-in-idaho-west-virginia/" target="_blank">Idaho</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="https://westvirginiawatch.com/2025/07/03/scotus-to-take-up-west-virginias-transgender-athlete-ban/" target="_blank">West Virginia</a>&nbsp;banning transgender athletes from participating in women’s sports. Both cases center on whether the laws violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.The West Virginia case before the Supreme Court also questions whether the state’s law violates Title IX — a landmark federal civil rights law that bars schools that receive federal funding from practicing sex-based discrimination.&nbsp;Lower court rulings have temporarily blocked the states from implementing the bans, to varying extents, and Republican attorneys general in Idaho and West Virginia have asked the Supreme Court to intervene.&nbsp;“We know we have an uphill fight, and our hope is certainly that we prevail,” Joshua Block, senior counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union’s LGBT &amp; HIV Project, who will be presenting oral arguments in the West Virginia case, said at a Jan. 8 ACLU press briefing.&nbsp;“But we also hope that regardless of what happens, this case isn’t successfully used as a tool to undermine the rights of transgender folks more generally in areas far beyond just athletics.”&nbsp;The outcome of the oral arguments before a court dominated 6-3 by conservative justices will be closely watched. Nearly 30 states have laws that ban trans students’ participation in sports consistent with their gender identity, according to the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.lgbtmap.org/equality-maps/youth/sports_participation_bans" target="_blank">Movement Advancement Project</a>, an independent think tank.<h2>Idaho case&nbsp;&nbsp;</h2>The justices are taking up both cases in one day. First will be&nbsp;<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/public/24-38.html" target="_blank">Little v. Hecox,&nbsp;</a>which contests a 2020 Idaho law that categorically bans trans athletes from competing on women’s and girls’ sports teams.&nbsp;Lindsay Hecox sued over the ban in 2020, just months before the law was set to take effect.&nbsp;Though Hecox wanted to try out for the women’s track and cross-country teams at Boise State University, the Idaho law — the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/01/sports/transgender-idaho-ban-sports.html" target="_blank">first of its kind</a>&nbsp;in the nation — would have prevented her from doing so because she is transgender.&nbsp;A federal court in Idaho halted the law from taking effect later that year. A federal appeals court initially upheld the ruling in 2023 but later adjusted the scope of it in 2024 to only apply to Hecox, not other athletes.&nbsp;Idaho appealed to the Supreme Court in July 2024.Since that time, Hecox has asked both an Idaho federal court and the Supreme Court to drop the case.&nbsp;An&nbsp;<a href="https://idahocapitalsun.com/2025/10/15/idaho-federal-judge-keeps-transgender-athletics-lawsuit-open/" target="_blank">Idaho federal judge</a>&nbsp;in October rejected that attempt, but the Supreme Court deferred the request until after oral argument — meaning justices could still dismiss the case.“The Supreme Court is trying to decide whether Idaho can preserve women’s sports based on biological sex, or must female be redefined based on gender identity,” Idaho Attorney General Raúl Labrador said at a Jan. 8 press briefing ahead of the oral arguments.“I think Idaho is just trying to protect fairness, safety and equal protection for girls and women in sports,” Labrador said at the briefing alongside West Virginia Attorney General John McCuskey, hosted by the conservative legal advocacy group Alliance Defending Freedom.&nbsp;&nbsp;<h2>West Virginia case</h2>After the Idaho case, the justices will hear arguments in&nbsp;<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/public/24-43.html" target="_blank">West Virginia v. B.P.J.</a>, which centers on a 2021 Mountain State law that also bans trans athletes from participating on women’s and girls’ sports teams.&nbsp;McCuskey argued that his state’s law “supports and bolsters the original intent and the continuing intent and purpose of Title IX.”&nbsp;McCuskey said the law complies with the Equal Protection Clause because it “treats all biological males and all biological females identically” and “doesn’t ban anyone from playing sports.”&nbsp;Becky Pepper-Jackson, who was 11 at the time, wanted to try out for the girls’ cross-country team when starting middle school, but would have been prevented from doing so under the West Virginia law because she is transgender.&nbsp;Her mother sued on her behalf in 2021.A federal appeals court in 2024 barred West Virginia from enforcing the ban, prompting the state to ask the nation’s highest court to intervene.&nbsp;&nbsp;<h2>White House, Congress zero in on trans athletes</h2>Meanwhile, President Donald Trump’s administration has taken steps at the federal level to prohibit trans athletes’ participation in women’s sports teams aligning with their gender identity.&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/trump-signs-executive-order-banning-transgender-athletes-womens-school-sports" target="_blank">signed an executive order</a>&nbsp;in February 2025 that banned such participation and made it the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/02/keeping-men-out-of-womens-sports/" target="_blank">policy</a>&nbsp;of the United States to “rescind all funds from educational programs that deprive women and girls of fair athletic opportunities, which results in the endangerment, humiliation, and silencing of women and girls and deprives them of privacy.”The&nbsp;<a href="https://www.ncaa.org/news/2025/2/6/media-center-ncaa-announces-transgender-student-athlete-participation-policy-change.aspx" target="_blank">NCAA promptly changed its policy</a>&nbsp;to comply with the order, limiting “competition in women’s sports to student-athletes assigned female at birth only.”&nbsp;In late 2024, prior to the policy shift, NCAA President Charlie Baker&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6062855/2025/01/14/ncaa-transgender-athlete-policy-charlie-baker/" target="_blank">told Congress</a>&nbsp;that of the more than half-million total athletes in NCAA schools, he knew of fewer than 10 who were transgender.&nbsp;The&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/us-house-passes-bill-banning-trans-athletes-competing-womens-school-sports" target="_blank">GOP-led House</a>&nbsp;passed a measure in January 2025 that would bar transgender students from participating on women’s school sports teams consistent with their gender identity.&nbsp;But Senate Democrats in March&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/us-senate-democrats-block-bill-banning-transgender-athletes-womens-school-sports" target="_blank">blocked an attempt</a>&nbsp;at imposing such a ban and codifying Trump’s executive order.&nbsp;Forty-eight GOP members of Congress argued in a September&nbsp;<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/24/24-38/375168/20250919112943701_CongressIdaho_Amicus%20Document%20September%2019%202025%20EFile.pdf" target="_blank">amicus brief</a>&nbsp;supporting Idaho and West Virginia that “if allowed to stand, the interpretation of the lower courts will unsettle the very promises that Congress made to generations of young women and men through Title IX.”&nbsp;On the flip side,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/24/24-43/384769/20251117150239241_MembersofCongressAmici.pdf" target="_blank">130 congressional Democrats</a>&nbsp;stood behind the two transgender athletes in a November amicus brief, noting that “categorical bans preventing transgender students from participating on sports teams consistent with their gender identity impose significant harm on all children — especially girls.”&nbsp;The group argued that such bans “do not meet the standards this Court has put in place to assess discrimination based on sex — whether as a matter of Title IX or under the Equal Protection Clause.”&nbsp;Trump’s broader anti-trans agenda has extended beyond athletic participation in the nearly one year since he took office.&nbsp;He signed executive orders that:<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/defending-women-from-gender-ideology-extremism-and-restoring-biological-truth-to-the-federal-government/" target="_blank">&nbsp;make it</a>&nbsp;the “policy of the United States to recognize two sexes, male and female;” restrict access to<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/newest-round-trump-moves-targets-federal-employees-care-transgender-kids" target="_blank">&nbsp;gender-affirming care</a>&nbsp;for kids; and aim to bar openly<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/trump-issues-order-prohibiting-openly-transgender-service-members-military" target="_blank">&nbsp;transgender service members</a>&nbsp;from the U.S. military.&nbsp;<h2>‘Textbook discrimination’&nbsp;</h2>The&nbsp;<a href="https://www.hrc.org/resources/get-the-facts-about-transgender-non-binary-athletes" target="_blank">Human Rights Campaign</a>, an LGBTQ+ advocacy group, has noted that there has been “considerable disinformation and misinformation about what the inclusion of transgender youth in sports entails” and that trans students’ sports participation “has been a non-issue.”In a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.hrc.org/press-releases/backgrounder-supreme-court-to-hear-oral-arguments-for-west-virginia-v-bpj-and-little-v-hecox-key-cases-on-the-inclusion-of-transgender-youth-in-sports" target="_blank">statement</a>&nbsp;ahead of oral arguments, HRC’s senior director of legal policy Cathryn Oakley said “every child, no matter their background, race, or gender, should have access to a quality education where they can feel safe to learn and grow — and for many kids that involves being a part of a school sports team.”Oakley added that “to deny transgender kids the chance to participate in school sports alongside their peers simply because of who they are is textbook discrimination — and it’s unconstitutional.”&nbsp;

🎧Landmark cases on transgender athletes at the US Supreme Court 

&nbsp;Valentine's Day Weekend Event Serves as Gateway to National Competition

Omaha, Neb. – Heartwood Park, located at 301 S. 145th St., will transform from an outdoor ice-skating rink to a competitive snow sculpting arena February 13–15, 2026, as Heartwood Preserve hosts the Nebraska Snow Sculpting Championships. This sanctioned qualifying event, held in partnership with Nebraska Snow Sculpting, will determine which team represents Nebraska at the 2027 U.S. National Snow Sculpting Competition in Lake Geneva, Wisconsin.

Teams of up to three sculptors will compete for the state championship title, using only hand tools to create family-friendly masterpieces out of 4' x 4' x 8' blocks of specially made snow that will be created on-site at Heartwood Park. Both amateur and professional sculptors are welcome to compete and must submit a team application by January 30, 2026.

The Nebraska Snow Sculpting Championships offers a rare experience for spectators, having taken place in Nebraska just once before in 2019.

"Having a qualifying event of this caliber in Omaha with no entry fee to compete gives Nebraska sculptors a legitimate path to the national stage," said Competition Director Matt Seeley with Nebraska Snow Sculpting. "This isn't just a local contest; it's a sanctioned competition that brings the community together to put Nebraska snow art on the map. The fact that it's happening at Heartwood Preserve during Valentine's weekend makes it even more special."

-Free to compete and attend the snow sculpting competition.

-Spectator and competition hours will be 10 a.m. to 8 p.m. on Friday, Feb. 13 and Saturday, Feb. 14.

-Judging will begin at 10 a.m. on Sunday, Feb. 15 with an awards ceremony at 2 p.m. and public viewing of the finished sculptures between 3-6 p.m. These events are open to the public.

-A People's Choice Award will be determined through public voting, 10 a.m. to 1 p.m. on Sunday.

For Immediate Release<h2>&nbsp;Valentine's Day Weekend Event Serves as Gateway to National Competition</h2><figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2026/1/1768250691295.png" alt=" " />
 <figcaption> </figcaption>
 </figure>Omaha, Neb. – Heartwood Park, located at 301 S. 145th St., will transform from an outdoor ice-skating rink to a competitive snow sculpting arena February 13–15, 2026, as Heartwood Preserve hosts the Nebraska Snow Sculpting Championships. This sanctioned qualifying event, held in partnership with Nebraska Snow Sculpting, will determine which team represents Nebraska at the 2027 U.S. National Snow Sculpting Competition in Lake Geneva, Wisconsin.Teams of up to three sculptors will compete for the state championship title, using only hand tools to create family-friendly masterpieces out of 4' x 4' x 8' blocks of specially made snow that will be created on-site at Heartwood Park. Both amateur and professional sculptors are welcome to compete and must submit a team application by January 30, 2026.The Nebraska Snow Sculpting Championships offers a rare experience for spectators, having taken place in Nebraska just once before in 2019."Having a qualifying event of this caliber in Omaha with no entry fee to compete gives Nebraska sculptors a legitimate path to the national stage," said Competition Director Matt Seeley with Nebraska Snow Sculpting. "This isn't just a local contest; it's a sanctioned competition that brings the community together to put Nebraska snow art on the map. The fact that it's happening at Heartwood Preserve during Valentine's weekend makes it even more special."Schedule and Event Highlights:-Free to compete and attend the snow sculpting competition.-Spectator and competition hours will be 10 a.m. to 8 p.m. on Friday, Feb. 13 and Saturday, Feb. 14.-Judging will begin at 10 a.m. on Sunday, Feb. 15 with an awards ceremony at 2 p.m. and public viewing of the finished sculptures between 3-6 p.m. These events are open to the public.-A People's Choice Award will be determined through public voting, 10 a.m. to 1 p.m. on Sunday.-Professional sculptor demonstrations throughout the weekend.-Valentine's Day weekend programming with additional surprises for spectators.For complete rules, judging criteria and application materials, visit https://heartwoodomaha.com/event/snow-sculpting-championships-2026/ or contact NebraskaSnowSculpting@gmail.com.About Heartwood Preserve (www.heartwoodomaha.com)Heartwood Preserve is a 500-acre mixed-use urban development with roughly 80 acres devoted to green space, 8 miles of bike paths and open trails and over 10,000 newly planted trees. Offering a wide variety of retail, commercial, residential and recreational facilities on an environmentally observant landscape, Heartwood Preserve is designed to become a top destination for the greater Omaha area and surrounding region. Follow Heartwood Preserve on Facebook, Instagram and TikTok or visit heartwoodomaha.com/events for the latest updates on events at Heartwood Park.