MILWAUKEE (AP) — President Joe Biden said it's “self-evident” that Donald Trump is an insurrectionist for trying to overturn his 2020 election loss but stopped short of commenting on&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-insurrection-14th-amendment-2024-colorado-d16dd8f354eeaf450558378c65fd79a2">a Colorado legal case</a>&nbsp;that would bar him from the state's ballot.

The Democratic president made the comments about his likely Republican opponent in next year's election shortly after landing in Milwaukee for&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/milwaukee-biden-wisconsin-small-businesses-black-latino-b12b198e413c7916e16ae4b61179d828">an event focused on the economy</a>.

“Whether the 14th Amendment applies or not, we’ll let the court make that decision," Biden told reporters on the tarmac after stepping off Air Force One. "But he certainly supported an insurrection. There’s no question about it. None. Zero. And he seems to be doubling down on it.”

The Colorado Supreme Court issued a decision on Tuesday declaring that Trump is ineligible to serve as president under&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-14th-amendment-insurrection-2024-election-ballot-9c5f79203109ba221b35a48e708ad725">Section 3 of the 14th Amendment</a>. It's the first time in the country's history that the provision has been used to keep a candidate off the ballot.

Republicans have denounced the court's decision, and Trump's lawyers said they plan to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Trump has refused to back down from his lies that voter fraud allowed Biden to win in 2020, and he's pledged to pardon supporters who participated in the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.

Biden has repeatedly condemned Trump and described him as a threat to American democracy. However, he's been more circumspect when addressing his predecessor's legal challenges, including several criminal cases against him, and this one is no different.

Press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre declined to comment when asked by reporters aboard Air Force One.

“The president is not involved; we’re not involved in this," she said. "This is a legal process and we’re not involved in this.”

Biden's campaign was similarly circumspect in a call with reporters on Tuesday.

“What I will say is that the president looks forward to defeating Donald Trump or whoever else emerges from the Republican primary on the ballot box in November 2024," said Brooke Goren, the campaign's deputy communications director.

MILWAUKEE (AP) — President Joe Biden said it's “self-evident” that Donald Trump is an insurrectionist for trying to overturn his 2020 election loss but stopped short of commenting on&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-insurrection-14th-amendment-2024-colorado-d16dd8f354eeaf450558378c65fd79a2">a Colorado legal case</a>&nbsp;that would bar him from the state's ballot.<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Q: Is Trump an insurrectionist, sir? President Biden: &quot;It&#39;s self-evident. You saw it all. Now whether the 14th Amendment applies, I&#39;ll let the court make that decision. But he certainly supported an insurrection. There&#39;s no question about it. None. Zero.&quot; <a href="https://t.co/kREbFSDbyV">pic.twitter.com/kREbFSDbyV</a>&mdash; CSPAN (@cspan) <a href="https://twitter.com/cspan/status/1737526031697801707?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 20, 2023</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>The Democratic president made the comments about his likely Republican opponent in next year's election shortly after landing in Milwaukee for&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/milwaukee-biden-wisconsin-small-businesses-black-latino-b12b198e413c7916e16ae4b61179d828">an event focused on the economy</a>.“Whether the 14th Amendment applies or not, we’ll let the court make that decision," Biden told reporters on the tarmac after stepping off Air Force One. "But he certainly supported an insurrection. There’s no question about it. None. Zero. And he seems to be doubling down on it.”The Colorado Supreme Court issued a decision on Tuesday declaring that Trump is ineligible to serve as president under&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-14th-amendment-insurrection-2024-election-ballot-9c5f79203109ba221b35a48e708ad725">Section 3 of the 14th Amendment</a>. It's the first time in the country's history that the provision has been used to keep a candidate off the ballot.Republicans have denounced the court's decision, and Trump's lawyers said they plan to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.Trump has refused to back down from his lies that voter fraud allowed Biden to win in 2020, and he's pledged to pardon supporters who participated in the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.Biden has repeatedly condemned Trump and described him as a threat to American democracy. However, he's been more circumspect when addressing his predecessor's legal challenges, including several criminal cases against him, and this one is no different.Press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre declined to comment when asked by reporters aboard Air Force One.“The president is not involved; we’re not involved in this," she said. "This is a legal process and we’re not involved in this.”Biden's campaign was similarly circumspect in a call with reporters on Tuesday.“What I will say is that the president looks forward to defeating Donald Trump or whoever else emerges from the Republican primary on the ballot box in November 2024," said Brooke Goren, the campaign's deputy communications director.

🎥 President Biden asked if Trump supported insurrection

CAIRO(AP) —The top leader of Yemen's Houthi rebels threatened Wednesday to target U.S. warships if attacks are launched against Yemen, a day after Washington announced a new international coalition to protect commercial vessels sailing through the Red Sea.

For weeks, the Iran-backed rebels in Yemen have been attacking ships transiting the Red Sea with drones and ballistic missiles. The group has said their attacks aim to end Israel's military offensive in the Gaza Strip. But the Israeli ties to the commercial ships targeted by the hardline Shia force have grown more tenuous with each attack.

In an hourlong speech, Abdel Malek al-Houthi said, “America seeks to militarize the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden, seeking to turn the region into a war zone.”

On Tuesday, Washington announced the establishment of a new international coalition to protect vessels traveling through the Red Sea. The United Kingdom, Bahrain, Canada, France, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Seychelles and Spain have joined the new maritime security mission, U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said. Bahrain is the only Arab country in the coalition, and it does not border the Red Sea. Few additional details about how the maritime alliance will operate were made public.

The rebel leader also accused other Arab countries of intercepting its missile fire bound for Israel. In both cases, no specific country was named.

The Houthis control the capital, Sanaa, several northern provinces bordering Saudi Arabia as well as much of the western highlands and Red Sea ports.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/10/1696803172229.png" alt="The USS Gerald R. Ford Carrier Strike Group arrived in the Eastern Mediterranean Sea in mid October-photo U.S. Central Command" />
 <figcaption>The USS Gerald R. Ford Carrier Strike Group arrived in the Eastern Mediterranean Sea in mid October-photo U.S. Central Command</figcaption>
 </figure>CAIRO(AP) —The top leader of Yemen's Houthi rebels threatened Wednesday to target U.S. warships if attacks are launched against Yemen, a day after Washington announced a new international coalition to protect commercial vessels sailing through the Red Sea.For weeks, the Iran-backed rebels in Yemen have been attacking ships transiting the Red Sea with drones and ballistic missiles. The group has said their attacks aim to end Israel's military offensive in the Gaza Strip. But the Israeli ties to the commercial ships targeted by the hardline Shia force have grown more tenuous with each attack.In an hourlong speech, Abdel Malek al-Houthi said, “America seeks to militarize the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden, seeking to turn the region into a war zone.”On Tuesday, Washington announced the establishment of a new international coalition to protect vessels traveling through the Red Sea. The United Kingdom, Bahrain, Canada, France, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Seychelles and Spain have joined the new maritime security mission, U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said. Bahrain is the only Arab country in the coalition, and it does not border the Red Sea. Few additional details about how the maritime alliance will operate were made public.The rebel leader also accused other Arab countries of intercepting its missile fire bound for Israel. In both cases, no specific country was named.The Houthis control the capital, Sanaa, several northern provinces bordering Saudi Arabia as well as much of the western highlands and Red Sea ports.

Terrorists threaten to strike US warships if Yemen is attacked 

Lincoln, Neb. —The 2024 Cow-Calf College, offered by Nebraska Extension, gives producers a chance to learn about cow and calf health from some of&nbsp;the University of Nebraska—Lincoln’s&nbsp;veterinarians and researchers.

Topics will range from newborn calf health to pinkeye, scours, causes of bovine abortion, and when to call the vet.

The free event is scheduled for Thursday, Jan. 11, 2024 from 10:15 a.m. to 2:15 p.m. (CST) at the Great Plains Veterinary Education Center (GPVEC), near Clay Center, Nebraska, with an optional tour of the U.S. Meat Animal Research Center to follow, weather permitting.

Dr. Matt Hille, assistant professor and diagnostic pathologist at the Nebraska Veterinary Diagnostic Center, will kick off the program with a discussion of management of infectious disease from birth to weaning.

During the provided lunch Dr. Brian Vander Ley, associate professor and assistant director of GPVEC, will give an overview of the work they are doing at GPVEC.

The afternoon will include three sessions. Hille will address bovine abortion causes and how and when to use the diagnostic tools available to producers.&nbsp;Dr. Lindsay Waechter-Mead,&nbsp;livestock systems educator with Nebraska Extension, will talk about neonatal calf care.&nbsp;

Dr. Becky Funk, animal health and teaching Extension specialist at GPVEC, will provide a wet lab that gives producers a hands-on opportunity to explore bovine reproductive tracts.

There is no cost to attend, but pre-registration is requested&nbsp;for&nbsp;food and supply counts.

Lincoln, Neb. —The 2024 Cow-Calf College, offered by Nebraska Extension, gives producers a chance to learn about cow and calf health from some of&nbsp;the University of Nebraska—Lincoln’s&nbsp;veterinarians and researchers.Topics will range from newborn calf health to pinkeye, scours, causes of bovine abortion, and when to call the vet.The free event is scheduled for Thursday, Jan. 11, 2024 from 10:15 a.m. to 2:15 p.m. (CST) at the Great Plains Veterinary Education Center (GPVEC), near Clay Center, Nebraska, with an optional tour of the U.S. Meat Animal Research Center to follow, weather permitting.Dr. Matt Hille, assistant professor and diagnostic pathologist at the Nebraska Veterinary Diagnostic Center, will kick off the program with a discussion of management of infectious disease from birth to weaning.During the provided lunch Dr. Brian Vander Ley, associate professor and assistant director of GPVEC, will give an overview of the work they are doing at GPVEC.The afternoon will include three sessions. Hille will address bovine abortion causes and how and when to use the diagnostic tools available to producers.&nbsp;Dr. Lindsay Waechter-Mead,&nbsp;livestock systems educator with Nebraska Extension, will talk about neonatal calf care.&nbsp;Dr. Becky Funk, animal health and teaching Extension specialist at GPVEC, will provide a wet lab that gives producers a hands-on opportunity to explore bovine reproductive tracts.There is no cost to attend, but pre-registration is requested&nbsp;for&nbsp;food and supply counts.

Beef producers can work with UNL veterinarians at one-day Cow-Calf College

Acting United States Attorney Susan Lehr announced that Eric L. Eggers, 39, of Oxford, Nebraska, was sentenced on December 19, 2023, in federal court in Lincoln, Nebraska for felon in possession of a firearm. Senior United States District Judge John M. Gerrard sentenced Eggers to 36 months’ imprisonment. There is no parole in the federal system. After Eggers’ release from prison, he will begin a 3-year term of supervised release.

On August 24, 2022, law enforcement executed a search warrant of Eggers’ residence in Furnas County, Nebraska.&nbsp; During the search, law enforcement located 16 firearms in total.&nbsp; Eggers admitted that he knew that the firearms were in his residence and that he knowingly possessed them. He also admitted that he knew he could not legally possess them.&nbsp; Eggers had previously been convicted of a felony in 2012.

Acting United States Attorney Susan Lehr announced that Eric L. Eggers, 39, of Oxford, Nebraska, was sentenced on December 19, 2023, in federal court in Lincoln, Nebraska for felon in possession of a firearm. Senior United States District Judge John M. Gerrard sentenced Eggers to 36 months’ imprisonment. There is no parole in the federal system. After Eggers’ release from prison, he will begin a 3-year term of supervised release.On August 24, 2022, law enforcement executed a search warrant of Eggers’ residence in Furnas County, Nebraska.&nbsp; During the search, law enforcement located 16 firearms in total.&nbsp; Eggers admitted that he knew that the firearms were in his residence and that he knowingly possessed them. He also admitted that he knew he could not legally possess them.&nbsp; Eggers had previously been convicted of a felony in 2012.

Oxford Man Convicted for Felon in Possession of Firearm

Dec. 19, 2023 (McCook, Neb.) — Weather permitting, a crack sealing project will begin Jan. 2, on US-6, according to the Nebraska Department of Transportation. Crack sealing is a process of cleaning and filling open joints and cracks in the surface with sealant to prevent the entry of moisture and debris.

State maintenance forces will be performing a crack seal from reference post 112 to reference post 126, from Cambridge to Arapahoe. The work is anticipated to take 15 days. Traffic will be maintained with a pilot car and flaggers.

Dec. 19, 2023 (McCook, Neb.) — Weather permitting, a crack sealing project will begin Jan. 2, on US-6, according to the Nebraska Department of Transportation. Crack sealing is a process of cleaning and filling open joints and cracks in the surface with sealant to prevent the entry of moisture and debris.State maintenance forces will be performing a crack seal from reference post 112 to reference post 126, from Cambridge to Arapahoe. The work is anticipated to take 15 days. Traffic will be maintained with a pilot car and flaggers.

Maintenance Work Will Begin on US-6, Near Arapahoe

AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — Civil rights organizations on Tuesday filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of a&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/immigration-texas-border-8c86bc6c20a7c30d6127b2413b8688fc">new Texas law</a>&nbsp;that would allow police to arrest migrants who cross the border illegally and permit local judges to order them to leave the country.

The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Austin, argues that the measure that is set to take effect in March is unconstitutional because the federal government has sole authority over immigration.

The American Civil Liberties Union, its Texas branch, and the Texas Civil Rights Project sued less than 24 hours after Republican Gov. Greg Abbott signed the measure during a ceremony on the U.S.-Mexico border in Brownsville.

The civil rights groups filed the lawsuit on behalf of El Paso County and two immigrant aid groups seeking to block enforcement of the measure, known as SB 4, and declare it unlawful.

“S.B. 4 creates a new state system to regulate immigration that completely bypasses and conflicts with the federal system,” the lawsuit states.

The lawsuit was filed against the head of the Texas Department of Public Safety, whose troopers could arrest migrants, and the El Paso County district attorney, whose office would potentially prosecute cases in that border community.

A DPS spokesperson declined to comment in an email Tuesday, citing the pending litigation. A person who answered the phone in Hicks’ office said he was not available and had no immediate comment.

Abbott and other Texas Republicans who support the measure say President Joe Biden isn’t doing enough to control the 1,950-mile (3,149-kilometer) southern border.

“In his absence, Texas has the constitutional authority to secure our border through historic laws like SB 4,” Abbott said in an email Tuesday, adding that he was willing to take the case to the Supreme Court.

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre criticized the law, but wouldn’t say whether the Justice Department would also challenge it.

“This is an extreme law that will not and does not make the communities in Texas safer,” Jean-Pierre said. She added that the purpose of the law was to “demonize immigrants and also dehumanize immigrants” and said “communities should not be individually targeted and put into harm’s way.”

According to Tuesday’s lawsuit, DPS Director Steve McGraw told lawmakers that his agency estimates approximately 72,000 arrests will be made each year under the measure.

The law comes as the U.S.&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/arizona-border-wall-breaches-asylum-immigration-beddd2ca0ffd02884ce0d0ad1785f538">is seeing an increase in illegal border crossings.</a>&nbsp;Customs and Border Patrol acting commissioner Troy Miller called the number of daily arrivals “unprecedented,” as illegal crossings have topped 10,000 on some days this month.

The measure allows any Texas law enforcement officer to arrest people who are suspected of entering the country illegally. Once in custody, they could either agree to a Texas judge’s order to leave the U.S. or be prosecuted on misdemeanor charges of illegal entry. Migrants who don’t leave could face arrest again under more serious felony charges.

Opponents have called it the most dramatic attempt by a state to police immigration since a 2010 Arizona law — denounced by critics as the “Show Me Your Papers” bill — that was largely&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/57fd255191214d54b420a39a96b82451">struck down</a>&nbsp;by the U.S. Supreme Court. The lawsuit cites the 2012 Supreme Court decision on the Arizona law, which stated the federal government has exclusive power over immigration.

“The bill overrides bedrock constitutional principles and flouts federal immigration law while harming Texans, in particular Brown and Black communities," Adriana Piñon, legal director of the ACLU of Texas, said in a statement.

Earlier Tuesday, ACLU affiliates in Oklahoma, New Mexico, Arkansas, Louisiana, Arizona, Texas, and San Diego and Imperial Counties in California issued a travel advisory warning of a possible threat to travelers’ civil and constitutional rights violations when passing through Texas.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/12/1702952665492.png" alt="Gov. Greg Abbott signed three bills into law at a border wall construction site in Brownsville, Texas on Monday, Dec. 18, 2023, that will broaden his border security plans and add funding for more infrastructure to deter illegal immigration. (AP Photo/Valerie Gonzalez)" />
 <figcaption>Gov. Greg Abbott signed three bills into law at a border wall construction site in Brownsville, Texas on Monday, Dec. 18, 2023, that will broaden his border security plans and add funding for more infrastructure to deter illegal immigration. (AP Photo/Valerie Gonzalez)</figcaption>
 </figure>By Associated PressAUSTIN, Texas (AP) — Civil rights organizations on Tuesday filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of a&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/immigration-texas-border-8c86bc6c20a7c30d6127b2413b8688fc">new Texas law</a>&nbsp;that would allow police to arrest migrants who cross the border illegally and permit local judges to order them to leave the country.The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Austin, argues that the measure that is set to take effect in March is unconstitutional because the federal government has sole authority over immigration.The American Civil Liberties Union, its Texas branch, and the Texas Civil Rights Project sued less than 24 hours after Republican Gov. Greg Abbott signed the measure during a ceremony on the U.S.-Mexico border in Brownsville.The civil rights groups filed the lawsuit on behalf of El Paso County and two immigrant aid groups seeking to block enforcement of the measure, known as SB 4, and declare it unlawful.“S.B. 4 creates a new state system to regulate immigration that completely bypasses and conflicts with the federal system,” the lawsuit states.The lawsuit was filed against the head of the Texas Department of Public Safety, whose troopers could arrest migrants, and the El Paso County district attorney, whose office would potentially prosecute cases in that border community.A DPS spokesperson declined to comment in an email Tuesday, citing the pending litigation. A person who answered the phone in Hicks’ office said he was not available and had no immediate comment.Abbott and other Texas Republicans who support the measure say President Joe Biden isn’t doing enough to control the 1,950-mile (3,149-kilometer) southern border.“In his absence, Texas has the constitutional authority to secure our border through historic laws like SB 4,” Abbott said in an email Tuesday, adding that he was willing to take the case to the Supreme Court.White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre criticized the law, but wouldn’t say whether the Justice Department would also challenge it.“This is an extreme law that will not and does not make the communities in Texas safer,” Jean-Pierre said. She added that the purpose of the law was to “demonize immigrants and also dehumanize immigrants” and said “communities should not be individually targeted and put into harm’s way.”According to Tuesday’s lawsuit, DPS Director Steve McGraw told lawmakers that his agency estimates approximately 72,000 arrests will be made each year under the measure.The law comes as the U.S.&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/arizona-border-wall-breaches-asylum-immigration-beddd2ca0ffd02884ce0d0ad1785f538">is seeing an increase in illegal border crossings.</a>&nbsp;Customs and Border Patrol acting commissioner Troy Miller called the number of daily arrivals “unprecedented,” as illegal crossings have topped 10,000 on some days this month.The measure allows any Texas law enforcement officer to arrest people who are suspected of entering the country illegally. Once in custody, they could either agree to a Texas judge’s order to leave the U.S. or be prosecuted on misdemeanor charges of illegal entry. Migrants who don’t leave could face arrest again under more serious felony charges.Opponents have called it the most dramatic attempt by a state to police immigration since a 2010 Arizona law — denounced by critics as the “Show Me Your Papers” bill — that was largely&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/57fd255191214d54b420a39a96b82451">struck down</a>&nbsp;by the U.S. Supreme Court. The lawsuit cites the 2012 Supreme Court decision on the Arizona law, which stated the federal government has exclusive power over immigration.“The bill overrides bedrock constitutional principles and flouts federal immigration law while harming Texans, in particular Brown and Black communities," Adriana Piñon, legal director of the ACLU of Texas, said in a statement.Earlier Tuesday, ACLU affiliates in Oklahoma, New Mexico, Arkansas, Louisiana, Arizona, Texas, and San Diego and Imperial Counties in California issued a travel advisory warning of a possible threat to travelers’ civil and constitutional rights violations when passing through Texas.

Lawsuit filed over new Texas law that lets police arrest illegals

Lincoln - Due to illness, the Nebraska Public Service Commission has delayed the Wednesday, Dec. 20 hearing of its investigation into 911 service outages involving telecommunication carrier Windstream (<a href="https://www.nebraska.gov/psc/orders/state911/2023-09-12%20911-076%20PI-249%20Order%20Opening%20Investigation.pdf" target="_blank">911-076/PI 249</a>).

The hearing into the Windstream 911 outage investigation (<a href="https://www.nebraska.gov/psc/orders/state911/2023-09-12%20911-076%20PI-249%20Order%20Opening%20Investigation.pdf" target="_blank">911-076/PI 249</a>&nbsp;) has beenrescheduled for Thursday, December 28 beginning at 9:00 a.m., in the Commission hearingroom.

This is an investigatory hearing being held for the Commission to receive testimony and gatherevidence relevant to its investigation into 911 outages involving the telecommunication carrierWindstream.&nbsp;

During the hearing Commissioners and Commission legal staff will ask questions and getanswers directly from the telecommunication carrier. Testimony during the hearing may alsoinclude invited witnesses. Any decision regarding the investigation will be made at a later date.

As the proceeding is an investigatory hearing, public comment will not be taken during thehearing.

Those choosing to observe the hearing in-person are reminded the Commission hearing room has a limited capacity. Individuals interested in watching the proceedings may also do so online at&lt;&nbsp;<a href="https://psc.nebraska.gov/stream" target="_blank">https://psc.nebraska.gov/stream</a>&gt;

Lincoln - Due to illness, the Nebraska Public Service Commission has delayed the Wednesday, Dec. 20 hearing of its investigation into 911 service outages involving telecommunication carrier Windstream (<a href="https://www.nebraska.gov/psc/orders/state911/2023-09-12%20911-076%20PI-249%20Order%20Opening%20Investigation.pdf" target="_blank">911-076/PI 249</a>).The hearing into the Windstream 911 outage investigation (<a href="https://www.nebraska.gov/psc/orders/state911/2023-09-12%20911-076%20PI-249%20Order%20Opening%20Investigation.pdf" target="_blank">911-076/PI 249</a>&nbsp;) has beenrescheduled for Thursday, December 28 beginning at 9:00 a.m., in the Commission hearingroom.This is an investigatory hearing being held for the Commission to receive testimony and gatherevidence relevant to its investigation into 911 outages involving the telecommunication carrierWindstream.&nbsp;During the hearing Commissioners and Commission legal staff will ask questions and getanswers directly from the telecommunication carrier. Testimony during the hearing may alsoinclude invited witnesses. Any decision regarding the investigation will be made at a later date.As the proceeding is an investigatory hearing, public comment will not be taken during thehearing.Those choosing to observe the hearing in-person are reminded the Commission hearing room has a limited capacity. Individuals interested in watching the proceedings may also do so online at&lt;&nbsp;<a href="https://psc.nebraska.gov/stream" target="_blank">https://psc.nebraska.gov/stream</a>&gt;

PSC DELAYS HEARING INTO WINDSTREAM 911 OUTAGE INVESTIGATION

(LINCOLN, NEB.)&nbsp;&nbsp;— Investigators with the Nebraska State Patrol have arrested a Lincoln woman after she attempted to bring contraband into a correctional facility.

On Monday, Nebraska Department of Correctional Services officials alerted State Patrol investigators that a visitor to the Reception and Treatment Center had attempted to pass an item, believed to be a controlled substance, to an inmate. Investigators have arrested Natalie Miller, 40, of Lincoln, for conveying an article to an inmate.

The substance Miller was attempting to deliver will be tested by the NSP Crime Lab. The investigation is ongoing. Miller was lodged in Lancaster County Jail.

Cody Thomas(LINCOLN, NEB.)&nbsp;&nbsp;— Investigators with the Nebraska State Patrol have arrested a Lincoln woman after she attempted to bring contraband into a correctional facility.On Monday, Nebraska Department of Correctional Services officials alerted State Patrol investigators that a visitor to the Reception and Treatment Center had attempted to pass an item, believed to be a controlled substance, to an inmate. Investigators have arrested Natalie Miller, 40, of Lincoln, for conveying an article to an inmate.The substance Miller was attempting to deliver will be tested by the NSP Crime Lab. The investigation is ongoing. Miller was lodged in Lancaster County Jail.

NDCS Visitor Arrested for Bringing Contraband to Inmate

DENVER (AP) — A divided Colorado Supreme Court on Tuesday declared former President Donald Trump ineligible for the White House under the U.S. Constitution’s insurrection clause and removed him from the state’s presidential primary ballot, setting up a likely showdown in the nation’s highest court to decide whether the front-runner for the GOP nomination can remain in the race

On social media, Kansas U.S. Senator Roger Marshall blasted the decision, "&nbsp;Colorado Democrats: If you can't beat him, take him off the ballot. This unprecedented weaponization of the 14th Amendment will only make victory that much sweeter on Nov. 5th, 2024."

The decision from a court whose justices were all appointed by Democratic governors marks the first time in history that&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-14th-amendment-insurrection-2024-election-ballot-9c5f79203109ba221b35a48e708ad725">Section 3 of the 14th Amendment</a>&nbsp;has been used to disqualify a presidential candidate.

“A majority of the court holds that Trump is disqualified from holding the office of president under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment,” the court wrote in its 4-3 decision.

Colorado’s highest court overturned a ruling from a district court judge who found that Trump incited an insurrection for his role in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, but said he could not be barred from the ballot because it was unclear that the provision was intended to cover the presidency.

The court stayed its decision until Jan. 4, or until the U.S. Supreme Court rules on the case. Colorado officials say the issue must be settled by Jan. 5, the deadline for the state to print its presidential primary ballots.

“We do not reach these conclusions lightly,” wrote the court’s majority. “We are mindful of the magnitude and weight of the questions now before us. We are likewise mindful of our solemn duty to apply the law, without fear or favor, and without being swayed by public reaction to the decisions that the law mandates we reach.”

Trump’s attorneys had promised to appeal any disqualification immediately to the nation's highest court, which has the final say about constitutional matters.

Trump's legal spokeswoman Alina Habba said in a statement Tuesday night: “This ruling, issued by the Colorado Supreme Court, attacks the very heart of this nation’s democracy. It will not stand, and we trust that the Supreme Court will reverse this unconstitutional order.”

Trump didn't mention the decision during a rally Tuesday evening in Waterloo, Iowa, but his campaign sent out a fundraising email citing what it called a “tyrannical ruling.”

Republican National Committee chairwoman Ronna McDaniel labeled the decision “Election interference” and said the RNC’s legal team intends to help Trump fight the ruling.

Trump lost Colorado by 13 percentage points in 2020 and doesn’t need the state to win next year’s presidential election. But the danger for the former president is that more courts and election officials will follow Colorado’s lead and exclude Trump from must-win states.

Dozens of lawsuits have been filed nationally to disqualify Trump under Section 3, which was designed to keep former Confederates from returning to government after the Civil War. It bars from office anyone who swore an oath to “support” the Constitution and then “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” against it, and has been used only a handful of times since the decade after the Civil War.

“I think it may embolden other state courts or secretaries to act now that the bandage has been ripped off,” Derek Muller, a Notre Dame law professor who has closely followed the Section 3 cases, said after Tuesday's ruling. “This is a major threat to Trump’s candidacy.”

The Colorado case is the first where the plaintiffs succeeded. After a weeklong hearing in November, District Judge Sarah B. Wallace found that Trump indeed had “engaged in insurrection” by inciting the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/congress-confirm-joe-biden-78104aea082995bbd7412a6e6cd13818">Jan. 6 attack</a>&nbsp;on the Capitol, and&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-insurrection-amendment-2024-ballot-colorado-5b6e40f069abc1b8604ec37c46621055">her ruling that kept him on the ballot</a>&nbsp;was a fairly technical one.

Trump’s attorneys convinced Wallace that, because the language in Section 3 refers to “officers of the United States” who take an oath to “support” the Constitution, it must not apply to the president, who is not included as an “officer of the United States” elsewhere in the document and whose oath is to “preserve, protect and defend” the Constitution.

The provision also says offices covered include senator, representative, electors of the president and vice president, and all others “under the United States,” but doesn’t name the presidency.

The state’s highest court didn’t agree, siding with attorneys for six Colorado Republican and unaffiliated voters who argued that it was nonsensical to imagine that the framers of the amendment, fearful of former confederates returning to power, would bar them from low-level offices but not the highest one in the land.

“President Trump asks us to hold that Section 3 disqualifies every oathbreaking insurrectionist except the most powerful one and that it bars oath-breakers from virtually every office, both state and federal, except the highest one in the land,” the court’s majority opinion said. “Both results are inconsistent with the plain language and history of Section 3.”

The left-leaning group that brought the Colorado case, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, hailed the ruling.

“Our Constitution clearly states that those who violate their oath by attacking our democracy are barred from serving in government,” its president, Noah Bookbinder, said in a statement.

Trump’s attorneys also had urged the Colorado high court to reverse Wallace’s ruling that Trump incited the Jan. 6 attack. His lawyers argued the then-president had simply been using his free speech rights and hadn’t called for violence. Trump attorney Scott Gessler also argued the attack was more of a “riot” than an insurrection.

That met skepticism from several of the justices.

“Why isn’t it enough that a violent mob breached the Capitol when Congress was performing a core constitutional function?” Justice William W. Hood III said during the Dec. 6 arguments. “In some ways, that seems like a poster child for insurrection.”

In the ruling issued Tuesday, the court's majority dismissed the arguments that Trump wasn’t responsible for his supporters’ violent attack, which was intended to halt Congress' certification of the presidential vote: “President Trump then gave a speech in which he literally exhorted his supporters to fight at the Capitol,” they wrote.

Colorado Supreme Court Justices Richard L. Gabriel, Melissa Hart, Monica Márquez and Hood ruled for the petitioners. Chief Justice Brian D. Boatright dissented, arguing the constitutional questions were too complex to be solved in a state hearing. Justices Maria E. Berkenkotter and Carlos Samour also dissented.

“Our government cannot deprive someone of the right to hold public office without due process of law,” Samour wrote in his dissent. “Even if we are convinced that a candidate committed horrible acts in the past — dare I say, engaged in insurrection — there must be procedural due process before we can declare that individual disqualified from holding public office.”

The Colorado ruling stands in contrast with the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-insurrection-election-president-f6b72c94bb351c1b870d4884e54f6a75">Minnesota Supreme Court</a>, which last month decided that the state party can put anyone it wants on its primary ballot. It dismissed a Section 3 lawsuit but said the plaintiffs could try again during the general election.

In another 14th Amendment case,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-insurrection-14th-amendment-ballot-michigan-b2a870f98a60dffbe4c9566cfe97457c">a Michigan judge</a>&nbsp;ruled that Congress, not the judiciary, should decide whether Trump can stay on the ballot. That ruling is&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-insurrection-14th-amendment-michigan-appeal-c6b66ef9ed85734305ff2dd27023447d">being appealed</a>. The liberal group behind those cases, Free Speech For People, also filed another lawsuit in Oregon seeking to bounce Trump from the ballot there.

Both groups are financed by liberal donors who also support President Joe Biden. Trump has blamed the president for the lawsuits against him, even though Biden has no role in them, saying his rival is “defacing the constitution” to try to end his campaign.

Trump’s allies rushed to his defense, slamming the decision as “un-American” and “insane” and part of a politically-motivated effort to destroy his candidacy.

“Four partisan Democrat operatives on the Colorado Supreme Court think they get to decide for all Coloradans and Americans the next presidential election,” House Republican Conference Chair Elise Stefanik said in a statement.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/12/1703040304815.png" alt="" />
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure>DENVER (AP) — A divided Colorado Supreme Court on Tuesday declared former President Donald Trump ineligible for the White House under the U.S. Constitution’s insurrection clause and removed him from the state’s presidential primary ballot, setting up a likely showdown in the nation’s highest court to decide whether the front-runner for the GOP nomination can remain in the raceOn social media, Kansas U.S. Senator Roger Marshall blasted the decision, "&nbsp;Colorado Democrats: If you can't beat him, take him off the ballot. This unprecedented weaponization of the 14th Amendment will only make victory that much sweeter on Nov. 5th, 2024."<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">The Left invokes “democracy” to justify its use of power, even if it means abusing judicial power to remove a candidate from the ballot based on spurious legal grounds. SCOTUS should reverse. <a href="https://t.co/D4pCzZ7FhY">https://t.co/D4pCzZ7FhY</a>&mdash; Ron DeSantis (@RonDeSantis) <a href="https://twitter.com/RonDeSantis/status/1737297350257693102?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 20, 2023</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div><figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/12/1703039912250.png" alt="" />
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure>The decision from a court whose justices were all appointed by Democratic governors marks the first time in history that&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-14th-amendment-insurrection-2024-election-ballot-9c5f79203109ba221b35a48e708ad725">Section 3 of the 14th Amendment</a>&nbsp;has been used to disqualify a presidential candidate.“A majority of the court holds that Trump is disqualified from holding the office of president under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment,” the court wrote in its 4-3 decision.Colorado’s highest court overturned a ruling from a district court judge who found that Trump incited an insurrection for his role in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, but said he could not be barred from the ballot because it was unclear that the provision was intended to cover the presidency.The court stayed its decision until Jan. 4, or until the U.S. Supreme Court rules on the case. Colorado officials say the issue must be settled by Jan. 5, the deadline for the state to print its presidential primary ballots.“We do not reach these conclusions lightly,” wrote the court’s majority. “We are mindful of the magnitude and weight of the questions now before us. We are likewise mindful of our solemn duty to apply the law, without fear or favor, and without being swayed by public reaction to the decisions that the law mandates we reach.”Trump’s attorneys had promised to appeal any disqualification immediately to the nation's highest court, which has the final say about constitutional matters.Trump's legal spokeswoman Alina Habba said in a statement Tuesday night: “This ruling, issued by the Colorado Supreme Court, attacks the very heart of this nation’s democracy. It will not stand, and we trust that the Supreme Court will reverse this unconstitutional order.”Trump didn't mention the decision during a rally Tuesday evening in Waterloo, Iowa, but his campaign sent out a fundraising email citing what it called a “tyrannical ruling.”Republican National Committee chairwoman Ronna McDaniel labeled the decision “Election interference” and said the RNC’s legal team intends to help Trump fight the ruling.Trump lost Colorado by 13 percentage points in 2020 and doesn’t need the state to win next year’s presidential election. But the danger for the former president is that more courts and election officials will follow Colorado’s lead and exclude Trump from must-win states.Dozens of lawsuits have been filed nationally to disqualify Trump under Section 3, which was designed to keep former Confederates from returning to government after the Civil War. It bars from office anyone who swore an oath to “support” the Constitution and then “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” against it, and has been used only a handful of times since the decade after the Civil War.“I think it may embolden other state courts or secretaries to act now that the bandage has been ripped off,” Derek Muller, a Notre Dame law professor who has closely followed the Section 3 cases, said after Tuesday's ruling. “This is a major threat to Trump’s candidacy.”The Colorado case is the first where the plaintiffs succeeded. After a weeklong hearing in November, District Judge Sarah B. Wallace found that Trump indeed had “engaged in insurrection” by inciting the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/congress-confirm-joe-biden-78104aea082995bbd7412a6e6cd13818">Jan. 6 attack</a>&nbsp;on the Capitol, and&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-insurrection-amendment-2024-ballot-colorado-5b6e40f069abc1b8604ec37c46621055">her ruling that kept him on the ballot</a>&nbsp;was a fairly technical one.Trump’s attorneys convinced Wallace that, because the language in Section 3 refers to “officers of the United States” who take an oath to “support” the Constitution, it must not apply to the president, who is not included as an “officer of the United States” elsewhere in the document and whose oath is to “preserve, protect and defend” the Constitution.The provision also says offices covered include senator, representative, electors of the president and vice president, and all others “under the United States,” but doesn’t name the presidency.The state’s highest court didn’t agree, siding with attorneys for six Colorado Republican and unaffiliated voters who argued that it was nonsensical to imagine that the framers of the amendment, fearful of former confederates returning to power, would bar them from low-level offices but not the highest one in the land.“President Trump asks us to hold that Section 3 disqualifies every oathbreaking insurrectionist except the most powerful one and that it bars oath-breakers from virtually every office, both state and federal, except the highest one in the land,” the court’s majority opinion said. “Both results are inconsistent with the plain language and history of Section 3.”The left-leaning group that brought the Colorado case, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, hailed the ruling.“Our Constitution clearly states that those who violate their oath by attacking our democracy are barred from serving in government,” its president, Noah Bookbinder, said in a statement.Trump’s attorneys also had urged the Colorado high court to reverse Wallace’s ruling that Trump incited the Jan. 6 attack. His lawyers argued the then-president had simply been using his free speech rights and hadn’t called for violence. Trump attorney Scott Gessler also argued the attack was more of a “riot” than an insurrection.That met skepticism from several of the justices.“Why isn’t it enough that a violent mob breached the Capitol when Congress was performing a core constitutional function?” Justice William W. Hood III said during the Dec. 6 arguments. “In some ways, that seems like a poster child for insurrection.”In the ruling issued Tuesday, the court's majority dismissed the arguments that Trump wasn’t responsible for his supporters’ violent attack, which was intended to halt Congress' certification of the presidential vote: “President Trump then gave a speech in which he literally exhorted his supporters to fight at the Capitol,” they wrote.Colorado Supreme Court Justices Richard L. Gabriel, Melissa Hart, Monica Márquez and Hood ruled for the petitioners. Chief Justice Brian D. Boatright dissented, arguing the constitutional questions were too complex to be solved in a state hearing. Justices Maria E. Berkenkotter and Carlos Samour also dissented.“Our government cannot deprive someone of the right to hold public office without due process of law,” Samour wrote in his dissent. “Even if we are convinced that a candidate committed horrible acts in the past — dare I say, engaged in insurrection — there must be procedural due process before we can declare that individual disqualified from holding public office.”The Colorado ruling stands in contrast with the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-insurrection-election-president-f6b72c94bb351c1b870d4884e54f6a75">Minnesota Supreme Court</a>, which last month decided that the state party can put anyone it wants on its primary ballot. It dismissed a Section 3 lawsuit but said the plaintiffs could try again during the general election.In another 14th Amendment case,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-insurrection-14th-amendment-ballot-michigan-b2a870f98a60dffbe4c9566cfe97457c">a Michigan judge</a>&nbsp;ruled that Congress, not the judiciary, should decide whether Trump can stay on the ballot. That ruling is&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-insurrection-14th-amendment-michigan-appeal-c6b66ef9ed85734305ff2dd27023447d">being appealed</a>. The liberal group behind those cases, Free Speech For People, also filed another lawsuit in Oregon seeking to bounce Trump from the ballot there.Both groups are financed by liberal donors who also support President Joe Biden. Trump has blamed the president for the lawsuits against him, even though Biden has no role in them, saying his rival is “defacing the constitution” to try to end his campaign.Trump’s allies rushed to his defense, slamming the decision as “un-American” and “insane” and part of a politically-motivated effort to destroy his candidacy.“Four partisan Democrat operatives on the Colorado Supreme Court think they get to decide for all Coloradans and Americans the next presidential election,” House Republican Conference Chair Elise Stefanik said in a statement.

Kan. U.S. Senator blasts decision to kick Trump off ballot in Colorado

WASHINGTON (AP) — The IRS said Tuesday it is going to waive penalty fees for people who failed to pay back taxes that total less than $100,000 per year for tax years 2020 and 2021.

Nearly 5 million people, businesses and tax-exempt organizations — most making under $400,000 per year — will be eligible for the relief starting this week, which totals about $1 billion, the agency said.

The IRS temporarily suspended mailing automated reminders to pay overdue tax bills during the pandemic, beginning in February 2022, and agency leadership says the pause in automated reminders is a reason behind the decision to forgive the failure-to-pay penalties.

“Due to the unprecedented effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, these reminders would have normally been issued as a follow up after the initial notice,” the IRS said in a statement.

“Although these reminder notices were suspended, the failure-to-pay penalty continues to accrue for taxpayers who did not fully pay their bills in response to the initial balance due notice.”

While the IRS plans to resume sending out normal collection notices, the Tuesday announcement is meant as one-time relief based on the unprecedented interruption caused by the pandemic, IRS officials said.

“It was an extraordinary time and the IRS had to take extraordinary steps,” IRS Commissioner Daniel Werfel told reporters. He said the change will be automatic for many taxpayers and will not require additional action.

Taxpayers are eligible for automatic relief if they filed a Form 1040, 1041, 1120 series or Form 990-T tax return for years 2020 or 2021, owe less than $100,000 per year in back taxes, and received an initial balance-due notice between Feb. 5, 2022 and Dec. 7, 2023.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The IRS said Tuesday it is going to waive penalty fees for people who failed to pay back taxes that total less than $100,000 per year for tax years 2020 and 2021.Nearly 5 million people, businesses and tax-exempt organizations — most making under $400,000 per year — will be eligible for the relief starting this week, which totals about $1 billion, the agency said.The IRS temporarily suspended mailing automated reminders to pay overdue tax bills during the pandemic, beginning in February 2022, and agency leadership says the pause in automated reminders is a reason behind the decision to forgive the failure-to-pay penalties.“Due to the unprecedented effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, these reminders would have normally been issued as a follow up after the initial notice,” the IRS said in a statement.“Although these reminder notices were suspended, the failure-to-pay penalty continues to accrue for taxpayers who did not fully pay their bills in response to the initial balance due notice.”While the IRS plans to resume sending out normal collection notices, the Tuesday announcement is meant as one-time relief based on the unprecedented interruption caused by the pandemic, IRS officials said.“It was an extraordinary time and the IRS had to take extraordinary steps,” IRS Commissioner Daniel Werfel told reporters. He said the change will be automatic for many taxpayers and will not require additional action.Taxpayers are eligible for automatic relief if they filed a Form 1040, 1041, 1120 series or Form 990-T tax return for years 2020 or 2021, owe less than $100,000 per year in back taxes, and received an initial balance-due notice between Feb. 5, 2022 and Dec. 7, 2023.

Christmas bonus: IRS cancels $1 billion in taxpayer penalties 

<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/nebraskas-600000-juvenile-justice-federal-grant-follows-multi-year-dry-spell/">Nebraska Examiner</a>

LINCOLN —&nbsp;Nebraska is to receive a $600,000 federal award to help prevent delinquency and protect youths in the juvenile justice system, the Department of Justice announced Thursday.

States can use the funds for a variety of youth services, including job training, mental health, substance abuse treatment and school-based programs to prevent truancy.

A DOJ news release said that Nebraska hadn’t received funding from the Title II Part B Formula Grants program since 2018. While it did not explain the gap, a program description says that a state might not receive an award if it hasn’t adequately addressed statutory state plan requirements.

Applicants have to submit a three-year plan describing how their state would use the funding. Among other requirements, they had to outline efforts to deinstitutionalize status offenders, separate youths from incarcerated adults and address racial and ethnic disparities.

“Title II funding is the clearest expression of the Justice Department’s deep commitment to supporting our youth and helping them succeed,” said Amy Solomon, assistant attorney general of the Office of Justice Program, which provides federal resources to reduce crime, advance racial equity, assist victims and enhance the rule of law.

Liz Ryan of the program said her staff worked closely with Nebraska officials to help meet grant requirements. As part of its plan, Nebraska is to fill vacancies on a state advisory group, prioritizing recruitment of members younger than 28 years old.

It also is to hire or appoint a juvenile justice specialist, a state compliance monitor and racial and ethnic disparities coordinator.

Nationwide, nearly $57 million has been invested in the Formula Grants program for fiscal year 2023. The funds are authorized under the amended Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974.

Cindy Gonzalez<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/nebraskas-600000-juvenile-justice-federal-grant-follows-multi-year-dry-spell/">Nebraska Examiner</a>LINCOLN —&nbsp;Nebraska is to receive a $600,000 federal award to help prevent delinquency and protect youths in the juvenile justice system, the Department of Justice announced Thursday.States can use the funds for a variety of youth services, including job training, mental health, substance abuse treatment and school-based programs to prevent truancy.A DOJ news release said that Nebraska hadn’t received funding from the Title II Part B Formula Grants program since 2018. While it did not explain the gap, a program description says that a state might not receive an award if it hasn’t adequately addressed statutory state plan requirements.Applicants have to submit a three-year plan describing how their state would use the funding. Among other requirements, they had to outline efforts to deinstitutionalize status offenders, separate youths from incarcerated adults and address racial and ethnic disparities.“Title II funding is the clearest expression of the Justice Department’s deep commitment to supporting our youth and helping them succeed,” said Amy Solomon, assistant attorney general of the Office of Justice Program, which provides federal resources to reduce crime, advance racial equity, assist victims and enhance the rule of law.Liz Ryan of the program said her staff worked closely with Nebraska officials to help meet grant requirements. As part of its plan, Nebraska is to fill vacancies on a state advisory group, prioritizing recruitment of members younger than 28 years old.It also is to hire or appoint a juvenile justice specialist, a state compliance monitor and racial and ethnic disparities coordinator.Nationwide, nearly $57 million has been invested in the Formula Grants program for fiscal year 2023. The funds are authorized under the amended Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974.

Nebraska’s $600,000 juvenile justice federal grant follows multi-year dry spell

DENVER (AP) — A divided Colorado Supreme Court on Tuesday declared former President Donald Trump ineligible for the White House under the U.S. Constitution’s insurrection clause and removed him from the state’s presidential primary ballot, setting up a likely showdown in the nation’s highest court to decide whether the front-runner for the GOP nomination can remain in the race.

The court stayed its decision until Jan. 4, or until the U.S. Supreme Court rules on the case.

"The Colorado Supreme Court issued a completely flawed decision tonight and we will swiftly file an appeal to the United States Supreme Court and a concurrent request for a stay of this deeply undemocratic decision,” Trump campaign spokesman Steven Cheung said in a statement Tuesday night.

Colorado officials say the issue must be settled by Jan. 5, the deadline for the state to print its presidential primary ballots.

The state’s highest court didn’t agree, siding with attorneys for six Colorado Republican and unaffiliated voters who argued that it was nonsensical to imagine the framers of the amendment, fearful of former Confederates returning to power, would bar them from low-level offices but not the highest one in the land.

“You’d be saying a rebel who took up arms against the government couldn’t be a county sheriff, but could be the president,” attorney Jason Murray said in&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-2024-ballot-14th-amendment-insurrection-f865cff9bdc5ac7ab61d63a3742a3630">arguments before the court</a>&nbsp;in early December.

Trump’s attorneys argued unsuccessfully that the writers of the amendment expected the Electoral College to prevent former insurrectionists from becoming president.

They also had urged the Colorado high court to reverse Wallace’s ruling that Trump incited the Jan. 6 attack. His lawyers argued the then-president had simply been using his free speech rights and hadn’t called for violence. Trump attorney Scott Gessler also argued the attack was more of a “riot” than an insurrection.

Colorado Supreme Court Justices Richard L. Gabriel, Melissa Hart, William W. Hood III and Monica Márquez ruled for the petitioners. Chief Justice Brian D. Boatright dissented, arguing the constitutional questions were too complex to be solved in a state hearing. Justices Maria E. Berkenkotter and Carlos Samour also dissented.

In another 14th Amendment case,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-insurrection-14th-amendment-ballot-michigan-b2a870f98a60dffbe4c9566cfe97457c">a Michigan judge</a>&nbsp;ruled that Congress, not the judiciary, should decide whether Trump can stay on the ballot. That ruling is&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-insurrection-14th-amendment-michigan-appeal-c6b66ef9ed85734305ff2dd27023447d">being appealed</a>.

The liberal group behind those cases, Free Speech For People, also filed another lawsuit in Oregon seeking to bounce Trump from the ballot there. The Colorado case was filed by another liberal group, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/12/1703030684419.png" alt="Trump during a campaign address in Iowa December 13-image CSPAN" />
 <figcaption>Trump during a campaign address in Iowa December 13-image CSPAN</figcaption>
 </figure>DENVER (AP) — A divided Colorado Supreme Court on Tuesday declared former President Donald Trump ineligible for the White House under the U.S. Constitution’s insurrection clause and removed him from the state’s presidential primary ballot, setting up a likely showdown in the nation’s highest court to decide whether the front-runner for the GOP nomination can remain in the race.The decision from a court whose justices were all appointed by Democratic governors marks the first time in history that&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-14th-amendment-insurrection-2024-election-ballot-9c5f79203109ba221b35a48e708ad725">Section 3 of the 14th Amendment</a>&nbsp;has been used to disqualify a presidential candidate.“A majority of the court holds that Trump is disqualified from holding the office of president under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment,” the court wrote in its 4-3 decision.Colorado’s highest court overturned a ruling from a district court judge who found that Trump incited an insurrection for his role in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, but said he could not be barred from the ballot because it was unclear that the provision was intended to cover the presidency.The court stayed its decision until Jan. 4, or until the U.S. Supreme Court rules on the case.“We do not reach these conclusions lightly,” wrote the court’s majority. “We are mindful of the magnitude and weight of the questions now before us. We are likewise mindful of our solemn duty to apply the law, without fear or favor, and without being swayed by public reaction to the decisions that the law mandates we reach.”Trump’s attorneys had promised to appeal any disqualification immediately to the nation's highest court, which has the final say about constitutional matters."The Colorado Supreme Court issued a completely flawed decision tonight and we will swiftly file an appeal to the United States Supreme Court and a concurrent request for a stay of this deeply undemocratic decision,” Trump campaign spokesman Steven Cheung said in a statement Tuesday night.Trump lost Colorado by 13 percentage points in 2020 and doesn’t need the state to win next year’s presidential election. But the danger for the former president is that more courts and election officials will follow Colorado’s lead and exclude Trump from must-win states.Colorado officials say the issue must be settled by Jan. 5, the deadline for the state to print its presidential primary ballots.Dozens of lawsuits have been filed nationally to disqualify Trump under Section 3, which was designed to keep former Confederates from returning to government after the Civil War. It bars from office anyone who swore an oath to “support” the Constitution and then “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” against it, and has been used only a handful of times since the decade after the Civil War.The Colorado case is the first where the plaintiffs succeeded. After a weeklong hearing in November, District Judge Sarah B. Wallace found that Trump indeed had “engaged in insurrection” by inciting the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/congress-confirm-joe-biden-78104aea082995bbd7412a6e6cd13818">Jan. 6 attack</a>&nbsp;on the Capitol, and&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-insurrection-amendment-2024-ballot-colorado-5b6e40f069abc1b8604ec37c46621055">her ruling that kept him on the ballot</a>&nbsp;was a fairly technical one.Trump’s attorneys convinced Wallace that, because the language in Section 3 refers to “officers of the United States” who take an oath to “support” the Constitution, it must not apply to the president, who is not included as an “officer of the United States” elsewhere in the document and whose oath is to “preserve, protect and defend” the Constitution.The provision also says offices covered include senator, representative, electors of the president and vice president, and all others “under the United States,” but doesn’t name the presidency.The state’s highest court didn’t agree, siding with attorneys for six Colorado Republican and unaffiliated voters who argued that it was nonsensical to imagine the framers of the amendment, fearful of former Confederates returning to power, would bar them from low-level offices but not the highest one in the land.“You’d be saying a rebel who took up arms against the government couldn’t be a county sheriff, but could be the president,” attorney Jason Murray said in&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-2024-ballot-14th-amendment-insurrection-f865cff9bdc5ac7ab61d63a3742a3630">arguments before the court</a>&nbsp;in early December.Trump’s attorneys argued unsuccessfully that the writers of the amendment expected the Electoral College to prevent former insurrectionists from becoming president.They also had urged the Colorado high court to reverse Wallace’s ruling that Trump incited the Jan. 6 attack. His lawyers argued the then-president had simply been using his free speech rights and hadn’t called for violence. Trump attorney Scott Gessler also argued the attack was more of a “riot” than an insurrection.That met skepticism from several of the justices.“Why isn’t it enough that a violent mob breached the Capitol when Congress was performing a core constitutional function?” Justice William W. Hood III said during the Dec. 6 arguments. “In some ways, that seems like a poster child for insurrection.”In the ruling issued Tuesday, the court's majority dismissed the arguments that Trump wasn’t responsible for his supporters’ violent attack, which was intended to halt Congress' certification of the presidential vote: “President Trump then gave a speech in which he literally exhorted his supporters to fight at the Capitol,” they wrote.Colorado Supreme Court Justices Richard L. Gabriel, Melissa Hart, William W. Hood III and Monica Márquez ruled for the petitioners. Chief Justice Brian D. Boatright dissented, arguing the constitutional questions were too complex to be solved in a state hearing. Justices Maria E. Berkenkotter and Carlos Samour also dissented.“Our government cannot deprive someone of the right to hold public office without due process of law,” Samour wrote in his dissent. “Even if we are convinced that a candidate committed horrible acts in the past — dare I say, engaged in insurrection — there must be procedural due process before we can declare that individual disqualified from holding public office.”The Colorado ruling stands in contrast with the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-insurrection-election-president-f6b72c94bb351c1b870d4884e54f6a75">Minnesota Supreme Court</a>, which last month decided that the state party can put anyone it wants on its primary ballot. It dismissed a Section 3 lawsuit but said the plaintiffs could try again during the general election.In another 14th Amendment case,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-insurrection-14th-amendment-ballot-michigan-b2a870f98a60dffbe4c9566cfe97457c">a Michigan judge</a>&nbsp;ruled that Congress, not the judiciary, should decide whether Trump can stay on the ballot. That ruling is&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-insurrection-14th-amendment-michigan-appeal-c6b66ef9ed85734305ff2dd27023447d">being appealed</a>.The liberal group behind those cases, Free Speech For People, also filed another lawsuit in Oregon seeking to bounce Trump from the ballot there. The Colorado case was filed by another liberal group, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.Both groups are financed by liberal donors who also support President Joe Biden. Trump has blamed the president for the lawsuits against him, even though Biden has no role in them, saying his rival is “defacing the constitution” to try to end his campaign.___<h2>Story Details</h2>

Landmark ruling: Trump removed from ballot in Colorado

(SUPERIOR, NEB.)&nbsp;&nbsp;— A suspect has been arrested for second degree murder following a shooting that occurred late Sunday evening in Superior.

The incident occurred shortly before midnight in Superior. The Nuckolls County Sheriff’s Office and Superior Police Department responded to the report of a shooting at 1216 Idaho Street in Superior. Upon arrival, deputies located a victim inside the home with an apparent gunshot wound. The victim, identified as Molly Gruber, 35, was transported to Brodstone Hospital where she was pronounced deceased.

Authorities also located the suspect, who had remained at the scene. He was taken into custody without incident. The Nuckolls County Sheriff’s Office requested assistance from the Nebraska State Patrol to investigate the shooting. There was a child in the residence at the time and was placed in protective custody.

The suspect has been identified as Sebastian Dunbar, 30. The two had been involved in a relationship. Following preliminary investigation, investigators have determined that the shooting occurred during a domestic dispute between Dunbar and Gruber.

Dunbar has been arrested for second degree murder, use of a weapon to commit a felony, and domestic violence. He has been lodged in Clay County Jail.

Cody Thomas(SUPERIOR, NEB.)&nbsp;&nbsp;— A suspect has been arrested for second degree murder following a shooting that occurred late Sunday evening in Superior.The incident occurred shortly before midnight in Superior. The Nuckolls County Sheriff’s Office and Superior Police Department responded to the report of a shooting at 1216 Idaho Street in Superior. Upon arrival, deputies located a victim inside the home with an apparent gunshot wound. The victim, identified as Molly Gruber, 35, was transported to Brodstone Hospital where she was pronounced deceased.Authorities also located the suspect, who had remained at the scene. He was taken into custody without incident. The Nuckolls County Sheriff’s Office requested assistance from the Nebraska State Patrol to investigate the shooting. There was a child in the residence at the time and was placed in protective custody.The suspect has been identified as Sebastian Dunbar, 30. The two had been involved in a relationship. Following preliminary investigation, investigators have determined that the shooting occurred during a domestic dispute between Dunbar and Gruber.Dunbar has been arrested for second degree murder, use of a weapon to commit a felony, and domestic violence. He has been lodged in Clay County Jail.The investigation remains ongoing.

Suspect, Victim Identified in Superior Homicide Investigation

LINCOLN, NEB. – In a letter to Homeland Security, Nebraska Farm Bureau (NEFB) expressed grave concern over the recent decision to close international railway entry points in Texas. The organization says&nbsp;suspending operations at the crossings in Eagle Pass and El Paso, Texas will likely lead to substantial economic harm.

“The recent decision by the Biden administration to shut down two railway entries at the U.S.-Mexico border is as asinine as it is economically harmful. The crisis at our nation’s Southern border and our nation’s broken immigration and guest worker systems are all in dire need of attention. However, the repurposing of a very small handful of U.S. Customs and Border Protection employees away from these vital rail entries won’t fix these problems,” said Mark McHargue, NEFB president.

NEFB says the value of Nebraska’s agricultural trade relationship with Mexico cannot be understated as Mexico remains our largest export partner. In 2021, Nebraska farmers exported 89 percent of the state’s corn exports or $590.4 million worth of corn into Mexico. Mexico also remains Nebraska’s largest soybean customer, importing over $280.6 million worth of soybeans and soybean products.

“What this move will do is block over 60 trains or 10,000 rail cars a day from carrying grain and other consumer goods into Mexico from the United States. What this move will do is disrupt supply chains and negatively impact both the U.S. and Mexican economies. The issues that exist at our southern border didn’t appear overnight, and it absolutely will not be fixed by adding a few employees who should remain at their posts at the Eagle Pass and El Paso, Texas rail crossings,” said McHargue

In the letter, NEFB pointed out the closures come at a critical time for farmers and that the rail network connecting the U.S. and Mexico is vital to the economic success of both countries.

“The timing could not be worse in that many farmers sell and deliver grain from storage during the Jan-March timeframe when prices and local basis tend to strengthen post-harvest and into the earlier part of the marketing year, said McHargue.

NEFB’s letter calls for the return of employees and reopening of the Eagle Pass and El Paso rail crossings.

The Nebraska Farm Bureau is a grassroots, state-wide organization dedicated to supporting farm and ranch families and working for the benefit of all Nebraskans through a wide variety of educational, service, and advocacy efforts. More than 55,000 families across Nebraska are Farm Bureau members, working together to achieve rural and urban prosperity as agriculture is a key fuel to Nebraska’s economy. For more information about Nebraska Farm Bureau and agriculture, visit&nbsp;<a href="http://www.nefb.org/" target="_blank">www.nefb.org</a>.

Nebraska Farm BureauLINCOLN, NEB. – In a letter to Homeland Security, Nebraska Farm Bureau (NEFB) expressed grave concern over the recent decision to close international railway entry points in Texas. The organization says&nbsp;suspending operations at the crossings in Eagle Pass and El Paso, Texas will likely lead to substantial economic harm.“The recent decision by the Biden administration to shut down two railway entries at the U.S.-Mexico border is as asinine as it is economically harmful. The crisis at our nation’s Southern border and our nation’s broken immigration and guest worker systems are all in dire need of attention. However, the repurposing of a very small handful of U.S. Customs and Border Protection employees away from these vital rail entries won’t fix these problems,” said Mark McHargue, NEFB president.NEFB says the value of Nebraska’s agricultural trade relationship with Mexico cannot be understated as Mexico remains our largest export partner. In 2021, Nebraska farmers exported 89 percent of the state’s corn exports or $590.4 million worth of corn into Mexico. Mexico also remains Nebraska’s largest soybean customer, importing over $280.6 million worth of soybeans and soybean products.“What this move will do is block over 60 trains or 10,000 rail cars a day from carrying grain and other consumer goods into Mexico from the United States. What this move will do is disrupt supply chains and negatively impact both the U.S. and Mexican economies. The issues that exist at our southern border didn’t appear overnight, and it absolutely will not be fixed by adding a few employees who should remain at their posts at the Eagle Pass and El Paso, Texas rail crossings,” said McHargueIn the letter, NEFB pointed out the closures come at a critical time for farmers and that the rail network connecting the U.S. and Mexico is vital to the economic success of both countries.“The timing could not be worse in that many farmers sell and deliver grain from storage during the Jan-March timeframe when prices and local basis tend to strengthen post-harvest and into the earlier part of the marketing year, said McHargue.NEFB’s letter calls for the return of employees and reopening of the Eagle Pass and El Paso rail crossings.The Nebraska Farm Bureau is a grassroots, state-wide organization dedicated to supporting farm and ranch families and working for the benefit of all Nebraskans through a wide variety of educational, service, and advocacy efforts. More than 55,000 families across Nebraska are Farm Bureau members, working together to achieve rural and urban prosperity as agriculture is a key fuel to Nebraska’s economy. For more information about Nebraska Farm Bureau and agriculture, visit&nbsp;<a href="http://www.nefb.org/" target="_blank">www.nefb.org</a>.

Nebraska Farm Bureau Calls for Ending of Border Rail Crossing Closures

On Sunday morning, December 17th, 2023, at approximately 3:15am, the Hastings Police Department and Hastings Fire and Rescue were called to 618 South Boston Avenue in reference to a house explosion. Through the investigation it was determined that the initial explosion, as well as the multiple secondary explosions, were likely due to explosive/destructive devices. 

The scene was secured and with the assistance of the Nebraska State Patrol Bomb Squad, the debris of the home was thoroughly searched. The explosions caused the collapse of the residence, causing a majority of the first floor to fall into the basement of the home. Multiple homemade destructive devices were located within the debris and on the property. A deceased, unidentified person, was also located within the debris. An autopsy was conducted in Omaha, on the morning of December 18th and the identity was confirmed.

At this time, next of kin have been notified. The deceased person located within the home was the resident, 52-year-old, Jeffery Ponder. Two other occupants of the home were away at the time of the explosions.  Crews consisting of law enforcement and fire personnel worked diligently Sunday, to make the scene secure, identify evidence and remove destructive devices. 

Due to the extent of damage to the residence, the Hastings Street Department and Ben Engel Construction also assisted in removal of debris with heavy machinery so all areas could be safely searched. All destructive devices and explosive materials were disposed of safely at an alternative, undisclosed, location Sunday morning and afternoon.

This is an ongoing criminal investigation, but preliminarily it has been determined that Ponder was illegally constructing and storing his own destructive devices within his property at 618 S Boston Ave. At this time, there is no indication that Ponder had intentions to use these destructive devices as weapons against other persons or property and the explosion is believed to be accidental. Our thoughts are with all individuals affected by this tragic incident. 

Social Media is an excellent platform to be able to disseminate information quickly but can also be a place for very hurtful comments during difficult times. We ask everyone to please be respectful to the family and friends of Mr. Ponder as they mourn the loss of their loved one. Information will be updated as it becomes available.&nbsp;&nbsp;

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/12/1703004436998.jpeg" alt="House explosion at 618 South Boston Avenue/Photo provided by Hastings Police Department" />
 <figcaption>House explosion at 618 South Boston Avenue/Photo provided by Hastings Police Department</figcaption>
 </figure>Hastings Police DepartmentOn Sunday morning, December 17th, 2023, at approximately 3:15am, the Hastings Police Department and Hastings Fire and Rescue were called to 618 South Boston Avenue in reference to a house explosion. Through the investigation it was determined that the initial explosion, as well as the multiple secondary explosions, were likely due to explosive/destructive devices. The scene was secured and with the assistance of the Nebraska State Patrol Bomb Squad, the debris of the home was thoroughly searched. The explosions caused the collapse of the residence, causing a majority of the first floor to fall into the basement of the home. Multiple homemade destructive devices were located within the debris and on the property. A deceased, unidentified person, was also located within the debris. An autopsy was conducted in Omaha, on the morning of December 18th and the identity was confirmed.<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/12/1703004522078.jpeg" alt="Photo provided by Hastings PD" />
 <figcaption>Photo provided by Hastings PD</figcaption>
 </figure>At this time, next of kin have been notified. The deceased person located within the home was the resident, 52-year-old, Jeffery Ponder. Two other occupants of the home were away at the time of the explosions. Crews consisting of law enforcement and fire personnel worked diligently Sunday, to make the scene secure, identify evidence and remove destructive devices. Due to the extent of damage to the residence, the Hastings Street Department and Ben Engel Construction also assisted in removal of debris with heavy machinery so all areas could be safely searched. All destructive devices and explosive materials were disposed of safely at an alternative, undisclosed, location Sunday morning and afternoon.<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/12/1703004584356.jpeg" alt="Photo provided by Hastings PD" />
 <figcaption>Photo provided by Hastings PD</figcaption>
 </figure>This is an ongoing criminal investigation, but preliminarily it has been determined that Ponder was illegally constructing and storing his own destructive devices within his property at 618 S Boston Ave. At this time, there is no indication that Ponder had intentions to use these destructive devices as weapons against other persons or property and the explosion is believed to be accidental. Our thoughts are with all individuals affected by this tragic incident. Social Media is an excellent platform to be able to disseminate information quickly but can also be a place for very hurtful comments during difficult times. We ask everyone to please be respectful to the family and friends of Mr. Ponder as they mourn the loss of their loved one. Information will be updated as it becomes available.&nbsp;&nbsp;<div><iframe src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FHastingsPoliceDepartmentNebraska%2Fposts%2Fpfbid02pn3T8FEhoq7tHR1QNMtP2zEiBJEc8oN3coS9PWAo5S1KCkYxMvwimdKQZg7xAH4nl&show_text=true&width=500" width="500" height="786" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="true" allow="autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; picture-in-picture; web-share"></iframe></div>

52-year-old identify in Sundays Hastings home explosion

DALLAS (AP) — Southwest Airlines will pay a $35 million fine as part of a $140 million settlement to resolve a federal investigation into a debacle in December 2022 when the airline canceled thousands of flights and stranded more than 2 million travelers over the holidays.

Most of the settlement will go toward compensating future passengers, which the U.S. Department of Transportation considers an incentive for Southwest to avoid repeating last winter’s mess.

The government said the assessment was the largest it has ever imposed on an airline for violating consumer protection laws.

Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg said the settlement demonstrates his agency’s resolve to make airlines take care of their passengers.

Southwest said it was “grateful to have reached a consumer-friendly settlement” that gives the airline credit for compensation it already provided to customers. The airline said it has “learned from the event, and now can shift its entire focus to the future.”

The assessment stems from nearly 17,000 canceled flights a year ago, which&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/kansas-city-plants-dallas-district-of-columbia-business-d2034f41df7a4f78de02db8aa4ba11df" target="_blank">started as</a>&nbsp;a&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/winter-storm-forecast-updates-d0808da42ce16e8a0ca4541b747572cb" target="_blank">winter storm</a>&nbsp;paralyzed Southwest operations in Denver and Chicago and then snowballed when a crew-rescheduling system couldn’t keep up with the chaos.

Even before the settlement, the nation’s fourth-biggest airline by revenue said the meltdown cost it&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/business-c679b26a8efe039f1881a2edb6535d01" target="_blank">more than $1.1 billion</a>&nbsp;in refunds and reimbursements, extra costs and lost ticket sales over several months.

The government said in a consent decree dated Friday that Southwest “violated the law on numerous occasions,” including by failing to help customers who were stranded in airports and hotels, leaving many of them to scramble for other flights.

Many who called the airline’s overwhelmed customer service center got a busy signal or were stuck on hold for hours.

Southwest also did not keep customers updated about canceled and delayed flights, failing to fulfill a requirement that airlines notify the public within 30 minutes of a change. Some said they never got an email or text notice and couldn’t access Southwest’s website.

The government also charged Southwest did not provide refunds quickly enough. People who made a mistake entering details in refund requests to a special Southwest website were not told to fix the error; they simply didn’t get the money. Others didn’t receive immediate refunds for things like pet fees and boarding upgrades that went unused because of canceled flights, according to the department.

In the consent order, Dallas-based Southwest disputed many of the Transportation Department’s findings.

Southwest said that only a small percentage of refunds were issued late and that it never gave false promises about long wait times for reaching customer service during weather-related disruptions. Still, the company said it entered the agreement just to settle the matter.

Southwest said the 2022 storm that produced record cold temperatures, blizzards and power outages a few days before Christmas created “unanticipated operational challenges.” The airline said it quickly began reimbursing travelers for meals, hotels and alternative transportation and also distributed frequent flyer points.

Southwest has added trucks and other&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/southwest-airlines-cancellations-technology-weather-314069ab4bb9de5eb804c566927606ec" target="_blank">de-icing equipment</a>&nbsp;and will increase staff during extreme cold temperatures at key airports such as Denver, CEO Robert Jordan said.

Southwest had previously agreed to make more than $600 million in refunds and reimbursements. Still, the carrier disclosed in October that federal officials found its efforts fell short and the carrier&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/southwest-airlines-december-cancellations-04b7dcd50716b5ce0cccfc32457160e0" target="_blank">could face a civil penalty</a>&nbsp;over its service to customers.

The settlement provides that in addition to the $35 million fine, Southwest will get $33 million in credit for compensation already handed out, mostly for giving 25,000 frequent flyer points each, worth about $300, to affected customers. The company promised to give out $90 million in vouchers to future travelers.

Starting next spring and running until April 2027, Southwest will provide a voucher of at least $75 to travelers who request them if they reach their destination at least three hours late because of a delay or flight cancellation caused by the airline.

The government values vouchers at 80% of their face value, so Southwest received credit for $72 million for the future vouchers, not the full $90 million to be distributed over three years. If Southwest pays out less than $30 million in any of those years, it will owe the government a penalty of 80% of any shortfall.

In exchange for Southwest agreeing to the fine and other measures, the government stopped short of deciding whether the airline advertised a flight schedule that it knew could not be kept. Buttigieg had raised that charge publicly.

The Transportation Department said it reviewed thousands of consumer complaints, visited Southwest facilities and met with senior company officials during the investigation.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/12/1672191058148.png" alt="Southwest Airlines scrubbed thousands of flights last December in the aftermath of the massive winter storm that wrecked Christmas travel plans across the U.S- photo courtesy KMGH" />
 <figcaption>Southwest Airlines scrubbed thousands of flights last December in the aftermath of the massive winter storm that wrecked Christmas travel plans across the U.S- photo courtesy KMGH</figcaption>
 </figure>DALLAS (AP) — Southwest Airlines will pay a $35 million fine as part of a $140 million settlement to resolve a federal investigation into a debacle in December 2022 when the airline canceled thousands of flights and stranded more than 2 million travelers over the holidays.Most of the settlement will go toward compensating future passengers, which the U.S. Department of Transportation considers an incentive for Southwest to avoid repeating last winter’s mess.The government said the assessment was the largest it has ever imposed on an airline for violating consumer protection laws.Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg said the settlement demonstrates his agency’s resolve to make airlines take care of their passengers.Southwest said it was “grateful to have reached a consumer-friendly settlement” that gives the airline credit for compensation it already provided to customers. The airline said it has “learned from the event, and now can shift its entire focus to the future.”The assessment stems from nearly 17,000 canceled flights a year ago, which&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/kansas-city-plants-dallas-district-of-columbia-business-d2034f41df7a4f78de02db8aa4ba11df" target="_blank">started as</a>&nbsp;a&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/winter-storm-forecast-updates-d0808da42ce16e8a0ca4541b747572cb" target="_blank">winter storm</a>&nbsp;paralyzed Southwest operations in Denver and Chicago and then snowballed when a crew-rescheduling system couldn’t keep up with the chaos.Even before the settlement, the nation’s fourth-biggest airline by revenue said the meltdown cost it&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/business-c679b26a8efe039f1881a2edb6535d01" target="_blank">more than $1.1 billion</a>&nbsp;in refunds and reimbursements, extra costs and lost ticket sales over several months.The government said in a consent decree dated Friday that Southwest “violated the law on numerous occasions,” including by failing to help customers who were stranded in airports and hotels, leaving many of them to scramble for other flights.Many who called the airline’s overwhelmed customer service center got a busy signal or were stuck on hold for hours.Southwest also did not keep customers updated about canceled and delayed flights, failing to fulfill a requirement that airlines notify the public within 30 minutes of a change. Some said they never got an email or text notice and couldn’t access Southwest’s website.The government also charged Southwest did not provide refunds quickly enough. People who made a mistake entering details in refund requests to a special Southwest website were not told to fix the error; they simply didn’t get the money. Others didn’t receive immediate refunds for things like pet fees and boarding upgrades that went unused because of canceled flights, according to the department.In the consent order, Dallas-based Southwest disputed many of the Transportation Department’s findings.Southwest said that only a small percentage of refunds were issued late and that it never gave false promises about long wait times for reaching customer service during weather-related disruptions. Still, the company said it entered the agreement just to settle the matter.Southwest said the 2022 storm that produced record cold temperatures, blizzards and power outages a few days before Christmas created “unanticipated operational challenges.” The airline said it quickly began reimbursing travelers for meals, hotels and alternative transportation and also distributed frequent flyer points.Southwest has added trucks and other&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/southwest-airlines-cancellations-technology-weather-314069ab4bb9de5eb804c566927606ec" target="_blank">de-icing equipment</a>&nbsp;and will increase staff during extreme cold temperatures at key airports such as Denver, CEO Robert Jordan said.Southwest had previously agreed to make more than $600 million in refunds and reimbursements. Still, the carrier disclosed in October that federal officials found its efforts fell short and the carrier&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/southwest-airlines-december-cancellations-04b7dcd50716b5ce0cccfc32457160e0" target="_blank">could face a civil penalty</a>&nbsp;over its service to customers.The settlement provides that in addition to the $35 million fine, Southwest will get $33 million in credit for compensation already handed out, mostly for giving 25,000 frequent flyer points each, worth about $300, to affected customers. The company promised to give out $90 million in vouchers to future travelers.Starting next spring and running until April 2027, Southwest will provide a voucher of at least $75 to travelers who request them if they reach their destination at least three hours late because of a delay or flight cancellation caused by the airline.The government values vouchers at 80% of their face value, so Southwest received credit for $72 million for the future vouchers, not the full $90 million to be distributed over three years. If Southwest pays out less than $30 million in any of those years, it will owe the government a penalty of 80% of any shortfall.In exchange for Southwest agreeing to the fine and other measures, the government stopped short of deciding whether the airline advertised a flight schedule that it knew could not be kept. Buttigieg had raised that charge publicly.The Transportation Department said it reviewed thousands of consumer complaints, visited Southwest facilities and met with senior company officials during the investigation.

$90M in vouchers for future travelers after holiday travel nightmare

BROWNSVILLE, Texas (AP) —&nbsp;<a href="https://pronto.associatedpress.com/Legal%20experts%20have%20called%20the%20measure%20a%20flagrant%20violation%20of%20the%20U.S.%20government's%20purview%20over%20immigration%20enforcement.">Republican Texas Gov. Greg Abbott</a>&nbsp;on Monday approved&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/texas-immigration-migrants-arrest-explainer-306f644e8bb95333b078ed3923adacf0">sweeping new powers</a>&nbsp;that allow police to arrest migrants who illegally cross the U.S. border and give local judges authority to order them to leave the country, testing the limits of how far a state can go to enforce immigration laws.

Opponents have called the measure the most dramatic attempt by a state to police immigration since a 2010 Arizona law — denounced by critics as the “Show Me Your Papers” bill — that was largely&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/57fd255191214d54b420a39a96b82451">struck down</a>&nbsp;by the U.S. Supreme Court. Immigration enforcement is a federal responsibility, and Texas’ law is also likely to face swift legal challenges.

The law, which takes effect in March, allows any Texas law enforcement officer to arrest people who are suspected of entering the country illegally. Once in custody, they could either agree to a Texas judge’s order to leave the U.S. or be prosecuted on misdemeanor charges of illegal entry. Migrants who don’t leave could face arrest again under more serious felony charges.

Abbott, who signed the law in front of a section of border fence in Brownsville, predicted the number of people crossing illegally into Texas would drop by “well over 50%, maybe 75%." He did not offer evidence for that estimate.

“The consequences of it are so extreme that the people being smuggled by the cartels, they will not want to be coming into the state of Texas," he said.

The law adds another tension point over immigration amid a struggle between the White House and Senate negotiators&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/border-security-ukraine-congress-senate-biden-cb8d4e3ad8271323cfd9294b527d6615">to reach a deal on border security</a>. Republicans in Congress are demanding changes to the immigration system in exchange for any help for Ukraine, Israel and other national security needs.

Texas Republicans have increasingly challenged the U.S. government’s authority over immigration, saying President Joe Biden's administration isn’t doing enough to control the 1,950-mile (3,149-kilometer) southern border. Texas has&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/migrants-los-angeles-california-texas-immigration-abbott-3fdb47985b34cd8301b61251b590778c">bused more than 65,000 migrants</a>&nbsp;to cities across America since August 2022 and recently&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/texas-immigration-border-wire-522e993680a4d729e538a53a788ec185">installed razor wire</a>&nbsp;along the banks of the Rio Grande, which has snagged and injured some asylum-seekers.

The U.S. government on Monday temporarily shut down two railroad border crossings in Texas, a move that rail operators said would hamper trade ahead of Christmas. Troy Miller, U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s acting commissioner, said the closures at Eagle Pass and El Paso were a response to more migrants traveling on freight trains, particularly over the last week.

Miller said authorities are seeing “unprecedented” arrivals at the border, topping 10,000 crossings on some days this month.

Shortly after Abbott signed the new law, the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas said it would challenge the measure in court. More than 20 congressional Democrats also signed a letter urging the U.S. Justice Department to sue to stop the law, known as Senate Bill 4.

“SB 4 is dangerous for the people of Texas and interferes with the federal government’s exclusive authority over immigration and foreign affairs," the letter read.

Mexico’s government also has rebuked the measure. Under bilateral and international agreements, Mexico is required to accept deportations of its own citizens, but not those of other countries. Under the Texas law, migrants ordered to leave would be sent to ports of entry along the border with Mexico, even if they are not Mexican citizens. In September and October,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/border-arrests-venezuela-mexico-a89f66759ac97c7ec62e4559af4e48a3">Venezuelans were the largest nationality</a>&nbsp;arrested for illegally crossing the U.S. border.

During debate in the Texas House in November, GOP state Rep. David Spiller pushed back against concerns that the law would be used as a dragnet to arrest immigrants statewide. He said enforcement would mostly take place in border counties. But he also rebuffed several efforts by Democrats to narrow the law, including a proposed carve-out for police on college campuses.

Because the illegal entry charge is a misdemeanor, which has a statue of limitation of two years, Spiller has said the law will not be used to target immigrants who have long been settled in the U.S.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/12/1702952665492.png" alt="Gov. Greg Abbott signed three bills into law at a border wall construction site in Brownsville, Texas on Monday, Dec. 18, 2023, that will broaden his border security plans and add funding for more infrastructure to deter illegal immigration. (AP Photo/Valerie Gonzalez)" />
 <figcaption>Gov. Greg Abbott signed three bills into law at a border wall construction site in Brownsville, Texas on Monday, Dec. 18, 2023, that will broaden his border security plans and add funding for more infrastructure to deter illegal immigration. (AP Photo/Valerie Gonzalez)</figcaption>
 </figure>BROWNSVILLE, Texas (AP) —&nbsp;<a href="https://pronto.associatedpress.com/Legal%20experts%20have%20called%20the%20measure%20a%20flagrant%20violation%20of%20the%20U.S.%20government's%20purview%20over%20immigration%20enforcement.">Republican Texas Gov. Greg Abbott</a>&nbsp;on Monday approved&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/texas-immigration-migrants-arrest-explainer-306f644e8bb95333b078ed3923adacf0">sweeping new powers</a>&nbsp;that allow police to arrest migrants who illegally cross the U.S. border and give local judges authority to order them to leave the country, testing the limits of how far a state can go to enforce immigration laws.<div><iframe src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/video.php?height=314&href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FTexasGovernor%2Fvideos%2F1979749065731909%2F&show_text=false&width=560&t=40" width="560" height="314" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="true" allow="autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowFullScreen="true"></iframe></div>Opponents have called the measure the most dramatic attempt by a state to police immigration since a 2010 Arizona law — denounced by critics as the “Show Me Your Papers” bill — that was largely&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/57fd255191214d54b420a39a96b82451">struck down</a>&nbsp;by the U.S. Supreme Court. Immigration enforcement is a federal responsibility, and Texas’ law is also likely to face swift legal challenges.The law, which takes effect in March, allows any Texas law enforcement officer to arrest people who are suspected of entering the country illegally. Once in custody, they could either agree to a Texas judge’s order to leave the U.S. or be prosecuted on misdemeanor charges of illegal entry. Migrants who don’t leave could face arrest again under more serious felony charges.Abbott, who signed the law in front of a section of border fence in Brownsville, predicted the number of people crossing illegally into Texas would drop by “well over 50%, maybe 75%." He did not offer evidence for that estimate.“The consequences of it are so extreme that the people being smuggled by the cartels, they will not want to be coming into the state of Texas," he said.The law adds another tension point over immigration amid a struggle between the White House and Senate negotiators&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/border-security-ukraine-congress-senate-biden-cb8d4e3ad8271323cfd9294b527d6615">to reach a deal on border security</a>. Republicans in Congress are demanding changes to the immigration system in exchange for any help for Ukraine, Israel and other national security needs.Texas Republicans have increasingly challenged the U.S. government’s authority over immigration, saying President Joe Biden's administration isn’t doing enough to control the 1,950-mile (3,149-kilometer) southern border. Texas has&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/migrants-los-angeles-california-texas-immigration-abbott-3fdb47985b34cd8301b61251b590778c">bused more than 65,000 migrants</a>&nbsp;to cities across America since August 2022 and recently&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/texas-immigration-border-wire-522e993680a4d729e538a53a788ec185">installed razor wire</a>&nbsp;along the banks of the Rio Grande, which has snagged and injured some asylum-seekers.The U.S. government on Monday temporarily shut down two railroad border crossings in Texas, a move that rail operators said would hamper trade ahead of Christmas. Troy Miller, U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s acting commissioner, said the closures at Eagle Pass and El Paso were a response to more migrants traveling on freight trains, particularly over the last week.Miller said authorities are seeing “unprecedented” arrivals at the border, topping 10,000 crossings on some days this month.Shortly after Abbott signed the new law, the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas said it would challenge the measure in court. More than 20 congressional Democrats also signed a letter urging the U.S. Justice Department to sue to stop the law, known as Senate Bill 4.“SB 4 is dangerous for the people of Texas and interferes with the federal government’s exclusive authority over immigration and foreign affairs," the letter read.Mexico’s government also has rebuked the measure. Under bilateral and international agreements, Mexico is required to accept deportations of its own citizens, but not those of other countries. Under the Texas law, migrants ordered to leave would be sent to ports of entry along the border with Mexico, even if they are not Mexican citizens. In September and October,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/border-arrests-venezuela-mexico-a89f66759ac97c7ec62e4559af4e48a3">Venezuelans were the largest nationality</a>&nbsp;arrested for illegally crossing the U.S. border.During debate in the Texas House in November, GOP state Rep. David Spiller pushed back against concerns that the law would be used as a dragnet to arrest immigrants statewide. He said enforcement would mostly take place in border counties. But he also rebuffed several efforts by Democrats to narrow the law, including a proposed carve-out for police on college campuses.Because the illegal entry charge is a misdemeanor, which has a statue of limitation of two years, Spiller has said the law will not be used to target immigrants who have long been settled in the U.S.“This is not, ‘Round up everyone who is here illegally and ship them back to Mexico,’” he said during debate over the bill.Opponents have accused Texas Republicans of using the law as a vehicle to force the Supreme Court’s new conservative majority to revisit its landmark 2012 Arizona decision. At the time, Justice Anthony Kennedy said Arizona may have “understandable frustrations” with immigrants who are in the country illegally but that it can’t pursue policies that “undermine federal law.”___