WASHINGTON —One year ago, the Supreme Court eliminated a constitutional right that it had previously recognized, overturning nearly fifty years of precedent.

According to a statement from the White House: 

Today, more than 23 million women of reproductive age—one in three—live in one of the 18 states with an abortion ban currently in effect. In the last year, women have been denied essential medical care to preserve their health and even save their lives. They have been turned away from emergency rooms, forced to delay care, and made to travel hundreds of miles and across state lines for needed medical care. Despite this devastating impact on women’s health, Republican elected officials continue to advance these bans at both the state and national level.

President Biden and Vice President Harris stand with the majority of Americans who believe the right to choose is fundamental—and who have made their voices heard at every opportunity since the Supreme Court’s decision in&nbsp;Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.&nbsp;As the President has made clear since the day of the&nbsp;Dobbs&nbsp;decision, the only way to ensure women in every state have access to abortion is for Congress to pass a law restoring the protections of&nbsp;Roe v. Wade.

While we continue to call on Congress to restore these protections, the Administration has taken executive action to protect access across the full spectrum of reproductive health care. In the wake of&nbsp;Dobbs, the President issued two Executive Orders directing a comprehensive slate of actions to protect access to reproductive health care services, including abortion. And today,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/06/23/fact-sheet-president-biden-issues-executive-order-on-strengthening-access-to-contraception/" target="_blank">the President is issuing a third Executive Order focused on strengthening access to affordable, high-quality contraception</a>, a critical aspect of reproductive health care. The Administration remains fully committed to implementing these Executive Orders and advancing access to reproductive health care through the leadership of the interagency Task Force on Reproductive Healthcare Access, co-chaired by the White House Gender Policy Council and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

Today, the Biden-Harris Administration is providing an update on the work of the Task Force on Reproductive Healthcare Access and the Administration’s ongoing efforts to defend reproductive rights.

Protecting Access to Abortion, including Medication Abortion

Supporting Women’s Ability to Travel for Medical Care

Reinforcing Nondiscrimination Protections under Federal Law

Promoting Safety and Security of Patients, Providers, and Clinics

Safeguarding Privacy and Sensitive Health Information

Providing Access to Accurate Information and Legal Resources

 Biden signs 3rd reproductive health care Executive Order

NEW YORK (AP) — Amazon was sued Wednesday by the Federal Trade Commission for allegedly engaging in a yearslong effort to enroll consumers without consent into Amazon Prime and making it difficult for them to cancel their subscriptions.

In a complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, the agency accused Amazon of using deceptive designs, known as “dark patterns,” to deceive consumers into enrolling in Prime, which provides subscribers with perks such as faster shipping for an fee of $139 annually, or $14.99 a month.

The FTC said Amazon made it difficult for customers to purchase an item without also subscribing to Prime. In some cases, consumers were presented with a button to complete their transactions — which didn’t clearly state it would also enroll them in Prime.

Getting out of a subscription was often too complicated, and Amazon leadership slowed or rejected changes that would have made canceling easier, the complaint said.

Internally, Amazon called the process “Iliad," a reference to the ancient Greek poem about lengthy siege of Troy during the Trojan war.

“Amazon tricked and trapped people into recurring subscriptions without their consent, not only frustrating users but also costing them significant money,” FTC Chair Lina Khan said in a prepared statement. “These manipulative tactics harm consumers and law-abiding businesses alike.”

The FTC argued that Amazon’s practices violated the FTC Act and another law called the Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence Act, which Amazon disputed.

“The FTC’s claims are false on the facts and the law," Amazon spokesperson Heather Layman said in a statement. “The truth is that customers love Prime, and by design we make it clear and simple for customers to both sign up for or cancel their Prime membership.”

Launched in 2005, Prime has more than 200 million members worldwide who are entitled to perks such as free delivery, returns and the streaming service Prime Video. In the first three months of this year, Amazon reported it made $9.6 billion from subscriptions, a 17% jump from the same period last year.

In a news release announcing the lawsuit, the FTC said though its complaint is significantly redacted, it contains “a number of allegations” that backs up its accusations against Amazon. It also accused the company of attempting to hinder the agency’s investigation into Prime, which began in 2021, in several instances.

In the past two years, the agency has been ramping up its enforcement against deceptive sign-up and cancellation tactics that could manipulate consumers into buying products or services they don't want. In December, it said Epic Games Inc., the maker of the popular Fortnite video game, would pay $245 million in customer refunds for deceptive payment methods. In November, the telecom company Vonage settled a similar case for $100 million.

Layman, the Amazon spokesperson, said the company found it “concerning” the FTC filed the lawsuit without notifying Amazon, which was in discussion with agency staffers about Prime.

“While the absence of that normal course engagement is extremely disappointing, we look forward to proving our case in court," she said.

The lawsuit also comes as Amazon is facing heightened regulatory scrutiny as it moves to expand its e-commerce dominance and dip its toes into other markets, including groceries and health care.

Some anti-monopoly groups celebrated the lawsuit shortly after the FTC’s announcement, while others called it absurd.

“The complaint is that Amazon encourages people to use Amazon Prime – this is like going after Kroger for promoting its rewards program or Costco for its membership club,” Carl Szabo, the vice president and general counsel of the tech industry group NetChoice, said in a statement. "It is abundantly clear that the FTC is a runaway agency in need of greater oversight. Congress must engage in robust oversight to rein in the FTC by cutting funding and investigating its ethical lapses and abuse of power.”

The group, which counts Amazon as one of its members, also pointed to Khan's prior criticism of the company, and accused her of using the lawsuit “to attack American businesses she doesn’t like.”

Khan, 34, burst onto the antitrust scene in 2017 with her massive scholarly work as a Yale law student, “Amazon’s Antitrust Paradox." In 2021, Amazon asked unsuccessfully that she remove herself from separate antitrust investigations into its business, arguing that her public criticism of the company’s market power before she joined the government makes it impossible for her to be impartial.

The U.S. and Amazon have traded barbs for over the investigation.

Last year, Amazon accused the FTC of harassing its executives, including founder Jeff Bezos, as the agency sought to get the company’s top brass to testify as part of the probe.

The tech giant has also faced other lawsuits accusing its Prime cancelation process of being too complicated. While under scrutiny from the FTC, the company in March provided consumers with instructions on how to cancel their Prime memberships in a blog post.

The lawsuit follows another Amazon-related win by the agency just a few weeks ago. Earlier this month, Amazon&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/amazon-alexa-ring-doorbell-privacy-violations-ftc-971419109d7af10203d7ccfd28fcd0ad">agreed to pay a $25 million civil penalty</a>&nbsp;to settle allegations it violated a child privacy law for storing kids’ voice and location data recorded by its popular Alexa voice assistant. It also agreed to pay $5.8 million in customer refunds for alleged privacy violations involving its doorbell camera Ring.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/6/1687370869736.png" alt="" />
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure>NEW YORK (AP) — Amazon was sued Wednesday by the Federal Trade Commission for allegedly engaging in a yearslong effort to enroll consumers without consent into Amazon Prime and making it difficult for them to cancel their subscriptions.In a complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, the agency accused Amazon of using deceptive designs, known as “dark patterns,” to deceive consumers into enrolling in Prime, which provides subscribers with perks such as faster shipping for an fee of $139 annually, or $14.99 a month.The FTC said Amazon made it difficult for customers to purchase an item without also subscribing to Prime. In some cases, consumers were presented with a button to complete their transactions — which didn’t clearly state it would also enroll them in Prime.Getting out of a subscription was often too complicated, and Amazon leadership slowed or rejected changes that would have made canceling easier, the complaint said.Internally, Amazon called the process “Iliad," a reference to the ancient Greek poem about lengthy siege of Troy during the Trojan war.“Amazon tricked and trapped people into recurring subscriptions without their consent, not only frustrating users but also costing them significant money,” FTC Chair Lina Khan said in a prepared statement. “These manipulative tactics harm consumers and law-abiding businesses alike.”The FTC argued that Amazon’s practices violated the FTC Act and another law called the Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence Act, which Amazon disputed.“The FTC’s claims are false on the facts and the law," Amazon spokesperson Heather Layman said in a statement. “The truth is that customers love Prime, and by design we make it clear and simple for customers to both sign up for or cancel their Prime membership.”Launched in 2005, Prime has more than 200 million members worldwide who are entitled to perks such as free delivery, returns and the streaming service Prime Video. In the first three months of this year, Amazon reported it made $9.6 billion from subscriptions, a 17% jump from the same period last year.In a news release announcing the lawsuit, the FTC said though its complaint is significantly redacted, it contains “a number of allegations” that backs up its accusations against Amazon. It also accused the company of attempting to hinder the agency’s investigation into Prime, which began in 2021, in several instances.In the past two years, the agency has been ramping up its enforcement against deceptive sign-up and cancellation tactics that could manipulate consumers into buying products or services they don't want. In December, it said Epic Games Inc., the maker of the popular Fortnite video game, would pay $245 million in customer refunds for deceptive payment methods. In November, the telecom company Vonage settled a similar case for $100 million.Layman, the Amazon spokesperson, said the company found it “concerning” the FTC filed the lawsuit without notifying Amazon, which was in discussion with agency staffers about Prime.“While the absence of that normal course engagement is extremely disappointing, we look forward to proving our case in court," she said.The lawsuit also comes as Amazon is facing heightened regulatory scrutiny as it moves to expand its e-commerce dominance and dip its toes into other markets, including groceries and health care.Some anti-monopoly groups celebrated the lawsuit shortly after the FTC’s announcement, while others called it absurd.“The complaint is that Amazon encourages people to use Amazon Prime – this is like going after Kroger for promoting its rewards program or Costco for its membership club,” Carl Szabo, the vice president and general counsel of the tech industry group NetChoice, said in a statement. "It is abundantly clear that the FTC is a runaway agency in need of greater oversight. Congress must engage in robust oversight to rein in the FTC by cutting funding and investigating its ethical lapses and abuse of power.”<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/6/1687370941423.png" alt="(AP Photo/Matt Rourke)" />
 <figcaption>(AP Photo/Matt Rourke)</figcaption>
 </figure>The group, which counts Amazon as one of its members, also pointed to Khan's prior criticism of the company, and accused her of using the lawsuit “to attack American businesses she doesn’t like.”Khan, 34, burst onto the antitrust scene in 2017 with her massive scholarly work as a Yale law student, “Amazon’s Antitrust Paradox." In 2021, Amazon asked unsuccessfully that she remove herself from separate antitrust investigations into its business, arguing that her public criticism of the company’s market power before she joined the government makes it impossible for her to be impartial.The U.S. and Amazon have traded barbs for over the investigation.Last year, Amazon accused the FTC of harassing its executives, including founder Jeff Bezos, as the agency sought to get the company’s top brass to testify as part of the probe.The tech giant has also faced other lawsuits accusing its Prime cancelation process of being too complicated. While under scrutiny from the FTC, the company in March provided consumers with instructions on how to cancel their Prime memberships in a blog post.The lawsuit follows another Amazon-related win by the agency just a few weeks ago. Earlier this month, Amazon&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/amazon-alexa-ring-doorbell-privacy-violations-ftc-971419109d7af10203d7ccfd28fcd0ad">agreed to pay a $25 million civil penalty</a>&nbsp;to settle allegations it violated a child privacy law for storing kids’ voice and location data recorded by its popular Alexa voice assistant. It also agreed to pay $5.8 million in customer refunds for alleged privacy violations involving its doorbell camera Ring.------------

Lawsuit: Amazon disputes deceptive sign-up, cancellation process 

WASHINGTON (AP) — The&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/us-supreme-court">Supreme Court</a>&nbsp;said Friday it will&nbsp;<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/22-58_i425.pdf">no longer stand in the way</a>&nbsp;of a long-blocked Biden administration policy to prioritize the deportation of immigrants who are deemed to pose the greatest public safety risk or were picked up at the border.

The justices rejected a challenge from some&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/us-supreme-court-louisiana-donald-trump-immigration-government-and-politics-0cca9ca72778e154da24ded403e8c415">Republican-led states</a>&nbsp;to a policy that, the administration said, recognizes that there is not enough money or manpower to deport all 11 million or so people who are in the United States illegally.

The states had argued that federal immigration law requires authorities to detain and deport even those who pose little or no risk.

At the center of the case is a September 2021 directive from the Department of Homeland Security that paused deportations unless individuals had committed acts of terrorism, espionage or “egregious threats to public safety.” The guidance, issued after Joe Biden became president, updated a Trump-era policy to remove people in the country illegally regardless of criminal history or community ties.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/5/1683898210525.png" alt="Migrants at the border as scene in photo from May 2023- Texas Dept. of Public Safety" />
 <figcaption>Migrants at the border as scene in photo from May 2023- Texas Dept. of Public Safety</figcaption>
 </figure>WASHINGTON (AP) — The&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/us-supreme-court">Supreme Court</a>&nbsp;said Friday it will&nbsp;<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/22-58_i425.pdf">no longer stand in the way</a>&nbsp;of a long-blocked Biden administration policy to prioritize the deportation of immigrants who are deemed to pose the greatest public safety risk or were picked up at the border.The justices rejected a challenge from some&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/us-supreme-court-louisiana-donald-trump-immigration-government-and-politics-0cca9ca72778e154da24ded403e8c415">Republican-led states</a>&nbsp;to a policy that, the administration said, recognizes that there is not enough money or manpower to deport all 11 million or so people who are in the United States illegally.The states had argued that federal immigration law requires authorities to detain and deport even those who pose little or no risk.At the center of the case is a September 2021 directive from the Department of Homeland Security that paused deportations unless individuals had committed acts of terrorism, espionage or “egregious threats to public safety.” The guidance, issued after Joe Biden became president, updated a Trump-era policy to remove people in the country illegally regardless of criminal history or community ties.

Supreme Court rejects challenge to Biden deportation plan

WASHINGTON (AP) — About 7.5 million singing and swimming “Baby Shark” bath toys are being recalled after multiple impalements, lacerations and puncture wounds were reported in children playing with them.

Zuru, an El Segundo, California-based toymaker, said it's recalling both full-size and mini versions of its robotic baby shark toys that have hard plastic top fins, which pose the injury risks.

Twelve injuries have already been reported with Zuru's full-sized Robo Alive Junior Baby Shark Sing &amp; Swim Bath Toys — after children sat or fell on the now-recalled products. Nine of these impalements, lacerations and puncture wounds required stitches or medical attention, according to <a href="https://www.cpsc.gov/Recalls/2023/Zuru-Recalls-7-5-Million-Baby-Shark-and-Mini-Baby-Shark-Bath-Toys-With-Hard-Plastic-Top-Fins-Due-to-Risk-of-Impalement-Laceration-and-Puncture-Injuries-to-Children">a Thursday release from the U.S. Consumer Protect Safety Commission.</a>

While injuries have only been reported with these full-sized toys so far, Zuru is also recalling Robo Alive Junior Mini Baby Shark Swimming Bath Toys “out of an abundance of caution."

Consumers in possession of the recalled toys are instructed to stop using them immediately and contact Zuru for a full refund. To get the refund, customers are asked to cut off or bend the tail fin, write “recalled” and a registration code on the body of the baby shark and upload a photo on a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.recallrtr.com/bathshark">site</a>&nbsp;dedicated to the recall.

The recalled products can be identified by&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cpsc.gov/Recalls/2023/Zuru-Recalls-7-5-Million-Baby-Shark-and-Mini-Baby-Shark-Bath-Toys-With-Hard-Plastic-Top-Fins-Due-to-Risk-of-Impalement-Laceration-and-Puncture-Injuries-to-Children">model numbers</a>&nbsp;and date codes. Zuru's Robo Alive Junior Baby Shark Sing &amp; Swim Bath Toys and Robo Alive Junior Mini Baby Shark Swimming Bath Toys were sold in-person and online at chains including Walmart, Target, CVS, Walgreens and TJX Companies from May 2019 through March 2023.

In a company announcement, Zuru noted that that the recall only impacts the versions of the baby shark toys with a hard plastic fin. The newest toys, which have a silicone fin, are not part of the recall, Zuru said.

“We want to assure our customers that we are committed to the highest levels of safety and quality of all our products, and we have implemented measures to prevent future incidents by working to promptly remove these products from retail and replace them with a newly designed product,” Zuru wrote.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/6/1687530371186.png" alt="Photo courtesy Consumer Product Safety Commission" />
 <figcaption>Photo courtesy Consumer Product Safety Commission</figcaption>
 </figure>WASHINGTON (AP) — About 7.5 million singing and swimming “Baby Shark” bath toys are being recalled after multiple impalements, lacerations and puncture wounds were reported in children playing with them.Zuru, an El Segundo, California-based toymaker, said it's recalling both full-size and mini versions of its robotic baby shark toys that have hard plastic top fins, which pose the injury risks.Twelve injuries have already been reported with Zuru's full-sized Robo Alive Junior Baby Shark Sing &amp; Swim Bath Toys — after children sat or fell on the now-recalled products. Nine of these impalements, lacerations and puncture wounds required stitches or medical attention, according to <a href="https://www.cpsc.gov/Recalls/2023/Zuru-Recalls-7-5-Million-Baby-Shark-and-Mini-Baby-Shark-Bath-Toys-With-Hard-Plastic-Top-Fins-Due-to-Risk-of-Impalement-Laceration-and-Puncture-Injuries-to-Children">a Thursday release from the U.S. Consumer Protect Safety Commission.</a>While injuries have only been reported with these full-sized toys so far, Zuru is also recalling Robo Alive Junior Mini Baby Shark Swimming Bath Toys “out of an abundance of caution."Consumers in possession of the recalled toys are instructed to stop using them immediately and contact Zuru for a full refund. To get the refund, customers are asked to cut off or bend the tail fin, write “recalled” and a registration code on the body of the baby shark and upload a photo on a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.recallrtr.com/bathshark">site</a>&nbsp;dedicated to the recall.The recalled products can be identified by&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cpsc.gov/Recalls/2023/Zuru-Recalls-7-5-Million-Baby-Shark-and-Mini-Baby-Shark-Bath-Toys-With-Hard-Plastic-Top-Fins-Due-to-Risk-of-Impalement-Laceration-and-Puncture-Injuries-to-Children">model numbers</a>&nbsp;and date codes. Zuru's Robo Alive Junior Baby Shark Sing &amp; Swim Bath Toys and Robo Alive Junior Mini Baby Shark Swimming Bath Toys were sold in-person and online at chains including Walmart, Target, CVS, Walgreens and TJX Companies from May 2019 through March 2023.In a company announcement, Zuru noted that that the recall only impacts the versions of the baby shark toys with a hard plastic fin. The newest toys, which have a silicone fin, are not part of the recall, Zuru said.“We want to assure our customers that we are committed to the highest levels of safety and quality of all our products, and we have implemented measures to prevent future incidents by working to promptly remove these products from retail and replace them with a newly designed product,” Zuru wrote.

'Baby Shark' bath toy recall: Multiple laceration and impalement injuries

Regents also approve next UNL chancellor, raise tuition by 3.5% and shift oversight of Husker Athletics to NU president

By ZACH WENDLING <a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/woman-who-shouted-shame-following-critical-gun-bill-passage-is-banned-from-nebraska-capitol/">Nebraska Examiner</a>

LINCOLN — University of Nebraska President Ted Carter on Thursday previewed a five-point plan designed to get NU out of a $58 million shortfall and “back on offense.”

Carter described to the NU Board of Regents a plan including: a renewed focus on students, raising NU’s academic and research profile, examining existing programs and strengthening communication and transparency.

Carter said his five-point plan will be implemented by the year’s end and allow NU to be among the best universities. It will address the shortfall that is projected by mid-2025.

“We will not only realize $58 million in savings, we will be back on offense, and we will be a national player,” Carter said.

The university system is implementing a hiring freeze on all non-faculty positions beginning in July. They will also withhold 2.5% quarterly funds from all departmental operating and supply budgets, according to Chris Kabourek, NU’s chief financial officer and senior vice president.

Carter announced NU will also be looking for students to lead recruitment efforts, and NU will reimagine Regents Scholarships to cover all the scholars’ NU expenses, not just tuition.

A major goal will also be for NU to rejoin the Association of American Universities, an elite group of colleges and universities. NU had belonged to the group from 1909 until 2011, when the AAU&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.espn.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/26078/nebraska-loses-aau-status">terminated</a>&nbsp;its membership. Bennett has also expressed interest in rejoining the AAU.

“No university that’s ever left the AAU has ever been brought back in. Ever. We would be the first,” Carter said.

As part of that plan, NU intends to report research expenditures at UNL, the University of Nebraska Medical Center and systemwide institutions together.&nbsp;

Multiple AAU members are aligned with a medical school.

“It’s not a merger,” Carter said. “It’s an administrative realignment that leverages the full combined strengths of our flagship university and our medical center.”

Regent Tim Clare of Lincoln, the board’s chair, said the budget and subsequent plan allow NU to go from good to great.

Barney McCoy, a professor in UNL’s College of Journalism and Mass Communications, expressed&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/university-of-nebraska-president-previews-athletics-bylaw-change-budget-status/">concern</a>&nbsp;at the regents’ proposal to shift oversight of Husker Athletics from the UNL chancellor to the NU president.

McCoy is the chair of the UNL Faculty Senate Intercollegiate Athletics Committee that reviews policies and advises Husker Athletics and includes Athletic Director Trev Alberts.

He said NU is facing a “historic operational threat” that requires Carter’s “full attention” to address. Similarly, intercollegiate athletics is in a “historic era,” with new transfer rules and name, image and likeness revenue, so campuses face new challenges and opportunities.

But the system is not broken, McCoy said, and UNL provides Husker student-athletes support, resources and opportunities for lifelong success.

“Under these circumstances, it seems prudent at present to keep oversight of Husker Athletics in the hands of the UNL chancellor,” McCoy said. “By doing so, this also allows President Carter to have sole focus and the undivided support needed to address the historic operational challenges now facing the entire University of Nebraska system.”

Regents, including Clare and Regent Rob Schafer of Beatrice, the board’s vice chair, said the move is to offer the job to the “best man” to advance the university.

“We need to put our best person that’s situated, for us, to move us forward,” Schafer said, noting that it’s not to take anything away from Bennett or current UNL Chancellor Ronnie Green.

Bennett, the former University of Southern Mississippi president, will start July 1 with a $720,000 base salary. This is&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/nebraska-regents-to-vote-on-next-unl-chancellor-37-pay-bump/#:~:text=NU%20President%20Ted%20Carter%20announced,That%20period%20ended%20Wednesday.">37% above</a>&nbsp;his predecessor’s salary.

“The chance to serve the University of Nebraska-Lincoln as chancellor is the opportunity I have been preparing for for over 30 years,” Bennett said in a statement.

“UNL is truly unique in building vibrant, economically competitive communities across Nebraska while preparing students to be successful in an evolving world in which they will live and work,” he continued.

Regents approved Bennett without discussion of his candidacy or the salary increase.

UNL Student Regent Paul Pechous said after the meeting that he’s excited to bring Bennett in, someone who is “really student-centered” with a background in&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/unl-chancellor-priority-candidate-meets-with-nebraska-students/">student affairs</a>.

“It’s exciting to be in this position, to have a chancellor who is excited to make some positive changes,” Pechous said. “He’s not afraid to speak candidly about some of the complexities of what we’re going to be facing in the next couple of years.”

Clare described Bennett as an “enthusiastic, bold, visionary leader.”

“He will …&nbsp; not only enhance the research credibility at the University of Nebraska, but will also help grow the entire institution,” Clare said. “That can change not only the University of Nebraska but change the nation if not the world.”&nbsp;

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/6/1687515295261.png" alt=" University of Nebraska President Ted Carter, at right, leads an NU Board of Regents meeting on Thursday, June 22, 2023, in Lincoln, Neb. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner)" />
 <figcaption> University of Nebraska President Ted Carter, at right, leads an NU Board of Regents meeting on Thursday, June 22, 2023, in Lincoln, Neb. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner)</figcaption>
 </figure><h2>Regents also approve next UNL chancellor, raise tuition by 3.5% and shift oversight of Husker Athletics to NU president</h2>By ZACH WENDLING <a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/woman-who-shouted-shame-following-critical-gun-bill-passage-is-banned-from-nebraska-capitol/">Nebraska Examiner</a>LINCOLN — University of Nebraska President Ted Carter on Thursday previewed a five-point plan designed to get NU out of a $58 million shortfall and “back on offense.”Carter described to the NU Board of Regents a plan including: a renewed focus on students, raising NU’s academic and research profile, examining existing programs and strengthening communication and transparency.The regents also unanimously approved:<ul>
 <li>The appointment of Rodney Bennett as chancellor of the University of Nebraska-Lincoln.</li><li>The university’s 2023-24 operating budget, which includes raising tuition rates by 3.5%.</li><li>Shifting Husker Athletics oversight from the UNL chancellor to the NU president.</li>
 </ul><h2>Carter’s five-point plan</h2>Carter said his five-point plan will be implemented by the year’s end and allow NU to be among the best universities. It will address the shortfall that is projected by mid-2025.“We will not only realize $58 million in savings, we will be back on offense, and we will be a national player,” Carter said.The university system is implementing a hiring freeze on all non-faculty positions beginning in July. They will also withhold 2.5% quarterly funds from all departmental operating and supply budgets, according to Chris Kabourek, NU’s chief financial officer and senior vice president.Carter announced NU will also be looking for students to lead recruitment efforts, and NU will reimagine Regents Scholarships to cover all the scholars’ NU expenses, not just tuition.A major goal will also be for NU to rejoin the Association of American Universities, an elite group of colleges and universities. NU had belonged to the group from 1909 until 2011, when the AAU&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.espn.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/26078/nebraska-loses-aau-status">terminated</a>&nbsp;its membership. Bennett has also expressed interest in rejoining the AAU.“No university that’s ever left the AAU has ever been brought back in. Ever. We would be the first,” Carter said.As part of that plan, NU intends to report research expenditures at UNL, the University of Nebraska Medical Center and systemwide institutions together.&nbsp;Multiple AAU members are aligned with a medical school.“It’s not a merger,” Carter said. “It’s an administrative realignment that leverages the full combined strengths of our flagship university and our medical center.”Regent Tim Clare of Lincoln, the board’s chair, said the budget and subsequent plan allow NU to go from good to great.<h2>Husker Athletics moves to NU president</h2>Barney McCoy, a professor in UNL’s College of Journalism and Mass Communications, expressed&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/university-of-nebraska-president-previews-athletics-bylaw-change-budget-status/">concern</a>&nbsp;at the regents’ proposal to shift oversight of Husker Athletics from the UNL chancellor to the NU president.McCoy is the chair of the UNL Faculty Senate Intercollegiate Athletics Committee that reviews policies and advises Husker Athletics and includes Athletic Director Trev Alberts.He said NU is facing a “historic operational threat” that requires Carter’s “full attention” to address. Similarly, intercollegiate athletics is in a “historic era,” with new transfer rules and name, image and likeness revenue, so campuses face new challenges and opportunities.But the system is not broken, McCoy said, and UNL provides Husker student-athletes support, resources and opportunities for lifelong success.“Under these circumstances, it seems prudent at present to keep oversight of Husker Athletics in the hands of the UNL chancellor,” McCoy said. “By doing so, this also allows President Carter to have sole focus and the undivided support needed to address the historic operational challenges now facing the entire University of Nebraska system.”Regents, including Clare and Regent Rob Schafer of Beatrice, the board’s vice chair, said the move is to offer the job to the “best man” to advance the university.“We need to put our best person that’s situated, for us, to move us forward,” Schafer said, noting that it’s not to take anything away from Bennett or current UNL Chancellor Ronnie Green.<h2>Chancellor Rodney Bennett</h2>Bennett, the former University of Southern Mississippi president, will start July 1 with a $720,000 base salary. This is&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/nebraska-regents-to-vote-on-next-unl-chancellor-37-pay-bump/#:~:text=NU%20President%20Ted%20Carter%20announced,That%20period%20ended%20Wednesday.">37% above</a>&nbsp;his predecessor’s salary.“The chance to serve the University of Nebraska-Lincoln as chancellor is the opportunity I have been preparing for for over 30 years,” Bennett said in a statement.“UNL is truly unique in building vibrant, economically competitive communities across Nebraska while preparing students to be successful in an evolving world in which they will live and work,” he continued.Regents approved Bennett without discussion of his candidacy or the salary increase.UNL Student Regent Paul Pechous said after the meeting that he’s excited to bring Bennett in, someone who is “really student-centered” with a background in&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/unl-chancellor-priority-candidate-meets-with-nebraska-students/">student affairs</a>.“It’s exciting to be in this position, to have a chancellor who is excited to make some positive changes,” Pechous said. “He’s not afraid to speak candidly about some of the complexities of what we’re going to be facing in the next couple of years.”Clare described Bennett as an “enthusiastic, bold, visionary leader.”“He will …&nbsp; not only enhance the research credibility at the University of Nebraska, but will also help grow the entire institution,” Clare said. “That can change not only the University of Nebraska but change the nation if not the world.”&nbsp;

University of Nebraska president details five-point plan to get NU ‘back on offense’

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden on Thursday defended his harsh public comments on China, including calling President Xi Jinping a dictator, saying his words would have no negative impact on U.S.-China relations and that he still expects to meet with Xi sometime soon.

Biden said his blunt statements regarding China are "just not something I’m going to change very much.”

(Click below to watch the President's comments)

The remarks, which drew a formal protest from China, opened a new rift just days after Secretary of State Antony&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/us-china-blinken-beijing-rivalry-0b08a809f12b1bcdee92afa5491a9fbf">Blinken concluded a visit to Beijing</a>&nbsp;that was meant as a step toward stabilizing ties and improving communications.

“I expect to be meeting with President Xi sometime in the future, near-term. And I don’t think it’s had any real consequence," he said.

His latest rebuff to China came on the same afternoon he&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-modi-india-state-visit-human-rights-5e4bc32e679ad6bae7225a28f7f6334d">welcomed Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi</a>&nbsp;to the White House in an alliance-strengthening move against their shared rival, China.

Just hours earlier, China's embassy in Washington said it had delivered a formal protest, with Chinese Ambassador Xie Feng telling senior White House and State Department officials Wednesday that Washington “should take earnest actions to undo the negative impact” of what Biden said or “bear all the consequences."

“With the latest irresponsible remarks about China’s political system and its top leader, people cannot help but question the sincerity of the U.S. side” in seeking to stabilize relations, the embassy said in a statement. “The Chinese government and people do not accept any political provocation against China’s top leader and will resolutely respond.”

At a campaign fundraiser on Tuesday, Biden had called the Chinese president a dictator, depicted him as out-of-touch during last winter’s tumult over a Chinese spy balloon, and dismissed China as having “real economic difficulties.”

As an official government-to-government communication, the ambassador’s message to the Biden administration carries more weight than the critical comments made a day earlier by a Chinese government spokesperson to reporters. China gave no further details of how the ambassador delivered his message, whether it was seeking an apology from the Biden administration, or what the consequences would be.

China and the U.S. in recent years have been cycling in and out of diplomatic flare-ups. China has used measures ranging from cutting diplomatic ties to staging military maneuvers off Taiwan to show its displeasure.

Biden administration officials on Wednesday defended Biden's remarks, saying the president has made a point of drawing distinctions between the world's democracies and autocracies. The State Department said Thursday that it does not comment on private diplomatic discussions.

Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen addressed the latest rift Thursday at an unrelated news conference in Paris, saying, “with respect to the comments, I think President Biden and I both believe it’s critical to maintain communication ... to clear up misperceptions, miscalculations. We need to work together where possible."

“But we have disagreements, and we are also forthright in recognizing we do have disagreements,” she added.

Yellen has recently&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/yellen-china-tensions-spy-balloon-taiwan-russia-edcb0077d45a3ffabbe4b9dbbf9fe29c">advocated for improving relations</a>&nbsp;between the U.S. and China, arguing cooperation is needed for the sake of maintaining global stability.

U.S. climate envoy John Kerry, at the same global finance and climate event as Yellen, expressed the urgency of resuming climate discussions between China and the U.S., the No. 1 and No. 2 emitters of climate-damaging fumes from fossil fuels.

Talks between the two countries were vital in the breakthrough that led to the 2015 Paris climate accord. But climate discussions between the two have stalled in the past couple of years over the governments’ diplomatic disputes and other issues.

When it comes to slowing climate change, it “should be China and the United States working together on a global threat in a way that can build some confidence and change the dynamics of the relationship. That’s the hope,” Kerry told a small group of reporters.

He said Xi and Biden understood the urgency of the emissions talks. “Every day that goes by without them is a day for mischief," Kerry said.

Chinese Premier Li Qiang was among the dozens of heads of state and government, world finance officials and activists who converged on the French capital to discuss ways of&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/climate-change-funding-imf-world-bank-paris-5adddd32452f548a71a55f802191b04d">reforming the global financial system</a>&nbsp;and addressing the debt, climate change and poverty crises, especially for developing nations.

“I believe it’s important, as President Biden does, that the world’s two largest economies are … working together in addressing global challenges,” Yellen said.

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden on Thursday defended his harsh public comments on China, including calling President Xi Jinping a dictator, saying his words would have no negative impact on U.S.-China relations and that he still expects to meet with Xi sometime soon.Biden said his blunt statements regarding China are "just not something I’m going to change very much.”(Click below to watch the President's comments)<div><iframe src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/video.php?height=314&href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FWhiteHouse%2Fvideos%2F3585103548384794%2F&show_text=false&width=560&t=1056" 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>The remarks, which drew a formal protest from China, opened a new rift just days after Secretary of State Antony&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/us-china-blinken-beijing-rivalry-0b08a809f12b1bcdee92afa5491a9fbf">Blinken concluded a visit to Beijing</a>&nbsp;that was meant as a step toward stabilizing ties and improving communications.But Biden was undeterred.“I expect to be meeting with President Xi sometime in the future, near-term. And I don’t think it’s had any real consequence," he said.His latest rebuff to China came on the same afternoon he&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-modi-india-state-visit-human-rights-5e4bc32e679ad6bae7225a28f7f6334d">welcomed Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi</a>&nbsp;to the White House in an alliance-strengthening move against their shared rival, China.Just hours earlier, China's embassy in Washington said it had delivered a formal protest, with Chinese Ambassador Xie Feng telling senior White House and State Department officials Wednesday that Washington “should take earnest actions to undo the negative impact” of what Biden said or “bear all the consequences."“With the latest irresponsible remarks about China’s political system and its top leader, people cannot help but question the sincerity of the U.S. side” in seeking to stabilize relations, the embassy said in a statement. “The Chinese government and people do not accept any political provocation against China’s top leader and will resolutely respond.”At a campaign fundraiser on Tuesday, Biden had called the Chinese president a dictator, depicted him as out-of-touch during last winter’s tumult over a Chinese spy balloon, and dismissed China as having “real economic difficulties.”As an official government-to-government communication, the ambassador’s message to the Biden administration carries more weight than the critical comments made a day earlier by a Chinese government spokesperson to reporters. China gave no further details of how the ambassador delivered his message, whether it was seeking an apology from the Biden administration, or what the consequences would be.China and the U.S. in recent years have been cycling in and out of diplomatic flare-ups. China has used measures ranging from cutting diplomatic ties to staging military maneuvers off Taiwan to show its displeasure.Biden administration officials on Wednesday defended Biden's remarks, saying the president has made a point of drawing distinctions between the world's democracies and autocracies. The State Department said Thursday that it does not comment on private diplomatic discussions.Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen addressed the latest rift Thursday at an unrelated news conference in Paris, saying, “with respect to the comments, I think President Biden and I both believe it’s critical to maintain communication ... to clear up misperceptions, miscalculations. We need to work together where possible."“But we have disagreements, and we are also forthright in recognizing we do have disagreements,” she added.Yellen has recently&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/yellen-china-tensions-spy-balloon-taiwan-russia-edcb0077d45a3ffabbe4b9dbbf9fe29c">advocated for improving relations</a>&nbsp;between the U.S. and China, arguing cooperation is needed for the sake of maintaining global stability.U.S. climate envoy John Kerry, at the same global finance and climate event as Yellen, expressed the urgency of resuming climate discussions between China and the U.S., the No. 1 and No. 2 emitters of climate-damaging fumes from fossil fuels.Talks between the two countries were vital in the breakthrough that led to the 2015 Paris climate accord. But climate discussions between the two have stalled in the past couple of years over the governments’ diplomatic disputes and other issues.When it comes to slowing climate change, it “should be China and the United States working together on a global threat in a way that can build some confidence and change the dynamics of the relationship. That’s the hope,” Kerry told a small group of reporters.He said Xi and Biden understood the urgency of the emissions talks. “Every day that goes by without them is a day for mischief," Kerry said.Chinese Premier Li Qiang was among the dozens of heads of state and government, world finance officials and activists who converged on the French capital to discuss ways of&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/climate-change-funding-imf-world-bank-paris-5adddd32452f548a71a55f802191b04d">reforming the global financial system</a>&nbsp;and addressing the debt, climate change and poverty crises, especially for developing nations.“I believe it’s important, as President Biden does, that the world’s two largest economies are … working together in addressing global challenges,” Yellen said.

🎥 Biden defends making 'absurd' comment about Chinese leader

US Navy system detected likely Titanic sub implosion days ago

RENO COUNTY —Police investigating a drive-by shooting in Reno County have made an arrest.

Just before 5 p.m. Monday, South Hutchinson police officers and deputies from the Reno County Sheriff’s office were dispatched a drive- by shooting to the 300 block of East 3rd Street, according to a media release from South Hutchinson Police.

A woman standing in front of the residence had a&nbsp;non-life threatening single gunshot wound to her wrist. She was treated and released from the hospital.

Police took the juvenile suspect into custody Wednesday night in South Dakota. Police have not released the name of the suspect.

RENO COUNTY —Police investigating a drive-by shooting in Reno County have made an arrest.Just before 5 p.m. Monday, South Hutchinson police officers and deputies from the Reno County Sheriff’s office were dispatched a drive- by shooting to the 300 block of East 3rd Street, according to a media release from South Hutchinson Police.A woman standing in front of the residence had a&nbsp;non-life threatening single gunshot wound to her wrist. She was treated and released from the hospital.Police took the juvenile suspect into custody Wednesday night in South Dakota. Police have not released the name of the suspect.

Teen in Kansas drive-by shooting arrested in South Dakota

<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/u-s-senate-spending-panel-sets-funding-levels-for-annual-bills/">Nebraska Examiner</a>

WASHINGTON — A group of U.S. Senate Democrats on Thursday approved funding levels for dozens of federal departments for the fiscal year that starts Oct. 1 — setting up a likely clash with House Republicans as a deadline approaches later this year.

The move to advance the spending plan was essential if Congress is going to avoid a partial government shutdown or a series of stopgap funding bills. But the levels agreed to by the Senate Appropriations Committee are significantly different from the ones their House Republican counterparts adopted last week. The panel approved the numbers following a party-line 15-13 vote.

The next steps will include the panel debating all 12 annual government spending bills and later moving to negotiate those with the House. If Congress doesn’t pass all of the bills by Jan. 1, a provision from the debt limit bill would trigger a 1% across-the-board spending cut until Congress approves all the funding measures.

Appropriations Chair Patty Murray, a Washington Democrat, noted the panel is restricted in what it can spend by the debt limit and budget agreement that President Joe Biden and Speaker Kevin McCarthy brokered earlier this year.

That agreement set total spending for the fiscal year set to begin Oct. 1 at $1.59 trillion, with $886.3 billion going toward defense and $703.7 billion for domestic spending accounts.

Murray said she is concerned about those limits, and indicated the committee will take up additional government spending bills to address national disaster response, border security and to boost aid to Ukraine.

“The challenges we face under the limits imposed by the debt ceiling deal do not get any easier and they don’t get any better if we start going backwards, or if we abandon our return to regular order, or we write unserious bills.,” Murray said.

“And as we all know, chaos only helps those who want to see our government shut down, including our adversaries — like the governments of Russia and China — who are rooting for Congress to descend into chaos,” Murray added.

Maine Republican Susan Collins, the ranking member, said she couldn’t support<a target="_blank" href="https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/fy24_302b_allocations.pdf">&nbsp;the spending levels</a>&nbsp;due to inadequate funding for defense and Homeland Security, though she thanked Murray for moving forward with the process.

“Due to the inadequacy of funding for Homeland Security and the need for additional defense funding, unfortunately, I cannot support the 302(b) allocations,” Collins said, referring to the technical name for the dozen spending levels.

But Collins agreed with a comment from Murray that the allocations the committee approved Thursday “are not the final story.”

In the coming weeks, Collins said, she hopes Democrats and Republicans will reach an agreement “to ensure that our military and the Department of Homeland Security have the resources they need to keep our country safe.”

“In the meantime, I want to second Chair Murray’s conclusion that we must continue to make progress in advancing the annual appropriations process in order to avoid a shutdown, a year-end omnibus, or damaging across-the-board funding cuts,” Collins added.

U.S. House Republicans on that chamber’s Appropriations Committee&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/dc-spending-standoff-ahead-us-house-republicans-demand-130-billion-cuts%C2%A0">approved spending allocations&nbsp;</a>for fiscal 2024 that are significantly lower than the spending levels included in the debt limit deal. That will make conferencing the bills later this year more challenging than had the House GOP written the bills to the numbers in the bipartisan agreement.

Here’s a look at what the Senate wants to spend during fiscal 2024:

Agriculture:&nbsp;Senators want to spend $25.9 billion in discretionary funds on the measure that provides for the Department of Agriculture and the Food and Drug Administration. That’s an increase from the $25.5 billion Congress approved for the current fiscal year. House Republicans proposed $17.8 billion.

Commerce-Justice-Science:&nbsp;Senators proposed $69.6 billion for the departments of Commerce and Justice, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the National Science Foundation. That’s a decrease from $83.9 billion in current funding. House Republicans proposed $58.7 billion.

Defense:&nbsp;The Pentagon’s funding bill would get $823.3 billion during the upcoming fiscal year, an increase from $797.7 billion. The House GOP proposed $826.4 billion.

Energy-Water:&nbsp;The Senate panel approved $56.7 billion in spending for the bill that funds the Energy Department as well as more than a dozen agencies, including the Appalachian Regional Commission, Army Corps of Engineers, Bureau of Reclamation, Denali Commission, Great Lakes Authority, Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Tennessee Valley Authority.

The spending level is an increase from the current level of $54.7 billion. The House Appropriations Committee approved $52.4 billion.

Financial Services and General Government:&nbsp;Senators approved $16.8 billion, a decrease from the current funding level of $27.7 billion. House Republicans proposed $11.3 billion.

The bill funds the Treasury Department, federal judiciary and several agencies, including the Executive Office of the President, Federal Communications Commission, Federal Trade Commission, National Archives and Records Administration and the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Homeland Security:&nbsp;Senators approved $56.9 billion in discretionary spending for the bill that funds the Department of Homeland Security, which includes Customs and Border Protection, the Federal Emergency Management Agency and Immigration and Customs Enforcement. That’s a decrease from $60.7 billion in current funding. House Republicans proposed $62.8 billion.

Interior-Environment:&nbsp;The Senate Appropriations Committee approved $37.9 billion for the Interior Department, Environmental Protection Agency, Forest Service, Indian Health Service, Smithsonian Institution and a couple dozen other federal programs that are funded within the measure.

The proposed funding level would mark a decrease from the current spending level of $40.5 billion. The House panel proposed $25.4 billion.

Labor-Health and Human Services-Education:&nbsp;The Senate spending panel approved $195.2 billion in funding for the departments of Education, Health and Human Services and Labor.

The Corporation for Public Broadcasting, Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission, National Labor Relations Board and Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission are some of the smaller federal agencies that receive funding from the measure.

House Republicans proposed $147.1 billion for the bill, compared to $209.9 billion in current base discretionary spending.

Legislative Branch:&nbsp;Senators approved spending $6.8 billion on the measure, which funds the U.S. Capitol Police, the Government Accountability Office and the Library of Congress and other accounts. That’s roughly equal to the $6.9 billion current funding level and the $6.8 billion that the House panel approved.

Military Construction-VA:&nbsp;Senators approved spending $154.4 billion in discretionary spending on the measure that funds the Veterans Affairs Department and military construction projects. The current funding level is $135.2 billion in discretionary funding and House Republicans proposed $155.7 billion.

State-Foreign Operations:&nbsp;The State Department, U.S. Agency for International Development, Peace Corps and several other programs would receive $58.4 billion during the upcoming fiscal year under the Senate proposal.

That’s a decrease from the current funding level of $61.8 billion. House Republicans approved $41.4 billion.

Transportation-HUD:&nbsp;Senators approved $88.1 billion for the Housing and Urban Development and Transportation departments. That would be a decrease from the current funding level of $90.96 billion. The House GOP allocated $65.2 billion.

The bill also funds the Federal Maritime Commission, National Transportation Safety Board and United States Interagency Council on Homelessness, among other smaller agencies.

By Jennifer Shutt<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/u-s-senate-spending-panel-sets-funding-levels-for-annual-bills/">Nebraska Examiner</a>WASHINGTON — A group of U.S. Senate Democrats on Thursday approved funding levels for dozens of federal departments for the fiscal year that starts Oct. 1 — setting up a likely clash with House Republicans as a deadline approaches later this year.The move to advance the spending plan was essential if Congress is going to avoid a partial government shutdown or a series of stopgap funding bills. But the levels agreed to by the Senate Appropriations Committee are significantly different from the ones their House Republican counterparts adopted last week. The panel approved the numbers following a party-line 15-13 vote.The next steps will include the panel debating all 12 annual government spending bills and later moving to negotiate those with the House. If Congress doesn’t pass all of the bills by Jan. 1, a provision from the debt limit bill would trigger a 1% across-the-board spending cut until Congress approves all the funding measures.Appropriations Chair Patty Murray, a Washington Democrat, noted the panel is restricted in what it can spend by the debt limit and budget agreement that President Joe Biden and Speaker Kevin McCarthy brokered earlier this year.That agreement set total spending for the fiscal year set to begin Oct. 1 at $1.59 trillion, with $886.3 billion going toward defense and $703.7 billion for domestic spending accounts.Murray said she is concerned about those limits, and indicated the committee will take up additional government spending bills to address national disaster response, border security and to boost aid to Ukraine.“The challenges we face under the limits imposed by the debt ceiling deal do not get any easier and they don’t get any better if we start going backwards, or if we abandon our return to regular order, or we write unserious bills.,” Murray said.“And as we all know, chaos only helps those who want to see our government shut down, including our adversaries — like the governments of Russia and China — who are rooting for Congress to descend into chaos,” Murray added.Collins votes against spending planMaine Republican Susan Collins, the ranking member, said she couldn’t support<a target="_blank" href="https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/fy24_302b_allocations.pdf">&nbsp;the spending levels</a>&nbsp;due to inadequate funding for defense and Homeland Security, though she thanked Murray for moving forward with the process.“Due to the inadequacy of funding for Homeland Security and the need for additional defense funding, unfortunately, I cannot support the 302(b) allocations,” Collins said, referring to the technical name for the dozen spending levels.But Collins agreed with a comment from Murray that the allocations the committee approved Thursday “are not the final story.”In the coming weeks, Collins said, she hopes Democrats and Republicans will reach an agreement “to ensure that our military and the Department of Homeland Security have the resources they need to keep our country safe.”“In the meantime, I want to second Chair Murray’s conclusion that we must continue to make progress in advancing the annual appropriations process in order to avoid a shutdown, a year-end omnibus, or damaging across-the-board funding cuts,” Collins added.U.S. House Republicans on that chamber’s Appropriations Committee&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/dc-spending-standoff-ahead-us-house-republicans-demand-130-billion-cuts%C2%A0">approved spending allocations&nbsp;</a>for fiscal 2024 that are significantly lower than the spending levels included in the debt limit deal. That will make conferencing the bills later this year more challenging than had the House GOP written the bills to the numbers in the bipartisan agreement.Here’s a look at what the Senate wants to spend during fiscal 2024:Agriculture:&nbsp;Senators want to spend $25.9 billion in discretionary funds on the measure that provides for the Department of Agriculture and the Food and Drug Administration. That’s an increase from the $25.5 billion Congress approved for the current fiscal year. House Republicans proposed $17.8 billion.Commerce-Justice-Science:&nbsp;Senators proposed $69.6 billion for the departments of Commerce and Justice, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the National Science Foundation. That’s a decrease from $83.9 billion in current funding. House Republicans proposed $58.7 billion.Defense:&nbsp;The Pentagon’s funding bill would get $823.3 billion during the upcoming fiscal year, an increase from $797.7 billion. The House GOP proposed $826.4 billion.Energy-Water:&nbsp;The Senate panel approved $56.7 billion in spending for the bill that funds the Energy Department as well as more than a dozen agencies, including the Appalachian Regional Commission, Army Corps of Engineers, Bureau of Reclamation, Denali Commission, Great Lakes Authority, Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Tennessee Valley Authority.The spending level is an increase from the current level of $54.7 billion. The House Appropriations Committee approved $52.4 billion.Financial Services and General Government:&nbsp;Senators approved $16.8 billion, a decrease from the current funding level of $27.7 billion. House Republicans proposed $11.3 billion.The bill funds the Treasury Department, federal judiciary and several agencies, including the Executive Office of the President, Federal Communications Commission, Federal Trade Commission, National Archives and Records Administration and the Securities and Exchange Commission.Homeland Security:&nbsp;Senators approved $56.9 billion in discretionary spending for the bill that funds the Department of Homeland Security, which includes Customs and Border Protection, the Federal Emergency Management Agency and Immigration and Customs Enforcement. That’s a decrease from $60.7 billion in current funding. House Republicans proposed $62.8 billion.Interior-Environment:&nbsp;The Senate Appropriations Committee approved $37.9 billion for the Interior Department, Environmental Protection Agency, Forest Service, Indian Health Service, Smithsonian Institution and a couple dozen other federal programs that are funded within the measure.The proposed funding level would mark a decrease from the current spending level of $40.5 billion. The House panel proposed $25.4 billion.Labor-Health and Human Services-Education:&nbsp;The Senate spending panel approved $195.2 billion in funding for the departments of Education, Health and Human Services and Labor.The Corporation for Public Broadcasting, Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission, National Labor Relations Board and Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission are some of the smaller federal agencies that receive funding from the measure.House Republicans proposed $147.1 billion for the bill, compared to $209.9 billion in current base discretionary spending.Legislative Branch:&nbsp;Senators approved spending $6.8 billion on the measure, which funds the U.S. Capitol Police, the Government Accountability Office and the Library of Congress and other accounts. That’s roughly equal to the $6.9 billion current funding level and the $6.8 billion that the House panel approved.Military Construction-VA:&nbsp;Senators approved spending $154.4 billion in discretionary spending on the measure that funds the Veterans Affairs Department and military construction projects. The current funding level is $135.2 billion in discretionary funding and House Republicans proposed $155.7 billion.State-Foreign Operations:&nbsp;The State Department, U.S. Agency for International Development, Peace Corps and several other programs would receive $58.4 billion during the upcoming fiscal year under the Senate proposal.That’s a decrease from the current funding level of $61.8 billion. House Republicans approved $41.4 billion.Transportation-HUD:&nbsp;Senators approved $88.1 billion for the Housing and Urban Development and Transportation departments. That would be a decrease from the current funding level of $90.96 billion. The House GOP allocated $65.2 billion.The bill also funds the Federal Maritime Commission, National Transportation Safety Board and United States Interagency Council on Homelessness, among other smaller agencies.

U.S. Senate spending panel sets funding levels for annual bills

By JENNIFER SHUTT&nbsp;&nbsp; <a href="https://kansasreflector.com/2023/03/30/u-s-judge-rules-insurers-dont-have-to-cover-many-free-preventive-health-services/">States Newsroom</a>

WASHINGTON — One year after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the constitutional right to an abortion, the courts rather than a divided Congress are leading the way on decisions on reproductive rights that would affect the entire nation.

Congress has not enacted federal legislation to either preserve reproductive rights or to restrict abortion in the year since the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization ruling nullified the landmark Roe v. Wade decision. And that’s unlikely to change anytime soon.

Despite many Republicans campaigning for the U.S. House on promises of a nationwide abortion ban, the chamber hasn’t brought such a bill to the floor six months after the GOP took control.

And in the U.S. Senate, Democrats who control that chamber don’t have the 60 votes needed to overcome the legislative filibuster, leading to a stalemate on abortion legislation as well as&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/democrats-congress-renew-push-protect-access-birth-control">protections for birth control access.&nbsp;</a>

The next nationwide policy on abortion is much more likely to be written by the same U.S. Supreme Court that wrote one year ago “the authority to regulate abortion is returned to the people and their elected representatives.” That court is dominated 6-3 by conservative justices.

“To the extent that Congress continues to be inept in many regards in legislating, it falls to the courts,” said Suzanne Bell, assistant professor in the Department of Population, Family and Reproductive Health at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

The stalemate within Congress is in sharp contrast to&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/see-data-reproductive-rights?eType=EmailBlastContent&amp;eId=12326989-bb86-442e-9f90-a46c19a27854">new laws from dozens of state legislatures</a>, where lawmakers have moved to either restrict abortion access or solidify it within the last year. But many of those proposals have landed in the state court systems, with some ending up at a state’s Supreme Court.

The nine justices on the U.S. Supreme Court are expected to take up a case late this year or next spring on access to the abortion pill, known as mifepristone or its brand name Mifeprex, after a federal circuit court in New Orleans rules on the appeal. It likely will be the highest-profile court case on reproductive rights since Dobbs to reach the Supreme Court.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved mifepristone in 2000 as part of a two-drug regimen that’s currently used up to 10 weeks in a pregnancy.

Alliance Defending Freedom, an anti-abortion legal organization, filed a lawsuit in November seeking to have that authorization overturned nationwide.

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas Judge Matthew Joseph Kacsmaryk, who was nominated by former President Donald Trump, found their arguments compelling and&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/biden-administration-appeals-judges-ruling-ordering-abortion-pill-us-market">stayed the FDA’s approval in early April</a>.

The U.S. Justice Department appealed the case to the 5th Circuit Court, which&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://lailluminator.com/2023/05/17/three-judge-panel-in-u-s-appeals-court-hears-arguments-in-abortion-pill-case/">heard oral arguments in May&nbsp;</a>and could rule any day.

That ruling will likely move to the U.S. Supreme Court after that.

Bell said in an interview that it’s odd to see the case in the courts system, calling it “disheartening,” though she expects that could become more common.

“This is such a strange overreach of the courts or even Congress, if Congress were to be involved in this mifepristone case,” she said.

Bell also cautioned that as politicians increasingly focus on winning or losing the debate&nbsp; — whether in the courts or in the legislature — they often lose sight of the impact of their decisions, and the effect changes in access have on Americans’ actual lives as well as public health.

“We get caught up in some of the politics and the legislation and the litigation around this issue. But in the meantime it’s having real impacts on birthing people and families,” Bell said.

In the year since Dobbs, Republicans and Democrats in Congress have introduced dozens of bills that would either expand reproductive rights or restrict access to abortion, though none stand a chance of becoming law anytime soon.

Republicans have introduced more than 80 bills that address abortion in some way, including a proposal from Missouri Rep. Ann Wagner that would require health care providers to give the same level of care “to preserve the life and health of the child” if an abortion were to result in a live birth.

House Republicans&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/us-house-republicans-push-through-two-anti-abortion-measures-first-work-week">passed the bill in January</a>, though it’s highly unlikely that it would move through the Democratically controlled Senate. House Republicans, however, have opted not to bring up any of the bills proposing a nationwide ban on abortion.

Democrats have reintroduced legislation that would provide nationwide protection for abortion access, though it hasn’t gotten a vote in the Senate this Congress and would be unlikely to secure the votes needed to move past the legislative filibuster.

The so-called Women’s Health Protection Act would bar local, state or federal governments from restricting access to abortion before viability, roughly 22 to 24 weeks gestation. After that threshold, governments couldn’t implement restrictions when “in the good-faith medical judgment of the treating health care provider, continuation of the pregnancy would pose a risk to the pregnant patient’s life or health.”

The nature of a divided Congress has led some members to turn their attention toward the annual government funding process as one way to change nationwide policy on abortion.

Attempts to do that in the past have been unsuccessful at shaking up the status quo, but Republicans in the House are attempting to bar the Defense and Veterans Affairs Departments from providing abortions — even in cases of rape, incest or the life of the pregnant patient.

The House GOP also added language to the annual funding bill for the FDA that would bar it from allowing pharmacies, including mail-order pharmacies, to apply to dispense abortion medication the same way they dispense other prescriptions. The FDA proposed that change in January and some pharmacy chains have begun the process.

Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America praised House Republican appropriators for adding “strong language in the Agriculture Appropriations Bill that protects women and girls from the dangers of chemical abortion.”

On barring female troops and veterans from having access to abortion in the case of rape, incest or their lives, SBA Pro-Life America thanked Republicans on the committee “for standing up for longstanding law and for the unborn by prohibiting funding for Biden’s illegal rule that would force taxpayers to pay for abortions at Veterans hospitals.”

Federal spending laws have barred the use of taxpayer dollars to pay for abortions with exceptions for rape, incest and the life of the patient since the 1970s. The provision is generally referred to as the Hyde amendment and applies to dozens of federal programs, including federal employee health care, Medicaid, Medicare and foreign aid.

The House Republicans’ decision is a change from September 2022, when&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/republicans-congress-say-theyd-keep-federal-abortion-funding-cases-rape-incest">numerous Republicans on the spending panels said</a>&nbsp;they didn’t anticipate changing how the provisions were applied.

While the House GOP proposals are unlikely to become law, they could throw a wrench into the annual government funding process, increasing the odds of a partial government shutdown later this year.

When Democrats were in control of the U.S. House during the first two years of the Biden administration, they removed the language that limited when the federal government could pay for abortion from all of their bills.

But the limitation that the federal government would only pay for abortions under the three exceptions was added back into the final bills at the insistence of Republicans.

Autumn Katz, managing senior counsel of U.S. Litigation at the Center for Reproductive Rights, said that while Congress may not be able to enact legislation protecting reproductive rights at the moment, the hearings, bill introductions and debate are “important work.”

“There’s the filibuster issue in the Senate, and things have changed in the House, so enacting protection for abortion I think is difficult right now,” Katz said. “But I do think it’s important to emphasize that Congress is not sticking its head in the sand.”

Katz said she expects cases will continue in the federal courts system, especially given that some states are seeking to restrict when and how residents travel to access reproductive health care.

“The idea it’s now settled and will be resolved in individual states is really kind of a cynical view because there are so many questions,” Katz said. “And so I think there is bound to continue to be litigation and confusion and chaos.”

Access to medication abortion is one of the areas of ongoing confusion amid a patchwork of state laws, an ongoing federal court case and the FDA announcing in January that pharmacies could apply to dispense mifepristone like other prescription drugs.

More than 50 Democrats in Congress&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://goldman.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/goldman.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/final-goldman_chu-letter-protect-access-to-medication-abortion_june-14-2023.pdf">wrote to&nbsp;</a>five major pharmacy chains earlier this month, encouraging them to apply to dispense mifepristone like other prescription drugs.

“We are concerned that your respective companies have not yet indicated plans to seek certification to dispense mifepristone, consistent with federal guidelines and regulations, as this could help increase access to needed medication,” they wrote. “Your continued silence is unacceptable as it is misaligned with your publicly stated values in support of equal access to health care and of gender equality.”

A possible U.S. Supreme Court opinion on access to mifepristone could decide the issue if the justices rule to overturn its 2000 approval, or revert to prescribing and dosage instructions that were in place before 2016.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/6/1656088183967.png" alt="People protest in response to the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization ruling in front of the U.S. Supreme Court on June 24, 2022, in Washington, D.C photo courtesy CSPAN" />
 <figcaption>People protest in response to the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization ruling in front of the U.S. Supreme Court on June 24, 2022, in Washington, D.C photo courtesy CSPAN</figcaption>
 </figure>By JENNIFER SHUTT&nbsp;&nbsp; <a href="https://kansasreflector.com/2023/03/30/u-s-judge-rules-insurers-dont-have-to-cover-many-free-preventive-health-services/">States Newsroom</a>WASHINGTON — One year after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the constitutional right to an abortion, the courts rather than a divided Congress are leading the way on decisions on reproductive rights that would affect the entire nation.Congress has not enacted federal legislation to either preserve reproductive rights or to restrict abortion in the year since the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization ruling nullified the landmark Roe v. Wade decision. And that’s unlikely to change anytime soon.Despite many Republicans campaigning for the U.S. House on promises of a nationwide abortion ban, the chamber hasn’t brought such a bill to the floor six months after the GOP took control.And in the U.S. Senate, Democrats who control that chamber don’t have the 60 votes needed to overcome the legislative filibuster, leading to a stalemate on abortion legislation as well as&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/democrats-congress-renew-push-protect-access-birth-control">protections for birth control access.&nbsp;</a>The next nationwide policy on abortion is much more likely to be written by the same U.S. Supreme Court that wrote one year ago “the authority to regulate abortion is returned to the people and their elected representatives.” That court is dominated 6-3 by conservative justices.“To the extent that Congress continues to be inept in many regards in legislating, it falls to the courts,” said Suzanne Bell, assistant professor in the Department of Population, Family and Reproductive Health at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.The stalemate within Congress is in sharp contrast to&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/see-data-reproductive-rights?eType=EmailBlastContent&amp;eId=12326989-bb86-442e-9f90-a46c19a27854">new laws from dozens of state legislatures</a>, where lawmakers have moved to either restrict abortion access or solidify it within the last year. But many of those proposals have landed in the state court systems, with some ending up at a state’s Supreme Court.<h2>Abortion pill case</h2>The nine justices on the U.S. Supreme Court are expected to take up a case late this year or next spring on access to the abortion pill, known as mifepristone or its brand name Mifeprex, after a federal circuit court in New Orleans rules on the appeal. It likely will be the highest-profile court case on reproductive rights since Dobbs to reach the Supreme Court.The U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved mifepristone in 2000 as part of a two-drug regimen that’s currently used up to 10 weeks in a pregnancy.Alliance Defending Freedom, an anti-abortion legal organization, filed a lawsuit in November seeking to have that authorization overturned nationwide.U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas Judge Matthew Joseph Kacsmaryk, who was nominated by former President Donald Trump, found their arguments compelling and&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/biden-administration-appeals-judges-ruling-ordering-abortion-pill-us-market">stayed the FDA’s approval in early April</a>.The U.S. Justice Department appealed the case to the 5th Circuit Court, which&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://lailluminator.com/2023/05/17/three-judge-panel-in-u-s-appeals-court-hears-arguments-in-abortion-pill-case/">heard oral arguments in May&nbsp;</a>and could rule any day.That ruling will likely move to the U.S. Supreme Court after that.Bell said in an interview that it’s odd to see the case in the courts system, calling it “disheartening,” though she expects that could become more common.“This is such a strange overreach of the courts or even Congress, if Congress were to be involved in this mifepristone case,” she said.Bell also cautioned that as politicians increasingly focus on winning or losing the debate&nbsp; — whether in the courts or in the legislature — they often lose sight of the impact of their decisions, and the effect changes in access have on Americans’ actual lives as well as public health.“We get caught up in some of the politics and the legislation and the litigation around this issue. But in the meantime it’s having real impacts on birthing people and families,” Bell said.<h2>Cascade of bill introductions</h2>In the year since Dobbs, Republicans and Democrats in Congress have introduced dozens of bills that would either expand reproductive rights or restrict access to abortion, though none stand a chance of becoming law anytime soon.Republicans have introduced more than 80 bills that address abortion in some way, including a proposal from Missouri Rep. Ann Wagner that would require health care providers to give the same level of care “to preserve the life and health of the child” if an abortion were to result in a live birth.House Republicans&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/us-house-republicans-push-through-two-anti-abortion-measures-first-work-week">passed the bill in January</a>, though it’s highly unlikely that it would move through the Democratically controlled Senate. House Republicans, however, have opted not to bring up any of the bills proposing a nationwide ban on abortion.Democrats have reintroduced legislation that would provide nationwide protection for abortion access, though it hasn’t gotten a vote in the Senate this Congress and would be unlikely to secure the votes needed to move past the legislative filibuster.The so-called Women’s Health Protection Act would bar local, state or federal governments from restricting access to abortion before viability, roughly 22 to 24 weeks gestation. After that threshold, governments couldn’t implement restrictions when “in the good-faith medical judgment of the treating health care provider, continuation of the pregnancy would pose a risk to the pregnant patient’s life or health.”<h2>Spending bills</h2>The nature of a divided Congress has led some members to turn their attention toward the annual government funding process as one way to change nationwide policy on abortion.Attempts to do that in the past have been unsuccessful at shaking up the status quo, but Republicans in the House are attempting to bar the Defense and Veterans Affairs Departments from providing abortions — even in cases of rape, incest or the life of the pregnant patient.The House GOP also added language to the annual funding bill for the FDA that would bar it from allowing pharmacies, including mail-order pharmacies, to apply to dispense abortion medication the same way they dispense other prescriptions. The FDA proposed that change in January and some pharmacy chains have begun the process.Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America praised House Republican appropriators for adding “strong language in the Agriculture Appropriations Bill that protects women and girls from the dangers of chemical abortion.”On barring female troops and veterans from having access to abortion in the case of rape, incest or their lives, SBA Pro-Life America thanked Republicans on the committee “for standing up for longstanding law and for the unborn by prohibiting funding for Biden’s illegal rule that would force taxpayers to pay for abortions at Veterans hospitals.”Federal spending laws have barred the use of taxpayer dollars to pay for abortions with exceptions for rape, incest and the life of the patient since the 1970s. The provision is generally referred to as the Hyde amendment and applies to dozens of federal programs, including federal employee health care, Medicaid, Medicare and foreign aid.The House Republicans’ decision is a change from September 2022, when&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/republicans-congress-say-theyd-keep-federal-abortion-funding-cases-rape-incest">numerous Republicans on the spending panels said</a>&nbsp;they didn’t anticipate changing how the provisions were applied.While the House GOP proposals are unlikely to become law, they could throw a wrench into the annual government funding process, increasing the odds of a partial government shutdown later this year.When Democrats were in control of the U.S. House during the first two years of the Biden administration, they removed the language that limited when the federal government could pay for abortion from all of their bills.But the limitation that the federal government would only pay for abortions under the three exceptions was added back into the final bills at the insistence of Republicans.<h2>‘Not sticking its head in the sand’</h2>Autumn Katz, managing senior counsel of U.S. Litigation at the Center for Reproductive Rights, said that while Congress may not be able to enact legislation protecting reproductive rights at the moment, the hearings, bill introductions and debate are “important work.”“There’s the filibuster issue in the Senate, and things have changed in the House, so enacting protection for abortion I think is difficult right now,” Katz said. “But I do think it’s important to emphasize that Congress is not sticking its head in the sand.”Katz said she expects cases will continue in the federal courts system, especially given that some states are seeking to restrict when and how residents travel to access reproductive health care.“The idea it’s now settled and will be resolved in individual states is really kind of a cynical view because there are so many questions,” Katz said. “And so I think there is bound to continue to be litigation and confusion and chaos.”Access to medication abortion is one of the areas of ongoing confusion amid a patchwork of state laws, an ongoing federal court case and the FDA announcing in January that pharmacies could apply to dispense mifepristone like other prescription drugs.More than 50 Democrats in Congress&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://goldman.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/goldman.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/final-goldman_chu-letter-protect-access-to-medication-abortion_june-14-2023.pdf">wrote to&nbsp;</a>five major pharmacy chains earlier this month, encouraging them to apply to dispense mifepristone like other prescription drugs.“We are concerned that your respective companies have not yet indicated plans to seek certification to dispense mifepristone, consistent with federal guidelines and regulations, as this could help increase access to needed medication,” they wrote. “Your continued silence is unacceptable as it is misaligned with your publicly stated values in support of equal access to health care and of gender equality.”A possible U.S. Supreme Court opinion on access to mifepristone could decide the issue if the justices rule to overturn its 2000 approval, or revert to prescribing and dosage instructions that were in place before 2016.

A year after Dobbs: Congress takes a back seat on federal abortion policy

By&nbsp;CINDY GONZALEZ <a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/woman-who-shouted-shame-following-critical-gun-bill-passage-is-banned-from-nebraska-capitol/">Nebraska Examiner</a>

OMAHA — The American Civil Liberties Union of Nebraska has elevated Mindy Rush Chipman to be executive director of the statewide advocacy organization.

Rush Chipman joined ACLU Nebraska last year as legal director and shortly afterward was appointed as interim director.

The organization’s board of directors conducted a national search for the top spot following the resignation last year of Danielle Conrad, who had headed the agency since 2014 but left to run successfully for her former seat in the Nebraska Legislature.&nbsp;

A civil rights attorney, Rush Chipman previously led the Lincoln Commission on Human Rights and served in leadership roles at the Immigrant Legal Center and Legal Aid of Nebraska.&nbsp;

In addition to speaking on various bills under consideration by the Legislature, Rush Chipman over the past year has helped lead efforts to support transgender rights in Nebraska and to distribute information about&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/tenemos-derechos-and-other-public-messaging-welcomes-immigrant-nebraskans/">immigrant rights in different languages</a>.

Rush Chipman named Rose Godinez to fill ACLU Nebraska’s role as legal director. Since joining the chapter in 2017, Godinez has&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2022/12/21/aclu-nebraska-report-omaha-and-lincoln-courts-still-creating-modern-day-debtor-prisons/">worked on</a>&nbsp;policy and litigation, focusing in part on immigrant rights, police practices and racial justice.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2019/6/1561548693198.png" alt="" />
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure>By&nbsp;CINDY GONZALEZ <a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/woman-who-shouted-shame-following-critical-gun-bill-passage-is-banned-from-nebraska-capitol/">Nebraska Examiner</a>OMAHA — The American Civil Liberties Union of Nebraska has elevated Mindy Rush Chipman to be executive director of the statewide advocacy organization.Rush Chipman joined ACLU Nebraska last year as legal director and shortly afterward was appointed as interim director.The organization’s board of directors conducted a national search for the top spot following the resignation last year of Danielle Conrad, who had headed the agency since 2014 but left to run successfully for her former seat in the Nebraska Legislature.&nbsp;<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/6/1687448524102.png" alt="Mindy Rush Chipman, executive director of the ACLU of Nebraska (Courtesy of Rebecca S. Gratz)" />
 <figcaption>Mindy Rush Chipman, executive director of the ACLU of Nebraska (Courtesy of Rebecca S. Gratz)</figcaption>
 </figure>A civil rights attorney, Rush Chipman previously led the Lincoln Commission on Human Rights and served in leadership roles at the Immigrant Legal Center and Legal Aid of Nebraska.&nbsp;In addition to speaking on various bills under consideration by the Legislature, Rush Chipman over the past year has helped lead efforts to support transgender rights in Nebraska and to distribute information about&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/tenemos-derechos-and-other-public-messaging-welcomes-immigrant-nebraskans/">immigrant rights in different languages</a>.Rush Chipman named Rose Godinez to fill ACLU Nebraska’s role as legal director. Since joining the chapter in 2017, Godinez has&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2022/12/21/aclu-nebraska-report-omaha-and-lincoln-courts-still-creating-modern-day-debtor-prisons/">worked on</a>&nbsp;policy and litigation, focusing in part on immigrant rights, police practices and racial justice.Her research helped secure support for a 2020 law requiring anti-bias training for law enforcement officers and a recently passed law protecting student rights to wear natural hair, headdresses and tribal regalia.“These are two proven leaders who are both well positioned to keep working alongside our communities to build power and achieve change,” said ACLU board president Ashlei Spivey. “I look forward to seeing the team’s continued impact in the months and years to come.”