WASHINGTON (AP) — House Republicans on Friday narrowly passed legislation that would fulfill a campaign promise to give parents a role in what's taught in public schools. It has little chance in the Democrat-run Senate and critics said it would propel a far-right movement that has led to book bans, restrictions aimed at transgender students and raucous school board meetings across the country.

Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif. who made the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/parents-rights-schools-woke-mccarthy-congress-f4643fa74dc4d82067c339fe950c3080">Parents’ Bill of Rights Act</a>&nbsp;a priority during the early weeks of his tenure, said Republicans were "keeping our promise, our commitment to America, that parents will have a say in their kids’ education.” The bill passed 213-208, with five Republicans — mostly members of the House Freedom Caucus — voting against it.

It would require schools to publish course studies and a list of books kept in libraries, as well as affirm parents' ability to meet with educators, speak at school board meetings and examine school budgets.

In the Senate, Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., promised that the legislation would face a “dead end.” He said it was further evidence that the House GOP had been overtaken by “hard right MAGA ideologues” — referencing former President Donald Trump’s “Make America Great Again” campaign slogan.

The bill was an&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/politics-us-republican-party-united-states-house-of-representatives-kevin-mccarthy-b9fcfd11427a695fe2eb49e36988f1a0">early test of unity</a>&nbsp;for the 222 House Republicans and their thin majority. The measure showed how the adoption of an open amendment process in the House —&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/politics-united-states-government-kevin-mccarthy-house-of-representatives-4922d22689eb79d5d05c1b49ca733123">a concession McCarthy</a>&nbsp;made to win hard-line conservatives’ support for his speakership — holds the potential to send legislation down unpredictable twists and turns.

Rep. Lauren Boebert, R-Colo., successfully added amendments that would require schools to report when transgender girls join girls' athletics teams and if trans girls are allowed to use girls’ school restrooms or locker rooms. The bill would also require elementary and middle schools get parents' consent to change a child’s gender designation, pronouns or name.

Advocates for LGBTQ people said the proposal poses a threat to LGBTQ students by potentially forcing them to come out to their families, which can sometimes lead to abuse or abandonment.

“It’s part of a pattern of attempts we’re seeing where the right wing of the Republican Party is really trying to marginalize LGBTQ people,” said David Stacy, the government affairs director for Human Rights Campaign.

House Freedom Caucus members unsuccessfully tried to add provisions that called for abolishing Department of Education programs in schools and endorsed vouchers that would send public funds to private schools.

Rep. Thomas Massie, R—Kentucky, pointed to the 100-plus Republicans who supported his amendment to terminate the department's authority and said “it adds a lot of momentum.”

In the wake of the coronavirus pandemic and racial justice protests, conservatives’ intense focus on parental control over public school classrooms has migrated from&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/health-education-coronavirus-pandemic-school-boards-e41350b7d9e3662d279c2dad287f7009">local school board fights</a>&nbsp;to Republican-held statehouses and now to the floor of the U.S. House.

“Parents want schools focused on reading, writing and math, not woke politics,” Rep. Mary Miller, R-Ill., said during earlier debate.

Public school education in the U.S.&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/religion-education-gender-identity-0e2ca2cf0ef7d7bc6ef5b125f1ee0969">has long invited concern</a>&nbsp;among some parents — usually conservative — over what children are taught. Historically, the term “parents' rights” has been used in schoolhouse debates over homeschooling, sex education and even the teaching of languages other than English.

Recently, Republicans have tapped into frustrations over remote learning and mask mandates in schools, as well as social conservatives' opposition to certain teachings on race that are broadly labeled as&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/what-is-critical-race-theory-08f5d0a0489c7d6eab7d9a238365d2c1">critical race theory</a>, a way of thinking about America’s history through the lens of racism.

<a href="https://apnews.com/article/election-day-school-boards-1e1f556e51de3f25c6f6eedb6f7a0ebe">Republican Glenn Youngkin</a>&nbsp;was elected as Virginia's governor in 2021 on the slogan “Parents matter" and political action committees have poured millions of dollars into school board races nationwide.

McCarthy made the bill a big part of his 2022 election pitch to voters to give Republicans a House majority. But the GOP's expectation of a sweeping victory never materialized, and even in school board races, conservative groups' goal of electing hundreds of “parents’ rights” activists&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/elections-education-race-and-ethnicity-racial-injustice-school-boards-bed36a1460957cb6be4df9d18583a765">largely fell short</a>.

But McCarthy pressed ahead with the bill, making&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/parents-rights-schools-woke-mccarthy-congress-f4643fa74dc4d82067c339fe950c3080">a public appeal</a>&nbsp;earlier this month at an event that featured a chalkboard, schoolchildren and parents who have been on the frontlines of the cause.

When asked about the five Republican votes against the bill, McCarthy contended that “Democrats are too extreme to believe that parents should have a say” in their children's education.

Democrats said they want to foster parental involvement, but said the bill caters to a vocal minority set on controlling and politicizing classrooms. They derided it as the “Politics over Parents Act."

Attempted book bans and restrictions at school and public libraries surged to their highest number in 2022 since the American Library Association began keeping data 20 years ago,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/book-bans-american-library-association-f84ac6fe3f8e3238fc54931bc1a5e054">according to a new report</a>&nbsp;the organization released this week.

“We’ll fight against this legislation. We’ll fight against the banning of books, fight against the bullying of children from any community, and certainly from the LGBTQ+ community,” House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries said.

Rep. Suzanne Bonamici, D-Ore. offered alternative legislation that she argued would foster parental involvement, encourage collaboration with educators and make schools welcoming places to families, including those with LGBTQ students.

“We want parents to be involved — peacefully,” she said.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/3/1679679549976.png" alt="House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, made the "parents' bill of rights” a plank in his midterm election pitch to voters to give Republicans a House majority-photo courtesy House Speaker's office" />
 <figcaption>House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, made the "parents' bill of rights” a plank in his midterm election pitch to voters to give Republicans a House majority-photo courtesy House Speaker's office</figcaption>
 </figure>WASHINGTON (AP) — House Republicans on Friday narrowly passed legislation that would fulfill a campaign promise to give parents a role in what's taught in public schools. It has little chance in the Democrat-run Senate and critics said it would propel a far-right movement that has led to book bans, restrictions aimed at transgender students and raucous school board meetings across the country.<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">American schools 𝘮𝘶𝘴𝘵 be accountable to American parents. RT if you agree. <a href="https://t.co/r1eyWbNF2G">pic.twitter.com/r1eyWbNF2G</a>&mdash; House Rules Committee (@RulesReps) <a href="https://twitter.com/RulesReps/status/1639258996967186439?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 24, 2023</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif. who made the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/parents-rights-schools-woke-mccarthy-congress-f4643fa74dc4d82067c339fe950c3080">Parents’ Bill of Rights Act</a>&nbsp;a priority during the early weeks of his tenure, said Republicans were "keeping our promise, our commitment to America, that parents will have a say in their kids’ education.” The bill passed 213-208, with five Republicans — mostly members of the House Freedom Caucus — voting against it.It would require schools to publish course studies and a list of books kept in libraries, as well as affirm parents' ability to meet with educators, speak at school board meetings and examine school budgets.In the Senate, Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., promised that the legislation would face a “dead end.” He said it was further evidence that the House GOP had been overtaken by “hard right MAGA ideologues” — referencing former President Donald Trump’s “Make America Great Again” campaign slogan.The bill was an&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/politics-us-republican-party-united-states-house-of-representatives-kevin-mccarthy-b9fcfd11427a695fe2eb49e36988f1a0">early test of unity</a>&nbsp;for the 222 House Republicans and their thin majority. The measure showed how the adoption of an open amendment process in the House —&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/politics-united-states-government-kevin-mccarthy-house-of-representatives-4922d22689eb79d5d05c1b49ca733123">a concession McCarthy</a>&nbsp;made to win hard-line conservatives’ support for his speakership — holds the potential to send legislation down unpredictable twists and turns.Rep. Lauren Boebert, R-Colo., successfully added amendments that would require schools to report when transgender girls join girls' athletics teams and if trans girls are allowed to use girls’ school restrooms or locker rooms. The bill would also require elementary and middle schools get parents' consent to change a child’s gender designation, pronouns or name.<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">The House has passed H.R. 5, the Parents Bill of Rights Act.<a href="https://twitter.com/HouseGOP?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@HouseGOP</a> is working to ensure better educational outcomes for our kids by embracing American parents, not casting them aside. <a href="https://t.co/Zfdu9kGj13">pic.twitter.com/Zfdu9kGj13</a>&mdash; House Rules Committee (@RulesReps) <a href="https://twitter.com/RulesReps/status/1639284734172831744?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 24, 2023</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>Advocates for LGBTQ people said the proposal poses a threat to LGBTQ students by potentially forcing them to come out to their families, which can sometimes lead to abuse or abandonment.“It’s part of a pattern of attempts we’re seeing where the right wing of the Republican Party is really trying to marginalize LGBTQ people,” said David Stacy, the government affairs director for Human Rights Campaign.House Freedom Caucus members unsuccessfully tried to add provisions that called for abolishing Department of Education programs in schools and endorsed vouchers that would send public funds to private schools.Rep. Thomas Massie, R—Kentucky, pointed to the 100-plus Republicans who supported his amendment to terminate the department's authority and said “it adds a lot of momentum.”In the wake of the coronavirus pandemic and racial justice protests, conservatives’ intense focus on parental control over public school classrooms has migrated from&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/health-education-coronavirus-pandemic-school-boards-e41350b7d9e3662d279c2dad287f7009">local school board fights</a>&nbsp;to Republican-held statehouses and now to the floor of the U.S. House.“Parents want schools focused on reading, writing and math, not woke politics,” Rep. Mary Miller, R-Ill., said during earlier debate.Public school education in the U.S.&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/religion-education-gender-identity-0e2ca2cf0ef7d7bc6ef5b125f1ee0969">has long invited concern</a>&nbsp;among some parents — usually conservative — over what children are taught. Historically, the term “parents' rights” has been used in schoolhouse debates over homeschooling, sex education and even the teaching of languages other than English.Recently, Republicans have tapped into frustrations over remote learning and mask mandates in schools, as well as social conservatives' opposition to certain teachings on race that are broadly labeled as&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/what-is-critical-race-theory-08f5d0a0489c7d6eab7d9a238365d2c1">critical race theory</a>, a way of thinking about America’s history through the lens of racism.<a href="https://apnews.com/article/election-day-school-boards-1e1f556e51de3f25c6f6eedb6f7a0ebe">Republican Glenn Youngkin</a>&nbsp;was elected as Virginia's governor in 2021 on the slogan “Parents matter" and political action committees have poured millions of dollars into school board races nationwide.McCarthy made the bill a big part of his 2022 election pitch to voters to give Republicans a House majority. But the GOP's expectation of a sweeping victory never materialized, and even in school board races, conservative groups' goal of electing hundreds of “parents’ rights” activists&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/elections-education-race-and-ethnicity-racial-injustice-school-boards-bed36a1460957cb6be4df9d18583a765">largely fell short</a>.But McCarthy pressed ahead with the bill, making&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/parents-rights-schools-woke-mccarthy-congress-f4643fa74dc4d82067c339fe950c3080">a public appeal</a>&nbsp;earlier this month at an event that featured a chalkboard, schoolchildren and parents who have been on the frontlines of the cause.When asked about the five Republican votes against the bill, McCarthy contended that “Democrats are too extreme to believe that parents should have a say” in their children's education.Democrats said they want to foster parental involvement, but said the bill caters to a vocal minority set on controlling and politicizing classrooms. They derided it as the “Politics over Parents Act."Attempted book bans and restrictions at school and public libraries surged to their highest number in 2022 since the American Library Association began keeping data 20 years ago,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/book-bans-american-library-association-f84ac6fe3f8e3238fc54931bc1a5e054">according to a new report</a>&nbsp;the organization released this week.“We’ll fight against this legislation. We’ll fight against the banning of books, fight against the bullying of children from any community, and certainly from the LGBTQ+ community,” House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries said.Rep. Suzanne Bonamici, D-Ore. offered alternative legislation that she argued would foster parental involvement, encourage collaboration with educators and make schools welcoming places to families, including those with LGBTQ students.“We want parents to be involved — peacefully,” she said.

House passes parents' rights bill in clash over schools

By PAUL HAMMEL <a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/time-running-out-to-apply-for-rebates-for-installing-reverse-osmosis-systems/">Nebraska Examiner</a>

LINCOLN — Nebraskans with high 
nitrate levels in private wells have until March 31 to apply for rebates
 to help with the installation of reverse osmosis systems to clean up 
drinking water.

State rebates of up to $4,000 are available to owners of private 
wells with drinking water test levels above 10 parts per million (ppm) 
of nitrate, the level deemed hazardous to humans.

The rebate program, administered by the Nebraska Department of 
Environment and Energy, was funded through the federal&nbsp; American Rescue Plan Act. It was authorized last year by the Nebraska 
Legislature.

Applicants must ensure that their <a target="_blank" href="https://nednr.nebraska.gov/dynamic/Wells/Wells">well is registered</a> with the Nebraska Department of Natural Resources.

They also must <a target="_blank" href="https://www.nebraska.gov/dhhs/water-test-kits/private.html">submit water quality data</a> from the State laboratory. Tests can be dated no earlier than January 1, 2022.

Applications must also submit a cost estimate from a qualified plumber or installer.

NDEE will disperse approved rebates after successful installation of a
 reverse osmosis system and demonstration, via a water test, of 
effective removal of nitrate to a level below 10 ppm.

Requirements and application forms for the Reverse Osmosis Rebate 
Program can be found on NDEE’s website at 
http://dee.ne.gov/Publica.nsf/pages/22- 051.

Inquiries can also be made to NDEE State Revolving Fund Section Supervisor Steve McNulty at steve.mcnulty@nebraska.gov or 402-471-4200.

By PAUL HAMMEL <a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/time-running-out-to-apply-for-rebates-for-installing-reverse-osmosis-systems/">Nebraska Examiner</a>LINCOLN — Nebraskans with high 
nitrate levels in private wells have until March 31 to apply for rebates
 to help with the installation of reverse osmosis systems to clean up 
drinking water.State rebates of up to $4,000 are available to owners of private 
wells with drinking water test levels above 10 parts per million (ppm) 
of nitrate, the level deemed hazardous to humans.<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/3/1679676449852.jpg" alt="The rebate program was funded through the American Rescue Plan Act. Pixabay photo" />
 <figcaption>The rebate program was funded through the American Rescue Plan Act. Pixabay photo</figcaption>
 </figure>The rebate program, administered by the Nebraska Department of 
Environment and Energy, was funded through the federal&nbsp; American Rescue Plan Act. It was authorized last year by the Nebraska 
Legislature.Applicants must ensure that their <a target="_blank" href="https://nednr.nebraska.gov/dynamic/Wells/Wells">well is registered</a> with the Nebraska Department of Natural Resources.They also must <a target="_blank" href="https://www.nebraska.gov/dhhs/water-test-kits/private.html">submit water quality data</a> from the State laboratory. Tests can be dated no earlier than January 1, 2022.Applications must also submit a cost estimate from a qualified plumber or installer.NDEE will disperse approved rebates after successful installation of a
 reverse osmosis system and demonstration, via a water test, of 
effective removal of nitrate to a level below 10 ppm.Requirements and application forms for the Reverse Osmosis Rebate 
Program can be found on NDEE’s website at 
http://dee.ne.gov/Publica.nsf/pages/22- 051.Inquiries can also be made to NDEE State Revolving Fund Section Supervisor Steve McNulty at steve.mcnulty@nebraska.gov or 402-471-4200.

Deadline nears for reverse osmosis rebates in Nebraska

DETROIT (AP) — Hyundai and Kia are telling the owners of more than 571,000 SUVs and minivans in the U.S. to park them outdoors because the tow hitch harnesses can catch fire while they are parked or being driven.

The affiliated Korean automakers&nbsp;<a href="https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/rcl/2023/RCAK-23V181-8117.pdf">are recalling the vehicles</a>&nbsp;and warning people to park them away from structures until repairs are made.

Affected Hyundai vehicles include the 2019 to 2023 Santa Fe, the 2021 to 2023 Santa Fe Hybrid, the 2022 and 2023 Santa Fe Plug-in hybrid and the 2022 and 2023 Santa Cruz. The only Kia affected is the Carnival minivan from 2022 and 2023. All have Hyundai or Kia tow hitch harnesses that came as original equipment or were installed by dealers.

The Korean automakers say in documents posted Thursday by U.S. safety regulators that water can get into a circuit board on the hitches and cause a short circuit even if the ignitions are off.

Hyundai has reports of one fire and five heat damage incidents with no injuries. Kia has no reports of fires or injuries.

Dealers at first will remove the fuse and tow hitch computer module until a fix is available. Later they will install a new fuse and wire extension with an improved connector that's waterproof. Owners will be notified starting May 16.

Last year Hyundai recalled more than 245,000&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/fires-1f1b54544b128bf1757a81b584ec530d">2020 through 2022 Palisade SUVs</a>&nbsp;for a similar problem.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said Thursday that the latest recall is a direct result of the agency monitoring the Palisade recall from last year.

DETROIT (AP) — Hyundai and Kia are telling the owners of more than 571,000 SUVs and minivans in the U.S. to park them outdoors because the tow hitch harnesses can catch fire while they are parked or being driven.The affiliated Korean automakers&nbsp;<a href="https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/rcl/2023/RCAK-23V181-8117.pdf">are recalling the vehicles</a>&nbsp;and warning people to park them away from structures until repairs are made.Affected Hyundai vehicles include the 2019 to 2023 Santa Fe, the 2021 to 2023 Santa Fe Hybrid, the 2022 and 2023 Santa Fe Plug-in hybrid and the 2022 and 2023 Santa Cruz. The only Kia affected is the Carnival minivan from 2022 and 2023. All have Hyundai or Kia tow hitch harnesses that came as original equipment or were installed by dealers.The Korean automakers say in documents posted Thursday by U.S. safety regulators that water can get into a circuit board on the hitches and cause a short circuit even if the ignitions are off.Hyundai has reports of one fire and five heat damage incidents with no injuries. Kia has no reports of fires or injuries.Dealers at first will remove the fuse and tow hitch computer module until a fix is available. Later they will install a new fuse and wire extension with an improved connector that's waterproof. Owners will be notified starting May 16.Last year Hyundai recalled more than 245,000&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/fires-1f1b54544b128bf1757a81b584ec530d">2020 through 2022 Palisade SUVs</a>&nbsp;for a similar problem.The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said Thursday that the latest recall is a direct result of the agency monitoring the Palisade recall from last year.

Hyundai, Kia recall vehicles due to fire risk

NEW ORLEANS (AP) — President Joe Biden’s order that&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-joe-biden-health-lawsuits-1054028d7cbf0ef46f7ddadbdc4ae167">federal employees</a>&nbsp;get vaccinated against COVID-19 has been blocked by a federal appeals court.

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans, in a decision Thursday, rejected arguments that Biden, as the nation’s chief executive, has the same authority as the CEO of a private corporation to require that employees be vaccinated.

The ruling from the full appeals court, 16 full-time judges at the time the case was argued, reversed an earlier ruling by a three-judge 5th Circuit panel that had upheld the vaccination requirement. Judge Andrew Oldham, nominated to the court by then-President Donald Trump, wrote the opinion for a 10-member majority.

The ruling maintains the status quo for federal employee vaccines. It upholds a preliminary injunction blocking the mandate issued by a federal judge in January 2022. At that point, the administration said nearly 98% of covered employees had been vaccinated.

And, Oldham noted, with the preliminary injunction arguments done, the case will return to that court for further arguments, when “both sides will have to grapple with the White House’s announcement that the COVID emergency will finally end on May 11, 2023.”

The White House defended the order, citing the high compliance rate among the federal workforce and saying in a statement Friday that “vaccination remains one of the most important tools to protect people from serious illness and hospitalizations” against COVID.

Opponents of the policy said it was an encroachment on federal workers’ lives that neither the Constitution nor federal statutes authorize.

Biden issued an executive order in September 2021 requiring vaccinations for all executive branch agency employees, with exceptions for medical and religious reasons. The requirement kicked in the following November. U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Brown, who was appointed to the District Court for the Southern District of Texas by Trump,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-joe-biden-business-health-jeffrey-brown-0ecd0b695f4f0fb7504670be12502da5">issued a nationwide injunction against the requirement</a>&nbsp;the following January.

One panel of three 5th Circuit judges&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-covid-health-donald-trump-new-orleans-5dfec69e95363b4bc4e94228c2de5729">refused to immediately block the law.</a>

But a different panel, after hearing arguments, upheld Biden’s position. Judges Carl Stewart and James Dennis, both nominated to the court by President Bill Clinton, were in the majority. Judge Rhesa Barksdale, nominated by President George H.W. Bush, dissented, saying the relief the challengers sought does not fall under the Civil Service Reform Act cited by the administration.

The broader court majority agreed, saying federal law does not preclude court jurisdiction over cases involving "private, irreversible medical decisions made in consultation with private medical professionals outside the federal workplace."

A majority of the full court voted to vacate that ruling and reconsider the case. The 16 active judges heard the case on Sept. 13, joined by Barksdale, who is now a senior judge with lighter duties than the full-time members of the court.

Judge Stephen Higginson, a nominee of President Barack Obama, wrote the main dissenting opinion. "For the wrong reasons, our court correctly concludes that we do have jurisdiction," Higginson wrote. "But contrary to a dozen federal courts — and having left a government motion to stay the district court’s injunction pending for more than a year — our court still refuses to say why the President does not have the power to regulate workplace safety for his employees."

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/10/1666730504896.png" alt="The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans rejected arguments that Biden, as the nation’s chief executive, has the same authority as the CEO of a private corporation to require that employees be vaccinated.-White House photo" />
 <figcaption>The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans rejected arguments that Biden, as the nation’s chief executive, has the same authority as the CEO of a private corporation to require that employees be vaccinated.-White House photo</figcaption>
 </figure>NEW ORLEANS (AP) — President Joe Biden’s order that&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-joe-biden-health-lawsuits-1054028d7cbf0ef46f7ddadbdc4ae167">federal employees</a>&nbsp;get vaccinated against COVID-19 has been blocked by a federal appeals court.The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans, in a decision Thursday, rejected arguments that Biden, as the nation’s chief executive, has the same authority as the CEO of a private corporation to require that employees be vaccinated.The ruling from the full appeals court, 16 full-time judges at the time the case was argued, reversed an earlier ruling by a three-judge 5th Circuit panel that had upheld the vaccination requirement. Judge Andrew Oldham, nominated to the court by then-President Donald Trump, wrote the opinion for a 10-member majority.The ruling maintains the status quo for federal employee vaccines. It upholds a preliminary injunction blocking the mandate issued by a federal judge in January 2022. At that point, the administration said nearly 98% of covered employees had been vaccinated.And, Oldham noted, with the preliminary injunction arguments done, the case will return to that court for further arguments, when “both sides will have to grapple with the White House’s announcement that the COVID emergency will finally end on May 11, 2023.”The White House defended the order, citing the high compliance rate among the federal workforce and saying in a statement Friday that “vaccination remains one of the most important tools to protect people from serious illness and hospitalizations” against COVID.Opponents of the policy said it was an encroachment on federal workers’ lives that neither the Constitution nor federal statutes authorize.Biden issued an executive order in September 2021 requiring vaccinations for all executive branch agency employees, with exceptions for medical and religious reasons. The requirement kicked in the following November. U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Brown, who was appointed to the District Court for the Southern District of Texas by Trump,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-joe-biden-business-health-jeffrey-brown-0ecd0b695f4f0fb7504670be12502da5">issued a nationwide injunction against the requirement</a>&nbsp;the following January.The case then went to the 5th Circuit.One panel of three 5th Circuit judges&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-covid-health-donald-trump-new-orleans-5dfec69e95363b4bc4e94228c2de5729">refused to immediately block the law.</a>But a different panel, after hearing arguments, upheld Biden’s position. Judges Carl Stewart and James Dennis, both nominated to the court by President Bill Clinton, were in the majority. Judge Rhesa Barksdale, nominated by President George H.W. Bush, dissented, saying the relief the challengers sought does not fall under the Civil Service Reform Act cited by the administration.The broader court majority agreed, saying federal law does not preclude court jurisdiction over cases involving "private, irreversible medical decisions made in consultation with private medical professionals outside the federal workplace."A majority of the full court voted to vacate that ruling and reconsider the case. The 16 active judges heard the case on Sept. 13, joined by Barksdale, who is now a senior judge with lighter duties than the full-time members of the court.Judge Stephen Higginson, a nominee of President Barack Obama, wrote the main dissenting opinion. "For the wrong reasons, our court correctly concludes that we do have jurisdiction," Higginson wrote. "But contrary to a dozen federal courts — and having left a government motion to stay the district court’s injunction pending for more than a year — our court still refuses to say why the President does not have the power to regulate workplace safety for his employees."___

Appeals court blocks COVID vaccine mandate for US gov't workers

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) —Utah became the first state to enact laws limiting how children can use social media after Republican Gov. Spencer Cox signed a pair of measures Thursday that require parental consent before kids can sign up for sites like TikTok and Instagram.

The two bills Cox signed into law also prohibit kids under 18 from using social media between the hours of 10:30 p.m. and 6:30 a.m., require age verification for anyone who wants to use social media in the state and seek to prevent tech companies from luring kids to their apps using addictive features.

The laws passed through Utah's Republican-supermajority Legislature are the latest reflection of how politicians’ perceptions of technology companies are changing — and that includes pro-business Republicans.

Tech giants like Facebook and Google have enjoyed unbridled growth for over a decade, but amid concerns over user privacy, hate speech, misinformation and harmful effects on teens’ mental health, lawmakers have begun trying to rein them in. Utah’s law was signed on the same day&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/tiktok-ban-ceo-congressional-hearing-bytedance-china-44d948c5b0ba18e2a714e0fa62d52779">TikTok’s CEO testified before Congress</a>&nbsp;about, among other things, TikTok’s effects on teenagers’ mental health.

But legislation has stalled on the federal level, pushing states to step in.

Other red states, such as Arkansas, Texas, Ohio and Louisiana have similar proposals in the works, along with New Jersey. California, meanwhile,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/technology-health-gavin-newsom-data-privacy-government-and-politics-b4767350cfe67fe45b44b03b713f0c22">enacted a law</a>&nbsp;last year requiring tech companies to put kids’ safety first by barring them from profiling children or using personal information in ways that could harm children physically or mentally.

In addition to the parental consent provisions, social media companies would likely have to design new features to comply with parts of the law to prohibit promoting ads to minors and showing them in search results. Tech companies like TikTok, Snapchat and Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, make most of their money by targeting advertising to their users.

What’s not clear from the Utah bill and others is how the states plan to enforce the new regulations. Companies are already prohibited from collecting data on children under 13 without parental consent under the federal Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act. For this reason, social media companies already ban kids under 13 from signing up to their platforms — but children can easily get around it, both with and without their parents’ consent.

Cox said studies have shown that time spent on social media leads to “poor mental health outcomes” for children.

“We remain very optimistic that we will be able to pass not just here in the state of Utah but across the country legislation that significantly changes the relationship of our children with these very destructive social media apps,” he said.

Children's advocacy groups generally welcomed the law, with some caveats. Common Sense Media, a nonprofit focusing on kids and technology, hailed the law aimed at reining in social media's addictive features. It "adds momentum for other states to hold social media companies accountable to ensure kids across the country are protected online,” said Jim Steyer, the CEO and founder of Common Sense.

He pointed to similar legislation in the works in California and New Jersey — and said the safety and mental well-being of kids and teens depend on legislation like this to hold big tech accountable for creating safer and healthier experiences online.

But Steyer said the other bill Cox signed giving parents access to children’s social media posts would “deprive kids of the online privacy protections we advocate for. The law also requires age verification and parental consent for minors to create a social media account, which doesn’t get to the root of the problem – kids and teens will still be exposed to companies’ harmful data collection and design practices once they are on the platform.”

The laws are the latest effort from Utah lawmakers focused on children and the information they can access online. Two years ago, Cox signed legislation that called on tech companies to automatically block porn on cell phones and tablets sold, citing the dangers it posed to children. Amid concerns about enforcement, lawmakers in the deeply religious state revised the bill to prevent it from taking effect unless five other states passed similar laws.

The social media regulations come as parents and lawmakers are growing increasingly concerned about kids and teenagers’ use and how platforms like TikTok, Instagram and others are affecting young people’s mental health.

It is set to take effect in March 2024, and Cox has previously said he anticipates social media companies will challenge it in court.

Tech industry lobbyists quickly decried the laws as unconstitutional, saying they infringe on people's right to exercise the First Amendment online.

“Utah will soon require online services to collect sensitive information about teens and families, not only to verify ages, but to verify parental relationships, like government-issued IDs and birth certificates, putting their private data at risk of breach,” said Nicole Saad Bembridge, an associate director at NetChoice, a tech lobby group.

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) —Utah became the first state to enact laws limiting how children can use social media after Republican Gov. Spencer Cox signed a pair of measures Thursday that require parental consent before kids can sign up for sites like TikTok and Instagram.<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">We’re no longer willing to let social media companies continue to harm the mental health of our youth. Today we signed two key bills in our fight against social media companies into law: ➡️ SB152 requires social media companies to verify that users in <a href="https://t.co/GVAcSi9zHx">https://t.co/GVAcSi9zHx</a>… <a href="https://t.co/M1Kbya1xQi">pic.twitter.com/M1Kbya1xQi</a>&mdash; Utah Gov. Spencer J. Cox (@GovCox) <a href="https://twitter.com/GovCox/status/1639015949964840960?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 23, 2023</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>The two bills Cox signed into law also prohibit kids under 18 from using social media between the hours of 10:30 p.m. and 6:30 a.m., require age verification for anyone who wants to use social media in the state and seek to prevent tech companies from luring kids to their apps using addictive features.The laws passed through Utah's Republican-supermajority Legislature are the latest reflection of how politicians’ perceptions of technology companies are changing — and that includes pro-business Republicans.Tech giants like Facebook and Google have enjoyed unbridled growth for over a decade, but amid concerns over user privacy, hate speech, misinformation and harmful effects on teens’ mental health, lawmakers have begun trying to rein them in. Utah’s law was signed on the same day&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/tiktok-ban-ceo-congressional-hearing-bytedance-china-44d948c5b0ba18e2a714e0fa62d52779">TikTok’s CEO testified before Congress</a>&nbsp;about, among other things, TikTok’s effects on teenagers’ mental health.But legislation has stalled on the federal level, pushing states to step in.Other red states, such as Arkansas, Texas, Ohio and Louisiana have similar proposals in the works, along with New Jersey. California, meanwhile,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/technology-health-gavin-newsom-data-privacy-government-and-politics-b4767350cfe67fe45b44b03b713f0c22">enacted a law</a>&nbsp;last year requiring tech companies to put kids’ safety first by barring them from profiling children or using personal information in ways that could harm children physically or mentally.In addition to the parental consent provisions, social media companies would likely have to design new features to comply with parts of the law to prohibit promoting ads to minors and showing them in search results. Tech companies like TikTok, Snapchat and Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, make most of their money by targeting advertising to their users.What’s not clear from the Utah bill and others is how the states plan to enforce the new regulations. Companies are already prohibited from collecting data on children under 13 without parental consent under the federal Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act. For this reason, social media companies already ban kids under 13 from signing up to their platforms — but children can easily get around it, both with and without their parents’ consent.Cox said studies have shown that time spent on social media leads to “poor mental health outcomes” for children.“We remain very optimistic that we will be able to pass not just here in the state of Utah but across the country legislation that significantly changes the relationship of our children with these very destructive social media apps,” he said.Children's advocacy groups generally welcomed the law, with some caveats. Common Sense Media, a nonprofit focusing on kids and technology, hailed the law aimed at reining in social media's addictive features. It "adds momentum for other states to hold social media companies accountable to ensure kids across the country are protected online,” said Jim Steyer, the CEO and founder of Common Sense.He pointed to similar legislation in the works in California and New Jersey — and said the safety and mental well-being of kids and teens depend on legislation like this to hold big tech accountable for creating safer and healthier experiences online.But Steyer said the other bill Cox signed giving parents access to children’s social media posts would “deprive kids of the online privacy protections we advocate for. The law also requires age verification and parental consent for minors to create a social media account, which doesn’t get to the root of the problem – kids and teens will still be exposed to companies’ harmful data collection and design practices once they are on the platform.”The laws are the latest effort from Utah lawmakers focused on children and the information they can access online. Two years ago, Cox signed legislation that called on tech companies to automatically block porn on cell phones and tablets sold, citing the dangers it posed to children. Amid concerns about enforcement, lawmakers in the deeply religious state revised the bill to prevent it from taking effect unless five other states passed similar laws.The social media regulations come as parents and lawmakers are growing increasingly concerned about kids and teenagers’ use and how platforms like TikTok, Instagram and others are affecting young people’s mental health.It is set to take effect in March 2024, and Cox has previously said he anticipates social media companies will challenge it in court.Tech industry lobbyists quickly decried the laws as unconstitutional, saying they infringe on people's right to exercise the First Amendment online.“Utah will soon require online services to collect sensitive information about teens and families, not only to verify ages, but to verify parental relationships, like government-issued IDs and birth certificates, putting their private data at risk of breach,” said Nicole Saad Bembridge, an associate director at NetChoice, a tech lobby group.

First state to require parental consent for social media use

WASHINGTON (AP) — U.S. lawmakers grilled the CEO of TikTok over data security and harmful content Thursday, responding skeptically during a tense committee hearing to his assurances that the hugely popular video-sharing app prioritizes user safety and should not be banned.

Shou Zi Chew's rare public appearance came at a crucial time for the company, which has 150 million American users but is under increasing pressure from U.S. officials. TikTok and its Chinese parent company, ByteDance, have been swept up in a wider geopolitical battle between Beijing and Washington over trade and technology.

In a bipartisan effort to reign in the power of a major social media platform, Republican and Democratic lawmakers pressed Chew on a host of topics, ranging from TikTok’s content moderation practices, how the company plans to secure American data from Beijing, and its spying on journalists.

“Mr. Chew, you are here because the American people need the truth about the threat TikTok poses to our national and personal security,” Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers, a Republican, said in her opening statement.

Chew, a 40-year-old Singapore native, told the House Committee on Energy and Commerce that TikTok prioritizes the safety of its young users and denied&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/tiktok-ceo-shou-zi-chew-security-risk-cc36f36801d84fc0652112fa461ef140">it's a national security risk</a>. He reiterated the company’s plan to protect U.S. user data by storing it on servers maintained and owned by the software giant Oracle.

“Let me state this unequivocally: ByteDance is not an agent of China or any other country,” Chew said.

TikTok has been dogged by claims that its Chinese ownership means user data could end up in the hands of the Chinese government or that it could be used to promote narratives favorable to the country's Communist leaders.

In 2019, the Guardian reported that TikTok was instructing its moderators to censor videos that mention Tiananmen Square and images unfavorable to the Chinese government. The platform says it has since changed its moderation practices.

ByteDance admitted in December that it fired four employees last summer who accessed data on two journalists and people connected to them while attempting to uncover the source of a leaked report about the company.

For its part, TikTok has been trying to distance itself from its Chinese origins, saying 60% percent of ByteDance is owned by global institutional investors such as Carlyle Group.

"Ownership is not at the core of addressing these concerns,” Chew said.

<a href="https://apnews.com/article/china-us-tiktok-security-technology-social-media-2245e433b5854010ebd99b7987fc78ca">China has also said it would oppose any U.S. attempts</a>&nbsp;to force ByteDance to sell the app.

In one of the most dramatic moments, Republican Rep. Kat Cammack played a TikTok video that showed a shooting gun with a caption that included the House committee holding the hearing, with the exact date before it was formally announced.

“You expect us to believe that you are capable of maintaining the data security, privacy and security of 150 million Americans where you can’t even protect the people in this room,” Cammack said.

TikTok spokesperson Ben Rathe said the company on Thursday removed the violent video aimed at the committee and banned the account that posted it.

Chew also noted the failure of U.S. social media companies to address the very concerns for which TikTok was being criticized.

“American social companies don’t have a good track record with data privacy and user security,” he said. "Look at Facebook and Cambridge Analytica, just one example.”

As the Energy and Commerce committee questioned Chew, Secretary of State Anthony Blinken was questioned about the threat TikTok poses at a separate committee hearing Thursday. Asked by Rep. Ken Buck, a Republican of Colorado, if the platform is a security threat to the United States, Blinken said: “I believe it is.”

“Shouldn’t a threat to United States security be banned?” Buck responded.

“It should be ended one way or another. But there are different ways of doing that,” Blinken responded.

Committee members also showed a host of TikTok videos that encouraged users to harm themselves and commit suicide. Many questioned why the platform’s Chinese counterpart, Douyin, does not carry the same controversial and potentially dangerous content as the American product.

Chew responded that it depends on the laws of the country where the app is operating. He said the company has about 40,000 moderators that track harmful content and an algorithm that flags material.

Wealth management firm Wedbush described the hearing as a “disaster” for TikTok that made a ban more likely if the social media platform doesn't separate from its Chinese parent. Emile El Nems, an analyst at Moody’s Investors Service, said a ban would benefit TikTok rivals YouTube, Instagram and Snap, “likely resulting in higher revenue share of the total advertising wallet.”

To avoid a ban, TikTok has been trying to sell officials on a&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/technology-us-news-business-ap-top-news-hong-kong-4eab38c608901de16e92facc1ed5debd">$1.5 billion plan, Project Texas</a>, which routes all U.S. user data to Oracle. Under the project, access to U.S. data is managed by U.S. employees through a separate entity called TikTok U.S. Data Security, which is run independently of ByteDance and monitored by outside observers.

As of October, all new U.S. user data was being stored inside the country. The company started deleting all historic U.S. user data from non-Oracle servers this month, in a process expected to be completed this year, Chew said.

Republican Rep. Dan Crenshaw noted that regardless of what the company does to assure lawmakers it will protect U.S. user data, the Chinese government can still have significant influence over its parent company and ask it to turn over data through its national security laws.

Congress, the White House, U.S. armed forces and more than half of U.S. states have already banned the use of the app from official devices.

But wiping away all the data tracking associated with the platform might prove difficult. In a report released this month, the Cybersecurity company Feroot said so-called tracking pixels from ByteDance, which collect user information, were found on 30 U.S state websites, including some where the app has been banned.

<a href="https://apnews.com/article/tiktok-ban-privacy-cybersecurity-bytedance-china-2dce297f0aed056efe53309bbcd44a04">Other countries</a>&nbsp;including Denmark, Canada, Great Britain and New Zealand, along with the European Union, have already banned TikTok from government-issued devices.

A complete TikTok ban in the U.S. would risk political and popular backlash.

The company sent dozens of popular TikTokers to Capitol Hill on Wednesday to lobby lawmakers to preserve the platform. And a dozen civil right and free speech organizations, including the American Civil Liberties Union and PEN America, have signed a letter opposing a wholesale TikTok ban, arguing it would set a “dangerous precedent for the restriction of speech."

David Kennedy, a former government intelligence officer who runs the cybersecurity company TrustedSec, said he agrees with restricting TikTok access on government-issued phones but that a nationwide ban might be too extreme.

“We have Tesla in China, we have Microsoft in China, we have Apple in China. Are they going to start banning us now?" Kennedy said. “It could escalate very quickly.”

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/3/1679584159357.png" alt="In one of the most dramatic moments of the hearing, Republican Rep. Kat Cammack played a TikTok video that showed a shooting gun with a caption that included the House committee holding the hearing, with the exact date before it was formally announced.&nbsp;Courtesy House Energy and Commerce Committee" />
 <figcaption>In one of the most dramatic moments of the hearing, Republican Rep. Kat Cammack played a TikTok video that showed a shooting gun with a caption that included the House committee holding the hearing, with the exact date before it was formally announced.&nbsp;Courtesy House Energy and Commerce Committee</figcaption>
 </figure>WASHINGTON (AP) — U.S. lawmakers grilled the CEO of TikTok over data security and harmful content Thursday, responding skeptically during a tense committee hearing to his assurances that the hugely popular video-sharing app prioritizes user safety and should not be banned.<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">.<a href="https://twitter.com/RepKatCammack?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@RepKatCammack</a> plays TikTok video: &quot;This video has been up for 41 days. It is a direct threat to the chairwoman of this committee, the people in this room and yet it still remains on this platform...&quot; <a href="https://t.co/9yyvBVGwT8">pic.twitter.com/9yyvBVGwT8</a>&mdash; CSPAN (@cspan) <a href="https://twitter.com/cspan/status/1638923933142458368?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 23, 2023</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>Shou Zi Chew's rare public appearance came at a crucial time for the company, which has 150 million American users but is under increasing pressure from U.S. officials. TikTok and its Chinese parent company, ByteDance, have been swept up in a wider geopolitical battle between Beijing and Washington over trade and technology.<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/3/1679580589228.png" alt="Shou Zi Chew -image courtesy CSPAN" />
 <figcaption>Shou Zi Chew -image courtesy CSPAN</figcaption>
 </figure>In a bipartisan effort to reign in the power of a major social media platform, Republican and Democratic lawmakers pressed Chew on a host of topics, ranging from TikTok’s content moderation practices, how the company plans to secure American data from Beijing, and its spying on journalists.“Mr. Chew, you are here because the American people need the truth about the threat TikTok poses to our national and personal security,” Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers, a Republican, said in her opening statement.Chew, a 40-year-old Singapore native, told the House Committee on Energy and Commerce that TikTok prioritizes the safety of its young users and denied&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/tiktok-ceo-shou-zi-chew-security-risk-cc36f36801d84fc0652112fa461ef140">it's a national security risk</a>. He reiterated the company’s plan to protect U.S. user data by storing it on servers maintained and owned by the software giant Oracle.“Let me state this unequivocally: ByteDance is not an agent of China or any other country,” Chew said.TikTok has been dogged by claims that its Chinese ownership means user data could end up in the hands of the Chinese government or that it could be used to promote narratives favorable to the country's Communist leaders.<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/3/1679603507710.png" alt="Image shown during Thursday's hearing -courtesy House Energy and Commerce Committee" />
 <figcaption>Image shown during Thursday's hearing -courtesy House Energy and Commerce Committee</figcaption>
 </figure>In 2019, the Guardian reported that TikTok was instructing its moderators to censor videos that mention Tiananmen Square and images unfavorable to the Chinese government. The platform says it has since changed its moderation practices.ByteDance admitted in December that it fired four employees last summer who accessed data on two journalists and people connected to them while attempting to uncover the source of a leaked report about the company.For its part, TikTok has been trying to distance itself from its Chinese origins, saying 60% percent of ByteDance is owned by global institutional investors such as Carlyle Group."Ownership is not at the core of addressing these concerns,” Chew said.<a href="https://apnews.com/article/china-us-tiktok-security-technology-social-media-2245e433b5854010ebd99b7987fc78ca">China has also said it would oppose any U.S. attempts</a>&nbsp;to force ByteDance to sell the app.In one of the most dramatic moments, Republican Rep. Kat Cammack played a TikTok video that showed a shooting gun with a caption that included the House committee holding the hearing, with the exact date before it was formally announced.“You expect us to believe that you are capable of maintaining the data security, privacy and security of 150 million Americans where you can’t even protect the people in this room,” Cammack said.TikTok spokesperson Ben Rathe said the company on Thursday removed the violent video aimed at the committee and banned the account that posted it.Chew also noted the failure of U.S. social media companies to address the very concerns for which TikTok was being criticized.“American social companies don’t have a good track record with data privacy and user security,” he said. "Look at Facebook and Cambridge Analytica, just one example.”As the Energy and Commerce committee questioned Chew, Secretary of State Anthony Blinken was questioned about the threat TikTok poses at a separate committee hearing Thursday. Asked by Rep. Ken Buck, a Republican of Colorado, if the platform is a security threat to the United States, Blinken said: “I believe it is.”“Shouldn’t a threat to United States security be banned?” Buck responded.“It should be ended one way or another. But there are different ways of doing that,” Blinken responded.Committee members also showed a host of TikTok videos that encouraged users to harm themselves and commit suicide. Many questioned why the platform’s Chinese counterpart, Douyin, does not carry the same controversial and potentially dangerous content as the American product.Chew responded that it depends on the laws of the country where the app is operating. He said the company has about 40,000 moderators that track harmful content and an algorithm that flags material.Wealth management firm Wedbush described the hearing as a “disaster” for TikTok that made a ban more likely if the social media platform doesn't separate from its Chinese parent. Emile El Nems, an analyst at Moody’s Investors Service, said a ban would benefit TikTok rivals YouTube, Instagram and Snap, “likely resulting in higher revenue share of the total advertising wallet.”To avoid a ban, TikTok has been trying to sell officials on a&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/technology-us-news-business-ap-top-news-hong-kong-4eab38c608901de16e92facc1ed5debd">$1.5 billion plan, Project Texas</a>, which routes all U.S. user data to Oracle. Under the project, access to U.S. data is managed by U.S. employees through a separate entity called TikTok U.S. Data Security, which is run independently of ByteDance and monitored by outside observers.As of October, all new U.S. user data was being stored inside the country. The company started deleting all historic U.S. user data from non-Oracle servers this month, in a process expected to be completed this year, Chew said.Republican Rep. Dan Crenshaw noted that regardless of what the company does to assure lawmakers it will protect U.S. user data, the Chinese government can still have significant influence over its parent company and ask it to turn over data through its national security laws.Congress, the White House, U.S. armed forces and more than half of U.S. states have already banned the use of the app from official devices.But wiping away all the data tracking associated with the platform might prove difficult. In a report released this month, the Cybersecurity company Feroot said so-called tracking pixels from ByteDance, which collect user information, were found on 30 U.S state websites, including some where the app has been banned.<a href="https://apnews.com/article/tiktok-ban-privacy-cybersecurity-bytedance-china-2dce297f0aed056efe53309bbcd44a04">Other countries</a>&nbsp;including Denmark, Canada, Great Britain and New Zealand, along with the European Union, have already banned TikTok from government-issued devices.A complete TikTok ban in the U.S. would risk political and popular backlash.The company sent dozens of popular TikTokers to Capitol Hill on Wednesday to lobby lawmakers to preserve the platform. And a dozen civil right and free speech organizations, including the American Civil Liberties Union and PEN America, have signed a letter opposing a wholesale TikTok ban, arguing it would set a “dangerous precedent for the restriction of speech."David Kennedy, a former government intelligence officer who runs the cybersecurity company TrustedSec, said he agrees with restricting TikTok access on government-issued phones but that a nationwide ban might be too extreme.“We have Tesla in China, we have Microsoft in China, we have Apple in China. Are they going to start banning us now?" Kennedy said. “It could escalate very quickly.”

🎥 Gun video shocks tense House hearing with TikTok CEO

NEW YORK (AP) —Track and field banned transgender athletes from international competition Thursday, while adopting new regulations that could keep Caster Semenya and other athletes with differences in sex development from competing.

In a pair of decisions expected to stoke outrage, the World Athletics Council adopted the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/transgender-swimmers-new-rules-fina-world-governing-body-c17e99d3121fa964336458b57ae266f7">same rules as swimming</a>&nbsp;did last year in deciding to bar athletes who have transitioned from male to female and have gone through male puberty. No such athletes currently compete at the highest elite levels of track.

Another set of updates, for athletes with differences in sex development (DSD), could impact up to 13 current high-level runners, WA President Sebastian Coe said. They include Semenya, a two-time Olympic champion at 800 meters, who has been barred from that event since 2019.

Semenya and others had been able to compete without restrictions in events outside the range of 400 meters through one mile but now will have to undergo hormone-suppressing treatment for six months before competing to be eligible.

Coe conceded there are no easy answers on this topic, which has turned into a&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/transgender-rights-athletes-ban-kansas-711e121ea0ab00653d61f9dadf9b9c0e">societal lightning rod</a>&nbsp;involving advocates who want people assigned female at birth to be able to compete on even footing and others who don't want to discriminate against transgender and DSD athletes.

“All the decisions we've taken have their challenges,” Coe said. “If that's the case, then we will do what we have done in the past, which is vigorously defend our position. And the overarching principle for me is we will always do what we think is in the best interest of our sport.”

Athletes with sex development differences, such as Semenya and Olympic 200-meter silver medalist Christine Mboma of Namibia, are not transgender, although the two issues share similarities when it comes to sports.

Such athletes were legally identified as female at birth but have a medical condition that leads to some male traits, including high levels of testosterone that World Athletics argues gives them the same kind of unfair advantage as transgender athletes.

Semenya has been running in longer events. She finished 13th in her qualifying heat at 5,000 meters at world championships last year. In a recent interview, she said she was&nbsp;<a href="https://olympics.com/en/news/caster-semenya-adapting-distance-running-coaching-future">aiming to run in the Olympics</a>&nbsp;at a longer distance.

“I’m in the adaptation phase, and my body is starting to fit with it. I’m just enjoying myself at the moment, and things will fall into place at the right time,” the South African runner said.

Now, in order to compete at next year's Olympics, she would have to undergo hormone-suppressing treatment for six months, something she has said she will never do again, having undergone the treatment a decade ago under previous rules.

Mboma, who won her silver in Tokyo two years ago but was out of worlds last year because of an injury, has not publicly stated whether she would be willing to undergo hormone therapy.

Another athlete, Olympic 800-meter silver medalist Francine Niyonsaba of Burundi, also has said she would not undergo treatment. While Semenya struggled at longer distances, Niyonsaba had relative success, winning Diamond League titles at 3,000 and 5,000 meters and running in the 5,000 at the Tokyo Olympics.

Under the new regulations, athletes in the previously “unrestricted” events would have to suppress testosterone levels below 2.5 nanomoles per liter of blood for six months. Ultimately, they would have to stay below those levels for two years.

Previously, athletes with differences in sex development had to lower their testosterone to below 5 nanomoles per liter of blood for at least six months before competing, and the rules only applied to distances between 400 meters and one mile.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/3/1679325206316.jpg" alt="" />
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure>NEW YORK (AP) —Track and field banned transgender athletes from international competition Thursday, while adopting new regulations that could keep Caster Semenya and other athletes with differences in sex development from competing.In a pair of decisions expected to stoke outrage, the World Athletics Council adopted the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/transgender-swimmers-new-rules-fina-world-governing-body-c17e99d3121fa964336458b57ae266f7">same rules as swimming</a>&nbsp;did last year in deciding to bar athletes who have transitioned from male to female and have gone through male puberty. No such athletes currently compete at the highest elite levels of track.Another set of updates, for athletes with differences in sex development (DSD), could impact up to 13 current high-level runners, WA President Sebastian Coe said. They include Semenya, a two-time Olympic champion at 800 meters, who has been barred from that event since 2019.Semenya and others had been able to compete without restrictions in events outside the range of 400 meters through one mile but now will have to undergo hormone-suppressing treatment for six months before competing to be eligible.Coe conceded there are no easy answers on this topic, which has turned into a&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/transgender-rights-athletes-ban-kansas-711e121ea0ab00653d61f9dadf9b9c0e">societal lightning rod</a>&nbsp;involving advocates who want people assigned female at birth to be able to compete on even footing and others who don't want to discriminate against transgender and DSD athletes.“All the decisions we've taken have their challenges,” Coe said. “If that's the case, then we will do what we have done in the past, which is vigorously defend our position. And the overarching principle for me is we will always do what we think is in the best interest of our sport.”Athletes with sex development differences, such as Semenya and Olympic 200-meter silver medalist Christine Mboma of Namibia, are not transgender, although the two issues share similarities when it comes to sports.Such athletes were legally identified as female at birth but have a medical condition that leads to some male traits, including high levels of testosterone that World Athletics argues gives them the same kind of unfair advantage as transgender athletes.Semenya has been running in longer events. She finished 13th in her qualifying heat at 5,000 meters at world championships last year. In a recent interview, she said she was&nbsp;<a href="https://olympics.com/en/news/caster-semenya-adapting-distance-running-coaching-future">aiming to run in the Olympics</a>&nbsp;at a longer distance.“I’m in the adaptation phase, and my body is starting to fit with it. I’m just enjoying myself at the moment, and things will fall into place at the right time,” the South African runner said.Now, in order to compete at next year's Olympics, she would have to undergo hormone-suppressing treatment for six months, something she has said she will never do again, having undergone the treatment a decade ago under previous rules.Mboma, who won her silver in Tokyo two years ago but was out of worlds last year because of an injury, has not publicly stated whether she would be willing to undergo hormone therapy.Another athlete, Olympic 800-meter silver medalist Francine Niyonsaba of Burundi, also has said she would not undergo treatment. While Semenya struggled at longer distances, Niyonsaba had relative success, winning Diamond League titles at 3,000 and 5,000 meters and running in the 5,000 at the Tokyo Olympics.Under the new regulations, athletes in the previously “unrestricted” events would have to suppress testosterone levels below 2.5 nanomoles per liter of blood for six months. Ultimately, they would have to stay below those levels for two years.Previously, athletes with differences in sex development had to lower their testosterone to below 5 nanomoles per liter of blood for at least six months before competing, and the rules only applied to distances between 400 meters and one mile.

World track bans transgender athletes from competition

By CINDY GONZALEZ <a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/state-selects-rural-entities-to-receive-the-latest-10-million-in-economic-recovery-act-grants/">Nebraska Examiner</a>

LINCOLN — Several rural Nebraska 
cities and the University of Nebraska were among winners of $10 million 
in grants that a state agency announced this week for pandemic recovery 
efforts.

The funds came from the Economic 
Recovery Act approved last year as Legislative Bill 1024. That pot of 
funds, largely from the federal American Rescue Plan Act, was to go to 
aid public and private entities in qualified low-income census tracts 
outside of Lincoln and Omaha.&nbsp;

Overall, LB 1024 earmarked $335 million for efforts that respond to the negative economic impacts of COVID-19.

For the $10 million pot, the Nebraska
 Department of Economic Development selected 14 recipients from 30 
applicants whose requests reportedly totaled more than $30 million.

The DED said in a statement that the 
recipients it selected submitted proposals to revitalize public spaces, 
create housing solutions and help with workforce retention and 
recruitment programs in greater Nebraska.

Banisters Leadership Academy — $368,500

Board of Regents of the University of Nebraska, DBA University of Nebraska at Kearney — $400,000

United Way of South Central Nebraska Inc. — $750,000

Board of Regents of the University of Nebraska DBA University of Nebraska at Kearney — $750,000

The Salvation Army DBA The Salvation Army of Norfolk — $1,000,000

By CINDY GONZALEZ <a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/state-selects-rural-entities-to-receive-the-latest-10-million-in-economic-recovery-act-grants/">Nebraska Examiner</a>LINCOLN — Several rural Nebraska 
cities and the University of Nebraska were among winners of $10 million 
in grants that a state agency announced this week for pandemic recovery 
efforts.The funds came from the Economic 
Recovery Act approved last year as Legislative Bill 1024. That pot of 
funds, largely from the federal American Rescue Plan Act, was to go to 
aid public and private entities in qualified low-income census tracts 
outside of Lincoln and Omaha.&nbsp;Overall, LB 1024 earmarked $335 million for efforts that respond to the negative economic impacts of COVID-19.For the $10 million pot, the Nebraska
 Department of Economic Development selected 14 recipients from 30 
applicants whose requests reportedly totaled more than $30 million.The DED said in a statement that the 
recipients it selected submitted proposals to revitalize public spaces, 
create housing solutions and help with workforce retention and 
recruitment programs in greater Nebraska.<h2>Entities the DED selected for grants: </h2>Banisters Leadership Academy — $368,500Center for Rural Affairs — $750,000Board of Regents of the University of Nebraska, DBA University of Nebraska at Kearney — $400,000City of Norfolk — $81,500South Sioux City — $750,000Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska — $750,000United Way of South Central Nebraska Inc. — $750,000City of Fairbury — $750,000City of Fairbury — $1,000,000City of Norfolk — $1,500,000Board of Regents of the University of Nebraska DBA University of Nebraska at Kearney — $750,000The Salvation Army DBA The Salvation Army of Norfolk — $1,000,000Nebraska Enterprise Fund — $750,000City of Beatrice — $400,000

Rural entities to receive latest $10M in Economic Recovery Act grants

By JENNIFER SHUTT <a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2022/07/26/gop-support-for-same-sex-marriage-protections-builds-in-u-s-senate/">States Newsroom</a>

WASHINGTON — The CEO of Moderna on Wednesday defended the company’s decision to drastically increase the price of its COVID-19 vaccine later this year, arguing that an expected drop in demand, changes to its distribution process and the overall benefit of the vaccine warrant the higher cost.

That decision was met with bipartisan condemnation from U.S. senators on the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee. Many criticized the decision before noting the federal government invested nearly $2 billion in Moderna’s development of the vaccine as well as providing a collaboration with the National Institutes of Health.

CEO Stéphane Bancel pledged during the hearing that even with the price increasing from less than $30 to about $130 a dose, Moderna would develop a system to provide uninsured or underinsured Americans with the COVID-19 vaccine and boosters at no cost.

Bancel, however, was unable to answer numerous questions from U.S. lawmakers about how the process would work in practice, indicating the company was still working out the broad parameters as well as the details.

Bancel annoyed several members on the panel when he declined to say directly if Moderna would negotiate the new price with the federal government to reduce the cost to taxpayers for COVID-19 vaccines provided through Medicare, Medicaid, or the Veterans Affairs health care system.

Bancel also declined to say if people in the United States would pay less for the vaccine than those in other countries, whose governments didn’t invest in its development.

“The price will depend on the value in each country,” Bancel said. “The cost of health care is different in each country.”

Wisconsin Democratic Sen. Tammy Baldwin questioned if Moderna’s decision to increase the price of its COVID-19 vaccine was linked to Bancel receiving a recent performance review in which the board said he “underperformed the company’s target for sales income generated by the COVID-19 vaccine.”

Baldwin said the decision to increase the price of the vaccine “appears tied to the impact of your personal performance assessment on your bonus and how much you would stand to gain personally from increasing the price of the COVID vaccine.”

Bancel contended the two were not linked, saying the price of the vaccine is determined by the value of the product and how much money can be saved in the long term through reduced hospital stays. He noted the cost of a high-dose flu vaccine for the elderly costs about $90 and the pneumonia vaccine costs about $240.

Baldwin also asked about Moderna’s stock buybacks, which totaled $3.3 billion in 2022 and more than $800 million in 2021.

“You are one of the, if not the, largest shareholders in Moderna,” Baldwin told Bancel. “Yet, despite spending significantly to buy back stock over the last two years, Moderna’s share price has actually declined. If you had not spent nearly $5 billion on buybacks when your stock was at the highest price it’s ever been, do you think you would be under less pressure to raise the price of COVID vaccine now?”

Bancel declined any connection, saying the vaccine’s “price is not linked to the company’s performance. The price is linked to the value of the product, to the patient and to the impact on the patient. That’s how we set the price.”

Bancel said Moderna believes the price it charged the U.S. government for the COVID-19 vaccine throughout the last couple of years represents a discount, in part because the company wanted to return the investment it got from the U.S. government to develop the vaccine, and in part because the federal government was purchasing in bulk.

Indiana Republican Sen. Mike Braun told Bancel that Moderna’s price increase “is indicative of a much bigger problem facing health care” and expressed frustration that some facets of the health care industry operate like an unregulated utility by not embracing competition or transparency.

Braun challenged Bancel for saying that one of the reasons the price is going up is to account for Moderna moving from the pandemic model, where it distributed the vaccine to the U.S. government through three Centers for Disease Control and Prevention warehouses, to a regular distribution process where it will need to get the vaccine to thousands of locations throughout the country.

“A 400% price increase is preposterous, especially when you’ve been given all this government largess,” Braun said.

Bancel testified Moderna is trying to figure out how it could best set up the new distribution network, noting the company has never had a commercial product.

Christopher Morten, associate clinical professor of law at Columbia Law School, said during his testimony on a second panel that Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine costs just $3 to make. He also criticized the price increase decision, saying Moderna benefited significantly from U.S. taxpayer investment.

“Mr. Bancel claims the value of these vaccines justifies Moderna’s proposed price increase. But his testimony ignored a key question — who created that value?” Morten said. “It was the U.S. government, the American taxpayer that spent billions. It was government scientists that toiled alongside Moderna’s.”

Moderna wasn’t the primary inventor of the three key scientific features of the vaccine, with the federal government providing the company with the specific mRNA sequence used in the vaccine, according to Morten.

The U.S. government also designed and ran the early clinical trials and provided Moderna with money and resources to expand its manufacturing, he said.

“To be clear, Moderna’s scientists and engineers made many contributions of their own, as did many academic scientists. These people and their work deserve credit and celebration too,” Morten said. “But Moderna cannot claim the vaccine’s value for itself.”

By JENNIFER SHUTT <a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2022/07/26/gop-support-for-same-sex-marriage-protections-builds-in-u-s-senate/">States Newsroom</a> WASHINGTON — The CEO of Moderna on Wednesday defended the company’s decision to drastically increase the price of its COVID-19 vaccine later this year, arguing that an expected drop in demand, changes to its distribution process and the overall benefit of the vaccine warrant the higher cost.That decision was met with bipartisan condemnation from U.S. senators on the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee. Many criticized the decision before noting the federal government invested nearly $2 billion in Moderna’s development of the vaccine as well as providing a collaboration with the National Institutes of Health.CEO Stéphane Bancel pledged during the hearing that even with the price increasing from less than $30 to about $130 a dose, Moderna would develop a system to provide uninsured or underinsured Americans with the COVID-19 vaccine and boosters at no cost.Bancel, however, was unable to answer numerous questions from U.S. lawmakers about how the process would work in practice, indicating the company was still working out the broad parameters as well as the details.Bancel annoyed several members on the panel when he declined to say directly if Moderna would negotiate the new price with the federal government to reduce the cost to taxpayers for COVID-19 vaccines provided through Medicare, Medicaid, or the Veterans Affairs health care system.Bancel also declined to say if people in the United States would pay less for the vaccine than those in other countries, whose governments didn’t invest in its development.“The price will depend on the value in each country,” Bancel said. “The cost of health care is different in each country.”<h2>Baldwin questions motives</h2>Wisconsin Democratic Sen. Tammy Baldwin questioned if Moderna’s decision to increase the price of its COVID-19 vaccine was linked to Bancel receiving a recent performance review in which the board said he “underperformed the company’s target for sales income generated by the COVID-19 vaccine.”Baldwin said the decision to increase the price of the vaccine “appears tied to the impact of your personal performance assessment on your bonus and how much you would stand to gain personally from increasing the price of the COVID vaccine.”Bancel contended the two were not linked, saying the price of the vaccine is determined by the value of the product and how much money can be saved in the long term through reduced hospital stays. He noted the cost of a high-dose flu vaccine for the elderly costs about $90 and the pneumonia vaccine costs about $240.Baldwin also asked about Moderna’s stock buybacks, which totaled $3.3 billion in 2022 and more than $800 million in 2021.“You are one of the, if not the, largest shareholders in Moderna,” Baldwin told Bancel. “Yet, despite spending significantly to buy back stock over the last two years, Moderna’s share price has actually declined. If you had not spent nearly $5 billion on buybacks when your stock was at the highest price it’s ever been, do you think you would be under less pressure to raise the price of COVID vaccine now?”Bancel declined any connection, saying the vaccine’s “price is not linked to the company’s performance. The price is linked to the value of the product, to the patient and to the impact on the patient. That’s how we set the price.”Bancel said Moderna believes the price it charged the U.S. government for the COVID-19 vaccine throughout the last couple of years represents a discount, in part because the company wanted to return the investment it got from the U.S. government to develop the vaccine, and in part because the federal government was purchasing in bulk.<h2>Braun: ‘preposterous’ increase</h2>Indiana Republican Sen. Mike Braun told Bancel that Moderna’s price increase “is indicative of a much bigger problem facing health care” and expressed frustration that some facets of the health care industry operate like an unregulated utility by not embracing competition or transparency.Braun challenged Bancel for saying that one of the reasons the price is going up is to account for Moderna moving from the pandemic model, where it distributed the vaccine to the U.S. government through three Centers for Disease Control and Prevention warehouses, to a regular distribution process where it will need to get the vaccine to thousands of locations throughout the country.“A 400% price increase is preposterous, especially when you’ve been given all this government largess,” Braun said.Bancel testified Moderna is trying to figure out how it could best set up the new distribution network, noting the company has never had a commercial product.<h2>Taxpayer investment</h2>Christopher Morten, associate clinical professor of law at Columbia Law School, said during his testimony on a second panel that Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine costs just $3 to make. He also criticized the price increase decision, saying Moderna benefited significantly from U.S. taxpayer investment.“Mr. Bancel claims the value of these vaccines justifies Moderna’s proposed price increase. But his testimony ignored a key question — who created that value?” Morten said. “It was the U.S. government, the American taxpayer that spent billions. It was government scientists that toiled alongside Moderna’s.”Moderna wasn’t the primary inventor of the three key scientific features of the vaccine, with the federal government providing the company with the specific mRNA sequence used in the vaccine, according to Morten.The U.S. government also designed and ran the early clinical trials and provided Moderna with money and resources to expand its manufacturing, he said.“To be clear, Moderna’s scientists and engineers made many contributions of their own, as did many academic scientists. These people and their work deserve credit and celebration too,” Morten said. “But Moderna cannot claim the vaccine’s value for itself.”

Senate rebukes plan to hike COVID vaccine price to $130 a dose

WASHINGTON (AP) — First lady Jill Biden on Wednesday used a Women's History Month event at the White House to call on men to step up and fight to protect women's rights.

(click below to watch the event at the White House)

The first lady, speaking ahead of President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris, didn't mince words as she lamented that women find themselves relitigating “battles that we thought we had won a long time ago.”

“We need more men to hold each other accountable when women are being hurt or being left behind,” she said.

The Supreme Court declared last June that states can ban abortion. Since then, Republican-controlled legislatures across the country have rolled out regulations shortening the period when a woman can get an abortion and otherwise restricting abortion access.

"The fight for women’s equality should have an end," the first lady said.

President Biden in his remarks vowed that his administration remained focused on improving the economic status of women, and argued that all major issues facing the nation — from public safety to public health — are directly tied to improving women’s economic security and wellbeing.

“We have to recommit to the work ahead to deliver a better future for our nation’s daughters," Biden said.

WASHINGTON (AP) — First lady Jill Biden on Wednesday used a Women's History Month event at the White House to call on men to step up and fight to protect women's rights.(click below to watch the event at the White House)<div><iframe src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/video.php?height=314&href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FWhiteHouse%2Fvideos%2F158894350383896%2F&show_text=false&width=560&t=299" 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 first lady, speaking ahead of President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris, didn't mince words as she lamented that women find themselves relitigating “battles that we thought we had won a long time ago.”“We need more men to hold each other accountable when women are being hurt or being left behind,” she said.The Supreme Court declared last June that states can ban abortion. Since then, Republican-controlled legislatures across the country have rolled out regulations shortening the period when a woman can get an abortion and otherwise restricting abortion access."The fight for women’s equality should have an end," the first lady said.President Biden in his remarks vowed that his administration remained focused on improving the economic status of women, and argued that all major issues facing the nation — from public safety to public health — are directly tied to improving women’s economic security and wellbeing.“We have to recommit to the work ahead to deliver a better future for our nation’s daughters," Biden said.

🎥 Jill Biden: It's time for men to step up for women's rights

By PAUL HAMMEL <a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2023/03/23/scott-frost-house-sold-for-a-capital-city-record-of-3-5-million/">Nebraska Examiner</a>

LINCOLN — Scott Frost’s success as a football coach at the University
 of Nebraska wasn’t a record-breaker, but the sale of his home in South 
Lincoln was.

Frost’s five-bedroom, eight-garage home in The Ridge neighborhood 
sold for $3.5 million in late November, according to Lancaster County 
property records.

That is the highest price paid for a home in Lincoln since 1997 and 
is probably an all-time record, according to Kyle Fischer of the 
Realtors Association of Lincoln.

Fischer said there’s a chance there might have been a private sale — 
one not listed in the multiple listing service used by Realtors — that 
was higher, but he was not aware of one.

“Prices in Lincoln overall are at an all-time high,” he said. “This is highest we’ve ever seen.”

The median sale price for an existing home in Lincoln was $259,900 in
 February, according to MLS records, which was 13% higher than a year 
ago.

Fischer said there has been some buzz in the industry over the recent
 sale of at least three condominiums in downtown Lincoln for more than 
$1 million each.

MLS records show 2022 was a banner year for sales in the Capital City, with four homes selling for $1.9 million or higher.

Frost, a star quarterback for NU and national coach of the year prior
 to being hired at Nebraska, had 16 wins and 31 losses in nearly five 
seasons as coach of the Huskers.

He was fired in September after a stunning loss to Georgia Southern. 
But he left with a $16.4 million buyout of his contract, according to <a target="_blank" href="https://www.wowt.com/2022/09/19/buying-out-scott-frosts-contract-before-october-cost-university-nebraska-millions-more/">wowt.com.</a>

In December, the <a target="_blank" href="https://www.azcentral.com/story/money/real-estate/done-deals/2022/12/26/former-nfl-player-and-cornhuskers-coach-pays-5-4m-for-phoenix-home/69742042007/">Arizona Republic</a> reported that Frost and his wife had purchased a home in the Phoenix area for $5.4 million.

The sale of his home in Lincoln went largely unnoticed, except in real estate circles.

The home did earn some publicity in June 2018 — three months after 
Frost purchased it. That’s when burglars made off with some Oregon Ducks
 football helmets, signed photographs and five pairs of Air Jordan 
shoes, according to the <a target="_blank" href="https://journalstar.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/scott-frost-on-burglary-at-his-lincoln-home-obviously-very-disappointing-and-discouraging/article_86acfc85-2c0d-5c12-a529-07c0dacc8ac7.html">Lincoln Journal-Star</a>. Three people were ultimately arrested, the paper reported.

The sale of his home was recorded Nov. 21 to the Chance Dudley Trust,
 but the owner was listed in county records as Lincoln lawyer and former
 Nebraska Attorney General Jon Bruning as trustee.

Bruning, as well as the Realtor who listed Frost’s home, declined to 
comment Wednesday. Frost retains ownership of a Nebraska home on a 
sandpit lake in the Ashland area.

Fischer said that MLS records for the Great Plains region indicated 
that at least two home sales in Omaha topped $3.5 million in the past 
five years.

The record price paid for a home in Omaha?

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/3/1679584583041.png" alt="Scott Frost’s home in The Ridge subdivision in south Lincoln sold for a $3.5 million, which is considered a record for a home in the Capital City. (Courtesy of Lancaster County) " />
 <figcaption>Scott Frost’s home in The Ridge subdivision in south Lincoln sold for a $3.5 million, which is considered a record for a home in the Capital City. (Courtesy of Lancaster County) </figcaption>
 </figure>By PAUL HAMMEL <a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2023/03/23/scott-frost-house-sold-for-a-capital-city-record-of-3-5-million/">Nebraska Examiner</a>LINCOLN — Scott Frost’s success as a football coach at the University
 of Nebraska wasn’t a record-breaker, but the sale of his home in South 
Lincoln was.Frost’s five-bedroom, eight-garage home in The Ridge neighborhood 
sold for $3.5 million in late November, according to Lancaster County 
property records.That is the highest price paid for a home in Lincoln since 1997 and 
is probably an all-time record, according to Kyle Fischer of the 
Realtors Association of Lincoln.Fischer said there’s a chance there might have been a private sale — 
one not listed in the multiple listing service used by Realtors — that 
was higher, but he was not aware of one.“Prices in Lincoln overall are at an all-time high,” he said. “This is highest we’ve ever seen.”The median sale price for an existing home in Lincoln was $259,900 in
 February, according to MLS records, which was 13% higher than a year 
ago.<h2>Condos sell for more than $1M </h2>Fischer said there has been some buzz in the industry over the recent
 sale of at least three condominiums in downtown Lincoln for more than 
$1 million each.MLS records show 2022 was a banner year for sales in the Capital City, with four homes selling for $1.9 million or higher.Frost, a star quarterback for NU and national coach of the year prior
 to being hired at Nebraska, had 16 wins and 31 losses in nearly five 
seasons as coach of the Huskers.He was fired in September after a stunning loss to Georgia Southern. 
But he left with a $16.4 million buyout of his contract, according to <a target="_blank" href="https://www.wowt.com/2022/09/19/buying-out-scott-frosts-contract-before-october-cost-university-nebraska-millions-more/">wowt.com.</a>In December, the <a target="_blank" href="https://www.azcentral.com/story/money/real-estate/done-deals/2022/12/26/former-nfl-player-and-cornhuskers-coach-pays-5-4m-for-phoenix-home/69742042007/">Arizona Republic</a> reported that Frost and his wife had purchased a home in the Phoenix area for $5.4 million.The sale of his home in Lincoln went largely unnoticed, except in real estate circles.The home did earn some publicity in June 2018 — three months after 
Frost purchased it. That’s when burglars made off with some Oregon Ducks
 football helmets, signed photographs and five pairs of Air Jordan 
shoes, according to the <a target="_blank" href="https://journalstar.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/scott-frost-on-burglary-at-his-lincoln-home-obviously-very-disappointing-and-discouraging/article_86acfc85-2c0d-5c12-a529-07c0dacc8ac7.html">Lincoln Journal-Star</a>. Three people were ultimately arrested, the paper reported.The sale of his home was recorded Nov. 21 to the Chance Dudley Trust,
 but the owner was listed in county records as Lincoln lawyer and former
 Nebraska Attorney General Jon Bruning as trustee.Bruning, as well as the Realtor who listed Frost’s home, declined to 
comment Wednesday. Frost retains ownership of a Nebraska home on a 
sandpit lake in the Ashland area.<h2>Record price in Omaha is $6.5 million</h2>Fischer said that MLS records for the Great Plains region indicated 
that at least two home sales in Omaha topped $3.5 million in the past 
five years.The record price paid for a home in Omaha?MLS records, going back to 1997, indicated that it was a home in the 
Fairacres neighborhood in central Omaha, purchased by TD Ameritrade 
founder Joe Ricketts. The 19-room, 17,232-square-foot home, which sits 
on nearly four acres, sold for $6.5 million in 1999, according to 
Douglas County property records.