TOPEKA, Kan. (AP) — The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision allowing states to ban abortion stirred alarm Friday among LGBTQ advocates, who feared that the ruling could someday allow a rollback of legal protections for gay relationships, including the right for same-sex couples to marry.

In the court’s majority opinion&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/abortion-supreme-court-decision-854f60302f21c2c35129e58cf8d8a7b0">overturning the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision,</a>&nbsp;Justice Samuel Alito said the decision applied only to abortion. But critics of the court’s conservative majority gave the statement no credence.

“I don’t buy that at all,” said Lawrence Gostin, a professor of medicine at Georgetown University and faculty director of its Institute for National and Global Health Law. “It really is much more extreme than the justices are making it out to be.”

He added: “It means that you can’t look to the Supreme Court as an impartial arbiter of constitutional rights because they’re acting more as culture warriors.”

Gostin and others pointed to a separate concurring opinion in which Justice Clarence Thomas said the court should review other precedents, including its 2015 decision legalizing same-sex marriage, a 2003 decision striking down laws criminalizing gay sex and a 1965 decision declaring that married couples have a right to use contraception.

“Today is about this horrifying invasion of privacy that this court is now allowing, and when we lose one right that we have relied on and enjoyed, other rights are at risk,” said Jim Obergefell, the plaintiff in the landmark ruling legalizing same-sex marriage, who is now running as a Democrat for the Ohio House.

Abortion opponents celebrated the potential for states to ban abortion after nearly 50 years of being prevented from doing so. Some argued that the case did not have implications beyond that, noting Alito’s words.

“And to ensure that our decision is not misunderstood or mischaracterized, we emphasize that our decision concerns the constitutional right to abortion and no other right,” Alito wrote. “Nothing in this opinion should be understood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abortion.”

Kristen Waggoner, legal director for the Alliance Defending Freedom, which helped defend the Mississippi abortion law at issue in the ruling, said the high court’s decision makes it clear that “the taking of human life is unlike any other issue.” She said raising other issues shows the weakness of critics’ arguments about abortion.

Still, said Paul Dupont, a spokesman for the conservative anti-abortion American Principles Project, conservatives are optimistic about the potential for future victories on cultural issues, though getting more states to ban abortion is “a huge enough battle.”

“If there is a thought that this could apply elsewhere, you know, they’re not going to say it here, and we’re just going to have to see,” Dupont said.

Other factors could protect those rulings on birth control and LGBTQ rights, too. The Obergefell decision that legalized same-sex marriage was based on equal protection, and hundreds of thousands of couples have relied on it to wed, a precedent that many courts would be loath to disturb.

Still, a sharp increase in anti-LGBTQ rhetoric in the U.S. and opposition to specific kinds of birth control on the right have advocates concerned that those rights are vulnerable.

The possibility worried some of the scores of people at a Friday evening abortion-rights rally outside the Kansas Statehouse in Topeka. including Rija Nazir, a 21-year-old community organizer from Wichita for a voting-rights group.

She wore a pink cowboy hat festooned with a button featuring a “cowboy uterus” drawing for a “Vote Neigh” campaign against&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/business-legislature-constitutions-kansas-topeka-2b65563a5637dda6d6707822154dece5">an anti-abortion measure</a>&nbsp;on the statewide ballot Aug. 2.

“They’re going to go for LGBTQ rights first and then same-sex marriage next. Who knows? Maybe interracial marriage, birth control,” Nazir said. “They’re not going to stop at abortion.”

Some abortion opponents treat some forms of contraception as forms of abortion, particularly IUDs and emergency birth control such as Plan B, also known as the “morning after” pill. Lawmakers in Idaho and Missouri last year discussed banning state funding for emergency contraception, and Idaho prevents public schools or universities from dispersing it.

“It’s all interconnected, because at its base, birth control and abortion are both types of health care that help people have bodily autonomy,” said Mara Gandal-Powers, director of birth control access for the National Women’s Law Center, which supports abortion rights. “I’m very concerned about where this is going to go.”

The Supreme Court’s three most liberal members argued that the majority decision “breaches a core rule-of-law principle, designed to promote constancy in the law” and “places in jeopardy” other rights.

At the White House, President Joe Biden pledged to do everything in his power to defend a woman’s right to have an abortion in states where it will be banned. He warned that the ruling could undermine rights to contraception and gay marriage: “This is an extreme and dangerous path.”

Then there is Thomas’ concurring opinion, which Sarah Warbelow, legal director for the pro-LGBTQ-rights Human Rights Campaign, called an invitation for “stirring up fringe organizations, fringe politicians who want to harm the LGBTQ community.”

“There are clearly members of the court who have an outdated notion of what America looks like today and have a fantasy of returning to their painted idealism of a 1940s, 1950s America, certainly not what it really was in the 1940s and ’50s,” she said. “And that is terrifying.”

Jason Pierceson, a University of Illinois political scientist, said he doesn’t see the conservative majority stopping with abortion.

“They are sending signals to the conservative legal movement, which has a lot of momentum right now because of this victory, to keep going and to keep bringing cases to them over the next several years that will give them opportunities to go further,” Pierceson said.

Jennifer Pizer, acting chief legal officer for the LGBTQ-rights group Lambda Legal, added: “It is an extremist assault on the privacy, self-determination, dignity and equality of every person in our country.”

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/6/1656175440177.png" alt="Abortion rights protesters in Kansas City on Friday night -photo courtesy KCTV" />
 <figcaption>Abortion rights protesters in Kansas City on Friday night -photo courtesy KCTV</figcaption>
 </figure>TOPEKA, Kan. (AP) — The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision allowing states to ban abortion stirred alarm Friday among LGBTQ advocates, who feared that the ruling could someday allow a rollback of legal protections for gay relationships, including the right for same-sex couples to marry.In the court’s majority opinion&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/abortion-supreme-court-decision-854f60302f21c2c35129e58cf8d8a7b0">overturning the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision,</a>&nbsp;Justice Samuel Alito said the decision applied only to abortion. But critics of the court’s conservative majority gave the statement no credence.“I don’t buy that at all,” said Lawrence Gostin, a professor of medicine at Georgetown University and faculty director of its Institute for National and Global Health Law. “It really is much more extreme than the justices are making it out to be.”He added: “It means that you can’t look to the Supreme Court as an impartial arbiter of constitutional rights because they’re acting more as culture warriors.”Gostin and others pointed to a separate concurring opinion in which Justice Clarence Thomas said the court should review other precedents, including its 2015 decision legalizing same-sex marriage, a 2003 decision striking down laws criminalizing gay sex and a 1965 decision declaring that married couples have a right to use contraception.“Today is about this horrifying invasion of privacy that this court is now allowing, and when we lose one right that we have relied on and enjoyed, other rights are at risk,” said Jim Obergefell, the plaintiff in the landmark ruling legalizing same-sex marriage, who is now running as a Democrat for the Ohio House.Abortion opponents celebrated the potential for states to ban abortion after nearly 50 years of being prevented from doing so. Some argued that the case did not have implications beyond that, noting Alito’s words.“And to ensure that our decision is not misunderstood or mischaracterized, we emphasize that our decision concerns the constitutional right to abortion and no other right,” Alito wrote. “Nothing in this opinion should be understood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abortion.”Kristen Waggoner, legal director for the Alliance Defending Freedom, which helped defend the Mississippi abortion law at issue in the ruling, said the high court’s decision makes it clear that “the taking of human life is unlike any other issue.” She said raising other issues shows the weakness of critics’ arguments about abortion.Still, said Paul Dupont, a spokesman for the conservative anti-abortion American Principles Project, conservatives are optimistic about the potential for future victories on cultural issues, though getting more states to ban abortion is “a huge enough battle.”“If there is a thought that this could apply elsewhere, you know, they’re not going to say it here, and we’re just going to have to see,” Dupont said.Other factors could protect those rulings on birth control and LGBTQ rights, too. The Obergefell decision that legalized same-sex marriage was based on equal protection, and hundreds of thousands of couples have relied on it to wed, a precedent that many courts would be loath to disturb.Still, a sharp increase in anti-LGBTQ rhetoric in the U.S. and opposition to specific kinds of birth control on the right have advocates concerned that those rights are vulnerable.<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/6/1656105291910.png" alt="Protests on Friday at the U.S. Supreme Court -photo courtesy CSPAN" />
 <figcaption>Protests on Friday at the U.S. Supreme Court -photo courtesy CSPAN</figcaption>
 </figure>The possibility worried some of the scores of people at a Friday evening abortion-rights rally outside the Kansas Statehouse in Topeka. including Rija Nazir, a 21-year-old community organizer from Wichita for a voting-rights group.She wore a pink cowboy hat festooned with a button featuring a “cowboy uterus” drawing for a “Vote Neigh” campaign against&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/business-legislature-constitutions-kansas-topeka-2b65563a5637dda6d6707822154dece5">an anti-abortion measure</a>&nbsp;on the statewide ballot Aug. 2.“They’re going to go for LGBTQ rights first and then same-sex marriage next. Who knows? Maybe interracial marriage, birth control,” Nazir said. “They’re not going to stop at abortion.”Some abortion opponents treat some forms of contraception as forms of abortion, particularly IUDs and emergency birth control such as Plan B, also known as the “morning after” pill. Lawmakers in Idaho and Missouri last year discussed banning state funding for emergency contraception, and Idaho prevents public schools or universities from dispersing it.“It’s all interconnected, because at its base, birth control and abortion are both types of health care that help people have bodily autonomy,” said Mara Gandal-Powers, director of birth control access for the National Women’s Law Center, which supports abortion rights. “I’m very concerned about where this is going to go.”The Supreme Court’s three most liberal members argued that the majority decision “breaches a core rule-of-law principle, designed to promote constancy in the law” and “places in jeopardy” other rights.At the White House, President Joe Biden pledged to do everything in his power to defend a woman’s right to have an abortion in states where it will be banned. He warned that the ruling could undermine rights to contraception and gay marriage: “This is an extreme and dangerous path.”Then there is Thomas’ concurring opinion, which Sarah Warbelow, legal director for the pro-LGBTQ-rights Human Rights Campaign, called an invitation for “stirring up fringe organizations, fringe politicians who want to harm the LGBTQ community.”“There are clearly members of the court who have an outdated notion of what America looks like today and have a fantasy of returning to their painted idealism of a 1940s, 1950s America, certainly not what it really was in the 1940s and ’50s,” she said. “And that is terrifying.”Jason Pierceson, a University of Illinois political scientist, said he doesn’t see the conservative majority stopping with abortion.“They are sending signals to the conservative legal movement, which has a lot of momentum right now because of this victory, to keep going and to keep bringing cases to them over the next several years that will give them opportunities to go further,” Pierceson said.Jennifer Pizer, acting chief legal officer for the LGBTQ-rights group Lambda Legal, added: “It is an extremist assault on the privacy, self-determination, dignity and equality of every person in our country.”___

With Roe dead, some fear rollback of LGBTQ and other rights

GRAY COUNTY—A Wyoming man escaped injury after a small plane crash just before 7:30a.m. Saturday in Gray County, Kansas.

The Kansas Highway Patrol reported a&nbsp;Kit Fox 5 Vixen aircraft piloted by&nbsp; 55-year-old Lester Lane Smothers of Casper Wyoming was attempting a flight from Meade, Kansas to Casper, Wyoming.&nbsp;

The plane began to have engine trouble due to a fuel issue. The pilot attempted to land at the&nbsp;Montezuma Airport. The aircraft landed nose first 50 yards east of the airport runway.

The KHP indicated Smothers was not injured but went to a local hospital.&nbsp; The Federal Aviation Association is investigating.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/6/1656187494303.png" alt="Google map" />
 <figcaption>Google map</figcaption>
 </figure>GRAY COUNTY—A Wyoming man escaped injury after a small plane crash just before 7:30a.m. Saturday in Gray County, Kansas.The Kansas Highway Patrol reported a&nbsp;Kit Fox 5 Vixen aircraft piloted by&nbsp; 55-year-old Lester Lane Smothers of Casper Wyoming was attempting a flight from Meade, Kansas to Casper, Wyoming.&nbsp;The plane began to have engine trouble due to a fuel issue. The pilot attempted to land at the&nbsp;Montezuma Airport. The aircraft landed nose first 50 yards east of the airport runway.The KHP indicated Smothers was not injured but went to a local hospital.&nbsp; The Federal Aviation Association is investigating.

Small plane lands nose first, short of SW Kan. airport runway

By CELIA LLOPIS-JEPSEN <a href="https://www.kcur.org/news/2022-06-21/how-satellite-guided-cows-might-save-the-kansas-prairie-and-make-ranchers-more-money">Kansas News Service</a>

STRONG CITY, Kan. — Third-generation rancher Daniel Mushrush has 30-plus miles of barbed wire fence to tend to.

Calves
 wriggle beneath it. The wires get loose. Wild animals take a toll. And 
when streams surge after storms, rushing water often snaps sections in 
two.

For Mushrush and his family, the fence-mending on their Flint Hills ranch never ends. It’s inescapable.

“Fencing is right up there with death and taxes,” the third-generation cattle rancher said.

But
 this year, his cattle sport new GPS collars intended to make 
traditional fences not quite obsolete, but less important. About the 
size of an iPhone and twice as thick, the collars offer a high-tech take
 on the kind of familiar invisible fences that homeowners install for 
dogs.

Mushrush joined a Nature Conservancy project that brings 
together ranchers, scientists and conservation experts in Kansas, 
Colorado and New Mexico.

Their work is part of a flurry of recent studies into the tech world’s fledgling virtual fence industry.

Mushrush’s Red Angus cattle will help researchers learn whether the devices can save
 ranchers money and simultaneously help ailing bird populations, reduce 
water pollution and increase the resilience and diversity of grasslands.

Biologists
 from Kansas State University will help study the effects of a project 
that could prove a model bridge between conservationists and Flint Hills
 ranchers.

The agriculture and conservation fields often stand at 
odds, but they also share some common ground in their appreciation of 
the nation’s last significant stretches of unplowed tallgrass prairie.

“If
 I’m going to own Flint Hills grass, there’s a moral obligation to treat
 it like it’s sacred,” Mushrush said. “Because it is. There’s not very 
much left.”

Still, paying his bills comes first. Protecting wildlife, such as the disappearing greater prairie chicken, comes second.

“Is
 it as important as me making my mortgage payment? Obviously not,” he 
said. “Because (prairie chickens) can’t take this ranch, like the bank 
still could.”

The Mushrush ranch is home to 
between 800 and a couple thousand cattle, depending on the time of year.
 The family owns or leases about 15,000 acres.

Seen on a map, the ranch is shaped something like Africa. Fencing, meanwhile, cuts across it in straight lines.

“That’s where it was drawn out 100 years ago,” Mushrush said. “That’s where the fence is yet today.”

Those
 rigid lines are blind to the curvy contours that shape this land — 
flat-topped hills, rocky ledges and snake-like, meandering streams.

Yet when it comes to grazing, the contours matter. They effectively funnel cattle toward some areas and away from others.

And
 when the herd consistently opts, say, to lounge along a creek, the 
damage can add up. The cattle can chomp and stomp the same areas too 
much, tearing up the banks and filling the stream with nitrogen from 
their manure.

Mushrush decided to try the GPS collars. His barbed 
wire fences just aren’t where he needs them, making it hard to give 
vegetation the right balance of grazing and rest that produces more 
robust grasses.

When grasses suffer, it limits how many animals a ranch can support.

Mushrush
 can’t solve the problem by installing ever more physical fences, which 
can cost thousands of dollars per mile. Even with temporary fences, it’s
 tough. This landscape — including when any given swath of it would 
benefit from more or less grazing — is simply too nuanced.

Virtual fence
 aims to let ranchers block off any zone on their property by pulling up
 a map on an electronic tablet and using software to set the lines.

Adding
 a buffer zone along a winding creek — practically impossible, and 
prohibitively expensive with normal fences — becomes easy. So do other 
changes, such as redrawing paddocks or moving cattle to let grazed 
grasses grow.

The GPS collars don’t require ranchers to bury wires in the ground the way invisible fences for dogs frequently do.

If
 cattle walk toward the invisible line, the collars make noises. If they
 keep walking, those noises get louder. If they cross the line, the 
collars deliver a shock.

Most of the cattle take the hint. A few shrug off the discomfort and cross the barrier to munch on the proverbial greener grass.

But if most of the cattle stick to the rules, that could be enough to benefit ranchers, flora and fauna.

The Nature Conservancy has an interest in ranchers succeeding financially.

Flint Hills ranchers run their cattle on what the environmental group describes as <a href="https://www.nature.org/en-us/get-involved/how-to-help/places-we-protect/tallgrass-prairie-national-preserve/" target="_blank">one of the world’s most diverse ecosystems</a>, with more than 500 plant species.

Once
 one of North America’s dominant landscapes, settlers and their 
descendents plowed almost the entire continent’s tallgrass to plant 
crops.

“The Flint Hills is really the only place where we have significant 
contiguous acres that are still in native tallgrass prairie,” said Tony 
Capizzo, who heads the Nature Conservancy’s work to preserve it.

Flint Hills ranches that thrive are likely to remain ranches — and unplowed prairie — instead of facing development.

“Ranching is very inherently compatible with prairie conservation,” he said. “Ranching needs to stay profitable.”

The Nature Conservancy owns the 10,000-acre <a href="https://www.nature.org/en-us/get-involved/how-to-help/places-we-protect/tallgrass-prairie-national-preserve/" target="_blank">Tallgrass Prairie National Preserve</a> next to Mushrush’s property. Bison roam there, as do some of Mushrush’s cattle, through a lease.

Prairie
 needs grazing — in the right amounts — to thrive. It prevents some 
plant species from taking over, so that the land continues to host its 
signature diverse collection of grasses and wildflowers.

The 
wildlife that call the prairie home, meanwhile, benefit from a patchy 
landscape, in which different areas bear the marks of varying degrees of
 grazing and burning. The Nature Conservancy thinks GPS could help 
achieve that.

Mushrush said he and the Nature Conservancy may rank their priorities differently, but their goals still overlap.

His
 top priority is grass that’s as healthy and robust as possible, so that
 he can graze more livestock and keep the ranch profitable for decades 
to come. He hopes the GPS collars will help him keep cattle in the right
 places at the right times to achieve that.

And if researchers can show him how to shore up prairie biodiversity at the same time, he said, “it’s certainly worth trying.”

“That
 is one of the reasons we’re so excited” to study virtual fencing, said 
Alice Boyle, a biology professor at K-State who studies birds. “It’s the
 first solution that I know about that is positive … from the ranching 
perspective and from the grassland conservation perspective.”

The 
cattle only recently received collars. This year, the devices will track
 where the animals spend their time, but won’t restrict their movements.

K-State
 biologists will use these months to gauge the current situation before 
the virtual fences go live. Then they’ll see in the coming years how the
 prairie responds to a nimbler way of managing livestock.

They’ll 
look for changes in nitrogen pollution and erosion when cattle can no 
longer loiter consistently along their favorite streams.

They’ll look for plant diversity and vigor in areas that get needed rest.

They’ll look for increases in grassland birds.

Half of North America’s grassland birds have disappeared since 1970.

For Kansas, that means icons of the open plains, such as <a href="https://www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/Eastern_Meadowlark/lifehistory" target="_blank">the brightly colored, sweet-singing meadowlarks</a>, pipe up each spring in smaller numbers.

“In
 many ways, the species that we’re worried about … define our natural 
landscape,” Boyle said. “And we live in the last big stronghold of where
 those populations are still common.”

Once widespread, <a href="https://www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/Greater_Prairie-Chicken/" target="_blank">prairie chickens</a>
 known for their eerie whooping sounds and dances on breeding grounds, 
called leks, now retain shrinking toeholds in scattered parts of the 
central U.S.

The virtual fencing project could help by effectively
 cording off areas for rest from prescribed burning and grazing, long 
enough to let a mat of dead grass called thatch accrue at ground level, 
interwoven among the live grass.

Many grassland birds need thatch to survive.

“We can create patches of that suitable nesting habitat in areas 
close to the prairie chicken leks,” said. “We know that the females tend
 to nest not too far from those leks.”

Like physical fences, 
virtual fences are expensive, too. The question is whether the benefits —
 both in terms of healthier grass and less time and money spent mending 
barbed wire or moving temporary fences — can pay off long-term for 
ranchers.

A team of business experts from Colorado State 
University will study Mushrush’s experience to help figure it out. 
Mushrush is optimistic.

“The math should work,” he said. “It’s a 
lot of money up front, but ultimately I think it will make our lives a 
little easier and it will help.”

“Water, wildlife (and) rancher profitability,” he said, “all three of those are really important to sustainability.”

Celia Llopis-Jepsen is a reporter for the Kansas News Service. You 
can follow her on Twitter @celia_LJ or email her at celia@kcur.org.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/6/1655832059297.png" alt="A Red Angus cow from the Mushrush herd wears a GPS collar. Celia Llopis-Jepsen / Kansas News Service" />
 <figcaption>A Red Angus cow from the Mushrush herd wears a GPS collar. Celia Llopis-Jepsen / Kansas News Service</figcaption>
 </figure>By CELIA LLOPIS-JEPSEN <a href="https://www.kcur.org/news/2022-06-21/how-satellite-guided-cows-might-save-the-kansas-prairie-and-make-ranchers-more-money">Kansas News Service</a>STRONG CITY, Kan. — Third-generation rancher Daniel Mushrush has 30-plus miles of barbed wire fence to tend to.Calves
 wriggle beneath it. The wires get loose. Wild animals take a toll. And 
when streams surge after storms, rushing water often snaps sections in 
two.For Mushrush and his family, the fence-mending on their Flint Hills ranch never ends. It’s inescapable.“Fencing is right up there with death and taxes,” the third-generation cattle rancher said.But
 this year, his cattle sport new GPS collars intended to make 
traditional fences not quite obsolete, but less important. About the 
size of an iPhone and twice as thick, the collars offer a high-tech take
 on the kind of familiar invisible fences that homeowners install for 
dogs.Mushrush joined a Nature Conservancy project that brings 
together ranchers, scientists and conservation experts in Kansas, 
Colorado and New Mexico.Their work is part of a flurry of recent studies into the tech world’s fledgling virtual fence industry.Mushrush’s Red Angus cattle will help researchers learn whether the devices can save
 ranchers money and simultaneously help ailing bird populations, reduce 
water pollution and increase the resilience and diversity of grasslands.Biologists
 from Kansas State University will help study the effects of a project 
that could prove a model bridge between conservationists and Flint Hills
 ranchers.The agriculture and conservation fields often stand at 
odds, but they also share some common ground in their appreciation of 
the nation’s last significant stretches of unplowed tallgrass prairie.“If
 I’m going to own Flint Hills grass, there’s a moral obligation to treat
 it like it’s sacred,” Mushrush said. “Because it is. There’s not very 
much left.”Still, paying his bills comes first. Protecting wildlife, such as the disappearing greater prairie chicken, comes second.“Is
 it as important as me making my mortgage payment? Obviously not,” he 
said. “Because (prairie chickens) can’t take this ranch, like the bank 
still could.”<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/6/1655832146738.png" alt="Kansas State University doctoral candidate Katy Silber, left, and undergraduate biology student Emily Burnett gather data on vegetation and cattle impacts along a stream on the Mushrush ranch. Celia Llopis-Jepsen / Kansas News Service" />
 <figcaption>Kansas State University doctoral candidate Katy Silber, left, and undergraduate biology student Emily Burnett gather data on vegetation and cattle impacts along a stream on the Mushrush ranch. Celia Llopis-Jepsen / Kansas News Service</figcaption>
 </figure>How the collars workThe Mushrush ranch is home to 
between 800 and a couple thousand cattle, depending on the time of year.
 The family owns or leases about 15,000 acres.Seen on a map, the ranch is shaped something like Africa. Fencing, meanwhile, cuts across it in straight lines.“That’s where it was drawn out 100 years ago,” Mushrush said. “That’s where the fence is yet today.”Those
 rigid lines are blind to the curvy contours that shape this land — 
flat-topped hills, rocky ledges and snake-like, meandering streams.Yet when it comes to grazing, the contours matter. They effectively funnel cattle toward some areas and away from others.And
 when the herd consistently opts, say, to lounge along a creek, the 
damage can add up. The cattle can chomp and stomp the same areas too 
much, tearing up the banks and filling the stream with nitrogen from 
their manure.Mushrush decided to try the GPS collars. His barbed 
wire fences just aren’t where he needs them, making it hard to give 
vegetation the right balance of grazing and rest that produces more 
robust grasses.When grasses suffer, it limits how many animals a ranch can support.Mushrush
 can’t solve the problem by installing ever more physical fences, which 
can cost thousands of dollars per mile. Even with temporary fences, it’s
 tough. This landscape — including when any given swath of it would 
benefit from more or less grazing — is simply too nuanced.Virtual fence
 aims to let ranchers block off any zone on their property by pulling up
 a map on an electronic tablet and using software to set the lines.Adding
 a buffer zone along a winding creek — practically impossible, and 
prohibitively expensive with normal fences — becomes easy. So do other 
changes, such as redrawing paddocks or moving cattle to let grazed 
grasses grow.The GPS collars don’t require ranchers to bury wires in the ground the way invisible fences for dogs frequently do.If
 cattle walk toward the invisible line, the collars make noises. If they
 keep walking, those noises get louder. If they cross the line, the 
collars deliver a shock.Most of the cattle take the hint. A few shrug off the discomfort and cross the barrier to munch on the proverbial greener grass.But if most of the cattle stick to the rules, that could be enough to benefit ranchers, flora and fauna.Where interests overlapThe Nature Conservancy has an interest in ranchers succeeding financially.Flint Hills ranchers run their cattle on what the environmental group describes as <a href="https://www.nature.org/en-us/get-involved/how-to-help/places-we-protect/tallgrass-prairie-national-preserve/" target="_blank">one of the world’s most diverse ecosystems</a>, with more than 500 plant species.Once
 one of North America’s dominant landscapes, settlers and their 
descendents plowed almost the entire continent’s tallgrass to plant 
crops.<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/6/1655832207591.png" alt="" />
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure>“The Flint Hills is really the only place where we have significant 
contiguous acres that are still in native tallgrass prairie,” said Tony 
Capizzo, who heads the Nature Conservancy’s work to preserve it.Flint Hills ranches that thrive are likely to remain ranches — and unplowed prairie — instead of facing development.“Ranching is very inherently compatible with prairie conservation,” he said. “Ranching needs to stay profitable.”The Nature Conservancy owns the 10,000-acre <a href="https://www.nature.org/en-us/get-involved/how-to-help/places-we-protect/tallgrass-prairie-national-preserve/" target="_blank">Tallgrass Prairie National Preserve</a> next to Mushrush’s property. Bison roam there, as do some of Mushrush’s cattle, through a lease.Prairie
 needs grazing — in the right amounts — to thrive. It prevents some 
plant species from taking over, so that the land continues to host its 
signature diverse collection of grasses and wildflowers.The 
wildlife that call the prairie home, meanwhile, benefit from a patchy 
landscape, in which different areas bear the marks of varying degrees of
 grazing and burning. The Nature Conservancy thinks GPS could help 
achieve that.Mushrush said he and the Nature Conservancy may rank their priorities differently, but their goals still overlap.His
 top priority is grass that’s as healthy and robust as possible, so that
 he can graze more livestock and keep the ranch profitable for decades 
to come. He hopes the GPS collars will help him keep cattle in the right
 places at the right times to achieve that.And if researchers can show him how to shore up prairie biodiversity at the same time, he said, “it’s certainly worth trying.”Protecting birds and water“That
 is one of the reasons we’re so excited” to study virtual fencing, said 
Alice Boyle, a biology professor at K-State who studies birds. “It’s the
 first solution that I know about that is positive … from the ranching 
perspective and from the grassland conservation perspective.”The 
cattle only recently received collars. This year, the devices will track
 where the animals spend their time, but won’t restrict their movements.K-State
 biologists will use these months to gauge the current situation before 
the virtual fences go live. Then they’ll see in the coming years how the
 prairie responds to a nimbler way of managing livestock.They’ll 
look for changes in nitrogen pollution and erosion when cattle can no 
longer loiter consistently along their favorite streams.They’ll look for plant diversity and vigor in areas that get needed rest.They’ll look for increases in grassland birds.Half of North America’s grassland birds have disappeared since 1970.For Kansas, that means icons of the open plains, such as <a href="https://www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/Eastern_Meadowlark/lifehistory" target="_blank">the brightly colored, sweet-singing meadowlarks</a>, pipe up each spring in smaller numbers.“In
 many ways, the species that we’re worried about … define our natural 
landscape,” Boyle said. “And we live in the last big stronghold of where
 those populations are still common.”Once widespread, <a href="https://www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/Greater_Prairie-Chicken/" target="_blank">prairie chickens</a>
 known for their eerie whooping sounds and dances on breeding grounds, 
called leks, now retain shrinking toeholds in scattered parts of the 
central U.S.The virtual fencing project could help by effectively
 cording off areas for rest from prescribed burning and grazing, long 
enough to let a mat of dead grass called thatch accrue at ground level, 
interwoven among the live grass.Many grassland birds need thatch to survive.<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/6/1655832260197.png" alt="Tony Capizzo shows a handful of thatch from the ground at the Tallgrass Prairie National Preserve. Celia Llopis-Jepsen / Kansas News Service" />
 <figcaption>Tony Capizzo shows a handful of thatch from the ground at the Tallgrass Prairie National Preserve. Celia Llopis-Jepsen / Kansas News Service</figcaption>
 </figure>“We can create patches of that suitable nesting habitat in areas 
close to the prairie chicken leks,” said. “We know that the females tend
 to nest not too far from those leks.”Like physical fences, 
virtual fences are expensive, too. The question is whether the benefits —
 both in terms of healthier grass and less time and money spent mending 
barbed wire or moving temporary fences — can pay off long-term for 
ranchers.A team of business experts from Colorado State 
University will study Mushrush’s experience to help figure it out. 
Mushrush is optimistic.“The math should work,” he said. “It’s a 
lot of money up front, but ultimately I think it will make our lives a 
little easier and it will help.”“Water, wildlife (and) rancher profitability,” he said, “all three of those are really important to sustainability.”Celia Llopis-Jepsen is a reporter for the Kansas News Service. You 
can follow her on Twitter @celia_LJ or email her at celia@kcur.org.

How satellite-guided cows might save prairie, make ranchers more money

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden said Friday he would fight to preserve access to abortion after the Supreme Court&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/abortion-supreme-court-decision-854f60302f21c2c35129e58cf8d8a7b0">overturned Roe v. Wade</a>, and he called on Americans to elect more Democrats who would safeguard rights upended by the court’s decision. “This is not over,” he declared.

(Click below to watch President Biden's comments)

“Let’s be very clear, the health and life of women across this nation are now at risk,” he said from the White House on what he called “a sad day for the court and the country.”

Biden added that “the court has done what it’s never done before — expressly taking away a constitutional right that is so fundamental to so many Americans.”

Republicans and conservative leaders celebrated the culmination of a decades-long campaign to undo the nationwide legalization of abortion that began with Roe v. Wade in 1973.

“Millions of Americans have spent half a century praying, marching and working toward today’s historic victories for the rule of law and for innocent life,” said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., an architect of efforts to tilt the Supreme Court to the right.

Although Biden has previously expressed&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/abortion-biden-us-supreme-court-health-religion-32fbfb858d7d3314427e5cdd88308b8b">conflicted feelings about abortion,</a>&nbsp;he delivered a forceful defense Friday. Noting that Republican-controlled states now had a clear path to ban abortion even in cases of incest or rape, he said “it just stuns me.”

Since the country will increasingly see a patchwork of policies — with some states restricting abortion and others providing it freely — Biden emphasized that the court decision does not prevent anyone from traveling to end a pregnancy.

“Women must remain free to travel safely to another state to seek the care they need,” he said. “And my administration will defend that bedrock right.”

Biden warned that other legal precedents ensuring same-sex marriage and access to birth control could also be at risk.

“This is an extreme and dangerous path this court is taking us on,” he said.

The overturning of Roe v. Wade was not unexpected — a draft of the decision leaked nearly two months ago — but it still reverberated throughout Washington in what has suddenly become a new era in the country’s battle over abortion.

The White House and the Justice Department said they would look for ways to blunt the impact of the ruling, and Biden said his administration would try to ensure that abortion medication is available as widely as possible.

However, no executive actions were announced Friday, and Biden conceded that his options were limited. White House officials tried to rally allies in a virtual meeting after the president spoke.

“We need to stay united,” said Emmy Ruiz, the director of political strategy and outreach. “We know that the task ahead is incredibly daunting. But we’re prepared to meet the moment.”

Protesters converged on&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/us-supreme-court">the Supreme Court,</a>&nbsp;where a crowd of abortion-rights supporters quickly swelled to the hundreds. One chanted into a bullhorn, “legal abortion on demand” and “this decision must not stand.” Some shouted “the Supreme Court is illegitimate.”

“It’s a painful day for those of us who support women’s rights,” said Laura Free, an Ithaca, New York, resident and women’s rights historian who came to Washington to do research. When she learned of the decision, she said, “I had to come here.”

A competing faction demonstrated in favor of the ruling, holding signs saying “the future is anti-abortion″ and “dismember Roe.”

Garrett Bess, with Heritage Action for America, a lobbying arm of the conservative Heritage Foundation, said his organization would be working in states to continue efforts to limit abortion.

“This has been a long time coming,” he said.

Biden and other Democrats hope to use outrage over the court decision to rally voters in&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/2022-midterm-elections">November’s midterm elections</a>. Although nationwide legislation ensuring access to abortion appears out of reach, more Democratic victories at the state level could limit Republican efforts to ban the practice.

“Congress must act, and with your vote, you can act,” Biden said. “You can have the final word.”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said the court’s ruling “is outrageous and heart-wrenching” and fulfills the Republican Party’s “dark and extreme goal of ripping away women’s right to make their own reproductive health decisions.”

In a statement, Attorney General Merrick Garland said the Justice Department “will work tirelessly to protect and advance reproductive freedom.” He said that in addition to protecting providers and those seeking abortions in states where it remains legal, “we stand ready to work with other arms of the federal government that seek to use their lawful authorities to protect and preserve access to reproductive care.”

He also noted that the Food and Drug Administration has approved the use of mifepristone, a drug used to end pregnancies.

“States may not ban mifepristone based on disagreement with the FDA’s expert judgment about its safety and efficacy,” Garland said.

Lawrence Gostin, who runs the O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health at Georgetown Law, said he was disappointed that the president did not announce more concrete steps.

“He was very ambiguous about what he planned to do,” he said. “There was no really decisive, strategic plan of action that the administration was going to take.”

Gostin said he’s discussed a variety of options with administration officials but believes they are “gun-shy” given the potential for legal challenges that could lead to more roadblocks from a Supreme Court dominated by conservatives.

Some of Gostin’s suggestions included having Medicaid cover the cost of traveling across state lines to end pregnancies, as well as expanding access to abortion medication that can be delivered by mail.

The Rev. John Dorhauer, the general minister and president of the United Church of Christ, drove from Cleveland to Washington to attend one meeting earlier this month. Another virtual meeting was held this week, featuring Vice President Kamala Harris.

“It was rather impressive to see the commitment the White House and the vice president’s office has had to gather advocates from around the country,” Dorhauer said.

But even before the ruling, there were concerns that the administration was not ready.

Dr. Colleen McNicholas, chief medical officer of Planned Parenthood of the St. Louis Region and Southwest Missouri, said she expects “a true health crisis.”

“I think that we should have been preparing for far longer than we have been,” McNicholas said. “Do I think that they recognize that this a problem? Yes. Do I think that they’re prepared in this moment? No.”

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden said Friday he would fight to preserve access to abortion after the Supreme Court&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/abortion-supreme-court-decision-854f60302f21c2c35129e58cf8d8a7b0">overturned Roe v. Wade</a>, and he called on Americans to elect more Democrats who would safeguard rights upended by the court’s decision. “This is not over,” he declared.(Click below to watch President Biden's comments)<div><iframe src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/video.php?height=314&href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FWhiteHouse%2Fvideos%2F739710633941546%2F&show_text=false&width=560&t=376" 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>“Let’s be very clear, the health and life of women across this nation are now at risk,” he said from the White House on what he called “a sad day for the court and the country.”Biden added that “the court has done what it’s never done before — expressly taking away a constitutional right that is so fundamental to so many Americans.”Republicans and conservative leaders celebrated the culmination of a decades-long campaign to undo the nationwide legalization of abortion that began with Roe v. Wade in 1973.“Millions of Americans have spent half a century praying, marching and working toward today’s historic victories for the rule of law and for innocent life,” said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., an architect of efforts to tilt the Supreme Court to the right.Although Biden has previously expressed&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/abortion-biden-us-supreme-court-health-religion-32fbfb858d7d3314427e5cdd88308b8b">conflicted feelings about abortion,</a>&nbsp;he delivered a forceful defense Friday. Noting that Republican-controlled states now had a clear path to ban abortion even in cases of incest or rape, he said “it just stuns me.”Since the country will increasingly see a patchwork of policies — with some states restricting abortion and others providing it freely — Biden emphasized that the court decision does not prevent anyone from traveling to end a pregnancy.“Women must remain free to travel safely to another state to seek the care they need,” he said. “And my administration will defend that bedrock right.”Biden warned that other legal precedents ensuring same-sex marriage and access to birth control could also be at risk.“This is an extreme and dangerous path this court is taking us on,” he said.The overturning of Roe v. Wade was not unexpected — a draft of the decision leaked nearly two months ago — but it still reverberated throughout Washington in what has suddenly become a new era in the country’s battle over abortion.The White House and the Justice Department said they would look for ways to blunt the impact of the ruling, and Biden said his administration would try to ensure that abortion medication is available as widely as possible.However, no executive actions were announced Friday, and Biden conceded that his options were limited. White House officials tried to rally allies in a virtual meeting after the president spoke.“We need to stay united,” said Emmy Ruiz, the director of political strategy and outreach. “We know that the task ahead is incredibly daunting. But we’re prepared to meet the moment.”Protesters converged on&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/us-supreme-court">the Supreme Court,</a>&nbsp;where a crowd of abortion-rights supporters quickly swelled to the hundreds. One chanted into a bullhorn, “legal abortion on demand” and “this decision must not stand.” Some shouted “the Supreme Court is illegitimate.”“It’s a painful day for those of us who support women’s rights,” said Laura Free, an Ithaca, New York, resident and women’s rights historian who came to Washington to do research. When she learned of the decision, she said, “I had to come here.”A competing faction demonstrated in favor of the ruling, holding signs saying “the future is anti-abortion″ and “dismember Roe.”Garrett Bess, with Heritage Action for America, a lobbying arm of the conservative Heritage Foundation, said his organization would be working in states to continue efforts to limit abortion.“This has been a long time coming,” he said.Biden and other Democrats hope to use outrage over the court decision to rally voters in&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/2022-midterm-elections">November’s midterm elections</a>. Although nationwide legislation ensuring access to abortion appears out of reach, more Democratic victories at the state level could limit Republican efforts to ban the practice.“Congress must act, and with your vote, you can act,” Biden said. “You can have the final word.”House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said the court’s ruling “is outrageous and heart-wrenching” and fulfills the Republican Party’s “dark and extreme goal of ripping away women’s right to make their own reproductive health decisions.”In a statement, Attorney General Merrick Garland said the Justice Department “will work tirelessly to protect and advance reproductive freedom.” He said that in addition to protecting providers and those seeking abortions in states where it remains legal, “we stand ready to work with other arms of the federal government that seek to use their lawful authorities to protect and preserve access to reproductive care.”He also noted that the Food and Drug Administration has approved the use of mifepristone, a drug used to end pregnancies.“States may not ban mifepristone based on disagreement with the FDA’s expert judgment about its safety and efficacy,” Garland said.Lawrence Gostin, who runs the O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health at Georgetown Law, said he was disappointed that the president did not announce more concrete steps.“He was very ambiguous about what he planned to do,” he said. “There was no really decisive, strategic plan of action that the administration was going to take.”Gostin said he’s discussed a variety of options with administration officials but believes they are “gun-shy” given the potential for legal challenges that could lead to more roadblocks from a Supreme Court dominated by conservatives.Some of Gostin’s suggestions included having Medicaid cover the cost of traveling across state lines to end pregnancies, as well as expanding access to abortion medication that can be delivered by mail.The Rev. John Dorhauer, the general minister and president of the United Church of Christ, drove from Cleveland to Washington to attend one meeting earlier this month. Another virtual meeting was held this week, featuring Vice President Kamala Harris.“It was rather impressive to see the commitment the White House and the vice president’s office has had to gather advocates from around the country,” Dorhauer said.But even before the ruling, there were concerns that the administration was not ready.Dr. Colleen McNicholas, chief medical officer of Planned Parenthood of the St. Louis Region and Southwest Missouri, said she expects “a true health crisis.”“I think that we should have been preparing for far longer than we have been,” McNicholas said. “Do I think that they recognize that this a problem? Yes. Do I think that they’re prepared in this moment? No.”___

🎥 Biden vows abortion fight, assails 'extreme' court ruling

WASHINGTON (AP) — The House sent President Joe Biden the widest ranging&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/congress-gun-violence-bill-highlights-ab399a7a1c5eea98bcd12e944679355f">gun violence bill</a>&nbsp;Congress has passed in decades Friday, a measured compromise that at once illustrates progress on the long-intractable issue and the deep-seated partisan divide that persists.

The Democratic-led chamber approved the election-year legislation on a mostly party-line 234-193 vote, capping a spurt of action prompted by voters’ revulsion over last month’s mass shootings in&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/buffalo-supermarket-shooting">New York</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/uvalde-school-shooting">Texas</a>. The&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/shootings-texas-new-york-violence-buffalo-21932705343ec6ff172561ad95c287d1">Senate approved the measure late Thursday</a>&nbsp;by a bipartisan 65-33 margin.

Every House Democrat and 14 Republicans — six of whom won’t be in Congress next year — voted for the measure including&nbsp;Liz Cheney (WY), Adam Kinzinger (IL), Tom Rice(KY), John Katko (NY), Maria Salazar(FL), Chris Jacobs(NY), Brian Fitzpatrick (PA), Peter Meijer(MI), Fred Upton(MI), Steve Chabot(OH), Mike Turner(OH), David Joyce(OH), Anthony Gonzalez(OH), and Tony Gonzalez of Texas.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., underscored its significance to her party by taking the unusual step of presiding over the vote and announcing the result from the podium, to huzzahs from rank-and-file Democrats on the chamber’s floor.

Among Republicans backing the legislation was Rep. Liz Cheney of gun-friendly Wyoming, who has broken sharply with her party’s leaders and is helping lead the House investigation into last year’s Capitol insurrection by supporters of then-President Donald Trump. In a statement, she said that “as a mother and a constitutional conservative,” she believed the bill would curb violence and enhance safety, adding, “Nothing in the bill restricts the rights of responsible gun owners. Period.”

Impossible to ignore was the juxtaposition of the week’s gun votes with a pair of jarring Supreme Court decisions on two of the nation’s most incendiary culture war issues. The justices on Thursday struck down&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-guns-decision-what-to-know-a068d964981b6d1242a5ab124224f77a">a New York law that has restricted peoples’ ability to carry concealed weapons</a>, and Friday it&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/abortion-supreme-court-decision-854f60302f21c2c35129e58cf8d8a7b0">overturned Roe v. Wade</a>, eliminating the protection for abortion that case had ensured for a half-century.

The bill, crafted by senators from both parties, would incrementally toughen requirements for young people to buy guns, deny firearms from more domestic abusers and help local authorities temporarily take weapons from people judged to be dangerous. Most of its $13 billion cost would go to bolster mental health programs and for schools, which have been targeted in Newtown, Connecticut, Parkland, Florida and many other infamous massacres.

It omits far tougher restrictions Democrats have long championed like a ban on assault-type weapons and background checks for all gun transactions, but is the most impactful firearms violence measure Congress has approved since enacting a now-expired assault weapons ban in 1993.

The legislation was a direct result of the slaying of 19 children and two teachers at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, exactly one month ago, and the killing of 10 Black shoppers days earlier in Buffalo, New York. Lawmakers returned from their districts after those shootings saying constituents were demanding congressional action, a vehemence many felt could not be ignored.

“This gives our community the sorely needed hope that we have been crying out for, for years and years and years,” Rep. Lucy McBath, D-Ga., whose 17-year-old son was shot dead in 2012 by a man complaining his music was too loud, told supporters outside the Capitol. “Understand and know that this bill does not answer all of our prayers, but this is hope.”

Speaking haltingly, Rep. Steven Horsford, D-Nev., said he was backing the bill for his father, shot to death 30 years ago to the day, the 58 people killed in a 2017 mass shooting in Las Vegas “and so many other Americans who are victims and survivors of gun violence.”

For conservatives who dominate the House GOP, it came down to the Constitution’s Second Amendment right for people to have firearms, a protection key for many voters who own guns. “Today they’re coming after our Second Amendment liberties, and who knows what it will be tomorrow,” Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio, the House Judiciary Committee’s top Republican, said of Democrats.

Pelosi said with Friday’s gun ruling by the justices, “the Trump-McConnell court is implicitly endorsing the tragedy of mass shootings and daily gun deaths plaguing our nation.” That was a reference to the balance-tipping three conservative justices appointed by Trump and confirmed by a Senate that was run by Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.

But House Republicans used the gun debate to praise both court decisions. “What a great day for the babies, and as the speaker described it, the Trump-McConnell Supreme Court,” said Rep. Scott Fitzgerald, R-Wis.

Rep. Dan Bishop, R-N.C., said the firearms decision has “electrified the country and left radicals seething — the Constitution means what it says.”

In the Senate, every Democrat and 15 Republicans backed the compromise. Just two of those GOP senators face reelection next year.

But overall, fewer than one-third of GOP senators and just 1-in-15 House Republicans supported the measure. That means the fate of future congressional action on guns seems dubious, even as the GOP is expected to win House and possibly Senate control in the November elections.

McConnell kept careful tabs on the negotiations that produced the bill and voted for it, partly in hopes it would attract moderate suburban voters whose support the GOP will need in its November bid for Senate control. In contrast, Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., and other GOP leaders of the more conservative House opposed it.

The legislation was opposed by firearms groups like&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/national-rifle-association">the National Rifle Association</a>. But groups backing gun curbs like Brady and Everytown for Gun Safety weren’t the only ones backing it. Support also came from the Fraternal Order of Police and the International Association of Chiefs of Police.

The talks that produced the bill were led by Sens. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz., John Cornyn, R-Texas, and Thom Tillis, R-N.C.

Under the compromise, background checks for gun buyers age 18 to 20 will now include an examination of their local juvenile records. The accused shooters in Uvalde and Buffalo were both 18.

People convicted of domestic abuse who are current or former romantic partners of the victim — not simply spouses or people who lived or had children with the person they abused — will be prohibited from acquiring firearms. That closes the so-called “boyfriend loophole.”

There will be money to help states enforce “red flag” laws that help authorities temporarily take guns from people considered threatening and for other states’ violence prevention programs. More people who sell weapons would have to become federally licensed gun dealers and need to conduct background checks.

Penalties for gun trafficking are strengthened, billions of dollars are provided for behavioral health clinics and school mental health programs and there’s money for school safety initiatives, though not for personnel to use a “dangerous weapon.”

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/6/1656098285763.png" alt="House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., underscored its significance to her party by taking the unusual step of presiding over the vote and announcing the result from the podium, to huzzahs from rank-and-file Democrats on the chamber’s floor." />
 <figcaption>House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., underscored its significance to her party by taking the unusual step of presiding over the vote and announcing the result from the podium, to huzzahs from rank-and-file Democrats on the chamber’s floor.</figcaption>
 </figure>WASHINGTON (AP) — The House sent President Joe Biden the widest ranging&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/congress-gun-violence-bill-highlights-ab399a7a1c5eea98bcd12e944679355f">gun violence bill</a>&nbsp;Congress has passed in decades Friday, a measured compromise that at once illustrates progress on the long-intractable issue and the deep-seated partisan divide that persists.The Democratic-led chamber approved the election-year legislation on a mostly party-line 234-193 vote, capping a spurt of action prompted by voters’ revulsion over last month’s mass shootings in&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/buffalo-supermarket-shooting">New York</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/uvalde-school-shooting">Texas</a>. The&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/shootings-texas-new-york-violence-buffalo-21932705343ec6ff172561ad95c287d1">Senate approved the measure late Thursday</a>&nbsp;by a bipartisan 65-33 margin.Every House Democrat and 14 Republicans — six of whom won’t be in Congress next year — voted for the measure including&nbsp;Liz Cheney (WY), Adam Kinzinger (IL), Tom Rice(KY), John Katko (NY), Maria Salazar(FL), Chris Jacobs(NY), Brian Fitzpatrick (PA), Peter Meijer(MI), Fred Upton(MI), Steve Chabot(OH), Mike Turner(OH), David Joyce(OH), Anthony Gonzalez(OH), and Tony Gonzalez of Texas.House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., underscored its significance to her party by taking the unusual step of presiding over the vote and announcing the result from the podium, to huzzahs from rank-and-file Democrats on the chamber’s floor.Among Republicans backing the legislation was Rep. Liz Cheney of gun-friendly Wyoming, who has broken sharply with her party’s leaders and is helping lead the House investigation into last year’s Capitol insurrection by supporters of then-President Donald Trump. In a statement, she said that “as a mother and a constitutional conservative,” she believed the bill would curb violence and enhance safety, adding, “Nothing in the bill restricts the rights of responsible gun owners. Period.”Impossible to ignore was the juxtaposition of the week’s gun votes with a pair of jarring Supreme Court decisions on two of the nation’s most incendiary culture war issues. The justices on Thursday struck down&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-guns-decision-what-to-know-a068d964981b6d1242a5ab124224f77a">a New York law that has restricted peoples’ ability to carry concealed weapons</a>, and Friday it&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/abortion-supreme-court-decision-854f60302f21c2c35129e58cf8d8a7b0">overturned Roe v. Wade</a>, eliminating the protection for abortion that case had ensured for a half-century.The bill, crafted by senators from both parties, would incrementally toughen requirements for young people to buy guns, deny firearms from more domestic abusers and help local authorities temporarily take weapons from people judged to be dangerous. Most of its $13 billion cost would go to bolster mental health programs and for schools, which have been targeted in Newtown, Connecticut, Parkland, Florida and many other infamous massacres.It omits far tougher restrictions Democrats have long championed like a ban on assault-type weapons and background checks for all gun transactions, but is the most impactful firearms violence measure Congress has approved since enacting a now-expired assault weapons ban in 1993.The legislation was a direct result of the slaying of 19 children and two teachers at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, exactly one month ago, and the killing of 10 Black shoppers days earlier in Buffalo, New York. Lawmakers returned from their districts after those shootings saying constituents were demanding congressional action, a vehemence many felt could not be ignored.“This gives our community the sorely needed hope that we have been crying out for, for years and years and years,” Rep. Lucy McBath, D-Ga., whose 17-year-old son was shot dead in 2012 by a man complaining his music was too loud, told supporters outside the Capitol. “Understand and know that this bill does not answer all of our prayers, but this is hope.”Speaking haltingly, Rep. Steven Horsford, D-Nev., said he was backing the bill for his father, shot to death 30 years ago to the day, the 58 people killed in a 2017 mass shooting in Las Vegas “and so many other Americans who are victims and survivors of gun violence.”For conservatives who dominate the House GOP, it came down to the Constitution’s Second Amendment right for people to have firearms, a protection key for many voters who own guns. “Today they’re coming after our Second Amendment liberties, and who knows what it will be tomorrow,” Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio, the House Judiciary Committee’s top Republican, said of Democrats.Pelosi said with Friday’s gun ruling by the justices, “the Trump-McConnell court is implicitly endorsing the tragedy of mass shootings and daily gun deaths plaguing our nation.” That was a reference to the balance-tipping three conservative justices appointed by Trump and confirmed by a Senate that was run by Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.But House Republicans used the gun debate to praise both court decisions. “What a great day for the babies, and as the speaker described it, the Trump-McConnell Supreme Court,” said Rep. Scott Fitzgerald, R-Wis.Rep. Dan Bishop, R-N.C., said the firearms decision has “electrified the country and left radicals seething — the Constitution means what it says.”In the Senate, every Democrat and 15 Republicans backed the compromise. Just two of those GOP senators face reelection next year.But overall, fewer than one-third of GOP senators and just 1-in-15 House Republicans supported the measure. That means the fate of future congressional action on guns seems dubious, even as the GOP is expected to win House and possibly Senate control in the November elections.McConnell kept careful tabs on the negotiations that produced the bill and voted for it, partly in hopes it would attract moderate suburban voters whose support the GOP will need in its November bid for Senate control. In contrast, Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., and other GOP leaders of the more conservative House opposed it.The legislation was opposed by firearms groups like&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/national-rifle-association">the National Rifle Association</a>. But groups backing gun curbs like Brady and Everytown for Gun Safety weren’t the only ones backing it. Support also came from the Fraternal Order of Police and the International Association of Chiefs of Police.The talks that produced the bill were led by Sens. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz., John Cornyn, R-Texas, and Thom Tillis, R-N.C.Under the compromise, background checks for gun buyers age 18 to 20 will now include an examination of their local juvenile records. The accused shooters in Uvalde and Buffalo were both 18.People convicted of domestic abuse who are current or former romantic partners of the victim — not simply spouses or people who lived or had children with the person they abused — will be prohibited from acquiring firearms. That closes the so-called “boyfriend loophole.”There will be money to help states enforce “red flag” laws that help authorities temporarily take guns from people considered threatening and for other states’ violence prevention programs. More people who sell weapons would have to become federally licensed gun dealers and need to conduct background checks.Penalties for gun trafficking are strengthened, billions of dollars are provided for behavioral health clinics and school mental health programs and there’s money for school safety initiatives, though not for personnel to use a “dangerous weapon.”

With no Neb. GOP support Congress sends gun violence bill to Biden

LINCOLN, Neb. (AP) — The Nebraska Supreme Court on Friday denied the postconviction appeal of a death row inmate who said his defense attorney was so inept that his right to a fair trial had been compromised.

Roy Ellis Jr., 68, was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death for the 2005 killing of 12-year-old Amber Harris. Amber’s remains were found buried in an Omaha park six months after she went missing from an Omaha school bus stop.

An autopsy showed she died of blunt-force trauma, and DNA on the girl’s book bag, which was found near Ellis’ home, connected him to the crime. At the time, Ellis was a registered sex offender who had raped children and had been categorized by authorities as most likely to re-offend.

Prosecutors presented evidence indicating Harris had likely sexually assaulted the girl before killing her and had Ellis’ former stepdaughters testify at his 2008 murder trial that he repeatedly raped them when they were ages 14 and 12 and had fathered a child with each of them. In his direct appeal, the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/politics-crime-nebraska-sexual-assault-omaha-9fd3b9f060334a7ab07cdee4822b450e">state Supreme Court rejected Ellis’ argument</a>&nbsp;that the former stepdaughters’ testimony should not have been allowed.

In its ruling Friday, the state’s high court said Ellis’ argument that his trial lawyer failed to effectively challenge prosecutors’ DNA evidence during his trial was without merit.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/6/1656119223373.png" alt="" />
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure>By ASSOCIATED PRESSLINCOLN, Neb. (AP) — The Nebraska Supreme Court on Friday denied the postconviction appeal of a death row inmate who said his defense attorney was so inept that his right to a fair trial had been compromised.Roy Ellis Jr., 68, was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death for the 2005 killing of 12-year-old Amber Harris. Amber’s remains were found buried in an Omaha park six months after she went missing from an Omaha school bus stop.An autopsy showed she died of blunt-force trauma, and DNA on the girl’s book bag, which was found near Ellis’ home, connected him to the crime. At the time, Ellis was a registered sex offender who had raped children and had been categorized by authorities as most likely to re-offend.Prosecutors presented evidence indicating Harris had likely sexually assaulted the girl before killing her and had Ellis’ former stepdaughters testify at his 2008 murder trial that he repeatedly raped them when they were ages 14 and 12 and had fathered a child with each of them. In his direct appeal, the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/politics-crime-nebraska-sexual-assault-omaha-9fd3b9f060334a7ab07cdee4822b450e">state Supreme Court rejected Ellis’ argument</a>&nbsp;that the former stepdaughters’ testimony should not have been allowed.In its ruling Friday, the state’s high court said Ellis’ argument that his trial lawyer failed to effectively challenge prosecutors’ DNA evidence during his trial was without merit.

Nebraska Supreme Court denies appeal of death row inmate

<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2022/06/24/nebraskans-react-to-the-roe-v-wade-ruling/">Nebraska Examiner</a>

Reaction from Nebraska officials has come in swiftly to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling Friday overturning Roe v. Wade. Here’s a sampling:

U.S. Sen. Deb Fischer, R-Neb.: I have always supported pro-life policies that show compassion for women and their unborn children. Both conservative and liberal legal scholars have long questioned the legal reasoning in Roe v. Wade. The justices made the right decision in Dobbs vs. Jackson Women’s Health Center by affirming that there is no constitutional right to abortion. Today’s ruling returns policy making decisions on this issue to state and federal lawmakers. It’s going to take good-faith and empathy to address it.”

U.S. Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb.: “America’s work of becoming a more perfect Union is never over, but today — by righting a constitutional wrong — the Supreme Court took a historic step forward. Roe’s days are over, but the pro-life movement’s work has just begun. This issue will now be debate in the 50 states, and a 330,000,000-person, continental nation will work through this debate in a way that’s healthier than Roe’s one-size-fits-all, Washington-centrism.”

U.S. Rep. Don Bacon, 2nd Congressional District: “Life is the most precious right and today’s decision in the Dobbs case affirms that. It does not outlaw abortion, but puts it in the hands of the elected representatives of the states and Congress. I now have worked for decades to defend life, and today their prayers were answered. I urge all to respond with mutual respect, civility and grace.”

State Sen. Patty Pansing Brooks, Democratic candidate for the 1st Congressional District: “Today the U.S. Supreme Court made an unconscionable decision to overturn Roe v. Waade, giving the government the seat at our daughters’ exam tables for which many have long coveted. A majority of Americans and Nebraskans do not agree that abortion should be illegal. Tuesday’s special election will be our first opportunity to stand up and fight back at the ballot box against this extreme effort to push us back into the Dark Ages.”

State Sen. Tony Vargas, Democratic candidate for the 2nd Congressional District: “Politicians don’t belong in doctor’s offices making medical decisions. Women should make the decisions that are the best for them with their doctors. Today’s ruling by the Supreme Court is a clear threat to Americans’ health, safety, and rights. Governor Ricketts has promised to call the Legislature back into a special session, and when he does I’m ready to keep fighting for Nebraska women and families, alongside Planned Parenthood Action, to ensure their access to reproductive health care is protected. And in Congress, just as I have in the Nebraska Legislature, I’ll continue fighting to keep the heavy hand of government out of these important and deeply personal decisions.”

Jim Pillen, Republican candidate for governor: “Nebraska is a pro-life state because our citizens understand that life is the most precious gift of God’s grace. Today, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed what we have long known to be true: Our Constitution contains no right to murder an unborn child. I will do all I can to ensure that no more unborn babies are killed.”

State Sen. Carol Blood, Democratic candidate for governor: “Reproductive justice is on the minds of many women here in Nebraska today. The trigger bill that will ultimately follow will cause Nebraskans to live in a police state. We will become a police state where doctors will live in fear when they need to provide necessary patient care. It will endanger the jobs of medical specialists who may be trying to protect a woman’s health, disallow women from making decisions on IVF with their doctors never allowing them to experience parenthood, mandate what types of birth control a woman may use instead of allowing the woman and her doctor to make that decision. … It’s terrifying that we are choosing to not protect the victims of sexual assault, especially our children.”

Sandy Danek, executive director, Nebraska Right to Life: “The Unicameral will now be charged with taking up the issue of abortion to determine what protection they are willing to provide to Nebraska women and their children. We must continue to work vigorously to elect pro-life representatives in the State Legislature to pass laws to protect mothers and their pre-born children. Elections matter. Nebraska is a pro-life state and our elected officials should reflect Nebraskans commitment to protecting all innocent life.”

Nate Grasz, policy director, Nebraska Family Alliance: “This is a historic victory for preborn children and their mothers. Overturning Roe finally gets the courts out of the abortion business and allows Americans to decide this issue through our elected representatives. For decades, the pro-life movement has worked not just to overturn Roe but to save lives, empower women, educate, and bring lasting cultural change. The pro-life movement cares not only about the unborn child but also for vulnerable mothers. This is demonstrated by the more than 2,700 pregnancy care centers nationwide that serve millions of people annually. With today’s decision, now our real work begins.”

Jo Giles, executive director, Women’s Fund of Omaha: “Everyone deserves the right to decide if, when and how to start a family — including all Nebraskans. Each of us should be free to live our lives with dignity and to make the decisions that are best for our lives, families and communities. Collectively, we will continue to reject further medically unnecessary restrictions to abortion that only stand in the way of pregnant people and the care they need.”

Scout Richters, legal and policy counsel, American Civil Liberties Union of Nebraska: “Most Nebraskans support keeping abortion legal in our state because they understand no one should be forced to carry a pregnancy against their will or face the life-altering consequences of being denied abortion care. This race to take away people’s rights is dangerous and dystopian — and we will do everything we can to stop it. The impacts of pushing abortion out of reach would fall disproportionately on the same people who have always faced systemic barriers to care: Nebraskans of color, LGBTQ+ Nebraskans, undocumented Nebraskans, young Nebraskans, Nebraskans living in rural communities, Nebraskans with disabilities and Nebraskans with low incomes. All Nebraskans must remain free to make the right decisions for themselves and their families. Now, more than ever, is the time to contact your state senator and demand they respect our reproductive rights.”

Gov. Pete Ricketts: “Roe v. Wade took away the states’ right to regulate abortion and cost millions of babies their lives. Today’s Supreme Court decision restores the rights of the people, and as a result our future generations will have a chance at life. The Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe is an answer to millions of prayers on behalf of the unborn and a victory for human life. I will be working with our legislative leaders to determine what more we can do to protect our preborn babies.”

U.S. Rep Adrian Smith, R-Neb: “Life is a miracle that begins at conception. While today’s decision is a win for the pro-life movement, our work does not end here. We must ensure states – which are now rightfully tasked with authority over abortion — have the resources needed to restore a culture that respects and values life by supporting at-risk mothers, fathers, and children.”

Nebraska Legislative Speaker Mike Hilgers: “After nearly 50 years, the Supreme Court has rightfully overturned Roe and Casey and returned the question of abortion to the elected representatives of the states. I anticipate that Nebraskans’ elected representatives in the Legislature will be in special session this summer to pass legislation to protect pre-born babies. I will work with Governor Ricketts on the timing of a special session. And, after reviewing the Supreme Court’s opinion in detail, I will work closely with the Governor and my legislative colleagues on the scope of such protections.”

State Sen. Machaela Cavanaugh of Omaha: “This is a really dark day for women in this country, and our autonomy. And I’m concerned about what the future holds for us. What other things will be taken away from women?” She said abortion no longer is a “hot-button political talking point. … Now you have to deal with the reality of the health care implications. They never had to address those health care realities before. … No matter what your religious beliefs are, women’s health care is a real thing.”

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/6/1656094828972.png" alt="Abortion rights protesters gather May 3, 2022, outside the U.S. Supreme Court Building. (Jane Norman/States Newsroom)" />
 <figcaption>Abortion rights protesters gather May 3, 2022, outside the U.S. Supreme Court Building. (Jane Norman/States Newsroom)</figcaption>
 </figure><a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2022/06/24/nebraskans-react-to-the-roe-v-wade-ruling/">Nebraska Examiner</a>Reaction from Nebraska officials has come in swiftly to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling Friday overturning Roe v. Wade. Here’s a sampling: U.S. Sen. Deb Fischer, R-Neb.: I have always supported pro-life policies that show compassion for women and their unborn children. Both conservative and liberal legal scholars have long questioned the legal reasoning in Roe v. Wade. The justices made the right decision in Dobbs vs. Jackson Women’s Health Center by affirming that there is no constitutional right to abortion. Today’s ruling returns policy making decisions on this issue to state and federal lawmakers. It’s going to take good-faith and empathy to address it.” U.S. Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb.: “America’s work of becoming a more perfect Union is never over, but today — by righting a constitutional wrong — the Supreme Court took a historic step forward. Roe’s days are over, but the pro-life movement’s work has just begun. This issue will now be debate in the 50 states, and a 330,000,000-person, continental nation will work through this debate in a way that’s healthier than Roe’s one-size-fits-all, Washington-centrism.” U.S. Rep. Don Bacon, 2nd Congressional District: “Life is the most precious right and today’s decision in the Dobbs case affirms that. It does not outlaw abortion, but puts it in the hands of the elected representatives of the states and Congress. I now have worked for decades to defend life, and today their prayers were answered. I urge all to respond with mutual respect, civility and grace.” State Sen. Patty Pansing Brooks, Democratic candidate for the 1st Congressional District: “Today the U.S. Supreme Court made an unconscionable decision to overturn Roe v. Waade, giving the government the seat at our daughters’ exam tables for which many have long coveted. A majority of Americans and Nebraskans do not agree that abortion should be illegal. Tuesday’s special election will be our first opportunity to stand up and fight back at the ballot box against this extreme effort to push us back into the Dark Ages.” State Sen. Tony Vargas, Democratic candidate for the 2nd Congressional District: “Politicians don’t belong in doctor’s offices making medical decisions. Women should make the decisions that are the best for them with their doctors. Today’s ruling by the Supreme Court is a clear threat to Americans’ health, safety, and rights. Governor Ricketts has promised to call the Legislature back into a special session, and when he does I’m ready to keep fighting for Nebraska women and families, alongside Planned Parenthood Action, to ensure their access to reproductive health care is protected. And in Congress, just as I have in the Nebraska Legislature, I’ll continue fighting to keep the heavy hand of government out of these important and deeply personal decisions.” Jim Pillen, Republican candidate for governor: “Nebraska is a pro-life state because our citizens understand that life is the most precious gift of God’s grace. Today, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed what we have long known to be true: Our Constitution contains no right to murder an unborn child. I will do all I can to ensure that no more unborn babies are killed.” State Sen. Carol Blood, Democratic candidate for governor: “Reproductive justice is on the minds of many women here in Nebraska today. The trigger bill that will ultimately follow will cause Nebraskans to live in a police state. We will become a police state where doctors will live in fear when they need to provide necessary patient care. It will endanger the jobs of medical specialists who may be trying to protect a woman’s health, disallow women from making decisions on IVF with their doctors never allowing them to experience parenthood, mandate what types of birth control a woman may use instead of allowing the woman and her doctor to make that decision. … It’s terrifying that we are choosing to not protect the victims of sexual assault, especially our children.” Sandy Danek, executive director, Nebraska Right to Life: “The Unicameral will now be charged with taking up the issue of abortion to determine what protection they are willing to provide to Nebraska women and their children. We must continue to work vigorously to elect pro-life representatives in the State Legislature to pass laws to protect mothers and their pre-born children. Elections matter. Nebraska is a pro-life state and our elected officials should reflect Nebraskans commitment to protecting all innocent life.” Nate Grasz, policy director, Nebraska Family Alliance: “This is a historic victory for preborn children and their mothers. Overturning Roe finally gets the courts out of the abortion business and allows Americans to decide this issue through our elected representatives. For decades, the pro-life movement has worked not just to overturn Roe but to save lives, empower women, educate, and bring lasting cultural change. The pro-life movement cares not only about the unborn child but also for vulnerable mothers. This is demonstrated by the more than 2,700 pregnancy care centers nationwide that serve millions of people annually. With today’s decision, now our real work begins.” Jo Giles, executive director, Women’s Fund of Omaha: “Everyone deserves the right to decide if, when and how to start a family — including all Nebraskans. Each of us should be free to live our lives with dignity and to make the decisions that are best for our lives, families and communities. Collectively, we will continue to reject further medically unnecessary restrictions to abortion that only stand in the way of pregnant people and the care they need.” Scout Richters, legal and policy counsel, American Civil Liberties Union of Nebraska: “Most Nebraskans support keeping abortion legal in our state because they understand no one should be forced to carry a pregnancy against their will or face the life-altering consequences of being denied abortion care. This race to take away people’s rights is dangerous and dystopian — and we will do everything we can to stop it. The impacts of pushing abortion out of reach would fall disproportionately on the same people who have always faced systemic barriers to care: Nebraskans of color, LGBTQ+ Nebraskans, undocumented Nebraskans, young Nebraskans, Nebraskans living in rural communities, Nebraskans with disabilities and Nebraskans with low incomes. All Nebraskans must remain free to make the right decisions for themselves and their families. Now, more than ever, is the time to contact your state senator and demand they respect our reproductive rights.” Gov. Pete Ricketts: “Roe v. Wade took away the states’ right to regulate abortion and cost millions of babies their lives. Today’s Supreme Court decision restores the rights of the people, and as a result our future generations will have a chance at life. The Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe is an answer to millions of prayers on behalf of the unborn and a victory for human life. I will be working with our legislative leaders to determine what more we can do to protect our preborn babies.” U.S. Rep Adrian Smith, R-Neb: “Life is a miracle that begins at conception. While today’s decision is a win for the pro-life movement, our work does not end here. We must ensure states – which are now rightfully tasked with authority over abortion — have the resources needed to restore a culture that respects and values life by supporting at-risk mothers, fathers, and children.” Nebraska Legislative Speaker Mike Hilgers: “After nearly 50 years, the Supreme Court has rightfully overturned Roe and Casey and returned the question of abortion to the elected representatives of the states. I anticipate that Nebraskans’ elected representatives in the Legislature will be in special session this summer to pass legislation to protect pre-born babies. I will work with Governor Ricketts on the timing of a special session. And, after reviewing the Supreme Court’s opinion in detail, I will work closely with the Governor and my legislative colleagues on the scope of such protections.” State Sen. Machaela Cavanaugh of Omaha: “This is a really dark day for women in this country, and our autonomy. And I’m concerned about what the future holds for us. What other things will be taken away from women?” She said abortion no longer is a “hot-button political talking point. … Now you have to deal with the reality of the health care implications. They never had to address those health care realities before. … No matter what your religious beliefs are, women’s health care is a real thing.”

Nebraskans react to the Roe v. Wade ruling

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden said Friday that “it’s a sad day for the court and the country” after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 decision that legalized abortion nationwide.

“Now with Roe gone, let’s be very clear, the health and life of women across this nation are now at risk,” he said from the White House.

He added that "the court has done what it’s never done before — expressly taking away a constitution right that is so fundamental to so many Americans,” he said.

The White House has been preparing for this moment since a draft of the decision leaked in May. Officials have been huddling with state leaders, advocates, health care professionals and others to prepare for a future without Roe v. Wade.

He said the court has done what it’s never done before in taking away a constitutional right that is so fundamental to so many Americans. He says the decision places the health and life of women at risk. 

Now Biden’s plans will be tested in terms of politics and policy. Biden said his administration would defend a woman's right to cross state lines to seek an abortion.

Outside the Supreme Court, a crowd of abortion supporters swelled to the hundreds after the ruling was issued. One chanted into a bullhorn, “legal abortion on demand” and “this decision must not stand.” Some shouted “the Supreme Court is illegitimate."

“It’s a painful day for those of us who support women’s rights,” said Laura Free, an Ithaca resident and women’s rights historian who came to Washington to do research. When she learned of the decision, she said, “I had to come here.”

A competing faction demonstrated in favor of the ruling, holding signs saying "the future is anti-abortion″ and “dismember Roe.”

“This has been a long time coming and it’s a welcome decision,” he said.

Biden and other Democrats hope to use outrage over the court decision to rally voters in November's midterm elections. Although nationwide legislation ensuring access to abortion appears out of reach, more Democratic victories at the state level could limit Republican efforts to ban the practice.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said the court's ruling “is outrageous and heart-wrenching” and fulfills the Republican Party's "dark and extreme goal of ripping away women’s right to make their own reproductive health decisions.”

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., applauded the decision.

“A lot of lives are going to be saved,” McCarthy told reporters. “But it also goes back to people in the states to have a say in the process.”

Many Republican-controlled states are poised to severely restrict abortion, or even ban it outright.

The White House has been exploring options for Biden to take executive action to safeguard abortion rights, but his options are limited.

Lawrence Gostin, who runs the O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health at Georgetown Law, said before Friday's ruling that he expected the Biden administration to be “to be nibbling around the edges, and is not going to do anything really profound.”

Gostin said he’s discussed a variety of options with administration officials but believes they are “gun shy” given the potential for legal challenges that could lead to more roadblocks from a Supreme Court dominated by conservatives.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/6/1656088873001.png" alt="President Biden said the court has done what it’s never done before in taking away a constitutional right that is so fundamental to so many Americans. He says the decision places the health and life of women at risk.-White House image" />
 <figcaption>President Biden said the court has done what it’s never done before in taking away a constitutional right that is so fundamental to so many Americans. He says the decision places the health and life of women at risk.-White House image</figcaption>
 </figure>WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden said Friday that “it’s a sad day for the court and the country” after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 decision that legalized abortion nationwide.(Click below to watch President Biden's comments)<div><iframe src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/video.php?height=314&href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FWhiteHouse%2Fvideos%2F739710633941546%2F&show_text=false&width=560&t=376" 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>“Now with Roe gone, let’s be very clear, the health and life of women across this nation are now at risk,” he said from the White House.He added that "the court has done what it’s never done before — expressly taking away a constitution right that is so fundamental to so many Americans,” he said.The White House has been preparing for this moment since a draft of the decision leaked in May. Officials have been huddling with state leaders, advocates, health care professionals and others to prepare for a future without Roe v. Wade.He said the court has done what it’s never done before in taking away a constitutional right that is so fundamental to so many Americans. He says the decision places the health and life of women at risk. The White House has been preparing for this moment since a draft of the decision leaked in May. Officials have been huddling with state leaders, advocates, health care professionals and others to prepare for a future without Roe v. Wade.Now Biden’s plans will be tested in terms of politics and policy. Biden said his administration would defend a woman's right to cross state lines to seek an abortion.Outside the Supreme Court, a crowd of abortion supporters swelled to the hundreds after the ruling was issued. One chanted into a bullhorn, “legal abortion on demand” and “this decision must not stand.” Some shouted “the Supreme Court is illegitimate."“It’s a painful day for those of us who support women’s rights,” said Laura Free, an Ithaca resident and women’s rights historian who came to Washington to do research. When she learned of the decision, she said, “I had to come here.”A competing faction demonstrated in favor of the ruling, holding signs saying "the future is anti-abortion″ and “dismember Roe.”Garrett Bess, with Heritage Action for America, a lobbying arm of the conservative Heritage Foundation, said his organization would be working in states to continue efforts to limit abortion.“This has been a long time coming and it’s a welcome decision,” he said.Biden and other Democrats hope to use outrage over the court decision to rally voters in November's midterm elections. Although nationwide legislation ensuring access to abortion appears out of reach, more Democratic victories at the state level could limit Republican efforts to ban the practice.In a statement, Attorney General Merrick Garland said the Justice Department “will work tirelessly to protect and advance reproductive freedom.” He said that in addition to protecting providers and those seeking abortions in states where it remains legal, “we stand ready to work with other arms of the federal government that seek to use their lawful authorities to protect and preserve access to reproductive care.”He also noted that the Food and Drug Administration has approved the use of mifepristone, a drug used to end pregnancies.“States may not ban mifepristone based on disagreement with the FDA’s expert judgment about its safety and efficacy,” Garland said.House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said the court's ruling “is outrageous and heart-wrenching” and fulfills the Republican Party's "dark and extreme goal of ripping away women’s right to make their own reproductive health decisions.”House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., applauded the decision.“A lot of lives are going to be saved,” McCarthy told reporters. “But it also goes back to people in the states to have a say in the process.”Many Republican-controlled states are poised to severely restrict abortion, or even ban it outright.The White House has been exploring options for Biden to take executive action to safeguard abortion rights, but his options are limited.Lawrence Gostin, who runs the O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health at Georgetown Law, said before Friday's ruling that he expected the Biden administration to be “to be nibbling around the edges, and is not going to do anything really profound.”Gostin said he’s discussed a variety of options with administration officials but believes they are “gun shy” given the potential for legal challenges that could lead to more roadblocks from a Supreme Court dominated by conservatives.Some of Gostin’s suggestions included having Medicaid cover the cost of traveling across state lines to end pregnancies, as well as expanding access to abortion medication that can be delivered by mail.“States couldn’t pick and choose what cancer drug they would allow, and they shouldn’t be permitted to choose what options women have for medication abortions that are fully approved as safe and effective,” he said.During their preparations, White House officials have held a series of meetings with advocates, medical groups and faith leaders who are supportive of abortion access.The Rev. John Dorhauer, the general minister and president of the United Church of Christ, drove from Cleveland to Washington to attend one meeting earlier this month. Another virtual meeting was held this week, featuring Vice President Kamala Harris.“It was rather impressive to see the commitment the White House and the vice president’s office has had to gather advocates from around the country,” Dorhauer said.However, there are also concerns that the administration is not ready.Dr. Colleen McNicholas, chief medical officer of Planned Parenthood of the St. Louis Region and Southwest Missouri, attended a recent virtual meeting with abortion providers and said she expects “a true health crisis.”“I think that we should have been preparing for far longer than we have been,” McNicholas said. “Do I think that they recognize that this a problem? Yes. Do I think that they’re prepared in this moment? No.”------<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/6/1656087288784.png" alt="Protests outside the U.S. Supreme Court Friday afternoon -image courtesy CSPAN" />
 <figcaption>Protests outside the U.S. Supreme Court Friday afternoon -image courtesy CSPAN</figcaption>
 </figure>WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden will speak from the White House about the U.S. Supreme Court ruling overturning Roe v. Wade, the landmark decision that legalized abortion nationwide.Biden's remarks are scheduled for 12:30 p.m. EDT Friday and will outline his approach to this new phase of the fight over abortion access. The White House has been holding meetings and researching policy ideas for weeks, but its options appear to be limited. A White House spokeswoman said this week Biden “believes we should defend the right of all Americans to make their own decisions.”