<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
    xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
    xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
    xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/">
<channel>
    <title>Opinion</title>
    <category>Opinion</category>
    <link>https://tcr.durangoherald.com/section/opinion/feed/</link>
    <atom:link href="https://tcr.durangoherald.com/section/opinion/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <description>Latest local news from The Durango Herald.</description>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 24 Aug 2026 04:28:05 -0600</lastBuildDate>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <ttl>30</ttl>
    <item>
        <link>https://tcr.durangoherald.com/aridification-is-here/</link>
        <title>Aridification is here</title>
        <description>The changed climate is inevitable — suffering doesn’t have to be</description>
        <pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2026 14:20:41 -0600</pubDate>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">12F76DE5-D621-4BE0-940D-95B85CA15FF2</guid>
        <media:content url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=3924CF09-CF23-59DD-B247-C1B155D7EADC&#038;function=thumbnail&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;width=600&#038;height=400" medium="image" type="image/jpeg" />
        <media:thumbnail url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=3924CF09-CF23-59DD-B247-C1B155D7EADC&#038;function=thumbnail&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;width=600&#038;height=400" />
        <content:encoded><![CDATA[The Middle Rio Grande started drying in April of 2026. This stretch in Albuquerque previously had a robust beaver population and supported fish, songbirds and other wildlife species. (Photo by Laura Paskus)The changed climate is inevitable — suffering doesn’t have to beThis week, more than 100 miles of the Middle Rio Grande are dry, as well as another roughly 120 miles of the river in southern New Mexico, through Hatch, Las Cruces and Mesilla.In Farmington, the Animas River should be running around 300 cubic feet per second. Instead, it’s below 30 cfs. The Santa Fe River above the city’s reservoirs is barely trickling. The Canadian River near Tyler Springs is tapped out, and so are numerous creeks that normally flow into the Cimarron River.Laura PaskusMost of New Mexico’s lakes and reservoirs are showing more shore than water, and some of the most popular are even off-limits to swimmers due to outbreaks of blue-green algae in the low, warm waters.In Albuquerque and beyond, thousands of trees have dropped their leaves and are dying. (Even if you’re not inclined toward arboreal compassion, consider those trees falling onto roads, roofs and powerlines in the coming months.) In the Sandias, wildflowers have withered, and swaths of the forests are quiet of both bird song and insect buzz. And while this summer’s fires haven’t been as terrifying as those in 2022, more than 600 firefighters are currently battling the Frijoles Fire, which has threatened Cundiyó and continues bellowing unhealthy smoke into the skies.Throughout the Middle Rio Grande Valley, farm fields are barren and orchards are dead, except where people have the rights or the resources to pump groundwater. In southern New Mexico, the Elephant Butte Irrigation District’s season ran for just over a month this year. And the people whose farms are surviving are pumping groundwater, a practice that landed New Mexico in a U.S. Supreme Court battle.Meanwhile, bears are on the move, desperate for food and water, and they’re being hit by cars, relocated and shot. More elusive species like mountain lions and bobcats are suffering, too. If you’ve been paying attention, you’ve seen the carcasses of beavers and porcupines crossing roads in search of water. Skinny elk and deer are coming down from the high country.And when migrating sandhill cranes, snow geese and ducks start arriving next month, they won’t find food in the refuges or farm fields — or water in the Rio Grande. In fact, the river through Albuquerque will remain dry or nearly dry at least until November.For decades, scientists warned that the U.S. Southwest would aridify as the climate continued warming. This summer, New Mexicans learned exactly what that means. And it’s just the beginning.With no water for miles, animals like this invasive bullfrog seek refuge in stormwater baffles. (Photo by Laura Paskus)According to the American Meteorological Society’s 36th annual State of the Climate report, the last 11 years have been the warmest on record — and as almost anyone on the globe can attest, 2026 is serving up to be another record hot year.In 2018, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change warned that to avert “long-lasting” and “irreversible” changes, human-caused emissions of carbon dioxide “would need to fall by about 45% from 2010 levels by 2030, reaching ‘net zero’ around 2050.”Yet, as the American Meteorological Society’s report shows, in 2025, the Earth’s greenhouse gas concentrations were the highest on record, with levels of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide all reaching new extremes last year. And 2026 is on track to be another banner year, for oil industry profits and greenhouse gas emissions.It didn’t have to be this way.More than 20 years ago, in October 2005, climate scientists like David Gutzler and Gregg Garfin spoke at the third annual Drought Summit in Albuquerque. Like many others, they connected the dots between rising greenhouse gas emissions and climate impacts to the U.S. Southwest. At that summit, the University of Arizona’s Kathy Jacobs warned land and water managers and public officials: “Don’t set communities up for devastating failure.”Yet, many land and water managers, politicians and lawmakers, business and civic leaders, shareholders, realtors and others did just that, ignoring the advice and repeated warnings of scientists like Gutzler, who spent decades in his role as a professor at the University of New Mexico speaking to lawmakers, public officials, and reporters about the impacts of climate change.Rather than feeling hopeless, however, New Mexicans must truly face the realities of rising temperatures and increased aridity.It should go without saying that no candidate should be elected to office without honest commitments to climate mitigation and adaptation, and no voter should rest from holding those people accountable during their times in office.But each of us also needs to make savvy daily choices, deciding which tree to keep watering and which garden to let die, deciding if it’s smart to pour herbicides onto a dying lawn or blast last-resort bird habitat in the neighborhood with a leaf blower. We need to decide if it’s safe for kids to attend school and play sports during dangerous heat waves, and we need to protect people who work and live outside. We must decide how we organize our public spaces and heat or cool our homes, how to help our neighbors and how to wrest control of our state — and the climate — from the fossil fuel industry.We also need to reconsider how we treat wildlife bearing the brunt of human-caused climate change and immediately prioritize protection of our landscapes, rivers and groundwater supplies from overuse and pollution.A changed climate is inevitable. Suffering doesn’t need to be. But it’s going to take each of us, paying attention, learning and adapting, accepting realities — and refusing to give up on the future.Laura Paskus is the author of At the Precipice: New Mexico’s Changing Climate and editor of Water Bodies: Love Letters to the Most Abundant Substance on Earth. She’s working on a new project, New Mexico Rivers Rising, about visions for wild and healthy futures for the state’s waters.This commentary was originally published by Source New Mexico and is republished here with permission. Source NM is an independent, nonprofit news organization that shines a light on governments, policies and public officials.]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    <item>
        <link>https://tcr.durangoherald.com/trump-is-threatening-to-bomb-oman-but-why-2/</link>
        <title>Trump is threatening to bomb Oman, but why?</title>
        <description>The small country is caught between two heavily armed and stubborn powers</description>
        <pubDate>Wed, 19 Aug 2026 11:15:54 -0600</pubDate>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">3096559D-BF38-4ABB-BE39-770E0BADA4D6</guid>
        <media:content url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=EA3C9456-F230-5755-A288-74CBF5919524&#038;function=thumbnail&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;width=600&#038;height=400" medium="image" type="image/jpeg" />
        <media:thumbnail url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=EA3C9456-F230-5755-A288-74CBF5919524&#038;function=thumbnail&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;width=600&#038;height=400" />
        <content:encoded><![CDATA[Cargo ships are seen at sea in the Gulf of Oman near the Strait of Hormuz, from a rocky shoreline near Khor Fakkan, United Arab Emirates, May 1. Fatima Shbair/AP File PhotoThe small country is caught between two heavily armed and stubborn powersThe world knows that U.S. President Donald Trump is angry with Iran. But he's not happy with the small country lying across the Strait of Hormuz from the Islamic Republic, either: Oman.Oman has played a relatively low-profile role since the Iran war began, including as a mediator. But its geography has thrust the sultanate into the uncomfortable position of negotiating with Tehran over management of the strait while facing Trump's threats.Trump this week told Fox News reporter Trey Yingst that the U.S. would bomb Oman if it “gets in the way,” using an expletive for emphasis. It's not the first such threat he's made. Oman's foreign ministry didn't immediately respond to emailed questions about Trump's threat and when Oman and Iran might issue a joint statement on their deal.Here's a look at the country in the middle of the Washington-Tehran tug-of-war.In this photo released by the Iranian Foreign Ministry, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, left, meets with Oman's Sultan Haitham bin Tariq in Muscat, Oman, April 26. Iranian Foreign Ministry via AP, FileTrump is not happy about emerging Oman-Iran dealTrump threatened Oman because he's not happy that it's close to a deal with Iran over the strait, two regional officials said Tuesday.Trump is under pressure. He vowed a quick war and a weakened Iran, along with a better deal on Tehran's nuclear program. Instead, Iran has seized on the Strait of Hormuz as a new weapon in talks, asserting control of what had been seen as an international waterway before the war.U.S.-Iran negotiations have dried up. This week ended the 60-day period that launched when the U.S. and Iran signed an interim agreement. It had been meant to open the way for more detailed talks. There's no sign of it being extended. Trump now says there are no planned talks with Iran.So the only confirmed discussions happening now are between Iran and Oman about shipping on the strait. These have been going on for weeks. Oman hasn't said much about them publicly. Tehran says they're finalizing a joint statement. There's widespread thinking that Iran is not in much of a hurry.Trump has made plenty of threats against Iran. Now he's venting his frustration at Oman, too.Oil residue lines the shore near fishing boats on Qeshm Island, Iran, Thursday, Aug. 13, amid ongoing wartime attacks on vessels and infrastructure in and around the Strait of Hormuz, though the spill's source has not been independently determined. Amirhosein Khorgooi/ISNA via APThe sultanate had been trying to make peaceOman, with a population of just over 5 million, is one of the quieter actors in the Gulf. It has allowed the U.S. military to use its facilities, though Washington has described defense relations as smaller in scale compared with Gulf neighbors like the United Arab Emirates.Unlike other regional states, Oman hasn't been targeted during the war in the way that Tehran has lashed out at other Gulf neighbors. The Washington-based Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft notes that while Omani ports have been targeted by drones, Iran hasn't claimed responsibility and Oman hasn't blamed Iran, and no missiles have struck Omani territory.Oman's leaders have long preferred engagement with Iran. The sultanate has been involved in mediation efforts, but that work is now being driven by Qatar and Pakistan.The world's focus has turned more toward Oman since the interim agreement was signed. Not long after the signing, the relative calm was shattered when Iran started firing at ships trying to transit the Strait of Hormuz near the Oman coast on a route supported by the U.S.Now Oman is in discussions that appear to be driven by Iran, which has described the talks as aiming to “develop mechanisms to ensure safe navigation through the Strait of Hormuz while respecting the sovereign rights and sovereignty of both coastal states, as well as Iran's security and national interests.” The mechanisms might include fees.Regional officials have said the emerging deal calls for ships to enter the Persian Gulf through an Iranian-controlled route and exit through a route controlled by Oman. But any deal appears to rely on the U.S. lifting its blockade of Iranian ports.Oman earlier this month described the talks as “proceeding in a positive and constructive atmosphere,” while in the same statement condemning repeated attacks on ships transiting the strait.After a meeting Tuesday between Oman's foreign minister and his Egyptian counterpart, Egypt said the Iranian-Omani deal could pave the way for the U.S. and Tehran to return to negotiations for a “comprehensive and permanent deal that addresses all concerns and enhances regional security and stability.”It is not clear what effect Trump's threat might haveOman is caught between two heavily armed and stubborn powers. Meanwhile, global supplies of oil, natural gas and related goods are only able to get through the strait at a reduced level, with ships still at risk of attack.Since Trump's latest threat, the government's Oman News Agency has been posting about other things – the Muscat Stock Exchange, sports, imports of coffee and tea. Foreign ministry statements have focused on diplomatic meetings and greetings.It is not clear whether Trump's threat will make any difference in Oman's talks with Iran, including in hurrying the countries to finalize and announce a deal.But it's clear that the U.S. president is passing along the growing heat his administration feels as midterm elections approach, and as the global economy watches events on the Iran-gripped strait for any sign of relief.___Associated Press writer Samy Magdy in Cairo contributed to this report.]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    <item>
        <link>https://tcr.durangoherald.com/theres-a-reason-why-israel-has-done-little-to-rein-in-settler-violence/</link>
        <title>Why Israel has done little to rein in settler violence</title>
        <description>It’s not just Netanyahu</description>
        <pubDate>Mon, 17 Aug 2026 11:11:46 -0600</pubDate>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">E767F8C9-91AA-4A9C-83E4-D1C7D84680D7</guid>
        <media:content url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=599C42A6-561E-5559-B51F-6A95640A3E60&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=0.05625&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.88875&#038;crop_h=0.99999" medium="image" type="image/jpeg" />
        <media:thumbnail url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=599C42A6-561E-5559-B51F-6A95640A3E60&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=0.05625&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.88875&#038;crop_h=0.99999" />
        <content:encoded><![CDATA[Israeli settlers put up an Israeli flag on a hilltop after it was taken down by Israeli and foreign peace activists during a protest in support of local landowners whose property is threatened with seizure by settlers, on the outskirts of the West Bank city of Beit Sahour, on Friday. Mahmoud Illean/AP PhotoIt’s not just NetanyahuPalestinians in the occupied West Bank village of Qusra have huddled inside their homes for days on end, unable to leave because of the threat posed by Israeli settlers.The Israeli military, which over the past three years has displayed staggering military and intelligence capabilities from Beirut to Tehran, has yet to fully remove the settlers from the area of the village, about an hour's drive from Tel Aviv.The United States, which provides billions of dollars in military aid to Israel, has issued a scathing rebuke, perhaps because one of the homeowners is a Palestinian American living in Ohio.U.S. Ambassador Mike Huckabee referred to the settlers as “terrorists.” Israel's defense minister dismissed them as radical misfits – “boys on the hills.”In reality, they are the tip of the spear for a much larger movement, supported by successive Israeli governments and supercharged under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, that is aimed at cementing Israeli rule over the territory and preventing the establishment of a Palestinian state.Settlements built over decades now house over 500,000Israel captured the West Bank, along with Gaza and east Jerusalem, in the 1967 Mideast war, territories the Palestinians want for a future state.Since then, the Israeli government has built nearly 150 settlements that are home to well over 500,000 Jewish settlers. Many of the settlements resemble fully developed suburbs, with apartment blocks, shopping malls, parks and industrial zones.Radical settlers have established hundreds of additional outposts without government authorization, while still enjoying protection from the Israeli military and often other public services.Netanyahu's government, the most nationalist and religious in Israel's history, has boasted of establishing over 100 new settlements. On Thursday, as the army deployed in Qusra, members of his Cabinet celebrated the rebuilding of a settlement that had been dismantled in 2005 as part of the Gaza withdrawal.Israel's current government and much of its political class view the West Bank as the biblical and historical homeland of the Jewish people and see the settlements as key to maintaining security.Most of the international community views all settlements as illegal and an obstacle to peace.Israeli settlers gather from a nearby outpost after Israeli and foreign peace activists took down a metal structure in the shape of a Star of David from atop a Palestinian structure during a protest in support of local landowners whose property is threatened with seizure by settlers, on the outskirts of the West Bank city of Beit Sahour on Friday. Mahmoud Illean/AP PhotoSeparate laws for settlers and PalestiniansThe roughly 3 million Palestinians in the West Bank live under Israeli military rule, with the Palestinian Authority exercising limited autonomy in population centers. Israel's military operates in all parts of the territory, and Palestinians suspected of militancy can be held without charge for months or years under what's known as administrative detention.The settlers are Israeli citizens, with law enforcement typically handled by Israeli police and civilian courts.Israel's Defense Minister Israel Katz said in 2024 that Israelis would no longer be subject to administrative detention, which has also been used against settlers accused of violence. On Friday, he announced plans to fully transfer law enforcement among settlers to the Israeli police.The military's role “is to fight Palestinian terrorism” and “focus on protecting the borders and settlements against threats,” he said in a statement. “Not chase after boys on the hills.”That would cement the status quo of what are already largely separate legal systems for Jews and Palestinians in the West Bank, which major human rights groups say amounts to apartheid, something Israel denies.Israel's police and military have been reluctant to confront the settlersThe Israeli police are overseen by National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir, himself a hard-line settler who has been convicted eight times for offenses that include supporting a terrorist organization. He was a defense attorney for Jewish extremists before entering politics.The Israeli military says the settlers' actions in Qusra are “illegal, reprehensible and unacceptable,” and that it tries to maintain law and order in the West Bank. It says it dismantled two outposts in the area of Qusra and detained one Israeli.But rights groups say the military frequently turns a blind eye to settler violence, and that when it intervenes it often focuses on protecting the settlers. Yesh Din, an Israeli rights group, says around 94% of investigations into settler violence since 2005 have ended without an indictment, with just 3% leading to full or partial convictions.Israeli and foreign peace activists take down a metal structure in the shape of a Star of David from atop a Palestinian structure during a protest in support of local landowners whose property is threatened with seizure by Israeli settlers, on the outskirts of the West Bank city of Beit Sahour on Friday. Mahmoud Illean/AP PhotoU.S. pressure has had little impact, and has eased under TrumpSettler violence intensified after the Hamas attack on Oct. 7, 2023, triggered the war in Gaza. The following year, the Biden administration imposed sanctions on settlers and Israeli organizations accused of violence.Other Western nations have announced sanctions against Ben Gvir and another hard-line Israeli Cabinet minister, Bezalel Smotrich, accusing them of “inciting extremist violence” toward Palestinians.The sanctions had little impact, as the settler community rallied around those targeted.President Donald Trump rescinded the U.S. sanctions at the start of his second term and appointed Huckabee, a staunch supporter of Israeli settlements, as his ambassador.During his first term, Trump had upended decades of U.S. policy by moving the American Embassy to Jerusalem and supporting Israel's claims to other territories seized in war.Netanyahu’s opponents criticize the violence but support settlement growthNetanyahu will need the backing of Ben Gvir, Smotrich and other settler supporters if he hopes to keep his job after October elections. He will also need to maintain good relations with the Trump administration.His opponents have criticized what they characterize as the growing chaos in the West Bank. But most of Israel's political leaders – even critics of Netanyahu – support the growth of existing settlements and are opposed to Palestinian statehood.Gadi Eisenkot, a former top general seen as Netanyahu's main opponent, criticized the government's handling of the events in Qusra, accusing it of undermining military commanders “in the face of anarchy and violent lawbreaking by an extremist minority.” He has also come out against plans to annex the West Bank.But he has also told Israeli media that he has “never spoken about a Palestinian state,” and that he supports settlements that are “in line with Israel's interests.”Naftali Bennett, a staunch settlement supporter and another leading rival of Netanyahu, has condemned the violence, saying it amounts to “terrorism” by a minority.“Precisely as someone who believes in our right to the land and in the settlement enterprise, we need to denounce this and eradicate the violence from within our own ranks – not wait for the Americans to tell us to do it,” he said in a recent interview with Israeli media.When Bennett was prime minister, during the only brief period in the last 17 years that Netanyahu was out of office, his national unity government approved thousands of additional settler homes.]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    <item>
        <link>https://tcr.durangoherald.com/a-look-at-the-history-and-beliefs-behind-japans-controversial-shrine-to-the-war-dead/</link>
        <title>A look at the history and beliefs behind Japan’s controversial shrine to the war dead</title>
        <description>More than 2.4 million people are honored at Yasukuni</description>
        <pubDate>Fri, 14 Aug 2026 13:18:28 -0600</pubDate>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">AFC09953-7560-4641-A4F1-88E74C6D71EA</guid>
        <media:content url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=60774FD6-ECAF-5E3C-B587-A02492C999DE&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=1.0E-5&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.88875&#038;crop_h=0.99999" medium="image" type="image/jpeg" />
        <media:thumbnail url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=60774FD6-ECAF-5E3C-B587-A02492C999DE&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=1.0E-5&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.88875&#038;crop_h=0.99999" />
        <content:encoded><![CDATA[Doves are released in prayer of peace by worshippers at the Yasukuni Shrine in Tokyo, Japan, Tuesday, Aug. 15, 2023. Eugene Hoshiko/AP File PhotoMore than 2.4 million people are honored at YasukuniEmperor Meiji first visited the site that would become one of Japan's most controversial shrines in 1874. He vowed that the names of those who died for their country would live there forever.More than 2.4 million people are now honored at Yasukuni, a memorial and Shinto shrine in central Tokyo. Among them are 14 war criminals who are also commemorated each Aug. 15, when Japan's surrender ended World War II.The shrine provides spiritual comfort for some who mourn relatives and others who visit to express gratitude. Yet for Asian countries that endured Japanese imperial rule and expansion, Yasukuni remains a symbol of Japan's militarism.Visits by Japanese leaders frequently draw criticism from China and South Korea, which see them as a sign of insufficient remorse for Japan's wartime aggression.Here's a look at the history and religious background of a shrine that is both a sacred place of remembrance and a source of controversy.People wait to pray at the main hall at Yasukuni Shrine, which honors Japan's war dead, in Tokyo on Aug. 15, 2024, as the country marks the 79th anniversary of its defeat in the World War II. Hiro Komae/AP File PhotoYasukuni's foundation followed a historic transformationImperial rule was restored in Japan in the 19th century after the fall of a military government that ruled for more than 250 years. A year into the new imperial era, in 1869, Emperor Meiji ordered the construction of the shrine that would later be renamed Yasukuni.The name derives from two Japanese characters that can be translated as “peaceful country,” and its purpose was to honor those who fell defending the imperial cause.“Yasukuni Shrine was initially conceived as a way to send a message to the Japanese people,” said Akiko Takenaka, a professor of history at the University of Kentucky. “The message was about the emperor; the message was about a new Japan.”In that Japan, Takenaka added, Meiji became the one who could bestow the highest honor on those who died fighting for the empire and men were expected to consider it an honor to sacrifice their lives for him.Religion and government became intertwinedJapan's emperors have long been regarded as descendants of the sun goddess Amaterasu under Shinto beliefs. However, the notion of the emperor's divine origins strengthened during the Meiji era, when the concept of State Shinto arose.On one hand, that meant the government exercised control over the shrine's practices and finances. Beyond that, the line between patriotism and religion blurred.“The Meiji reformers believed that they were establishing an ideal nation in which the people and the sacred emperor maintained a spiritual union,” wrote Susumu Shimazono, a scholar specializing in religion and modern Japan, in the Japanese Journal of Religious Studies.The separation of religion and state came after Japan's surrender in WWII.In December 1945, U.S. Gen. Douglas MacArthur issued an order that abolished State Shinto. The measure effectively cut off government funding for shrines and removed Shinto practices and teachings from public institutions.Yasukuni subsequently became a private religious corporation. Official visits have raised questions about the constitutional separation of religion and government.Visitors line up to offer prayers at the Yasukuni Shrine on the 80th anniversary of Japan's surrender in World War II in Tokyo, Aug. 15, 2025. Louise Delmotte/AP File PhotoEnshrinement at Yasukuni has long stirred controversyYasukuni is not a cemetery. Rather than bodies or graves, those remembered there are enshrined as “kami” – divinities or sacred spirits in the Shinto tradition.They include soldiers, women who provided battlefield relief, students mobilized to support wartime production, and foreign nationals who died while serving Japan.Yasukuni's most controversial kami are 14 Class-A war criminals, a designation applied to Japanese leaders accused of “crimes against peace” by planning and waging the war. Among them is wartime Prime Minister Hideki Tojo, one of the masterminds behind the attack on Pearl Harbor.Their enshrinement was carried out in secret by Yasukuni's head priest in 1978, three years after Hirohito last prayed at the shrine.“Emperor Hirohito did not go again after he found out,” said Mark R. Mullins, professor of Japanese and religious studies at the University of Auckland. “He didn't want to get caught up in criticism surrounding that.”Hirohito's successors have sent emissaries to Yasukuni for its key annual rites, but neither has visited the shrine in person as emperor.Other controversial enshrinements include Buddhists, Christians, Koreans and Taiwanese whose families say they were included without their consent, Mullins said.Some have taken legal action, but Japanese courts have rejected efforts to have relatives removed from the shrine.Yasukuni means different things to different people“For some of those in the bereaved families' association, the focus may be on the personal grief,” Mullins said. “But for those who are keen to restore what they feel was lost by the loss of the war and the foreign occupation, it means something more.”Adjacent to the shrine is the Yushukan Museum, which displays wartime artifacts. Scholars have underscored how its account of Japan's military history leaves out the experiences of China and Korea under Japanese imperialism.“By eliminating the enemy, the Yushukan remembers a war that was only ever glorious,” wrote John Breen, a professor at the International Research Center for Japanese Studies, in a paper called “Yasukuni Shrine: Ritual and Memory.”Some visitors say paying respects at Yasukuni carries a spiritual meaning that should not be equated with endorsing war.Kana Shindo, a member of Tokyo's Minato City Assembly, said she regards the shrine as a place where she purifies her mind, gives thanks to the kami and reflects on herself.“I have absolutely no intention of glorifying war,” said Shindo, who added that politicians also have freedom of religion and conscience. “I visit because I believe that the peaceful Japan in which we live today exists upon the lives and accumulated history of the people who lived before us.”Bereaved families maintain ties to YasukuniBefore leaving for war, Japanese soldiers were told that if they died, they would be enshrined at Yasukuni.“They told their families: 'I want you to come see me at Yasukuni Shrine,'” said Toshiei Mizuochi, president of the Japan War-Bereaved Families Association.His father, who served in the Japanese navy, was killed in a bombing six days before the end of the war, on Aug. 9, 1945.More than 2.4 million Japanese soldiers died overseas during WWII. The remains of approximately 1 million have yet to be recovered.“For that reason, the vast majority of bereaved families who received neither remains nor personal belongings believe that the spirits of the war dead are at Yasukuni Shrine,” Mizuochi said.Relatives like him visit Yasukuni beyond Aug. 15. They attend major ceremonies, commemorate death anniversaries and report family milestones – entering school, starting a job, getting married or having a child.“I visit Yasukuni Shrine more times than I can count in a year,” Mizuochi said. “Every time I put my hands together in prayer, the face of my father in his portrait naturally comes to mind.”___Associated Press religion coverage receives support through the AP's collaboration with The Conversation U.S., with funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The AP is solely responsible for this content.]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    <item>
        <link>https://tcr.durangoherald.com/how-state-constitutions-became-the-battleground-for-american-rights-and-liberties-on-both-the-lef/</link>
        <title>How state constitutions became the battleground for American rights and liberties – on both the left and right</title>
        <description>The New Mexico Capitol is pictured on Feb. 2, 2023. Source NM, File Beyond picking governors, state legislators, local officials and representatives to serve in Congress, voters in almost every state this year will have the opportunity to amend the...</description>
        <pubDate>Wed, 12 Aug 2026 14:32:07 -0600</pubDate>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">54F3F7FA-22F1-4688-862D-3E68AD2FA638</guid>
        <media:content url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=119DD362-3E01-590B-921B-1790478F2C0A&#038;function=thumbnail&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;width=600&#038;height=400" medium="image" type="image/jpeg" />
        <media:thumbnail url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=119DD362-3E01-590B-921B-1790478F2C0A&#038;function=thumbnail&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;width=600&#038;height=400" />
        <content:encoded><![CDATA[The New Mexico Capitol is pictured on Feb. 2, 2023. Source NM, File Beyond picking governors, state legislators, local officials and representatives to serve in Congress, voters in almost every state this year will have the opportunity to amend the language of their state constitution. In one state, they could potentially rewrite the constitution altogether.Though the U.S. Constitution is rarely amended, voters frequently amend their state constitutions. In every election cycle, voters are asked to ratify constitutional amendments.In recent years, around 100 amendments have been voted on in each cycle. Most of them are proposed by state legislatures, but some are proposed through the voter initiative process.This year, however, voters in Michigan will decide whether to convene a state constitutional convention in 2027. At a constitutional convention, elected delegates consider editing or rewriting the state’s constitution, with virtually no limits on what they can do. Michigan’s constitution requires that voters be asked every 16 years whether to hold a convention, and the last three times the question appeared on the ballot, voters rejected the idea in landslides.If Michigan voters do want to call a convention, an election for 148 delegates would be held in 2027, and the elected delegates would meet to discuss whether to completely overhaul the constitution or propose small changes, though they might not come to an agreement at all.State constitutions play an increasingly important role in American politics, though voters may not know much about them.Protecting rightsEvery state has a constitution, and each constitution has an individual bill of rights that provides parallel – and sometimes greater – protections for the liberties guaranteed in the U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights. The federal Bill of Rights sets a minimum for the rights and liberties that states must recognize, but state constitutions can increase the protections – or provide different ones.Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Center, which overturned Roe v. Wade and held that the U.S. Constitution does not protect a right to abortion, abortion rights advocates have turned to state constitutions to recognize reproductive rights.Attorneys and advocates have fought state abortion restrictions, asserting that state constitutions implicitly guarantee the right to an abortion. They have had mixed success with that tack, and better luck proposing amendments to state constitutions to expressly recognize rights to abortion. Conservative efforts to add abortion restrictions or bans to state constitutions have seen more limited success.As a scholar of state constitutions, I know that turning to such constitutions to recognize rights and liberties is not a new project. It is not an exclusively liberal or conservative one.Turning to statesAfter Richard Nixon was elected president in 1968, he appointed Warren Burger as chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, succeeding Earl Warren. Under Warren’s leadership, the court had strengthened the protections in the Bill of Rights, required states to fully recognize them and ushered in many of the rights and liberties we know today.Among them: Miranda warnings – the standard warnings that police are required to give suspects of crimes before interrogations, as well as the requirement that indigent defendants be provided counsel in criminal trials and the rule that unconstitutionally obtained evidence cannot be used against defendants, came from the Warren Court.Burger’s appointment, therefore, was concerning to criminal defense attorneys and civil rights activists, who feared that the Warren Court’s landmark decisions would be weakened or overturned.So they turned to state courts and state constitutions.A group of scholars, advocates and judges began arguing that lawyers and courts needed to take state constitutional rights seriously. They started developing legal arguments that relied on state constitutional rights, which saw some early successes.From education to LGBTQ+ rightsThough these efforts began with attempts to ensure rights for criminal defendants, they were not limited to that context.In 1973, the Supreme Court held that the Constitution contained no right to education and that a funding disparity among school districts in Texas was not unconstitutional.In response, advocates went to state courts. Relying on explicit provisions in state constitutions that require the legislature to provide students with an adequate education, they argued that funding disparities violated state constitutions.Many courts agreed. Over the past 50 years, education financing lawsuits, aimed at eliminating inequalities in education funding, have made their way through state courts, with some important and high-profile successes.Advocates have also brought cases that used state constitutions to recognize LGBTQ+ rights, sometimes well before the Supreme Court did the same.In the 1980s, the high court refused to strike down a Georgia law that criminalized sexual relations between people of the same gender. Marriage equality was a long way off, too. In several states, LGBTQ+ rights activists successfully argued that their state constitutions protected rights to privacy that made similar laws unconstitutional, a position that the Supreme Court would later adopt.And by the time the Supreme Court recognized a right to marriage equality in Obergefell v. Hodges in 2015, a growing number of states had come to the same conclusion under their own constitutions.Conservative project, tooBut the rights and liberties protected by state constitutions haven’t just evolved in a liberal direction.During the movement for marriage equality, voters in many states ratified constitutional amendments defining marriage as between one man and one woman. Likewise, a handful of state constitutions expressly preclude courts from recognizing a right to abortion.The National Rifle Association has successfully pushed for stronger rights to bear arms under state constitutions. Also, in many states, victims’ rights amendments guarantee to victims of crimes the opportunity to participate in criminal trials, and frequently constrain defendants’ rights.As political polarization increases, and as the Supreme Court removes itself from many rights disputes, state constitutions will likely be more important than ever in rights adjudication. Voters, who can and do amend those constitutions, can play an important role in how that plays out.This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. The Conversation is an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts.]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    <item>
        <link>https://tcr.durangoherald.com/what-to-know-about-trumps-new-attempt-to-limit-birthright-citizenship-2/</link>
        <title>What to know about Trump’s new attempt to limit birthright citizenship</title>
        <description>Previous attempt was struck down in June</description>
        <pubDate>Mon, 10 Aug 2026 10:46:31 -0600</pubDate>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">BBD0E906-12FD-4E4E-A98B-7C2BB05A0F06</guid>
        <media:content url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=B147A45C-A8CF-5E5A-86E8-B507146DFC36&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=0.05625&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.88875&#038;crop_h=0.99999" medium="image" type="image/jpeg" />
        <media:thumbnail url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=B147A45C-A8CF-5E5A-86E8-B507146DFC36&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=0.05625&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.88875&#038;crop_h=0.99999" />
        <content:encoded><![CDATA[President Donald Trump listens before signing executive orders in the Oval Office of the White House on Thursday in Washington, as Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick watches. Alex Brandon/AP PhotoPrevious attempt was struck down in JuneThe Trump administration is once again trying to limit who can become an American, with a pair of executive orders issued last week that attempt to place restrictions on birthright citizenship and on foreigners who give birth in the U.S.A Supreme Court decision in June struck down a previous attempt at restricting birthright citizenship, but Thursday's orders were made with “adjustments” keeping the decision in mind, President Donald Trump said.Still, some of the restrictions announced by the White House are expected to face legal challenges.The 14th Amendment, which makes a citizen of anyone born in the country, and two subsequent Supreme Court decisions interpreting it provide guidelines that already exclude certain births from receiving the citizenship benefit.Trump's new attempt to restrict birthright citizenship even after the Supreme Court loss highlights the administration's drive to limit who can become an American.New categories of restricted citizenship benefitsBirthright citizenship is guaranteed under current law for anyone who is born on U.S. soil, with a few exceptions.The executive order released Thursday was narrower in scope than the previous one shot down by the Supreme Court and appeared to focus on restricting automatic citizenship to specific categories of people, including children born to adults with connections to foreign embassies or organizations as well as anyone considered an “alien enemy” of the United States.U.S. immigration law says babies born to a “foreign diplomatic officer accredited to the United States” are not entitled to birthright citizenship under the Constitution, including ambassadors, ministers, chargés d'affaires, counselors, secretaries and attachés of embassies and legations, and members of the Delegation of the Commission of the European Communities.Trump's orders Thursday would sharply expand those exemptions.One order disqualifies babies who are products of “birth tourism.” The other applies to children of anyone working in a foreign embassy or representing a foreign government and employees of the United Nations or other international organizations. Children of parents tied to groups that are deemed terrorist organizations, like Antifa or Tren de Aragua, are also excluded.“How is the federal government going to decide that a child is born to a member of a designated terrorist organization?” said César Cuauhtémoc García Hernández, a law professor at Ohio State University. “These are not organizations that are sharing the membership lists if they even have them.”Citizenship through surrogacy has become a concern for Republican members of Congress, some of whom proposed a bill this year that would restrict citizenship for children of noncitizen parents born to surrogates in the U.S.García Hernández said he believes the new executive order addressing surrogacy could raise new legal questions. “Neither the 14th Amendment nor any of the Supreme Court's decisions about how to interpret the 14th Amendment mentions or hints at surrogates,” the law professor said.Questions over the scope of birth tourismTrump's executive order defines birth tourism as someone who enters the United States on a “nonimmigrant visa for the purpose of giving birth on American soil.”Birth tourism is already considered fraud and grounds to restrict a visa if someone seeks one specifically to come to the U.S. and obtain citizenship for a child.Advocates said the executive order would give immigration officers discretion to deny entry to pregnant women suspected of wanting to give birth in the U.S. without providing clearly defined guidelines.The president did not offer data indicating the scope of the problem, but said Thursday: “I'll tell you right now, hundreds of thousands, OK? Hundreds of thousands.”Although there's no official estimate of how many births can be considered “birth tourism” cases, experts say Trump's approximation is exaggerated.“The hundreds of thousands just seems like an overestimate based on the sort of limited data that we have available,” said Colleen Putzel-Kavanaugh, an associate policy analyst at the Migration Policy Institute.Data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shows that in 2024 nearly 9,600 children were born to foreign mothers with an official address outside the country. Another estimate from the Center for Immigration Studies, a think tank that advocates for lower immigration, estimated that 20,000 to 26,000 birth tourists come to the U.S. each year.Facilitators of birth tourism targetedThe order provides a sweeping indictment of “birth tourism operators” with no evidence of how widespread they are or how or why anyone accused of using their services would be exempt from constitutional protection.Those efforts are not new either. Previous administrations have also sought to prosecute so-called “birth tourism” schemes that helped women hide their pregnancies while traveling to the United States to give birth.“Birth tourism operators use deceptive advertisements and inducements to entice foreign nationals to travel to the United States for the purpose of giving birth on American soil,” the order says.“They promise citizenship; access to public benefits; and short-term stays in specialized facilities, hotels, or rentals, but often fail to deliver on these promises. These operators coach their clients to misrepresent the purpose and duration of their travel to consular and border officials to obtain visas authorizing entry into the United States.”The Republican Party has embraced the mission. In late July, the office of the attorney general in Texas announced a “sweeping investigation” into potentially unlawful birth tourism schemes after some south Texas hospitals advertised birthing services in Mexico.Legal challenges expectedAsked Thursday how his orders would survive Supreme Court scrutiny when his last attempt failed, Trump deferred to White House staff secretary Will Scharf, who, like his boss, sounded alarms about “birth tourism.” He emphasized consular discretion to grant visas.“What we're doing is taking legally validated means that are clearly within our disposal and targeting them to this birth tourism industry. There's absolutely nothing here that runs afoul of any of the Supreme Court rulings on the subject,” Sharf said.Advocates against the proposed changes said they believe the constitutional amendment and Supreme Court decisions will again stop the administration's efforts to restrict birthright citizenship.“The bottom line is that the Supreme Court already considered the Trump administration's plea to rewrite the Constitution and rejected it,” said Cody Wofsy, deputy director at the American Civil Liberties Union Immigrants' Rights Project.“Birthright citizenship is guaranteed by the 14th Amendment, and no amount of executive orders is going to change that.”___Associated Press writer Melissa Goldin contributed.]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    <item>
        <link>https://tcr.durangoherald.com/taiwans-military-drills-suggest-deeper-alignment-with-the-u-s/</link>
        <title>Taiwan’s military drills suggest deeper alignment with the U.S.</title>
        <description>Soldiers conduct shooting training during the annual Han Kuang military exercises in Taipei, Taiwan, Wednesday, Aug. 5, 2026. Chiang Ying-ying/AP Photo TAIPEI, Taiwan – Through this year’s military drills, Taiwan has chosen to emphasize its army’s and society’s flexibility and...</description>
        <pubDate>Thu, 06 Aug 2026 14:23:08 -0600</pubDate>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">8B74193B-28FE-4FAD-864D-914172501B7B</guid>
        <media:content url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=335D7829-34CD-575A-8E6E-E182D3708990&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=0.0025&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.88875&#038;crop_h=0.99999" medium="image" type="image/jpeg" />
        <media:thumbnail url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=335D7829-34CD-575A-8E6E-E182D3708990&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=0.0025&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.88875&#038;crop_h=0.99999" />
        <content:encoded><![CDATA[Soldiers conduct shooting training during the annual Han Kuang military exercises in Taipei, Taiwan, Wednesday, Aug. 5, 2026. Chiang Ying-ying/AP Photo TAIPEI, Taiwan – Through this year's military drills, Taiwan has chosen to emphasize its army's and society's flexibility and resilience as opposed to primarily putting advanced weapons on display. Experts say the exercises' structure indicate closer ties with the U.S. military in the face of China's ongoing military threat.The annual Huang Kuang drills kicked off on Wednesday and are set to extend through Aug. 14 in various locations around the island. The live-fire exercises will test the Taiwanese army's ability to sustain 24-hour defense operations as well as counter China's “gray-zone tactics,” which stop just short of open warfare.China claims the self-ruled democracy as its own territory, and has not renounced the use of force to bring it under its control. Taiwan dismisses China's claims and insists it is a sovereign state.The United States, while not recognizing Taiwan as a country, sees all threats to the island as a matter of great concern. Washington is bound by its own laws to provide Taiwan with the means to defend itself.The drills show closer ties with the U.S. militaryWhile there has long been speculation that the U.S. military has been quietly training Taiwanese troops, the collaboration between the two sides has been more visible in recent weeks. A key component of the Han Kuang drills, for example, is the practice of a U.S.-inspired military communications method called backbriefing, where subordinates explain to commanders how they plan to carry out assigned missions.The communication drills are intended to encourage first-line fighters to be more self-reliant and effective in battle, experts say.“The most important new development in this year's Han Kuang is the incorporation of American-style military training methods, which are aimed at enhancing the coordination and combat readiness of the Taiwanese military,” said William Yang, a senior Northeast Asia analyst for the International Crisis Group.The drills thus “stay away from the mostly performative tasks of firepower display” of past years and instead focus on building real combat capabilities, Yang added.Soldiers conduct team training on a mortar during the annual Han Kuang military exercises in Taipei, Taiwan, on Wednesday. Chiang Ying-ying/AP PhotoEmphasis on reservists and urban resilienceAnother focus of this year's drills is that they will mobilize one of the largest numbers yet of reservists, of around 20,000 personnel, according to local media. Taiwan's Defense Ministry did not say how many reservists will be involved in the drills.The emphasis on reserves illustrates Taiwan's efforts to address the military power asymmetry between itself and China, Yang said. China maintains the world's largest army, of more than 2 million active-duty personnel, almost nine times the size of Taiwan's active-duty armed forces.Another focus of the military drills, reflecting Taiwan's longstanding emphasis on civil defense, are urban resilience drills. These will take place on different days in the major cities of Kaohsiung, Taichung and the capital, Taipei. During the drills, mobile internet speed will be reduced for about 30 minutes to simulate telecommunications interference in case of an attack.The emphasis on combat readiness and civilian preparedness reflect Taiwanese President Lai Ching-te's priorities amid political constraints, said Lev Nachman, a political science professor at National Taiwan University. Lai has sought to pass a $40 billion special defense budget for U.S. arms purchases and local defense manufacturing. A much smaller version of the budget, of $24.8 billion, was eventually approved by the opposition-controlled parliament.“Given that Lai has been constrained on his ability to pass a budget that could even supply the kinds of weapons he would want to test, he has had to look to what he is able to do given the domestic political gridlock,” Nachman said.U.S. arms sales to Taiwan remain in questionDespite closer informal ties between the U.S. and Taiwan militaries, questions remain around a massive $14 billion arms sales package to Taiwan that U.S. President Donald Trump has yet to approve. After traveling to China in May, Trump described arms sales to Taiwan as a “very good negotiating chip” with Beijing, raising anxieties on the island about continued U.S. support.Trump also said after his summit with Chinese leader Xi Jinping that he does not want to “travel 9,500 miles to fight a war” over Taiwan.In that context, seeing the U.S. influence on Taiwan's military drills offers a “silver lining” in terms of Washington's commitment to Taiwan, Nachman said.“Even though Trump and those close to him have flip-flopped on supporting Taiwan, the connection between the two militaries remains strong, enough to at least ensure that Taiwan is still able to learn at a high level from the U.S.,” he said.]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    <item>
        <link>https://tcr.durangoherald.com/how-hackers-attack-municipal-water-systems-and-why-the-utilities-are-so-vulnerable/</link>
        <title>How hackers attack municipal water systems – and why the utilities are so vulnerable</title>
        <description>A water tower is seen Thursday, July 30, in Plymouth, Minnesota. A cyberattack targeted the operating technology at over 30 water systems in Minnesota, including Plymouth&apos;s, earlier this week, state officials said. Ellen Schmidt/AP File Photo Hackers tried to break...</description>
        <pubDate>Wed, 05 Aug 2026 10:28:02 -0600</pubDate>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">473EC8CA-8898-492B-B991-FE13CDA80583</guid>
        <media:content url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=76151C18-11F2-534C-8741-C7975E7B68E8&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=0.05625&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.88875&#038;crop_h=0.99999" medium="image" type="image/jpeg" />
        <media:thumbnail url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=76151C18-11F2-534C-8741-C7975E7B68E8&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=0.05625&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.88875&#038;crop_h=0.99999" />
        <content:encoded><![CDATA[A water tower is seen Thursday, July 30, in Plymouth, Minnesota. A cyberattack targeted the operating technology at over 30 water systems in Minnesota, including Plymouth's, earlier this week, state officials said. Ellen Schmidt/AP File Photo Hackers tried to break into at least 30 municipal water systems in Minnesota on July 26-27, 2026. Since then, Michigan, New Jersey and several other states have reported similar cyberattacks.The attackers did not try to infiltrate the computers that utility offices use. Instead, they tried to seize control of small computers in equipment like pumps and valves that deliver drinking water to millions of people.The utilities countered the attacks by shutting down the control computers and sending personnel out into the field to operate equipment manually. Utility officials have said that water remained safe to drink.As a scholar who researches cyber conflict, I find that the methods used in these incidents are typical of international cyberattacks. Initial suspicion has fallen on hackers allegedly aligned with Iran, but the U.S. government has yet to attribute the attack to anyone.How can someone from far away seize control of a water system and possibly shut off the flow or taint the water?Controlling the water machineryThere are about 152,000 public drinking water systems in the United States, according to the federal government. A municipality gets its water from lakes, reservoirs, rivers or underground aquifers.Pumps move water through pipes to a treatment plant that filters and disinfects it. More pumps push the treated water into storage tanks, then through distribution pipes to homes and businesses. The entire system can span many square miles.The hackers accessed small computers called programmable logic controllers at the water systems that operate all sorts of industrial equipment. The programmable logic controllers read sensors that measure conditions such as water pressure, water chemistry, tank levels and equipment status, and automatically operate pumps, valves and alarms. A household thermostat is a useful comparison: It reads the temperature and tells the heating or cooling system what to do.The programmable logic controllers also transmit operational data to a utility’s central computer system. Workers use dashboards to monitor the information and send commands back to the controllers. The two-way communications can travel through wired networks, over radio or cellular links, or through internet connections.Many utilities operate with small staffs, so remote connections allow an employee to monitor a distant pump or tank, receive an alarm after hours or let a vendor diagnose equipment without traveling to every site.Controllers that use the internet may access it directly, or go through protective firewalls, secure gateways or virtual private networks. Direct access is more vulnerable because there are fewer defensive barriers. A hacker can find a controller by scanning the internet and finding its Internet Protocol, or IP, address, then try a weak or stolen password or exploit a known security flaw.To reach a controller through a secure gateway or encrypted service, a hacker would have to steal remote-access credentials, or break into the gateway or private network, or get control of an operator’s workstation. The hacker could then use that foothold to reach the controller.Attempted access can also be part of an intruder’s longer-term strategy to collect information, test defenses or establish entry for a later date.How an attack worksAttacks on industrial control systems often follow a familiar sequence. Infiltration often begins with a quiet search for access. Attackers scan internet addresses for controllers, dashboards and outside companies that provide remote access services, looking for targets that are linked directly to the internet.Next, the attacker looks for a default or stolen password to log in, an unpatched vulnerability or a misconfigured remote-access service. Sophisticated malware is not always necessary: In 2023, U.S. officials reported that Iranian-linked hackers targeted internet-connected Unitronics programmable logic controllers used by water utilities. Some utilities were still using the manufacturer’s default password, according to the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency.Finally, the attacker exploits the access they have gained. This could mean changing a password, issuing commands or attempting to alter the controller’s software. Researchers at the National Institute of Standards and Technology note that an intruder could replace legitimate control instructions with malicious commands. An attacker could also sneak into an office computer through phishing, then access the controller network.Industrial equipment in service for decades is extremely vulnerable because it may not support modern security features, and utilities may delay updates because they want to avoid interrupting operations.Reports thus far indicate that hackers accessed the Minnesota water systems through controllers that communicate over the internet directly. A July 30 FBI and Environmental Protection Agency advisory stated that attackers remotely accessed Rockwell Automation MicroLogix programmable logic controllers that were connected directly to the internet, and changed their IP addresses and passwords.Defensive moves that utilities can takeThe most immediate step that utilities can take to protect themselves is to remove controllers and human dashboards from direct connection to the internet. Following the Minnesota attacks, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency urged water utilities to place this equipment behind properly configured firewalls and other safeguards.When remote access is necessary, utilities should route communications through a secure gateway or VPN, require multiple levels of authentication, and limit how much access each user has. Utilities should change default passwords, disable unused remote-access services and install vendor-approved updates to connected equipment.In their guidance on internet-exposed dashboards, the cybersecurity agency also recommends separating operational networks from email and other business systems. This measure makes it harder for attackers to move between the two systems.Finally, utilities should back up controller programs, log remote-access activity and practice restoring systems and operating manually.A matter of resourcesRural water utilities with limited resources are a significant vulnerability in the United States’ critical infrastructure.A group of volunteer cybersecurity experts is providing guidance to water utilities, but their reach is limited. Smaller utilities may need government funding or shared cybersecurity services to be able to defend themselves.This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. The Conversation is an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts.]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    <item>
        <link>https://tcr.durangoherald.com/trump-administration-moves-to-block-public-from-enforcing-environmental-protection-laws/</link>
        <title>Trump administration moves to block public from enforcing environmental protection laws</title>
        <description>DOJ argues citizen suits cannot proceed when the federal government does not oppose the polluting behavior</description>
        <pubDate>Mon, 03 Aug 2026 11:01:47 -0600</pubDate>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">C9323E55-8668-4DD7-B10C-849EE2D186A6</guid>
        <media:content url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=0576F04E-507E-55BA-9F16-7EED93084DA3&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=0.05625&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.88875&#038;crop_h=0.99999" medium="image" type="image/jpeg" />
        <media:thumbnail url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=0576F04E-507E-55BA-9F16-7EED93084DA3&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=0.05625&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.88875&#038;crop_h=0.99999" />
        <content:encoded><![CDATA[A truck enters the Exxon Mobil Baytown Olefins Plant, Wednesday, April 29, in Baytown, Texas. A citizen-initiated lawsuit under the Clean Air Act forced a cleanup at the refinery and chemical complex Ashley Landis/AP File PhotoDOJ argues citizen suits cannot proceed when the federal government does not oppose the polluting behaviorReducing rampant pollution across the United States was so important that when Congress passed many environmental protection laws, including the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act and Safe Drinking Water Act, it didn’t want to leave enforcement only to the executive branch.Congress specifically wrote into those laws ways for citizens to enforce them through the courts when the government does not act to address the problem. Called “citizen suit provisions,” those parts of the laws allow regular people and advocacy groups to sue companies they believe are violating the law. Citizens can also sue federal agencies that fail to enforce the laws.Since the 1970s, those provisions have been used in over 2,000 lawsuits. In fact, a majority of environmental cases are citizen suit cases. Citizen suits have been used to halt the construction of dams to protect endangered species, end the injection of wastewater into groundwater, and secure $14.2 million in civil penalties for illegal emissions from a petrochemical facility. In short, these cases have shaped modern environmental law.Now, in a legal filing, the Trump administration is saying citizens should not be allowed to enforce environmental laws. Rather, despite what the laws say, the U.S. Department of Justice has claimed in a case involving Elon Musk’s xAI that people should be required to leave enforcement to the executive branch – even if the executive decides to take no action.A history of successFor more than 50 years, citizen suits have been an effective part of cleaning up the environment in the U.S. The process is fairly straightforward: A person or group must send a formal notification to the person, company or agency they suspect of violating the law – with a copy to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. If after 60 days the problem is not rectified, the people can sue.Citizen suits often ask the courts to order a stop to the polluting activity, payments for reducing or cleaning up the harm done, and civil penalties paid to the government. But if the government has already begun an enforcement action or is actively prosecuting the violator, a citizen suit cannot proceed.The success of these cases depends on the ability of the plaintiff to prove a violation of the law. Violations of the Clean Water Act are somewhat easier to prove than violations of other statutes because the simple act of discharging a pollutant without a permit is a violation of the law. As a result, more citizen suit provisions have been brought under the Clean Water Act than under any other environmental statute.In my area of research, plastic pollution, citizen suits have been used to hold plastic pellet manufacturers responsible for pollution. For example, the citizen suit provision of the Clean Water Act allowed Diane Wilson, a shrimper from Texas’ Gulf Coast, to sue Formosa Plastics in 2017 for persistent discharges of plastic pellets into Lavaca Bay, where some shrimp were caught, and which is connected to the Gulf of Mexico. In 2019, Formosa ended up settling for $50 million to pay for mitigation and remediation projects in the bay, cleaning up plastic and other pollution. Formosa also agreed to pay court costs and attorneys fees.In another example, the environmental advocacy groups PennEnvironment and Three Rivers Waterkeeper in 2023 sued Styropek USA, which manufactured expandable polystyrene used for packaging and shipping, over pellet discharges into a western Pennsylvania creek. The pellets attracted and collected other toxic chemicals and were harming local aquatic plants and fish. In 2025, Styropek settled for $2.5 million. As part of the settlement agreement, Styropek agreed to install filters in the facility’s wastewater and stormwater systems to capture plastic pellets before they reached Raccoon Creek or the Ohio River. Styropek also had to eliminate the unauthorized discharge of plastic pellets from all of the facility’s stormwater drains.Citizen suit provisions are not included in every law. But they have arisen in other contexts. For instance, a 2025 Texas state law seeks to restrict abortion rights and allows any citizen to sue doctors or other medical providers who perform or assist with abortions.NAACP v. xAIIn April 2026, using the citizen suit provision of the Clean Air Act, the NAACP, a nationwide civil rights organization, sued xAI, an artificial intelligence company founded by Elon Musk, in federal court.The NAACP alleged that xAI and a subsidiary company built and operated 27 natural gas-fired turbines in Southaven, Mississippi, without the required Clean Air Act permits. The turbines generated electricity to power xAI’s nearby Colossus 2 data center. The NAACP alleged that the gas plant released harmful pollutants, such as nitrogen oxides and formaldehyde, which can increase rates of asthma, respiratory diseases, heart problems and certain cancers.Had xAI applied for a permit to operate the turbines under the Clean Air Act, the EPA would have required xAI to use the best available technology to reduce those emissions. But xAI never applied to the EPA for a permit.A request from the federal governmentIn June 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice asked the judge to dismiss the case, claiming, among other arguments, that citizen suits cannot proceed when the federal government does not oppose the polluting behavior.The Justice Department’s court filing cited two executive orders signed by President Donald Trump within days of the start of his second term – one declaring a “national energy emergency” and the other seeking to support “American leadership in artificial intelligence.”According to the Justice Department, the NAACP’s lawsuit threatens “artificial intelligence innovation” and national security. The government’s filing goes on to argue that citizen lawsuits were not intended to allow everyday citizens to enforce laws in ways that go against what the federal government deems is in the public interest.Instead, the Justice Department claimed, citizen suits should be allowed by the court only when the government fails to enforce the statute, and not when the government has decided that executive branch policy means enforcement action is contrary to the public interest.Conflict between the government and the publicThis is the first time the Justice Department has taken this position in court. But defendants and judges have questioned the constitutionality of citizen suits in the past.Some critics, including the Trump administration, view citizen suits as a way for citizens to usurp the executive branch’s prosecutorial authority. Supporters of the citizen suit provisions, on the other hand, say they allow regular people to exercise their statutory rights to advocate for a clean and healthy environment and enforce environmental laws when the government’s efforts fall short.Regardless of how the court rules in the NAACP case against xAI, I believe the filing from the Trump administration is another step in a broader effort to consolidate government power in the executive branch.This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. The Conversation is an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts.]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    <item>
        <link>https://tcr.durangoherald.com/ukraine-hits-more-outlets-of-russias-largest-online-marketplace-to-bring-the-war-home/</link>
        <title>Ukraine hits more outlets of Russia’s largest online marketplace to bring the war home</title>
        <description>Wildberries accounts for 52% of all online orders in Russia</description>
        <pubDate>Fri, 31 Jul 2026 11:43:19 -0600</pubDate>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">29C94103-7E1C-4792-A5CE-37A3AE7DF6D1</guid>
        <media:content url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=B7772942-7DAE-54D8-9F08-E16B7221C11E&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=0.05625&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.88875&#038;crop_h=0.99999" medium="image" type="image/jpeg" />
        <media:thumbnail url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=B7772942-7DAE-54D8-9F08-E16B7221C11E&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=0.05625&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.88875&#038;crop_h=0.99999" />
        <content:encoded><![CDATA[Smoke billows into the sky following Ukrainian drone strikes on warehouses of Russia's online retailer Wildberries, in St. Petersburg, Russia, Friday, July 24, with St. Isaac's Cathedral seen in foreground. UGC via APWildberries accounts for 52% of all online orders in RussiaUkraine's attacks on the sprawling Russian warehouses have produced stark images, with massive pillars of smoke rising above fires that raged at facilities of Wildberries, the country's biggest online retailer and its equivalent of Amazon.In under two weeks, Ukraine has struck over a dozen of the retailer's depots, part of Kyiv's aerial campaign aimed at undermining Russia's war effort, hurting its economy and making people feel the consequences of the Kremlin's all-out invasion of Ukraine.Kyiv's drones first hit the sites in Elektrostal, just east of Moscow, and in the Tambov region July 18. Strikes followed on facilities across western and southern Russia, as well as Russian-held Crimea. A total of nine people have been killed and scores were injured.A look at Wildberries and how it became a wartime target:The retailer was launched in 2004Wildberries was launched in 2004 by Tatyana Kim, a teacher and a young mother at the time, focusing at first on selling clothes.Since then, the platform with its distinct purple logo has become an industry leader and household name, allowing big and small businesses alike to sell their goods to customers across the country by storing, shipping and delivering their inventory. In April, Forbes Russia estimated Kim's fortune at $8.1 billion.The marketplace features clothes, books, cosmetics, toys, appliances, household items, sports gear and much more. There's an “E-Pharmacy” page and a travel section for booking plane tickets or hotels.In 2021, Kim acquired a small bank and turned it into what now is Wildberries Bank, but that institution has since come under sanctions by the U.K. and the European Union.Kim said that last year, the company had more than 200 logistics facilities, with plans to expand to Belarus and Kazakhstan, where it already operates. It's also in Crimea, which was illegally annexed by Russia in 2014.An estimated 500,000 to 800,000 sellers are involved with Wildberries, said Sergei Semko of Data Insight, a Moscow-based company that analyzes online retail in Russia.Wildberries accounts for 52% of all online orders in Russia, he told The Associated Press.Shoppers interviewed July 23 by AP in Moscow praised its convenience. One said she would continue to use Wildberries, even if it cost more after the attacks.“Well, if they raise the prices, I don't mind. It still saves me time, and time is even more valuable,” said Irina Potapova.Kyiv says the facilities supplied Russia's militaryWhile Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy did not name Wildberries directly, he has said the attacked facilities were involved in supplying gear and technical components to Russia's military.Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said July 21 that “it is not the case” and accused Ukraine of striking civilian targets. Russia regularly attacks Ukrainian logistics and retail facilities.An AP search of the Wildberries website showed goods that could be used for both civilian and military purposes, such as body armor, helmets, radios and other electronics. Some were even marked as “tested in the SVO” or “SVO fighters' choice” – a Russian acronym for “special military operation,” the term the Kremlin uses for the war in Ukraine.Wildberries did not respond to a request for comment.New attacks came across RussiaThe July 18 strikes began a series of attacks on Wildberries facilities that now total 16 in under two weeks.Sites were hit recently in the southern Krasnodar and Stavropol regions, St. Petersburg, the adjacent Leningrad region and Simferopol in Crimea.On Thursday, a Wildberries depot burned in the Penza region southeast of Moscow, with four people injured and 200 workers evacuated, said Gov. Oleg Melnichenko. Wildberries said that same day its warehouse in Sarapul in the Udmurtia region was attacked by a drone but all workers got out safely.On Friday, Wildberries' press service said a logistics facility in Volgograd was hit. Russian news outlet Astra reported a Wildberries depot also was set ablaze in Zelenodolsk, near Kazan in the Tatarstan region.Small businesses are sufferingThe attacks have dealt a massive blow to many small Russian businesses, Semko said.Online retailers like Wildberries and its competitors Ozon and Yandex Market allow local craftsmen and entrepreneurs to sell their goods across Russia's vast territory, he said.People have taken to social media to say inventory for their businesses that was stored in the stricken Wildberries facilities had been destroyed, tearfully recounting their losses.The extent of the damage is unclear. Wildberries said it took three days to extinguish the fire in Elektrostal, a distribution hub for Moscow, while the Tambov region site only resumed operations five days later. After an attack on a site in Ryazan, Wildberries said most of the goods were saved.Kim said some goods were salvaged after attacks in the Leningrad region and Crimea but didn't elaborate.To support the sellers, Wildberries offered discounts on storage fees, free transfer of goods to other sites, discounted loans at the Wildberries Bank and other measures.Many still wondered if they would be compensated. Earlier in July, Wildberries changed its seller policy, exempting it from liability for stock damaged because of a “force majeure” that includes drone attacks.In the week after the first attacks, Kim said the company began reimbursing sellers whose inventory was damaged in Elektrostal. “First and foremost, we want to support the smallest and most vulnerable entrepreneurs – there are more than 88,000 of them. The funds will appear on sellers' balances within 24 hours,” she said.On Thursday, Wildberries said it distributed a second tranche of reimbursement to over 97,000 businesses, “including those who previously received the first round of support payments.”Semko cautioned there isn't enough data to make an assessment, but he estimated the stricken facilities in the Moscow, Tambov, Krasnodar and Stavropol regions accounted for about 12% of Wildberries' total warehouse space. He said the losses of goods stored there could be as high as $3 billion.Those losses, amid increased taxes, a fuel crisis and more regulatory hurdles, have created “almost a perfect storm” for many small businesses this year, he said.The strikes also undermine Russian moraleRussia's online retail sector has grown rapidly since 2022, said Chris Weafer, CEO of Macro-Advisory Ltd. Consultancy, accounting for about 20% of all retail sales, and “that comes from about much less than half of that five years ago.”After Western brands withdrew from Russia over its war in Ukraine, Wildberries and Ozon sourced similar products from Asia, the United Arab Emirates or Turkey, leading to the rapid growth in online business, Weafer said.He estimated Russia's e-commerce sector to be worth around $150 billion, and online retail around $80 billion to $90 billion of that.The warehouse attacks add to the pain felt by small businesses, which in recently are “struggling very badly,” Weafer said, while probably causing only “relatively slight” damage to the industry and the economy in general, which he described as effectively stagnant but stable.Rather, he said, it's about “undermining public morale, and getting people to talk much more” about the war and question the Kremlin's actions. Since the fighting began, Russians appeared largely complacent about it.“It was something that was happening a long way off,” Weafer said. But that has changed this year, with attacks on Russian oil refineries and now Wildberries, he added.“There is now much more awareness, but there's also much more discussion, and more people are questioning what's going on and why is it happening and the conflict lasting so long,” he said. “It brings it home.”]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    <item>
        <link>https://tcr.durangoherald.com/should-you-wash-your-prewashed-lettuce-an-infectious-disease-expert-explains-how-to-eat-your-gree/</link>
        <title>Should you wash your prewashed lettuce? An infectious disease expert explains how to eat your greens safely during the cyclospora outbreak</title>
        <description>Romaine lettuce sits on the shelves as a shopper walks through the produce area of an Albertsons market Tuesday in Simi Valley, California. Mark J. Terrill/AP File Photo Salads – along with other fresh produce – are some of the...</description>
        <pubDate>Wed, 29 Jul 2026 15:09:38 -0600</pubDate>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">9FE73127-74CE-431A-BB4C-6E38ED4C5BCC</guid>
        <media:content url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=3C48CCF3-A886-4766-BB5E-508CE672E906&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=1.0E-5&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.86&#038;crop_h=0.99999" medium="image" type="image/jpeg" />
        <media:thumbnail url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=3C48CCF3-A886-4766-BB5E-508CE672E906&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=1.0E-5&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.86&#038;crop_h=0.99999" />
        <content:encoded><![CDATA[Romaine lettuce sits on the shelves as a shopper walks through the produce area of an Albertsons market Tuesday in Simi Valley, California. Mark J. Terrill/AP File Photo Salads – along with other fresh produce – are some of the healthiest foods you can eat. Leafy greens are rich in vitamins A, C and K, folate, potassium and magnesium. They also contain lots of fiber, which supports a healthy gut microbiome, promotes fullness, helps regulate blood sugar, and may contribute to healthy aging and better cognitive function.But an ongoing 2026 outbreak of cyclosporiasis, caused by the cyclospora parasite, has sickened more than 11,500 people across the United States with explosive diarrhea and other gastrointestinal symptoms and has put a damper on salad consumption. A poll released on July 26 reports that 40% of U.S. adults have cut down on buying and eating fresh produce. News of egg and blueberry recalls, plus an investigation into a new, separate cyclospora outbreak, has not helped.As an immunologist and infectious disease specialist studying how germs spread and cause illnesses and outbreaks, I know it’s impossible to entirely eliminate your risk of being infected with microbes that can contaminate foods, such as cyclospora, E. coli and salmonella.But rather than avoiding fresh produce, adopting a few sensible food safety practices can help you significantly reduce your risk of getting sick while continuing to enjoy the many health benefits and flavor perks of salads and fresh veggies.During an active outbreak, washing your prewashed greens is a good idea. But better still would be choosing a whole head of lettuce that you wash at home.The perks of prewashed produceBagged lettuce and other veggies, often labeled “triple washed” or “prewashed” and marketed as ready to eat, have become very popular. The packaging gives consumers confidence that the product has been commercially cleaned and helps save time when preparing fast, healthy meals.Convenience is important: Research shows that when vegetables are easier to prepare and eat, people tend to consume more of them.Commercial processors follow food safety practices, and millions of bags of produce are consumed safely each year. Normally, using prewashed lettuce right out of the bags is a low-risk move.Commercial packaging risksHowever, prewashed doesn’t mean sterile. “Triple washed” or “ready to eat” means a product is cleaned to commercial standards, not that it is free of all harmful germs. And the same things that make prewashed vegetables convenient and appealing also introduce risk. That’s because each stage of production – harvest, cut, wash, conveyor belt and packaging – creates another opportunity for contamination.What’s more, bagged lettuce often travels a considerable distance to consumers. This gives germs ample time to multiply, making contaminated food harder to locate and recall. During commercial processing, pathogen from a single contaminated leaf can spread to additional leaves through equipment or wash water, increasing the potential for cross contamination. Research also suggests that cut leaves release plant juices that may help bacteria survive and multiply.Cyclospora is resistant to the chlorine and sanitizers commonly used to sanitize fresh produce, and routine washing may not completely remove the parasite. It’s also a particularly persistent pathogen in that its eggs adhere tightly to the surface of leafy greens and other bumpy produce. For these reasons, preventing contamination during growing, harvesting and processing is the most effective strategy for reducing risk.Benefits of whole, local lettuceIn the face of multiple outbreaks involving fresh produce, choosing whole heads of lettuce and washing them at home is a reasonable way to reduce risk. Strip off and throw away the outer leaves, wash the leaves you plan to eat under running water and dry them in a salad spinner or with paper towels.Whole lettuce heads undergo less processing than commercially bagged lettuce, which means fewer chances for exposure to microbes that can make people sick. That’s also true of locally grown produce. Local produce usually comes from smaller farms and gets to your plate in fewer steps, so it tends to be safer than mass-produced fruits and vegetables.Buying lettuce at local farmers markets or farm stands – or even just choosing locally grown produce at your supermarket – can lower your risk of exposure during the current cyclosporiasis outbreak, which is suspected to come from commercial producers.The upshot is that the health benefits of salad far outweigh the relatively small risk of foodborne illness – particularly if you follow these three simple rules:Opt for whole heads of lettuce when possible, and rinse them well at home. Thoroughly scrub other produce with water and a produce brush, too.When possible, buy locally grown produce, since nationwide outbreaks generally come from large commercial producers.If you do go for bagged and prewashed greens and other produce, give them a good rinse even when they say “prewashed.”This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. The Conversation is an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts.]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    <item>
        <link>https://tcr.durangoherald.com/u-s-saudi-nuclear-deal-invites-proliferation-risks-unless-safeguards-are-written-in/</link>
        <title>U.S.‑Saudi nuclear deal invites proliferation risks … unless safeguards are written in</title>
        <description>President Donald Trump meets Saudi Arabia&apos;s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in the Oval Office of the White House, Tuesday, Nov. 18, 2025, in Washington. Evan Vucci/AP File Photo A key question remains over the landmark U.S.-Saudi nuclear deal announced...</description>
        <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jul 2026 14:34:25 -0600</pubDate>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">4898655E-5DEC-4A66-A6AD-1A1B4CF3A494</guid>
        <media:content url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=0381C64F-4C74-54AA-BF10-DFB056FE5925&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=0.05625&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.88875&#038;crop_h=0.99999" medium="image" type="image/jpeg" />
        <media:thumbnail url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=0381C64F-4C74-54AA-BF10-DFB056FE5925&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=0.05625&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.88875&#038;crop_h=0.99999" />
        <content:encoded><![CDATA[President Donald Trump meets Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in the Oval Office of the White House, Tuesday, Nov. 18, 2025, in Washington. Evan Vucci/AP File Photo A key question remains over the landmark U.S.-Saudi nuclear deal announced with much fanfare on July 22, 2026: Will it allow a nation long suspected of having nuclear weapons ambitions to enrich uranium?U.S. President Donald Trump has already shifted the sands of the agreement, adding a major caveat requiring Saudi Arabia to normalize relations with Israel first. He also posted that there would be “no enrichment.”But it is unclear whether either condition is included in the signed deal, something that has nonproliferation experts like me worried.Allowing enrichment in any form would be a major step. Moreover, it would deviate from past experience. In 2009, the U.S. government signed a civilian nuclear cooperation agreement with the United Arab Emirates. Called a 123 agreement, it prohibited uranium enrichment and spent fuel reprocessing – both of which can produce fissile material for nuclear weapons – and is seen as the gold standard of such deals.The nonproliferation implications of the new Saudi-U.S. deal are clear. Without limits on the kingdom’s nuclear wish list, Riyadh might gain access to key capabilities relevant to producing the fissile material needed for nuclear weapons.That could spark a nuclear arms race in the region, notably with Riyadh’s traditional rival for influence, Iran. In addition, the UAE has the right to renegotiate its 123 agreement with the U.S. should any other state in the region reach an agreement with Washington on more favorable terms.Saudi’s nuclear ambitionsFor years, senior Saudi officials have expressed interest in developing the full front end of the nuclear fuel cycle – meaning it would have the capability to undertake the key stages of the process, from mining to power generation.The deal announced last week began with detailed discussions between Saudis and the U.S. during the Biden administration. Then, in January 2023, Saudi Energy Minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman noted the kingdom’s interest in using a complete fuel cycle to develop nuclear fuel for two planned commercial power reactors.The key steps in the front end of the fuel cycle are uranium mining and milling, uranium conversion, uranium enrichment and fuel fabrication. Uranium enriched to about 3% to 5% uranium-235 is used to make fuel for civilian nuclear reactors, although some reactors use fuel enriched up to just under 20%. But a country can use expertise from a civilian program to further enrich uranium to weapons grade levels of more than 90%.As such, mastering all of the processes involved in the front end of the fuel cycle – especially enrichment – would provide Saudi Arabia with the technical and industrial capability to produce weapons-grade uranium if it chose to pursue nuclear weapons.Proliferation risksThe risk of Saudi Arabia having such capabilities for commercial purposes is high, given the kingdom’s de facto leader Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s public stance that Riyadh would acquire a nuclear weapon if Iran did.Especially relevant would be Riyadh’s potential pursuit of a “latent” nuclear weapons capability, meaning that Saudi Arabia would develop relevant technology and expertise to be able to produce a weapon quickly if it made the political decision to do so. Most experts agree that Iran has long had such a latent capability, after it halted its full pursuit of nuclear weapons in 2003.Were Saudi Arabia to desire a nuclear weapons program, a domestic capability to enrich uranium would be key. Mohamed ElBaradei, former director of the U.N. nuclear watchdog International Atomic Energy Agency, warned in a December 2006 statement on nuclear power that countries with these capabilities are “only a short step away from a nuclear weapons capability.”To enrich or notProhibiting uranium enrichment in the Saudi deal would be the most direct way to prevent the Gulf kingdom from using civilian nuclear cooperation to learn the intricacies of uranium enrichment operations.After all, producing low-enriched uranium accounts for much of the separative work needed to produce weapons-grade material. And enriching to the lower enrichment levels needed for reactor fuel can “significantly reduce the time a country requires to make a nuclear weapon,” according to Pierce Corden and David Hafemeister, former State Department arms control experts.Yet, the day before Trump’s comments suggesting “no enrichment,” U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright said U.S. companies could build a “black box” enrichment facility in Saudi Arabia. In effect, that would mean a U.S.-owned and operated enrichment site without direct Saudi input.The U.S. will reportedly use a study focused on the commercial viability of a Saudi enrichment capability to determine whether to proceed with such a facility.Precedent exists for building and operating a black box uranium enrichment plant to protect uranium enrichment technology. The driving principle is that the supplier country builds and provides the sensitive uranium enrichment centrifuges, while the recipient receives knowledge related to plant operations.In one example, the European nuclear services consortium URENCO supplied the centrifuge technology for the U.S. National Enrichment Facility uranium enrichment plant in New Mexico. According to the Congressional Research Service, URENCO installed the centrifuges, but personnel from the U.S. operating company were prohibited from viewing “any details of the sensitive equipment as it was being assembled and installed.”Limiting Saudi access to enrichment technology would make it more difficult for Saudi Arabia to acquire the technical expertise needed for domestic enrichment capability. It also reduces the risk of Saudi Arabia diverting low-enriched uranium from a civilian program and further enriching it to weapons-grade levels. But some experts have already said that maintaining a black box facility with no Saudi personnel or involvement over the long term is unrealistic.Plutonium reprocessingSaudi officials have not discussed plutonium reprocessing publicly. However, reports suggest that the new deal will allow Saudi Arabia to reprocess nuclear fuel.Countries can use reprocessing to separate plutonium from spent nuclear fuel for use in nuclear weapons.Preventing material diversion in reprocessing plants is difficult due to many factors, including their size and complexity and the large amount of nuclear material processing occurring. According to the IAEA, these plants present a unique problem because “most of the equipment (is) inaccessible during operation.”The IAEA emphasizes the need to build safeguards into these facilities, such as measurement, surveillance and verification systems.The need for a watchdogReducing the proliferation risk of Saudi nuclear capabilities would require robust implementation of IAEA safeguards – that is, the accounting, inspection and monitoring systems implemented by the international nuclear watchdog. It would also mean Saudi Arabia abiding by the terms of the IAEA’s Additional Protocol, which allows for a set of more intrusive measures, including short-notice inspections of facilities.Yet press reports suggest the U.S.-Saudi deal does not require Saudi Arabia to abide by the IAEA’s Additional Protocol.The most effective way to reduce the proliferation risk of the deal is prohibiting indigenous Saudi uranium enrichment and plutonium reprocessing. Should the U.S. allow enrichment, implementing a black box facility and stringent IAEA safeguards would mitigate any risk of Riyadh gaining expertise for a future nuclear weapons program.This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. The Conversation is an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts.]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    <item>
        <link>https://tcr.durangoherald.com/what-experts-are-saying-as-ebola-outbreak-in-congo-and-uganda-kills-more-than-1000-people-2/</link>
        <title>What experts are saying as Ebola outbreak in Congo and Uganda kills more than 1,000 people</title>
        <description>Virus driving the epidemic has no approved vaccine or treatment</description>
        <pubDate>Thu, 23 Jul 2026 13:36:14 -0600</pubDate>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">15B1E31C-BE80-44ED-B375-50AE229DA847</guid>
        <media:content url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=145D1275-9B5B-584F-9A86-AA7D08DAB2E7&#038;function=thumbnail&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;width=600&#038;height=400" medium="image" type="image/jpeg" />
        <media:thumbnail url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=145D1275-9B5B-584F-9A86-AA7D08DAB2E7&#038;function=thumbnail&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;width=600&#038;height=400" />
        <content:encoded><![CDATA[Health workers disinfects an ambulance at Ebola Treatment Center at Bunia General Hospital in Ituri, Congo, Wednesday. Dirole Lotsima Dieudonne/AP PhotoVirus driving the epidemic has no approved vaccine or treatmentDAKAR, Senegal – The fastest-growing Ebola outbreak in history has killed more than 1,000 people in eastern Congo as health officials race to contain a virus with no approved vaccine or treatment.An update from Congo's public health institute on Wednesday said there have been 2,536 confirmed Ebola cases and 1,033 deaths, with at least 738 patients in isolation or hospitalized.The outbreak declared on May 15 is unlike most previous instances of Ebola spreading through communities because the Bundibugyo virus responsible has no approved vaccines or treatments.It is mostly concentrated in remote Ituri province, which accounts for nearly 90% of cases, but there have been others confirmed in five provinces including one of Congo's largest cities, Kisangani, and in neighboring Uganda.Here is what to know about the outbreak:Outbreak is spreading despite signs of slowingWhile Congolese officials say the sharp rise in cases appears to be slowing, they caution the outbreak has not yet peaked. The latest report by the country's public health institute says transmission remains sustained, with recent fluctuations in cases likely influenced by reporting delays and ongoing data consolidation.A health worker, wearing protective gear, stands outside the Ebola Treatment Center at the Bunia General Hospital in Ituri, Congo, on Wednesday. Dirole Lotsima Dieudonne/AP PhotoContact tracing continues to lag, with only around 77% of known contacts monitored nationwide, well below the 95% target health officials say is needed to interrupt transmission.Responders are struggling to understand how far the Ebola outbreak has spread and how much worse it might become.U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention researchers last month used computer modeling and found that in a worst-case scenario, the current Ebola outbreak could approach the worst in history.The West Africa epidemic in 2014-2016 caused more than 11,000 deaths and took about eight months from the first case to reach 1,000 deaths.The new outbreak's origin is still a medical mystery. The vast majority of cases are emerging from unknown chains of transmission, the World Health Organization said.Risk of the outbreak spreading globally remains lowThe WHO continues to assess the risk from the outbreak as “very high” inside Congo and “high” in Uganda and neighboring countries, citing cross-border spread, frequent population movement and ongoing transmission in eastern Congo.The agency says the global risk of spread is low, noting Ebola spreads through direct contact with the bodily fluids of an infected person rather than through the air, making it much harder to spread than respiratory viruses.While WHO says additional imported cases are likely as the outbreak grows, those cases have so far been rapidly detected and contained without leading to sustained transmission outside the affected region.The CDC echoed that assessment in its latest situation report, saying Ebola doesn't spread like respiratory viruses such as flu or COVID-19.“You cannot get Ebola from being near someone,” the agency said.The CDC also notes that people infected with Ebola are not contagious until they develop symptoms, making case identification and contact tracing easier than with diseases that spread before symptoms appear.Health workers disinfects an ambulance at Ebola Treatment Center at Bunia General Hospital in Ituri, Congo, on Wednesday. Dirole Lotsima Dieudonne/AP PhotoThe outbreak has spread little beyond CongoThe vast majority of Ebola cases are concentrated in Congo.In neighboring Uganda, 20 cases have been confirmed, including two deaths. All cases were linked to imported infections from Congo and are concentrated in the capital Kampala. No new Ebola cases have been reported since June 21 and the WHO has discharged its final patient, beginning the 42-day countdown used to declare the end of an outbreak.A positive case of Ebola was identified in France in a doctor traveling from Congo in June. He has since fully recovered and was discharged from the hospital earlier this month.The United States currently bars most recent travelers from Congo from entering the country and requires U.S. citizens to spend 21 days outside Congo before returning, while travelers from neighboring Uganda and South Sudan who are allowed to enter are routed through designated airports for Ebola screening.U.S. plans to build an Ebola quarantine facility in Kenya for Americans evacuated from Congo have been met with legal challenges and a series of protests in Kenya, including some that have turned violent.Community resistance and lack of testing slow responseLack of trust and resistance from locals remain one of the biggest obstacles to containing the outbreak, according to authorities and health workers.Rumors about Ebola treatment centers, fears of isolation and resistance to safe burials have led some people to avoid testing or seek care only after becoming critically ill.The response also has been hampered by conflict. Fighting involving the Rwanda-backed M23 rebels, attacks by the Islamic State-linked Allied Democratic Forces and mass displacement have complicated surveillance, contact tracing and access to affected communities.At least 16 people were killed in an attack Wednesday by suspected ADF rebels in a village in Ituri province, local authorities said Thursday.Unlike previous Ebola outbreaks, the Bundibugyo virus driving the epidemic has no approved vaccine or treatment. Although testing capacity has expanded since the outbreak began, responders say the virus continues to spread faster than they can contain it.“There's never been an Ebola outbreak that started with so many cases because it was so late to be identified,” said Trish Newport, emergency program manager for Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors Without Borders), who has been working in Congo.Earlier this month, researchers began the first clinical trial of potential treatments for the Bundibugyo virus, enrolling patients at an Ebola treatment center in Ituri province. The WHO said it could take months and as many as 1,000 participants to determine whether either of the two experimental treatments is effective.___Associated Press writers Mike Stobbe in New York and Prosper Heri Ngorora in Bunia, Congo, contributed to this report.]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    <item>
        <link>https://tcr.durangoherald.com/the-trump-administrations-global-campaign-against-radical-left-terrorism-is-built-on-a-national-s/</link>
        <title>The Trump administration’s global campaign against ‘radical left terrorism’ is built on a national security memo without congressional approval</title>
        <description>White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller listens as President Donald Trump speaks during a roundtable meeting on antifa in the State Dining Room at the White House, Wednesday, Oct. 8, 2025, in Washington. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci) That domestic...</description>
        <pubDate>Tue, 21 Jul 2026 15:36:45 -0600</pubDate>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">EC511664-A200-449F-93A7-D7EEA7616DB3</guid>
        <media:content url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=0AB422C3-CC90-57C7-8008-2A4D10399F1C&#038;function=thumbnail&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;width=600&#038;height=400" medium="image" type="image/jpeg" />
        <media:thumbnail url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=0AB422C3-CC90-57C7-8008-2A4D10399F1C&#038;function=thumbnail&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;width=600&#038;height=400" />
        <content:encoded><![CDATA[White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller listens as President Donald Trump speaks during a roundtable meeting on antifa in the State Dining Room at the White House, Wednesday, Oct. 8, 2025, in Washington. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci) That domestic campaign now has an international dimension, one that American officials had been planning for months, culminating on July 16, 2026, when Secretary of State Marco Rubio's Ministerial on the Resurgence of Political Terrorism drew representatives from more than 65 countries to Washington. The gathering was informally called the “Antifa summit.”Rubio described antifa-aligned networks as sharing infrastructure across borders and accused Iran and Cuba of helping bankroll the movement, without offering evidence. The White House declared the summit the start of an “unprecedented global offensive” against what it calls “radical left terrorism.”This offensive is built on the same domestic legal architecture that has now sent American activists to prison for decades.That architecture is National Security Presidential Memorandum/NSPM-7, issued on Sept. 25, 2025, which for the first time appeared to authorize preemptive law enforcement measures against Americans based not on whether they are planning to commit violence but for their political or ideological beliefs.Nearly a year later, that blueprint has moved from paper into practice.The Justice Department has built task forces staffed by counterterrorism prosecutors. The FBI has set up its own NSPM-7 mission center to oversee investigations into left-wing movements, including a joint effort with the IRS to investigate nonprofit groups.The Justice Department has used this machinery to convict activists and send some of them to prison for decades.NSPM-7 was not passed by Congress. It's a lesser-known tool of executive power: a presidential memorandum.As an international relations scholar who has studied U.S. foreign policy decision-making and national security legislation, I recognize that presidents can take several types of executive actions without legislative involvement: executive orders, memoranda and proclamations.This structure allows the president to direct law enforcement and national security agencies, with little opportunity for congressional oversight.Presidential national security powersExecutive memorandums direct agencies to prepare reports, implement policies or align programs with the administration's priorities. Unlike executive orders, they aren't required to be published. When they relate to national security, like NSPM-7, they're called national security directives – many of which stay classified and may not be declassified for years or decades.The stated purpose of NSPM-7 is to counter domestic terrorism and organized political violence, focusing mainly on perceived threats from the political left. The memorandum identifies “anti-Christian,” “anti-capitalism” or “anti-American” views as potential indicators that a group or person will commit domestic terrorism.The memorandum claims that political violence originates with “anti-fascist” groups that hold the following views: “support for the overthrow of the United States Government; extremism on migration, race, and gender; and hostility towards those who hold traditional American views on family, religion, and morality.”The strategy includes preemptive measures to disrupt groups before they engage in violent political acts, empowering multiagency task forces to investigate potential federal crimes related to radicalization and the groups' funders. Former Attorney General Pam Bondi's December 2025 implementation memo went further, ordering a five-year review of agency files on antifa. A task force staffed with counterterrorism and organized-crime prosecutors is carrying out these investigations.'Domestic terrorist organizations'The memorandum directs the Department of Justice to focus FBI resources from approximately 200 Joint Terrorism Task Forces on investigating “acts of recruiting or radicalizing persons” for the purpose of “political violence, terrorism, or conspiracy against rights; and the violent deprivation of any citizen's rights.”NSPM-7 also allows the attorney general to propose groups for designation as “domestic terrorist organizations.” That includes groups that engage in “organized doxxing campaigns, swatting, rioting, looting, trespass, assault, destruction of property, threats of violence, and civil disorder.”Existing laws allow the secretary of state to designate groups as “foreign terrorist organizations” that are then subject to financial sanctions.But these laws do not permit the president to label domestic groups this way.That gap hasn't stopped prosecutions. In Texas, eight defendants tied to a “North Texas Antifa Cell” were sentenced in June 2026 for a 2025 armed confrontation at the Prairieland immigration detention center. One man received 100 years, and others who never fired a weapon still drew decades in prison under terrorism sentencing guidelines.In Minnesota, 15 members and associates of a group called Direct Action Minnesota were indicted in June 2026 on conspiracy and assault charges. A 94-page indictment cited behavior such as wearing an “I'm Antifa!” sweatshirt, possessing a bullhorn or including a devil emoji in a Signal message.Defining terrorismNSPM-7 marks a major conceptual shift in U.S. counterterrorism policy, departing from approaches that primarily targeted foreign threats.Earlier directives, dating to Ronald Reagan's presidency, treated terrorism as a global menace countered through military power and diplomacy. In the 1990s, the Clinton administration reframed it as a domestic challenge after the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and 1995 Oklahoma City bombing.After 9/11, the Bush administration fused counterterrorism with national defense through the global war on terrorism. The Obama administration later tried to narrow those powers, asking whether targeted individuals “pose a continuing, imminent threat to U.S. persons” – a standard focused on tactics and capture feasibility, not ideology.The first Trump administration used a “travel ban” against several “terror-prone” countries, while President Joe Biden redirected focus toward weapons of mass destruction.Notably, the “domestic terrorist” label itself has rarely produced actual charges. The State Department designated four antifa-aligned groups as foreign terrorist organizations. But antifa is a decentralized movement, not a formal group with a roster.This designation lacks any real legal weight because U.S. law has no formal domestic terrorist organization category. Creating one risks infringing on First Amendment protected speech. Domestic terrorism itself is not a chargeable offense.Prosecutors have instead leaned on older statutes such as material support for terrorism and conspiracy laws, tools originally built for cases like the ones above, not protest movements.First Amendment rights at riskThere is no single official definition of terrorism in U.S. law; definitions vary by purpose – criminal law, intelligence collection, civil liability.Definitions in all those areas typically focus on identifying violent or dangerous acts done with the intent to intimidate or coerce civilians or influence government policy.But more than redefining terrorism, NSPM-7 reorients the machinery of national security toward the policing of belief.The First Amendment generally prevents the government from punishing people for unpopular opinions. It also protects the ability for people to associate to advance public and private ideas in pursuit of political, economic, religious or cultural goals.The directive's emphasis on ideological orientations – “anti-Christianity,” “anti-capitalism” and “anti-American” views – as indicators of domestic terrorism potentially jeopardizes First Amendment rights.Thirty-one members of Congress sent a letter to Trump in October 2025 expressing “serious concerns” about NSPM-7, warning that it poses “serious constitutional, statutory and civil liberties risks, especially if used to target political dissent, protest or ideological speech.”As the ACLU warns, any definition of terrorism that includes ideological components risks criminalizing people or groups based on belief rather than based on violence or other criminal conduct.Congress has declined to create a domestic complement to the foreign terrorist designation in large part because of the potential for impinging on First Amendment – protected association and speech.But I fear that chilling speech may be the point.Silencing dissentNSPM-7 does not criminalize previously legal conduct.Rather, it states that the Trump administration will focus investigations around the identity and ideology of supposed perpetrators. Prioritizing investigations into this broad swath of ideologies serves to instill fear, silencing anti-fascist and other messages in opposition to the Trump administration.Law professor Steve Vladeck frames this chill as “obeying in advance,” in which organizations self-censor rather than risk investigation, prosecution or defending against the “domestic terrorist” label. Federal judges in the Prairieland case have shown little sympathy for that distinction: One judge described the protest itself as “an assault on democracy,” even for defendants who never touched a weapon.Although left-wing violence has risen in the past decade, empirical evidence shows it remains far below historical levels of right-wing or jihadist violence.Most domestic terrorists in the U.S. are politically on the right, accounting for the vast majority of domestic terrorism fatalities.Yet NSPM-7 focuses disproportionately on left-wing ideologies. NSPM-7 departs from prior U.S. counterterrorism frameworks by prioritizing the suppression of ideologically motivated dissent, even where, as in Minnesota, judges have already dismissed roughly half of similar federal cases for lack of evidence.This is an updated version of a story originally published Dec. 3, 2025.This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article here: https://theconversation.com/the-trump-administrations-global-campaign-against-radical-left-terrorism-is-built-on-a-national-security-memo-without-congressional-approval-287276.]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    <item>
        <link>https://tcr.durangoherald.com/why-american-elections-are-so-complicated-and-secure-2/</link>
        <title>Why American elections are so complicated – and secure</title>
        <description>People vote in the Democratic primaries at Blair-Caldwell Library, Tuesday, June 30, in Denver. Rebecca Slezak/AP Photo In a speech to the nation Thursday evening, President Donald Trump said Americans deserve secure elections, and he claimed to be using federal...</description>
        <pubDate>Mon, 20 Jul 2026 13:50:09 -0600</pubDate>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">16A2AE31-63EC-435E-8E85-7112D7574BAF</guid>
        <media:content url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=ADAD683A-977C-572C-BB2C-7218617C4307&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=0.03125&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.89&#038;crop_h=0.99999" medium="image" type="image/jpeg" />
        <media:thumbnail url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=ADAD683A-977C-572C-BB2C-7218617C4307&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=0.03125&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.89&#038;crop_h=0.99999" />
        <content:encoded><![CDATA[People vote in the Democratic primaries at Blair-Caldwell Library, Tuesday, June 30, in Denver. Rebecca Slezak/AP Photo In a speech to the nation Thursday evening, President Donald Trump said Americans deserve secure elections, and he claimed to be using federal authority to prevent them from being “stolen.”In fact, one of the strongest security features of U.S. elections is the fact that they aren't conducted at the federal level. America votes in more than 10,000 different election jurisdictions, each with different rules set by state and sometimes local governments.That structure makes the nation's elections extraordinarily complicated – and also safe from widespread fraud. And when misconduct does happen – rarely – security protocols frequently catch it.Decentralized elections date back to the nation's foundingAmerica's highly decentralized system of voting exists because the nation's Founding Fathers gave authority over elections to the states, rather than the federal government. While Congress has the power to regulate elections – and has used that authority to pass such laws as the Voting Rights Act – the Constitution makes clear that states have primary authority to set the “times, places and manner” for elections.There also is no national election agency that administers the presidential contest, something that's different from many other countries. And when it comes to doing the day-to-day work of running an election, the responsibility falls to officials at the local level – usually a clerk or election supervisor – with help from staff and volunteers.While differences in election laws can get confusing, election security experts say this structure is a strength. That's because to pull off stealing a presidential election – as Trump falsely claims was done to him in 2020 – it would require large numbers of election workers in the most competitive counties across the country who are willing to risk prosecution, prison time and fines while working with officials from both parties willing to look the other way. And everyone somehow would have to keep quiet – a highly unlikely scenario.There are also shared practices and security measures in place across the country that together work to ensure that only eligible voters can cast a ballot and only one ballot is counted for each.President Donald Trump gestures after speaking in the East Room of the White House on Thursday in Washington. Saul Loeb/Pool via APVoter fraud can happen, but it's rare and there are safeguards to catch itMost Americans by now have probably heard stories about someone casting multiple ballots, or voting in the name of dead relatives, or stealing mail ballots from mailboxes.When these incidents happen, they are often caught and prosecuted.Voting more than once, tampering with ballots, lying about your residence to vote somewhere else or casting someone else's ballot are crimes that can be punished with hefty fines and prison time. Non-U.S. citizens who break election laws can be deported.For anyone still motivated to cheat, election systems in the United States are designed with multiple layers of protection and transparency intended to stand in the way.For example, for in-person voting, most states either require or request voters provide some sort of identification at the polls. Others require voters to verify who they are in another way, such as stating their name and address, signing a poll book or signing an affidavit.For absentee voting, all states require a voter's signature, and many states have further precautions, such as having bipartisan teams compare the signature with other signatures on file, requiring the signature to be notarized or requiring a witness to sign.That means even if a ballot is erroneously sent to someone's past address and the current resident mails it in, there are checks to alert election workers to the foul play.AP review found there was too little voter fraud to tip the 2020 electionTrump has spent six years insisting he won the 2020 election, a campaign he lost to former President Joe Biden.An Associated Press review in 2021 dug into every potential case of voter fraud in the six battleground states that Trump disputed. It found fewer than 475 cases – a number that would have made no difference in that race.Allegations from Trump of massive voting fraud have been refuted by a variety of judges, state election officials and an arm of his own administration's Homeland Security Department. In 2020, then-Attorney General William Barr, a Trump appointee, told the AP that no proof of widespread voter fraud had been uncovered. “To date, we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have effected a different outcome in the election,” he said at the time.]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    <item>
        <link>https://tcr.durangoherald.com/how-to-protect-yourself-from-the-bad-air-caused-by-wildfires-3/</link>
        <title>How to protect yourself from the bad air caused by wildfires</title>
        <description>Boats maneuver the East River near the Brooklyn Bridge as smoke from wildfires blankets the sky on Thursday in New York. Alyssa Goodman/AP Photo When wildfires burn, smoke can travel long distances and degrade air quality far away, posing risks...</description>
        <pubDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2026 16:36:15 -0600</pubDate>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">C6358DC3-6FD6-429A-B14E-FB38AB4DD442</guid>
        <media:content url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=0F7B763E-200F-501E-9742-6713A0991EA4&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=0.05625&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.88875&#038;crop_h=0.99999" medium="image" type="image/jpeg" />
        <media:thumbnail url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=0F7B763E-200F-501E-9742-6713A0991EA4&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=0.05625&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.88875&#038;crop_h=0.99999" />
        <content:encoded><![CDATA[Boats maneuver the East River near the Brooklyn Bridge as smoke from wildfires blankets the sky on Thursday in New York. Alyssa Goodman/AP Photo When wildfires burn, smoke can travel long distances and degrade air quality far away, posing risks to those breathing it.Fires burning in one state can make the air worse several states away, and wildfires in Canada can send smoke into U.S. cities.Here's what to know about taking precautions against poor air quality due to wildfires.What counts as bad air?The Environmental Protection Agency's Air Quality Index converts all pollutant levels into a single number. The lower the number, the better.Anything below 50 is classified as “healthy.” Fifty to 100 is “moderate,” while 100 to 150 is unhealthy for “sensitive groups,” and anything above 150 is bad for everyone.Sensitive groups include people with asthma, lung disease or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, said Dr. Sanjay Sethi, chief of the division of pulmonary, critical care and sleep medicine at the University at Buffalo medical school.“If you have heart or lung problems, then you've got to be definitely more careful,” Sethi said. “I would either avoid going outside or wear an N95 or at least a dust mask.”A plumes of smoke from the Camp Fire hang in the air over Moose Lake as multiple wildfires burn in Minnesota's Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness on Tuesday. Anthony Souffle/Minnesota Star Tribune via APIs my air unhealthy?Sometimes the air is bad enough to see or smell the smoke. Even if you don't see the pollution, it can be unhealthy to breathe.The EPA maintains a website with up-to-date, regional air quality information. PurpleAir, a company that sells air quality sensors and publishes real-time air quality data, has a citizen scientist air quality monitoring network with a more granular map of street-by-street air quality readings.The best way to get indoor air quality readings is to buy a monitor, said Joseph Allen, director of Harvard University's Healthy Buildings Program.“You can find these low-cost, indoor air quality monitors just about everywhere online now. They don't cost all that much anymore,” he said.What if I have to go outside?For most people, going outside for just a short time won't have a negative long-term impact, said Sethi.Wearing an N95 mask, which became common during the coronavirus pandemic, will help filter out the pollution.“N95 is going to get rid of 90-95% of the particles,” said Jennifer Stowell, a research scientist at Boston University's Center for Climate and Health. “If you have access to a mask that has a respirator-type attachment to it, then that's the very best.”If you must be outside and you experience symptoms, experts say you should head indoors or elsewhere with better air quality. Even if you are healthy, it's good to take precautions.“If you start wheezing, which is like this whistling sound of the chest, or if you're feeling short of breath, that's definitely more concerning,” Sethi said.How do I make my air cleaner?Close the windows and turn on the air conditioner, if you have one, setting it to circulate the indoor air. Use blankets to cover cracks that allow outside air into your home, such as under doors.Finally, swapping the air conditioner's filter for a MERV 13 filter can help, but ensure it's installed correctly.“If you happen to have access to an air purifier, even if it's just a room air purifier, try to keep it running and in the room that you're doing most of your activities in,” said Stowell.___Wells is a former reporter for The Associated Press.___The Associated Press' climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    <item>
        <link>https://tcr.durangoherald.com/a-rare-bipartisan-housing-bill-just-became-law-but-americans-will-still-struggle-with-affordabili/</link>
        <title>A rare bipartisan housing bill just became law – but Americans will still struggle with affordability</title>
        <description>People work on the roof of a new housing development in Sandston, Virginia, June 6, 2025. Mike KRopf/Richmond Times-Dispatch via AP, File A sweeping housing measure, which became law on July 11, 2026, is being widely celebrated as a crucial...</description>
        <pubDate>Mon, 13 Jul 2026 09:24:02 -0600</pubDate>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">1EC2C3EB-199B-4E37-B412-ADED8CD40995</guid>
        <media:content url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=688F5FD7-4C2F-51EE-AE93-D6FB76B3896E&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=0.05625&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.88875&#038;crop_h=0.99999" medium="image" type="image/jpeg" />
        <media:thumbnail url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=688F5FD7-4C2F-51EE-AE93-D6FB76B3896E&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=0.05625&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.88875&#038;crop_h=0.99999" />
        <content:encoded><![CDATA[People work on the roof of a new housing development in Sandston, Virginia, June 6, 2025. Mike KRopf/Richmond Times-Dispatch via AP, File A sweeping housing measure, which became law on July 11, 2026, is being widely celebrated as a crucial step in addressing the nation’s housing crisis. The ROAD to Housing Act is one of the few substantive bills passed by Congress in recent years, and the first major housing bill enacted since the 1990s.Despite clearing Congress with overwhelming margins in the Senate and the House, the measure encountered one final hiccup when President Donald Trump abruptly canceled its signing ceremony on June 24, and then again refused to sign it on July 10. However, since Trump did not veto the bill, it automatically became law at 12:01 a.m. on July 11.Despite the bipartisan support, however, even supporters say it doesn’t do enough to ease America’s housing affordability crunch.Many of the 60 provisions in the wide-ranging bill are regulatory in nature, such as streamlining environmental impact reviews and reducing the frequency of inspections for homes with tenants receiving federal rental assistance. Others seek to make it easier for homebuyers to acquire financing.These elements and more could help move the needle on the nation’s housing morass.But as housing policy scholars, we believe the improvements will be only marginal. That’s because the reforms do not address the main source of the nation’s housing problem: that millions of renters and homeowners lack the income necessary to cover their housing costs.Promising changesThe bill does include several important reforms.The provision that has received the most attention limits the ability of private equity firms and other institutional investors to acquire and operate single-family homes as rental properties.Although institutional investors account for about 2% of all single-family rentals nationally, they have a bigger presence in certain housing markets, mostly in the South. These firms will typically purchase homes in cash, disadvantaging individual homebuyers who need to take out a mortgage. They’ve also been known to more aggressively raise rents and initiate eviction proceedings than other landlords.The legislation also includes several measures aimed at reducing home prices and increasing housing supply.One reduces the cost of manufactured housing – often known as mobile homes – by eliminating the requirement to include a steel chassis that can be attached to wheels. This is expected to reduce building costs by around $5,000 to $10,000, or about 4% to 8% of the average cost of a new unit.Other cost-saving elements include streamlining environmental reviews for proposed housing developments and encouraging new designs for midsize apartment buildings that would allow for just one stairway. Fire safety regulations have long required multifamily buildings to contain two or more staircases so that residents can exit their homes safely if one staircase is impassable because of smoke or other reasons.However, improvements in fire safety have largely eliminated the need for the second staircase in midsize buildings. By eliminating the two-stairway requirement, developers can reduce their construction costs and have more flexibility in their architectural designs.Another component requires the Department of Housing and Urban Development to issue guidelines and “best-practice frameworks” for zoning and land-use policies, presumably to nudge cities and towns to allow developers to build smaller homes on smaller lots.To further facilitate housing construction, the bill requires local governments that receive federal funding for community development to publish a “searchable online database of undeveloped land parcels,” which is intended to make it easier to identify potential low-cost development sites.The bill also encourages the Federal Housing Administration and other lenders to issue “small dollar mortgages” of less than $100,000. Currently, when low-priced homes are available, it can be difficult for interested homebuyers to obtain financing because it is more profitable for lenders to underwrite larger mortgages.Finally, the law reauthorizes for three years the Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery program. This program helps cities, counties and states recover from disasters declared by U.S. presidents, focusing on low- and moderate-income households.While most of the legislation focuses on homeowner housing, a couple of provisions address important challenges for subsidized rental housing. One seeks to encourage landlord participation in the Housing Choice Voucher Program by making it easier for landlords to satisfy the federal government’s housing inspection requirements.Another provision helps protect low-income rural renters from losing their homes when the federally funded mortgages on their buildings expire. Currently, these rent subsidies, which are provided by the Department of Agriculture, can only be used in the buildings it finances. Many of these mortgages are due to expire over the next few years, putting residents with rental assistance at risk of eviction. The legislation will enable these households to remain in place or move to other buildings without federally funded mortgages.Americans are still being crushed by costsYet as sweeping as the bill is, its impact is likely to be modest.Nearly all of the legislation involves regulatory changes. The bill does not increase subsidies available to low-income renters and homeowners, or to potential homebuyers.The majority of all renters are cost burdened, meaning they currently spend more than 30% of their income on housing. Over a quarter of all homeowners are cost burdened, too. The legislation almost certainly will not diminish this affordability crisis.Several measures aim to reduce the cost of new housing. But with few exceptions, they are contingent on the support and participation of states, cities and suburbs.For example, nothing in the bill requires localities to change their zoning and building codes to allow more apartment buildings or smaller single-family homes to be built at higher densities. Homeowners are usually strongly opposed to development if they fear it will change the character of their community or lower the value of their property. Existing homeowners do not want – and almost certainly will not allow – a wholesale erosion of their home equity. They will continue to fight to preserve the valuations of their homes.Nor does the House’s passage of the bill mean that Congress has become more supportive of low-income housing. On the same day that the House passed the bill, the House Appropriations Committee released its fiscal year 2027 budget proposal for Transportation, Housing and Urban Development. It included cuts to public housing, Community Development Block Grants, the Home Investment Partnership Program and the Housing Choice Voucher Program.Now that it is law, the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act will hopefully accelerate reform efforts. But on its own, it’s less a speedway that will supercharge housing supply and provide immediate relief for the most cost-burdened Americans, and more a modest on-ramp that reflects the limits of what’s politically feasible in a divided and polarized Congress.This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. The Conversation is an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts.]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    <item>
        <link>https://tcr.durangoherald.com/what-to-know-about-protecting-pets-from-the-new-world-screwworm-fly-2/</link>
        <title>What to know about protecting pets from the New World screwworm fly</title>
        <description>Flea and tick medications recommended to help reduce spread</description>
        <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2026 14:17:50 -0600</pubDate>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">17FC39CB-B162-4248-B10E-A245A02D19F6</guid>
        <media:content url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=C1C02157-D6A0-5C7B-A32D-E76CB04D3234&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=0.05625&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.88875&#038;crop_h=0.99999" medium="image" type="image/jpeg" />
        <media:thumbnail url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=C1C02157-D6A0-5C7B-A32D-E76CB04D3234&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=0.05625&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.88875&#038;crop_h=0.99999" />
        <content:encoded><![CDATA[This photo provided by the Texas Veterinary Medical Association shows veterinarian Russell Ueckert treating a cat at his clinic in Abilene, Texas, in August 2019. Abel Amendare/Texas Veterinary Medical Association via APFlea and tick medications recommended to help reduce spreadTwo New World screwworm cases in dogs are among more than 30 confirmed instances in Texas and New Mexico, prompting warnings Wednesday from veterinarians and humane societies that pet owners need to remain vigilant to protect their animals.The parasite reappeared in cattle in the U.S. in June, more than 50 years after it had been largely eradicated from the country. The pest is actually the larvae of the New World screwworm fly. It eats live flesh and fluids rather than dead material, as the larvae of most fly species do.Here is what to know about the parasite, the threat it poses to pets and how to protect them:Screwworm fly larvae can infest any mammalThe fly's migration north from Panama starting in 2024, and through Mexico in 2025, has agriculture officials warning that it poses a threat to the $113 billion U.S. cattle industry, but the larvae can hatch and breed in any mammal, including wildlife, dogs, cats and occasionally humans.The problem develops when a female fly lays its eggs in open wounds and mucus. After the eggs hatch, the larvae feed for about a week before maturing, dropping to the ground and continuing to develop into an adult fly.The American Veterinary Medical Association says newborn animals and animals with open wounds or who have undergone surgery or other medical procedures recently are especially vulnerable. Even a tick bite can host an infestation, Aaron Grady, executive director of the Houston Humane Society shelter, said during a webinar on the screwworm.Thousands of dyed fly pupae are seen in a sterile fly dispersal station placed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture to combat the spread of the New World screwworm fly on grounds of a ranch near La Pryor, Texas, Thursday, June 11. Eric Gay/AP PhotoInfestation signs include restlessness and bad smellAnimal health experts say pet owners in areas where the screwworm is present – southern and southwestern Texas and southeastern New Mexico so far – should watch their animals closely and examine them for wounds, cuts and bites regularly.Pet owners should look for any maggots or movement in a wound. Other signs include a foul smell and restlessness or anxiety in an animal, or an animal “hyper-fixating on looking or chewing in a certain area of the body,” said Melissa Stansell, a veterinarian at the shelter Austin Pets Alive!Any one of those is reason enough to go to a veterinarian. The affected animal is likely in a great deal of pain, and that can cause death from shock. The larvae also can cause death if they move into vital organs or by causing infections that turn deadly.Cattle graze near a sterile fly dispersal station placed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture to combat the spread of the New World screwworm fly on grounds of a ranch near La Pryor, Texas, Thursday, June 11. Eric Gay/AP PhotoFlea, tick medications can stop an infestationHumane society officials and veterinarians said shelters across Texas are trying to prevent infestations in animals by giving them prescription flea and tick medications. They recommend that pet owners do the same.“It will kill the larvae as they ingest the blood and tissue,” Stansell said. “The chemical compositions of those products are what kill the actual larval stages of these flies.”Veterinarians also can treat infestations and animals can recover if pet owners contact them quickly. Stansell said the treatment could include antibiotics.“It is only fatal if left untreated,” she said.An effort to eradicate the fly again is underwayThe New World screwworm fly is a tropical species and decades ago would disappear each year when colder weather arrived with the fall or winter.But state and U.S. Department of Agriculture officials aren't waiting for the weather to turn. They've returned to an eradication method that worked decades ago, breeding sterile male flies and releasing them into the wild. The female New World screwworm fly mates once in her monthslong life, and if her partner is sterile, her eggs won't hatch – causing the population in an area to drop and then disappear.For years, the only factory breeding sterile flies in the Western Hemisphere was in Panama, but the USDA invested $21 million to convert a site in southern Mexico from breeding fruit flies to recently start breeding screwworm flies. The agency also plans to spend $750 million on a new fly factory in Texas, set to open next year.]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    <item>
        <link>https://tcr.durangoherald.com/political-parties-can-now-spend-unlimited-money-supporting-candidates-after-supreme-court-overtur/</link>
        <title>Political parties can now spend unlimited money supporting candidates, after Supreme Court overturns decades of precedent</title>
        <description>Brett Kavanaugh testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington in 2018. Manuel Balce Ceneta/AP File Photo A decades-old law limiting how much money political parties can spend in coordination with candidates was struck down by the...</description>
        <pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2026 11:18:25 -0600</pubDate>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">D4F7B457-0D2E-4A87-80A1-8FA914B8D90C</guid>
        <media:content url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=BB540AD8-7BFD-4492-98C4-87D4A7B67139&#038;function=thumbnail&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;width=600&#038;height=400" medium="image" type="image/jpeg" />
        <media:thumbnail url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=BB540AD8-7BFD-4492-98C4-87D4A7B67139&#038;function=thumbnail&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;width=600&#038;height=400" />
        <content:encoded><![CDATA[Brett Kavanaugh testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington in 2018. Manuel Balce Ceneta/AP File Photo A decades-old law limiting how much money political parties can spend in coordination with candidates was struck down by the Supreme Court on June 30, 2026. Citing First Amendment principles, the court held in NRSC v. FEC that the limit unduly prevented political parties from “freely” and “fully” advocating for their respective nominees. The case marks the Roberts court’s latest chapter in a 20-year trajectory toward a more deregulated campaign finance system.While not the earth-shattering decision that was Citizens United, the 2010 ruling that struck down limits on corporate and union campaign spending as a violation of their free speech, NRSC v. FEC is still significant. And it has the potential to materially reshape the American political process.Indeed, campaign finance regulation is a cornerstone of a healthy democracy. Some political theorists even contend that the private funding of campaigns is antithetical to core democratic principles of integrity, equality and responsiveness to voters.Campaign spending: Freedom or corruption?At a minimum, it is broadly agreed upon – and observed – that reining in money in politics is necessary to curb all-out corruption, where the wealthy are able to donate unlimited sums of money to politicians in exchange for favors.The U.S. Supreme Court has historically upheld restrictions on political spending only if they furthered this anti-corruption goal – the idea being that fighting corruption is a compelling enough reason to limit political expression and association conducted via the dollar.Modern-day discussion of U.S. campaign finance revolves around issues such as dark money, outside-group spending and corporate personhood. Political party spending, by contrast, receives comparatively little attention from scholars, activists and the media.This asymmetry is not entirely without warrant. Political party spending used to dominate election cycles, with parties sometimes even outspending their own candidates.In 2000, for example, the Republican National Committee and Democratic National Committee combined spent more money on television ads supporting Texas Gov. George Bush and Vice President Al Gore than the candidates’ own campaigns did.Over the past two decades, however, political parties have played a waning role in elections. The advent of super PACs, political action committees that can receive and spend unlimited sums of money to support candidates, has led to a degree of outside-group spending – spending made without coordination with any candidate – that far surpasses that of political parties. Moreover, candidates’ growing reliance on small-dollar donations in the age of online fundraising has shifted their financial support base from their party to their individual followers.Political party spending nonetheless remains consequential in U.S. elections. In the 2024 election cycle, for instance, political parties spent over $2.6 billion to support federal candidates – a substantial amount, even if modest compared with the $5.5 billion spent by federal candidates themselves and the whopping $15.5 billion spent by PACs and super PACs.The regulation of party spending is therefore a significant component of the U.S. campaign finance system. And its deregulation could unleash billions of dollars more in spending by parties in future elections.Quid pro quo risk?Federal campaign finance law regulates political parties in a variety of ways.Individuals are limited in how much money they can donate annually to political parties – $10,000 to state and local party committees and $44,300 to national party committees, as of 2025. Political parties are further prohibited from accepting money from corporations and unions for party-building purposes, known as “soft money.”Finally, prior to the NRSC v. FEC ruling, political parties were subject to limits on how much money they could spend to support a given candidate.This last restriction has faced the most challenges in court. NRSC v. FEC is not the first time the Supreme Court considered the legality of party expenditure limits.In the 1990s and early 2000s, the Supreme Court heard two such challenges, both brought by the Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Committee. In the first case, Colorado Republicans challenged a federal campaign finance provision that limited how much money political parties could independently spend to support candidates. The Supreme Court ultimately struck down the limits as a violation of parties’ First Amendment speech rights.The second challenge, meanwhile, targeted federal limits on party spending made directly in coordination with party nominees. The Supreme Court heard this case in 2001 and, in a perhaps surprising 5-4 decision, ultimately upheld the limits.Why the different outcome? In the court’s view, with coordination came a real corruption risk.Indeed, underlying the Supreme Court’s broader campaign finance doctrine is a long-standing – and controversial – assumption that political spending raises zero corruption concerns when made independent of any collaboration with a candidate. And when corruption is not a concern, the court believes limits on political spending are unjustified.Using this logic, the Supreme Court identified coordinated party spending as a potential source of corrupt dealings. Specifically, the court found that donors could use political parties as “conduits” to funnel further money to candidates.For instance, individuals can currently donate up to only $3,500 to a given federal candidate. Yet, they can donate $44,300 to a national party committee, which can then channel that money to the same federal candidate.Back to the courtThe difference between a $3,500 donation and a nearly $50,000 donation is, of course, stark.In its latter Colorado Republicans opinion, the Supreme Court specifically noted concerning practices born out of this conduit system. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, for instance, used to have exclusive clubs in which generous donors were invited to personally meet with Democratic senatorial candidates.In the 25 years following this decision, coordinated party expenditure limits remained on the books, with the precise dollar amount changing each election cycle. For 2026, political parties could spend up to $65,300 in coordination with U.S. House candidates, or $130,600 in states with only one representative. The limit, meanwhile, varied for U.S. Senate candidates depending on state population, ranging from $130,600 for Wyoming to $4,071,800 for California.Hanging on by a mere 5-4 Supreme Court majority, however, campaign finance experts knew the coordinated party expenditure limit rested on shaky ground. And in 2022, with an almost entirely different Supreme Court composition, the National Republican Senatorial Committee and National Republican Congressional Committee sued the Federal Election Commission over its enforcement of the limit.Money equals speechThe plaintiffs’ arguments were largely the same as the Colorado Republicans’ over two decades earlier, resting primarily in the First Amendment.Nevertheless, as the plaintiffs explicitly noted in their briefs, the Supreme Court’s campaign finance doctrine had shifted remarkably under Chief Justice John Roberts’ tenure, moving toward a more libertarian, deregulatory jurisprudence. The plaintiffs thus asked the court to revisit its treatment of coordinated party expenditure limits.The court answered in NRSC v. FEC, overturning its previous decision on the matter and ultimately striking down the coordinated party expenditure limit. The majority opinion, written by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, largely adopted the First Amendment argument that the limit impedes political parties’ ability to advocate for their candidates.As for the government’s anti-corruption interest, the court was not convinced that limiting coordinated party expenditures was necessary to curb conduit corruption. Specifically, the court noted that existing disclosure laws and rules about earmarking donations already act as disincentives for donors hoping to use parties as a means to indirectly funnel money to candidates.Many election law experts will likely argue that this decision will now result in increased circumvention of federal limits on individual contributions to candidates. In her dissent, Justice Elena Kagan contended that the decision will only further contribute to “a legal regime increasingly unable to stop political corruption, and thus to preserve our institutions’ democratic legitimacy.”Still, not all experts see today’s outcome as a cause for concern. Numerous scholars have called for the bolstering of political party power in light of an increasingly polarized country, viewing parties as an antidote to ideological extremism fueled by outside-group spending. For those scholars, permitting unlimited coordinated expenditures by parties may help to realize that goal.One thing is certain after the NRSC v. FEC decision: Political party spending is now unleashed. Parties will likely play a bigger role in future elections than they have in some time. Whether that is good for American democracy remains to be seen.This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. The Conversation is an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts.]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    <item>
        <link>https://tcr.durangoherald.com/awesome-sad-lets-keep-democracy-going-americans-weigh-in-on-state-of-a-250-year-old-nation-2/</link>
        <title>‘Awesome.’ ‘Sad.’ ‘Let’s keep democracy going.’ Americans weigh in on state of a 250-year-old nation</title>
        <description>The Washington Monument and the ferris wheel on the National Mall are seen at sunset, Wednesday, July 1, on the National Mall in Washington. Allison Robbert/AP Photo WASHINGTON – Across the United States, many Americans are celebrating their country’s 250th...</description>
        <pubDate>Fri, 03 Jul 2026 13:55:17 -0600</pubDate>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">E8D83ACB-61D4-412E-933E-2A2D901B28C2</guid>
        <media:content url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=9A6A4729-2B14-50AD-A099-DF58B6726DD5&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=0.05625&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.88875&#038;crop_h=0.99999" medium="image" type="image/jpeg" />
        <media:thumbnail url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=9A6A4729-2B14-50AD-A099-DF58B6726DD5&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=0.05625&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.88875&#038;crop_h=0.99999" />
        <content:encoded><![CDATA[The Washington Monument and the ferris wheel on the National Mall are seen at sunset, Wednesday, July 1, on the National Mall in Washington. Allison Robbert/AP Photo WASHINGTON – Across the United States, many Americans are celebrating their country's 250th birthday by closing their ears to all the partisan shouting. All the fingernails-on-chalkboard screeching out of Washington. All the clamor of social media agitprop.Instead, in varied ways, they are tuning into their own personal concepts of America the Beautiful.In Associated Press interviews with citizens in the days before the Fourth, auto technician Joe Fuqua-Bejarano, in Topeka, Kansas, sized up “what makes us awesome” as a people. It's clearly not the politics, in his view, but rather resilience.“We've just all got to find unity somewhere, whether that's in laughter or perseverance, and keep everybody cool,” he said from the fireworks stand where he's doing a booming business as a side hustle.The world's long-running image of Americans as a brash and confident (if not boastful and jingoistic) lot did not square easily with the tempered enthusiasms and trepidations expressed by many of the people AP interviewed.“There are lots of points of contention going around,” noted one of them, Christina Zhou, a 25-year-old research assistant from Cambridge, Massachusetts. Yet “there are still a lot of beautiful things that are happening.”“What I'm trying to do is think about just things that are happening locally,” she added. “It feels a little bit more like within our own personal control.”Joe Fuqua-Bejarano, left, and his brother, Drake, manage Jake’s Fireworks stand on Tuesday, June 30, 2026, in Topeka, Kansas. (AP Photo/John Hanna)'We're just happy Americans'In Mont Vernon, New Hampshire, farmer Mindy Dean, 50, and her family will be milking their goats Saturday and maybe taking in some local fireworks. Or maybe not. The 250th hoopla has been mostly lost on her. “We're just happy Americans,” she said. “We kinda do our own thing and just enjoy our freedom as Americans.”In contrast, the goat-free Neil Casey, an 81-year-old retiree from Nashua, New Hampshire, and his friend Maureen Regan, who lives in Cambridge, are free-range celebrants. They're roaming Boston's historical sites, like Paul Revere's house, and as many of the city's Fourth events as they can manage. They, too, are plugging their ears to discord.“I'm very much aware of our country and what we've been through, you know, so I'm just trying to immerse myself in the atmosphere of the 250th,” Casey said. Regan took heart in all the soccer fans who poured into the country for the World Cup and praised what they experienced.“They love everything we have,” she said, “and I want people to not forget that and remember how lucky we are.” Her advice to compatriots: “Just enjoy the moment. Enjoy that we've been here for 250 years.”Still, for some, it is nearly impossible to separate holiday patriotism from steps by President Donald Trump to bend the celebrations toward himself, as with the Fourth of July festivities on the National Mall that he said will culminate in a Trump rally Saturday.The Commerce Department is decorated for the Fourth of July celebration on Thursday, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)When patriotism feels 'Republican'“When you're celebrating the Fourth of July right now, it feels like that's like a Republican thing to do,” said Madeline Capodilupo, 26, a special-education teacher who lives in Boston. She planned to spend the weekend with her fiancé's family at their Maine beach house.“It's just hard to celebrate something when it doesn't feel like we should be celebrating anything,” she said.What celebrants are celebrating, exactly, is diverse and personal.Ronald Hall spent 18 months in the Air Force toward the end of the Vietnam War. His wife, Karen, served two years in the Army and took part in Operation Desert Storm during the first Gulf War. While they shopped for vegetables at Detroit's Eastern Market this week, Ronald said he's spent a lifetime celebrating American ideals, which might be distinct from reality.As a Black man, he said, America's promise of freedom and equality was at the core. “I grew up remembering the promise,” he said. “That's what we celebrated: the promise, not the country.”Mindy Dean poses for a photo at the farmers market in Bedford, New Hampshire, on Tuesday, June 30. (AP Photo/Holly Ramer)Old warriors find their faith testedVeterans are always front and center in America's big occasions and the 250th is no different. At the New Hampshire Veterans Home in Tilton, residents were looking forward to a community celebration in the coming days that will feature a National Guard Black Hawk helicopter, a World War II ambulance, food trucks, music and even Uncle Sam on stilts.The old warriors are keeping the faith. But that faith is being tested.“I believe this country is the greatest that ever existed,” said Leo LeClerc, 83, an Air Force veteran who served in Vietnam. “Our democracy is strong and it will continue to be strong as long as people participate in it.”But, he said. “I don't like what's going on in this country” and “I don't feel very good about the 250th.” An independent who voted for Trump in 2016, he now believes a “cult of personality has taken over” around the president.Tom Gaumont, 74, an Army veteran and former history teacher, remembered the 1976 bicentennial as a more hopeful time, despite the aftershocks of President Richard Nixon's resignation under threat of impeachment.“I'm kinda sad at this point with what I anticipate,” Gaumont said. “I've seen and taught about how these things kind of crumble, so I'm concerned.”“We've lasted this long,” he added, “and this is a very existential time in our history.”Allan Bailey, 83, a Republican who also served in Vietnam and later owned a motel, voiced similar pessimism.“I'm worried about how the country is going, I really am,” he said. “I don't know what we're going to leave our children, and that bothers me a lot.”A security guard works to 'make the USA the greatest'In Dearborn, Michigan, Nabeel Mawari, 38, sounded a more hopeful note. On Saturday, he was scheduled to be working his security guard job while his wife and two young sons celebrated the holiday with relatives. An immigrant from Yemen, now a U.S. citizen, Mawari spoke from his backyard about life in the United States.“My life is here,” Mawari said. “We try to make the U.S.A. the greatest. That's why I'm here. I love this country. The Fourth of July, it is very important.”Then there's the man who, for perhaps very understandable reasons, wanted to stay far away from the political fray.Gary MacGrath, 77, has been a caricaturist at a suburban Philadelphia fair for 14 years. This year, McGrath's booth was sandwiched right between the local Democratic and Republican Party clubs. Talk about a rock and a hard place. He said he learned as a bartender earlier in life to “never talk about religion or politics” and was heeding that lesson now.But he did permit himself this: “It's 250 years,” he said. “Let's keep democracy going.”___Ramer reported from Bedford and Tilton, N.H. Associated Press writers John Hanna in Topeka, Kansas, Mike Catalini in Southampton, Pennsylvania., Michael Casey in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and Corey Williams in Detroit contributed to this report.]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    <item>
        <link>https://tcr.durangoherald.com/supreme-court-bars-states-from-protecting-consumers-if-federal-agencies-wont/</link>
        <title>Supreme Court bars states from protecting consumers if federal agencies won’t</title>
        <description>Decision in Monsanto case will effectively block tens of thousands of other lawsuits</description>
        <pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2026 14:25:00 -0600</pubDate>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">C5B174B7-F94E-46C5-AD91-78F4EE79C3AE</guid>
        <media:content url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=1D62B10D-8BC0-51E5-9D3E-2974DDBB8631&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=1.0E-5&#038;y=0.09824281&#038;crop_w=0.99999&#038;crop_h=0.63897764" medium="image" type="image/jpeg" />
        <media:thumbnail url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=1D62B10D-8BC0-51E5-9D3E-2974DDBB8631&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=1.0E-5&#038;y=0.09824281&#038;crop_w=0.99999&#038;crop_h=0.63897764" />
        <content:encoded><![CDATA[In this Feb. 24, 2019, file photo, containers of Roundup are displayed on a store shelf in San Francisco. Haven Daley/AP File PhotoDecision in Monsanto case will effectively block tens of thousands of other lawsuitsChemical giant Monsanto has argued for years that if the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency approves a pesticide label without requiring a cancer warning, states cannot hold its manufacturer liable in court for failing to warn consumers about cancer risks. The U.S. Supreme Court agreed, in a ruling issued on June 25, 2026, though some members of Congress are taking steps to override that ruling.Between 2009 and 2019, the EPA repeatedly concluded there is no evidence that glyphosate causes cancer in humans. The agency has, therefore, allowed glyphosate-based weed killers, including Monsanto’s Roundup, to remain on the market without a cancer warning on its label. That’s despite a 2015 report from the International Agency for Research on Cancer, a branch of the World Health Organization, that classified glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans” based on “limited” evidence of cancer in humans from real-world exposure and “sufficient” evidence of cancer in experimental animals. A 2025 study had similar findings in lab rats.Several U.S. lawsuits have used the 2015 report to win legal cases claiming that Monsanto failed to warn them of the chemical’s dangers. One of the first, Hardeman v. Monsanto Co., ended in an $80 million verdict against Monsanto in 2019. The jury found that Edwin Hardeman, a California man who used the weed killer on his properties, had proved that Roundup had caused his cancer and that Monsanto had failed to warn consumers of the dangers of its product. That finding was upheld on appeal.In the years since, Monsanto, now owned by German chemical giant Bayer, has paid out over $10 billion to settle about 100,000 claims from people who said their health was harmed after they were exposed to Roundup. But Monsanto continues to say – and the Supreme Court agreed – that a federal law passed in 1947 and significantly amended in 1972, the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, bars states from imposing any labeling requirement beyond what the federal government has approved – meaning state courts cannot hold the company liable for failing to include a warning that the U.S. EPA does not require.Monsanto crew leader Zenaida Arcala places a pollination bag over a corn tassel in Kihei, Hawaii, in 2014. Matthew Thayer/AP File PhotoWhile the law was originally administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, today the Environmental Protection Agency regulates the registration, use and sale of pesticides in the United States. Companies that wish to sell pesticides must, according to the law, demonstrate that they will not “cause unreasonable adverse effects on the environment,” including “water, air, land, and all plants and man and other animals … and the interrelationships which exist among these.”As a scholar of environmental and food law, I can say the Supreme Court’s decision in the case will effectively block tens of thousands of other lawsuits saying the company failed to warn consumers about glyphosate’s potential dangers. It will also raise problems for similar lawsuits against other pesticide manufacturers.A recent proposal to settle a large number of lawsuits with a $7.25 billion class action settlement may also be reexamined.The Durnell decision, however, is limited to failure-to-warn claims. The harms associated with pesticides will continue to be a concern for consumers, courts and legislatures.A short history of the caseThe case before the Supreme Court began in 2019, when John Durnell, a resident of St. Louis, sued Monsanto in a Missouri state court, claiming that his regular use of Roundup in neighborhood beautification efforts over many years had caused him to develop non-Hodgkin lymphoma, a type of blood cancer.As it had done in previous cases, Monsanto sought to dismiss the lawsuit by claiming the federal law prevented Durnell from making those claims in state court. But the trial proceeded, and in 2023 a Missouri jury found that Monsanto had, in fact, failed to warn Durnell of the danger and awarded him $1.25 million in damages.In February 2025, a state appeals court upheld the jury’s verdict, ruling that Missouri’s laws requiring companies to warn of dangers are not preempted by federal law. Both Missouri and federal law, the appeals court found, require companies to label products with adequate warnings to protect public health. The fact that the EPA had not required a cancer warning on Roundup did not, in the court’s view, absolve Monsanto of its separate obligation under Missouri law to warn consumers of known dangers.The Supreme Court agreed to hear an appeal in the case, seeking to determine whether federal law bars states from holding a company liable for failing to include a warning that the EPA reviewed and chose not to require.At the Supreme CourtDuring the oral argument, lawyer Paul Clement, representing Monsanto, claimed that Missouri was trying to require a different label than federal law allows, and that the company could not have added a cancer warning on its own. The company argued that EPA regulations prohibit manufacturers from changing safety warnings without the agency’s prior approval, which Monsanto never asked to do.Principal Deputy Solicitor General Sarah Harris, a top Justice Department attorney, told the court the Trump administration agrees with Monsanto’s interpretation of the law.Durnell’s attorney, Ashley Keller, argued that registration of a pesticide with the EPA does not exempt a company from civil liability for its product’s safety.The justices split 7-2. In the court’s majority ruling, Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote that the federal law specifically prevents states from requiring labels “in addition to or different from” federal labeling. And, Kavanaugh wrote, the law specifically prevents “misbranding” – the inclusion of inaccurate information on product labels. The ruling said Durnell’s claim would require a warning that the EPA did not require – but information counter to EPA’s conclusions is by definition inaccurate.In her dissent, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who was joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch, said the majority misread the federal law’s text and that Durnell’s state-law claim paralleled the federal law’s prohibition on misbranded pesticides rather than imposing an additional or different requirement. Jackson said the court’s majority ultimately made a ruling that “leaves Durnell without a remedy for the significant harms he has suffered.”What comes nextThe ruling in Monsanto’s favor blocks Durnell’s claim. While some Democrats in Congress say they’ll work to pass legislation undoing the ruling’s effects, other efforts are underway to defend corporations from similar claims by consumers alleging products were dangerous.In February 2026, President Donald Trump signed an executive order calling glyphosate “crucial to the national security and defense” because of its role in boosting food production by killing weeds in farmers’ fields.Congress is also considering a proposal that would prevent state and local governments from imposing stricter labeling requirements on pesticides than those approved by the EPA. Six states have also introduced bills to limit pesticide manufacturers’ liability. A similar provision was stripped from the Farm Bill in April 2026.A broader legal principle is also at stake: whether Congress or federal agencies can block states from protecting people when federal regulators have not required companies to warn the public about potential harm.In April 2026, Sen. Ted Cruz, a Texas Republican, introduced a bill that would prevent people from filing lawsuits in state courts that seek to hold oil and gas companies responsible for environmental damage, including their contributions to climate change. In late 2026 or early 2027, the Supreme Court is also expected to hear a case about whether existing federal law already blocks those lawsuits.Together, these efforts reflect concerted efforts to protect large corporations from consumers’ claims that products have harmed them and to prevent states from holding companies accountable when federal regulation falls short.This article includes material previously published on April 30, 2026.This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. The Conversation is an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts.]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    <item>
        <link>https://tcr.durangoherald.com/changes-to-student-loans-are-taking-effect-july-1/</link>
        <title>Changes to student loans are taking effect July 1</title>
        <description>Here&apos;s what to know</description>
        <pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2026 10:34:02 -0600</pubDate>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">B0EE2F19-1F07-4582-B9D9-271EADEAD241</guid>
        <media:content url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=B9E090CA-415F-533E-BE88-850CFE478CD8&#038;function=thumbnail&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;width=600&#038;height=400" medium="image" type="image/jpeg" />
        <media:thumbnail url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=B9E090CA-415F-533E-BE88-850CFE478CD8&#038;function=thumbnail&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;width=600&#038;height=400" />
        <content:encoded><![CDATA[The U.S. Department of Education building is seen in Washington, Nov. 18, 2024. Jose Luis Magana/AP File PhotoHere's what to knowNEW YORK – Changes to federal student loans expected to affect millions of borrowers are taking effect July 1. A part of President Donald Trump's “Big Beautiful Bill,” these changes mean the end of some payment plans and new limits for graduate loans.Along with the end of the Biden-era SAVE plan, the changes are expected to raise the cost of payments for millions of borrowers.“The main concern is the affordability of monthly payments. I think a lot of people are simply going to see their payment increase significantly and they're either going to have to stretch pretty significantly to make that payment work or they're not going to be able to make the payment,” said Michele Zampini, an associate vice president at The Institute for College Access & Success.Around 9 million Americans are in default on their federal student loans as of June, according to the Education Department. Hundreds of thousands more are behind on loan payments and at risk of default this year.Earlier this month, Education Department officials said borrowers who are enrolled in auto pay will be eligible for a 1% rate reduction beginning July 1. However, borrowers who currently use auto pay already receive an interest-rate discount of 0.25%, so the new reduction takes off just 0.75%. For all borrowers, the rate reduction will be temporary, lasting through June 2028.If you're a student loan borrower, here are some key things to know:SAVE plan comes to an endThe SAVE plan was a repayment option with some of the most lenient terms ever offered by the government. Soon after its launch it was challenged in court, leaving millions of student loan borrowers in limbo. Earlier this year, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit struck down the SAVE plan, which ended Wednesday.There are about seven and a half million borrowers in the SAVE plan and servicers will begin sending them official notices Wednesday, said Lindsay Vail Clark, chief borrower advocate at Savi, a student loan debt assistance platform.Borrowers enrolled in the SAVE plan will be notified that they have 90 days to enroll in another income-driven repayment plan. Vail Clark recommends borrowers start checking their options as soon as possible because processing delays are likely. If borrowers don't enroll in another plan before the 90-day deadline, they will be auto-enrolled in one of the standard options by the Education Department, said Vail Clark.However, there's no specific deadline for all borrowers enrolled in the SAVE plan to find another plan. This is because notices will be going out on a rolling basis, said Zampini.Changes in graduate school loan capsTrump's “Big Beautiful Bill” changed the amounts graduate students can borrow for various programs, but his administration revised that plan this week in line with a judge's order.Under the new rule, programs designated as professional degrees face federal student loan caps of $200,000, while other graduate programs are capped at $100,000. Previously, graduate students had been able to take out federal loans up to the full cost of their degree.For now, the administration's revised plan restores eligibility for students pursuing graduate degrees in nursing, physical therapy and several other fields to take out higher federal student loan amounts. The initial rule had held them to lower limits.Changes to Parent PLUS LoansParent PLUS Loans have had fewer repayment options but now, the options are being reduced further, said Zampini. New limits on Parent PLUS loans cap them at $20,000 per student, and $65,000 per family.Additionally, Parent PLUS borrowers who take out new loans on or after July 1 will not have access to any income-driven repayment plans, only a new tiered standard payment plan.“Going forward, they're basically only going to have the standard payment option and there's not going to be any caveat or any safety net to adjust that based on income, if they have a low income or if they have an income fluctuation or some kind of other hardship,” Zampini said.Parent PLUS Loan borrowers who consolidated their Parent PLUS Loans into a Direct Consolidation Loan before July 1 can repay their loans through the income-contingent repayment plan until June 30, 2028. After that date, borrowers will be moved to the income-based repayment plan.Enrolling in income-driven repayment plansCurrent borrowers can apply for the following income-driven plans: the Income-Based Repayment Plan, the Pay as You Earn plan, and the Income-Contingent Repayment plan. The payment amount under income-driven plans is a percentage of the borrower's discretionary income, and the percentage varies depending on the plan.However, students who take loans on or after July 1 will only be able to enroll in two income-driven repayment plans: the Repayment Assistance Plan and the Income-Based Repayment Plan.You can find out which repayment plan might work best for you by logging on to the Education Department's loan simulator.If you're working toward your Public Service Loan ForgivenessThere are no changes to the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program, despite a Trump administration plan announced last year to change the eligibility requirements for participating nonprofits. The policy sought to disqualify nonprofit workers if their work is deemed to have “substantial illegal purpose.” The Trump administration said it's necessary to block taxpayer money from lawbreakers, while critics said it turns the program into a tool of political retribution.Two separate federal judges struck down the new rules on Tuesday, a day before they were due to take effect.If your student loans are in defaultInvoluntary collections on federal student loans remain on hold. The Trump administration announced earlier this year that it is delaying plans to withhold pay from student loan borrowers who default on their payments.Federal student loan borrowers can have their wages garnished and their federal tax refunds withheld if they default on their loans. Borrowers are considered in default when they are at least 270 days behind on payments.If your student loans are in default, you can contact your loan holder to apply for a loan rehabilitation program. Through this program, borrowers are enrolled in a reduced payment plan and, after five successful payments, wage garnishment ends.Borrowers can find more information about loan rehabilitation here.If you want to consolidate your loanThe online application for loan consolidation is available at studentaid.gov/loan-consolidation. If you have multiple federal student loans, you can combine them into a single loan with a fixed interest rate and a single monthly payment.The consolidation process typically takes around 60 days to complete. You can only consolidate your loans once.___The Associated Press receives support from Charles Schwab Foundation for educational and explanatory reporting to improve financial literacy. The independent foundation is separate from Charles Schwab and Co. Inc. The AP is solely responsible for its journalism.]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    <item>
        <link>https://tcr.durangoherald.com/in-2-landmark-decisions-the-supreme-court-expands-gun-rights-for-concealed-carry-holders-and-casu/</link>
        <title>In 2 landmark decisions, the Supreme Court expands gun rights for concealed carry holders and casual drug users</title>
        <description>The Supreme Court is seen in Washington, May 18. J. Scott Applewhite/AP File Photo Two Supreme Court rulings in June 2026 reinforced the trend toward broad gun rights under the Second Amendment, overriding attempts to limit concealed carry and to...</description>
        <pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2026 16:28:11 -0600</pubDate>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">012729D0-6008-4BF6-8D8A-7940755B8D0B</guid>
        <media:content url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=9441A47C-348E-59A4-A37F-2E9374310F35&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=0.05625&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.88875&#038;crop_h=0.99999" medium="image" type="image/jpeg" />
        <media:thumbnail url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=9441A47C-348E-59A4-A37F-2E9374310F35&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=0.05625&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.88875&#038;crop_h=0.99999" />
        <content:encoded><![CDATA[The Supreme Court is seen in Washington, May 18. J. Scott Applewhite/AP File Photo Two Supreme Court rulings in June 2026 reinforced the trend toward broad gun rights under the Second Amendment, overriding attempts to limit concealed carry and to punish the ownership of guns by drug users.The ruling in the concealed carry case, Wolford v. Lopez, was no surprise. It followed the expected 6-3 division of the conservative and liberal wings of the court to block the state of Hawaii from making concealed carry a practical impossibility.As a longtime observer of the Supreme Court, I believe the unanimous ruling in the second case, U.S. v. Hemani, is more surprising from the conservative court. That’s because it strikes down the long-standing federal law restricting gun ownership by consumers of controlled substances. The ruling suggests the current court is so pro-gun it has decided it must also be pro-drugs.Concealed carry protectedIn Wolford v. Lopez, the gist of the ruling comes in the first sentence: “For years, the State of Hawaii made it almost impossible to obtain a license to carry a firearm.”After the Supreme Court’s 2022 Bruen ruling recognized the right to carry a concealed handgun in public for personal defense, Hawaii continued to attempt to restrict the right. The state’s recent gun law flipped the script on allowable concealed carry regulations: Rather than the normal limitation that a property owner can ban concealed carry by posting a sign, all concealed carry was assumed to be banned unless the owner posted a sign allowing it.As Justice Samuel Alito, the author of the decision, summarized the effect of the law, citizens would “be barred from entering many places that people routinely visit in the course of their daily routines, such as gas stations, convenience stores, restaurants, coffee shops, drug stores, grocery stores, ‘big box’ stores, home improvement stores, barber shops or hair salons, dry cleaners, and laundromats.”If those restrictions make concealed carry impractical for ordinary citizens, then “this regime hobbles what the Second Amendment protects: the right of Americans to carry arms for self-defense as they go about their daily lives,” Alito wrote.Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson and Sonia Sotomayor see the regulation as nothing remarkable or unconstitutional, but just property owners exercising their rights to ban guns. The majority sees this as subterfuge.Under the current court, a core individual right – free speech, free exercise of religion, or personal defense with firearms – can be regulated but not eradicated, limited but not eliminated. For the court majority, the Hawaii regulation was a transparent attempt to stamp out concealed carry in the state.Guns and drugsThe 1968 Gun Control Act initiated the federal restriction on the combination of guns and drugs, specifically targeting marijuana users.The amendments in 1993, the Brady Law, and in 1994 the Violence Against Women Act expanded the restriction to apply to “any person who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance.”From 1968 to 2026 it seemed reasonable to believe that drug use and gun use were incompatible because each can kill you. In combination, they seem even more likely to have that result. As Justice Neil Gorsuch noted in the Hemani ruling, “We appreciate that drugs and guns can sometimes make for a dangerous mix.”Nonetheless, the court ruled unanimously that the federal law overreaches for two interrelated reasons, one about constitutional law and the other about the facts surrounding marijuana use.In 2021, the New York Rifle & Pistol v. Bruen ruling set the constitutional standard for firearms regulations that do not violate the Second Amendment: They must fit within the nation’s historical tradition. This places the burden on the government to identify examples of similar regulations with a long-standing pedigree. They do not have to be “a historical twin,” but they do have to be grounded in the same “how and why” of the current law.In its 2024 U.S. v. Rahimi ruling, the court employed the new historical standard to uphold the federal law denying gun rights to people who are under a domestic violence protective order.At the time of the founding there were no specific laws addressing guns and spousal abusers, but there were laws that disarmed those who went “armed offensively” or “to the fear and terror of any person.” The court considered those comparisons to be close enough.Regarding drugs, advocates of the federal law outlawing gun ownership for users and addicts argue that historical examples of laws restraining “habitual drunkards” provide the necessary analog.The court disagreed because those laws focused only on those whose habits rendered them “practically incapacitated.”In 2022, Ali Hemani, a Texas marijuana user who owned a gun for self-defense, was indicted under a federal statute that makes it a felony for anyone who “is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance” to possess a firearm.In the court’s view, Hemani’s kind of moderate marijuana use simply does not qualify given that “he admits to using marijuana about every other day. But how much marijuana does Mr. Hemani use, in what potency, and to what effect? Is he routinely unable to manage his affairs, a risk to himself or his family? Or does he use a mild gummy as a sleep aid a few times a week?”The court insists that habitual drunkard laws at the time of the nation’s founding applied only to those who could not manage their own affairs, but did not apply to social or even heavy drinkers.There is copious evidence that the founders themselves – not just Sam Adams, but also John Adams and James Madison – were serious drinkers. Even George Washington “often drank three glasses of madeira in the evening – ‘not enough to be considered a heavy drinker in his day,’” according to the historical research cited in the Hemani ruling.The implication seems to be that alcohol was normal then, while marijuana has become normal now.Increasing acceptance of cannabis useThe ruling hinges on evolving perceptions of recreational drugs, especially marijuana. Does pot make users irrational? Does a marijuana habit indicate that someone is irresponsible?If drug users are more likely to leave a gun unattended, more likely to mistakenly perceive a person as threatening, maybe because they have become paranoid, or more likely to react irrationally when someone steals their Cheetos, then the law may have a rational foundation. But the court’s view is that the government must demonstrate danger connected with drug use, not merely infer it.The background of the ruling is the increasing acceptance of marijuana use. Even Alito, a conservative, penned a concurrence joined by liberal justice Elena Kagan noting that “marijuana consumption is increasingly common in this country … And from a practical standpoint, law enforcement widely tolerates the use of marijuana.”The unanimous ruling notes that the federal government recently moved marijuana from Schedule 1, with no accepted medical use and high potential for abuse, to Schedule 3, which includes drugs such as anabolic steroids or Tylenol with codeine. Gorsuch points out that “surveys suggest there now may be more adults in this country who regularly use marijuana than consume alcohol.”The court seems to have concluded that they can’t fight the new logic: Americans have a constitutional right to guns; Americans smoke weed; so weed can’t justify a denial of constitutional rights.To meet the new standards, future gun regulations that come to the court will need to have a clear historical pedigree as well as target a group for whom Americans have less sympathy, such as spousal abusers, rather than increasing affinity – pot users.This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. The Conversation is an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts.]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    <item>
        <link>https://tcr.durangoherald.com/the-2-earthquakes-that-struck-venezuela-are-known-as-a-doublet/</link>
        <title>The 2 earthquakes that struck Venezuela are known as a ‘doublet’</title>
        <description>Here&apos;s how they happen</description>
        <pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2026 15:01:55 -0600</pubDate>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">C4FEEE1C-1D1D-45DD-8A83-9443B26470B7</guid>
        <media:content url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=3003C9E9-2F37-5DD8-9827-3EDCB252EA13&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=0.05625&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.88875&#038;crop_h=0.99999" medium="image" type="image/jpeg" />
        <media:thumbnail url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=3003C9E9-2F37-5DD8-9827-3EDCB252EA13&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=0.05625&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.88875&#038;crop_h=0.99999" />
        <content:encoded><![CDATA[Residents walk among the rubble of building damaged in earthquakes the previous day in Catia La Mar, Venezuela, on Thursday. Pedro Mattey/AP PhotoHere's how they happenSAN JUAN, Puerto Rico – The two powerful earthquakes that struck Venezuela's northern coast, killing at least 920 people, were an event known as a “doublet.”Doublet earthquakes happen when a pair of similar-sized quakes hit close in location and time, according to the U.S. Geological Survey. On Wednesday evening, a 7.2 magnitude quake hit first, followed by a magnitude 7.5 just 39 seconds later.The deadly one-two punch toppled buildings in Venezuela's capital, Caracas and beyond. Some 1,500 people were injured and thousands were reported missing. The coastal region of La Guaira, which is north of Caracas, experienced some of the heaviest damage and casualties, officials said.A firefighter rescues a dog from a building that collapsed after an earthquake in Caracas, Venezuela, on Wednesday. Pedro Mattey/AP PhotoHow rare are doublets?While not as common as a typical earthquake where a main shock is followed by much smaller aftershocks, doublets can happen anywhere in the world, Christine Goulet, director of the USGS earthquake science center in California, told The Associated Press.Doublets indicate a complex fault structure, like the one in Venezuela. Known as the Bocono fault, it runs along the backbone of the Venezuelan Andes for about 300 miles. A previous doublet – of magnitudes 6.2 and 6.3 – struck an area west of Caracas in September 2025, killing at least one person and injuring more than 100 others. Most of the damage was reported in the states of Zulia and Lara.What caused Wednesday's double earthquake?Most earthquakes occur along plate boundaries, which is where tectonic plates meet.A rupture where the Caribbean and South American tectonic plates meet unleashed the two quakes this week.The doublet occurred where the Caribbean plate, located north of Venezuela, moves eastward relative to the South American plate at an average rate of 0.79 inches a year.“It's a large displacement,” Goulet noted. “It's on the order of the San Andreas fault.”The movement was a shallow strike-slip faulting, which occurs when two blocks of rock slide past one another horizontally.That kind of movement is not more dangerous by default, Goulet said.“A more vertical motion can be more damaging,” she said, adding that other factors, including the length of the rupture, determine the amount of damage.The boundary between the Caribbean and South American plates is less active than others, said David Naar, associate dean at the University of South Florida's College of Marine Science.A man walks among the rubble of a building that collapsed in earthquakes the previous day in La Guaira, Venezuela, on Thursday. Pedro Mattey/AP PhotoHow common are earthquakes in Venezuela?In the past century, only seven earthquakes of magnitude 6 and higher have hit in the immediate vicinity of the most recent ones, according to USGS.These include the 2025 doublet that struck west-northwest of the latest quakes.Individual earthquakes of magnitude 6 or higher struck in 2009, 1989 and 1975. The most devastating one hit in July 1967. It was a 6.6 magnitude quake that killed hundreds of people.José Vitriago, who lives in Caracas, remembers that one. He was 2 years old.“Our house broke,” he recalled in an interview with state-owned TV station Venezolana de Televisión.Vitriago said the doublet that hit Wednesday “was horrible, horrible.”Overall, five earthquakes of magnitude 7 and higher have occurred in northern Venezuela or near the coast since 1900, according to USGS.The most catastrophic earthquake occurred in March 1812 along the Bocono fault system, killing an estimated 30,000 people.Will more earthquakes hit Venezuela?Scientists cannot predict earthquakes, but aftershocks are common after big ones. The USGS said there's a 99% chance of at least one magnitude 4 aftershock hitting Venezuela within the next week, and a 24% chance of a magnitude 6 one occurring.Unlike other countries, Venezuela does not have an early earthquake warning system, which relies on sensors to detect the first waves of an earthquake.“It's very distressing that there was basically no time to evacuate,” she said. “That's extremely unfortunate.”___This story has been corrected to reflect that Lara and Zulia are states, not towns.]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    <item>
        <link>https://tcr.durangoherald.com/the-military-traded-its-flu-vaccine-mandate-for-medical-freedom-an-outbreak-quickly-followed/</link>
        <title>The military traded its flu vaccine mandate for ‘medical freedom’ – an outbreak quickly followed</title>
        <description>New recruits are once again being required to get vaccinated against the influenza virus</description>
        <pubDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2026 14:42:05 -0600</pubDate>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">B5AE2982-E69F-4273-AC39-4D81CBFD1AB0</guid>
        <media:content url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=F0FAE8F6-BED2-5FB1-A90A-8AEC4999C62A&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=0.055&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.89&#038;crop_h=0.99999" medium="image" type="image/jpeg" />
        <media:thumbnail url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=F0FAE8F6-BED2-5FB1-A90A-8AEC4999C62A&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=0.055&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.89&#038;crop_h=0.99999" />
        <content:encoded><![CDATA[Graduates from basic training are pictured on April 26, 2023, at Joint Base San Antonio-Lackland, Texas. Christa D'Andrea/U.S. Air Force via APNew recruits are once again being required to get vaccinated against the influenza virusAmid a worsening flu outbreak at Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio, Texas, the U.S. Air Force, Army and Navy are once again requiring new recruits to get vaccinated against the influenza virus, according to ABC News. The move comes two months after Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth rescinded the U.S. military’s mandate that they do so.As of June 23, 2026, at least 222 recruits on the base have fallen ill and four have reportedly been hospitalized.In his April 21 announcement making the flu vaccine optional, Hegseth cited medical autonomy and religious freedom, describing the vaccination requirement as “overly broad and not rational,” telling troops that “your body, your faith and your convictions are not negotiable.”The flu shot requirement that Hegseth ended had been in place since 1945, with one brief pause in 1949. It was part of a tradition of military vaccine mandates nearly as old as the United States itself.As an epidemiologist who studies vaccine-preventable diseases, I found the end of the flu mandate striking less for its immediate impact than for what it signals. For most of American history, military commanders took for granted that infectious disease could cost them a war, which is why vaccination was considered a matter of military readiness rather than personal choice.The Lackland outbreak is evidence that the underlying epidemiology has not changed – only the political climate surrounding public health.United States Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth speaks during a press statement on arrival for a meeting of NATO defense ministers at NATO headquarters in Brussels, Thursday, June 18. Virginia Mayo/AP File PhotoA tradition that started with George WashingtonThe first American military vaccine mandate predates the Constitution. In the winter of 1777, Gen. George Washington ordered the mass inoculation of the Continental Army against smallpox.His decision wasn’t ideological – it was strategic. The year before, a smallpox outbreak had torn through American troops outside Quebec, contributing to the collapse of the northern campaign. John Adams famously wrote to his wife, Abigail, that smallpox was killing 10 soldiers for every one felled in battle.Inoculation in 1777 was itself risky. The procedure, called variolation, involved deliberately infecting a soldier with a small amount of smallpox virus to build immunity. Washington gambled that losing some to inoculation was better than losing a war to the virus. Historians have credited the decision with saving the Continental Army.That pattern held for centuries: When an infectious disease threatened to take more soldiers off the line than enemy fire did, the military required protection.U.S. troops received smallpox vaccinations from the War of 1812 through World War II. During World War I, the Army added typhoid vaccination. During World War II, it expanded vaccine requirements to also include tetanus, cholera, diphtheria, plague, yellow fever and, in 1945, influenza.1945: New war, new vaccineThe flu vaccine mandate grew out of military experiences during the influenza pandemic of 1918. That spring, a novel influenza strain spread through crowded Army training camps and traveled to Europe with American troops. About 45,000 American soldiers died of influenza during World War I – nearly as many as the roughly 53,000 killed in combat.The 1918 pandemic made clear that a respiratory virus could cripple an army. In 1941, as the country prepared to enter another world war, the U.S. Army organized an influenza commission that partnered with the University of Michigan to develop the first influenza vaccine. Clinical trials in military recruits showed that the vaccine reduced the incidence of influenza illness by 85%, and in 1945 the military mandated the vaccine. Roughly 7 million service members were vaccinated that year.The mandate was briefly paused in 1949 after scientists realized the vaccine needed regular updates due to the virus changing. Once formulations could be adjusted seasonally, the mandate returned in the early 1950s and has stayed in place continuously – until Hegseth’s change of policy.COVID-19 changed vaccine politicsFor decades, vaccine mandates were an unremarkable fact of military life, but COVID-19 changed that.In August 2021, all service members were ordered to be vaccinated against COVID-19. More than 98% of active duty troops complied, but the mandate became a flash point. More than 8,000 service members were involuntarily discharged for refusing the shot.In 2023, Congress passed a law requiring the Pentagon to rescind the military COVID-19 vaccine mandate. This reversal reframed the politics of military vaccine requirements. In January 2025, President Donald Trump ordered the reinstatement, with back pay, of troops discharged over COVID-19 vaccine refusal.In announcing the end of the flu mandate, Hegseth relied heavily on “medical freedom” language that emerged from the COVID-19 vaccine debate, rather than on any new evidence about influenza or the effectiveness of the flu vaccine.The medical freedom movement opposes government involvement in what its supporters see as personal health decisions – including public health recommendations such as vaccine mandates, masking and social distancing.Does the vaccination rationale still hold?Critics of the military flu vaccine mandate argued that flu is a milder threat than it was in 1918, that service members are healthier than the general population, and that personal choice should outweigh public health logic for a seasonal virus.The epidemiology – and now the outbreak at Lackland – tell a different story.Although flu seasons can vary in disease severity, the virus mutates so unpredictably that pandemic flu seasons – like those in 1918, 1957, 1968 and 2009 – are a recurring possibility. Flu still hospitalizes and kills tens of thousands of Americans annually. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates the influenza vaccine prevented roughly 180,000 hospitalizations and 12,000 deaths during the 2024-2025 season.The military operates in precisely the conditions that favor the spread of respiratory viruses: recruit training centers, barracks, ships and submarines where people live in close quarters. When vaccination rates among Lackland recruits dropped from nearly 100% to 40% after the mandate was lifted, according to ABC News, the virus did exactly what respiratory viruses do in close quarters – it quickly spread.The logic that drove Washington in 1777 and the Army surgeon general in 1945 to require vaccination hasn’t really changed. A sick soldier can’t deploy, can’t train and can spread illness through an entire unit. At Lackland, more than 220 recruits learned that firsthand.This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. The Conversation is an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts.]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    <item>
        <link>https://tcr.durangoherald.com/refugee-numbers-dropped-in-2025-but-aid-cuts-and-others-trends-suggest-little-to-celebrate/</link>
        <title>Refugee numbers dropped in 2025 – but aid cuts and others trends suggest little to celebrate</title>
        <description>The closure of USAID has had the largest global reverberation</description>
        <pubDate>Thu, 18 Jun 2026 14:26:12 -0600</pubDate>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">2AF99785-9717-4463-97C3-937EB5D26831</guid>
        <media:content url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=E042FFAD-5EE7-567B-9243-C11C6067351F&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=0.02&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.88875&#038;crop_h=0.99999" medium="image" type="image/jpeg" />
        <media:thumbnail url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=E042FFAD-5EE7-567B-9243-C11C6067351F&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=0.02&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.88875&#038;crop_h=0.99999" />
        <content:encoded><![CDATA[Afghan refugee families heading back to their homeland, gather next to trucks loaded with their belongings as they wait for documentation at the UNHCR Voluntary Repatriation Centre in Azakhel, Nowshera a district of Pakistan's Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Monday, Aug. 25, 2025. Muhammad Sajjad/AP File PhotoThe closure of USAID has had the largest global reverberationThere was surprisingly good news when the United Nations refugee agency, UNHCR, released its latest report on June 10: The number of displaced people in the world fell in 2025 for the first time in a decade.But there are some serious caveats. Many of the people who returned home in 2025 did so to countries such as Syria, still recovering from more than a decade of war, and Afghanistan, with its humanitarian emergency and repressive Taliban rule.Conflict in the Middle East has added even more strain, with an extra 3.2 million people temporary displaced in Iran and more than 1 million forced from their homes in Lebanon at the peak of fighting. Meanwhile, in Sudan an increasingly protracted civil war forces families from their homes on a daily basis.Moreover, as we prepare to mark World Refugee Day on June 20, there is a backdrop that is deeply worrying to experts in migration and development: As the world walks away from the way the humanitarian system has long been financed without a new structure to replace it, refugees are the ones being left in the lurch.Nearly one year has passed since the Trump administration officially shuttered the U.S. Agency for International Development, or USAID, slashing humanitarian budgets, canceling contracts and laying off 16,000 employees. The cuts – alongside reduced funding from European governments – have thrown the humanitarian system that supports more than 100 million displaced individuals into crisis.In parallel, the Trump administration has pressured at least 30 countries into signing new migration deals. This has seen underresourced countries accept deportees from the United States – often people who are not even the countries’ own nationals – in exchange for aid.As experts in migration and development, we have published three books on how and why governments of Global North countries contribute humanitarian aid.The latest cuts and tit-for-tat deals signal a shift in how the world supports refugees. We believe rich countries are now in a race to the bottom, looking for ways to reduce spending and erase their human rights commitments.A cliff edge for aidThe closure of USAID has had the largest global reverberation: a decline in expenditures from $8 billion in 2024 to $5.8 billion in 2025, with future obligations also falling from $9.2 billion to $3.5 billion. But this is not just a U.S. story. The United Kingdom cut $1 billion in 2021 and never restored those funds, and Germany’s humanitarian spending declined by 76% between 2022 and 2025.The global drop in aid has acutely affected refugee-related funding. The U.S. State Department’s Migration and Refugee Assistance spending declined from $4.6 billion in the 2024 financial year to $3.2 billion the following year, and obligations fell from $5.7 billion to $2.9 billion.A person carries a sign in support of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) workers, as they carry their personal belongings after retrieving them from the USAID's headquarters in Washington, Feb. 27, 2025. Jose Luis Magana/AP File PhotoFor its part, UNHCR’s 2026 budget was set at $8.5 billion, a 20% reduction compared to 2025 – largely attributable to U.S. cuts. This has led to a deliberate strategic shift in how UNHCR operates. The organization has closed, merged or downsized field offices, with 185 out of 550 offices affected and more than 5,200 UNHCR staff losing their jobs – approximately 25% of its global workforce.For refugees, this has a very tangible impact. For example, in Lebanon – a major refugee-host country that has also experienced mass internal displacement off and on since 2023 as a result of war with Israel – about 80,000 refugees lost shelter-related financial aid in 2025, increasing risks of eviction and homelessness.Reset and hyperprioritizationAnticipating the global plummeting of aid, the Inter-Agency Standing Committee – the U.N.’s body for coordinating global aid responses – announced a humanitarian reset in March 2025 seeking to reorganize how aid is delivered through a lighter footprint and the pooling of resources.Once the global aid cliff became a reality, U.N. agencies in June 2025 announced a reformulated policy of hyperprioritization to identify which populations were most at risk. “We have been forced into a triage of human survival,” Tom Fletcher, the undersecretary-general for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief coordinator, said at the time.Concretely, this meant that the U.N. aimed to support 114.4 million people with lifesaving assistance in 2025 – just 38.3% of the 298.9 million people it identified as in need of humanitarian aid.For UNHCR and the International Organization for Migration, the humanitarian reset has also meant focusing on a “route-based approach,” which encompasses facilitating political dialogue, building capacity and providing support to countries along the entirety of a migration route.This partly entails protection for refugees but also promotes border security and even migrant returns. Critics have argued that the approach serves the priorities of rich donor countries that prefer to stop migration earlier in a migratory route, even when the migration in question is forced rather than voluntary.Aid as migration controlWhile more recent aid cuts have and will continue to hurt refugees acutely, this new approach draws on a two-decade trend of countries leveraging aid to control migration.Migrants gather in an area near the Libyan-Tunisia border, as Libyan security forces and Libyan Red Cross workers distribute food aid to them on Sunday, July 23, 2023. Yousef Murad/AP File PhotoThis policy of migration management aid, which includes support for refugees but also any funding used to control the movement of people, increased more than 1,000% from 2002-2022. Our estimates show that migration management aid amounted to $73 billion from 2002-22 and was often used to keep refugees and migrants in poorer countries at the periphery of the international system.Our forthcoming book, “Aiding Autocrats,” explains how this type of aid goes toward supporting migrants and refugees in developing countries and is also spent on border control and state security that forces – rather than incentivizes – people to stay put.This type of funding further entrenches what scholars have termed the “grand compromise,” whereby rich states pay for the aid for the majority of the world’s refugees, to be hosted in the Global South, as long as those hosting states prevent their onward movement. This unequal setup ensures that migrants and refugees remain contained in the countries least equipped to host them, which only works when aid functions as the grease that keeps the system hobbling along.Building the capacity of governments, especially authoritarian ones, to manage migration and contain refugees is not an inherent global good. Indeed, our book shows that it leads to serious negative consequences and human rights violations. Funding that is distributed to governments or organizations working in repressive countries carries the grave risk of empowering security actors that not only impinge on the rights of refugees but also those of citizens.Global aid will likely never return to its pre-pandemic level, but we think what is left – particularly after the aid cliff of 2025 – should be spent saving lives and responding to refugees’ needs, not preventing migration or facilitating returns.On World Refugee Day, it’s worth recognizing that aid is a critical, lifesaving tool that helps refugees temporarily survive and, sometimes, permanently rebuild their lives. Humanitarian aid for refugees should be justified for its impact, independent of whether it prevents emigration or convinces countries to accept deportees.This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. The Conversation is an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts.]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    <item>
        <link>https://tcr.durangoherald.com/why-fatherhood-matters-more-than-ever-before/</link>
        <title>Why fatherhood matters more than ever before</title>
        <description>Today’s fathers contribute more to childcare than even the most hands-on hunter-gatherer dad</description>
        <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2026 10:23:51 -0600</pubDate>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">E71A1004-5691-4926-86A1-4616E0D39ED3</guid>
        <media:content url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=C3954CA0-0E1A-4847-94A5-4A832C0BDC89&#038;function=thumbnail&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;width=600&#038;height=400" medium="image" type="image/jpeg" />
        <media:thumbnail url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=C3954CA0-0E1A-4847-94A5-4A832C0BDC89&#038;function=thumbnail&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;width=600&#038;height=400" />
        <content:encoded><![CDATA[Four-year-old Marguerite, daughter of Sarah and Ross Douglas, hangs on to the towrope with her father’s help at Chapman Hill in Durango in 2014. Durango Herald, FileToday’s fathers contribute more to childcare than even the most hands-on hunter-gatherer dadLong gone are the days of the distant dad.According to some estimates, the average time dads spend caring for their kids each day has quadrupled over the past 50 years. Their attitudes about parenting are also changing. Today, men are about as likely as mothers to say parenting is a key source of meaning and a central priority in their lives. Roughly 85% of fathers identify parenthood as one of the most important aspects of their identity.As a parenting researcher who focuses on fathers, I’m pleased to see that dads are so invested in their kids. It correlates with better outcomes for kids, and it reduces pressure on moms.But there’s a less encouraging trend tucked into these gains. More is being asked of dads – and moms, for that matter – because the extended family and community networks that once supported child rearing have shrunk or deteriorated.Parenting aloneIn researching my new book, “Dad Brain: The New Science of Fatherhood and How it Shapes Men’s Lives,” I talked to an anthropologist named Barry Hewlett, who has spent his career studying hunter-gatherer fathers.One society he studies, the Aka Pygmies of the Central Congo, have been called “the best fathers in the world” for their dedication to childcare. Aka men are frequently observed within arms reach of their infants and take a lead role in raising them. Children are seen as central to men’s lives.However, if you compare the time Aka dads spent on childcare with recent data on American parents, as parenting writer Tomo Kumaki recently did, you might be surprised.According to 2024 American Time Use Survey data – considered the gold standard of evidence on how Americans are spending their time – American dads of infants are devoting about 125 minutes a day to what’s called “primary child care,” in which their main activity is tending to the child. They’re spending another 394 minutes on what’s known as “secondary child care,” which involves watching a child while doing something else, such as cooking dinner or straightening up the house.In contrast, according to Hewlett’s research from the field, Aka fathers of infants spend about 57 minutes a day on primary and 96 minutes a day on secondary childcare.The minutes American dads relayed should be taken with a grain of salt; it’s a stretch to compare an anthropologist’s direct observations with self-reported time diary data, which can often be subject to bias. Still, it’s striking to see how – based on these calculations, at least – today’s new dads are devoting far more time to parenting than a society described as having the best dads in the world.When I spoke with him about how fatherhood has changed, Hewlett told me he thinks the role of fathers has taken on more importance today than ever before – not just because mothers are more likely to have jobs outside the home, but because there are simply fewer childcare helpers around.When you’re surrounded by your kin and neighbors in a communal setting like the Aka, it’s easy to get assistance with kids. Fathers care for children, but so do lots of other people.A 2021 study of another hunter-gatherer society, the Agta, which lives in the mountains of the Philippines, found that fathers provided only about 7% of child care. Mothers, however, provided only about 25%. The rest came from siblings, grandparents, extended family, peers and other community members, who all pitch in.A class divideIn much of the industrialized world, daily life is organized around the nuclear family, with relatives and neighbors playing a less central role than they once did.Today’s fathers contribute more to childcare than even the most hands-on hunter-gatherer dad, because there’s simply less of a village to support shared care.Even as men are being asked to take on a bigger role in childcare, it’s become harder for some men to do so. That’s because – in the U.S., at least – the time men are able to spend on childcare has become increasingly stratified by class.Journalists Derek Thompson and Aziz Sunderji analyzed multiple waves of U.S. data collected by the Multinational Time Use Study and were able to show that the significant rise in the time dads spend parenting over the past 60 years has primarily been driven by college-educated fathers.When the Multinational Time Use Study started in the 1960s, fathers with a college degree were devoting only a few extra minutes per day to childcare compared with noncollege-educated dads. But the gap has quintupled over that time span, such that college-educated dads are now spending 46 more minutes with their kids each day compared with noncollege-educated dads.So why the growing divide? In part, it’s because benefits such as universal paid paternity leave and stable, flexible work options are available only to dads with good jobs.Only about half of U.S. fathers take any paid paternity leave following the birth of a new baby, because many employers don’t offer it. In theory, most dads who can’t access paid leave should be eligible for unpaid leave through the 1993 Family and Medical Leave Act. However, since that legislation doesn’t apply to small businesses or many part-time or gig work situations, about 44% of workers are ineligible for it. Low-wage dads are also often reluctant to take leave because they can’t afford to lose income.The rise of what sociologists call intensive parenting among the most educated, affluent parents also helps account for some of the class divide in parenting time. As the wealth gap between the richest and poorest Americans has widened over the past 60 years, many parents have been eager to optimize their children’s success. Devoting extra time to children, including monitoring their schoolwork and enrolling them in enrichment activities that require time and money, has become one way for parents with privilege to give their children a leg up.In my view, hands-on parenting should not be a luxury good. Americans should be fighting for policies that empower all dads, no matter their income, to enjoy time with their children. The village could use some rehabilitation, too, since parents fare best when they have access to community support and stronger connections with their neighbors, friends and family.This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. The Conversation is an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts.]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    <item>
        <link>https://tcr.durangoherald.com/paving-paradise-dismantling-the-u-s-roadless-rule-threatens-to-disrupt-wildlife-water-and-peace-i/</link>
        <title>Paving paradise: Dismantling the U.S. Roadless Rule threatens to disrupt wildlife, water and peace in the last quiet places in America</title>
        <description>A brown bear fishes for salmon in the Tongass National Forest in southeast Alaska. AP File Photo Pause for a moment and listen. What do you hear? Chances are, somewhere in the background, is the ever-present hum of a road....</description>
        <pubDate>Mon, 15 Jun 2026 11:48:05 -0600</pubDate>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">98E47677-11FA-4702-A07F-B26671D0DD2F</guid>
        <media:content url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=AB1C6C75-F31A-4444-BEB2-696F5E22F9D0&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=0.05375&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.89375&#038;crop_h=0.99999" medium="image" type="image/jpeg" />
        <media:thumbnail url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=AB1C6C75-F31A-4444-BEB2-696F5E22F9D0&#038;function=cropresize&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;q=75&#038;width=1200&#038;x=0.05375&#038;y=1.0E-5&#038;crop_w=0.89375&#038;crop_h=0.99999" />
        <content:encoded><![CDATA[A brown bear fishes for salmon in the Tongass National Forest in southeast Alaska. AP File Photo Pause for a moment and listen. What do you hear? Chances are, somewhere in the background, is the ever-present hum of a road.More than 4.2 million miles of public roads crisscross the lower 48 states – enough to reach the Moon and back almost nine times. This vast network of roads spiderwebs its way across the contiguous U.S., leaving only about 5% as an inventoried roadless area or wilderness.Now, some of those last remaining lands free of roads are under threat from the Trump administration’s proposed rollback of the 2001 Roadless Rule. That includes southeast Alaska’s Tongass National Forest, where eagles, bears, salmon and many other species thrive in old-growth coastal forest along the Inside Passage.In announcing its plan, the administration said rescinding the rule would remove prohibitions on road construction and logging on nearly 59 million acres of national forest, arguing that the rule slowed economic development.In Congress, another effort is underway to try to change the law through an amendment to the Wildfire Prevention Act. That change, if approved, would both remove the Roadless Rule and prevent the U.S. Forest Service from reinstituting it in the future, despite overwhelming public support for the rule.As ecologists who have spent decades studying wilderness and the animals and ecological functions that depend on undisturbed habitats, we believe it’s important to understand that preserving roadless areas has value for environmental health, clean water, wildlife survival and people’s own well-being.What is the Roadless Rule?The National Forest Roadless Area Conservation Policy, better known as the Roadless Rule, was issued in January 2001 by President Bill Clinton. It has had overwhelming public support and received more public comments than any other rule in history.The rule prohibits road construction, maintenance and commercial timber harvest in inventoried roadless areas within the National Forest System. It applies to over 58 million acres across the country, excluding Idaho and Colorado, which have their own state-specific roadless rules. While most of these roadless areas are in the western states and Alaska, 38 total states as well as Puerto Rico host roadless areas.The primary goal of the Roadless Rule is to maintain forest health and productivity for future generations. It also helps avoid exacerbating the U.S. Forest Service’s road maintenance backlog by not making new roads.The Roadless Rule prohibits new road construction, with very limited exceptions, as well as commercial logging in designated roadless areas. It does not restrict other uses that are compatible with the management plan, such as hiking and mountain biking, or resource uses such as grazing livestock and working existing mining claims.Beyond providing vital habitat for species and enabling healthy forests, the rule protects drinking water for the millions of Americans whose water flows from national forests. It also preserves high-quality recreation opportunities – hiking, camping, hunting and fishing – that Americans cherish.Logging and mining use large, loud vehicles that can disrupt wildlife and fragment habitat. Pictured is a helicopter ferrying a log to the landing Wednesday, Sept. 20, 2006, on the Mike's Gulch timber sale in the South Kalmiopsis Roadless Area of the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest near Selma, Oregon. Jeff Barnard/AP File PhotoThe problem with roads in national forestsWhile roads can provide benefits, such as access to forests, they can also do ecological harm.Roads enable invasive weeds to spread by being carried on vehicle tires and deposited in exposed soils, erode sediments into streams and fragment habitat that wildlife rely on. Vehicles directly kill and injure animals through collisions. They occasionally start fires, too. A recent study found that fires are more likely to start in areas with roads than in areas without.Studies show that road noise displaces wildlife, increases stress and can affect wildlife behavior patterns at distances of over a mile from the road.And roads don’t just cause problems for species on land. Most roads cross streams and rivers, which requires building a way for those waters to keep flowing under the road (structures called culverts). While culverts can be designed to allow fish to pass through and maintain ecological connections, they are rarely built to do so. This leads to declines in the health of fish populations and can leave some species locally extinct.The benefits of roadless areasInventoried roadless areas are among the most ecologically intact and wildest places left in the United States, yet – unlike Wilderness Areas and National Parks – there are no signs acknowledging their boundaries when you enter one.Most are part of larger ecosystems, directly adjacent or ecologically connected to better known national parks and wilderness areas. Removing Roadless Rule protections would erode ecological buffers to these more famous protected lands.For some species, roadless areas protect critical core habitat. For instance, over half the suitable habitat for relictual slender salamander, a critically imperiled species native to the Sierra Mountains of California, occurs in a roadless area. Nearly 40% of Mount Pinos, lodgepole chipmunk, an imperiled subspecies of the lodgepole chipmunk, also live in roadless areas in California.Research shows that every formal roadless area provides habitat for at least two wildlife species of conservation concern – those facing risks to their long-term survival – with the median roadless area supporting 10 of these imperiled species. Some Arizona roadless areas contain habitat for up to 62 of these species.Roadless areas also protect watersheds that supply drinking water to 47 million Americans.The Sawtooth National Recreation Area in Idaho is bordered by roadless areas within the Sawtooth National Forest The Milky Way is seen at the foot of the Boulder Mountains in the area. Nils Ribi Photography via APWithout this protection, these watersheds would still provide water, but their long-term health and hydrological sustainability could be compromised if roads block stream flow and increase sediments flowing into waterways. The result can be higher costs for water purification.The Forest Service’s own watershed health assessment, known as the Watershed Condition Framework, uses road density as a key indicator of conditions that can disrupt water quantity and quality.What is at risk in rescinding the Roadless Rule?The Trump administration’s proposed rollback, expected to be formalized in 2026, would open these last wild places to development, fragmenting habitats that can never be restored.The American public spoke loudly in 2001 when they supported the Roadless Rule. Two decades later, the public comments submitted on the recission notice overwhelming opposed rolling back the rules, a Center for Western Priorities review found, reaffirming that U.S. roadless forests remain as vital and valued as ever.Protecting these areas is about promoting healthy ecosystems on public lands so they can provide hiking, hunting and fishing opportunities for generations to come to enjoy the tranquility of being in nature.This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. The Conversation is an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts.]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    <item>
        <link>https://tcr.durangoherald.com/a-key-u-s-government-surveillance-program-is-set-to-expire/</link>
        <title>A key U.S. government surveillance program is set to expire</title>
        <description>A look at what that means</description>
        <pubDate>Fri, 12 Jun 2026 10:57:49 -0600</pubDate>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">EC73F2D0-C1DB-4870-B4C8-DB01A1CB5B19</guid>
        <media:content url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=A3A2B988-FA13-5FAB-BE32-C07E4510A20F&#038;function=thumbnail&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;width=600&#038;height=400" medium="image" type="image/jpeg" />
        <media:thumbnail url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=A3A2B988-FA13-5FAB-BE32-C07E4510A20F&#038;function=thumbnail&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;width=600&#038;height=400" />
        <content:encoded><![CDATA[The U.S. Capitol is seen from Pennsylvania Avenue, Wednesday, May 13, in Washington. Julia Demaree Nikhinson/AP PhotoA look at what that meansWASHINGTON – A key surveillance tool seen as vital in preventing terror attacks and catching foreign spies is set to expire Friday after congressional efforts to temporarily extend it failed in bipartisan fashion.It's a significant lapse for the program known as Section 702, and even as President Donald Trump nominates a new national intelligence director more palatable to both Republicans and Democrats than his initial pick, it's unclear how soon lawmakers – set for recess – would be able to revive the spy program.Still, there may not be an immediate drop-off given that a court order from March authorized these government surveillance powers to remain in effect for another year.Section 702 allows for sweeping powers to sift through foreign communicationsThe provision is a part of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, known as FISA, and grants American spy agencies sweeping powers to collect and examine the communications of foreigners located outside the United States without first getting a warrant.U.S. officials see the law as an invaluable national security tool that has helped disrupt potential acts of terrorism, yielded valuable insight into ransomware attacks on critical infrastructure and contributed to the killing of al-Qaida leader Ayman al-Zawahri in a 2022 drone strike.The law was passed in 2008 as an effort to codify key aspects of a predecessor spy program created by President George W. Bush's Republican administration.Since then, officials across administrations of both major political parties have warned that without the law the government won't be able to collect crucial intelligence overseas.Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Arizona, left, and Sen. Elissa Slotkin, D-Mich., attend a press conference about the introduction of the Drain the Slush Fund Act, Monday, June 1, in Washington. Allison Robbert/AP PhotoThe program's renewal historically has been contentiousThe periodic need to reauthorize the law has prompted protracted debate in Congress well before this year, including discussion over whether additional guardrails are needed to protect the privacy of Americans and their personal data.That's because when the government eavesdrops on foreigners abroad, it also sweeps up the communications of American citizens and others in the U.S. who are in contact with those surveillance targets.Civil liberties advocates have raised concerns over revelations that FBI analysts over the years have improperly queried the vast repository of intelligence collected through the program for information about Americans, including related to the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the Capitol by a mob of Trump supporters and the racial justice protests of 2020, as well as about state and federal political figures.Some of those advocates have said the government should be required to have a warrant before examining communications collected from Americans. U.S. officials have said that a warrant would be legally unnecessary and overly cumbersome and that corrective measures have been implemented to reduce the number of improper queries.Complicating the debate is the unlikely political alliances it has produced, uniting a coalition of lawmakers skeptical of government surveillance that includes both privacy-minded liberal Democrats and Republicans who still regard the intelligence community with suspicion over the investigation of ties between Russia and Trump's 2016 Republican presidential campaign.The holdup this time is tied to pushback over acting intelligence pick Bill PulteDemocrats balked when Trump picked Bill Pulte to serve as acting national intelligence director and refused to support a FISA extension until the selection was withdrawn. Pulte, a Trump loyalist with no known national security experience, has set off alarms by using his perch as director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency to facilitate dubious mortgage fraud investigations of perceived Trump adversaries.A House vote this week that would have temporarily extended the program collapsed, with 19 Republicans and nearly all Democrats rejecting the temporary measure, 198-218. A Senate effort to approve its own versions also failed.After those votes, Trump announced he was tapping Jay Clayton, the U.S. attorney in Manhattan who previously served as chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, as his permanent pick for director of national intelligence, or DNI. The pick was warmly received on Capitol Hill, but it was not enough to break the impasse before Friday's scheduled expiration.Connecticut Rep. Jim Himes, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said that he has “known and respected” Clayton for decades and that had he been tapped a week ago, “lots of pain might have been avoided.”“His intelligence, temperament and deep commitment to public service will make him a terrific DNI,” Himes said.The next steps for the spy powers provisionRepublican Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, and Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, have warned the Trump administration to prepare “for a potential significant gap in foreign intelligence collection.”The expiration is likely to be the first meaningful lapse of Section 702 since it was created more than 15 years ago. In 2024, the Senate barely missed its midnight deadline before voting to approve a bill that was then signed by President Joe Biden, a Democrat, creating a brief lapse.Despite this year's lapse, there's no expectation of any immediate drop-off in intelligence collection as the U.S. hosts a series of events this summer with potential national security concerns, including the World Cup and festivities surrounding the 250th birthday of the United States.A March opinion from the secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court certified the program's renewal for another year, meaning that Section 702's authority is expected to remain intact for months.Even so, it's conceivable that without congressional reauthorization, communications companies could try to cease cooperating with the government and stop complying with orders that it assist in intelligence collection.___Associated Press writers Mary Clare Jalonick, Lisa Mascaro and Seung Min Kim contributed to this report.]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    <item>
        <link>https://tcr.durangoherald.com/a-pentagon-list-overhaul-puts-mormon-churchs-christian-identity-back-in-the-spotlight-2/</link>
        <title>A Pentagon list overhaul puts Mormon church’s Christian identity back in the spotlight</title>
        <description>Utah Senators challenge the Pentagon&apos;s exclusion of their faith from list of Christian religions</description>
        <pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2026 10:25:45 -0600</pubDate>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">82F30172-CB2E-436A-8F98-59B47E16ECF1</guid>
        <media:content url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=18C6E6DD-826D-5D9B-A01E-07DF2E1BB977&#038;function=thumbnail&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;width=600&#038;height=400" medium="image" type="image/jpeg" />
        <media:thumbnail url="https://imengine.public.prod.dur.navigacloud.com/?uuid=18C6E6DD-826D-5D9B-A01E-07DF2E1BB977&#038;function=thumbnail&#038;type=preview&#038;source=false&#038;width=600&#038;height=400" />
        <content:encoded><![CDATA[Members of the Tabernacle Choir at Temple Square perform during the twice-annual conference of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Sunday, April 7, 2024, in Salt Lake City. Rick Bowmer/AP File PhotoUtah Senators challenge the Pentagon's exclusion of their faith from list of Christian religionsThe Pentagon's revision to its list of Christian religions this week has reignited a nearly 200-year-old debate: Is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints a Christian denomination?Most Latter-day Saints do see themselves as Christians. But there are many prominent Christian clergy and scholars who disagree, citing core differences in how they view God and the Trinity and revere a scripture that is not part of the two-testament Christian Bible.Utah's U.S. Senators Mike Lee and John Curtis, both Republicans and Latter-day Saints, challenged the Pentagon's exclusion of their faith from its list of Christian religions. It was part of the Department of Defense's recent effort to significantly pare down a list of more than 200 religious affiliations that troops could choose from, deleting categories such as atheists, Unitarian Universalists, pagans and Wiccans.“Latter-day Saints are among the most patriotic, service-oriented individuals in our country,” Curtis posted on X in defense of his faith. “They are also unequivocally Christian – just look at who is in the name of the Church.”He also said in his post that it is “unacceptable” for the government to characterize a faith in a way that contradicts how the religion identifies itself – a sentiment echoed widely in the social media blowback.The Pentagon responded on Monday by removing the Christian label from 20 other traditions, including Catholic, Lutheran and Pentecostal, and stayed away from labeling Latter-day Saints as Christian. The department also issued a statement saying that the new rubric is not intended to “make any claims on the legitimacy of any faith or religion's belief,” but to help chaplains do their jobs and structure resources quickly and efficiently.Latter-day Saints identify as ChristiansThe Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, widely known as the Mormon church, has nearly 18 million members worldwide with the highest concentration in Utah. The church has a long history of military service; it emphasizes patriotism and chaplaincy support.In a social media post, Lee said: “My church membership is inextricably intertwined with my Christianity, as it is for 17 million other Latter-day Saints. Regardless of what the Pentagon thinks.”The church's website states that it is a “Christian Church, but is neither Catholic nor Protestant.”“Rather, it is a restoration of the Church of Jesus Christ as originally established by the Savior in the New Testament of the Bible,” the site further explains. “Jesus Christ is central to the lives of Church members. They seek to follow his example by being baptized, praying in His holy name, partaking of the sacrament, doing good to others and bearing witness of Him through both word and deed. The only way to salvation is through faith in Jesus Christ.”Yet the debate about whether Latter-day Saints are Christians goes back nearly 200 years to the days of the church's founding.The Salt Lake Temple stands at Temple Square in Salt Lake City, Oct. 5, 2019. Rick Bowmer/AP File PhotoDefinitions of God and the Holy Trinity VaryMatthew Bowman, chair of Mormon studies at Claremont Graduate University in Southern California, said the primary difference between major Christian denominations and Latter-day Saints lies in how the nature of God is defined, and their view of the Trinity, the spiritual relationship between God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit. Most Christian faiths believe God is spirit, while founders of the Latter-day Saints believed that God was a human being who achieved Godhood, he said.Latter-day Saints also reject the Nicene Creed, which emphasizes the doctrine of the Trinity as one divine being.“They believe that while the three have a relationship, they are distinct beings,” Bowman said.The Catholic Church has long held that Latter-day Saints are not Christian. Most recently in 2012, the Vatican stated that even if the Latter-day Saint baptismal rite refers to the Trinity, the church's beliefs about the identities of the three are so different from Catholic and mainline Christian beliefs that the rite cannot be regarded as a Christian baptism.Tension over religious beliefs spilled over to politicsThis debate has raged on in U.S. politics over the decades, resulting in tensions between evangelical Christians and Latter-day Saints who have long considered themselves members of the religious right. Like evangelicals, most Latter-day Saints hold conservative views on topics such as abortion and LGBTQ+ issues.Bowman said the question of Latter-day Saints' Christian identity exploded during Mitt Romney's 2012 presidential campaign.“At the time – and often after that – there continues to be a sense of surprise among Latter-day Saints that the evangelicals didn't consider them Christian and among evangelicals when they learn that the Latter-day Saints in fact consider themselves Christian,” he said.The rise of Donald Trump has created a feeling among Latter-day Saints that their old alliance with evangelical Christians is shakier than ever, especially with younger Latter-day Saints viewing evangelicals as a hostile group, Bowman said.“In the past five years or so, there is a growing push among evangelicals to create a muscular, masculine Christianity, more vocal on doctrine, with some calling (Mormons) heretics,” he said.LDS chaplains in the military were viewed with suspicionPhilip McLemore, who served as a Latter-day Saint chaplain in the Air Force from 1984 to 2005, said he and others felt discriminated against then, and he was passed up for promotions because of his faith.“That mostly came from other Christian chaplains and supervisors who believed Mormon chaplains were not Christian,” he said. “They also felt the same way about Christian Scientists.”McLemore said some of the other Christian chaplains told him they feared that Latter-day Saint chaplains were using the military to proselytize and convert. But he said he could see why other Christians were suspicious of Latter-day Saints.“Mormonism doesn't fit comfortably into most classic Christianity mostly because of the founders' claims of exclusive truth and authority that can be offensive to some,” he said. “Joseph Smith's first vision – a foundational event for the church – was one of Jesus telling him that all the other churches are false and their creeds are abominations.”Overall, McLemore does not believe denomination matters much in the military.“In my experience, service members would not know what your denomination was, and they didn't care,” he said. “They didn't consult chaplains on matters of religion. They needed chaplains for personal problems and issues with work, mental health and marriage.”___AP reporters Konstantin Toropin and Tiffany Stanley contributed to this report.___Associated Press religion coverage receives support through the AP's collaboration with The Conversation U.S., with funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The AP is solely responsible for this content.]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
</channel>
</rss>
