Nebraska Department of Transportation

&nbsp;(Lincoln, Neb.) — With the excitement of warming temperatures, blooming spring flowers and a spring football game on the horizon, the Nebraska Department of Transportation (NDOT) reminds everyone to prepare for gameday traffic on Saturday, April 27. 

When traveling to Lincoln for the annual Nebraska spring football game, plan for heavier traffic and road construction along the way. NDOT reminds travelers that construction is beginning for the I-80 six-lane expansion from the Pleasant Dale interchange to NW 48th Street in Lincoln. The speed limit is posted at 65 miles per hour in this construction zone. 

As fans make their way to and from getting their first look at the Huskers on Saturday, drivers need to be alert for slower traffic, obey the speed limit and pay attention when behind the wheel – especially in construction zones.

NDOT encourages people to always buckle up, put the phone down and designate a sober driver if they plan to drink. Following these simple steps will help get the football season off on the right foot. 

For more information about construction projects and lane closures, check 511 and the Lincoln Transportation and Utilities (LTU) website, Facebook or X. For gameday information, visit the Husker’s website. 

• Drivers arriving in Lincoln on I-80 from the west should take Exit 397 (south U.S. Highway 77 (US-77)) to

• Rosa Parks Way into downtown Lincoln. 

• Drivers arriving in Lincoln on I-80 from the east should take Exit 401 to south Interstate 180 (I-180) into downtown Lincoln.

When leaving the game, drivers should avoid Exit 409 between Lincoln and Waverly as it may be closed due to safety concerns as heavy interstate traffic builds. This may significantly increase traffic on US-6 and cause slowdowns. Leaving downtown Lincoln immediately after the game can put you in heavy traffic. Spending some extra time in town may allow traffic to ease up and provide a smoother ride home.

Nebraska Department of Transportation&nbsp;(Lincoln, Neb.) — With the excitement of warming temperatures, blooming spring flowers and a spring football game on the horizon, the Nebraska Department of Transportation (NDOT) reminds everyone to prepare for gameday traffic on Saturday, April 27. When traveling to Lincoln for the annual Nebraska spring football game, plan for heavier traffic and road construction along the way. NDOT reminds travelers that construction is beginning for the I-80 six-lane expansion from the Pleasant Dale interchange to NW 48th Street in Lincoln. The speed limit is posted at 65 miles per hour in this construction zone. As fans make their way to and from getting their first look at the Huskers on Saturday, drivers need to be alert for slower traffic, obey the speed limit and pay attention when behind the wheel – especially in construction zones.NDOT encourages people to always buckle up, put the phone down and designate a sober driver if they plan to drink. Following these simple steps will help get the football season off on the right foot. For more information about construction projects and lane closures, check 511 and the Lincoln Transportation and Utilities (LTU) website, Facebook or X. For gameday information, visit the Husker’s website. When coming to the game:• Drivers arriving in Lincoln on I-80 from the west should take Exit 397 (south U.S. Highway 77 (US-77)) to• Rosa Parks Way into downtown Lincoln. • Drivers arriving in Lincoln on I-80 from the east should take Exit 401 to south Interstate 180 (I-180) into downtown Lincoln.When leaving the game, drivers should avoid Exit 409 between Lincoln and Waverly as it may be closed due to safety concerns as heavy interstate traffic builds. This may significantly increase traffic on US-6 and cause slowdowns. Leaving downtown Lincoln immediately after the game can put you in heavy traffic. Spending some extra time in town may allow traffic to ease up and provide a smoother ride home.

Gameday Traffic Springs Back to Lincoln

WASHINGTON (AP) — On the left and right,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/us-supreme-court">Supreme Court</a>&nbsp;justices seem to agree on a basic truth about the American system of government: No one is above the law, not even the president.

<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/live.aspx">Click here to listen to</a> the arguments live 9a.m. CDT

“The law applies equally to all persons, including a person who happens for a period of time to occupy the Presidency,” Justice Samuel Alito wrote in 2020.

Less than a year earlier, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, then a federal trial judge, wrote, “Stated simply, the primary takeaway from the past 250 years of recorded American history is that Presidents are not kings.”

But former President&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/donald-trump">Donald Trump</a>&nbsp;and his legal team are&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-supreme-court-jan-6-immunity-38fd48f47324bf812e2194831ef75471">putting that foundational belief to the test</a>&nbsp;on Thursday when the high court takes up the Republican’s bid to avoid prosecution over his efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss to Democrat Joe Biden.

Trump’s lawyers argue that former presidents are entitled to&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-trump-immunity-prosecution-capitol-riot-9fd5dc5947dab82bbd18d3efcb4267d8">absolute immunity</a>&nbsp;for their official acts. Otherwise, they say, politically motivated prosecutions of former occupants of the Oval Office would become routine and presidents couldn't function as the commander in chief if they had to worry about criminal charges.

Lower courts have rejected those arguments, including a unanimous three-judge panel on an appeals court in Washington, D.C. And even if the high court resoundingly follows suit, the timing of its decision may be as important as the outcome. That’s because Trump, the presumptive 2024 Republican presidential nominee, has been pushing to delay the trial until after the November election, and the later the justices issue their decision, the more likely he is to succeed.

The court typically issues its last opinions by the end of June, which is roughly four months before the election.

The&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-indictments-election-january-6-classified-documents-5cb04868bb1cdf91c19eafdb882af8c0">election interference conspiracy case</a>&nbsp;brought by special counsel Jack Smith in Washington is just one of four criminal cases confronting Trump, the first former president to face prosecution. He already is&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-hush-money-trial-national-enquirer-1dd3c3111febf219bdf1d8627504a3c5">standing trial in New York</a>&nbsp;on charges that he falsified business records to keep damaging information from voters when he directed hush money payments to a former porn star to keep quiet her claims that they had a sexual encounter.

Smith’s team says the men who wrote Constitution never intended for presidents to be above the law and that, in any event, the acts Trump is charged with — including participating in a scheme to enlist&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-jan-6-investigation-fake-electors-608932d4771f6e2e3c5efb3fdcd8fcce">fake electors in battleground states</a>&nbsp;won by Biden — aren’t in any way part of a president’s official duties.

Nearly four years ago, all nine justices rejected Trump’s claim of absolute immunity from a district attorney’s subpoena for his financial records. That case played out during Trump’s presidency and involved a criminal investigation, but no charges.

Justice Clarence Thomas, who would have prevented the enforcement of the subpoena because of Trump’s responsibilities as president, still rejected Trump’s claim of absolute immunity and pointed to the text of the Constitution and how it was understood by the people who ratified it.

“The text of the Constitution … does not afford the President absolute immunity,” Thomas wrote in 2020.

The lack of apparent support on the court for the sort of blanket immunity Trump seeks has caused commentators to speculate about why the court has taken up the case in the first place.

Phillip Bobbitt, a constitutional scholar at Columbia University’s law school, said he worries about the delay, but sees value in a decision that amounts to “a definitive expression by the Supreme Court that we are a government of laws and not of men.”

The court also may be more concerned with how its decision could affect future presidencies, Harvard law school professor Jack Goldsmith wrote on the Lawfare blog.

But Kermit Roosevelt, a law professor at the University of Pennsylvania, said the court never should have taken the case because an ideologically diverse panel of the federal appeals court in Washington adequately addressed the issues.

"If it was going to take the case, it should have proceeded faster, because now, it will most likely prevent the trial from being completed before the election. Even Richard Nixon said that the American people deserve to know whether their president is a crook. The Supreme Court seems to disagree,” Roosevelt said.

The court has several options for deciding the case. The justices could reject Trump's arguments and unfreeze the case so that U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan can resume trial preparations, which she has indicated may last up to three months.

The court could end Smith's prosecution by declaring for the first time that former presidents may not be prosecuted for official acts they took while in office.

It also might spell out when former presidents are shielded for prosecution and either declare that Trump's alleged conduct easily crossed the line or return the case to Chutkan so that she can decide whether Trump should have to stand trial.

WASHINGTON (AP) — On the left and right,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/us-supreme-court">Supreme Court</a>&nbsp;justices seem to agree on a basic truth about the American system of government: No one is above the law, not even the president.<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/live.aspx">Click here to listen to</a> the arguments live 9a.m. CDT<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Former President Trump: &quot;We have a big case today this judge isn&#39;t allowing me to go. We have a big case today at the Supreme Court on presidential immunity. A president has to have immunity if you don&#39;t have immunity you just have a ceremonial president.&quot; <a href="https://t.co/oJB9O7eaud">pic.twitter.com/oJB9O7eaud</a>&mdash; CSPAN (@cspan) <a href="https://twitter.com/cspan/status/1783481860468724184?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 25, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>“The law applies equally to all persons, including a person who happens for a period of time to occupy the Presidency,” Justice Samuel Alito wrote in 2020.Less than a year earlier, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, then a federal trial judge, wrote, “Stated simply, the primary takeaway from the past 250 years of recorded American history is that Presidents are not kings.”But former President&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/donald-trump">Donald Trump</a>&nbsp;and his legal team are&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-supreme-court-jan-6-immunity-38fd48f47324bf812e2194831ef75471">putting that foundational belief to the test</a>&nbsp;on Thursday when the high court takes up the Republican’s bid to avoid prosecution over his efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss to Democrat Joe Biden.Trump’s lawyers argue that former presidents are entitled to&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-trump-immunity-prosecution-capitol-riot-9fd5dc5947dab82bbd18d3efcb4267d8">absolute immunity</a>&nbsp;for their official acts. Otherwise, they say, politically motivated prosecutions of former occupants of the Oval Office would become routine and presidents couldn't function as the commander in chief if they had to worry about criminal charges.Lower courts have rejected those arguments, including a unanimous three-judge panel on an appeals court in Washington, D.C. And even if the high court resoundingly follows suit, the timing of its decision may be as important as the outcome. That’s because Trump, the presumptive 2024 Republican presidential nominee, has been pushing to delay the trial until after the November election, and the later the justices issue their decision, the more likely he is to succeed.The court typically issues its last opinions by the end of June, which is roughly four months before the election.The&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-indictments-election-january-6-classified-documents-5cb04868bb1cdf91c19eafdb882af8c0">election interference conspiracy case</a>&nbsp;brought by special counsel Jack Smith in Washington is just one of four criminal cases confronting Trump, the first former president to face prosecution. He already is&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-hush-money-trial-national-enquirer-1dd3c3111febf219bdf1d8627504a3c5">standing trial in New York</a>&nbsp;on charges that he falsified business records to keep damaging information from voters when he directed hush money payments to a former porn star to keep quiet her claims that they had a sexual encounter.Smith’s team says the men who wrote Constitution never intended for presidents to be above the law and that, in any event, the acts Trump is charged with — including participating in a scheme to enlist&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-jan-6-investigation-fake-electors-608932d4771f6e2e3c5efb3fdcd8fcce">fake electors in battleground states</a>&nbsp;won by Biden — aren’t in any way part of a president’s official duties.Nearly four years ago, all nine justices rejected Trump’s claim of absolute immunity from a district attorney’s subpoena for his financial records. That case played out during Trump’s presidency and involved a criminal investigation, but no charges.Justice Clarence Thomas, who would have prevented the enforcement of the subpoena because of Trump’s responsibilities as president, still rejected Trump’s claim of absolute immunity and pointed to the text of the Constitution and how it was understood by the people who ratified it.“The text of the Constitution … does not afford the President absolute immunity,” Thomas wrote in 2020.The lack of apparent support on the court for the sort of blanket immunity Trump seeks has caused commentators to speculate about why the court has taken up the case in the first place.Phillip Bobbitt, a constitutional scholar at Columbia University’s law school, said he worries about the delay, but sees value in a decision that amounts to “a definitive expression by the Supreme Court that we are a government of laws and not of men.”The court also may be more concerned with how its decision could affect future presidencies, Harvard law school professor Jack Goldsmith wrote on the Lawfare blog.But Kermit Roosevelt, a law professor at the University of Pennsylvania, said the court never should have taken the case because an ideologically diverse panel of the federal appeals court in Washington adequately addressed the issues."If it was going to take the case, it should have proceeded faster, because now, it will most likely prevent the trial from being completed before the election. Even Richard Nixon said that the American people deserve to know whether their president is a crook. The Supreme Court seems to disagree,” Roosevelt said.The court has several options for deciding the case. The justices could reject Trump's arguments and unfreeze the case so that U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan can resume trial preparations, which she has indicated may last up to three months.The court could end Smith's prosecution by declaring for the first time that former presidents may not be prosecuted for official acts they took while in office.It also might spell out when former presidents are shielded for prosecution and either declare that Trump's alleged conduct easily crossed the line or return the case to Chutkan so that she can decide whether Trump should have to stand trial.

🎥Supreme Court hears Trump’s claim to ‘absolute immunity’

WASHINGTON (AP) — Ukraine for the first time has begun using long-range ballistic missiles&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/ukraine-weapons-russia-congress-aid-a28f463da6df2f144e3bbdbf47254ece">provided secretly by the United States</a>, bombing a Russian military airfield in Crimea last week and Russian forces in another occupied area overnight, American officials said Wednesday.

Long sought by Ukrainian leaders, the new missiles give Ukraine nearly double the striking distance — up to 300 kilometers (190 miles) — that it had with the mid-range version of the weapon that it received from the U.S. last October.

"We’ve already sent some, we will send more now that we have additional authority and money,” White House national security adviser Jake Sullivan said. The additional ATACMS were included in a new&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-mike-johnson-ukraine-israel-b72aed9b195818735d24363f2bc34ea4">military aid package signed by President Joe Biden</a>&nbsp;on Wednesday.

Biden approved delivery of the long-range Army Tactical Missile System, known as ATACMS, in February, and then in March the U.S. included a “significant” number of them in a $300 million aid package announced, officials said.

U.S. officials would not provide the exact number of missiles given last month or in the latest aid package, which&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/54045b0755b1711d0e22beaedf137cab">totals about $1 billion</a>.

Ukraine has been forced to ration its weapons and is facing&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/russia-ukraine">increasing Russian attacks.</a>&nbsp;Ukraine had been begging for the long-range system because the missiles provide a critical ability to strike Russian targets that are farther away, allowing Ukrainian forces to stay safely out of range.

Information about the delivery was kept so quiet that lawmakers and others in recent days have been demanding that the U.S. send the weapons — not knowing they were already in Ukraine.

For months, the U.S. resisted sending Ukraine the long-range missiles out of concern that Kyiv could use them to hit deep into Russian territory, enraging Moscow and escalating the conflict. That was a key reason the administration sent the mid-range version, with a range of about 160 kilometers (roughly 100 miles), in October instead.

Adm. Christopher Grady, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Wednesday that the White House and military planners looked carefully at the risks of providing long-range fires to Ukraine and determined that the time was right to provide them now.

He told The Associated Press in an interview that long-range weapons will help Ukraine take out Russian logistics nodes and troop concentrations that are not on the front lines. Grady declined to identify what specific weapons were being provided but said they will be “very disruptive if used properly, and I’m confident they will be.”

Like many of the other sophisticated weapons systems provided to Ukraine, the administration weighed whether their use would risk further escalating the conflict. The administration is continuing to make clear that the weapons cannot be used to hit targets inside Russia. At the State Department, spokesman Vedant Patel said Wednesday that Biden directed his national security team to send the ATACMS specifying that they be used inside Ukrainian sovereign territory.

“I think the time is right, and the boss (Biden) made the decision the time is right to provide these based on where the fight is right now,” Grady said Wednesday. “I think it was a very well considered decision, and we really wrung it out — but again, any time you introduce a new system, any change — into a battlefield, you have to think through the escalatory nature of it.”

Ukrainian officials haven’t publicly acknowledged the receipt or use of long-range ATACMS. But in thanking Congress for passing the new aid bill Tuesday, Ukrainian President&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-military-aid-package-kharkiv-drones-cadd79c8abd56ad58d07c93253e04ef1">Volodymyr Zelenskyy noted</a>&nbsp;on the social platform X that “Ukraine’s long-range capabilities, artillery and air defense are extremely important tools for the quick restoration of a just peace.”

One U.S. official said the Biden administration warned Russia last year that if Moscow acquired and used long-range ballistic missiles in Ukraine, Washington would provide the same capability to Kyiv. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to talk about internal discussions.

Russia got some of those weapons from North Korea and has used them on the battlefield in Ukraine, said the official, prompting the Biden administration to greenlight the new long-range missiles.

The U.S. had refused to confirm that the long-range missiles were given to Ukraine until they were actually used on the battlefield and Kyiv leaders approved the public release. One official said the weapons were used early last week to strike the airfield in Dzhankoi, a city in&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/crimea">Crimea</a>, a peninsula that Russia seized from Ukraine in 2014. They were used again overnight east of the occupied city of Berdyansk.

Videos on social media last week showed the explosions at the military airfield, but officials at the time would not confirm it was the ATACMS.

"These strikes proved -– once again -– that Ukraine can notch battlefield victories when given the right tools,” said Sen. Roger Wicker of Mississippi, the top Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee who has long pressed the administration to send the long-range weapons.

Ukraine’s first use of the weapon came as political gridlock in Congress had delayed approval of a&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/israel-ukraine-house-speaker-42a2f281a5437beaa8af4c3345987637">$95 billion foreign aid package</a>&nbsp;for months, including funding for Ukraine, Israel and other allies. Facing acute shortages of artillery and air defense systems, Ukraine has been rationing its munitions as U.S. funding was delayed.

With the war now in its third year, Russia used the delay in U.S. weapons deliveries and its own edge in firepower and personnel to step up attacks across eastern Ukraine. It has increasingly used satellite-guided gliding bombs — dropped from planes from a safe distance — to pummel Ukrainian forces beset by a&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/ukraine-parliament-recruit-army-russia-war-5b7d9f58bb398b4ad1296311b8130b92">shortage of troops</a>&nbsp;and ammunition.

The mid-range missiles provided last year, and some of the long-range ones sent more recently, carry cluster munitions that open in the air when fired, releasing hundreds of bomblets rather than a single warhead. Others sent recently have a single warhead.

One critical factor in the February decision to send the weapons was the U.S. Army’s ability to begin replacing the older ATACMS. The Army is now buying the Precision Strike Missile, so is more comfortable taking ATACMS off the shelves to provide to Ukraine, the official said.

At the White House, Sullivan said the administration “has worked relentlessly to address those concerns" and stocks are now coming off the production line and the ATACMS can be sent without hurting U.S. military readiness.

WASHINGTON (AP) —&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/joe-biden">President Joe Biden</a>&nbsp;signed into law into law Wednesday&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/ukraine-aid-israel-gaza-taiwan-c0645ad3f47f9d919c8988a98593e887">a $95 billion war aid measure</a>&nbsp;that includes aid for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan that also includes a provision that would force social media site TikTok to be sold or be banned in U.S.

The announcement marks an end to long, painful battle with Republicans in Congress over urgently needed assistance for Ukraine.

“We rose to the moment. we came together. and we got it done," Biden said at White House event to announce the signing. "Now we need to move fast, and we are,”

But significant damage has been done to the Biden administration’s effort to help Ukraine repel Russia’s brutal invasion during the funding impasse that dates back to August, when the Democratic president made his first emergency spending request for Ukraine aid. Even with a burst of new weapons and ammunition, it is unlikely Ukraine will immediately recover after months of setbacks.

Biden said the transfer of an initial aid package of&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/ukraine-russia-pentagon-weapons-congress-54045b0755b1711d0e22beaedf137cab">military assistance</a>&nbsp;will begin in a matter of hours — the first tranche from about $61 billion allocated for Ukraine, according to U.S. officials. It is expected to include air defense capabilities, artillery rounds, armored vehicles and other weapons to shore up Ukrainian forces who have seen morale sink as Russian President Vladimir Putin has racked up win after win.

But longer term, it remains uncertain if Ukraine — after months of losses in Eastern Ukraine and sustaining massive damage to its infrastructure — can make enough progress to sustain American political support before burning through the latest influx of money.

“It’s not going in the Ukrainians' favor in the Donbas, certainly not elsewhere in the country,” said White House national security spokesman John Kirby, referring to the eastern industrial heartland where Ukraine has suffered setbacks. “Mr. Putin thinks he can play for time. So we’ve got to try to make up some of that time.”

Russia now appears focused on Kharkiv, Ukraine's second largest city. Russian forces have exploited air&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-war-kharkiv-attacks-751d368a403127f2cc0e6e6e5fd43d15">defense shortages in the city,</a><a href="https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-war-power-plant-missiles-drones-94692e19900f60c2c3641c9352a416ed">pummeling the region’s energy infrastructure</a>, and looking to shape conditions&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-war-offensive-putin-8fce40ee08fdcc483f1d0fbe51c44bbe">for a potential summer offensive</a>&nbsp;to seize the city.

House Speaker Mike Johnson delayed a vote on the supplemental aid package for months as members of his party's far right wing, including Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia and Thomas Massie of Kentucky, threatened to move to oust him if he allowed a vote to send more assistance to Ukraine. Those threats persist.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell suggested his fellow Republicans' holding up the funding could have a lasting impact on Ukraine's hopes of winning the war.

“Make no mistake: Delay in providing Ukraine the weapons to defend itself has strained the prospects of defeating Russian aggression,” McConnell said Tuesday. "Dithering and hesitation have compounded the challenges we face.”

Former President Donald Trump, the presumptive 2024 presidential GOP nominee, has complained that European allies have not done enough for Ukraine. While he stopped short of endorsing the supplemental funding package, his tone has shifted in recent days, acknowledging that Ukraine's survival is important to the United States.

Indeed, many European leaders have long been nervous that a second Trump presidency would mean decreased U.S. support for Ukraine and for the NATO military alliance. The European anxiety was heightened in February when Trump in a campaign speech warned&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-war-nato-artillery-shells-59663a6a14ad180be86bc79a86cea07b">NATO allies</a>&nbsp;that he “would encourage” Russia&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-nato-foreign-aid-russia-2b8054a9fe185eec34c2c541cece655d">“to do whatever the hell they want”</a>&nbsp;to countries that don't meet defense spending goals if he returns to the White House.

It was a key moment in the debate over Ukraine spending. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg quickly called out Trump for putting&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/europe-trump-nato-277d1b30ba6fd0ee37ca626c59ab05ed">“American and European soldiers at increased risk.”</a>&nbsp;Biden days later called Trump's comments&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/europe-trump-nato-277d1b30ba6fd0ee37ca626c59ab05ed">"dangerous" and “un-American”</a>&nbsp;and accused Trump of playing into Putin's hands.

But in reality, the White House maneuvering to win additional funding for Ukraine started months earlier.

Biden, the day after returning from a whirlwind trip to Tel Aviv following Hamas militants' stunning Oct. 7 attack on Israel, used a rare prime time address to make his pitch for the supplemental funding.

At the time, the House was in chaos because the Republican majority had been&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/jim-jordan-house-speaker-mccarthy-trump-abdef873a8d14979848b658e4ef46fd2">unable to select a speaker</a>&nbsp;to replace Rep. Kevin McCarthy, who had been ousted more than two weeks earlier. McCarthy’s reckoning with the GOP's far right came after he agreed earlier in the year to allow federal spending levels that many in his right flank disagreed with and wanted undone.

Far-right Republicans have also adamantly opposed sending more money for Ukraine, with the war appearing to have no end in sight. Biden in August requested more than $20 billion to keep aid flowing into Ukraine, but the money was stripped out of&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/government-shutdown-mccarthy-congress-republicans-732baaa19c91f981e492fd0e6a76aba8">a must-pass spending bill</a>&nbsp;even as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy traveled to Washington to make&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/zelenskyy-biden-washington-visit-congress-ukraine-war-1d20574fb3ea4fb5efcc7db5458a33a3">a personal plea</a>&nbsp;for continued U.S. backing.

By late October, Republicans finally settled on Johnson, a low-profile Louisiana Republican whose thinking on Ukraine was opaque, to serve as the next speaker. Biden during his congratulatory call with Johnson urged him to quickly pass Ukraine aid and began a months-long, largely behind-the-scenes effort to bring the matter to a vote.

In private conversations with Johnson, Biden and White House officials leaned into the stakes for Europe if Ukraine were to fall to Russia. Five days after Johnson was formally elected speaker, national security adviser Jake Sullivan outlined to him the administration's strategy on Ukraine and assured him that accountability measures were in place in Ukraine to track where the aid was going — an effort to address a common complaint from conservatives.

On explicit orders from Biden himself, White House officials also avoided directly attacking Johnson over the stalled aid — a directive the president repeatedly instilled in his senior staff.

For his part, Johnson came off to White House officials as direct and an honest actor throughout the negotiations, according to a senior administration official. Biden had success finding common ground with Republicans earlier in his term to win the passage of a&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-congress-infrastructure-bill-signing-b5b8cca843133de060778f049861b144">$1 trillion infrastructure deal</a>,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/micron-biden-trump-schumer-chips-computer-ab9eeef7636262177e7b1aabbd6d1245">legislation to boost the U.S. semiconductor industry,</a>&nbsp;and an expansion of federal health care services for veterans exposed to toxic smoke from burn pits. And he knew there was plenty of Republican support for further Ukraine funding.

At frustrating moments during the negotiations, Biden urged his aides to “just keep talking, keep working,” according to the official, who requested anonymity to discuss internal discussions.

So they did. In a daily meeting convened by White House chief of staff Jeff Zients, the president's top aides — seated around a big oval table in Zients' office — would brainstorm possible ways to better make the case about Ukraine’s dire situation in the absence of aid.

Steve Ricchetti, counselor to the president, and legislative affairs director Shuwanza Goff were in regular contact with Johnson. Goff and Johnson’s senior staff also spoke frequently as a deal came into focus.

The White House also sought to accommodate Johnson and his various asks. For instance, administration officials at the speaker's request briefed Reps. Chip Roy, R-Texas, and Ralph Norman, R-S.C. — two conservatives who were persistent antagonists of Johnson.

All the while, senior Biden officials frequently updated McConnell as well as key Republican committee leaders, including Reps. Michael McCaul and Mike Turner.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said Biden's instincts to resist pressuring Johnson proved correct.

“Joe Biden has a very good sense of when to heavily intervene and when to try to shape things,” Schumer said.

In public, the administration deployed a strategy of downgrading intelligence that demonstrated Russia's efforts to tighten its ties with U.S. adversaries China, North Korea and Iran to fortify Moscow's defense industrial complex and get around U.S. and European sanctions.

For example, U.S. officials this month laid out intelligence findings that showed&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/united-states-china-russia-ukraine-war-265df843be030b7183c95b6f3afca8ec">China has surged sales</a>&nbsp;to Russia of machine tools, microelectronics and other technology that Moscow in turn is using to produce missiles, tanks, aircraft and other weaponry. Earlier, the White House publicized intelligence that Russia has acquired ballistic missiles from&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/north-korea-russia-missiles-ammunitions-5fd4221d9c4844240011632fd9b9e849">North Korea</a>&nbsp;and has acquired attack drones from&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-war-iran-ballistic-missiles-f14501f6f9a6401af7f8835b2ddd01cf">Iran</a>.

The $61 billion can help triage Ukrainian forces, but Kyiv will need much more for a fight that could last years, military experts say.

Realistic goals for the months ahead for Ukraine — and its allies — include avoiding the loss of major cities, slowing Russia's momentum and getting additional weaponry to Kyiv that could help them go on the offensive in 2025, said Bradley Bowman, a defense strategy and policy analyst at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies in Washington.

“In our microwave culture, we tend to want immediate results,” Bowman said. “And sometimes things are just hard and you can’t get immediate results. I think Ukrainian success is not guaranteed, but Russian success is if we stop supporting Ukraine."

🎥 US secretly sent long-range missiles to Ukraine to hit Russia

JERUSALEM (AP) — A warship — part of a U.S.-led coalition protecting shipping in the Mideast — intercepted an anti-ship ballistic missile fired over the Gulf of Aden on Wednesday, the American military said, marking a&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/houthis">new attack by Yemen's Houthi rebels</a>&nbsp;after a recent lull.

The Houthis claimed the assault, which comes after a period of relatively few rebel attacks on shipping in the region over Israel's ongoing war on Hamas in the Gaza Strip.

The explosion happened some 130 kilometers (80 miles) southeast of Djibouti in the Gulf of Aden, the British military's United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations center said in a statement.

Early Thursday, the U.S. military's Central Command said a coalition warship shot down the missile likely targeting the MV Yorktown, a U.S.-flagged, owned and operated vessel with 18 U.S. and four Greek crew members.

“There were no injuries or damage reported by U.S., coalition or commercial ships," Central Command said.

Brig. Gen. Yahya Saree, a Houthi military spokesman, claimed the attack but insisted without evidence that the missile hit the Yorktown. Saree also claimed the Houthis targeted another ship in the Indian Ocean, without providing proof. The Houthis have made repeated claims that turned out to not be true during their yearslong war in Yemen.

The Houthis have&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/yemen-houthi-rebel-attack-israel-hamas-war-bf077f026a9f177ec87f4131d695cafc">launched more than 50 attacks</a>&nbsp;on shipping, seized one vessel and sank another since November, according to the U.S. Maritime Administration.

Houthi attacks have dropped in recent weeks as the rebels have been targeted by a U.S.-led airstrike campaign in Yemen and shipping through the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden has declined because of the threat. American officials have speculated that the rebels may be running out of weapons as a result of the U.S.-led campaign against them and firing off drones and missiles steadily in the last months.

The Houthis have said they would continue their attacks until Israel ends its war in Gaza, which has killed more than 34,000 Palestinians there. The war began after Hamas-led militants attacked Israel on Oct. 7, killing 1,200 people and taking some 250 others hostage.

The ships targeted by the Houthis largely have had little or no direct connection to Israel, the U.S. or other nations involved in the war. The rebels have also fired missiles toward Israel, though they have largely fallen short or been intercepted.

The assaults on shipping have raised the profile of the Houthis, who are members of Islam’s minority Shiite Zaydi sect, which ruled Yemen for 1,000 years until 1962. The group seized Sanaa, Yemen's capital, in late 2014. A Saudi-led coalition has been battling the group in a stalemated conflict since 2015.

Meanwhile, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has lashed out at pro-Palestinian demonstrations on American college campuses, calling them antisemitic and comparing them to the lead-up to the Holocaust.

In a video statement released Wednesday, Netanyahu said that “antisemitic mobs have taken over leading universities” where “they call for the annihilation of Israel.”

“This is reminiscent of what happened in German universities in the 1930s,” he said. “It’s unconscionable.”

He called on state, local and federal officials to intervene.

Groups organizing the protests deny allegations of antisemitism, saying the demonstrations are directed at Israel and its actions in Gaza.

Students demanding&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/college-protests-israel-divestment-palestinians-3f37f96f7be8e1124f266842d9caa627">schools cut financial ties</a>&nbsp;to Israel and divest from companies enabling its monthslong conflict, which was sparked by Hamas' Oct. 7 attack in southern Israel. Dozens have been arrested on charges of trespassing or disorderly conduct.

Some Jewish students are taking part in the protests, while others say the demonstrations have veered into antisemitism and made them afraid to set foot on campus.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/2/1708804229711.png" alt="File photo U.S. Central Command" />
 <figcaption>File photo U.S. Central Command</figcaption>
 </figure>JERUSALEM (AP) — A warship — part of a U.S.-led coalition protecting shipping in the Mideast — intercepted an anti-ship ballistic missile fired over the Gulf of Aden on Wednesday, the American military said, marking a&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/houthis">new attack by Yemen's Houthi rebels</a>&nbsp;after a recent lull.The Houthis claimed the assault, which comes after a period of relatively few rebel attacks on shipping in the region over Israel's ongoing war on Hamas in the Gaza Strip.The explosion happened some 130 kilometers (80 miles) southeast of Djibouti in the Gulf of Aden, the British military's United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations center said in a statement.Early Thursday, the U.S. military's Central Command said a coalition warship shot down the missile likely targeting the MV Yorktown, a U.S.-flagged, owned and operated vessel with 18 U.S. and four Greek crew members.“There were no injuries or damage reported by U.S., coalition or commercial ships," Central Command said.Brig. Gen. Yahya Saree, a Houthi military spokesman, claimed the attack but insisted without evidence that the missile hit the Yorktown. Saree also claimed the Houthis targeted another ship in the Indian Ocean, without providing proof. The Houthis have made repeated claims that turned out to not be true during their yearslong war in Yemen.The Houthis have&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/yemen-houthi-rebel-attack-israel-hamas-war-bf077f026a9f177ec87f4131d695cafc">launched more than 50 attacks</a>&nbsp;on shipping, seized one vessel and sank another since November, according to the U.S. Maritime Administration.Houthi attacks have dropped in recent weeks as the rebels have been targeted by a U.S.-led airstrike campaign in Yemen and shipping through the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden has declined because of the threat. American officials have speculated that the rebels may be running out of weapons as a result of the U.S.-led campaign against them and firing off drones and missiles steadily in the last months.The Houthis have said they would continue their attacks until Israel ends its war in Gaza, which has killed more than 34,000 Palestinians there. The war began after Hamas-led militants attacked Israel on Oct. 7, killing 1,200 people and taking some 250 others hostage.The ships targeted by the Houthis largely have had little or no direct connection to Israel, the U.S. or other nations involved in the war. The rebels have also fired missiles toward Israel, though they have largely fallen short or been intercepted.The assaults on shipping have raised the profile of the Houthis, who are members of Islam’s minority Shiite Zaydi sect, which ruled Yemen for 1,000 years until 1962. The group seized Sanaa, Yemen's capital, in late 2014. A Saudi-led coalition has been battling the group in a stalemated conflict since 2015.Meanwhile, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has lashed out at pro-Palestinian demonstrations on American college campuses, calling them antisemitic and comparing them to the lead-up to the Holocaust.In a video statement released Wednesday, Netanyahu said that “antisemitic mobs have taken over leading universities” where “they call for the annihilation of Israel.”“This is reminiscent of what happened in German universities in the 1930s,” he said. “It’s unconscionable.”He called on state, local and federal officials to intervene.Groups organizing the protests deny allegations of antisemitism, saying the demonstrations are directed at Israel and its actions in Gaza.Students demanding&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/college-protests-israel-divestment-palestinians-3f37f96f7be8e1124f266842d9caa627">schools cut financial ties</a>&nbsp;to Israel and divest from companies enabling its monthslong conflict, which was sparked by Hamas' Oct. 7 attack in southern Israel. Dozens have been arrested on charges of trespassing or disorderly conduct.Some Jewish students are taking part in the protests, while others say the demonstrations have veered into antisemitism and made them afraid to set foot on campus.

Iran-backed terrorists target U.S. owned ship in the Gulf of Aden  

WASHINGTON (AP) — Conservative Supreme Court justices appeared skeptical Wednesday that state abortion bans after their sweeping ruling overturning&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/abortion-supreme-court-decision-854f60302f21c2c35129e58cf8d8a7b0">Roe v. Wade</a>&nbsp;violate federal healthcare law, though some also questioned the effects on emergency care for pregnant patients.

<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/audio/2023/23-726">Click here to listen to a replay</a> of the oral argument

The case marks the first time the Supreme Court has considered the implications of a state ban since overturning the nationwide right to abortion. It comes from Idaho, which is among 14 states that&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/video/courts-abortion-supreme-court-of-the-united-states-district-of-columbia-kansas-city-fdd18338724547c9a9f069107ced4347">now ban abortion</a>&nbsp;at all stages of pregnancy&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/abortion-supreme-court-idaho-emergency-care-000a2482fdd1f1299599c91a6cc7635a">with very limited exceptions</a>.

The high court has already allowed the state ban to go into effect, even in medical emergencies, and it was unclear whether members of the conservative majority were swayed by the Biden administration's argument that federal law overrides the state in rare emergency cases where a pregnant patient's health is at serious risk.

The closely watched case tests how open the six-justice conservative majority is to carving out limited exceptions to state abortion bans. Their ruling, expected by late June, could have wide implications&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/pregnancy-emergency-care-abortion-supreme-court-roe-9ce6c87c8fc653c840654de1ae5f7a1c">amid a spike</a>&nbsp;in complaints that pregnant women have been turned away from emergency rooms care since Roe was overturned.

The&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/video/biden-vows-to-restore-roe-v-wade-0000018e1bf9dae6afdf9bf98ace0000">Biden administration says</a>&nbsp;abortion care must be allowed in those cases under a law that requires hospitals accepting Medicare to provide emergency care regardless of patients' ability to pay.

Justice Samuel Alito, who wrote the decision overturning Roe v. Wade, was doubtful. “How can you impose restrictions on what Idaho can criminalize, simply because hospitals in Idaho have chosen to participate in Medicare?” he said.

Idaho contends its ban does have exceptions for life-saving abortions, and the administration wants to wrongly expand the times when it's allowed to&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-abortion-arizona-law-florida-ban-7cdd6d2e3c320a89ec7a7c037824e7cd">turn hospitals into “abortion enclaves</a>."

But liberal justices detailed cases of pregnant women hemorrhaging or having to undergo hysterectomies after abortion care was denied or delayed in states with bans.

“Within these rare cases, there’s a significant number where the woman’s life is not in peril, but she’s going to lose her reproductive organs. She’s going to lose the ability to have children in the future unless an abortion takes place,” said Justice Elena Kagan.

Conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett, meanwhile, said she was “kind of shocked” that an attorney for Idaho appeared to hedge when asked whether the state would allow abortions in cases like those. Attorney Joshua N. Turner responded that doctors can use their “good faith” medical judgment under Idaho's life-saving exception, but Barrett continued to press: “What if the prosecutor thinks differently?”

Turner acknowledged that a doctor could face a criminal case in that situation. Performing an abortion outside of limited exceptions in Idaho is a felony punishable by up to five years in prison.

Doctors have said Idaho’s abortion ban has already affected emergency care. More women whose conditions are typically treated with abortions must now be flown out of state for care, since doctors must wait until they are close to death to provide terminations within the bounds of state law.

Abortion opponents say doctors have mishandled maternal emergency cases, and argue the Biden administration overstates health care woes to undermine state abortion laws.

The justices also heard another abortion case this term seeking to restrict access to&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-abortion-mifepristone-telemedicine-4406d53e8af90f6a523264f535f5adf8">abortion medication</a>. It remains pending, though the justices overall seemed skeptical of the push.

The Justice Department originally brought the case against Idaho, arguing the state’s abortion law conflicts with the 1986 Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/abortion-supreme-court-idaho-emergency-care-000a2482fdd1f1299599c91a6cc7635a">known as EMTALA</a>. It requires hospitals that accept Medicare to provide emergency care to any patient regardless of their ability to pay. Nearly all hospitals accept Medicare.

A federal judge initially sided with the administration and ruled that abortions were legal in medical emergencies. After the state appealed, the Supreme Court allowed the law to go fully into effect in January.

Outside the court, dueling protesters gathered with signs like “Abortion saves lives,” from one side of the crowd and “Emergency rooms are not abortion clinics” from abortion opponents.

Inside, the audience was sparse, though, with several benches empty or sparingly used.

___ Associated Press writers Gary Fields and Mark Sherman contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court will consider Wednesday when doctors can provide&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/abortion">abortions</a>&nbsp;during medical emergencies in states with bans enacted after the high court’s sweeping decision overturning Roe v. Wade.

The case comes from Idaho, which is among 14 states that now ban abortion at all stages of pregnancy with limited exceptions. It marks the first time the Supreme Court has considered a state ban since Roe was reversed.

The Biden administration argues that even in states where abortion is banned, federal health care law says hospitals must be allowed to terminate pregnancies in rare emergencies where a patient’s life or health is at serious risk.

Idaho contends its ban has exceptions for life-saving abortions but allowing it in more medical emergencies would turn hospitals into “abortion enclaves.” The state argues the Biden administration is misusing a health care law that is meant to ensure patients aren't turned away based on their ability to pay.

The Supreme Court has&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-abortion-medical-emergencies-idaho-8ca89d7de0c1fa9256dcd27d1847e144">allowed the Idaho law</a>&nbsp;to go into effect, even during emergencies, as the case played out.

Dueling protests were taking shape outside the court before the start of arguments on Wednesday. “Abortion saves lives,” read signs displayed by abortion rights supporters. Opponents displayed a sign that read, “Emergency rooms are not abortion clinics.”

Doctors have said Idaho’s abortion ban has already affected emergency care. More women whose conditions are typically treated with abortions must now be flown out of state for care, since doctors must wait until they are close to death to provide abortions within the bounds of state law.

Meanwhile, complaints of pregnant women being turned away from U.S. emergency rooms&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/pregnancy-emergency-care-abortion-supreme-court-roe-9ce6c87c8fc653c840654de1ae5f7a1c">spiked</a>&nbsp;after the Supreme Court&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/abortion-supreme-court-decision-854f60302f21c2c35129e58cf8d8a7b0">overturned Roe v. Wade</a>, according to federal documents obtained by The Associated Press.

Anti-abortion groups blame doctors for mishandling maternal emergency cases. Idaho argues the Biden administration overstates health care woes to undermine state abortion laws.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/4/1713986233216.png" alt="Photo courtesy Physicians for Human Rights" />
 <figcaption>Photo courtesy Physicians for Human Rights</figcaption>
 </figure>WASHINGTON (AP) — Conservative Supreme Court justices appeared skeptical Wednesday that state abortion bans after their sweeping ruling overturning&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/abortion-supreme-court-decision-854f60302f21c2c35129e58cf8d8a7b0">Roe v. Wade</a>&nbsp;violate federal healthcare law, though some also questioned the effects on emergency care for pregnant patients.<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/audio/2023/23-726">Click here to listen to a replay</a> of the oral argumentThe case marks the first time the Supreme Court has considered the implications of a state ban since overturning the nationwide right to abortion. It comes from Idaho, which is among 14 states that&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/video/courts-abortion-supreme-court-of-the-united-states-district-of-columbia-kansas-city-fdd18338724547c9a9f069107ced4347">now ban abortion</a>&nbsp;at all stages of pregnancy&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/abortion-supreme-court-idaho-emergency-care-000a2482fdd1f1299599c91a6cc7635a">with very limited exceptions</a>.The high court has already allowed the state ban to go into effect, even in medical emergencies, and it was unclear whether members of the conservative majority were swayed by the Biden administration's argument that federal law overrides the state in rare emergency cases where a pregnant patient's health is at serious risk.The closely watched case tests how open the six-justice conservative majority is to carving out limited exceptions to state abortion bans. Their ruling, expected by late June, could have wide implications&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/pregnancy-emergency-care-abortion-supreme-court-roe-9ce6c87c8fc653c840654de1ae5f7a1c">amid a spike</a>&nbsp;in complaints that pregnant women have been turned away from emergency rooms care since Roe was overturned.The&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/video/biden-vows-to-restore-roe-v-wade-0000018e1bf9dae6afdf9bf98ace0000">Biden administration says</a>&nbsp;abortion care must be allowed in those cases under a law that requires hospitals accepting Medicare to provide emergency care regardless of patients' ability to pay.Justice Samuel Alito, who wrote the decision overturning Roe v. Wade, was doubtful. “How can you impose restrictions on what Idaho can criminalize, simply because hospitals in Idaho have chosen to participate in Medicare?” he said.Idaho contends its ban does have exceptions for life-saving abortions, and the administration wants to wrongly expand the times when it's allowed to&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-abortion-arizona-law-florida-ban-7cdd6d2e3c320a89ec7a7c037824e7cd">turn hospitals into “abortion enclaves</a>."But liberal justices detailed cases of pregnant women hemorrhaging or having to undergo hysterectomies after abortion care was denied or delayed in states with bans.“Within these rare cases, there’s a significant number where the woman’s life is not in peril, but she’s going to lose her reproductive organs. She’s going to lose the ability to have children in the future unless an abortion takes place,” said Justice Elena Kagan.Conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett, meanwhile, said she was “kind of shocked” that an attorney for Idaho appeared to hedge when asked whether the state would allow abortions in cases like those. Attorney Joshua N. Turner responded that doctors can use their “good faith” medical judgment under Idaho's life-saving exception, but Barrett continued to press: “What if the prosecutor thinks differently?”Turner acknowledged that a doctor could face a criminal case in that situation. Performing an abortion outside of limited exceptions in Idaho is a felony punishable by up to five years in prison.Doctors have said Idaho’s abortion ban has already affected emergency care. More women whose conditions are typically treated with abortions must now be flown out of state for care, since doctors must wait until they are close to death to provide terminations within the bounds of state law.Abortion opponents say doctors have mishandled maternal emergency cases, and argue the Biden administration overstates health care woes to undermine state abortion laws.The justices also heard another abortion case this term seeking to restrict access to&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-abortion-mifepristone-telemedicine-4406d53e8af90f6a523264f535f5adf8">abortion medication</a>. It remains pending, though the justices overall seemed skeptical of the push.The Justice Department originally brought the case against Idaho, arguing the state’s abortion law conflicts with the 1986 Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/abortion-supreme-court-idaho-emergency-care-000a2482fdd1f1299599c91a6cc7635a">known as EMTALA</a>. It requires hospitals that accept Medicare to provide emergency care to any patient regardless of their ability to pay. Nearly all hospitals accept Medicare.A federal judge initially sided with the administration and ruled that abortions were legal in medical emergencies. After the state appealed, the Supreme Court allowed the law to go fully into effect in January.Outside the court, dueling protesters gathered with signs like “Abortion saves lives,” from one side of the crowd and “Emergency rooms are not abortion clinics” from abortion opponents.Inside, the audience was sparse, though, with several benches empty or sparingly used.___ Associated Press writers Gary Fields and Mark Sherman contributed to this report.--------------------WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court will consider Wednesday when doctors can provide&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/abortion">abortions</a>&nbsp;during medical emergencies in states with bans enacted after the high court’s sweeping decision overturning Roe v. Wade.The case comes from Idaho, which is among 14 states that now ban abortion at all stages of pregnancy with limited exceptions. It marks the first time the Supreme Court has considered a state ban since Roe was reversed.The Biden administration argues that even in states where abortion is banned, federal health care law says hospitals must be allowed to terminate pregnancies in rare emergencies where a patient’s life or health is at serious risk.Idaho contends its ban has exceptions for life-saving abortions but allowing it in more medical emergencies would turn hospitals into “abortion enclaves.” The state argues the Biden administration is misusing a health care law that is meant to ensure patients aren't turned away based on their ability to pay.The Supreme Court has&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-abortion-medical-emergencies-idaho-8ca89d7de0c1fa9256dcd27d1847e144">allowed the Idaho law</a>&nbsp;to go into effect, even during emergencies, as the case played out.Dueling protests were taking shape outside the court before the start of arguments on Wednesday. “Abortion saves lives,” read signs displayed by abortion rights supporters. Opponents displayed a sign that read, “Emergency rooms are not abortion clinics.”Doctors have said Idaho’s abortion ban has already affected emergency care. More women whose conditions are typically treated with abortions must now be flown out of state for care, since doctors must wait until they are close to death to provide abortions within the bounds of state law.Meanwhile, complaints of pregnant women being turned away from U.S. emergency rooms&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/pregnancy-emergency-care-abortion-supreme-court-roe-9ce6c87c8fc653c840654de1ae5f7a1c">spiked</a>&nbsp;after the Supreme Court&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/abortion-supreme-court-decision-854f60302f21c2c35129e58cf8d8a7b0">overturned Roe v. Wade</a>, according to federal documents obtained by The Associated Press.Anti-abortion groups blame doctors for mishandling maternal emergency cases. Idaho argues the Biden administration overstates health care woes to undermine state abortion laws.The justices also heard another abortion case this term seeking to restrict access to&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-abortion-mifepristone-telemedicine-4406d53e8af90f6a523264f535f5adf8">abortion medication</a>. It remains pending, though the justices overall seemed skeptical of the push.The Justice Department originally brought the case against Idaho, arguing the state’s abortion law conflicts with the 1986 Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/abortion-supreme-court-idaho-emergency-care-000a2482fdd1f1299599c91a6cc7635a">known as EMTALA</a>. It requires hospitals that accept Medicare to provide emergency care to any patient regardless of their ability to pay. Nearly all hospitals accept Medicare.A federal judge initially sided with the administration and ruled that abortions were legal in medical emergencies. After the state appealed, the Supreme Court allowed the law to go fully into effect in January.

🎧Supreme Court divided over access to emergency abortions

NEW YORK (AP) — A veteran tabloid publisher testified Tuesday that he pledged to be&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/donald-trump">Donald Trump</a>&nbsp;'s “eyes and ears" during his 2016 presidential campaign, recounting how he promised the then-candidate that he would help suppress harmful stories and even arranged to purchase the silence of a doorman.

<a href="https://pdfs.nycourts.gov/PeopleVs.DTrump-71543/transcripts/">Click here to read the </a>transcript from Day 2 of the historic trial (-The court system is posting the daily transcripts of the trial proceedings. The transcript for each day is available before the end of the following business day.)

The testimony Tuesday from&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/david-pecker">David Pecker</a>&nbsp;was designed to bolster the prosecution's premise of a decades-long friendship between Trump and the former publisher of the National Enquirer that culminated in an agreement to give the candidate's lawyer a heads-up on negative tips and stories so they could be quashed.

The effort was a way to illegally influence the election, prosecutors have alleged in striving to elevate the gravity of the history-making first trial of a former American president and the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/projects/trump-investigations-civil-criminal-tracker/">first of four criminal cases</a>&nbsp;against Trump to reach a jury. The presumptive Republican presidential nominee in this year's race&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-arraignment-hush-money-81225510ef7638494852816878f612f0">faces 34 felony counts of falsifying business records</a>&nbsp;in connection with hush money payments meant to stifle embarrassing stories from surfacing in the final days of the 2016 campaign.

With Trump sitting just feet away in the courtroom, Pecker, the first witness, detailed his behind-the-scenes role in Trump's rise from political novice to the Republican nomination and the White House. He explained how he and the National Enquirer parlayed rumor-mongering into splashy tabloid stories that smeared Trump's opponents and, just as crucially, leveraged his connections to suppress seamy stories about Trump, including a porn actor's claim of an extramarital sexual encounter years earlier.

Pecker traced the origins of their relationship to a 1980s meeting at Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida, and said the friendship bloomed alongside the success of the real estate developer's TV show “The Apprentice" and the program's subsequent celebrity version.

Their ties were solidified during a pivotal August 2015 meeting at Trump Tower involving Trump, his lawyer and personal fixer Michael Cohen, and another aide, Hope Hicks, in which Pecker was asked what he and the publications he led could do for the campaign.

Pecker said he volunteered to publish positive stories about Trump and negative stories about his opponents. But that wasn't all, he said, telling jurors how he told Trump: “I will be your eyes and ears.”

“I said that anything I hear in the marketplace, if I hear anything negative about yourself, or if I hear anything about women selling stories, I would notify Michael Cohen," so that the rights could be purchased and the stories could be killed.

“So that they would not get published, you mean?” asked prosecutor Joshua Steinglass.

“So that they would not get published, yes” Pecker replied.

To illustrate their point, prosecutors displayed a screenshot of various flattering headlines the National Enquirer published about Trump, including “Donald Dominates!’ and “World Exclusive: The Donald Trump Nobody Knows.” The jury was also shown disparaging and outlandish stories about Trump's opponents, including surgeon Ben Carson and Republican Sen. Marco Rubio.

Pecker painted Cohen as a shadow editor of the National Enquirer’s pro-Trump coverage, directing the tabloid to go after whichever Republican candidate was gaining momentum.

“I would receive a call from Michael Cohen, and he would direct me and direct Dylan Howard on which candidate and which direction we should go,” Pecker said, referring to the tabloid's then-editor.

Pecker said he underscored to Howard that the agreement with the Trump operation was “highly, highly confidential.” He said he wanted the tabloid’s bureau chiefs to be on the lookout for any stories involving Trump and said he wanted them to verify the stories before alerting Cohen.

“I did not want anyone else to know about this agreement I had and what I wanted to do,” the ex-publisher added.

Cohen pleaded guilty in 2018 to federal charges related to his role in the hush money payments. He was once a confidant of Trump's, but their relationship deteriorated in spectacular fashion. Cohen is expected to be a star government witness, and he routinely posts profane broadsides against Trump on social media.

Trump's lawyers are expected to make attacks on Cohen's credibility a foundation of their defense, but in opening with Pecker, prosecutors hoped to focus attention on a witness with a less volatile backstory. Besides maintaining that Trump is innocent, Trump lawyer Todd Blanche told jurors that Cohen cannot be trusted and has “an obsession with getting Trump.”

Pecker's testimony Tuesday followed a hearing earlier in the day in which prosecutors urged Judge Juan M. Merchan to hold Trump in contempt and fine him $1,000 for each of 10 social media posts that they say violated an earlier gag order barring attacks on witnesses, jurors and others involved in the case.

Merchan did not immediately rule, but he seemed skeptical of defense arguments that Trump was merely responding in his posts to others' attacks and had been trying to comply with the order.

Prosecutors allege that Trump sought to illegally influence the 2016 race through a practice known in the tabloid industry as “catch-and-kill” — catching a potentially damaging story by buying the rights to it and then killing it through agreements that prevent the paid person from telling the story to anyone else.

In this case, that included a $130,000 payment to porn actor Stormy Daniels to silence her claims of an extramarital sexual encounter that Trump denies. Prosecutors also described other arrangements, including one that paid a former Playboy model $150,000 to suppress claims of a nearly yearlong affair with the married Trump, which Trump also denies.

In another instance, Pecker recounted a&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/general-news-united-states-government-f37ecfc4710b468db6a103a245146172">$30,000</a>&nbsp;payment from the National Enquirer to a Trump Tower doorman for the rights to a rumor that Trump had fathered a child with an employee at Trump World Tower. The tabloid concluded the story was not true, and the woman and Trump have denied the allegations.

As Pecker described receiving the tip in court, Trump shook his head.

Pecker said upon hearing the rumor, he immediately called Cohen, who said it was “absolutely not true” but that he would look into whether the people involved had indeed worked for Trump’s company.

“I made the decision to buy the story because of the potential embarrassment it had to the campaign and Mr. Trump,” Pecker said.

When he told Cohen, Pecker said he thanked him, "And he said that the boss would be very pleased.”

Asked by the prosecutor who he understood the boss to be, Pecker replied: “Donald Trump.”

Explaining why he decided to have the National Enquirer foot the bill, Pecker recalled telling Cohen: “This can be a very big story. I believe it's important that it be removed from the marketplace.”

If he published the story, Pecker said it would be “probably the biggest sale of the National Enquirer since the death of Elvis Presley.”

Jurors viewed an internal Enquirer email and invoice describing the payments to the doorman to kill his story. One document describes the funds coming from the publication’s “corporate” account. An invoice references an “immediate” $30,000 bank transfer payment for “‘Trump’ non-published story.”

Trump's&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-arraignment-hush-money-81225510ef7638494852816878f612f0">34 felony counts</a>&nbsp;arise from reimbursements that prosecutors say Trump's company made to Cohen for hush money payments and that were falsely recorded as legal expenses.

The charges are punishable by up to four years in prison, though it’s unclear whether Merchan would seek to put him behind bars. A conviction would not preclude Trump from becoming president again, but because it is a state case, he would not be able to pardon himself if found guilty. He has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/4/1713974662413.png" alt="One piece of evidence from Trump's civil trial on Tuesday -provided by New York State Court System" />
 <figcaption>One piece of evidence from Trump's civil trial on Tuesday -provided by New York State Court System</figcaption>
 </figure>NEW YORK (AP) — A veteran tabloid publisher testified Tuesday that he pledged to be&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/donald-trump">Donald Trump</a>&nbsp;'s “eyes and ears" during his 2016 presidential campaign, recounting how he promised the then-candidate that he would help suppress harmful stories and even arranged to purchase the silence of a doorman.<a href="https://pdfs.nycourts.gov/PeopleVs.DTrump-71543/transcripts/">Click here to read the </a>transcript from Day 2 of the historic trial (-The court system is posting the daily transcripts of the trial proceedings. The transcript for each day is available before the end of the following business day.)The testimony Tuesday from&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/david-pecker">David Pecker</a>&nbsp;was designed to bolster the prosecution's premise of a decades-long friendship between Trump and the former publisher of the National Enquirer that culminated in an agreement to give the candidate's lawyer a heads-up on negative tips and stories so they could be quashed.The effort was a way to illegally influence the election, prosecutors have alleged in striving to elevate the gravity of the history-making first trial of a former American president and the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/projects/trump-investigations-civil-criminal-tracker/">first of four criminal cases</a>&nbsp;against Trump to reach a jury. The presumptive Republican presidential nominee in this year's race&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-arraignment-hush-money-81225510ef7638494852816878f612f0">faces 34 felony counts of falsifying business records</a>&nbsp;in connection with hush money payments meant to stifle embarrassing stories from surfacing in the final days of the 2016 campaign.With Trump sitting just feet away in the courtroom, Pecker, the first witness, detailed his behind-the-scenes role in Trump's rise from political novice to the Republican nomination and the White House. He explained how he and the National Enquirer parlayed rumor-mongering into splashy tabloid stories that smeared Trump's opponents and, just as crucially, leveraged his connections to suppress seamy stories about Trump, including a porn actor's claim of an extramarital sexual encounter years earlier.Pecker traced the origins of their relationship to a 1980s meeting at Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida, and said the friendship bloomed alongside the success of the real estate developer's TV show “The Apprentice" and the program's subsequent celebrity version.Their ties were solidified during a pivotal August 2015 meeting at Trump Tower involving Trump, his lawyer and personal fixer Michael Cohen, and another aide, Hope Hicks, in which Pecker was asked what he and the publications he led could do for the campaign.Pecker said he volunteered to publish positive stories about Trump and negative stories about his opponents. But that wasn't all, he said, telling jurors how he told Trump: “I will be your eyes and ears.”“I said that anything I hear in the marketplace, if I hear anything negative about yourself, or if I hear anything about women selling stories, I would notify Michael Cohen," so that the rights could be purchased and the stories could be killed.“So that they would not get published, you mean?” asked prosecutor Joshua Steinglass.“So that they would not get published, yes” Pecker replied.To illustrate their point, prosecutors displayed a screenshot of various flattering headlines the National Enquirer published about Trump, including “Donald Dominates!’ and “World Exclusive: The Donald Trump Nobody Knows.” The jury was also shown disparaging and outlandish stories about Trump's opponents, including surgeon Ben Carson and Republican Sen. Marco Rubio.Pecker painted Cohen as a shadow editor of the National Enquirer’s pro-Trump coverage, directing the tabloid to go after whichever Republican candidate was gaining momentum.“I would receive a call from Michael Cohen, and he would direct me and direct Dylan Howard on which candidate and which direction we should go,” Pecker said, referring to the tabloid's then-editor.Pecker said he underscored to Howard that the agreement with the Trump operation was “highly, highly confidential.” He said he wanted the tabloid’s bureau chiefs to be on the lookout for any stories involving Trump and said he wanted them to verify the stories before alerting Cohen.“I did not want anyone else to know about this agreement I had and what I wanted to do,” the ex-publisher added.Cohen pleaded guilty in 2018 to federal charges related to his role in the hush money payments. He was once a confidant of Trump's, but their relationship deteriorated in spectacular fashion. Cohen is expected to be a star government witness, and he routinely posts profane broadsides against Trump on social media.Trump's lawyers are expected to make attacks on Cohen's credibility a foundation of their defense, but in opening with Pecker, prosecutors hoped to focus attention on a witness with a less volatile backstory. Besides maintaining that Trump is innocent, Trump lawyer Todd Blanche told jurors that Cohen cannot be trusted and has “an obsession with getting Trump.”Pecker's testimony Tuesday followed a hearing earlier in the day in which prosecutors urged Judge Juan M. Merchan to hold Trump in contempt and fine him $1,000 for each of 10 social media posts that they say violated an earlier gag order barring attacks on witnesses, jurors and others involved in the case.Merchan did not immediately rule, but he seemed skeptical of defense arguments that Trump was merely responding in his posts to others' attacks and had been trying to comply with the order.Prosecutors allege that Trump sought to illegally influence the 2016 race through a practice known in the tabloid industry as “catch-and-kill” — catching a potentially damaging story by buying the rights to it and then killing it through agreements that prevent the paid person from telling the story to anyone else.In this case, that included a $130,000 payment to porn actor Stormy Daniels to silence her claims of an extramarital sexual encounter that Trump denies. Prosecutors also described other arrangements, including one that paid a former Playboy model $150,000 to suppress claims of a nearly yearlong affair with the married Trump, which Trump also denies.In another instance, Pecker recounted a&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/general-news-united-states-government-f37ecfc4710b468db6a103a245146172">$30,000</a>&nbsp;payment from the National Enquirer to a Trump Tower doorman for the rights to a rumor that Trump had fathered a child with an employee at Trump World Tower. The tabloid concluded the story was not true, and the woman and Trump have denied the allegations.As Pecker described receiving the tip in court, Trump shook his head.Pecker said upon hearing the rumor, he immediately called Cohen, who said it was “absolutely not true” but that he would look into whether the people involved had indeed worked for Trump’s company.“I made the decision to buy the story because of the potential embarrassment it had to the campaign and Mr. Trump,” Pecker said.When he told Cohen, Pecker said he thanked him, "And he said that the boss would be very pleased.”Asked by the prosecutor who he understood the boss to be, Pecker replied: “Donald Trump.”Explaining why he decided to have the National Enquirer foot the bill, Pecker recalled telling Cohen: “This can be a very big story. I believe it's important that it be removed from the marketplace.”If he published the story, Pecker said it would be “probably the biggest sale of the National Enquirer since the death of Elvis Presley.”Jurors viewed an internal Enquirer email and invoice describing the payments to the doorman to kill his story. One document describes the funds coming from the publication’s “corporate” account. An invoice references an “immediate” $30,000 bank transfer payment for “‘Trump’ non-published story.”Trump's&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-arraignment-hush-money-81225510ef7638494852816878f612f0">34 felony counts</a>&nbsp;arise from reimbursements that prosecutors say Trump's company made to Cohen for hush money payments and that were falsely recorded as legal expenses.The charges are punishable by up to four years in prison, though it’s unclear whether Merchan would seek to put him behind bars. A conviction would not preclude Trump from becoming president again, but because it is a state case, he would not be able to pardon himself if found guilty. He has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing.Testimony resumes on Thursday.

Read transcript: Day 2 of historic Trump civil trial

<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/nebraska-pharmacist-lost-her-license-this-month-following-federal-sentence-linked-to-fraud/">Nebraska Examiner</a>

LINCOLN —&nbsp;A Nebraska pharmacist sentenced last fall for dispensing generic medications for name-brand drugs or processing claims despite not filling prescriptions lost her pharmacist license this month.

Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers announced Tuesday that Danelle Charf, 49,&nbsp;who was&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/sentence-charf.pdf">sentenced Nov. 20 in federal court</a>&nbsp;for one felony count of making a false, fictitious and fraudulent statement in connection with health care services, lost her pharmacist license following an April 2 hearing.&nbsp;

She is barred from seeking reinstatement of her license for at least two years.

“The chief medical officer for the State of Nebraska found Ms. Charf, while operating pharmacies in Neligh and Tilden, fraudulently billed patients for name-brand prescriptions but filled those orders with generic medications,” a news release states.

According to the&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/guilty-plea-charf.pdf">guilty plea</a>&nbsp;Charf agreed to make last June, Charf owned and operated Wanek Pharmacy in Neligh, Nebraska, from at least January 2016 to January 2021, and Tilden Pharmacy in Tilden, Nebraska, from at least August 2018 to January 2021. The pharmacies regularly submitted documents for reimbursements for Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries.

A pharmacy intern filed a complaint in September 2020 that led federal and state investigators to interview current and former employees as well as some beneficiaries at random.

Multiple employees reported that&nbsp;the pharmacies would submit false claims for name brand medications despite dispensing generic medications or processing claims despite not filling a customer’s prescriptions, according to the&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.justice.gov/usao-ne/pr/neligh-woman-sentenced-health-care-fraud#:~:text=Acting%20United%20States%20Attorney%20Susan,connection%20with%20health%20care%20services.">Nebraska U.S. Attorney’s Office</a>.

In one case, a Medicare recipient was supposed to receive 120 blisters of Advair, for asthma and COPD, but received 60 blisters of a different medication —&nbsp;fluticasone propionate.

Investigators compared reimbursement claims and estimated a total loss of $573,337.53 — $369,837.38 in Neligh and $203,500.15 in Tilden.

In November, Charf was sentenced to two months in prison with three years of supervised release. She is required to pay back the defrauded money —&nbsp;$546,142.04 to U.S. Medicare and $27,195.49 to Nebraska Medicaid. She also was ordered to pay a $5,000 civil penalty.

Charf must pay at least $100 a month, or 5% of her gross income, whichever is greater, until her restitution is paid, according to the plea agreement.

Zach Wendling<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/nebraska-pharmacist-lost-her-license-this-month-following-federal-sentence-linked-to-fraud/">Nebraska Examiner</a>LINCOLN —&nbsp;A Nebraska pharmacist sentenced last fall for dispensing generic medications for name-brand drugs or processing claims despite not filling prescriptions lost her pharmacist license this month.Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers announced Tuesday that Danelle Charf, 49,&nbsp;who was&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/sentence-charf.pdf">sentenced Nov. 20 in federal court</a>&nbsp;for one felony count of making a false, fictitious and fraudulent statement in connection with health care services, lost her pharmacist license following an April 2 hearing.&nbsp;She is barred from seeking reinstatement of her license for at least two years.“The chief medical officer for the State of Nebraska found Ms. Charf, while operating pharmacies in Neligh and Tilden, fraudulently billed patients for name-brand prescriptions but filled those orders with generic medications,” a news release states.According to the&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/guilty-plea-charf.pdf">guilty plea</a>&nbsp;Charf agreed to make last June, Charf owned and operated Wanek Pharmacy in Neligh, Nebraska, from at least January 2016 to January 2021, and Tilden Pharmacy in Tilden, Nebraska, from at least August 2018 to January 2021. The pharmacies regularly submitted documents for reimbursements for Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries.A pharmacy intern filed a complaint in September 2020 that led federal and state investigators to interview current and former employees as well as some beneficiaries at random.Multiple employees reported that&nbsp;the pharmacies would submit false claims for name brand medications despite dispensing generic medications or processing claims despite not filling a customer’s prescriptions, according to the&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.justice.gov/usao-ne/pr/neligh-woman-sentenced-health-care-fraud#:~:text=Acting%20United%20States%20Attorney%20Susan,connection%20with%20health%20care%20services.">Nebraska U.S. Attorney’s Office</a>.In one case, a Medicare recipient was supposed to receive 120 blisters of Advair, for asthma and COPD, but received 60 blisters of a different medication —&nbsp;fluticasone propionate.Investigators compared reimbursement claims and estimated a total loss of $573,337.53 — $369,837.38 in Neligh and $203,500.15 in Tilden.In November, Charf was sentenced to two months in prison with three years of supervised release. She is required to pay back the defrauded money —&nbsp;$546,142.04 to U.S. Medicare and $27,195.49 to Nebraska Medicaid. She also was ordered to pay a $5,000 civil penalty.Charf must pay at least $100 a month, or 5% of her gross income, whichever is greater, until her restitution is paid, according to the plea agreement.

Nebraska pharmacist lost her license this month following federal sentence linked to fraud

APRIL 24, 2024 (LINCOLN, NEB.)&nbsp;&nbsp;— Troopers with the Nebraska State Patrol removed 18 impaired drivers from the road during a weekend campaign focused on drunk and drugged driving. One of the arrests was for driving under the influence of drugs.

“Impaired driving can take multiple forms,” said Colonel John Bolduc, Superintendent of the Nebraska State Patrol. “Every time you get behind the wheel, you should be sober. Driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs endangers yourself and everyone else on the road.”

The effort, which ran from Friday, April 19, through Sunday, April 21, coincided with a national campaign organized by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

In addition to the 18 arrests for driving under the influence, troopers also cited drivers for speeding (286), driving under suspension (26), minor in possession (5), open alcohol container (14), no seat belt (9), and improper child restraint (7). Troopers also assisted 78 motorists in need of help over the weekend.

“As the summer travel season approaches, now is the time to get into the safe driving mindset,” said Colonel Bolduc. “Make your mind up now that you’ll always have a plan for a sober driver after summer parties, community events, and family gatherings.”

This effort was made possible thanks in part to a grant from the Nebraska Department of Transportation – Highway Safety Office.

Cody ThomasNebraska State PatrolAPRIL 24, 2024 (LINCOLN, NEB.)&nbsp;&nbsp;— Troopers with the Nebraska State Patrol removed 18 impaired drivers from the road during a weekend campaign focused on drunk and drugged driving. One of the arrests was for driving under the influence of drugs.“Impaired driving can take multiple forms,” said Colonel John Bolduc, Superintendent of the Nebraska State Patrol. “Every time you get behind the wheel, you should be sober. Driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs endangers yourself and everyone else on the road.”The effort, which ran from Friday, April 19, through Sunday, April 21, coincided with a national campaign organized by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.In addition to the 18 arrests for driving under the influence, troopers also cited drivers for speeding (286), driving under suspension (26), minor in possession (5), open alcohol container (14), no seat belt (9), and improper child restraint (7). Troopers also assisted 78 motorists in need of help over the weekend.“As the summer travel season approaches, now is the time to get into the safe driving mindset,” said Colonel Bolduc. “Make your mind up now that you’ll always have a plan for a sober driver after summer parties, community events, and family gatherings.”This effort was made possible thanks in part to a grant from the Nebraska Department of Transportation – Highway Safety Office.