Ethics probe into Wichita mayor moves forward
The executive session on Thursday night lasted for 90 minutes. The city's ethics officer says the case is not cut and dry.
Ambulance procession honors fallen Butler County paramedic
Over the last few weeks, the board's investigator questioned witnesses, including staff members and elected officials.
Last month, seven complaints were presented to the ethics board, Wichita's Ethics Officer Kathy Sexton says. More were filed since then, and now there are 22 different complainants.
Sexton says it is not as simple as just telling the board an elected official did something they did not like.
'It's one thing to say that an elected official does something you don't like, but it's a whole other thing to be able to say, is there evidence of wrongdoing and intent and does it meet the letter of the law, so to speak, and that's why this board has so much work to do,' said Sexton.
Sexton says there are a total of six provisions in the code of ethics that were allegedly violated.
A meeting is tentatively set for Thursday, June 12, when the board is expected to make a decision.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
40 minutes ago
- Yahoo
How latest block of Trump's birthright citizenship order tests legal landscape after Supreme Court ruling
A federal judge's decision to temporarily prevent the Trump administration from stripping birthright citizenship for some babies born in the U.S. is an early test of the legal landscape, after the Supreme Court greatly restricted the ability of judges to issue nationwide blocks of presidential policies. On Thursday morning, in New Hampshire, U.S. District Judge Joseph Laplante granted class action status to a lawsuit that seeks to protect babies who would be denied birthright citizenship, and granted a temporary block of President Donald Trump's order from going into effect throughout the country. The decision brought hope to pregnant women and groups who were dealt a blow two weeks ago when the Supreme Court largely restricted the ability of federal judges to use one of the strongest tools at their disposal — the use of nationwide injunctions to prevent federal policies from going into effect. The Supreme Court decision would have allowed Trump's executive order to go into effect on July 27 in parts of the U.S. In the aftermath, immigrants and their attorneys pivoted to seeking class action status for immigrant babies and parents in hopes of finding another way to stop the president. 'It was clear that the Supreme Court decision had closed one very important door for challenging policies, but it also in the process opened other doors,' Muzaffar Chishti, a senior fellow with the Migration Policy Institute, told NBC News. The Supreme Court has not yet ruled on whether Trump's executive order is unconstitutional and multiple lawsuits challenging it remain ongoing. But its decision on June 27 left open an important avenue for plaintiffs to try to stop federal government policies nationwide through the use of class action lawsuits. 'This case is an early test for how litigants will adapt to the legal landscape after the Supreme Court's death blow to national injunctions,' Chishti said. 'It normally takes months, if not years, for an altered landscape to be observed. But since this is such an important constitutional issue, we are getting a chance to revisit the landscape within two weeks.' Under Trump's plan, birthright citizenship would be limited to those who have at least one parent who is a U.S. citizen or permanent resident. The order also denies citizenship to children whose mothers are temporarily in the United States, including those visiting under the Visa Waiver Program or as tourists, or who are students and whose fathers are not citizens or lawful permanent residents. In the written order issued Thursday, Laplante wrote that the court certified class action status to the following group in issuing the nationwide block of Trump's order: 'All current and future persons who are born on or after February 20, 2025, where (1) that person's mother was unlawfully present in the United States and the person's father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person's birth, or (2) that person's mother's presence in the United States was lawful but temporary, and the person's father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person's birth.' Laplante, who was appointed by President George W. Bush, had previously denied issuing a nationwide injunction in a similar case earlier this year. Instead, he had issued a narrower order where he only blocked the policy from being enforced on members of groups that would be affected by Trump's order. But his order on Thursday effectively blocked Trump's executive order from being enforced nationwide, at least temporarily. 'This was a ruling that certified a preliminary class of folks across the nation from a judge who was skeptical of nationwide injunctions, and so I think it shows that the class action mechanism is a viable one, that courts are willing to entertain,' said Haiyun Damon-Feng, an immigration and constitutional law professor at Cardozo School of Law. Cody Wofsy, the American Civil Liberties Union's lead attorney in the case, said after Thursday's court hearing that Laplante's order was 'going to protect every single child around the country from this lawless, unconstitutional and cruel executive order.' White House spokesperson Harrison Fields said in a statement to NBC News that the decision was 'an obvious and unlawful attempt to circumvent the Supreme Court's clear order against universal relief.' 'This judge's decision disregards the rule of law by abusing class action certification procedures. The Trump Administration will be fighting vigorously against the attempts of these rogue district court judges to impede the policies President Trump was elected to implement,' Fields said in the statement. The Trump administration has seven days to appeal Laplante's temporary block to a higher court, and the issue could find itself back at the Supreme Court to determine if the judge's order complies with last month's ruling. 'It's not the end right of the birthright question. We are probably going to see more fights take place over procedure, over the question of class certification, as well as the question of birthright citizenship on the merits,' Damon-Feng said. This article was originally published on
Yahoo
40 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Karoline Leavitt Just Made A Trump Claim So Ridiculous That Even Republicans Are Calling It Out
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt managed to unite many on the left and right alike on Thursday with a claim about President Donald Trump so over-the-top that neither side was buying it. Leavitt shared a link on X to a USA Today column arguing that Trump is deserving of the Nobel Peace Prize. Twitter: @PressSec Related: The text of Leavitt's post on X was also the headline of the story: 'Trump deserves Nobel Peace Prize. He's achieved more than those who've won before.' The column argued that Trump's attack on Iran last month stopped the nation from acquiring a nuclear weapon. Trump himself claimed the strike 'totally obliterated' Iran's facilities. Analysts have been more measured, saying the strikes may have only set Iran's nuclear program back by a few months. The column also credits Trump for a ceasefire between Israel and Iran, and notes that he is trying to broker one between Israel and Hamas as well. Earlier this week, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that he had nominated Trump for the honor. The Nobel Peace Prize has been a sore spot for Trump for years. He's complained repeatedly about not getting one, has griped that President Barack Obama has one, and insisted that he should have had 'four or five' of them by now. But critics pointed out that Trump bombed Iran before the ceasefire, and that the United States has been providing Israel with weapons in its various offensives, among other reasons, Trump shouldn't get the prize. They fired back on X: @seanrcallaghan @gamboleer Related: @backavatar @CassandraRules Twitter: @kranbjam @vanranstmarc Related: @thomasstjames3 @evanakilgore @butlerlonney @healthranger @criticerx @voteharrisout Related: @barnes_law @shirokanechoja Twitter: @PatriotJoe13 Twitter: @JonMadison711 Twitter: @DeGeneralDimes This article originally appeared on HuffPost. Also in In the News: Also in In the News: Also in In the News:
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Trump to use presidential authority to send weapons to Ukraine, sources say
By Mike Stone WASHINGTON (Reuters) -President Donald Trump for the first time since returning to office will send weapons to Kyiv under a presidential power frequently used by his predecessor, two sources familiar with the decision said on Thursday, a move suggesting new interest by the president in defending Ukraine. More than three years after Russia's invasion of its neighbor, Trump's team will identify arms from U.S. stockpiles to send to Ukraine under the Presidential Drawdown Authority, the sources said, with one saying they could be worth around $300 million. Trump on Tuesday said the U.S. would send more weapons to Ukraine to help the country defend itself against intensifying Russian advances. The package could include defensive Patriot missiles and offensive medium-range rockets, but a decision on the exact equipment has not been made, the sources said. One of the people said this would happen at a meeting on Thursday. So far, the Trump administration has only sent weapons authorized by former President Joe Biden, who was a staunch supporter of Kyiv. Presidential Drawdown Authority allows the president to draw from weapons stocks to help allies in an emergency. The Pentagon and the White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The Republican president's stance on defending Ukraine has been inconsistent. At times he has criticized U.S. spending and spoken favorably of Russia but also sometimes has voiced support for Kyiv and disparaged the Kremlin. The U.S. has $3.86 billion worth of Presidential Drawdown Authority for Ukraine remaining. The last drawdown was a $500 million award by Biden on January 9. Ukraine's top priorities are Patriot missile interceptors and GMLRS mobile rocket artillery which may be included in the package. The weapons could be on the front lines within days because stocks are positioned in Europe. The Trump administration this month halted shipments of some critical weapons that were approved by Biden but some of those shipments have resumed. Congress has approved nearly $175 billion of aid and military assistance for Ukraine and allied nations in the nearly 3-1/2 years since Russia's full-scale invasion.
