Wonder how free buses will fare in New York? Watch these Md. counties.
While scrutinizing the county's budget in the spring, the county council found that the amount of money it cost to collect the fares was greater than the amount being taken in. Not only is eliminating bus fares a better deal for riders and a stronger encouragement to choose transit, but it also will save the county $4 million over the next several years.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox News
an hour ago
- Fox News
Judge Judy recreates controversial American verdicts and challenges viewers in 'Justice on Trial'
EXCLUSIVE - Judge Judith Sheindlin helps recreate some of the most controversial court cases in American history in her new show, "Justice on Trial." The show, which was over 10 years in the making and finally premiered on Prime Video last Monday, revisits eight of the most monumental court cases in American memory — allowing the viewer to decide if justice was truly served with each verdict. The main lawyers featured on the show are Larry Bakman and Daniel Mentzer. Episode seven features a re-telling of "Snyder v. Phelps," in which a grieving father, Albert Snyder, sued Fred Phelps and his followers at the Westboro Baptist Church for emotional distress after church members protested his son Matthew's military funeral. The churchgoers, as depicted in the episode, carried signs reading, "God Hates Your Son," "Thank God for Dead Soldiers," and "Thank God for 9/11," to protest the military's tolerance of homosexuality. As Snyder noted during the trial, his son was not gay. The protesters were protesting the military at-large. The court showdown highlighted the legal boundaries of protected speech when it conflicts with potential harm to others. A jury in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland agreed with Snyder and awarded him a total of $10.9 million, which the judge lowered to $5 million. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the judgment, holding that Phelps' speech was protected by the First Amendment. The Supreme Court upheld the Fourth Circuit's ruling. The fiery Sheindlin had an opinion on the matter. While she and others may find the protesters' signs "abhorrent," she intoned that the Constitution does protect free speech. "Totally uncaring for people who are religious people, totally uncaring about the emotional trauma that that kind of demonstration might have on the family," Sheindlin said of the Westboro protests in an interview with Fox News Digital. "And yet the Supreme Court said in its decision that they had a right to express their views, even though their views were maybe abhorrent to the vast majority of Americans. I suppose you have to be able to... I wouldn't want to tolerate seeing the American flag burned in protest in America. Just wouldn't. It would offend me. But you have the right to do it. Is there a law that proscribes it? And I'd say probably not." So how do Americans reconcile their anger at a verdict with the Court's constitutional responsibilities? Sheindlin began her answer by referencing the movie "American President." "I mean, we all would like our presidents to be like Michael Douglas, correct?" she said. "And he said something at the end, but he's making the big speech at the end. He said, 'As an American, America is not easy, and you have to be able to defend somebody burning a flag, the American flag, as a protest, if you're going to insist that freedom of speech and expression exists.' And while we are all offended, it just didn't seem right that for no apparent reason, with no knowledge of who this young man was who was killed, just because they had a cause, they didn't care what the collateral damage was emotionally to the family of this young man." Judge Judy said there was one case, in particular, that spurred her to want to create "Justice on Trial" and that may also leave some Americans feeling like justice may have taken a walk. "It was a case that happened in New York many, many years ago," she shared. "Two young thugs decided to rob an old man on the subway. Believe it or not, I remember the man's name. His name was Jerome Sandusky, and he was a man well in his 70s. And one of them was acting as a lookout. The other one went down the stairs with the pretty deserted platform and was beating up this old man in an attempt to take his watch and cash. And a transit police officer heard the screams of the old man coming from the subway, and he ran down into the subway. Pulled out his revolver and said, 'Stop, police!' And the young thug ran off and was running up the stairs. Police said, 'Stop, police!' He didn't stop, and the police officer shot him. And he shot him in the back as he was fleeing." Then things got tricky in court and the situation seemed to turn on the victim. "The young man pled guilty to the robbery, was sentenced, but hired a lawyer who sued the transit authority in the city of New York and received a judgment, a jury verdict for $4.3 million," Sheindlin continued. "And then Mr. Sandusky, who took a very long time to recover from his physical wounds, but who would, you know — if you're a crime victim emotionally, you really never get over being a victim of violent crime. And Mr. Sandusky, he said, 'Well, that's sort of outrageous. I was the victim.' And so he hired a lawyer because now this thug had $4.3 million and his lawsuit was barred by the statute of limitations. So there are many facets to that case. Whether or not, ultimately, justice was served is an issue. And if you ask 10 people, given those set of facts, you will get at least eight different opinions." All eight episodes of "Justice on Trial" are streaming now on Prime Video. Other cases covered by the series include the famous Scopes Monkey trial, Gideon v. Wainwright and People v. Turriago. In the latter case, troopers stopped Leonardo Turriago for a speeding violation on the New York State Thruway, which led police to discover a decomposing body locked in a steamer trunk. The episode explores the question of whether or not the search of the truck was legal. The series is created and executive produced by Sheindlin. Casey Barber, David Carr and Randy Douthit are also executive producers. Amy Freisleben is a co-executive producer.
Fox News
2 hours ago
- Fox News
Could Senator Adam Schiff really go to jail over alleged mortgage fraud?
Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) Director William Pulte sent a criminal referral to Attorney General Pam Bondi in May alleging that California Democrat Sen. Adam Schiff "has, in multiple instances, falsified bank documents and property records to acquire more favorable loan terms, impacting payments from 2003-2019 for a Potomac, Maryland-based property." What is the gist of the complaint? That Schiff, while representing a California district in the House of Representatives, falsely listed his posh Maryland home as his primary residence in order to get more favorable loan terms when, in truth and in fact, his California condo, which he designated as his primary residence in order to qualify for a California homeowner's tax exemption, was his real primary residence. Even worse, according to the referral, Schiff claimed his Burbank condo as his primary/principal residence in California tax filings during the same years he listed his Maryland home as his primary/principal residence on loan applications to finance that home. Schiff's response to the criminal referral and to subsequent Truth Social posts by President Donald Trump was one we often see in white collar cases. Per the senator's office, "the lenders who provided the mortgages for both homes were well aware of then-Representative Schiff's Congressional service and of his intended year-round use of both homes, neither of which were vacation homes." That's not much of a denial, senator. The question is whether you lied on these forms or not. Were your answers accurate or not, and if they were inaccurate, were the answers a mistake or intentional? The devil is always in the details in white-collar cases like this. Which representatives of which particular lenders "were well aware" that Schiff intended to use both homes year-round, and why does that matter? The issue is whether Schiff intentionally lied on federal or state forms to gain a financial advantage. If he falsely listed his Maryland home as his primary residence in order to get a lower interest rate, that matters too. (After all, similar alleged falsehoods by Donald Trump were used by New York Attorney General Letitia James to go after Trump in her massive New York state civil action.) Did Schiff lie on California tax forms to gain an exemption he was not entitled to, and, if so, does it implicate any federal criminal statutes? This is what inquiring minds want to know, and we just don't have enough information at this stage to know all the answers. Based on what we do know, how likely is it that Schiff will be indicted for violating one of several federal bank fraud statutes that potentially cover his conduct? Not very likely. Here are several reasons why: The devil is always in the details in white-collar cases like this. Which representatives of which particular lenders "were well aware" that Schiff intended to use both homes year-round, and why does that matter? This leaves open the possibility of a state of California prosecution for filing false tax returns. Would you care to place any bets on that happening? The bottom line is this: Schiff's alleged conduct may be sleazy and his explanation shifty, but a criminal charge at the federal or state level does not seem to be in the offing.
CBS News
10 hours ago
- CBS News
Maryland governor, representative respond after denied FEMA aid request for historic flooding
Maryland lawmakers called it an insult after the state was denied federal disaster assistance for the damages caused by the historic flooding in Western Maryland in May. Heavy rain caused significant flooding damage in Allegany and Garrett counties, with residents still recovering. Gov. Wes Moore requested a Presidential Disaster Declaration in June to aid in the recovery effort after the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and Maryland Department of Emergency Management (MDEM) found that it could cost nearly $15.8 million. The flooding damaged more than 200 homes, some businesses, roads, and utilities. People were rescued from flooded schools, and some were trapped overnight during power outages. The White House rejected the Presidential Disaster Declaration, which would have allowed Maryland to receive help from FEMA and access funding to repair broken infrastructure. In the rejection letter, FEMA called the aid "not warranted," according to the governor's office. "The day before they denied Maryland, they actually accepted and gave West Virginia over $10 million in support for a storm that had about the same amount of damage," Gov Moore said. "This is petty, it is partisan, and it is punishing." Gov. Moore said in a social media video that the denial of federal assistance funding is "an insult to Maryland and the community still suffering in the aftermath of the storm." U.S. Congresswoman April McClain Delaney, from Maryland, told WJZ that while progress has been made, more work needs to be done Delaney said many residents are frustrated with the president, after he received overwhelming support in Western Maryland in the 2024 election. "We just have to, you know, push back and say, these are the reasons why people pay taxes," Rep. Delaney said. "No matter what your zip code, you should be able to rely on our federal government to deliver when there's an emergency or tragedy." Gov. Wes Moore said the damage and recovery efforts in Western Maryland were catastrophic, and it would need support from the federal government. "After a thorough assessment of the damage, it's clear that additional support is necessary," Gov. Moore said. A Presidential Disaster Declaration would have given Maryland financial assistance from FEMA to help repair infrastructure damage caused by the massive flooding, and provide for those still impacted. "The addition of much-needed federal assistance is necessary to get those affected back to their regular lives and to allow those communities to fully recover in months instead of years," MDEM Secretary Russ Strickland said. According to the governor's office, the estimated $15.8 million cost for recovery surpasses FEMA's threshold for disaster assistance, which in Allegany County is $321,460. In Maryland, that threshold is $11.6 million. "Historically, if the joint damage assessment process demonstrates eligible costs over and above the county and state indicator, disaster assistance has been awarded by the President," Gov. Moore said. President Trump argues that FEMA is unsuccessful and has suggested changes to the agency. He signed an executive order that he said would "begin the process of fundamentally reforming and overhauling FEMA, or maybe getting rid of FEMA," though that action would need approval from Congress. In June, the administration said it wanted to "wean" states off of FEMA aid after the 2025 hurricane season. The administration indicated that governors would be in a better position to respond to disasters in their states. "We want to wean off of FEMA, and we want to bring it down to the state level — a little bit like education, we're moving it back to the states," Mr. Trump said. Maryland Gov. Wes Moore said in a social media video that the state is going to appeal the state is going to appeal FEMA's decision to reject federal financial aid for Allegany and Garrett counties. "To our neighbors in Western Maryland, while the federal government is saying, 'You are on your own,' here in Maryland, we are saying, 'We are leaving no one behind,'" Gov. Moore said. Gov. Wes Moore on Sunday visited areas in Western Maryland that are still recovering from the flooding, including Westernport. According to the governor's office, Moore visited the Port West Restaurant, which was directly impacted by and temporarily closed due to flood damage. He met with other state leaders and residents to talk about the ongoing recovery efforts and his administration's plan to fight back for federal disaster assistance. "Today, I once again saw the strength of Western Maryland—a community that mobilized in the wake of disaster," Gov. Moore said. "Our resolve hasn't wavered, and there is no question that our recovery requires more time and resources." Moore continued, "The Trump administration denied our request for federal disaster assistance, even though Maryland met long-standing criteria for FEMA support. This cruel choice by the federal government won't stop us from moving forward. We will appeal their decision and continue fighting for the people of Allegany and Garrett counties."
