‘Musk is right about this': Elizabeth Warren shocked to find agreement with Musk over megabill
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
12 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
How Rhode Island finally pushed a partial assault weapons ban over the finish line
PROVIDENCE, R.I. (AP) — Passing a new law restricting assault weapons took Rhode Island lawmakers more than 10 years, but it may offer a road map to other states looking to ease the proliferation of such firearms. For advocates, the fight is a prime example of the current challenges to passing gun control measures in the U.S., particularly surrounding semiautomatic rifles that have become the weapon of choice among those responsible for most of the country's devastating mass shootings. When Rhode Island's bill was signed into law by Democratic Gov. Dan McKee late last month, its sponsor, Democratic Rep. Jason Knight, told jubilant supporters: 'What was once the impossible became the inevitable.' How? Persistent advocacy, a change in legislative leadership and a last-minute overhaul to note the broader legal landscape. What did Rhode Island do? Rhode Island's ban, which goes into effect in 2026, prohibits the sale, manufacturing and distribution of certain high-powered firearms that were once banned nationwide. The law does not prohibit possessing such weapons, a key distinction compared with other assault weapon bans enacted elsewhere in the U.S. Currently, only Washington state has a similar law. The assault weapons ban got a much-needed boost from Senate President Valerie Lawson, who secured the Senate's top spot in the middle of session after her predecessor, Sen. Dominick Ruggiero, died in April. Lawson turned to the bill's sponsors and others to find common ground between lawmakers in the House and Senate who remained split on how far the law should go. Lawson's endorsement was seen as critical to securing the bill's passage, whereas Ruggiero had previously deferred action, pointing instead to the need for Congress to act rather than a state Legislature taking the lead. 'There are issues at certain points that meet the moment,' Lawson said. 'I think it was the time for this." Gun control advocates also acknowledged that banning assault weapons in Rhode Island hadn't previously been a top priority given that the state has largely been spared from national high-profile shootings that sometimes help propel legislative change. Assault weapons bans consistently face court challenges In the U.S., just 11 states and Washington D.C. have some sort of prohibition on certain high-powered firearms that were once banned nationwide. Rhode Island's version is the only one not yet facing a constitutional challenge — though a lawsuit against it is all but assured. Certain state legal battles are on hold until others make their way through lower federal courts. To date, none of the lawsuits have been completely thrown out, but the U.S. Supreme Court is expected to have the final say. As Rhode Island lawmakers were in the middle of their gun debate, the high court declined to hear a challenge to Maryland's assault weapons ban — a move that some of the more conservative justices opposed. Justice Brett Kavanaugh even signaled that laws banning assault weapons are likely unconstitutional. 'Opinions from other Courts of Appeals should assist this Court's ultimate decision making on the AR–15 issue,' Kavanaugh wrote, referencing a popular style of high-powered rifle. Yet the legal focus on banning such weapons often hinges on possessing firearms such as AR-15-style rifles and AK-47s, rather than on the distribution process. Rhode Island lawmakers hope that by tailoring their assault weapons ban to sales, manufacturing and distribution, they might will bypass the thorniest legal questions raised by the Second Amendment. What other states are doing Attempts to expand Democratic-dominated Hawaii's assault weapons ban to rifles in addition to pistols stalled this year. In New Mexico, Democratic lawmakers who control the General Assembly adjourned without taking up an assault weapon ban. In Rhode Island, advocates say their work isn't over. 'It's progress,' said Melissa Carden, executive director of the Rhode Island Coalition Against Gun Violence. 'But we know that a true assault weapons ban includes an enforceable ban on possession as well." Defenders of Rhode Island's law bristle that their version could be considered weak. They point out that residents looking to purchase an assault weapon from nearby New Hampshire or elsewhere will be blocked. That's because federal law prohibits people from traveling to a different state to purchase a gun and returning it to a state where that particular of weapon is banned. 'Some of my constituents have already called me and made comments about 'bad, bad bad, I'm going out and buying three and four of them now,'' said Sen. Louis DiPalma, the Senate sponsor of the statute. 'Okay, come July 1st next year, you will not be able to do that anymore.'
Associated Press
19 minutes ago
- Associated Press
How Rhode Island finally pushed a partial assault weapons ban over the finish line
PROVIDENCE, R.I. (AP) — Passing a new law restricting assault weapons took Rhode Island lawmakers more than 10 years, but it may offer a road map to other states looking to ease the proliferation of such firearms. For advocates, the fight is a prime example of the current challenges to passing gun control measures in the U.S., particularly surrounding semiautomatic rifles that have become the weapon of choice among those responsible for most of the country's devastating mass shootings. When Rhode Island's bill was signed into law by Democratic Gov. Dan McKee late last month, its sponsor, Democratic Rep. Jason Knight, told jubilant supporters: 'What was once the impossible became the inevitable.' How? Persistent advocacy, a change in legislative leadership and a last-minute overhaul to note the broader legal landscape. What did Rhode Island do? Rhode Island's ban, which goes into effect in 2026, prohibits the sale, manufacturing and distribution of certain high-powered firearms that were once banned nationwide. The law does not prohibit possessing such weapons, a key distinction compared with other assault weapon bans enacted elsewhere in the U.S. Currently, only Washington state has a similar law. A leadership change helped propel momentum The assault weapons ban got a much-needed boost from Senate President Valerie Lawson, who secured the Senate's top spot in the middle of session after her predecessor, Sen. Dominick Ruggiero, died in April. Lawson turned to the bill's sponsors and others to find common ground between lawmakers in the House and Senate who remained split on how far the law should go. Lawson's endorsement was seen as critical to securing the bill's passage, whereas Ruggiero had previously deferred action, pointing instead to the need for Congress to act rather than a state Legislature taking the lead. 'There are issues at certain points that meet the moment,' Lawson said. 'I think it was the time for this.' Gun control advocates also acknowledged that banning assault weapons in Rhode Island hadn't previously been a top priority given that the state has largely been spared from national high-profile shootings that sometimes help propel legislative change. Assault weapons bans consistently face court challenges In the U.S., just 11 states and Washington D.C. have some sort of prohibition on certain high-powered firearms that were once banned nationwide. Rhode Island's version is the only one not yet facing a constitutional challenge — though a lawsuit against it is all but assured. Certain state legal battles are on hold until others make their way through lower federal courts. To date, none of the lawsuits have been completely thrown out, but the U.S. Supreme Court is expected to have the final say. As Rhode Island lawmakers were in the middle of their gun debate, the high court declined to hear a challenge to Maryland's assault weapons ban — a move that some of the more conservative justices opposed. Justice Brett Kavanaugh even signaled that laws banning assault weapons are likely unconstitutional. 'Opinions from other Courts of Appeals should assist this Court's ultimate decision making on the AR–15 issue,' Kavanaugh wrote, referencing a popular style of high-powered rifle. Yet the legal focus on banning such weapons often hinges on possessing firearms such as AR-15-style rifles and AK-47s, rather than on the distribution process. Rhode Island lawmakers hope that by tailoring their assault weapons ban to sales, manufacturing and distribution, they might will bypass the thorniest legal questions raised by the Second Amendment. What other states are doingAttempts to expand Democratic-dominated Hawaii's assault weapons ban to rifles in addition to pistols stalled this year. In New Mexico, Democratic lawmakers who control the General Assembly adjourned without taking up an assault weapon ban. In Rhode Island, advocates say their work isn't over. 'It's progress,' said Melissa Carden, executive director of the Rhode Island Coalition Against Gun Violence. 'But we know that a true assault weapons ban includes an enforceable ban on possession as well.' Defenders of Rhode Island's law bristle that their version could be considered weak. They point out that residents looking to purchase an assault weapon from nearby New Hampshire or elsewhere will be blocked. That's because federal law prohibits people from traveling to a different state to purchase a gun and returning it to a state where that particular of weapon is banned. 'Some of my constituents have already called me and made comments about 'bad, bad bad, I'm going out and buying three and four of them now,'' said Sen. Louis DiPalma, the Senate sponsor of the statute. 'Okay, come July 1st next year, you will not be able to do that anymore.'
CNN
19 minutes ago
- CNN
Trump's immigrant deportations are ‘morally repugnant,' senior US Catholic leader says
A prominent Catholic Church leader and ally of Pope Leo XIV has strongly criticized the Trump administration's immigration crackdown, describing the rounding up and deportation of immigrants as 'inhumane' and 'morally repugnant.' In a wide-ranging interview with CNN, Cardinal Robert McElroy, the Archbishop of Washington, DC, also voiced strong opposition to Trump's major tax and spending bill, warned of the risks of US and Israeli strikes on Iran, and discussed his view of the role of women in the church. 'It's right to be able to control our borders. However, what's going on now is something far beyond that,' the cardinal told CNN on Tuesday. 'It is a mass, indiscriminate deportation of men and women and children and families which literally rips families apart and is intended to do so.' McElroy was appointed to lead the archdiocese in the US capital by Pope Francis in January, the month of Donald Trump's presidential inauguration. He was among the more than 100 cardinals who took part in the conclave that elected the first American pope in May. McElroy, who spoke to CNN in Rome on the same day that Trump visited a migrant detention center in Florida known as 'Alligator Alcatraz,' said the 'mechanism' being used was the 'creation of fear' among 10 million undocumented people in the US – 'the great majority' of whom had worked hard and contributed to society. 'This is simply not only incompatible with Catholic teaching, it's inhumane and is morally repugnant,' he added. 'The scenes that occurred in Los Angeles where you saw mass agents of the government descending on car washers and Costco parking lots to round up whoever they can round up is not a sign of going after those who have criminal convictions.' Trump has said his tough immigration policies are necessary to keep criminals off US streets and to ease the burden on US institutions. He has embraced the sinister image of a migrant detention facility surrounded by swampland and reptiles. 'It's known as 'Alligator Alcatraz,' which is very appropriate, because I look outside and it's not a place I want to go,' Trump said Tuesday. McElroy argued that the government had a right to deport people convicted of 'serious crimes,' adding that the problems with immigration were rooted in an American political system that had failed to address immigration law and reform over the last 15 years. But McElroy said people were now 'afraid even to go to church' after the Trump administration removed the policy that prohibited immigration agents from making arrests in sensitive areas, like churches. 'What is behind this?' he asked, referencing the stricter immigration policies and enforcement tactics. 'I fear that one of the main things behind it, in the minds of many who are pushing it, is the sense that the people who are coming to our country now are of a different kind. 'And that's been a great theme in American culture and history all through our country's immigration, when the Irish came, when the Italians came, when the Poles came, the refrain has been the same, 'these are inferior people,' and that's what's going on now… it's an outrage.' The cardinal, a former Bishop of San Diego, is one of several Catholic bishops who have spoken out against Trump's migration policies. But Vice President JD Vance, a devout Catholic who converted in 2019, earlier this year suggested the bishops' criticisms of the Trump administration's policies were motivated by financial interests because the church receives federal funding to resettle immigrants. McElroy hit back in the interview, saying the government funding was far from sufficient to cover the programs and the church had to pick up the shortfall. 'Those who say that haven't done the math on what the church has been contributing over and above what the government has contributed to these programs,' he added. Since his election, Pope Leo has urged respect for migrants, describing himself as 'the descendant of immigrants, who in turn chose to emigrate.' McElroy said that while Leo XIV spoke about immigration in a 'universal' context, 'when you look at what he's saying, it has clear implications for us.' During the interview, Cardinal McElroy also criticized Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' – a sweeping piece of legislation that would extend tax cuts and increase funding for national security, partly paid for by the biggest cut to the federal social safety net in decades. He's recently signed a letter with other bishops and faith leaders opposing the bill. He said it appeared that millions would 'ultimately lose their health care because of this bill so that billionaires can receive greater tax cuts,' adding: 'There's something radically wrong with a society that takes from the poorest to give to the wealthiest. It's just wrong.' In a statement, White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson rejected the criticism – particularly that leveled at the Trump agenda bill. 'The American people elected President Trump, not a DC Archbishop, to serve as their President,' Jackson said. 'President Trump is fulfilling the mandate the American people gave him in November to turn his campaign promises – like no tax on tips, social security, and overtime – into law. The One, Big, Beautiful Bill will be one of the most successful pieces of legislation ever passed and will supercharge our economy to benefit all Americans.' When it came to church reforms and priorities for Pope Leo, McElroy talked about the importance of addressing the role of women. He said this topic had been an 'immensely powerful current' during recent Vatican assemblies, the synod, which looked at questions of church renewal and looked at how to include more women in decision making roles. 'The major thrust has to be look at where women 'aren't' and then ask why?' McElroy supports ordaining women as deacons, who carry out functions like a priest but without saying Mass or hearing confessions, which he says is consistent with the church's theology. 'It's a controversial question within the church,' he admits, 'but I think it would be important to move in that direction.' Cardinal McElroy's candidacy for Washington DC was bolstered by his doctorate in political science from Stanford University, which he was awarded for a thesis on moral norms in foreign policy. He told CNN that the recent US attacks on Iran's nuclear sites could encourage other countries to develop nuclear weapons to defend themselves. He said it was 'critically important' to maintain 'non-proliferation' of nuclear weapons. 'My great fear is that the lessons that nations will take away from this intervention against Iran is that if they have nuclear weapons then they won't be subject to this sort of attack,' he said. 'I think that's an open question. Will this encourage more proliferation because the incentives are stronger now or clearer now, and that's very ominous.' Finally, the cardinal said he believes that Chicago-born Pope Leo would make a visit home – although he did not know when. 'I think when he does come to the United States it will be a great moment for our country.'
