Do you have to open the door for police in Alabama? What to know after MN attacks
It's unexpected. Your heart races.
Why are they here? Is someone in danger? Are you in trouble?
And the big question: should you open the door?
The shocking killings of Minnesota lawmakers Melissa Hortman and her husband, Mark, along with the shooting of state Sen. John Hoffman and his wife in what officials are calling a "political assassination," have left the nation reeling.
Vance Boelter, the man accused in the attacks, allegedly showed up at the victims' homes in the middle of the night disguised as a police officer, wearing a realistic-looking mask, according to authorities.
Boelter was arrested near his farm in Green Isle, Minnesota. He faces multiple charges, federal counts, including stalking and firearms violations, and state charges, including first-degree murder, officials said.
Now, many Americans are asking a chilling but practical question: What are your legal rights and obligations when someone claiming to be the police is at your door?
If you're in Alabama and someone shows up saying they're the police, what should you do? Here's what to know.
Alabama law experts say the only time you are obligated to legally open the door for police officers in Alabama is if there is a warrant or an emergency.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) says you don't have to and shouldn't invite police into your home. Instead, speak to them through the door. Ask to see ID. If they say they have a warrant, ask them to hold it to a window or slip it under the door. Look closely for your name, address and a judge's signature.
Even if officers have a warrant, you still have the right to remain silent. You don't have to answer any questions. While they're inside searching, stay quiet and pay attention. Watch where they go, what they do and what they take.
If you're not sure the person at your door is a police officer, it is okay to call 911 to check. This is especially important if you're in a remote area or the vehicle outside is unmarked. Let the dispatcher know you're trying to confirm the officer's identity before opening the door.
Jennifer Lindahl is a Breaking and Trending Reporter for the Deep South Connect Team for Gannett/USA Today. Connect with her on X @jenn_lindahl and email at jlindahl@gannett.com.
This article originally appeared on Montgomery Advertiser: Do you have to open the door for police in AL? MN attacks raise questions
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Miami Herald
44 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Donald Trump's Approval Rating Flips With Baby Boomers
Donald Trump's support among baby boomers has rebounded sharply, giving the president a boost with one of his most dependable voting blocs as he heads into the 2026 midterm cycle. In the latest Quantus Insights poll, Trump's approval rating with baby boomers has flipped from being even to solidly positive. Last month, his numbers among over-65s stood at 49 percent approve and 49 percent disapprove. This month's results, however, show a significant turnaround. Trump now sits at 56 percent approve and 41 percent disapprove, a net positive of +15 points and a 15-point swing in his favor in just a few weeks. The reversal underscores Trump's enduring appeal with older conservatives, even as his approval ratings have dropped among younger Americans and some other key groups. Baby boomers—who were critical to Trump's win in 2024, when 51 percent of the age group voted for him—remain a vital pillar of his political base. While the Quantus Insights poll showed a boost in boomer support for the president, other polls show that his approval rating among this demographic has remained remarkably consistent in recent months. A YouGov/Economist poll found Trump's rating among over-65s holding steady at 45 percent approve/53 percent disapprove in June—barely changed from May's numbers of 45/51. An ActiVote poll shows a similar pattern, with Trump's approval slipping only slightly from 48 percent approve/48 percent disapprove in May to 42/52 in June among over-65s. Marist polling, too, shows almost no movement among boomers, with 41 percent approve/58 percent disapprove in June for over-60s compared with 40/57 in April. A Fox News poll recorded a modest shift, with Trump's rating among over-65s at 46/53 in June, up just a few points from 43/57 in April. Trump's standing with boomers could collapse in the coming months after Congress passed Trump's "Big Beautiful Bill" on Thursday. It will cut roughly $1.1 trillion in health care spending and result in 11.8 million people losing Medicaid health insurance over the next decade, according to new estimates from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. In 2021, approximately 9.4 million individuals aged 65 and older were enrolled in Medicaid, according to the Brookings Institution, including many who are "dual eligibles," meaning they are enrolled in both Medicare and Medicaid. This makes Medicaid the single largest payer for long-term services and supports in the country. In fact, more than 60 percent of nursing home residents in the U.S. depend on Medicaid to help pay for their care. Recent polls have shown that a majority of Americans say they oppose Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act. A Quinnipiac poll conducted June 22-24 found that 55 percent of Americans oppose the bill. A Fox News survey from June 13-16 put opposition even higher, at 59 percent. Meanwhile, a KFF poll from June 4-8 showed the strongest pushback, with 64 percent saying they reject the legislation. Even polls with relatively lower opposition still show more Americans against the bill than in favor. A Washington Post-Ipsos poll, conducted June 6–10, found 42 percent opposed but only 23 percent support it. While a Pew Research Center survey conducted June 2-8 showed 49 percent disapproval and 29 percent in favor. All five surveys included samples of at least 950 U.S. adults, indicating broad national sentiment. In the Quinnipiac poll, 47 percent of registered voters said they support the Medicaid work provision in the bill and 46 percent said they oppose them, effectively a dead heat. Meanwhile, the KFF poll found that 79 percent of Americans think it is the government's responsibility "to provide health insurance coverage to low-income Americans who cannot afford it." During his campaign, Trump vowed: "We're not cutting Medicaid, we're not cutting Medicare, and we're not cutting Social Security." Trump's approval rating among baby boomers is likely to fluctuate throughout his second term. Related Articles Steve Bannon Attacks Elon Musk Over New Party: 'You're Not American'Trump 'Heartbroken' Over Texas Flooding as Federal Aid PledgedIran's Supreme Leader Makes First Public Appearance Since WarWeather Service Staffing 'Clearly a Concern' Ahead of Deadly Texas Floods 2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
New York Post
2 hours ago
- New York Post
Why Greenland is more important to the US than ever
Wittingly or unwittingly, United Airlines gave Donald Trump a birthday present that more than made up for the lackluster army parade put on by Pete Hegseth. On June 14, the day Trump turned 79, the US carrier launched its inaugural flight from Newark to Nuuk, the capital of Greenland — a rugged Arctic expanse possessing vast mineral wealth, stark beauty and huge strategic significance. The possibility that the timing may have been entirely coincidental did nothing to detract from the political symbolism of United's commercial aviation milestone. 10 A statue of Norwegian missionary Hans Egede in Nuuk, the Capital and largest city in Greenland — which has become one of the most hotly-contested piece of land on the planet since the return of Donald Trump to the White House. robertharding – By connecting the US to Greenland, which Trump has vowed to annex 'one way or another,' its flight demystified the Arctic island for ordinary Americans. Greenland is not some inaccessible fantasyland. It is, in fact, closer to New York than it is to Denmark, which colonized Greenland in the 18th century. The preservation of Danish sovereignty over Greenland has now become a matter of honor for European leaders exasperated by Trump's menacing taunts. Advertisement The United Airlines flight to Nuuk was followed, a day later, by an aircraft carrying Emmanuel Macron. 'The situation in Greenland is clearly a wake-up call for all Europeans,' the French president declared in the presence of Danish and Greenlandic leaders. Macron described the threat to Greenland as a warning for all Europe. 10 The Pituffik Space Base in Greenland, one of the most important strategic military asset under US control in the Arctic region. via REUTERS But why, in the first place, does Trump covet this piece of Arctic real estate? His interest in Greenland — he offered to buy it in his first term — is animated by an obsession with the rewards of owning it. Situated between North America and Europe, Greenland is a linchpin for monitoring Russian missile launches and naval movements through the Greenland-Iceland-UK gap, a vital Atlantic choke point. The biggest military installation there, the Cold War-era Pituffik Space Base, is already owned by the US. Security, however, is one aspect of Trump's fixation. The president is also drawn to the overabundant natural resources — from precious minerals to an estimated 17.5 billion barrels of oil and 148 trillion cubic feet of natural gas — that Greenland, citing climate change, refuses to exploit. Advertisement 10 Greenland is a source of 'strategic wealth' for Denmark says author and academic Dr. Elizabeth Buchanan. Lest anybody doubt his intent to take Greenland, Trump dispatched his vice president to the island in March. JD Vance excoriated Denmark for failing to keep Greenland safe, criticized its stewardship and pitched American control as an opportunity for the locals. His trip was followed by leaks of White House plans to move Greenland's oversight from US European Command to Northern Command, framing it as integral to American, not European, defense. Greenland's history with Denmark could potentially bolster Trump's efforts. Colonized in the 18th century, it was a Danish possession until 1953, when it was integrated into the Kingdom of Denmark. Home rule came in 1979, and it was not until 2009 that the Self-Government Act granted expanded autonomy to the locals over their domestic affairs. 10 French Pres. Emmanuel Macron greeting local Greenlanders during his visit to the island on June 15. AP Advertisement Copenhagen still controls foreign policy and defense. Greenlanders — overwhelmingly descended from Inuit populations that migrated from North America in the 1200s — chafe under Danish control, and many favor independence. What keeps them tethered to Denmark are the subsidies that finance half their budget. Greenlanders are technically allowed an independence referendum, but it is subject to Danish approval — a sticking point for leaders who aspire to self-rule. Trump's pressure has barely scratched the surface of this tension. Dr. Elizabeth Buchanan, a senior fellow at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute and a fellow at the Modern War Institute at West Point Military Academy, says that the 'US has not engaged in emotional warfare yet.' Officials in the Trump administration could profit from reading her forthcoming book, 'So You Want to Own Greenland: Lessons from Vikings to Trump,' which explains the contest for Greenland without omitting the perspective of the Greenlanders. 10 Passengers deplaning from the first United Airlines flight from Newark to Nuuk Airport on June 14. Ritzau Scanpix/AFP via Getty Images 'Strategically picking at the wounds of Danish colonial politics and [its] abhorrent generational effects' on Greenland has not yet begun, she notes. For all its lofty rhetoric, Denmark is not holding on to Greenland for the benefit of the Greenlanders. The island, as Dr Buchanan notes, is a source of 'strategic wealth' for Denmark; without it, Copenhagen would be measurably worse off. Advertisement None of this means Greenlanders are desperate to be governed from Washington. Privately, officials in the local government enumerate the benefits of being subsumed into the United States. But shaped by a history of being the objects of great power competition, they are wary of swapping one foreign overlord for another. What they most want, as a Nuuk-based historian told me, is to 'experience true freedom, real sovereignty.' Even those who are open to the idea of a union with the United States are put off by the way President Trump has gone about it. A Greenlandic academic put it acidly: 'Trump is interested in Greenland. He doesn't give a f–k about Greenlanders.' 10 Donald Trump, Jr. paid a provocative visit to Greenland at the height of his father's bluster just before Pres. Trump inauguration in early January. Donald Trump Jr / Instagram Denmark is no saint among nations — it was an ugly imperial power that oppressed Greenland's natives and maintained colonies from the Americas to India — and its florid proclamations about the sanctity of sovereignty are somewhat undermined by its recent history of enthusiastic participation in the 2003 invasion of Iraq as part of George W. Bush's 'coalition of the willing.' But it is also this very association that makes the rift between Washington and Copenhagen so surreal. A NATO member since 1949, Denmark has fought alongside America in Baghdad and Afghanistan, while hosting US forces at Pituffik since 1941. Together, the two countries blocked a Chinese bid for a Greenland naval base in 2017. But this partnership, a NATO bedrock forged in trust and prized by successive American administrations, is rapidly unravelling under Trump. Greenlanders are again caught in the crossfire of conflict between big powers. The spectacle of the US threatening annexation in Europe is staggering to those who grew up under the umbrella of American protection. Since 1945, Washington has championed sovereignty and alliances on the continent, not territorial grabs. European leaders are livid. 10 The iconic Trump jet on the tarmac during Donald Trump, Jr's visit in January of this year. Ritzau Scanpix/AFP via Getty Images Macron's visit in June was a calibrated demonstration of 'European unity' against Trump's designs. Even Macron's political rivals endorse his action. Greenland's defense 'must concern all Europeans,' says André Rougé, a member of the European Parliament and a leading light of the nationalist Rassemblement National. Rougé is keen to emphasize that this issue 'transcends partisan divides' in France. Advertisement Macron is the last great liberal politician on the continent — a man who, for all his flashes of hubris and impulsiveness, has a profound understanding of the perils facing Europe. But will he really race to defend Denmark's territorial integrity if Trump decides to seize Greenland? 'Let me tell you very directly that you're not alone,' Macron assured Danes and Greenlanders. This was a well-intentioned platitude. In truth, all the noise about solidarity can scarcely conceal the fact that NATO was audibly silent about Greenland at its annual summit last month at The Hague. 'The sheer effort to tell the world 'everything is fine' points to the fact that NATO will avoid at all costs any issues that undermine the precious veneer of resolve and unity it currently has,' says Dr. Buchanan. 10 Greenland's defense 'must concern all Europeans,' says André Rougé, a member of the European Parliament. Courtesy of André Rougé Picture a scenario in which Denmark, facing an invasion by US troops, triggers Article 5 — the mechanism meant to compel NATO members to mobilize a collective defense of an ally under attack. What then? NATO, predicated on mutual defense, will be confronted with an intra-alliance conflict. This is not novel — Turkey and Greece have fought in Cyprus. Advertisement But a war of annexation waged against a NATO member by the United States, the alliance's anchor, would be unprecedented. NATO members will for the most part urge de-escalation. Some states may be tempted to put on a show of token support for Denmark. But there will be no serious 'military intervention' against America, says Professor Jeremy Black, a prolific historian of Europe. Instead, any coercive US action against Greenland will destroy the very idea of 'being allied to America.' 10 There is little doubt that NATO do everything possible to avoid any sort of military confrontation over Greenland. Picture of NATO-member leaders at The Hague on June 24. Getty Images The post-war order will face certain ruin. The taboo against aligning with Russia and China will be impossible to sustain. Beijing may come to be regarded as a potential reinforcer of European security and some states may forge open alliances with Moscow and Beijing. Washington will gain Greenland, along with the resentment of its people for being snatched by force. It will permanently squander its already diminishing dominance in Europe and the world. Trump's craving for Greenland is not without precedent: The US sought to purchase the island on at least two occasions in the 20th century. What is different today is that America already enjoys primacy in Greenland through its military base and pacts with Denmark, a longstanding ally of Washington. Minerals and shipping lanes are eminently negotiable without the use force. Annexation would alienate Greenlanders, most of whom demonstrated their contempt for the idea of US rule by boycotting Vance during his March visit. Governing a hostile population would drain, not gain, resources. Advertisement 10 European political historian and author Jeremy Black says there is little likelihood of military intervention against the US if it were to attempt a Greenland take-over. Trump's claim that for American security 'we can't' do without Greenland ignores reality: America already 'has' Greenland. And anything else it wants is achievable, within reason, through conversation, not conquest. Greenlanders are eager to deepen their relationship with the US — as friends, not subjects.
Newsweek
2 hours ago
- Newsweek
Social Security Email Causes Anger: 'Blatant Political Statement'
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. An email sent by the Social Security Administration (SSA) celebrating the passage of President Donald Trump's spending bill has angered politicians, former SSA officials and recipients. Subscribers to an SSA mailing list received an email from the federal agency early morning on Friday, following the passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) through Congress. The email, shared with Newsweek by recipients, is titled "Social Security Applauds Passage of Legislation Providing Historic Tax Relief for Seniors" and touts the benefits of the bill. Newsweek has contacted the SSA via email for comment. Why It Matters The email has raised questions about partisanship at the SSA, which distributes benefits to tens of millions of Americans every month. There are concerns that the message may violate the Hatch Act, which prohibits partisan political activities of most federal executive branch employees, including the SSA and its commissioner. What To Know The email was sent early in the morning on Friday, prior to Trump signing the bill later in the day. It claims that 90 percent of Social Security beneficiaries "will no longer pay federal income taxes on their benefits, providing meaningful and immediate relief to seniors who have spent a lifetime contributing to our nation's economy." The same message was posted on the SSA website. While Trump repeatedly promised to nix federal income taxes on Social Security benefits, this has not happened because of congressional rules that prevent amendments to Social Security through the reconciliation process. The OBBBA does, however, include legislation that gives American taxpayers aged 65 and over a $6,000 boost to their standard deduction, which will impact all taxable income, including Social Security benefits, from 2025 through 2028. A stock image shows a Social Security Administration sign. A stock image shows a Social Security Administration sign. GETTY The email also includes a quote from SSA Commissioner Frank Bisignano, a Trump appointee, who said the bill is "a historic step forward for America's seniors" and that it "reaffirms President Trump's promise to protect Social Security and helps ensure that seniors can better enjoy the retirement they've earned." However, former SSA officials, Democratic lawmakers and social media users have expressed concerns about the accuracy of the email. New Jersey Democrat Frank Pallone said on X, formerly Twitter, that "every word of it is a lie," and accused the Trump administration of disseminating "blatant misinformation." "Social Security benefits are still taxed," he said. "This big, ugly bill doesn't change that. It's disturbing to see Trump hijack a public institution to push blatant misinformation." Jeff Nesbit, the former deputy commissioner of the SSA under President Joe Biden, said the email was "unbelievable." "The agency has never issued such a blatant political statement," he wrote on X. "The fact that Trump and his minion running SSA has done this is unconscionable." Social media users have also raised concerns that the message may violate the Hatch Act, which bars most federal executive branch employees from engaging in partisan political activity while on duty. "I mean that Social Security email has got to be a Hatch Act violation, correct?" X user Cary Waxler wrote. Another user said: "Federal agencies must remain neutral. The Hatch Act exists for a reason." What's Next Newsweek contacted the SSA asking for an explanation regarding the email on Friday and has not yet received a response.
