Latest news with #NationalImmigrationandBorder
USA Today
21-07-2025
- Politics
- USA Today
Nobel laureates plea for diplomacy to prevent nuclear war
On Monday's episode of The Excerpt podcast: USA TODAY White House Reporter Davis Winkie breaks down what nuclear experts said last week about the current state of nuclear threats and what to do about it. Support for President Donald Trump's immigration policies fell in a new poll. USA TODAY National Immigration and Border Reporter Lauren Villagran discusses Louisiana's place as a major immigration detainer. Israeli fire killed 67 people seeking aid in Gaza. WNBA All-Stars make a CBA statement with 'Pay Us What You Owe Us' shirts. Hit play on the player below to hear the podcast and follow along with the transcript beneath it. This transcript was automatically generated, and then edited for clarity in its current form. There may be some differences between the audio and the text. Podcasts: True crime, in-depth interviews and more USA TODAY podcasts right here Taylor Wilson: Good morning. I'm Taylor Wilson, and today is Monday, July 21st, 2025. This is USA TODAY's The Excerpt. Today what nuclear experts are saying about present-day threats, plus support for Trump immigration policies drops in a new poll, and we hear how one state in the south is approaching immigration detention facilities. ♦ Top nuclear experts gathered last week to offer world leaders a playbook for reducing the risk of nuclear war. I discussed with USA TODAY White House reporter, Davis Winkie. Thanks for joining me, Davis. Davis Winkie: Good to be back, Taylor. Taylor Wilson: All right, just tell us a bit about this meeting of Nobel Prize winners and nuclear experts in Chicago, why was this held? Davis Winkie: Nobel Prize winners and physicists have long considered themselves the guardians, so to speak, of the nuclear world, because of their pivotal role in the creation of the nuclear bomb. A couple of physics Nobel winners thought the threat of nuclear war keeps creeping higher and higher in recent years, so this year, to mark the 80th anniversary of the Trinity nuclear test near Los Alamos, New Mexico, this group of Nobel laureates assembled in Chicago, and brought together nuclear policy experts, former government officials, diplomats, et cetera, to face down the challenges in reducing the risk of nuclear war right now, and to provide a declaration of policy recommendations that could help world leaders to reduce that risk. Taylor Wilson: Well, Davis, in terms of what they functionally did here, it's clear many of them hammered home the point that international agreements are key to reducing some of the risk of nuclear war. Let's start with the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty. Can you help us understand what that is, and how did this come up during these discussions? Davis Winkie: The CTBT, as it's known in nuclear circles, arose in the mid 1990s, after a lot of leading nuclear powers agreed to stop nuclear testing. A handful of the world's countries have at least signed this treaty, and have agreed to pause testing. However, it has not gone into binding effect, because nine countries that are specified in the treaty as needing to ratify it, or have their legislatures or governing bodies formally approve it. The United States is one of those countries, as is Russia, as is China, as is North Korea. The CTBT has always existed at the limit of its current potential. It has an organization headquartered Vienna, that does incredibly sophisticated technological monitoring of seismic activity around the world, satellite imagery, et cetera, that allows them to tell us in near real time whether something that has occurred is a nuclear test or not. That's incredibly valuable for international stability, but it's limited because of the fact that the treaty is not in enforced, and now you have Russia, China, and the U.S. potentially considering resuming explosive nuclear testing, because they are not bound by this treaty, because they've not ratified it. Taylor Wilson: Well, shifting gears, AI is entering basically every facet of society at this point. Does it have a role in nuclear spaces, Davis? Davis Winkie: Taylor, you've touched on something very hotly debated in nuclear policy circles right now, what is the appropriate extent in areas in which that AI can be integrated? Everybody pretty much agrees that the AI should not, SKYNET style, decide when and where the missiles are being launched. You cannot give control of the missiles over to AI. Former president, Joe Biden, and Chinese president, Xi Jinping, actually agreed to that publicly last year. So there's common ground among the nuclear powers on some of the limits of AI, but there's questions still swirling around what's the proper role of AI in things like early warning systems. It's a good thing, Taylor, that we've never had a global thermonuclear war. What that means, however, is that there is not global thermonuclear war data on which to train AI models for something like early warning, or targeting solution, or any of these other potential applications across nuclear command control and communications enterprise. One of the major things that came out at this conference though is the Vatican's representatives there was really outspoken about wanting there to be an independent faith leader component of assessing the morality of AI integration, which largely does align with some of the other initiatives regarding AI that we have seen coming out of the Vatican recently. I, for one, am really interested to see how these further policy recommendations and such develop in the months and years ahead. Taylor Wilson: USA TODAY White House reporter, Davis Winkie. Thank you, Davis. Davis Winkie: Thanks for having me. ♦ Taylor Wilson: Support for President Donald Trump's immigration policies fell in a new poll with stark differences between Republicans and Democrats on deportations, and the use of detention facilities. The poll out yesterday from CBS YouGov found that immigration is the top issue that swayed respondents' opinion on the president. 61% said immigration and deportation policies mattered a lot, followed by inflation and the economy. Overall, the poll puts Trump's approval rating at 42%, with disapproval at 58%. The survey previously found Trump's approval rating was 45% last month. In the latest CBS poll, 56% disapproved of the president's immigration stances, marking a 10-point drop from polling at the beginning of Trump's second term in February, the outlet reported. Support for Trump's immigration policies is split along party lines, nearly all Republicans surveyed, 91% say they approve of the president's deportation program. Among Democrats, 14% say they approve. You can read more with a link in today's show notes. ♦ One state in the south, long known for its prison economy now houses more ICE detention facilities than any other non-border state. I spoke with USA TODAY national immigration and border reporter, Lauren Villagran, to learn more. Thanks for joining me, Lauren. Lauren Villagran: Thanks for having me, Taylor. Taylor Wilson: How involved is Louisiana with detaining migrants? How many detention facilities do they have? Lauren Villagran: I think a lot of Americans don't realize that Louisiana is actually one of the biggest ICE detention center posts in the country. So Texas is the largest, and has the most ICE detention centers, but Louisiana is number two, with nine total dedicated ICE detention facilities. Taylor Wilson: How and why has the state become such a deportation hub? When did this begin? Lauren Villagran: Back in 2017, the state was going through a criminal justice reform. The result of that bipartisan reform was that many of Louisiana's prisons, the state is known as one of the world's largest incarcerators per capita, were emptied of many prisoners who were in jail for low-level offenses, and that's around when some communities turned to the federal government. ICE at the time was looking for ways to expand immigration detention, and they came to Louisiana, saw that there were empty beds, and they had people to fill them with. So you started to see a pretty dramatic expansion of ICE detention around 2019 in Louisiana. Several organizations have studied this phenomenon, the ACLU of Louisiana, Tulane University, researchers, and we had the opportunity to travel to Louisiana last month. Taylor Wilson: Yeah, I want to hear about that trip, Lauren. What did you see? Tell us about this experience. Lauren Villagran: Photographer, Omar Ornelas and I traveled around the state. Many of these detention centers are located far from New Orleans, the sort of metropolitan center of the state at the southern tip. You have to drive 3, 5, 7 hours to reach some of these facilities, many of which are located in rural communities, sometimes deep in the woods. There were, in July, more than 7,000 people detained in ICE detention in Louisiana. Taylor Wilson: Wow. Lauren, what are some of the advantages of Louisiana for immigration officials? And what are some of the advantages for Louisiana? Lauren Villagran: As of this recording, DHS had not responded to multiple requests for comment from USA TODAY. We asked why DHS, why ICE went to Louisiana, so far from the border, and we didn't get a response. Now, what we learned from community members, from immigration advocates who work in the area is that Louisiana had a number of advantages. One, it had these empty jails and prisons, so there were facilities and infrastructure already available. There were members of the community who know how to do corrections work, and the immigration advocates will say there was another reason as well, Louisiana is located in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, it's a circuit that has historically been very difficult for immigration advocates to win their cases, the immigration judges in Louisiana are considered some of the toughest in the nation. Taylor Wilson: And in terms of some of those advantages for the state itself, you're hearing similar things on the ground there? Lauren Villagran: Certainly for the smaller rural communities that had facilities that were an anchor to the economy, of course. The federal government offered to pay more than the state per bed, per night. And a facility where you've got several hundred people working there when your community is maybe a population 4,000 or so is a pretty big deal. It was considered economic development. Taylor Wilson: President Trump is increasingly leaning on Republican-led states far from the U.S.-Mexico border to detain and deport immigrants, as you write. Are other states following Louisiana's lead as more federal funding moves to ICE detention? Lauren Villagran: We saw Congress give ICE $45 billion for detention over the next four years, that quadruples the agency's annual budget currently. So we're going to see likely a huge expansion of immigration detention in this country. Taylor Wilson: We went through some of the apparent advantages for some of the players here. What do critics say about using these states to detain migrants in this way? What are some of the due process concerns and other worries? Lauren Villagran: There's been a practice for a long time now that seems to have accelerated under the current administration of detaining people far from their families. Now, previously, immigration detention was often used for recent border crossers. For example, under the Biden administration and under the first Trump administration, you saw moves to detain asylum seekers at the border. People would cross the border, and then be transferred to Louisiana. Now, as interior enforcement has ramped up, you're seeing people get picked up all over the country for immigration violations. But unlike local jails where folks might be taken into custody in their community, in this case, immigrants are being sent very far from their communities and their families. Some of the higher-profile detainees that we've seen under the Trump administration, Mahmoud Khalil, the Columbia University student activist, Kseniia Petrova, the Harvard University researcher from Russia, they were removed from respectively New York and Boston, and sent to Louisiana. Taylor Wilson: All right, Lauren, great reporting work on this story. I found it really eye-opening. Lauren Villagran covers the border and immigration for USA TODAY. Thanks, Lauren. Lauren Villagran: Really appreciate it, Taylor. Thanks. ♦ Taylor Wilson: Israel opened fire and killed dozens of Palestinians as they waited for UN aid trucks in Northern Gaza yesterday according to the Gaza health ministry, as Israel issued new evacuation orders for certain areas. There are continued starvation concerns in the enclave. Palestinian health officials said hundreds of people could soon die as hospitals were inundated with patients suffering from dizziness and exhaustion due to the scarcity of food and a collapse in aid deliveries. And Pope Leo called for an end to what he said was the barbarity of war as he spoke of his pain over an Israeli strike on the sole Catholic Church in Gaza that killed three people on Thursday. Israel and Hamas are engaged in indirect talks in the nation of Qatar, aimed at reaching a 60-day truce and deal to release Israeli hostages held in Gaza, though there has been no sign of breakthrough. ♦ All eyes were on the WNBA, as the best players in the league gathered in Indianapolis over the weekend for the All-Star game, and they used that opportunity to make a bold statement to the league, walking onto the court for warmups in black T-shirts that read pay us what you owe us. One of the main items on the All-Star Week agenda was a face-to-face meeting between the players and league on collective bargaining agreement negotiations, as the current contract expires at the end of the 2025 season. According to multiple players, that meeting did not go well. Still, more than 40 players turned out for the first meeting with league officials in months. WNBA commissioner, Cathy Engelbert, had a different tone, saying she believed the meeting with players had been productive. ♦ Thanks for listening to The Excerpt. You can get the podcast wherever you get your audio, and if you're on a smart speaker, just ask for The Excerpt. I'm Taylor Wilson, and I'll be back tomorrow with more of The Excerpt from USA TODAY.
USA Today
10-06-2025
- Politics
- USA Today
Downtown LA declared 'unlawful assembly'
Downtown LA declared 'unlawful assembly' | The Excerpt On Monday's episode of The Excerpt podcast: Tensions escalated in Los Angeles late Sunday between law enforcement and protesters as California National Guard troops arrived. USA TODAY National Immigration and Border Reporter Lauren Villagran takes a look at Trump's 'invasion' claims. Proud Boys who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6 sue the government for $100 million. USA TODAY White House Correspondent Bart Jansen discusses disputes among Republicans about parts of Trump's major tax bill. Cole Escola makes nonbinary history at the Tony Awards. Let us know what you think of this episode by sending an email to podcasts@ Hit play on the player below to hear the podcast and follow along with the transcript beneath it. This transcript was automatically generated, and then edited for clarity in its current form. There may be some differences between the audio and the text. Podcasts: True crime, in-depth interviews and more USA TODAY podcasts right here Taylor Wilson: Good morning. I'm Taylor Wilson, and today is Monday, June 9th, 2025. This is The Excerpt. Today, the latest from California amid demonstrations over integration actions. Plus, we take a look at Trump's invasion claims. And disputes among Senate Republicans fuel concerns about the tax bill. ♦ Tensions escalated in Los Angeles last night between law enforcement and protesters as California National Guard troops arrived to quell demonstrations against President Donald Trump's immigration crackdown. Trump ordered the deployment of 2,000 guard members over the objections of Los Angeles mayor, Karen Bass, and California governor, Gavin Newsom, who said, "Trump wanted to create a spectacle." US Northern Command said, "About 300 soldiers were on the ground at three locations in the greater Los Angeles area to provide safety and protection of federal property and personnel." Newsom said, "The guards deployment was unlawful.", and called on the Trump administration to rescind its order in a letter yesterday afternoon. The governor said, "The decision was a serious breach of state sovereignty.", and demanded that the president return control to California. And in an interview with MSNBC, he said he planned to sue the administration over the deployment, adding that Trump has created the conditions around the protests. Trump has pledged to deport record numbers of people in the country illegally and locked down the US-Mexico border, setting ICE a goal of arresting at least 3,000 migrants a day. Sweeping enforcement measures have also included residents in the country legally, some with permanent residents, spurring legal challenges. Trump said he was sending the National Guard to restore order. He told reporters on his way to Camp David for a meeting with military leaders that he doesn't think the protests in Los Angeles qualify as an insurrection, but that he would be keeping a close eye on the situation. Still on a social media post, he called the demonstrators "violent, insurrectionist mobs" and said he was directing his cabinet officers to take all such action necessary to stop what he called "riots". You can stay with the latest throughout the week on ♦ President Trump insists the US is under invasion and has continued to invoke wartime powers to stop it. For more on the administration's perspective and what the border numbers tell us, I spoke with USA TODAY, national immigration and border reporter, Lauren Villagran. Hello, Lauren. Lauren Villagran: Hey, Taylor. Taylor Wilson: You're right that as part of Trump's immigration actions, he has put the nation on a wartime footing. I just want to start by getting a sense of what you mean by that. Lauren Villagran: What we've seen in the past five months is really a solidification of the rhetoric that we heard for a very long time, both on the campaign trail and over the past four years regarding a quote, unquote, "invasion" of immigrants into the country. While that was rhetoric before, it is now essentially what is driving many of the Trump administration's actions regarding immigration enforcement. We did a review of President Donald Trump's executive orders, proclamations and memoranda, and found at least 12 references to an invasion both at the southern border, references to illegal alien invaders within the country, and that is forming the basis for the Trump administration's quote, unquote, "repelling" of the quote, unquote, "invasion". Taylor Wilson: What's his stated goal amid all this? Lauren Villagran: In his formal communications, it is to stop and repel the invasion of the southern border and the consequences of the quote, unquote, "invasion" that is already here. I think at that point it becomes a fair question to ask whether the president of the United States has put the country on a wartime footing. He has on the basis of, again quote, unquote, "invasion" claimed extraordinary powers that are being challenged in courts of law now: everything from invoking the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to aggressive and militarized immigration enforcement tactics which, I should say, many of his supporters endorse. Taylor Wilson: I want to hear a little bit more about his supporters. We know that immigration was a big part of his campaigning and he made some big campaign promises as it pertains to migration. What have his supporters said about this approach since he's taken office? Lauren Villagran: It's a mixed bag. There are certainly supporters who have been vocal about supporting President Trump's initiative to remove millions of people from the country. There are others who say that the president on the campaign trail promised to remove criminals. We are seeing that happening every day. It's clear that others are getting swept up in the dragnet. We are seeing folks who are legal, permanent residents be detained, people who are here on a tourist visa. Students, of course, are now facing additional scrutiny should they support causes that this administration does not support. Taylor Wilson: And constitutional scholars say many of the president's actions are based on claims of authority he does not lawfully actually have, right? What are scholars saying here, what are academics saying, just in terms of what he can and cannot do? Lauren Villagran: That's really for the courts to decide, of course. And we're seeing that. We have seen the Supreme Court of the United States decide to send cases back to lower courts for review. So really, the jury is quite literally out on whether the powers the president has claimed to quickly remove immigrants from the country to deport or send them away to detention in foreign nations like El Salvador. All of these things are open questions. It's very early days of the administration. We've got to remember, we're five months in. The President has made a promise to remove millions of people and it's playing out in really dramatic ways from California to Vermont. Taylor Wilson: Lauren Villagran covers the border and immigration for USA TODAY. Thank you, Lauren. Lauren Villagran: Thanks, Taylor. ♦ Taylor Wilson: Five members of the right-wing extremist group, the Proud Boys, who stormed the U.S. Capitol during the January 6th insurrection and were later pardoned by President Trump are suing the government for more than a $100 million. They alleged the Justice Department and FBI violated their constitutional rights after arresting and jailing them for their participation in the effort to stop Congress from certifying former president, Joe Biden's, election victory in 2020. They argue in their suit that the Proud Boys and their families were subjected to forceful government raids, solitary confinement, and cruel and unusual treatment. On the first day of his return to office in 2025, President Trump issued a sweeping clemency order granting pardons to almost all of the more than 1,500 defendants who stormed the Capitol on January 6th and issuing sentence commutations to 14 others. In interviews with USA TODAY in February, most of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit defended their actions on that day and said unequivocally they would do the same thing again. You could read more with the link in today's show notes. ♦ As senators continue to work on President Trump's tax bill, disputes among Republicans threaten its approval in the Senate and pass compromises reached by the GOP-led house. That's as Democrats show no sign of wanting to help Trump grab a major win to begin his new administration. I spoke with USA TODAY White House correspondent, Bart Jansen, for more. Thanks as always for joining me, Bart. Bart Jansen: Thanks for having me. Taylor Wilson: Bart, several Republican senators said, "The government would still spend too much here." As for some of the concerns we're hearing, let's start with Senator Rand Paul and some of his issues. Bart Jansen: Yeah, that's right. He's been the most vocal among about a handful of Republican senators who have spoken up saying that they think the package of Trump's priorities, tax cuts, and border security, and other things will still spend too much money. The Congressional Budget Office estimates it could add $2.4 trillion to the national debt over the next decade. Trump disputes that figure because he thinks economic growth is going to overcome it, but lawmakers usually stick to CBO for their estimates. So, Rand Paul is saying they need to cut more, and he would also do some other things such as there's a provision in the legislation to increase the debt limit. We're right now getting very close. It's approaching $37 trillion overall that the country has in debt. And we're going to get to the cap on that borrowing, it's estimated now, in August. This legislation would raise that cap by $5 trillion as part of the overall package. There's a few folks that are squeamish about doing that. And then, Rand Paul is among the ones who says, "Hey, let's split that off into a second vote." That's a difficult vote. The leadership and Trump want to keep that all in the same package where you basically jump off the cliff with everything at once. Taylor Wilson: Medicaid issues seem to be pretty contested as part of this part. How are some senators pushing back on this point? Bart Jansen: That's right. Again, the estimate is that Medicaid would be cut a little north of $700 billion over the next decade, and that that could lead to a lack of coverage for 7.6 million people. Again, leadership and Trump contend that there aren't really cuts. A big portion of how those cuts would be achieved is by requiring able-bodied folks to work or show that they tried for jobs or did volunteer work, something in order to get those healthcare benefits for lower-income people. But Senator Josh Hawley, a Republican of Missouri, has raised issues with the legislation, restricting the ways that states can raise money to provide their portion of the matching funds that are required for this federal program, sometimes called a provider tax or a sick tax. But Missouri is one of the states that's taken advantage of those things, and Hawley worries that if you get rid of those provisions, that rural healthcare providers might not be able to stay in business. And that would be tough for everybody, because maybe you'd have to travel farther or people wouldn't be around to provide healthcare. Taylor Wilson: Bart, you're right, the Senate could drop some contentious provisions that house members really risk supporting. Which provisions are we talking about here? Bart Jansen: Recall that the House passed the bill 215 to 214. They've got almost no margin for error. If the Senate tinkers with anything, that could disrupt the very precarious balance that they've got in the House, and if they change anything, it has to go back to the House. So, a key compromise that was needed for the support of Republican lawmakers in the house in expensive states, California, New York, New Jersey, was an increase in the federal tax deduction for folks in those high property value states. And so it raised the deduction limit from 10,000 to $40,000 for people earning less than $500,000 a year. They were fine with it on the House side. One House member said, "Boy, if you reopen that can of worms, it would be like digging up radioactive waste." He was really encouraging the Senate not to do. But there are senators that are eager to reduce that tax deduction back to where it was, because they contend, "Hey, if you live in a high tax state, that's your own fault." Taylor Wilson: Senators have given themselves a July 4th deadline here. Are they on track to meet that? And then, I guess some of these provisions could go back to the house, correct? Bart Jansen: That's right. If the Senate changes the bill at all on its way to passage, it has to go back to the House for another vote, and presumably the House could change it again as well. But the goal in both chambers is to try to get it through the entire congress by July 4th, to get it on President Trump's desk. That's just an aspirational goal. There's no drop-dead deadline to that. But a real deadline having to do with this is that the Treasury Department has estimated that the country will reach its limit on borrowing sometime in August. And they'd be scheduled for a recess in August, so the real goal is to try to pass this before the August recess. Taylor Wilson: Right. Bart, I'm sure we'll be chatting again soon on this. Bart Jansen covers the White House for USA TODAY. Thanks, Bart. Bart Jansen: Thanks for having me. ♦ Taylor Wilson: The Tony Awards are in the books. This year's ceremony saw the vibrant Afro-Cuban musical, Buena Vista Social Club, and Netflix prequel play Stranger Things: The First Shadow, scoop up multiple trophies apiece. Meanwhile, Cole Escola won best leading actor in a play for their inspired turn as First Lady Mary Todd Lincoln. They're now the first non-binary performer to win in that Tony category. ♦ And coming up later today, a new episode of Forum. Gillian Gurney: Pride means so much more than just the joy and courage that we exude as a community year round. But I think this time specifically is a time to acknowledge the revolution that it took to get us here. Taylor Wilson: That was Gillian Gurney, a 26 year old who lives in New York City. There are more people sharing their thoughts on pride right here today, beginning at 4:00 PM Eastern Time. ♦ Thanks for listening to The Excerpt. You can get the podcast wherever you get your audio, and if you're on a smart speaker, just ask for The Excerpt. As always, you can email us at podcasts@ I'm Taylor Wilson and I'll be back tomorrow with more of The Excerpt from USA TODAY.
USA Today
03-06-2025
- Health
- USA Today
Suspect charged with federal hate crime in Boulder attack
Suspect charged with federal hate crime in Boulder attack | The Excerpt On Tuesday's episode of The Excerpt podcast: A 45-year-old suspect has been charged with a federal hate crime in the attack on a Colorado pro-Israel protest. Russia and Ukraine hold peace talks after Ukraine's recent drone strikes. USA TODAY Supreme Court Correspondent Maureen Groppe takes a look at the high court's move to take up a challenge to a grace period for mail-in ballots. A new study has found a link between chronic cannabis use and an increased risk of cardiovascular disease. USA TODAY National Immigration and Border Reporter Lauren Villagran tells us about volunteers who search for migrant remains along the U.S.-Mexico border. Let us know what you think of this episode by sending an email to podcasts@ Hit play on the player below to hear the podcast and follow along with the transcript beneath it. This transcript was automatically generated, and then edited for clarity in its current form. There may be some differences between the audio and the text. Podcasts: True crime, in-depth interviews and more USA TODAY podcasts right here Taylor Wilson: Good morning. I'm Taylor Wilson, and today is Tuesday, June 3rd, 2025. This is The Excerpt. Today we're learning more about the suspect in the Boulder attack. Plus the Supreme Court takes up a challenge to a grace period for mail-in ballots, and how volunteers search for bodies along the southern border. ♦ The man accused of setting 12 people on fire at a pro-Israel protest has been charged with a federal hate crime. He told investigators he wanted to kill all Zionist people and wished all of them were dead. According to an FBI affidavit released yesterday. 45-year-old Mohammed Sabry Soliman is accused of attacking a demonstration with a makeshift flamethrower and firebombs while shouting, "Free Palestine." Injuries to victims range from minor to serious. According to an affidavit, the suspect told investigators he planned the attack for a year and waited for his daughter to graduate before carrying it out. A judge has set bond at $10 million. Stephen Miller, President Donald Trump's deputy chief of staff said the suspect overstayed a tourist visa issued in 2022. You can read more with the link in today's show notes. ♦ During peace talks yesterday, Russia told Ukraine that it would only agree to end the war if Ukraine concedes large amounts of territory and agrees to limits on the size of its army, according to a memorandum reported by Russian media. It's the latest refusal out of Moscow to compromise on its war goals. Negotiations in Turkey came after Ukraine destroyed dozens of enemy bombers over the weekend using drones smuggled deep into Russia. It was the most damaging Ukrainian attack on Russia in the three years since Moscow invaded. ♦ The Supreme Court will decide if a challenge to an Illinois grace period for mail-in ballots can proceed. I spoke with USA TODAY's Supreme Court correspondent Maureen Groppe to learn more. Hello, Maureen. Maureen Groppe: Hello. Taylor Wilson: All right, so what is this challenge, Maureen, and what will the Supreme Court now be deciding? Maureen Groppe: This case is about Illinois law that lets mail-in ballots be counted if they are postmarked on or before the day of the election and received within two weeks. The court isn't deciding whether that grace period is allowed, which Republicans say it's not. Instead, they're deciding whether a congressman as Republican congressman Michael Bost has what is called standing to even bring this challenge into court to have the lawsuit proceed. Taylor Wilson: Well, how did this play out in the lower courts, Maureen? Maureen Groppe: Well, the lower court said that the congressman can't bring the case because he hadn't shown he had been sufficiently harmed by the law. He said he's harmed because he has to spend campaign funds to contest any objectionable ballots that come in after election day. So he says that's an extra cost to his campaign that he wouldn't have if there was no grace period. But the Chicago-based Seventh US Circuit Court of Appeals, they dismissed that argument. One of the judges said it was speculative at best that later ballots could cause him to lose an election, and the judge noted that this congressman won by 75% in the most recent election before this decision came out. But one of the three appeals court judges who ruled on this lawsuit said he would have let it proceed. Taylor Wilson: Well, you know Republicans have been pushing back and even trying to end this practice in a variety of other ways. How so, Maureen? Maureen Groppe: They've been challenging state laws individually, like in this suit, and in Mississippi. And recently President Trump issued an executive order that, among other things, would prevent such grace periods. His executive order does a lot of things about election law, but this is one of the things that it would do, but that order is also being challenged in court. Taylor Wilson: All right, and really what's the potential broader impact of a SCOTUS decision here? Maureen Groppe: Well, the broader impact for the specific legal question that the Supreme Court agreed to hear is how hard it should be for a candidate to be able to challenge election law. What do they have to show, what kind of harms do they have to show to let them challenge an election rule that they don't agree with? And in the appeal to the court trying to give them reasons for why they should take this case, the lawyers for the Congressmen said the court needed to hear this because there's this growing trend of courts limiting candidate's ability to challenge electoral rules. Taylor Wilson: All right, we are smarter on all things Supreme Court anytime you stop by. Thanks Maureen. Maureen Groppe: Thanks for having me. ♦ Taylor Wilson: A new study has found a link between chronic cannabis use, including in edible form, and an increased risk of cardiovascular disease that's comparable to the effects of smoking tobacco. The study is the latest to associate cannabis with negative health impacts and was conducted by researchers at the University of California San Francisco, who analyzed the cardiovascular health of 55 people who consumed cannabis at least three times a week for at least a year. They found vascular function was reduced by about half when compared with those who did not consume cannabis regularly. They also showed signs of increased risk for premature heart disease researchers found similar to tobacco smokers. Those included in the study were tested to ensure they do not smoke tobacco or vape and were not frequently exposed to secondhand tobacco smoke. You can read more of the study's findings with a link in today's show notes. ♦ At the southern border a group of volunteers has a grim task, to find the remains of migrants who had passed away in the desert. I spoke with USA TODAY National Immigration and Border Reporter Lauren Villagran for more. Thanks for joining me as always, Lauren. Lauren Villagran: Thanks, Taylor. Taylor Wilson: So I want to hear about these volunteers and their work here in a second, but just first, how many migrants, Lauren, die along the border, especially in this part of the El Paso sector? Lauren Villagran: So Taylor, for the past two years, we don't actually know what the death toll has been, border-wide, California to Texas. What we do know is in El Paso sector, which is a 264-mile area stretching from West Texas through New Mexico, last year, 176 remains of likely migrants were found in the desert area here. The year before it was 149. But Taylor, just five or six years ago, that number was in the single digits. Taylor Wilson: So how do folks often die along the border, Lauren? What are some of the causes and why is this part of the border so deadly? Lauren Villagran: People will have different opinions about this, but what is certain is that as the United States has hardened its borderline as border security has become more intense and the border fencing higher. For example, in much of the border now it's 30 feet high, migrants are more easily injured. Specifically in this area, though, Taylor, the desert outside of El Paso is hot. It's very hot in the summer, but it wasn't at Arizona levels, we don't see temperatures like north of 110 degrees. But the last two years we've had extreme summer temperatures, more triple-digit days than ever before. And during this period, the past two years, there was a massive wave of migration. So that meant that more people were trying to make the risky and often deadly illegal crossing. Taylor Wilson: Well, Lauren, for this piece, I know you spoke with some volunteers who are working out in the desert to find human remains. What did you hear from them and the work they're doing? Lauren Villagran: So it should be said that to start, it is the responsibility of federal, state, and local authorities to investigate and find bodies. But this desert, even though it is near the urban footprint, can at times be vast. This particular New Mexico based group called Battalion Search and Rescue, run by James Holman and Abbey Carpenter is fashioned after other groups like it in Arizona and California where volunteers have rallied to search for missing migrants and often turn up migrant remains. Here in southern New Mexico, this group goes out once a month, combs through the desert, looking for any remains that may have been left behind. Or in a best case scenario, migrants who might be lost or missing. Unfortunately, in recent months they've often turned up bones. Taylor Wilson: Such a trying work. What happens with the remains once they find them, Lauren? Lauren Villagran: These volunteers fill out paperwork noting the precise location of the remains that they have found. They tie brightly colored tape to desert brush and they phone it in to local law enforcement. The volunteers are not authorized to touch or collect the bones. So the ball really lies with the state, both the office of the medical investigator in New Mexico and local law enforcement like the Doña Ana County Sheriff to go out and collect the remains that are still there in the desert. Taylor Wilson: These folks, who are they, Lauren? What prompted them to get involved with this type of work? And I'm also curious what they say about the impact on them and what they've come away with after it. Lauren Villagran: Yeah, so for example, Abbey Carpenter is a retired college administrator. She used to teach English as a second language classes in Arizona. And when she went on her first search, she told me it was a really emotional moment in which she recalled hearing about the journeys of her students, migrants who did survive the dangerous journey through the desert, who now live and work in the United States and in seeing the piles of clothes that you sometimes find in the desert, Taylor, pants and shirts and abandoned things left behind, she told me she really saw the journeys of her former students. I know that some of those who got involved here had recently learned about the uptick in migrant deaths. And what's harrowing about it, Taylor, is that the number 176 is the number of bodies that were found. But as these volunteers tell me, every time they go to look, they often find a new site, which means that there could be more remains out in the desert that remain undiscovered. Taylor Wilson: Wow. Well, as for customs and border protection, you mentioned this Missing Migrant Program that they created back in 2017. It's been renamed the Missing Alien Program here under the latest Trump administration. What can you tell us about that program and its potential impact amid all this? Lauren Villagran: US Border Patrol agents are frequently the first to come upon remains or migrants obviously in distress. So this was a program that is run by US Border Patrol that tries to work to connect family members to their consulates and the possibility of remains. Of course, when you really dial it back, whenever there is an enforcement measure, you're going to see migrants take additional risks and that's also in part what's contributed to the rising death toll. Taylor Wilson: All right, folks can find the full version of this story with the link in today's show notes. Lauren Villagran covers the border and immigration for USA TODAY. Thanks, Lauren. Lauren Villagran: Thanks, Taylor. ♦ Taylor Wilson: Thanks for listening to The Excerpt. You can get the podcast wherever you get your audio, and if you're on a smart speaker, just ask for The Excerpt. If you have any comments or questions, you can email us at podcasts@ I'm Taylor Wilson and I'll be back tomorrow with more of The Excerpt from USA TODAY.
