Denton Loudermill, falsely accused on social media of being the shooter on Feb. 14 has once again sued state Sens. Rick Brattin, Denny Hoskins and Nick Schroer for defamation and invasion of privacy

BY:&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/rudi-keller/">RUDI KELLER</a> <a href="https://missouriindependent.com/briefs/missouri-senate-committee-advances-bill-to-ban-texting-while-driving/">Missouri Independent</a>

Three Republican Missouri state senators — including one running for secretary of state — are once again being sued by the man they incorrectly identified in social media posts as&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/chiefs-super-bowl-parade-shooting-kansas-city-d9f4466b69cbb2dfe0f007414aebe730" target="_blank">being the shooter</a>&nbsp;at the Kansas City Chiefs’ Super Bowl victory celebration.

Denton Loudermill of Olathe, Kansas, filed lawsuits Thursday against state Sens. Denny Hoskins of Warrensburg, Rick Brattin of Harrisonville and Nick Schroer of Defiance. In the individual lawsuits, each is accused of violating Loudermill’s privacy and libeling him with their posts.&nbsp;

Hoskins is the GOP nominee for secretary of state. Brattin is seeking re-election in the 31st Senate District. Schroer, who won his seat in the Senate in 2022, is not on the ballot this year.

The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri. Similar lawsuits against all three men&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/10/21/judge-dismisses-case-against-missouri-senators-over-chiefs-parade-shooting-posts/">were dismissed Oct. 21</a>&nbsp;in Kansas federal court when U.S. District Judge John Broomes ruled he did not have jurisdiction over Brattin, Hoskins and Schroer.

In the more than nine months since the Feb. 14 victory parade and pep rally, people have not stopped making him feel uncomfortable, Loudermill said in a news conference with one of his attorneys, LaRonna Lassiter Saunders.

“They come through looking at me, on video on their phone, saying ‘yeah, that’s him,” he said. “That worries me sometimes.”

In an interview with The Independent, Lassiter Saunders said she believes the jurisdictional issue is solved with the new filing. It was important to refile the cases quickly, she said, because the legal nuances could be missed by a public that has only heard the cases were dismissed.

“It’s reported that the case gets tossed, then they’re thinking, there’s some merit to the Missouri senators position,” Lassiter Saunders said.

Hoskins, reached via text message, declined to respond to the new filing.

“I have not been served and I have no comment at this time,” he said.

Brattin and Schroer did not respond to messages seeking comment.

Like thousands of other regional residents, Loudermill went to Union Station in Kansas City for the pep rally that followed the Chiefs’ victory parade after this year’s Super Bowl. As the crowd was departing, an argument in the crowd resulted in gunfire.

The shooting at the end of the victory celebration left one person dead and&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/10/17/kansas-city-super-bowl-rally-shooting-victims-pick-up-pieces-but-gun-violence-haunts-their-lives/">at least 24 people injured</a>.

Loudermill, who was born in Kansas and lives there now, was detained briefly because he was too slow to leave the area of the shooting, he told The Independent earlier this year.

A photo of him, seated, with his hands restrained behind his back, was posted on X, formally known as Twitter, by an account with the name Deep Truth Intel. That post incorrectly identified him with a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68353305" target="_blank">name associated with misinformation</a>&nbsp;posted after other shootings and said he was an undocumented immigrant.

Soon after that initial social media post, the Missouri Freedom Caucus, Hoskins, Brattin, Schroer and U.S. Rep. Tim Burchett, a Tennessee Republican, posted their own versions, some with the photo, some without. Burchett’s post said he was one of the shooters and referred to him as an “illegal alien.”

Burchett later deleted the tweet but included a screenshot of it&nbsp;<a href="https://x.com/timburchett/status/1759645965445636470?s=20" target="_blank">that is still visible</a>&nbsp;in a separate post.

A lawsuit filed against Burchett in Kansas was also dismissed because of jurisdictional issues. Lassiter Saunders said Thursday that she is working with attorneys in the Washington, D.C., area to refile the case against Burchett.

“He is not off the hook,” she said.&nbsp;

Hoskins’ version on social media shared a screenshot of the initial anonymous post and blamed President Joe Biden and political leaders of Kansas City for making the shooting possible.

Brattin’s first post linking Loudermill to the shooting, since deleted, demanded “#POTUS CLOSE THE BORDER” and incorporated the deleted anonymous post that kicked everything off.

Schroer was the least certain post about the immigration and arrest status of Loudermill among the three.

Schroer’s post included a link to one from Burchett stating, over Loudermill’s photo, that “One of the Kansas City Chiefs victory parade shooters has been identified as an illegal Alien.”

“Can we get any confirmation or denial of this from local officials or law enforcement?” Schroer wrote. “I’ve been sent videos or stills showing at least 6 different people arrested from yesterday but officially told only 3 still in custody. The people deserve answers.”

In the complaint filed against Brattin, attorneys wrote that the lawmakers had no reason to make the comments directed at Loudermill.

“The publication of the false representation that plaintiff was an ‘illegal alien’ and a ‘shooter’ was not made in good faith nor was it made by (Brattin) with any legitimate interest in making or duty to make such assertions,” the filing states.

In the Kansas cases, the lawmakers were represented by Attorney General Andrew Bailey, who raised both the jurisdictional objections and claims that the senators were acting in their official capacity when they made their posts on social media. Therefore, the filings stated, they are protected by “legislative immunity.”&nbsp;

When the case was dismissed, Bailey put out a statement saying it was a victory for keeping “questions of Missouri law…in Missouri courts.”

Bailey’s office did not respond immediately to an email asking if the office would again provide representation. Lassiter Saunders said the attorney general should not take the case again.

“I would hope not, but given the track record of the attorney general doing as he pleases, it’s a possibility,” Lassiter Saunders said.

Bailey’s participation in the case generated its own dispute. In a May letter to the commissioner of the Office of Administration, the state agency that certifies payments from Missouri’s legal expense fund, Gov. Mike Parson wrote that no payments related to the lawsuits should be certified “without my approval or a court order.”

Bailey’s claim of legislative immunity is based in the Missouri Constitution’s provisions on legislative privileges. Along with being immune from arrest for minor offenses while the General Assembly is in session, members also “<a href="https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=III++++19&amp;bid=36212&amp;constit=y" target="_blank">shall not be questioned</a>&nbsp;for any speech or debate in either house in any other place.”

Social media posts are not statements or speeches made during debates in the chambers, Lassiter Saunders said.

“It wasn’t legitimate legislative activity,” she said. “They were following this story like hundreds of thousands of other people seeing tweets, retweeting, and we don’t believe it was the same.

The lawsuit seeks to vindicate a core American principle, the right to be let alone, Lassiter Saunders said.

“I would like to refocus the attention from politics to the principle of, private citizens should have the right to live their lives privately,” she said. “The elected officials need to be mindful and do a better job of not just speaking out because they have the authority to do so.”

The lawsuit states that because of the hostility of some people in the public, Loudermill has “injuries and actual damages including mental distress, sleeplessness, anxiety, and agitation.”

“I’m just getting all the attention still,” he said. “ I just want them to pay for that.”

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/10/1730420656214.png" alt="Denton Loudermill, right, appears with his attorney, LaRonna Lassiter Saunders, at an online news conference held Thursday to discuss his new defamation lawsuits against three Missouri state senators. (Screenshot via Zoom)" />
 <figcaption>Denton Loudermill, right, appears with his attorney, LaRonna Lassiter Saunders, at an online news conference held Thursday to discuss his new defamation lawsuits against three Missouri state senators. (Screenshot via Zoom)</figcaption>
 </figure><h2>Denton Loudermill, falsely accused on social media of being the shooter on Feb. 14 has once again sued state Sens. Rick Brattin, Denny Hoskins and Nick Schroer for defamation and invasion of privacy</h2>BY:&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/rudi-keller/">RUDI KELLER</a> <a href="https://missouriindependent.com/briefs/missouri-senate-committee-advances-bill-to-ban-texting-while-driving/">Missouri Independent</a>Three Republican Missouri state senators — including one running for secretary of state — are once again being sued by the man they incorrectly identified in social media posts as&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/chiefs-super-bowl-parade-shooting-kansas-city-d9f4466b69cbb2dfe0f007414aebe730" target="_blank">being the shooter</a>&nbsp;at the Kansas City Chiefs’ Super Bowl victory celebration.Denton Loudermill of Olathe, Kansas, filed lawsuits Thursday against state Sens. Denny Hoskins of Warrensburg, Rick Brattin of Harrisonville and Nick Schroer of Defiance. In the individual lawsuits, each is accused of violating Loudermill’s privacy and libeling him with their posts.&nbsp;Hoskins is the GOP nominee for secretary of state. Brattin is seeking re-election in the 31st Senate District. Schroer, who won his seat in the Senate in 2022, is not on the ballot this year.The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri. Similar lawsuits against all three men&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/10/21/judge-dismisses-case-against-missouri-senators-over-chiefs-parade-shooting-posts/">were dismissed Oct. 21</a>&nbsp;in Kansas federal court when U.S. District Judge John Broomes ruled he did not have jurisdiction over Brattin, Hoskins and Schroer.In the more than nine months since the Feb. 14 victory parade and pep rally, people have not stopped making him feel uncomfortable, Loudermill said in a news conference with one of his attorneys, LaRonna Lassiter Saunders.Loudermill works at a car wash.“They come through looking at me, on video on their phone, saying ‘yeah, that’s him,” he said. “That worries me sometimes.”In an interview with The Independent, Lassiter Saunders said she believes the jurisdictional issue is solved with the new filing. It was important to refile the cases quickly, she said, because the legal nuances could be missed by a public that has only heard the cases were dismissed.“It’s reported that the case gets tossed, then they’re thinking, there’s some merit to the Missouri senators position,” Lassiter Saunders said.Hoskins, reached via text message, declined to respond to the new filing.“I have not been served and I have no comment at this time,” he said.Brattin and Schroer did not respond to messages seeking comment.Like thousands of other regional residents, Loudermill went to Union Station in Kansas City for the pep rally that followed the Chiefs’ victory parade after this year’s Super Bowl. As the crowd was departing, an argument in the crowd resulted in gunfire.<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/2/1707939847272.png" alt="Image from online coverage of the victory parade" />
 <figcaption>Image from online coverage of the victory parade</figcaption>
 </figure>The shooting at the end of the victory celebration left one person dead and&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/10/17/kansas-city-super-bowl-rally-shooting-victims-pick-up-pieces-but-gun-violence-haunts-their-lives/">at least 24 people injured</a>.Loudermill, who was born in Kansas and lives there now, was detained briefly because he was too slow to leave the area of the shooting, he told The Independent earlier this year.A photo of him, seated, with his hands restrained behind his back, was posted on X, formally known as Twitter, by an account with the name Deep Truth Intel. That post incorrectly identified him with a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68353305" target="_blank">name associated with misinformation</a>&nbsp;posted after other shootings and said he was an undocumented immigrant.Soon after that initial social media post, the Missouri Freedom Caucus, Hoskins, Brattin, Schroer and U.S. Rep. Tim Burchett, a Tennessee Republican, posted their own versions, some with the photo, some without. Burchett’s post said he was one of the shooters and referred to him as an “illegal alien.”Burchett later deleted the tweet but included a screenshot of it&nbsp;<a href="https://x.com/timburchett/status/1759645965445636470?s=20" target="_blank">that is still visible</a>&nbsp;in a separate post.A lawsuit filed against Burchett in Kansas was also dismissed because of jurisdictional issues. Lassiter Saunders said Thursday that she is working with attorneys in the Washington, D.C., area to refile the case against Burchett.“He is not off the hook,” she said.&nbsp;Hoskins’ version on social media shared a screenshot of the initial anonymous post and blamed President Joe Biden and political leaders of Kansas City for making the shooting possible.Brattin’s first post linking Loudermill to the shooting, since deleted, demanded “#POTUS CLOSE THE BORDER” and incorporated the deleted anonymous post that kicked everything off.Schroer was the least certain post about the immigration and arrest status of Loudermill among the three.Schroer’s post included a link to one from Burchett stating, over Loudermill’s photo, that “One of the Kansas City Chiefs victory parade shooters has been identified as an illegal Alien.”“Can we get any confirmation or denial of this from local officials or law enforcement?” Schroer wrote. “I’ve been sent videos or stills showing at least 6 different people arrested from yesterday but officially told only 3 still in custody. The people deserve answers.”In the complaint filed against Brattin, attorneys wrote that the lawmakers had no reason to make the comments directed at Loudermill.“The publication of the false representation that plaintiff was an ‘illegal alien’ and a ‘shooter’ was not made in good faith nor was it made by (Brattin) with any legitimate interest in making or duty to make such assertions,” the filing states.In the Kansas cases, the lawmakers were represented by Attorney General Andrew Bailey, who raised both the jurisdictional objections and claims that the senators were acting in their official capacity when they made their posts on social media. Therefore, the filings stated, they are protected by “legislative immunity.”&nbsp;When the case was dismissed, Bailey put out a statement saying it was a victory for keeping “questions of Missouri law…in Missouri courts.”Bailey’s office did not respond immediately to an email asking if the office would again provide representation. Lassiter Saunders said the attorney general should not take the case again.“I would hope not, but given the track record of the attorney general doing as he pleases, it’s a possibility,” Lassiter Saunders said.Bailey’s participation in the case generated its own dispute. In a May letter to the commissioner of the Office of Administration, the state agency that certifies payments from Missouri’s legal expense fund, Gov. Mike Parson wrote that no payments related to the lawsuits should be certified “without my approval or a court order.”Bailey’s claim of legislative immunity is based in the Missouri Constitution’s provisions on legislative privileges. Along with being immune from arrest for minor offenses while the General Assembly is in session, members also “<a href="https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=III++++19&amp;bid=36212&amp;constit=y" target="_blank">shall not be questioned</a>&nbsp;for any speech or debate in either house in any other place.”Social media posts are not statements or speeches made during debates in the chambers, Lassiter Saunders said.“It wasn’t legitimate legislative activity,” she said. “They were following this story like hundreds of thousands of other people seeing tweets, retweeting, and we don’t believe it was the same.The lawsuit seeks to vindicate a core American principle, the right to be let alone, Lassiter Saunders said.“I would like to refocus the attention from politics to the principle of, private citizens should have the right to live their lives privately,” she said. “The elected officials need to be mindful and do a better job of not just speaking out because they have the authority to do so.”The lawsuit states that because of the hostility of some people in the public, Loudermill has “injuries and actual damages including mental distress, sleeplessness, anxiety, and agitation.”He rarely goes out, Loudermill said.“I’m just getting all the attention still,” he said. “ I just want them to pay for that.”

Defamation case against lawmakers over Chiefs parade shooting posts refiled in Missouri

JOHNSON COUNTY — An Emporia State University placed&nbsp; on administrative leave following an arrest for alleged child sex crimes is due back in court Wednesday.

Last week, 72-year-old Howard Pitler was booked into the Johnson County jail on requested charges of&nbsp; electronic solicitation of a child under 14 years old, according to online jail records. He met the requirements of a $25,000 bond and is no longer in&nbsp; custody.

According to Emporia State, "Upon being made aware of the arrest of Howard Pitler, the university responded immediately and placed Pitler on administrative leave. With our rich tradition as a premier Teachers College, the care and safety of students of all ages is of the utmost importance. Pitler taught fully online master’s level courses as an associate professor of School Leadership, Middle &amp; Secondary Teacher Education in The Teachers College. He has been at ESU since 2018. Emporia State will cooperate fully with authorities. We cannot comment further on an ongoing investigation."

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/10/1729898976418.png" alt="Pitler-photo Johnson County" />
 <figcaption>Pitler-photo Johnson County</figcaption>
 </figure>JOHNSON COUNTY — An Emporia State University placed&nbsp; on administrative leave following an arrest for alleged child sex crimes is due back in court Wednesday.Last week, 72-year-old Howard Pitler was booked into the Johnson County jail on requested charges of&nbsp; electronic solicitation of a child under 14 years old, according to online jail records. He met the requirements of a $25,000 bond and is no longer in&nbsp; custody.According to Emporia State, "Upon being made aware of the arrest of Howard Pitler, the university responded immediately and placed Pitler on administrative leave. With our rich tradition as a premier Teachers College, the care and safety of students of all ages is of the utmost importance. Pitler taught fully online master’s level courses as an associate professor of School Leadership, Middle &amp; Secondary Teacher Education in The Teachers College. He has been at ESU since 2018. Emporia State will cooperate fully with authorities. We cannot comment further on an ongoing investigation."

Emporia State professor due in court for alleged child sex crime

BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://kansasreflector.com/author/sherman-smith/">SHERMAN SMITH</a> <a href="https://kansasreflector.com/">Kansas Reflector</a>

TOPEKA — An adviser for Republican congressional candidate Derek Schmidt says the “fake newspaper” Democratic rival Nancy Boyda mailed to 160,000 households is “illegal” and “dishonest.”

Schmidt, a three-term Kansas attorney general and former state Senate majority leader, is challenging Boyda for the 2nd District seat that Boyda held from 2007 to 2009.

Boyda has repeatedly produced campaign materials this year without including the mandatory disclosure that they were paid for by her campaign. That includes two eight-page publications, which she labeled “The Kansas Voter Guide.” The latest arrived in mailboxes last week.

The publications provide Boyda-friendly mock news stories, a side-by-side comparison of the candidates on various issues, letters of endorsement for Boyda, and cartoons making fun of Schmidt.

In a statement for this story, Boyda says she mistakenly swapped a page that included the “paid for” designation with the printer at the last minute. She apologized to the voters of the 2nd District and thanked the Kansas Republican Party for calling attention to the situation in its weekly email newsletter.

“Believe me, the last thing we needed was negative press about what we believe is an excellent way to communicate directly with the voters,” Boyda said. “Again, I apologize we did not follow the letter of the law. It was never our intent.”

On Friday, the GOP newsletter complained that Boyda was “breaking federal campaign finance law” by not clearly labeling her publication as paid for by her campaign.

“Politicians who can’t adhere to even the most basic laws do not deserve your approval — or your vote,” the GOP newsletter said.

Kansas GOP chairman Mike Brown in September&nbsp;<a href="https://kansasreflector.com/2024/09/20/kansas-gop-chairman-complains-about-democratic-congressional-candidates-lack-of-disclosures/">filed a complaint</a>&nbsp;with the Federal Election Commission alleging Boyda failed to include “paid for by” disclosures on billboards, videos, yard signs, campaign communications and her campaign website.

Eric Pahls, a Schmidt adviser, said Boyda was being “intentionally dishonest” by not disclosing her publication was “a paid hit piece.”

“Nancy Boyda’s fake newspaper is just the latest in her series of illegal and deceitful campaign activities that are currently under investigation,” Pahls said in a statement for this story. “She’s either incompetent or dishonest — Kansans will reject her either way.”

Boyda said she originally planned to produce three newspapers, but the printer informed the campaign that it only had the capacity to print two. She said the page that included the “paid for by” designation was “inadvertently left off” when she reworked the second and third mailers into a single publication.

She also noted that the return address on the mailing label reads “Boyda for Congress.”

“I want to be clear, that was our mistake, not the printer’s,” Boyda said. “This is an incredibly busy time for everyone and they were good partners to work with. It was our duty to get it right, not theirs.”

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/9/1727015582485.png" alt=" Democrat Nancy Boyda&nbsp; -photo by Grace Hills / Kansas Reflector" />
 <figcaption> Democrat Nancy Boyda&nbsp; -photo by Grace Hills / Kansas Reflector</figcaption>
 </figure>BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://kansasreflector.com/author/sherman-smith/">SHERMAN SMITH</a> <a href="https://kansasreflector.com/">Kansas Reflector</a>TOPEKA — An adviser for Republican congressional candidate Derek Schmidt says the “fake newspaper” Democratic rival Nancy Boyda mailed to 160,000 households is “illegal” and “dishonest.”Schmidt, a three-term Kansas attorney general and former state Senate majority leader, is challenging Boyda for the 2nd District seat that Boyda held from 2007 to 2009.Boyda has repeatedly produced campaign materials this year without including the mandatory disclosure that they were paid for by her campaign. That includes two eight-page publications, which she labeled “The Kansas Voter Guide.” The latest arrived in mailboxes last week.The publications provide Boyda-friendly mock news stories, a side-by-side comparison of the candidates on various issues, letters of endorsement for Boyda, and cartoons making fun of Schmidt.In a statement for this story, Boyda says she mistakenly swapped a page that included the “paid for” designation with the printer at the last minute. She apologized to the voters of the 2nd District and thanked the Kansas Republican Party for calling attention to the situation in its weekly email newsletter.“Believe me, the last thing we needed was negative press about what we believe is an excellent way to communicate directly with the voters,” Boyda said. “Again, I apologize we did not follow the letter of the law. It was never our intent.”On Friday, the GOP newsletter complained that Boyda was “breaking federal campaign finance law” by not clearly labeling her publication as paid for by her campaign.“Politicians who can’t adhere to even the most basic laws do not deserve your approval — or your vote,” the GOP newsletter said.Kansas GOP chairman Mike Brown in September&nbsp;<a href="https://kansasreflector.com/2024/09/20/kansas-gop-chairman-complains-about-democratic-congressional-candidates-lack-of-disclosures/">filed a complaint</a>&nbsp;with the Federal Election Commission alleging Boyda failed to include “paid for by” disclosures on billboards, videos, yard signs, campaign communications and her campaign website.Eric Pahls, a Schmidt adviser, said Boyda was being “intentionally dishonest” by not disclosing her publication was “a paid hit piece.”“Nancy Boyda’s fake newspaper is just the latest in her series of illegal and deceitful campaign activities that are currently under investigation,” Pahls said in a statement for this story. “She’s either incompetent or dishonest — Kansans will reject her either way.”Boyda said she originally planned to produce three newspapers, but the printer informed the campaign that it only had the capacity to print two. She said the page that included the “paid for by” designation was “inadvertently left off” when she reworked the second and third mailers into a single publication.She also noted that the return address on the mailing label reads “Boyda for Congress.”“I want to be clear, that was our mistake, not the printer’s,” Boyda said. “This is an incredibly busy time for everyone and they were good partners to work with. It was our duty to get it right, not theirs.”

Kansas Republicans blast Democrat for mailing ‘voter guide’ without campaign disclosure

Proponents of Amendment 3 have spent over $10 million on TV ads, more than 20 times what the opposition has invested

BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/annaspoerre/">ANNA SPOERRE</a> <a href="https://missouriindependent.com/briefs/missouri-senate-committee-advances-bill-to-ban-texting-while-driving/">Missouri Independent</a>

An effort to legalize abortion in Missouri has raised nearly 10 times more than the political action committees seeking to stop it.&nbsp;

Missourians for Constitutional Freedom, the campaign behind&nbsp;<a href="https://moconstitutionalfreedom.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Missourians-for-Constitutional-Freedom-Amendment.pdf" target="_blank">Amendment 3</a>, which would legalize abortion up until the point of fetal viability, has raised more than $30.9 million since launching its campaign in 2023, according to fundraising reports filed Monday with the Missouri Ethics Commission.

That includes roughly $9 million since Oct. 1, most of which came from out-of-state groups that&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/09/13/missouri-abortion-rights-campaign-doubles-fundraising-fairness-project/">aren’t required to disclose their donors.&nbsp;</a>

A half dozen PACs urging Missourians to vote against Amendment 3 collectively raised around $3.2 million.

This follows a trend seen in other states where abortion has been on the ballot: efforts to legalize or protect the procedure often outspend efforts to defeat it, including in&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/pittsburgh/news/ohios-2023-abortion-fight-cost-campaigns-70-million/" target="_blank">Ohio</a>, where a similar measure&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/11/07/us/elections/results-ohio-issue-1-abortion-rights.html" target="_blank">won with more than 56% of the vote.&nbsp;</a>

But Missouri is a particularly stark example of abortion-rights groups vastly outspending opposition.&nbsp;

One reason may be that less money is coming from the Catholic Church than in previous campaigns. A recent&nbsp;<a href="https://www.npr.org/transcripts/nx-s1-5144660#:~:text=An%20NPR%20and%20Religion%20News,%2D%20zero%2C%20Arizona%20%2D%20zero." target="_blank">analysis by NPR and Religion News Service</a>&nbsp;found U.S. bishops have donated significantly less this year to fight abortion measures than in 2022 and 2023.&nbsp;

While Catholic churches in Kansas spent nearly $4 million to fight an abortion referendum in Kansas in 2022, the Missouri dioceses have only invested about $30,000 in Missouri’s fight, the news outlets found.

In an effort to bridge this gap, some congregants are going door-to-door in opposition of the amendment.

“We pray for your assistance in this fight against Amendment 3,” Eric Holder, a&nbsp;volunteer with the local Knights of Columbus, prayed aloud in early October before canvassing in Independence.&nbsp;“We are like David facing Goliath. We pray that you be with us.”&nbsp;

He bowed his head alongside half a dozen other knights outside St. Mary’s Catholic Church before heading out to hang “vote no” fliers on about 1,000 doors.

Holder said he became passionate about ending abortion after he converted to Catholicism about 30 years ago and joined in the annual March for Life in Washington, D.C. He was motivated in part by a relative with an unplanned pregnancy who contemplated abortion before walking into a pregnancy resource center in Kansas City where she was encouraged to keep her baby.&nbsp;

“Missouri could suddenly become one of the worst states in the union in terms of abortion,” Holder said, fearing “the degradation of the family” and a shift to a “pro-death” culture.&nbsp;

In the interview, Holder lamented the dearth of TV ads aired from a “vote no” perspective. Fighting the amendment, he said, felt like “throwing a pebble into a raging ocean.”

But that changed in the coming weeks, as the first ads went up on TV and radio opposing the amendment.&nbsp;

A virtual rally held last week brought out several big names against the amendment, many of whom urged viewers to donate to support the purchase of TV ads.&nbsp;

Hosts of the rally, which included guest appearances by Missouri Gov. Mike Parson and conservative commentator Bill O’Reilly, appealed to viewers to donate to fund for ads to run in the 11 days before the election.&nbsp;

“We need to invest in this fight to get the messages in front of people,” said David Bereit, Founder of 40 Days for Life.&nbsp;

A number of people heeded Bereit’s advice.

As of Monday, groups opposing Amendment 3 have spent about $545,000 on radio and TV ads.&nbsp;

Nearly $442,000 of that total was purchased since Thursday, the day of the rally.&nbsp;

More than half of that spending was in TV ads purchased by the Vitae Foundation, an anti-abortion research organization based in Missouri. The group’s president was among those who spoke at Thursday’s rally, asking for contributions for TV ads. The Vitae Foundation is not registered as Missouri PAC, and therefore hasn’t reported donors or spending as is required of PACS.&nbsp;

The foundation’s ads do not specifically name Amendment 3, but rather focus on abortion broadly, encouraging viewers to “think about it.”

But spending on anti-abortion ads remains miles behind spending on digital and TV ads encouraging Missourians to “vote yes.”

As of Monday, Missourians for Constitutional Freedom spent nearly $10.4 million on TV ads, and about $22,000 on radio ads, more than twenty times what the opposition has invested.

The campaign has seen widespread support since its inception. More than&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/05/03/missourians-signatures-abortion-amendment-viability/">380,000 Missourians signed an initiative petition</a>&nbsp;to put the amendment on the ballot, and most Democratic nominees have campaigned on their support for Amendment 3.&nbsp;<a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fG46LwM4JRGAf-ZJSMEqKnJY_7kBABGI/view" target="_blank">More than 500 physicians and more than 300 other medical professionals</a>&nbsp;also signed a letter in support of&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/09/13/missouri-abortion-rights-campaign-doubles-fundraising-fairness-project/">Amendment 3.</a>&nbsp;

No excuse absentee voting in Missouri began Oct. 22. Election officials in&nbsp;<a href="https://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/election/article294677984.html" target="_blank">Kansas City&nbsp;</a>and&nbsp;<a href="https://www.firstalert4.com/2024/10/25/early-voting-turnout-missouri-running-high/" target="_blank">St. Louis</a>&nbsp;are already reporting significant early voter turnouts ahead of the Nov. 5 General Election.&nbsp;

<a href="https://emersoncollegepolling.com/september-2024-missouri-poll-republican-candidates-lead-in-president-governor-senate-races/" target="_blank">A recent Emerson College poll</a>&nbsp;found 58% of those surveyed support Amendment 3, with 30% opposed. The most recent&nbsp;<a href="https://www.slu.edu/research/research-institute/big-ideas/slu-poll/index.php" target="_blank">SLU/YouGov Poll</a>&nbsp;found that 52% supported the amendment and 34% opposed.

The Independent’s Rudi Keller contributed reporting.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/4/1712225243467.png" alt=" Volunteers with Missourians for Constitutional Freedom collect signatures in support of putting forward a ballot measure that would legalize abortion up to the point of fetal viability in Missouri. More than 500 people signed up for a campaign event on Tuesday, Feb. 6, 2024, in Kansas City (Anna Spoerre/Missouri Independent)." />
 <figcaption> Volunteers with Missourians for Constitutional Freedom collect signatures in support of putting forward a ballot measure that would legalize abortion up to the point of fetal viability in Missouri. More than 500 people signed up for a campaign event on Tuesday, Feb. 6, 2024, in Kansas City (Anna Spoerre/Missouri Independent).</figcaption>
 </figure><h2>Proponents of Amendment 3 have spent over $10 million on TV ads, more than 20 times what the opposition has invested</h2>BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/annaspoerre/">ANNA SPOERRE</a> <a href="https://missouriindependent.com/briefs/missouri-senate-committee-advances-bill-to-ban-texting-while-driving/">Missouri Independent</a>An effort to legalize abortion in Missouri has raised nearly 10 times more than the political action committees seeking to stop it.&nbsp;Missourians for Constitutional Freedom, the campaign behind&nbsp;<a href="https://moconstitutionalfreedom.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Missourians-for-Constitutional-Freedom-Amendment.pdf" target="_blank">Amendment 3</a>, which would legalize abortion up until the point of fetal viability, has raised more than $30.9 million since launching its campaign in 2023, according to fundraising reports filed Monday with the Missouri Ethics Commission.That includes roughly $9 million since Oct. 1, most of which came from out-of-state groups that&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/09/13/missouri-abortion-rights-campaign-doubles-fundraising-fairness-project/">aren’t required to disclose their donors.&nbsp;</a>A half dozen PACs urging Missourians to vote against Amendment 3 collectively raised around $3.2 million.This follows a trend seen in other states where abortion has been on the ballot: efforts to legalize or protect the procedure often outspend efforts to defeat it, including in&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/pittsburgh/news/ohios-2023-abortion-fight-cost-campaigns-70-million/" target="_blank">Ohio</a>, where a similar measure&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/11/07/us/elections/results-ohio-issue-1-abortion-rights.html" target="_blank">won with more than 56% of the vote.&nbsp;</a>But Missouri is a particularly stark example of abortion-rights groups vastly outspending opposition.&nbsp;One reason may be that less money is coming from the Catholic Church than in previous campaigns. A recent&nbsp;<a href="https://www.npr.org/transcripts/nx-s1-5144660#:~:text=An%20NPR%20and%20Religion%20News,%2D%20zero%2C%20Arizona%20%2D%20zero." target="_blank">analysis by NPR and Religion News Service</a>&nbsp;found U.S. bishops have donated significantly less this year to fight abortion measures than in 2022 and 2023.&nbsp;While Catholic churches in Kansas spent nearly $4 million to fight an abortion referendum in Kansas in 2022, the Missouri dioceses have only invested about $30,000 in Missouri’s fight, the news outlets found.In an effort to bridge this gap, some congregants are going door-to-door in opposition of the amendment.“We pray for your assistance in this fight against Amendment 3,” Eric Holder, a&nbsp;volunteer with the local Knights of Columbus, prayed aloud in early October before canvassing in Independence.&nbsp;“We are like David facing Goliath. We pray that you be with us.”&nbsp;He bowed his head alongside half a dozen other knights outside St. Mary’s Catholic Church before heading out to hang “vote no” fliers on about 1,000 doors.Holder said he became passionate about ending abortion after he converted to Catholicism about 30 years ago and joined in the annual March for Life in Washington, D.C. He was motivated in part by a relative with an unplanned pregnancy who contemplated abortion before walking into a pregnancy resource center in Kansas City where she was encouraged to keep her baby.&nbsp;“Missouri could suddenly become one of the worst states in the union in terms of abortion,” Holder said, fearing “the degradation of the family” and a shift to a “pro-death” culture.&nbsp;In the interview, Holder lamented the dearth of TV ads aired from a “vote no” perspective. Fighting the amendment, he said, felt like “throwing a pebble into a raging ocean.”But that changed in the coming weeks, as the first ads went up on TV and radio opposing the amendment.&nbsp;A virtual rally held last week brought out several big names against the amendment, many of whom urged viewers to donate to support the purchase of TV ads.&nbsp;Hosts of the rally, which included guest appearances by Missouri Gov. Mike Parson and conservative commentator Bill O’Reilly, appealed to viewers to donate to fund for ads to run in the 11 days before the election.&nbsp;“We need to invest in this fight to get the messages in front of people,” said David Bereit, Founder of 40 Days for Life.&nbsp;A number of people heeded Bereit’s advice.As of Monday, groups opposing Amendment 3 have spent about $545,000 on radio and TV ads.&nbsp;Nearly $442,000 of that total was purchased since Thursday, the day of the rally.&nbsp;More than half of that spending was in TV ads purchased by the Vitae Foundation, an anti-abortion research organization based in Missouri. The group’s president was among those who spoke at Thursday’s rally, asking for contributions for TV ads. The Vitae Foundation is not registered as Missouri PAC, and therefore hasn’t reported donors or spending as is required of PACS.&nbsp;The foundation’s ads do not specifically name Amendment 3, but rather focus on abortion broadly, encouraging viewers to “think about it.”But spending on anti-abortion ads remains miles behind spending on digital and TV ads encouraging Missourians to “vote yes.”As of Monday, Missourians for Constitutional Freedom spent nearly $10.4 million on TV ads, and about $22,000 on radio ads, more than twenty times what the opposition has invested.The campaign has seen widespread support since its inception. More than&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/05/03/missourians-signatures-abortion-amendment-viability/">380,000 Missourians signed an initiative petition</a>&nbsp;to put the amendment on the ballot, and most Democratic nominees have campaigned on their support for Amendment 3.&nbsp;<a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fG46LwM4JRGAf-ZJSMEqKnJY_7kBABGI/view" target="_blank">More than 500 physicians and more than 300 other medical professionals</a>&nbsp;also signed a letter in support of&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/09/13/missouri-abortion-rights-campaign-doubles-fundraising-fairness-project/">Amendment 3.</a>&nbsp;No excuse absentee voting in Missouri began Oct. 22. Election officials in&nbsp;<a href="https://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/election/article294677984.html" target="_blank">Kansas City&nbsp;</a>and&nbsp;<a href="https://www.firstalert4.com/2024/10/25/early-voting-turnout-missouri-running-high/" target="_blank">St. Louis</a>&nbsp;are already reporting significant early voter turnouts ahead of the Nov. 5 General Election.&nbsp;<a href="https://emersoncollegepolling.com/september-2024-missouri-poll-republican-candidates-lead-in-president-governor-senate-races/" target="_blank">A recent Emerson College poll</a>&nbsp;found 58% of those surveyed support Amendment 3, with 30% opposed. The most recent&nbsp;<a href="https://www.slu.edu/research/research-institute/big-ideas/slu-poll/index.php" target="_blank">SLU/YouGov Poll</a>&nbsp;found that 52% supported the amendment and 34% opposed.The Independent’s Rudi Keller contributed reporting.

Missouri abortion-rights campaign raises $9M in October, bringing overall tally to $31M

KANSAS CITY – Two men have been indicted by a federal grand jury for their roles in a conspiracy to distribute fentanyl, with one of the men also charged with possessing six machine gun conversion devices, according to the U.S. State's Attorney.

Kal J. Nay, 21, of Oak Grove, Mo., and Robert J. Turnage, 20, of Blue Springs, Mo., were charged in a five-count indictment returned by a federal grand jury last week. Nay was arrested and had his initial court appearance. Turnage has not yet been arrested.

The federal indictment charges Nay and Turnage with participating in a conspiracy to distribute fentanyl. They are also charged together in one count of distributing fentanyl from May 2 to June 11, 2024.

Additionally, Nay is charged with two counts of distributing fentanyl and one count of possessing machine guns. The indictment alleges that Nay was in possession of six machine gun conversion devices, commonly referred to as “switches,” on June 18, 2024.

The charges contained in this indictment are simply accusations, and not evidence of guilt. Evidence supporting the charges must be presented to a federal trial jury, whose duty is to determine guilt or innocence.

KANSAS CITY – Two men have been indicted by a federal grand jury for their roles in a conspiracy to distribute fentanyl, with one of the men also charged with possessing six machine gun conversion devices, according to the U.S. State's Attorney.Kal J. Nay, 21, of Oak Grove, Mo., and Robert J. Turnage, 20, of Blue Springs, Mo., were charged in a five-count indictment returned by a federal grand jury last week. Nay was arrested and had his initial court appearance. Turnage has not yet been arrested.The federal indictment charges Nay and Turnage with participating in a conspiracy to distribute fentanyl. They are also charged together in one count of distributing fentanyl from May 2 to June 11, 2024.Additionally, Nay is charged with two counts of distributing fentanyl and one count of possessing machine guns. The indictment alleges that Nay was in possession of six machine gun conversion devices, commonly referred to as “switches,” on June 18, 2024.The charges contained in this indictment are simply accusations, and not evidence of guilt. Evidence supporting the charges must be presented to a federal trial jury, whose duty is to determine guilt or innocence.

Indicted KC fentanyl dealer is still at large

BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/natanyafriedheim/">NATANYA FRIEDHEIM</a>

Physician David Mehr addressed a dozen voters gathered Saturday morning at the Columbia headquarters of Missourians for Constitutional Freedom, the coalition behind a proposed amendment would enshrine the right to abortion in Missouri’s constitution.

Meanwhile, physicians greeted volunteers in St. Louis County, and still more gathered in Kansas City, as part of the coalition’s final get-out-the-vote campaign before the Nov. 5 election.

“I’ve cared for women my entire life,” Mehr told the group of volunteers in Columbia. “It’s important that we keep this decision between a woman and her doctor.”

Mehr works at University of Missouri Health Care but spoke as an individual and not on behalf of the hospital.

An hour later, he was navigating a thicket in a northwest Columbia neighborhood, looking for the right door to knock on. By the end of the day, he and his canvassing partner had knocked on 44 doors.

Like other states with abortion bans, Missouri’s state law carves out exceptions “in cases of medical emergency.” Medical professionals who perform abortions deemed unnecessary can be found guilty of a Class B felony and have their license revoked or suspended.

“There’s no definition of what a medical emergency might be,” said Betsy Wickstrom, a high-risk obstetrician who works in Kansas City. “So if my patient is bleeding and her cervix is open, there’s still cardiac activity, how much do I need to let her bleed?”

Wickstrom preferred not to disclose her hospital affiliation. Her reluctance was shared by doctors who gathered in St. Louis on Saturday and reflects a broader trend of doctors keeping their workplaces hidden when talking about abortion, identified in a 2023 study.

Last month, a group of 800 medical professionals from Missouri, including 500 physicians, signed a letter supporting the abortion-rights amendment, which appears on the ballot as Amendment 3.

No doctor in any state has been criminally prosecuted for performing an abortion during a medical emergency, according to an article published last month by the Association of American Medical Colleges. However, doctors across the country have warned that lack of clarity about what constitutes a medical emergency compromises their ability to offer emergency abortions.

In August, a group of OB-GYN medical residents in Missouri anonymously published an article in the Journal of Graduate Medical Education describing their shock and fear entering the profession in a state with a strict abortion ban.

“Because the text of the law reads so punitively, it has struck fear into clinicians and caused life-saving care to be unnecessarily delayed or blatantly refused,” the authors wrote.

Since abortion became illegal in Missouri in 2022, the state has seen a more than 25% drop in applications for OB-GYN medical residencies, according to a May report by the Association of American Medical Colleges.

In a widely publicized case from 2022, two hospitals, including one in Missouri, turned away Missouri resident Mylissa Farmer when she sought care after her water broke at just 18 weeks of pregnancy. Last year, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid found the two hospitals — Freeman Hospital West in Joplin and the University of Kansas Health System in Kansas City, Kansas — violated federal law when they denied Farmer care.

Numerous other examples of women being denied emergency medical care have appeared in news media since the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization ended the constitutional right to an abortion.

Health care professionals opposed to abortion argue that media reports promote an exaggerated narrative that abortion bans jeopardize women’s access to emergency care.

“All state laws allow for maternal fetal separations to be done (through whatever means necessary) in order to save the life of the mother,” Christina Francis, an OB-GYN and CEO of the American Association of Pro-Life OB-GYNs, wrote in testimony for a U.S. Senate Finance Committee hearing in September.

Decisions in medicine are rarely black-and-white. When a woman’s water breaks early enough that the fetus’ viability is remote, abortion is the standard of care, said Wickstrom. When a woman is closer to 20 weeks, factors like bleeding, signs of infection and how much amniotic fluid is in the uterus are considered.

Some women want to wait, and a doctor guides the patient through that choice.

“Of course we do that, because the point is choice. The point is that it is her body to determine for herself what’s right for her, and we come alongside her and support her and guide her through what is right for her,” Wickstrom said.

If a woman does not want to continue the nonviable pregnancy, the fetus has a heartbeat and her condition is not considered an emergency, she has to leave the state for an abortion, Wickstrom said. In Kansas City and St. Louis, women can get to clinics that offer abortion care in Kansas and Illinois more easily than those in mid-Missouri.

Wickstrom brings her metal water bottle to work at a hospital in Kansas City. She keeps it on display when she talks to patients so they can see the stickers adorning it: Just above a cutout of Taylor Swift is a sticker that reads “ABORTION RESOURCES,” followed by a list of phone numbers and website URLs.

Wickstrom said she struggles to speak frankly with women who have high-risk pregnancies about their options.

“You’ve got to dance around it a lot more,” she said, “because the waters are muddy.”

This story originally appeared in the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.columbiamissourian.com/news/elections/ballot-initiatives/doctors-gather-across-missouri-to-canvass-for-amendment-3/article_bad37842-93aa-11ef-a493-9b41a7d95124.html#tncms-source=Top%20Story" target="_blank">Columbia Missourian</a>. It can be republished in print or online.&nbsp;

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/9/1725887984419.png" alt=" Supporters of a proposed ballot measure to legalize abortion up until the point of fetal viability gathered at a rally hosted by Missourians for Constitutional Freedom on Feb. 6 in Kansas City (Anna Spoerre/Missouri Independent)." />
 <figcaption> Supporters of a proposed ballot measure to legalize abortion up until the point of fetal viability gathered at a rally hosted by Missourians for Constitutional Freedom on Feb. 6 in Kansas City (Anna Spoerre/Missouri Independent).</figcaption>
 </figure>BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/natanyafriedheim/">NATANYA FRIEDHEIM</a>Physician David Mehr addressed a dozen voters gathered Saturday morning at the Columbia headquarters of Missourians for Constitutional Freedom, the coalition behind a proposed amendment would enshrine the right to abortion in Missouri’s constitution.Meanwhile, physicians greeted volunteers in St. Louis County, and still more gathered in Kansas City, as part of the coalition’s final get-out-the-vote campaign before the Nov. 5 election.“I’ve cared for women my entire life,” Mehr told the group of volunteers in Columbia. “It’s important that we keep this decision between a woman and her doctor.”Mehr works at University of Missouri Health Care but spoke as an individual and not on behalf of the hospital.An hour later, he was navigating a thicket in a northwest Columbia neighborhood, looking for the right door to knock on. By the end of the day, he and his canvassing partner had knocked on 44 doors.Like other states with abortion bans, Missouri’s state law carves out exceptions “in cases of medical emergency.” Medical professionals who perform abortions deemed unnecessary can be found guilty of a Class B felony and have their license revoked or suspended.“There’s no definition of what a medical emergency might be,” said Betsy Wickstrom, a high-risk obstetrician who works in Kansas City. “So if my patient is bleeding and her cervix is open, there’s still cardiac activity, how much do I need to let her bleed?”Wickstrom preferred not to disclose her hospital affiliation. Her reluctance was shared by doctors who gathered in St. Louis on Saturday and reflects a broader trend of doctors keeping their workplaces hidden when talking about abortion, identified in a 2023 study.Last month, a group of 800 medical professionals from Missouri, including 500 physicians, signed a letter supporting the abortion-rights amendment, which appears on the ballot as Amendment 3.No doctor in any state has been criminally prosecuted for performing an abortion during a medical emergency, according to an article published last month by the Association of American Medical Colleges. However, doctors across the country have warned that lack of clarity about what constitutes a medical emergency compromises their ability to offer emergency abortions.In August, a group of OB-GYN medical residents in Missouri anonymously published an article in the Journal of Graduate Medical Education describing their shock and fear entering the profession in a state with a strict abortion ban.“Because the text of the law reads so punitively, it has struck fear into clinicians and caused life-saving care to be unnecessarily delayed or blatantly refused,” the authors wrote.Since abortion became illegal in Missouri in 2022, the state has seen a more than 25% drop in applications for OB-GYN medical residencies, according to a May report by the Association of American Medical Colleges.In a widely publicized case from 2022, two hospitals, including one in Missouri, turned away Missouri resident Mylissa Farmer when she sought care after her water broke at just 18 weeks of pregnancy. Last year, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid found the two hospitals — Freeman Hospital West in Joplin and the University of Kansas Health System in Kansas City, Kansas — violated federal law when they denied Farmer care.Numerous other examples of women being denied emergency medical care have appeared in news media since the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization ended the constitutional right to an abortion.Health care professionals opposed to abortion argue that media reports promote an exaggerated narrative that abortion bans jeopardize women’s access to emergency care.“All state laws allow for maternal fetal separations to be done (through whatever means necessary) in order to save the life of the mother,” Christina Francis, an OB-GYN and CEO of the American Association of Pro-Life OB-GYNs, wrote in testimony for a U.S. Senate Finance Committee hearing in September.Decisions in medicine are rarely black-and-white. When a woman’s water breaks early enough that the fetus’ viability is remote, abortion is the standard of care, said Wickstrom. When a woman is closer to 20 weeks, factors like bleeding, signs of infection and how much amniotic fluid is in the uterus are considered.Some women want to wait, and a doctor guides the patient through that choice.“Of course we do that, because the point is choice. The point is that it is her body to determine for herself what’s right for her, and we come alongside her and support her and guide her through what is right for her,” Wickstrom said.If a woman does not want to continue the nonviable pregnancy, the fetus has a heartbeat and her condition is not considered an emergency, she has to leave the state for an abortion, Wickstrom said. In Kansas City and St. Louis, women can get to clinics that offer abortion care in Kansas and Illinois more easily than those in mid-Missouri.Wickstrom brings her metal water bottle to work at a hospital in Kansas City. She keeps it on display when she talks to patients so they can see the stickers adorning it: Just above a cutout of Taylor Swift is a sticker that reads “ABORTION RESOURCES,” followed by a list of phone numbers and website URLs.Wickstrom said she struggles to speak frankly with women who have high-risk pregnancies about their options.“You’ve got to dance around it a lot more,” she said, “because the waters are muddy.”This story originally appeared in the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.columbiamissourian.com/news/elections/ballot-initiatives/doctors-gather-across-missouri-to-canvass-for-amendment-3/article_bad37842-93aa-11ef-a493-9b41a7d95124.html#tncms-source=Top%20Story" target="_blank">Columbia Missourian</a>. It can be republished in print or online.&nbsp;

Doctors gather across Missouri to canvass for abortion amendment

KANSAS CITY – A Mexican national who worked with a drug-trafficking organization tied to the Cárteles Unidos cartel in Michoacán, Mexico, was convicted by a federal trial jury last week for his role in a $4.7 million conspiracy to distribute more than 335 kilograms of methamphetamine and 22 kilograms of heroin in the Kansas City metropolitan area and throughout the United States, according to the United State's Attorney.

Luis Eduardo Pineda-Zarao, 29, a citizen of Mexico residing in Lebanon, Tennessee, was found guilty of participating in a conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine and heroin from Feb. 28, 2020, to June 1, 2022.

The indictment alleges the conspiracy involved the distribution of more than 335.5 kilograms of methamphetamine, with an average street price of $300 per ounce, and more than 22.1 kilograms of heroin, with an average street price of $1,500 per ounce.

During the investigation, federal agents with Homeland Security Investigations conducted two undercover bulk cash pickups totaling $308,775 and seized $610,400 in bulk cash, over 56 kilograms of methamphetamine, 5.5 kilograms of heroin, 2.6 kilograms of marijuana, and at least eight firearms, two of which were stolen. Law enforcement officers also seized $277,863 during a vehicle stop and $114,863 while executing search warrants at four Kansas City, Mo., residences.

Pineda-Zarao is among 44 defendants charged in this case. Nine co-defendants have been sentenced and 34 co-defendants have pleaded guilty and await sentencing.

Following the presentation of evidence, the jury in the U.S. District Court in Kansas City, Mo., deliberated for less than an hour before returning guilty verdicts to U.S. District Judge Greg Kays, ending a trial that began Monday, Oct. 21.

Under federal statutes, Pineda-Zarao is subject to a mandatory minimum sentence of 10 years in federal prison without parole, up to a sentence of life in federal prison without parole. The maximum statutory sentence is prescribed by Congress and is provided here for informational purposes, as the sentencing of the defendant will be determined by the court based on the advisory sentencing guidelines and other statutory factors. A sentencing hearing will be scheduled after the completion of a presentence investigation by the United States Probation Office.

This case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Patrick C. Edwards and Megan Baker. It was investigated by Homeland Security Investigations, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Jackson County Drug Task Force, IRS-Criminal Investigation, the Kansas Bureau of Investigation, the Kansas City, Mo., Police Department, the Kansas City, Kan., Police Department, the Missouri State Highway Patrol, the Kansas Highway Patrol, the Independence, Mo., Police Department, the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, the Minnesota State Patrol, the Olmsted County, Minn., Sheriff’s Office, the Texas Department of Public Safety, the FBI, the Clay County, Mo., Sheriff’s Department, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, and the U.S. Marshals Service.

Organized Crime and Drug Enforcement Task Force

This case is part of an Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF) operation. OCDETF identifies, disrupts, and dismantles the highest-level criminal organizations that threaten the United States using a prosecutor-led, intelligence-driven, multi-agency approach. Additional information about the OCDETF Program can be found at https://www.justice.gov/OCDETF.

This prosecution was brought as a part of the Department of Justice’s Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF) Co-located Strike Forces Initiative, which provides for the establishment of permanent multi-agency task force teams that work side-by-side in the same location. This co-located model enables agents from different agencies to collaborate on intelligence-driven, multi-jurisdictional operations against a continuum of priority targets and their affiliate illicit financial networks. These prosecutor-led co-located Strike Forces capitalize on the synergy created through the long-term relationships that can be forged by agents, analysts, and prosecutors who remain together over time, and they epitomize the model that has proven most effective in combating organized crime. The principal mission of the OCDETF program is to identify, disrupt, and dismantle the most serious drug trafficking organizations, transnational criminal organizations, and money laundering organizations that present a significant threat to the public safety, economic, or national security of the United States.

KANSAS CITY – A Mexican national who worked with a drug-trafficking organization tied to the Cárteles Unidos cartel in Michoacán, Mexico, was convicted by a federal trial jury last week for his role in a $4.7 million conspiracy to distribute more than 335 kilograms of methamphetamine and 22 kilograms of heroin in the Kansas City metropolitan area and throughout the United States, according to the United State's Attorney.Luis Eduardo Pineda-Zarao, 29, a citizen of Mexico residing in Lebanon, Tennessee, was found guilty of participating in a conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine and heroin from Feb. 28, 2020, to June 1, 2022.The indictment alleges the conspiracy involved the distribution of more than 335.5 kilograms of methamphetamine, with an average street price of $300 per ounce, and more than 22.1 kilograms of heroin, with an average street price of $1,500 per ounce.During the investigation, federal agents with Homeland Security Investigations conducted two undercover bulk cash pickups totaling $308,775 and seized $610,400 in bulk cash, over 56 kilograms of methamphetamine, 5.5 kilograms of heroin, 2.6 kilograms of marijuana, and at least eight firearms, two of which were stolen. Law enforcement officers also seized $277,863 during a vehicle stop and $114,863 while executing search warrants at four Kansas City, Mo., residences.Pineda-Zarao is among 44 defendants charged in this case. Nine co-defendants have been sentenced and 34 co-defendants have pleaded guilty and await sentencing.Following the presentation of evidence, the jury in the U.S. District Court in Kansas City, Mo., deliberated for less than an hour before returning guilty verdicts to U.S. District Judge Greg Kays, ending a trial that began Monday, Oct. 21.Under federal statutes, Pineda-Zarao is subject to a mandatory minimum sentence of 10 years in federal prison without parole, up to a sentence of life in federal prison without parole. The maximum statutory sentence is prescribed by Congress and is provided here for informational purposes, as the sentencing of the defendant will be determined by the court based on the advisory sentencing guidelines and other statutory factors. A sentencing hearing will be scheduled after the completion of a presentence investigation by the United States Probation Office.This case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Patrick C. Edwards and Megan Baker. It was investigated by Homeland Security Investigations, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Jackson County Drug Task Force, IRS-Criminal Investigation, the Kansas Bureau of Investigation, the Kansas City, Mo., Police Department, the Kansas City, Kan., Police Department, the Missouri State Highway Patrol, the Kansas Highway Patrol, the Independence, Mo., Police Department, the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, the Minnesota State Patrol, the Olmsted County, Minn., Sheriff’s Office, the Texas Department of Public Safety, the FBI, the Clay County, Mo., Sheriff’s Department, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, and the U.S. Marshals Service.Organized Crime and Drug Enforcement Task ForceThis case is part of an Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF) operation. OCDETF identifies, disrupts, and dismantles the highest-level criminal organizations that threaten the United States using a prosecutor-led, intelligence-driven, multi-agency approach. Additional information about the OCDETF Program can be found at https://www.justice.gov/OCDETF.KC Metro Strike ForceThis prosecution was brought as a part of the Department of Justice’s Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF) Co-located Strike Forces Initiative, which provides for the establishment of permanent multi-agency task force teams that work side-by-side in the same location. This co-located model enables agents from different agencies to collaborate on intelligence-driven, multi-jurisdictional operations against a continuum of priority targets and their affiliate illicit financial networks. These prosecutor-led co-located Strike Forces capitalize on the synergy created through the long-term relationships that can be forged by agents, analysts, and prosecutors who remain together over time, and they epitomize the model that has proven most effective in combating organized crime. The principal mission of the OCDETF program is to identify, disrupt, and dismantle the most serious drug trafficking organizations, transnational criminal organizations, and money laundering organizations that present a significant threat to the public safety, economic, or national security of the United States.

Jury: Mexican national guilty of $4.7 million meth, heroin conspiracy in KC

BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/ashley-murray/">ASHLEY MURRAY</a>

WASHINGTON — The next U.S. president must steer the nation through crises across the globe, including worsening violence in the Middle East, Russian President Vladimir Putin’s refusal to retreat from Ukraine and U.S-China trade relations.

The Democratic nominee, Vice President Kamala Harris, largely built her career as a prosecutor, but once in Washington she sat on the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, a position that comes with access to highly classified national security files.

As vice president she’s represented the U.S. at high-profile international meetings, including the Munich Security Conference and Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation.

The Republican nominee, former President Donald Trump, who followed his wealthy father’s path into real estate and ascended to the status of celebrity businessman, has already held the elected position of Commander-in-Chief for four years — though high-ranking officials who served under him&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/milley-trump-biden-democracy-military-d2abb76858291c87ae856f91e9556d8e" target="_blank">say</a>&nbsp;he&nbsp;<a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/us/bolton-excoriates-trump-fresh-introduction-his-memoir-2024-01-30/" target="_blank">should</a>&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2024/03/30/mark-esper-wont-vote-for-trump-wont-say-he-will-vote-for-biden-sot-nr-vpx.cnn" target="_blank">not</a>&nbsp;occupy that seat again.

Trump and Harris’ track records can provide clues on how, if elected, they would handle complex and challenging national and economic security policies.

But overall on the campaign trail, foreign policy “has played a back seat role to domestic politics in the 2024 election,” James M. Lindsay, a senior fellow in U.S. foreign policy for the Council on Foreign Relations, told States Newsroom in an interview.

That’s not unusual, Lindsay said, as presidential year politics generally tend to have a domestic focus.

“This has been more a campaign about personalities than about specific policy prescriptions. It’s safe to say that the two candidates have very different world views,” Lindsay said.

Harris centers relationship building, and promised in her Democratic National Convention acceptance speech to “stand strong” with NATO allies.

In Trump’s convention speech he lamented that the U.S. has “long been taken advantage of” by “so-called allies.”

Observers say the former president leads with a transactional outlook: In other words, nations must pay for access to U.S. markets and security.

“Trump thinks that U.S. support to allies is a bad deal for America, whereas Harris realizes that the United States benefits immensely from them,” Matthew Waxman, senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and chair of Columbia Law School’s National Security Law Program, told States Newsroom.

But predicting how a presidential candidate would act on the global stage, if elected, is tricky. Conflicts continue to evolve, and those in top defense and diplomatic jobs are likely to turn over.

“It’s partly because a President Harris or President Trump could face a very different situation in the Middle East or in Ukraine come Inauguration Day, but it’s also because in Washington personnel are policy, people are policy,” Lindsay said.

Here are some of the serious international situations either administration will face:

The deadly Oct. 7, 2023 Hamas attack on Israel, launched from the Palestinian territory of the Gaza Strip, reignited smoldering regional tensions and highlighted the inextricable U.S. role. Hamas militants killed roughly 1,200 in the brutal and unexpected incursion, and took 250 hostages, many of whom still remain in captivity.

President Joe Biden immediately&nbsp;<a href="https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R47828" target="_blank">surged</a>&nbsp;weapons and security aid to the key U.S. defense partner, and in April Congress approved his request for $8.7 billion more in foreign military financing and missile defense.

Israel’s year-long campaign to completely eliminate Iranian-allied Hamas militants from the Gaza Strip has resulted in a staggering death toll, now over 41,000, according to Gaza health officials.

Hamas’ assault also set in motion attacks from other Iranian-backed militias, opening up a war front between Israel and Hezbollah fighters to the north in Lebanon. And for months, Yemen’s Iranian-backed Houthis have terrorized commercial shipping in the Red Sea.

Biden has faced fierce criticism for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s war tactics.

Harris, as early as March,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.npr.org/2024/03/04/1234822836/kamala-harris-benny-gantz-gaza-cease-fire-israel-hamas" target="_blank">publicly</a>&nbsp;criticized Israel over the humanitarian “<a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/us-vp-harris-urges-israeli-government-do-more-boost-aid-into-gaza-2024-03-03/" target="_blank">catastrophe</a>” in Gaza and called for an immediate six-week cease-fire.

Harris, who became the Democratic presidential nominee in mid-summer after Biden dropped his bid, has repeatedly said she defends Israel’s right to defend itself but that “<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2024/07/25/remarks-by-vice-president-harris-following-meeting-with-prime-minister-benjamin-netanyahu-of-israel/" target="_blank">how it does so matters</a>.”

Protesters could be heard in the distance Monday as Harris planted a memorial tree at the vice president’s residence to mark the one-year anniversary of the Oct. 7 attack. Pro-Palestinian activists protesting the death toll in Gaza have marched and rallied throughout the U.S. during the past year.

Harris&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/one-year-oct-7-attack-israel-us-leaders-honor-victims-and-protesters-march" target="_blank">told</a>&nbsp;reporters that the administration is “not giving up” on negotiating a cease-fire deal and release of hostages, an effort that has so far floundered.

“It’s one of the most important ways we will be able to end this war and bring any type of stability to the region. It’s one of the highest priorities of this administration,” she said.

She has not indicated any slowdown or conditions on assistance to Israel if elected — though she continues to advocate for a two-state solution.

“Trump may give Jerusalem less public chastising and criticism, but I’m not sure the policy differences would be that great either,” Michael O’Hanlon, senior fellow and foreign policy research director at the Brookings Institution, told States Newsroom. O’Hanlon recently published an article arguing the Trump and Harris defense strategies would at least “<a href="https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-partially-convergent-trump-and-harris-defense-policies/" target="_blank">partially</a>” converge.

Trump maintains that Oct. 7 “would never have happened” had he been in office, and he accuses the Biden administration of inviting the attack because of its “weak” relationship with Iran.

“What is needed more than ever is a return of unwavering American leadership and unquestioned American strength. We were strong, we were powerful … That’s what I intend to deliver as the 47th president of the United States,” he said Monday while in Miami marking one year since the ambush on Israel.

The attack also wrecked any forward progress on the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.state.gov/the-abraham-accords/" target="_blank">Abraham Accords</a>&nbsp;— Trump’s signature Middle East achievement that created full diplomatic relations between Israel and the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Morocco. While those established channels remain steady, the Biden administration’s efforts to strike a deal between Israel and Saudi Arabia are now at a standstill.

Trump is increasingly selling himself on the campaign trail as the candidate of stability who can quash Iran’s aggression — which is pretty much a “standard approach to campaigning,” Lindsay said.

“He is not the first challenger to argue that the incumbent president has been weak.”

But Lindsay said, “the important question isn’t whether he was tougher, it’s whether his policies were more effective.”

For example, the Iranian-backed so-called “axis of resistance” militias currently upending the Middle East were also operating during Trump’s presidency.

“(They) pre-dated his coming into office but it’s not that a Trump administration ended that network of anti-Western, anti-Israeli groups,” Lindsay said. “And during the Trump administration it was the case that Iran both underwrote attacks on American troops and actually launched attacks on American troops.”

Trump drew attention last week to an early January 2020 barrage on U.S. troops in Iraq when he again&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/trump-describes-traumatic-brain-injuries-sustained-us-troops-iraq-headache" target="_blank">described</a>&nbsp;the traumatic brain injuries they suffered as “headaches.”

U.S. troops&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cfr.org/article/us-troops-middle-east-mapping-military-presence" target="_blank">in Iraq and Syria</a>, already a target, have come under increasing fire from Iran-backed militants, with more than 100&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cfr.org/in-brief/drone-strike-risks-dangerous-us-iran-escalation" target="_blank">attacks</a>&nbsp;on U.S. service members since Israel began its post-Oct. 7 offensive. A drone strike in January&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/28/politics/us-troops-drone-attack-jordan/index.html" target="_blank">killed</a>&nbsp;three U.S. soldiers and injured 30 at an outpost in Jordan on the Syrian border. The U.S. retaliated by&nbsp;<a href="https://www.npr.org/2024/02/02/1228132782/us-biden-iran-drone-response-strike" target="_blank">launching</a>&nbsp;more than 100 precision rockets at 85 of Iran military sites in Iraq and Syria.

The U.S. assisted Israel&nbsp;<a href="https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Stories/Article/Article/3923123/us-assets-in-mediterranean-again-helped-defend-israel-against-iranian-missiles/" target="_blank">twice</a>&nbsp;in 2024 in intercepting rockets fired directly from Iran — once in April following Israel’s bombing of the Iranian embassy in Damascus, and again in September after Israel’s assassination of Iranian-backed Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah in Beirut, Lebanon.

“We’re in the last months of the Biden presidency, and Biden’s own, I think, personal influence here is quite diminished. And you know, I can’t predict what Trump policy really would be. I assume he would be less likely to be trying to restrain the Israelis, but so is the Biden administration. And maybe that is a Biden-Harris policy,” Elliott Abrams, CFR’s senior fellow for Middle Eastern Studies, told reporters on Oct. 2, the day after Iran launched its second direct&nbsp;<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/oct/01/iran-imminent-ballistic-missile-attack-israel-us-warns" target="_blank">attack</a>.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy met with both&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/zelenskyy-washington-meets-us-leaders-beef-support-ukraine" target="_blank">Harris</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="https://iowacapitaldispatch.com/2024/09/27/u-s-government-unveils-charges-against-iranians-who-hacked-into-trump-2024-campaign/" target="_blank">Trump</a>&nbsp;in recent weeks to shore up continued U.S. support for his country’s ongoing war against Russia’s occupation.

Harris’ meeting with the Ukrainian leader was her seventh, and she pledged continued aid for the eastern European nation on the principle that Putin would continue marching into Europe if allies relent on Ukraine.

Harris supports continued U.S. assistance, which has&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cfr.org/article/how-much-us-aid-going-ukraine" target="_blank">totaled</a>&nbsp;roughly $175 billion since 2022. At the Ukraine peace&nbsp;<a href="https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2024/06/16/joint-communique-on-a-peace-framework-summit-on-peace-in-ukraine/" target="_blank">summit</a>&nbsp;in Switzerland in June, Harris&nbsp;<a href="https://www.france24.com/en/americas/20240723-from-gaza-to-china-where-kamala-harris-stands-on-foreign-policy-issues" target="_blank">pledged</a>&nbsp;<a href="https://www.usaid.gov/news-information/press-releases/jun-15-2024-/vice-president-kamala-harris-announces-over-1-billion-bolster-ukraines-energy-sector-address-humanitarian-needs-and-strengthen-civilian-security" target="_blank">nearly</a>&nbsp;$2 billion, some new and some redirected, to bolster the country’s energy sector and add to humanitarian efforts.

The vice president has&nbsp;<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2022/02/19/remarks-by-vice-president-harris-at-the-munich-security-conference/" target="_blank">represented</a>&nbsp;the U.S.&nbsp;<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2023/02/18/remarks-by-vice-president-harris-at-the-munich-security-conference-2/" target="_blank">three</a>&nbsp;<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2024/02/16/remarks-by-vice-president-harris-at-the-munich-security-conference-munich-germany/" target="_blank">times</a>&nbsp;at the annual Munich Security Conference in Germany, where she praised the NATO alliance and said the U.S. commitment to its principles is “ironclad.”

When facing Harris on the presidential debate stage in September, Trump&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/harris-tears-trump-over-abortion-rights-and-race-tense-presidential-debate" target="_blank">refused</a>&nbsp;to answer whether he wants Ukraine to be victorious over Russia.

Trump’s rhetoric and past behavior “spells bad news for Ukraine,” Waxman said.

“He is likely to reduce American support for Ukraine and push Ukraine to make concessions to Russia. Overall, Trump’s transactional approach to leader-to-leader diplomacy is likely to benefit Putin,” Waxman continued. “Whereas Harris wants to invest in alliances like NATO, Trump is skeptical of them.”

That type of leader-to-leader communication was notoriously highlighted in 2019 when U.S. House lawmakers&nbsp;<a href="https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S4-4-9/ALDE_00000035/" target="_blank">impeached</a>&nbsp;Trump for directly threatening to withhold Ukraine aid if Zelenskyy did not announce an investigation into Biden — Trump’s presidential campaign rival at the time. The Senate acquitted Trump.

Like his campaign line on the Israel attack, Trump also repeatedly claims that had he been in office, instead of Biden, Russia would have never launched its February 2022 attack on Ukraine.

“The war in Ukraine did not begin in February of ‘22, it began back in 2014,” Lindsay said, referring to Putin’s forced annexation of the Crimean Peninsula.

Trump’s own administration&nbsp;<a href="https://www.brookings.edu/articles/on-the-record-the-u-s-administrations-actions-on-russia/" target="_blank">expanded</a>&nbsp;Obama-era sanctions meant to punish Russia’s actions in Crimea.

“Experts can argue about how to dole out criticism across administrations, but clearly the issue of Russian support for a notionally independent insurrection in eastern Ukraine was not solved during the Trump presidency,” Lindsay continued.

Foreign trade is a “political hot potato,” and neither Harris nor Trump are offering much clarity for U.S. trading partners around the world, Mary E. Lovely, senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, told States Newsroom in an interview.

Lovely described the Biden-Harris approach as multipronged, in that they’ve instituted policies to bring manufacturing back to the U.S. while also aiming to maintain good trade relationships with partner nations.

The tightrope walk becomes even trickier as U.S. policy also&nbsp;<a href="https://www.piie.com/blogs/realtime-economics/2024/while-us-and-china-decouple-eu-and-china-deepen-trade-dependencies" target="_blank">disincentivizes</a>&nbsp;materials and components from China — one of the world’s largest trading nations — in the final products imported from trading partners. Think: components in solar panels and electric vehicles.

The Biden administration’s major legislative accomplishments — the Inflation Reduction Act and the CHIPS and Science Act — provided major subsidies for “reshoring,” or returning to the U.S., clean energy and semiconductor production. But the policies were not without risks to U.S. trading partners.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/9/1695389171060.png" alt="File photo -President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyy&nbsp; and U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin- photo courtesy White House" />
 <figcaption>File photo -President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyy&nbsp; and U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin- photo courtesy White House</figcaption>
 </figure>BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/ashley-murray/">ASHLEY MURRAY</a>WASHINGTON — The next U.S. president must steer the nation through crises across the globe, including worsening violence in the Middle East, Russian President Vladimir Putin’s refusal to retreat from Ukraine and U.S-China trade relations.The Democratic nominee, Vice President Kamala Harris, largely built her career as a prosecutor, but once in Washington she sat on the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, a position that comes with access to highly classified national security files.As vice president she’s represented the U.S. at high-profile international meetings, including the Munich Security Conference and Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation.The Republican nominee, former President Donald Trump, who followed his wealthy father’s path into real estate and ascended to the status of celebrity businessman, has already held the elected position of Commander-in-Chief for four years — though high-ranking officials who served under him&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/milley-trump-biden-democracy-military-d2abb76858291c87ae856f91e9556d8e" target="_blank">say</a>&nbsp;he&nbsp;<a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/us/bolton-excoriates-trump-fresh-introduction-his-memoir-2024-01-30/" target="_blank">should</a>&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2024/03/30/mark-esper-wont-vote-for-trump-wont-say-he-will-vote-for-biden-sot-nr-vpx.cnn" target="_blank">not</a>&nbsp;occupy that seat again.Trump and Harris’ track records can provide clues on how, if elected, they would handle complex and challenging national and economic security policies.But overall on the campaign trail, foreign policy “has played a back seat role to domestic politics in the 2024 election,” James M. Lindsay, a senior fellow in U.S. foreign policy for the Council on Foreign Relations, told States Newsroom in an interview.That’s not unusual, Lindsay said, as presidential year politics generally tend to have a domestic focus.“This has been more a campaign about personalities than about specific policy prescriptions. It’s safe to say that the two candidates have very different world views,” Lindsay said.<h2>Relationships with allies</h2>Harris centers relationship building, and promised in her Democratic National Convention acceptance speech to “stand strong” with NATO allies.In Trump’s convention speech he lamented that the U.S. has “long been taken advantage of” by “so-called allies.”Observers say the former president leads with a transactional outlook: In other words, nations must pay for access to U.S. markets and security.“Trump thinks that U.S. support to allies is a bad deal for America, whereas Harris realizes that the United States benefits immensely from them,” Matthew Waxman, senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and chair of Columbia Law School’s National Security Law Program, told States Newsroom.But predicting how a presidential candidate would act on the global stage, if elected, is tricky. Conflicts continue to evolve, and those in top defense and diplomatic jobs are likely to turn over.“It’s partly because a President Harris or President Trump could face a very different situation in the Middle East or in Ukraine come Inauguration Day, but it’s also because in Washington personnel are policy, people are policy,” Lindsay said.Here are some of the serious international situations either administration will face:<h2>Middle East</h2>The deadly Oct. 7, 2023 Hamas attack on Israel, launched from the Palestinian territory of the Gaza Strip, reignited smoldering regional tensions and highlighted the inextricable U.S. role. Hamas militants killed roughly 1,200 in the brutal and unexpected incursion, and took 250 hostages, many of whom still remain in captivity.President Joe Biden immediately&nbsp;<a href="https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R47828" target="_blank">surged</a>&nbsp;weapons and security aid to the key U.S. defense partner, and in April Congress approved his request for $8.7 billion more in foreign military financing and missile defense.Israel’s year-long campaign to completely eliminate Iranian-allied Hamas militants from the Gaza Strip has resulted in a staggering death toll, now over 41,000, according to Gaza health officials.Hamas’ assault also set in motion attacks from other Iranian-backed militias, opening up a war front between Israel and Hezbollah fighters to the north in Lebanon. And for months, Yemen’s Iranian-backed Houthis have terrorized commercial shipping in the Red Sea.Biden has faced fierce criticism for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s war tactics.Harris, as early as March,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.npr.org/2024/03/04/1234822836/kamala-harris-benny-gantz-gaza-cease-fire-israel-hamas" target="_blank">publicly</a>&nbsp;criticized Israel over the humanitarian “<a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/us-vp-harris-urges-israeli-government-do-more-boost-aid-into-gaza-2024-03-03/" target="_blank">catastrophe</a>” in Gaza and called for an immediate six-week cease-fire.Harris, who became the Democratic presidential nominee in mid-summer after Biden dropped his bid, has repeatedly said she defends Israel’s right to defend itself but that “<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2024/07/25/remarks-by-vice-president-harris-following-meeting-with-prime-minister-benjamin-netanyahu-of-israel/" target="_blank">how it does so matters</a>.”Protesters could be heard in the distance Monday as Harris planted a memorial tree at the vice president’s residence to mark the one-year anniversary of the Oct. 7 attack. Pro-Palestinian activists protesting the death toll in Gaza have marched and rallied throughout the U.S. during the past year.Harris&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/one-year-oct-7-attack-israel-us-leaders-honor-victims-and-protesters-march" target="_blank">told</a>&nbsp;reporters that the administration is “not giving up” on negotiating a cease-fire deal and release of hostages, an effort that has so far floundered.“It’s one of the most important ways we will be able to end this war and bring any type of stability to the region. It’s one of the highest priorities of this administration,” she said.She has not indicated any slowdown or conditions on assistance to Israel if elected — though she continues to advocate for a two-state solution.“Trump may give Jerusalem less public chastising and criticism, but I’m not sure the policy differences would be that great either,” Michael O’Hanlon, senior fellow and foreign policy research director at the Brookings Institution, told States Newsroom. O’Hanlon recently published an article arguing the Trump and Harris defense strategies would at least “<a href="https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-partially-convergent-trump-and-harris-defense-policies/" target="_blank">partially</a>” converge.Trump maintains that Oct. 7 “would never have happened” had he been in office, and he accuses the Biden administration of inviting the attack because of its “weak” relationship with Iran.“What is needed more than ever is a return of unwavering American leadership and unquestioned American strength. We were strong, we were powerful … That’s what I intend to deliver as the 47th president of the United States,” he said Monday while in Miami marking one year since the ambush on Israel.The attack also wrecked any forward progress on the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.state.gov/the-abraham-accords/" target="_blank">Abraham Accords</a>&nbsp;— Trump’s signature Middle East achievement that created full diplomatic relations between Israel and the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Morocco. While those established channels remain steady, the Biden administration’s efforts to strike a deal between Israel and Saudi Arabia are now at a standstill.Trump is increasingly selling himself on the campaign trail as the candidate of stability who can quash Iran’s aggression — which is pretty much a “standard approach to campaigning,” Lindsay said.“He is not the first challenger to argue that the incumbent president has been weak.”But Lindsay said, “the important question isn’t whether he was tougher, it’s whether his policies were more effective.”For example, the Iranian-backed so-called “axis of resistance” militias currently upending the Middle East were also operating during Trump’s presidency.“(They) pre-dated his coming into office but it’s not that a Trump administration ended that network of anti-Western, anti-Israeli groups,” Lindsay said. “And during the Trump administration it was the case that Iran both underwrote attacks on American troops and actually launched attacks on American troops.”Trump drew attention last week to an early January 2020 barrage on U.S. troops in Iraq when he again&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/trump-describes-traumatic-brain-injuries-sustained-us-troops-iraq-headache" target="_blank">described</a>&nbsp;the traumatic brain injuries they suffered as “headaches.”U.S. troops&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cfr.org/article/us-troops-middle-east-mapping-military-presence" target="_blank">in Iraq and Syria</a>, already a target, have come under increasing fire from Iran-backed militants, with more than 100&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cfr.org/in-brief/drone-strike-risks-dangerous-us-iran-escalation" target="_blank">attacks</a>&nbsp;on U.S. service members since Israel began its post-Oct. 7 offensive. A drone strike in January&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/28/politics/us-troops-drone-attack-jordan/index.html" target="_blank">killed</a>&nbsp;three U.S. soldiers and injured 30 at an outpost in Jordan on the Syrian border. The U.S. retaliated by&nbsp;<a href="https://www.npr.org/2024/02/02/1228132782/us-biden-iran-drone-response-strike" target="_blank">launching</a>&nbsp;more than 100 precision rockets at 85 of Iran military sites in Iraq and Syria.The U.S. assisted Israel&nbsp;<a href="https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Stories/Article/Article/3923123/us-assets-in-mediterranean-again-helped-defend-israel-against-iranian-missiles/" target="_blank">twice</a>&nbsp;in 2024 in intercepting rockets fired directly from Iran — once in April following Israel’s bombing of the Iranian embassy in Damascus, and again in September after Israel’s assassination of Iranian-backed Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah in Beirut, Lebanon.“We’re in the last months of the Biden presidency, and Biden’s own, I think, personal influence here is quite diminished. And you know, I can’t predict what Trump policy really would be. I assume he would be less likely to be trying to restrain the Israelis, but so is the Biden administration. And maybe that is a Biden-Harris policy,” Elliott Abrams, CFR’s senior fellow for Middle Eastern Studies, told reporters on Oct. 2, the day after Iran launched its second direct&nbsp;<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/oct/01/iran-imminent-ballistic-missile-attack-israel-us-warns" target="_blank">attack</a>.<h2>Ukraine and NATO</h2>Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy met with both&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/zelenskyy-washington-meets-us-leaders-beef-support-ukraine" target="_blank">Harris</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="https://iowacapitaldispatch.com/2024/09/27/u-s-government-unveils-charges-against-iranians-who-hacked-into-trump-2024-campaign/" target="_blank">Trump</a>&nbsp;in recent weeks to shore up continued U.S. support for his country’s ongoing war against Russia’s occupation.Harris’ meeting with the Ukrainian leader was her seventh, and she pledged continued aid for the eastern European nation on the principle that Putin would continue marching into Europe if allies relent on Ukraine.Harris supports continued U.S. assistance, which has&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cfr.org/article/how-much-us-aid-going-ukraine" target="_blank">totaled</a>&nbsp;roughly $175 billion since 2022. At the Ukraine peace&nbsp;<a href="https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2024/06/16/joint-communique-on-a-peace-framework-summit-on-peace-in-ukraine/" target="_blank">summit</a>&nbsp;in Switzerland in June, Harris&nbsp;<a href="https://www.france24.com/en/americas/20240723-from-gaza-to-china-where-kamala-harris-stands-on-foreign-policy-issues" target="_blank">pledged</a>&nbsp;<a href="https://www.usaid.gov/news-information/press-releases/jun-15-2024-/vice-president-kamala-harris-announces-over-1-billion-bolster-ukraines-energy-sector-address-humanitarian-needs-and-strengthen-civilian-security" target="_blank">nearly</a>&nbsp;$2 billion, some new and some redirected, to bolster the country’s energy sector and add to humanitarian efforts.The vice president has&nbsp;<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2022/02/19/remarks-by-vice-president-harris-at-the-munich-security-conference/" target="_blank">represented</a>&nbsp;the U.S.&nbsp;<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2023/02/18/remarks-by-vice-president-harris-at-the-munich-security-conference-2/" target="_blank">three</a>&nbsp;<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2024/02/16/remarks-by-vice-president-harris-at-the-munich-security-conference-munich-germany/" target="_blank">times</a>&nbsp;at the annual Munich Security Conference in Germany, where she praised the NATO alliance and said the U.S. commitment to its principles is “ironclad.”When facing Harris on the presidential debate stage in September, Trump&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/harris-tears-trump-over-abortion-rights-and-race-tense-presidential-debate" target="_blank">refused</a>&nbsp;to answer whether he wants Ukraine to be victorious over Russia.Trump’s rhetoric and past behavior “spells bad news for Ukraine,” Waxman said.“He is likely to reduce American support for Ukraine and push Ukraine to make concessions to Russia. Overall, Trump’s transactional approach to leader-to-leader diplomacy is likely to benefit Putin,” Waxman continued. “Whereas Harris wants to invest in alliances like NATO, Trump is skeptical of them.”That type of leader-to-leader communication was notoriously highlighted in 2019 when U.S. House lawmakers&nbsp;<a href="https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S4-4-9/ALDE_00000035/" target="_blank">impeached</a>&nbsp;Trump for directly threatening to withhold Ukraine aid if Zelenskyy did not announce an investigation into Biden — Trump’s presidential campaign rival at the time. The Senate acquitted Trump.Like his campaign line on the Israel attack, Trump also repeatedly claims that had he been in office, instead of Biden, Russia would have never launched its February 2022 attack on Ukraine.“The war in Ukraine did not begin in February of ‘22, it began back in 2014,” Lindsay said, referring to Putin’s forced annexation of the Crimean Peninsula.Trump’s own administration&nbsp;<a href="https://www.brookings.edu/articles/on-the-record-the-u-s-administrations-actions-on-russia/" target="_blank">expanded</a>&nbsp;Obama-era sanctions meant to punish Russia’s actions in Crimea.“Experts can argue about how to dole out criticism across administrations, but clearly the issue of Russian support for a notionally independent insurrection in eastern Ukraine was not solved during the Trump presidency,” Lindsay continued.<h2>China and trade</h2>Foreign trade is a “political hot potato,” and neither Harris nor Trump are offering much clarity for U.S. trading partners around the world, Mary E. Lovely, senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, told States Newsroom in an interview.Lovely described the Biden-Harris approach as multipronged, in that they’ve instituted policies to bring manufacturing back to the U.S. while also aiming to maintain good trade relationships with partner nations.The tightrope walk becomes even trickier as U.S. policy also&nbsp;<a href="https://www.piie.com/blogs/realtime-economics/2024/while-us-and-china-decouple-eu-and-china-deepen-trade-dependencies" target="_blank">disincentivizes</a>&nbsp;materials and components from China — one of the world’s largest trading nations — in the final products imported from trading partners. Think: components in solar panels and electric vehicles.The Biden administration’s major legislative accomplishments — the Inflation Reduction Act and the CHIPS and Science Act — provided major subsidies for “reshoring,” or returning to the U.S., clean energy and semiconductor production. But the policies were not without risks to U.S. trading partners.“We had a lot of things (in the legislation), including things that upset the allies — you know, subsidies for American businesses, that they saw potentially as pulling investment out of their economies,” Lovely said.“These are things that the European Union, Japan, Korea were concerned about,” Lovely continued. “So we’ve seen it there — this tension between foreign policy and this idea of economic security.”While Lovely said she worries about how some of the Biden-Harris trade policies might affect competition and the nation’s ability to sign timely trade agreements, she said Trump’s plans are overall “destabilizing.”“The increased use of tariffs is misguided at best,” Lovely said.Trump’s promise to not only increase tariffs on Chinese imports to 60%, but also to slap flat 10% to 20% tariffs on all imports across the board is akin to “starting a trade war with the entire world.”“We’re not going to see those kinds of tariffs without retaliation,” Lovely said.If enacted, the tariffs would be particularly challenging for Indo-Pacific countries that rely on U.S. partnership in the face of China’s regional dominance.“I mean, you can imagine how this will go down in, say, Japan and Korea, two countries which rely on the U.S. for a security umbrella, which is why Trump thinks that he can do stuff to them. But they also have to protect their own economies,” Lovely said. “So it’s going to put them in a really terrible position because it’s very important for them to maintain their alliance with the U.S., economic as well as military.”But one thing is for sure, Lovely said: “Everybody wants to know what’s going to happen. Everybody in every embassy here in Washington.”

Kbct