KANSAS CITY—Law enforcement authorities are investigating a suspect on multiple charges after a chase, traffic stop.

&nbsp;On June 26, Officer Dustin Christina was actively patrolling and observed a black SUV at a high rate of speed traveling south on Blue Ridge Blvd. in Raytown, according to a media release.

With his experience as an officer, he could estimate the vehicle exceeded 100mph. The officer attempted to initiate a traffic stop, but the SUV continued to evade him and he lost sight of the SUV.

The officer located the vehicle again shortly after and activated his emergency lights and sirens for a traffic stop, but once more, it SUV fled. 

However, this time, officer Christina could read the license plate, which came to an address close to the area the vehicle was navigating through.

Officer Christina responded to the plate's registered address and waited for the vehicle. About 15 minutes later, the SUV returned to the address, and when the driver saw the patrol car, he tried to circle to leave. 

However, Officer Christina predicted this outcome and had stop sticks deployed. The SUV could not flee without hitting them, so the driver decided to park his car instead.

When Officer Christina contacted the driver, he spontaneously uttered, "I'm sorry, I just didn't want to go back to jail. I'm on house arrest." 

He was then arrested and detained in the patrol vehicle. Officer Christina then returned to the driver's vehicle, which was still running with the driver's door open, and he observed what looked to be an AK47 sticking up from the vehicle's passenger side within the driver's reach. 

Officer Christina secured the weapon and confirmed it was an AK47 with the buttstock removed. 

It was loaded with a magazine and one in the chamber.The male driver was transported to the Raytown Police Headquarters. He was issued citations for C&amp;I, fleeing and eluding, operating a motor vehicle without a license, and no proof of insurance.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/6/1688035314698.png" alt="Photo Raytown Police" />
 <figcaption>Photo Raytown Police</figcaption>
 </figure>KANSAS CITY—Law enforcement authorities are investigating a suspect on multiple charges after a chase, traffic stop.&nbsp;On June 26, Officer Dustin Christina was actively patrolling and observed a black SUV at a high rate of speed traveling south on Blue Ridge Blvd. in Raytown, according to a media release.With his experience as an officer, he could estimate the vehicle exceeded 100mph. The officer attempted to initiate a traffic stop, but the SUV continued to evade him and he lost sight of the SUV.The officer located the vehicle again shortly after and activated his emergency lights and sirens for a traffic stop, but once more, it SUV fled. However, this time, officer Christina could read the license plate, which came to an address close to the area the vehicle was navigating through.Officer Christina responded to the plate's registered address and waited for the vehicle. About 15 minutes later, the SUV returned to the address, and when the driver saw the patrol car, he tried to circle to leave. However, Officer Christina predicted this outcome and had stop sticks deployed. The SUV could not flee without hitting them, so the driver decided to park his car instead.When Officer Christina contacted the driver, he spontaneously uttered, "I'm sorry, I just didn't want to go back to jail. I'm on house arrest." He was then arrested and detained in the patrol vehicle. Officer Christina then returned to the driver's vehicle, which was still running with the driver's door open, and he observed what looked to be an AK47 sticking up from the vehicle's passenger side within the driver's reach. Officer Christina secured the weapon and confirmed it was an AK47 with the buttstock removed. It was loaded with a magazine and one in the chamber.The male driver was transported to the Raytown Police Headquarters. He was issued citations for C&amp;I, fleeing and eluding, operating a motor vehicle without a license, and no proof of insurance.

KC-area officer found loaded AK 47 after 100mph chase

PAWNEE COUNTY—One person died in an accident just before 12:30p.m. Saturday in Pawnee County.

The Kansas Highway Patrol reported a 2004 GMC Envoy driven by Zona Rhoades, 25, Kinsley, was southbound on 100 Avenue at Q Road a mile and a half north of U.S. 56.

The driver lost control of the SUV. It traveled into the east ditch and rolled.

A passenger identified as 17-year-old Drew Edward&nbsp;Craghead of Jetmore was pronounced dead at the scene and was transported to Beckwith Mortuary.&nbsp; EMS transported Rhoades to Wesley Medical Center.&nbsp; They were not wearing seat belts, according to the KHP.

PAWNEE COUNTY—One person died in an accident just before 12:30p.m. Saturday in Pawnee County.The Kansas Highway Patrol reported a 2004 GMC Envoy driven by Zona Rhoades, 25, Kinsley, was southbound on 100 Avenue at Q Road a mile and a half north of U.S. 56.The driver lost control of the SUV. It traveled into the east ditch and rolled.A passenger identified as 17-year-old Drew Edward&nbsp;Craghead of Jetmore was pronounced dead at the scene and was transported to Beckwith Mortuary.&nbsp; EMS transported Rhoades to Wesley Medical Center.&nbsp; They were not wearing seat belts, according to the KHP.

Kansas teen dies, woman injured after SUV rolls into ditch

By ANNELISE HANSHAW <a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2023/01/30/open-enrollment-missouri-school-choice/">Missouri Independent</a>

At the center of the&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://missouriindependent.com/2023/06/30/u-s-supreme-court-rules-against-biden-administration-student-loan-debt-relief-plan/">U.S. Supreme Court decision striking down Joe Biden’s student loan forgiveness</a>&nbsp;program on Friday was a little-known Missouri nonprofit that goes by MOHELA.

Based in St. Louis, the Missouri Higher Education Loan Authority is a quasi-governmental entity created by state lawmakers in 1981 to service student loans.

And when former Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt went looking for legal standing in order to bring a lawsuit challenging the president’s program, he relied on the relationship between the state and MOHELA — even though the company wanted nothing to do with the lawsuit.

On Friday, the six conservative justices on the U.S. Supreme Court agreed with Schmitt that, despite the company’s reluctance, MOHELA gave Missouri standing to sue. The court then struck down the program, with Chief Justice John Roberts accusing the executive branch of a power grab over the legislature.

“Today, we have concluded that an instrumentality created by Missouri, governed by Missouri, and answerable to Missouri is indeed part of Missouri; that the words ‘waive or modify’ do not mean ‘completely rewrite;’ and that our precedent — old and new — requires that Congress speak clearly before a Department Secretary can unilaterally alter large sections of the American economy,”&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/22-506_nmip.pdf">Roberts wrote</a>.

The ruling affects more than 777,000 Missourians with federal student loans who would have received $10,000-$20,000 of relief under the proposal.

In addition to Schmitt, five other attorneys general from Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska and South Carolina filed the case in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, seeking to bar the Secretary of Education from providing student loan relief.&nbsp;

<a target="_blank" href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-506/251435/20230104222942852_22-506tsUnitedStates.pdf">The attorneys general argued&nbsp;</a>&nbsp;the secretary didn’t have authority and the forgiveness program would hurt state tax revenue.

The Supreme Court had to decide whether Missouri’s attorney general could sue on behalf of MOHELA before determining the validity of the loan relief.

The district-court judge dismissed the case, saying MOHELA can represent itself in litigation. But the Supreme Court reversed that decision, finding that MOHELA is an “instrumentality of Missouri.”

“The secretary’s plan will cut MOHELA’s revenues, impairing its efforts to aid Missouri college students. This acknowledged harm to MOHELA in the performance of its public function is necessarily a direct injury to Missouri itself,” Roberts wrote.

Some predict that debt cancellation would increase MOHELA’s revenue.&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://rooseveltinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/RI_Flawed-Claims-of-Legal-Standing-in-Biden-v-Nebraska_brief_202305.pdf">Projections from the Roosevelt Institute</a>&nbsp;show a steep increase as MOHELA takes over federal loans dropped by other servicers and is paid for each cancellation.

The dissenting opinion, written by Justice Elena Kagan, said MOHELA qualifies as a third party, not an arm of the government. Thus, Missouri had no standing to bring the lawsuit, she argued.&nbsp;

“If MOHELA had brought this suit, we would have had to resolve it, however hot or divisive. But Missouri? In adjudicating Missouri’s claim, the majority reaches out to decide a matter it has no business deciding. It blows through a constitutional guardrail intended to keep courts acting like courts,” Kagan wrote.

Although MOHELA is named 85 times in the court’s opinion, the nonprofit’s employees were opposed to the loan servicer’s inclusion, as recently revealed by the&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://protectborrowers.org/internal-mohela-emails-press-release/">Student Borrower Protection Center</a>.

This month, the SBPC&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://protectborrowers.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/SBPC-SLR-10-19-2022-Internal-E-Mails-z_Redacted.pdf">released internal MOHELA emails</a>&nbsp;it obtained through Missouri’s Sunshine Law showing employees discussing the case, with some confused at the organization’s inclusion in the lawsuit.

“The MO state AG needed to claim that our borrowers were harmed for standing, so they’re making us look bad by filing it not only with MO on it, but especially bad because they filed it in MO,” another employee wrote.

In October, U.S. Rep. Cori Bush sent a letter to MOHELA’s executive director Scott Giles and asked for the company’s stance on the attorney general’s lawsuit and accused MOHELA of being involved.&nbsp;

MOHELA had been largely silent up to that point.

“​​In Missouri alone, your efforts to halt cancellation could rob Missouri families — particularly Black and brown families who are disproportionately impacted by the student debt crisis — of more than $12.7 billion in life-changing economic relief,” Bush wrote.

MOHELA responded to Bush’s letter by distancing itself from the litigation. It informed the congresswoman that it was not involved in the decision to file the federal case.

“MOHELA has not had, and does not have, a contractual relationship or agreement with the Missouri Attorney General’s Office on any topic including as to student debt relief. The only communications between MOHELA and that office as it relates to student debt relief, is that the office recently filed a series of sunshine law requests on MOHELA seeking copies of documents relative to MOHELA’s federal loan servicing contract,” the company wrote in a letter to Bush.&nbsp;

<a target="_blank" href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.moed.198213/gov.uscourts.moed.198213.1.0_1.pdf">Attorneys argued</a>&nbsp;that loan cancellations would deprive MOHELA from the interest it would otherwise receive. Bush asked the organization about its capacity to serve as the Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) program servicer.

MOHELA took over the PSLF program July 1, 2022,&nbsp; after the former servicer resigned. These loans are not the Federal Student Aid contested by the attorneys general and are actively being forgiven.

MOHELA said it had “available funds in excess of operating expenses” with its reserves dedicated to student financial aid.

“We are committed to meeting the expectations and requirements as directed and administered by Federal Student Aid,” it said.

Federal student loan relief isn’t new. The secretary of education has paused student loan payments during national emergencies historically through the Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students Act of 2003, or HEROES Act.

In March 2020, then-Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos chose to use this precedent to stop payments and the accrual of interest during the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic.

As federal employees in the Biden Administration looked toward the resumption of loan payments, they learned that Americans were at a higher risk of delinquency and faced economic pressures,&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-506/251435/20230104222942852_22-506tsUnitedStates.pdf">the secretary of education said in litigation.</a>.

The Department of Education decided that $10,000 in relief, and $20,000 for Pell Grant recipients, would keep delinquency rates at or below pre-pandemic levels.

The secretary of education was planning to use the HEROES Act to forgive the payments, but Friday’s Supreme Court decision found that would be beyond the scope of the act. The secretary said he is allowed to “modify” the HEROES Act, but Roberts wrote that the widespread student-loan forgiveness was beyond a simple edit.

Schmitt, who was elected to the U.S. Senate in November,&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://twitter.com/Eric_Schmitt/status/1674791643000754179">wrote on Twitter</a>&nbsp;he was “proud to have brought this case.”

“Working folks who paid off their loans or took another path shouldn’t have to pay for the unpaid loans of the tenured college professor,” he said.

Kansas City Mayor Quinton Lucas said on Twitter that the ruling showed a commitment to inequality.

“On eliminating student loan relief, the Supreme Court again shows its activist stripes,” he wrote,&nbsp;“working overtime to protect the wealthy, erase opportunity for the poor, and to build permanent inequality, harming the chance for millions to build their lives free of burdensome debt.”

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/1/1673377040107.png" alt="White House image" />
 <figcaption>White House image</figcaption>
 </figure>By ANNELISE HANSHAW <a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2023/01/30/open-enrollment-missouri-school-choice/">Missouri Independent</a>At the center of the&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://missouriindependent.com/2023/06/30/u-s-supreme-court-rules-against-biden-administration-student-loan-debt-relief-plan/">U.S. Supreme Court decision striking down Joe Biden’s student loan forgiveness</a>&nbsp;program on Friday was a little-known Missouri nonprofit that goes by MOHELA.Based in St. Louis, the Missouri Higher Education Loan Authority is a quasi-governmental entity created by state lawmakers in 1981 to service student loans.And when former Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt went looking for legal standing in order to bring a lawsuit challenging the president’s program, he relied on the relationship between the state and MOHELA — even though the company wanted nothing to do with the lawsuit.On Friday, the six conservative justices on the U.S. Supreme Court agreed with Schmitt that, despite the company’s reluctance, MOHELA gave Missouri standing to sue. The court then struck down the program, with Chief Justice John Roberts accusing the executive branch of a power grab over the legislature.“Today, we have concluded that an instrumentality created by Missouri, governed by Missouri, and answerable to Missouri is indeed part of Missouri; that the words ‘waive or modify’ do not mean ‘completely rewrite;’ and that our precedent — old and new — requires that Congress speak clearly before a Department Secretary can unilaterally alter large sections of the American economy,”&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/22-506_nmip.pdf">Roberts wrote</a>.The ruling affects more than 777,000 Missourians with federal student loans who would have received $10,000-$20,000 of relief under the proposal.In addition to Schmitt, five other attorneys general from Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska and South Carolina filed the case in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, seeking to bar the Secretary of Education from providing student loan relief.&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-506/251435/20230104222942852_22-506tsUnitedStates.pdf">The attorneys general argued&nbsp;</a>&nbsp;the secretary didn’t have authority and the forgiveness program would hurt state tax revenue.The Supreme Court had to decide whether Missouri’s attorney general could sue on behalf of MOHELA before determining the validity of the loan relief.The district-court judge dismissed the case, saying MOHELA can represent itself in litigation. But the Supreme Court reversed that decision, finding that MOHELA is an “instrumentality of Missouri.”“The secretary’s plan will cut MOHELA’s revenues, impairing its efforts to aid Missouri college students. This acknowledged harm to MOHELA in the performance of its public function is necessarily a direct injury to Missouri itself,” Roberts wrote.Some predict that debt cancellation would increase MOHELA’s revenue.&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://rooseveltinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/RI_Flawed-Claims-of-Legal-Standing-in-Biden-v-Nebraska_brief_202305.pdf">Projections from the Roosevelt Institute</a>&nbsp;show a steep increase as MOHELA takes over federal loans dropped by other servicers and is paid for each cancellation.The dissenting opinion, written by Justice Elena Kagan, said MOHELA qualifies as a third party, not an arm of the government. Thus, Missouri had no standing to bring the lawsuit, she argued.&nbsp;“If MOHELA had brought this suit, we would have had to resolve it, however hot or divisive. But Missouri? In adjudicating Missouri’s claim, the majority reaches out to decide a matter it has no business deciding. It blows through a constitutional guardrail intended to keep courts acting like courts,” Kagan wrote.Although MOHELA is named 85 times in the court’s opinion, the nonprofit’s employees were opposed to the loan servicer’s inclusion, as recently revealed by the&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://protectborrowers.org/internal-mohela-emails-press-release/">Student Borrower Protection Center</a>.This month, the SBPC&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://protectborrowers.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/SBPC-SLR-10-19-2022-Internal-E-Mails-z_Redacted.pdf">released internal MOHELA emails</a>&nbsp;it obtained through Missouri’s Sunshine Law showing employees discussing the case, with some confused at the organization’s inclusion in the lawsuit.“Are we the bad guys?” one asked.“The MO state AG needed to claim that our borrowers were harmed for standing, so they’re making us look bad by filing it not only with MO on it, but especially bad because they filed it in MO,” another employee wrote.In October, U.S. Rep. Cori Bush sent a letter to MOHELA’s executive director Scott Giles and asked for the company’s stance on the attorney general’s lawsuit and accused MOHELA of being involved.&nbsp;MOHELA had been largely silent up to that point.“​​In Missouri alone, your efforts to halt cancellation could rob Missouri families — particularly Black and brown families who are disproportionately impacted by the student debt crisis — of more than $12.7 billion in life-changing economic relief,” Bush wrote.MOHELA responded to Bush’s letter by distancing itself from the litigation. It informed the congresswoman that it was not involved in the decision to file the federal case.“MOHELA has not had, and does not have, a contractual relationship or agreement with the Missouri Attorney General’s Office on any topic including as to student debt relief. The only communications between MOHELA and that office as it relates to student debt relief, is that the office recently filed a series of sunshine law requests on MOHELA seeking copies of documents relative to MOHELA’s federal loan servicing contract,” the company wrote in a letter to Bush.&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.moed.198213/gov.uscourts.moed.198213.1.0_1.pdf">Attorneys argued</a>&nbsp;that loan cancellations would deprive MOHELA from the interest it would otherwise receive. Bush asked the organization about its capacity to serve as the Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) program servicer.MOHELA took over the PSLF program July 1, 2022,&nbsp; after the former servicer resigned. These loans are not the Federal Student Aid contested by the attorneys general and are actively being forgiven.MOHELA said it had “available funds in excess of operating expenses” with its reserves dedicated to student financial aid.“We are committed to meeting the expectations and requirements as directed and administered by Federal Student Aid,” it said.Federal student loan relief isn’t new. The secretary of education has paused student loan payments during national emergencies historically through the Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students Act of 2003, or HEROES Act.In March 2020, then-Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos chose to use this precedent to stop payments and the accrual of interest during the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic.As federal employees in the Biden Administration looked toward the resumption of loan payments, they learned that Americans were at a higher risk of delinquency and faced economic pressures,&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-506/251435/20230104222942852_22-506tsUnitedStates.pdf">the secretary of education said in litigation.</a>.The Department of Education decided that $10,000 in relief, and $20,000 for Pell Grant recipients, would keep delinquency rates at or below pre-pandemic levels.The secretary of education was planning to use the HEROES Act to forgive the payments, but Friday’s Supreme Court decision found that would be beyond the scope of the act. The secretary said he is allowed to “modify” the HEROES Act, but Roberts wrote that the widespread student-loan forgiveness was beyond a simple edit.Schmitt, who was elected to the U.S. Senate in November,&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://twitter.com/Eric_Schmitt/status/1674791643000754179">wrote on Twitter</a>&nbsp;he was “proud to have brought this case.”“Working folks who paid off their loans or took another path shouldn’t have to pay for the unpaid loans of the tenured college professor,” he said.Kansas City Mayor Quinton Lucas said on Twitter that the ruling showed a commitment to inequality.“On eliminating student loan relief, the Supreme Court again shows its activist stripes,” he wrote,&nbsp;“working overtime to protect the wealthy, erase opportunity for the poor, and to build permanent inequality, harming the chance for millions to build their lives free of burdensome debt.”

Company played central role in downfall of Biden loan forgiveness program

SEDGWICK COUNTY—A Kansas felon accused in a series of burglary been charged in multiple crimes.

According to the Sedgwick County District Attorney's office, Harold Deloach, 49, was charged this week with four counts of burglary non-residence, four counts of theft which included the theft of a firearm, and six&nbsp; counts of unlawful use of financial card.&nbsp;

The crime spree occurred in February, according&nbsp;to police spokesman Officer Chad Ditch. 

Seven officers and two sergeants from Patrol West in Wichita coordinated 9 cases, 4 victims and 9 witnesses in connection with the crime spree.

The&nbsp; investigation led to the arrest of&nbsp; Deloach and 39-year-old Princess Karibo.&nbsp; Deloach has a previous forgery conviction, according to the Kansas Department of Corrections.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/4/1681409703672.png" alt="Deloach-photo Sedgwick Co." />
 <figcaption>Deloach-photo Sedgwick Co.</figcaption>
 </figure>SEDGWICK COUNTY—A Kansas felon accused in a series of burglary been charged in multiple crimes.According to the Sedgwick County District Attorney's office, Harold Deloach, 49, was charged this week with four counts of burglary non-residence, four counts of theft which included the theft of a firearm, and six&nbsp; counts of unlawful use of financial card.&nbsp;The crime spree occurred in February, according&nbsp;to police spokesman Officer Chad Ditch. Seven officers and two sergeants from Patrol West in Wichita coordinated 9 cases, 4 victims and 9 witnesses in connection with the crime spree.<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/4/1681409536968.png" alt="Karibo-photo Sedgwick Co." />
 <figcaption>Karibo-photo Sedgwick Co.</figcaption>
 </figure>The&nbsp; investigation led to the arrest of&nbsp; Deloach and 39-year-old Princess Karibo.&nbsp; Deloach has a previous forgery conviction, according to the Kansas Department of Corrections.

Kansas felon charged with string of theft and burglaries

More than 75 laws surviving 2023 legislative gauntlet take root

By TIM CARPENTER <a href="https://kansasreflector.com/2023/04/06/grieving-moms-plea-to-kansas-lawmakers-do-something-this-epidemic-is-killing-our-kids/">Kansas Reflector</a>

TOPEKA — Jay Schumacher was locked up at the Ellis County Jail on a charge of first-degree murder in the slaying of his wife, but under Kansas law could spend the couple’s assets while awaiting trial for offenses capable of sending him to prison for decades.

A loophole in the state’s so-called slayer law compelled Jeremiah Schumacher, the son of alleged perpetrator Jay and domestic violence victim Karen, to plead with the 2023 Kansas Legislature to adopt a statute to prevent distribution of assets until resolution of criminal proceedings involving anyone arrested or charged with killing a person sharing financial interest in an estate.

Under Kansas law in place at time of the March 2022 slaying, alleged perpetrators could procure estate assets until convicted of killing someone.

“He’s arrested for the murder of his spouse,”&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://kansasreflector.com/2023/01/18/son-sister-of-slain-hays-resident-urge-kansas-house-members-to-amend-estate-law/">Jeremiah Schumacher told lawmakers</a>&nbsp;days after the session began in January. “I can’t wrap my head around it.”

Gov. Laura Kelly as well as the Senate and House heard his plea. The House vote on House Bill 2027 was 123-0. The Senate paired that with a 40-0 vote. The law signed by Kelly allowed as of July 1 a court to block sale, distribution, spending or other use of a decedent’s assets by a person arrested or charged in that killing. That order must stand until charges were dismissed, the accused was acquitted or convicted, and if records were expunged.

“This change is necessary, reasonable and will close what amounts to a loophole in the slayer provision of Kansas probate law by limiting those individuals, who kill a spouse or person from whom they will inherit, from receiving those proceeds,” said Hays attorney Chris McGowne.

The amended slayer law was among 77 bills — three fourths of the total to survive the legislative process in 2023 — scheduled to become effective on Saturday. The 21 others went live promptly rather than await the first day of July. The new roster of laws delve into abortion, concealed guns, elections, clergy abuse, public health, retirement investments, food stamps, transgender rights, water, smoking, utilities and sports.

Republicans in the Legislature tangled with Democrats and the governor on merits of the Fairness in Women’s Sports Act, otherwise known as House Bill 2238. It was designed to forbid transgender girls or women from participating in girls or women school sports. The anti-transgender&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://kansasreflector.com/2023/03/17/kansas-governor-vetoes-legislation-banning-transgender-athletes-from-school-sports/">bill easily cleared the GOP-led Legislature, but was vetoed by Kelly</a>. Both chambers were able to override her veto.

The law required interscholastic, intercollegiate, intramural and club athletic teams sponsored by public or private educational entities to group players on teams of boys or men, girls or women or on separate coeducational units based on “biological sex” of athletes. It covered sports teams from kindergarten through college.

“The fairness in women’s sports act is just that — fairness,” said Senate President Ty Masterson, R-Andover. “It simply sets guidelines that ensure the fair playing field continues for women and girls that we have recognized for decades.”

The Kansas State High School Activities Association established a policy requiring participants to present a copy of their first birth certificate to verify the gender declaration at birth.

Initially, the idea of decriminalizing possession of test strips to detect the synthetic opioid fentanyl didn’t gain much political traction at the statehouse. For three years, the prevailing legislative sentiment was Senate Bill 174 and others like it sent the wrong message to people using drugs illegally.

<a target="_blank" href="https://kansasreflector.com/2023/04/06/grieving-moms-plea-to-kansas-lawmakers-do-something-this-epidemic-is-killing-our-kids/">Advocates for the change pointed with alarm to the rising death toll among Kansans</a>&nbsp;who unknowingly consumed drugs blended with fentanyl, which could be 50 to 100 times as potent as morphine.

Kelly, looking for ways to prevent overdose poisonings and fatalities, signed the bipartisan bill removing test strips from the state’s list of illegal drug paraphernalia. At the same time, the penalty for manufacture and distribution of fentanyl-laced substances was heightened.

Rep. Jason Probst, D-Hutchinson, said the&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://kansasreflector.com/2023/05/11/gov-kelly-signs-bipartisan-bill-decriminalizing-use-of-fentanyl-test-strips-in-kansas/">agonizing wait for adoption of the legislation</a>&nbsp;meant the values of kindness and compassion prevailed in the end.

“By decriminalizing fentanyl testing strips,” Probst said, “we are helping Kansans protect themselves from a deadly poison that has taken far too many lives, including the tragic and profoundly painful loss of far too many teenagers and young adults in our state.”

The contents of Senate Bill 180 also become law July 1, but conflict over interpretations of the statute could drag on for months or years.

The measure labeled by supporters as the Women’s Bill of Rights aimed to define biological sex as the determinant for use of restrooms, domestic violence shelters, locker rooms and correctional facilities. It didn’t contain enforcement mechanisms, leaving open questions about how the bill would operate in the real world outside the Capitol bubble.

Kelly vetoed the bill, but the House and Senate had votes to override the governor.&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://kansasreflector.com/2023/06/26/kris-kobach-delivers-advice-on-new-law-targeting-transgender-kansans/">Attorney General Kris Kobach issued a nonbinding legal opinion</a>&nbsp;declaring new Kansas licenses to drive and birth certificates had to reflect gender at birth. At the same time, he said, the identification documents revised in the past to address transgender residents of Kansas had to be reissued to reflect an individual’s determination of sex at birth.

The ACLU of Kansas and&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://kansasreflector.com/2023/06/29/kansas-governor-rejects-ags-advice-on-new-anti-trans-law-kobach-we-will-see-her-in-court/">the governor disagreed with the Republican attorney general</a>, and contended the law couldn’t impact public accommodations because it didn’t include an enforcement mechanism. Kelly said state agencies would continue to allow transgender individuals to change gender markers on driver’s licenses and birth certificates.

“KDHE and KDOR disagree about its impacts on their operations and will instead keep in place their policies regarding gender markers on birth certificates and driver’s licenses,” Kelly said.

Kobach, who lost the 2018 general election for governor against Kelly, said he would proceed with a legal challenge of the governor’s decision.

The launch of a new fiscal year July 1 coincided with implementation of salary adjustments for state government employees. The package adopted by the Legislature and embraced by the governor linked pay increases to market rates for comparable job classifications in the private sector.

State workers 10% below peers in that occupational field would be brought up to that 10% figure or given a 5% adjustment. Personnel earning above 10% of the market rate would receive a 2.5% increase. Those less than 10% below market or 10% above market would qualify for a 5% raise.

Meanwhile, the Legislature pushed through a bill forbidding trustees of the Kansas Public Employee Retirement System from making investment decisions based on principles of ESG. It stands for environmental, social and corporate governance considerations relied on by investors and often associated with liberal political causes.

Majorities in the Legislature said KPERS should manage its $20 billion portfolio to bring about the highest return on investment with the least risk.

<a target="_blank" href="https://kansasreflector.com/2023/03/07/kansas-attorney-general-craves-law-making-state-funded-esg-investment-policies-illegal/">Kobach, who lobbied for passage of the reform</a>, said it was wrong to enable corporate intruders to jeopardize pensions of state government workers, teachers and law enforcement officers.

“ESG investing uses retirement savings as leverage to force companies to reduce their carbon footprints, adopt racial and gender quotas or to succumb to the ‘woke’ social justice fad of the month,” he said.

After years of debate, a bipartisan coalition of Kansas lawmakers agreed to make it easier for victims of childhood sexual assault to make a case in court.

House Bill 2027, which received unanimous support in the Senate and House, dropped the statute of limitations for criminal prosecution of the alleged crimes and extended by 10 years the opportunity to file lawsuits against alleged perpetrators.

Sen. Cindy Holscher, D-Overland Park, said&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://kansasreflector.com/briefs/gov-laura-kelly-legislators-honor-bipartisan-reform-of-kansas-law-on-sexual-abuse-claims/">persistence of a group of survivors made the difference</a>.

“This is breakthrough legislation that will keep our children and communities safer by permitting our state to get more predators off our streets, while building a foundation to allow more survivors of childhood sexual violence to pursue justice,” she said.

Previous Kansas law dictated criminal cases had to be filed within five years of the alleged crime. Cases of rape carried a 10-year statute of limitations once a person alleging harm turned 18. In civil cases, the suit had to be filed by the time a victim turned 21 years of age.

Turn of the calendar to July also enabled implementation of a law requiring groundwater management districts to produce for the Legislature annual reports on water usage and to develop strategies for conserving a resource made scarce by drought and heavy reliance on the Ogallala Aquifer for irrigation.

Conservative legislators pushed through eligibility reform in the state’s food stamp program, technically known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or SNAP. The new Kansas mandate required people 50 to 59 years of age without dependents to work 30 hours a week or participate in job training initiatives to qualify for food aid.

In divorce cases, Kansans would now be permitted to change a last name to something other than a maiden name or former name.

Election laws were modified to open the door to a presidential preference primary in March 2024.

The cluster of abortion reforms include a&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://kansasreflector.com/2023/04/26/kansas-house-overrides-governors-vetoes-of-three-anti-abortion-bills/">law requiring health professionals to perform life-saving care</a>&nbsp;when an infant was was born alive during an abortion. In 2022, Kansas doctors reported no such instances of live birth. Organizations opposed to abortion, a right protected in Kansas by the state constitution, pointed to examples of failed abortions in other states. Kelly vetoed the measure but was overridden.

In addition, state lawmakers earmarked $2 million to support activities of anti-abortion centers that would be scattered across Kansas.

Legislators and the governor agreed the state should limit how much public utility companies could recover through rate increases when making investments in new electricity transmission lines.

The $100 fee paid to the attorney general’s office to obtain a concealed weapon license in Kansas was eliminated, but left in place a charge of $32.50 payable to a county sheriff’s department. Individuals as young as 18 can receive a permit to carry a concealed handgun.

But&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://kansasreflector.com/2023/03/28/kansas-legislature-on-cusp-of-raising-to-21-minimum-age-to-buy-tobacco-products/">lawmakers passed a law declaring only individuals 21 years of age or older</a>&nbsp;were mature enough to purchase, possess or consume tobacco products. Until Saturday, those 18 or older could buy cigarettes.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/7/1688217568622.png" alt="Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly and Republican-led Kansas Legislature tangled over many issues in 2023 session — there were more than a dozen veto showdowns — and led to implementation Saturday of 77 new state laws, including a measure altering criminal and civil procedure in sex abuse cases. (Tim Carpenter/Kansas Reflector)" />
 <figcaption>Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly and Republican-led Kansas Legislature tangled over many issues in 2023 session — there were more than a dozen veto showdowns — and led to implementation Saturday of 77 new state laws, including a measure altering criminal and civil procedure in sex abuse cases. (Tim Carpenter/Kansas Reflector)</figcaption>
 </figure><h2>More than 75 laws surviving 2023 legislative gauntlet take root</h2>By TIM CARPENTER <a href="https://kansasreflector.com/2023/04/06/grieving-moms-plea-to-kansas-lawmakers-do-something-this-epidemic-is-killing-our-kids/">Kansas Reflector</a>TOPEKA — Jay Schumacher was locked up at the Ellis County Jail on a charge of first-degree murder in the slaying of his wife, but under Kansas law could spend the couple’s assets while awaiting trial for offenses capable of sending him to prison for decades.A loophole in the state’s so-called slayer law compelled Jeremiah Schumacher, the son of alleged perpetrator Jay and domestic violence victim Karen, to plead with the 2023 Kansas Legislature to adopt a statute to prevent distribution of assets until resolution of criminal proceedings involving anyone arrested or charged with killing a person sharing financial interest in an estate.Under Kansas law in place at time of the March 2022 slaying, alleged perpetrators could procure estate assets until convicted of killing someone.“He’s arrested for the murder of his spouse,”&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://kansasreflector.com/2023/01/18/son-sister-of-slain-hays-resident-urge-kansas-house-members-to-amend-estate-law/">Jeremiah Schumacher told lawmakers</a>&nbsp;days after the session began in January. “I can’t wrap my head around it.”Gov. Laura Kelly as well as the Senate and House heard his plea. The House vote on House Bill 2027 was 123-0. The Senate paired that with a 40-0 vote. The law signed by Kelly allowed as of July 1 a court to block sale, distribution, spending or other use of a decedent’s assets by a person arrested or charged in that killing. That order must stand until charges were dismissed, the accused was acquitted or convicted, and if records were expunged.“This change is necessary, reasonable and will close what amounts to a loophole in the slayer provision of Kansas probate law by limiting those individuals, who kill a spouse or person from whom they will inherit, from receiving those proceeds,” said Hays attorney Chris McGowne.The amended slayer law was among 77 bills — three fourths of the total to survive the legislative process in 2023 — scheduled to become effective on Saturday. The 21 others went live promptly rather than await the first day of July. The new roster of laws delve into abortion, concealed guns, elections, clergy abuse, public health, retirement investments, food stamps, transgender rights, water, smoking, utilities and sports.<h2>Just that — fairness’</h2>Republicans in the Legislature tangled with Democrats and the governor on merits of the Fairness in Women’s Sports Act, otherwise known as House Bill 2238. It was designed to forbid transgender girls or women from participating in girls or women school sports. The anti-transgender&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://kansasreflector.com/2023/03/17/kansas-governor-vetoes-legislation-banning-transgender-athletes-from-school-sports/">bill easily cleared the GOP-led Legislature, but was vetoed by Kelly</a>. Both chambers were able to override her veto.The law required interscholastic, intercollegiate, intramural and club athletic teams sponsored by public or private educational entities to group players on teams of boys or men, girls or women or on separate coeducational units based on “biological sex” of athletes. It covered sports teams from kindergarten through college.“The fairness in women’s sports act is just that — fairness,” said Senate President Ty Masterson, R-Andover. “It simply sets guidelines that ensure the fair playing field continues for women and girls that we have recognized for decades.”The Kansas State High School Activities Association established a policy requiring participants to present a copy of their first birth certificate to verify the gender declaration at birth.<h2>Test-strip ban lifted</h2>Initially, the idea of decriminalizing possession of test strips to detect the synthetic opioid fentanyl didn’t gain much political traction at the statehouse. For three years, the prevailing legislative sentiment was Senate Bill 174 and others like it sent the wrong message to people using drugs illegally.<a target="_blank" href="https://kansasreflector.com/2023/04/06/grieving-moms-plea-to-kansas-lawmakers-do-something-this-epidemic-is-killing-our-kids/">Advocates for the change pointed with alarm to the rising death toll among Kansans</a>&nbsp;who unknowingly consumed drugs blended with fentanyl, which could be 50 to 100 times as potent as morphine.Kelly, looking for ways to prevent overdose poisonings and fatalities, signed the bipartisan bill removing test strips from the state’s list of illegal drug paraphernalia. At the same time, the penalty for manufacture and distribution of fentanyl-laced substances was heightened.Rep. Jason Probst, D-Hutchinson, said the&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://kansasreflector.com/2023/05/11/gov-kelly-signs-bipartisan-bill-decriminalizing-use-of-fentanyl-test-strips-in-kansas/">agonizing wait for adoption of the legislation</a>&nbsp;meant the values of kindness and compassion prevailed in the end.“By decriminalizing fentanyl testing strips,” Probst said, “we are helping Kansans protect themselves from a deadly poison that has taken far too many lives, including the tragic and profoundly painful loss of far too many teenagers and young adults in our state.”<h2>Unsettled law</h2>The contents of Senate Bill 180 also become law July 1, but conflict over interpretations of the statute could drag on for months or years.The measure labeled by supporters as the Women’s Bill of Rights aimed to define biological sex as the determinant for use of restrooms, domestic violence shelters, locker rooms and correctional facilities. It didn’t contain enforcement mechanisms, leaving open questions about how the bill would operate in the real world outside the Capitol bubble.Kelly vetoed the bill, but the House and Senate had votes to override the governor.&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://kansasreflector.com/2023/06/26/kris-kobach-delivers-advice-on-new-law-targeting-transgender-kansans/">Attorney General Kris Kobach issued a nonbinding legal opinion</a>&nbsp;declaring new Kansas licenses to drive and birth certificates had to reflect gender at birth. At the same time, he said, the identification documents revised in the past to address transgender residents of Kansas had to be reissued to reflect an individual’s determination of sex at birth.The ACLU of Kansas and&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://kansasreflector.com/2023/06/29/kansas-governor-rejects-ags-advice-on-new-anti-trans-law-kobach-we-will-see-her-in-court/">the governor disagreed with the Republican attorney general</a>, and contended the law couldn’t impact public accommodations because it didn’t include an enforcement mechanism. Kelly said state agencies would continue to allow transgender individuals to change gender markers on driver’s licenses and birth certificates.“KDHE and KDOR disagree about its impacts on their operations and will instead keep in place their policies regarding gender markers on birth certificates and driver’s licenses,” Kelly said.Kobach, who lost the 2018 general election for governor against Kelly, said he would proceed with a legal challenge of the governor’s decision.<h2>State salaries, pensions</h2>The launch of a new fiscal year July 1 coincided with implementation of salary adjustments for state government employees. The package adopted by the Legislature and embraced by the governor linked pay increases to market rates for comparable job classifications in the private sector.State workers 10% below peers in that occupational field would be brought up to that 10% figure or given a 5% adjustment. Personnel earning above 10% of the market rate would receive a 2.5% increase. Those less than 10% below market or 10% above market would qualify for a 5% raise.Meanwhile, the Legislature pushed through a bill forbidding trustees of the Kansas Public Employee Retirement System from making investment decisions based on principles of ESG. It stands for environmental, social and corporate governance considerations relied on by investors and often associated with liberal political causes.Majorities in the Legislature said KPERS should manage its $20 billion portfolio to bring about the highest return on investment with the least risk.<a target="_blank" href="https://kansasreflector.com/2023/03/07/kansas-attorney-general-craves-law-making-state-funded-esg-investment-policies-illegal/">Kobach, who lobbied for passage of the reform</a>, said it was wrong to enable corporate intruders to jeopardize pensions of state government workers, teachers and law enforcement officers.“ESG investing uses retirement savings as leverage to force companies to reduce their carbon footprints, adopt racial and gender quotas or to succumb to the ‘woke’ social justice fad of the month,” he said.<h2>Revise and extend</h2>After years of debate, a bipartisan coalition of Kansas lawmakers agreed to make it easier for victims of childhood sexual assault to make a case in court.House Bill 2027, which received unanimous support in the Senate and House, dropped the statute of limitations for criminal prosecution of the alleged crimes and extended by 10 years the opportunity to file lawsuits against alleged perpetrators.Sen. Cindy Holscher, D-Overland Park, said&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://kansasreflector.com/briefs/gov-laura-kelly-legislators-honor-bipartisan-reform-of-kansas-law-on-sexual-abuse-claims/">persistence of a group of survivors made the difference</a>.“This is breakthrough legislation that will keep our children and communities safer by permitting our state to get more predators off our streets, while building a foundation to allow more survivors of childhood sexual violence to pursue justice,” she said.Previous Kansas law dictated criminal cases had to be filed within five years of the alleged crime. Cases of rape carried a 10-year statute of limitations once a person alleging harm turned 18. In civil cases, the suit had to be filed by the time a victim turned 21 years of age.<h2>The grab bag</h2>Turn of the calendar to July also enabled implementation of a law requiring groundwater management districts to produce for the Legislature annual reports on water usage and to develop strategies for conserving a resource made scarce by drought and heavy reliance on the Ogallala Aquifer for irrigation.Conservative legislators pushed through eligibility reform in the state’s food stamp program, technically known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or SNAP. The new Kansas mandate required people 50 to 59 years of age without dependents to work 30 hours a week or participate in job training initiatives to qualify for food aid.In divorce cases, Kansans would now be permitted to change a last name to something other than a maiden name or former name.Election laws were modified to open the door to a presidential preference primary in March 2024.The cluster of abortion reforms include a&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://kansasreflector.com/2023/04/26/kansas-house-overrides-governors-vetoes-of-three-anti-abortion-bills/">law requiring health professionals to perform life-saving care</a>&nbsp;when an infant was was born alive during an abortion. In 2022, Kansas doctors reported no such instances of live birth. Organizations opposed to abortion, a right protected in Kansas by the state constitution, pointed to examples of failed abortions in other states. Kelly vetoed the measure but was overridden.In addition, state lawmakers earmarked $2 million to support activities of anti-abortion centers that would be scattered across Kansas.Legislators and the governor agreed the state should limit how much public utility companies could recover through rate increases when making investments in new electricity transmission lines.The $100 fee paid to the attorney general’s office to obtain a concealed weapon license in Kansas was eliminated, but left in place a charge of $32.50 payable to a county sheriff’s department. Individuals as young as 18 can receive a permit to carry a concealed handgun.But&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://kansasreflector.com/2023/03/28/kansas-legislature-on-cusp-of-raising-to-21-minimum-age-to-buy-tobacco-products/">lawmakers passed a law declaring only individuals 21 years of age or older</a>&nbsp;were mature enough to purchase, possess or consume tobacco products. Until Saturday, those 18 or older could buy cigarettes.

Crime, gender and guns: July begins with dozens of new state laws in Kansas

KANSAS CITY —A Kansas City man facing multiple felony charges for the fatal shooting of three people at an after hours club near 57th and Prospect Avenue early Sunday in Kansas City has been moved from the hospital to jail.

Keivon M. Greene, 26,&nbsp; was booked into the Jackson County jail Friday evening, according to online jail records.

 He faces two counts of Murder in the 2nd Degree, a third Murder in the 2nd Degree Felony Murder, and three counts of Armed Criminal Action charges.

Just after 4:30a.m. Sunday, responding officers found two men and a woman dead from gunshot wounds in a parking lot where a crowd had gathered near an auto shop known to host informal after-hours get-togethers, according to police.

According to the probable cause statement, one of the wounded told police the shooting started after she greeted one of the suspects and his girlfriend with a hug.

The victim's boyfriend then told the suspect to “watch his hands.” When the victim and her boyfriend began to walk away, the suspect took out a gun and fatally shot him in the back, according to the statement.

Another person pulled a gun and began shooting, striking the woman in the buttocks. The victim identified Greene as the man who shot her, according to the statement.

Police initially said at least five others were shot and taken to hospitals by private vehicles and ambulances. On Monday, police identified a sixth person who went to a hospital after being wounded.

The dead were identified as Nikko Manning, 22; Jasity Strong, 28; and Camden Brown, 29.

Greene was taken into custody at a hospital, where he went after being shot in the hand.&nbsp; He had posted $1,000 cash bond about two days before the shooting on felony charges of resisting arrest and drug possession in Independence, Missouri.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/6/1688177145080.png" alt="Greene-photo Jackson Co." />
 <figcaption>Greene-photo Jackson Co.</figcaption>
 </figure>KANSAS CITY —A Kansas City man facing multiple felony charges for the fatal shooting of three people at an after hours club near 57th and Prospect Avenue early Sunday in Kansas City has been moved from the hospital to jail.Keivon M. Greene, 26,&nbsp; was booked into the Jackson County jail Friday evening, according to online jail records. He faces two counts of Murder in the 2nd Degree, a third Murder in the 2nd Degree Felony Murder, and three counts of Armed Criminal Action charges.Just after 4:30a.m. Sunday, responding officers found two men and a woman dead from gunshot wounds in a parking lot where a crowd had gathered near an auto shop known to host informal after-hours get-togethers, according to police.<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/6/1687710602889.png" alt="Police on the scene of the investigation early Sunday-photo courtesy KCTV" />
 <figcaption>Police on the scene of the investigation early Sunday-photo courtesy KCTV</figcaption>
 </figure>According to the probable cause statement, one of the wounded told police the shooting started after she greeted one of the suspects and his girlfriend with a hug.The victim's boyfriend then told the suspect to “watch his hands.” When the victim and her boyfriend began to walk away, the suspect took out a gun and fatally shot him in the back, according to the statement.Another person pulled a gun and began shooting, striking the woman in the buttocks. The victim identified Greene as the man who shot her, according to the statement.Police initially said at least five others were shot and taken to hospitals by private vehicles and ambulances. On Monday, police identified a sixth person who went to a hospital after being wounded.The dead were identified as Nikko Manning, 22; Jasity Strong, 28; and Camden Brown, 29.Greene was taken into custody at a hospital, where he went after being shot in the hand.&nbsp; He had posted $1,000 cash bond about two days before the shooting on felony charges of resisting arrest and drug possession in Independence, Missouri.

Suspect in Kansas City mass shooting moved from hospital to jail

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden vowed Friday to push ahead with a new plan to provide student loan relief for millions of borrowers while blaming Republican “hypocrisy” for triggering the day’s&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/student-loan-forgiveness-supreme-court-653c2e9c085863bdbf81f125f87669fa" target="_blank">Supreme Court decision</a>&nbsp;that wiped out his original plan.

<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/22-506_nmip.pdf">Click here to read</a>&nbsp;the Supreme Court decision

(click below to watch the statement from the President)

Biden said payment requirements for student loans would&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/student-loan-payment-pause-end-642276f724b30890669a60ea2c0bbfd5" target="_blank">resume in coming weeks</a>, but that he would work under the authority of the Higher Education Act to begin a new program designed to ease borrowers’ threat of default if they fall behind over the next year.

Hours after the Supreme Court ruling, Biden commented from the White House, trying to stay on the political offensive even as the ruling undermined a key promise to young voters who will be vital to his 2024 reelection campaign.

Biden delivered most of his remarks in a measured tone but then raised his voice at the end when a reporter asked if he had given borrowers false hope.

“I didn’t give any false hope,” he said heatedly. “The Republicans snatched away the hope that they were given.”

Ticking off what he said were billions of dollars in benefits to the well-to-do under the Trump administration, he said, “These Republican officials just couldn’t bear the thought of providing relief for working class, middle class Americans.”

“The hypocrisy of Republican elected officials is stunning,” he said.

Top administration officials said they had met for weeks to discuss how to handle the Supreme Court’s expected reversal of Biden’s original plan.

Electoral consequences aside, progressive Democrats in Congress and activists clamored for the White House to offer a swift and substantial response to the court’s decision. Natalia Abrams, president and founder of the Student Debt Crisis Center, said the responsibility falls “squarely” on Biden’s shoulders.

“The president possesses the power, and must summon the will, to secure the essential relief that families across the nation desperately need,” Abrams said in a statement.

Massachusetts Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren, one of her party’s leading voices on the left, said, “The president has more tools to cancel student debt — and he must use them.”

The GOP has long argued that repaying the student loans is a fairness issue, and they celebrated the ruling. Betsy DeVos, who served as secretary of education under President Donald Trump, called Biden’s original plan “deeply unfair to the majority of Americans who don’t have student loans.”

Republicans now seeking their party’s 2024 presidential nomination lined up to applaud the ruling, with former Vice President Mike Pence saying he was “pleased that the court struck down the radical left’s effort to use the money of taxpayers who played by the rules and repaid their debts in order to cancel the debt of bankers and lawyers in New York, San Francisco, and Washington.”

Former U.S. ambassador to the United Nation’s Nikki Haley said the Supreme Court was “right to throw out Joe Biden’s power grab.”

Trying to place the onus for ending the plan on the GOP could allow Biden’s reelection campaign to keep the issue of students loans as one of strength in the short term. But that may ultimately offer little solace to 43 million Americans who will now could have to start again repaying their student loans.

“We do not want to go into excruciating debt for our entire lives to enhance our education,” Voters of Tomorrow, a Gen Z-led organization that promotes the power of young Americans, said in a statement.

The White House’s efforts to block payments were an attempt to keep a Biden 2020 campaign promise to wipe out student loan debt that was especially popular with young voters and progressives. Both will be vital to Biden in next year’s presidential race — but may be less energized about supporting him after the high court’s decision.

Wisdom Cole, the national director of the NAACP Youth &amp; College Division, said Black Americans helped put Biden in the White House, so there’s an obligation for him to “finish the job” with his pledges to provide relief for borrowers around the country. He suggested a lack of action could see Biden face a backlash next year with key demographics — specifically young voters and Black voters.

“It’s going to have a huge impact on the next election. This was a key point. This was a key policy priority,” Cole said, adding, “If we don’t do this, we continue the cycle of seeing our elected leaders make promises and not follow through.”

A May poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found that 43% of U.S. adults approve of how Biden sought to handle student debt, similar to his approval rating overall of 40% in the same poll.

The poll suggested that Biden gets credit for his handling of the issue among young adults in particular. Fifty-three percent of adults under age 30 said they approved of Biden’s handling of student debt, compared with only 36% who approved of his job performance overall.

The high court’s decision comes as loan payments — which have been on hold since the start of the coronavirus pandemic three years ago — were already set to&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/student-loans-repayment-a6560bab75419007049cba34a30d6657" target="_blank">resume</a>&nbsp;in the fall.

Jed Shugerman, a law professor at Fordham University, said it would be essentially impossible to provide immediate debt relief before payments start again.

“That’s why we call it administrative law rather than fiat,” Shugerman said, noting that the rulemaking process requires “crossing t’s and dotting i’s and giving real reasons for policies.”

The situation has some political overlap with a COVID pandemic-era&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-health-coronavirus-pandemic-us-supreme-court-8d397f378c01c369f0d8618a4d9b3a83" target="_blank">ban on nationwide evictions</a>, which expired in 2021 with the Biden administration opposing the move but arguing that its hands were tied because the Supreme Court refused to extend it — despite the protests of progressive Democrats and housing activists. But the impact of the student loan program could be far wider.

Friday’s decision wasn’t unexpected given the court’s reactions when it&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/student-loan-forgiveness-supreme-court-hearing-2128da75fc27ff3bcc0c3804ebd98aa7" target="_blank">heard arguments in the case in February</a>. Since then, the White House has faced pressure from activists and progressive Democrats to formulate a backup plan that would provide relief to borrowers — but spent months publicly refusing to publicly discuss a Plan B.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/6/1688156132621.png" alt="President Biden and Education Secretary Miguel Cardona during a late Friday afternoon announcement -White House photo" />
 <figcaption>President Biden and Education Secretary Miguel Cardona during a late Friday afternoon announcement -White House photo</figcaption>
 </figure>WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden vowed Friday to push ahead with a new plan to provide student loan relief for millions of borrowers while blaming Republican “hypocrisy” for triggering the day’s&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/student-loan-forgiveness-supreme-court-653c2e9c085863bdbf81f125f87669fa" target="_blank">Supreme Court decision</a>&nbsp;that wiped out his original plan.<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/22-506_nmip.pdf">Click here to read</a>&nbsp;the Supreme Court decision(click below to watch the statement from the President)<div><iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/KCQAaoyrOgk?start=7" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen></iframe></div>Biden said payment requirements for student loans would&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/student-loan-payment-pause-end-642276f724b30890669a60ea2c0bbfd5" target="_blank">resume in coming weeks</a>, but that he would work under the authority of the Higher Education Act to begin a new program designed to ease borrowers’ threat of default if they fall behind over the next year.Hours after the Supreme Court ruling, Biden commented from the White House, trying to stay on the political offensive even as the ruling undermined a key promise to young voters who will be vital to his 2024 reelection campaign.Biden delivered most of his remarks in a measured tone but then raised his voice at the end when a reporter asked if he had given borrowers false hope.“I didn’t give any false hope,” he said heatedly. “The Republicans snatched away the hope that they were given.”Ticking off what he said were billions of dollars in benefits to the well-to-do under the Trump administration, he said, “These Republican officials just couldn’t bear the thought of providing relief for working class, middle class Americans.”“The hypocrisy of Republican elected officials is stunning,” he said.<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">My statement on SCOTUS Rightfully Striking Down Biden’s Student Loan Scheme ⬇️ <a href="https://t.co/J5GyVtURI2">pic.twitter.com/J5GyVtURI2</a>&mdash; Dr. Roger Marshall (@RogerMarshallMD) <a href="https://twitter.com/RogerMarshallMD/status/1674796782302408706?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 30, 2023</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>Top administration officials said they had met for weeks to discuss how to handle the Supreme Court’s expected reversal of Biden’s original plan.Electoral consequences aside, progressive Democrats in Congress and activists clamored for the White House to offer a swift and substantial response to the court’s decision. Natalia Abrams, president and founder of the Student Debt Crisis Center, said the responsibility falls “squarely” on Biden’s shoulders.“The president possesses the power, and must summon the will, to secure the essential relief that families across the nation desperately need,” Abrams said in a statement.Massachusetts Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren, one of her party’s leading voices on the left, said, “The president has more tools to cancel student debt — and he must use them.”The GOP has long argued that repaying the student loans is a fairness issue, and they celebrated the ruling. Betsy DeVos, who served as secretary of education under President Donald Trump, called Biden’s original plan “deeply unfair to the majority of Americans who don’t have student loans.”Republicans now seeking their party’s 2024 presidential nomination lined up to applaud the ruling, with former Vice President Mike Pence saying he was “pleased that the court struck down the radical left’s effort to use the money of taxpayers who played by the rules and repaid their debts in order to cancel the debt of bankers and lawyers in New York, San Francisco, and Washington.”Former U.S. ambassador to the United Nation’s Nikki Haley said the Supreme Court was “right to throw out Joe Biden’s power grab.”Trying to place the onus for ending the plan on the GOP could allow Biden’s reelection campaign to keep the issue of students loans as one of strength in the short term. But that may ultimately offer little solace to 43 million Americans who will now could have to start again repaying their student loans.“We do not want to go into excruciating debt for our entire lives to enhance our education,” Voters of Tomorrow, a Gen Z-led organization that promotes the power of young Americans, said in a statement.<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Today, SCOTUS ruled against students &amp; families across the country. It’s an outrage that lawsuits brought on by Republicans have blocked critical student debt relief that would have been a lifeline for 40 million+ Americans—nearly 90% of whom make less than $75k a year.&mdash; Secretary Miguel Cardona (@SecCardona) <a href="https://twitter.com/SecCardona/status/1674875966470979586?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 30, 2023</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>The White House’s efforts to block payments were an attempt to keep a Biden 2020 campaign promise to wipe out student loan debt that was especially popular with young voters and progressives. Both will be vital to Biden in next year’s presidential race — but may be less energized about supporting him after the high court’s decision.Wisdom Cole, the national director of the NAACP Youth &amp; College Division, said Black Americans helped put Biden in the White House, so there’s an obligation for him to “finish the job” with his pledges to provide relief for borrowers around the country. He suggested a lack of action could see Biden face a backlash next year with key demographics — specifically young voters and Black voters.“It’s going to have a huge impact on the next election. This was a key point. This was a key policy priority,” Cole said, adding, “If we don’t do this, we continue the cycle of seeing our elected leaders make promises and not follow through.”A May poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found that 43% of U.S. adults approve of how Biden sought to handle student debt, similar to his approval rating overall of 40% in the same poll.The poll suggested that Biden gets credit for his handling of the issue among young adults in particular. Fifty-three percent of adults under age 30 said they approved of Biden’s handling of student debt, compared with only 36% who approved of his job performance overall.The high court’s decision comes as loan payments — which have been on hold since the start of the coronavirus pandemic three years ago — were already set to&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/student-loans-repayment-a6560bab75419007049cba34a30d6657" target="_blank">resume</a>&nbsp;in the fall.Jed Shugerman, a law professor at Fordham University, said it would be essentially impossible to provide immediate debt relief before payments start again.“That’s why we call it administrative law rather than fiat,” Shugerman said, noting that the rulemaking process requires “crossing t’s and dotting i’s and giving real reasons for policies.”The situation has some political overlap with a COVID pandemic-era&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-health-coronavirus-pandemic-us-supreme-court-8d397f378c01c369f0d8618a4d9b3a83" target="_blank">ban on nationwide evictions</a>, which expired in 2021 with the Biden administration opposing the move but arguing that its hands were tied because the Supreme Court refused to extend it — despite the protests of progressive Democrats and housing activists. But the impact of the student loan program could be far wider.Friday’s decision wasn’t unexpected given the court’s reactions when it&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/student-loan-forgiveness-supreme-court-hearing-2128da75fc27ff3bcc0c3804ebd98aa7" target="_blank">heard arguments in the case in February</a>. Since then, the White House has faced pressure from activists and progressive Democrats to formulate a backup plan that would provide relief to borrowers — but spent months publicly refusing to publicly discuss a Plan B.

🎥Biden offers alternative student debt relief plan, lashes out at GOP

PAWNEE COUNTY—A Kansas man accused of child sex crimes appeared in Pawnee County District court Wednesday.

Shelby Lee Starr, 48 of Great Bend, appeared for an evidentiary Preliminary Hearing on a single count of Aggravated Indecent Liberties; lewd fondling, of a child under the age of 14, according to Pawnee County Attorney Doug McNett.

The alleged incident was reported by a mandatory reporter to the Kansas Department of Children and Families on February 17, 2023, and was additionally investigated by the Larned Police Department.&nbsp;The alleged acts occurred at separate private residences in Larned sometime between 2016 and the Summer of 2017.

&nbsp;Magistrate Judge Julie Cowell found the State presented sufficient evidence to support two separate sexual offenses and bound the Starr over to the higher court on two counts of Aggravated Indecent Liberties. Arraignment has been scheduled for October 26, 2023.&nbsp;

Starr was arrested in Barton County on April 1, 2023, without incident. He has been in the custody of the Pawnee County Sheriff since his arrest. Bond is currently set at $100,000 cash or surety.

He has been registered as a sex offender since 2001 for child sex crime convictions in Georgia in 1998, according to the Sex Offender Registry.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/6/1688048000741.png" alt="Starr-photo Pawnee Co." />
 <figcaption>Starr-photo Pawnee Co.</figcaption>
 </figure>PAWNEE COUNTY—A Kansas man accused of child sex crimes appeared in Pawnee County District court Wednesday.Shelby Lee Starr, 48 of Great Bend, appeared for an evidentiary Preliminary Hearing on a single count of Aggravated Indecent Liberties; lewd fondling, of a child under the age of 14, according to Pawnee County Attorney Doug McNett.The alleged incident was reported by a mandatory reporter to the Kansas Department of Children and Families on February 17, 2023, and was additionally investigated by the Larned Police Department.&nbsp;The alleged acts occurred at separate private residences in Larned sometime between 2016 and the Summer of 2017.<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/6/1688048306418.png" alt="Starr has been registered as a sex offender since 2001 for child sex crime convictions in Georgia, according to the Kansas Offender Registry" />
 <figcaption>Starr has been registered as a sex offender since 2001 for child sex crime convictions in Georgia, according to the Kansas Offender Registry</figcaption>
 </figure>&nbsp;Magistrate Judge Julie Cowell found the State presented sufficient evidence to support two separate sexual offenses and bound the Starr over to the higher court on two counts of Aggravated Indecent Liberties. Arraignment has been scheduled for October 26, 2023.&nbsp;Starr was arrested in Barton County on April 1, 2023, without incident. He has been in the custody of the Pawnee County Sheriff since his arrest. Bond is currently set at $100,000 cash or surety.He has been registered as a sex offender since 2001 for child sex crime convictions in Georgia in 1998, according to the Sex Offender Registry.

Sex offender from Georgia accused of sex crimes in Kansas

BOURBON COUNTY&nbsp;–&nbsp;The Kansas Bureau of Investigation (KBI), along with the Bourbon County Sheriff’s Office, Kansas Highway Patrol (KHP), Allen County Sheriff’s Office, and the Bourbon County Public Works, investigated an extensive outdoor marijuana grow operation in Bourbon County, Kansas, according to a media release from the agency.

On June 27, the Bourbon County Sheriff’s Office received information related to a possible illegal marijuana grow operation located near the intersection of 35th&nbsp;Street and Highway 65, near Bronson, Kansas.&nbsp;

At approximately 8:30 a.m. on June 29, law enforcement authorities secured the grow site. An unknown subject fled the area and was unable to be located. A total of 1,350 marijuana plants were seized along with camping gear, firearms, a vehicle, and growing paraphernalia (such as watering devices, garden sprayers, gardening tools, herbicides, pesticides, and fertilizer).

The marijuana being grown at this site would have produced approximately 1,350 pounds of marijuana, with an estimated street value of around $1.7 million.&nbsp;

Anyone with information about this suspected grow operation is encouraged to contact the Bourbon County Sheriff’s Office at 620-223-1440 or the KBI at 1-800-KSCRIME.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/6/1688156909489.png" alt="35th Street near Highway 65 in Bourbon County -Google map" />
 <figcaption>35th Street near Highway 65 in Bourbon County -Google map</figcaption>
 </figure>BOURBON COUNTY&nbsp;–&nbsp;The Kansas Bureau of Investigation (KBI), along with the Bourbon County Sheriff’s Office, Kansas Highway Patrol (KHP), Allen County Sheriff’s Office, and the Bourbon County Public Works, investigated an extensive outdoor marijuana grow operation in Bourbon County, Kansas, according to a media release from the agency.On June 27, the Bourbon County Sheriff’s Office received information related to a possible illegal marijuana grow operation located near the intersection of 35th&nbsp;Street and Highway 65, near Bronson, Kansas.&nbsp;At approximately 8:30 a.m. on June 29, law enforcement authorities secured the grow site. An unknown subject fled the area and was unable to be located. A total of 1,350 marijuana plants were seized along with camping gear, firearms, a vehicle, and growing paraphernalia (such as watering devices, garden sprayers, gardening tools, herbicides, pesticides, and fertilizer).The marijuana being grown at this site would have produced approximately 1,350 pounds of marijuana, with an estimated street value of around $1.7 million.&nbsp;Anyone with information about this suspected grow operation is encouraged to contact the Bourbon County Sheriff’s Office at 620-223-1440 or the KBI at 1-800-KSCRIME.

Kan. sheriff discovers $1.7 million marijuana grow operation 

SHAWNEE COUNTY—Law enforcement authorities investigating a fatal shooting in Topeka have identified the victim as&nbsp;s Xavion E. Phannix, 20, of Topeka, according to Police Lt. Donna Eubanks.

Just after 12:14 a.m. Thursday, police responded to a call for service in the 2600 Block of SE Gilmore CT in Topeka on a call for service regarding a report of a person with a gunshot wound.

First responders located three individuals suffering from gunshot wounds. All three individuals were transported to a local medical care facility, with one injury considered non-life threatening and two considered life-threatening.

While at the hospital, Phannix was pronounced deceased by medical staff.

Topeka Police Department Officers and Detectives continue reviewing all investigative leads. Police have not reported any suspect details.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/6/1688055124163.png" alt="Police on the scene of the shooting early Thursday photo courtesy WIBW TV" />
 <figcaption>Police on the scene of the shooting early Thursday photo courtesy WIBW TV</figcaption>
 </figure>SHAWNEE COUNTY—Law enforcement authorities investigating a fatal shooting in Topeka have identified the victim as&nbsp;s Xavion E. Phannix, 20, of Topeka, according to Police Lt. Donna Eubanks.Just after 12:14 a.m. Thursday, police responded to a call for service in the 2600 Block of SE Gilmore CT in Topeka on a call for service regarding a report of a person with a gunshot wound.First responders located three individuals suffering from gunshot wounds. All three individuals were transported to a local medical care facility, with one injury considered non-life threatening and two considered life-threatening.While at the hospital, Phannix was pronounced deceased by medical staff.Topeka Police Department Officers and Detectives continue reviewing all investigative leads. Police have not reported any suspect details.

Police ID 20-year-old Kansas man who died in triple-shooting

WASHINGTON (AP) — A sharply divided&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/us-supreme-court">Supreme Court</a>&nbsp;on Friday effectively killed President Joe Biden’s $400 billion plan to&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/student-loans">cancel or reduce federal student loan debts</a>&nbsp;for millions of Americans.

<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/22-506_nmip.pdf">Click here to read</a> the decision

The 6-3 decision, with conservative justices in the majority, said the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23865243-biden-v-nebraska-opinion">Biden administration overstepped its authority</a>&nbsp;with the plan, and it leaves borrowers on the hook for repayments that are expected to resume by late summer.

Biden was to announce a new set of actions to protect student loan borrowers and would address the court decision later Friday, said a White House official. The official was not authorized to speak publicly ahead of Biden’s expected statement on the case and spoke on condition of anonymity.

The court held that the administration needed Congress' endorsement before undertaking so costly a program. The majority rejected arguments that a bipartisan 2003 law dealing with student loans, known as the HEROES Act, gave Biden the power he claimed.

“Six States sued, arguing that the HEROES Act does not authorize the loan cancellation plan. We agree,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the court.

Justice Elena Kagan wrote in a dissent, joined by the court’s two other liberals, that the majority of the court “overrides the combined judgment of the Legislative and Executive Branches, with the consequence of eliminating loan forgiveness for 43 million Americans.”

Loan repayments are expected to resume by late August under a schedule initially set by the administration and included in the agreement to raise the debt ceiling. Payments have been on hold since the start of the coronavirus pandemic more than three years ago.

The forgiveness program would have canceled $10,000 in student loan debt for those making less than $125,000 or households with less than $250,000 in income. Pell Grant recipients, who typically demonstrate more financial need, would have had an additional $10,000 in debt forgiven.

Twenty-six million people had applied for relief and 43 million would have been eligible, the administration said. The cost was estimated at $400 billion over 30 years.

Advocacy groups supporting debt cancellation condemned the decision while demanding that Biden find another avenue to fulfill his promise of debt relief.

Natalia Abrams, president and founder of the Student Debt Crisis Center, said the responsibility for new action falls “squarely” on Biden’s shoulders. “The president possesses the power, and must summon the will, to secure the essential relief that families across the nation desperately need,” Abrams said in a statement.

The loan plan joins other pandemic-related initiatives that faltered at the Supreme Court.

Conservative majorities ended an eviction moratorium that had been imposed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and blocked a plan to require workers at big companies to be vaccinated or undergo regular testing and wear a mask on the job. The court upheld a plan to require vaccinations of health-care workers.

The earlier programs were billed largely as public health measures intended to slow the spread of COVID-19. The loan forgiveness plan, by contrast, was aimed at countering the economic effects of the pandemic.

In more than three hours of arguments last February, conservative justices voiced their skepticism that the administration had the authority to wipe away or reduce student loans held by millions.

Republican-led states arguing before the court said the plan would have amounted to a “windfall” for 20 million people who would have seen their entire student debt disappear and been better off than they were before the pandemic.

Roberts was among those on the court who questioned whether non-college workers would essentially be penalized for a break for the college educated.

In contrast, the administration grounded the need for the sweeping loan forgiveness in the COVID-19 emergency and the continuing negative impacts on people near the bottom of the economic ladder. The declared emergency ended on May 11.

Without the promised loan relief, the administration’s top Supreme Court lawyer told the justices, “delinquencies and defaults will surge.”

At those arguments, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said her fellow justices would be making a mistake if they took for themselves, instead of leaving it to education experts, “the right to decide how much aid to give” people who would struggle if the program were struck down.

The HEROES Act has allowed the secretary of education to waive or modify the terms of federal student loans in connection with a national emergency. The law was primarily intended to keep service members from being hurt financially while they fought in wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Biden had once doubted his own authority to broadly cancel student debt, but announced the program last August. Legal challenges quickly followed.

The court majority said the Republican-led states had cleared an early hurdle that required them to show they would be financially harmed if the program had been allowed to take effect.

The states did not even rely on any direct injury to themselves, but instead pointed to the Missouri Higher Education Loan Authority, a state-created company that services student loans.

Nebraska Solicitor General James Campbell, arguing before the court in February, said the Authority would lose about 40% of its revenues if the Biden plan went into effect. Independent research has cast doubt on the financial harm MOHELA would face, suggesting that the agency would still see an increase in revenue even if Biden’s cancellation went through. That information was not part of the court record.

A federal judge initially found that the states would not be harmed and dismissed their lawsuit before an appellate panel said the case could proceed.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/6/1688137205940.png" alt="" />
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure>WASHINGTON (AP) — A sharply divided&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/us-supreme-court">Supreme Court</a>&nbsp;on Friday effectively killed President Joe Biden’s $400 billion plan to&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/student-loans">cancel or reduce federal student loan debts</a>&nbsp;for millions of Americans.<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/22-506_nmip.pdf">Click here to read</a> the decisionThe 6-3 decision, with conservative justices in the majority, said the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23865243-biden-v-nebraska-opinion">Biden administration overstepped its authority</a>&nbsp;with the plan, and it leaves borrowers on the hook for repayments that are expected to resume by late summer.Biden was to announce a new set of actions to protect student loan borrowers and would address the court decision later Friday, said a White House official. The official was not authorized to speak publicly ahead of Biden’s expected statement on the case and spoke on condition of anonymity.The court held that the administration needed Congress' endorsement before undertaking so costly a program. The majority rejected arguments that a bipartisan 2003 law dealing with student loans, known as the HEROES Act, gave Biden the power he claimed.“Six States sued, arguing that the HEROES Act does not authorize the loan cancellation plan. We agree,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the court.Justice Elena Kagan wrote in a dissent, joined by the court’s two other liberals, that the majority of the court “overrides the combined judgment of the Legislative and Executive Branches, with the consequence of eliminating loan forgiveness for 43 million Americans.”Loan repayments are expected to resume by late August under a schedule initially set by the administration and included in the agreement to raise the debt ceiling. Payments have been on hold since the start of the coronavirus pandemic more than three years ago.The forgiveness program would have canceled $10,000 in student loan debt for those making less than $125,000 or households with less than $250,000 in income. Pell Grant recipients, who typically demonstrate more financial need, would have had an additional $10,000 in debt forgiven.Twenty-six million people had applied for relief and 43 million would have been eligible, the administration said. The cost was estimated at $400 billion over 30 years.Advocacy groups supporting debt cancellation condemned the decision while demanding that Biden find another avenue to fulfill his promise of debt relief.Natalia Abrams, president and founder of the Student Debt Crisis Center, said the responsibility for new action falls “squarely” on Biden’s shoulders. “The president possesses the power, and must summon the will, to secure the essential relief that families across the nation desperately need,” Abrams said in a statement.The loan plan joins other pandemic-related initiatives that faltered at the Supreme Court.Conservative majorities ended an eviction moratorium that had been imposed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and blocked a plan to require workers at big companies to be vaccinated or undergo regular testing and wear a mask on the job. The court upheld a plan to require vaccinations of health-care workers.The earlier programs were billed largely as public health measures intended to slow the spread of COVID-19. The loan forgiveness plan, by contrast, was aimed at countering the economic effects of the pandemic.In more than three hours of arguments last February, conservative justices voiced their skepticism that the administration had the authority to wipe away or reduce student loans held by millions.Republican-led states arguing before the court said the plan would have amounted to a “windfall” for 20 million people who would have seen their entire student debt disappear and been better off than they were before the pandemic.Roberts was among those on the court who questioned whether non-college workers would essentially be penalized for a break for the college educated.In contrast, the administration grounded the need for the sweeping loan forgiveness in the COVID-19 emergency and the continuing negative impacts on people near the bottom of the economic ladder. The declared emergency ended on May 11.Without the promised loan relief, the administration’s top Supreme Court lawyer told the justices, “delinquencies and defaults will surge.”At those arguments, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said her fellow justices would be making a mistake if they took for themselves, instead of leaving it to education experts, “the right to decide how much aid to give” people who would struggle if the program were struck down.The HEROES Act has allowed the secretary of education to waive or modify the terms of federal student loans in connection with a national emergency. The law was primarily intended to keep service members from being hurt financially while they fought in wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.Biden had once doubted his own authority to broadly cancel student debt, but announced the program last August. Legal challenges quickly followed.The court majority said the Republican-led states had cleared an early hurdle that required them to show they would be financially harmed if the program had been allowed to take effect.The states did not even rely on any direct injury to themselves, but instead pointed to the Missouri Higher Education Loan Authority, a state-created company that services student loans.Nebraska Solicitor General James Campbell, arguing before the court in February, said the Authority would lose about 40% of its revenues if the Biden plan went into effect. Independent research has cast doubt on the financial harm MOHELA would face, suggesting that the agency would still see an increase in revenue even if Biden’s cancellation went through. That information was not part of the court record.A federal judge initially found that the states would not be harmed and dismissed their lawsuit before an appellate panel said the case could proceed.In a second case, the justices ruled unanimously that two Texans who filed a separate challenge did not have legal standing to sue. But the outcome of that case has no bearing on the court's decision to block the debt relief plan.