SALINE COUNTY —Law enforcement authorities continue their search for a Salina man who has not been seen in over two weeks and is being considered a missing, endangered person.

Police are looking for information concerning a Chevrolet Express van they believe is connected to the disappearance of a Salina man.

On June 18, the Salina Police Department reported it was investigating the disappearance of 44-year-old Nathan Philip Thompson who at that time hadn't been seen in approximately a week. Police said Thompson was being considered a missing endangered person.

He is described as being 6-foot-2, weighs 184 pounds with brown hair and hazel eyes.

On June 21, the Salina Police Department reported investigators, developed information that the a Chevrolet Express van was possibly used to facilitate the disappearance of Nathan Thompson. The Salina Police Department has the van in its possession and are asking the public for any information they can provide with regards to the van since June 9th, 2022. Police especially want information on sightings of the vehicle in rural areas.

Anyone that has seen the van and/or its driver should contact the Salina Police Department, Crime Stoppers or the tip line below.

If you have had contact with Nathan Thompson since June 1, 2022, have information concerning his disappearance, or have information relative to the fire at 1635 Elgin please contact the Salina Police Department at 785-826-7210. You may also call Crimestoppers at 785-825-TIPS or make an online tip at:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.p3tips.com/tipform.aspx?ID=950#">https://www.p3tips.com/tipform.aspx?ID=950#</a>. Tipsters may also contact the Salina Police Department at (785) 826-7210 and ask to speak to Detective Lemon, case 2022-17281.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/6/1655917384049.png" alt="Police seek information about this van.Photo Salina Police Department" />
 <figcaption>Police seek information about this van.Photo Salina Police Department</figcaption>
 </figure>SALINE COUNTY —Law enforcement authorities continue their search for a Salina man who has not been seen in over two weeks and is being considered a missing, endangered person.Police are looking for information concerning a Chevrolet Express van they believe is connected to the disappearance of a Salina man.On June 18, the Salina Police Department reported it was investigating the disappearance of 44-year-old Nathan Philip Thompson who at that time hadn't been seen in approximately a week. Police said Thompson was being considered a missing endangered person.He is described as being 6-foot-2, weighs 184 pounds with brown hair and hazel eyes.<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/6/1655577117894.jpeg" alt="Nathan Phillip Thompson -photo from May 2022" />
 <figcaption>Nathan Phillip Thompson -photo from May 2022</figcaption>
 </figure>On June 21, the Salina Police Department reported investigators, developed information that the a Chevrolet Express van was possibly used to facilitate the disappearance of Nathan Thompson. The Salina Police Department has the van in its possession and are asking the public for any information they can provide with regards to the van since June 9th, 2022. Police especially want information on sightings of the vehicle in rural areas.<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/6/1655917461520.png" alt="The van police believe is connected to Thompson's disappearance" />
 <figcaption>The van police believe is connected to Thompson's disappearance</figcaption>
 </figure>Anyone that has seen the van and/or its driver should contact the Salina Police Department, Crime Stoppers or the tip line below.If you have had contact with Nathan Thompson since June 1, 2022, have information concerning his disappearance, or have information relative to the fire at 1635 Elgin please contact the Salina Police Department at 785-826-7210. You may also call Crimestoppers at 785-825-TIPS or make an online tip at:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.p3tips.com/tipform.aspx?ID=950#">https://www.p3tips.com/tipform.aspx?ID=950#</a>. Tipsters may also contact the Salina Police Department at (785) 826-7210 and ask to speak to Detective Lemon, case 2022-17281.

Search continues: Foul play could be involved in Kan. man's disappearance

KANSAS CITY —Law enforcement authorities investigating a fatal SUV, ATV crash have identified the victim as 39-year-old Nicholas Santiago-Angeles of Kansas City, Kansas, according to KCK police.

Just before 9p.m. Wednesday, police responded to report of an accident in the 4900 Block of Shawnee Drive found a the Santiago-Angeles, the driver of an ATV deceased, according to police spokesperson Nancy Chartrand.

EMS transported his adult, female passenger to an area hospital for treatment of serious but non-life-threatening injuries. The adult male driver of the SUV sustained minor injuries.&nbsp;

the accident remains under investigation.

KANSAS CITY —Law enforcement authorities investigating a fatal SUV, ATV crash have identified the victim as 39-year-old Nicholas Santiago-Angeles of Kansas City, Kansas, according to KCK police.Just before 9p.m. Wednesday, police responded to report of an accident in the 4900 Block of Shawnee Drive found a the Santiago-Angeles, the driver of an ATV deceased, according to police spokesperson Nancy Chartrand.EMS transported his adult, female passenger to an area hospital for treatment of serious but non-life-threatening injuries. The adult male driver of the SUV sustained minor injuries.&nbsp;the accident remains under investigation.---------

Police ID Kansas man who died in SUV, ATV crash

WASHINGTON (AP) — The House sent President Joe Biden the widest ranging&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/congress-gun-violence-bill-highlights-ab399a7a1c5eea98bcd12e944679355f">gun violence bill</a>&nbsp;Congress has passed in decades Friday, a measured compromise that at once illustrates progress on the long-intractable issue and the deep-seated partisan divide that persists.

The Democratic-led chamber approved the election-year legislation on a mostly party-line 234-193 vote, capping a spurt of action prompted by voters’ revulsion over last month’s mass shootings in&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/buffalo-supermarket-shooting">New York</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/uvalde-school-shooting">Texas</a>. The&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/shootings-texas-new-york-violence-buffalo-21932705343ec6ff172561ad95c287d1">Senate approved the measure late Thursday</a>&nbsp;by a bipartisan 65-33 margin.

Every House Democrat and 14 Republicans — six of whom won’t be in Congress next year — voted for the measure including&nbsp;Liz Cheney (WY), Adam Kinzinger (IL), Tom Rice(KY), John Katko (NY), Maria Salazar(FL), Chris Jacobs(NY), Brian Fitzpatrick (PA), Peter Meijer(MI), Fred Upton(MI), Steve Chabot(OH), Mike Turner(OH), David Joyce(OH), Anthony Gonzalez(OH), and Tony Gonzalez of Texas.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., underscored its significance to her party by taking the unusual step of presiding over the vote and announcing the result from the podium, to huzzahs from rank-and-file Democrats on the chamber’s floor.

Among Republicans backing the legislation was Rep. Liz Cheney of gun-friendly Wyoming, who has broken sharply with her party’s leaders and is helping lead the House investigation into last year’s Capitol insurrection by supporters of then-President Donald Trump. In a statement, she said that “as a mother and a constitutional conservative,” she believed the bill would curb violence and enhance safety, adding, “Nothing in the bill restricts the rights of responsible gun owners. Period.”

Impossible to ignore was the juxtaposition of the week’s gun votes with a pair of jarring Supreme Court decisions on two of the nation’s most incendiary culture war issues. The justices on Thursday struck down&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-guns-decision-what-to-know-a068d964981b6d1242a5ab124224f77a">a New York law that has restricted peoples’ ability to carry concealed weapons</a>, and Friday it&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/abortion-supreme-court-decision-854f60302f21c2c35129e58cf8d8a7b0">overturned Roe v. Wade</a>, eliminating the protection for abortion that case had ensured for a half-century.

The bill, crafted by senators from both parties, would incrementally toughen requirements for young people to buy guns, deny firearms from more domestic abusers and help local authorities temporarily take weapons from people judged to be dangerous. Most of its $13 billion cost would go to bolster mental health programs and for schools, which have been targeted in Newtown, Connecticut, Parkland, Florida and many other infamous massacres.

It omits far tougher restrictions Democrats have long championed like a ban on assault-type weapons and background checks for all gun transactions, but is the most impactful firearms violence measure Congress has approved since enacting a now-expired assault weapons ban in 1993.

The legislation was a direct result of the slaying of 19 children and two teachers at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, exactly one month ago, and the killing of 10 Black shoppers days earlier in Buffalo, New York. Lawmakers returned from their districts after those shootings saying constituents were demanding congressional action, a vehemence many felt could not be ignored.

“This gives our community the sorely needed hope that we have been crying out for, for years and years and years,” Rep. Lucy McBath, D-Ga., whose 17-year-old son was shot dead in 2012 by a man complaining his music was too loud, told supporters outside the Capitol. “Understand and know that this bill does not answer all of our prayers, but this is hope.”

Speaking haltingly, Rep. Steven Horsford, D-Nev., said he was backing the bill for his father, shot to death 30 years ago to the day, the 58 people killed in a 2017 mass shooting in Las Vegas “and so many other Americans who are victims and survivors of gun violence.”

For conservatives who dominate the House GOP, it came down to the Constitution’s Second Amendment right for people to have firearms, a protection key for many voters who own guns. “Today they’re coming after our Second Amendment liberties, and who knows what it will be tomorrow,” Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio, the House Judiciary Committee’s top Republican, said of Democrats.

Pelosi said with Friday’s gun ruling by the justices, “the Trump-McConnell court is implicitly endorsing the tragedy of mass shootings and daily gun deaths plaguing our nation.” That was a reference to the balance-tipping three conservative justices appointed by Trump and confirmed by a Senate that was run by Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.

But House Republicans used the gun debate to praise both court decisions. “What a great day for the babies, and as the speaker described it, the Trump-McConnell Supreme Court,” said Rep. Scott Fitzgerald, R-Wis.

Rep. Dan Bishop, R-N.C., said the firearms decision has “electrified the country and left radicals seething — the Constitution means what it says.”

In the Senate, every Democrat and 15 Republicans backed the compromise. Just two of those GOP senators face reelection next year.

But overall, fewer than one-third of GOP senators and just 1-in-15 House Republicans supported the measure. That means the fate of future congressional action on guns seems dubious, even as the GOP is expected to win House and possibly Senate control in the November elections.

McConnell kept careful tabs on the negotiations that produced the bill and voted for it, partly in hopes it would attract moderate suburban voters whose support the GOP will need in its November bid for Senate control. In contrast, Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., and other GOP leaders of the more conservative House opposed it.

The legislation was opposed by firearms groups like&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/national-rifle-association">the National Rifle Association</a>. But groups backing gun curbs like Brady and Everytown for Gun Safety weren’t the only ones backing it. Support also came from the Fraternal Order of Police and the International Association of Chiefs of Police.

The talks that produced the bill were led by Sens. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz., John Cornyn, R-Texas, and Thom Tillis, R-N.C.

Under the compromise, background checks for gun buyers age 18 to 20 will now include an examination of their local juvenile records. The accused shooters in Uvalde and Buffalo were both 18.

People convicted of domestic abuse who are current or former romantic partners of the victim — not simply spouses or people who lived or had children with the person they abused — will be prohibited from acquiring firearms. That closes the so-called “boyfriend loophole.”

There will be money to help states enforce “red flag” laws that help authorities temporarily take guns from people considered threatening and for other states’ violence prevention programs. More people who sell weapons would have to become federally licensed gun dealers and need to conduct background checks.

Penalties for gun trafficking are strengthened, billions of dollars are provided for behavioral health clinics and school mental health programs and there’s money for school safety initiatives, though not for personnel to use a “dangerous weapon.”

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/6/1656098285763.png" alt="House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., underscored its significance to her party by taking the unusual step of presiding over the vote and announcing the result from the podium, to huzzahs from rank-and-file Democrats on the chamber’s floor." />
 <figcaption>House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., underscored its significance to her party by taking the unusual step of presiding over the vote and announcing the result from the podium, to huzzahs from rank-and-file Democrats on the chamber’s floor.</figcaption>
 </figure>WASHINGTON (AP) — The House sent President Joe Biden the widest ranging&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/congress-gun-violence-bill-highlights-ab399a7a1c5eea98bcd12e944679355f">gun violence bill</a>&nbsp;Congress has passed in decades Friday, a measured compromise that at once illustrates progress on the long-intractable issue and the deep-seated partisan divide that persists.The Democratic-led chamber approved the election-year legislation on a mostly party-line 234-193 vote, capping a spurt of action prompted by voters’ revulsion over last month’s mass shootings in&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/buffalo-supermarket-shooting">New York</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/uvalde-school-shooting">Texas</a>. The&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/shootings-texas-new-york-violence-buffalo-21932705343ec6ff172561ad95c287d1">Senate approved the measure late Thursday</a>&nbsp;by a bipartisan 65-33 margin.Every House Democrat and 14 Republicans — six of whom won’t be in Congress next year — voted for the measure including&nbsp;Liz Cheney (WY), Adam Kinzinger (IL), Tom Rice(KY), John Katko (NY), Maria Salazar(FL), Chris Jacobs(NY), Brian Fitzpatrick (PA), Peter Meijer(MI), Fred Upton(MI), Steve Chabot(OH), Mike Turner(OH), David Joyce(OH), Anthony Gonzalez(OH), and Tony Gonzalez of Texas.House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., underscored its significance to her party by taking the unusual step of presiding over the vote and announcing the result from the podium, to huzzahs from rank-and-file Democrats on the chamber’s floor.Among Republicans backing the legislation was Rep. Liz Cheney of gun-friendly Wyoming, who has broken sharply with her party’s leaders and is helping lead the House investigation into last year’s Capitol insurrection by supporters of then-President Donald Trump. In a statement, she said that “as a mother and a constitutional conservative,” she believed the bill would curb violence and enhance safety, adding, “Nothing in the bill restricts the rights of responsible gun owners. Period.”Impossible to ignore was the juxtaposition of the week’s gun votes with a pair of jarring Supreme Court decisions on two of the nation’s most incendiary culture war issues. The justices on Thursday struck down&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-guns-decision-what-to-know-a068d964981b6d1242a5ab124224f77a">a New York law that has restricted peoples’ ability to carry concealed weapons</a>, and Friday it&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/abortion-supreme-court-decision-854f60302f21c2c35129e58cf8d8a7b0">overturned Roe v. Wade</a>, eliminating the protection for abortion that case had ensured for a half-century.The bill, crafted by senators from both parties, would incrementally toughen requirements for young people to buy guns, deny firearms from more domestic abusers and help local authorities temporarily take weapons from people judged to be dangerous. Most of its $13 billion cost would go to bolster mental health programs and for schools, which have been targeted in Newtown, Connecticut, Parkland, Florida and many other infamous massacres.It omits far tougher restrictions Democrats have long championed like a ban on assault-type weapons and background checks for all gun transactions, but is the most impactful firearms violence measure Congress has approved since enacting a now-expired assault weapons ban in 1993.The legislation was a direct result of the slaying of 19 children and two teachers at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, exactly one month ago, and the killing of 10 Black shoppers days earlier in Buffalo, New York. Lawmakers returned from their districts after those shootings saying constituents were demanding congressional action, a vehemence many felt could not be ignored.“This gives our community the sorely needed hope that we have been crying out for, for years and years and years,” Rep. Lucy McBath, D-Ga., whose 17-year-old son was shot dead in 2012 by a man complaining his music was too loud, told supporters outside the Capitol. “Understand and know that this bill does not answer all of our prayers, but this is hope.”Speaking haltingly, Rep. Steven Horsford, D-Nev., said he was backing the bill for his father, shot to death 30 years ago to the day, the 58 people killed in a 2017 mass shooting in Las Vegas “and so many other Americans who are victims and survivors of gun violence.”For conservatives who dominate the House GOP, it came down to the Constitution’s Second Amendment right for people to have firearms, a protection key for many voters who own guns. “Today they’re coming after our Second Amendment liberties, and who knows what it will be tomorrow,” Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio, the House Judiciary Committee’s top Republican, said of Democrats.Pelosi said with Friday’s gun ruling by the justices, “the Trump-McConnell court is implicitly endorsing the tragedy of mass shootings and daily gun deaths plaguing our nation.” That was a reference to the balance-tipping three conservative justices appointed by Trump and confirmed by a Senate that was run by Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.But House Republicans used the gun debate to praise both court decisions. “What a great day for the babies, and as the speaker described it, the Trump-McConnell Supreme Court,” said Rep. Scott Fitzgerald, R-Wis.Rep. Dan Bishop, R-N.C., said the firearms decision has “electrified the country and left radicals seething — the Constitution means what it says.”In the Senate, every Democrat and 15 Republicans backed the compromise. Just two of those GOP senators face reelection next year.But overall, fewer than one-third of GOP senators and just 1-in-15 House Republicans supported the measure. That means the fate of future congressional action on guns seems dubious, even as the GOP is expected to win House and possibly Senate control in the November elections.McConnell kept careful tabs on the negotiations that produced the bill and voted for it, partly in hopes it would attract moderate suburban voters whose support the GOP will need in its November bid for Senate control. In contrast, Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., and other GOP leaders of the more conservative House opposed it.The legislation was opposed by firearms groups like&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/national-rifle-association">the National Rifle Association</a>. But groups backing gun curbs like Brady and Everytown for Gun Safety weren’t the only ones backing it. Support also came from the Fraternal Order of Police and the International Association of Chiefs of Police.The talks that produced the bill were led by Sens. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz., John Cornyn, R-Texas, and Thom Tillis, R-N.C.Under the compromise, background checks for gun buyers age 18 to 20 will now include an examination of their local juvenile records. The accused shooters in Uvalde and Buffalo were both 18.People convicted of domestic abuse who are current or former romantic partners of the victim — not simply spouses or people who lived or had children with the person they abused — will be prohibited from acquiring firearms. That closes the so-called “boyfriend loophole.”There will be money to help states enforce “red flag” laws that help authorities temporarily take guns from people considered threatening and for other states’ violence prevention programs. More people who sell weapons would have to become federally licensed gun dealers and need to conduct background checks.Penalties for gun trafficking are strengthened, billions of dollars are provided for behavioral health clinics and school mental health programs and there’s money for school safety initiatives, though not for personnel to use a “dangerous weapon.”

With no Kan. GOP support Congress sends gun violence bill to Biden

SHAWNEE COUNTY –&nbsp;The Kansas Bureau of Investigation (KBI) is investigating an officer-involved shooting that occurred Friday morning in Topeka.

At approximately 9 a.m. on Friday, officers from the Topeka Police Department (TPD) responded to the area of 4th&nbsp;St. and SE Holliday, near the railroad, after 911 callers reported that a male subject armed with a knife had threatened them. The Shawnee County Sheriff’s Office and BNSF Police Department also responded to the incident.

Preliminary information indicates that when officers arrived, they located the man and attempted to convince him to put down the knife. As they negotiated with him, he cut himself several times with his knife. 

Law enforcement officers deployed bean bag rounds and used other less than lethal methods to try to subdue the man. These efforts were unsuccessful and at around 10 a.m., the man charged toward a group of officers with the knife. Three officers from TPD fired toward the man striking him multiple times.

Officers secured the knife and rendered aid to the man. EMS transported him to Stormont Vail Hospital where he died from his injuries.

At this time, law enforcement is still working to positively identify the man, and to make family notifications.

SHAWNEE COUNTY—Law enforcement authorities are investigating a fatal officer-involved shooting.

Just after 10:00 a.m. Friday, three police officers were involved in an officer-involved shooting with an armed individual near the Amtrak Station located at SE Holliday Place in Topeka, according to Police Lt. Manuel Munoz.&nbsp;

Police were on scene due to multiple citizen calls of a subject armed with a knife chasing and threatening people.

Officers made several attempts to negotiate with the armed individual to achieve a peaceful resolution, including the deployment of less-lethal munitions. Those attempts were ultimately unsuccessful, and the armed individual charged at the officers placing them in fear for their lives.

The involved officers were not injured in the incident, according to Munoz. American Medical Response transported the man to a local hospital with critical injuries. He was later pronounced deceased.

The Kansas Bureau of Investigation has been notified and will investigate this incident. Per policy, the involved the police officers have been placed on paid administrative leave while the incident is investigated.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/6/1656093522642.png" alt="The officers involved were not injured -photo courtesy WIBW TV" />
 <figcaption>The officers involved were not injured -photo courtesy WIBW TV</figcaption>
 </figure>SHAWNEE COUNTY –&nbsp;The Kansas Bureau of Investigation (KBI) is investigating an officer-involved shooting that occurred Friday morning in Topeka.At approximately 9 a.m. on Friday, officers from the Topeka Police Department (TPD) responded to the area of 4th&nbsp;St. and SE Holliday, near the railroad, after 911 callers reported that a male subject armed with a knife had threatened them. The Shawnee County Sheriff’s Office and BNSF Police Department also responded to the incident.Preliminary information indicates that when officers arrived, they located the man and attempted to convince him to put down the knife. As they negotiated with him, he cut himself several times with his knife. Law enforcement officers deployed bean bag rounds and used other less than lethal methods to try to subdue the man. These efforts were unsuccessful and at around 10 a.m., the man charged toward a group of officers with the knife. Three officers from TPD fired toward the man striking him multiple times.Officers secured the knife and rendered aid to the man. EMS transported him to Stormont Vail Hospital where he died from his injuries.At this time, law enforcement is still working to positively identify the man, and to make family notifications.-----------SHAWNEE COUNTY—Law enforcement authorities are investigating a fatal officer-involved shooting.Just after 10:00 a.m. Friday, three police officers were involved in an officer-involved shooting with an armed individual near the Amtrak Station located at SE Holliday Place in Topeka, according to Police Lt. Manuel Munoz.&nbsp;Police were on scene due to multiple citizen calls of a subject armed with a knife chasing and threatening people.Officers made several attempts to negotiate with the armed individual to achieve a peaceful resolution, including the deployment of less-lethal munitions. Those attempts were ultimately unsuccessful, and the armed individual charged at the officers placing them in fear for their lives.The involved officers were not injured in the incident, according to Munoz. American Medical Response transported the man to a local hospital with critical injuries. He was later pronounced deceased.The Kansas Bureau of Investigation has been notified and will investigate this incident. Per policy, the involved the police officers have been placed on paid administrative leave while the incident is investigated..

Update KBI: Police kill man who was chasing others with a knife 

WALLACE COUNTY—Some 700 Midwest Energy customers lost power Friday after what the company called a " weird outage" in Wallace County, according to a social media report.

A sprayer plane clipped a high-voltage transmission line, bringing those wires down onto Midwest Energy wires.

The pilot was able to make a safe landing. 

Crews are were able to restore power to Sharon Springs and the surrounding area on one of the hottest days of the year by approximately 1:30p.m. central daylight time, according to Midwest Energy.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/6/1656103477529.png" alt="Power outage area-Midwest Energy" />
 <figcaption>Power outage area-Midwest Energy</figcaption>
 </figure>WALLACE COUNTY—Some 700 Midwest Energy customers lost power Friday after what the company called a " weird outage" in Wallace County, according to a social media report.A sprayer plane clipped a high-voltage transmission line, bringing those wires down onto Midwest Energy wires.The pilot was able to make a safe landing. Crews are were able to restore power to Sharon Springs and the surrounding area on one of the hottest days of the year by approximately 1:30p.m. central daylight time, according to Midwest Energy.

Pilot makes safe landing after plane hits power lines in SW Kan.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court has ended constitutional protections for abortion that had been in place nearly 50 years — a decision by its conservative majority to overturn the court's landmark abortion cases.&nbsp; Kansas Governor Laura Kelly and members of the state's congressional delegation responded to the decision.

Friday’s outcome overturning Roe v. Wade is expected to lead to abortion bans in roughly half the states. 

The decision, unthinkable just a few years ago, was the culmination of decades of efforts by abortion opponents, made possible by an emboldened right side of the court that has been fortified by three appointees of former President Donald Trump. The ruling came more than a month after the stunning leak of a draft opinion by Justice Samuel Alito.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/6/1656087288784.png" alt="Protestors outside the U.S. Supreme Court Friday -photo courtesy CSPAN" />
 <figcaption>Protestors outside the U.S. Supreme Court Friday -photo courtesy CSPAN</figcaption>
 </figure>WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court has ended constitutional protections for abortion that had been in place nearly 50 years — a decision by its conservative majority to overturn the court's landmark abortion cases.&nbsp; Kansas Governor Laura Kelly and members of the state's congressional delegation responded to the decision.<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><a href="https://t.co/Ve5xL7JOHm">https://t.co/Ve5xL7JOHm</a> <a href="https://t.co/VSYLIas3FI">https://t.co/VSYLIas3FI</a>&mdash; Laura Kelly (@LauraKellyKS) <a href="https://twitter.com/LauraKellyKS/status/1540366440540372992?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 24, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div><div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Today, nearly 50 years after Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court ruled there is no constitutional right to abortion. As stated by Justice Alito, “It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.” <a href="https://t.co/9casCWipus">pic.twitter.com/9casCWipus</a>&mdash; Senator Jerry Moran (@JerryMoran) <a href="https://twitter.com/JerryMoran/status/1540344653458903040?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 24, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div><div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Today’s historic decision on the Dobbs case signals a new beginning for millions of unborn American children. Thank you <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/SCOTUS?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#SCOTUS</a>!&mdash; Dr. Roger Marshall (@RogerMarshallMD) <a href="https://twitter.com/RogerMarshallMD/status/1540340873757597696?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 24, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div><div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">My statement on today&#39;s life-saving decision from the Supreme Court. <a href="https://t.co/oisrPqPZQS">pic.twitter.com/oisrPqPZQS</a>&mdash; Rep. Ron Estes (@RepRonEstes) <a href="https://twitter.com/RepRonEstes/status/1540351612937416704?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 24, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div><div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">The Supreme Court just erased nearly 50 years of precedent, endangering the lives of women in Kansas and the entire country. Here&#39;s a promise - I&#39;ll always fight to ensure Kansas families have access to the full range of health care services, including reproductive health care. <a href="https://t.co/OXE7iblFSn">https://t.co/OXE7iblFSn</a>&mdash; Rep. Sharice Davids (@RepDavids) <a href="https://twitter.com/RepDavids/status/1540339768239734785?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 24, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div><div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Today is a monumental win for pro-life Americans across our country who have been fighting tirelessly over the last fifty years to protect the most vulnerable among us—the unborn. My full statement ⤵️ <a href="https://t.co/hHDTAo2zei">pic.twitter.com/hHDTAo2zei</a>&mdash; Rep. Jake LaTurner (@RepLaTurner) <a href="https://twitter.com/RepLaTurner/status/1540343998484725762?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 24, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>Friday’s outcome overturning Roe v. Wade is expected to lead to abortion bans in roughly half the states. The decision, unthinkable just a few years ago, was the culmination of decades of efforts by abortion opponents, made possible by an emboldened right side of the court that has been fortified by three appointees of former President Donald Trump. The ruling came more than a month after the stunning leak of a draft opinion by Justice Samuel Alito.

Kan. Gov., legislative leaders respond to Roe ruling

By DYLAN LYSEN <a href="https://www.kcur.org/news/2022-06-24/kansas-abortion-laws-constitution-roe-v-wade">Kansas News Service</a>

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday, in a decision overturning the 
nearly 50-year-old case of Roe v. Wade, ruled that it’s up to each state
 to determine what, if any, restrictions to impose on abortion access.

That ruling raises the stakes for an upcoming constitutional amendment vote in Kansas.

The high court’s ruling confirms what <a href="https://www.kcur.org/news/2022-05-03/roe-v-wade-decision-will-mean-kansas-abortion-rights-hinge-on-a-state-vote-in-august" target="_blank">was expected for weeks</a> after a draft of the decision was leaked showing the 1973 precedent was doomed.

The
 country is now covered with a state-by-state patchwork of differing 
abortion laws. Some states could follow the ruling by enacting more 
restrictive laws — including Kansas. But the Sunflower State will first 
need to change the Kansas Constitution before it can pursue them.

Abortion rights in Kansas currently fall under the protection of <a href="https://www.kcur.org/2019-04-26/kansas-supreme-court-rules-state-constitution-protects-right-to-abortion" target="_blank">a 2019 </a><a href="https://www.kcur.org/2019-04-26/kansas-supreme-court-rules-state-constitution-protects-right-to-abortion" target="_blank">Kansas</a><a href="https://www.kcur.org/2019-04-26/kansas-supreme-court-rules-state-constitution-protects-right-to-abortion" target="_blank"> Supreme Court ruling</a>
 that found the state constitution includes the right to an abortion. 
But that ruling spurred the Republican-dominated Kansas Legislature to 
push for a change to the state constitution.

Kansas voters will 
decide on Aug. 2 whether to amend the state constitution with a 
provision that says it doesn’t promise access to abortion. All Kansas 
voters may cast a ballot on the issue in that primary, regardless of 
whether they’re affiliated with a party.

Here’s what the U.S. Supreme court ruling means for abortion rights in Kansas:

The Supreme Court ruling does not immediately change anything in 
Kansas, but it raises the stakes for a statewide abortion rights vote in
 August.

The federal ruling puts even more importance on the 
upcoming state constitutional amendment vote, setting up all-or-nothing 
political fight that will determine the future of abortion rights in the
 state.

The Kansas Supreme Court ruling is now the only shield for
 abortion rights in the state. If the amendment is approved, those state
 abortion protections would be scrapped.

The state constitutional amendment itself would not ban abortion in Kansas.

If
 Kansas voters approve the amendment, abortion will not be banned 
immediately. Instead, approval could open the floodgates for lawmakers 
to pass more restrictive abortion laws, likely following the lead of 
neighboring Republican-led states.

Oklahoma approved a <a href="https://www.kcur.org/news/2022-04-14/more-women-are-expected-to-come-to-kansas-clinics-because-of-oklahomas-abortion-ban" target="_blank">near-total ban on abortion</a> this year, and Texas enacted significant abortion restrictions in 2021.

One <a href="http://www.kslegislature.org/li/b2021_22/measures/documents/hb2746_00_0000.pdf" target="_blank">bill banning abortion</a>
 that does not appear to allow exceptions even in cases of rape or 
incest was introduced in the Kansas Legislature this spring. Lawmakers 
did not take action on the bill before adjourning for the rest of 2022.

Kansas lawmakers could look to restrictions quickly.

If
 the constitutional amendment in approved in August, Republicans will 
likely be ready to introduce bills for new abortion restrictions.

Tighter
 abortion laws also would likely become a major campaign topic in the 
fall that Republicans to lean on to help keep their supermajority in the
 Legislature.

Then, when they return to Topeka in January, those 
bills could be approved quickly — especially if Republican Derek Schmidt
 defeats incumbent Democrat Laura Kelly for governor. That would pave 
the way for bills to sail through the lawmaking process.

Unaffiliated and smaller party voters may cast a ballot on the amendment question during the primary.

Despite
 the constitutional amendment vote coming during the primary election, 
when the Republican and Democrat parties pick who they want to go onto 
general elections for positions, voters who are not part of those major 
political parties <a href="https://www.kcur.org/news/2022-06-09/kansas-abortion-amendment-how-all-registered-voters-can-cast-a-ballot-in-augusts-primary-election" target="_blank">will still be able to vote</a> on the constitutional amendment.

Anyone
 can vote on the constitutional amendment. Voters who are not Republican
 or Democrat — such as Libertarian Party voters, or those who chose not 
to be affiliated with a political party — will be provided a ballot with
 only the constitutional amendment question on it.

Dylan Lysen 
reports on politics for the Kansas News Service. You can follow him on 
Twitter @DylanLysen or email him at dlysen@kcur.org.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/6/1656082391177.png" alt="Kansas voters will decide whether to remove the last barrier to abortion rights in the state constitution during the Aug. 2 primary election. Dylan Lysen / Kansas News Service" />
 <figcaption>Kansas voters will decide whether to remove the last barrier to abortion rights in the state constitution during the Aug. 2 primary election. Dylan Lysen / Kansas News Service</figcaption>
 </figure>By DYLAN LYSEN <a href="https://www.kcur.org/news/2022-06-24/kansas-abortion-laws-constitution-roe-v-wade">Kansas News Service</a>The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday, in a decision overturning the 
nearly 50-year-old case of Roe v. Wade, ruled that it’s up to each state
 to determine what, if any, restrictions to impose on abortion access.That ruling raises the stakes for an upcoming constitutional amendment vote in Kansas.The high court’s ruling confirms what <a href="https://www.kcur.org/news/2022-05-03/roe-v-wade-decision-will-mean-kansas-abortion-rights-hinge-on-a-state-vote-in-august" target="_blank">was expected for weeks</a> after a draft of the decision was leaked showing the 1973 precedent was doomed.The
 country is now covered with a state-by-state patchwork of differing 
abortion laws. Some states could follow the ruling by enacting more 
restrictive laws — including Kansas. But the Sunflower State will first 
need to change the Kansas Constitution before it can pursue them.<div><iframe title="If Roe v. Wade is overturned, a patchwork of restrictive laws would take effect" aria-label="Map" id="datawrapper-chart-aebuB" src=https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/aebuB/31/ scrolling="no" frameborder="0" style="border: none;" width="600" height="605"></iframe></div>Abortion rights in Kansas currently fall under the protection of <a href="https://www.kcur.org/2019-04-26/kansas-supreme-court-rules-state-constitution-protects-right-to-abortion" target="_blank">a 2019 </a><a href="https://www.kcur.org/2019-04-26/kansas-supreme-court-rules-state-constitution-protects-right-to-abortion" target="_blank">Kansas</a><a href="https://www.kcur.org/2019-04-26/kansas-supreme-court-rules-state-constitution-protects-right-to-abortion" target="_blank"> Supreme Court ruling</a>
 that found the state constitution includes the right to an abortion. 
But that ruling spurred the Republican-dominated Kansas Legislature to 
push for a change to the state constitution.Kansas voters will 
decide on Aug. 2 whether to amend the state constitution with a 
provision that says it doesn’t promise access to abortion. All Kansas 
voters may cast a ballot on the issue in that primary, regardless of 
whether they’re affiliated with a party.Here’s what the U.S. Supreme court ruling means for abortion rights in Kansas:<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/6/1656082532826.png" alt="The federal ruling overturning Roe v. Wade raises the stakes on the upcoming state constitutional amendment vote, which will determine the future of abortion rights in Kansas. Dylan Lysen / Kansas News Service" />
 <figcaption>The federal ruling overturning Roe v. Wade raises the stakes on the upcoming state constitutional amendment vote, which will determine the future of abortion rights in Kansas. Dylan Lysen / Kansas News Service</figcaption>
 </figure>The Supreme Court ruling does not immediately change anything in 
Kansas, but it raises the stakes for a statewide abortion rights vote in
 August.The federal ruling puts even more importance on the 
upcoming state constitutional amendment vote, setting up all-or-nothing 
political fight that will determine the future of abortion rights in the
 state.The Kansas Supreme Court ruling is now the only shield for
 abortion rights in the state. If the amendment is approved, those state
 abortion protections would be scrapped.The state constitutional amendment itself would not ban abortion in Kansas.If
 Kansas voters approve the amendment, abortion will not be banned 
immediately. Instead, approval could open the floodgates for lawmakers 
to pass more restrictive abortion laws, likely following the lead of 
neighboring Republican-led states.Oklahoma approved a <a href="https://www.kcur.org/news/2022-04-14/more-women-are-expected-to-come-to-kansas-clinics-because-of-oklahomas-abortion-ban" target="_blank">near-total ban on abortion</a> this year, and Texas enacted significant abortion restrictions in 2021.One <a href="http://www.kslegislature.org/li/b2021_22/measures/documents/hb2746_00_0000.pdf" target="_blank">bill banning abortion</a>
 that does not appear to allow exceptions even in cases of rape or 
incest was introduced in the Kansas Legislature this spring. Lawmakers 
did not take action on the bill before adjourning for the rest of 2022.Kansas lawmakers could look to restrictions quickly.If
 the constitutional amendment in approved in August, Republicans will 
likely be ready to introduce bills for new abortion restrictions.Tighter
 abortion laws also would likely become a major campaign topic in the 
fall that Republicans to lean on to help keep their supermajority in the
 Legislature.Then, when they return to Topeka in January, those 
bills could be approved quickly — especially if Republican Derek Schmidt
 defeats incumbent Democrat Laura Kelly for governor. That would pave 
the way for bills to sail through the lawmaking process.Unaffiliated and smaller party voters may cast a ballot on the amendment question during the primary.Despite
 the constitutional amendment vote coming during the primary election, 
when the Republican and Democrat parties pick who they want to go onto 
general elections for positions, voters who are not part of those major 
political parties <a href="https://www.kcur.org/news/2022-06-09/kansas-abortion-amendment-how-all-registered-voters-can-cast-a-ballot-in-augusts-primary-election" target="_blank">will still be able to vote</a> on the constitutional amendment.Anyone
 can vote on the constitutional amendment. Voters who are not Republican
 or Democrat — such as Libertarian Party voters, or those who chose not 
to be affiliated with a political party — will be provided a ballot with
 only the constitutional amendment question on it.Dylan Lysen 
reports on politics for the Kansas News Service. You can follow him on 
Twitter @DylanLysen or email him at dlysen@kcur.org.

Roe overturned: What that means for abortion in Kansas

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden said Friday that “it’s a sad day for the court and the country” after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 decision that legalized abortion nationwide.

(Click below to watch President Biden's comments)

“Now with Roe gone, let’s be very clear, the health and life of women across this nation are now at risk,” he said from the White House.

He added that "the court has done what it’s never done before — expressly taking away a constitution right that is so fundamental to so many Americans,” he said.

The White House has been preparing for this moment since a draft of the decision leaked in May. Officials have been huddling with state leaders, advocates, health care professionals and others to prepare for a future without Roe v. Wade.

He said the court has done what it’s never done before in taking away a constitutional right that is so fundamental to so many Americans. He says the decision places the health and life of women at risk. 

Now Biden’s plans will be tested in terms of politics and policy. Biden said his administration would defend a woman's right to cross state lines to seek an abortion.

Outside the Supreme Court, a crowd of abortion supporters swelled to the hundreds after the ruling was issued. One chanted into a bullhorn, “legal abortion on demand” and “this decision must not stand.” Some shouted “the Supreme Court is illegitimate."

“It’s a painful day for those of us who support women’s rights,” said Laura Free, an Ithaca resident and women’s rights historian who came to Washington to do research. When she learned of the decision, she said, “I had to come here.”

A competing faction demonstrated in favor of the ruling, holding signs saying "the future is anti-abortion″ and “dismember Roe.”

Garrett Bess, with Heritage Action for America, a lobbying arm of the conservative Heritage Foundation, said his organization would be working in states to continue efforts to limit abortion.

“This has been a long time coming and it’s a welcome decision,” he said.

Biden and other Democrats hope to use outrage over the court decision to rally voters in November's midterm elections. Although nationwide legislation ensuring access to abortion appears out of reach, more Democratic victories at the state level could limit Republican efforts to ban the practice.

In a statement, Attorney General Merrick Garland said the Justice Department “will work tirelessly to protect and advance reproductive freedom.” He said that in addition to protecting providers and those seeking abortions in states where it remains legal, “we stand ready to work with other arms of the federal government that seek to use their lawful authorities to protect and preserve access to reproductive care.”

He also noted that the Food and Drug Administration has approved the use of mifepristone, a drug used to end pregnancies.

“States may not ban mifepristone based on disagreement with the FDA’s expert judgment about its safety and efficacy,” Garland said.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said the court's ruling “is outrageous and heart-wrenching” and fulfills the Republican Party's "dark and extreme goal of ripping away women’s right to make their own reproductive health decisions.”

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., applauded the decision.

“A lot of lives are going to be saved,” McCarthy told reporters. “But it also goes back to people in the states to have a say in the process.”

Many Republican-controlled states are poised to severely restrict abortion, or even ban it outright.

The White House has been exploring options for Biden to take executive action to safeguard abortion rights, but his options are limited.

Lawrence Gostin, who runs the O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health at Georgetown Law, said before Friday's ruling that he expected the Biden administration to be “to be nibbling around the edges, and is not going to do anything really profound.”

Gostin said he’s discussed a variety of options with administration officials but believes they are “gun shy” given the potential for legal challenges that could lead to more roadblocks from a Supreme Court dominated by conservatives.

Some of Gostin’s suggestions included having Medicaid cover the cost of traveling across state lines to end pregnancies, as well as expanding access to abortion medication that can be delivered by mail.

“States couldn’t pick and choose what cancer drug they would allow, and they shouldn’t be permitted to choose what options women have for medication abortions that are fully approved as safe and effective,” he said.

During their preparations, White House officials have held a series of meetings with advocates, medical groups and faith leaders who are supportive of abortion access.

The Rev. John Dorhauer, the general minister and president of the United Church of Christ, drove from Cleveland to Washington to attend one meeting earlier this month. Another virtual meeting was held this week, featuring Vice President Kamala Harris.

“It was rather impressive to see the commitment the White House and the vice president’s office has had to gather advocates from around the country,” Dorhauer said.

However, there are also concerns that the administration is not ready.

Dr. Colleen McNicholas, chief medical officer of Planned Parenthood of the St. Louis Region and Southwest Missouri, attended a recent virtual meeting with abortion providers and said she expects “a true health crisis.”

“I think that we should have been preparing for far longer than we have been,” McNicholas said. “Do I think that they recognize that this a problem? Yes. Do I think that they’re prepared in this moment? No.”

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden will speak from the White House about the U.S. Supreme Court ruling overturning Roe v. Wade, the landmark decision that legalized abortion nationwide.

Biden's remarks are scheduled for 12:30 p.m. EDT Friday and will outline his approach to this new phase of the fight over abortion access. The White House has been holding meetings and researching policy ideas for weeks, but its options appear to be limited. 

A White House spokeswoman said this week Biden “believes we should defend the right of all Americans to make their own decisions.”

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/6/1656088873001.png" alt="President Biden said the court has done what it’s never done before in taking away a constitutional right that is so fundamental to so many Americans. He says the decision places the health and life of women at risk.-White House image" />
 <figcaption>President Biden said the court has done what it’s never done before in taking away a constitutional right that is so fundamental to so many Americans. He says the decision places the health and life of women at risk.-White House image</figcaption>
 </figure>WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden said Friday that “it’s a sad day for the court and the country” after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 decision that legalized abortion nationwide.(Click below to watch President Biden's comments)<div><iframe src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/video.php?height=314&href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FWhiteHouse%2Fvideos%2F739710633941546%2F&show_text=false&width=560&t=376" width="560" height="314" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="true" allow="autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowFullScreen="true"></iframe></div>“Now with Roe gone, let’s be very clear, the health and life of women across this nation are now at risk,” he said from the White House.He added that "the court has done what it’s never done before — expressly taking away a constitution right that is so fundamental to so many Americans,” he said.The White House has been preparing for this moment since a draft of the decision leaked in May. Officials have been huddling with state leaders, advocates, health care professionals and others to prepare for a future without Roe v. Wade.He said the court has done what it’s never done before in taking away a constitutional right that is so fundamental to so many Americans. He says the decision places the health and life of women at risk. The White House has been preparing for this moment since a draft of the decision leaked in May. Officials have been huddling with state leaders, advocates, health care professionals and others to prepare for a future without Roe v. Wade.Now Biden’s plans will be tested in terms of politics and policy. Biden said his administration would defend a woman's right to cross state lines to seek an abortion.Outside the Supreme Court, a crowd of abortion supporters swelled to the hundreds after the ruling was issued. One chanted into a bullhorn, “legal abortion on demand” and “this decision must not stand.” Some shouted “the Supreme Court is illegitimate."“It’s a painful day for those of us who support women’s rights,” said Laura Free, an Ithaca resident and women’s rights historian who came to Washington to do research. When she learned of the decision, she said, “I had to come here.”A competing faction demonstrated in favor of the ruling, holding signs saying "the future is anti-abortion″ and “dismember Roe.”Garrett Bess, with Heritage Action for America, a lobbying arm of the conservative Heritage Foundation, said his organization would be working in states to continue efforts to limit abortion.“This has been a long time coming and it’s a welcome decision,” he said.Biden and other Democrats hope to use outrage over the court decision to rally voters in November's midterm elections. Although nationwide legislation ensuring access to abortion appears out of reach, more Democratic victories at the state level could limit Republican efforts to ban the practice.In a statement, Attorney General Merrick Garland said the Justice Department “will work tirelessly to protect and advance reproductive freedom.” He said that in addition to protecting providers and those seeking abortions in states where it remains legal, “we stand ready to work with other arms of the federal government that seek to use their lawful authorities to protect and preserve access to reproductive care.”He also noted that the Food and Drug Administration has approved the use of mifepristone, a drug used to end pregnancies.“States may not ban mifepristone based on disagreement with the FDA’s expert judgment about its safety and efficacy,” Garland said.House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said the court's ruling “is outrageous and heart-wrenching” and fulfills the Republican Party's "dark and extreme goal of ripping away women’s right to make their own reproductive health decisions.”House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., applauded the decision.“A lot of lives are going to be saved,” McCarthy told reporters. “But it also goes back to people in the states to have a say in the process.”Many Republican-controlled states are poised to severely restrict abortion, or even ban it outright.The White House has been exploring options for Biden to take executive action to safeguard abortion rights, but his options are limited.Lawrence Gostin, who runs the O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health at Georgetown Law, said before Friday's ruling that he expected the Biden administration to be “to be nibbling around the edges, and is not going to do anything really profound.”Gostin said he’s discussed a variety of options with administration officials but believes they are “gun shy” given the potential for legal challenges that could lead to more roadblocks from a Supreme Court dominated by conservatives.Some of Gostin’s suggestions included having Medicaid cover the cost of traveling across state lines to end pregnancies, as well as expanding access to abortion medication that can be delivered by mail.“States couldn’t pick and choose what cancer drug they would allow, and they shouldn’t be permitted to choose what options women have for medication abortions that are fully approved as safe and effective,” he said.During their preparations, White House officials have held a series of meetings with advocates, medical groups and faith leaders who are supportive of abortion access.The Rev. John Dorhauer, the general minister and president of the United Church of Christ, drove from Cleveland to Washington to attend one meeting earlier this month. Another virtual meeting was held this week, featuring Vice President Kamala Harris.“It was rather impressive to see the commitment the White House and the vice president’s office has had to gather advocates from around the country,” Dorhauer said.However, there are also concerns that the administration is not ready.Dr. Colleen McNicholas, chief medical officer of Planned Parenthood of the St. Louis Region and Southwest Missouri, attended a recent virtual meeting with abortion providers and said she expects “a true health crisis.”“I think that we should have been preparing for far longer than we have been,” McNicholas said. “Do I think that they recognize that this a problem? Yes. Do I think that they’re prepared in this moment? No.”------<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/6/1656087288784.png" alt="Protests outside the U.S. Supreme Court Friday afternoon -image courtesy CSPAN" />
 <figcaption>Protests outside the U.S. Supreme Court Friday afternoon -image courtesy CSPAN</figcaption>
 </figure>WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden will speak from the White House about the U.S. Supreme Court ruling overturning Roe v. Wade, the landmark decision that legalized abortion nationwide.Biden's remarks are scheduled for 12:30 p.m. EDT Friday and will outline his approach to this new phase of the fight over abortion access. The White House has been holding meetings and researching policy ideas for weeks, but its options appear to be limited. A White House spokeswoman said this week Biden “believes we should defend the right of all Americans to make their own decisions.”

🎥 Biden: Abortion ruling 'a sad day' for country

Following the Supreme Court of the United States’ ruling in Dobbs that overturns Roe v. Wade, Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt Friday issued an opinion to the Missouri Revisor of Statutes that “triggers” parts of Missouri’s House Bill 126, effectively ending abortion in the State of Missouri, according to a statement from his office.

 Missouri is the first state in the country to do so.

<a href="https://ago.mo.gov/docs/default-source/press-releases/22-2022.pdf?sfvrsn=39ffd2d_2">&nbsp;Click here</a>&nbsp;to read the full opinion

"Today, following the United States Supreme Court’s ruling that overturned Roe v. Wade, with the issuance of an attorney general opinion, my Office has yet again reinforced Missouri’s dedication to protecting the sanctity of life, both born and unborn. With this attorney general opinion, my Office has effectively ended abortion in Missouri, becoming the first state in the country to do so following the Court’s ruling,” said&nbsp;Attorney General Schmitt. 

“My Office has been fighting to uphold the sanctity of life since I became attorney general, culminating in today’s momentous court ruling and attorney general opinion. I will continue the fight to protect all life, born and unborn.” Section B of HB126 states, “The enactment of section 188.017 of this act shall only become effective upon notification to the revisor of statutes by an opinion by the attorney general of Missouri…”&nbsp; And Section 188.017 that is “triggered” by an attorney general’s opinion states, in part, “Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, no abortion shall be performed or induced upon a woman, except in cases of medical emergency…” Thus, with the opinion from the Missouri Attorney General’s Office, abortion, except in cases of medical emergency, is now outlawed in the State of Missouri.&nbsp; The opinion states, “By issuing this Attorney General Opinion No. 22-2022&nbsp;and providing it directly to you, I hereby provide notification to the Revisor of Statutes, pursuant to § 188.017.4(1), that the United States Supreme Court has overruled, in whole or in part, Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), restoring or granting to the state of Missouri the authority to regulate abortion to the extent set forth in § 188.017, RSMo, and that as a result, it is reasonably probable that § 188.017 would be upheld by the court as constitutional.”

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/6/1656081443186.png" alt="Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt said, "Since taking office, I have always fought to protect the unborn. Because of our action today, millions of lives will be protected moving forward" -courtesy photo" />
 <figcaption>Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt said, "Since taking office, I have always fought to protect the unborn. Because of our action today, millions of lives will be protected moving forward" -courtesy photo</figcaption>
 </figure>Following the Supreme Court of the United States’ ruling in Dobbs that overturns Roe v. Wade, Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt Friday issued an opinion to the Missouri Revisor of Statutes that “triggers” parts of Missouri’s House Bill 126, effectively ending abortion in the State of Missouri, according to a statement from his office. Missouri is the first state in the country to do so.<a href="https://ago.mo.gov/docs/default-source/press-releases/22-2022.pdf?sfvrsn=39ffd2d_2">&nbsp;Click here</a>&nbsp;to read the full opinion"Today, following the United States Supreme Court’s ruling that overturned Roe v. Wade, with the issuance of an attorney general opinion, my Office has yet again reinforced Missouri’s dedication to protecting the sanctity of life, both born and unborn. With this attorney general opinion, my Office has effectively ended abortion in Missouri, becoming the first state in the country to do so following the Court’s ruling,” said&nbsp;Attorney General Schmitt. “My Office has been fighting to uphold the sanctity of life since I became attorney general, culminating in today’s momentous court ruling and attorney general opinion. I will continue the fight to protect all life, born and unborn.” Section B of HB126 states, “The enactment of section 188.017 of this act shall only become effective upon notification to the revisor of statutes by an opinion by the attorney general of Missouri…”&nbsp; And Section 188.017 that is “triggered” by an attorney general’s opinion states, in part, “Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, no abortion shall be performed or induced upon a woman, except in cases of medical emergency…” Thus, with the opinion from the Missouri Attorney General’s Office, abortion, except in cases of medical emergency, is now outlawed in the State of Missouri.&nbsp; The opinion states, “By issuing this Attorney General Opinion No. 22-2022&nbsp;and providing it directly to you, I hereby provide notification to the Revisor of Statutes, pursuant to § 188.017.4(1), that the United States Supreme Court has overruled, in whole or in part, Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), restoring or granting to the state of Missouri the authority to regulate abortion to the extent set forth in § 188.017, RSMo, and that as a result, it is reasonably probable that § 188.017 would be upheld by the court as constitutional.”

Abortion immediately banned in Missouri as trigger law takes effect

WASHINGTON (AP) — The&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/us-supreme-court">Supreme Court</a>&nbsp;has ended constitutional protections for abortion that had been in place nearly 50 years in a decision by its conservative majority to overturn&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/what-is-roe-v-wade-33c08858dc8b0aa5f0450858b51a648a">Roe v. Wade</a>. Friday’s outcome is expected to lead to abortion bans in roughly half the states.

The decision, unthinkable just a few years ago, was the culmination of decades of efforts by abortion opponents, made possible by an emboldened right side of the court that has been fortified by three appointees of former President Donald Trump.

The ruling came more than a month after the stunning&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-abortion-draft-opinion-07439f9fc4542f1500ab78dfd34036b1">leak of a draft opinion</a>&nbsp;by Justice Samuel Alito indicating the court was prepared to take this momentous step.

It puts the court at odds with a majority of Americans who favored preserving Roe, according to opinion polls.

Alito, in the final opinion issued Friday, wrote that Roe and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the 1992 decision that reaffirmed the right to abortion, were wrong the day they were decided and must be overturned.

“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled. The Constitution makes no reference to abortion, and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision,” Alito wrote.

Authority to regulate abortion rests with the political branches, not the courts, Alito wrote.

Joining Alito were Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett. The latter three justices are Trump appointees. Thomas first voted to overrule Roe 30 years ago.

Chief Justice John Roberts would have stopped short of ending the abortion right, noting that he would have upheld the Mississippi law at the heart of the case, a ban on abortion after 15 weeks, and said no more.

Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan — the diminished liberal wing of the court — were in dissent.

“With sorrow—for this Court, but more, for the many millions of American women who have today lost a fundamental constitutional protection—we dissent,” they wrote.

The ruling is expected to disproportionately affect minority women who already face limited access to health care, according to statistics analyzed by The Associated Press.

Thirteen states, mainly in the South and Midwest, already have laws on the books that ban abortion in the event Roe is overturned. Another half-dozen states have near-total bans or prohibitions after 6 weeks of pregnancy, before many women know they are pregnant.

In roughly a half-dozen other states, the fight will be over dormant abortion bans that were enacted before Roe was decided in 1973 or new proposals to sharply limit when abortions can be performed, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a research group that supports abortion rights.

More than 90% of abortions take place in the first 13 weeks of pregnancy, and more than half are now done with pills, not surgery, according to data compiled by Guttmacher.

The decision came against a backdrop of public opinion surveys that find a majority of Americans oppose overturning Roe and handing the question of whether to permit abortion entirely to the states. Polls conducted by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research and others also have consistently shown about 1 in 10 Americans want abortion to be illegal in all cases. A majority are in favor of abortion being legal in all or most circumstances, but polls indicate many also support restrictions especially later in pregnancy.

The Biden administration and other defenders of abortion rights have warned that a decision overturning Roe also would threaten other high court decisions in favor of gay rights and even potentially, contraception.

But Alito wrote in his draft opinion that his analysis addresses abortion only, not other rights that also stem from a right to privacy that the high court has found implicit, though not directly stated, in the Constitution. Abortion is different, Alito wrote, because of the unique moral question it poses.

Whatever the intentions of the person who leaked Alito’s draft opinion, the conservatives held firm in overturning Roe and Casey.

In his draft, Alito dismissed the arguments in favor of retaining the two decisions, including that multiple generations of American women have partly relied on the right to abortion to gain economic and political power.

Changing the composition of the court has been central to the anti-abortion side’s strategy. Mississippi and its allies made increasingly aggressive arguments as the case developed, and two high-court defenders of abortion rights retired or died. The state initially argued that its law could be upheld without overruling the court’s abortion precedents.

Then-Gov. Phil Bryant signed the 15-week measure into law in March 2018, when Justices Anthony Kennedy and Ruth Bader Ginsburg were still members of a five-justice majority that was mainly protective of abortion rights.

By early summer, Kennedy had retired and was replaced by Justice Brett Kavanaugh a few months later. The Mississippi law was blocked in lower federal courts.

But the state always was headed to the nation’s highest court. It did not even ask for a hearing before a three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which ultimately held the law invalid in December 2019.

By early September 2020, the Supreme Court was ready to consider the state’s appeal.

The court scheduled the case for consideration at the justices’ private conference on Sept. 29. But in the intervening weeks, Ginsburg died and Barrett was quickly nominated and confirmed without a single Democratic vote.

The stage now was set, although it took the court another half year to agree to hear the case.

By the time Mississippi filed its main written argument with the court in the summer, the thrust of its argument had changed and it was now calling for the wholesale overruling of Roe and Casey.

The first sign that the court might be receptive to wiping away the constitutional right to abortion came in late summer, when the justices divided 5-4 in allowing Texas to enforce a ban on the procedure at roughly six weeks, before some women even know they are pregnant. That dispute turned on the unique structure of the law, including its enforcement by private citizens rather than by state officials, and how it can be challenged in court.

But Justice Sonia Sotomayor noted in a searing dissent for the three liberal justices that their conservative colleagues refused to block “a flagrantly unconstitutional law” that “flouts nearly 50 years of federal precedents.” Roberts was also among the dissenters.

Then in December, after hearing additional arguments over whether to block the Texas law known as S.B. 8, the court again declined to do so, also by a 5-4 vote. “The clear purpose and actual effect of S. B. 8 has been to nullify this Court’s rulings,” Roberts wrote, in a partial dissent.

In their Senate hearings, Trump’s three high-court picks carefully skirted questions about how they would vote in any cases, including about abortion.

But even as Democrats and abortion rights supporters predicted Kavanaugh and Gorsuch would vote to upend abortion rights if confirmed, the two left at least one Republican senator with a different impression. Sen. Susan Collins of Maine predicted Gorsuch and Kavanaugh wouldn’t support overturning the abortion cases, based on private conversations she had with them when they were nominees to the Supreme Court.

Barrett was perhaps the most vocal opponent of abortion in her time as a law professor, before becoming a federal judge in 2017. She was a member of anti-abortion groups at Notre Dame University, where she taught law, and she signed a newspaper ad opposing “abortion on demand” and defending “the right to life from fertilization to natural death.” She promised to set aside her personal views when judging cases.

Trump, meanwhile, had predicted as a candidate that whoever he named to the court would “automatically” vote to overrule Roe.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/6/1656080467605.png" alt="A view outside the U.S. Supreme Court as the decision was announced Friday morning -image courtesy CSPAN" />
 <figcaption>A view outside the U.S. Supreme Court as the decision was announced Friday morning -image courtesy CSPAN</figcaption>
 </figure>WASHINGTON (AP) — The&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/us-supreme-court">Supreme Court</a>&nbsp;has ended constitutional protections for abortion that had been in place nearly 50 years in a decision by its conservative majority to overturn&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/what-is-roe-v-wade-33c08858dc8b0aa5f0450858b51a648a">Roe v. Wade</a>. Friday’s outcome is expected to lead to abortion bans in roughly half the states.The decision, unthinkable just a few years ago, was the culmination of decades of efforts by abortion opponents, made possible by an emboldened right side of the court that has been fortified by three appointees of former President Donald Trump.The ruling came more than a month after the stunning&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-abortion-draft-opinion-07439f9fc4542f1500ab78dfd34036b1">leak of a draft opinion</a>&nbsp;by Justice Samuel Alito indicating the court was prepared to take this momentous step.It puts the court at odds with a majority of Americans who favored preserving Roe, according to opinion polls.<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Today’s historic decision on the Dobbs case signals a new beginning for millions of unborn American children. Thank you <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/SCOTUS?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#SCOTUS</a>!&mdash; Dr. Roger Marshall (@RogerMarshallMD) <a href="https://twitter.com/RogerMarshallMD/status/1540340873757597696?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 24, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>Alito, in the final opinion issued Friday, wrote that Roe and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the 1992 decision that reaffirmed the right to abortion, were wrong the day they were decided and must be overturned.“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled. The Constitution makes no reference to abortion, and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision,” Alito wrote.<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/6/1656080662104.png" alt="Protesters outside the U.S. Supreme Court Friday -image courtesy CSPAN" />
 <figcaption>Protesters outside the U.S. Supreme Court Friday -image courtesy CSPAN</figcaption>
 </figure>Authority to regulate abortion rests with the political branches, not the courts, Alito wrote.Joining Alito were Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett. The latter three justices are Trump appointees. Thomas first voted to overrule Roe 30 years ago.Chief Justice John Roberts would have stopped short of ending the abortion right, noting that he would have upheld the Mississippi law at the heart of the case, a ban on abortion after 15 weeks, and said no more.Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan — the diminished liberal wing of the court — were in dissent.“With sorrow—for this Court, but more, for the many millions of American women who have today lost a fundamental constitutional protection—we dissent,” they wrote.The ruling is expected to disproportionately affect minority women who already face limited access to health care, according to statistics analyzed by The Associated Press.Thirteen states, mainly in the South and Midwest, already have laws on the books that ban abortion in the event Roe is overturned. Another half-dozen states have near-total bans or prohibitions after 6 weeks of pregnancy, before many women know they are pregnant.In roughly a half-dozen other states, the fight will be over dormant abortion bans that were enacted before Roe was decided in 1973 or new proposals to sharply limit when abortions can be performed, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a research group that supports abortion rights.More than 90% of abortions take place in the first 13 weeks of pregnancy, and more than half are now done with pills, not surgery, according to data compiled by Guttmacher.The decision came against a backdrop of public opinion surveys that find a majority of Americans oppose overturning Roe and handing the question of whether to permit abortion entirely to the states. Polls conducted by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research and others also have consistently shown about 1 in 10 Americans want abortion to be illegal in all cases. A majority are in favor of abortion being legal in all or most circumstances, but polls indicate many also support restrictions especially later in pregnancy.The Biden administration and other defenders of abortion rights have warned that a decision overturning Roe also would threaten other high court decisions in favor of gay rights and even potentially, contraception.But Alito wrote in his draft opinion that his analysis addresses abortion only, not other rights that also stem from a right to privacy that the high court has found implicit, though not directly stated, in the Constitution. Abortion is different, Alito wrote, because of the unique moral question it poses.Whatever the intentions of the person who leaked Alito’s draft opinion, the conservatives held firm in overturning Roe and Casey.In his draft, Alito dismissed the arguments in favor of retaining the two decisions, including that multiple generations of American women have partly relied on the right to abortion to gain economic and political power.Changing the composition of the court has been central to the anti-abortion side’s strategy. Mississippi and its allies made increasingly aggressive arguments as the case developed, and two high-court defenders of abortion rights retired or died. The state initially argued that its law could be upheld without overruling the court’s abortion precedents.Then-Gov. Phil Bryant signed the 15-week measure into law in March 2018, when Justices Anthony Kennedy and Ruth Bader Ginsburg were still members of a five-justice majority that was mainly protective of abortion rights.By early summer, Kennedy had retired and was replaced by Justice Brett Kavanaugh a few months later. The Mississippi law was blocked in lower federal courts.But the state always was headed to the nation’s highest court. It did not even ask for a hearing before a three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which ultimately held the law invalid in December 2019.By early September 2020, the Supreme Court was ready to consider the state’s appeal.The court scheduled the case for consideration at the justices’ private conference on Sept. 29. But in the intervening weeks, Ginsburg died and Barrett was quickly nominated and confirmed without a single Democratic vote.The stage now was set, although it took the court another half year to agree to hear the case.By the time Mississippi filed its main written argument with the court in the summer, the thrust of its argument had changed and it was now calling for the wholesale overruling of Roe and Casey.The first sign that the court might be receptive to wiping away the constitutional right to abortion came in late summer, when the justices divided 5-4 in allowing Texas to enforce a ban on the procedure at roughly six weeks, before some women even know they are pregnant. That dispute turned on the unique structure of the law, including its enforcement by private citizens rather than by state officials, and how it can be challenged in court.But Justice Sonia Sotomayor noted in a searing dissent for the three liberal justices that their conservative colleagues refused to block “a flagrantly unconstitutional law” that “flouts nearly 50 years of federal precedents.” Roberts was also among the dissenters.Then in December, after hearing additional arguments over whether to block the Texas law known as S.B. 8, the court again declined to do so, also by a 5-4 vote. “The clear purpose and actual effect of S. B. 8 has been to nullify this Court’s rulings,” Roberts wrote, in a partial dissent.In their Senate hearings, Trump’s three high-court picks carefully skirted questions about how they would vote in any cases, including about abortion.But even as Democrats and abortion rights supporters predicted Kavanaugh and Gorsuch would vote to upend abortion rights if confirmed, the two left at least one Republican senator with a different impression. Sen. Susan Collins of Maine predicted Gorsuch and Kavanaugh wouldn’t support overturning the abortion cases, based on private conversations she had with them when they were nominees to the Supreme Court.Barrett was perhaps the most vocal opponent of abortion in her time as a law professor, before becoming a federal judge in 2017. She was a member of anti-abortion groups at Notre Dame University, where she taught law, and she signed a newspaper ad opposing “abortion on demand” and defending “the right to life from fertilization to natural death.” She promised to set aside her personal views when judging cases.Trump, meanwhile, had predicted as a candidate that whoever he named to the court would “automatically” vote to overrule Roe.

Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade; states can ban abortion

BUTLER COUNTY —Friends of 21-year-old Kansas girl who died in a weekend accident have<a href="https://www.gofundme.com/f/carley-bullard?utm_medium=referral&amp;utm_source=unknown&amp;utm_campaign=comms_34pk+carley-bullard"> created a fundraiser </a>to assist her family.

On Sunday law enforcement authorities and emergency crews&nbsp; located the body of Carley Bullard who was reported missing along the Walnut River after an ATV crash South of Augusta.&nbsp;

Just before 3:30 a.m., Saturday, friends and family reported Bullard was missing when an ATV she was on traveled off a bank of the Walnut River.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/6/1655909388476.png" alt="Carley Bullard photo GoFundMe" />
 <figcaption>Carley Bullard photo GoFundMe</figcaption>
 </figure>BUTLER COUNTY —Friends of 21-year-old Kansas girl who died in a weekend accident have<a href="https://www.gofundme.com/f/carley-bullard?utm_medium=referral&amp;utm_source=unknown&amp;utm_campaign=comms_34pk+carley-bullard"> created a fundraiser </a>to assist her family.On Sunday law enforcement authorities and emergency crews&nbsp; located the body of Carley Bullard who was reported missing along the Walnut River after an ATV crash South of Augusta.&nbsp;Just before 3:30 a.m., Saturday, friends and family reported Bullard was missing when an ATV she was on traveled off a bank of the Walnut River.

Fundraiser continues for family of Kan. girl who died in ATV accident

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Senate easily approved a bipartisan&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/health-violence-gun-politics-mental-ab399a7a1c5eea98bcd12e944679355f">gun violence bill</a>&nbsp;Thursday that seemed unthinkable a month ago, setting up final approval of what will be Congress’ most far-reaching response in decades to the nation’s run of brutal mass shootings.

After years futile Democratic efforts to curb firearms,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/shootings-texas-new-york-violence-buffalo-df9202d5686880aab00559979d180e17">15 Republicans joined with them as both sides decided inaction was untenable</a>&nbsp;after last month’s rampages in&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/buffalo-supermarket-shooting-victims-982351652caf7ecf3da304c6c64f62fb">Buffalo, New York</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/uvalde-texas-school-shooting-may-24-584466945120">Uvalde, Texas</a>.

 It took weeks of closed-door talks but senators emerged with a compromise embodying incremental but impactful movement to curb bloodshed that has come to regularly shock — yet no longer surprise — the nation. Kansas Senators Jerry Moran and Roger Marshall voted against the measure.

The $13 billion measure would toughen background checks for the youngest gun buyers, keep firearms from more domestic violence offenders and help states put in place red flag laws that make it easier for authorities to take weapons from people adjudged dangerous. It would also fund local programs for school safety, mental health and violence prevention.

“Families in Uvalde and Buffalo, and too many tragic shootings before, have demanded action. And tonight, we acted,” President Joe Biden said after passage. He said the House should send it to him quickly, adding, “Kids in schools and communities will be safer because of it.”

The election-year package fell far short of more robust gun restrictions Democrats have sought and Republicans have thwarted for years, including bans on the assault-type weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines used in the slayings in Buffaloand Uvalde. Yet the accord let leaders of both parties declare victory and demonstrate to voters that they know how to compromise and make government work, while also leaving room for each side to appeal to its core supporters.

“This is not a cure-all for the all the ways gun violence affects our nation,” said Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., whose party has made gun restrictions a goal for decades. “But it is a long overdue step in the right direction.”

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., in a nod to the Second Amendment right to bear arms that drives many conservative voters, said “the American people want their constitutional rights protected and their kids to be safe in school.” He said “they want both of those things at once, and that is just what the bill before the Senate will have accomplished.”

The day proved bittersweet for advocates of curtailing gun violence. Underscoring the enduring potency of conservative cIout, the right-leaning&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-guns-decision-what-to-know-a068d964981b6d1242a5ab124224f77a">Supreme Court issued a decision expanding the right of Americans to carry arms in public by</a>&nbsp;striking down a New York law requiring people to prove a need for carrying a weapon before they get a license to do so.

McConnell hailed the justices’ decision and Senate passage of the guns bill as “complementary victories that will make our country freer and safer at the same time.”

The Senate vote on final passage was 65-33. A cluster of House Democrats who watched the vote in the chamber’s rear included Rep. Lucy McBath, D-Ga., whose 17-year old son was shot to death in 2012 by a man complaining his music was too loud.

In the key roll call hours earlier, senators voted 65-34 to end a filibuster by conservative GOP senators. That was five more than the 60-vote threshold needed. The House planned to vote Friday and approval seemed certain.

On both votes, 15 Senate Republicans joined all 50 Democrats, including their two allied independents, in backing the legislation.

Yet the votes highlighted the risks Republicans face by defying the party’s pro-gun voters and firearms groups like the National Rifle Association. Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Todd Young of Indiana were the only two of the 15 up for reelection this fall. Of the rest, four are retiring and eight don’t face voters until 2026.

Tellingly, GOP senators voting “no” included potential 2024 presidential contenders like Ted Cruz of Texas, Josh Hawley of Missouri and Tim Scott of South Carolina. Some of the party’s most conservative members voted “no” as well, including Sens. Rand Paul of Kentucky and Mike Lee of Utah.

Cruz said the legislation would “disarm law-abiding citizens rather than take serious measures to protect our children.”

John Feinblatt, president of Everytown for Gun Safety, hailed senators who supported the measure for “coming together and putting the safety of the American people ahead of gun lobby priorities.”

While the Senate measure was a clear breakthrough, the outlook for continued congressional movement on gun curbs is dim.

Less than one-third of the Senate’s 50 GOP senators backed the measure and solid Republican opposition is certain in the House. Top House Republicans urged a “no” vote in an email from the No. 2 GOP leader, Rep. Steve Scalise of Louisiana, that called the bill “an effort to slowly chip away at law-abiding citizens’ 2nd Amendment rights.”

Both chambers — now narrowly controlled by Democrats — could well be run by the GOP after November’s midterm elections.

Senate action came one month after a gunman killed 19 students and two teachers in Uvalde. Just days before that, a white man was accused of being motivated by racism as he killed 10 Black grocery shoppers in Buffalo. Both shooters were 18 years old, a youthful profile shared by many mass shooters, and the close timing of the two slaughters and victims with whom many could identify stirred a demand by voters for action, lawmakers of both parties said.

The talks were led by Sens. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz., John Cornyn, R-Texas, and Thom Tillis, R-N.C. Murphy represented Newtown, Connecticut, when an assailant killed 20 students and six staffers at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012, while Cornyn has been involved in past gun talks following&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/uvalde-school-shooting-victims-0fc46ce400c3fed9081ee5c033d2aba5">mass shootings in his state</a>&nbsp;and is close to McConnell.

Murphy said the measure would save thousands of lives and was a chance to “prove to a weary American public that democracy is not so broken that it is unable to rise to the moment.”

“I don’t believe in doing nothing in the face of what we saw in Uvalde” and elsewhere, Cornyn said.

The bill would make the local juvenile records of people age 18 to 20 available during required federal background checks when they attempt to buy guns. Those examinations, currently limited to three days, would last up to a maximum of 10 days to give federal and local officials time to search records.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/6/1656067928516.png" alt="Members of the United State's Senate during Thursday's vote on the gun violence bill.-photo courtesy CSPAN" />
 <figcaption>Members of the United State's Senate during Thursday's vote on the gun violence bill.-photo courtesy CSPAN</figcaption>
 </figure>WASHINGTON (AP) — The Senate easily approved a bipartisan&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/health-violence-gun-politics-mental-ab399a7a1c5eea98bcd12e944679355f">gun violence bill</a>&nbsp;Thursday that seemed unthinkable a month ago, setting up final approval of what will be Congress’ most far-reaching response in decades to the nation’s run of brutal mass shootings.<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Kansans expect me to protect their Constitutional freedoms in the U.S. Senate, and I will not sacrifice those freedoms for this gun grabbing scheme.&mdash; Dr. Roger Marshall (@RogerMarshallMD) <a href="https://twitter.com/RogerMarshallMD/status/1540158340160012288?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 24, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>After years futile Democratic efforts to curb firearms,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/shootings-texas-new-york-violence-buffalo-df9202d5686880aab00559979d180e17">15 Republicans joined with them as both sides decided inaction was untenable</a>&nbsp;after last month’s rampages in&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/buffalo-supermarket-shooting-victims-982351652caf7ecf3da304c6c64f62fb">Buffalo, New York</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/uvalde-texas-school-shooting-may-24-584466945120">Uvalde, Texas</a>. It took weeks of closed-door talks but senators emerged with a compromise embodying incremental but impactful movement to curb bloodshed that has come to regularly shock — yet no longer surprise — the nation. Kansas Senators Jerry Moran and Roger Marshall voted against the measure.The $13 billion measure would toughen background checks for the youngest gun buyers, keep firearms from more domestic violence offenders and help states put in place red flag laws that make it easier for authorities to take weapons from people adjudged dangerous. It would also fund local programs for school safety, mental health and violence prevention.“Families in Uvalde and Buffalo, and too many tragic shootings before, have demanded action. And tonight, we acted,” President Joe Biden said after passage. He said the House should send it to him quickly, adding, “Kids in schools and communities will be safer because of it.”The election-year package fell far short of more robust gun restrictions Democrats have sought and Republicans have thwarted for years, including bans on the assault-type weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines used in the slayings in Buffaloand Uvalde. Yet the accord let leaders of both parties declare victory and demonstrate to voters that they know how to compromise and make government work, while also leaving room for each side to appeal to its core supporters.“This is not a cure-all for the all the ways gun violence affects our nation,” said Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., whose party has made gun restrictions a goal for decades. “But it is a long overdue step in the right direction.”Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., in a nod to the Second Amendment right to bear arms that drives many conservative voters, said “the American people want their constitutional rights protected and their kids to be safe in school.” He said “they want both of those things at once, and that is just what the bill before the Senate will have accomplished.”The day proved bittersweet for advocates of curtailing gun violence. Underscoring the enduring potency of conservative cIout, the right-leaning&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-guns-decision-what-to-know-a068d964981b6d1242a5ab124224f77a">Supreme Court issued a decision expanding the right of Americans to carry arms in public by</a>&nbsp;striking down a New York law requiring people to prove a need for carrying a weapon before they get a license to do so.McConnell hailed the justices’ decision and Senate passage of the guns bill as “complementary victories that will make our country freer and safer at the same time.”The Senate vote on final passage was 65-33. A cluster of House Democrats who watched the vote in the chamber’s rear included Rep. Lucy McBath, D-Ga., whose 17-year old son was shot to death in 2012 by a man complaining his music was too loud.In the key roll call hours earlier, senators voted 65-34 to end a filibuster by conservative GOP senators. That was five more than the 60-vote threshold needed. The House planned to vote Friday and approval seemed certain.On both votes, 15 Senate Republicans joined all 50 Democrats, including their two allied independents, in backing the legislation.Yet the votes highlighted the risks Republicans face by defying the party’s pro-gun voters and firearms groups like the National Rifle Association. Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Todd Young of Indiana were the only two of the 15 up for reelection this fall. Of the rest, four are retiring and eight don’t face voters until 2026.Tellingly, GOP senators voting “no” included potential 2024 presidential contenders like Ted Cruz of Texas, Josh Hawley of Missouri and Tim Scott of South Carolina. Some of the party’s most conservative members voted “no” as well, including Sens. Rand Paul of Kentucky and Mike Lee of Utah.Cruz said the legislation would “disarm law-abiding citizens rather than take serious measures to protect our children.”John Feinblatt, president of Everytown for Gun Safety, hailed senators who supported the measure for “coming together and putting the safety of the American people ahead of gun lobby priorities.”While the Senate measure was a clear breakthrough, the outlook for continued congressional movement on gun curbs is dim.Less than one-third of the Senate’s 50 GOP senators backed the measure and solid Republican opposition is certain in the House. Top House Republicans urged a “no” vote in an email from the No. 2 GOP leader, Rep. Steve Scalise of Louisiana, that called the bill “an effort to slowly chip away at law-abiding citizens’ 2nd Amendment rights.”Both chambers — now narrowly controlled by Democrats — could well be run by the GOP after November’s midterm elections.Senate action came one month after a gunman killed 19 students and two teachers in Uvalde. Just days before that, a white man was accused of being motivated by racism as he killed 10 Black grocery shoppers in Buffalo. Both shooters were 18 years old, a youthful profile shared by many mass shooters, and the close timing of the two slaughters and victims with whom many could identify stirred a demand by voters for action, lawmakers of both parties said.The talks were led by Sens. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz., John Cornyn, R-Texas, and Thom Tillis, R-N.C. Murphy represented Newtown, Connecticut, when an assailant killed 20 students and six staffers at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012, while Cornyn has been involved in past gun talks following&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/uvalde-school-shooting-victims-0fc46ce400c3fed9081ee5c033d2aba5">mass shootings in his state</a>&nbsp;and is close to McConnell.Murphy said the measure would save thousands of lives and was a chance to “prove to a weary American public that democracy is not so broken that it is unable to rise to the moment.”“I don’t believe in doing nothing in the face of what we saw in Uvalde” and elsewhere, Cornyn said.The bill would make the local juvenile records of people age 18 to 20 available during required federal background checks when they attempt to buy guns. Those examinations, currently limited to three days, would last up to a maximum of 10 days to give federal and local officials time to search records.People convicted of domestic abuse who are current or former romantic partners of the victim would be prohibited from acquiring firearms, closing the so-called “boyfriend loophole.”That ban currently only applies to people married to, living with or who have had children with the victim. The compromise bill would extend that to those considered to have had “a continuing serious relationship.”There would be money to help states enforce red flag laws and for other states without them that for violence prevention programs. Nineteen states and the District of Columbia have such laws.The measure expands the use of background checks by rewriting the definition of the federally licensed gun dealers required to conduct them. Penalties for gun trafficking are strengthened, billions of dollars are provided for behavioral health clinics and school mental health programs and there’s money for school safety initiatives, though not for personnel to use a “dangerous weapon.”