There is new, temporary leadership at a prominent Minnesota business advocacy group after the sudden departure of the prior top executive.

The Minnesota Business Partnership named Erika Nelson and Abby Loesch as interim co-CEOs after the resignation of Kurt Zellers.

Zellers had run the organization since September 2023. He has a background in Republican politics, having served a stint as Minnesota House speaker and an unsuccessful run for governor in 2014.

The group didn't provide a reason for his departure, saying only that he “is no longer with the organization.” He didn’t return a message about his status.

“Our focus remains on advancing our mission and ensuring continuity for our partners, stakeholders and the communities we serve,” said Sarah Barten, the partnership’s communications director.

The partnership represents senior executives at Minnesota's largest companies. It has a team of lobbyists at the Capitol. They have traditionally advocated for lower taxes, less regulation and improvements to state education policy, among other topics.

A search process has begun to find a new chief executive.

The job is a prime spot often occupied by ex-lawmakers or those with government experience. The organization holds annual dinners that attract Capitol movers and shakers.

Nelson has been chief of staff at the partnership and is a former top staff member to U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar, a Democratic candidate for governor. Loesch was in charge of the group’s education and workforce policy efforts and has deep experience in Republican politics.

It’s just one of the big shifts ahead for the Minnesota business community.

Doug Loon announced in May he would retire as president and CEO of the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce at the end of this year. He had led the 6,300-member group since 2015. No successor has been named and a search process is in progress.

Meanwhile, the Minneapolis and St. Paul chambers of commerce have been exploring a possible merger since 2025.

Gov. Tim Walz this week filed 16 records requests under the federal Freedom of Information Act seeking internal documents from the Trump administration that might reveal evidence of retribution by the federal government against Minnesota.

FOIA experts, though, know that actually getting documents from the feds can be a frustrating experience.

While the law requires the federal government to respond within roughly one month, officials can drag out requests longer due to certain exemptions, said Jane Kirtley director of the Silha Center for the Study of Media Ethics and Law at the University of Minnesota.

Walz asked for documents using terms such as “reckoning,” “retribution,” “punish” and other words that suggest actions by the Trump administration, including the winter surge of federal immigration agents, were driven by a political motive against Walz and Minnesota.

“The use of these keywords, which is a great way to get records, can also be used as a justification to say that the request is too broad,” Kirtley told MPR News. “It could be months before there's any kind of definitive response from the federal government.”

Minnesotans could file requests into the fatal shootings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti by federal agents in Minneapolis, but the government could also turn those down for “national security, for privacy, for ongoing investigations,” she added.

If Walz does get documents showing a clear pattern of political retribution, then separate litigation can begin, Kirtley said. “He needs the evidence. This is the first step to getting that,”

Listen to the full conversation by clicking the player above. Find more information on FOIA requests here.

The Minneapolis City Council voted 9-2 on Thursday with one abstaining to repeal the longstanding ban on adult bathhouses and businesses where people can have sex in the city. The vote comes after work from advocates, city staff and council members who say the ban is rooted in homophobia.

The final step to repeal the ban is a signature from Mayor Jacob Frey, who previously told MPR News he supports the repeal.

Adult bathhouses are community spaces that were historically frequented by gay men in the 1970s and ‘80s where people could engage in sexual activity or relax after going out to bars. They were banned in Minneapolis in 1988 during the AIDS epidemic.

Council members LaTrisha Vetaw, Linea Palmisano and Michael Rainville joined the six co-authors in voting to repeal the ban. Council member Jamison Whiting, who previously voiced his support for repealing the ban, was absent and council member Jamal Osman abstained.

Council member Jason Chavez, the only out LGBTQ+ member of the council, was a co-author for the pair of ordinances to repeal the ban and worked with the Safer Sex Spaces Coalition, an organization dedicated to overturning the ban.

He spoke ahead of the vote, mentioning former council member Brian Coyle, a gay man who voted for the ban in 1988.

“Today is the first step and it will not be the last. And it is an important one,” he said. “I believe if Brian Coyle was here with us today, with everything we know about public health, he would be standing with us proudly and me on this council so I would not feel alone taking this vote.”

Council members emphasized that the vote doesn’t mean that bathhouses will become legal and ready to open immediately. Instead, it is the beginning of a long and technical process that sets the city up for a pathway to consider permitting bathhouses and other sex venues in the future.

Issue draws debate in council meeting

Council member Elizabeth Schaffer, who represents the Loring Park neighborhood where the annual Twin Cities Pride festival will take place this weekend, said she voted to keep the ban because she does not think it is a priority for the city and she talked to constituents who were against it.

Specifically, she shared a story of a resident who worked for former Sen. Allan Spear, the first out LGBTQ+ senator in Minnesota.

“My constituent has spent decades in this fight. He shared with me that many gay men in his own network either oppose the return of bathhouses or have real questions about whether this is the right path for a variety of reasons,” she said.

Council member Robin Wonsley urged fellow members to not “hyper-sexualize” adult bathhouses and said while it is important to listen to constituents, she doesn’t want to ignore those in the chambers telling her things need to change.

“I think it’s so important to not use this trope of hyper-sexualizing our communities. That put a very repressive, ignorant and fear-based policy in our legal code in the first place,” she said. “If you can go and enjoy a drag show at Gay 90s, you should also be able to stand up for the policies that makes those spaces possible.”

A small group of less than a dozen cheered when the council voted in favor of the repeal.

Patrick Scully, a local artist and activist, was in attendance for the vote. Scully said he remembers what Minneapolis was like before the ban and the homophobia he said followed.

“I’m frustrated and angry that it took this long, but it just speaks to the sex negative, homo-hating world that we live in,” he said. “I'm glad that we won today, and I look forward to the momentum of this moving forward and getting these gay-negative laws off the books.”

How Minneapolis came to repeal the ban

The work for the repeal has been on and off for several years.

A few years ago, while working as a policy aide for the Minneapolis City Council, Claire Kingstad got an email from Phil Duran, the former legal director for OutFront Minnesota. People at the time were talking about Embrace North, a sauna in Linden Hills facing problems in part because of a different zoning code restricting saunas and bathhouses to downtown Minneapolis, and Duran wondered if Kingstad knew about his previous work attempting to repeal the bathhouse ban.

Duran and Karri Joe Plowman, the founder of Twin Cities Leather, worked together in 2017 to try to repeal the ban. Their work never came to an official vote. Plowman said while some people knew sex was happening in social group settings, they didn’t want to talk about it.

“That’s what I was saying in 2017, we deserve to be safe in a commercial space. And the city has a responsibility to make sure that space is safe. They do not have a responsibility to tell us what we can do in that space,” Plowman told MPR News in March.

Kingstad and Ben Carrier, another policy aide, created the Safer Sex Spaces Coalition. The two worked together in 2023 to amend the code, changing language that reflected advancements in treatment and prevention to HIV and removing language that advocates called stigmatizing to same-sex couples.

All 13 council members voted in favor of the new language. Kingstad and Carrier also both worked closely with sex workers in the city who were in favor of the repeal.

For this most recent effort, the council ended up pursuing two separate ordinances to remove the ban and move building standards for sex venues under the same rules that govern strip clubs.

Kingstad said she is proud of the community and city leaders for working together and that their effort shows that real change can happen at the municipal level by organizing.

“I understand that this is a complex issue, and it seemingly came out of nowhere, but for something that should have been revisited decades ago, there was never a right time. Now is the time. We did it. We put the work in,” she said.

“This is a testament to the the spirit of our city and our culture of organizing around the issues we care about and making progress as people.”

Dylan Boyer, the development director at the Aliveness Project, said it was hard for him not to feel emotional during the vote.

“I think suddenly the impact that this has had on people that I work with, my friends, the greater queer community at large — it all hit me in that moment realizing that this got passed,” he said. “We just made history in Minneapolis.”

Repeal opens door for city to consider permitting bathhouses

Minneapolis had three adult bathhouses at its peak, and in 1979 police raided Locker Room Baths which later became known as the largest adult bathhouse raid in U.S. history. Locker Room was renamed 315 Health Club and closed just one day before the ban passed in 1988.

Chavez said that if Frey signs the repeal, then he will start the long process of working with staff to begin the zoning, planning and regulations component of a framework for an adult bathhouse in Minneapolis.

Any proposed ordinances to establish a framework for licensing adult bathhouses would again go in front of the council for feedback, public hearings and votes.

San Francisco in 2021 overturned its AIDS-crisis-era ban on sex in private rooms inside businesses, and in 2022 created “adult sex venue” zoning legislation. Some cities that never banned them to begin with, including nearby Chicago, already have bathhouses.

Public attitude toward bathhouses has evolved as HIV and AIDS prevention and treatment has improved. The medication PrEP, when taken consistently, reduces the chance of contracting HIV by about 99 percent. According to KFF, the number of new HIV infections declined by about 76 percent between 1984 and 2022.

In 2018, the city of Minneapolis signed on to be a fast track city and take on initiatives to end HIV. It follows the 90-90-90 goal, meaning 90 percent of people living with HIV are aware of their status, 90 percent of people diagnosed are on antiretroviral therapy and 90 percent of people on medication achieve viral suppression.

The year to hit the goal is 2030 and Boyer said he isn’t sure the city will reach that goal. But, he thinks the bathhouse repeal could be part of the solution.

“These are big goals, it is going to take bold change, bold and radical change,” Boyer said. “[Bathhouses are] one of those spaces that we can really connect with folks that are on the outskirts of that care, and not knowing their status and not knowing what prevention looks like for them. This is a population that we’re able to tap into, that we are not currently able to reach.”

Next week, the United States marks a unique milestone: the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence.

For some Americans, the semiquincentennial is a moment to celebrate the nation’s achievements and ideals. For others, it is an opportunity to reflect on the gaps between those ideals and the realities of American history. For many, it is both.

MPR News host Angela Davis and her guests talk about what the anniversary means for the U.S.

Guests:

• Sarah Holtman is a professor of philosophy at the University of Minnesota.

• Gideon Mailer is a professor of early American history at the University of Minnesota Duluth.

Subscribe to the MPR News with Angela Davis podcast on: Apple Podcasts, Spotify or RSS.

Use the audio player above to listen to the full conversation. 

Roughly an hour before President Donald Trump was set to sign bipartisan housing legislation on Capitol Hill alongside the Republican leaders of both chambers, he imploded the plan in a social media post, denying his party a key affordability-focused win to promote ahead of the midterms.

Trump wrote in the post on Wednesday that he would not sign the legislation until Congress passed the strict voter ID law he has been pushing for months, the Save America Act.

The last-minute swerve is just the latest example of Trump abruptly changing course, leaving his colleagues on the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue to deal with the fallout.

Trump has repeatedly torched Senate Republicans online and complicated their plans without warning as he vents his frustration with Senate Majority Leader John Thune for being unable to pass the controversial voting measure.

The dynamic is testing Republican unity across branches of government at a critical time, with the Senate and House majorities on the line this fall.

And while the president has for years enjoyed unbending loyalty from all but a few GOP lawmakers, the strength of that relationship appears to be fraying as some departing members feel more uninhibited to push back and more members of Congress begin to envision life after Trump.

Just last week, Thune thought he had a plan to reauthorize a key spy tool after Democrats refused to renew it unless Trump pulled back his selection of Bill Pulte, a loyal attack dog, as acting director of national intelligence.

So Thune pressed for a more palatable permanent director, allowing the Senate to swiftly confirm him before Pulte took the reins. When Trump then nominated Jay Clayton, the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, to take the job permanently, crisis seemed averted.

Then, just hours before the confirmation hearing was scheduled to begin last week, Trump blew up that plan in a similar fashion, writing in a 4 a.m. social media post that he would not sign legislation reauthorizing the spy tool unless it included the Save America Act.

Blowback from Senate Republicans has been swift, as simmering tensions between Trump and Senate Republicans increasingly spill into public view.

Trump is set to meet with Senate Republicans for lunch Wednesday as some say the president's erratic moves risk derailing their shared agenda. That meeting is still set to go on, according to the office of Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., who is organizing the gathering.

Growing outcry from Senate Republicans

Retiring Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., who last week accused Trump of treating the Senate like a manufacturing department for the executive branch rather than its board of directors, said if Trump understood the repercussions of his moves around Pulte and acted anyway, it was a, "colossal mistake."

Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, last week compared Trump's actions to a moose startling a pack of sled dogs.

"If some big distraction like a moose comes through these trees, and you got half the team going over here and half the team going over there, it is chaos," Murkowski explained, using a photo in her office as a visual aid. "What that musher has to do is he's got to stop and spend all his time untangling this mess."

Thune has been trying to untangle a lot of mess lately as Trump tries to strong-arm or sidestep Congress.

For days, top congressional Republicans say they were left in the dark on the text of the memorandum of understanding between the U.S. and Iran. Four Senate Republicans voted with Democrats on Tuesday to advance a war powers resolution directing Trump to pull back forces from the conflict with Iran, which has not been authorized by Congress.

A last-ditch effort by Trump to pass the Save America Act nearly derailed a vote on another of Trump's top priorities, funding for immigration enforcement. Trump's support for an "anti-weaponization" fund that could have compensated January 6th rioters resulted in the key spy tool known as FISA 702 lapsing in the first place.

"He's got two speeds, uninterested and the speed of light," Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., says of Trump, whom he speaks with regularly. "And the things that are important to him, he moves at the speed of light."

Thune, though, often ends up in the position of having to give the president a reality check. The majority leader has been clear that there are not enough votes in the narrowly divided Senate to pass the Save America Act, which has already failed to advance several times. Nor are there enough votes to dismantle the filibuster to muscle it through, as Trump is demanding.

"It's a function of the math," Thune recently said on Fox News. "We've got to deal with the real world."

Even after this latest outcry from Senate Republicans, Trump doubled down, calling out Thune by name on social media and writing that anyone who opposes nixing the filibuster is a "fool."

"The White House and President Trump have enjoyed working closely with Leader Thune and Senate Republicans to deliver on many important promises to the American people," White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson wrote in a statement.

Kennedy says Trump's friction with the majority leader is not personal. "If you don't like John Thune, you don't like golden retrievers," Kennedy said last week.

Most Senate Republicans agree with that sentiment — and with Thune's assessment that the votes just don't exist to do what Trump wants. A few exceptions, like Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, continue to insist the Save America Act can pass and say the public supports many of its provisions, helping fuel Trump's ongoing push to act.

Why Thune wants to preserve the filibuster

Thune has told reporters that he fears eliminating the filibuster would haunt Republicans the next time Democrats take power again. Scrapping it would eliminate the 60-vote threshold needed to pass most legislation, gutting a rare point of leverage for the minority in the Senate.

Still, Adam Jentleson, a former top aide to former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, the late Nevada Democrat, says Thune and his predecessors have slowly chipped away at the rule, including passing more major legislation with a simple majority through the party-line budget reconciliation process.

"What you see is sort of death by a thousand cuts, where both Republicans and Democrats are increasing the number of carve-outs to the filibuster rule," says Jentleson, who wrote a book on the filibuster, Kill Switch: The Rise of the Modern Senate and the Crippling of American Democracy.

Former Republican Sen. Saxby Chambliss of Georgia acknowledges Thune is no hammer like Reid or another one of his other predecessors, Mitch McConnell, the Kentucky Republican, but says the amiable South Dakotan is just right for this moment.

Chambliss says Thune is a level-headed former college basketball player whose defense of the filibuster is about preserving the Senate's consensus-driven nature.

"He feels very strongly that the institution of the United States Senate matters," Chambliss says. "And we get the best pieces of legislation when you have input by Republicans and Democrats."

Chambliss says the former colleagues he regularly speaks with are frustrated by Trump's actions. He still keeps in touch with Thune and says his old friend recognizes the delicate position he is in.

"He used to be a guy who would roll with every punch," Chambliss says. "Right now, every time he twitches, I can see anxiety. But thank goodness he's there."

Could a focus on 2020 risk the GOP majority?

For Trump, a lot rides on the Save America Act. He wrote in a recent social media post that without it, "The Republican Party will never win another Election. I will sadly be the last Republican president."

But the president has himself complicated his party's path to holding the majority this fall by helping push out incumbents he says have not been loyal enough, fueling more intraparty tension and pushback.

Though Congress this week passed a sweeping bipartisan housing bill, lawmakers have also spent significant time trying to anticipate and react to Trump's moves. Some Republicans have grown frustrated with some of Trump's comments, like saying he doesn't "think about Americans' financial situation."

Some Republicans see Trump's fixation on the 2020 election imperiling an agenda that could help Republicans in 2026. Asked about that recently, Thune answered indirectly.

"At least as far as I'm concerned, I think our path to keeping the majority in the Senate is going to be focused on the issues that the American people are most concerned about," Thune told reporters last week. "Kitchen table pocketbook issues. Is my community safe, is my country safe? I think those are going to be paramount."

But is it harder to focus on that now?

"I'm doing my best to stay focused," Thune said as he disappeared into his office off the Senate floor.

Copyright 2026, NPR

Gov. Tim Walz is pressuring the Trump administration to release records that he argues could show he and Minnesota have been targeted for political retribution.

Walz filed 16 records requests under the Freedom of Information Act that reference terms like “reckoning,” “retribution,” “punish” or other words that suggest actions were driven by a political motive.

“We are taking steps to find out exactly how far this campaign reaches, who’s directing it and what it has cost Minnesotans,” Walz said in a statement issued Tuesday.

A day earlier, a federal judge invalidated subpoenas for records the Justice Department sought from the offices of Walz and other Minnesota Democratic officials.

Those grand jury subpoenas were tied to pushback to the winter’s immigration agent surge in Minnesota. The judge ruled the subpoenas were without merit and ethically questionable.

According to Walz’s office, federal agencies have made more than 100 demands of Minnesota through investigations, lawsuits and threats to illegally withhold money from the state.

The state records requests of federal agencies include U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the Department of Justice, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Education, Department of the Treasury and others.

Federal records requests often take months or years to fulfill — so it’s possible Walz’s office won’t see results either before the end of his final term in early January, or ever.

Jason Lohmann had already worked a full day at the lumber yard, but his tasks for the day were hardly over.

“We're going to plant our sweet corn tonight, in that 42 acre field,” Lohmann said as he stood on the edge of his farm in Zumbrota.

Lohmann and his family have lived there for just six years, but he has been farming for a long time. He grew up doing it with his dad just down the road.

“I've been doing it for almost 40 years, some sort of farming,” he said. “I can't just give it up."

Lohmann is on the local school board. He’s served on the township and country education boards, too. And now, running as a Democrat, Lohmann is a first-time state Senate candidate in a district that's Republican territory. His farming background makes him a rarity in a party that isn't popular in rural Minnesota these days.

He’s among a handful of candidates Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party leaders are promoting this election cycle in a bid to court rural voters who once exemplified the "Farmer" in the party's name. With the Legislature closely divided, every race counts – even if it hasn’t been blue in decades.

Lohmann said he's disappointed in the DFL because urban concerns have gotten the party's lopsided attention while voters in greater Minnesota have gravitated toward conservative candidates.

“They literally have ‘Farm-Labor’ in the name, and they have literally forgotten about farmers for the last 20 years,” Lohmann said. “They've decided that they've had their vote, they don't need to talk to them. And you hear that from people in the rural areas: ‘You guys don't want to talk to us. Why should we vote for you?’"

Striking a moderate tone

At its convention in Rochester last month– one that nodded to the DFL’s historic ties to rural voters in videos and in speeches from the stage — party chair Richard Carlbom acknowledged the DFL’s rural struggles.

In an interview, Carlbom said the party is trying to course correct now in a moment when President Donald Trump's tariff policies and high oil prices are handicapping farmers.

“In June of 2025 we deployed 10 organizers, and we put them in the rural parts of this state to make sure that we're working with organizing units in rural areas that want to stand up and get their neighbors involved,” he said. “We have to prove to farmers that we're ready to stand up and fight for them."

It has been a hard fall for the DFL, with its legislative ranks now occupied mostly by lawmakers from urban and suburban areas as well regional centers like Duluth, Rochester and St. Cloud. Farmers are even more scarce in the party’s ranks.

Fifty years ago, the DFL had plenty of state lawmakers who identified themselves as having farm occupations — 25 of them, according to the Minnesota Legislative Reference Library. That same legislative session, 17 Republicans identified as farmers. The high-water mark in the past half-century was 28 for DFLers and 28 for Republicans during different sessions.

The library’s data show the complement of farmers in the Legislature has steadily dwindled in recent decades for both parties but more dramatically for DFLers. In the current Legislature, there are 11 lawmakers who list an agricultural occupation. All are Republican.

Pinched family farmers

Mark Legvold is a retired military veteran and farms corn and soybeans near Northfield. He’s also a first time state Senate candidate running as a Democrat, and said he deeply understands the financial pressures facing farmers because he’s living them, too.

“There’s been a 30 percent increase in the price of fertilizer. That alone is enough to crush most family farms,” he said. “And then we start buying diesel fuel to put into our tractors and our equipment; that also is up about 30 percent because of an unnecessary war in the Middle East. This is pinching family farmers but it's also pinching every single person in Minnesota's economy, whether they're in ag or not.”

Legvold is striking the same moderate tone as Lohmann on the campaign trail, and is promising voters he will work to build bridges in a very polarized Legislature.

"What we need to do is get away from legislation from the extremes on either end of the party. That's where most people reside in Minnesota,” he said. “It’s one of those things that getting up to St. Paul, bringing those voices. Compromising can be rewarded."

Out of touch

Republican Jeremy Munson of Lake Crystal is running for the state Senate in the area not far from Mankato. He has long argued that Democrats are out of touch with rural voters. He farms, too, and during a prior stint in the Minnesota House, he co-founded the RFL -- short for Republican Farmer Labor caucus.

"The DFL really hasn't represented farmers in generations,” he said. He said Democrats have supported too many operational regulations and impediments to pass farms down to future generations.

Munson said that DFLers who pledge moderation on the campaign trail often don’t deliver on that promise once they arrive in St. Paul.

"These candidates believe they can work across the aisle, and they can say, "I'm going to be an independent voice.’ But they get up to St. Paul and it [is] a party line vote on everything,” he said.

Back on his farm, Lohmann admitted running as a Democrat in a reliably red district is hard.

When he’s talking to voters, he empathizes with the financial pressures they’re facing, whether they farm or not. Voters, he said, want their lawmakers to make life more affordable, to fund schools, to lower taxes and to stamp out fraud in public programs — all concerns that Lohmann shares.

While the Senate DFL caucus touts candidates like him, he said they haven't delivered much financial or logistical support yet. Their messaging also makes him uneasy because he’s worried it will lead to more political division.

“I hate them using farmers as a pawn,” he said. “It's 'Farmers are hurting, farmers this, farmers that.' Well, to me, everybody's hurting. This party needs to try and figure out how to get back to their roots and include everybody.”

The U.S. Senate on Tuesday voted 50 to 48 in favor of a war powers resolution to remove U.S. armed forces from hostilities with Iran. Four Republicans joined Democrats in support of ending the war. The U.S. House approved the measure earlier this month.

MPR News host Clay Masters spoke with Minnesota Democratic U.S. Sen. Tina Smith about the Senate vote and the importance of the resolution.

Use the audio player above to listen to the full conversation.

The Senate for the first time approved a war powers resolution Tuesday seeking to block U.S. military action against Iran, as lawmakers warily watch President Donald Trump’s efforts to resolve a conflict that the administration launched on its own and now needs Congress to fund.

It was the 10th time the Senate has tried to stop the war, and the outcome, on a vote of 50-48, was a stunning turnaround from past efforts. While the resolution is largely symbolic, and does not fully carry the force of law, it reflects the growing concerns from a number of Republican lawmakers in both the House and Senate over both the war and the deal Trump struck with Iran to end it. The House approved the resolution earlier this month.

“Time after time, the vast majority of Senate Republicans sided with Trump and his war instead of the American people,” said Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer.

Schumer said Americans have paid the price for “Trump's historic blunder in Iran. It'll go down in the history books as one of the worst foreign policy forays America has ever made.”

In the past, as many as four GOP senators have voted for the war powers resolutions, and they did so Tuesday — Republicans Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Susan Collins of Maine, Rand Paul of Kentucky and Bill Cassidy of Louisiana. One Democrat, Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, voted against.

On this vote, the absence of two Republicans, including Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, who was admitted to the hospital recently for an undisclosed matter, left the GOP without a full majority to halt the effort. Sen. Dave McCormick, R-Pa., also missed the vote.

The vote also comes as the Pentagon is seeking $80 billion from Congress mostly for the Iran war as it backfills munitions and stockpiles.

Trump to meet senators as Republicans balk at Iran deal

Trump himself is headed to the Capitol this week to meet with GOP senators as Vice President JD Vance has been overseas working to negotiate with Iran to end its nuclear ambitions — which had been among the stated rationales for the war.

The president is not pleased with the Republicans who have been critical of the deal he struck with Iran, according to one GOP senator granted anonymity to discuss the private dynamics.

The terms of the Iran deal are spelled out in a memorandum of understanding that Trump signed last week, starting a 60-day clock for the sides to reach a broader agreement over ending Iran's nuclear program.

But Republicans have particularly objected to the $300 billion fund to help Iran rebuild, which is far greater than the $1.7 billion then-President Barack Obama refunded the country under his administration's 2015 Iran deal.

"I believe President Trump is getting very poor advice on Iran," Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, said last week on his podcast after the deal was made public.

Democrats have repeatedly forced Iran votes

Over and again, Democrats have been forcing votes on the Iran war, almost since the U.S. and Israel launched missile strikes on Iran on Feb. 28.

Nearly each week they're in session, the Senate Democrats have put forward war powers resolutions, but they have failed to amass the majority needed for passage in the narrowly split chamber, where Trump’s Republican Party holds the majority.

The House pushed its own version to passage earlier this month, with four Republicans joining all Democrats in approving the war powers resolution, over the objections of House Speaker Mike Johnson and the GOP leadership.

While such resolutions do not go to the president for his signature, passage stands as a powerful, if symbolic, statement from Congress and a rebuke of the administration’s military actions.

Sen. Tim Kaine, the Democrat from Virginia who has led his party’s efforts, said the pause in warfighting, as Trump’s team works to shore up a fragile ceasefire, provides the perfect time for Congress to step back and assess “what should the next chapter be.”

Hegseth seeks $80 billion from Congress for the Iran war

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is also on Capitol Hill this week, seeking roughly $80 billion in supplemental funding to shore up defense supplies in the aftermath of the Iran war, which is drawing scrutiny when many Americans are reeling from high gas prices and costs of living.

The Pentagon early on had estimated the war cost $11.3 billion during its first week, and experts have put the overall price tag at close to $100 billion.

The Defense Department's funding request is part of a broader beef-up of military money the White House wants as part of its budget request this year.

The Trump administration is seeking $1.5 trillion in defense funding this year — a 50% increase — including $350 billion that it wants in a so-called budget reconciliation package. Johnson and GOP leaders are working to pass that package on their own, over the objections of Democrats, much the way they approved Trump's big tax cuts bill last year.

The 2025 tax cuts package also included a sizable increase of about $175 billion for the military.

An Inver Grove Heights City Council meeting ended with shouting and boos Monday night after council members delayed a move to pause construction of new data centers.

The city council was scheduled to have a final reading of a one-year moratorium on data center construction to allow time to study their impacts.

But council members decided to recess the meeting until 8 a.m. Friday to consider new information, which they said they’d just received.

As Mayor Brenda Dietrich recessed the meeting, residents loudly voiced their displeasure at the delay.

The council previously voted 3-2 to pass the moratorium. But city ordinance requires three readings of the moratorium before it can take effect.

Data centers are warehouses filled with computer servers that power cloud computing and artificial intelligence. More than a dozen large data centers have been proposed across Minnesota.

A Florida-based developer, QLevr, is proposing to build a 54,000-square-foot data center on Carmen Avenue East in Inver Grove Heights. It’s considerably smaller than hyperscale data centers proposed around the state.

The facility would use a maximum of five megawatts of electricity and a closed-loop water cooling system.

QLevr's attorneys warned city officials in a letter of possible legal action if its decision isn't based on objective zoning laws.

Inver Grove Heights would join several other Minnesota cities that have passed a moratorium on data centers, including Minneapolis, Rosemount, Eagan and Carver.

Early voting for the 2026 primary election starts Friday and election officials are expecting a spike in turnout.

While Minnesota has famously high turnout in general elections, primaries always have fewer voters. Still, turnout increases “where there’s a lot of action and competitiveness on the ballot,” said Minnesota Secretary of State Steve Simon. “And we certainly have that this year.”

The last time Minnesota had an open governor’s race was 2018. That year, turnout in the general election was about 64 percent of eligible voters and 23 percent in the primary, which featured competitive nominating contests in both parties.

After both major parties largely failed to unite around candidates during their endorsing conventions last month, multiple high-profile races are set to have competitive primaries this summer.

The primary election is Tuesday, Aug. 11, but before then voters can vote early by mail or in person.

What’s on the ballot?

The primary ballot has candidates for both partisan and nonpartisan races. For example, the gubernatorial race is partisan so candidates declare a party affiliation. Other offices like county commissioner or county attorney are nonpartisan.

Check out example ballots for the general election and the primary here.

There is a seven-candidate race to determine the Republican nominee for governor. The top three contenders are:

• Former healthcare executive Kendall Qualls, who won the party convention endorsement

• Minnesota House Speaker Lisa Demuth

• My Pillow CEO Mike Lindell

The DFL also has seven candidates in its gubernatorial primary. Among them:

• U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar, who has the DFL endorsement and is the heavy favorite

• Former Capitol staffer Kobey Layne, the sole convention challenger to Klobuchar

One of Minnesota’s two U.S. Senate seats is up for election because Sen. Tina Smith is retiring. Both parties have a crowded field of candidates — six DFLers and nine Republicans.

The top two Democrats are:

• Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan, who won the party endorsement

• U.S. Rep. Angie Craig

The top three Republicans are:

• Former Navy SEAL Adam Schwarze, who won the party endorsement

• Former professional basketball player Royce White

• Former sports broadcaster Michele Tafoya

Are there races that won’t be on all ballots?

Yes. Candidates for local offices, the Minnesota Legislature and the U.S. House will be on the ballots of voters only in their districts or jurisdictions.

Every congressional district has a primary race in one party or the other — or both. But the most competitive is in Minnesota’s 2nd Congressional District, an open seat. Six DFLers are competing to face state Sen. Eric Pratt, R-Prior Lake, in November.

The top three DFL contenders are:

• Former Lakeville mayor and former state Sen. Matt Little, who won the DFL endorsement

• Physician and state Sen. Matt Klein

• Flight attendant and state Rep. Kaela Berg

The entire Minnesota Legislature is up for reelection. Sixteen state Senate races feature primaries, including some involving incumbents. There are 20 state House primaries.

Do I need to declare a party to vote in the primary?

No. In open primary states like Minnesota, voters don’t need to affiliate with a political party and they can vote in any primary. However, in partisan races Minnesota voters have to vote for candidates of only one party so they can’t hopscotch between party candidates in different races.

How do I vote early? Absentee vs. new ‘early voting’

Forty six days before an election Minnesota voters can start voting absentee, which this year means voting starts Friday for the primary. Voting absentee means you mark your ballot and place it into an envelope for it to be verified by a ballot board and counted later. You can request an absentee ballot be mailed to you and then you can mail it back or submit it in person. You can also go to an absentee voting location, fill out an absentee ballot application and submit your ballot then and there.

New this year, voters can participate in what the state calls “early voting” — though it starts later than absentee voting — up to 18 days before the election. That’s when you go to a polling location, mark your ballot and then place your completed ballot directly into a tabulator machine.

“I think it will be quite popular and that voters will really like it, because it's more like the election day or game day experience,” Simon said.

Absentee ballots can be verified and processed before election day, but the actual counting of votes for each candidate happens after polls close Aug. 11.

When are mail-in ballots due?

Most absentee ballots must be returned to the correct elections office or ballot drop box by 5 p.m. on election day. However, qualified agents delivering marked ballots on behalf of nursing home residents, hospital patients and others in need of assistance have until 8 p.m.

In Minnesota, what matters is the ballot being physically received by that deadline, not when it was postmarked.

Do I need an excuse to vote early?

No, Minnesota is part of the majority of states that has no-excuse absentee voting.

Michelle Blue, the director of elections for Dakota County, said people have many reasons for voting early. Some voters have mobility challenges that make voting by mail more accessible. Others may work long hours and can’t make it to the polls on election day. And “a lot of people just prefer the convenience,” Blue said.

Whatever your reason, you don’t have to justify why you want to vote absentee to the state.

What is an election judge and can I be one?

Election judges are volunteers or temporary paid employees who are required to oversee certain aspects of elections to make sure the law is being followed. Election judges are party balanced to make sure election oversight is fair.

“Our elections would not work without them,” Blue said. “Please come see the process up close and personal for yourself.”

To be an election judge you must be eligible to vote in Minnesota and must be able to read, write and speak English.

With a sternly worded rebuke, a federal judge tossed out grand jury subpoenas sought by the Justice Department for records from the offices of Gov. Tim Walz, Attorney General Keith Ellison and other top Twin Cities leaders related to immigration.

The order came from Judge Patrick Schiltz, the chief judge in Minnesota’s U.S. District Court system. He found the subpoenas issued in January to be baseless, unethical and possibly illegal.

“The fact that connections between the information sought in the subpoenas and any possible criminal violation range from extremely weak to nonexistent only adds to the overwhelming evidence that these subpoenas were not issued to investigate, but to harass, coerce, and retaliate,” Schiltz wrote in a 29-page order made public on Monday.

The order, dated June 17, is a big blow to the Trump administration’s effort to unlock records from Democratic public officials about how they confronted the winter immigration agent surge in Minnesota. The administration lashed out at those who failed to cooperate with efforts to detain and potentially deport immigrants.

The judge has taken the rare step of ordering information taken to a grand jury to be made public, although put that part of the ruling on hold to allow for DOJ to appeal or otherwise make the case that the deliberations should remain private. That process will extend into July.

“Nothing in this order or in the materials submitted to the court could possibly compromise a criminal investigation; as the court has explained at length, the Department is not conducting a criminal investigation, but is instead using the grand jury process for other (unlawful) purposes,” Schiltz wrote.

He noted that the officials who were subject to the subpoenas “who appear to be the targets of the Department's misuse of the grand-jury process-want this matter disclosed.”

Schiltz was put on the federal bench by former Republican President George W. Bush and he clerked for the late conservative Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia earlier in his career.

A DOJ spokesperson responded to Schiltz’s conclusions in a brief statement. “The Department takes the unlawful obstruction of federal law enforcement operations extremely seriously and will continue to act in full compliance with the law to investigate these matters.”

Mark Osler, a professor at the University of St. Thomas School of Law and a former federal prosecutor, said the ruling is noteworthy.

“It is rare for a subpoena to be quashed, but this was a rare kind of investigation as well, and Judge Schiltz concluding that there was political motivation, for example, is very unusual,” he said.

“We're not talking about some radical, out there judge,” he said. “We're talking about a rock solid federal judge who seems to have reached a breaking point.”

Public officials targeted by the subpoenas issued statements welcoming the judge’s decision.

Walz called it a “victory for the rule of law and our democracy.”

In a written statement, Walz added, “This case was just one example of that, but we are seeing daily reminders of this administration’s lawlessness — in Minnesota and around the country. “

“The facts are clear: the Trump administration is targeting me because I’m standing up for the people of Minnesota,” said Ellison, a DFLer who is running for another term in office.

Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey also welcomed the decision, which he says upholds his First Amendment right to speak out against the administration’s immigration policies.

“Criticism of government action is not a crime,” he wrote. “One of the defining strengths of our democracy is the ability to challenge those in power without fear of retribution. Elected officials have both the right and the responsibility to speak honestly about how government decisions affect the people they serve.”

Aside from Walz, Ellison and Frey, subpoenas for records were also issued to the office of St. Paul Mayor Kaohly Her and the governing boards in Hennepin and Ramsey counties.

President Trump has claimed that United States Park Police have made several arrests in connection with what he described as deliberate sabotage of the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool in Washington D.C., which underwent a multimillion-dollar renovation earlier this year.

"The United States Park Police have arrested multiple individuals for vandalizing our Nations magnificent Reflecting Pool," Trump wrote on Truth Social late Saturday evening. "These are very serious crimes having to do with the destruction of National Monuments. Years in jail! Work will begin immediately on its repair."

In a second post on Saturday, Trump described the alleged damage in greater detail, saying more arrests had followed. He provided no evidence for any of his claims about the nature of the damage, and neither the Park Police nor any other law enforcement agency had publicly confirmed any arrests as of the time of publication.

On Friday, Maryland resident and former Olympian David Hearn was arrested and charged with destroying government property. Hearn says he merely reached into the pool to touch one of the already dislodged blue pieces, and denies the charge.

Trump said that the pool would be drained and repaired quickly, and framed the alleged vandalism as an affront to American history. "We met with contractors today, will probably be forced to release and drain much of the water in order to do the necessary repairs," he wrote. "What these terrible Vandals have done is a true affront to both Presidents George Washington and Abraham Lincoln, and should be dealt with accordingly".

‘A 250-foot long gash’

Trump described what he said was physical destruction to the pool's newly renovated lining. "They took some form of knife or blade, and put a 250 foot long gash into the beautiful facade of what took so much work, competence, and money to build and complete," he wrote Saturday. "They also poured corrosive and destructive chemicals into the Pool."

The president connected the alleged vandalism to the recent green color of the pool — again, without evidence. The pool turned green last week after being refilled following its renovation, in which its floor was repainted in a shade Trump calls "American flag blue."

Aquatic ecologists and pool specialists told NPR the discoloration was caused by a natural bloom of algae from the genus Desmodesmus — a process scientists say is common in shallow, sun-exposed bodies of water, and one that may have been accelerated by the renovation disturbing the nutrient balance of the water.

A George Mason University professor who took water samples confirmed the algae was not toxic.

A renovation that grew in scope and cost

In April, Trump revealed his plans for the pool to be made "American flag blue," in time for the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence on July 4. The president also posted a fake image of himself and several of his administration officials in swimsuits, along with an unidentified woman in a bikini lounging in the water.

Trump defended the recent work in his Saturday post, writing: "The Reflecting Pool was never so beautiful as it was just one week ago, even going back to 1922 when it opened." The pool opened in 1923.

The renovation project expanded significantly beyond the initial public cost estimate of $2 million, to more than $14 million by the time work was completed. A Virginia-based contractor received the no-bid contract. A separate Ohio-based company was paid approximately $1.7 million for nanobubble ozone technology deployed to treat the algae bloom.

The project was also the subject of a lawsuit filed in May by the Cultural Landscape Foundation, a nonprofit that argued the administration had bypassed required historic preservation reviews. A federal judge had not yet ruled on the case by the time the administration notified the court that work had been completed.

The White House has also provided no evidence that vandalism caused the pool's discoloration, or any of the structural damage the president has described.

Copyright 2026, NPR

Sign up for the Planet Money newsletter. The world is confusing. Economics can help.

Alan Greenspan, who steered the Federal Reserve for nearly two decades, through some of the longest economic booms in U.S. history, has died. Greenspan died Monday at his home in Washington. He was 100.

Greenspan was the rare celebrity among central bankers, lionized for his economic stewardship in the 1990s. At a time when it seemed every barbershop had a television tuned to the stock market channel, ordinary Americans hung on the Fed chairman's every word.

His reputation was tarnished, however, by the global financial crisis that struck a decade later.

Greenspan liked to write speeches in the bathtub, but it was his listeners who were sometimes left feeling underwater by the unfamiliar dialect known as "Fedspeak."

Greenspan later acknowledged that he would deliberately garble his syntax to avoid saying anything that might move financial markets.

A notorious exception came in 1996, when Greenspan seemed to suggest that stock prices might be getting ahead of themselves.

"How do we know when irrational exuberance has unduly escalated asset prices?" he asked during a speech at the American Enterprise Institute.

The warning that exuberant investors might not be quite rational sent temporary shivers through global stock markets. But Greenspan's own stock continued to climb.

Greenspan dabbled in jazz

He was married to NBC news anchor Andrea Mitchell, who announced his death in a statement, and the two made a somewhat unlikely power couple. Comedian Jay Leno once joked during a White House Correspondents Association dinner that Mitchell, not then-first lady Hillary Clinton, was married to "the most powerful man in the world."

Greenspan was a talented jazz musician who studied clarinet and saxophone at Juilliard. But it was economics that made him a rock star and a symbol of the widely shared prosperity at the end of the 20th century.

A master of monetary policy, Greenspan led the central bank under four different presidents, beginning in 1987.

Much of his tenure was marked by falling unemployment. Traditionally, central bankers respond to low unemployment by raising interest rates to ward off inflation. But Greenspan broke with that tradition and kept borrowing costs low.

"He was willing to watch and wait as the unemployment rate drifted lower and lower and lower and lower, and we still had no inflation," recalled Princeton economist Alan Blinder, who served under Greenspan on the Fed's governing board.

Greenspan oversaw an economic boom

Greenspan's gamble with low rates paid off, and the economy kept booming for a decade, although critics argue his easy-money policies also helped inflate the dot-com bubble and later fueled the subprime mortgage meltdown.

In addition to low interest rates, Greenspan pursued a light touch on regulation, refusing to use the Fed's powers to crack down on risky lending. His libertarian philosophy was shaped in part by the novelist Ayn Rand.

Greenspan had been a member of Rand's inner circle, contributing chapters to her book, Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal. When Greenspan joined the Ford administration as an economic adviser, Rand attended his swearing-in ceremony.

"Greenspan said that Ayn Rand put the moral foundation under capitalism for him," said Rand's biographer, Anne Heller.

Greenspan believed bankers didn't need heavy-handed regulation because their own self-interest would prevent them from taking undue risks. Only after risky banking helped trigger the global financial crisis in 2008 — two years after he left the Fed — would Greenspan sheepishly admit that he'd been wrong.

"I was shocked because I had going for 40 years or more with very considerable evidence that it was working exceptionally well," Greenspan told a congressional committee investigating the financial meltdown.

Greenspan long advocated for a light regulatory touch

The idea that bankers will sometimes take dangerous risks if they're allowed to should not have come as a surprise to Greenspan, however.

Decades earlier, he'd played a bit part in the savings-and-loan crisis, which was a kind of dress rehearsal for the 2008 financial crisis.

As a private economist in the 1980s, Greenspan provided a testimonial for what he called "seasoned and expert" management at Lincoln Savings and Loan, in an effort to ward off regulation of the thrift.

Lincoln later collapsed, costing taxpayers billions. And its boss, Charles Keating, went to prison for fraud.

Economist Vincent Reinhart said it took courage for Greenspan to acknowledge, however belatedly, that self-interest is not always enough to protect taxpayers and investors from the risky behavior of bankers.

"For Alan Greenspan to say, 'Well, maybe markets don't always get it right,' is a reflection on his entire career, not just his tenure at the Fed," Reinhart said.

Ultimately, Greenspan will be remembered as both a maestro of monetary policy and a reluctant regulator. His legacy is shaped by the boom he fostered, and by the bust he failed to prevent.

John Ydstie contributed to this report.

Copyright 2026, NPR

By declining to take up a lower court ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court has dealt another blow to the Voting Rights Act.

The court announced Monday that it will not review an Arkansas-based lawsuit, leaving in place a 2025 appeals panel ruling that ends a long-used tool for protecting minority voters from discrimination under the landmark law in seven mainly Midwestern states.

That ruling found that in the states covered by the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals — Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota — private individuals and groups do not have the right to sue to enforce what's known as Section 208 of the Voting Rights Act, which generally allows voters with a disability or inability to read or write to get help with voting from a person of their choice.

The Supreme Court's move comes almost two months after its conservative supermajority issued a major ruling that further weakened the Voting Rights Act, setting off a groundswell in redistricting across the country.

At issue in the case: a ‘private right of action’

In May, shortly after that undermining of Section 2 protections against racial discrimination in redistricting, the high court decided not to weigh in on what the legal world calls a "private right of action," sending back to lower courts two cases brought by Black voters in Mississippi and Native American voters in North Dakota.

For decades, enforcement of these sections of the Voting Rights Act has mainly been driven by lawsuits by private individuals and groups.

But after conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch issued a single-paragraph opinion in 2021 questioning a private right of action, Republican officials in multiple states have raised a novel legal argument: Only the U.S. attorney general, they contend, has the right to bring lawsuits under these parts of the Voting Rights Act.

Such an interpretation of the law is likely to lead to a dramatic decline in voting rights lawsuits because of the Justice Department's limited resources and shifting priorities under different presidential administrations.

The case that the justices decided not to take up was brought by the immigrant advocacy group Arkansas United, which has provided Spanish-language interpreters at polling sites to assist voters with limited English proficiency. The group challenged an Arkansas law that bans a person who is not a poll worker from helping more than six voters cast ballots. In 2022, a federal judge ruled that the state law violates Section 208 of the Voting Rights Act. But after GOP state officials appealed, an 8th Circuit panel found last year that private groups, like Arkansas United, do not have the right to bring this kind of lawsuit, partly because such a right is not explicitly spelled out in the words of the Voting Rights Act.

So far, the 8th Circuit — which also found that there is no private right of action under Section 2 — is the only federal appeals court to break with decades of precedent on this legal issue.

In a statement, Arkansas' Republican Attorney General Tim Griffin called the Supreme Court's refusal to take up the 8th Circuit panel's ruling "a victory for the state" and applauded the high court for "following the plain meaning of the language in the Voting Rights Act."

The Supreme Court may take up this issue in a future case

The brief, unsigned order the high court released Monday did not explain why the justices decided not to review the 8th Circuit panel's ruling in the Arkansas case.

But in a court filing last month, Republican officials in Arkansas pointed out that no other federal appeals court has issued a ruling that specifically addresses whether private groups and individuals can sue under Section 208. That, the Arkansas Republican officials argued, means there is no disagreement between appeals courts for the Supreme Court to resolve.

Arkansas United's attorneys at the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, however, countered that there is a "clear conflict between the Eighth Circuit's decision and the unbroken line of cases allowing private litigants to vindicate their rights under Section 208."

"The limited case law regarding private enforcement of Section 208 does not mean that the circuit split is nonexistent, or that the issue is unimportant," the MALDEF attorneys wrote in their court filing. "Instead, it demonstrates just how much of an anomaly the Eighth Circuit's decision is."

Thomas Saenz, MALDEF's president and general counsel, tells NPR that the civil rights group now plans to eventually ask the Supreme Court to review a private right of action under Section 208 through a Missouri-based lawsuit, which was put on hold while the appeals process for the Arkansas case played out.

The case led by Missouri Protection and Advocacy Services, which advocates for voters with disabilities, challenges a state law that bans a person from helping more than one disabled voter or voter who cannot read or write for each election, unless the person providing assistance is a poll worker or the voter's immediate family member.

"We will attempt to move it forward, and these precedents will be cited to stop us," Saenz says. "We will move up and hope that the Supreme Court will see that it needs to stop this situation where only one circuit in the entire country has taken a contrary view to everyone else and foreclosed private enforcement of the Voting Rights Act."

Edited by Benjamin Swasey

Copyright 2026, NPR

Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan and U.S. Rep. Angie Craig will go head-to-head in their first televised debate Friday night.

Both DFL candidates are running for the U.S. Senate seat currently held by Sen. Tina Smith.

Last month, Flanagan received the DFL endorsement at the party’s convention in Rochester. Craig skipped the convention, saying the endorsement process “just doesn’t reflect the full scope of the party that we are and the purple state that we have become.”

The debate will be part of “Almanac” on Twin Cities PBS. The broadcast begins at 7 p.m.

Frustrations between the U.S. and Israeli governments spilled into the open this week as President Donald Trump moved this week toward settling the war in Iran. On Thursday, Vice President JD Vance warned Israeli critics of the deal against “attacking the only powerful ally” the country has left in the world.

Politically, attitudes toward Israel have been steadily shifting even before then and it’s particularly apparent among Democrats, including in Minnesota.

On stage at last month's Minnesota DFL convention in Rochester, three state auditor candidates were asked: “Would you use your seat on the State Board of Investment to push other State Board of Investment members to divest from countries committing war crimes and crimes against humanity?”

Auditor candidates Dan Wolgamott, Adam Jennings and Zack Filipovich all agreed with the calls to divest, though none of them mentioned Israel by name. Many on the progressive left want the board of top Minnesota officials to sell off Israeli assets; organizers have repeatedly pressed for that action at public hearings.

“We need to make sure that our dollars, our public dollars, and our pension dollars are not going to fuel war and genocide and human rights abuses from across the world,” said Filipovich, who won the party’s backing in the open auditor race.

The race is just one where stances on Israel come up with greater frequency. Within the DFL, feelings toward Israel are frostier.

A punishing military response in Gaza after a Hamas attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, has fed into the shift as has Israel’s role in the extended military campaign in Iran and its parallel strikes in Lebanon.

In the open 2nd Congressional District, DFL-endorsed candidate Matt Little did not hold back on the issue. He spoke at the state party convention.

“The truth is, what's happening in Gaza is a genocide,” Little said, criticizing U.S. support for Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his government. “And so let us be bold and brave and stop sending weapons to Netanyahu.”

Little is among several Democrats vying to fill the swing district seat. An August primary featuring Little, state Rep. Kaela Berg, state Sen. Matt Klein and three others will decide the nominee. The winner will face GOP state Sen. Eric Pratt in November.

To be clear, those convention displays don't represent all Democrats in Minnesota.

Nonetheless, Ethan Roberts, the deputy executive director with the Jewish Community Relations Council of Minnesota and the Dakotas, said he’s sensing a change in tone.

"We are seeing a shift where I wouldn't say that Jews are becoming Republicans, but I would say that Jews are increasingly feeling politically homeless,” Roberts said. “Maybe more identifying as independent, and definitely more likely to support candidates rather than parties."

Polling shows that American views of Israel have turned more negative. A poll released in April by the Pew Research Center found that eight in 10 Democrats or Democratic-leaning independents have an unfavorable view of Israel. Disfavor among Republicans is also growing but is not as pronounced, with 41 percent overall having a negative view and 57 percent of Republicans between the ages of 18 and 49 having a negative view.

Roberts said there is room for criticism of policy or military decision by Israeli leaders.

“I think there is a difference in kind and not degree if the criticism is about tactics or particular decisions made by the government, that's something that's broadly shared among Israelis,” Roberts said. “That is completely different than not just believing — but like a foundational part of your identity or your movement — is that Israel should not exist.”

Other long-time supporters of Israel among Minnesota Democrats, including U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar and U.S. Rep. Angie Craig, have criticized Israeli tactics in its military campaigns. Both called on the Israeli government to allow more humanitarian aid to Gaza. Klobuchar is running for governor, which would make her a member of the state investment board. Craig is running for U.S. Senate but faces Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan in a DFL primary.

St. Olaf College political science professor Dan Hofrenning remembers how Kamala Harris attempted to “thread a needle” between support for Israel and respect for citizens of Gaza during her 2024 presidential run. He's seen criticism of Israel grow since then.

Israel’s war with Hamas in Gaza “has emerged as a huge fault line in the Democratic Party, maybe as big as NAFTA was in the 90s, or civil rights was in the 1960s,” he said. “That is, they were issues that really divided the party and I think time will tell how that will go now.”

Hofrenning said he expects politicians to follow what those recent polls found.

“Those poll numbers suggest that in the future I think leading Democratic politicians will be critical of Israel in ways they haven't been before,” he said. ”I think also the numbers on the Republican side suggest that supporting Israel might not be a winning issue for Republicans either.”

Klobuchar, Craig, U.S. Rep. Kelly Morrison and Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison all attended a recent annual JCRC event, Roberts said. He takes that as a sign that there is still strong support from Democrats in the state for the Jewish community.

“So if there had been this complete about-face on where all of these mainstream Democrats who have always supported Israel's right to exist and defend itself had changed their mind on that, they wouldn't come to our event,” he said.

President Trump said Wednesday night he had formally signed the framework agreement to end the war with Iran during a dinner with French President Emmanuel Macron at Versailles.

The Trump administration shared the details of the agreement earlier on Wednesday, as President Trump took questions from reporters in Evian, France, at a press conference that capped off his visit to the G7 summit.

Senior administration officials, who briefed reporters on condition of anonymity, read the agreement in its entirety. Trump had announced the two sides struck an agreement on Sunday but the specifics of the plan had not been made public until Wednesday -- causing a lot of speculation and confusion about what is and isn't outlined in the framework.

As expected, the entire document is fairly short and light on details, with much left to be sorted out in future negotiations.

According to the document read by a senior administration official earlier Wednesday, the U.S. and Iran declare "the immediate and permanent termination of military operations on all fronts" — including in Lebanon. The two sides also promise "not to initiate" any further war or operation against each other.

It sets out a 60-day period — extendable if both sides agree — to negotiate a final deal.

The agreement says the U.S. will begin the removal of its naval blockade immediately and will "fully end" the blockade within 30 days if a final deal is reached.

Iran, according to the agreement, will use its "best efforts" to ensure the safe passage of commercial vessels traveling between the Persian Gulf and the Sea of Oman. Those vessels would face "no charge" for 60 days.

The U.S. will work with regional partners to create a fund of up to $300 billion for reconstruction and economic development for Iran, according to the framework read aloud to reporters. Trump, during his press conference, said the U.S. would not be directly contributing to this fund, though he did say it may be possible for other countries to invest in Iran.

The U.S. will also lift its sanctions against Iran as part of reaching a final deal, according to the agreement.

Finally, the framework read aloud says Iran will not "procure or develop nuclear weapons" and the U.S. and Iran will agree to develop a plan to deal with the enriched uranium that Iran has stockpiled deep underground.

The agreement also states that while sanctions will officially remain in place until a final deal is struck, the U.S. will issue waivers for the export of Iranian oil, petroleum and derivatives – including banking transactions, insurance and transportation.

The U.S. will also "make fully available" frozen or restricted Iranian funds when a final deal is struck.

Other issues to be negotiated in a final deal, according to the framework, are how to monitor implementation and future compliance.

Trump's press conference in Evian was meandering, but on the agreement he said that Iran will "work closely" with the U.S. to turn over enriched material.

"When we have a chance, we'll do it, but in the meantime, we have cameras on every inch of it. Nobody can do it, and if they do, we'll hit them with Patriots," Trump told reporters, referring to the military missiles.

He said the two sides would begin the technical discussions on the nuclear issues immediately and that any economic relief for Iran as a result of the deal would be "based on merit, and it won't be from us."

Trump painted the agreement as necessary for the economy.

"If we didn't do this deal, we could have dropped more bombs for another three weeks, two weeks, four weeks, two years," he said but added that if that happened, the Strait of Hormuz would not have reopened.

"You would never have success. Your market… would go down at levels that nobody ever saw before," he said.

The U.S.-Israel-led war launched in late February rocked the global economy, sending oil prices and the cost of other goods surging. Polling consistently showed Americans disapproved of U.S. attacks on Iran, and Trump's economic approval ratings tanked, even among his own base.

Copyright 2026, NPR

Federal prosecutors on Tuesday charged 15 Minnesotans with conspiring to impede or injure federal officers during the surge of immigration agents into the state earlier this year. But proving conspiracy is going to be difficult, a law professor told MPR News.

“That's the essence of conspiracy in that it has to be an agreement to do an illegal act, not just to exercise constitutional rights. So it's going to be an uphill climb for the government on this one,” Mark Osler, who teaches law at the University of St. Thomas, told MPR News.

U.S. Attorney for Minnesota Daniel Rosen told reporters the 15 were “charged not for what they said, but for what they did” as agents from Immigration and Customs Enforcement and other agencies flooded the Twin Cities.

Prosecutors also alleged those charged conspired to “violently oppose immigration law enforcement,” but the indictment itself does not allege any specific acts of violence.

“There's no doubt that there's people that commit political violence on on every side of the issue, and when you've got things that are truly dangerous, then those should be prosecuted,” Osler said. “The question is, is this one of those cases?”

Listen to the full conversation by clicking the player above.

One of Minnesota's longstanding cannabis testing labs has ended its cannabis and hemp testing program following regulatory troubles.

Legend Technical Services announced this week it has shut down its cannabis testing program. This comes weeks after the state’s cannabis agency froze Legend’s cannabis testing license after the lab failed to complete compliance requirements.

“We no longer see the Minnesota Cannabis Program fitting with our long-term corporate plans for the laboratory and consulting services at LEGEND,” Legend said in a written statement. “Under the current regulatory framework, we do not see foresee an ability to continue to meet our client expectations in an economically viable manner.”

Legend was founded in 1991 and was the first to develop testing methods for cannabis after Minnesota legalized medical use in 2014. It also does environmental and medical device testing.

The statement also described the circumstances around the decision as a “mutually frustrating period of change.” Legend’s cannabis and hemp program manager, Taylor Schertler, told MPR News that employees were informed of the decision last Friday and a few were let go.

He says he was one of at least three employees laid off.

“The main feeling was kind of a shock and bafflement that this decision to me, at least, seemed sudden,” Schertler said.

He says the decision has already shaken up the industry. Minnesota currently has five other licensed testing labs: ChRi Labs, Adams Independent Testing, PhytoLab, True North Analytical and Fina Lab. Three of them can do full compliance testing.

Back in February, testing backlogs meant turnaround times at Legend and ChRi — Minnesota’s two longest-running labs — stretched up to three weeks. Legend’s absence has left a gap among the remaining labs, most of which are new, and could lead to longer turnaround times for cannabis and hemp testing.

According to Schertler, the lab was working with some of the biggest players in the cannabis market including the two major medical cannabis businesses and several tribal nations — all who now have to find a new lab.

Lake Leaf Cultivation, the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe cannabis company, has already transitioned testing to other labs.

“We do not anticipate an immediate impact on our operations,” said Zach Atherton-Ely of Mille Lacs Corporate Ventures. “The loss of testing capacity will place additional demand on the remaining labs … with the fall harvest season approaching, we are watching closely to see whether enough testing capacity exists to meet industry demand.”

Some state-licensed cultivators like Trawa, based in Grasston, are also not expecting longer turnaround times. Trawa’s president Alex Zappa says losing Legend is not great, but existing labs have worked hard to create more efficiency when it comes to testing.

Less than a month ago, state regulators paused cannabis testing at Legend because it had not met security and testing requirements. Office of Cannabis Management communications director Josh Collins said the agency allowed Legend to operate because of sufficient testing capacity, but the lab had to complete “method validations.”

“We are disappointed to hear their decision, as Legend has been a part of Minnesota’s medical cannabis program since its inception,” Collins said. “The integrity, health, and safety of Minnesota’s cannabis market depend on all testing facility license holders being held to the same standards, including being able to demonstrate validated testing methods and ensuring minimum security measures are in place. Businesses must decide if they are willing to meet those consistent requirements if they intend to participate as a license holder in Minnesota’s cannabis industry.”

Last fall, Schertler told MPR News that the new testing standards are stricter compared to previous standards for testing medical cannabis, including adding more security cameras and testing methods for pesticides and residual solvents. Legend had to re-evaluate nearly all of its established testing practices. The lab had been running hundreds of products each week until its license paused last month.

Collins says all of the remaining labs are close to or already meeting the recommended 10-day turnaround time for testing to move product to market.

“OCM will continue to prioritize the development of a robust testing infrastructure to support the state’s emerging adult-use cannabis industry,” he said.

Minnesota’s red flag law, established in 2024, allows courts to temporarily take guns away from people deemed a risk to themselves or others — but that only works to curb tragedy if people know about the law.

Samantha Hoyt, who was previously in law enforcement for 18 years, took on the new role of Extreme Risk Protection Order coordinator in March and is tasked with raising awareness about the law. After reviewing the existing case files, she joined Morning Edition for her first interview on the job this week.

Since 2024, the number of ERPOs filed has more than doubled, Hoyt said. This year so far, judges have issued 151 orders out of 163 requests.

“The petitions themselves are six more per month on average than they were last year, so each year we are seeing an increase,” Hoyt said.

However, there is a lingering knowledge gap. During her time as a police officer, Hoyt said she used ERPOs occasionally, but had to seek out her own training to become familiar with them.

“And so knowing that it's up to individual law enforcement agencies, attorneys offices and communities to find their own understanding of this law, I think that's impacting the numbers most certainly,” she said.

As coordinator, Hoyt hopes to roll out statewide education about when it is and isn’t appropriate to employ an ERPO.

While she has encountered pushback, Hoyt said, “The goal is safety and to prevent harm before it happens, and while they restrict firearms, it's temporary and civil, meaning this is not about punishment.”

The Department of Public Safety says she’s also put together a working group with court officials, law enforcement and other partners to meet monthly about the challenges of implementing ERPOs.

Two of the U.S. Department of Education's biggest responsibilities will shift to other federal agencies: safeguarding student civil rights and supervising programs for students with disabilities.

The Trump administration said Tuesday it will move the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). OSERS manages programs that support students with disabilities, offering guidance and oversight to ensure states follow the landmark Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), a law that guarantees disabled students access to an equitable public education.

The administration announced it would also move the Education Department's Office for Civil Rights (OCR) to the U.S. Department of Justice. OCR's staff of civil rights attorneys are tasked with protecting students in K-12 schools and universities from discrimination based on disability, gender, race and national origin. OCR has been in tumult for months, targeted repeatedly by the Trump administration for staff cuts, then reversals of those cuts.

The moves to HHS and DOJ would further dismantle an agency that President Donald Trump has vowed to close, and it would leave the Education Department with a shrinking number of responsibilities.

In a press release, Education Secretary Linda McMahon said of shifting special education programs: "Through our partnership with HHS, we will align federal services with the goal of strengthening academic outcomes and supporting individuals with disabilities so that they can achieve greater independence, key life skills, and meaningful employment."

And of moving civil rights enforcement, McMahon said the partnership between OCR and the Justice Department would "ensure stronger, more coordinated civil rights enforcement and robust protections for student privacy."

While the administration claimed the move would better serve some of the nation's most vulnerable children, disability rights advocates sounded the alarm.

"This is another vindictive attempt to undermine public education," says Denise Forte, president and CEO of Ed Trust, a think tank focused on addressing education inequity. "And at this moment, when we know that children with disabilities need more support, not less — HHS is not the place for that."

"My stomach drops for children and parents of infants, toddlers, children and young adults with disabilities," a former OSERS staffer told NPR. "The move would separate out oversight of the implementation of IDEA and it would decimate civil rights protections that have been in place for more than 50 years." The employee, who has disabilities and is the parent of an adult with disabilities, spoke on the condition of anonymity because they fear professional repercussions for speaking publicly on this issue.

The former employee says without federal oversight ensuring the rights of students with disabilities, schools' legal responsibility to disabled students could go unchecked. "If nobody's looking, they could buy football jerseys rather than pay for a one-on-one aide for a child with autism."

This is the latest effort in McMahon's self-described push to "peel back the layers of federal bureaucracy by partnering with agencies that are better suited to manage programs and empowering states and local leaders to oversee the rest."

Edited by: Nirvi Shah and Nicole Cohen
Visual design and development by: LA Johnson

Copyright 2026, NPR

Todd Lyons, who led U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement during some of the most volatile moments this year, has been hired by a defense contractor to help "on U.S. homeland defense strategy, interagency operations, and international security."

In confirming the move, Navigators Security and Defense told NPR that it does not engage in lobbying activities, and that Lyons cannot engage with the Department of Homeland Security for a year due to federal laws.

It said Lyons is the company's new senior vice president for U.S. homeland security and international affairs.

Lyons did not respond to NPR's multiple requests for comment.

Navigators Security and Defense is a subsidiary of Navigators Global, a lobbying firm with clients including General Motors, the New York Jets, and GEO Group, a private prison contractor running immigration detention centers across the country, including Delaney Hall Detention Center in Newark, N.J.

"Lyons brings more than three decades of law enforcement leadership and military expertise in support of Navigators Security and Defense clientele," the company said.

Navigators Global has represented NPR and the NPR Network to Congress since 2011.

Leading ICE through tumultuous times

Lyons served as ICE's acting director from March 2025 to May 2026.

During his tenure, ICE agents were tasked with carrying out some of the Trump administration's most aggressive immigration enforcement operations, including big, made-for-TV crackdowns in Chicago and Minneapolis.

Lyons faced intense pressure to meet a 3,000-person daily arrest quota imposed by the White House. Despite the agency's aggressive tactics to accomplish this — including arresting immigrants inside immigration courts — the quota was never met.

Lyons stepped down last month.

He was replaced by David Venturella, a veteran of ICE who most recently worked for GEO Group in multiple roles, including as senior vice president of client relations and, more recently, as a paid consultant.

The GEO Group has seen a business boom as it cultivated close ties to the Trump administration.

In 2025, GEO Group made $254 million in income — that's a 700% increase from 2024. In a news release issued last month celebrating GEO Group's 2026 first quarter results, Chairman George Zoley said 2025 "was the most successful period for new business wins in our Company's history."

Copyright 2026, NPR

Omar Ansari watches thousands of THC beverages roll through Surly Brewing’s production facility each hour, wondering if he’ll have to shut down operations in a matter of months.

Around him, machines fill, label and package cans while conveyor belts carry finished products into a warehouse stacked with beverages waiting to be delivered to liquor stores in Minnesota and beyond. Up to 134,000 drinks are made at the Brooklyn Center brewery each day.

But a federal ban on hemp-derived THC products scheduled to take effect Nov. 12 could jeopardize Ansari’s operation and the brewery's future.

“We have to be full throttle,” said Ansari, owner of Surly Brewing. “The plan has been, like most people in the industry, is fight like hell to either have a delay or to have this product regulated.”

Surly is one of several Minnesota breweries that have come to rely on THC beverage sales to bolster business since legalization in 2022 as alcohol consumption declines nationwide. Ansari says the company has grown into one of the state's largest hemp beverage manufacturers, even expanding distribution into more than a dozen states including Wisconsin, Texas and New York.

He’s hopeful lawmakers in Washington will intervene before the ban hits. But if they don't, the consequences for Surly could be severe.

“We make more THC beverages than beer,” Ansari said. “Without the THC space, it’s not enough to keep going anymore. And I think a lot of breweries are in that same spot — beer has just dried up so much.”

Ban uncertainty triggers layoffs, order slowdown

Last fall, President Donald Trump signed a law that will limit hemp-derived products to 0.4 milligrams of THC per container — a level industry leaders say is so low that it would wipe out most beverages and edibles currently sold in Minnesota. Low-dose hemp products are restricted at 5 milligrams THC per serving and 10 milligrams per container under state law.

The ban was tucked into a deal to reopen the government after a 43-day shutdown.

“As soon as the ban got announced, our orders stopped — and we had some huge volumes lined up,” Ansari said.

Four months ago, he laid off half of Surly’s leadership team over uncertainty about the future of the hemp beverage market.

“It’s already affected jobs, and those are people that have worked here for 17 years, friends of mine, and people with kids in school, and mortgages,” he said.

Orders have rebounded as summer — the beer industry's busiest season — gets underway. But with the federal ban looming, Ansari says he's balancing meeting demand against the risk of excess inventory.

Some brands that contract with Surly to manufacture their THC beverages are betting the ban will be delayed or overturned.

“We’ve had some folks that say we’re going up to the deadline,” Ansari said. “There are brands that we make stuff for and they’re like, ‘We think it’s going to pass,' or 'We think it’s worth the money to have product come November.’”

Others are already scaling back orders, creating uncertainty throughout the supply chain. Bob Galligan, industry and government relations director at Minnesota Brewers Guild, says July is the deadline many retailers and wholesalers are looking at for last orders.

“July is kind of that cliff. After July, we’re kind of in free fall, and each operator is going to have to operate however they deem best for their business,” he said.

Some local distributors have an internal deadline of August. Hohenstein’s is a Cottage Grove-based company that supplies beer and THC drinks to roughly 700 liquor stores and 300 bars and restaurants across the Twin Cities, Rochester and Mankato regions.

Chris Fream, director of brands, says the company is already adjusting its strategy. A few suppliers have even stopped making hemp beverages.

“We have enough product to get us through August and hopefully we hear more news before then,” Fream said. “We’re kind of planning on going right up to Nov. 12 and waiting to see what happens. It’s business as usual, just with a little extra care around inventory.”

Fream says Hohenstein’s doesn’t plan to place additional orders after August unless there’s more clarity from Washington. The company wants to avoid a scenario where distributors, retailers and manufacturers are left holding products they can’t sell.

But Fream says inventory planning is difficult because most people don't realize hemp-derived THC drinks could disappear from store shelves starting Nov. 12. He predicts there will be a last-minute rush for drinks right before the ban hits.

“If on November 12 you can’t carry it, how much do you bring in to satisfy the mad dash at the end of people loading up?,” Fream said. “And then afterwards, what’s the recovery, what are the plans beyond that? What happens to all that inventory? Is this just going to cost everybody a lot of money?”

A ban on hemp-derived THC beverages would be a major blow to business. In the past year, Hohenstein’s brought in $10 million from low-dose THC drink sales.

“We will feel a lot of pain if it goes away,” Fream said.

Industry expert says up to 30 percent of breweries could close

New changes in Minnesota’s cannabis laws this year streamline cannabis supply chains and open the door for hemp producers to enter the recreational cannabis market.

While some hemp operators are pivoting to recreational cannabis ahead of the ban, many in the beverage industry say that’s not a realistic option for them. Brewers have to hold a permit from the federal Alcohol And Tobacco Tax And Trade Bureau and most won’t risk losing that license over going into recreational cannabis, which is still illegal at the federal level.

The bureau did not respond to an MPR News request for comment.

The Minnesota Craft Brewers Guild represents 150 breweries in the state, roughly half of which operate in hemp. Galligan says it would be costly for brewers to go into cannabis.

“You could feasibly just start a second business that is a different financial entity, but at the same time now you're running two businesses, which I don't think many of my members are having much interest in,” he said.

That means breweries selling THC drinks only have a few options: scale back hemp beverages and return to beer, continue operating until the deadline, shut down, or explore making drinks with adaptogens (i.e. ashwagandha, non-hallucinogenic mushrooms) instead of THC.

Adaptogens are found in plants and mushrooms and are often used in beverages and supplements marketed for stress relief.

That’s something Nathan Schneider is working to adapt into a new drink at Trove Brewing Company in Burnsville. He is a part owner at the brewery, which makes beer and recently started producing low-dose hemp derived “Voltage THC” drinks.

Schneider says Trove will continue producing Voltage THC until Nov. 12 and is also developing a new line of mushroom-based drinks.

“Adaptogens are now trendy and rightfully so,” Schneider said. “People are trying to find either a healthier, more sustainable energy source that are just better for your body. So we've been making some small batch stuff here, just to kind of play around with some flavors.”

Fortunately, the hemp drinks are an added stream of revenue and it going away won’t make or break the small brewery. Schneider says it’s not the best contingency plan to bet on mushroom drinks filling the gap for THC, but it is another potential stream of revenue.

As for Surly, the cans will continue to roll off the production line as long as there is demand.

“There’s nothing to pivot to for us,” Ansari said.

But shutting down business is also a real possibility. Galligan estimates about 75 breweries in the Minnesota Craft Brewers Guild would immediately start to struggle if hemp goes away.

“Their workforce is going to be hit and they're going to be thinned out real bad. So, whether or not that actually puts them under, how many are going to be able to just kind of scoot by and try to rebuild something else?,” he said.

Coupled with the financial hits from Operation Metro Surge and rising ingredient costs, Galligan says he would not be surprised if 20 to 30 percent of Minnesota’s breweries close after the ban goes into effect.

Hemp beverage makers put hopes into DC

Despite the looming ban, Galligan remains optimistic. It's unclear what lawmakers will ultimately do, but discussions are underway in Washington about preserving the hemp edible industry or delaying implementation of the ban.

“Right now I think the most realistic would probably be just delaying the language, whether that is outright delaying or putting a timeline on it,” he said. “DC needs something that’s right in front of them, and as the deadline gets closer, it starts getting more in front of them, and I think they realize that they need more time to begin having this policy conversation.”

Ansari and Schneider are also hopeful, pointing to continued investment in hemp-derived THC beverages by major retailers like Target. The company recently expanded sales into Illinois, Florida and Texas, a move they say suggests confidence in the industry’s future.

Minnesota lawmakers are also pushing for federal action. U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., is proposing a pair of bills. One would protect existing regulated hemp markets. Another is the Senate companion bill to Democratic U.S. Rep. Angie Craig’s legislation that would delay the ban.

“Republicans in DC pulled the rug out from under Minnesota’s hemp farmers and brewers with this ban,” wrote Craig in a statement to MPR News. “I am continuing to work with stakeholders and my colleagues to explore short-term solutions that prevent a cliff this fall, while also creating a durable long-term framework that puts safety standards in place and allows small businesses to thrive. I’m not going to give up on trying to clean up the Republicans’ mess.”

The hemp crackdown was led by U.S. Sen. Mitch McConnell, a Kentucky Republican.

The state’s Office of Cannabis Management says it’s keeping a pulse on the hemp market and preparing for potential federal policy changes.

For now, it’s business as usual. But every order placed, every pallet shipped and every can produced carries the same question: What happens on Nov. 12?

As Luigi Mangione's team of attorneys heads back to state court in Manhattan this week for a key pretrial hearing, public support for the 28-year-old continues to grow.

Some legal experts say Mangione's populist appeal, fueled in part by what many describe as his Instagram-ready good looks, could complicate state and federal trials.

"The concern you have as a prosecutor is that public support is going to make it into the jury room," said Richard Schoenstein, a legal analyst and defense attorney.

Mangione is accused of stalking and murdering Brian Thompson, age 50, a health insurance executive and father of two, on a Manhattan street in 2024. Mangione has pleaded not guilty to all charges.

His crowd-sourced legal defense fund now tops $1.5 million, with more than 42,000 donors. According to a pro-Mangione website created by volunteers, he has also received nearly 7,000 personal letters from dozens of countries around the world.

Gary Galperin, a former assistant district attorney in New York County who teaches at Cardozo School of Law, agrees jury selection will be challenging because of Mangione's popularity.

"You may come to find that one or more jurors who seemed [unbiased] harbor views that could derail the deliberations," he said.

A CEO's killing, the rise of a folk hero

Another risk, say Schoenstein, Galperin and others, is that some jurors could come to see Mangione's state and federal trials as a referendum on the costly, frustrating and often inaccessible U.S. healthcare system.

According to federal prosecutors, a notebook kept by Mangione "contained several handwritten pages that express hostility towards the health insurance industry and wealthy executives in particular."

Mangione's writings allegedly included a plan to "wack" an insurance company CEO.

Schoenstein thinks many Mangione supporters are so outraged by U.S. healthcare that they view his alleged violence as a legitimate political statement.

"There definitely are people out there who assume this defendant committed the crime, but support him in doing so," he said.

Evan Clarkson, an assistant professor at Utah Valley University who has studied the phenomenon of Mangione's popular support, says he began his research after many of his students told him they felt "conflicted" about Mangione's alleged crimes.

"There are some students who believe he is absolutely a justified vigilante ... against this system, the American healthcare system, that they think is unjust."

Clarkson and other experts think Mangione's political appeal is being further fueled by the fact that he's young and photogenic.

Images of Mangione shirtless have gone viral on social media platforms. His fans have written poetry and songs about him and flooded the prison where he's detained with photographs.

"He's hot — and our [research] paper does talk about the role of his physical attractiveness," Clarkson said, noting that views expressed about Mangione's appearance are a "powerful predictor of people's attitudes about him."

Daniel Byman, an expert on domestic political violence in the U.S. at Georgetown University and a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, agrees Mangione's physical appearance is a significant factor.

He compares Mangione's relatively broad cultural support to that of Cuban revolutionary Che Guevara.

"Che Guevara was a very bloody revolutionary and yet his poster was on dorm room walls," Byman said. "Mangione [like Guevara] is a good-looking guy."

Mangione's legal team declined to be interviewed for this story, but in a statement posted on a website they created to communicate with supporters, his attorney, Karen Friedman Agnifilo, rejected the idea that her client espoused political violence.

State trial scheduled to begin in September

In a separate statement, Mangione himself, currently behind bars at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, acknowledged the personal connection many of his supporters feel.

"I am overwhelmed by — and grateful for — everyone who has written me to share their stories and express their support," Mangione said in the undated post.

It's unclear how the political and cultural currents surrounding Mangione will play out in court.

His team has won significant legal victories. Last September, a state judge tossed out terrorism charges filed against Mangione. Earlier this year, a federal judge ruled that Mangione won't face the death penalty.

But prosecutors have also won key rulings, including a decision last month by state Judge Gregory Carro to allow crucial pieces of evidence to be presented at trial.

"I found that ruling, at the end of the day, to be a compelling win for the prosecutors," said Schoenstein, the legal analyst. "The gun, the silencer and the notebook [which allegedly belonged to Mangione] are all coming into evidence. It seems like a very strong case for the prosecution."

The state trial is scheduled to begin in early September, with the federal trial delayed to next year. In a comment left online, while donating $5,000 to Mangione's legal fund, one supporter made it clear they see the upcoming trials as political persecution.

"I am disturbed by what the government is doing to you," the donor wrote. "For them, it was and always will be about protecting the 1%. Head up, Luigi. We are right here with you."

If found guilty on the remaining charges, Mangione could face life in prison without the possibility of parole.

Copyright 2026, NPR

President Trump and Iran declared they've reached an agreement intended to end more than three months of war in Iran and reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

The deal, scheduled to be formally signed Friday in Switzerland, marks a major breakthrough in the conflict that set the Middle East aflame and shook the global economy.

"The Deal with the Islamic Republic of Iran is now complete. Congratulations to all!" Trump wrote on social media on Sunday evening.

Iran's Supreme National Security Council said the deal was reached "following a difficult and intensive period of negotiations lasting several months."

If the agreement works as planned, several key developments are supposed to happen almost immediately.

The U.S. and Iran will end the sporadic attacks that have been taking place despite a ceasefire. The Israel-Hezbollah fighting in Lebanon should stop. And Iran and the U.S. will lift their dueling blockades of the Strait of Hormuz that has prevented oil from leaving the Gulf, driving up prices across the world.

"Ships of the World, start your engines. Let the oil flow!" Trump said in his post.

However, the memorandum of understanding between the U.S. and Iran did not resolve several critical issues that must still be worked out in another round of negotiations.

The text of the deal was not immediately released, but has been widely described by U.S. and Iranian officials and in media reports.

The agreement extends the current U.S.-Iran ceasefire for 60 days. The goal in upcoming talks will be a permanent end to the war.

The fate of Iran's nuclear program will be negotiated, but remains unresolved for now. Trump made no mention of the nuclear issue in his initial posts, though this is the main reason he cited for launching the war in February.

In an interview with The New York Times, Trump said Iran would be permitted low-level nuclear enrichment. In the past, he has repeatedly called for the dismantling of Iran's entire nuclear program.

Also, Iran wants billions of dollars in its assets that have been frozen abroad, and the lifting of U.S. and international sanctions.

These issues will be difficult to resolve, and it's not clear what happens if agreement is not reached during the 60 days of negotiations.

Trump told The New York Times that if no deal was reached, he could relaunch attacks on Iran or make the U.S. "the guardian of the Middle East" in return for 20% of the region's revenues.

Signing set for Friday

Pakistan's prime minister, Shehbaz Sharif, who played a key mediating role in the negotiations, said an official signing ceremony will take place on Friday in Switzerland. Trump said the same in a second Truth Social post Sunday evening.

Iran Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi, quoted by Iranian state media in a post on Telegram, said Iran sees this deal as a victory.

Iran has effectively controlled the Strait of Hormuz since shortly after the war began on Feb. 28, virtually shutting down the vital passage for around 20 percent of the world's oil. The U.S. blockaded Iranian ports in response.

The U.S. says Iran has laid mines in the strait. Trump said Sunday the strait will be opened for mine removal after the deal is signed Friday.

Iran made an end to fighting between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon a condition for a deal with the U.S.

However, Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz said Monday the country would keep troops in southern Lebanon indefinitely.

Israel and Hezbollah have continued to fight daily despite an official ceasefire. On Sunday, Hezbollah fired drones into northern Israel, according to the Israeli military.

Israel responded with a deadly airstrike on a Hezbollah stronghold in the southern suburbs of Beirut.

Trump criticized the Israeli action.

"This morning's attack on Beirut should not have happened, particularly on a special day when we are so close to a peace deal with Iran," Trump wrote on Truth Social, hours before he announced the agreement with Iran.

Trump and Netanyahu speak often by phone, but they've been at odds on several occasions recently and Israel was not directly involved in the negotiations with Iran.

Israeli officials have said previously that they would support an agreement, but they had many reservations about the terms that were being discussed.

Leaders in the Middle East and Europe praised the deal.

Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al Thani, who helped mediate the deal alongside Pakistan, praised the breakthrough. He thanked Pakistan, urging "positive and constructive" negotiations ahead.

European leaders from the U.K., France, Germany and Italy also welcomed the deal, calling for swift implementation. They also called for the urgent reopening of the Strait of Hormuz and reaffirmed support for Lebanon's sovereignty and stability.

French President Emmanuel Macron, speaking in a video on Instagram as G7 leaders prepare to meet in Evian, said talks would focus on the long-term reopening of the Strait of Hormuz and the wider diplomatic opportunity created by the agreement.

U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres called the deal a "critical step," with his spokesperson Stéphane Dujarric saying he hopes parties will build on the momentum and "redouble their efforts towards a final resolution of the conflict."

Copyright 2026, NPR

Almost a year ago, at a rally in Des Moines, President Trump made an announcement to his supporters.

“We're going to have a UFC fight — think of this — on the grounds of the White House,” he said.

The crowd of supporters didn't cheer, exactly — rather, a murmur ran through the crowd. They seemed, if anything, surprised.

And now, he's following through, allowing the UFC to erect an arena on the South Lawn. Seven cage fights will be held on the White House grounds in honor of the nation's upcoming 250th anniversary — a day that also happens to be the president's 80th birthday.

Beyond that, he's undertaken a roster of other side projects not — strictly speaking — traditionally central to a war time president's daily decision-making. Tied to the anniversary, he's going to host a rally on the national mall and has an IndyCar race planned on the streets of D.C.

And then there are the building projects, which the president can't help bringing up, even at unrelated official events. Before signing a bill funding immigration enforcement last week, he described at length his work on the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool. At an announcement about coal power, he brought up a pedestrian bridge to connect the Lincoln Memorial and the Potomac River.

And at a recent agricultural roundtable in Wisconsin, he showed the farmers seated on either side of him printouts of photos of a Washington, D.C., fountain.

“We had 22 fountains that didn't work,” he told the crowd. “All of the fountains, not one fountain in Washington worked. Out of the 22 fountains, they're all looking beautiful.”

Beyond all that, he has knocked down the White House East Wing to build a ballroom and an underground military complex. And he's planning a massive arch near Arlington National Cemetery.

The White House has defended many of these actions as having precedent, pointing to past presidents' building projects. And that's fair, but only to an extent, says Princeton professor of history Julian Zelizer.

“You can find bits and pieces of what President Trump has done that are done very differently and with different purposes,” he said.

Trump has referenced previous fights at the White House — President Theodore Roosevelt himself participated in some. And Zelizer points to President Truman massively renovating the White House, which at the time, was literally falling apart.

War-time priorities

All of Trump's expanded portfolio passion projects have happened as the US has been at war with Iran, inflation has passed 4 percent , and his approval has sunk. Russia's war in Ukraine, which Trump once vowed to end, rages on. He has mostly stopped talking about a healthcare overhaul. And midterms are approaching.

All of which casts the UFC fights for America's 250th birthday in a different light, says Zelizer.

“In addition to just how big it is and how much space it's literally and symbolically taking in his presidency, at a moment the nation's in the middle of a war, it also raises all these conflict of interest questions, which are also different than having a boxing match in the White House,” he said.

A watchdog group, the Public Integrity Project, has filed a lawsuit attempting to halt the event. The lawsuit calls the planned fights “deeply corrupt,” noting the money that UFC, headed by Trump ally Dana White, stands to make off the event. It also pointed out that a recent financial disclosure from Trump shows he owns up to $50,000 dollars of stock in the company that owns UFC.

In a subsequent filing, the government responded with multiple counterarguments. It said the plaintiffs don't have standing, the lawsuit was filed too late, that it would be too disruptive to halt an event a year in the making, and that other presidents have held public events on the South Lawn.

White House spokesperson Davis Ingle insisted to NPR there are no conflicts of interest, and added that Trump's assets are in a trust managed by his children. However, it's not a blind trust, in which the owner's assets are under the control of an independent manager.

The government's filing also states that “well over $60 million and tens of thousands of hours of labor have been expended” on UFC Freedom 250. The White House says UFC is footing the bill for the entire event.

However, the filing also says seven government agencies and components have been involved in coordinating this event.

“There are no taxpayer dollars being used outside of what would be applied towards employees normal duties and responsibilities,” said a White House spokesperson in a statement to NPR.

America 250

A major milestone like the nation's 250th birthday can be expected to involve big celebrations featuring the president.

In 1976, President Ford participated in a series of bicentennial events at historic sites up and down the East coast, including a sweeping speech at Independence Hall, in Philadelphia.

It's a stark contrast to ultimate fighting.

“The UFC has nothing to do with American history. So it's not about Independence Hall, it's not about the founders,” said Zelizer. “This reflects the preferences and the friendships and at some level the perceived electoral interests, meaning the popularity of UFC with young male voters, rather than celebrating the nation itself.”

Only 16 percent of U.S. adults believe it's appropriate to hold mixed martial arts fighting matches on the White House lawn, according to a new Reuters/Ipsos poll. Even among Republicans, the idea isn't popular — 31 percent say it's appropriate, while 22 percent disapprove (36 percent said “neither”).

Both President Trump and UFC CEO Dana White — who introduced Trump at the 2024 Republican National Convention — have insisted the mixed martial arts fights on the White House lawn are purely about America's birthday, not Trump's birthday. In a recent interview with NPR's Steve Inskeep, however, White added that UFC fights do reflect Trump's personality.

“Trump is one of the toughest, most resilient human beings that I've ever met in my life," he said. "The will to win, the will to overcome – you know, he has every ounce of that plus some, even at 80 years old.”

Second-term presidents think about their legacies, and there is a sense that Trump is thinking about his, with his events and building projects.

In the case of Sunday's fights, he will be doing so with an organization he has a long history with. And Trump knows the sport — in 2023, he did an extended interview on the UFC Unfiltered podcast, where he riffed on what happens as fighters age.

“As you get older, it's not that you can't do it. I think you're physically the same. Maybe in some ways you're stronger and better, but you don't have that same motivation to do it,” he told host and ex-fighter Matt Serra. “You want the success, but you don't want to work quite as hard.”

Trump supporters have long said they see him as a fighter. And on the cusp of his 80th birthday, after multiple assassination attempts, and as he navigates the end of his presidency, he may also be showing the world what does and doesn't motivate him.

Copyright 2026, NPR

The United States and Iran appear close to a deal to end the war and open the Strait of Hormuz.

Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif said Saturday that a deal aimed at ending the war in the Middle East is closer than “ever before” and expected to be finalized within 24 hours. Pakistan is preparing for the electronic signing of the agreement, followed immediately by technical-level talks next week.

Previous declarations of an imminent breakthrough failed to materialize.

The apparent breakthrough in negotiations comes after Iran exchanged fire with the U.S. and Israel over three days this week, threatening to push the region into a full-scale war. U.S. Central Command late Friday said in a social media post that it intercepted several Iranian attack drones that were targeting commercial ships in the Strait of Hormuz.

The war launched by the U.S. and Israel on Feb. 28 has rattled the Middle East and virtually shut down oil and natural gas shipments from the Persian Gulf. A fragile ceasefire has been in place since April 7.

Here's what to know:

Iran's nuclear program terms to be finalized within 60 days of the agreement.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Friday the terms of dealing with Iran’s nuclear program would be finalized in the 60 days after the initial agreement is signed and that the parties could decide to extend that period.

Iran’s nuclear program has been a key point of division. The U.S. and Israel fear it could lead to an atomic weapon — a main reason their leaders cited for going to war. Tehran has insisted its nuclear efforts are for peaceful purposes.

A senior U.S. administration official, who briefed reporters on condition of anonymity under ground rules set by the White House, said Friday that the emerging agreement would begin the process of destroying or removing Tehran’s highly enriched uranium.

The official said the 60-day period after both sides sign the deal would be used to work out technical details for removing Iran’s enriched uranium. The official did not detail who the U.S. envisions taking charge of removing the uranium, believed to be entombed under three nuclear sites that were battered by American strikes last year.

The deal will include conditions to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, official says

The U.S. official said the emerging agreement includes provisions for reopening the strait.

Araghchi said Iran wants a deal that allows Tehran to charge ships “for services rendered” when they transit the Strait of Hormuz. Iran has imposed a toll system during the war, which the U.S. and other nations say violates international law.

Transit through the Strait of Hormuz, a vital shipping lane for oil and natural gas, has been disrupted and crimped global energy supplies, driven up fuel prices and made food and other basics more expensive well beyond the region.

The agreement is set to include Iranian sanctions relief

Three regional officials said the emerging deal is also expected to include the phased lifting of sanctions on Iran and the release of frozen Iranian assets. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the negotiations.

They said they expect a signing ceremony for the agreement in the coming days after officials in Washington and Tehran approve it.

What will happen to Lebanon remains unclear

Iran has insisted throughout that any deal must also include a ceasefire in Lebanon, where Israel has been fighting Hezbollah, Iran’s proxy militia.

Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz warned Friday that Israel could still act independently toward Iran and that the country would not pull out of the zones it is occupying in Lebanon, Syria and Gaza, nor would it withdraw from the northern refugee camps of the Israeli-occupied West Bank.

Fighting continued in southern Lebanon on Saturday.

WASHINGTON - Workers have taken down President Donald Trump's name from the Kennedy Center, hours after a court-ordered Friday deadline to remove it from the building, and less than six months after it was first affixed to the iconic performing arts venue. The removal of the more than a dozen bronze letters followed a judge's ruling that the Center could not be renamed without Congressional approval.

In a court filing, Kennedy Center Executive Director and Chief Operating Officer Charles Matthew Floca confirmed that President Trump's name has been removed from the building façade, despite what Floca said were weather-related delays. References to Trump on the center's website are also gone.

Just a month into his second term, Trump ousted the Kennedy Center's president, board chair and board members, then replaced them with a group of trustees that soon named Trump as chairman. Soon after, the president's name was added to the building, so that it became, "The Donald J. Trump and the John F. Kennedy Memorial Center for the Performing Arts."

The administration had on Friday asked a higher court to stay the ruling as it argued that Trump's name on the building had helped attract donors and was crucial to raising funds for the Kennedy Center's renovation.

"Without the name, "Trump" on the Building, our fundraising will not only come to a halt," the administration wrote in a court filing, "but any and all monies raised or committed would be obligated to be returned, refunded or terminated."

An appeals court denied that request Friday night. Workers erected scaffolding on Friday around the section of the building where Trump's name had been added in December 2025. Then, in a pre-dawn operation, the laborers draped the scaffolding in tarpaulin, before removing the giant metallic letters. The Kennedy Center had asked a judge to briefly extend the deadline for this removal —because of Friday night thunderstorms forecast for Washington D.C.

Finally, with the scaffolding up, and tarpaulin covering their efforts, workers began to remove Trump's name. Hundreds of people braved the rain and thunderstorms overnight to document the take-down. Some heckled those involved for hiding the removal using tarpaulin – with shouts of "Cover up!" and "Cowards!"

Among the onlookers watching proceedings was Krystal Brewer, 40, who works for a social justice advocacy group. She said removing Trump's name was a way to enforce accountability, maintain government checks and balances, and reclaim a piece of Washington from a president who she said has tried to impose his stamp on the nation's capital. "It's about just not being able to do something just because you think you're the most powerful person and you can defy the courts," Brewer said.

Trump has recently overseen the controversial demolition of the White House's East Wing in favor of a giant ballroom, and ordered large banners of his face to hang from several federal buildings during his second term. "I wanted to see us get a part of our city back," said Brewer. "With all the things that he's trying to destroy and corrupt and taint and alter, it's nice to see a piece of it being restored."

Also among those gathered on the Center's plaza Friday was Rep. Joyce Beatty of Ohio, who initiated the lawsuit to remove Trump's name from the building. She wrote on social media that she had stood outside to watch, writing "No more stalling. It's time for Trump to obey the law."

Watching the tarps go up a little before 2 a.m., Saturday, another onlooker, 60-year-old nurse Mary Foltz, said it was a metaphor for the Trump administration.

"I think there's a lack of transparency — and that's just the epitome of it," Foltz said. "This is a meme."

Copyright 2026, NPR

The federal government will pay North Dakota nearly $28 million to settle a lawsuit over the costs of policing massive protests against the Dakota Access oil pipeline nearly a decade ago, the state’s attorney general announced Thursday.

The final settlement agreement's sum is the same amount a federal judge determined last year after trial. The government also agreed to dismiss all of its appeals and to issue a statement that recognizes "that the people of North Dakota, including, centrally, our law enforcement officers, endured repeated acts of intimidation, violence, property destruction, unlawful conduct associated with encampments established on federal land without authorization," Republican Attorney General Drew Wrigley told reporters.

“We deeply appreciate those acknowledgments. They’re a long time coming," he said, joined by attorneys and investigators from his office.

North Dakota is now “made financially whole,” Wrigley said. The settlement money will finalize the debts of loans taken from the state-owned Bank of North Dakota, he said.

Republican Gov. Kelly Armstrong welcomed the settlement as “long overdue” and thanked Wrigley's office and others who worked on the case and reached the settlement "that removes the financial burden from North Dakota taxpayers and places it on the shoulders of the federal government where it belongs.”

In a statement, the U.S. Justice Department said it disputes the court's legal analysis, “but acknowledges in hindsight that, under the Obama Administration, the federal government could have done more to reduce the impacts to the people of North Dakota” from the protests, which included “unlawfulness and confrontational violence" at times.

“To avoid further escalation of unlawful behaviors, the federal government at the time chose not to forcibly remove the protestors from the encampment on federal property. The United States recognizes that this difficult choice had painful consequences for North Dakota and many of its residents,” the department said.

The settlement comes more than a year after U.S. District Judge Daniel Traynor found the federal government liable on all claims, including negligence, gross negligence, civil trespass and public nuisance, and determined it owed the state about $27.8 million.

For months in 2016 and 2017, thousands of people camped and protested on and around federally managed land near the pipeline's Missouri River crossing upstream of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe's reservation. The tribe has long opposed the pipeline's risk to its water supply.

The protesters included people from around the U.S. and even the world; supporters of the tribe, Native rights and the environment; and opponents of fossil fuels. Figures such as actors Shailene Woodley and Mark Ruffalo and the Rev. Jesse Jackson traveled to North Dakota to support the tribe.

The protests resulted in sometimes-violent clashes between demonstrators and law enforcement officers. An attorney for the state said the protests prompted a response that stretched over seven months and involved 178 agencies, resulted in 761 arrests, and required four days of cleanup of the camp to remove millions of pounds of trash.

The state sued in 2019, seeking $38 million. In 2017, the pipeline company Energy Transfer donated $15 million to help cover the response costs. That same year, the Justice Department gave a $10 million grant to the state for reimbursing the response.

The judge found that Energy Transfer’s contribution was a gift and subtracted the $10 million already paid by the federal government when calculating the nearly $28 million award.

Last month, he vacated several previous orders, including his 2025 ruling, at the request of both sides as they negotiated the settlement.

“The Court does not believe it should stand in the way of a satisfactory settlement between the Parties but should encourage litigants to pursue settlements even when federal government conduct is at its worst,” Traynor wrote.

The pipeline has been operating since mid-2017. It transports about 4 percent of U.S. daily oil production, or approximately 540,000 barrels a day.

In May, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers gave final approval for the pipeline's Missouri River crossing near the reservation, six years after a federal judge had ordered a more rigorous environmental review. Tribal Chairman Steve Sitting Bear said Standing Rock will consider its options to uphold its treaty rights, ensure safe water, and hold the government and corporations accountable.