Latest news with #TheExcerpt
USA Today
6 hours ago
- Politics
- USA Today
Trump to decide on US role in Israel-Iran conflict within 2 weeks
Trump to decide on US role in Israel-Iran conflict within 2 weeks | The Excerpt On Friday's episode of The Excerpt podcast: President Donald Trump will decide on the U.S. role in the Israel-Iran conflict within two weeks. USA TODAY White House Reporter Davis Winkie discusses how the Trump administration's National Guard immigration enforcement could divide states. Plus, a court lets Trump keep control of California's National Guard for now. The Los Angeles Dodgers say they denied federal agents access to Dodger Stadium parking lots. Trump signs an executive order delaying a ban on TikTok - again. USA TODAY National Correspondent Marco della Cava looks back on the phenomenon that was 'Jaws' on its 50th anniversary. Plus, how locals made up much of the film's cast. Let us know what you think of this episode by sending an email to podcasts@ Hit play on the player below to hear the podcast and follow along with the transcript beneath it. This transcript was automatically generated, and then edited for clarity in its current form. There may be some differences between the audio and the text. Podcasts: True crime, in-depth interviews and more USA TODAY podcasts right here Taylor Wilson: Good morning. I'm Taylor Wilson. And today is Friday, June 20th, 2025. This is USA TODAY's The Excerpt. Today, when might we get a decision on the US approach to Iran and Israel? Plus, how Trump's National Guard immigration enforcement could divide states. And it's been 50 years since the release of Jaws. ♦ President Donald Trump will decide in the next two weeks whether the US will get involved in the conflict between Israel and Iran. That's what the White House said yesterday. Trump continues to keep the world guessing on his plans. He had proposed a diplomatic solution, but has also suggested the US might join the fighting on Israel's side. Iran has said it won't negotiate under duress. The conflict has killed at least 240 Iranians and 24 Israelis in a week. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt declined to say if Trump would seek congressional authorization for strikes on Iran. ♦ The possibility of the Trump administration sending National Guard troops on immigration raids outside their own state could cause a legal clash between states and with the federal government. I spoke with USA TODAY White House reporter Davis Winkie for more. Davis, thanks for joining me today. Davis Winkie: It's good to be back. Taylor Wilson: Davis, starting here, the Pentagon is weighing a request from the Department of Homeland Security to call up members of the National Guard under state authority. What did you find taking a closer look at this memo? Davis Winkie: The way that the administration wants to bring the National Guard into immigration enforcement really diverges from the ways in which the National Guard has previously been used on this front. There have been border efforts that have really sparked professionalization and even reforms of the National Guard when necessary. But each of those missions to include ones under Obama, Biden, and Trump were focused on border security rather than interior immigration enforcement. And that's what stands out, is that now the Trump administration wants 20,000 guardsmen to participate in interior immigration enforcement rather than just border security as they have in the past. Taylor Wilson: Well, putting just slightly a tighter lens here, Davis, what is the 287(g) program and how would it be used here? Davis Winkie: It's named after a section in the federal law that authorizes a lot of immigration enforcement. It's a vehicle by which local and state law enforcement agencies can enter formal partnerships with ICE and DHS. One of the ways in which this can be done is by serving warrants or by doing jailhouse cooperation, where if somebody that a local sheriff's office brings in, for example, has an ICE detainer, then they will coordinate with ICE to give that person over to them when it's appropriate to do so. But the Trump administration has revived a old version of 287(g) called the task force model that actually involves taking law enforcement officers from local and now even state agencies and deputizing them with immigration enforcement powers that lets them go forth and detain people on suspicion of not being lawfully in the United States for example. What it also does is it allows these individuals from participating agencies to go out and about as part of ICE-led task forces or other federal law enforcement task forces that seek to enforce immigration laws. It's basically a way for the immigration enforcement apparatus to widen its reach around the country. Taylor Wilson: Well, I know a big question here is what this means for crossing state lines and the differences from one state to the next. I mean, can task force participants under 287(g) operate across state lines? Davis Winkie: Well, Taylor, that's the big question, and it's one that, according to CNN, officials in the administration and DHS and in the Pentagon are asking. The reason why the administration is likely exploring this possibility is that National Guard troops under state authority are not subject to the restrictions of the Posse Comitatus Act, which is a law that forbids active-duty US military personnel from directly enforcing civilian laws. That's a law that has limited exceptions, but the biggest one is those guard troops on state duty can enforce laws. And by bringing guard troops on state duty onto immigration task forces, you've theoretically then expanded those task forces with a lot more manpower. But the question remains, can those troops go across state lines? The experts that I talked to for this story, Taylor, just don't know. Taylor Wilson: And as you outlined in this piece, Davis, this could potentially mean just broader clashes between red states and blue states. Is that a fair way to look at this? Davis Winkie: I think so. There's been, in recent years, a increasing pattern of clashes between states and the federal government over control and use of the National Guard. The modern examples start with more recently in the first Trump administration when the news of family separations came to light. A lot of democratic governors withdrew their consent for their personnel who were on state duty at the border under a federally-organized task force. So there have been concepts like this before that haven't been doing direct interior immigration enforcement that have had political issues rend the working relationships there. You also saw during the COVID pandemic some red state governors fight against the Biden administration trying to mandate the COVID-19 vaccine for troops in their National Guard. And then what we're seeing right now out in California with the administration federalizing the 4,000 members of the California National Guard against the consent of Governor Gavin Newsom out there. It's a different legal authority than the one that would be in play for the DHS request, but it just goes to show that there are a lot of traditional limits and boundaries with this relationship over the guard between states and the federal government that's taken it from a largely cooperative one in the modern era to one where now you've got people looking to score political points on each other. Taylor Wilson: All right. Another great piece from you, Davis. Folks can find the full version with the link in today's show notes. Davis Winkie covers the White House for USA TODAY. Thank you, Davis. Davis Winkie: Thanks for having me. Taylor Wilson: The US appeals Court let President Trump retain control yesterday of California's National Guard, while the state's Democratic governor proceeds with a lawsuit, challenging Trump's use of the troops amid protests and riots in Los Angeles. ♦ Meanwhile, the Los Angeles Dodgers said yesterday that immigration and customs enforcement agents were denied entry to the stadium grounds. While ICE says the agency was never there. And the Department of Homeland Security claims, the masked agents were with Customs and Border patrol. You can read more about that with a link in today's show notes. ♦ President Trump has again extended the deadline for a TikTok ban to go into effect, allowing the Chinese-owned social media platform to continue operating for the next 90 days. Trump had said earlier in the week that he planned to give TikTok a third extension and signed an executive order yesterday making it official. It was the third time that Trump authorized a delay. The social media app's parent company, ByteDance, now has until September 17th to secure a deal that satisfies a legal requirement. Lawmakers ordered TikTok to divest from its Chinese ownership or face a ban in the United States over national security concerns. Former President Joe Biden signed the bipartisan legislation into law and the Supreme Court held the ban. But since returning to office, Trump has directed the Department of Justice not to enforce it. ♦ It's been 50 years since an iconic movie and theme song kept beachgoers out of the water for a summer and even longer. I spoke with USA TODAY national correspondent Marco della Cava on the anniversary of Jaws. Marco, I always appreciate you stopping by. How are you today? Marco della Cava: I am great. Thanks for having me. Taylor Wilson: Thanks for having on. Really fun story. I cannot believe it's the 50th anniversary of Jaws. So let's just first go back to 1975. How big of a phenomenon was Jaws that summer? Marco della Cava: One way to answer that is one of the gentlemen I interviewed said he finally got to see it in 1979 because he was old enough, four years later, and the line was still around the block in 1979. So you can imagine 1975. Taylor Wilson: Wow. And I know you hear stories about folks not wanting to go into the water for that entire summer. In some cases, years. In some cases, an entire lifetime, right Marco, after seeing this movie. How badly did it scare people? Marco della Cava: Yeah, I mean it terrified folks, young and old. And I was happy to learn interviewing people that I was not alone in not wanting to go in the water and being very scared for years. In fact, I was even scared of going into a pool. And apparently, that phenomenon affected other people as well. As crazy as it sounds, there's no sharks in pools, but any kind of situation where you're in water and you're not sure what's out there, your mind can get ahead of yourself quickly. And Spielberg did an amazing job because as you remember in the opening scene in the first shark attack, you don't see a shark. And that sort of stayed with people, that, here I am bobbing in the water and yet who knows what's beneath me. Taylor Wilson: Well, you mentioned Spielberg. He went on to have this massive career, but this was early on in his career. And you're right that Jaws was both his origin story and almost his career killer. How so? Marco della Cava: Absolutely. He was under pressure to deliver a blockbuster, ideally, under budget. This was a very, very popular novel at the time, and they wanted it out for summer. And he was having massive problems with the mechanical shark. Obviously, he had insisted on shooting it, as you know, in Martha's Vineyard and also with a real mechanical shark out in the ocean. And that caused all sorts of problems that he felt were just going to be his undoing. He felt he might get kicked off the project. And in the end of course it was, as he said in a documentary I watched, the movie that gave him final cut for the rest of his life. So it made him in a huge way. Taylor Wilson: So many of the iconic scenes were filmed off the coast of Massachusetts around the island of Martha's Vineyard, a place I know well and have spent a lot of time. Most Jaws cast members were locals from the island, Marco. Tell us about some of these folks and also their memories from the Jaws production. Marco della Cava: Yeah, that's quite the amazing thing. They came to Martha's Vineyard with, I think, it was eight professional actors. And everyone else was cast locally. And that is what gives the movie its real genuine flavor. And a lot of these folks have since turned up at Jaws festivals that are happening. Different years they've happened, but they're going to happen this summer at the 50th anniversary on Martha's Vineyard. And those who are still alive, who were probably in their 20s, I think the gentleman who plays the college kid at the opening scene, he's often spotted talking to Jaws fans on the island. So that's a big part of the success of the movie, was the fact that it felt real because it really kind of was real in many ways. Taylor Wilson: And Martha's Vineyard local, Jeff Voorhees, played one of the Jaws victims as a kid. He spoke to the Cape Cod Times part of the USA TODAY network. Let's hear what he had to say. Jeff Voorhees: The third victim to get eaten by the shark in that movie back 50 years ago. Day two, we tried. Your leg came out of the water. Day three, your arm came out of the water. And then day five, Spielberg finally goes, "This is taking too long." He goes, "This time we got a different plan." He goes, "We got two guys in wetsuits. They're going to be underwater. When that thing explodes, each going to grab one of your legs, lift you in and out of the water a few times, and then pull you under and give you air." Taylor Wilson: It's the 50th anniversary of this summer. How are fans, how are former, you mentioned part of this, but former cast members and members of this production marking the 50th anniversary? Marco della Cava: In terms of how the cast is marking it, it's a good question. I mean, Richard Dreyfus famously doesn't like talking about Jaws. Spielberg rarely talks about Jaws. It was a long time ago, but I think it's mostly the fans, young and old, and therefore you're going to see Jaws on television quite often over the next few months. There's going to be a re-release of the actual movie, I believe in August. And there are lots of documentaries as well coming out. So anyone who likes the movie is going to be able to learn a lot more about it. Taylor Wilson: And Mark, are you still staying away from the ocean all these years after seeing Jaws? Marco della Cava: I don't stay away from it, but as one of the people I interviewed said, "I don't turn my back to the horizon." Taylor Wilson: Fair enough. Marco della Cava is a national correspondent with USA TODAY joining us here on the 50th anniversary of Jaws. Thanks, Marco. Marco della Cava: Thank you. ♦ Taylor Wilson: Thanks for listening to The Excerpt. We're produced by Shannon Rae Greene and Kelly Monahan, and our executive producer is Laura Beatty. You can get to podcast wherever you get your audio. And if you're on a smart speaker, just ask for The Excerpt. As always, you can email us at podcasts@ I'm Taylor Wilson and I'll be back tomorrow with more of The Excerpt from USA TODAY.
USA Today
6 hours ago
- Politics
- USA Today
President Trump says US 'may' or 'may not' strike Iran
President Trump says US 'may' or 'may not' strike Iran | The Excerpt On Thursday's episode of The Excerpt podcast: President Donald Trump is weighing U.S. actions amid Israel and Iran's ongoing strikes. Plus, MAGA infighting grows on the issue. And there are risks for Trump of 'regime change' in Iran: Just ask George W. Bush. USA TODAY Supreme Court Correspondent Maureen Groppe breaks down the high court's move to uphold Tennessee's ban on transgender minors using puberty blockers and hormone therapy. The Social Security crisis is coming a year earlier than we thought. Karen Read has been acquitted of murder in the death of her police officer boyfriend. The FDA approves a new twice-yearly HIV shot. USA TODAY Chief Political Correspondent Phillip M. Bailey discusses the importance of Juneteenth and how some communities are marking the day. Let us know what you think of this episode by sending an email to podcasts@ Hit play on the player below to hear the podcast and follow along with the transcript beneath it. This transcript was automatically generated, and then edited for clarity in its current form. There may be some differences between the audio and the text. Podcasts: True crime, in-depth interviews and more USA TODAY podcasts right here Taylor Wilson: Good morning. I'm Taylor Wilson, and today is Thursday, June 19th, 2025. This is USA TODAY's The Excerpt. Today, the latest on Trump's decision-making with regards to Iran and Israel strikes. Plus what a Supreme Court decision means for youth gender-affirming care. And today is Juneteenth. ♦ As Israel-Iran strikes continue, President Donald Trump weighing US involvement said he may or may not strike the country. Some conservatives have urged Trump to support Israel more forcefully and use the American military to help destroy Iran's nuclear facilities. Drawing pushback from leading MAGA figures, including Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, Tucker Carlson, and former White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon sparking increasingly growing MAGA infighting on the issue. As for what US involvement would potentially mean for those in the military, the country has some 40,000 troops stationed around the Middle East. Iran Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei responded yesterday to President Trump's call for the country to surrender. Warning that any US strike will have serious irreparable consequences. The President had this to say. President Donald Trump: Well, I don't want to get involved either, but I've been saying for 20 years, maybe longer, that Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. I've been saying it for a long time. And I think they were a few weeks away from having one maybe longer, and they had to sign a document. I think they wish they signed it now. It was a fair deal. And now it's a harder thing to sign. It's a lot of water over the dam. Taylor Wilson: The decision now facing President Donald Trump on Iran over whether to try to overthrow a government seen as unfriendly to the US is one that previous commanders in chief have wrestled with in countries from Iraq to Cuba, often with catastrophic consequences. As our own Washington Bureau Chief Susan Page writes, we have a link to her piece in today's show notes. Israel struck a key Iranian nuclear site earlier today and Iran hit an Israeli hospital. You can stay with throughout the day and the week for the latest from the Middle East. ♦ The Supreme Court has upheld Tennessee's ban on gender-affirming care for minors. I spoke with USA TODAY Supreme Court Correspondent Maureen Groppe for a closer look at the decision. Hey, Maureen. Maureen Groppe: Hey. Taylor Wilson: So starting to hear just what did the justices decide and how did we get to this point? Maureen Groppe: Well, they decided that Tennessee's ban on gender-affirming care for minors does not violate the Equal Protection Clause at the 14th Amendment, which requires the government to treat people in similar situations the same. And that means that the law is subject to the lowest level of judicial review. And it passed that review. As Chief Justice John Roberts put it in the opinion, which he authored, the court is leaving it up to Tennessee's elected officials and the democratic process to decide whether the policy is a good one. That decision was in line with an appeals court decision, which had allowed the 2023 law to take effect after a district judge had ruled against it. Taylor Wilson: This week's decision came five years after the court ruled that transgender people and gay and lesbian people are protected by a landmark civil rights law barring sex discrimination in the workplace. Did that, Maureen, factor into this decision? Maureen Groppe: It did not. Roberts said that that decision hadn't gone beyond the civil rights law issue in that case, and the court didn't have to decide whether it should in this case, and that's because the majority of the court did not find that Tennessee's law treated people differently based on their sex. Instead, they said that the ban is based on the patient's age and what the treatment is being used for. Taylor Wilson: And what did we hear from the dissenting opinion? Maureen Groppe: The three liberal justices dissented. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who wrote a very lengthy dissent read part of it from the bench, and that's done in rare occasions when a justice really wants to emphasize their dissent. And she said that the court had retreated for meaningful judicial review exactly where it matters the most and had abandoned transgender children and their families to, quote, political whims. Taylor Wilson: And Maureen, who cheered this decision this week? Maureen Groppe: Well, Tennessee's Attorney General called it a landmark victory in defense of America's children. He also said the Democratic process prevailed over what he called judicial activism, meaning that the court deferred to the judgment of Tennessee's lawmakers who he said voted to protect kids from irreversible decisions that they can't yet fully understand. Taylor Wilson: All right. And how were transgender advocates reacting? Maureen Groppe: Well, they called it a painful setback, and it came at a time when transgender people are increasingly under fire in both conservative states and from the new Trump administration. But they did take some solace in the fact that the decision was not as broad as it could have been. They said that means they still have ways to fight some restrictions on medical care as well as other actions taken against transgender people. Taylor Wilson: What do medical experts say about these treatments? Maureen Groppe: This type of care that was banned in Tennessee is supported by every major medical organization in the United States, including the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Psychiatric Association. Those groups say this care is appropriate in certain circumstances and the decision about whether to use it should be left to families and their doctors. But the courts' majority, they focus more on the fact that some European countries have tightened restrictions on these treatments. Taylor Wilson: Of course, the focus here was on Tennessee, but what's the broader significance of this move from the high court beyond Tennessee? Maureen Groppe: About half the states have similar bans and this decisions means that they're more likely to be upheld if they're challenged. But transgender rights advocates say they think they can still fight some of them. Taylor Wilson: All right, Maureen Groppe covers the Supreme Court for USA TODAY. I appreciate the insight as always, Maureen. Maureen Groppe: Thanks for having me. ♦ Taylor Wilson: Social Security may run dry sooner than expected. New federal projections released yesterday show that the combined Social Security Trust funds will pay 100% of benefits until 2034 before becoming depleted. That date is one year earlier than the Social Security Administration reported a year ago. That administration faces a funding crisis in the not so distant future. Trustees say The projected shortfall in retirement benefits has risen to $25.1 trillion through 2099, up from $22.6 trillion a year ago. Retirement advocates sounded alarm at the findings. You can read more with a link in today's show notes. ♦ Massachusetts jury found Karen Read not guilty of the most serious charges and guilty on a lesser charge related to the 2022 death of her Boston police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe. The decision ends a weeks long trial that has drawn intense attention from true-crime fans across the country. The jury convicted Read of operating a vehicle under the influence but not on charges of second degree murder and leaving the scene of a collision resulting in death. Read was sentenced to one year probation. Prosecutors accused Read of backing into O'Keefe with her Lexus SUV in a drunken rage and leaving him to die in the snow after a night out drinking with friends in 2022. Her defense team claimed she was framed for the death by police who beat O'Keefe, let a dog attack him, threw him in the snow, and then purposefully botched the investigation. ♦ The Food and Drug Administration has approved Gilead's HIV prevention drug, a twice a year injectable medication that clinical trials show prevents new infections. Advocates say the long-acting medication is promising because it's more convenient than existing HIV prevention drugs that must be taken daily. Will sell for an annual price of around $28,000. The company said that price is comparable to existing HIV prevention drugs and that it will work with insurers to obtain broad coverage of the drug. ♦ Today is Juneteenth marking events that took place 160 years ago in Galveston, Texas where Union troops arrived to proclaim that more than 250,000 enslaved Black people in the state were free two and a half years after President Abraham Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation. I caught up with USA TODAY, Chief Political Correspondent Phillip M. Bailey, to discuss how several communities keep emancipation stories alive and what Juneteenth means this year. Well, thanks for joining me, sir Phillip M. Bailey: Taylor, how are you? Taylor Wilson: I'm well. Thanks for wrapping on Phillip from Texas to New England, Concord, Massachusetts is seen in some ways as the home of the American Revolution. But tell us about some of the efforts there to push back really on the whitewashing of American history. Phillip M. Bailey: Look, when you think of New England and the birthplace of the American Revolution, right alongside that are Black patriots, Black Americans at the founding of the country who are really calling out the contradiction of slavery, but at the same time embedded in the fight that ultimately created the United States. And I think that was important to show it in these vignettes and these different communities that we touched on and reported on. The Robbins House, which is this 544 square duplex sits in the heart of the Black community in Concord, Massachusetts. We often think of these issues as in the South. But no, in the north it was just as prevalent. And historians there gave us a look inside The Robbins House, inside there that lived the family of Caesar Robbins, who's a Black patriot and enslaved man who probably gained his freedom from fighting during the American Revolution and covering his history and how it sort of works alongside this story of African-Americans fighting for freedom in a country that had not yet recognized their humanity, not yet recognized the contradiction and the hypocrisy of having a country that calls for everyone to be equal while also still having enslaved people within the country. So connecting you to these sort of well-known names like Frederick Douglass, who does the famous, what is 4th of July to the slave? That's perhaps one of the more well-known speeches, but focusing on other sort of lesser-known figures in Black history, in American history who were calling for emancipation long before it occurred at the country's founding Taylor Wilson: Well, and in your home state of Kentucky, Phillip, I know you spoke with some rural Black Americans who also circle another date on the calendar. How do they celebrate emancipation? Phillip M. Bailey: Here in my old Kentucky home, places like Paducah, places like Hopkinsville, and even in parks going deep to Tennessee celebrate a day called the 8th of August. And that's because during the 19th century, it's not like today where you can get a hold of folks instantaneously put yourself back in the mindset and the time period of how long it took to travel from one state, one place to the other. So emancipation really came depending on the geography of where you were and when the Union soldiers got to you when you first heard that, oh, slavery has ended. 8th of August is often associated with future president Andrew Johnson, who was then a military governor for the union in Tennessee. The legend is that this is celebrated because he freed his slaves on August the eighth, 1863. Other folks you talk to will give different attribution to where it comes from, but for many Black families in Western Kentucky, the 8th of August is their Juneteenth. And long before Juneteenth became a national holiday, folks in parts of Kentucky and Tennessee and other parts of the south, they point to the 8th of August and still do as the emancipation day that they're often have more affinity towards. So you might get an earful when going to certain parts of this country when saying, oh, Juneteenth is the day of jubilation. They'll say, no, no, no, no, here it's 8th of August. So we wanted to call attention to that as well. Taylor Wilson: All right, good to know. And we're speaking now in the summer of 2025. What does Juneteenth mean across America right now in this moment? Phillip M. Bailey: Given the aggressive approach that the Trump administration has taken to diversity, equity, and inclusion programs, and not only just that, but executive orders that the President has signed, rolling back some historic civil rights executive orders, really after the Supreme Court case toppling affirmative action, for many Black Americans there is a feeling that we are going backward rather than forward. And I know always going to be some contention over those issues and debates about race in America, but particularly I think after you saw when Harriet Tubman and Jackie Robinson were taken down from some federal government websites, and even though they were later put back up for a lot of folks we spoke to for this package, Taylor, they would point to that as an example. And there's many people who are afraid of what's going to happen next. For example, with the African-American Museum in DC, there are many folks who we spoke to who conveyed not having a trust anymore, that the US government, that white Americans can be trusted with housing Black history. Many of the folks we spoke to, whether it was in Concord, whether it was in Galveston, whether it was in parts of Maryland speaking to, hey, look, this history has always belonged to us, maybe it was wrong to lend it out to others who didn't really appreciate it, who could at any moment's notice, or based upon one or two elections decide to yank that history away. And I think you're going to see more and more of a call to self-sufficiency, doing for self. I think that more conservative voice within the Black community is going to emerge much more in Trump 2.0 than even the first Trump administration. There's a lot of pessimism that US institutions, the federal government, can be trusted to house this history. Taylor Wilson: Phillip M. Bailey is USA TODAY's Chief Political Correspondent joining us here on Juneteenth. Thank you, Phillip. Phillip M. Bailey: Taylor, as always, man, be free. ♦ Taylor Wilson: Despite the fact that trade schools offer a viable path for financial independence, without the burdensome debt of college trade, schools are still often viewed as less prestigious. Steve Klein: So I think there is a bias against working in the trades, and I think that that's one of the pieces that we have to as a society address. Taylor Wilson: Steve Klein, a researcher from Education Northwest, says that there are many benefits of going to a trade school, but it's not for everybody. He sat down with my colleague, Dana Taylor, and parsed through how high school students can make the right career decision for themselves. You can find that conversation later today, beginning at 4:00 PM eastern Time, right here on The Excerpt. ♦ And thanks for listening. You can get the podcast wherever you get your audio, and if you're on a smart speaker, just ask for The Excerpt. As always, you can email us at podcasts@ I'm Taylor Wilson. I'll be back tomorrow with more of The Excerpt from USA TODAY.
USA Today
2 days ago
- General
- USA Today
One immigrant's story of what it means to be undocumented
One immigrant's story of what it means to be undocumented | The Excerpt On a special episode (first released on June 18, 2025) of The Excerpt podcast: There are an estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants in the U.S. each with their own unique story. This is the story of one of them - Alix Dick. Let us know what you think of this episode by sending an email to podcasts@ Hit play on the player below to hear the podcast and follow along with the transcript beneath it. This transcript was automatically generated, and then edited for clarity in its current form. There may be some differences between the audio and the text. Podcasts: True crime, in-depth interviews and more USA TODAY podcasts right here Taylor Wilson: Hello, I'm Taylor Wilson, and this is a special episode of The Excerpt. There are an estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants in the US, but what does it mean to be undocumented? Every one of their stories is different, and the broad strokes coverage of migration you often hear can't possibly touch on everyone's reality. Alix Dick and Antero Garcia decided to focus on the story of just one undocumented person, Alix herself. Their new book, The Cost of Being Undocumented, One Woman's Reckoning with America's Inhumane Math, is on bookshelves now. And I'm joined by the authors Alix Dick and Antero Garcia to discuss. Thank you both for being here. Antero Garcia: Thank you. Alix Dick: Thank you so much for having us. Taylor Wilson: So Antero, I want to just start with this. How did you two meet and what led to this idea for a book? Antero Garcia: I've spent most of my time, my career as an educational researcher spent in classrooms thinking about educational inequalities and thinking about historically marginalized young people and teachers and communities and families. And during all of that, I was privileged with my wife to have a pair of twins. We hired Alix as our nanny. The pandemic happened and our world shut down to just the five of us in a very small household for a long time. And after Alix was no longer working with us, as my children got older, we really started to explore this question of the kinds of inequalities of what I experienced during this disruption of the pandemic was built on the privilege of being able to employ Alix and to use her labor. And that really led to us having some hard conversations together about what that work looked like. And so I invited her to do participatory research alongside me. There are some difficult conversations between the two of us of how to negotiate what that research process would look like. But that is the impetus is the ways invisible labor helps maneuver even well-intentioned individuals to be able to thrive in this country. Taylor Wilson: Interesting, and we will get to that research partnership here in a bit, but Alix, could you just tell us a bit about you and your family's life in Mexico before you arrived to the US and what spurred the decision to migrate? Alix Dick: I feel that most people believe that our stories begin when we become undocumented, and that's not the case. My story began in Mexico. I grew up with a wonderful family, the happiest kid that you could imagine. I had the best parents, the best siblings, and then life happened and tragedy hit. And unfortunately during that time there was so many economic issues that my parents lost at all in the process. They used to be very successful business owners, and when things got really bad, my parents weren't able to pay off debt. So we started receiving life threats and during that process we got in trouble with a lot of dangerous people. And then my dad got sick in that process when we were trying to stay safe, and unfortunately he passed away and the only thing that we have left was to immigrate to the United States to save our lives. Taylor Wilson: Alix, I'm so sorry for your loss and that you went through that. I can't imagine what that decision process was like to then have to cross the border. And we'll talk a little bit more about your story here in a second. But Antero, you call this a unique research partnership between you and Alix. I want to hear a little bit more about that. And can you tell us a bit about the platica approach to telling this story? What is that? Antero Garcia: I think one of the unique things is oftentimes in educational research, in social science research in general, you go in, and this was my pitch to Alix, was, "I'm going to interview you. I'm going to engage in ..." And I'll talk about platica in a moment, "... But we're going to have these conversations. We're going to do some co-research together, and then we're going to publish this in a boring academic journal, and I'm going to change your name in. I'll give you a pseudonym." That was the intention. And very early on, Alix was very clear that that's not the case. "This is my story, and if we're going to do this work together, I need to be recognized as a co-contributor." And I think it really helped me think through the limitations of how social science research functions and who gets to participate in those systems. And so in moving through this and thinking through, all right, we're going to move beyond the boundaries of what traditional research looks like, and we're going to do this alongside each other, that invited us to engage in platica, a Spanish word for having conversations with one another. And so this was no longer me interviewing Alix, it wasn't subject, participant and going back and forth. Instead, this was having co-constructive conversations. She would share fears, anxieties, hopes, dreams. I would share the same. There's always differentials in our perspectives and understandings. And it meant that oftentimes we didn't necessarily agree on the same things. There's a chapter in the book and we had ongoing conversations around things like faith and Christianity and very different perspectives on these. And that led to being able to get a more robust understanding of the world around us by trying to bridge the shared sense of empathy between different worldviews, even with shared similar social justice commitments. Taylor Wilson: Alix, you outline the costs of undocumented life in this book in a variety of ways, and I want to just break down a few of those sections. Let's talk about the cost of time. What did you mean when you wrote that, Alix? Alix Dick: I feel that the first thing that might come to people's mind might be, "Oh, the cost. It has to do with money, right?" But how about the time? How about the youth that has been stolen from me? How about the years that life is changing and moving and I'm missing my family? I'm missing a lot of things, and that has a lot to do with time. There is many things I cannot recover and I would say time was the first one of them. Taylor Wilson: Tell us about the cost of mental health as well, Alix. I know this is a big part of the book as well. Alix Dick: Yes, mental health is very important for me because I've been dealing with mental health since the beginning, even before I got to United States. But life here has made it absolutely more difficult. And that was important for me, especially in the immigrant community because there is so much stigma about talking about these issues, talking about being depressed, and a lot of times we don't even have that luxury to sit down and actually understand, is this because I'm really busy or is this because I'm actually in need of medications? Or the fact that it's so difficult for an undocumented person to get the help that is needed is also alarming and something that I never thought that I would be part of. But the struggle to be able to get the help that I needed just to barely survive was very alarming to me. And that was one of the main reasons why I was like, "I need to speak about this." Taylor Wilson: So much of the migrant experience as it pertains to the US comes alongside this long held ideal of the American dream. We hear this all the time. What made you want to outline this cost of dreaming as well? Antero Garcia: So I'll say a couple things around that. And one is, as you've been going through and asking these questions, I think you're highlighting, for folks who are listening to this, that each chapter is a different cost, the cost of time, the cost of mental health, the cost of dreaming. And part of this is my own bitter sense that the people who oftentimes get to tell these stories are economists. And oftentimes this is a way where can we use these tools to think of other ways to imagine costs. And so I want to say before I answer around cost of dreaming, that we do offer a breakdown of the actual costs towards the end of this book. We try to offer a financial number. Some people might think it's too big, some people might think it's too small. But I want to name that because I think there's an economic cost to Alix's dreams. Before she came to the United States, one of her dreams, one of her aspirations, one of the things that she was making legitimate progress towards was to be a lawyer. This was a thing that she intended to do. She was receiving the marks in school and she was a pre-law student, tried to continue that work in the United States and time and again, financially is not able to do that. And so that's a double cost, right? Both the time and money that Alix invested into this, that she lost and will no longer come back, as well as the lost cost for the United States and for the rest of the world of not having a lawyer with the kinds of gifts and sensibilities that Alix has. So when we think of the cost of dreaming, it's not just a cost that's felt and shouldered by undocumented folks in this country because of the things that they may feel sad or bad about not being able to achieve while they're here. But it's also the ways that American progress, the American dream, is no longer being able to move forward. To use particular kinds of rhetoric, our country is not as great because we're not fulfilling the kinds of dreams of all of the people who currently live in this country. And so I just want to think of both sides of that cost. Taylor Wilson: Antero, many of the people who buy this book are already sympathetic, potentially, with undocumented migrants. How do you reach readers who are not? Is this about building awareness? How do see this? Antero Garcia: Yeah, so on the one hand I think yes, a lot of people who are reading this are going to probably be do-gooder people who ... And thank you. Hopefully those folks who are reading this, folks who I think are aligned with this and might hand this book or tell this story to a neighbor. This is an invitation to say, "This is one person's life. Imagine the myriad other stories that aren't told in this book that we could imagine." So it's an opportunity for a dialogue. I think the other side of this is there's a couple of chapters in here that we intentionally tried to think through, who could hear this story that might not otherwise? And so I think we are hoping to think through where are places, where are levers to think through changing the nature of this conversation? And so that might be one local communities, book groups. I think those are some of the ways that we're trying to think about how to get this into other people's hands. Taylor Wilson: All right. I want to end with a question for both of you. What's next as it pertains to this work beyond this book? Alix Dick: Well, I'm starting to work in other books that I want to write, which they are a little happier than this one. Antero Garcia: I think this work continues every Thursday. Alix And I co-edit a website called La Cuenta. It stands for the bill in Spanish, to again use the same language of the cost. And that is a site that other than myself is run and edited and features the voices of undocumented communities and writers all across this country. It's an invitation. So anyone who's watching or listening to this that would like to contribute, we would love to have your words featured on La Cuenta. And this is a place where we're continuing to tell this work outside of the story of just one individual. Taylor Wilson: The book is called The Cost of Being Undocumented, One Woman's Reckoning with America's Inhumane Math, and it's on bookshelves now. Thank you both so much for joining me. Great conversation. Antero Garcia: Thank you. Alix Dick: Thank you. Taylor Wilson: Thanks to our senior producers, Shannon Rae Green and Kaely Monahan for their production assistance. Our executive producer is Laura Beatty. Let us know what you think of this episode by sending a note to podcasts@ Thanks for listening. I'm Taylor Wilson, and I'll be back tomorrow morning with another episode of The Excerpt.
USA Today
2 days ago
- Politics
- USA Today
Pentagon sends warplanes to Middle East as Iran-Israel conflict continues
Pentagon sends warplanes to Middle East as Iran-Israel conflict continues | The Excerpt On Wednesday's episode of The Excerpt podcast: The Pentagon has shifted warplanes and an aircraft carrier to the Middle East. Plus, President Donald Trump threatens Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on social media. And Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene and Tucker Carlson urge Trump to stay out of Iran, exposing a MAGA rift. USA TODAY National Correspondent Will Carless discusses how as 'lone actor' attacks rise, Trump is dismantling the program aimed at spotting them. A poll finds the majority of Americans oppose Trump's tax bill. USA TODAY Washington Bureau Chief Susan Page breaks down what some recent primaries can tell us ahead of midterms next year. The Florida Panthers are Stanley Cup champions again. Let us know what you think of this episode by sending an email to podcasts@ Hit play on the player below to hear the podcast and follow along with the transcript beneath it. This transcript was automatically generated, and then edited for clarity in its current form. There may be some differences between the audio and the text. Podcasts: True crime, in-depth interviews and more USA TODAY podcasts right here Taylor Wilson: Good morning. I'm Taylor Wilson, and today is Wednesday, June 18th, 2025. This is The Excerpt. Today, the latest on US actions as it pertains to Israel and Iran. Plus, as lone actor attacks rise, Trump cuts a program aimed at spotting them. And what lessons can we take away from some recent primaries? ♦ The Pentagon has shifted warplanes and an aircraft carrier to the Middle East as the conflict between Israel and Iran continues. Still, US officials insist the moves are defensive in nature. Meanwhile, President Donald Trump threatened Iran's Supreme Leader as he pushed Tehran to end its retaliatory airstrikes on Israel and warned against any threats to US service members in the region. Trump wrote on Truth social, "We know exactly where the so-called Supreme Leader is hiding. He is an easy target, but is safe there." He went on to say that the US is not going to take him out, at least for now. He also added a two-word post writing in all caps the words, unconditional surrender. While many Republicans might back any Trump military action in regards to the conflict, conservative pundit Tucker Carlson and representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, who sat near Trump in the VIP section at his military parade over the weekend, are among the MAGA stars pressing for the US military to stay out of the fight, which they say is out of step with the movement's principles. Thousands of people were fleeing Tehran and other major cities according to Iranian media as Iran and Israel launched new missile strikes at each other in the early morning hours. ♦ As politically motivated attacks by lone actors surge across the country, the Trump administration is dismantling the office that oversees efforts to identify and stop such violent extremists. I spoke with USA TODAY National Correspondent Will Carless for more. Will, thanks for joining me. Will Carless: Thanks for having me. Taylor Wilson: So I want to just start here as we talk about lone actors. Are these types of attacks on the rise, Will? Will Carless: Yes. I mean, look, lone actors are nothing new. We've had lone actor attacks for decades in the United States, but there has been a recent surge in them. We're in a very heated political climate, and we've seen a good half dozen of these attacks since the beginning of the year. So for example, there was an attack in Washington, DC in which the young Jewish couple were shot and killed by a man with a political grievance. There was an incident in Boulder, Colorado just a couple of weeks ago, people might remember where a man attacked a parade with some firebombs. And then of course there was a surrender shooting over the weekend of the lawmakers in Minnesota. So there's been a gradual uptick in these since the beginning of the year. Taylor Wilson: All right, and how is the Trump administration cutting a program aimed at, in theory, spotting this sort of violence before it happens, Will? Will Carless: So if you talk to experts in terrorism and extremism, they'll tell you that these are extraordinarily difficult attacks to predict and to intervene, do anything about. If you think about it, we're not talking about members of extremist groups, like members of say a neo-Nazi group going out and committing violence. Those groups tend to be on the radar screen of law enforcement. They're watching, they're paying attention to them. But what we've seen increasingly over the last few months is just individuals who, for whatever reason, go out and act on that political grievance and either kill people or injure people. And those people didn't really have any signs of what they were going to do. The only way to really predict this is that people, even though they might not post about it on social media, they might not make their intentions clear. People do sometimes tell loved ones, or they tell friends, or they tell co-workers. And so there are a network of programs around the country where people can report that. They can call a hotline and they can say, "Hey, look, I'm a bit concerned about my co-worker," or my son or my daughter or my dad. And what the Trump administration has done is to roll back the government agency that funds those, that gives grants to those programs, essentially shutting them down. Taylor Wilson: How does the Department of Homeland Security defend this kind of dismantling of this program? Will Carless: Well, they say that this program, which is known as CP3, is really just aimed at targeting conservatives. They say that it's all about stymieing free speech, and they say that it's been used to overwhelmingly target conservative groups and not to look at left-wing groups. They also say that it's ineffectual and it doesn't really do anything, and so they don't want to spend the money on it and they want to shut it down. That's what DHS told us. Now, if you talk to the people who ran the program as I have, they'll defend against that and say, "That's not true. We intervene in hundreds of cases where people could go out and do something." These programs are able to intervene and get people mental health counseling or get them some sort of treatment or help to make sure that they don't go out and commit one of these atrocities. So it depends who you talk to. But yes, certainly under the Trump administration, they see this program as largely ineffectual and useless and a waste of money. Taylor Wilson: And as you write, programs supported by CP3, they also help to get people away from extremist groups, a lot of these groups that you follow and cover on a daily basis. Will, what can you tell us about this angle? Will Carless: So what people who watch extremist groups are concerned about at the moment is particularly post the January insurrection pardons in which anybody involved in the January 6th insurrection, including people who were accused and convicted of plotting against this country and of committing insurrection and of committing seditious conspiracy, they were all pardoned by President Trump. And that includes the leaders of the largest extremist groups or the most popular extremist groups in the United States. So what the experts are concerned about is that those groups are now regrouping. They've been given a green light by the federal government to say, go out there and do whatever you need to do. Do your training and mass weapons, write up your constitutions and your mandates, and train and form your compounds. And that's what they're worried about. They see groups like the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys gradually regaining strength and it should be said these are groups that really, January 6th and the prosecutions that followed, really hobbled those groups and took a lot of the power out of them, and they're now re-strengthening. Taylor Wilson: Folks can find Will's full story with a link in today's show notes. Will covers extremism and emerging issues for USA TODAY. Thanks as always, Will. Will Carless: Thank you. ♦ Taylor Wilson: A majority of Americans, 64%, have an unfavorable view of President Trump's tax policy bill, according to a new poll from the nonpartisan health research group KFF. The bill would extend Trump's 2017 tax cuts, implement new tax cuts for tips and overtime, pour billions into the administration's deportation plans, and make cuts to Medicaid and food stamps. It's expected to be the biggest legislative accomplishment of Trump's second term so far if the Republican-led Congress can find the votes to pass it through both chambers. It passed the house last month and is currently being tweaked in the Senate. He poll found responses skewed heavily on party lines, though. The vast majority of Democrats, 85%, and Independents, 71%, have an unfavorable opinion of the bill while 61% of Republicans have a favorable opinion of it. Among Republicans, support for the bill is also divided between those who do and don't identify as supporters of Trump's Make America Great Again movement. Two-thirds of non-MAGA Republicans had an unfavorable view, while 72% of MAGA Republicans had a favorable view. ♦ What lessons can we take from a handful of primaries across the country? I spoke with USA TODAY Washington Bureau Chief Susan Page to find out. Susan, always a pleasure. Thanks for joining me today. Susan Page: Hey Taylor, it's great to be with you. Taylor Wilson: So Susan, let's get to some of these primary lessons starting with Virginia where you write that Democrats are revved up. What did we learn from this race and how else are we seeing some of this democratic energy play out around the country? Susan Page: Here's the amazing thing about Virginia. The Democratic gubernatorial nomination is not contested. Abigail Spanberger has in effect already won it, and yet Democrats are still turning out to vote. In fact, turnout in the early vote is almost 60% higher than it was four years ago when there was a contested race. So that tells you that Democrats are revved up and ready to go in a selection. Taylor Wilson: Well, as for the GOP, this is still very much President Donald Trump's party. What did you learn from his hold on the GOP in New Jersey and elsewhere? Susan Page: Here's some amazing thing about New Jersey. Jack Ciattarelli is now running for governor for the third time, seeking the Republican nomination. The first time around he said Trump was a charlatan. The second time around, he's just kept his distance from Donald Trump. This time, he courted Donald Trump. He went to his Bedminster golf club, he posted pictures of him with Trump, and he won Trump's nomination. That was very important to him in having a real landslide victory in the Republican primary there last week. Taylor Wilson: Well, you know Susan, everyone's been trying to forecast who, if anyone, might grab a similar hold of the Democrats. Have primaries taught us anything here? Susan Page: Primaries have taught us that Democrats are everywhere and nowhere. You just look at New Jersey, the Democratic vote there where Mikie Sherrill, the congresswoman, won the Democratic nomination. She won it with 34% of the vote. That was enough to win, not really impressive. The two liberal candidates got more votes than she did, if you combine them, about 36% of the vote. And the two most moderate or conservative Democrats got 19% of the vote, also a significant share. So there are no conclusions you can draw from that outcome to where Democrats will go ideologically. Taylor Wilson: Well, I guess New York's mayoral race also shows us another angle of some of these democratic divisions. What did you really take away from what's been happening out in New York City? Susan Page: Well, New York is sort of sui generis. It has its own politics, it's decidedly liberal. There are 11 candidates in this mayoral primary. They also used rank choice voting where voters can list up to five people in the order they would like to see them elected. So it's a little different than most places. In New York, we do see a kind of ideological battle. The front-runner is former governor Andrew Cuomo, who is pretty much a centrist, but there's a newcomer, Zohran Mamdani, who is just 33 years old, and he has come on strong. He's the strongest challenger to Cuomo and he is a Democratic socialist who has been endorsed by AOC and Bernie Sanders. Taylor Wilson: All right, Susan, a long way to go until midterms next year, but what else are you keeping an eye on between now and then? Susan Page: The one thing that tells you the most about what's going to happen in the midterms, the President's approval rating. If a president is doing pretty well at the midterm point, he tends to do pretty well in the midterms. But if the President is underwater, if he's in trouble, that is where voters let him know it. Taylor Wilson: All right, brilliant analysis, as always. Susan Page is USA TODAY's Washington Bureau Chief. Thank you, Susan. Susan Page: Thank you. ♦ Taylor Wilson: The Florida Panthers are Stanley Cup champions, winning the hockey championship for the second straight year over the Edmonton Oilers. Edmonton continues to search for its first cup since 1990. ♦ And coming up later today, there are an estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants in the US, each with their own unique story. Alix Dick: I feel that most people believe that our stories begin when we become undocumented, and that's not the case. My story began in Mexico. I have the best parents, the best siblings, and then life happened, and tragedy hit. Taylor Wilson: That was Alix Dick, co-author of The Cost of Being Undocumented, describing her reconciliation with being just one in a vast sea of people in the US without documentation, currently under attack. She and her co-author on Antero Garcia joined me for a frank conversation of how undocumented immigrants are experiencing this inflection point in politics amid a global immigration surge. You can hear that episode right here on this feed today, beginning at 4:00 PM Eastern Time. ♦ And thanks for listening to The Excerpt. You can get the podcast wherever you get your audio, and as always, you can find us on email at podcasts@ I'm Taylor Wilson. I'll be back tomorrow with more of The Excerpt from USA TODAY.
USA Today
3 days ago
- Politics
- USA Today
Trump leaves G7 early, urges everyone in Tehran to evacuate
Trump leaves G7 early, urges everyone in Tehran to evacuate | The Excerpt On Tuesday's episode of The Excerpt podcast: USA TODAY White House Correspondent Francesca Chambers breaks down President Donald Trump's decision to abruptly leave the Group of Seven summit. Multiple lawmakers push to curb Trump's war powers on Iran. A federal prosecutor said Monday that the man accused of shooting two Minnesota lawmakers went to the homes of two other state officials the morning he launched a targeted "political assassination." USA TODAY Government Accountability Reporter Erin Mansfield discusses the trickle-down effect of Trump's NIH budget cuts. Trump Organization launches a new mobile cell service. Let us know what you think of this episode by sending an email to podcasts@ Hit play on the player below to hear the podcast and follow along with the transcript beneath it. This transcript was automatically generated, and then edited for clarity in its current form. There may be some differences between the audio and the text. Podcasts: True crime, in-depth interviews and more USA TODAY podcasts right here Taylor Wilson: Good morning. I'm Taylor Wilson. And today is Tuesday, June 17th, 2025. This is The Excerpt. Today why Trump left the G7 early. Plus the trickle-down effect of his massive budget cuts to the National Institute's Health. And we're learning more about the suspect and the shootings of Minnesota lawmakers. ♦ President Donald Trump abruptly left the Group of Seven Summit in Alberta, Canada yesterday due to the current situation in the Middle East, according to the White House. Trump also urged residents of Tehran to evacuate immediately after telling Iran it should have signed a nuclear deal with the US when talks were on the table. For more on his decision to leave early and the ongoing conflict between Israel and Iran, I spoke last night with USA TODAY White House correspondent Francesca Chambers. Taylor Wilson: Hey Francesca. Francesca Chambers: Hey Taylor. Thanks for having me. Taylor Wilson: Thanks for hopping on. So let's start with the big news here. Trump leaving G7 early. Why did he do so? What changed? Francesca Chambers: Well, Taylor, the president left abruptly halfway through the summit. The White House said it was because of the deepening conflict that was taking place in the Middle East, just as the president said on social media that residents of Tehran should leave the city. Taylor Wilson: So obviously these G7 meetings were already being held as Israel and Iran continued to exchange strikes in recent days. How did really just this broad conflict change the dynamic in Canada this week? Francesca Chambers: So Taylor, the President's tariffs had been expected to be front and center at the gathering. It's an economic summit after all. And those conversations still took place at the G7 conference before Donald Trump left. But Israel and Iran and the fighting between the two, that overshadowed the rest of the summit. President Trump had conversations about the issue with nearly every world leader that he met with on Monday before he left. Taylor Wilson: Francesca, Trump's decision to abruptly leave like this and return to Washington. How is this landing with other leaders at G7? Francesca Chambers: Well, the president said as he was on his way out that they didn't mind, because they understood the situation that he was dealing with. And asked about it specifically, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney just sidestepped the question a little bit, and said what a good summit had been, and how grateful they were that Donald Trump came. Taylor Wilson: You and I had spoken earlier in the day about this planned meeting between Trump and Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy that was set forward today, Tuesday. Presumably that won't be the case now, Francesca. What's next in terms of, I guess, the expectation for that meeting between Zelenskyy and Trump? Francesca Chambers: Right. And it's not the only meeting that President Trump had to cancel. The White House had previously said he would be meeting with Mexico's president Claudia Sheinbaum while he was at the G7 as well. Notably, the president is expected to head to the NATO summit next week in the Netherlands. So this won't be the last time that he gathers with these world leaders and talks about the Russia-Ukraine war. Taylor Wilson: All right. Francesca covers the White House for USA TODAY. Thanks, Francesca. Francesca Chambers: Thanks so much. ♦ Taylor Wilson: The Group of Seven Nations expressed support for Israel in a statement last night, and labeled its rival Iran as a source of instability in the Middle East, with the G7 leaders urging broader de-escalation of hostilities in the region. Meanwhile, democratic Senator Tim Kaine introduced legislation yesterday to prevent President Trump from using military force against Iran without Congress's authorization. During Trump's first term in 2020, Kaine introduced a similar resolution to rein in Trump's ability to wage war against Iran. That measure passed both the Senate and House with some Republican support, but did not get enough votes to win over the President's veto. While some Republicans, including Senator Rand Paul have said the US should avoid war, most of Trump's fellow Republicans who control Congress have shown little desire for opposing him, and are likely to support Trump if he decides to get more involved in the conflict. Independent Senator Bernie Sanders also introduced legislation yesterday to prohibit the use of federal funds for any use of military force in or against Iran, absent specific congressional authorization. ♦ The man accused of shooting two Minnesota lawmakers went to the homes of two other state officials the morning he launched a targeted political assassination, a federal prosecutor said yesterday. 57-year-old Vance Boelter appeared in a federal court and said he cannot afford a lawyer. A judge ordered public defense for him, and granted the prosecutor's request that he be detained in federal custody pending a trial. A combined detention and preliminary hearing has also been set for June 27th. Federal affidavit released yesterday, says he was impersonating a police officer and embarked on a planned campaign of stalking and violence. He faces six federal charges, including multiple counts of murder and stalking, opening the possibility of the death penalty if convicted. His arrest came after state representative Melissa Hortman and her husband Mark were shot and killed. And state Senator John Hoffman and his wife Yvette were shot multiple times and wounded outside Minneapolis. ♦ We're learning more about the trickle-down effect of President Trump's massive budget cuts to the National Institutes of Health. I spoke with USA TODAY government accountability reporter, Erin Mansfield for more. Hello, Erin. Erin Mansfield: Hi, how are you? Taylor Wilson: I'm well, thanks. Thanks for hopping back on The Excerpt. So just starting here, how exactly has the Trump administration slashed parts of the NIH? What have we seen in recent months? Erin Mansfield: We've seen targeted cuts of grants from universities all over the country, research universities. These are grants that professors, graduate students, doctors use. And they have slashed things that they think promote diversity, equity, inclusion, things that they believe are too focused on coronavirus, which peaked about five years ago, and also some grants involving vaccine hesitancy. And then going forward, Trump has proposed in his budget to cut $18 billion from the NIH budget. And that is huge. That is the biggest of any agency when you go and look at his budget, and it's significant. Taylor Wilson: Well, let's get into some of the specifics there. You mentioned Coronavirus, in terms of just how all this is impacting research, it does seem like the administration is going after projects that I perceived as being focused on COVID-19 in terms of some of these cuts. What did you hear specifically in reporting this? Erin Mansfield: There are some. The big one that was really notable is something called the World Reference Center. And it's sort of a library of infectious diseases. And it's held at the University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston, Texas. According to the scientific director for Galveston National Laboratory, they actually looked at COVID. And the reasoning behind that had to do with it was an emergency, everyone shifted to that. And what the gentleman Scott Weaver said was that when he received the letter, which USA TODAY has reviewed, it said that COVID is over. We're cutting off all Coronavirus grants. And this is not necessary. And this is something that Mr. Weaver thinks was done in error. He thinks that whoever decided to cut it really didn't have an understanding of what they were doing. But nonetheless, there was at one point research related to Coronavirus, so it got cut. Taylor Wilson: Well, and Erin, there have also been research programs targeted that were mistaken for DEI-related projects. What can you tell us on this point? Erin Mansfield: So this is obviously no secret that the Trump administration has been very anti-DEI. I spoke to Andy Johns from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. And he said that some of the most stinging cuts have been ones that might be perceived as diversity, equity inclusion, but in his book are not. And he said there are cases when maybe a scientist is doing a study and they collected demographic information and they're going to do a demographic analysis. So they'll say, "Hey, NIH, can we do everything else, and just omit that analysis?" And they're not letting them. One of the examples also comes from Texas, from Scott Weaver who talked about a grant that helps people who get bachelor's degrees from small colleges that aren't really research colleges. Well, they might want to get into a program that'll help them get some research experience before they applied to a PhD program. Weaver said that grant was cut on the grounds that it was DEI. And he doesn't quite agree with it. He said it's really a bad opportunity. But we've seen a health equity hub, that according to the head Daniel Mullins, he said that it was really disease agnostic. It was kind of infrastructure to help people achieve health equity. That was cut. That was almost a $10 million grant over five years. Kim Elaine Barrett has worked a lot toward building a biomedical workforce that's more representative of the population. She said she had to see that effort just get cut. People are really heartbroken by the DEI cuts. Taylor Wilson: We've heard this argument from Trump officials that it's all about waste and getting rid of waste in terms of these cuts in recent months. Is that the fundamental argument here when it comes to NIH? What are we hearing from the Trump side? Erin Mansfield: So Kush Desai, a spokesman for the White House gave us a statement. It said in recent years, Americans have lost confidence and are increasingly polarized healthcare and research apparatus that has been obsessed with DEI and COVID, which the majority of Americans moved on from years ago. And his argument is that they're going to address the chronic disease epidemic and return to a gold standard of science. So there really is a perception in the Trump administration that the scientific research world has lost its way and gone off course. Taylor Wilson: You at the top, Erin, mentioned that further cuts are expected in this space. What might be coming down the pike, and what would it mean for some of this other existing research? Erin Mansfield: We're going to have to see that as Donald Trump's budget works its way through Congress. The top line sum is $18 billion. And that is huge. A lot of the public universities I spoke with talked about losing tens of million dollars here and there. But we're talking about a huge cut to universities all over the country, including public universities. Yes, including Harvard, including Columbia, but also including the places in American's backyards. Taylor Wilson: And just in terms of the pushback here, Erin, I mean, what kinds of challenges have we seen into these cuts? Erin Mansfield: Yeah. So there was actually a federal judge on Monday who said that the termination of these NIH grants was void and illegal. And he accused the Trump administration of discriminating against minorities and LGBT people. That's according to Reuters. So these challenges to existing cuts are definitely not going away. Taylor Wilson: Erin Mansfield is a government accountability reporter with USA TODAY. Thanks, Erin. Erin Mansfield: Thank you, Taylor. ♦ Taylor Wilson: Trump organization, the holding company for President Trump's business ventures has announced the launch of a new cellular service and cell phone. It'll be dubbed Trump Mobile. And its first phone the T-One will use an Android operating system, and the mobile plan itself is expected to be made available through the three major cellular carriers. You can read more with a link in today's show notes. ♦ Thanks for listening to The Excerpt. You can get the podcast wherever you get your audio. And as always, if you want to email us, you can find us at podcasts@ I'm Taylor Wilson, and I'll be back tomorrow with more of The Excerpt from USA TODAY.
