Dryden Gold Corp. (DRY:TSXV; DRYGF:OTCQB) has announced its participation in three significant mining investment conferences scheduled for November 2024. Read more about the company's plans to showcase major project updates and connect with global investors at these key events.

A photo of La Soufrière erupting Friday in St. Vincent. The blast could be sending ash as far as Jamaica and South America.; Credit: Zen Punnett/AFP via Getty Images

La Soufrière, the highest peak on the Caribbean island of St. Vincent, began to explosively erupt Friday morning, forcing thousands to evacuate as ash and smoke filled the sky.

And a larger eruption may be on the way.

Richard Robertson, a geologist with the University of the West Indies Seismic Research Centre, said the volcano is in its explosive eruption phase. The initial explosion of dust and debris St. Vincent experienced Friday is likely just the beginning.

"The explosive eruption has started and it is possible you could have more explosions like these," he said during a press conference. "The first one is not necessarily the worst one, the first bang is not necessarily the biggest bang this volcano will give."

Ralph Gonsalves, the prime minister of St. Vincent and the Grenadines, ordered residents on the northern side of the island to evacuate Thursday out of the red volcano danger zone. The Associated Press reported some 16,000 people were forced to flee their homes.

Soot and ash fell throughout the night, blanketing neighborhoods and streets across the island Saturday morning. Robertson said the ash is expected to fall for the next handful of days, possibly even weeks.

The dome of the volcano, which is about 3,100 feet long and more than 820 feet wide, was destroyed in Friday's eruption, catapulting 460 million cubic feet of debris into the atmosphere. The ash could reach as far as Jamaica and parts of South America, Robertson said.

The last time La Soufrière had a major eruption was in 1979, which lasted several weeks. This eruption, Robertson said, "will more than likely be a bigger eruption than 1979 was." He added, "We don't know how much material is down there that wants to come out."

The fine ash particles, which are difficult to clean up, pose a respiratory risk, especially for people with underlying issues. Robertson recommended that individuals who have decided to stay on the island do their best to clean the ash before it settles or gets wet.

With more potential eruptions looming, Robertson advised residents to move as far south as possible. La Soufrière could be heard rumbling and grumbling throughout the night, he said, from the sound of magma moving inside the volcano.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Vehicles are covered with ash coming from the St. Vincent eruption of La Soufrière volcano, on the outskirts of Bridgetown, Barbados, on Sunday.; Credit: Chris Brandis/AP

Conditions on the Caribbean island of St. Vincent have worsened, as La Soufrière volcano continues to push ash and debris into the atmosphere. Dozens of individuals have been rescued from the northern part of the island after refusing to evacuate last week. Officials are warning anyone still in the red and orange zones to flee as the mountain presents a new danger to anyone still in the area.

There is evidence of pyroclastic flows, an avalanche of super-heated gas and debris traveling as fast as more than 120 miles per hour along the mountainside, in the areas around the volcano, University of the West Indies Seismic Research Center's lead scientist Richard Robertson said in a Sunday news conference. These flows are the most dangerous trait of the volcano, he said, as opposed to a slow-moving river of lava.

As La Soufrière continues to explosively erupt, ash and debris are launched into the air. Sometimes there isn't enough force behind the materials to continue upwards and the ash plume collapses on itself and it shoots back down, Robertson said. These clouds of gas can reach scalding-hot temperatures and carry car-sized boulders as the flows make their way through valleys along the mountain. Once the pyroclastic flows hit the coast, the sea water begins to boil and the clouds pick up speed, racing across the surface of the water and away from land until they run out of energy.

"These flows are really moving masses of destruction," Robertson said. "They just destroy everything in its path. Even if you have the strongest house in the world, they will just bulldoze it off the ground."

These flows can happen as the volcano goes through periods of explosive activity and venting. Every hour-and-a-half to 3 hours, Robertson explained, La Soufrière rumbles and produces tremors as the mountain vents more ash. This activity can create pyroclastic flows anywhere on the volcano, threatening anyone who didn't evacuate last week.

During the news conference, St. Vincent and the Grenadines Prime Minister Ralph Gonsalves said the coast guard has rescued dozens of people from the northern part of the island since the volcano started to erupt Friday morning. The areas closest to the volcano were ordered to be evacuated last week, but some people decided to stay, putting rescuers at risk.

"I'm pleading with persons, please, it's past the hour to get out," Gonsalves said. "And we will still have to try and get you out."

Some 16,000 people have already evacuated, The Associated Press reported, about 3,200 of whom have fled to 78 government-run shelters.

Robertson said things will likely get worse before they get better. Instruments monitoring the eruption have shown no sign of activity dying down. The volcano, he explained, is showing a similar pattern to the volcano's eruption in 1902 that killed about 1,600 people.

"That means it's probably, unfortunately, going to cause more damage and destruction to St. Vincent," Robertson said.

But the volcano isn't just affecting the people of St. Vincent. The winds have carried ash all the way to Barbados, about 120 miles east. Barbadian Prime Minister Mia Amor Mottley said the country needs to prepare itself for weeks of ashfall and harsh times.

"As bad as it is, it can be worse, and that's the first thing that we need to recognize," she said in a news conference Sunday. "We are living in uncertain times."

Dr. Erouscilla Joseph, director of the UWI Seismic Research Center, said the winds that carry the debris east over the island can then also circle back around, blanketing the island with more ash from the west.

"Unfortunately, the worst case scenario is this can go on for weeks because of the changes and the dynamics of this system," Joseph said. "We have to keep monitoring the seismicity associated with the volcano and advise based on that."

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

• Provide the utmost Child Support Services by always providing excellent customer service to internal and external customers.

• Advocating for children to receive the financial stability that they deserve and providing the best customer service to all that we serve.

• Building relationships with all parties involved as well as stakeholders to obtain an order of support or to enforce an order support, so that children can receive the financial support they need and deserve.

• Striving for excellence in meeting all mandated standards in a fast – paced rewarding environment that ultimately seeks to provide financial stability for children, parents and caretakers.

Bill Cosby gestures outside his home in Elkins Park, Pa., on June 30, 2021, after being released from prison when the Pennsylvania's supreme court overturned his sexual assault conviction. Cosby expressed support for former TV co-star Phylicia Rashad's freedom of speech after she defended him in a tweet.; Credit: Matt Rourke/AP

Bill Cosby called on Howard University to support former co-star Phylicia Rashad's freedom of speech after she expressed support for him when his sexual assault conviction was overturned.

In a statement, Cosby also lashed out at the media, comparing journalists to the rioters who stormed the Capitol in January.

"Howard University you must support ones Freedom of Speech (Ms. Rashad), which is taught or suppose to be taught everyday at that renowned law school, which resides on your campus," Cosby said in a statement provided to NPR by his spokesman Andrew Wyatt.

"This mainstream media has become the Insurrectionists, who stormed the Capitol," Cosby continued in his statement. "Those same Media Insurrectionists are trying to demolish the Constitution of these United State of America on this Independence Day."

Cosby concluded by saying, "WE THE PEOPLE STAND IN SUPPORT OF MS. PHYLICIA RASHAD" in all caps.

Cosby's support of Rashad comes after the actress, who played his TV wife in The Cosby Show, defended the comedian in a tweet. Cosby was released from prison last week when the Pennsylvania Supreme Court vacated his sexual assault conviction on the grounds that his due process rights were violated.

"FINALLY!!!! A terrible wrong is being righted- a miscarriage of justice is corrected!" Rashad said last week.

The tweet has since been removed and Rashad later backpedaled, writing that she "fully support survivors of sexual assault coming forward." She also sent a letter of apology to Howard students

Many Howard alumni had expressed disappointment at the remarks. Howard University responded with its own tweet, stating that Dean Rashad's "initial tweet lacked sensitivity towards survivors of sexual assault."

Rashad was recently named Dean of Howard University's Chadwick Boseman College of Fine Arts.

Rashad, an acclaimed stage and screen artist, graduated from Howard magna cum laude in 1970 with a bachelor's in fine arts. She returned as a guest lecturer and adjunct faculty member.

In a statement announcing her appointment in May, Provost Anthony K. Wutoh said Rashad's "passion for the arts and student success makes her a perfect fit for this role."

One of the students Rashad mentored at Howard was the late actor Chadwick Boseman, for whom the school's College of Fine Arts is named.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Bharti Airtel has awarded a multi-million-dollar contract to IBM to deploy a blockchain -based pan India network which will allow the telco to protect its 284 million subscribers from pesky calls and messages

Panelists in a discussion on ‘Mobility Megatrends 2050’, highlighted that in the next decade, with electrification, autonomous driving, smart and connected infrastructure, modal diversity, and mobility that is integrated, resilient, shared, and sustainable – powered by disruptive business models, will transform and shape up of the automotive industry. The industry is racing towards a new world, driven by sustainability and changing consumer behaviour, encompassing electric vehicles, autonomous cars, mobility fleet sharing, and always connected.

Oil prices have whipsawed between concerns over supply as Western sanctions on Russian crude and products over the Ukraine war disrupt trade flows, and worries that central bank efforts to tame inflation may trigger a demand-destroying recession.

Commissioner Barger was recognized as �a leader with insight and determination� and a person of �trust, integrity, responsibility, and concern for fellow citizens� in a Distinguished Public Service Award presented to him during the meeting.

Brian Drum, one of the supervisors of the Catawba County 911 Communications Center, who has been called upon to increase his supervising duties over the past year and has a record of dedication to 911 dispatch that spans more than ten years, has been recognized by his peers in the North Carolina Chapter of the National Emergency Number Association (NC NENA) as Supervisor of the Year.

The North Carolina Veterans Park in Fayetteville includes a visitor�s center, gardens, fountains, sculpture and displays. Five Catawba County residents, including World War II veteran Carmie Cook, had a �hand� in the park�s creation.

911 should be used only in emergencies. But if you should ever dial 911 accidently, Sheriff Coy Reid says you should not just hang up.

The information was developed and compiled by the Children's Agenda Planning Committee, appointed by the Catawba County Board of Commissioners. The committee's vision is to ensure a safe community where all children are engaged, enriched and equipped to reach their full potential.

Catawba County has been ranked #1 nationally in its population group in the 2013 Digital Counties Survey by Gov Tech Magazine.

Catawba County Board of Commissioners adopts resolution supporting citizen participation in government through elections in Catawba County.

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that low-level crack cocaine offenders cannot benefit from a 2018 federal law.; Credit: J. Scott Applewhite/AP

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Monday that some crack cocaine offenders sentenced to harsh prison terms more than a decade ago cannot get their sentences reduced under a federal law adopted with the purpose of doing just that.

At issue in the case was the long and now notorious history of sentencing under the 1986 Anti-Drug Abuse Act, which established harsh mandatory prison sentences based on the amount of drugs that the defendant possessed or sold. The triggering amount, however, was different for crack cocaine used most often by Black people, and powder cocaine, used most often by whites.

Indeed, the ratio was 100-to-1, so that a five-year mandatory minimum penalty, for instance, was triggered by possession of 5 grams of crack, whereas the same penalty was triggered by 500 grams of powder cocaine.

Nine years after enactment of these mandatory penalties, the U.S. Sentencing Commission found these disparities unjustified, and by 2010 Congress passed new legislation to reduce the disparity to from 100-to-1 to 18-to-1. But that left everyone previously sentenced under the old regime stuck with the harsher penalties. And in 2018, Congress passed and then-President Donald Trump signed into law a bipartisan bill to make the new ratios retroactive.

That allowed thousands of crack offenders who were serving prison sentences to be resentenced under the new law and new sentencing guidelines, with an average reduction of six years in their sentences. But while the new law allowed even drug kingpins to be resentenced, some prisoners were left out — a number now in the low hundreds, according to the Biden administration.

One of those was the prisoner at the center of Monday's case, Tarahrick Terry, sentenced to nearly 16 years in prison for possession with intent to distribute 3.9 grams of crack cocaine, less than the weight of four paper clips.

He claimed that his sentence, like others, should be revised in light of the 2018 law, but the Supreme Court rejected that argument. Writing for the court, Justice Clarence Thomas noted that Terry had been sentenced under a section of the law that applied to "career criminals," those who had two previous drug or violent convictions. Terry did, in fact, have two previous drug convictions as a teenager — for which he spent 120 days in jail.

So, as Thomas observed, Terry was sentenced under the provision of the law that was not included in the 2018 revision.

Democratic Sens. Dick Durbin and Cory Booker and Republican Sens. Charles Grassley and Mike Lee — the sponsors and drafters of the act — warned in a friend of the court brief filed in the case that excluding low-level offenders from the act's reforms would mean ignoring its purpose. "Had Congress intended to exclude individuals with low-level crack offenses from relief," they wrote, "Congress of course could have done so."

Thomas and the rest of the court rejected that argument. "We will not convert nouns to adjectives and vice versa," wrote Thomas, which is what he said Congress was asking the court to do. The 2018 law, he said, did not change the section of the law under which Terry was sentenced, so the argument that the revision modified the whole law just wouldn't wash.

Although the decision was unanimous, it included an interesting back-and-forth about race between Thomas, the only African American on the court and arguably its most conservative member, and Justice Sonia Sotomayor, its only Hispanic and arguably most liberal member. Specifically, their disagreement was about the role race played in the adoption of mandatory minimum sentences that were wildly more harsh for possession or sale of crack cocaine than for powder cocaine.

As Thomas saw it, the 100-to-1 ratio for crack cocaine was enacted "with near unanimity" by Congress, because of two concerns expressed by Black leaders at the time: First, that crack "was fueling crime against residents in the inner cities who were predominantly black," and second that "prosecutors were not taking these kinds of crimes seriously enough because the victims were disproportionately black." Moreover, he quoted a 1995 U.S. Sentencing Commission report that concluded the 100-to-1 ratio created "a perception of unfairness," even though there was no reason to believe that "racial bias or animus undergirded the initiation of the federal sentencing law."

In a concurring opinion, Sotomayor declined to join that part of Thomas' opinion, because "it includes an unnecessary, incomplete, and sanitized history of the 100-to-1 ratio," including "race-based myths" about crack cocaine.

"The full history is far less benign," she said. It ignores the fact that Black leaders were promised federal investment in longer term solutions — including in job training and education programs — but that help never arrived. Nor, she noted, did the majority opinion mention that the bill containing the 100-to-1 ratio was "rush[ed] through to pass dramatic drug legislation before the midterm elections," and that the legislative history of the bill offered no justification for the 100-to-1 ratio, "save that it was the highest ratio proposed."

"Most egregiously, the Court barely references the ratio's real-world impact" — one so profound and unjustified, as demonstrated by subsequent research — "that the [Congressional Black Caucus] came together in unanimous and increasingly vocal opposition to the law."

In the end, however, Sotomayor agreed that "unfortunately," the reading of the law urged by the primary sponsors of the 2018 revision is not born out by the text. "Fortunately," she added, "Congress has numerous tools to right this injustice."

As for prisoner Terry, who brought Monday's case, he is now in the final months of his prison term, and according to the Biden administration is serving his remaining time in home confinement.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

A demonstrator holds a sign in support of the Affordable Care Act in front of the U.S. Supreme Court last November. On Thursday, the justices did just that.; Credit: Alex Brandon/AP

The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the Affordable Care Act for the third time on Thursday, leaving in place the broad provisions of the law enacted by Congress in 201o. The vote was 7 to 2.

The opinion was authored by Justice Stephen Breyer who was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett. Justices Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch dissented.

The decision threw out the challenge to the law on the grounds that Texas and other objecting GOP-dominated states were not required to pay anything under the mandate provision and thus had no standing to bring the challenge to court.

"To have standing, a plaintiff must 'allege personal injury fairly traceable to the defendant's allegedly unlawful conduct and likely to be redressed by the requested relief,' " the majority wrote. "No plaintiff has shown such an injury 'fairly traceable' to the 'allegedly unlawful conduct' challenged here."

The mandate, the most controversial provision of the law, required that people either buy health insurance or pay a penalty. In 2012, it was upheld by a 5-4 vote, with Chief Justice John Roberts casting the decisive fifth vote, on the grounds that the penalty fell within the taxing power of Congress.

In 2017, Congress got rid of the penalty after the Congressional Budget Office concluded that the law would continue to function effectively without it. That prompted the challengers to go back to court, contending that because the penalty had been zeroed out, it was no longer a tax or a mandate. What's more, they contended, because the mandate was so interwoven with the rest of the ACA, the whole law must be struck down.

Over 31 million Americans have access health insurance through the ACA — a record high since the law's inception, the White House said last week. In addition, the Urban Institute reported in May that ACA premiums have gone down each of the last three years.

Many of the provisions of the ACA are now taken for granted. Up to 135 million people are covered by the ban on discrimination against those with preexisting conditions.

Young adults are now permitted to stay on their parents' insurance until age 26; copays are not permitted for preventive care; and insurance companies can no longer put lifetime caps on benefits, are required to spend 80% of premiums on medical coverage and are barred from discrimination based on factors like gender.

In addition, Medicaid coverage was greatly expanded after all but a dozen states took advantage of the ACA to expand federally subsidized coverage under the program. Among those who have benefited are many who lost their health insurance when they lost their jobs in the COVID-19 pandemic.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

The U.S. Supreme Court sided with students on Wednesday, ruling that a former cheerleader's online F-bombs about her school is protected speech under the First Amendment.

By an 8-1 vote, the court declared that school administrators do have the power to punish student speech that occurs online or off campus if it genuinely disrupts classroom study. But the justices concluded that a few swear words posted online from off campus, as in this case, did not rise to the definition of disruptive.

"While public schools may have a special interest in regulating some off-campus student speech, the special interests offered by the school are not sufficient to overcome B. L.'s interest in free expression in this case," Justice Stephen Breyer wrote for the court's majority.

At issue in the case was a series of F-bombs issued in 2017 on Snapchat by Brandi Levy, then a 14-year-old high school cheerleader who failed to win a promotion from the junior varsity to the varsity cheerleading term at her Pennsylvania school.

"I was really upset and frustrated at everything," she said in an interview with NPR in April. So she posted a photo of herself and a friend flipping the bird to the camera, along with a message that said, "F*** the school ... F*** cheer, F*** everything."

Suspended from the team for what was considered disruptive behavior, Brandi and her parents went to court. They argued that the school had no right to punish her for off-campus speech, whether it was posted online while away from school, as in this case, or spoken out loud at a Starbucks across the street from school.

A federal appeals court agreed with her, declaring that school officials have no authority to punish students for speech that occurs in places unconnected to the campus.

The decision marked the first time that an appeals court issued such a broad interpretation of the Supreme Court's landmark student speech decision more then a half century ago. Back then, in a case involving students suspended for wearing black armbands to school to protest the Vietnam War, the court ruled that students do have free speech rights under the Constitution, as long as the speech is not disruptive to the school.

Although Brandi Levy is now in college, the school board in Mahanoy, Pa., appealed to the Supreme Court, contending that disruption can come from outside the campus but still have serious effects on campus. It pointed to laws in 47 states that require schools to enforce anti-bullying and anti-harassment policies.

The high court, however, focused on the facts in Levy's case, concluding that while her posts were less than admirable, they did not meet the test of being disruptive.

"We do not believe the special characteristics that give schools additional license to regulate student speech always disappear when a school regulates speech that takes place off campus," Breyer wrote. "The school's regulatory interests remain significant in some off-campus circumstances."

In a concurring opinion, Justice Samuel Alito wrote: "If today's decision teaches any lesson, it must be that the regulation of many types of off-premises student speech raises serious First Amendment concerns, and school officials should proceed cautiously before venturing into this territory."

In a dissent, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that the school was right to suspend Levy because students like her "who are active in extracurricular programs have a greater potential, by virtue of their participation, to harm those programs."

"For example, a profanity-laced screed delivered on social media or at the mall has a much different effect on a football program when done by a regular student than when done by the captain of the football team," Thomas wrote. "So, too, here."

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

In a case originating with a California Highway Patrol officer's pursuit of a vehicle and ultimately entering the driver's home, the Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that police may not enter homes without a warrant for minor crimes.; Credit: Chris Carlson/AP

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that police cannot enter a home without a warrant when pursuing someone for a minor crime.

By a unanimous vote, the court declared that police violated the rights of a California man by pursuing him into his garage for allegedly playing loud music while driving down a deserted two-lane highway late at night.

Writing for the court majority, Justice Elena Kagan said police had no right to enter the man's home without a warrant for such a trivial offense.

"On many occasions, the officer will have good reason to enter – to prevent imminent harms of violence, destruction of evidence, or escape from the home," she wrote. "But when the officer has time to get a warrant, he must do so – even though the misdemeanant fled."

The court's ruling came in the case of Arthur Lange, who was playing loud music in his car late one night, at one point honking his horn several times. A California highway patrol officer, believing Lange was violating a noise ordinance, followed him, and when the motorist slowed to enter his driveway, the officer put on his flashing lights.

Lange, who later said he didn't notice the police car, drove into his garage. The officer, in "hot pursuit," got out of his car and put his foot under the closing garage door sensor to force the door open again. He had no warrant to enter the home, but once inside, he said, he smelled liquor on Lange's breath and arrested him, not only for the noise violation, but also for driving under the influence.

Lange appealed all the way to the Supreme Court, contending that the officer had no right to enter his home without a warrant and that the DUI evidence had been illegally obtained.

The Supreme Court has long held that police may conduct a warrantless search when pursuing a fleeing felon. The question in Lange's case was whether police are free to do the same thing when pursuing someone suspected of a minor offense like playing loud music.

"[P]ursuit of a misdemeanant does not trigger a categorical rule allowing a warrantless home entry," she wrote.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

The Supreme Court found that a law that allowed farmworkers union organizers onto farm property during nonworking hours unconstitutionally appropriates private land.; Credit: Patrick T. Fallon/AFP via Getty Images

The Supreme Court on Wednesday tightened the leash on union representatives and their ability to organize farmworkers in California and elsewhere. At issue in the case was a California law that allows union organizers to enter farms to speak to workers during nonworking hours — before and after work, as well as during lunch — for a set a number of days each year.

By a 6-3 vote along ideological lines, the court ruled that the law — enacted nearly 50 years ago after a campaign by famed organizer Cesar Chavez — unconstitutionally appropriates private land by allowing organizers to go on farm property to drum up union support.

"The regulation appropriates a right to physically invade the growers' property," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the court's conservative majority. "The access regulation amounts to simple appropriation of private property."

The decision is a potentially mortal blow that threatens the very existence of the farmworkers union. However, the ruling stopped short of upending other laws that allow government officials to enter private property to inspect and enforce health and safety rules that cover everything restaurants to toxic chemical sites.

Indeed, as Roberts wrote: "Under this framework, government health and safety inspection regimes will generally not constitute takings."

The court's decision on Wednesday was only the latest in a series of decisions that have aimed directly at the heart of organized labor in the United States. In 2018, the court hamstrung public-sector unions' efforts to raise money for collective bargaining. In that decision, the court by a 5-4 vote overturned a 40-year precedent that had allowed unions to collect limited "fair share" fees from workers not in the union but who benefited from the terms of the contract that the union negotiated.

The case decided by the court on Wednesday began in 2015 at Cedar Point Nursery, near the Oregon border. The nursery's owner, Mike Fahner, said union organizers entered the farm at 5 a.m. one morning, without the required notice, and began harassing his workers with bullhorns. The general counsel for the United Farm Workers, Mario Martinez, countered that the people with bullhorns were striking workers, not union organizers.

When Cedar Point filed a complaint with the California Agricultural Labor Relations Board, the board found no illegal behavior and dismissed the complaint. Cedar Point, joined by another California grower, appealed all the way to the Supreme Court, arguing they should be able to exclude organizers from their farms.

Writing for the court's three liberals, Justice Stephen Breyer said the access in the case was "temporary" and so did not constitute a "taking" under the law.

The rule, he wrote , is "not functionally equivalent to the classic taking in which government directly appropriates private property or ousts the owner from his domain."

"In my view, the majority's conclusion threatens to make many ordinary forms of regulation unusually complex or impractical," he wrote.

The court's decision could be disastrous for unions in general, but especially those that represent low-income workers. The growers asserted that unions should have no problem organizing workers in the era of the internet. But many of the workers at Cedar Point don't own smartphones and don't have internet access. What's more, many speak Spanish or indigenous languages and live scattered throughout the area, in motels, in labor camps or with friends and family, often moving after just a few weeks when the seasonal harvest is over.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

The U.S. Supreme Court; Credit: Jose Luis Magana/AP

The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to lift a ban on evictions for tenants who have failed to pay all or some rent during the coronavirus pandemic.

By a 5-to-4 vote, the court left in place the nationwide moratorium on evictions put in place by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and which was challenged by the Alabama Association of Realtors.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who cast the fifth and deciding vote, wrote in a concurring opinion that he voted not to end the eviction program only because it is set to expire on July 31, "and because those few weeks will allow for additional and more orderly distribution" of the funds that Congress appropriated to provide rental assistance to those in need because of the pandemic. He added, however, that in his view Congress would have to pass new and clearer legislation to extend the moratorium past July 31.

The Biden administration has said it does not plan to extend the moratorium any further.

Also voting to leave the program intact until July 31 were Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.

Dissenting were Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett. They would have blocked the moratorium from continuing for another month.

The decision comes at a time when roughly 7 million American households say they are still behind on their rent. Many suffered job loss during the pandemic. And delays have stopped more than $46 billion in congressionally approved rental assistance from reaching many people facing eviction who need it.

Housing groups have been warning that pulling the CDC eviction protections away from people before that congressional aid can reach them would spark a wave of evictions that could otherwise be avoided.

Evictions often send families into a downward financial spiral. It can be very hard to find another place to live with an eviction on your record. People can end up living in their cars, motels when they can afford it or in homeless shelters. Research has found there's also a disparate impact on people of color.

During the pandemic, public health experts have warned — and research showed — that evictions result in more coronavirus cases because people end up living in more crowded situations, where they are more likely to catch or spread the disease.

At the outset of the pandemic, Congress adopted a limited, temporary moratorium on evictions. After Congress' moratorium lapsed last July, however, then-President Donald Trump asked the CDC to step in and issue a new eviction ban, which it did in September. In March, President Biden extended that ban, which was to expire at the end of June. Then on June 24, the Biden administration notified the Supreme Court that it had extended the moratorium until July 31. It also said that barring a rise in coronavirus cases, the "CDC does not plan to extend the Order further."

Landlords have long argued that the CDC order was an overreach and that the agency doesn't have the power to, in effect, take control over their own properties away from them.

A group of the nation's landlords challenged the eviction ban and on May 5, a federal judge in Washington, D.C., ruled that the CDC has exceeded its authority. The judge, however, blocked her own decision from going into effect to give the government time to appeal. On June 2, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia upheld the stay, prompting the landlords to go to the Supreme Court.

Keeping the status quo in place "will prolong the severe financial burdens borne by landlords under the moratorium for the past nine months," the property owners said.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

After issuing its final decisions of the term Thursday, the Supreme Court on Friday granted a religious liberty case for next term and turned away challenges to longstanding decisions on qualified immunity and defamation, prompting dissents from the court's conservatives.

Court agrees to hear one religious liberty case, but rejects another

The justices agreed to consider a constitutional challenge to a school funding program in Maine that excludes private schools that teach religion.

Only half the school districts in Maine run their own high schools. The rest pay for students to attend public schools in other districts or to attend private schools. The state, however, will not fund students who attend any school that offers religious teaching.

Parents who wanted to send their children to a private Christian school challenged the law, alleging it violated their right to exercise their religion freely. The First Circuit disagreed, but now the high court will hear their case.

The justices, however, declined to hear another case about religious liberty – this one brought by a Washington state florist who refused to provide flowers for a same-sex wedding. She alleged that the state's antidiscrimination law violated her First Amendment rights, and in 2017, Washington's supreme court ruled against her.

Though the justices on Friday declined to hear her appeal, three of the court's conservatives—Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, and Neil Gorsuch—would have taken it for next term.

Thomas calls to do away with qualified immunity

Also on Friday, Justice Thomas once again called for the court to do away with qualified immunity, the legal shield for police officers that has come under intense scrutiny in the last year of racial justice protests.

Thomas was dissenting from the court's refusal to hear the case of a college student promoting Turning Point USA, a right-wing organization known for publishing lists of university professors it deems hostile to conservatives. The student alleged campus police at Arkansas State University violated her First Amendment rights when they stopped her from advertising the organization near the student union. But the campus officers escaped liability in the lower court because of qualified immunity, a doctrine created by the Supreme Court in 1967 that has evolved into a near-impenetrable bulwark for the police.

"Why should university officers," wrote Thomas, "receive the same protection as a police officer who makes a split-second decision to use force in a dangerous setting?" Going further, Thomas questioned whether the judicially-created doctrine should exist at all, an opinion that has garnered more and more bipartisan consensus in the wake of George Floyd's murder.

Thomas and Gorsuch call to overturn landmark Free Speech precedent

The court declined to hear a defamation case brought by a Miami-born international arms dealer—portrayed in the 2016 movie War Dogs—against the author of a book about his life.

The lower court dismissed the suit. It pointed to a landmark 1964 First Amendment decision, in which the high court said that publishers are immune from libel suits brought by public figures, so long as the publishers either didn't know, or had no reason to know, that the information they published was false.

Both Thomas and Gorsuch dissented, arguing the court should overturn the nearly 50-year-old precedent. In the era of disinformation, "lies impose real harm," wrote Thomas. "Instead of continuing to insulate those who perpetrate lies," said Thomas, the court should narrow First Amendment protections.

In a separate dissent, Gorsuch agreed. In 1964, publishers needed protection against libel for unpopular opinions to survive. Indeed, the court's 1964 decision was first used to protect civil rights leaders who had published a New York Times ad criticizing the Montgomery, Alabama police for repeatedly arresting Martin Luther King Jr.

But, said Gorsuch, in 2021, "it's less obvious what force [libel protections have] in a world in which everyone carries a soapbox in their hands," referring to smartphones. Now, Gorsuch wrote, "the deck seems stacked against those with traditional (and expensive) journalistic standards—and in favor of those who can disseminate the most sensational information as efficiently as possible without any particular concern for truth."

Another execution

On top of its decisions about cases next term, the justices gave Alabama the green light to execute Matthew Reeves, whose death sentence was recently overturned by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.

This is the second time the justices have ruled against Reeves, who in 1998 was convicted for murder in Alabama. In 2002, Reeves first challenged his sentence in state court. He argued that because of his low IQ, his lawyer should have hired an expert to evaluate him for an intellectual disability. After 15 years of appeals, the Supreme Court denied his claim in 2017. So Reeves appealed his claim through the federal system.

But on Friday, the high court again rejected his challenge, thus allowing Alabama to move forward with his execution. Justice Sotomayor, joined by Justice Kagan, dissented, criticizing the state court for its brusque dismissal of Reeves's claim.

Sotomayor drew attention to "a troubling trend in which this court strains to reverse summarily any grants of relief to those facing execution." The court, wrote Sotomayor, "turns deference" to state courts "into a rule that...relief is never available to those facing execution."

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Outdated food safety laws and a fragmented federal structure serve as barriers to improving protection of the nations food supply from contamination or other hazards, according to Ensuring Safe Food From Production to Consumption.

Darkly colored, carotene-rich fruits and vegetables -- such as carrots, sweet potatoes, and broccoli -- provide the body with half as much vitamin A as previously thought.

American students progress toward proficiency in mathematics requires major changes in instruction, curricula, and assessment in the nations schools, says a new report from the National Research Council of the National Academies.

Representatives from academies and research organizations around the world sent messages of condolence and support to members, officials and staff of the U.S. National Academies in the wake of terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. The following are excerpts from some of these messages.

The value of what the United States loses because of the poorer health and earlier death experienced by the 41 million Americans who lack health insurance is estimated to be $65 billion to $130 billion every year, according to a first-ever economic analysis of the costs of uninsurance for society overall.

Government authorities in the United States and Canada should use the current Dietary Reference Intakes (DRIs) to update nutrition information on food and dietary supplement labels so that consumers can compare products more easily and make informed food choices based on the latest science, says a new report from the Institute of Medicine of the National Academies.

Scientific evidence links mold and other factors related to damp conditions in homes and buildings to asthma symptoms in some people with the chronic disorder, as well as to coughing, wheezing, and upper respiratory tract symptoms in otherwise healthy people, says a new report from the Institute of Medicine of the National Academies.

The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) and Institute of Medicine (IOM) today released SCIENCE, EVOLUTION, AND CREATIONISM, a book designed to give the public a comprehensive and up-to-date picture of the current scientific understanding of evolution and its importance in the science classroom.

A congressionally mandated report from the National Research Council finds serious deficiencies in the nations forensic science system and calls for major reforms and new research.

A growing amount of scientific evidence indicates that how much weight women gain during pregnancy and their starting weight at conception can affect their health and that of their babies, says a new report from the Institute of Medicine and the National Research Council.

The U.S. electric power delivery system is vulnerable to terrorist attacks that could cause much more damage to the system than natural disasters such as Hurricane Sandy, blacking out large regions of the country for weeks or months and costing many billions of dollars, says a newly released report by the National Research Council.

On average, Americans die sooner and experience higher rates of disease and injury than people in other high-income countries, says a new report from the National Research Council and Institute of Medicine.

Young athletes in the U.S. face a culture of resistance to reporting when they might have a concussion and to complying with treatment plans.

A new report from the National Research Council recommends best practices that law enforcement agencies and courts should follow to improve the likelihood that eyewitness identifications used in criminal cases will be accurate.

There would not be sufficient benefit to updating estimates of the social cost of carbon (SCC) within a year based only on the revision of a specific climate parameter in the existing framework used by the government’s interagency group to measure the SCC, says a new interim report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.

The 2011 Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident should serve as a wake-up call to nuclear plant operators and regulators on the critical importance of measuring, maintaining, and restoring cooling in spent fuel pools during severe accidents and terrorist attacks, says a new report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.

Across the current military and civilian trauma care systems, the quality of trauma care varies greatly depending on when and where an individual is injured, placing lives unnecessarily at risk, says a new report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.

U.S. adults perform comparably to adults in other economically developed countries on most measures of science knowledge and support science in general, says a new report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.

A new report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine urges Congress, federal and state agencies, and regulatory institutions to significantly increase their support for innovation for what the report’s study committee calls “increasingly clean” electric power technologies – nuclear power, carbon capture and storage, and renewables such as solar and wind. Some of these technologies have seen recent cost and price declines and are cost-competitive in certain locations.

The demand for family caregivers for adults who are 65 or older is increasing significantly, and family caregivers need more recognition, information, and support to fulfill their responsibilities and maintain their own health, financial security, and well-being, says a new report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.

Despite broad understanding of volcanoes, our ability to predict the timing, duration, type, size, and consequences of volcanic eruptions is limited, says a new report by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.

Cognitive training, blood pressure management for people with hypertension, and increased physical activity all show modest but inconclusive evidence that they can help prevent cognitive decline and dementia, but there is insufficient evidence to support a public health campaign encouraging their adoption, says a new report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.

A new report by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine proposes a strategy that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) should use to evaluate the evidence of adverse human health effects from low doses of exposure to chemicals that can disrupt the endocrine system.

Although the process used to develop the Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA) has become more evidence-based since its inception more than 30 years ago, it is not currently positioned to effectively adapt to changes such as food diversity and chronic disease prevalence, while also ensuring the integrity of the process, says a new congressionally mandated report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) should lead a collaborative effort with the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and the states to establish and strengthen regional occupational safety and health surveillance programs, says a new report by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.

While the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) provides mental health care of comparable or superior quality to care provided in private and non-VA public sectors, accessibility and quality of services vary across the VA health system, leaving a substantial unmet need for mental health services among veterans of the recent wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, says a new congressionally mandated report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.

The current process for planetary protection policy development is inadequate to respond to increasingly complex solar system exploration missions, says a new report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.

A new report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine examines evidence on whether providing permanent supportive housing (PSH) – a combination of stable housing and supportive services -- to individuals who are experiencing homelessness improves their health.