Yeah, even Homeland Security acknowledges it too:

“Fundamentally, our system is not equipped to deal with migration as it exists now, not just this year and last year and the year before, but for years preceding us,” Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said in an interview with NBC News. “We have a system that was last modified in 1996. We’re in 2024 now. The world has changed.”

But guess who in Congress don’t want to change that?

The position of Mayorkas and the Biden administration is that these problems can only be meaningfully addressed by a congressional overhaul of the immigration system, such as the one proposed in February in a now defunct bipartisan Senate bill.

“We cannot process these individuals through immigration enforcement proceedings very quickly — it actually takes sometimes more than seven years,” Mayorkas told NBC News. “The proposed bipartisan legislation would reduce that seven-plus-year waiting period to sometimes less than 90 days. That’s transformative.”

These guys:

Now, after a hard-negotiated bipartisan Senate compromise bill has been released, Republicans are either vowing to block it or declaring it “dead on arrival,” in the words of House Speaker Mike Johnson.

Can confirm that Chichén Itzá is now roped off. And Yucatán is now the safest state in Mexico:

Mexico’s lowest-crime region is strengthening its reputation as an oasis of calm in a country roiled by drug killings. Yucatán, the southeastern state known for its Mayan ruins, has a homicide rate more than 90% lower than the national average.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-05-10/how-did-yucatan-become-mexico-s-safest-state

From the article, it’s likely because they live and work in lower income areas:

He said it’s hard to give one reason why Southeast Asians are feeling the brunt of this hate, but he thinks financial status might play a role. A 2020 report by the Southeast Asia Resource Action Center said that all Southeast Asian ethnic groups have a lower per capita income than the average in the U.S.

“It depends on socioeconomics,” Chen said. “Where these people are living, where they’re commuting, where they’re working. That may be a factor as well.”

What you’re saying tracks with the article as well:

Charlene Harrington, a professor emeritus at the nursing school of the University of California-San Francisco, said: “In their unchecked quest for profits, the nursing home industry has created its own problems by not paying adequate wages and benefits and setting heavy nursing workloads that cause neglect and harm to residents and create an unsatisfactory and stressful work environment.”

Oh you mean the post summary. Yeah, that’s the article’s verbatim linked URL. Check the article’s source and see for yourself.

In any case, thanks for pointing that out. I’ve stripped the tracker link and updated the post summary portion.

Huh? That’s the exact same link as the post’s.

FWIW the most recent analysis I came across from a law professor makes me think the emergence of the “major questions doctrine” is more concerning:

In Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, the US Supreme Court will decide whether to overrule one of its most frequently cited precedents—its 1984 opinion in Chevron v. NRDC. The decision in Loper may change the language that lawyers use in briefs and professors use in class, but is unlikely to significantly affect case outcomes involving interpretation of the statutes that agencies administer. In practice, it’s the court’s new major questions doctrine announced in 2021 that could fundamentally change how agencies operate.

…

I am much more concerned about the court’s 2021 decision to create the “major questions doctrine” and to apply it in four other cases than I am about the effects of a potential reversal of Chevron in Loper. Lower courts are beginning to rely on the major questions doctrine as the basis to overturn scores of agency decisions. That doctrine has potential to make it impossible for any agency to take any significant action.

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/courts-new-chevron-analysis-likely-to-follow-one-of-these-paths

No, the case is still pending: https://www.oyez.org/cases/2023/22-451

So cool!

Good call. Thanks for letting me know.

Kudos for doing additional research and sharing it with sources!

Standing is a specific legal term that defines whether a party is allowed to sue, and injury is also a legal term in this case. Cornell Law School has a great intro on the legal requirements to establish standing using a 3-part test:

• The plaintiff must have suffered an “injury in fact,” meaning that the injury is of a legally protected interest which is (a) concrete and particularized and (b) actual or imminent
• There must be a causal connection between the injury and the conduct brought before the court
• It must be likely, rather than speculative, that a favorable decision by the court will redress the injury.

In this case, seems to be the Supreme Court is skeptical that these doctors have satisfied this 3-part standing test, especially the injury in fact one. If SCOTUS decides that these doctors don’t have standing, then the lawsuit is dismissed.

From the article:

No states have made such proposals or actions on restricting access to Opill, but the concern stems from the US Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision in 2022, which reversed Roe v. Wade and overturned the constitutional right to an abortion.

and:

But these examples have not set a precedent for what type of authority states may have to restrict access to an FDA-approved medication, Gupta said.

When it comes to Opill, “many states also allow pharmacists to refuse to participate in ‘health care’ that they find morally objectionable. This could include providing individuals with Opill even though it is OTC,” she said. “Legal approval and actual access are two distinct issues, with the latter influenced by a broader set of factors including state policies, healthcare practices, and socio-economic determinants of health.”

You just made my day. Thanks @ptz@dubvee.org!

It’s more of an issue because it’s a foreign company. For example, companies like Facebook (Meta) and Cambridge Analytica can be investigated and regulated by US agencies like the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). But they have no sway over TikTok’s developer ByteDance because it’s located outside of the US.

That’s what this bill is trying to do: force ByteDance to divest.

While other companies also have issues, TikTok goes further by having strong connection to the PRC:

Lawmakers have long voiced concerns that the Chinese government could access user data or influence what people see on the app, including pushing content to stoke US political divisions.

Comments like this are so odd. People (rightfully) get all worked up about surveillance in the West like the US and UK, but then kinda shrug off the same stuff when it’s China.

China is no longer weak and isolationist. It’s been flexing its muscles around the world, with 102 overseas police stations in 53 countries, including Italy, France, Canada, Britain and the Netherlands for example.

deleted by creator

Here’s the EPA’s estimate:

Water utilities throughout the United States will need to spend $625 billion over the next 20 years to fix, maintain, and improve the country’s drinking water infrastructure, according to the results of a periodic assessment done by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/articles/2023/09/25/more-federal-funding-needed-to-improve-drinking-water-epa-study-finds

That’s $31.25 billion per year. This $5.8 billion is another injection into the $50 billion federal program for improving water infrastructure in 2021.

The article lists several factors:

Because car prices in general have skyrocketed, more Americans are keeping their current cars for longer. This means costly repairs can become more likely, and the car insurers have adjusted their rates accordingly.

In the last year, car repair prices also climbed 7 percent, outpacing inflation by more than double.

A supply chain slowdown and ongoing labor shortages have also pushed the insurance industry to implement price hikes on customers, insuranceQuotes.com analyst Michael Giusti said.

“None of that even mentions the higher medical costs they have to pay after accidents,” Giusti said. “Today’s higher premiums are just a reflection of those higher costs.”

The sudden rise of electric vehicle purchases also carried some of the blame, since EVs are more expensive to purchase and repair, Henn said.