Black population in the United States experienced more than 1.63 million excess deaths and more than 80 million excess years of life lost, when compared with the White population over the last two decades, according to a new study published on Tuesday. After a period of progress in reducing disparities, improvements stalled, and differences between the Black population and the White population worsened in 2020, according to the study published in the medical journal JAMA. From 1999 to 2020, the disproportionately higher mortality rates in Black males and females resulted in 997,623 and 628,464 excess deaths, respectively, representing a loss of more than 80 million years of life, according to the study. Also Read: Silicon Valley Bank collapse concerns founders of color Heart disease had the highest excess mortality rates, and the excess years of potential life lost rates were largest among infants and middle-aged adults, according to the study. Amid efforts in the United States to promote health equity, there is a need to assess recent progress in reducing excess deaths and years of potential life lost among the Black population compared with the White population, the study said. 

The government of the U.S. Virgin Islands is trying to subpoena billionaire Elon Musk for documents in its lawsuit seeking to hold JPMorgan Chase liable for sex trafficking acts committed by businessman Jeffrey Epstein. Musk has never been publicly accused of any wrongdoing related to Epstein, who killed himself in 2019 as he awaited sex trafficking charges in a federal jail in Manhattan. But over the years, there had been unconfirmed speculation — encouraged by Epstein himself — that Epstein had advised Musk on certain business matters. Also Read: Musk, new Twitter CEO Linda Yaccarino spar over content moderation during on-stage interview Spokespeople for Musk have denied those reports, but the government of the U.S. Virgin Islands said in a court filing that it believes Epstein may have referred or tried to refer Musk to JPMorgan as a potential client. The Virgin Islands, where Epstein had an estate, sued JPMorgan last year, saying its investigation has revealed that the financial services giant enabled Epstein’s recruiters to pay victims and was “indispensable to the operation and concealment of the Epstein trafficking enterprise.” Lawyers for JPMorgan did not immediately return messages seeking comment Monday. In the past, they have said victims are entitled to justice but litigation attempting to blame the financial institution for Epstein’s actions were legally meritless, directed at the wrong party and should be dismissed. Also Read: Elon Musk’s Tesla tweet trial delves into investor damages Authorities alleged that Epstein recruited and sexually abused dozens of underage girls at his mansions in New York and Palm Beach, Florida, in the early 2000s. He had pleaded not guilty. Lawyers for the Virgin Islands told a federal judge Monday that they haven't been able to locate Musk to serve him with the subpoena. They asked the court to serve Tesla, his electric vehicle company, instead. They said they hired an investigative firm to search public records databases for possible addresses for Musk and reached out to one of his lawyers by email, but received no response. A message sent to a lawyer for Musk seeking comment Monday was not immediately returned. The subpoena — one of several sent to prominent business figures — sought documents from Jan. 1, 2002, to the present reflecting communications between Musk and JPMorgan or Musk and Epstein regarding Epstein or Epstein’s role in Musk’s accounts, transactions or financial management. It also sought all documents reflecting or regarding Epstein’s involvement in human trafficking and his procurement of girls or women for commercial sex. And it sought information about fees Musk might have paid to Epstein or JPMorgan and any documents concerning communications between Musk, Epstein and JPMorgan regarding accounts, transactions or the relationship at JPMorgan.

An investigation into the origins of the FBI's probe into ties between Russia and Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaign has finally been concluded, with the prosecutor leading the inquiry submitting a much-awaited report that found major flaws. The report, the culmination of a four-year investigation into possible misconduct by U.S. government officials, contained withering criticism of the FBI but few significant revelations. Nonetheless, it will give fodder to Trump supporters who have long denounced the Russia investigation, as well as Trump opponents who say the Durham team's meager court record shows their probe was a politically motivated farce. Also Read: Jury finds Trump liable for sexual abuse, awards accuser $5M A look at the investigation and the report: WHO IS JOHN DURHAM? Durham has spent decades as a Justice Department prosecutor, with past assignments including investigations into the FBI's cozy relationship with mobsters in Boston and the CIA's destruction of videotapes of its harsh interrogations of terrorism subjects. He was appointed in 2019 to investigate potential misconduct by U.S. government officials as they examined Russian election interference in 2016 and whether there was any illegal coordination between the Kremlin and Trump's presidential campaign. Despite skimpy results — one guilty plea and two acquittals — that failed to live up to Trump's expectations, Durham was able to continue his work well into the Biden administration, thanks in part to William Barr appointing Durham as a Justice Department special counsel shortly before Barr's 2020 resignation as attorney general. WHY DID THE TRUMP JUSTICE DEPARTMENT THINK SUCH AN APPOINTMENT WAS NECESSARY? The appointment came weeks after a different special counsel, Robert Mueller, wrapped up his investigation of possible connections between Russia and the Trump campaign. That probe produced more than two dozen criminal cases, including against a half-dozen Trump associates. Though it did not charge any Trump aide with working with Russia to tip the election, it did find that Russia interfered on Trump's behalf and that the campaign welcomed, rather than discouraged, the help. From the start, Barr was deeply skeptical of the investigation's foundation, telling Congress that “spying did occur” on the campaign. He enlisted an outside prosecutor to hunt for potential misconduct at the government agencies who were involved in collecting intelligence and conducting the investigation, even flying with Durham to Italy to meet with officials there as part of the probe. WERE THERE PROBLEMS WITH THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION? Yes, and a Justice Department inspector general inquiry already identified many. The watchdog report found that FBI applications for warrants to eavesdrop on a former Trump campaign aide, Carter Page, contained significant errors and omitted information that would likely have weakened or undermined the premise of the application. The cumulative effect of those errors, the report said, was to make it “appear that the information supporting probable cause was stronger than was actually the case.” Still, the inspector general did not find evidence that investigators acted with political bias and said there was a legitimate basis to open a full investigation into potential collusion, though Durham has disagreed. WHAT CRIMINAL CASES DID HE BRING AND WHAT WAS THE OUTCOME? Durham brought three prosecution during his tenure, but only one resulted in a conviction — and that was for a case referred to him by the Justice Department inspector general. None of the three undid core findings by Mueller that Russia had interfered with the 2016 election in sweeping fashion. A former FBI lawyer, Kevin Clinesmith, pleaded guilty in 2020 to altering an email related to the surveillance of ex-Trump campaign aide. He was given probation. But two other cases, both involving alleged false statements to the FBI, resulted in acquittals by jury. Michael Sussmann, a lawyer for the Hillary Clinton campaign, was found not guilty of lying to the FBI during a meeting in which he presented computer data information that he wanted the FBI to investigate. A different jury acquitted Igor Danchenko, a Russian-American analyst, of charges that he lied to the FBI about his role in the creation of a discredited dossier about Trump. WHAT SPECIFICALLY DID DURHAM FIND? Durham found that the FBI acted too hastily and relied on raw and unconfirmed intelligence when it opened the Trump-Russia investigation. He said at the time the probe was opened, the FBI had no information about any actual contact between Trump associates and Russian intelligence officials. He also claimed that FBI investigators fell prone to “confirmation bias,” repeatedly ignoring or rationalizing away information that could have undercut the premise of their investigation, and he noted that the FBI failed to corroborate a single substantive allegation from a dossier of research that it relied on during the course of the probe. “An objective and honest assessment of these strands of information should have caused the FBI to question not only the predication for Crossfire Hurricane, but also to reflect on whether the FBI was being manipulated for political or other purposes,” the report said, using the FBI's code name for the Trump-Russia probe. “Unfortunately, it did not.” HOW DID THE FBI RESPOND? The FBI pointed out that it had long ago made dozens of corrective actions. Had those measures been in place in 2016, it says, the errors at the center of the report could have been prevented. It also took pains to note that the conduct in the report took place before the current director, Christopher Wray, took the job in fall 2017. WHAT HAPPENS NEXT? It didn't take long for Republicans in Congress to react. Rep. Jim Jordan, who chairs the House Judiciary Committee, said he had invited Durham to testify on Capitol Hill next week. Trump, too, sought to seize on the report, claiming anew in a post on his Truth Social platform that the Durham report had found “the crime of the century” and calling the Russia investigation the “Democrat Hoax.” Though the FBI says it's already taken some steps to address the problems cited in the report, Durham did say it's possible more reform could be needed. One idea, he said, would be to provide additional scrutiny of politically sensitive investigations by identifying an official who would be responsible for challenging the steps taken in a probe. He said his team had considered but did not ultimately recommend steps that would curtail the FBI's investigative authorities, including its use of tools under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to eavesdrop on suspected spies or terrorists.

The historic Roosevelt Hotel in midtown Manhattan shuttered three years ago, but it will soon be bustling again — reopening to accommodate an anticipated influx of asylum seekers just as other New York City hotels are being converted to emergency shelters. Mayor Eric Adams announced Saturday that the city will use the Roosevelt to eventually provide as many as 1,000 rooms for migrants who are expected to arrive in coming weeks because of the expiration of pandemic-era rules, known collectively as Title 42, that had allowed federal officials to turn away asylum seekers from the U.S. border with Mexico. Across the city, hotels like the Roosevelt that served tourists just a few years ago are being transformed into emergency shelters, many of them in prime locations within walking distance from Times Square, the World Trade Center memorial site and the Empire State Building. A legal mandate requires the city to provide shelter to anyone who needs it. Even so, Adams says the city is running out of room for migrants and has sought financial help from the state and federal governments. “New York City has now cared for more than 65,000 asylum seekers — already opening up over 140 emergency shelters and eight large-scale humanitarian relief centers in addition to this one to manage this national crisis,” the mayor said in a statement announcing the Roosevelt decision. The storied hotel near Grand Central Terminal served as election headquarters for New York Gov. Thomas Dewey, who in 1948 was said to have wrongly announced from the Roosevelt that he had defeated Harry Truman for president. As the city faces growing pressure to expand its shelter system, it is turning to vacant hotels for those who need a roof and a place to bunk down as they sort out their lives. One of them is the Holiday Inn, located in Manhattan’s Financial District. A few months ago, signs in the lobby windows of the 50-story, 500-room hotel said it was closed. Scott Markowitz of Tarter Krinsky & Drogin, attorneys for the hotel’s owner, said reopening as a city-sponsored shelter made financial sense. “They rent out every room at the hotel at a certain price every night,” Markowitz said, adding that it is bringing “substantially more revenue” than normal operations would have brought in. It’s not new for the city to turn to hotels for New Yorkers without homes when shelters and other options weren’t available. During the pandemic, group shelters made it difficult to comply with social distancing rules, prompting the city to rent out hundreds of hotel rooms as quasi COVID wards. As the pandemic eased, the city became less reliant on hotels. That changed as thousands of migrants began arriving by bus last year. The Watson Hotel on West 57th Street, which used to receive rave reviews for its rooftop pool and proximity to Central Park, is now being used to house migrant families. “It is our moral and legal obligation to provide shelter to anyone who needs it,” the city’s Department of Social Services said in a statement. “As such, we have utilized, and will continue to utilize, every tool at our disposal to meet the needs of every family and individual who comes to us seeking shelter.” Before the surge in asylum seekers, the city was dealing with increased homelessness, packed shelters and a dearth of affordable housing. New York even announced a plan to send hundreds of migrants to hotels in suburban Orange and Rockland counties across across the Hudson River, angering local leaders. Vijay Dandapani, the president and CEO of the Hotel Association of New York City, said the city needs to come up with long-term solutions. “Hotels are not the solution for these situations,” he said, adding that the optics posed problems for taxpayers who might think migrants are living in luxury at their expense. But some advocates for the homeless say the private quarters that hotel rooms provide are a better choice than the barracks-style accommodations the city usually provides. Kassi Keith, 55, one of the city’s homeless residents, welcomed the hotel arrangement. “Having your own room, what it gives you, it gives you peace of mind,” Keith said. “I can go to sleep with both eyes closed, you don’t have to keep one eye open.” Earlier this year, dozens of migrants staged a protest after being evicted from hotel rooms and forced into barracks set up at the Brooklyn Cruise Terminal, which has poor access to public transportation. They complained about the cold, the lack of privacy and not having enough bathrooms. The Roosevelt Hotel will first open this week as a welcome center providing legal and medical information and resources, officials said. It also will open 175 rooms for families with children, then expand the number of rooms to 850. The city said another 150 other rooms will be available to other asylum seekers. “When you offer people something like a hotel room, you’re much more likely to get a positive response to it," said David Giffen, executive director of the Coalition for the Homeless, adding that the rooms provide “privacy and dignity.” But Giffen said hotels won't address the greater problem of a lack of affordable, permanent housing. “What’s behind all of this (is) that we have such a failed housing system that people who have lower incomes end up using the shelter system as the de facto housing system,” he said. “And then the shelter system doesn’t have enough beds so we’re using the hotels as a de facto shelter system.”

White House national security adviser Jake Sullivan told senior Chinese foreign policy adviser Wang Yi during talks in Vienna this week that the Biden administration is "looking to move beyond" tensions spurred by the U.S. shooting down a Chinese spy balloon that traversed the continental United States, according to a senior Biden administration official. The meeting was not publicized by Washington or Beijing ahead of the high-level talks on Wednesday and Thursday in the Austrian capital. The White House described the wide-ranging discussions, in which the two leaders spent more than eight hours together, as "candid" and "constructive." The administration official, who briefed reporters on condition of anonymity to discuss the private meeting, said that both sides recognize that the February incident was "unfortunate" and are now looking to "reestablish standard, normal channels of communications." The talks are the latest in a series of small signs that tensions could be easing between the world's two biggest economies. As the political and military rivalry between China and the U.S. intensifies, American officials and analysts are worried that a lack of reliable crisis communications could cause a minor confrontation to spiral into greater hostilities. They cite the ability to communicate with the former Soviet Union as allowing the Cold War to end without a nuclear exchange. The White House in a statement said the meeting was part of "ongoing efforts to maintain open lines of communication and responsibly manage competition," and that Sullivan and Wang discussed key issues in the U.S.-China relationship, Russia's ongoing invasion of Ukraine, Taiwan, and more. The meeting took place in a luxury hotel along Vienna's historical Ringstrasse, according to an Austrian official familiar with the matter. The official, who was not authorized to comment publicly and spoke on the condition of anonymity, said planning for the meeting was closely guarded and Austrian authorities were only given a few days' advance notice that Vienna was chosen for the talks. Chinese officials saw the discussions as "substantive" and said both sides would "continue to make good use of this channel of strategic communication," according to the official Xinhua News Agency. Sullivan also repeated White House concerns about a lack of "constructive engagement" by Beijing to use its influence to press Russia to end its invasion of Ukraine and called on China to do more to stop the movement of illegal drugs, according to the administration official. The U.S. in particular has been pressing China to clamp down on the production of precursor chemicals used to make fentanyl. Sullivan also raised the cases of three American citizens imprisoned in China – Mark Swidan, Kai Li, and David Lin. All three have been designated by the State Department's office of the special presidential envoy on hostage affairs designates as "wrongful detainees." Tensions between the countries spiked last year after then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's visit to democratically governed Taiwan. That visit, the first by a sitting House speaker since Newt Gingrich in 1997, led China, which claims the island as its territory, to launch military exercises around Taiwan. U.S.-China relations became further strained earlier this year after the U.S. shot down a Chinese spy balloon that had crossed the United States. Beijing also was angered by Taiwan President Tsai Ing-wen's stopover in the U.S. last month that included an encounter with House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif. The speaker hosted the Taiwanese leader at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in southern California. But there are signs that the two sides are getting diplomatic communications back on track. President Joe Biden and Chinese President Xi Jinping held talks in Bali, Indonesia, in November. Secretary of State Antony Blinken was to travel to China in February, but the trip was postponed after the spy balloon incident. Blinken and Wang, China's top diplomat, met later in February on the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference after the U.S. had shot down the balloon. The White House has expressed interest in rescheduling Blinken's visit. White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre earlier this week said that Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen and Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo also could visit Beijing at some point. The talks between Sullivan and Wang was their first face-to-face meeting since Wang was elevated last year to the Communist Party's Politburo, the top policymaking body made up of the party's 24 most senior officials. Wang served as foreign minister for nearly 10 years and was the only diplomat promoted to the Politburo. U.S. Ambassador Nicholas Burns and Chinese Foreign Minister Qin Gang also met in Beijing this week, and Biden's special envoy for climate, John Kerry, held a call last month with his counterpart, Xie Zhenhua. Burns, during a virtual forum hosted by the Stimson Center earlier this month, said communication is improving. "Yes, we did have instances when we wanted to have certain very high-level conversations when it wasn't possible," Burns said. "But I have to say, in recent weeks, in the last month or so, there's been a consistent communication between myself and senior officials in the foreign ministry, my colleagues in the U.S. mission and their counterparts in the foreign ministry here."  

A federal judge in Virginia has ruled that a law banning licensed federal firearms dealers from selling handguns to young adults under 21 violates the Second Amendment and is unconstitutional. The ruling Wednesday by U.S. District Court Judge Robert Payne in Richmond, if not overturned, would allow dealers to sell handguns to 18- to 20-year-olds. In his 71-page ruling, Payne wrote that many of the rights and responsibilities of citizenship are granted at the age of 18, including the right to vote, enlist in the military without parental permission and serve on a federal jury. "If the Court were to exclude 18-to-20-year-olds from the Second Amendment's protection, it would impose limitations on the Second Amendment that do not exist with other constitutional guarantees," Payne wrote. "Because the statutes and regulations in question are not consistent with our Nation's history and tradition, they, therefore, cannot stand," he wrote. Payne's ruling is the latest decision striking down gun laws in the wake of a landmark Supreme Court ruling last year that changed the test courts have long used to evaluate challenges to firearm restrictions. The Supreme Court said judges should no longer consider whether the law serves public interests, like enhancing public safety. Governments that want to uphold a gun restriction must look back into history to show it is consistent with the country's "historical tradition of firearm regulation," the Supreme Court said. Amid upheaval in the months since that ruling, courts have declared unconstitutional laws including federal measures designed to keep guns out of the hands of domestic abusers and defendants under felony indictment, as well as a ban on possessing guns with the serial number removed. A federal judge recently cited the high court decision in ruling against a Minnesota law prohibiting 18- to 20-year-olds from getting permits to carry handguns in public. A judge struck down a similar law last year on gun restrictions for young adults in Texas. Payne, who cited the 2022 Supreme Court ruling repeatedly in his ruling, wrote that the government failed to present "any evidence of age-based restrictions on the purchase or sale of firearms from the colonial era, Founding or Early Republic." The lack of similar regulations from those time periods indicates that the "Founders considered age-based regulations on the purchase of firearms to circumscribe the right to keep and bear arms confirmed by the Second Amendment," he wrote. John Corey Fraser, 20, along with several other plaintiffs, challenged the constitutionality of the Gun Control Act of 1968 and the associated regulations from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives after they were turned down when they tried to buy handguns. "Even though it ensures that future buyers can now purchase these firearms in the federal system — one that includes background checks and other requirements — we expect the defendants will appeal," said Elliott Harding, Fraser's attorney. He said he is optimistic that the ruling will be affirmed. Harding said the lawsuit was aimed at "closing a loophole" because 18- to 20-year-olds can already buy handguns from private sellers, a process that is "completely unregulated." "This allows them to go in and buy a registered firearm, direct from a manufacturer, but they'll also go through background checks," he said. "They have to go through the traditional steps in purchasing a firearm." Everytown Law, a legal group that advocates for gun violence prevention in the courts and has filed a brief supporting the age restrictions, said the law is constitutional and an essential tool for preventing gun violence. "Not only are guns the leading cause of death for U.S. kids and teens, but research shows us that 18- to 20-year-olds commit gun homicides at triple the rate of adults 21 years and older," said Janet Carter, Everytown Law's senior director of issues and appeals. "The Court's ruling will undoubtedly put lives at risk," she said. "It must be reversed." The Justice Department and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives did not respond to emails seeking comment on the ruling.  

A jury found Donald Trump liable Tuesday for sexually abusing advice columnist E. Jean Carroll in 1996, awarding her $5 million in a judgment that could haunt the former president as he campaigns to regain the White House. The verdict was split: Jurors rejected Carroll’s claim that she was raped, finding Trump responsible for a lesser degree of sexual abuse. The judgment adds to Trump's legal woes and offers vindication to Carroll, whose allegations had been mocked and dismissed by Trump for years. She nodded as the verdict was announced in a New York City federal courtroom only three hours after deliberations had begun, then hugged supporters and smiled through tears. As the courtroom cleared, Carroll could be heard laughing and crying. Jurors also found Trump liable for defaming Carroll over her allegations. Trump did not attend the civil trial and was absent when the verdict was read. Trump immediately lashed out on his social media site, claiming that he does not know Carroll and referring to the verdict as “a disgrace” and “a continuation of the greatest witch hunt of all time.” He promised to appeal. Trump’s lawyer, Joseph Tacopina, shook hands with Carroll and hugged her lawyer, Roberta Kaplan, after the verdict was announced. Outside the courthouse, he told reporters the jury's rejection of the rape claim while finding Trump responsible for sexual abuse was “perplexing” and “strange.” “Part of me was obviously very happy that Donald Trump was not branded a rapist," he said. He defended Trump's absence, citing the trial's “circus atmosphere." He said having Trump there "would be more of a circus.” Tacopina added: “What more can you say other than ‘I didn’t do it'?" In a written statement, Kaplan said the verdict proved nobody is above the law, “not even the president of the United States.” Carroll, in her own statement, said she sued Trump to “clear my name and to get my life back. Today, the world finally knows the truth. This victory is not just for me but for every woman who has suffered because she was not believed.” It was unclear what, if any, implications the verdict would have on Trump’s third presidential bid. He’s in a commanding position among GOP contenders and has faced few political consequences in the wake of previous controversies, ranging from the vulgar “Access Hollywood” tape to his New York criminal indictment. His GOP rivals were mostly silent after the verdict, a sign of their reluctance to cross Trump supporters who are critical to winning the presidential nomination. Former Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson, one of the few vocal Trump critics in the race, said the verdict was “another example of the indefensible behavior of Donald Trump.” Carroll was one of more than a dozen women who have accused Trump of sexual assault or harassment. She went public in a 2019 memoir with her allegation that the Republican raped her in the dressing room of a posh Manhattan department store. Trump, 76, denied it, saying he never encountered Carroll at the store and did not know her. He has called her a “nut job” who invented “a fraudulent and false story” to sell a memoir. Carroll, 79, sought unspecified damages, plus a retraction of what she said were Trump’s defamatory denials of her claims. The trial revisited the lightning-rod topic of Trump’s conduct toward women. Carroll gave multiple days of frank, occasionally emotional testimony, buttressed by two friends who testified that she reported the alleged attack to them soon afterward. Jurors also heard from Jessica Leeds, a former stockbroker who testified that Trump abruptly groped her against her will on an airline flight in the 1970s, and from Natasha Stoynoff, a writer who said Trump forcibly kissed her against her will while she was interviewing him for a 2005 article. The six-man, three-woman jury also saw the well-known 2005 “Access Hollywood” hot-mic recording of Trump talking about kissing and grabbing women without asking. The Associated Press typically does not name people who say they have been sexually assaulted unless they come forward publicly, as Carroll, Leeds and Stoynoff have done. The verdict comes as Trump faces an accelerating swirl of legal risks. He’s fighting a New York criminal case related to hush money payments made to a porn actor. The state attorney general has sued him, his family and his business over alleged financial wrongdoing. Trump is also contending with investigations into his possible mishandling of classified documents, his actions after the 2020 election and his activities during the insurrection at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. Trump denies wrongdoing in all of those matters. Carroll, who penned an Elle magazine advice column for 27 years, has also written for magazines and “Saturday Night Live.” She and Trump were in social circles that overlapped at a 1987 party, where a photo documented them and their then-spouses interacting. Trump has said he doesn’t remember it. According to Carroll, she ended up in a dressing room with Trump after they ran into each other at Bergdorf Goodman on an unspecified Thursday evening in spring 1996. They took an impromptu jaunt to the lingerie department so he could search for a women’s gift and soon were teasing each other about trying on a skimpy bodysuit, Carroll testified. To her, it seemed like comedy, something like her 1986 “Saturday Night Live” sketch in which a man admires himself in a mirror. But then, she said, Trump slammed the door, pinned her against a wall, planted his mouth on hers, yanked her tights down and raped her as she tried to break away. Carroll said she ultimately pushed him off with her knee and immediately left the store. “I always think back to why I walked in there to get myself in that situation,” she testified, her voice breaking, “but I’m proud to say I did get out.” She never called police or noted it in her diary. Carroll said she kept silent for fear Trump would retaliate, out of shame and because she worried that people would see her as somewhat responsible for being attacked. The jury awarded Carroll $2 million for Trump’s sexual abuse and $20,000 in punitive damages. For defamation, jurors awarded $1 million for Trump's October statement, another $1.7 million for harm to Carroll's reputation and $280,000 in punitive damages. Tacopina told jurors Carroll invented her claims after hearing about a 2012 “Law and Order” episode in which a woman is raped in the dressing room of the lingerie section of a Bergdorf Goodman store. Carroll “cannot produce any objective evidence to back up her claim because it didn’t happen,” he told jurors. He accused her of “advancing a false claim of rape for money, for political reasons and for status.” In questioning Carroll, he sought to cast doubt on her description of fighting off the far heavier Trump without dropping her handbag or ripping her tights, and without anyone around to hear or see them in the lingerie section. The lawyer pressed her about — by her own account — not screaming, looking for help while fleeing the store or seeking out medical attention, security video or police. Carroll reproached him. “I’m telling you he raped me, whether I screamed or not,” she said. There’s no possibility of Trump being charged with attacking Carroll, as the legal time limit has long since passed. For similar reasons, she initially filed her civil case as a defamation lawsuit, saying Trump’s derogatory denials had subjected her to hatred, shredded her reputation and harmed her career. Then, starting last fall, New York state gave people a chance to sue over sexual assault allegations that would otherwise be too old. Carroll was one of the first to file.

President Joe Biden said Monday his administration will write new regulations that will require airlines to compensate air travelers and cover their meals and hotel rooms if they are stranded for reasons within the airline's control. The compensation would be in addition to ticket refunds when the airline is at fault for a flight being canceled or significantly delayed. It would give consumers in the United States protections similar to those in the European Union. “I know how frustrated many of you are with the service you get from your U.S. airlines,” Biden said. “That's why our top priority has been to get American air travelers a better deal.” Biden added, “You deserve more than just getting the price of your ticket (refunded) — you deserve to be fully compensated. Your time matters, the impact on your life matters." Biden’s pledge comes just weeks before the start of the peak summer travel season, when air travel could exceed pre-coronavirus pandemic records. Officials at the Transportation Department, which will write the new rules, said they didn't have a precise date for when they expect to finish, but indicated they are working to quickly publish a notice that is required to get the process started. As outlined at the White House by Biden and Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, the rules would focus on cancellations and long delays caused by things such as mechanical issues with the plane or lack of a crew. Airlines for America, which represents the biggest carriers, said in a statement that airlines have no incentive to delay or cancel flights. The trade group said more than half of cancellations in 2022 and 2023 have been caused by “extreme weather” or air traffic control outages. “Carriers have taken responsibility for challenges within their control and continue working diligently to improve operational reliability,” including hiring more workers and reducing their schedules, the group said. After the pandemic hit, airlines received $54 billion in federal aid that included a prohibition on layoffs, but that didn't prevent them from paying tens of thousands of workers to quit or retire early. Airlines have added about 118,000 workers since November 2020 and now have 5% more employees than before the pandemic, according to Transportation Department figures. The rate of canceled flights has declined to 1.6% so far this year, compared with 2.1% in the same period last year. However, delays are slightly more common and a few minutes longer on average, according to data from tracking service FlightAware. Currently, when an airline cancels a flight for any reason, consumers can demand a refund of the unused part of their ticket and certain extras that they might have paid to the airline, such as fees for checking a bag or getting a seat assignment. Airlines often try to persuade consumers to accept a travel voucher instead of a refund. After widespread flight disruptions last summer, the Transportation Department posted an online dashboard to let consumers compare airline policies on refunds and compensation. The Transportation Department is expanding the site to indicate when airlines offer cash, travel vouchers or frequent-flyer miles as compensation for flight disruptions under their control. None of the major U.S. airlines offer cash for controllable cancellations or long delays, only Alaska Airlines offers frequent-flyer miles, and only Alaska and JetBlue provide travel credits, according to the dashboard. Biden and Buttigieg credited the dashboard with pushing the 10 largest U.S. airlines to promise to provide cash or vouchers for meals when a carrier-caused cancellation forces passengers to wait at least three hours for another flight. Nine of the 10 — all but Frontier Airlines — also promise under those circumstances to pay for accommodations for passengers stranded overnight. Questions arose again around reimbursing consumers for out-of-pocket costs after Southwest Airlines canceled nearly 17,000 flights during a December meltdown in service. The Transportation and Justice departments are investigating whether Southwest scheduled more flights than it realistically could handle. A report last month from the congressional Government Accountability Office blamed airlines for a surge in cancellations as air travel began to recover in 2021 and early 2022. The Federal Aviation Administration has also created disruptions due to technology outages and staffing shortages. The FAA recently encouraged airlines to reduce flights to and from major New York airports this summer because it doesn't have enough air traffic controllers at a key facility.

Police are preparing to arrest the hospitalized driver of an SUV that slammed into a crowd, killing eight people waiting for a bus Sunday outside a migrant shelter in the border city of Brownsville, Texas. At least 10 others were injured, authorities said. With no bench at the unmarked city bus stop, some of the victims were sitting on the curb around 8:30 a.m. when the driver hit them, surveillance video from the Bishop Enrique San Pedro Ozanam Center showed. Brownsville police investigator Martin Sandoval, who confirmed the latest death Sunday evening, said police did not know whether the collision was intentional. Shelter director Victor Maldonado said the SUV ran up the curb, flipped and continued moving for about 200 feet (60 meters). Some people walking on the sidewalk about 30 feet (9 meters) from the main group were also hit, Maldonado said. Witnesses detained the driver as he tried to run away and held him until police arrived, he said. "This SUV, a Range Rover, just ran the light that was about 100 feet (30 meters) away and just went through the people who were sitting there in the bus stop,” said Maldonado, who reviewed the shelter’s surveillance video. Victims struck by the vehicle were waiting for the bus to return to downtown Brownsville after spending the night at the overnight shelter, said Sister Norma Pimentel, executive director of Catholic Charities of the Rio Grande Valley. Most of the victims were Venezuelan men, Maldonado said. Brownsville has seen a surge of Venezuelan migrants over the last two weeks for unclear reasons, authorities said. On Thursday, 4,000 of about 6,000 migrants in Border Patrol custody in Texas’ Rio Grande Valley were Venezuelan. The driver was taken to the hospital for injuries sustained when the car rolled over, Sandoval said. There were no passengers in the car, and police didn’t immediately know the driver’s name or age, Sandoval said Sunday afternoon. Sandoval said there are three possible explanations for the collision: “It could be intoxication; it could be an accident; or it could be intentional. In order for us to find out exactly what happened, we have to eliminate the other two. “He’s being very uncooperative at the hospital, but he will be transported to our city jail as soon as he gets released," Sandoval said. "Then we’ll fingerprint him and (take a) mug shot, and then we can find his true identity.” Police retrieved a blood sample and sent it to a Texas Department of Public Safety lab to test for intoxicants. The surge in the number of migrants this week has prompted Brownsville commissioners to indefinitely extend a declaration of emergency during a special meeting Thursday. "We don’t want them wandering around outside,” Pedro Cardenas, a city commissioner, said Sunday after the crash. “So, we’re trying to make sure they’re as comfortable as they can be so they don’t have to go out and look for anywhere else.” Brownsville has long been an epicenter for migration across the U.S.-Mexico border, and it has become a key location of interest for next week's end to pandemic-era border restrictions known as Title 42. The Ozanam shelter is the only overnight shelter in the city and manages the release of thousands of migrants from federal custody. Maldonado said the center had not received any threats before the crash, but did afterward. “I've had a couple of people come by the gate and tell the security guard that the reason this happened was because of us,” Maldonado said. About 2,500 migrants have crossed through the river daily into Brownsville in the past few days, Cardenas said. He said the Border Patrol is aware of the city’s capacity of 1,000 at their processing area near the crossing point and a downtown building where city employees and volunteers guide migrants on how to purchase bus or plane tickets to their final destinations. The city is considering expanding services to accommodate needs in the coming days, Cardenas said. While 80% of people released from federal custody leave the same day, the city’s emergency management official said, a bottleneck has formed over the past few days. “Most of the people coming across don’t want to stay in Brownsville, but we don’t have enough buses for them to buy their ticket to leave,” Cardenas said. “Some are waiting for family members.” The Ozanam shelter can hold 250, but many who arrive leave the same day. In the last several weeks, an uptick in border crossings prompted the city to declare an emergency as local, state and federal resources coordinated enforcement and humanitarian response. “In the last two months, we’ve been getting 250 to 380 a day,” Maldonado said. While the shelter offers migrants transportation during the week, they also use the city’s public transportation. Rochelle Garza, president of the Texas Civil Rights Project, said in a statement shared Sunday afternoon: “I hope that today serves as a wake up call, and that state officials will begin investing in a humanitarian response that might have helped the people who were impacted by this morning’s tragedy." U.S. Rep. Vicente González said Sunday that local officials are in communication with the federal government about the crash. “We are all extremely sad and heartbroken to have such a tragedy in our neighborhood," he said.

Former President Donald Trump rejected his last chance Sunday to testify at a civil trial where a longtime advice columnist has accused him of raping her in a luxury department store dressing room in 1996. Trump, a Republican candidate for president in 2024, was given until 5 p.m. Sunday by U.S. District Judge Lewis A. Kaplan to file a request to testify. Nothing was filed. It was not a surprise. Trump has not shown up once during the two-week Manhattan trial where writer E. Jean Carroll testified for several days, repeating claims she first made publicly in a 2019 memoir. She is seeking compensatory and punitive damages totaling millions of dollars. The jury has also watched lengthy excerpts from an October videotaped deposition in which Trump vehemently denied raping Carroll or ever really knowing her. Without Trump’s testimony, lawyers were scheduled to make closing arguments Monday, with deliberations likely to begin on Tuesday. After plaintiffs rested their case Thursday, Trump attorney Joe Tacopina immediately rested the defense case as well without calling any witnesses. He did not request additional time for Trump to decide to testify. Tacopina declined in an email to comment after the deadline passed Sunday. On Thursday, Kaplan had given Trump extra time to change his mind and request to testify, though the judge did not promise he would grant such a request to reopen the defense case so Trump could take the stand. At the time, Kaplan noted that he’d heard about news reports Thursday in which Trump told reporters while visiting his golf course in Doonbeg, Ireland, that he would “probably attend” the trial. Trump also criticized Kaplan, a Bill Clinton appointee, as an “extremely hostile” and “rough judge” who “doesn’t like me very much.” On the witness stand, Carroll, 79, testified that Trump, 76, raped her in spring 1996 after they met at the entrance of the midtown Manhattan department store Bergdorf Goodman. She said the encounter began as a fun and flirtatious outing as Trump coaxed her into helping him shop for a gift for another woman. She said they ended up in the store’s desolate lingerie section, where they teased each other to try on a see-through bodysuit. As Carroll recalled it, laughter accompanied them into a dressing room where Trump became violent, slamming her up against a wall, pulling aside her tights and raping her before she kneed him and fled the store. In his deposition, Trump said Carroll made it up. He called it “a false, disgusting lie” delivered by a “nut job” who was trying to stoke sales of her book. He also repeated comments he made in statements that she was not his “type.” “She’s not my type and that’s 100% true,” he said. And he repeated his claims in a 2005 “Access Hollywood” video in which he bragged that men who are celebrities can grab women by the genitals without asking. “Historically that’s true with stars,” he said. Carroll sued Trump in November, minutes after New York state enacted a law allowing adult sexual assault victims to sue others even if the attacks occurred decades earlier. Carroll’s attorney, Roberta Kaplan, wrote a letter to the judge Sunday to complain that Trump still has not removed April 26 posts on his social media network in which he called Carroll’s allegations “a made up SCAM.” And she noted that he repeated disparaging remarks about the trial three days ago in Ireland. After the April 26 postings on Truth Social, Judge Kaplan, who is not related to Carroll’s lawyer, said Trump’s comments were “highly inappropriate” and expressed concern that Trump was trying to communicate to the jury “about stuff that has no business being spoken about.” The Associated Press typically does not name people who say they have been sexually assaulted unless they come forward publicly, as Carroll has done.