Home Blog Page 54

Best pest control company for your home

0

Mosquitoes, spiders, ants…oh my! When pests invade your home, it can really feel like you’ve been to war. But with the right pest control company at your disposal, victory is easy.

USA TODAY researched the top 15 pest control companies in the United States and created a list of the top six pest control companies that exterminate everything from the smallest bed bugs to the largest wild animals.

Which pest control is best?

The best pest control companies are Orkin and Terminix. Both companies operate nationwide and can exterminate everything from ants and ticks to termites and bedbugs.

However, the right pest control company will depend on your home, location, pests, and budget. This means that one of the other companies on our best list may be a better fit.

best pest control company

  • Orkin Pest Control: Ideal for general pest control
  • Terminal: Ideal for termite extermination
  • Proper pest control: Ideal for environmentally friendly pest control
  • Viking Pest Control: Best service guarantee
  • mosquito joe: Ideal for exterminating mosquitoes and ticks.
  • Creature control: Ideal for wildlife control

Why trust USA TODAY?

The USA TODAY review team conducts all research in-house and vets all companies featured on our ranking list. We call customer service, get real quotes, and comb through customer reviews to truly understand what these pest control companies have to offer.

Orkin Pest Control: Great for general pest control

  • Average cost: $50 to $80 per month
  • Top pests: Crawling pests, flying pests, rodents, termites, bed bugs, stinging pests

Orkin Pest Control is well known in the pest control world, and for good reason. General pest control services are performed quarterly and treat over 20 common household pests, including ants, cockroaches, beetles, fleas, and ticks.

Each treatment comes with a 60-day service guarantee that guarantees re-treatment if your pest problem returns. To work with Orkin, all technicians must complete 160 hours of training, so each provider you visit is a certified pest specialist.

Strong Points:

  • 125 years of pest control experience
  • Over 400 locations nationwide
  • Certified technicians who have completed 160 hours of training
  • Providing general pest control, specialized pest services, and home services.

Cons:

  • There is no free inspection, but estimates are free.
  • Specialized pest management can be expensive
  • Quality of service may vary depending on branch location

Terminix: Ideal for termite extermination

Get a free quote

  • Average cost: $40-$70
  • Top pests: Termites, crawling pests, biting pests, rodents, flying pests, bed bugs

Although Terminix is ​​best known for termite control, we also offer general pest control and home insulation services.

If termites are eating away at your home, give Terminix a call. Our trained technicians will perform a free inspection to determine the extent of the damage, eliminate the termite colony, and develop a plan to prevent termite infestations from recurring. Terminix also offers an annual termite prevention plan (PestFree365+) that can prevent up to 39 common pests from taking over your home.

Strong Points:

  • Experienced termite extermination experts
  • Up to $250,000 in termite damage repair coverage on eligible plans
  • Nearly 100 years of pest control experience
  • We also offer residential services such as attic insulation and subfloor space encapsulation.

Cons:

  • Quality of service may vary by branch
  • Some pest species excluded from general pest control plans

Proper Pest Control: Best for eco-friendly pest control

Get a free quote

  • Average cost: $50/month
  • Top pests: Ants, spiders, cockroaches, wasps, rats, mice, centipedes, crickets, earwigs, silverfish, mites, fleas, millipedes and other common household pests

Aptive pest control is a child, pet, and eco-friendly pest control company that offers three different annual plans: Basic, Pro, and Premium. Each of these plans includes seasonal pest control in advance of pest activity, while professional and premium treatments occur more frequently during peak pest season. Treatments start at $49, a bargain compared to the cost of regular pest control treatments, which cost nearly three times as much.

Aptive focuses primarily on outdoor pests. Pro and Premium services include pantry pests, but you’ll have to pay extra for other specialized pest control, such as rodents.

Strong Points:

  • We focus on environmentally friendly pest control methods.
  • Available nationwide
  • Free re-treatment guarantee if target pests return between scheduled treatments

Cons:

  • We do not treat bed bugs.
  • Wildlife management services are generally not provided
  • Rodent removal usually requires a separate professional service

Viking Pest Control: Best Service Guarantee

Get a free quote

  • Average cost: $55 per month
  • Top pests: Ants, rats, mice, cockroaches, spiders, termites, mosquitoes, ticks, biting insects, centipedes, earwigs, paper fish, fleas, etc.

What sets Viking Pest Control apart from our competitors is our service guarantee. An active home pest prevention plan entitles you to unlimited free service requests for covered pests. So if the pests return during treatment, you’ll be covered right away.

Viking Pest Control’s Anticimex SMART pest control system is an environmentally friendly system that tracks mouse activity. By monitoring your home 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, we can predict and prevent rodent intrusion. This is different from what our competitors offer.

If you live in the Northeast, it’s worth giving Viking Pest Control a call. However, homeowners in other areas will need to look elsewhere for pest control services.

Strong Points:

  • Top plan covers up to 72 pests
  • Unlimited free service calls between scheduled visits
  • Mosquito, tick and termite coverage can be included in premium plans

Cons:

  • Limited service area (primarily available in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Maryland)
  • Preventive visits occur quarterly

Mosquito Joe: Perfect for killing mosquitoes and ticks

Get a free quote

  • Average cost: $80 to $100 per month
  • Top pests: Mosquitoes, flies, gnats, ticks

Mosquitoes can ruin even the most beautiful summer day. Mosquito Joe is a pest control company that keeps mosquitoes away. During mosquito season, Mosquito Joe sprays your yard every three weeks to turn your backyard into a paradise for summer BBQs, pool days, and bonfires.

Mosquito Jaw treatments don’t just cover mosquitoes. It also keeps dust mites away. And with the worst tick season ever predicted, this treatment is more important than ever.

Strong Points:

  • Specializes in mosquito control
  • Providers offering tick and fly treatment services
  • Comes every 3 weeks during the summer

Cons:

  • We do not provide general pest control services.
  • Few professional pest control services available

Creature Removal: Ideal for wildlife removal

Get a free quote

  • Average cost: Not applicable, quote required
  • Top pests: Wildlife such as rodents, squirrels, and bats

Critter Control is exactly that. Get rid of unwanted wild animals that have settled in your home. Critter Control offers specialized pest control plans to get rid of raccoons, squirrels, rats, mice, bats, and more.

This company does not offer general pest control services like the other providers on our list, instead focusing entirely on wildlife services.

Strong Points:

  • We also provide rat and mouse extermination.
  • We provide wildlife removal that most pest control companies don’t offer
  • Available nationwide

Cons:

  • There is no general pest control plan
  • You need to get a professional quote for the price.

Do I need a pest control company?

DIY pest control can be effective to some extent, but in the case of large-scale pest infestations or nuisance pests like termites or bed bugs, you should call in the professionals. They have the knowledge, experience, and equipment to deal with pest problems quickly.

Pest control companies know how to exterminate pests and prevent them from returning, which can prevent serious problems like structural damage to your home and the spread of disease.

What to expect from a pest control company

When choosing a pest control company, you should keep the following points in mind:

  • Fee: Most pest control companies charge a fee based on their processing fee, so you end up paying a fee each time you receive pest control services. pest control cost $40 to $80 per month or $80 to $160 per treatmenton average. Choose a company that fits your budget.
  • Pest specialist services: Not all exterminators can exterminate all pests. For convenience, if you want all your pests covered by the same company, choose a provider that covers all the major pests in your area. Wildlife such as fleas, termites, bed bugs, and bats are also common.
  • Treatment frequency: Most pest control companies offer quarterly treatments, while others offer monthly or bimonthly treatments during high pest seasons (such as spring and summer).
  • Service guarantee: A service guarantee is one of the most important features to look for in a pest control company. Most providers will set back your yard for free between services, but some have a 30-day limit on reprocessing.
  • Customer service: When you have a pest problem, what you have to deal with is withholding. For the best experience, choose a provider with positive reviews and solid customer service.

Pests commonly included in general pest control plans

Almost all common pests are included in the average pest control plan. Pests you are likely to encounter include:

  • crawling insects These include ants (though fire ants may be redundant), cockroaches, silverfish, centipedes, millipedes, earwigs, and crickets.
  • Arachnids including spiders (the most common variety) and scorpions.
  • rodent such as mice and rats.
  • stinging insect Hornets, hornets, yellow hornets, honeybees, etc. (but this varies by provider)

Rodent coverage is a wild card. Some pest control companies include them in their general pest control, while others include them in higher-level plans or offer rat and rat control as an additional specialty service.

Special pest control plan

Unfortunately, the most difficult pests to get rid of are often left out of typical pest control plans. Pests such as fleas, termites, bed bugs, and wildlife infestations require professional treatment and prevention. Serious stinging insect infestations, such as wasps and carpenter bees, may require special plans that are not included in typical pest control services.

“If you have termites, they’re a pest that I highly recommend you don’t try to deal with on your own,” says Matt Smith, co-owner of Green Pest Management, a pest control company serving Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Tennessee. “At the very least, get it checked by a professional to find out where the problem is and how serious the problem is.”

SAVE Act revolt stalls Congress, sending lawmakers home

0


The House canceled the vote and went into an early July Fourth recess as Speaker Mike Johnson struggled to appease the hardliners who had essentially taken over the proceedings.

play

WASHINGTON — Amid a Republican revolt to tighten voting restrictions, the House is stalled on passing critical legislation that will keep Americans safe and keep the wheels of government turning.

Speaker of the House Mike Johnson abruptly adjourned the chamber on Tuesday, June 30th. The impasse over several disagreements, including passing election reform legislation known as the Save America Act, which President Donald Trump has said is a top priority, forced him to cancel voting and send lawmakers home early for the Fourth of July holiday.

The House failed to approve a procedural bill known as a “rule” on Tuesday after about a dozen Republicans decided to let the bill sink, effectively paralyzing the Republican leadership’s legislative timeline.

Some were angered by Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s strategy to pass SAVE, which hardliners have publicly declared ineffective. Some said they had been promised a vote on another border security bill but had not gotten it.

Shortly after, the Defense Policy Act, which the Pentagon must pass every year, stalled. But the House also lost several voting days, which will be difficult to regain.

The infighting has wreaked havoc within the Republican-controlled Congress, jeopardizing the party’s ability to further achieve its policy goals as the midterm elections approach. More urgently, it continues to prevent Congress from performing its more basic functions, on which so many Americans depend.

“Broadly speaking, there are things we need to move forward with, things we’ve all been talking about, things that aren’t happening, things that are starting to become bottlenecks,” Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), one of the lawmakers blocking the agenda, told USA TODAY. “We need to find a way to open things up again.”

Johnson blamed the problem on the Republican Party’s razor-thin House majority (although the party’s standing improved slightly on Tuesday, when a New Jersey lawmaker finally reappeared on Capitol Hill for the first time in four months for health reasons).

“This is a close life,” the speaker told reporters before canceling the vote. “We will get through it.”

Democrats did little to hide their frustration amid what House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries called “Republican dysfunction.”

“What on earth are we doing here?” said Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) in a floor speech. “Every week I wonder if someone is going to have a seizure, if Donald Trump is going to make some weird post and blow everything up, if Mike Johnson is going to bring something to the floor when there are no votes.”

Republican Rep. Anna Paulina Luna of Florida, one of the lawmakers pursuing the Save America Act, which would require proof of citizenship and a photo ID to vote, defended herself on the steps of the Capitol on Tuesday. Even though Trump, who met with Johnson just last week, encouraged Republicans like him to “stop the grandstanding” over his demands to pass voting restriction legislation, he and other hardliners remained undaunted.

“The only thing I can do is use my vote,” Luna said. “Why don’t we do everything we can?”

Contributed by: Reuters

Zachary Schermele is USA TODAY’s Congressional Correspondent. You can email us at zschermele@usatoday.com. Follow him on X at @ZachSchermele and on Bluesky at @zachschermele.bsky.social..

LeBron James becomes NBA free agent after leaving Lakers

0

play

LeBron James’ next decision is here, and it could change the NBA landscape once again. Ahead of the start of the league’s free agency period, multiple reports reported on Tuesday, June 30, that the league’s all-time leading scorer has informed the Los Angeles Lakers that he plans to play elsewhere during the 2026-27 season.

James will be the most coveted free agent on the market, especially if he’s willing to take a pay cut, despite entering his 24th NBA season. He signed with the Lakers ahead of the 2018-19 NBA season and won the 2020 NBA Championship with the franchise inside the coronavirus bubble. The 41-year-old is one year away from earning All-NBA honors.

The Golden State Warriors are considered the frontrunners to sign James after Draymond Green decided to opt out of his contract to give the team financial flexibility. But that would cost James less money than he has in the past, and there are other potential suitors, including two of James’ former teams.

Now that James has informed the Lakers that he plans to play elsewhere during the 2026-27 season, here’s a breakdown of the potential spots for James to become an NBA free agent.

Lebron james landing spot

golden state warriors

Considering recent developments, the Warriors have emerged as early favorites to acquire James. If James is willing to accept a mid-level exception of around $15 million, it would open up a relatively easy path for Stephen Curry and Green to be on Golden State’s roster next season.

cleveland cavaliers

James’ possible return to Cleveland has long been considered and could give the Cavaliers the veteran boost they need to get through their current mainstay in the Eastern Conference. James Harden’s decision to agree to a new contract would give Cleveland enough flexibility to make this happen, either through the midfield exception or a sign-and-trade.

miami heat

Would James want to work with Giannis Antetokounmpo and get a deep discount? That’s probably what South Beach needs to make its comeback. It’s also unclear whether James and Antetokounmpo will be able to work with Bam Adebayo. But Pat Riley has always taken big swings. Acquiring James and Giannis in the same offseason would be the ultimate.

denver nuggets

The Nuggets are a big target in this process, but the pairing of James and Nikola Jokic would create one of the most basketball-savvy duos of all time. Denver could make this happen as a sign-and-trade or if James intends to take the veteran minimum wage.

Los Angeles Lakers

James has told the Lakers he intends to play elsewhere, but the Lakers are still the team that could pay him the most given their cap situation. Perhaps James will find a better fit elsewhere. Perhaps the Lakers will do the same with other players. But don’t completely close the door on James and the Lakers just because more money and leverage could always change their minds.

How Cracker Barrel is winning back customers after the backlash

0

play

  • Cracker Barrel is making a comeback after a failed rebranding attempt last year.
  • The company’s recovery can be attributed to the return of traditional menu items and Americana-themed products.
  • Its 2025 plan to modernize its logo and store decorations sparked widespread customer backlash.

Nearly a year after a failed rebranding attempt, Cracker Barrel appears to be back on its feet.

According to a recent LinkedIn News report, the Middle Tennessee-based company has bounced back by bringing back its traditional menu and introducing Americana-themed items.

“New products like patriotic shirts and salt shakers are clearly resonating with customers,” LinkedIn wrote in a June 10 report. “The decline in store foot traffic has slowed, the company revised its full-year revenue outlook upward this week, and the stock soared on Wednesday.”

In 2025, the company caused a shock by announcing plans to retire its popular logo featuring the iconic “Oldtimer” and replace it with a minimalist design. As part of the rebrand, the company also aimed to renovate its restaurants, doing away with the mismatched, cluttered decor and cluttered walls that were popular.

“Cracker Barrel needs to feel like Cracker Barrel today and tomorrow. The things you love are still there,” Cracker Barrel CEO Julie Fels Masino said in an interview on “Good Morning America.” “We need people to choose us, and we want people to choose us.”

The move sparked widespread backlash and drew the attention of several Republican officials, including President Donald Trump.

Here’s what you need to know about how Cracker Barrel was able to win back customers.

How Cracker Barrel was able to bounce back from a disastrous rebranding attempt

According to LinkedIn, Cracker Barrel’s recovery was fueled by its decision to lean into the nostalgia its customers have come to love.

Earlier this year, Cracker Barrel announced a partnership with America 250 to commemorate the anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence and “celebrate the traditions and people that define America.”

“Cracker Barrel has always been more than just a restaurant, it has always been a place where Americans reconnect with their traditions, with each other and with the comforts of familiar food and nostalgic surroundings,” Chief Marketing Officer Sarah Moore said in a statement.

“Our partnership with America250 is a natural extension of our heritage and reflects the way we have always brought people together through comforting flavors and shared moments that give meaning to everyday life.”

The partnership includes limited-time merchandise, new menu items and a reimagined version of the iconic rocking chair that has long been synonymous with the Cracker Barrel experience.

What was the reaction to Cracker Barrel’s rebranding attempt?

Viewers expressed strong opposition to Cracker Barrel’s rebranding attempt, with some vowing not to return until they restored the logo and previous interior design.

Comments flooded social media urging the chain to reverse the changes, many calling for Masino’s resignation, and the company also reported a drop in profits.

In West Nashville, “Fired CEO” signs, styled similar to Cracker Barrel’s rebranded logo with brown text on a gold-yellow background, were installed along Interstate 40.

Cracker Barrel media personnel said the sign was installed by Sardar Biglari, who owns Steak ‘n Shake, Western Sizzlin’ and Maxim Magazine. A statement provided to the Tennessean on Sept. 18 said the sign was “exactly the kind of stunt we would expect from him.”

Additionally, political conservatives argued that the changes were based on practices of diversity, equity, and inclusion. President Trump ultimately weighed in on the issue and called on the chain industry to “make Cracker Barrel a winner again.”

The controversy was so severe that the company had to stop renovating the restaurant and changing its logo.

“If your restaurant hasn’t been renovated, don’t worry; it won’t be,” the company acknowledged in a statement titled “Your Old Country Store Is Here to Stay.”

Diana Leyva covers trending news and service journalism for The Tennessean. Contact Dleyva@gannett.com.

Clarence Thomas and Ketanji Brown Jackson clash over birthright citizenship

0


The Supreme Court’s birthright citizenship case sparked a contentious briefing between the court’s two black justices.

play

The Supreme Court’s June 30 rejection of President Donald Trump’s attempt to limit birthright citizenship also fueled a debate between the court’s two black justices.

Judge Clarence Thomas, appointed by Republican President George H.W. Bush, and Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, appointed by Democratic President Joe Biden, differed sharply on aspects of the case’s key issue: whether the 14th Amendment guarantees citizenship to everyone born in the United States.

The case stemmed from President Trump’s orders to federal agencies. do not have Grants citizenship to infants born in the United States if at least one parent is a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident. Expectant parents, immigrant rights groups, and 22 state attorneys general filed a lawsuit challenging the order.

The 6-3 majority decision found that President Trump cannot change the definition of how constitutional guarantees have been historically understood and that children born to parents who are in the United States illegally or temporarily still meet the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment.

The Fourteenth Amendment provides that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and who are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, are nationals of the United States and of the state in which they reside.”

President Trump has argued that the amendment, ratified in 1868 after the Civil War, was intended to protect the rights of enslaved children, not the rights of temporary visitors or illegal immigrants it sought to exclude.

Justices Thomas and Jackson focused in part on the court’s infamous 1857 Dred Scott decision, which ruled that slaves could not become citizens or claim the resulting rights and privileges.

In his dissent, Justice Thomas said Congress overruled Dred Scott under the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the Fourteenth Amendment. But neither provision confers citizenship on visitors, he argued.

“Both the Civil Rights Act and the Citizenship Clause guaranteed citizenship to anyone born and resident in the United States, regardless of race,” Thomas wrote to himself and Justice Neil Gorsuch. “Neither guaranteed citizenship to anyone without a domicile in the United States.”

Unlike temporary visitors from other countries, blacks were Americans and therefore entitled to citizenship. “They had no other homeland, owed allegiance to no foreign power, and were not subject to any other authority,” he wrote. He also said the 14th Amendment had been “transferred into a political project that the Reconstruction Congress did not support.”

But Jackson, in a concurring opinion, hit on Thomas, saying Thomas had “recycled” the 14th Amendment and went along with the “abhorrent” Dred Scott decision in his agreement with Trump to deny citizenship to tourists and the children of illegal immigrants.

She argued that the 14th Amendment’s “universalist purpose” persists through past debates over whether children of Chinese or Roma immigrants should be considered citizens.

“The Reconstruction Amendment was an anti-caste, anti-subordination reset on the nation, more than just a spot-on cure for the dark stains of slavery,” she wrote, arguing that the minority opinion “pitches black Americans against immigrants, when the proponents of the Fourteenth Amendment did no such thing. Freed blacks fought for the humanity shared by all peoples.”

“Their conclusion is that for certain people, being born on American soil is not enough to confer citizenship,” Jackson wrote.

Kylian Mbappé vs. Sweden goal approaches Messi’s World Cup scoring record

0

EAST RUTHERFORD, N.J. — Kylian Mbappé continues to score goals at the 2026 FIFA World Cup.

In the 45th minute of Tuesday’s Round of 32 match against Sweden, Mbappe swung through the Swedish defense and scored, beating Broghardt goaltender Jakob Wider Zetterström at the net to give France a 1-0 lead just before half-time.

This was Mbappé’s ninth goal in the World Cup finals, and a record for an individual player in the tournament. This was also his fifth goal in the 2026 World Cup. He now surpasses Germany’s Miroslav Klose to become the second-highest goalscorer in men’s World Cup history, behind Lionel Messi’s 19 World Cup goals for Argentina.

Mbappé’s goal ended a strong first half, with France and Mbappé unable to score early in the game. In the 20th minute, Mbappe swung past the Swedish defense in midfield to clear the grass, but the goal was ruled out for offside. Moments later, Mbappe hit the post with a shot that briefly sparked a post-goal celebration.

This is the third game in this tournament that the Real Madrid forward has scored for France. His first goal on Tuesday was the 61st of his Les Bleus career, joining France’s all-time goalscoring list.

But in true Mbappé fashion, that wouldn’t be his last goal of the day.

In the 74th minute, Mbappe curled a shot past Videl Zetterström for his 18th World Cup goal, bringing him within one goal of Messi. It was Mbappé’s third second goal in this tournament.

Mbappé helped lead France to four consecutive World Cup finals. Les Bleus won Group I with nine points after defeating Senegal, Iraq and Norway.

If France defeats Sweden on Tuesday, Les Bleus will face Paraguay on Saturday, July 4th at Lincoln Financial Field in Philadelphia.

Texas city bans data center as voters oppose project

0

play

Texas’ welcome to the data center industry clashed with growing opposition in June, when a new poll showed a majority of voters opposed the project. Counties have tried and failed, one city has banned them, and the governor has hinted at future restrictions.

The San Marcos City Council adopted a new ordinance on Tuesday, June 16, amending zoning regulations that effectively ban data center development in the city, citing concerns about the strain the project would place on local water and energy resources.

The ordinance narrowly passed on a 4-3 vote, making it the first time a Texas city has banned data centers. But this isn’t the first sign of opposition from Texans to the industry.

A poll released last week by the University of Texas and the Texas Politics Project found that 56% of Texas voters oppose building data centers in their region, with 42% strongly opposed.

Two Texas counties also attempted to halt data center construction this year, but neither was successful.

As the Texas Tribune reported, Hill County leaders passed a moratorium on the data center, but it was later rescinded after the developer sued the county for $100 million in June. Another moratorium was in place in Hood County, but county leaders rescinded it after the Texas Senate sought the attorney general’s opinion on whether the county could impose such restrictions.

Texas leaders are also eyeing data center regulationsMr. Abbott announced on June 10 that he had directed state regulators to require the implementation of the DA.The ta center must fully cover the cost of the electricity infrastructure necessary for its operation.

Mr. Abbott indicated that he intends to work with the 90th Texas Legislature, which convenes in January 2027, to:

  • Require data centers to implement best practices such as setbacks, noise reduction technologies, and other measures to reduce their impact on local communities.
  • Codifies actions by state regulators to require data centers to pay for their own electrical infrastructure costs.
  • The data center will definitely increase Texas’ power demand as well as power capacity.
  • Require all new data centers to be built with water-efficient technologies such as closed-loop cooling systems.
  • Require large data centers to annually report electricity and water usage to state regulators.
  • Eliminate sales tax exemptions and other outdated or unnecessary incentives for data centers.

Mateo Rosiles is a Texas Connect reporter for USA TODAY and local Texas newspapers. Do you have any news tips for him? Email us at mrosiles@usatodayco.com.

State-by-state guide to banning trans athletes

0

play

The U.S. Supreme Court on June 30 upheld a Trump administration directive allowing states to ban transgender women and girls from participating in women’s sports.

While no ban exists at the federal level, at least half of the states in the U.S. already prohibit transgender students from participating in sports based on their gender identity, a USA TODAY review of state laws and policy documents found.

Below is a state-by-state breakdown of laws upheld by Supreme Court decisions.

Alabama

Alabama has two laws. HB261, first introduced in 2023, would prohibit individuals at two- or four-year public institutions from participating in sports teams that differ from their gender assigned at birth, among other things. HB391 was subsequently announced in February, imposing a similar ban on public kindergartens up to age 12.th grade institution.

alaska

Effective November 11, 2023, the State of Alaska amended the regulations governing the State Department of Education and Early Development. The nonprofit organization is required to limit participation on girls’ high school track and field teams to those assigned female at birth.

arizona

Introduced in 2022, Arizona’s SB 1165 requires public and private schools that compete against public schools in intramural and interscholastic sports to identify players on their teams according to three strictly defined categories: “male,” “male,” or “male.” “woman”, “female”, or “girl”. “Coeducational” or “mixed.”

arkansas

HB1570/SB354 was introduced in the Arkansas State Legislature in 2021. Together, they prohibit complaints, investigations and “other adverse action” against public authorities that prohibit transgender individuals from competing on teams that do not match their assigned sex at birth.

florida

In 2021, the Florida Legislature amended several laws regarding transgender students and school sports. This included mandating that certain athletic teams and sports be based on the gender a student was assigned at birth. Allowing female students to participate in sports designed for male students. Ban male students from playing on women’s sports teams.

georgia

Georgia’s SB1 goes into effect on July 1, 2025, and allows for “certain designations of teams” at the middle school, high school, and college levels to participate in public education sports. Specifically, men are prohibited from joining women’s teams and vice versa.

idaho

The language of Idaho’s HB500, introduced in 2020, closely mirrors the language used in Arizona’s SB1165, introduced two years later. The regulations require public and private schools that compete against public schools in interscholastic or interscholastic sports to identify the players on their teams according to three strictly defined categories: “male,” “male,” or “male.” “woman”, “female”, or “girl”. “Coeducational” or “mixed.”

Indiana

Indiana’s HB1041 was actually vetoed in 2022 after Republican Gov. Eric Holcomb determined the bill addressed a problem he didn’t think existed. However, this veto was ultimately overridden by both the House and Senate. Since then, interscholastic sporting events are required to designate teams based on biological and reproductive sex and include only athletes.

iowa

In March 2022, Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds approved House File 2416, which also adopts the same language as Idaho, Arizona, and Indiana. Essentially, accrediting agencies or public agencies within a state must identify teams and team players according to three strictly defined categories: “male,” “male,” or “juvenile.” “woman”, “female”, or “girl”. “Coeducational” or “mixed.”

Kansas

Kansas’ HB2238 was vetoed by Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly when it passed the state Legislature in 2023. However, as in Indiana, that veto was overridden by the Senate. HB2238 specifically targets transgender women and girls, as sorority athletic teams can only have biologically female members.

kentucky

In 2022, Kentucky used SB83 to amend its previous law, paving the way for a strict ban on transgender women and girls from participating in girls’ sports teams from middle school through high school. Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear tried unsuccessfully to veto the law, which would have barred charges and investigations.

louisiana

Louisiana’s SB44, enacted in 2022, is just one of many bills on this list called the Women’s Sports Fairness Act. As its name suggests, it specifically prohibits transgender women and girls from participating in women’s sports teams. It would also give educational institutions immunity if they face potential investigation or lawsuits if they deny a transgender person’s request to compete on a team that aligns with their gender identity.

mississippi

Mississippi’s SB2536 went into effect on July 1, 2021. It uses the same language seen in other states. A certifying agency or public agency within a state must identify teams and team players according to three strictly defined categories. i.e. “man”, “male”, or “boy”. “woman”, “female”, or “girl”. “Coeducational” or “mixed.”

missouri

Missouri’s SB39 defines gender as “male” or “female” and that definition is attributed to students based on their birth certificate or other government document. Therefore, students cannot participate in sports teams that are “opposite” to their biological sex. However, an exception is made for female students who wish to play a male sport but do not have a sport of their own. Think about it, there is no women’s soccer league. The law was adopted in 2023 and expires in 2027.

montana

HB112, which went into effect on July 1, 2021, prohibits public schools and universities from allowing male athletes to compete on women’s sports teams and allows students, schools, and organizations to sue if they violate the law. Meanwhile, HB300, which will be introduced in 2025, would specifically amend the language of the law banning men from participating in women’s sports and require educational institutions to provide restrooms, locker rooms, shower areas, and sleeping areas that are “not accessible to members of the opposite sex while in use.”

nebraska

The Stand With Women Act, also known as LB89, is patterned after other bills filed before it and requires Nebraska certifying agencies or public agencies to identify teams and team players according to three strictly defined categories: “male,” “male,” or “juvenile.” “woman”, “female”, or “girl”. “Coeducational” or “mixed.” It also requires changing rooms and toilets to be separate for men and women. The law is one of the newer on the list, having been approved by Gov. Jim Pillen about a year ago.

new hampshire

The Granite State also introduced the Women’s Sports Fairness Act (HB1205) during the 2024 legislative session, bringing its language in line with states such as Idaho, Iowa, Florida, Arkansas, and Louisiana.

north carolina

HB574, introduced during the 2023-2024 legislative session, is also the standard women’s sports equity bill. Democrat Roy Cooper was one of the governors who vetoed the bill, but it was defeated in both houses of Congress.

north dakota

North Dakota introduced two bills in 2023, HB1489 and HB1249. Both employ language that strictly defines teams and players according to “men,” “men,” or “boys.” “woman”, “female”, or “girl”. “Coeducational” or “mixed.” Additionally, investigations or adverse actions conducted against educational institutions on behalf of government agencies, interscholastic sports organizations, or other entities are prohibited.

ohio

Ohio’s HB68 is actually a step ahead of its contemporaries. The law, known as the Ohio Saving Youth from Experimentation (SAFE) Act, not only bans people assigned male at birth from participating in women’s sports, but also bans gender-affirming care in the state. It was passed in April 2024 despite opposition from Republican Gov. Mike DeWine. A lawsuit challenging the SAFE Act is currently pending in the Ohio Supreme Court.

oklahoma

SB2 spanned the 2021-2022 legislative session. See: North Dakota, Arizona, Nebraska, Iowa, Idaho, etc.

south carolina

In 2022, South Carolina passed H4608. It is the “Law to Protect Women’s Sports Act.” See Oklahoma State.

south dakota

SB46 of 2022 also falls under the Fairness Protection in Women’s Sports Act. The language is virtually indistinguishable from the languages ​​outlined above.

tennessee

Tennessee passed SB228 in 2021. Similarly, it requires student participation in sports to follow the gender listed on their birth certificate, but only applies to students in grades 5-12. The following year, SB2153 was passed, banning men from participating in women’s sports at the collegiate level. However, there are no restrictions for students who wish to participate in designated sports as “male,” “male,” “male,” “coed,” or “mixed.”

texas

There are two laws in place in the Lone Star State. HB25 passed the House in 2021 and was the predecessor to SB39 in Missouri. This provision defines gender as “male” or “female,” and that definition is ascribed to students based on their birth certificate or other government document. Therefore, students cannot participate in sports teams that are “opposite” to their biological sex. However, an exception is made for female students who wish to play a male sport but do not have a sport of their own. Think again, there is no women’s soccer league. SB15, passed in 2023, is the same, but applies to intercollegiate athletic teams.

Utah

At this point, I think you know the drill. Utah’s HB11 bill passed the state legislature in 2022. The bill imposes limits on women’s participation in sports by requiring schools and local educational institutions to designate athletic activities by gender. Prohibiting male students from playing against other schools on teams designated for female students. No Complaints or Investigations.

virginia

In 2023, Virginia amended the Department of Education’s model policy to include an athletics provision that states, “For athletic programs and activities that are segregated by gender, appropriate student participation shall be determined by gender and not by sex or gender identity.”

west virginia

West Virginia passed HB3923 in 2021. This is a textbook piece on fairness protections in women’s sports law.

wyoming

In SF133, the language is broadly similar to the other laws outlined above, with some fairly important exceptions. Students who have undergone or are undergoing gender transition procedures may apply for eligibility to play on a team that does not match their assigned gender at birth.

Drew Pittock covers trending news from around the country for USA TODAY. He can be reached at DPittock@usatodayco.com.

President Trump’s biggest Supreme Court victory: birthright, tariffs, and more

0

play

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court’s final decision this term striking down President Donald Trump’s attempt to limit who can automatically become a citizen at birth was not what the president had hoped for.

But the ruling against Trump was surprisingly close, given that birthright citizenship has been considered a settled issue for more than 125 years.

And even though a majority of the justices ruled against Trump in his two most important cases: birthright citizenship and tariffs, Trump won many other victories at the high court.

Here’s a breakdown of what this decision means for President Trump and his policies.

President Trump develops new plan for birthright citizenship

The Supreme Court on June 30 rejected President Trump’s attempt to redefine who is an American by striking down the birthright citizenship restrictions that had been the centerpiece of his hard-line approach to immigration..

Five of the nine justices said an executive order restricting birthright citizenship that President Trump signed on his first day in office violated the Constitution’s citizenship clause. Justice Brett Kavanaugh said this simply violated the 1952 Immigration Act.

That gave President Trump hope that Republicans in Congress might change the law.

“The Supreme Court upheld birthright citizenship, which is too bad for our country, but can easily be made up for in Congress with support from the President. This is what is being decided now in this process,” Trump said in a post on Truth Social.

But Trump will need to convince one of the five judges who ruled against him on the Constitution’s civil rights clause that any new law is consistent with the 14th Amendment.

President Trump hails ruling against transgender athletes as ‘huge victory’

In another landmark ruling on June 30, the court said states can ban transgender women and girls from competing on women’s sports teams without violating the Constitution or federal law prohibiting sex discrimination in education.

The president called the ruling a “huge victory” on social media.

Trump has made opposition to transgender women’s participation on women’s teams a centerpiece of his 2024 campaign, and as president he has moved to cut federal funding to schools that allow transgender women to participate in women’s sports and women’s sports.

The Department of Justice helped West Virginia and Idaho defend their bans in the Supreme Court.

But while the administration is separately seeking to block states from allowing transgender girls to play on women’s teams, the Justice Department has asked the court to rule only that the ban is allowed at this time, not to get into whether it is necessary.

Campaign finance ruling could give Republicans a boost for now

On June 30, the court’s conservative majority upheld a challenge by Vice President J.D. Vance and other Republicans to one of the remaining checks for funds in politics.

The court overturned a quarter-century-old ruling aimed at circumventing restrictions that wealthy donors can place on federal candidates by funneling money through political parties.

The court’s ruling could benefit Republicans, at least in the short term, because Democratic candidates are better at raising small donations and are less reliant on party funding.

“This opinion may be of modest help to the Republican Party, which raises more money than Democratic organizations,” Rick Hasen, an election expert and law professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, wrote on his election law blog. “But in the long term, we can expect greater parity.”

Limits on a 90-year-old president’s ability to remove him from office will be lifted.

President Trump said the court’s June 29 decision to fire Rebecca Slaughter from the Federal Trade Commission was “the biggest and most consequential decision ever made by the court” for presidential power.

The court overturned 90 years of precedent in a case called Humphrey’s Executors v. United States, which limited how presidents can remove independent board members.

Congress established various boards with representatives from both parties. But Trump insisted he should have control over all executive branch positions and be free to fire and replace members.

Roberts, writing for the majority in a decision that could affect more than a dozen government agencies, said the president “must have the support of trusted officials.”

“It is a great honor to be the sitting president who won this historic and unprecedented ruling, one of the most important presidential powers ever granted,” Trump wrote on social media.

Court upholds Federal Reserve independence

In contrast, President Trump downplayed the Supreme Court’s June 29 decision blocking Lisa Cook’s immediate removal from office, posting on social media that the court had sent the case back to lower courts “based on rigorous procedures.”

But Chief Justice John Roberts wrote to the court’s majority that the Trump administration “has not shown that it is likely to prevail” in lower courts defending the circumstances surrounding Cook’s firing. Roberts also emphasized that Congress has established protections for the Fed president and that the United States has a tradition of protecting the central bank from political influence.

The Federal Reserve is a powerful economic regulator and is responsible for monetary policy, which can affect inflation and unemployment rates. Its board is made up of governors appointed by the president and confirmed by the U.S. Senate for varying terms of 14 years.

President Trump’s support for firing Cook, who was nominated by former President Joe Biden and confirmed in 2022, would have made the Fed even more vulnerable regardless of who is currently in the Oval Office.

Trump claimed he could immediately fire Cook over allegations that he made false statements that affected mortgage rates on two properties he purchased. Cook said he looked forward to “debunking” Trump’s claims and argued that his firing was illegal because the Fed’s board has historically been independent and its directors have legal protections.

States can receive and count mail-in ballots after Election Day.

In a significant loss for Mr. Trump, the court on June 29 upheld a Mississippi law that allows mail-in ballots that are postmarked by Election Day and arrive up to five days later to be counted.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett and Justice Roberts joined the court’s three liberal justices in upholding the law. Barrett wrote that voters have to make a decision by a certain date, but that doesn’t mean they have to receive their ballots that day.

President Trump has long opposed mail-in voting, arguing that it is susceptible to corruption, but in March he voted by mail himself. He cited the court’s decision as he continued to press Congress to require voters to present identification and proof of citizenship at polling places and to register, and to ban mail-in voting except for voters who are sick, traveling or serving in the military.

“There is no excuse for anyone, politician or not, to violate the three requirements listed above,” Trump said on social media. “The only reason I object is cheating!”

According to a 2025 report from the Brookings Institution, incidents of fraud related to mail-in voting are extremely rare, at about 4 cases per 10 million mail-in votes. Research also shows that non-citizen voting is virtually non-existent.

Trump wins three important cases involving humanitarian aid, asylum and green cards

Significant decisions handed down in the final weeks of the Supreme Court’s term confirmed three of President Trump’s policies: One allowed the suspension of humanitarian programs that allow people fleeing dangerous countries to temporarily live in the United States. In another example, it allowed asylum-seeking refugees to be turned away at the border. Third, it allowed for tighter scrutiny of green card holders returning from abroad.

A humanitarian program called Temporary Protected Status granted work permits and protection from deportation to 350,000 Haitians and Syrians. But the administration proposed ending protected status for 1.3 million people in 13 countries combined.

The asylum decision allowed the government to turn refugees back at the border rather than admit them to await a decision on their claims. Critics of the decision said it would encourage refugees to enter the country illegally, with Justice Sonia Sotomayor writing that “many more people will die.”

The court also agreed to allow immigration authorities to consider criminal charges against green card holders returning from overseas when deciding whether to allow them to return home.

Court overturns emergency tariffs, the centerpiece of President Trump’s economic policy.

The court overturned President Trump’s emergency tariffs in February, gutting the centerpiece of his economic policy, forcing him to return more than $166 billion he had already collected, and stripping him of a key foreign policy tool.

The 6-3 ruling found that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 does not give President Trump the authority to impose tariffs on his own. But other laws, such as the 1974 Trade Act, allow the Trump administration to investigate and impose tariffs on unfair trade practices, such as forced labor and overproduction, all of which the administration is pursuing.

President Trump called opponents of the tariffs “nasty, ignorant and loud” and accused the judges of acting out of fear of critics. He called the plaintiffs in the lawsuit “scumbags.”

Why did silver soar and what will happen next?

0

Silver is a key ingredient in the manufacturing of solar panels, electronics, and power grids. As the AI ​​boom fuels new investment in data centers, with Goldman Sachs predicting that U.S. data center power demand could double by next year, investors are wondering if demand for silver will also increase.

Industrial demand for silver influences the price of the metal, but other forces are also at play. These include monetary policy, supply constraints, and investor sentiment, all of which can play an important role in short-term price movements.

For example, the price of silver hit an all-time high earlier this year, but that rally was primarily driven by investor sentiment and financial trends, not just AI infrastructure. Still, massive investment in AI is supporting silver’s long-term price and is a key factor investors are paying attention to.

Here’s how AI fits into the big picture for silver, and what it can tell us about what’s next for the price of silver.

How AI really impacts silver demand

Silver is used in many components of AI infrastructure. Most directly, silver is used to manufacture data center hardware such as circuit breakers.

Silver also indirectly supports AI infrastructure. Data centers require large amounts of energy. The power grid upgrades and solar power projects built to support this demand also use silver in their production.

“Every gigawatt of new computing requires power conversion, switching, and grid construction, all of which consume large amounts of silver,” said Giuseppe Sette, co-founder and president of Reflexivity, an AI market analysis platform.

As AI drives demand for data centers and enhanced energy grids, it stands to reason that demand for silver will increase.

Why AI is not the only factor influencing silver prices

Industrial demand for silver is increasing, but that doesn’t necessarily translate into higher prices.

First, industry is only a part of total demand. Consumer and investor demand has slumped since hitting a record high in January on expectations of higher interest rates and a stronger dollar.

Additionally, some industries are finding ways to use less silver in their manufacturing processes.

“When silver soared above $100, manufacturers had a strong incentive to eliminate silver,” Sette says. Therefore, demand for silver is not necessarily growing at the same pace as new investment.

Still, AI continues to act as a force in support of silver’s long-term prospects. “AI is a real, but secondary, indirect silver demand tailwind,” Sette said.

Did AI cause the price of silver to rise above $100?

AI wasn’t the only thing driving silver prices soaring above $100 an ounce in early 2026. Rather, the rally to historic highs was primarily driven by investor demand, widespread economic uncertainty, and supply constraints.

“As evidenced by the sharp reversal to the mid-$60s, the jump above $100 was overwhelmingly a financial/speculative event and not an AI demand-driven event,” Sette said. “Actual industrial demand is less than 30% relieved in 48 hours.”

Is AI creating a new price floor for silver?

Rather than causing a temporary price spike, AI may be contributing to an increase in the base price of silver. This means that demand for silver could become permanently higher as companies continue to invest in data centers and infrastructure to support AI technologies.

“AI will increase sustained demand for critical high-performance applications,” said technology investment strategist and author Igor Pejic.

Still, AI is only part of the industrial demand for silver. “Calling this an ‘AI demand floor’ overstates the direct role of AI; it is actually a green technology and electronics floor where AI enhances the marginal parts,” Sette says.

What’s Next: The Price of Silver in the AI ​​Economy

As demand for AI infrastructure increases rapidly, “upward pressure is likely to continue in the coming years,” Pejic said.

As a result, Pejic and Sette predict that silver prices will continue to rise for the foreseeable future. “We expect silver to remain structurally elevated relative to the 2023-2024 range (low $30s), but volatility is very high,” Sette says.

Sette suggests that while macroeconomic conditions and financial demand will contribute to short-term price fluctuations, industrial demand, such as the AI ​​and solar power industries, will increase the metal’s price floor in the long term.

Bottom line: AI is one of several factors influencing the price of silver

The rise of artificial intelligence and huge demand for electricity are contributing to the increase in demand for silver. Still, AI wasn’t necessarily the main driver of silver’s recent rally above $100 an ounce. Rather, AI could be a long-term tailwind for silver prices, pushing the price floor above historical trends in the coming years.

Judge revokes defense mandate for Defense Department’s media policy

0

play

A federal judge on June 30 blocked the Pentagon from enforcing a policy that requires journalists to be escorted on premises at all times.

U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman said in the opinion that the Founding Fathers “believed that the nation’s security required a free press and an informed public, and that such security was endangered by government suppression of political speech.”

“As our nation celebrates its 250th anniversary this week, we must not abandon our principles now,” he wrote.

The legal battle began when the Pentagon implemented a media policy in October 2025 that said journalists who “requested” information not authorized for release could lose media access to the building.

Experts told USA TODAY at the time that the policy called into question the First Amendment, but ultimately a court would have to decide whether the policy was unconstitutional.

The New York Times first filed a lawsuit over the issue in December. Mr. Friedman blocked the Pentagon from implementing the policy in March, prompting the Army Corps, officially the Pentagon, to develop an interim policy that would close work spaces where journalists have worked for years and require reporters to pass through buildings.

“New and improved press workspace will be located in a new building on Pentagon property and will be available for use as soon as it is ready,” Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said at the time. Press freedom groups denounced the policy update and accused the Pentagon of violating the judge’s order.

Friedman agreed with the April 9 ruling, saying the Pentagon “used slightly different language to achieve the same unconstitutional result.”

The New York Times filed a second lawsuit in May, arguing that the escort requirement is “unreasonable because it imposes a significant burden on journalists” and “completely unnecessary given the long history and tradition of unaccompanied press access.”

Friedman wrote in a June 30 opinion that the New York Times is likely to succeed in arguing that the escort mandate violates the First Amendment, partly in a retaliatory sense.

He said public statements by Pentagon officials about mainstream news outlets, including comments from Secretary Pete Hegseth, whom he called “Trump-hating traditional media” and Biblical “Pharisees,” were “strong evidence of the Pentagon’s retaliatory motives” in implementing the policy.

Parnell said the Pentagon will appeal the decision in a June 30 X post.

“Unescorted access to the Pentagon allowed journalists to observe patterns of activity and develop relationships that led to repeated unauthorized disclosures of operational plans and information,” he said. “At a time when protecting military secrets is more important than ever, the court’s order effectively restores that dangerous environment.”

New York Times spokesman Charlie Stadtlander said Friedman’s order “reaffirms the First Amendment right of news organizations to report on the Pentagon without restrictions to keep the public from knowing what the military is doing.”

Breanna Frank is USA TODAY’s First Amendment reporter. please contact her bjfrank@usatoday.com.

USA TODAY’s coverage of First Amendment issues is funded by the Freedom Forum in collaboration with our journalism funding partners. Funders do not provide editorial input.

Why tomato prices will be so high in 2026 and when they might fall?

0


Tomatoes have become the new symbol of soaring food prices, posting the largest price increase of any food item in April and May.

play

  • A severe winter freeze in Florida and problems in Mexico have caused tomato prices to skyrocket, creating what some are calling “tomatoflation.”
  • The national average price of fresh tomatoes hit a record high of $2.689 per pound in April, an increase of nearly 40% from a year ago.
  • Florida’s tomato industry suffered an estimated loss of $164 million due to the freeze, which affected a significant portion of the crop.
  • Experts expect retail tomato prices to decline over the summer as production recovers in Florida and harvest season begins in other states.

Tomatoes have become the new symbol of soaring food prices.

Some economists are calling this “tomatoflation” because the flavorful fruit has seen the biggest price increases of all foods in recent months. Florida is one of the reasons.

Florida, the nation’s largest producer of fresh tomatoes, suffered two severe winter freezes earlier this year, resulting in production losses on 80% of the 27,900 acres grown tomato on Florida’s commercial farms.

This cost Florida’s tomato industry an estimated $164 million, and the state’s agriculture industry as a whole suffered a staggering $3.17 billion loss, according to Florida Agriculture Secretary Wilton Simpson.

It also coincided with setbacks such as bad weather and disease outbreaks that hit Mexico’s tomato industry. The country produces 70% of the fresh tomatoes consumed in the United States

A combination of these factors pushed the national average price of fresh tomatoes to $2.689 per pound in April, up nearly 40% from $1.793 a year earlier, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Consumer Price Index for the same month.

April’s average price is the highest ever for tomatoes since at least 1980, which is how far back BLS historical data for that fresh produce goes.

The national average price in May was $2.489, up 32% from $1.705 a year ago and the third highest price on record.

“What we saw was a textbook supply shock in fresh produce, with two simultaneous weather disruptions hitting the only two regions that supply the U.S. market in the winter and early spring,” said Robert Guenther, manager of the Maitland-based Florida Tomato Exchange.

“For tomato producers in particular, the $164 million loss comes on top of years of margin compression from import competition,” Gunther wrote in an email in response to questions from USA TODAY NETWORK-FLORIDA. “It’s been a tough year. …April was the toughest month of the season (for Florida tomato growers). Production was about 40% lower than last year as freeze damage hit the entire system.”

The good news is that the tomato crisis may be starting to end.

“Florida tomato production was back to near normal by the end of April,” Gunther said. “May was a strong recovery month, with production up about 36% compared to last year and about 11% above the seven-year average.…Overall, Florida’s tomato industry finished the 2025-26 season with production up about 13% compared to the previous season.”

When will tomato prices start falling?

Although it may not yet be felt by consumers, retail prices for fresh tomatoes have fallen in May from their peak in April, although they remain high.

Are tomatoflation, or whatever you want to call it, nearing its end?

Guenther thinks so, pointing to the strong end to Florida’s tomato growing season this year, which runs from October to mid-June.

As a result, “consumers should see significantly lower retail prices for tomatoes over the summer,” he said. “Long-term price conditions for the remainder of the summer will be determined by conditions in California, Georgia, North Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, New Jersey, Michigan, and Ohio, which supply the U.S. market from June to October, as well as in Mexico and Canada.

“As long as these regions have a normal growing season, consumers should see prices return to historically normal ranges by late summer.”

Losses suffered by Florida’s tomato industry could be long-lasting

Congressman Brian Mast, who represents all of St. Lucie County and parts of Martin and Palm Beach counties, addressed the impact this winter’s freeze has had on Florida’s agriculture industry during a town hall event March 13 at the Hobe Sound Farmers Market. The event was advertised as the “Farmer Freeze Recovery Conference.”

The Palm City Republican also published a blog post the same day describing this winter’s freeze as two of the “most harmful weather events for growers in our state’s history.” These caused “years of lost labor,” he wrote.

Guenther acknowledged that it will take time for Florida’s tomato industry to recover the economic losses caused by this winter’s freeze.

“Recovery from a freeze of this magnitude is not the same as full recovery,” he says. “The impact varied depending on the stage of each crop. Seedlings and early plantings often did not survive, fields ready for harvest were cut back, and damaged tomatoes were left in the field. Growers lost an entire window of marketable production during one of Florida’s most valuable seasons. Those weeks will never be regained.”

Guenther added that the estimated $164 million loss to Florida’s tomato industry applies only to round tomatoes inspected under the federal marketing mandate. “It doesn’t include Roma, grapes, cherries or specialty varieties,” he said.

When will tomato growers start planting next season’s crop?

“The real physical recovery is already underway, as Florida’s next crop begins to be planted in August for the 2026-27 season,” said Gunther, who represents a group of commercial tomato growers across the state.

“Financial recovery to replenish balance sheets after a freeze of this magnitude will take much longer,” he said. “Federal disaster assistance through the block grant program that Secretary Simpson and Governor DeSantis have been promoting with the Department of Agriculture will be critical for many producers as they make planting decisions for next season.”

Is there a possibility that “tomatoflation” will be repeated in the future?

Gunther is furious about the term “tomatoflation,” calling it “an independent phenomenon that exaggerates what happened.”

Nevertheless, he admitted it could happen again.

“Florida has never experienced freezes this severe before, but in recent years we have not experienced freezes of this magnitude and the variability of weather has increased,” he said. “Florida agriculture is currently absorbing approximately $7.5 billion to $8.5 billion in cumulative losses from hurricanes, freezes, and blight between 2017 and 2026. This is a level of cumulative risk that will ultimately become very difficult for producers to continue absorbing without serious attention to disaster relief, trade enforcement, and the underlying competitiveness of the domestic industry.”

Gunter points out that tomatoes are not the only crop that is vulnerable to hard freezes and unfavorable growing conditions.

“The bottom line is that the U.S. food system relies on a small number of growing regions, and when those regions are disrupted at the same time, it shows up on grocery store shelves. The answer is to maintain a strong and resilient domestically based fresh tomato industry, which is exactly what FTE (Florida Tomato Exchange) does every day.”

Did US tariffs on Mexico contribute to “tomatoflation”?

Some economists attribute “tomatoflation” in part to the 17% tariff imposed by the United States on Mexican fresh tomatoes that went into effect on July 14, 2025.

Because Mexico is a major supplier of fresh tomatoes, the United States cannot easily substitute tomatoes from other countries or U.S. producers, Ricky Volpe, an agribusiness professor at California Polytechnic State University, told CNBC in an April 15 article.

These tariffs have caused some Mexican tomato growers to cut back on plantings. According to an April 22 article in Kansas-based Farm Journal The Packer, the combination of a disease outbreak that has affected some tomato fields in the country and the winter freeze that hit Florida has led to a spike in the price of tomatoes for U.S. consumers.

Gunther doesn’t think so.

“The tariffs on Mexican tomatoes are anti-dumping duties, not tariffs in the traditional trade policy sense,” he told USA TODAY NETWORK-FLORIDA. “This regulation was imposed in July 2025 after the U.S. Department of Commerce determined that Mexican growers were selling tomatoes to the U.S. market at unreasonably low prices, a determination previously confirmed by the U.S. International Trade Commission.

“The purpose of anti-dumping duties is to restore fair competition, not as a tax on consumers.”

Evidence for that, Gunter said, is the fact that U.S. wholesale tomato prices remained stable from July 2025 to January 2026.

“The sharp rise in prices started until late February 2026, when the freeze and Mexico’s disease and weather issues hit the supply chain,” he said. “This is a seven-month gap and we dispute that duty was the trigger.”

What do the historical numbers for U.S. tomato prices show?

In August 2025, the month after U.S. tariffs on Mexican tomatoes began, the national average price for field-grown tomatoes rose slightly to $1.925 per pound, according to historical BLS data stored on the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis website. The average price in July of the same year was $1.793.

U.S. tomato prices continued to decline year-on-year through February, with the average price increasing 11.1 cents from January to $1.902 per pound, a 2.9% increase from $1.848 in February 2025.

The average price in March was $2.255 per pound, an increase of 35.3 cents, an increase of nearly 24% from $1.819 in the same month last year.

The average price rose another 43.4 cents to the highest price in April and a new all-time high for fresh tomatoes. The price was $2.528 per pound, recorded 10 years ago in January 2016.

Clayton Park is a journalist with USA TODAY NETWORK FLORIDA. He’s a consumer planner in Florida, covering everything from insurance, utilities and home prices to grocery, gas and car prices. If you have a news tip, send it to cpark@usatodayco.com. Sign up for our free Florida TODAY newsletter at https://news-journalonline.com/newsletters to get all of Florida’s best content straight to your inbox every weekday.

Supreme Court upholds women’s sports over trans athletes | Opinion

0


In a consolidated opinion written by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, the court concluded that “the term ‘sex’ in Title IX cannot plausibly be interpreted to refer to anything other than biological sex.”

play

If you need a reason why the U.S. Supreme Court’s June 30 decisions in two cases preserving fairness in girls’ and women’s sports are so important, just look to California.

AB Hernandez, a transgender athlete and biological male, won his second consecutive state championship in track and field in late May. This is not surprising given that biological males are inherently better than females in athletics.

A rule change was made just before last year’s high school championships that prevented Hernandez from “banning” female athletes from the tournament after the Trump administration threatened to withhold funding. Still, he had to share the podium with Hernandez, who won a medal. This is a humiliation that young women should not have to endure.

The Supreme Court’s decision does not force California or other progressive states to make unfair policy changes. This would allow the 27 states that have passed laws banning transgender athletes from participating in women’s teams to enforce those rules.

In a consolidated opinion written by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, the court concluded that “the term ‘sex’ in Title IX cannot plausibly be interpreted to refer to anything other than biological sex.”

This is a huge victory for the state and female athletes who have been fighting to get this figured out.

Trans athlete cites Title IX of the Constitution

The justices considered two cases dealing with these state laws: Little v. Hecox in Idaho and West Virginia v. BPJ. The court heard arguments in January.

In both lawsuits, transgender athletes challenged the state’s regulations, arguing they violate the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause and Title IX, the federal law that prohibits sex discrimination in schools and universities receiving public funds. The 1972 law was enacted to provide equal opportunities for girls and women in sports.

In the Idaho case, the court specifically considered whether “laws that seek to protect women’s and girls’ sports by restricting women’s and girls’ participation on the basis of sex” violate the Constitution.

The West Virginia case raised two questions: whether the Equal Protection Clause and Title IX prevent states from designating women’s and men’s sports teams “based on biological sex as determined at birth.”

Opinion warning: Get columns from your favorite columnists and expert analysis on key issues delivered straight to your device through the USA TODAY app. If you don’t have the app, download it for free from the app store.

The court found that neither the Constitution nor Title IX prevent states from separating sports teams in this manner. That means Idaho and West Virginia, along with 25 other states with similar laws, can protect girls from the unfairness and safety risks that come with having to compete with the opposite sex.

“Now these states will be able to do that and the law will not be suspended,” said Jim Campbell, chief legal counsel at Alliance Defending Freedom, which served as co-counsel on both cases and represents the individual female athletes who intervened, Lainey Armistead of West Virginia and Madison Kenyon of Idaho.

Most people in the country think trans athletes shouldn’t play on women’s teams.

This decision was made with momentum toward excluding biological males from women’s sports and spaces. Approximately 80% of the public believes transgender athletes should not play on women’s teams or women’s teams.

President Donald Trump ran on the issue in 2024 and made good on that promise early in his second term, issuing an executive order calling for equity in women’s sports.

And former President Joe Biden’s misguided attempt to rewrite Title IX by replacing “sex” with “gender identity” was rejected by a lower court in early 2025.

These are all encouraging developments for those who have been sounding the alarm on this problem for years. We applaud the young women who stood up to make their concerns known, even if it meant enduring public shaming.

Biological reality matters, and the Supreme Court recognized it by allowing states to do the right thing.

Ingrid Jack is a columnist for USA TODAY. Contact ijacques@usatoday.com or X:@.Ingrid Jacks.

Slot machine at Las Vegas airport pays $3.3 million jackpot to traveler

0

play

A traveler passing through Las Vegas received an unforgettable send-off after winning a $3.3 million jackpot at a slot machine inside Harry Reid International Airport.

According to a June 29 X post from Harry Reid International Airport, the winning spin happened over the weekend at the Wheel of Fortune slot machine at the airport’s C gate. Airport officials congratulated the lucky flyer, writing it was “one way to spend a layover” and thanking travelers for making Las Vegas part of their “lucky journey.”

The airport did not identify the winner or say where the travelers were headed. Additional details regarding the jackpot or winning stake were not immediately released.

Huge jackpot hit again this month in Las Vegas

The airport win came just days after another visitor won big at a Las Vegas casino.

On June 16, an Atlanta visitor won $10,292,912.32 playing an IGT Megabucks progressive slot machine at Westgate Las Vegas Resort & Casino, according to the resort. Officials say guests played for just a few minutes before turning $5 bets into eight-figure jackpots.

“Las Vegas is built on unforgettable moments, and there’s nothing more memorable than turning a $5 bet into more than $10 million,” Westgate Las Vegas President and General Manager Kami Christensen said in a statement at the time.

The resort said winners celebrated with guests and employees as news of the jackpot spread across the casino floor.

It’s not unheard of for large jackpots to occur at airports.

Multi-million dollar jackpots are rare at airports, but several other travelers have been spotted at Harry Reid International Airport winning big before they even boarded their plane.

In May 2025, an unidentified player turned a $5 bet on the Wheel of Fortune slot machine at D-Gate into a $1.8 million jackpot. A few months ago, in August 2024, a traveler from San Diego won nearly $1.5 million at a slot machine at another airport. The airport also announced a jackpot of more than $1 million for January 2024.

Reporter Anthony Thompson can be reached at ajthompson@usatodayco.com or X @athompsonUSAT.

President Trump asks Congress after losing birthright citizenship case

0

play

WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump called on Congress to take action to end birthright citizenship after the Supreme Court ruled that the Supreme Court invalidated his efforts to overturn the long-held principle that all individuals born in the United States are American citizens.

President Trump expressed disappointment on June 30 in his first public statement over the court’s 6-3 decision to block the 2025 executive order he issued to prevent the children of illegal immigrants from automatically becoming U.S. citizens because they were born on U.S. soil.

But the president also insisted there is a legislative path to achieving his goals, which would likely require a constitutional amendment, despite Trump’s claims to the contrary.

“The Supreme Court upheld birthright citizenship, which is too bad for our country, but can easily be made up for in Congress with support from the President. This is what is being decided now in this process,” Trump said in a post on Truth Social.

“We don’t need long and unwieldy constitutional amendments!” the president added. “Congress should begin today to end the costly and unfair birthright citizenship rights for our country. They have my full and complete support!”

The Supreme Court’s decision is a major blow to President Trump’s hard-line immigration policies, which center on large-scale illegal deportations of immigrants within the country.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., speaking for the majority, said that children born to parents who are in the United States illegally or temporarily meet the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which states that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state in which they reside.”

Roberts was joined by two conservative justices appointed by President Trump, Amy Coney Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh, and three liberal justices, Ketanji Brown Jackson, Elena Kagan, and Sonia Sotomayor. Kavanaugh wrote that he based his decision on federal law, not the Constitution. The court’s three other conservatives, Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch, dissented.

A majority of the justices ruled that birthright citizenship is constitutionally protected by the 14th Amendment, so banning the policy would require a constitutional amendment, which would require support from two-thirds of both houses of Congress.

Kavanaugh said in a concurring opinion that Congress could create an exception to birthright citizenship for children born illegally in the country. However, Kavanaugh’s position did not reflect the majority opinion of the court.

It also seems unlikely that President Trump will have the votes in Congress to pass legislation that would overturn birthright citizenship. Republicans hold a 218-212 majority in the House and a 53-47 majority in the Senate, and Republicans would likely need 60 votes to defeat a potential Democratic filibuster.

Passing a bill that would redefine who is eligible for citizenship would be an even tougher road to the 2026 midterm elections.

Trump allies Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Rep. Brian Babin (R-Texas) introduced legislation last year to ban birthright citizenship. The language of their bill recognizes birthright citizenship rights under the Fourteenth Amendment, but defines a person “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States as an individual whose parent is a citizen or national of the United States, an alien admitted to reside in the United States, or an immigrant legally entitled to serve in the military.

This bill would not affect the citizenship or citizenship status of any person born before the date of enactment of the bill.

“For many years, I have pushed for legislation and constitutional amendments to change America’s policy on birthright citizenship,” Graham said in a statement after the Supreme Court’s ruling. “While I am disappointed in the court’s decision on birthright citizenship, I am more determined than ever to end this great magnet of illegal immigration and birth tourism.”

Contributor: Maureen Groppe for USA TODAY

X Contact Joey Garrison at @joeygarrison.

LeBron James leaves Lakers but promises to return: What we know

0

play

The king is coming back — we don’t know where.

NBA icon LeBron James, the league’s all-time leading scorer, has agreed to return to the NBA, but not to the Lakers, said a person familiar with the situation who was not authorized to speak publicly.Cold. This will allow him to return for the 2026-27 season, which will be his 24th season and set him as the NBA’s all-time leader for most appearances in a season.

This comes after Los Angeles was swept in the Western Conference semifinals against the Oklahoma City Thunder, a series in which the Lakers were without star player and leading NBA scorer Luka Doncic.

James will become an unrestricted free agent after playing the final season of his contract in 2025-26, which was a player option. James and his agent Rich Paul acknowledged in June 2025 that the Lakers were building for a future, but that future didn’t seem to include James.

The Lakers played very well down the stretch with James, Doncic and Austin Reeves healthy and available. Los Angeles had won 16 of 18 games through April 2, the night Doncic suffered a hamstring injury that sidelined him for the rest of the year. The Lakers then lost three straight (including one in which Doncic left early), but James helped improve the Lakers’ play, and the Lakers also missed an extended period of time without Reeves.

In particular, James, who turns 42 in December, was exceptional in the first round series against the Rockets, which Los Angeles won in six games.

This season, James tied for the lowest points of his career, averaging 20.9 points, 7.2 assists, and 6.1 rebounds per game while shooting 51.5 percent from the field, 31.7 percent from 3-point range, and 73.7 percent from free throws. He was selected to the All-Star team for a league-record 22 consecutive times.

A 22-time All-Star and four-time Most Valuable Player, James is also a four-time NBA champion and has won four NBA Finals Most Valuable Player trophies. He is a member of the NBA 75th Anniversary Team and has played for the Cavaliers (twice), Miami Heat, and Lakers. He won at least one NBA championship with each team.

James is also a three-time Olympic gold medalist (2008, 2012, 2024) and won a bronze medal in 2004.

On Tuesday, October 22, 2024, the pair became the first father-son duo to appear in a regular season game together in a 110-103 win over the Minnesota Timberwolves after the Lakers drafted their oldest son, Bronny.

James already holds several all-time NBA records, including points (43,440), field goal attempts (31,502) and minutes played (61,030), and he also holds the all-time record for nearly every major playoff individual statistic.

It remains to be seen how his next chapter will unfold.

LeBron James’ next decision is here, and it could change the NBA landscape once again. Ahead of the start of the league’s free agency period, multiple reports reported on Tuesday, June 30, that the league’s all-time leading scorer has informed the Los Angeles Lakers that he plans to play elsewhere during the 2026-27 season.

Mark Jeannot of USA TODAY Sports lists five spots where LeBron James could land.

Raising Cane’s will open a new store in July 2026. See list

0

play

Raising Cane’s plans to open several new restaurants in July. These new stores will bring the Chicken Finger chain into three new markets in the southern United States, including cities in Georgia, North Carolina and Tennessee.

Overall, Raising Cane’s plans to open five new restaurants and three renovated stores in July, the company told USA TODAY. The company also announced the opening of its first restaurants in Johnson City, Tennessee, Jacksonville, North Carolina, and Albany, Georgia.

“We are excited to celebrate these milestones with our newest communities in Johnson City, Jacksonville and Albany,” the company said in a June 29 statement.

The company also said each opening or renovation gives brands an opportunity to “create jobs and strengthen local partnerships.”

According to the company, this is not the only new feature for July. Some existing restaurants will adjust their hours, with some opening earlier and others closing later to better serve customers in areas where late-night dining is more popular. Areas with extended hours include Dallas and Fort Martin. Worth and Houston, Miami and Orlando, New Orleans, Nashville, Phoenix and Las Vegas.

Here’s what you need to know about the new Raising Cane location.

Where will Raising Cane open its new restaurant?

Raising Canes told USA TODAY there are five openings and three reopenings planned for July.

The opening schedule for July is as follows.

  • Schillerville, Indiana – 703 US Route 41 (opening July 6)
  • Johnson City, TN – 1904 N. Roan St. (opens July 7)
  • Jacksonville, NC – 1106 Western Blvd. (Opening July 13th)
  • Albany, Georgia – 2616 Dawson Road (opens July 21)
  • Los Angeles, California – 1008 Broxton Ave. (Opening date TBA)

Three renovated stores will reopen in the following days.

  • Edmond, Oklahoma – 1225 E. 2nd St. (Reopening July 13th)
  • Fort Collins, Colorado – 2108 S. College Ave. (Reopening July 17)
  • Las Vegas, NV – 6051 N. Decatur Blvd. (Reopening July 20th)

This story has been updated with new information.

Saleen Martin is a reporter on USA TODAY’s Trends team. She is from Norfolk, Virginia (757). Email sdmartin@usatoday.com.

Georgia state legislature calls for constitutional amendment following court ruling

0

play

New Georgia Congressman Clay Fuller called for a constitutional amendment following Tuesday’s Supreme Court ruling protecting birthright citizenship.

In a landmark 6-3 decision at the U.S. Supreme Court, the justices rejected President Donald Trump’s proposed immigration policy that would limit the membership of U.S. citizens.

The justices ruled that the president cannot redefine birthright citizenship and that all children born in the United States meet the 14th Amendment’s citizenship requirements, regardless of whether their parents are in the country legally.

“Citizenship, then and now, was the right to have rights and to participate freely in our political community,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the majority opinion. “The framers of the Fourteenth Amendment extended that promise to “all persons born free in this land.” We keep that promise today. ”

Courts are “prioritizing the future of illegals,” Fuller said.

In a statement published in X following the court’s ruling, Representative Fuller of Georgia’s 14th Congressional District accused the court of “prioritizing the future of illegal aliens over Americans.”

“The invasion must stop,” Fuller wrote. “Congress needs to take decisive action.”

Fuller then mentioned HJRes, a resolution he introduced in the House of Representatives in May. 172.

The resolution would require people born in the United States to have at least one citizen or legal resident parent in order to obtain citizenship. People born in the United States to illegal parents are not citizens.

Fuller has previously criticized the Temporary Protected Status (TPS) system in place for many Syrian and Haitian refugees in the United States, calling Somalis “crooks,” “pirates” and “thugs.” He celebrated the Supreme Court’s decision to end TPS for Haiti and Syria earlier this month.

“Temporary means temporary. Send them back. Americans first!” Fuller wrote of X.

He has even joked on social media about the deportation of Somali-born Rep. Ilhan Omar.

Mr. Fuller is newly elected after Marjorie Taylor Greene retires.

Fuller was elected to the House of Representatives in a special runoff earlier this year against Democrat Sean Harris to fill the seat left by former Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene.

Fuller has been endorsed by President Trump and was a strong supporter of MAGA during his first months in Washington.

Mr. Fuller won the seat by a much narrower margin than Ms. Greene had ever seen, and Ms. Harris had the best performance in Democratic history in the deep red district of northwest Georgia between Atlanta and Tennessee.

Harris and Fuller are scheduled to return to the polls in November, when Fuller will have to answer to voters about her actions in Congress.

“Northwest Georgia needed a vote on housing. Clay Fuller voted no. But when President Trump called for the deportation of Haitian and Syrian families, Clay suddenly spoke up,” Harris said in a social media post after Fuller supported ending TPS. “For us, he’s a no-vote. For Trump, he’s a full-time yes-man.”

Eileen Wright is an Atlanta Connect reporter for USA Today’s Deep South Connect team, covering Georgia politicians and elections. X Find her at @IreneEWright or email her at ismith@usatodayco.com.This story has been updated to include a gallery.

Supreme Court allows states to ban transgender athletes from women’s teams

0


Twenty-seven states prohibit transgender girls and women from participating in girls’ school sports teams. Opinion polls show widespread support for suspending trans athletes.

play

WASHINGTON – States can ban transgender women and girls from competing on women’s sports teams, the Supreme Court ruled June 30, addressing a major cultural and political flashpoint ahead of the summer recess.

The ruling marks the latest setback in a series of recent decisions the high court has handed down for the LGBTQ+ community that impact transgender Americans.

The court said West Virginia and Idaho’s bans on transgender female athletes do not violate the Constitution or federal law prohibiting sex discrimination in education.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh, writing for the majority, said schools “may determine women’s and girls’ eligibility to participate in sports based on their biological sex.”

“It makes sense to separate sports teams between biological males and biological females,” he wrote.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in a partial dissent joined by two liberal colleagues, said she would have given students challenging West Virginia’s law an opportunity to show that the ban should not apply to them.

“The vast majority who choose not to do so express great sympathy for the people they support: young cisgender girls and women in sports,” she wrote. “However, I respectfully disagree because the majority is inflicting hardship on those who are against it by denying them the fair and full opportunity to litigate that the Constitution requires.”

West Virginia Attorney General J.B. McCaskey called the decision “a monumental victory for every female athlete who has ever competed or dreamed of competing on a fair and safe playing field.”

“This landmark victory will give not only West Virginia, but all states, the clarity and confidence to ensure equity and safety for female athletes today and for generations to come,” McCaskey said in a statement.

Twenty-seven states have passed similar bans, saying they seek to ensure equity and address safety concerns for non-transgender women.

Transgender students who challenged the law said hormone therapy and other treatments eroded the physiological benefits of being born male. Therefore, they said, the law should not apply to them.

Students also looked forward to a landmark 2020 Supreme Court ruling protecting transgender employees from workplace discrimination.

But since the conservative court’s unexpected 6-3 ruling, justices have increasingly ruled against transgender Americans. This includes a 2025 decision that states can ban gender-affirming care for transgender minors.

President Trump supports state ban

The court’s latest ruling, one of the most anticipated of this term, comes amid President Donald Trump’s broader efforts to target transgender people.

Trump has made opposition to transgender women’s participation on women’s teams a centerpiece of his 2024 campaign, and as president he has moved to cut federal funding to schools that allow transgender women to participate in women’s sports and women’s sports.

The Department of Justice helped West Virginia and Idaho defend their bans in the Supreme Court.

Separately, the administration is seeking to block states from allowing transgender girls to play on women’s teams, but the Justice Department asked the court to rule only that the ban is allowed at this time, not to get into whether it is necessary.

Lower courts sided with trans athletes.

Boise State University student Lindsey Hecox tried to abandon her challenge to the Idaho law before the high court considered it, given the intense public attention and growing criticism of transgender athletes.

Two appeals courts sided with transgender students early in the case, blocking the law from going into effect as challenges continued.

Hecox said that because her testosterone was suppressed and she was taking estrogen, her testosterone levels were typical of a non-transgender woman, and her muscle mass and size (which may have been in her favor) were both reduced.

Are the laws “overreacting”?

Hecox’s attorney said he played soccer and ran on his school’s club team before retiring from sports this year. Her transition was to the “uncut” sport. She said she wasn’t fast enough to join the NCAA cross country and track teams.

“I think it’s an important time to step back and ask, ‘Is this law actually addressing the problem in a reasonable way, or are we overreacting to the assumption that transgender women are absolutely going to be strong athletes?'” Hecox’s attorney, Kathleen Hartnett, told the court.

He argued that a workaround to an outright ban could require students like Hecox to have their testosterone levels tested, but an attorney for Idaho said states don’t need to make such considerations.

“Idaho’s law is substantially compatible with 99 percent of men, and it does not have to be completely compatible,” Idaho Attorney General Alan Hurst said in court.

West Virginia students block male puberty

Becky Pepper Jackson began challenging West Virginia’s law when she entered middle school and is taking puberty-delaying drugs and estrogen.

Still, West Virginia maintained its physical advantage, with Pepper Jackson placing third in last year’s state discus throwing tournament and eighth in shooting when she was a freshman in high school.

Pepper Jackson attributed her athletic achievements to hard work and practice and said her grades were “within the range” of non-transgender girls her age.

Her lawyers argued that the judges should send the case back to federal district court for a trial to determine whether she has an advantage over her teammates and rivals who were identified as female at birth.

“Then the facts will be in front of you, and maybe the problem will be resolved,” Joshua Bullock, an American Civil Liberties Union attorney who is representing Pepper Jackson, said during oral arguments. “You know, I don’t think it’s necessary to intervene in this case with sweeping legal conclusions about what may actually be a narrow factual dispute.”

Michael Williams, a West Virginia attorney, countered that the primary responsibility for weighing evidence in “evolving areas of science and medicine, particularly those involving children,” and making policy decisions rests with state legislatures, not courts.

Opinion poll shows support for banning trans athletes

Opinion polls show widespread public support for requiring transgender athletes to compete on teams that match the gender assigned to them at birth.

Idaho and West Virginia have said transgender athletes’ participation in women’s sports is a serious issue, but advocates say the scope of the controversy is blown out of proportion.

play

SCOTUS hears arguments in transgender sports lawsuit

Transgender students in Idaho and West Virginia are challenging state regulations that ban transgender women from participating in women’s sports.

For example, Pepper Jackson was the only transgender student in West Virginia who asked to join the women’s team.

Her lawyer, Mr Bullock, called the court’s decision “heartbreaking”.

“The reality is that equality for transgender women and girls does nothing to take away from equality for all women and girls; in fact, it advances it,” Block said in a statement.

Kavanaugh, who coached his daughters in basketball, said during oral argument that he disliked the idea that even if they wanted to play sports, they might not be able to. But if a transgender girl were to join a team or a starting lineup, he said, she would run into conflict with someone else.

“And I don’t think it can be wiped away,” Kavanaugh added.

Kavanaugh emphasized that point in his opinion, but also called for respect for transgender athletes, who are at the center of national debate.

“Student-athletes want to play sports, and their desire to compete deserves to be respected,” he wrote. “No student-athlete on either side of this issue, whether biologically female or transgender, should be ostracized or vilified.”

There are no clear statistics on the number of students affected by the ban.

In 2024, NCAA President Charlie Baker told a Senate committee that he was aware of fewer than 10 transgender athletes participating in college sports across U.S. campuses.

The Williams Institute at UCLA School of Law, a think tank that studies sexual orientation and gender identity, estimates that as many as 122,000 transgender youth may be participating in team competitions at the high school level. At the college level, fewer than 1.5% of student-athletes are likely transgender, according to the institute.

Social Security Payments for July 2026. When will I receive my check?

0

play

Social Security payments for July will follow the normal schedule, with most payments scheduled to be sent starting July 8th.

Social Security benefits are paid primarily to seniors and retirees and are typically paid on Wednesdays. If your birthday falls between the 1st and 10th of a month, your payment is expected to arrive on the second Wednesday of the month (July 8th in July), according to the Social Security Administration’s calendar.

If you were born between the 11th and 20th, you will be paid on the third Wednesday of each month (July 15th). According to the SSA calendar, those born on or after the 20th of the month are paid on the fourth Wednesday of the month (July 22nd). Social Security recipients who began receiving benefits before May 1997 will receive payments on July 2nd.

The social security payment schedule for July is as follows:

Social Security Payment Schedule for July 2026

The Social Security Administration’s 2026 and 2027 payment calendars are available online. We also have a handy calendar below so you can see your schedule for budgeting purposes.

SSA says the check you receive in July will technically be your June Social Security retirement benefit, but the July benefit will be covered by the check you receive in August. The SSA schedule is as follows:

  • Wednesday, July 8th: Birthdays are from the 1st to the 10th of every month.
  • Wednesday, July 15th: Birthdays are between the 11th and 20th of every month.
  • Wednesday, July 22nd: Birthdays from the 21st to the 31st of each month.

July 2026 and Remaining SSI Payment Schedule

Supplemental Security Income (SSI), a program also administered by the Social Security Administration, provides benefits to people with limited or no income or assets, people age 65 and older, people who are blind or have a qualifying disability, and children with a qualifying disability, according to the SSA website.

SSI recipients are typically issued payments on the first business day of the month, or July 1st for July. In some cases, such as in July, the first business day of the next month (in this case August) is a weekend or holiday, so the recipient receives two checks.

Here are the SSI payment dates for 2026 according to the SSA calendar:

  • Wednesday, July 1, 2026
  • Friday, July 31, 2026
  • Tuesday, September 1, 2026
  • Thursday, October 1, 2026
  • Friday, October 30, 2026
  • Tuesday, December 1, 2026
  • Thursday, December 31, 2026

This is a calendar showing all Social Security and SSI payments for 2026.

2026 Social Security Payment Schedule

Mike Snyder is a national trends news reporter for USA TODAY. You can follow him on Threads, Bluesky, and X, and email him at: mike snyder & @mikegsnider.bsky.social & @mikesnider & msnider@usatoday.com.