Border Patrol says some illegal migrants arrested in Sacramento raid had criminal histories

Harvard University is heading back to court to challenge the Trump administration's freeze on $2 billion in funding, which has stalled critical research projects. Meanwhile, in a separate but equally troubling story, an elderly Pennsylvania man was reportedly deported to Guatemala after visiting an immigration office to replace his lost green card—his family was initially told he had died and still hasn’t heard from him.

Editor’s Note: These two stories highlight the real-world consequences of policy decisions—whether it’s cutting funding for vital research or mishandling immigration cases. Harvard’s legal battle could set a precedent for how federal funding disputes play out, while the deportation case raises serious questions about transparency and accountability in immigration enforcement. Both are reminders of how policy isn’t just abstract; it impacts lives and institutions in tangible, sometimes devastating ways.

House Republicans are accusing Democrats of hypocrisy after Democrats pushed for more transparency around Jeffrey Epstein’s case—a shift from when Republicans previously demanded the same during Trump’s presidency. The spat reignites as a DOJ memo under Trump stated Epstein died by suicide and denied the existence of a "client list," fueling partisan finger-pointing over who’s really seeking accountability.

Editor’s Note: This isn’t just about Epstein—it’s another round of "gotcha" politics, where both sides weaponize transparency demands depending on who’s in power. The back-and-forth underscores how deeply polarized investigations have become, with each party seizing opportunities to paint the other as insincere. For the public, it raises frustrating questions: Is anyone genuinely interested in answers, or is this just another political game?

Harvard University is taking the Trump administration to court, claiming that its $2.6 billion funding cuts were illegal. A ruling in Harvard’s favor could reverse those cuts, which started as freezes before escalating into a full-blown financial fight with the federal government.

Editor’s Note: This isn’t just about Harvard—it’s a high-stakes clash over how much control the government should have over university funding. If Harvard wins, it could set a precedent protecting other schools from similar cuts. But if it loses, it might embolden future administrations to slash budgets for higher education with fewer legal consequences. Either way, the outcome could ripple far beyond Cambridge.

Police are hunting for a second suspect involved in the shooting of an off-duty Border Patrol agent during what appears to have been a failed robbery attempt in New York City. The agent, 42, was with a woman when two men on a moped confronted him, leaving him injured. Authorities are still piecing together the details.

Editor’s Note: This isn’t just another crime story—it involves a federal officer, which could signal broader concerns about safety, even for those trained to handle dangerous situations. If this was indeed a botched robbery, it raises questions about brazenness in street crime. Plus, with one suspect still at large, there’s an active threat, making it urgent for both law enforcement and the public.

A man in California, already a convicted felon on parole, is accused of deliberately driving his car into a crowd on a Los Angeles sidewalk over the weekend, according to police. The incident raises fresh concerns about parole oversight and public safety.

Editor’s Note: This isn’t just another hit-and-run—it’s a disturbing case where someone with a violent past, supposedly under supervision, allegedly committed another serious crime. It’ll likely fuel debates about parole systems, repeat offenders, and how to balance rehabilitation with community safety. For Angelenos, it’s another reminder of the vulnerabilities in urban spaces.