NEW YORK (AP) — For a day, at least, Democrats across the country have a sense that their comeback against President Donald Trump may have begun. It wasn’t just about the election results in Wisconsin, where Democratic-backed Judge Susan Crawford won a 10-point victory against Trump and Elon Musk’s favored candidate for the state Supreme Court. Some Democrats highlighted New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker’s marathon, record-setting 25-hour Senate speech as a rallying point for frustrated voters. Others pointed to congressional Democrats lining up with a handful of House Republican lawmakers to oppose a procedural rule that would have stopped a proposal for new parents in Congress to able to vote by proxy. The series of victories gave Democratic leaders moments of relief and vindication of their strategy to focus on Trump’s alliances with Musk and other billionaires. That’s even as some party officials warned that it was far too early to draw sweeping conclusions from a series of lower-turnout off-year elections with polls still showing that the party’s brand is deeply unpopular among key groups of voters. “Elon Musk and Donald Trump are on the ropes,” charged Ken Martin, the newly elected chair of the Democratic National Committee. “We’re just getting started.” Democrats have had little to cheer about in the five months since Trump won a decisive victory in November’s presidential election in which he peeled away a significant portion of working-class voters and people of color. And in more recent weeks, the party’s activist base has become increasingly frustrated that Democratic leaders have not done more to stop Trump’s unprecedented push to slash the federal government and the reshape the economy. Democrats in Washington and in state capitals across the country privately conceded that a bad night, especially in Wisconsin, would have been devastating. Brad Schimel, the conservative candidate for the Wisconsin Supreme Court, lost to liberal-backed Crawford in a relative blowout, five months after Trump carried Wisconsin by less than 1 point. And in Florida, Republicans won special elections in two of the most pro-Trump House districts in the country, but both candidates significantly underperformed Trump’s November margins. “I went to bed last night feeling uplifted and relieved,” Kansas Democratic Party Chair Jeanna Repass said Wednesday. Rep. Mark Pocan, D-Wis., predicted further political consequences for Republicans if they don’t resist the sweeping cuts to government services enacted by Musk and Trump. “In swing districts, if I was a Republican, I would either decide how to stand up for your constituents or find out how to get a discount on adult depends, because one or the other is what you’re going to be needing to do,” Pocan said. Rebecca Cooke, a Democratic candidate in Wisconsin’s 3rd congressional district, said the election was a clear indication that voters are upset with how Trump and Musk “are messing with their lives.” But she stopped short of projecting confidence in future elections. “We have work to do to build long term infrastructure in this party and to really build trust back with voters that I think have felt left behind by the Democratic Party,” said Cooke, a 37-year-old waitress who is running against GOP Rep. Derrick Van Orden. “I think it takes time to build trust with voters, and it can’t happen overnight, and it can’t happen in just one election.” In this week’s successes, Democratic officials believe they have confirmed the effectiveness of their core message heading into the 2026 midterms that Trump and his billionaire allies are working for the rich at the expense of the working class. Indeed, talking points distributed by the Democratic National Committee on Wednesday reinforced that notion while pointing to what the committee described as “an undeniable trend” after recent lower-profile Democratic victories in Virginia, Iowa, Pennsylvania, Louisiana and Minnesota. “In 2025, Democrats continue to overperform in special elections as voters send a resounding message: They want Democrats to fight for them, and they want the Trump-Musk agenda out of their communities,” the talking points read. Rep. Suzan DelBene, D-Wash., told the AP Wednesday that the election results showed that the public is “outraged” by chaos and dysfunction coming from the Trump administration. The chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee said Trump and Republicans in Congress are failing to fix high prices and seeking Medicaid cuts, in addition to supporting tariffs that could worsen inflation for families. “What we saw yesterday in Florida and Wisconsin was Republicans running scared because the American people are angry and scared about the direction the Trump-Musk agenda is taking us,” she said. “They’re seeing prices go up. They’re seeing more and more the focus is not on them, but on Trump and his wealthy donors.” On Saturday, hundreds of thousands of voters are expected to attend more than 1,000 so-called “Hands Off!” related protests nationwide focused on Trump and Musk. More than 150 political groups worked together to organize what will almost certainly represent the single biggest day of protest of the second Trump administration. The Washington event, which will feature Reps. Maxwell Frost, D-Fla., and Jamie Raskin, D-Md., already has more than 12,000 RSVPs, according to organizers. Meanwhile, Booker is planning to attend a series of unrelated public events, including a town hall in New Jersey this weekend. His office reports receiving 28,000 voicemails since he finished his speech shortly after 8 p.m. on Tuesday. At its peak, the 25-hour address was being streamed by more than 300,000 people across Booker’s social media channels. It earned more than 350 million likes on his newly formed TikTok account. A spokesperson said that the Democratic senator spent much of Wednesday sleeping. ___ Associated Press writers Josh Boak and Leah Askarinam in Washington and Scott Bauer in Madison, Wisconsin contributed reporting. Brought to you by www.srnnews.com

A federal judge on Wednesday pressed an attorney for the Environmental Protection Agency about whether the agency broke the law when it swiftly terminated $20 billion worth of grants awarded to nonprofits for a green bank by allegedly bulldozing past proper rules and raising flimsy accusations of waste and fraud. In a nearly three-hour hearing, U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan said the government had provided no substantial new evidence of wrongdoing by the nonprofits and considered technical arguments that could decide whether she is even the right person to hear the case. Climate United Fund and other groups had sued the EPA, its Administrator Lee Zeldin and Citibank, which held the grant money, saying they had illegally denied the groups access to funds awarded last year to help finance clean energy and climate-friendly projects. They want Chutkan to give them access to those funds again, saying the freeze had paralyzed their work and jeopardized their basic operations. “What plaintiffs are saying is if you wanted to stop that money from going out, you should have gone through the procedures under the” law, Chutkan said, adding that instead of doing that, the EPA appears to have demanded the bank simply freeze the funds and then quickly terminated the grants. The Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, commonly referred to as a “green bank,” was authorized by the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act. However, its goals run counter to the Trump administration’s opposition to climate-friendly policies and its embrace of fossil fuels. Zeldin quickly made the bank a target, characterizing the grants as a “gold bar” scheme marred by conflicts of interest and potential fraud. “Twenty billion of your tax dollars were parked at an outside financial institution, in a deliberate effort to limit government oversight — doling out your money through just eight pass-through, politically connected, unqualified and in some cases brand-new” nonprofit institutions, Zeldin said in a previously posted video. The nonprofits say Zeldin and the EPA led an evidence-free scheme to end the grants, in violation of the law and their contracts, which only allowed termination in limited circumstances like fraud or major performance failures – not ideological opposition. Chutkan noted that EPA allegedly demanded Citibank stop providing funds that had already been awarded without letting the nonprofits know or responding to their questions. “Is that lawful?” she asked. “It certainly is lawful, your honor. I don’t know if it is the best course of action or the one that in retrospect that we all wish the agency would have followed,” responded Department of Justice Attorney Marcus Sacks for the EPA. The EPA said it does not comment on pending litigation. In March, Chutkan pressed pause on the EPA’s move to terminate the grant program, saying the government’s reasoning for doing so was based on “vague and unsubstantiated assertions of fraud.” But she declined to immediately unfreeze the accounts. The Trump administration says that it was allowed to terminate the contracts based on oversight concerns and shifting priorities. The nonprofits are trying to make grand constitutional and statutory arguments that simply don’t apply, the government said. “At bottom, this is just a run-of-the-mill (albeit large) contract dispute,” federal officials said in a court filing. That argument is important. If the government successfully argues the case is a contract dispute, then they say it should be heard by a different court that can only award a lump sum – not force the government to keep the grants in place. Federal officials argue there is no law or provision in the Constitution that compels EPA to make these grants to these groups. The nonprofits, which also include the Coalition for Green Capital and Power Forward Communities, argue the EPA was focused on ending the grants quickly, even if their methods violated the law. They said the agency appeared to have pressured a high-ranking prosecutor in the U.S. Attorney’s Washington office to pressure Citibank to freeze the funds. That prosecutor resigned rather than follow through. Then the Trump administration pushed Citibank to freeze the money, which the bank did, according to the nonprofits. “The purported terminations are the fruit of EPA’s clandestine, weekslong effort to freeze plaintiffs’ money without ever giving plaintiff notice of what was happening or an opportunity to correct it,” according to the nonprofits. Power Forward Communities is a coalition of nonprofits, and since the termination, two of its members left, United Way Worldwide and Habitat for Humanity International. Power Forward Communities said it “respects and understands the tough decisions.” United Way said the decision to withdraw was difficult, but they realized that the only option they had after the grant termination was to sue the government. Habitat for Humanity also chose not to get involved in the legal fight. “UWW will not join this suit. As a charitable organization, UWW must carefully focus and steward its financial and technical resources in alignment with its mission and donors’ intent and expectations,” the organization said in a statement. ___ The Associated Press receives support from the Walton Family Foundation for coverage of water and environmental policy. The AP is solely responsible for all content. For all of AP’s environmental coverage, visit https://apnews.com/hub/climate-and-environment Brought to you by www.srnnews.com

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — A new report released Wednesday shines more light on the person who killed three 9-year-olds and three adults at a private Nashville Christian elementary school in 2023. According to the nearly 50-page report, Audrey Hale’s initial fascination with mass shootings and school shooters ballooned into planning his own type of attack. For nearly five years, Hale scoped and researched locations where he could unleash terror, and he stocked up on firearms. All the while, Hale’s parents and therapists became increasingly concerned, causing Hale to become more manipulative. He even considered killing his mother so she couldn’t upend his mass shooting plan. Hale sometimes used male pronouns and police say Hale identified as male but the report uses female pronouns due to a Tennessee law definition of “sex” as “determined by anatomy and genetics existing at the time of birth.” Here is a timeline of what police have confirmed: At 16-years-old, Nashville police say Hale became increasingly socially isolated, “failed to establish connections” within his school’s social circles and began contemplating suicide. Noticing a change in her child, Hale’s mother took him to a therapist, who Hale met with for several years. That therapist performed a psychological assessment and concluded Hale suffered from major depressive disorder, dysthymic disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, social phobias, anger-management issues, and was underdeveloped both emotionally and socially. At the encouragement of the therapist, Hale began journaling. In those initial writings, police say that’s when Hale started researching mass killers in the U.S. and watching documentaries about school shootings. That same year, Hale’s weight dropped significantly at a rate that alarmed both his mother and therapist. Hale agreed to attend an eating disorder clinic for six weeks. The report says as his research into mass killers and school shooters continued, Hale began planning an attack at his former middle school, including listing firearms and ammunition needed to carry out the attack. Hale’s therapist was alarmed in 2019 when Hale “let slip” that he had suicidal thoughts and homicidal fantasies. This sparked a psychological assessment at Nashville’s Vanderbilt University Medical Center. The report says that assessment confirmed Hale’s mental health disorders but included a note that Hale denied attempting to harm himself or others. The assessment concluded that Hale should participate in an intensive outpatient program to address his mental health. The program lasted eight weeks and during that time, Hale’s therapist retired. Upon completion of the program, Hale resumed his planning for an attack. At 25-years-old, Hale purchased a rifle and started training privately on how to use it as planning for the middle school attack continued. Hale began purchasing more firearms while attempting to hide them from his parents but in April 2021, Hale mentioned to his new therapist that he owned a rifle. The report says the therapist “immediately objected” due to Hale’s history of depression and suicidal thoughts. Hale assured the therapist that those thoughts were in his past. A few months later, Hale’s mother not only found out about the guns but also discovered Hale’s copy of a book on the 1999 Columbine shooting and alerted Hale’s therapist. They convinced Hale to surrender his guns and referred him once again to VUMC for a psychological assessment. Hale avoided hospitalization this time, then secretly purchased a separate firearm and found a new therapist. The report says the attempts to treat Hale failed in part due to his not wanting to be treated, and that he subsequently became more paranoid, secretive and isolated. This is also the year that Hale began considering Covenant School as a possible target for an attack. The report says Hale became increasingly paranoid of being discovered by his parents and therapist, and notably worried that he would be involuntarily hospitalized and his guns would be seized. Hale carried out the Covenant School shooting on March 23. The people killed in the shooting at Covenant were: Evelyn Dieckhaus, Hallie Scruggs, and William Kinney, all 9 years old; Cynthia Peak, 61; Katherine Koonce, 60; and Mike Hill, 61. According to police, Hale’s father told law enforcement that when he heard about the Covenant shooting, he suspected that his child was involved. Brought to you by www.srnnews.com

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump declared on Wednesday a 10% baseline tax on imports from all countries and higher tariff rates on dozens of nations that run trade surpluses with the United States, threatening to upend much of the architecture of the global economy and trigger broader trade wars. Trump held up a chart while speaking at the White House, showing the United States would charge a 34% tax on imports from China, a 20% tax on imports from the European Union, 25% on South Korea, 24% on Japan and 32% on Taiwan. The president used aggressive rhetoric to describe a global trade system that the United States helped to build after World War II, saying “our country has been looted, pillaged, raped, plundered” by other nations. Trump declared a national economic emergency to launch the tariffs, expected to produce hundreds of billions in annual revenues. He has promised that factory jobs will return back to the United States as a result of the taxes, but his policies risk a sudden economic slowdown as consumers and businesses could face sharp price hikes on autos, clothes and other goods. “Taxpayers have been ripped off for more than 50 years,” Trump said in remarks at the White House. “But it is not going to happen anymore.” Trump was fulfilling a key campaign promise as he imposed what he called “reciprocal” tariffs on trade partners, acting without Congress through the 1977 International Emergency Powers Act in an extraordinary attempt to both break and ultimately reshape America’s trading relationship with the world. The president’s higher rates would hit foreign entities that sell more goods to the United States than they buy, meaning the tariffs could stay in place for some time as the administration expects other nations to lower their tariffs and other barriers to trade that it says have led to a $1.2 trillion trade imbalance last year. The tariffs follow similar recent announcements of 25% taxes on auto imports; levies against China, Canada and Mexico; and expanded trade penalties on steel and aluminum. Trump has also imposed tariffs on countries that import oil from Venezuela and he plans separate import taxes on pharmaceutical drugs, lumber, copper and computer chips. None of the warning signs about a falling stock market or consumer sentiment turning morose have caused the administration to publicly second-guess its strategy, despite the risk of political backlash as voters in last year’s election said they wanted Trump to combat inflation. Senior administration officials, who insisted on anonymity to preview the new tariffs with reporters ahead of Trump’s speech, said the taxes would raise hundreds of billions of dollars annually in revenues. They said the 10% baseline rate existed to help ensure compliance, while the higher rates were based on the trade deficits run with other nations and then halved to reach the numbers that Trump presented in the Rose Garden. In a follow-up series of questions by The Associated Press, the White House could not say whether the tariff exemptions on imports worth $800 or less would remain in place, possibly shielding some imports from the new taxes. Based on the possibility of broad tariffs that have been floated by some White House aides, most outside analyses by banks and think tanks see an economy tarnished by higher prices and stagnating growth. Trump would be applying these tariffs on his own; he has ways of doing so without congressional approval. That makes it easy for Democratic lawmakers and policymakers to criticize the administration if the uncertainty expressed by businesses and declining consumer sentiment are signs of trouble to come. Heather Boushey, a member of the Biden White House’s Council of Economic Advisers, noted that the less aggressive tariffs Trump imposed during his first term failed to stir the manufacturing renaissance he promised voters. “We are not seeing indications of the boom that the president promised,” Boushey said. “It’s a failed strategy.” Rep. Suzan DelBene, D-Wash., said the tariffs are “part of the chaos and dysfunction” being generated across the Trump administration. The chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee stressed that Trump should not have the sole authority to raise taxes as he intends without getting lawmakers’ approval, saying that Republicans so far have been “blindly loyal.” “The president shouldn’t be able to do that,” DelBene said. “This is a massive tax increase on American families, and it’s without a vote in Congress … President Trump promised on the campaign trail that he would lower costs on day one. Now he says he doesn’t care if prices go up — he’s broken his promise.” Even Republicans who trust Trump’s instincts have acknowledged that the tariffs could disrupt an economy with an otherwise healthy 4.1 % unemployment rate. “We’ll see how it all develops,” said House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La. “It may be rocky in the beginning. But I think that this will make sense for Americans and help all Americans.” Longtime trading partners are preparing their own countermeasures. Canada has imposed some in response to the 25% tariffs that Trump tied to the trafficking of fentanyl. The European Union, in response to the steel and aluminum tariffs, put taxes on 26 billion euros’ worth ($28 billion) of U.S. goods, including on bourbon, which prompted Trump to threaten a 200% tariff on European alcohol. Many allies feel they have been reluctantly drawn into a confrontation by Trump, who routinely says America’s friends and foes have essentially ripped off the United States with a mix of tariffs and other trade barriers. The flip side is that Americans also have the incomes to choose to buy designer gowns by French fashion houses and autos from German manufacturers, whereas World Bank data show the EU has lower incomes per capita than the U.S. “Europe has not started this confrontation,” said European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. “We do not necessarily want to retaliate but, if it is necessary, we have a strong plan to retaliate and we will use it.” Italy’s premier, Giorgia Meloni, on Wednesday reiterated her call to avoid an EU-US trade war, saying it would harm both sides and would have “heavy” consequences for her country’s economy. Because Trump had hyped his tariffs without providing specifics until Wednesday, he provided a deeper sense of uncertainty for the world, a sign that the economic slowdown could possibly extend beyond U.S. borders to other nations that would see one person to blame. Ray Sparnaay, general manager of JE Fixture & Tool, a Canadian tool and die business that sits across the Detroit River, said the uncertainty has crushed his company’s ability to make plans. “There’s going to be tariffs implemented. We just don’t know at this point,” he said Monday. “That’s one of the biggest problems we’ve had probably the last — well, since November — is the uncertainty. It’s basically slowed all of our quoting processes, business that we hope to secure has been stalled.” ___ Associated Press writers Mike Householder in Oldcastle, Ontario, Sylvie Corbet in Paris and Lisa Mascaro contributed to this report. Brought to you by www.srnnews.com

COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) — For the first time in over two centuries as a U.S. state, South Carolina lawmakers are going to try to remove a statewide elected official from office. The Republican-dominated Senate on Wednesday decided to hold a hearing to decide if Republican state Treasurer Curtis Loftis should be removed from office over a $1.8 billion accounting error and then failing to report the problem to the General Assembly. Loftis says the attempt to oust him is politically motivated. Loftis can be removed if two-thirds of the Senate and House vote against him. At a hearing on April 21, senators will present their case and Loftis or his attorney will have three hours to respond. The House would then follow suit with their own hearing. A 58-page report released last week on the accounting error said South Carolina’s books have been inaccurate for 10 years and continue to not be corrected. The state paid millions of dollars to forensic accountants who eventually determined the missing money was not cash the state never spent, but instead was a series of errors in balancing books and shifting accounts from one system to another that were never reconciled. The state should “not consign the ongoing fiscal oversight — the banking and investment functions of our state — to continued incompetence. In sum: if the treasurer cannot keep track of the treasury, then he should not remain treasurer,” senators wrote in their report that included more than 600 pages of exhibits. Loftis responded by pointing out he has won four elections since 2010 and called the Senate investigation a power grab so they can get support for a bill to have the treasurer become an appointed position. “South Carolina’s financial threat isn’t from mismanagement or missing money. The real danger comes from a relentless, politically motivated attack on my office — one that risks undermining our state’s financial reputation, increasing taxpayer costs, and stripping voters of their right to elect a Treasurer who works for the people, not special interests,” Loftis wrote in a statement. The problems started as the state changed computer systems in the 2010s. When the process was finished, workers couldn’t figure out why the books were more than $1 billion out of whack. A fund was created to cover the accounting error and over the years more was added on paper to keep the state’s books balanced. The error came to light after Comptroller General Richard Eckstrom resigned in March 2023 over a different accounting mistake and his replacement reported the mystery account. The report said Loftis not only ignored or failed to find mistakes made by his office but also rejected or slowed down attempts to independently investigate the problem. “The treasurer tried to cover them up. He covered it up for the better part of seven to eight years,” Republican Sen. Stephen Goldfinch said. A Senate subcommittee has held hearings to question Loftis under oath. They have been contentious. Loftis has slammed papers, accused senators of a witch hunt and threatened to get up and leave. One move that particularly angered senators occurred after a lawmaker asked Loftis why he didn’t file reports on the state finances, as required by law. The treasurer said he would publish a report online that could include bank account numbers and other sensitive information. Senators were in an uproar the next day. They said the report could easily be published without information that would allow cybercriminals to empty the state’s accounts. They had the governor and the head of the state police find Loftis and demand he not publish the report. The treasurer said he was just following the Senate’s instructions. “His volatile temperament and angry demeanor degrade those who are charged to work with him to secure the financial standing of South Carolina,” senators wrote in last week’s report. The report also said Loftis is responsible for millions of dollars to be spent through his lack of oversight and later lack of cooperation investigating the account. The Senate approved Wednesday what is called the “removal on address” hearing by a voice vote with no opposition. Lawmakers have never taken the constitutional step to its conclusion. The resolution’s future is a little more murky in the House, where no Republicans have come out to forcefully call for the treasurer’s removal. Republican Gov. Henry McMaster has also suggested removing Loftis from office is too drastic, but the governor does not have a major role in the process. Brought to you by www.srnnews.com