LAS VEGAS — A fired United Airlines flight attendant says the carrier’s “friendly skies” turned decidedly hostile when he spoke with a colleague about his faith’s gender doctrine. The 28-year-veteran employee said neither the airline nor the Association of Flight Attendants union would take his side in the face of an anonymous Twitter complaint laden with what he said were false accusations. Ruben D. Sanchez Jr., 52, of Anchorage, Alaska, wants to raise $18,000 via GoFundMe to continue the fight to get his job back. “I’m too young to retire and too old to start new,” the former jet-setter told The Post in a telephone interview. He said he’s taken “a pay cut from what I made with United” working as an active-duty member of the Air National Guard in Alaska. Sanchez said his troubles began on a May 31, 2023, red-eye flight from Los Angeles to Cleveland. He was trying to stay awake, he said of the last-minute assignment, and ended up speaking with another flight attendant about their shared Catholic faith — and the next day’s start of Pride month. The annual gay-rights observance is “a big deal at United,” Sanchez said. The airline “has all these things about Pride, with the Pride flags everywhere” and “drag-queen DJ s” playing music at United’s Los Angeles terminal. “It was just innocent. ‘Let’s have a conversation so I can stay awake,’” Sanchez said. But Sanchez was overheard by an unidentified person who then complained to the airline via Twitter. “I said, ‘You know, as Catholics, we’re not really supposed to be observing Pride,’” the now-former flight attendant said. “‘The church will never believe that men give birth, women have penises or that the church should bless same-sex marriages because marriage is a sacrament, and it’s not meant for two men or two women or three people or whatever.’ That’s all I said.” Sanchez said the online complainant claimed, “I hate all black people,” and “I am proudly anti-trans” — which isn’t true, he told The Post. Suspended with pay over the unsubstantiated tweet-complaint, Sanchez said a supervisor said the airline would examine his Twitter history. That timeline revealed Sanchez had once posted a couple of Joan Rivers jokes about Elizabeth Taylor’s weight and one about plus-size pol Chris Christie, which a supervisor said showed disrespect to any “passenger of size.” Sanchez said the airline also saw as problematic his tweets about removing the “transgender triangle” from the Pride flag and dissenting from global warming. He was told a humorous photo of him carrying a pilot over his shoulder that “went viral” online “created a nexus” between his personal social-media posts and his job. The Post asked United Airlines for comment, and the firm twice said via email, “We won’t have anything to share” about Sanchez’s case. Officials at the Association of Flight Attendants union headquarters, United Airlines counsel and local counsel in Houston, which initially represented Sanchez in the investigative process, also did not respond to The Post’s multiple calls and emails seeking comment. This isn’t the first time the flight attendants’ union has been criticized for not supporting religiously observant employees. First Liberty Institute, a public-interest law firm, sued in January on behalf of two Alaska Airlines flight attendants who questioned the carrier’s support for the 2021 Equality Act, a proposal that would’ve added LGBTQ protections to federal civil-rights law. The Alaska Airlines workers’ suit alleged the AFA-CWA Master Executive Council did not support the employees but instead reported their comments to company officials. First Liberty has asked the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to review the case after a lower court ruled against the workers. “Employers are increasingly becoming more hostile to people of faith in the workplace, and you’re seeing that play out in a lot of different ways,” David Hacker, the group’s vice president of litigation, told The Post. “We at First Liberty have seen these types of situations popping up more and more, and that’s a disturbing trend. . . . The law provides that employers cannot discriminate against you based on your religious beliefs or practices.” Hacker said corporate shareholders must push back on woke corporate attitudes and where the federal government says companies “can’t discriminate against people based on their faith.” “There’s no one silver bullet to change it. But there’s certainly a lot of different tools in the toolbox, and we should be using all those to make sure that people of faith are protected,” he said. Sanchez said because the union said it wouldn’t represent him in arbitration, he tried — and failed — to raise roughly $15,000 to pay those costs. He hopes to use the GoFundMe proceeds to cover existing legal bills and move forward with his case.After an unseasonably warm fall, the chill of winter is finally setting in, meaning it’s time to turn up our thermostats and brace for the inevitable rise in heating costs. For families and seniors already feeling the pinch of inflation, the added burden of soaring energy bills can be overwhelming. I recently heard from a [...]p777 。

Pictet North America Advisors SA Increases Stock Holdings in NVIDIA Co. (NASDAQ:NVDA)Private medical colleges barred from charging next year’s fees Committee warns private medical colleges of strict action if they fail to comply with directives ISLAMABAD: A sub-committee of the Senate Standing Committee on Health has directed private medical colleges across the country to cease collecting next year’s fees from students until the issue of medical and dental colleges’ fee structures is resolved. The decision was made during a meeting on Friday, chaired by Senator Palwasha Mohammad Zai Khan. The directive comes amidst allegations of exorbitant fees charged by private medical colleges, prompting inquiries by two high-level committees—one constituted by Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and the other by the Senate sub-committee. The sub-committee took action after learning that some private institutions had started issuing fee vouchers despite ongoing investigations. The committee also warned private medical colleges of strict action, including revocation of registrations, if they fail to comply with directives. The matter is expected to be deliberated in the next Senate sub-committee meeting. The sub-committee chairperson, Senator Palwasha Khan, highlighted the staggering increase in medical college fees over recent years. “Some institutions have raised annual fees from Rs800,000 in 2018 to over Rs 3 million in 2023-24, which is a blatant exploitation of students and their families. Pakistan Medical and Dental Council (PMDC) has failed to regulate these colleges and has instead facilitated their unjust practices,” Senator Khan lamented. Registrar PMDC, Dr Shaista Faisal, informed the committee that the council is authorised to regulate fee structures under the PMDC Act, 2023. She noted that the earlier attempts to regulate fees were not legally enforceable, but the 2023 Act now empowers the council to act decisively. In 2012, PMDC capped annual fees for private medical colleges at Rs500,000 with a 5 per cent annual increase, but this regulation was disregarded by many institutions. Dr Shaista Faisal acknowledged the failure of PMDC to act in recent years and assured the committee that directives would be issued after consulting PMDC President Prof. Rizwan Taj. Senator Syed Masroor Ahsan questioned PMDC’s performance since the enactment of the 2023 Act, demanding details of steps taken to regulate private medical colleges. PMDC officials could not provide a satisfactory response, leading to further criticism. Special Secretary National Health Services, Regulations, and Coordination, Mirza Nasiruddin Mashud, informed the committee that Prime Minister Shahbaz Sharif had formed a high-level committee led by Deputy Prime Minister Ishaq Dar to examine the reason for fees charged by private medical colleges. Senator Palwasha Khan appealed to the public to submit grievances against private medical colleges. “We will keep the identities of complainants confidential, and any unjust fees by these institutions will be reimbursed,” she assured. The sub-committee directed PMDC to scrutinise audit reports of private medical colleges and to investigate allegations of unjustified fee hikes. Furthermore, private medical colleges were ordered to refrain from collecting fees for the next academic year until the matter is resolved. Parents and students affected by unjust fees can submit their grievances at Room No. 2, Parking Area, C-Block, Senate Standing Committee on Information Technology and Telecommunications, G-5 Islamabad, or by calling 051-9223955.In an online Q&A with supporters, the husband and wife team spoke about a number of issues at Penton Park with the current form of the side, the proposed takeover and the club's financial status the main topics on which fans demanded answers. In October this year, news broke that hip hop star A$AP Rocky, the 36-year-old boyfriend of pop icon Rihanna, was reportedly part of an investment group, led by celebrity lawyer Joe Tacopina, interested in purchasing an 80% stake in the Birkenhead club. Since then, chairman Mark Palios, who became Tranmere owner in 2014 alongside his wife Nicola, has remained tight-lipped on the proposals with rumours swirling that any deal may have fallen through. On the pitch Rovers' form has deteriorated to such a degree that they now find themselves in 21st place in League Two just four points off the relegation zone heaping pressure on manager and former teammates of the chairman, Nigel Adkins. Addressing the supporters, Mark Palios, said: "The first thing to say is the speculation that a deal to buy the club has collapsed is entirely wrong. "We are limited by non-disclosure agreements around the sale and that's entirely normal so we're not allowed to put out there what is happening or is not happening. "These things are complex and as a reference point you can look at Everton where even though they've recently said they've completed a deal it still hasn't gone through. "We can't communicate freely or give a blow by blow account as to what is happening but part of the delay is that we want the incoming people to add value and increase the potential of the club. "I think that the parties we are talking to can do that and we'd rather that happened than people just come in and put money into the playing budget or put money into an ego trip or asset strip which has happened to other clubs over the yeas and we don't want to see that." Putting a time scale on the takeover was something Mark Palios said was difficult but he did have encouraging words for those who want changes fast. "It's difficult to identify exactly when this will happen," he said. "People have to go through the officers and directors tests at the EFL and they have to make sure they have the funds to do what is necessary but we're reasonably confident that this deal will close by the end of quarter one next year. "Whether I stay on to aid the acquisition is up to the incoming consortium - if they want me to stay on to affect a smooth transition I will. If they don't I will shake hands and say goodbye." The husband and wife began the session by addressing what they have achieved in their ten year tenure. "Our strategy since we came in has always been that at some point we would have to hand over the club," said Mark. "In terms of what we could do it was about 'can we put ourselves in a better position so that there's interest from people in taking over the club and building on the increased potential of the club and could those people coming in have aspirations to take the club into the Championship. "The difficulty in that is keeping the on-field performances going but I think over time we've built the potential - we have our own ground and a training ground in which £3.6m has been invested and that would enable us to play in the Championship without significant further investment and that's attractive to people who are coming in and looking at clubs that don't have their own ground or training ground. "Over a period of time not everything has been great but what we wanted to achieve was to get interest from people investing in the club and that is certainly what we're seeing at this point in time. "The club is in a better place and people recognise that - I don't think we will go into the National League but if we did I'd point at Wrexham who were in the National League and I think we ae actually in a better place than Wrexham were." Addressing the club's performances on the pitch this season, both Mark and Nicola could not hide their frustration with Rovers' recent form which has seen them win just one game in the last seven. Mark said: "For a lot of fans the disenchantment and unhappiness they feel is around this area and it won't surprise you that it's the most difficult question to answer. "No one in situations like this can put their finger on one thing that you can fix like in a normal business and it's all the more perplexing because this is the highest playing budget we've had and when you back to the optimism of pre-season and our stat to the season, optimism was high and yet here we are in 21st place. "This happens in football and it happens all over the world in football in every league. Good players don't become bad players overnight and good managers and coaches don't become bad managers and coaches overnight. "I appreciate you don't see what I see in terms of what the manager and the players are doing to try and make themselves better and fix the problems but they do work on it and they are as unhappy as everybody else around the club and in the stands. "It's hard to accept but sometimes you've just got to stick together, look at what you're doing and seek to improve. Everybody is working hard and they are not complacent." Mark confirmed that Andy Crosby would be joining the coaching staff on a short-term basis. Crosby, who was most recently manager at Port Vale, worked previously with Adkins at Scunthorpe, Southampton, Sheffield United and Reading as the current Rovers' boss' assistant. "He brings an experienced but new set of eyes that may see things that other people don't see," said Mark. "No one is happy with the results and where we are in the table - they all came to the club with an ambition to get promoted and enhance their careers. "We have three home games coming up and it is about everyone helping out on this if you accept that all the players are trying really hard, the staff are really trying hard and at the end of the day everyone is working to achieve the same thing. "If you go home happy on a Saturday afternoon I go home happy on a Saturday afternoon because that's what everyone wants to achieve."

NoneDrought, fires and deforestation battered Amazon rainforest in 2024

Walmart’s mega “Black Friday Deals” sale is coming to a close, but there’s still time to score major savings on those holiday gifts online now. The Walmart “Black Friday Deals” sale will end early on Sunday, Dec. 1 , giving you a few more hours to snag markdowns up to 70% off in some of the best deals of the year from Walmart. This includes big discounts on those hot-ticket electronic devices , essential kitchen appliances , stylish fashion and top toys . Walmart rolled out this big “Black Friday Deals” sale on Nov. 11, splitting the event into two sales that were featured online and in stores. It also gave exclusive online access to Walmart+ members five hours before the general public for a first chance at the best deals. As the second of Walmart’s “Black Friday Deals” sale , this holiday shopping event kicked off on Nov. 25 and will come to a close just before Walmart rolls out online-only deals for Cyber Monday on Dec. 1 at 8 p.m. ET with exclusive online access for Walmart+ members at 8 p.m. ET. The Cyber Monday deals will run until midnight ET on Dec. 2. But before this Cyber Monday sale arrives, you can shop the mega discounts Walmart is still offering now on TVs , wireless headphones , smartwatches , vacuums , cookware , grills and griddles , gaming consoles and more. Shop Walmart’s Black Friday sale To help you find the best deals, here’s a roundup of some of our favorites that you can still grab from Walmart’s “Black Friday Deals” sale before it ends today. TCL 65” Class S4 4K UHD HDR LED Roku TV for $228, instead of $378 Hisense 55′′ Class R6 Series 4K UHD Roku Smart TV for $178, instead of $278 Hisense 85′′ Class R6 Series 4K UHD Roku Smart TV for $548, instead of $798 VIZIO 75” Class 4K UHD LED HDR Smart TV for $478, instead of $598 Apple Watch SE (2nd Gen) for $149, instead of $249 Apple AirPods Pro 2 for $154, instead of $249 Apple iPad (10th Gen) for $259, instead of $349 Beats Studio3 Wireless Headphones for $89, instead of $159 Samsung Galaxy Watch4 40mm Smart Watch for $99, instead of $144 HP Stream 14-inch Windows Laptop for $129, instead of $249 Dyson V7 Advanced Cordless Vacuum Cleaner for $220, instead of $400 iRobot Roomba Combo j5 Robot Vacuum & Mop for $299, instead of $599 Shark IQ Robot Vacuum for $248, instead of $500 Carote 11-Piece Nonstick Cookware Set for $54, instead of $200 Gourmia All-in-One 14-Quart Air Fryer for $50, instead of $99 Chefman CraftBrew 15-Bar Espresso Machine for $50 Ninja Sizzle 14-inch Indoor Griddle for $60, instead of $99 KitchenAid 5.5 Quart Bowl Lift Stand Mixer for $279, instead of $450 Blackstone Adventure Ready 2-Burner 22′′ Propane Omnivore Griddle for $197, instead of $247 Blackstone 25-Piece Griddle Accessory Set for $40, instead of $80 Blackstone Outdoor Tabletop Propane Pizza Oven for $147, instead of $274 Muskoka 19.5′′ Stainless Steel Smokeless Fire Pit for $97, instead of $148 Michael Kors Women’s Jet Set Travel Tote for $89, instead of $339 Cate & Chloe Bianca 18k White Gold Drop Dangle Hoop Earrings for $15, instead of $115 PlayStation 5 Disc Edition – Fortnite Cobalt Star Bundle for $424, instead of $500 Xbox Series S, 512GB SSD, All Digital Gaming Console for $248, instead of $300 Shop for more markdowns during Walmart’s Black Friday sale here. The Best Cyber Monday & Leftover Black Friday Deals Amazon has the Peloton Bike+ for $500 off in a huge Cyber Monday deal, plus up to 77% off other Peloton products UGG’s Black Friday sale ends soon. Here’s how to get up to 70% off boots and slippers, including Bailey and Tasman styles Walmart’s Cyber Monday sale has massive markdowns — and these 20 online deals have already been revealed Amazon has this 10-piece DEWALT 20V power tool kit back on sale for $450 off in a massive Black Friday deal Amazon has the Oura Ring Gen3 in Horizon and Heritage models for up to 30% off, but not for long Our journalism needs your support. Please subscribe today to NJ.com . Dawn Magyar can be reached at dmagyar@njadvancemedia.com . Have a tip? Tell us at nj.com/tips/ .

Automatic Partners with MeridianLink to Revolutionize Lender-Dealership Connectivity

NEW YORK (AP) — The man charged with killing UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson was not a client of the medical insurer and may have targeted it because of its size and influence, a senior police official said Thursday. NYPD Chief of Detectives Joseph Kenny told NBC New York in an interview Thursday that investigators have uncovered evidence that Luigi Mangione had prior knowledge UnitedHealthcare was holding its annual investor conference in New York City. Mangione also mentioned the company in a note found in his possession when he was detained by police in Pennsylvania. “We have no indication that he was ever a client of United Healthcare, but he does make mention that it is the fifth largest corporation in America, which would make it the largest healthcare organization in America. So that’s possibly why he targeted that company,” said Kenny. UnitedHealthcare is in the top 20 largest U.S. companies by market capitalization but is not the fifth largest. It is the largest U.S. health insurer. Mangione remains jailed without bail in Pennsylvania, where he was arrested Monday after being spotted at a McDonald's in the city of Altoona, about 230 miles (about 370 kilometers) west of New York City. His lawyer there, Thomas Dickey, has said Mangione intends to plead not guilty. Dickey also said he has yet to see evidence decisively linking his client to the crime. Mangione's arrest came five days after the caught-on-camera killing of Thompson outside a Manhattan hotel. Police say the shooter waited outside the hotel, where the health insurer was holding its investor conference, early on the morning of Dec. 4. He approached Thompson from behind and shot him before fleeing on a bicycle through Central Park. Mangione is fighting attempts to extradite him back to New York so that he can face a murder charge in Thompson's killing. A hearing has been scheduled for Dec. 30. The 26-year-old, who police say was found with a “ ghost gun ” matching shell casings found at the site of the shooting, is charged in Pennsylvania with possession of an unlicensed firearm, forgery and providing false identification to police. Mangione is an Ivy League graduate from a prominent Maryland real estate family. In posts on social media, Mangione wrote about experiencing severe chronic back pain before undergoing a spinal fusion surgery in 2023. Afterward, he posted that the operation had been a success and that his pain had improved and mobility returned. He urged others to consider the same type of surgery. On Wednesday, police said investigators are looking at his writings about his health problems and his criticism of corporate America and the U.S. health care system . Kenny said in the NBC interview that Mangione's family reported him missing to San Francisco authorities in November.What is Digital Arrest and How to Avoid Falling Victim?

Undercover FBI agents were not present during the 2021 attack on the US Capitol by Donald Trump supporters, a Justice Department watchdog said Thursday in a report debunking a popular right-wing conspiracy theory. "We found no evidence in the materials we reviewed or the testimony we received showing or suggesting that the FBI had undercover employees in the various protest crowds, or at the Capitol, on January 6," Justice Department inspector general Michael Horowitz said in an 88-page report. Thousands of Trump supporters stormed the US Capitol on January 6 in a bid to prevent congressional certification of Democrat Joe Biden's election victory. Right-wing media and even some Republican lawmakers have spuriously claimed that undercover FBI agents provoked the attack on Congress, which followed a fiery speech by Trump in which he falsely claimed the election had been stolen. The inspector general said that while no undercover FBI agents were present at the Trump rally or the Capitol, 26 FBI informants known as confidential human sources (CHS) were in Washington at the time. Three of the informants had been tasked with reporting on domestic terrorist suspects while the others were there on their own. "None of these FBI CHSs were authorized to enter the Capitol or a restricted area, or to otherwise break the law on January 6, nor was any CHS directed by the FBI to encourage others to commit illegal acts on January 6," the report said. The inspector general also said there had been an intelligence-gathering failure by the FBI ahead of the January 6 attack. "While the FBI undertook significant efforts to identify domestic terrorism subjects who planned to travel to the Capital region on January 6," the report said, "the FBI did not take a step that could have helped the FBI and its law enforcement partners with their preparations. "Specifically, the FBI did not canvass its field offices in advance of January 6, 2021, to identify any intelligence, including CHS reporting, about potential threats to the January 6 Electoral Certification," it said. FBI deputy director Paul Abbate was quoted as saying this was a "basic step that was missed" in "understanding the threat picture prior to January 6." Trump was impeached by the Democratic-majority House of Representatives following the attack on the Capitol, but acquitted by the Senate. He is to return to the White House on January 20 after defeating Vice President Kamala Harris in the November presidential election. More than 1,500 people have been charged in connection with the assault on Congress. Trump has lauded them as "patriots" and "political prisoners" and pledged to pardon many of them when he returns to the White House. cl/stMets Named 'Perfect Fit' For Two Top Free Agents Projected to Earn $357 MillionAldeyra Therapeutics, Inc ( NASDAQ:ALDX – Get Free Report ) crossed below its 50 day moving average during trading on Friday . The stock has a 50 day moving average of $5.07 and traded as low as $4.83. Aldeyra Therapeutics shares last traded at $4.94, with a volume of 362,371 shares. Aldeyra Therapeutics Trading Down 1.6 % The business has a fifty day moving average of $5.07 and a two-hundred day moving average of $4.79. The company has a debt-to-equity ratio of 0.18, a quick ratio of 6.80 and a current ratio of 6.80. Aldeyra Therapeutics ( NASDAQ:ALDX – Get Free Report ) last issued its quarterly earnings data on Thursday, November 7th. The biotechnology company reported ($0.25) earnings per share for the quarter, meeting the consensus estimate of ($0.25). Equities analysts forecast that Aldeyra Therapeutics, Inc will post -0.92 EPS for the current year. Institutional Investors Weigh In On Aldeyra Therapeutics About Aldeyra Therapeutics ( Get Free Report ) Aldeyra Therapeutics is a clinical-stage biotechnology company focused on the development of novel therapies with the potential to improve the lives of patients with immune-mediated diseases. Two of the company’s lead compounds, reproxalap and ADX-629, target reactive aldehyde species (RASP), which are elevated in ocular and systemic inflammatory disease, leading to elevated levels of cytokine release via activation of a broad array of inflammatory factors, including NF-κB, inflammasomes, and Scavenger Receptor A. See Also Receive News & Ratings for Aldeyra Therapeutics Daily - Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts' ratings for Aldeyra Therapeutics and related companies with MarketBeat.com's FREE daily email newsletter .

Will crime in Delhi decrease by stopping me?: Arvind Kejriwal trains guns on Amit Shah after attackAndrew met the individual through “official channels” with “nothing of a sensitive nature ever discussed”, a statement from his office said. The businessman – known only as H6 – lost an appeal over a decision to bar him from entering the UK on national security grounds. He brought a case to the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) after then-home secretary Suella Braverman said he should be excluded from the UK in March 2023. H6 was described as a “close confidante” of The Duke. Judges were told that in a briefing for the home secretary in July 2023, officials claimed H6 had been in a position to generate relationships between prominent UK figures and senior Chinese officials “that could be leveraged for political interference purposes”. They also said that H6 had downplayed his relationship with the Chinese state, which combined with his relationship with Andrew, 64, represented a threat to national security. A statement from Andrew’s office said: “The Duke of York followed advice from His Majesty’s Government and ceased all contact with the individual after concerns were raised. “The Duke met the individual through official channels with nothing of a sensitive nature ever discussed. “He is unable to comment further on matters relating to national security.” At a hearing in July, the specialist tribunal heard that the businessman was told by an adviser to Andrew that he could act on the duke’s behalf when dealing with potential investors in China, and that H6 had been invited to Andrew’s birthday party in 2020. A letter referencing the birthday party from the adviser, Dominic Hampshire, was discovered on H6’s devices when he was stopped at a port in November 2021. In a ruling on Thursday, Mr Justice Bourne, Judge Stephen Smith and Sir Stewart Eldon, dismissed the challenge.

A major U.S. Supreme Court decision this summer was hailed as a conservative court’s broadside against a Democratic administration, giving red states more backing to delay or overturn policies they don’t like, such as transgender protections and clean energy goals. But the ruling in the Loper Bright case, which granted courts more power to scrutinize federal rules, can go both ways. Experts say it will likely give blue states more leeway to attack any forthcoming policy changes from President-elect Donald Trump — ranging from immigration and the environment to Medicaid and civil rights. The decision overturns a legal concept called “Chevron deference,” in place since 1984 and named after a case involving the Chevron oil company. That ruling granted federal agencies wide discretion in interpreting vague laws that had been passed by Congress and sent to the executive branch to sort out the details. Generally, courts deferred to the agency regulations. Chevron deference became a superstar of the courts, cited in more than 18,000 federal court decisions. The latest ruling wipes that all away. Experts said it will boost blue-state resistance to Trump policies. Lawsuits already are being planned in many statehouses, as California holds a special session to set aside money for legal fights, and other states such as Connecticut, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey and New York also talk court strategy. Democratic governors in Colorado and Illinois formed a coalition in November to “fortify essential democratic rights nationwide.” In effect, the ruling opens more federal rules to those court challenges. Blue states now have a new weapon to fight conservative federal rules on issues such as immigration, climate change, abortion access and civil rights. Ironically, the original 1984 decision establishing more power for federal agencies was made by a conservative court that was paving the way for deregulation in the Reagan administration, noted Leonardo Cuello, a research professor at Georgetown University’s McCourt School of Public Policy’s Center for Children and Families. “It was a case that really opened the door to Reagan deregulation, sort of untying the hands of the [federal] agencies by saying, ‘We’re going to give you a lot of slack to start doing things,’ ” Cuello said. “Fast-forward to today, and overturning Chevron really has the opposite effect,” Cuello said. “You’re handcuffing the new [Trump administration] agency from deregulating. “It makes it hard for an agency to build out new things and it makes it hard to undo existing things,” he said. “There’s some irony to the fact that a conservative majority issued that ruling just before a conservative administration took office.” Trump appointed three of the six justices who supported the decision. Some Trump allies still see the ruling as a weapon against excessive regulation. Vivek Ramaswamy, chosen by Trump alongside tech billionaire Elon Musk to lead an advisory body the president-elect named the Department of Government Efficiency, said in a December post on X that the decision “paves the way for not a slight but a drastic reduction in the scope of the federal regulatory state.” But most experts see the change as an obstacle to a new Republican administration looking to make sweeping changes but lacking enough support in Congress to pass large-scale legislation. Any proposals restricting access to abortion or attempting to dismantle the Affordable Care Act or Medicaid expansion will be more complicated, said Zachary Baron, a director of the Center for Health Policy and the Law at Georgetown University’s O’Neill Institute. “All these new policies are going to be challenged in court, and state attorneys general will certainly be leading the way,” Baron said. “I think there will be a lot of big legal fights to come.” Now, it could become harder for a Trump administration to deregulate areas of the economy, crack down on immigration, impose work requirements on Medicaid recipients, or remove protections for gender and LBGTQ+ status. The Biden administration similarly has run into roadblocks. “We have already seen conservative judges point to Loper Bright as one reason to block the Biden administration’s efforts to expand the reach of nondiscrimination protections, including with respect to LGBTQ+ folks,” Baron said. For instance, federal courts in Florida, Mississippi and Texas — in response to lawsuits brought by various Republican states — prevented an Affordable Care Act rule banning gender identity-based discrimination from taking effect in July. Each ruling cited Loper Bright as one factor. With Trump’s election, it’s now blue states that have a sharper tool to combat Republican agendas. “To the extent that the Trump administration tries to radically rewrite these nondiscrimination protections again, he may well find that Democratic state AGs [attorneys general] will be able to successfully block such efforts as a result of Loper Bright also,” Baron said. Congress has not approved a major immigration or environmental law for decades. That has forced both Democratic and Republican administrations to change policy through either executive order or federal regulations that can now be more easily challenged by hostile states in the courts. “If you like the administration that’s advancing policies, then Loper Bright is not a good thing for what would happen when states challenge those policies,” said Nancy Morawetz, a New York University law professor who helps run an immigrant legal clinic, speaking at a September conference on immigration law. Trump’s election does not change that, Morawetz told Stateline later. “If the administration is anti-immigrant, Loper Bright provides stronger grounds for having a court look at whether it is breaking the law,” Morawetz said. “The executive branch gets less deference.” The court’s decision may also help immigrants themselves when they go to court to challenge federal policies on deportation and legal status, Morawetz said. Red states looking to enact Medicaid work requirements under a more amenable Trump administration also might be thwarted by the Loper Bright decision, Cuello said. The first Trump administration lost every court challenge when it granted state requests for work requirements, he said, and Loper Bright will make it even harder this time. “Even with the more generous standards granted to the agency [under the previous Chevron deference], those cases got shot down, and so now you would expect they’d be even more likely to be shot down,” Cuello said. “The win is harder.” The Loper Bright decision could also hamper promised efforts by a Trump administration to unwind environmental regulations, by making it easier for blue states to challenge any changes. That would flip the script from today’s lawsuits, in which red states are fighting the stricter regulations of coal-fired power plants. Red states have also fought new Biden administration vehicle pollution standards, and Trump allies have threatened to undermine scientific integrity policies seen as preventing deregulation by shielding scientists from political interference. The Loper Bright decision went 6-2 in favor of New Jersey herring fishermen who opposed a 2020 federal rule requiring them to pay salaries for the third-party observers on their boats who were there to ensure compliance with regulations. The fishermen argued that the cost, up to $710 per day, had no legal justification and cut their family profits by 20 percent. Lower courts ruled against the fishermen, saying the often-cited Chevron deference principle did not allow them to challenge the federal rule. The Supreme Court struck down the principle, ruling that courts are required “to exercise their independent judgment” on federal rules. “Agencies have no special competence in resolving statutory ambiguities. Courts do,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote. In a dissenting opinion joined by liberal justices, Associate Justice Elena Kagan called the deference to agency interpretations “part of the warp and woof of modern government, supporting regulatory efforts of all kinds ... keeping air and water clean, food and drugs safe, and financial markets honest. And the rule is right.”