Ohio
Opal Lee returns to Fort Worth after Ohio hospitalization
FORT WORTH, Texas – Opal Lee, the grandmother of Juneteenth, is back in Fort Worth after being admitted to the hospital in Ohio.
Opal Lee returns home
The 98-year-old returned home from her out-of-state hospital stay on Monday evening.
Dionne Sims, Lee’s granddaughter, says the 98-year-old has been resting, reading and staying in bed.
For now, she is not doing any interviews to give her time to rest.
What they’re saying:
“I think one of the things she is most encouraging young people to do is to take Juneteenth, take the baton and go forward. you’ll hear that, she’s always said it. I think we just need to pay attention to what she said. She always said It’s not a me thing. It’s a we thing,” said Sims.
Kamala Harris calls Opal Lee
US Vice President Kamala Harris (R) greets US teacher and activist Opal Lee prior to a Juneteenth concert on the South Lawn of the White House in Washington, DC, on June 13, 2023. (Photo by ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS/AFP via Getty Images)
There is one call that Lee did take.
Former vice president Kamala Harris called after she heard about her hospital stay.
What they’re saying:
“She had a big smile on her face, right. To think that the former vice president, would call to check in on her, really, it made us feel special. We all know that she is, but I don’t think she realizes she is,” Sims said.
Walk for Freedom
Lee’s health is leading to some changes for her Juneteenth festivities, including her Walk for Freedom on June 19.
She will still take part in the walk, but will be in a golf cart.
What they’re saying:
“It was always the plan to have my grandmother in a golf cart, one so we can finish in a timely manner, but it’s just time,” Sims said. “It is named for her but we definitely don’t want to wear her out, so I think that is the name of the game, to keep her here as long as possible.”
The Source: Information in this article comes from an interview with family members of Opal Lee.
Ohio
Lorain woman killed, three children injured in Ohio Turnpike crash in Elyria (UPDATED)
`
const PAYWALL_HTML2 = `
Subscribe For Unlimited Access
You have exceeded the number of free articles available each month.
Thank you for supporting quality local journalism
Our award-winning coverage would not be possible without you.
Sign in here
if you are already a subscriber for unlimited access to breaking news, sports, photos, videos and our e-edition on your phone, tablet or desktop.
Click here
for our new subscriber specials.
*Read more about digital access.
`.trim();
const PAYWALL_HTML3 = `
Already a subscriber? LOG IN.
`
const PAYWALL_HTML4 = “
function ensureCss() {
if (!document.head) return;
const existing = document.querySelector(‘link[data-paywall-css=”1″]’);
if (existing) return;
const link = document.createElement(‘link’);
link.rel=”stylesheet”;
link.type=”text/css”;
link.href = CSS_HREF;
link.setAttribute(‘data-paywall-css’, ‘1’);
document.head.appendChild(link);
}
function hasSubInfo(el) {
// Only replace once the widget already contains .subInfo
return !!(el && el.querySelector(‘.subInfo’));
}
function applyTo(el) {
if (!el || el.dataset.paywallReplaced === ‘1’) return;
if (!hasSubInfo(el)) return; //
Ohio
Licking County real estate transfers for June 1-5, 2026, hit $865,000
Real estate transfers in Licking County, Ohio, range from $85,000 to $865,000
The following are property transfers recorded in Licking County from June 1-5, 2026.
First name indicates the seller; second name represents the buyer
Buckeye Lake
- 502 Providence Lane; Cohagen, Christopher C and Lori A; Adams, Jeffrey L and Boyce-Adams, Jo Anna; 6/1/2026; $511,000
- 131 Cranberry Lane; Smart, Amy and Kidwell, Kevin K; Sew and Minor, Christian; 6/1/2026; $262,000
Etna Township
- 116 Cameron Drive SW; Ray, Erica L; Darjee, Sanjay and Laxmi and Dil; 6/2/2026; $412,000
- 119 Kraner St. SW; Adkins, Zane and Amy; Culbertson, Brenton Howard; 6/1/2026; $368,500
- 160 Dusky Willow Drive; Willow Reserve LLC; Martin, Alaina K; 6/2/2026; $290,940
Granville
- 119 Derwyn Del Way; Lifer, David C and Julia H; Martin, Michael and Lisa; 6/1/2026; $865,000
- 39 Victoria Drive; Acton, Wendy S and Paul J; Cannon, Matthew Evan and Zywica, Natalie Nicole; 6/2/2026; $835,000
Granville Township
- 49 Alberry Drive; Halliday, Lucas and Breayne; Howe, Jason and Kathryn; 6/2/2026; $570,000
Harrison Township
- 102 Whirlaway Loop; Rice, Dawn (Trustee); Bope, Maria and Shane; 6/2/2026; $420,000
Heath
- 1306 Kacey Court; Fischer Homes Columbus II LLC; Owens, Blake Andrew and Taylor Marie; 6/2/2026; $437,779
- 805 Fieldson Drive; Flowers, Ingrit; Harder, Noah C; 6/2/2026; $250,000
Hebron
- 802 Cumberland Meadows Circle; Lines, Marlene S; Gerhart, Jamie A and Ralph W Jr; 6/2/2026; $232,000
Johnstown
- 101 Bigelow Drive; McGovern, Matthew S and Jennifer L; Sanford, Jessica; 6/2/2026; $442,500
Liberty Township
- 5844 Nichols Lane Road NW; La Jeunesse, Garth E and Debra; Nesselroad, William Heath and Annie; 6/1/2026; $629,000
- 7211 Northridge Road NW; Devault, Robert E Jr and Joann; Esbenshade, Travis M and Lowe, Shelby M; 6/1/2026; $495,000
Newark
- 2110 Overlook Way; D.R. Horton-Indiana LLC; Tarsha, Michele A; 6/1/2026; $433,335
- 1162 Taylor Ave.; Heath Fluid LLC; Anglada, Gabriel P and Salina T; 6/1/2026; $200,000
- 32 Postal Ave. W.; Palmisano, Phil; Moore, Dominic Michael and Miksich, Paige Elizabeth; 6/1/2026; $198,900
- 75 Gay St.; Velez, Marcos A; Camell, Campbell; 6/1/2026; $155,000
- 655 Evans St.; TNL; McRada Properties LLC; 6/1/2026; $145,000
- 63 Wallace St.; FDA Peachtree LLC; Burns, Amber L; 6/2/2026; $86,500
- 404 10th St.; Synergy Group Properties LLC; Busy Boys Restoration LLC; 6/2/2026; $85,000
Reynoldsburg
- 8447 Rodebaugh Road; Collins, Carol J; Thorpe, Kimberley Lynn and Henry, Steven; 6/2/2026; $340,000
Ohio
Court orders Ohio restrictions on kids’ use of social media restored
COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — Ohio’s law requiring children under 16 to get parental consent to use social media apps must be restored, a divided panel of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Thursday.
The decision comes as a blow to NetChoice, which has won court victories against identical digital identification laws in other states, including Arkansas, Louisiana and Georgia. The trade group representing TikTok, Snapchat, Meta and other major tech companies said the Ohio decision went against “clear national consensus” and that it intended to keep fighting.
“An unconstitutional law protects no one, and we remain focused on ensuring the First Amendment rights of Ohioans are protected,” said Paul Taske, director of the NetChoice Litigation Center.
Netchoice brought suit against Ohio’s law in 2024, arguing that it was overly broad, vague and represented an unconstitutional impediment to free speech.
The Cincinnati-based Sixth Circuit’s panel disagreed. In a 2-1 decision, it found that the law was not unconstitutional and sent it back to a lower court to have a block on the law’s enforcement vacated.
“At bottom, the Act imposes a parental consent requirement,” Judge Eric Clay wrote in the lead opinion. “That requirement constitutes a marginal burden that precisely targets the multi-faceted problem that Ohio has identified: Children’s unsupervised assent to terms and conditions for use of platforms that take advantage of and harm them.”
Judge Alice Batchelder concurred, writing that “a statute is not vague just because it has a wide berth.”
Known as the Social Media Parental Notification Act, the Ohio law was part of an $86.1 billion state budget bill that Republican Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine signed into law in July 2023.
The administration pushed the measure as a way to protect children’s mental health, with then-Lt. Gov. Jon Husted, now a U.S. senator, saying at the time that social media was “intentionally addictive” and harmful to kids.
The law requires companies to get parental permission for social media and gaming apps and to provide their privacy guidelines so families know what content would be censored or moderated on their child’s profile.
Republican Ohio Attorney General Andy Wilson called Thursday’s ruling “a win for Ohio families.”
“The court agreed that parents –- not social media companies –- should get a say in what kids see online,” he said in a statement. “We have an obligation to keep our children safe, and today, the most dangerous place for our kids is the internet. This decision gives parents the tools to be involved and provide oversight.”
-
World5 minutes agoTwo-train crash leaves at least 1 dead, 89 injured as emergency crews rush to chaotic scene
-
Politics8 minutes agoDouble endorsement drama: Trump backs second candidate in red state’s GOP gubernatorial runoff
-
Health13 minutes agoMeasles-infected traveler may have exposed passengers at LAX and nearby hotel, health officials warn
-
Sports20 minutes agoWorld Cup Red Cards: 2026 Has More Red Cards Than Each Of Last 2 World Cups
-
Technology23 minutes agoChina’s brain chip breakthrough raises big questions
-
Business28 minutes agoRanch lovers can soon travel with a TSA-friendly kit of the popular American dressing
-
Entertainment35 minutes agoAt the Fonda, Jane Remover’s violent yearning heralds a new kind of stardom
-
Lifestyle38 minutes agoBeer, with a twist? SoCal dads find solidarity through an unexpected activity