Connect with us

News

Up First briefing: Boeing faces production caps, Haley bets on South Carolina

Published

on

Up First briefing: Boeing faces production caps, Haley bets on South Carolina

Good morning. You’re reading the Up First newsletter. Subscribe here to get it delivered to your inbox, and listen to the Up First podcast for all the news you need to start your day.

Today’s top stories

The Federal Aviation Administration has laid out a plan for Boeing 737 Max 9 jets to fly again, but also imposed new limits on production at the company’s factories. More than 170 planes have been grounded since a door plug blew off an Alaska Airlines flight in midair earlier this month.

  • An apparent Boeing whistleblower has blamed mistakes at the Washington plant, alleging that four key bolts for the door were never re-installed after maintenance work before the jet left the factory. 
  • Max 9 planes could be back in the air as soon as tomorrow once they complete the FAA’s maintenance and inspection plan, NPR’s Joel Rose tells Up First. He says the FAA is imposing production caps not only on the Max 9 but other 737 lines, a rare step by the government.
  • Aviation safety analyst and former commercial pilot Kathleen Bangs told Morning Edition that while those limits will hurt Boeing’s bottom line, the company is in many ways “too big to fail” because it gets more revenue from U.S. taxpayers than its commercial jets. 

An Alaska Airlines Boeing 737 MAX 9 aircraft is seen at Portland International Airport on January 9, 2024 in Oregon. The plane made an emergency landing following a midair fuselage blowout on Jan. 5.

Mathieu Lewis-Rolland/Getty Images


hide caption

Advertisement

toggle caption

Mathieu Lewis-Rolland/Getty Images


An Alaska Airlines Boeing 737 MAX 9 aircraft is seen at Portland International Airport on January 9, 2024 in Oregon. The plane made an emergency landing following a midair fuselage blowout on Jan. 5.

Mathieu Lewis-Rolland/Getty Images

Former South Carolina Gov. and U.N. ambassador Nikki Haley is pinning her presidential hopes on her home state, which holds its primary on Feb. 24. At a rally in Charleston last night, Haley criticized former President Donald Trump as “chaos” for the country and knocked him for his mental lapses. She also touted her own achievements from her time as governor, from economic development to criminal justice reform.

Advertisement
  • It’s not clear that Haley’s message is getting through to voters, NPR’s Stephen Fowler reports from Charleston. When it comes to securing the votes and delegates needed to beat Trump, Fowler says in many ways “the math ain’t mathin’.” 

Alabama is set to carry out an execution today using nitrogen gas, a method that has never been used before in the U.S. This will be the second time the state attempts to execute Kenneth Smith, who was convicted for his role in a 1988 murder-for-hire plot. His first execution attempt, by lethal injection in 2022, was called off after workers spent hours trying to find a vein for the IV.

Today’s listen

Religiously unaffiliated people now make up 28% of U.S. adults, according to a new study from Pew Research. That’s a larger cohort than Catholics or evangelical Protestants.

Natacha Pisarenko/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Natacha Pisarenko/AP

Advertisement


Religiously unaffiliated people now make up 28% of U.S. adults, according to a new study from Pew Research. That’s a larger cohort than Catholics or evangelical Protestants.

Natacha Pisarenko/AP

Religious “Nones” are now the largest cohort in the U.S. A new study from Pew Research Center found that the country’s share of religiously unaffiliated adults — meaning they consider themselves to be “atheists,” “agnostics” or “nothing in particular” — has grown to 28%, up from 16% in 2007. Nones tend to be young, white, male and liberal. And researchers say they could change electoral politics in the coming decades — if they can be persuaded to go to the polls. Read the story or give it a listen.

Deep dive

The scene at the U.S. Supreme Court on the day it overturned Roe v. Wade in June 2022. Researchers estimate that 64,565 rape-caused pregnancies have occurred in states that banned abortion since then.

Jacquelyn Martin/AP


hide caption

Advertisement

toggle caption

Jacquelyn Martin/AP


The scene at the U.S. Supreme Court on the day it overturned Roe v. Wade in June 2022. Researchers estimate that 64,565 rape-caused pregnancies have occurred in states that banned abortion since then.

Jacquelyn Martin/AP

Advertisement

New research estimates that rape has caused more than 64,500 pregnancies in the 14 states where abortion is banned. Few states with total bans on abortion have exceptions for rape, and those that do require victims to report the rape to authorities — which research shows only happens in a fraction of sexual assaults.

  • Data on sexual assault and pregnancy is limited, so researchers analyzed figures from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Bureau of Justice Statistics and FBI Uniform Crime Reports.
  • Polls show that most Americans support access to abortion after rape, though such exceptions are not legally or logistically feasible in many states that ban the procedure.
  • High-profile cases of abortion after rape — including in Kentucky and Ohio — have become political flashpoints since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022. 

3 things to know before you go

An experimental gene therapy tested in young children with an inherited form of deafness restored some hearing for most of them.

VICTOR HABBICK VISIONS/Getty Images/Science Photo Library


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

VICTOR HABBICK VISIONS/Getty Images/Science Photo Library


An experimental gene therapy tested in young children with an inherited form of deafness restored some hearing for most of them.

VICTOR HABBICK VISIONS/Getty Images/Science Photo Library

  1. Gene therapy is showing promise for treating inherited deafness, researchers say. An experimental gene therapy restored at least some hearing for five of six participating children.
  2. Jon Stewart is returning to The Daily Show — which has spent more than a year looking for its new host — as executive producer and part-time host through the 2024 presidential election.  
  3. The Palestinian national soccer team has advanced to the knockout stages of the AFC Asian Cup for the first time, sparking a moment of joy amid war. 

This newsletter was edited by Majd Al-Waheidi.

News

Supreme Court reinstates Republican-favored Alabama congressional districts

Published

on

Supreme Court reinstates Republican-favored Alabama congressional districts

The U.S. Supreme Court

Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images

The Supreme Court on Tuesday cleared the way for Alabama to use a congressional district map favored by Republicans.

The court, in an unsigned order, overturned a three-judge district court panel that found that the map is “tainted by intentional race-based discrimination.” The court’s three liberals publicly dissented.

The ruling means that Alabama’s 2026 midterm elections will feature six Republican-leaning districts and one Democratic-leaning one, as opposed to a map with only five safe Republican seats. Democrat Shomari Figures, who represents Alabama’s Second District, will likely lose his seat as a result of the high court’s ruling.

Advertisement

The story of Alabama’s congressional map is long and tortured. It began in 2021, when the state implemented a new map to account for population changes in the census. The map featured only one majority-black district out of seven, even though the state is more than one-quarter Black.

Voters immediately sued, claiming the map illegally diluted minority votes in violation of the Voting Rights Act and the Constitution. Lower court judges agreed, ruling that the state must draw a map with two districts where Black voters have a realistic chance of electing their candidate of choice. The Supreme Court more than once has ordered Alabama to draw a compliant map.

But the state has refused and instead continued to litigate the case. On Tuesday, that tactic paid off.

What changed? In April, the Supreme Court’s conservative supermajority all but gutted what remains of the Voting Rights Act, ruling that states cannot purposefully draw districts that are majority-minority.

Alabama then asked the high court to reinstate the state’s old map, under the theory that this new ruling meant that it was permissible to use a map with only one majority-Black district. In an unsigned, unexplained order in May, the high court essentially reversed its previous opinions, and allowed Alabama to use the old map for the upcoming midterm elections.

Advertisement

This set off a flurry of activity in Alabama. By the time the Supreme Court issued its May order, absentee balloting had already begun, using the court-drawn map. So Republican Governor Kay Ivey cancelled elections and scheduled a special primary for August for the affected congressional races.

The case, however, was not over.

In its ruling, the Supreme Court had ordered a lower court panel to continue evaluating Alabama’s map in light of its recent Voting Rights Act decision. And just 15 days after that order, the panel, composed of three Republican judges—two of them Trump appointees—concluded unanimously that even under the Supreme Court’s new standards, the plan for a single black district was “intentionally discriminatory.”

So, once again, Alabama returned to the Supreme Court, arguing that the map was partisan, not racially discriminatory. In short, that the Republican legislature simply drew the map to elect more Republicans. And that under the Supreme Court’s new interpretation of the Voting Rights Act, the GOP map should be allowed to stand.

The court’s conservative agreed, writing that the lower court “did not heed the presumption of legislative good faith.”

Advertisement

The court’s three liberals publicly dissented, castigating the conservative majority for failing to abide by its 2006 decision in the case of Purcell v. Gonzalez. That decision declared that courts should not change election rules too close to an election.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in her dissent, said the court “debases the democratic process” and “corrodes the rule of law by rewarding Alabama’s gamesmanship and outright defiance of court orders.”

Tuesday’s decision is the latest in a series of Supreme Court rulings that could well reshape the 2026 midterm elections, making it much harder for Democrats to prevail.

Continue Reading

News

Map: 3.7-Magnitude Earthquake Shakes the San Francisco Bay Area

Published

on

Map: 3.7-Magnitude Earthquake Shakes the San Francisco Bay Area

Advertisement

Note: Map shows the area with a shake intensity of 3 or greater, which U.S.G.S. defines as “weak,” though the earthquake may be felt outside the areas shown.  All times on the map are Pacific time. The New York Times

Advertisement

A minor, 3.7-magnitude earthquake struck in the San Francisco Bay Area on Tuesday, according to the United States Geological Survey.

The temblor happened at 9:44 a.m. Pacific time about 4 miles southeast of Cloverdale, Calif., data from the agency shows.

Advertisement

U.S.G.S. data earlier reported that the magnitude was 3.6.

As seismologists review available data, they may revise the earthquake’s reported magnitude. Additional information collected about the earthquake may also prompt U.S.G.S. scientists to update the shake-severity map.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Aftershocks detected

Subsequent quakes have been reported in the same area. Such temblors are typically aftershocks caused by minor adjustments along the portion of a fault that slipped at the time of the initial earthquake.

Advertisement

Quakes and aftershocks within 100 miles

Aftershocks can occur days, weeks or even years after the first earthquake. These events can be of equal or larger magnitude to the initial earthquake, and they can continue to affect already damaged locations.

Advertisement

When quakes and aftershocks occurred

 All times are Pacific time. The New York Times

Advertisement

Advertisement

Sources: United States Geological Survey (epicenter, aftershocks, shake intensity); LandScan via Oak Ridge National Laboratory (population density) | Notes: Shaking categories are based on the Modified Mercalli Intensity scale. When aftershock data is available, the corresponding maps and charts include earthquakes within 100 miles and seven days of the initial quake. All times above are Pacific time. Shake data is as of Tuesday, June 2 at 12:59 p.m. Eastern. Aftershocks data is as of Tuesday, June 2 at 1:59 p.m. Eastern.

Continue Reading

News

Promoting Advanced Artificial Intelligence Innovation and Security

Published

on

Promoting Advanced Artificial Intelligence Innovation and Security

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:

Section 1.  Purpose.  The United States continues to lead the world in Artificial Intelligence (AI) because of the enormous talent and innovation of our AI industry, and because we refuse to stifle this innovation with overly burdensome regulation.  My Administration has unleashed tremendous technological growth and economic investment in AI by slashing the bureaucratic constraints that the prior administration placed on America’s AI developers and researchers, and by instead encouraging AI innovation and accelerating responsible AI adoption across government and industry. 

Advanced AI capabilities make our Nation stronger, but also introduce new national security considerations that require coordinated action across executive departments and agencies (agencies), and components.  As these capabilities evolve, my Administration will continue to work closely with industry to ensure that the best and most secure technology is deployed rapidly to confront any and all threats to our country.  We will continue to lead an America First cybersecurity effort that enhances both our national security and our global AI dominance.

It is the policy of the United States to promote AI innovation and security by working collaboratively with the private sector to modernize government and private sector information systems and harden them against external threats; to protect American ingenuity and intellectual property from exploitation and theft by adversaries; and to cultivate America’s advanced AI-enabled capabilities.

Sec. 2.  Upgrading American Systems for Advanced AI.  (a)  Within 30 days of the date of this order, the Committee on National Security Systems shall prioritize the cyber defense of National Security Systems, as defined in 44 U.S.C. 3552(b)(6)(A), by taking appropriate and expeditious action consistent with the purpose of this order.

Advertisement

(b)  Within 30 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of War shall prioritize the cyber defense of Department of War information systems by taking appropriate and expeditious action consistent with the purpose of this order.

(c)  Within 30 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Homeland Security, through the Director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), in consultation with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, and the National Cyber Director, shall release Binding Operational Directives and other guidance as appropriate to:

(i)    expedite and prioritize the cyber defense of civilian Federal Government information systems in order to protect our Nation’s vital functions;

(ii)   establish or expand Federal programs and cybersecurity services that enhance AI-enabled defensive tools; and

(iii)  facilitate access to cybersecurity tools and services including, where appropriate, covered frontier models for agencies, State and local authorities, and operators of critical infrastructure such as rural hospitals, community banks, and local utilities.

Advertisement

(d)  Within 30 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the National Cyber Director, the Secretary of War, through the Director of the National Security Agency (NSA), and the Secretary of Homeland Security, through the Director of CISA, shall form an AI cybersecurity clearinghouse, in voluntary collaboration with the AI industry and operators of critical infrastructure, that coordinates and deconflicts scanning for software vulnerabilities, discovers and validates such vulnerabilities, and coordinates and prioritizes remediation and distribution of vulnerability patches.

(e)  Within 30 days of the date of this order, the Director of OMB, in coordination with the National Cyber Director and the Director of CISA, shall determine whether any Federal grant programs have available and relevant funding that can be directed toward applicants developing advanced AI vulnerability detection.

(f)  Within 60 days of the date of this order, the Director of the Office of Personnel Management shall expand the United States Tech Force Information Cybersecurity Specialist hiring and placement pathways.

Sec. 3.  Secure Frontier Model Deployment.  Within 60 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of War, through the Director of NSA, and the Secretary of Homeland Security, through the Director of CISA, in consultation with the White House Chief of Staff, through the National Cyber Director, the Assistant to the President for Science and Technology (APST), and the Secretary of Commerce, through the Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, and in coordination with other agencies, as appropriate, shall:

(a)  develop and maintain a classified benchmarking process to assess the advanced cyber capabilities of AI models and determine the threshold at which an AI model should be designated a “covered frontier model” for the purposes of this order, sharing such assessments with AI developers and researchers as appropriate.  Such a determination shall be made by the Director of NSA, in consultation with the National Cyber Director, the APST, the Director of CISA, and other representatives of the Department of War, as appropriate.

Advertisement

(b)  design a voluntary framework with AI developers through which developers would be able to:

(i)    engage the Federal Government to determine whether model(s) under development meet the designation of “covered frontier model”;

(ii)   provide the Federal Government with access to covered frontier models, subject to appropriate confidentiality, cybersecurity, insider-risk, and intellectual-property protection, use, and nondisclosure requirements, for a period of up to 30 days before they plan to release such models to other trusted partners; and 

(iii)  collaborate with the Federal Government to select trusted partners that will have early access to covered frontier models to promote secure innovation and strengthen the cybersecurity of critical infrastructure.

(c)  Nothing in this section shall be construed to authorize the creation of a mandatory governmental licensing, preclearance, or permitting requirement for the development, publication, release, or distribution of new AI models, including frontier models.

Advertisement

Sec. 4.  Protection Against Criminal Actors.  The Attorney General shall prioritize the enforcement of 18 U.S.C. 1028, 18 U.S.C. 1030, 18 U.S.C. 1343, and all other applicable Federal criminal laws against anyone who utilizes AI to illegally access or damage a computer without authorization, or who utilizes AI while engaged in such illegal access to further any other crime.  This includes breaching any public or private information technology system, or employing AI agents to unlawfully access data or information that is subsequently used for a criminal or unlawful purpose.

Sec. 5.  General Provisions.  (a)  Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i)   the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii)  the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b)  This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

Advertisement

(c)  This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

(d)  The costs for publication of this order shall be borne by the Department of War.

                             DONALD J. TRUMP

THE WHITE HOUSE,

    June 2, 2026.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending