CONCORD, N.H. (AP) — A private school teacher who says she was fired after driving an 18-year-old student to get an abortion is suing New Hampshire’s Department of Education and officials she says falsely suggested she circumvented state law.

New Hampshire law requires parents to receive written notice at least 48 hours before an abortion is performed on an unemancipated minor. But in this case, the student wasn’t living with her parents and was a legal adult, according to the lawsuit filed Monday.

The teacher, who filed the suit as “Jane Doe,” said she provided the student with contact information for a community health center last fall when the student disclosed her suspected pregnancy and later gave her a ride to the appointment in October. The school fired her within days and referred the matter to the Department of Education, which revoked her teaching license earlier this month.

The lawsuit says the department exceeded its authority and violated her due process rights by revoking her credentials without a fair and impartial process. And it accuses Education Commissioner Frank Edelblut of pushing a false narrative of her conduct via an opinion piece he published in April.

The essay, titled “Thank God Someone is Looking Out for the Children,” was published in response to New Hampshire Public Radio reports critical of the commissioner. In it, Edelblut asked rhetorically whether the department should “turn a blind eye” when “allegedly, an educator lies by calling in sick so they can take a student – without parental knowledge – to get an abortion.”

According to the lawsuit, department officials knew for months prior to the essay’s publication that the student in question was an adult and thus not subject to the parental notification law.

Kimberly Houghton, spokesperson for the department, declined to comment on its investigation of the teacher and referred questions about the lawsuit to the attorney general’s office. Michael Garrity, spokesperson for that agency, said Wednesday that officials are reviewing it and will respond in due course. Attorneys for the teacher did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The teacher’s firing was first reported last week by The Boston Globe, based on investigatory records it requested from the Education Department. The lawsuit said the department’s “biased and stilted disclosure” of information that should have remained confidential until the case was settled created a misleading narrative that damaged the teacher’s reputation and put her at risk.

A hearing is scheduled for July 3, five days before the teacher is set to begin a new job.

TRENTON, N.J. — New Jersey lawmakers are poised to send a $56.6 billion fiscal year 2025 budget to Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy this week, hiking taxes on high-earning businesses and funding for many state services and programs.

The annual spending plan is expected to get enough votes in the Democrat-led Legislature on Friday to reach Murphy’s desk. The state constitution requires a balanced budget to be enacted by July 1.

Here’s a closer look at what’s in the budget, which would spend 4.2% more than the plan Murphy signed last year.

ARE THERE ANY NEW TAXES?

Yes. The budget calls for increasing the state’s corporation business tax on companies that make more than $10 million a year. The current 9% rate would climb to 11.5%. Business groups say that would give New Jersey the nation’s highest tax rate and punish the state’s best corporate citizens.

WHY ARE TAXES GOING UP?

The higher rate was first proposed by Murphy as part of his budget proposal early this year to help New Jersey Transit. He’s billing the levy as a corporate transit fee to help the beleaguered agency, which has regularly had to use capital funds to help finance projects.

Critics note that the revenue won’t go to transit until next year. The current budget keeps it in the general fund, so when the money goes to transit next year, whatever is being paid for now out of the general would need to be replenished or cut, those critics say.

ARE THERE OTHER TAX CHANGES?

Yes. The budget calls for ending a sales tax holiday on school supplies that had gone into effect around the start of the academic year. That cut was first introduced in 2022 when the Democrats who control state government aimed to show voters they were making the state more affordable. Lawmakers didn’t explain this cut when they unveiled the budget Wednesday, but the additional revenue could help balance the budget.

WHAT ABOUT PROPERTY TAXES?

New Jersey has among the nation’s highest property taxes, levied by local governments to finance services and schools. The state dedicates some income tax revenue to fund local governments, which helps keep property tax rates from growing even higher. This budget calls for increasing state K-12 funding to fully implement an aid formula ratified by the state Supreme Court, raising such aid to more than $11 billion, up nearly $1 billion from the current fiscal year. The budget also has about $2.5 billion for direct property tax relief, continuing programs introduced in 2022 and 2023 to help residents, renters and seniors. The average property tax amount in 2022, which is the most recently available information, is about $9,500, according to the state.

WHAT ELSE IS IN THE BUDGET?

Quite a bit, given it funds all aspects of state government, from the executive departments to public colleges and universities, to the Legislature itself, which this year passed a 67% pay raise for lawmakers, their first since 2002, which goes into effect in 2026. Overall, spending is up just over 4% compared with the current fiscal year budget.

It includes a number of expenditures — sometimes referred to as Christmas tree line items because they’re viewed as gifts for specific constituencies. They include funding for ending homelessness, helping people re-enter society from prison, fire departments, arts programs and one city’s effort to teach life skills through tennis.

Republican lawmakers said they barely had time to review the budget and lamented that they weren’t sure what all was in it. Even Democratic Senate Budget Committee Chairman Paul Sarlo said the document is too vast to read line by line, but he supports it overall.

“I could not take a test and be quizzed on every line item because it would take hours and hours and days and months,” Sarlo said. “I try to look at it in totality and that’s where I think we’re at.”

This story originally appeared on Spotlight PA.

As billions of federal dollars for clean energy projects become available to Pennsylvania, state lawmakers are increasingly talking about making the commonwealth’s energy network greener. But underlying those discussions are big questions about the future of the state’s electrical grid.

Major policy decisions are on the table, like regulating new hydrogen production and carbon capture industries, capping emissions, and speeding up permitting.

But many Republicans say they’re concerned that in the coming years, energy production will fall short of growing demand — both from Pennsylvania residents and from entities outside of the state that purchase its power. They also fear that passing legislation to incentivize clean energy production or capping emissions will worsen shortages.

Environmental advocates say concerns about grid reliability are exaggerated and serve as excuses to slow the clean energy transition. Many also argue that clean energy is the solution to potential shortages.

Pennsylvania gets its electricity from PJM, a grid operator that serves 13 states in the Northeast and Midwest.

PJM oversees a marketplace in which producers, like natural gas and coal plants and a smaller number of solar, wind, and other renewable energy producers, participate. Utilities can then buy the electricity generated by these producers and supply it to homes and businesses.

Pennsylvania is a major supplier of energy to PJM’s grid, accounting for up to a quarter of the total electricity produced, and is the second biggest energy producer in the country.

In recent years, PJM has reported multiple times that its energy demand is set to outpace its energy production, especially as more power plants close. The company has predicted that over a fifth of its existing power generators, largely coal and natural gas plants, will retire by 2030.

Some states have already had issues meeting demand. In Maryland, a coal power plant notified PJM that it intended to close down, but PJM found that shuttering it would negatively affect grid reliability and refused to approve its closure. The plant, Brandon Shores, has been forced to stay open and could continue operating until 2028. Environmental advocates accused PJM of lacking foresight during its planning of the plant’s closure.

Republicans in Harrisburg say incidents like this make them wary of transitioning away from coal and natural gas too quickly.

“I think the PJM has a real crisis looming on its hands,” state Senate Majority Leader Joe Pittman (R., Indiana) told Spotlight PA. “I see no real reliable plan to replace the megawatts that are due to come offline in the next few short years.”

Pittman said that energy production from natural gas and coal is essential to a reliable grid, and supports an all-of-the-above approach to energy. He argued for reducing permitting requirements for natural gas and oil companies, opposing any cap-and-trade program that would put a price tag on carbon emissions, and buildout of nuclear plants and carbon capture.

“There’s no secret that the demand for electricity is growing. It’s growing more rapidly than anybody anticipated,” Pittman said. “So we have to be very honest with ourselves that it’s going to take all forms of electricity production to ensure we have a stable grid.”

Environmental advocates agree that the deficit between energy production and demand has increased and will continue to grow, but they argue the issue can be solved by federal regulators and PJM speeding up the approval and construction of clean energy projects.

Tom Rutigliano, a senior advocate for the Natural Resources Defense Council who focuses on PJM, said no proposal is being considered in Pennsylvania that would immediately shut down all gas or coal power plants. He added, many grid concerns could be solved by PJM speeding up its approval process for new energy producers, most of which are solar.

“PJM has to be able to get these new power plants connected much, much quicker than they are and they’ve proven unable to keep pace with getting the new plants on in turn to keep up with the retirements,” Rutigliano said.

According to Rutigliano, PJM’s approval procedure was meant to handle a small number of connection requests from generators with large capacities, like coal and natural gas plants.

However, over 90% of the current projects awaiting approval from PJM are from renewable sources such as solar and wind, which generate less energy but would be much more numerous.