WASHINGTON (AP) —Divisions flared quickly on Wednesday as U.S. Catholic bishops opened a national meeting highlighted by a sensitive agenda item — whether to take initial steps toward a possible rebuke of politicians, including President Joe Biden, who receive Communion while supporting abortion rights.

Some said the issue was so important and contentious that all the more than 260 participating bishops should have an opportunity to address it during the three-day meeting that’s being held virtually.

Others derided that proposal as a delaying tactic by those who are skeptical of the initiative. They said bishops would have ample time to comment at a later meeting when the full draft of a new statement on Communion would be presented for consideration.

After an extended exchange, 59% of the bishops voted against a motion by St. Louis Archbishop Mitchell Rozanski to allow more speaking opportunities at this week’s meeting.

At stake is a proposal that the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ doctrine committee draft a statement on the meaning of Communion in the life of the church that would be submitted for a vote at a future meeting, probably an in-person gathering in November.

Some conservative bishops say such a statement should signal to Catholic politicians that support of abortion rights should disqualify them from receiving Communion.

Yet there are scores of bishops who oppose any swift or aggressive action on the issue; some cite a letter from the Vatican urging the USCCB to take a cautious, collegial approach. Nearly 70 bishops last month signed a letter to USCCB president and Los Angeles Archbishop José Gomez urging him to delay the discussion until the bishops convene in person, but that request was not granted.

Gomez, in his opening address Wednesday, did not mention the Communion debate but stressed the importance of unity in a time of heightened political and social divisions.

“It’s not realistic to expect the church to stay immune from the pressures of division,” he said. “And we are living in a secular society where politics is becoming the substitute religion for a lot of people. So we need to guard against the temptation to think about the church in simply political terms.”

“Only a church that is united can heal the brokenness and challenge the injustices that we see more clearly now in the wake of this pandemic,” he added.

Gomez noted that Pope Francis also has emphasized unity within the church — a point driven home in an address to the bishops by the Vatican’s ambassador to the United States, Papal Nuncio Christophe Pierre.

“Pope Francis is convinced that dialogue is the best way to realize what always ought to be affirmed and respected,” Pierre said. “Our commitment to this type of dialogue, one which produces unity of faith and action, and not merely talking about things endlessly, will strengthen the church’s credibility.”

Some bishops have expressed concern that the debate is being used as a political weapon to embarrass Catholic Democrats — such as Biden and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi — who hold high office and support abortion rights.

One of Wednesday’s participants, retired Bishop Michael Pfeifer of San Angelo, Texas, openly assailed Biden for recent moves to expand and protect abortion access. Pfeifer’s request to add this specific topic to the agenda was rebuffed, but Gomez said that some of the contentious aspects of the president’s policies would be raised later in the meeting by Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas City, Kansas, head of the USCCB’s Committee on Pro-Life Activities.

Biden is the country’s second Catholic president and the first to hold that office while espousing clear-cut support for abortion rights.

Naumann has said such a stance by a public figure is “a grave moral evil,” and he has advocated for a public rebuke of the president.

Among other subtopics, a Communion document would likely address the issue of who among Catholic public figures is worthy of receiving the sacrament. However, Bishop Kevin Rhoades of Fort Wayne-South Bend, Indiana, chairman of the doctrine committee, said it would not mandate a national policy and instead leave decisions about specific churchgoers up to individual bishops and archbishops.

Cardinal Wilton Gregory, the archbishop of Washington, has made clear that Biden is welcome to receive Communion at churches in the archdiocese.

WASHINGTON (AP) —The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops plans to devote part of its national meeting this month to the sensitive issue of which Catholics are worthy of receiving Communion, despite calls for a delay.

Dozens of bishops had requested the USCCB president, Los Angeles Archbishop José Gomez, postpone the debate until a later meeting, when they could meet in person rather than virtually. But prompt action is being sought by some conservative bishops who want to signal that President Joe Biden and other Catholic politicians who support abortion rights should not receive Communion.

The conservatives are now heartened, as Gomez confirmed in a memo&nbsp; that the topic is on the agenda of the June meeting. A vote is scheduled on whether the conference’s Committee on Doctrine should draft a document addressing the Communion issue and present it at a later date.

An explanation of the agenda item makes clear that one of the subtopics will be the receiving of Communion by cultural and political leaders.

Denver Archbishop Samuel Aquila, one of the conservatives engaged in the discussions, issued a statement Tuesday praising Gomez and saying he “followed the correct procedures to facilitate this critical discussion as a body of bishops.”

Aquila referred to a May 7 letter to Gomez from the head of the Vatican’s doctrine office, Cardinal Luis Ladaria, urging the U.S. bishops to deliberate carefully and minimize divisions before proceeding with any action on the Communion issue.

“It was clear from it that the USCCB’s plan to discuss and debate this important issue is warranted and encouraged,” Aquila said. “In contrast, the publication of the letter calling for a halt to discussion at our June meeting on this vital issue risks creating an atmosphere of factionalism, rather than unity amongst the bishops.”

The bishops who requested a delay did not release their letter publicly or issue statements about it. According to The Pillar, an online news outlet covering the Catholic Church, the signatories included Cardinals Blase Cupich of Chicago and Wilton Gregory of Washington, the latter of whom has made clear that Biden is welcome to receive Communion at his archdiocese’s churches.

But in a recent essay, Bishop Robert McElroy of San Diego made a case against the campaign to deny Biden and others Communion.

“It will bring tremendously destructive consequences,” McElroy wrote. “The Eucharist is being weaponized and deployed as a tool in political warfare. This must not happen.”

San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone, one of the conservatives, criticized the request to delay the debate.

“I’m deeply grieved by the rising public acrimony among bishops and the adoption of behind-closed-doors maneuvers to interfere with the accepted, normal, agreed-upon procedures of the USCCB,” Cordileone said in a statement. “Those who do not want to issue a document on Eucharistic coherence should be open to debating the question objectively and fairly with their brother bishops, rather than attempting to derail the process.”

Cordileone thanked Gomez “for his integrity in assuring that the procedures of our bishop’s conference are followed” and said he looked forward to “serene dialogue” about Communion policies at the June meeting.

Aquila, in his statement, suggested that Catholics endanger their souls if they receive Communion “in an unworthy manner.”

“As bishops, we are failing in our duty as shepherds if we ignore this truth and how it is manifesting itself in today’s society, especially with regards to those in prominent positions who reject fundamental teachings of the Church and insist that they be allowed to receive Communion,” Aquila said.

Cardinal Ladaria’s letter to Gomez in May made several points that could affect how the USCCB handles the issue:

— He said any new statement should not be limited to Catholic political leaders but broadened to encompass all churchgoing Catholics regarding their worthiness to receive Communion.

— He questioned the USCCB policy identifying abortion as “the preeminent” moral issue, saying it would be misleading if any new document “were to give the impression that abortion and euthanasia alone constitute the only grave matters of Catholic moral and social teaching that demand the fullest accountability on the part of Catholics.”

— He said that if the U.S. bishops pursue a new policy, they should confer with bishops’ conferences in other countries “both to learn from one another and to preserve unity in the universal church.”

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/4/1619629905595.png" alt="Some bishops have expressed concern that the debate is being used as a political weapon to embarrass Catholic Democrats — such as Biden and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi — who hold high office and support abortion rights. -image courtesy CSPAN" />
 <figcaption>Some bishops have expressed concern that the debate is being used as a political weapon to embarrass Catholic Democrats — such as Biden and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi — who hold high office and support abortion rights. -image courtesy CSPAN</figcaption>
 </figure>WASHINGTON (AP) —Divisions flared quickly on Wednesday as U.S. Catholic bishops opened a national meeting highlighted by a sensitive agenda item — whether to take initial steps toward a possible rebuke of politicians, including President Joe Biden, who receive Communion while supporting abortion rights.Some said the issue was so important and contentious that all the more than 260 participating bishops should have an opportunity to address it during the three-day meeting that’s being held virtually.Others derided that proposal as a delaying tactic by those who are skeptical of the initiative. They said bishops would have ample time to comment at a later meeting when the full draft of a new statement on Communion would be presented for consideration.After an extended exchange, 59% of the bishops voted against a motion by St. Louis Archbishop Mitchell Rozanski to allow more speaking opportunities at this week’s meeting.At stake is a proposal that the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ doctrine committee draft a statement on the meaning of Communion in the life of the church that would be submitted for a vote at a future meeting, probably an in-person gathering in November.Some conservative bishops say such a statement should signal to Catholic politicians that support of abortion rights should disqualify them from receiving Communion.Yet there are scores of bishops who oppose any swift or aggressive action on the issue; some cite a letter from the Vatican urging the USCCB to take a cautious, collegial approach. Nearly 70 bishops last month signed a letter to USCCB president and Los Angeles Archbishop José Gomez urging him to delay the discussion until the bishops convene in person, but that request was not granted.Gomez, in his opening address Wednesday, did not mention the Communion debate but stressed the importance of unity in a time of heightened political and social divisions.“It’s not realistic to expect the church to stay immune from the pressures of division,” he said. “And we are living in a secular society where politics is becoming the substitute religion for a lot of people. So we need to guard against the temptation to think about the church in simply political terms.”“Only a church that is united can heal the brokenness and challenge the injustices that we see more clearly now in the wake of this pandemic,” he added.Gomez noted that Pope Francis also has emphasized unity within the church — a point driven home in an address to the bishops by the Vatican’s ambassador to the United States, Papal Nuncio Christophe Pierre.“Pope Francis is convinced that dialogue is the best way to realize what always ought to be affirmed and respected,” Pierre said. “Our commitment to this type of dialogue, one which produces unity of faith and action, and not merely talking about things endlessly, will strengthen the church’s credibility.”Some bishops have expressed concern that the debate is being used as a political weapon to embarrass Catholic Democrats — such as Biden and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi — who hold high office and support abortion rights.One of Wednesday’s participants, retired Bishop Michael Pfeifer of San Angelo, Texas, openly assailed Biden for recent moves to expand and protect abortion access. Pfeifer’s request to add this specific topic to the agenda was rebuffed, but Gomez said that some of the contentious aspects of the president’s policies would be raised later in the meeting by Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas City, Kansas, head of the USCCB’s Committee on Pro-Life Activities.Biden is the country’s second Catholic president and the first to hold that office while espousing clear-cut support for abortion rights.Naumann has said such a stance by a public figure is “a grave moral evil,” and he has advocated for a public rebuke of the president.Among other subtopics, a Communion document would likely address the issue of who among Catholic public figures is worthy of receiving the sacrament. However, Bishop Kevin Rhoades of Fort Wayne-South Bend, Indiana, chairman of the doctrine committee, said it would not mandate a national policy and instead leave decisions about specific churchgoers up to individual bishops and archbishops.Cardinal Wilton Gregory, the archbishop of Washington, has made clear that Biden is welcome to receive Communion at churches in the archdiocese.___WASHINGTON (AP) —The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops plans to devote part of its national meeting this month to the sensitive issue of which Catholics are worthy of receiving Communion, despite calls for a delay.Dozens of bishops had requested the USCCB president, Los Angeles Archbishop José Gomez, postpone the debate until a later meeting, when they could meet in person rather than virtually. But prompt action is being sought by some conservative bishops who want to signal that President Joe Biden and other Catholic politicians who support abortion rights should not receive Communion.The conservatives are now heartened, as Gomez confirmed in a memo&nbsp; that the topic is on the agenda of the June meeting. A vote is scheduled on whether the conference’s Committee on Doctrine should draft a document addressing the Communion issue and present it at a later date.An explanation of the agenda item makes clear that one of the subtopics will be the receiving of Communion by cultural and political leaders.Denver Archbishop Samuel Aquila, one of the conservatives engaged in the discussions, issued a statement Tuesday praising Gomez and saying he “followed the correct procedures to facilitate this critical discussion as a body of bishops.”Aquila referred to a May 7 letter to Gomez from the head of the Vatican’s doctrine office, Cardinal Luis Ladaria, urging the U.S. bishops to deliberate carefully and minimize divisions before proceeding with any action on the Communion issue.“It was clear from it that the USCCB’s plan to discuss and debate this important issue is warranted and encouraged,” Aquila said. “In contrast, the publication of the letter calling for a halt to discussion at our June meeting on this vital issue risks creating an atmosphere of factionalism, rather than unity amongst the bishops.”The bishops who requested a delay did not release their letter publicly or issue statements about it. According to The Pillar, an online news outlet covering the Catholic Church, the signatories included Cardinals Blase Cupich of Chicago and Wilton Gregory of Washington, the latter of whom has made clear that Biden is welcome to receive Communion at his archdiocese’s churches.But in a recent essay, Bishop Robert McElroy of San Diego made a case against the campaign to deny Biden and others Communion.“It will bring tremendously destructive consequences,” McElroy wrote. “The Eucharist is being weaponized and deployed as a tool in political warfare. This must not happen.”San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone, one of the conservatives, criticized the request to delay the debate.“I’m deeply grieved by the rising public acrimony among bishops and the adoption of behind-closed-doors maneuvers to interfere with the accepted, normal, agreed-upon procedures of the USCCB,” Cordileone said in a statement. “Those who do not want to issue a document on Eucharistic coherence should be open to debating the question objectively and fairly with their brother bishops, rather than attempting to derail the process.”Cordileone thanked Gomez “for his integrity in assuring that the procedures of our bishop’s conference are followed” and said he looked forward to “serene dialogue” about Communion policies at the June meeting.Aquila, in his statement, suggested that Catholics endanger their souls if they receive Communion “in an unworthy manner.”“As bishops, we are failing in our duty as shepherds if we ignore this truth and how it is manifesting itself in today’s society, especially with regards to those in prominent positions who reject fundamental teachings of the Church and insist that they be allowed to receive Communion,” Aquila said.Cardinal Ladaria’s letter to Gomez in May made several points that could affect how the USCCB handles the issue:— He said any new statement should not be limited to Catholic political leaders but broadened to encompass all churchgoing Catholics regarding their worthiness to receive Communion.— He questioned the USCCB policy identifying abortion as “the preeminent” moral issue, saying it would be misleading if any new document “were to give the impression that abortion and euthanasia alone constitute the only grave matters of Catholic moral and social teaching that demand the fullest accountability on the part of Catholics.”— He said that if the U.S. bishops pursue a new policy, they should confer with bishops’ conferences in other countries “both to learn from one another and to preserve unity in the universal church.”

Divided US Catholic bishops debate Communion policy

WICHITA, Kan. (AP) — A man charged with killing a Wichita security guard at a QuikTrip will undergo a mental competency examination. Defense attorney Jeremy Koop sought the evaluation for Laroy Monzell West, saying he may be incompetent to stand trial in the May 5 death of 39-year-old Will Robinson.

Sedgwick County District Court Judge Bruce Brown granted the defense request on Tuesday. Police say Robinson was shot after West was escorted out of the QuikTrip because he was causing a disturbance. West's case will be on hold until the competency evaluation is completed.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/5/1620334492831.png" alt="West as scene from the QuikTrip security camera the night of the fatal shooting-image courtesy Wichita Police" />
 <figcaption>West as scene from the QuikTrip security camera the night of the fatal shooting-image courtesy Wichita Police</figcaption>
 </figure>WICHITA, Kan. (AP) — A man charged with killing a Wichita security guard at a QuikTrip will undergo a mental competency examination. Defense attorney Jeremy Koop sought the evaluation for Laroy Monzell West, saying he may be incompetent to stand trial in the May 5 death of 39-year-old Will Robinson.<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/5/1620393217853.png" alt="West photo Sedgwick Co." />
 <figcaption>West photo Sedgwick Co.</figcaption>
 </figure>Sedgwick County District Court Judge Bruce Brown granted the defense request on Tuesday. Police say Robinson was shot after West was escorted out of the QuikTrip because he was causing a disturbance. West's case will be on hold until the competency evaluation is completed.

Mental exam ordered for suspect in Kan. security guard's death

By LESLIE EIKLEBERRY Salina Post

A Salina woman was scammed out of nearly $3,000 by a caller claiming she had an outstanding warrant for missing jury duty.

A 27-year-old woman received a call at work Tuesday night from a man claiming to be from the sheriff's department, according to Salina Police Captain Paul Forrester.

 The man told her that she had a warrant for her arrest because she missed jury duty and that there was a $2,300 bond.

The caller convinced the woman that if she hung up, she would be arrested, but if she stayed on the line, he could take care of the bond over the phone, Forrester said. 

The caller told the woman to purchase pre-paid gift cards and provide the numbers on the cards to him. She purchased three cards at Walmart and two at a Dollar General.

She then provided the numbers to the man and was told to break the cards in half and mail them and the receipt to the City-County Building, Forrester said.

The man called her back and said there were some additional fees. She ended up transferring another $860 to the caller, Forrester said.

Forrester wants the public to be alert to calls such as those the woman received. He said it is important to remember that the sheriff's office will not collect bond money over the phone and does not take gift cards.

By LESLIE EIKLEBERRY Salina PostA Salina woman was scammed out of nearly $3,000 by a caller claiming she had an outstanding warrant for missing jury duty.A 27-year-old woman received a call at work Tuesday night from a man claiming to be from the sheriff's department, according to Salina Police Captain Paul Forrester. The man told her that she had a warrant for her arrest because she missed jury duty and that there was a $2,300 bond.The caller convinced the woman that if she hung up, she would be arrested, but if she stayed on the line, he could take care of the bond over the phone, Forrester said. The caller told the woman to purchase pre-paid gift cards and provide the numbers on the cards to him. She purchased three cards at Walmart and two at a Dollar General.She then provided the numbers to the man and was told to break the cards in half and mail them and the receipt to the City-County Building, Forrester said.The man called her back and said there were some additional fees. She ended up transferring another $860 to the caller, Forrester said.Forrester wants the public to be alert to calls such as those the woman received. He said it is important to remember that the sheriff's office will not collect bond money over the phone and does not take gift cards.

Sheriff: Kansas woman lost $3,000 in jury duty scam

KANSAS CITY, Kan. (AP) — Police in Kansas City, Kansas, are seeking a driver whose car slammed into a group of spectators at a sideshow over the weekend, seriously injuring one man.

<a href="https://www.facebook.com/13622061127/videos/361596085561871">Click here to watch</a> a video of the sideshow from KCK police

Police say the sideshow, which is a street demonstration of car stunts, drew about 100 people to First Street and Osage Avenue around 10 p.m. Sunday. 

Police say that during the show, a 1990s Ford Mustang was spinning circles when it slid into the crowd and hit a 24-year-old man who suffered a broken neck and broken leg. Police say the driver left before officers and medics arrived and had not been found by Wednesday. Police are asking the driver to come forward.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/6/1623936996958.png" alt="Dangerous sideshow in Kansas City, Kansas&nbsp;" />
 <figcaption>Dangerous sideshow in Kansas City, Kansas&nbsp;</figcaption>
 </figure>KANSAS CITY, Kan. (AP) — Police in Kansas City, Kansas, are seeking a driver whose car slammed into a group of spectators at a sideshow over the weekend, seriously injuring one man.<a href="https://www.facebook.com/13622061127/videos/361596085561871">Click here to watch</a> a video of the sideshow from KCK policePolice say the sideshow, which is a street demonstration of car stunts, drew about 100 people to First Street and Osage Avenue around 10 p.m. Sunday. Police say that during the show, a 1990s Ford Mustang was spinning circles when it slid into the crowd and hit a 24-year-old man who suffered a broken neck and broken leg. Police say the driver left before officers and medics arrived and had not been found by Wednesday. Police are asking the driver to come forward.

 🎥 Police in Kan. seeking driver whose car slammed into crowd

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court has dismissed a challenge to the Obama era health care law, preserving insurance coverage for millions of Americans.

<a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/20949627-california-v-texas" target="_blank">The justices, by a 7-2 vote, left the entire law intact</a>&nbsp;Thursday in ruling that Texas, other Republican-led states and two individuals had no right to bring their lawsuit in federal court.

The law’s major provisions include protections for people with pre-existing health conditions, a range of no-cost preventive services and the expansion of the Medicaid program that insures lower-income people, including those who work in jobs that don’t pay much or provide health insurance.

Also left in place is the law’s now-toothless requirement that people have health insurance or pay a penalty. Congress rendered that provision irrelevant in 2017 when it reduced the penalty to zero.

The elimination of the penalty had become the hook that Texas and other Republican-led states, as well as the Trump administration, used to attack the entire law. They argued that without the mandate, a pillar of the law when it was passed in 2010, the rest of the law should fall, too.

And with a more conservative Supreme Court that includes three Trump appointees, opponents of “Obamacare” hoped a majority of the justices would finally kill off the law they have been fighting against for more than a decade.

But the third major attack on the law at the Supreme Court ended the way the first two did, with a majority of the court rebuffing efforts to gut the law or get rid of it altogether.

Trump’s three appointees to the Supreme Court — Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh — split their votes. Kavanaugh and Barrett joined the majority. Gorsuch was in dissent, signing on to an opinion from Justice Samuel Alito.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court has dismissed a challenge to the Obama era health care law, preserving insurance coverage for millions of Americans.<a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/20949627-california-v-texas" target="_blank">The justices, by a 7-2 vote, left the entire law intact</a>&nbsp;Thursday in ruling that Texas, other Republican-led states and two individuals had no right to bring their lawsuit in federal court.The law’s major provisions include protections for people with pre-existing health conditions, a range of no-cost preventive services and the expansion of the Medicaid program that insures lower-income people, including those who work in jobs that don’t pay much or provide health insurance.Also left in place is the law’s now-toothless requirement that people have health insurance or pay a penalty. Congress rendered that provision irrelevant in 2017 when it reduced the penalty to zero.The elimination of the penalty had become the hook that Texas and other Republican-led states, as well as the Trump administration, used to attack the entire law. They argued that without the mandate, a pillar of the law when it was passed in 2010, the rest of the law should fall, too.And with a more conservative Supreme Court that includes three Trump appointees, opponents of “Obamacare” hoped a majority of the justices would finally kill off the law they have been fighting against for more than a decade.But the third major attack on the law at the Supreme Court ended the way the first two did, with a majority of the court rebuffing efforts to gut the law or get rid of it altogether.Trump’s three appointees to the Supreme Court — Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh — split their votes. Kavanaugh and Barrett joined the majority. Gorsuch was in dissent, signing on to an opinion from Justice Samuel Alito.

Supreme Court dismisses another challenge to Obamacare

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Justice Department is warning Missouri officials that the state can’t ignore federal law, after the governor signed a bill last week that bans police from enforcing federal gun rules.

n a letter sent Wednesday night and obtained by The Associated Press, Justice officials said the U.S. Constitution's Supremacy Clause outweighs the measure that Gov. Mike Parson signed into law Saturday. The new rules penalize local police departments if their officers enforce federal gun laws.

Acting Assistant Attorney General Brian Boynton said the law threatens to disrupt the working relationship between federal and local authorities, they said in the letter, noting that Missouri receives federal grants and technical assistance.

“The public safety of the people of the United States and citizens of Missouri is paramount,” Boynton wrote in the letter.

President Joe Biden has made gun control laws a priority of his administration, and the House has passed two bills requiring background checks on firearms sales and an expanded review for gun purchases, though they face a tough road in the Senate. But states, including Missouri, have increasingly worked to loosen gun laws, including abandoning requirements that people get training and pass background checks to carry concealed handguns.

Missouri’s law would subject law enforcement agencies with officers who knowingly enforce any federal laws to a fine of about $50,000 per violating officer.

Republican lawmakers who worked to pass the bill have said they were motivated by the potential of more restrictive gun laws in the Biden administration. But state Democrats have argued the law is unconstitutional and have predicted it would not pass a challenge in the courts.

The Justice Department argued in the letter that the state lacks the authority to shield any Missouri businesses or citizens from federal law or to prevent federal law enforcement officials from carrying out their duties.

Boynton said the bill “conflicts with federal firearms laws and regulation” and federal law would supersede the state’s new statute. He said federal agents and the U.S. attorney’s offices in the state would continue to enforce all federal firearms laws and regulations. He asked that Parson and Eric Schmitt, the state’s attorney general, clarify the law and how it would work in a response by Friday.

Six states have passed legislation removing or weakening concealed-carry permit requirements this year, most recently Texas, where Republican Gov. Greg Abbott signed a bill Wednesday. About 20 states now allow people to carry concealed weapons without a license. At least three other states have passed legislation banning police from enforcing federal gun laws, a preemptive shot at any new measures passed by Democrats.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/6/1623695079192.png" alt="Governor Mike Parson celebrated the bill's signing June 12" />
 <figcaption>Governor Mike Parson celebrated the bill's signing June 12</figcaption>
 </figure>WASHINGTON (AP) — The Justice Department is warning Missouri officials that the state can’t ignore federal law, after the governor signed a bill last week that bans police from enforcing federal gun rules.n a letter sent Wednesday night and obtained by The Associated Press, Justice officials said the U.S. Constitution's Supremacy Clause outweighs the measure that Gov. Mike Parson signed into law Saturday. The new rules penalize local police departments if their officers enforce federal gun laws.Acting Assistant Attorney General Brian Boynton said the law threatens to disrupt the working relationship between federal and local authorities, they said in the letter, noting that Missouri receives federal grants and technical assistance.“The public safety of the people of the United States and citizens of Missouri is paramount,” Boynton wrote in the letter.President Joe Biden has made gun control laws a priority of his administration, and the House has passed two bills requiring background checks on firearms sales and an expanded review for gun purchases, though they face a tough road in the Senate. But states, including Missouri, have increasingly worked to loosen gun laws, including abandoning requirements that people get training and pass background checks to carry concealed handguns.Missouri’s law would subject law enforcement agencies with officers who knowingly enforce any federal laws to a fine of about $50,000 per violating officer.Republican lawmakers who worked to pass the bill have said they were motivated by the potential of more restrictive gun laws in the Biden administration. But state Democrats have argued the law is unconstitutional and have predicted it would not pass a challenge in the courts.The Justice Department argued in the letter that the state lacks the authority to shield any Missouri businesses or citizens from federal law or to prevent federal law enforcement officials from carrying out their duties.Boynton said the bill “conflicts with federal firearms laws and regulation” and federal law would supersede the state’s new statute. He said federal agents and the U.S. attorney’s offices in the state would continue to enforce all federal firearms laws and regulations. He asked that Parson and Eric Schmitt, the state’s attorney general, clarify the law and how it would work in a response by Friday.Six states have passed legislation removing or weakening concealed-carry permit requirements this year, most recently Texas, where Republican Gov. Greg Abbott signed a bill Wednesday. About 20 states now allow people to carry concealed weapons without a license. At least three other states have passed legislation banning police from enforcing federal gun laws, a preemptive shot at any new measures passed by Democrats.

Justice Dept.: Missouri governor can't void federal gun laws

WASHINGTON (AP) — The United States will soon have a new federal holiday commemorating the end of slavery in the nation. All members of the Kansas congressional delegation voted in support of the bill in both the House and Senate.

The House voted 415-14 Wednesday to make Juneteenth, or June 19th, the 12th federal holiday. The bill now goes to President Joe Biden’s desk, and he is expected to sign it into law.

Juneteenth commemorates the day the last enslaved African Americans learned they were free. Confederate soldiers surrendered in April 1865, but word didn’t reach the last enslaved Black people until June 19, when Union soldiers brought the news of freedom to Galveston, Texas. That was also about 2 1/2 years after the Emancipation Proclamation freed slaves in the Southern states.

It’s the first new federal holiday since Martin Luther King Jr. Day was created in 1983.

“Our federal holidays are purposely few in number and recognize the most important milestones,” said Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y. “I cannot think of a more important milestone to commemorate than the end of slavery in the United States.”

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas, speaking next to a large poster of a Black man whose back bore massive scarring from being whipped, said she would be in Galveston this Saturday to celebrate along with Republican Sen. John Cornyn of Texas.

“Can you imagine?” said the rather short Jackson Lee. “I will be standing maybe taller than Sen. Cornyn, forgive me for that, because it will be such an elevation of joy.”

The Senate passed the bill a day earlier under a unanimous consent agreement that expedites the process for considering legislation. It takes just one senator’s objection to block such agreements.

“Please, let us do as the Senate. Vote unanimously for passage,” Rep. David Scott, D-Ga., pleaded with his colleagues.

The vote comes as lawmakers struggle to overcome divisions on police reform legislation following the killing of George Floyd by police and as Republican state legislators push what experts say is an unprecedented number of bills aimed at restricting access to the ballot box. While Republicans say the goal is to prevent voter fraud, Democrats contend that the measures are aimed at undermining minority voting rights.

Several members of the Congressional Black Caucus took to the floor to speak in favor of the bill. Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman, D-N.J., said she viewed Juneteenth as a commemoration rather than a celebration because it represented something that was delayed in happening.

“It also reminds me of what we don’t have today,” she said. “And that is full access to justice, freedom and equality. All these are often in short supply as it relates to the Black community.”

The bill was sponsored by Sen. Edward Markey, D-Mass., and had 60 co-sponsors. Democratic leaders moved quickly to bring the bill to the House floor after the Senate’s vote the day before.

Some Republican lawmakers opposed the effort. Rep. Matt Rosendale, R-Mont., said creating the federal holiday was an effort to celebrate “identity politics.”

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/6/1623892661718.png" alt="Image courtesy Juneteenth ICT" />
 <figcaption>Image courtesy Juneteenth ICT</figcaption>
 </figure>WASHINGTON (AP) — The United States will soon have a new federal holiday commemorating the end of slavery in the nation. All members of the Kansas congressional delegation voted in support of the bill in both the House and Senate.The House voted 415-14 Wednesday to make Juneteenth, or June 19th, the 12th federal holiday. The bill now goes to President Joe Biden’s desk, and he is expected to sign it into law.Juneteenth commemorates the day the last enslaved African Americans learned they were free. Confederate soldiers surrendered in April 1865, but word didn’t reach the last enslaved Black people until June 19, when Union soldiers brought the news of freedom to Galveston, Texas. That was also about 2 1/2 years after the Emancipation Proclamation freed slaves in the Southern states.It’s the first new federal holiday since Martin Luther King Jr. Day was created in 1983.“Our federal holidays are purposely few in number and recognize the most important milestones,” said Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y. “I cannot think of a more important milestone to commemorate than the end of slavery in the United States.”Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas, speaking next to a large poster of a Black man whose back bore massive scarring from being whipped, said she would be in Galveston this Saturday to celebrate along with Republican Sen. John Cornyn of Texas.“Can you imagine?” said the rather short Jackson Lee. “I will be standing maybe taller than Sen. Cornyn, forgive me for that, because it will be such an elevation of joy.”The Senate passed the bill a day earlier under a unanimous consent agreement that expedites the process for considering legislation. It takes just one senator’s objection to block such agreements.“Please, let us do as the Senate. Vote unanimously for passage,” Rep. David Scott, D-Ga., pleaded with his colleagues.The vote comes as lawmakers struggle to overcome divisions on police reform legislation following the killing of George Floyd by police and as Republican state legislators push what experts say is an unprecedented number of bills aimed at restricting access to the ballot box. While Republicans say the goal is to prevent voter fraud, Democrats contend that the measures are aimed at undermining minority voting rights.Several members of the Congressional Black Caucus took to the floor to speak in favor of the bill. Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman, D-N.J., said she viewed Juneteenth as a commemoration rather than a celebration because it represented something that was delayed in happening.“It also reminds me of what we don’t have today,” she said. “And that is full access to justice, freedom and equality. All these are often in short supply as it relates to the Black community.”The bill was sponsored by Sen. Edward Markey, D-Mass., and had 60 co-sponsors. Democratic leaders moved quickly to bring the bill to the House floor after the Senate’s vote the day before.Some Republican lawmakers opposed the effort. Rep. Matt Rosendale, R-Mont., said creating the federal holiday was an effort to celebrate “identity politics.”

Kan. congressional delegation votes for Juneteenth holiday

GENEVA (AP) —Presidents Joe Biden and Vladimir Putin of Russia spent more than three hours discussing issues Wednesday at their summit in Geneva. They ticked through their respective lists so quickly and in such “excruciating detail,” Biden says, that they looked at each other and thought, “OK, what next?”

The most pressing issues the leaders discussed:

Biden and Putin agreed to return their respective ambassadors to Washington and Moscow in a bid to improve badly deteriorated diplomatic relations between their countries.

Russia’s ambassador to the United States, Anatoly Antonov, left Washington in March amid a row after Biden called Putin a killer in a television interview and imposed new sanctions on Russia over its treatment of opposition figure Alexei Navalny.

John Sullivan, the U.S. ambassador to Russia, flew out of Moscow in April after public suggestions from Russian officials that he should leave to mirror Antonov’s departure.

Both ambassadors were present at Wednesday’s summit.

Putin also said the Russian foreign ministry and the U.S. State Department would begin consultations on other vexing diplomatic issues, including the closures of consulates in both countries and the employment status of Russian citizens working for U.S. missions in Russia.

A senior Biden administration official said Sullivan is likely to return to Moscow next week. A different senior administration official said both governments had begun discussing consulate and local staff issues and the hope was an agreement could be reached in the next two months.

Neither administration official was authorized to comment publicly by name and both spoke on condition of anonymity.

No breakthroughs on this issue were announced, but the leaders agreed to at least talk about what has become a major source of conflict between the U.S. and Russia.

Biden said he and Putin agreed to have their experts work out an understanding about what types of critical infrastructure would be off-limits to cyberattacks. He said the U.S. presented Russia with&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cisa.gov/critical-infrastructure-sectors" target="_blank">16 specific types of infrastructure,</a>&nbsp;including energy, elections, banking and water systems, and the defense industry.

The agreement comes amid a flood of ransomware attacks against U.S. businesses and government agencies, including one in May that disrupted fuel supplies along the East Coast for nearly a week. The disruption was blamed on a criminal gang operating out of Russia, which does not extradite suspects to the U.S.

Other serious incidents include the SolarWinds intrusion discovered last year in which hackers, believed by U.S. authorities to be Russian, penetrated multiple U.S. government networks and prompted Biden to impose additional U.S. sanctions against Russia.

Biden said the U.S. and Russian governments would follow up on certain criminal cases, an apparent reference to cybercriminals operating with impunity from Russian territory.

Putin agreed there is mutual interest in the subject.

Biden also made an implicit threat against Russia, saying the U.S. has “significant cyber capability” it could use against Russia if it were to interfere with U.S. critical infrastructure.

Biden and Putin instructed their diplomats to begin laying the groundwork for a new phase of arms control.

The&nbsp;<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/06/16/u-s-russia-presidential-joint-statement-on-strategic-stability/" target="_blank">“strategic stability dialogue”&nbsp;</a>would be a series of discussions designed to set the table for a negotiation by sorting out what exactly should be negotiated. More broadly, it would aim to reduce the risk of war between the world’s two largest nuclear powers.

Biden said the goal is to work with Russia on “a mechanism that can lead to control of new and dangerous and sophisticated weapons that are coming on the scene now, that reduce the time for response, that raise the prospect of accidental war.” He said this was discussed in detail.

No date was announced for the start of talks.

The basic idea is to identify and sort out the many areas of disagreement over what a future arms control treaty should address. It also would address ways to avoid unintended or accidental moves that could trigger war.

Shortly after Biden took office in January, he and Putin agreed to extend until 2026 the New START treaty that limits long-range nuclear weapons. The challenge now is to work out what a potential follow-on pact would include.

The Russians insist it include defensive weapons, such as U.S. missile defense systems. The Americans argue that it should include so-called tactical nuclear weapons, which are not covered by New START and of which the Russians have a far larger number deployed. It might also include new and emerging technologies such as hypersonic missiles and space weaponry.

Biden said he raised with Putin the plight of two Americans detained in Russia.

Putin had opened the door to possible discussions about a prisoner swap with the U.S. and said those conversations would continue. Biden said he would follow up, too.

The U.S. is holding two prisoners whose release Russia has sought for more than a decade, including arms trader Viktor Bout. The other is Konstantin Yaroshenko, a pilot who was extradited from Liberia in 2010 and convicted the next year of conspiracy to smuggle cocaine into the U.S.

Biden said Americans Paul Whelan and Trevor Reed are being “wrongfully imprisoned” in Russia.

Whelan, who also holds Canadian, Irish and British citizenship, was arrested in Moscow in 2018, convicted of espionage and sentenced to 16 years. Whelan says he was just visiting Moscow.

Reed was convicted of assaulting a police officer while intoxicated and sentenced to nine years. Putin, in a recent interview with NBC News, called Reed a “drunk and a troublemaker.”

Biden said he’ll continue to air with Putin concerns about basic human rights because it is a core tenet of what the United States stands for.

Biden said he couldn’t be president of the United States and not raise human rights issues during the summit with Putin. He mentioned the internationally publicized case of jailed Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny.

But Putin said Navalny got what he deserved when he was handed a stiff prison sentence. Navalny is Putin’s most ardent political foe. He was arrested in January after returning to Russia from Germany, where he’d spent five months recovering from nerve agent poisoning that he blames on the Kremlin. Russian officials deny involvement in Nalvany’s poisoning.

Navalny received a 30-month prison sentence for violating terms of a suspended sentence from a 2014 embezzlement conviction he dismissed a politically motivated.

Biden pressed Putin to drop a push to close the last international humanitarian crossing into Syria, making clear the matter was of “significant importance” to the U.S.

No deal was reached to keep it open, however.

Russia is threatening to use its U.N. Security Council veto to close the aid route for millions of Syrians internally displaced by that country’s war.

Biden said Putin asked about Afghanistan and expressed a desire that peace and security be maintained there. Biden said he told Putin that a lot of that will depend on him, and that Putin indicated he was prepared to “help” on Afghanistan as well as on Iran.

Biden declined to go into further detail. Biden’s administration is mounting new efforts to get Iran to comply with the terms of a nuclear deal it had once agreed to before Biden’s predecessor, Donald Trump, withdrew the U.S. from the agreement the U.S. and other world powers struck with Iran in 2015.

Putin also talked about preventing a resurgence of terrorist violence in Afghanistan. Biden said it would be very much in Russia’s interest to not see that happen.

GENEVA (AP) — President Joe Biden and Russian President Vladimir Putin concluded their summit on Wednesday with an agreement to return their nations' ambassadors to their posts in Washington and Moscow and a plan to begin work toward replacing the last remaining treaty between the two countries limiting nuclear weapons.

But the two leaders offered starkly different views on difficult simmering issues including cyber and ransomware attacks originating from Russia.

Putin insisted anew that his country has nothing to do with such attacks, despite U..S. intelligence that indicates otherwise. Biden, meanwhile, said that he made clear to Putin that if Russia crossed certain red lines — including going after major American infrastructure — his administration would respond and “the consequences of that would be devastating,”

Will Putin change his behavior? Biden was asked at a post-summit news conference.

“I said what will change their behavior is if the rest of the world reacts” in a way that “diminishes their standing in the world," Biden said. "I’m not confident of anything. I’m just stating a fact.”

Both leaders, who have stirred escalating tension since Biden took office in January, suggested that while an enormous chasm between the two nations remains the talks were constructive.

Putin said there was “no hostility” during three hours of talks, a session that wrapped up more quickly than expected.

When it was over, Putin had first crack at describing the results at a solo news conference, with Biden following soon after. Biden said they spent a “great deal of time” discussing cybersecurity and he believed Putin understood the U.S. position.

“I pointed out to him, we have significant cyber capability," Biden said. "In fact, (if) they violate basic norms, we will respond. ... I think that the last thing he wants now is a Cold War.”

Putin noted that Biden raised human rights issues with him, including the fate of opposition leader Alexei Navalny. Putin defended Navalny’s prison sentence and deflected repeated questions about mistreatment of Russian opposition leaders by highlighting U.S. domestic turmoil, including the Black Lives Matter protests and the Jan. 6 Capitol insurrection.

Putin held forth for nearly an hour before international reporters. While showing defiance at queries about Biden pressing him on human rights, he also expressed respect for Biden as an experienced political leader.

The Russian noted that Biden repeated wise advice his mother had given him and also spoke about his family — messaging that Putin said might not have been entirely relevant to their summit but demonstrated Biden's “moral values.” Though he raised doubt that the U.S.-Russia relationship could soon return to a measure of equilibrium of years past, Putin suggested that Biden was someone he could work with.

“The meeting was actually very efficient,” Putin said. “It was substantive, it was specific. It was aimed at achieving results, and one of them was pushing back the frontiers of trust.”

Putin said he and Biden agreed to begin negotiations on nuclear talks to potentially replace the New START treaty limiting nuclear weapons after it expires in 2026.

Washington broke off talks with Moscow in 2014 in response to Russia’s annexation of Ukraine’s Crimea and its military intervention in support of separatists in eastern Ukraine. Talks resumed in 2017 but gained little traction and failed to produce an agreement on extending the New START treaty during the Trump administration.

The Russian president said there was an agreement between the leaders to return their ambassadors to their respective postings. Both countries had pulled back their top envoys to Washington and Moscow as relations chilled in recent months.

Russia’s ambassador to the U.S., Anatoly Antonov, was recalled from Washington about three months ago after Biden called Putin a killer; U.S. Ambassador to Russia John Sullivan left Moscow almost two months ago, after Russia suggested he return to Washington for consultations. Putin said that the ambassadors were expected to return their posts in the coming days.

The meeting in a book-lined room had a somewhat awkward beginning — both men appeared to avoid looking directly at each other during a brief and chaotic photo opportunity before a scrum of jostling reporters.

Biden nodded when a reporter asked if Putin could be trusted, but the White House quickly sent out a tweet insisting that the president was “very clearly not responding to any one question, but nodding in acknowledgment to the press generally.”

Their body language, at least in their brief moments together in front of the press, was not exceptionally warm.

The two leaders did shake hands — Biden extended his hand first and smiled at the stoic Russian leader — after Swiss President Guy Parmelin welcomed them to Switzerland for the summit. When they were in front of the cameras a few minutes later—this time inside the grand lakeside mansion where the summit was held—they seemed to avoid eye contact.

For months, Biden and Putin have traded sharp rhetoric. Biden has repeatedly called out Putin for malicious cyberattacks by Russian-based hackers on U.S. interests, for the jailing of Russia's foremost opposition leader and for interference in American elections.

Putin has reacted with whatabout-isms and denials — pointing to the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol to argue that the U.S. has no business lecturing on democratic norms and insisting that the Russian government hasn't been involved in any election interference or cyberattacks despite U.S. intelligence showing otherwise.

In advance of Wednesday's meeting, both sides set out to lower expectations.

Even so, Biden said it would be an important step if the United States and Russia were able to ultimately find “stability and predictability" in their relationship, a significant goal for a president who sees Russia as one of America's crucial adversaries.

Arrangements for the meeting were carefully choreographed and vigorously negotiated.

Biden first floated the meeting in an April phone call in which he informed Putin that he would be expelling several Russian diplomats and imposing sanctions against dozens of people and companies, part of an effort to hold the Kremlin accountable for interference in last year’s presidential election and the hacking of federal agencies.

The White House announced ahead of the summit that Biden wouldn't hold a joint news conference with Putin, deciding it did not want to appear to elevate Putin at a moment when the U.S. president is urging European allies to pressure Putin to cut out myriad provocations.

Biden sees himself with few peers on foreign policy. He traveled the globe as a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and was given difficult foreign policy assignments by President Barack Obama when Biden was vice president. His portfolio included messy spots like Iraq and Ukraine and weighing the mettle of China's Xi Jinping during his rise to power.

He has repeatedly said that he believes executing effective foreign policy comes from forming strong personal relations, and he has managed to find rapport with both the likes of Turkey's Recep Tayyip Erdogan, whom Biden has labeled an “autocrat,” and more conventional Western leaders including Canada's Justin Trudeau.

But with Putin, who he once said has “no soul," Biden has long been wary. At the same time, he acknowledges that Putin, who has remained the most powerful figure in Russian politics over the span of five U.S. presidents, is not without talent.

“He’s bright. He’s tough," Biden said earlier this week. “And I have found that he is a — as they say ... a worthy adversary."

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/6/1623857775069.png" alt="The meeting in a book-lined room had a somewhat awkward beginning — both men appeared to avoid looking directly at each other during a brief and chaotic photo opportunity before a scrum of jostling reporters.-image courtesy CSPAN" />
 <figcaption>The meeting in a book-lined room had a somewhat awkward beginning — both men appeared to avoid looking directly at each other during a brief and chaotic photo opportunity before a scrum of jostling reporters.-image courtesy CSPAN</figcaption>
 </figure>GENEVA (AP) —Presidents Joe Biden and Vladimir Putin of Russia spent more than three hours discussing issues Wednesday at their summit in Geneva. They ticked through their respective lists so quickly and in such “excruciating detail,” Biden says, that they looked at each other and thought, “OK, what next?”The most pressing issues the leaders discussed:AMBASSADORSBiden and Putin agreed to return their respective ambassadors to Washington and Moscow in a bid to improve badly deteriorated diplomatic relations between their countries.Russia’s ambassador to the United States, Anatoly Antonov, left Washington in March amid a row after Biden called Putin a killer in a television interview and imposed new sanctions on Russia over its treatment of opposition figure Alexei Navalny.John Sullivan, the U.S. ambassador to Russia, flew out of Moscow in April after public suggestions from Russian officials that he should leave to mirror Antonov’s departure.Both ambassadors were present at Wednesday’s summit.Putin also said the Russian foreign ministry and the U.S. State Department would begin consultations on other vexing diplomatic issues, including the closures of consulates in both countries and the employment status of Russian citizens working for U.S. missions in Russia.A senior Biden administration official said Sullivan is likely to return to Moscow next week. A different senior administration official said both governments had begun discussing consulate and local staff issues and the hope was an agreement could be reached in the next two months.Neither administration official was authorized to comment publicly by name and both spoke on condition of anonymity.___CYBERSECURITYNo breakthroughs on this issue were announced, but the leaders agreed to at least talk about what has become a major source of conflict between the U.S. and Russia.Biden said he and Putin agreed to have their experts work out an understanding about what types of critical infrastructure would be off-limits to cyberattacks. He said the U.S. presented Russia with&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cisa.gov/critical-infrastructure-sectors" target="_blank">16 specific types of infrastructure,</a>&nbsp;including energy, elections, banking and water systems, and the defense industry.The agreement comes amid a flood of ransomware attacks against U.S. businesses and government agencies, including one in May that disrupted fuel supplies along the East Coast for nearly a week. The disruption was blamed on a criminal gang operating out of Russia, which does not extradite suspects to the U.S.Other serious incidents include the SolarWinds intrusion discovered last year in which hackers, believed by U.S. authorities to be Russian, penetrated multiple U.S. government networks and prompted Biden to impose additional U.S. sanctions against Russia.Biden said the U.S. and Russian governments would follow up on certain criminal cases, an apparent reference to cybercriminals operating with impunity from Russian territory.Putin agreed there is mutual interest in the subject.Biden also made an implicit threat against Russia, saying the U.S. has “significant cyber capability” it could use against Russia if it were to interfere with U.S. critical infrastructure.___NUCLEAR WEAPONSBiden and Putin instructed their diplomats to begin laying the groundwork for a new phase of arms control.The&nbsp;<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/06/16/u-s-russia-presidential-joint-statement-on-strategic-stability/" target="_blank">“strategic stability dialogue”&nbsp;</a>would be a series of discussions designed to set the table for a negotiation by sorting out what exactly should be negotiated. More broadly, it would aim to reduce the risk of war between the world’s two largest nuclear powers.Biden said the goal is to work with Russia on “a mechanism that can lead to control of new and dangerous and sophisticated weapons that are coming on the scene now, that reduce the time for response, that raise the prospect of accidental war.” He said this was discussed in detail.No date was announced for the start of talks.The basic idea is to identify and sort out the many areas of disagreement over what a future arms control treaty should address. It also would address ways to avoid unintended or accidental moves that could trigger war.Shortly after Biden took office in January, he and Putin agreed to extend until 2026 the New START treaty that limits long-range nuclear weapons. The challenge now is to work out what a potential follow-on pact would include.The Russians insist it include defensive weapons, such as U.S. missile defense systems. The Americans argue that it should include so-called tactical nuclear weapons, which are not covered by New START and of which the Russians have a far larger number deployed. It might also include new and emerging technologies such as hypersonic missiles and space weaponry.___PRISONER EXCHANGEBiden said he raised with Putin the plight of two Americans detained in Russia.Putin had opened the door to possible discussions about a prisoner swap with the U.S. and said those conversations would continue. Biden said he would follow up, too.The U.S. is holding two prisoners whose release Russia has sought for more than a decade, including arms trader Viktor Bout. The other is Konstantin Yaroshenko, a pilot who was extradited from Liberia in 2010 and convicted the next year of conspiracy to smuggle cocaine into the U.S.Biden said Americans Paul Whelan and Trevor Reed are being “wrongfully imprisoned” in Russia.Whelan, who also holds Canadian, Irish and British citizenship, was arrested in Moscow in 2018, convicted of espionage and sentenced to 16 years. Whelan says he was just visiting Moscow.Reed was convicted of assaulting a police officer while intoxicated and sentenced to nine years. Putin, in a recent interview with NBC News, called Reed a “drunk and a troublemaker.”___HUMAN RIGHTSBiden said he’ll continue to air with Putin concerns about basic human rights because it is a core tenet of what the United States stands for.Biden said he couldn’t be president of the United States and not raise human rights issues during the summit with Putin. He mentioned the internationally publicized case of jailed Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny.But Putin said Navalny got what he deserved when he was handed a stiff prison sentence. Navalny is Putin’s most ardent political foe. He was arrested in January after returning to Russia from Germany, where he’d spent five months recovering from nerve agent poisoning that he blames on the Kremlin. Russian officials deny involvement in Nalvany’s poisoning.Navalny received a 30-month prison sentence for violating terms of a suspended sentence from a 2014 embezzlement conviction he dismissed a politically motivated.___SYRIABiden pressed Putin to drop a push to close the last international humanitarian crossing into Syria, making clear the matter was of “significant importance” to the U.S.No deal was reached to keep it open, however.Russia is threatening to use its U.N. Security Council veto to close the aid route for millions of Syrians internally displaced by that country’s war.___AFGHANISTAN and IRANBiden said Putin asked about Afghanistan and expressed a desire that peace and security be maintained there. Biden said he told Putin that a lot of that will depend on him, and that Putin indicated he was prepared to “help” on Afghanistan as well as on Iran.Biden declined to go into further detail. Biden’s administration is mounting new efforts to get Iran to comply with the terms of a nuclear deal it had once agreed to before Biden’s predecessor, Donald Trump, withdrew the U.S. from the agreement the U.S. and other world powers struck with Iran in 2015.Putin also talked about preventing a resurgence of terrorist violence in Afghanistan. Biden said it would be very much in Russia’s interest to not see that happen.___<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/6/1623845475995.png" alt="Russian President Vladimir Putin and President Joe Biden as their summit begins in Geneva-image courtesy CSPAN" />
 <figcaption>Russian President Vladimir Putin and President Joe Biden as their summit begins in Geneva-image courtesy CSPAN</figcaption>
 </figure>GENEVA (AP) — President Joe Biden and Russian President Vladimir Putin concluded their summit on Wednesday with an agreement to return their nations' ambassadors to their posts in Washington and Moscow and a plan to begin work toward replacing the last remaining treaty between the two countries limiting nuclear weapons.But the two leaders offered starkly different views on difficult simmering issues including cyber and ransomware attacks originating from Russia.Putin insisted anew that his country has nothing to do with such attacks, despite U..S. intelligence that indicates otherwise. Biden, meanwhile, said that he made clear to Putin that if Russia crossed certain red lines — including going after major American infrastructure — his administration would respond and “the consequences of that would be devastating,”Will Putin change his behavior? Biden was asked at a post-summit news conference.“I said what will change their behavior is if the rest of the world reacts” in a way that “diminishes their standing in the world," Biden said. "I’m not confident of anything. I’m just stating a fact.”Both leaders, who have stirred escalating tension since Biden took office in January, suggested that while an enormous chasm between the two nations remains the talks were constructive.Putin said there was “no hostility” during three hours of talks, a session that wrapped up more quickly than expected.When it was over, Putin had first crack at describing the results at a solo news conference, with Biden following soon after. Biden said they spent a “great deal of time” discussing cybersecurity and he believed Putin understood the U.S. position.“I pointed out to him, we have significant cyber capability," Biden said. "In fact, (if) they violate basic norms, we will respond. ... I think that the last thing he wants now is a Cold War.”Putin noted that Biden raised human rights issues with him, including the fate of opposition leader Alexei Navalny. Putin defended Navalny’s prison sentence and deflected repeated questions about mistreatment of Russian opposition leaders by highlighting U.S. domestic turmoil, including the Black Lives Matter protests and the Jan. 6 Capitol insurrection.Putin held forth for nearly an hour before international reporters. While showing defiance at queries about Biden pressing him on human rights, he also expressed respect for Biden as an experienced political leader.The Russian noted that Biden repeated wise advice his mother had given him and also spoke about his family — messaging that Putin said might not have been entirely relevant to their summit but demonstrated Biden's “moral values.” Though he raised doubt that the U.S.-Russia relationship could soon return to a measure of equilibrium of years past, Putin suggested that Biden was someone he could work with.“The meeting was actually very efficient,” Putin said. “It was substantive, it was specific. It was aimed at achieving results, and one of them was pushing back the frontiers of trust.”Putin said he and Biden agreed to begin negotiations on nuclear talks to potentially replace the New START treaty limiting nuclear weapons after it expires in 2026.Washington broke off talks with Moscow in 2014 in response to Russia’s annexation of Ukraine’s Crimea and its military intervention in support of separatists in eastern Ukraine. Talks resumed in 2017 but gained little traction and failed to produce an agreement on extending the New START treaty during the Trump administration.The Russian president said there was an agreement between the leaders to return their ambassadors to their respective postings. Both countries had pulled back their top envoys to Washington and Moscow as relations chilled in recent months.Russia’s ambassador to the U.S., Anatoly Antonov, was recalled from Washington about three months ago after Biden called Putin a killer; U.S. Ambassador to Russia John Sullivan left Moscow almost two months ago, after Russia suggested he return to Washington for consultations. Putin said that the ambassadors were expected to return their posts in the coming days.The meeting in a book-lined room had a somewhat awkward beginning — both men appeared to avoid looking directly at each other during a brief and chaotic photo opportunity before a scrum of jostling reporters.Biden nodded when a reporter asked if Putin could be trusted, but the White House quickly sent out a tweet insisting that the president was “very clearly not responding to any one question, but nodding in acknowledgment to the press generally.”Their body language, at least in their brief moments together in front of the press, was not exceptionally warm.The two leaders did shake hands — Biden extended his hand first and smiled at the stoic Russian leader — after Swiss President Guy Parmelin welcomed them to Switzerland for the summit. When they were in front of the cameras a few minutes later—this time inside the grand lakeside mansion where the summit was held—they seemed to avoid eye contact.For months, Biden and Putin have traded sharp rhetoric. Biden has repeatedly called out Putin for malicious cyberattacks by Russian-based hackers on U.S. interests, for the jailing of Russia's foremost opposition leader and for interference in American elections.Putin has reacted with whatabout-isms and denials — pointing to the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol to argue that the U.S. has no business lecturing on democratic norms and insisting that the Russian government hasn't been involved in any election interference or cyberattacks despite U.S. intelligence showing otherwise.In advance of Wednesday's meeting, both sides set out to lower expectations.Even so, Biden said it would be an important step if the United States and Russia were able to ultimately find “stability and predictability" in their relationship, a significant goal for a president who sees Russia as one of America's crucial adversaries.Arrangements for the meeting were carefully choreographed and vigorously negotiated.Biden first floated the meeting in an April phone call in which he informed Putin that he would be expelling several Russian diplomats and imposing sanctions against dozens of people and companies, part of an effort to hold the Kremlin accountable for interference in last year’s presidential election and the hacking of federal agencies.The White House announced ahead of the summit that Biden wouldn't hold a joint news conference with Putin, deciding it did not want to appear to elevate Putin at a moment when the U.S. president is urging European allies to pressure Putin to cut out myriad provocations.Biden sees himself with few peers on foreign policy. He traveled the globe as a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and was given difficult foreign policy assignments by President Barack Obama when Biden was vice president. His portfolio included messy spots like Iraq and Ukraine and weighing the mettle of China's Xi Jinping during his rise to power.He has repeatedly said that he believes executing effective foreign policy comes from forming strong personal relations, and he has managed to find rapport with both the likes of Turkey's Recep Tayyip Erdogan, whom Biden has labeled an “autocrat,” and more conventional Western leaders including Canada's Justin Trudeau.But with Putin, who he once said has “no soul," Biden has long been wary. At the same time, he acknowledges that Putin, who has remained the most powerful figure in Russian politics over the span of five U.S. presidents, is not without talent.“He’s bright. He’s tough," Biden said earlier this week. “And I have found that he is a — as they say ... a worthy adversary."

Biden-Putin summit: What they accomplished

SEDGWICK COUNTY—Law enforcement authorities are investigating a police officer on multiple charges following an arrest.

On Wednesday afternoon,&nbsp; 23-year-0ld Wichita Police Department officer Jonathan Ahumada <a href="https://ssc.sedgwickcounty.org/sheriffinmates/SheriffInmateDetail.aspx?nameId=20071260">was booked</a> into the Sedgwick County Jail on charges of domestic battery, stalking, and criminal restraint, according to police spokesman Officer Charley Davidson.

Law enforcement authorities recently learned of Ahumada possibly involved in domestic violence incidents with a&nbsp; woman known to him.&nbsp; Further investigation into the allegations led to his arrest.&nbsp; The Sedgwick County Sheriff’s Office (SCSO) investigated at the request of WPD in order to avoid conflicts of interest.&nbsp; The SCSO is still actively investigating the case.&nbsp;&nbsp;

Ahumada has been employed with WPD for 10 months and was placed on paid administrative leave Wednesday, pending the outcome of the criminal and internal investigation.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/6/1623885824400.png" alt="Ahumada photo Sedgwick Co. Jail" />
 <figcaption>Ahumada photo Sedgwick Co. Jail</figcaption>
 </figure>SEDGWICK COUNTY—Law enforcement authorities are investigating a police officer on multiple charges following an arrest.On Wednesday afternoon,&nbsp; 23-year-0ld Wichita Police Department officer Jonathan Ahumada <a href="https://ssc.sedgwickcounty.org/sheriffinmates/SheriffInmateDetail.aspx?nameId=20071260">was booked</a> into the Sedgwick County Jail on charges of domestic battery, stalking, and criminal restraint, according to police spokesman Officer Charley Davidson.Law enforcement authorities recently learned of Ahumada possibly involved in domestic violence incidents with a&nbsp; woman known to him.&nbsp; Further investigation into the allegations led to his arrest.&nbsp; The Sedgwick County Sheriff’s Office (SCSO) investigated at the request of WPD in order to avoid conflicts of interest.&nbsp; The SCSO is still actively investigating the case.&nbsp;&nbsp;Ahumada has been employed with WPD for 10 months and was placed on paid administrative leave Wednesday, pending the outcome of the criminal and internal investigation.

Kan. police officer jailed for alleged stalking, domestic battery

BROWN COUNTY—A Kansas man died in an accident just after 7p.m. Tuesday in Brown County.

The Kansas Highway Patrol reported a 2008 Chevy Trailblazer driven by Irvin Jessepe, 73, Horton, was southbound on Falcon Road eight miles west of Horton.

The vehicle left the roadway, struck a fence then an embankment.

Jessepe was pronounced dead at the scene and was transported&nbsp; Dishon-Maple-Chaney Mortuary. He was not wearing a seat belt, according to the KHP.

BROWN COUNTY—A Kansas man died in an accident just after 7p.m. Tuesday in Brown County.The Kansas Highway Patrol reported a 2008 Chevy Trailblazer driven by Irvin Jessepe, 73, Horton, was southbound on Falcon Road eight miles west of Horton.The vehicle left the roadway, struck a fence then an embankment.Jessepe was pronounced dead at the scene and was transported&nbsp; Dishon-Maple-Chaney Mortuary. He was not wearing a seat belt, according to the KHP.

Kansas man dies after SUV strikes fence, embankment

WICHITA, Kan. (AP) — A Kansas teenager who shot and killed his mother in 2018 pleaded no contest Wednesday to lesser charges in her death.

A teen, who was not charged as an adult, was originally&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/d3e237d00ca84e1aacb5638ab2e3b181">charged</a>&nbsp;with second-degree murder in the death of Lisa Trimmell, 41, on June 20, 2018 at a home near Andover. He pleaded no contest Wednesday to aggravated battery and criminal use of a weapon.

Prosecutors said Trimmell was arguing with her young son, who was 12, and made “physical contact” with him. Her older son, who was 14, retrieved a gun and shot her once.

The teenager’s attorney argued he was protecting his brother and himself from his mother, who was drunk at the time of the shooting.

An autopsy found Trimmell had “acute and chronic alcoholism” and scarring of the liver. Her blood-alcohol level was more than double the legal limit for driving.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/6/1623880631080.png" alt="Lisa Trimmell's blood-alcohol level was more than double the legal limit for driving the night of her death, according to autopsy-courtesy photo" />
 <figcaption>Lisa Trimmell's blood-alcohol level was more than double the legal limit for driving the night of her death, according to autopsy-courtesy photo</figcaption>
 </figure>WICHITA, Kan. (AP) — A Kansas teenager who shot and killed his mother in 2018 pleaded no contest Wednesday to lesser charges in her death.A teen, who was not charged as an adult, was originally&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/d3e237d00ca84e1aacb5638ab2e3b181">charged</a>&nbsp;with second-degree murder in the death of Lisa Trimmell, 41, on June 20, 2018 at a home near Andover. He pleaded no contest Wednesday to aggravated battery and criminal use of a weapon.Prosecutors said Trimmell was arguing with her young son, who was 12, and made “physical contact” with him. Her older son, who was 14, retrieved a gun and shot her once.The teenager’s attorney argued he was protecting his brother and himself from his mother, who was drunk at the time of the shooting.An autopsy found Trimmell had “acute and chronic alcoholism” and scarring of the liver. Her blood-alcohol level was more than double the legal limit for driving.

Kan. teen who killed mom pleads to lesser charges

WICHITA, Kan. (AP) — A 48-year-old man who was granted a rare medical release from a Kansas prison has died. Christopher McIntyre was released April 12 from Lansing Correctional Facility because he had terminal cancer. 

The American Civil Liberties Union of Kansas says he died Friday. Relatives in Wichita cared for him after his release from Lansing, where he was serving a sentence for aggravated burglary. 

Kansas prison officials granted his release because of “functional incapacitation,” which applies to people who have medical or mental health conditions so serious they are not considered a threat to the public. The department has granted such releases only two other times in the last five years.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/4/1618330141856.png" alt="McIntyre photo KDOC" />
 <figcaption>McIntyre photo KDOC</figcaption>
 </figure>WICHITA, Kan. (AP) — A 48-year-old man who was granted a rare medical release from a Kansas prison has died. Christopher McIntyre was released April 12 from Lansing Correctional Facility because he had terminal cancer. The American Civil Liberties Union of Kansas says he died Friday. Relatives in Wichita cared for him after his release from Lansing, where he was serving a sentence for aggravated burglary. Kansas prison officials granted his release because of “functional incapacitation,” which applies to people who have medical or mental health conditions so serious they are not considered a threat to the public. The department has granted such releases only two other times in the last five years.

Man given rare medical release from Kan. prison has died

SHAWNEE COUNTY—Officials are working to determine the cause of a Kansas house fire.

The Topeka Fire Department responded to a house fire located at 6219 Southwest Murrow Court, just

Just before 5:00 a.m.. on Wednesday, fire crews responded to a house fire at 6219 Southwest Murrow Court in Topeka, according to spokesman Alan Stahl.

When crews arrived the single-story home was fully evolved in flames. Due to the extensive amount of fire, firefighters began an exterior defensive fire attack. The house next door sustained minor heat damage to its siding. 

&nbsp;Neighbors reported an individual had been staying at the house. Officials found this person and confirmed they were safe.

The estimated dollar loss is $24,910 all of which is associated with structural loss. No working smoke detectors were located within the home, according to Stahl.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/6/1623858216821.png" alt="Wednesday morning fire photo courtesy WIBW TV" />
 <figcaption>Wednesday morning fire photo courtesy WIBW TV</figcaption>
 </figure>SHAWNEE COUNTY—Officials are working to determine the cause of a Kansas house fire.The Topeka Fire Department responded to a house fire located at 6219 Southwest Murrow Court, justJust before 5:00 a.m.. on Wednesday, fire crews responded to a house fire at 6219 Southwest Murrow Court in Topeka, according to spokesman Alan Stahl.When crews arrived the single-story home was fully evolved in flames. Due to the extensive amount of fire, firefighters began an exterior defensive fire attack. The house next door sustained minor heat damage to its siding. &nbsp;Neighbors reported an individual had been staying at the house. Officials found this person and confirmed they were safe.The estimated dollar loss is $24,910 all of which is associated with structural loss. No working smoke detectors were located within the home, according to Stahl.