777mnl
Judge rejects request to sideline SJSU volleyball playerGlen Burnie man accused of burning Donald Trump’s name into road with flamethrower, authorities say
US homelessness up 18% as affordable housing remains out of reach for many peopleFluence Energy, Inc. Reports Record Performance in 2024 and Initiates 2025 Guidance
Britain, Germany, France, Italy and several other European countries said Monday they would freeze all pending asylum requests from Syrians, a day after the ouster of president Bashar al-Assad. While Berlin and other governments said they were watching the fast-moving developments in the war-ravaged nation, Austria signalled it would soon deport refugees back to Syria. Far-right politicians elsewhere made similar demands, including in Germany -- home to Europe's largest Syrian community -- at a time when immigration has become a hot-button issue across the continent. Alice Weidel, of the anti-immigration Alternative for Germany, reacted with disdain to Sunday's mass rallies by jubilant Syrians celebrating Assad's downfall. "Anyone in Germany who celebrates 'free Syria' evidently no longer has any reason to flee," she wrote on X. "They should return to Syria immediately." World leaders and Syrians abroad watched in disbelief at the weekend as Islamist-led rebels swept into Damascus, ending Assad's brutal rule while also sparking new uncertainty. A German foreign ministry spokesman pointed out that "the fact that the Assad regime has been ended is unfortunately no guarantee of peaceful developments" in the future. Germany has taken in almost one million Syrians, with most arriving in 2015-16 under ex-chancellor Angela Merkel. Interior Minister Nancy Faeser said many Syrian refugees "now finally have hope of returning to their Syrian homeland" but cautioned that "the situation in Syria is currently very unclear". The Federal Office for Migration and Refugees had imposed a freeze on decisions for ongoing asylum procedures "until the situation is clearer". She added that "concrete possibilities of return cannot yet be predicted and it would be unprofessional to speculate in such a volatile situation". Rights group Amnesty International slammed Germany's freeze on asylum decisions, stressing that for now "the human rights situation in the country is completely unclear". The head of the UN refugee agency also cautioned that "patience and vigilance" were needed on the issue of refugee returns. In Austria, where about 100,000 Syrians live, conservative Chancellor Karl Nehammer instructed the interior ministry "to suspend all ongoing Syrian asylum applications and to review all asylum grants". Interior Minister Gerhard Karner added he had "instructed the ministry to prepare an orderly repatriation and deportation programme to Syria". "The political situation in Syria has changed fundamentally and, above all, rapidly in recent days," the ministry said, adding it is "currently monitoring and analysing the new situation". The French interior ministry said it too would put asylum requests from Syrians on hold, with authorities in Belgium, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Denmark, Sweden and Norway announcing similar moves. Britain's interior ministry said it was taking the same measure "whilst we assess the current situation". The Italian government said late Monday after a cabinet meeting that it too was suspending asylum request "in line with other European partners." The leader of the far-right Sweden Democrats, a coalition partner in the government, said residence permits for Syrian refugees should now be "reviewed". "Destructive Islamist forces are behind the change of power" in Syria, wrote their leader Jimmie Akesson on X. "I see that groups are happy about this development here in Sweden. You should see it as a good opportunity to go home." In Greece, a government spokesman voiced hope that Assad's fall will eventually allow "the safe return of Syrian refugees" to their country, but without announcing concrete measures. In Germany, the debate gained momentum as the country heads towards February elections. Achim Brotel, president of a grouping of German communes, called for border controls to stop fleeing Assad loyalists reaching Germany. The centre-right opposition CDU suggested that rejected Syrian asylum-seekers should now lose so-called subsidiary protection. "If the reason for protection no longer applies, then refugees will have to return to their home country," CDU legislator Thorsten Frei told Welt TV. CDU MP Jens Spahn suggested that Berlin charter flights to Syria and offer 1,000 euros ($1,057) to "anyone who wants to return". A member of Chancellor Olaf Scholz's Social Democrats criticised the debate as "populist and irresponsible". Greens party deputy Anton Hofreiter also said "it is completely unclear what will happen next in Syria" and deportation talk was "completely out of place". Many Syrians in Germany have watched the events in their home country with great joy but prefer to wait and see before deciding whether to return. "We want to go back to Syria," said Mahmoud Zaml, 25, who works in an Arabic pastry shop in Berlin, adding that he hopes to help "rebuild" his country. "But we have to wait a bit now," he told AFP. "We have to see what happens and if it is really 100 percent safe, then we will go back to Syria." burs-fz/rlp/phz/gv/givSEOUL, South Korea — South Korea’s opposition-controlled National Assembly voted Friday to impeach acting President Han Duck-soo despite vehement protests by governing party lawmakers, further deepening the country’s political crisis set off by President Yoon Suk Yeol’s stunning imposition of martial law and ensuing impeachment. Han’s impeachment means he will be stripped of the powers and duties of the president until the Constitutional Court decides whether to dismiss or reinstate him. The court is already reviewing whether to uphold Yoon’s earlier impeachment. The impeachments of the country’s top two officials worsened its political turmoil, deepened economic uncertainties and hurt its international image. The single-chamber National Assembly passed Han’s impeachment motion with a 192-0 vote. Lawmakers with the governing People Power Party boycotted the vote and surrounded the podium where assembly Speaker Woo Won Shik was seated, shouting that the vote was invalid and demanding Woo’s resignation. No violence or injuries were reported. The PPP lawmakers protested after Woo called for a vote on Han’s impeachment motion after announcing its passage required a simple majority in the 300-member assembly, not a two-thirds majority as claimed by the PPP. In a statement, Han said his impeachment was regrettable but added that he respects the assembly’s decision and will suspend his duties to “not add to additional confusion and uncertainty.” He said he will wait for “a swift, wise decision” by the Constitutional Court. The deputy prime minister and finance minister, Choi Sang-mok, took over. Later Friday, Choi’s office said he instructed the military to boost its readiness to help prevent North Korea from miscalculating the situation and launching provocations. He also told the foreign ministry to inform the United States, Japan and other major partners that South Korea’s foreign policies remain unchanged. Han, who was appointed prime minister by Yoon, became acting president after the National Assembly impeached Yoon, a conservative, about two weeks ago over his short-lived Dec. 3 imposition of martial law. Get local news delivered to your inbox!
Craigwood Youth Services to cease operations after more than 70 yearsKANSAS CITY, Mo. — A Missouri judge on Monday upheld the state’s ban on gender-affirming care for minors, allowing the state to continue prohibiting treatments such as hormone therapy and puberty blockers for people under 18. Circuit Court Judge Robert Craig Carter from southern Douglas County wrote in a 74-page order on Monday that the ban was constitutional. The ruling rejects a lawsuit brought on behalf of families of trans youth, medical providers and national LGBTQ advocacy organizations. In addition to ruling that the ban was constitutional, Carter went a step further, finding that there was “an almost total lack of consensus as to the medical ethics” of treating adolescent gender dysphoria, which is typically defined as the feeling of distress when a person’s gender identity does not match their sex assigned at birth. “The evidence at trial showed severe disagreement as to whether adolescent gender dysphoria drug and surgical treatment was ethical at all, and if so, what amount of treatment was ethically allowable,” Carter wrote in the order. Carter’s ruling comes after a nine-day trial that concluded in Jefferson City last month. The trial and lawsuit centered on a law that the Republican-controlled General Assembly passed and Gov. Mike Parson signed into law in 2023. The law, which took effect in August 2023, bans gender transition surgeries on minors and imposes a three-year moratorium on hormone therapy and puberty blockers unless the patients were already receiving the medications. The legislation also affects adults, prohibiting Missouri Medicaid dollars from covering gender-affirming care and bans prisons and jails from providing gender-affirming surgeries. The ban was part of a nationwide push to regulate the lives of transgender people and has sparked fear in Missouri’s transgender community, prompting some to leave the state. The Kansas City-area was at the center of the fight , with transgender residents straddling two states that sought to restrict their rights. The ACLU of Missouri and the national LGBTQ civil rights law firm Lambda Legal, representing the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, sharply criticized the ruling in a joint statement. The two groups said they planned to appeal. “The court’s findings signal a troubling acceptance of discrimination, ignore an extensive trial record and the voices of transgender Missourians and those who care for them, and deny transgender adolescents and Medicaid beneficiaries from their right to access to evidence-based, effective, and often life-saving medical care,” the groups said in the statement. The lawsuit alleged the ban violated the Missouri Constitution by discriminating against trans patients on the basis of sex and their trans status, and deprives parents of a fundamental right to seek medical care for their children. The law also forces medical providers to choose between abandoning their patients or keeping their medical licenses, according to the suit. Carter disagreed, upholding the law on all counts, according to his order. Republican Attorney General Andrew Bailey’s office defended the law in court. The ban came after Bailey had previously attempted to severely restrict gender-affirming care by issuing a regulation, leading even some Republicans to question its legality. He eventually abandoned that effort after lawmakers approved the ban. Bailey and other Republicans have regularly framed restrictions on gender-affirming care as necessary to protect children, an argument Bailey reiterated after Monday’s ruling. “Mutilation is not healthcare,” Bailey wrote on social media on Monday. “We will never stop fighting to protect your children.” Bailey’s office put out a release later in the day, saying he was proud of the work his office put in to “shine a light on the lack of evidence supporting these irreversible procedures.” “We will never stop fighting to ensure Missouri is the safest state in the nation for children,” Bailey said. Impact on Kansas City Bailey had pushed for restrictions on gender-affirming care after a former employee at Washington University in St. Louis’ transgender center at St. Louis Children’s Hospital alleged the center was harming patients. The university’s internal report found the allegations to be unfounded. Despite Bailey’s argument, the ACLU of Missouri and Lambda Legal said Monday that Missouri had “prioritized politics over the well-being of its people.” “This ruling sends a chilling message that, for some, compassion and equal access to health care are still out of reach,” the groups said. The law firm Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner also represented the plaintiffs in the suit. After the ruling came down, Celeste Michael, a 23-year-old transgender woman from Kansas City, said that she felt for transgender kids. Trans people, she said, are facing “even more vitriol and more hatred.” “I think it’s a really scary time to be a trans person,” Michael said. “If they’re going to go for kids, which are our most vulnerable subset of trans people, they’re going for incarcerated people, which are also some of our most vulnerable trans people, who’s to say they’re not going to go for me next?” ©2024 The Kansas City Star. Visit kansascity.com . Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.Since Donald Trump , his campaign has labeled his victory a “landslide” and even marketed merchandise like the “Official Trump Victory Glass.” However, his win was not a landslide by any means. According to a new report by the , Trump defeated Vice President Kamala Harris with one of the smallest margins of victory in the popular vote since the 19th century. The outlet’s showed Mr. Trump won the popular vote with 49.997 percent as of Thursday (Nov. 21). A different count shows him winning by 49.9 percent. His margin over Vice President Kamala Harris was around 1.6 percentage points—the third smallest since 1888. Trump and his team are pushing the notion of a “resounding margin” (as stated by one of his aides) to make is seem that the president-elect is more popular than he actually is. This perception is also a tool to make Trump seem like a more indelible figure when it comes to pushing through a radical agenda, which includes dismantling the Department of Education and deporting illegal immigrants at alarming rates. His Cabinet, which is comprised of unqualified loyalists, was also pushed through at lightning speed. However, when Trump nominated Matt Gaetz—a former Republican congressman from Floridacwho has been accused of sex trafficking—he faced immediate backlash. Gaetz was ultimately replaced by one of Trump’s lawyers, Pam Bondi. However, in a statement Trump’s communications director Steven Cheung remains steadfast that Trump beat Harris by a landslide. “President Trump won in dominating and historic fashion after the Democrats and the fake news media peddled outright lies and disinformation throughout the campaign,” . Trump garnered the popular vote for the first time after three consecutive attempts and became the first Republican to win it in two decades.
Luke Humphries bid for back-to-back World Championship titles on track after winWASHINGTON (AP) — President-elect Donald Trump has promised to as soon as he gets into office to make good on campaign promises aiming and redefining what it means to be American. But any efforts to halt the policy would face steep legal hurdles. Birthright citizenship means anyone born in the United States automatically becomes an American citizen. It’s been in place for decades and applies to children born to someone in the country illegally or in the U.S. on a tourist or student visa who plans to return to their home country. It’s not the practice of every country, and Trump and his supporters have argued that the system is being abused and that there should be tougher standards for becoming an American citizen. But others say this is a right enshrined in the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, it would be extremely difficult to overturn and even if it’s possible, it’s a bad idea. Here’s a look at birthright citizenship, what Trump has said about it and the prospects for ending it: What Trump has said about birthright citizenship During an interview Sunday on Trump said he “absolutely” planned to halt birthright citizenship once in office. “We’re going to end that because it’s ridiculous,” he said. Trump and other opponents of birthright citizenship have argued that it creates an incentive for people to come to the U.S. illegally or take part in pregnant women enter the U.S. specifically to give birth so their children can have citizenship before returning to their home countries. “Simply crossing the border and having a child should not entitle anyone to citizenship,” said Eric Ruark, director of research for NumbersUSA, which argues for reducing immigration. The organization supports changes that would require at least one parent to be a permanent legal resident or a U.S. citizen for their children to automatically get citizenship. Others have argued that ending birthright citizenship would profoundly damage the country. “One of our big benefits is that people born here are citizens, are not an illegal underclass. There’s better assimilation and integration of immigrants and their children because of birthright citizenship,” said Alex Nowrasteh, vice president for economic and social policy studies at the pro-immigration Cato Institute. In 2019, the Migration Policy Institute estimated that 5.5 million children under age 18 lived with at least one parent in the country illegally in 2019, representing 7% of the U.S. child population. The vast majority of those children were U.S. citizens. The nonpartisan think tank said during Trump’s campaign for president in 2015 that the number of people in the country illegally would “balloon” if birthright citizenship were repealed, creating “a self-perpetuating class that would be excluded from social membership for generations.” What does the law say? In the aftermath of the Civil War, Congress ratified the 14th Amendment in July 1868. That amendment assured citizenship for all, including Black people. “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside,” the 14th Amendment says. “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.” But the 14th Amendment didn’t always translate to everyone being afforded birthright citizenship. For example, it wasn’t until 1924 that Congress finally granted citizenship to all Native Americans born in the U.S. A key case in the history of birthright citizenship came in 1898, when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Wong Kim Ark, born in San Francisco to Chinese immigrants, was a U.S. citizen because he was born in the states. The federal government had tried to deny him reentry into the county after a trip abroad on grounds he wasn’t a citizen under the Chinese Exclusion Act. But some have argued that the 1898 case clearly applied to children born of parents who are both legal immigrants to America but that it’s less clear whether it applies to children born to parents without legal status or, for example, who come for a short-term like a tourist visa. “That is the leading case on this. In fact, it’s the only case on this,” said Andrew Arthur, a fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies, which supports immigration restrictions. “It’s a lot more of an open legal question than most people think.” Some proponents of immigration restrictions have argued the words “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” in the 14th Amendment allows the U.S. to deny citizenship to babies born to those in the country illegally. Trump himself used that language in his 2023 announcement that he would aim to end birthright citizenship if reelected. So what could Trump do and would it be successful? Trump wasn’t clear in his Sunday interview how he aims to end birthright citizenship. Asked how he could get around the 14th Amendment with an executive action, Trump said: “Well, we’re going to have to get it changed. We’ll maybe have to go back to the people. But we have to end it.” Pressed further on whether he’d use an executive order, Trump said “if we can, through executive action.” He gave a lot more details in a . In it, he said he would issue an executive order the first day of his presidency, making it clear that federal agencies “require that at least one parent be a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident for their future children to become automatic U.S. citizens.” Trump wrote that the executive order would make clear that children of people in the U.S. illegally “should not be issued passports, Social Security numbers, or be eligible for certain taxpayer funded welfare benefits.” This would almost certainly end up in litigation. Nowrasteh from the Cato Institute said the law is clear that birthright citizenship can’t be ended by executive order but that Trump may be inclined to take a shot anyway through the courts. “I don’t take his statements very seriously. He has been saying things like this for almost a decade,” Nowrasteh said. “He didn’t do anything to further this agenda when he was president before. The law and judges are near uniformly opposed to his legal theory that the children of illegal immigrants born in the United States are not citizens.” Trump could steer Congress to pass a law to end birthright citizenship but would still face a legal challenge that it violates the Constitution. __ Associated Press reporter Elliot Spagat in San Diego contributed to this report. Rebecca Santana, The Associated PressSaco Community Connector Joe Moreshead with Age Friendly Saco helped launch the new Community Connections pilot program. Contributed / Age Friendly Saco Age-Friendly Saco is celebrating the launch of a new Community Connections project, a local initiative aimed at strengthening community and promoting well-being for older people. The project’s primary goal is to build robust connections between local services and older adults, allowing them easier access to essential resources and social opportunities. However, one ambitious goal is to promote the Home Assessment Program in an effort to help reduce slips and falls. Saco EMS responds to over 5,000 calls per year and more than half are for slips and falls. Saco Community Connector Joe Moreshead began the project in September, and is already working closely with residents and community partners, helping bridge gaps in access to programs and services and creating avenues for participation. So many residents are eligible for a number of services that they are not even aware of. For example, the new Medicare Savings Program has eliminated the $10,000 asset limit opening up the program to a large number of people already on Medicare. Key local partners, including Southern Maine Agency on Aging, Saco Parks and Recreation, Saco Food Pantry, Saco Fire Department/EMS and the Saco Police Department, have joined forces in support of this effort. These partners are providing essential resources and expertise to strengthen the project’s reach, ensuring that vital support and programs are accessible to all who need them. By focusing on service navigation, social engagement, and community-building, the pilot is bringing a renewed focus to supporting older residents. The Community Connections program, a signature statewide initiative of the Governor’s Cabinet on Aging, is made possible by a $2.5 million investment from the American Rescue Plan Act, and is managed in collaboration with the University of Maine Center on Aging and Maine’s five Area Agencies on Aging. “Maine has long been a national leader in promoting healthy, active, and engaged aging,” said Elizabeth Gattine, Cabinet on Aging coordinator.. “Partnering together at the community level strengthens our critical work to create inclusive and livable communities where Mainers of all ages can thrive and recognizes the value of these community efforts in accomplishing that goal. Twelve pilot sites are engaged with the Community Connections program across the state, each with goals specific to the unique needs of their community. The statewide goals of the program are to create pathways for assistance, strengthen ties between Age-Friendly Communities and local Area Agencies on Aging, and enhance access to training and technology supports for Age-Friendly initiatives. For residents of Saco, the pilot offers new opportunities to engage, seek assistance, and participate in local programs tailored to their needs. Through Age Friendly Saco’s website residents can sign up for medical rides and appointments, commodity food boxes delivered to your home, information and sign up for the new Medicare Savings Program, the new Home Assessment Program, newsletter and more. Community members interested in learning more about Community Connections, or looking to get involved, are encouraged to reach out to Community Connector Joe Moreshead at Connector.agefriendlysaco@gmail.com or at 207.710.4384 To learn about events, services, or volunteer opportunities, visit agefriendlysaco.org, or call 207-710-5029. Comments are not available on this story. Send questions/comments to the editors. « PreviousAfter Trump’s win, Black women are rethinking their role as America’s reliable political organizers
What is one thing — just one — you can agree on with someone on the opposite side of the political divide? The late Gen. Colin Powell once told me, “Figure that out and you can get a lot done. And as you win one victory together, you might just discover along the way that there’s something else you agree on.” Our nation seems utterly divided. Many of the wounds that have been torn open in these last few election cycles are real and painful. But too much focus has been placed on further tearing open those wounds rather than healing them. One way we can heal them is simply by rolling up our sleeves and getting to work on the things we can agree on. One thing Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. taught his lieutenants, several of whom trained me when I was a young organizer, is that if you are comfortable in your coalition, your coalition is too small. We need unlikely allies and uncomfortably large coalitions. Coalitions of what can seem like strange bedfellows get things done. When I served as national president of the NAACP, we brought together prison guard unions, conservative governors and Democratic legislators to dramatically shrink prison systems and allow people who served their sentences to regain their right to vote. Bipartisanship itself can be a powerful tool and vehicle for progress. Here are a few examples, just from recent or ongoing environmental fights for legislation at the federal, state and local levels. ‘One of the most important conservation bills in a generation’ We know that Donald Trump and his allies in Congress are close friends of the fossil fuel and other extractive industries. As such, one might assume Republican support for conservation efforts would be hard, if not impossible, to find. But one of the green movement’s great victories at the federal level during the first Trump administration was passage of the bipartisan Great American Outdoors Act. The bill provided permanent funding for important conservation and public recreation projects across the country and addressed a multi-billion-dollar maintenance backlog in national parks and other public lands. At the time, then-executive director of the Sierra Club, Michael Brune, called it “one of the most important conservation bills in a generation.” It passed in a closely divided U.S. Senate with overwhelming bipartisan support, by a vote of 73-25. We now hope to replicate that success with passage of the bipartisan EXPLORE Act during the current lame-duck session or in the next Congress. That bill is a wide-ranging package of popular policies including the Outdoors for All Act and expansion of the Every Kid Outdoors program to make national parks and public lands accessible to more of America’s youth. One of my favorite current examples of a powerful multi-partisan, common ground-finding coalition at the state level is in the fight to stop a dangerous carbon capture pipeline in Iowa. A bill supported by that coalition to slow approval of land seizures for the project passed the Republican-majority Iowa House in March by a whopping 86-7 vote . That bill was unfortunately killed in the state Senate, by just a handful of powerful senators, before it could receive a floor vote. But coalition organizers are still fighting, and they believe the bill — or one similar to it — has the support to pass once they can get it to the Senate floor. At the local level, I heard a story just this month that illustrates how, even when things seem bleak, there are still plenty of opportunities for progress. A Sierra Club volunteer leader receiving a lifetime achievement award for her work spoke to a crowd that was no doubt devastated by the results of the recent election. She told them she had, just the day prior, attended a board of supervisors meeting in her community where she and other community members convinced the body — composed entirely of Republicans except for one Democrat — to ban gasoline-powered leaf blowers. It was a reminder of how often straightforward local community organizing transcends politics. This is just a small sampling of countless examples across the country of Americans who are not letting partisanship stand in their way as they work to make things better for their families and communities. The common ground is there if we bother to look for it. And look we must if we care about getting things done. We do not have to agree on much for us to thrive together, in our families and communities, and as a country. For those of us fighting to get something done, we must remember: coalitions that include a variety of viewpoints are coalitions that ultimately win. Gen. Powell’s words still ring true. Ben Jealous is the executive director of the Sierra Club and a professor at the University of Pennsylvania. Send letters to letters@suntimes.com Get Opinions content delivered to your inbox. Sign up for our weekly newsletter here .Canadian foreign, finance ministers meet Trump's team on tariffs
The suspect in the high-profile killing of a health insurance CEO that has gripped the United States graduated from an Ivy League university, reportedly hails from a wealthy family, and wrote social media posts brimming with cerebral musings. Luigi Mangione, 26, was thrust into the spotlight Monday after police revealed his identity as their person of interest, crediting his arrest to a tip from a McDonald's worker. He has been connected by police to the fatal shooting of United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson last week in broad daylight, in a case that has laid bare deep frustrations and anger with the nation's privatized medical system. News of his capture triggered an explosion of online activity, with Mangione quickly amassing new followers on social media as citizen sleuths and US media try to understand who he is. While some lauded him as a hero and lamented his arrest, others analyzed his intellectual takes in search of ideological clues. A photo on one of his social media accounts includes an X-ray of an apparently injured spine, though no explicit political affiliation has emerged. Meanwhile, memes and jokes proliferated, many riffing on his first name and comparing him to the "Mario Bros." character Luigi, sometimes depicted in AI-altered images wielding a gun or holding a Big Mac. "Godspeed. Please know that we all hear you," wrote one user on Facebook. "I want to donate to your defense fund," added another. According to Mangione's LinkedIn profile, he is employed as a data engineer at TrueCar, a California-based online auto marketplace. A company spokesperson told AFP Mangione "has not been an employee of our company since 2023." Although he had been living in Hawaii ahead of the killing, he originally hails from Towson, Maryland, near Baltimore. He comes from a prominent and wealthy Italian-American family, according to the Baltimore Banner. The family owns local businesses, including the Hayfields Country Club, per the club's website. A standout student, Mangione graduated at the top of his high school class in 2016. In an interview with his local paper at the time, he praised his teachers for fostering a passion for learning beyond grades and encouraging intellectual curiosity. He went on to attend the prestigious University of Pennsylvania, where he completed both a bachelor's and master's degree in computer science by 2020, according to a university spokesperson. While at Penn, Mangione co-led a group of 60 undergraduates who collaborated on video game projects, as noted in a now-deleted university webpage, archived on the Wayback Machine. On Instagram, where his following has skyrocketed from hundreds to tens of thousands, Mangione shared snapshots of his travels in Mexico, Puerto Rico and Hawaii. He also posted shirtless photos flaunting a six-pack and appeared in celebratory posts with fellow members of the Phi Kappa Psi fraternity. However, it is on X (formerly Twitter) that users have scoured Mangione's posts for potential motives. His header photo -- an X-ray of a spine with bolts -- remains cryptic, with no public explanation. Finding a coherent political ideology has also proved elusive. Mangione has linked approvingly to posts criticizing secularism as a harmful consequence of Christianity's decline. In April, he wrote, "Horror vacui (nature abhors a vacuum)." The following month, he posted an essay he wrote in high school titled "How Christianity Prospered by Appealing to the Lower Classes of Ancient Rome." In another post from April, he speculated that Japan's low birthrate stems from societal disconnection, adding that "fleshlights" and other vaginal-replica sex toys should be banned. ia/nro
Christchurch woman Rachel Wagner shot dead by teen daughter in US, family trying to bring body home