Breaking
Wealth World News
Archive

2024

Browsing
Sports

NFL draft order: Every pick for every round of this year’s draft

Draft day has arrived!

The 2024 NFL draft takes off Thursday from Detroit with the first 32 picks taking place in the first round. On Friday, Rounds 2 and 3 will follow, and then Rounds 4-7 will conclude the draft Saturday.

The Chicago Bears have this year’s No. 1 pick, but they actually have the fewest selections in this year’s draft with four. There are three teams – Arizona Cardinals, Green Bay Packers and Los Angeles Rams – that boast a league-high 11 picks for the three-day event.

Here is the complete round-by-round order for the 2024 NFL draft., which includes the picks exchanged in Monday’s Zach Wilson trade between the New York Jets and Denver Broncos.

NFL DRAFT HUB: Latest NFL Draft mock drafts, news, live picks, grades and analysis.

Round 1

1. Chicago Bears (from Carolina Panthers)

2. Washington Commanders

3. New England Patriots

4. Arizona Cardinals

5. Los Angeles Chargers

6. New York Giants

7. Tennessee Titans

8. Atlanta Falcons

9. Chicago Bears

10. New York Jets

11. Minnesota Vikings

12. Denver Broncos

13. Las Vegas Raiders

14. New Orleans Saints

15. Indianapolis Colts

16. Seattle Seahawks

17. Jacksonville Jaguars

18. Cincinnati Bengals

19. Los Angeles Rams

20. Pittsburgh Steelers

21. Miami Dolphins

22. Philadelphia Eagles

23. Minnesota Vikings (from Cleveland Browns through Houston Texans)

24. Dallas Cowboys

25. Green Bay Packers

26. Tampa Bay Buccaneers

27. Arizona Cardinals (from Houston Texans)

28. Buffalo Bills

29. Detroit Lions

30. Baltimore Ravens

31. San Francisco 49ers

32. Kansas City Chiefs

Round 2

33. Carolina Panthers

34. New England Patriots

35. Arizona Cardinals

36. Washington Commanders

37. Los Angeles Chargers

38. Tennessee Titans

39. Carolina Panthers (from New York Giants)

40. Washington Commanders (from Chicago Bears)

41. Green Bay Packers (from New York Jets)

42. Houston Texans (from Minnesota Vikings)

43. Atlanta Falcons

44. Las Vegas Raiders

45. New Orleans Saints (from Denver Broncos)

46. Indianapolis Colts

47. New York Giants (from Seattle Seahawks)

48. Jacksonville Jaguars

49. Cincinnati Bengals

50. Philadelphia Eagles (from New Orleans Saints)

51. Pittsburgh Steelers

52. Los Angeles Rams

53. Philadelphia Eagles

54. Cleveland Browns

55. Miami Dolphins

56. Dallas Cowboys

57. Tampa Bay Buccaneers

58. Green Bay Packers

59. Houston Texans

60. Buffalo Bills

61. Detroit Lions

62. Baltimore Ravens

63. San Francisco 49ers

64. Kansas City Chiefs

Round 3

65. Carolina Panthers

66. Arizona Cardinals

67. Washington Commanders

68. New England Patriots

69. Los Angeles Chargers

70. New York Giants

71. Arizona Cardinals (from Tennessee Titans)

72. New York Jets

73. Detroit Lions (from Minnesota Vikings)

74. Atlanta Falcons

75. Chicago Bears

76. Denver Broncos

77. Las Vegas Raiders

78. Washington Commanders (from Seattle Seahawks)

79. Atlanta Falcons (from Jacksonville Jaguars)

80. Cincinnati Bengals

81. Seattle Seahawks (from New Orleans Saints through Denver Broncos)

82. Indianapolis Colts

83. Los Angeles Rams

84. Pittsburgh Steelers

85. Cleveland Browns

86. Houston Texans (from Philadelphia Eagles)

87. Dallas Cowboys

88. Green Bay Packers

89. Tampa Bay Buccaneers

90. Arizona Cardinals (from Houston Texans)

91. Green Bay Packers (from Buffalo Bills)

92. Tampa Bay Buccaneers (from Detroit Lions)

93. Baltimore Ravens

94. San Francisco 49ers

95. Kansas City Chiefs

96. Jacksonville Jaguars (compensatory selection)

97. Cincinnati Bengals (compensatory selection)

98. Pittsburgh Steelers (from Philadelphia Eagles; special compensatory selection)

99. Los Angeles Rams (special compensatory selection)

100. Washington Commanders (from San Francisco 49ers; special compensatory selection)

Round 4

101. Carolina Panthers

102. Seattle Seahawks (from Washington Commanders)

103. New England Patriots

104. Arizona Cardinals

105. Los Angeles Chargers

106. Tennessee Titans

107. New York Giants

108. Minnesota Vikings

109. Atlanta Falcons

110. Los Angeles Chargers (from Chicago Bears)

111. New York Jets

112. Las Vegas Raiders

113. Baltimore Ravens (from Denver Broncos through New York Jets)

114. Jacksonville Jaguars

115. Cincinnati Bengals

116. Jacksonville Jaguars (from New Orleans Saints)

117. Indianapolis Colts

118. Seattle Seahawks

119. Pittsburgh Steelers

120. Philadelphia Eagles (from Los Angeles Rams through Pittsburgh Steelers)

121. Denver Broncos (from Miami Dolphins)

122. Chicago Bears (from Philadelphia Eagles)

123. Houston Texans (from Cleveland Browns)

124. San Francisco 49ers (from Dallas Cowboys)

125. Tampa Bay Buccaneers

126. Green Bay Packers

127. Houston Texans

128. Buffalo Bills

129. Minnesota Vikings (from Detroit Lions)

130. Baltimore Ravens

131. Kansas City Chiefs

132. San Francisco 49ers (compensatory selection)

133. Buffalo Bills (compensatory selection)

134. New York Jets (from Baltimore Ravens; compensatory selection)

135. San Francisco 49ers

Round 5

136. Denver Broncos (from Carolina Panthers through Cleveland Browns)

137. New England Patriots

138. Arizona Cardinals

139. Washington Commanders

140. Los Angeles Chargers

141. Carolina Panthers (from New York Giants)

142. Carolina Panthers (from Tennessee Titans)

143. Atlanta Falcons

144. Buffalo Bills (from Chicago Bears)

145. Denver Broncos (from New York Jets)

146. Tennessee Titans (from Minnesota Vikings through Philadelphia Eagles)

147. Denver Broncos

148. Las Vegas Raiders

149. Cincinnati Bengals

150. New Orleans Saints

151. Indianapolis Colts

152. Washington Commanders (from Seattle Seahawks)

153. Jacksonville Jaguars

154. Los Angeles Rams

155. Los Angeles Rams (from Pittsburgh Steelers)

156. Cleveland Browns (from Philadelphia Eagles through Arizona Cardinals)

157. Minnesota Vikings (from Cleveland Browns)

158. Miami Dolphins

159. Kansas City Chiefs (from Dallas Cowboys)

160. Buffalo Bills (from Green Bay Packers)

161. Philadelphia Eagles (from Tampa Bay Buccaneers)

162. Arizona Cardinals (from Houston Texans)

163. Buffalo Bills

164. Detroit Lions

165. Baltimore Ravens

166. New York Giants (from San Francisco 49ers through Carolina Panthers)

167. Minnesota Vikings (from Kansas City Chiefs)

168. New Orleans Saints (compensatory selection)

169. Green Bay Packers (compensatory selection)

170. New Orleans Saints (compensatory selection)

171. Philadelphia Eagles (compensatory selection)

172. Philadelphia Eagles (compensatory selection)

173. Kansas City Chiefs (compensatory selection)

174. Dallas Cowboys (compensatory selection)

175. New Orleans Saints (compensatory selection)

176. San Francisco 49ers (compensatory selection)

Round 6

177. Minnesota Vikings (from Carolina Panthers through Jacksonville Jaguars)

178. Pittsburgh Steelers (from Arizona Cardinals through Carolina Panthers)

179. Seattle Seahawks (from Washington Commanders)

180. New England Patriots

181. Los Angeles Chargers

182. Tennessee Titans (reacquired through Philadelphia Eagles)

183. New York Giants

184. Miami Dolphins (from Chicago Bears)

185. New York Jets

186. Arizona Cardinals (from Minnesota Vikings)

187. Atlanta Falcons

188. Houston Texans (from Las Vegas Raiders through New England Patriots and Minnesota Vikings)

189. Houston Texans (from Denver Broncos through Los Angeles Rams and Buffalo Bills)

190. New Orleans Saints

191. Indianapolis Colts

192. Seattle Seahawks

193. New England Patriots (from Jacksonville Jaguars)

194. Cincinnati Bengals

195. Pittsburgh Steelers

196. Los Angeles Rams

197. Atlanta Falcons (from Cleveland Browns)

198. Miami Dolphins

199. New Orleans Saints (from Philadelphia Eagles)

200. Buffalo Bills (from Dallas Cowboys through Houston Texans)

201. Detroit Lions (from Tampa Bay Buccaneers)

202. Green Bay Packers

203. New York Jets (from Houston Texans through Cleveland Browns and Denver Broncos)

204. Buffalo Bills

205. Detroit Lions

206. Cleveland Browns (from Baltimore Ravens)

207. Denver Broncos (from San Francisco 49ers)

208. Las Vegas Raiders (from Kansas City Chiefs)

209. Los Angeles Rams (compensatory selection)

210. Philadelphia Eagles (compensatory selection)

211. San Francisco 49ers (compensatory selection)

212. Jacksonville Jaguars (compensatory selection)

213. Los Angeles Rams (compensatory selection)

214. Cincinnati Bengals (compensatory selection)

215. San Francisco 49ers (compensatory selection)

216. Dallas Cowboys (compensatory selection)

217. Los Angeles Rams (compensatory selection)

218. Baltimore Ravens (from New York Jets; compensatory selection)

219. Green Bay Packers (compensatory selection)

220. Tampa Bay Buccaneers (compensatory selection)

Round 7

221. Kansas City Chiefs (from Carolina Panthers through Tennessee Titans)

222. Washington Commanders

223. Las Vegas Raiders (from New England Patriots)

224. Cincinnati Bengals (from Arizona Cardinals through Houston Texans)

225. Los Angeles Chargers

226. Arizona Cardinals (from New York Giants)

227. Cleveland Browns (from Tennessee Titans)

228. Baltimore Ravens (from New York Jets)

229. Las Vegas Raiders (from Minnesota Vikings)

230. Minnesota Vikings (from Atlanta Falcons through Cleveland Browns and Arizona Cardinals)

231. New England Patriots (from Chicago Bears)

232. Minnesota Vikings (from Denver Broncos through San Francisco 49ers and Houston Texans)

233. Dallas Cowboys (from Las Vegas Raiders)

234. Indianapolis Colts

235. Seattle Seahawks

236. Jacksonville Jaguars

237. Cincinnati Bengals

238. Houston Texans (from New Orleans Saints)

239. New Orleans Saints (from Los Angeles Rams through Denver Broncos)

240. Carolina Panthers (from Pittsburgh Steelers)

241. Miami Dolphins

242. Tennessee Titans (from Philadelphia Eagles)

243. Cleveland Browns

244. Dallas Cowboys

245. Green Bay Packers

246. Tampa Bay Buccaneers

247. Houston Texans

248. Buffalo Bills

249. Detroit Lions

250. Baltimore Ravens

251. San Francisco 49ers

252. Tennessee Titans (from Kansas City Chiefs)

253. Los Angeles Chargers (compensatory selection)

254. Los Angeles Rams (compensatory selection)

255. Green Bay Packers (compensatory selection)

256. Denver Broncos (from New York Jets; compensatory selection)

257. New York Jets (compensatory selection)

This post appeared first on USA TODAY
Keep Reading
By
Sports

Which NFL teams look most likely to trade up or down in first round?

Trades are going to occur Thursday night, when the 2024 NFL draft kicks off in downtown Detroit with what should be a highly entertaining first round. In fact, some have already happened.

Last month, the Minnesota Vikings picked up an extra selection in Round 1 by dealing with the Houston Texans – a transaction many draft observers believe could be a precursor to another move by the Vikes. For now, thanks to previously executed swaps, they’re one of three teams – along with the Chicago Bears and Arizona Cardinals – set to pick twice Thursday. (The Texans, Carolina Panthers and Cleveland Browns do not presently have first-round slots, though that’s subject to change.)

And NFL general managers typically want you to know their phone lines are always open.

‘The easy answer is, yeah, you always want more picks. But we need players. It’s more opportunity-based,’ said Monti Ossenfort, who masterfully manipulated the first round’s top 10 on the fly last year, his first as general manager of the Cardinals.

‘The way I look at it is … I love my house. I love where I live. My wife loves where we live. If all of a sudden I’m at my door, and someone is going to offer me something, I’m going to look and see what they are offering me. If I open that up and it’s something I’m not expecting? ‘Hey, Shannon, pack up, it’s time to roll.’ That happens beforehand, it happens on the clock, but I think different teams have different motivations and we’ll see how that plays out.’

NFL DRAFT HUB: Latest NFL Draft mock drafts, news, live picks, grades and analysis.

Unlike Ossenfort, first-year New England Patriots director of scouting Eliot Wolf – he has the third overall pick, one spot ahead of Arizona – does not have a franchise quarterback. Yet that doesn’t necessarily mean Wolf will stick and pick to get one.

‘We’re open to anything,’ he said. ‘Moving up, moving down. We’re open for business in the first round and in every round. We have some holes we feel like we need to fill in the draft. We’re drafting to develop the team. The more picks we have the better.’

Naturally, any team trying to accrue picks with a drop down the board requires a collaborator elsewhere who’s willing to come up – typically a club that needs a quarterback or is targeting a very specific player.

‘I think just because something’s risky, doesn’t mean you have to stay away from it,’ said Vikings GM Kwesi Adofo-Mensah about the potential move up many anticipate he’ll eventually make.

‘It’s something that is hard to grasp but if you grasp it, you know what the rewards are, right? And that’s something you have to weigh and measure.’

Gonna be lots of weighing, measuring, haggling, fretting and agonizing in draft rooms Thursday night (and beyond) – and, make no mistake, all 32 teams will be lining up and/or considering potential options. Or, as Ossenfort said, ‘We’ll have our popcorn ready for what goes on in front of us.’

But who’s most likely to pull the trigger on a draft night deal in the first round? Here are eight clubs that are logical candidates to trade up, and eight that could be especially willing to drop back:

TRADE UP CANDIDATES

Minnesota Vikings

The departure of QB Kirk Cousins to Atlanta and subsequent trade with Houston has seemingly telegraphed an eventual move by the Vikes to target another potential franchise passer in this draft. Presuming that’s true, doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to initiate another swap until Thursday, when Adofo-Mensah can clearly survey the lay of the land and his options.

Washington Commanders

No, there’s not an expectation they’ll climb from the No. 2 overall spot to No. 1 – nor much expectation they’ll move out of the second spot (sorry, Raiders). But aside from the first-rounder, new Commanders GM Adam Peters has five more picks in the top 100 this year, including the 36th, 40th, and 67th. Could be a golden opportunity for Peters to re-enter the first round and potentially get a top offensive lineman to protect the quarterback he’s doubtless taking second overall.

Las Vegas Raiders

It’s no secret new HC Antonio Pierce would love to reunite with LSU QB Jayden Daniels, who played for him when both were at Arizona State. But getting from No. 13 into the top five – more likely the top two – is a steep climb and assumes the Commanders or Patriots would be willing to vacate. However it does seem feasible that Pierce could convince new GM Tom Telesco to come back into the first round for another quarterback – maybe Washington’s Michael Penix Jr.? – if the Silver and Black go with the best player available route (non-QB) in their organic slot.

Buffalo Bills

They’re all the way down at No. 28. And they’re down to players more accustomed to the WR3 role – Khalil Shakir and Curtis Samuel – after trading Stefon Diggs and letting Gabe Davis go in free agency. It would likely take a Julio Jones-level move for the perennial AFC East champs to get into position for one of this draft’s elite receivers – Ohio State’s Marvin Harrison Jr., Washington’s Rome Odunze and LSU’s Malik Nabers. But they could more reasonably move up – and might have to – to potentially get a pass catcher like Nabers’ former teammate, Brian Thomas Jr., one of the Texas twosome of Adonai Mitchell or Xavier Worthy or possibly even Georgia’s Ladd McConkey.

Los Angeles Rams

They’re set to make their first Round 1 choice since selecting QB Jared Goff No. 1 overall in 2016. But if they don’t take a quarterback with this year’s 19th pick – a solid assumption – might LA consider moving back into the first round for one, say Penix or Oregon’s Bo Nix? Veteran Matthew Stafford, 36, is entering his 16th season and his last with guaranteed money on this contract, which runs through the 2026 campaign.

San Francisco 49ers

Over the past five seasons, they’ve lost twice in the Super Bowl and twice more in the NFC title game. The Niners remain oh-so-close to an elusive sixth Super Bowl victory – yet might need to up the ante next season, the last one that QB Brock Purdy is likely to play on his dirt-cheap rookie contract. GM John Lynch has 10 picks this year, though seven are on Day 3, but this could be the time to bundle a few to target another elite player who probably wouldn’t be available when San Francisco is scheduled to pick 31st.

New York Giants

Slated to pick sixth, they’re in a prime location – unless they want a quarterback to replace Daniel Jones, and the Giants have done ample scouting of the position. If a passer – North Carolina’s Drake Maye? Michigan’s J.J. McCarthy? – they covet slips into the third or fourth spot, the G-Men wouldn’t have to go far to secure him.

New York Jets

Perhaps no team is under more pressure to win in 2024 than this one. Could that mean advancing just a few spots to get QB Aaron Rodgers another weapon – maybe Odunze or Nabers to further complement WRs Garrett Wilson and Mike Williams – or perhaps another bodyguard in a draft loaded with promising offensive linemen, a position GM Joe Douglas has always put a premium on?

TRADE DOWN CANDIDATES

New York Jets

Perhaps no team is under more pressure to win in 2024 than this one. But could that mean retreating just a few spots – and maybe picking up the second-rounder they currently don’t have due to the Rodgers trade – while still reeling in, say, Georgia TE Brock Bowers or a prime blocker?

Denver Broncos

It’s pretty clear they need a quarterback, even after Monday’s trade for Jets washout Zach Wilson. Currently slotted at No. 12, good chance they could take Penix or Nix, the latter’s skill set fairly analogous to HC Sean Payton’s longtime QB in New Orleans, Drew Brees. But Denver’s first-rounder is currently its only pick in the draft’s top 75, meaning not a lot of ammo for the Broncos to move up. Might be a lot more realistic to move back, add some capital, yet still have a realistic shot at Nix and/or Penix further down the board.

Atlanta Falcons

They don’t need a quarterback after signing Cousins to a four-year, $180 million pact. They don’t need a receiver, either. Yet their position at No. 8 could be quite enticing to other teams targeting those positions or others. Sliding back a bit likely wouldn’t prevent the Falcons from obtaining blue-chip defensive help they do require.

Seattle Seahawks

GM John Schneider often gets a little antsy where he is, very often taking opportunities to deal down. That could be an especially attractive avenue this year given the Seahawks have no second-rounder yet plenty of needs – offensive line, defensive tackle, linebacker, safety, even quarterback – to address.

New England Patriots

It would probably take a lot to detach them from the No. 3 pick, one that should convey a premium quarterback prospect like Daniels or Maye. But if Wolf has lukewarm assessments of his options and/or another team blows him away with an offer that could accelerate what’s likely going to be an extensive rebuild, he and the organization will surely be compelled to give it due consideration.

Arizona Cardinals

Do they stay at No. 4, a spot likely to afford Ossenfort the opportunity to pick the draft’s best non-quarterback as a new cornerstone of his rebuild? Or does he bail out for the second straight year, presumably paid off by a team that wants McCarthy? And, don’t forget, the Cards also sit in the 27th position, which might be a juncture where another club could target Nix or Penix if they remain available.

Los Angeles Chargers

Do they stay at No. 5, a spot likely to afford new HC Jim Harbaugh and GM Hortiz the opportunity to pick the draft’s best or second-best non-quarterback as a new cornerstone of their rebuild? Or do the Bolts try and get out given their apparent interest in an offensive lineman – a deep position in this draft, and one that could present the opportunity to pick up draft capital while still getting a tone-setting blocker later in the evening … along with, potentially, another pressing need?

Chicago Bears

No, they won’t make the No. 1 pick and opportunity to score former USC QB Caleb Williams available. But, considering GM Ryan Poles is working with a draft-low four choices, maybe someone targets that ninth overall selection. However it better be a strong offer since vacating probably costs Poles a topflight receiver, blocker or pass rusher. ‘It’s gonna be really hard to make this team,’ he said Tuesday. ‘That doesn’t mean you don’t want more shots later. We’ll always welcome a lot of picks. But it doesn’t force you to panic about the situation we’re in right now with how many picks we have.”

***

Follow USA TODAY Sports’ Nate Davis on X, formerly Twitter @ByNateDavis.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY
Keep Reading
By
Sports

Maple Leafs coach: Bruins star ‘elite’ at getting away with penalties

Boston Bruins pesky star Brad Marchand played a major role in Game 3 against the Toronto Maple Leafs, scoring twice for a 4-2 victory and a 2-1 series lead.

He also hauled down Toronto’s Tyler Bertuzzi before Boston’s Trent Frederic tied the game 1-1 in the second period. He did it again before the final Boston goal.

Maple Leafs coach Sheldon Keefe lamented the lack of a call but indicated it was typical for Marchand, whom he called a world-class player for his ability and his gamesmanship.

‘He gets calls. It’s unbelievable, actually, how it goes,’ Keefe said. ‘You’ve got to play through that stuff. I don’t think there’s another player in this series that gets away with taking out Bertuzzi’s legs the way that he does. There’s not one other player in the series that gets away with that, but he does. It’s an art and he’s elite at it.’

SHARKS: Last-place team fires coach David Quinn

Bertuzzi, also known for his peskiness, played for Boston last season in the playoffs after the Bruins acquired him at the 2023 trade deadline. He and Marchand were going at each other throughout Wednesday’s game.

After Bertuzzi tied the game 2-2 at 11:25 of the third period, Marchand responded 28 seconds later with a perfect shot into the top corner of the net after Maple Leafs goalie Ilya Samsonov lost his stick.

The Bruins captain added an empty-net goal after first knocking down Bertuzzi. He leads Boston with six playoff points in three games.

‘He’s a great player,’ Bertuzzi said. ‘That’s what he does. He’s been doing it a long time. I don’t expect it to stop.’

Marchand has 55 playoff goals, tying Cam Neely’s franchise record. He passed Neely to take the lead with his 12th playoff game-winning goal.

‘He obviously wants to get under our skin and influence the refs,’ said Toronto’s Matthew Knies, who scored the opening goal. ‘I think we just have to be composed and not kind of get into that (expletive).’

Golden Knights go up 2-0 on Stars

The Western Conference-leading Dallas Stars are in trouble after the defending champion Vegas Golden Knights won 3-1 to take a 2-0 series lead.

Vegas is now 5-0 against the Stars this season as goalie Logan Thompson improved on his shaky Game 1 win with a 20-save effort. Jonathan Marchessault, the 2023 playoff MVP, had a goal and assist and Noah Hanifin scored the game-winner.

Worse for the Stars: Mason Marchment and Radek Faksa left in the third period and didn’t return.

The series shifts to Las Vegas for the next two games.

Kings tie up series with overtime win vs. Oilers

Los Angeles Kings captain Anze Kopitar, who tied Luc Robitaille for most playoff appearances in franchise history, scored at 2:07 of overtime for a 5-4 win that evens the series with the Edmonton Oilers at 1-1.

Kopitar also assisted on Adrian Kempe’s two goals. Kempe batted the puck out of the air on the second goal.

The Kings held Connor McDavid to one assist after he had five in the opening game.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY
Keep Reading
By
Sports

NWSL team fires employee for violating non-fraternization policy

The Kansas City Current have fired Carlos Jimenez, the head of its medical staff, for violating the NWSL’s non-fraternization policy.

The news was first reported by The Athletic on Wednesday. The outlet reported Jimenez violated the policy by having a relationship with an unidentified Current player. The team confirmed Jimenez’s firing to USA TODAY Sports.

‘When we learned of his actions in violation of club and league policies, he was immediately terminated. We remain committed to making sure our policies and practices ensure a safe space for our players and our staff,’ the team said in a statement.

The league’s non-fraternization policy, enacted in 2022, applies to all NWSL players, coaches, owners, managers, trainers and any employees or other associated personnel of NWSL and its member clubs or teams. It is in place to ‘minimize the risk of actual, potential or perceived conflicts of interest and promote fairness and professionalism.’

Under the policy, Jimenez would be considered a ‘supervisor’ since that is defined as someone who can ‘responsibly direct (staff), including as to performance and medical decisions, address concerns or exert influence over such actions in the interest of the NWSL or a team.’

‘NWSL Supervisors may not engage in, develop, continue or pursue any romantic and/or sexual relationships or encounters, even when consensual, with any employee (including NWSL players or trialists) over whom they currently have direct or indirect supervisory authority or management influence,’ the policy reads.

The non-fraternization policy was one of several the NWSL enacted following the firing of Paul Riley in 2022, the former North Carolina Courage head coach who was alleged to have sexually harassed and coerced players for a decade.

A report released by former U.S. Attorney General Sally Q. Yates found the league and U.S. Soccer failed to take action against the misconduct, and an investigation commissioned by the NWSL found ‘widespread misconduct’ directed at players. As a result, the league instituted a non-fraternization policy ahead of the 2023 season, along with other workplace discrimination, harassment and bullying policies.

Jimenez was hired by the KC Current in December 2023 after he spent last season with the Washington Spirit as a physical therapist, and he was also a physical therapist with U.S. Soccer from December 2019 to December 2021. He is the second person in the league to be fired for violating the non-fraternization policy this season. The Houston Dash fired goalkeeper coach Matt Lampson in March after an NWSL investigation and he was suspended by the league through the 2024 season.

The KC Current are in first place of the NWSL with 4-0-1 record.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY
Keep Reading
By
Politics

New poll reveals how voters’ views on abortion have changed as Dems seek to make issue a central 2024 theme

A new Quinnipiac University poll released Wednesday revealed information about Americans’ views on abortion that could surprise voters as the November election draws nearer.

The poll comes as Democrats seek to make abortion a central issue this election year, hoping it will drive turnout across the country in their favor as they seek to win control of the House of Representatives and hold the Senate and the White House.

According to the poll, a record number of Americans (66%) now support legal abortion in some or all cases, the highest level of support ever recorded by the poll in its two-decade history. A plurality of 34% said abortion should be legal in all cases, while 32% said it should be legal in most cases.

At the same time, support for abortion to be illegal in all cases is at a record low of 5%, while 22% said it should be illegal in most cases.

Strong majorities of 89% and 85% believe abortion should be legal when the life of the mother is in danger and when the pregnancy is caused by rape or incest, respectively.

Democrats have made the issue of abortion a central theme in their campaigns across the country this election year, including warning that Republican control of Congress, in tandem with another four years in the White House for former President Donald Trump, would mean a nationwide ban.

In what appeared to be an effort to alleviate fears of electoral reprisal, Trump said earlier this month that rather than any national legislation, the issue of abortion should be decided by the states.

He posted a video on Truth Social explicitly affirming his support for in vitro fertilization and emphasizing his support for states determining their own laws for abortion so long as there are exceptions for rape, incest and life of the mother.

‘The states will determine by vote, or legislation, or perhaps both, and whatever they decide must be the law of the land — in this case, the law of the state,’ Trump said. ‘Many states will be different. Many states will have a different number of weeks… at the end of the day, it is all about the will of the people.’

His statement drew flak from some pro-life groups, including Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, whose president Marjorie Dannenfelser said she was ‘deeply disappointed’ by the announcement, arguing it was a victory for Democrats.

Fox News’ Paul Steinhauser and Anders Hagstrom contributed to this report.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
Keep Reading
By
Politics

Secret Service agent on VP Harris’ detail removed from assignment after physical fight while on duty

A U.S. Secret Service agent with Vice President Kamala Harris’ detail was removed from their assignment after engaging in a physical fight with other agents while on duty Monday, Fox News Digital has learned. 

The fight was first reported by The New York Post and confirmed to Fox News Digital by a source.

The incident happened at Joint Base Andrews in Maryland while Harris was at the Naval Observatory, but didn’t delay her departure from the base, the Secret Service told Fox News Digital.  

Anthony Guglielmi, chief of communications for the U.S. Secret Service, called the incident a ‘medical matter,’ adding that the agency wouldn’t be commenting further. 

‘At approximately 9 a.m. April 22, a U.S. Secret Service special agent supporting the Vice President’s departure from Joint Base Andrews began displaying behavior their colleagues found distressing,’ Guglielmi said in a statement shared with Fox News Digital.

He added, ‘The agent was removed from their assignment while medical personnel were summoned. The Vice President was at the Naval Observatory when this incident occurred and there was no impact on her departure from Joint Base Andrews.

‘The U.S. Secret Service takes the safety and health of our employees very seriously. As this was a medical matter, we will not disclose any further details.’ 

The agent, who had been acting ‘erratically,’ began punching the special agent in charge after getting on top of him, Real Clear Politics reported. 

The agent, who was handcuffed after the incident and treated by medical staff, had previously been a subject of concern by staff, the outlet reported.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
Keep Reading
By
Politics

Supreme Court to hear arguments in Trump presidential immunity case

The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments Thursday on whether former President Donald Trump is immune from prosecution in Special Counsel Jack Smith’s election interference case. 

The high court agreed it would review whether Trump, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, has immunity from prosecution.

Arguments at the Supreme Court are expected to begin at 10 a.m. Thursday, but the former president will not be present for the proceedings. 

Instead, Trump will be in New York City for the seventh day of his criminal trial stemming from charges out of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s investigation. Trump has pleaded not guilty to all 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree. 

Trump, a criminal defendant, is required to be present for each day of his trial. He requested, though, to attend Supreme Court arguments on presidential immunity, but Judge Juan Merchan, who is presiding over the trial, rejected that request. 

‘Arguing before the Supreme Court is a big deal, and I can certainly appreciate why your client would want to be there, but a trial in New York Supreme Court… is also a big deal,’ Merchan said last week, requiring the former president to be in his Manhattan courtroom. 

A ruling from the Supreme Court on the issue of presidential immunity is expected by late June. 

Trump’s criminal trial stemming from Smith’s investigation has been put on hold pending a resolution on the matter. 

The former president and his legal team, in requesting the Supreme Court review the issue of presidential immunity, said that ‘if the prosecution of a President is upheld, such prosecutions will recur and become increasingly common, ushering in destructive cycles of recrimination.’ 

‘Criminal prosecution, with its greater stigma and more severe penalties, imposes a far greater ‘personal vulnerability’ on the President than any civil penalty,’ Trump’s lawyers wrote. ‘The threat of future criminal prosecution by a politically opposed Administration will overshadow every future President’s official acts – especially the most politically controversial decisions.’ 

Trump’s request states that the president’s ‘political opponents will seek to influence and control his or her decisions via effective extortion or blackmail with the threat, explicit or implicit, of indictment by a future, hostile Administration, for acts that do not warrant any such prosecution.’

Smith charged the former president with conspiracy to defraud the United States; conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding; obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding; and conspiracy against rights. Those charges stemmed from Smith’s investigation into whether Trump was involved in the Jan. 6 Capitol riot and any alleged interference in the 2020 election result.

Trump pleaded not guilty to all charges in August.

‘Without presidential immunity, it would be impossible for a president to properly function, putting the United States of America in great and everlasting danger!’ Trump posted on his Truth Social last week, in all capital letters. ‘If they take away my presidential immunity, they take away crooked Joe Biden’s presidential immunity.’ 

In another post, Trump argued that if a president does not have immunity, ‘the Opposing Party, during his/her term in Office, can extort and blackmail the President by saying that, ‘if you don’t give us everything we want, we will Indict you for things you did while in Office,’ even if everything done was totally Legal and Appropriate.’ 

‘That would be the end of the Presidency, and our Country, as we know it, and is just one of the many Traps there would be for a President without Presidential Immunity,’ Trump posted. 

Pointing to his presidential predecessors, and 2020 and 2024 opponent Biden, Trump said: ‘Obama, Bush, and soon, Crooked Joe Biden, would all be in BIG TROUBLE.’ 

‘If a President doesn’t have IMMUNITY, he/she will be nothing more than a ‘Ceremonial’ President, rarely having the courage to do what has to be done for our Country,’ Trump continued, calling for the protection of presidential immunity. ‘MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!’ 

Trump added that if immunity is not granted to a president, ‘every president that leaves office will be immediately indicted by the opposing party.’ 

‘Without complete immunity, a president of the United States would not be able to properly function,’ he said again.

This will be the second time this term the Supreme Court will hear a case involving the presumed Republican presidential nominee. 

Last month, the Supreme Court sided unanimously with Trump in his challenge to Colorado’s attempt to kick him off the 2024 primary ballot. 

The high court ruled in favor of Trump’s arguments in the case, which will impact the status of efforts in several other states to remove the likely GOP nominee from their respective ballots. 

The court considered for the first time the meaning and reach of Article 3 of the 14th Amendment, which bars former officeholders who ‘engaged in insurrection’ from holding public office again. Challenges have been filed to remove Trump from the 2024 ballot in over 30 states.

Trump, during an exclusive interview with Fox News Digital after that ruling, shifted back to the issue of presidential immunity. 

‘Equally important for our country will be the decision that they will soon make on immunity for a president – without which, the presidency would be relegated to nothing more than a ceremonial position, which is far from what the founders intended,’ Trump told Fox News Digital. ‘No president would be able to properly and effectively function without complete and total immunity.’ 

He added, ‘Our country would be put at great risk.’ 

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
Keep Reading
By
Politics

Morning Glory: Trump’s numbers are surging in the swing states

The latest polling from Bloomberg on the rematch race between former President Trump and President Joe Biden is stunning. 

Trump is being prosecuted in a show trial-circus in Manhattan that serious observers know is both complete nonsense and an utter disgrace. On top of that, Trump is subject to a gag order. He is also obliged to be in court four out of five days a week and thus not campaigning in swing states. 

Despite all of this, Trump is surging in the swing states according to the new Bloomberg numbers, with Trump’s lead increasing to 7 and 8 points in Arizona and Nevada, respectively and to an astonishing 10 point lead in North Carolina! 

Trump is up in Georgia by six points and in Wisconsin by four. Biden ‘leads’ in Michigan by two points but that’s margin-of-error land. When Trump names any solid running mate —former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Senators Tom Cotton or Joni Ernst, former National Security Advisor Ambassador Robert O’Brien or either of Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin or North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum— Trump’s momentum will increase. 

Vice presidents rarely matter when a voter chooses a president, but the obvious physical infirmity of President Biden changes that in 2024. People will be thinking a lot about ‘President Kamala Harris,’ and shuddering when they do. When Trump chooses a mainstream running mate who is good on the stump, the gap is going to widen in Trump’s favor. 

The issues cake is baked too. My device for recalling them all is ‘A-B-C-D-E-I-E-I-I’: appeasement, the border, crime, ‘DEI,’ education, inflation and Israel. Swing state voters know Biden is on the wrong side of every single one of these issues. And not just on the wrong side by a little. Biden-Harris has gone so far left on all of these issues that detailed arguments don’t even need to be made. Trump and his running mate just have to repeat the mantra. Voters already know the score.

It’s a remarkable comeback for Trump, and he’s got the crazy prosecutors in Manhattan to thank in part. What Bragg is doing in Manhattan is appalling, and it will get worse before it gets better in terms of interference with the campaign in a trial that should never have been begun much less continued into the stretch run of the campaign. Voters are smart. Voters know when the permanent government is putting its thumb on the scale, or in this case, its entire fist. 

And voters don’t like it, any more than they like the cumulative inflation of 20% since Biden was sworn in or Biden’s wide-open border. Not a bit. It’s banana republic politics and it isn’t helping Biden at all and the numbers show that. But when the Democrats committed to a frail and failing nominee, they had to commit to this approach. Biden is incapable of giving a good speech, indeed, he can barely make it around a stage. So Democrats are banking everything on a conviction in New York which, when it comes, will energize the hosts on MSNBC and almost nobody else. It’s priced in already. It’s a show trial and everyone knows how they end. I expect a spectacular backlash from this abuse of the criminal law. Most Americans have due process in their bones and Trump isn’t getting it. Again, voters are smart. They know.

Pray the rebuke Democrats receive in November is enough to reset the party back somewhere close to where the old-school liberals lived. We don’t need a two party system where one party has lost its commitment to the rule of law and to our ally Israel. Democrats have abandoned both. The reckoning is coming.

Hugh Hewitt is host of ‘The Hugh Hewitt show,’ heard weekday mornings 6am to 9am ET on the Salem Radio Network, and simulcast on Salem News Channel. Hugh wakes up America on over 400 affiliates nationwide, and on all the streaming platforms where SNC can be seen. He is a frequent guest on the Fox News Channel’s news roundtable hosted by Brett Baier weekdays at 6pm ET. A son of Ohio and a graduate of Harvard College and the University of Michigan Law School, Hewitt has been a Professor of Law at Chapman University’s Fowler School of Law since 1996 where he teaches Constitutional Law. Hewitt launched his eponymous radio show from Los Angeles in 1990.  Hewitt has frequently appeared on every major national news television network, hosted television shows for PBS and MSNBC, written for every major American paper, has authored a dozen books and moderated a score of Republican candidate debates, most recently the November 2023 Republican presidential debate in Miami and four Republican presidential debates in the 2015-16 cycle. Hewitt focuses his radio show and his column on the Constitution, national security, American politics and the Cleveland Browns and Guardians. Hewitt has interviewed tens of thousands of guests from Democrats Hillary Clinton and John Kerry to Republican Presidents George W. Bush and Donald Trump over his 40 years in broadcasting, and this column previews the lead story that will drive his radio/TV show today.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
Keep Reading
By
Politics

Trump v US: SCOTUS likely to determine presidents get ‘some amount’ of immunity, experts say

The Supreme Court is set to consider arguably the highest-profile cases of the term Thursday to determine whether former President Trump can claim presidential immunity against criminal charges brought by the Biden Justice Department.

Special Counsel Jack Smith, who brought charges against Trump following his investigation into the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot and Trump’s alleged plot to overturn the 2020 election result, argued in briefs submitted to the high court that ‘presidents are not above the law.’

Trump’s legal team conversely argued, ‘A denial of criminal immunity would incapacitate every future President… [t]he threat of future prosecution and imprisonment would become a political cudgel to influence the most sensitive and controversial decisions, taking away the strength, authority, and decisiveness of the Presidency.’ 

Legal experts told Fox News Digital that while all nine justices might be skeptical of Trump’s sweeping immunity claims, they are likely to give guidance on where presidential immunity from criminal prosecution ends for actions taken while in the Oval Office — which could have a profound impact in the criminal cases against the former president.

Jonathan Turley, a practicing criminal defense attorney and professor at George Washington University, told Fox News Digital the case is ‘surrounded by rather steep constitutional cliffs.’

‘This case may be rather maddening for the justices because it is surrounded by rather steep constitutional cliffs. If the court goes one way, a president has little protection in carrying out the duties of his office. If they turned the other way, he has a little accountability for the most serious criminal acts,’ Turley said. 

‘This is a court that tends to be incremental. They tend not to favor sweeping rulings,’ he said.

The Justice Department argued in lower court that a president has virtually no immunity when he leaves office, and the lower court agreed.

Turley says the justices ‘could reject the lower court decision and send it back for a more nuanced approach on constitutional immunity.’

‘The justices may find that presidents do require immunity, even with regard to some criminal acts,’ Turley said, adding that ‘any remand would work significantly in the former president’s favor on a tactical level.’

Turley explained that if the case were to be remanded back down to Judge Tanya Chutkan in the D.C. District Court, that process would make a trial before the November election ‘even less likely.’ 

‘There are both constitutional and tactical aspects to the ruling, but I think these justices are likely to approach this argument with an eye toward balancing these interests, and if that’s the case, they could well come up with a different approach than the lower court or the former president,’ Turley said.

The thrust of Trump’s legal argument is that Supreme Court precedent says absolute immunity from civil liability exists for a former president for his official acts, and that the same immunity should apply to a criminal context. 

‘There’s a real likelihood that the Supreme Court will give some concrete guidance on the exact amount of protection a president is entitled to,’ Jim Trusty, former legal counsel for Trump and a former federal prosecutor, told Fox News Digital.

‘There are still likely to be factual issues that the lower courts will then have to decide as to where President Trump’s actions fit within this continuum of protected or unprotected conduct,’ he explained.

John Shu, a constitutional law expert who served in both the George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush administrations, gave a similar view.

‘The chances of the Supreme Court giving the office of the president some amount of level of immunity are pretty good,’ Shu told Fox News Digital.

But Shu also said ‘there’s also a decent chance that whatever immunity the court carves out, it may not encompass Trump’s alleged acts.’

‘They won’t be making purely legal arguments, but political power arguments as well, and they’ll have to get at least five Supreme Court justices to agree with them,’ Shu said.

Trusty said the questions put to each of the parties in Thursday’s oral arguments ‘could be pretty transparent as to each justice’s view of immunity.’

So far, Shu observed, Trump’s attorneys have argued that the president has absolute immunity, even after he leaves office, for any and all acts.

‘I don’t think the court will go that far,’ Shu said.

Similarly, Trusty said he expects the court to ‘give very little credit to the notion of absolutely unlimited immunity, as President Trump’s lawyers have argued.’

‘But I do think there is a strong possibility that the court confirms the notion that immunity protects the president and that their ruling could set in motion the eventual dismissal of the Jan. 6, Mar-a-Lago and Georgia cases,’ he said.

The Supreme Court will hear the case, Trump v. United States, on Thursday at 10 a.m.

The Justice Department declined to comment.

Trump campaign spokesperson Steven Cheung said in a statement, ‘Without immunity for official acts, there can be no Presidency. No President in American history has faced prosecution for his official acts — until now.’

‘Allowing political opponents to prosecute the President once he leaves office will distort the President’s most important decisions. Even during his Presidency, his enemies will blackmail and extort him with threats of lawless criminal charges and imprisonment once his term ends. The Framers of our Constitution wisely created a system that prevented this endless, destructive cycle of recrimination for 234 years,’ he continued.

‘The Supreme Court should uphold Presidential immunity and put an end to Jack Smith’s deranged, unconstitutional witch hunt against President Trump, once and for all.’

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
Keep Reading
By
Politics

Johnson fundraises for House Republican who called Matt Gaetz, Bob Good ‘scumbags’

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., is in the middle of yet another intraparty conflict within the House GOP after showing support for one of his vulnerable incumbents on Tuesday.

Johnson was in San Antonio this week for a campaign fundraiser held by Rep. Tony Gonzales, R-Texas, who is facing a primary challenger backed by members of the ultra-conservative House Freedom Caucus and their allies.

It came days after Gonzales infuriated the GOP rebel group when he called two of his colleagues, House Freedom Caucus Chair Bob Good, R-Va., and Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., ‘scumbags’ and compared them to Klansmen in a stunning CNN interview over the weekend.

‘It’s my absolute honor to be in Congress, but I serve with some real scumbags like Matt Gaetz. He paid minors to have sex with him at drug parties. Bob Good endorsed my opponent, a known neo-Nazi,’ Gonzales said. ‘These people used to walk around with white hoods at night. Now they’re walking around with white hoods in the daytime.’

The allegations against Gaetz, which he denies, were the subject of a federal probe that prosecutors ultimately decided not to move forward with.

Gaetz and Good’s allies seized on the comments and, soon after, on Johnson’s plan to appear with Gonzales.

It is part of the continued fallout from the House passing Johnson’s $95 billion foreign aid plan for Ukraine, Israel and the Indo-Pacific. Johnson’s plan got wide bipartisan support but angered a rebellious faction of House GOP lawmakers who feel increasingly sidelined by Johnson as he navigates critical legislation with a historically slim majority.

Johnson’s campaign events are typically planned well in advance, but the backlash to this recent stop shows the historic division that’s plagued the House GOP for much of this Congress.

‘I’m just beside myself that that’s where things are. And I don’t mind saying it, but I’m going to be very clear. I’m being attacked. Conservatives are being attacked. Bob Good, the chairman of the Freedom Caucus is being attacked by Tony. He said that he’s a Klansman,’ Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, said on local radio station KTSA. 

Gonzales’ opponent, pro-Second Amendment social media personality Brandon Herrera, responded to Gonzales’ comments on X on Sunday shortly after the congressman’s interview. ‘He has to cry to his liberal friends about me, because Republicans won’t listen anymore,’ Herrera wrote.

Gaetz accused Gonzales of ‘laundering lies on CNN’ and pointed out that Gonzales was censured last year by the Texas GOP for his support of gun control measures in the wake of the Uvalde school shooting, which occurred in Gonzales’ district, where 19 elementary school students and two teachers were murdered by an 18-year-old with an AR-15.

On Wednesday morning, Gaetz mocked Johnson and Gonzales with a photo from the event and accused them of having ‘briefed donors in Texas about their hard work to secure the border……of Ukraine.’

A source familiar with Johnson’s campaign plans told Fox News Digital that the event with Gonzales was a longstanding stop that was part of a wider campaign season swing through Texas.

Gonzales wrote on X of the fundraiser, ‘Proud to host an incredible crowd for our Fiesta luncheon! Thank you to Speaker Johnson for attending and being a champion for the issues that impact.’

Fox News Digital reached out to Gonzales’ campaign for comment on the GOP rebel-led backlash but did not immediately hear back. Fox News Digital reached out to Good’s campaign as well.

When reached for further comment by Fox News Digital, Gaetz listed off what conservatives say are Johnson’s legislative shortfalls, including the bipartisan government funding deal, renewal of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), and his support of Gonzales.

‘Speaker Johnson has undergone a metamorphosis that would make the monarch butterfly blush,’ he said.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
Keep Reading
By