Breaking
Wealth World News
Archive

2025

Browsing
Politics

House kicks off final sprint for Trump’s ‘big beautiful bill’ with key committee hearing

The House of Representatives is beginning the final legislative sprint of President Donald Trump’s ‘big, beautiful bill’ before the commander in chief signs it into law.

The powerful House panel is the final gatekeeper before most pieces of legislation get a chamber-wide vote.

It comes after the Senate spent more than 24 hours straight considering the bill, eventually passing it along the narrowest of margins around midday Wednesday. Vice President JD Vance was on Capitol Hill to cast the tie-breaking vote.

It’s not clear how long the House Rules Committee meeting will go; when the panel considered the House’s own version of the bill in May, Democrats introduced dozens of amendments to symbolically object to the bill and delay the process.

Meanwhile, two conservatives on the House Rules Committee, Reps. Ralph Norman, R-S.C., and Chip Roy, R-Texas, are among those in the lower chamber raising concerns about the bill.

Their opposition in committee would not be enough to stop it, but the legislation could face serious threats House-wide, where just four GOP ‘no’ votes would be enough to sink the bill.

The House first passed the bill – a mammoth piece of legislation advancing Trump’s agenda on taxes, the border, energy, defense and the national debt – in late May by just one vote.

Modifications made by the Senate in order to pass that chamber’s own razor-thin, three-vote majority must now be approved in the House before getting to Trump’s desk.

Republican leaders have a self-imposed deadline of getting the bill to Trump’s desk by the Fourth of July.

House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., told Fox News Digital early evening on Monday that he expected his chamber would begin considering the bill as early as 9 a.m. Wednesday.

But two members of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, Norman and Rep. Eric Burlison, R-Mo., told Fox News Digital earlier that same day that they believed the bill would not survive a House-wide procedural vote Wednesday if the Senate’s text did not materially change.

The bill would permanently extend the income tax brackets lowered by Trump’s 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), while temporarily adding new tax deductions to eliminate duties on tipped and overtime wages up to certain caps.

It also includes a new tax deduction for people aged 65 and over.

The legislation also rolls back green energy tax credits implemented under former President Joe Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act, which Trump and his allies have attacked as ‘the Green New Scam.’

The bill would also surge money toward the national defense, and to Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in the name of Trump’s crackdown on illegal immigrants in the U.S.

The bill would also raise the debt limit by $5 trillion in order to avoid a potentially economically devastating credit default sometime this summer, if the U.S. runs out of cash to pay its obligations.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
Keep Reading
By
Politics

Why Justice Jackson is a fish out of water on the Supreme Court

Much has been written in recent days about the war of words between Supreme Court justices Amy Coney Barrett and Ketanji Brown-Jackson in the opinions handed down in Trump v. Casa, Inc., the case involving an injunction issued in a case challenging birthright citizenship.

But as I pointed out in a Post on X Friday morning, Barrett’s decision was written on behalf of herself and the five other justices in the majority. The fact that Barrett was assigned this opinion by the chief judge (the chief judge decides who writes the opinion when he votes with the majority) is a signal that the other five justices turned her loose on Jackson. Such an unsparing smackdown of the most junior justice with a vastly different view of the judicial function would have been received much differently had it come from one of the other five justices in the conservative wing of the Court.

But coming from another female justice, one with only two more terms on the Court than Jackson, it was the least harsh way to deliver the rebuke that the majority opinion represented. But the language was anything but gentle, and the point was anything but subtle. 

If Jackson seems out of her element, there’s a reason. There have been many career paths followed by justices who have been appointed to the Supreme Court. But it is quite uncommon for someone to be appointed to the Supreme Court without meaningful experience at the level of an appellate court, as is the case with Jackson.

Justice Elena Kagan charted a very different course to the Supreme Court, largely through academia. However, before joining the court she did serve in various DOJ positions in the Clinton administration, and as the solicitor general of the United States under President Obama. The solicitor general argues cases on behalf of the United States before the Supreme Court.  Kagan also wrote extensively on legal issues during the nine years she served as both a professor and dean at Harvard Law School.

Another outlier was Justice Lewis Powell, who joined the Court in 1972 directly out of a large law firm where he had practiced corporate law for 35 years, never having been a judge in any court at any level. 

Jackson did not join the Court with no experience as a judge as was the case with Justices Kagan and Powell. But the judicial experience she had is not necessarily conducive to the largely cerebral approach of judging that happens on the Supreme Court.

Jackson hashad  a distinguished academic career, having graduated from both Harvard College and Harvard Law School with honors. In the 17 years between Harvard Law School and her first judicial appointment, she had several noteworthy positions in various legal enterprises, including five years as a member of the U.S. Sentencing Commission. Jackson also served as an assistant federal defender in the District of Columbia for three years, during which she enjoyed success as a trial lawyer.

Her first judicial appointment was to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in 2014, where she served as a district judge for seven years. In June of 2021, following President Biden’s nomination, Jackson was confirmed to replace Merrick Garland on the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.

But only eight months later, Biden named her to replace the retiring Justice Stephen Breyer on the Supreme Court. In her eight months on the Court of Appeals, Justice Jackson authored only two opinions. 

The practical reality was that Biden nominated a district court judge to a seat on the Supreme Court consisting of nine justices who decide cases by majority vote. 

District court is where federal cases begin – where ‘cases’ and ‘controversies’ are first decided. The district judges are the ‘referees’ between the litigants, and sometimes they serve as the decision-makers on the outcome of the cases. There is a significant amount of trial work where the district judge presides alone over the proceedings. Many quick decisions and judgments are made during a trial, often with little time for research or considered analysis.   

Even where time and research are available, the district judge is still working ‘solo’ with the assistance of one or more law clerks. The final decision on such motions belongs to the judge alone. 

District judges largely operate independent of their peers in the same courthouse. Their decisions are not binding on each other. They preside over their own dockets and make decisions in the cases assigned to them as they see fit.

Under this system, legal mistakes and errors are inevitable. The only requirement for proceedings at the district court level – including trials – is that they be fair. It is not required that they be ‘error-free.’ Only when errors result in unfairness that prejudices one side or the other is the outcome of the case called into doubt.       

Appellate courts sit in review of the outcomes in trial courts. They focus on the errors in the case presented. While broader legal questions are sometimes an issue on appellate review, the focus is primarily on the presence or absence of errors in the case in the district court, and whether any identified errors justify altering the outcome in that court. 

The Supreme Court plays a very different role. While it does make a judgment about the correctness of the outcome of cases, the focus of the Supreme Court is normally on the broader legal implications for hundreds/thousands of other cases in the future from affirming or reversing the case being reviewed.   

The federal district judge often plays the role of interrogator of the attorneys representing each side. Anyone who has been a trial attorney for any substantial period of time in federal district courts understands this. The questioning by that district judge can be hostile, aggressive, condescending, dismissive, humiliating, etc.  But that questioning is focused on the facts and specific legal issues presented in that case, and not the broader implications of how the outcome of that case might impact other cases. Part of the reason is because that district judge’s decisions are not binding on other district judges.

Jackson just completed her third term on the court. This chart, which is from the 2024-2025 term, is highly revealing in terms of one of the issues that stands between her and her colleagues – her conduct as a justice is still influenced by her eight years as a district judge, i.e., she spends much more time examining the attorneys before the court than do her colleagues.

The same source has a similar chart for the 2023-2024 Term of the Court, and the numbers are no different.

Setting aside this quantitative measure, in listening to many oral arguments of the Court this past term, one gets the very familiar vibe from Jackson of a district judge interrogating one counsel or the other to wring out admissions or concessions about the specifics of the case. The focus is on the outcome of the case, and not the broader implications that the outcome might foretell.       

Justice Samuel Alito can often present in the same manner, but he spoke less than half the number of words as Jackson. She separates herself from her colleagues both in terms of how much time she is involved in the dialogue and her sharply partisan tenor that gives away what her likely vote will be in pretty much every case with any political implications.

Her rhetoric in dissenting from the Trump v. Casa – ‘With deep disillusionment, I dissent’ – seems an almost unintended peek behind the curtain of her thinking.  What the majority did was take away one of the most powerful weapons possessed by a district court judge to shape how a case goes forward from the outset. 

The progressive activist inner district judge in her – who seeks only to ‘do right’ – is protesting that loss.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
Keep Reading
By
Business

Clean energy stocks fall as Trump bill would tax components from China, phase out credits

Clean energy stocks fell Monday as President Donald Trump’s spending legislation now includes a tax on wind and solar projects using Chinese components and abruptly phases out key credits.

Shares of NextEra Energy, the largest renewable developer in the U.S., fell 4%. Solar stocks Array Technologies, Enphase and Nextracker were down between 1% and 9%.

The Senate is voting Monday on amendments to the legislation. The current draft ends the two most important tax credits for solar and wind projects placed in service after 2027.

“The latest Senate draft bill will destroy millions of jobs in America and cause immense strategic harm to our country,” Tesla CEO Elon Musk posted on X over the weekend. “Utterly insane and destructive. It gives handouts to industries of the past while severely damaging industries of the future.”

Previous versions of the bill were more flexible, allowing projects that began construction before 2027 to qualify for the investment and electricity production tax credits, according to Monday note from Goldman Sachs.

The change “compresses project timelines and adds significant execution risk,” Bank of America analyst Dimple Gosal told clients in a note Monday. “Developers with large ’25 pipelines, may struggle to meet the new deadlines — potentially delaying or downsizing planned investments.”

The Senate legislation also slaps a tax on solar and wind projects that enter service after 2027 if they use components made in China.

“The latest draft in the Senate has become more restrictive for most renewable players, moving toward a worst case outcome for solar and wind, with a few improvements for subsectors on the margin,” Morgan Stanley analyst Andrew Percoco told clients in a Sunday note.

To be sure, the rooftop solar industry is viewed by Wall Street as a relative winner from the bill, with Sunrun shares up more than 13% and SolarEdge trading more than 6% higher on Monday. The legislation seems to allow tax credits for leased rooftop systems to remain in place through the end of 2027, which was not the case in previous versions, according to Goldman Sachs.

And First Solar is up more than 9% as the legislation seems to allow the manufacturer to claim credits for both components and final products, according to Bank of America.

This post appeared first on NBC NEWS
Keep Reading
By
Sports

Who are best players in EA Sports College Football 26? Top rankings

Who are the top players in college football? EA Sports is giving possible answers.

With College Football 26 set to be released July 10 − July 7 for early access − EA Sports announced the top offensive and defensive players in the game, as well as who is at the top of each position.

It should be no surprise the top of the list include Heisman Trophy contenders, including the cover athletes of the game in Ohio State receiver Jeremiah Smith and Alabama receiver Ryan Williams. Other notable people include the other stars of major programs like Notre Dame, Texas and Clemson. While the rankings don’t mean a team will actually have success in the upcoming season, it does give a good indicator of who are the top College Football Playoff contenders.

Here are the top players in EA Sports College Football 26:

EA Sports College Football 26 top offensive players

Jeremiah Smith, Ohio State, receiver: 98 overall
Ryan Williams, Alabama, receiver: 95 overall
Jeremiyah Love, Notre Dame, running back: 95 overall
Jordyn Tyson, Arizona State, receiver: 94 overall
Kadyn Proctor, Alabama, tackle: 94 overall
Spencer Fano, Utah, tackle: 94 overall
Ar’maj Reed-Adams, Texas A&M, guard: 93 overall
Eli Stowers, Vanderbilt, tight end: 93 overall
Franicis Mauigoa, Miami, tackle: 93 overall
Nicholas Singleton, Penn State, running back: 93 overall

EA Sports College Football 26 top quarterbacks

Cade Klubnik, Clemson: 92 overall
Garrett Nussmeier, LSU: 92 overall
Drew Allar, Penn State: 92 overall
Sam Leavitt, Arizona State: 91 overall
Lanorris Sellers, South Carolina: 91 overall

EA Sports College Football 26 top running backs

Jeremiyah Love, Notre Dame: 95 overall
Nicholas Singleton, Penn State: 93 overall
Isaac Brown, Louisville: 93 overall
Jonah Coleman, Washington: 93 overall
Mahki Hughes, Oregon: 92 overall

EA Sports College Football 26 top receivers

Jeremiah Smith, Ohio State: 98 overall
Ryan Williams, Alabama: 95 overall
Jordyn Tyson, Arizona State: 94 overall
Elijah Sarratt, Indiana: 93 overall
Eric Rivers, Georgia Tech: 92 overall

EA Sports College Football 26 top tight ends

Eli Stowers, Vanderbilt: 93 overall
Tanner Koziol, Houston: 92 overall
Max Klare, Ohio State: 91 overall
Oscar Delp, Georgia: 90 overall
Jack Endries, Texas: 90 overall

EA Sports College Football 26 top offensive lineman

Kadyn Proctor, Alabama: 94 overall
Spencer Fano, Utah: 94 overall
Francis Mauigoa, Miami: 93 overall
Ar’maj Reed-Adams, Texas A&M: 93 overall
Jordan Seaton, Colorado: 92 overall

EA Sports College Football 26 top defensive players

Caleb Downs, Ohio State, safety: 96 overall
Anthony Hill Jr., Texas, linebacker: 95 overall
T.J. Parker, Clemson, edge: 95 overall
Dylan Stewart, South Carolina, edge: 94 overall
Jermod McCoy, Tennessee, cornerback: 94 overall
Peter Woods, Clemson, defensive tackle: 94 overall
Colin Simmons, Texas, edge: 93 overall
Leonard Moore, Notre Dame, cornerback: 93 overall
Keldric Faulk, Auburn, edge: 93 overall
Dillon Thieneman, Oregon, safety: 93 overall

EA Sports College Football 26 top edge rushers

T.J. Parker, Clemson: 95 overall
Dylan Stewart, South Carolina: 94 overall
Colin Simmons, Texas: 93 overall
Keldric Faulk, Auburn: 93 overall
David Bailey, Texas Tech: 93 overall

EA Sports College Football 26 top defensive tackles

Peter Woods, Clemson: 94 overall
Christen Miller, Georgia: 92 overall
Tim Keenan III, Alabama: 92 overall
Dontay Corleone, Cincinnati: 92 overall
Rayshaun Benny, Michigan: 91 overall

EA Sports College Football 26 top linebackers

Anthony Hill Jr., Texas: 95 overall
Kyle Louis, Pittsburgh: 93 overall
Suntarine Perkins, Mississippi: 93 overall
Gabe Jacas, Illinois: 92 overall
Austin Romaine, Kansas State: 92 overall

EA Sports College Football 26 top cornerbacks

Jermod McCoy, Tennessee: 94 overall
Leonard Moore, Notre Dame: 93 overall
Chandler Rivers, Duke: 93 overall
Avieon Terrell, Clemson: 92 overall
Malik Muhammad, Texas: 92 overall

EA Sports College Football 26 top safeties

Caleb Downs, Ohio State: 96 overall
Dillon Thieneman, Oregon: 93 overall
Rod Moore, Michigan: 92 overall
Bud Clark, TCU: 92 overall
Terry Moore, Duke: 92 overall

This post appeared first on USA TODAY
Keep Reading
By
Sports

Browns get $600 million in public funds for new stadium project

The Cleveland Browns are one step closer to moving to the suburbs. They had already bought the plot of land, and on Monday night, they got the public funding.

Ohio governor Mike DeWine signed a new budget into law on Monday that allocates $600 million in unclaimed funds to partially fund the Browns’ new stadium project in the southeastern Cleveland suburb, according to 92.3 The Fan. The budget decision came three days after the Haslam Sports Group officially purchased a 176-acre plot of land for $76 million, according to Cuyahoga County Fiscal Office via Sportico.

The Browns originally revealed the plans to move to Brook Park in August 2024, at the time calling it ‘a modern, dynamic, world-class venue that would greatly enhance the fan experience and enable the State of Ohio and our region to compete for some of the biggest events in the world 365 days a year.’

The Browns estimate the project to build a new, domed stadium will cost $2.4 billion in total. They’ve now received $600 million from the state of Ohio for the stadium, and the team expects to use an additional $400 million from Brook Park’s income taxes for the new Huntington Bank Stadium.

Haslam Sports Group has also committed $2 billion to mixed-use area development surrounding the stadium.

Though they’ve officially received the public funding, the Browns still have a bit to go before they can begin building the stadium. According to the Columbus Dispatch, former Ohio Attorney General Marc Dann and former state Rep. Jeff Crossman announced they would immediately file a lawsuit if the state budget included funding the Browns’ stadium project with unclaimed funds.

That said, Gov. DeWine already helped the Browns clear another potential road bump by adjusting language in the Modell Law.

The law is nicknamed after infamous former Browns owner Art Modell, who moved the team to Baltimore in 1996. Its actual title is Ohio Revised Code 9.67, which requires any Ohio-based team to give their city six months’ notice to allow ‘political subdivision or any individual or group of individuals who reside in the area the opportunity to purchase the team.’

DeWine passed an amendment that changes language in the Modell Law to only apply to teams attempting to leave the state.

With the Ohio governor backing their project and providing a sizable portion of the state’s budget, the Browns are pushing ahead. Team principal owner Jimmy Haslam says he hopes to break ground in Brook Park by early next year.

‘We respect the firm commitment and leadership that Governor DeWine, and the Ohio Senate and House have shown in their collaborative work to find a responsible way to support such a transformative project, one that will create a generational impact for our region and the State,’ the Haslams said in a statement.

‘Our fans deserve a world-class facility, and we are committed to building a state-of-the-art enclosed stadium that resonates with Cleveland, highlighting our loyal and passionate fans and the Dawg Pound, while also incorporating innovation, bold design, and an immersive experience. The new enclosed Huntington Bank Field will be completely fan-centric, a first-of-its-kind design in the NFL, and a dynamic venue that draws visitors from across Ohio and beyond, for concerts and significant sporting events throughout the year.

‘This premiere facility will anchor a major lifestyle and entertainment development and be a catalyst for one of Northeast Ohio’s largest economic development projects ever and something our community will be proud of and can enjoy for years to come. We appreciate the support of State leaders and their belief in this transformative project.’

This post appeared first on USA TODAY
Keep Reading
By
Sports

How Bobby Bonilla Day helped Mets draft a franchise icon

Bobby Bonilla Day is an annual opportunity to poke fun at the New York Mets, but the club’s infamous deal that pays Bonilla $1.19 million every year until he’s 72, is sort of the reason the team ended up with one of its all-time greats.

Bonilla played just 60 games for the Mets in 1999 and rather than paying him the $5.9 million he was owed for 2000, the club agreed to make yearly payments of $1.19 million for 25 years – with 8% interest – starting in July 2011.

Coming off a trip to the NLCS in 1999, New York had World Series hopes heading into 2000 – and $5.9 million was a big salary back then, with most of the league’s payrolls in the $50 million range. Saving that money in 2000 by dumping Bonilla, the Mets were able to upgrade in the offseason, trading for pitcher Mike Hampton, coming off a 22-4 season with the Houston Astros – with a $5.75 million salary.

The lefty won 15 games with a 3.14 ERA in 2000 and was named NLCS MVP as the Mets reached the World Series for the first time since 1986.

Hampton left the Mets after one season, signing a $121 million deal with the Rockies, citing the state’s school system. (‘I’ve got a son that’s working on his master’s, and my other son’s on the dean’s list … so I guess the school system worked out all right,’ Hampton joked 20 years later.)

But Hampton leaving gave the Mets a compensation pick in the 2001 draft.

With that pick – the 38th overall selection – the Mets selected third baseman David Wright.

Wright went on to become one of the best players in franchise history, trailing only Tom Seaver in WAR and is the club’s career leader in runs, hits, total bases and RBIs. Wright spent his entire career with the Mets, debuting in 2004 and making his final appearance in 2018. He was a seven-time All-Star and won two Gold Glove Awards at the hot corner, but injuries cut his career short.

The Mets will retire his number in July 2025, making him the 10th player to earn the honor and first who spent their entire career with the organization.

Wright debuted on the Baseball Hall of Fame ballot in 2024, receiving 6.1% of the vote to earn another year on the ballot. In 2025, his vote share ticked up to 8.1%, but there’s almost no chance he ever reaches the 75% threshold required for election.

The USA TODAY app gets you to the heart of the news — fast. Download for award-winning coverage, crosswords, audio storytelling, the eNewspaper and more.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY
Keep Reading
By
Sports

Biggest NBA contracts in history: Where SGA’s new salary ranks

It can pay handsomely to be a professional athlete, and these days the biggest contracts are going to basketball and baseball players.

Oklahoma City Thunder guard and NBA MVP Shai Gilgeous-Alexander agreed to a four-year, $285 million contract extension on Tuesday, making him the highest-paid player in the league with an average salary of $71.3 million per season when the deal kicks in the 2027-28 season.

By comparison, Dallas Cowboys quarterback Dak Prescott is making $60 million per season, Edmonton Oilers center Leon Draisaitl is making an average of $14 million as the National Hockey League’s highest paid player, and Los Angeles Dodgers superstar Shohei Ohtani makes $70 million a season, but $680 million of that total is being deferred, and scheduled to paid out starting in 2034.

Here are the biggest contracts in NBA history, in terms of value and annual salary:

Highest-paid NBA players, by total contract value

Jayson Tatum, Boston Celtics, five years, $313 million
Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, Oklahoma City Thunder: four years, $285 million
Jaylen Brown, Boston Celtics: five years, $285 million
Nikola Jokic, Denver Nuggets: five years, $276 million
Cade Cunningham, Detroit Pistons: five years, $269 million
Evan Mobley, Cleveland Cavaliers: five years, $269 million
Bradley Beal, Phoenix Suns: five years, $251 million
Anthony Edwards, Minnesota Timberwolves: five years, $244 million
Tyrese Haliburton, Indiana Pacers: five years, $244 million
Giannis Antetokounmpo, Milwaukee Bucks: five years, $228 million

Highest-paid NBA players by annual average salary

Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, Oklahoma City Thunder: $71.3 million
Joel Embiid, Philadelphia 76ers: 64.3 million
Jayson Tatum, Boston Celtics: $62.8 million
Giannis Antetokounmpo, Milwaukee Bucks: $58.4 million
Anthony Davis, Dallas Mavericks: $58.4 million
Jaylen Brown, Boston Celtics: $57 million
Jimmy Butler, Golden State Warriors: $55.4 million
Nikola Jokic, Denver Nuggets: $55.2 million
Bam Adebayo, Miami Heat: $55.116 million
Karl-Anthony Towns, New York Knicks: $55.1 million
Devin Booker, Phoenix Suns: $55.1 million

Richest contracts in North American sports history

Juan Soto, New York Mets: 15 years, $765 million
Shohei Ohtani, Los Angeles Dodgers: 10 years, $700 million
Patrick Mahomes, Kansas City Chiefs: 10 years, $450 million
Mike Trout, Los Angeles Angels: 12 years, $426.5 million 
Mookie Betts, Los Angeles Dodgers: 12 years, $365 million
Aaron Judge, New York Yankees: nine years, $360 million
Manny Machado, San Diego Padres: 11 years, $350 million
Francisco Lindor, New York Mets: 10 years, $341 million
Fernando Tatís Jr., San Diego Padres: 14 years, $340 million
Bryce Harper, Philadelphia Phillies: 13 years, $330 million

This post appeared first on USA TODAY
Keep Reading
By
Sports

Jalen Ramsey improves one vital aspect of Steelers’ secondary

Like most people who had their smartphones or computers in front of them as the Miami Dolphins and Pittsburgh Steelers swung a June 30 trade that sent cornerback Jalen Ramsey (and tight end Jonnu Smith) to the Steel City and safety Minkah Fitzpatrick back to South Beach, Jason McCourty’s reaction changed once the full details became known.

Because at first, the ESPN analyst assumed Ramsey would be fitting into a secondary that included Fitzpatrick. Then McCourty’s twin brother and former NFL teammate Devin texted him with the update that Fitzpatrick was the primary compensation returned to the Dolphins.

Which leaves the Steelers without a three-time All-Pro at free safety but an upgrade at cornerback – and some added flexibility when it comes to lining up against the high-powered offenses in the AFC North.

‘I love this addition for the Steelers, just because it adds a ton of versatility,’ Jason McCourty told USA TODAY Sports.

After Devin’s text update, Jason started to think about where Ramsey – who is receiving a $1.5 million raise and making $26.6 million total in 2025 – would line up for Steelers head coach Mike Tomlin. Free safety is a possibility because of that patented aggressiveness and instincts, along with experience playing inside and outside cornerback.

But the Steelers are losing Fitzpatrick’s experience within the role as the center fielder of the defense and the communication that comes along with it.

‘I think those are big shoes to fill,’ McCourty said. ‘That’s why I’m so curious to see exactly where they see Ramsey to fit – because when you’re paying this much money, I don’t know if you’re going to just stick a guy like that at free safety. You typically want him covering the other team’s best wide receivers.

‘It says a lot about what (the Steelers) felt about Minkah Fitzpatrick. Because you make this trade and you give Jalen Ramsey a bit of a pay bump as well. So if (Ramsey) is playing free safety, that says a lot about it. But I am excited for the Steelers with this move.’

Steelers’ secondary has options after Jalen Ramsey trade

The Fitzpatrick-Ramsey trade was the most recent revamping of the Steelers’ secondary. The team signed cornerback Darius Slay and safety Juan Thornhill this offseason. Joey Porter Jr. is a starting outside corner, while Beanie Bishop Jr. had a nice rookie season in 2024 as the nickel corner.

Even though Slay, 34, and Ramsey, 30 ‘aren’t in the prime of their careers, both are still playing at a high level,’ said McCourty, who posted on social media about the trade and the replies immediately referenced the age of Ramsey and Slay.

‘You’re like, ‘These guys can’t play anymore’ but I think guys like Slay and Ramsey are still playing at a high level,’ he added.

Steelers-Dolphins trade: Who won and lost as Jalen Ramsey, Minkah Fitzpatrick get moved?

Multiple secondary lineups is why a guy like Ramsey can be a ‘chess piece’ for the Steelers’ coaching staff. Slay and Porter Jr. are more entrenched in their roles as sideline corners. Ramsey can be moved anywhere.

‘Now you have the opportunity to do so much with that secondary, especially when you have versatile pieces and guys who can play multiple roles,’ McCourty said.

What direction are Dolphins going?

Under general manager Chris Grier and head coach Mike McDaniel, the Dolphins made it to the postseason in 2022 and 2023 but fell off late in those campaigns. The organization hasn’t won a playoff game since the 2000 season.

Now they’ve parted with Smith, who arguably had the best season of his career in 2024, and Ramsey, who leaves behind a largely unproven secondary (aside from Fitzpatrick).

Jalen Ramsey trade grades: Who won deal between Steelers, Dolphins?

‘They don’t have a lot of guys who have been proven year after year that have had success in this league,’ McCourty said. ‘You look at the trade from their standpoint, and you’re like ‘What direction are they going in as a team?”

But Fitzpatrick is back in the fold – this time without a position change forced on him by the coaching staff as Brian Flores tried to in 2019, which precipitated his trade to the Steelers two games into that season.

‘It worked out for both parties, because Minkah went to Pittsburgh and became a monster,’ McCourty said.

Now the ‘monster’ is back in Miami.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY
Keep Reading
By
Sports

NBA free agency: Who are the best remaining available players?

The NBA free agency period is off and running, and some of the biggest names in the game are already off the market. Teams can negotiate deals and announce trades during this moratorium period, which ends July 6, when all signings can become official.

Lakers star LeBron James, Clippers guard James Harden and Timberwovles forward Julius Randle have each reportedly agreed to return to their teams for the 2025-26 season. Kyrie Irving has re-signed with the Dallas Mavericks, while Russell Westbrook and Chris Paul are some other veteran guards who will continue to chase a championship.

This story will be updated as the best remaining free agents sign contracts:

Myles Turner reaches deal with Milwaukee Bucks, per report

The Milwaukee Bucks waived guard Damian Lillard and will take the remainder of his salary to sign free agent forward Myles Turner, reports ESPN.com.

Turner was one of the core pieces in the Pacers making it to the NBA Finals, and his departure will be a big blow for the Pacers, especially with the Achilles’ injury to Tyrese Haliburton, which can ultimately sideline him for the whole upcoming season.

Jonathan Kuminga, G, Golden State Warriors, restricted free agent

Kuminga has established himself as a reliable third scoring option in Golden State behind Steph Curry and Jimmy Butler, as he averaged 15.3 points, 4.6 rebounds, and 2.2 assists, missing significant time this season with an ankle injury.

Josh Giddey, G, Chicago Bulls, restricted free agent

In his first season with the Bulls, Giddey averaged 14.6 points and 7.2 assists and is looking to cash in on his good season. He made $8.35 million last season and could be looking to make four times that amount if he returns to Chicago.

Malik Beasley, G, Detroit Pistons, unrestricted free agent

Beasley’s free agency is officially on hold after he was implicated in a federal gambling investigation. Before the news came out, he was looking at a potential three-year, $42 million deal.

DeAndre Ayton, C, Portland Trail Blazers, unrestricted free agent

Ayton became a free agent after agreeing to a contract buyout with the Blazers. The No. 1 pick of the 2018 draft averaged 14.4 points and 10.2 rebounds in 40 games last season.

Al Horford, C, Boston Celtics, unrestricted free agent

Horford can be a valuable asset to a team looking for a veteran presence and a three-point shooter coming off the bench. The 39-year-old still played 60 games for a Boston team that is looking for a reset after trades and the injury to Jayson Tatum.

When is NBA free agency? Dates, times and offseason schedule

NBA free agency officially began on Monday, June 30, at 6 p.m. ET. Teams and players can now start agreeing to the terms of a contract. Teams and players, however, will have to wait until July 6 for contracts to be officially signed.

The biggest stories, every morning. Stay up-to-date on all the key sports developments by subscribing to USA TODAY Sports’ newsletter.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY
Keep Reading
By
Politics

Congress must reconcile key differences in both versions of Trump’s signature bill

The Senate has completed consideration of President Donald Trump’s $3.3 trillion, 940-page agenda bill, sending it back to the House of Representatives to sync up before hitting the commander in chief’s desk for his signature.

It first passed the House by just one vote in late May, and now it must advance through the chamber one more time before it can be signed into law.

That’s because the Senate made some key changes to the legislation, chiefly to pass the ‘Byrd Bath’ process in which its various measures are weighed for whether they adhere to the strict guidelines of the budget reconciliation process.

Republicans are using budget reconciliation to pass Trump’s agenda on taxes, the border, energy, defense and the national debt. It allows the party in power to pass fiscal legislation while sidelining the minority – in this case, Democrats – by lowering the Senate’s threshold for passage from 60 to 51. 

Here are some of the key changes between the two versions:

Medicaid

Stricter work requirements have been the crown jewel for the GOP, being included in both versions. The bill would require ​​able-bodied, childless adults between the ages of 18 and 64 to work at least 80 hours a month to maintain their benefits, or by ​​participating in community service, going to school or engaging in a work program.

But there are more divisive changes, like tweaks to the Medicaid provider tax rate. The rate change would, year-by-year, lower the provider tax in Medicaid expansion states from 6 %to 3.5%. The plan was tweaked to comply with Senate rules, and now starts in fiscal year 2028. 

The House bill, in comparison, would have frozen states at their current rates and placed a moratorium on new provider taxes.

It’s a sticking point for moderate House Republicans who could see their states be forced to foot more of the bill for Medicaid than they currently do, risking politically damaging cuts to the program.

The Senate bill also includes a $50 billion fund to help rural hospitals in a bid to ease the concerns of Republicans in their own chamber.

Debt ceiling

The Senate bill aims to raise the debt limit by $5 trillion, $1 trillion higher than the House bill called for.

The U.S. national debt is currently just over $36 trillion.

A failure to raise that limit – also called the debt ceiling – before the U.S. government runs out of cash to pay its obligations could result in a downgrade in the country’s credit rating and potential turmoil in financial markets.

Trump has made it a priority for congressional Republicans to deal with the debt ceiling and avoid a national credit default.

A bipartisan agreement struck in 2023 suspended the debt ceiling until January 2025.

Multiple projections show the U.S. is poised to run out of cash to pay its debts by sometime this summer.

Taxes

The Senate version of the legislation provides more generous corporate tax benefits than the House version, while placing limits on Trump’s newer policies, eliminating taxes on tips and overtime pay.

Both bills sought to permanently extend the income tax brackets of Trump’s 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA).

The Senate bill makes permanent some corporate tax breaks that the House bill only temporarily expanded. It also makes permanent the standard deduction for personal income taxes, while the House bill only extended it through 2028.

The Senate bill would also allow people to deduct taxes on up to $25,000 of tipped wages. That deduction would begin to phase out for people making $150,000 per year or $300,000 as a married couple.

On the House side, the deduction is eliminated for both married and single filers making above $160,000. There is no cap of any kind on the amount that can be deducted, however.

Those same income differences are at play between the Senate and House versions of Trump’s ‘no tax on overtime pay’ promise. Whereas the Senate bill would allow people to deduct up to $12,500 in overtime pay, the House version did not include a stated limit.

Artificial Intelligence

The House version of the bill would have effectively blocked states from implementing their own AI regulations – a provision that was stripped out of the Senate bill even despite negotiations with critics to salvage the measure.

Sen. Masha Blackburn, R-Tenn., led the Senate GOP opposition to the measure, arguing it would prevent states from shielding populations who are vulnerable to the pitfalls of AI.

After talks with key senators fell through, Blackburn and Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., co-sponsored an amendment to remove that provision. It passed 99 to 1.

Outside of Washington, 17 Republican state governors wrote to Congress objecting to the AI moratorium. 

‘This is a monumental win for Republican governors, President Trump’s one, big beautiful bill, and the American people,’ Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders, one of the signatories, wrote on X after it was removed.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
Keep Reading
By