Capitol View: State Rep. Matthew Shepherd, KARK reporter Caroline Derby & State Sen. Clarke Tucker
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. – There was a spotlight last week on Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sander's higher education overhaul.
Capitol View host Roby Brock met with former speaker of the Arkansas House of Representatives, Republican Rep. Matthew Shepherd to talk about the ongoing legislative session and his role as the lead sponsor of the governor's higher education bill, the ACCESS Act.
Roby then talks with KARK capitol reporter Caroline Derby who gives an overview of the week in legislative activity.
Roby also speaks with Democratic Sen. Clarke Tucker about the fight against specific bills during the legislative session.
Capitol View airs on Sundays at 8:30 a.m.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Fact Check: What we know about 'Big Beautiful Bill' banning states from regulating AI for 10 years
Claim: H.R. 1, commonly known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, contains a provision that bans states from regulating artificial intelligence for 10 years. Rating: Context: If the "Big Beautiful Bill" becomes law, states and local governments would be unable to enforce any regulations on AI systems and models involved in interstate commerce for 10 years. There are exceptions for any laws or regulations that facilitate the rollout, operations or adoption of AI models and systems. A budget bill that Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives passed on May 22, 2025, allegedly bans all 50 states from regulating artificial intelligence for a decade, according to claims shared on social media in early June. As the Senate prepared to take up H.R. 1, more commonly known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, people online expressed their concerns about the alleged AI-related provisions in the legislation. For example, one X user shared this claim (archived) on June 2, 2025: Similar claims also appeared in Facebook (archived) posts (archived) around the same time. Snopes reviewed the text of H.R. 1 and found a provision that bans states from regulating AI systems "entered into interstate commerce" for 10 years in Section 43201 of the bill. Paragraph (c) in that section outlines the 10-year moratorium on states' AI regulation: (1) In general. – Except as provided in paragraph (2), no State or political subdivision thereof may enforce, during the 10-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, any law or regulation of that State or a political subdivision thereof limiting, restricting, or otherwise regulating artificial intelligence models, artificial intelligence systems, or automated decision systems entered into interstate commerce. In other words, if the bill becomes law, states and local governments will be blocked from enforcing any regulations on AI systems and models that are involved in interstate commerce for 10 years. The phrase "interstate commerce" broadly refers to business or activity that crosses state lines. But in the context of this bill, the distinction likely doesn't mean much. As a result, we've rated the claim mostly true. The Supreme Court has said activities that happen entirely within one state can still count as interstate commerce if they have a significant enough impact on the national economy, as David Brody, a civil rights and technology legal expert, explained in an article for Tech Policy Press published on May 27, 2025. That means many AI systems would likely be subject to the federal rules if H.R. 1 passes. However, there are some exceptions to the 10-year moratorium on states' AI regulation — notably for any laws or regulations that facilitate the rollout, operations or adoption of AI models and systems, according to the bill text. Snopes reached out to the White House and the office of U.S. Rep. Jodey Arrington, R-Texas, who introduced H.R. 1, for comment about the 10-year moratorium on states regulating AI and the purpose of including it in the bill, and is awaiting responses. Multiple Republican lawmakers have voiced support for the 10-year moratorium, with some saying a patchwork of state laws doesn't support innovation and others stressing the importance of a federal approach to AI regulation. But other federal and state lawmakers as well as watchdog groups have strongly opposed the proposed rule over concerns about limiting states' ability to deal with potential harms caused by AI. For example, U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., said in an X post on June 3, 2025, that she "did not know about" the section of H.R. 1 that bans states from regulating AI for a decade, adding that she is "adamantly opposed" to the provision. Hundreds of state lawmakers across the political spectrum also signed a letter addressed to the U.S. House and Senate on June 3, 2025, expressing "strong opposition" to the 10-year moratorium on AI regulation. The letter read in part, "The proposed 10-year freeze of state and local regulation of AI and automated decision systems would cut short democratic discussion of AI policy in the states with a sweeping moratorium that threatens to halt a broad array of laws and restrict policymakers from responding to emerging issues." Nearly two weeks earlier, a coalition of advocacy organizations, including Common Sense Media, Fairplay and Encode, also called on congressional leaders to oppose the provision, writing in part that AI companies would have "no rules, no accountability and total control" if it were to take effect. In a letter dated May 21, 2025, the groups wrote: As written, the provision is so broad it would block states from enacting any AI-related legislation, including bills addressing hyper-sexualized AI companions, social media recommendation algorithms, protections for whistleblowers, and more. It ties lawmakers' hands for a decade, sidelining policymakers and leaving families on their own as they face risks and harms that emerge with this fast-evolving technology in the years to come. Discussions about AI companions and possible issues arising from their use have gained prominence in recent months. For example, research from Drexel University in Philadelphia suggests that inappropriate behavior, including sexual harassment, during conversations with AI chatbots is "becoming a widespread problem," the university said on May 5, 2025. Consumer Reports, another advocacy organization, also raised concerns about states being unable to deal with a variety of issues that AI technology poses, including sexually explicit images, audio and video created without a person's consent. Snopes has previously looked into other claims about the "Big Beautiful Bill," including whether it contains a provision allowing the U.S. president to delay or cancel elections. Arrington, Jodey. "Text - H.R.1 - 119th Congress (2025-2026): One Big Beautiful Bill Act." 2025, Accessed 4 June 2025. Brody, David. "The Big Beautiful Bill Could Decimate Legal Accountability for Tech and Anything Tech Touches." Tech Policy Press, 27 May 2025, Accessed 4 June 2025. Cornell Law School. "Commerce Clause." Legal Information Institute, 18 Sept. 2018, Accessed 4 June 2025. Hendrix, Justin. "Transcript: US House Subcommittee Hosts Hearing on 'AI Regulation and the Future of US Leadership.'" Tech Policy Press, 21 May 2025, Accessed 4 June 2025. Open letter from consumer advocacy organizations to congressional leadership. Common Sense Media, 21 May 2025, Accessed 4 June 2025.
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The Millers: Washington power couple straddles Trump-Musk feud
They're the Washington couple at the center of power in the Trump administration. They're also straddling opposing sides of an explosive breakup between President Donald Trump and billionaire Elon Musk. CNN reported last week that Katie Miller, the wife of Stephen Miller, Trump's deputy chief of staff, would be departing her senior role at the White House as a top spokesperson and adviser for Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency. She was on her way to work for Musk as he went back to running his companies, helping the tech titan manage and arrange interviews unrelated to his time in government. But days later, amid the smoldering ruin of Musk and Trump's epic meltdown on Thursday over social media, that job suddenly took on a whole new layer. Among the attacks both men lobbed at each other was Musk endorsing the possibility of impeaching Trump and installing Vice President JD Vance in his place. Trump, in turn, raised the possibility of terminating federal contracts for Musk's companies. The episode has left the Millers on conflicting sides of the biggest breakup of Trump's second term, spawning gossip among White House aides and rounds of speculation about how the fallout could impact the political fortunes of one of the most powerful couples in Trump's Washington, where loyalty reigns. 'Everyone is talking about it,' a former Trump staffer told CNN. Katie Miller was in Texas last week for the series of interviews Musk held with space and technology journalists as SpaceX's Starship had its ninth test flight. It was there that Musk first delicately expressed he was 'disappointed' in the Republican's domestic policy bill in an interview with CBS News. Her X account is now a steady stream of laudatory posts about Musk and his companies, with a banner photo of a SpaceX rocket launching into space and a biography that says, 'wife of @stephenm.' Her only social media post on Friday was a reply with laughing emojis to an altered photo of her husband as a Home Depot employee attached to a post about immigration raids on the chain's stores. One former colleague told CNN that she will ultimately need to make a choice. 'She has a choice between Elon and Trump, but it can't be both,' the administration official said. Musk unfollowed Stephen Miller on X on Thursday, although both Millers continued following Musk on the platform into Friday. There are divided views on how the situation will impact Stephen Miller's ascendance. Among Trump's closest advisers, many believe he is surpassed in power only by Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, fueling speculation among some over whether he could take over should Wiles decide to move on. 'This whole thing will definitely make that more complicated,' one senior White House official told CNN. 'Katie being paid by Elon is not good for Stephen.' Another senior White House official strongly pushed back on the idea that this episode with Musk would impact Miller in any way with the President. 'Next to Susie, Trump trusts and relies on Stephen the most,' the official said, adding that the President and top brass were understanding that his wife working for Musk had nothing to do with Stephen or the current state of events. Katie Miller declined to comment for this story. Deeply connected and influential in Republican circles and at the highest levels of government, Stephen Miller and Katie Miller (née Waldman) met during Trump's first term in 2018. He was a senior adviser and speechwriter at the White House; she was on the Department of Homeland Security's public affairs team and on her way to becoming then-Vice President Mike Pence's communications director. He developed a reputation as the architect of some of the administration's most hardline immigration policies, becoming an influential and trusted aide in the Trump orbit. She developed her own reputation as a staunch supporter of those policies, once reflecting on a trip to the US-Mexico border as the administration came under fire for its child separation policy. 'My family and colleagues told me that when I have kids I'll think about the separations differently. But I don't think so … DHS sent me to the border to see the separations for myself — to try to make me more compassionate — but it didn't work,' Miller told NBC News journalist Jacob Soboroff in an interview for his book, 'Separated.' The pair married at Trump's Washington, DC, hotel in February 2020. Trump attended the wedding. In the four years after Trump left office, both set their sights on a Trump return to the White House. Stephen Miller launched a conservative nonprofit group, America First Legal Foundation, that served in part as a prelude to the policy of Trump's second term. Katie Miller headed to the private sector, where she consulted a number of major companies, including Apple. They were also raising three young children. Stephen Miller returned to the White House in January with a vast mandate, deeply involved in many of the president's signature policy initiatives and further empowered from the first term. Katie Miller joined the administration as well, working on behalf of DOGE and Musk, who had become a new figure in the Trump orbit after being an active campaign surrogate and 2024 megadonor. Like Musk, Katie Miller was working at the White House as a 'Special Government Employee,' which limits the number of days one can work within the administration. As their professional lives intertwined, the couple also became personally close with Musk, socializing outside of work. In the heat of the Thursday afternoon social media showdown, Stephen Miller had been scheduled to appear on Larry Kudlow's show on Fox Business Network – an appearance that was canceled. 'We lost Mr. Miller to a meeting in the Oval Office. Perfectly understandable. When I was in government, it would happen all the time. We'd have to kill a TV show. You're at the president's beck and call,' Kudlow said during his eponymous broadcast. This is not the first time Trump has divided a marital relationship. During his first term, Trump lashed out at the husband of one of his top advisers, Kellyanne Conway. Her husband, George Conway, had been intensely critical of Trump on social media. 'He's a whack job. There's no question about it. But I really don't know him,' Trump said at the time of George Conway. 'I think he's doing a tremendous disservice to a wonderful wife.' In 2023, the couple announced they were filing for divorce. George Conway, a prolific user of Musk's X platform and ardent anti-Trump figure, posted dozens of times about the Trump-Musk spat. 'Does anyone have any updates on Katie Miller?' he asked Thursday evening.
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Brooklyn Center attorney suspended by Minnesota Supreme Court
The Minnesota Supreme Court has indefinitely suspended attorney Susan Shogren Smith, who authorities say filed legal challenges in the November 2020 election without permission of the plaintiffs. The suspension from practicing law came Thursday, on the heels of a petition for disciplinary action against Shogren Smith filed by the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility saying that she has conducted professional misconduct. The Brooklyn Center attorney was given a $10,000 sanction in 2021 after a judge found she 'bamboozled' voters into signing on as plaintiffs without their knowledge or permission to file legal challenges against the election of five congressional Democrats. Calls to Shogren Smith on Friday were not returned. The petition for disciplinary action noted that a three-judge panel had determined she had committed a 'fraud on the court' and gave her an additional $15,000 sanction. The petition claims that Shogren Smith has failed to pay the $25,000, according to court documents. 'Respondent's misconduct is serious,' the state Supreme Court document said, 'and involved not just lack of competence and failure to communicate with clients, but dishonesty to the courts and disregard for the discipline process.' The court documents said her actions were 'not a brief lapse of judgement' but something that occurred for several years. Shogren Smith is a member of the MN Election Integrity Team, a conservative group that sought to prevent the state from certifying its election results while President Donald Trump and his allies promoted unfounded claims of election fraud. On Dec. 1, 2020, she filed five complaints in Ramsey County District Court, naming as defendants Secretary of State Steve Simon and the Democratic candidates who won their Congressional races. Those legal challenges were filed in the names of 14 separate voters, at least four of whom had no idea they were participating. 'Susan Shogren Smith … perpetrated a fraud against this court and, more importantly, perpetrated a fraud against these plaintiffs,' Ramsey County Chief District Judge Leonardo Castro said at the time the first sanction was imposed. In February of 2021, Republican activist Corinne Braun discovered her name was connected to one of the cases. 'To my horror, I saw that I had sued Steve Simon and Ilhan Omar. It was a surreal moment for me,' she said, likening the discovery to finding her car had been broken into. Braun testified she had received an anonymous email asking to add her name to a list of disgruntled voters. She filled out the form and signed her name and then forwarded the email to about 5,000 people on her mailing list. As Shogren Smith explained in court, what Braun had signed was an affidavit that agreed she 'will be joining with other voters across Minnesota to contest Minnesota election results.' Braun, though, said she didn't understand the implications. Shogren Smith acknowledged she never spoke with the plaintiffs or informed them of the outcome of the case, even when Braun and two other unwitting plaintiffs were ordered to pay $3,873 to the defendants at the conclusion of the case. Shogren Smith said at the time, she believed someone else with the MN Election Integrity Team was having those conversations with plaintiffs. 'I absolutely believed that those conversations were happening with these plaintiffs,' she said. U.S. Customs Border Protection officer charged with possessing child porn Man once convicted in Minnesota of supporting al-Qaida is now charged in Canada for alleged threats Jury finds Milwaukee man guilty of killing and dismembering 19-year-old woman 'We feel relief': Derrick Thompson found guilty in Minneapolis crash that killed five young women Man charged with hate crime in Boulder attack on 'Zionist people' appears in federal court
