Cleveland drivers could face $250 fine for passing school buses illegally
CLEVELAND (WJW) — To say Cleveland City Councilman Kevin Conwell is passionate about students in the Cleveland Metropolitan School District would be an understatement.
In office since 2001, the Ward 9 councilman is now making bus safety one of his top priorities, after witnessing countless drivers ignore the flashing red stop signs when picking up and dripping off students.
Browns say city 'misguiding' Clevelanders on stadium: Court
'Very, very frustrating to me as a father, as a grandfather,' he said. 'It's our job to protect children. When you see that as a legislator, my job is to write policy for people who work, live and travel through the city of Cleveland.'
His newly-drafted legislation would call for cameras to be installed on the stop signs that extend from the buses to catch violators in the act.
'I got tired of seeing when I'm driving in the neighborhood, people going around the buses when the stopped arms is extended outwards, they're going around. And guess what, you're putting our children at risk,' he said.
With support needed from the district, Conwell says many school board members are on board. He said once the council votes that will hopefully encourage the district to install the cameras, paid for, he said, by a fund, created by those who break the law.
Cleveland schools spent nearly $1M on travel before tax hike: I-Team
'We'll fine them to the tune of $250 and we'll send it to their houses and when they're fined, it will help to change their behavior,' he said. 'Also the fines will set up a fund to pay for the cameras.'
CMSD provides bussing for students in Kindergarten through 8th grade who live one mile away or further from school, roughly 15,000.
The councilman is hoping to have the cameras installed in time for the 2025-2026 school year.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Kate Beckinsale Sues Film Producers After Injury On Set
Kate Beckinsale has launched a lawsuit against the producers of "Canary Black," accusing them of gross negligence and battery after suffering a serious knee injury on set. The "Serendipity" star claims she was pushed to work under hazardous conditions that ignored her health, safety, and repeated warnings. Her legal team says the injury was not only foreseeable but also preventable. In an amended complaint filed on May 21 in Los Angeles Superior Court, Beckinsale accused "Canary Black" producers, including Anton Entertainment and John Zois, of exposing her to "dangerous and unsafe conditions." According to court documents obtained by Entertainment Weekly, Beckinsale and her team flagged issues such as grueling 15-hour workdays, a lack of medical personnel, and inadequate stunt preparation. "Ms. Beckinsale and her team repeatedly raised red flags regarding unsafe conditions on and off set to Defendants, including long, dangerous set days, often lasting fifteen hours, inadequate equipment and medical personnel to help manage the high physical workload and recover from the exertion off set, and failure to adequately inform Ms. Beckinsale of what stunts she was expected to perform until often the moment she had to perform it," the filing stated. Despite the warnings, the lawsuit claims producers continued to prioritize profits over safety. Beckinsale alleged, "The producers continued to recklessly and intentionally forge ahead with unsafe filming conditions, forgoing safety to maintain profit margins, and in the process, put Ms. Beckinsale in harm's way." Kate Beckinsale initially filed anonymously in December, but the new complaint includes damning communications. Her agent, Shani Rosenzweig, emailed Zois in frustration, writing, "No one is actually taking real action to put a plan in place to fix this situation so it never happens again… [Ms. Beckinsale] keeps showing up to set for her call time and everyone around her has been made aware it's going to be a 15 hour [or more] day except for her." Rosenzweig didn't mince words, adding, "If you're trying to kill a person, you're doing a great job." Zois reportedly replied, "I don't know what else to say other than you're right," acknowledging the production schedule was "unsustainable" and promising changes. However, according to Beckinsale's legal team, nothing changed. She was allegedly pressured to work long days and perform dangerous stunts without proper training or safety precautions. The actress suffered a complex meniscus tear in her left knee in December 2022, requiring surgery and a production shutdown. Before she returned, her surgeon instructed her to avoid "running, jumping, harness suspension, squatting, or kicking." However, those orders were allegedly ignored. Beckinsale's complaint states she was coerced into doing "unsafe action sequences," leading to further injury. Her legal team argued that this ongoing disregard for her health caused severe emotional distress and physical harm. Kate Beckinsale's legal complaint is not the first time she has spoken out about issues she faced on set. After Blake Lively accused Justin Baldoni of harassment and online defamation, Beckinsale praised her for speaking up in a now-deleted Instagram video. In the deeply personal video, Beckinsale shared disturbing details about the abuse and mistreatment she has endured while working in the film industry. The actress recalled being insulted for calling out a male co-star who was "drunk every day" and caused hours of delays. She said, per The Blast, "He was going through something. I have sympathy for that, but I was waiting, as was the crew, for six hours a day for him to learn his lines. It means I'm not getting to see my daughter in the evenings the whole movie." Beckinsale added, "The studio's response was to give me a bike so I could ride around the studio lot while I was waiting. And then, of course, I was called a c-nt and a b-tch. During a take, I was called a 'stupid b-tch.'" She also revealed that on two different productions, she was subjected to such extreme diet and exercise routines that she "lost my periods altogether." The actress revealed that a male co-star once injured her during a fight scene, leading to MRIs. Yet when she raised concerns, she claimed she "was gaslit and made to feel like I was the problem and blamed and left out of cast dinners." Even more shocking, she shared, "I was forced by a publicist to film the day after I had a miscarriage. I said, 'I can't. I'm bleeding. I don't want to go and change my clothes in front of people I don't know and do a photoshoot. I'm bleeding out a miscarriage.'" Beckinsale continued, "She was like, 'You'll have to, or you'll be sued.'"
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Nancy Mace said 'due process is for citizens.' Here's who it's really for
In early June 2025, Republican U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace of South Carolina wrote an X post (archived) that read: "Due process is for citizens." Her comment had been viewed more than 2.4 million times as of this writing and had amassed more than 6,500 likes. The same claim has appeared in multiple X posts. In a similar tone, in May 2025, another X user wrote: "Due process is for citizens, not invaders." (X user @NancyMace) In short, due process is the legal principle that the government must follow fair procedures before depriving a person of life, liberty or property. It serves as a safeguard against arbitrary actions by the state, ensuring that people are treated justly under the law. For a more detailed explanation, see our full breakdown in this article on former President Bill Clinton's 1996 immigration law. While Mace's post did not explicitly say that due process protections are, or should be, limited to only U.S. citizens, her replies below the post reinforced that interpretation. However, the U.S. Constitution protects all "persons," not just citizens, under the due-process clauses of the Fifth and 14th amendments. The Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed that these protections apply to anyone physically present in the United States regardless of citizenship or immigration status. An MSNBC article on the topic similarly concluded that Mace's "implication … that noncitizens don't get that protection" was "incorrect." The South Carolina representative doubled down on her stance in the replies below her post, suggesting that noncitizens should not be entitled to due-process protections in the U.S. For example, when one X user wrote, "The Constitution doesn't say 'only citizens.' Due process applies to persons — that includes non-citizens. That's settled law," Mace replied by saying: "Skip due process coming in, don't expect it going out. Citizens first!" Other replies further suggested she believed only U.S. citizens should be entitled to such protections (archived, archived, archived). (X users @FJBIDEN_22 and @NancyMace) These exchanges were not the first time Mace commented on due process. In late May 2025, she weighed in on the principle in response to a federal judge's decision to block the deportation of eight noncitizens convicted of violent crimes. The day before U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy issued a 17-page order in which he emphasized that "the Court recognizes that the class members at issue here have criminal histories. But that does not change due process," Mace criticized the ruling, telling Fox News (archived): "They didn't want due process on their way in illegally, they shouldn't get due process on their way out." However, the representative's comments about due process contradicted remarks she made about the principle in the past. In February 2023, Mace wrote on X (archived): "Everyone deserves the right to due process. Even those we vehemently oppose." (X user @NancyMace) Snopes has reached out to Mace for comment on whether she maintains that due-process protections should apply only to U.S. citizens and how she reconciles that view with her 2023 statement. We will update this article if we receive a response. The U.S. Constitution's guarantee of due process appears in the Fifth and 14th amendments, both of which state that no person should be deprived "of life, liberty or property, without due process of law." As shown, the language uses "person," not "citizen," with regard to due-process protections. Further, the Supreme Court has repeatedly interpreted that due-process protections apply to everyone within U.S. borders regardless of citizenship or immigration status. In Shaughnessy v. United States ex rel Mezei (1953) the Court emphasized (Page 212) that "aliens who have once passed through [U.S.] gates, even illegally, may be expelled only after proceedings conforming to traditional standards of fairness-encompassed in due process of law." Similarly, in cases such as Zadvydas v. Davis (2001) and earlier decisions dating back more than a century, the Supreme Court made clear that the government cannot detain or deport people arbitrarily. In the 2001 case, the Court underscored that "the Due Process Clause applies to all persons within the United States, including aliens, whether their presence is lawful, unlawful, temporary, or permanent." In simple words, noncitizens must be given fair procedures, such as notice or a "credible fear interview," before being deprived of their liberty. The Supreme Court expressed the same view in the case of Reno v. Flores (1993), stating: "It is well established that the Fifth Amendment entitles aliens to due process of law in deportation proceedings." This was not the first time Snopes addressed a claim regarding Mace. For instance, in late May 2025, we investigated a rumor that she ordered staffers to create burner accounts to promote her online. Meanwhile, earlier in June 2025, we also fact-checked a rumor about whether the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, signed by Clinton, allowed deportation without due process. "327K Views · 15K Reactions | Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) Responds to Arguments That Illegal Immigrants Convicted of Heinous Crimes Deserve Due Process after a Judge Blocks a Deportation Flight to South Sudan | 'They Didn't Want Due Process on Their Way in Illegally, They Shouldn't Get Due Process on Their Way Out.' Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) Responds to Arguments... | by Fox News | Facebook." 2022, Accessed 6 June 2025. "U.S. Constitution - Fifth Amendment | Resources | Constitution Annotated | | Library of Congress." 15 Dec. 1791, Constitution Annotated. "U.S. Constitution - Fourteenth Amendment | Resources | Constitution Annotated | | Library of Congress." 9 July 1868, Deng, Grace. "Did Nancy Mace Order Staffers to Create Burner Accounts to Promote Her Online? Here's What We Know." Snopes, 30 May 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025. Dunbar, Marina. "Court Halts Trump Administration's Effort to Send Eight Men to South Sudan." The Guardian, The Guardian, 23 May 2025, Gabbatt, Adam. "Group Stranded with Ice in Djibouti Shipping Container after Removal from US." The Guardian, The Guardian, 6 June 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025. " 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025. "Reno v. Flores, 507 U.S. 292 (1993)." Justia Law, Rubin, Jordan. "Due Process Is Not Limited to Citizens, Contrary to Nancy Mace's Claim." MSNBC, 4 June 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025. Wrona, Aleksandra. "Bill Clinton Did Not Sign Law in 1996 Allowing Deportation without Due Process." Snopes, 5 June 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025. "Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001)." Justia Law,
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Kilmar Abrego Garcia's lawyers ask judge to release him from custody pending trial
Lawyers for Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the Salvadoran man illegally deported to his native country in March and returned to the U.S. last week to face human trafficking charges, say the Trump administration is compounding his mistreatment by trying to keep him in jail while awaiting trial. 'Mr. Abrego Garcia asks the Court for what he has been denied the past several months — due process,' his lawyers, four appointed public defenders, argued in a20-page filing to a federal magistrate judge in Nashville, Tennessee, where Abrego Garcia was secretly indicted last month ahead of his return. U.S. Magistrate Judge Sarah Holmes has set a hearing for Friday on whether Abrego Garcia should be detained as he awaits trial. However, even if she opts against detention in the criminal case, Abrego Garcia will likely be put in immigration custody and his prospects for release there are uncertain. Holmes has given both sides a deadline of noon local time Thursday to indicate whether they plan to call witnesses at the hearing. However, defense attorneys argue in the new filing that the crimes Abrego Garcia was charged with don't permit pretrial detention in most circumstances. Prosecutors allege that Abrego Garcia worked for at least nine years as a driver for an immigrant-smuggling operation and that he was transporting undocumented immigrants in 2022 when he was stopped by Tennessee Highway Patrol on I-40 with 'nine Hispanic males packed into' his vehicle. That incident, captured on officers' body-worn video cameras, involved just a few of the thousands of undocumented immigrants Abrego Garcia ferried across the country, prosecutors contend. Abrego Garcia currently faces two federal felony charges for transporting undocumented immigrants and conspiring with others to do so. But prosecutors have accused him in court papers of being a member of the MS-13 gang and engaging in a 'myriad of illegal conduct,' including claiming involvement in the murder of a rival gang member's mother and of soliciting child pornography. The submission from Abrego Garcia's lawyers is his first attempt to rebut the criminal allegations against him. The attorneys used the filing to poke holes in the government's legal arguments while making few factual claims that could complicate his future defense in the case. Abrego Garcia 'obviously denies the government's baseless gang-affiliation allegations,' his attorneys said, while not grappling with the murder and child pornography claims prosecutors have floated but not charged. The defense attorneys argue that Abrego Garcia is not a danger to the public and poses no risk of fleeing rather than facing the charges against him, the two bases upon which prosecutors are seeking to keep him incarcerated. 'Mr. Abrego Garcia must be released,' they say. Abrego Garcia entered the United States in 2012 and sought asylum in 2019, after he was detained and faced deportation proceedings. Though his claim was denied, an immigration judge agreed to bar immigration officials from sending him back to El Salvador because of the potential that he might be targeted for violence by a local gang. But in March, amid President Donald Trump's mass deportation effort, Abrego Garcia was whisked onto an airplane and sent to El Salvador without warning, violating the 2019 order, which remains in effect. Despite the error, which the Trump administration repeatedly acknowledged in court, Trump and his aides resisted court orders to facilitate Abrego Garcia's return. They disparaged him as a criminal gang member and mocked legal efforts aimed at securing his return. Trump and El Salvador's president, Nayib Bukele, discussed the issue publicly in the Oval Office and rejected suggestions that they return Abrego Garcia to the United States. That changed last week after the criminal case was made public. Bukele said he had no qualms returning Abrego Garcia, given the charges against him. In the meantime, Abrego Garcia became emblematic of Trump's haphazard race to fulfill his mass deportation promise, marked by repeated court rulings that found him to be violating due process rights and several other admissions of erroneous deportations. That publicity, Abrego Garcia's lawyers say, suggests he may have an even stronger case against deportation to El Salvador when the criminal matter is resolved — even if he's convicted.
