Afternoon Briefing: Dexter Reed settlement in limbo
Good afternoon, Chicago.
A controversial settlement remains in legislative limbo after a deal to award $1.25 million to the family of a man shot and killed by police after firing at officers first was not brought up for a planned vote today.
Aldermen had appeared poised for a tense debate over the settlement recommended by city attorneys for the family of Dexter Reed as a way to avoid a potentially more costly payout in court. But Ald. Pat Dowell, chair of the City Council's Finance Committee, withheld the settlement when it came up for a vote.
Here's what else is happening today. And remember, for the latest breaking news in Chicago, visit chicagotribune.com/latest-headlines and sign up to get our alerts on all your devices.
President Donald Trump is expected to pardon ex-Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich 5 years after commuting his sentence
President Donald Trump will pardon Democratic former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich, according to a person familiar with his plans. Trump commuted Blagojevich's 14-year sentence for political corruption charges during his first term. Read more here.
Two major winter storms expected to hit Chicago area this week
Madigan jurors return for 9th day of deliberations
Lakeview home once owned by rocker Billy Corgan sells for $2.5M
The six-bedroom, 5,750-square-foot Victorian painted lady-style house in Lakeview that rocker Billy Corgan owned from 1993 until 2001 sold once again Feb. 3, this time for $2.5 million. Read more here.
More top business stories:
Column: Steph Curry's Jordanesque night takes a bit of the sting out of an epic Chicago Bulls collapse
The United Center crowd of 21,297, many of whom were wearing Steph Curry jerseys and unabashedly rooting for the Warriors Saturday night, left the building en masse after Curry was removed with just under four minutes remaining. Read more here.
More top sports stories:
Here is a clear case for why Lorraine Hansberry's story about a Black Chicago family is one of the best plays of the 20th century. Read more here.
More top Eat. Watch. Do. stories:
President Donald Trump says no right of return for Palestinians in Gaza under his plan for US 'ownership'
The president said Palestinians in Gaza would not have a right to return under his plan for U.S. 'ownership' of the war-torn territory, contradicting other officials in his administration who have sought to argue Trump was only calling for the temporary relocation of its population. Read more here.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
10 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Liberals under fire for rushing bill through Parliament to speed up resource projects
OTTAWA — Prime Minister Mark Carney's government is coming under fire for seeking to rush through a major piece of legislation that grants cabinet sweeping powers to quickly approve major projects. Government House leader Steven MacKinnon put a motion on notice Thursday that would push Bill C-5 through the House of Commons by the end of next week — leaving just one day to hear from civil society groups, stakeholders and experts. Critics charge the move is anti-democratic. In a fiery exchange in question period, Bloc Québécois House Leader Christine Normandin accused Prime Minister Mark Carney of trying to "steamroll" a bill through the House that would greatly expand his own powers. "The prime minister has no right to impose C-5 under closure when the bill gives him exceptional powers unlike anything that we've seen before," she said in French. "Is that the prime minister's intention, to bypass Parliament and govern by decree like Donald Trump?' MacKinnon pushed back by saying "Canadians and Quebecers spoke loud and clear" in the last election for action to shore up the economy, in part due to the illegal trade war initiated by U.S. President Donald Trump. "We are acting in a democratic way," he said, noting the bill delivers on election promises laid out clearly in the Liberal platform. The bill includes controversial provisions that could allow cabinet to skirt existing processes and laws to fast-track approvals for projects the government deems to be in the national interest. The government aims to streamline disparate processes to limit approval timelines for big projects to a maximum of two years, boosting investor confidence. When asked about the timeline at a press conference Thursday, Energy Minister Tim Hodgson said the legislation needs to pass quickly to shore up an economy being undermined by Trump's tariffs. "We have a trade war that is affecting sector after sector after sector. Canadians' jobs are at risk. Canadians' livelihoods are at risk. And quite frankly, the prosperity of the country is at risk," Hodgson said. But NDP MP Leah Gazan said in the House of Commons foyer Thursday that the bill isn't going to build the economy out because it will trigger a series of court challenges. She called on the government to extend the time frame of the public study and do more to consult with Indigenous Peoples — something she said got shortchanged in the bill. "I'm calling on the prime minister to slow it down, to not rush a bill that has this much consequence through in five days," she said. Hodgson pointed to support for the bill from the First Nations Major Projects Coalition, which represents more than 100 First Nations seeking to have their own projects advanced, and said he is consulting privately with stakeholders. "I can tell you I've got multiple conversations going on with different rights holders and business leaders as part of my department's efforts to ensure that consultation is robust," he said. Indigenous Services Minister Mandy Gull-Masty said there will be a meeting between the Prime Minister's Office and First Nations leaders, citing the wildfires as one reason it has been delayed. "I also want to acknowledge that because there are many communities in a critical state of wildfire and evacuation, that time will be taken to have that dialog," she said. "I know that it is the intention of the Prime Minister's Office to sit down with First Nation's leadership directly and to have the economic discussion and hear from them." But Anna Johnston, staff lawyer at West Coast Environmental Law, said the drive to push the bill through quickly is "incredibly concerning" because the government has done "very little engagement" so far on such a major piece of legislation. "The biggest concern is that it's going to give cabinet the power to approve projects before they have any information about them beyond what the proponent has decided to give the government," she said. "There's a reason why we have decisions at the end of environmental assessments and regulatory processes. It's so that governments can make informed decisions about projects that have the potential to harm Canadians and to harm the environment." Stuart Trew, a senior researcher with the left-leaning think tank Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, said the bill is "destined to end up in court" and "really bump up against the government's commitments to reconciliation with First Nations." "It seems geared to let the government ram projects through, without adequate study, without all the usual considerations about the impacts on endangered species," he said. "We should raise our eyebrows any time a government claims a national emergency in order to rush through legislation with implications as significant as this does." The legislation also looks to break down internal trade barriers and make it easier for workers to take jobs in other provinces. MacKinnon rejected a call from the Bloc Québécois this week to split the landmark legislation in two. That would have allowed the House to speed through the less contentious internal trade provisions while putting the controversial major projects portion under the microscope. Carney has vowed repeatedly to eliminate interprovincial trade barriers by Canada Day, 19 days from now. The House has been sitting for just three weeks and is currently scheduled to rise next week on June 20. MacKinnon said in a scrum on Wednesday that he has not tried to get consensus from the other parties to have the House sit any later. This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 12, 2025. Kyle Duggan, The Canadian Press
11 minutes ago
Democrats slam military parade as Trump's multimillion-dollar 'birthday party'
Congressional Democrats and at least one high-profile Republican are slamming the multimillion-dollar cost of the Army 's 250th anniversary parade on Saturday that President Donald Trump has long sought to celebrate the military. Trump has said the cost -- projected to be as much as $45 million for the Army alone, not counting security and other expenses -- will be "peanuts compared to the value of doing it." However, his critics argue the money could be better spent elsewhere. "If it was really about celebrating military families, we could put $30 million toward helping them offset the cost of their child care, food assistance and tuition," Sen. Tammy Duckworth said on X. "But it isn't. Trump is throwing himself a $30 million birthday parade just to stroke his own ego." The Army said it has accounted for spending between $25 million and $45 million on the parade, which will include 6,700 troops and dozens of tanks, military fighting vehicles and aircraft staged on or near the National Mall. "Money should be put in medical defense research instead of wasted on some pomp and circumstance for the president," Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., said during a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Wednesday. "This is not consistent with what the men and women in uniform deserve." Saturday's parade also falls on Trump's 79th birthday, and when it ends near the White House, the Army's Golden Knights parachute team will present him with an American flag, after which he'll administer the constitutional oath to Army enlistees. "We all like to enjoy a nice birthday party," Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., posted on X. "But most of us don't celebrate with a $45 million taxpayer-funded military parade. "Save taxpayer money. Have a birthday cake and blow out a few candles," he said. "Don't shut down the capital and roll out 60-ton tanks through the streets." "I wouldn't have done it," Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul said. "We were always different than, you know, the images you saw in the Soviet Union and North Korea. We were proud not to be that." Some Democrats echoed that criticism. "It's outrageous," Rep. Yassamin Ansari, D-Ariz., said. "This is something that would happen in North Korea, not the United States of America. Donald Trump thinks he's a king. He's not. He was elected as president of the United States, and he should act as such." Army spokesman Steve Warren defended the parade, saying, "It is a lot of money, but I think that amount of money is dwarfed by 250 years of service and sacrifice that American soldiers have given this country. "We're looking at this as an opportunity to really strengthen the connection between America and her Army," he added. "So, yeah, it's a lot of money, but it pales in comparison to what we're selling." The White House this week also requested a flyover by the Air Force Thunderbirds. When asked Thursday what he hopes the public will remember about the parade, Trump said, "How great our country is, very simple, and how strong our military is." "We have the strongest military in the world," he added. The White House has not responded to requests for a total cost estimate that would include money spent on security and other arrangements. Several Republicans say they're skipping the parade due to prior commitments, including House Speaker Mike Johnson. Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene said she would attend and defended the display. "Washington D.C. is the safest it's ever been!!" she wrote. "I wish our great military men and women could just stay here. I am so excited for the parade celebrating the 250th anniversary of our United States Army!!" Protests of the Trump administration's immigration crackdown are planned across the country to counterprogram the parade, with the flagship "No Kings" protest occurring in Philadelphia. Nine small protests are also expected in Washington, according to the Secret Service and local officials. Trump has warned protesters will be met with "heavy force." On Friday, he disputed the characterization of him as a king. "I don't feel like a king. I have to go through hell to get stuff approved," he said, adding, "No, no, we're not a king. We're not a king at all."
Newsweek
15 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Bernie Sanders Introduces Bill Backing RFK Jr., Elon Musk Priority
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Senator Bernie Sanders is leading a new bill to address a key priority of Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who serves as President Donald Trump's Health and Human Services Secretary. Why It Matters Sanders, a Vermont independent, alongside Senator Angus King, a Maine independent, introduced the "End Prescription Drug Ads Now Act," which, if passed, would ban prescription drug advertising on TV, radio, print and digital platforms as well as social media. Critics say these ads contribute to the high price of healthcare while doing little to improve care in the United States, though proponents say the advertisements can improve patients' knowledge of healthcare. Most wealthy countries, with the U.S. and New Zealand being two notable exceptions, ban pharmaceutical drug advertisements. The bill also represents an issue where Sanders, viewed as perhaps the most progressive senator, has found common ground with Kennedy inside the Trump administration, though the secretary has not commented on this bill specifically. What to Know Sanders and King announced the legislation on Thursday, highlighting that the pharmaceutical industry spent more than $5 billion on TV ads in 2024 and that many of these drugs cost more in the U.S. than in other countries that do not allow drug companies to run ads on TV. "The American people are sick and tired of greedy pharmaceutical companies spending billions of dollars on absurd TV commercials pushing their outrageously expensive prescription drugs," Sanders said, describing the fact that the U.S. stands mostly alone in allowing pharmaceutical ads as an "international embarrassment." vSenator Bernie Sanders, a Vermont independent, questions U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. during a committee hearing on May 14, 2025 in Washington, D.C. vSenator Bernie Sanders, a Vermont independent, questions U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. during a committee hearing on May 14, 2025 in Washington, director of communications Anna Bahr confirmed to Newsweek his office has reached out to Republicans to join the bill. Bahr pointed to lobbying from the pharmaceutical and health insurance industries as to why the U.S. has not joined other countries in bannign the ads. "Over the past 25 years, the drug companies have spent $8.5 billion on lobbying. Today, they have some 1,800 well-paid lobbyists in Washington, D.C. – including former leaders of the Republican and Democratic parties," she said in a statement to Newsweek. "Unbelievably, that is more than three lobbyists for every member of Congress. During that same period, they have provided over $700 million in campaign contributions. And they are equal opportunity contributors. They contribute heavily to both Republican and Democratic candidates." Secretary Kennedy—as well as Elon Musk, who previously served in Trump's administration—have expressed support for ending pharmaceutical advertising. "Let's get President Trump back in the White House and me to DC so we can ban pharmaceutical advertising," Kennedy wrote in a post to X (formerly Twitter) on November 3, 2024. During his own presidential campaign, Kennedy said he would have issued an executive order ending the advertisements on his first day in office. Newsweek reached out to DHS for comment via the department's press contact form. Caleb Alexander, professor of epidemiology at the Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, told Newsweek that while a potential ban's impact on drug prices remains uunclear, there would be benefits to ending these advertisements. Pharmaceutical advertisements can drive up "inappropriate demand" for prescription drugs in settings where they may not be needed, he said. "In terms of the potential benefits of banning [direct-to-consumer advertisements], the most immediate and likely is that it would temper demand for products in settings where they may not be needed," Alexander said. The U.S. has "evolved to believe" the benefits of the ads, such as empowering patients to identify health concerns, outweigh the risks, though much of the research on the topic indicates that the benefits may not be worth the drawbacks, he said. What People Are Saying Alexander told Newsweek: "Direct to consumer advertising has been a lightning rod for controversy, and it remains a curious and unique feature of the U.S. marketplace. While a ban on direct advertising may be welcomed by many, it's not going to fundamentally transform the marketplace for prescription drugs in the United States, simply because DTCA is highly concentrated among a small number of products. It may be a reasonable political and public health target, but I think that if you just look at the way the dollars flow, there's vastly more money spent on marketing drugs to prescribers." Senator Angus King wrote in a statement: "The widespread use of direct-to-consumer advertising by pharmaceutical companies drives up costs and doesn't necessarily make patients healthier. The End Prescription Drug Ads Now Act would prohibit direct-to-consumer advertising of pharmaceutical drugs to protect people. This bill is a great step to ensure that patients are getting the best information possible and from the right source: their providers and not biased advertisements." Elon Musk wrote to X in November 2024: "No advertising for pharma." What Happens Next It's unclear whether a majority of senators are also in support of the bill. So far, Democratic Senators Chris Murphy of Connecticut, Peter Welch of Vermont, Jeff Merkley of Oregon and Dick Durbin of Illinois have co-sponsored the bill, according to Sanders' office.
