Today in History: Supreme Court rules in Miranda v. Arizona
Today is Friday, June 13, the 164th day of 2025. There are 201 days left in the year.
Today in history:
On June 13, 1966, the Supreme Court ruled in Miranda v. Arizona that criminal suspects had to be informed of their constitutional rights to remain silent and consult with an attorney.
Also on this date:
In 1942, during World War II, a four-man Nazi sabotage team arrived by submarine on Long Island, New York, three days before a second four-man team landed in Florida. (All eight men were arrested within weeks, after two members of the first group defected.)
In 1967, President Lyndon B. Johnson nominated Solicitor General Thurgood Marshall to become the first non-white justice on the U.S. Supreme Court.
In 1971, The New York Times began publishing excerpts of the Pentagon Papers, a top secret study of America's involvement in Vietnam since 1945, that had been leaked to the paper by military analyst Daniel Ellsberg.
In 1983, the U.S. space probe Pioneer 10, launched in 1972, became the first spacecraft to leave the solar system as it crossed the orbit of Neptune.
In 1996, the 81-day-old Freemen standoff in Montana ended as the 16 remaining members of the anti-government group left their ranch and surrendered to the FBI.
In 2000, the first meeting between leaders of North Korea and South Korea since the Korean War began as South Korean President Kim Dae-Jung met North Korean leader Kim Jong-Il in Pyongyang.
In 2013, the White House said it had conclusive evidence that Syrian President Bashar Assad's government had used chemical weapons against opposition forces seeking to overthrow him.
In 2022, the committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol was told that Donald Trump's closest campaign advisers, top government officials and even his family were dismantling his false claims of 2020 election fraud ahead of the insurrection, but the defeated president was becoming 'detached from reality' and clinging to outlandish theories to stay in power.
Today's Birthdays: Actor Malcolm McDowell is 82. Former U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon is 81. Actor Stellan Skarsgård is 74. Actor Richard Thomas is 74. Former heavyweight boxing champion Mike Weaver is 74. Actor-comedian Tim Allen is 71. Actor Ally Sheedy is 63. Sportscaster Hannah Storm is 63. Musician Rivers Cuomo (Weezer) is 55. Actor-comedian Steve-O is 51. Actor Ethan Embry is 47. Actor Chris Evans is 44. Actor Kat Dennings is 39. Fashion designers and former actors Ashley Olsen and Mary-Kate Olsen are 38. Actor Aaron Taylor-Johnson is 35. Actor Kodi Smit-McPhee is 29.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
38 minutes ago
- The Hill
Raskin takes swipe at Trump over price of military parade, GOP megabill
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) slammed President Trump for his Saturday military parade, which is expected to cost millions of dollars. 'As tanks roll down PA. Ave and planes streak above, remember this is all courtesy of the taxpayers,' Raskin wrote in a post on the social media platform X. 'Maybe there will be goodie bags for 14 million people who used to have Medicaid,' he added, referencing Medicaid cuts in the president's spending bill. The celebratory event held in honor of the Army's 250th birthday also coincides with the president's 79th birthday. The parade plans, which feature the public display of tanks and weapons from World War II, are expected to cost between $25 million and $45 million, according to the Army. 'It's a surprise party! Most people's spouse or family pay for theirs, but—surprise!—you're paying for Donald Trump's $45 million 79th birthday military parade,' Raskin wrote on Saturday. For months, Raskin and other Democrats have rebuked the Trump administration for the House-approved GOP spending bill that would add $2.4 trillion to the national debt while locking out some Medicaid recipients with new work requirements. Republicans have lauded the bill for its extensions to Trump's 2017 tax cuts and $1,000-per-baby investment accounts . The president has suggested that tariffs will mitigate a significant rise in the national debt while encouraging patrons to honor the country's history of servicemembers in the Army during the military parade hosted on Flag Day. 'OUR GREAT MILITARY PARADE IS ON, RAIN OR SHINE. REMEMBER, A RAINY DAY PARADE BRINGS GOOD LUCK. I'LL SEE YOU ALL IN D.C.' Trump wrote in a Saturday Truth Social post. Sixty-four percent of Americans disapprove of the use of state funds for this weekend's military parade, according to results from a NBC Decision Desk Poll.
Atlantic
an hour ago
- Atlantic
A Test of Presidential Powers
Donald Trump is embroiled in conflicts, facing new tests of his presidential powers and of his willingness to use military force. Panelists on Washington Week With The Atlantic joined to discuss the conflict between Israel and Iran—and how it is a test of Trump's influence. Iran likely does not want to draw the United States into war, but Israel might have other incentives. Those, including some on the right, who do not want the Trump administration to become enmeshed in this conflict fear that Benjamin Netanyahu 'launched this wider-scale attack that didn't just target nuclear facilities, but also military personnel and scientists, in part to try and make Iran's response bigger to then draw the U.S. in,' Tyler Pager, a White House correspondent at the The New York Times, said last night. Joining guest moderator and staff writer at The Atlantic, Ashley Parker, to discuss this and more: Eugene Daniels, a senior Washington correspondent and a co-host of The Weekend at MSNBC; Tyler Pager, a White House correspondent at the The New York Times; Matt Viser, the White House bureau chief at The Washington Post; and Nancy Youssef, a national-security correspondent for the The Wall Street Journal. Watch the full episode here.
Los Angeles Times
2 hours ago
- Los Angeles Times
What will happen to food assistance under Trump's tax cut plan? A look at the numbers
President Trump's plan to cut taxes by trillions of dollars could also trim billions in spending from social safety net programs, including food assistance for lower-income people. The proposed changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program would make states pick up more of the costs, require several million more recipients to work or lose their benefits, and potentially reduce the amount of food aid people receive in the future. The legislation, which narrowly passed the U.S. House, could undergo further changes in the Senate, where it's currently being debated. Trump wants lawmakers to send the 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act' to his desk by July 4, when the nation marks the 249th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. Here's a look at the food assistance program, by the numbers: The federal aid program formerly known as food stamps was renamed the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, on Oct. 1, 2008. The program provides monthly payments for food purchases to low-income residents generally earning less than $1,632 monthly for individuals, or $3,380 monthly for a household of four. The nation's first experiment with food stamps began in 1939. But the modern version of the program dates to 1979, when a change in federal law eliminated a requirement that participants purchase food stamps. There currently is no cost to people participating in the program. A little over 42 million people nationwide received SNAP benefits in February, the latest month for which figures are available. That's roughly one out of every eight people in the country. Participation is down from a peak average of 47.6 million people during the 2013 federal fiscal year. Often, more than one person in a household is eligible for food aid. As of February, nearly 22.5 million households were enrolled in SNAP, receiving an average monthly household benefit of $353. The money can be spent on most groceries, but the Trump administration recently approved requests by six states — Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Nebraska and Utah — to exclude certain items, such as soda or candy. Legislation passed by the House is projected to cut about $295 billion in federal spending from SNAP over the next 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office. A little more than half of those federal savings would come from shifting costs to states, which administer SNAP. Nearly one-third of those savings would come from expanding a work requirement for some SNAP participants, which the CBO assumes would force some people off the rolls. Additional money would be saved by eliminating SNAP benefits for between 120,000 and 250,000 immigrants legally in the U.S. who are not citizens or lawful permanent residents. Another provision in the legislation would cap the annual inflationary growth in food benefits. As a result, the CBO estimates that the average monthly food benefit would be about $15 lower than it otherwise would have been by 2034. To receive SNAP benefits, current law says adults ages 18 through 54 who are physically and mentally able and don't have dependents need to work, volunteer or participate in training programs for at least 80 hours a month. Those who don't do so are limited to just three months of benefits in a three-year period. The legislation that passed the House would expand work requirements to those ages 55 through 64. It also would extend work requirements to some parents without children younger than age 7. And it would limit the ability of states to waive work requirements in areas that lack sufficient jobs. The combined effect of those changes is projected by the CBO to reduce SNAP participation by a monthly average of 3.2 million people. The federal government currently splits the administrative costs of SNAP with states but covers the full cost of food benefits. Under the legislation, states would have to cover three-fourths of the administrative costs. States also would have to pay a portion of the food benefits starting with the 2028 fiscal year. All states would be required to pay at least 5% of the food aid benefits, and could pay more depending on how often they make mistakes with people's payments. States that had payment error rates between 6-8% in the most recent federal fiscal year for which data is available would have to cover 15% of the food costs. States with error rates between 8-10% would have to cover 20% of the food benefits, and those with error rates greater than 10% would have to cover 25% of the food costs. Many states could get hit with higher costs. The national error rate stood at 11.7% in the 2023 fiscal year, and just three states — Idaho, South Dakota and Vermont — had error rates below 5%. But the 2023 figures are unlikely to serve as the base year, so the exact costs to states remains unclear. As a result of the cost shift, the CBO assumes that some states would reduce or eliminate benefits for people. The House resolution containing the SNAP changes and tax cuts passed last month by a margin of just one vote — 215-214. A vote also could be close in the Senate, where Republicans hold 53 of the 100 seats. Democrats did not support the bill in the House and are unlikely to do so in the Senate. Some Republican senators have expressed reservations about proposed cuts to food assistance and Medicaid and the potential impact of the bill on the federal deficit. GOP Senate leaders may have to make some changes to the bill to ensure enough support to pass it. Lieb writes for the Associated Press.
