Latest news with #Annapolis-based
Malaysian Reserve
01-05-2025
- Business
- Malaysian Reserve
Fichtner Home Exteriors Marks 14 Consecutive Years as Central Maryland's Most Trusted Roofer in "What's Up? Media's" Best of Annapolis Awards
ANNAPOLIS, Md., May 1, 2025 /PRNewswire/ — Fichtner Home Exteriors, an Annapolis-based leader in roofing and exterior home improvements, has solidified its legacy as a cornerstone of trust and quality. For an extraordinary 14th consecutive year, the company has been voted #1 roofer, siding contractor, window contractor, or gutter contractor in What's Up? Media's Best of Annapolis Awards, a powerful reflection of its roofing mastery and commitment to Central Maryland. Since 1997, What's Up? Media has connected the Chesapeake Bay region with over 300,000 monthly readers through What's Up? Annapolis, What's Up? Eastern Shore, and What's Up? Central Maryland. Its reader-voted Best of Annapolis Awards celebrate the area's finest, and Fichtner Home Exteriors' 14-year streak underscores its unmatched standing in Anne Arundel County and beyond. 'We're deeply humbled to be recognized for 14 straight years,' said Tom Fichtner, owner and president. 'Customer service is at our heart, and this enduring support from our community drives us to uphold the highest standards of quality and reliability.' Roofing is the bedrock of Fichtner Home Exteriors, proven by elite distinctions like GAF Master Elite status—earned by only 3% of U.S. roofing contractors—and membership in the National Roofing Contractors Association (NRCA) since 2000. Affiliations with TAMKO, James Hardie, and others ensure top-tier materials and techniques, while a 97% client recommendation rate highlights their excellence. Beyond roofs, their expertise spans siding, windows, doors, porches, and gutters, enhancing homes with precision. With decades of experience, Fichtner Home Exteriors has become a local standard-bearer, crafting storm-resistant roofs and energy-efficient solutions that stand the test of time. Licensed under MHIC #50157, their work reflects a deep-rooted passion for the craft and community. This 14-year milestone cements Fichtner Home Exteriors as Central Maryland's most trusted name in roofing and exterior improvements. Media Contact:Tom FichtnerFichtner Home ExteriorsPhone: 410.519.1900Email: Tom@
The Independent
28-03-2025
- Politics
- The Independent
US Naval Academy ends affirmative action in admissions
The U.S. Naval Academy will no longer consider race, ethnicity or sex as a factor for admission to the service institution, a response to an executive order by President Donald Trump, according to federal court documents made public Friday. The change in policy was made in February by Vice Adm. Yvette Davids, the academy's superintendent, in response to an executive order issued by President Donald Trump in January, according to a court filing by the U.S. Justice Department in the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The president's order on Jan. 27 said that 'every element of the Armed Forces should operate free from any preference based on race or sex.' It also directed the secretary of defense to conduct an internal review with respect to all 'activities designed to promote a race- or sex-based preferences system,' including reviews at the service academies. 'Under revised internal guidance issued by the Superintendent on Feb. 14, 2025, neither race, ethnicity, nor sex can be considered as a factor for admission at any point during the admissions process, including qualification and acceptance,' according to the court filing made public Friday. The decision comes after a federal judge ruled in December that the academy could continue considering race in its admissions process. In that case, the judge found that military cohesion and other national security factors mean the school should not be subjected to the same standards as civilian universities. During a two-week bench trial in September, attorneys for the academy argued that prioritizing diversity in the military makes it stronger, more effective and more widely respected. The case against the policy was brought by the group Students for Fair Admissions, which was appealing the judge's decision. The Justice Department asked in the filing on Friday to suspend the current briefing schedule in the case while the parties consider the change in the academy's policy. 'The parties require a reasonable amount of time to discuss the details of the Academy's new policy and to consider the appropriate next steps for this litigation, including whether this litigation is now moot and, if so, whether the district court judgment should be vacated," the Justice Department wrote. Students for Fair Admissions also brought the lawsuit challenging affirmative action that resulted in a landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 2023. The high court's conservative majority broadly prohibited the consideration of race and ethnicity in college admissions, ending a long-standing practice meant to boost opportunities for historically marginalized groups and sending shock waves through higher education. But it carved out a potential exemption for military academies, suggesting that national security interests could affect the legal analysis. Students for Fair Admissions later sued the Annapolis-based Naval Academy, challenging the exemption. But Judge Richard Bennett rejected their arguments, saying that the school had 'established a compelling national security interest in a diverse officer corps.' Attorneys for the group argued during trial that prioritizing minority candidates is unfair to qualified white applicants and that cohesion should arise from other sources such as training and command structure. The academy argued in that case that its admissions process considers many factors, including grades, extracurricular activities, life experience and socioeconomic status, according to court testimony. Race often played no role in the process, but sometimes it came under consideration in a 'limited fashion,' attorneys for the academy wrote in court papers.
Associated Press
28-03-2025
- Politics
- Associated Press
US Naval Academy ends affirmative action in admissions
ANNAPOLIS, Md. (AP) — The U.S. Naval Academy will no longer consider race, ethnicity or sex as a factor for admission to the service institution, a response to an executive order by President Donald Trump, according to federal court documents made public Friday. The change in policy was made in February by Vice Adm. Yvette Davids, the academy's superintendent, in response to an executive order issued by President Donald Trump in January, according to a court filing by the U.S. Justice Department in the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The president's order on Jan. 27 said that 'every element of the Armed Forces should operate free from any preference based on race or sex.' It also directed the secretary of defense to conduct an internal review with respect to all 'activities designed to promote a race- or sex-based preferences system,' including reviews at the service academies. 'Under revised internal guidance issued by the Superintendent on Feb. 14, 2025, neither race, ethnicity, nor sex can be considered as a factor for admission at any point during the admissions process, including qualification and acceptance,' according to the court filing made public Friday. The decision comes after a federal judge ruled in December that the academy could continue considering race in its admissions process. In that case, the judge found that military cohesion and other national security factors mean the school should not be subjected to the same standards as civilian universities. During a two-week bench trial in September, attorneys for the academy argued that prioritizing diversity in the military makes it stronger, more effective and more widely respected. The case against the policy was brought by the group Students for Fair Admissions, which was appealing the judge's decision. The Justice Department asked in the filing on Friday to suspend the current briefing schedule in the case while the parties consider the change in the academy's policy. 'The parties require a reasonable amount of time to discuss the details of the Academy's new policy and to consider the appropriate next steps for this litigation, including whether this litigation is now moot and, if so, whether the district court judgment should be vacated,' the Justice Department wrote. Students for Fair Admissions also brought the lawsuit challenging affirmative action that resulted in a landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 2023. The high court's conservative majority broadly prohibited the consideration of race and ethnicity in college admissions, ending a long-standing practice meant to boost opportunities for historically marginalized groups and sending shock waves through higher education. But it carved out a potential exemption for military academies, suggesting that national security interests could affect the legal analysis. Students for Fair Admissions later sued the Annapolis-based Naval Academy, challenging the exemption. But Judge Richard Bennett rejected their arguments, saying that the school had 'established a compelling national security interest in a diverse officer corps.' Attorneys for the group argued during trial that prioritizing minority candidates is unfair to qualified white applicants and that cohesion should arise from other sources such as training and command structure. The academy argued in that case that its admissions process considers many factors, including grades, extracurricular activities, life experience and socioeconomic status, according to court testimony. Race often played no role in the process, but sometimes it came under consideration in a 'limited fashion,' attorneys for the academy wrote in court papers.
Yahoo
28-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Sheriffs defend cooperation with federal officials on immigration enforcement
Frederick County Sheriff Chuck Jenkins testifies against a bill that would force his agency to cancel an agreement with Immigration and Customs Enforcement allowing the local department to enforce federal immigration law. (Photo by William J. Ford/Maryland Matters) Supporters of a bill that would force sheriff's departments to cancel agreements with federal immigration officials said deputies could still enforce the law just as effectively, they would just not be doing so as an extension of federal authorities. 'There are counties that do not have these formal agreements that still cooperate with ICE [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] still honor judicial warrants, still honor containers when they are presented to them,' Del. Nicole Williams (D-Prince George's) said Thursday during testimony for her bill, House Bill 1222. The bill would prohibit local law enforcement agencies from entering into so-called 287(g) agreements that allow ICE to delegate some federal enforcement authorities to local officers, including the authority to arrest and check a person's immigration status through a federal database. The bill also requires those departments that have 287(g) agreements to cancel them by July 1. Six counties — Carroll, Cecil, Frederick, Garrett, Harford and Washington — currently have 287(g) agreements with ICE. Frederick and Harford sheriffs turned up at Thursday's Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee hearing to defend the program. 'Please allow the local counties to provide public safety as they see fit,' Harford County Sheriff Jeffrey Gahler said. Frederick County Sheriff Chuck Jenkins said his jurisdiction has been part of the 287(g) program since 2008 and 'removed 1,795 criminals,' the majority of whom he described as 'dangerous' and 'violent.' Gahler noted that since his department signed a 287(g) agreement in 2014, ICE has chosen not to initiate action in 35% of cases there. He also pointed to the popularity of the agreements, citing a January poll by Annapolis-based Gonzales Research & Media that found 76% of people surveyed said they would support requiring local governments to cooperate with federal efforts to enforce immigration laws. But opponents of the agreements say 287(g) agreements 'significantly undermined any trust in law enforcement' in immigrant communities. '287(g) agreements literally turn local law enforcement into ICE agents,' said Nicholas Katz, general counsel for the nonprofit immigrant-rights organization CASA, based in Prince George's County. 'In this moment, Black and brown families don't know if it's safe to go to work, if its safe to walk their kids to school, if it's safe to go to the hospital,' Katz said. Under Williams' bill, which passed the House 98-38 last week, if federal authorities identify an immigrant who's been convicted and is being held in a local jail, the local officials would have to give ICE at least 48 hours notice before release of the imate, and would have to turn the immigrant over when federal authoritis arrived. At Thursday's hearing, Sen. Chris West (R-Baltimore County) said the sheriffs would continue to do their job protecting the public, but asked if not having the 287(g) program would decrease their public safety work. It would, Gahler said. 'If we lose the ability to have these agreements with ICE, we lose what comes along with it,' Gahler said. 'Which is finding out whether these people are indeed in the country illegally, and recommendations from ICE in relation to national security.' SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE Sen. William C. Smith Jr. (D-Montgomery), chair of the committee, said he understood the perspectives from supporters and opponents of the bill. But he acknowledged 'there is a distinct fear' under the administration of President Donald Trump (R), who has made an immigration crackdown a key element of his tenure. The 287(g) program began under former President Bill Clinton (D) in the 1990s. 'I guess our policy debate here is centered on the federal prerogatives and their implementation of deportation policy and the existence of 287(g) in Maryland,' Smith said. 'Is that creating such an atmosphere that people are not going to want to cooperate with law enforcement? Live life?' he asked. 'Is that something that is beneficial to keeping the 287(g) program or getting rid of it?'
CBS News
12-03-2025
- Health
- CBS News
Maryland disability advocates press lawmakers to pass bill helping those with mobility challenges
Maryland disability advocates are pushing for lawmakers to pass a bill that would require insurance coverage for people who have mobility impairments. The Orthotics bill would require insurance to cover the cost of orthotic devices. However, time is running out with the approaching Crossover Day, which is the deadline to determine whether the bill advances. Advocates say two medical orthoses are necessary for people with disabilities to live a fulfilling and active life. But insurance typically only covers one brace for everyday use. A group of advocates, led by Maryland veteran and Paralympian John-Edward Heath, are leading the fight to change that. Crossover Day is March 17. "We're in a deficit, there's a lot of changes going on federally," Heath said. "So we're trying to figure out whether our bill is going to be able to pass or if we're going to have to try again next year." In 2024, Heath led the group that called on Maryland lawmakers to pass the "So Everybody Can Move Act," which requires the Maryland medical assistance program and state commercial plans to cover prosthetics designed for physical activities, including running, biking, or swimming. Why two braces are necessary Maryland resident Matthew Mitchell said orthoses gave him his life back after he had a devastating spinal injury and nerve damage following a 35-foot fall off a roof. "I woke up in a hospital, completely unable to move my left leg," Mitchell said. At 23 years old, Mitchell was using a cane and was only able to walk about 25 yards. He made significant progress working with Annapolis-based orthotist Charlie Kelly, who set him up with a custom brace. He eventually upgraded Mitchell to another brace allowing him to walk and hike long distances. "This brace is important for the ability to push off and actually train my foot on how to walk," said Mitchell. "They're both necessary." Kelly said his patients deserve to see the bill become law.
