It was one of several bills signed Wednesday that lawmakers say establish Maryland as a leader in health care access.

The constitutional amendment will be on general election ballots in November 2024. The measure is a response to the U.S. Supreme Court‘s decision last summer in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization to leave it to states to decide how to regulate abortion access.

The Supreme Court’s ruling was a reversal of its Roe v. Wade decision decades earlier, under which the U.S. Constitution protected a woman’s right to an abortion.

“I’ve heard story after story about how women in other states aren’t getting the care they need and had their lives at risk because of abortion restrictions,” said House Speaker Adrienne Jones, a Baltimore County Democrat. “Anyone seeking or providing abortion care will always be able to come to Maryland safely to get the care that they need or treat those who need it.”

Moore said the state will be putting “the health and safety of the majority over the political ambitions of a select few.”

The Supreme Court’s decision didn’t change Maryland’s law on abortion, which prohibits the state from interfering with an abortion before viability — generally within 24-26 weeks, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a reproductive rights research group — or at any point if a woman’s health is at risk.

The high court’s ruling granted state lawmakers the authority to preserve abortion access or enact restrictions that were previously unconstitutional.

There are 14 states with near total bans on abortion, including Maryland’s western neighbor, West Virginia, according to a New York Times tracker.

The four states bordering Maryland, including Pennsylvania, Delaware and Virginia, all have more restrictions on abortion access than Maryland.

Another measure signed Wednesday improves legal protections for abortion providers assisting people who come to Maryland for an abortion. The measure protects those seeking an abortion, too.

Moore also signed into law legislation to regulate, license and tax businesses that will sell recreational cannabis when it becomes legal for people ages 21 and older on July 1, which Marylanders voted for in November.

Sales of recreational cannabis will come with a 9% tax, a portion of which will go to organizations that serve communities most harmed by the criminalization of cannabis and the enforcement of laws against using or possessing it.

Moore said the measure he signed will “ensure that the rollout of recreational cannabis in our state drives opportunity in an equitable way,” lifting low-income communities and communities of color.

Senate President Bill Ferguson, a Baltimore City Democrat, said he believes Maryland’s recreational cannabis industry will become a national model for how to create economic opportunities for communities that have suffered the most because of the war on drugs.

Under another measure signed Wednesday, transgender Marylanders on Medicaid will have more access to gender-affirming treatments beginning in January.

Gender-affirming care helps people align their body or appearance with their gender identity and alleviate distress from gender dysphoria, which can occur when the sex someone was assigned at birth doesn’t align with their gender identity.

“In our state, no one should ever have to justify their humanity,” Moore said before signing the bill.

Moore has signed more than half of the 810 bills lawmakers passed in the last legislative session. He’s yet to act on gun-control measures passed after the Supreme Court loosened concealed carry restrictions in its New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen decision, though he said he intends to sign them.

Moore has until May 30 to sign or veto bills, and any that he doesn’t act on will become law.

The Maryland Appellate Court found that state police were correct to deny a license to the man, Mark McCloy, because his conviction for witness tampering under federal law is equivalent to a Maryland statute that would be disqualifying.

Under state law, Marylanders can be denied a handgun qualification license if they have been convicted of a “disqualifying crime:” a crime of violence, a felony, or a misdemeanor that brings a possible penalty of more than two years in prison.

The Maryland State Police determined that McCloy’s 1999 conviction in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia was a disqualifying crime because the equivalent law in Maryland carries a maximum sentence of 10 years.

A three-judge panel of the Appellate Court upheld MSP’s decision and announced a new standard for determining whether an out-of-state conviction is a disqualifying crime for a Maryland handgun license.

The court reviewing a denial should first compare the elements of the out-of-state crime with the equivalent Maryland statute to determine if they prohibit the same conduct; then, the court should weigh whether a reasonable person would conclude that the conduct leading to the out-of-state conviction would be prohibited under the Maryland law.

McCloy pleaded guilty to witness tampering in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in 1999 and was sentenced to six months of home detention and five years of probation, court records show.

While he was a government employee, McCloy was accused of having sex with a coworker and then offering her money to dismiss a sexual harassment claim she brought against him, leading to the federal charge, according to the Appellate Court panel’s 32-page opinion.

Judge Stuart R. Berger authored the opinion.

In 2015, McCloy applied for and received a Maryland handgun license, which he used to purchase several firearms, according to the opinion. MSP denied McCloy’s application when he sought a license again in 2021 because a background check turned up the 1999 conviction. The conviction did not federally prohibit McCloy from possessing a firearm but was disqualifying under Maryland law, MSP found.

McCloy appealed, first to the Office of Administrative Hearings and then to circuit court in Queen Anne’s County. Both an administrative law judge and the circuit judge upheld MSP’s decision, albeit on different grounds.

The Appellate Court panel rejected McCloy’s argument that because his conviction took place in 1999, it could only be compared to other Maryland laws that existed in 1999. The judges found MSP should compare out-of-state crimes based on Maryland law at the time a handgun license application is received.

“In short, it is irrelevant what the laws of Maryland were at the time of his conviction; what matters is that the statute deemed comparable to the out-of-state conviction was in place at the time he submitted his HQL application,” Berger wrote.

The judges agreed that the federal crime to which McCloy pleaded guilty is equivalent to a Maryland statute that prohibits using “corrupt means” to impede a witness from testifying in court.

They also rejected McCloy’s claims that the disqualification violates the U.S. and Maryland constitutions’ prohibitions on retrospective punishment — Maryland’s handgun regulations are civil, not criminal rules, the judges noted — and that his due process rights were violated because he was not informed in 1999 that his plea would impact his ability to own a gun in Maryland.

Lawyers for McCloy did not respond to requests for comment Tuesday.

Democratic Sen. Ben Cardin of Maryland announced Monday that he will not seek reelection at the end of his third term in 2024, triggering what is likely to be a highly competitive primary to replace him in the blue-leaning state.

“I am proud of all I have done for Maryland. I have given my heart and soul to our great state, and I thank Marylanders for trusting me as your representative for all these years,” the 79-year-old said in a statement.

Cardin has served in the Senate since 2006 when he won a seat to replace retiring Democrat Paul Sarbanes. Before that, he was a congressman who represented a large part of Baltimore and several nearby suburbs, winning his first U.S. House race in 1986.

During his tenure in the Senate, Cardin has been a leader in health care, retirement security, the environment and fiscal issues. The senator has also been a leading advocate for clean water and the Chesapeake Bay, the nation’s largest estuary, which flows through his home state.

He helped write the Paycheck Protection Program that helped small businesses in Maryland and nationwide endure the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. He also created the Economic Injury Disaster Loan Advance Grant program to quickly get cash to small businesses in need.

His legislation to expand Medicare to include preventive benefits such as colorectal, prostate, mammogram, and osteoporosis screening was also enacted.

“I salute my friend and our state’s senior Senator Ben Cardin on his extraordinary public service to Maryland and our country,” Sen. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland said in a statement Monday. “It is a privilege to serve alongside him and in partnership every day for the people of our great state.”

Cardin’s decision is likely to spur interest among Maryland Democrats in the House eying a chance to step up or among current or former state office holders.

On the Republican side, GOP strategists who couldn’t convince then-Gov. Larry Hogan to oppose Van Hollen may hope that the popular Hogan is more receptive to seeking a Senate seat since he’s no longer in the governor’s mansion or weighing a presidential bid.

On Monday, Democrats and others took time to praise Cardin, who was generally a low-key member of the U.S. Senate.

“For over 50 years, Maryland has benefited from his tireless work across our communities, this state, and this nation,” said Gov. Wes Moore. “His personal sacrifice is admirable and his impact on our home is truly immeasurable — from his work on the Chesapeake Bay to his efforts to pass the Affordable Care Act, his work has benefited so many.

“Ben Cardin is a model public servant, principled leader, and citizen,” said Rep. Kweisi Mfume, D-7th, who lost a Senate primary race against Cardin in 2006. “I have been honored to call him my friend and colleague for over 4 decades. He deserves our heartiest congratulations today and every day for the 57 years of untiring work on behalf of Marylanders”

Cardin also has worked in foreign affairs, supporting the integration of anti-corruption, transparency and respect for human rights into foreign policy. He chaired the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, also known as the U.S. Helsinki Commission.

Cardin counts among his achievements the passage of his legislation to increase the amount Americans can put into their 401(k) plans and IRAs, which was enacted in 2001.

Cardin also had a long career in state government before he became a congressman. He won a seat in the Maryland House of Delegates in 1966. He served as the Maryland House speaker from 1979 to 1986.

As a state legislator and a member of Congress, Cardin has generally supported liberal views, emphasizing increased aid for education, tax relief for low-income people and protection of the environment.

The guilty verdict came on the second day of deliberations following a trial in which the Trump Organization was accused of being complicit in a scheme by top executives to avoid paying personal income taxes on job perks such as rent-free apartments and luxury cars.

The conviction is a validation for New York prosecutors, who have spent three years investigating the former president and his businesses, though the penalties aren’t expected to be severe enough to jeopardize the future of Trump’s company.

As punishment, the Trump Organization could be fined up to $1.6 million — a relatively small amount for a company of its size, though the conviction might make some of its future deals more complicated.

Trump, who recently announced he was running for president again, has said the case against his company was part of a politically motivated “witch hunt” waged against him by vindictive Democrats.

Trump himself was not on trial but prosecutors alleged he “knew exactly what was going on” with the scheme, though he and the company’s lawyers have denied that.

The case against the company was built largely around testimony from the Trump Organization’s former finance chief, Allen Weisselberg, who previously pleaded guilty to charges that he manipulated the company’s books and his own compensation package to illegally reduce his taxes.

Weisselberg testified in exchange for a promised five-month jail sentence.

To convict the Trump Organization, prosecutors had to convince jurors that Weisselberg or his subordinate, Senior Vice President and Controller Jeffrey McConney, were “high managerial” agents acting on the company’s behalf and that the company also benefited from his scheme.

Trump Organization lawyers repeated the mantra “Weisselberg did it for Weisselberg” throughout the monthlong trial. They contended the executive had gone rogue and betrayed the company’s trust. No one in the Trump family or the company was to blame, they argued.

Though he testified as a prosecution witness, Weisselberg also attempted to take responsibility on the witness stand, saying nobody in the Trump family knew what he was doing.

“It was my own personal greed that led to this,” an emotional Weisselberg testified.

Weisselberg, who pleaded guilty to dodging taxes on $1.7 million in fringe benefits, testified that he and McConney conspired to hide that extra compensation from his income by deducting their cost from his pre-tax salary and issuing falsified W-2 forms.

During his closing argument, prosecutor Joshua Steinglass attempted to refute the claim that Trump knew nothing about the scheme. He showed jurors a lease Trump signed for Weisselberg’s company-paid apartment and a memo Trump initialed authorizing a pay cut for another executive who got perks.

“Mr. Trump is explicitly sanctioning tax fraud,” Steinglass argued.

The verdict doesn’t end Trump’s battle with Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, a Democrat who took office in January.

Bragg has said that a related investigation of Trump that began under his predecessor, District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr., is “active and ongoing.”

In that wide-ranging probe, investigators have examined whether Trump misled banks and others about the value of his real estate holdings, golf courses and other assets — allegations at the heart of New York Attorney General Letitia James’ pending lawsuit against the former president and his company.

The district attorney’s office has also investigated whether any state laws were broken when Trump’s allies made payments to two women who claimed to have had sexual affairs with the Republican years ago.

Near the end of his tenure last year, Vance directed deputies to present evidence to a grand jury for a possible indictment of Trump. After taking office, though, Bragg let that grand jury disband so he could give the case a fresh look.

On Monday, he confirmed that a new lead prosecutor had been brought on to handle that investigation, signaling again that it was still active.

The pandemic has challenged the resourcefulness, skill and compassion of health care professionals. Both the public health care sector and private sector have found their systems, networks and underlying operations sorely tested.

The men and women leading our health care institutions, as well as key policymakers and advocates, have risen to this challenge. They are the 30 individuals you will meet in this special publication, The Daily Record’s inaugural Power 30 Health Care List.

This list was chosen by our editorial team. We reached out to readers and others for input and perspective. Many of the Power 30 are familiar to all of us, but some are known mostly inside their organizations or communities.

In these pages, we explore how these leaders view the health care landscape, not only how it now exists but what it may look like in the future. And, just as importantly, we’ve tried to offer a glimpse into the kind of people they are, what drives them to excel, to lead, to serve.

This list is part of a series of Power Lists throughout 2021 that will showcase the most powerful figures in law, higher education, manufacturing and other fields. It was preceded by our Power 100 List, which showcased the most powerful men and women from all fields of endeavor across Maryland.

You can find this and all our Power Lists on our website, TheDailyRecord.com.

We hope you enjoy this publication, and we welcome your feedback and suggestions.

Thomas Baden Jr.
Editor

Bob Atlas
President, CEO
Md. Hospital Association

Victoria W. Bayless
CEO
Luminis Health

Kathleen A. Birrane
Commissioner
Maryland Insurance Administration

Jinlene Chan
Deputy Secretary for Public Health Services
Maryland Department of Health

John Chessare
CEO
GBMC

Vincent DeMarco
President
Maryland Health Care for All

Joe DeMattos
President
Health Facilities Association of Maryland

Michele Eberle
Executive Director
Md. Health Benefit Exchange

Bruce Jarrell
President
University of Maryland, Baltimore

Aliya Jones
Deputy Secretary for Behavioral Health
Maryland Department of Health

Thomas Kleinhanzl
President, CEO
Frederick Memorial Hospital

Ken Kozel
President, CEO
UM Shore Regional Health

David N. Maine
President, CEO
Mercy Health Services

Sam McClure
Executive Director
Center for LGTBQ Health Equity

Neil Meltzer
President, CEO
LifeBridge Health

Redonda Miller
President
Johns Hopkins Hospital

Joseline Pena-Melnyk
Delegate
State of Maryland

Brian Pieninck
President and CEO
CareFirst

E. Albert Reece
Dean
University of Maryland School of Medicine

William Regine
Executive Director
Maryland Proton Center

Carmel Roques
CEO
Keswick

Barry Rosen
Chairman
Gordon Feinblatt

Kenneth Samet
CEO
MedStar Health

Joshua M. Sharfstein
Vice Dean/Director
Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health/Bloomberg American Health Initiative

Lyle Sheldon
President, CEO
University of Maryland Upper Chesapeake Health

Leslie Simmons
Senior Vice President, COO
LifeBridge Health

Kevin Sowers
President
Johns Hopkins Health System

Mohan Suntha
President
University of Maryland Medical System

Gustavo Torres
Executive Director
CASA de Maryland

Ruth Williams-Brinkley
Mid-Atlantic Regional President
Kaiser Permanente

Redonda G. Miller

PRESIDENT, THE JOHNS HOPKINS HOSPITAL

When Redonda G. Miller was named president of Johns Hopkins Hospital in 2016, she became the first woman to hold the title in the institution’s 127-year his-tory.

While continuing to see patients as a practicing internist, Miller has used her tenure to strive for excellence at the institution. In 2019, the hospital became the largest academic medical center in the world to be certified for person-centered care by Planetree International.

What’s the most important lesson you’ve learned in your career?

The most important lesson I’ve learned in my career, no matter the role, is that teamwork is essential to success. Whether we are managing the COVID-19 crisis or the day-to-day needs of a large academic hospital, leveraging the collective expertise of the group — from the front-line providers and staff to the most senior executives — drives the best possible outcomes for our patients.

What are your hopes for the state or your community this year?

My hope is that we are able to return to a semblance of normalcy this year and that our new normal will be a combination of the best of our pre-COVID-19 and current COVID-19 lives. A lot has been said about what we’ve lost during the pandemic, but I like to think about the silver linings from our experience: We’ve de-veloped a greater sense of community and appreciation for those on the front lines, a new openness to different ways of working, and a keen understanding of the need to improve health equity.

This profile is part of The Daily Record's Power 100 list for 2021. Information used in this profile was sourced from the honoree. See the full list at thedailyrecord.com or in our digital edition.

Rachel Garbow Monroe

PRESIDENT AND CEO, THE HARRY AND JEANETTE WEINBERG FOUNDATION

When Rachel Garbow Monroe first joined the Harry and Jeanette Weinberg Foundation in 2005 as its first chief operating officer, the nonprofit only had a small staff. Through her work and 2010 promotion to president and CEO, the foundation has expanded to employ more than 60 staff members in offices in Baltimore and Honolulu.

She has championed several major foundation initiatives over her tenure. One is the $15 million Baltimore Elementary and Middle School Library project, which has built or renovated 16 libraries that serve close to 13 percent of all Baltimore City Public School students. Another project includes increasing accessibility for campers and staff with disabilities through a $12 million partnership with the Foundation for Jewish Camp.

Before coming to the foundation, Garbow Monroe served as chief operations officer for The Associated: Jewish Community Federation of Baltimore, director of marketing for the architectural firm Skidmore, Owings & Merrill and marketing manager for the Jewish Community Centers of Chicago.

What are your hopes for the state or community this year?

When I think about our collective hopes for the state of Maryland in the coming year, I can’t help but remember what Maya Angelou once wrote: “The challeng-ing days of my existence may or may not be bright and promising. Stormy or sunny days, glorious or lonely nights, I maintain an attitude of gratitude. If I insist on being pessimistic, there is always tomorrow. Today I am blessed.”

I hope now, almost a year into COVID-19, we are perhaps finally starting to step onto the long road to recovery with better days ahead.

This profile is part of The Daily Record's Power 100 list for 2021. Information used in this profile was sourced from the honoree. See the full list at thedailyrecord.com or in our digital edition.

William E. Lori

ARCHBISHOP OF BALTIMORE, ROMAN CATHOLIC ARCHDIOCESE OF BALTIMORE

William E. Lori was ordained into the priesthood in 1977 and has been archbishop of Baltimore since 2012.

He is the former chairman of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Committee on Doctrine and the Ad Hoc Committee for Religious Liberty.

In 2002, in recognition of his role as an emerging leader on the Catholic Church’s response to the sexual misconduct crisis, Lori was appointed to the USCCB Ad Hoc Committee on Sexual Abuse. He was instrumental in drafting the landmark Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People.

What’s the most important lesson you’ve learned in your career?

To remember how much God loves every person I meet, whether they are lifelong friends, colleagues, parishioners, community members or someone I just met on the street.

What’s been your biggest success?

Attracting dedicated and talented co-workers who are focused on mission and are a joy to work with.

Who have been the biggest mentors in your career?

Cardinal James Hickey, who served as the archbishop of Washington from 1980 to 2001.

What are your hopes for the state or your community this year?

This is a big year for the archdiocese. I hope to see us all staying safe and moving past this global pandemic. I also wish great success to the opening of our new school in Baltimore, Mother Lange Catholic School — the first Catholic school to be opened in Baltimore in six decades.

This profile is part of The Daily Record's Power 100 list for 2021. Information used in this profile was sourced from the honoree. See the full list at thedailyrecord.com or in our digital edition.

Public universities in Maryland canceled classes and will prepare to shift to online classes following spring break and Maryland hospitals made changes to their visitor policies and schools canceled field trips Tuesday as the state’s institutions continued to respond to the rapidly evolving COVID-19 epidemic.

University System of Maryland Chancellor Jay Perman instructed university presidents to prepare for students to remain off campus for at least the two weeks following spring break — which begins Saturday and lasts through March 22  — and said classes may be canceled this week to prepare.

“Given the residential nature of the universities within the System, USM must apply an abundance of caution to ensure that students and employees are protected and safe,” Perman said in a statement. “Therefore, I strongly urge every university to prepare for students to remain off campus—for at least two weeks—following the end of spring break. During those two weeks or longer, all USM universities should be prepared to deliver instruction remotely.”

Towson University became the first university to cancel classes, announcing Tuesday afternoon that classes Wednesday through Friday would be canceled. The university asked students to take all essential belongings, medications, and materials from their residence hall or work space in case campus access were to become restricted.

The system’s Board of Regents will receive a briefing from Perman and state Health Secretary Robert R. Neall — who is also a regent — Tuesday evening. 

Universities across the country, including American University, Ohio State University and Harvard University have moved their classes online. 

While the campuses will encourage  students to remain off campus, Perman also emphasized that they will remain open before, during and after spring break.

“Preparation for campus departures and online instruction will vary among universities, and each USM president therefore has discretion to ensure that faculty and staff have adequate time to set these plans in motion,” he said. “While this means that some classes may be canceled this week, all campuses will remain open before, during, and after spring break.”

Maryland hospital systems have put in place more stringent visitor policies that include restrictions on child visitors and visitors who have recently traveled internationally.

The University of Maryland Medical System announced over the weekend that one of its hospitals was treating a patient with a confirmed case of COVID-19, the disease caused by the coronavirus.

“The coronavirus disease poses several challenges to an extended family presence at a patient’s bedside including potential spread of the virus to patients and staff by those with asymptomatic or mild infection,” David Marcozzi, the system’s COVID-19 incident commander, said in a statement.  “Enacting these changes to visitation is consistent with recommendations from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention regarding response to the coronavirus.”

UMMS and LifeBridge Health made changes, effective Wednesday.

Their changes include:

• All visitors must check in at the front desk;
• No visitors younger than 18 are permitted in hospitals, ambulatory clinics or urgent care facilities;
• One adult visitor per patient;
• Visitors will be screened for flu-like symptoms and cannot visit if they have symptoms;
• Visitors who recently traveled internationally may not visit 14 days after they arrive in the U.S.

At LifeBridge, children of patients will be allowed to visit.

Luminis Health’s coronavirus visitors policy says children younger than 12 should not visit, people with cold- or flu-like symptoms should not visit and patients or visitors coming to Luminis hospitals with respiratory symptoms must request a mask.

Greater Baltimore Medical Center said it had not updated its visitor policy, but was reviewing its policies daily and would update if necessary.

Hospitals put some similar restrictions in place during the heights of flu season, Marcozzi said.

“These enhanced visitor limitations are designed to protect the health and safety of the public, our staff and our patients, now that there are confirmed cases of COVID-19 in Maryland,” he said. “We understand this is a challenging time for many in our communities and we are continuing to remain vigilant and work with local, state and federal partners to keep patients and health care workers safe.”

UMMS has also suspended all animal therapy because of reports of canine COVID-19 transmission. Service animals are still permitted.

At LifeBridge’s Sinai, Northwest and Carroll hospitals, tents have been set up outside of the emergency departments as a precaution in case the hospitals need a large area to screen and triage patients, LifeBridge said in a news release. 

“While we hope that we will not have need for them, having these tents in place will allow our teams to respond more quickly should the need arise,” the release said.

Maryland school systems have also begun to make changes as responses to the virus evolve.

Howard County Public Schools Superintendent Michael Martirano cancelled all out-of-state field trips and athletic events, including trips to Washington, D.C. and said the system was evaluating in-state trips with a decision coming by Thursday.

“The decision to cancel out-of-state field trips was made out of an abundance of caution to minimize risk to HCPSS students, staff and families,” he said in a statement.

After one semester of law school, Dani Rush realized being an attorney was not for her.

But Rush refused to quit. Bolstered by people who told her that practicing law would be different from studying it, she graduated in less than three years and passed the bar exam.

“I don’t like the idea of quitting something without seeing it through,” said Rush, who graduated from the University of Baltimore School of Law in 2013. “That’s why when I finished up with law school, even though I knew after the first semester it wasn’t a good fit, I wanted to practice as well.”

Rush worked in family law for six months and then in criminal defense for a year before leaving the profession.

“For some reason, I’m one of those people that cannot separate work from life,” she said of her time practicing criminal defense law. “Dealing with all the personal stories is kind of what got me out of it.”

A brief stint with an event planning company in Bethesda followed. Then Rush’s mother, Maryann Rush, a broker and appraiser with more than three decades of experience in real estate, suggested the two become partners in a real estate venture. Dani Rush, at her mother’s insistence, had received her broker’s license while she was in college but had let it lapse.

The hypothetical discussion soon led to reality, with Dani Rush sitting for the real estate exam again and then listing her first home within a month. She is now the president of Belrush Realty, a Timonium-based boutique firm.

Though she no longer practices law, Rush said the experience and the connections she made in law school have been helpful in her real estate career.

“It really helped me in the beginning when I was starting from scratch, because in real estate all you have is your reputation,” she said. “From a reputation standpoint, people give a lot more credence to attorneys, whether we deserve it or not.”

Rush said she is also able to think through a contract like an attorney and make sure she does the best job for her clients.

Though she appreciates how her law degree has helped her, Rush said she has no plans to return to practicing law and is on inactive status with the Maryland Bar. With her first child due in September, Rush said real estate will provide a more flexible schedule for a new parent.

“I don’t regret anything,” she said. “I think it’s all led me to where I am and I’m pretty happy with where I am.”

Maryland police can no longer stop people based solely on the suspicion that they are carrying a handgun, the Appellate Court of Maryland ruled last week.

In a Thursday opinion, all 14 judges of the state’s intermediate appellate court ruled that the possession of a handgun is presumptively legal and that a stop must be justified by reasonable suspicion of other crimes. The opinion marked the first time in 14 years that the Maryland Appellate Court heard a case en banc.

Appellate Judge Kathryn Graeff wrote that a 2022 U.S. Supreme Court opinion expanding gun rights had the effect of significantly restraining police from conducting stop-and-frisks. Graeff wrote that the decision was “compelled” by the Supreme Court ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen.

“Without a presumption of illegality, mere possession of a handgun is not, by itself, indicative of criminal activity that justifies an investigatory stop,” Graeff wrote. “To be sure, this holding is a big change in the law. Arguably, it is not a positive change, to the extent that it limits the ability of the police to thwart danger to the public.”

In making the decision, the court ruled that the Baltimore City Circuit Court was wrong to deny a motion to suppress the evidence obtained during the unconstitutional police stop.

In July 2023, Baltimore Police officers saw a large group at an intersection in Northwest Baltimore and stopped Steven Hicks, who started to walk away from the group when he noticed the unmarked police car. The officers saw a gun in his waistband and stopped him, though he told them multiple times that he had a valid permit. Officers frisked him and rummaged through his pockets and bag, and found drugs and another gun.

After his motion to suppress was denied, Hicks pleaded guilty to possession of a firearm with a nexus to a drug trafficking crime. He was sentenced to five years then appealed.

The Maryland Office of the Attorney General is reviewing the opinion to determine next steps, according to spokesperson Kelsey Hartman.

Maryland Public Defender Natasha Dartigue, whose office represented Hicks, celebrated the appellate court’s decision.

“The Appellate Court of Maryland has made clear that exercising a constitutional right is not grounds for a police stop,” Dartigue stated. “This court decision protects all Marylanders, but it matters most to communities of color that have long borne the weight of over-policing. Constitutional rights do not depend on where you live, who you are, or how heavily your community is policed.”

The court held that even if the police had reasonable suspicion to stop Hicks, the frisk was improper, as officers only have permission during such stops to pat the outside of pockets, not to remove objects from suspects’ pockets, bags or clothing.

“Our holding does not, however, leave the police powerless,” Graeff wrote. “As indicated, the police are permitted to engage in a consensual encounter with an individual; they can approach someone and ask if they have a license.”

“The mere possibility, however, that a person with a gun might not have a valid license, or may otherwise be restricted from possessing a gun, is not enough, by itself, to justify a seizure,” she wrote. “To justify a stop based on possession of a gun, the police must have reasonable suspicion that the person is possessing the gun illegally.”

There were no dissents, but several judges filed concurring opinions. Because the frisk “went too far,” three judges filed a concurrence saying the court didn’t need to address the Fourth Amendment question.

“Whatever justified the stop, the search that followed exceeded the limits the Fourth Amendment imposes,” wrote Judge Stuart Berger, who was joined by judges Daniel Friedman and Melanie Shaw. “That conclusion was available at the outset, without any of the analysis the majority undertakes. We would have stopped there.”

Despite being filed late, a former Baltimore equity official’s discrimination lawsuit against the city can proceed because the delay was caused by a bureaucratic hiccup by federal authorities, a federal magistrate ruled.

In his Friday ruling, Magistrate Judge J. Mark Coulson wrote that he was “unpersuaded” by the city’s arguments that the case should be dismissed as untimely despite the blunder between the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Department of Justice. It was an early victory for Linda L. Batts, the former director of equity and environmental justice at the city’s Department of Public Works, who alleges that Mayor Brandon Scott‘s administration fired her after she pressed officials to address racially hostile working conditions at the city agency.

Batts had filed a charge of discrimination with the EEOC in February 2022, less than a year after her firing. Although the Justice Department had sent a letter to Batts’ old email address last May granting her the right to file a complaint in federal court, the EEOC agent assigned to her case repeatedly told her that he had not heard from federal attorneys about issuing a right-to-sue letter. The agent eventually discovered it after Batts inquired again in December.

“This is the first I am hearing of this or seeing it,” the agent said last December, adding that he didn’t know why he wasn’t notified, according to an email chain filed in court. He said he had inquired with the Justice Department months before and “did not hear anything back.”

Batts, who is represented in court by Baltimore-based attorney Thiru Vignarajah, filed her lawsuit in February, alleging retaliatory firing and race, sex and age discrimination. Spokespeople for Scott’s office and the EEOC did not immediately return requests for comment Monday.

Lawsuits under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 must generally be filed within 90 days of receipt of a “right-to-sue” notice issued after federal authorities close their investigation. In his Friday decision, Coulson noted that Batts’ complaint “alleges in great detail the history of [her] communication with the EEOC in pursuit of her right to sue letter.” He found that Batts “relied on [the EEOC’s] representations that no right to sue letter had yet been issued,” and once she became aware of it, she sought counsel to file her complaint.

Resignations and staffing cuts under Donald Trump‘s second presidency have left the EEOC with its lowest personnel levels in decades, leading to case management backlogs at the agency, which investigates alleged violations of workplace civil rights laws. In addition to the EEOC’s staffing being reduced by over 20% from 2024, according to federal data, the agency’s efforts were also hamstrung due to Trump firing two members of its governing body after he reassumed office. With the commission’s quorum now reestablished, its new chair has recast the agency to bring in cases that match Trump’s agenda.

Batts, who served in the equity post from 2019 to her 2021 firing, alleged in her complaint that she was abruptly terminated because she documented and highlighted “evidence of a wide range of unlawful activity and civil rights violations” at the department. She alleged that in the months before her firing, she had pressed then-acting DPW Director Matthew Garbark to address “racially hostile conditions and conflicts of interest that obstructed civil rights enforcement” and reported to the department’s internal auditor that her efforts to enforce civil rights laws were being obstructed due to bias in human resources investigations.

In his Friday decision, Coulson also granted the city’s motion to dismiss counts against the public works agency itself, leaving the city as the sole defendant.

A woman from Baltimore‘s Park Heights neighborhood had asked HER Resiliency Center, an antitrafficking nonprofit, for help escaping an abusive relationship, founder Natasha Guynes said.

HER’s people picked the woman up, found shelter and enrolled her in an addiction recovery program. But first, they bought her some things to get through the next few hours. She had no clothes other than what she was wearing; the lollipops and cigarettes were to soften the impact of opioid withdrawal and to provide an oral fixation.

Guynes said HER then submitted a standard reimbursement request to the Governor’s Office of Crime Prevention and Policy — known as “go-cap,” the office largely serves as a pass-through entity for federal funds to nonprofits. Guynes didn’t include the cigarettes.

But the reimbursement was denied, Guynes told The Daily Record before she died last month. She said a GOCPP official told her, “That’s not what victims need.”

The Daily Record spoke with nine heads of nonprofits, including two former GOCPP staffers, that receive victims’ services funding from the crime office. They described worsening relationships with GOCPP, along with funding losses and clawbacks. Six of these leaders said their funding had been cut for fiscal year 2025 or 2026, though the money had been approved for the same uses in the past.

GOCPP had narrowed eligibility for victims services funding, arguing the change allowed it to better serve victims of crime with “immediate” needs. But the nonprofits and some experts say that definition of the law is too narrow and prioritizes only certain kinds of victims.

Widespread distrust

When describing GOCPP, the nonprofit leaders used words such as “schoolmarm,” “micromanage,” “bully” and “strict,” and say the office doesn’t see them as partners. Some lost hundreds of thousands of dollars in funding amid the cuts, creating huge budget holes.

All except for Guynes spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of retribution.

HER Resiliency Center suspended services last fall due to funding difficulties and is on the brink of closure after GOCPP allegedly breached their contract, prompting a lawsuit in October. The office declined to comment on the suit.

Guynes said that under Democratic Gov. Wes. Moore — whose office did not respond to a request for comment — GOCPP has adopted a “punitive mindset” and is “finding ways not to pay us.”

Another nonprofit leader said GOCPP has “lost its way.”

“It’s focused on micromanaging and strict interpretations that are beyond what’s needed to ensure that there’s good fiscal responsibility,” the person said. “They need to get back to focusing on survivors and victims, and helping people recover and helping to support the programs, instead of taking them to task for changes that are necessary to provide services.”

GOCPP declined to comment on these broader accusations.

But the critiques appear to be widely shared, according to a survey of 52 nonprofits published in December 2024 by the Maryland Network Against Domestic Violence and the Maryland Coalition Against Sexual Assault. 

“Some respondents felt that GOCPP’s processes were adversarial, with a focus on finding mistakes and withholding funding rather than fostering collaboration,” the survey stated. “This has led to distrust and a feeling that GOCPP does not see subgrantees as essential partners.”

‘Directly’ serving victims

At the heart of the funding conflict is a disagreement about who counts as a victim of crime — at least under federal law — and what services they deserve.

Ahead of fiscal year 2026, GOCPP changed its criteria for grantees under the federal Victims of Crime Act. The office adopted a narrower interpretation of the term “victim” than it had traditionally used.

GOCPP Executive Director Dorothy Lennig declined an interview request, but her spokesperson, Arinze Ifekauche, offered a statement saying the law is intended to provide immediate support to people with urgent needs and to support their recovery “after a violent criminal act.”

He added that “all VOCA funded services or treatment must be directly related to the immediate needs of the crime victim.”

VOCA is funded by fines and fees assessed in federal court. The federal government gives the money to the states, which have wide discretion over how to spend it. Matching state funds guarantee at least $60 million per year. For fiscal year 2025, Maryland organizations had to compete for VOCA grants for the first time in six years.

‘No wrong door to come in as a victim’

Grantees and experts describe the new definition of a victim as too narrow.

They say it is uncontroversial for people to receive VOCA-funded services even if they don’t seek those services immediately after becoming a victim, and even if they have been accused of illegal behavior such as sex work, drug use or even violent crime.

With its current definition, the office is citing outdated guidance from 1997, according to Kathrina Peterson, a former Department of Justice official who oversaw state VOCA programs. Peterson led rule changes during the Obama administration that clarified what spending was allowable under the law.

Now at Democracy Forward but speaking outside the context of that role, she said nothing in the law limits VOCA funding to “primary and secondary” victims, as GOCPP claimed in its statement to The Daily Record, and that funds can support victims of both violent and nonviolent crime.

“At best, that’s a really, really narrow interpretation,” she said. “I reject their definition of ‘victim’ and what direct services are under this program.”

She added in a follow-up email: “All of this is so outrageous, so misleading. I don’t know if it qualifies as illegal, but it’s definitely unethical to be representing the VOCA Victim Assistance program like this.”

Kristina Rose, who led the Justice Department‘s Office for Victims of Crime under President Joe Biden, declined to weigh in on the dispute in Maryland but spoke generally about the importance of VOCA funding for legal services — even for victims accused of crimes.

She said that when she ran the federal office, states rarely narrowed victims’ eligibility.

“If a state wanted to change their definition of ‘victim,’ it was usually more likely that they would make it more inclusive,” Rose said.

Many victims, she noted, delay reporting or don’t seek services right away.

“My point of view is that if you’re a victim of crime, you’re a victim of crime,” she said. “Victims of crime with a past criminal history should be eligible for compensation, as should people who were perceived to be involved in criminal activity at the time of their victimization. Often, these perceptions turn out to be incorrect or were made through a biased lens.”

Peterson added, “There’s no wrong door to come in as a victim.”

From $317,000 to zero

One of the organizations that lost funding with the VOCA change is Baltimore-based FreeState Justice, which provides free civil legal services to the LGBTQ+ community.

FreeState “helps to remove barriers to security, stability, and self-sufficiency for primary and secondary LGBTQ+ victims of crime, and makes the LGBTQ+ community less vulnerable and susceptible to victimization,” states a GOCPP report from 2024.

GOCPP gave FreeState about $217,000 in fiscal year 2024 and about $317,000 in fiscal 2025, GOCPP data shows. But last year, the office decided that the nonprofit no longer qualified for VOCA funding and didn’t renew its grant for fiscal year 2026. The cut represented a quarter of the organization’s budget.

Deena Hausner, GOCPP’s director of policy and strategic initiatives, wrote in an email that FreeState “did not receive a true $100,000 increase” because the 2024 grant was for a nine-month period due to a revised start date for fiscal 2025. Hausner stated that the nonprofit “did not meet the threshold for funding” for fiscal year 2026, which was a “highly competitive funding cycle for VOCA.”

FreeState Executive Director Phillip Westry declined to comment.

Ifekauche said many organizations were denied funding because they didn’t adequately distinguish between the services they provided to people recently victimized as opposed to other clients.

“These organizations did not clearly demonstrate the difference between their victim services clients and their social or community service clients,” Ifekauche said. “In some cases, the organizations did distinguish between the crime victims they serve and their social service clients but the number of crime victims they served was so low that they were not competitive with other organizations requesting funding.”

Smaller budget issues

Even the nonprofits that didn’t lose funding complained that GOCPP is inflexible about minor budget adjustments.

For example, at one organization, a source said, staff were driving more than expected after serving more people in locations far from the office. When they billed for more mileage than they had budgeted, GOCPP didn’t reimburse them for the extra amount.

“You don’t know who’s going to be abused,” the source said. “GOCPP doesn’t provide flexibility where they could and should. You have to have the flexibility to actually administer your grants to provide human services.”

In addition, Guynes and two other grantees said GOCPP has tried to claw back funding for executive salaries.

“The way that they’re auditing, they’re bullying,” said one grantee that does not receive VOCA funds. “I don’t think they’re partners at all. You can’t piss them off.”

‘If this is not victimization, what is?’

Guynes sued the crime office in October as a last-ditch effort to keep HER Resiliency Center running. After her death, the future of the organization is even more uncertain.

GOCPP determined that more than half of the women served by the organization were not eligible for VOCA-funded services, the lawsuit alleges, and slashed the percentage of Guynes’ salary and other expenses it would reimburse. Guynes alleged that GOCPP changed reimbursement rates without notice, costing HER about $219,000 for fiscal 2025.

She also said the office violated her First Amendment rights by retaliating after she publicly criticized the Moore administration.

GOCPP removed the case to federal court; its motion to dismiss is pending. Timothy Sutton, of Nguyen Roche Sutton in Baltimore, who represents the plaintiffs, said the organization’s board of directors is discussing next steps. For Guynes’ individual claims to proceed, a personal representative would have to open an estate.

Before she died, Guynes canvassed neighborhoods, telling women she had to suspend the center’s services. She posted videos to Facebook in an effort to show the cost of the alleged breach of contract.

In one video, an unnamed woman said HER did an “amazing job” supporting her health, helping her get drinking water and more.

“I would tell Gov. Moore, we are out here struggling, and it is up to you to fix that,” she said. “I genuinely ask from the bottom of my heart that you help us with bringing them back.”

Another woman said, “I’ve been held at gunpoint. I’ve been kidnapped. I’ve been sexually assaulted by multiple men. Held hostage. Forced to do things.”

Guynes juxtaposed their statements with a quote from a GOCPP staffer saying not all of the women she served are victims.

“If this is not victimization,” Guynes wrote, “what is?”

This story has been updated.

A new report says states are finally seeing reductions in fatal drug overdoses, alcohol-induced deaths and suicides, after two decades of increases across the nation, leaving some hopeful of a potential “turning point” in those types of deaths.

But while the 2026 edition of “Pain in the Nation: The Epidemics of Alcohol, Drug, and Suicide Deaths” released this week said deaths by suicide fell 3% nationwide from 2023 to 2024, Maryland actually saw a 4% increase, one of more than a dozen states to see a rise that year.

Why Maryland didn’t see the same progress as the nation is unclear, but advocates and public health experts say the report’s findings can be used to further build on suicide prevention efforts in the state and nation.

“There’s so many factors and it’s really hard to have a sort of definitive answer,” said Molly Warren, senior health policy researcher and analyst with Trust for America’s Health, which produced the 2026 report.

“All these deaths went up a huge amount during the pandemic … and they weren’t good before,” she said. “So, we have a lot more work to do.”

Warren notes Maryland still has a relatively low rate of suicide deaths, even if the percentage grew between two years, with a rate of 9.7 deaths per 100,000, compared to the nation’s 13.7 per 100,000. She even called Maryland “relatively stable,” as previous data shows Maryland’s rate of suicide deaths has fluctuated between around 8 deaths per 100,000 to the pandemic-era peak of 10.3 per 100,000.

She still urges Maryland to continue supporting and boosting suicide prevention efforts, especially as federal cuts under the Trump administration could disrupt funding for certain behavioral health services and other efforts at the state level.

“National funding is harder to get, and even when you do get it, there’s sometimes disruption and uncertainty that can cause programmatic difficulties,” Warren said. “I think … state officials, should try to continue programs as best you can and find funding to continue this extremely important work.”

Overall, the report says the cited fatalities peaked in the early years of COVID-19, with more than 207,800 people dying in both 2021 and 2022 from all three of those causes. It wasn’t until 2023 that deaths started to drop, and the all three metrics fell nationwide in the 2024 report.

In 2024, alcohol-related deaths fell 4% nationwide along with a 26% drop in drug overdose mortality and a 3% decline in deaths by suicide. They combined for a total of 173,913 deaths in 2024, a 16% decrease from 2023 data.

Maryland largely aligned with those trends. In 2024, about 2,900 Marylanders died from either alcohol, overdose or suicide, a 24% drop from 2023. Alcohol-induced deaths in the state fell 12% and overdose-related deaths dropped 32%, outpacing the national figures.

The report notes that Maryland does not currently have a state official or commission required by law to focus on suicide prevention. That said, Maryland does have a group established by a long-running executive order to do just that.

The Governor’s Commission on Suicide Prevention was initially formed in 2009 through an executive order issued by former Gov. Martin O’Malley (D). Former Gov. Larry Hogan (R) issued another executive order in 2018 to modernize the commission by expanding its membership. It still meets in 2026.

Help is at hand

If you are in crisis, you can call the Suicide and Crisis Lifeline at 988, or contact the Crisis Text Line by texting TALK to 741741.”

But Warren said that having the commission codified into Maryland law would be “one way to ensure” that suicide prevention has “long-term” state efforts behind it.

“If governors change, this would be a permanent office that would have funding dedicated to it, personnel that could focus on suicide across governorship,” she said. “None of these are going to fix any of it by itself, it really needs to be a variety of these efforts.”

Holly Wilcox, who chairs the Governor’s Commission on Suicide Prevention, says that there are opportunities and challenges in reducing suicide in Maryland. Accessibility of firearms is one of the current main points of interest.

“One thing that’s been keeping many of us up at night is this issue of, during the pandemic, there were more people at the beginning of the pandemic buying firearms, so there are more firearms out in circulation. For suicide prevention, that is a major challenge,” said Wilcox, who is director of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Center for Suicide Prevention.

In a written statement Friday, the Maryland Department of Health reports that since 2022, firearm suicides have increased by 24%, accounting for almost 53% of firearm-related deaths in 2025. From January through April this year, approximately 55% of the 158 reported firearm deaths have been suicides.

A newer point of interest is in workplace suicide-prevention initiatives, which could involve training employees to recognize signs of distress or the use of an anonymous questionnaire that could connect an employee with additional resources if needed.

Wilcox noted there can be overlaps between substance use and suicide, which can complicate reduction efforts.

“Another challenge is that when people die and it’s an overdose, sometimes it’s really hard to understand the intent and to classify it as an accidental death or a suicide,” she said.

Wilcox said that those deaths may be ruled “undetermined,” leading to a lack of data for advocates and state leaders to consider new policies that could have best helped that person and could prevent a similar death in the future.

Wilcox said that state officials are working to reduce the number of “undetermined” deaths, which could be impacting the Maryland’s data in the TFAH report.

According to 2023 data from the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner, so-called “undetermined” deaths made up 19% of autopsies evaluated by the state medical examiner. In 2024, that figure decreased to 14% of fatalities ruled as undetermined. In 2025, a state audit reported that Office of the Chief Medical Examiner had reevaluated and reclassified dozens of previously “undetermined” deaths.

Meanwhile, the reduction in national death by suicide figures coincides with an increased awareness of the national 988 Lifeline, which people in crisis or people who are concerned for another’s wellbeing can call for specialized crisis supports and resources.

Wilcox said it’s too early to determine if the introduction of the 988 Lifeline correlates with the national reduction in suicide deaths, but it’s still helpful to have those resources available.

The Trust for America’s Health is not taking any victory laps on downward trend of nationwide fatal drug overdoses, alcohol-induced deaths or suicides just yet.

It says the progress outlined in the 2026 report is fragile, as funding disruption under the Trump administration threatens to weaken the programs and resources available to keep deaths trending down.

“Over the past year, the federal behavioral health and injury prevention systems that support prevention, surveillance, and crisis response have experienced leadership upheaval, funding disruptions, and workforce reductions,” the report says. “Whether recent gains continue will depend on sustained investment in the public health infrastructure that makes prevention possible.”

Warren urges states like Maryland to bolster state-level efforts to further prevent suicides along with the other trends in reducing overdose and alcohol-induced deaths.

“This is the first year we’ve seen significant declines for each off the three causes nationwide, and that’s really important — it’s also not guaranteed to continue,” Warren said. “This is the best data I’ve seen since working on this and I want to keep going.”

Danielle J. Brown is a new Maryland resident covering health care and equity for Maryland Matters.

Maryland was listed as a plaintiff in the coalition that included 20 states and Washington, D.C., all of which requested a preliminary injunction that was granted by Judge Myong J. Joun on June 5.

Attorneys general argued in a federal lawsuit filed in March that the conditions put at risk supports such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP — also known as food stamps — that millions of low-income families use to pay for food.

The USDA funding conditions include provisions that require states to certify compliance with policies related to gender ideology, immigration and “fair athletic opportunities for women and girls” that the states argue are vague, unconstitutional and unrelated to food and nutrition.

“The Trump Administration cannot make cruel funding restrictions without any basis in law or fact,” New Jersey Attorney General Jennifer Davenport said in a March press release when the lawsuit was filed. “I will not let people go hungry because of the Administration’s latest effort to impose unrelated ideological conditions on essential services.”

In court filings, the USDA opposed the preliminary injunction, arguing that the requirements promote the “sound stewardship” of taxpayer funds, strengthen control and oversight and ensure that grant recipients are complying with federal laws.

The New Jersey Attorney General’s Office did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Sunday. A USDA spokesperson said the agency will not comment on pending litigation.

New York Attorney General Letitia James wrote on X, “We won a court order protecting billions of dollars in @USDA funding as our lawsuit continues. My office will keep fighting to protect New Yorkers and stop the federal government from punishing our state for refusing to bend.”

Congress appropriated billions of dollars in the 2025 fiscal year through USDA grant programs in New Jersey, the Attorney General’s Office said. They include:

• $1.93 billion in SNAP funds.
• $658 million for Child Nutrition Programs, which provide low-cost or free meals and snacks to children.
• $12 million for the Emergency Food Assistance Program, which distributes food to soup kitchens, pantries and other local organizations.
• $210 million for the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children, or WIC, which provides food, nutrition education and support for eligible women, babies and children up to 5 years old.
• Funds for wildfire defense programs that aim to reduce wildfire risks.

The other plaintiffs are California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin.

Joun, a judge in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, wrote that he would issue a memorandum of decision at a later date.

Reporting by Ashley Balcerzak, NorthJersey.com/USA TODAY via Reuters Connect.

A judge on Friday threw out the Kennedy Center’s breach-of-contract lawsuit against a jazz musician who withdrew from a performance after the venue’s board voted to rename the building after President Donald Trump.

D.C. Superior Court Judge Tanya Jones Bosier said center officials failed to show they had made a legally binding agreement with Chuck Redd to perform at the venue’s annual Christmas Eve concert, as he had in years past. Redd told the center he chose to bow out because of “the defiant and illegal name change happening to the Kennedy Center.”

“I could not find a valid breach-of-contract claim here,” Jones Bosier said Friday before dismissing the suit. “There’s no dispute that he did not sign the 2025 agreement.”

Friday’s legal defeat was another blow to an institution that faces an uncertain future: a planned two-year closure that a federal judge has blocked but not resolved, a budget crisis that has imperiled the National Symphony Orchestra’s season, and an unpredictable board chair in Trump, who said Friday that he intends to remain involved after suggesting he would cede control of the center.

A lawyer for Redd hailed the judge’s decision and denounced the center for what she described as a retaliatory effort to silence Redd.

“The Center sued Mr. Redd because he publicly and rightly objected to adding Donald Trump’s name to the Kennedy Center, a living memorial to former President John F. Kennedy,” attorney Lisa Banks said in a statement. “The lawsuit against Mr. Redd was political retribution, pure and simple, by the Trump Kennedy Center, and the Court correctly saw it as such in dismissing the case.”

The Kennedy Center did not respond to requests for comment. Lawyers representing the center had argued that, even though Redd never signed, he “agreed to a written contract” in late November obligating him to perform a one-hour concert on Christmas Eve for $6,500.

After Redd withdrew, Richard Grenell, then the Kennedy Center’s president, quickly threatened to sue. “This is your official notice that we will seek $1 million in damages from you for this political stunt,” Grenell told Redd in a December letter.

The center followed through with the lawsuit in early March, but days later offered to secretly settle, according to a court filing: The center would drop the suit if Redd paid it $7,500, played at this year’s Christmas Eve concert and made no “political commentary” about his reason for withdrawing last year.

The dismissal is the center’s second legal loss in a week. A federal judge last week ordered center officials to remove Trump’s name from official materials, ruling a Trump-led board of trustees had illegally added it to the performing arts venue in December. On Thursday, the center’s general counsel sent a memo telling employees to scrub all references to Trump, restoring the venue’s title to “The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts.”

The center’s future remains unclear. In the memo, the general counsel said it was “considering its options” to comply with U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper’s other order to center officials: Halt plans to close the center for two years unless the board more thoroughly considers the possible harms such a closure might cause.

In the memo, the general counsel said Cooper’s order does not require the center to put on any performances, even if it technically remains open.

On Friday, Rep. Joyce Beatty (D-Ohio) – the ex officio board member and plaintiff in the federal case – argued that guidance risks flouting the judge’s order. The Kennedy Center’s memo, her lawyers wrote in a court filing, left her “deeply concerned that Defendants are attempting to effectuate their shutdown-which the Court enjoined-through inertia.”

Beatty asked the judge to press officials for their plans to restore performing arts programming after July 5, when the closure was set to take effect.

Justice Department lawyers responded that the center’s board plans to meet in the coming weeks to chart next steps. Until the trustees do, “it would be irrational and unreasonable” to try to book prospective performers.

Trump added to the confusion Friday afternoon, saying he plans to remain involved in the center in “the same way” as he has since being elected board chair last year in February. Those comments clashed with his earlier statements, in which he said he had directed his administration to transfer the institution to Congress, “giving them the responsibility for its Operation, Maintenance, and Management.”

Jonathan Edwards is an arts and government reporter covering how the Trump administration is influencing cultural institutions — including the Kennedy Center, the Smithsonian museums, the Library of Congress and the National Endowments for the Arts and Humanities — and how those shifts ripple through the arts, public life and national identity.

Brendan Banfield, a former IRS agent who plotted with his Brazilian au pair to kill his wife and a man lured to the family’s Northern Virginia home, was sentenced to life in prison Friday.

“The level of cruelty, calculation and inhumanity in this case reflects something far deeper than anger or impulse,” Chief Judge Penney Azcarate told Banfield. “It reflects evil.”

Banfield, 41, was found guilty earlier this year of murdering his wife and the man he tried to frame for her murder – convictions that followed a dramatic trial in which he and the au pair testified.

Prosecutors painted Banfield as a man so deeply in love with the au pair, Juliana Peres Magalhães, that he orchestrated an elaborate plot to kill his wife, Christine Banfield, 37, and a stranger, Joseph Ryan, 39, whom he lured to their home under the pretext of a rough sex fantasy. Brendan Banfield wanted to create a confrontation, according to prosecutors, that would allow him to pin his wife’s murder on Ryan so he and Magalhães could make a life together. But ultimately, Magalhães testified against him.

Magalhães had earlier pleaded guilty in the case and was sentenced by Azcarate to 10 years. During Banfield’s trial, she testified that he wouldn’t divorce his wife because he feared losing custody of the couple’s then-4-year-old daughter. Instead, Magalhães said, he devised a plan to “get rid of” Christine Banfield by “catfishing” a man online, then framing him for the murder.

After Ryan came to the house, Brendan Banfield shot him and stabbed Christine Banfield seven times in the neck with a kitchen knife, and Magalhães shot Ryan a second time, according to prosecutors. During the entire confrontation, the Banfields’ daughter was in the basement.

Relatives of both victims described them in court Friday.

“She had a way about her that made people feel comfortable and welcomed without effort,” Christine Banfield’s older sister, Danielle Hocker, said.

It didn’t surprise Hocker that her sister became a pediatric ICU nurse.

“She provided comfort to frightened parents,” Hocker said. “She made those moments more bearable with her big smile and infectious laugh.”

Hocker recalled how people often said she looked like her sister – and how that has now taken a heartbreaking turn.

“When I look into a mirror, I sometimes see her first, my face replaced by hers, and in a flash, she’s gone, and I’m left confused by my own reflection,” Hocker said.

Ryan’s mother, Deirdre Fisher, said she tries to live on the words he’d always tell her: “Be kind to yourself, mom. Take better care of yourself, mom. Love you, mom.”

Fisher closed her remarks as if she were addressing her son: “I won’t forget you, Joe. I hear you now.”

In his trial testimony, Banfield denied any plan to harm his wife and called the notion he concocted a catfishing plot “absolutely crazy.” He told jurors that his relationship with Magalhães was not serious, citing his previous extramarital affairs as proof that he would not kill his wife over a dalliance.

Banfield struck the same tone Friday, standing in a dark-green jail jumpsuit and speaking for 11 minutes before his sentence was imposed.

“I am greatly disappointed in the legal system,” he began. “I was found guilty of a crime that I did not commit. It is actually impossible to have committed the crime as the prosecution, the experts and their witnesses have presented.”

He claimed that his wife and Ryan arranged the meeting and that the confrontation was about him trying to save his wife. “Only Christine could have planned the meeting,” Banfield said.

He also praised his wife.“Christine was a wonderful and loving person,” he said. “She was a loving and compassionate nurse.”

He spoke of how his earlier affairs shouldn’t be confused for not caring for his wife.

“I loved her very much, despite what you may think of my affairs,” Banfield said in court. “Our marriage worked for us. It wasn’t something that I looked to end. It was told to other women that I was never going to leave Christine. That was always how it was said.”

During his trial, when Brendan Banfield was confronted with letters he had written to Magalhães planning how they would name their future children – Chloe for a girl, Robby for a boy – he said he fell in love with her only after the death of his wife. Evidence photos taken of Banfield’s bedroom after the killings showed that he had replaced photos of his wife with photos of Magalhães.

In her earlier sentencing of Magalhães, Azcarate spoke of her active participation in the plot.

“You do not deserve anything other than incarceration and a life of reflection on what you have done,” the judge told her. “May it weigh heavily on your soul.”

Hocker and Fisher, the relatives of the victims, spoke of how Banfield’s plot – and his continued deception – was an insult to their memories.

“His testimony was the most self-serving display of narcissism I have ever witnessed,” Christine Banfield’s sister, Hocker, said. “He attempted to smear her through outright lies.”

″Joe was chosen because Brendan Banfield thought he would make a good dupe,” said Fisher, Ryan’s mom.

She spoke of her son’s kindness, how he taught jiujitsu to children with autism and cared for two grandparents. And he had an affection for the most neglected of animals. “He would walk into an animal shelter, and ask for the oldest, ugliest dogs,” Fisher said, forcing a smile and laugh through her tears, “and bring them home and love them for years.”

Just before imposing her penalty Friday, Azcarate reflected on her long career and others who had come before her for sentencing.

“In the vast majority of these cases, people made mistakes,” the judge said. “They were not inherently bad people, but they made terrible decisions and suffered the consequences. Sentencing in those cases is difficult. It weighs on me often long after the hearing is over.”

She made it clear she held no such burdens with Banfield’s case.

“The disregard of the life of your wife, someone you supposedly loved, is almost unfathomable,” Azcarate said. “Scheming for months a master plan involving so many moving parts, including deception and manipulation, luring a completely innocent man into your deadly trap, continuing on after the murders without a care, and not once thinking of the impact on Christine’s daughter.”

“You did not just take her mother from her,” the judge added. “You placed her in the middle of the horror you created. She is young now, but one day she will understand your true self, and she will understand what you took from her – which is everything.”

In handing down the life sentence with no chance of parole, Azcarate added eight years for two of Banfield’s other convictions – use of a firearm in commission of a felony and child endangerment.

“One would hope that someday you will become tortured by what you have done to Christine, Joe, Christine’s daughter and their families,” Azcarate said. “But nothing I have seen suggests that you will.”

Dan Morse covers courts and crime in Montgomery County. He arrived at the paper in 2005, after reporting stops at the Wall Street Journal, Baltimore Sun and Montgomery (Ala.) Advertiser, where he was a Pulitzer Prize finalist. He is the author of “The Yoga Store Murder.”

The lawsuit was filed by the families of Mary Owens, Bonnie Tienken and Geneva Williams, who each died of ovarian cancer after using talc-based baby powder.

More than 67,000 plaintiffs have sued J&J, alleging that its baby powder and other talc products cause ovarian cancer. J&J has won some cases outright, including an Oklahoma trial last week, but juries have awarded large verdicts for plaintiffs in other cases.

The case was based on “junk science,” said Erik Haas, J&J’s vice president of litigation.

The verdict is “disappointing,” said lawyer Ari Friedman, who represented one of the plaintiffs.

J&J stopped selling talc-based baby powder in the U.S. in 2020, switching to a cornstarch product.

J&J has settled a majority of cases alleging that its products caused mesothelioma, a rare form of cancer associated with asbestos. Nearly all of the remaining cases allege that talc products cause ovarian cancer.

Reporting by Dietrich Knauth; editing by Rosalba O’Brien and Sergio Non.

The Greenberg Gibbons Real Estate Income Fund II will aim to pursue retail-driven shopping centers including grocery-anchored community, neighborhood and power centers. The company said it will look to invest in properties across emerging markets that generate consistent income and offer opportunities that strengthen tenant mix, drive foot traffic and improve asset performance.

The purchase of Wakefield Commons, a 163,975-square-foot neighborhood shopping center in Raleigh, N.C., marked the first acquisition of the newly launched fund, according to a release.

“The launch of our second fund and acquisition of Wakefield Commons represents an important milestone for our firm,” Greenberg Gibbons President Eric Walter said according to a release. 

“Our first fund validated both the strength of our platform and the durability of necessity-based retail. With this second fund, we’re expanding that strategy—deploying capital into high-quality assets across the East Coast, where we can apply our integrated approach to drive performance, create value, and continue delivering strong outcomes for our investors.”

Through a joint venture with Boston-based real estate firm Wilder, Wakefield Commons is being acquired for $33 million, according to a release, which also says the transaction marks Greenberg Gibbon’s first retail acquisition in North Carolina.

Located at 14460 New Falls of Neuse Road, the shopping center is home to several national retailers and establishments including Starbucks, Burn Boot Camp, Moe’s Southwest Grill, AT&T, MyEyeDr., Spectrum Paint and Marquee Cinemas.

To have any value to its owners, and to be meaningful to help consumers better select goods and services, the mark must be protectable from infringers. To be protectable, a mark has to be distinctive of the owner’s goods and services and be known to an appreciable number of consumers and potential consumers. The first criteria involves the selection of the mark and the second involves use of the mark in practice.

Not all trademarks or service marks are distinctive and protectable, but as a general rule, strong marks will be protected and weak marks will not be. There are two types of strengths when considering trademarks. The first is conceptual strength, and the second is commercial strength. A lot of money and time can be wasted attempting to create exclusive rights in a mark that lacks either or both of these criteria.

In 1976, Judge Friendly divided trademarks into four categories. The case was Abercrombie & Fitch v. Hunting World, and involved two New York retailers who sold similar goods for safari use. 60 years later, the case is still heavily cited by courts and studied in law schools around the country. What Judge Friendly was describing was the conceptual strength of a trademark.

The judge recited the requirement that to serve as a trademark, the term must distinguish its owner’s goods or services from those of its competitors. Many trademarks do, but some do not presently, and others will never be capable of doing so. The judge arrayed four types of marks in ascending order of protection, which he wrote reflects their eligibility for trademark status and their degree of protection. The classes of marks he described are generic, descriptive, suggestive and arbitrary or fanciful.

A generic mark refers to the genus of which the particular product is a species. It asks and answers the question, “What is it?” “It’s an apple, it comes from a tree. It’s a fruit.” A generic mark can never serve as a trademark, but a term that might be generic can have two meanings. IVORY can be generic to describe products made from elephant tusks, but when used to describe IVORY, a soap that floats, it is arbitrary. Sometimes a mark that did not start off as generic becomes generic because of how it is used by the consuming public or by its owner. Aspirin and shredded wheat are examples, and these marks can never regain trademark status for their genus of species.

Descriptive marks describe the characteristics of a product. For example, NEVER MAR describes an attribute of a linoleum product, as does VENTURE LAW PARTNERS (although one could make the argument that the latter is generic). But with use and acceptance by consumers and potential consumers, descriptive marks are capable of moving from being “merely descriptive” to developing what is called ‘’secondary meaning,” being an association by consumers and would-be consumers with the product, or the source of the product. When that occurs, the mark becomes distinctive and it is protectable by its owner. Federal registration of a descriptive mark requires proof that the mark has obtained secondary meaning.

Yet even an unprotectable descriptive mark can have value because it can serve to immediately explain the claimed virtues to prospective customers without the need to engage in an expensive advertising campaign. My mark, EVER SHARP, may be unprotectable, but it immediately conveys an attribute to the consumer who may be looking for a kitchen knife that need not be sharpened.

A suggestive mark requires some imagination, but it is distinctive. It bridges a gap between a descriptive mark and one that is arbitrary or fanciful. POLAR BEAR used as a mark for a line of winter coats would be suggestive. Sometimes it can be very difficult to distinguish a suggestive mark from an arbitrary mark, but it dosen’t matter because both are distinctive and protectable.

Arbitrary marks adopt everyday words for dissimilar products. MONSTER energy drinks, APPLE computers, Chevrolet IMPALA cars, for example. These are strong marks. Fanciful marks are made up of words or use very obscure words. EXXON and POLAROID are examples. They are generally the most protectable marks on the spectrum. But even a conceptually strong mark may be left without protection if it is unknown to consumers.

How can a mark unfamiliar and unknown to the marketplace be confused with another mark? When a mark becomes aware to the marketplace, it is said to have developed commercial strength, and the test for determining commercial strength is very similar to the test that is applied to a descriptive mark to determine whether that mark has acquired secondary meaning.

The factors that a court will examine include length and manner of the use of the mark, volume of sales associated with the mark, the amount of money spent on advertising and promotion, whether the mark was the subject of unpaid stories in the media, consumer surveys and sometimes direct consumer testimony. Each of these factors is intended to measure strength in the marketplace and therefore consumer awareness of the mark’s use.

Marks that are conceptually and commercially strong are going to be protectable. Other marks not so much, if at all, although it is more important that the mark be conceptually strong. It pays to give serious thought to a mark before it is adopted because the mark may be used for a length of time before a challenge occurs, and if the use of the term as a trademark is successfully challenged and the mark is found not to be protectable, the owner may have to start all over again with a new mark.

Jim Astrachan is a counsel to Corey Tepe LLC and has taught intellectual property law in the two Maryland law schools since 1999.