(UVALDE, Texas) — This week has been filled with funerals in Uvalde, Texas, to honor the 21 victims killed in the second-worst school shooting in U.S. history.
The funeral services for Irma Garcia, one of the teachers killed in the shooting, and her husband, Jose Garcia, who died of a heart attack two days after the shooting, took place Wednesday at the Sacred Heart Catholic Church in Uvalde.
Amerie Jo Garza and Maite Rodriguez, both 10 years old, were laid to rest Tuesday following funeral services in the afternoon.
The last photo ever taken of Garza, at this year’s award’s day, was featured inside the Hillcrest Funeral Home where her visitation took place, one mourner told ABC Houston station KTRK.
Nineteen students and two teachers were murdered on May 24 when 18-year-old Salvador Ramos allegedly opened fire at Robb Elementary School with an AR-15 style rifle he purchased days before.
Memorial services are expected to take place in the small Texas town through June 16.
The funeral for Jose Manuel Flores Jr., 10, was Wednesday.
A funeral for 10-year-old Nevaeh Alyssa Bravo took place Thursday.
Maranda Gail Mathis, 11, and Eliahna Torres, 10, were also laid to rest Thursday.
The funeral for cousins Jailah Nicole Silguero, 11, and Jayce Carmelo Luevanos, 10, will take place Friday at the Sacred Heart Catholic Church. The cousins were “full of life” and “always had a smile on their face,” their family said in a statement to ABC News.
Jacklyn Cazares, 10, will be remembered at Sacred Heart on Friday. She “had the biggest heart,” her mother, Jacinto Cazares, told ABC News.
Annabell Rodriguez, 10, Cazares’ cousin who was in the same fourth-grade class, was also killed in the shooting. Her funeral will take place on June 8 at the Rushing-Estes-Knowles Mortuary.
Makenna Elrod’s funeral will take place at First Baptist Church on Saturday. The 10-year-old’s “smile would light up a room,” her aunt, Allison McCullough, told ABC News.
The funeral for Rojelio Torres, 10, will take place at Rushing Knowles on Saturday. Rojelio Torres’ mother, Evadulia Orta, described her son to ABC News as a “very smart and loving child.”
Alithia Ramirez, 10, will be buried Sunday after her funeral takes place at First Baptist Church. Her grandmother, Rosa Maria Ramirez, described her to ABC News as a “very talented little girl” who loved to draw.
Ellie Garcia, 9, will be laid to rest on June 6 after a funeral at Sacred Heart.
Xavier Lopez, 10, will be buried at the Hillcrest Memorial Cemetery after his funeral on June 7. He was always the “life of the party,” his grandmother, Amelia Sandoval, told ABC News.
The funeral for fourth grade teacher Eva Mireles will take place on June 10 at Sacred Heart. Miresles’ cousin, Amber Ybarra, described her as a “hero” and an “amazing mom.”
Alexandria Rubio, 10, will be remembered on June 11 at First Baptist Church. The straight A student received a good citizen award from her school on the day she was killed, her family said.
The funeral for Tess Mata, 10, will take place on June 13 at Sacred Heart. Her mother, Veronica Mata, told ABC News she never believed a school shooting could happen in their small town.
Layla Salazar, 11, will be laid to rest on June 16 after a service at Sacred Heart. Her brother, Julien Salazar, described her as “positive” and “energetic.”
The memorial service for Uziyah Garcia, 10, will take place on June 25 at Immanuel Baptist Church in San Angelo. Uziyah, who is not related to Irma and Jose Garcia, was described by his grandfather as “the sweetest little boy that I’ve ever known.”
ABC News’ Emily Shapiro and Jenna Harrison contributed to this report.
(WASHINGTON) — The U.S. saw a slight slowdown in job growth in May, as the economy added 390,000 jobs and the unemployment rate remained at 3.6%, according to data released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics on Friday.
This a breaking news story. Please check back for updates.
(LONDON) — Prince Harry and his wife Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, attended their first royal event Friday in two years.
The Sussexes attended Friday’s National Service of Thanksgiving for Queen Elizabeth II’s Platinum Jubilee, marking the first time the couple has appeared publicly with Britain’s royal family since stepping down from their senior royal roles.
Meghan, wearing a white, belted coat and hat, and Harry, dressed in a suit adorned with his military medals, were greeted by cheers from the crowd as they climbed the steps of St. Paul’s Cathedral in London, walking in several minutes ahead of Harry’s father, Prince Charles, and his wife, Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, and brother, Prince William, and his wife, Kate, Duchess of Cambridge.
Harry and Meghan’s last official engagement as senior working royals was in March 2020.
Since then, the couple, now the parents of two children, have moved to California and launched their own careers, starting the Archewell Foundation, their nonprofit, and Archewell Productions, their production company, through which they have launched deals with companies including Spotify and Netflix.
The last time Harry appeared publicly with his family was last July, when he traveled to the U.K. and joined his brother, Prince William, for the unveiling of a statue of their late mother, Princess Diana.
Meghan was not believed to have returned to the U.K. until earlier this year, in April, when she and Harry made a private visit to the queen on their way to the Netherlands for the Invictus Games.
While at the Invictus Games, Harry made headlines when he said in an interview that he was focused on making sure his 96-year-old grandmother, the queen, has “the right people around her.”
“I’m just making sure that she’s, you know, protected and got the right people around her,” said Harry, who described his relationship with his grandmother as “really special,” adding, “We talk about things that she can’t talk about with anybody else.”
Harry’s comments drew some backlash from the British press and raised questions about who he believes he is protecting her from. The royal family did not issue a response to Harry’s comments.
Last year, Harry and Meghan also made headlines when they sat down for an in-depth interview with Oprah Winfrey. During the interview, the couple revealed Meghan’s serious mental health struggles as a royal, made an allegation of racism within the royal family and claimed they were cut off financially and denied security protection after stepping down from their royal roles.
Buckingham Palace issued a statement after the interview on behalf of the queen, saying the Sussexes “will always be much loved family members.”
“The whole family is saddened to learn the full extent of how challenging the last few years have been for Harry and Meghan,” the statement read. “The issues raised, particularly that of race, are concerning. While some recollections may vary, they are taken very seriously and will be addressed by the family privately.”
Harry has seemed to maintain a close relationship with the queen even after his departure from the U.K. and his royal role. He and Meghan named their youngest child, daughter Lilibet “Lili” Diana Mountbatten-Windsor, after Elizabeth, whose family nickname is Lilibet.
The queen is believed to have met Lili on Thursday in Windsor. The Sussexes confirmed last month they would bring Lili, who turns 1 on Saturday, and her older brother, 3-year-old Archie, with them to the U.K.
“Yesterday, after Trooping the Color, would have been the first opportunity for the queen to meet Lilibet, as they both returned to Windsor following the parade,” said Omid Scobie, ABC News royal contributor. “Despite everything that has happened, the relationship between the Sussexes and the queen has remained warm and close.”
He continued, “Introducing her to Lilibet will no doubt be one of the highlights of the Sussexes’ time here in England and a moment the queen has been looking forward to.”
Friday’s service of thanksgiving is the first jubilee event Harry and Meghan have attended publicly, but they did gather with royal family members one day prior.
The Sussexes watched the Trooping the Color parade and the military flypast Thursday from an office in Buckingham Palace, along with other members of the royal family. Only family members who are active working royals appeared on the balcony of Buckingham Palace with the queen at the annual event.
(WASHINGTON) — More than 110 days after Justice Samuel Alito authored a first draft opinion that would overturn Roe v. Wade, Supreme Court deliberations over a final ruling have entered a critical phase, four weeks before the justices recess for summer and as an internal probe into a leak of the draft intensifies.
A decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health — the Mississippi case challenging Roe — could come as soon as Monday, but most veteran court watchers expect an opinion rolling back constitutional protection for abortion rights will likely be released in late June.
The unprecedented publication of Alito’s leaked draft last month upended the court’s traditional workflow, an iterative process marked by frank and private exchanges of ideas between justices over the course of months.
“What happened at the court is tremendously bad,” Justice Clarence Thomas said this month of the leak’s impact on court dynamics. “You begin to look over your shoulder. It’s kind of an infidelity.”
Several former Supreme Court clerks, once intimately involved in the opinion drafting process, told ABC News the Dobbs majority opinion — and related concurring and dissenting opinions — are all likely in the midst of tense and frenzied rounds of revision.
“The more everyone else’s temperature goes up, the more Chief Justice Roberts insists on business as usual — even when the building is on fire,” said Sarah Isgur, an ABC News legal analyst. “What that means for Dobbs is not clear at this point.”
How the opinion drafting process works
On Dec. 3, two days after oral arguments in the abortion rights case, the justices met for their scheduled weekly conference when preliminary votes are taken on cases heard that week. Each was asked to weigh in on the central question posed in Dobbs: “Whether all pre-viability prohibitions on elective abortions are unconstitutional.”
Five conservative justices — with the exception of Chief Justice Roberts — voted ‘no’ at that time, according to the leaked first draft opinion. Justice Thomas, who as the most senior among them had responsibility to assign the majority author, assigned Justice Alito to put their views into writing.
More than two months later, according to the time stamp on the leaked draft, Alito shared with his colleagues a 67-page majority opinion. Legal experts have characterized the document, dated Feb. 10, as an opening bid in the opinion writing process, as it does not reflect any input from dissenting justices and may not reflect input from other justices on Alito’s side of the case, legal experts point out.
Over the past three and a half months, the justices have likely been providing feedback to Alito in the form of electronic and paper memos between chambers, former clerks said. Only around 80 people — the justices, clerks and administrative staff — have access to draft opinions and dissents as they circulate, sources say.
“We had two different computer systems — one for internal materials where draft opinions were held, and another for research through one of the online resources,” said Thiru Vignarajah, a former clerk to Justice Stephen Breyer.
It is not clear how many subsequent draft opinions and dissents may have been circulated to date.
Roberts in a May 3 statement on the leaked Alito draft noted, however, that “it does not represent a decision by the Court or the final position of any member on the issues in the case.”
Revising opinions, changing votes
The Supreme Court says some opinions may be revised a dozen or more times before publication, sometimes including a dramatic shift in vote alignment on the outcome of a case.
“It is a common experience that dissents change votes, even enough votes to become the majority,” the late Justice William Brennan once said, according to the Supreme Court Historical Society.
Roberts famously changed his position several times behind the scenes in 2012 during the first major challenge to the Affordable Care Act. After initially voting to strike down the heart of the law — the individual insurance mandate — and uphold the law’s expansion of Medicaid, Roberts ultimately flipped on both late in the drafting process, CNN’s Joan Biskupic, the Chief’s biographer, reported at the time. The shift narrowly saved the ACA.
While most legal analysts expect the Court will uphold Mississippi’s 15-week ban on abortions at the center of the Dobbs case — and in turn, rollback nearly 50 years of precedent, as reflected in the Alito draft — the scope of the ruling and its legal rationale could still be in flux behind the scenes.
“There may be people that after they read [Alito’s opinion] say, I don’t really agree with that, or it’s not as strong an argument as I thought, and so they may decide to write separately [in a concurrence],” said Rachel Barkow, vice dean of NYU Law School and a former clerk to Justice Antonin Scalia.
“Sometimes people take an even more extreme position and say, I was wrong. I thought I was going to vote to uphold this law, but I can’t do it, so I’m going to join the dissent, or I’m going to wait and see what the dissent has to say and see which one is better,” Barkow said.
Chief Justice Roberts, who has long signaled opposition to Roe and its reasoning, notably did not join the majority in the initial vote on Dobbs and has reportedly been lobbying fellow conservatives to join him in taking a narrower approach than the one advanced by Alito.
Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Stephen Breyer have all previously supported constitutional protection of a woman’s right to end a pregnancy before a fetus is considered viable outside the womb, around 24 weeks. They are certain to author a vigorous dissent.
Barkow said draft dissenting opinions will likely seek to pressure the majority justices by calling out alleged inconsistencies, flawed reasoning, and overlooked impacts of their decision.
“Each side goes back and forth until everybody feels like they’re ready to release the decisions. That’s why we wait so long,” Barkow said. “The justices are usually very respectful of each other in terms of hearing the feedback, giving the other side time to respond to the extent they want to, and it’s only when everyone agrees that an opinion is ready to go out.”
Publication and release of opinions
Complicating the process in major cases is the likelihood that each justice will want to write an individual opinion — concurring or dissenting — to emphasize a special point. Those drafts are circulated along with the majority opinion and primary dissent and can evolve over time.
The Dobbs decision is also overshadowed by an ongoing internal investigation into how a first draft of the Alito opinion was leaked to Politico. The probe, ordered by Chief Justice Roberts and led by Court Marshal Army Col. Gail Curley, has strained relations inside the court and exacerbated divisions around one of the most contentious cases in years, several justices and court insiders have said publicly.
When all revisions are complete, traditionally before the end of the court’s term on June 30, a master proof of the opinions is sent to the Court’s Reporter of Decisions for final processing before release.
The Reporter writes a summary of the ruling — called a “syllabus” — and copy edits the text of the opinions before having physical copies of the case documents printed, a step that can take several additional days after a decision is technically finalized.
Prior to the pandemic, the justices would announce decisions in-person from the Supreme Court bench. Today, the releases happen electronically on the court’s website not long after physical printing is complete. It is not publicly known in advance which cases will be decided on a designated opinion release day.
(JOURDANTON, Texas) — A Texas inmate suspected of murdering five people after he escaped from a prison bus was killed by authorities on Thursday, officials said.
A massive manhunt was underway for 46-year-old Gonzalo Lopez when an adult and four children were found dead Thursday evening inside a residence in Leon County in east-central Texas, near where the inmate had escaped three weeks prior. Lopez was believed to have broken into the home and committed the murders, according to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.
Authorities said at the time that Lopez may have stolen clothes, firearms and a 1999 white Chevrolet Silverado from the residence.
The house was believed to be a weekend home for the victims, whose primary residence was in Houston. Authorities said the family had been seen Thursday morning and were found murdered around 6 p.m. local time, after an individual contacted law enforcement because they had not heard from an elderly relative inside the home and were concerned. Authorities had initially said that two adults and three children were discovered dead there.
“We will not rest until Gonzalo Lopez is in custody,” Jason Clark, chief of staff for the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, said at a press conference Thursday evening.
Later that night, deputies from the Atascosa County Sheriff’s Office spotted the stolen pickup truck that Lopez was believed to be driving and followed it. They laid out spike strips that flattened all four tires of the vehicle on a street in Jourdanton, just south of San Antonio and some 250 miles southwest of Leon County. The suspect then pointed a rifle out of the window and fired several shots at the deputies, who returned fire, according to authorities.
The suspect was killed in the shootout and was confirmed to be Lopez, who authorities said was armed with an AR-15 and a pistol.
“We received additional information from the U.S. Marshals Service that he may be in the San Antonio area. So then we heightened our alert and, sure enough, we spotted him,” Atascosa County Sheriff David Soward said at a press conference Thursday night. “This dangerous individual is off the street and no officers were injured.”
Reward grows to $50,000 for arrest of escaped inmate serving life for murder
Lopez, who was serving a life sentence for a capital murder in Hidalgo County and an attempted capital murder in Webb County, managed to break free from his shackles, overpower a bus driver and escape from custody near Centerville on May 12, while being transported from Gatesville to Huntsville for a medical appointment. He was added to Texas’ 10 Most Wanted Fugitives List and a $50,000 reward was issued for his capture.
Authorities had said Lopez was allegedly affiliated with the Mexican Mafia.
ABC News’ Meredith Deliso, Marilyn Heck, Emily Shapiro, Flor Tolentino and Jennifer Watts contributed to this story.
(WASHINGTON) — As mass shootings continue to rock the nation, President Joe Biden delivered prime-time remarks on guns Thursday evening from the White House, imploring the nation to “For God’s sake, do something.”
“This time we must actually do something,” he said, calling for a ban on assault weapons.
“We need to ban assault weapons and high capacity magazines. And if we can’t ban assault weapons, then we should raise the age to purchase them from 18 to 21, strengthen background checks, enact safe storage law, and red flag laws. Repeal the immunity that protects gun manufacturers from liability, address the mental health crisis,” he said in an impassioned address.
The latest mass shooting on Wednesday in Tulsa, Oklahoma, leaving four dead, follows a massacre of 19 students and two teachers at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, as well as an apparently racially-motivated attack at a grocery store in Buffalo, New York, leaving 10 Black people dead.
“We spent hours with hundreds of family members who were broken, whose lives will never be the same,” Biden said. “They had one message for all of us. Do something. Just do something … After Columbine, after Sandy Hook, after Charleston, after Orlando, after Las Vegas, after Parkland, nothing has been done. This time that can’t be true.”
Biden taking the national spotlight on Thursday evening comes amid questions over why he has not yet lobbied lawmakers personally and more forcefully as they aim to find a compromise on gun control legislation.
Biden told reporters earlier this week he “will meet with the Congress on guns — I promise you,” but did not provide details on when such a meeting might take place. On Thursday, he once again made the case for legislative action.
“This isn’t about taking anyone’s rights. It’s about protecting children, ” he said. “It’s about protecting families, it’s about protecting whole communities, it’s about protecting our freedoms to go to school, to a grocery store to a church without being shot and killed. According to new data just released by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention guns are the number one killer of children in the United States of America. The number one killer. More than car accidents, more than cancer. Over the last two decades, more school-aged children have died from guns than on-duty police officers and active-duty military combined.”
“Think about that,” he said, adding, “How much more carnage are we willing to accept? How many more innocent American lives must be taken before we say enough, enough?”
White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre pushed back Thursday against the notion that Biden hasn’t been involved in negotiations, arguing he’s been involved since taking office and repeating a sentiment from earlier this week that he “wants to give it some space” as the talks continue.
Biden’s making the speech Thursday, Jean-Pierre said, because he wants to make sure “that his voice is still out there and that the American people know that he’s fighting for them.”
Jean-Pierre also said the president is “encouraged” by what he’s seeing on Capitol Hill, even though Biden himself cast doubt that legislation will be passed, telling reporters he’s “not confident” as he recounted his first-hand experience in the Senate.
While serving as then-President Barack Obama’s vice president, Biden was tasked in the wake of the Sandy Hook shooting to lead the administration’s effort to enact tougher gun control laws — but in the nearly decade since the nation mourned for Newtown, no action on gun control has passed at a federal level.
The last meaningful gun reform legislation passed on Capitol Hill was the 1994 assault weapons ban, which expired in 2004 due to a “sunset” clause in the legislation. Similar legislation has failed for decades in the Senate due in large part to the filibuster rule, which requires 60 senators for a measure to advance toward a final vote. Though Democrats hold a razor-thin majority in Congress, they cannot push legislation through the Senate without the support of at least 10 Republicans.
The American public is widely supportive of universal background checks, which have already passed through the House’s Democratic majority. An ABC News/Washington Post poll conducted in September 2019 found 89% support for universal background checks, including at least eight in 10 Republicans and conservatives.
Ahead of Biden’s speech, Vice President Kamala Harris offered brief remarks Thursday afternoon on the mass shooting in Tulsa and urged Congress to pass gun safety laws.
“No more excuses,” Harris said. “Thoughts and prayers are important, but not enough. We need Congress to act.”
As Biden prepared for his speech on Thursday, funerals were underway in Uvalde, where he visited families of victims.
He claimed earlier this week to have visited more aftermaths of mass shootings than any other American president.
In impassioned remarks from the White House last week after the Uvalde shooting, Biden expressed outrage at lawmakers who are blocking “common-sense” gun laws and rejected the argument often heard from Republicans that gun violence is a mental health issue.
“These kinds of mass shootings never happen with the kind of frequency they happen in America. Why? Why are we willing to live with this carnage?” Biden said with outrage. “Where in God’s name is our backbone to have the courage to deal with and stand up to the lobbies?”
(TULSA, Okla.) — Two doctors, an employee and a patient were gunned down at a Tulsa, Oklahoma, medical building on Wednesday after the gunman allegedly targeted his doctor, blaming him for pain.
Here is what we know about the four people who died in America’s latest mass shooting.
Dr. Preston Phillips, 59
Dr. Preston Phillips was an orthopedic surgeon at Saint Francis Hospital. He had “an interest in spinal surgery, joint reconstruction — including joint replacement and the treatment of fractures,” according to the hospital website. He graduated from Harvard Medical School in 1990 and also earned advanced degrees in organic chemistry and pharmacology, as well as theology from Emory University, police said in a statement on the victims.
Dr. Cliff Robertson, president and CEO of Saint Francis Health System, described Phillips as a “consummate gentleman,” telling reporters, “he is a man that we should all strive to emulate.”
Phillips was the target of the mass shooting, authorities said.
Phillips performed surgery on the suspected gunman on May 19, Tulsa Police Chief Wendell Franklin said.
The suspect was released from the hospital on May 24, and after his release, he called several times over several days complaining of pain and wanting additional treatment, the chief said.
On Tuesday, Phillips saw the suspect again for additional treatment, the chief said. Then, on Wednesday, the suspect called the doctor complaining of back pain and wanting additional help, the chief said.
A letter found on the gunman, who died by apparent suicide at the medical facility, made it clear “that he came with the intent to kill Dr. Phillips and anyone who got in his way,” Franklin said. “He blamed Dr. Phillips for the ongoing pain following the surgery.”
Dr. Stephanie Husen, 48
Dr. Stephanie Husen, a sports medicine specialist, was working at the medical office when she was killed.
She graduated medical school at Oklahoma State University in 2000 and completed her internship and residency at Greenville Memorial Hospital, according to her hospital profile.
She completed her undergraduate degree at the University of Oklahoma and was a member of the Chi Omega Sorority.
“Our hearts are with the family and loved ones who lost such an incredible woman,” the chapter said in a statement on social media. “She was known and loved by so many and will always be remembered.”
Amanda Glenn, 40
Amanda Glenn was an employee who had a “supervisory role” at the medical facility, officials said.
She leaves behind a husband and two teenage sons, The Oklahoman reported, citing her Facebook page.
“Amanda Glenn was a devoted wife, mother and friend,” the Sandite High School baseball team posted on Facebook. “She was on our Booster Club Board and served the baseball boys and coaches selflessly. She was the biggest cheerleader for both of her sons and all of our boys.”
Glenn worked in the medical field for over 18 years and had a “true servant’s heart” in that she “always put everyone else first,” the Tulsa police said in their statement on the victims.
William Love, 73
William Love was a patient receiving care when the gunfire erupted.
Officials said Love held a door closed to help someone else escape the shooting. That person appears to be his wife of nearly 55 years, Deborah Love, according to a police statement.
“William Love’s family would like us to share that at the time of shooting, William heard the gunshots and knew his wife would not be able to escape the building on her own,” the Tulsa Police Department said in its statement on the victims. “He sacrificed his life for her.”
Love was a retired Army first sergeant with 27 years of service who served one tour in Vietnam, police said.
He is survived by his wife, brother, two daughters and their spouses, eight grandchildren and six great-grandchildren, police said.
(CONCORD, N.H.) — New Hampshire police investigating the unsolved shooting deaths of a retired couple said Thursday that they are looking to speak to the owner or operator of a car that was parked near a hiking trail where the bodies of the victims were discovered in April.
New Hampshire Attorney General John M. Formella and Concord Police Chief Bradley Osgood released photos of a dark green 2006 to 2012 Toyota RAV4 that was parked near the March Loop trailhead in Concord on April 18, the day Stephen Reid, 67, and his wife, Djeswende “Wendy” Reid, 66, were last seen alive.
Authorities emphasized that the person who owns or was driving the car is not a suspect in the case, but investigators are eager to speak to them about what they might have seen on the trail that day.
The Marsh Loop trail is part of the Broken Ground Trails system where the bodies of the couple were discovered on April 21, a day after relatives reported them missing, police said.
The FBI has joined the investigation and a $33,500 reward is being offered for information that leads to the arrest and indictment of the person or persons responsible for the killings.
Autopsies revealed the Reids were both shot multiple times.
The development comes about three weeks after authorities released a sketch of a man authorities described as a person of interest. The man was seen in the vicinity of where the bodies were found the day the Reids went missing, officials said.
A spokesperson for the New Hampshire Department of Justice, which released the sketch, told ABC News Thursday that the person of interest has not been located.
During a news conference on Thursday afternoon, Formella said there is no connection between the person of interest and the vehicle being sought in the case. The person of interest is not currently a suspect in the case, he said.
The Reids left their home in the Alton Woods apartment complex in Concord around 2:22 p.m. on April 18 and went for a walk in the Broken Ground Trails area, Formella and Osgood said in their joint statement on Thursday.
The couple was reported missing on April 20 when Stephen Reid failed to show up at a planned event, authorities said. Their bodies were discovered a day later, officials said.
Homicide investigators and the couple’s children, Lindsay and Brian Reid, have asked the public to report any information that could possibly help crack the case.
The couple’s family released a statement after the murders, describing Stephen and Wendy Reid as soulmates who traveled the world and shared a “mutual love of adventure and fitness.”
The Reids moved to Concord about three years ago when Stephen Reid, who grew up there, retired from a more than 30-year career as an international development specialist working on humanitarian projects around the world through USAID, their family said. The couple met while Wendy Reid, who was from West Africa, was studying in Washington, D.C., on an athletic scholarship, the family said.
(NEW YORK) — A spate of deadly gun attacks across the country has reignited the national debate on gun reform in the United States. Lawmakers are arguing over what to do, if anything, to regulate guns.
Many are pointing specifically to a 2008 Supreme Court decision that was the first time the Supreme Court ever held that the Second Amendment protected an individual’s right to gun ownership. The case, District of Columbia v. Heller, has been cited as one of the reasons why big gun reform may not be possible.
“The Supreme Court had not decided before Heller whether the Second Amendment created an individual right,” said attorney John Bash, who was a clerk for Justice Antonin Scalia on the landmark case.
Bash pointed to the First Amendment and the Fourth Amendment as examples of other protected individual rights.
“They had never decided whether it was just the right to serve in a militia or a right to have a gun for self-defense. And what the majority decided was that it is an individual right, and it includes a self-defense component,” he added.
Kate Shaw, a professor of law at Cardozo Law School in New York and ABC News legal analyst, and Bash, an attorney in private practice in Austin, Texas, were clerks on opposing sides of the decision. On Tuesday, Shaw and Bash penned an op-ed in the New York Times titled, “We Clerked for Justices Scalia and Stevens. America is Getting Heller Wrong.”
“Kate believes in a robust set of gun safety measures to reduce the unconscionable number of shootings in this country. John is skeptical of laws that would make criminals out of millions of otherwise law-abiding citizens who believe that firearm ownership is essential to protecting their families,” read the New York Times article.
Bash assisted Justice Scalia on the majority opinion and Shaw helped Justice Stevens argue the dissenting opinion. Bash and Shaw spoke to ABC News’ podcast, “Start Here” on Thursday morning.
“We’re required to say, and it’s actually true in this case, that the justices themselves did the most important work, but we did assist them in preparing their opinions,” said Shaw.
Due to the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975, provisions of the District of Columbia Code made it illegal to carry an unregistered firearm and prohibited the registrations of handguns. The chief of police could issue one-year licenses for handguns. The code also contained provisions, including requiring owners of lawfully registered firearms to keep them unloaded and disassembled, unless the firearm was located in a place of business or for legal recreational activities.
Dick Anthony Heller, a D.C. special police officer, was authorized to carry a handgun while on duty. He applied for a one-year license for the handgun he wished to keep at home, but his application was denied. In 2007, Heller sued the District of Columbia, arguing that parts of the code violated his Second Amendment right to keep a firearm in his home without a license.
The Supreme Court held that the ban on registering handguns and the requirement to keep guns in the home disassembled or nonfunctional with a trigger lock mechanism violates the Second Amendment. Justice Scalia delivered the opinion for the 5-to-4 majority.
Shaw said the Heller decision is used to argue that gun regulations impede on an individual’s right to self defense, often incorrectly. She said the decision was to protect the Second Amendment as an individual right, but the actual specific holding of the case was quite narrow.
“[The] total prohibition just wasn’t consistent with the individual right that the court announced in Heller and, as John said, had actually never been identified or identified previously,” said Shaw.
Bash agreed with Shaw that the court had explicitly left room for reasonable regulations.
“[The court] gave a lot of historical examples of what it called ‘presumptively lawful regulations.’ [What is] really relevant nowadays is prohibitions on felons and the mentally ill getting their hands on guns and they didn’t disturb those at all and essentially signaled that they were probably OK,” said Bash. “Although there may be some wiggle room or debate there, they pretty much signaled that.”
Shaw also pointed out that the Heller opinion doesn’t call into question the ban on guns in sensitive places like schools or bans on carrying other “dangerous and unusual weapons.”
“There’s been a lot of attention paid to Heller’s announcement of an individual right to own a gun, but much less attention paid to the language in Heller. Making clear the government can absolutely regulate that,” she said.
As lawmakers look to what can be done, Bash said they still have the power to create new laws about gun reform, “if crafted correctly.”
“Background check laws and what’s called ‘Red Flag laws,’ meaning you have some indication that someone’s a threat, you afford them due process and temporarily take their firearm until a fuller hearing can be had. And there are variations on that,” he said. “Some of them may be OK. Some of them may not be OK.”
For now, the country stands in the wake of tragedy. Last month, 10 people died in a shooting at a Buffalo supermarket in what law enforcement authorities described as a racially motivated attack. Last week, 19 students and two teachers were killed in a school shooting in Uvalde, Texas. On Wednesday night, four people died in a Tulsa, Oklahoma, hospital shooting. Shaw said that the real question she and Bash ask in the op-ed is if legislators can pass gun legislation before the next tragedy.
“I think it’s right that reasonable minds can disagree about limitations on particular types of weapons and how those would fare under Heller… I think that our point is Congress has done nothing on guns since Heller was decided in 2008,” said Shaw. “If they want to decide to do nothing, I think they just need to take ownership of that decision as opposed to pointing to something external to themselves.”
(COLUMBUS, Ohio) — Teachers in Ohio are frustrated after lawmakers passed a bill Wednesday that would allow them and other school staff to carry guns in school safety zones, with little training.
The bill overrules an Ohio Supreme Court decision from last year that required teachers to receive gun training equivalent to the training police officers receive. If signed into law by the governor, it would create a minimum training commitment of 24 hours for teachers who voluntarily choose to carry guns in schools.
“I think that the idea to arm teachers is a way for lawmakers to pass the buck on much bigger issues,” Tate Moore, a seventh-grade English teacher in Ohio, told ABC News.
Moore said he is worried about the “unintended consequences” of teachers carrying guns in schools, saying something bad could happen.
“It seems like more things are getting added to our plate. And nothing is being taken off,” Moore said. “I’m just not sure how much more teachers can take.”
Moore said it is not a teacher’s job to stop a school shooter.
“I have yet to find one teacher who thinks it’s a good idea for teachers to carry firearms,” he said.
Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine said he will sign the bill into law, with his office telling ABC News he had been working for several weeks to get this bill passed.
Ohio police go through over 700 hours of police training. A representative for the governor’s office said more than 600 hours of that training is related to policing and would not be appropriate for teachers.
“My office worked with the General Assembly to remove hundreds of hours of curriculum irrelevant to school safety and to ensure training requirements were specific to a school environment and contained significant scenario-based training,” DeWine said in a statement to ABC News.
Another Ohio teacher said the bill is scary to her.
“I love to teach and, to me, that is my primary job. So to have this layer added to it is quite terrifying,” Lauren Alberti, a sixth-grade teacher, told ABC News.
Alberti said she is worried this bill would deter people from going into education and result in more teacher shortages, a crisis felt in schools across the U.S.
Alberti also said she is concerned about it becoming teachers’ responsibility to shoot a gunman and worries what would happen to teachers if they were to shoot and miss.
“If you really want to eradicate the issue, I don’t think that fighting fire with fire is the answer,” Alberti said.
She later added that she would feel “on edge all the time” if there were guns in her school. She said other teachers she’s spoken with have also told her they are not comfortable with what this bill allows.
Alberti said it would be better to work on the root problems that cause shootings, like working on mental health programs and anti-bullying campaigns or even increasing the number of security guards.
Asked about teachers’ criticism of the proposed rule, Joe Eaton, the program director of pro-gun group FASTER saves lives, told ABC News this bill is important to allow teachers to protect themselves in schools.
“If they’re already in the school buildings, they are in danger so they deserve the right to protect themselves and the students they’re responsible for, right now,” Eaton said. He also said it is a voluntary program and there is no requirement for schools to implement it.
Eaton said teachers and staff willingly put themselves between shooters and students to protect them, saying “we owe it to them” to allow them to defend themselves. He also said the cost of bringing in school police officers is high and it may not be a good solution for schools with large campuses.
Eaton also pushed back on claims this could fuel teacher shortages saying, there is “no indication that that could ever happen.”
Sara DeMuch, a volunteer with the Ohio chapter of gun control group Moms Demand Action, told ABC News she is “continuously disappointed” in Ohio legislators for repeatedly making decisions that “put students and teachers at risk.”
“We have done enough. And it is time for us to get back to just being students and teachers and do what we do in schools. And it’s time for our politicians to step up and tackle the problems that are going on,” DeMuch said.
DeMuch said there is no data or research that supports arming teachers in schools and called on legislators to stop putting extra work on teachers.
“It’s unrealistic, it’s dangerous, it’s irresponsible. And I think the way that they fast-tracked this bill is reprehensible,” DeMuch said.
“As an Ohio public school teacher, I’m afraid, going forward, for our schools, I’m afraid for our students, I’m afraid for other teachers,” DeMuch added.
