Best friends die in Florida after sand hole traps them underground: Sheriff
Stock image of police lights. Douglas Sacha/Getty Images
(INVERNESS, Fla.) — Two teenagers, whose relatives said were best friends, have died after a sand hole they were digging at a Florida park collapsed and buried them for more than an hour, authorities said.
The incident occurred at Sportsman Park in Inverness, Florida, according to the Citrus County Sheriff’s Office.
“Our hearts are with both families as they grieve the tremendous loss of their sons. We hope the community will continue to respect their privacy and unite in remembering and celebrating both boys,” the sheriff’s office said in a statement.
The two 14-year-olds were identified on Wednesday as George Watts and Derrick Hubbard, the Florida District 8 and District 5 Medical Examiners’ offices told ABC News.
The boys were playing in the park on Sunday when a five-foot-deep sand hole they were digging collapsed, trapping them, according to the sheriff’s office.
The sheriff’s office said the emergency was reported about 12:44 p.m. local time.
“The caller reported that two 14-year-old children were lost in the park, and there was a large hole; the caller thought the children were trapped inside the hole,” the sheriff’s office said.
Deputies, firefighters and emergency medical services personnel raced to the park and attempted to rescue the boys after one of their parents pinged their child’s cellphone and pinpointed their whereabouts underground, according to the sheriff’s office.
Rescuers pulled both boys from the sand hole around 1:15 p.m. and began cardiopulmonary resuscitation. They were taken by ambulance to HCA Florida Citrus Hospital in Inverness.
One of the boys, Derrick Hubbard, was pronounced dead on Sunday, authorities said. The sheriff’s office said George Watts was pronounced dead at the hospital on Tuesday afternoon.
“In a tragic accident, we lost our oldest son, George Watts, and his best friend, Derrick Hubbard,” Watts’ mother, Jasmine Watts, wrote on a GoFundMe page set up to raise money to cover the boys’ funeral expenses. “These two boys shared a bond that went beyond friendship — they were inseparable, full of life, curiosity, and dreams for the future.”
The boys were students at Inverness Middle School, the school said in a statement.
“This situation has deeply affected many within our school and district community,” the school said in a statement, adding that counselors, social workers and psychologists were made available to students this week “as we navigate this difficult time together.”
Signage at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) headquarters in Washington, DC, US, on Tuesday, Feb. 10, 2026. Stefani Reynolds/Bloomberg via Getty Images
(WASHINGTON) — The Environmental Protection Agency is walking back a landmark environmental decision to regulate greenhouse gas emissions and fight climate change.
For more than 16 years, the EPA’s endangerment finding served as the scientific and legal foundation for federal regulations on carbon dioxide and five other heat-trapping greenhouse gases. The 2009 decision found that certain greenhouse gases endanger public health and welfare. The regulations that resulted cover everything from vehicle tailpipe emissions to the release of greenhouse gases from power plants and other significant emission sources.
President Donald Trump, joined by EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, is expected to announce the decision on Thursday.
In a statement to ABC News, the EPA said it’s “actively working to deliver a historic action for the American people. Sixteen years ago, the Obama Administration made one of the most damaging decisions in modern history – the 2009 Endangerment Finding. In the intervening years, hardworking families and small businesses have paid the price as a result.”
Some climate scientists and policy experts say the agency’s decision to repeal the finding, even just for cars and trucks, could significantly affect U.S. efforts to address human-amplified climate change. The EPA calculates that the transportation sector is the largest contributor of direct greenhouse gas emissions in the country, with cars and trucks accounting for more 75% of those emissions.
“This is taking away the principal federal authority to regulate greenhouse gases. All of the federal regulations under the Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gases depend on the endangerment finding. If it’s wiped out, none of those regulations exist,” said Michael Gerrard, a professor at Columbia Law School and the faculty director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law.
Gerrard said the immediate impact of the EPA’s decision will be somewhat muted by the fact that the Trump administration has already revoked most regulations on greenhouse gas emissions.These include greenhouse gas emission limits on passenger vehicles, emission controls on fossil fuel-powered power plants, and controls on methane leakage from oil and gas wells.
“But this action attempts to be the nail in the coffin of all those regulations, at least for the balance of the Trump administration,” Gerrard added.
Saying the decision “amounts to the largest act of deregulation in the history of the United States,” the Trump administration estimates the move will save Americans $1.3 trillion, primarily by reducing the cost of cars and trucks. The EPA said consumers will save more than $2,400 on the purchase of a new vehicle.
But Lou Leonard, dean of Clark University’s School of Climate, Environment, and Society, says the repeal could also result in companies facing more financial and legal challenges.
“It’s going to expose, particularly businesses that are very fossil fuel intensive, to legal claims that they might not have otherwise been exposed to,” said Leonard.
“When the EPA vacates the space legally and says we’re not going to regulate, we’re out of this game, then that not only creates room for other state and local governments to do their regulation, but it also creates room for legal claims against companies for not acting on climate, because they can’t say, well, we’re just following the regulations that the federal government has created,” he added.
“The EPA’s 2009 endangerment finding triggered a trillion-dollar regulatory cascade that Congress never authorized,” the conservative nonprofit Pacific Legal Foundation said in a statement to ABC News. “What began as authority to address regional smog and acid rain has been stretched to vehicle emissions, power plants, oil and gas operations, and federal lands – reshaping America’s entire energy economy and ability to harness natural resources through administrative fiat.”
The EPA’s expected repeal of the 2009 finding “restores the principle that decisions of this magnitude require clear congressional authorization, not bureaucratic improvisation,” the statement continued.
A widely anticipated decision
The announcement from the administration was widely anticipated; the Trump administration has made the endangerment finding’s review a priority since the first day of Trump’s second term.
On Jan. 20, 2025, Trump signed an executive order titled “Unleashing American Energy” that required the head of the EPA to work with other agencies to “submit joint recommendations to the Director of OMB on the legality and continuing applicability of the Administrator’s findings” regarding the endangerment finding. The order gave them 30 days to respond.
Then, in March, the EPA announced more than two dozen policy recommendations aimed at rolling back environmental protections and eliminating a series of climate change regulations, including plans to “formally reconsider the endangerment finding.”
In a statement at the time, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin wrote, “The Trump Administration will not sacrifice national prosperity, energy security, and the freedom of our people for an agenda that throttles our industries, our mobility, and our consumer choice while benefiting adversaries overseas. We will follow the science, the law, and common sense wherever it leads, and we will do so while advancing our commitment towards helping to deliver cleaner, healthier, and safer air, land, and water.”
As part of the March announcement, the agency released a fact sheet about the endangerment finding, describing it as “the first step in the Obama-Biden Administration’s (and later the Biden-Harris Administration’s) overreaching climate agenda” and stating that it has cost the country trillions of dollars.
The EPA announced its proposal to rescind the endangerment finding in late July 2025, citing recent Supreme Court decisions that limited the regulatory power of executive agencies and arguing that the Obama administration misinterpreted Congress’s intent when it passed the Clean Air Act.
The Supreme Court case that led to the endangerment finding
The endangerment finding stems from the 2007 Supreme Court decision Massachusetts v. EPA, which held that the EPA could regulate greenhouse gases from motor vehicles under the 1970 Clean Air Act because those gases are air pollutants.
That ruling became the legal foundation for many of the federal government’s greenhouse gas emissions regulations for vehicles, fossil-fuel power plants, and other sources of pollution responsible for climate change.
Writing for the court at the time, Justice John Paul Stevens said, “If EPA makes a finding of endangerment, the Clean Air Act requires the agency to regulate emissions of the deleterious pollutant from new motor vehicles.”
“Under the clear terms of the Clean Air Act, EPA can avoid taking further action only if it determines that greenhouse gases do not contribute to climate change or if it provides some reasonable explanation as to why it cannot or will not exercise its discretion to determine whether they do,” Stevens added.
In 2009, the head of the EPA made a landmark environmental decision. Lisa P. Jackson, appointed by President Barack Obama to lead the agency, determined that the current and projected concentrations of six greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide, “endanger both the public health and the public welfare of current and future generations.” Her decision, based on a nearly 200-page EPA analysis of the science, more than 380,000 public comments and two public hearings, became what is now known as the “endangerment finding.”
Critics of decision say the underlying science is even stronger today
Critics of the administration’s plan to rescind the finding argue that the science linking greenhouse gas emissions to climate change is even stronger today than when the endangerment finding was established in 2009. They argue that the repeal lacks both a scientific basis and a legal foundation and will exacerbate the harmful impacts of climate change. Some are already promising to fight the decision in court.
“The Trump administration justifies this assault on science and our health by falsely claiming that U.S. climate-heating pollution doesn’t matter and that it lacks the authority to cut it. That’s a lie, and any 6-year-old knows it’s wrong to lie,” said Dan Becker, director of the Center for Biological Diversity’s Safe Climate Transport Campaign, in a statement to ABC News.
“The United States is the second-largest carbon polluter in the world after China, and the largest historical emitter of greenhouse gases. The U.S. emitted 11% of the world’s greenhouse gases in 2021, and during Trump’s first term his administration admitted that emissions in excess of 3% were ‘significant,’” he added.
“EPA’s own settled science shows that managing greenhouse gases is fundamental to protecting Americans. Rolling back these safeguards is a dangerous breach of responsibility to protect people, the environment, and our economy, benefitting polluters at the expense of all people,” said World Resources Institute (WRI) U.S. Director David Widawsky in a statement.
Overwhelming scientific evidence
In the more than 16 years since the EPA issued its 2009 endangerment finding, the science on how greenhouse gases impact human health has become more robust.
In response to the EPA’s request for public input, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine conducted a comprehensive independent assessment of the science behind the endangerment finding to help inform the agency’s final decision. They released their report in September, concluding the EPA’s 2009 determination was accurate and is now supported by stronger scientific evidence, with many uncertainties that existed at the time now resolved.
“[T]he evidence for current and future harm to human health and welfare created by human-caused greenhouse gases is beyond scientific dispute,” the report stated.
The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine are private, nonprofit institutions that provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation on such issues. They operate under an 1863 congressional charter to the National Academy of Sciences, signed by President Abraham Lincoln.
Similarly, the United Nations concluded that “health and the climate are inextricably linked, and today the health of billions is endangered by the climate crisis.” The U.N. cited severe weather events, toxic air pollution, an increased risk of infectious disease outbreaks, and extreme heat as evidence that human-amplified climate change poses a significant danger to people.
In 2021, 200 leading medical journals issued a joint editorial stating that “the science is unequivocal: a global increase of 1.5° C above the pre-industrial average and the continued loss of biodiversity risk catastrophic harm to health that will be impossible to reverse.”
And in 2023, the Fifth National Climate Assessment, a report that the federal government describes as providing “authoritative scientific information about climate change risks, impacts, and responses in the U.S.,” found that “climate changes are making it harder to maintain safe homes and healthy families; reliable public services; a sustainable economy; thriving ecosystems, cultures, and traditions; and strong communities.”
“This is another setback in the fight against climate change. We’re already seeing climate change having very negative impacts. It worsens flooding, heat waves, wildfires and other impacts. We’ve seen catastrophes already in the United States for all of these. We will see more,” Gerrard said.
What happens next?
A coalition of state attorneys general, including those from California, New York, Connecticut, and Massachusetts, along with environmental groups such as the Natural Resources Defense Council, has indicated they will challenge the EPA’s decision. They argue the action is unlawful because it ignores the agency’s obligations under the Clean Air Act to regulate pollutants that endanger public health and welfare.
“This action is unlawful, ignores basic science, and denies reality. We know greenhouse gases cause climate change and endanger our communities and our health – and we will not stop fighting to protect the American people from pollution,” said California Governor Gavin Newsom and Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers, who are also the co-chairs of the U.S. Climate Alliance.
While the courts could overturn the repeal, Gerrard said they could also rule that the EPA needs congressional authorization for significant regulatory actions.
“If the Supreme Court says that, that would tie the hands of another president in reinstating the endangerment finding and in using the Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gases. It would not block another president from rejoining the Paris Agreement or doing lots of other things to fight climate change, but it would greatly hurt their ability to use the Clean Air Act,” said Gerrard.
Previous lawsuits challenged the endangerment finding itself, but the courts have consistently rejected those efforts. In 2012, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the endangerment finding after fossil fuel industry groups challenged the EPA’s use of scientific assessments. The court ruled that the EPA’s findings were supported by substantial evidence and that the agency had considered the scientific evidence in “a rational manner.” The following year, the Supreme Court declined to hear petitions specifically contesting the finding.
Leonard warns that it will be a “long road” to learn out how the decision plays out.
“There’s a lot of uncertainty, and we’re gonna have even more starting tomorrow or the next day, and that’s not good. It’s not good for the public health of Americans, it’s not good for the welfare of our communities, and it’s not good for the business climate and the economy in America,” said Leonard.
People hold Greenlandic flags and placards as they gather by the United States Consulate to march in protest against U.S. President Donald Trump and his announced intent to acquire Greenland on January 17, 2026 in Nuuk, Greenland.(Sean Gallup/Getty Images)
(NEW YORK) — President Donald Trump said on Saturday that the NATO countries who have sent small contingents of troops to Greenland amid the White House’s push to acquire the island will be charged a 10% tariff on all goods sent to the United States starting on Feb. 1.
The tariffs on Denmark, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Finland will then increase to 25% on June 1, until the U.S. is able to purchase Greenland, according to the president.
Greenland is a self-governing territory of the Kingdom of Denmark.
“This is a very dangerous situation for the Safety, Security, and Survival of our Planet. These Countries, who are playing this very dangerous game, have put a level of risk in play that is not tenable or sustainable,” Trump posted on social media.
Trump, in his post, repeated his claim that China and Russia would threaten to take Greenland if the U.S. does not. He claimed Denmark cannot protect Greenland.
“Only the United States of America, under PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP, can play in this game, and very successfully, at that!” he said in the post.
Some leaders from the targeted countries slammed Trump over his tariff threats.
“France is committed to the sovereignty and independence of Nations,” French President Emmanuel Macron said in a statement Saturday, adding that “no intimidation nor threat will influence us, neither in Ukraine, nor in Greenland, nor anywhere else in the world when we are confronted with such situations.”
“Tariff threats are unacceptable and have no place in this context. Europeans will respond to them in a united and coordinated manner if they were to be confirmed. We will know how to uphold European sovereignty,” Macron said.
UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer said in a statement that “Applying tariffs on allies for pursuing the collective security of NATO allies is completely wrong.”
“Our position on Greenland is very clear – it is part of the Kingdom of Denmark and its future is a matter for the Greenlanders and the Danes,” he said.
Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson said in a statement Saturday that discussions are being had between the countries for a coordinated response.
“We will not let ourselves be blackmailed. Only Denmark and Greenland decide on issues concerning Denmark and Greenland,” he said. “I will always stand up for my country, and for our allied neighbors.”
Trump has said he would consider taking Greenland by force as an option to acquire the land.
Leaders from Greenland and Denmark, which governs international matters for the country, have repeatedly said Greenland is not for sale.
“It’s clear that the president has this wish of conquering over Greenland,” Danish Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen told reporters after meeting with Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio Wednesday.
Rasmussen called that outcome “totally unacceptable.”
Several leaders from European nations, including France and Germany, have slammed Trump’s rhetoric and sent military forces to Greenland this week as part of training exercises launched by the Danish military.
Trump’s controversial plan to acquire Greenland has been met with disapproval on the island, where protests against the U.S. have taken place.
On Saturday, huge crowds hit the streets in Greenland lashing out at Trump over his proposal. A large crowd of protesters conducted a “Stop Trump” march through the streets of Nuuk.
Trump’s proposal has also not sat well among many Americans where people and leaders across the aisle have spoken out against the idea of acquiring Greenland.
A Quinnipiac University poll found 55% of voters are opposed to the United States trying to buy Greenland, with majorities of Democratic voters (85%) and Independent voters (58%) opposed and a majority of Republican voters in support (67%).
On Friday, a bipartisan group of House members and senators traveled to Greenland and said they had “constructive” conversations with members of Denmark’s parliament.
The delegation said the visit was to nurture the relationship between Denmark, Greenland and the United States and to reassure NATO partners that many members of Congress do not support any effort by the United States to acquire Greenland.
“I think it’s important that it be recognized that when it comes to matters of relationships with our friends, with our allies, as we have here in Denmark, as we have in Greenland, that it is — it is not a subject of Republicans versus Democrats. It is a recognition, again, of a strong and continuing relationship over decades,” Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, said.
Trump’s tariffs have been hit with lawsuits which have been appealed all the way the Supreme Court. It is not known when the high court will rule on the case.
(LAS VEGAS) — Multiple people who spent time inside a Las Vegas residence that houses a possible illegal biological lab fell ill, the property’s former cleaning employee told police, according to newly released court documents.
The former cleaning employee, who went by the pseudonym “Kelly,” tipped off authorities to the alleged operation early last month, according to an arrest report for the residence’s property manager filed with the Las Vegas Justice Court following a weekend raid at the home.
Kelly said she had been hired by the property manager, Ori Solomon, to clean the home, which was rented out by the room via websites, including Airbnb, according to the report.
Solomon, also known as Ori Salomon, was arrested over the weekend and faces both state and federal charges, including felony disposal/discharge of hazardous waste in an unauthorized manner and allegedly violating his visa by possessing firearms.
Kelly told police that while working at the house in April 2025, she entered the garage, which was usually locked, and found an assortment of “refrigerators/freezers, glass beakers with reddish liquid inside,” a biological safety cabinet and what she believed to be a centrifuge, according to Solomon’s arrest report.
She said the garage smelled “like a hospital (not like a clean hospital but more of a foul stale stagnant air smell),” the report said.
Kelly said she and Solomon’s handyman both got “‘deathly ill’ after going into the garage,” the report said. “Approximately five days after entering the garage, she was left with breathing issues, fatigue, ‘could not get out of bed,’ and muscle aches.”
The handyman had the “same symptoms,” and he “believed entering the garage was the reason that they both were sick,” the report said. Kelly said Solomon’s own wife also got sick after going into the garage, according to the report.
“Kelly said a lot of people who have lived inside the house have gotten sick. One female ended up in the hospital with severe respiratory issues,” the report said. “Kelly also noted when she was cleaning the house there would be many dead crickets found in the master bedroom,” which was “super uncommon as she had lived in Las Vegas for numerous years and never seen anything like that before.”
Police and FBI agents spent Saturday and Sunday removing equipment and materials from the garage and then transported the substances to a secure lab on the East Coast for testing, the results of which have not yet been released. Authorities have said they believe the Vegas property “is being used to house the biolab equipment” as well as potential viruses and “biological substances,” the police report said.
She told police that the refrigerators that she saw in the garage “were not medical grade ones but ones you would find in a normal home,” the report said.
The report noted that the description matches the “same type of fridge used” in a previous case in Reedley, California. Officials there said an illegal bio lab was discovered in a warehouse that allegedly had unauthorized biological agents, including samples of possible infectious diseases, along with misbranded medical devices and test kits. The alleged operator, a Chinese national, was arrested in 2023 and remains in federal custody awaiting trial. He has pleaded not guilty to his charges.
The report also alleges that Solomon had “direct knowledge of the biolab being owned and operated by” the Reedley bio lab’s operator — and that the pair had been in “constant communication” since his 2023 arrest.
While incarcerated, that previous operator had more than 460 calls with Solomon in the past year alone, the report said. Solomon “is known to execute the business dealings for” the prior operator — and then would transfer funds to the prior operator’s wife and business partner, who had absconded federal indictment in China, according to the report.
Kelly told police she believes Solomon is still in contact with the prior operator because the federal inmate “calls him every day to check on the residences,” the report said.
Kelly allegedly added that if investigators “contacted Ori, he would have the lab moved out of the garage immediately.”
Police said in the report that they believe the property is “being used to house the biolab equipment, viruses, and biological substances.” Four bottles of hydrochloric acid were also found in an “apparently abandoned and open box, stored haphazardly on an open shelf, according to the report.
Hydrochloric acid can “cause substantial permanent injuries to the human body if exposed to the skin, inhaled or ingested,” the report said, alleging that the bottles were not secure or stored “in a way to avoid inadvertent exposure or ingestion.”
“As a result, the failure to properly dispose of these chemicals imperiled the lives of anyone in or near the garage,” the report said. “Moreover, hydrochloric acid is known to be volatile if airborne and can cause respiratory injury if inhaled” — particularly concerning, the report said, since the house was “additionally being used as a short term rental property with multiple occupants, including an elderly male living mere yards away from the entry to that garage.”
Three people who rented a room in the house were safely removed from the residence and are not involved in the investigation at this time, authorities previously said.
