West experiencing record heat, fire danger as wildfire smoke reduces air quality
Fire Weather Danger – Wednesday Map. ABC News
(NEW YORK) — Dozens of fires are burning throughout the West as parts of the country remain under advisories for high temperatures.
Red flag warnings are in place for Northern California and parts of Oregon due to dry thunderstorms possible on Wednesday. The storms bring little to no rain but still produce lightning and strong wind gusts, which can start new fires and exacerbate existing fires. Dry, warm conditions also continue.
In Washington’s Cascade Mountains, a red flag warning is in place for Thursday due to relative humidity dropping to 12% in places and high temperatures in the valleys between 97 and 102 degrees and 85 to 90 degrees in the mountains. These hot, dry conditions will lead to potential rapid fire growth.
High temperatures and heat alerts are forecast for the Northwest. Temperatures are expected to be between 93 and 103 on Wednesday and Thursday.
Yakima and Spokane, Washington, may hit their all-time September highest temperature record on Wednesday, with highs around 102 degrees possible in both locations.
Los Angeles and Burbank, California, remain under a heat advisory on Wednesday for temperatures reaching between 92 and 102 degrees.
Wildfire smoke continues to blanket the Northwest, and now additional smoke from Canadian wildfires will join the American fire smoke as northerly flow begins. A plume of heavy smoke is expected to reach Omaha, Nebraska, by sunset on Wednesday.
On Thursday afternoon, very heavy smoke is expected throughout much of the Rocky Mountains, reaching from Washington to Kansas.
Heavy smoke will also spread across southern Minnesota, Iowa and Missouri on Thursday.
From Wichita, Kansas, to Kansas City, Missouri, there is a slight risk — level 2 of 5 — for severe storms Wednesday after 6 p.m.
Large to very large hail is possible, potentially as large as tennis balls, with damaging wind gusts in excess of 60 mph also possible.
(WASHINGTON) — Immigrant rights groups are asking a federal judge in Washington, D.C., to provide “emergency relief” and bar the Trump administration from continuing to ramp up its use of expedited removal.
The motion, filed on Tuesday, is part of an ongoing lawsuit that is challenging the administration’s expansion of the process which allows the government to quickly expel migrants sometimes without going before a judge.
The filing has taken a renewed sense of urgency for the groups. In recent weeks, there’s been a dramatic spike of arrests in courthouses after DHS moves to dismiss cases against migrants in removal proceedings.
“With no advance notice to the noncitizens, Defendants are moving for [immigration judges] to dismiss people’s removal proceedings; arresting and detaining people who have appeared for their court hearings as directed; and placing them in expedited removal proceedings, thereby denying them any meaningful opportunity to be heard before quickly removing them,” the groups wrote in the filing.
The filing added, “This aggressive new implementation of the Rule and Guidance has sown fear in immigrant communities, as noncitizens who have been complying with their legal obligations now face the risk of arrest and summary deportation at their next court dates.”
The groups accuse ICE officers of coordinating with Department of Homeland Security attorneys and “stationing themselves in immigration courts” to “ambush noncitizens” after their cases are dismissed.
Even those who have pending asylum applications and other petitions for relief are being targeted for expedited removal, the groups say.
They claim that those who have been detained include “man whose partner was 8 months pregnant and who had applied for asylum, gay couple who feared persecution, asylum seeker married to a U.S. citizen, and 19-year-old who appears eligible for Special Immigrant Juvenile Status.”
The groups are asking the judge to halt expedited removals while the court battle continues.
A senior DHS spokesperson previously defended the courthouse arrests in a statement to ABC News, saying: “Most aliens who illegally entered the United States within the past two years are subject to expedited removals. Biden ignored this legal fact and chose to release millions of illegal aliens, including violent criminals, into the country with a notice to appear before an immigration judge. ICE is now following the law and placing these illegal aliens in expedited removal, as they always should have been.”
The statement added on the migrants, “If they have a valid credible fear claim, they will continue in immigration proceedings, but if no valid claim is found, aliens will be subject to a swift deportation.”
Michele Jokinen, Minnesota House Public Information Services
(CHAMMPLIN, Minn.) — Two days after a man in a mask knocked on their door, identified himself as a police officer and opened fire on them, Minnesota state Sen. John Hoffman and his wife, Yvette, are recovering and “both incredibly lucky to be alive,” their family said.
“We continue our healing journey and are humbled by the outpouring of love and support our family has received from across the state and our nation,” the family said in a statement obtained by ABC News.
Early Saturday morning, the gunman knocked on the Hoffmans’ door in Champlin, Minnesota, identified himself as a police officer and then went in the house and shot the couple, according to court documents.
At 2:05 a.m., the Hoffmans’ child called 911 to report their parents had been shot, according to court documents.
John Hoffman was shot nine times and Yvette was shot eight times, Yvette said, according to a message released by Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar.
Vance Boelter, who was arrested early Monday, is accused of shooting and wounding the Hoffmans and then shooting and killing Minnesota state Rep. Melissa Hortman and her husband, Mark.
After the Hoffmans were shot, officers proactively went to Hortman’s house in the nearby town of Brooklyn Park.
“When officers arrived at approximately 3:35 a.m., they saw the Ford SUV with police-style lights and immediately saw Defendant, still dressed as a police officer, shoot an adult man … through the open door of the home,” according to court records.
“We are devastated by the loss of Melissa and Mark, and our hearts go out to all those who knew and loved them both,” the Hoffmans said in their statement.
“There is never a place for senseless political violence and loss of life,” they said.
The Hoffmans also said they had “deep and profound” gratitude for the work of law enforcement officials who tracked down the suspect.
Boelter has been charged with two counts of murder and two counts of attempted murder, with the second set of charges related to the shooting at the Hoffmans’ house. He’s due in court on Monday.
ABC News’ Darren Rynolds and Jessica Gorman contributed to this report.
(BOSTON) — A woman on the jury that voted to acquit Karen Read this week on murder and manslaughter charges spoke exclusively to ABC News, telling Chief National Correspondent Matt Gutman she believed “a collision did not occur” and that a “sloppy police investigation” sunk the case for the prosecution.
“I think, with the evidence presented, a collision did not occur, and that’s all I’m letting myself consider,” said the juror, who declined to speak on camera and asked not to be identified by name in ABC News’ reporting out of concern for her privacy.
When asked what she thought happened to the victim, John O’Keefe, the juror said it “wasn’t [her] job to figure out, and it would have it a lot harder if I had to come up with a theory or had to prove another theory.”
In 2022, Read and O’Keefe, a police officer, had met friends for drinks at two local bars. Around midnight, they and others decided to leave the bar and head to the home of a fellow policer in Canton, Massachusetts, after an invitation to continue the gathering there.
Read said she dropped off O’Keefe, her boyfriend at the time, outside the home.
Prosecutors alleged that Read hit O’Keefe with her car and left him to die. Defense lawyers argued instead that O’Keefe had gotten into a fight inside the home and was also attacked by the homeowners’ dog.
The juror said she thought O’Keefe’s arm injuries looked “a lot more like” a dog bite “than anything else.”
Asked what she thought was the biggest stumbling block the prosecution faced, the juror paused before saying, “The sloppy police investigation.”
“I can’t assess the motive to the sloppy police investigation,” she continued. “It could be tampering, that’s a possibility. It could just be bad police work. But if anyone had done their job correctly, we wouldn’t be in this position. It would either be proved or disproved right away.”
At trial, prosecutors stood by the investigation.
The homeowners, Brian and Nicole Albert, and everyone else at the gathering that night say O’Keefe never entered the home. The Alberts — who have not spoken out about the trial until now — say that they only found out about O’Keefe’s death when Jen McCabe, Nicole’s sister, barged into their bedroom.
“She was just upset, and I immediately thought something had happened to one of her children, or one of my children,” Nicole Albert told ABC News. “Because why else is she in my bedroom at 6:30 in the morning right now?”
“She said, ‘John’s — John’s out front, John, I think John’s dead out front,’” Brian Albert added. “I didn’t understand what she was talking about because why would John be out in front of my house? I was just woken up out of a cold sleep from hanging out the night before. By the time I came downstairs, the police were already in my house. John was already gone. There was nobody to save. I would have taken a bullet for John O’Keefe.”
“I’m just, I’m just very sad,” Nicole said. “What has happened to all of us. It’s just, it’s just heartbreaking,
Speaking about the dramatic moment Wednesday when Judge Cannone said at one point the jury had delivered a verdict only to rescind it minutes later, the juror told ABC News there was “a moment of reconsideration,” leading the full jury to deliberate for several more minutes before returning a verdict.
The juror suggested another fellow juror had suddenly had second thoughts about the group’s verdict, though she declined to describe the moment in detail or specify whether it was one or multiple jurors who had reservations.
“There was a moment of reconsideration that every single person respected,” she said. “No one was upset or, like, ‘Oh we decided, now we need to decide again.’ Like, no, this verdict deserved for it to be supported by all of us, for us to be able to go home and feel settled and comfortable with our choice.”
The juror said the group continued to discuss the case until delivering the verdict to Judge Cannone for the final time and that “it wasn’t one piece of evidence” that caused reasonable doubt among the jury.
“I think it was overall, a lot of the evidence had caused reasonable doubt, and that was enough for us not to convict,” she said.
ABC News’ Boston affiliate WCVB spoke to juror number 11, Paula Prado, who initially thought that Read was guilty of manslaughter but changed her mind as the trial went on.
“As the, the weeks passed by, I just realized there was too many holes that we couldn’t fill,” Prado told WCVB. “And there’s nothing that put her on the scene in our opinion besides just drop John O’Keefe off.”
Asked for her impression of Read as a person, the juror said she found Read to be “working just as hard as the lawyers.”
“She was incredibly involved. There were so many moments where, you know, something was said and she was right on it, writing a sticky note, looking up evidence, turning to get someone’s attention. She was very involved in her own case.”
The Massachusetts State Police issued a statement on Thursday, offering up their condolences to the family and loved ones of O’Keefe.
“The events of the last three years have challenged our Department to thoroughly review our actions and take concrete steps to deliver advanced interrogation training, ensure appropriate oversight, and enhance accountability,” the statement said. “Under my direction as Colonel, the State Police has, and will continue to, improve in these regards. Our focus remains on delivering excellent police services that reflect the value of professionalism and maintain public trust.”
