All emerging technology needs to deliver on its promise, sooner or later. For AI agents, that time is now.

Romes National Gallery of Ancient Art at Palazzo Barberini offers an astonishing survey of the painter, featuring instructive groupings of his work from collections in Italy and around the world.

Harvard Art Museums exhibition of paintings and prints by the Norwegian artist highlights his processes and practice of returning to the same subjects.

ProPublica is a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative newsroom. Sign up for The Big Story newsletter to receive stories like this one in your inbox.Leaders at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ordered staff this week not to release their experts assessment that found the risk of catching measles is high in areas near outbreaks where vaccination rates are lagging, according to internal records reviewed by ProPublica.In an aborted plan to roll out the news, the agency would have emphasized the importance of vaccinating people against the highly contagious and potentially deadly disease that has spread to 19 states, the records show.A CDC spokesperson told ProPublica in a written statement that the agency decided against releasing the assessment because it does not say anything that the public doesnt already know. She added that the CDC continues to recommend vaccines as the best way to protect against measles.But what the nations top public health agency said next shows a shift in its long-standing messaging about vaccines, a sign that it may be falling in line under Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a longtime critic of vaccines:The decision to vaccinate is a personal one, the statement said, echoing a line from a column Kennedy wrote for the Fox News website. People should consult with their healthcare provider to understand their options to get a vaccine and should be informed about the potential risks and benefits associated with vaccines.ProPublica shared the new CDC statement about personal choice and risk with Jennifer Nuzzo, director of the Pandemic Center at Brown University School of Public Health. To her, the shift in messaging, and the squelching of this routine announcement, is alarming.Im a bit stunned by that language, Nuzzo said. No vaccine is without risk, but that makes it sound like its a very active coin toss of a decision. Weve already had more cases of measles in 2025 than we had in 2024, and its spread to multiple states. It is not a coin toss at this point.For many years, the CDC hasnt minced words on vaccines. It promoted them with confidence. One campaign was called Get My Flu Shot. The agencys website told medical providers they play a critical role in helping parents choose vaccines for their children: Instead of saying What do you want to do about shots?, say Your child needs three shots today.Nuzzo wishes the CDCs forecasters would put out more details of their data and evidence on the spread of measles, not less. The growing scale and severity of this measles outbreak and the urgent need for more data to guide the response underscores why we need a fully staffed and functional CDC and more resources for state and local health departments, she said.Kennedys agency oversees the CDC and on Thursday announced it was poised to eliminate 2,400 jobs there.When asked what role, if any, Kennedy played in the decision to not release the risk assessment, HHSs communications director said the aborted announcement was part of an ongoing process to improve communication processesnothing more, nothing less. The CDC, he reiterated, continues to recommend vaccination as the best way to protect against measles.Secretary Kennedy believes that the decision to vaccinate is a personal one and that people should consult with their healthcare provider to understand their options to get a vaccine, Andrew G. Nixon said. It is important that the American people have radical transparency and be informed to make personal healthcare decisions.Responding to questions about criticism of the decision among some CDC staff, Nixon wrote, Some individuals at the CDC seem more interested in protecting their own status or agenda rather than aligning with this Administration and the true mission of public health.The CDCs risk assessment was carried out by its Center for Forecasting and Outbreak Analytics, which relied, in part, on new disease data from the outbreak in Texas. The CDC created the center to address a major shortcoming laid bare during the COVID-19 pandemic. It functions like a National Weather Service for infectious diseases, harnessing data and expertise to predict the course of outbreaks like a meteorologist warns of storms.Other risk assessments by the center have been posted by the CDC even though their conclusions might seem obvious.In late February, for example, forecasters analyzing the spread of H5N1 bird flu said people who come in contact with potentially infected animals or contaminated surfaces or fluids faced a moderate to high risk of contracting the disease. The risk to the general US population, they said, was low.In the case of the measles assessment, modelers at the center determined the risk of the disease for the general public in the US is low, but they found the risk is high in communities with low vaccination rates that are near outbreaks or share close social ties to those areas with outbreaks. The CDC had moderate confidence in the assessment, according to an internal Q&A that explained the findings. The agency, it said, lacks detailed data about the onset of the illness for all patients in West Texas and is still learning about the vaccination rates in affected communities as well as travel and social contact among those infected. (The H5N1 assessment was also made with moderate confidence.)The internal plan to roll out the news of the forecast called for the expert physician whos leading the CDCs response to measles to be the chief spokesperson answering questions. It is important to note that at local levels, vaccine coverage rates may vary considerably, and pockets of unvaccinated people can exist even in areas with high vaccination coverage overall, the plan said. The best way to protect against measles is to get the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine.This week, though, as the number of confirmed cases rose to 483, more than 30 agency staff were told in an email that after a discussion in the CDC directors office, leadership does not want to pursue putting this on the website.The cancellation was not normal at all, said a CDC staff member who spoke anonymously for fear of reprisal with layoffs looming. Ive never seen a rollout plan that was canceled at that far along in the process.Anxiety among CDC staff has been building over whether the agency will bend its public health messages to match those of Kennedy, a lawyer who founded an anti-vaccine group and referred clients to a law firm suing a vaccine manufacturer.During Kennedys first week on the job, HHS halted the CDC campaign that encouraged people to get flu shots during a ferocious flu season. On the night that the Trump administration began firing probationary employees across the federal government, some key CDC flu webpages were taken down. Remnants of some of the campaign webpages were restored after NPR reported this.But some at the agency felt like the new leadership had sent a message loud and clear: When next to nobody was paying attention, long-standing public health messages could be silenced.On the day in February that the world learned that an unvaccinated child had died of measles in Texas, the first such death in the U.S. since 2015, the HHS secretary downplayed the seriousness of the outbreak. We have measles outbreaks every year, he said at a cabinet meeting with President Donald Trump.In an interview on Fox News this month, Kennedy championed doctors in Texas who he said were treating measles with a steroid, an antibiotic and cod liver oil, a supplement that is high in vitamin A. Theyre seeing what they describe as almost miraculous and instantaneous recovery from that, Kennedy said.As parents near the outbreak in Texas stocked up on vitamin A supplements, doctors there raced to assure parents that only vaccination, not the vitamin, can prevent measles.Still, the CDC added an entry on Vitamin A to its measles website for clinicians.On Wednesday, CNN reported that several hospitalized children in Lubbock, Texas, had abnormal liver function, a likely sign of toxicity from too much vitamin A.Texas health officials also said that the Trump administrations decision to rescind $11 billion in pandemic-related grants across the country will hinder their ability to respond to the growing outbreak, according to The Texas Tribune.Measles is among the most contagious diseases and can be dangerous. About 20 percent of unvaccinated people who get measles wind up in the hospital. And nearly 1 to 3 of every 1,000 children with measles will die from respiratory and neurologic complications. The virus can linger in the air for two hours after an infected person has left an area, and patients can spread measles before they even know they have it.This week Amtrak said it was notifying customers that they may have been exposed to the disease this month when a passenger with measles rode one of its trains from New York City to Washington, DC.

No menu item is quite as iconic as a fast-food cheeseburger, and every chain does theirs a little differently.McDonald's has been serving cheeseburgers since it was founded in 1940, and its most basic cheeseburger remains one of the cheapest items on the menu.In an effort to provide better value, other chains have beefed up their most basic cheeseburger offerings with bigger patties and toppings with tomato, red onion, and shredded lettuce.I tried and ranked cheeseburgers from five major chains: McDonald's, Burger King, Wendy's, Sonic Drive-In, and Checkers.All of the burgers were slightly different. However, there was a clear winner in terms of taste and value.Here's how five fast-food cheeseburgers ranked, from worst to best.McDonald's had my least favorite cheeseburger.The cheeseburger cost less than $4. Erin McDowell/Business Insider The most basic cheeseburger at McDonald's cost $3.49, excluding tax and fees, at my local McDonald's in Brooklyn, New York.The cheeseburger came topped with a single beef patty, pickles, chopped onions, ketchup, mustard, and a slice of American cheese.The burger was topped with diced onions. Erin McDowell/Business Insider The cheeseburger had a smattering of diced onions across the bottom of the patty and inside the bottom bun. The cheese made the burger patty and top bun stick together, sandwiching the other ingredients inside.I didn't mind the cheeseburger, but it wasn't my favorite.The burger tasted strongly of ketchup and cheese. Erin McDowell/Business Insider Overall, it was a good snack but not hearty enough to satiate me for a full meal. I also thought the bun was a little flavorless, and the cheese could have been more melted.The condiments also overpowered the taste of the burger this cheeseburger really only tasted of cheese and ketchup to me, while the bun made my mouth feel a little dry.I didn't really taste the onions, though I thought the pickles were tart and crunchy.Burger King's basic cheeseburger was up next.Burger King's cheeseburger was the least expensive. Erin McDowell/Business Insider The cheeseburger cost $2.79, excluding tax and fees, at a Burger King in Brooklyn, New York. It was the least expensive burger I tried.The burger came with American cheese, pickles, ketchup, and mustard on a sesame seed bun.The burger came topped with pickles and ketchup. Erin McDowell/Business Insider This burger appeared to be just a touch bigger than the McDonald's burger. The cheese was also more melted.While this burger had fewer toppings, it was more flavorful.The burger had a slightly smoky flavor to it. Erin McDowell/Business Insider I thought the addition of diced onion and mustard on the McDonald's burger did little to amp up the flavor, and I found this burger much tastier.The bun had a distinct sesame flavor, and the beef patty had a slight smokiness that tasted fresh off the grill.The cheese was thick and perfectly melted onto the burger patty, something I didn't experience with the burger from McDonald's. For its low price, I thought this burger was a good value.Wendy's Dave's Single cheeseburger landed squarely in the middle.Wendy's Dave's Single is the chain's most classic cheeseburger. Erin McDowell/Business Insider While Wendy's offers a variety of different burgers, big and small, the Dave's Single is the chain's most classic cheeseburger. Named after Wendy's founder, Dave Thomas, it is available in multiple sizes, from a single to a triple-stacked burger.It features one of Wendy's signature square-shaped patties and is the chain's version of a classic cheeseburger.It cost $8.74, excluding tax and fees, at my local Wendy's in Brooklyn, New York. It was the most expensive burger I tried.The burger came slathered with condiments and toppings.The burger came with classic toppings like cheese, lettuce, and tomato. Erin McDowell/Business Insider The Dave's Single cheeseburger comes with a quarter-pound beef patty, a slice of American cheese, lettuce, tomato, pickles, ketchup, mayo, and onions.When I lifted the top bun of the burger, it was practically dripping sauces, which I didn't necessarily mind. There was also a generous serving of pickles and a large slice of tomato.I thought the burger was tasty, but the condiments slightly overpowered the other ingredients.The burger checked a lot of boxes. Erin McDowell/Business Insider Next time, I might remove the mayonnaise or ask for a half-serving to reduce how moist the burger was.I thought the toppings tasted fresh, and it was a good size. However, I wasn't sure if it was worth the high price tag.Checkers came in second place.The Checkers cheeseburger came on a hearty bakery-style bun. Erin McDowell/Business Insider The Cheese Champ, which is Checker's most basic cheeseburger, cost $6.49, excluding tax and fees, at the location I visited in Brooklyn, New York.The burger came loaded with toppings.The burger came with classic toppings like lettuce, tomato, and red onion. Erin McDowell/Business Insider The burger had one patty and was topped with American cheese, tomato, red onion, lettuce, pickles, ketchup, mustard, and mayonnaise. It was served on a toasted "bakery-style" bun.The burger was big and juicy. I thought it was a great value.The burger was large, flavorful, and a good value for the price. Erin McDowell/Business Insider Checkers served one of the largest burgers I tried, and I thought it was also relatively affordable at just under $7. The burger toppings were fresh, especially the thickly cut sliced tomato and iceberg lettuce.I thought the cheese and beef patty were both flavorful, and the burger had the perfect amount of condiments to add moisture and flavor without making it too soggy.My only complaint was with the bun, which I thought was a little too thick and stodgy compared to Sonic's fluffier bun.Overall, I was impressed.My favorite cheeseburger came from Sonic Drive-In.The cheeseburger from Sonic Drive-In was my favorite. Erin McDowell/Business Insider The Sonic cheeseburger cost $8.04, excluding tax and fees, at my local Sonic Drive-In in Brooklyn, New York.The burger came topped with one slice of cheese, pickles, tomato, lettuce, diced onion, mayonnaise, and ketchup.The cheeseburger had a generous amount of toppings. Erin McDowell/Business Insider There was a generous serving of each topping, and they were evenly layered across the burger patty to ensure that every bite had an equal amount of all the ingredients.I thought this was a great classic cheeseburger, and I'd definitely order it again.The Sonic cheeseburger impressed me the most. Erin McDowell/Business Insider While it wasn't the cheapest burger, I thought it was a great value considering its size and the amount of flavor packed into it.The beef was juicy but well-seasoned, the cheese added the perfect amount of tang, the pickles and tomato were fresh and added a tart crunch to every bite, and the soft bun held everything together.Although Sonic's burger was quite similar to Checkers', I preferred the more expensive option solely for its flavor. It simply tasted fresher and better overall.The next time I'm reaching for a classic fast-food cheeseburger, I'll stop by Sonic Drive-In.

The business of flying people from point A to point B has evolved over the decades from small rickety prop planes to massive jetliners capable of carrying hundreds of people.Among the most famous examples of this progress is Qantas' "Kangaroo Route" between Australia and the UK.Early versions of the over 12,000-mile journey first operated in the mid-1930s, and the route is still going strong today but it's about to travel even faster. What was once a 12-day and up-to-31-stop route is set to become a 21-hour nonstop journey by 2027. The Sydney to London flight is poised to become the world's longest route thanks so a specially equipped Airbus A350. Qantas' International and Freight CEO Cam Wallace told Business Insider the ultra-long-range plane will "unlock the ability to fly nonstop from Australia to anywhere in the world."The unofficial Kangaroo Route started as an airmail service in 1934.A Qantas Empire Airways DH50 flew the inaugural airmail route from Brisbane to Darwin in 1934. Queensland State Archives The first version of the Kangaroo Route was an airmail operation flown by Qantas Empire Airways, where both Qantas and Britain's Imperial Airways each had about half a stake.In 1934, QEA started flying between Brisbane and Singapore via Darwin, which then connected to England. It was a precursor to today's codesharing partnerships.Passenger transport began in 1935, and the route took 12 days.There was no cabin crew to hand out snacks, and the 10-passenger De Havilland DH86 biplanes were a far cry from the luxury of today's airliners. Print Collector/Getty Images The airmail route quickly morphed into weekly passenger flights in 1935. Qantas flew the leg to Singapore, where travelers connected to London on Imperial.The series of snaking connections included up to 31 stops, including overnights, across Australia, Asia, the Middle East, and Europe. The trek from Brindisi in Southern Italy to Paris was via train.The long journey which was reserved for wealthy flyers as tickets cost 195 one-way (about $15,250, adjusted for inflation) was still faster than the six-week option by boat.Flying boats were introduced in 1938 to shave off time.The flying boats operated from Sydney Harbour's Rose Bay. Qantas QAE's Short Empire flying boats were launched in 1938 and cut the flying time by several hours.The flights were rocky and rough due to turbulence and a lack of weather radar. After the fall of Singapore in 1942, World War II halted the kangaroo service.A truncated Kangaroo Route was revived in 1943 with the 'Double Sunrise.'The "double sunrise" was coined because passengers and crew saw two sunrises during the trek. The planes carried up to three passengers and mail. Qantas Qantas' modified route connected Australia to England via Ceylon (present-day Sri Lanka) instead of Singapore.The nonstop Ceylon flight across the Indian Ocean lasted up to 33 hours and is still the longest commercial flight in history by time.The route used Consolidated PBY Catalina flying boats, followed later by Liberator planes, the latter of which were the first to sport Qantas' kangaroo logo.Converted war-era bombers took over the re-established route in 1945.The Lancastrian had nine sideways-facing seats and convertible bunks. The planes' unreliability meant airports in each layover city had to carry spare components and engines. Qantas Qantas operated the portion between Australia and Karachi, Pakistan, using Avro 691 Lancastrian aircraft.Its partner, the British Overseas Airways Corporation, or BOAC which is an early version of British Airways took over for the rest of the trip to London. The trek took about 70 hours.Qantas reverted the Ceylon portion of the route back to Singapore after the war.Qantas fully took over the route in 1947 and trademarked "Kangaroo Route."The stops were Darwin, Singapore, Kolkata (formerly Calcutta), Karachi, Cairo, Castel Benito in Tripoli, and Rome. National Library of Australia, The Sydney Morning Herald/Getty Images The airline used 29-seat quad-engine Lockheed Constellations to reduce flight time to about 55 hours across seven stops and four total travel days. Tickets were 525 (about $22,600, adjusted for inflation)."When the Kangaroo Route launched in 1947, it opened a new frontier for aviation," Wallace said.In 1954, Qantas received its first Super Constellation. These carried more people and further reduced travel time.Qantas introduced the Boeing 707 in 1959.According to Qantas, the fare from Sydney to London in 1959 cost about 30 weeks of one's average weekly earnings. Mirrorpix/Mirrorpix via Getty Images Thanks to its more powerful jet engines, Qantas' 707 aircraft could carry up to 90 people and make the trek to London in 27 hours.It was the first Jet Age aircraft bought by Qantas.The Boeing 747 cut flying time to less than a day in 1971.The 747's immense size helped bring affordable air travel to the masses and changed the landscape of international flying. Qantas The famous 747 jumbo jet flew from Australia to London via a single stop in Singapore.From 1979 to 1985, Qantas operated an all-747 fleet, complete with comfortable seats and an exclusive lounge and bar.The Airbus A380 complemented the 747 beginning in 2008.The Qantas Airbus A380 double-decker can carry nearly 500 passengers 50x the capacity of the DH86 biplanes that flew in 1935. James D. Morgan/Getty Images The A380 currently flies from Sydney and Melbourne to London, with a stop in Singapore. The route previously went through Dubai.The mammoth A380 complemented the 747 fleet for decades until the iconic "Queen of the Skies" was officially retired during the pandemic in 2020.Qantas' Boeing 787-9 Dreamliners began flying nonstop between Perth and London in 2018.The plane carries 236 passengers split across business, premium economy, and coach. James D. Morgan/Getty Images It was the first nonstop passenger service connecting Australia with the UK, but it was only for Perth.Key destinations in Eastern Australia, like Sydney and Brisbane, still lack nonstop service.Deep-pocket travelers can experience the famous Kangaroo Route for $30,000 in 2026.English politicians leaving a Qantas Constellation in London in 1953. Fairfax Media Archives/Fairfax Media via Getty Images Tour company Captain's Choice is flying a one-off tourist trip in February 2026 to nearly mirror the Kangaroo Route as it was in 1947 hops included.Seats start at about $30,000. While Qantas is not pricing or selling any of the tickets, it is operating the Airbus A330 charter plane.Project Sunrise is expected to launch in 2027 in a full-circle moment for Qantas.Qantas said at a conference in March that the one-stop treks would fly alongside Project Sunrise for scale and flexibility. James D. Morgan/Getty Images The up-to-21-hour and 10,000-mile flight will officially eliminate the "hop" from the historic Kangaroo Route. Project Sunrise will include two ultra-long-haul routes using a fleet of purpose-built A350-1000ULRs: Sydney to London and Sydney to New York.Qantas is introducing new cabins on the A350s.A rending of the new first class. Test flights have been conducted to see how people will fare on the ultra-long-haul flights. Qantas Qantas's A350 will have just 238 seats and will boast four different cabins including economy, premium economy, and enclosed business and first-class suites.The airline announced in late February that the plane would enter final assembly in September, followed by flight testing and delivery in the second half of 2026.

I was an English major in college, and my favorite poet was the first-generation Romantic William Wordsworth. For one thing, theres the name, the best example of nominative determinism in the annals of English literature.But what I most love about Wordsworth is the way he acts as a bridge between the formal, at times stultified style of the poetry that came before him, and the dawn of a new era that venerated individual emotion and experience both the good and the ill. All that comes together in one of my favorite Wordsworth poems: Surprised by JoyLove, faithful love, recalled thee to my mind--But how could I forget thee? Through what power,Even for the least division of an hour,Have I been so beguiled as to be blindTo my most grievous loss?Beneath the archaic language, the thees and so forth, the verse describes a father who is temporarily distracted from his loss by a moment of joy, only to recall with agonizing suddenness that the one person he wishes to share it with his young child is gone. The surprise in Surprised by Joy is that it was possible, even for the briefest moment, for the poet not to be consumed by that most grievous loss.Like most of Wordsworths poems, Surprised by Joy was drawn from his personal experience in this case, the loss of his daughter Catherine in 1812, when she was just three years old. Wordsworth and his wife Mary had five children, two of whom died young: Catherine, and their son Thomas, who passed away from measles at age 6, just a half year after Catherines death. RelatedWhat would a world without foreign aid look like?To lose two young children in less than a calendar year is a grief I cannot fathom. But it was unbearably common at the time. Nearly one in every three children in England in 1800 died before the age of 5. In 1900 in the US, the death rate for children was nearly one in five, as my Vox colleague Anna North wrote recently. Look back over the full course of human history, and it is estimated that nearly one in every two children died before reaching their 15th birthday. It might be comforting, perhaps, to pretend that the parents of the past werent as affected with the death of a child, because it was so common. After all, family sizes used to be much larger, in part because of the ubiquity of childhood mortality. Yet Wordsworths lines bury that comfort in the graveyard where it belongs. In 2025, in 1812, in 2000 BC, the death of a young child is the worst thing that could happen to any parent.The most important number in the worldYoure probably wondering, Wheres the good news? Here it is: The rate of childhood mortality is now far, far lower than it once was. Best of all, its continuing to drop.In 1990, 12.8 million children died before the age of 5, but in the years since that number has fallen by more than 60 percent. According to new data released by the UN this week, the number of under-5 deaths fell to a record-low of 4.8 million in 2023.At Voxs Future Perfect, the section I run, we like to refer to the drastic drop in child mortality as the most important statistic in the world, for several reasons:If a child can make it to their fifth birthday, it significantly increases their chance of living a full life. Given that life expectancy overall has increased hugely as well, that can mean the difference between a life of a few years and one that extends to 70 years or more. With millions of children alive today who would have been dead just a few decades ago, that adds up to billions of years of additional life.Child mortality is one of the most important indicators of a countrys development. As the chart above shows, rich nations like the UK and the US first made progress in keeping children alive, but more recently poorer nations like India have made tremendous strides. (Child mortality dropped an astounding 81 percent between 1980 and today in India.)The reduction in child mortality is perhaps the best example of the international community setting a goal and making major progress toward it. In 2000, the UN aimed to reduce child mortality to two-thirds below 1990 levels by 2015. While we didnt quite make it by then, were almost there now. Global health is a bright spot compared to the struggles in making progress on climate change.We shouldnt need economic motivations to want to reduce child deaths, but reduced childhood mortality is also associated with better economic performance. Family sizes fall to a more manageable level in poor countries, and more future workers survive to a productive age.How did we get here and where are we going?There is no secret formula to reducing child mortality. Improved prenatal, childbirth, and postnatal care all keep children alive in their vulnerable first months. Better sanitation and nutrition prevent early deaths from waterborne illnesses and malnutrition. Vaccines have, of course, saved untold millions of children from once common killers like measles, diphtheria and polio. (Let me say this again louder for those in the back row, especially if any of you happen to currently be running the Department of Health and Human Services: VACCINES!)Despite this tremendous success, 4.8 million children approximately the population of Phoenix still die before their fifth birthday, which is exactly 4.8 million too many. The world would have to reduce child mortality by an additional 30 percent or so to meet the new UN goal of essentially ending preventable child deaths 2030.Unfortunately, were not on that trajectory. While the number of child deaths is still declining, progress has been slowing down, and that was before the massive cuts in foreign aid in the US and other countries. The highest levels of child mortality today are found in extremely poor sub-Saharan African nations like Chad and Mali where aid will be the difference between life and death. Here in the US, the turn away from childhood vaccines risks reintroducing long-conquered killers of children. The fact that an unvaccinated child in Texas recently died of the measles the same disease that took Wordsworths son Thomas, back when there was no protection from the virus should horrify all of us. Whether it is through resurrecting the most effective forms of foreign aid, or reconfirming our trust in vaccines that have saved millions, it is in our power to eventually end preventable child deaths. We can ensure that one day no parent will experience the pain suffered by William Wordsworth and by countless parents before and after him. Such an achievement would be a joy that lasts.A version of this story originally appeared in the Good News newsletter. Sign up here!Youve read 1 article in the last monthHere at Vox, we're unwavering in our commitment to covering the issues that matter most to you threats to democracy, immigration, reproductive rights, the environment, and the rising polarization across this country.Our mission is to provide clear, accessible journalism that empowers you to stay informed and engaged in shaping our world. By becoming a Vox Member, you directly strengthen our ability to deliver in-depth, independent reporting that drives meaningful change.We rely on readers like you join us.Swati SharmaVox Editor-in-ChiefSee More: Future Perfect

All nine of the Supreme Court justices are lawyers. All of them have friends and law school classmates in private practice. All of them sit at the apex of a legal system that depends on lawyers to brief judges on the matters those judges must decide. Many of them were themselves litigators at large law firms, where their livelihood depended on their ability to advocate for their clients without fear of personal reprisals. So its hard to imagine a presidential action that is more likely to antagonize the justices President Donald Trump needs to uphold his agenda, not to mention every other federal judge who isnt already in the tank for MAGA, than a series of executive orders Trump has recently issued. These actions aim to punish law firms that previously represented Democrats or clients opposed to Trump. The lawyers targeted by these orders are the justices friends, classmates, and colleagues. It would likely be easy for, say, Chief Justice John Roberts or Justice Brett Kavanaugh to empathize with law partners who do the exact same work they once did.The striking thing about all the law firm executive orders is that they barely even attempt to justify Trumps decision with a legitimate explanation for why these orders are lawful.The order targeting law firm Perkins Coie attacks the firm for representing failed Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton in its second sentence. The order targeting WilmerHale accuses it of engaging in obvious partisan representations to achieve political ends, as if Democrats do not have the same right to hire lawyers who advocate on their behalf that everyone else does. The order targeting Jenner & Block justifies that attack because the firm once hired Andrew Weissmann, a prominent television legal commentator who, in the executive orders words, engaged in partisan prosecution as part of Robert Muellers entirely unjustified investigation into Trump. Weissmann left Jenner in 2021.The sanctions laid out in these orders, moreover, are extraordinary. They attempt to bar the firms attorneys and staff from federal buildings, preventing lawyers representing criminal defendants from engaging in plea bargaining with federal prosecutors and potentially preventing lawyers who practice before federal agencies from appearing before those agencies at all. They also seek to strip security clearances from the firms lawyers, and to strip federal contracts from companies that employ the targeted law firms.Its hard to think of a precedent for this kind of sweeping attack on a business that did some work for a presidents political opponents. During the second Bush administration, a political appointee in the Defense Department criticized lawyers who represent Guantanamo Bay detainees and suggested that their firms clients should look elsewhere for legal representation. But that official apologized shortly thereafter. And he resigned his position three weeks after his widely criticized comments.Bush himself did not attempt anything even resembling the sanctions Trump now seeks to impose on law firms.As Perkins Coie argues in a lawsuit challenging the order against that firm, these sanctions are an existential threat to the firms Trump is targeting. Perkins says that it has nearly 1,000 active matters that require its lawyers to interact with more than 90 federal agencies, and it fears it cant continue many of those representations if it isnt even allowed into the building to meet with government officials. Similarly, the firm says many of its biggest clients, including its 15 biggest clients, have or compete for government contracts that could be cancelled unless those clients fire the firm.Trump, in other words, is claiming the power to exterminate multi-billion dollar businesses, with over a thousand lawyers and as many support staff, to punish them for things as innocuous as representing a Democrat in 2016.Its hard to count all the ways these orders violate the Constitution. Perkins, in its lawsuit, alleges violations of the First Amendment right to free speech and free association, due process violations because it was given no hearing or notice of the sanctions against it, separation of powers violations because no statute authorizes Trump to sanction law firms in this way, and violations of their clients right to choose their own counsel among other things. The Trump administration has not yet filed a brief laying out its response to these arguments, but in a hearing, one of its lawyers claimed that the Constitution gives the president inherent authority to find that there are certain individuals or certain companies that are not trustworthy with the nations secrets.Normally, when a litigant wants the courts to permit something that obviously violates existing law, they try to raise the issue in a case that paints them in a sympathetic light. But Trump has chosen to fight this fight on the most unfavorable ground imaginable:There may be a perverse logic to Trumps decision to fight on such unfavorable terrain. If he wins the right to punish law firms for representing a prominent Democrat a decade ago, it is unlikely that the Supreme Court will stop him from doing anything at all in the future. Most lawyers will be too scared of retaliation to even bring lawsuits challenging Trumps actions. Already, one of the firms targeted by Trump, Paul Weiss, appears to have caved to him by agreeing to do $40 million worth of free legal work on causes supported by Trumps White House. (Like Perkins, Wilmer and Jenner sued to block the orders targeting them.)And, of course, if Trumps endgame is to openly defy the courts, an obviously unconstitutional executive order targeting law firms that are in the business of suing the government is a good way to bring about that endgame quickly.These stunning executive orders dare the courts to either make themselves irrelevant, or to trigger what could be the final showdown over the rule of law.The anti-Thurgood Marshall strategyIf you want to understand how litigants normally proceed when they want to convince the courts to make audacious changes to the law, consider Sweatt v. Painter (1950), a case brought by future Justice Thurgood Marshall a few years before he successfully convinced the justices to declare public school segregation unconstitutional in Brown v. Board of Education (1954).Marshalls goal was to convince the justices that, as they eventually concluded in Brown, separate education facilities are inherently unequal, even if a state attempted to equalize the resources provided to segregated Black and white schools. Before he brought the much more difficult challenge to K-12 segregation, however, Marshall chose a more favorable ground to fight for integrated educational facilities: law schools.In Sweatt, a Black man was denied admission to the University of Texas Law School solely because of his race. Rather than integrate UT, Texas opened a new law school for aspiring Black lawyers, and argued that this facility solved the constitutional problem because now Black law students could receive a similar education to the one they would receive at the states flagship university.But the justices, all of whom were lawyers, understood the subtle hierarchies of the legal profession in which where you go to law school can determine the entire trajectory of your career all too well to be fooled by this arrangement. As the Courts unanimous decision explained, the University of Texas Law School possesses to a far greater degree those qualities which are incapable of objective measurement but which make for greatness in a law school qualities like a reputation for excellence, and an alumni network full of successful lawyers eager to lend a hand to UTs graduates. Marshall, in other words, understood that, by appealing to the professional sensibilities of the justices, he could make them see that the concept of separate but equal is at odds with itself. And once those justices took the easy step of empathizing with law students denied access to an elite school, it was much easier to get them to see themselves in grade school students shunted into an inferior elementary school.Trump has done the exact opposite of what Marshall did in Sweatt. And that means that the same empathy that Marshalls clients benefitted from in Sweatt and Brown is likely to cut against Trump.Not only that, but the justices who will ultimately hear this case are likely to have unique sympathy for lawyers attacked by a politician seeking to discredit them, because many of them experienced just that in their confirmation hearings.When Chief Justice John Roberts was nominated to the Supreme Court, for example, one of the few controversies surrounding his nomination was whether the positions he took as a lawyer representing a client could be attributed to him personally. Roberts had been a judge for only about two years when he was nominated for the Supreme Court, so his judicial record was quite thin, and some Democrats and their allies hoped to point to his work as a lawyer to discredit him. Among other things, they pointed to a brief Roberts signed as a Justice Department lawyer, which argued that Roe v. Wade should be overruled.The White House and Senate Republicans defense of Roberts at the time was that a lawyers job is to represent their clients interests, even if they do not agree with the client. So it is unfair to attribute a former clients views to their lawyer. And this was an excellent defense! The Constitution gives everyone a right to hire legal counsel to represent them before the courts. This entire system breaks down if lawyers who represent unpopular clients or positions face professional sanction for doing so.The point is that the most powerful judge in the country, like numerous other judges whove had their careers probed by the Senate Judiciary Committee, has a very personal stake in the question of whether lawyers can be punished because the wrong elected officials dont like their clients. That does not mean that the author of the Courts unconscionable Trump immunity decision will suddenly have an epiphany and turn against Donald Trump. But if Trumps goal is to turn Roberts (and numerous other judges) against him, attacking lawyers who stand in very similar shoes to the ones Roberts wore 20 years ago is a pretty good way to do it.See More:

After a long, cold Winter, we have finally made it past the final stretch: The weather is warming up, the sun is staying out longer and the seasonal depression is fading to make way for the regular depression. We can finally hang out outside again! And no outside hang out is complete without good musicand a good sound system. Were not all getting together to listen to Dua Lipa on a phone stuck inside a red Solo cup. We want rich booming sound thats still only the size of a phone in a red Solo cup.The Anker Soundcore 2 portable speaker is here to save the day and great news: During Amazons Big Spring Sale, you can grab one for up to 38% off. Normally priced at about $45, the black model has dropped down to just $27. Additionally, the more fun color options including blue, red, and teal are also on sale.See at AmazonThis is a portable speaker at its finest. Measuring in at only 6.5 long, the Anker Soundcore 2 can easily fit into your bag for easy travel. The Bluetooth 5.0 ensures youll maintain a stable connection to your phone or other audio source even as youre wandering throughout your yard at the next barbecue.The Bluetooth Anker Soundcore 2 is IPX7 waterproof so you can take it poolside or to the beach without worrying about it getting splashed onor heck, even fully submerged in the water. That also makes it ideal for listening to music in the shower.All-Day ListeningThis speaker is designed by Anker, so you know its battery is gonna be absolutely top tier. Packing 5,200mAh, youll be able to listen to your favorite music, podcasts, or audiobooks for a solid 24 hours on a full charge. Quite literally you can jam out all day long.This 38% discount makes buying a second speaker a pretty attractive prospect. Why? Because you can use wireless stereo pairing to connect two Soundcore 2 speakers together. Once paired, you can set the two speakers to listen into a single sound source to play bold stereo soundor simply to have double the volume. Its also great to set up in multiple rooms during a house party so every space is synced to the same music.See at Amazon

Weve finally made it through the long Winter. The weather has warmed up and now its finally time for that long-awaited Spring cleaning. Cleaning doesnt have to feel like a chore. It can be easy with the right tool? The Dyson V8 cordless vacuum is that tool. And right now this stick vacuum cleaner is part of the Big Spring Sale over at Amazon. At the moment, this model is available for $399, down from $469.See at AmazonWhen it comes to the Dyson V8 cordless vacuum, convenience is the name of the game: This vac is easy to move around though out your home. Its lightweight and ergonomic cleaning places high up and hard to reach couldnt be easier. The vacuum can transform into a handheld, making it maneuverable while remaining powerful, perfect for taking out to the car for a little interior cleanup before your next night out.Pet Hair, BewareOur furry friends are wonderful and we wouldnt change them for the world. Though, the shedding can be a real drag. Having the right tool on hand can keep your couches and carpets fur free. The Dyson V8 cordless vacuum is all to suck up pet hair from pet beds, couches, and even tough corners like those along stairs. The Dyson vac comes with a hair screw tool. Its conical in shape and helps detangle hair while you vacuum your home. And the polycarbonate hair removal vanes on the Motorbar cleaner help to automatically clear hair thats been wrapped around the brush bar.Hows the battery life you ask? Exceptional. Youll get a full 40 minutes of of vacuuming done before the Dyson V8 vac needs a recharge. Itll reach back to 100% in just five hours. You can neatly store the stick vacuum against the wall dock so it will recharge on its own just by being put away.Clean up afterwards is easy. Thats a word were using a lot here, isnt it? Easy. The hygienic ejection mechanism drives out all the dust and dirt inside with just one action , and you dont need to touch it at all to get it in the trash. Youll be left with fresh clean home as the whole-machine filtration system will clear pet dander and dust, capturing and sealing in 99.99% of particles as small as 0.3 microns.See at Amazon