Mia Bieniemy, the wife of Kansas City Chiefs offensive coordinator Eric Bieniemy, was hospitalized after authorities say she was shot multiple times by their son Sunday night in their Virginia home. The 57-year-old is in stable condition after sustaining multiple gunshot wounds to the chest and arm, according to ESPN’s Chiefs reporter Nate Taylor. The Loudoun County Sheriff’s Office said deputies responded to reports of a shooting at the family’s Ashburn home before arresting the couple’s 27-year-old son, Elijah Zion Bieniemy.   Elijah Zion Bieniemy (LCSO) He was charged with malicious wounding, use of a firearm in the commission of a felony, and discharging a firearm inside a dwelling. Authorities said he is being held without bond at the Loudoun County Adult Detention Center while the investigation continues. Authorities have not released a possible motive for the shooting. Eric Bieniemy was with the Chiefs at training camp in St. Joseph, Missouri, when the shooting occurred. He left training camp to be with his wife and did not attend Monday’s practice. Chiefs head coach Andy Reid said there is no timetable for his return. “Our hearts go out to Eric Bieniemy … Mia is stable, which is a plus. We all love EB, and you hate seeing those things happen,” Reid told the media Monday. “She’s a saint … one of God’s great blessings. But things happen.” Bieniemy previously served as the Chiefs’ offensive coordinator from 2018 to 2022 before leaving for stints with the Washington Commanders, UCLA, and the Chicago Bears. He returned to Kansas City this offseason. In college, he was one of the greatest running backs in Colorado Buffaloes’ history. He helped lead the team to its 1990 national championship victory and remains the program’s all-time leader in rushing yards, rushing touchdowns, and all-purpose yards.

While publicly urging Americans to avoid family gatherings and maintain “social distance,” Dr. Anthony Fauci was also busy behind the scenes cultivating a chummy friendship with CNN anchor Jake Tapper. Fauci’s meetings and family dinners with the longtime CNN personality were revealed in a series of diary entries made public on Saturday by Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), who uncovered them during his lengthy and thorough investigation into Fauci and the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic. The former White House chief medical adviser thoroughly documented his actions throughout the pandemic — with a heavy focus on his own media appearances and coverage, particularly when it was overly flattering — and referenced an interview with Tapper that took place on April 13, 2020. During that interview, Fauci conceded that Tapper had asked tough — but reasonable — questions, and then had called him directly afterward to make sure that the interview had not caused him “any problems.” “Potential big problem (we shall see). NY Times reporting on an answer to a question that I gave on CNN yesterday (see above). Jake Tapper asked me if we had closed down earlier, whould (sic) that have saved lives. I said it is complicated; he persisted and I said obviously, if you close earlier there would have been lives saved, but the decision was complicated,” Fauci wrote. “I could have answered the question better and with more clarity, but the Times is now saying that I was implying that the POTUS was to blame for additional deaths according to me. The far right is tweeting to fire me. The POTUS even re-tweeted the tweet that said to fire me. We shall see how the day goes …” Fauci said that he later met with President Donald Trump, who said that he did not have an issue and business continued as usual. Of the press briefing that followed, he said, “I went out and explained that I was being hoest (sic) in my answer to Jake, but that I was not implying that anyone was responsible for more deaths … Phone call with Jake Tapper. Jake wanted to make sure the interview did not cause me any problems.” Later that month, Tapper spoke with Fauci about an interview he’d done with Coronavirus coordinator Deborah Birx. Of that exchange, Fauci wrote, “I was not on Sunday shows. Deb was on CNN with Jake Tapper and did not answer the question of whether it was a mistake for the POTUS to talk about injecting or swallowing bleach. Jake wrote me a text afterwards and said: “Birx has lost her way I fear. She has chosen to focus on defending the president and attacking the press. Odd.” On May 4, 2020, Fauci referenced a CNN interview in which Tapper had been hard on the Trump administration’s “inadequate” response to the pandemic — but had spared him the ire reserved for the president: “Jake Tapper did a segment last night on the inadequate response of the Trump administration to the pandemic. I came out relatively well.” Later that month, when Katie Miller, a spokesperson for Vice President Mike Pence, tested positive, and Fauci was directly exposed to SARS-CoV-2, he got a call from Tapper making sure that he was all right. “Jake Tapper called me and asked whether I was going inot (sic) quarantine. I explained to Jake that I would do a “modified quarantine” since I was a low risk exposure to Kstie (sic). Thid merans (sic) that I will get tested every day, would wear a mask ontinually (sic), and would spend most of my time either alone in my home office or alone in my NIH office and would go to White House or Congress with precautions of universal mask wearing and phycial (sic) distancing. I tested negative yesterday and will get tested every day for 14 days and then 1 time per week,” he wrote, adding in a subsequent entry that Marc Short was not taking enough precautions. “Marc Short (whom I resally (sic) like) practically sits on Katie’s lap and he is vey (sic) close to the VP. Yet he is not even wearing a mask. He actually should be self-quarantining. He was at a much greater risk than I.” On July 1, Fauci mentioned a dinner with Tapper and his wife: “Had dinner over Jake Tapper and Jen Tapper’s home in DC. Terrific couple. Friendship building.” By late July, Fauci was feeding questions to Tapper ahead of interviews with other officials: “Brett Giroir on Tapper (State of the Union) talking bullsh*t about testing with Jake pressing him. I gave Jake some questions to ask him.” And Tapper was calling Fauci to complain about President Trump: “Jake Tapper woke me up at 11:23 AM (I went to bed early) furius (sic) at POTUS for tweeting about the fact that Jake severly (sic) questioned Brett Giroir on SOTU CNN show today. Jake was really pissed at the craziness of it all.” In later entries — into the fall of 2020, as Americans were preparing to host holiday dinners via Zoom — Fauci mentioned another dinner at the Tapper home: “Had dinner at my home with Jake and Jennifer Tapper. Relaxed, good time. Jake clearly believes that Trump is totally nuts.” Tapper texts Fauci to attack Laura Ingraham and defend the integrity of Dartmouth pic.twitter.com/pLW5c1zuja — Emily Jashinsky (@emilyjashinsky) July 26, 2026 In a later exchange, after Fauci appeared on Fox News with host Laura Ingraham, Tapper texted to mock Ingraham, saying it was a shock that she’d graduated from Dartmouth.

K-pop singer Jang Won-young surprised fans when she threw the opening ceremonial pitch at the Mets game on Sunday with a “helluva windup.” On Sunday, the IVE K-pop band, with over six million daily listeners across the globe, was invited to attend the New York Mets game against the Los Angeles Dodgers. While the entire IVE group was there, Jang had the honor of throwing out the first pitch, and her mechanical windup caused people to question whether South Korea taught basic pitching mechanics to its students.  “​​To be fair, Jang has a helluva windup, which has me thinking, do they teach pitching mechanics in elementary schools in South Korea and Japan?” OutKick Senior Director of Content Joe Kinsey asked. Kinsey wondered how Jang could come over here and put “our travel ball kids to shame?” The K-pop group also filmed content with former Korean major leaguer Kim Byung-hyun and former professional pitcher Dustin Nippert.  “I’m honored to have the opportunity to throw the first pitch at a game watched by baseball fans around the world,” Jang said according to The Korean Times.  “I’ll do my best to share positive energy with both the players and everyone in the stands,” she added. The IVE K-pop group participated in the ceremony while on the North American section of its second world tour “SHOW WHAT I AM.” Called an “undeniable force in K-pop’s next generation” by Billboard, IVE will perform in eight arena shows in both the United States and Canada from July to August. Their world tour launched late in 2025 also includes performances in Australia, New Zealand, and Southeast Asia. This is not the first time the MLB has integrated K-pop stars into the league in an effort to appeal to a younger audience. On the league’s opening day, BTS — one of the most popular music groups in global history — teamed up with MLB after its album “ARIRANG” debuted shortly before the baseball season began. MLB used the song for a hype video on Instagram.   View this post on Instagram   A post shared by MLB ⚾ (@mlb) BTS band member V threw the ceremonial opening pitch at Dodger Stadium and met baseball superstar Shohei Ohtani in 2025. K-pop has exploded in popularity in the United States, particularly due to BTS, who won the Billboard Music Award for Top Social Artist in 2017.

Polk County Sheriff Grady Judd said five teenagers from the Washington, D.C., area and their basketball coach will go home with “commemorative mug shots” after the teens stole from a Davenport 7 Eleven and the coach lied to deputies to protect two of them. “If you don’t take care of your children and keep them under control, then not only are we gonna hold them accountable, but we’re gonna hold you accountable, too,” Judd said. “Well, here’s your sign.” The teens are members of Run it Up, a travel basketball program affiliated with the Amateur Athletic Union. Their team was in the area for the Puma NXTPro tournament. According to Judd, the coach arranged for them to take an Uber to an Airbnb late at night. No adult was there yet because their flight out of D.C. had run late. At about 4 a.m. on July 23, the five teens walked to the 7 Eleven at 3141 Ronald Reagan Parkway in Davenport and stole Doritos, gummies, Starburst Minis, a Big Mama sausage, lemonade, and grape and orange Slurpees totaling $37.60. After a store clerk confronted them, they fled. Deputies located three of the suspects near the entrance to Solterra after the group put the stolen items in a backpack and hid it in the bushes. When deputies showed Coach Malik Abdul Harvey photos of all five teens from the security video, he denied knowing the remaining two. He resisted and misled investigators. He later admitted he had lied to protect them. Harvey was arrested and charged with child neglect, contributing to the delinquency of a minor, accessory after the fact, and resisting without violence. Judd noted that Harvey works for the Department of Juvenile Services at the Cheltenham Youth Detention Center in Maryland. Another coach, the mother of one of the teens, identified the remaining suspects and fully cooperated. The five teens were each charged with conspiracy to commit retail theft, tampering with evidence, petit theft, and violation of the county curfew ordinance for juveniles. They are identified as 17-year-old Tavion Rashaud Hale of Washington, D.C.; 16-year-old Taureon Darnell Ferrell of Washington, D.C.; 16-year-old Obai Sankoh Sheriff of Lanham, Maryland; 16-year-old James Thomas Hall of Washington, D.C.; and 17-year-old Tyjuan Grover of Washington, D.C. Judd made his position clear: “I don’t know what y’all do in Washington, D.C. But it must be crazy. But you’re not gonna come from all around the country and steal in this county without going to jail. That’s a promise from the sheriff.”

Despite its many groundbreaking victories for originalism and textualism, the Supreme Court’s term closed with a barrage of vitriol from some conservatives aimed at Justice Amy Coney Barrett. The biggest trigger was the Court’s birthright citizenship decision, Trump v. Barbara, which came on the Court’s last day. Social media lit up with barbs declaring that Barrett had veered Left. The College Republicans from her alma mater and former employer, Notre Dame, called her an “absolute disgrace” and Rep. Nancy Mace declared that she “should be removed from the Bench.” Missing from the pile-on was any contextual analysis of Barrett’s full track record on the Court. Frustration over Barbara is understandable. Conservatives (including me) care about immigration enforcement and hoped for a different outcome. But the justices do not cast votes on outcomes, and it’s a mistake to judge them solely by the question, “Did my side win or lose?” Fidelity to the Constitution is what matters. We should credit the originalist majority for its good-faith effort to apply originalism and textualism in difficult cases. No approach does better at reading the law as it is rather than as judges wish it to be. The Court regularly wrestles with hard methodological questions, and even principled originalists sometimes err. Take Justice Antonin Scalia, who more than anyone else steered the Court — and legal scholarship generally — toward originalism. He wrote the Court’s decision in Employment Division v. Smith (1990), gutting free-exercise protections so badly that Congress had to pass the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to fix it. He spent years championing Chevron deference to agency interpretations of ambiguous laws. And in Gonzales v. Raich (2005), he provided a concurring vote for a sweeping reading of the Commerce Clause that let the federal government prohibit local cultivation of marijuana — an affront to federalism. Justice Clarence Thomas, a favorite of mine and of many other originalists, dissented in Raich. But weeks later, he wrote the Court’s opinion in National Cable & Telecommunications Assn. v. Brand X Internet Services, which expanded Chevron deference over Scalia’s dissent. (In 2020, Thomas changed his position.) Justice Samuel Alito, another towering originalist, balked at perhaps the best opportunity over the past decade to revive the nondelegation doctrine, the separation-of-powers principle under which Congress is prevented from transferring its legislative power to another branch. Those are long-serving judicial superstars. Of course, many Republican appointees drifted leftward over time, embracing the bald judicial activism of “living Constitution” liberals: Harry Blackmun, John Paul Stevens, Sandra Day O’Connor, Anthony Kennedy, and David Souter. Justice Barrett is not one of them. In fact, she helped clean up the jurisprudential mess those justices had made — most notably voting to overturn Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization and to overturn racial preferences in education in SFFA v. Harvard. She also voted to end Chevron deference in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo.  Apart from those jurisprudential earthquakes, she has been a reliable originalist vote in hard-fought First Amendment cases, on both speech and free exercise — supporting a web designer’s ability to refuse websites that violate her religious beliefs, protecting parents’ right to opt out of sexual material in public schools, upholding states’ ability to require age verification for pornography, safeguarding political speech, and striking down Colorado’s “conversion therapy” ban. The same holds for Second Amendment protections of the individual right to bear arms in cases from New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn. v. Bruen in 2022 to Wolford v. Lopez this term. Barrett helped the Court reject activist contortions of the Equal Protection Clause — efforts to stop states from prohibiting transitioning procedures for minors and limiting women’s sports to biological females. She supported extending the colorblind principle to racial gerrymandering cases. A strong protector of the separation of powers, Barrett defended the president’s ability to fire heads of “independent” commissions — overturning a 91-year-old precedent that had fueled the modern unaccountable administrative state — and dissented with other conservatives when the majority declined to apply the same principle to the Federal Reserve. She has also invoked the major questions doctrine to check executive overreach involving draconian carbon mandates and student loan forgiveness. Yet all these strong rulings risk being overshadowed by the online fury over Barbara, a challenging case in which originalists differed over the text and history of the Citizenship Clause. Barrett’s critics selectively ignore this term’s other textualist victories, several of which she joined on the side of immigration enforcement, including the president’s termination of Temporary Protected Status. The major originalist and textualist victories in the six years since Barrett joined the Court seemed completely out of reach a generation ago. That is not a record of a justice, let alone a majority of the Court, slouching leftward. This is one of the greatest Courts in American history, and Justice Barrett is an instrumental part of it. *** Carrie Severino is the President of the Judicial Crisis Network.