By COLLIN BINKLEY

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Pentagon will forbid members of the military from attending Columbia, Yale, Brown and other universities starting next school year amid a campaign to cut ties with institutions that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth called “factories of anti-American resentment.”

Related Articles

2 trans men sue Kansas over a law invalidating their driver’s licenses and about 1,700 others

Trump raises the possibility of a ‘friendly takeover of Cuba’ coming out of talks with Havana

Biden flies commercial from Reagan National Airport and winds up stuck in delays like everyone else

AIPAC faces test of its power in Illinois primary as Democrats debate future of Israel relationship

What to watch as the midterms begin with Tuesday’s primaries

Hegseth announced the policy in a video posted to social media on Friday, three weeks after he said the military was cutting ties with Harvard University. Without citing evidence, Hegseth said the universities have become “breeding grounds of toxic indoctrination” that undermine military values.

“For decades, the Ivy League and similar institutions have gorged themselves on a trust fund of American taxpayer dollars, only to become factories of anti-American resentment and military disdain,” he said. “They’ve replaced the study of victory and pragmatic realism with the promotion of wokeness and weakness.”

Hegseth said the ban applies to Columbia, Princeton, Brown, Yale, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and “many others” without elaborating. He called for “complete and immediate cancellation of all Department of War attendance,” though it was not clear how broadly it would be applied.

A message seeking further details was not immediately answered by the Pentagon.

As of Friday, Columbia, Brown, MIT and Harvard were still listed as eligible institutions in a Pentagon database for its Tuition Assistance program, which covers the full cost of tuition for active-duty personnel. Harvard had 39 participants in 2023, according to the most recent data, while Columbia had nine and MIT had two.

The earlier action against Harvard aims to block members of the military from attending graduate-level professional military education, fellowships and certificate programs, according to a statement released at the time. There are still questions about whether it applies to programs such as Harvard’s Reserve Officers’ Training Corps program.

Harvard has offered a series of professional development programs and a small number of degree programs tailored to the Pentagon. Last year, it created a new master’s degree in public administration for active-duty military members and veterans. Hegseth earned a master’s degree from Harvard but symbolically returned his diploma in a 2022 Fox News segment.

The military offers its officers a variety of opportunities to get graduate-level education, both at war colleges run by the military as well as civilian institutions like Harvard.

Campuses across the Ivy League have been a favorite target of President Donald Trump, who accuses them of becoming overrun by “woke” ideology. His administration has cut billions of dollars in research funding and attempted a number of other sanctions against the universities, often as part of investigations into allegations that officials tolerated antisemitism on campus.

Hegseth’s announcement is a rebuke to universities that had appeared to have reached a truce with the administration in recent months. Columbia and Brown were among the earliest universities to sign deals with the White House, agreeing to a range of demands in order to have their federal funding restored.

Harvard is fighting back against such demands, alleging in lawsuits that the government is illegally retaliating against the university for rebuffing its ideological views. Last summer, Trump said he was days away from reaching a deal with Harvard, but negotiations appear to have fallen apart. Earlier this month, Trump said Harvard must pay $1 billion to the government as part of any deal, twice what he had previously demanded.

The Associated Press’ education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.

By MICHAEL R. SISAK

NEW YORK (AP) — Federal prosecutors said Friday they won’t appeal a judge’s ruling that bars them from seeking the death penalty against Luigi Mangione in the killing of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson.

Related Articles

Neil Sedaka, the singer-songwriter behind dozens of hits of the 1960s and ’70s, dies at age 86

Deadline nears for US to return Babson freshman mistakenly deported to Honduras

Despite recent gains, tribal citizens descended from slaves face disparate treatment

US offers $10 million for capture of brothers said to lead Mexico’s Sinaloa cartel in Tijuana

Civil Rights agency rules against transgender Army worker who asked to use women’s bathroom

In a letter, Deputy U.S. Attorney Sean Buckley told Judge Margaret Garnett that the government will not ask the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to reverse her decision, clearing the way for a trial beginning in September. His state murder trial is set to start in June.

Garnett last month dismissed a federal murder charge — murder through use of a firearm — that had enabled prosecutors to seek capital punishment, finding it legally flawed.

She wrote that she did so to “foreclose the death penalty as an available punishment to be considered by the jury” when it weighs whether to convict Mangione in the December 2024 killing in Manhattan.

The judge, a former Manhattan federal prosecutor appointed to the bench by President Joe Biden, also threw out a gun charge but left in place stalking charges that carry a maximum punishment of life in prison.

To seek the death penalty, prosecutors needed to show that Mangione killed Thompson while committing another “crime of violence.” Stalking doesn’t fit that definition, Garnett wrote in a 39-page opinion, citing case law and legal precedents.

The ruling disrupted the Trump administration’s bid to see Mangione executed for what U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi called a “premeditated, cold-blooded assassination that shocked America.” It was the first capital case brought by the Justice Department in President Donald Trump’s second term.

Mangione, 27, has pleaded not guilty in the federal and state cases. The state charges also carry the possibility of life in prison. At a recent court hearing, he spoke out against the prospect of back-to-back trials, telling a judge: “It’s the same trial twice. One plus one is two. Double jeopardy by any commonsense definition.”

Thompson, 50, was killed on Dec. 4, 2024, as he walked to a midtown Manhattan hotel for UnitedHealth Group’s annual investor conference. Surveillance video showed a masked gunman shooting him from behind. Police say “delay,” “deny” and “depose” were written on the ammunition, mimicking a phrase used to describe how insurers avoid paying claims.

Mangione, a University of Pennsylvania graduate from a wealthy Maryland family, was arrested five days later after he was spotted eating breakfast at a McDonald’s in Altoona, Pennsylvania, about 230 miles (370 kilometers) west of Manhattan.

His lawyers have argued that authorities prejudiced his case by turning his arrest into a “Marvel movie” spectacle, including by having armed officers parade him up Manhattan pier after he was flown to New York, and by publicly declaring their desire to see him executed even before he was formally indicted.

Jury selection in Mangione’s federal case is scheduled for Sept. 8, followed by opening statements and testimony on Oct. 13. His state trial is scheduled to begin June 8, but the judge in that case, Gregory Carro, said it could have been pushed back until Sept. 8 if federal prosecutors appealed the death penalty ruling.

In her ruling, Garnett acknowledged that the decision “may strike the average person — and indeed many lawyers and judges — as tortured and strange, and the result may seem contrary to our intuitions about the criminal law.”

But, she said, it reflected her “committed effort to faithfully apply the dictates of the Supreme Court to the charges in this case. The law must be the Court’s only concern.”

By JOHN HANNA

TOPEKA, Kan. (AP) — Two transgender men are suing Kansas over a new law that invalidated their driver’s licenses and about 1,700 others for reflecting people’s gender identities and not their sex assigned at birth, arguing that the measure is “dehumanizing.”

Related Articles

Trump raises the possibility of a ‘friendly takeover of Cuba’ coming out of talks with Havana

Biden flies commercial from Reagan National Airport and winds up stuck in delays like everyone else

AIPAC faces test of its power in Illinois primary as Democrats debate future of Israel relationship

What to watch as the midterms begin with Tuesday’s primaries

House Democrats say they’re headed back to power. Their agenda is a work in progress

The men filed their case Thursday, the same day the law took effect, and argue that it violates rights to privacy, personal autonomy and due legal process guaranteed by the Kansas Constitution. The men also are challenging the law’s tough, new enforcement provisions for the state’s 3-year-old policy of barring transgender people from using public restrooms or other single-sex facilities associated with their gender identities.

The men want to block the law, which also invalidated roughly 1,800 transgender people’s birth certificates. They filed their case in district court in Douglas County, where they live, which is home to the main University of Kansas campus and is a liberal bastion in a red-leaning state.

“The Kansas Constitution prohibits the Kansas Legislature’s targeting of transgender individuals for this discriminatory and dehumanizing treatment,” the lawsuit says.

The state Supreme Court declared in 2019 that the Kansas Bill of Rights confers and protects a right to bodily autonomy — a decision that protected abortion rights.

Small transgender and LGBTQ rights flags sit on the desks of Kansas state Reps. Tobias Schlingensiepen, right, D-Topeka, and Kirk Haskins, left, also D-Topeka, in the Kansas House chamber, protesting a new law that will prevent transgender people from changing their driver’s licenses and birth certificates to reflect their gender identities and nullify past changes, Thursday, Feb. 19, 2026, at the Statehouse in Topeka, Kansas. (AP Photo/John Hanna)

The new law was enacted last week when Republicans, who hold a supermajority in the Legislature, overrode a veto by Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly. The judge handling the lawsuit, James McCabria, was appointed to the bench in 2014 by Republican Gov. Sam Brownback, and Douglas County residents have voted three times since to keep him on the bench.

A 2023 state law, also enacted over Kelly’s veto, defined male and female by a person’s “biological reproductive system” at birth. The Kansas Supreme Court hasn’t yet reviewed it.

This year’s law calls for stiff fines for cities, counties, public schools and state agencies that don’t restrict transgender people’s use of facilities, as well as fines and criminal prosecutions for transgender people who violate it. People also can sue trans individuals over alleged violations.

Republican legislators argued that the new law will protect girls and women and often described transgender women and girls as male.

Kansas State Reps. Susan Humphries, left, R-Wichita; Bob Lewis, center, R-Garden City, and Shannon Francis, right, R-Liberal, confer during a House debate on a measure to prevent transgender people from changing their driver’s licenses and birth certificates to reflect their gender identities and invalidate any past changes made for them, Wednesday, Jan. 28, 2026, at the Statehouse in Topeka, Kan. (AP Photo/John Hanna)

“Kansans expect clarity, not confusion,” House Speaker Dan Hawkins, a Wichita Republican, said after the law was enacted. “They expect leadership, not surrender to radical activists.”

The law bars any “sex” listing on driver’s licenses and birth certificates other than the one assigned at birth and invalidates existing records that don’t comply. The state has started notifying transgender people by mail that their licenses are invalid and they must get new ones immediately.

At least eight other states don’t allow transgender people to change one or both documents, but only Kansas has invalidated documents that were previously changed.

The two men suing over the new law are from Lawrence, about 40 miles west of Kansas City, and represented by American Civil Liberties Union attorneys. They’re identified as Daniel Doe and Matthew Moe, saying they fear discrimination, harassment and violence if they don’t remain anonymous.

By LEANNE ITALIE

NEW YORK (AP) — Neil Sedaka, the hit-making singer-songwriter whose boyish soprano and bright melodies made him a top act in the early years of rock ‘n’ roll and led to a second run of success in the 1970s, has died.

Related Articles

Deadline nears for US to return Babson freshman mistakenly deported to Honduras

Despite recent gains, tribal citizens descended from slaves face disparate treatment

US offers $10 million for capture of brothers said to lead Mexico’s Sinaloa cartel in Tijuana

Civil Rights agency rules against transgender Army worker who asked to use women’s bathroom

NASA revamps Artemis moon landing program to reduce flight gaps and risk

Sedaka, whose hits included “Breaking Up Is Hard to Do” and “Laugher in the Rain,” died Friday at age 86.

“Our family is devastated by the sudden passing of our beloved husband, father and grandfather, Neil Sedaka,” his family said in a statement. “A true rock and roll legend, an inspiration to millions, but most importantly, at least to those of us who were lucky enough to know him, an incredible human being who will be deeply missed.”

No other details of his death were immediately available.

A key member of the Brill Building songwriting factory, Sedaka teamed with lyricist and boyhood neighbor Howard Greenfield on songs that reflected the teen innocence of the post-Elvis/pre-Beatles era of the late 1950s-early 1960s, including “Happy Birthday Sweet Sixteen,” “Calendar Girl” and “Oh! Carol,” a lament for his high school sweetheart, Carole King.

After a long dry spell, he reemerged with such smashes as “Laughter in the Rain” and “Bad Blood.” The Captain & Tennille’s cover of his “Love Will Keep Us Together” was a chart-topper in 1975.