By ALEXA ST. JOHN

In one of the nation’s first wrongful-death claims seeking to hold the fossil fuel industry accountable for its role in the changing climate, a Washington state woman is suing seven oil and gas companies, saying they contributed to an extraordinarily hot day that led to her mother’s fatal hyperthermia.

Related Articles

The world’s longest living pygmy hippo in captivity is a California resident

Looking to keep wildlife out of the ‘emergency room,’ states expand managers’ role

Oil and gas have boomed in New Mexico. Its schools are contending with pollution’s effects

Trump’s push to save coal faces a new hurdle: his own trade war

Supreme Court scales back a key environmental law in a ruling that could speed development projects

The lawsuit filed in state court this week says the companies knew that their products have altered the climate, including contributing to a 2021 heat wave in the Pacific Northwest that killed 65-year-old Juliana Leon, and that they failed to warn the public of such risks.

On June 28, 2021, an unusual heat wave culminated in a 108-degrees Fahrenheit day — the hottest ever recorded in the state, according to the filing. Leon had just driven 100 miles from home for an appointment, and she rolled down her windows on the way back because her car’s air conditioning wasn’t working.

Leon pulled over and parked her car in a residential area, according to the lawsuit. She was found unconscious behind the wheel when a bystander called for help. Despite medical interventions, Leon died.

The filing names Exxon Mobil, Chevron, Shell, BP, ConocoPhillips, Phillips 66 and BP subsidiary Olympic Pipeline Company. ConocoPhillips, BP and Shell declined to comment when reached by The Associated Press. The other companies did not respond to requests for comment.

“Defendants knew that their fossil fuel products were already altering the earth’s atmosphere,” when Juliana was born, Thursday’s filing said. “By 1968, Defendants understood that the fossil fuel-dependent economy they were creating and perpetuating would intensify those atmospheric changes, resulting in more frequent and destructive weather disasters and foreseeable loss of human life.”

The filing adds: “The extreme heat that killed Julie was directly linked to fossil fuel-driven alteration of the climate.”

The lawsuit accuses the companies of hiding, downplaying and misrepresenting the risks of climate change caused by humans burning oil and gas and obstructing research.

International climate researchers said in a peer-reviewed analysis that the 2021 “heat dome” was “virtually impossible without human-caused climate change.”

Scientists have broadly attributed the record-breaking, more frequent, longer-lasting and increasingly deadly heat waves around the world to climate change that they say is a result of burning fossil fuels. Oil and gas are fossil fuels that, when burned, emit planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions, such as carbon dioxide.

“We’ve seen a really advanced scientific understanding about this specific effects that climate change can cause in individual extreme weather events,” said Korey Silverman-Roati, a senior fellow at the Columbia Law School’s Sabin Center for Climate Change Law. “Scientists today are a lot more confident in saying that but for climate change, this would not have happened.”

Silverman-Roati said the specificity of the case could clarify for people the consequences of climate change and the potential consequences of company behavior.

The lawsuit was first reported by The New York Times.

“Big Oil companies have known for decades that their products would cause catastrophic climate disasters that would become more deadly and destructive if they didn’t change their business model,” said Richard Wiles, president of the Center for Climate Integrity, said in a statement on the case. “But instead of warning the public and taking steps to save lives, Big Oil lied and deliberately accelerated the problem.”

Unprecedented action

States and cities have long gone after fossil fuel industry stakeholders for contributing to the planet’s warming. Recently, Hawaii and Michigan announced plans for legal action against fossil fuel companies for harms caused by climate change, though the states have been met by counter lawsuits from the U.S. Justice Department.

The current administration has been quick to disregard climate change and related jargon. Under President Donald Trump, the U.S. withdrew from the Paris climate agreement, again; the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration — an agency whose weather forecasting and research workforce has been gutted — will no longer track the cost of weather disasters fueled by climate change; and the Environmental Protection Agency has been called on to a rewrite its long-standing findings that determined planet-warming greenhouse gases endanger public health and welfare.

Meanwhile, the federal government has ramped up support for oil and gas production in the name of an “American energy dominance” agenda, and it rolled back a host of other efforts and projects to address climate change.

FILE – Chris Cowan, with Cascadia Behavioral Healthcare’s street outreach team, loads water and other cooling supplies before visiting homeless camps on Aug. 12, 2021, in Portland, Ore. (AP Photo/Nathan Howard, File)

Around the world, other climate cases are being watched closely as potentially setting unique precedent in the effort to hold major polluters accountable. A German court ruled this week against a Peruvian farmer who claimed an energy company’s greenhouse gas emissions fueled global warming and put his home at risk.

Still, a case that looks to argue these companies should be held liable for an individual’s death is rare. Misti Leon is seeking unspecified monetary damages.

“Looking ahead, it’s hard to imagine this will be an isolated incident,” said Don Braman, associate professor at George Washington University Law School. “We’re facing an escalating climate crisis. It’s a sobering thought that this year, the hottest on record, will almost certainly be one of the coolest we’ll experience for the foreseeable future.

“It is predictable or — to use a legal term, foreseeable — that the loss of life from these climate-fueled disasters will likely accelerate as climate chaos intensifies,” he added. “At the heart of all this is the argument about the culpability of fossil fuel companies, and it rests on a large and growing body of evidence that these companies have understood the dangers of their products for decades.”

Alexa St. John is an Associated Press climate reporter. Follow her on X: @alexa_stjohn. Reach her at ast.john@ap.org.

Read more of AP’s climate coverage at http://www.apnews.com/climate-and-environment

The Associated Press’ climate and environmental 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.

WASHINGTON (AP) — An information technology specialist for the Defense Intelligence Agency was charged Thursday with attempting to transmit classified information to a representative of a foreign government, the Justice Department said.

Related Articles

How to watch tonight’s Scripps National Spelling Bee

Foundations donate $1.5M to help restore historic Black church in Memphis gutted by arson

What to know about onetime Chicago gang leader Larry Hoover, whose federal sentence Trump commuted

National Spelling Bee runners-up rarely go on to win. But Faizan Zaki hopes to defy the odds

Smokey Robinson sues former housekeepers for defamation over rape allegations

Prosecutors say Nathan Vilas Laatsch, 28, of Alexandria, Virginia, was arrested at a location where he had arranged to deposit sensitive records to a person he thought was an official of a foreign government, but who was actually an undercover FBI agent. The identity of the country Laatsch thought he was in communication with was not disclosed, but the Justice Department described it as a friendly, or allied, nation.

It was not immediately clear if Laatsch, who was set to make a court appearance Friday, had a lawyer who could speak on his behalf.

The Justice Department said its investigation into Laatsch began in March after officials received a tip that he had offered to provide classified information to another nation. Laatsch wrote in his email that he “did not agree or align with the values of this administration” and was willing to transmit sensitive materials, including intelligence documents, to which he had access, prosecutors said.

An undercover agent got in touch with Laatsch, who began transcribing classified information to a notepad and made plans to drop off information that the foreign government representative could pick up in a park.

At one drop-off this month, prosecutors say, Laatsch left behind a thumb drive containing multiple typed documents marked up to the Secret and Top Secret levels. In return, prosecutors say, Laatsch said that he was interested in obtaining citizenship from that country because he did not anticipate “things here to improve in the long term.”

He was arrested Thursday at a prearranged location after making additional plans for a drop-off.

By BEN NUCKOLS, Associated Press

OXON HILL, Md. (AP) — The best young spellers in the English language are competing at the Scripps National Spelling Bee, which celebrates its 100th anniversary this year.

The first bee was held in 1925, when the Louisville Courier-Journal invited other newspapers to host spelling bees and send their champions to Washington. The bee is now held just outside the nation’s capital, at a convention center on the banks of the Potomac River. It started Tuesday and concludes Thursday night.

This is the 97th bee; it was canceled from 1943 to 1945 because of World War II and again in 2020 because of the COVID-19 pandemic. This year’s champion will be the 110th, because the bee ended in a two-way tie several times and an eight-way tie in 2019.

Yahya Ali Mohammed, 13, of Geneva, Ill., reacts after spelling a word correctly during the semifinals of the Scripps National Spelling Bee, Wednesday, May 28, 2025, in Oxon Hill, Md. (AP Photo/Julia Demaree Nikhinson)

Indian Americans have dominated the competition for a quarter-century. Since 1999, 29 of 35 winners have been Indian American, including seven of the eight co-champs in 2019.

How can I watch the Scripps National Spelling Bee?

The bee is broadcast and streamed on channels and platforms owned by Scripps, a Cincinnati-based media company.

— Thursday, May 29: Finals broadcast on ION from 8-10 p.m. ET

Who is competing at the Scripps National Spelling Bee?

The bee features 243 spellers, with at least one from each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia; as well as spellers from U.S. territories Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands and the Northern Mariana Islands; and from Canada, the Bahamas, Germany, Ghana, Kuwait and Nigeria.

Aishwarya Kallakuri, 14, of Charlotte, N.C., reacts after spelling a word correctly in the semifinals of the Scripps National Spelling Bee, Wednesday, May 28, 2025, in Oxon Hill, Md. (AP Photo/Julia Demaree Nikhinson)

Sixty spellers were eliminated in Tuesday’s preliminary spelling and vocabulary rounds, leaving 183 to take a written spelling and vocabulary test ahead of Wednesday’s quarterfinals. An additional 84 were eliminated by the test, leaving 99 quarterfinalists on the stage Wednesday morning. Three quarterfinal rounds narrowed the field to 57 semifinalists, and nine spellers made the finals after four semifinal rounds.

Faizan Zaki, last year’s runner-up, is back in the finals after losing to Bruhat Soma in a lightning-round tiebreaker known as a “spell-off.” The 13-year-old seventh-grader from Allen, Texas, was the only speller to get a perfect score on the written test.

If Faizan falls short again, he would have one more year of eligibility. He has won several online bees that top spellers compete in as preparation, including the Words of Wisdom Spelling Bee and the South Asian Spelling Bee.

Faizan Zaki, 13, of Dallas, reacts after spelling his word correctly during the semifinals of the Scripps National Spelling Bee at the Gaylord National Resort & Convention Center Wednesday, May 28, 2025, in Oxon Hill, Md. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana)

The other finalists:

— Aishwarya Kallakuri, a 14-year-old eighth-grader from Concord, North Carolina, and winner of the SpellPundit National Spelling Bee.

— Harini Murali, a 13-year-old eighth-grader from Edison, New Jersey, a finalist last year and the younger sister of Navneeth Murali, who would have been a top contender in the 2020 bee had it not been canceled because of COVID-19.

— Esha Marupudi, a 13-year-old seventh-grader from Chandler, Arizona, who is competing at the bee for the first time.

— Oliver Halkett, a 13-year-old seventh-grader from Los Angeles and a two-time bee participant.

— Sarvadnya Kadam, a three-time speller and a 14-year-old eighth-grader from Visalia, California.

— Sarv Dharavane, an 11-year-old from Dunwoody, Georgia, who made the semifinals last year as a fourth-grader.

— Brian Liu, a 13-year-old eighth-grader from Great Neck, New York, who was a semifinalist two years ago but didn’t make it to the bee in 2024.

— Akshaj Somisetty, a 13-year-old eighth-grader from Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania, and a two-time speller who leaped from quarterfinalist to finalist.

What are the rules of the Scripps National Spelling Bee?

Spellers qualify by advancing through regional bees hosted by sponsors around the country. To compete, spellers must not have advanced beyond the eighth grade or be older than 15.

Zwe Sunyata Spacetime, 13, of Washington, center, applauds following the quarterfinals of the Scripps National Spelling Bee, Wednesday, May 28, 2025, in Oxon Hill, Md. (AP Photo/Julia Demaree Nikhinson)

Spellers must get through two preliminary rounds, quizzing them on words from a list provided in advance: one spelling round and one multiple-choice vocabulary round.

Those who make it through the preliminaries sit for a written spelling and vocabulary test, with the top 100 or so finishers advancing to the quarterfinals. The words for the test, and for all subsequent rounds, are taken from the Merriam-Webster Unabridged dictionary.

Throughout the quarterfinals and semifinals, spellers are eliminated at the microphone through oral spelling or vocabulary questions.

When only two spellers remain, Scripps has the option to use a lightning-round tiebreaker known as a “spell-off” to determine the champion. However, Scripps has taken away the requirement that the spell-off begin at a specific time, giving bee judges more discretion to let the competition play out.

Related Articles

Foundations donate $1.5M to help restore historic Black church in Memphis gutted by arson

What to know about onetime Chicago gang leader Larry Hoover, whose federal sentence Trump commuted

National Spelling Bee runners-up rarely go on to win. But Faizan Zaki hopes to defy the odds

Smokey Robinson sues former housekeepers for defamation over rape allegations

Skittles removes controversial additive targeted by RFK Jr.

What are the prizes for the Scripps National Spelling Bee champion?

The winner receives a custom trophy and more than $50,000 in cash and prizes. Here are the prize payouts:

— First place: $52,500 in cash, reference works from Encyclopaedia Britannica and Merriam-Webster, and a $1,000 contribution to a school of the champion’s choice.

— Second place: $25,000.

— Third place: $15,000.

— Fourth place: $10,000.

— Fifth place: $5,000.

— Sixth place: $2,500.

— All other finalists: $2,000.

Ben Nuckols has covered the Scripps National Spelling Bee since 2012. Follow his work here.

By CHRIS MEGERIAN

WASHINGTON (AP) — Elon Musk arrived in the nation’s capital with the chain saw-wielding swagger of a tech titan who had never met a problem he couldn’t solve with lots of money, long hours or a well-calibrated algorithm.

Related Articles

What to know about onetime Chicago gang leader Larry Hoover, whose federal sentence Trump commuted

Already numb to tariff twists, US importers see legal decisions as another price of doing business

Trump suffered ‘mental anguish’ from disputed CBS News interview with Harris, lawyer says

The US academic partnership with China, under strain for years, faces its biggest threat

White House acknowledges problems in RFK Jr.’s MAHA report

President Donald Trump was delighted to have the world’s richest person — and a top campaign donor — working in his administration, talking about how he was “a smart guy” who “really cares for our country.”

Musk was suddenly everywhere — holding forth in Cabinet meetings while wearing a “tech support” shirt and black MAGA hat, hoisting his young son on his shoulders in the Oval Office, flying aboard Air Force One, sleeping in the White House. Democrats described the billionaire entrepreneur as Trump’s “co-president,” and senior officials bristled at his imperial approach to overhauling the federal government.

After establishing Tesla as a premier electric automaker, building rockets at SpaceX and reshaping the social media landscape by buying Twitter, Musk was confident that he could bend Washington to his vision.

Now that’s over. Musk said this week that he’s leaving his job as a senior adviser, an announcement that came after he revealed his plan to curtail political donations and he criticized the centerpiece of Trump’s legislative agenda.

It’s a quiet exit after a turbulent entrance, and he’s trailed by upheaval and unmet expectations. Thousands of people were indiscriminately laid off or pushed out — hundreds of whom had to be rehired — and some federal agencies were eviscerated.

But no one has been prosecuted for the fraud that Musk and Trump said was widespread within the government. Musk reduced his target for cutting spending from $2 trillion to $1 trillion to $150 billion, and even that goal may not be reached.

In Silicon Valley, where Musk got his start as a founder of PayPal, his kind of promises are known as vaporware — a product that sounds extraordinary yet never gets shipped to market.

Trump, who once called Musk “a truly great American” and “a patriot,” said nothing about the departure. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said: “We thank him for his service.”

Musk’s position was always designed to be temporary, and he had previously announced his intention to dedicate more of his time to his companies. But he also told reporters last month that he was willing to work part-time for Trump “indefinitely, as long as the president wants me to do it.”

Musk got a seat at Trump’s table and put $250 million behind his campaign

It was clear that Musk wouldn’t be the typical kind of presidential adviser around the time that he showed the world his belly button.

Racing on stage at a campaign rally one month before the election, he jumped for joy next to Trump, his T-shirt rising to expose his midriff. Musk had already sold Trump on his idea for a Department of Government Efficiency while also putting at least $250 million behind his candidacy.

The plan called for a task force to hunt for waste, fraud and abuse, a timeworn idea with a new twist. Instead of putting together a blue-ribbon panel of government experts, Trump would give his top donor a desk in the White House and what appeared to be carte blanche to make changes.

Musk deployed software engineers who burrowed into sensitive databases, troubling career officials who sometimes chose to resign rather than go along. Trump brushed off concerns about Musk’s lack of experience in public service or conflicts of interest from his billions of dollars in federal contracts.

Their unlikely partnership had the potential for a generational impact on American politics and government. While Musk dictated orders for government departments from his perch in the White House, he was poised to use his wealth to enforce loyalty to the president.

His language was that of catastrophism. Excessive spending was a crisis that could only be solved by drastic measures, Musk claimed, and “if we don’t do this, America will go bankrupt.”

But even though he talked about his work in existential terms, he treated the White House like a playground. He brought his children to a meeting with the Indian prime minister. He let the president turn the driveway into a makeshift Tesla showroom to help boost sales. He installed an oversized screen in his office that he occasionally used to play video games.

Sometimes, Trump invited Musk to sleep over in the Lincoln Bedroom.

“We’ll be on Air Force One, Marine One, and he’ll be like, ‘do you want to stay over?’” Musk told reporters. The president made sure he got some caramel ice cream from the kitchen. “This stuff’s amazing,” Musk said. “I ate a whole tub of it.”

Looking back on his experience in government, he described it as a lark.

“It is funny that we’ve got DOGE,” an acronym that references an online meme featuring a surprised-looking dog from Japan. “How did we get here?”

Musk did not give federal workers the benefit of the doubt

From the beginning, Musk treated federal workers with contempt. At best, they were inefficient; at worst, they were committing fraud.

His team offered them a “fork in the road,” meaning they could get paid to quit. Probationary employees, generally people new on the job without full civil service protection, were shown the door.

Anyone who stayed faced escalating demands, such as what became known as the “five things” emails. Musk wanted every government employee to submit a list of five things they accomplished in the previous week, and he claimed that “failure to respond will be taken as a resignation.”

Some administration officials curtailed the plan, concerned that it could jeopardize security in more sensitive areas of the government, and it eventually faded, an early sign of Musk’s struggle to get traction.

But in the meantime, he continued issuing orders like thunderbolts.

One day in February, Musk posted “CFPB RIP,” plus an emoji of a tombstone. The headquarters of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, created after the Great Recession to protect Americans from fraud and deceptive practices, was shut down and employees were ordered to stop working.

Musk had already started gutting the U.S. Agency for International Development, a pillar of the country’s foreign policy establishment and the world’s largest provider of humanitarian assistance.

“Spent the weekend feeding USAID into a wood chipper,” he bragged.

Thousands of contacts were cut off, pleasing conservatives who disliked the agency’s progressive initiatives on climate change and gay rights.

Musk rejected concerns about the loss of a crucial lifeline for impoverished people around the globe, saying, “no one has died.” However, children who once relied on American assistance perished from malnutrition, and the death toll is expected to increase.

The lawsuits began piling up. Sometimes workers got their jobs back, only to lose them again.

The Food and Drug Administration, which is responsible for ensuring the safety of everything from baby formula to biotech drugs, planned to lay off 3,500 employees. But again and again, the agency was forced to rehire people who were initially deemed expendable, including laboratory scientists, travel bookers and document specialists.

Commissioner Marty Makary, who started his job after many of the cuts took place, told attendees at a recent conference that “it was hard and my job is to make sure we can heal from that.”

Only 1,900 layoffs took place, but another 1,200 staffers took buyouts or early retirement. Experts fear the agency has lost much of its institutional knowledge and expertise in areas like vaccines, tobacco and food.

There are also concerns about safety on public lands. The National Park Service has been bleeding staff, leaving fewer people to maintain trails, clean restrooms and guide visitors. More cuts at the Forest Service could undermine efforts to prevent and fight wildfires.

The Environmental Protection Agency faces a broad overhaul, such as gutting the Office of Research and Development, which was responsible for improving air pollution monitoring and discovering harmful chemicals in drinking water.

Not even low-profile organizations were exempt. Trump ordered the downsizing of the U.S. Institute of Peace, a nonprofit think tank created by Congress, and Musk’s team showed up to carry out his plan. The organizations’ leaders were deposed, then reinstated after a court battle.

Musk made little headway at the top sources of federal spending

The bulk of federal spending goes to health care programs like Medicaid and Medicare, plus Social Security and the military.

Unfortunately for Musk, all of those areas are politically sensitive and generally require congressional approval to make changes.

Thousands of civilian workers were pushed out at the Pentagon, and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is reducing the ranks of top generals and looking to consolidate various commands. A plan to downsize an office for testing and evaluating new weapons systems could save $300 million per year. Hegseth recently asked employees to submit one idea per week for cutting waste.

However, the Pentagon budget would increase by $150 billion, for a total of more than $900 billion, under Trump’s spending proposal working its way through Congress. The money includes $25 billion to lay the groundwork for Trump’s “golden dome” missile defense program and $34 billion to expand the naval fleet with more shipbuilding.

Another $45 million is expected to be spent on a military parade on June 14, which is the 250th anniversary of the Army’s founding and Trump’s 79th birthday.

Musk also faced blowback for targeting Social Security, which provides monthly benefits to retirees and some children. He suggested that the popular program was “a Ponzi scheme” and the government could save between $500 billion and $700 billion by tackling waste and fraud.

However, his estimates were inflated. Social Security’s inspector general said there was only $71.8 billion in improper payments over eight years. Nor was there any evidence that millions of dead people were receiving benefits.

Changes to Social Security phone services, pitched as a way to eliminate opportunities for fraud, were walked back after an outcry from lawmakers and beneficiaries. But the agency could still shed 7,000 workers while closing some of its offices.

Musk’s popularity cratered even though Americans often agreed with his premise that the federal government is bloated and wasteful, according to polling from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.

Just 33% of U.S. adults had a favorable view of Musk in April, down from 41% in December. In addition, 65% said Musk had too much influence over the federal government.

Musk talked of staggering savings but delivered modest results

During a campaign rally in October, Musk said he could find “at least $2 trillion” in spending cuts. In January, before Trump was inaugurated, he revised by saying, “if we try for $2 trillion, we’ve got a good shot at getting one.”

But in April, at a Cabinet meeting, Musk provided a different target. He was “excited to announce” that they could reach $150 billion in savings during the current fiscal year.

Whether that figure proves to be accurate is difficult to measure, especially because DOGE routinely inflated or mischaracterized its work. But it falls short of President Bill Clinton’s initiative three decades ago, which resulted in $136 billion in savings — the equivalent of more than $240 billion today.

Elaine Kamarck, a key figure in the Clinton administration, said they focused on making the government more responsive and updating antiquated internal procedures. The work took years.

“We went about it methodically, department by department,” she said. The effort also reduced the federal workforce by more than 400,000 employees.

However, Musk did little to seek insight from people who knew the inner workings of government.

“They made some changes without really knowing what they were doing,” said Alex Nowrasteh, vice president for economic and social policy studies for the libertarian think tank Cato Institute. He said there were “a lot of unforced errors.”

In the end, Nowrasteh said, “they set themselves up for failure.”

Associated Press writers Tom Beaumont in Des Moines and Lolita Baldor, Matthew Daly, Gary Fields, Fatima Hussein, Ellen Knickmeyer, Matthew Perrone, Michelle Price and Amelia Thomson DeVeaux in Washington contributed to this report.