One does not need much in the way of advanced statistics to confirm that playing defense at the top levels of hockey can be hazardous to your health.

For definitive proof, just take a look at the Minnesota Wild’s season statistics, which show that Tuesday’s home game versus Chicago was the sixth in a row played without the services of veteran blueliners Zach Bogosian and Jonas Brodin.

Wild coach John Hynes is hopeful that Bogosian could return relatively soon from his third stint on the injured list this season. Brodin, on the other hand, will miss the chance to skate for Team Sweden in the coming Winter Olympics and is not expected back on the ice for Minnesota until early March.

“It’s difficult,” Hynes acknowledged following the team’s morning skate on Tuesday. “It is special. That’s why the players have voted to go play in the Olympics. It is, you know, a best-on-best tournament. You don’t get a lot of opportunities to be able to represent your country.”

However, out of challenges come opportunities for the young defensemen in the Wild system that have been tasked with filling those roles. Already this season, prospects like David Spacek and Carson Lambos have made their NHL debuts for the Wild, and newcomer Matt Kiersted — originally from Elk River, Minn. — has logged four games for his home-state team.

The two mainstays among the next wave of defensemen getting ice time have been David Jiricek and Daemon Hunt.

In a strange twist, last season the Wild traded Hunt to Columbus as part of the package that brought Jiricek to Minnesota. At the end of training camp, when Columbus placed Hunt, 23, on waivers for purposes of sending him to their American Hockey League team, the Wild claimed him and brought Hunt back to Minnesota.

Hunt admits there was a bit of an odd relationship between Jiricek, 22, and him early in the season, knowing that they were once traded for each other.

“But now, half way through the season, I think it feels normal,” said Hunt, who had three assists in his first 21 games with the Wild this season. “He’s a good friend of mine now.”

Jiricek, who was a top-10 draft pick by Columbus, was prized enough by Wild general manager Bill Guerin that he sent Hunt, a first-round pick, and three other draft picks to the Blue Jackets to get the big Czech in green and red.

In Minnesota, Jiricek’s development has been slower than most had hoped. But after 22 games at the NHL level this season, Hynes is seeing some encouraging signs, especially when Jiricek lets his 6-foot-3, 210-pound frame do the work.

“He’s always been competitive. I think now it’s understanding how to use his body, when to use his body, how to have angles, how to use your leverage against elite players,” Hynes said. “I think the more opportunities you get to do that, whether it’s here or the American League level, you’re always going to get better and better. The good thing is he has a willingness to work on those things.”

For the Wild system’s young defensemen, those opportunities to work on their game, and learn, while playing at the NHL level are expected to help them be valuable additions as inevitable injuries happen to veterans. Time with the Iowa Wild is important for any developing player but there is no substitute for what they experience playing for Minnesota.

“Those games are highly competitive, but they’re not the NHL,” Hynes said of the work done for Iowa. “So, I think when you get your opportunities and you get a taste of the speed of the NHL, the strength of the NHL, the structure that teams and individual players play with, it does give you a better perspective of whether you’re truly ready or not, but also what you need to work on.”

Related Articles

Twin Cities unrest has been ‘devastating’ for some Wild players

Recent spate of OT shows Wild NHL parity

Understated Matt Boldy makes bold return for Wild

Panthers spoil the Wild’s Hockey Day fun in overtime

Hockey Day Minnesota bound for Maple Grove in 2028

By OLIVIA DIAZ, Associated Press

RICHMOND, Va. (AP) — A Virginia judge ruled Tuesday that a proposed constitutional amendment letting Democrats redraw the state’s Congressional maps was illegal, potentially foiling their efforts to pick up seats in the U.S. House in November.

Related Articles

US says it’s taking first steps to possibly reopen embassy in Venezuela after Maduro’s ouster

Carney rolls his eyes at US Treasury secretary, telling Trump he meant what he said at Davos

Families of 2 men killed in boat strike sue Trump administration over attack they call ‘unlawful’

What to know about Gregory Bovino, the commander of Trump’s immigration crackdown

Top US trading partners pledged to invest $5 trillion in America. These researchers have doubts.

Tazewell Circuit Court Judge Jack Hurley Jr. wrote in a court order that Virginia lawmakers’ proposed constitutional amendment was not valid due to a technicality under state law that says such proposals must be passed and published by the clerk’s office at least three months before a general election.

In October, lawmakers advanced their mid-decade redistricting resolution less than a week before their statewide races.

The unusual mid-decade redistricting battle across the country has resulted, so far, in a nine more seats that Republicans believe they can win in Texas, Missouri, North Carolina and Ohio. Democrats, meanwhile, think they can win six more because of redistricting in California and Utah.

That leaves the GOP up by three seats, and Democrats hope to fully or partially make that up in Virginia.

As in Virginia, redistricting is still being litigated in several states, and there is no guarantee that the parties will win the seats they have redrawn.

“A bench that mirrors the city’s diversity is not just more representative—it is better equipped to deliver justice that is fair, credible, and trusted.”

A view of the Queens County Criminal Courthouse located on Queens Boulevard on the morning of November 20, 2024.

New York City’s courts shape millions of lives, yet one gap remains stark: Black men are dramatically underrepresented on the bench. Despite the city’s growing diversity, political and judicial leadership has not kept pace, leaving too few Black male judges in positions of influence.

Demographics have long shaped city politics. In the 1970s and 1980s, rising engagement by Black and Hispanic voters reshaped the landscape. By the 1990s, minority candidates—many women—gained ground in the City Council, State Legislature, Congress, and county leadership in the Bronx, Brooklyn, and Manhattan.

The judiciary followed a similar path.  Early waves of elected minority judges often included Black men who had practiced law in their own communities and were well known to local voters and elected officials. As the legal profession diversified, women—long the backbone of minority voting communities—advanced steadily. More Black women began winning Civil Court judgeships with strong support from Democratic county leadership. This was, and remains, a positive and important development for communities of color.

Yet this progress has produced an unintended consequence. As more women excelled in the pipeline, identifying and elevating qualified Black men to the bench has become increasingly difficult. New York State’s Office of Court Administration publishes an annual self-reported judicial demographics report reflecting participation by roughly 76 percent of eligible jurists. In the city’s elected Civil Court, about 22 percent of judges are Black; in Supreme Court, just 19 percent. Appointed courts show similar disparities: roughly 15 percent of criminal court judges and 23 percent of Family Court judges are Black. Including men and women, Black male judges are an even smaller share, reflecting a narrowing pipeline despite qualified candidates.

Nowhere is this imbalance more consequential than in criminal court. NYPD arrest data and New York City Criminal Justice Agency reports show roughly 49 percent of arrests are Black, with Black men making up the overwhelming majority. Black men thus constitute a substantial—often the plurality—of defendants, even as their chances of appearing before a Black male judge remain exceedingly low.

Representation matters not because judges should decide cases based on identity, but because courts depend on legitimacy and public trust. For many Black male defendants, the system has long felt distant or unresponsive. Seeing Black men on the bench strengthens confidence that courts understand defendants as individuals and can administer justice with rigor and humanity.  That trust reinforces respect for court outcomes and compliance with judicial decisions.

Judges must follow the law, but within it, judicial discretion matters—especially in criminal court, where decisions on bail, sentencing, and alternatives to confinement can shape a person’s life. Black male judges, informed by both professional training and lived experience, may be especially attuned to when a defendant is a strong candid][ate for rehabilitation rather than jail.  This is not a call for favoritism, but for the thoughtful use of discretion to promote public safety while reducing unnecessary incarceration.

Remarkably, more Black judges—of any gender—build trust not only between Black defendants and the courts but also influence white judges. Their relationships with Black colleagues deepen understanding of Black defendants’ circumstances and encourage more thoughtful discretion.  That influence, in turn, can strengthen Black defendants’ trust—not just in the Black judges they encounter, but in their white colleagues and the court system as a whole.

A 2023 study in the American Political Science Review found that as Black judges serve in greater numbers, white judges are less likely to impose custodial sentences on Black defendants, narrowing racial disparities by up to 7 percentage points. A 2022 Journal of Criminal Justice study found similar patterns, with lower confinement rates in jurisdictions with more Black judicial representation. In short, greater diversity on the bench reshapes judicial discretion and reduces reliance on incarceration.

The path forward is clear. To build a more representative bench, promising Black male candidates—whether from district attorney offices, public defender organizations, the courts, or community-based legal institutions—must be identified, mentored, and supported through transparent election and appointment processes. 

That work should begin early, with law schools re-emphasizing criminal law, practice and procedure, and expanding access to public-sector training increasingly constrained by economic pressures—cultivating a pipeline that strengthens judicial decision-making and better reflects the communities it serves. Local Democratic and Republican Party organizations, bar associations, judicial nonprofits, justice centers, and judicial screening committees also play a critical role in providing these candidates the guidance, resources, and opportunities they need to succeed.

New York City has proven its institutions can evolve to reflect the people they serve. By intentionally cultivating the next generation of Black male judges, the city can build on decades of progress, restore confidence in the courts, and strengthen justice. A bench that mirrors the city’s diversity is not just more representative—it is better equipped to deliver justice that is fair, credible, and trusted.

Arthur Greig, Esq. is a Manhattan-based election lawyer and former counsel to the New York County Democratic Party. Michael Oliva is a public relations consultant who has specialized in New York City judicial elections.

The post Opinion: Why More Black Male Judges Matter in New York City appeared first on City Limits.

By SOPHIA TAREEN, Associated Press

CHICAGO (AP) — A Chicago carpenter cleared of accusations that he put a $10,000 bounty on the life of a Border Patrol commander has been taken into immigration custody and faces deportation, attorneys confirmed Tuesday.

Juan Espinoza Martinez, 37, was acquitted of one count of murder-for-hire last week. Within 24 hours, he was picked up by federal immigration agents, said defense attorneys Jonathan Bedi and Dena Singer.

Born in Mexico, Espinoza Martinez was brought from Mexico to the U.S. as a young child, according to a videotaped interview played during the short trial. His immigration status was not part of the first criminal trial stemming from the Chicago immigration crackdown.

Defense attorneys said the federal government, which referred to Espinoza Martinez as a “criminal illegal alien,” engaged in “character assassination.” Prosecutors accused Espinoza Martinez of being a “ranking” member of the Latin Kings, but the claim quickly unraveled when they didn’t present evidence and a judge barred mentions of the street gang at trial.

“This verdict is a reminder that juries see through political prosecutions. They demand real evidence, not speculation and character assassination,” Bedi and Singer said in a joint statement. “The government didn’t have it. They never did.”

Related Articles

Shooting involving Border Patrol leaves 1 in critical condition near US-Mexico border

UPS looks to cut up to 30,000 jobs this year

TikTok settles as social media giants face landmark trial over youth addiction claims

Fed expected to keep rates unchanged as Chair Powell pivots back to economics

More arctic air is expected for Southern states hit by ice and riddled with power outages

Espinoza Martinez, a married father of three, was arrested in October.

His wife, Bianca Hernandez, told the Chicago Tribune that her husband was a recipient of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, the Obama-era program that’s shielded hundreds of thousands of people from deportation if they meet certain criteria, including no criminal history. However, Espinoza Martinez was not able to reapply in 2020 due to financial hardship, according to family.

“We were very, very happy because we knew that he didn’t do anything,” Hernandez told the Tribune. “But at the same time, it is a very bittersweet victory because he doesn’t actually get to come home.”

She did not return messages left this week by The Associated Press.

Espinoza Martinez was charged in October as the city of 2.7 million and surrounding suburbs were seeing a surge of federal immigration agents. Protests and standoffs with immigration officers were common, particularly in the city’s heavily Mexican Little Village neighborhood where Espinoza Martinez lived.

He was accused of sending Snapchat messages to his brother and a friend who turned out to be a longtime government informant. One read in part “10k if u take him down,” along with a picture of Gregory Bovino, a Border Patrol official who has led aggressive crackdowns nationwide, including in the Chicago area.

After the verdict, the Department of Homeland Security dismissed the decision by the jury, which deliberated less than four hours.

“This verdict does not change the facts: Espinoza targeted federal law enforcement with violence via Snapchat,” DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement. She referred reports to the Department of Justice, which did not immediately respond to a message Tuesday.

The case has fueled skepticism about the Trump administration’s narratives surrounding the immigration enforcement surges. Of the roughly 30 criminal cases stemming from Operation Midway Blitz in the Chicago area, roughly half have been dismissed or dropped.