It started to feel like superstar winger Kirill Kaprizov might never score again.

He failed to bury multiple chances on Tuesday night at Grand Casino Arena while the Wild rolled to a 5-1 win over the Tampa Bay Lightning. It was an uncharacteristic performance from the 28-year-old Russian. He hit the post so many times over the course of 60 minutes that he started to wonder to himself, “What’s going on?”

Maybe former Wild winger Marian Gaborik made a deal with the hockey gods before the game with Kaprizov on the precipice of leapfrogging him to become the franchise’s all time leading goal scorer.

Not even divine intervention could stop the most prolific goal scorer to ever wear the Wild sweater from rewriting the record books.

As the slowly game wound to a close with the result well in hand, Kaprizov casually flicked a backhanded shot into an empty net.

It officially marked the 220th goal of his career.

No player has ever had more for the Wild.

“It’s good,” Kaprizov said with a smile after the game. “You always want more.”

As much as he’s tried to downplay the idea of passing Gaborik to become the franchise’s leading goal scorer, Kaprizov understands why the conversation itself has carried so much fan fare.

Not that he’s feeling satisfied. He knows he has to keep putting the puck into the back of the net in order for the Wild to get to where they want to go.

“Now it’s done,” Kaprizov said while shifting back to serious. “Just need to keep going.”

Related Articles

Wild beat Lightning to get back on track ahead of trade deadline

Wild trade for 6-foot-6 forward Michael McCarron

What are the Wild getting in new addition Robby Fabbri?

US Olympic gold medalists Hilary Knight and Quinn and Jack Hughes appear on ‘Tonight Show’

NHL trade deadline: Wild fully ‘in the game’

In 1761, James Otis Jr., a 36-year-old lawyer, ignited an early spark of the American Revolution when he resigned his post as Massachusetts Advocate General to represent merchants challenging the British use of overly broad warrants. Though he lost the case, his speech electrified the colonies: John Adams later wrote that Otis’s argument was the moment when “the Child Independence was born.”

That struggle over arbitrary warrants is no longer a historical footnote, now that the federal government is reviving the very practice Otis condemned. An internal ICE memo dated May 12, 2025, authorizes agents to enter homes solely on the basis of an “administrative warrant,” without prior judicial approval. The memo acknowledged that this marked a departure from historic ICE practices but claimed that DHS had “recently determined that the U.S. Constitution… (did) not prohibit relying on administrative warrants.”

Counter to Supreme Court precedent

In early January, ICE agents were documented forcibly entering homes on the basis of administrative warrants alone. The flagrant violation of a key constitutional right — the Fourth Amendment’s “right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures” — happened in plain sight. Even today’s conservative Supreme Court reaffirmed in January the “strong presumption against warrantless intrusions into the home” (Case v. Montana).

Rather than backing away from these practices, the administration has now publicly doubled down. On Feb. 4, the Department of Homeland Security issued a lengthy statement defending the use of administrative warrants and rejecting the claim that ICE is violating the Fourth Amendment.

DHS asserted that judicial warrants are unnecessary for immigration arrests and suggested that undocumented individuals are not entitled to the same constitutional protections — a position that runs directly counter to decades of Supreme Court precedent. Congressional Republicans have echoed this stance, calling any proposal to require judicial warrants a “non‑starter.” Far from retreating, the government is entrenching itself.

Born from our Revolution, the Fourth Amendment

In the leadup to the American Revolution, British officials used general warrants, known as writs of assistance, that allowed for the search of any property without the need to show probable cause. This practice outraged the American colonists, who believed that general warrants enabled tyranny by empowering officers to enter homes and businesses at will.

The Fourth Amendment was adopted specifically to prevent arbitrary searches, seizures, and intrusions into one’s home. Its protections reflect an intentional transition away from general, unlimited writs to specific, judicially approved warrants.

Born from the Revolution, the Fourth Amendment is a cornerstone of American governance. If ICE agents are being told they may disregard this foundational principle and violate the Fourth Amendment, we should all be alarmed. But let there be no confusion — an internal government memo should not be used to override our Constitution.

Like the British ‘writs of assistance’

The administrative warrants that ICE claims give them the authority to enter homes ironically resemble the warrants used by the British. Writs of assistance were open‑ended search warrants granted to British customs officers to search for smuggled goods; they were not limited by time, person, or location, and no probable cause was required. This meant that the British could use these writs at their will, without supervision or oversight.

The specificity requirements built into the Fourth Amendment — particularity and probable cause — are key to protecting people from searches that are too broad or arbitrary. The Supreme Court has repeatedly emphasized that these requirements are intended to prevent general exploratory searches, an emphasis that has shaped modern American law enforcement practices.

Different kinds of warrants, like arrest warrants (for people) and search warrants (for property), ensure proper procedures are employed based on the government’s specified interest and authority. The use of administrative warrants to carry out immigration arrests is not new, but these warrants have traditionally been understood to authorize only the arrest of a specific individual — not to allow officers to enter private homes or businesses without consent.

A clear departure

The leaked ICE memo, however, sanctions a clear departure from constitutionally bound practices. These administrative warrants authorize agents to enter a home without consent and, if necessary, by force, regardless of the presence or identity of persons inside.

As such, while ICE claims that administrative warrants are used only to enforce final removal orders, those orders are issued against individuals, not households. When ICE forcibly enters a household using an administrative warrant, they are violating the Fourth Amendment rights of everyone in that home, even those not listed in the removal order.

In addition to probable cause and specificity requirements, the Fourth Amendment requires a warrant to be signed by a neutral judge or magistrate to ensure an independent check on law enforcement. Judges determine whether there is sufficient evidence to support probable cause and ensure that the warrant’s scope is narrowly focused to permit only minimal incursions on people’s rights. Judicial oversight functions as an essential check on government power.

ICE’s administrative warrants, by contrast, are procedural forms approved internally by immigration authorities with no independent judicial review. This brings us closer to the very tyranny we sought to escape when we founded our country.

If we would not tolerate officers forcibly entering our homes without cause during the Revolution, we must certainly reject this conduct today when it is expressly prohibited by our Constitution.

Reference to the American Revolution here is not intended as a history lesson; rather, it reminds us that the use of general warrants was one of the foundational grievances that animated our Constitution and the founding of our country. Americans across the colonies who had little else in common agreed that the warrants used by the British would not be tolerated in the new United States of America. Even then, the sanctity of the home and the right to privacy were seen as core American principles, shared across the political spectrum.

That consensus has not changed. Standing up for our constitutional rights and shared American principles is not political.

Our founders knew why government power must be limited

Our Constitution was intentionally written, born out of lived experiences of tyranny and authoritarianism. Our founders understood that placing limits on government power — especially when it comes to the privacy of the home — was fundamental to ensuring democracy and preventing tyranny. The current government’s attempts to ignore the Fourth Amendment fly in the face of our constitutional democracy and disregard the very foundations of our national ethos.

Today, as DHS publicly defends practices that erode judicial oversight and Congress refuses to impose even the most basic guardrails, we are confronted with a stark question: Will we allow the very abuses that sparked the American Revolution to be revived under the banner of immigration enforcement? The answer will determine not only how we treat the most vulnerable among us, but whether we still recognize the Constitution as the supreme law of the land. The Fourth Amendment was written to restrain government power in moments exactly like this.

Our willingness to defend it now will reveal whether we still believe in the promise our founders fought to secure.

Amanda Cats-Baril is project manager and content strategist for the Meeting the Moment initiative of Lawyers Defending American Democracy. She wrote this column for The Fulcrum, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news platform covering efforts to fix our governing systems.

Related Articles

Rich Harwood: As America turns 250, it’s time to begin again

Carl P. Leubsdorf: Trump’s threats to next November’s elections

Other voices: Killing of ‘El Mencho’ signals renewal in the US-Mexico relationship

Ajaypal Banga: How to create jobs for the world’s 1.2 billion new workers

Commentary: Rising costs, chronic disease and AI — the fight to save US health care

For decades, autism was believed to overwhelmingly affect boys. Yet a big new study out of Sweden provides perhaps the best evidence yet that girls aren’t less likely to be autistic — they’re just less likely to be diagnosed young.

Researchers looked across 35 years of health records for nearly 2.8 million people (an incredibly complete window into their lives thanks to Sweden’s universal health care system). They found that whether it was 2025 or 1995, boys under 10 were three to four times more likely to be diagnosed with autism than girls. But by adulthood, the gap had nearly disappeared.

The study might have looked at kids in Sweden, but it points to a global problem: Too many autistic girls are being missed during childhood.

That’s a critical time when social supports and interventions could help them learn to more easily navigate their world. On a more basic level, going unidentified means they are left until adolescence or even adulthood without a fundamental understanding of themselves.

Why do so many autistic girls fly under the radar? Child psychologists have a few theories. For starters, some of the traits of autism are expressed differently in girls than in boys. They often are milder — for example, girls with autism are more likely to hold eye contact and have an easier time with communication.

And although they may express strong interests, they tend to line up with things neurotypical girls are drawn to — say, Taylor Swift or makeup or animals, explains Conner Black, associate director of the Child Mind Institute’s Autism Center.

Those subtle differences make autistic traits easy to miss, even by pediatricians and therapists. That’s in part because girls don’t tend to display some of the big externalizing behaviors, like aggression or tantrums, that people tend to associate with autism in boys, Black says.

In recent years, experts have particularly focused on girls’ ability to “mask” or “camouflage” their autism traits. More so than boys, the desire to blend in is strong in young girls, and might be even more powerful in autistic girls, says Gina Rippon, a British neurobiologist whose recent book, “The Lost Girls of Autism,” chronicles the ways science has overlooked girls with autism.

That can be exhausting and impossible to keep up full-time. Girls might not display challenging behaviors at school but still melt down the moment they get home, Black says. That mismatch was illustrated in a 2024 study that found striking differences between teachers and parents’ perceptions of autism traits — things like having trouble interpreting body language or understanding social mores. Teachers viewed boys as having significantly more traits than girls — and consistently said girls had fewer traits than their parents identified.

Camouflaging might allow girls to navigate the early elementary school years, when there’s a lot of predictability. But the tactic starts to fall apart around middle school. “All of a sudden, the whole social environment becomes much more complex, much more unpredictable, much more pressurized, particularly for adolescents,” Rippon says. “The scaffolding that they’ve kind of built up to protect themselves is no longer fit for purpose.”

As the social dynamics of middle school set in — surely every adult has vivid memories of those difficult years — autistic girls might start to struggle. That doesn’t necessarily mean their autism suddenly becomes apparent to caregivers and clinicians; rather, they might start to be diagnosed with other conditions, like ADHD, depression, anorexia or self-harm. Those diagnoses can mean more years where their autism is missed — one study found an ADHD diagnosis can delay an autism diagnosis by nearly three years on average.

That delay can subject girls to treatments for other conditions that, though intended to help, can make life harder. Conventional eating disorder interventions, for example, might not be appropriate for someone with autism, Rippon notes. That’s because for some, the driver for an eating disorder has less to do with body image and more to do with sensory hypersensitivity or the need for rigid eating rituals.

Too many girls are missing out on early supports that could help them navigate life — not to mention missing out on the opportunity to have a deeper understanding of who they are and how their brain works. As robust research like the study out of Sweden makes it increasingly clear that autism is nearly as common in girls as in boys, there’s so much work to do to better meet girls’ needs.

That starts with simply studying girls more. Despite growing recognition over the last decade or so that autistic girls deserve more time, attention and research dollars, there are still glaring knowledge gaps that need to be filled. A big one is developing better diagnostic tools to capture the subtle traits of autism in girls when they are young, especially when girls are camouflaging those traits.

Teachers could use more education, too, to recognize the less obvious traits that might be showing up in their classrooms. Parents, meanwhile, are in the best position to advocate for their child, and pediatricians, therapists and educators should do a better job listening when parents are describing what they’re seeing at home.

None of this is to suggest that boys don’t deserve less; it’s simply that girls shouldn’t be left to struggle. The goal should be to get to a place where every child has the support they need to live their happiest, healthiest life.

Lisa Jarvis is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering biotech, health care and the pharmaceutical industry. Previously, she was executive editor of Chemical & Engineering News.

Related Articles

Rich Harwood: As America turns 250, it’s time to begin again

Carl P. Leubsdorf: Trump’s threats to next November’s elections

Other voices: Killing of ‘El Mencho’ signals renewal in the US-Mexico relationship

Ajaypal Banga: How to create jobs for the world’s 1.2 billion new workers

Commentary: Rising costs, chronic disease and AI — the fight to save US health care

Today is Wednesday, March 4, the 63rd day of 2026. There are 302 days left in the year.

Today in history:

On March 4, 1966, John Lennon of The Beatles was quoted in the London Evening Standard as saying, “We’re more popular than Jesus now,” a comment that caused an angry backlash in the United States.

Also on this date:

In 1789, the Constitution of the United States took effect as the first Federal Congress met in New York.

Related Articles

US soldiers who died in Iran war remembered as devoted parents and reservists

Alexander brothers used wealth to lure, drug and rape women and girls, prosecutor says

A trial seeks to tie Iranian paramilitary to alleged assassination plot in US

Trial against Meta in New Mexico highlights video depositions by top executives

Military families anxious about unknowns of Iran war, proud of their service members

In 1801, Thomas Jefferson became the first president to be inaugurated in Washington, D.C.

In 1865, President Abraham Lincoln was inaugurated for a second term. With the end of the Civil War in sight, and just six weeks before his assassination, Lincoln declared:

“With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the fight as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in to bind up the nation’s wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan — to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.”

In 1933, Franklin D. Roosevelt was inaugurated for his first term as president; he was the last U.S. president to be inaugurated on this date (subsequent inaugurations have been held on Jan. 20). In his inaugural speech, Roosevelt stated, “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.”

In 1987, President Ronald Reagan addressed the nation on the Iran-Contra affair, acknowledging that his overtures to Iran had “deteriorated” into an arms-for-hostages deal.

In 1998, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that workplace sexual harassment laws are applicable when the offender and victim are of the same sex.

In 2015, the Justice Department cleared Darren Wilson, a white former Ferguson, Missouri, police officer, in the fatal shooting of Michael Brown, a Black 18-year-old, but also issued a scathing report calling for sweeping changes in city law enforcement practices, which it called discriminatory and unconstitutional.

In 2020, daredevil Nik Wallenda successfully walked across a 1,800-foot tightrope spanning the active Masaya Volcano in Nicaragua, completing the trip across the steel cable in just over 31 minutes.

Today’s birthdays:

Film director Adrian Lyne is 85.
Author James Ellroy is 78.
Musician-producer Emilio Estefan is 73.
Actor Mykelti (MY’-kul-tee) Williamson is 69.
Actor Patricia Heaton is 68.
Democratic Sen. Tina Smith of Minnesota is 68.
Actor Steven Weber is 65.
Rock musician Jason Newsted is 63.
Author Dav Pilkey is 60.
Republican Sen. James Lankford of Oklahoma is 58.
NBA forward Draymond Green is 36.
NFL wide receiver George Pickens is 25.
Singer Cameron Winter is 24.