Cleveland • LeBron James flew back to Los Angeles from a family vacation in the Caribbean. He could be there longer than usual.

Hours before NBA free agency opened with the three-time champion as its most coveted prize, James returned Saturday to Southern California, where he has two homes and a film production company. The Lakers are hoping they can persuade him to sign with them and return them to glory.

Los Angeles is among the teams in the mix to land James after his agent told the Cleveland Cavaliers on Friday that he will not exercise his $35.6 million contract option for next season. At 10:01 p.m. MDT Saturday, James will be an unrestricted free agent, and agent Rich Paul is expected to contact several teams with the Lakers and Cavs atop his list.

By declining his option, James positioned himself to be able to choose where he’ll play next, and Cleveland, just up the road from his home near Akron, remains a strong possibility. But there are at least three other teams — and maybe an outsider or two — with legitimate shots at landing James, who made it clear following this year’s NBA Finals that he’s still driven to win championships.

While every team dreams of being ruled by King James, only a few have a legit chance of signing him.

Here are the cases — for and against — the leading contenders:

CLEVELAND

WHY: Home; money.

James came back four years ago to a hero’s welcome, something that seemed unimaginable when he left in disgrace four years earlier for Miami. But he vowed to do everything he could to deliver a title to championship-starved Cleveland. He delivered in 2016, erasing past sins and raising James to a worshipped level few athletes in any sport have experienced. His family is comfortable here and it’s where he has complete control.

The Cavs can also offer him the most lucrative package, a five-year, $209 million contract.

WHY NOT: Flawed roster; blemished relationship with owner Dan Gilbert.

Last summer’s stunning trade of guard Kyrie Irving left the Cavs without a quality running mate for James, who was forced to carry a heavier offensive load throughout the regular season and playoffs. Cleveland has deep salary-cap issues — partially caused by James’ failure to commit long-term — and the Cavs currently lack enough talent to unseat the champion Golden State Warriors.

Gilbert and James mended some fences for his return in 2014, but they remain distant other than a shared commitment to winning. Gilbert has gone above and beyond financial barriers to appease James, but the well could be running dry.

LOS ANGELES LAKERS

WHY: Salary-cap space; business interests; iconic franchise.

With some savvy moves, the Lakers are poised to potentially add two superstars — James and Paul George and maybe Kawhi Leonard — to a team featuring up-and-coming talents like Kyle Kuzma, Brandon Ingram and Lonzo Ball, who is reportedly dealing with a knee injury. James loves the Hollywood lights, and with two homes in the Los Angeles area as well as a film production company, he has already established some roots in the land of movie stars and slow-moving traffic. The appeal of playing for one of the league’s most storied teams is another allure.

WHY NOT: Youth; the Western Conference.

There’s little doubt James has some quality years ahead of him. But does he have enough time to let a group of unproven players with no postseason experience develop into a title contender? And if he jumps conferences for the first time in his career, the path to the Finals is far more treacherous.

PHILADELPHIA

WHY: Rising team; staying in the East.

In Sixers guard Ben Simmons, James sees a younger version of himself and he’d relish the chance to play alongside the 21-year-old while mentoring him. The Sixers also have center Joel Embiid, 24, projected to become the game’s next dominant big men. Philadelphia would instantly vault from conference contender to favorite with James, who could make a strong run at his ninth straight Finals in Year One.

WHY NOT: Too young; front-office dysfunction.

Much like the Lakers, the Sixers lack postseason experience and James would be surrounded by players who have barely tasted the postseason. General manager Bryan Colangelo’s resignation following an investigation into whether he created Twitter accounts to criticize his own players has given the impression that the team isn’t operating in concert and then would turn off James quickly.

OTHER CONTENDERS

Houston: While the Rockets once seemed a good fit, James declining his option all but eliminated the chances of him joining up with close friend Chris Paul and MVP James Harden. If James had opted in with the Cavs, they could have worked out a sign-and-trade with Houston.

San Antonio: James reveres Spurs coach Gregg Popovich, but living in Texas doesn’t seem appealing to the star’s family and the Spurs are still trying to figure out what to do with Leonard, who can become a free agent after next season.

It’s a business that has existed for as long as there have been summer vacations and borrowed lawn mowers: A pint-size entrepreneur offers to endure the rage of a summer sun on a neighbor’s behalf, pushing a lawn mower across high grass for a small fee.

Last week, in Maple Heights, Ohio, that entrepreneur was Reggie Fields, a 12-year-old middle schooler who is the owner and mower-in-chief of Mr. Reggie’s Lawn Service. His sister and two cousins also provided manual labor in their neighborhood outside Cleveland, working a rake and a broom to corral clippings.

That’s what they told Lucille Holt-Colden, 51, who encountered them at a Dollar Tree where they were purchasing a gas canister and some lawn bags on June 23. Holt-Colden thought it was a good investment. Her grass was growing taller, and her $20 would be used to keep this particular group of black youths off the street and out of trouble.

She was mostly right.

As Reggie and his troupe were finishing up her yard, a Maple Heights Police SUV rolled up in front of Holt-Colden’s house.

When she saw the police through the window, she was surprised. Then, when she learned what had happened, she was outraged - and reached for her cellphone to share it with the world.

“My neighbors that stay in that house right there,” she said, swiveling the phone as it recorded her on video. “So I guess I have a line where part of it is not my yard. They called the police to tell the police that the kids was cutting their grass. Who does that? Who does that?”

She captioned the video: “This is RIDICULOUS!!!” a phrase she repeated several times during an interview with The Washington Post, along with “Who does this?”

Reggie, it seemed, was not just getting a lesson in summer business economics; he was also being schooled in the 21st century phenomenon known as #LivingWhileBlack.

Recently, African Americans who were engaged in laughably innocuous activities have been viewed through criminal-tinted glasses — and suddenly found themselves making explanations to police officers and security guards about completely lawful activities.

Someone called the police on a black man who was reading a book about Christianity while watching the ocean. Black people have had the authorities sicced on them while going to the gym, shopping for underwear, waiting for the school bus and couponing.

Reggie isn’t even the youngest #LivingWhileBlack victim. A few weeks ago, an 8-year-old selling cold water to passersby to help fund a trip to Disneyland was approached by a white woman who pretended to call the police on her. In 2012, police were summoned to an elementary school in Georgia where they handcuffed a 6-year-old kindergarten student - for throwing a temper tantrum.

Holt-Colden and Reggie are both black; the neighbor who called the police on Reggie is white, but she doesn’t know why the woman called the police. According to Holt-Colden, the same neighbor has called police in the past — last December the neighbor reported a snowball fight between Holt-Colden’s children. The Washington Post has reached out to the Maple Heights Police Department to verify the call about a snowball fight. The neighbor could not be reached for comment.

“If the kids were white,” Holt-Colden said of Reggie and his family members, “they would not have called.” She told The Washington Post that neighbors of various races live in the neighborhood but “I don’t have any problems with any other neighbors.”

When the police came, Holt-Colden said, Reggie’s 9-year-old cousin was frozen with fear in her driveway, worried that he was in trouble.

But Reggie kept mowing. The children were not cited or stopped by the police in any way.

Still, Holt-Colden said she was upset that a lawman responded in the first place.

The Cleveland area has recently been shaken by the death of Saniyah Nicholson, a 9-year-old killed in the crossfire during a shooting in the eastern part of the city. Her death raised concerns about the idle time of thousands of students out of school for the summer, Holt-Colden said.

Saniyah was sitting outside a boxing club in east Cleveland, according to the city’s Fox-affiliate, WJW-TV, when two rival groups started firing at each other. The bullets missed the older men, but struck the little girl sitting in her mother’s car. Her family planned to bury her on Saturday.

Holt-Colden said she wants more people to do what they can to keep children occupied with meaningful tasks. She worried that Reggie’s interaction with the police would be discouraging.

Many others chipped in to prevent that from happening.

“People are inboxing me like, ‘How can I get in touch with these children?’ ‘Where are they at?’ ‘I got property I want these kids to cut,’” Holt said.

She started a GoFundMe for Reggie. By Saturday afternoon, people had donated more than $8,600, the equivalent of more than 430 lawns.

But Reggie and his crew aren’t resting on that publicity-fueled windfall. Some people donated supplies — a leaf blower and a lawn mower — to help his business. And he’s still out mowing lawns.

He’s even made fliers on orange paper with an image of a lawn mower: “Mr. Reggie Lawn Cutting Service. Taking it one step at a time. Schedule an appointment I’ll be on time ...”

There is plenty of outrage still remaining about how immigrants and asylum-seekers are being treated at our southern border. There is also some hope.

The backlash against baby jails has been swift and vocal. Some on the right have called it “fake news” and “hysteria,” but to me, it shows that compassion and humanity are not dead in this country.

A federal judge in California has stepped up and ordered that all separated children be reunited with their parents in no more than 30 days — within 14 days for children under the age of 5 — and that no more deportations of parents without their children occur unless the parent is found to be unfit, present a danger or voluntarily agrees to deportation without their child.

On Tuesday, Alex Azar II, the secretary of health and human services told senators that his department is holding 2,047 separated children — only six fewer than last week. He also admitted that his department is having trouble figuring out how to care for the children and how to reunite them, as some of the parents have been returned to Central America without their children.

However, as the judge acknowledged in his findings and as evidenced by Azar’s testimony, there is no current plan for reunification and no one in the government seems to be able to figure out how to go about matching kids with parents, now that the children are in “the system” as unaccompanied minors.

Instead of waiting around for inept and impersonal bureaucracies to figure it out, there are many people wanting to help, and many organizations already on the ground that are looking for help.

The Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services, or RAICES, is the largest immigration nonprofit in Texas. They provide legal services to immigrant children, families and refugees in Texas and help post bond for detained parents.

Charlotte and Dave Willner started a Facebook fundraising project for RAICES, hoping to raise a modest $1,500. Instead, they now have the largest single fundraising campaign Facebook has ever seen, with over $20 million raised, by more than 530,000 individual donors.

RAICES is looking for pro-bono legal help, interns, graphic designers and volunteers who speak Spanish, French (for refugees from the Democratic Republic of the Congo) and Central American native languages including Mayan.

Asylum Seekers Advocacy Project is working to prevent deportation of families who are fleeing violence and seeking asylum, no matter where they are located in the United States. They need an increase in funds, in volunteer attorneys, law students and interns. Catholic Charities of the Rio Grande Valley shelters immigrants who have recently been released from Border Patrol custody. Comfort Cases is raising money to provide backpacks with blankets, pajamas, toiletries, a stuffed animal, books, art supplies and more to all 2,000-plus separated immigrant children. Local philanthropist Sarah Parson is providing stuffed dolls and bears through her organization, Dolls of Hope. (I’ve sewn, stuffed and distributed some of those bears. They are easy and comforting to their little recipients.)

The CARA Project provides legal services at family detention centers. They are looking for attorneys, law students, interpreters, social workers, researchers and “extraordinary people of goodwill” on-the-ground in Dilley, Texas, to defend the children and their mothers everyday.

KIND (Kids In Need of Defense) protects unaccompanied children who enter the U.S. immigration system alone to ensure that no child appears in court without an attorney. It sounds self-evident but it’s not. Many children have no legal representation as they try to navigate the U.S. legal system.

There are many other good organizations nationwide working to solve this crisis.

Another quick and easy step to take is signing and circulating a petition.

The ACLU, MomsRising, MoveOn, and CREDO have petitions to Sec. Nielsen.

Kids in Need of Defense (KIND) and Change.org also have a petition to the Department of Homeland Security.

The Women’s March has a petition to Ivanka Trump.

Define American has a petition to Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

The National Domestic Workers Alliance has a petition to President Trump.

The Women’s Refugee Commission has a petition and Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley has started a petition on his website.

I was unable to find a “right-leaning” organization circulating a petition, although this issue should not be partisan.

Finally, please do be in touch with your political representatives. Call, use social media, send email, then call again. This is one humanitarian crisis that “we the people” must not sit back and wait for the government to solve. It will take all of us staying involved until the last child is reunited with her parents.

Holly Richardson believes #FamiliesBelongTogether.

President Trump is such a fun person. He told us again and again that Mexico would pay for “The Wall.” Now we all know he is just messing with Congress to see if they really listened to him.

Yes, Mr. Trump, we all listened, and I guess those who voted for you believed you. So, please quit keeping us in suspense, and keep your promise, and get the money from Mexico to build the wall.

Bob Gilchrist, Millcreek

Moscow • The men’s World Cup is notable for women.

Fox’s Aly Wagner and Telemundo’s Viviana Vila are the first in-match analysts on U.S. television for soccer’s showcase. BBC’s Vicki Sparks is making a similar breakthrough in Britain and ZDF’s Claudia Neumann in Germany.

“It took me 10 years. It was very disappointing that it took so much time,” Vila said of her advance. “It truly was draining, unfair and ungrateful. It shouldn’t be that way. But it made me stronger, to keep learning and improving in my work. I’m better now to face whatever comes my way.”

Former England captain John Terry caused a flap during Sparks’ call of the Portugal-Morocco game when he posted a video of a TV screen to Instagram and added the words: “Having to watch this game with no volume.” Terry deleted the post and wrote he meant there was no audio in his house when he returned from the Maldives.

No matter the interpretation, it is clear women have had a difficult path gaining roles in sports broadcasts beyond studio hosts and sideline reporters. Play-by-play and color jobs remain nearly universally the domain of men.

“Women traditionally have kind of been accepted into their hosting role, whether or not they were the strongest candidate, because for a long period of time there was just simply the idea that it was enough to look good on television. It didn’t necessarily imply somebody being an expert,” said Kate Abdo, Fox’s start-of-the-day studio show anchor in Red Square. “For women to break into that domain, which traditionally has been very, very male, has been more difficult.”

Wagner, a national team midfielder from 1998-2008, was a game analyst for Fox at the 2015 Women’s World Cup and called 10 of Fox’s 48 group-stage telecasts this year from the network’s Los Angeles studios, paired with Scottish broadcaster Derek Rae.

“It wasn’t that I set out to end up calling a men’s World Cup match, but my path has led me here now and I’ll be extremely proud doing it,” Wagner said. “Hopefully I can prove it’s about my effort and my work and my passion and my commitment and my love for the game that comes through when I call the match as opposed to it having anything to do with being the first female.”

Vila covered news and sports on radio and got a break when a game analyst failed to show for a match and noted Argentine play-by-play man Víctor Hugo Morales asked her to fill in. She impressed and earned more broadcasts.

“There was a lot resistance at the start. Some responded positively,” she said. “But I needed to work harder ... to gain credibility.”

Gayle Gardner became the first woman to call Major League Baseball play-by-play when she subbed on a Colorado broadcast of a Rockies against Cincinnati in 1993. Suzyn Waldman has been the color commentator on New York Yankees’ radio since 2005, and Jenny Cavnar has filled in on Rockies radio this year. Jessica Mendoza has been an ESPN MLB analyst since 2015.

After calling college basketball on ESPN for more than a decade, Doris Burke became the network’s regular NBA game analyst this season. Stephanie Ready became the NBA’s first woman club broadcast game analyst with the Charlotte Hornets in 2015-16, and Sarah Kustock moved up from court-side reporter to game analyst on Brooklyn Nets broadcasts last season.

AJ Mleczko has announced hockey for NBC at Olympics since 2006 and started on its NHL broadcasts in March. Cassie Campbell calls game for Sportsnet in Canada and is the first woman color commentator on CBC’s “Hockey Night in Canada.”

Kyndra de St. Aubin is the color analyst for Minnesota’s local Major League Soccer telecasts

In perhaps the biggest breakthrough, Beth Mowins last season became the first woman to regularly call play-by-play in the NFL, working for ESPN and CBS. Gayle Sierens had worked a game for NBC in 1987.

“That may have been the last barrier to break,” Mowins said. “I think more and more people are accustomed now to women in the booth. I think there’s a younger generation, that’s all they know — is their mothers played sports and their sisters and their girlfriends all played sports. And now their daughters want to play sports, too, and are sports consumers and fans and viewers.”

Neumann, who has worked for ZDF since 1999, broadcast at the 2011 Women’s World Cup. She was a target of social media criticism when she commented on matches during the 2016 European Championship and again this year.

ZDF sport director Thomas Fuhrmann estimated 10-20 percent of the audience was not accepting of a woman, a segment he said “wants to watch the soccer game and drink beer, and to make it the perfect cliche, eat the bratwurst and listen to a man’s voice. It’s completely irrational.”

“While they get a lot of attention, these haters, as we call them in Germany, I think it’s a more general issue of our society,” Fuhrmann said. “It’s not only sports. It’s more that something is changing.”

Paul Nicholls, Terry’s agent, did not respond to an email about his client’s Instagram posts.

Abdo thinks the U.S. audience may be more accepting of women.

“A lot of the TV executives and particularly Fox have definitely put themselves in the forefront at making sure they give women a strong voice in soccer. Perhaps in the U.S. that female voice has been seen as more credible and hasn’t had to fight for the credibility quite the same way because the woman’s game has an elevated status in comparison to what it has in Europe.”

Still, she has some trepidation about expanding beyond soccer.

“You can very quickly undo a lot of work and a good reputation if as a woman you position yourself at the front of a sport’s coverage and you aren’t as a good as another man,” she said. “I think you need to be as good as if not better than any man in your field just to be able to earn that right to be there.”

London • Everything’s changed for Andy Murray at Wimbledon this time.

A two-time champion at the All England Club, he’s not really considered a serious title contender — by himself or by anyone else, for that matter.

He is not as prepared as usual as the grass-court Grand Slam tournament’s Monday start approaches, having played a total of three matches all year after recently returning from hip surgery.

He is not seeded, because his ranking is outside the top 150.

Murray is, however, thrilled to be playing, provided nothing crops up before he’s scheduled to face Benoit Paire of France in the first round Tuesday.

“I always want to be here competing. It feels a little bit odd coming into the tournament this year,” Murray said Saturday after practicing at the All England Club. “Normally, like, at this stage, I feel really nervous, lots of pressure, and I expect a lot of myself around this time of year. I’ve always loved that and enjoyed that in a way. It has been difficult, but enjoyed it. Whereas this year, it feels very, very different.”

The first British man in 77 years to win a Wimbledon singles title when he did so in 2013, before adding another in 2016, Murray lost in the quarterfinals in 2017 to Sam Querrey, clearly hampered by his hip. Murray wound up not playing another match last season, then had his operation in January.

Nearly 12 full months had passed by the time he ventured back into competition at the Queen’s Club grass-court event less than two weeks ago. Still with a hitch in his gait, Murray played more than 2½ hours before losing to Nick Kyrgios in three sets.

This week, again on grass, Murray beat fellow three-time major champion Stan Wawrinka, before losing to countryman Kyle Edmund.

“I’m pumped obviously because, I mean, four or five weeks ago, I didn’t know whether I’d be capable of competing at a level I’d be happy with. I think the last couple of weeks has been beneficial,” said Murray, a two-time Olympic singles gold medalist whose first Grand Slam championship came at the 2012 U.S. Open. “I don’t think I played amazing in the matches, but I think I’ve done well, considering the opponents.”

Now comes Paire, a former member of the top 20 who is currently ranked 48th.

Murray has won both of their two previous matchups, including in the fourth round at Wimbledon a year ago.

“He’s a tricky guy to play against, because of his style,” Murray said. “He does hit a lot of drop shots, he serve-volleys. He’s unorthodox with his shot selection and stuff. He can be quite up and down, too, at times.”

Get past that test, and Murray could face No. 26 Denis Shapovalov of Canada in the second round.

Asked to assess how deep he might be able to go in the draw, Murray rested his chin on his right hand and exhaled.

“I don’t know. Because how am I supposed to tell you how I’m going to feel if I play for four hours in the first match? I can’t answer that question honestly,” he said. “In terms of how I would fare, how I would do in the tournament, results-wise, I have no idea.”

Murray is accustomed to experiencing so much pressure and attention during this fortnight.

That should ease, theoretically at least. Any fair assessment would conclude that Murray’s streak of reaching at least the quarterfinals at the past 10 Wimbledons is in jeopardy.

There are other owners of multiple titles at the tournament known simply as The Championships who will be hounded about their prospects: Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal among the men; Serena Williams and Petra Kvitova among the women. (Williams was slated to hold a news conference Saturday, but it was moved at the last minute to Sunday because of what was described as a scheduling conflict.)

For the first time in a dozen years, Murray is not Britain’s highest-ranked male tennis player.

That honor — burden? — belongs to Kyle Edmund, who is seeded 21st at Wimbledon and reached his first Grand Slam semifinal at the Australian Open.

“Andy being here is obviously great from a tennis fan point of view,” Edmund said. “But also being British, having a bit of a personal relationship with him, it’s good to see him back after pretty much a year out.”

The Utah Jazz will be proactive with the start of free agency.

On Sunday afternoon, the franchise is scheduled to meet with unrestricted free agent power forward Derrick Favors and his representation in Atlanta, Favors’ hometown, league sources tell The Tribune.

Favors is currently vacationing in Miami with friends and family, according to sources. He’s expected to fly home to Atlanta on Saturday night and be ready for the meeting on Sunday.

The two sides are expected to speak extensively, which could determine the remainder of Favors’ free agency. Favors has interest from other teams, but is also waiting to see what happens with DeAndre Jordan and DeMarcus Cousins, two of the elite free agent big men.

Utah has said keeping Favors is a priority, as well as restricted free agents Dante Exum and Raul Neto. The Jazz also have to make a contract decision on Thabo Sefolosha on Sunday. According to league sources, Sefolosha and his camp are confident the Jazz will guarantee his deal for the upcoming season.

I am teacher by profession but, like many of you, I find my greatest challenge is in crafting meaningful lessons for my own children. Lately I have struggled with how I can teach my daughter that appearing to be one thing and actually being it are not always the same.

She wants to enter a school writing contest with the theme of “Heroes around me.” I am afraid that she’ll compose a bland piece that argues her grandpa is a hero because he fought in the Vietnam war. Her grandpa is truly a hero, but he’ll be the first one to tell you that fighting in a war doesn’t make a person a hero. He would tell her, it’s not what we do that matters, but why we do it. While I can live with her superficial understanding of heroism (she is only in second grade) I am perplexed by society’s craving for cosmetic displays of substantive values.

For example, I recently saw President Trump hug an American flag, an action no one would argue is divisive, after giving a speech to business leaders. Whether sincere or not, hugging that flag was meant to been interpreted as an act of patriotism. Our president has also declared that those who kneel in protest during the National Anthem — an extremely divisive act, but one that exercises the very freedoms that flag guarantees — “shouldn’t be in the country.”

We are at a time in history when we are drowning in information, but more than ever we are being to asked to make important decisions with only our eyes. I agree it looks bad to kneel during the anthem, and that it looks great to hug a flag. But when you explore the reasons why someone is performing certain actions, the answers become more nuanced.

It was refreshing this week to have Utah Lt. Gov. Spencer Cox quote Judge Learned Hand: “The spirit of liberty is the spirit which is not too sure that it is right; the spirit of liberty is the spirit which seeks to understand the minds of other men and women.”

As we approach the 4th of July, with our flag T-shirts, flag paper plates, flag napkins and other outward appearances of patriotism, my challenge is to teach my daughter that heroism, like patriotism, is more that what we show on the outside. I would like her to understand that the Fathers we honor: Washington, Jefferson, Madison and the others, were seen once as seditious criminals. But their reasons were just.

My responsibility is to teach and model through example that morals are more important sometimes than laws or policies. I want her to understand that laws like separate but equal, executive orders like 9066 (the one that created internment camps for Japanese-Americans during World War II) and policies that separate families are unAmerican. I need her to understand that laws, policies, executive orders can change, but that our values and morals individually and collectively are what matter and what should guide those changes.

As the firecrackers boom and the rockets leave red glares across the sky, we will celebrate once again the good in this country. I hope she will also celebrate the good that is in the immigrant crossing the perilous desert by the dawn’s early light. I hope she can sing praises to the immigrant who risks life, death and, now, separation of family, because she is driven by an American value, the possibility of a better life. Because I need my daughter to know that such an immigrant is more heroic and patriotic than I am as ketchup drips down my shirt while eating a cheeseburger and holding a sparkler.

How do you teach someone you love that the American spirit ignited so long ago by the founders we revere cannot be contained by borders, or policies, or laws, or executive orders? That spirit has and will continue to spread and spark fires of hope in people across the globe. I hope that she and her generation have the wisdom to recognize the difference between superficial displays of it and the real thing when it comes crawling across the desert in search of Liberty’s flame.

Gary Bigelow, Murray, teaches English at The Academy for Math, Engineering & Science.

Eight years ago, when Congress was about to pass Obamacare, John A. Boehner, leader of a powerless Republican congressional minority, gave a passionate, prescient speech on the House floor.

“This is the People’s House, and the moment a majority forgets this, it starts writing itself a ticket to minority status,” he said. “If we pass this bill, there will be no turning back. It will be the last straw for the American people ... And in a democracy, you can only ignore the will of the people for so long and get away with it.”

This was Boehner’s famous “hell no, you can’t” speech. But the Democrats could. They had the votes, and they passed Obamacare.

Boehner was correct in his prediction, though. The Democrats were soon on their way to minority status in the House and would later lose the Senate and the presidency.

Now I think I know how Boehner felt in 2010. We see Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., vowing to ram through the Senate the confirmation of the decisive fifth hard-right justice on the Supreme Court, quite likely signaling the end of legal abortion in much of America and possibly same-sex marriage and other rights Americans embrace, in far greater number, than they ever did Obamacare.

One wants to cry out: Hell no, you can’t! But Republicans can. They have the votes. Democrats can and should fight, but the GOP controls the schedule, sets the rules and already eliminated the procedures that gave the minority a say in Supreme Court confirmations.

If anything, the fury should be far more intense on the Democratic side right now than it was for Boehner in 2010. The Affordable Care Act was the signature proposal of a president elected with a large popular mandate, it had the support of a plurality of the public, and it was passed by a party that had large majorities in both chambers of Congress and had attempted to solicit the participation of the minority.

Now we have a Supreme Court nomination — the second in as many years — from an unpopular president who lost the popular vote by 2.8 million. The nominee will be forced through by also-unpopular Senate Republicans, who, like House Republicans, did not win a majority of the vote in 2016.

Compounding the outrage, each of the prospective nominees is all but certain, after joining the court, to support the eventual overturning of Roe v. Wade, which has held the nation together in a tenuous compromise on abortion for 45 years and is supported by two-thirds of Americans. For good measure, the new justice may well join the other four conservative justices in revoking same-sex marriage, which also has the support of two-thirds of Americans. And this comes after the Republicans essentially stole a Supreme Court seat by refusing to consider President Barack Obama’s nominee, Merrick Garland.

You can only ignore the will of the people for so long and get away with it.

Republicans have been defying gravity for some time. As New York magazine’s Jonathan Chait reminds us in a smart piece, they lost the popular vote in six of the last seven presidential elections. Electoral college models show Republicans could plausibly continue to win the White House without popular majorities.

Because of partisan gerrymandering and other factors, Democrats could win by eight percentage points and still not gain control of the House, one study found. And the two-senators-per-state system (which awards people in Republican Wyoming 70 times more voting power than people in Democratic California) gives a big advantage to rural, Republican states.

The Supreme Court’s conservative majority has protected Republican minority rule. It gave the wealthy freedom to spend unlimited dark money on elections, while crippling the finances of unions. It sustained gerrymandering and voter-suppression laws that reduce participation of minority voters. And, of course, it gave the presidency to George W. Bush.

Control of the judiciary, and the resulting protection of minority rule, has been the prize for Republicans who tolerated President Trump’s starting a trade war, losing allies while getting cozy with Kim Jong Un and Vladimir Putin, flirting with white supremacists, paying off a porn star and attacking the justice system while his former advisers are indicted and convicted.

Now Republicans will seize their solid fifth vote on the court without pause or compunction. But how long do they think they can sustain this? What happens when Roe is overturned?

The backlash is coming. It is the deserved consequence of minority-rule government protecting the rich over everybody else, corporations over workers, whites over nonwhites and despots over democracies. It will explode, God willing, at the ballot box and not in the streets.

You can only ignore the will of the people for so long and get away with it.

Follow Dana Milbank on Twitter, @Milbank.

Utah’s economic gurus are pushing the panic button about affordable housing.

Unfortunately, it’s only the sprawlers who are panicking.

The Salt Lake Chamber last week launched a campaign to address the rising price of housing along the Wasatch Front. Both home values and rents are outpacing wage growth, and the result is a growing number of people who are being priced out of housing.

The University of Utah’s Gardner Institute earlier this year released “What Rapidly Rising Prices Mean for Housing Affordability,” and the numbers are not pretty. One in five of households making below the median income are paying half their household income for housing. That is defined as “a severe housing cost burden.”

Utah has been more successful than most states in maintaining a middle class built on homeownership. Zooming housing prices will test that.

For those who are already buying homes, they at least have the advantage of seeing their own properties rise with the tide. But for those who are struggling to save for a down payment, every price increase just puts home ownership that much farther out of reach. As a result, the percentage of Utah residents owning their own homes has been inching down from 76 percent when the recession hit in 2008.

There’s another factor — beyond Utahns’ control — that could turn a bad situation even uglier: interest rates. We still are enjoying relatively low mortgage interest rates, but the pressure to raise rates has been increasing. If rates do jump, more people will stay renting, which will keep rents high, too. No one escapes rising interest rates.

If there is an upside here, it’s that more younger Utahns are starting to see a different way. That is, they’re seeing the traditional single-family home becoming too big of a bite, and not just a financial bite. The consumptive lifestyle of a big yard and a long drive to work is looking like their parents’ dream. They value access to transit and shopping over the ride-on mower.

The problem is that the parents are still in charge, particularly in the suburbs.

While business leaders and just about everyone else have been sounding the horn on affordability, residents in southwest Salt Lake County and in Holladay continue to fight tooth and nail against new projects that put more people on fewer acres.

Residents perform an important civic duty when they question new developments. They are one-time decisions with far-reaching effects. But they can’t draw a line in the sand. We will double the population in the Salt Lake Valley in the next 30 years. The valley can’t get bigger, only denser.

The burden of affordable housing will never be met by Salt Lake City alone. Suburbanites need to step up. The coming masses are their children and grandchildren.

Washington • The Supreme Court is especially admirable when correcting especially deplorable prior decisions, as with the 1954 school desegregation decision rejecting a 1896 decision’s “separate but equal” doctrine. It did so again last Wednesday, overturning a 41-year-old precedent inimical to the First Amendment.

Shortly before the court made this predictable ruling, a Wall Street Journal headline revealed why it was necessary. The headline said: “Unions Court Own Members Ahead of Ruling.” Anticipating defeat, government-employee unions had begun resorting to persuasion — imagine that — in the hope of retaining members and convincing nonmembers to continue making payments to the unions that the court says can no longer be obligatory.

In 1977, the court upheld, 6-3, the constitutionality of compelling government employees who exercise their right not to join a union to pay “fair share” or “agency” fees. These, which the union determines, supposedly cover only the costs of collective bargaining from which nonmembers benefit. But the payments usually are much more than half of, and sometimes equal to, dues that members pay.

The majority opinion in 1977 admitted something that was too obvious to deny and so constitutionality problematic that a future challenge was inevitable. That majority said: “There can be no quarrel with the truism that, because public employee unions attempt to influence government policymaking, their activities ... may be properly termed political.” And one justice, concurring with the majority, said “the ultimate objective of a union in the public sector, like that of a political party, is to influence public decision-making.” (Emphasis added.)

Actually, everything public-sector unions do is political. Therefore, the 1977 decision made compulsory political contributions constitutional. Which made the court queasy.

By 2014, it was affirming the principle that doomed the 1977 decision and foretold Wednesday’s: It is a “bedrock principle that, except perhaps in the rarest of circumstances, no person in this country may be compelled to subsidize speech by a third party that he or she does not wish to support.” Which is what the court now says regarding compulsory financial support of government-employee unions. Yet Justice Elena Kagan, in her uncharacteristically strident dissent, said:

“There is no sugarcoating today’s opinion. The majority overthrows a decision entrenched in this nation’s law — and in its economic life — for over 40 years. As a result, it prevents the American people, acting through their state and local officials, from making important choices about workplace governance. And it does so by weaponizing the First Amendment, in a way that unleashes judges, now and in the future, to intervene in economic and regulatory policy.”

How does Kagan err? Let us count the ways.

The 1977 decision was no more entrenched than the 1896 “separate but equal” decision was for 58 years. The First Amendment exists to prevent the people’s representatives from making certain kinds of choices (“Congress shall make no law ... ”). Wednesday’s decision was not about “workplace governance” or “economic and regulatory policy.” It was about coerced speech. And about denial of another First Amendment guarantee, freedom of association, which includes the freedom not to associate, through coerced financial support, with uncongenial political organizations. And judges are supposed to be unleashed to wield the First Amendment as a weapon against officials perpetrating such abuses.

Wednesday’s 5-4 decision accords with President Franklin Roosevelt’s judgment that “the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service.” In private-sector bargaining, unions contest management concerning the distribution of companies’ profits. In the public sector, government gets its revenues from a third party — taxpayers. Because a majority of organized labor’s members are government employees, the labor movement is mostly not horny-handed sons of toil. It increasingly is government organized as an interest group that pressures government to do what it has a metabolic urge to do anyway: grow.

The deadliest dagger in Wednesday’s decision was the stipulation that nonmembers’ fees cannot be automatically deducted from their wages — nonmembers must affirmatively consent to deductions. So, public-sector unions must persuade people. No wonder they are panicking.

There is no sugarcoating today’s reality. Public-sector unions are conveyor belts that move a portion of government employees’ salaries — some of the amount paid in union dues — into political campaigns, almost always Democrats’, to elect the people with whom the unions “negotiate” for taxpayers’ money. Progressives who are theatrically distraught about there being “too much money in politics” are now theatrically distraught that the court has ended coercing contributions that have flowed to progressive candidates.

George F. Will writes a twice-weekly column on politics and domestic and foreign affairs. He began his column with The Post in 1974, and he received the Pulitzer Prize for Commentary in 1977. //georgewill@washpost.com

.

In a way, Saturday night’s Food Truck Face-off was less battle royale and more of a benefit for local nonprofits. Sure, a champion would emerge in the fourth annual event that features more than 30 food trucks. But the gathering — the largest in Utah — really was about raising money for homeless and low-income youths and families. Proceeds go to the Fourth Street Clinic, Volunteers of America, YWCA Utah and Utah Community Action.

On the eve of free agency, John Tavares is leaving the NHL guessing about his destination.

Roughly 18 hours until the market opens, the elite center had not chosen between six suitors, with the San Jose Sharks, hometown Toronto Maple Leafs and incumbent New York Islanders considered the most likely options. Tavares could only get an eight-year deal by re-signing with the Islanders, but would have to do so before midnight when that advantage expires.

If the Tavares sweepstakes drag on into Sunday, it would seem to favor San Jose and Toronto, either of which could sign the 27-year-old to a seven-year deal worth $70 million or more. He met this week with the Sharks, Maple Leafs, Islanders, Boston Bruins, Dallas Stars and Tampa Bay Lightning, and his decision could drastically affect the plans of those teams and others.

“I think other teams have admitted, we would have to make moves (to clear salary-cap space),” Bruins general manager Don Sweeny told reporters in Boston on Friday. “Pretty confident we’d be able to do that.”

As hockey waited for the Tavares watch to end, several teams made moves Saturday ahead of the frenzy.

The Sharks agreed to terms on a $64 million, eight-year extension with forward Logan Couture, according to a person familiar with the deal who spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because the deal hasn’t been announced. It can’t become official until after noon Sunday because it doesn’t begin until the 2019-20 season — the same as long-term deals the Los Angeles Kings have with Drew Doughty and Arizona Coyotes have with Oliver Ekman-Larsson and Niklas Hjalmarsson.

Detroit got its own defenseman under contract for the next two seasons by agreeing to deal with Mike Green that pays him $5.375 million annually. Signing Green could be just the start of the action for the Red Wings, who have been linked to unrestricted free agent goaltender Jonathan Bernier and winger Thomas Vanek.

New Jersey also shored up its goaltending situation by re-signing Eddie Lack to a $650,000, one-year deal. The Devils also have Cory Schneider and Keith Kinkaid, who split time last season and in the playoffs.

A person with direct knowledge of discussions said the Buffalo Sabres are expected to sign goalie Carter Hutton, who had been the St. Louis Blues’ backup to Jake Allen. The person spoke to the AP on condition of anonymity because agreements cannot be announced until the signing period begins.

Hutton and others seem to already be ticketed for certain places, but many big-name players are still up for grabs.

Maple Leafs winger James van Riemsdyk, who tied Tavares with 36 goals last season, has been drawing significant interest and, at 29, could easily command a seven-year contract at a substantial raise over his previous $4.25 million salary. The Western Conference-champion Vegas Golden Knights have cap space but might lose wingers David Perron and James Neal, who combined for 110 points last season.

The Winnipeg Jets are doing their best to try to bring back center Paul Stastny after he was so instrumental in their playoff run. They cleared about $5.5 million in cap space by trading goaltender Steve Mason and Finnish forward Joel Armia to Montreal on Saturday but may still need more room to bring back the 32-year-old.

The Canadiens are set to buy out Mason, putting him on unconditional waivers as the Minnesota Wild did with forward Tyler Ennis to clear cap space.

Stastny fit in seamlessly after Winnipeg acquired him from St. Louis at the trade deadline but also might be better served waiting to see what Tavares does. Teams looking for a center who don’t land Tavares will look to Stastny and Toronto’s Tyler Bozak and could look into a trade for Buffalo’s Ryan O’Reilly, who is signed for the next five years and owed a $7.5 million bonus Sunday.

Columbus, Ohio • Gyasi Zardes and Eduardo Sosa scored first-half goals and the Columbus Crew held on to beat Real Salt Lake 2-1 on Saturday night.

Zardes sent the penalty kick into the lower right corner to open the scoring in the sixth minute. Danilo Acosta brought down Luis Argudo in the area to set up Zardes for his 11th goal of the season.

Sosa finished Pedro Santos’ cross with a right-footed shot from the top right corner of the penalty box to double the Columbus (8-5-6) lead in the 23rd minute.

Albert Rusnak finished Joao Plata’s low cross with a left-footed shot from the middle of the area to pull Real Salt Lake (7-8-2) within one.

Kyle Beckerman made his 300th start for Real Salt Lake, the most by a field player for a single club in MLS history.

Listen, kiddos, Mitt Romney is many things — too many things — but he was never anything but good clickbait.

A week ago, The Tribune’s Sunday opinion section was led by an op-ed contributed by the Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate from Utah. It was sold, to The Tribune and to its readers, as an answer to a key question before the voters: “Where I stand on the Trump agenda.”

The lead was pretty good:

“One of the questions I am asked frequently on the campaign trail is whether as Senator I will support the Trump agenda. I’ve learned this means different things to different people. That difference, I believe, is a defining choice for Republicans.”

Sadly, the rest of the piece was a wibbly-wobbly, flippy-floppy ball of Mitt.

Basically, Romney took 700 words to say that he would support the president when he thought he was right, not support him when he thought he was wrong and call him out when he thought he had stepped over the line.

That’s a statement of principle that should be standard issue for any member of Congress. Everyone from John Quincy Adams to Henry Clay to Tip O’Neill probably thought that. If they ever bothered to say it out loud it probably would draw little attention. Thanks, Captain Obvious.

It’s only because we live in such polarized times that a smart politician would feel the need to say such a thing in such a space. And, rather than being ignored, the piece was quickly picked up and tossed around the internet.

Reporters and pundits quoted, discussed, elaborated upon, dissed and, to their credit, linked to Romney’s commentary. Whatever the Utah electorate may have thought of it, the national media wasn’t very impressed. And, like everyone else, had to look very closely at this set of chicken entrails to figure out what Mitt was saying:

“Voters in Utah and elsewhere are right to worry that Romney will let far too much slide for the sake of comity and will become another enabler, albeit a less slavish one than his Republican colleagues.“ — “When will Mitt Romney speak out about Trump?” — Jennifer Rubin, The Washington Post

“Utah Senate candidate Mitt Romney pledged Sunday to be an independent voice within the Republican Party if he is elected and to speak his mind, good or bad, about President Donald Trump. — “Romney vows to speak out against Trump if elected” — Louis Nelson, Politico

“In other words, Romney supports Trump’s agenda — except when it’s really really, bad, and then he will say something.” — “Mitt Romney is now just like every other Republican: he’s with Trump for the tax cuts” — Tara Golshan, Vox

“Romney proved in Massachusetts and later around the rest of the country that he can twist and turn and flip and flop to fit the political mold that gives him the best chance to win.” — “Senate may see all sides of Mitt Romney” — Joe Battenfeld, The Boston Herald

“On the Senate campaign trail, a Utah voter tries to give Mitt Romney a handful of re-elect Donald Trump buttons. ‘You can give them to me. I’m not going to put them on because I haven’t decided who I’ll support yet. It’s a little early,’ he says with a thank you and a chuckle. Take the Trump button but don’t put it on — a simple moment that sums up a complex situation for the former Republican presidential nominee.“ — “Mitt Romney is running for Senate as a friend and foe of Donald Trump” — Dana Bash and Bridget Nolen, CNN

Just about all the reporting and commentary recalled the big flip between Romney’s 2016 #NeverTrump “phony and fraud” speech, the most thundering and widely reported of the genre, and his 2017 bow and scrape job interview with the president-elect.

Now it is all a question of why. Why is a man with such an impressive resume, name recognition, bank account and big lead in the polls still so acquiescent to the simpleton at 1600?

How can he say he will keep his powder dry except, “when the president says or does something which is divisive, racist, sexist, anti-immigrant, dishonest or destructive to democratic institutions,” when that’s about all this president does?

The issue of our time, and most certainly of this election, is, Are you in the president’s camp or not?

It is, as Romney himself pointed out, not just the TV pundits who want to know.

The fact that a savvy politician such as Mitt Romney is going into all kinds of contortions to avoid really answering that question, when a firm no would make him a national hero, suggests that he’s not that savvy. Or that we live in dangerous times.

Or both.

George Pyle, The Salt Lake Tribune’s editorial page editor, has been known to flip on really important questions. Like which actor was the best Batman.

Kevin Durant is staying with the NBA champions.

LeBron James might be moving much closer to them.

And two other big names in free agency — Oklahoma City’s Paul George and Houston’s Chris Paul — have decided to stay put.

Durant has decided to sign a two-year deal with the Golden State Warriors, a person familiar with the situation told The Associated Press on condition of anonymity Saturday because the deal cannot become official until the league’s offseason moratorium ends on Friday. The deal comes with a player option for 2019-20, so Durant can — and likely will — become a free agent again next summer.

It’s a win on multiple levels for the two-time defending NBA champion Warriors. Not only do they get to keep the 2017 and 2018 NBA Finals MVP, but they also get some financial flexibility in the deal.

Durant will be paid about $30.5 million this coming season, about $5 million less than he could have commanded if the deal was structured differently. That savings will give Golden State options for other moves this summer, as the Warriors look to bolster their bench.

The New York Times first reported Durant’s intention.

A person familiar with George’s situation spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because the deal’s terms have not been announced, although ESPN — which first reported the deal — said the forward agreed to a four-year, $137 million dollar contract that includes a player option in the final year.

The move, which can become official on Friday, further validates Oklahoma City’s decision to send a package — including Most Improved Player Victor Oladipo — to Indiana last year for George, who clearly enjoyed playing with Russell Westbrook with the Thunder.

Paul announced on Twitter that he has “Unfinished Business” in Houston, which took Golden State to seven games in the Western Conference finals. Paul missed the last two games of that series with an injury, and the Rockets wasted big leads in both.

He averaged 18.6 points and 7.9 assists last season with the Rockets, who went 65-17 led by Paul and newly minted NBA MVP James Harden.

ESPN reported it is a four-year deal that will be worth $160 million.

Meanwhile, James created a frenzy on Saturday without saying a word.

James spent the week vacationing in Anguilla, and hopped aboard a private Gulfstream jet in the morning to fly to the Los Angeles area. By the time he arrived around midday — after his flight plan was tracked online — reporters and at least one news helicopter were waiting for the Cleveland Cavaliers star, who decided to become an unrestricted free agent and not opt-in to a $35.6 million deal for this coming season.

The Lakers have long been mentioned as a top destination for James, and they have more salary cap space this summer than any team in the NBA. But going to L.A. on Saturday doesn’t necessarily provide any hint about his destination, since James has homes in Southern California.

But if James is going to be the next superstar to follow in the legacy that Wilt Chamberlain, Jerry West, Shaquille O’Neal, Kobe Bryant and Magic Johnson built for the Lakers, it’s already fairly evident that not everyone in the NBA will be thrilled.

“The Lakers are FOREVER gonna be Kobe’s and Magic’s team. ... Process that,” Philadelphia star Joel Embiid wrote on Twitter.

More free agency

Mavericks • Two people with knowledge of the deal said Dallas and DeAndre Jordan have agreed on a one-year contract at roughly the $24.1 million the center was set to make with the Clippers.

The agreement comes three years after Jordan agreed to join Dallas as an unrestricted free agent but changed his mind before a contract could be signed and stayed in L.A.

Nuggets • Will Barton is getting a major raise from Denver. A person familiar with the situation tells The Associated Press that Barton will sign a four-year deal that — if played to conclusion — would be worth more than $50 million.

Rockets • Gerald Green and his hometown Houston Rockets are staying together. The Houston native has agreed to a one-year deal at the $2.4 million minimum, a person familiar with the terms tells The Associated Press.

Spurs • Rudy Gay is returning to San Antonio. A person familiar with the terms says Gay has agreed to a one-year, $10 million deal to be back in silver and black next season.

Timberwolves • Derrick Rose and Minnesota will be counting on one another next season. The 2011 NBA MVP has agreed to a one-year deal worth nearly $2.4 million to stay with Minnesota, a person with knowledge of the negotiations said.

Thunder • Forward Jerami Grant has agreed to a three-year, $27 million deal with a player option the third year. Grant’s agent, Happy Walters, confirmed Grant’s decision in a text message to The Associated Press.

Salary cap • The NBA released the official cap and tax numbers for the coming season on Saturday night — the salary cap is $101,869,000, and the tax level is $123,733,000.

Sandy • The last blow of the whistle allowed the fans clad in gold to lift themselves out of their seats and salute the half of soccer they’d been yearning for, well, a very long time. So they did. They gave their team a standing ovation.

At halftime.

Because for once, there was no talk of lack of finishing in front of goal, or lack of scoring chances created, or being unable to run the opposition off its home field inside Rio Tinto Stadium. On Saturday night, Utah Royals FC did what it was supposed to do against the worst team in the NWSL: Put the other team to bed. And early. It looked easy.

“If you score early, goals change games,” Royals coach Laura Harvey said. “I’m renowned for saying that, but it’s true.”

The Royals made club history at home, and did so in historic, comforting fashion. They thumped visiting and still winless Sky Blue FC 3-1, eclipsing the three-goal mark for the first time in the very brief existence of the organization.

It all got started, unsurprisingly, with the franchise’s sparkling new acquisition, Christen Press.

In her second-ever match with the Royals, the U.S. women’s national team star goal-scorer christened the south-side goal with an early tap-in. Press put the Royals up 1-0 — and ended their two-game scoreless streak — in the seventh minute after running onto a pass into the box originally intended for teammate Gunny Jonsdottir. The Icelandic national-teamer whiffed her attempt, but it fell perfectly for Press, who took her time and finished with ease with her left foot.

“She’s kinda good,” said forward Katie Stengel, who had two goals Saturday night.

“Obviously we’ve got quite a bit of speed up front now with Christen,” added midfielder Katrina Gorry, “and if we create enough space she gets on the ball and makes her own opportunities.”

The impact the Royals envisioned — and the NWSL feared — was on full display in Press’ first start Wednesday, but there would be no scoreless draw Saturday night. Press made sure of that. And she ensured the party continued. In the 25th minute, Press found Stengel, who chipped a shot over the onrushing goalkeeper to put the Royals up 2-0.

Harvey said while the likes of Press and Amy Rodriguez might always be in the limelight for their NWSL and national-team accolades, Stengel has been underrated for the franchise in its inaugural season.

“I thought for the whole game while [Stengel] was on,” Harvey said, “she was very, very good.”

Stengel put comfortable distance between the Royals the Sky Blue FC four minutes later as she finished a powerful header off a free kick by Gorry. After cementing the 3-0 lead, Stengel sprinted toward the throne of Leo the Lion and fittingly took a seat in celebration.

“I saw that throne the first RSL game I went to,” Stengel said. “I said if I ever score, I have to go sit in that throne.”

Sky Blue eventually settled in and didn’t allow the Royals to run rampant as they did in the first half. U.S. national teamer Carli Lloyd put Sky Blue on the scoreboard in the 62nd minute, finishing off a deflected shot from outside the box.

As a bike shop manager in Moab, I’ve been optimistic about our new congressman, John Curtis. I had high hopes that he understood what makes Utah so special and such a great place to raise a family.

He genuinely likes to get outside, and seems to get that Utah’s public land is bringing in not just visitors, but businesses that have chosen Utah precisely because we have such great mountain biking, climbing, hiking and skiing on our public land.

That was before Curtis introduced a bill to amend the Mineral Leasing Act, called “the Streamlining Permitting Efficiencies in Energy Development Act” or the “SPEED Act.”

What this means is that oil and gas operators, most of whom do not live in Utah, can start drilling on our public land without telling the public. Currently, companies are required to analyze environmental impacts and seek public comment on their proposals to drill. When public comment is included, other public land concerns can be addressed. Such as: Let’s not put a well-pad right on the trailhead, or directly in the view shed of a campground, or put the access road right next to a famous climbing area.

Here in the Moab area, some 40 percent of our recreation occurs on land currently leased for oil and gas. In the past our community has been able to work with oil and gas operators directly to optimize our public land. Luckily, the Moab Master Leasing plan is still in place, but I don’t think Curtis really understands that he is putting Moab’s reputation at risk by fast tracking permits to drill right next to Dead Horse State Park and Canyonlands National Park.

My family and I love living in Moab, but my congressman is putting our livelihood at risk. Sure, we might get a few more dollars in mineral lease money for the county, but it is little compared to the revenue that our trails and parks generate, and subject to the boom and bust nature of the fossil fuel industry.

And please don’t tell me about local job creation. Every time we drill another well in southeast Utah, the hotels fill up with more folk from Texas and Alaska.

It is so disappointing to have yet another Utah elected official in the pocket of the oil and gas industry, and apparently oblivious to the power of public land in its natural state. By kowtowing to oil and gas and eliminating public comment, Curtis is joining the rest of our delegation to chase away our outdoor industry. If this attitude continues, losing the Outdoor Retailer show will be the tip of the iceberg. Silicon Slopes and the Utah tech industry are using Utah’s great outdoors to attract the best and the brightest — I know because they come to Moab every weekend.

The states around us understand that recreation assets on public land bring economic prosperity. From Twin Falls, Idaho, to Fruita, Colo., to Farmington, N.M. — they are working hard to celebrate recreation on their public land and reduce their dependence on oil and gas.

In Utah we already have more than 2,100 approved permits for drilling that have not been used. Rep. Curtis’s bill is absolutely unnecessary. The “SPEED Act” will damage the Moab economy and fast track Utah in the wrong direction.

Jacques Hadler is manager of Moab Cyclery.

Mormonism is nothing short of crystal clear when it comes to its ideals surrounding the family unit. Mormon doctrine is unapologetically exclusionary in its practices and policies regarding people in same-sex relationships. As a queer woman with Mormon roots that run deep, this is no secret to me.

So, when my fiancee and I announced our engagement, we were shocked to realize that almost all of our wedding guests are Mormon, and they can’t wait to be a part of our “I Do’s”.

As the RSVPs trickled in, my fiancee and I were surprised that many people who we had assumed would want no part in our wedding (due to their devout Mormon beliefs and lifestyles), had actually found a way to show support, love and acceptance to two women in love.

It turns out, the LDS Church has never officially prohibited its members from attending gay weddings. There is plenty of room to assume that non-attendance is the stance. Especially since Mormon bishops are prohibited from performing same-sex marriages. But there is no formal policy regarding individual church member’s attendance.

The narrative surrounding this lack of explicit policy is simple: Individuals and families should pray and ask God what is right for them in regards to attending same-sex weddings. Given the hard stance Mormonism takes on same-sex relationships (namely that they are only second to murder in the severity of sin), I assumed that if my LDS friends and family asked their God if they should come to my wedding that the answer would be no.

I couldn’t have been more wrong.

As I dug deeper into our pile of RSVPs, a less surprising reality hit me. The Mormons who are choosing to come to my lesbian wedding are mostly young, liberal, millennials. While there are a few exceptions to this observation, it is definitely a trend that appears on my wedding guest list. This trend might give a clue as to why a church that has such an extreme view on homosexuality would hold off from telling its membership that they shouldn’t attend a gay wedding.

Mormon retention rates for young adults is on the decline. Pew Research along with other prominent study results have proven as much. Mormonism is backed into the same corner that many Christian denominations are: Stick to traditional beliefs and lose young membership. Or modernize policies and upset the perception that God is unchanging.

Taking this dilemma into consideration, Mormon leaders are actually trying to be practical in withholding an explicit “yay” or “nay” policy regarding same-sex wedding attendance. Either way, they would upset a large proportion of their membership.

And yet, this lack of clarity has very real consequences for the other side of the divide: People who do not attend their loved one’s weddings for fear of godly disapproval.

Jennifer Bement, a 2017 graduate of BYU-Idaho, is a master’s student at Boston University in the School of Education.

There’s been a lot of chatter in recent years about the game-changing technology of self-driving cars, and rightly so. This revolutionary approach to transportation could solve many big problems, from increase mobility for the blind to a profound increase in productivity by eliminating wasted time.

Most importantly, with over 40,000 deaths last year due to driving accidents — most from human error — fully autonomous cars could substantially reduce the risk involved in getting where we need to go.

Some industries may become obsolete. If taxi drivers are feeling the heat now from Uber and Lyft, imagine the threat automation poses. And truck drivers might not be needed, replaced by computers that don’t require sleep.

But there’s one impact that has been entirely overlooked amid all the discussion: automated vehicles are going to profoundly change law enforcement.

Consider the case of Kyle Savely, an out-of-stater who was driving westbound through Utah along I-80 in late 2016 when he was stopped by Utah Highway Patrol. He wasn’t speeding or driving recklessly. Instead, he was pulled over for allegedly following another vehicle too closely.

The trooper requested permission to search Savely’s car, but the driver did not give his consent. So a drug dog was called and allegedly “alerted” on the vehicle, giving the officer the legal justification to detain Savely and search the vehicle.

No drugs or contraband was found — only cash. Savely was issued a citation for following the car ahead of him too closely and was released. UHP kept the cash.

This is called civil asset forfeiture, and it amounts to legalized theft. No criminal allegations were made against Savely, yet officers used the roadside stop as a fishing expedition to see what they might find. And it happens throughout the country, day after day. A recent Washington Post analysis found that hundreds of millions of dollars are taken in cases just like Savely’s.

Imagine a system of connected autonomous vehicles in which the operators are perfectly compliant with each state’s driving laws because it’s hardwired into the programmed code. Savely wouldn’t have had his money taken. He never would have been stopped in the first place.

Known as “highway interdiction,” the process of pulling drivers over and looking for other violations of the law is widespread and routine. It is a core aspect of modern law enforcement. Far from mere traffic safety and enforcement, it turns cops on streets into roving investigators using the traffic code as a pretext to pull anybody over they think looks suspicious.

And that includes racial minorities. People of color are more likely to be stopped, and more likely to be searched once detained, than their white counterparts. No data indicates that white people are less likely to come to a full and complete stop at a stop sign or use their blinkers for two seconds before changing lanes, but officers use these violations more discriminately against those of another ethnicity.

Autonomous cars would once again eliminate this problem. And imagine the area of DUI enforcement — not only would the issue itself be largely resolved by having impaired people safely chauffeured home by their smart car, but all of the law enforcement resources allocated to DUI enforcement would nearly disappear. And yes, that means many police officers will likely lose their jobs due to obsolescence.

This future won’t come too quickly; the technological connectivity required for this level of automation is not ready for prime time. Also, a recent poll found that almost 80 percent of Americans fear traveling in a autonomous car. But the lure of increased safety and freeing up wasted time behind the wheel will be strong and eventually persuade most of us to adopt the rapidly improving technology. The world will become a better place since 90 percent of vehicle crashes are caused by human error.

And Utah is ahead of the curve. Much of the state’s transportation infrastructure is embedded with fiber optics that can provide the technology backbone needed to communicate with autonomics vehicles passing along the surface above.

This new technology will surely require us to readjust our behavior patterns and personal preferences. But for law enforcement, it stands to undermine and make irrelevant many current practices and efforts.

After all, if every vehicle is automatically obeying traffic laws, what’s the point of traffic cops at all?

—

Connor Boyack is president of Libertas Institute, a free market think tank in Utah, and author of 14 books.