Drugs, Tears, and Neglect: A Young Girl’s Tragic Death and the Systems That Failed Her.

By: Eowyn Weiss

A district court case investigates the tragic problems presented by performance-enhancing drugs often used in high school sports. This case explores neglect and culpability, telling the story of Genesis Hernandez, a teenage tennis prodigy whose abuse of anxiety medications, combined with PEDs (Performance Enhancing Drugs), ultimately led to her death. 

Hernandez V. Hillside Valley Charter High School delves into the complexities of whose negligence caused the death of the young athlete. The defense seeks to prove that Katarina Hernandez was at fault for her daughter’s drug use. Katarina, Genesis’s mother, an ex-Olympic-level tennis player whose injuries rendered a career in the sport impossible, delivered a tearful account of the situation. Meanwhile, the plaintiff's desire to prove the school was at fault led to some tense questioning. 

Varsity Tennis Coach Derrek Blazer of Hillside Valley Charter School, who overlooked two reports--one made by one of his players, Fiona Patel, the other by Katarina Hernandez herself-- was called as a witness for the defense, and said in his testimony, “As a coach at the school, I've developed the reputation of being very supportive but also stern.” 

Among the many witnesses called to the stand was Mia Thompson, an education officer with a Ph.D. in Educational Administration from the University of Michigan. Thompson was Chief of Education for the district, and, during her cross-examination, revealed that Hillside had one of the lowest rates of PED use in the district, which was why they did not often pursue more rigorous drug programs. Thompson stated that “the investigation showed that the school was properly informing the parents and the students, who were also aware of the specific danger of PEDs.” Yet, after a rigorous cross-examination from the prosecution, she revealed that “there was no need for the school to do an investigation because there was no evidence,” despite Blazer’s two conversations concerning drug abuse among his players.

The state guidelines concerning drug testing and investigations could have been improved, but that wouldn’t have been cost-effective, according to Thompson’s affidavit. Thompson went on to insist that “If we had done these tests based off of a loose claim it would have been extremely harmful and detrimental to the students.” Confusion among the jury arose as to what, exactly, the death of Genesis was if not harmful and detrimental, a point best illustrated when the prosecutor asked, “A young woman is dead, is she not?”

The cross-examination of witness Dr Julian Perry, a forensic anthropologist who performed Genesis Hernandez’s autopsy, revealed the cause of death: the drugs Boldenone and Citalopram, a steroid and an anxiety medication, respectively. Perry described the injection of Boldenone as "difficult" and "precise,” and confirmed that Hernandez would have had to have been taught how to use such a drug by someone who also took it. “She couldn’t have done this completely on her own,” Doctor Perry insisted while on the witness stand.

After Genesis returned from a tennis summer camp she was reported to have become more aggressive, irritable, and anxious, all symptoms of the almost undetectable anabolic, androgenic steroid Boldenone. Genesis’s coach attributed this to the pressure put on her by her ex-tennis-player mother, Katarina, saying that “parents try to project themselves on their kids.”

This case was one of tragedy, confusion, the grief of a coach, mother, school, and the system itself, all of whose failure led to the devastating loss of a young life.

From the DNC: “We Are Not Having a Party in the USA”

Written by: Maryn Vasquez 

At approximately 9:20 PM, February 20th, members of the DNC stormed the Oval Office during a presidential cabinet meeting. They protested while playing Party in the USA and chanting “Lock him up” at President Donald J. Trump. Trump swiftly responded by chanting his own name while a member of his cabinet reportedly passed out in response to all the chaos. 

The DNC’s song choice, Party in the USA, signals the DNC protestors’ enduring sense of patriotism and perhaps renewed nationalism within the party — even amid a Republican presidency. Alongside blaring music, the DNC’s chants “Lock him up” exemplified the strong contempt some partisans have for a president whose criminal background has come under mounting scrutiny.

In terms of specific policy items, the DNC appeared to protest Trump's radical changes in his first month of the administration concerning the renaming of the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America, striking DEI, and attempting to end birthright citizenship.

U.S Veteran and Pro Choice Activist Burns American Flag on Livestream

Authors: Kylie Hall, Norma Sarofiem, Lilly Kupersmit, Aarohi Dessi

A U.S. military Veteran was found not guilty on counts of vandalism and terroristic threats by a unanimous jury, and all charges have been dropped.

Lulu Miner, a 36-year-old veteran from Texas and a “seasoned pro-choice activist,” is being tried for charges of vandalism and terroristic threats after the protest that occurred outside of the Texas Supreme Court on June 1, 2024.  

The events that transpired that Saturday were all caught on livestream by a well known social media influencer by the name of Carmen Bellair, where she openly advocates her support for Miner’s words. “I thought Lulu’s words were a little heated, but I totally stood by them. I wouldn’t have streamed them if I hadn’t.” The stream had reached a peak of 52.3 thousand viewers before the protest was forcefully shut down by the city of Austin police department. Prior to the end of the live stream, Miner is heard directly addressing Bellair and viewers, where she states “Screw this failure of a country, the negligence of our government shows its inability to serve the people that trusted them to protect their rights. I will not rest until every single one of these fascists that run Texas eat dirt.” Shortly after this, Miner was taken into custody.

According to 18 U.S.C. § 2331, domestic terrorism involves acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or any State. The State of Texas argues Miner is in violation as such. 

The prosecution claims, “It's not a matter of politics, but a matter of destruction and direct violence.” 

During the defense's closing statements, verdicts of a previous case similar to Miner’s were referred to in her defense. The Supreme Court in Johnson v. Texas (1989) held that burning the American flag constitutes protected speech under the First Amendment.

The defense concluded, “She fought for what she believed in, what's more American than that?”

Democrats are leveling the playing field; bipartisanism on the rise

By: Payton Blake, Julia Sipelis, and Brannen Brantley

This Thursday, the Democratic National Convention hosted a high-stakes debate among the party’s top contenders: Vice President Kamala Harris, Maryland Governor Wes Moore, Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro, and Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitner. As the nation watched a deeply polarized debate, one topic dominated the floor: bipartisanship.

In a heated exchange between Whitner and Shaprio, the convention centered on the importance of unbiased perspective. Shapiro’s team, known for exposing corporate scandals and collaborating with both parties, declared that “bipartisanship still holds strength.” His campaign emphasizes that Americans do not want a far left candidate,” but rather a leader focused on financial security. In the end, Shapiro’s team overcame, leading him to victory.

Meanwhile, in the debate between Former Vice President Harris and Governor Moore, Moore took a different tone, shifting towards leadership style and personal connection to voters. As a former U.S. Army Captain, Moore presented himself as a “people-politics person” who embodies American values—service, sacrifice, and an ability to unite the people. His team argued that, unlike Harris, he was “going to act…and stand up.” The convention favored said “people person” in a vote 11-8, as he could inspire and mobilise a broad coalition.

In the end, the message was clear: Bipartisanship won the night. Both Moore and Shaprio emerged victorious, advancing to the final round of the DNC where Shaprio’s economic leadership overpowered Moore’s bold and people-driven movement. Both candidates proved their political agility, emphasising the need for unity in a divided and polarized nation.

BREAKING NEWS: The Ghost of Ronald Reagan Appears During a National Economic Council Meeting

Written By: Brannen Brantley and Stella Vicioso

Former President Ronald Reagan came back to life to speak to a very divided National Economic Council when the committee was debating. A bill to impose tariffs on all imported goods was on the table. The former president was appalled by the committee's willingness to possibly pass a bill that would benefit the government over the people. Reagan spoke about how he wanted the power to lay in the hands of the people rather than the government. He also spoke about how he would not have been able to afford goods before his presidency if this tariff was imposed. This tariff would come with a 3.1 trillion-dollar price tag. In order to achieve this amount, the government would have to impose a 100% tariff on most imported goods. The former president deemed this not feasible, along with a number of the committee members.

President Reagan illustrated his support of President Trump's position to implement the New Department of Efficiency (DOGE), despite disagreeing with many of Trump’s policies. The discussion between President Reagan and the National Economic Council was cut short due to a protest from the DNC during a speech by President Trump. After the protest calmed, Ronald Reagan returned to the grave.

Devastating Loss in Homeland

Article by: Liz Hoegel and Taylor Goodspeed

The proposed “Cybersecurity Workforce Act,” taking aim at nationwide cybersecurity instruction, failed by a 24-36 vote in the House Committee on Homeland Security. 

This bill focused on providing cybersecurity workforce training to computer science students to equip the next generation to shore up America’s cybersecurity policies and research in the future.

One co-author of the bill, who asked to remain anonymous, stated one goal of the bill was to “[stop] future attacks before they can start overtaking our systems and infiltrating our databases.” The primary objective, though, as stated by the authors, was to protect[the United States of America] and personal databases. 

In the course of deliberations, delegates spoke in favor of this bill and highlighted the importance of education about cybersecurity. “It's about new experts, it's about bringing us together to combat this problem,” said one delegate who voted for the passing of this bill.

Despite the authors’ clear objectives and a prevailing sense of  good will flowing through the committee, multiple delegates spoke in opposition to this bill.

An anonymous critic of the Cybersecurity Workforce Act went as far as dubbing it“legislative authoritarianism.” What once seemed like a bill that had full committee support, took a devastating hit from its opposition in the committee’s final vote. For now, proposed improvements to America’s cybersecurity curricula are bound for the back-burner.

Cutting Costs, Raising Pain: The Grim Reality of House Judiciary’s New Execution Method

By: Banks Rafool and Marley Reid

Favoring the cheaper three-drug protocol over the more commonly used pentobarbital, the committee prioritizes cost savings at the potential expense of increased suffering, raising ethical questions about justice and cruelty.

With the recent passage of the Rapist and Repeaters Enforcement Act (R.A.R.E.), Jim Jordan, Congressman from Ohio, worked alongside his bipartisan team to extend the death penalty to repeat offenders of rape. The bill faced little opposition from amendments and acted as a bipartisan regulation to an already-in-place standard; as he stated, "getting rid of the Death Penalty will not work."

In Section 2 of their bill, Jim Jordan and team introduced a different injection used for death row cases: an older three-drug protocol. Although this drug is a cheaper alternative to lethal injection, this three-drug method is commonly known to be a more excruciating type of lethal injection, which raises ethical concerns among citizens. In a direct quote, Congressman Jordan states “Money was a primary concern in gathering support behind this bill.” Is this difference in price worth the agony caused by this three-drug protocol?

The more common method of pentobarbital costs on average $20,000 per execution. Meanwhile, the older method costs roughly $1,500 across the three different drugs used.

In 2014, the state of Oklahoma, renowned for its long-standing use of the death penalty, injected Micheal Lee Wilson with a three-drug process. In the final moments of his life and the culmination of all his regrets and mistakes up to that point, he was quoted saying, “I feel my whole body burning.”

Many are left wondering, is it ethical to undermine the feelings of those on death row despite the 8th Amendment's assurance that all those charged are not given cruel or unusual punishments? 

The Dangers of PED: Explaining the Hernandez V. Hillside Valley Charter High School Case

By: Abby McGuire and Noura Adel 

The Hernandez v. Hillside Valley Charter High School district court case kicked off on February 20th, and both the defense and the plaintiff are in hot pursuit of justice. The case concerns high school tennis player Genesis Hernandez, who died of a stroke on April 21st, 2022. The stroke was caused by the performance enhancement drug (PED) boldenone. The jury ended up voting in favor of the defense-Hillside Valley High, which freed them from any responsibility in her death. 

Here’s the breakdown of the case: Katarina Hernandez, mother of the victim, decided to pursue legal action towards the charter school. She believed that Derek Blazer, Genesis’ coach, was aware of  boldenone usage within his team and overlooked it, preferring a triumphant team over his player’s health. Hernandez viewed Blazer as incompetent and negligent to the needs of her daughter and of the complaints she filed earlier concerning her daughter’s mental health and presumed PED usage. Her complaint wasn’t the only one. Genesis’s teammate and friend Fiona Patel reported her to Blazer as well, and no action was taken in response to her concerns. 

The plaintiff hyperfocused on the neglect of the administration, specifically Blazer, during the trial. Blazer gave talks about the harms of PED to combat usage, but that was the extent of his actions against PEDs. In order to investigate an issue within their student body the administration needs physical proof, like screenshots or substances. 

Blazer explained how as a school, they could only do so much, “She can’t blame us after we were doing all we could do to protect her,”. 

However, when Genesis passed out at a practice, Blazer didn’t contact medical care or notify Hernandez because she was only passed out for 40 seconds, not 60.

School administrator and fellow witness Mia Thompson backed up his claim, stating,“The school takes proper actions.” 

Thompson justified their lack of investigations due to the pain it could cause families, the schools’ reputation and students, along with the high costs of a drug usage investigation. 

The turning point in the case comes down to the effects of boldenone. One of the key witnesses, Dr. Julia Ferry, explained on stand that boldenone couldn’t cause effects like the stroke Genesis suffered on its own- it would need to interact with another substance. Hernandez had been giving her daughter anti-anxiety medication, although Doctors didn’t prescribe them for Genesis. The defense, led by attorney Jackson Witherspoon, focuses on the negligence of Katarina in their argument, describing how her choice to pressure Genesis in her sport and encouraging her to take anxiety meds led to her stroke and subsequent death. 

Blazer elaborated on issues with Hernandez during his testimony, explaining how he was initially nervous to promote Genesis to varsity after talking with Hernandez about her own past dreams of participating in Olympic tennis due to several injuries.  

This case poses a question for all administrators: What constitutes evidence in a school environment? And what is the role of parents in contrast to the role of teachers? The jury voted in favor of the defense, shifting the blame of Genesis’ death into the hands of her mother. 

A Glimpse Into Homeland

Homeland does more than just protect our physical borders

Article written by: Liz Hoegel and Taylor Goodspeed

Passing bills in House Homeland has been far from an easy task.  The first bill to be passed in Homeland so far this weekend was the Cybersecurity Security Act. Co-written by authors Joseph Banning, Simon Smith, Latiyfa Fayzullaeua, and Solene Luttway, have given us a glimpse inside the logistics of their bill. Working to tackle cryptocurrency hacking from North Korea, this bill has three main points. The bill provides funding for hospital programs, builds a consumer awareness program, and invests in conducting research further into cyber security to prevent the ever-growing concern. The authors state the most important point of this bill was stated as the second point – consumer awareness. Delegates want to provide complete transparency on the cybersecurity measures they plan to take.

Delegate Smith, one of the co-authors, made it clear in his efforts to pass this bill that this is not a completely new system meant to overtake our security measures now but a second effort to permanently enhance cybersecurity in America. 

When asked how it felt to co-author the first bill passed in a grueling few days of Homeland Security, delegate Banning, another co-author stated, “Feels good! It feels nice to see our government do something for once.”

The Cybersecurity Security Act passed with a 48-5 bipartisan vote, highlighting just how favorable this bill is to the majority of the House. The Cybersecurity Security Act seems to be a key effort to provide The United States with high security and high standard protection.

Senate Finance fails to pass the Reevaluation of Telehealth Act

By: Payton Blake & Sarin Chaimattayompol

Friday Afternoon, the Senate Finance failed to pass the Reevaluation Telehealth Act, a bill aiming to reassess the structure and funding of telehealth services across the country. Telehealth refers to the use of digital communication technologies—such as video calls, mobile apps, and online monitoring—to provide healthcare services remotely. However, controversy has arisen within the Senate over telehealth, as the integrity of its spending has been called into question.

In order to combat these concerns over telehealth’s ventures, cost, and implications, the bill proposed the Telehealth Evaluation Agency (TEA), requiring an estimated 50 million-dollar budget annually. 

This budget promptly sparked controversy. A majority of the Senate—in a vote of 13-14—argued that the bill was hypocritical, as it pulled funding away from telehealth services and underserved communities. 

In an interview with an author of the bill, Republican State Sen. John Barrasso, he argued that the senators “did not have a good understanding of” the bill. The bill was not trying to cut telehealth’s budget, but in fact, “cut over-spending…by placing scrutiny on” incorrect usage of the budget. 

When asked about the importance of the bill, Barrasso claimed that protection of the budget would “protect those in rural communities,” especially those that do “not have access to transportation.” As the Senator of Wyoming—the least populated state at 587,618 residents—Barrasso says he understands the struggles of accessing healthcare within “rural and underserved communities more than any.”

In an interview with Senator Maggie Hassan, the New Hampshire Democrat raised concerns about how the bill lacked a comprehensive plan that was accessible to rural and underserved communities. She explains how rural communities, particularly the rural elderly population, have “less access to education” about insurance processes. “Without a clear plan,” she empathizes, “they could be really taken advantage of.” She expressed lingering concerns about  “regulations, VPN, and national guidelines.” 

When she asked about cybersecurity during the Senate session, her question was swiftly brushed aside because the bill authors claimed cybersecurity was “implied.” In her view, the bill was “vague enough to take accountability out of the hands of the healthcare provider and slip under the radar.” 

Overall, she explained, the bill “was like reading a classic book. If you asked me to explain the plot points I wouldn’t know how.” She did, however, acknowledge that having someone in healthcare determine the insurance fee was a “good step in the right direction.”

Reflecting on the big picture, Senator Hassan ended the interview with a broad outlook on the status of telehealth’s expansion under medicare: “You can’t expand a system that doesn’t have a firm foundation.”