Ark Pine Bluff Texas Tech Football

(The Center Square) – The Trump administration asked the U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday to halt a federal judge's blockade on mail-in voting restrictions again. 

Judge Indira Talwani, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, issued an order blocking the United States Postal Service from requiring unique barcodes on mail-ballot envelopes and lists of voters who requested ballots. 

The first mail-in ballots across the country will begin to ship out in North Carolina on Friday from the 100 county boards of elections. Solicitor General John Sauer said the administration's rule would implement practices that are already commonplace in states across the country and characteristic of USPS authority. 

"It requires states to upload the name, address, and barcode information of intended recipients of ballot mail in an online portal – information that election officials would necessarily already possess to send ballot mail to those recipients," Sauer wrote. 

He said the USPS already implemented regulations on processing of cremated remains, explosives and other election-related materials. Sauer also pointed to North Carolina's mail-in ballot period as a reason to halt the federal judge's order since many states have already implemented the barcode changes.

Wisconsin is next to begin mailing absentee ballots on Sept. 17.

"Once those ballot envelopes enter the mailstream, there is no retrieving them," Sauer said. 

The Trump administration also argued that the judge's order makes the mail-in voting guidelines appear optional when it is meant to be mandatory. 

"There is a grave risk that states may not have taken the necessary steps to comply due to the false sense of latitude created by the court’s improper order, potentially depriving those states’ citizens of the ability to vote by mail," Sauer wrote. 

The Trump administration asked justices on the high court to respond by Sept. 8 to its appeal. 

The debate over large data center development has become a major talking point in the midterm election. Nonstop Local caught up with the candidates running for Montana’s Eastern House District, where Montana’s largest data center project is currently being developed.

The four candidates for MT-02 that will appear on the November ballot are the Republican incumbent U.S. Rep. Troy Downing, Democratic candidate Brian Miller, Independent candidate Dr. Mike Eisenhauer and Libertarian candidate Patrick McCracken.

Democratic candidate Brian Miller has been directly involved in the debate, serving as legal counsel for citizens challenging the Quantica Infrastructure development in Yellowstone County.

“We need to have maximum local control and respect state sovereignty on data centers,” said Miller. “And the bottom line is, if these guys cannot make their pitch and convince the people that this is good, after laying their cards on the table, then they absolutely should not be coming in.”

Miller has also been critical of what he sees as a lack of transparency when large data center projects go into a community.

“And they don’t disclose what they’re doing with water. They don’t disclose agreements; they use a lot of nondisclosure agreements to kind of hide the data that they are operating under,” he said. “And so this causes a tremendous amount of concern for people, especially in eastern Montana. You know, outsiders may come in and see the Yellowstone River and think, ‘You guys got lots of water,’ no, we don’t.”

Quantica Infrastructure recently outlined its planned water use in Yellowstone County. They estimate using 20,000 gallons of water per day once completed, using closed-loop cooling technology.  They also said the company is in the early stages of evaluating opportunities to make water available to surrounding communities and neighboring farmers and ranchers in the long term. 

Independent candidate Dr. Mike Eisenhauer told Nonstop Local he has a 5-Pillar policy on data center development, which includes requiring closed-loop cooling, protecting ratepayers and workers in the area, and letting each community have the final say.

“I think local control is the way it needs to be. I am not in favor of a mandate either for or against, by either the federal level or the state level. I think there are ways to make this mutual and to make it beneficial for both parties,” said Eisenhauer.

Eisenhauer said he’s not opposed to data centers as a whole, and recognizes the potential technological benefits. 

“It's almost become a necessity for our way of life. But that doesn't mean we need to do it in a negative or environmentally damaging way. And we don't need to put it, you know, where people don't want it to be,” he noted.

Candidates told Nonstop Local a big thing they’ve heard from people is that they don't want a large data center “in their backyard.”

“The reality is most people would not want to live next door to a data center,” noted Libertarian candidate Patrick McCracken. “It just seems like in Montana right now, and across the nation, is a national infrastructure project that’s being delivered to us state by state on behalf of billion- and trillion-dollar companies.”

McCracken said he is necessarily against data center developments, but communities need to make the decisions and there needs to be a real look at the resources they’re use and impacts they’ll have. 

“Here we have two major problems,” said McCracken, “They haven’t addressed electrical needs and how Montanans aren’t going to pay increased electrical bills and we haven’t addressed how the water is going to come back into our environment. Which we’re guaranteed under the Montana State Constitution: a healthful environment.”

The incumbent in the race, Republican U.S. Representative Troy Downing, was unable to do an interview because he was traveling back to Montana on Thursday, but he did provide a statement on his stance.

“Data centers can bring investment and opportunity to Montana, but these decisions should be made by the communities that will live with them,” said Downing. “The federal government should take a light-touch approach and leave these choices to the state and local level. One thing is nonnegotiable: Montana’s senior water rights must be protected. No data center should ever be allowed to usurp the water rights our communities depend on.”

The debate around large-scale data centers will likely continue even after the election, with economists predicting trillions of dollars in new developments across the nation in the coming years. 

(The Center Square) – California’s strict pollution and clean air laws will remain in place, at least for now, after a federal judge granted a preliminary injunction in a lawsuit against the Trump administration. 

For decades, the Clean Air Act has allowed California to set tougher emissions rules for cars, ships and other vehicles than the rest of the country, using special permissions known as waivers.

While many Republican and Democratic presidents have granted these waivers to California, Republican President Donald Trump has objected out of concern that Golden State rules are harming consumers and the economy.

In June, Trump and Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin sought to reclassify four Clean Air Act pre-emption waivers as rules subject to congressional repeal. Soon after, California Attorney General Rob Bonta and Gov. Gavin Newsom, both Democrats, and California’s Air Resources Board filed a lawsuit calling the federal EPA’s efforts an “unlawful attempt to circumvent administrative procedure and attack state emissions rules.”

The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Judge Beryl Howell, an Obama appointee, granted the preliminary injunction on Wednesday.

While this is a temporary win for California, Bonta called it “a key victory” against the Trump administration.

“When it comes to environmental integrity, posterity demands that we act,” said Bonta in a press release. “The bottom line is that California is taking many steps forward to protect the environment and public health while President Trump is taking six steps back.”

When asked to comment, the White House referred The Center Square to the EPA, which said it is considering mediation appeal options.

Meanwhile, Larry Behrens of Power the Future, a nonprofit dealing with energy issues, said the costly emission standards are typical for the Golden State.

“California already pays the highest prices in America for nearly everything, yet Gavin Newsom and Rob Bonta are fighting to preserve mandates that will make life even more expensive,” the Power the Future communications director told The Center Square. “President Trump and Administrator Zeldin are right to challenge a system that allows California’s costly mandates to spread far beyond its borders.”

While admitting that the injunction is a “setback for affordability and common sense,” Behrens added that it “does not change the fact that Californians are paying the price for the green agenda.”

For several years, California has had the highest gas prices in the nation. That was true again Thursday, with the California's average at $5.78 a gallon. The national average is $4.14, according to AAA.

(The Center Square) – A Pennsylvanian who once received support from President Donald Trump to run for U.S. Senate may be selected to serve as the next secretary of the Army. 

CBS News reported on Thursday several senior officials have said that U.S. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth’s top choice to be the next secretary of the Army would be Sean Parnell, a combat veteran who currently serves as a senior advisor and assistant to the Secretary of War for Public Affairs.

Reports first surfaced last week that Hegseth favored seeing Parnell in that role as chatter continued about Army Secretary Dan Driscoll’s future in the Trump administration. Driscoll’s final day serving was on Wednesday. 

Parnell, a native of western Pennsylvania, previously announced candidacies for two different offices in the Keystone State. 

In 2020, Parnell was the Republican Party nominee for Pennsylvania’s 17th U.S. House District. He narrowly lost to incumbent Democratic U.S. Rep. Conor Lamb. 

The following year, Parnell announced his intentions to seek the Republican nomination for U.S. Senate. Trump endorsed his candidacy early on, however, Parnell dropped out of the race after losing a court battle over the custody of several of his children in 2021, according to City & State PA.

During divorce proceedings, according to NOTUS, Parnell’s estranged wife alleged she endured years of rage and abuse from him, including being choked — charges he called “baseless” at the time.

Just a few weeks after being sworn in for a second term, Trump announced that he was nominating Parnell to serve as the chief Pentagon spokesperson for his administration. 

Following the nomination, Parnell said he was honored to be selected for the position. 

“I must emphasize that I am the leader I am today because of the incredible Soldiers I served with in Afghanistan. Their bravery, dedication, courage & sacrifice have shaped me profoundly,” Parnell wrote on social media in Feb. 2025. “I am alive today because of them.”

“I accept this position with great humility, recognizing that we are all standing on the shoulders of giants—those warriors who came before us, who sacrificed so much on behalf of a grateful nation,” he continued. “I also want to thank my wonderful wife, Melanie, & our five incredible children for their unwavering support & love. This achievement is as much theirs as it is mine. Time to get to work!”

White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles will lead the process to name the next secretary of the Army, according to CBS News, adding that it’s currently not clear who is on Trump’s shortlist for the role.

However, NOTUS reports that Parnell would “probably face a tough path to Senate confirmation,” saying that critics of his believe that he is “highly partisan and too closely aligned” with Hegseth.

(The Center Square) – Medical watchdog Do No Harm’s Center for Accountability in Medicine released its second index on medical schools, ranking schools by excellence and merit instead of identity politics.

Director of the Center for Accountability in Medicine (CAM) Ian Kingsbury told The Center Square: “We created the Medical School Excellence Index so that patients and aspiring medical school students have clear information about which schools are doing the best job of recruiting and training physicians.”

“Since launching the Index last year, we’ve seen several schools change their mission statements and applicant essay prompts in ways that eschew DEI-aligned activism,” Kingsbury said.

“Unfortunately, we’ve also seen some backsliding by schools that infuse DEI into admissions and student grading policies,” Kingsbury said.

“As we continue to make progress to restore excellence to medical education, this tool will be invaluable to the public and students who want medical schools to focus on training the next generation of highly qualified medical professionals,” Kingsbury said.

According to the Medical School Excellence Index, the top schools are as follows, starting with what it says are the best: USF Health Morsani College of Medicine; Albert Einstein College of Medicine; Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania; Dell Medical School – University of Texas at Austin; and Vanderbilt University School of Medicine.

The worst schools, according to Do No Harm, are Michigan State University College of Human Medicine; Charles R. Drew University of Medicine and Science College of Medicine; California University of Science and Medicine – School of Medicine; University of California, Riverside School of Medicine; and Roseman University College of Medicine.

None of these 10 schools provided comment to The Center Square by publishing time.  

Do No Harm’s medical school ranking system differs from other traditional rankings that favor diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI).

Instead, Do No Harm looks at “academic excellence, transparency, and the rejection of DEI” to rank schools.

According to Do No Harm, Michigan State University College of Human Medicine received its ranking as the worst U.S. medical school after GPA scores declined and another DEI office was added.

California University of Science and Medicine also fell into the bottom five after it lowered MCAT and GPA scores and added a DEI office, while Riverside School of Medicine and Charles R. Drew University of Medicine and Science College of Medicine both added DEI offices, contributing to their index placement, according to Do No Harm. 

Roseman University College of Medicine is a newer medical school that has a strong commitment to DEI, Do No Harm said.

In last year’s Medical School Excellence Index, 18% of schools received a grade of F, The Center Square reported. 

Both USF Health Morsani College of Medicine and Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania were in last year’s top five schools.

(The Center Square) – Social isolation will increase as people increasingly use artificial intelligence companions, says a new study and poll from two Elon University research centers.

Twenty-seven percent of American adults are using the internet with significant emotional or social interactions with AI large language models such as ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude and Copilot. The study from the Imagining the Digital Future Center and the Elon University Poll found bonds of connection, confidence and trust built between users and the LLMs.

“For decades,” Lee Rainie, director of the Imagining the Digital Future Center, writes in the report, “people have adapted digital technologies to help them communicate, learn, work and entertain themselves. What is different now is that millions of Americans are beginning to use AI language models like ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude and Copilot for purposes that have traditionally been exclusive domain of humans.”

The study found positive and negative future outcomes expected by people using AI as companions.

On the plus side, 74% said education and information will be more accessible; 69% said there will be advancements in healthcare and research; 67% cited innovation; and 62% said it will create new types of careers and opportunities.

On the downside, 57% said there will be more social isolation and loneliness; 55% said there will be less trust in news or news media; 54% said it will be harder to get a job or meaningful work; and 47% said more mental problems are coming.

Rainie points out the context of some simply “fooling around with language models for the novelty of it.” Notwithstanding, he said the broad patterns of intimacy that are familiar and meaningful are highlighted.

“One important way to think about AI companion users is that they are harbingers of the future for larger segments of the population – and our children,” Rainie said. “Even these adopters, as enthusiastic as they are, offer a mixed balance sheet. Many say they reap benefits like comfort, confidence, motivation and good advice.

“Yet they also sound warnings. More than a third say their bot agrees with them too much, and a majority predict AI will deepen social isolation and loneliness in the years ahead. That tension is the story of this report.”

A portion of the report, “The Secrets People Tell Their Bots,” includes comments from those surveyed.

A sampling includes, “I vent my suicidal thoughts and ideation to AI”; “I tell AI that I’m bisexual”; “I’m autistic and use AI to translate conversations and plan my responses”; and “I can cry to it instead of bothering my husband and my friends and family.”

The report includes in this section, “If you or someone you know is struggling or in crisis, help is available. Call or text 988 or chat at 988lifeline.org.”

The poll found 29% have used AI “to talk about problems in their personal relationships” and 26% have used AI “to talk about problems in work relationships.”

Using the AI bot to get advice on health, fitness or lifestyle choices was made by 67%; dealing with major financial questions like investments or big purchases was done by 41%.

Elon’s two research centers worked with YouGov, and international marketing and polling firm, for a web-based survey from May 18-22 and released results Wednesday. Internet-using adults ages 18 and older were interviewed, 4,268 total, that was matched down to a sample of 4,031 and yielding a target subsample of 1,000 AI users with emotional or social use of AI. The margin of error is +/- 3.68%.

(The Center Square) – A Zapata County judge, his family members and campaign staff were served with search warrants as part of an ongoing investigation into voter fraud in the southern Texas county.

The allegations, according to affidavits unsealed as part of the case, involve a campaign allegedly paying staff to assist hundreds of voters, telling them who to vote for and watching as they vote, transporting and paying the voters to vote in exchange for dropping community service hours and/or fines the voters previously were assessed for wrongdoing. 

In the March 2026 Democratic primary election for Zapata County judge, candidate Martha Morales alleged this pattern occurred, The Center Square reported. She sued and lost her civil case due to a statutory deadline and asked the Secretary of State and attorney general to investigate. 

In the March 2024 Democratic primary election for Zapata County sheriff, former Sheriff Raymundo Del Bosque made similar allegations after losing his primary. He sued, lost his civil case and requested the SOS and AG to investigate. 

Last September, the AG’s Criminal Investigations Division Election Integrity Unit launched an investigation into the Zapata County judge, sheriff, one Justice of the Peace and others. 

In July, the AG’s CID EIU executed search warrants at the residences of Zapata County Judge Joe Rathmell, and his wife, Gina Rathmell; of Sheriff Ramon Montes, and his wife, Sonia Sanchez; of the sheriff’s secretary, Norma Garcia, and her husband, Corando Barrera; of Laura Garza who worked on Montes’ and Rathmell’s campaigns; and of Justice of the Peace Olga Bruni. Phone and bank records were seized as part of the investigation, according to 73 pages of affidavits exclusively obtained by The Center Square. 

None responded to multiple requests for comment from The Center Square.

In the March 2026 Democratic primary race for county clerk, candidate Carmen Mena-Paredes lost and also alleges voter fraud occurred. She didn’t have the financial resources to contest the outcome, she told The Center Square. The outgoing county clerk maintains no voter fraud occurred, The Center Square reported.  

“Given the affidavit allegations involving vote harvesting and bribery surrounding the most recent election,” Mena-Paredes is calling on the AG to investigate all races in the most recent elections in the county. 

“If there are legitimate concerns about the integrity of our elections, every race deserves the same level of scrutiny. This isn’t about targeting one candidate, one party, or one office, it’s about transparency, accountability, and making sure every vote was legally and fairly cast. The people of our county deserve to know that their elections are conducted with integrity and that their voices truly matter,” she told The Center Square. 

Judge Rathmell has not responded to multiple requests for comment about allegations made in four affidavits about him, his wife, adult daughter and campaign staff. 

On Wednesday afternoon, Gina Rathmell, the judge's wife, posted a statement on Facebook stating she and Judge Rathmell “have publicly and fairly served for over 22 years.” She also said the affidavits are “NOT charges, these are only allegations.”  

“We cannot discuss matters at this time,” she added, stating in the Facebook post, “We are fighting this fight as best we know; through our attorneys and not on FB.” 

Two separate affidavits conclude: “It appears, based on witness statements, video recorded surveillance, bank records, and text message evidence that Gina Rathmell committed the offense of Vote Harvesting by compensating individuals to interact with voters in the presence of their official ballot with the with that interaction intended to be for a specific candidate.”

Two other affidavits state, “It appears, based on witness statements, video recorded surveillance, bank records, and text message evidence that [Judge] Rathmell committed the offense of Vote Harvesting by compensating individuals to interact with voters in the presence of their official ballot with that interaction intended to be for a specific candidate.”

Investigators interviewed several cooperating witnesses, including a former Rathmell campaign worker, Roman Guerrero, who signed an affidavit in Morales’ case that he was paid to bring and assist voters to vote for Rathmell, The Center Square first reported. Guerrero also told AG EIU investigators he was paid to “bring people to vote and assist voters to vote” for Rathmell, according to an affidavit 

“According to text messages between Guerrero and Garza, Rathmell's network of harvesters and vote harvester facilitators communicated on their cell phone devices including communications about being paid to collect votes for Rathmell. There would have to have been coordination between Rathmell, Gina Rathmell, and Garza regarding this check and what it was for,” one affidavit states.

Text message exchanges indicate that Rathmell’s campaign employee Norma Garza instructed Guerrero to “work for Rathmell to obtain votes for him while interacting with voters in the presence of their official ballots, and in return, Guerrero would be provided with compensation,” one affidavit states. Garza allegedly used her phone with Guerrero “to coordinate payment for vote harvesting activity,” it states.

According to phone records obtained by investigators, there were 174 phone contacts between Garza and Judge Rathmell between June 2024 and June 2026. There were also 1,035 phone contacts between Garza and Gina Rathmell between June 2024 and June 2026, investigators allege. The affidavits also quote text messages exchanged between their adult daughter and campaign staff related to alleged vote harvesting.

“These text messages are an indicator that [Judge] Rathmell utilized his family to coordinate vote harvesting services which involved having vote harvesters interact with voters in the presence of their official ballots with the intention of having the voters vote for Rathmell for elections by texting these vote harvesters directly on behalf of Rathmell. This also shows that Gina Rathmell, Rathmell's wife, had knowledge of the coordination for vote harvesting services,” one affidavit states. 

The affidavit also notes that “it is common for candidates and/or elected officials to compensate vote harvesters and/or communicate with vote harvesters through third parties … to provide themselves with a deniability on what those funds and or communications are intended for.”

Corando Barrera, who worked on Rathmell’s campaign, didn’t respond to requests for comment but posted a statement on Facebook on Wednesday afternoon. “Accusations are easy to make but proving them is an entirely different story,” he said, referring to two AG EIU affidavits resulting in his home being searched and his phone being seized.

“Norma and I know exactly what we did and did not do, and we are extremely confident about where the truth and the evidence will ultimately lead. We have remained quiet for a reason, and that silence should never be mistaken for fear, weakness, or an inability to defend ourselves. There are things we simply cannot discuss publicly,” he said, referring to his wife, Norma Garcia, who works for Montes. Montes also is being investigated.  

The affidavits related to Barrera cite examples of alleged vote harvesting and bribery in the 2024 Democratic primary race for sheriff. It cites video surveillance, bank records and eye-witness accounts of Barerra allegedly withdrawing cash from Montes’ campaign bank account of which Garcia is an account co-owner, according to the affidavit. It also alleges Barrera paid voters cash after they voted for Montes, using a drop off point by a porta potty located near the county courthouse, among other allegations.

Montes, Garcia and the AG’s office did not respond to requests for comment. 

(The Center Square) – With Americans across the country rebelling against thousands of AI enhanced surveillance cameras infiltrating their cities, a bipartisan group of lawmakers has proposed a bill prohibiting the funding of those cameras with taxpayer money.

U.S. Reps. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., and Eric Burlison, R-Mo., are cosponsoring the FLOCK OFF Act with bipartisan support. It targets the controversial cameras, such as Flock Safety cameras, that use Automated License Plate Recognition (ALPR) or biometric data collection technology.

"The federal government shouldn’t provide 'security' grants to cities and police departments that have gone beyond the pale and turned their communities into a version of 1984," Massie said.

"The Flock-Off Act withholds federal money from municipalities and police departments that deploy Flock cameras to surveil law-abiding citizens. Federal taxpayers should not be forced to fund the surveillance state."

The legislation prohibits state and local governments, municipalities, police departments, and other entities receiving federal funds from “directly or indirectly” using that money to “[p]urchase, lease, acquire, install, deploy, maintain, repair, replace, upgrade, or operate a covered camera system or any associated component.”

It also forbids those government agencies from renewing any current subscription, contract or agreement involving the use of those cameras or the data the cameras collect. Those parties additionally cannot reimburse or subsidize a non-federally funded party for the installation or maintenance of such technology.

"Technology may change, but our constitutional rights do not,” Burlison said. "The Fourth Amendment protects Americans from unreasonable searches, and advances in surveillance technology should not come at the expense of our privacy and liberty. The federal government should not use taxpayer dollars to build a surveillance state that tracks law-abiding Americans. Our rights are unalienable, and Congress has a responsibility to protect them.”

The bill stipulates that both government agencies and the surveillance technology providers currently receiving taxpayer funds remove and cease operating the surveillance technology within 180 days of the bill’s enactment.

However, the bill carves out an exception for U.S. Border Patrol as long as the cameras are situated within a mile of the country’s northern or southern border and are “used primarily for border security”-related criminal activity. It also allows the use of the cameras for toll collection.

As of September 2026, at least 138,000 cameras with ALPR technology have been mapped across the U.S. by independent organizations like Finding Flock. Flock Safety, Axon Enterprise, and Motorola Solutions are just a few of the companies in the surveillance industry.

The recent spread of these cameras raises multiple privacy and safety concerns, according to critics. There are dozens of documented cases of individuals utilizing the cameras to harass and stalk innocent individuals.

More importantly, the federal government can buy the data collected by these cameras, outsourcing what would normally constitute unconstitutional surveillance to private companies.

Flock Safety alone has spent $2 million in federal and state lobbying efforts since 2025, according to a recent analysis by OpenSecrets.

(The Center Square) — Louisiana could emerge as one of the biggest domestic beneficiaries of a U.S.-backed expansion of Venezuela's oil industry, with refineries designed to process the country's heavy crude and infrastructure capable of receiving massive oil tankers offshore.

The Trump administration is pushing to sharply increase Venezuelan oil production and direct more of it toward the United States. U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright said Wednesday that new investments could more than double Venezuela's oil output over the next several years. Chevron separately announced plans to invest $7 billion in its Venezuelan operations and roughly double its production there to 600,000 barrels per day.

Where those additional barrels ultimately go will be determined in large part by refiners and oil markets. But Louisiana has an advantage: Much of Venezuela's crude is heavy and high in sulfur, requiring more sophisticated refining equipment than lighter varieties of oil.

“Louisiana has the refineries capable to process the kind of heavy crude coming from Venezuela, making our state a natural beneficiary of increased supply from the region,” Louisiana Mid-Continent Oil and Gas Association President Tommy Faucheux told The Center Square. “As energy security remains a top international concern, the rest of the country will again be looking to Louisiana for leadership.”

Federal data support that assessment.

Louisiana had 15 operating refineries at the beginning of 2026 with combined crude oil distillation capacity of roughly 3 million barrels per day, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

U.S. refineries are not interchangeable. Facilities are built around particular mixes of crude, and the EIA notes that while domestic U.S. production is dominated by lighter oil, the country continues to import heavier and more sulfur-intensive crude to supply refineries designed to process it.

Venezuelan oil is already moving disproportionately toward the Gulf Coast.

In May, the United States imported an average of 471,000 barrels per day of Venezuelan crude. Of that, 457,000 barrels per day were processed in the Gulf Coast refining region, according to EIA data. U.S. imports have continued rising since then, with the four-week average exceeding 600,000 barrels per day at points in July.

Louisiana also has something most states do not: an offshore crude terminal specifically built to handle oil tankers too large to enter conventional ports.

The Louisiana Offshore Oil Port, or LOOP, sits about 18 nautical miles offshore and can load and unload some of the world's largest tankers. Crude moves through pipelines from the offshore terminal to storage facilities at Clovelly and into a pipeline network serving refineries. The state-regulated facility also has more than 80 million barrels of storage capacity.

According to Louis Gurvich, Director of the Louisiana Offshore Terminal Authority, many of the oil tankers coming from Venezuela "couldn't get anywhere near the Mississippi River or New Orleans fully loaded" because the waters are too shallow.  

"A tanker pulls up to it, connects to one of the buoys and begins transferring crude," Gurvich told The Center Square. "It can handle both imports and exports and different types of crude, including light and heavy crude."

No other state currently operates a similar offshore terminal, leaving LOOP as a premier destination for the incoming Venezuelan oil. 

The potential economic effect would not necessarily stop at refineries.

Traditional oil-service ports including Port Fourchon, the Port of Iberia and the Port of Morgan City could benefit indirectly if expanded Venezuelan production creates additional offshore and marine work in the Caribbean.

Washington and Caracas are now moving toward a major rebuilding of the Venezuelan oil industry after years of sanctions and declining production. Venezuela produced more than 3 million barrels per day during the 1990s but has recently produced roughly 1.1 million to 1.2 million barrels per day. The Trump administration says agreements now being negotiated with U.S. and international companies could more than double that output.

Gurvich expects the supply of Venezuelan oil to increase sharply in the coming years, which could mean a drop in the price of oil, which would mean a drop in the price of things like gasoline or asphalt, all else being equal. 

Under an oil arrangement announced by the Trump administration in August, Venezuela granted North American Blue Energy Partners, a private company backed by the U.S. government, 100-year concessions to develop 17 oil fields containing an estimated 65 billion barrels of reserves. The U.S. government will hold a 35% stake in the company's parent and has secured rights to buy a portion of its oil production at cost.

For Louisiana, the state already has the refineries, storage, pipelines and offshore terminal needed to turn unusually heavy crude into usable fuels — infrastructure that could become more valuable as Venezuelan production returns to the world market.

BIRMINGHAM - Amid a legal battle concerning eligibility for players who have already gone pro, the Southeastern Conference has sued LSU, its head football coach Lane Kiffin and the university's leaders. 

The federal lawsuit was filed in the Northern District of Alabama on Thursday. It alleges that LSU's conduct surrounding the ongoing legal fight has harmed the SEC, created a "competitive imbalance," and disrupted student-athletes' expectations.

The conference claims that one of the “most fundamental” rules in the SEC is that players who have been rostered on professional teams cannot compete in collegiate sports. 

“College athletics is reserved for students who are actively pursuing an education while competing for their universities,” the suit says. 

Kiffin’s LSU roster has been recently enhanced by the additions of former Cleveland Brown Dae'Quan Wright, former New Orleans Saint Zxavian Harris and former Denver Bronco Blake Cotton. The three declared for the draft, signed NFL contracts and spent the summer practicing with their respective professional teams before returning to college football. 

The SEC called the move “a deliberate and coordinated campaign to recruit professional athletes to play football for LSU.”

The lawsuit says that LSU violated the conference's First Amendment rights by forcing it to "associate its competitions, its brand, its championships, and its media properties with conduct that the Conference has expressly, unanimously, and publicly rejected and repudiated since its inception."

WBRZ reached out to LSU for a comment. A university spokesperson said they have not seen the suit yet, but they will not be able to comment due to pending litigation. 

This is a developing story.