Friday Wrap Up
Keeping you up to date on pressing news from May 14 – 16.
Welcome back to Ghost Reader – a publication to help you stay informed when you don’t have the time, access or energy to keep pace with today’s news cycle.
Here’s what you can look forward to this edition:
High-Impact News: An update on the final part of President Trump’s trip to the Middle East; and ongoing talks to end the war in Ukraine.
Federal Government Operations: The latest on Trump’s “big, beautiful bill.”
Executive Orders & Legislative Impacts: Where things stand after the Supreme Court heard arguments on birthright citizenship and nation-wide injunctions.
Human Experience & Rights: A recent study examining the number of children with parents who experience substance use disorder. We’ll also highlight a recent piece in New York Magazine about the rise of AI cheating in schools.
Good for the Soul: News of the first person (an infant!) with a rare genetic disease to be successfully treated with personalized gene editing therapy.
Let’s get into it.
High-Impact Events
Tell me about how Trump ended his trip to the Middle East
Thursday, President Trump reached the third and final stop in his trip to the Middle East, visiting Abu Dhabi (the capital of the United Arab Emirates) and announcing deals totaling more than $200 billion.
What should I know?
About the deals: The agreements centered on data, AI, energy, and aircrafts. Here’s a breakdown:
Investments in energy: Abu Dhabi agreed to increase the value of its energy investments in the U.S. to $440 billion over the next decade. The UAE currently invests $70 billion in U.S. energy.
A new data center in Abu Dhabi: The U.S. and UAE agreed to partner in building a massive data center complex in Abu Dhabi. The complex will eventually hold 5-gigawatts of capacity – enough to power a major city. According to the Department of Commerce, it will be the largest data center deployment outside the U.S., with a goal to span 10 square miles.
New data centers in the U.S.: The White House also announced an agreement in which the UAE committed to build or finance data centers in the U.S. that are “at least as large and powerful” as those in the UAE.
AI, generally: The two countries agreed to establish a “US – UAE AI Acceleration Partnership” framework. With this, the U.S. preliminarily agreed to allow the UAE to import 500,000 AI chips from Nvidia per year.
Aircrafts: Trump also announced a $14.5 billion commitment from Etihad Airways to invest in 28 American-made Boeing aircrafts.
Oil and gas: It was announced Emirates Global Aluminum would develop a $4 billion aluminum smelter project in Oklahoma. It was also shared that ExxonMobil Corp, Occidental Petroleum, and EOG Resources will partner with the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company to expand oil and natural gas production valued at $60 billion.
One caveat: The data centers in combination with increased access for UAE to AI chips spark some national security concerns. For context, the Biden administration imposed strict oversight on exports of U.S. AI chips to the Middle East, partially due to fears the semiconductors would be diverted to China and help advance its military strength.
The latest with Russia & Ukraine
After days of “will he or won’t he” on a potential appearance by Russian President Vladimir Putin in Turkey for talks with Ukraine on an end to the war, it was confirmed he did not, in fact, show up. Ukrainian and Russian delegations are in direct negotiations today, though, for the first time since Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022.
What should I know?
The context: Check out Wednesday’s edition of Ghost Reader.
What Putin did instead: He sent a delegation of Russian aides and diplomats in his place. Delegations from the two sides are in talks today, although many said the negotiations are unlikely to yield significant results.
About the talks: They’re in Istanbul. With Putin not attending, Zelenskyy met with the Turkish president in Ankara but did not travel to Istanbul to join the talks. Secretary of State Marco Rubio represented the U.S. in the morning and met with the Ukrainian and Russian officials separately before leaving for other business.
What the U.S. said: Thursday, in reference to talks between the delegations, President Trump said “nothing is going to happen” until he meets one-on-one with Putin. Secretary of State Marco Rubio echoed the sentiment, saying it was “abundantly clear” a breakthrough wouldn’t occur until a meeting between Trump and Putin took place.
What Zelenskyy said: After a week of confusion and theatrics, he questioned Russia’s seriousness. While he agreed to send a Ukrainian delegation despite being snubbed by Putin, he said he did so out of respect for President Trump (who encouraged the talks) and Turkish president Erdogan for agreeing to host and help mediate.
What comes next: Eyes turn to a potential one-on-one meeting between Trump and Putin that U.S. officials suggest could occur in coming weeks.
Federal Government Operations
Where things stand with Trump’s “big, beautiful bill”
Wednesday, House Republicans moved forward with major legislation to deliver President Trump’s agenda. Friday afternoon, though, the House Budget Committee rejected the bill with five Republicans voting no based on a desire for deeper spending cuts and concerns about the U.S. budget deficit.
What should I know?
The latest: The vote was 16 – 21, with five Republicans joining all Democrats in voting against the legislation, despite for different reasons. The Republicans who voted “no” are Representatives Chip Roy (TX), Ralph Norman (SC), Andrew Clyde (GA), Josh Brecheen (OK), and Lloyd Smucker (PA).
What this means: The weekend will likely include a lot of negotiations to try to flip the Republican holdouts; and House Speaker Mike Johnon’s Memorial Day deadline could be in jeopardy.
What Trump said: A few hours before the failed vote, Trump posted on Truth Social that “Republicans MUST UNITE behind, ‘THE ONE, BIG BEAUTIFUL BILL!” He also posted, “We don’t need ‘GRANDSTANDERS’ in the Republican Party. STOP TALKING, AND GET IT DONE! It is time to fix the MESS that Biden and the Democrats gave us. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”
What preceded today’s vote: Most of the week entailed all-night and all-day drafting sessions and hearings on different components of the bill. Mid-week, votes occurred in three key committees – Ways and Means, Agriculture, and Energy and Commerce – that resulted in the main pieces of legislation being sent to the full House, where Republicans are trying to pass it before the upcoming Memorial Day recess.
About the bill, overall: It aims to extend Trump’s 2017 tax cuts and temporarily enact his campaign pledges not to tax tips or overtime pay. It includes cuts to Medicaid, food stamps, and subsidies for clean energy to help offset the cost of those tax measures plus increased spending on defense and immigration enforcement.
Important components of the bill, right now: Here are a few key elements to know about the legislation as it stands today.
In the Ways and Means Committee: Legislators approved the tax provisions of the bill, estimated to cost $3.8 trillion over a decade.
In the Agriculture Committee: Legislators approved major cuts to food assistance programs through increased work requirements and by shifting some of the program’s costs away from the federal government and to the states.
In the Energy and Commerce Committee: Legislators approved a roll-back of Biden-era energy and environmental policies, major funding cuts and policy changes to Medicaid, and other cuts to health care programs. The cuts are estimated to save more than $900 billion over the next decade, but would result in more than 8 million Americans losing insurance coverage.
An important caveat: The bill would sunset some key provisions after a few years. Congressional Republicans are trying to balance a few things – encourage growth via business investment incentives; honor Trump’s campaign promises for tax breaks; cut spending; and limit damage to the U.S. economy. If that sounds like a difficult challenge, it’s because it is. The Republicans’ solution is to offer tax breaks that expire in a few years. This would set up a “fiscal cliff” down the road, that a future Congress would have to either extend or allow to expire, potentially creating a tax hike. This means several key provisions are only proposed for 2025 – 2029, despite the legislation spanning to 2034.
How the tariffs may play in: Recent modeling from the Tax Foundation, a right-leaning think tank – found any positive effects from the legislation would be offset by negative impacts from the recently imposed (or still to be imposed) tariffs.
Where things stand now: With today’s failed vote, Republican leaders face an uphill battle in their own party that could delay or derail passage of the bill. Some conservative lawmakers argue the proposed cuts to Medicaid don’t go far enough, while others say the cuts can’t happen. The plan also faces opposition in the Senate, with Senators like Rand Paul (R-KY) and Ron Johnson (R-WI) saying the current bill is fiscally irresponsible. Senator Susan Collins (R-ME) and Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) also have concerns about the bill’s changes to Medicaid and other health programs, saying the changes amount to “taxing the poor to give to the rich.”
Why we’re not talking about Democrats: Because they have little power. Republicans are using a process known as budget reconciliation, which shields the measure from a filibuster and enables passage with a simple majority. With that said, Republicans can’t lose more than three votes in the House and three in the Senate or the legislation won’t pass.
Executive Orders & Legislative Impacts
Talk to me about birthright citizenship … and nationwide injunctions
Thursday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case that sits at the intersection of two areas: birthright citizenship and the power of lower courts to block presidential actions nationwide.
What should I know?
The background: On President Trump’s first day in office, he signed an executive order barring automatic citizenship for babies born in the U.S. whose parents entered the country illegally or who were here legally with a temporary visa. Immigrant rights groups and 22 states sued the Trump administration over constitutional legality of the EO. Since then, three federal judges (conservative and liberal) have ruled the executive order is unconstitutional. Three separate appeals courts upheld those rulings. Due to this, the Trump administration made an emergency appeal to the Supreme Court, asking the Court to rule on the power of federal district court judges to issue nation-wide orders.
What this means: Basically, while the subject of the case is the executive order to end birthright citizenship, the Trump administration is really seeking a Supreme Court ruling on if lower courts can issue orders that impact the entire country.
What a universal injunction is: An order that blocks a federal policy from taking effect across the country, even for people not directly involved in a lawsuit. During Trump’s first term, he faced 64 nationwide injunctions. Now, he’s on pace to pass that with more than 200 lawsuits filed against his administration already. These court orders have frozen his policies ranging from pandemic-era workplace rules to immigration enforcement to federal funding reallocations to federal worker firings.
The debate over universal injunctions: Critics of these injunctions – including several Supreme Court justices – argue they grant too much power to individual district judges and encourage “shopping,” where plaintiffs seek out judges that will rule in their favor. Others urge caution against sweeping decisions that could undermine the judiciary’s ability to provide meaningful relief for all. Legal experts say nationwide injunctions are sometimes needed and the case of birthright citizenship is a good example, in that it would be chaos if the order was allowed for certain people in certain states but not for others.
What the Trump administration argues: Department of Justice (DOJ) attorneys argue universal injunctions exceed the constitutional authority of individual judges and prevent the government from implementing policy changes while cases move through the courts. They say broader relief of that nature should only come through mechanisms like class-action lawsuits.
What would happen if the Justices rule in Trump’s favor: A couple of things. In this case, the administration would be able to attempt to deny citizenship to thousands of children born in some states (where lawsuits don’t exist) while being barred from doing so in others (where lawsuits do exist). It would also pave the way for other executive orders to be treated similarly, creating a legal and logistical nightmare when it comes to EOs enacted in some states but not others.
Where things seem to stand as of Thursday: The Supreme Court’s justices seemed to support the lower courts’ rulings that found Trump’s desired end to birthright citizenship as unconstitutional, while potentially being split over the universal injunction aspect of the case. Many of the justices asked questions about the practical effects of a decision to limit nationwide injunctions and how quickly the government would be ready to deal with the logistics of such a ruling.
What comes next: The Supreme Court will continue to weigh the arguments, with a decision expected by late June or early July.
A pulse check: A recent NPR / Ipsos poll found that less than a third of all Americans are in favor of ending birthright citizenship, despite about half of the population being in support of the Trump administration’s immigration policies, overall. In the poll, 53% of respondents said they oppose an end to birthright citizenship, with only 28% responding they approve. The poll was conducted from May 9 – 11 with a national sample of 1,019 respondents.
Human Experience & Rights
Let’s talk about a recent study on substance use disorder
According to a study published in JAMA Pediatrics this week, nearly 19 million children in the U.S. have at least one parent with a substance use disorder; with a significant number of those children also having a parent whose addiction is moderate or severe.
What should I know?
About the study: It used data from the 2023 National Survey on Drug Use and Health – a federal survey that estimated the prevalence of substance use and mental health disorders based on the latest criteria in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-5 (DSM-5).
What the DSM-5 is: The standard classification of mental disorders used by mental health professionals in the United States. The American Psychiatric Association (APA) is responsible for writing, editing, reviewing, and publishing the manual, which is in its fifth edition (hence the ‘5’). It provides clear, highly detailed definitions of mental health and brain-related conditions to guide medical and mental healthcare professionals in their work. It is technical and intended for use by trained, qualified mental health and medical providers.
The findings: About 1 in 4 children have a parent with a substance use addiction. Here is a breakdown of what the study found, with the findings based on definitions of substance use disorders and mental health disorders from the DSM-5.
7.6 million children live in a household with a parent that has either moderate or severe substance use disorder.
3.4 million children live with a parent with multiple substance use disorders.
More than 6 million children have a parent with a mental health condition in addition to a substance use disorder.
About 12 million parents have alcohol use disorder.
How to think about the findings: Researchers mainly drew attention to the potential impact of parental substance use and mental health disorders on their children. They called for a need to pay greater attention to a rising number of children exposed to parental alcohol use disorder, and an acknowledgement that alcohol is the leading cause of substance-related deaths in the U.S. despite it being a slower death rate due to its relation with chronic diseases. They also emphasized how children of parents with addictions are at a higher risk of various physical and mental health problems; including development of mental health conditions and substance use problems, as well as impacts from impaired caregiving and potentially witnessing parental overdose.
Tell me about the challenge of AI in education
We’re only raising awareness of this topic today with a goal to conduct a deeper dive in future editions.
In January 2023 – two months after OpenAI launched ChatGPT – a survey of 1,000 college students found nearly 90% of them had used the chatbot to help with homework assignments. In its first year, ChatGPT’s total monthly visits increased month-over-month until June, when schools let out for the summer. A similar pattern was seen in 2024, with traffic dropping for summer months and increasing from August through the academic year.
What should I know?
About a must-read article: The article, “Everyone is cheating their way through college – ChatGPT has unraveled the entire academic project” by New York Magazine is highly recommended if you’re interested in learning more about how AI is impacting the educational landscape – for both students and educators. There is unfortunately no gift link available, but I recommend signing up for the free subscription to access the piece (and then unsubscribing if you don’t want to keep it).
Here are a few teasers from the article:
It describes how generative AI chatbots – like ChatGPT, Google’s Gemini, and Microsoft’s Copilot – are used by students to take notes during class, make study guides and practice tests, summarize novels and textbooks, and brainstorm outline, draft, write, and edit their essays. STEM students are using AI to automate research and data analysis, as well as complete coding and debugging assignments. One student interviewed said, “College is just how well I can use ChatGPT at this point.”
One professor interviewed said after two years of grading AI-generated papers, “Massive numbers of students are going to emerge from college with degrees, and go into the workforce, who are essentially illiterate. Both in the literal sense and in the sense of being historically illiterate and having no knowledge of their own culture, much less anyone else’s.”
One student interviewed said, “I use AI a lot. Like, every day. And I do believe it could take away that critical thinking part. But it’s just – now that we rely on it, we can’t really imagine living without it.”
One student described how he manipulates AI detection systems so his professors can’t tell he uses AI. He said, “You put a prompt in ChatGPT, then put the output into another AI system, then put it into another AI system. At that point, if you put it into an AI-detection system, it decreases the percentage of AI used every time.”
Most professors interviewed said they believe stopping rampant AI abuse requires more than academic integrity policies and policing individual cases – it would mean overhauling the entire education system to prioritize students more holistically, since cheating correlates with mental health, well-being, sleep exhaustion, anxiety, depression, and belonging.
One computer-science lecturer tries to reason with his students about the impact of AI on their learning and future job prospects. At the beginning of class he says, “If you’re handing in AI work, you’re not actually anything different than a human assistant to an artificial intelligence engine, and that makes you very easily replaceable. Why would anyone keep you around?”
The bottom line: It’ll be years before we know what AI now – and as it continues to advance – is doing to students’ brains. Early research shows when students offload cognitive tasks to chatbots, their capacity for memory, problem solving, and creativity might suffer. Multiple studies in the last year also linked AI use with a deterioration of critical thinking skills, with the effect more pronounced in younger participants.
Good for the Soul
Let’s end the week with the first successful personalized gene editing therapy treatment. It involves a 9-month-old baby in Pennsylvania and might pave the way for additional medical advancement in the area moving forward.
What should I know?
The context: The baby – KJ – was born with a rare metabolic disease known as severe carbamoyl phosphate synthetase 1 (CPS1) deficiency. The condition causes toxic levels of ammonia to build up in a child’s body when they eat protein, making them prone to brain damage and possible death. CPS1 patients can be treated with drugs to reduce ammonia in their bodies and minimize the damage, but the treatment may only be partially effective. Patients can also get a liver transplant but not until they’re a year old. By that time, many patients have already suffered irreversible brain damage.
What happened: Treated at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP), KJ received three infusions containing billions of microscopic gene editors that zeroed in on a mutation in his liver and corrected the defect. While doctors must follow KJ longer to determine how well the treatment works over time, for now, the therapy appears to have at least partially reversed his condition, reducing the risk of brain damage and possible death.
About the treatment: Gene editing based on CRISPR (clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeat) is an advanced gene editing technology that enables precise changes to DNA inside living cells. This was the first known case of a personalized CRISPR-based medicine administered to a single patient. Previously, doctors used gene-editing treatments like CRISPR to treat genetic blood disorders like sickle cell disease; and are studying use cases for other diseases like cancer, inherited high cholesterol, and some forms of genetic blindness.
Some challenges: Doctors and many patients are frustrated because pharmaceutical companies don’t have a strong enough economic incentive to develop gene-editing treatments for extremely rare disorders, despite millions of babies born each year with conditions that could potentially be cured by gene editing. In response, scientists have tried to develop a template for groups of rare conditions that can be easily adapted. That way, each case doesn’t have to go through a long regulatory approval process, which could make it less expensive and more practical.
How KJ is doing now: The treatment was administered safely and he’s meeting milestones his family didn’t think he’d ever see. His care team is cautiously optimistic, with one of his doctors saying, “We have made real progress and right now the signs are promising, but we’re still in early days.”
So as we close out another week, let us continue to be in awe of the incredible things science and medical advancements can do for the human body, while also hoping pathways for advancement continue so children like KJ and countless others can receive the treatment and care they need.
Enjoy the weekend. Until Monday, let’s keep working to create clarity in the chaos.
Did you find this newsletter helpful? If so, please subscribe and share.