Slipping a letter pleading for help into the path of someone who can help sounds like a tense moment from a suspenseful movie.
According to one woman, she lived that experience when she worked as a housekeeper for Kylie Jenner.
Unfortunately, it did not lead to her rescue. She says that her plight grew worse.
And she’s the second housekeeper to sue the makeup mogul in the space of a week.
Kylie Jenner attends the 2026 Vanity Fair Oscar Party Hosted By Mark Guiducci at Los Angeles County Museum of Art on March 15, 2026. (Photo Credit: Jamie McCarthy/WireImage)
PHOTO ONE
A second housekeeper has filed a lawsuit against the makeup mogul, alleging that she suffered cruel and unusual treatment under her employ.
Juana Delgado Soto is suing Kylie, staff supervisor Itzel Sibrian, Tri Star Services, and La Maison Family Services.
Her lawsuit includes allegations of racial discrimination, harassment, failure to pay wages, failure to prevent or remedy harassment and discrimination.
According to court filings obtained by The Los Angeles Times, Soto began working for Kylie in May of 2019.
From the start, it sounds like a miserable ordeal.
Soto alleges that, for the first few years of the job, her supervisor withheld meal breaks and rest breaks from her.
In 2023, when Sibrian became her direct supervisor, she alleges that the situation escalated.
In 2024, she filed a complaint with HR — after an incident in which Sibrian allegedly mocked and humiliated her for her accent, her race, and her immigration status.
During the incident, Sibrian allegedly called her stupid and ridiculed her accent.
Because of the complaint, Sibrian was reportedly removed — but only temporarily. After Sibrian’s reinstatement, an alleged campaign of retaliation began.
In alleged retaliation for the HR report, Soto says, Sibrian reduced her hourly wage, assigned unreasonable workloads, and changed her schedule.
Her filing cites one incident in which she was preparing to leave work when Sibrian insisted that she stay late or risk losing her job. She ended up missing her own surprise party.
“No one cares about your birthday,” Sibrian allegedly told her. “Kylie is having dinner.”
In late 2024, new housekeepers assumed leadership roles. Soto alleges that she was denied adequate time off after the sudden death of her brother.
Even while working amidst her grief, she claims that staff members “whispered” that she was “lying about her brother’s death and kept forcing her to pick up trash they purposely threw on the ground.”
According to the court filing, Soto slipped a letter to Kylie onto the makeup mogul’s massage table just before her massage.
I need to express just how terribly I am mentally abused” she reportedly wrote, detailing the alleged wrongdoings.
“I really apologize for letting you know about all these situations,” Soto says that she expressed. “I know you wouldn’t allow this to happen, if you were aware of it.”
Her rescue did not come. Instead, the next day, Soto was allegedly informed that she should never attempt to contact Kylie again — threatened with termination, and told to avoid even catching a glimpse of her employer again.
Whether Kylie actually received the letter is unknown. But Soto is alleging labor law and employment law violations, and she is seeking an unspecified amount of punitive and compensatory damages.
Gov. Mike Dunleavy discusses proposed education legislation at a news conference on Jan. 31, 2025. (Photo by Corinne Smith/Alaska Beacon)
Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy vetoed a bipartisan bill aimed at streamlining the state’s elections process on Thursday, just seven months ahead of high-stakes state and federal elections in November.
Leaders with the multipartisan House Majority caucus said there will be a joint legislative veto override vote within the next few days.
In a prepared statement announcing the veto, Dunleavy said while there are many provisions in the bills he supports, the bill contained “legal and operational challenges and could jeopardize the election process.” He told lawmakers his two main issues with the bill are related to when it would go into effect and voters’ signature verification.
“The Division of Elections warns such changes would be extremely difficult if not impossible, to implement securely and reliably in advance of the 2026 elections,” he wrote in a transmittal letter to the Legislature. He said the Division needs sufficient time to make necessary changes.
The Alaska House passed the bill in March along caucus lines, following passage by the Senate last year. It contained a variety of changes to the state’s elections system, which supporters say is years overdue and needed to update and strengthen the elections process and expand voter access.
The governor said that the bill would impose “significant operational hurdles” for the Alaska Division of Elections in administering state and federal elections in November.
Sen. Bill Wielechowski, D-Anchorage, who carried the legislation in the Senate, condemned the decision in a written statement following the announcement.
“Governor Dunleavy has said, by his veto, that Alaska’s elections are secure enough,” Wielechowski said. “Unfortunately, they are not, and even his supporters confirm that. Our voter rolls stood at 114% of the voting-age population in 2022. Ballots are being rejected over technical errors. Tampering with a voting machine is not explicitly a crime under current law. This bill addressed every one of those concerns. The Governor had every reason to sign it.”
The bill would have authorized checks to update Alaska’s voter rolls. Officials have said managing an updated voter registration list is a continuous challenge with Alaska’s transitional environment and many residents moving in and out of state, resulting in the number of registered voters currently outnumbering actual eligible voters in state.
The bill would also have enacted a new ballot tracking system, provided paid postage for all absentee mail-in ballots, strengthened security protocols, and implemented provisions for faster elections results, among others.
The Legislature has five days to convene in a joint session to consider an override of Dunleavy’s veto. A majority of 40 votes of the Legislature’s 60 members are needed for an override.
“There will be a veto override vote. I don’t think it will come as a surprise to the governor,” said House Speaker Rep. Bryce Edgmon, I-Dillingham, in a call Thursday evening.
On Thursday afternoon, members of the House Majority caucus slammed the decision Thursday following the announcement, saying in a joint statement the veto is “a significant setback for election integrity and a direct blow to voting access for Alaskans living in rural and off-road communities.”
Edgmon called the decision “deeply disappointing.”
“This was a bipartisan effort to address the real challenges of voting in a state as vast, rural and remote as Alaska. We worked in good faith to improve access, strengthen transparency, and maintain the integrity of our elections,” Edgmon said. “Alaskans deserve a system that reflects our unique geography, not one that ignores it. This veto does exactly that.”
Rep. Nellie Unangiq Jimmie, D-Toksook Bay, said that rural Alaska “is the hardest place in the state” to vote.
“Everyone who has looked at the data knows that. We passed a bill to clean up our rolls and remove barriers. It will not become law today,” she said. “My people have been patient with systems that were not built for us, distances that were not considered, delays inevitable in rural areas beyond our control. So today, the problem doesn’t go away. Neither do we.”
Dunleavy also took issue with provisions to establish a ballot tracking system and to allow voters to fix mistakes on their ballot — a process called ballot curing — by requiring the division to contact the voter by phone or email within 24 hours. Under the bill, voters would have been allowed to return a form to correct the ballot with a copy of identification by email or by mail within 10 days of the election for their ballot to be counted.
“The ballot-tracking and ballot-curing provisions are especially problematic,” Dunleavy wrote. “The ballot-curing provisions create tension with Alaska’s witness requirement by allowing a voter to cure a missing witness signature after the ballot has already been returned, even though Alaska’s absentee-ballot framework requires the voters certificate to be signed in the presence of a qualified attesting official or witness.”
The governor sent a letter following a meeting with presiding officers of the Legislature on Thursday with technical changes he’d like to see in legislation for fixing ballots, evaluating and verifying signatures.
Dunleavy said the potential Alaska gas line is his main priority, but he’s open to continuing negotiations on the elections bill this session.
“While the Alaska gas line bill is the most important bill this session, I am open to a conversation with lawmakers on how we can address the legal and operational issues this session.”
Other provisions in the now vetoed bill would have included:
Require all absentee ballots to be received within 10 days of Election Day;
Establish a new rural community liaison position within the Division of Elections to support rural districts, including recruitment and training of poll workers;
Require the Permanent Fund Dividend Division to share data to improve the accuracy of the voter rolls’
Require the state to develop a cybersecurity program, and notify the public if there is a data breach;
Require the division to publish results for all rankings in the precinct results.
Require presidential ballots to include a line for write-in votes for president and vice president
Updates crimes of unlawful interference with an election, ballot tampering and election official misconduct
Dunleavy said he applauded the Legislature’s efforts, but said the state needs more time to make changes to the state’s elections system.
“I appreciate the efforts made to improve Alaska’s elections. Going forward, I encourage those who wish to continue this work to use this bill as a starting point; ensure that any proposed changes comply with state and federal law; and pass any election legislation on a timeline that allows the Division of Elections to implement the necessary systems properly,” he said.
Edgmon said that the issues Dunleavy raised were “highly subjective” and lawmakers had heard from the division and the lieutenant governor, who is charged with overseeing state elections, that the timeline for implementing the bill was doable.
Edgmon said it’s unclear if there are the votes to override.
“You never know until the votes are tallied. You just never know,” he said. “And I know there will be plenty of votes. Will there be enough? I’m not going to hazard a guess at this point, because I’ve been proven wrong before.”
It’s heartwarming to hear how a simple hug and high-fives turned competition into a lasting friendship in country music. Continue reading…The Boot – Country Music News, Music Videos and Songs
It’s heartwarming to hear how a simple hug and high-fives turned competition into a lasting friendship in country music. Continue reading…Country Music News – Taste of Country
A TV displays U.S. President Donald Trump’s prime-time address on the war in Iran inside a Cheesecake Factory on April 1, 2026, in Washington, D.C. Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images
May 1, 2026, marks the 60th day of Operation Epic Fury in Iran – a symbolically significant date designating when a president who has mounted unilateral military operations must receive Congressional approval or wind it down.
However, the complex history of the War Powers Resolution clock demonstrates it is a toothless milestone.
The Trump administration signaled on April 30, 2026, that it would ignore that deadline, set by the War Powers Resolution. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee that “we are in a cease-fire right now, which my understanding is that the 60-day clock pauses or stops in a cease-fire. That’s our understanding, so you know.”
Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia, a Democrat, responded that the 60-day threshold poses a “legal question” and “constitutional concerns.”
This is not the first time presidents and members of Congress have sparred on the meaning of the War Powers Resolution. What happens next will play out through regular politics, because the conflict is not a matter of simple legal interpretation.
A crucial section of the resolution reasserts legislators’ role, and makes clear that the constitutional power of the president to make war is subject to, or exercised with, the following conditions: a Congressional declaration of war; specific statutory authorization; or a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions or its armed forces.
For new military campaigns that do not meet these criteria, the resolution included a 60-day clock that begins when a president reports the action to congressional leadership within 48 hours of the action beginning.
After 60 to 90 days, the resolution originally said this type of unilateral military action would be terminated automatically unless both chambers of Congress approved some form of legislative authorization.
Congress could also choose to terminate an unauthorized military operation any time before the 60 days with a concurrent resolution, which doesn’t require a president’s signature – essentially, a “legislative veto.”
And to make sure the president couldn’t stretch the definition of congressional approval, the resolution said neither existing treaties nor new budget appropriations could substitute for legislative authorization of a military action.
Since 1973, actions by all three branches across a variety of political and policy landscapes have undermined its intents and procedures.
Now, if members want to stop a presidential military campaign already in progress, they must act affirmatively and pass a disapproval resolution, which a president could veto like any other bill. Congress has sent only one such disapproval – to President Donald Trump in his first term – which he vetoed. Congress did not have the two-thirds required in the Constitution to override.
Both chambers of Congress now have to vote twice, once to disapprove a military action and then again to overcome a likely veto, to stop something it never approved in the first place.
House Majority Leader Mike Johnson explains on March 4, 2026, why his party rejects a Democratic-led measure to assert Congress’ war powers and stop the Iran military action.
The 60-day mark for the current Iran operation has therefore loomed as more of a politically charged symbol of this longstanding imbalance on war powers than a real deadline for action by either branch.
Although most presidents from Richard Nixon onward have claimed that the War Powers Resolution is an unconstitutional check on their institutional powers, they usually filed the required reports on new military actions 48 hours after they began.
While the current Iran conflict is different in many ways, presidential unilateralism, inconclusive chamber actions and even member lawsuits all echo controversies over U.S. military action in Kosovo in 1999 and Libya in 2011.
After detailing the rationale for military action, Trump added “Although the United States desires a quick and enduring peace, it is not possible at this time to know the full scope and duration of military operations that may be necessary.”
He concluded the memo with his interpretation of constitutional power to act unilaterally.
“I directed this military action consistent with my
responsibility to protect Americans and United States interests both at home and abroad and in furtherance of United States national security and foreign policy interests,” the president wrote. He acted, he said, “pursuant to my constitutional authority as Commander in Chief and Chief Executive to conduct United States foreign relations.” He said he made the report “consistent with the War Powers Resolution. I appreciate the support of the Congress in these actions.”
Similarly, on March 26, 1999, President Bill Clinton sent a War Powers Resolution letter explaining his decision two days earlier to take part in a NATO-led operation against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, known as FRY.
Clinton wrote to Congress using mostly the same words and phrases Trump did in his 2026 letter. Clinton also said that he took the action “in response to the FRY government’s continued campaign of violence and repression against the ethnic Albanian population of Kosovo.”
President Bill Clinton after his television address to the nation on the NATO bombing of Serbian forces in Kosovo, March 24, 1999. Pool/Getty Images
Clinton explained his authority in virtually the same language as Trump and, like Trump, said it was hard to predict how long the operations would continue.
The House and Senate repeatedly failed to either approve or disapprove of Clinton’s actions through a series of votes across March and April 1999. But lawmakers did send him supplemental appropriations for the operations in May.
NATO suspended the operation after 78 days. Almost a year later, a federal appellate court upheld a district court’s decision rejecting a lawsuit led by Rep. Tom Campbell, a California Republican, alleging Clinton violated the War Powers Resolution. Rather than deciding on the merits, the decision rejected the lawmakers’ claims of injury as not reviewable by the court.
Obama did it, too
In a very different context, a similar rhythm played out during President Barack Obama’s presidency.
Within the current dynamics of the War Powers Resolution, until Congress musters bipartisan supermajorities to connect its own institutional ambition with constitutional power, presidents from either party will decide alone if, and when, the country goes to war. Instead of Congress, presidents may heed public opinion and economic indicators, especially in election years.
Jasmine Farrier is affiliated with the American Political Science Association.
That’s the good news. The bad news is that Josh is still allowed to make contact with the outside world.
Upon his arrest, Josh Duggar was charged with receiving and possessing CSAM. (Photo Credit: Washington County Jail)
And a newly revealed prison email from Josh to wife Anna Duggar tells us more about their marriage than we ever wanted to know.
“Okay so wow! WOWOWOW! I just got your 4 photo collage,” he wrote Anna in June 2022 (via Radar Online), adding:
“THE PICS ARE SUPER HOT AND YOU LOOK STUNNINGLY GORGEOUS. YOU ARE SOOOO CUTE! THANK YOU FOR SENDING! YOU ARE SOOOO PRECIOUS!”
“It’s so much fun to get those — wow you are sexy!” Josh ranted on.
“Thank you for sharing with me, it means a lot to hear your heart! Thank you for the super sexy photos too cutie! xoxo.”
Already in custody, Josh Duggar continued to exude a smug presence when posing for mugshots. (Photo Credit: Washington County Detention Center)
You get the idea. It seems that Anna also offered some updates on her life in her latest email, but Josh was primarily fixated on her pics.
He also implored her to figure out how to continue sending pics once he arrives at his new home with “the feds,” aka Seagoville Federal Correctional Facility in Texas.
In other newly revealed emails, Josh lashed out at his parents and accused them of hypocrisy.
“You continue to talk about how you forgive others and try not to be bitter, yet you constantly are putting me down,” Josh wrote.
“Not just this situation, I’m talking years of it. Do you think it’s helping me? Does it help you? Does it help the ‘spirit’ of our family?
“When I try to bring this up, or ANY criticism of Pops and Mom, they immediately point to my bad choices in life and then defend themselves. REALLY? You accuse Anna of doing this most of the time and you call her the ‘most bitter person you know’ etc.”
On Reddit, many commenters noted that Anna, who is now raising seven kids on her own, has every right to be bitter.
If you’ve ever picked up a bag or clamshell of grapes, you’ve likely noticed the tiny holes scattered across the packaging. So, what’s the deal with those?
A recent video — alongside other recent glimpses at the actress — has people mixing body-shaming, concern trolling, and old-fashioned worry.
Other fans are rushing to her defense, saying that she’s doing just fine.
Olivia Wilde attends the 12th Breakthrough Prize Ceremony at Barker Hangar on April 18, 2026. (Photo Credit: Emma McIntyre/Getty Images)
Is she okay?
In late April, Wilde stopped to chat with SFGate for quick red carpet interview.
The 42-year-old actor and director was there for the San Fransisco International Film Festival.
Specifically, she was promoting The Invite, her newest film.
Unfortunately, much of the focus on social media had nothing to do with her creative works.
Instead, the attention fell upon her appearance.
To say that she looked “slimmer than usual” would arguably be to miss the point of much of the discussion.
Wilde has always been a strikingly beautiful actress.
While that is still the case, her facial features appear to be both exaggerated and, some argue, sunken.
Her famously prominent cheekbones stand out even more than usual, which is saying a lot.
Is she sick? Is this the result of some sort of ill-advised cosmetic change? Or are people being concern-trolls just to give a famous woman a hard time?
When a flurry of commenters across social media criticized or expressed worry about Wilde’s appearance, some took that as an insult.
A number of fans have expressed the belief that lighting, angles, and unflattering lighting were at play.
(That actually seems likely.)
Others have pointed out that Wilde’s other recent appearances — including photos that she herself has shared to social media — display similar features.
Ultimately, we do not know if this is natural aging, illness, or something else.
We do know that online discourse is almost never careful.
Yes, every now and then, a celebrity will admit that social media feedback got them to see a dermatologist about an urgent issue, or helped them to kick a bad habit.
The vast majority of the time, it looks and sounds like body-shaming — no matter the intention. The comments do not help, and could even cause someone to double down.
As a society, we need to feel less entitled to “worry” about someone’s looks. If Wilde is getting this kind of chatter, what chances to the rest of us have?
A lawsuit against Greg Biffle’s estate is one of two filed between families on board the fatal flight. Continue reading…The Boot – Country Music News, Music Videos and Songs
A lawsuit against Greg Biffle’s estate is one of two filed between families on board the fatal flight. Continue reading…Country Music News – Taste of Country
