ARLINGTON, Texas – Something seemed somewhat off. DeMarvion Overshown blitzed and the running back caught him. But after the 2 collided, the back let go of the Dallas Cowboys linebacker.

And that's where Overshown modified the sport.

The second-year linebacker raised his right arm, grabbed the short pass intended for the running back and hurled it near the New York Giants' 25-yard line. Overshown then finished the run, keeping the ball within the air near the 5-yard line as he bumped into the top zone.

The play helped give the Cowboys a 13-7 lead early within the second quarter, they usually never looked back, defeating the Giants 27-20 on Thursday at AT&T Stadium.

“I really just thought, 'Just blow that play up,'” Overshown said. “It was a lightning bolt with my number on it. I just knew I had to make an impactful play or at least cause some confusion back there. When the running back let go of me, I thought, 'Some bullshit is going on.' And then the quarterback threw the ball and I thought, 'That's my play.'”

The quarterback was Drew Lock, who played in place of the injured Tommy DeVito. The running back was Devin Singletary. On the Fox game broadcast, Tom Brady pointed out that the Giants called the screen a “low-risk play” and were certainly not anticipating a potential turnover.

“Lock doesn’t even think about an interception,” Brady said. “You think I made an easy throw. But Overshown’s length ultimately makes for a game-changing play.”

The crowd at AT&T Stadium, which has understandably booed the house team several times this season, was about as loud because it has been all season when Overshown ended the run.

What a chunk from Overshown.

: #NYGvsDAL on FOX
: Keep streaming #NFLPlus pic.twitter.com/o9hC8Zduzw

– NFL (@NFL) November 28, 2024

“I was able to inject some nitrous and after that we were dancing in the end zone,” Overshown said. “As soon as I got the ball, I knew I was going to score. So I asked myself, “What dance can I do today?”

“It couldn't have come at a better time. Thanksgiving, the world is watching.”

The start of Thursday's game looked much like previous Cowboys home games this season. The offense was unimpressive and the defense struggled to stop the Giants' offense, which managed only one meaningless late touchdown in a 30-7 loss to the Tampa Bay Buccaneers on Sunday.

But after the overshown game there was a momentum that was missing at home. Dallas entered the sport having trailed significantly entering the fourth quarter in its last five home games, all of them decisive losses. It was a wierd situation for a team that had been on a 16-game home winning streak over the past two seasons. The Cowboys led 27-10 at the top of the third quarter.

“This is our home,” Overshown said. “This is our castle. Teams should be afraid to play against us when they come here. The series of defeats wasn't pretty for us either. It's nice that this place rocks like it's supposed to. Now we have to move on.”

The Cowboys have won two straight games and improved their record to 5-7. But they’re removed from realistically discussing the playoffs. Winning against the Washington Commanders and Giants is actually no reason to discount the beginning of this disappointing season. Even Jerry Jones, the team owner and general manager, who is often half full, didn't need to discuss playoff possibilities after the sport.

But Overshown's game is a reason to be optimistic concerning the future. It also makes you wonder what might have been last season when his rookie 12 months resulted in Dallas' second preseason game. Would a play just like the one he made Thursday have made a difference in the course of the season, or maybe even within the playoffs, if he hadn't suffered a torn ACL in his left knee?

“I told y’all from the beginning that he was going to be a guy,” Cowboys All-Pro pass rusher Micah Parsons said. “Before the injury, I said, 'This is going to be a Pro Bowl-type All-Pro player.' Well, he's not yet (No. 11), that's Agent 0. He's not trying to be like me; he is his very special specimen. He is a wildcat in the field. Man, I love playing next to him.”

Overshown delivered flash plays early in the season but has been more consistent over the course of this year. Playing alongside a veteran like Eric Kendricks helped. The two met on Thursday in another important defensive game.

On the opening series of the third quarter, Kendricks sacked Lock, depriving him of the ball in the process. Overshown recovered. Six plays later, Dallas scored, making the score 20-10.

“D-Mo is a great player,” Kendricks said. “He’s one of the best I’ve ever been with. His attitude is just pure. He loves the game. I love watching it. And it motivates me to be in my 10th year. It motivates me to see a sophomore like him, especially what he brings to the field.

“He’s getting better every game. He knows he has things he needs to work on. He takes it seriously. The sky is the limit. I'm excited to see what he has in store. Expect more big games from him this year.”

Cowboys coach Mike McCarthy had similar thoughts after the sport, saying Overshown's interception was one among the highlights of the season for Dallas. He also sees higher days ahead for last 12 months's third-round pick.

“I’m very grateful,” Overshown said. “Right before the game I said to myself, 'This time last year I was just waiting to show people what I said.' “When I get back on the sector, I'm going to indicate what God has really put into me: to go on the market, encourage me and play the best way I do. “All I can hope for is to be healthy on the field. “

Red Sox

COMMENT

The penultimate baseball Sunday of 2024 was quite a baseball Sunday.

In Los Angeles, Shohei Ohtani and Mookie Betts cracked consecutive home runs to go away the Rockies. The Dodgers are within the place they at all times appear to be – on the cusp of one other National League West title, with a pitching staff that doesn’t seem healthy enough to win what really matters.

The Tigers won again by starting six pitchers and tied the Royals for the second wild card within the American League. (Detroit is 29-14 for the reason that morning of August 5, putting it 11 games ahead of the Red Sox despite scoring exactly another run than Boston.) The Mariners couldn't sustain, blowing a five-run lead against Texas.

The Padres handed the White Sox their a hundred and twentieth loss, matching the worst losing streak in your and your grandparents' lifetime, the 1962 Mets. The Yankees won in Oakland, falling only one win wanting reclaiming the AL East.

Paul Skenes brought his ERA back below 2.00 for the Pirates in Cincinnati, which was partly helped by the primary MLB home run for Quinn Priest traded Nick Yorke. (He made his debut for the Pirates last Monday.)

Also noteworthy: This defeat was the tip for David Bell of the Reds, who fired on Sunday evening a full 14 months after the franchise gave him a three-year contract extension. That extension got here amid hopes of a dynamic line-up of young players within the hunt for a spot within the postseason.

That October surge fizzled out. There wasn't one this yr; injuries and the vagaries of young players developing into major leaguers saw to that. (As did among the game's consistently worst defenses.) Some franchises persist with the method. Some fire their Chaim Bloom. Some fire their manager.

You know, there are not any analogies to Boston. I'm sure the hope here is different.

This obviously had a big effect on the playoffs on Sunday. At least for the Twins, although the Red Sox could not less than play the role of spoiler. A doubleheader sweep, 8-1 and 9-3ousted Minnesota for the primary time since their Sausage days Beginning of May.

Triston Casas, who hit three home runs in his first 32 games since his final return from his rib injury, scored three in Game 1. (“Not even in a video game,” Casas told reporters when asked if he had ever done that before.) Romy Gonzalez, an exceptional pinch hitter this season who was in an 11-1 loss earlier within the day, hit a three-run homer in Game 2 to spark a nine-run rally.

On the primary day of fall, the old ballpark rocked to Mr. Brightside, just because it had done for many of the summer. Those in attendance were glad to be there. The home team won a crucial game.

Even if it was a crucial game for another person. Even in the event that they lost greater than they won there for the second yr in a row, the primary time that has happened in two consecutive seasons since 1965/66.

“We will continue playing,” coach Alex Cora told reporters on Sunday evening. “We will keep playing until the end.”

A spotlight, as Cora had some deep personal reflection which gave each himself and his team a transparent advantage.

Another win can be No. 79, a step up from the last two discouraging years. (The Blue Jays, 6-12 this month, appear to have not less than a last-place contract signed for 2024.) Three more wins would mean a .500 season and possibly a third-place finish ahead of the Rays.

Actually, it was just window dressing. Before Casas made the memory of what might have been within the Red Sox lineup louder, told MassLive that “I never felt like myself this year.”

Devers won't must undergo shoulder surgery this winter, and the remaining appears to be enough to get one in every of Boston's key offensive players back into shape. It can be a start, but only that.

“There is a brand [of play] that we are looking for. We will make sure that we play like that,” said Cora said The Athletic in March“I think these guys are talented. They are. Now we have to go out and prove it, and I think they will.”

This team has something. They've proven it. Tanner Houck was an All-Star and hit the 170-inning mark. Kutter Crawford has nearly 180 innings and commenced 32 times. Jarren Duran. Wilyer Abreu and so forth.

They also proved that they need something more to get out of the quagmire of comparable teams — just a few good breaks in competition, just a few bad breaks in failure — and that they'll once more be the type of guys preparing for baseball after the upcoming Finals Sunday.

The season ends here. Hope is best than among the alternatives presented in the sport at the tip of one other yr.

But this isn’t a promise and it’s high time to construct on this hope.

Gerald Ford knew that Richard Nixon could possibly be prosecuted for the crimes he committed as President. That was simply a fact when President Ford told his predecessor “a complete, free and absolute pardon” 50 years ago this week.

Former presidents didn’t enjoy comprehensive immunity from criminal prosecution until July 1, 2024, when six members of the Supreme Court created this privilege in Trump against the United States.

In 1974, when Nixon's resignation would likely result in prosecution for his role in lots of the Watergate crimes, Republicans within the White House and Congress were based on the Constitution. Article II, Section 4 established that former presidents were criminally liable but not immune. Even after impeachment, conviction, and removal from office, “the party convicted shall nevertheless be liable, and subject to indictment, trial, judgment, and punishment, according to law.”

Ford faced this fact in his Declaration of pardon: “Because of certain acts or omissions prior to his resignation from the office of President, Richard Nixon is in danger of being impeached and tried for crimes against the United States.”

Nixon had a right to a good trial, Ford said. The Constitution guarantees this to everyone. But Ford expressed doubts about whether America would find a way to present Nixon a good trial until months or perhaps years had passed. That was his reasoning for pardoning Nixon.

For most Americans, it wasn't adequate.

From anger to respect

According to a poll, only 26 percent of Americans supported the pardon, while 59 percent were against it.

Reporters interviewed outraged residents.

“What about the others in his administration who are on trial?” asked John Dawdy, a Vietnam veteran and law student. After all, Nixon’s co-conspirators, including a former Attorney General And former White House Chief of Staffreceived fair trials.

Joseph Hickel, a refugee from Czechoslovakia, saw “the danger of future crimes” by presidents if Nixon's crimes went unpunished. Ann Robinson of Cerritos, California, said: “This pardon makes the incumbent seem like a king.”

Opinions modified as Watergate faded into oblivion, and in 1986 A poll found that only 39% were against it for pardoning Nixon and 54% for it.

Senator Ted Kennedy, a Democrat from Massachusetts and critic of the 1974 pardon, later concluded that Ford was right and gave him a Profile within the Courage Award in 2001 for taking an unpopular but conscientious stance.

During the Trump administration, when one other president was under impeachment and prosecution, public opinion concerning the Nixon pardon modified again. Americans were completely polarized: 38% in favor, 38% against.

In light of the Trump experience, some historians looked back and saw Nixon’s pardon in a brand new light: as harmful precedent Establishment of the President impunity.

No one is above the law

This 12 months, Americans must grapple with a brand new consequence of pardons. Because Ford's decision robbed the country of a precedent for prosecuting a former president, the Supreme Court's six Republican-appointed justices were capable of fill that void with what I call a radical revision the structure.

The majority of the court Ruling that presidents enjoy immunity from prosecution for his or her “official acts” would have forgiven most of Nixon’s Watergate crimes. Nixon used the CIA to obstruct the FBI's Watergate investigation; created a illegal, unconstitutional secret police unit; sicced the IRS on political opponents; commuted the sentence of former Teamster President Jimmy Hoffa of jury tampering and pension fund fraud in exchange for union support; and blackmailed campaign donors in return for presidency favors.

Under Trump against the United States, Nixon needn’t have frightened a couple of pardon. He could have declared all these crimes to be “official acts” that he had committed throughout the scope of his powers as president.

Ironically, the conservative justices of the Supreme Court, who consider themselves “originalists” and pride themselves on adhering to the literal wording of the Constitution and the unique intent of its framers, have provided an ideal example of the risks of allowing judges to rewrite the Constitution to suit their particular preferences.

The Watergate break-in occurred the identical 12 months that Joe Biden has entered national politics as a Democratic U.S. Senate candidate from Delaware. Newly elected Senator Biden criticized the pardon a day after Ford issued it, saying: “It puts a man above the law.”

Biden couldn’t have known that fifty years later, in his final 12 months in national politics, the Supreme Court would authorize presidents to commit Nixon-style crimes – or worse – throughout the scope of their official authority and without fear of punishment.

As a part of his legacy, Biden has proposed Constitutional amendment to repair the damage done by Trump v. United States. Its name reflects the principle Biden invoked 50 years ago. It is named the “No One Is Above the Law Amendment.” It would strip presidents of immunity from prosecution for crimes committed as “official acts.” As a soon-to-be former president, Biden could have so much to lose by passing his own amendment.

This 12 months’s Republican candidate has often expressed Eagerness to prosecute Biden despite an absence of evidence of a criminal offense. In the case of Trump v. United States, Biden enjoys extensive immunity. According to the amendment “No one is above the law,” he would lose this privilege.

The amendment shouldn’t be only an example of Biden putting the country before himself, but in addition an indication of courage.

Ashley and Kyle were newly married in early 2022 and were excited to welcome their first child. However, Ashley suffered from bleeding from the start of her pregnancy and in July, at seven weeks, she suffered a miscarriage.

The couple's grief got here weeks after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down federal abortion rights in Wisconsin, their home state, after reinstating an 1849 law that allowed abortions only when the pregnant woman was near death.

Abortion insurance is a mixed bag within the United States. Patients often don't know if and when a procedure or abortion pill might be covered, and the proliferation of abortion bans has added to the confusion. Ashley says she's caught up within the tangle of uncertainties.

Ashley's life was not at risk throughout the miscarriage, however the state's abortion ban meant that even during a miscarriage, doctors in Wisconsin couldn’t perform a D&E (dilation and evacuation) until the embryo died. She went backwards and forwards from hospital to hospital, bleeding and on sick leave, until doctors could confirm the pregnancy had ended. Only then did doctors remove the pregnancy tissue.

“My first pregnancy was the first time I realized that something like this could affect me,” said Ashley, who asked to be identified only by her middle name and her husband by his first name. She works in a government agency with conservative colleagues and fears retaliation if she talks about her abortion care.

A 12 months later – the 1849 abortion ban was still in force in Wisconsin – Ashley was pregnant again.

“Everything was perfect. I started feeling kicks and movements,” she said. “It was the day I turned 20 weeks, a Monday. I went to work and then picked Kyle up from work. When I got up from the driver's seat, there was fluid on the seat.”

The amniotic sac had ruptured, a condition called previable PPROM. The couple headed straight to obstetric triage at UnityPoint Health-Meriter Hospital, the most important maternity hospital in Wisconsin. The fetus was deemed too underdeveloped to survive, and the ruptured membranes posed a serious risk of infection.

Gynecologists from across the state of Wisconsin had decided that “in cases of pre-existing PPROM, every patient should be offered an abortion because there is a significant risk of ascending infection and possible sepsis and death,” said Eliza Bennett, the gynecologist who treated Ashley.

Ashley needed an abortion to avoid wasting her life.

The couple called his parents; Ashley's mother got here to the hospital to comfort her. Because of Wisconsin's 1849 abortion ban, Bennett, an associate clinical professor on the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine, needed two other doctors to verify that Ashley was facing death.

But despite a wealth of medical documentation, Ashley's medical insurance, the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, didn’t cover the fee of the abortion. Months later, Ashley logged into her medical billing portal and was surprised to search out that while the insurance had paid for her three-day hospital stay, it had not paid for the abortion.

“Every time I called the insurance company about my bill, I cried on the phone because it was so frustrating having to explain the situation and why I think it should be covered,” she said. “I feel like it's my fault and I should be ashamed of it,” Ashley said.

Eventually, Ashley spoke to a lady within the hospital's billing department, who passed on the insurance company's statement to her.

“She told me,” Ashley said, “quote: 'FEP Blue does not cover abortion costs. Period. It doesn't matter what it is. We do not cover abortion costs.'”

The University of Wisconsin Health, which manages billing for the UnityPoint Health-Meriter hospital, confirmed this exchange.

The Federal Employees Health Benefits Program has contracts with FEP Blueor the BlueCross BlueShield Federal Employee Program to supply medical insurance plans for federal employees. In response to an interview request, FEP Blue emailed an announcement saying it was “committed to complying with federal law that prohibits federal employee health insurance plans from covering procedures, services, drugs and supplies related to abortion, except when the life of the mother would be in danger if the fetus were carried to term, or when the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest.”

These restrictions, generally known as the Hyde Amendment, have been passed by Congress yearly since 1976 and forestall abortion services from receiving federal funding.

In Ashley's case, doctors said her life was at risk and her bill must have been paid immediately, said Alina Salganicoff, director of ladies's health policy at KFF, a nonprofit health information organization that features KFF Health News.

What tripped up Ashley's bill was the word “abortion” and a billing code that’s kryptonite to insurance, Salganicoff says.

“Right now we're in a situation where there's really a heightened sensitivity about what is a life-threatening emergency and when it's a life-threatening emergency,” Salganicoff said. The same chilling effect that keeps doctors and hospitals from offering legal abortion care could also affect insurance coverage, she said.

In Wisconsin, Bennett said, underprovision of abortion services is widespread.

“Many of the patients I see who have a pregnancy complication or, more commonly, a severe fetal abnormality, are uninsured,” Bennett said.

Recently, the $1,700 bill disappeared from Ashley's online billing portal. The hospital confirmed that the insurer paid the claim eight months later after several appeals. When contacted again on August 7, FEP Blue responded that it will not “comment on the specifics of individual members' medical care.”

Ashley said battling together with her insurance company and experiencing the impact of abortion restrictions on her health care — just like other women across the country — gave her courage.

“I'm here with all these people now,” she said. “I feel much more connected to them, which wasn't the case before.”

Ashley is pregnant again, and he or she and her husband are hoping that this time her insurance will cover the medical care her doctor deems crucial.

Still thousands and thousands of Americans shouldn’t have access to high-speed web. Christopher AliProfessor of Telecommunications at Penn State University discusses who doesn't have access to broadband and the way the federal government – with a commitment of $65 billion – is attempting to get more people online.

The Conversation has collaborated with SciLine to bring you highlights from the discussion, edited for brevity and clarity.

What is Broadband Internet?

Christopher Ali: Broadband Internet, often just called broadband, is the technical term for it High speed web connection.

The Federal Communications Commissionwhich is answerable for establishing an official definition of broadband within the country, defines broadband as an always-available Internet connection from 100 megabits per second download and 20 megabits per second upload.

But what high-speed web essentially means for Americans is that now we have the connectivity we want for our digital lives. Can we stream Netflix? Can we go on Zoom? Can we file our taxes? Can we do our homework? Can we do our job? Can we play?

What are you able to tell us in regards to the differences in broadband access?

Christopher Ali: What's really frustrating is that despite the thousands and thousands – even tens of thousands and thousands – of dollars being spent on broadband mapping, we still aren't sure who’s underserved across the country.

This is what the FCC is currently reporting 7.2 million people haven’t any access, however the commission numbers have historically been suspect. As a result, there are undoubtedly many more people who find themselves neglected and undercounted. In fact, the FCC continues to receive challenges to its broadband map.

For example, when the FCC reported in 2021 that about 14 million people lacked web access, an independent review found this 42 million people had no access. That's a giant discrepancy.

However, one thing is definite: broadband deserts are mostly present in rural, distant and indigenous areas.

It's also clear that cost is a component of the issue. Here within the US, we pay enormous amounts of cash – the best monthly amount for web access almost every other country within the developed world.

A program called Affordable connectivity program subsidizes broadband for low-income families, and 50 million families across the country are eligible for it.

What are the advantages of broadband access?

Christopher Ali: Broadband access can Help with economic development. It generally is a game-changer, particularly in the sector of telehealth for rural, distant and indigenous communities, where there is usually a shortage of doctors and nurses. With telemedicine, you possibly can suddenly keep in touch with a healthcare skilled.

It helps with education. Some studies have found that access to broadband can impact grades and SAT scoresAlthough There is disagreement about this. But the opportunities for college kids with a broadband connection are undeniable – for instance, applying online for study and student grants.

It contributes to civic engagement, which allows voters to contact local officials online. It impacts public safetyeach when it comes to our own safety as members of the general public, but additionally in providing first responders with the power to speak with their responders online.

Broadband also sometimes helps with cultural enrichment, and we I see this often with indigenous communitiesthat may stream cultural and traditional events.

And it improves the standard of life. Everyone enjoys FaceTime with family and friends and shopping online. These things were special essential through the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment Program, enacted as a part of the 2023 Infrastructure Act, provides $42 billion in federal funding to expand broadband infrastructure. How can communities maximize their impact?

Christopher Ali: The money from the BEAD program is run by the states and never by the federal government. Each state receives a portion of the cash depending on the variety of people who find themselves unconnected. Texas, with greater than 1 million unserved or underserved locations, will get $3.3 billion, essentially the most of any state. Pennsylvania will receive about $1.2 billion.

Which federal states have done particularly good work in expanding broadband access?

Christopher Ali: Minnesota did it some amazing work within the last decade. As I describe in my book: “Farm Fresh Broadband: The Politics of Rural Connectivity“Minnesota was certainly one of the primary states to create a broadband funding program – this Border-to-Border Program – and has set himself really ambitious goals. In 2016, for instance, the state set itself the goal of Comprehensive coverage with 100 Mbit/s/20 Mbit/s by 2026.

Another state is Virginia that basically had a wake-up call through the pandemic, leveraging much of the federal money that was flowing through the pipes Strengthening counties, cooperatives and native ISPs.

Vermont has something called “ Communications Union Districts. They have enabled communities to band together to make use of public funds to construct broadband networks.

Public networks will likely be game-changers because they provide communities the chance to attach and shape their very own digital future – either with municipally funded networks, with cooperatives or with some kind of public-private partnership.

Watch them full interview to listen to more.

SciLine is a free service of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, a nonprofit organization that helps journalists incorporate science and experts into their news stories.