WASHINGTON — The body of re­tired Justice John Paul Stevens, who died last week at 99, re­turned Mon­day to the Great Hall of the Supreme Court, where he served for 35 terms.

Pres­i­dent Don­ald Trump, first lady Mela­nia Trump, and a long line of for­mer clerks and mem­bers of the pub­lic paid their re­spects to the man Justice Elena Kagan called a hero.

“He was a bril­liant man with ex­tra­or­di­nary le­gal gifts and tal­ents, which he com­bined with a deep de­vo­tion to the rule of law and a deep com­mit­ment to equal justice,” Justice Kagan said dur­ing a brief and som­ber cer­e­mony.

Justice Kagan, who was nom­i­nated by Pres­i­dent Barack Obama to re­place Justice Stevens af­ter his 2010 re­tire­ment, added: “Maybe more per­son­ally and more di­rectly than any­one, I’ve thought about the enor­mity of Justice Stevens’ shoes and the im­pos­si­bil­ity of fill­ing them.”

Justice Stevens, a leader of the court’s lib­eral wing, died July 16 af­ter hav­ing a stroke the day be­fore at his home in Flor­ida. He will be bur­ied Tues­day at Arling­ton Na­tional Ceme­tery.

No charges for Ron­aldo

Cris­tiano Ron­aldo won’t face crim­i­nal charges af­ter a woman ac­cused the soc­cer star of rap­ing her in his suite at a Las Vegas re­sort more than 10 years ago, a top pros­e­cu­tor said Mon­day.

A new in­ves­ti­ga­tion by Las Vegas po­lice failed to show that Kath­ryn May­orga’s claim could be proven at trial be­yond a rea­son­able doubt, Clark County Dis­trict At­tor­ney Steve Wolf­son said.

The de­ci­sion rep­re­sented a vic­tory on one of two le­gal tracks tied to the 2009 al­le­ga­tion against one of the most recog­niz­able and highly paid play­ers in sports.

In a law­suit still pend­ing in fed­eral court, Ms. May­orga al­leges that she was pres­sured to sign an agree­ment to keep quiet in ex­change for $375,000. Her law­yers want to void the deal and col­lect at least $200,000 more from Mr. Ron­aldo.

Mr. Ron­aldo’s at­tor­neys have ac­knowl­edged that the soc­cer star and Ms. May­orga had con­sen­sual sex in June 2009 but deny it was rape.

Davis will run for House

Wendy Davis, a for­mer Demo­cratic nom­i­nee for gov­er­nor of Texas whose mar­a­thon fil­i­bus­ter as a state sen­a­tor turned her into an over­night po­lit­i­cal star, said Mon­day that she would run for a House seat held by a fresh­man Re­pub­li­can.

Her bid to chal­lenge the in­cum­bent, Chip Roy, comes about six years af­ter she stood and talked for more than 11 hours to tem­po­rar­ily halt pas­sage of an anti-abor­tion bill.

Ms. Davis’ ef­fort vaulted her onto the na­tional po­lit­i­cal scene, which led her to run for gov­er­nor in 2014.

But the bill she fil­i­bus­tered even­tu­ally passed, and she lost the 2014 elec­tion to Greg Ab­bott by more than 20 per­cent­age points.

Texas Dem­o­crats have slowly made gains since, pick­ing up two House seats in the 2018 mid­terms as Beto O’Rourke came within 3 per­cent­age points of best­ing Sen. Ted Cruz.

“I’m run­ning for Con­gress be­cause peo­ple’s voices are still be­ing si­lenced,” Ms. Davis said in a video she posted on Twit­ter.

Of­fi­cers fired over post

Two Lou­i­si­ana po­lice of­fi­cers were fired Mon­day for a Face­book post that sug­gested Rep. Al­ex­an­dria Oca­sio-Cortez, D-N.Y., should be shot.

It was not clear from the now-de­leted post whether for­mer Gretna, La., po­lice of­fi­cer Char­lie Ris­poli knew he was shar­ing a story from a self-de­scribed sat­ire web­site. In re­sponse to the fake head­line, Mr. Ris­poli wrote: “This vile id­iot needs a round........and I don’t mean the kind she used to serve,” re­fer­ring to a gun­shot and the law­maker’s ear­lier ca­reer as a bar­tender.

Under the new pol­icy, of­fi­cials from Im­mi­gra­tion and Cus­toms En­force­ment and Cus­toms and Border Pro­tec­tion will be em­pow­ered to use the fast-track pro­ce­dures any­where in the U.S. and for any­one who can­not show “to the sat­is­fac­tion of an im­mi­gra­tion of­fi­cer, that they have been phys­i­cally pres­ent in the United States con­tin­u­ously for the two-year pe­riod im­me­di­ately pre­ced­ing” ar­rest, re­gard­less of how they ar­rived, ac­cord­ing to the no­tice pub­lished Mon­day.

The Amer­i­can Civil Lib­er­ties Union and the Amer­i­can Im­mi­gra­tion Coun­cil said they would sue to block the pol­icy.

The new pol­icy is the sec­ond ma­jor ef­fort by the ad­min­is­tra­tion this month to ag­gres­sively ex­pand its power to try to keep mi­grants out of the U.S. or re­move them if they en­ter. Last week,

the ad­min­is­tra­tion moved to curb asy­lum in the U.S. That rule ef­fec­tively elim­i­nated al­most all asy­lum claims at the south­ern bor­der by ren­der­ing in­el­i­gi­ble any asy­lum-seeker who had tran­s­ited at least one other coun­try prior to ar­riv­ing.

The move to ex­pand ex­pe­dited re­mov­als comes as

back­logs in im­mi­gra­tion courts con­tinue to grow. Nearly 950,000 cases are cur­rently pend­ing in U.S. im­mi­gra­tion courts, with an av­er­age wait time of 713 days, ac­cord­ing to Syr­a­cuse Univer­sity’s Trans­ac­tional Records Ac­cess Clear­ing­house.

Pres­i­dent Don­ald Trump and his anti-im­mi­gra­tion

MINNEAPOLIS — Former Demo­cratic Sen. Al Fran­ken of Min­ne­sota told The New Yorker mag­a­zine in a story pub­lished Mon­day that he “ab­so­lutely” re­grets re­sign­ing from the Senate af­ter sev­eral women ac­cused him of un­wanted kiss­ing or touch­ing.

In the same ar­ti­cle writ­ten by Jane Mayer, seven cur­rent or for­mer sen­a­tors say they re­gret call­ing for Mr. Fran­ken’s res­ig­na­tion in Decem­ber 2017. Mr. Fran­ken re­signed his seat af­ter con­ser­va­tive talk ra­dio host Lee­ann Tweeden and seven other women ac­cused him of sex­ual ha­rass­ment.

The ar­ti­cle, Mr. Fran­ken’s first in­ter­view since leav­ing the Senate, calls into ques­tion some of the as­ser­tions against Mr. Fran­ken and quotes sev­eral fe­male for­mer staff mem­bers and close friends who de­scribed him as clumsy but not pred­a­tory.

Mr. Fran­ken said at the time that the al­le­ga­tions were false, and he re­peats that in The New Yorker ar­ti­cle. A for­mer co­me­dian who made his name on “Satur­day Night Live,” Mr. Fran­ken re­signed amid a na­tional wave of sex­ual ha­rass­ment al­le­ga­tions against men in pow­er­ful po­si­tions as the #MeToo move­ment was gain­ing mo­men­tum.

Both Mr. Fran­ken and Ms. Tweeden had called for an in­de­pen­dent in­ves­ti­ga­tion at the time, but none was con­ducted be­fore fel­low Dem­o­crats forced Mr. Fran­ken to re­sign three weeks af­ter Ms. Tweeden made her claims.

Asked by Ms. Mayer whether he re­gret­ted step­ping down, Mr. Fran­ken said: “Oh, yeah. Ab­so­lutely.”

Ms. Tweeden al­leged in 2017 that Mr. Fran­ken told her dur­ing a USO tour to en­ter­tain sol­diers in 2006 that he had writ­ten a com­edy skit with her in mind that re­quired her to kiss him. She said Mr. Fran­ken forc­i­bly kissed her and stuck his tongue in her mouth dur­ing a re­hearsal of the sketch be­fore they per­formed it in Af­ghan­istan.

The New Yorker cited two ac­tresses, Karri Turner and Tray­lor Port­man, who had played the same role as Ms. Tweeden on ear­lier USO tours with Mr. Fran­ken. Both told the mag­a­zine that they had per­formed the same role as Ms. Tweeden on ear­lier tours with Mr. Fran­ken and that there was noth­ing in­ap­pro­pri­ate about his be­hav­ior.

Ms. Tweeden also re­leased a photo show­ing Mr. Fran­ken, who was then a co­me­dian, reach­ing out to­ward her breasts, as if to grope her, as she slept in a flak jacket while on a mil­i­tary air­craft dur­ing the USO tour. The New Yorker re­ported that the pose echoed an­other USO skit in which a “Dr. Fran­ken” ap­proaches Ms. Tweeden’s char­ac­ter with his hands aim­ing at her breasts.

Seven sen­a­tors who had called for Mr. Fran­ken’s res­ig­na­tion said they’d been wrong to do so with­out a thor­ough in­ves­ti­ga­tion into the claims made against the Dem­o­crat. They are Demo­cratic Sen. Patrick Leahy of Ver­mont, now-for­mer Demo­cratic Sen. Heidi Heit­kamp of North Da­kota, Demo­cratic Sen. Tammy Duck­worth of Il­li­nois, in­de­pen­dent Sen. An­gus King of Maine, Demo­cratic Sen. Jeff Merk­ley of Ore­gon, Demo­cratic Sen. Tom Udall of New Mex­ico and now-for­mer Demo­cratic Sen. Bill Nel­son of Flor­ida.

WASHINGTON — White House of­fi­cials and con­gres­sio­nal lead­ers have reached a deal to lift the na­tion’s debt limit and boost fed­eral spend­ing by about $320 bil­lion over lim­its set in a 2011 bud­get law.

Pres­i­dent Don­ald Trump an­nounced the agree­ment with the four con­gres­sio­nal lead­ers on Twit­ter, call­ing it a “real com­pro­mise in or­der to give an­other big vic­tory to our Great Mil­i­tary and Vets!”

The deal, as­sum­ing it moves for­ward, would pre­vent the coun­try from de­fault­ing on its debt — ca­lam­i­tous for the fi­nan­cial mar­kets — and raise the na­tion’s bor­row­ing ca­pac­ity for about two years.

The plan would also re­verse mas­sive, au­to­matic spend­ing cuts to fed­eral pro­grams — known as the se­ques­ter, ac­cord­ing to con­gres­sio­nal sources.

Mr. Trump spoke pos­i­tively about it ear­lier Mon­day.

“We’re hav­ing very good talks with the speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi,” Mr. Trump told re­port­ers at the White House while speak­ing with Paki­stani Prime Min­is­ter Im­ran Khan. He also said talks were “do­ing pretty well on a bud­get.”

The agree­ment, crafted largely be­tween Ms. Pelosi, D-Calif., and Trea­sury Sec­re­tary Steven Mnuchin, would mark an end to cuts

man­dated un­der the bi­par­ti­san 2011 bud­get deal. The an­nual cuts — which ex­pire in 2021 — were de­signed to con­trol fed­eral spend­ing by re­quir­ing pain­ful re­duc­tions for both sides. But they never took full ef­fect and now they prob­a­bly never will. Law­mak­ers in both par­ties, con­cerned about the ef­fect on do­mes­tic and de­fense pro­grams, have re­versed them in ev­ery bud­get deal reached since 2013.

Con­ser­va­tives are likely to balk. The deal could amount to a sig­nifi­cant blow to act­ing Chief of Staff Mick Mul­vaney, who has

ad­vo­cated for lim­ited fed­eral spend­ing since he was in Con­gress. He has been largely side­lined in the talks by con­gres­sio­nal Re­pub­li­cans who don’t like the spend­ing caps.

The White House orig­i­nally wanted to off­set the new spend­ing with about $150 bil­lion in cuts. But the im­pend­ing deal would be off­set by only about $75 bil­lion, ac­cord­ing to a con­gres­sio­nal aide. Nego­ti­a­tors are con­sid­er­ing ex­tend­ing au­to­matic cuts to Med­i­care and new Cus­toms and Border Pro­tec­tion fees to help pay for it.

Mr. Mnuchin and Ms.

Pelosi have been ne­go­ti­at­ing a deal for sev­eral weeks, with a sig­nifi­cant up­tick in phone calls in re­cent days, ac­cord­ing to an aide fa­mil­iar with the con­ver­sa­tions.

House lead­ers are rac­ing to com­plete the agree­ment be­fore House mem­bers de­part Wash­ing­ton at the end of the week un­til af­ter La­bor Day. The Senate is slated to leave a week later.

The na­tion is ex­pected to hit its debt limit — the max­i­mum amount Con­gress has au­tho­rized the coun­try to bor­row — as early as the sec­ond week of Sep­tem­ber, ac­cord­ing to Mr. Mnuchin.