College leaders say they have myriad reasons to oppose a prospective repeal of DACA. Undocumented students, they argue, often bring unique viewpoints and backgrounds to campus, excel academically, and contribute to the economy after graduating. But recent developments have also raised questions about the financial impact such students have on the campuses themselves. What, if anything, would DACA’s rollback mean for tuition revenue and enrollment numbers at colleges across the country?

The loss of work permits could also mean that DACA beneficiaries who plan on attending college would be all the more reliant on financial aid, which can be hard to come by. DACA recipients, like all undocumented students, do not have access to federal financial support for higher education, but depending on where they live they may be eligible for other forms of publicly funded aid. Twenty-one states currently offer undocumented students who meet certain criteria the ability to pay in-state tuition, and at least six offer financial-aid benefits to undocumented students of all statuses who meet particular qualifications.

Higher-education leaders at many private universities have been reminding their students of these options; in a letter to the Harvard community after Trump’s announcement on ending the program, for example, President Drew Faust wrote that “the University will maintain its existing financial aid policies, which provide funding to students without reference to immigration status.”

Pelosi’s interjection, first reported by The Post’s Ashley Parker and confirmed by Pelosi’s office, did the trick. “There was, at last, silence, and she was not interrupted again,” Parker wrote.

Because while what happened will remain the subject of fierce debate, it is also important to consider the implications of what didn’t happen: the election of the first female president.

Where Pelosi chose to call out what she interpreted as sexist dismissal, Clinton calculated that confronting Trump, gratifying as that might have been, was too risky. “A lot of people,” she notes, “recoil from an angry woman, or even just a direct one.”

They fired shots in the air, and then, the villagers say, turned their guns on fleeing residents, who fell dead or wounded in the monsoon-green rice paddies. The military’s retribution for a Rohingya militant attack on police posts earlier that day had begun.

The Burmese military’s “clearance operation” in the hamlet of Maung Nu and dozens of other villages populated by Burma’s ethnic Rohingya minority has triggered an exodus of an estimated 400,000 refugees into Bangladesh, an episode the United Nations human rights chief has called “ethnic cleansing.

Rights groups say it will take months or years to fully chronicle the devastation the refugees are fleeing. Satellite photos show widespread burning, witnesses recount soldiers killing civilians, and the Burmese government has said that 176 Rohingya villages stand empty. No total death toll is yet available because the area remains sealed by the military.

Was President Trump’s bipartisan hurricane relief/debt ceiling/government funding deal last week simply a “bipartisan moment,” as the House speaker, Paul Ryan, put it? Probably, given this president’s pattern of poor impulse control and of reverting to base politics. But it’s tempting nevertheless to imagine what Mr. Trump might achieve if he could see beyond momentary, tactical wins.

leeful at media coverage of his shockingly bipartisan move, Mr. Trump called Mr. Schumer last week to talk about keeping up the good work. So how could these unlikely allies actually make headway?

this is a ripe moment for Congress and Mr. Trump to get behind an overhaul of an outmoded program that does nothing to discourage people from building, and rebuilding, in areas prone to catastrophic flooding.

According to the stated policy of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, or FEMA, houses of worship cannot receive funding from the agency’s public-assistance program, which provides money for emergency fire and rescue services, medical care, urgent debris removal, and critical utility repairs in the wake of disasters.

Faith-based organizations, including churches, synagogues, and mosques, provide an extraordinary amount of support during natural disasters. Greg Forrester—the president and CEO of the National Voluntary Organizations Active in Disaster, an association of relief groups—told USA Today that non-profits are responsible for 80 percent of recovery efforts, and most of those are faith-based.

. “Our faith is what drives us to help others. Faith certainly doesn’t keep us from helping others, and we’re not sure why it keeps FEMA from helping us.”

AFTER SIX YEARS of conflict and extended exposure to trauma, Syria is in the throes of a mental health crisis

“There has been a huge increase in psychological trauma since the start of the crisis, including depression and anxiety. Especially among the vulnerable populations, which include children, women, the elderly and the disabled,” Sahloul said.

People who suffer from even common mental health conditions like anxiety or depression refuse to seek help or take medication because of the stigma that they will receive from their family members and society. People with mental health conditions are called “majnun,” which means crazy in Arabic.

While parts of Texas are still submerged from the historic flooding wrought by Hurricane Harvey, four members of Congress who represent the state voted against sending it billions in federal disaster aid.

As usual in Washington, the hang-up sits at the nexus of money and making a political statement about money.

“I am not against voting for relief programs to help hurricane victims, but I am against raising the public debt ceiling without a plan to reduce deficits in the short term, and eliminate them in the long term,” Barton said in a statement after the vote. “The money we vote to spend today will have to be paid back by our children and grandchildren.”

Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt said that now is not the time to talk about climate change.

In the interest of minimizing harm to people, it’s always an important time to talk about climate change. We don’t have to choose between helping current victims and working to prevent the next tragedy.

Even amid this unprecedented sequence of hurricanes and destruction, most Americans are not in the path of danger. Those who want to lend a hand—to save lives and minimize harm and do something—stand to do much good by using this moment of awareness to prepare for a severe-weather event that does eventually affect their community.

For the past 16 years, whenever the United States has been faced with the reality of a failing war in Afghanistan, it has blamed Pakistan.

Pakistan has not been able to convince the United States of the validity of its primary interest in Afghanistan — preventing it from becoming a “proxy for India” and stemming fears of “encirclement” in Pakistan despite India’s proclamations of merely offering economic assistance to Afghanistan.

It is only the American grievances that have been registered; the humiliations seem reserved for Pakistan. Everyone remembers the killing of Bin Laden in 2011 and the subsequent embarrassment of Pakistan. Few recall the killing of 24 Pakistani soldiers on the border with Afghanistan by American forces later that year.