GEOFF BENNETT: Good evening.

I'm Geoff Bennett.

Amna Nawaz is away.

On the "NewsHour" tonight: Israeli airstrikes leave craters where apartments once stood at a Gaza refugee camp, while, in Washington, Congress considers whether to send more aid to Israel and Ukraine.

The U.S. Supreme Court takes on questions of free speech and social media in cases involving public officials blocking followers.

And West Virginia University cuts jobs and academic subjects in the face of budget shortfalls.

Could this become a nationwide trend?

ANDREA RUPP, College Student: The lack of transparency and sheer amount of cuts is decimating the trust that faculty has here.

This is not just affecting those small majors.

It's affecting everybody.

(BREAK) GEOFF BENNETT: Welcome to the "NewsHour."

For a fifth day, Israeli troops pushed into Gaza on the ground, and Israel's military reported its first soldiers killed in action there.

From the skies, a punishing air campaign continues tonight, with a strike that killed many Palestinians in the northern part of the Gaza Strip.

Hamas militants said they would release foreign hostages in the coming days, and some badly wounded Palestinians may soon be allowed into Egypt for treatment.

Leila Molana-Allen has the story.

LEILA MOLANA-ALLEN: Gaza, cloaked in black smoke for yet another day, as Israel's airstrikes and ground invasion show no signs of slowing.

Tanks line the border, and Israel said it has infiltrated the network of Hamas tunnels underneath the Gaza Strip.

An Israeli strike hit the Jabalia refugee camp, where Israel said it targeted Hamas infrastructure, killing its leader in Northern Gaza.

But the blast also killed and wounded hundreds of civilians.

Crowds of men dug through the rubble to reach trapped victims underneath.

The pain of the loss is unbearable in Gaza, trapped in this war where few are spared.

MAN (through translator): Here they are, children.

We are filling up bags with children.

We are placing them in bags.

LEILA MOLANA-ALLEN: Body bags lined up outside a nearby hospital, inside, chaos, as overworked doctors rush to treat the injured.

DR. SUAIB IDAIS, Indonesian Hospital (through translator): Children, women, elderly.

We have no idea what to do.

There are injured everywhere.

LEILA MOLANA-ALLEN: Gazans are trying desperately to survive the airstrikes and, under siege, a growing humanitarian crisis.

Most extreme is the water shortage.

With an Israeli blockade on fuel, water can't be pumped or desalinized.

Residents wait in line for hours to fill their jugs with clean water.

MOHAMMED, Gaza Strip Resident (through translator): The people are miserable.

There are lines everywhere.

Even if you find a drop of water, you will find a line of thousands.

You go out in the morning at 7:00 a.m. and you go home after sundown just so you can get two good gallons of water for your home.

LEILA MOLANA-ALLEN: In Washington, U.S. officials reiterated support for Israel and sought to clarify the American role in the conflict.

ANTONY BLINKEN, U.S. Secretary of State: All of us know the imperative of standing up with our allies and partners.

LEILA MOLANA-ALLEN: Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin testified before the Senate over an aid package that would send more than $105 billion to Israel and Ukraine.

LLOYD AUSTIN, U.S. Secretary of Defense: I think it's important to remind ourselves that what happens in Ukraine and what happens in Israel matters not to just Ukraine and Israel.

It matters to us.

It affects our national security as well.

(SHOUTING) LEILA MOLANA-ALLEN: The hearing was interrupted more than once by protesters, their hands painted blood red.

PROTESTERS: Cease-fire now!

LEILA MOLANA-ALLEN: Blinken defended U.S. policy, while stressing the need for humanitarian aid.

ANTONY BLINKEN: In each and every one of these conflicts, people are suffering.

And I think it's profoundly who we are to want to do everything we can to assist them.

LEILA MOLANA-ALLEN: The request has bipartisan support in the Senate, but the Republican-controlled House wants to carve out funding for Israel, leaving Ukraine for later.

ANTONY BLINKEN: This is all one fight.

And we have to respond in a way that recognizes that.

If we start to peel off pieces of this package, they will see that, they will understand that we are playing Whac-A-Mole, while they cooperate increasingly.

LEILA MOLANA-ALLEN: The war in Ukraine has not seen major changes on the battlefield for months, while the war between Israel and Hamas threatens to explode into the wider region.

Israeli tanks line the border with Lebanon, trading fire with Hezbollah and other militant groups.

Israel shot down drones and missiles launched from Yemen by Houthi militants.

The Iranian-backed group said their attacks will continue until Israel stands down.

YAHYA SAREA, Houthi Military Spokesman (through translator): The Yemeni armed forces affirm that this operation is the third in support of our oppressed brothers in Palestine.

LEILA MOLANA-ALLEN: Meanwhile in the occupied West Bank, tensions threaten to boil over after another raid, a funeral for a 70-year-old man killed by Israeli forces.

As the violence spreads, Palestinians racked with grief and pulsating with anger fill the streets.

For the "PBS NewsHour," I'm Leila Molana-Allen in the West Bank.

GEOFF BENNETT: For analysis of Israel's ground offensive in Gaza and concerns about the war potentially spilling over into a broader regional conflict, we turn to former Commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East retired General Frank McKenzie.

He's now executive director of the Global and National Security Institute at the University of South Florida.

Thank you for being with us.

GEN. FRANK MCKENZIE (RET.

), Former Commander, U.S. Central Command: I'm glad to be with you, Geoff.

GEOFF BENNETT: Israeli troops have fought on the streets of Gaza before, during the First and Second Intifadas.

What makes this current and this current ground operation different?

GEN. FRANK MCKENZIE: Geoff, this is a far more comprehensive operation.

They're proceeding methodically with overwhelming firepower, and I think really with, I think four objectives.

I think they want to minimize casualties, IDF casualties, Israeli army casualties.

I think they want to minimize casualties among the population of Gaza.

I think they want to get after the command-and-control structure of Hamas, political and military leadership.

And I think they want to recover their hostages.

These are difficult objectives and it's going to be slow going for them, and it's not going to go very quickly.

GEOFF BENNETT: What risks and challenges does Hamas' extensive labyrinth of tunnels pose?

GEN. FRANK MCKENZIE: When you're fighting in Gaza, you're fighting in multiple dimensions.

First of all, you're fighting on the surface of the earth.

When you see tanks move, soldiers walk around, that's what you're looking at.

Then, underneath, there's a sewer system.

Then, underneath that, there's a comprehensive tunnel system that Hamas has put in over many years of preparation for just this moment.

So -- and then you're fighting at the very low altitudes, where Israel has a predominance of highly effective drones and other robot-type aircraft.

But Hamas is going to fly some of those too.

So it's a multidimensional struggle.

And it's ultimately -- the technical advantages of a force like the IDF are going to be challenged in this close fighting, where it really becomes infantry combat.

Certainly, there will be tanks involved.

Certainly, there will be all kinds of fire support involved.

But it's going to be a very methodical approach, very difficult, and they're going to have to be careful of the tunnels.

And I know they have given the tunnels a lot of thought.

And I would expect them to use robots and other sophisticated measures to get down into those tunnels.

GEOFF BENNETT: How long might this last?

What's your assessment of Israel's ability to sustain ground combat over the long term, potentially?

GEN. FRANK MCKENZIE: So, they have had a while to get themselves set.

They have mobilized a significant portion of the military.

I think we need to consider this in terms of months.

I don't believe it'll be days.

I don't believe it'll be weeks.

I believe it will take some time, because they're going to be methodical.

And I realize there's frustration over there, when innocent people die in Gaza.

And innocent people are dying in Gaza.

But I actually believe the IDF is doing the very best they can to try to minimize those civilian casualties, even, at the same time, while Hamas is doing their level best to maximize those civilian casualties.

We think of the hostages, the 200 or so hostages there, as shields.

But, actually it's far more than that.

The population of Gaza is actually a shield for Hamas.

And they're going to wield it to the maximum extent they can to protect themselves and to force the Israelis into making very tough decisions about what they target and what they don't target, because they will play this out in the information space, as we just seen in the reporting that preceded my segment here.

GEOFF BENNETT: Yes.

And as we saw in Leila's report, there was an airstrike today that Israel said was aimed at Hamas militants, hit a densely populated neighborhood in Northern Gaza, left a massive crater, caused extensive damage and death.

Are there tactics, weapons, munitions that the Israelis could use to go after Hamas without destroying entire neighborhoods and killing so many civilians?

GEN. FRANK MCKENZIE: It's hard to do, because Hamas has chosen as a matter of policy to embed their organization into hospitals, into mosques, into schools, and into high-density population areas.

That is a fundamental tactic of Hamas.

And I believe Israel is doing the very best they can to deal with it, to minimize the human cost on the ground to innocents.

But, unfortunately, it's not going to be a perfect campaign.

It's going to be a very bloody, ugly, harsh campaign.

And Hamas has designed it explicitly that way.

GEOFF BENNETT: I want to ask you about the effort to rescue hostages.

The Pentagon's top special operations policy official said today that American commandos on the ground in Israel are helping locate the more than 200 hostages seized by Hamas on October 7.

Help us understand the nature of that relationship, that partnership, given that U.S. special operations forces are not assigned any combatant roles in Israel.

GEN. FRANK MCKENZIE: Sure.

Well, we should begin by noting that Israeli special operations forces are among some of the best in the world.

GEOFF BENNETT: And it appears we have lost General Frank McKenzie.

Are you back with us, sir?

GEN. FRANK MCKENZIE: I believe I am back with you, Geoff.

GEOFF BENNETT: All right, pick up where you left off, if you would.

GEN. FRANK MCKENZIE: Sure.

I think we should begin by recognizing that Israeli special operations forces are very good, very capable, very battle-tested.

We need to recognize that.

But our forces are also very unique and capable and battle-testing.

They can share techniques and procedures.

They can talk about best practices.

There are a lot of things we can do to help that don't involve putting U.S. soldiers into combat.

GEOFF BENNETT: On the potential for escalation, what's the decision matrix for Hezbollah and getting involved in this war?

GEN. FRANK MCKENZIE: It's my personal judgment that Hezbollah doesn't really care about the suffering that's going on in Gaza, and that will not prompt them to enter.

Hezbollah will enter if they see a strategic opportunity, and that would be if Israel gets heavily bogged down in Gaza, if there's political fractures in the Israeli government, if they sense the international political mood is such that they might be able to gain a strategic objective.

But Hassan Nasrallah will make a very strategic, very cold-eyed calculation that.

And while the Iranians may or may not press him to do that, his calculation will be based on what's best for his organization in Lebanon.

And he's had better days in Lebanon than right now, because of the battering that the economy has taken over the past few years.

He's in a very different position with the government of Lebanon than he was 10 years ago or in 2006-2007, when they last fought a significant fight with Israel.

So he will have to balance that.

So I think it's far from certain that Hezbollah will come in.

There's always the danger of miscalculation, of error on either side, that sparks something that could get them into the fight.

But I think they will be very cold-eyed as they take a look at it, and possibly the same thing for the Iranians, although I would note their continued attack against U.S. forces in Iraq and Syria is very concerning, and that augurs the possibility of escalation.

I would hope that we are sending all the signals we can, both diplomatic and in terms of force deployment and actions on the ground, to convince them this is not time to come into this fight.

This is not the time to escalate.

GEOFF BENNETT: Retired General Frank McKenzie, thank you for your insights this evening, sir.

We appreciate it.

GEN. FRANK MCKENZIE: Thank you.

GEOFF BENNETT: In the day's other headlines: Capitol Hill is grappling with new domestic threats in the wake of the Israel-Hamas war.

At a Senate hearing today, Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas confirmed a rise in hate towards Arab-Americans, Muslims, and Jews.

And FBI Director Christopher Wray acknowledged that Jewish communities have been uniquely targeted.

CHRISTOPHER WRAY, FBI Director: When you look at a group that makes up 2.4 percent, roughly, of the American population, it should be jarring to everyone that that same population accounts for something like 60 percent of all religious-based hate crimes.

And so they need our help.

GEOFF BENNETT: Wray also warned that Hamas actions in the Middle East could inspire other terrorist attacks, including by violent extremists in the U.S.

The Senate also confirmed Jack Lew to be the next U.S. ambassador to Israel at a critical moment in the country's war with Hamas.

Lew previously served as Treasury secretary under President Obama.

The U.S. hasn't had a Senate-confirmed ambassador to Israel since July.

Michigan's attorney general has ended prosecutions over Flint's tainted water without making any criminal convictions.

The decision comes after the state's Supreme Court rejected an effort to revive charges against former Governor Rick Snyder and others accused of wrongdoing.

In 2014, the city switched its water supply to the Flint River, but didn't properly treat the water for lead.

Tens of thousands of Flint residents were exposed to dangerous levels of lead.

At least 12 people died from Legionnaires' disease.

And some residents of the majority-black city say they're still grappling with long-term health issues.

The Biden administration is deepening its crackdown on so-called junk fees, this time by proposing new rules on retirement advisers.

The guidelines would require advisers to recommend plans that are in the customers' best interest, instead of trying to boost their own bottom lines.

President Biden made the announcement today at the White House and said the move was necessary to protect retirement security.

JOE BIDEN, President of the United States: If this rule is finalized as proposed, it's going to protect workers and it's going to save for -- that are saving through their retirements.

It'll protect seniors from being exploited.

It'll protect many trustworthy financial advisers out there who are doing the right thing from unfair competition.

GEOFF BENNETT: The president has also tried to eliminate hidden junk fees in other areas, like concert tickets, hotel reservations, and airfare.

In Pakistan, Afghan refugees are fleeing the country in droves ahead of the government's fast-approaching crackdown on migrants living in the country illegally.

A wall of trucks formed along border areas as families crammed the cargo beds with their belongings.

They have until tomorrow to leave or face deportation.

Afghans say they were given just one month's notice.

ROHULLAH KHAN, Afghan Refugee (through translator): We lived nearly 40 years in Pakistan, but they did not accept us, nor give us any documents so we can stay.

But the disappointing thing for us is that the government should have given us at least one year to leave.

Now we are on our way to Afghanistan, and winter is coming, and there will be no work for us there.

GEOFF BENNETT: U.N. agencies say Afghans make up the bulk of Pakistan's migrant population at more than two million.

Some 600,000 Afghans fled to Pakistan over the Taliban takeover more than two years ago.

A record 6.9 million people have been uprooted by the decades-long conflict in Congo.

That's according to new data from the U.N.'s migration agency.

It says its one of the world's largest humanitarian crises.

Most of those who've been displaced come from Congo's eastern provinces taken over by armed groups seeking natural resources.

And stocks closed higher on Wall Street today.

The Dow Jones industrial average gained 124 points to close at 33053.

The Nasdaq rose 62 points.

The S&P 500 added 27.

Still to come on the "NewsHour": Maine law enforcement faces scrutiny after revelations that a mass shooter's family flagged his concerning behavior; Alabama jail officials are accused of putting pregnant detainees at risk in the name of protecting unborn children; and a Pulitzer Prize winner reflects on his family's experience of war and exile in a new memoir.

The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in two key cases today about how public officials use social media.

The cases explore whether two school board members in California and a city manager in Michigan violated the First Amendment by blocking constituents posting criticism on their personal social media pages.

The constituents in the cases believe these social media pages were actually operating as an extension of government work.

To help us understand the stakes here, we're joined by our Supreme Court analyst Marcia Coyle.

It is always good to see you.

MARCIA COYLE: Good to see you, Geoff.

GEOFF BENNETT: So, Marcia, you were in the courtroom for the, what, three hours of proceedings.

MARCIA COYLE: Three long hours.

(LAUGHTER) GEOFF BENNETT: So, what's the question that the justices were considering today in both arguments?

MARCIA COYLE: Well, the challenge here for the justices is to determine how can you know when a public official is speaking in his or hers official capacity or personal capacity in their -- on their personal web pages?

And the distinction is important, because, if it's in the official capacity, what we call a state actor, then the First Amendment kicks in.

And that public official could be held liable for violating the rights of someone who may have been blocked.

GEOFF BENNETT: So, in the one case, there's James Freed.

He's the city manager in Port Huron, Michigan.

He has this personal Facebook page where he mostly posted about his family, but he also during the pandemic would post about COVID and other city-related matters.

And he blocked from his Facebook page a man named Kevin Lindke after Lindke posted criticism of the ways in which Freed was handling the pandemic.

And so our team spoke with both men about how they see the case.

Here's what they had to say.

JAMES FREED, City Manager, Port Huron, Michigan: schoolteachers, police officers, firefighters, school custodians, like my grandfather was, can't go home and talk about what happened at work?

Just think of the chilling effect that would have on those people.

I have -- I have a right for speech.

In the middle of a COVID pandemic, I have a right to communicate with my friends and family and what's going on in our lives and what's going on with our community.

KEVIN LINDKE, Petitioner: He can say that this was his personal page.

I don't necessarily disagree with that.

The issue is that when he started blurring the lines and started putting out policy directives that couldn't be found anywhere else, he then created a public forum.

And, therefore, the protection of the First Amendment kicked in.

And by blocking stuff he didn't like or stuff that was critical of him, we felt that was just -- he was trying to silence us.

GEOFF BENNETT: So tell us more about how the justices interpreted those two arguments.

MARCIA COYLE: I will tell you, Geoff, during the three hours, there were lots of hypotheticals about what kind of posts on a social media page could constitute either private speech or official speech.

There was even mention of Donald Trump, and even Taylor Swift entered the conversation.

GEOFF BENNETT: Because Donald Trump, when he was president, he blocked people.

MARCIA COYLE: Absolutely, on Twitter, which is now known as X. GEOFF BENNETT: On Twitter.

MARCIA COYLE: But his case ultimately was mooted out because he was no longer president.

But what was happening in the arguments was, the lawyers were trying to offer the justices a variety of tests for how to make this distinction between the two.

And the public officials really want a clearly defined, kind of rigid test that says, basically, if you are fulfilling a duty on your personal Web page, or you are demonstrating authority, then you are state action, and the First Amendment will apply.

And the individuals who are blocked, their lawyers were telling the court, no, that's too narrow a test.

And we think you need a broader test.

One lawyer described it as, are you doing your job test, which looks at the content of the page, the appearance of the page, and the function that the public official serves.

The justices had some qualms about both tests.

One was considered a little too narrow and would chill speech.

The other was considered too broad.

And I think, ultimately, Justice Kagan sort of hit the nail on the head on what the justices were facing.

She said, what makes these cases hard is that there are First Amendment interests on both sides.

Public officials have every right to engage in the kind of speech you and I do, to talk about their jobs, to talk about a job with someone in the grocery store, talk about family, friends, pets.

But an individual has a right to be able to access information that -- government information that may be important to their lives, as well as to share in the conversation on that page with other commenters.

So I think they're struggling here not only with, what's the right test, but also, what is a social media page or account?

There was a comment by Chief John Roberts at one point, who said, basically, what is it?

Is it a gathering of protons or what?

(LAUGHTER) MARCIA COYLE: Is this really property?

So, it's a dilemma for them, and they have got opportunities.

I could not tell which way they were going to go on this at all.

GEOFF BENNETT: And we should say, these two cases, these are not the only social media cases coming before the court this term.

MARCIA COYLE: No, they're not.

GEOFF BENNETT: It's such a sign of the times that social media is so big this term.

MARCIA COYLE: Lots of issues.

They have three more cases that they're going to be looking at, probably hearing arguments in the new year.

The cases today are significant in their own right as to what they will do in terms of speech.

The -- when you put them together with the other three cases, it becomes a huge term for not only social media, but also for the First Amendment.

GEOFF BENNETT: Marcia Coyle, I have to say, I'd never block you on social media.

(LAUGHTER) MARCIA COYLE: Thanks, Geoff.

GEOFF BENNETT: Thanks so much for your insight and analysis.

MARCIA COYLE: Take care.

GEOFF BENNETT: Lewiston, Maine is in mourning after last week's shooting that killed 18 people and injured 13 others.

It's the worst mass shooting in the state's history, and questions remain over why it wasn't prevented, despite warning signs.

Laura Barron-Lopez has the latest.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: Geoff, Mainers are still feeling this loss.

Joshua Seal was one of four members of the deaf community killed.

He leaves behind four children and his wife, Elizabeth, who is also deaf and speaks here through an interpreter.

ELIZABETH SEAL, Widow of Shooting Victim (through interpreter): I want the world to remember him, his passion, his love, his patience, his kindness, his motivation, his zeal for life, his ability to get things done, and his humor.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: Along with the grief, there's growing scrutiny about why law enforcement didn't find or stop Robert Card before the shooting.

His friends and family and the Army Reserve all reported concerns about his behavior and access to guns to police months before the shooting, according to documents released by the Sagadahoc County Sheriff's Office.

We have now learned that, in May, Card's family told police he was experiencing paranoia and hearing voices.

They also reported he had 10 to 15 firearms.

In July, Card's Army Reserve unit sent him to a psychiatric hospital for two weeks.

In early September, Card told a friend he was going to commit a mass shooting.

Then, on September 15, deputies went to Card's home, but didn't find him.

They sent an alert to other law enforcement agencies stating he was -- quote -- "armed and dangerous."

On September 16, police returned to Card's home, found his car, and reported hearing someone inside who would not answer the door.

On October 18, just one week before the attack, police canceled the alert.

For a closer look at this, I'm joined by Margaret Groban, a retired federal prosecutor and law professor at University of Maine School of Law.

Margaret, thank you so much for joining.

Can you recall a shooting like this, where multiple active warnings right before the shooting occurs and they go nowhere?

MARGARET GROBAN, University of Maine School of Law: Well, I think you have to kind of look at it in context.

Looking at it in hindsight, which is 20/20, it looks like all these dots have been connected.

But I doubt that those dots were all connected ahead of time.

And so -- and the law enforcement was really limited in what they could do in this situation.

Although it's a tragic situation, I think the mental health crisis and the access to firearms, especially an assault weapon, is what led to the tragedy here.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: So are you saying that, essentially, at the time that all of these warnings were occurring that, potentially, police and the Army Reserve and others were just not communicating with each other?

MARGARET GROBAN: No, I can't speak to that.

I don't know what was happening within that law enforcement community, because I'm not a part of that.

But I know that the laws that were available to them to try and stop this kind of shooting from happening are extremely burdensome and would have been very difficult to use in this situation.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: And so law enforcement appeared to try to find Robert Card prior to the mass shooting, but didn't.

And then they dropped their alert on him.

Is that a breakdown of procedures under Maine's yellow flag law?

MARGARET GROBAN: Well, under Maine's yellow flag law -- I'm glad you raised that -- the person has to be taken into protective custody in order for the procedure to start to then get a mental health assessment and then go to the judge, unlike in states, many states, that have red flag laws, where the family could bond directly to the court and asked for an intervention or relinquishment of the firearm.

So, they didn't find Mr. Card, so they couldn't take him into protective custody and get the procedure started.

So I think a procedure that didn't require those steps would be beneficial for our state going forward.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: Would you say then that the law enforcement officers couldn't have done much more than they already did?

MARGARET GROBAN: Well, I don't know those circumstances, so I don't feel right commenting on them, but I know that, absent taking him into protective custody, and when they went to the house and he did not respond, what were their options?

To get a warrant for his arrest?

What options did they have going forward?

But the family could not on their own have gone to the court and asked for relinquishment of firearms.

That much, we do know.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: If Maine had a red flag law in place, what could have happened differently?

MARGARET GROBAN: What could have happened is that the family, who expressed concern - - it looks like a brother, a sister, an ex-wife and a son all expressed concern about Mr. Card.

And they could have gone directly to a court, given their evidence that they had that he might pose a danger to himself of others, and asked for an order to relinquish his firearms.

Or they could have gone and tried to get Mr. Card involuntarily committed to a psychiatric hospital.

So those could have been two avenues that they could have pursued.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: Based on the information that we have so far -- and we know that more is likely to probably come out.

But, beyond a red flag law, do you think that there's anything else that Maine could change about its gun laws that could prevent a situation like this in the future?

MARGARET GROBAN: I certainly do.

And I know that everyone is looking at these specific facts and you want to target, did this person act correctly?

Did this person act correctly?

But the bottom line is that this was someone in a mental health crisis who had access to assault weapons.

Absent the assault weapon, there would not have been a mass shooting.

We do not have an assault weapon ban in Maine, and it was easy for him to obtain those weapons.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: Professor, you mentioned that these laws can be quite burdensome.

Could you expand on that a little bit?

MARGARET GROBAN: Yes.

In order to get the yellow flag laws, I said first law enforcement must be called.

They must take a person into protective custody, which means putting them in the back of a patrol car, which can be an extremely difficult and dangerous situation for law enforcement.

Then they have to get a mental health assessment which shows that person is a danger to themselves or others.

And then they have to go to the court to get the court to determine whether or not that person is a danger to themselves or others.

So, it's a three-step process, while, in red flag states, all you have is a one-step process, where judges determine dangerousness every day of the week.

When they set bail, when they sent in someone, they make those determinations.

And Maine has instead imposed two additional steps that I think are not in the best interests of our state.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: Professor Margaret Groban of the University of Maine, thank you so much for your time.

MARGARET GROBAN: Thank you.

GEOFF BENNETT: West Virginia University made headlines in the world of higher education this year when it announced it was making major cuts to some academic programs and faculty.

And there's concern about whether other public universities may follow suit.

Special correspondent Hari Sreenivasan has the story from Morgantown, West Virginia, for our series, Rethinking College.

HARI SREENIVASAN: On-campus protests over social issues can be a typical part of the college experience, but these West Virginia University students are protesting for a different reason.

They're speaking out against the budget cuts their university has made.

PROTESTER: What do we say Gordon Gee?

HARI SREENIVASAN: It's part of their ongoing fight against the elimination of programs by West Virginia University President Gordon Gee.

Tucked into the foothills of the Appalachian Basin, the state's largest university is home to more than 24,000 students.

The school's long-serving president announced the cuts this summer.

On the chopping block, almost 8 percent of its majors and up to 5 percent of its faculty positions.

Among the majors eliminated, biometric engineering systems and almost all foreign languages, though there will be a few classes remaining in Spanish, French, Arabic, and Chinese as electives.

FELICIA CARRARA, College Student: All of this change is kind of scary.

HARI SREENIVASAN: The school's decisions have left students like Felicia Carrara, who is majoring in international and Russian studies, in limbo and unsure of the future.

FELICIA CARRARA: I thought that, when I chose my college, I would have a pretty set path for four or five years, and that after, I would be able to figure things out, of course, but I would have a degree under my belt.

HARI SREENIVASAN: President Gee first ran the land-grant university from 1981 to 1985.

Under the Morrill Act of 1882, states were given federally controlled land to create colleges.

They offered research and educational opportunities to people in the state, especially those in rural areas.

Over time, many of the original schools became large public universities, like West Virginia.

Gee says that, when he returned for a second term, he wanted the school to keep pace with where he thinks the future of education is headed.

GORDON GEE, President, West Virginia University: When I came back, I could see that was going - - there were starting to be some fundamental changes.

We started on the non-academic side, hired McKinsey, asked them to tell me, how could I change the university in order to impact the state?

HARI SREENIVASAN: So, you're looking at cutting, I want to say, 32 majors, 169 faculty.

GORDON GEE: I'm counting on it being enough.

Actually, due to retirements and a variety of other things, it's going to be about 70 faculty.

We will still be one of the most comprehensive, robust universities in the country with well over 300 majors.

HARI SREENIVASAN: What was the decision criteria?

Which department, or... GORDON GEE: We based it on facts.

And the fact was, if you have a large number of faculty members teaching few students, that's where you start off.

If students are not graduating and getting good jobs, that's one of the things you take a look at.

HARI SREENIVASAN: Critics say the rollout of cuts has been messy and confusing.

JONAH KATZ, West Virginia University You will basically choose two more classes from the whole menu.

HARI SREENIVASAN: Jonah Katz met with this student for the first time to tell her he cannot be her adviser.

She came from Spain in August.

JONAH KATZ: The week that she arrived here, she found out that the department is likely to be eliminated.

HARI SREENIVASAN: Katz is an associate professor with tenure at West Virginia University.

His job was cut.

JONAH KATZ: The provost's office has settled on eliminating my department and the program in which I teach.

HARI SREENIVASAN: What do you think the impact of these cuts will be to the university?

JONAH KATZ: I think the level of reputational damage that the university is going to take will not be survivable.

I don't think that this will be a viable research university in five to 10 years.

And it essentially means that there's no real tenure here anymore.

And so nobody is going to come teach here unless they have absolutely no other choice.

HARI SREENIVASAN: Since the announcement of cuts, dozens of faculty and students have protested the university's decision to eliminate certain programs.

And, in early September, the faculty voted to pass a no-confidence resolution in Gee's leadership, calling for the budget cut process to be frozen.

You got a huge no-confidence vote from the faculty just recently.

GORDON GEE: I got a third of them.

If you're a university president right now, everyone's getting no-confidence votes, because it's a tough environment.

HARI SREENIVASAN: One of the main issues confronting the university, a $45 million deficit.

Gee says the school lost revenue due to the pandemic and declining enrollment.

But students and faculty believe he spent money on projects which ultimately don't benefit the school.

Everybody is looking at this shortfall now.

They're saying, hey, Mr. President, why did you spend $100 million on the business school or another $40 million on football team-building?

GORDON GEE: The answer to that is the fact that we have invested wisely, I think.

You know, people will say, well, gee, you know, you had overextended or over-budgeted.

But the reality is this.

We've spent about $300 million in capital projects.

Our business school is one of our great growing areas.

And we wanted to invest in it.

And, you know, we raise a lot of private money for that.

HARI SREENIVASAN: Where the cuts are concerned, Gee says they are necessary to ensure future growth.

GORDON GEE: We're cutting back in order to pour money in.

That's the whole point.

We're making the kind of decisions that will allow us to be able to invest in the programs that we think are going to be essential for our institution.

HARI SREENIVASAN: What's the role of the state here?

GORDON GEE: I will say that, since I returned, that the state has been very supportive of our institution.

We've lost dollars because the whole state had to cut back.

HARI SREENIVASAN: Last year, West Virginia lawmakers changed how public colleges and universities are funded in the state, giving priority to majors in engineering, education, and information technology.

Many of the university's cuts approved by the board of governors last month reflect that.

So, what happens to public universities, especially in states like West Virginia?

If you really want that kind of liberal arts, want language arts, everything else, you have got to go somewhere else?

GORDON GEE: No, absolutely not.

Remember, I said we have over 300 academic programs.

No one needs to leave the state to get a great education, a great liberal arts, a great academic, a great science, a great STEM, a great medical education.

No one needs to leave the state.

HARI SREENIVASAN: How many of you are directly affected by the programs that are on the chopping block or being scaled back?

How many of you have to rethink what you're going to do to graduate?

The students in this room are part of the West Virginia United Students Union founded this July as a direct result of the cuts.

How many of you feel like the university is hearing your concerns?

Gee says his administration has been clear about the changes.

These students do not agree.

ANDREA RUPP, College Student: The thing about these cuts and the narrative proposed about how they are only affecting these small departments is that it is not the case, because the lack of transparency and sheer amount of cuts is decimating the trust that faculty has here.

This is not just affecting those small majors.

It's affecting everybody.

TAYA SULLIVAN, College Student: When I first came to this university, what I wanted to do was, I wanted to go to med school and, like, know Spanish so that I could treat patients in their native language.

And I, mean, I have kind of changed course completely there.

CHRISTIAN ROWE, College Student: I think that a lot of students are being forced into majors that have like a big paycheck waiting for them when they graduate, because tuition has gotten so high.

LISA CORRIGAN, University of Arkansas: What's happening at West Virginia, I think, is, sort of an atom bomb has gone off, and it's sort of slow moving.

It's something that's happening in much a smaller scale around the country.

HARI SREENIVASAN: Lisa Corrigan is a professor at the University of Arkansas who has written about West Virginia University.

She says other land-grant universities, like Texas A&M and the University of Utah, are making similar changes.

So, what do you think other schools are watching about how this all plays out?

LISA CORRIGAN: It depends on what kind of institution they are and what kind of state they're in, and some as a cautionary tale, and some as an opportunity.

And I think you're going to see a split happen, as other universities either follow in line with what he is doing and/or repudiate it completely.

HARI SREENIVASAN: Last week, in his state of the university address, President Gee outlined his vision for West Virginia University as a modern land-grant university, promising that, regardless of cuts, every student would be afforded a well-rounded education.

As for these students, they told us they plan to continue their fight.

MATTHEW KOLB, College Student: Something that the student union is trying to do is build student power.

HARI SREENIVASAN: If there is power in numbers, then these students are on the right path.

Since July, their group has grown to more than 400, they say, with more lining up to join.

For "PBS NewsHour," Hari Sreenivasan in Morgantown, West Virginia.

GEOFF BENNETT: You can watch more of the stories in our series Rethinking College on our Web site, PBS.org/NewsHour.

A federal civil rights lawsuit is raising concerns about the treatment of pregnant inmates at an Alabama jail and the potential harm to their unborn children, whom the law claims to protect.

Stephanie Sy has more.

STEPHANIE SY: Ashley Caswell was arrested in March 2021 after law enforcement said she'd tested positive for methamphetamines.

She was two months' pregnant.

The rest of her pregnancy was spent at Etowah County Detention Center in Alabama, where she says she gave birth in a jail shower without any medical help.

A lawsuit filed by the advocacy group Pregnancy Justice alleges that, leading up to the birth, Caswell was denied regular access to prenatal visits, forced to sleep on a thin mat on a concrete floor.

And during 12 hours of labor, the suit says staff gave her only Tylenol for pain.

The suit claims Caswell's story represents a disturbing pattern of inhumane treatment at the jail.

For a closer look, I'm joined now by Dana Sussman, deputy executive director for Pregnancy Justice.

Dana, thank you for joining the "NewsHour."

What I just listed earlier doesn't even begin to describe what Caswell said she experienced.

How dangerous was that shower delivery for her and her baby?

And how are they doing now?

DANA SUSSMAN, Deputy Executive Director, Pregnancy Justice: Well, thank you so much for having me.

Ms. Caswell endured 12 hours of unassisted, unmedicated labor and later learned that she had a placental abruption, which is incredibly painful and causes significant blood loss.

In fact, she labored and asked for help repeatedly and repeatedly and was denied.

She didn't even give birth in the jail's medical facility.

She was accompanied to the shower and refused help even while she stood and knew that the baby was coming.

Only when she believed she was going to pass out from the blood loss did an Etowah County Jail staff person catch the baby.

And then Ms. Caswell passed out on the floor of the shower and continued to bleed significantly.

Eventually, she made -- she was brought to the hospital, where she needed several iron transfusions because of her blood loss.

And when she gave birth and lost consciousness, the Etowah County Jail officials or staff members who were with her took her baby and proceeded to take pictures with her baby while Ms. Caswell was undressed, regaining consciousness and continuing to bleed.

So, the inhumane treatment that Ms. Caswell experienced shocks the conscience.

And we filed the lawsuit, along with our partners, the Southern Poverty Law Center and the law firm of Sullivan & Cromwell, to seek redress for the harms and the trauma that Ms. Caswell endured.

Ms. Caswell is in Tutwiler, women's prison in Alabama, so she remains incarcerated, but she is overwhelmed by the support that she's received and the legal team that is behind her and the other women that have come forward and shared their experiences at Etowah County Jail.

STEPHANIE SY: How many other women have similar stories from that facility?

DANA SUSSMAN: We have identified three other women in the three years leading up to Ms. Caswell's labor that experienced similar treatment when it came to laboring without care, including one who gave birth in the jail just the year prior, and another who tragically lost her baby because her water broke.

And she was not transported to the hospital for five days, and then later delivered a stillborn baby.

So, we know that this is a pattern.

And we also know of dozens of other women who have experienced mistreatment in the jail, anything from lack of postnatal care after delivery to lack of mental health services and treatment and the medication that they are prescribed.

So the harms in this jail and the mistreatment and the rights violations are vast and yearslong.

STEPHANIE SY: Following reporting from al.com on this, the jail said last year it no longer detains pregnant women awaiting trial on these endangerment laws.

What else do you hope to gain from this lawsuit?

DANA SUSSMAN: Well, I just want to clarify that the DA's office has shifted its bond policy.

The bond conditions at Etowah County Jail for women who were charged with chemical endangerment of a child -- and by the way, this is a law that does not mention pregnancy -- was passed by the legislature not intended to apply to pregnancy, but has since been used by counties in Alabama to target pregnant women.

And, in fact, Etowah County targets more pregnant women than any other county in the state; 93 percent of chemical endangerment charges in Etowah County are of women.

The vast majority are of mothers.

But what we hope to achieve with this lawsuit is, first, redress.

We're seeking damages for Ms. Caswell's experience.

Of course, money doesn't change what happened to her, but that is the form of redress that the law allows.

We want to continue to shine a light on the inhumane human rights violations that are occurring in the Etowah County Jail.

And we want the jail to change its practices.

If Etowah County is going to incarcerate or detain more pregnant people than almost any other county in the country that we know of, they need to take care of those.

They have an obligation, a legal and constitutional obligation, to provide medical care to those pregnant and postpartum women.

STEPHANIE SY: Dana Sussman with the group Pregnancy Justice, thanks so much for joining us.

DANA SUSSMAN: Thank you for having me.

GEOFF BENNETT: Recently, an event featuring the writer Viet Thanh Nguyen at the 92nd Street Y, one of New York's leading cultural institutions, was canceled.

The organizers cited Nguyen's public criticism of Israel.

It's just one example of how the Israel-Hamas war is roiling cultural and educational organizations in this country.

The Vietnamese-born Pulitzer Prize-winning author has long written on themes of war, refugees, and exile, now most directly and personally in a new memoir about his own family's experience.

Jeffrey Brown spoke with Nguyen about "A Man of Two Faces" before this conflict began for our arts and culture series, Canvas.

JEFFREY BROWN: A favorite?

VIET THANH NGUYEN, Author, "A Man of Two Faces": Yes.

JEFFREY BROWN: On a recent afternoon just outside Los Angeles, Viet Thanh Nguyen brought us to Golden Deli, a favorite Vietnamese restaurant, to try the fried spring rolls, and talk of exile, secrecy, divided identity, the lives and histories that have made him "A Man of Two Faces," the name of his new memoir.

VIET THANH NGUYEN: When I was growing up, my parents told me that I was 100 percent Vietnamese.

JEFFREY BROWN: One hundred percent.

VIET THANH NGUYEN: One hundred percent.

JEFFREY BROWN: Yes.

VIET THANH NGUYEN: And whenever they said American, they meant other people, not us.

JEFFREY BROWN: Yes.

VIET THANH NGUYEN: So they definitely wanted me to stay Vietnamese.

The United States was where we live, but it wasn't, I think, their idea of a permanent home.

And it wasn't... JEFFREY BROWN: I mean, literally?

Like, they thought they might go back or you might go back or you could somehow... VIET THANH NGUYEN: Well, I think a lot of people are -- yes.

JEFFREY BROWN: Yes?

VIET THANH NGUYEN: I think a lot of refugees think that way, even if you obviously have to live here and work and survive.

JEFFREY BROWN: Yes.

Yes.

VIET THANH NGUYEN: And my parents became citizens.

JEFFREY BROWN: Survival was a central theme of his family's life.

His parents were born in the 1930s during the French colonization of Vietnam.

They moved to the south in 1954, and then, in 1975, when Nguyen was 4, fled to the U.S., refugees twice over.

They eventually settled in San Jose, California, dealing with traumas physical, including a holdup at the grocery story his parents owned in which they were shot and injured, and psychological, never quite leaving the past behind.

We continued our talk at his Pasadena home.

VIET THANH NGUYEN: For me, history was really present, because I felt that history was rippling through all of us Vietnamese refugees through our bodies and our emotions, because we wouldn't speak about history necessarily in the house, but people would be angry, people would be sad, people would be torn up by all these emotions, not just my family, but every other family I ever interacted with.

JEFFREY BROWN: Stories became a way to both escape and forge his own identity through the books he read and eventually his own writing.

VIET THANH NGUYEN: I had to not acknowledge to my parents that what I really wanted to be was a writer, because I felt that writing was how I could save myself and also hopefully save them in some way, like, save their stories, and in some way impact the country in which I was living and growing up in.

JEFFREY BROWN: That puts a lot of weight on you as a writer.

VIET THANH NGUYEN: A self-imposed weight.

JEFFREY BROWN: Self-imposed.

VIET THANH NGUYEN: Right.

JEFFREY BROWN: Which you feel?

VIET THANH NGUYEN: I feel, because I believe stories can do all these things.

JEFFREY BROWN: His debut novel, "The Sympathizer," about a North Vietnamese spy in the South Vietnamese army who then lives among the U.S. refugee community took in all this history.

The new memoir borrows from its opening line: "I am a spy, a sleeper, a spook, a man of two faces."

VIET THANH NGUYEN: Growing up as a refugee in San Jose, California, I felt like a man of two faces.

I was an American spying on my Vietnamese parents, but I was a Vietnamese person spying on Americans when I stepped out of the house.

And so, with this memoir, the only way I could really write it was to imagine the sympathizer writing about me.

I had to, again, pretend I was someone else writing about me to gain some distance from myself, because part of the subject of this book is how difficult it is for us to know ourselves, or at least it's difficult for me to know myself.

JEFFREY BROWN: And how difficult for what he terms America T.M.

to know itself and its often destabilizing role in the world.

There is a sharp political critique here, also of how popular culture, the movies most of all, shape and distort our sense of history, other people, and war itself.

Indeed, Nguyen refers to his memoir as a war story, just not in the way we typically think of one.

VIET THANH NGUYEN: In the 20th century, wars killed more civilians than killed soldiers.

So, why are civilian stories not typically thought of as war stories?

And so when I think about the fact that my family was displaced, that it was fractured, that we left people behind, that my parents' lives were destroyed and had to rebuild them, to me, even though my parents were never soldiers, these are war stories.

JEFFREY BROWN: One person left behind, an older sister.

VIET THANH NGUYEN: I didn't even realize I had a sister until we got a letter from her when I was like 9 years old.

Never came up.

So, that was... (CROSSTALK) JEFFREY BROWN: And you realized she was -- she had been left behind.

VIET THANH NGUYEN: Yes.

And who was this person?

And what happened to our family?

What have we never talked about?

And so that was really a defining element of my life, is trying to figure out how the personal conflicts and emotions and anxieties that are present in all families were present in my family, but they were shaped also by this terrible, terrible history.

JEFFREY BROWN: It's a history that deeply affected his mother, who died in 2018.

Nguyen presents her as a successful, self-made woman, but one who also struggled with mental illness.

VIET THANH NGUYEN: Went to the psychiatric hospital three times in her life.

That was never something we talked about outside of the family.

So she definitely had two faces there.

Her illness will always be a mystery, because what happens inside of us, who knows what combination of genetics and psychology leads to this kind of experience.

But I also surmise, I can guess that everything she underwent, as someone who grew up in 40 years of war and colonization, and being a refugee twice, and being separated from her family, not seeing her siblings for 25 years, not being there when her own mother passed away -- her mother passed away in Vietnam when she was in the United States -- that must have had an impact on her, must have shook her.

JEFFREY BROWN: I knew you first as a fiction writer.

Was it -- how -- what was it like to write about yourself?

VIET THANH NGUYEN: Writing about myself was very difficult.

That is why I had to create some distance between my persona and me.

What does it mean to delve into these family experiences that were so painful?

And so I think that, in fact, I become a better writer, but also hopefully a better human being, a better father, because I could finally engage with these things that I -- that have been so difficult for me to confront for 30 and 40 years.

And then, in the penultimate chapter, the book addresses my own children.

They're 10 and 3.

Maybe, one day, they will read the book, or maybe they will never read the book.

I have no idea.

But it was very important for me in that chapter to say, I hope they never feel the need to write a memoir.

But, if they do, they have my blessing.

JEFFREY BROWN: The memoir "A Man of Two Faces" was long-listed for this year's National Book Award.

For the "PBS NewsHour," I'm Jeffrey Brown in Pasadena, California.

GEOFF BENNETT: And that's the "NewsHour" for tonight.

Remember, there's much more online, including some spooky stories this Halloween.

Learn more about how science and medicine are woven through our modern vampire mythology.

That's at PBS.org/NewsHour.

I'm Geoff Bennett.

On behalf of the entire "NewsHour" team, thank you for joining us, and have a happy Halloween.