Category: Politics

An escalating confrontation between the Trump administration and artificial intelligence firm Anthropic has reached a critical juncture, with Pentagon officials giving the company until Friday to abandon its ethical restrictions or face serious business consequences.

Just one day before the ultimatum expires, Anthropic’s CEO Dario Amodei took a firm stance, stating his organization “cannot in good conscience accede” to the military’s final request for unlimited access to the company’s technology.

While Anthropic, the creator of the Claude chatbot, has the financial stability to walk away from a military contract, the warning issued this week by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth carries much broader implications during the company’s rapid transformation from an obscure San Francisco research facility to one of the globe’s most valuable emerging tech companies.

Should Amodei maintain his position, Pentagon leaders have threatened not only to terminate Anthropic’s existing agreement but also to classify the company as a “supply chain risk” – a label usually reserved for hostile foreign entities that could severely damage the firm’s essential business relationships.

Conversely, if Amodei were to surrender to the pressure, he risks losing credibility within the rapidly expanding AI sector, especially among elite professionals who joined the company specifically because of its commitment to developing advanced AI systems responsibly, given the potential catastrophic dangers of unregulated artificial intelligence.

The company had requested specific guarantees from the Pentagon that Claude would not be deployed for widespread monitoring of American citizens or in completely automated weapons systems. However, following months of behind-the-scenes negotiations that erupted into public confrontation, Anthropic released a Thursday statement explaining that revised contract terms “framed as compromise was paired with legalese that would allow those safeguards to be disregarded at will.”

This response came after Pentagon chief spokesperson Sean Parnell declared on social media that “we will not let ANY company dictate the terms regarding how we make operational decisions” and specified the company has “until 5:01 p.m. ET on Friday to decide” whether to comply with demands or face repercussions.

Defense undersecretary for research and engineering Emil Michael subsequently attacked Amodei personally, claiming on X that he “has a God-complex” and “wants nothing more than to try to personally control the US Military and is ok putting our nation’s safety at risk.”

However, this criticism has found little support throughout Silicon Valley, where increasing numbers of technology professionals from Anthropic’s main competitors, OpenAI and Google, expressed solidarity with Amodei’s position Thursday evening through a public statement.

Both OpenAI and Google, alongside Elon Musk’s xAI, maintain their own agreements to provide AI systems to military forces.

“The Pentagon is negotiating with Google and OpenAI to try to get them to agree to what Anthropic has refused,” the public statement declares. “They’re trying to divide each company with fear that the other will give in.”

The Pentagon’s strategy has also drawn criticism from both Republican and Democratic congressional members, as well as a former Defense Department AI program director.

“Painting a bullseye on Anthropic garners spicy headlines, but everyone loses in the end,” posted retired Air Force Gen. Jack Shanahan on social media.

Shanahan previously encountered different tech industry resistance during the initial Trump presidency while overseeing Maven, an initiative using AI technology for analyzing drone surveillance and weapons targeting. Google employee protests against the company’s Maven participation were so intense that the tech corporation chose not to extend the contract and subsequently promised to avoid using AI for military weapons.

“Since I was square in the middle of Project Maven & Google, it’s reasonable to assume I would take the Pentagon’s side here,” Shanahan posted Thursday on social media. “Yet I’m sympathetic to Anthropic’s position. More so than I was to Google’s in 2018.”

He noted that Claude is already extensively utilized throughout government agencies, including in classified environments, and described Anthropic’s boundaries as “reasonable.” He emphasized that the AI large language models powering chatbots like Claude are “not ready for prime time in national security settings,” especially not for completely autonomous weapons systems.

“They’re not trying to play cute here,” he stated.

Parnell maintained Thursday that the Pentagon seeks to “use Anthropic’s model for all lawful purposes” and argued that expanding technology access would prevent the company from “jeopardizing critical military operations,” though neither he nor other officials have specified their intended applications for the technology.

The military “has no interest in using AI to conduct mass surveillance of Americans (which is illegal) nor do we want to use AI to develop autonomous weapons that operate without human involvement,” Parnell wrote.

During Tuesday’s meeting between Hegseth and Amodei, military officials warned they might classify Anthropic as a supply chain threat, terminate its contract, or activate a Cold War-era statute called the Defense Production Act to grant the military broader authority over the company’s products, regardless of corporate approval.

Amodei responded Thursday that “those latter two threats are inherently contradictory: one labels us a security risk; the other labels Claude as essential to national security.” He expressed hope that the Pentagon would reconsider given Claude’s military value, but added that if not, Anthropic “will work to enable a smooth transition to another provider.”

The current administration is breaking with long-standing White House traditions as President Trump continues to attach his personal brand to various government programs and initiatives.

Unlike his predecessors who typically avoided such self-promotion while in office, Trump has made naming government projects after himself a regular practice during his presidency.

This approach marks a notable departure from the conventional way presidents have conducted themselves in the Oval Office throughout American history.

A small Minnesota community is making efforts to preserve an important piece of American political history by seeking federal recognition for a former vice president’s boyhood residence.

Community supporters in Elmore, Minnesota are pushing to have the childhood residence of the late Walter Mondale included on the National Register of Historic Places. The former vice president grew up in this small town before going on to serve under President Jimmy Carter from 1977 to 1981.

Local preservationists believe the residence deserves official historical designation due to its connection to Mondale, who also served as a U.S. Senator from Minnesota and was the Democratic presidential nominee in 1984.

WASHINGTON — Recent polling data from Gallup reveals a historic transformation in American public opinion regarding the Middle East conflict, with citizens now showing nearly equal support for both Palestinians and Israelis after generations of strong pro-Israel sentiment.

The research indicates that just three years prior, more than half of Americans (54%) expressed greater sympathy for Israel, while less than one-third (31%) sided with Palestinians.

Current findings show a remarkable reversal, with 41% of respondents indicating stronger support for Palestinians and 36% expressing greater sympathy for Israelis.

These results highlight how Middle East policy has become increasingly divisive across America, creating significant consequences for both domestic politics and international relations. Democratic voters have primarily fueled this transformation, now showing substantially higher levels of Palestinian support. Israel aid has emerged as a major point of contention within Democratic primary contests this election cycle.

According to Gallup’s research, this opinion shift began before Hamas launched its October 7, 2023 assault on Israel, but gained momentum throughout Israel’s subsequent Gaza military campaign. The survey carries a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points, indicating public sentiment toward both sides has reached statistical parity.

“It’s the first time they have reached parity, which is really quite striking,” said Benedict Vigers, a senior global news writer at Gallup. “In not many years, that very significant gap in public opinion has now completely closed.”

Approximately two-thirds of Democratic respondents now express primary concern for Palestinians, while roughly 20% show greater Israeli sympathy. This represents a dramatic departure from 2016 data, when approximately half of Democrats favored Israel and only 25% supported Palestinians.

This opinion evolution predates the current Israel-Hamas conflict that has created deep divisions within Democratic ranks. The initial Hamas assault resulted in approximately 1,200 deaths, predominantly civilians, plus 251 hostages taken, while Israel’s military response has been widely criticized as excessive. Gaza health authorities report over 72,000 Palestinian casualties, with nearly half being women and children, alongside widespread territorial destruction. Numerous progressive leaders and advocacy groups now characterize Israel’s military actions as genocidal — allegations Israel strongly rejects.

Gallup data shows Democrats expressing stronger Palestinian sympathy than Israeli support since 2023 — surveyed before the October 7 attacks occurred — but this trend toward Palestinian support and away from Israeli backing began around 2017.

Some early sympathy decline appeared connected to disapproval of conservative Israeli leadership under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, whose American favorability dropped nearly 15 percentage points from 2017 to 2024 in separate Gallup research.

Netanyahu experienced tensions with former President Barack Obama during his administration’s final year, then developed closer ties with President Donald Trump, who provided Netanyahu several significant wins during his initial presidency, including Jerusalem capital recognition and Golan Heights sovereignty acknowledgment. Trump also facilitated diplomatic and commercial relationships between Israel and three Arab nations. The Trump-Netanyahu alliance has continued into Trump’s current term.

The Israeli-Palestinian situation created friction for Democrats throughout President Joe Biden’s tenure and during the 2024 election cycle. An AP-NORC survey from late 2023, conducted months into the Gaza conflict, revealed sharp Democratic divisions over whether America provided excessive Israeli support, while another 2024 AP-NORC poll found Democratic voters more likely to assign significant war escalation responsibility to Israel’s government.

Democratic Palestinian sympathy intensified as fighting continued, Gallup research demonstrates, with independent voters also shifting perspectives. Independent voters expressed stronger Palestinian than Israeli sympathy for the first time in Gallup’s tracking this year. About 40% of independents show greater Palestinian sympathy compared to roughly 30% favoring Israelis, representing a new low.

Most Republican voters maintain Israeli support — approximately 70% express stronger Israeli sympathy — though this reflects a slight decrease from roughly 80% before conflict began. Some figures within the Republican “America First” isolationist movement increasingly question traditional American Israeli support.

Young adults aged 18 to 34 demonstrate growing Palestinian sympathy according to the Gallup survey.

Younger American sympathies have trended toward Palestinians since approximately 2020, reaching new peaks this year. About half of 18-34 year-olds report stronger Palestinian sympathy, compared to roughly 25% expressing similar Israeli feelings.

Student demonstrations opposing the Israel-Hamas conflict emerged on campuses nationwide during the war, demanding colleges divest from Israel-supporting investments.

However, this shift represents only “partly a generational story,” according to Vigers.

The latest polling also found middle-aged Americans (35-54) expressing stronger Palestinian than Israeli sympathy for the first time — reversing last year’s pattern. While Americans over 55 maintain greater Israeli sympathy, that margin continues narrowing.

“With adults over 55, they are more sympathetic to Israelis, but it’s as low as it’s been since 2005,” Vigers said.

About 57% of American adults support establishing an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, according to new polling. This figure remains consistent with recent years, as at least half of Americans have backed Palestinian statehood since 2020.

Vigers notes that “party polarization is at or near its record high” on this question, despite not showing sharp year-over-year increases.

Recent years have seen increased Democratic and independent support for two-state solutions. Currently, approximately three-quarters of Democrats and roughly 60% of independents support independent Palestinian statehood. Only about one-third of Republicans share this view.

Opinions among those directly affected by two-state solutions differ significantly. Only about 30% of Israelis living in Israel and Palestinians in the West Bank and east Jerusalem supported a two-state solution featuring an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel, according to the 2025 Gallup World Poll.

“On the ground, in the region, far fewer Israelis and Palestinians tell us that they are in favor of the two-state solution than Americans when asked a very similar question,” Vigers said. “There is that interesting sort of disconnect between the region itself and Americans’ views toward it.”

The Gallup poll was conducted February 2-16, 2026, among 1,001 American adults aged 18 and older, using Gallup’s probability-based panel sample. The margin of sampling error for all adults is plus or minus 4.0 percentage points.

During his State of the Union speech on Tuesday, President Donald Trump revealed a new initiative designed to help millions of Americans build their retirement nest eggs, particularly targeting workers who don’t have access to workplace retirement benefits.

The proposed program would provide government matching contributions of up to $1,000 each year for eligible participants, potentially benefiting tens of millions of Americans who currently struggle to save for their golden years.

The Scale of America’s Retirement Challenge

Recent data from the National Institute on Retirement Security reveals a stark picture: half of all American workers between ages 21 and 64 have saved $955 or less for retirement. Even among those with employer-provided plans like 401(k)s, half have accumulated less than $40,000.

These figures fall dramatically short of what experts say is needed. A 2025 BlackRock survey found that respondents believe they need $2 million for a comfortable retirement. BlackRock CEO Larry Fink noted in his annual investor letter that “Almost no one is close” to reaching that goal.

The situation is particularly concerning for Generation X workers, ages 46 to 61, with 62% having saved less than $150,000 despite approaching retirement age.

Many younger workers postpone retirement contributions due to student loan payments or saving for home purchases, but this delay can prove extremely expensive since early contributions have more time to grow tax-free.

Who Would Benefit from the New Program?

Research from the Economic Innovation Group indicates that nearly 54 million American workers have no access to employer-provided retirement plans. Additionally, 63 million people lack access to employer matching contributions, which financial advisors often call the “only free lunch in investing.”

Details of Trump’s Proposal

The president’s plan includes two main components. Workers without employer-sponsored retirement plans would gain access to a program similar to the Thrift Savings Plan currently available to federal employees. The government would then match employee contributions to both these new plans and existing employer plans that don’t offer matching, providing up to $1,000 annually.

The plans would feature an array of low-cost index funds for investors to choose from. Craig Bolanos, co-founder of VestGen Wealth Partners, says this makes them more attractive than previous attempts like the MyRA accounts.

Any expansion of the matching amount would require Congressional approval.

Previous Presidential Efforts

This isn’t the first time a president has addressed retirement savings in a State of the Union address. In 2014, former President Barack Obama introduced MyRA accounts overseen by the Treasury Department, which allowed after-tax contributions with principal protection. However, these accounts failed to gain traction and were eliminated by the first Trump administration in 2017.

Under legislation signed by former President Joe Biden in 2022, low- to moderate-income households will qualify starting next January for government matching of 50% of their retirement savings contributions, up to $1,000 annually.

Why Not Focus on Social Security Instead?

Most Americans rely on Social Security for the majority of their retirement income, but the program faces sustainability challenges. Projections show that reserves helping cover program costs will be depleted by 2033, with ongoing payroll taxes expected to cover less than 80% of current benefit levels.

Addressing this shortfall would likely require politically difficult choices such as raising the eligibility age, reducing benefits, or limiting payments to lower-income Americans. As BlackRock’s Fink has observed, Social Security serves as a safety net rather than a path to financial security.

Potential Obstacles

The proposal currently lacks specific implementation details. The administration will need to build public awareness and make participation simple, as research shows that easier or automatic saving programs see higher participation rates.

However, questions remain about whether lower-income Americans facing other financial pressures will be able to contribute. Catherine Valega from Green Bee Advisory notes that “Most of them are not flexible with their cash flow to even consider putting money aside.”

Additional concerns include the cost to the government, which already operates with a substantial budget deficit, and whether more efficient approaches might exist, such as strengthening Social Security.

Industry Response

Some financial professionals welcome the initiative. Michael Lofley, a financial advisor at HBKS in Florida, reports that one of his clients, a small business owner who already provides a 401(k) plan to his 10 employees, is considering adding these new accounts and related “Trump accounts” for his employees’ children as part of his benefits package.

WASHINGTON — The American Israel Public Affairs Committee finds itself at the center of another contentious Democratic primary battle in Illinois, where the influential lobbying group is investing heavily to shape the outcome of a congressional race.

The organization, commonly known as AIPAC, has committed at least $1.9 million in television advertising through its super PAC to support Chicago city treasurer Melissa Conyears-Ervin in her bid to succeed retiring Rep. Danny Davis. Conyears-Ervin faces more than a dozen rivals in the March 17 Democratic primary.

Additional groups suspected of having ties to AIPAC are also pouring money into Illinois races, adding fuel to an already intense political atmosphere in a state famous for its aggressive campaign tactics.

This latest spending blitz follows AIPAC’s controversial involvement in a New Jersey special election, where the group invested nearly $2 million targeting former congressman Tom Malinowski. That effort ultimately failed when progressive candidate Analilia Mejia, who has been critical of Israel, narrowly defeated Malinowski.

Despite the setback and widespread criticism, AIPAC shows no signs of scaling back its political activities.

“We expect to be involved in dozens of races both in primaries and general elections this cycle,” said Patrick Dorton, a spokesman for AIPAC’s affiliated super PAC, the United Democracy Project, or UDP.

The organization has intensified its political engagement as Democratic support for Israel faces increasing challenges due to the ongoing conflict in Gaza, threatening the historically bipartisan backing for military aid to the longtime ally. However, AIPAC’s aggressive primary interventions risk deepening divisions within the Democratic Party.

Campaign finance regulations make it extremely difficult to trace the sources of much of the money flowing into Illinois races. While UDP openly acknowledges its AIPAC connection, newer organizations like Elect Chicago Women and Affordable Chicago Now are not required to reveal their donors until after the primary election.

Critics believe these groups serve as channels for AIPAC funding, though the organization has refused to confirm or deny any connections.

According to AdImpact, a nonpartisan advertising tracking service, UDP, Elect Chicago Women, and Affordable Chicago Now rank among the top four spenders on House race advertisements, with combined expenditures approaching $11 million, most of it directed toward Illinois contests.

Notably, none of these organizations reference Israel in their campaign advertisements, following a pattern used by AIPAC-affiliated groups in previous elections.

In New Jersey, the United Democracy Project attacked Malinowski by claiming he supported President Donald Trump’s deportation policies, attempting to undermine his standing with progressive voters. In Illinois, the group promotes Conyears-Ervin by emphasizing her commitment to reducing costs and defending healthcare access.

This approach has fueled suspicions and anxiety about AIPAC’s political reach. Pro-Israel advocates argue that critics are employing antisemitic stereotypes about divided loyalties, while others contend that the focus on AIPAC misses the broader issue.

“I think the folks who are talking the most about AIPAC are seeking to demonize Israel and create a break in the U.S.-Israel relationship,” said Rep. Brad Schneider, a Democrat representing Illinois’ 10th district.

“The problem is Citizens United and the decision to allow dark money,” added Schneider, who co-chairs the Congressional Jewish Caucus. “The problem is the rules. Let’s fix the rules.”

Several candidates have criticized their opponents for accepting AIPAC support. Four progressive candidates running for different Illinois congressional seats held a joint February press conference denouncing the organization’s involvement in state primaries. Another candidate is marketing anti-AIPAC t-shirts through her campaign website.

Malinowski remains bitter about his experience as an AIPAC target and has vowed not to endorse any candidates supported by the organization this year. He maintains his pro-Israel stance despite opposing unconditional aid to the country, a position that drew AIPAC’s opposition.

“Obviously, we were going to talk about Israel and Gaza in the campaign because many voters would be asking questions about it,” Malinowski said. “But I wanted those discussions to be about the substance, not colored by baggage of endorsements from groups that are controversial now.”

AIPAC characterized Mejia’s primary victory as “an anticipated possibility,” indicating no regret that their involvement may have helped elect a candidate who has labeled Israel’s Gaza actions as genocide.

While AIPAC has maintained political activities for decades, it only began direct campaign spending during the 2022 midterm elections.

Federal Election Commission records show the organization has spent over $221 million through its traditional PAC and super PAC between December 2021 and January 2026.

The super PAC has concentrated primarily on Democratic primaries. During the 2022 and 2024 election cycles, UDP invested at least $1 million supporting or opposing 18 candidates, with 16 of them being Democrats. Many of these candidates were competing in open seat races.

Traditional PACs can raise and contribute up to $5,000 per candidate per election and may coordinate directly with campaigns. Super PACs face no fundraising or spending restrictions but cannot make direct contributions to candidates or coordinate communications with them.

In 2024, UDP’s largest investments supported centrist candidates challenging progressive incumbents. The group spent more than $13 million in New York’s 16th District Democratic primary, where current Rep. George Latimer defeated former Rep. Jamaal Bowman. It also invested $8.5 million opposing former Rep. Cori Bush, who lost her primary to Rep. Wesley Bell.

Former President Donald Trump finds himself in an unusual position as he prepares to visit Texas on Friday – unable to pick a favorite among three Republican friends vying for a U.S. Senate seat.

During his first major trip since delivering the State of the Union address, Trump will host all three GOP primary contenders at his Texas event focused on energy and economic policies, just days before voters head to the polls on Tuesday.

The contentious primary pits incumbent Senator John Cornyn, seeking his fifth term, against Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and Representative Wesley Hunt in what has devolved into a nasty personal battle. Each candidate has been working overtime to showcase their connection to Trump, who has withheld the endorsement they all desperately want.

Trump plans to build on themes from his Tuesday State of the Union speech, emphasizing economic growth and national security – key Republican talking points as the party works to maintain its congressional control this fall.

The former president’s reluctance to take sides reveals the complicated nature of this particular race.

A portion of Texas Republicans have soured on Cornyn, partly due to his initial skepticism about Trump’s 2024 presidential bid and his involvement in crafting stricter gun legislation following the tragic 2022 Uvalde school shooting. However, Senate Republican leaders and supporting organizations view Cornyn as having the best shot in a general election, given the controversies surrounding Paxton.

Paxton successfully fought off impeachment proceedings related to fraud allegations in 2023 and has dealt with public accusations of extramarital affairs made by his wife, state Senator Angela Paxton.

Both Senate Majority Leader John Thune and South Carolina Senator Tim Scott, who leads the National Republican Senatorial Committee, have pushed Trump to back Cornyn. They contend that defending the seat with Paxton as the nominee would require hundreds of millions of additional dollars.

“It is a strong possibility we cannot hold Texas if John Cornyn is not our nominee,” Scott stated during a Wednesday Fox News appearance.

Hunt, a Houston-area congressman serving his second term, joined the race later but emphasizes his Trump connection, having endorsed the former president early in his 2024 campaign. Hunt frequently campaigned alongside Trump and secured a prominent speaking opportunity at the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee.

Should no candidate secure 50% of Tuesday’s vote, the top two will compete in a May 26 runoff election.

Cornyn’s campaign and approximately six supporting organizations have invested over $63 million in the contest since fall, primarily targeting Paxton while recently shifting attacks toward Hunt to prevent him from reaching the runoff.

Trump hinted at potential involvement earlier this month, saying he was giving “a serious look” to making an endorsement in the Texas primary, but has since maintained his neutral stance.

Television viewers across Texas wouldn’t guess Trump’s neutrality from the advertising blitz. Cornyn has run commercials since last year highlighting his alignment with Trump’s policies, despite their sometimes strained relationship. Both Paxton and Hunt currently air advertisements showing them alongside Trump.

“I like all three of them, actually. Those are the toughest races. They’ve all supported me. They’re all good. You’re supposed to pick one, so we’ll see what happens. But I support all three,” Trump commented earlier this month.

While Republicans battle among themselves, Democrats have their own competitive primary featuring state Representative James Talarico, who describes himself as a policy expert who frequently references scripture, against progressive favorite U.S. Representative Jasmine Crockett.

Trump has actively participated in other Texas Republican primaries. In the state’s 34th congressional district, which includes portions of Corpus Christi, former Representative Mayra Flores seeks to regain her position against Trump-endorsed Eric Flores (no family relation). The primary winner will challenge Democratic Representative Vicente Gonzalez, a longtime GOP target whose redrawn district now favors Republican candidates.

Eric Flores will attend Trump’s event at the Port of Corpus Christi, though the venue technically sits in an adjacent district.

In another part of Texas, Trump has endorsed Representative Tony Gonzales, who faces calls from fellow Republicans to resign following reports of an alleged relationship with a former staff member who later died after setting herself on fire. Gonzales refuses to step down and maintains that “opportunities for all of the details and facts to come out” will arise, stating the current reports don’t reflect “all the facts.”

Gonzales confronts a primary challenge from Brandon Herrera, a firearms manufacturer and Second Amendment advocate who lost to Gonzales by under 400 votes in their 2024 runoff. The White House declined to comment Thursday on whether Trump continues supporting Gonzales.

President Trump’s choice for the nation’s top doctor faced questions from lawmakers Wednesday about the administration’s pesticide policies during her Senate confirmation hearing.

Dr. Casey Means, nominated to serve as U.S. Surgeon General, fielded inquiries regarding the Trump administration’s executive order concerning glyphosate and its broader strategy on agricultural chemical regulation during the Wednesday session.

The confirmation hearing comes as the new administration moves forward with policy changes affecting the agricultural sector and public health oversight.

WASHINGTON – Three intelligence sources are disputing President Donald Trump’s recent assertion that Iran is close to developing missiles capable of striking the United States, saying current intelligence assessments don’t support this timeline.

During Tuesday’s State of the Union address, Trump told Congress that Tehran was “working on missiles that will soon reach” American soil as he built his argument for potential military action against the Islamic Republic.

However, two sources indicate that a 2025 Defense Intelligence Agency evaluation remains unchanged, projecting Iran could require until 2035 to create a “militarily viable intercontinental ballistic missile” using its current satellite-launching technology.

White House spokesperson Anna Kelly defended the president’s position, stating: “President Trump is absolutely right to highlight the grave concern posed by Iran, a country that chants ‘death to America,’ possessing intercontinental ballistic missiles.”

One intelligence source suggested that even with technological help from China or North Korea – both Iranian partners – the country would likely need at least eight years to produce “something that is actually ICBM level and operational.”

The sources, speaking anonymously due to the classified nature of intelligence matters, acknowledged they weren’t aware of any assessments showing Iran’s imminent missile threat to the U.S. homeland, though they couldn’t dismiss the existence of newer reports they hadn’t seen.

The New York Times previously reported that intelligence agencies believe Iran remains years away from missiles capable of reaching American territory.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio used more cautious language Wednesday, describing Iran as being “on a pathway to one day being able to develop weapons that could reach the continental U.S.”

Trump’s missile claims emerge as American and Iranian representatives continue nuclear program negotiations without apparent progress, while the U.S. maintains a significant military presence in the region.

In his Tuesday speech, Trump cited Tehran’s support for militant organizations, its crackdown on protesters, and its missile and nuclear programs as regional and American threats.

Without offering proof, Trump claimed Iran was starting to reconstruct nuclear facilities he said were “obliterated” in U.S. airstrikes last June targeting uranium enrichment sites.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi rejected claims of expanded missile development in a Wednesday interview with India Today TV.

“We are not developing long range missiles. We have limited range to below 2000 kilometers intentionally,” Araghchi explained. “We don’t want it to be a global threat. We only have (them) to defend ourselves. Our missiles build deterrence.”

Iran maintains its uranium enrichment serves purely civilian purposes, denying any nuclear weapons ambitions.

Both U.S. intelligence agencies and the International Atomic Energy Agency, the UN’s nuclear monitoring body, report that Iran ended its nuclear weapons development in 2003.

The IAEA notes, however, that Tehran has continued uranium enrichment in recent years, including to levels approaching weapons-grade purity.

Trump has warned of attacks on Iran if it executes protesters arrested during January’s anti-government demonstrations or fails to reach a nuclear agreement.

Iran operates the Middle East’s largest ballistic missile arsenal, with weapons capable of hitting Israel, regional U.S. installations, and portions of Europe.

The country has also created space-launch vehicles for satellite deployment that specialists say could potentially be converted into ICBMs for nuclear warhead delivery.

David Albright, a former UN nuclear inspector and president of the Institute for Science and International Security, emphasized Iran’s limitations in developing functional warhead delivery systems.

“Iran can launch a very long-range missile because of its space launch program,” Albright noted. “But it needs lots of work to develop an adequate RV (re-entry vehicle).”

Albright and other experts pointed out that Israeli airstrikes in recent years significantly damaged Iranian facilities producing liquid and solid-fuel ballistic missiles.

WASHINGTON – Intelligence officials are questioning the accuracy of President Donald Trump’s recent statements about Iran’s missile capabilities, with three sources saying his claims lack backing from current U.S. intelligence assessments.

During his State of the Union speech to Congress on Tuesday, Trump told lawmakers that Iran was “working on missiles that will soon reach” American soil, using this assertion as part of his argument for potential military strikes against the Middle Eastern nation.

However, intelligence sources indicate Trump’s timeline appears overstated. Two officials confirmed that current Defense Intelligence Agency projections remain unchanged from their unclassified 2025 report, which estimates Iran would need until 2035 to successfully create a “militarily viable intercontinental ballistic missile” using technology from their current space launch programs.

The discrepancy raises questions about the intelligence foundation supporting Trump’s public statements regarding Iran’s weapons development progress and potential military responses.

White House officials chose not to provide comment on the matter when contacted by reporters.

FORT HANCOCK, Texas — Congressional representatives revealed Thursday that military forces deployed laser technology to destroy a Customs and Border Protection surveillance drone, leading federal aviation officials to expand airspace restrictions near El Paso, Texas.

The reason behind the laser deployment remains unclear, marking the second such incident in the region over a two-week period.

The previous laser activation occurred near Fort Bliss, approximately 50 miles northwest, when CBP personnel fired the weapon without hitting any target. That earlier event forced the FAA to temporarily halt all air traffic at El Paso’s airport and surrounding airspace. Thursday’s incident resulted in a more limited closure that did not disrupt commercial aviation.

Congressman Rick Larsen, along with other senior Democrats on the House Transportation and Infrastructure committee, expressed shock upon learning of the most recent event.

“Our heads are exploding over the news,” the legislators stated collectively. They condemned the Trump administration for “sidestepping” bipartisan legislation designed to enhance drone operator training and strengthen coordination between the Pentagon, FAA, and Department of Homeland Security.

“Now, we’re seeing the result of its incompetence,” they declared.

Both the Defense and Transportation departments directed inquiries to the FAA, which issued a concise statement confirming the expanded airspace closure around Fort Hancock. Border Protection officials have not yet provided responses to media questions.

The El Paso airport shutdown two weeks earlier lasted several hours but caused significant concern and resulted in multiple flight cancellations in the border city of nearly 700,000 residents.

During that previous incident, CBP deployed anti-drone laser technology near Fort Bliss without coordinating with aviation authorities, prompting the FAA to close El Paso airspace as a safety precaution, according to sources with knowledge of the situation who were not authorized to speak publicly.

Following that event, congressional members characterized it as another instance of government dysfunction, with various agencies failing to maintain proper coordination.

Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy announced plans to brief Congress members this week regarding the incidents. Speaking at an unrelated press conference last Friday, Duffy defended the FAA’s decision to close El Paso airspace and dismissed suggestions that communication failures contributed to the problems.

The investigation into last year’s fatal midair collision near Washington, D.C., which killed 67 people when an airliner struck an Army helicopter, revealed ongoing coordination challenges between the FAA and Pentagon.

The National Transportation Safety Board determined that both the FAA and Army failed to share critical safety information about the concerning frequency of near-miss incidents around Reagan National Airport and did not adequately address associated risks.

ST. PAUL, Minn. — A federal judge in Minnesota delivered a forceful ultimatum Thursday to both the state’s top federal prosecutor and Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials, declaring they must follow court directives or face potential criminal contempt proceedings.

Chief Judge Patrick Schiltz, a conservative jurist nominated by former President George W. Bush, responded sharply to a February 9th email from U.S. Attorney Daniel Rosen. In that message, the prosecutor challenged the judge’s characterization of ICE’s failure to comply with judicial orders stemming from recent immigration enforcement actions across Minnesota.

This latest judicial rebuke represents another chapter in ongoing tensions between federal courts in Minnesota and other states versus the current administration’s approach to mass deportation efforts, with judges frequently citing due process violations and inadequate treatment standards.

A separate judge also scheduled a contempt hearing for Tuesday, requiring Rosen, his civil division chief, and ICE representatives to appear over their failure to return detained individuals’ personal belongings as ordered.

Previously, Schiltz had labeled ICE as repeatedly violating court directives related to enforcement activities. In a January 28th ruling, he voiced “grave concerns” after Minnesota federal judges documented 96 order violations across 74 different cases. Thursday’s filing revealed that rather than improving compliance, “the government’s response was not to do a better job complying with court orders, but instead to attack the Court.”

Rosen pushed back against the judge’s assessment, informing Schiltz that his office’s examination of 12 cases from the original 74 showed strong compliance rates. The prosecutor argued the judicial tally “was far beyond the pale of accuracy for an order that would be wielded so publicly and so sharply. The lawyers in my civil division didn’t deserve it.”

In Thursday’s new filing, Schiltz revealed he directed his judicial colleagues and clerks to re-examine the data. Though they found some errors on both sides, their review confirmed ICE violated 97 orders across 66 of the referenced cases.

“Increasingly, this Court has had to resort to using the threat of civil contempt to force ICE to comply with orders,” Schiltz stated. “The Court is not aware of another occasion in the history of the United States in which a federal court has had to threaten contempt — again and again and again — to force the United States government to comply with court orders.”

The chief judge included documentation of 113 additional violations spanning 77 more cases, most occurring after the initial count.

“The judges of this District have been extraordinarily patient with the government attorneys, recognizing that they have been put in an impossible position by Rosen and his superiors in the Department of Justice,” Schiltz noted, referencing widespread resignations that have depleted Rosen’s staff. “What those attorneys ‘didn’t deserve’ was the Administration sending 3000 ICE agents to Minnesota to detain people without making any provision for handling the hundreds of lawsuits that were sure to follow.”

Neither Rosen nor ICE representatives provided immediate responses to requests for comment.

During Wednesday’s news conference — his first since assuming office in October — Rosen confirmed his prosecutor ranks have been severely reduced. He showed frustration when questioned about at least two criminal cases recently dismissed partly due to staffing shortages. Rosen reported having 64 assistant U.S. attorneys when his predecessor left office, 47 on his first day, and currently just 36. However, he maintained he was recruiting new prosecutors rapidly and insisted his office retained capacity for handling serious crimes.

Schiltz concluded with an unambiguous warning:

“This Court will continue to do whatever is required to protect the rule of law, including, if necessary, moving to the use of criminal contempt,” he declared. “One way or another, ICE will comply with this Court’s orders.”

Denver’s mayor took a bold stance against federal immigration enforcement Thursday, issuing an executive order that directs city police to shield peaceful demonstrators during ICE operations while blocking immigration agents from accessing municipal facilities.

Mayor Mike Johnston’s directive comes as the Trump administration intensifies its immigration enforcement efforts through ICE operations that civil rights organizations have strongly criticized, particularly following the deadly shooting of two American citizens by federal agents in Minnesota last month.

The fatal Minnesota incident has prompted Democratic city and state leaders across the country to take action against Trump’s policies.

Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey recently implemented his own restrictions, forbidding federal agencies from utilizing city-owned parking structures, lots, and vacant properties for immigration enforcement staging areas.

Johnston’s executive order mandates that when federal immigration operations occur, including situations involving increased ICE personnel, Denver’s police departments must implement their standard de-escalation procedures to safeguard peaceful demonstrators while maintaining public safety and protecting First Amendment rights.

During a press briefing discussing the new order, Johnston made his position clear: “If we see any ICE officer using excessive force against a Denver resident, we will step in to detain that officer and remove them from the situation.”

“We hold our own officers to that standard, and we will hold any ICE agent to the same,” Johnston continued.

The White House responded by urging local authorities to cooperate with ICE rather than oppose it. White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson stated, according to Politico, “Anyone doing otherwise is simply doing the bidding of criminal illegal aliens.”

President Trump has defended his administration’s enforcement actions as necessary measures to reduce unauthorized immigration and enhance national security. He has also warned Democratic-controlled cities and states of potential federal funding cuts.

Civil rights organizations argue that the current enforcement approach has fostered an atmosphere of fear among both citizens and immigrants, while undermining constitutional protections including due process and freedom of speech.

The Trump administration scored a legal win when a federal appeals court overturned a lower court ruling that had blocked an executive order affecting union rights for federal workers.

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a preliminary injunction that had stopped the implementation of the executive order, which would limit collective bargaining rights for approximately 800,000 federal employees across the nation.

Among those affected by the court’s decision are workers employed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service, which oversees food safety regulations and inspections nationwide.

President Donald Trump’s State of the Union speech this week drew 32.6 million television viewers, representing a decline of 4 million from his previous year’s congressional address and marking his lowest viewership for the annual presidential message.

According to Nielsen ratings, Trump’s remarks — which set a record as the lengthiest televised State of the Union in presidential history — aired across 15 separate television networks.

During his initial presidential term, Trump consistently attracted at least 37.1 million viewers for each of his four State of the Union speeches. His audience numbers surpassed 40 million annually from 2017 to 2019, reaching a high point of 47.7 million for his inaugural address, Nielsen data shows.

Tuesday’s viewership figures closely matched those of former President Joe Biden’s last State of the Union in 2024, which drew 32.2 million watchers. The presidential address continues to rank among television’s most-watched annual events, especially among older demographics, with 23.6 million of Trump’s Tuesday audience being viewers aged 55 and older.

Fox News Channel dominated viewership preferences, capturing 9.1 million of Trump’s total audience. ABC News secured second place with 5.1 million viewers, while no other network managed to attract more than 3.6 million watchers.

The chairwoman of the National Transportation Safety Board delivered sharp criticism Thursday against House lawmakers, saying their aviation safety legislation fails to properly implement her agency’s recommendations following a deadly midair collision near the nation’s capital that claimed 67 lives.

Jennifer Homendy, who leads the NTSB, described the House proposal as having “watered-down” provisions that won’t adequately prevent future disasters. She argued that a Senate version, which fell just one vote shy of House passage earlier this week, would be far more effective. The NTSB sent an official letter Thursday afternoon to two House committees stating they cannot support the current legislation.

“We can have disagreements over policy all day. But when something is sold as these are the NTSB recommendations and that is not factually accurate, we have a problem with that. Because now you’re using the NTSB and you’re using people who lost loved ones in terrible tragedies,” Homendy stated. “You’re using their pain to move your agenda forward.”

At the heart of the dispute lies Homendy’s concern, shared by crash victims’ families, that all aircraft should be mandated to carry advanced tracking technology the NTSB has advocated since 2008. This equipment would give pilots better awareness of nearby air traffic. While aircraft already must have Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast Out systems near major airports to transmit their position, the ADS-B In technology that receives location data from other aircraft remains optional.

Rather than mandating ADS-B In systems, the House proposal would direct the Federal Aviation Administration to develop regulations for the most advanced tracking technology available. However, the legislation includes exceptions for corporate jets and smaller aircraft in certain airspace areas. Homendy also criticized weaknesses in other provisions, including restrictions on military authority to disable tracking systems and insufficient requirements for ensuring the technology functions properly.

House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee leaders Sam Graves and Rick Larsen chose not to address Homendy’s remarks Thursday, though they have previously stated their ALERT bill properly handles the 50 safety recommendations the NTSB issued after investigating the crash between an American Airlines aircraft and an Army Black Hawk helicopter.

The lawmakers defended their approach and promised collaboration with families, Senate colleagues, and industry representatives to create the most effective solution quickly. Committee markup of the bill is expected within weeks.

“From the beginning, we have stressed the importance of getting this right, and we are confident that we will achieve that goal,” Larsen and Graves stated. House Speaker Mike Johnson has also expressed commitment to advancing the legislation.

The NTSB published a detailed comparison between their recommendations and the House bill, documenting numerous areas where the proposed law doesn’t fully address necessary reforms.

Doug Lane, whose wife and son died in the January 29, 2005 collision, joined other bereaved families in calling the House measure “not really a serious attempt to address the NTSB recommendations.” Lane suggested the bill’s timing, introduced days before voting on the Senate’s ROTOR Act, appeared calculated to undermine that unanimous Senate proposal and delay ADS-B In requirements through extended regulatory proceedings.

Matt Collins, who lost his brother Chris in the tragedy, emphasized that mandatory ADS-B In systems are essential for family approval.

“As far as the ALERT act — the way it’s written now, I can’t endorse the way its written now. It needs to include ADS-B In,” Collins declared. “It’s non-negotiable for us as family members, extremely non-negotiable.”

While the NTSB identified systematic failures and years of unheeded warnings as primary crash factors, Homendy has maintained that ADS-B In equipment on both aircraft, if activated, would have prevented the collision. Army protocols at the time required helicopters to fly with such systems disabled to maintain operational secrecy, despite the involved helicopter conducting routine training rather than sensitive operations.

Homendy accused House members of selectively incorporating NTSB recommendations rather than comprehensive implementation.

“We were very explicit of what needed to occur,” Homendy explained. “When we issue a recommendation, those recommendations are aimed at preventing a tragedy from happening again. And if you’re just going to give us half a loaf, it’s not going to do it. We’re not gonna save lives.”

A high-ranking White House official announced Thursday he plans to closely examine the aviation industry following troublesome experiences he and his wife had with American Airlines flights.

Deputy White House Chief of Staff James Blair expressed his frustration on social media platform X, describing how American Airlines caused him a 2.5-hour delay due to staff failing to detect empty hydraulic fluid before his aircraft reached the runway. His wife faced a different problem when the airline apparently neglected to schedule a pilot for her flight.

“I’m going to take a new interest in the airline industry,” Blair stated in his post.

Neither the White House nor American Airlines provided immediate responses to requests for comment.

The carrier has faced increased criticism following its handling of a major winter storm in late January that resulted in extensive flight cancellations and highlighted weaknesses in the airline’s recovery procedures.

According to information from aviation analytics company OAG, American Airlines performed worse than major competitors in January. The carrier ranked behind Southwest Airlines, Alaska Airlines, United Airlines, and Delta Air Lines for punctuality while recording the highest rate of canceled flights among these carriers.

The Trump administration has been rolling back several aviation consumer protection measures that were introduced during the Biden presidency.

This past December, the Transportation Department decided to eliminate certain airline penalties that had been imposed under the previous administration. This included canceling $16.7 million in fines levied against American Airlines in 2024 as part of an agreement addressing how the company treated passengers with disabilities.

The department also forgave the outstanding $11 million portion of Southwest Airlines’ penalty, which was part of a $140 million resolution concerning operational failures that left over 2 million travelers stranded during the December 2022 holiday season.

In November, transportation officials withdrew a Biden-era proposal that would have mandated airlines provide cash payments to passengers when flight disruptions were the carrier’s fault.

Most recently, the Transportation Department has suggested revising its enforcement approach to reduce emphasis on imposing financial penalties against airlines that breach consumer protection regulations, moving away from the stricter enforcement policies established during the Biden years.

Minnesota’s Democratic Governor Tim Walz unveiled new anti-fraud legislation Thursday following a federal immigration enforcement operation in his state that was justified by allegations of program fraud.

The announcement comes after the Trump administration conducted an extensive immigration enforcement campaign in Minnesota over several months, which included incidents where federal agents fatally shot two American citizens in January. Federal officials also suspended funding for various social programs based on fraud claims, though the deportation operations have been reduced this month.

“This package strengthens oversight, improves detection, expands enforcement, and increases penalties to protect every dollar Minnesotans depend on. We’ve followed the experts, audits, and proven roadmaps; now it’s time for the Legislature to act,” Walz stated Thursday.

The governor’s “Anti-Fraud Package” would enhance auditing procedures and internal oversight, create a centralized inspector general office, broaden the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension’s authority to issue subpoenas, and impose lifetime prohibitions on state contracts and grants for those found guilty of fraud.

Additional provisions include establishing a new public funds theft law, increasing fraud penalties by 20%, and extending the statute of limitations to seven years for specific fraud-related offenses.

On Wednesday, the Trump administration suspended $259 million in deferred Medicaid payments to Minnesota. State officials report this latest funding freeze adds to federal withholding of more than $2 billion in annual Medicaid support for Minnesota.

Minnesota’s health department has submitted a corrective action plan seeking to persuade the Trump administration to restore the funding.

President Trump has made claims about fraudulent activities within Somali communities in Minnesota. The administration has characterized its actions as efforts to combat fraud and enhance national security.

Civil rights organizations argue the enforcement actions have fostered a climate of fear and contend that Trump has exploited individual fraud cases to justify targeting immigrant populations. These groups also question Trump’s commitment to fighting fraud, pointing to his previous pardons of individuals with fraud convictions.

WASHINGTON – Federal aviation safety investigators are raising concerns that Congress isn’t doing enough to prevent deadly mid-air crashes like the one that claimed 67 lives near the nation’s capital earlier this year.

The National Transportation Safety Board issued a statement Thursday criticizing a House aviation safety measure, saying the proposed ALERT Act falls short of implementing crucial safety improvements.

According to the safety board, lawmakers failed to include a key recommendation requiring aircraft to use ADS-B collision-warning technology, which could help prevent similar tragedies in the future.

The criticism comes as aviation safety remains under intense scrutiny following the devastating 2025 mid-air collision in the Washington area that killed dozens of people.

WASHINGTON – A member of Congress is challenging the decision to redirect millions in foreign aid funding to cover personal security costs for White House budget director Russell Vought, labeling the move an improper use of taxpayer money.

The Office of Management and Budget has transferred more than $15 million from the U.S. Agency for International Development’s operational budget to pay for Vought’s protection through the U.S. Marshals Service during 2024, according to a February 13 Reuters investigation.

In response to that report, Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi sent a letter to Vought on Wednesday, arguing that redirecting these dollars for his security protection “deviates sharply from Congress’s intent and undermines the agency’s core purpose.”

“The misuse of funds is fundamentally wrong and a gross abuse of power,” Krishnamoorthi stated.

Vought’s office has not yet provided a response to requests for comment on the matter.

President Trump disbanded USAID last year, alleging widespread corruption within the organization without providing supporting evidence. The closure resulted in thousands of job losses among staff and contractors and disrupted international humanitarian programs worldwide.

A minimal staff remains to finalize outstanding contracts before the 64-year-old agency permanently closes its doors in September.

In his letter, Krishnamoorthi demanded that Vought provide comprehensive information about the USAID money being used for his protection, including the funds’ “original congressional intent” and whether lawmakers were informed about the reallocation.

The congressman also inquired whether alternative White House funding options were explored and requested identification of who approved using USAID resources for Vought’s security expenses.

NEW YORK CITY Mayor Zohran Mamdani employed an unconventional strategy during his White House meeting Thursday, bringing along a fabricated newspaper front page to convince President Donald Trump to support major housing development funding for the city.

The creative approach was specifically tailored to Trump’s well-documented attention to media coverage and his habit of closely following New York City news outlets, according to political observers. Despite their opposing political parties, the Republican president and Democratic mayor have developed a working relationship since initially meeting last autumn.

Communications director Anna Bahr explained that Mamdani’s team designed the fake newspaper headlines to show Trump the potential positive media response that federal housing investments could generate. The fabricated New York Daily News cover displayed “Trump to City: Let’s Build” — a clever reference to the notorious 1975 headline “Ford to City: Drop Dead,” which criticized President Gerald Ford’s refusal to provide financial aid to the city.

The mayor shared images from their White House encounter on his social media accounts, showcasing the mock newspaper pages.

While Mamdani’s office wouldn’t provide specifics about the housing proposal, Bahr reported that Trump responded with “very enthusiastic” support. During their previous November meeting, Trump had encouraged the mayor to return with ambitious development ideas for New York City, according to Bahr.

Despite Trump’s previous campaign attacks calling Mamdani a “communist” during the mayoral race, the president appeared impressed with the mayor following their private November White House discussion.

Thursday’s unscheduled meeting, which extended for approximately one hour, also addressed the detention of Ellie Aghayeva, a Columbia University student from Azerbaijan who was apprehended by federal immigration officers earlier that day.

Immigration agents had gained access to the campus dormitory by falsely claiming they were investigating a “missing person” case, according to both Aghayeva’s legal team and Columbia’s president. During his Trump meeting, Mamdani advocated for the student’s release.

Shortly after their White House discussion concluded, Trump contacted the mayor by phone to confirm that Aghayeva would be freed. Mamdani also provided White House chief of staff Susie Wiles with names of four additional students facing federal action, requesting administrative assistance for their cases.

The four students — Mahmoud Khalil, Yunseo Chung, Mohsen Mahdawi and Leqaa Kordia — were all arrested for participating in pro-Palestinian demonstrations. Currently, only Kordia remains detained, though all four cases continue moving through the court system.

NASHVILLE, Tenn. — A federal court has declared unconstitutional a Tennessee statute that would have subjected local government officials to felony prosecution and potential jail time for supporting sanctuary immigration measures.

Nashville Chancellor Russell Perkins approved a settlement agreement Wednesday involving Tennessee’s attorney general and seven Nashville-Davidson County council members who filed the legal challenge against the controversial measure.

Republican Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti’s office refused to defend the law for several months. Speaking to media in September, Skrmetti explained that the Constitution provides “absolute immunity for all legislative votes, whether at the federal, state, or local levels” despite Tennessee’s prohibition on sanctuary policies by municipalities and counties.

Council member Clay Capp announced in a statement that the ruling guarantees Tennessee’s elected leaders can serve their communities “without looking over their shoulder at criminal penalties.”

“This settlement affirms a basic American principle: the government cannot prosecute you for how you vote,” Capp declared. “Tennessee tried to gag local officials with threats of prison time, but the Constitution doesn’t allow that.”

The Republican-controlled Legislature and GOP Governor Bill Lee enacted the immigration enforcement measure last year to support the Trump administration’s policies. The legislation established a Class E felony penalty — carrying up to six years imprisonment — for any municipal official who votes to establish or support sanctuary policies as outlined in state statute. Such violations could encompass supporting local measures that hinder Immigration and Customs Enforcement operations targeting undocumented immigrants.

GOP legislators maintained the criminal provision within the comprehensive immigration package despite legal advisors cautioning that such penalties might violate constitutional protections.

Republican legislative leadership supported the punishment, with House Majority Leader William Lamberth describing it as “the easiest felony in the world to avoid.”

Tennessee banned sanctuary jurisdictions in 2019, warning that non-compliant local governments would forfeit state economic development funding.

The Department of Justice announced Thursday that it has filed lawsuits against five additional states, claiming they have not provided complete voter registration records as required.

Utah, Oklahoma, Kentucky, West Virginia, and New Jersey are now facing federal legal action, expanding the total count of states being sued to 29, along with the District of Columbia.

“Accurate, well-maintained voter rolls are a requisite for the election integrity that the American people deserve,” Attorney General Pamela Bondi said in a statement.

State and local officials handle the administration of elections throughout the United States, including those for federal positions.

Former President Donald Trump has consistently questioned the reliability of the electoral process and maintains his unfounded claims that his 2020 defeat to Democratic President Joe Biden resulted from fraudulent activity.

Earlier this month, Trump announced his intention to implement voter identification mandates for the upcoming November midterm elections, regardless of whether Congress grants approval.

A federal appeals court has given the green light to President Donald Trump’s directive removing collective bargaining rights from hundreds of thousands of government employees, overturning a previous court decision that had temporarily halted the policy.

The three-judge panel from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco ruled Thursday that Trump’s 2025 executive order was properly justified by national security considerations when it eliminated union negotiation rights for large numbers of federal workers.

Labor unions had contended that Trump issued the directive as payback for their opposition to other administration policies, claiming it violated their First Amendment rights. However, the appeals court determined that Trump would have implemented the same policy regardless of any intent to penalize unions.

Circuit Judge Daniel Bress, appointed by Trump, wrote in the court’s opinion that Trump’s directive “expresses that the President’s primary – if not only – concern with union activity was its interference with national security.”

The elimination of collective bargaining rights will enable government agencies to modify workplace conditions and terminate or discipline employees with greater ease, while potentially stopping unions from legally challenging Trump administration policies in court.

The appellate panel overturned a decision from last year by U.S. District Judge James Donato in San Francisco, who had temporarily suspended Trump’s executive order. The 9th Circuit had already put Donato’s decision on hold in August while the appeal was being considered. A separate federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., had similarly paused a comparable ruling in May that had also blocked Trump’s directive.

Neither the White House nor the unions involved in the litigation provided immediate responses when asked for comment.

Trump’s executive order removed collective bargaining requirements from more than twelve federal agencies, including the Departments of Justice, State, Defense, Treasury, and Health and Human Services.

The presidential directive exempted agencies that Trump described as having “as a primary function intelligence, counterintelligence, investigative, or national security work” from union negotiation requirements, substantially broadening an existing exemption for employees whose jobs involve national security matters.

WASHINGTON — A federal judge ruled Thursday that the Internal Revenue Service violated federal law by improperly sharing private taxpayer information with Immigration and Customs Enforcement on “approximately 42,695” occasions.

U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly determined that the IRS illegally provided confidential taxpayer data for thousands of individuals to the Department of Homeland Security through a disputed information-sharing arrangement between the agencies designed to locate and remove immigrants living in the United States without authorization.

The judge’s determination stems from a court filing submitted this month by Dottie Romo, the IRS’ chief risk and control officer, which disclosed that the tax agency had furnished DHS with data on 47,000 individuals out of 1.28 million people ICE had requested information about — and in the majority of instances, provided ICE with supplementary address details that violated privacy regulations protecting taxpayer information.

In her Thursday decision, Kollar-Kotelly stated that the agency breached IRS Code 6103, among the most stringent confidentiality statutes in federal law, “approximately 42,695 times by disclosing last known taxpayer addresses to ICE.” She described the Romo filing as “a significant development in this case.”

“The IRS not only failed to ensure that ICE’s request for confidential taxpayer address information met the statutory requirements, but this failure led the IRS to disclose confidential taxpayer addresses to ICE in situations where ICE’s request for that information was patently deficient,” she wrote.

While the government is challenging the case on appeal, Thursday’s decision carries weight because Romo’s filing bolsters the ruling during the appeals process.

Nina Olson, founder of the Center for Taxpayer Rights, which has filed suit against the government regarding the information sharing, says “this confirms what we’ve been saying all along: that the IRS has an unlawful policy that violates the Internal Revenue Code’s protections by releasing these addresses in a way that violates the law’s requirements.”

Officials from the IRS and Treasury Department did not provide responses to Associated Press inquiries seeking comment.

An information-sharing compact executed last April by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem permits ICE to submit names and addresses of immigrants residing in the U.S. without legal status to the IRS for verification against tax documentation. The arrangement prompted the then-acting IRS commissioner to step down.

Multiple ongoing legal challenges are contesting the IRS-DHS information-sharing arrangement.

Earlier this week, a three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit rejected a request for a preliminary injunction from the immigrants’ rights organization Centro de Trabajadores Unidos and other nonprofit organizations suing the federal government to halt the agreement’s implementation.

In rejecting the preliminary injunction petition, Judge Harry T. Edwards stated that the nonprofit organizations “are unlikely to succeed on the merits of their claim,” because the data the agencies are exchanging falls outside the scope of the IRS privacy law.

Nevertheless, two distinct court orders have prevented the agencies from conducting large-scale transfers of taxpayer data and prohibited ICE from taking action based on any IRS information in its possession. Those preliminary injunctions remain active.

NEW YORK — Federal immigration officers detained a Columbia University student on Thursday morning after using deceptive tactics to enter campus housing, claiming they were investigating a missing person case, according to legal representatives and university officials.

The student’s situation took an unexpected turn when New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani announced on social media that President Donald Trump had committed to her “immediate” release following their conversation during a separate meeting.

The detained student, identified as Ellie Aghayeva, is completing her final year at Columbia where she studies neuroscience and political science. Originally from Azerbaijan, she has built a substantial online presence by creating content about college life as an international student.

Around 7:00 a.m., Aghayeva reached out to her Instagram audience of over 100,000 followers with an urgent message: “DHS illegally arrested me. Please help.” She included an image that appeared to be taken from inside a vehicle.

A Department of Homeland Security representative verified the arrest and revealed that Aghayeva’s student visa was revoked in 2016 due to class attendance issues. The agency did not address inquiries regarding her potential release timeline.

Legal documents filed on Aghayeva’s behalf indicate she originally arrived in the United States on a visa around 2016. Her lawyers state that Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers detained her early Thursday without presenting a warrant, instead “represented they were searching for a missing person to gain entry” to the university residence.

The attorneys reported she was being held at the federal detention facility in Lower Manhattan and declined to elaborate further on her immigration circumstances.

Columbia’s acting president, Claire Shipman, informed the campus community via email that federal agents accessed a residential facility around 6:30 a.m. under the pretense of locating a missing individual.

Shipman noted the university was working to contact the student’s relatives and arrange legal assistance.

Immigration officials’ use of false identities or misleading claims has gained scrutiny recently, particularly after agents were observed impersonating utility workers and service personnel in Minneapolis and other cities.

While such deceptive practices are typically within legal bounds, immigration lawyers report they are becoming more frequent, raising alarm about the current administration’s evolving approach to immigration enforcement across the country.

This arrest occurs almost exactly one year after federal authorities apprehended Mahmoud Khalil, a former Columbia graduate student and Palestinian advocate, at his university residence. Khalil remains free on bond while challenging his deportation proceedings.

Following Khalil’s detention, student groups pressured the university to strengthen protections against federal immigration operations on campus.

Columbia’s current policy mandates that law enforcement officials must present a court-issued warrant or subpoena to enter restricted university areas, including student housing.

In her communication to students, Shipman advised against permitting law enforcement access to non-public university spaces and recommended contacting campus security rather than accepting legal documents directly.

WASHINGTON — Defense Department officials have issued a firm deadline to artificial intelligence company Anthropic, demanding the firm agree to expanded military use of its technology by Friday evening or face serious consequences.

Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell emphasized Thursday through social media that military leaders want access to Anthropic’s AI systems for all legitimate purposes and stressed that the company will not be allowed to restrict operational decisions.

“The Pentagon has no interest in using AI to conduct mass surveillance of Americans (which is illegal) nor do we want to use AI to develop autonomous weapons that operate without human involvement,” Parnell stated.

These specific applications are already prohibited under Anthropic’s current policies. The company remains the only major AI firm that hasn’t provided its technology to the military’s new internal network system.

While Parnell confirmed the Pentagon seeks to “use Anthropic’s model for all lawful purposes,” he declined to elaborate on specific intended applications. He argued that broader access would ensure the company doesn’t interfere with “critical military operations.”

“We will not let ANY company dictate the terms regarding how we make operational decisions,” he declared.

The ultimatum follows a Tuesday meeting between Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Anthropic’s chief executive Dario Amodei, where military leaders outlined potential repercussions including supply chain risk designation, contract termination, or invoking the Defense Production Act from the Cold War era to force broader technology access.

In his Thursday social media post, Parnell referenced two of these potential actions and set a specific timeline, stating Anthropic has “until 5:01 PM ET on Friday to decide.”

“Otherwise, we will terminate our partnership with Anthropic and deem them a supply chain risk,” he announced.

Anthropic had not provided a response to requests for comment by Thursday evening. Following Tuesday’s discussions, the company released a statement saying it “continued good-faith conversations about our usage policy to ensure Anthropic can continue to support the government’s national security mission in line with what our models can reliably and responsibly do.”

Minnesota Governor Tim Walz criticized the Trump administration Thursday for freezing federal Medicaid payments to his state, calling it political payback while announcing new legislation designed to combat fraud in government programs.

The Democratic governor’s remarks came one day after Vice President JD Vance announced the administration would temporarily suspend Medicaid funding due to concerns about fraudulent activity. Walz had been developing his anti-fraud proposals before the federal announcement, continuing efforts he started previously to address problems that contributed to his decision not to seek reelection.

“This is a targeted retribution against a state that the president doesn’t like,” Walz stated during a press briefing. He accused the administration of using misleading fraud claims as justification, similar to how they defended Operation Metro Surge, which deployed more than 3,000 federal agents to Minnesota.

Walz’s comprehensive proposal includes enhanced detection systems, stronger investigative powers, tougher criminal penalties, and establishing a centralized Office of the Inspector General for fraud prevention. The state Senate approved a bipartisan inspector general measure last year, but it remains stuck in the House due to disputes over whether the office should have law enforcement powers or focus solely on investigations while leaving enforcement to the existing state Bureau of Criminal Apprehension.

Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Administrator Dr. Mehmet Oz announced Wednesday alongside Vance that the federal government would withhold $259.5 million in Minnesota Medicaid payments. Oz stated the funds would only be released after Minnesota develops “a comprehensive corrective action plan to solve the problem” and gave Walz a 60-day deadline to respond.

“How does taking and punishing children and elderly have anything to do with fighting fraud?” Walz responded. He noted that the Trump administration has provided no guidance on addressing their concerns or opportunities to demonstrate Minnesota’s existing anti-fraud efforts. His administration projects that 1.2 million state residents could be affected.

The federal action represents part of a broader nationwide fraud investigation, stemming from allegations involving daycare facilities operated by Somali residents in the Minneapolis region that triggered the massive federal enforcement operation in the city, leading to widespread demonstrations.

A Minnesota federal prosecutor estimated last summer that total fraud across multiple programs might surpass $9 billion. However, John Connolly, the state’s Medicaid director, told media Thursday that the state lacks evidence supporting such an enormous figure.

Minnesota Department of Human Services officials, who oversee Medicaid, pointed out that withholding the $259.5 million — retroactive to the fourth quarter of 2025 — follows previous federal decisions to freeze over $2 billion in annual Medicaid funding. The department said it previously submitted a corrective action plan and continues appealing that determination.

The state agency reported implementing multiple new procedures and reforms to prevent and identify Medicaid fraud since 2024. These changes included pinpointing high-risk fraud areas, establishing tighter controls like criminal background screenings for providers, and conducting more surprise facility inspections.

Both Walz and Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison are set to testify before the U.S. House Oversight Committee next Wednesday during a hearing examining federal fund misuse in Minnesota’s social service programs.

WASHINGTON – The nation’s chief banking regulator indicated Thursday he might grant a congressional request to let senior lawmakers examine the banking charter application submitted by World Liberty Financial, a cryptocurrency business operated by President Donald Trump’s family.

During testimony before the Senate Banking Committee, Comptroller of the Currency Jonathan Gould, who was appointed by Trump last year, told Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren he would “entertain” her request for confidential access to the crypto firm’s national trust bank charter application, which was submitted in January. Approval of such a charter would enable the company to broaden its business activities.

Senator Warren, alongside fellow Democrats who have expressed worries about possible conflicts of interest, requested that Gould provide both her and Republican Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Scott with a complete, unredacted version of the application to verify it contains all required details.

Warren and additional Democratic committee members also urged Gould to either deny or postpone consideration of the application. The Trump sons and other business partners manage World Liberty Financial.

Democratic lawmakers also referenced Wall Street Journal coverage indicating that the United Arab Emirates’ national security adviser holds a significant investment stake.

A representative for World Liberty Financial stated the firm has met all regulatory requirements throughout the application procedure, including mandatory disclosures.

Company spokesperson David Wachsman said, “Democrats are playing politics and, with baseless lies, smearing a private American company undergoing a rigorous regulatory process.”

The White House has previously stated that the Trump family’s cryptocurrency business connections do not create a conflict of interest.

Gould described the licensing procedure as being managed by “superb” agency personnel and noted that the process is outlined in publicly accessible staff guidelines.

During the congressional hearing, he stated, “We process applications in a fair and evenhanded manner.”

A trust bank charter permits companies to manage and store customer assets while processing payments more quickly, though these institutions cannot accept deposits or issue loans. Multiple other cryptocurrency companies have obtained preliminary approval for similar charters.

A newly disclosed State Department document reveals the United States plans to handle 4,500 refugee applications monthly from white South Africans, a figure that significantly exceeds President Donald Trump’s announced refugee program limits.

The January 27 document, which had not been previously reported, shows officials are setting up temporary trailer facilities at the U.S. embassy compound in Pretoria to handle the increased workload.

This monthly processing goal far surpasses Trump’s declared ceiling of 7,500 total refugees from all countries for fiscal year 2026. Internal discussions last year had considered much higher limits between 40,000 and 60,000 people.

Since the program began in May 2025, approximately 2,000 white South Africans have arrived in the United States as refugees through January 31, though the numbers have increased in recent months.

However, recent administrative holdups in Washington have temporarily suspended all refugee arrivals to the U.S., including those from South Africa, according to a government official with knowledge of the situation.

Neither the State Department nor Department of Homeland Security provided responses to inquiries about the program. White House officials directed questions to the State Department.

The South African Chamber of Commerce in the U.S. reported last year that over 67,000 individuals had shown interest in relocating to America.

After initially stopping all refugee admissions upon taking office in 2025, Trump later created a special program for white South Africans of Afrikaner heritage, claiming they face violent persecution in the predominantly Black nation. South African officials have disputed this characterization, and some refugee advocacy groups have condemned the policy.

The contracting document, published Wednesday in a government database, justifies bypassing competitive bidding for the trailer contract due to urgent security needs.

According to the document, South African immigration officials had previously raided a U.S. refugee processing center located in a commercial building in Johannesburg, which “compromised operations” and forced officials to seek a more secure location.

“The inability to safely process about 4,500 applicants per month, an objective communicated to (the U.S. State Department’s refugee division) from the White House, would result in failure to meet a Presidential priority,” the document stated.

South African Foreign Ministry spokesperson Chrispin Phiri indicated his government would not obstruct the U.S. program as long as it operates within legal parameters, while maintaining Pretoria’s disagreement with Trump’s persecution claims.

“The assertion that Afrikaners face systemic persecution is fundamentally unsubstantiated,” Phiri said.

It remains uncertain whether the ambitious 4,500 monthly target can be achieved. The State Department recently suspended all refugee travel, including South Africans, from February 23 through March 9 due to operational issues, according to an email sent to applicants.

Due to Trump’s comprehensive refugee prohibition issued in January 2025, South Africans must receive individual approval from Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem on a case-by-case basis.

The government official, speaking anonymously about internal operations, said DHS has delayed these approvals, creating an administrative bottleneck.

Before the temporary suspension, South African admissions had been increasing, with approximately 1,500 people entering in December and January, compared to roughly 500 during the previous six and a half months, based on State Department data.

U.S.-South Africa relations became strained in mid-December when South African authorities conducted the raid on the Johannesburg commercial facility where American staff and contractors were processing refugee cases.

Seven Kenyan contractors working for a U.S.-based refugee organization were arrested for alleged visa violations, while two American refugee officers were temporarily detained.

American and South African officials reached a private understanding during a closed meeting in late December to permit processing to resume, as Reuters previously reported.

The contracting document revealed that a South African company received a non-competitive $772,000 contract to provide and install 14 prefabricated modular units as part of a “temporary modular village” at an embassy property in Pretoria.

In a WhatsApp chat group where South Africans exchange program information, one applicant reported having an interview this week in a trailer-style building at an embassy property, noting that additional trailers were being prepared, indicating the facility is now functioning.

In an era of deep political division, lawmakers from both sides of the aisle are discovering shared concerns about regulating emerging technologies like artificial intelligence and massive data facilities.

The bipartisan collaboration on tech oversight represents a rare moment of unity between Republican and Democratic officials at the state level. However, the cross-party cooperation isn’t limited to technology policy alone, as legislators are also working together on other significant issues affecting their constituents.

This unexpected alliance demonstrates that despite partisan gridlock on many fronts, certain challenges are compelling enough to bridge the political divide and encourage lawmakers to work toward common solutions.

Two key White House representatives expressed frustration following diplomatic discussions with Iranian officials on Thursday morning in Geneva, according to a report from Axios.

The envoys, Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff, came away from the negotiations feeling unsatisfied with what Iranian representatives presented during the talks, the news outlet reported.

The diplomatic meeting represents part of ongoing efforts to engage with Iran on various international issues.

WASHINGTON – A federal judge has denied a request to stop President Donald Trump’s massive $400 million White House ballroom construction project, allowing work to continue on the controversial renovation.

U.S. District Judge Richard Leon rejected the National Trust for Historic Preservation’s attempt to secure a preliminary injunction that would have halted the project while their lawsuit moves forward. The preservationist organization argued the construction violates federal laws and lacks proper congressional approval.

Leon determined that the National Trust’s legal arguments didn’t satisfy the stringent requirements needed for a court order to stop the work temporarily. However, the judge indicated the organization could revise their legal complaint.

“Unfortunately, because both sides initially focused on the President’s constitutional authority to destruct and construct the East Wing of the White House, Plaintiff didn’t bring the necessary cause of action to test the statutory authority the President claims is the basis to do this construction project without the blessing of Congress and with private funds,” Leon stated in his decision.

The National Trust filed their lawsuit in December against Trump and multiple federal agencies, claiming the project proceeded illegally without necessary approvals, environmental studies, or congressional authorization.

Trump’s demolition crew tore down the historic East Wing in October. The structure, originally constructed in 1902 during Theodore Roosevelt’s administration and significantly expanded in 1942 under Franklin Roosevelt, previously contained the first lady’s offices, a theater, and an entrance for visiting foreign dignitaries.

The planned ballroom represents just one of multiple significant modifications Trump has implemented at the White House since taking office in January 2025. The president has also installed gold decorative elements throughout the Oval Office and transformed the Rose Garden lawn into a paved patio similar to his Mar-a-Lago property in Florida.

The preservation group contends that federal statutes prohibit construction on federal parkland in Washington without explicit congressional permission. They also claim the National Park Service broke federal law by conducting an environmental assessment rather than a comprehensive impact study, and by releasing it after demolition had already started.

“No president is legally allowed to tear down portions of the White House without any review whatsoever – not President Trump, not President Biden, and not anyone else,” the lawsuit stated.

Leon previously refused to grant a temporary restraining order requested by the National Trust in December.

The Trump administration has maintained the project’s legality, stating it continues a tradition of presidential renovations. Administration lawyers argued in court documents that the ballroom is essential for state functions, design plans are still developing, and above-ground construction won’t begin until April, making an injunction unnecessary.

The rapid demolition of the East Wing sparked criticism from preservationists and other opponents, who viewed the project as reflecting the Republican president’s assertions of broad presidential authority. Trump has stood by the project, writing on his Truth Social platform that using private donations means “ZERO taxpayer funding.” Trump described the proposed ballroom as a “desperately needed space.”

While no definitive completion timeline has been announced, the White House has stated the project will finish “long before the end” of Trump’s presidential term.

Neither the White House nor the National Trust for Historic Preservation immediately provided comments when contacted about the ruling.

Federal immigration officers arrested a Columbia University student early Thursday morning after allegedly deceiving their way into campus housing, according to university officials.

Acting President Claire Shipman revealed that Department of Homeland Security agents took the student into custody around 6:30 a.m. from a residential building on the New York campus. The university has not disclosed the detained student’s identity.

“Our understanding at this time is that the federal agents made misrepresentations to gain entry to the building to search for a ‘missing person,’” Shipman stated, emphasizing that law enforcement requires judicial warrants or subpoenas to access private university spaces like dormitories and classrooms.

New York Governor Kathy Hochul criticized the agents’ tactics on social media, directly accusing immigration enforcement of deception.

“Let’s be clear about what happened: ICE agents didn’t have the proper warrant, so they lied to gain access to a student’s private residence,” Hochul wrote on X.

Shipman advised that when law enforcement seeks access to restricted campus areas, they should wait for campus security to facilitate the university’s proper response protocols.

Student arrests on university campuses remain uncommon, even amid President Donald Trump’s intensified immigration enforcement efforts.

The most recent arrests at Columbia occurred approximately one year ago following pro-Palestinian demonstrations. Among those detained was activist Mahmoud Khalil, who spent three months in immigration detention before his release. Khalil continues fighting legal efforts to strip his permanent resident status and remove him from the country.

The Department of Homeland Security has not yet responded to requests for comment regarding Thursday’s incident.

WASHINGTON — A federal court has denied efforts by historic preservationists to stop President Trump’s massive White House ballroom construction project on Thursday.

U.S. District Judge Richard Leon determined that The National Trust for Historic Preservation had little likelihood of winning their case seeking to temporarily stop the $400 million project.

However, Leon indicated the organization might find more success by revising their legal challenge.

“Unfortunately, because both sides initially focused on the President’s constitutional authority to destruct and construct the East Wing of the White House, Plaintiff didn’t bring the necessary cause of action to test the statutory authority the President claims is the basis to do this construction project without the blessing of Congress and with private funds,” the judge stated in his ruling.

The preservation organization had filed suit seeking to pause construction until the project receives multiple independent evaluations and congressional authorization.

The administration revealed plans for the ballroom during the summer months. By the end of October, Trump had already torn down the East Wing to clear space for the massive venue, which he claims will accommodate 999 guests. According to White House officials, private contributions — including funds from Trump personally — will finance the entire 90,000-square-foot ballroom complex.

The president moved forward with demolition and construction without first consulting two key federal oversight bodies: the National Capital Planning Commission and the Commission of Fine Arts. Trump has appointed supporters to leadership positions on both regulatory panels.

More than 1,000 transgender residents in Kansas have had their official identification documents invalidated under new state legislation that became effective Thursday.

The Kansas state government has voided driver’s licenses and birth certificates for transgender individuals who had previously updated their gender markers on these official documents. Under the new requirements, residents must have their gender identification reflect the sex designated at birth, and future modifications to gender markers on official documents are now prohibited.

Those impacted by the change are required to cover the costs of obtaining replacement driver’s licenses.

The legislation also mandates that transgender individuals must use restroom facilities and changing areas in government-owned or government-leased buildings that correspond to their birth-assigned sex.

This development comes as transgender Americans face mounting legal restrictions across multiple states and at the federal level. Since returning to the presidency, Republican Donald Trump has implemented several executive orders that limit transgender rights.

Trump’s directives include establishing that the federal government will only acknowledge male and female as the two recognized sexes, while another order aims to prevent transgender athletes from participating in women’s sports competitions.

Harper Seldin, a senior staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union’s LGBTQ and HIV Project, warned that the Kansas legislation creates serious safety concerns for transgender individuals.

“The mismatch between how they present themselves in the world and their driver’s license puts them at risk of discrimination or violence, and so that’s why many trans people choose to change the sex markers on our licenses so that we can live as ourselves in society and keep ourselves safe,” Seldin explained.

Seldin added that the law “puts transgender people in danger any time they interact with law enforcement or apply for a job or for housing or public benefits.”

Kansas had previously allowed residents to modify gender markers on licenses and birth certificates until 2023, when such changes were suspended during legal proceedings initiated by Republican Attorney General Kris Kobach. Courts restored the ability to make these modifications last year, prompting state legislators to draft the current bill. The measure became law after the Kansas legislature successfully overturned a veto by Democratic Governor Laura Kelly.

The ACLU plans to challenge the legislation in court, with Seldin indicating the organization expects to file a lawsuit by Friday’s end.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth delivered a Friday deadline to artificial intelligence company Anthropic this week: allow unlimited military access to your technology or lose your federal contract.

Trump administration defense leaders have also threatened to classify Anthropic, creator of the Claude AI chatbot, as a supply chain threat — or potentially use a Korean War-era statute known as the Defense Production Act to grant military forces broader authority over the company’s products, regardless of corporate approval.

Legal scholars indicate that applying the legislation in this manner would be uncharted territory and might trigger court battles. The government’s push to essentially coerce Anthropic highlights broader tensions surrounding artificial intelligence’s function in national security matters.

The Defense Production Act grants federal authorities extensive power to compel private enterprises to fulfill national defense requirements.

President Harry S. Truman enacted the legislation in 1950 during supply and equipment concerns throughout the Korean conflict. Throughout its multi-decade existence, officials have activated the law’s authorities not just during wartime but also for domestic emergency readiness and recovery following terrorist incidents and natural catastrophes.

One section of the statute enables the president to mandate that companies prioritize government contracts and orders considered essential for national defense, aiming to ensure private sector production meets wartime or emergency needs. Additional sections provide presidential authority to offer loans and other incentives to boost critical goods production, plus authorize government establishment of voluntary partnerships with private industry.

“One of the government’s most powerful and adaptable industrial policy tools,” described Joel Dodge, an attorney and director of industrial policy and economic security at the Vanderbilt Policy Accelerator.

Among its artificial intelligence competitors, Anthropic remains the sole company refusing to provide its technology to a new U.S. military internal system. Chief Executive Dario Amodei has consistently expressed ethical objections regarding unrestricted government AI usage, including risks from completely autonomous weaponized drones and AI-enhanced mass monitoring that could track opposition movements.

According to sources familiar with the situation and a senior Pentagon official, the Defense Department is exploring DPA activation to expand military authority over Anthropic’s products without company consent. This could involve compelling Anthropic to modify its system for Pentagon requirements without built-in safety measures, or eliminating specific ethical limitations from contractual language.

Legal experts including Dodge characterize both approaches as “without precedent under the history of the DPA.”

“It’s a powerful law,” Dodge explained. “(But) it has never been used to compel a company to produce a product that it’s deemed unsafe, or to dictate its terms of service.”

During his initial presidency, Trump and former President Joe Biden both activated the DPA to increase supplies for fighting the COVID-19 pandemic. Throughout 2022’s national infant formula crisis, Biden employed the law to accelerate formula production and authorize international supply flights.

Biden also utilized the DPA in a 2023 executive directive on AI, particularly requiring companies to share safety testing results and additional data with the government. Trump revoked this order upon beginning his second term.

Years earlier, both President Bill Clinton and George W. Bush administrations invoked the DPA to ensure electricity and natural gas suppliers maintained service to California utilities during an energy emergency. Officials also applied the law following Hurricane Maria’s 2017 Puerto Rico impact to prioritize contracts for food, bottled water, temporary housing and electrical system repairs.

The DPA needs periodic reauthorization to continue operating, which can broaden or refine the law’s scope. Congressional records show its next expiration scheduled for September 30 this year. Depending on how the Defense Department’s reported demands develop, Anthropic could become a primary concern for legislators.

Should the Defense Department employ the DPA provision targeting government contract prioritization and production ordering — which the Anthropic situation suggests it will — companies can resist if the requested product isn’t something they currently manufacture, according to Dodge and other experts, or if they consider the terms unreasonable. However, the government may attempt to override such objections, notes Charlie Bullock, senior research fellow at the Institute for Law & AI.

“If neither side backs down, it seems realistic that there would be litigation between Anthropic and the government,” Bullock stated.

Some observers have highlighted contradictions between the Pentagon’s warning about potentially designating Anthropic as a supply chain threat while simultaneously suggesting its products are so crucial to national defense that DPA invocation is necessary — two claims that appear contradictory.

“There are a lot of forces that I think the administration’s counting on that would lead Anthropic to just give in on Friday and agree with its terms,” Dodge said.

Regarding potential future litigation over a possible DPA order, Dodge doesn’t anticipate government victory because “it seems very out of bounds under the text of the law.”

However, if the administration succeeds, or Anthropic simply accepts new terms, that could unleash “a Pandora’s box of what the government could do to assert power and control over private companies,” he added.

DALLAS — Texas Congressman Wesley Hunt is drawing heavier fire from his more established Republican opponents as Tuesday’s GOP Senate primary approaches, which he interprets as evidence that his candidacy poses a real challenge to their ambitions.

“As an Apache helicopter pilot, it means I must be right over the target zone,” the Iraq War veteran told about 50 people during a recent event at Dallas GOP headquarters.

Hunt jumped into the Senate race late, disrupting what had been primarily a two-way battle between incumbent four-term Senator John Cornyn and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. Throughout much of the campaign, political observers viewed him as the third-place contender whose presence would likely prevent either frontrunner from securing an outright victory, thereby triggering a May runoff.

During recent weeks, both Cornyn and Paxton have ramped up their advertising spending to target Hunt with critical messaging, indicating that these two prominent statewide officials view him as an obstacle to their nomination strategies.

The escalating attacks highlight Cornyn’s precarious position as he works to avoid becoming the first Texas Republican senator in state history to lose a primary challenge for renomination.

Should no candidate capture at least 50 percent of Tuesday’s vote, the nomination will be determined through a May 26 runoff between the two highest vote-getters.

Cornyn, who anticipates facing Paxton in a runoff, needs to prevent Hunt from overtaking him during the campaign’s final stretch. At the same time, Paxton could potentially secure an outright victory by reaching 50 percent if he successfully reduces Hunt’s support among voters seeking an alternative to Cornyn.

“I think it suggests Paxton thinks he might be able to get to 50 percent, and that Hunt is polling too close,” said Wayne Hamilton, a Republican strategist unaffiliated with any of the Senate candidates and an adviser to Gov. Greg Abbott. “And Cornyn may be seeing Hunt ticking up too close.”

Hunt, who serves Houston’s northwest suburban districts, rejects the notion that he’s merely disrupting the race and insists he can win the nomination outright.

“I was told this was going to be a vanity project and that I didn’t have a chance,” Hunt told reporters after his Dallas event. “If that were the case, then why are they spending all this money attacking me?”

Cornyn’s campaign organization and supporting super PACs have launched advertisements targeting Hunt, including one highlighting his 2008 Democratic presidential primary vote for Hillary Clinton. Hunt has explained that vote as part of a conservative strategy to assist GOP nominee John McCain by prolonging the contentious 2008 Democratic nominating process ultimately won by Barack Obama.

However, Hunt hasn’t been the primary target of Cornyn and his supporters, who include Senate Republican leadership. According to ad-tracking service AdImpact, the majority of the more than $63 million spent by Cornyn and his allies on television advertising has focused on attacking Paxton.

A super PAC backing Paxton also launched advertisements criticizing Hunt this month, particularly highlighting his House absences while campaigning across Texas as the least recognizable of the three candidates.

Hunt has positioned himself as the most loyal supporter of the former president, despite none of the three receiving Trump’s endorsement. He endorsed Trump’s 2024 campaign early and frequently served as a surrogate during his comeback effort two years ago.

Hunt entered the October race recognizing an opportunity against Cornyn, a former state Supreme Court justice who has lost favor with segments of the Republican primary base partly due to his early dismissal of Trump’s 2024 candidacy. Trump subsequently won Texas by nearly 14 percentage points.

Cornyn also became a conservative target for supporting gun-control legislation following the 2022 Uvalde school shooting tragedy.

“I would never vote for Cornyn,” said Bob Burns, a 74-year-old retired manufacturing executive from Dallas who attended Hunt’s GOP office appearance. He characterized the incumbent as disconnected from today’s Republican Party.

Burns indicated he will support Hunt because he’s “new” and “can carry on Trump’s good work.” He also appreciates Hunt’s advocacy for two-term limits for U.S. senators.

Hunt particularly identified an opportunity as an alternative to Paxton, whom Senate Republican campaign officials in Washington fear would require significantly more resources to defend in a general election. Paxton has endured a failed 2023 impeachment trial and faced allegations of extramarital relationships.

At 44, Hunt represents a generational shift for Texas Republicans choosing between him, the 74-year-old Cornyn who has served in the Senate since 2003, and the 63-year-old Paxton who has held the attorney general position since 2015.

Ultimately, some Texas Republicans suggest Hunt may have simply extended an already lengthy and contentious primary campaign by forcing a runoff, potentially without his participation.

“The biggest thing that’s happened in the race is Hunt’s getting in,” said Tyler Norris, a Texas Republican strategist unaffiliated with any of the Senate candidates. “But, so far, his major contribution is to guarantee a runoff where Paxton and Cornyn will spend tens of millions more to attack each other.”

The Trump administration announced Thursday its plan to eliminate a worker classification regulation from 2024 that business organizations have strongly criticized for creating obstacles when companies want to designate workers as independent contractors instead of full employees.

The Department of Labor issued a proposal to eliminate the regulation, stating it contained legal defects and prevented workers from enjoying the flexibility that independent contractor status provides.

Since Trump returned to office last year, the department has ceased enforcement of the regulation, which mandates companies classify workers as employees under federal wage laws when those workers are “economically dependent” on the company for their livelihood. The new proposal would substitute this with a business-preferred approach that examines the level of control companies exercise over their workers.

Eliminating this regulation will significantly benefit companies across multiple sectors, including trucking operations, healthcare providers, retail sales organizations, and app-based transportation and delivery platforms like Uber and Instacart. These companies depend extensively on contractor relationships and have faced numerous legal challenges alleging worker misclassification to reduce costs.

Research indicates that employees can increase business expenses by as much as 30%, as they receive minimum wage guarantees, overtime compensation, unemployment benefits, expense reimbursements, and additional protections that contractors do not receive.

Worker classification disputes have emerged as among the most heated employment controversies during the past ten years, with industry associations conducting intensive lobbying efforts to overturn the 2024 regulation after Congressional Republican attempts to prevent its implementation failed to advance.

The regulation had superseded a rule from Trump’s initial presidency that permitted workers who operate their own businesses or can work for rival companies, such as drivers working for both Uber and Lyft, to receive contractor classification. Thursday’s proposal would essentially restore that previous framework.

Friday will mark the formal publication of the proposal, initiating a 60-day window for public feedback.

The Biden administration’s regulation was anticipated to generate numerous new legal cases claiming worker misclassification as independent contractors. However, this wave of litigation failed to emerge, probably because the rule remained active for only a brief period before the Labor Department indicated its intention to repeal it last year.

At least five legal challenges targeted the regulation from freelance workers, employers, and business organizations, with these cases either dismissed or suspended while the department continues its rulemaking process.

Last year, a Trump-appointed federal judge in New Mexico validated the regulation, dismissing a trucking company’s arguments that the Labor Department had overstepped its authority and improperly attempted to rewrite federal legislation. The company’s appeal has been suspended and will likely face dismissal following the rule’s repeal.

Federal authorities announced Wednesday they are examining whether certain documents connected to Jeffrey Epstein were improperly kept from public view, following media reports that some files containing unverified allegations against President Donald Trump were missing from the released materials.

The development coincides with Bill and Hillary Clinton’s scheduled appearances Thursday and Friday before a House committee investigating Epstein connections. The former first couple agreed to testify after facing potential contempt of Congress charges, with support from both Republican and Democratic lawmakers.

Representative Robert Garcia of California, the leading Democrat on the Oversight committee, stated that both Republican and Democratic administrations “have failed survivors in not getting more information out to the public.” Garcia also expressed interest in questioning potential connections between Epstein and foreign governments.

Democratic members joined their Republican colleagues last month in advancing contempt charges against the Clintons. Several lawmakers indicated they felt no personal allegiance to the former president and first lady.

This week, Democrats brought women who survived Epstein’s abuse as guests to Trump’s State of the Union address, highlighting concerns about the previous administration’s handling of Epstein-related materials. Even prominent Democrats like former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi supported interviewing anyone with Epstein connections, including former presidents.

The Justice Department’s review follows news reports indicating that a large collection of released records did not contain several FBI interview summaries with an unnamed woman who came forward after Epstein’s 2019 arrest. This woman allegedly claimed she was sexually assaulted by both Trump and Epstein as a minor during the 1980s, though these accusations remain unverified.

“Several individuals and news outlets have recently flagged files related to documents produced to Ghislaine Maxwell in discovery of her criminal case that they claim appear to be missing,” the Justice Department stated on social media platform X.

Officials promised that if any document was found to have been wrongfully withheld and falls under the federal law requiring the files’ release, “the Department will of course publish it, consistent with the law.”

Meanwhile, World Economic Forum President Børge Brende announced his resignation Thursday following scrutiny over his connections to Epstein. The former Norwegian foreign minister, who served from 2013-2017, stepped down from leading the organization known for its annual Davos summit.

“I am grateful for the incredible collaboration with my colleagues, partners, and constituents, and I believe now is the right moment for the Forum to continue its important work without distractions,” Brende said in his resignation statement.

The World Economic Forum had initiated an internal investigation into Brende’s relationship with Epstein after released files showed the two had dined together multiple times and exchanged messages.

For the Clintons, the upcoming testimony represents another chapter in their decades-long experience with Washington controversies. Political observers note that the couple, whose careers began during the Vietnam War and Watergate era, have frequently found themselves at the center of cultural and political battles involving questions of judgment, misconduct, money, and influence.

WASHINGTON — Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton appeared before House lawmakers Thursday for questioning related to a congressional probe into deceased sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, beginning two days of depositions that will also feature former President Bill Clinton.

The private testimony sessions taking place in Chappaqua, New York — the Clintons’ home community in the quiet suburbs north of Manhattan — follow months of heated exchanges between the former Democratic power couple and House Oversight Committee Republicans. This marks an unprecedented moment as no former president has previously been compelled to provide congressional testimony.

The push for accountability regarding Epstein’s exploitation of minors has gained unstoppable momentum both in Congress and across the nation.

President Donald Trump, despite expressing sympathy for the Clintons’ situation, yielded to pressure last year by authorizing the release of Epstein case documents. Epstein died by suicide in a Manhattan detention facility in 2019 while facing trial. The Clintons ultimately consented to testify after the Oversight Committee, led by Chairman Rep. James Comer of Kentucky, rejected their written statement proposals and warned of potential contempt charges.

In a recent BBC interview, Hillary Clinton stated: “We have a very clear record that we’ve been willing to talk about.” She acknowledged her husband’s travel with Epstein for philanthropic purposes and mentioned having no memory of meeting Epstein personally, though she recalled encounters with Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein’s former associate, at Clinton Foundation events.

“We are more than happy to say what we know, which is very limited and totally unrelated to their behavior or their crimes, and we want to do it in public,” Hillary Clinton explained.

Republicans have particularly focused on Bill Clinton amid political battles over Epstein connections. Justice Department documents released in January contained multiple photographs featuring the former president alongside women with obscured identities. No misconduct allegations have been made against Clinton regarding his Epstein association.

Comer has cited Hillary Clinton’s anti-trafficking efforts as Secretary of State as additional justification for her deposition. The committee aims to understand why federal prosecutors under previous administrations failed to pursue additional charges against Epstein after his 2008 plea deal in Florida, where he admitted to soliciting an underage prostitute while avoiding federal prosecution.

Conspiracy theories, particularly among conservatives, have long surrounded the Clintons’ Epstein ties and their connection to Maxwell, who maintains her innocence. Republicans have persistently sought Clinton testimony on these matters.

“I mean if you’re the wife of Bill Clinton, aren’t you going to have some questions about your husband’s activities?” questioned Rep. Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, an Oversight Committee member. “We only go where the facts take us. We didn’t put the president and the secretary in this position. They put themselves in it.”

Democrats, now under younger leadership, have emphasized Epstein transparency over protecting former party leaders. Multiple Democratic lawmakers supported Republican contempt proceedings against the Clintons last month, with several indicating no personal ties or obligations to the couple.

Rep. Robert Garcia of California, the Oversight Committee’s ranking Democrat, stated that both parties’ administrations “have failed survivors in not getting more information out to the public.” He expressed interest in exploring potential foreign government connections to Epstein.

Democrats recently highlighted Trump’s Epstein file handling by bringing abuse survivors as guests to the State of the Union address. Even prominent Democrats like former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California endorsed interviewing anyone with Epstein connections, including former presidents.

“We want to hear from everyone,” Pelosi remarked, questioning Hillary Clinton’s inclusion while emphasizing the importance to “believe survivors.”

A new nationwide survey shows Americans hold conflicting views about President Donald Trump’s immigration enforcement approach, supporting the goal of removing unauthorized immigrants while criticizing the methods being used.

The Reuters/Ipsos poll, which wrapped up this Monday after six days of questioning, found that 61% of Americans back deporting people living in the country without legal status. This includes an overwhelming 92% of Republican respondents and 35% of Democrats who expressed support for removals.

However, the same survey revealed widespread concern about how these deportations are being carried out. Approximately 60% of those polled believe immigration enforcement has become too aggressive, including one-fifth of Republicans and nearly all Democrats surveyed.

The polling data highlights potential political challenges for Trump’s party as they work to maintain control of both chambers of Congress in the upcoming November elections. Independent voters, who often decide close races, showed particular disapproval with 65% saying authorities have overstepped boundaries.

During his State of the Union speech Tuesday, Trump addressed growing criticism of enforcement tactics that have included confrontations between masked agents and American citizens, family separations, and fatal shootings of two U.S. citizens. The president emphasized targeting criminals specifically, stating: “We’re getting them the hell out of here fast.”

The survey shows Trump’s immigration stance, which helped secure his 2024 election victory as he criticized Democrats for supporting “open borders,” remains popular in principle but faces implementation concerns.

Minority communities have shown the strongest opposition to current enforcement methods. Nearly three-quarters of Black respondents (74%) and Hispanic respondents (72%) disapproved of how the administration handles deportations, compared to roughly half (51%) of white Americans.

These concerns appear to be affecting Trump’s standing with minority voters. Since February 2025, his approval rating dropped 7 points among Hispanic Americans to 29%, fell 2 points among Black Americans to 14%, and declined 4 points among white Americans to 49%.

The immigration issue has created divisions within both major parties. Nearly a quarter (23%) of Republicans who support deportations expressed discomfort with current enforcement tactics. Democrats face their own splits, disagreeing both on deportation policy generally and on whether to eliminate Immigration and Customs Enforcement entirely.

Support for abolishing ICE has grown significantly among Democrats, with 63% now favoring dissolution compared to 44% in a 2018 survey. However, only 30% of Democratic voters oppose this idea, while independents remain largely unchanged with just one-third supporting ICE elimination.

Despite this Democratic sentiment, few congressional candidates have publicly called for ending the agency. Centrist organizations like Third Way have cautioned that embracing such positions could hurt Democratic candidates in November elections.

The online survey collected responses from 4,638 American adults nationwide and carries a margin of error of two percentage points.

WASHINGTON – The former Secretary of State and 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton will appear before a House committee Thursday for private questioning about her connections to deceased financier Jeffrey Epstein, according to congressional sources.

Clinton has maintained she possesses minimal knowledge relevant to the investigation and has criticized the GOP-controlled committee for allegedly attempting to divert attention from former President Trump’s own relationship with Epstein. The convicted sex offender took his own life in federal custody during 2019 while facing sex trafficking allegations.

Both Hillary and former President Bill Clinton initially declined the committee’s request to appear, prompting House Oversight Committee members to threaten contempt proceedings against the couple.

The private questioning session is scheduled for 11 a.m. Thursday at the Clinton residence area in Chappaqua, New York. Bill Clinton will face similar questioning Friday at the same location.

Representatives for the Clinton family have not provided statements regarding the upcoming testimony.

Kentucky Republican James Comer, who chairs the oversight panel, has indicated the interview transcripts will be released to the public following the sessions.

The nature of Hillary Clinton’s relationship with Epstein remains largely unknown.

Records show Bill Clinton used Epstein’s private aircraft multiple times during the early 2000s following his presidency. The former president has denied any misconduct while acknowledging regret about the association.

Chairman Comer has stated that White House visitor logs show Epstein made 17 visits during Clinton’s presidential tenure.

Former President Trump maintained social connections with Epstein throughout the 1990s and 2000s, ending before Epstein’s 2008 conviction for soliciting underage prostitution. Comer claims the committee’s findings do not suggest Trump involvement in wrongdoing.

The Justice Department has made public over 3 million pages of Epstein-related materials in recent months, following congressional mandate.

While Justice officials have highlighted photographs involving Bill Clinton, the released documents have exposed Epstein’s connections to numerous business executives and political figures, including Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and Tesla’s Elon Musk.

Internationally, the document releases have sparked criminal inquiries involving Britain’s Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, previously known as the Duke of York, along with other high-profile individuals.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement faces significant challenges screening new employees during an unprecedented hiring campaign, according to an internal agency communication obtained by Reuters Monday.

The message, distributed to supervisors within ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations unit, outlined concerns about the “high volume of new hires” and delayed security screenings creating complications for regional offices when misconduct allegations surface regarding actions prior to ICE employment.

“If a Field Office receives derogatory information about a newly hired employee’s conduct prior to ERO employment (e.g., termination or resignation in lieu of termination from another law enforcement agency for misconduct), please refer the matter to IIU,” the communication stated, referring to the agency’s Integrity Investigations Unit.

The Trump administration rapidly expanded ICE’s workforce last year, adding thousands of officers to support the president’s mass deportation initiative. The Department of Homeland Security reported hiring 12,000 new ICE officers to supplement an existing workforce of 10,000, though federal employment records show smaller numbers, resulting in a net increase of 6,200 positions after accounting for departures.

DHS representative Lauren Bis disputed suggestions that ICE was having difficulty processing security clearances, characterizing the email as informational guidance for supervisors.

“This was not highlighting any vetting problems, but rather a reminder of the services and resources ICE provides supervisors,” Bis explained. “All new hires go through extensive background checks and continuous vetting when they are hired including criminal and financial checks.”

White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller reportedly pressed aggressively during conference calls for ICE to meet ambitious hiring targets before the end of last year, according to an administration source.

“The president’s entire team has worked to make sure his agenda is implemented,” a White House representative responded when asked about Miller’s involvement.

Congressional Democrats and former ICE leadership have expressed concerns that accelerated recruitment could allow unsuitable or problematic candidates to join the agency’s ranks.

Senator Dick Durbin wrote to Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem last year, drawing parallels to Border Patrol’s hiring surge in the 2000s that preceded increased misconduct allegations. The Illinois Democrat, who serves as Senate Majority Whip, predicted ICE’s expansion would “likely result in increased officer misconduct.”

Claire Trickler-McNulty, who served as an ICE official during the Biden administration, emphasized that thorough background investigations help verify candidates’ law-abiding history and identify potential vulnerabilities to coercion.

“To speed, shortcut, or limit background checks or training puts the public and other law enforcement officers at risk,” she warned.

Multiple recruits have encountered problems after being hired, according to current and former federal officials who spoke anonymously about internal operations.

Two trainees were identified as possible MS-13 gang members based on their tattoos while attending the training facility in Georgia last year, one former official disclosed. Additionally, at least five other trainees were terminated after ICE discovered active arrest warrants against them.

“They weren’t completing the background checks before they would get to the academy,” the former official revealed.

A current official reported that one new hire was removed from an ICE facility in February after background check issues were discovered.

ICE does not release statistics on dismissed recruits. However, NBC News reported in October that the agency had terminated more than 200 recruits since the hiring surge commenced, citing internal records.

At one location, approximately one-third of new employees are awaiting completion of stalled background investigations, including some who have already finished training, according to the current official.

Vice President JD Vance is scheduled to make a Thursday trip to Wisconsin’s third congressional district as the Trump administration works to safeguard Republican control of the House of Representatives before this November’s midterm contests.

The vice president will make his stop in Plover, located within the congressional district currently held by Republican Representative Derrick Van Orden. This seat represents one of two GOP-controlled districts in Wisconsin that Democratic challengers are actively pursuing this election cycle.

Vance plans to conduct a tour of a local manufacturing business as a way to reinforce President Trump’s economic priorities following Tuesday’s State of the Union speech.

In that address, Trump addressed a wide range of pocketbook concerns affecting American families, including housing costs, healthcare expenses, and utility payments. However, the president did not fully recognize that numerous citizens continue to face challenges with elevated living expenses, particularly regarding food and housing costs.

Political strategists within the Republican Party have cautioned that failing to deliver a stronger anti-inflation message could put GOP congressional control at risk come November.

The vice president’s Wisconsin visit represents part of a broader White House strategy to deploy the president and senior administration members across crucial swing regions to promote Trump’s economic platform. Trump himself is slated to travel to Texas later this week for an event centered on energy policy and economic matters.

Democratic Party officials announced this week they are increasing their financial investment in Van Orden’s Wisconsin district, where the incumbent secured reelection in 2024 with a margin of less than three percentage points.

Trump secured victory in this district by seven points during the 2024 election, contributing to his successful sweep of key battleground states. The president gave his endorsement to Van Orden for the 2026 race ten months prior.

This marks Vance’s second appearance in the congressional district. He previously visited La Crosse, Wisconsin last August to advocate for President Trump’s tax and spending legislation.

Law enforcement professionals are voicing concerns about the preparation standards for Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers as the agency increases its presence in communities nationwide.

The questions surrounding ICE training protocols come at a time when the federal immigration enforcement agency is expanding its workforce and deploying additional personnel to urban areas across the country.

Industry experts in law enforcement are scrutinizing whether current educational and preparation methods adequately equip new immigration officers for the complexities of field work in diverse communities.

WASHINGTON — A fresh national survey reveals significant public concern about Iran’s nuclear capabilities, even as Americans express doubts about President Donald Trump’s decision-making on overseas military operations during ongoing diplomatic talks in Geneva.

The latest research from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research shows roughly half of American adults express high levels of worry that Iran’s atomic program directly threatens the United States. An additional 30% report moderate concern, while only 20% indicate minimal or no worry about the issue.

Researchers gathered data between February 19-23 amid escalating tensions in the Middle East between Washington and Tehran. American officials are working toward an agreement that would restrict Iran’s nuclear development and prevent weapons production, while Iranian leaders maintain they aren’t seeking weapons capability and continue resisting calls to stop uranium processing or surrender their enriched uranium supplies.

The current president, who abandoned a previous Iranian nuclear accord during his earlier administration, has made multiple threats to employ military action against Iran’s atomic facilities. Trump claimed to have “obliterated” the program after a 12-day conflict in June that saw American forces strike Iranian nuclear locations. Tehran has promised retaliation for any attacks. Trump has also issued warnings regarding Iran’s treatment of demonstrators. Officials from both nations have indicated readiness for armed conflict should diplomatic efforts collapse, with America deploying its most substantial Middle Eastern military presence in recent decades.

Survey results show 61% of Americans classify Iran as an adversary of the United States, representing a slight increase from a September 2023 Pearson Institute/AP-NORC study. However, public faith in the president’s foreign policy judgment remains limited, with only approximately 30% of respondents expressing substantial confidence in Trump’s handling of international relationships and military decisions abroad.

Some Republican voters, particularly younger party members, harbor concerns about Trump’s capability to navigate these critical situations appropriately.

This year’s administration has conducted two sets of nuclear discussions with Iran through Omani intermediaries, with additional talks beginning Thursday. Previous negotiations between the countries collapsed following Israel’s involvement in the June military action.

“We are in negotiations with them,” Trump stated during Tuesday evening’s State of the Union speech, delivered after poll completion. “They want to make a deal, but we haven’t heard those secret words: We will never have a nuclear weapon.”

The AP-NORC survey demonstrates substantial American skepticism regarding Trump’s foreign policy judgment. Only about 30% of adults express high confidence in the president’s military decision-making, adversarial relationship management, or nuclear weapons policies. More than half report minimal or no trust in these areas.

Republican respondents show greater confidence than Democrats and Independents in presidential decision-making. Approximately 60% of Republicans express high trust levels in Trump, while roughly 90% of Democrats report low confidence.

Republican support varies by age group. Younger Republicans under 45 show less confidence than older party members in Trump’s military judgment, with about half expressing high trust compared to two-thirds of older Republicans.

Current findings showing 48% of adults expressing high concern about Iran’s nuclear threat align with July 2025 AP-NORC polling, suggesting American opinions remain stable despite recent escalations.

Prior to the June conflict, Iran had been processing uranium to 60% purity levels, approaching weapons-grade concentrations. The International Atomic Energy Agency identified Iran as the only non-nuclear nation enriching uranium to such levels.

Iran continues blocking IAEA inspection requests for sites damaged during June’s military action, raising proliferation concerns among experts.

Concern about Iran’s nuclear development spans party lines, though Republicans currently show higher worry levels. About 56% of Republicans express high concern compared to 44% of Democrats.

Americans maintain predominantly negative views of Iran, with stronger opposition among older citizens.

Approximately 60% of adults classify Iran as an American enemy, up from 53% in the 2023 Pearson/AP-NORC survey. About 30% describe relations as unfriendly but not hostile, while only 10% consider Iran friendly or allied.

Age differences emerge in these perceptions, with only half of Americans under 45 viewing Iran as an enemy compared to 70% of those 45 and older. Generational gaps also appear in nuclear concerns, with about one-third of younger Americans expressing high worry versus 60% of older respondents.

Decades-long tensions over Iran’s nuclear program may explain older Americans’ heightened concern. Nuclear negotiations stalled after Trump’s 2018 decision to withdraw America from Iran’s 2015 international nuclear agreement.

The AP-NORC survey included 1,133 adults interviewed February 19-23 using NORC’s AmeriSpeak Panel, designed to represent the U.S. population. The margin of error is plus or minus 4.0 percentage points.

The Himalayan nation of Nepal is gearing up for a pivotal national election scheduled for March 5, marking the country’s first vote since massive anti-corruption demonstrations led by young people forced the resignation of former Prime Minister K.P. Sharma Oli’s administration in September.

Approximately 19 million citizens out of Nepal’s total population of 30 million are registered to participate in the upcoming election for the 275-seat national assembly. Following last year’s widespread protests that resulted in 77 deaths and over 2,000 injuries, election officials added roughly one million new voters to the rolls, with young people making up the majority of these fresh registrations.

The electoral system will fill 165 positions through direct competition where candidates receiving the highest vote totals will claim victory, while the remaining seats will be distributed using proportional representation based on each party’s overall vote percentage. Election officials report that 65 different political organizations have registered to participate in the contest.

Beyond addressing government corruption, economic concerns dominate the campaign agenda, particularly job creation in a nation where approximately 20 percent of residents live below the poverty line and youth unemployment remains persistently high, according to political observers.

The landlocked country’s relationships with neighboring giants India and China will significantly influence the election outcome as Nepal seeks to maintain diplomatic balance between these regional powers. India currently handles two-thirds of Nepal’s international commerce, while China manages 14 percent and has provided loans exceeding $130 million to the impoverished nation, World Bank data shows.

Leading the race for prime minister is 35-year-old Balendra Shah, a former rapper turned politician who previously served as Kathmandu’s mayor and represents the moderate Rastriya Swatantra Party. His main challenger in the Jhapa 5 district is 74-year-old Oli from the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist–Leninist), who has held the prime minister position four times and seeks to return despite struggling to reconnect with younger voters who removed him from power just six months earlier.

Additional candidates include 49-year-old Gagan Thapa from the centrist Nepali Congress party and 71-year-old Pushpa Kamal Dahal, who has served as prime minister three times and currently heads the Nepali Communist Party. Oli has maintained liberal communist positions since the 1990s, while Dahal previously commanded a violent Maoist rebellion for ten years before transitioning to conventional politics in 2006.

NEWARK, N.J. — Federal immigration officers were involved in a pursuit that ended in a multi-car collision Wednesday in New Jersey’s most populous city, according to local officials.

Newark Mayor Ras Baraka announced through social media that Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents tried to stop a van when the operator chose to escape. The mayor explained that federal agents pursued the vehicle, which led to a collision involving multiple cars, one of which had three children as passengers.

According to Baraka, the van’s operator sustained injuries and was transported to a medical facility.

The severity of the driver’s injuries remains unknown, as does the reason ICE was attempting to apprehend the individual. Baraka clarified that Newark’s police department had no involvement in the federal investigation and only responded to handle the accident scene.

Representatives from the mayor’s office, Newark police, the Department of Homeland Security, and ICE have not yet provided responses to requests for additional information.

However, the Democratic mayor used his statement on X to condemn ICE’s conduct as irresponsible and hazardous. He pointed out that New Jersey’s state regulations prohibit law enforcement from pursuing vehicles unless a suspect represents an immediate danger.

“Federal authorities should adhere to local laws regarding vehicle pursuits and exercise common sense,” Baraka said. “Based on the damage they are inflicting on our communities, ICE has no business engaging in chases at anytime, anywhere — but especially in densely populated areas, and on roads still being cleared from a significant snowstorm.”

Last May, Baraka faced arrest and trespassing charges during a demonstration outside Delany Hall, a recently opened federal immigration detention facility located in his city. Those charges were subsequently dropped.

A high-ranking Navy officer has been dismissed from a top Pentagon leadership role after serving just two months in the position, according to sources with knowledge of the decision.

Vice Admiral Fred Kacher was ousted from his role directing Joint Staff operations, having assumed the position in December. Two sources briefed on the matter confirmed the removal to Reuters on Wednesday, with one indicating that Kacher simply wasn’t well-suited for the demanding role.

When contacted about the dismissal, Pentagon officials acknowledged that Kacher would be transitioning back to regular Navy duties. The military confirmed his departure from the Joint Staff position.

General Dan Caine, who serves as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, issued a diplomatic statement regarding the leadership change. “We are deeply grateful for Vice Adm. Kacher’s dedicated service to the Joint Force and his contributions to the Joint Staff,” Caine said in his official remarks.

The brief tenure highlights the challenging nature of senior Pentagon positions, where military leaders must navigate complex inter-service coordination and high-level strategic planning.

A federal court in Boston has declared unconstitutional a Trump-era immigration policy that enabled the government to quickly deport migrants to nations other than their home countries without adequate legal protections.

U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy delivered his final decision on Wednesday, invalidating the Department of Homeland Security’s controversial deportation practice in a legal battle expected to reach the Supreme Court.

Murphy, nominated by President Joe Biden, delayed implementation of his order for two weeks to give federal officials time to file an appeal, citing the case’s “importance and its unusual history.”

The Supreme Court has already weighed in on this matter twice, initially overturning Murphy’s earlier temporary block on the policy in April, then later permitting eight individuals to be transported to South Sudan.

During the period when Murphy’s initial order was active, it significantly hampered the government’s ability to send migrants to alternative destinations including South Sudan, Libya, and El Salvador.

The current legal challenge originated from a group lawsuit targeting a Homeland Security directive first outlined in March documentation and later expanded through July guidance. This policy enabled quick deportations to third nations for migrants who had received final removal orders from immigration courts.

Legal representatives filed the case on behalf of migrants facing removal to countries that were not originally specified in their deportation orders or mentioned during their immigration hearings.

Under this policy, migrants could be sent to alternative nations if immigration officials either obtained reliable diplomatic guarantees that deportees would face no persecution or torture, or provided migrants with as little as six hours advance notice of their transfer to such locations.

Justice Department attorneys defended the practice, claiming it met immigration law standards and provided adequate due process protections for migrants, who they said could voice concerns about specific third countries during their court proceedings.

Government lawyers contended that finding alternative destinations was crucial for removing the “worst of the worst” – migrants whose origin countries rejected them due to criminal backgrounds.

DENVER (AP) — State election officials received assurance Wednesday from a federal homeland security administrator that immigration enforcement personnel will stay away from voting sites during the upcoming November midterm elections, addressing concerns raised by Democratic leaders about potential federal interference.

During a conference call with state secretaries of state, Heather Honey, who holds the position of deputy assistant secretary for election integrity, stated that “any suggestion that ICE will be present at any polling location is simply not true,” as reported by Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes, a Democrat.

The commitment was also confirmed by a representative for Oregon Secretary of State Tobias Read, while Kentucky’s Republican Secretary of State Michael Adams shared the assurance on social media platform X, crediting “DHS” as the source.

The Department of Homeland Security has not provided a response to requests for additional comment.

Honey, who has previously supported unfounded theories claiming President Donald Trump was wrongfully denied victory in the 2020 election, participated in the discussion alongside officials from the FBI, U.S. Election Assistance Commission, Postal Service and additional federal departments to coordinate midterm election preparations.

While such coordination meetings typically occur without controversy, this year’s session takes place against a backdrop of actions by the Trump administration that have raised alarm among Democratic state election leaders.

The Justice Department has initiated legal proceedings seeking comprehensive voter information from states without providing clear justification for these data requests. Meanwhile, Trump continues to promote debunked allegations about widespread electoral fraud in 2020 while directing his administration to pursue investigations.

Federal investigators conducted a raid earlier this month at the Fulton County, Georgia election office, a Democratic-leaning area encompassing Atlanta, to confiscate voting materials and ballots from the 2020 election, based on thoroughly discredited conspiracy theories.

For months, Democratic officials and civil rights attorneys nationwide have been developing response strategies to address potential Trump administration interference in midterm voting procedures and vote tallying processes.

The participation of Honey in the call highlighted the changed landscape facing election administrators. Under the U.S. Constitution, individual states rather than federal authorities maintain responsibility for conducting elections, with most states delegating this authority to elected secretaries of state.

Call participants reported that Democratic secretaries of state questioned Honey extensively about the Trump administration’s reduction of election security funding, its initiative to identify non-citizen voters — an already prohibited practice that occurs infrequently — and concerns about federal law enforcement presence at polling locations this fall.

The White House has previously dismissed these concerns, pointing to the absence of disruptions during last year’s elections when Democrats achieved strong results. During recent congressional testimony, leadership from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection both responded “No, sir” when questioned about involvement in voting precinct security efforts.

Democratic leaders emphasize that Trump previously attempted to reverse his 2020 electoral defeat, issued pardons to individuals who stormed the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, in his support, and has appointed administration officials who assisted his efforts to challenge the 2020 results.

WASHINGTON — Federal Bureau of Investigation officials have dismissed more agents involved in investigating President Donald Trump, specifically targeting personnel who participated in the classified documents case, according to sources with knowledge of the situation who spoke Wednesday.

These dismissals represent part of an extensive staff overhaul led by Director Kash Patel, a Trump selection who has removed dozens of bureau personnel over the past year. Those terminated either took part in Trump-related investigations or were viewed as opposing the current administration’s priorities. The Department of Justice has conducted similar widespread dismissals of attorneys since Trump returned to office last year.

The FBI Agents Association has denounced these terminations as illegal and dangerous to America’s security.

“These actions weaken the Bureau by stripping away critical expertise and destabilizing the workforce, undermining trust in leadership and jeopardizing the Bureau’s ability to meet its recruitment goals — ultimately putting the nation at greater risk,” the association said in a statement.

The most recent wave of dismissals affected personnel who assisted in examining Trump’s possession of classified materials at his Mar-a-Lago estate, an investigation that featured a widely publicized FBI raid of the Florida location and culminated in federal charges against the current president for retaining confidential government documents from his initial presidency and blocking official recovery attempts.

Multiple sources confirmed these dismissals to The Associated Press under condition of anonymity due to restrictions on discussing personnel decisions publicly. Several sources indicated approximately 10 employees lost their jobs, with one source stating at least 10 were dismissed.

The bureau has previously terminated agents involved in a different investigation examining Trump’s attempts to reverse the 2020 election outcome. This probe also generated criminal charges, but similar to the Mar-a-Lago matter, special counsel Jack Smith dropped the case following Trump’s November 2024 electoral victory due to established Justice Department policies preventing the prosecution of serving presidents.

These dismissals became public on the same day Patel told Reuters that the FBI during the Biden presidency had requested his phone records along with those of current White House chief of staff Susie Wiles. Patel indicated this occurred during 2022 and 2023 when both were private citizens.

Federal prosecutors subpoenaed Patel in 2022 for grand jury testimony in Washington regarding the Mar-a-Lago investigation, and he testified after receiving immunity protection, as previously reported by the AP.

Two Delaware congressional leaders are demanding answers from the British government about a controversial directive that would have forced Apple to compromise its encryption security measures.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan and Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Brian Mast sent a formal request Wednesday to British Interior Minister Shabana Mahmood, seeking a comprehensive briefing about the technical capability notice that was issued to Apple.

The directive, which Britain ultimately withdrew according to U.S. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard’s August statement, would have required Apple to develop backdoor access to its encrypted user information.

Both congressional leaders had previously expressed concerns that such requirements could create vulnerabilities that cybercriminals and authoritarian regimes might exploit. They have also been vocal critics of Big Tech regulations imposed by European authorities.

In their Wednesday correspondence, which Reuters obtained, the lawmakers emphasized the need for transparency in the matter.

“For there to be a ‘mature and informed public debate,’ it is imperative that the Committees fully understand the actions taken by the UK government with respect to the TCN issued to Apple,” Jordan and Mast stated in their joint letter.

The representatives are requesting expedited scheduling for the briefing, writing: “We respectfully ask that the Home Office and UK Embassy to the United States arrange for the briefing to occur as soon as possible but no later than 10:00 a.m. ET on March 11, 2026.”

Apple had contested the British government’s technical capability notice through the UK’s Investigatory Powers Tribunal. The technology giant has consistently maintained its position against creating such access points, stating it would never incorporate backdoor capabilities into its encrypted products or services.

WASHINGTON – Federal immigration officials will not be positioned at voting sites during this year’s elections, the Department of Homeland Security confirmed Wednesday during a briefing with state election administrators.

The clarification came after state officials across the country sought assurance about potential Immigration and Customs Enforcement activities near polling places. Heather Honey, who serves as deputy assistant secretary for election integrity at DHS, addressed these concerns directly.

“Any suggestion that ICE will be present at any polling location is simply not true,” Honey stated during the virtual conference call, according to Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes who participated in the discussion.

The topic arose when California Secretary of State Shirley Weber inquired whether states would receive advance notice of any immigration enforcement activities planned near voting locations, her office confirmed.

Maine’s top election official, Secretary of State Shenna Bellows, emphasized during the briefing that deploying ICE agents to polling sites would violate constitutional protections.

However, a DHS spokesperson acknowledged to reporters that immigration agents might need to respond to a polling location “if an active public safety threat endangered” the site, but only for targeted enforcement actions addressing immediate safety concerns.

The November midterm elections will determine control of Congress and numerous state offices, with primary contests beginning next month to select party nominees.

These assurances come as the current administration pursues heightened immigration enforcement policies that have drawn criticism from advocacy groups and Democratic lawmakers, including operations conducted by federal agents in protective gear.

The Trump administration is preventing Venezuela from covering legal defense expenses for their former leader Nicolás Maduro, who faces drug trafficking charges in New York, according to his attorney who argues this could violate his constitutional right to legal representation.

Defense lawyer Barry Pollack informed a federal judge in Manhattan through an email last week that the U.S. Treasury Department had prevented authorization for legal fees that Venezuela’s government is obligated to cover for Maduro and First Lady Cilia Flores according to their nation’s laws and traditions. This correspondence became part of the public court file on Wednesday.

Both Maduro and his spouse have been detained in New York without the possibility of bail since their capture from their Venezuelan residence on January 3 during a covert nighttime operation conducted by U.S. military personnel. Both individuals have entered not guilty pleas.

This dramatic arrest, which came after months of military preparation in the Caribbean region, has enabled the Trump administration to wield significant control over Maduro’s successor, Vice President and current acting President Delcy Rodriguez. Facing U.S. pressure, Rodriguez has quickly moved to welcome American investment in Venezuela’s petroleum sector, release political detainees, and restore direct diplomatic contact with Washington — a relationship that had been severed when the first Trump administration closed the U.S. embassy in Caracas during 2019.

According to Pollack’s email, the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control, which oversees Venezuela-related sanctions, had initially approved payment of legal expenses by the Venezuelan government on January 9.

However, the Trump administration withdrew this approval in under three hours “without explanation,” while maintaining authorization for the first lady’s legal representation costs, Pollack stated.

This legal fee controversy is directly connected to American foreign policy objectives. The initial Trump administration severed diplomatic relations with Maduro in 2019, instead recognizing the opposition leader of the National Assembly as Venezuela’s rightful president. The Biden administration followed a similar approach.

Nonetheless, permitting Rodriguez’s administration to fund Maduro’s defense could undermine prosecutors’ courtroom efforts to challenge the former leader’s claims that his arrest was unlawful and that he enjoys immunity from U.S. prosecution as a foreign head of state under domestic and international law.

A 25-page criminal indictment charges Maduro and co-conspirators with collaborating alongside drug cartels and military officials to enable the transportation of thousands of tons of cocaine into the United States. Both defendants could receive life sentences upon conviction.

The alleged conspiracy included Maduro and his wife ordering kidnappings, physical assaults, and murders of individuals who owed drug money, according to the indictment. This reportedly included executing a local drug leader in Caracas.

The Treasury Department, White House, and Justice Department did not respond to requests for comment.

Pollack indicated he requested the Office of Foreign Assets Control on February 11 to restore the original authorization and allow Venezuela to fulfill its responsibility for Maduro’s defense expenses.

The attorney noted that Maduro “cannot otherwise afford counsel” and will seek judicial assistance to fund his defense.

Pollack argued the United States was “interfering with Mr. Maduro’s ability to retain counsel and, therefore, his right under the Sixth Amendment to counsel of his choice.”

WASHINGTON — Federal officials confirmed Wednesday they are examining whether certain documents from the Jeffrey Epstein investigation were improperly excluded from public release, following media reports that key records were missing from the files.

The review comes after multiple news outlets discovered that FBI interview summaries were absent from the extensive collection of Epstein-related documents the government made public. These missing records reportedly involve unverified allegations made by an unnamed woman against President Donald Trump.

According to news reports, the woman contacted authorities following Epstein’s 2019 arrest, claiming she had been sexually assaulted by both Trump and Epstein during the 1980s when she was underage. Trump has consistently rejected any wrongdoing connected to Epstein.

“Several individuals and news outlets have recently flagged files related to documents produced to Ghislaine Maxwell in discovery of her criminal case that they claim appear to be missing,” the Justice Department stated on social media. “As with all documents that have been flagged by the public, the Department is currently reviewing files within that category of the production.”

Maxwell, who served as Epstein’s long-time associate, is currently serving two decades in prison following her conviction on sex trafficking charges.

Federal officials indicated that any document determined to have been wrongfully withheld and required under the law mandating the files’ public release would be published accordingly.

The controversy centers on a series of 2019 FBI interviews with the accuser. While authorities reportedly spoke with the woman four times, only one interview summary appeared in the publicly available documents, according to recent news coverage.

Journalist Roger Sollenberger first reported the missing records on Substack, with NPR also covering the issue. Subsequently, major outlets including The New York Times, MS Now, and CNN have documented the omissions.

Democratic Representative Robert Garcia, who holds the ranking position on the House Oversight Committee, announced his panel would examine the withheld documents. Garcia stated he had examined unredacted evidence logs and could “confirm that the DOJ appears to have illegally withheld FBI interviews” with the woman making the accusations.

Last month, the Justice Department announced it was making public over 3 million pages of Epstein-related materials. Epstein died by suicide in a New York detention facility in 2019 while facing sex trafficking charges. Officials explained they aimed for transparency while reserving the right to withhold certain materials, including those that could expose victims, duplicate records, legally privileged information, or documents tied to active investigations.

“Some of the documents contain untrue and sensationalist claims against President Trump that were submitted to the FBI right before the 2020 election. To be clear, the claims are unfounded and false, and if they have a shred of credibility, they certainly would have been weaponized against President Trump already,” the department stated when initially releasing the records.

The document redaction process quickly showed problems, with officials pulling back materials flagged by victims and their attorneys, plus a “substantial number” of additional documents the government identified on its own.

Legal representatives for Epstein accusers informed a New York federal judge last month that nearly 100 victims had their lives “turned upside down” due to inadequate redactions in the government’s latest document release. The exposed materials included nude photographs showing victims’ faces, along with names, email addresses, and other personal details that were either left unredacted or inadequately concealed.

The publicly released files contained other unsubstantiated allegations against Trump and additional public figures. In Wednesday’s social media statement, the department did not explain why documents related to this particular accuser might have been excluded.

WASHINGTON – A leading House Democrat is charging that the Justice Department has deliberately concealed FBI interview records involving sexual abuse allegations against President Donald Trump by an underage victim.

Rep. Robert Garcia, who serves as the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, stated Wednesday that he has verified news reports indicating DOJ held back more than 50 pages of documents concerning the woman’s claims. These materials were excluded from the over 3 million Jeffrey Epstein-related documents the department has made public.

According to Garcia, the concealed records demonstrate that federal investigators treated the allegations with seriousness, conducting four separate interviews with the accuser. However, authorities only made public the initial interview, which did not contain specific details about her accusations involving Trump.

“The fact that DOJ is suppressing documents alleging President Trump’s commission of sexual abuse of an underage victim only heightens my genuine concerns about a White House cover-up,” Garcia stated in his correspondence to the department.

Justice Department officials responded that they are conducting a review to determine whether any Epstein-connected documents were inappropriately withheld, promising to make them available to the public if deemed suitable.

DOJ officials have cautioned that some previously released materials contain unsubstantiated allegations and sensational claims targeting Trump.

The department maintains it has kept certain materials confidential to protect the identities of Epstein’s victims and avoid compromising active investigations.

Among the materials DOJ has made public are photographs showing Trump alongside several women with obscured faces, plus a provocative message to Epstein featuring the silhouette of an unclothed woman that appears to carry Trump’s signature.

Court records and witness testimony from Ghislaine Maxwell’s 2021 prosecution reveal Trump used Epstein’s aircraft on multiple occasions. In one electronic message, Epstein stated that Trump “knew about the girls,” though the meaning remains unclear.

White House representative Abigail Jackson maintained that Trump has been “totally exonerated on anything relating to Epstein.”

Trump maintained close social connections with Epstein throughout the 1990s and 2000s but has consistently denied awareness of the financier’s criminal activities. He claims their relationship ended prior to Epstein’s 2008 conviction for soliciting prostitution from a minor. Trump disputes ever using Epstein’s aircraft and maintains the suggestive note is fraudulent.

WASHINGTON — Conservative critics believe they may have found the controversy that could finally bring down the Clinton political dynasty. After initially resisting calls to appear before Congress, the former first couple now faces another major political battle as they prepare to use their decades of experience to challenge their opponents.

Bill and Hillary Clinton are returning to a familiar 1990s-style political warfare.

The former president and secretary of state are scheduled to appear before a House committee Thursday and Friday as part of an ongoing Jeffrey Epstein investigation. This arrangement came after Republicans made it clear they would pursue contempt charges if the Clintons continued to refuse cooperation. For this politically seasoned duo, it represents yet another Capitol Hill confrontation featuring the same elements that have defined their careers: questionable decisions, sexual misconduct allegations, financial dealings, and power struggles.

When Bill Clinton ran for president in 1992, he described his candidacy as offering voters “two for the price of one,” signaling a presidential partnership unlike any previous administration, featuring a first lady with professional achievements matching her husband’s. This partnership has enabled the Clintons to survive numerous controversies, including deeply personal scandals that might have destroyed other marriages. As his political career wound down, hers gained momentum with her election to represent New York in the U.S. Senate, followed by her role as secretary of state and her 2016 Democratic presidential nomination.

Long-time Clinton observers note that this latest controversy demonstrates how the couple — shaped by the political upheaval of Vietnam and Watergate — has consistently found itself at the center of cultural battles. With the Epstein investigation continuing to develop globally, the Clintons once again find themselves caught up in a major scandal.

“It’s kind of a sad but fitting coda to extraordinary political lives,” said David Maraniss, who has written two biographies of Bill Clinton.

Neither Clinton has been accused of any criminal activity related to Epstein, the convicted sex offender who died by suicide in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges.

However, Epstein maintained connections with Bill Clinton over many years, including multiple White House visits during the 1990s according to official records. Following Clinton’s presidency, Epstein became involved in his charitable work, and the former president took several trips aboard Epstein’s private aircraft.

“Traveling on Epstein’s plane was not worth the years of questioning afterward,” Bill Clinton wrote in his 2024 memoir. “I wish I had never met him.”

The Republican-controlled House Oversight Committee issued subpoenas for both Clintons last summer. The 79-year-old former president and 78-year-old former secretary of state mostly avoided public discussion of the matter for months, but maintaining silence became more difficult in December when Bill Clinton appeared prominently in the initial release of Epstein documents.

The thousands of released documents included photographs showing him aboard a private aircraft, including one image with an unidentified woman whose face was obscured sitting next to him with her arm around him. Another photograph depicted Bill Clinton in a swimming pool alongside Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein’s longtime associate and British socialite, with another person whose face was redacted. A third image showed Bill Clinton in a hot tub with an unidentified woman whose face was also obscured.

Committee Chairman Rep. James Comer of Kentucky warned he would pursue contempt charges against the Clintons if they failed to comply with the subpoenas, which would mark an unprecedented action since no former president has ever been forced to testify before Congress. Donald Trump cited this precedent between his presidential terms to resist a subpoena from the committee investigating the January 6, 2021 Capitol attack.

Although the photographs of Bill Clinton lacked context, they highlighted how his political potential has consistently been overshadowed by personal misconduct.

The same 1992 campaign that symbolized the Baby Boom generation’s political emergence was also plagued by allegations of an extramarital affair with Gennifer Flowers. A presidency largely characterized by economic growth nearly collapsed when Clinton faced impeachment in 1998 for perjury and obstruction of justice after denying a sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky.

In each instance, many Republicans believed they had finally gained an advantage over the Clintons. Yet each time, the Clintons managed to escape the pressure.

Former Republican congressman Asa Hutchinson of Arkansas, who served as a House manager during Clinton’s impeachment proceedings, characterized the couple as “a smart lawyer and brilliant communicator.”

A consistent strategy emerged with each crisis: the Clintons would vehemently deny accusations and frequently discredited women making claims against them. They would portray the Republican Party as villainous while redirecting public focus toward more positive topics like the era’s strong economy.

Bill Clinton, famous for telling voters “I feel your pain,” consistently maintained public connection. He actually achieved some of his highest presidential approval ratings during his impeachment investigation and trial, with approximately 70% of Americans approving of his job performance.

Hillary Clinton similarly outmaneuvered Republicans who saw opportunity in her response to a 2012 attack on a Libyan compound that resulted in four American deaths. She emerged from an 11-hour televised congressional hearing in 2015 appearing composed. Even the Republican committee chairman investigating the attack acknowledged uncertainty about whether she had revealed new information about what many in his party viewed as scandalous.

That experience is shaping the Clintons’ approach to this week’s testimony. Hillary Clinton has been particularly outspoken about demanding public hearings rather than the private sessions Comer currently plans.

“We have nothing to hide,” she told the BBC earlier this month.

Bill Clinton’s communications team has adopted an aggressive approach reminiscent of the political “war room” strategy popularized during the 1992 campaign to counter negative coverage.

One statement accused Comer of “lying in every appearance he’s made this week.” Another mockingly presented GOP Representatives Scott Perry of Pennsylvania and Andy Biggs of Arizona with a “hypocrisy award of the day,” pointing out how these Oversight committee members ignored subpoenas from the January 6 panel.

The Clintons also published a four-page letter to Comer on social media defiantly criticizing a process they described as “literally designed to result in our imprisonment.”

Echoing their 1990s strategy of redirecting attention, the letter criticized the White House for dismantling institutions, implementing severe immigration enforcement, and pardoning Capitol riot participants.

The Clintons’ political ascent coincided with talk radio’s emergence as a political force, with Rush Limbaugh using his daily program to constantly attack the White House. Today, conservative podcast hosts like Benny Johnson have assumed Limbaugh’s role and celebrated when the House panel moved to hold the couple in contempt last month.

“Do you understand Donald Trump made good on his oldest promise arguably which is he told all of us 10 years ago that Hillary Clinton would be going to jail?” Johnson said last month.

However, some circumstances have shifted.

The unwavering Democratic support the Clintons previously enjoyed in Congress has weakened as newer lawmakers have taken office — nine Democrats joined Republicans on the House committee to advance the contempt resolution. Trump, who faces his own scrutiny regarding Epstein connections and may be concerned about establishing a precedent for compelling former presidents to testify, has shown unusual sympathy for the Clintons.

He told NBC News that it “bothers me that somebody is going after Bill Clinton.” He has called Hillary Clinton “a very capable woman.”

Even Hutchinson, who helped build the case for Bill Clinton’s impeachment, expressed compassion for the couple.

“It’s frustrating and disappointing that President Clinton and Secretary Clinton are having to go through this fact-finding ordeal,” he said. “That’s difficult for them.”

During Tuesday evening’s State of the Union speech, President Donald Trump orchestrated what many are calling a calculated political ambush targeting Democratic lawmakers. Midway through his address to Congress, Trump issued a direct challenge: rise to your feet if you believe safeguarding American citizens, rather than ‘illegal aliens,’ should be the government’s primary obligation.

The orchestrated confrontation may become the defining moment of what was already an exceptionally lengthy presidential address. Trump’s Republican supporters are certainly hoping it will be.

Democratic members of Congress who chose to attend the speech found themselves trapped in an impossible scenario. They could either show support for a president their party opposes, or risk appearing unpatriotic in what was clearly designed as campaign material.

‘One of the great things about the State of Union is how it gives Americans a chance to see clearly what their representatives really believe,’ Trump declared. He then issued his ultimatum: ‘If you agree with this statement, then stand up and show your support: The first duty of the American government is to protect American citizens. Not illegal aliens.’

The president’s words immediately created visible battle lines throughout the congressional chamber, reflecting the broader divisions across America.

Trump’s entire speech demonstrated the unique theatrical power available to any sitting president, particularly one with his background in entertainment. He honored military veterans while connecting their service to America’s upcoming 250th birthday celebration. He highlighted the U.S. men’s hockey team’s Olympic victory and delivered emotional moments, including introducing the widow of murdered activist Charlie Kirk.

However, no other segment of the address generated the impact of Trump’s sit-or-stand ultimatum.

Vice President JD Vance and House Speaker Mike Johnson immediately jumped up behind the president. Republican legislators throughout the chamber followed suit with enthusiastic applause. Nearly every Democratic lawmaker remained in their seats, some appearing uncomfortable while others stared ahead stoically.

‘Isn’t that a shame?’ Trump responded. ‘You should be ashamed of yourself, not standing up.’

The confrontation exemplified Trump’s signature style as a former reality TV personality who has incorporated dramatic moments into his political leadership. His next test will be using this divisive approach to help Republicans in upcoming midterm elections, as the party works to maintain congressional control.

The moment seemed tailor-made for Trump supporters to share across social media platforms and preserve for future campaign advertisements. White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller posted on X: ‘The entire Democrat Party disqualified itself from government service in this one exchange. Nothing like it in U.S. history.’

Fox News host Lawrence Jones commented Wednesday morning: ‘This is your Democratic Party right here. The entire speech was riddled with test questions for Democrats.’ He argued Democrats don’t view people ‘with different stripes’ as legitimate Americans.

CNN analyst Van Jones dismissed the moment as pure theatrics. ‘If he would have said ‘Stand up if you like puppies,’ they would have said, ‘We like kittens.’ I mean, there was no way they were going to stand up. He was just trying to make Democrats look bad.’

While gathering reactions from Saginaw, Michigan residents, Jones questioned a panel member about what he would have done as a Democrat in that situation. The man avoided directly answering initially. When pressed again, he replied: ‘I would have respected our country and I would have stood to my standards. I would have stayed to who I am.’

During a Fox News interview Wednesday, host Bill Hemmer asked Pennsylvania Democratic Senator John Fetterman whether he stood during that particular moment.

Fetterman explained he stood when Trump recognized a crime victim’s mother, a freed Venezuelan political prisoner, and Erika Kirk. He also stood for military veterans. However, he avoided directly answering Hemmer’s specific question about the controversial challenge.

Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer deflected when CNN asked about the moment. ‘We agree we need to protect Americans,’ Schumer said. ‘He’s not. By his reckless ICE agency in Minnesota, two Americans were killed. Americans are being pulled out of their car and beaten.’

The confrontation showcased Trump’s television communication abilities, developed during his years starring in ‘The Apprentice’ before entering politics, according to Robert Thompson, director of Syracuse University’s Bleier Center for Television and Popular Culture. ‘However we feel about the politics and craziness,’ Thompson explained, ‘he has a real sense of rhetorical timing. He can play a room.’

Thompson noted that Democrats were caught unprepared, forced into a role they never agreed to play. With more time to consider their response, he suggested, they might have simply rolled their eyes and stood up anyway.

That approach might have worked if Trump had only mentioned the government’s duty to protect American citizens, said Kathleen Hall Jamieson, director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania.

But Trump went further than that. By framing the choice as citizens versus ‘illegal aliens’ — terminology many find offensive — he changed the entire dynamic, Jamieson explained. While the challenge may have energized Trump’s base supporters, she predicted independents and Democrats would recognize it as a trap.

‘I don’t think the Democrats had any choice,’ Jamieson concluded. ‘But here’s a potential implication: You may see a higher number of Democrats not attending future State of the Union addresses.’

Democratic strategist Xochitl Hinojosa argued her party couldn’t participate in characterizing any immigrant as subhuman. While Trump achieved a visual moment ‘that might end up being on Fox News all day,’ she said it doesn’t alter negative public opinion about his immigration policies and the ICE operation in Minneapolis where two Americans died.

David Axelrod, former President Barack Obama’s communications director, said Trump’s objective was provoking a reaction. He dismissed concerns that Democrats made a lasting error, even if Trump achieved his immediate goal.

‘He’s on the defense now’ regarding the economy and immigration issues, Axelrod observed. ‘It will be interesting to see how it plays out.’

Democratic strategist Antjuan Seawright from South Carolina, who occasionally advises House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, characterized the sit-or-stand challenge as a ‘distraction moment’ for Trump.

‘I think,’ Seawright concluded, ‘the members who ignored the president did our party a favor.’

President Donald Trump launched a social media attack Wednesday against two Muslim Democratic congresswomen following their disruptive outbursts during his State of the Union speech the night before.

Representatives Ilhan Omar from Minnesota and Rashida Tlaib from Michigan interrupted Trump’s address Tuesday evening as he highlighted his administration’s strict immigration policies and enforcement measures. The lawmakers yelled “you’re killing Americans” at the president, with Omar also shouting “liar” during the speech.

Trump responded with harsh criticism on his Truth Social platform Wednesday, describing the two representatives as having “the bulging, bloodshot eyes of crazy people, LUNATICS, mentally deranged and sick who, frankly, look like they should be institutionalized.”

“We should send them back from where they came — as fast as possible,” Trump wrote, despite both Omar and Tlaib being United States citizens.

The confrontation stemmed from the lawmakers’ opposition to Trump’s immigration crackdown, which has faced scrutiny after two deadly incidents in January where federal agents fatally shot U.S. citizens in Minnesota. Immigration detention facilities have recorded at least eight deaths since early 2026, adding to 31 fatalities documented last year.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries condemned Trump’s remarks as “xenophobic” and “disgraceful.” Tlaib responded on social media platform X, saying Trump’s comments demonstrated “he is crashing out.”

The Council on American-Islamic Relations labeled the president’s statements as racist. “It’s racist and bigoted to say two Muslim U.S. lawmakers should be sent to the country they were born in or where their ancestors came from based on their criticism of the gunning down of Americans by ICE,” stated CAIR National Deputy Director Edward Ahmed Mitchell.

During Tuesday’s address, Trump repeated accusations against Somali communities regarding fraud and claimed “Somali pirates” had damaged Minnesota. His administration has deployed armed federal immigration officers to Minnesota citing these fraud allegations.

The White House has not provided comment on the latest controversy. Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt previously stated that media outlets have unfairly “smeared” the president with racism accusations.

Civil rights organizations argue Trump’s enforcement actions have fostered an atmosphere of fear and that he exploits individual fraud cases to justify broader immigrant targeting. Critics also question his commitment to fighting fraud, pointing to his past pardons of individuals with fraud convictions.

This incident follows recent criticism of Trump after his social media account shared a video containing racist portrayals of former President Barack Obama and former First Lady Michelle Obama.

FBI Director Kash Patel is coming under fire from Democratic lawmakers and other critics who are questioning his use of government-funded aircraft for official travel.

The controversy surrounds concerns about whether taxpayer dollars are being properly utilized for the director’s transportation expenses on federal jets.

Critics are calling for greater transparency and accountability regarding how public funds are being allocated for high-ranking officials’ travel arrangements.

WASHINGTON — On Wednesday, Vice President JD Vance declared that the Trump administration will “temporarily halt” certain Medicaid payments to Minnesota due to suspected fraudulent activity, marking part of what he characterized as an intensive campaign against the abuse of taxpayer dollars.

The Medicaid program serves as America’s healthcare lifeline for individuals with low incomes. By the end of 2025, approximately 70 million Americans were participating in the program across the nation.

Speaking alongside Dr. Mehmet Oz, who heads the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Vance explained the administration was implementing this measure “in order to ensure that the state of Minnesota takes its obligations seriously to be good stewards of the American people’s tax money.”

This Wednesday action represents one component of the Trump administration’s broader initiative to expose fraudulent activities nationwide. The push follows accusations of fraudulent behavior involving daycare facilities operated by Somali residents in Minneapolis, which led to an extensive immigration enforcement operation in the Minnesota city and sparked widespread demonstrations.

Last month, Oz released a social media video claiming billions in fraudulent hospice and home healthcare activities in Los Angeles. California Democratic leaders criticized Oz for the video, where he appeared outside an Armenian bakery while alleging, without supporting documentation, that much of the fraudulent activity was “run by the Russian Armenian mafia.”

During a Wednesday interview on Fox News Channel, Vance revealed that both the Justice Department and Treasury Department would participate in the anti-fraud efforts, including examining tax documentation to identify fraudulent schemes.

“There’s a whole host of tools that we have never used,” Vance stated.

WASHINGTON – Federal officials are withholding portions of Medicaid payments to Minnesota following allegations that federal money earmarked for social welfare programs has been stolen, Vice President JD Vance announced Wednesday.

The suspension of funding comes as the Trump administration investigates suspected fraudulent activity involving federal dollars meant to support the state’s Medicaid program.

Vance made the announcement from Washington on Wednesday, though additional details about the scope of the investigation or the specific amount of funding being withheld were not immediately provided.

Federal investigators secretly collected phone records belonging to two individuals who now hold top positions in the Trump administration, according to revelations made Wednesday by current FBI Director Kash Patel.

Patel disclosed to Reuters that the FBI issued subpoenas for his phone records and those of current White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles during 2022 and 2023, when both were private citizens. The collection occurred during Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigation into former President Donald Trump’s handling of classified documents and alleged election interference.

The FBI director characterized the record seizure as government overreach under the previous administration, claiming the files were deliberately hidden from oversight.

“It is outrageous and deeply alarming that the previous FBI leadership secretly subpoenaed my own phone records – along with those of now White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles – using flimsy pretexts and burying the entire process in prohibited case files designed to evade all oversight,” Patel stated.

Smith received his appointment as special counsel in November 2022 to oversee the investigation examining whether Trump interfered with the 2020 election results and improperly retained classified materials at his Mar-a-Lago resort.

The phone record collection focused on what investigators call “toll records,” which show call timing and recipients but not conversation content. Federal authorities can obtain such records through subpoenas without requiring judicial approval.

According to Patel, investigators gathered the records during the period when Smith was examining allegations that Trump illegally removed classified documents to his Florida property after leaving office in 2021 and subsequently obstructed federal recovery efforts.

Both Patel and Wiles maintained close relationships with Trump during this timeframe. Patel had publicly stated in 2022 that Trump had declassified the Mar-a-Lago documents, though prosecutors challenged this assertion and Trump’s legal team never presented this argument in court proceedings.

Patel received a grand jury summons in connection with the case after being granted limited immunity from criminal prosecution. Both he and Wiles underwent questioning by investigators as part of Smith’s document retention probe.

The FBI director revealed that the phone records were stored in files marked “Prohibited,” making them difficult to locate within the bureau’s computer systems. He announced that he has recently eliminated the FBI’s ability to use this classification system.

Smith brought felony charges against Trump related to the classified documents investigation in 2023, though a federal judge later dismissed the case. Smith abandoned his appeal following Trump’s election victory. Trump has consistently denied any wrongdoing in connection with Smith’s investigations.

Congressional Democrats have previously supported Smith’s investigative methods, arguing that subpoenaing phone records and collecting other evidence was appropriate for thoroughly examining allegations of misconduct by Trump and his associates.

Phone record collection represents a standard investigative practice, even involving prominent individuals, as authorities work to establish case facts and identify potential participants in alleged incidents.

The record collection continued into Wiles’ tenure as Trump’s co-campaign manager, though Patel did not specify exact start and end dates for the surveillance period.

Republican leadership has previously criticized Smith’s investigative approaches, particularly his collection of phone records from U.S. senators and other GOP officials during his examination of alleged attempts to overturn the 2020 presidential election.

During previous testimony, Smith defended his record collection practices, stating they helped investigators confirm the timeline surrounding the January 6 Capitol riot and that prosecutors “followed all legal requirements in getting those records.” He assured lawmakers that the collected records did not include conversation content.

A federal judge issued a permanent order Monday preventing the Justice Department from releasing Smith’s report on the documents investigation. Smith has informed Congress that court orders prohibit him from discussing investigation aspects not previously revealed in court documents.

Smith previously told congressional members that his investigators had significant concerns about obstruction of justice during their probes. He informed lawmakers that his office “followed Justice Department policies, observed legal requirements and took actions based on the facts and the law.”

Representatives for Smith declined to provide comments regarding Patel’s allegations. Former Attorney General Merrick Garland, who appointed Smith as special counsel, former FBI Director Chris Wray, and President Biden have not responded to requests for comment. The White House and Wiles also have not issued statements.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture announced Wednesday it plans to put its historic South Building headquarters on the National Mall up for sale while moving remaining staff to facilities nationwide before 2025 ends.

Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins described the decision as a necessary cost-saving measure, pointing to expensive upkeep requirements and sparse occupancy levels in the decades-old facility.

The announcement comes after thousands of USDA workers accepted voluntary departure packages and left their positions during the past year as part of President Donald Trump’s initiative to streamline federal government operations and reduce its overall size.

Speaking at a Wednesday news conference held outside the building, Rollins reflected on the facility’s decline. “At one time, the South Building was the beating heart of USDA, alive with research and teeming with activity decades ago. But today, it is a shell of what it once was,” she stated.

The property will be transferred to the General Services Administration for the sales process, Rollins explained, while Iowa Senator Joni Ernst displayed a “For Sale By Owner” sign during the announcement.

According to GSA Administrator Edward Forst, the landmark USDA building constructed during the 1930s faces $1.6 billion in overdue maintenance expenses, with approximately 80% of its office space currently unoccupied.

Department officials have indicated plans to relocate most Washington-based personnel to regional centers in North Carolina, Missouri, Indiana, Colorado and Utah.

Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins announced Wednesday that the Trump administration has begun taking steps to put the USDA South building up for sale by handing control of the property over to the General Services Administration.

The move represents the opening phase of what officials describe as an effort to dispose of the government-owned facility and relocate the Food and Nutrition Service office currently housed there.

By transferring oversight of the building to GSA, the administration is setting in motion the formal process that could eventually lead to the sale of the federal property.

WASHINGTON — The nominee selected to oversee a newly established Justice Department fraud unit promised Wednesday to conduct investigations “without fear or favor” amid growing concerns about potential political interference in the division’s operations.

Colin McDonald’s appointment to head the proposed National Fraud Enforcement Division has drawn scrutiny because fraud cases are already handled by the department’s existing Criminal Division, and because the White House has indicated it will play an unprecedented role in supervising the new unit’s activities.

The nomination comes as the Trump administration has intensified focus on alleged fraud schemes in Minnesota. During Tuesday’s State of the Union address, President Trump announced that Vice President JD Vance would spearhead the administration’s “war on fraud,” making accusations that Minnesota’s Somali community members have “pillaged” billions in taxpayer funds.

When questioned during Wednesday’s confirmation hearing about whether he would comply with presidential directives to launch specific investigations, McDonald avoided giving a direct response. The experienced prosecutor, who currently serves in Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche’s office, stated only that he bases decisions on evidence and legal standards.

“The vision that we have is a division that is large enough where no fraud is too big, and no fraud is too small, so that we can reach all actors within the chain of criminal culpability and no one more than that,” McDonald testified. “Those are the ones that we are going to be looking after, investigating and following the facts — without fear or favor.”

Vance’s January announcement that the new fraud division chief would answer directly to the White House surprised many Justice Department officials, even within an administration that has dismantled traditional barriers between the department and executive branch.

The administration has since modified its position, stating that McDonald would report to the deputy attorney general like other division leaders, though questions remain about Vance’s specific involvement in overseeing cases and prosecutions.

Federal investigators have been examining extensive fraud allegations in Minnesota for several years, with dozens of defendants — primarily of Somali heritage — facing charges under both the Biden and Trump administrations. The alleged fraud gained heightened attention during the current administration’s immigration enforcement operations in Minneapolis. A federal prosecutor has estimated that potentially half of approximately $18 billion in federal program funding distributed in Minnesota since 2018 may have been fraudulently obtained.

If confirmed, McDonald may immediately encounter staffing challenges as the Minnesota U.S. attorney’s office has experienced mass resignations following controversial fatal shootings of civilians by federal agents during recent immigration raids. Joseph Thompson, the prosecutor overseeing the extensive Minnesota fraud investigation, is among those who have resigned amid tensions over the Justice Department’s handling of the shootings.

Skeptics have questioned the necessity of creating the new division when the department’s Criminal Division already handles fraud prosecutions effectively. The existing fraud section filed charges against 265 individuals last year, representing a more than 10% increase from the previous year. These cases involved over $16 billion in attempted fraud losses, setting a record for the section and more than doubling 2024’s total.

Despite these achievements, McDonald told committee members that significant additional work remains “to ensure that our taxpayer funded programs are free of fraud.”

“The problem is massive,” McDonald stated. “And so President Trump and the attorney general were right to identify this as a place where we needed to put significantly more focus.”

A winter snowball battle in New York City has sparked tension between Mayor Zohran Mamdani and the police department after officers were targeted and injured during the chaotic event.

The mayor has characterized the incident at Washington Square Park as young people enjoying themselves after a major snowstorm. However, Police Commissioner Jessica Tisch and the NYPD view the situation much more seriously.

Authorities are now hunting for four individuals and have released their photographs after officers sustained injuries from thrown snow and ice during Monday’s gathering, which social media influencers had promoted online.

Mamdani has indicated he doesn’t think criminal prosecution is necessary in this case.

“I’ve said time and time again that, having seen these videos, to me it was a snowball fight that got out of hand and it should be treated accordingly,” he told reporters Wednesday when asked if anyone should be prosecuted.

Commissioner Tisch condemned the events as “disgraceful” and “criminal.” The police officers’ union immediately pointed to the incident as proof that officer respect has eroded under the new mayor’s leadership.

“This was not just a ‘snowball fight.’ This was an assault,” the Police Benevolent Association said in a statement.

The controversy could potentially develop into a significant political challenge for Mamdani, who entered office facing criticism from multiple directions due to his previous statements about law enforcement.

The Monday snowball event attracted large crowds to Washington Square Park following a major winter storm that hit the Northeast, resulting in pandemonium as participants hurled snowballs throughout the famous city park.

As any parent understands, snowball battles naturally tend to escalate into conflicts or injuries. Participants can become overly aggressive, and not everyone appreciates being struck with snow.

Social media footage revealed two officers who walked into the park being bombarded with snowballs from multiple directions, leaving them covered in snow as they moved along a pathway. The officers knocked at least two individuals to the ground while snowballs continued flying and bystanders recorded with their devices. One officer’s face appeared injured and he was seen touching his eye.

More video footage captured people launching snowballs at additional officers positioned on the street outside the park boundaries.

The police department subsequently issued a statement confirming that several officers were hit in the face with snowballs. A union representative reported that two police officers received medical treatment at a local hospital for injuries to their face, head and neck areas.

The responses to this week’s snowball incident mirrored reactions following a 2019 summer episode when energetic young people engaged in water fights were captured on video splashing police officers.

Those water incidents also generated anger from police leadership, who condemned it as unacceptable disrespect and even suggested officers who would tolerate such behavior should find different careers.

On Tuesday night, the police department published photos of four suspects they’re seeking regarding the incident while requesting public assistance in identifying them. These images were distributed just hours after Mamdani minimized the confrontation during an unrelated press event earlier that day.

Mamdani stated Wednesday that he has communicated with Tisch and values her efforts but avoided addressing questions about their conflicting views on the snowball incident.

During his election campaign, Mamdani, a progressive Democrat, issued an apology for previous language he’d used to describe the police department, having once called it in a social media post “racist, anti-queer & a major threat to public safety.”

He also disappointed some left-wing supporters when he kept Tisch, a moderate establishment figure, as police commissioner, indicating his intention to take a balanced approach to law enforcement matters.

A federal judge has declared that the Trump administration’s practice of sending immigrants to nations where they lack any connections violates the law and must be halted, according to a Wednesday ruling in a case that previously went before the Supreme Court.

Federal District Judge Brian E. Murphy in Massachusetts has given the government a 15-day window to appeal his latest decision by temporarily suspending the ruling. Murphy referenced how the Supreme Court sided with the administration last year, putting his earlier decision on hold and allowing a deportation flight carrying multiple migrants to proceed to conflict-ridden South Sudan, despite the deportees having no connections there.

According to Murphy, immigrants who are challenging the Department of Homeland Security’s approach deserve “meaningful notice” and a chance to contest their removal to a third nation before it happens. The current policy “extinguishes valid challenges to third-country removal by effecting removal before those challenges can be raised,” the judge determined.

“These are our laws, and it is with profound gratitude for the unbelievable luck of being born in the United States of America that this Court affirms these and our nation’s bedrock principle: that no ‘person’ in this country may be ‘deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law,’” Murphy stated in his ruling.

The Supreme Court’s conservative majority decided in June that immigration authorities could rapidly remove individuals to third nations. Justice Sonia Sotomayor and Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, both liberal justices, opposed the decision, arguing it provided preferential treatment to the government.

Murphy pointed out that the Trump administration has consistently broken or attempted to break his court orders. He highlighted how the Defense Department sent at least six individuals covered by the case to El Salvador and Mexico last March without following the procedures mandated by a temporary restraining order he had issued.

“The simple reality is that nobody knows the merits of any individual class member’s claim because (administration officials) are withholding the predicate fact: the country of removal,” Murphy, who received his judicial appointment from Democratic President Joe Biden, explained in his decision.

The judge noted that DHS’s third-country deportation approach has focused on immigrants who had received protection against being returned to their native countries, where they faced potential torture or other forms of persecution.

According to Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials, eight men deported to South Sudan in May had criminal convictions in the United States and faced final removal orders.

Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins announced Wednesday that the U.S. Department of Agriculture is moving forward with plans to sell its South Building as part of a broader agency restructuring initiative.

Speaking at a Wednesday press conference, Rollins explained that putting the South Building on the market represents the next step in the USDA’s reorganization strategy, which aims to reduce unnecessary expenses and improve how the department’s staff is distributed.

The Agriculture Secretary indicated that the current state of the South Building demonstrates the need for this change, beginning to describe what visitors would encounter if they entered the facility today.

Political spending has reached unprecedented levels in Texas’s competitive U.S. Senate primary, driven largely by Democratic candidate James Talarico’s impressive fundraising efforts and Republican groups working to protect Senator John Cornyn’s lengthy political career.

As voters prepare for Tuesday’s primary contest, advertising expenditures and reserved airtime have exceeded $110 million, establishing a new benchmark for Senate primary races nationwide, according to AdImpact, which monitors political advertising. This massive financial commitment in Texas offers a glimpse of the substantial monetary investments anticipated throughout this year’s midterm campaigns nationwide, as both parties battle for congressional control.

In the Democratic contest, Talarico is competing against U.S. Representative Jasmine Crockett for the party’s nomination. His most recent television commercial, released Wednesday before the primary, criticizes the previous Trump administration’s harsh immigration policies, referring to Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents as “secret police.”

Financial reports show Talarico has collected over $21 million through the previous week, while Crockett has accumulated nearly $8.6 million, with most of those funds transferred from her congressional campaign after joining the Senate race in December, three months behind Talarico’s entry.

Crockett has branded herself as the more aggressive advocate, creating a stark contrast with Talarico’s final advertisement, which differs from his previous appeals to disenchanted Republican voters through discussions of his Christian beliefs.

During a campaign event Tuesday in Tyler, located in northeastern Texas where President Donald Trump won decisively in 2024, Talarico declared, “We can transform this broken political system.”

Texas Democrats haven’t secured a Senate victory since 1988, yet Cornyn confronts his most challenging primary battle against Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and U.S. Representative Wesley Hunt.

Independent expenditure groups, operating separately from candidate campaigns, have contributed more than $75 million of the total Texas spending, AdImpact data reveals.

Republican-aligned organizations dominate this outside spending, with groups supporting Cornyn’s quest for a fifth term investing nearly $57 million. Texans for a Conservative Majority, a pro-Cornyn organization, has allocated over $22 million specifically for advertisements opposing Hunt.

Cornyn’s official campaign has generated more than $11 million, while two additional organizations using his name have contributed another $10 million toward his candidacy.

Political observers anticipate Paxton will advance to a May 26 runoff election, despite conducting a relatively quiet campaign until recently and facing ongoing legal challenges.

Cornyn and Senate Republican leadership express concern that the party may need to invest tens of millions more to retain the Texas seat should Paxton become the nominee.

South Carolina GOP Senator Tim Scott expressed this worry Wednesday on “Fox & Friends,” stating, “It is a strong possibility we cannot hold Texas if John Cornyn is not our nominee.”

However, other Republicans dispute this assessment. Paxton traveled to Washington Tuesday, attending President Trump’s State of the Union address as the invited guest of Texas Republican Representative Troy Nehls.

Campaign finance records indicate Paxton has raised approximately $6 million, while Hunt has collected about $2 million, though he possessed roughly $3 million in his House campaign account when entering the Senate race in October, based on Federal Election Commission filings.

The combined $19 million raised by all Republican candidates falls short of Talarico’s individual campaign total, highlighting the critical importance of outside group support for GOP efforts to maintain the seat.

Talarico received a significant financial surge this month when his campaign reported collecting $2.5 million within 24 hours after late-night television host Stephen Colbert canceled a scheduled interview for his February 16 program, citing concerns from CBS legal representatives. Donations under $1,000 during this period won’t appear in public reports until after the primary.

During a recent campaign appearance, Crockett reminded supporters of her 2020 Texas House race, two years before winning her Dallas-area congressional seat, when opponents outspent her campaign by a 5-to-1 margin.

“People said, ‘There’s no way she’s going to win,’” Crockett recalled emotionally. “I show up, authentically me. That makes some people cringe, but the people are tired of politics as usual.”

WASHINGTON — During his inaugural State of the Union address, President Donald Trump painted a picture of economic prosperity with declining inflation and robust job creation, but polling data reveals Americans hold a far more pessimistic outlook on the nation’s financial health.

Just hours before Trump’s Tuesday evening speech, The Conference Board published consumer confidence data showing economic optimism remains at historically weak levels, hovering near the depths seen during the COVID-19 recession.

The February confidence index registered 91.2, significantly lower than the four-year high of 112.8 recorded in November 2024. Survey respondents expressed concern about elevated costs and limited employment opportunities.

Additional research supports these findings: Trump’s economic stewardship receives approval from only 39% of Americans, based on the most recent Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll. The University of Michigan’s consumer sentiment measurements also remain stuck at levels typically associated with economic downturns.

Trump attempted to counter this pessimism by highlighting positive economic indicators, a strategy previously employed unsuccessfully by President Joe Biden. However, Tuesday’s address contained discrepancies between presidential assertions and the financial realities confronting many citizens.

“Inflation is plummeting, incomes are rising fast, the roaring economy is roaring like never before,” Trump declared.

However, current economic expansion falls short of truly “roaring” growth patterns.

The economy grew 2.2% in the previous year, declining from Biden’s final year rate of 2.8% and 2023’s 2.9% expansion. While Americans expressed widespread frustration with Biden-era price increases that drove inflation to 9.1% in 2022 — a four-decade record — current growth remains modest.

Historical “roaring” economies typically resemble the late 1990s, when expansion exceeded 4% for four consecutive years, or the 1980s, which saw growth of 3.5% or higher for six straight years.

While inflation has decelerated recently, Americans continue identifying high prices as their primary economic concern in surveys.

Trump accurately stated that core inflation, excluding volatile food and energy sectors, reached a five-year low in January. Nevertheless, alternative price measurements indicate inflation remains persistently high: The Federal Reserve’s preferred core price gauge showed 3% year-over-year growth in December, exceeding the Fed’s 2% objective. This measure assigns less significance to housing costs, which have moderated, compared to Trump’s cited metric.

Nearly half of University of Michigan survey participants in February “spontaneously mentioned high prices eroding their personal finances,” according to survey director Joanne Hsu.

While Trump noted egg prices have dropped substantially from peak levels — which is accurate — most essential items Americans depend on, including groceries, housing, and utilities, cost significantly more than five years ago. Electricity prices alone increased 6.3% over the past year.

Trump’s trade tariffs have elevated costs for numerous imported goods, encompassing furniture, automotive components, tools, and clothing. Grocery items like ground beef, coffee, and bananas have experienced sharp price increases recently, with ground beef costs rising 17%.

Consumer pessimism likely stems partly from last year’s dramatic hiring slowdown. Employers created merely 181,000 positions in 2025 — approximately 15,000 monthly — marking the weakest job growth outside recession periods since 2002.

Despite Trump’s commitment to revitalizing American manufacturing, factories eliminated 108,000 positions in 2025, adding to the 202,000 jobs lost during Biden’s final two years. Automotive and parts manufacturing has shed nearly 74,000 positions over two years.

Trump’s tariffs bear partial responsibility, forcing manufacturers to pay premium prices for imported materials and components. High interest rates have also damaged manufacturing over recent years. Many companies hired extensively — perhaps excessively — during 2021 and 2022 as the economy recovered from pandemic restrictions. Automation additionally reduces factory workforce requirements.

January hiring showed unexpected strength with 130,000 new positions, and manufacturing added jobs for the first time in over a year.

Trump suggested his tariffs directly fuel American economic growth, though most citizens likely experience minimal benefits.

“Moving forward, factories, jobs, investment and trillions and trillions of dollars will continue pouring into the United States of America,” Trump stated.

Trump again portrayed tariffs as costless, claiming foreign nations pay them. Actually, U.S. importers pay these fees and frequently transfer costs to customers through higher prices. Foreign companies might suffer if they reduce prices to maintain American market share, but import prices haven’t decreased significantly, indicating overseas exporters aren’t experiencing substantial impact.

Harvard University economist Alberto Cavallo and colleagues found American consumers absorb 43% of increased tariff costs, with U.S. businesses covering most remaining expenses.

Trump’s comprehensive import taxes haven’t achieved meaningful progress toward reducing America’s substantial trade deficit — the difference between exports and imports.

The U.S. goods trade deficit in products like automobiles and appliances — the target of Trump’s protectionist measures — reached a record $1.24 trillion last year, increasing 2% from 2024.

A record-breaking $110 million has been spent on television advertisements and reserved airtime for Texas’ U.S. Senate primary contest, making it the most expensive Senate primary in American history according to advertising tracking company AdImpact.

The massive financial investment reflects the high-stakes battle between Democratic candidates James Talarico and U.S. Representative Jasmine Crockett, while Republican Senator John Cornyn fights to survive a primary challenge that could end his decades-long political career.

This unprecedented spending in the Lone Star State offers a glimpse of the enormous sums expected to flow into congressional races nationwide this year as both parties battle for control of the Senate.

On the Democratic side, Talarico has emerged as a fundraising powerhouse, collecting more than $21 million through last week’s reporting deadline. His opponent Crockett has brought in nearly $8.6 million, though most of that money came from transferring funds from her House campaign war chest after jumping into the Senate race in December, three months behind Talarico’s entry.

Talarico released his closing television advertisement Wednesday before Tuesday’s primary, taking aim at former President Trump’s immigration policies and characterizing Immigration and Customs Enforcement as “secret police.”

The ad’s aggressive tone marks a shift from Talarico’s earlier strategy of appealing to Republican voters by emphasizing his Christian beliefs and values.

“We can transform this broken political system,” Talarico declared at a campaign event Tuesday in Tyler, located in northeastern Texas where Trump won decisively in 2024.

Crockett has branded herself as the more combative candidate willing to take on tough fights.

Texas Democrats haven’t captured a Senate seat since 1988, but Cornyn faces his most challenging primary battle yet against Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and U.S. Representative Wesley Hunt.

Independent political organizations account for more than $75 million of the total spending, with the overwhelming majority supporting Republican candidates, AdImpact data shows.

Groups backing Cornyn’s quest for a fifth Senate term have invested nearly $57 million. The organization Texans for a Conservative Majority alone has poured over $22 million into negative advertisements targeting Hunt.

Cornyn’s official campaign has collected more than $11 million, while two additional organizations using his name have contributed another $10 million to his cause.

Political observers expect Paxton to advance to a May 26 runoff election despite running a relatively quiet campaign until recently and facing ongoing legal troubles.

Cornyn and Republican Senate leadership fear the party may need to invest tens of millions more to defend the Texas seat if Paxton becomes the nominee.

“It is a strong possibility we cannot hold Texas if John Cornyn is not our nominee,” Republican Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina warned Wednesday during an appearance on “Fox & Friends.”

Not all Republicans share that concern. Paxton attended President Trump’s State of the Union address Tuesday as the invited guest of Texas Republican Representative Troy Nehls.

Campaign finance reports show Paxton has raised approximately $6 million, while Hunt has collected about $2 million, plus roughly $3 million remaining in his House campaign account when he entered the Senate race in October.

The combined $19 million raised by all Republican candidates falls short of Talarico’s individual fundraising total, highlighting the critical role outside groups will play in helping the GOP maintain control of the seat.

Talarico received a significant financial windfall this month, with his campaign reporting $2.5 million in donations within 24 hours after late-night television host Stephen Colbert canceled a scheduled interview on February 16, citing concerns from CBS legal advisors.

During a recent campaign appearance, Crockett reminded supporters of her 2020 Texas House race where opponents outspent her campaign by a 5-to-1 margin before she won her current Dallas-area congressional seat two years later.

“People said, ‘There’s no way she’s going to win,’” Crockett said, becoming emotional. “I show up, authentically me. That makes some people cringe, but the people are tired of politics as usual.”

WASHINGTON – A prominent Democratic senator is pushing the House of Representatives to schedule another vote on aviation safety legislation that came up just one vote short of passage despite Pentagon resistance.

The House cast ballots with 264 members supporting and 133 opposing the ROTOR Act on Wednesday. The legislation had previously received unanimous approval from the Senate in December. The bill was drafted in response to a tragic mid-air collision between an American Airlines regional aircraft and an Army Black Hawk helicopter in Washington D.C. airspace that resulted in 67 fatalities. Senator Maria Cantwell is advocating for the House to hold another vote on the measure.

Because the legislation was considered under expedited procedures, it required approval from two-thirds of House members to advance – missing that threshold by a single vote.

WASHINGTON — During Tuesday evening’s State of the Union address, President Donald Trump spotlighted his administration’s border security achievements, declaring that migrant arrivals at the southern border have dramatically decreased following his January 2025 inauguration.

However, the president largely avoided discussing the controversial aftermath of federal enforcement actions in cities including Minneapolis and Chicago, where local communities have protested against federal agents’ methods. The Minneapolis operation in January resulted in the fatal shootings of two American citizens, sparking significant public backlash and broader criticism of how immigration authorities are executing the Republican president’s directives.

“Today our border is secure,” Trump declared to Congress during his Tuesday evening remarks. “We now have the strongest and most secure border in American history by far. In the past nine months, zero illegal aliens have been admitted to the United States.”

Immigration policy has remained Trump’s cornerstone political issue and played a crucial role in securing his 2024 electoral victory. His initial year back in the Oval Office brought dramatic enforcement overhauls and billions in additional funding for agencies implementing his policies. These changes are fundamentally altering enforcement practices for Trump’s remaining presidency, affecting everything from detention numbers to asylum approval rates.

An examination of six critical immigration metrics reveals how his administration has performed.

Throughout Joe Biden’s presidency, Republican lawmakers consistently characterized migrant flows at the U.S.-Mexico border as a crisis they attributed to Democratic policies.

Illegal border crossing arrests peaked at nearly 250,000 in December 2023 before beginning to decline during Biden’s final months in office.

December 2024, Biden’s last complete month as president, saw approximately 46,000 arrests. By February 2025, that figure dropped below 8,000 and has remained at similar or lower levels since. January’s total reached 6,070.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement announced a transformed enforcement approach, eliminating previous restrictions on who could be detained and deported. This policy shift led to a dramatic increase in ICE apprehensions.

December 2024 saw ICE record 8,507 arrests. Throughout 2025, numbers climbed to 17,000 by February, approached 30,000 by June, and hit 32,771 by September, based on University of California, Berkeley’s Deportation Data Project research analyzed by The Associated Press. The most recent data release covered mid-October, preceding the Minneapolis operation.

Rising arrest numbers have correspondingly increased the immigrant population housed in ICE’s nationwide detention network.

The Department of Homeland Security received $45 billion to construct, purchase, or lease additional facilities for detained immigrants awaiting deportation.

ICE publishes detention population data biweekly. These figures change daily as individuals enter the system or are released through bond arrangements — now increasingly uncommon — or deportation.

December 2024 average daily detention populations stayed just below 40,000 individuals. Under Trump’s leadership, these numbers have risen sharply. February figures reached 70,000 people. With current ICE funding, the agency could potentially detain approximately 100,000 immigrants or more.

ICE has embarked on extensive spending following its $45 billion congressional allocation for enhanced immigration enforcement and border security. The agency is actively seeking additional detention space through rental or purchase agreements and collaborating with conservative states to establish facilities with distinctive names like “Alligator Alcatraz” and “Speedway Slammer.”

Approximately $30 billion will fund hiring 10,000 additional deportation officers. Another $46 billion supports completing Trump’s first-term border wall project. Additional funds support hiring more Customs and Border Protection personnel and strengthening immigration court systems.

Asylum seekers arriving at the U.S.-Mexico border have increased substantially in recent years, creating enormous immigration court backlogs.

These individuals are experiencing higher case rejection rates under the current Trump administration.

Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse data shows asylum application denial rates ranged from 40% to 60% before Trump’s initial presidency. Rejection rates increased annually during his first term before declining under Biden’s administration.

However, the data indicates asylum denial rates surged 22.5% during Trump’s second term’s first year.

The Trump administration consistently describes its mass deportation operations as targeting immigrants with criminal records or those posing public safety risks, labeling them “the worst of the worst.”

Yet Deportation Data Project information reveals the percentage of ICE arrests involving individuals with criminal histories has steadily decreased.

Prior to Trump’s inauguration, approximately 86% of ICE arrests involved people with criminal backgrounds — meaning they had been convicted or charged with U.S. crimes beyond illegal entry, which constitutes a civil violation.

This percentage has declined, with mid-October data showing about 55% had criminal backgrounds while 45% did not. Critics note that criminal arrests don’t necessarily indicate serious felonies like murder, often involving minor offenses such as shoplifting.

This trend partly reflects increased collateral arrests by immigration enforcement. When ICE targets specific individuals with criminal records, officers can arrest others encountered who are in the country illegally.

Traditionally, most ICE arrests involved transfers from state or local correctional facilities. While ICE continues this practice, the Trump administration has implemented additional arrest strategies. These include workplace raids and targeting individuals attending immigration court hearings or routine agency check-ins.

Federal lawmakers are pushing to stop the Department of Homeland Security from purchasing and using a controversial full-body restraint system following revelations about its deployment during deportation operations.

Congresswoman Delia Ramirez, a Democrat from Illinois, introduced the “Full-Body Restraint Prohibition Act” in the House Wednesday, which would block future acquisitions of the device known as the WRAP and establish new oversight measures.

Ramirez referenced an Associated Press investigation that uncovered multiple instances where U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement used the restraint system on individuals during deportation flights, sometimes for extended periods, in cases dating back to 2020.

“The WRAP fuels destruction in our communities and human suffering. This legislation is an additional step to end the pain and violence caused by DHS,” Ramirez said in a statement.

The restraint system, manufactured by California company Safe Restraints Inc., has become the focus of multiple federal court cases, with plaintiffs arguing its improper use constitutes punishment or torture. Civil rights advocates worry that ICE isn’t properly documenting WRAP usage as mandated by federal regulations governing use of force, creating challenges in determining how many people have been subjected to the restraints.

Beyond ICE’s deployment of the device, the Associated Press discovered twelve fatalities over the past ten years involving local police and jail officials using the WRAP, with medical examiners concluding that “restraint” contributed to the deaths.

The Department of Homeland Security has not provided detailed responses to Associated Press inquiries about WRAP usage and did not comment on the proposed legislation.

The investigation revealed that ICE continued using the device even after a 2023 internal report from DHS’s civil rights division raised concerns, partly based on fatality reports involving the WRAP’s use by local law enforcement. Ramirez also referenced Bloomberg Law reporting on the restraint system.

Federal procurement documents indicate DHS has paid Safe Restraints Inc. $268,523 from when purchases began in late 2015 during the Obama presidency through June 2025. Government records show the Trump administrations accounted for approximately 91% of that expenditure.

Company CEO Charles Hammond defended the device, stating the WRAP was created to offer a “safer, more humane, pain-free alternative to other restraint methods.”

“Eliminating The WRAP from these situations would not lead to safer outcomes; it would force the return to alternative restraints and tactics proven to cause pain, injury and even fatalities,” Hammond said.

Hammond explained that his company developed a specialized version for ICE, with modifications designed to accommodate use during flights and extended bus transportation.

However, the Associated Press found that ICE personnel deploy the WRAP under circumstances that fall well below the manufacturer’s recommended guidelines. Detained individuals who spoke with the Associated Press described officers applying the restraints after they were already shackled, claiming this occurred to intimidate or punish them for requesting legal counsel or expressing concerns about deportation to countries they had fled due to violence and persecution.

Hammond acknowledged to the Associated Press that if individuals were not acting violently and were only voicing protests, placing them in the WRAP might constitute inappropriate usage.

Following the October Associated Press investigation, eleven Democratic senators sent correspondence to senior immigration officials, referencing the reporting and stating that ICE’s deployment of full-body restraints during deportation flights raises “serious human rights concerns.”

WASHINGTON — The nation’s highest court delivered a setback Wednesday to a major private prison corporation battling claims that immigration detainees were compelled to perform labor for just $1 per day at a Colorado facility.

In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court rejected GEO Group’s request for an expedited appeal, though this represents a procedural loss rather than a final judgment on the merits. The company has been contesting a decade-old lawsuit from 2014 that accuses the firm of requiring detainees at its Aurora facility to carry out custodial duties and other tasks without compensation, or for minimal wages to help offset insufficient food provisions.

The GEO Group has maintained its employment practices are lawful and contended the litigation should be dismissed because the company enjoys immunity from civil suits due to its status as a federal contractor.

When a lower court rejected this argument, GEO petitioned the Supreme Court for permission to bypass normal appeals procedures. However, the justices declined to grant this request.

Based in Florida, GEO Group ranks among the nation’s largest private detention operators, controlling approximately 77,000 beds across 98 facilities nationwide. The company’s portfolio includes a recently opened federal immigration detention facility in Newark, New Jersey, where Mayor Ras Baraka was taken into custody during a May 2025 demonstration, though charges against the Democratic mayor were subsequently dismissed.

Comparable legal challenges have emerged at other locations where GEO operates, including litigation in Washington state that resulted in a court ordering the company to pay over $23 million in damages.

During his State of the Union speech on Tuesday, President Donald Trump informed members of Congress that he will not require their approval to implement his tariff strategy moving forward. The president expressed confidence that existing trade agreements will remain in place, suggesting that other nations understand the consequences of backing out could be significantly more severe.

Trump’s remarks indicate he plans to move ahead with trade policy initiatives without seeking legislative backing from lawmakers, relying instead on executive authority to pursue his economic agenda.

WASHINGTON — A wellness entrepreneur and physician who champions Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s Make America Healthy Again initiative will testify Wednesday before senators considering her nomination as the nation’s top doctor.

Dr. Casey Means, 38, will finally get her chance to address the Senate health committee after her original October hearing was postponed when she went into labor on the scheduled day. The Stanford-educated nominee plans to outline her approach to combating chronic illness by tackling underlying causes through nutrition and lifestyle modifications — a philosophy that aligns with the health department’s current emphasis on dietary improvements as midterm elections draw near.

However, Means is expected to encounter challenging questions regarding her credentials and possible financial entanglements. The physician’s frustration with conventional medicine led her to pursue ventures promoting various products, sometimes without revealing her potential financial gains.

The surgeon general serves as America’s chief health advocate, issuing public health warnings and guidance to both citizens and medical professionals. Should senators confirm her appointment, Means would champion Kennedy’s comprehensive MAHA platform, which seeks to eliminate thousands of food additives, eliminate conflicts within federal agencies, and improve nutrition in school meals and related programs.

While previous surgeons general have occasionally weighed in on vaccination matters — despite having no official vaccine policy authority — Means has largely avoided Kennedy’s discredited vaccine positions, though she has supported additional safety research.

Means brings no government service to the role, and her medical license remains inactive. Following her medical degree completion at Stanford University, she abandoned her surgical residency at Oregon Health and Science University in 2018, citing her view that the healthcare system was fundamentally flawed and exploitative.

She subsequently pursued alternative methods to address what she characterizes as widespread metabolic problems caused primarily by inadequate nutrition and excessive consumption of highly processed foods.

Having completed sufficient postgraduate training for medical licensure, she obtained one and established a functional medicine practice in Oregon, which eventually shuttered. She later helped launch Levels, a health-tracking application that monitors nutrition, sleep, and exercise while providing users with blood test results and continuous glucose data.

Financial disclosure documents reveal she earned hundreds of thousands of dollars endorsing wellness products, including specialized basil seed supplements, teas, elixirs, probiotics, and meal delivery services. An Associated Press review discovered that she sometimes failed to reveal potential financial benefits from these product recommendations.

According to ethics documentation, Means has committed to leaving her Levels position and surrendering stock options and shares if confirmed by the full Senate. She also promised to end her relationship with Rupa, a specialized laboratory company for which she created an online educational program. While she may continue receiving book royalties from “Good Energy,” she will cease promotional activities, the filing indicated.

The documentation further states she will “avoid acquiring direct financial stakes in companies appearing on the Food and Drug Administration’s prohibited holdings roster.”

Two former surgeons general have publicly questioned Means’ suitability for the position.

Former Bush administration surgeon general Dr. Rich Carmona wrote in a Hill op-ed last May that Means’ professional background “creates substantial concerns.” Shortly afterward, Dr. Jerome Adams, who served as surgeon general during Trump’s initial term, posted on social media platform X that leading the U.S. Public Health Service Commissioned Corps traditionally requires an active medical license.

Means would join an administration already employing her brother, Calley Means, who serves as a senior Health and Human Services Department adviser promoting the Republican administration’s warnings about highly processed foods.

Trump’s initial surgeon general selection, former Fox News medical contributor Janette Nesheiwat, withdrew her nomination following criticism from presidential allies. Means received her nomination last May.

Small convenience stores across the region are voicing concerns over a new federal proposal that would change what items retailers must stock to accept food stamp benefits.

Under the Trump administration’s plan, stores participating in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program would need to carry increased amounts of fresh and whole food products. The proposal has sparked opposition from convenience store owners who fear the new mandates could force them to drop out of the federal nutrition program altogether.

The potential changes would affect how local corner stores and small retailers serve customers who rely on SNAP benefits for their grocery needs.

WASHINGTON — After delivering his State of the Union address Tuesday evening, President Donald Trump faces the challenge of ensuring his message resonates with voters across the nation.

Trump’s 108-minute speech served as a celebration of accomplishments during his second term’s early months, highlighting what he described as economic revival domestically and establishing new international leadership. He will first test this midterm election year messaging when he visits Texas later this week, targeting Latino voters who played a crucial role in his 2024 reelection victory and demonstrated his transformation of the Republican Party base.

The administration seeks to communicate this message to a wider voter base that remains largely skeptical of Trump’s performance, even as potential Middle East tensions could divert attention from his domestic agenda. Trump has shown a tendency to deviate from prepared remarks during campaign events, including a recent Georgia appearance where he claimed to have “solved” affordability issues despite ongoing voter concerns about high costs.

However, the economic growth and national security themes Trump highlighted during Tuesday’s lengthy address will form the foundation of the campaign message he and Republican colleagues plan to present to voters in November.

“This is going to be setting the tone for the following year,” Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla., who maintains close relationships with Trump, told The Associated Press.

Following State of the Union speeches, presidents typically embark on immediate travel to promote their priorities. President Joe Biden, for example, visited battleground states like Wisconsin and Pennsylvania the day following his addresses during his final two years in office.

Trump will remain in the Washington region until later this week before departing for Texas, where he plans to address economic matters and energy initiatives just before the state’s March 3 congressional primaries. Instead of immediate travel, the president will spend Wednesday in White House meetings, including policy discussions and a session with Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy.

Trump, who incorporated several social media-friendly surprises into his speech, demonstrates skill at capturing attention in today’s fragmented media landscape and will likely discover additional methods to maintain visibility beyond typical post-State of the Union activities.

“Donald Trump is a master at the big moments, so he obviously cares a lot about how the speech goes, but what he cares a lot about are the clips that get replayed over and over again from the State of the Union,” said Austin Cantrell, who served as an assistant White House press secretary in Trump’s first term.

Cantrell, now working with Chattanooga, Tennessee-based Bridge Public Affairs, added: “I don’t expect this to be some Aaron Sorkin-esque, perfectly choreographed post-State of the Union media fan-out.”

Six years earlier, Trump surprised audiences by presenting conservative radio personality Rush Limbaugh with the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the nation’s highest civilian recognition. Tuesday’s record-breaking lengthy address featured comparable headline-grabbing moments. He announced plans to bestow the same honor on Connor Hellebuyck, the U.S. men’s hockey team goaltender who recently won gold at the Milano-Cortina Winter Olympics. Trump invited Hellebuyck and teammates into the House chamber, where they received thunderous applause.

Trump also unveiled new proposals addressing affordability issues during his speech, while criticizing Democrats for opposing policies he credited with creating a more prosperous and secure America. Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger, delivering the Democratic response, countered that costs remain elevated for many Americans and families continue struggling under Trump’s policies.

Trump urged both parties to “protect American citizens, not illegal aliens,” advocating for restrictions on mail-in voting and stricter voter identification requirements while emphasizing dangers of uncontrolled illegal immigration.

“I do think a lot of the success outlined in the State of the Union will be a part of the Republican message in the fall,” Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., another Trump ally, told the AP, referencing GOP accomplishments in tax policy and border security. “As far as the president is concerned, I think he’ll be anxious to get on the road and talk about the success.”

Senior White House staff members have committed to regular Trump travel until the midterm elections. His economy tour has included crucial swing states like Michigan, Pennsylvania and North Carolina, plus traditionally conservative Iowa and former Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s congressional district. He has supported candidates — in Rocky Mount, North Carolina, he engaged with Republican Michael Whatley and endorsed his Senate campaign — while occasionally straying from the economic focus these trips are designed to emphasize.

Simply leaving Washington can signal to voters that a president values connecting with them. Edward Frantz, a University of Indianapolis historian, noted that Herbert Hoover — an engineer, self-made millionaire and technocrat — believed he could address national problems by working with his team in isolation and rarely departing Washington. This created voter perception that Hoover was indifferent because they didn’t witness him engaging with Americans.

“If you think about a call and response … the call is the State of the Union, and if you really do care about being in touch with others, then what’s the response?” Frantz explained. “The best way to be able to see that is by hitting the road.”

American opinions about Trump have remained relatively consistent throughout his second term, making it improbable that a single speech will significantly alter public perception. His approval ratings have shown minimal change during his second term, with Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research polling indicating only a slight decline from 42% in March 2025 to 36% in early February.

Despite this, the annual address provides Trump an opportunity to reshape his message, as it has for previous presidents.

Presidential historian Timothy Naftali noted that Bill Clinton used his 1996 State of the Union to establish themes for his Democratic reelection campaign. Following George W. Bush’s November 2006 midterm losses, the Republican adopted a notably more conciliatory approach toward newly empowered Democratic leadership on Capitol Hill.

“The State of the Union, they’re less important than they once were because with a president like Trump, he’s always available,” said Naftali, a senior research scholar at Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs. “But the State of the Union is an opportunity to reset the president’s agenda or to reaffirm it, and resetting an agenda in the social media era is different from resetting it in previous times.”

President Donald Trump’s pick to serve as America’s top doctor will finally face senators Wednesday in a confirmation hearing that was delayed for months due to childbirth.

Casey Means, the 38-year-old nominee for U.S. Surgeon General, was initially scheduled to testify before the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee back in October. However, the session was postponed when she delivered her baby at full term.

If senators approve her nomination, Means would take on the role of providing Americans with science-based health guidance aimed at preventing disease and injuries. She works closely with Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and strongly backs his “Make America Healthy Again” campaign, alongside her brother Calley Means, who advises the Trump administration on nutrition policy.

This marks Trump’s second attempt to fill the surgeon general position after he pulled his earlier choice, Janette Nesheiwat, in May. Both selections have drawn criticism from conservative activists like Laura Loomer and traditional political figures who question her positions.

The nominee has promoted drinking unpasteurized milk, repeatedly supported Kennedy’s debunked theories connecting vaccines to autism, and spoken against hormonal contraceptives.

In testimony prepared for her original October appearance, Means described herself as both a wellness advocate and licensed physician who has cared for thousands of patients across 15 years in hospitals, surgical suites, and private practice. The committee has not posted any revised testimony for Wednesday’s hearing.

The Stanford University School of Medicine graduate left her surgical training program before completion. Her Oregon medical credentials are currently listed as “inactive,” which Means explains is by choice since she’s not actively seeing patients.

Means helped start Levels, a health technology application, and owns stock in Truemed, her brother’s business that helps customers get tax breaks for specialized medical treatments.

She has promised in ethics documents to step down from Levels and sell her ownership stakes in both businesses if confirmed to the federal post.

During a Food and Drug Administration gathering Tuesday, Kennedy praised Means for having “an extraordinary capacity to communicate to the American public” and said he expects her confirmation to succeed.

“We’ve been waiting for a long time for Dr. Means to come on board,” he said.

The Trump administration has directed American diplomats to actively oppose foreign regulations targeting how U.S. technology companies manage overseas citizens’ personal information, according to an internal State Department communication obtained by Reuters.

The diplomatic directive, issued February 18 and bearing Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s signature, warns that international data sovereignty measures could harm artificial intelligence services and disrupt global information networks.

Policy analysts suggest this represents a shift toward more aggressive tactics as nations worldwide increasingly seek to control how Silicon Valley giants process and store their residents’ digital information through what experts call “data sovereignty” or “data localization” policies.

According to the State Department memo, such regulations would “disrupt global data flows, increase costs and cybersecurity risks, limit Artificial Intelligence (AI) and cloud services, and expand government control in ways that can undermine civil liberties and enable censorship.”

The communication outlined the administration’s push for “a more assertive international data policy” while instructing diplomatic personnel to “counter unnecessarily burdensome regulations, such as data localization mandates.”

The State Department has not responded to requests for comment regarding the directive.

These data protection efforts have accelerated across Europe amid growing tensions between Washington and the European Union over trade protectionism and political interference concerns.

European officials have expressed mounting anxiety about American AI companies’ dominance, particularly given these firms’ reliance on vast personal data collections to fuel their technological models. Continental regulators have simultaneously intensified scrutiny of American social media platforms.

Bert Hubert, a Netherlands-based cloud computing specialist and former Dutch intelligence oversight board member, believes Europe’s growing skepticism of American tech firms may be prompting Washington’s more confrontational stance.

“Where the previous administration attempted to woo European customers, the current one is demanding that Europeans disregard their own data privacy regulations that could hinder American business,” he said.

International data sovereignty legislation takes various forms. Some regulations mandate that information collected within specific countries remain stored domestically. Others restrict how data gets shared, limiting distribution to foreign corporations. The European Union’s 2018 General Data Protection Regulation exemplifies such measures, imposing transfer restrictions on Europeans’ data and resulting in substantial penalties for American technology companies.

Rubio’s communication specifically criticized GDPR as imposing “unnecessarily burdensome data processing restrictions and cross-border data flow requirements.”

The memo also accused China of “bundling enticing technology infrastructure projects with restrictive data policies that expand its global influence and access to international data for surveillance and strategic leverage.” Beijing has strengthened oversight of how Chinese companies handle and transfer user information in recent years.

China’s Washington embassy stated unfamiliarity with the diplomatic cable but emphasized that Beijing “has always attached great importance to cybersecurity and data security.” The European Commission’s Washington office did not provide comment.

The directive, labeled an “action request,” assigned American diplomatic staff to monitor proposals restricting international data transfers while providing promotional materials for the Global Cross-Border Privacy Rules Forum. This organization, established in 2022 by the United States alongside Mexico, Canada, Australia, Japan, and other nations, aims “to support the free flow of data and effective data protection and privacy globally.” The Forum has not responded to inquiries.

This communication represents the latest effort to challenge European digital regulation initiatives.

Last year, Rubio instructed diplomats to build opposition against the EU’s Digital Services Act, legislation designed to enhance internet safety by requiring major social platforms to eliminate illegal content including extremist materials and child exploitation imagery. Reuters recently reported that the United States plans to launch an online platform helping Europeans and others circumvent censorship of content including alleged hate speech and terrorist propaganda.

Federal immigration enforcement agencies are conducting dangerous vehicle pursuits that have resulted in multiple accidents and at least one fatality, raising concerns about chase policies during heightened deportation operations.

As the Trump administration intensifies mass deportation efforts, more individuals are attempting to evade Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers. Federal agents have responded by engaging in high-speed vehicular chases and aggressive driving tactics that would violate pursuit policies used by local law enforcement agencies.

The dangerous pursuit practices have led to several vehicle crashes, with at least one resulting in death. The incidents highlight a gap between federal immigration enforcement tactics and the safety protocols that govern local police departments across the country.

Former President Donald Trump used his State of the Union address to showcase what he views as economic successes while launching verbal attacks against his political opponents. The speech represented Trump’s effort to convince American voters of his economic vision and record.

During the address, Trump attempted to persuade the public to embrace his perspective on the nation’s financial situation and economic policies.

In separate congressional news, the United States House of Representatives voted to reject proposed legislation focused on aviation safety measures, blocking the bill from advancing.

Fresh questions are being raised about FBI Director Kash Patel’s leadership approach following his participation in celebratory activities with the U.S. men’s hockey team after they captured Olympic gold.

The director’s decision to join the team’s post-victory festivities has generated renewed scrutiny of his tenure at the helm of the federal law enforcement agency, with critics pointing to the incident as another example of questionable judgment in his leadership role.

Annie Farmer, who courageously testified against Jeffrey Epstein during legal proceedings, recently spoke with journalist Leila Fadel regarding her attendance at President Trump’s State of the Union address.

Farmer, recognized as one of the survivors who came forward with testimony in the Epstein case, shared her reflections on being present for the presidential address to Congress.

The interview focused on Farmer’s experience and thoughts following her participation in the significant political event.

For more than ten years, federal immigration officers quietly used a California city’s shooting range for training exercises without drawing much attention from local residents. That changed following President Trump’s intensified immigration enforcement efforts and deadly incidents involving federal agents shooting U.S. citizens.

The training agreement in Escondido, a community of roughly 150,000 located north of San Diego amid agricultural land and horse properties, has now become the center of ongoing protests. Community members are calling on city leaders to terminate the contract allowing Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents access to the police department’s shooting facility, part of a broader nationwide pushback against the administration’s immigration policies.

“We don’t want ICE anywhere near Escondido or fraternizing with the police,” said Richard Garner, 71, while rallying against the deal outside the city’s police station.

Recent polling shows most Americans believe Trump has overstepped by deploying federal immigration officers in U.S. cities. Beyond large-scale protests in Minneapolis, residents from New York to California are challenging existing agreements between ICE and municipal governments covering everything from training facility access to parking arrangements. Communities have also expressed anger over ICE’s plans to establish massive detention warehouses, some designed to hold up to 10,000 immigration detainees.

Congressional Democrats have blocked Department of Homeland Security funding during this controversy, stating they won’t approve additional resources without new restrictions on federal immigration activities following last month’s fatal shootings of U.S. citizens Alex Pretti and Renee Good in Minneapolis.

Escondido’s City Council plans to address the ICE contract during Wednesday’s meeting.

Escondido previously maintained unusually strong ties with ICE compared to other California municipalities, permitting immigration officers to operate from police headquarters and collaborate on traffic enforcement. This cooperation ceased after California enacted 2017 legislation restricting such partnerships with federal immigration authorities.

Local activists say they discovered the shooting range contract online and were previously unaware of the arrangement at the facility located in the city’s hills. They worry the agreement will discourage immigrants from reporting crimes to local law enforcement, potentially compromising public safety in a community where Latino residents comprise approximately half the population.

Residents express concern about providing ICE agents any justification to visit their area or supporting an agency they believe may not adhere to federal law. These fears affect both immigrants and citizens worried about masked federal immigration officers’ use of lethal force.

Police Captain Erik Witholt explained that Escondido provides the facility through a contract ICE signed in 2024 and renewed this year, although the agency has conducted training at the outdoor range along a curved road outside downtown for over a decade.

The three-year agreement with ICE’s San Diego Homeland Security Investigations unit, which handles cases involving human trafficking and drug smuggling, will pay the city $22,500 annually.

“We don’t train with them. We don’t train them,” Witholt said, noting that 22 different agencies utilize the facility, each bringing their own range supervisors, targets, and ammunition.

The Department of Homeland Security, ICE’s parent agency, declined to address the criticism and wouldn’t verify training locations due to security considerations.

However, several training sites have been revealed as communities seek to terminate such contracts.

In Cottage Grove, Minnesota, located 20 miles southeast of Minneapolis, Ruth Jones and fellow residents have petitioned their community to cancel its agreement allowing ICE access to the regional training center. Mayor Myron Bailey responded that the facility was constructed using state bond money and serves approximately 60 law enforcement agencies and other organizations, including ICE.

“Contractually we cannot discriminate against any public agency,” Bailey said in a statement.

Islip, New York residents urged local officials last year to cancel a long-term contract for rifle range training access, but municipal leaders maintained the agreement.

Hartford, Connecticut has taken steps to terminate a contract allowing ICE personnel to use a city-owned parking facility.

Not all Escondido residents oppose the city’s ICE agreement. Luke Beckwith, 26, believes police should determine facility access.

“I personally don’t care,” Beckwith said. “It’s bringing revenue to the city.”

Edgar, a Mexican immigrant who requested his surname be withheld due to deportation concerns, said preventing ICE from using the city’s shooting range won’t eliminate the danger for immigrants like himself.

“If they want to come, they will come,” he said.