Category: Politics

WASHINGTON (AP) — Several Republican members of Congress have faced criticism this week for inflammatory statements targeting Muslim Americans, with Democratic leaders condemning the remarks while GOP leadership has offered limited response.

The controversial comments have been building among Republican officials for months, frequently surfacing when criticizing New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani, who practices Islam. Recent violent incidents in Michigan and Virginia have intensified these statements from lawmakers.

Alabama Senator Tommy Tuberville posted on Thursday that “The enemy is inside our gates” while responding to an image of Mamdani seated during an iftar meal at New York City Hall. The senator’s post placed this photo alongside an image from the September 11 attacks.

Later that day, Tuberville reinforced his position, stating: “To be clear, I didn’t ‘suggest’ Islamists are the enemy. I said it plainly.”

The inflammatory language escalated Friday when Republican legislators reacted to violent incidents in Michigan and Virginia by calling for complete immigration suspension. Several specifically targeted Muslim immigrants.

Muslim Americans see parallels to the early 2000s period following 9/11, when the Afghanistan and Iraq conflicts sparked hostility toward Muslim communities nationwide, frequently resulting in discrimination and hate crimes.

“When members of Congress speak, it’s not just words,” said Iman Awad, the national director for policy and advocacy for the Muslim American advocacy group Emgage Action. “It shapes public perception. It legitimizes prejudice.”

Tennessee Representative Andy Ogles declared on social media that Muslims don’t belong in the United States. When faced with backlash, he maintained his stance, later posting that “paperwork doesn’t magically make you American” and claiming “Muslims are unable to assimilate; they all have to go back.”

When questioned about Ogles’ statements Tuesday, House Speaker Mike Johnson revealed he had discussed “our tone and our message and what we say” with members. Johnson said Ogles used “different language than I would use,” while describing the underlying concern as “serious.”

“There’s a lot of energy in the country, and a lot of popular sentiment that the demand to impose Sharia law in America is a serious problem,” Johnson said. “That’s what animates this.”

Sharia represents a religious framework guiding many Muslims’ moral and spiritual behavior. Politicians frequently reference “Sharia law” to suggest Muslims seek to impose religious practices on American communities.

Multiple Republicans cite a Muslim-focused planned community near Dallas as evidence of “Sharia law” implementation, though developers have rejected these claims and assert they face targeting due to their faith.

Johnson’s refusal to condemn Ogles’ statements — or recent comments from Florida Representative Randy Fine claiming “the choice between dogs and Muslims is not a difficult one” — has emboldened additional anti-Muslim rhetoric. Following circulation of Mamdani’s iftar dinner photo, numerous Republicans posted critical responses.

Democratic leaders widely denounced the GOP messaging. Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer labeled Tuberville’s post “mindless hate.”

“Islamophobic hate like this is fundamentally un-American and we must confront and overcome it whenever it rears its ugly head,” Schumer said.

Responding to Tuberville’s “the enemy is inside our gates” post, Mamdani stated: “Let there be as much outrage from politicians in Washington when kids go hungry as there is when I break bread with New Yorkers.”

Federal authorities identified the man who drove his vehicle into Temple Israel in West Bloomfield Township, Michigan, this week as a naturalized citizen from Lebanon. Officials reported that he had lost four relatives in an Israeli airstrike in Lebanon the previous week, occurring at sunset during their Ramadan fast-breaking meal.

At Old Dominion University in Virginia, Mohamed Bailor Jalloh fired shots in a classroom before ROTC students overpowered and killed him. Court records revealed his previous imprisonment for attempting to support the Islamic State, with his release occurring less than two years prior.

Certain Republican legislators claimed validation for their positions. Others promoted new legislation. Minnesota Representative Tom Emmer, the House GOP whip, declared “the security of our nation hinges on our ability to denaturalize and deport terrorists.”

West Virginia Representative Riley Moore announced plans to introduce legislation allowing denaturalization and deportation of any naturalized citizen who “commits an act of terrorism, plots to commit an act of terrorism, joins a terrorist organization or otherwise aids and abets terrorism against the American people.”

Comparable rhetoric and policy proposals have emerged previously, generating controversy. Last year, protesters linked to Israel-Hamas war demonstrations faced arrest and government targeting, including former Columbia University graduate student Mahmoud Khalil, a Palestinian activist whom authorities have attempted to detain and deport.

Middle Eastern conflicts generating domestic tensions represents a recurring pattern. During the Gaza war, both Muslim and Jewish communities have experienced faith-based discrimination and attacks.

Mamdani described posts referencing the 9/11 attacks as concerning not only for their language but for “the actions that often accompany them.”

“I think too of the smaller indignities, the indignities that many New Yorkers face, but that Muslims are expected to face in silence,” Mamdani said. “Of the exhaustion of having to explain yourself to those who are not interested in understanding. Of the men who introduce themselves by their given name only to be called Muhammad for years on end.”

The notable silence from Republican leadership, including President Donald Trump, demonstrates a significant party transformation. Following the September 11, 2001 attacks, Republican President George W. Bush visited Washington D.C.’s Islamic Center to explicitly discourage Muslim discrimination.

“America counts millions of Muslims amongst our citizens, and Muslims make an incredibly valuable contribution to our country,” Bush said during that visit, adding: “They need to be treated with respect. In our anger and emotion, our fellow Americans must treat each other with respect.”

“Those who feel like they can intimidate our fellow citizens to take out their anger don’t represent the best of America, they represent the worst of humankind, and they should be ashamed of that kind of behavior,” Bush said.

WASHINGTON — Federal attorneys are urging the Supreme Court to overturn lower court decisions that have blocked the administration’s attempts to remove legal safeguards for migrants from several nations currently living in the United States, potentially putting thousands at risk of removal.

In a Monday letter to the nation’s highest court, the Justice Department seeks sweeping authority to quickly eliminate temporary protections for people from various countries, including Haiti and Syria.

Administration officials maintain the federal government possesses full discretion to terminate temporary protected status without judicial interference.

However, multiple lower courts have rejected this position, with a Washington D.C. judge determining that “hostility to nonwhite immigrants” likely influenced decisions to revoke Haitian protections. An appellate court later affirmed this ruling.

The Supreme Court has previously backed the administration’s stance, permitting the elimination of protections for hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans while legal challenges continued. This decision was among several victories for Trump through the Court’s expedited emergency procedures, enabling advancement of key policy priorities.

The administration now seeks a definitive ruling preventing courts from challenging Department of Homeland Security actions within the broader mass deportation campaign.

Solicitor General D. John Sauer accused lower court judges of showing “persistent disregard” for the Court’s previous emergency decisions, creating a pattern that appears “likely to repeat again and again unless and until this Court steps in.”

Sauer challenged a decision maintaining Syrian immigrant protections last month and announced Monday his intention to contest another ruling affecting approximately 350,000 Haitians.

More than 175 former judges have submitted arguments stating that emergency rulings don’t establish binding precedent and urging the court to permit standard appeals procedures to continue.

Haiti’s protections began in 2010 following a devastating earthquake and have been renewed repeatedly. The nation continues experiencing severe gang violence that has forced hundreds of thousands from their homes.

Homeland Security officials claim conditions have stabilized and reject claims that racial bias influenced their decisions. However, legal representatives for Haitian migrants warn that “people will almost certainly die” if the administration eliminates the program.

The Homeland Security secretary can authorize temporary protected status when home country conditions are considered too dangerous for return due to natural disasters, political turmoil, or other threats. These designations last 18 months and don’t create paths to permanent residency.

The Department of Homeland Security has also ended protections for approximately 600,000 Venezuelans, 6,100 Syrians, 60,000 individuals from Honduras, Nicaragua and Nepal, over 160,000 Ukrainians, and thousands from Afghanistan and Cameroon.

A senior official in President Trump’s administration has made an unusual public call for the United States to withdraw from its military engagement with Iran, suggesting the country should seek a negotiated end to the conflict.

David Sacks, who serves as the White House’s artificial intelligence and cryptocurrency chief, made the remarks during a Friday appearance on the “All-In Podcast,” breaking from typical administration messaging on the Iran situation.

“This is a good time to declare victory and get out,” Sacks stated during the podcast interview. He argued that American forces have successfully weakened Iran’s military strength, creating an opportunity for withdrawal.

Sacks went further in advocating for diplomatic solutions, saying “I agree that we should try to find the off-ramp.” He emphasized the need to consider alternatives to continued military action.

“If escalation doesn’t lead anywhere good, then you have to think about, well, how do you de-escalate? De-escalation, I think, involves reaching some sort of ceasefire agreement or some sort of negotiated settlement with Iran,” he explained.

The conflict intensified following joint American and Israeli military operations against Iran on February 28. In response, Iran and its Lebanese ally Hezbollah have launched retaliatory strikes against Israel and other regional targets.

The ongoing military tensions have created ripple effects beyond the battlefield, causing instability in international financial markets and driving up global oil prices.

Casualty figures from the conflict paint a stark picture of the human cost. Iran’s United Nations representative reports that more than 1,300 people have died in Iran due to American and Israeli military strikes. Israeli officials say 12 of their citizens have been killed in Iranian attacks, while the U.S. military has confirmed seven American service members have lost their lives in the fighting.

Alexander Butterfield, the former White House official whose bombshell testimony about secret recordings helped topple President Richard Nixon during the Watergate crisis, has passed away at 99 years old.

Butterfield’s wife Kim and former Nixon White House counsel John Dean confirmed his death to news outlets. Dean praised Butterfield’s courage in revealing classified information.

“He had the heavy responsibility of revealing something he was sworn to secrecy on, which is the installation of the Nixon taping system,” Dean said. “He stood up and told the truth.”

Working as a deputy assistant to Nixon, Butterfield supervised a covert recording system linked to voice-activated devices installed in four separate locations, including Nixon’s Executive Office Building workspace and the Camp David presidential retreat.

According to Butterfield’s later statements, only a small circle knew about the recording equipment: himself, Nixon, Chief of Staff H.R. Haldeman, one of Haldeman’s assistants, and several Secret Service personnel.

“Everything was taped … as long as the president was in attendance,” Butterfield testified when questioned by Watergate investigators during a sworn preliminary interview.

These recordings ultimately revealed Nixon’s involvement in covering up the 1972 break-in at Democratic Party offices in the Watergate complex. Rather than face House impeachment proceedings, Nixon stepped down on August 9, 1974, less than 30 days after the Supreme Court ordered him to turn over relevant recordings to prosecutors.

Butterfield acknowledged his role in the president’s downfall. “I didn’t like to be the cause of that, but I felt that I was, in a lot of ways,” he reflected in a 2008 interview for the Nixon Presidential Library and Museum.

A UCLA classmate of Haldeman’s, Butterfield had reached out to his friend seeking opportunities in the incoming Nixon White House. From 1969 to 1973, he worked under Haldeman as deputy assistant, serving as Cabinet secretary and helping manage White House operations.

The Air Force veteran had already departed the White House to lead the Federal Aviation Administration when Senate investigators privately interviewed him on July 13, 1973, during their Watergate probe. A standard inquiry about potential recording systems arose from John Dean’s earlier testimony suggesting his Nixon conversation might have been captured.

After Butterfield confirmed the taping system’s existence, he appeared before a public Senate Select Committee hearing. His July 16, 1973 revelation of comprehensive presidential recording capabilities shocked both Nixon supporters and critics, promising investigators valuable evidence about the break-in knowledge.

Investigators’ efforts to obtain the recordings triggered a year-long court battle that concluded in July 1974 when the Supreme Court unanimously ordered Nixon to release them.

The thousands of hours of recordings released over time—now managed by the National Archives—offer an unprecedented, often unfavorable glimpse of Nixon, revealing his temper, crude language, prejudiced attitudes, and candid views on domestic and foreign leaders.

“I just thought, ‘When they hear those tapes …’ I mean, I knew what was on these tapes … they’re dynamite,” Butterfield told the Nixon Library. “I guess I didn’t foresee that the president might be put out of office or impeached, but I thought it would be a perilous few years for him. I guess I couldn’t conceive of (Nixon) being forced out of office. It had never happened before.”

Butterfield believed President Gerald Ford dismissed him as FAA administrator in 1975 as part of a deal between Nixon and Ford staff members. He claimed White House contacts informed him he became a target following his Senate testimony.

Following his FAA departure, Butterfield pursued business executive roles in California and completed a master’s degree at UC San Diego in 1994.

Born Alexander Porter Butterfield on April 6, 1926, in Pensacola, Florida, he left UCLA to join the Navy, later earning his bachelor’s from the University of Maryland in 1956 and a master’s from George Washington University in 1967.

He entered the Air Force in 1948, serving as an instructor near Las Vegas during the Korean War and later in Germany. In Washington, he assisted the defense secretary’s special assistant in 1965-1966 and served as senior military representative for Pacific Forces in Australia. He retired as a colonel after two decades of Air Force service.

In his later years, Butterfield harshly criticized his former boss. While acknowledging Nixon’s foreign policy successes, he called Nixon “not an honest man” and “a crook,” believing Nixon knew about the Watergate break-in beforehand and orchestrated the subsequent cover-up.

Butterfield admitted to “cheering … just cheering” when Nixon resigned, telling the Nixon Library that “justice had prevailed.”

“I didn’t think that it would for a while,” he said. “This guy was the ringleader.”

McALLEN, Texas — Immigration enforcement officials have detained members of a Mexican family, including two teenage sons who performed with an award-winning high school mariachi ensemble, drawing criticism from politicians on both sides of the aisle who say the action goes too far.

The Gámez-Cuéllar family was taken into custody on February 25th during what should have been a routine immigration check-in, according to family members and supporters who have started fundraising efforts online. The family includes brothers Antonio, 18, Joshua, 14, and a 12-year-old sibling, along with their parents.

The two older boys had earned recognition as key performers in McAllen High School’s Mariachi Oro ensemble, a group that has achieved remarkable success including White House appearances, Carnegie Hall performances, and eight state championship titles.

Antonio was freed from the Raymondville immigration detention facility on Monday afternoon, though he and his legal team declined to speak with media. His four family members remain held at a separate facility in Dilley, Texas, designed for families.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials have not yet provided a response to media inquiries about the case.

Politicians from different parties have expressed solidarity with the Mexican family, who had been seeking asylum through official U.S. immigration channels.

“The Gamez-Cuellar family’s story breaks my heart. South Texans know better than anyone that we can secure our border and still treat people with dignity — these are not competing values,” said Rep. Monica de la Cruz, a Republican congresswoman representing McAllen.

McAllen’s Republican mayor, Javier Villalobos, expressed his backing for the family while continuing his push for “responsible pathways for law abiding individuals who want to contribute to our economy, support their families, and become productive neighbors in McAllen.”

Democratic Representative Joaquin Castro of Texas made the trip to visit the four detained family members at the Dilley facility on Monday. Castro has previously advocated at the same location for the release of 5-year-old Liam Conejo Ramos from Minnesota and his Ecuadorian father.

New York Democratic Representative Adriano Espaillat, who leads the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, described the family’s detention as “outrageous.”

“This family followed the rules, showed up to their immigration appointment in good faith, and is now being torn apart by ICE, with their 18-year-old son separated from his parents and younger brothers,” he said.

A federal judge in Massachusetts has temporarily blocked the Trump administration’s effort to end deportation protections for immigrants from Somalia, just days before the program was set to expire.

U.S. District Judge Allison D. Burroughs issued the emergency ruling on Friday, stating that allowing Somalia’s Temporary Protected Status designation to end on Tuesday would have “weighty” consequences. Immigration advocates had rushed to court seeking the emergency halt after the Trump administration announced plans last month to terminate the program during an immigration enforcement operation in Minneapolis, home to a large Somali community.

The judge’s decision highlighted the serious risks facing affected individuals, stating that “Over one thousand people will face ‘a myriad of grave risks,’ including detention and deportation, physical violence if removed to Somalia, and forced separation from family members.”

Burroughs explained that issuing an administrative stay while postponing a final decision allows both legal teams time to submit detailed arguments on the emergency request.

“While the stay is in effect, the termination shall be null, void, and of no legal effect,” the court order stated, emphasizing that individuals with TPS status or pending applications will continue to have access to work permits and protection from deportation and detention.

The Department of Homeland Security responded with criticism of the ruling, calling it another instance of a judge appointed by former President Barack Obama blocking Trump from “restoring integrity” to America’s immigration system.

“Temporary means temporary,” the department’s statement declared. “Country conditions in Somalia have improved to the point that it no longer meets the law’s requirement for Temporary Protected Status. Allowing Somali nationals to remain temporarily in the United States is contrary to our national interests. The Trump administration is putting Americans first.”

Legal representatives for those challenging the termination expressed cautious optimism about the temporary victory. In their statement, they acknowledged that while the order is temporary and “many battles lie ahead,” they are “heartened by the interim protection today’s order affords all Somali people in the U.S. who have TPS or pending TPS applications.”

A National Transportation Safety Board official was terminated by the Trump administration following allegations of workplace misconduct, though Todd Inman strongly contests the accusations and pledges to pursue legal action.

Inman disclosed on Sunday that his employment was terminated Friday without any explanation provided, despite his board appointment extending through 2027’s conclusion. The Trump White House defended the decision on Monday, stating the termination was warranted.

White House spokesperson Kush Desai explained the administration’s position: “The White House lawfully removed Todd Inman from the NTSB after receiving highly concerning reports of inappropriate alcohol use on the job, harassment of staff, misuse of government resources, and failure to attend at least half of NTSB meetings. The Trump administration remains committed to maintaining safety and security for Americans in the air and on the ground.”

Initially, Inman hadn’t considered litigation regarding his dismissal, but now states: “I look forward to defending my reputation through all legal means possible.”

“I categorically deny the allegations made in the White House statement. It has become increasingly obvious this action was a political hit job,” declared Inman, a Republican who received his appointment in March 2024 under former President Joe Biden.

Following Inman’s termination and Vice Chair Alvin Brown’s surprising removal in May – a Biden-appointed Democrat – the NTSB’s website currently shows just three active members. However, the U.S. Senate has recently approved American Airlines executive John DeLeeuw, who will join as the board’s fourth member. The agency examines significant aviation, rail, highway, and pipeline accidents while currently handling over 1,000 active investigations, ultimately issuing prevention recommendations in final reports.

The NTSB has refused to provide commentary regarding Inman’s removal.

Inman served as the primary board representative at the scene of last year’s devastating midair collision near Washington, D.C., which claimed 67 lives when a commercial aircraft struck a U.S. Army Black Hawk helicopter. He also supervised the preliminary investigation into November’s UPS cargo aircraft crash in Kentucky that resulted in 15 fatalities.

Prior to recent events, dismissing independent agency board members was extraordinarily rare. Nevertheless, Trump has removed officials from the Federal Reserve Board, Surface Transportation Board, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and Nuclear Regulatory Commission to install his preferred candidates.

The NTSB’s five-member structure traditionally includes three members from the president’s political party and two from the opposition. With Inman’s departure and DeLeeuw’s addition, the board now stands at an even 2-2 party split, allowing Trump to select a third Republican member.

Both Brown and Robert Primus, who previously served on the U.S. Surface Transportation Board, were the sole Black board members leading their respective independent agencies when terminated last year. Each has contested their dismissals in federal court, with legal advocacy organization Democracy Forward filing discrimination complaints on their behalf.

Travelers across the nation are facing dramatically extended delays at airport security screening areas as the partial federal government shutdown continues. Transportation Security Administration personnel are working their shifts despite not receiving their regular paychecks during the ongoing budget impasse.

The prolonged wait times at TSA checkpoints have become increasingly problematic at multiple airports throughout the country, creating frustration for passengers trying to reach their flights on schedule.

A former top Missouri lawmaker will spend nearly two years behind bars after admitting he fraudulently diverted hundreds of thousands of dollars in pandemic relief money for his own use.

John Diehl, who once held the position of Republican House Speaker in Missouri, was handed a 21-month federal prison sentence on Monday following his guilty plea to wire fraud charges. The case centered on his misappropriation of approximately $380,000 in federal assistance designed to help businesses survive the economic impact of COVID-19.

Between 2020 and 2022, Diehl obtained the federal loans for his legal practice through a program specifically created to assist companies with operational costs during the pandemic crisis. However, according to his September plea deal, he diverted these funds toward personal expenditures including membership fees at a country club, pool upkeep at his residence, mortgage payments, and car loans for luxury vehicles including a Tesla, Audi, and Jeep.

Federal prosecutors revealed that Diehl channeled more than half of the fraudulent funds into his law firm’s retirement benefit program, where he served as the sole beneficiary. He also used portions of the money to settle a civil lawsuit stemming from his tenure as House Speaker.

Diehl’s political career ended in scandal when he stepped down from his leadership role in 2015. His resignation came after The Kansas City Star published reports about inappropriate text communications he had sent to a college intern working at the state Capitol. Diehl publicly admitted at the time that sending those messages constituted “making a serious error in judgment.”

His legal troubles continued in 2023 when Missouri’s Ethics Commission hit him with approximately $47,000 in penalties for campaign finance infractions, including accusations that he spent nearly $6,800 in campaign donations on personal items.

Defense attorneys had urged the judge to avoid imposing jail time, emphasizing that Diehl had already repaid the entire amount to the Small Business Administration. However, federal prosecutors had sought a sentence ranging from 21 to 27 months behind bars.

Along with the prison term, the court imposed a $50,000 monetary penalty on Monday.

“Through his education and public office, Defendant had every privilege and opportunity, and to put it bluntly, he knew better than to engage in the charged fraud scheme,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Hal Goldsmith stated in court documents regarding Diehl’s case.

A fugitive fatally shot by Dallas SWAT officers this week had been working as part of the security team for U.S. Representative Jasmine Crockett while allegedly impersonating a law enforcement officer, according to a Friday report from CBS News Texas.

The individual, who publicly identified himself as Mike King, had been operating under false identities while running a company that connected police officers with off-duty security assignments, sources told the news outlet. Law enforcement officials have not disclosed the person’s actual identity.

Dallas police SWAT team members fatally shot the suspect Wednesday evening, according to department statements released earlier this week.

According to CBS News Texas, the man faced charges for pretending to be a police officer and had falsely claimed law enforcement credentials while operating Off Duty Police Services, a digital platform that matches North Texas officers with private security opportunities.

Neither Representative Crockett’s office nor the Dallas Police Department provided immediate responses to requests for comment on the matter.

The news station reported obtaining photographs showing King positioned near Crockett, a Democratic representative, during various public appearances and campaign activities related to her recent bid for a U.S. Senate position.

Investigators also discovered that he operated a vehicle designed to resemble an unmarked police car and had been using license plates that were stolen from vehicles parked outside a military recruitment facility, according to the report.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Federal officials have unveiled plans for a massive underground security facility at the White House designed to streamline visitor processing as part of ongoing renovations to the presidential complex.

Blueprints and architectural drawings for the 33,000-square-foot subterranean center were disclosed Friday in preliminary documents for an upcoming April federal commission meeting that must approve construction projects on government property in the nation’s capital.

The proposed security facility would be constructed underneath Sherman Park, positioned to the southeast of the White House complex and immediately south of the Treasury Department building.

For years, Sherman Park served as the staging area where White House visitors and tour groups would queue for security processing before passing through temporary trailer-like screening stations and proceeding to the East Wing entrance. Last fall, President Donald Trump demolished the East Wing to make way for a new ballroom, forcing visitors to now gather near Lafayette Park on the opposite side of Pennsylvania Avenue.

The proposed underground facility would feature seven separate processing lanes designed to speed up security checks and minimize waiting periods for guests. According to project timelines, construction work could commence as soon as August, with the White House targeting a July 2028 operational date — approximately six months before the end of Trump’s presidential term.

Project documents indicate that the monument honoring Union General William Tecumseh Sherman, which stands at the heart of Sherman Park, would remain untouched during construction. The initiative represents a joint effort between the Executive Office of the President, the U.S. Secret Service, and the National Park Service, which oversees White House grounds management.

The National Capital Planning Commission, the federal body responsible for reviewing government construction projects, has scheduled discussion of the proposal for its April 2 session, based on the preliminary meeting agenda distributed Friday.

Commission members will also consider and vote on the Republican president’s separate proposal to construct a 90,000-square-foot structure, featuring an expansive ballroom, on the former East Wing site.

A federal jury in Texas has delivered guilty verdicts against nine individuals connected to an armed assault on a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention facility last summer, according to the Justice Department.

Eight of those convicted face terrorism-related charges, including providing material support to terrorists, participating in a riot, conspiracy to use and transport explosives, and deploying explosive devices during civil unrest, according to local news reports.

The verdicts came after a 12-day federal trial examining the defendants’ roles in the July 4th incident in Alvarado, Texas, where a police officer was shot but survived.

Federal authorities said the group wore dark “military-style” uniforms with masks and head coverings during their assault on the immigration facility. The Trump administration has identified the defendants as participants in the antifa movement, which President Donald Trump classified as a domestic terrorist organization last year.

This marks the first instance where federal prosecutors have brought terrorism charges against individuals linked to antifa, a loosely organized far-left movement whose supporters typically oppose what they consider authoritarian or racist policies.

Attorney General Pam Bondi indicated after the convictions that similar prosecutions will continue under the Trump administration.

ICE Director Todd M. Lyons praised the jury’s decision, characterizing the summer incident as a violent act and “an abhorrent way for antifa terrorists to ‘protest.’”

Those found guilty include Cameron Arnold, Zachary Evetts, Benjamin Song, Savanna Batten, Bradford Morris, Maricela Rueda, Elizabeth Soto, Ines Soto and Daniel Rolando Sanchez-Estrada.

Most defense attorneys did not respond to requests for comment following the verdicts.

Cody Cofer, representing lead defendant Arnold, criticized the prosecution’s approach, stating: “We are thankful that the jury could see through the Government’s fear mongering antifa ‘ambush’ narrative.”

“We are afraid that our client’s guilty verdicts for Riot and related charges resulted from a compromise during deliberations or failure to consider our client’s individual conduct,” Cofer added.

The defense attorney announced plans to file an appeal in the case.

Alexander Butterfield, the former White House official whose testimony about President Richard Nixon’s secret recording devices became pivotal evidence in the Watergate scandal, has passed away at 99 years old.

Butterfield’s wife Kim confirmed his death to major news outlets. He died at his La Jolla, California residence, just one month before reaching his 100th birthday. No specific cause of death was provided.

The former aide’s disclosure about Nixon’s covert audio recording system triggered a fierce legal fight over presidential executive privilege and ultimately provided crucial evidence that led to Nixon’s downfall.

Butterfield previously expressed frustration about his historical legacy, telling journalist Alicia Shepard that he disliked being remembered solely as the person who revealed the tapes’ existence, as it suggested he had “eagerly and breathlessly” shared the information with congressional investigators.

Born in Pensacola, Florida, and raised in California, Butterfield studied at UCLA before enlisting in the U.S. Air Force in 1948. He served as a combat pilot in Vietnam, leading a tactical reconnaissance squadron, and later worked as a military assistant to senior Pentagon officials, which gave him initial White House experience.

After leaving military service, Butterfield joined Nixon’s White House team as deputy to Chief of Staff H.R. Haldeman, his former UCLA classmate. His responsibilities included maintaining presidential historical records, which involved supervising the installation of the voice-activated recording equipment.

By the time the investigation into the June 17, 1972, Democratic headquarters break-in at the Watergate complex intensified, Butterfield had already moved on to lead the Federal Aviation Administration.

As one of the few White House insiders aware of the recording system, Butterfield decided when facing Senate questioning that he would avoid lying while also not volunteering unnecessary information.

During a private preliminary interview, a Republican committee attorney directly asked whether the White House maintained a recording system. Butterfield reluctantly confirmed its existence.

PIVOTAL MOMENT

Three days following his initial private testimony, on July 16, 1973, Butterfield testified publicly before the televised Senate Watergate Committee hearing. Fred Thompson, then serving as Republican counsel and later an actor and senator, posed the same crucial question.

After a lengthy pause, Butterfield responded, “I was aware of listening devices, yes, sir.”

This revelation shocked the nation because it meant concrete evidence existed of Nixon’s conversations, including exactly what he said, when he said it, and to whom.

Butterfield explained that the recording equipment had been secretly capturing conversations and meetings in the Oval Office, Nixon’s Executive Office Building office, and the Cabinet room, plus four White House phone lines. He stated the recordings were intended for historical purposes.

In a 1975 People magazine interview, Butterfield revealed that Nixon frequently forgot about the recording devices and ignored recommendations to destroy the tapes, never anticipating the Watergate investigation would escalate to the point of requiring their surrender.

“I’m sure that he hates me as much as anyone can,” Butterfield said regarding his former boss, who died in 1994.

He believed Nixon should have stepped down sooner, stating, “I don’t feel awful about the president’s resignation. Not at all.”

THE SMOKING GUN

A recording from six days after the Watergate break-in became Nixon’s ultimate downfall – the “smoking gun” that demonstrated his knowledge of the cover-up. The tape captured him approving a plan to halt the break-in investigation citing national security concerns.

The Supreme Court eventually rejected the White House’s executive privilege claims and mandated Nixon surrender the subpoenaed recordings as his public and political support crumbled. Facing impeachment and Senate trial, he resigned on August 9, 1974.

Since Butterfield had no involvement in the break-in or subsequent cover-up, he faced no criminal charges, though his friend Haldeman joined several other Nixon associates in prison.

Butterfield became the subject of Bob Woodward’s 2015 book “The Last of the President’s Men.” The Washington Post reporter, who helped expose the Watergate story, received thousands of documents that Butterfield had secretly taken from Nixon administration offices.

These materials and Butterfield’s interviews revealed what the former aide called a “cesspool” within the administration and depicted Nixon as peculiar, isolated, and bitter.

Butterfield said he regularly faced hostility from Nixon supporters and told Time magazine that longtime Nixon secretary Rose Mary Woods, who claimed to have accidentally erased 18½ minutes of White House tapes, had called him a “son of a bitch” who had “destroyed the greatest leader this country ever had.”

Butterfield served as an advisor for Oliver Stone’s 1995 movie “Nixon” and appeared in a small role as a White House staff member.

His first marriage to Charlotte Maguire ended in divorce in 1985. He previously dated Audrey Geisel, widow of children’s author-illustrator Theodor Seuss Geisel, known as Dr. Seuss.

Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell is contemplating remaining as a board member when his leadership role concludes in May, according to court documents made public Friday in Washington.

The information emerged from legal filings connected to the Fed’s successful effort to prevent Justice Department subpoenas in a criminal probe examining Powell’s management of the central bank’s Washington headquarters renovation project. A federal district court judge sided with the Fed and blocked the subpoenas Friday.

During a January 29th meeting with U.S. District Attorney Jeannine Pirro, Powell’s legal team indicated their client’s thinking, according to Justice Department lawyers opposing the Fed’s legal motion. The attorneys stated: “The Chair (Powell) feels like he would not leave the Board when his term as Chair expires, if he was still under investigation; and while he could not say the converse is true, it would be a different look to the Chair if he was not facing criminal investigation and the Chair would be free to make a decision that would focus on his family.”

Powell’s lawyers also noted that President Donald Trump, who has pushed for lower interest rates, “does not have enough votes in the Senate to confirm a new Board Chair,” the documents showed.

Trump has nominated former Fed Governor Kevin Warsh to replace Powell, though Warsh encounters confirmation hurdles.

The 73-year-old Powell has not publicly announced his intentions regarding the conclusion of his chairmanship, but his potential continuation as a governor could prove significant. His position might serve as a crucial swing vote on the Fed’s seven-member governing panel.

Historically, Fed chairs step down from their board positions when successors assume leadership, but concerns about Federal Reserve independence and Trump’s potential influence through additional appointments have fueled speculation that Powell might break this tradition.

No precedent exists for how a former chair might operate while still participating in monetary policy discussions and votes, or how such an arrangement would affect relations with Warsh.

Powell’s governor appointment runs through January 2028, extending beyond November’s midterm elections and into Trump’s final presidential year.

The Federal Reserve declined to comment on the unsealed document contents.

Justice Department attorneys characterized Powell’s lawyers’ remarks as “strongarming” the U.S. attorney by suggesting he would depart the board if the investigation ended.

“By making this peculiar suggestion, the Board morphed the Subpoenas into the exact thing about which they complain,” by attempting to introduce politics into the matter, the legal filing argued.

The Federal Reserve Board has enlisted Robert Hur, the former special counsel who probed President Biden’s classified documents case, to help fight a Justice Department investigation targeting Fed Chair Jerome Powell, according to court documents made public Friday.

The records became available after a Washington federal judge struck down Justice Department subpoenas in a criminal probe examining Powell’s oversight of historic building renovations at the central bank. The court determined the government “offered no evidence whatsoever that Powell committed any crime other than displeasing the President.”

President Trump has repeatedly demanded the Federal Reserve lower interest rates and has publicly criticized Powell for moving too slowly on rate cuts. Powell has characterized the Justice Department’s probe as politically motivated.

Hur, who holds conservative views, served as special counsel under Biden’s administration to examine his possession of classified materials discovered at his residence and office. While Hur chose not to file charges, he faced Democratic backlash for describing Biden as an “elderly man with a poor memory.”

During Trump’s initial presidency, Hur held the position of Maryland’s chief federal prosecutor. He currently works as a partner with the King & Spalding law firm. Jeffrey Bucholtz, another firm partner who has previously represented the Federal Reserve in court cases, is also working on this subpoena matter.

Neither Hur nor Bucholtz provided immediate responses to comment requests. A Federal Reserve Board of Governors representative refused to comment.

King & Spalding and Hur are also defending Harvard University in legal battles with the Trump administration concerning the university’s federal funding and international student enrollment.

Powell, whose legal team comes from Williams & Connolly, revealed in January that the Justice Department was examining a renovation project for historic structures at the Fed’s Washington headquarters. The subpoenas demanded details about the renovations and Powell’s July 2025 Senate Banking Committee appearance.

The Fed’s governing board sought to dismiss the subpoenas, claiming in a February 24 court document that they were designed to “aid the president’s quest to seize for himself a power specifically denied to him by federal law.”

Chief U.S. District Judge James Boasberg ruled in favor of the Fed’s Board of Governors Friday, stating there exists a “mountain of evidence” indicating the DOJ’s investigation aimed to force Powell to reduce rates or step down.

Washington, D.C. U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro, whose office leads the investigation, announced plans to appeal the decision.

TRENTON, N.J. — A federal judge delivered a sharp rebuke to the Trump administration Monday, blocking three Justice Department officials from jointly overseeing New Jersey’s federal prosecutor office in what the court called an unconstitutional attempt to circumvent Senate approval.

U.S. District Judge Matthew Brann issued a blistering 130-page decision that marks another chapter in the ongoing legal battle between federal courts and President Donald Trump regarding the appointment process for U.S. attorneys, who typically must receive Senate confirmation to remain in their roles.

Last year, Judge Brann had already blocked Trump’s initial pick for U.S. attorney, former personal lawyer Alina Habba, ruling she had served beyond the legal time limit without Senate confirmation.

Monday’s decision rejected Attorney General Pam Bondi’s unprecedented move to install three Justice Department officials — Philip Lamparello, Jordan Fox and Ari Fontecchio — to collectively run the office that Habba had previously overseen on a temporary basis.

The judge determined that appointing this trio violated the Constitution’s Appointments Clause, which mandates Senate confirmation for such positions.

Brann characterized the administration’s actions as representing an “enormous assertion of Presidential power.”

“It is plain that President Trump and his top aides have chafed at the limits on their power set forth by law and the Constitution. To avoid these roadblocks, this administration frequently purports to have discovered enormous grants of executive power hidden in the vagaries and silences of the code,” Brann stated in his opinion.

Habba, who continues working at the Justice Department as a senior adviser, dismissed the court’s decision as “ridiculous.”

“Judges may continue to try and stop President Trump from carrying out what the American people voted for, but we will not be deterred,” she posted on social media. “The unconstitutionality of this complete overreach into the Executive Branch, time and time again, will not succeed.”

Federal law typically mandates Senate confirmation for U.S. attorneys and permits individuals to serve without such approval only for restricted timeframes.

However, under Trump’s administration, the Justice Department has attempted to keep unconfirmed prosecutors in place much longer through creative staffing arrangements that courts have subsequently deemed improper.

In his ruling, Brann noted there are “at least three undisputedly legal methods” available to the Trump administration for filling the New Jersey position and ending the dispute.

“With all these options remaining, why does the fate of thousands of criminal prosecutions in this District potentially rest on the legitimacy of an unprecedented and byzantine leadership structure?” he questioned. “The Government tells us: the President doesn’t like that he cannot simply appoint whomever he wants.”

Using an occasionally sharp and critical tone, the judge accused the Trump administration of caring “far more about who is running” New Jersey’s federal prosecutor office than “whether it is running at all.”

“I am not fooled by the Government’s superficial arguments,” he wrote elsewhere in the decision.

Similar court rulings have found that individuals placed as chief federal prosecutors in Nevada, Los Angeles and northern New York were all serving illegally.

Lindsey Halligan, who had pursued charges against two Trump opponents, stepped down from her role as acting U.S. attorney in Virginia following a November judicial determination that her appointment was unlawful. The court also ordered the dismissal of indictments she had filed against New York Attorney General Letitia James and former FBI Director James Comey.

In certain situations, judges have used their legal authority to name U.S. attorneys to run prosecutor offices until the president’s nominees receive Senate confirmation. The Justice Department has responded by immediately dismissing these court-appointed officials.

A federal judge in Boston has put a temporary halt to the Trump administration’s mandate requiring colleges and universities to submit detailed race-related admissions information by next week.

U.S. District Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV granted a temporary restraining order Friday following a lawsuit filed by 17 Democratic state attorneys general who challenged the new Education Department requirement.

The contested mandate would have forced schools receiving federal student aid funding to provide detailed admissions data broken down by race and gender of their student populations. Federal officials intended to use this information to monitor whether institutions are following the Supreme Court’s 2023 decision that eliminated affirmative action in college admissions.

Judge Saylor, nominated during the George W. Bush presidency, recognized that educational institutions across the country were facing a Wednesday deadline to submit the required information. He pushed back that deadline to March 25 to allow time for a full hearing on the states’ legal challenge and ensure an “orderly resolution of the issues.”

The Education Department has not yet provided a response to requests for comment on the court’s decision.

The disputed information would have been collected through the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System surveys, a data collection program that the Education Department’s National Center for Education Statistics has operated since 1986 to gather university information on topics including financial data, admissions processes, and student outcomes.

Trump ordered changes to the survey system in an August directive, citing insufficient data to determine whether race continues to influence admissions decisions following the Supreme Court ruling, particularly given what he called the “rampant use of ‘diversity statements’ and other overt and hidden racial proxies.”

Education Secretary Linda McMahon subsequently announced that higher education institutions would be required to submit undergraduate applicant and enrollment data separated by race and gender categories.

The Office of Management and Budget formalized these new data collection requirements in December, requesting information covering the 2025-2026 academic year plus the previous six years.

A federal judge in Rhode Island has ordered the restoration of collective bargaining rights for 320,000 Department of Veterans Affairs workers, dealing a significant blow to the Trump administration’s efforts to limit union activities across federal agencies.

U.S. District Judge Melissa DuBose made the ruling Friday in Providence, determining that the VA improperly terminated its union agreement in August as payback against the American Federation of Government Employees for opposing Trump administration labor policies.

The decision stands as one of the most important legal victories so far in multiple court challenges to Trump’s 2025 executive directive that eliminated collective bargaining rights for much of the federal workforce.

Judge DuBose sided with AFGE, which represents over 800,000 federal employees nationwide, finding that the Veterans Affairs department acted out of retaliation rather than legitimate policy concerns.

The VA had defended its actions by arguing that Trump correctly excluded the agency from union negotiations due to its national security responsibilities, specifically describing itself as “the primary backup” for military healthcare during wartime or national emergencies.

However, DuBose concluded that the VA failed to demonstrate that national security considerations actually drove the decision to terminate the union agreement, and she restored the contract while the union’s broader lawsuit continues.

“There is zero indication from the Defendants that the termination decision would have been made or implemented without the retaliatory motive,” DuBose wrote in her decision. The judge was appointed by former Democratic President Joe Biden.

VA officials have not yet responded to requests for comment. The department manages an extensive system of hospitals and medical centers serving veterans and employs more than 400,000 people, ranking among the federal government’s largest agencies.

AFGE President Everett Kelley stated that the VA targeted his union for retaliation because of its resistance to budget reductions and policy changes that the organization believes would negatively impact veteran services.

“Today’s ruling holds this administration accountable and makes clear: no one can retaliate against workers for standing up for their rights,” Kelley said in a statement.

Trump’s executive directive removed collective bargaining obligations from the VA and more than a dozen additional federal departments, including Justice, State, Defense, Treasury, and Health and Human Services.

The presidential order targets agencies that Trump says “have as a primary function intelligence, counterintelligence, investigative, or national security work.” This represents a major expansion of existing limitations that previously applied only to workers with specific national security duties, such as federal law enforcement officers.

At least three separate lawsuits have been filed challenging Trump’s directive, while unions have initiated numerous additional legal actions against individual agencies that have canceled their bargaining agreements. Last month, a federal appeals court in San Francisco denied a request by AFGE and other unions to halt Trump’s order while their case moves through the courts.

WASHINGTON — Richard Grenell, a veteran Republican foreign policy advisor who implemented sweeping reforms at the Kennedy Center that drove numerous performers away from the prestigious arts facility, is resigning from his position as president.

Former President Donald Trump revealed the leadership transition on Friday following initial coverage by Axios. Trump named Matt Floca, who currently oversees the Kennedy Center’s facility management, as Grenell’s replacement. Sources familiar with the situation, speaking on condition of anonymity about plans not yet made public, indicate the transitions will be completed during a board meeting set for Monday at the White House.

Grenell played a key role in Trump’s effort to completely transform the Kennedy Center after the Republican leader returned to the presidency. While Trump largely overlooked the venue during his initial presidency, he made it a centerpiece of his campaign against what he termed “woke” culture upon his return. Trump removed the Kennedy Center’s existing leadership and installed his own chosen board of trustees, who voted to rebrand the institution as the Trump Kennedy Center — a modification that experts and legislators argue requires congressional approval.

In a recent development, Trump’s name was physically installed on the building’s famous exterior.

The arts world responded with immediate and severe backlash, as major theatrical productions like “Hamilton” pulled their scheduled shows. Notable figures including actress Issa Rae and writer Louise Penny canceled their planned appearances, while advisors including musician Ben Folds and opera singer Renée Fleming stepped down from their roles.

ATLANTA — Georgia state senators on Friday questioned Nathan Wade, the former special prosecutor who handled the election interference case against President Donald Trump, focusing on his team’s communications with federal investigators. However, Wade’s frequent claims of not remembering specific details left lawmakers with few answers.

Wade testified before a subcommittee of the Special Committee on Investigations, established by the Republican-controlled state Senate in January 2024 to investigate alleged misconduct by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, a Democrat, regarding her Trump prosecution.

Despite multiple hearings featuring various witnesses, including a contentious December appearance by Willis herself, the committee has revealed little new information. Republicans have also expanded their investigation to include Democrat Stacey Abrams, though no public action has been taken on that front.

Willis secured an indictment against Trump and 18 co-defendants in August 2023, using Georgia’s anti-racketeering statute to allege their participation in a broad conspiracy to unlawfully reverse Trump’s narrow Georgia defeat. Four defendants subsequently entered guilty pleas through plea agreements.

The committee’s founding resolution centered on Wade’s appointment as special prosecutor, describing his romantic involvement with Willis as a “clear conflict of interest and a fraud upon the taxpayers” of both the county and state. A December 2024 appeals court ruling removed Willis from the case due to an “appearance of impropriety” stemming from their relationship, and a new prosecutor dropped the charges last November.

While senators questioned Wade about his appointment — including the timeline and selection process — his romantic relationship with Willis was not discussed. Wade’s opening statement suggested a prior agreement that personal relationships would remain off-limits.

Senator Greg Dolezal primarily focused on Wade’s billing records, particularly entries suggesting contact with the U.S. House committee investigating the January 6, 2021 Capitol attack and meetings with Justice Department officials. Wade consistently claimed inability to recall timing of trips or calls, meeting participants, or discussion topics.

Wade defended his team’s work, emphasizing that Willis led the investigation independently. “She led us, I led the team and we did the work,” Wade testified. “We didn’t get assistance, coordination, however you want to characterize it. No one held her hand and guided her through the process. This is her work.”

Following the hearing, Dolezal acknowledged not obtaining all desired information. “Look, I wish Mr. Wade had a better memory,” he told reporters, while appreciating Wade’s appearance and responses “to the best of his recollection.”

Dolezal expressed satisfaction with establishing that Wade’s team met with January 6 investigation personnel and contacted Justice Department officials, suggesting potential coordination in efforts to “get Trump.”

Wade’s attorney Andrew Evans dismissed conspiracy theories as “absolute fiction,” accusing Republican senators of using the committee to distract from unfavorable issues as midterm elections approach.

Four of the committee’s five Republicans, including Dolezal who is seeking lieutenant governor, are pursuing statewide offices in 2026. Bill Cowsert is running for attorney general, while Senators Blake Tillery and Steve Gooch are also seeking the Republican lieutenant governor nomination. Former committee member John Kennedy resigned to launch his own lieutenant governor campaign. Only Dolezal and Cowsert attended Friday’s subcommittee session.

The subcommittee also heard from Fulton County Deputy District Attorney Jeff DiSantis, who handles media relations for Willis’ office. He answered questions about Wade’s hiring, which he said he learned about after the decision was made, and the district attorney’s office’s media monitoring services.

The ongoing conflict between the U.S., Israel and Iran has disrupted global energy markets and supply chains, prompting the Trump administration to explore suspending requirements under a maritime law that’s been in place for more than 100 years.

Known as the Jones Act, this legislation mandates that cargo transported between American ports must travel aboard vessels flying U.S. flags. Originally enacted in 1920, the law was designed to safeguard America’s shipping industry, though critics have long argued it delays goods delivery and drives up costs, particularly for gasoline.

White House officials confirmed this week they’re examining the possibility of temporarily waiving Jones Act provisions as part of broader efforts to address surging oil prices and shipping disruptions caused by the war.

Officially called the Merchant Marine Act of 1920, this legislation was championed by Senator Wesley Jones from Washington state. Congress approved the measure to help restore America’s shipping capabilities after German submarines destroyed much of the nation’s merchant fleet during World War I.

The Jones Act establishes that vessels transporting goods and passengers between domestic ports must be constructed in America and owned by U.S. citizens, essentially barring foreign-flagged ships from participating in domestic commerce. These ships must also employ American crews.

According to the U.S. Maritime Administration, the law can be suspended for “interest of national defense” purposes through either the Homeland Security or Defense departments.

The legislation was also designed to guarantee America maintained its own merchant fleet during wartime. Some U.S. shipping companies, national security experts and labor unions have championed the law, but eliminating foreign competition has increased domestic cargo transportation expenses.

American-flagged vessels typically cost more to operate and construct compared to foreign alternatives. These elevated costs particularly impact states and territories dependent on maritime supply routes, including Hawaii and Puerto Rico.

Since the Iran war began, oil prices have experienced dramatic spikes and volatility as tanker traffic through the crucial Strait of Hormuz has essentially stopped and major Middle Eastern oil producers have reduced output. Commercial vessels carrying everything from medications to computer components have also faced delays at sea or direct attacks.

These disruptions are increasing costs for businesses and consumers globally. Crude oil now trades near $100 per barrel, climbing from approximately $70 before hostilities commenced. American drivers have already experienced pump price increases, with regular gasoline averaging around $3.63 per gallon on Friday according to AAA, representing a 69-cent jump from the previous month.

These developments have nations seeking additional supply sources and alternative shipping pathways. When asked Friday about potentially suspending the 1920s-era Jones Act, President Donald Trump responded, “we’ll take a look at everything.”

During a Fox News Radio interview, Trump described the Jones Act as a “restrictive act” while acknowledging it enjoys “tremendous support” in Congress. The president’s remarks followed White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt’s Thursday confirmation that the administration was exploring a temporary waiver to “ensure vital energy products and agricultural necessities are flowing freely to U.S. ports.”

Neither official provided a specific timeframe for any decision.

Numerous factors influence gasoline prices. Allowing foreign-flagged vessels access to domestic shipping routes might provide some relief by expanding transportation alternatives, but it wouldn’t represent a comprehensive solution.

The Center for American Progress projects that waiving the Jones Act would reduce East Coast gasoline prices by approximately three cents while potentially increasing Gulf Coast costs. The research organization stated Friday that such action “would also sideline American shipbuilders and workers and allow the oil industry to continue to profit from high prices while reducing transport costs.”

The United States has emerged as a leading crude oil producer, now exporting more petroleum than it imports. However, oil remains a globally traded commodity, and countries worldwide are pursuing additional measures to combat escalating prices.

Thursday evening, the Treasury Department announced another step to release Russian oil from U.S. sanctions related to its Ukraine conflict, issuing a one-month waiver license. This follows last week’s decision granting India temporary authorization to purchase Russian oil.

Earlier this week, the International Energy Agency committed to releasing 400 million barrels from member nations’ reserves, representing the largest emergency oil release in the organization’s history. While Trump previously questioned the need to access reserve oil, he confirmed Wednesday that the U.S. would withdraw 172 million barrels from its Strategic Petroleum Reserve over 120 days as part of the IEA initiative.

Analysts maintain this release will serve as a short-term solution. New supply takes time to reach consumers, and refineries purchase crude oil in advance, meaning higher price impacts could intensify if the conflict continues. Even with additional reserve withdrawals, they may be working with more expensive supply for an extended period.

Election authorities in California announced Friday they are examining allegations that ballot petition workers in San Francisco broke the law by paying individuals to sign petitions with fabricated identities.

A video that went viral on social media earlier this week captured a sign advertising “Sign petition for $5” with a queue of people lined up on the sidewalk. The footage shows a woman seated at a portable table who appears to be telling people what names and addresses to write on the petition forms. When asked by the person filming about the petition’s purpose, the woman simply responded, “Just sign it.”

The California secretary of state’s office confirmed in a written statement that officials were “aware of, and investigating, the matter.”

California’s ballot initiative process allows citizens to place measures before voters by collecting hundreds of thousands of valid signatures. While campaigns are permitted to compensate signature gatherers for each name they collect, this creates pressure to maximize the number of signatures obtained.

The video revealed that at least one petition was connected to a technology industry-supported ballot measure designed to counter a proposed tax on billionaires. The initiative receives funding from Building a Better California, an organization established by prominent business figures including Google co-founder Sergey Brin, who contributed $20 million.

Molly Weedn, speaking for the campaign, clarified that the signature collectors were not direct employees of their organization. She stated the campaign was working with authorities to disqualify any petitions containing fraudulent information.

“Under no circumstance do we tolerate this type of activity,” Weedn declared. “Our campaign took immediate action and campaign attorneys reported to authorities.”

Weedn added that election officials were contacted immediately after the video became public.

The video also showed another ballot petition backed by Building a Better California, this one aimed at blocking new taxes on retirement savings. Nathan Click, representing that campaign, emphasized they “does not tolerate fraudulent activity in any signature-gathering process.”

“As soon as we became aware of the activities in question, we demanded that our signature-gathering firm identify the petition circulator, reject any and all petitions submitted by this circulator,” Click stated.

Multiple petitions were visible on the table, though it remains uncertain whether additional campaigns were involved.

State election law prohibits offering monetary payments or other incentives in exchange for ballot measure signatures, according to the secretary of state’s office. All petition signatures undergo verification against voter registration databases, and those that fail to match are rejected.

“It is also a crime to circulate, sign and/or file those signed petitions with an election official any initiative petition that is known to include forged names,” the office explained.

WASHINGTON – A federal court has mandated that the Trump administration must maintain financial support for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau without time limits, after determining that senior officials improperly used questionable legal justification to halt funding.

U.S. District Judge Edward Davila from California’s Northern District delivered the decision Friday, representing yet another judicial setback for President Trump’s approach to CFPB operations, which he has advocated for eliminating entirely. A Washington-based judge reached comparable findings in December.

CFPB representatives have not yet provided statements regarding the court decision. The consumer protection organization focuses on tackling financial industry issues including exploitative lending practices, unreasonable charges, and the inclusion of medical debt in credit evaluations.

During the administration’s initial period, agency operations were nearly completely halted while officials attempted widespread staff reductions.

The Trump administration refused to provide agency funding in 2025. Officials claimed in November that legal guidelines prevented them from using Federal Reserve funds to support the CFPB as Congress originally intended, citing the Fed’s financial losses.

Judge Davila determined that acting CFPB Director Russell Vought requested Justice Department legal guidance as part of a “transparent attempt” to eliminate the CFPB through misinterpretation of Federal Reserve finances and applicable laws – circumventing Congressional intentions to protect the CFPB “from this exact transparent display of partisanship.”

The judge clarified that while the CFPB faces a preliminary injunction in separate litigation, Friday’s decision ensures ongoing agency funding indefinitely.

Following court requirements, Vought, who simultaneously serves as Trump’s budget director, requested $145 million from the Federal Reserve in January to cover CFPB operational costs for one fiscal quarter, though he indicated his objection to the action.

Administration officials have criticized the CFPB for politically motivated enforcement actions and hampering business freedom, allegations that agency defenders and employees dispute. They argue that dismantling the CFPB benefits politically connected donors and business interests.

Consumer advocacy groups in San Jose, California initiated the legal action.

On Friday, President Donald Trump put his signature on two executive orders designed to make housing more affordable for Americans, according to White House officials.

The first order focuses on removing regulatory obstacles that slow down the construction of new homes and drive up building costs. The second directive addresses mortgage regulations, aiming to reduce loan costs and streamline the home financing process, based on information sheets provided by the White House.

The Associated Press was the first news organization to break the story about these housing-focused executive orders.

WASHINGTON — Federal officials have dramatically cut the cost for Americans seeking to formally abandon their U.S. citizenship, reducing the fee by roughly 80% to $450.

Following extended court fights with multiple organizations advocating for Americans seeking to surrender their citizenship, the State Department released its final regulation Friday in the Federal Register, lowering the price from $2,350 to $450.

The updated fee, which became effective Friday, had been pledged in 2023 but never put into practice. The price now matches what the State Department initially charged when it began requiring payment for formal citizenship renunciation in 2010.

Giving up U.S. citizenship involves a complex and time-consuming procedure. Those seeking renunciation must confirm through numerous written and oral declarations to State Department consular officials that they fully comprehend the consequences of their decision before taking a formal renunciation oath. The department must then conduct its review.

Officials increased the fee from $450 to $2,350 in 2015 to address administrative costs as citizenship renunciations increased significantly, partly due to new tax reporting rules for Americans living overseas that frustrated many expatriates.

The steep price hike faced strong resistance from organizations like the France-based Association of Accidental Americans, which advocates for individuals primarily residing abroad whose American citizenship stems solely from being born on U.S. soil.

The organization pursued multiple legal challenges questioning the fee’s constitutionality, including an ongoing case arguing that citizenship renunciation should be completely free.

“The Association of Accidental Americans welcomes this decision, which acknowledges the necessity of making this fundamental right accessible to all,” its president, Fabien Lahagre, said in a statement. “This victory is the direct result of six years of relentless legal action and advocacy.”

During court proceedings, the association reported that since the 2023 announcement about the fee reduction, at least 8,755 Americans had paid the complete $2,350 to renounce their citizenship. State Department officials have not released total figures for Americans who have renounced their citizenship.

A Wisconsin state representative has admitted guilt to misdemeanor disorderly conduct charges following a contentious dispute with Democratic colleagues over Hispanic heritage resolutions.

State Rep. Sylvia Ortiz-Velez, a Milwaukee Democrat, entered her guilty plea on Friday in Milwaukee County court, according to online records. Judge Paul Malloy sentenced her to pay $300 in fines and provide a DNA sample. The charge could have resulted in up to 90 days behind bars.

Following her sentencing, Ortiz-Velez released a statement saying she would pay the penalty and continue concentrating on constituent services rather than party disputes.

“My voting choices caused a rift that has been ugly and bitter,” she said. “My constituents did not send me to Madison to litigate internal caucus disputes or be distracted by the personal feuds — they sent me there to deliver results.”

Assembly Democratic Minority Leader Greta Neubauer’s office did not respond to requests for comment.

The criminal complaint reveals the conflict originated in August when Assembly Democrats were developing resolutions to celebrate Hispanic heritage and honor Hispanic veterans for September’s Hispanic Heritage Month observance.

Ortiz-Velez became upset, believing an unidentified colleague deliberately kept her out of the heritage resolution drafting process.

Court documents indicate she had received an invitation to participate in June but declined, though she later wanted involvement in writing the language. She reached out to news organizations claiming intentional exclusion from the resolution work. She also expressed frustration to the resolution’s author about being left out of a separate measure honoring Hispanic veterans, noting her deceased husband’s status as a Hispanic veteran.

Two additional unnamed legislators informed investigators that Ortiz-Velez threatened during separate phone calls to release “negative personal information” about the resolution author to media outlets and stated “they are going to do what I want them to do, or I’m going to x, y and z,” the complaint states.

When pressed for clarification, she made remarks about the resolution author’s private life and other legislators. The complaint described these comments as “indecent and tended to disrupt the good public order” without providing additional details.

Democratic leadership released a September statement claiming Ortiz-Velez had made comments about shooting three caucus members. This came one day after announcing her departure from the Democratic caucus.

In conversations with Wisconsin Right Now and the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Ortiz-Velez rejected claims she threatened colleagues. However, the Legislature’s human resources department temporarily prohibited her Capitol access for one day. A representative for Assembly Republican Speaker Robin Vos stated she should not have faced the ban.

Ortiz-Velez’s legal counsel, Michael Cernin, explained in a Friday phone interview that Assembly Democrats were already frustrated with his client before September due to her support for the 2025-27 state budget and new legislative maps created by Democratic Gov. Tony Evers in 2024. Democrats opposed the spending plan partly because they believed it inadequately funded public education and argued the state Supreme Court should have created the new legislative boundaries.

According to Cernin, Rep. Priscilla Prado, another Milwaukee Democrat, prevented Ortiz-Velez from participating in the Hispanic resolutions. Two unnamed lawmakers in the complaint alleged to investigators that Ortiz-Velez threatened to reveal unfavorable aspects of Prado’s personal life to media outlets.

“It’s incredibly petty, and Sylvia didn’t want any part of this,” Cernin said. “Sylvia truly wanted to spare Prado any sort of embarrassment on this.”

Prado’s Capitol office did not respond to Friday afternoon requests for comment.

A federal judge delivered a crushing defeat to the Justice Department on Friday, throwing out subpoenas targeting Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell and condemning the investigation as baseless harassment.

The probe centers on Powell’s congressional testimony last June regarding a $2.5 billion Federal Reserve building renovation project. The controversy has created political ripple effects in Washington, stalling Senate confirmation proceedings for Kevin Warsh, whom President Trump has nominated to succeed Powell when his tenure expires on May 15.

Judge James Boasberg issued a scathing rebuke of the government’s case, stating they have “produced essentially zero evidence to suspect Chair Powell of a crime.” The judge characterized the justifications for the subpoenas as so “thin and unsubstantiated” that they appeared designed solely to pressure Powell into cutting interest rates, which Trump has repeatedly advocated.

“There is abundant evidence that the subpoenas’ dominant (if not sole) purpose is to harass and pressure Powell either to yield to the President or to resign and make way for a Fed Chair who will,” Boasberg wrote in his decision.

The court’s decision prevents U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro, who authorized the subpoenas, from accessing Federal Reserve documents related to the building renovation. Pirro responded angrily to the ruling during a press conference, announcing plans to appeal.

Pirro criticized what she termed an “activist judge” for quashing the subpoenas, claiming the decision has “neutered the grand jury’s ability to investigate crime” and leaves Powell “bathed in immunity.”

“This is wrong and it is without legal authority,” she declared.

The investigation became public knowledge when Powell took the unusual step of announcing it in a video statement on January 11. This revelation prompted Senator Thom Tillis, a North Carolina Republican who serves on the Banking Committee, to halt consideration of Warsh’s nomination until the probe is abandoned.

Following Friday’s ruling, Tillis said the court decision validated his concerns about the investigation’s merit, calling it “weak and frivolous.” The senator has maintained his position of blocking all Federal Reserve nominations, including Warsh’s appointment as the next Fed chair, until authorities drop their criminal investigation of Powell.

“We all know how this is going to end and the D.C. U.S. Attorney’s Office should save itself further embarrassment and move on,” Tillis stated Friday. “Appealing the ruling will only delay the confirmation of Kevin Warsh as the next Fed Chair.”

President Donald Trump issued an executive order Friday targeting companies that deceive consumers with false ‘Made in America’ product labeling, according to White House officials.

The directive instructs the Federal Trade Commission chairman to make enforcement against deceptive origin labeling a top priority, focusing on manufacturers and retailers who illegally misrepresent where their products are actually made.

Under the new order, all federal agencies responsible for monitoring country-of-origin labeling must work alongside the FTC to develop updated regulations and provide uniform guidance on enforcement.

The action reflects the current administration’s focus on promoting domestic manufacturing and ensuring companies provide truthful information about how much of their products contain foreign versus American-made components.

Additionally, the executive order mandates that agencies handling federal procurement contracts must regularly check claims about American origins for products purchased by the government, White House officials announced.

Companies found violating these requirements will be reported to the Department of Justice for potential prosecution, the order specifies.

A federal judge has halted the Justice Department’s criminal investigation into Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, ruling Friday that subpoenas targeting the Fed leader should be blocked.

Chief U.S. District Judge James Boasberg determined that prosecutors failed to provide adequate evidence of criminal wrongdoing in their investigation of Powell’s oversight of historic building renovations at Federal Reserve facilities.

The criminal probe, led by U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro, centers on renovation projects at Fed headquarters buildings in Washington. Powell first revealed the existence of the Justice Department investigation on January 11.

In his ruling, Judge Boasberg stated that a “mountain of evidence” indicated the investigation’s true purpose was to force the Fed chair to reduce interest rates or step down from his position.

“The Government has produced essentially zero evidence to suspect Chair Powell of a crime; indeed, its justifications are so thin and unsubstantiated that the Court can only conclude that they are pretextual,” Boasberg wrote in his decision.

Powell has consistently characterized the investigation as an attack on Federal Reserve independence and part of former President Trump’s efforts to influence monetary policy decisions.

The Fed’s Board of Governors had filed a motion to block the subpoenas, which demanded details about the renovation projects and Powell’s scheduled July 2025 testimony to the Senate Banking Committee.

Prosecutor Pirro, who was appointed during the Trump administration, announced plans to challenge the judge’s decision. She told reporters that the ruling “has neutered the grand jury’s ability to investigate crime; as a result Jerome Powell today is now bathed in immunity.” Pirro maintained that her suspicions of legal violations justify continuing the case.

The investigation has created political complications on Capitol Hill. Republican Senator Thom Tillis has threatened to block any Federal Reserve nominations through his Banking Committee position as long as the probe continues, potentially stalling confirmation of Trump’s choice to replace Powell when his leadership term concludes in mid-May.

The Trump administration has sparked controversy by creating promotional videos that blend actual combat footage from the Iran war with clips from blockbuster films, popular video games, and professional sports highlights.

These rapid-fire montages feature snippets from beloved entertainment franchises including “Braveheart,” “Superman,” “Top Gun,” “Breaking Bad,” and “Iron Man,” interwoven with declassified military imagery. One particularly striking video includes SpongeBob SquarePants asking “You wanna see me do it again?” between scenes of American airstrikes destroying buildings and vehicles. The administration captioned one explosive compilation “Courtesy of the Red, White and Blue,” referencing Toby Keith’s patriotic anthem.

The White House social media team has incorporated cultural references that appeal to younger male audiences, drawing from gaming titles like Call of Duty, Grand Theft Auto, Mortal Kombat and Halo. Additional videos showcase NFL and college football hits alongside MLB home runs, with the sound of cracking bats mixed between explosion audio.

These productions feature intense soundtracks including Childish Gambino’s “Bonfire,” Miami XO’s “Bazooka” and AC/DC’s “Thunderstruck.” One White House post labeled the content “JUSTICE THE AMERICAN WAY,” adding flag and fire emojis.

The strategy appears designed to make warfare more cinematic and potentially boost public support for military action.

While politicians have long used popular music and cultural references in campaigns dating back to Bill Clinton’s use of Fleetwood Mac in 1992, no previous administration has created content explicitly connecting entertainment violence with actual battlefield footage to promote military engagement.

This “gamification” of warfare has drawn sharp criticism from multiple sources.

Actor Ben Stiller, whose 2008 film “Tropic Thunder” appeared in the videos, posted on X that he had “no interest in being part of your propaganda machine. War is not a movie.” Voice actor Steve Downes, who portrays the Halo video game character Master Chief, called the videos “disgusting and juvenile war porn.” Both demanded their content be removed, saying it was used without authorization. The NFL and MLB declined to comment on their footage being included.

Cardinal Blase J. Cupich, Chicago’s archbishop, issued strong condemnation of the administration’s approach, saying it sickened him to see real warfare with genuine casualties treated like gaming entertainment.

“Our government is treating the suffering of the Iranian people as a backdrop for our own entertainment, as if it’s just another piece of content to be swiped through while we’re waiting in line at the grocery store,” Cupich stated over the weekend. “But, in the end, we lose our humanity when we are thrilled by the destructive power of our military.”

When asked about accommodating artists who objected to unauthorized use of their work, the White House declined to respond directly.

“America’s heroic warfighters are meeting or surpassing all of their goals under Operation Epic Fury,” White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly responded. “The legacy media wants us to apologize for highlighting the United States Military’s incredible success, but the White House will continue showcasing the many examples of Iran’s ballistic missiles, production facilities, and dreams of owning a nuclear weapon being destroyed in real time.”

This isn’t the administration’s first venture into gaming culture. Previous posts have depicted Trump as the Master Chief character and as a Minecraft figure with the caption “America’s most pro-gamer president.”

Zia Haque, who directs the Baker Institute for Peace and Conflict Studies at Juniata College in Pennsylvania, views this as psychological warfare adapted for the digital era. “We live in a digital age, and I see this as a use of the space to propagate the message across the board,” he explained.

Some analysts suggest these videos might serve as military recruitment tools targeting gamers. The Pentagon has pursued gamer recruitment since 2002 with the release of “America’s Army” and continues sending recruiters to gaming conventions and esports events.

Trump’s core supporters include many young white men who consume gaming content, sports, and popular culture heavily, making them a natural audience for such material.

Retired Navy Commander Ray Deptula, who served 24 years before recently leaving the service, understands the appeal. He admits action movies motivated his own military service, so he recognizes why these videos might attract recruits.

However, Deptula warns of a significant disconnect.

“That’s not what your life is going to be like,” said Deptula, who authored the novel “A Dog Before a Soldier” about Revolutionary War military service. “Your life is going to be about hard work and humility.”

Jeff Fromm, who co-wrote “Marketing to Gen Z,” questions whether these videos will prove effective long-term.

Generation Z values organizational transparency and ethics highly, and Fromm doubts the current administration scores well in those areas among younger audiences.

Sometimes the entertainment-military crossover appears unintentional. Trump recently posted on Truth Social about defense contractors agreeing to “quadruple Production of the ‘Exquisite Class’ Weaponry.” While policy experts were confused, Final Fantasy XIV players recognized terminology from their game’s most powerful weapons. However, the president likely wasn’t advocating for production of the game’s Exquisite Wrathgrinder.

WASHINGTON — California Representative Kevin Kiley announced Monday he is abandoning his Republican Party membership and will continue serving in Congress as an independent, effective immediately.

The congressman, now in his second term, is confronting a difficult reelection campaign after California’s congressional map was redrawn. Last Friday, he declared his intention to seek reelection in a district that favors Democrats, choosing not to include any party designation alongside his name on the ballot.

On Monday, Kiley informed reporters he had requested the House clerk update the chamber’s official records to show his new independent status, while noting he plans to continue working with the Republican caucus to keep his committee positions.

“So I will be the sole independent member of the House of Representatives,” Kiley told Politico.

Following Kiley’s departure from the GOP, Republicans now hold a 217-214 advantage in the House, with one independent member. The most recent independent House member was Michigan’s Justin Amash, who left the Republican Party in 2019.

Kiley had been weighing several choices after his district’s borders underwent major changes last year. In recent weeks, he considered whether to challenge Republican colleague Tom McClintock in a safely Republican area or try his luck in a Democratic-favored district centered around Sacramento. He chose the second option and will compete in California’s 6th Congressional District.

Kiley’s situation illustrates how the redistricting battles that started in Texas, encouraged by President Donald Trump, and prompted Democratic retaliation in California, have forced some sitting lawmakers to fight to keep their political futures alive.

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump put his signature on two executive orders Friday, demonstrating his administration’s focus on tackling housing affordability challenges that resonate with voters as November’s midterm elections approach.

The first directive instructs federal agencies to cut housing-related regulatory obstacles and establish incentive programs encouraging best practices among state and local authorities, with the objective of simplifying the home construction process for builders. The second order targets mortgage-related regulatory requirements and aims to help smaller community banks expand their home lending capabilities.

A draft version of the order stated, “Layers of unnecessary regulatory barriers, slow permitting processes, and onerous mandates at all levels of government have delayed construction, restricted development, and driven up the costs of new housing. These constraints have made housing less affordable for many Americans.”

These executive directives — exclusively obtained by The Associated Press — demonstrate the Trump administration’s renewed policy focus on promoting homeownership opportunities. Housing costs have become a critical political issue affecting both Republican and Democratic lawmakers, who are working to develop legislation showing their responsiveness to concerns that first-time home purchases have become increasingly difficult for middle-income families.

The Senate approved comprehensive bipartisan housing legislation Thursday, which aims to modify policies for increased construction while limiting institutional ownership in residential development. The bill’s future in the House remains uncertain, though the White House expressed support for the measure in a March 2 statement.

Questions remain about how rapidly federal initiatives can stimulate new construction or substantially lower mortgage expenses, given that primary regulatory challenges in housing development stem from state and local policy decisions, while mortgage rates respond to financial market fluctuations.

Years of construction shortages have maintained elevated prices, while mortgage rates that surged following the pandemic have prevented many renters from purchasing homes and discouraged current owners from selling their properties.

Trump’s first executive order directs federal agencies to develop incentive programs accelerating permitting timelines for state and local authorities, including reducing “green” building requirements, minimizing design and construction mandates, and facilitating innovative building techniques.

The directive focuses significantly on federal environmental regulations, instructing the EPA and Army secretary to examine and revise stormwater, wetlands, and other water-related permitting standards to lower costs and improve home insurability.

The Commerce, Housing and Urban Development, and Transportation departments, alongside the Federal Housing Finance Agency, must eliminate regulations and modify programs that hinder residential development. Various federal agencies will also work to remove environmental and energy efficiency rules that might increase expenses and limit home construction.

White House officials indicated that Biden-era energy efficiency requirements in HUD and Agriculture department guidelines could increase housing construction costs by up to $9,000. These officials spoke anonymously to detail the orders before signing, noting that additional federal regulations would impose even greater costs on participants.

The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation will simplify its historic review guidance, while the federal government will work to align its New Markets Tax Credit program with Opportunity Zone tax incentives established during Trump’s initial presidency.

The order avoids changing state and local zoning regulations, as the administration prioritizes preserving suburban housing rather than increasing housing density.

White House officials explained that federal agencies can include housing regulation best practices as criteria for awarding discretionary grants to state and local governments. One best practice example would require local governments to approve building permits within 60 days. The administration views this order as providing long-term benefits for homebuilders and purchasers.

The second directive seeks to simplify mortgage procedures, instructing the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to modify mortgage guidelines enabling smaller banks to increase lending activities. The CFPB will update Home Mortgage Disclosure Act requirements to reduce regulatory burdens for mortgage acquisition, among other instructions.

The administration believes these mortgage regulation changes will increase the number of financial institutions competing to offer home loans, thereby reducing borrowing costs for buyers. The White House asserts that these modifications will maintain mortgage market financial safety and stability.

White House officials anticipate that prospective homebuyers could experience the effects of mortgage regulation changes within months.

Elevated home prices have become a significant concern for voters under 40 heading into this fall’s midterm elections.

According to the National Association of Realtors, the median price for existing homes sold in February reached $398,000. This figure represents nearly five times the median household income, compared to the historical benchmark of homes costing approximately three times household income.

The National Association of Realtors reported that the average 30-year mortgage rate in February was 6.05%, declining from 6.84% the previous year.

While reduced borrowing costs have improved monthly payment affordability, rates remain significantly higher than the sub-3% averages experienced in 2020 and 2021 when the economy struggled with coronavirus pandemic impacts.

Trump has primarily addressed home affordability challenges by directing government-controlled mortgage companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to purchase $200 billion in mortgage bonds.

He has also advocated for restricting financial institutions’ ability to purchase homes and implementing credit card interest rate caps, arguing both measures would facilitate home purchases.

However, the president has previously opposed dramatically increasing construction, suggesting such action could reduce home prices and existing owners’ net worth. This position requires him to balance maintaining price growth while expanding ownership opportunities for current renters.

“People that own their homes, we’re going to keep them wealthy,” Trump stated during his January Cabinet meeting. “We’re going to keep those prices up. We’re not going to destroy the value of their homes so that somebody that didn’t work very hard can buy a home.”

Extended security checkpoint delays stretching several hours at multiple American airports this week underscore potential complications when government funding lapses during peak spring vacation travel periods.

Houston’s Hobby Airport experienced the most severe disruptions, with security screening waits consistently exceeding three hours throughout Sunday and Monday. Travelers at other major hubs, including New Orleans and Atlanta facilities, also endured delays surpassing one hour.

The influx of millions of spring break travelers would challenge even fully operational airport systems. Combined with personnel shortages typically associated with government funding interruptions, certain airports are experiencing increased strain. However, the majority of aviation facilities have not encountered substantially extended security queues.

As Transportation Security Administration personnel continue working without compensation during this partial funding lapse, absenteeism becomes increasingly likely as employees seek additional employment to cover essential expenses such as fuel, childcare, and other financial obligations. Many workers may still be recovering financially from the 43-day funding interruption last fall, which marked the longest such period in U.S. history.

Johnny Jones, secretary-treasurer of the TSA union’s bargaining unit, indicated workers will miss their initial complete paychecks this weekend following the shutdown’s February 14 start date. He described workforce morale as having “taken a severe hit.”

“Over the last 15 months, TSA officers have went through three government shutdowns,” he told The Associated Press.

Jones, who serves as both union official and TSA agent, explained that recovering financially from the 43-day shutdown required months.

“I refilled my water buckets and now I’m starting to empty them again. Some people were not so fortunate to be able to refill their water buckets,” he said.

This ongoing shutdown exclusively impacts the Department of Homeland Security. Congressional Democrats have withheld department funding due to objections regarding immigration enforcement methods. Democratic representatives state DHS funding will remain blocked until new limitations are implemented on federal immigration activities following the fatal shootings of Alex Pretti and Renee Good in Minneapolis earlier this year.

Both TSA leadership and the Airlines for America trade organization immediately attributed extended security delays to Democratic lawmakers.

“This chaos is a direct result of Democrats and their refusal to fund DHS. These political stunts force patriotic TSA officers, who protect our skies from serious threats, to work without pay,” said Lauren Bis, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs, Department of Homeland Security. “These frontline heroes received only partial paychecks earlier this month and now face their first full missed paycheck, leading to financial hardship, absences, and crippling staffing shortages.”

Chris Sununu, president and CEO of the airlines trade group, renewed his appeal for Congress to resolve the shutdown.

“More than 2.7 million people cleared through TSA yesterday, but too many had to wait in extraordinarily long—and painfully slow—lines at checkpoints,” Sununu said in a written statement Monday. “It’s unacceptable to have wait times of 2 or 3 hours. And it’s unacceptable that TSA officers will have $0 in their paychecks this week.”

However, House Homeland Security Committee Democrats dismissed responsibility for TSA personnel working without compensation.

“FACTS: Democrats introduced a clean bill to fully fund TSA with no conditions. Republicans blocked it,” the Homeland Democrats group said on X. “Republicans would rather disrupt our travel than rein in ICE. It’s shameful.”

The nation’s most extensive security delays have occurred at Houston’s William P. Hobby Airport, where waiting periods have exceeded three hours. Sunday footage from New Orleans displayed security queues extending beyond the terminal into a parking structure, with peak wait times reaching 77 minutes.

Conditions at both locations had improved by Monday afternoon, though Hobby airport continued reporting two-hour security waits while officials advised travelers to arrive three to four hours before departure times. New Orleans wait times dropped to 10 minutes by late afternoon.

Additional complications may emerge when security shifts operate with insufficient screening personnel during busy periods.

Neither Houston airport authorities nor TSA responded to Monday inquiries regarding why Hobby airport experiences such pronounced delays during the shutdown. While Hobby remains smaller than George Bush Intercontinental Airport, which processes approximately three-quarters of Houston’s air passengers, Hobby still accommodated nearly 15 million travelers in 2024.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio delivered a strong message Monday that America will not accept nations using detained Americans as political bargaining chips, speaking at a ceremony dedicated to those wrongfully held overseas.

During the annual ceremony at the State Department raising the flag for American hostages and wrongful detainees, Rubio emphasized Washington’s commitment to bringing citizens home while warning foreign governments they will face consequences for such practices.

The Monday event pays tribute to Americans detained in foreign countries and honors families fighting for their loved ones’ freedom. This year’s ceremony took place on March 9, marking the 19th anniversary of Robert Levinson’s vanishing in Iran.

“I wish it was on a happier occasion, although we do have things to celebrate in terms of Americans that have been returned,” Rubio stated. “But also we remember those who have not returned.”

Levinson, a former FBI agent who vanished in Iran during 2007, was honored specifically during the flag-raising ceremony. His sons Dan and Doug Levinson were present as the flag was raised in dedication to their family.

FBI Deputy Director Christopher Raia emphasized how personally meaningful Levinson’s case remains for the agency. Levinson dedicated almost 30 years to American law enforcement, spending 22 of those years as an FBI special agent.

“Our evidence suggests that Bob died in captivity in Iran, and he is the longest held American hostage in US history,” Raia explained, adding that the FBI actively pursues any leads connected to his vanishing.

“Today, unfortunately, marks 19 years since his abduction,” Raia continued. “The urgency to uncover the facts of Bob’s disappearance has never been greater.”

Adam Boehler, serving as the U.S. special envoy for hostage affairs, reported that the current administration has ramped up operations to bring home Americans held in foreign countries. Boehler revealed that 175 detainees have gained freedom in recent years, with more than 100 being American citizens.

“We’ve brought 175 people home – over 100 Americans, others – allies in Israel, other places,” Boehler announced. “But we’re not going to stop. We’re not going to stop until all Americans are home.”

Boehler acknowledged President Donald Trump for prioritizing this issue as a key policy focus. He noted that Washington has started formally labeling nations that hold Americans for political advantage.

“Secretary Rubio… made it a clear priority,” Boehler explained. “In fact, he let Iran know that they are a State Sponsor of Wrongful Detention.”

Rubio connected the wrongful detention issue to America’s wider policy approach toward Tehran during his remarks. He characterized Iran as the globe’s most consistent state supporter of hostage-taking activities.

“The United States is currently engaged in an operation targeting one – the world’s leading hostage-taker, the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism – the regime in Iran,” Rubio declared.

He outlined the current U.S. military efforts as focused on eliminating Iran’s capacity to endanger regional stability through missile systems, drone technology, and maritime operations.

“The goals of this mission are clear,” Rubio explained. “It is to destroy the ability of this regime to launch missiles, both by destroying their missiles and their launchers; destroy the factories that make these missiles; and destroy their navy.”

Rubio also commended the efforts of various U.S. agencies working on hostage recovery operations, including the FBI, State Department, and National Security Council.

“Our mission is forward-looking,” Rubio concluded. “We believe in homecomings, we work for homecomings, and under the President’s leadership, we will not stop until every single unjustly detained American is brought home.”

WASHINGTON – Multiple Republican lawmakers are facing intense criticism for social media posts that many view as targeting Muslim Americans, amid new data showing anti-Islamic incidents have reached unprecedented levels nationwide.

Alabama Senator Tommy Tuberville sparked outrage Thursday with a post on X that placed a photo of the September 11 attacks next to an image of New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani hosting a Ramadan iftar dinner at City Hall on March 8. The post included text reading “less than 25 years ago” and “The enemy is inside the gates.”

The controversial post targeted Mamdani, who made history as New York’s first Muslim mayor. Tuberville, who has a track record of anti-Muslim statements both online and in Senate proceedings, did not respond to requests for comment and later reinforced his position in additional social media posts.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) took the unprecedented step of adding Tuberville to its registry of anti-Muslim extremists – the first time the organization has placed a sitting U.S. senator on such a list.

The incidents occur as CAIR released new research this week showing Islamophobic events in 2025 have hit an all-time high. The rise in religious hatred extends beyond the Muslim community, with antisemitic attacks also climbing, including Thursday’s incident where a driver crashed a truck into a Detroit-area synagogue.

Tennessee Representative Andy Ogles generated widespread condemnation earlier this week with his X post stating, “Muslims don’t belong in American society. Pluralism is a lie.”

Rather than backing down, Ogles intensified his rhetoric, writing: “Muslims are unable to assimilate; they all have to go back.” He attached this message to coverage of federal terrorism charges against two individuals accused of detonating an improvised explosive device at an anti-Islam demonstration outside Mamdani’s residence. Officials say the suspects claimed inspiration from ISIS.

Ogles has repeatedly attacked Mamdani personally, calling him “little muhammad” and demanding he face “DEPORTATION” and “denaturalization proceedings” following his Democratic primary victory for New York City mayor.

Democratic lawmakers have responded with two censure motions against Ogles during the current congressional session. Michigan Representative Shri Thanedar filed the latest censure resolution Thursday, seeking Ogles’ removal from the House Homeland Security Committee.

“Congressman Ogles’ disgusting and bigoted words have no place anywhere in our country, let alone from a member of Congress. His words incite hatred against millions of Muslim Americans,” Thanedar stated.

House Speaker Mike Johnson declined to condemn Ogles’ statements when questioned by reporters earlier this week.

“The language that people use, it’s different language than what I would use, but I think that’s a serious issue,” Johnson said, referencing concerns about Islamic law being imposed in America.

Islamic law, or sharia, represents a collection of legal and moral guidelines interpreted differently across the Muslim faith. The concept of implementing sharia law in the United States lacks broad support among American Muslims and their community leaders.

CAIR Government Affairs Director Robert McCaw responded: “Ironically, the only people trying to impose their religion on America are those politicians who seek to ban Muslims from our nation, who try to force public school teachers to read the Bible to their students, and who demand that our nation go to war in the Middle East to fulfill their end times prophecies.”

Georgia Representative Andrew Clyde used the same Mamdani photograph as Tuberville in his Thursday X post, claiming Democrats “whine” about church-state separation regarding Christian imagery in government but “when it’s Islam, they welcome it.”

Texas Representative Chip Roy shared a Capitol building image with text reading “Protect America. Ban Sharia.”

Roy and fellow Texas Republican Keith Self established the Sharia Free Caucus, comprising nearly 50 legislators committed to prohibiting Islamic law and advancing bills like the “Preserving a Sharia-Free America Act.” Tuberville authored the Senate version of this legislation, which would block immigration benefits and authorize deportation for immigrants who promote implementing sharia in ways that conflict with U.S. law or constitutional protections.

Clyde, Ogles, Roy and Self did not respond to comment requests.

New York Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer characterized Tuberville’s statements as “mindless hate.” The 2020 U.S. Religion Census counted approximately 4.5 million Muslim Americans.

“Muslim Americans are cops, doctors, nurses, teachers, bankers, bricklayers, mothers, fathers, neighbors, mayors, and more,” Schumer posted on X.

Federal immigration officials announced Friday they are firing the company operating the nation’s biggest immigration detention center and bringing in a new firm with more expertise to enhance healthcare and other services.

The management change at Camp East Montana in El Paso, Texas, follows mounting criticism about conditions that people held there have characterized as cruel and inhumane since the facility was rapidly built and opened last year.

Housing nearly 3,000 detainees across six sprawling tent complexes on average, the facility has faced growing evidence supporting allegations of overcrowding, inadequate medical treatment, poor nutrition and psychological trauma. The camp also recently experienced a measles outbreak, prompting several Democratic lawmakers to demand its closure.

People detained there report difficulty accessing medications and healthcare, dramatic weight loss due to insufficient food, and fear of security personnel who reportedly use excessive force. Emergency services received at least 130 calls during the camp’s initial five months of operation, including responses to two deaths, multiple suicide attempts, altercations and medical crises, according to Associated Press reporting last week.

The dismissed primary contractor, Acquisition Logistics, LLC, had secured a contract last year valued at up to $1.3 billion to construct and operate the facility at Fort Bliss Army base. The company had never previously managed an ICE detention center, had no history of winning federal contracts exceeding $16 million, and operated without a working website.

ICE has chosen Amentum Services, Inc., which had been working as a subcontractor at Camp East Montana, to become the new primary contractor, according to a federal announcement published Wednesday and confirmed by an agency representative who declined to be identified. The Washington Post first reported the contractor change on Wednesday.

The agency representative would not explain what led to ending Acquisition Logistics’ agreement, which government records indicate was scheduled to continue until September 30, 2027, and has already cost taxpayers nearly $600 million.

ICE stated it recently finished inspecting conditions at Camp East Montana, though those findings remain confidential. Acquisition Logistics and its president and CEO Ken Wagner did not respond to requests for comment.

Immigration officials said Amentum, recognized for its work supporting military and intelligence operations, was the best choice to assume control and enhance facility operations.

“Amentum’s size, maturity and pedigree make them the right partner at the right time,” the spokesperson said. “We will work closely with them in their implementation of higher standards of medical care, more thorough case processing and intake procedures, and delivery of performance requirements according to well-defined accountability measures.”

Representative Veronica Escobar, an El Paso Democrat representing the area where the camp operates, welcomed Friday’s news that Acquisition Logistics had been removed. She renewed her demands for the facility’s permanent shutdown and called for investigations into the contractors for “the fraud they’ve perpetrated on the American taxpayer.”

“Whether the new contractor is an improvement remains to be seen, and I remain deeply concerned about the chronic substandard conditions that exist at Camp East Montana,” said Escobar, who has visited the facility seven times.

Headquartered in Chantilly, Virginia, Amentum’s parent organization describes itself as a “global advanced engineering and technology solutions provider” working with U.S. government agencies and other clients. The company has previously delivered services for ICE and other Department of Homeland Security components.

The federal contracting announcement indicated ICE was pursuing a sole-source agreement with Amentum to operate Camp East Montana, including providing secure accommodations, medical services and transportation. The document suggested a 180-day contract duration, leaving uncertain what would occur at Camp East Montana afterward.

“The contractor must demonstrate the capacity for rapid operational transition and sustained adherence to all regulatory and performance requirements, thereby safeguarding public safety and supporting national enforcement priorities,” the notice said.

The announcement cited the “proprietary nature” of the facility’s systems as justification for why only Amentum could maintain continuous operations there.

The center was designed for brief stays before detainees are transferred elsewhere, with ICE data showing an average nine-day detention period. However, some individuals have remained for weeks or months while contesting their detention or facing administrative delays related to their deportation cases.

This contractor change occurs as ICE prepares to operate warehouse-style facilities nationwide designed to house significantly more detainees than Camp East Montana, with some proposed locations planned for up to 8,500 people. Escobar urged ICE to cancel plans for these warehouses, including one proposed near El Paso, saying they would “serve only as tools for the administration’s inhumanity.”

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth voiced his support Friday for a media deal that would place CNN under the control of a Trump administration ally, while launching harsh criticism against news outlets’ coverage of the ongoing Iran conflict.

Speaking during a Pentagon briefing, Hegseth expressed enthusiasm for David Ellison’s potential takeover of the news network through Paramount’s massive $110 billion acquisition of CNN’s parent company, Warner Bros.

“The sooner David Ellison takes over that network, the better,” declared Hegseth, who previously worked as a Fox News host and served in combat roles before joining the Pentagon leadership.

The Defense Secretary’s remarks came on the 14th day of the Iran war, as he took aim at CNN’s reporting about Iran’s blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. The shipping disruption has caused oil prices to surge and created volatility in financial markets, while polling data indicates Americans have little appetite for the conflict due to fears of rising gas costs.

Under Hegseth’s leadership, the Pentagon has implemented new restrictions on media access, prompting approximately 30 prominent news organizations to surrender their press credentials. Major outlets including Fox News, the Washington Post, and Reuters have stepped back, while defense officials have welcomed alternative media sources.

CNN defended its journalism when questioned about the Pentagon’s complaints. “We stand by our reporting,” a network spokesperson stated. Paramount representatives declined to provide comment on the matter.

The controversy centers around CNN’s Thursday report claiming Pentagon and National Security Council officials badly misjudged Iran’s determination to shut down the crucial waterway, according to sources with knowledge of the situation.

David Ellison, whose father is tech billionaire Larry Ellison, maintains strong connections to President Trump’s inner circle and is spearheading the Warner Bros acquisition. His media empire expanded in 2025 when he gained control of Paramount following its merger with Skydance Media, which included CBS News.

Federal regulators must sign off on the Paramount-Warner Bros transaction, though the Federal Communications Commission leadership indicated this month they would not oppose the deal.

However, legislators across party lines have expressed worry that such media consolidation could limit consumer options and increase costs. Additional concerns focus on potential threats to editorial freedom and press independence, despite First Amendment constitutional protections.

While Hegseth has recently reopened Pentagon briefings to traditional media outlets covering Iran operations, he has primarily fielded questions from non-mainstream reporters during the past two weeks.

Friday’s briefing featured extensive criticism of war reporting from the Defense Secretary. He also targeted ABC News for covering an FBI warning about possible Iranian drone retaliation strikes in California following U.S. military action. ABC News had not responded to requests for comment by press time.

“We’re used to bad reporting. We’re used to ill-informed reporting, and so it doesn’t change how we operate, but we engage with it to prove that it’s not true,” Hegseth stated. He dismissed CNN’s Strait of Hormuz coverage as “fake news,” “patently ridiculous” and “a fundamentally unserious report.”

WASHINGTON — During a Republican Party retreat at his Florida golf resort on Monday, President Donald Trump issued an ultimatum to lawmakers: he will refuse to sign any legislation until Congress approves comprehensive voting restrictions that would eliminate most mail-in ballot options across the country.

Speaking to House Republicans at their annual gathering, Trump argued that electoral victories are impossible without stricter voting regulations to combat fraud, despite mail-in voting’s widespread popularity and existing federal requirements that voters in national elections must be U.S. citizens. Evidence of non-citizen voting attempts remains extremely limited.

The president is advocating for an expanded version of the SAVE America Act, which has already received House approval, and is urging the Senate to override filibuster procedures to deliver the legislation to his desk. According to voting rights experts, the current bill could prevent approximately 20 million Americans from casting ballots due to lack of readily available birth certificates or similar documentation, with Trump’s proposed mail-in voting ban potentially affecting millions more.

“I’m not going to sign anything until this is approved,” Trump declared, identifying it as his top legislative priority.

“It’ll guarantee the midterms,” he added. “If you don’t get it, big trouble.”

Trump’s push for federal election oversight has raised concerns among voting rights advocates, as his administration seeks expanded authority over elections that traditionally fall under state jurisdiction according to constitutional provisions.

These developments occur as Republicans maintain narrow congressional control while facing challenging prospects in upcoming fall elections. Lawmakers are juggling competing priorities, including urgent funding needs for the Department of Homeland Security as federal workers miss paychecks during ongoing congressional disputes over immigration enforcement operations.

Democratic opposition to Trump’s election control efforts remains strong, with Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer warning that Trump’s demands would create legislative paralysis.

“This is what he does — he’s a thug, he’s a bully,” Schumer of New York stated.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, maintaining close ties with Trump, joined the president on stage alongside other GOP leaders showing support for the proposed legislation.

However, Senate Majority Leader John Thune has expressed skepticism about using the “talking filibuster” approach to advance the voting bill, as Trump and supporters suggest.

“We can’t find a piece of legislation in history that’s been passed that way,” Thune explained to reporters.

Trump has indicated willingness to wait up to six months for the bill’s approval before considering other legislative matters.

The president maintains his position that the 2020 election results were illegitimate, with his Justice Department investigating these claims. Federal investigators have taken the unusual step of confiscating ballots and election materials in Georgia and Arizona.

Trump envisions Congress expanding the Safeguarding American Voter Eligibility, or SAVE America Act, into a comprehensive package he describes as the “best of Trump.”

The House-approved version currently mandates voters present citizenship proof through passports or birth certificates during registration, plus photo identification when voting, similar to existing requirements in numerous states.

Trump’s primary addition would prohibit mail-in voting nationwide, with limited exceptions for disabled voters, military personnel, and other specific circumstances.

While Trump considers mail-in ballots inherently fraudulent, voting advocacy groups have consistently promoted the practice as expanding voter access and participation.

The president also proposes including two unrelated transgender rights provisions — prohibiting individuals born male from participating in women’s athletics and restricting gender reassignment procedures for certain minors.

Trump additionally mentioned potentially incorporating an unrelated foreign surveillance measure, known as FISA, which requires congressional reauthorization and typically generates political controversy.

“Let’s go for the gold,” he told House Republicans at his Doral resort.

A coalition supporting Trump has promoted various SAVE America Act versions, with citizenship verification requirements representing a long-standing objective of the president’s MAGA movement. Trump also cautioned House GOP members that their current bill version falls short of expectations. “We’re not going to sign a watered-down version,” he emphasized.

Republican senators plan to address advancement strategies during private meetings this week. Currently, no consensus exists, with some favoring the talking filibuster approach while others strongly oppose it.

Thune has cautioned that allowing unlimited Senate debate, as the talking filibuster proposal would require, could also permit endless amendments that might alter the bill in ways that could fracture Republican unity.

Other senators argue the time has arrived to force action and overcome Democratic opposition to the legislation.

DORAL, Fla. — President Donald Trump acknowledged Monday that Vice President JD Vance held different philosophical perspectives on military engagement in Iran, though he minimized suggestions of any major rift between the two leaders.

During a press conference at his Doral golf club in Florida, Trump characterized Vance as being “philosophically a little bit different than me” regarding the Iran conflict, noting that his vice president was “maybe less enthusiastic about going” with the military strikes.

However, Trump defended his decision to proceed with airstrikes alongside Israeli forces, stating his belief that military action was unavoidable. “I felt it was something we had to do,” Trump told reporters. “I didn’t feel we had a choice.”

The Iran military operation has created divisions within Republican ranks as the party faces a difficult election cycle, with some GOP members questioning how the intervention aligns with the isolationist “America First” philosophy that has defined the Trump movement.

Vance has been a leading advocate of that non-interventionist approach throughout his rapid political ascent from bestselling author to senator and eventually vice president. As a potential 2028 presidential candidate, he’s positioned to continue Trump’s political legacy.

The former Marine has consistently championed Trump’s preference for addressing domestic issues rather than overseas military involvement. In a 2023 Wall Street Journal opinion piece that has received renewed scrutiny following the Iran strikes, Vance expressed support for Trump because “I know he won’t recklessly send Americans to fight overseas.”

Before the strikes commenced, Vance assured The Washington Post there was “no chance” America would get pulled into an extended conflict similar to the Iraq War.

The administration has since offered mixed signals about the operation’s duration. While Trump previously stated the war could continue “as long as necessary,” he referred to it Monday as a “short-term excursion” amid growing economic concerns.

Despite any private reservations Trump suggested, Vance has publicly backed the president since military action began. In a Fox News appearance with Jesse Watters, Vance distinguished the Iran operation from previous conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

“If you think back to Afghanistan, 20 years of mission creep, 20 years (of) not having a clear objective and 20 years (of) the United States trying to bring liberal democracy to Afghanistan,” Vance explained. “Iraq was a little bit shorter, but we were still in that country for nearly a decade with no clear mission, no clear definition.”

“What’s so different about this, Jesse,” Vance continued, “is that the president has clearly defined what he wants to accomplish.”

Monday evening found Vance at Dover Air Force Base for the ceremonial transfer of Sgt. Benjamin Pennington, the seventh American service member killed in the Iran conflict.

Iran policy expert Behnam Ben Taleblu from the Foundation for Defense Democracies noted that Trump has maintained consistent hardline positions toward Tehran throughout his White House tenure and beyond.

During his initial presidency, Trump withdrew from the Obama-era Iran nuclear agreement despite strong European opposition. He later celebrated delivering “American justice” through a drone strike that killed Iranian General Qassem Soleimani, while criticizing Democrats who questioned his decision to act without congressional consultation.

The Soleimani assassination, targeting the Quds Force leader who ranked among Iran’s most influential figures, represented the most aggressive U.S. military action in the Middle East in years and dramatically escalated tensions with Tehran.

Trump’s antagonistic stance toward Iran’s religious leadership traces back to his real estate career in New York, when he publicly advocated military intervention during the Iran hostage crisis.

“There’s this narrative with Trump on Iran that Bibi’s in his ear,” Taleblu said, referencing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. “Or that Vance is in his ear. But Trump has had a fundamental view and personal interest on Iran for years.”

Trump concluded Monday’s remarks by dismissing speculation about disagreements with his vice president. “We get along very well on this,” Trump said.

WASHINGTON, March 13 – Former President Donald Trump indicated during a Friday Fox News Radio appearance that America stands ready to provide naval protection for ships traveling through the strategically important Strait of Hormuz if circumstances demand such action.

During his conversation on “The Brian Kilmeade Show,” Trump addressed questions about potential assistance for oil tankers navigating the critical waterway. “We would do it if we needed to. But, you know, hopefully things are going to go very well. We’re going to see what happens,” Trump stated, though he provided no additional specifics about such operations.

The former president also made pointed remarks about Iran, declaring: “We’re going to be hitting them very hard over the next week.”

Trump’s statements emerge during a period of escalating energy costs, with crude oil trading near $100 per barrel on Friday. The price surge coincides with the ongoing U.S.-Israel conflict now in its second week, creating additional pressure on global oil and gas markets.

PORTLAND, Ore. — Federal agents in Portland will face new restrictions on their use of chemical weapons during protests outside the Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility, following a court ruling issued Monday by U.S. District Judge Michael Simon.

The decision comes as a result of legal action brought by the ACLU of Oregon representing demonstrators and freelance journalists who claim they were targeted with excessive force by federal officers.

During a three-day court proceeding, several plaintiffs took the stand to describe their experiences with chemical and projectile weapons deployed by federal agents. Among those testifying were a protester known for donning a chicken outfit, an elderly married couple in their eighties, and two freelance journalists.

The legal challenge names the Department of Homeland Security among its defendants and contends that federal officers’ deployment of such weapons constitutes retaliation that violates protesters’ constitutional free speech rights.

In his written decision, Judge Simon noted the extensive video evidence presented in court. “Plaintiffs provided numerous videos, which were received in evidence and unambiguously show DHS officers spraying OC Spray directly into the faces of peaceful and nonviolent protesters engaged in, at most, passive resistance and discharging tear gas and firing pepper-ball munitions into crowds of peaceful and nonviolent protestors,” Simon wrote, using the term OC Spray to refer to pepper spray.

The judge further criticized federal agents’ actions, stating: “Defendants’ conduct — physically harming protestors and journalists without prior dispersal warnings — is objectively chilling.”

The Department of Homeland Security has not yet responded to requests for comment regarding the ruling. In earlier statements, the agency maintained that federal officers operated within their training protocols and applied only the minimum force required.

This marks the second recent court order restricting federal agents’ use of chemical weapons at the ICE facility. Judge Simon had previously imposed a temporary restraining order with similar limitations, and another federal judge overseeing a separate case filed by residents of nearby affordable housing also issued restrictions.

The aggressive crowd control methods employed by federal officers have drawn scrutiny as demonstrations continue across the nation in response to the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement initiatives.

Under Monday’s court order, federal agents are prohibited from deploying chemical or projectile weapons like pepper balls and tear gas unless an individual presents an immediate threat of physical violence. The ruling also bars officers from aiming such weapons at a person’s head, neck, or torso “unless the officer is legally justified in using deadly force against that person.”

The order further prohibits the indiscriminate use of pepper spray that could impact bystanders, limiting its use to situations involving violent illegal behavior, active resistance to arrest, or “as reasonably necessary in a defensive capacity.” Judge Simon clarified that actions such as trespassing, refusing to relocate, or ignoring dispersal orders constitute passive rather than active resistance.

The judge also approved provisional class certification, expanding the order’s protection to include all individuals who have peacefully demonstrated or covered protests at the ICE building in recent months.

The preliminary injunction will stay in place as the legal case moves forward.

Tennessee legislators have rejected a controversial proposal that would have made women who obtain abortions subject to criminal charges. The failed legislation represented an unprecedented approach that no other state has adopted, even among those that have implemented strict abortion restrictions or outright bans.

The proposed bill created significant disagreement within pro-life communities throughout Tennessee and nationwide. Supporters of the criminal liability measure argued it was necessary to provide additional protection for unborn children. However, opponents within the pro-life movement expressed concerns that such legislation could damage their broader cause, emphasizing that many women seeking abortions face external pressure and difficult circumstances when making these decisions.

A cryptocurrency company co-founded by President Trump and his sons is providing exclusive access to company executives for investors willing to commit $5 million worth of tokens for a six-month period.

World Liberty Financial describes this arrangement on its website as “guaranteed direct access” to select team members in exchange for voting privileges. The company’s documentation identifies Trump’s sons Eric, Donald Jr., and Barron as part of the “Supporting Team,” though the company states Trump himself and other family members are excluded from the access program.

Token holders concluded voting on Thursday, with the company reporting 99% approval from 1,786 ballots cast, according to World Liberty’s website. Reuters was unable to verify these numbers independently or determine how many individual token holders participated.

The arrangement, first published on the company’s website February 25, establishes a premium class of token holders, seemingly contradicting earlier public commitments to democratize financial access.

World Liberty refers to investors who lock up $5 million in tokens as “Super Nodes,” representing the highest tier outlined in their proposal.

Company spokesperson David Wachsman explained that “Super Nodes” receive “preferential access to the World Liberty Financial business development team and executives – not to specific founders – to discuss partnership opportunities.” However, the original February proposal promised “Super Nodes” would receive “guaranteed direct access to the WLFI team” for “partnership discussions.”

When asked about the difference between “guaranteed” and “preferential” access, Wachsman avoided addressing the distinction directly, stating only: “Super Nodes grant access to World Liberty Financial’s business development team.”

A “Meet our team” section on World Liberty’s website previously featured Eric Trump, Donald Trump Jr., and Barron Trump among others. After Reuters inquired about the proposal, this entire section disappeared from the website.

Wachsman claimed the website undergoes constant “upgrades” and insisted “any recent changes” were unconnected to Reuters’ investigation.

Partnership discussions will be handled by World Liberty’s business development and compliance teams, Wachsman stated separately. “WLFI does not arrange or facilitate access to any individuals outside of those teams as part of the Super Node program,” he said. “Being a Super Node doesn’t guarantee a partnership. It means being taken seriously in a process with rigorous standards behind it.”

According to the company’s website, this offer aims to “incentivize more significant participation in governance” of the crypto venture, which generated over $460 million for President Trump’s family in just the first half of 2025, based on Reuters’ analysis. Token holders must “stake” their WLFI tokens – locking them from trading for 180 days – before gaining voting rights on company governance issues. Participants in at least two votes receive a 2% yield paid in WLFI tokens.

“Super Nodes” must stake 50 million WLFI tokens, valued at approximately $5 million according to crypto data site CoinGecko.

Congressional opposition members, government ethics specialists, and academics have highlighted concerns about the president’s family profiting enormously from cryptocurrency while he reduces regulatory oversight of crypto companies. Trump now leads a government whose decisions directly impact World Liberty – including the company’s current application for a U.S. banking license under Trump’s administration. Trump’s Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and his sons also founded World Liberty and appeared on the company’s team listing. Wachsman confirmed the Super Node program excludes access to Witkoff family members as well.

World Liberty’s business structure directs 75% of all new token sales to President Trump’s family, meaning $5 million token purchasers effectively send $3.75 million to the Trumps. Previous terms allocated 12.5% of new token sales to the Witkoffs (effectively $625,000), though current terms specify only an unspecified portion of a 25% stake.

White House Counsel David Warrington responded to Reuters: “The President has no involvement in business deals that would implicate his constitutional responsibilities. President Trump performs his constitutional duties in an ethically sound manner and to suggest so otherwise is either ill-informed or malicious.” Warrington added that Steve Witkoff “like all Administration officials, takes seriously his compliance with the government ethics rules. As Special Envoy for Peace Missions, he has not and does not participate in any official matters that could impact his financial interests. He has also divested from World Liberty Financial, notwithstanding his ability and willingness to recuse.”

The access provided through these new “staking” measures represents a shift from World Liberty’s original public messaging, according to a review of the company’s statements. When launched one month before the 2024 presidential election, executives promised to bring cryptocurrency to ordinary people – teachers, dentists, and firefighters – through a mobile application and token holder governance.

Previously, WLFI token holders could vote on changes to the company’s underlying code, with each token providing one vote. They could also express approval or disapproval of the venture’s “directions and plans,” according to World Liberty’s “Gold Paper” venture summary.

With the measure’s passage, voting rights now belong exclusively to holders of staked tokens – either previously purchased or newly acquired tokens locked from use for six months.

CHICAGO – Three Democratic frontrunners competing for Illinois’ vacant Senate position have pledged to significantly overhaul or completely dismantle U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, demonstrating how immigration enforcement has become a central campaign issue following controversial federal operations that resulted in civilian casualties in Minnesota this year.

Taking a firm position against President Trump’s immigration enforcement approach has proven successful in other races. In New Jersey, Analilia Mejia secured victory in a competitive Democratic congressional primary by promising to eliminate ICE, the federal agency deploying armed officers across American cities to meet Trump’s deportation objectives. While such positions might pose challenges in general elections, the risk appears minimal in Illinois, a Democratic stronghold where no Republican has claimed statewide victory since 2014.

Senator Dick Durbin, 81, who is stepping down, has served as a prominent figure in the Senate’s progressive faction for years, consistently advocating for immigrant protections and championing legislation to provide citizenship pathways for childhood arrivals. The candidates seeking to succeed Durbin have embraced immigration reform, particularly targeting ICE, as Trump’s approval ratings on immigration have dropped from 50% last year to 39% by late February, according to Reuters/Ipsos surveys.

Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi advocates to “abolish Trump’s ICE.” Lieutenant Governor Juliana Stratton, who participated in protests during Chicago deportation operations last fall, supports completely eliminating the agency. Representative Robin Kelly has proposed the most extensive changes, suggesting the Department of Homeland Security, ICE’s parent agency, should be “dismantled,” and calling for the impeachment of outgoing secretary Kristi Noem.

“Given that the policy differences are relatively minor, the differentiation is the edge in which you’re bringing the opposition,” said Ruth Bloch Rubin, an associate professor of political science at the University of Chicago.

The primary victor will compete against one of six Republican candidates, though political experts consider the seat safely Democratic. Krishnamoorthi, a centrist first elected to Congress in 2016, held a 22-point lead over Stratton in Emerson College’s January survey and had accumulated over $30 million compared to Stratton’s $4 million and Kelly’s $3.3 million by February’s end, according to Federal Election Commission data.

Recent polling shows Stratton gaining ground after Governor JB Pritzker donated $5 million to her campaign via his family’s political action committee, funding advertisements featuring endorsers including Senator Tammy Duckworth using profanity directed at Trump.

Some political experts worry that hardline anti-ICE positions could harm Democrats in national contests. Trump secured the presidency in 2024 promising comprehensive immigration enforcement, and in 2020, Republicans successfully weaponized progressive “defund the police” messaging against Democratic congressional candidates.

However, Durbin’s history of supporting immigration reform and Chicago’s substantial, politically engaged immigrant population have made this a significant Illinois issue for years. The topic gained additional prominence since 2022, when Texas Governor Greg Abbott began transporting thousands of immigrants from the Mexican border to Chicago, straining municipal resources.

Last summer, the Trump administration deployed additional federal immigration agents to the city and attempted National Guard activation, which federal district court blocked. During the chaotic, extended operation, agents used tear gas in residential areas, detained protesters, and shot two individuals, fatally wounding Silverio Villegas Gonzalez, a Mexican father of two. Pritzker, considered a potential 2028 presidential candidate, characterized the surge as an “occupation” and established a commission to investigate alleged agent misconduct.

Stratton, whose 10-year-old daughter’s Chicago school was locked down twice due to nearby ICE operations, joined her community’s rapid response network and participated in demonstrations against Trump’s policies. “It’s not even about immigration. It’s to instill fear, and it’s a part of his authoritarian agenda,” Stratton said. She argued that congressional Democrats’ failure to restrain Trump’s immigration tactics should prevent her opponents from advancing to the Senate.

Following federal agents’ fatal shooting of U.S. citizens Renee Good and Alex Pretti in Minneapolis, both Kelly and Krishnamoorthi opposed legislation funding additional Homeland Security resources and supported Senate Democrats in forcing a month-long partial department shutdown. “You can’t wear masks. You have to have cameras on. You can’t just kidnap people off the street. You can’t just go to people’s homes without a warrant. We need to dismantle and rebuild,” Kelly said.

Krishnamoorthi, born in New Delhi and raised in Peoria, Illinois, describes his opposition to Trump’s immigration policies as deeply personal. His vocal criticism has drawn attacks, including after ICE agents prevented him from inspecting an immigration facility in suburban Chicago that became a site of daily confrontations between protesters and federal agents. A Florida city council member subsequently called for mass deportation of Indian immigrants and labeled Krishnamoorthi a “foreign occupier.”

“I’m a racial, religious and ethnic minority and an immigrant with 29 letters in my name. I care deeply about making sure that nobody gets otherized, whoever they are, including immigrants. And I want immigrants to feel like this is home, that this is where they belong,” he said.

Stratton has criticized Krishnamoorthi’s campaign for receiving Republican donor contributions, including from Shyam Sankar, chief technology officer of Palantir, a Homeland Security contractor. In January, the campaign announced Krishnamoorthi had donated $29,300 in Sankar contributions received since 2015 to Illinois immigrant advocacy organizations.

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration is working to recover federal revenue following a Supreme Court decision last month that invalidated major tariff policies, but congressional Democrats warn the replacement measures will significantly burden American families.

A Democratic study released Friday projects that new import taxes will impose an average cost of $2,512 on U.S. households in 2026, representing a 44% increase from the $1,745 tariff burden families faced last year. This financial pressure comes as Americans already grapple with elevated living costs and rising energy prices amid the Iran conflict.

“Despite a Supreme Court ruling that much of Trump’s tariff agenda is illegal, the Trump administration refuses to provide relief for families,” said Sen. Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire, the top Democrat on the Joint Economic Committee. “As American families continue to struggle with high costs, the President keeps choosing to institute new tariffs that will push prices even higher.”

White House spokesman Kush Desai dismissed the analysis as “phony,” stating “President Trump will continue using tariffs to renegotiate broken trade deals, lower drug prices, and secure trillions in investments for the American people.”

The president had previously used the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act to establish substantial tariffs on nearly all global trading partners last year.

However, the Supreme Court determined on February 20 that this legislation did not authorize presidential tariff authority. The ruling requires the government to issue refunds totaling approximately $175 billion to importers who paid the now-illegal IEEPA tariffs.

The administration has quickly implemented replacement tariffs, with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent stating that new levies “will result in virtually unchanged tariff revenue in 2026.”

Trump has already announced a 10% tariff under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, with potential increases to 15%. These measures are limited to 150 days without congressional approval, and legal challenges are already underway against the Section 122 tariffs.

A more durable approach involves Section 301 of the same 1974 trade legislation, which permits presidential tariffs and sanctions against nations engaging in “unjustifiable,” “unreasonable” or “discriminatory” trade practices. Trump previously used Section 301 for Chinese import tariffs during his first term, which survived court challenges.

This Wednesday, U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer announced an extensive Section 301 investigation examining whether 16 trading partners, including China and the European Union, are overproducing goods and flooding global markets at the expense of American manufacturers.

“The United States will no longer sacrifice its industrial base to other countries that may be exporting their problems with excess capacity and production to us,” Greer stated. Industry experts anticipate this investigation will lead to substantial new tariffs.

“The fact that they launched 301 investigations is not surprising,” said trade lawyer Ryan Majerus, a partner at King & Spalding and former U.S. trade official. “We all knew that’s what they were going to pivot to. The challenge is that this is way more sprawling than anyone expected.” He noted the broad scope targeting multiple countries and the expansive nature of investigating excess industrial capacity and overproduction.

The administration is developing another Section 301 investigation focused on prohibiting imported goods produced through forced labor. Greer indicated Wednesday that additional Section 301 probes might address digital services taxes, pharmaceutical pricing, and ocean pollution.

Officials are also expected to expand use of Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, allowing presidential tariffs on goods considered national security threats following Commerce Department investigations. Current Section 232 tariffs already cover steel, aluminum, automobiles, auto parts, and other products.

The Joint Economic Committee Democrats’ report indicates new tariffs will increase household financial burdens this year, partly because tariff revenue collection will occur year-round, unlike 2025 when Trump needed time to implement tariffs and occasionally suspended them.

The Democratic analysis assumes American households will bear 100% of tariff costs. They reference a Congressional Budget Office report finding that importers typically pass 70% of tariff costs to consumers. However, tariffs also enable domestic producers to raise prices due to reduced import competition and increased demand for their tariff-free products. The CBO concludes that combined costs from importers and higher domestic prices effectively mean consumers pay the entire U.S. tariff bill.

The administration’s renewed tariff strategy coincides with the Iran war driving up gasoline and commodity prices ahead of November’s midterm elections, while voters already express frustration over high costs.

“If the affordability and other political issues really start to become cumbersome, that certainly can impact all this,” Majerus said. “What the world’s going to look like two months from now is going to be very different from what it is now.”

Federal airport security screeners across the nation have been reporting to work without receiving paychecks since February 14th as the ongoing partial federal government shutdown persists.

A Morning Edition investigation recently examined the current state of airport security checkpoints by visiting three different airports to observe firsthand how the financial strain on Transportation Security Administration workers is impacting daily operations.

The unpaid TSA personnel continue to staff security lines and conduct passenger screenings despite the financial hardship caused by the extended government shutdown.

Officials across North Carolina are expressing optimism that a change in leadership at the Department of Homeland Security could unlock disaster recovery funds that have been stuck in bureaucratic limbo.

The FEMA assistance had been stalled during Kristi Noem’s time overseeing the department, leaving communities waiting for critical recovery resources. State leaders believe the transition to new leadership could break the logjam and allow the federal aid to flow to areas that need it.

The delayed funding represents a significant concern for North Carolina communities still working to recover from previous disasters and prepare for future emergencies.

Voters in Georgia are casting ballots Tuesday in a special congressional election to fill the seat vacated by controversial Republican Marjorie Taylor Greene, with the outcome serving as an early indicator of former President Donald Trump’s political influence in one of the state’s most conservative areas.

Former district attorney Clay Fuller has received Trump’s backing for the position representing four counties in northwest Georgia. However, he faces competition from Colton Moore, a former state senator with far-right views who describes himself as “Trump’s #1 Defender” and is attempting to appeal directly to the former president’s most devoted supporters.

The crowded field of 17 contenders makes it unlikely anyone will secure an outright majority in what’s anticipated to be a contest with limited voter participation, leading to a runoff scheduled for April 7 between the two highest vote-getters. Democratic candidate Shawn Harris is also competing and has been working to attract disenchanted Trump supporters.

National political observers are paying close attention to this contest because it provides an early indication of Trump’s hold on his political base in a region that has served as a cornerstone of his Make America Great Again coalition. A decisive victory for Fuller would demonstrate Trump’s ongoing political clout, while a disappointing result might suggest his influence is diminishing among MAGA supporters.

“This is an interesting case to see how powerful Trump’s hold over the party is in that particular district,” said Kerwin Swint, a political science professor at Kennesaw State University who lives in the district at stake.

According to Swint’s analysis, the most probable scenario involves Harris leading the initial vote count without achieving a majority, while the dozen Republican contenders divide their party’s support between Fuller and Moore for the second runoff position. Swint noted that Harris would face steep odds in a runoff against any Republican candidate due to the district’s deeply conservative character.

The 14th Congressional District of Georgia encompasses a predominantly working-class region stretching from Atlanta’s outer suburbs northward to the Tennessee state line. This area gained national prominence when Greene won decisively in 2020 and rapidly emerged as one of MAGA’s most vocal and recognizable figures nationwide.

Following Greene’s departure in January after a bitter disagreement with Trump, district residents are now considering the Republican Party’s future direction and determining how much say the former president should have in selecting her replacement.

Trump made a campaign appearance last month in Rome, a key city within the district, where he brought Fuller onto the stage to endorse him as his preferred candidate. Despite this backing, the race remains unpredictable, with some Trump supporters expressing their desire to make an independent choice.

Moore maintains confidence in his ability to prevail without Trump’s official endorsement, pointing to his aggressive promotion of Trump’s unfounded assertions about the 2020 election being fraudulent and his attacks on perceived political opponents as evidence of his appeal to MAGA loyalists.

During a recent interview, Moore claimed that substantial “DC swamp money” has poured into the district to support Fuller through television advertising and other means. He suggested that some “low-information voters” might support Fuller solely because of Trump’s endorsement.

“But the activists, the people who are most likely to get out and vote, they know we were Trump’s number one defender in Georgia,” said Moore.

The special election winner will hold the position until the end of 2026 but must immediately begin campaigning for the complete two-year term beginning in January 2027, starting with a May primary that could feature many of the same candidates competing once again.

That subsequent race will be part of November’s general election, when voters will decide control of all 435 House seats and one-third of the Senate’s 100 positions.

Tuesday’s election occurs just days after joint U.S. and Israeli military action against Iran, a development that some White House officials privately believe could create political challenges for Trump and Republicans when voters have indicated greater concern with domestic priorities such as cost of living and healthcare access.

WASHINGTON, March 13 – Internal White House divisions are influencing President Donald Trump’s contradictory public remarks about the Iran conflict, as administration officials debate how and when to end military operations while the war continues expanding throughout the Middle East.

According to interviews with a Trump adviser and sources familiar with the discussions, some administration officials are cautioning Trump about potential political damage from rising fuel costs due to U.S.-Israeli military actions against Iran, while defense hawks are urging the president to continue the assault on the Islamic Republic.

These revelations provide an unprecedented look into White House strategy discussions regarding the largest U.S. military engagement since the Iraq invasion of 2003.

COMPETING VOICES AND MIXED SIGNALS

The internal competition for Trump’s attention highlights the significant challenges facing the president, who returned to power last year pledging to end “foolish” military interventions, nearly two weeks after launching a war that has shaken global markets and disrupted international energy supplies.

While influence battles are typical in Trump’s administration, this situation involves life-and-death decisions in one of the planet’s most unstable and economically vital regions.

Moving away from the broad objectives he outlined when starting the war on February 28, Trump has recently portrayed the conflict as a focused operation with largely completed goals.

However, his messaging remains confusing to many observers, including energy traders who have reacted erratically to his statements.

During a rally-style event in Kentucky on Wednesday, he declared “we won” the war, then quickly changed course: “We don’t want to leave early, do we? We’ve got to finish the job.”

Treasury Department officials and National Economic Council members have cautioned Trump that oil market disruptions and increased gasoline costs could rapidly diminish public war support, according to the adviser and two additional sources who requested anonymity to discuss private conversations.

Political strategists, including Chief of Staff Susie Wiles and deputy chief James Blair, are making comparable arguments, emphasizing potential political consequences from higher fuel prices and encouraging Trump to define success narrowly while signaling the operation’s limited scope and near completion, sources indicated.

Meanwhile, hawkish voices are advocating for sustained military pressure against Iran, including Republican senators like Lindsey Graham and Tom Cotton, plus media figures such as Mark Levin, according to informed sources.

These voices contend the U.S. must stop Iran from acquiring nuclear capabilities and respond forcefully to attacks on American personnel and vessels.

A third influence comes from Trump’s populist supporters and figures like strategist Steve Bannon and television personality Tucker Carlson, who have been urging him and senior staff to avoid another extended Middle Eastern engagement.

“He is allowing the hawks to believe the campaign continues, wants markets to believe the war might end soon and his base to believe escalation will be limited,” the Trump adviser explained.

When asked for response, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt stated: “This story is based on gossip and speculation from anonymous sources who aren’t even in the room for any discussions with President Trump.

“The President is known for being a good listener and seeking the opinions of many people, but ultimately everyone knows he’s the final decision maker and his own best messenger,” she continued. “The President’s entire team is focused on ensuring the objectives of Operation Epic Fury are fully achieved.”

Other individuals mentioned regarding their roles in the discussions did not immediately respond to questions.

SEARCHING FOR A WAY OUT

When taking America into war, Trump provided minimal justification, and the administration’s stated objectives have varied from preventing an immediate Iranian attack to destroying its nuclear capabilities to overthrowing its government.

While seeking an exit from an unpopular conflict, Trump is attempting to balance competing narratives that critics argue have complicated an already challenging situation, with Iran remaining defiant despite devastating U.S.-Israeli airstrikes.

Senior political advisers and economic officials, whose pre-war warnings about potential economic disruption were largely dismissed, appear to have significantly influenced Trump’s efforts this week to calm nervous markets and control rising energy costs.

His public pivot to minimizing the war’s impact, calling it a “short-term excursion,” and his claims that fuel price increases would be temporary seemed designed to ease fears about an indefinite conflict.

Some top advisers have recommended he work toward ending the conflict in a way he can claim as a victory, at least militarily, sources said, even if much Iranian leadership survives along with nuclear program remnants the campaign was supposed to eliminate.

Repeated U.S. and Israeli airstrikes have eliminated numerous top Iranian officials among approximately 2,000 total casualties – some as distant as Lebanon – destroyed much of its missile arsenal, sunk significant naval assets and weakened its ability to support regional proxy forces.

However, military gains have been significantly undermined by Iran’s increased attacks on oil tankers and transportation infrastructure in the Gulf, pushing up energy prices.

Trump has indicated he will determine when to conclude the campaign. He and his staff claim they are well ahead of the four- to six-week timeline Trump originally announced.

The changing justifications for launching the conflict, which has spread to more than half a dozen countries, have made predicting future developments even more difficult.

For their part, Iranian leaders will declare victory, analysts predict, simply for surviving the U.S.-Israeli assault, particularly after showing their capacity to retaliate and damage Israel, the U.S. and allied nations.

VENEZUELA MISJUDGMENT

The war’s ultimate direction will depend heavily on the Strait of Hormuz. Twenty percent of global oil shipments, which typically pass through the narrow channel, have nearly stopped. Iran has recently attacked tankers in Iraqi waters and other vessels near the strait, and new Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei has promised to keep it closed.

If Iran’s control over the waterway drives U.S. gasoline prices high enough, that could create political pressure on Trump to end military operations to help his Republican Party, which is protecting slim congressional majorities in November’s midterm elections.

Trump has recently stopped promoting the idea that the war aims to overthrow Tehran’s government. U.S. intelligence suggests Iran’s leadership faces no immediate collapse risk, Reuters reported Wednesday.

At least some confusion about the war’s direction appears connected to rapid U.S. military success in Venezuela.

Since the war began, some aides have had difficulty persuading Trump that the Iran campaign would likely not proceed like the January 3 Venezuela operation that captured President Nicolas Maduro, according to another source familiar with administration thinking.

That mission enabled Trump to pressure former Maduro supporters into giving him significant influence over the country’s massive oil reserves – without requiring extended U.S. military involvement.

Iran, in contrast, has proven a much stronger, better-equipped opponent with an established religious and security structure.

Experts have dismissed Trump aide claims that Iran was weeks away from producing nuclear weapons, despite the president’s June assertion that U.S.-Israeli bombing had “obliterated” its nuclear program.

Most of Iran’s highly enriched uranium stockpile is believed buried by June strikes, meaning the material could potentially be recovered and refined to weapons grade. Iran has consistently denied pursuing nuclear weapons.

If the war continues, American casualties increase and economic costs grow, some analysts suggest it could weaken support from Trump’s political base. However, despite criticism from some supporters opposing military interventions, members of his “Make America Great Again” movement have largely remained supportive regarding Iran.

“The MAGA base is going to give the president wiggle room,” said Republican strategist Ford O’Connell.

WASHINGTON — Three Democratic senators have introduced new legislation aimed at preventing President Donald Trump from launching military operations against Cuba without first obtaining approval from Congress, responding to the president’s recent remarks about a potential “takeover” of the island nation.

The measure, submitted Thursday by Senators Tim Kaine, Ruben Gallego, and Adam Schiff, would mandate that the president withdraw U.S. forces from any military engagement with Cuba and may come up for a vote before the month concludes. This represents the latest effort by Democrats to use war powers legislation to challenge Trump’s foreign policy decisions, though GOP lawmakers have generally supported the administration’s approach.

“Only Congress has the power to declare war under the Constitution, but he operates with the belief that the U.S. military is a palace guard, ordering military action in the Caribbean, Venezuela, and Iran without Congress’ authorization or any explanation for his actions to the American people,” Kaine stated.

The president revealed earlier this week that Secretary of State Marco Rubio is currently in discussions with Cuban officials while the nation struggles with a severe energy shortage made worse by ongoing U.S. sanctions against the island.

“It may be a friendly takeover, ⁠it may not be a friendly takeover,” Trump explained to journalists during a recent press briefing in Florida, noting that he and Rubio plan to pursue this objective following the conflict with Iran.

Relations between Washington and Havana have remained strained for decades, but Trump’s willingness to employ military force against international adversaries has sparked concerns that Cuba might become the next target. Rubio, whose Cuban family relocated to America during the 1950s, has consistently advocated for taking a hardline stance against the Caribbean nation’s government.

Speaking to fellow senators earlier this year, Rubio indicated the Trump administration would welcome Cuban leadership change but emphasized “that does not mean we are going to provoke it directly.” Congressional Republicans have largely endorsed the administration’s confrontational international approach.

Nevertheless, Democratic lawmakers have repeatedly turned to war powers measures to spark discussions about Trump’s authority to deploy military forces overseas. While none of these efforts have succeeded in becoming law, the strategy has occasionally pushed the administration to clarify its intentions to lawmakers.

Democratic leaders are also preparing to potentially call votes next week on multiple war powers resolutions concerning Iran, unless Republican colleagues agree to conduct public hearings about the ongoing conflict.

“He ran on America First, but now it’s clear he’s become a puppet of the war hawks in his party,” Gallego commented.

A historic $14 billion military aid package for Taiwan sits on President Donald Trump’s desk awaiting final approval, with sources indicating the deal could move forward once Trump completes his scheduled visit to China later this month.

The weapons package would mark the largest arms sale in history to the democratically-governed island, which continues to face mounting military threats from China.

According to administration insiders who spoke with reporters, the deal is being kept confidential until after Trump’s March 31-April 2 diplomatic meetings with Chinese President Xi Jinping in Beijing. However, an announcement could come shortly after the president’s return to Washington.

During February discussions, Xi Jinping urged Trump to approach Taiwan arms sales with “prudence,” as Beijing maintains its territorial claims over the island.

Some foreign policy experts have expressed worry that Trump’s focus on securing favorable trade agreements with China might lead to reduced American military assistance for Taiwan. However, this pending arms approval indicates the administration intends to maintain or potentially expand its support.

Such a move would likely provide reassurance to officials in Taipei.

The military package primarily features PAC-3 and NASAMS air defense missile systems, according to one informed source.

“As soon as the president gives the thumbs up, those are ready to be officially announced. Everything is done,” stated the source, who requested anonymity due to the sensitive nature of the discussions.

An additional $6 billion worth of “asymmetric” defense equipment also awaits presidential approval and could be revealed in connected or follow-up announcements, the same source noted. However, they declined to detail what specific capabilities would be included.

Trump’s National Security Strategy, released in recent months, identifies preventing Taiwan conflict as a Washington priority, “ideally by preserving military overmatch.”

Despite this, Trump’s public statements, including February comments to media that he was “talking” with Xi about Taiwan weapons sales, have generated questions about whether he might reduce America’s traditional practice of supplying Taiwan with defensive capabilities – a commitment codified in federal law.

Even so, Trump’s arms sale authorizations to Taiwan during his current term have already exceeded the total amount approved by former President Joe Biden across four years, including an $11 billion package approved in December covering various missiles, drones, artillery systems, and aircraft components.

Foreign policy analysts note that American administrations spanning multiple decades have strategically scheduled Taiwan weapons approvals around delicate diplomatic engagements with Beijing.

China’s foreign ministry responded to questions by stating that the government’s “opposition to U.S. arms sales to China’s Taiwan region is consistent and unequivocal.”

Chinese officials regularly call on the United States to halt weapons sales to what Beijing considers its own territory.

When asked for comment, a senior White House official acknowledged that additional weapons approvals were being processed.

“Arms sales are working their way through the process. There is no change to our policy with respect to Taiwan,” the official stated.

Two sources with knowledge of the situation in Taiwan reported that Washington has consistently provided assurances of continued support.

However, the approaching summit has created some uncertainty.

Beijing has been working to postpone American arms sales to Taiwan and attempting to improve diplomatic conditions before the summit, including by reducing military pressure on the island, another Taiwan source familiar with the matter explained.

“We have confidence in Trump, though. Beijing has underestimated the strategic vision of the White House,” the source said.

Taiwan’s defense ministry confirmed to reporters that its weapons procurement projects have finished “preliminary coordination” with American counterparts, and the U.S. Defense Security Cooperation Agency has shared information regarding items for purchase and delivery timelines.

In January, Taiwan’s defense ministry announced that an arms agreement with the United States covering four categories was forthcoming, though officials said they could not provide specifics before presenting details to the U.S. Congress, which is the standard approval process for such sales.

The State Department has expressed support for increased defense investment by the island. Raymond Greene, America’s senior diplomatic representative in Taiwan, said in January that the U.S. remained “fully committed to delivering critical systems as quickly as possible.”

Democratic senators in Oregon have blocked proposed legislation that would have required physicians to provide identical medical care to babies who survive abortion attempts as they would for any other newborn, according to Ashley Sadler from Oregon Right to Life.

“Pro-abortion lawmakers in the Oregon Senate voted against bringing a bill to the floor that would require doctors to provide the same standards of care to babies born alive during failed abortions as newborns delivered under usual circumstances,” Sadler stated.

Currently, 18 states across the country have enacted similar protective measures for infants who survive abortion procedures. Public opinion research shows that a majority of Americans support this type of legislation.

Ohio has witnessed a significant rise in women seeking abortion services from neighboring states after voters approved constitutional protections for the procedure. State health department data shows abortion procedures have climbed 15% since the constitutional amendment took effect.

According to the Ohio Department of Health, out-of-state residents now account for one-fifth of all abortion procedures performed within Ohio’s borders. This trend reflects a growing pattern as states with restrictive abortion laws drive patients to seek care in more permissive jurisdictions.

The shift comes as conservative-leaning states continue implementing stricter abortion regulations while more liberal states expand access to reproductive services, creating a patchwork of availability across the nation. Opponents of the constitutional change argue that financial incentives played a significant role in the push to guarantee abortion access in Ohio.

A Marion County Superior Court judge has temporarily suspended Indiana’s abortion ban after ruling on a lawsuit filed by plaintiffs who argue that access to abortion services is protected under their religious beliefs. Judge Christina Klineman granted the preliminary injunction in response to the challenge.

The legal strategy being used in this case mirrors efforts being pursued across the country by the Satanic Temple, an organization that seeks to safeguard abortion access by framing it as a matter protected under First Amendment religious freedoms.

Indiana Right to Life has responded to the ruling, stating that religious freedom protections “were never intended to equate taking the life of an unborn child with religious expression.”

Federal officials are conducting a cost analysis of a multimillion-dollar program designed to monitor racial discrimination at polling places across the country.

The Office of Personnel Management announced Thursday that it’s working with the Justice Department to determine if the $2.5 million annual price tag for the election observer initiative is warranted and whether changes should be made to the program.

According to OPM officials, the monitoring program only activates when the U.S. attorney general receives a “written meritorious complaint” alleging racial discrimination in voting processes.

The federal oversight program was significantly reduced following a 2013 Supreme Court decision in a case involving Shelby County, Alabama. That ruling eliminated a key section of the Voting Rights Act that previously required states and local governments with histories of racial discrimination to obtain federal permission before modifying their election procedures.

The landmark Voting Rights Act, passed in 1965, represented one of the most important legislative victories of the civil rights era.

Earlier Thursday, CBS News reported that the White House is weighing whether to eliminate funding for the election monitoring program that works to safeguard minority voting rights.

When asked for comment, White House officials directed inquiries to the Justice Department.

A Justice Department representative told CBS News that the agency has no intention of discontinuing its separate election oversight program within the civil rights division.

The OPM confirmed Thursday that federal election observers are currently deployed in three locations operating under court mandates: Union County, New Jersey; Pawtucket, Rhode Island; and two regions in Alaska.

The United States is preparing for midterm elections this November. Republicans, led by President Donald Trump, maintain slim control of both the House and Senate.

Trump has been urging GOP legislators to pursue stricter voting regulations in advance of the upcoming elections.

ATLANTA — Georgia voters in the state’s 14th Congressional District will head to the polls Tuesday to select a new representative following Marjorie Taylor Greene’s departure from Congress earlier this year after tensions with President Donald Trump escalated.

The crowded field features 17 candidates, including prominent Republicans Clay Fuller and Colton Moore, along with Democrat Shawn Harris. Tuesday’s contest may only mark the beginning of a lengthy electoral process in the northwest Georgia district.

Fuller, who serves as a district attorney and has received Trump’s backing, aims to secure victory without heading to an April 7 runoff election. A runoff becomes mandatory if no candidate captures more than half the vote in the district spanning 10 counties from Atlanta’s suburbs to the Tennessee border.

“We need to win this thing on March 10 and send an America First warrior to fight for President Trump,” Fuller declared to supporters gathered in Rome, Georgia, on Feb. 19 during a Trump campaign event.

However, achieving an outright victory may prove challenging given the large candidate pool of 12 Republicans, three Democrats, one Libertarian, and one independent, despite five Republican candidates dropping out of the race.

The victorious candidate will complete Greene’s remaining term, but must campaign again to stay in office past January. Both parties have scheduled May 19 primaries for the full two-year term, with potential June 16 runoffs preceding November’s general election.

Ten Republicans and Harris have already secured spots on November’s ballot for the full term. This group includes both Fuller and Moore, a former state legislator popular among far-right supporters who gained attention for his aggressive defense of Trump during Georgia’s election interference case.

Harris, who operates a cattle farm and previously served as a general, campaigns on moderate positions and addressing local concerns. Nevertheless, Democratic victory appears unlikely in the 14th District, which the Cook Political Report identifies as Georgia’s most solidly Republican constituency.

District voters rallied behind Greene’s conservative agenda in 2020 when she shifted her campaign there after abandoning her original bid in a more competitive Atlanta-area district.

Greene became one of Congress’s most recognizable figures before departing in January. She maintained unwavering support for Trump following his 2020 loss to Joe Biden, amplifying his unsubstantiated claims about election fraud. During Trump’s 2024 campaign, she traveled nationwide as a surrogate speaker, frequently appearing at rallies wearing her signature red “Make America Great Again” cap.

However, Greene’s relationship with Trump soured last year when he and fellow Republicans opposed her potential Senate or gubernatorial campaigns. Greene publicly criticized Trump’s international policies and his decision not to release Jeffrey Epstein-related documents. Trump eventually announced his willingness to back a primary opponent, prompting Greene to announce her resignation one week later.

Electing another Republican would strengthen the party’s slim House majority. Republicans currently hold 218 seats compared to Democrats’ 214.

WASHINGTON — New polling data shows the American public remains sharply divided along partisan lines regarding U.S. military involvement in Iran, with recent surveys indicating more people oppose the action than support it.

Survey results reveal widespread concern that the military engagement is putting America at greater risk, despite many viewing Iran as a security threat. These findings present potential challenges for Trump as he faces the prospect of an extended conflict that could bring substantial economic disruption. On Monday, the president sent mixed signals about how long the conflict might continue, hinting it could be nearing completion while simultaneously warning of additional military force if Iran interferes with international oil supplies.

Rising and falling oil costs may already be causing voter anxiety. Weekend polling found approximately 70% of registered voters express significant worry that the conflict will drive up oil and gas prices, with most expecting the U.S. military response to continue for several months or longer.

Survey data shows Republicans generally support the president’s approach, though there are signs of hesitation regarding any response involving American ground forces in Iran. Given Trump’s campaign promises to prioritize “America first” policies and end U.S. participation in prolonged overseas conflicts, the Iran situation could create particular political tension.

The latest Quinnipiac Poll, conducted over the weekend, found 53% of registered voters disapprove of U.S. military action against Iran. Just 40% express support, while roughly 10% remain undecided.

These findings align with rapid-response text polling from The Washington Post and CNN, both conducted immediately after the joint U.S.-Israel strikes commenced, which similarly showed more Americans rejecting than supporting the military response.

However, a recent Fox News survey found public opinion more evenly split, with half of registered voters approving the U.S. military action and half disapproving.

Multiple recent polls indicate most Americans believe the Trump administration has failed to clearly articulate the reasoning behind the military strikes, with disagreement over whether Iran actually presented an “imminent and direct threat” to America, as White House officials have claimed.

In the Quinnipiac survey, 55% of voters said they didn’t believe Iran represented an “imminent military threat” to the U.S. prior to current military operations. Conversely, about 60% of registered voters in the Fox News poll characterized Iran as a “real national security threat,” while a recent AP-NORC poll found roughly half of U.S. adults deeply worried that Iran’s nuclear capabilities pose a direct danger to America.

With oil prices fluctuating, the overwhelming majority of voters express significant concern about potential increases in oil and gasoline costs within the United States, the Quinnipiac poll shows. Only about 25% of voters report being minimally concerned or unconcerned about price increases.

Democrats and independents show the highest levels of concern, though approximately half of Republicans also worry the conflict could increase gas prices.

Trump stated Monday that the U.S. would escalate action against Iran if they attempted to disrupt global oil distribution.

As the Iran conflict expands throughout the Middle East, many Americans fear Trump’s military choices have compromised U.S. security.

Roughly half of voters in both Quinnipiac and Fox News polls indicated the U.S. military action in Iran makes America “less safe,” while only about 30% in each survey said it improved national security. The CNN poll discovered about half of U.S. adults believed the strikes would make Iran “more of a threat” to America, while only approximately 30% thought it would reduce the danger.

About 60% of U.S. adults said they trust Trump “not much” or “not at all” to make appropriate decisions regarding U.S. military force in Iran, according to CNN polling. Republicans showed greater confidence than Democrats or independents.

An AP-NORC poll conducted prior to the strikes found similar results, with 56% of U.S. adults trusting Trump “only a little” or “not at all” to make correct decisions about overseas military force deployment.

Most voters worry about potential expansion of the conflict.

Approximately 75% of voters reject the concept of deploying ground troops to Iran, according to the Quinnipiac poll conducted after six U.S. service member deaths were announced. A seventh service member death was reported Wednesday.

The Trump administration has recognized the probability of American casualties and hasn’t eliminated the possibility of sending American soldiers to Iran. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth stated last week it would be “foolishness” to expect U.S. officials to publicly declare “here’s exactly how far we’ll go.”

Only about 20% in the Quinnipiac poll supported deploying troops to Iran. Even among Republican voters, more oppose than support ground troop deployment, 52% to 37%.

WASHINGTON – Steve Witkoff, who serves as a special envoy and key advisor to President Donald Trump, announced during a Tuesday television interview that he expects to make a trip to Israel in the coming week.

Speaking with CNBC, Witkoff indicated the purpose of his anticipated visit would be to work with Israeli officials on coordinating strategic plans concerning Iran-related military operations.

The White House launched a sharp attack against CNN Thursday following the network’s decision to broadcast segments of Iran’s new Supreme Leader’s public address, representing the administration’s second criticism of CNN’s Iran-related coverage within a three-day period.

This confrontation highlights the delicate balance news organizations must strike when covering conflicts, particularly regarding their duty to report perspectives from nations the U.S. government considers adversaries. The situation also revealed contradictions, as Supreme Leader Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei’s message during his inaugural public address since taking over after his father’s death in an Israeli airstrike was readily accessible through multiple sources.

In a social media post, the White House declared that “fake news CNN just aired four straight minutes of uninterrupted Iranian state TV, run by the same psychotic and murderous regime that prided itself on brutally slaughtering Americans for 47 years.”

Earlier this week, White House communications director Steven Cheung criticized CNN anchor Erin Burnett’s conversation with Seyed Hossein Mousavian, a former Iranian nuclear negotiator. During the interview, Burnett inquired about Mousavian’s knowledge regarding Iran’s willingness to engage in discussions with the United States, to which he indicated limited interest.

“Ever notice how CNN just regurgitates quotes and unverified information from Iranian terrorists?” Cheung posted on X. “Total disgrace. They have become the murderous Iranian Regime’s version of Pravda,” he added, making reference to the former Soviet Union’s official publication.

While CNN remained silent on Cheung’s earlier criticism, the network issued a response to Thursday’s White House attack. CNN pointed out that it joined Sky News and Al Jazeera in broadcasting segments of the ayatollah’s live statement.

“The world is watching with anticipation which direction this war will take,” CNN stated. “Purported remarks from Iran’s new supreme leader are a critical component in helping audiences understand where this conflict is heading and were aired for their obvious news value.”

Multiple news organizations, including The Associated Press, distributed breaking news alerts about Khamenei’s statements. His promises to continue strikes against regional Arab nations and intentions to disrupt global oil supplies became major headlines. The New York Times prominently featured coverage of the address on its homepage immediately following the speech, later analyzing that the remarks “was an early indication of how the new supreme leader would approach the war, as well as how he would lead the country.”

CNN has remained a frequent target of President Donald Trump’s criticism since his initial presidency. The network faces particular vulnerability currently due to Paramount Global’s pending acquisition of CNN’s parent company, Warner Bros. Discovery, which has sparked concerns about future editorial autonomy.

The network presented a news anchor reading selected portions of Khamenei’s statement in Farsi alongside English translations, rather than broadcasting the complete address. Following the speech, correspondent Nick Paton Walsh provided analysis to anchor Kate Bolduan, emphasizing how the leader’s absence from public view — reportedly due to injuries from an air attack — carried as much significance as his words.

“We were waiting to see the face of the man to have proof of his health and survival,” Walsh explained, “and they’ve not met that moment. Instead, a handwritten message, it seems, that mostly reiterates things we kind of already knew.”

According to the Tech Transparency Project, numerous Iranian officials and organizations maintain verified profiles on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter and owned by Trump associate Elon Musk. CNBC reported Thursday that Khamenei operates one such account, and an X profile featuring his image shared his statement’s text in both Farsi and English.

Despite his father’s death, an account displaying the former leader’s image remained active Thursday, primarily sharing content from his son. “The revenge we have in mind is not just because of the martyrdom of the illustrious Leader of the Revolution,” stated one Thursday post. “Every member of the nation martyred by the enemy is a separate case that demands we seek revenge.”

Although X faces official restrictions in Iran, many citizens access the platform through virtual private networks. The platform did not immediately respond to Thursday inquiries.

American journalists have a lengthy tradition of pursuing interviews with world leaders, including those considered U.S. adversaries. The most famous example remains “60 Minutes” correspondent Mike Wallace’s 1979 interview with Iran’s Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini during the American hostage crisis.

Jane Ferguson, an experienced international correspondent and founder of journalism platform Noosphere, defended CNN’s decision to broadcast the Iranian leader’s newsworthy remarks as entirely appropriate. She argued that government officials should not critique news organizations’ editorial choices.

“We’ve always faced this,” Ferguson noted regarding criticism when reporters engage with figures hostile to American interests. “This has been a bit of low-hanging fruit for awhile.”

Rice University historian Douglas Brinkley argued that singling out CNN in this situation was unjustified. While he agreed that understanding adversarial leaders’ perspectives holds news value, he stressed the importance of journalistic caution.

“You have to be leery of being used as a propaganda tool by the Iranian regime,” Brinkley observed. “On the other hand, knowing what the enemy is saying and looking for a sign of a peace offering or a nuance is important … It’s a difficult balance.”

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Federal officials have escalated their conflict with California by filing a lawsuit Thursday challenging the state’s pioneering automotive emission regulations designed to reduce vehicle pollution.

Former President Donald Trump has consistently opposed California’s initiatives to reduce exhaust emissions and promote electric vehicle usage. Last summer, he prevented the state from implementing its groundbreaking prohibition on new gasoline-powered vehicle sales starting in 2035. Trump has also frequently criticized California’s elevated fuel costs, which stem primarily from taxation and environmental policies.

Governor Gavin Newsom’s administration strongly condemned the legal action, pointing out its timing coincides with rising fuel costs due to Middle Eastern conflicts and increased consumer interest in electric alternatives.

“Gas prices are soaring nationwide because of Trump’s reckless choices, and now he’s attacking the Golden State for trying to give Californians more freedom and cheaper options,” stated Anthony Martinez, a spokesperson for Newsom.

California drivers paid an average of $5.37 per gallon Thursday, data from the American Automobile Association shows. The national average stood at $3.60 per gallon. Statewide prices have increased approximately 56 cents per gallon, while national prices rose 35 cents since last week — roughly 20% higher since U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran.

“It’s ironic that they’re doing this just at the time when people are most worried about gas prices,” commented Dan Farber, who directs the Center for Law, Energy, and the Environment at UC Berkeley’s law school.

Following Trump’s previous blocking of California’s strict electric vehicle requirements, the state immediately filed a counter-lawsuit. The California Air Resources Board maintained that existing emission standards addressing climate and health concerns would continue operating despite the blocked ambitious regulations.

However, federal attorneys argue in their lawsuit that California lacks authority to implement even these moderate standards.

“Oppressive, expensive electric vehicle mandates drive up costs for American consumers and violate federal law,” declared Attorney General Pam Bondi.

California has historically received Environmental Protection Agency approval for stricter emission requirements than federal standards, partly due to severe air quality issues. Other states may adopt California’s regulations.

Trump’s initial presidency saw the revocation of this special authority. The Biden administration restored California’s waiver privileges in 2022.

The current administration has also announced intentions to roll back Biden-era fuel efficiency requirements for new vehicles.

WASHINGTON — Responding to demands from President Donald Trump, Senate Republicans are preparing to engage in an extended floor debate next week concerning legislation that would establish stringent citizenship verification requirements for voters, despite acknowledging the measure lacks sufficient support for enactment.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune of South Dakota is organizing an extended speaking session on the Senate floor for an unspecified duration, though it will not constitute the formal “talking filibuster” that Trump has advocated for. The Republican strategy involves maintaining control of the floor for potentially days or weeks to apply pressure on Democratic colleagues.

“I can guarantee that we are going to put Democrats on the record,” Thune declared from the Senate floor Thursday while announcing the strategy for the House-passed legislation.

Trump has declared he will not approve any additional legislation until Congress passes this measure — officially titled the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility or SAVE America Act. The bill encounters complete Democratic resistance, meaning Senate approval would require Republicans to modify chamber rules and abolish the filibuster, a step many GOP senators refuse to take.

The president has elevated this legislation as a key priority before the midterm elections, contending Republicans require it for electoral success — despite his party securing both the presidency and congressional control in 2024 without such measures. Current federal statutes already mandate that national election voters swear under oath, with potential prosecution consequences, that they possess U.S. citizenship.

The proposed legislation would additionally mandate photo identification for ballot casting, a requirement already implemented in numerous states.

Trump’s adamant stance on this bill, combined with energetic support from the Republican base, has created pressure for Thune. The GOP leader has consistently stated they lack the votes to eliminate the filibuster, which establishes a 60-vote requirement, or to implement the talking filibuster Trump has vigorously promoted.

Even with adequate votes, a talking filibuster would not ensure passage. Advocates argue Democrats would eventually exhaust themselves speaking or permit the legislation to advance. However, Democrats would retain the right to propose unlimited amendments on any topic, compelling Republicans to cast difficult votes during an election year while further prolonging the process.

“We can’t find a piece of legislation in history that’s been passed that way,” Thune stated this week.

Positioned between Trump’s pressure and Democratic resistance, Republican senators have developed an alternative approach to control the floor themselves — preventing Democrats from obtaining a weeks-long platform for speeches. This strategy circumvents procedural complications, even though the process will likely conclude with an unsuccessful vote. Republicans also plan to examine several amendments addressing Trump’s priorities, including restrictions on mail-in voting.

“Republicans are looking forward to this debate,” Thune stated.

Like the talking filibuster approach, this plan carries risks — primarily that it may not appease Trump, who has insisted on passage and threatened to obstruct nearly all other Congressional business.

Utah Senator Mike Lee, a Republican who has collaborated with Trump to advance the SAVE America Act and advocated for the talking filibuster, said Thursday the outcome remains uncertain.

“I think he understands that we need to put in an aggressive effort here,” Lee commented regarding Trump. “And a lot of that is going to have to be determined in real time as we go about it.”

Lee indicated Trump’s satisfaction with the process “will depend on whether in his view, we gave it everything we have.”

Republican Senator Katie Britt of Alabama stated the objective is determining how to bring it to the floor and “actually achieve a result.”

“We’re working through what that means and what we need to be prepared to do,” Britt explained.

Democrats unanimously reject the legislation, contending it would prevent approximately 20 million American voters lacking readily available birth certificates or similar documentation from exercising their voting rights.

Senator Alex Padilla, the top Democrat on the Senate Rules Committee, announced his party is organizing “to bring our arguments — and the facts — to the floor as well.”

He suggested it would be more precise to call it the “Save Trump’s Ass Act,” because he argued the only method Republicans can attempt to maintain power in November’s elections is by creating barriers for eligible voters.

Padilla characterized the SAVE America Act as “not a voter ID bill. It is a voter suppression bill. It is a voter purging bill.”

NEW YORK (AP) — We’ve all wondered at some point: “What else could I have purchased with that money instead?”

Military conflicts raise the same question on a much larger scale.

During the opening seven days of the Trump administration’s military engagement with Iran, America spent over $11.3 billion — a sum that could have purchased countless alternatives. When numbers reach such astronomical heights, they become difficult to comprehend. The Associated Press has calculated what this enormous expenditure could have bought when divided into smaller, more relatable purchases.

Associated Press correspondent Lisa Mascaro from Washington provided additional reporting. Additional graphics covering the U.S.-Iran military engagement are available online, where this breakdown will also appear.

WASHINGTON — A Justice Department official is facing professional misconduct allegations after threatening a prestigious law school over its diversity programs, according to ethics charges filed in the nation’s capital.

Ed Martin, currently serving as the Justice Department’s pardon attorney, stands accused of sending a threatening communication to Georgetown Law School’s dean while he held the position of interim U.S. Attorney for Washington, D.C. The Office of Disciplinary Counsel filed the charges last Friday.

According to the ethics filing, Martin threatened that his office would refuse to hire Georgetown law students unless the institution dismantled its diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives. The allegations claim Martin violated his professional oath and constitutional protections for free speech and due process.

Hamilton Fox, the Disciplinary Counsel who brought the charges, has requested a D.C. Court of Appeals panel determine appropriate disciplinary action. Martin has been given 20 days to submit a written response to the accusations. Neither Martin nor his legal representative responded to requests for comment.

The controversy stems from Martin’s February communication to Georgetown Law Dean William Treanor, in which he claimed a whistleblower reported that the school “continues to promote and teach DEI.” Martin’s action aligned with a Trump administration executive order targeting federal DEI programs.

“This is unacceptable,” Martin stated in his correspondence, threatening to block all Georgetown students from consideration for employment opportunities, internships, or fellowships until the matter was addressed.

Dean Treanor pushed back against Martin’s demands, citing First Amendment protections. “Given the First Amendment’s protection of a university’s freedom to determine its own curriculum and how to deliver it, the constitutional violation behind this threat is clear, as is the attack on the University’s mission as a Jesuit and Catholic institution,” Treanor responded.

When Martin discovered the ethics investigation last year, he attempted to contact D.C. Court of Appeals judges directly, criticizing Fox’s “uneven behavior” and requesting a “face-to-face meeting with all of you to discuss this matter and find a way forward,” according to the disciplinary filing.

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche defended Martin, characterizing the complaint as originating from “a blatantly Democrat-run political organization.” The Justice Department issued a statement claiming the charges represent “a partisan organization’s agenda” targeting Trump administration officials while overlooking ethical violations by attorneys who served under Democratic administrations.

“Let us not forget that DC-barred members of Biden’s special counsel were found to have acted against President Trump without legal authority and in clear violation of the Constitution, yet the bar did nothing,” the department stated.

Martin, a conservative activist without prosecutorial background, was selected by President Trump in January to head the country’s largest U.S. Attorney’s office. He had previously played a prominent role in Trump’s “Stop the Steal” movement following the 2020 election.

Trump eventually withdrew Martin’s nomination for permanent appointment after a Republican senator opposed his confirmation due to Martin’s vocal support for January 6, 2021 Capitol protesters. In May, Trump nominated Fox News personality Jeanine Pirro to take over the U.S. Attorney position.

While Martin continues in his role as pardon attorney, he was recently stripped of his leadership position in the Justice Department’s “Weaponization Working Group,” which examines federal prosecutions of Trump.

CHICAGO — An unusual opportunity for Illinois voters to choose a new U.S. senator has ignited a fierce contest among the state’s top three Democratic contenders.

However, the Democratic primary to succeed retiring Senator Dick Durbin has transformed into a crucial political evaluation for another name appearing on Tuesday’s ballot: Governor JB Pritzker.

The wealthy governor is endorsing Lieutenant Governor Juliana Stratton against two seasoned House representatives — Raja Krishnamoorthi and Robin Kelly. Pritzker has invested millions in Stratton’s campaign, joined her at senior center visits, and even featured in a profanity-laden television commercial targeting Trump. Yet Pritzker’s prominent involvement has generated complications, including pushback from influential Black Democratic leaders, doubts about the potential 2028 presidential hopeful’s sway, and voter concerns regarding his use of personal fortune.

“Money should not have to be a factor into tipping the scales in the political arena,” stated Maria Pike, a Chicago anti-violence activist. Despite being a strong Pritzker supporter, she feels uncomfortable with the millions the governor, who faces no opposition in his own primary, has directed toward electing Stratton. She plans to vote for Kelly.

Sixteen contenders have entered the race following Durbin’s retirement announcement after three decades as senator, where he serves as the Senate’s second-ranking Democrat.

The Democratic primary victor among ten candidates is expected to secure victory in the solidly blue state this November. Illinois hasn’t elected a Republican senator since 2016, when Mark Kirk lost to Democrat Tammy Duckworth.

The leading candidates include 52-year-old Krishnamoorthi, a five-term congressman who launched the first television advertisements in July. Krishnamoorthi demonstrates exceptional fundraising ability, collecting over $30 million from approximately mid-2025 through last month.

He avoided direct comments about Pritzker’s involvement.

“At the end of the day, voters will make their decision. They don’t want anyone else to decide for them,” Krishnamoorthi stated. “We’re on a good path. We just have to run down it as fast as we can.”

Among all 2026 Senate contenders nationwide this election cycle, Krishnamoorthi ranked second in fundraising behind only Georgia Democrat Jon Ossoff, based on Federal Election Commission records.

Kelly raised approximately $3.3 million during the same period, while Stratton collected about $4 million, both significantly trailing Krishnamoorthi.

However, Pritzker contributed $5 million to a super PAC primarily focused on supporting Stratton’s election in December.

While governors and prominent politicians commonly endorse candidates, primary involvement often generates divisions. Pritzker, inheritor of the Hyatt Hotels fortune, holds a unique position due to his wealth. He has served as the state party’s financial backbone for years, supporting numerous candidates both within Illinois and nationally.

Yet no previous endorsement has been so directly connected to his personal career trajectory.

Pritzker selected Stratton as his running mate in 2017, just months into her single legislative term. When discussing her major achievements, she highlights her support for Pritzker’s initiatives, including Illinois’ minimum wage increase.

Stratton adopted an aggressive debate strategy, criticizing Krishnamoorthi’s voting history and funding sources so intensely that he joked about needing “body armor” during a televised January forum.

Her debut television advertisement features voters and Senator Duckworth directing profanity at Trump. While Stratton and Pritzker don’t use the expletive, they appear together smiling.

“It captured what so many people are feeling right now. Why are we playing around that these are normal times?” Stratton explained. “People are looking for fire.”

She maintains that Pritzker’s backing presents no disadvantages.

Others disagree with this assessment.

The Congressional Black Caucus, which includes Kelly as a member, recently criticized his support.

“Governor Pritzker’s effort to tip the scales in Illinois’ U.S. Senate race is beyond frustrating,” stated Representative Yvette Clarke of New York, the caucus leader. “A sitting governor shouldn’t be heavy-handing the race. Quite frankly, his behavior in this race won’t soon be forgotten by any of us.”

Kelly, 69, clarified she didn’t request the statement.

“They see what’s going and they feel like, a very qualified woman that’s running, is already there,” she said. “Just because you don’t have the most money, doesn’t mean that you haven’t done the most.”

She referenced outgoing Governor Tim Walz, who hasn’t endorsed any candidate in Minnesota’s Senate race, where Lieutenant Governor Peggy Flanagan and Representative Angie Craig compete for the Democratic nomination.

Kelly won her first election in 2013, campaigning on gun control messaging that connected with her district encompassing Chicago’s South Side, suburban areas, and rural regions. Through her people-over-profits platform, she has established herself as a progressive voice, including denouncing Israel’s Gaza operations as genocide.

Chicago resident Kiyonna Mosely, 49, expressed trust in Pritzker but lacks familiarity with Stratton. She appreciates Kelly’s anti-gun violence record and finds her relatable.

“She just kind of speaks my language when she is speaking, always straightforward,” Mosely said. “She’s experienced a lot of things I have, with being a Black woman.”

Pritzker has justified his participation as proper. He said he understood the CBC’s position of “standing up for a friend of theirs.”

“I’m working very hard to elect someone as our U.S. senator, a Black woman, who would be a member of the Congressional Black Caucus when she wins,” he told reporters last week in Springfield. “She has the best chance of being a great U.S. senator for us among the three Democrats in the running.”

Some voters welcome his involvement.

Pritzker receives credit for bringing governmental stability to Illinois, something voter Susan Stockman values. The 73-year-old retired suburban Chicago teacher plans to vote for Stratton partly because of Pritzker’s endorsement.

“He’s done as great of a job as anybody can do,” she said. “I don’t think there’s any such thing as being too involved.”

Tuesday’s election results will also indicate Pritzker’s political strength as his name surfaces in discussions about potential 2028 presidential candidates. Pritzker added over $25 million to his campaign treasury last year, generating speculation about broader political ambitions, though he remains evasive about presidential plans.

Recently, Stratton has appeared more frequently at Pritzker’s official events. Thursday saw Pritzker campaigning for her through multiple senior living center visits on Chicago’s South Side. Already among Trump’s harshest critics, Pritzker told residents in one predominantly Black neighborhood that Stratton provides a fresh approach to challenging the president.

“My partner in governance for seven years decided that it was time for her to go take this fight to Washington on my behalf,” he told residents.

Candidates have also focused efforts on connecting with voters throughout the state. Stratton, 60, grew up in Chicago but claims her rural communities commission experience has established her recognition in downstate areas. Kelly emphasizes her Peoria connections, approximately 150 miles southwest of Chicago, where she attended college.

Krishnamoorthi, born in India and raised in Peoria, says he has spent years cultivating support beyond his suburban Chicago district, engaging with residents on Medicare issues beginning in 2023 and securing endorsements from prominent downstate Democrats.

This strategy appeals to 63-year-old Kimberly Beal, who resides in Kelly’s congressional district and attended Thursday’s Stratton event. She’s considering voting for Krishnamoorthi.

“His boots on the group approach has been one I like,” she said. “He brings a no-nonsense appeal.”

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. — A Missouri circuit court has upheld newly drawn congressional district boundaries endorsed by former President Donald Trump, designed to boost Republican chances of capturing another House seat in upcoming elections.

Legal challengers argued the revised districts breached Missouri’s constitutional requirement for geographically compact boundaries. However, Jackson County Circuit Judge Adam Caine dismissed these arguments in his Thursday decision.

While Republicans celebrated this legal win, additional court battles continue at the Missouri Supreme Court, where opponents argue that redrawing districts mid-decade violates the constitution. Critics have also gathered more than 300,000 petition signatures seeking to put the congressional map before voters statewide.

Missouri represents one of multiple states where Trump has pushed for congressional boundary changes, seeking electoral advantages as Republicans work to maintain their slim House majority this November. Following Trump’s call for Texas redistricting, Democrats responded with their own map changes in California, sparking similar battles nationwide.

The state’s current House delegation includes six Republicans and two Democrats under boundaries established in 2022 following the latest census. Initially, Republican legislators rejected proposals for a seven-seat Republican map, fearing it might spread the party too thin and create vulnerability during strong Democratic election cycles.

However, White House pressure led Republicans to abandon these concerns last year, prioritizing partisan gains through district revision.

The revised map, approved during September’s special legislative session, targets the Kansas City-area seat held by Democratic Representative Emanuel Cleaver. The plan shifts Kansas City portions into two neighboring Republican districts while extending Cleaver’s 5th Congressional District eastward into heavily Republican rural territory.

Legal documents filed by challenging voters claimed the new boundaries “radically departs” from traditional patterns by dividing and elongating the 5th District, which previously centered more tightly around Kansas City.

Republican Attorney General Catherine Hanaway’s legal team argued the updated map actually improves overall design. While acknowledging the 5th District’s reduced compactness, state lawyers maintained the statewide map achieves better compactness and reduces municipal splits across district lines. Judge Caine accepted this reasoning.

The judge noted that challengers essentially argued against combining rural and urban voters within single districts. However, Caine referenced previous instances of such combinations, including maps used from 2012-2020 that merged Kansas City’s downtown core with eastern rural areas.

“The decision of what municipalities to split is a political and policy determination that is properly left in the hands of the General Assembly and Missouri’s political processes,” Caine wrote.

Organizations representing the challenging voters condemned the ruling but haven’t announced appeal plans.

“If allowed to stand, it would represent a significant setback for fair representation in Missouri,” stated the American Civil Liberties Union and Campaign Legal Center jointly.

The Treasury Department announced Thursday that Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent will conduct trade discussions with China’s Vice Premier He Lifeng over the weekend in Paris, setting the stage for President Trump’s planned state visit to Beijing that begins March 31.

While Beijing has not yet publicly acknowledged these weekend negotiations between Bessent and He, they appear to serve as preliminary preparations for the state visit, which China also has not officially confirmed. The White House has indicated Trump plans to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping, with the visit widely viewed as an effort to maintain stability between the globe’s two biggest economies.

In a statement, Bessent said, “Thanks to the bonds of mutual respect between President Trump and President Xi, the trade and economic dialogue between the United States and China is moving forward. Under the guidance of President Trump, our team will continue to deliver results that put America’s farmers, workers, and businesses first.”

This will mark Trump’s first presidential trip to China since his 2017 visit during his initial term. The upcoming visit occurs five months following the leaders’ meeting in Busan, South Korea, where they established a one-year ceasefire in their trade dispute that had previously escalated tariffs to triple-digit levels before both nations stepped back.

Business leaders and policy experts plan to monitor the Bessent-He discussions closely for hints about potential deals when Trump and Xi convene in Beijing, particularly regarding whether China might increase purchases of American goods like soybeans and aircraft, and how both countries will address their trade deficit issues.

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi recently described the coming period as a “big year” for U.S.-China relations. Though he stopped short of confirming the state visit, Wang noted that “the agenda of high-level exchange is already on the table.”

Wang added, “What the two sides need to do now is to make thorough preparations accordingly, create a suitable environment, manage the risks that do exist and remove unnecessary disruptions.”

Bessent and He have been spearheading trade discussions between both nations since the previous year, conducting meetings across multiple cities including Geneva, London, Stockholm, Madrid and Kuala Lumpur.

WASHINGTON — As military action against Iran has driven fuel costs sharply higher, President Donald Trump has changed his messaging strategy, now portraying elevated oil prices as beneficial rather than focusing on keeping energy costs affordable for consumers.

This shift in approach occurs while Trump’s administration has yet to present a concrete strategy for reopening the vital Strait of Hormuz, leaving numerous oil and natural gas tankers unable to navigate the crucial waterway.

“The United States is the largest Oil Producer in the World, by far, so when oil prices go up, we make a lot of money,” Trump posted Thursday on his social media platform.

This represents a dramatic change from just one month ago during his State of the Union speech, when Trump celebrated gasoline prices at $2.30 per gallon. That figure has now climbed over 50% to reach a nationwide average of $3.60 per gallon, based on AAA data.

This reversal highlights how Trump’s domestic political calculations now conflict with his international military objectives. The timing creates challenges for his party with November’s midterm elections approaching. While Trump previously credited elevated gas prices with helping him unseat former President Joe Biden, he expressed no concern Saturday about current rising costs potentially affecting voter sentiment or forcing an early end to the conflict.

Financial firm Goldman Sachs warned Thursday that their projections indicate higher oil prices will drive up inflation, slow economic growth, and increase unemployment rates by year’s end.

Oil prices on international markets have fluctuated dramatically in response to Trump’s changing statements and as shipping companies avoid the Strait of Hormuz. Thursday saw global crude oil benchmark prices reach $100 per barrel.

“The swings in Brent crude oil prices over the past several days are eye-catching and odds are volatility will remain because of the absence of a timeline for when the conflict will deescalate and when the Strait of Hormuz, which is effectively closed, will see traffic begin to recover,” analysts at the consultancy Oxford Economics concluded on Wednesday.

Trump has delivered conflicting statements regarding his plans to resolve the shipping crisis. During Monday’s press conference, he assured that the Strait of Hormuz “is going to remain safe” despite being designated a danger zone, asserting that U.S. Navy presence and tanker insurance would maintain security.

However, by Tuesday, he warned on Truth Social that Iran would face “Military consequences” at “a level never seen before” if mines were placed in the strait, later emphasizing that American forces were destroying Iran’s mine-laying vessels.

Wednesday brought another confusing development when Energy Secretary Chris Wright briefly posted that the U.S. Navy had successfully escorted a tanker through the waterway, only to delete the inaccurate statement shortly afterward.

Following initial reluctance to utilize strategic oil reserves, Trump announced Wednesday that America would coordinate with other nations to release oil supplies aimed at reducing prices. The administration later specified it would draw down 172 million barrels. However, experts suggest this coordinated international release will likely stabilize rather than significantly lower oil prices.

“Such a move will slow rather than stop rising oil prices and offer a temporary salve to the searing burn of rising gasoline prices,” said Joe Brusuelas, chief U.S. economist at the consultancy RSM.

The administration also indicated it might suspend Jones Act requirements mandating U.S.-flagged vessels for domestic port-to-port shipping. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt described this temporary measure as ensuring “vital energy products and agricultural necessities are flowing freely to U.S. ports.”

Energy Secretary Wright appeared on television Thursday to acknowledge the conflict was creating “a significant disruption” in immediate gas prices, while attempting to highlight long-term advantages of neutralizing Iran’s threat to America and Middle Eastern allies.

Despite Trump’s Wednesday assertion that “the straits are in great shape” and his suggestion that oil companies should utilize them, Wright could not specify when the U.S. Navy might begin escorting tankers through the Strait of Hormuz, the bottleneck responsible for current price increases.

“It’ll happen relatively soon, but it can’t happen now,” Wright told CNBC. “We’re simply not ready. All of our military assets right now are focused on destroying Iran’s offensive capabilities.”

WASHINGTON — In a rare display of bipartisan cooperation, the U.S. Senate overwhelmingly approved comprehensive housing legislation Thursday, targeting the nation’s growing affordability crisis with an 89-10 vote.

The sweeping measure aims to cut regulatory red tape, place restrictions on corporate home purchases, and broaden the use of federal housing funds for affordable construction projects. The legislation now returns to the House of Representatives, which previously approved similar measures earlier this year.

Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren, who collaborated with Republican colleagues to secure broad cross-party support, emphasized the urgency of the nation’s housing shortage. “We have a housing shortage all across America,” Warren stated. “We need more housing of every kind. More housing for first-time home buyers, more housing for renters, more housing for seniors, more housing for people with disabilities, more rural housing, more urban housing, more, more, and more.”

Warren added that the legislation “will help drive down prices.”

Republican Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina, who chairs the Senate Banking Committee and spearheaded the effort alongside Warren, highlighted the historic nature of the achievement. Speaking before the vote, Scott said the Senate could “do what so many people failed to do in this legislative body for the last few decades, and that is pass consequential legislation that makes it easier to become a homeowner.”

However, the bill’s future remains uncertain despite the decisive Senate approval. Questions persist about whether the House will approve the legislation again and if President Donald Trump will ultimately sign it into law.

While Trump previously supported the measure throughout bipartisan negotiations, he recently complicated its progress by declaring he would not sign new legislation unless Congress first passes voter identification requirements and restrictions on mail-in voting. The Senate is expected to consider that separate bill next week, though it faces likely defeat due to unified Democratic opposition.

House leadership has also signaled reluctance to accept the Senate version as written, suggesting they may initiate formal conference negotiations between the chambers — a process that could extend for months.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune acknowledged Thursday that conference negotiations remain possible, “but obviously the quickest way to do this would be to pick up the Senate bill and pass it.” If the White House wants swift action, Thune noted, “they’ll probably have to make that argument to House leadership.”

The legislation would empower local governments with greater housing authority, enable banks to increase affordable housing investments, and remove caps on public housing units eligible for private Section 8 financing for property rehabilitation.

Peter Carroll from Cotality, a housing data tracking company, praised the local approach. “You’ve got many provisions in this bill that stop treating the U.S. like one single housing market and start giving local leaders the tools they need to fix their unique regional puzzle,” Carroll explained.

The measure seeks to simplify homebuilding by reducing regulatory hurdles that mandate environmental assessments and inspections. It also removes funding limits for emergency shelter beds and homeless outreach programs.

Recognizing the growing reliance on manufactured and modular housing for areas needing quick housing solutions, the bill eliminates requirements for permanent chassis construction, facilitating easier building and design processes.

Housing advocacy organizations acknowledge the bill’s limitations, wishing for more direct investment in housing construction and renter assistance programs.

Urban Institute researcher Yonah Freemark noted the inherent constraints of bipartisan compromise. “This legislation is the product of essentially senators and House members wanting to come up with something that could pass with both Democratic and Republican votes, which means it’s inherently less ambitious,” Freemark observed.

Among the bill’s most controversial elements is a provision restricting institutional investors from purchasing single-family homes — a key Trump administration priority.

The measure defines institutional investors as entities owning 350 or more single-family properties, directly or indirectly. Current investors wouldn’t need to sell existing properties purchased before the law’s enactment.

These investors could still purchase or construct single-family homes for rental purposes but would face mandatory sales to individual buyers after seven years, with required “price concessions” and 30-day “first-look” periods for current tenants.

The U.S. housing market has struggled since 2022, when mortgage rates began climbing from pandemic-era historic lows.

Previously owned home sales have hovered near 4 million annually since 2023 — significantly below the typical 5.2 million annual rate. Sales reached a 30-year low last year and continue declining, with January and February showing year-over-year decreases.

Dramatic price increases in recent years, combined with chronic housing shortages worsened by years of insufficient construction, have pushed many potential buyers out of the market.

While median monthly rent has declined for over two years, January rates remained 15.2% higher than early 2020 levels, according to Realtor.com data.

These trends have intensified pressure on lawmakers this year, with November midterm elections approaching, to demonstrate concrete action on homeownership and rental affordability challenges.

WASHINGTON – The White House disclosed Thursday that a recent FBI warning about potential Iranian drone strikes on California stemmed from a single unconfirmed tip, with officials emphasizing no genuine threat exists.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt revealed that the law enforcement bulletin, which became public Wednesday, originated from just one unverified email sent to California authorities last month.

The classified warning had been distributed through the Los Angeles Joint Regional Intelligence Center, alerting agencies about Tehran’s possible retaliatory plans. The bulletin emerged as ongoing military actions that started February 28 with extensive U.S. and Israeli strikes against Iran continue.

According to the FBI intelligence, Iran reportedly hoped to execute a surprise assault using drones launched from maritime vessels targeting California locations if America conducted military operations against Iranian territory, as of early February.

Taking to social media platform X Thursday, Leavitt clarified the warning’s origins, stating it came from a single email containing one unconfirmed tip sent to California law enforcement.

“TO BE CLEAR: No such threat from Iran to our homeland exists, and it never did,” Leavitt wrote.

ABC News initially reported on the FBI security alert.

President Donald Trump has dismissed concerns about Iranian-sponsored attacks within American borders. When reporters asked Wednesday whether he feared Iran might escalate retaliation to include strikes on U.S. territory, Trump responded, “No, I’m not.”

WASHINGTON — Senate Majority Leader John Thune announced Tuesday that lawmakers will vote on legislation requiring stringent citizenship verification for elections, while rejecting President Donald Trump’s call for an extended filibuster strategy to force passage.

The president has declared he won’t approve any other legislation until Congress passes the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act, commonly called the SAVE America Act. However, Democrats unanimously oppose the measure, leaving Republicans without the necessary votes unless they eliminate Senate filibuster rules.

Thune indicated his caucus lacks sufficient support for rule changes or implementing a marathon filibuster that would require Democrats to continuously occupy the Senate floor to block the legislation.

“That is just a function of math,” Thune explained to reporters Tuesday, delivering his most definitive remarks following weeks of Republican discussions. “For better or worse, I’m the one who has to be a clear-eyed realist about what we can achieve here.”

Instead of Trump’s preferred approach, Republican leadership plans to bring the bill up for a standard vote as early as next week, which will likely result in defeat. Thune stated Republicans will “have a fight on the floor” and compel Democrats to take a position on “whether they think noncitizens should vote in American elections.”

The president’s aggressive attempts to control Senate procedures have created challenges for Thune, who must balance appeasing Trump with managing increasingly frustrated conservative voters demanding action before midterm elections. However, most Republican senators appear to support Thune’s strategy.

“There’s been enough dithering,” stated Sen. John Kennedy of Louisiana. “It’s time to go and let the chips fall where they may.”

Trump has prioritized the SAVE America Act ahead of midterm elections, claiming Republicans need it to secure victories despite winning both the presidency and congressional control in 2024 without such legislation. Current federal law already mandates U.S. citizenship for national election participation.

“It’ll guarantee the midterms,” Trump told House Republicans Monday during their annual retreat at his Florida resort. “If you don’t get it, big trouble.”

However, Trump’s demands face Senate procedural realities, where minority Democrats can block legislation through filibuster, forcing Republicans to secure 60 votes while holding only 53 seats. Democrats consistently oppose the bill, arguing it would prevent approximately 20 million American citizens lacking readily available birth certificates or documentation from voting.

While Republicans could eliminate filibuster rules or attempt extended floor debates, Thune maintains insufficient GOP conference support exists for either option.

Even with adequate support, marathon filibuster tactics wouldn’t guarantee success. Proponents suggest Democrats would eventually exhaust themselves speaking or allow passage, but Democrats could introduce unlimited amendments on any topic, forcing Republicans into difficult election-year votes while further delaying proceedings.

“We can’t find a piece of legislation in history that’s been passed that way,” Thune remarked this week.

Utah Senator Mike Lee, who has championed the extended filibuster approach alongside Trump, posted on social media Tuesday that the “Senate should do everything it can in an effort to pass” the legislation.

“While passage isn’t guaranteed, we can be certain that failure will be the outcome if we don’t try,” Lee wrote.

Following Tuesday’s GOP conference meeting, multiple senators expressed readiness to proceed with the legislation despite inability to accommodate presidential procedural demands.

“I think we just go ahead and try to get on the bill,” said Sen. Roger Marshall of Kansas.

Wisconsin’s Ron Johnson suggested extended floor debate time, opposing a “one and done vote” approach.

“Our base would scream about that and that wouldn’t be smart,” Johnson explained.

Little anger toward Thune emerged, as many Republican colleagues agree that eliminating filibuster rules would be unwise and extended filibuster tactics risky. Republicans have historically opposed efforts to “nuke” the filibuster, arguing minority legislative rights require protection.

“There’s a right way to do it, there’s a wrong way to do it,” said North Carolina Republican Sen. Thom Tillis. “Nuking the filibuster doesn’t work. The talking filibuster would be a goat rodeo.”

Tillis praised Thune, saying he “has the toughest job in Washington, D.C. He’s doing just fine. And he, quite honestly, has taken on a lot for the members.”

Trump announced over the weekend his desire to expand the legislation, including mail-in ballot restrictions he has promoted since his 2020 election loss. He also wants two unrelated transgender rights provisions: banning biological males from women’s sports and blocking certain minor sex reassignment procedures.

“Let’s go for the gold,” Trump urged House Republicans.

House Speaker Mike Johnson stated Tuesday at the Florida retreat they are “looking at mechanisms” for additions, despite the House already passing and sending the bill to the Senate. However, mail-in ballot restrictions face uncertain House support given their popularity in numerous states.

Thune suggested the House would need to pass revised legislation incorporating these additions.

“It would probably make sense for them to send over another version,” he concluded.

Veteran South Carolina Congressman Jim Clyburn announced Thursday his intention to seek an 18th term in the House of Representatives, a decision that could establish him as a senior Democratic voice if his party reclaims control this November.

The 85-year-old lawmaker stands as the senior-most Democrat in South Carolina’s delegation and represents the sole remaining member of the previous Democratic leadership structure planning to continue serving. Both former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi from California and former Majority Leader Steny Hoyer from Maryland have announced their retirement plans.

Having previously held positions as majority whip and assistant Democratic leader, Clyburn’s continued presence in Congress could allow him to work alongside what may become the chamber’s first Black speaker, as New York Representative Hakeem Jeffries stands ready to assume leadership should Democrats regain the majority. Clyburn previously held the distinction of being the highest-ranking African American House member for many years.

When launching his campaign for a 16th term four years earlier, Clyburn shared with The Associated Press his commitment to continue serving as long as his health remained strong and his family supported his efforts.

“I’ve told them, if you ever see that I need to go to the rocking chair or spend my spare time on the golf course, let me know,” he explained regarding advice from his daughters. “And so far, they’re telling me, from what they feel and hear, I should keep going.”

Clyburn secured his 2024 reelection victory with a margin exceeding 20 percentage points. Since his initial election in 1992, he has represented a district spanning from Columbia’s surrounding areas through rural central and eastern counties extending to Charleston.

Completing an 18th term would make Clyburn the most enduring House representative in South Carolina’s history. The state’s Senate delegation has seen longer tenures, including Republican Strom Thurmond’s 48-year service and Democrat Fritz Hollings’ nearly 39-year career.

South Carolina’s election filing period begins Monday and concludes March 30, with primary elections scheduled for June 9.

WASHINGTON – Federal officials have launched legal action against California, challenging the state’s environmental vehicle regulations as violations of federal authority.

The Transportation Department filed the lawsuit Thursday in federal district court, targeting the California Air Resources Board over rules governing zero-emission vehicles and exhaust pollution standards. Officials argue these state-level regulations exceed California’s legal authority and conflict with federal oversight.

The legal challenge focuses on environmental vehicle standards that continue to operate despite President Trump’s recent action to cancel California’s Advanced Clean Cars II program, which aimed to eliminate gas-powered vehicle sales by 2035. While that specific initiative was blocked through federal legislation, California’s existing emission requirements remain active.

The federal lawsuit seeks to invalidate these remaining state regulations, setting up a potential court battle over environmental policy and states’ rights to set their own vehicle emission standards.

Former President Donald Trump announced his support Tuesday for Ed Gallrein, a former Navy SEAL, in the race for Kentucky’s 4th Congressional District currently represented by Thomas Massie.

Trump revealed his backing of Gallrein through a social media post on Tuesday, targeting the seat currently occupied by one of his sharpest Republican detractors in the House.

The relationship between Trump and Massie has deteriorated over recent months, with the Kentucky representative consistently demanding transparency regarding documents connected to the Jeffrey Epstein investigation. Massie has also been vocal in his disapproval of how the Trump administration addressed Epstein-related matters.

In his Tuesday endorsement announcement, Trump continued his pattern of public criticism directed at Massie, reinforcing the ongoing tension between the former president and the Kentucky congressman.

WASHINGTON – Federal lawmakers are on the verge of approving comprehensive legislation Thursday that aims to increase affordable housing development across the United States, providing politicians with a key talking point as they seek re-election while addressing rising living expenses.

The bipartisan measure has been championed by an unlikely duo: conservative Republican Tim Scott of South Carolina, who chairs the Senate Banking Committee, and progressive Democrat Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, the committee’s ranking member. Should the Senate approve the bill as anticipated, it will move to the House of Representatives for consideration.

Wednesday evening saw senators vote by a wide margin to move the legislation forward for final passage. The collaborative effort stood out in sharp contrast to the day’s heated partisan battles over border security issues and ongoing military actions in Iran that lack congressional authorization.

New Jersey Democratic Representative Andy Kim addressed the Senate Wednesday, stating the legislation “will take meaningful steps to lower the first-time home buyer age significantly by allowing for the construction of substantially more homes at more affordable prices.”

The proposed law would establish various government incentives targeting housing and financial sectors to address an estimated shortage of 4 million homes caused by multiple contributing factors.

These challenges include elevated mortgage rates, home values that have climbed 60% since 2019 according to certain analyses, building material supply issues stemming from the coronavirus pandemic, and ongoing repercussions from the 2008 housing market collapse.

The legislation would streamline or eliminate environmental assessments for building projects while increasing available funding through federal block grants distributed to states.

Additionally, the measure would increase loan caps for government-backed mortgages on multi-unit residential properties.

In a provision drawing criticism, the bill would restrict institutional investors to purchasing no more than 350 single-family homes and mandate they sell newly constructed rental properties within seven years of acquisition. This aims to prevent investment firms from outbidding individual homebuyers.

Several industry organizations voiced opposition to these restrictions this week, contending they might reduce the overall supply of available housing units.

Idaho’s House of Representatives has approved a measure asking the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse its landmark 2015 ruling that made same-sex marriage legal across the nation.

The legislative resolution argues that the Supreme Court’s marriage equality decision “is at odds with the Constitution and the principles upon which the United States is established.” The measure also emphasizes that matrimonial law has historically fallen under state jurisdiction rather than federal oversight.

The resolution now moves to the Idaho Senate, where lawmakers will decide whether to advance the measure.

Democratic legislators in New Hampshire have voted down two anti-abortion measures during their recent session. The first proposal sought to prohibit abortions beyond the 20-week mark of pregnancy, while the second aimed to provide legal protections for pregnancy resource centers that oppose abortion services.

Political observers indicate that while these legislative proposals could potentially resurface in future sessions, their chances of success remain slim. Even if such measures were to gain legislative approval, they would likely encounter a gubernatorial veto from Governor Kelly Ayotte, a Republican who maintains pro-choice positions on reproductive rights.

The outcome reflects New Hampshire’s political landscape, where the state leans predominantly liberal and lawmakers from both major political parties generally support maintaining access to abortion services.

Federal officials have silently brought back a program that had been inactive for decades, one designed to return firearm privileges to individuals with felony convictions. The Justice Department’s revival of this initiative is now drawing scrutiny over how transparent the process has been.

At least one individual whose name appears on the restoration list has prompted particular concerns about whether the public has adequate visibility into how these decisions are being made and who qualifies for renewed gun ownership rights.

President Trump called on lawmakers during his State of the Union speech to prevent states from issuing commercial driver’s licenses to undocumented immigrants, despite federal regulations already prohibiting this practice.

The administration and supporters argue this measure would enhance highway safety across the country. However, opponents point out that the Department of Transportation has not provided evidence showing that immigrant drivers pose greater risks on the road compared to other motorists.

RICHMOND, Va. — Virginia may soon see another member of the McAuliffe family in elected office.

Dorothy McAuliffe, who served as Virginia’s first lady and previously worked as a State Department official, announced Wednesday her intention to seek a congressional seat in a recently created district. The wife of former Democratic Governor Terry McAuliffe brings significant name recognition to the race.

“We need a leader who has a record of delivering and can finally bring down costs for families, who will increase access to affordable healthcare, and who will never back down from holding Donald Trump and ICE accountable,” McAuliffe stated in her announcement.

Virginia residents will vote on a constitutional amendment April 21 that would establish new congressional boundaries throughout the state.

Should voters approve the redistricting proposal, McAuliffe plans to seek election in the expansive 7th District, covering territory from Arlington County all the way to western Augusta County. The majority of constituents in this district would reside in the Washington, D.C. suburbs, and political analysts consider it one of four newly created seats likely to elect Democrats.

“I look forward to traveling this district — from Arlington to Augusta and Prince William to Powhatan — and sharing that vision for this community that I’ve long called home,” she stated.

A practicing lawyer and mother to five children, McAuliffe held the role of Virginia’s first lady between 2014 and 2018. During her tenure, she championed programs focused on children’s nutrition and worked to address Virginia’s backlog of unprocessed sexual assault evidence kits.

The former first lady considered challenging then-Republican Representative Barbara Comstock in 2017 but ultimately decided against entering that race. Most recently, she accepted a position in 2022 as the State Department’s special representative for global partnerships under the Biden administration.

McAuliffe faces stiff competition in what promises to be a contested Democratic primary. Virginia Delegate Dan Helmer, serving his fourth term, and former federal prosecutor J.P. Cooney both launched their campaigns last month. Cooney previously worked under special counsel Jack Smith and was dismissed from his position during the Trump presidency. Additionally, State Delegate Elizabeth Guzman, who made history as the first Latina immigrant elected to Virginia’s General Assembly, has indicated she may also enter the race.

All potential candidates, including McAuliffe, would need to reassess their campaign strategies should Virginia’s Supreme Court reject the redistricting plan or if voters defeat the constitutional amendment.

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump continues to declare victory in his military campaign against Iran, but his administration has provided conflicting messages about how and when the 12-day conflict might conclude.

Global financial markets remain unstable and Trump’s approval ratings have declined since he initiated the military action against Iran. The president has alternated between demanding Iran’s complete capitulation and suggesting he might accept a scenario where one hardline Iranian leader simply replaces another.

The inconsistent messaging from Trump and his senior officials has heightened uncertainty surrounding the nearly two-week-old military engagement, which has affected virtually every region of the Middle East while creating economic instability worldwide. With both nations refusing to back down, the conflict’s trajectory remains uncertain with no clear resolution in sight.

On Tuesday, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth informed journalists that Trump will determine “whether it’s the beginning, the middle or the end” of the military action. During a Monday address to House Republicans, Trump described the conflict as both a “short-term excursion” that might conclude quickly while also declaring “we haven’t won enough.”

These contradictory statements have drawn sharp criticism from lawmakers who argue the president lacks defined objectives. “They didn’t have a plan,” Arizona Democratic Senator Mark Kelly stated to reporters. “They have no timeline. And because of that, they have no exit strategy.”

Following his decision to begin bombing Iran, Trump has repeatedly modified his timelines and objectives for the military campaign, creating more confusion than clarity through his shifting rhetoric.

In recent days, the president has demanded Iran’s leadership accept “unconditional surrender” while simultaneously claiming he has already accomplished his goal of destroying Iran’s military capabilities.

Trump’s administration has attempted to reassure concerned Americans that this will not become a prolonged engagement, even as the president maintains that deploying ground forces remains a possibility.

Military officials report significant damage to Iran’s naval forces and substantial progress in neutralizing the country’s missile and drone capabilities used against regional neighbors. However, the strategically important Strait of Hormuz, which typically handles about 20% of global oil shipments daily, remains blocked for commercial traffic, and Iranian leadership shows no signs of yielding.

Iran’s Revolutionary Guard has pledged to prevent “a single liter of oil” from passing through the crucial waterway until America ends its bombing operations. Ali Larijani, Iran’s senior national security official, responded defiantly on Tuesday after Trump threatened to strike Iran “TWENTY TIMES HARDER” if Tehran continues blocking oil shipments through the strait.

“The sacrificial nation of Iran doesn’t fear your empty threats,” Larijani posted on X. “Even those bigger than you couldn’t eliminate Iran. Be careful not to get eliminated yourself.”

Trump has found it challenging to justify to Americans why preventive military action against Iran was essential and how it aligns with his campaign promise to avoid the “forever wars” of recent decades that he has criticized for their financial and human costs. So far, eight American service members have died and approximately 140 have been wounded in Iranian counterattacks across the region.

Among Trump’s various justifications for initiating the war, he has stated he had a “feeling” that Iran was preparing to attack the United States.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt modified this explanation, telling reporters the president’s “feeling” was “based on fact.”

Despite this claim, Pentagon officials have privately informed congressional staff that U.S. intelligence agencies have no evidence suggesting Iran was planning a preemptive strike against America.

Recent surveys indicate Trump’s decision to attack Iran has not generated the typical surge of public support that usually accompanies the start of American military conflicts.

Approximately half of respondents in Quinnipiac and Fox News surveys said U.S. military operations in Iran make America “less safe,” while only about 30% in each poll believed it improved national security. A CNN survey found roughly half of American adults think the military action makes Iran “more of a threat” to the U.S., while only about 30% believed it would reduce the danger.

The CNN poll also revealed that about 60% of American adults trust Trump “not much” or “not at all” to make appropriate decisions regarding U.S. military force in Iran.

European partners are proceeding cautiously after British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Spain’s Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez experienced Trump’s anger for what he considered insufficient support for his military campaign.

Even German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who has generally supported the U.S.-Israeli operations against Iran, expressed concern on Tuesday that “more questions arise with every day of war.”

“Above all, we’re concerned that there is apparently no joint plan for how this war can be brought quickly to a convincing end,” Merz stated.

Merz emphasized that “Germany and Europe have no interest in an endless war” or in seeing Iran’s territorial unity collapse.

Trump has avoided taking responsibility for the bombing of a girls’ school in southern Iran during the conflict’s first day, an attack that resulted in at least 165 deaths.

On Saturday, Trump blamed Iran for the incident, claiming its security forces have “very inaccurate” weapons.

After the investigative organization Bellingcat published verified footage on Monday showing a U.S. Tomahawk cruise missile striking a Revolutionary Guard compound near the school and causing the explosion, Trump maintained it might still be Iran’s responsibility but said he would accept the findings of an ongoing U.S. investigation.

The president incorrectly stated that Tehran possesses Tomahawk missiles, a U.S.-manufactured weapons system available only to America and select close allies.

When questioned by a reporter, Leavitt avoided directly addressing why Trump made the false claim about Iran having access to the American-made missiles.

She responded partly that “the president has a right to share his opinions with the American public” while noting “he has said he’ll accept the conclusion of that investigation.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York told reporters that Trump’s assertion “is beyond asinine.”

“Again, he says whatever pops into his head no matter what the truth is,” Schumer stated. “And we all know he lies, but on something as formidable as this, it’s appalling.”

Senator Kevin Cramer, a North Dakota Republican, was among Trump supporters who gently urged the administration to clarify what occurred at the school.

Cramer said the military must “do everything you can to eliminate those mistakes going forward.”

“But you also can’t undo it,” he added.

RICHMOND, Va. — After almost twenty years of tax incentives that transformed Virginia into the world’s largest data center hub, state senators are moving to eliminate breaks worth $1.6 billion per year to the tech industry.

The Senate proposal would force data center companies to start paying at least 5.3% in sales taxes on their equipment and software purchases. Industry representatives warn this change could bring new construction to a complete stop.

“We have now left the ‘NIMBY’ phase: Not In My Backyard,” Republican state Sen. Mark Obenshain said last month. “And we’ve entered the ‘banana’ phase: Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything.”

Virginia’s rise as a data center powerhouse began eighteen years ago when the state offered tax breaks to attract tech companies. The strategy worked beyond expectations, with the industry investing over $80 billion and generating thousands of jobs in just the past two years, according to state tax officials.

The push to end these incentives reflects nationwide concerns about data centers’ massive power consumption and impact on local communities. These facilities now rival small cities in their electricity needs, straining power grids as artificial intelligence drives demand even higher.

The Data Center Coalition, representing major tech companies, claims the proposed tax would “effectively halt investment” in Virginia. However, development continues, with Amazon Data Services purchasing land from George Washington University this month for another northern Virginia facility.

The Senate’s bipartisan vote — 21 Democrats and seven Republicans supporting the measure — has created friction within the Democratic Party as budget negotiations intensify before Saturday’s deadline.

Gov. Abigail Spanberger’s office expressed concern about “going back on Virginia’s commitments to businesses that have invested in the Commonwealth.”

Democratic Sen. L. Louise Lucas, who leads the finance committee and backs the tax change, responded on X: “Gov. Spanberger thinks our chicken isn’t cooked — then what is the Senate supposed to pluck out of our budget? Raises for teachers, health insurance assistance, transit support, a tax rebate, or childcare slots?”

The debate comes as data centers have evolved into sprawling complexes of server warehouses, electrical substations, and backup generators that dwarf traditional factories and stadiums. Many require more electricity than utilities have ever provided to a single customer.

House Democrats oppose eliminating the tax breaks, setting up a confrontation with senators as lawmakers race to finalize the state budget.

Republican Sen. Richard Stuart believes removing the incentives won’t slow Virginia’s data center boom: “This ain’t going to slow this train down one iota.”

Virginia isn’t alone in reconsidering data center tax policy. Minnesota eliminated sales tax exemptions on electricity for the largest facilities last year while adding usage fees and stricter regulations including water use oversight.

Washington state legislators are advancing a bill to maintain tax breaks for new data centers while ending them for existing facilities upgrading equipment — a change worth $83 million in the first year.

Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker called for a two-year “pause” on data center incentives last month, citing rising residential electric bills. Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs wants to completely eliminate her state’s sales tax exemption, calling it a “corporate handout.”

Similar repeal bills have been introduced this year in Arizona, Michigan, and Georgia, though tech companies continue aggressive lobbying efforts in state capitals.

Georgia passed legislation for a two-year pause on data center tax exemptions, but Gov. Brian Kemp vetoed the measure in 2024.

Virginia senators still face organized opposition. The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers has lobbied lawmakers to preserve the data center industry.

“We need this industry,” said Dorian Hargrave, a Virginia-based electrical worker, in a statement. “If we lose it, our economy is going to take a very big hit.”

Federal officials have resumed the Global Entry service on Wednesday following a suspension that lasted more than two weeks due to the partial government shutdown.

The expedited entry service enables pre-screened travelers who pay a fee to bypass regular immigration lines by using automated kiosks when returning to the United States from international destinations, significantly reducing wait times at airports and border crossings.

When announcing the suspension on February 22, Department of Homeland Security leadership indicated the program would remain closed throughout the duration of the partial shutdown.

The agency redirected U.S. Customs and Border Protection personnel who normally operated the Global Entry service to handle standard passenger processing duties.

Extended security queues at several major U.S. airports over the recent weekend sparked worries about potential disruptions during the upcoming busy spring travel period.

The government shutdown commenced on February 14 following failed negotiations between Democratic lawmakers and the White House over funding legislation for the Department of Homeland Security. The disagreement centers on Democratic demands for modifications to immigration enforcement policies that form a key component of President Donald Trump’s deportation initiatives.

The recent disruptions have renewed discussions about preventing airport security slowdowns during future political standoffs, with proposals including expanded privatization of security screening operations under continued TSA supervision.

Following the cessation of penny manufacturing several months ago, state governments nationwide are establishing regulations for how cash transactions should be handled when exact change isn’t possible.

Former President Donald Trump declared an end to penny manufacturing last year, citing the wasteful expense of producing coins that cost 3.7 cents each to manufacture, according to U.S. Mint data from 2024. This decision created penny shortages at retail locations during the summer months, compelling both merchants and customers to adapt to transactions without the ability to make precise change.

The Treasury Department has indicated it will keep the approximately 114 billion existing pennies in circulation for as long as feasible, and businesses must continue accepting pennies as valid payment.

The primary approach being considered involves rounding cash payments to the nearest five-cent increment through a method known as symmetrical rounding. Under this system, final prices ending in one, two, six, or seven cents would round downward for cash payments. For instance, totals of $1.91 or $1.92 would become $1.90. Conversely, prices concluding with three, four, eight, or nine cents would round upward, meaning $1.98 or $1.99 purchases would cost $2 in cash.

Congressional legislation introduced previously and approved by the House financial services committee would implement symmetrical rounding nationwide. Representative Lisa McClain, a Michigan Republican, stated via email that federal legislation is necessary to avoid creating a “confusing patchwork of state policies.”

The legislation remains pending a full House vote and would require Senate approval before reaching Trump’s desk.

Meanwhile, six states—Arizona, Florida, Oregon, Tennessee, Virginia, and Washington—have enacted bills addressing cash transactions without pennies, awaiting gubernatorial approval. State approaches vary between permitting businesses to round purchases versus mandating the practice.

Indiana’s Republican Governor Mike Braun signed legislation this month requiring businesses to round all cash transactions not ending in zero or five. However, lawmakers created a second bill making rounding voluntary, which would become effective Sunday pending Braun’s signature.

Both Indiana measures allow businesses to choose their rounding method: consistently rounding up to the nearest nickel, always rounding down, or using the symmetrical approach.

Tennessee’s Republican-controlled legislature passed measures exempting symmetrical rounding from state consumer protection lawsuits without requiring the practice.

“It is to provide safe harbor for private businesses,” explained Republican Representative Charlie Baum, the Tennessee bill’s sponsor, during legislative debate.

An Associated Press review using Plural bill-tracking services found approximately two dozen states have introduced rounding legislation since late last year.

Beyond legislative action, various state agencies have issued guidance recommending rounding occur after tax calculations, ensuring full taxed amounts reach state coffers.

While electronic payments have reduced cash usage, Federal Reserve survey data from 2024 shows roughly 80% of American adults recently used cash, with higher usage among seniors and lower-income households.

The Treasury Department has stated online that prices would be “rounded down just as often as they will be rounded up, so there should be no overall effect on consumer prices.”

However, Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond researchers analyzed 2023 survey data revealing prices not ending in zero or five frequently concluded with eight or nine. Though payment amounts vary based on multiple item purchases and tax rates, the prevalence of upward rounding could collectively transfer millions from consumers to businesses, though individual losses would amount to mere pennies per person.

Social media posts from Americans experiencing rounding have expressed feelings of being cheated, even over small amounts.

Nikki Capozzo-Hennessy, a 50-year-old Trumbull, Connecticut resident, prefers cash payments to monitor her spending habits. She shared her grocery receipt online after noticing a rounding adjustment on her $8.73 after-tax purchase, where the store rounded down, giving her three cents back.

Capozzo-Hennessy acknowledged potential frustration from consistently paying extra pennies but recognizes the practicality of uniform rules. As a food truck operator, she anticipates using symmetrical rounding for consistency.

“At the end of the day it’s three cents, but I can imagine with all the purchases that you make, it can add up,” Capozzo-Hennessy noted.

Washington State Representative April Berg, who sponsored rounding legislation there, understands consumer frustration over losing pennies but emphasizes that eliminating the physical currency leaves few alternatives.

“We did make sure that everyone is allowed to pay exactly what they owe,” Berg said regarding her legislation.

The Treasury estimates ending penny production will generate $56 million in annual savings, though rounding may increase nickel demand. Five-cent coins are also expensive to produce, costing nearly 14 cents each in 2024, according to Mint data.

Current federal legislation includes potential cost-reduction measures, permitting the Treasury to modify coin composition using less expensive zinc and nickel rather than copper and nickel.

SALT LAKE CITY — Utah has maintained one of America’s strictest anti-gambling stances for over 100 years, with no casinos, lotteries, or betting tracks allowed within state boundaries. This prohibition stems from the conservative values of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which considers gambling a harmful vice that promotes selfishness and addiction.

Now the state faces a modern challenge as it prepares to pass legislation targeting prediction market platforms such as Kalshi and Polymarket. These smartphone-based services enable users to place wagers on everything from weather patterns in Los Angeles to potential military conflicts involving the United States.

While federal regulators and other states continue debating whether these platforms represent financial instruments or gambling operations, Utah officials have reached a definitive conclusion.

“We are putting a casino in the pocket of every single American, and they are targeting especially young people,” Governor Spencer Cox stated. “It is really awful what they are doing, and we are going to make sure this doesn’t happen in our state.”

Cox has committed to signing the proposed legislation, creating tension between conservative Utah and federal authorities. Kalshi has already filed a lawsuit against the state, with support from the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the federal body overseeing financial market regulation.

This dispute places Utah, typically not known for confrontational stances, at the center of a nationwide cultural, political, and economic debate. On one side stands a state heavily shaped by Mormon church influence, where both elected officials and religious leaders treat this matter as a moral campaign. Opposing them is an expanding industry — both Kalshi and Polymarket carry estimated valuations of $20 billion following recent funding rounds — with Washington connections that may provide regulatory protection.

Donald Trump’s oldest son serves as an advisor to both companies and has invested in Polymarket. Additionally, Trump’s Truth Social platform is developing its own cryptocurrency-based prediction market called Truth Predict.

The outcome of this legal battle could influence how other states approach similar issues going forward.

“What’s at stake here is whether states will be able to regulate gambling or if gambling is going to be subsumed into finance and ultimately regulated by Congress,” explained Todd Phillips, a Georgia State University professor who has extensively studied prediction market regulation.

Both Polymarket and Kalshi operate by allowing users to purchase and sell contracts based on event probabilities. Contract prices typically range from one cent to 99 cents, roughly corresponding to the percentage of users who believe a particular outcome will occur.

These companies maintain their products help customers manage risk, similar to how farmers purchase corn futures to secure crop prices in advance. Traditional derivative markets like the Chicago Board of Trade and Chicago Mercantile Exchange have long provided binary options to investors, essentially betting on whether events will or will not happen.

However, unlike established derivative markets, most of Kalshi’s trading activity and approximately half of Polymarket’s now involves sports betting. Kalshi reported more than $1 billion in trading volume for the Super Bowl alone.

Utah’s strategy focuses on limiting prediction markets’ state operations by restricting proposition betting in sports, a potentially significant revenue source for these platforms.

The legislation Cox plans to approve would extend the state’s gambling prohibition to include wagers on specific in-game events rather than overall game results. Examples of these “prop bets” include individual player performance or teams reaching particular statistical benchmarks like rebounds.

The bill also targets sportsbook companies such as FanDuel and DraftKings that have established their own prediction markets, which analysts suggest could help these companies circumvent state gambling restrictions.

Due to vocal opposition from Utah officials, Kalshi filed a preemptive lawsuit in late February, requesting judicial intervention to prevent Utah from enforcing gambling restrictions on their platform. A federal judge has not yet ruled on Kalshi’s petition. Other judges in Nevada and Massachusetts have issued preliminary rulings supporting states seeking to ban Kalshi and Polymarket sports betting, while judges in New Jersey and Tennessee have ruled in Kalshi’s favor.

Kalshi maintains its product differs from sportsbooks or casinos because customers bet against each other rather than against the “house,” according to spokesperson Elisabeth Diana.

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission under Trump has supported Kalshi’s position, claiming exclusive regulatory authority over prediction markets. The agency contends states cannot prohibit these products from operating within their borders based solely on moral objections.

“To those who seek to challenge our authority in this space, let me be clear, we will see you in court,” chairman Michael Selig recently declared in a social media video.

This represents the first significant issue where Cox has opposed Trump since the Republican governor rebuilt his relationship with Trump over the past year and a half, after not supporting him in 2016 and 2020.

Patrick Mason, who chairs Mormon history and culture studies at Utah State University, expressed no surprise at Cox and other Utah Republicans taking this position against prediction markets, even when it means opposing their party’s Washington leadership. In Utah, where approximately half of the 3.5 million residents are Latter-day Saints, even church bingo games are uncommon.

“Maybe they play for M&Ms, but never money,” he noted.

All major state politicians, including the governor, lieutenant governor, and entire congressional delegation, belong to the Salt Lake City-headquartered church. When they perceive an issue as moral rather than political, religious teachings often override party loyalty, Mason explained.

Church doctrine forbids all forms of gambling, describing it as driven by “a desire to get something for nothing” and harmful to individuals and families.

“The idea that it goes against a sense of work ethic, a kind of fair exchange, has always been at the heart of the way a lot of people think about themselves in terms of Utah identity, and certainly Latter-day Saint identity and ethics,” Mason said.

Utah’s religious foundation led to gambling prohibition since statehood in 1895. Along with Hawaii, it maintains the nation’s most restrictive gambling laws, even excluding broad multi-state lotteries like Powerball or Mega Millions.

Phillips, the regulation-focused professor, indicated that without Congressional clarification on prediction market legality, courts will determine the outcome.

“The line between gambling and finance is very, very fine,” Phillips observed. “There’s a reason why Congress has, over and over again, stepped in to define and regulate financial markets when the products skew too close to gambling.”

Congressional movement has already begun, partially led by another Utah Republican.

Republican Representative Blake Moore of Utah and Democratic Representative Salud Carbajal of California introduced bipartisan legislation this week for stricter prediction market regulation. The bill would prohibit prediction markets from accepting bets on warfare, assassinations, terrorist attacks, or election results, while allowing states to ban sports-related betting.

“We, as a society, should not be taking bets on whether we are going to invade Cuba,” Moore stated.

Democratic senators have also announced plans to introduce legislation banning violence-related wagers.

“It’s insane this is legal,” Connecticut Senator Chris Murphy wrote on social media.

In court documents, Kalshi has attempted to demonstrate its sports prediction market’s economic value and utility. The company cites an example of insurance companies underwriting college athlete careers using prediction markets for risk hedging. Kalshi also suggests hotels, travel agencies, and stadium management companies might use prediction markets to hedge risks against underperforming sports.

Moore remains unconvinced by Kalshi and Polymarket’s economic arguments.

“Utah’s economic outlook has been strong for many years,” he said. “I see no need why we need to embrace these as an economic tool.”