Category: Politics

Democratic leaders have selected Virginia Governor Abigail Spanberger to present their party’s official response following President Donald Trump’s State of the Union speech scheduled for next Tuesday evening.

Spanberger’s selection comes just months after she made history by becoming Virginia’s first woman to hold the governor’s office, defeating her Republican opponent by a significant double-digit margin in the recent election.

The Democratic counter-speech will air immediately after Trump concludes his remarks to Congress, providing the opposition party with their most prominent platform to present an alternative vision to the nation.

Before assuming the governor’s mansion, Spanberger represented Virginia in the U.S. House of Representatives for six years. Her successful gubernatorial campaign focused heavily on making life more affordable for working families and reducing everyday expenses.

Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer praised the selection in a prepared statement, saying Spanberger “will lay out a clear path forward: lower everyday costs, protect healthcare, and defend the freedoms that define who we are as a nation.”

House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries announced the choice, describing Spanberger as someone who “embodies the best of America as a mother, community leader and dedicated public servant.”

During her campaign, Spanberger frequently criticized the administration’s efforts to reduce the federal workforce, a message that resonated strongly in Virginia due to its large population of government employees.

At her swearing-in ceremony, she addressed federal workers directly, stating: “Those who have devoted their lives to public service, you are worried about an administration that is gilding buildings while schools crumble, breaking the social safety net and sowing fear across our communities. Betraying the values of who we are as Americans.”

Virginia’s substantial federal employee base was severely impacted by last year’s historic government shutdown, which left thousands of workers without paychecks for several weeks.

Currently, another partial government shutdown is underway as congressional Democrats and the White House remain deadlocked over Department of Homeland Security funding. The shutdown, which started Saturday, appears likely to continue through Tuesday’s presidential address with no resolution in sight.

Spanberger brings unique credentials to the role, having previously worked as a CIA case officer before entering politics. She has built her political brand around her national security background and public service experience.

The governor also emphasizes her role as a mother whose daughters attended Virginia’s public schools and her reputation as a former House member who frequently collaborated across party lines.

Since taking office, Spanberger has indicated willingness to cooperate with the president on areas of mutual agreement while also delivering sharper criticism of White House policies.

WASHINGTON — The Justice Department building in the nation’s capital now displays a prominent banner showing President Donald Trump’s image on its exterior, installed Thursday as a visible representation of the administration’s influence over the federal law enforcement agency.

Though similar banners have appeared on other federal buildings throughout Washington, placing one on the Justice Department represents a notable break from the agency’s historical practice of maintaining separation from direct White House influence.

Positioned between two building columns, the banner displays the message “Make America Safe Again,” reflecting the administration’s emphasis on combating illegal immigration and reducing violent crime.

Current Attorney General Pam Bondi has positioned herself as a strong ally of the president, departing from previous attorneys general who maintained greater distance from the White House to preserve the neutrality of legal proceedings and investigations.

Administration officials have pushed back against claims of politicizing the Justice Department, arguing instead that the previous Biden administration compromised law enforcement integrity through two federal criminal prosecutions of Trump that were ultimately dropped following his 2024 electoral victory.

The Justice Department has not yet provided a response regarding Thursday’s banner installation.

Under the current administration, the Justice Department has launched investigations targeting several individuals the president has criticized, raising questions about potential political motivations behind enforcement actions.

Federal prosecutors have filed charges against New York Attorney General Letitia James and former FBI Director James Comey, though these cases were subsequently dropped. Separately, efforts were made to pursue indictments against Democratic Congress members related to a video encouraging military personnel to resist “illegal orders.”

Additional ongoing investigations include examining Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell’s congressional testimony and reviewing whether Minnesota Democratic officials interfered with federal immigration enforcement through their public statements.

Federal housing officials announced Thursday a new regulation that would restrict public housing assistance primarily to U.S. citizens, a move that housing advocates warn could displace tens of thousands of residents across the country.

The regulation, which appeared in the Federal Register, would restrict funding for public housing and other federal housing programs to citizens and qualified noncitizens. Under the new requirements, all residents living in federally-funded housing must provide documentation proving their citizenship or qualified status, including seniors over 62 who previously only needed to verify their age.

The policy would essentially prevent families with mixed immigration status — households where some members qualify for assistance while others do not — from receiving housing aid, representing part of the administration’s broader immigration enforcement efforts. A comparable regulation was introduced but never completed during Trump’s previous term and appears as a key objective in the conservative policy framework Project 2025.

“Under President Trump’s leadership, the days of illegal aliens, ineligibles, and fraudsters gaming the system and riding the coattails of American taxpayers are over,” HUD Secretary Scott Turner said in a statement. “HUD’s proposed rule will guarantee that all residents in HUD-funded housing are eligible tenants. We have zero tolerance for pushing aside hardworking U.S. citizens while enabling others to exploit decades-old loopholes.”

The regulation becomes official when published in the Federal Register on Friday. HUD officials have not specified a timeline for implementation.

Housing rights organizations immediately condemned the proposal.

“Our country can ensure that every one of us, no matter where we come from or what language we speak, has a safe home,” Shamus Roller, the executive director of the National Housing Law Project said in a statement. “Instead, Trump is trying to evict immigrant families, citizen and non-citizen, from HUD housing.

Research from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities in December projected that as many as 20,000 families or up to 80,000 individuals could lose housing assistance under eligibility changes that would reverse policies in place for decades.

The regulation’s effects could extend beyond those without proper documentation. Approximately 3.8 million U.S. citizens lack documentation proving their citizenship, while another 17.5 million face difficulties obtaining such paperwork.

“Everyone deserves an affordable home, including our neighbors, friends, and coworkers who are immigrants,” said Sonya Acosta, a senior policy analyst with the Center. “This rule would force 20,000 families with mixed immigration statuses to make the agonizing choice between losing the assistance that helps them pay rent every month or separating their family. People without a documented immigration status have never been eligible for rental assistance.”

A California federal judge delivered a harsh rebuke of the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement practices in a strongly-worded court ruling issued Wednesday evening.

U.S. District Judge Sunshine Sykes, based in Riverside, California, directed the Department of Homeland Security to inform detained immigrants nationwide about her previous rulings that may make them eligible for bond release hearings.

“The threats posed by the executive branch cannot be viewed in isolation,” Sykes stated in her Wednesday decision.

The controversy stems from policy changes made under Trump’s presidency. While previous administrations typically allowed immigrants without criminal backgrounds to request bond hearings before immigration judges during their court proceedings, the Trump White House implemented a policy requiring mandatory detention for most cases.

Judge Sykes, appointed by Democratic President Joe Biden, had previously ruled in November and December that this policy change was unlawful and applied her decision across the nation. Despite these rulings, the current Republican administration has persisted in denying bond hearings, leading to a flood of legal challenges.

Federal court data reviewed by the Associated Press shows more than 20,000 habeas corpus petitions have been filed since Trump took office, as individual immigrants seek their release through separate federal court cases.

The Department of Homeland Security did not respond to requests for comment on Thursday.

In her Wednesday ruling, Sykes criticized the administration for ignoring her previous decisions, stating they had “wasted valuable time and resources” while denying immigrants their “liberty, economic stability, and fundamental dignity.”

The judge also challenged assertions that the immigration crackdown primarily targets dangerous criminals, noting that most arrested individuals don’t match that profile.

“Americans have expressed deep concerns over unlawful, wanton acts by the executive branch,” Sykes wrote. “Beyond its terror against noncitizens, the executive branch has extended its violence on its own citizens, killing two American citizens— Renée Good and Alex Pretti in Minnesota.”

Federal broadcasting regulators are examining whether ABC’s daytime talk program ‘The View’ broke rules requiring equal airtime for political candidates, the agency’s top official confirmed this week.

FCC Chairman Brendan Carr told reporters Wednesday that his agency has launched an enforcement probe into the show. “The FCC has an enforcement action underway on that,” Carr stated following an agency meeting. “And we’re taking a look at it.”

The investigation centers on appearances by Texas Senate candidates James Talarico, a Democrat, and U.S. Representative Jasmine Crockett, who are competing for their party’s nomination. Talarico appeared on the program February 2nd, while Crockett has also been featured on the show.

The current administration has intensified scrutiny of television talk programs, with federal regulators suggesting some may be “motivated by partisan purposes.” This week, late-night comedian Stephen Colbert revealed that CBS network executives canceled a planned appearance by Talarico on his program due to concerns about equal time violations.

Broadcasting officials issued fresh guidelines in January warning late-night and daytime television hosts they must provide balanced airtime to political candidates. While certain programs are exempt from these requirements – including news broadcasts, legitimate interview shows, and live event coverage – regulators are questioning whether talk shows should maintain their exemption.

“The FCC has not been presented with any evidence that the interview portion of any late night or daytime television talk show program on air presently would qualify for the bona fide news exemption,” the agency stated in its public notice last month.

Carr, who was appointed during the previous Trump administration, previously suggested that examining ‘The View’ – whose hosts regularly criticize the Republican president – could be “worthwhile.”

The FCC chairman appeared to relish the controversy surrounding Colbert’s situation, telling reporters Wednesday that watching the aftermath “was probably one of the most fun days I’ve had in the job.” He accused Talarico of exploiting media attention “apparently for the purpose of raising money and getting clicks.”

These equal airtime regulations only affect traditional broadcast television, not streaming platforms or internet content. Colbert subsequently released the Talarico interview on YouTube, where it has garnered over 7.5 million views – far exceeding his typical CBS viewership.

Following the blocked CBS appearance, Talarico’s campaign reported collecting $2.5 million in donations within 24 hours of the YouTube interview’s release.

Representatives for ‘The View’ did not respond to requests for comment Thursday.

CBS officials said they provided Colbert with “legal guidance” indicating that airing the Talarico interview could trigger equal time requirements. During Tuesday night’s broadcast, Colbert noted that while Carr suggested in January he might eliminate talk show exemptions, “CBS generously did it for him.”

PHILADELPHIA — Crews began putting back together a historical display about slavery at Philadelphia’s Independence Mall on Thursday, following a court order that forced federal officials to reverse their controversial decision to remove the exhibit.

The display focuses on nine individuals who were held in bondage at what was once called the President’s House, where George Washington lived. Philadelphia Mayor Cherelle Parker made an appearance at the location Thursday morning to express gratitude to the restoration workers, according to her spokesperson Joe Grace.

A federal court judge had given the Interior Department until Friday to put the exhibit back in place at the Independence Mall site. Officials from the U.S. Attorney’s Office refused to provide comments about the restoration efforts when asked by reporters.

Federal officials maintain they have sole authority over what historical narratives are presented at locations managed by the National Park Service. Last month, park service employees suddenly took down the exhibits from the Philadelphia location, which led the city and exhibit supporters to file a federal lawsuit.

On Monday, Senior U.S. District Judge Cynthia Rufe issued a court order requiring the materials to be put back while the legal case continues. Her ruling also prevents Trump administration officials from developing new historical interpretations for the site.

In her extensive 40-page ruling, Judge Rufe drew parallels between the Trump administration’s actions and the authoritarian government depicted in George Orwell’s “1984,” which altered historical documentation to support its own version of events. She declared that the federal government lacks authority “to dissemble and disassemble historical truths.”

“If the President’s House is left dismembered throughout this dispute, so too is the history it recounts,” wrote Rufe, who was nominated by former Republican President George W. Bush.

“Worse yet, the potential of having the exhibits replaced by an alternative script — a plausible assumption at this time — would be an even more permanent rejection of the site’s historical integrity, and irreparable,” she added in her decision.

WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump announced Thursday that America will provide financial support to bolster the United Nations and enhance its effectiveness, speaking at the inaugural meeting of his Board of Peace.

While the United States remains the largest financial contributor to the UN’s budget, the Trump administration had previously withheld required payments for regular operations and peacekeeping missions, while also cutting back on voluntary contributions to various UN agencies that operate with independent budgets.

“We’re going to strengthen up the United Nations. We’re going to make sure its facilities are good. They need help …we’re going to help them money-wise, and we’re going to make sure the United Nations is viable,” Trump stated.

The president also expressed optimism about the international organization’s future capabilities, saying “I think the United Nations has great potential, really great potential. It has not lived up to (that) potential.”

WASHINGTON — A federal commission overseeing President Donald Trump’s controversial plan to construct an enormous ballroom where the former White House East Wing once stood is anticipated to move the project forward during Thursday’s session.

The U.S. Commission of Fine Arts will likely cast their vote on the architectural plans during their monthly virtual meeting. Trump appointees currently control the majority of the panel.

During last month’s January session, several commissioners raised concerns with the project’s lead architect regarding the “immense” scope and dimensions of the proposed structure, despite generally supporting Trump’s concept for a ballroom that would be approximately double the White House’s current size.

Trump’s October choice to tear down the East Wing sparked significant public backlash when demolition commenced without the standard independent assessments, Congressional authorization, and public input processes typically required for even minor changes to Washington’s historic structures.

Federal court litigation has been filed by the National Trust for Historic Preservation seeking to stop the ballroom construction. A judicial ruling on this case remains outstanding.

Further deliberation on the proposal is slated for the National Capital Planning Commission’s March 5 session, headed by one of Trump’s senior White House staff members. This commission oversees construction projects and significant renovations to federal buildings throughout the area.

New York’s Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer has put forward legislation that would extend federal protections currently reserved for the American flag to include the rainbow Pride flag. The bill comes in response to the Trump administration’s refusal to display the Pride flag at a memorial site in New York dedicated to LGBTQ rights.

Schumer described the Stonewall memorial location as “sacred ground” when discussing his proposed legislation. However, political observers note that the measure faces slim chances of advancement given the current Republican control of Congress, with some viewing the proposal as a politically motivated move rather than serious policy.

President Donald Trump is scheduled to address economic concerns during a Thursday appearance in Georgia, as he continues efforts to convince voters that Republicans can deliver relief from persistent high prices before November’s congressional elections.

Trump secured his 2024 re-election victory largely by pledging to combat inflation, yet polling data indicates he faces challenges in demonstrating meaningful progress on reducing costs that burden American families.

Rising anxiety over expenses has become a significant concern for Republican lawmakers as they defend their congressional control in the upcoming November races.

The president’s address in Rome, Georgia, will focus on his strategies “to make life affordable for working people,” according to White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt’s Wednesday briefing with reporters. Trump is anticipated to speak at the Coosa Steel Corporation, based on Republican Party promotional materials.

While Trump won’t appear on November ballots, he has taken the lead role in communicating his party’s position on living costs. However, his recent economic addresses have sometimes wandered off-topic and have seldom recognized the financial pressures many Americans continue experiencing while shopping for groceries.

A Reuters examination of Trump’s five economic speeches since December revealed he claimed nearly 20 times that inflation had been defeated or significantly reduced, and stated almost 30 times that prices were dropping – claims that conflict with economic statistics and voters’ real-world experiences.

January’s annual inflation rate reached 2.4%, declining from December’s 2.7%. However, food costs increased nearly 3% year-over-year, meaning grocery bills continue rising for Americans, while housing expenses have also climbed.

Republican political advisors have indicated to Reuters that Trump’s inconsistent messaging on this voter frustration issue could damage credibility for both him and the Republican Party before the midterm contests.

Republicans maintain a narrow House majority and face potential loss of control, while Democrats require a net gain of four Senate seats to regain that chamber – a more difficult objective given their current defensive positions.

A new Reuters/Ipsos survey released this week shows Trump’s economic approval rating at 34%, dropping from last month’s 36%. Additionally, 57% of poll participants expressed disapproval of his economic performance.

During his Georgia appearance, Trump will likely promote his tax reduction measures that began last month, providing increased savings for millions of families, along with eliminated taxes on tips, overtime pay, and Social Security benefits.

Trump has also outlined proposals for reducing mortgage rates and housing costs, plus agreements with health insurance providers to cut prescription drug expenses.

The president will speak in a strongly conservative district previously held by Marjorie Taylor Greene. Greene, formerly a devoted Trump supporter, left her congressional position in January following a contentious break with the president.

A special election for Greene’s vacant seat is scheduled for March 10. Trump has endorsed a local prosecutor hoping to consolidate support, but his endorsement hasn’t prevented 14 other Republicans from joining the race, making this contest a measure of Trump’s influence within his Make America Great Again movement.

Car manufacturers across the nation are facing an unprecedented regulatory split as the Trump administration and California wage a legal battle over electric vehicle standards, with major financial consequences for both traditional automakers and electric vehicle companies like Tesla.

The Golden State is fighting back against a Republican congressional effort to eliminate California’s special authority to create its own vehicle emissions rules. Should California succeed in court, automakers could find themselves navigating two completely different regulatory frameworks: Trump’s policies that discourage electric vehicles versus California’s push toward zero-emission transportation, which a dozen other states have embraced.

The state has mandated that automakers must sell only electric vehicles or other zero-emission cars by 2035, with demanding intermediate goals that were supposed to start this year. Meanwhile, the Trump administration has eliminated federal electric vehicle incentives and support programs, causing a sharp decline in electric car sales across the country.

For many years, California has maintained its own stricter vehicle pollution standards with support from both Republican and Democratic federal administrations. Under recent Democratic leadership, California’s regulations generally matched federal policies that encouraged electric vehicles and improved fuel economy.

However, current California and federal regulations are moving in completely different directions. Trump relaxed emissions rules during his first presidency, but President Joe Biden reversed those changes. Now in his second term, Trump is taking an aggressive stance against federal electric vehicle support.

Republican lawmakers eliminated a $7,500 electric vehicle tax credit last year and removed penalties for automakers who failed to meet fuel efficiency requirements. Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency reversed an Obama-era scientific determination last week that classified greenhouse gas emissions as a public health threat — the legal basis for EPA vehicle pollution regulations established in 2010.

Eliminating California’s special waiver represents a crucial part of Trump’s approach, but the state’s legal challenge claims Congress acted unlawfully. The administration has requested dismissal of the case, with a federal court hearing scheduled for Thursday in Oakland, California.

California contends that Trump’s EPA and Congress used questionable tactics to reclassify California’s waivers as administrative “rules” that can be overturned through the Congressional Review Act. For decades, the EPA has stated in its California decisions that waivers are “not a rule” and the Congressional Review Act “does not apply” — a central argument in California’s lawsuit.

Should the administration prevail, traditional car manufacturers would experience reduced pressure to sell unprofitable electric vehicles in California and 11 additional states, which collectively represent 29% of U.S. new vehicle sales, according to S&P Global Mobility data. Tesla and other electric vehicle manufacturers could lose significant income from selling regulatory credits to other automakers for compliance purposes.

If California wins, traditional automakers might need to create separate vehicle lineups to satisfy two conflicting regulatory systems within the United States. The Alliance for Automotive Innovation, representing the industry, argues this would limit consumer vehicle options and has described California’s rules as an “unaccountable, unachievable regulatory wormhole.”

Mike Murphy, a former Republican strategist who helped establish the advocacy organization EVs for All America, explained that the California-federal conflict demonstrates how automakers are being “whipsawed” by political changes that disrupt their vehicle development and manufacturing strategies. Following Trump’s election, automakers have recorded $55 billion in electric vehicle investment writedowns.

“What I hear from all of them is, ‘This short-termism is killing us,’” Murphy stated. “We have a monkey at the controls in Washington, and it’s very hard to plan.”

White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers dismissed California’s lawsuit as “frivolous” and said Trump has “canceled unpopular green-energy subsidies that wasted Americans’ hard-earned tax dollars.”

California began establishing its own vehicle emissions standards during the 1950s while combating serious air quality issues from automotive and industrial pollution, including dense smog covering Los Angeles.

The Air Quality Act of 1967 allowed California to maintain this authority, granting the EPA power to approve California waivers for pursuing independent regulations. Administrations from both parties have subsequently approved more than 100 such waivers for the state.

During 2019, Trump’s EPA canceled portions of a waiver through formal rulemaking procedures, a lengthier process that California also contested in federal court. The Biden administration restored the waiver in 2022. In Trump’s second term, Republicans attempted a faster approach — eliminating the waiver through the Congressional Review Act.

The Government Accountability Office, an independent agency that historically determines whether agencies comply with the act, concluded last March that waivers are not rules because they represent a “case-specific, individual determination” rather than a “broad application of general principles.”

Congressional Republicans ignored the GAO finding, maintaining that Congress holds authority to define what constitutes a rule. California filed suit the same day Trump signed the legislation in June.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta described the case to Reuters as highlighting the Trump administration’s “contempt for the law” and use of “fringe” legal theories to justify violations.

“They were told. They knew. They did it anyway,” Bonta said during an interview, characterizing the action as a dangerous expansion of congressional review authority.

The EPA responded in a statement that “the only ‘contempt for the law’ here is California’s.”

“We live in a democracy, and Congress writes the laws,” the agency stated, adding that California’s regulations would have “crippled American industry” and increased consumer costs.

Legal experts note that many aspects of the case have never been examined in court, providing limited precedent to predict the court’s decision.

“The level of instability and confusion here is unprecedented,” said Paul Libus, an attorney at Van Ness Feldman LLP who focuses on vehicle emissions policy.

California’s Air Resources Board has informed automakers they can currently choose whether to follow its new standards — but cautioned they might face penalties for non-compliance later if California wins in court. CARB records indicate many automakers are choosing compliance.

California initially adopted these regulations in 2022, when U.S. electric vehicle sales were expected to surge. The state now confronts challenges in achieving its ambitious electric vehicle adoption objectives as consumer interest declines, raising doubts about whether the goals are achievable. Electric vehicles represented 21% of the state’s new car sales last year, slightly lower than the previous year. CARB has announced it will not enforce this year’s electric vehicle sales target due to regulatory uncertainty.

Murphy, the former Republican electric vehicle advocate, predicted automakers will negotiate with California regulators because they cannot risk betting that Trump’s pollution standard rollback will survive beyond his administration — and they must remain competitive globally. Electric vehicles are crucial in markets including China and Europe, where regulators are strengthening vehicle emissions controls.

Automakers recognize, he noted, that “the drunken holiday with the federal regs is probably not going to last.”

WASHINGTON – Federal immigration authorities now have enhanced powers to detain legal refugees while they undergo additional background screening, according to a new government directive that marks a significant policy shift.

The Department of Homeland Security issued a memorandum on February 18 requiring refugees to report back to government custody for “inspection and examination” one year after entering the United States. This coincides with when refugees are required by law to apply for permanent resident status.

“This detain-and-inspect requirement ensures that refugees are re-vetted after one year, aligns post-admission vetting with that applied to other applicants for admission, and promotes public safety,” department officials stated in the memo, which was filed in federal court.

The directive represents a complete reversal from 2010 guidance that specified failing to obtain permanent resident status was not grounds for detention or removal from the country. Immigration officers can now hold individuals throughout the entire re-inspection period.

The Department of Homeland Security has not responded to requests for additional information about the policy change.

Refugee assistance organizations have strongly condemned the new approach.

Shawn VanDiver, who leads AfghanEvac, described the policy as “a reckless reversal of long-standing policy” that “breaks faith with people the United States lawfully admitted and promised protection.”

HIAS, previously called the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, warned the “move will cause grave harm to thousands of people who were welcomed to the United States after fleeing violence and persecution.”

Immigration detention numbers have surged under President Trump’s leadership, reaching approximately 68,000 people this month – a 75% increase since he returned to office last year.

Immigration enforcement served as a central campaign theme that contributed to Trump’s 2024 electoral victory.

Federal courts have already intervened in some cases. In January, U.S. District Judge John Tunheim in Minneapolis issued a temporary restraining order blocking enforcement of the policy against roughly 5,600 legal refugees in Minnesota who are waiting for green cards.

Judge Tunheim determined that federal agents likely broke multiple federal laws when they arrested some of these refugees for additional screening purposes.

MINNEAPOLIS — A staffing crisis at Minnesota’s federal prosecutor’s office has allowed dangerous criminals to walk free as career attorneys abandon their posts over disagreements with current administration policies.

The chaos enabled repeat offender Cory Allen McKay, with a dozen felony convictions spanning three decades, to escape justice. McKay, whose violent history includes choking a pregnant woman and placing a shotgun beneath someone’s chin, was facing methamphetamine trafficking charges that carried a potential 25-year sentence. However, when his assigned prosecutor retired unexpectedly, authorities dropped the case entirely.

The Trump administration credits its strict immigration enforcement efforts in Minnesota with enhancing community safety. However, this approach has severely damaged the U.S. Attorney’s Office, where numerous prosecutors have expressed frustration with how Trump’s Justice Department appointees have managed operations.

Similar resignation waves have struck prosecutor offices nationwide, from New York to Virginia, as attorneys protest what they perceive as political interference in legal decisions under Trump’s leadership. Minnesota’s office has experienced particularly severe impacts.

An increasing number of accused criminals like McKay are avoiding consequences as overwhelmed remaining prosecutors must abandon cases, halt investigations before filing charges, and negotiate plea deals and postponements.

Regional authorities express concern that the office may temporarily lose its capacity to prosecute the state’s most dangerous criminals.

“The consequence will be reduced capability to pursue dangerous con artists, sexual predators, violent criminal organizations and narcotics dealers,” stated John Marti, a Minneapolis attorney who previously served as a fraud prosecutor in the office until 2015.

Following a request for additional time to assign someone to McKay’s case, the office under Trump appointee Daniel Rosen dismissed it so suddenly that McKay’s attorney learned of her client’s release only afterward.

“This development completely caught me off guard,” McKay’s attorney Jean Brandl remarked. Though she hasn’t contacted him yet, “I can assure you he’s pleased with this outcome.”

During the past year, the Minnesota office’s assistant U.S. attorney count has dropped from more than 40 prosecutors before Trump’s return to office to under two dozen. This information comes from a former federal prosecutor who requested anonymity due to lack of authorization to discuss staffing issues with The Associated Press.

The departures started last year as multiple prosecutors “anticipated changes ahead” regarding their positions and the government’s approach to justice under the new administration, the former federal prosecutor explained.

The situation worsened after Trump’s Justice Department appointees intervened to halt a collaborative state-federal investigation into the January 7 fatal shooting of Renee Good by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer Jonathan Ross. While Trump administration officials labeled Good a “domestic terrorist” and claimed Ross acted in self-defense, some office members considered the killing potentially criminal.

Career prosecutors also opposed orders to redirect significant resources toward immigration cases and were frustrated by repeated ICE violations of court orders that angered judges.

“They could not in good conscience participate in what they have seen,” stated a letter published last week by eight former permanent or acting U.S. attorneys in Minnesota.

Notable departures last month included former acting office leader Joe Thompson and criminal division chief Harry Jacobs. Thompson, a Justice Department veteran recognized for major fraud investigations, worked with Jacobs to expose the $300 million Feeding Our Future scandal, resulting in charges against more than 75 defendants for defrauding a COVID-19-era child nutrition program.

When experienced attorneys depart, leadership evaluates their caseloads and determines how many cases can be transferred to remaining staff and which must be abandoned due to reduced resources.

Court documents reveal the office operating in emergency mode, bringing in out-of-state prosecutors, requesting hearing delays from judges, and attempting to resolve cases through dismissals and plea agreements. Defense attorneys are capitalizing by demanding swift trials and filing motions requiring prosecutor responses.

The Justice Department and U.S. Attorney’s Office have not responded to comment requests. Former office spokesperson and prosecutor Melinda Williams was among those who departed.

McKay, age 47, is not the sole drug trafficking defendant to benefit from this situation.

The office also dismissed a case last month against a man arrested in September after investigators allegedly discovered him with drugs intended for Twin Cities distribution, including 7,600 fentanyl pills and 15 pounds of cocaine.

A third dropped case involved a man charged with methamphetamine distribution conspiracy after Rochester police discovered three pounds of the drug during a January 2025 vehicle search.

“With the mass departures there, it’s creating difficulties for everyone statewide,” said Clay County Sheriff Mark Empting, who described McKay as presenting “a major public safety threat” if he returns to Moorhead. “Hopefully they will reconstruct the office and resume handling these cases.”

McKay’s case originated in 2024 when FedEx workers in Fargo, North Dakota, found a package containing nearly 10 pounds of high-purity methamphetamine shipped from California and addressed to McKay. Police valued the drugs at $80,000 on the street.

An undercover detective disguised as a FedEx worker delivered the package to McKay, leading to his arrest. Investigators claim cellphone searches revealed text messages connecting McKay to suspected drug dealers in Minnesota, California, Chicago and Mexico.

McKay remained in jail nearly a year awaiting state charges before a federal grand jury issued an indictment in May 2025 with two methamphetamine distribution charges. The indictment included enhanced sentencing due to his multiple prior violent felonies.

His record includes aggravated assault in 2013, domestic assault by strangulation in 2017, and assault causing substantial bodily harm in 2021. Prosecutors noted at least a dozen felony convictions, beginning at age 16 when he fired a short-barreled shotgun under a victim’s chin.

Veteran assistant U.S. Attorney Thomas Hollenhorst argued last summer that McKay posed too great a danger for pre-trial release, even to substance abuse treatment, stating his violent history would “endanger numerous people.”

A judge concurred, observing McKay’s pattern of missing court appearances, providing false identities to police, and violating probation terms.

However, last month the U.S. Attorney’s Office announced Hollenhorst was “retiring unexpectedly” and requested a delay. A judge rescheduled the trial from February 12 to March 2. The office dismissed the case days later without explanation. A judge ordered McKay’s immediate release. Hollenhorst declined to comment.

On January 31, McKay left the Sherburne County Jail in Elk River, 30 miles from Minneapolis. AP attempts to contact him were unsuccessful.

McKay’s attorney Brandl said while the result favored her client, Hollenhorst’s retirement after 40 Justice Department years represented “a significant loss.”

“He was an excellent prosecutor,” she said. “He was fair and viewed our clients as people, not just case numbers.”

ATLANTA — While President Donald Trump juggles multiple policy initiatives including potential military action against Iran and immigration enforcement, his administration says Thursday’s Georgia visit will center on economic messaging to strengthen Republican prospects before crucial midterm elections.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt emphasized the strategic importance of the trip, stating that “Georgia is obviously a very important state to the president and to the Republican Party.” She indicated Trump’s Georgia speech would emphasize “his efforts to make life affordable for working people.”

The president’s chosen location reveals additional motivations beyond economic messaging. Trump is visiting the congressional district formerly held by Marjorie Taylor Greene, his one-time ally who stepped down in January following public disputes with the president. Voters will select Greene’s replacement in a special election scheduled for March 10.

Despite administration promises to prioritize economic themes — an area where Trump frequently argues he receives insufficient recognition — recent months have been overshadowed by other controversies, including violent incidents during deportation operations in Minneapolis.

Thursday’s schedule reflects Trump’s competing priorities, beginning with a gathering of representatives from over two dozen nations participating in his Board of Peace initiative, an alternative diplomatic framework to the United Nations.

The Georgia appearance occurs just weeks after federal authorities confiscated voting materials and ballots from Fulton County, the state’s most Democratic stronghold.

Georgia remains central to Trump’s persistent and debunked assertions that Democrats fraudulently secured the 2020 presidential election. He reinforced these false claims Wednesday during a White House Black History Month event, declaring: “We won by millions of votes but they cheated.”

Multiple audits, state election officials, judicial rulings, and Trump’s former attorney general have all dismissed allegations of widespread electoral irregularities sufficient to change the outcome.

Several Republicans now advocate for Georgia’s Trump-majority State Election Board to assume control of Fulton County elections, utilizing powers granted by contentious 2021 state legislation. The timing of any potential board action remains uncertain.

When questioned about Trump’s weekend social media hints regarding a possible executive order targeting voter fraud, Leavitt said the president was “exploring his options.”

Trump’s social media post, prominently displayed on his account, branded Democrats as “horrible, disingenuous CHEATERS” and urged Republicans to emphasize such accusations “at the top of every speech.”

The president may face additional criticism from Greene, who has transformed from ardent supporter to prominent conservative opponent. Anticipating Trump’s visit, Greene criticized White House and Republican leadership strategy sessions, suggesting they were “on the struggle bus” regarding healthcare costs affecting her former constituents.

“Approximately 75,000 households in my former district had their health insurance double or more on January 1st of this year because the ACA tax credits expired and Republicans have absolutely failed to fix our health insurance system that was destroyed by Obamacare,” Greene wrote. “And you can call me all the petty names you want, I don’t worship a man. I’m not in a cult.”

Early voting has commenced for Greene’s replacement, with leading Republican contenders expressing strong Trump loyalty.

Trump recently backed Clay Fuller, a district attorney handling prosecutions across four counties. Fuller characterized the presidential endorsement as “rocket fuel” for his campaign and promised to maintain America First policies beyond Trump’s presidency.

Another Republican candidate, former state Senator Colton Moore, gained recognition defending Trump against Georgia legal proceedings. Despite Trump’s Fuller endorsement, Moore claims ongoing communication with the president while calling the endorsement decision “unfortunate.”

“I think he’s the greatest president of our lifetimes,” Moore stated.

Democrat Shawn Harris, who previously challenged Greene in 2024, leads his party’s ticket. While Democrats express optimism about potential victory, the Cook Political Report ranks this district as Georgia’s most Republican.

MINNEAPOLIS — A federal court will consider Thursday whether to extend safeguards for legally admitted refugees in Minnesota who face potential arrest and removal from the country.

Federal Judge John Tunheim issued a temporary court order last month preventing the government from targeting these refugees, stating the case plaintiffs would likely succeed in proving “their detention and arrest, along with the policy used to justify these actions, violate the law.” The judge’s January 28 restraining order expires February 25 unless he approves a longer-lasting preliminary injunction.

Advocacy organizations for refugee rights filed suit against federal authorities in January following the December launch of Operation PARRIS by the Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. The operation’s name stands for Post-Admission Refugee Reverification and Integrity Strengthening.

Officials described the effort as a “comprehensive initiative” to review cases involving 5,600 Minnesota refugees who had not yet received permanent resident status, commonly called green cards. Federal agencies pointed to fraudulent activity in Minnesota public programs as their reasoning.

The operation was one component of the Trump administration’s wide-ranging immigration enforcement efforts focusing on Minnesota, which included deploying thousands of federal agents to the state. Homeland Security called it their most extensive immigration enforcement action in history. The operation prompted widespread demonstrations following the fatal shootings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti. White House border czar Tom Homan said last week the large-scale operation was concluding, though some federal personnel would stay.

According to the legal challenge, ICE agents conducted home visits under Operation PARRIS, detaining refugees and transporting them to Texas detention facilities where they couldn’t access legal representation. Some detainees were subsequently released onto Texas streets and had to arrange their own transportation back to Minnesota, the lawsuit claims.

Tunheim dismissed the government’s argument that it had authority to detain and arrest refugees who hadn’t secured green cards within one year of U.S. arrival. The judge called this position illogical and unreasonable, noting refugees cannot submit permanent residency applications until completing one year in the United States.

In his ruling, which only applies to Minnesota, Tunheim emphasized that refugees undergo thorough screening by multiple government agencies before U.S. resettlement. He noted that none of those detained in the operation had been classified as community threats or flight risks, and none faced criminal charges that could warrant deportation.

The judge referenced specific cases from lawsuit plaintiffs, including an individual identified as U.H.A., a refugee with no criminal background. This person entered the U.S. in 2024 and was detained by ICE on January 18 while traveling to work. “He was stopped, forced from his vehicle, restrained with handcuffs, and held in custody without a warrant or clear justification,” Tunheim wrote.

The judge emphasized that refugees covered by his order had been admitted to the U.S. due to persecution in their native countries. He banned additional arrests under Operation PARRIS and mandated the release and return to Minnesota of all individuals still detained from the operation.

“These individuals are not engaging in criminal activity in our communities, nor did they enter the border illegally. Refugees possess legal authorization to remain in the United States, authorization to work, authorization to live in peace — and crucially, authorization not to face the fear of warrantless or unjustified arrest and detention in their homes or while attending religious services or shopping for necessities,” he stated.

“At its finest, America provides sanctuary for individual freedoms in a world frequently marked by oppression and brutality. We betray that principle when we subject our community members to anxiety and disorder,” he added.

In a subsequent February 9 order, Tunheim denied a government request to remove the temporary restraining order.

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump hosted the first meeting of his newly formed Board of Peace on Thursday, bringing together officials from more than 40 nations and the European Union to discuss rebuilding Gaza and establishing international peacekeeping forces in the war-torn region where a fragile ceasefire continues.

Before the gathering, Trump revealed that board participants have committed $5 billion toward reconstruction efforts, though this represents only a small portion of the estimated $70 billion experts say will be required to rebuild the Palestinian territory following two years of devastating conflict. Attendees are also expected to announce commitments involving thousands of personnel for international security and police operations in the area.

“We have the greatest leaders in the world joining the Board of Peace,” Trump stated to reporters earlier this week. “I think it has the chance to be the most consequential board ever assembled of any kind.”

Originally conceived as part of Trump’s comprehensive 20-point peace proposal to resolve the Gaza conflict, the board’s mission has expanded significantly since the October ceasefire agreement. Trump now envisions the organization taking on a broader role that extends beyond achieving lasting peace between Israel and Hamas to addressing global conflicts worldwide.

However, as the board holds its inaugural session, the Gaza ceasefire remains unstable, and Trump’s expanded ambitions for the organization have raised concerns among some that the U.S. president seeks to establish an alternative to the United Nations. Earlier this week, Trump expressed hope that the board would encourage the U.N. to “get on the ball.”

“The United Nations has great potential,” he remarked. “They haven’t lived up to the potential.”

According to a senior administration official who spoke anonymously, representatives from more than 40 countries and the European Union confirmed their attendance at Thursday’s session. Several nations including Germany, Italy, Norway, and Switzerland, while not board members, are participating as observers.

The United Nations Security Council conducted a high-level session Wednesday addressing the ceasefire agreement and Israel’s expanding activities in the West Bank. Originally planned for Thursday, the U.N. meeting was rescheduled earlier to avoid conflicts with the Board of Peace gathering that would have complicated diplomatic travel arrangements.

Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin expressed this week that “at the international level it should above all be the U.N. that manages these crisis situations.” The Trump administration responded to these Vatican concerns on Wednesday.

“This president has a very bold and ambitious plan and vision to rebuild and reconstruct Gaza, which is well underway because of the Board of Peace,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt stated. “This is a legitimate organization where there are tens of member countries from around the world.”

U.S. ambassador to the U.N. Mike Waltz also addressed skeptical allies, emphasizing that the board is “not talking, it is doing.”

“We are hearing the chattering class criticizing the structure of the board, that it’s unconventional, that it’s unprecedented,” Waltz commented. “Again, the old ways were not working.”

A primary focus of Thursday’s discussions involves establishing an armed international stabilization force to maintain security and ensure the disarmament of Hamas militants, which represents both a key Israeli requirement and a fundamental element of the ceasefire agreement.

However, only Indonesia has made a concrete commitment to Trump’s proposed force so far. Hamas has shown little indication of willingness to proceed with disarmament. While the administration acknowledges it is “under no illusions on the challenges regarding demilitarization,” officials report encouragement from mediator feedback, according to a U.S. official speaking anonymously.

Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto committed to collaborating closely with other prominent Islamic nations invited by Trump to “join in the endeavors to try to achieve lasting peace in Palestine.”

“We recognize there are still obstacles to be overcome, but at least my position is at least we have to try, and we have to do our best,” he said during a Wednesday event at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, where he engaged with business community members.

Thursday’s agenda includes updates from the Gaza Executive Board, the organization’s operational division, regarding efforts to establish functional government systems and services for the territory, according to the anonymous official who outlined the meeting’s general framework.

Alongside Trump, other scheduled speakers include Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff, Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, executive board high representative Nickolay Mladenov, and Waltz.

Michael Hanna, U.S. program director at the International Crisis Group, a nonprofit organization dedicated to conflict prevention, indicated that skepticism from some U.S. allies appears justified.

“Without any clear authorization for the expansion of its mandate beyond Gaza, it is unsurprising that many U.S. allies and partners have chosen to decline Trump’s offer to join the board,” Hanna explained. “Instead, many of the states most invested in Gaza’s future have signed up with the hope of focusing U.S. attention and encouraging Trump himself to use the influence and leverage he has with Israel.”

Microsoft has pushed back against allegations that Immigration and Customs Enforcement is utilizing the company’s technology to conduct widespread surveillance of civilians, though the tech giant confirmed it does supply cloud-based services to the federal agency.

The company’s response came after The Guardian published a report Wednesday suggesting ICE has significantly expanded its dependence on Microsoft’s cloud services while intensifying arrest and deportation activities. The news outlet based its findings on internal documents that were leaked.

According to The Guardian’s investigation, ICE increased the volume of information stored on Microsoft’s Azure cloud system by more than 300% during a six-month span ending in January 2026. This timeframe coincided with substantial budget increases and rapid staff expansion at the immigration agency. The report indicated ICE appears to be utilizing multiple Microsoft productivity applications, including artificial intelligence-powered tools, to examine and process data housed in Azure.

A Microsoft representative addressed the allegations in an official statement: “As we’ve previously said, Microsoft provides cloud-based productivity and collaboration tools to DHS (Department of Homeland Security, of which ICE is a part) and ICE, delivered through our key partners.”

The spokesperson added: “Microsoft policies and terms of service do not allow our technology to be used for the mass surveillance of civilians, and we do not believe ICE is engaged in such activity.”

Microsoft called on lawmakers, the executive branch, and judicial system to establish “clear legal lines” defining acceptable ways law enforcement can utilize new technologies.

ICE declined to provide detailed information about investigative methods and tools used in active criminal cases, but stated the agency employs various technological resources to assist in apprehending criminals.

President Donald Trump’s immigration enforcement policies have drawn criticism from human rights organizations, who argue the approach creates dangerous conditions and fails to provide adequate legal protections. ICE has emerged as the primary face of Trump’s immigration crackdown, particularly following last month’s deadly shootings involving two American citizens.

Trump has defended his administration’s actions, stating they are designed to enhance national security and reduce illegal border crossings.

Technology companies have worked to strengthen relationships with Trump during his current presidential term.

This isn’t the first time Microsoft has faced questions about government use of its services. In September, the company terminated certain services being used by an Israeli military division after initial findings supported media reports of widespread monitoring of Palestinian communications. The connection to Israel’s armed forces had sparked internal company protests, resulting in the termination of some employees who participated.

Federal immigration officials are facing criticism after a Texas congressman accused them of sending a seriously ill 2-month-old infant back to Mexico despite the baby’s deteriorating health condition.

Democratic Representative Joaquin Castro of Texas claimed Tuesday on social media that Immigration and Customs Enforcement removed the infant, who was suffering from bronchitis and had become unresponsive for several hours before being released from medical care.

According to Castro, the baby was sent back to Mexico alongside a 16-month-old sibling and both parents. The congressman said he verified these details through the family’s legal representative.

Castro condemned the action, stating: “To unnecessarily deport a sick baby and his entire family is heinous.”

The lawmaker promised to “hold ICE accountable for this monstrous action.”

However, Department of Homeland Security representative Tricia McLaughlin disputed Castro’s characterization Wednesday, explaining that medical professionals determined the infant was in “stable condition and medically cleared for removal.” She added that doctors provided the parents with nasal saline solution and a bulb syringe for continued treatment.

McLaughlin detailed that Border Patrol agents detained the infant’s mother, Mireya Stefani Lopez-Sanchez, after she illegally crossed near Eagle Pass, Texas, on January 21st.

The mother decided to keep her child with her during the transfer to ICE custody, McLaughlin explained.

“All of her claims were heard by a judge and found not to be valid,” McLaughlin stated.

A federal judge ordered Lopez-Sanchez’s removal on February 8th, and she was sent back to Mexico with her child this past Tuesday, according to McLaughlin.

“She received full due process,” McLaughlin emphasized.

Immigration authorities’ handling of children has faced increased examination since the Trump administration intensified border enforcement efforts.

Public attention recently focused on 5-year-old Liam Conejo Ramos, who was photographed wearing a bunny hat while surrounded by ICE agents in Minnesota last month. A judge subsequently ordered the release of both the child and his father.

The father and son were detained at the same Dilley, Texas family facility where Castro said Lopez-Sanchez and her infant were held.

Previous court documents from last year revealed that families and oversight groups reported problems at federal facilities, including contaminated meals and inadequate access to healthcare and legal representation. The filings also indicated that hundreds of immigrant children remained in federal custody longer than court-imposed time limits, with some detained for more than five months.

According to the National Institute of Health, bronchitis occurs when lung airways become inflamed, resulting in persistent coughing.

President Donald Trump announced Wednesday his selection of Justin Smith, an attorney who defended him in several major legal battles, to serve as a federal judge on the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals based in St. Louis.

Smith previously represented the president in the presidential immunity case that went before the U.S. Supreme Court, as well as in the E. Jean Carroll litigation where a jury determined Trump was responsible for sexual abuse and defamation.

According to Smith’s professional profile, he has held multiple legal positions throughout Missouri, including deputy counsel to the governor and deputy attorney general handling special litigation matters.

Writing on his Truth Social platform, Trump stated: “Justin also played a BIG role in securing a Supreme Court Landmark Victory on Presidential Immunity. He is a true America First Fighter, who will continue to deliver strong results for the American People.”

The Supreme Court decision in 2024 determined that Trump could not face prosecution for actions taken within his presidential authority during his initial term in office, despite facing criminal charges related to his first presidency.

Trump simultaneously announced three additional judicial nominations for Kansas federal district court positions on Wednesday: Kansas Solicitor General Anthony Powell, Kansas Bureau of Investigation Director Tony Mattivi, and Jeffrey Kuhlman.

The president commended these nominees for their dedication to upholding the U.S. Constitution.

Requests for comment from Smith, Kuhlman, the Kansas Bureau of Investigation, and the Kansas attorney general’s office went unanswered.

Since beginning his second presidential term, Trump has put forward more than 40 individuals for federal district and appeals court positions nationwide.

WASHINGTON — A Tuesday evening political rally in Houston featured the usual lineup of Democratic lawmakers and candidates, but the biggest draw wasn’t running for any office.

Carlos Eduardo Espina, a progressive social media personality with over 14 million TikTok followers, worked the crowd at the Mexican restaurant venue, posing for photos that supporters quickly shared across their social networks.

The Houston event served a dual purpose beyond energizing voters ahead of Texas’ March 3 primary election. It also marked the debut of a new Democratic approach aimed at recapturing Latino support that shifted toward the GOP in recent cycles.

Espina joined nine other Houston-area online personalities as part of this fresh strategy, which centers on building partnerships with digital content creators to better connect with Hispanic communities.

The TikTok star, who has previously endorsed Democratic causes and candidates, believes party leaders are finally recognizing they must modernize their outreach beyond conventional campaign methods.

“I do think there’s a lot of failures in the past Democratic Party, but I think initiatives like this one are pretty cool,” Espina shared during an interview.

The Congressional Hispanic Caucus’ political division developed this approach, launching it as Texas early voting commenced. Officials want to harness the appeal of local digital stars like Espina to more effectively deliver Democratic messages to Latino audiences.

Party strategists plan to expand this program, dubbed “RUIDO” — meaning noise in Spanish — to additional competitive races where Hispanic candidates and communities could determine outcomes. Hispanic Caucus PAC leadership hasn’t yet selected future investment locations.

“The Trump campaign reached out to those nontraditional voices to amplify their message,” explained Rep. Linda Sanchez of California, who chairs the caucus’ political action committee, referencing Republican success with influencers and podcast hosts in previous elections. “We didn’t anticipate that was going to be a way by which politics was disseminated. We’ve seen the contrary, that we do need to be in those spaces, as well.”

This program launches while Democrats wrestle with widespread party dissatisfaction and questions about effectively engaging key voter groups — particularly young people, communities of color, and non-college graduates who moved away from the party during the 2024 presidential race.

Former President Donald Trump gained significant Latino voter support that year through heavy investment in streamers, podcasters, and other digital content producers.

The Hispanic Caucus initiative provides financial support to accepted content creators, with funds designated for travel costs when collaborating with political campaigns, according to program documentation.

Previous election cycles saw both parties purchase sponsored posts from influencers, who must legally reveal these paid partnerships. Espina noted the compensation offered represents a small portion of his typical video earnings, which regularly attract hundreds of thousands of views, though smaller creators might find the support more meaningful.

The Spanish-language political content creator, whose videos consistently receive hundreds of thousands of likes, emphasized that elected officials must ultimately make their own case to voters. However, he stressed that genuine communication and meaningful messages are essential for online political success.

According to Espina, the party moved away from addressing “working class people” concerns and began discussing economic and cultural topics in ways that felt disconnected from voters’ actual experiences.

“I think a lot of that messaging a few years back kind of got lost. But now I think, especially after the wake-up call from the 2024 election, things have definitely gotten better,” he observed.

The caucus recruited nine Houston-area digital creators spanning various content types — from political commentary to food, travel, sports, and local interest topics. Their follower counts range from several thousand to approximately 100,000.

“People are going to act more when they hear from a family member, when they hear from a friend,” explained Carlos Castillo, another network participant. “Just talking to people in an organic way, whether it’s through get-ready-with-me videos and just slightly mentioning, ‘Oh, also, by the way, the primaries are coming up in our state.’”

Castillo compared the program’s financial support to commission offers he receives from corporations like Comcast, United Airlines, and FIFA Houston.

Whether this local influencer recruitment strategy will prove successful for Democrats in competitive districts remains uncertain. Both major parties have recognized across recent election cycles that traditional campaigning alone cannot reach politically disengaged voters.

This trend will likely increase the influence of content creators like Espina.

“Honestly, that I have more influence, at least right now, as a social media content creator, than I would in any kind of elected office, at least any that I can run for,” Espina said when asked about potential candidacy plans.

“Who knows, maybe I’ll run against Ted Cruz in a few years,” he joked, referencing Texas’ Republican senator. “That would be pretty fun.”

A California federal judge has overturned a decision by an immigration appeals board that had backed the Trump administration’s controversial detention practices on Thursday.

District Judge Sunshine Sykes, presiding in Riverside, California, nullified the Board of Immigration Appeals’ ruling that had supported holding thousands of individuals in mandatory custody without the possibility of bond release during the former administration’s immigration enforcement efforts.

The judge’s action came after she determined that the Trump administration had not followed through with compliance requirements from her previous court order, which had declared the detention policy to be unlawful.

The original policy had resulted in thousands of people being held in immigration detention facilities without the opportunity to seek release through posting bond while their cases moved through the immigration court system.

WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump celebrated the centennial of Black History Month at the White House on Wednesday, showcasing prominent Black administration members while pushing back against allegations of racial bias.

During the invitation-only gathering of approximately 100 attendees, Trump promised “a century more” of African American achievement. However, the celebration unfolded against a backdrop of recent controversy and ongoing criticism of his administration’s efforts to eliminate diversity and inclusion programs.

The event took place roughly two weeks following significant backlash over a social media post from the president’s account that contained racist imagery depicting former President Barack Obama and former First Lady Michelle Obama as apes.

South Carolina Republican Senator Tim Scott had condemned the video, calling it “the most racist thing I’ve seen out of this White House.” The administration initially stood by the post and criticized what they termed “fake outrage” before eventually removing it.

Trump stated he hadn’t viewed the controversial clip, attributed responsibility to a staff member, refused to offer an apology, and indicated no disciplinary action was taken.

The president, now serving his second term, has previously shared racially charged rhetoric, including his long-standing promotion of the debunked theory questioning Obama’s U.S. birthplace during Obama’s 2009-2017 presidency. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters Wednesday that media outlets have unfairly “smeared” the president as racist.

Throughout Wednesday’s ceremony, Trump offered praise for several notable African Americans. He complimented Senator Scott on multiple occasions and invited various Black administration officials to speak, including Housing and Urban Development Secretary Scott Turner, whom he described as “exceptional.”

The president also welcomed former presidential candidate and previous Cabinet member Dr. Ben Carson, announcing Carson would soon receive the Presidential Medal of Freedom, along with White House pardons coordinator Alice Johnson, whom Trump pardoned in 2020.

“When I met her, I fell in love,” Trump remarked about his initial encounter with Johnson.

The audience applauded as Trump discussed his first-term criminal justice reforms and recent strict immigration enforcement measures. “It’s no wonder that in 2024 we won more African American voters than any Republican presidential candidate in history,” he declared.

Trump has faced criticism over the past year for language targeting immigrant populations, including Somali Americans and Latin American immigrants, frequently connecting these groups to crime discussions. He continued this approach Wednesday by bringing a Washington D.C.-area grandmother on stage whose grandson was murdered in 2017.

Civil rights organizations and specialists have warned that Trump’s moves to eliminate diversity initiatives could reverse decades of advancement.

“He keeps it real, just like grandma,” Forlesia Cook stated from the podium, expressing gratitude to Trump for requesting National Guard patrols in the capital as part of his tough crime stance.

“I love him,” Cook continued as the president patted her back, “I don’t want to hear nothing you got to say about that ‘racist’ stuff…get off the man’s back. Let him do his job, he’s doing the right thing, back up off him!”

For the second consecutive day, Trump highlighted his long-standing relationships with prominent African Americans to counter racism allegations. At the celebration, he praised boxer Mike Tyson’s loyalty in defending him.

Following civil rights leader Jesse Jackson’s death on Tuesday, Trump shared 11 photographs online showing himself alongside Jackson and other Black celebrities, writing that “despite the fact that I am falsely and consistently called a Racist by the Scoundrels and Lunatics on the Radical Left, Democrats ALL, it was always my pleasure to help Jesse along the way.”

After attendees chanted “four more years,” the president concluded Wednesday’s gathering with forward-looking remarks.

“This is a very special group of people,” Trump said, “So happy Black History Month, happy Black History Year, and happy Black History Century.”

Work will begin again next week on the $16 billion Hudson Tunnel Project after the Trump administration unfroze $127 million in federal funding, New York Governor Kathy Hochul announced Wednesday.

The states of New York and New Jersey filed a lawsuit following the U.S. Department of Transportation’s decision to hold back $205 million in project funding beginning October 1. This funding stoppage forced construction to stop, leaving 1,000 workers without jobs. The Hudson Tunnel Project is designed to create a new commuter rail tunnel linking Manhattan with New Jersey while also fixing an existing tunnel that’s more than 100 years old and serves over 200,000 passengers and 425 trains each day.

Three western states filed a federal lawsuit Wednesday demanding the Trump administration distribute congressionally approved grants for renewable energy initiatives that have been frozen by the new administration.

California, Colorado and Washington launched the legal challenge after the Trump administration halted funding previously allocated through environmental legislation, including the Inflation Reduction Act, according to California’s attorney general’s office. The funding freeze represents part of a wider administration strategy to reduce support for renewable energy sources like wind and solar power while focusing on boosting domestic oil production.

California stands to lose $1.2 billion in federal support for its Alliance for Renewable Clean Hydrogen Energy Systems (ARCHES) program, which was designed to transition utilities, public transportation, trucking operations and ports away from fossil fuel dependency, according to Attorney General Rob Bonta.

The states argue that federal agencies are legally obligated to implement congressional legislation. “Congress has the power of the purse, not the executive branch, and Congress already appropriated this funding,” Bonta explained during a Tuesday interview before the lawsuit announcement. “It’s as simple as” federal agencies must follow the law, he added.

This legal action represents the latest in an ongoing series of court challenges California and other states have mounted against Trump administration policies across multiple policy areas.

WASHINGTON — The U.S. military confirmed Thursday that future presidential aircraft will sport a patriotic red, white, gold and dark blue paint design, fulfilling President Donald Trump’s vision for a new look.

Air Force officials announced the updated color scheme will be applied to the new aircraft being prepared to serve as Air Force One, along with smaller jets used to transport senior government officials.

Military officials unveiled a design rendering that mirrors an aircraft model previously displayed in the Oval Office during meetings with international dignitaries.

Boeing is currently working to modify two 747-800 aircraft intended to replace the current pair of older Boeing 747-200 planes that transport the president and carry the Air Force One designation when he’s on board.

Back in 2018, Trump had ordered the replacement of the famous Kennedy-era blue and white livery with a different white and navy design. His original plan called for a white upper section and dark blue lower portion, including the aircraft’s belly, with a dark red stripe extending from nose to tail. The proposed design closely resembled Trump’s private aircraft.

However, Air Force analysts determined the darker paint colors would drive up expenses and push back delivery schedules for the new presidential jets. President Joe Biden subsequently canceled the redesign in March 2023.

Speaking to media last month, Trump expressed his preference, saying “we want power blue, not baby blue,” in reference to the current aircraft’s appearance.

“Everything has its time and place. We’ll be changing the colors,” Trump stated.

The Air Force announcement indicates a third Boeing 747-8i aircraft will receive the same patriotic paint treatment.

Last May, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth officially received a luxury Boeing 747 from Qatar for presidential use, though the acceptance of this costly gift from a foreign government raised ethical and legal concerns.

Air Force Secretary Troy Meink informed Congress in June that security upgrades for the aircraft would cost under $400 million, though he didn’t provide specific details about the modifications.

A congressional representative from Iowa believes legislation permitting year-round E15 ethanol fuel sales could advance quickly through Congress. Representative Randy Feenstra, who serves on the House Rural Domestic Energy Council, reported that his committee held productive discussions on Wednesday regarding the biofuel initiative.

“This is full on, year round E15 and we worked with the small, midsized and large refiners,” Feenstra stated following the meeting. The congressman indicated that negotiations involved petroleum refiners across the industry spectrum as lawmakers work to build consensus on the ethanol legislation.

Climate advocacy organization Extinction Rebellion disclosed Wednesday that federal authorities have been conducting an investigation into the group, with FBI personnel making contact with several members during the past year.

The bureau declined to provide details when contacted for a response, stating it cannot verify or deny ongoing investigations per Department of Justice protocols.

According to the activist organization’s public statement, federal agents from the Joint Terrorism Task Force approached a former participant at their home on February 6, 2026. The residence was located approximately 200 miles from New York City, where the person had been involved with the group’s local chapter.

During that encounter, the agents questioned the individual about their participation in Extinction Rebellion’s New York City operations, the organization reported. The former member directed all inquiries to their legal counsel.

The group revealed additional contact occurred in March 2025, when six activists connected to Extinction Rebellion’s Boston branch were approached by individuals claiming FBI affiliation. No subsequent communications followed those initial contacts.

The activist organization provided limited additional information, and federal authorities offered no details regarding the investigation’s scope or objectives.

Civil liberties organizations have expressed concerns about free speech protections during President Donald Trump’s current term, pointing to his administration’s response to pro-Palestinian demonstrations regarding Israel’s military actions in Gaza, along with his public statements targeting liberal organizations and groups challenging his policy positions on immigration and environmental issues.

Trump’s administration has made allegations against various organizations, frequently without supporting evidence, claiming they provide financial support and coordination for political violence. Environmental advocates have criticized the president’s rollback of climate regulations and America’s exit from international environmental agreements.

According to its international website, the environmental organization describes itself as a “decentralised, international and politically non-partisan movement using non-violent direct action and civil disobedience to persuade governments to act justly” regarding climate issues. Notable activist Greta Thunberg has participated in events coordinated by the organization.

Federal immigration officials are investigating the death of a 59-year-old Cambodian man who died while in custody at an Indiana detention facility this week.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement announced Wednesday that Lorth Sim was discovered unresponsive in his cell at Miami Correctional Facility on Monday. The cause of his death remains under investigation, and this marks the seventh fatality this year within the federal immigration detention system.

According to ICE records, Sim arrived in the United States as a refugee in 1983 and obtained permanent resident status three years later in 1986. He was taken into custody in Boston this past December.

Immigration court records show that a judge had previously ordered Sim’s deportation to Cambodia back in 2006. Federal authorities noted that Sim had prior arrests on charges including disorderly conduct, indecent exposure, and larceny, resulting in a suspended sentence and probation.

The death occurs amid a significant expansion of immigration enforcement under President Trump’s administration. Current detention numbers have swelled to approximately 68,000 individuals in early February, representing a dramatic increase from the 40,000 people held when Trump assumed office. This surge has coincided with immigration custody deaths reaching their highest point in twenty years.

Civil rights organizations and Democratic lawmakers have raised serious concerns about the treatment and conditions within ICE detention centers, describing them as inhumane.

Recent incidents have intensified this scrutiny. Earlier this month, Leqaa Kordia, a 33-year-old Palestinian woman whose mother holds U.S. citizenship, required three days of hospitalization after suffering a seizure while in immigration detention. Kordia reported being restrained with chains during her medical treatment.

Federal immigration authorities maintain they provide appropriate medical care to all detainees, and government officials reject claims of inhumane treatment.

Particular attention has focused on ICE following the January 3rd death of Cuban immigrant Geraldo Lunas Campos at a Texas detention facility. The El Paso County medical examiner ruled that death a homicide caused by asphyxia from compression to the neck and torso. A Washington Post investigation included witness accounts alleging guards choked Lunas.

The Department of Homeland Security has provided inconsistent explanations regarding that incident and has not acknowledged the choking allegations or homicide determination.

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration’s chief economist called for punishment of Federal Reserve researchers on Wednesday after they published findings indicating U.S. businesses and consumers shoulder nearly all costs from new trade tariffs implemented by the administration in recent months.

Kevin Hassett, who heads the White House National Economic Council, criticized the research during a CNBC appearance, stating: “The paper is an embarrassment. It’s the worst paper I’ve ever seen in the history of the Federal Reserve system. The people associated with this paper should presumably be disciplined.”

The harsh criticism marks another instance of the Trump White House challenging the Federal Reserve’s traditional independence from political interference. The administration’s strong reaction also indicates ongoing sensitivity about economic pressures affecting American families, as polling data reveals continued public frustration with costs for essentials like food, housing, vehicles and home furnishings.

The New York Federal Reserve Bank’s research, released recently, determined that American businesses and consumers are absorbing approximately 90% of tariff expenses implemented under Trump’s trade policies. The study documented how average import duties jumped dramatically from 2.6% early last year to 13% by year’s end.

Multiple independent analyses have reached identical conclusions, including research conducted by Harvard University and University of Chicago economists, findings from Germany’s Kiel Institut research organization, and a recent nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office assessment.

The mechanics of tariff collection explain why domestic entities bear these costs. U.S. importing companies pay tariffs directly to federal treasury coffers, meaning foreign manufacturers would only absorb expenses if they substantially reduced their prices to compensate for the additional duties. However, the Fed’s analysis showed overseas exporters have implemented only minimal price reductions, far below tariff increases.

This confrontation follows a pattern of White House attacks on economists reaching similar conclusions about tariff burden distribution. Last August, Trump called for Goldman Sachs CEO David Solomon to terminate the firm’s chief economist after that analyst predicted Americans would increasingly shoulder tariff costs over time.

WASHINGTON — The White House welcomed guests Wednesday evening for its annual Black History Month celebration, occurring less than two weeks following President Donald Trump’s controversial social media post that generated widespread criticism from both political parties.

During Wednesday’s ceremony, Trump avoided mentioning the deleted social media content, which he has refused to apologize for despite significant public backlash. The president also made no reference to Barack Obama, America’s first Black commander-in-chief, instead focusing his remarks on other notable African American historical figures.

“We celebrate Black History Month. We honor the memory of those who came before us by continuing their legacy,” Trump stated during the reception.

The president highlighted several Black Americans who have publicly supported him, including former heavyweight champion Mike Tyson, whom Trump commended for speaking out against racism allegations. Trump also mentioned rapper Nicki Minaj, making comments about her appearance including remarks about her fingernails and calling her skin “so beautiful.”

Several administration officials joined Trump on stage, including Housing and Urban Development Secretary Scott Turner and White House pardon advisor Alice Marie Johnson.

“As you look out upon this sea of Black Americans, this president hears you. This president cares for you. Don’t let anyone tell you that this president right here, Donald Trump has not — is not for Black America,” Johnson declared. “Because he is.”

Trump outlined various policy initiatives he claims have helped Black communities, including legislation he enacted last year removing federal taxes on tip income and his decision to deploy National Guard units to restore order in cities with significant Black populations, including Washington, New Orleans and Memphis, Tennessee.

The White House gathering occurred one day after Trump defended himself on social media, writing that he has been “falsely and consistently called a Racist by the Scoundrels and Lunatics on the Radical Left” in a post intended to honor the late Rev. Jesse Jackson, who passed away Tuesday.

When reporters questioned White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt about the president’s statement, she responded Wednesday morning: “There is a lot this president has done for all Americans, regardless of race. And he has absolutely been falsely called and smeared as a racist.”

While Trump has consistently acknowledged Black History Month during his presidency, his administrative actions and public statements frequently conflict with celebrating diversity and recognizing Black American achievements.

The current administration has specifically targeted diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives that have provided employment opportunities for many Black Americans in government agencies and private companies over recent decades. Trump has labeled DEI programs as “discrimination” and is working to eliminate them from federal operations while encouraging private businesses to follow suit.

Despite this approach, Trump positions himself as a supporter of historically Black colleges and universities. The White House emphasized Wednesday that the administration allocated $500 million to HBCUs last year. However, this funding boost primarily came from redirecting federal dollars previously designated for institutions serving predominantly Hispanic student populations. The HBCU funding announcement came shortly after the Education Department withdrew $350 million from grant programs supporting colleges with substantial Hispanic and other minority enrollment. Administration officials declared those previous grant programs violated constitutional principles.

Trump launched his second presidential term by arguing that certain African American history curricula are designed to foster anti-American sentiment. He signed an executive directive titled “restoring truth and sanity to American history,” which his administration has used to remove historical content from national parks deemed to “inappropriately disparage Americans past or living,” including markers related to Black history.

Early in his current term, Trump issued an official proclamation designating February as Black History Month, even as the Defense Department announced it would no longer use official resources to observe cultural awareness months.

Last year’s White House Black History Month reception similarly followed another executive order that terminated federal diversity, equity and inclusion programs.

WASHINGTON – The Biden administration on Wednesday urged Cuba to implement substantial reforms immediately, describing the communist nation as a deteriorating regime while stopping short of demanding leadership changes.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt addressed reporters about the situation during a Wednesday briefing, characterizing Cuba’s current state as unstable.

“They are a regime that is falling. Their country is collapsing and that’s why we believe it’s in their best interest to make very dramatic changes very soon,” Leavitt stated during the press conference.

The press secretary emphasized America’s commitment to promoting democratic values throughout the region, expressing the administration’s desire to witness thriving democratic nations across the Western Hemisphere. However, Leavitt declined to elaborate on specific measures the United States might pursue to achieve these goals.

The U.S. State Department is working on a new website that would allow people in Europe and other regions to access content that their governments have blocked, according to three sources with knowledge of the initiative.

The website will operate under the domain “freedom.gov,” sources revealed. Officials have discussed incorporating virtual private network capabilities that would make users’ internet activity appear to come from the United States, with one source noting that the site won’t track user behavior.

Undersecretary for Public Diplomacy Sarah Rogers is leading this initiative, which was originally scheduled to debut at last week’s Munich Security Conference but faced delays, the sources indicated.

Reuters was unable to confirm the specific reasons for the postponement, though two sources mentioned that some State Department personnel, including legal staff, have expressed reservations about the proposal without specifying their exact concerns.

This initiative could create additional tension between the Trump administration and European allies, who are already dealing with disagreements over trade issues, Russia’s conflict in Ukraine, and President Trump’s interest in asserting influence over Greenland.

The website would also place Washington in an unusual position of seemingly encouraging people to circumvent their local regulations.

When contacted by Reuters, a State Department representative stated that the U.S. government doesn’t operate a censorship-bypassing program targeting Europe specifically, but noted: “Digital freedom is a priority for the State Department, however, and that includes the proliferation of privacy and censorship-circumvention technologies like VPNs.”

The representative disputed claims about any delayed announcement and said it was incorrect that State Department attorneys had voiced concerns.

The Trump administration has prioritized free speech issues, particularly what it perceives as suppression of conservative viewpoints online, making it a cornerstone of foreign policy efforts in Europe and Brazil.

European approaches to free expression differ significantly from American standards, where the Constitution safeguards nearly all forms of speech. European Union restrictions developed from efforts to prevent any return of extremist messaging that powered Nazism, including its targeting of Jewish people, immigrants, and minority groups.

American officials have criticized EU policies they claim suppress right-wing political figures in Romania, Germany, and France, arguing that regulations like the EU’s Digital Services Act and Britain’s Online Safety Act restrict free expression.

The EU delegation in Washington, serving as the 27-nation bloc’s diplomatic mission, didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment regarding the American proposal.

Through regulations that primarily affect social media platforms and major services like Meta’s Facebook and X, the EU restricts access to — and sometimes mandates quick removal of — material labeled as illegal hate speech, terrorist content, or dangerous misinformation under various rules, laws, and decisions implemented since 2008.

Rogers has become a vocal supporter of the Trump administration’s stance on EU content regulations. Since assuming her role in October, she has traveled to more than six European nations and met with representatives from right-wing organizations that the administration claims face oppression. The department declined to make Rogers available for interviews.

The Trump administration’s National Security Strategy, released in December, cautioned that Europe faced “civilisational erasure” due to its immigration policies. The document stated the U.S. would focus on “cultivating resistance to Europe’s current trajectory within European nations.”

EU regulators frequently mandate that American-based platforms remove content and can implement bans as a final option. X, owned by Trump associate Elon Musk, received a 120 million-euro penalty in December for failing to comply.

Germany, as an example, issued 482 removal orders in 2024 for material it determined supported or encouraged terrorism and compelled providers to eliminate 16,771 pieces of content.

Similarly, Meta’s oversight board in 2024 mandated removal of a Polish political party’s posts containing racial slurs and portraying immigrants as sexual predators, content that EU law classifies as illegal hate speech.

Kenneth Propp, a former State Department official who handled European digital regulations and now works at the Atlantic Council’s Europe Center, described the U.S. plan as “a direct shot” at European rules and laws. He said freedom.gov “would be perceived in Europe as a U.S. effort to frustrate national law provisions.”

Edward Coristine, a former member of Musk’s cost-cutting Department of Government Efficiency, is also participating in the U.S. portal project, according to two sources. Coristine collaborates with the National Design Studio, established by Trump to improve government website aesthetics. Reuters couldn’t reach Coristine for comment.

The specific benefits the U.S. government portal would provide beyond those offered by commercial VPN services remain unclear.

Federal registry get.gov shows the freedom.gov web address was registered on January 12. As of Wednesday, the site contained no content but displayed the National Design Studio’s logo, the phrase “fly, eagle, fly” and a login form.

Prior to Trump’s second presidency, the U.S. government supported commercial VPNs and similar tools as part of global democracy promotion efforts, helping users access unrestricted information in China, Iran, Russia, Belarus, Cuba, Myanmar, and other nations.

SANTA FE, N.M. — Lawmakers in New Mexico’s unique volunteer legislature have moved to end their unpaid status that has existed since the state joined the union.

In a close vote Tuesday evening, the state Senate approved a constitutional amendment that would eliminate the current ban on direct legislative pay. The measure will now go before voters this November, who will decide whether to link lawmaker salaries to New Mexico’s median household income.

The proposal gained momentum after years of failed attempts, driven this time by a coalition of younger female state representatives who highlighted the difficulties of managing careers, families, and legislative responsibilities simultaneously.

Currently, New Mexico covers lawmakers’ travel costs and provides meal and lodging stipends during legislative sessions. Many representatives also qualify for public retirement benefits.

The volunteer “citizen legislature” has traditionally been viewed with pride throughout New Mexico. However, supporters of paying legislators argue the current arrangement prevents young people and working-class individuals from running for office and can hamper work on complicated policy matters as lawmakers must maintain separate paying jobs.

For comparison, lawmakers in states like New York and California earn more than $100,000 annually, while New Hampshire pays its legislators just $100 per year.

NEW YORK (AP) — Following a series of cold weather deaths, New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani announced Wednesday that the city will restart operations to clear homeless encampments, but with a significantly different strategy than his predecessor used.

The Democratic mayor had halted the encampment clearing program shortly after taking office in January, criticizing the previous administration’s methods as inadequate for connecting people with permanent housing solutions.

However, Mamdani now says his revised strategy — which puts the city’s homeless services department in charge instead of police and includes extensive outreach efforts — will produce better outcomes.

“We will meet them looking to connect them with shelter, looking to them with services, looking to connect them with a city that wants them to be sheltered and indoors and warm and safe. And that is something that I believe will yield far better results,” he said at an unrelated news conference.

The announcement follows the deaths of at least 19 individuals outdoors during recent severe cold weather, sparking concerns about the city’s homeless response efforts. City officials report no evidence that any of the deceased were residents of encampments, despite the administration’s intensive efforts to encourage homeless individuals to use new shelters, heated buses and warming facilities.

The outdoor fatalities have created an early challenge for Mamdani’s administration, generating questions about whether more could have been done and renewed criticism regarding the new mayor’s limited administrative background.

Former Mayor Eric Adams had made encampment sweeps a signature element of his public safety agenda. Those operations, conducted by police and sanitation teams, faced strong opposition from homeless advocacy organizations and produced limited success — while most cleared sites remained empty, only a small percentage of those encountered during sweeps agreed to enter temporary housing.

The updated protocol calls for posting advance notice before clearing any encampment, followed by daily visits from homeless services outreach staff for one week to connect individuals with available resources and support services.

On the eighth day, sanitation crews would remove the encampment structures, with officials hoping residents would have relocated voluntarily. Police would only observe the process, according to a city spokesperson.

Coalition for the Homeless Executive Director David Giffen expressed surprise at the announcement, calling it “blindsided” by the decision and describing it as a “political response” that won’t benefit homeless New Yorkers.

He warned that such actions could damage relationships between city outreach staff and unsheltered individuals, potentially leading to more fatalities during future extreme weather events.

“When a city worker shows up and throws out all your belongings, you’re not going to trust that person the next time they show up offering you a place to sleep inside,” Giffen said.

New York City Council Speaker Julie Menin, also a Democrat, praised Mamdani’s decision as “an important step forward.”

“Allowing New Yorkers to stay on the street during extreme weather is inhumane,” Menin said in a statement, adding that after oversight hearings at the Council, “it was clear that the City needed to take a closer look at how this policy was being implemented. Protecting lives must remain our top priority.”

The Trump administration is set to roll back environmental regulations governing coal-fired power facilities this week, which would permit these plants to release increased amounts of dangerous pollutants such as mercury, according to a Wednesday report from the New York Times.

Top officials from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency are anticipated to make this announcement public during their scheduled visit to Louisville, Kentucky, on Friday, the Times reported.

The British Broadcasting Corporation announced Wednesday it will seek dismissal of President Donald Trump’s massive $10 billion defamation lawsuit, claiming the president cannot prove the network harmed his reputation through a controversial documentary.

Court documents filed in Miami federal court reveal the BBC’s strategy to challenge Trump’s legal case on multiple fronts. The network plans to argue that Trump has not successfully demonstrated valid claims for defamation or violations of Florida’s unfair trade practices statutes.

Additionally, the BBC intends to challenge whether the court has proper authority to hear the case under Florida state law, federal civil procedure rules, and constitutional due process protections. The network has previously issued an apology to Trump regarding the editing in question.

Trump’s legal team has not yet provided comment on the BBC’s filing. The network has until March 17 to submit its official response to Trump’s December 15 lawsuit, with a trial date set for February 15, 2027.

The lawsuit stems from allegations that the BBC manipulated video footage from Trump’s January 6, 2021 address to create a misleading impression that he directly instructed his supporters to attack the U.S. Capitol as Congress prepared to confirm Joe Biden’s 2020 election victory.

The disputed editing in the documentary titled “Trump: A Second Chance?” combined footage of Trump telling supporters they would march to the Capitol with separate footage recorded nearly an hour later where he urged them to “fight like hell.”

Trump is demanding a minimum of $5 billion in damages for each of his claims against the publicly-funded British broadcaster.

The documentary controversy and accompanying accusations of editorial bias resulted in the November departures of the BBC’s chief executive and news director.

President Donald Trump voiced sharp criticism Wednesday of British Prime Minister Keir Starmer regarding an agreement concerning the Diego Garcia military installation, calling the British leader’s approach misguided.

Writing on his Truth Social platform, Trump stated: “Prime Minister Starmer is losing control of this important Island by claims of entities never known of before.”

The president also indicated that the United States might need to utilize Diego Garcia, along with an airfield in Fairford, to “eradicate a potential attack” from Iran should diplomatic efforts fail to resolve the ongoing nuclear standoff with Tehran.

The controversy stems from a 2025 deal in which Britain agreed to hand over sovereignty of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius, while maintaining operational control of the crucial U.S.-UK military facility on Diego Garcia through a lease lasting 99 years.

WASHINGTON – The White House confirmed Wednesday that President Donald Trump has not engaged in direct conversations with Democratic members of Congress in recent days regarding potential government shutdown issues.

Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt made the statement during Wednesday’s briefing, clarifying the current level of communication between the administration and Democratic leadership on the matter.

WASHINGTON – The Treasury Department announced Wednesday new guidelines requiring oil companies conducting business in Venezuela to handle their tax payments through a split system.

Under the new rules, businesses operating in Venezuela’s oil sector will pay local taxes, permits, and fees directly to Venezuelan authorities. Meanwhile, energy royalties, per-barrel charges, and federal tax obligations must be deposited into the Foreign Government Deposit Funds, which are overseen by the current administration.

These guidelines were outlined in a Frequently Asked Questions document that Reuters obtained before its official posting on the Treasury Department’s website.

The new FAQ document references two general licenses that Treasury released on February 10th. The first license removed U.S. sanctions that had restricted Venezuelan oil exports, sales, storage, and transportation activities. The second authorization permits American companies to provide goods, technology, software, or services for Venezuela’s oil and gas exploration, development, and production operations.

Missouri Attorney General Catherine Hanaway is taking a stance that federal pesticide labeling requirements should satisfy state regulations as legal battles continue over glyphosate-based products. Hanaway expressed her position clearly, stating: “Look, if there’s an EPA warning that’s prescribed for any herbicide or pesticide, that should be enough in Missouri.”

Her comments come during a period when both state legislators and the U.S. Supreme Court are examining various legal disputes connected to glyphosate, the active ingredient in many weed killers. Meanwhile, Monsanto’s popular Roundup product faces ongoing litigation challenges in courts across the country.

Rev. Jesse Jackson’s historic 1988 presidential campaign launch in Pittsburgh represented more than political ambition—it embodied his vision for America to achieve its greatest potential.

“If I can become president,” Jackson declared, reflecting on his upbringing in poverty as a Black child in segregated South Carolina, “every woman can. Every man can. I’m giving America a chance to make a choice to fulfill the highest and best of an authentic and honest democracy.”

Though Jackson’s presidential bid didn’t succeed, it sparked inspiration across America among those who believed in his vision. Jackson passed away Tuesday at age 84, leaving behind a transformative legacy.

Today, numerous activists, religious leaders, civic organizers, and elected officials trace their motivation back to Jackson’s groundbreaking campaigns and his unwavering commitment to equality and justice.

“Here I was, a kid growing up in public housing, and I got to witness this Black man running for president. He gave me a glimpse of what is possible, and he taught me how to say, ‘I am somebody’,” explained Democratic Sen. Raphael Warnock of Georgia, referencing Jackson’s famous slogan taken from poetry.

Warnock, who leads Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta—the same congregation once pastored by Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.—believes Jackson’s influence remains crucial today amid current political challenges regarding elections, international relations, and immigration policy.

“His voice is now silent, but his example is eternal, and that work is left to us,” Warnock stated.

Jackson’s remarkable career encompassed international humanitarian efforts, advocacy for progressive economic policies, and leadership within the Civil Rights Movement that King had previously guided. Jackson witnessed King’s assassination at the Memphis hotel where it occurred.

Jackson’s 1988 White House pursuit forced Americans to consider whether King’s protégé could reach the presidency twenty years after the civil rights leader’s death. His equality-focused message during the Democratic primary attracted diverse voter support and surprised party establishment figures, who subsequently restructured the primary process due to increased participation.

Political experts believe these changes later enabled another Black Illinois politician to win the presidency twenty years afterward.

Barack Obama acknowledged this connection in his tribute to Jackson’s life.

Obama noted that former first lady Michelle Obama “got her first glimpse of political organizing at the Jacksons’ kitchen table when she was a teenager.” He added, “And in his two historic runs for president, he laid the foundation for my own campaign to the highest office in the land.”

This relationship didn’t prevent Jackson from critiquing Obama or supporting activists who challenged America’s first Black president’s policies.

“He continued to reach out to young Black activists throughout the protests that started in 2014,” explained DeRay McKesson, a racial justice organizer active in Ferguson, Missouri, during Black Lives Matter demonstrations. “As an activist and organizer, I appreciate that Jesse, just like the generation of people he came up with, had a deep understanding of structural change.”

Following his presidential campaigns, Jackson maintained significant political influence. Operating from his Rainbow PUSH Coalition headquarters in Chicago, he guided emerging leaders for decades. Following his death, numerous activists, political strategists, and congressional members attributed their success to Jackson’s mentorship.

Democratic Rep. Troy Carter of Louisiana first encountered Jackson while working as a young aide to New Orleans Mayor Sidney Barthelemy.

“Over the years, since our first meeting, he encouraged me in every step of my political career. His legacy will endure in every life he inspired,” Carter reflected.

Former Vice President Kamala Harris honored Jackson by recalling how his 1988 campaign created unity among supporters. As a San Francisco law student, she remembered strangers “from every walk of life would give me a thumbs-up or honk of support” when they spotted her “Jesse Jackson for President” bumper sticker.

“They were small interactions, but they exemplified Reverend Jackson’s life work — lifting up the dignity of working people, building community and coalitions, and strengthening our democracy and nation,” Harris wrote. She later became the first Black woman nominated for president by a major party.

Even political opponents recognized Jackson’s significance as a civil rights pioneer and champion of progressive humanitarian principles.

“I don’t have to agree with someone politically to deeply respect the role Jesse Jackson, a South Carolina native, played in uplifting Black voices and inspiring young folks to believe their voices mattered,” wrote Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina, the Senate’s only Black Republican. “Those that empower people to stand taller always leave a lasting mark.”

Tennessee state Rep. Justin Pearson discovered Jackson at age 8 through a Black history picture book his mother provided, with Jackson’s image on the cover.

Pearson, now 31, expressed gratitude to Jackson for “creating space for people like me to be where I am.” He met Jackson after Republican legislators expelled him and another Black Democratic colleague for participating in a gun control demonstration at the Tennessee Statehouse.

The Memphis representative later accompanied Jackson to place a wreath where King was murdered. Pearson has joined Jackson at various civil rights commemorations across the South, noting Jackson’s distinctive presence even among other prominent figures.

“You have a lot of civil rights elders who you read about, but it means something different when you have somebody who you can talk to, who can be present, who is there physically,” said Tennessee state Rep. Justin Jones, the other expelled legislator who met Jackson. Both representatives won reelection to their positions.

Jackson “was committed to raising the rising generation of civil rights voices and leaders and legislators, and somebody who has a whole movement that is standing on his shoulders,” Jones, 30, observed.

Stacey Abrams was 10 years old in Gulfport, Mississippi, during Jackson’s initial presidential campaign. The ministers’ daughter recalls being “transfixed” by this “larger than life figure who did not look like everyone else.”

As former Georgia House minority leader, Abrams launched two unsuccessful gubernatorial campaigns. Both times, she worked to mobilize diverse constituencies, including communities of color and lower-income voters, using strategies that reflected Jackson’s political approach. Jackson provided guidance throughout both campaigns.

“I’ve been one of, I would say, thousands of people who received counsel and support from Jackson, but also got a phone call that said, ‘I’m thinking about you,’ or an offer to come and be a part of something he was doing,” Abrams shared.

“I think that’s the legacy that’s most important, that he didn’t stand as a single figure who wanted to be alone. He built community.”

The Federal Communications Commission obtained written transcripts of Bad Bunny’s Super Bowl halftime show from NBC following complaints from a Republican congressman who claimed the Spanish-language performance might have broken federal broadcast standards, an FCC official revealed Wednesday.

Commissioner Anna Gomez disclosed that she examined the performance transcripts after discovering the agency had requested them from NBC, which is owned by Comcast. “I reviewed them carefully, and I found no violation of our rules and no justification for harassing broadcasters over a standard live performance,” Gomez stated.

The review came after a GOP legislator raised concerns that the Puerto Rican superstar’s Spanish-language performance during the halftime show could have contained content that violated broadcast decency standards.

WASHINGTON – The head of the Federal Communications Commission pushed back Wednesday against claims that federal regulators forced CBS to block a political interview on Stephen Colbert’s late-night program, while also announcing an official probe into ABC’s daytime talk show “The View.”

FCC Chairman Brendan Carr verified that his agency has launched an enforcement action to determine whether ABC’s popular morning program broke federal equal time regulations regarding political candidate appearances.

The controversy began when Colbert revealed Monday that CBS attorneys prevented him from broadcasting a sit-down interview with James Talarico, a Democratic state lawmaker from Texas seeking his party’s U.S. Senate nomination. According to Colbert, network legal teams made this decision following updated FCC guidelines issued in January that removed previous exemptions for daytime and late-night talk shows from equal time requirements when featuring political candidates.

PHILADELPHIA (AP) — Federal officials are challenging a court ruling that mandated the return of a historical display about nine enslaved individuals who lived at George Washington’s former residence in Philadelphia’s Independence Mall.

The Justice Department maintains that federal authorities have exclusive control over the narratives presented at National Park Service locations. Last month, park officials suddenly took down displays at the Philadelphia location, leading the city and exhibit supporters to file legal action.

On Monday, U.S. Senior Judge Cynthia M. Rufe issued a temporary restraining order requiring the materials to be put back in place during ongoing litigation and preventing Trump administration officials from developing new historical interpretations for the site. The following day, the administration submitted an appeal notice to the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia.

Judge Rufe, who was nominated by Republican President George W. Bush, drew parallels between President Donald Trump’s administration and the authoritarian government depicted in George Orwell’s dystopian work “1984,” which altered historical documentation to support its agenda.

“As if the Ministry of Truth in George Orwell’s 1984 now existed, with its motto ‘Ignorance is Strength,’ this Court is now asked to determine whether the federal government has the power it claims — to dissemble and disassemble historical truths when it has some domain over historical facts,” Rufe wrote. “It does not.”

Philadelphia, recognized as the birthplace of America, anticipates hosting millions of visitors this year as the nation marks the 250th anniversary of its establishment in 1776.

This location is part of a broader pattern where the current administration has discretely eliminated educational materials addressing the experiences of enslaved individuals, LGBTQ+ communities, and Native American populations at various historical sites.

A senior economic advisor to President Trump is calling for disciplinary action against Federal Reserve researchers who published findings that contradict the administration’s position on trade tariffs.

Kevin Hassett, who leads the White House’s National Economic Council, delivered harsh criticism Wednesday of a New York Federal Reserve study examining who pays the price for increased import taxes. The research concluded that Americans shoulder the burden of tariff costs, contradicting the Trump administration’s longstanding claim that foreign nations absorb these expenses.

During a CNBC interview, Hassett denounced the research in strong terms. “The paper is an embarrassment,” he stated. “It’s, I think, the worst paper I’ve ever seen in the history of the Federal Reserve System” and “the people associated with this paper should presumably be disciplined” for writing it.

Hassett further criticized the methodology behind the study, claiming the New York Fed researchers have “put out a conclusion which has created a lot of news that’s highly partisan based on analysis that wouldn’t be accepted in a first semester econ class.”

The disputed research analyzed the effects of the president’s substantial increases in import duties and determined that domestic consumers and businesses ultimately pay these costs rather than foreign exporters. Similar conclusions have emerged from other economic studies on the topic.

Officials at the New York Federal Reserve had not provided a response to requests for comment regarding Hassett’s statements.

MONTGOMERY, Ala. — Republican lawmakers in Alabama have passed new legislation that would significantly limit the state’s power to create environmental regulations beyond federal requirements, mirroring the deregulatory approach championed by President Donald Trump’s administration.

The Alabama Legislature voted Tuesday to approve the business-backed measure, which blocks state agencies from establishing pollution standards that surpass federal guidelines. When federal standards don’t exist, Alabama could only create new environmental rules by proving a “direct causal link” between harmful emissions and “manifest bodily harm” to people.

Advocates of the Alabama bill argue it ensures regulations are based on “sound science” and prevents government overreach. However, environmental advocates warn the legislation will severely handicap the state’s capacity to address environmental and public health threats, including PFAS contamination — commonly called forever chemicals — that has affected large portions of the South.

Sarah Stokes, a senior attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center, described the bill as creating an “impossible hurdle” for state environmental protections because it specifies that simply showing an “increased risk of disease” isn’t sufficient to prove harm to people.

“It’s a blank check to businesses. We’re basically sacrificing human health for businesses,” Stokes stated. “That doesn’t seem like the best calculation for our citizens.”

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and various business organizations endorsed the legislation. Republican Sen. Donnie Chesteen, who sponsored the bill, described it as “pro-business” legislation during committee hearings this month.

“If we’re going to be able to compete with states in the Southeast to attract and bring some of these businesses in, then we need to have these standards adopted so that it’s clearly defined what our companies are working with,” Chesteen explained. Supporters also pointed to the measure as aligned with Trump’s deregulatory policies.

“This does not remove the use of sound science and legitimate science,” Republican Rep. Troy Stubbs stated during floor debate. “What it does is protect Alabama and the people of Alabama from runaway government that can become overly burdensome and regulatory to a point that it drives the cost of living way up.”

Stubbs argued the legislation wouldn’t weaken current regulations, claiming existing state environmental rules would remain unchanged. Environmental attorney Stokes, however, expressed worry that companies might use the new law to challenge current regulations.

This Alabama action represents part of a broader movement to constrain state environmental oversight. Indiana Gov. Mike Braun issued an executive order last year preventing Indiana from implementing environmental regulations stricter than federal ones without state law authorization or gubernatorial approval. Tennessee legislators passed similar legislation last year mandating that regulations exceeding federal standards demonstrate connections to “manifest bodily harm in humans.”

Stokes noted that Alabama’s proposal extends further than Tennessee’s law. Similar legislation has been proposed in Utah.

According to Stokes, the Alabama bill emerged after advocacy organizations convinced the Alabama Environmental Management Commission to consider updating state standards for arsenic, cyanide, and eleven other toxic substances.

Cara Horowitz, an environmental law professor and executive director of the Emmett Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at UCLA School of Law, said the legislation would block state agencies from making “independent decisions about how much to protect public health from things like water pollution, air pollution, and toxics.”

“Alabama could adopt its own pollution standard only where the state’s rationale for doing so relies on a very particular kind of science,” Horowitz explained in an email. “Alabama could not rely, for example, on studies showing a correlation between pollution exposure and an increased risk of disease.”

The legislation also prohibits agencies from using the EPA’s Integrated Risk Information System as the primary foundation for water quality standards. This system evaluates health risks from environmental chemicals, but chemical industry lobbying groups have criticized it as excessively restrictive and scientifically questionable.

Alabama Democrats opposed the bill during two hours of debate before GOP legislators voted to halt discussion and force the vote.

Democratic Rep. Chris England argued the bill transforms Alabama citizens into experimental subjects. “We are a petri dish for businesses to do as they will until they kill people,” England declared.

Rep. Neil Rafferty, also a Democrat, said the bill is “defining sound science just to gut our ability to use it to drive science-based and data-driven policy.”

The state House of Representatives approved the measure 88-34, sending it to Republican Gov. Kay Ivey. Her office has not yet responded to requests for comment.

WASHINGTON — Health and environmental organizations filed a federal lawsuit Wednesday against the Environmental Protection Agency, contesting the agency’s recent decision to overturn a key scientific determination that has served as the foundation for U.S. greenhouse gas regulations and climate action.

The EPA finalized a rule Thursday that eliminates a 2009 government declaration — called the endangerment finding — which concluded that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases pose a threat to public health and welfare. This Obama-era determination has served as the legal foundation for nearly all climate regulations under the Clean Air Act, covering motor vehicles, power plants and other pollution sources contributing to global warming.

The reversal removes all greenhouse gas emission standards for cars and trucks and could trigger a wider dismantling of climate regulations on stationary sources like power plants and oil and gas operations, according to experts.

The legal challenge was filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, arguing that the EPA’s elimination of the endangerment finding violates the law. The 2009 determination backed sensible protections to reduce climate pollution, including from cars and trucks, according to the lawsuit. Vehicle standards implemented by the Biden administration were designed to “deliver the single biggest cut to U.S. carbon pollution in history, save lives and save Americans hard-earned money on gas,” the coalition stated in their court filing.

Following almost twenty years of scientific evidence that supports the 2009 determination, “the agency cannot credibly claim that the body of work is now incorrect,” stated Brian Lynk, a senior attorney at the Environmental Law & Policy Center.

“This reckless and legally untenable decision creates immediate uncertainty for businesses, guarantees prolonged legal battles and undermines the stability of federal climate regulations,” Lynk stated.

Organizations bringing the lawsuit include the American Public Health Association, American Lung Association, Alliance of Nurses for a Healthy Environment and Physicians for Social Responsibility, alongside environmental organizations such as the Center for Biological Diversity, Conservation Law Foundation, Environmental Defense Fund, Natural Resources Defense Council and Sierra Club.

The lawsuit names EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin and the EPA as defendants.

President Donald Trump described the reversal as “the single largest deregulatory action in American history, by far,” while Zeldin characterized the endangerment finding as “the Holy Grail of federal regulatory overreach.”

The endangerment finding “led to trillions of dollars in regulations that strangled entire sectors of the United States economy, including the American auto industry,” Zeldin stated. “The Obama and Biden administrations used it to steamroll into existence a left-wing wish list of costly climate policies, electric vehicle mandates and other requirements that assaulted consumer choice and affordability.”

Environmental organizations characterized the action as the largest assault in U.S. history on federal authority to combat climate change. Scientific evidence supporting the endangerment finding has only strengthened in the 17 years since its approval, they argued.

The Clean Air Act legally requires EPA to restrict emissions of any air pollutant that causes or contributes to “air pollution that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.” In 2007, the Supreme Court ruled in Massachusetts v. EPA that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases qualify as “air pollutants” under the Clean Air Act and directed EPA to make a science-based determination about whether that pollution endangers human health and welfare. EPA reached that conclusion in 2009, leading to new vehicle standards. The agency used that finding as the basis for additional standards.

The EPA’s own research determined that removing the vehicle standards will raise gas prices and force Americans to pay more for fuel, advocates noted.

The EPA’s elimination of the endangerment finding, combined with removing protections that limit vehicle emissions, “marks a complete dereliction of the agency’s mission to protect people’s health and its legal obligations under the Clean Air Act,” said Dr. Gretchen Goldman, president and CEO at the Union of Concerned Scientists.

“This shameful and dangerous action … is rooted in falsehoods, not facts, and is at complete odds with the public interest and the best available science,” Goldman stated. Heat-trapping emissions and global average temperatures continue rising — mainly from burning fossil fuels — creating mounting human and economic costs worldwide, she noted.

Recent special election victories haven’t lifted Democratic spirits, as a fresh survey from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research shows party members remain discouraged following President Donald Trump’s 2024 election triumph.

The polling data reveals that roughly 70% of Democratic Party members maintain a favorable opinion of their organization. Though most Democrats continue supporting their party, this represents a significant drop from previous levels of enthusiasm.

With midterm elections still months ahead, weak approval ratings don’t necessarily predict electoral failure. Democrats may benefit from other circumstances this year, particularly widespread negative opinions about Trump and Republican officials.

However, this enthusiasm gap could create lasting challenges for the party. Democratic support for their own organization crashed following the 2024 election results. Even after decisive November victories in off-year races and subsequent electoral successes, member confidence hasn’t rebounded.

Environmental and health advocacy organizations filed a federal lawsuit Wednesday against the Environmental Protection Agency, contesting the agency’s decision to eliminate a key scientific determination that has served as the foundation for U.S. greenhouse gas regulations and climate change efforts.

Last week’s finalized regulation eliminates a 2009 government declaration called the endangerment finding, which established that carbon dioxide and additional greenhouse gases pose risks to public health and safety. This Obama administration determination supports virtually all climate-related regulations under Clean Air Act provisions covering automobiles, power facilities, and other sources contributing to planetary warming.

EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin described the endangerment finding as federal regulatory excess, while lawsuit supporters argue it provided reasonable protections to reduce climate pollution from vehicles and other sources.

The sleek black-and-white strapless dress came from her regular fashion designer and stylist, Herve Pierre, whose design and fitting process appears in “Melania,” her recently launched documentary.

Trump plans to donate the dress to the Smithsonian Institution’s National Museum of American History on Friday, White House officials announced. The museum operates a well-known first ladies exhibition displaying over two dozen of their formal gowns.

This marks Trump’s second contribution to the collection. In 2017, she donated the cream-colored off-the-shoulder dress from that year’s inaugural celebrations, also created by Pierre.

Even with internal party dissatisfaction, Democrats maintain at least one possible edge heading into midterm election season.

Approximately 35% of American adults trust Democrats to better manage healthcare issues, while only 23% prefer Republicans on this topic.

Meanwhile, Republicans have seen their standing decline on issues central to Trump’s reelection success — economic policy and immigration — though Democrats haven’t gained ground in these areas.

Just 31% of Americans now trust Republicans with economic management, dropping from 36% the previous year. Democrats haven’t improved their economic credibility; instead, more Americans now say they trust “neither” party.

The dissatisfaction extends beyond Democrats — Americans currently express lukewarm feelings toward both major parties.

Roughly one-third of U.S. adults view either the Democratic or Republican Party positively, the AP-NORC survey found. About 25% of Americans dislike both organizations, with this dual negativity particularly pronounced among independent voters and those under 45.

Democratic popularity decline appears more recent. Gallup polling spanning 25 years indicates Americans previously held much more positive views of Democrats. Public opinion shifted against them around 2010, and since then, at least half of Americans have maintained unfavorable party views.

Current negative Democratic perceptions match the Republican Party’s lowest historical approval periods.

Democratic enthusiasm for their organization dropped after Trump secured the presidency in 2024. Despite multiple recent special election victories, polling indicates party morale remains depressed.

Fresh AP-NORC data confirms that 70% of Democratic Party members maintain positive party views. While most Democrats still support their organization, current enthusiasm levels fall well below historical standards.

Democratic self-approval collapsed following the 2024 election, tumbling from 85% in September 2024 to 67% by October 2025.

A coalition of national park supporters and teachers has filed a federal lawsuit challenging the Trump administration’s efforts to remove educational exhibits that address slavery, the forced relocation of Native Americans, and other difficult periods in the nation’s past.

The legal action seeks to prevent park officials from dismantling displays that educate visitors about these challenging historical topics at national park sites across the country.

The plaintiffs argue that removing these educational materials would eliminate important opportunities for Americans to learn about and confront the more troubling aspects of the nation’s history.

Television comedian Stephen Colbert continues his public confrontation with CBS management regarding content restrictions on his late-night program.

During Tuesday’s broadcast of “The Late Show,” Colbert expressed shock at CBS’s public denial that network attorneys had prevented him from airing a segment featuring Democratic Texas Senate hopeful James Talarico the previous evening.

In a theatrical display of frustration, the host placed CBS’s official statement inside a pet waste bag before discarding it on stage.

The comedian had published his Talarico conversation on YouTube instead, explaining to his audience the network’s concerns about FCC Chairman Brendan Carr potentially implementing “equal time” regulations requiring broadcasters to offer similar airtime to rival candidates following political interviews.

“We looked and we can’t find one example of this rule being enforced for any talk show interview, not only for my entire late-night career, but for anyone’s late-night career going back to the 1960s,” Colbert stated.

While Carr mentioned in January his consideration of eliminating late-night show exemptions, no such action has occurred. “But CBS generously did it for him,” Colbert remarked.

The host revealed that CBS executives knew Monday evening he planned to address this matter publicly, with network attorneys approving his prepared remarks. This made their subsequent statement claiming they provided “legal guidance” about equal time violations particularly surprising to him.

“I don’t know what this is about,” Colbert said. “For the record, I’m not even mad. I really don’t want an adversarial relationship with the network. I’ve never had one.”

He criticized what he called the failure of “this giant global corporation” to resist intimidation tactics. Paramount Global owns CBS.

Colbert’s tenure at CBS will conclude in May following the network’s announcement last summer. While CBS cited financial considerations for ending the program, which frequently mocks President Donald Trump, both Colbert and observers question whether Trump’s ongoing criticism influenced the decision.

This controversy mirrors last fall’s incident when ABC temporarily removed Jimmy Kimmel from broadcasts over comments about conservative activist Charlie Kirk’s death, later reversing course after viewer backlash.

By Wednesday morning, Colbert’s YouTube conversation with Talarico had attracted over five million views, approximately twice his typical CBS viewership.

WASHINGTON — Despite winning several recent special elections, the Democratic Party continues to struggle with internal approval ratings following Donald Trump’s 2024 presidential victory, according to fresh polling data from the AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.

The survey shows that roughly 70% of Democratic voters maintain positive feelings toward their party — a significant drop from the 85% approval rating recorded in September 2024, which fell to 67% by October 2025. This decline represents an unusually steep fall in party confidence that hasn’t recovered despite recent electoral successes.

While midterm elections remain months away and poor favorability ratings don’t guarantee electoral failure, the enthusiasm gap could present long-term challenges for the party. Historical trends typically favor the opposition party during midterm cycles, and negative public opinion of Trump and Republicans, combined with independent voters gravitating toward the out-of-power party, may still benefit Democrats.

The internal dissatisfaction spans all demographic groups within the Democratic base, cutting across age, race, ideology, and education levels — indicating that targeted appeals to specific voter segments won’t easily resolve the issue.

Gallup polling confirms this trend, showing a 12-percentage-point decline in Democratic self-approval over the past year, marking the lowest rating since tracking began in 2001. Notably, Democrats didn’t experience similar drops after Trump’s initial 2016 victory.

Additional research from Pew Research Center found that approximately two-thirds of Democrats reported feeling “frustrated” with their party in September, compared to just 40% of Republicans expressing similar sentiments about the GOP. Among frustrated Democrats, roughly 40% believed their party wasn’t fighting Trump aggressively enough, while about 10% cited poor leadership and lack of unified messaging.

The discontent extends beyond party lines, with roughly one-quarter of all Americans holding negative views of both major political parties, particularly among independent voters and those under 45. Only about half of U.S. adults view one party positively, while just 10% approve of both parties.

Long-term Gallup data indicates that Democratic favorability among the general public began declining around 2010, with at least half of Americans maintaining unfavorable views since then. Current negative ratings for Democrats now match the worst periods for Republican approval.

However, some opportunities exist for Democrats heading into the midterm cycle. Healthcare remains a top priority for Americans as costs continue rising, with 35% trusting Democrats to handle the issue better compared to 23% for Republicans — numbers consistent with October 2025 polling.

Republicans have lost ground on Trump’s signature campaign issues. Public trust in the GOP’s economic stewardship dropped from 36% to 31% over the past year, though Democrats haven’t capitalized on this decline, with more Americans now saying they trust neither party on economic matters. No party holds an advantage on cost-of-living concerns, according to the latest survey.

Immigration presents a similar pattern, with Republican trust falling from 39% to roughly one-third of adults, but Democrats haven’t gained from this shift either.

The AP-NORC survey interviewed 1,156 adults between February 5-8 using NORC’s AmeriSpeak Panel, designed to represent the U.S. population. The overall margin of error is plus or minus 3.9 percentage points, with a plus or minus 6.0 percentage point margin for Democratic respondents specifically.

Utah state legislators are examining proposed legislation that would give college students the right to refuse academic assignments that go against their religious convictions. Republican State Representative Mike Peterson has put forward the bill after his own daughter faced what he considers a problematic classroom situation. According to Peterson’s account to the Salt Lake Tribune, a professor required his daughter to compose a letter to a government official advocating for LGBT-related policies. Peterson explained his rationale for the legislation, stating “Sometimes a student gets put in a position where it violates their conscience and have no recourse.” The proposed measure aims to provide students with an alternative when they believe their coursework conflicts with their deeply held faith-based principles.

Civil rights activists across the nation are mourning the loss of Jesse Jackson while vowing to carry forward his decades-long mission for racial equality following his death Tuesday at 84.

Jackson emerged as a pivotal figure in America’s civil rights movement following Martin Luther King Jr.’s assassination in 1968, dedicating over fifty years to breaking down segregation barriers and expanding political involvement for Black Americans and other underrepresented groups.

However, civil rights and diversity programs nationwide now face mounting challenges under the current Trump administration’s policies.

The federal government has rolled back diversity initiatives and targeted educational materials about slavery that officials label “anti-American.” The administration has also backed efforts to restore Confederate monuments honoring Civil War leaders who defended slavery. Civil rights advocates express concern that these actions threaten to reverse decades of advancement.

Through a series of interviews with civil rights leaders and experts, many expressed alarm that Jackson’s dream of a unified, multiracial American democracy faces serious threats in today’s polarized political environment.

National Urban League President and CEO Marc Morial warned: “We’re in a moment where the fabric and the social compact of America, which included rights, could be unraveled and we could be on the brink of a long period of division and hate in America.”

“The last 60 to 70 years have been about building this multicultural, multiracial democracy in America and we’re in a period of danger,” Morial added.

President Trump offered his condolences on Truth Social, sharing multiple photographs with Jackson and calling him “a good man, with lots of personality, grit, and ‘street smarts’” while describing the civil rights leader as “a force of nature.”

When contacted about Jackson’s passing, the White House directed inquiries to Trump’s social media statement. Officials did not immediately respond to questions regarding the elimination of diversity programs.

CARRYING FORWARD JACKSON’S MISSION

Jackson, who launched two campaigns for the Democratic presidential nomination, became renowned for his magnetic ability to channel grassroots energy into electoral power — registering millions of new voters through his National Rainbow Coalition while remaining at the forefront of racial justice activism.

Civil rights leaders emphasized that such political engagement remains crucial today.

Civil rights lawyer and Democratic analyst Areva Martin stressed the importance of preserving Jackson’s legacy through continued organizing and advocacy for civil and voting rights, especially as the Trump administration dismantles diversity programs, intensifies immigration enforcement, and challenges foundational civil rights laws like the 1965 Voting Rights Act that prohibited nationwide voting discrimination.

“We need to pick up the mantle,” Martin declared. “If Jesse Jackson were able-bodied he would have been out across the country organizing voters and building coalitions. He would know that’s the only way to fight to win back Congress and reverse the damage done by this administration.”

Community organizers have raised concerns about aggressive immigration enforcement operations and raids in Democratic strongholds, disproportionately affecting Black and Latino neighborhoods in what advocates describe as efforts to diminish immigrant communities’ voting influence.

NAACP President Derrick Johnson announced that his organization will intensify outreach initiatives leading up to November’s midterm elections in Jackson’s honor, highlighting multiple legal challenges addressing alleged voter suppression and registration efforts.

“Jesse Jackson is American history,” Johnson stated. “His legacy demonstrates how one can use their voice and a platform to advance interest in causes that are pro-democracy, pro-America and pro-bringing people together.”

The Movement for Black Lives, which energized the 2020 racial justice demonstrations, committed to continuing Jackson’s tradition of electoral participation.

The group is establishing nationwide rapid-response “community care networks,” already activated to distribute food and essential supplies in at least seven cities during ongoing federal immigration operations.

“He had the audacity — from his presidential run, being that Black left voice and being unapologetic about the need for us to form coalitions and engage with systems,” explained Dr. Amara Enyia, the movement’s co-executive director.

Jackson established the Chicago-headquartered civil rights organizations Operation PUSH and the National Rainbow Coalition, later merged into the Rainbow PUSH Coalition.

Ziff Sistrunk, a 70-year-old Chicago local, regularly participates in complimentary Saturday morning community breakfasts at the organization’s offices that combine social connection with civic participation.

“Jackson showed us how to resist, he showed us how to protest and how to be a statesman,” Sistrunk reflected. “All we have to do for the next generation who want to make changes is use his life as an example.”

Federal officials are advancing plans to construct additional border barrier sections through areas known for their environmental significance and cultural importance. Community organizers are making urgent appeals to congressional representatives to intervene and prevent the construction work.

The proposed wall segments would cut through regions that activists say contain delicate ecosystems and sites of cultural value. Environmental advocates worry about the potential impact on local wildlife habitats and protected natural areas.

Opposition groups are mobilizing efforts to pressure lawmakers into blocking the construction plans before work begins in these sensitive locations.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials conducted a large-scale detention operation in Maine over several days, resulting in more than 200 people being taken into custody. The agency has confirmed that a portion of those detained during the enforcement action have subsequently been released.

The multi-day sweep represents a significant immigration enforcement effort in the state, with ICE agents focusing their activities over a concentrated time period. While the exact number of those released has not been specified, officials indicate that some individuals are returning to communities within Maine.

LOS ANGELES — A California ballot initiative targeting the state’s wealthiest residents is creating a political rift between prominent Democrats at a time when party unity is crucial for upcoming midterm elections.

Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders is scheduled to hold a rally Wednesday afternoon in Los Angeles, advocating for a controversial tax measure that would impose a 5% levy on billionaire assets. The proposal has sparked fierce opposition from California’s tech industry, with some executives threatening to relocate if the measure passes.

Governor Gavin Newsom stands firmly against the initiative, expressing concerns that it could destabilize state revenues and damage California’s economic competitiveness on a national scale.

The progressive senator from Vermont, known for his democratic socialist views, has maintained strong support in California since winning the state’s 2020 Democratic presidential primary by a wide margin. Sanders has spent decades criticizing wealthy elites and highlighting income inequality.

A major healthcare union is spearheading efforts to get the November ballot measure approved, which would create a one-time 5% assessment on billionaire holdings including stocks, artwork, businesses, collectibles and intellectual property. Revenue would help replace federal healthcare funding for low-income residents that was eliminated under former President Trump’s administration.

Sanders expressed his backing for the tax on social media platform X, stating he “strongly supports” the measure “at a time of unprecedented and growing wealth and income inequality.”

“Our nation will not thrive when so few own so much,” Sanders wrote.

The debate emerges as Americans across party lines express anxiety about economic conditions and the country’s direction amid deep political divisions. Public skepticism toward government effectiveness remains high.

This disagreement has placed Newsom at odds with Sanders and other progressive Democrats, who view the California tax as a model for similar initiatives nationwide.

Brian Brokaw, a veteran Newsom advisor leading opposition efforts, argued the proposal wouldn’t address key Democratic priorities. “The issues that are really going to be motivating Democrats this year, affordability and the cost of health care and cuts to schools, none of these would be fixed by this proposal. If fact, they would be made worse,” Brokaw said.

Historical patterns show midterm elections typically favor the party not holding the presidency, with Democrats working to gain enough House seats to flip the chamber’s narrow Republican control. California’s newly drawn congressional districts could potentially deliver up to five additional Democratic seats, leaving the GOP with minimal representation.

University of California, Berkeley political science professor Eric Schickler noted the political challenges. “It is always better for a party to have the political debate focused on issues where you are united and the other party is divided,” Schickler explained. “Having an issue like this where Newsom and Sanders — among others — are on different sides is not ideal.”

However, Schickler acknowledged that billionaire taxation resonates with many voters, potentially helping Democratic candidates “rally that side and break through from the pack.”

The measure has already influenced gubernatorial and down-ballot races. Republican candidates Chad Bianco and Steve Hilton have criticized the tax as job-destroying, while Democratic San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan argues inequality issues should be addressed through federal tax code reforms.

Opposition groups are launching targeted digital campaigns and email outreach to influence party leaders, timing their efforts with Sanders’ visit and this weekend’s state Democratic convention.

Whether voters will see the proposal remains uncertain, as supporters must collect over 870,000 petition signatures to qualify for the ballot.

The campaign has already attracted substantial financial backing on both sides, with millions flowing into competing political committees.

Newsom has consistently opposed state wealth taxes, viewing them as harmful to California’s status as the world’s fourth-largest economy. Facing budget constraints and considering a potential 2028 presidential campaign, the governor is working to prevent the measure from reaching voters.

Policy experts warn that wealthy residents leaving the state could cost California hundreds of millions in tax revenue. Supporters counter that the funding is essential to maintain vital services that would otherwise be lost due to federal budget cuts.

COLUMBUS, Ohio — Congressional investigators will question billionaire retail executive Les Wexner behind closed doors Wednesday about his controversial relationship with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, following the release of new Justice Department documents.

The 88-year-old former L Brands founder has agreed to comply with a subpoena issued by House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Democrats.

Wexner’s connection to Epstein has drawn scrutiny for years, given their extensive business relationship spanning decades. Court filings include allegations from prominent Epstein victim Virginia Giuffre, who claimed Wexner was among those to whom Epstein trafficked her.

The retail magnate has repeatedly rejected any knowledge of or participation in Epstein’s criminal activities and states he never encountered Giuffre. Speaking to L Brands shareholders in 2019, Wexner expressed shame for his association with someone “so sick, so cunning, so depraved.”

No criminal charges have been filed against Wexner, and the Justice Department documents indicate Epstein did not operate a sex trafficking network.

The recently released files mention Wexner’s name over 1,000 times, which his representative described as unsurprising considering their lengthy partnership. These records provide fresh insights into their association, which concluded acrimoniously when Wexner and his spouse Abigail discovered Epstein had embezzled funds from them.

The two men first crossed paths through a mutual business contact around 1986.

This timing proved beneficial for Wexner’s financial interests. The successful Ohio entrepreneur had expanded from operating one Limited store in Columbus to controlling major retail brands of the 1980s mall era: The Limited, Limited Express, Lane Bryant and Victoria’s Secret. His empire later encompassed Abercrombie & Fitch, Lerner, White Barn Candle Co. and additional brands.

By the late 1980s, Wexner had entrusted management of his substantial wealth to Epstein. Documentation reveals that in 1991, he granted Epstein power of attorney, enabling him to handle investments, conduct business transactions, acquire real estate, and help develop what became Wexner’s extensive New Albany, Ohio estate. Wednesday’s testimony will occur either at that location or in the vicinity, according to participating legislators.

Speaking to Vanity Fair in 2003, Wexner praised Epstein’s “excellent judgment and unusually high standards,” calling him “always a most loyal friend.”

Among the newly disclosed documents, Epstein wrote personal notes about Wexner stating: “never ever, did anything without informing les” and “I would never give him up.” Another document, appearing to be an unsent letter to Wexner, referenced their “gang stuff” spanning over 15 years and described their mutual dependence — with Wexner enriching Epstein while Epstein increased Wexner’s wealth.

A Wexner representative confirmed he never received this correspondence.

“It appears Epstein was furious that Mr. Wexner refused to meet with him years after Mr. Wexner terminated Epstein and cut off all ties with him following Mr. Wexner’s discovery of Epstein’s theft and criminal conduct,” spokesperson Tom Davies stated. “The draft appears to fit a pattern of untrue, outlandish, and delusional statements made by Epstein in desperate attempts to perpetuate his lies and justify his misconduct.”

Wexner only disclosed publicly after Epstein’s July 2019 federal sex trafficking arrest that he had ended their relationship. In an August Wexner Foundation statement, he indicated this occurred in 2007. However, the newly released Justice Department records demonstrate continued communication beyond that date.

On June 26, 2008, Wexner sent Epstein an email following announcement of a plea agreement requiring 18 months in Florida jail on state charges of soliciting prostitution from a minor to avoid federal prosecution. Epstein ultimately served 13 months.

“Abigail told me the result… all I can say is I feel sorry. You violated your own number 1 rule…always be careful,” Wexner wrote. Epstein responded: “no excuse.”

Davies clarified that the 2007 date Wexner referenced in 2019 pertained to dismissing Epstein as financial advisor, canceling his power of attorney and removing his access to Wexner’s banking accounts.

In his 2019 statement, Wexner also revealed that Epstein had stolen “vast sums” from his family’s fortune during his financial oversight role. An investigative memo from the recent document release indicates Wexner’s legal team informed investigators in 2008 that Epstein had returned $100 million, believed to represent only a fraction of the stolen amount.

The document releases have empowered sexual assault survivors and intensified pressure on Wexner.

Epstein survivor Maria Farmer expressed vindication following a redacted FBI report in the documents confirming she filed among the earliest complaints against Epstein.

Despite the complaint documenting his possession of underage nude photographs, the records have renewed focus on Farmer’s disturbing account of an alleged forced sexual encounter with Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell during summer 1996 at Epstein’s New Albany residence. This property sat approximately half a mile from the Wexner family home. The Wexners maintain they remained unaware of Farmer’s allegations until media reports surfaced years later.

Concurrently, survivors of another sexual predator — deceased Dr. Richard Strauss, a former Ohio State University team physician found to have sexually abused at least 177 male students over multiple years — are referencing Wexner’s Epstein connection in their effort to remove his name from a campus football facility funded by his donations. Their petition awaits review by a university committee. Davies declined to comment.

The alumni group achieved a legal success last week when a district court judge ruled they can compel Wexner’s testimony in their lawsuit against the university. He served on Ohio State’s board of trustees during the period when Strauss, who died before his crimes were exposed, committed his offenses.

Additionally, an Ohio State representative confirmed that Dr. Mark Landon, head of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, is cooperating with the school’s investigation regarding his mention in the Epstein files. Recent documents revealed Epstein retained Landon in 2006 for $25,000 quarterly.

“I did not provide any clinical care for Jeffrey Epstein or any of his victims,” Landon stated. “I was a paid consultant for the New York Strategy Group regarding potential biotech investments from 2001 to 2005.” Davies indicated the consultation Epstein sought was conducted on the Wexners’ behalf.

The Trump administration has announced George Kelesis as its latest nominee for Nevada’s chief federal prosecutor role, following ongoing legal disputes over the current appointee’s qualifications to serve in the position.

The White House revealed Kelesis’s nomination last week. The longtime Nevada criminal defense lawyer would take over from Sigal Chattah, who has held the role since her appointment in March but whose legal authority to serve is currently being examined by an appellate court.

Chattah represents one of multiple Trump nominees for U.S. attorney positions who failed to receive Senate confirmation and have been deemed legally ineligible for their roles by federal courts. Similar eligibility disputes have recently forced appointees in New Jersey and Virginia to step down, while another in California continues serving under a modified title.

When contacted for comment, Chattah chose not to respond.

While the nation’s chief federal prosecutors generally need Senate approval, federal law allows the attorney general to make interim appointments.

Attorney General Pam Bondi has worked in multiple instances to extend the tenure of appointees lacking sufficient bipartisan backing for confirmation beyond normal time limits. These efforts have sparked legal challenges from criminal defendants and opposition from judges who consider the appointments improper.

A federal district judge determined in September that Chattah lacks valid authority in her position but permitted her to continue handling certain cases during the appeals process. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals conducted hearings last week without yet issuing a decision. Given losses in comparable cases, the selection of Kelesis suggests the administration anticipates an unfavorable outcome for Chattah.

A recent conflict concluded last month in Virginia’s Eastern District when Lindsey Halligan, a Trump supporter quickly appointed to the acting U.S. attorney position, announced her resignation. She had initiated prosecutions against two Trump critics, former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James. A court threw out those cases in November and declared her appointment unlawful. The Justice Department is challenging the dismissal of those prosecutions.

The administration faced a similar defeat in New Jersey when a federal judge determined Alina Habba had served as U.S. attorney beyond the permitted timeframe. Habba stepped down in December after an appeals court confirmed the lower court’s decision.

Bill Essayli, Trump’s selection for the Central District of California U.S. Attorney role, was also barred by a judge from serving as acting U.S. attorney. However, he remains the office’s senior prosecutor under the title First Assistant U.S. Attorney since the administration hasn’t nominated another candidate for the top position. The administration hasn’t indicated plans to replace him.

During last week’s appeals hearing, federal attorney Tyler Anne Lee contended that Chattah holds valid authority as acting U.S. attorney and may continue while Kelesis undergoes the nomination process. Should Kelesis face rejection or withdrawal of his nomination, Lee maintained that Chattah could remain in position for 210 days.

Kelesis might face better prospects for Senate confirmation, which generally demands bipartisan backing. Nevada’s Democratic Senators Catherine Cortez Masto and Jacky Rosen strongly opposed Chattah’s appointment, labeling her an extremist. They haven’t voiced similar objections to Kelesis. Cortez Masto plans to conduct a “tough, thorough interview with Kelesis,” according to her spokesperson Lauren Wodarski.

Kelesis maintains nonpartisan voter registration and has contributed to candidates from both major parties throughout his career. Since beginning his Las Vegas legal practice in 1981, he has specialized in white-collar criminal defense and tax-related civil and criminal litigation. He currently chairs the Nevada Tax Commission and has taught as an adjunct professor at the University of Nevada Las Vegas law school.

Similar to Chattah, he provided legal representation to a Nevada Republican accused of sending fraudulent certificates to Congress falsely claiming Trump won the state’s 2020 presidential election.

However, Chattah is generally considered more polarizing. Her unsuccessful 2022 state attorney general campaign included accusations of racist remarks about her opponent, Democrat Aaron Ford, who is Black. She has consistently promoted Trump’s debunked assertions about election fraud in 2020. She also represented religious institutions that challenged Nevada’s pandemic restrictions.

NEW YORK — A federal immigration court has halted deportation proceedings against Mohsen Mahdawi, a Palestinian graduate student who organized demonstrations at Columbia University opposing Israel and the conflict in Gaza.

Immigration Judge Nina Froes dismissed the case on Tuesday after discovering that federal prosecutors made a critical error in handling evidence. The government lawyers submitted a photocopied document without the required legal certification, violating federal procedures.

The decision represents another obstacle for the Trump administration’s broad campaign to remove pro-Palestinian campus organizers and other critics of Israeli policy from the United States. Federal officials retain the option to challenge the court’s decision.

Earlier this year, immigration authorities faced a similar defeat when another judge prevented the deportation of Rümeysa Öztürk, a graduate student at Tufts University who had written an editorial piece condemning her school’s handling of the Gaza situation.

Mahdawi has maintained legal permanent residency status in America for ten years after being born in a refugee settlement within the Israeli-controlled West Bank territory. Immigration officers detained him during a naturalization appointment last April, though a federal court ordered his release after two weeks.

Federal authorities have persisted in their removal efforts, referencing a policy statement from Secretary of State Marco Rubio that allows for expelling non-citizens whose activities could potentially conflict with American diplomatic objectives.

However, prosecutors presented only an uncertified photocopy of this directive to the immigration court, failing to meet mandatory documentation standards established by federal regulations.

“I am grateful to the court for honoring the rule of law and holding the line against the government’s attempts to trample on due process,” Mahdawi said in a statement released by his attorneys. “This decision is an important step towards upholding what fear tried to destroy: the right to speak for peace and justice.”

Mahdawi’s legal team has simultaneously filed a separate lawsuit in federal district court challenging the lawfulness of his initial detention. Those proceedings continue to move forward, according to his representatives.

The Department of Homeland Security has not responded to requests for comment regarding the court’s ruling.

WASHINGTON – Vice President JD Vance voiced concerns Tuesday about the potential misuse of artificial intelligence technology by private corporations to monitor American citizens.

During an appearance on Fox News’ “The Story” program, Vance outlined his apprehensions about corporate AI applications. “I worry about companies using artificial intelligence to surveil Americans. I worry about invasions of privacy, I worry a lot about political bias,” the Vice President stated during the television interview.

The comments highlight growing national debate over how businesses implement AI technology and its implications for citizen privacy rights.

WASHINGTON — An 18-year-old Georgia man was taken into custody by U.S. Capitol Police on Tuesday following a dangerous incident where he sprinted toward the Capitol building while wielding a loaded shotgun.

Capitol Police Chief Michael Sullivan identified the suspect as Carter Camacho from Smyrna, Georgia. According to Sullivan, Camacho left his Mercedes SUV parked near the Capitol grounds and charged toward the building’s west entrance, covering “several hundred yards” while armed before officers stopped him and commanded him to drop his weapon and lie down.

During a news briefing after the incident, Sullivan revealed that Camacho was dressed in tactical gear including a protective vest and gloves. Officers also discovered a Kevlar helmet and gas mask inside his vehicle. Sullivan confirmed the shotgun contained ammunition and that Camacho carried extra rounds with him.

Authorities are still investigating what motivated the attack, including whether Camacho intended to target specific members of Congress, Sullivan stated. Currently, Congress is in recess.

Sullivan mentioned that while the department has recorded footage of the event, they are requesting any additional video evidence from witnesses who may have captured the incident.

“Who knows what would have happened if we wouldn’t have officers standing here?” Sullivan commented, noting that the department had conducted active shooter training exercises in nearly the same location in recent months.

The suspect was previously unknown to law enforcement and is not a local resident, Sullivan explained. According to the chief, the Mercedes SUV was not registered under Camacho’s name, and he maintains multiple residential addresses. Capitol Police have charged him with unlawful activities and possessing an unlicensed rifle, along with violations related to unregistered firearms and ammunition.

This arrest occurred just one week ahead of President Donald Trump’s scheduled State of the Union speech to Congress. Sullivan emphasized that the incident will not alter security preparations for the address. “We take the State of the Union very, very seriously,” he stated.

Criminal activity in Washington has dropped significantly in 2026 compared to previous years. Last August, President Trump issued an emergency declaration for the city to combat crime, resulting in the deployment of over 2,000 National Guard troops along with thousands of federal law enforcement personnel and agents.

These federal officers and agents remain stationed throughout the capital city.

WASHINGTON — Federal prosecutors have issued additional subpoenas as part of a Florida investigation examining how the United States responded to Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential race, sources familiar with the matter tell news outlets.

The first round of subpoenas sent in November demanded documents concerning the creation of a U.S. intelligence report that detailed Moscow’s efforts to assist Trump in defeating Hillary Clinton during the 2016 contest.

While the initial document requests focused on materials from around the time the Obama administration released its intelligence report in January 2017, the newer subpoenas are seeking any documentation from the years that followed, according to sources who requested anonymity when discussing the confidential investigative demands.

Justice Department officials refused to provide comment on Tuesday.

Multiple former intelligence and law enforcement leaders have received subpoenas, and attorneys representing former CIA Director John Brennan, who supervised the intelligence report’s creation, have confirmed he has been designated as a target.

The Trump administration has renewed its examination of the intelligence community’s assessment partly because its classified edition included portions of the “Steele dossier,” which contained opposition research funded by Democrats and compiled by ex-British intelligence officer Christopher Steele before being shared with the FBI. The research examining Trump’s possible connections to Russia contained unverified claims and scandalous allegations, which Trump has repeatedly cited as evidence that the entire Russia probe was flawed.

The Florida-based investigation seems to be connected to wider administration efforts to reexamine conclusions and choices made during the Russia investigation years ago.

A publicly released CIA analysis published last July by current Director John Ratcliffe did not challenge the finding that Russia interfered in the election but identified “multiple procedural anomalies” in the intelligence assessment and criticized Brennan for including references to the Steele dossier in the classified version.

Whether the Florida investigation will lead to criminal charges remains uncertain.

In correspondence sent last December to the chief judge of the Southern District of Florida, Brennan’s legal team contested the investigation’s foundation, asking what justification prosecutors had for launching the probe in that jurisdiction and stating they had received no explanation from prosecutors regarding what potential violations were under investigation.

California officials are gearing up for a legal battle against the Trump administration’s recent modifications to federal childhood vaccination guidelines, according to the state’s top prosecutor.

Attorney General Rob Bonta announced Tuesday that his office is developing a lawsuit to contest the policy changes implemented under Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Bonta leads the legal team for the nation’s most populated state.

During a Tuesday interview, Bonta also indicated he might consider collaborating with the Trump administration to reduce extensive federal protections that shield pharmaceutical companies from lawsuits related to alleged vaccine harm.

The Department of Health and Human Services has not yet responded to requests for comment on the matter.

Legal action from California would intensify pressure on the current administration, as healthcare professionals and public health authorities have cautioned that these policy shifts may result in declining immunization rates across the country.

Since assuming his role, Kennedy has dramatically altered established vaccination policies. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has released an updated immunization framework that eliminated blanket recommendations for vaccines protecting against rotavirus, flu, meningococcal disease, and both hepatitis A and B. The new approach emphasizes that families should discuss vaccination decisions with their doctors through what officials term “shared clinical decision-making.”

The American Academy of Pediatrics, along with other prominent medical associations, has already filed legal challenges aimed at blocking the revised vaccine schedule. Their lawsuit contends the overhaul lacks legal authority and scientific backing. The litigation seeks to remove Kennedy’s appointed Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices and reverse their determinations.

Speaking with reporters Tuesday, both Bonta and Connecticut’s Attorney General William Tong criticized Kennedy’s stance on vaccines. Regarding potential litigation, Bonta stated his “team is mobilized” and is “looking at what the complaint looks like, where to file, what our standing is, all the, all the things we have to have locked in.”

Bonta declined to share specific details about the planned legal action, including its expected filing date. Tong similarly indicated urgency, saying “we’re scrambling our jets.” A representative from his office later confirmed Connecticut is collaborating with California on a possible multi-state court filing.

Current federal law requires most individuals seeking to sue vaccine manufacturers to present their cases to a specialized vaccine court operated by HHS. This system aims to resolve claims efficiently while limiting financial awards and reducing company liability.

Kennedy and his supporters have long criticized this program, partly because HHS attorneys defend these cases instead of pharmaceutical companies directly. Prior to leading HHS, Kennedy represented clients claiming vaccine-related injuries and played a key role in organizing large-scale legal action against Merck regarding its Gardasil vaccine. Federal judges sided with Merck in numerous instances.

While Bonta expressed doubt about sweeping legal protections Congress has granted to certain industries, including vaccine producers, he emphasized his reluctance to support Kennedy’s anti-vaccine positions.

“I like the facts. I like science. I don’t want to give any airtime to his– I mean, just conspiracy bullshit,” Bonta said.

“Can there be an example of a pharmaceutical company that did something wrong, and hurt people based on the facts, and they’re enjoying absolute immunity when they should have accountability? Yeah, that’s possible,” Bonta added.

Public support for President Donald Trump’s immigration agenda has dropped to its weakest point since he took office again, with a new Reuters/Ipsos survey showing declining approval particularly among male voters who helped secure his 2024 victory.

The four-day survey, completed this Monday, found that only 38% of Americans believe Trump is effectively managing immigration matters – a key focus of his administration. This represents a decline from 39% recorded in January polling and marks a significant drop from the 50% approval he enjoyed in his early months back in office.

During his 2024 campaign, Trump pledged to execute the largest deportation operation in recent American history and immediately implemented extensive immigration enforcement operations upon taking office in January 2025. Citizens across the country now regularly witness masked federal agents in tactical equipment, and confrontations between immigration officers and demonstrators have turned violent.

The polling data reveals particularly notable declines in support among male voters, who were instrumental in Trump’s election win. While men consistently backed his immigration approach at nearly 50% throughout 2025, current support has fallen to 41%. Female approval has similarly decreased from approximately 40% for most of 2025 to 35% in this latest measurement.

In an uncommon policy reversal, the Trump administration announced last week it would halt its controversial deportation operations in Minnesota following incidents where immigration agents fatally shot two American citizens.

Trump’s broader presidential approval rating has also remained at its lowest levels, with 38% of respondents supporting his overall job performance – matching results from a late January survey. He began his current term with 47% approval.

The nationwide online poll surveyed 1,117 American adults and carries a margin of error of 3 percentage points.

Municipal governments nationwide are wrestling with whether to continue using automated license plate scanning systems as privacy concerns mount.

The technology, which automatically captures and stores vehicle license plate information, has become a source of controversy in communities across America. Local officials are expressing growing unease about how the collected data might be used and who could gain access to it.

A primary concern driving these municipal debates centers on the possibility that federal immigration enforcement agencies could tap into locally-gathered license plate databases. This potential access to community surveillance data has prompted city leaders to question whether the benefits of the technology outweigh the privacy risks for their residents.

Throughout Barack Obama’s eight-year presidency, his staff remained baffled by Donald Trump’s persistent presence in politics, unable to understand how ridicule, controversies, or dismissal failed to diminish his influence.

This confusion emerges clearly in a comprehensive oral history of the Obama administration made public Tuesday, featuring conversations with 450 former officials. The extensive interviews reveal how Obama’s team of seasoned political professionals struggled to grasp an evolving electorate shaped by emerging social media platforms.

During Obama’s two White House terms, his advisers witnessed the rise of online conspiracy theories, including false claims about the president’s birthplace, but failed to recognize Trump’s political staying power or his connection with disaffected voters whom the administration viewed as supporting a “clown.”

David Simas, who served as Obama’s White House political director, remembered confidently telling the president “He’s done” in October 2016, just five weeks before the election, after showing Obama the explosive “Access Hollywood” recording on his phone. Even on the eve of voting, with Hillary Clinton’s lead narrowed to approximately three points, Simas remained optimistic, thinking “She’s fine.”

Trump ultimately secured 306 electoral votes compared to Clinton’s 232, despite losing the popular vote – a result that devastated Democrats. The oral history interviews illuminate how extensively staff members, polling experts, and media organizations dismissed Trump’s victory chances while Americans grew increasingly skeptical of government and traditional political leaders.

Former White House press secretary Josh Earnest reflected on the widespread disbelief: “Not many people even expected that he had a chance to win. It was hard not to take it personally, because Trump’s candidacy, the essence of his being, and everything that he stood for, and everything about the way that he carried himself, and everything that he championed, and his rhetoric, his campaign tactics— all were anathema to everything that the Obama campaign and the Obama era, the Obama administration, had been about.”

The Obama Presidency Oral History project interviews show how advisers felt Trump rejected their administration’s key achievements: economic recovery efforts, automotive industry rescue, healthcare reform, and significant environmental regulations. Many described learning how Americans across age groups and political affiliations consumed news and engaged with social media – areas where Trump demonstrated natural skill.

A pivotal period beginning in April 2011 exemplified the administration’s dismissive approach and potentially motivated Trump’s presidential ambitions.

Trump had been promoting the baseless conspiracy theory that Obama, actually born in Hawaii, was not a natural-born citizen and therefore constitutionally ineligible for the presidency – claims that carried racial undertones and personally affected Obama. Initially, the president followed advisers’ recommendations to ignore these allegations.

David Axelrod, then serving as Obama’s senior adviser, recalled the president’s initial reluctance: “He felt with all the important things that needed to be dealt with, this was stupid and shouldn’t be dignified. But ultimately, it had to be.”

On April 27, Obama publicly released his detailed birth certificate proving his Hawaiian birth.

Nancy-Ann DeParle, former White House deputy chief of staff for policy, disagreed with this decision: “I thought it was a mistake at the time, because I thought, ‘This is absurd, and it’s unnecessary and beneath him to dignify the question.’”

The birth certificate release forced speechwriter Jon Favreau to revise Obama’s upcoming White House Correspondents Dinner remarks. Knowing Trump would attend the event, Favreau took the situation seriously, stating in his interview: “I thought what he was doing was racist. I thought that it was not just damaging to Obama but damaging to the country.”

Despite the gravity, Favreau described an intensive joke-writing session with Hollywood director Judd Apatow that left the writing team laughing uncontrollably. The possibility of Trump reaching the presidency? “Not even a brief moment did I ever think that,” he admitted.

Obama enthusiastically approved the final speech, with Favreau noting the president’s tendency toward sarcastic humor.

Obama began his remarks with a cheerful “Mahalo!” and showed a humorous birth video mocking Fox News coverage.

“I want to make clear to the Fox News table: That was a joke,” he said. “That was not my real birth video. That was a children’s cartoon.”

He then acknowledged Trump’s presence: “Donald Trump is here tonight!” as Trump sat stone-faced at his table.

“We all know about your credentials and breadth of experience,” Obama continued while the Washington elite laughed. Referencing Trump’s reality show, the president said: “At the steakhouse, the men’s cooking team did not impress the judges from Omaha Steaks. And there was a lot of blame to go around.” Obama sarcastically suggested that deciding “the kind of decisions that would keep me up at night” included whom to fire in such situations.

The following day brought Obama’s announcement of Osama bin Laden’s death during a U.S. special forces operation in Pakistan. He had approved the mission earlier that week without informing most close advisers, meaning he knew about the successful raid while delivering his Trump criticism.

Axelrod described the speech’s impact on Obama: “In some ways, it was cathartic for the president.”

Earlier that evening, Axelrod recalled walking past Trump’s table and overhearing him discuss potentially running for president. Axelrod “chuckled at it and went to my seat.”

“Obviously, we misread that,” he acknowledged.

Rev. Jesse Jackson, who passed away Tuesday at age 84, will be remembered not only for his unwavering commitment to civil rights but also for his extraordinary ability to inspire through speech. Throughout his career, Jackson championed causes affecting the poor and disenfranchised, from fair housing to voting access. His voice resonated through his work with the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition, during his 1980s presidential campaigns, and later as he supported the Black Lives Matter movement.

Several powerful statements capture the essence of Jackson’s mission and message.

While Jackson didn’t author these words originally, he made this poem his signature rallying call during 1960s demonstrations and even shared it on a 1972 “Sesame Street” appearance:

“I may be poor, / But I am Somebody. / I may be young, / But I am Somebody. / I may be on welfare, / But I am Somebody.”

During a Chicago address in the 1970s promoting his PUSH Excel educational program, Jackson connected learning with civic participation:

“Senior high school graduation must be seen as a passage of rites into adulthood. On that graduation day or night, we must put a diploma in one hand symbolizing knowledge and wisdom, and put a voter registration card in that other hand symbolizing power and responsibility.”

Jackson often emphasized action over complaint, stating: “Both tears and sweat are salty, but they render a different result. Tears will get you sympathy; sweat will get you change.”

During his initial presidential bid, Jackson addressed the 1984 Democratic National Convention with this vision of American diversity:

“America is not like a blanket — one piece of unbroken cloth, the same color, the same texture, the same size. America is more like a quilt: many patches, many pieces, many colors, many sizes, all woven and held together by a common thread.”

Four years later, as he came close to securing the Democratic nomination, Jackson delivered his memorable “Keep hope alive” message to delegates:

“You must not surrender. You may or may not get there, but just know that you’re qualified and you hold on and hold out. We must never surrender. America will get better and better. Keep hope alive. Keep hope alive. Keep hope alive. On tomorrow night and beyond, keep hope alive.”

Speaking to Kansas State University students in November 1993, Jackson challenged young people to combat society’s problems:

“At this stage we are on the defensive as a struggle, as a humane struggle. Fear: it is pushing hope back. Cowardice is pushing courage back. Death is taking the joy of life. Dope is outdistancing hope. Escapism is outdistancing embrace. When youth come alive, you have the energy, the strength, the need, and the moral authority to make America better and the whole world more secure.”

At the Martin Luther King Jr. Bridge dedication ceremony in Virginia during September 2008, Jackson spoke about the structure’s symbolic meaning:

“It must lead to more futures and fewer young funerals. It must embrace Dr. King’s last dream, a poor people’s campaign, where all could come together with a job, income, education, and health care. A bridge that leads us from racial battleground to economic common ground. It leads us to healing.”

During a December 2013 address to England’s Cambridge Union Society, Jackson emphasized unity and encouraged young activists:

“Common ground leads to coalition, to cooperation, to reconciliation and redemption, and to higher moral and economic ground. … I want to say to you young people especially — keep reaching beyond your grasp, keep dreaming beyond your circumstances, keep dreaming of a new Europe. When young people move, the world changes.”

The nation’s largest pediatricians organization has taken the Federal Trade Commission to court, claiming the agency is conducting an unconstitutional investigation targeting their position on medical care for transgender children.

On Tuesday, the American Academy of Pediatrics filed the federal lawsuit in Washington, D.C., contesting the FTC’s January demand for extensive documentation related to the group’s stance on gender-affirming treatments for young people.

The medical organization argues that the federal agency’s information request violates constitutional free speech protections and represents payback from President Trump’s administration for the group’s advocacy positions.

“Unable to prevail in the marketplace of ideas, the FTC has resorted to burdening AAP with an intrusive and expensive investigation that is unconstitutional and outside the scope of the FTC’s statutory authority,” the pediatricians stated in their court filing, which asks a judge to halt the document demand.

The FTC has not yet provided a response to requests for comment on the legal challenge.

According to court documents, the Federal Trade Commission issued what amounts to a subpoena on January 15, investigating potential false advertising or deceptive practices related to how the organization promotes “pediatric gender dysphoria treatment.” Gender dysphoria refers to the medical diagnosis for distress caused when someone’s gender identity differs from their biological sex at birth.

This federal investigation follows Trump’s executive orders from January 2025 that established official recognition of only male and female sexes while directing government agencies to halt all federal support for gender-affirming medical care for minors.

The pediatricians group contends the FTC is specifically targeting them over a 2018 policy statement where they endorsed appropriate medical interventions to help transgender youth.

Just three days before the trade commission’s document request, a federal judge prevented the Department of Health and Human Services from canceling nearly $12 million in grant money awarded to the pediatricians organization. That funding was terminated following disputes with Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. regarding vaccine policy changes.

The medical group is also pursuing separate litigation challenging federal health officials’ efforts under Kennedy to modify vaccine policies in ways they believe will reduce immunization rates and damage public health.

Established in 1930 and headquartered in the Chicago region, the American Academy of Pediatrics represents 67,000 pediatricians and pediatric specialists across various medical fields.

U.S. Capitol Police detained an 18-year-old man Tuesday afternoon after he charged toward the Capitol building while armed with a loaded shotgun, according to Capitol Police Chief Michael Sullivan.

The suspect arrived at the scene shortly after midday in a white Mercedes SUV, parking close to the Capitol before exiting his vehicle and sprinting toward the building that serves as home to Congress, Sullivan explained.

Authorities discovered the young man was outfitted in tactical equipment, including a protective vest and gloves. Officers also found additional gear in his vehicle, including a Kevlar helmet and gas mask.

When confronted by law enforcement officers who commanded him to surrender his firearm, the suspect cooperated and dropped the weapon, Sullivan reported to the media.

Police have not yet determined what motivated the individual’s actions.

This security breach occurred just under three months following a deadly ambush attack near the White House that claimed the life of one National Guard member and left another injured.

The timing is particularly notable as President Donald Trump is scheduled to present his State of the Union speech at the Capitol next week.

“We take the State of the Union very, very seriously, and this doesn’t change our posture. We will be prepared on State of the Union night,” Sullivan said.

Late-night television host Stephen Colbert disclosed that CBS network attorneys blocked him from broadcasting an interview with Texas Democratic Senate hopeful James Talarico due to concerns over federal broadcasting regulations that could require equal airtime for opposing candidates.

The controversy centers on federal rules mandating that television stations provide equivalent on-air opportunities to all political candidates when one appears on their programming. Colbert discussed the situation during Monday evening’s broadcast and subsequently released the complete interview through online channels.

The Trump administration, working through the Federal Communications Commission that oversees America’s broadcast networks, has been tightening enforcement of these requirements, particularly targeting talk shows like Colbert’s that officials claim may have “partisan purposes.”

“He was supposed to be here, but we were told in no uncertain terms by our network’s lawyers, who called us directly, that we could not have him on the broadcast,” Colbert explained during “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert.”

CBS released a statement Tuesday explaining that Colbert’s program “was provided legal guidance that the broadcast could trigger the FCC equal-time rule for two other candidates” competing in the March 3 Democratic primary, “and presented options for how the equal time for other candidates could be fulfilled.” The network decided “to present the interview through its YouTube channel with on-air promotion on the broadcast rather than potentially providing the equal-time options.”

Talarico, who has been vocal in his opposition to President Donald Trump, shared a brief excerpt of his Colbert conversation on social media platform X, describing it as “the interview Donald Trump didn’t want you to see.”

The regulatory framework stems from the Communications Act of 1934, comprehensive legislation that has governed American broadcasting for nearly nine decades. The law requires stations to provide comparable airtime to competing candidates when one receives coverage, if requested by opponents.

These requirements also extend to paid political advertising, mandating that stations offer equal advertising opportunities to all candidates seeking the same office.

Several exemptions exist within the regulations, including news programs, legitimate interview shows, live event coverage, and documentary programming. However, when candidates appear on entertainment shows or host their own programs, the equal time provisions are triggered.

Importantly, these rules only affect traditional broadcast television and radio, excluding cable networks, streaming platforms, and social media content.

Historically, talk shows have not been subject to equal time requirements, but the current administration has moved to alter this precedent.

The Federal Communications Commission issued updated guidance in January, alerting late-night and daytime talk show hosts about equal time obligations. FCC Chairman Brendan Carr has challenged the talk show exemption, suggesting hosts operate with “partisan purposes.”

“The FCC has not been presented with any evidence that the interview portion of any late night or daytime television talk show program on air presently would qualify for the bona fide news exemption,” the agency’s public notice stated.

The guidance also requires television networks to seek individual program exemptions from the agency.

Colbert emphasized the distinction between broadcast and streaming regulations during his remarks, noting that his nearly quarter-hour interview with Talarico appeared exclusively on his show’s YouTube channel rather than on traditional television.

Chairman Carr, whom Trump selected to head the FCC, has frequently targeted network talk programs, previously suggesting that investigating ABC’s “The View” — whose hosts regularly criticize Trump — over exemption violations might be “worthwhile.”

The FCC did not provide immediate responses to requests for comment Tuesday.

The agency previously enforced the Fairness Doctrine, established in 1949, which required broadcasters to present opposing perspectives on controversial public issues. Unlike equal time rules written into federal law, this was an FCC regulation rather than congressional legislation.

The doctrine focused on topics rather than individual candidates. The Supreme Court validated the rule against First Amendment challenges in 1969, determining that limited broadcast spectrum availability justified government regulation.

The FCC eliminated the Fairness Doctrine in 1987, citing increased spectrum availability, and President Ronald Reagan blocked congressional efforts to make it permanent law.

WASHINGTON — An 18-year-old man was taken into custody by U.S. Capitol Police on Tuesday following a dangerous incident in which he abandoned his vehicle and charged toward the Capitol building while armed with a loaded shotgun.

According to Capitol Police Chief Michael Sullivan, the suspect left a Mercedes SUV parked near the Capitol and sprinted “several hundred yards” toward the building’s west entrance before law enforcement officers stopped him and forced him to the ground.

During a news briefing after the incident, Chief Sullivan revealed that the individual was equipped with tactical gear including a protective vest and gloves. Officers also discovered a Kevlar helmet and gas mask inside his vehicle. Sullivan confirmed the shotgun contained ammunition and the suspect carried extra rounds.

Authorities are still investigating what motivated the attack, including the possibility that members of Congress were intended targets. However, Congress is currently not in session.

Chief Sullivan mentioned that his department has surveillance video of the event but is requesting any additional footage the public may have captured.

“Who knows what would have happened if we wouldn’t have officers standing here?” Sullivan stated, noting that his department had conducted active shooter training exercises in nearly the same location in recent months.

The suspect was previously unknown to law enforcement and Sullivan indicated he is not from the Washington area. The Mercedes SUV was not registered under the young man’s name, and authorities say he maintains multiple residential addresses.

WASHINGTON – The United States Air Force revealed Tuesday that it will implement a fresh color design for its executive transportation fleet, including future Air Force One aircraft, featuring a combination of red, white, gold and dark blue colors.

This updated appearance represents a shift away from the traditional white and dual-tone blue coloring that has been in use since the Kennedy presidency in the 1960s. The new design incorporates aspects of a red, white and blue color scheme that former President Donald Trump had previously suggested, but which was abandoned in 2022 when Air Force officials concluded that darker paint colors might lead to aircraft overheating problems.

President Donald Trump revealed details Tuesday about three significant infrastructure developments planned for construction across Ohio, Texas, and Georgia.

Through a post on his Truth Social platform, Trump outlined the planned facilities: a natural gas power generation plant slated for Ohio, petroleum and natural gas operations in Texas, and a critical minerals processing center in Georgia.

The announcement marks the latest in a series of energy sector investments being promoted by the Trump administration.

New Jersey’s acting attorney general announced Tuesday that she will abandon efforts to revive racketeering charges against influential Democratic figure George E. Norcross III and his co-defendants.

Jennifer Davenport, recently named to the position by newly-elected Governor Mikie Sherrill, made the announcement almost three weeks following an appellate court’s decision to uphold a lower court’s dismissal of the criminal charges. The original indictment had been pursued by Matt Platkin, who held the attorney general position under former Governor Phil Murphy.

“In light of the Appellate Division’s decision, we have concluded that our prosecutorial resources would be best spent on other matters,” the attorney general’s office said in a statement. “Our office remains committed to prioritizing public corruption prosecutions in this time of deepening mistrust in government.”

The criminal charges originated from a June 2024 indictment that Platkin revealed during a press conference where Norcross made the remarkable decision to attend personally, positioning himself directly before the attorney general as the charges were announced.

The indictment alleged that Norcross and five additional defendants operated “an enterprise” dating back to 2012, leveraging their political connections to shape laws that would benefit their personal interests. However, a state judge issued an extensive ruling spanning nearly 100 pages, determining that the prosecution’s claims failed to establish criminal coercion or extortion and were beyond the statute of limitations.

Throughout the legal proceedings, Norcross and his legal team consistently proclaimed his innocence, arguing the charges were driven by political motivations—claims that Platkin has consistently rejected.

Norcross, who held the position of executive chairman at insurance company Conner Strong & Buckelew, has long been recognized as one of New Jersey’s most powerful unelected Democratic figures. His influence extended to serving on the Democratic National Committee until 2021 and previously leading the Camden County Democratic Party.

ST. PAUL, Minn. — As Minnesota’s legislative session begins Tuesday, Democratic lawmakers are pushing to limit the authority of federal immigration enforcement agents within state borders, while their Republican counterparts plan to concentrate on eliminating fraud in government-funded programs that President Donald Trump referenced when defending recent immigration operations.

According to White House border czar Tom Homan, over 1,000 federal officers have already departed the Minneapolis-St. Paul region this past weekend, with hundreds more expected to leave soon. However, the political consequences of these enforcement actions will continue to shape discussions at the state capitol throughout the session, which extends into late May.

Passing meaningful legislation may prove challenging given the legislature’s narrow partisan divide. Republicans control the House with a tied chamber and Republican speaker, while Democrats maintain just a single-seat advantage in the Senate. This means any bill requires support from both parties to advance. Adding complexity, this year brings elections for all 201 legislative positions, and House Speaker Lisa Demuth, who is seeking the Republican gubernatorial nomination, hopes to secure Trump’s backing.

“There are definitely going to be priorities on both sides of the aisle. … But when it comes right down to it, we need to have bipartisan votes to move bills through the committees and get the work done for Minnesotans,” Demuth told reporters Monday.

Enhanced security measures are now in place at the capitol following last summer’s tragic assassination of former Democratic House Speaker Melissa Hortman and her spouse. All visitors must now pass through weapons detection screening.

Democratic Governor Tim Walz announced a $10 million assistance package last week to help small businesses that suffered customer and employee losses during the federal enforcement operations, with additional aid proposals potentially forthcoming.

Prior to the session’s start, Democratic legislators in both chambers introduced eleven separate bills designed to address what they view as federal immigration officers’ most problematic actions during the recent surge.

The proposed measures would prohibit federal agents from entering schools, daycare facilities, medical centers, and universities. Additional provisions would ban federal officers from concealing their faces with masks while mandating clearly visible identification. The legislation would also require federal authorities to include state investigators in probes of officer-involved shootings, including the deaths of Renee Good and Alex Pretti. State officials remain excluded from these investigations, with the FBI formally notifying Minnesota Monday that it will not provide information or evidence from the Pretti death investigation.

House Democratic leader Zack Stephenson acknowledged they don’t anticipate backing from Republican leadership but hope individual GOP members might cross party lines.

“What we’ve seen these last six weeks has been so exceptional, so damaging, that I don’t know how you can be human and not respond to it,” Stephenson said. “But even if it’s not that, we also know it’s an election year and voters are watching, and voters will hold people accountable if they don’t stand up to this administration.”

Stephenson recognized that any state-imposed limitations on federal law enforcement would likely face court challenges.

“But some things are worth fighting for,” Stephenson added. “And if we’re not going to fight for this, what are we doing here?”

Republicans show minimal interest in confronting federal authorities and prefer redirecting attention toward anti-fraud efforts.

“Minnesotans want our state and local law enforcement to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement,” said Rep. Harry Niska, the House’s second-ranking Republican.

A primary Republican anti-fraud goal involves establishing an independent Office of Inspector General to investigate and prevent public fund misuse. The Senate approved similar legislation last year with bipartisan support in a 60-7 vote. House Democratic leadership prevented a floor vote at the previous session’s conclusion, but the proposal returns this year.

Republicans also seek greater accountability measures for agencies and officials who allow fraud to occur under their oversight.

The nation’s highest court revealed Tuesday it has implemented automated technology designed to flag potential ethical conflicts among the nine justices, who maintain the final say on whether to remove themselves from cases.

Developed by the court’s IT department working alongside other staff members, this new system will cross-reference details about attorneys and case participants with information supplied by each justice’s chambers, according to a court representative.

Court officials described these “automated recusal checks” as an addition to current methods justices use when evaluating possible conflicts of interest.

Last year, the Supreme Court established its inaugural formal ethics guidelines governing justice behavior. However, critics highlighted the lack of enforcement tools and the continued practice allowing individual justices to personally determine whether to recuse themselves from cases.

According to the court’s ethical standards, justices must step aside from cases where their “impartiality might reasonably be questioned.”

Supporting this technological upgrade, the court announced enhanced documentation standards for certain legal filings, requiring more comprehensive listings of case participants and applicable stock symbols when appropriate. These updated filing rules become effective March 16.

Gabe Roth from Fix the Court advocacy organization described the announcement as “somewhat positive,” while expressing his broader concerns about justices maintaining stock portfolios during their service.

“The court wrote at the end of the code that it would ‘undertake an examination of best practices’ on judicial ethics, and the use of conflict-check software is a best practice,” Roth said, noting software-based checks have long been used by lower courts.

WASHINGTON – Federal transportation officials have freed up an additional $77 million in previously frozen funding for the massive $16 billion Hudson Tunnel Project, New York Governor Kathy Hochul announced on Tuesday.

The funding release follows legal action taken by New York and New Jersey after the U.S. Department of Transportation withheld $205 million designated for the tunnel project starting October 1st. Combined with $30 million released last Friday, federal officials have now provided $107 million of the disputed funds.

Despite the partial funding restoration, work on the major infrastructure project remains at a standstill. The Gateway Development Commission, the agency managing the tunnel construction, stated Tuesday they are actively working to “get workers back on the job to resume some construction as soon as possible.”

NEW YORK — President Trump’s family business has submitted federal trademark applications seeking exclusive control over using his name on airports, though the company states it won’t charge fees for at least one proposed airport renaming in Florida.

The Trump Organization’s filings with the federal trademark office request sole rights to the president’s name on airports and numerous airport-related items, including passenger shuttle buses, umbrellas, luggage, and flight suits. These applications come as Florida lawmakers debate legislation to rename Palm Beach airport after Trump, while separate disputes involve funding for a New York-New Jersey tunnel linked to proposals naming both that project and Virginia’s Dulles International Airport after the president.

According to the Trump Organization, the Florida legislation prompted these trademark applications, with the company emphasizing it seeks no financial gain — only defense against “bad actors” since the Trump name represents the “most infringed trademark in the world.”

“To be clear, the President and his family will not receive any royalty, licensing fee, or financial consideration whatsoever from the proposed airport renaming,” the company stated, referencing what’s currently known as Palm Beach International Airport, located near Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort.

When questioned about potential future royalty charges for Trump’s name at other airports or on merchandise covered in the filings, the company didn’t provide an immediate response.

Trademark attorney Josh Gerben, who discovered these filings over the weekend, described the applications as unprecedented in his experience.

“While presidents and public officials have had landmarks named in their honor, a sitting president’s private company has never in the history of the United States sought trademark rights in advance of such naming,” Gerben explained on his blog. “I should be very clear: these are trademark filings that are completely unprecedented.”

The applications submitted by DTTM Operations, a Trump family company division, to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office cover three variations — President Donald J. Trump International Airport, Donald J. Trump International Airport and DJT.

Over the past year, the family has expanded their branding efforts, attaching the Trump name to towers, golf facilities and housing projects across Dubai, India, Saudi Arabia and Vietnam. The company has additionally marketed Trump-branded electric guitars, bibles and sneakers through the same DTTM division.

Addressing concerns about profiting from his presidency, Trump has maintained that his business operates under a trust managed by his sons, with no direct daily involvement from him.

Television host Stephen Colbert announced Monday evening that CBS legal representatives blocked the broadcast of his conversation with Texas Democratic State Representative James Talarico, who seeks his party’s U.S. Senate nomination.

During Monday’s episode of “The Late Show,” Colbert stated, “Donald Trump’s administration wants to silence anyone who says anything bad about Trump on TV, because all Trump does is watch TV.”

The Federal Communications Commission, now under Republican leadership, announced last month that daytime and evening talk programs no longer qualify as legitimate news shows exempt from equal opportunity regulations. These rules mandate that broadcasters provide comparable airtime to competing political candidates.

Colbert directed criticism toward FCC Chairman Brendan Carr and CBS attorneys, arguing they implemented Carr’s policy for “purely financial reasons.”

This explanation mirrors Paramount’s justification when announcing in July that Colbert’s show would conclude in May while the company pursues FCC approval for its $8.4 billion acquisition by Skydance Media.

News organizations reported earlier this month that the FCC launched an inquiry into whether ABC’s daytime program “The View” violated equal time regulations following Talarico’s guest appearance.

President Donald Trump has consistently urged Carr to challenge U.S. television networks and has denounced what he perceives as biased reporting.

The blocked interview appeared on the show’s YouTube channel, accumulating approximately one million views by 11 a.m. Eastern Time.

Before January, talk show programs qualified for equal opportunity exemptions as legitimate news interviews, following a 2006 FCC Media Bureau decision regarding Jay Leno’s “The Tonight Show” interview segments.

Television networks have used this precedent to justify recent candidate interviews.

Neither Carr, Paramount Skydance, nor CBS responded to comment requests regarding Colbert’s statements. The White House declined commentary.

Democratic FCC Commissioner Anna Gomez condemned CBS’s choice to withhold the interview, characterizing it as censorship. She emphasized that the FCC lacks legal power to pressure broadcasters for political motives and that CBS maintains free speech protections to broadcast the conversation.

“This represents another concerning instance of corporate surrender to this administration’s extensive effort to censor and manipulate speech,” Gomez stated. “While Paramount, CBS’s parent corporation, faces regulatory matters with the government, business interests cannot excuse withdrawing newsworthy programming.”

Paramount Skydance currently pursues the acquisition of Warner Bros Discovery.

Carr encountered bipartisan opposition after demanding broadcasters remove ABC late-night host Jimmy Kimmel in September, threatening penalties or license revocation, declaring “it’s time for them to step up.”

Two prominent broadcasters agreed to remove Kimmel, and Disney temporarily suspended his program before reinstatement. In December, Democratic Senator Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin confronted Carr, stating “you used your position within the federal government to take Jimmy Kimmel off the air in a clear attempt to chill free speech.”

WASHINGTON — Federal prosecutors have delivered additional subpoenas as part of a Florida-based probe examining the government’s handling of Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential race, sources with knowledge of the investigation tell the Associated Press.

The initial round of subpoenas sent out in November sought documents connected to the creation of an intelligence community report that outlined Russia’s comprehensive campaign to assist Trump in defeating Hillary Clinton during the 2016 election.

While the earlier subpoenas focused on materials from around the January 2017 release of the intelligence report during the Obama administration’s final days, these newer legal demands are seeking any documentation from the years that followed, according to sources who requested anonymity when discussing the non-public investigative requests.

The Justice Department refused to provide comment on Tuesday.

These subpoenas demonstrate ongoing investigative work in one of multiple criminal probes the Justice Department has launched targeting Trump’s political adversaries. Various former intelligence and law enforcement leaders have received subpoenas in this investigation. Legal representatives for former CIA Director John Brennan, who supervised the intelligence assessment’s creation and whom Trump has labeled “crooked as hell,” stated they’ve been notified he’s a target but haven’t been given any “legally justifiable basis for undertaking this investigation.”

The intelligence community report, released during the Obama administration’s closing days, determined that Russia had formed a “clear preference” for Trump in 2016 and that Vladimir Putin had directed an influence operation designed to weaken faith in American democratic processes and damage Clinton’s electoral prospects.

This finding, along with a separate probe into potential coordination between Trump’s 2016 campaign and Russia, have remained among the Republican president’s primary complaints, and he has promised payback against government officials who participated in these inquiries. The Trump administration’s Justice Department indicted former FBI Director James Comey last year on charges of making false statements and obstruction, though the case was subsequently dropped.

Several government investigations, including bipartisan congressional studies and former special counsel Robert Mueller’s criminal probe, have confirmed that Russia interfered to benefit Trump through hacking and releasing Democratic emails and conducting a hidden social media operation designed to create division and influence American voters. Mueller’s investigation concluded that Trump’s campaign eagerly accepted Russian assistance, but didn’t prove that Russian agents and Trump or his team conspired to manipulate the election outcome.

The Trump administration has recently reexamined the intelligence community assessment partly because a classified section included a summary of the “Steele dossier,” a collection of Democratic-funded opposition research compiled by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele and subsequently provided to the FBI. This research into Trump’s possible Russian connections contained unverified claims and scandalous allegations, and Trump has consistently highlighted its flaws to undermine the entire Russia investigation.

A declassified CIA review commissioned by current Director John Ratcliffe and published last July criticizes Brennan’s supervision of the assessment.

The review doesn’t dispute the finding of Russian election meddling but criticizes Brennan for allowing the classified version to reference the Steele dossier.

Brennan told Congress, and also stated in his book, that he opposed including the dossier in the intelligence assessment because its content and sources hadn’t been verified, and he has maintained the dossier didn’t influence the assessment’s conclusions. He claims the FBI advocated for its inclusion.

The recent CIA review attempts to portray Brennan’s position differently, claiming he “showed a preference for narrative consistency over analytical soundness” and ignored dossier concerns because he felt it aligned “with existing theories.” It cites him, without providing context, as stating in writing that “my bottomline is that I believe that the information warrants inclusion in the report.”

In a December letter sent to the chief judge of the Southern District of Florida, where the investigation is headquartered, Brennan’s attorneys questioned the investigation’s foundation, asking what justification prosecutors had for launching the inquiry in Florida and noting they had received no explanation from prosecutors about what potential crimes were being examined.

“While it is mystifying how the prosecutors could possibly believe there is any legally justifiable basis for undertaking this investigation, they have done nothing to explain that mystery,” the lawyers said.

Television host Stephen Colbert disclosed that CBS network attorneys blocked his scheduled interview with Texas Democratic Senate hopeful James Talarico from appearing on Monday evening’s program due to concerns about violating federal broadcasting regulations regarding equal time for political candidates.

During his program “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert,” the host explained the situation to viewers. “He was supposed to be here, but we were told in no uncertain terms by our network’s lawyers, who called us directly, that we could not have him on the broadcast,” Colbert stated.

The comedian went on to reveal additional restrictions placed on the discussion. “Then I was told, in some uncertain terms, that not only could I not have him on, I could not mention me not having him on. And because my network clearly doesn’t want us to talk about this, let’s talk about this.”

The incident occurred just as early voting commenced in Texas primary elections, highlighting how media organizations are adapting to revised broadcasting regulations implemented during the Trump administration that govern political candidate interviews.

Talarico shared portions of the conversation on social media platforms, describing it as “the interview Donald Trump didn’t want you to see.”

While broadcasters have long been subject to equal time requirements for political candidates, these regulations historically did not extend to talk show programming. However, the Federal Communications Commission released updated guidance in January, alerting late-night and daytime television hosts that they must now provide equal access to political candidates. FCC Chairman Brendan Carr challenged the previous talk show exemption, suggesting hosts were acting with “partisan purposes.”

The FCC’s public notice stated: “The FCC has not been presented with any evidence that the interview portion of any late night or daytime television talk show program on air presently would qualify for the bona fide news exemption.”

Colbert pointed out that equal time rules apply only to traditional broadcast television, not streaming services. As a result, his approximately 15-minute conversation with Talarico appeared on his show’s YouTube channel instead, with the host specifically noting the segment would only be available online rather than on television.

On social media platform X, Talarico posted a brief excerpt from their discussion, writing: “This is the interview Donald Trump didn’t want you to see. His FCC refused to air my interview with Stephen Colbert. Trump is worried we’re about to flip Texas.”

Neither CBS nor the FCC provided immediate responses to requests for comment on Tuesday.

Texas voters began early voting Tuesday in races where Talarico and Representative Jasmine Crockett are among Democrats competing for the U.S. Senate position currently occupied by four-term Republican Senator John Cornyn. The primary election is scheduled for March 3.

Chairman Carr, whom Trump selected to head the agency last year, has frequently targeted network talk shows with criticism. He previously suggested that investigating ABC’s “The View” — whose hosts regularly critique Trump — regarding the exemption could be “worthwhile.”

Colbert’s tenure as host is approaching its end, following CBS’s decision last year to conclude his program in May due to financial considerations, ending a long-running television tradition amid an evolving media environment.

However, the timing of that cancellation announcement — occurring three days after Colbert criticized an agreement between Trump and Paramount Global, CBS’s parent company, concerning a “60 Minutes” report — prompted two U.S. senators to publicly question the decision’s motivations, as it removes one of Trump’s most vocal and consistent late-night television critics from the airwaves.

WASHINGTON — Multiple conservation and historical organizations filed a federal lawsuit Tuesday challenging National Park Service policies they claim are eliminating historical facts and scientific information from America’s national parks.

The Boston-filed legal action alleges that directives from President Donald Trump and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum have compelled park officials to eliminate or modify displays containing accurate historical information and scientific data, particularly regarding slavery and climate change.

These exhibit modifications followed a Trump executive directive aimed at “restoring truth and sanity to American history” throughout the nation’s museums, parks and historic sites. The order instructed the Interior Department to prevent these locations from featuring content that “inappropriately disparage Americans past or living.”

According to the plaintiff organizations, this review initiative has intensified recently, resulting in the elimination of multiple displays covering slavery history, civil rights, Indigenous peoples’ treatment, climate science, and other “core elements of the American experience.”

The legal challenge involves a coalition including the National Parks Conservation Association, American Association for State and Local History, Association of National Park Rangers and Union of Concerned Scientists. This lawsuit follows Monday’s federal court ruling requiring restoration of an exhibit about nine individuals enslaved by George Washington at his former Philadelphia residence.

Park officials eliminated informational displays last month from Independence National Historical Park, where George and Martha Washington resided with nine enslaved people during the 1790s when Philadelphia served as the temporary national capital. The judge mandated exhibit restoration by Presidents Day, the federal holiday celebrating Washington’s legacy.

Beyond the Philadelphia situation, park officials have identified civil rights movement interpretive materials for elimination, according to the organizations. At Alabama’s Selma to Montgomery National Historic Trail, approximately 80 items face removal.

Officials have targeted the permanent display at Kansas’s Brown v. Board of Education National Historical Park for mentioning “equity,” the lawsuit states. A Pride flag was eliminated from New York City’s Stonewall National Monument. Missing signage from Grand Canyon National Park previously described how settlers forced Native American tribes “off their land” for park establishment and “exploited” the terrain for mining and grazing.

“Censoring science and erasing America’s history at national parks are direct threats to everything these amazing places, and our country, stand for,” stated Alan Spears, senior director of cultural resources at the parks conservation association.

“National parks serve as living classrooms for our country, where science and history come to life for visitors,” Spears continued. “As Americans, we deserve national parks that tell stories of our country’s triumphs and heartbreaks alike. We can handle the truth.”

The Interior Department did not provide immediate comment.

U.S. District Judge Cynthia Rufe ordered Monday that all Philadelphia exhibit materials must return to their original state while legal proceedings continue regarding the removal’s legitimacy. She barred Trump officials from installing alternative displays explaining the history differently.

Rufe, appointed by Republican President George W. Bush, opened her written decision with a quote from George Orwell’s dystopian novel “1984” and drew comparisons between the Trump administration and the book’s authoritarian Ministry of Truth, which altered historical records to match its preferred narrative.