President Trump

California and a coalition of other states are suing the Trump administration over a policy charging employers $100,000 for each new H-1B visa they request for foreign employees to work in the U.S. — calling it a threat not only to major industry but also to public education and healthcare services.

“As the world’s fourth largest economy, California knows that when skilled talent from around the world joins our workforce, it drives our state forward,” said California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta, who announced the litigation Friday.

President Trump imposed the fee through a Sept. 19 proclamation, in which he said the H-1B visa program — designed to provide U.S. employers with skilled workers in science, technology, engineering, math and other advanced fields — has been “deliberately exploited to replace, rather than supplement, American workers with lower-paid, lower-skilled labor.”

Trump said the program also created a “national security threat by discouraging Americans from pursuing careers in science and technology, risking American leadership in these fields.”

Bonta said such claims are baseless, and that the imposition of such fees is unlawful because it runs counter to the intent of Congress in creating the program and exceeds the president’s authority. He said Congress has included significant safeguards to prevent abuses, and that the new fee structure undermines the program’s purpose.

“President Trump’s illegal $100,000 H-1B visa fee creates unnecessary — and illegal — financial burdens on California public employers and other providers of vital services, exacerbating labor shortages in key sectors,” Bonta said in a statement. “The Trump Administration thinks it can raise costs on a whim, but the law says otherwise.”

Taylor Rogers, a White House spokeswoman, said Friday that the fee was “a necessary, initial, incremental step towards necessary reforms” that were lawful and in line with the president’s promise to “put American workers first.”

Attorneys for the administration previously defended the fee in response to a separate lawsuit brought by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Assn. of American Universities, arguing earlier this month that the president has “extraordinarily broad discretion to suspend the entry of aliens whenever he finds their admission ‘detrimental to the interests of the United States,’” or to adopt “reasonable rules, regulations, and orders” related to their entry.

“The Supreme Court has repeatedly confirmed that this authority is ‘sweeping,’ subject only to the requirement that the President identify a class of aliens and articulate a facially legitimate reason for their exclusion,” the administration’s attorneys wrote.

They alleged that the H-1B program has been “ruthlessly and shamelessly exploited by bad actors,” and wrote that the plaintiffs were asking the court “to disregard the President’s inherent authority to restrict the entry of aliens into the country and override his judgment,” which they said it cannot legally do.

Trump’s announcement of the new fee alarmed many existing visa holders and badly rattled industries that are heavily reliant on such visas, including tech companies trying to compete for the world’s best talent in the global race to ramp up their AI capabilities. Thousands of companies in California have applied for H-1B visas this year, and tens of thousands have been granted to them.

Trump’s adoption of the fees is seen as part of his much broader effort to restrict immigration into the U.S. in nearly all its forms. However, he is far from alone in criticizing the H-1B program as a problematic pipeline.

Critics of the program have for years documented examples of employers using it to replace American workers with cheaper foreign workers, as Trump has suggested, and questioned whether the country truly has a shortage of certain types of workers — including tech workers.

There have also been allegations of employers, who control the visas, abusing workers and using the threat of deportation to deter complaints — among the reasons some on the political left have also been critical of the program.

“Not only is this program disastrous for American workers, it can be very harmful to guest workers as well, who are often locked into lower-paying jobs and can have their visas taken away from them by their corporate bosses if they complain about dangerous, unfair or illegal working conditions,” Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) wrote in a Fox News opinion column in January.

In the Chamber of Commerce case, attorneys for the administration wrote that companies in the U.S. “have at times laid off thousands of American workers while simultaneously hiring thousands of H-1B workers,” sometimes even forcing the American workers “to train their H-1B replacements” before they leave.

They have done so, the attorneys wrote, even as unemployment among recent U.S. college graduates in STEM fields has increased.

“Employing H-1B workers in entry-level positions at discounted rates undercuts American worker wages and opportunities, and is antithetical to the purpose of the H-1B program, which is ‘to fill jobs for which highly skilled and educated American workers are unavailable,’” the administration’s attorneys wrote.

By contrast, the states’ lawsuit stresses the shortfalls in the American workforce in key industries, and defends the program by citing its existing limits. The legal action notes that employers must certify to the government that their hiring of visa workers will not negatively affect American wages or working conditions. Congress also has set a cap on the number of visa holders that any individual employer may hire.

Bonta’s office said educators account for the third-largest occupation group in the program, with nearly 30,000 educators with H-1B visas helping thousands of institutions fill a national teacher shortage that saw nearly three-quarters of U.S. school districts report difficulty filling positions in the 2024-2025 school year.

Schools, universities and colleges — largely public or nonprofit — cannot afford to pay $100,000 per visa, Bonta’s office said.

In addition, some 17,000 healthcare workers with H-1B visas — half of them physicians and surgeons — are helping to backfill a massive shortfall in trained medical staff in the U.S., including by working as doctors and nurses in low-income and rural neighborhoods, Bonta’s office said.

“In California, access to specialists and primary care providers in rural areas is already extremely limited and is projected to worsen as physicians retire and these communities struggle to attract new doctors,” it said. “As a result of the fee, these institutions will be forced to operate with inadequate staffing or divert funding away from other important programs to cover expenses.”

Bonta’s office said that prior to the imposition of the new fee, employers could expect to pay between $960 and $7,595 in “regulatory and statutory fees” per H-1B visa, based on the actual cost to the government of processing the request and document, as intended by Congress.

The Trump administration, Bonta’s office said, issued the new fee without going through legally required processes for collecting outside input first, and “without considering the full range of impacts — especially on the provision of the critical services by government and nonprofit entities.”

The arguments echo findings by a judge in a separate case years ago, after Trump tried to restrict many such visas in his first term. A judge in that case — brought by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Assn. of Manufacturers and others — found that Congress, not the president, had the authority to change the terms of the visas, and that the Trump administration had not evaluated the potential impacts of such a change before implementing it, as required by law.

The case became moot after President Biden decided not to renew the restrictions in 2021, a move which tech companies considered a win.

Joining in the lawsuit — California’s 49th against the Trump administration in the last year alone — are Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, North Carolina, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin.

WASHINGTON — House Democrats on Friday released 19 photographs from Jeffrey Epstein’s private email server showing a collection of powerful men in politics, media and Hollywood in the convicted sex offender’s orbit.

The photographs do not reveal any wrongdoing, but offer more detail about who Epstein associated with.

The images show Steve Bannon, a former Trump adviser, meeting with Epstein at an office; Bill Gates standing by what appears to be Epstein’s private jet; former President Clinton with Epstein’s longtime associate Ghislaine Maxwell; Epstein with American filmmaker Woody Allen on a movie set; and President Trump with six unidentified women.

The images — which were released without information on the timing, location or context of the events portrayed — are the latest records from Epstein’s private estate to be released to the public, adding pressure on the Trump administration to follow through with a congressional mandate to publish all of its Epstein files by next week.

An image released by a House committee shows former president Bill Clinton, center, with Jeffrey Epstein, right, and Ghislaine Maxwell, second from right.

(House Oversight Committee )

Trump has denied any involvement or knowledge of Epstein’s sex-trafficking operations, but thousands of emails released last month have suggested the president may have known more about his abuse than he had acknowledged.

The photographs released on Friday are part of more than 95,000 images that were recently turned over to a House committee in response to a set of subpoenas issued for records related to Epstein’s estate.

Rep. Robert Garcia, of Long Beach, the top Democrat on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, in a statement Friday said Democrats on the panel are reviewing the full set of photos and will continue to release them to the public in the days and weeks ahead.

“These disturbing photos raise even more questions about Epstein and his relationships with some of the most powerful men in the world,” Garcia said. “We will not rest until the American people get the truth. The Department of Justice must release all of the files, NOW.”

One of the images released by a House committee shows Steve Bannon, left, with Jeffrey Epstein.

(House Oversight Committee )

Trump had tried to thwart the release of the what have become commonly known as the “Epstein files” for several months, but reversed course in November under growing pressure form his party.

The president then signed legislation that requires the Department of Justice to release its investigative files related to Epstein by Dec. 19. But his past resistance has led to skepticism among some lawmakers on Capitol Hill who question whether the Justice Department may try to conceal information.

“The real test will be, will the Department of Justice release the files or will it all remain tied up in investigations?” Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) said last month.

Epstein, a convicted sex offender who is believed to have abused more than 200 women and girls, died by suicide in federal prison in 2019. His longtime associate, Maxwell, is serving a 20-year sentence for her role in a sex-trafficking scheme to groom and sexually abuse underage girls with Epstein.

INDIANAPOLIS — Indiana’s Republican-led Senate decisively rejected a redrawn congressional map Thursday that would have favored their party, defying months of pressure from President Trump and delivering a stark setback to the White House ahead of next year’s midterm elections.

The vote was overwhelmingly against the proposed redistricting, with more Republicans opposing than supporting the measure, signaling the limits of Trump’s influence even in one of the country’s most conservative states.

Trump has been urging Republicans nationwide to gerrymander their congressional maps in an unprecedented campaign to help the party maintain its thin majority in the House of Representatives. Although Texas, Missouri, Ohio and North Carolina went along, Indiana did not — despite cajoling and insults from the president and the possibility of primary challenges.

“The federal government should not dictate by threat or other means what should happen in our states,” said Spencer Deery, one of the Republican senators who voted no Thursday.

When the proposal failed, 31 to 19, cheers could be heard inside the chamber as well as shouts of “thank you!” The debate had been shadowed by the possibility of violence, and some lawmakers have received threats aimed at persuading them to support the proposal.

Trump tried to brush off the defeat, telling reporters in the Oval Office that he “wasn’t working on it very hard” despite his personal involvement in the pressure campaign.

Two Democratic districts targeted

The proposed map was designed to give Republicans control of all nine of Indiana’s congressional seats, up from the seven they currently hold. It would have essentially erased Indiana’s two Democratic-held districts — splitting Indianapolis among four districts that extend into rural areas, reshaping U.S. Rep. André Carson’s safe district in the city and eliminating the northwest Indiana district held by U.S. Rep. Frank J. Mrvan.

District boundaries are usually adjusted once a decade after a new census. But Trump has cast the issue in existential terms for his party as Democrats push to regain power in Washington.

“If Republicans will not do what is necessary to save our Country, they will eventually lose everything to the Democrats,” Trump wrote on social media the night before the vote.

The president said anyone who voted against the plan should lose their seats. Half of Indiana senators are up for reelection next year, and the conservative organization Turning Point Action had pledged to fund campaigns against them.

David McIntosh, president of Club for Growth, which had backed redistricting, said the vote allowed disloyal Republicans to “stick their finger in the eye of the president of the United States.”

Former Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels praised the senators for “courageous principled leadership” in rejecting the new map.

A Republican who has vocally criticized Trump, Daniels said the outcome was “a major black eye for him and all the Washington groups that piled in, spent money, blustered and threatened.” He added that “this thing rubbed our state the wrong way and Republicans in our state very wrong from the jump.”

‘A full-court press’

Inside the state Senate chamber, Democratic lawmakers spoke out against redistricting ahead of the vote.

“Competition is healthy, my friends,” Sen. Fady Qaddoura said. “Any political party on Earth that cannot run and win based on the merits of its ideas is unworthy of governing.”

In the hallways outside, redistricting opponents chanted “Vote no!” and “Fair maps!” while holding signs with slogans such as “Losers cheat.”

Three times over the fall, Vice President JD Vance met with Republican senators — twice in Indianapolis and once in the White House — to urge their support. Trump joined a conference call with senators on Oct. 17 to make his own 15-minute pitch.

Behind the scenes, James Blair, Trump’s deputy White House chief of staff for political affairs, was in regular touch with members, as were other groups supporting the effort such as the Heritage Foundation and Turning Point USA.

“The administration made a full-court press,” said Republican Sen. Andy Zay, who said he was on the phone with White House aides sometimes multiple times per week, despite his commitment as a yes vote.

Across the country, mid-cycle redistricting so far has resulted in nine more congressional seats that Republicans believe they can win and six more congressional seats that Democrats think they can win — five in California. Some of the new maps, however, are facing litigation.

In Utah, a judge imposed new districts that could allow Democrats to win a seat, saying Republican lawmakers violated voter-backed standards against gerrymandering.

Republicans were split over plan

Despite Trump’s push, support for gerrymandering in Indiana’s Senate was uncertain. A dozen of the 50 senators had not publicly committed to a stance ahead of the vote.

Republican Sen. Greg Goode signaled his displeasure with the redistricting plan before voting no. He said some of his constituents objected to seeing their county split up or paired with Indianapolis. He expressed “love” for Trump but criticized what he called “over-the-top pressure” from inside and outside the state.

Sen. Michael Young, another Republican, said the stakes in Washington justify redistricting, as Democrats are only a few seats away from flipping control of the U.S. House in 2026. “I know this election is going to be very close,” he said.

Republican Sen. Mike Gaskill, the redistricting legislation’s sponsor, showed senators maps of congressional districts around the country, including several focused on Democratic-held seats in New England and Illinois. He argued that other states gerrymander and that Indiana Republicans should therefore play by the same rules.

The bill cleared its first hurdle Monday with a 6-3 Senate committee vote, although one Republican joined Democrats in opposing it and a few others signaled they might vote against the final version. The state House passed the proposal last week, with 12 Republicans siding with Democrats in opposition.

Among them was state Rep. Ed Clere, who said state troopers responded to a hoax message claiming there was a pipe bomb outside his home Wednesday evening. Indiana state police said “numerous others” received threats but wouldn’t offer details about an ongoing investigation.

In an interview, Clere said these threats were the inevitable result of Trump’s pressure campaign and a “winner-take-all mentality.”

“Words have consequences,” Clere said.

Volmert, Lamy and Beaumont write for the Associated Press and reported from Lansing, Mich., Indianapolis and Des Moines, respectively.

WASHINGTON — Justice Department leadership has directed the FBI to “compile a list of groups or entities engaged in acts that may constitute domestic terrorism” by the start of next year, and to establish a “cash reward system” that incentivizes individuals to report on their fellow Americans, according to a memo reviewed by The Times.

Law enforcement agencies are directed in the memo, dated Dec. 4, to identify “domestic terrorists” who use violence, or the threat of violence, to advance political and social agendas, including “adherence to radical gender ideology, anti-Americanism, anti-capitalism, or anti-Christianity.”

Although the memo does not mention protests against President Trump’s immigration crackdown directly, it says that problematic “political and social agendas” could include “opposition to law and immigration enforcement, extreme views in favor of mass migration and open borders.”

The memo, sent by Atty, Gen. Pam Bondi to federal prosecutors and law enforcement agencies, follows on a presidential memorandum signed by Trump in the immediate aftermath of the killing of Charlie Kirk, a prominent conservative figure, that gave civil rights groups pause over the potential targeting of political activists, donors and nonprofits opposed to the president.

The memo also outlines what it says are causes of domestic terrorist activity, including “hostility towards traditional views on family, religion, and morality.”

“Federal law enforcement will prioritize this threat. Where federal crime is encountered, federal agents will act,” the memo states.

Some national security experts said the memo represents a dramatic operational shift, by directing federal prosecutors and agents to approach domestic terrorism in a way that is “ideologically one-sided.” At worst, critics said, the memo provides legal justification for criminalizing free speech.

“I think this causes a chilling impact, because it definitely seems to be directing enforcement toward particular points of view,” Mary McCord, a former acting assistant attorney general for national security, said in an interview.

The memo, for example, primarily focuses on antifa-aligned extremism, but omits other trends that in recent years have been identified as rising domestic threats, such as violent white supremacy. Since Trump resumed office, the FBI has cut its office designated to focus on domestic extremism, withdrawing resources from investigations into white supremacists and right-wing antigovernment groups.

The memo’s push to collect intelligence on antifa through internal lists and public tip lines also raised questions over the scope of the investigative mission, and how wide a net investigators might cast.

“Whether you’re going to a protest, whether you’re considering a piece of legislation, whether you’re considering undertaking a particular business activity, the ambiguity will affect your risk profile,” Thomas Brzozowski, a former counsel for domestic terrorism at the Justice Department, said in an interview.

“It is the unknown that people will fear,” he added.

Protesters in 1980s style aerobic outfits work out during a demonstration dubbed “Sweatin’ Out the Fascists” on Sunday in Portland, Ore.

(Natalie Behring / Getty Images)

Groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union have expressed alarm over the new policy, which could be used by the Justice Department to target civil society groups and Democratic individuals and entities with burdensome investigations.

But the White House argues that Democratic appointees under the Biden administration targeted conservative extremists in similar ways.

Members of Trump’s team have embraced political retribution as a policy course. Ed Martin, the president’s pardon attorney, has openly advocated for Justice Department investigations that would burden who Trump perceives as his enemies, alongside leniency for his friends and allies.

“No MAGA left behind,” Martin wrote on social media in May.

Law enforcement agencies are directed in the memo to “zealously” investigate those involved in what it calls potential domestic terrorist actions, including “doxing” law enforcement. Authorities are also directed to “map the full network of culpable actors” potentially tied to crime.

Domestic terrorism is not an official designation in U.S. law. But the directive cites over two dozen existing laws that could substantiate charges against domestic extremists and their supporters, such as conspiracy to injure an officer, seditious conspiracy and mail and wire fraud.

Only in a footnote of the memo does the Justice Department acknowledge that the U.S. government cannot “investigate, collect, or maintain information on U.S. persons solely for the purpose of monitoring activities protected by the First Amendment.”

“No investigation may be opened based solely on activities protected by the First Amendment or the lawful exercise of rights secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States,” the footnote says.

Some tension could arise when citizens report what they believe to be suspected domestic terrorism to the FBI.

The memo directs the FBI online tip line to allow “witnesses and citizen journalists” to report videos, recordings and photos of what they believe to be suspected acts of domestic violence, and establish a “cash reward system” for information that leads to an arrest.

“People will inform because they want to get paid,” Brzozowski said. He added that some information could end up being unreliable and likely be related to other Americans exercising their constitutional rights.

State and local law enforcement agencies that adhere to the Justice Department directive will be prioritized for federal grant funding.

A man dressed as a bee participates in the No Kings Day of Peaceful Action in downtown Los Angeles on Oct. 18.

(Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)

One of the directives in the memo would require the FBI to disseminate an “intelligence bulletin on Antifa and Antifa-aligned anarchist violent extremist groups” early next year.

“The bulletin should describe the relevant organizations structures, funding sources, and tactics so that law enforcement partners can effectively investigate and policy makers can effectively understand the nature and gravity of the threat posed by these extremist groups,” the memo states.

The mission will cross several agencies, with the FBI working alongside joint terrorism task forces nationwide, as well as the Counterterrorism Division and the National Threat Operations Center, among others, to provide updates to Justice Department leadership every 30 days.

WASHINGTON — Members of Congress clashed Thursday over President Trump’s use of the National Guard in American cities, with Republicans saying the deployments were needed to fight lawlessness while Democrats called his move an extraordinary abuse of military power that violated states’ rights.

Top military officials faced questioning over the deployments for the first time at the hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee. They were pressed by Democrats over the legality of sending in troops, which in some places were done over the objections of mayors and governors, while Trump’s Republican allies offered a robust defense of the policy.

It was the highest level of scrutiny, outside a courtroom, of Trump’s use of the National Guard in U.S. cities since the deployments began and came a day after the president faced another legal setback over efforts to send troops to support federal law enforcement, protect federal facilities and combat crime.

“In recent years, violent crime, rioting, drug trafficking and heinous gang activity have steadily escalated,” said Mississippi Sen. Roger Wicker, the committee chairman. The deployments, he said, are “not only appropriate, but essential.”

Democrats argued they are illegal and contrary to historic prohibitions about the use of military force on U.S. soil.

Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., had pushed for the hearing, saying domestic deployments traditionally have involved responding to major floods and tornadoes, not assisting immigration agents who are detaining people in aggressive raids.

“Trump is forcing our military men and women to make a horrible choice: uphold their loyalty to the Constitution and protect peaceful protesters, or execute questionable orders from the president,” said Duckworth, a combat veteran who served in the Illinois National Guard.

Military leaders point to training

During questioning, military leaders highlighted the duties that National Guard units have carried out. Troops are trained in community policing, they said, and are prohibited from using force unless in self-defense.

Since the deployments began, only one civilian — in California — has been detained by National Guard personnel, according to Air Force Gen. Gregory M. Guillot, commander of U.S. troops in North America. Guillot said the troops are trained to de-escalate tense interactions with people, but do not receive any specific training on mental health episodes.

“They can very quickly be trained to conduct any mission that we task of them,” Guillot said.

Republicans and Democrats see the deployments much differently

In one exchange, Sen. Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii, noted how former Defense Secretary Mark Esper alleged that Trump inquired about shooting protesters during the George Floyd demonstrations. She asked whether a presidential order to shoot protesters would be lawful.

Charles L. Young III, principal deputy general counsel at the Defense Department, said he was unaware of Trump’s previous comments and that “orders to that effect would depend on the circumstances.”

“We have a president who doesn’t think the rule of law applies to him,” Hirono said in response.

Republicans countered that Trump was within his rights — and his duty — to send in the troops.

Republican Sen. Tim Sheehy of Montana, a former Navy SEAL officer, argued during the hearing that transnational crimes present enough of a risk to national security to justify military action, including on U.S. soil.

Sheehy claimed there are foreign powers “actively attacking this country, using illegal immigration, using transnational crime, using drugs to do so.”

Senators also offered their sympathies after two West Virginia National Guard members deployed to Washington were shot just blocks from the White House in what the city’s mayor described as a targeted attack. Spc. Sarah Beckstrom died a day after the Nov. 26 shooting, and her funeral took place Tuesday. Staff Sgt. Andrew Wolfe is hospitalized in Washington.

Hearing follows court setback for Trump

A federal judge in California on Wednesday ruled that the administration must stop deploying the California National Guard in Los Angeles and return control of the troops to the state.

U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer granted a preliminary injunction sought by California officials, but also put the decision on hold until Monday. The White House said it plans to appeal.

Trump called up more than 4,000 California National Guard troops in June without Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom’s approval to further the administration’s immigration enforcement efforts.

The move was the first time in decades that a state’s National Guard was activated without a request from its governor and marked a significant escalation in the administration’s efforts to carry out its mass deportation policy. The troops were stationed outside a federal detention center in downtown Los Angeles where protesters gathered and were later sent on the streets to protect immigration officers as they made arrests.

Trump also had announced National Guard members would be sent to Illinois, Oregon, Louisiana and Tennessee. Other judges have blocked or limited the deployment of troops to Portland, Oregon, and Chicago, while Guard members have not yet been sent to New Orleans.

Klepper, Finley and Groves write for the Associated Press. AP writer Konstantin Toropin contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — President Trump’s approval on the economy and immigration have fallen substantially since March, according to a new AP-NORC poll, the latest indication that two signature issues that got him elected barely a year ago could be turning into liabilities as his party begins to gear up for the 2026 midterms.

Only 31% of U.S. adults now approve of how Trump is handling the economy, the poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research finds. That is down from 40% in March and marks the lowest economic approval he’s registered in an AP-NORC poll in his first or second term. The Republican president also has struggled to recover from public blowback on other issues, such as his management of the federal government, and has not seen an approval bump even after congressional Democrats effectively capitulated to end a record-long government shutdown last month.

Perhaps most worryingly for Trump, who’s become increasingly synonymous with his party, he’s slipped on issues that were major strengths. Just a few months ago, 53% of Americans approved of Trump’s handling of crime, but that’s fallen to 43% in the new poll. There’s been a similar decline on immigration, from 49% approval in March to 38% now.

The new poll starkly illustrates how Trump has struggled to hold onto political wins since his return to office. Even border security — an issue on which his approval remains relatively high — has declined slightly in recent months.

The good news for Trump is that his overall approval hasn’t fallen as steeply. The new poll found that 36% of Americans approve of the way he’s handling his job as president, which is down slightly from 42% in March. That signals that even if some people aren’t happy with elements of his approach, they might not be ready to say he’s doing a bad job as president. And while discontent is increasing among Republicans on certain issues, they’re largely still behind him.

Declining approval on the economy, even among Republicans

Republicans are more unhappy with Trump’s performance on the economy than they were in the first few months of his term. About 7 in 10 Republicans, 69%, approve of how Trump is handling the economy in the December poll, a decline from 78% in March.

Larry Reynolds, a 74-year-old retiree and Republican voter from Wadsworth, Ohio, said he believes in Trump’s plan to impose import duties on U.S. trading partners but thinks rates have spiraled too high, creating a “vicious circle now where they aren’t really justifying the tariffs.”

Reynolds said he also believes that inflation became a problem during the coronavirus pandemic and that the economy won’t quickly recover, regardless of what Trump does. “I don’t think it’ll be anything really soon. I think it’s just going to take time,” he said.

Trump’s base is still largely behind him, which was not always the case for his predecessor, President Joe Biden, a Democrat. In the summer of 2022, only about half of Democrats approved of how Biden was handling the economy. Shortly before he withdrew from the 2024 presidential race two years later, that had risen to about two-thirds of Democrats.

More broadly, though, there’s no sign that Americans think the economy has improved since Trump took over. About two-thirds of U.S. adults, 68%, continue to say the country’s economy is “poor.” That’s unchanged from the last time the question was asked in October, and it’s broadly in line with views throughout Biden’s last year in office.

Why Trump gets higher approval on border security than immigration

Trump’s approval ratings on immigration have declined since March, but border security remains a relatively strong issue for him. Half of U.S. adults, 50%, approve of how Trump is handling border security, which is just slightly lower than the 55% who approved in September.

Trump’s relative strength on border security is partially driven by Democrats and independents. About one-third of independents, 36%, approve of Trump on the border, while 26% approve on immigration.

Jim Rollins, an 82-year-old independent in Macon, Georgia, said he believes that when it comes to closing the border, Trump has done “a good job,” but he hopes the administration will rethink its mass deportation efforts.

“Taking people out of kindergarten, and people going home for Thanksgiving, taking them off a plane. If they are criminals, sure,” said Rollins, who said he supported Trump in his first election but not since then. “But the percentages — based on the government’s own statistics — say that they’re not criminals. They just didn’t register, and maybe they sneaked across the border, and they’ve been here for 15 years.”

Other polls have shown it’s more popular to increase border security than to deport immigrants, even those who are living in the country illegally. Nearly half of Americans said increasing security at the U.S.-Mexico border should be “a high priority” for the government in AP-NORC polling from September. Only about 3 in 10 said the same about deporting immigrants in the U.S. illegally.

Shaniqwa Copeland, a 30-year-old independent and home health aide in St. Augustine, Florida, said she approves of Trump’s overall handling of the presidency but believes his immigration actions have gone too far, especially when it comes to masked federal agents leading large raids.

“Now they’re just picking up anybody,” Copeland said. “They just like, pick up people, grabbing anybody. It’s crazy.”

Health care and government management remain thorns for Trump

About 3 in 10 U.S. adults approve of how Trump is handling health care, down slightly from November. The new poll was conducted in early December, as Trump and Congress struggled to find a bipartisan deal for extending the Affordable Care Act subsidies that will expire at the end of this month.

That health care fight was also the source of the recent government shutdown. About one-third of U.S. adults, 35%, approve of how Trump is managing the federal government, down from 43% in March.

But some Americans may see others at fault for the country’s problems, in addition to Trump. Copeland is unhappy with the country’s health care system and thinks things are getting worse but is not sure of whether to blame Trump or Biden.

“A couple years ago, I could find a dentist and it would be easy. Now, I have a different health care provider, and it’s like so hard to find a dental (plan) with them,” she said. “And the people that do take that insurance, they have so many scheduled out far, far appointments because it’s so many people on it.”

Sanders and Weissert write for the Associated Press. The AP-NORC poll of 1,146 adults was conducted Dec. 4-8 using a sample drawn from NORC’s probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for adults overall is plus or minus 4 percentage points.

MOUNT POCONO, Pa. — On the road in Pennsylvania on Tuesday, President Trump tried to emphasize his focus on combating inflation, yet the issue that has damaged his popularity couldn’t quite command his full attention.

The president told the crowd gathered at a casino and resort in Mount Pocono that inflation was no longer a problem and that Democrats had used the term “affordability” as a “hoax” to hurt his reputation. But his remarks weaved wildly to include grievances he first raised behind closed doors in his first term in 2018 — and later denied saying — asking why the U.S. doesn’t have more immigrants from Scandinavia.

“Why is it we only take people from s—hole countries, right?” Trump said onstage. “Why can’t we have some people from Norway, Sweden, just a few?”

Trump said he objected to taking immigrants from “hellholes like Afghanistan, Haiti, Somalia and many other countries.” He added for emphasis that those places “are a disaster, right? Filthy, dirty, disgusting, ridden with crime.”

Tuesday’s gathering in the swing state — and in a competitive House district — was an official White House event, yet it seemed more like one of his signature campaign rallies that his chief of staff said he would hold regularly ahead of next year’s midterms. But instead of being in an arena that could draw several thousand attendees, it was held in a conference center ballroom at the Mount Airy Casino Resort in Mount Pocono, a small town of about 3,000 residents.

Voters starting to pin inflation on GOP

Following dismal results for Republicans in last month’s off-cycle elections, the White House has sought to convince voters that the economy will emerge stronger next year and that any anxieties over inflation have nothing to do with Trump.

He displayed a chart comparing price increases under his predecessor, Joe Biden, to prices under his own watch to argue his case. But the overall inflation rate has climbed since he announced broad tariffs in April and left many Americans worried about their grocery, utility and housing bills.

“I have no higher priority than making America affordable again,” Trump said. “They caused the high prices and we’re bringing them down.”

As the president spoke, his party’s political vulnerabilities were further seen as Miami voters chose Eileen Higgins to be their first Democratic mayor in nearly 30 years. Higgins defeated the Trump-endorsed Republican Emilio Gonzalez.

The president’s reception in the county hosting his Tuesday rally showed he could still appeal to the base, but it was unable to settle questions of whether he could hold together his 2024 coalition. Monroe County flipped to Trump last year after having backed Biden in 2020, helping the Republican win the swing state of Pennsylvania and return to the White House after a four-year hiatus.

As home to the Pocono Mountains, the county has largely relied on tourism for skiing, hiking, hunting and other activities as a source of jobs. Its proximity to New York City — under two hours by car — has also attracted people seeking more affordable housing.

In Monroe County, prices are a problem

But what seems undeniable — even to Trump supporters in Monroe County — is that inflation seems to be here to stay.

Lou Heddy, a retired maintenance mechanic who voted for Trump last year, said he’s noticed in the past month alone that his and his wife’s grocery bills have risen from $175 to $200, and he’s not sure Trump can bring food prices down.

“Once the prices get up for food, they don’t ever come back down. That’s just the way I feel. I don’t know how the hell he would do it,” said Heddy, 72.

But Suzanne Vena, a Democratic voter, blames Trump’s tariffs for making life more expensive, as she struggles with rising bills for food, rent and electricity on a fixed income. She remembers Trump saying that he would stop inflation.

“That’s what we were originally told,” said Vena, 66. “Did I believe it? That’s another question. I did not.”

The area Trump visited could help decide control of the House in next year’s midterm elections.

Trump held his rally in a congressional district held by first-term Republican Rep. Rob Bresnahan, who is a top target of Democrats. Scranton Mayor Paige Cognetti, a Democrat, is running for the nomination to challenge him.

Speaking to the crowd before Trump, Bresnahan said the administration was working to lower costs, but voters “aren’t asking for partisan arguments — they’re asking for results.”

It’s not clear if Trump can motivate voters in Monroe County to show up in next year’s election if they’re worried about inflation.

Nick Riley, 38, said he’s cutting back on luxuries, like going out to eat, as he absorbs higher bills for food and electricity and is having a hard time finding a good deal on a used car. Riley voted for Trump in 2020, but he sat out the 2024 election and plans to do so again next year.

“We’re all broke. It doesn’t matter whether you support Republicans or support Democrats,” Riley said. “We’re all broke, and we’re all feeling it.”

Trump to start holding more rallies

White House chief of staff Susie Wiles said on the online conservative talk show “The Mom View” that Trump would be on the campaign trail next year to engage supporters who otherwise might sit out a congressional race.

Wiles, who helped manage Trump’s 2024 campaign, said most administrations try to localize midterm elections and keep the president out of the race, but she intends to do the opposite of that.

“We’re actually going to turn that on its head,” Wiles said, “and put him on the ballot because so many of those low-propensity voters are Trump voters.”

The challenge for Trump is how to address the concerns of voters about the economy while simultaneously claiming that the economy is enjoying a historic boom.

Asked on a Politico podcast how he’d rate the economy, Trump leaned into grade inflation by answering “A-plus,” only to then amend his answer to “A-plus-plus-plus-plus-plus.”

The U.S. economy has shown signs of resilience with the stock market up this year and overall growth looking solid for the third quarter. But many Americans see the prices of housing, groceries, education, electricity and other basic needs as swallowing up their incomes, a dynamic that the Trump administration has said it expects to fade next year with more investments in artificial intelligence and manufacturing.

So far, the public has been skeptical about Trump’s economic performance. Just 33% of U.S. adults approve of Trump’s handling of the economy, according to a November survey by the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.

But Trump indicated that his tariffs and other policies were helping industries such as the steel sector. He said those industries mattered for the country as he then specifically told Americans that they should buy fewer pencils and dolls from overseas.

“You don’t need 37 dolls for your daughter,” he told the crowd. “Two or three is nice.”

Levy and Boak write for the Associated Press. Boak reported from Washington.

President Trump admitted Tuesday that he used the slur “shithole countries” to disparage Haiti and African nations during a 2018 meeting with lawmakers, bragging about a comment that sparked global outrage during his first term.

Back then, Trump had denied making the contemptuous statement during a closed-door meeting, but on Tuesday, he showed little compunction reliving it during a rally in Pennsylvania. He went on to further disparage Somalia as “filthy, dirty, disgusting, ridden with crime.”

Trump was boasting in his speech that he had last week “announced a permanent pause on Third World migration, including from hellholes like Afghanistan, Haiti, Somalia and many other countries,” when someone in the crowd yelled out the 2018 remark.

That prompted him to recall the 2018 incident. His telling hewed closely to the description offered at the time by people who were briefed on the Oval Office meeting.

“We had a meeting and I said, ‘Why is it we only take people from shithole countries,’ right? ‘Why can’t we have some people from Norway, Sweden?’” Trump told rallygoers.

“But we always take people from Somalia,” he continued. “Places that are a disaster. Filthy, dirty, disgusting, ridden with crime.”

The White House at the time did not deny Trump’s remarks, but the president posted on Twitter the day after the news broke that “this was not the language I used.” He added that he “never said anything derogatory about Haitians.”

Back in 2018, Trump’s comments denigrating predominantly Black nations while seeking more migration from predominantly white countries were widely denounced as racist. Some congressional Republicans condemned the comments, and foreign leaders were outraged. Botswana’s government summoned the U.S. ambassador, and Senegal’s president at the time, Macky Sall, said he was shocked, noting, “Africa and the Black race merit the respect and consideration of all.”

But since then, Trump has pushed past many norms and traditions of decorum that had guided his predecessors, both in his first term and in the years since. He often peppers his public remarks with curse words, and this year has dropped the F-bomb as cameras were rolling — on two separate occasions.

On Thanksgiving, in a pair of lengthy posts on social media complaining about immigrants, he demeaned Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, using a dated slur for intellectually disabled people. Asked by a reporter if he stood by a comment that many Americans find offensive, Trump was unrepentant. “Yeah. I think there’s something wrong with him,” he said.

Cooper writes for the Associated Press.

Mega billionaire Elon Musk, in a friendly interview with his aide and conservative influencer Katie Miller, said his efforts leading the Department of Government Efficiency were only “somewhat successful” and he would not do it over again.

The Tesla and SpaceX chief executive, who also owns the social media platform X, still broadly defended President Trump’s controversial pop-up agency that Musk left in the spring before it shuttered officially last month. Yet Musk bemoaned how difficult it is to remake the federal government quickly, and he acknowledged how much his businesses suffered because of his DOGE work and its lack of popularity.

“We were a little bit successful. We were somewhat successful,” he told Miller, who once worked as a DOGE spokeswoman charged with selling the agency’s work to the public.

When Miller pressed Musk on whether he would do it all over again, he said: “I don’t think so. … Instead of doing DOGE, I would have, basically … worked on my companies.”

Almost wistfully, Musk added, “They wouldn’t have been burning the cars” — a reference to consumer protests against Tesla.

Still, things certainly have turned up for Musk since his departure from Trump’s administration. Tesla shareholders approved a pay package that could make Musk the world’s first trillionaire.

Musk was speaking as a guest on the “Katie Miller Podcast,” which Miller, who is married to top Trump advisor Stephen Miller, launched after leaving government employment to work for Musk in the private sector. The two sat in chairs facing each other for a conversation that lasted more than 50 minutes and spanned topics from DOGE to Musk’s thoughts on AI, social media, conspiracy theories and fashion.

Miller did not press Musk on the inner workings of DOGE and the controversial manner in which it took over federal agencies and data systems.

Musk credited the agency with saving as much as $200 billion annually in “zombie payments” that he said can be avoided with better automated systems and coding for federal payouts. But that number is dwarfed by Musk’s ambitious promises at one time that an efficiency commission could measure savings in the trillions.

Barrow writes for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — As he shook President Obama’s hand and pulled him in for what he thought was a private aside, Vice President Joe Biden delivered an explicit message: “This is a big f——— deal.” The remark, overheard on live microphones at a 2010 ceremony for the Affordable Care Act, caused a sensation because open profanity from a national leader was unusual at the time.

More than 15 years later, vulgarity is now in vogue.

During a political rally Tuesday night in Pennsylvania that was intended to focus on tackling inflation, President Trump used profanity at least four times. At one point, he even admitted to disparaging Haiti and African nations as “ shithole countries ” during a private 2018 meeting, a comment he denied at the time. And before a bank of cameras during a lengthy Cabinet meeting last week, the Republican president referred to alleged drug smugglers as “sons of b——-s.”

While the Biden incident was accidental, the frequency, sharpness and public nature of Trump’s comments are intentional. They build on his project to combat what he sees as pervasive political correctness. Leaders in both parties are seemingly in a race now to the verbal gutter.

Vice President JD Vance called a podcast host a “dips—t” in September. In Thanksgiving remarks before troops, Vance joked that anyone who said they liked turkey was “full of s—-.” After one National Guard member was killed in a shooting in Washington last month and a second was critically injured, top Trump aide Steven Cheung told a reporter on social media to “shut the f—- up” when she wrote that the deployment of troops in the nation’s capital was “for political show.”

Among Democrats, former Vice President Kamala Harris earned a roar of approval from her audience in September when she condemned the Trump administration by saying “these mother———- are crazy.” After Trump called for the execution of several Democratic members of Congress last month, Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., said it was time for people with influence to “pick a f——— side.” Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York said the administration cannot “f—- around” with the release of the Jeffrey Epstein files. Democratic Rep. Jasmine Crockett, who on Monday announced her Senate campaign in Texas, did not hold back earlier this year when asked what she would tell Elon Musk if given the chance: “F—- off.”

The volley of vulgarities underscore an ever-coarsening political environment that often plays out on social media or other digital platforms where the posts or video clips that evoke the strongest emotions are rewarded with the most engagement.

“If you want to be angry at someone, be angry at the social media companies,” Utah Gov. Spencer Cox, a Republican, said Tuesday night at Washington National Cathedral, where he spoke at an event focused on political civility. “It’s not a fair fight. They’ve hijacked our brains. They understand these dopamine hits. Outrage sells.”

Cox, whose national profile rose after calling for civility in the wake of conservative activist Charlie Kirk’s assassination in his state, approved an overhaul of social media laws meant to protect children. A federal judge has temporarily blocked the state law.

Tough political talk is nothing new

Tough talk is nothing new in politics, but leaders long avoided flaunting it.

Recordings from Democrat Lyndon B. Johnson’s administration, for instance, revealed a crude, profane side of his personality that was largely kept private. Republican Richard Nixon bemoaned the fact that the foul language he used in the Oval Office was captured on tape. “Since neither I nor most other Presidents had ever used profanity in public, millions were shocked,” Nixon wrote in his book “In the Arena.”

“Politicians have always sworn, just behind closed doors,” said Benjamin Bergen, a professor at the University of California-San Diego’s Department of Cognitive Science and the author of “What the F: What swearing reveals about our language, our brains, and ourselves.” “The big change is in the past 10 years or so, it’s been much more public.”

As both parties prepare for the 2026 midterm elections and the 2028 presidential campaign, the question is whether this language will become increasingly mainstream. Republicans who simply try to imitate Trump’s brash style do not always succeed with voters. Democrats who turn to vulgarities risk appearing inauthentic if their words feel forced.

For some, it is just a distraction.

“It’s not necessary,” said GOP Rep. Don Bacon of Nebraska, who is retiring next year after winning five elections in one of the most competitive House districts. “If that’s what it takes to get your point across, you’re not a good communicator.”

There are risks of overusing profanity

There also is a risk that if such language becomes overused, its utility as a way to shock and connect with audiences could be dulled. Comedian Jerry Seinfeld has talked about this problem, noting that he used swear words in his early routines but dropped them as his career progressed because he felt profanity yielded only cheap laughs.

“I felt like well I just got a laugh because I said f—- in there,” he said in a 2020 interview on the WTF podcast with fellow comedian Marc Maron. “You didn’t find the gold.”

White House spokesperson Liz Huston said Trump “doesn’t care about being politically correct, he cares about Making America Great Again. The American people love how authentic, transparent, and effective the President is.”

But for Trump, the words that have generated the most controversy are often less centered in traditional profanity than slurs that can be interpreted as hurtful. The final weeks of his 2016 campaign were rocked when a tape emerged of him discussing grabbing women by their genitals, language he minimized as “locker room talk.” His “shithole” remark in 2018 was widely condemned as racist.

More recently, Trump called a female journalist “piggy,” comments that his press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, defended as evidence of a president who is “very frank and honest.” Trump’s use of a slur about disabled people prompted an Indiana Republican whose child has Down syndrome to come out in opposition to the president’s push to redraw the state’s congressional districts.

On rare occasions, politicians express contrition for their choice of words. In an interview with The Atlantic published last week, Gov. Josh Shapiro, D-Pa., dismissed Harris’ depiction of him in her book about last year’s presidential campaign by saying she was “trying to sell books and cover her a—.”

He seemed to catch himself quickly.

“I shouldn’t say ‘cover her a—,” he said. “I think that’s not appropriate.”

Sloan writes for the Associated Press.

MIAMI — Democrat Eileen Higgins won the Miami mayor’s race on Tuesday, defeating a Republican endorsed by President Trump to end her party’s nearly three-decade losing streak and give Democrats a boost in one of the last electoral battles ahead of the 2026 midterms.

Higgins, 61, will be the first woman to lead the city of Miami. She spoke frequently in the Hispanic-majority city about Trump’s immigration crackdown, saying she has heard of many people in Miami who were worried about family members being detained. She campaigned as a proud Democrat despite the race being officially nonpartisan and beat Trump-backed candidate Emilio Gonzalez, a former city manager, who said he called Higgins to congratulate her.

“We are facing rhetoric from elected officials that is so dehumanizing and cruel, especially against immigrant populations,” Higgins told The Associated Press after her victory speech. “The residents of Miami were ready to be done with that.”

With nearly all votes counted Tuesday, Higgins led the Republican by about 19 percentage points.

The local race is not predictive of what may happen at the polls next year. But it drew attention from the two major national political parties and their leaders. The victory provides Democrats with some momentum heading into a high-stakes midterm election when the GOP is looking to keep its grip in Florida, including in a Hispanic-majority district in Miami-Dade County. The area has shifted increasingly rightward politically in recent years, and the city may become the home of Trump’s presidential library.

“Tonight’s result is yet another warning sign to Republicans that voters are fed up with their out-of-touch agenda that is raising costs,” said Ken Martin, the chair of the Democratic National Committee, in a statement.

Some nationally recognized Democrats supported Higgins, including former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg. U.S. Sen. Ruben Gallego and former Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel traveled to Miami on Sunday and Monday to rally voters for the Democrat who served as a Miami-Dade county commissioner for seven years.

Higgins, who speaks Spanish, represented a district that leans conservative and includes the Cuban neighborhood of Little Havana. When she first entered politics in 2018, she chose to present herself to voters as “La Gringa,” a term Spanish speakers use for white Americans, because many people did not known how to pronounce her name.

“It just helps people understand who I am, and you know what? I am a ‘gringa,’ so, what am I going to do, deny it?” she told the AP.

Republicans’ anxiety grows

Republicans in Florida have found strong support from voters with heritage from Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua, because they likened some members of the Democratic party’s progressive wing with politicians from the governments they fled. Trump and other GOP members have tapped into those sentiments over the past eight years.

However, some local Republicans are growing increasingly frustrated since November’s elections when Democrats scored wins in New Jersey and Virginia, where both winning gubernatorial candidates performed strongly with nonwhite voters.

The results from those races were perceived as a reflection of concerns over rising prices and the Trump administration’s aggressive immigration policies.

U.S. Rep. Maria Elvira Salazar, a Republican whose district is being targeted by Democrats and includes the city of Miami, called the elections elsewhere a “wake-up call.” She said Hispanics also want a secure border and a healthy economy but some relief for “those who have been here for years and do not have a criminal record.”

“The Hispanic vote is not guaranteed,” Salazar said in a video posted on X last month. “Hispanics married President Trump, but they are only dating the GOP.”

David Jolly, who is running to represent Democrats in the Florida governor’s race next year, said the mayoral election was good news for Democrats in what used to be a battleground state.

“Change is here. It’s sweeping the nation, and it’s sweeping Florida,” Jolly said.

Miami mayor-elect gains national platform

The mayoral position in Miami is more ceremonial, but Higgins promised to execute it like a full-time job.

The city is part of Miami-Dade County, which Trump flipped last year, a dramatic improvement from his 30 percentage point loss to Democrat Hillary Clinton in 2016.

As Florida’s second-largest city, Miami is considered the gateway to Latin America and attracts millions of tourists. Its global prominence gives Higgins a significant stage as mayor.

Her pitch to voters included finding city-owned land that could be turned into affordable housing and cutting unnecessary spending.

Licon writes for the Associated Press.

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. — Opponents of Missouri’s new congressional map submitted thousands of petition signatures Tuesday calling for a statewide referendum on a redistricting plan backed by President Trump as part of his quest to hold on to a slim Republican majority in next year’s elections.

Organizers of the petition drive said they turned in more than 300,000 signatures to the secretary of state’s office — more than the roughly 110,000 needed to suspend the new U.S. House districts from taking effect until a public vote can be held sometime next year.

Referendum votes in Missouri are automatically set for the upcoming November election, unless the General Assembly approves an earlier date during its regular session that begins in January. Missouri’s candidate filing period runs from Feb. 24 through March 31, but districts can still be changed after the deadline, as occurred when the legislature last approved districts in 2022.

The signatures also need to be formally verified by local election authorities and Republican Secretary of State Denny Hoskins, who has argued the referendum is unconstitutional. But if the signatures hold up, the referendum could create a significant obstacle for Republicans who hope the new districts could help them win a currently Democratic-held seat in the Kansas City area in the November election.

“At the end of the day, these are going to have to get counted, and people are going to vote on this,” said Richard von Glahn, executive director of People Not Politicians, which sponsored the referendum drive.

Redistricting typically happens once a decade, after each census. But the national political parties are engaged in an unusual mid-decade redistricting battle after Trump urged Republican-led states to reshape House voting districts to their advantage. The Republican president is trying to avert a historical tendency for the incumbent’s party to lose seats in midterm elections.

Each House seat could be crucial, because Democrats need a net gain of just three seats to win control of the chamber and impede Trump’s agenda.

Redistricting is spreading through states

Texas was the first to respond to Trump’s call by passing a new congressional map that could help Republicans win five additional seats. The U.S. Supreme Court cleared the way last week for the new districts to be used in the 2026 elections.

Republicans could gain one seat each under new maps passed in Missouri and North Carolina and have an improved chance at taking two additional seats under a new Ohio congressional map. In Indiana, senators are considering a proposal this week that also could help Republicans win two additional seats.

Democrats scored a victory in California, where voters in November approved a new Democratic-drawn congressional map that could help the party win five additional seats. Democrats could gain a seat in Utah under new congressional districts imposed by a judge.

But Republicans are challenging both states’ measures in court. And Utah lawmakers are meeting in a special session Tuesday to consider delaying the candidate filing deadline to allow more time for the legal challenge.

Virginia Democrats have also taken a first step toward mid-decade redistricting, with additional votes expected in the new year.

Missouri referendum sparks intense battle

People Not Politicians has raised about $5 million, coming mostly from out-of-state organizations opposed to the new map. National Republican-aligned groups have countered with more than $2 million for a committee supporting the new map.

Republicans have tried to thwart the referendum in numerous ways.

Organizations supporting the Republican redistricting have attempted to pay people up to $30,000 to quit gathering petition signatures, according to a lawsuit filed by Advanced Micro Targeting Inc., a company hired by People Not Politicians.

Hoskins, the secretary of state, contends he cannot legally count about 100,000 petition signatures gathered in the one-month span between legislative passage of the redistricting bill and his approval of the referendum petition’s format, but can only count those gathered after that.

Hoskins also wrote a ballot summary stating the new map “repeals Missouri’s existing gerrymandered congressional plan … and better reflects statewide voting patterns.” That’s the opposite of what referendum backers contend it does, and People Not Politicians is challenging that wording in court.

Meanwhile, Republican Atty. Gen. Catherine Hanaway filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of Hoskins and the General Assembly asserting that congressional redistricting legislation cannot be subject to a referendum. Although a federal judge dismissed that suit Monday, the judge noted that Hoskins has “the power to declare the petition unconstitutional himself,” which would likely trigger a new court case.

Missouri’s restricting effort already has sparked an intense court battle. Lawsuits by opponents challenge the legality of Republican Gov. Mike Kehoe’s special session proclamation, assert that mid-decade redistricting isn’t allowed under Missouri’s constitution and claim the new districts run afoul of requirements to be compact, contiguous and equally populated.

It’s been more than a century since Missouri last held a referendum on a congressional redistricting plan. In 1922, the U.S. House districts approved by the Republican-led legislature were defeated by nearly 62% of the statewide vote.

Lieb writes for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — President Trump will road-test his claims that he’s tackling Americans’ affordability woes at a Tuesday rally in Mount Pocono, Penn., — shifting an argument made in Oval Office appearances and social media posts to a campaign-style event.

The trip comes as polling consistently shows that public trust in Trump’s economic leadership has faltered. Following dismal results for Republicans in last month’s off-cycle elections, the White House has sought to convince voters that the economy will emerge stronger next year and that any anxieties over inflation have nothing to do with Trump.

The president has consistently blamed his predecessor, Democrat Joe Biden, for inflation even as his own aggressive implementation of policies has pushed up prices that had been settling down after spiking in 2022 to a four-decade high. Inflation began to accelerate after Trump announced his sweeping “Liberation Day” tariffs in April. Companies warned that the import taxes could be passed along to consumers in the form of higher prices and reduced hiring, yet Trump continues to insist that inflation has faded.

“We’re bringing prices way down,” Trump said at the White House on Monday. “You can call it ‘affordability’ or anything you want — but the Democrats caused the affordability problem, and we’re the ones that are fixing it.”

The president’s reception in the county hosting his Tuesday rally could give a signal of just how much voters trust his claims. Monroe County flipped to Trump in the 2024 election after having backed Biden in 2020, helping the Republican to win the swing state of Pennsylvania and return to the White House after a four-year hiatus.

As home to the Pocono Mountains, the county has largely relied on tourism for skiing, hiking, hunting and other activities as a source of jobs. Its proximity to New York City — under two hours by car — has also attracted people seeking more affordable housing.

It’s also an area that could help decide control of the House in next year’s midterm elections.

Trump is holding his rally in a congressional district held by freshman Republican Rep. Rob Bresnahan, who is a top target of Democrats and won his 2024 race by about 1.5 percentage points, among the nation’s closest. Scranton Mayor Paige Cognetti, a Democrat, is running for the nomination to challenge him.

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is running digital ads during Trump’s visit on the Wilkes-Barre Times-Leader website that criticize Bresnahan for his stock trading while in Congress and suggest that Trump has not as promised addressed double-dealing in Washington.

White House chief of staff Susie Wiles said on the online conservative talk show “The Mom View” that Trump would be on the “campaign trail” next year to engage supporters who otherwise might sit out a congressional race.

Wiles, who helped manage Trump’s 2024 campaign, said most administrations try to localize midterm elections and keep the president out of the race, but she intends to do the opposite of that.

“We’re actually going to turn that on its head,” Wiles said, “and put him on the ballot because so many of those low-propensity voters are Trump voters.”

Wiles added, “So I haven’t quite broken it to him yet, but he’s going to campaign like it’s 2024 again.”

The challenge for Trump is how to address the concerns of voters about the economy while simultaneously claiming that the economy is enjoying an historic boom.

Asked on a Politico podcast about how he’d rate the economy, Trump leaned into the grade inflation by answering “A-plus,” only to then amend his answer to “A-plus-plus-plus-plus-plus.”

Trump has said he’s giving consumers relief by relaxing fuel efficiency standards for autos and signing agreements to reduce list prices on prescription drugs.

Trump has also advocated for cuts to the Federal Reserve’s benchmark interest rate — which influences the supply of money in the U.S. economy. He argues that would reduce the cost of mortgages and auto loans, although critics warn that cuts of the scale sought by Trump could instead worsen inflation.

The U.S. economy has shown signs of resilience with the stock market up this year and overall growth looking solid for the third quarter. But many Americans see the prices of housing, groceries, education, electricity and other basic needs as swallowing up their incomes, a dynamic that the Trump administration has said it expects to fade next year with more investments in artificial intelligence and manufacturing.

Since the elections in November when Democrats won key races with a focus on kitchen table issues, Trump has often dismissed the concerns about prices as a “hoax” and a “con job” to suggest that he bears no responsibility for inflation, even though he campaigned on his ability to quickly bring down prices. Just 33% of U.S. adults approve of Trump’s handling of the economy, according to a November survey by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.

Boak and Levy write for the Associated Press. Levy reported from Harrisburg, Penn.

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Navy admiral who is retiring early from command of the campaign to destroy vessels allegedly carrying drugs near Venezuela spoke to key lawmakers Tuesday as Congress seeks more answers on President Trump’s mission, which, in one instance, killed two survivors clinging to the wreckage of an initial strike.

The classified video call between Adm. Alvin Holsey, who will be retiring from U.S. South Command in the coming days, and the GOP chairs and ranking Democrats of the Senate Armed Services Committee represented another determined step by lawmakers to demand an accounting from the Department of Defense on the threats against Venezuela and the strikes, especially after a report that two survivors were killed during one operation in September.

Sen. Roger Wicker of Mississippi, the Republican chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee, declined to discuss the specifics of the call but described Holsey as a “great public servant.”

Congress is also demanding that the Pentagon turn over unedited video of the strikes, as well as the orders authorizing the attacks, as part of its annual defense authorization bill. Wicker said that the Pentagon is weighing whether the video had “classified sections.”

The demands were evidence of the intense scrutiny being placed on the Sept. 2 strike, which legal experts say may have violated the laws governing how the U.S. military uses deadly force. Congressional leaders will also receive a wider foreign policy and national security briefing from Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Tuesday afternoon.

“They are using expensive, exquisite American military capabilities to kill people who are the equivalent of corner dealers and not making progress interdicting the trafficking by the cartels,” said Sen. Chris Coons, a Delaware Democrat.

Congress presses for more information

What lawmakers learn from Holsey could shed new light on the purpose and parameters of Trump’s campaign, which has struck 22 boats and killed at least 87 people since it started in September. Trump has also been making threats against Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, sending a fleet of warships near the South American country, including the largest U.S. aircraft carrier.

Holsey became the leader of U.S. Southern Command just over one year ago, but in October, Hegseth announced that Holsey would be retiring early from his post. As commander of U.S. forces in the region, Holsey oversaw a command structure that has in recent years been mostly focused on building stability and cooperation across much of Latin America.

Trump’s drug boat campaign, however, has added a new, deadly dynamic to its mission. Rather than trying to interdict drug vessels, as forces such as the U.S. Coast Guard have traditionally done, the Trump administration asserts that the drugs and drug smugglers are posing a direct threat to American lives. Officials say they are applying the same rules as the global war on terrorism to kill drug smugglers.

Lawmakers are also questioning what intelligence the military is using to determine whether the boats’ cargo is headed for the U.S. As they have looked closer at the Sept. 2 strike, lawmakers learned that the destroyed boat was heading south at the time of the attack and that military intelligence showed it was headed toward another vessel that was bound for Suriname.

Still, it remains to be seen whether the Republican-controlled Congress will push back on the Trump administration’s campaign.

“I want a full set of data to draw my conclusions from,” said Sen. Thom Tillis, a North Carolina Republican who had demanded accountability after it was revealed that two survivors had been killed.

Trump this week justified the strike by claiming that the two suspected drug smugglers were trying to right part of the boat after it had capsized in the initial attack. However, Adm. Frank “Mitch” Bradley, the special operations commander who ordered the second strike, told lawmakers in a closed-door briefing last week that he ordered the second strike to ensure that the cocaine in the boat could not be picked up later by cartel members.

Groves and Mascaro write for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — Pamela Smith, who was catapulted into national attention after President Trump moved to federalize Washington’s police force and who worked to confront rising violence in the nation’s capital, is stepping down as the city’s police chief, Mayor Muriel Bowser said Monday.

Smith, appointed in 2023, had been brought in to stabilize a department facing staffing shortages and a city shaken by post-pandemic crime. But her tenure unfolded amid a fierce battle over authority, as Trump asserted federal control over the Metropolitan Police Department and deployed National Guard troops and federal agents alongside the city’s officers.

In announcing her resignation, Bowser praised Smith for “stepping up” at a moment of “significant urgency,” crediting her with helping drive down violent crime, cutting homicides to an eight-year low and launching major policing initiatives, including a Real-Time Crime Center and new technology upgrades.

“Chief Smith got all of this done while navigating unprecedented challenges and attacks on our city’s autonomy,” Bowser said.

The mayor did not say why Smith is leaving. She also did not announce who would take over the department or whether the change in leadership might affect the city’s broader public-safety strategy at a moment when Washington continues to recover from historic levels of violence.

The announcement comes after Bowser said she would not seek a fourth term. Smith and Bowser have been under tremendous pressure from constituents over the police force’s performance during the federal law enforcement intervention.

In a statement, Smith said she was confident the police force “is in a strong position and that the great work will continue” and that the role has been both a challenge and a reward.

“I am proud of the accomplishments we achieved together, and I thank the residents of this city for their trust and partnership,” Smith said. “While my aspiration has always been to see zero percent crime, we are not there yet. Nonetheless, we have made tremendous progress, and there remains important work ahead.”

Smith, a longtime federal law enforcement official and former head of the U.S. Park Police, assumed command during one of Washington’s most volatile years in nearly two decades, as homicides surged, carjackings hit record highs and frustration mounted among residents and lawmakers.

The spike in 2023 violence prompted congressional hearings and led city leaders to expand police authority, including authorizing drug-free zones in areas with persistent crime. Lawmakers also rewrote parts of the city’s criminal code in an effort to stem the rise in violent offenses.

The city began to see improvement in early 2024. Overall crime fell by about 17% in the first 10 weeks, a drop Smith attributed to the new law and to targeted deployments in neighborhoods experiencing repeated trouble. She also imposed temporary youth curfew zones in parts of the district.

Pointing to the city’s crime, Trump issued an emergency order in August that federalized the police force and sent in hundreds of National Guard troops. Trump has hailed the operation as a resounding success that has brought down crime, although rates already were on the decline.

WASHINGTON — Twelve former FBI agents fired after kneeling during a 2020 racial justice protest in Washington sued Monday to get their jobs back, saying their action had been intended to de-escalate a volatile situation and was not meant as a political gesture.

The agents say in their lawsuit that they were fired in September by Director Kash Patel because they were perceived as not being politically affiliated with President Trump. But they say their decision to take a knee on June 4, 2020, days after the death of George Floyd at the hands of Minneapolis police, has been misinterpreted as political expression.

The lawsuit says the agents were assigned to patrol the nation’s capital during a period of civil unrest prompted by Floyd’s death. Lacking protective gear or extensive training in crowd control, the agents became outnumbered by hostile crowds they encountered and decided to kneel to the ground in hopes of defusing the tension, the lawsuit said. The tactic worked, the lawsuit asserts — the crowds dispersed, no shots were fired and the agents “saved American lives” that day.

“Plaintiffs were performing their duties as FBI Special Agents, employing reasonable de-escalation to prevent a potentially deadly confrontation with American citizens: a Washington Massacre that could have rivaled the Boston Massacre in 1770,” the lawsuit says.

The FBI declined to comment Monday.

The lawsuit in federal court in Washington represents the latest court challenge to a personnel purge that has roiled the FBI, targeting both top-ranking supervisors and line agents, as Patel has worked to reshape the nation’s premier law enforcement agency. Besides the kneeling agents, other employees pushed out in recent months have worked on investigations involving Trump or his allies and in one case displayed an LGBTQ+ flag in his workspace.

After photographs emerged of the agents taking a knee, the FBI conducted an internal review, with the then-deputy director determining that the agents had no political motive and should not be punished. The Justice Department inspector general reached a similar conclusion and faulted the department for having put the agents in a precarious situation that day, the lawsuit says.

It was only after Patel took over the bureau in February that the FBI took a different posture.

Multiple kneeling agents were removed from supervisory positions last spring and a fresh disciplinary inquiry was launched that resulted in the agents being interviewed about their actions. That internal process was still pending when the agents in September received terse letters telling them they were being terminated because of “unprofessional conduct and a lack of impartiality in carrying out duties, leading to the political weaponization of government.”

“Defendants dismissed Plaintiffs in a partisan effort to retaliate against FBI employees that they perceived to be sympathetic to President Trump’s political opponents,” the lawsuit states. “And Defendants acted summarily to avoid creating any further administrative record that would reveal their actions as vindictive and unjustified.”

The plaintiffs are among 22 agents from different squads across Washington who were deployed to downtown D.C. on June 4, 2020, to demonstrate a visible law enforcement process during a time of protests in the nation’s capital and across the country.

The lawsuit asserts that the agents were thrust into a chaotic scene, saying that a crowd recognized them as being from the FBI and “intentionally” pushed toward them, becoming “increasingly agitated” and shouting and gesturing toward them. Some in the crowd began chanting “take a knee,” a gesture that at that point was widely recognized as a sign of solidarity with Floyd, who was pinned to the pavement by police with a knee on his neck.

The agents closest to the crowd were the first to kneel. After the crowd’s attention turned to the other agents who remained standing, the other FBI employees followed suit, taking a knee in recognition that it was the “most tactically sound means to prevent violence and to maintain order.” The crowd moved on.

“Plaintiffs demonstrated tactical intelligence in choosing between deadly force — the only force available to them as a practical matter, given their lack of adequate crowd control equipment — and a less-than-lethal response that would save lives and keep order,” the lawsuit says. “The Special Agents selected the option that prevented casualties while maintaining their law enforcement mission. Each Plaintiff kneeled for apolitical tactical reasons to defuse a volatile situation, not as an expressive political act.”

In addition to seeking reinstatement, the lawsuit also asks for a court judgment declaring the firings as unconstitutional, backpay and other monetary damages and an expungement of personnel files related to the terminations.

Tucker writes for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — President Trump on Sunday hosted the Kennedy Center Honors and praised Sylvester Stallone, Kiss, Gloria Gaynor, Michael Crawford and George Strait, the slate of honorees he helped choose, as being “legendary in so many ways.”

“Billions and billions of people have watched them over the years,” Trump, the first president to command the stage, said to open the show.

The Republican president said the artists, recognized with tribute performances during the show, are “among the greatest artists and actors, performers, musicians, singers, songwriters ever to walk the face of the Earth.”

Since returning to office in January, Trump has made the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, which is named after a Democratic predecessor, a touchstone in a broader attack against what he has lambasted as “woke” anti-American culture.

Trump said Saturday that he was hosting “at the request of a certain television network.” He predicted the broadcast scheduled for Dec. 23 on CBS and Paramount+ would have its best ratings ever.

Before Trump, presidents watched the show alongside the honorees. Trump skipped the honors altogether during his first term.

Asked how he got ready for the gig, Trump said as he moved along the red carpet with his wife, first lady Melania Trump, that he “didn’t really prepare very much.”

“I have a good memory, so I can remember things, which is very fortunate,” the president said. “But just, I wanted to just be myself. You have to be yourself.”

Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, one of several Cabinet secretaries attending the ceremony, said his boss “is so relaxed in front of these cameras, as you know, and so funny, I can’t wait for tonight.” Lutnick arrived with his wife, a member of the Kennedy Center’s board.

Trump appeared on stage three times to open and close the show, and after intermission. He also talked up each artist in prerecorded videos that played before their tributes.

Trump was both gracious and critical in the comments he delivered from the stage, lavishing the honorees with effusive praise but at times showing a mean streak. After returning from intermission, he said he’d toured some of the construction projects he has launched to renovate the performing arts center. And he said it was a “fantastic” night.

“Well, we’re really having a good time tonight,” Trump said. “So many people I know in this audience. Some good. Some bad. Some I truly love and respect. Some I just hate.”

Since 1978, the honors have recognized stars for their influence on American culture and the arts. Members of this year’s class are pop-culture standouts, including Stallone for his “Rocky” and “Rambo” movies, Gaynor for her “I Will Survive” feminist anthem and Kiss for its flashy, cartoonish makeup and onstage displays of smoke and pyrotechnics.

Strait is a leader in the world of country music and Crawford, a Tony Award-winning actor, is best known for starring in “Phantom of the Opera,” the longest-running show in Broadway history.

Trump said persistence is a trait shared by the honorees, several of whom had humble beginnings.

“Some of them have had legendary setbacks, setbacks that you have to read in the papers because of their level of fame,” he said from the stage. “But in the words of Rocky Balboa, they showed us that you keep moving forward, just keep moving forward.”

He said many of the politicians, celebrities and others in the audience shared the trait, too.

“I know so many of you are persistent,” Trump said in his opening. “Many of you are miserable, horrible people. You are persistent. You never give up. Sometimes I wish you’d give up, but you don’t.”

The ceremony was expected to be emotional for the members of Kiss. The band’s original lead guitarist, Ace Frehley, died in October after he was injured during a fall. During the tribute to Kiss, a lone red guitar that emitted smoke was placed on stage in remembrance of Frehley, who was known for having a smoke bomb in his instrument.

The program closed with a rousing performance by Cheap Trick of Kiss’ “Rock and Roll All Nite” that brought the audience to its feet.

Stallone said receiving the honor was like being in the “eye of a hurricane.”

“This is an amazing event,” he said on the red carpet. “But you’re caught up in the middle of it. It’s hard to take it in until the next day. … but I’m incredibly humbled by it.”

Crawford also said it was “humbling, especially at the end of a career.”

Gaynor said it “feels like a dream” to be honored. “To be recognized in this way is the pinnacle,” she said after arriving.

Mike Farris, an award-winning gospel singer who performed for Gaynor, called her a dear friend. “She truly did survive,” Farris said. “What an iconic song.”

Trump has taken over the Kennedy Center

Trump upended decades of bipartisan support for the center by ousting its leadership and stacking the board of trustees with Republican supporters, who elected him chair. He has criticized the center’s programming and the building’s appearance — and has said, perhaps jokingly, that he would rename it as the “Trump Kennedy Center.” He secured more than $250 million from Congress for renovations of the building.

Asked Sunday night about a possible renaming, Trump said it would be up to the board. Still, he joked at one point about the “Trump Kennedy Center.”

Presidents of each political party have at times found themselves face to face with artists of opposing political views. Republican Ronald Reagan was there for honoree Arthur Miller, a playwright who championed liberal causes. Democrat Bill Clinton, who had signed an assault weapons ban into law, marked the honors for Charlton Heston, an actor and gun rights advocate.

During Trump’s first term, multiple honorees were openly critical of the president. In 2017, Trump’s first year in office, honors recipient and film producer Norman Lear threatened to boycott his own ceremony if Trump attended. Trump stayed away during that entire term.

Trump has said he was deeply involved in choosing the 2025 honorees and turned down some recommendations because they were “too woke.” He said Sunday that about 50 names were whittled down to five. While Stallone is one of Trump’s Hollywood ”special ambassadors” and has likened Trump to George Washington, the political views of Sunday’s other guests are less clear.

Honorees’ views about Trump

Strait and Gaynor have said little about their politics, although Federal Election Commission records show that Gaynor has given money to Republican organizations in recent years.

Simmons spoke favorably of Trump when Trump ran for president in 2016. But in 2022, Simmons told Spin magazine that Trump was “out for himself” and criticized Trump for encouraging conspiracy theories and public expressions of racism.

Fellow Kiss member Paul Stanley denounced Trump’s effort to overturn his 2020 election defeat to Democrat Joe Biden, and said Trump supporters who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, were “terrorists.” But after Trump won in 2024, Stanley urged unity.

“If your candidate lost, it’s time to learn from it, accept it and try to understand why,” Stanley wrote on X. “If your candidate won, it’s time to understand that those who don’t share your views also believe they are right and love this country as much as you do.”

Superville and Italie write for the Associated Press. Italie reported from New York.