Politics Desk

A federal judge heard arguments Tuesday to decide whether maneuvers used by the Trump administration to install Bill Essayli as acting United States attorney in Los Angeles are improper — and, if so, what should be done about it.

During a Tuesday hearing in downtown L.A., Senior Judge J. Michael Seabright — who flew in from Hawaii for the proceeding — wondered how to proceed after defense attorneys sought to dismiss indictments against three clients and to disqualify Essayli “from participating in criminal prosecutions in this district.”

Essayli, a former Riverside County assemblyman, was appointed as the region’s interim top federal prosecutor by U.S. Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi in April.

His term was set to expire in late July unless he was confirmed by the U.S. Senate or a panel of federal judges. But the White House never moved to nominate him to a permanent role, instead opting to use an unprecedented legal maneuver to shift his title to “acting,” extending his term for an additional nine months without any confirmation process.

Seabright was selected from the District of Hawaii after L.A.’s federal judges recused themselves from the proceedings. He questioned the consequences of dismissing any charges over Essayli’s title.

“If I did this for your client, I’ll have to do it for every single defendant who was indicted when Mr. Essayli was acting under the rubric of acting U.S. attorney, correct?” Seabright said to a deputy federal public defender.

“I don’t think you will,” replied James A. Flynn. “This is a time-specific, case-specific analysis and the court doesn’t need to go so far as to decide that a dismissal would be appropriate in all cases.”

“Why not? You’re asking for a really draconian remedy here,” Seabright said, before questioning how many indictments had been made since Essayli was designated acting U.S. attorney at the end of July.

“203, your honor,” Assistant U.S. Atty. Alexander P. Robbins responded.

In a court filing ahead of the hearing Tuesday, lawyers bringing the challenge against Essayli called the government’s defense of his status a handbook for circumventing the protections that the Constitution and Congress built against the limitless, unaccountable handpicking of temporary officials.”

During the nearly two-hour hearing, Flynn cited similar legal challenges that have played out elsewhere. A federal judge ruled in August that Alina Habba has been illegally occupying the U.S. attorney post in New Jersey, although that order was put on hold pending appeal. Last month, a federal judge disqualified Nevada’s top federal prosecutor, Sigal Chattah, from several cases, concluding she “is not validly serving as acting U.S. attorney.”

The judges who ruled on the Nevada and New Jersey cases did not dismiss the charges against defendants, instead ordering that those cases not be supervised by Habba or Chattah.

Flynn argued that the remedies in other states “have not been effective to deter the conduct.”

“This court has the benefit of additional weeks and has seen the government’s response to that determination that their appointments were illegal and I submit the government hasn’t gotten the message,” Flynn said.

Flynn said another option could be a dismissal without prejudice, which means the government could bring the case against their clients again. He called it a “weaker medicine” than dismissal with prejudice, “but would be a stronger one than offered in New Jersey and Nevada.”

The hearing grew testy at times, with Seabright demanding that Assistant U.S. Atty. Robbins tell him when Essayli’s term will end. Robbins told the judge the government believes it will end on Feb. 24 and that afterward the role of acting U.S. attorney will remain vacant.

Robbins noted that Essayli has also been designated as first assistant U.S. attorney, essentially allowing him to remain in charge of the office if he loses the “acting” title.

Bondi in July also appointed him as a “special attorney.” Robbins told the judge that “there’s no developed challenge to Mr. Essayli’s appointment as a special attorney or his designation as a first assistant.”

“The defense challenge here, the stated interest that they have, is Bill Essayli cannot be acting,” Robbins said. “But they don’t have a compelling or strong response to Bill Essayli is legitimately in the office and he can be the first assistant … he can supervise other people in the office.”

Seabright asked both sides to brief him by Thursday on “whatever hats you believe [Essayli’s] wearing now” and “whether I were to say he wasn’t legitimately made acting U.S. attorney … what hats does he continue to wear.”

“If I understand the government’s proposed remedy correctly … it would essentially be no remedy at all, because they would be re-creating Mr. Essayli as the acting United States attorney, he’d just be wearing a first assistant hat,” Flynn said.

A spokesperson for the U.S. attorney’s office in L.A. did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

When asked by a Times reporter last month about the motion to disqualify him, Essayli said “the president won the election.”

“The American people provided him a mandate to run the executive branch, including the U.S. attorney’s office and I look forward to serving at the pleasure of the president,” he said during a news conference.

Since taking office, Essayli has doggedly pursued Trump’s agenda, championing hard-line immigration enforcement in Southern California, often using the president’s language verbatim at news conferences. His tenure has sparked discord in the office, with dozens of prosecutors quitting.

Fesia Davenport, L.A. County’s chief executive officer, received a $2 million settlement this summer due to professional fallout from Measure G, a voter-approved ballot measure that will soon make her job obsolete, according to a letter she wrote to the county’s top lawyer.

Davenport wrote in the July 8 letter, which was released through a public record request Tuesday, that she had been seeking $2 million for “reputational harm, embarrassment, and physical, emotional and mental distress caused by the Measure G.”

“Measure G is an unprecedented event, and has had, and will continue to have, an unprecedented impact on my professional reputation, health, career, income, and retirement,” Davenport wrote to County Counsel Dawyn Harrison. “My hope is that after setting aside the amount of my ask, that there can be a true focus on what the real issues are here – measure G has irrevocably changed my life, my professional career, economic outlook, and plans for the future.”

The existence of the $2 million settlement, finalized in mid-August, was first reported Tuesday by the LAist. It was unclear what the settlement was for.

Davenport began a medical leave last week. She told staff she expects to be back early next year.

Supervisors Lindsey Horvath and Janice Hahn first announced Measure G in July 2024, branding it as a long overdue overhaul to the county’s sluggish bureaucracy. Under the charter amendment, which voters approved this November, the number of supervisors increased to nine and the county chief executive, who manages the county government and oversees its budget, will be now be elected by voters instead of appointed by the board starting in 2028.

In August 2024, a few weeks after the announcement, Davenport wrote a letter to Horvath saying the measure had impugned her “professional reputation” and would end her career at least two years earlier than she expected, according to another letter released through a public records request.

“This has been a tough six weeks for me,” Davenport wrote in her letter. “It has created uncomfortable, awkward interactions between me and my CEO team (they are concerned), me and other departments heads (they are apologetic), and even County outsiders (they think I am being fired).”

This story will be updated.

SACRAMENTO — Gun rights organizations filed a lawsuit Tuesday challenging a new California law that bans certain types of Glock-style semiautomatic firearms.

The law, signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom last week, prohibits the sale of semiautomatic pistols with a “cruciform trigger bar” — a feature that allows gun owners to attach a device, commonly called a switch, that boosts the weapon’s firepower and converts it into a machine gun capable of spraying dozens of bullets in a fraction of a second.

“Newsom and his gang of progressive politicians in California are continuing their crusade against constitutional rights,” John Commerford, executive director of the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action, said in a statement. “They are attempting to violate landmark Supreme Court decisions and disarm law-abiding citizens by banning some of the most commonly owned handguns in America.”

The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, alleges the law violates the 2nd Amendment. Plaintiffs include the NRA, Firearms Policy Coalition, and the Second Amendment Foundation, as well as some individuals and smaller businesses.

The legal action alleges that California’s new law essentially bans the sale of certain Glock-brand handguns and others with similar features that allow modification by owners.

“A law that bans the sale of — and correspondingly prevents citizens from acquiring — a weapon in common use violates the Second Amendment,” the lawsuit states. “Semiautomatic handguns with cruciform trigger bars are not different from any other type of semiautomatic handgun in a constitutionally relevant way. The Supreme Court has already held that handguns are in common use and cannot be banned.”

The lawsuit states the only justification for banning a firearm is when the weapon is “dangerous and unusual” and argues that semiautomatic pistols are neither.

“They are also unquestionably in common use for lawful purposes,” the lawsuit states. “In fact, they are among the most popular handguns in the nation.”

Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel, who introduced Assembly Bill 1127, said his bill was intended to help protect communities from gun violence.

“Automatic weapons are exceptionally lethal and capable of firing hundreds of rounds per minute; they are illegal in California,” he told the Senate Public Safety Committee in July. “Unfortunately, some semiautomatic firearms feature a dangerous design element allowing them to be converted to automatic weapons through the attachment of an easy-to-use device known as a switch.”

Over the last few years, handguns retrofitted with switches were used in several prominent shootings in California, including the 2022 mass shooting in downtown Sacramento that left six people dead and a dozen injured.

Machine gun conversion switches are illegal in the United States and are mostly manufactured overseas. They also can be built at home using 3D printers. Instructions for installing one on a firearm can be found online and require little to no technical expertise.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives reported a 570% increase in the number of conversion devices collected by police departments between 2017 and 2021, according to the Associated Press.

Democratic gubernatorial candidate Katie Porter, under fire for recently emerged videos showing her scolding a reporter and swearing at an aide, expressed remorse for her behavior on Tuesday in her first public remarks since the incidents were publicized.

Porter, a former Orange County congresswoman and a top candidate in California’s 2026 governor’s race, said that she “could have handled things better.”

“I think I’m known as someone who’s able to handle tough questions, who’s willing to answer questions,” Porter told Nikki Laurenzo, host of Inside California Politics and anchor on Fox40 in Sacramento. “I want people to know that I really value the incredible work that my staff can do. I think people who know me know I can be tough. But I need to do a better job expressing appreciation for the amazing work my team does.”

Last week, a video emerged of Porter telling a separate television reporter that she doesn’t need the support of the millions of Californians who voted for President Trump, and brusquely threatening to end the interview because the reporter asked follow-up questions. The following day, a second video emerged of Porter telling a young staffer “Get out of my f—ing shot!” while videoconferencing with a member of then-President Biden’s cabinet in 2021.

Porter on Tuesday said that she had apologized to the staffer. She repeatedly sidestepped Laurenzo’s questions about whether other videos could emerge.

“What I can tell you … is that I am taking responsibility for the situation,” Porter said.

Porter’s behavior in the videos underscored long-standing questions about her temperament and high staff turnover while she served in Congress.

The most recent polls showed that Porter held a narrow lead in the competitive race to replace Gov. Gavin Newsom, who is serving his second and final term as governor. After the videos emerged last week, several of Porter’s rivals criticized her behavior, including former state Controller Betty Yee, who said she should drop out of the race.

On Tuesday, Yee argued that Porter’s temperament could imperil Democrats’ efforts to pass Proposition 50, the Nov. 4 ballot measure to redraw congressional districts in California to boost their party’s numbers in the House.

Yee, a former vice chair of the state Democratic party, warned that a Republican could potentially win the governor’s race and Democrats could lose the U.S. House of Representatives because of Porter’s “demeanor.”

“I don’t relish picking a fight, and it’s not even a fight,” Yee said during a virtual press conference. “I’m doing what’s best for this party.”

Porter is also expected to address the issue Tuesday night during a virtual forum with the California Working Families Party.

Prior to her statements on Tuesday, Porter had released one statement about the 2021 video, saying, “It’s no secret I hold myself and my staff to a high standard, and that was especially true as a member of Congress. I have sought to be more intentional in showing gratitude to my staff for their important work.”

The UC Irvine law professor has not responded to multiple interview requests from the Times.

Mehta reported from Los Angeles and Smith reported from Sacramento.

WASHINGTON — An extraordinary new policy from the Defense Department that equates basic reporting methods to criminal activity has prompted a revolt among Pentagon journalists that could leave the nation’s largest agency and the world’s largest military without a press corps.

The new policy, from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, is a dramatic departure from historic standards at the department, which previously required credentialed reporters to sign a simple, single-page document laying out safety protocols.

Replacing that document is a 21-page agreement that warns reporters against “soliciting” information, including unclassified material, without the Pentagon’s official authorization, characterizing individuals who do so as a “security risk.”

The policy would force journalists and media organizations to refrain from publishing any material that is not approved by the military — a clear violation of 1st Amendment protections to free speech, lawyers for media outlets said.

Major news organizations including the New York Times, Washington Post and Wall Street Journal, as well as right-leaning outlets such as Newsmax and the Washington Times, have refused to sign the document, with only one far-right outlet — the cable channel One American News — agreeing to do so.

The Los Angeles Times also will not agree to the policy, said Terry Tang, the paper’s executive editor.

In a rare joint statement, ABC, CBS, CNN, Fox News and NBC said that the policy “is without precedent and threatens core journalistic protections.”

“We will continue to cover the U.S. military as each of our organizations has done for many decades, upholding the principles of a free and independent press,” the news outlets said.

But Hegseth, who has aggressively pursued leaks and sources of unfavorable news stories since the start of his turbulent tenure as secretary, has doubled down in recent days, posting emojis on social media waving goodbye as media organizations have issued statements condemning the policy. Journalists were given a deadline of 2 p.m. PDT on Tuesday to either sign the document or relinquish their credentials.

It is unclear whether it will be viable for the Pentagon to maintain the policy, leaving the secretary without a traveling press corps to highlight his official duties or public events. And it is also uncertain whether President Trump approves of the extreme measure.

At a White House event Tuesday, Hegseth said that the policy was “common sense” and that he was “proud” of it. He said credentials should not be given to reporters who will try to get officials “to break the law by giving them classified information.”

Asked last month whether the Pentagon should control what reporters gather and write, Trump said “no.”

“I don’t think so,” Trump said, adding: “Nothing stops reporters.”

But Trump said Tuesday that he understands why Hegseth is pushing for the new policy.

“I think he finds the press to be very destructive in terms of world peace and maybe security for our nation,” Trump said. “The press is very dishonest.”

The widespread revolt has generated a show of solidarity from the White House and State Department correspondents associations, which characterized the Pentagon policy in a joint statement Monday as an attack on freedom of the press.

“Access inside the Pentagon has never been about convenience to reporters,” the statement reads. “The public has a right to know how the government is conducting the people’s business. Unfettered reporting on the U.S. military and its civilian leadership provides a service to those in uniform, veterans, their families and all Americans.”

Beyond the restrictions on media outlets, the Pentagon has taken a series of steps this year to try and identify officials who are deemed disloyal or who provide information to reporters.

In April, the Pentagon dismissed three top officials after an investigation into potential leaks related to military operational plans. That same month, Hegseth’s team began subjecting officials to random polygraph tests, a practice that was temporarily halted after the White House intervened, according to the Washington Post.

Then, in October, the Pentagon drafted plans to renew the use of polygraphs and to require thousands of personnel to sign strict nondisclosure agreements that would “prohibit the release of non-public information without approval or through a defined process.” The nondisclosure agreements include language that is similar to what reporters are being asked to sign by Tuesday.

Notably, many of Hegseth’s plans to target leaks have been leaked to news outlets, probably contributing to the Defense secretary’s suspicion about whom he can trust.

The timing of his efforts are also noteworthy, as they gained traction after he personally shared sensitive details about forthcoming strikes in Yemen in a private Signal group chat that mistakenly included a reporter from the Atlantic. Hegseth also shared information about the attacks in a separate Signal chat that included his wife, a former Fox News producer who is not a Defense Department employee.

Hegseth denied that any classified information was shared in the chat. Yet the situation led to an internal review of whether the disclosures were in violation of Defense Department policies.

The Pentagon has taken an even more aggressive approach to restricting reporters’ access than the White House, which months ago took control over press operations from the White House Correspondents Assn. — an independent group that had organized the White House press corps for decades.

Still, the White House has refrained from implementing changes to the briefing room seating chart, evicting outlets from workspaces within the White House complex or revoking press passes, after facing a legal challenge over an attempt to bar one major outlet — the Associated Press — from covering some presidential events at the beginning of Trump’s second term.

Trump, meanwhile, has continued to single out individual outlets he dislikes. On Tuesday, for example, the president refused to take questions from ABC News because he said he did not like how a news anchor had treated Vice President JD Vance.

“You’re ABC Fake News,” Trump said at a public appearance in the White House. “I don’t take questions from ABC Fake News!”

WASHINGTON — President Trump on Tuesday posthumously awarded America’s highest civilian honor to Charlie Kirk, the slain activist who inspired a generation of young conservatives and helped push the nation’s politics further to the right.

The ceremony coincided with what would have been Kirk’s 32nd birthday. It came just over a month after the Turning Point USA founder was fatally shot while speaking to a crowd at Utah Valley University.

In a sign of Kirk’s close ties to the administration, he was the first recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom in Trump’s second term. The president also spoke at at Kirk’s funeral in September, calling him a “great American hero” and “martyr” for freedom, while Vice President JD Vance accompanied his body home to Arizona on Air Force Two along with Kirk’s widow, Erika.

“We’re here to honor and remember a fearless warrior for liberty, beloved leader who galvanized the next generation like nobody I’ve ever seen before, and an American patriot of the deepest conviction, the finest quality and the highest caliber,” Trump said Tuesday afternoon.

Of Kirk’s killing, Trump said: “He was assassinated in the prime of his life for boldly speaking the truth, for living his faith and relentless fighting for a better and stronger America.”

The Presidential Medal of Freedom was established by President Kennedy in 1963 for individuals making exceptional contributions to the country’s security or national interests or to world peace, or being responsible for significant cultural endeavors or public and private initiatives.

Tuesday’s event followed Trump returning to the U.S. in the predawn hours after a whirlwind trip to Israel and Egypt to celebrate a ceasefire agreement in Israel’s war with Hamas in Gaza that his administration was instrumental in brokering.

Trump joked that he almost requested to move the ceremony because of the trip.

“I raced back halfway around the globe,” Trump said. “I was going to call Erika and say, ‘Erika, could you maybe move it to Friday? And I didn’t have the courage to call. But you know why I didn’t call? Because I heard today was Charlie’s birthday.”

Argentine President Javier Milei, who had been visiting with the president at the White House earlier, stayed to attend the ceremony.

Trump has awarded a string of presidential medals going back to his first term, including to golf legend Tiger Woods, ex-football coach Lou Holtz and conservative economist Arthur Laffer, as well as to New York Yankees Hall of Fame pitcher Mariano Rivera and conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh, the latter of which came during the 2020 State of the Union. He awarded posthumous medals to Babe Ruth and Elvis.

This term, Trump has also announced his intentions to award the medals to Rudolph W. Giuliani, the former New York City mayor and a close former advisor, and to Ben Carson, who served as Trump’s first-term secretary of Housing and Urban Development.

Kirk founded Turning Point USA in 2012. Trump has praised Kirk as one of the key reasons he was reelected.

But Kirk’s politics were also often divisive. He sharply criticized gay and transgender rights while inflaming racial tensions. Kirk also repeated Trump’s false claims that former Vice President Kamala Harris was responsible for policies that encouraged immigrants to come to the U.S. illegally and called George Floyd, a Black man whose killing by a Minneapolis police officer sparked a national debate over racial injustice, a “scumbag.”

Trump wrote in a social media post hours before the event that he was moving the ceremony from the White House’s East Room to the Rose Garden to accommodate a crowd he said would be “so big and enthusiastic.”

Weissert writes for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee requested Tuesday that Jack Smith, the former Justice Department special counsel, appear for an interview, part of an escalating effort among the GOP to pursue the perceived enemies of President Donald Trump.

Rep. Jim Jordan, the committee chair, charged in a letter to Smith that his prosecutions of Trump were “partisan and politically motivated.” Smith has come under particular scrutiny on Capitol Hill, especially after the Senate Judiciary Committee said last week that his investigation had included an FBI analysis of phone records for more than half a dozen Republican lawmakers from the week of Jan. 6, 2021

Smith brought two cases against Trump, one accusing him of conspiring to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election and the other of hoarding classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida. Both were brought in 2023, well over a year before the 2024 presidential election, and indictments in the two cases cited what Smith and his team described as clear violations of well-established federal law. Former Atty. Gen. Merrick Garland, who named Smith as special counsel in November 2022, has repeatedly said politics played no part in the handling of the cases.

Smith abandoned the criminal cases against Trump after he won the presidential election last year. Trump’s return to the White House precluded the federal prosecutions, as well as paved the way for Republicans to go after Trump’s political and legal opponents.

Jordan wrote to Smith: “Your testimony is necessary to understand the full extent to which the Biden-Harris Justice Department weaponized federal law enforcement.”

In just the last weeks, the Trump administration has pursued criminal charges against both James Comey, the former FBI director, and New York Atty. Gen. Letitia James, who for years investigated and sued Trump.

The House Judiciary Committee has been looking into Smith’s actions as special counsel since the start of the year. Jordan said that it had interviewed two other members of Smith’s prosecutorial team, but they had declined to answer many questions, citing the Fifth Amendment.

An attorney for Smith did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the House Judiciary Committee’s interview request.

Groves writes for the Associated Press.

Fort Lauderdale, Fla. — Some airports around the country are refusing to play a video with a message from Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem in which she blames Democrats for the federal government shutdown and its impacts on TSA operations because of its political content.

Airports in Las Vegas, Charlotte, Atlanta, Phoenix, Seattle and more say the video goes against their airport policy or regulations that prohibit political messaging in their facilities.

Various government agencies, in emails to workers and on websites, have adopted language that blames Democrats for the shutdown, with some experts arguing it could be in violation of the 1939 Hatch Act, which restricts certain political activities by federal employees.

The shutdown has halted routine operations and left airports scrambling with flight disruptions. Democrats say any deal to reopen the government has to address their healthcare demands, and Republicans say they won’t negotiate until they agree to fund the government. Insurance premiums would double if Congress fails to renew the subsidy payments that expire Dec. 31.

In the video, Noem says that TSA’s “top priority” is to help make travel pleasant and efficient while keeping passengers safe.

“However, Democrats in Congress refuse to fund the federal government, and because of this, many of our operations are impacted, and most of our TSA employees are working without pay,” she continues.

The Transportation Security Administration falls under the Department of Homeland Security. Roughly 61,000 of the agency’s 64,130 employees are required to continue working during the shutdown. The Department said Friday that the video is being rolled out to airports across the country.

A DHS spokeswoman responded to a request for comment restating some of the message from Noem’s video.

“It’s unfortunate our workforce has been put in this position due to political gamesmanship. Our hope is that Democrats will soon recognize the importance of opening the government,” spokeswoman Tricia McLaughlin said.

The Harry Reid International Airport, in Las Vegas, said it had to “remain mindful of the Hatch Act’s restrictions.”

“Per airport regulations, the terminals and surrounding areas are not designated public forums, and the airport’s intent is to avoid the use of the facility for political or religious advocacy,” the statement said.

Westchester County Executive Ken Jenkins said the county north of New York City won’t play the video at its local airport. In a statement, he called the video “inappropriate, unacceptable, and inconsistent with the values we expect from our nation’s top public officials,” and said its tone is “unnecessarily alarmist” as it relates to operations at Westchester County Airport.

“At a time when we should be focused on ensuring stability, collaboration and preparedness, this type of messaging only distracts from the real issues, and undermines public trust,” he said.

Even in red states, airports weren’t showing the video for various reasons. Salt Lake City International Airport wasn’t playing the video because state law prohibits using city-owned property for political purposes, said airport spokesperson Nancy Volmer.

The airport in Billings, Mont., “politely declined” even though it has screens that could show the video with audio, assistant aviation director Paul Khera said Tuesday.

“We don’t want to get in the middle of partisan politics,” Khera said. “We like to stay middle of the road, we didn’t want to play that video.”

Gomez Licon writes for the Associated Press. AP writers Rio Yamat in Las Vegas and Mead Gruver in Fort Collins, Colo. contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — The United States struck another small boat accused of carrying drugs in the waters off Venezuela, killing six people, President Trump said on Tuesday.

Those who died in the strike were aboard the vessel, and no U.S. forces were harmed, Trump said in a social media post. It’s the fifth deadly strike in the Caribbean as Trump’s administration has asserted it’s treating alleged drug traffickers as unlawful combatants who must be met with military force.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth ordered the strike Tuesday morning, said Trump, who released a video of it, as he had in the past. Hegseth later shared the video in a post on X.

Trump said the strike was conducted in international waters and “Intelligence” confirmed the vessel was trafficking narcotics, was associated with “narcoterrorist networks” and was on a known drug trafficking route.

The Pentagon did not immediately respond to an email from the Associated Press seeking more information on the latest boat strike.

Frustration with the Trump administration has been growing on Capitol Hill among members of both major political parties. Some Republicans are seeking more information from the White House on the legal justification and details of the strikes. Democrats contend the strikes violate U.S. and international law.

The Senate last week voted on a war powers resolution that would have barred the Trump administration from conducting the strikes unless Congress specifically authorized them, but it failed to pass.

In a memo to Congress that was obtained by The Associated Press, the Trump administration said it had “determined that the United States is in a non-international armed conflict with these designated terrorist organizations” and that Trump directed the Pentagon to “conduct operations against them pursuant to the law of armed conflict.”

The Trump administration has yet to provide underlying evidence to lawmakers proving that the boats targeted by the U.S. military in a series of fatal strikes were in fact carrying narcotics, according to two U.S. officials familiar with the matter who were not authorized to comment publicly and spoke on the condition of anonymity.

The strikes followed a buildup of U.S. maritime forces in the Caribbean unlike any seen in recent times.

Last week, Venezuelan Defense Minister Vladimir Padrino told military leaders that the U.S. government knows the drug-trafficking accusations used to support the recent actions in the Caribbean are false, with its true intent being to “force a regime change” in the South American country.

He added that the Venezuelan government does not see the deployment of the U.S. warships as a mere “propaganda-like action” and warned of a possible escalation.

“I want to warn the population: We have to prepare ourselves because the irrationality with which the U.S. empire operates is not normal,” Padrino said during the televised gathering. “It’s anti-political, anti-human, warmongering, rude, and vulgar.”

Price and Toropin write for the Associated Press. AP writer Ben Finley contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — President Trump is making this government shutdown unlike any the country has ever seen, enabling his budget office a rare authority to pick winners and losers — who gets paid or fired — in an unprecedented restructuring across the federal workforce.

As the shutdown enters its third week, the Office and Management and Budget said Tuesday it’s preparing to “batten down the hatches” with more reductions in force to come. The president calls budget chief Russ Vought the “grim reaper” who’s seized on the opportunity to fund Trump’s priorities, paying the military while slashing employees in health, education, the sciences and other areas with actions that have been criticized as illegal and are facing court challenges.

“Pay the troops, pay law enforcement, continue the RIFs, and wait,” OMB said in a social media post.

With Congress at a standstill — the Republican-led House refusing to return to session and the Senate stuck in a loop of failed votes to reopen government as Democrats demand health care funds — the White House’s budget office quickly filled the void.

From Project 2025 to the White House

Vought, a chief architect of the conservative Project 2025 policy book, is reshaping the size and scope of federal government in ways similar to those envisioned in the blueprint. It is exactly what certain lawmakers, particularly Democrats, feared if Congress failed to fund the government.

Trump’s priorities — supporting the military and pursuing his mass deportation agenda — have been kept largely uninterrupted, despite the closures. But employees in health, education, the sciences and other federal departments are among those being laid off. As many as 750,000 workers are being furloughed.

“Donald Trump and Russ Vought and all of their cronies are using this moment to terrorize these patriots,” said Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., standing with federal workers Tuesday outside the White House budget office.

Van Hollen said it’s “a big fat lie” when Trump and his budget director say that the shutdown is making them fire federal workers. “It is also illegal and we will see them in court,” Van Hollen said.

Shutdown grinds into a third week

Now on its 14th day, the federal closure is quickly becoming among the longest government shutdowns. Congress failed to meet the Oct. 1 deadline to pass the annual appropriations bills needed to fund the government as the Democrats demanded a deal to preserve expiring health care funds that provide subsidies for people to purchase insurance through the Affordable Care Act.

House Speaker Mike Johnson on Tuesday said he has nothing to negotiate with the Democrats until they vote to reopen the government.

The Republican speaker welcomed OMB’s latest actions to pay some workers and fire others.

“They have every right to move the funds around,” Johnson said at a press conference at the Capitol. If the Democrats want to challenge the Trump administration in court, Johnson said, “bring it.”

Typically, federal workers are furloughed during a lapse in funding, traditionally with back pay once government funding is restored. But Vought’s budget office announced late last week the reductions in forces had begun. More than 4,000 workers received layoff notices over the weekend.

Military pay, deportations on track

At the same time, Trump instructed the military to find money to ensure service personnel wouldn’t miss paychecks this week. The Pentagon said over the weekend it was able to tap $8 billion in unused research and development funds to make payroll.

On Tuesday, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said her agency was relying on Trump’s big tax cuts law for funding to make sure members of the Coast Guard, which falls under the department, are also paid.

“We at DHS worked out an innovative solution to make sure that didn’t happen,” Noem said in a statement. Thanks to “the One Big Beautiful Bill,” she said, “the brave men and women of the US Coast Guard will not miss a paycheck this week.”

In past shutdowns, the Office of Management and Budget has overseen agency plans during the lapse in federal fundings, ensuring which workers are essential and remain on the job. Vought, however, has taken his role further by speaking openly about his plans to go after the federal workforce.

As agencies started making their shutdown plans, Vought’s OMB encouraged department heads to consider reductions in force, an unheard of action. The budget office’s general counsel, Mark Paoletta suggested in a draft memo that the workforce may not be automatically eligible for back pay once government reopens.

‘Grim reaper’ replaces Elon Musk’s chainsaw

Trump posted an AI-generated video last week that portrayed Vought dressed with cloak and dagger, against the backdrop of the classic rock staple “(Don’t Fear) The Reaper.”

“Every authoritarian leader has had his grim reaper. Russell Vought is Donald Trump’s,” said Rep. Steny Hoyer, the senior Democrat from Maryland.

Hoyer compared the budget chief to billionaire Elon Musk wielding a chainsaw earlier this year as part of the Department of Government Efficiency’s slashing of the workforce “Vought swings his scythe through the federal government as thoughtlessly,” he said.

In many ways, the “Big, Beautiful Bill, Act” as the law is commonly called, gives the White House a vast new allotment of federal funding for its priority projects, separate from the regular appropriations process in Congress.

The package unleashed some $175 billion for the Pentagon, including for the Golden Dome missile shield and other priority projects, and another $175 million to Homeland Security largely for Trump’s mass deportation agenda. It also included extra funds for Vought’s work at OMB.

Trump’s big bill provides billions

Certain funds from the “big bill” are available to be used during the shutdown, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

“The Administration also could decide to use mandatory funding provided in the 2025 reconciliation act or other sources of mandatory funding to continue activities financed by those direct appropriations at various agencies,” according to CBO.

The CBO cited the Department of Defense, the Department of the Treasury, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Office of Management and Budget as among those that received eligible funds under the law..

Mascaro writes for the Associated Press. AP writers Kevin Freking, Stephen Groves and Mary Clare Jalonick contributed to this report.

PHILADELPHIA — President Trump’s legal team suffered yet another defeat in court Friday as a federal appeals court in Philadelphia roundly rejected its latest effort to challenge the state’s election results.

Trump’s lawyers vowed to appeal to the Supreme Court despite the judges’ assessment that the “campaign’s claims have no merit.”

“Free, fair elections are the lifeblood of our democracy. Charges of unfairness are serious. But calling an election unfair does not make it so. Charges require specific allegations and then proof. We have neither here,” Judge Stephanos Bibas wrote for the three-judge panel.

The case had been argued last week in a lower court by Trump lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani, who insisted during five hours of oral arguments that the 2020 presidential election had been marred by widespread fraud in Pennsylvania. However, Giuliani failed to offer any tangible proof of that in court.

U.S. District Judge Matthew Brann had said that the campaign’s error-filled complaint, “like Frankenstein’s Monster, has been haphazardly stitched together,” and he denied Giuliani the right to amend it for a second time.

The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals called that decision justified. The three judges on the panel were all appointed by Republican presidents, including Bibas, a former University of Pennsylvania law professor appointed by Trump. Judge Maryanne Trump Barry, Trump’s sister, sat on the court for 20 years, retiring in 2019.

Friday’s ruling comes four days after Pennsylvania officials certified their vote count for President-elect Joe Biden, who defeated Trump by more than 80,000 votes in the state. Nationally, Biden and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris garnered nearly 80 million votes, a record in U.S. presidential elections.

Trump has said he hopes the Supreme Court will intervene in the race as it did in 2000, when its decision to stop the recount in Florida gave the election to Republican George W. Bush. On Nov. 5, as the vote count continued, Trump posted a tweet saying the “U.S. Supreme Court should decide!”

Ever since, Trump and his surrogates have attacked the election as flawed and filed a flurry of lawsuits to try to block the results in six battleground states. But they’ve found little sympathy from judges, nearly all of whom dismissed their complaints about the security of mail-in ballots, which millions of people used to vote from home during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Trump perhaps hopes a Supreme Court he helped steer toward a conservative 6-3 majority would be more open to his pleas, especially since the high court upheld Pennsylvania’s decision to accept mail-in ballots through Nov. 6 by only a 4-4 vote last month. Since then, Trump nominee Amy Coney Barrett has joined the court.

“The activist judicial machinery in Pennsylvania continues to cover up the allegations of massive fraud,” Trump lawyer Jenna Ellis tweeted after Friday’s ruling. “On to SCOTUS!”

In the case before Brann, the Trump campaign asked to disenfranchise the state’s 6.8 million voters, or at least the 700,000 who voted by mail in Philadelphia, Pittsburgh and other Democratic-leaning areas.

“One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption,” Brann wrote in his Nov. 21 ruling. “That has not happened.”

A separate Republican challenge that reached the Pennsylvania Supreme Court this week seeks to stop the state from further certifying any races on the ballot. Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf’s administration is fighting that effort, saying it would prevent the state’s Legislature and congressional delegation from being seated in the coming weeks.

On Thursday, Trump said the Nov. 3 election was still far from over. Yet he offered the clearest signal to date that he would leave the White House peaceably on Jan. 20 if the electoral college formalizes Biden’s win, which appears certain.

“Certainly I will. But you know that,” Trump said at the White House, taking questions from reporters for the first time since election day.

Yet on Friday, he continued his baseless attacks on Detroit, Atlanta and other Democratic cities with large Black populations, calling them sources of “massive voter fraud.” And he claimed, without evidence, that a Pennsylvania poll watcher had uncovered computer memory drives that “gave Biden 50,000 votes” apiece.

All 50 states must certify their results before the electoral college meets Dec. 14, and any challenge to the results must be resolved by Dec. 8. Biden won both the electoral college and popular vote by wide margins.

BUENOS AIRES, Argentina — Argentina’s libertarian leader is lavishing praise on President Trump ahead of his first White House visit on Tuesday. It’s a tactic that has helped transform President Javier Milei ’s cash-strapped country into one of the Trump administration’s closest allies.

The effusive declarations are nothing new for Milei — whose dramatic cuts to state spending and attacks on “woke leftists” have won him a following among U.S. conservatives.

“Your commitment to life, freedom and peace has restored hope to the world,” Milei wrote on social media Monday, congratulating the U.S. president on securing a ceasefire deal in Gaza, where a truce is holding after a devastating, two-year Israel-Hamas war.

“It is an honor to consider you not only an ally in the defense of those values, but also a dear friend and an example of leadership that inspires all those who believe in freedom,” he said.

The Trump-Milei bromance has already paid off for Argentina — most recently, to the tune of a $20 billion bailout.

Experts say Milei comes to the White House with two clear objectives. One is to negotiate U.S. tariff exemptions or reductions for Argentine products.

The other is to see how the United States will implement a $20 billion currency swap line to prop up Argentina’s peso and replenish its depleted foreign currency reserves ahead of crucial midterm elections later this month.

In a crisis, turning to Trump

The Trump administration made a highly unusual decision to intervene in Argentina’s currency market after Milei’s party suffered a landslide loss in a local election last month.

Along with setbacks in the opposition-dominated Congress, the party’s crushing defeat created a crisis of confidence as voters in Buenos Aires Province registered their frustration with rising unemployment, contracting economic activity and brewing corruption scandals.

Alarmed that this could herald the end of popular support for Milei’s free-market program, investors dumped Argentine bonds and sold off the peso.

Argentina’s Treasury began hemorrhaging precious dollar reserves at a feverish pace, trying shore up the currency and keep its exchange rate within the trading band set as part of the country’s recent $20 billion deal with the International Monetary Fund.

But as the peso continued to slide, Milei grew desperate.

He met with Trump on Sept. 23 while in New York City for the United Nations General Assembly. A flurry of back-slapping, hand-shaking and mutual flattery between the two quickly gave way to U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent publicly promising Argentina a lifeline of $20 billion.

Markets cheered, and investors breathed a sigh of relief.

Timing is everything

In the days that followed, Argentine Economy Minister Luis Caputo spent hours in meetings in Washington trying to seal the deal.

Reassurance came last Thursday, when Bessent announced that the U.S. would allow Argentina to exchange up to $20 billion worth of pesos for an equal sum in dollars. Saying that the success of Milei’s program was “of systemic importance,” Bessent added that the U.S. Treasury directly purchased an unspecified amount of pesos.

For the Trump administration, the timing was awkward as it struggles to manage the optics of bailing out a nine-time serial defaulter in the middle of a U.S. government shutdown that has led to mass layoffs.

But for Argentina, it came in the nick of time.

Aware of how a weak currency could threaten his flagship achievement of taming inflation and hurt his popularity, Milei hopes to stave off what many economists see as an inescapable currency devaluation until after the the Oct. 26 midterm elections.

A devaluation of the peso would likely fuel a resurgence in inflation.

“Milei is going to the U.S. in a moment of desperation now,” said Marcelo J. García, political analyst and Director for the Americas at the Horizon Engage political risk consultancy firm.

“He needs to recreate market expectations and show that his program can be sustainable,” García added. “The government is trying to win some time to make it to the midterms without major course corrections, like devaluing or floating the peso.”

No strings attached

Milei was vague when pressed for details on his talks with Trump, expected later on Tuesday. Officials say he would have a two-hour meeting with the U.S. president, followed by a working lunch with other top officials.

He was also expected to participate in a ceremony at the White House honoring Charlie Kirk, the prominent right-wing political activist who was fatally shot last month. Milei often crossed paths with Kirk on the speaking circuit of the ascendant global right.

“We don’t have a single-issue agenda, but rather a multi-issue agenda,” Milei told El Observador radio in Buenos Aires Monday. “Things that are already finalized will be announced, and things that still need to be finalized will remain pending.”

It’s not clear what strings, if any, the Trump administration has attached to the currency swap deal, which Democratic lawmakers and other critics have slammed as an example of Trump rewarding loyalists at the expense of American taxpayers.

There has been no word on how Argentina, the IMF’s largest debtor, will end up paying the U.S. back for this $20 billion, which comes on top of IMF’s own loan for the same amount in April. And that one came on top of an earlier IMF loan for $40 billion.

Despite all the help, Milei’s government already missed the IMF’s early targets for rebuilding currency reserves.

“The U.S. should be concerned that Argentina has had to return for $20 billion so quickly after getting $14 billion upfront from the IMF,” said Brad Setser, a former Treasury official now at the Council on Foreign Relations.

“I worry that this may prove to just be a short-term bridge and won’t leave Argentina better equipped” to tackle its problems, he added.

But in the radio interview before his flight, Milei was upbeat. He gushed about U.S. support saving Argentina from “the local franchise of 21st-century socialism” and waxed poetic about Argentina’s economic potential.

“There will be an avalanche of dollars,” Milei said. “We’ll have dollars pouring out of our ears.”

Debre writes for the Associated Press.

In the last few weeks, USC has found itself caught in a political tug-of-war that could potentially change campus life permanently.

Gov. Gavin Newsom threatened on Oct. 2 to cut “billions” in state funding, including the popular Cal Grants that many students rely upon, if California schools bowed to pressure from the Trump administration.

Newsom’s messaging came in response to a White House directive that asked USC and eight other major national universities to commit to President Trump’s views on gender identity, admissions, diversity and free speech in exchange for priority access to federal dollars.

The topic was covered in depth by my colleagues Jaweed Kaleem and Melody Gutierrez.

Let’s jump into their article and see what options lie ahead for USC.

What the White House told USC

USC and other universities were asked to sign a “Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education,” which commits them to adopt the White House’s conservative vision for America’s campuses.

The Oct. 1 letter also suggests colleges should align with Trump’s views on student discipline, college affordability and the importance of hard sciences over liberal arts.

The compact asks universities to accept the government’s definition of gender — excluding transgender people — and apply it to campus bathrooms, locker rooms and women’s sports teams.

But the White House letter to USC and other campuses is more stick than carrot.

The government says it will dole out new federal money and give preference to the universities that accept the deal over those that do not agree to the terms.

Signing on would give universities priority access to some federal grants, but White House officials say the government money would not be limited solely to those schools.

How Trump wants to cut back on international students

The federal compact would also severely restrict international student enrollment to 15% of a college’s entire undergraduate student body. Plus, no more than 5% could come from a single country.

That provision would hit USC hard, where 26% of the fall 2025 freshman class is international. Half of those students hail from either China or India.

Cutting into that rate would be a financial blow to USC, where full-fee tuition from international students is a major source of revenue. The university has already endured hundreds of layoffs this year amid budget troubles.

How Newsom is responding

Newsom wrote that “if any California university signs this radical agreement, they’ll lose billions in state funding — including Cal Grants — instantly.”

He added, “California will not bankroll schools that sell out their students, professors, researchers, and surrender academic freedom.”

Students become eligible for Cal Grants through the Free Application for Federal Student Aid or California Dream Act Application. In 2024-25, $2.5 billion in Cal Grants were doled out to California students.

What is USC doing?

The school’s faculty members strongly denounced Trump’s offer at a meeting Monday, calling it “antithetical to principles of academic freedom.”

But interim President Beong-Soo Kim told the roughly 500 attendees that the university “has not made any kind of final decision.”

One of the nine schools presented with Trump’s deal, MIT, forcefully rejected the White House’s proposal last week. (It is unclear how the White House selected the nine schools that were offered the deal.)

Notes from a reporter’s notepad

Kaleem, one of the Times reporters on this story, noted that universities throughout Southern California, including USC, UCLA and others in the UC or Cal State systems, find themselves under siege from the White House, whether they were offered Trump’s proposal or not.

“Grants for funding and research are being held up because of investigations into antisemitism or diversity or other issues,” he said. “There are very few universities untouched by the push from Trump on higher education.”

Kaleem spoke with several politically active students and professors at USC who see Newsom’s gesture as a blessing in disguise.

“They felt the governor’s threat to take away money actually gives the USC campus cover to resist Trump more forcefully,” Kaleem said.

Now USC administrators could defy the White House under the guise of trying to avoid losing funding from the state, according to those who spoke with Kaleem.

“They could say they can’t be blamed because they’re being forced to resist Trump,” he said. “It’s an interesting potential strategy.”

For more, check out the full article here.

Today’s top stories

Part of the debate over the ongoing federal government shutdown focuses on funding for the treatment of undocumented immigrants at hospital emergency rooms.

(Ashley Landis / Associated Press)

Trump claims Democrats want to use federal funds to give undocumented residents healthcare. That’s misleading

• Undocumented immigrants cannot access federal programs, but California law provides state-funded Medi-Cal coverage costing the state $11.2 billion annually.
• President Trump claimed recently that Democrats “want to have illegal aliens come into our country and get massive healthcare at the cost to everybody else.”
• Democrats called Trump’s assertion an absolute lie, accusing Republicans of wanting to slash federal healthcare benefits to Americans in need to pay for tax breaks for the wealthy.

Beutner launches bid for L.A. mayor, vowing to fight ‘injustices’ under Trump

• Former L.A. schools Supt. Austin Beutner kicked off his campaign for mayor on Monday with a video message that hits not just Mayor Karen Bass but also President Trump and his immigration crackdown.
• Beutner vowed to counter Trump’s “assault on our values,” while also criticizing City Hall over homelessness, housing costs and rising city fees.

Three more L.A. County deaths tied to synthetic kratom

• The deaths have been linked to kratom, a compound that is being synthetically reproduced and sold over the counter as a cure-all for a host of ailments, the county Department of Public Health announced Friday.
• The compound was found to be a contributing cause of death in three residents who were between the ages of 18 and 40, according to the county health department.
• That brings the total number of recent overdose deaths related to kratom in L.A. County to six.

What else is going on

Commentary and opinions

This morning’s must read

Other must reads

For your downtime

The Griselda’s Revenge cocktail from the Black Lagoon pop-up bar.

(Black Lagoon)

Going out

Staying in

A question for you: What frustrates you the most about parking in L.A.?

Karen writes: “My frustration is that the city started making people pay to park along the road up to the Griffith Observatory. That was the one free and delightful place to get both some sight-seeing and some good walking in after the hunt for a spot. It felt very unfair and opportunistic of the city to limit access to city parks by charging that fee.”

Email us at [email protected], and your response might appear in the newsletter this week.

And finally … your photo of the day

Theatergoers take their seats to see “Les Miserables” on Oct. 8 in Los Angeles.

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

Today’s great photo is from Times photographer Jason Armond at opening night of “Les Misérables” at the Hollywood Pantages Theatre.

Have a great week, from the Essential California team

Jim Rainey, staff writer
Kevinisha Walker, multiplatform editor
Andrew J. Campa, reporter
Hugo Martín, assistant editor
Karim Doumar, head of newsletters

How can we make this newsletter more useful? Send comments to [email protected]. Check our top stories, topics and the latest articles on latimes.com.

As Californians start voting on Democrats’ effort to boost their ranks in Congress, former President Barack Obama warned that democracy is in peril as he urged voters to support Proposition 50 in a television ad that started airing Tuesday.

“California, the whole nation is counting on you,” Obama says in the 30-second ad, which the main pro-Proposition 50 campaign began broadcasting Tuesday across the state. The spot is part of a multimillion-dollar ad buy promoting the congressional redistricting ballot measure through the Nov. 4 election.

Proposition 50 was spearheaded by Gov. Gavin Newsom and other California Democratic leaders this summer after President Trump urged GOP-led states, notably Texas, to redraw their congressional districts to boost the number of Republicans elected to the House in next year’s midterm election, in an effort to continue enacting his agenda during his final years in office.

“Republicans want to steal enough seats in Congress to rig the next election and wield unchecked power for two more years,” Obama says in the ad, which includes footage of ICE raids. “With Prop. 50, you can stop Republicans in their tracks. Prop. 50 puts our elections back on a level playing field, preserves independent redistricting over the long term, and lets the people decide. Return your ballot today.”

Congressional districts were long drawn in smoke-filled chambers by partisans focused on protecting their parties’ power and incumbents. But good-government groups and elected officials, notably former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, have fought to take the drawing of congressional boundaries out of the hands of politicians to end gerrymandering and create more competitive districts.

Obama, long a supporter of ending gerrymandering, had already endorsed the ballot measure.

In California, these districts have been drawn by an independent commission created by voters in 2010, which is why state Democrats have to go to the ballot box to seek a mid-decade partisan redistricting that could improve their party’s chances in five of the state’s 52 congressional districts.

The ad featuring Obama, who spoke Monday on comedian Marc Maron’s final podcast about Trump’s policies testing the nation’s values, appears on Californians’ televisions after mail ballots were sent to the state’s 23 million registered voters last week.

The proposition’s prospects are uncertain — it’s about an obscure topic that few Californians know about, and off-year elections traditionally have low voter turnout. Still, more than $150 million has been contributed to the three main committees supporting and opposing the proposition, in addition to millions more funding other efforts.

Obama is not the only famous person to appear in ads about Proposition 50.

In September, former California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who championed the creation of the independent redistricting commission while in office and has campaigned for similar reforms across the nation since then, was featured in ads opposing the November ballot measure.

He described Proposition 50 as favoring entrenched politicians instead of voters.

“That’s what they want to do, is take us backwards. This is why it is important for you to vote no on Proposition 50,” the Hollywood celebrity and former governor says in the ad, which was filmed last month when he spoke to USC students. “The Constitution does not start with ‘We, the politicians.’ It starts with ‘We, the people.’ … Democracy — we’ve got to protect it, and we’ve got to go and fight for it.”

It’s not my habit to preface my columns with “trigger alerts,” so this is a first:

If talking about circumcision makes you cringe, feel free to move along.

If, on the other hand, you wish to understand what Robert F. Kennedy Jr. was talking about during a White House meeting Oct. 9 when he tried to connect circumcision with autism, follow along with me.

The offhand reference to circumcision’s possible role in autism by Kennedy, Trump’s secretary of Health and Human Services, is part and parcel of Kennedy’s documented assault on science-based medicine.

His campaign encompasses attacks on COVID-19 vaccines, which have been shown over the years to have saved millions of people from death, hospitalization or long-term disability; his firing members of professional advisory boards at his agency and replacing them with anti-vaccine activists; his promotion of unproven “cures” for vaccine-preventable diseases; and his inaction in the face of a nationwide surge in cases of measles, a disease that was declared eliminated in the U.S. in 2000.

Let’s pause for a few words about the broader consequences of the erosion of our public health infrastructure. It not only exposes Americans to more disease and more serious disease, but has profound economic effects.

That’s true worldwide, but especially in the U.S., which spends much more per capita on healthcare than other developed countries, for lower results. Undermining the existing system for partisan ends won’t make the picture look any lovelier.

“The U.S. health disadvantage threatens the country’s global competitiveness and national security, as well as the hopes and prospects of future generations,” according to a 2021 paper from the Department of Health and Human Services, the agency that Kennedy now leads.

“U.S. employers depend on a healthy workforce to maximize productivity and minimize healthcare costs,” the paper stated. “Population health also affects the consumer market, whereby the demand for nonessential products and services suffers when families are struggling with illnesses and much of their disposable income is required for medical expenses.”

The chaos imposed on our public health system under the Trump administration only intensifies the damage.

On Friday, hundreds of employees at Kennedy’s agency, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, abruptly received layoff notices. Some were hastily informed that their firings were erroneous, but the experience rattled the CDC, an agency tasked with overseeing the national response to seasonal respiratory illnesses at a time when those illnesses typically spike.

“The damage is beyond repair,” Demetre Daskalakis, who resigned as director of the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, a unit of the National Institutes of Health, over conflicts with Kennedy, told CNN. “Crippling CDC, even as a ploy to create political pressure to end the government shutdown, means America is even less prepared for outbreaks and infectious disease security threats.”

That brings us back to Kennedy’s preoccupation with autism. He has claimed that the autism rate is on the rise due to “environmental toxins” such as childhood vaccinations and the use of Tylenol — or acetaminophen, its generic name — by mothers during pregnancy.

As I’ve reported, however, the roots of the increase in reported autism rates in recent decades are well understood: They have much to do with a broader definition of autism, which is widely described today as “autism spectrum disorder,” and with improved access to screening and diagnostic services by formerly overlooked groups such as Blacks, Hispanics and other nonwhite cohorts.

Kennedy’s comment about circumcision came during a White House Cabinet meeting. At first, he and Trump traded misconceptions they had previously aired about Tylenol use by pregnant women — Trump asserting that “obviously,” the rise in autism rates is “artificially induced” and adding, “I would say don’t take Tylenol if you’re pregnant, and … when the baby is born don’t give it Tylenol.”

That advice dismayed physicians, who say that fevers during pregnancy are a greater risk for the unborn and that acetaminophen is safer than alternative fever-reducing medicines.

Kennedy then injected circumcision into the discussion. “There’s two studies that show children who were circumcised early have double the rate of autism,” he said. “It’s highly likely because they were given Tylenol.”

Unsurprisingly, Kennedy’s remark got extensive play in the news media, prompting him to try walking it back via a tweet on X. Rather than accept responsibility for his confusing words, he responded with Bondi-esque truculence, writing: “As usual, the mainstream media attacks me for something I didn’t say in order to distract from the truth of what I did say.”

He even took arms against the Murdoch-owned New York Post, which posted its story with the headline, “RFK Jr. says Tylenol after circumcisions linked to autism,” and proceeded to debunk the claim.

In trying to clarify his point, however, Kennedy dug himself a deeper hole. According to his tweet, the two studies he was referring to at the cabinet meeting were a Danish study from 2015 and a non-peer-reviewed preprint posted online in August, which refers to the Danish paper. Kennedy mischaracterizes both.

Contrary to Kennedy’s implication, the Danish study did not address the use of acetaminophen (called “paracetamol” in the paper) in connection with circumcision. The reason, its authors wrote, was that “we had no data available on analgesics or possible local anesthetics used during ritual circumcisions in our cohort, so we were unable to address the paracetamol hypothesis directly.”

They did note, however, that the acetaminophen theory had only “limited empirical support.” In other words, evidence was lacking. Anyway, the Danish study was criticized — in the same journal that had published it — for its reliance on a very small sample of children.

As for the preprint, contrary to Kennedy’s description, it did not identify the Danish paper as offering “the most compelling ‘standalone’ evidence” for an autism-acetaminophen link. That language referred to three studies, one of which was the Danish paper. Of the other papers, one was based on later interviews with parents. The other was a study of the effects of acetaminophen on 10-day-old mice, not human children.

I asked Kennedy’s agency to clarify his claim and to explain the discrepancies between his words and the papers themselves, but received no reply.

To summarize, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the nation’s top federal healthcare official, conjured up a connection between circumcision and autism via a relationship between circumcision and Tylenol that is unsupported by the research he cited. Indeed, the Danish paper describes the idea that boys undergoing circumcision invariably are given acetaminophen for pain as “a questionable assumption.”

In searching for empirical support for the acetaminophen theory, moreover, the Danish paper cited a 2010 paper funded by NIH that cautioned: “No evidence is presented here that acetaminophen in any way causes autism. … This hypothesis is largely based on multiple lines of often weak evidence.” Anyway, the paper was focused on a possible link between acetaminophen use and asthma, not autism.

Sadly, this sort of mischaracterization of research described as “a rigorous scientific framework” (RFK Jr.’s words) isn’t surprising coming from today’s Department of Health and Human Services. This is the agency, it may be recalled, that in May issued an “assessment” of the health of America’s children that cited at least seven sources that did not exist.

Nothing can stop unwary parents from relying on the judgment of Donald Trump or Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to make healthcare decisions for their infants and children. But they should be warned: They do so at their own and their offsprings’ risk.

California Secretary of State Shirley Weber on Monday pushed back against a torrent of misinformation on social media sites claiming that mail-in ballots for the state’s Nov. 4 special election are purposefully designed to disclose how people voted.

Weber, the state’s top elections official, refuted claims by some Republicans and far-right partisans that holes on ballot envelopes allow election officials to see how Californians voted on Proposition 50, the ballot measure about redistricting that will be decided in a special election in a little over three weeks.

“The small holes on ballot envelopes are an accessibility feature to allow sight-impaired voters to orient themselves to where they are required to sign the envelope,” Weber said in a statement released Monday.

Weber said voters can insert ballots in return envelopes in a manner that doesn’t reveal how they voted, or could cast ballots at early voting stations that will open soon or in person on Nov. 4.

Weber’s decision to “set the record straight” was prompted by conspiracy theories exploding online alleging that mail ballots received by 23 million Californians in recent days are purposefully designed to reveal the votes of people who opposed the measure.

“If California voters vote ‘NO’ on Gavin Newscum’s redistricting plan, it will show their answer through a hole in the envelope,” Libs of TikTok posted on the social media platform X on Sunday, in a post that has 4.8 million views. “All Democrats do is cheat.”

GOP Texas Sen. Ted Cruz earlier retweeted a similar post that has been viewed more than 840,000 times, and Republican California gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton, a conservative commentator, called for the November special election to be suspended because of the alleged ballot irregularities.

The allegation about the ballots, which has been raised by Republicans during prior California elections, stems from the holes in mail ballot envelopes that were created to help visually impaired voters and allow election workers to make sure ballots have been removed from envelopes.

The special election was called for by Gov. Gavin Newsom and other Democrats in an effort to counter President Trump urging GOP-led states, notably Texas, to redraw their congressional districts before next year’s midterm election to boost GOP ranks in the House and buttress his ability to enact his agenda during his final two years in office.

California Democrats responded by proposing a rare mid-decade redrawing of California’s 52 congressional boundaries to increase Democratic representation in Congress. Congressional districts are typically drawn once a decade by an independent state commission created by voters in 2010.

Nearly 600,000 Californians have already returned mail ballots as of Monday evening, according to a ballot tracker created by Political Data, a voter data firm that is led by Democratic strategist Paul Mitchell, who drew the proposed congressional boundaries on the November ballot.

Republican leaders in California who oppose the ballot measure have expressed concern about the ballot conspiracy theories, fearing the claims may suppress Republicans and others from voting against Proposition 50.

“Please don’t panic people about something that is easily addressed by turning their ballot around,” Roxanne Hoge, the chair of the Los Angeles County Republican Party, posted on X. “We need every no vote and we need them now.”

Jessica Millan Patterson, the former chair of the state GOP who is leading one of the two main committees opposing Proposition 50, compared not voting early to sitting on the sidelines of a football game until the third quarter.

“I understand why voters would be concerned when they see holes in their envelopes … because your vote is your business. It’s the bedrock of our system, being able to [vote by] secret ballot,” she said in an interview. “That being said, the worst thing that you could do if you are unhappy with the way things are here in California is not vote, and so I will continue to promote early voting and voting by mail. It’s always been a core principle for me.”

SACRAMENTO — Gov. Gavin Newsom on Monday vetoed legislation that would have phased out a range of popular consumer products, including nonstick pots and pans, that contain synthetic chemicals with potential links to cancer.

“I appreciate the efforts to protect the health and safety of consumers, and while this bill is well-intentioned, I am deeply concerned about the impact this bill would have on the availability of affordable options in cooking products,” Newsom wrote in his veto statement. “I believe we must carefully consider the consequences that may result from a dramatic shift of products on our shelves.”

The legislation would have prohibited the selling or distributing of cookware with intentionally added perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, known as PFAS, by 2030. It phased out PFAS in products for infants and children, ski wax, dental floss, food packaging and cleaning products starting in 2028. Previously used items would have been exempt.

Sen. Ben Allen (D-Santa Monica), who introduced the legislation, Senate Bill 682, said he will continue to work on the issue moving forward.

“We are obviously disappointed,” he said. “We know there are safer alternatives — [but] I understand there were strong voices on both sides on this topic.”

Allen previously explained he introduced the bill to help protect the state’s water supply from contamination.

A study released in 2023 by the U.S. Geological Survey found tap water in urban areas of Southern and Central California is more likely to contain PFAS than the drinking water in most of the nation’s other regions.

“The water agencies, sanitation agencies and local governments are faced with increasingly impossible-to-meet standards just to keep the water supply for our constituents clean,” Allen said during a Senate committee meeting in April. “They’re facing the costs while the producers who keep pushing these products out on the market are not being held accountable.”

PFAS are commonly dubbed “forever chemicals” because of their well-established longevity. They are linked to adverse health effects, including liver enzyme changes and kidney and testicular cancer, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The chemicals have been used for decades to prevent food from sticking to pans or packaging, or to make materials more resistant to stains. California has taken steps in recent years to ban their use in certain items, like cosmetics and menstrual products.

Dozens of organizations weighed-in on Allen’s bill, with the Sierra Club, California Health Coalition Advocacy and the League of California Cities supporting the legislation.

The Chemical Industry Council of California and the Cookware Sustainability Alliance were among those opposed.

Steve Burns, president of the sustainability alliance, was especially concerned by the provision barring the distribution of the banned products.

“California is the entry point for nonstick cookware and other products that come into the Port of Long Beach, the Port of Los Angeles or the Port of Oakland, and then get distributed throughout the country,” he told The Times. “They go to warehouses, distribution centers and get loaded up on rail or usually trucks — so there’s a lot of jobs in the California economy that depend on products that have Teflon.”

Burns said science hasn’t shown that all PFAS are harmful and argued California should have studied the issue further. He pointed to Illinois, which recently passed similar legislation but ultimately nixed the line banning nonstick cookware. An amendment instead directs the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency to assess scientific data on fluoropolymers, the type of PFAS used in nonstick pots and pans.

Several states have recently moved toward restricting items with PFAS. Last January, Minnesota became the first state to ban PFAS in cookware. The Cookware Sustainability Alliance filed a lawsuit arguing the law discriminated against out-of-state commerce. A judge dismissed the suit in August.

The sustainability alliance has shared letters of opposition on its website from several prominent chefs and culinary personalities, including cook and television host Rachael Ray and Mark Dommen, the chef at Hestan, a new restaurant in Napa slated to open later this year.

Dommen explained the legislation would have placed an unfair burden on restaurants and food service providers.

“Non-stick cookware is essential to our daily operations and eliminating these products without a viable alternative would drive up costs, disrupt our supply chain, and put California restaurants at a competitive disadvantage,” Dommen wrote.

Ray, who has a cookware line, argued easy-clean cookware helps families eat healthier by making it easier to prepare meals without extra oils or fats.

Her letter drew a gentle rebuke from actor and environmental activist Mark Ruffalo, who implored Ray on social media to reconsider her stance and said her advocacy on behalf of the cookware industry was putting the bill in jeopardy.

“Some of us have so much PFAS in our blood that we face a far greater risk of developing cancer,” he wrote in a recent letter shared on X. “Let’s work together to get PFAS out of the everyday products we bring into our home.”

Scientific studies about the health effects of PFAS will continue, according to the CDC.

“Ongoing research has identified associations between PFAS exposure and several health impacts,” the agency’s website states. “There are many factors that can influence the risk of these effects, such as exposure, individual factors and other health determinants. Research is ongoing to understand the mechanisms of PFAS toxicity.”

Times staff writer Melody Gutierrez contributed to this report.

SACRAMENTO — Gov. Gavin Newsom on Monday vetoed legislation that would have allowed public and private colleges to provide preferential admissions to applicants directly descended from individuals who were enslaved in the United States before 1900.

The governor thanked the bill’s author for his commitment to addressing disparities and urged educational institutions to review and determine “how, when, and if this type of preference can be adopted.”

“This bill clarifies, to the extent permitted by federal law, that California public and private postsecondary educational institutions may consider providing a preference in admissions to an applicant who is a descendant of slavery,” Newsom wrote Monday in his veto. “These institutions already have the authority to determine whether to provide admissions preferences like this one, and accordingly, this bill is unnecessary.”

The legislation would not have required applicants to belong to any particular race or ethnicity — a crucial detail that proponents said distinguished it from affirmative action, which is banned at California colleges. Critics, however, argued the term “slave” was used as a proxy for race.

Legal experts told The Times last month the measure probably would have faced challenges in court if the governor signed it into law.

“The question with this sort of provision is does this count as on the basis of race?” said Ralph Richard Banks, professor at Stanford Law School and the founder and faculty director of the Stanford Center for Racial Justice. “A secondary issue is going to be whether, even if it is not formally about racial classification, was it really adopted to get around the no-racial-classification rule? The law prohibits indirect methods of doing something that would be prohibited if you were to do it directly.”

Race-based college admissions are banned by federal and state law.

Proposition 209, which California voters approved nearly three decades ago, amended the state Constitution to bar colleges from considering race, sex, national origin or ethnicity during admissions. The U.S. Supreme Court in 2023 in effect ended race-conscious college admissions nationwide, ruling in Students for Fair Admissions vs. Harvard that such policies violate the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.

California became the first state government in the country to study reparations, efforts to remedy the lingering effects of slavery and systemic racism, after the 2020 killing of George Floyd by a Minneapolis police officer sparked a national conversation on racial justice.

Newsom and state lawmakers passed a law to create a “first in the nation” task force to study and propose effective ways to help atone for the legacy of slavery. That panel spent years working on a 1,080-page report on the effects of slavery and the discriminatory policies sanctioned by the government after slavery was abolished, and the findings became the genesis for a slate of legislation proposed by the California Legislative Black Caucus.

Last week, Newsom signed Senate Bill 518, which will create a new office called the Bureau for Descendants of American Slavery. That bureau will create a process to determine whether someone is the descendant of a slave and to certify someone’s claim to help them access benefits.

Assemblymember Isaac Bryan (D-Los Angeles), who introduced Assembly Bill 7, said his legislation would have allowed colleges to grant preference to the descendants of enslaved people in order to rectify a “legacy of exclusion, of harm.”

Andrew Quinio, an attorney specializing in equality issues for the Pacific Legal Foundation, believes AB 7 was blatantly unconstitutional. The foundation is a conservative public interest law firm that seeks to prevent government overreach.

“This was a bill that was born out of the Reparations Task Force recommendations; it was part of the package of bills of the Road to Repair from the California Legislative Black Caucus so this has a very clear racial intent and racial purpose and it will have a racial effect,” he said. “[Legislation] doesn’t have to benefit the entirety or even the majority of a demographic in order for it to be unlawfully based on race.”

Lisa Holder, a civil rights attorney and president of the Equal Justice Society, a progressive nonprofit that works to protect policies that promote diversity, argued the measure’s framing made it highly likely to satisfy legal challenges.

“This (legislation) is very specifically tailored to correct the harms that we have seen, the harms from the past that continue into the present,” she said. “… Because this bill seeks to erase those harms by focusing specifically on the descendant community, it is strong enough to establish a compelling interest.”

Gary Orfield, a law and education professor and co-founder of the Civil Rights Project/Proyecto Derechos Civiles at UCLA, agreed the legislation was carefully written in a way that could have withstood legal challenges. He pointed out California allows university programs that support Native American students because they were narrowly tailored to focus on tribal affiliation — which is considered a political classification — instead of race or ethnicity.

Orfield said applicants of various races could have potentially benefited from the new admissions policy, as many Native Americans were enslaved and Asiatic coolieism, or Asian indentured servitude, was declared a form of human slavery in the state constitution in 1879.

“All Black people weren’t slaves and all slaves were not Black,” he said. “I think there is a good argument to say that slavery isn’t defined strictly by race and is not just a proxy for race and there certainly is a legitimate concern when you are thinking about remediation for historic violations.”

Orfield, however, said convincing the public was a different matter.

“I don’t think all people will easily understand this,” he said. “Americans tend to think that discrimination doesn’t cross over multiple generations. But I think that it does — I think there has been a long-lasting effect.”

Staff writer Melody Gutierrez contributed to this report.

SACRAMENTO — Gov. Gavin Newsom on Monday signed legislation to study inequalities in youth sports, a move likely to draw ire from Republicans who believe the measure is intended to support transgender athletes.

The legislation, Assembly Bill 749, creates a commission to examine whether a new state board or department is needed to improve access to sports regardless of race, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, income or geographic location.

In an open letter last month to the governor, Senate Minority Leader Brian Jones (R-Santee) zeroed in on the term “gender identity.”

“The author and supporters of [this legislation] know if they were upfront and put forth a straightforward bill allowing biological males to compete against young women and girls, it would be easily defeated,” Jones wrote on Sept. 26. “So instead they are trying to establish a stacked commission to indirectly rig the issue in their favor.”

Jones urged Newsom to veto the bill and referenced the governor’s previous remarks about transgender athletes. During the first episode of his podcast “This Is Gavin Newsom,” the governor — a longtime ally of the LGBTQ+ community — acknowledged the struggle faced by transgender people but called transgender women’s participation in women’s sports “deeply unfair” and warned it was hurting Democrats at the polls.

Assemblymember Tina S. McKinnor, who introduced the bill, said Jones should keep his focus on Washington.

“Senator Brian Jones’ time would be better spent writing to the Republican controlled Congress to end the Trump Shutdown and reopen the federal government, rather than attacking trans students,” McKinnor (D-Hawthorne) wrote in an email to The Times.

Legislation referencing gender identity tends to be a lightning rod for controversy nationwide, with opinion polls suggesting Americans hold complex views on transgender issues.

A survey conducted this year by the nonpartisan Pew Research Center found 66% of U.S. adults favor laws requiring transgender athletes to compete on teams that match their sex assigned at birth. At the same time, 56% of adults supported policies protecting transgender people from discrimination in jobs and public spaces.

During legislative committee hearings on the bill, McKinnor focused on the legislation’s potential racial impact. She said last year’s Play Equity Report found 59% of white youth participated in structured sports programs, compared with 47% of Black youth and 45% of Latino youth.

“Participation in youth sports remains unequal despite the well-documented physical, mental and academic benefits,” McKinnor told the Senate Health Committee in July. “These disparities stem from systemic barriers such as financial limitations, uneven program quality, outdated physical education standards and the lack of a coordinated statewide strategy.”

More than two dozen organizations endorsed the bill, including the Los Angeles Rams, city of San Diego, USC Schwarzenegger Institute, YMCA of Metropolitan Los Angeles and the Boys and Girls Clubs of West San Gabriel Valley and Eastside.

The legislation directs the state public health officer to convene the commission, which will be composed of 10 members appointed by the governor and three appointed by each the speaker of the Assembly and the Senate Committee on Rules. The health officer will also sit on the panel, or appoint their own designee.

Newsom did not issue a statement when his office announced a slate of bills he signed on Monday.

In March, Newsom infuriated the progressive wing of his party when, while hosting conservatives commentator Charlie Kirk on the governor’s podcast, he broke away from many Democrats on the issue of transgender athletes. Newsom, an outspoken champion of LGBTQ+ rights since he was mayor of San Francisco, publicly criticized the “unfairness” of transgender athletes participating in women’s sports.

WASHINGTON — President Trump is declaring Israel’s war with Hamas in the Gaza Strip over and has already barreled ahead toward far larger goals — arguing that the fragile ceasefire his administration helped broker is a chance to bring a lasting peace to the greater Middle East.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is equally exuberant about the present, but far more measured in his assessments going forward. He’s characterized the deal, which is still in its early stages, as “a proposal to free hostages and end the war” while also saying that his country used two years of often brutal war in Gaza to showcase its military might.

The pair seemingly offering strikingly different perspectives about the prospects for future peace is noteworthy given just how much each lavished the other with praise during speeches before the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, on Monday.

But it also reflects just how different the political and diplomatic stakes may be for each leader going forward.

That’s especially true given that Trump could see his reputation as an international dealmaker tested by a ceasefire that could yet prove precarious, while Netanyahu may have to focus on domestic issues and keeping the Israeli electorate happy given that he’s set to face election no later than next October.

‘You’ve won’ vs. ‘Our enemies now understand’

Trump gleefully added the Israel-Hamas war as No. 8 on the list of global conflicts he’d claimed to have solved — even if that tally exaggerates the role he played in calming some global hot spots. He also declared that the ceasefire would usher in a new “dawn of a new Middle East.”

“You’ve won,” he said of Israel, encouraging the U.S. ally to see the limitations of military force in bringing about enduring peace. “Now it is time to translate these victories against terrorists on the battlefield into the ultimate prize of peace and prosperity for the entire Middle East.”

That followed Netanyahu using his own speech to say, “Our enemies now understand just how powerful and just how determined Israel is.”

Recalling Hamas’ attack on Israel two years ago that sparked the war, he had a message for his country’s adversaries: “Understand that attacking Israel on Oct. 7 was a catastrophic mistake.”

Referring to the militant group Hamas, Netanyahu said, “These monsters take babies as hostages,” adding that “Israel did what it had to do.”

Over the last two years, Netanyahu was steadfast in vowing to achieve “total victory” over Hamas — not only returning the hostages released as part of the ceasefire agreement, but also disarming the group and pounding it into surrender. With Hamas weakened but still intact, he’s fallen far short of that goal.

Trump’s plan also holds out the possibility of Palestinian statehood one day — something that Netanyahu and his coalition partners oppose. By declaring an end to the war, Netanyahu could see his government crumble and be forced into an early election at a time when his popularity remains low and his war goals remain unfulfilled.

‘Economic development’ vs. ‘Civilization against barbarism’

Trump has long approached diplomacy as he would dealmaking in the business world. He’s now saying that promoting economic interests in the greater Middle East can help bridge divides and foster cooperation — even among the most bitter of historical foes.

The president suggested Monday that wealthy Arab countries would be willing to help finance an end to the fighting to promote prosperity in one of the world’s most volatile regions.

“The total focus of Gazans must be on restoring the fundamentals of stability, safety, dignity and economic development,” Trump said.

Netanyahu said he hoped the future would bring “peace inside Israel and peace outside Israel.” But rather than echo Trump’s excitement about regionwide unity through economic development, he called for a future “that will unite civilization against barbarism, light against darkness and hope against despair.”

‘Ready when you are’ vs. ‘Terror axis’

Another key point where Trump and Netanyahu diverged was on Iran.

Trump praised U.S. strikes in June, which he has characterized as a knockout blow against Iran’s nuclear program: “We took a big cloud off of the Middle East and off of Israel.”

But he also acknowledged that Tehran may have a role in helping achieve larger Middle East peace, saying that when it comes to Iran and possible negotiations, officials in the U.S. “are ready when you are.”

“You know what would be great, if we could make a peace deal with them,” Trump added of Iran. “Would you be happy with that? Wouldn’t it be nice? Because I think they want to. I think they’re tired.”

In a speech that often drew raucous cheers from Israeli lawmakers, that particular sentiment elicited a muted response. Netanyahu, meanwhile, saluted his country’s “amazing victories over Hamas and the entire Iranian terror axis.”

‘Little dot’ vs. ‘Hamas’ false propaganda’

Both leaders spoke about mounting international pressure on Israel to end the war — but to different ends.

Netanyahu chastised the global community for having “bought into Hamas’ false propaganda” and said that doing so saw “more and more governments succumb to antisemitic mobs in their own countries” while pushing for Israel to “surrender to Hamas demands.”

Doing so, he said, would have meant that “in no time, the Hamas killers would be back on the border fence, ready to repeat the horrors of October 7th again and again.”

Trump, by contrast, suggested that Israel might have been unable to continue fighting with Hamas for much longer amid outside opposition from so many corners of a world he noted was very big — even while praising Israel’s military and political strength.

The sheer number of people in Gaza killed during the war, the widespread destruction there, and an ongoing starvation and humanitarian crisis, sparked allegations of genocide denied by Israel.

“This piece of land is very small,” Trump said. “You have this little dot, and think of what you’ve done. It’s incredible.”

Mutual admiration. But no joint participation in Egypt summit

Trump hailed Netanyahu repeatedly, and even took the extraordinary step of suggesting that the prime minister be pardoned in an ongoing corruption inquiry.

“Cigars and champagne, who the hell cares about that?” Trump asked.

That was a reference to three corruption cases for which Netanyahu has been indicted. One involves accusations the prime minster and his wife accepted luxury goods — including cigars and champagne — in exchange for political favors.

After Trump was snubbed by the Nobel Peace Prize committee last week, Netanyahu promised to nominate Trump as the first non-Israeli to receive the Israel Prize, the country’s highest honor.

Still, such praise didn’t lead to both men heading to Egypt after finishing their speeches.

Trump left Israel to attend what the White House has billed as a “ peace summit ” featuring 20-plus world leaders in Sharm el Sheikh, Egypt. Netanyahu was invited, but declined Monday. His office said it was too close to the Jewish holiday of Simchat Torah.

Weissert writes for the Associated Press.