POLITICS

WASHINGTON — Christopher J. Boyce, whose sale of CIA satellite secrets to Soviet agents was one of the nation’s gravest espionage crimes of the 1970s, pleaded before a Senate panel Thursday for improvements in U.S. security procedures and for other young persons to avoid his fate.

In an emotional, hourlong statement, the 31-year-old Boyce said his 21 months of spying at TRW Inc. offered no “James Bond” thrills and brought him “only depression and a hopeless enslavement to an inhuman, uncaring foreign bureaucracy.”

“As we sit here, a half-dozen, perhaps a dozen, perhaps more Americans are operatives of the KGB,” the former Californian told the Senate Governmental Affairs permanent investigations subcommittee, which is examining how federal security clearances are granted.

‘None Are Happy’

“Perhaps some of them have been in place for years. I tell you that none of them are happy men or women,” he said during testimony described by Sen. William S. Cohen (R-Me.) as “one of the most powerful and poignant statements we have ever heard.”

Boyce, who is serving a 68-year prison sentence for espionage and for robbing banks after escaping from the Lompoc Federal Correctional Institution in 1980, said that “for whatever reason a person begins his involvement . . . the original intent and purpose becomes lost in the ignominy of the ongoing nightmare.”

Although Boyce took the witness stand in his defense during his 1977 spy trial, his Senate testimony Thursday–in which he paused to fight back tears four times–provided his fullest statement to date on his actions and reflections as a Soviet collaborator.

He told senators that he had received a top-secret clearance from the government in 1975 after only a cursory investigation in which he was never interviewed about his anti-Establishment attitudes, which were well known among his friends.

Boyce said the government interviewed only his parents and some of their acquaintances, “who lived in another world” and knew nothing of his opinions.

Smoked Marijuana at 16

“Had the investigators asked any of my friends what I thought of the U.S. government, and in particular the CIA, I would never have gotten the job,” Boyce said. “Had they asked, they would have learned that I had first begun smoking ‘pot’ at 16 and that I had experimented with a variety of other drugs.”

He said he was hired only because his father, a former FBI agent, knew a top security official at the company.

At the Redondo Beach-based TRW, where Boyce worked as a clerk assigned to a highly sensitive satellite project, plant security was “a joke–almost laughable,” making it easy to photograph thousands of documents to pass on to Soviet agents, he said.

Boyce–who testified before the subcommittee while guarded by a dozen federal marshals–described the informal atmosphere and lax security at TRW and said his co-workers never suspected he was cooperating with the Soviets.

Parties in ‘Black Vault’

“We regularly partied and boozed it up during working hours within the ‘black vault,’ ” the super-secret room housing the CIA satellite project, he said. “Bacardi rum was usually stored behind the crypto machines.”

Boyce said a code-destruction machine similar to a blender “was used for making banana daiquiris and Mai Tais. On occasion, the project security manager would join us for a drink on the house.”

Boyce, whose case was recounted in the best-selling book “The Falcon and the Snowman” and in a subsequent film, said he understood that TRW has tightened security in recent years. Witnesses from the company confirmed this in later testimony.

Monkey Badge

So lax was security at TRW, Boyce said, that “my immediate supervisor once made a security badge with a monkey’s face on it and, to everyone’s amusement, used it to come in and out of the building.”

With tears in his eyes, Boyce said he no longer is “a rebellious 21” and agreed to testify “in the hope that I am performing a constructive act.”

He concluded: “I only wish that before more Americans take that irreversible step, they could know what I now know, that they are bringing down upon themselves heartache more heavy than a mountain.”

WASHINGTON — U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has temporarily ordered officers to avoid, in most cases, making vehicle stops in the wake of two deadly shootings.

The tactical shift comes a day after an ICE officer shot and killed a Colombian man in Biddeford, Maine, and a week after an ICE officer fatally shot another man in Houston. Both men were driving at the time of the shootings, and the incidents have renewed criticism over the agency’s immigration enforcement tactics.

Multiple news outlets and a former federal immigration official said early Tuesday that the order allows for exceptions if officers are executing a criminal warrant and working with partner law enforcement agencies. The directive, later confirmed by a top official, is a temporary pause while ICE officers receive more training on vehicle stops.

An ICE spokesperson said that the agency wouldn’t discuss law enforcement tactics but that “we are always evaluating our procedures to keep our officers safe and criminals off our streets.”

But on Fox News on Tuesday afternoon, Tom Homan, a top White House immigration official, said the decision to halt most vehicle stops was made by Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin and top ICE leadership. But he emphasized that “it’s not a policy change, it’s a temporary pause” while officials review the incidents and decide whether training could be improved.

Homan said the pause won’t affect ICE arrests. He said officers could, in some instances, make an arrest before someone gets into their vehicle or after they arrive at their destination.

“I think it’s going to be a short pause,” he said. “I’m confident that ICE is well trained in vehicle stops and you’re going to see us keep moving forward.”

Reacting to ICE’s policy change, Rep. Christian Menefee (D-Texas) said in a statement that training won’t solve the agency’s deeply ingrained issues.

“Immigration enforcement shouldn’t be heavily militarized and chasing people through our streets,” he said. “The American people deserve competent leadership and law enforcement that is transparent, accountable, and worthy of the public’s trust.”

Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) said she had urged Mullin to “cease all non-urgent vehicle stops” in the wake of the Biddeford shooting.

“I am encouraged that the Department has agreed to do so,” she wrote on X.

Hundreds of people protested in Biddeford on Tuesday over the killing Monday of Johan Sebastián Durán Guerrero, a 26-year-old Colombian. Protests similarly broke out in Houston last week after the killing of Lorenzo Salgado Araujo, a 52-year-old from Mexico.

The Department of Homeland Security alleged that the men killed in both incidents resisted arrest and that the officers fired their weapons defensively as the men attempted to flee. Neither man was the intended target of the ICE officers.

Local officials in Houston and Biddeford are calling for independent investigations into the shootings. In both instances, the officers involved were not wearing body cameras.

Homeland Security said the officer who shot Durán Guerrero was “fearing for public safety.” The agency said Salgado Araujo had “weaponized his vehicle in an attempt to run over an ICE law enforcement officer.”

Durán Guerrero’s shooting marked at least the ninth such death since President Trump began his immigration crackdown. In a scathing post on X, outgoing Colombian President Gustavo Petro called the shooting an assassination “at the hands of the U.S. government.”

Durán Guerrero is survived by his wife and young daughter. Advocacy groups said he was authorized to work in the U.S.

Daniel Boucher, who lives near where Durán Guerrero was shot, said he “clearly heard the victim say, ‘I tried to stop.’”

The two shootings come as immigration arrests have surged again amid a Trump administration push to carry out its mass deportation agenda. Over five days at the end of June, ICE arrested more than 10,000 people.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

BIDDEFORD, Maine — Trump administration officials have told Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers to suspend most vehicle stops after two deadly shootings in little over a week, according to a person familiar with the matter.

The order came a day after an ICE officer shot and killed a Colombian man in Maine, renewing criticism of the agency’s tactics during enforcement operations.

The suspension is not absolute and there’s room for exceptions when executing a criminal warrant or working with partner agencies, according to a person who spoke Tuesday on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive law enforcement operations.

The Department of Homeland Security said an ICE officer, “fearing for public safety,” shot and killed the man Monday in the city of Biddeford while officers were watching the home of someone they believed was in the U.S. illegally and had a final order of removal from the country.

This is a developing story and will be updated.

Whittle, Brook and Sisak write for Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett told lawmakers Tuesday that a sharp increase in threats targeting her and other justices is increasingly encroaching on their personal and family lives.

During a rare appearance by justices before Congress, Barrett said she had to wear a bulletproof vest home a few years ago, something she struggled to explain to her 12-year-old son.

“I didn’t expect that performing this service would put me in the position of explaining to my children what a bulletproof vest was, why I had to wear one,” she said.

She and Justice Elena Kagan testified before a House appropriations panel in support of a request to increase security funding for members of the nation’s highest court.

Judges around the country have seen a rise in threats of violence and intimidation. Barrett’s home was also targeted by a swatting call to police in May.

The hearing comes two weeks after the conservative-majority court finished handing down a series of major opinions, including a decision that increased President Trump’s power over federal regulatory agencies and another that rejected his wide-ranging tariffs, sparking harsh personal criticism.

It’s the first time justices have testified before Congress since 2019, and the two justices are facing wide-ranging questions about the court’s work.

Security is central to the Supreme Court’s budget request

The Supreme Court requested a total of $228 million for next fiscal year, a roughly 10% increase over the year before. About $18 million of that is for maintaining the building and grounds.

Much of the requested increase, $14.6 million, would go to expanding personal protection for justices, with six more agents for each.

An additional $2 million would fund an off-site residential security post aimed at making emergency responses faster, as well as increasing the number of Supreme Court police officers.

The U.S. Marshals Service, responsible for protecting judges, reported 564 threats in the government fiscal year that ended in September, an increase from the year before.

That total includes threats to the hundreds of federal judges around the country, though the nine-member Supreme Court has not been immune.

In May, Barrett’s security detail worked with police to quickly deal with the swatting incident, a fake 911 call designed to provoke a police response. Last year, her sister was the victim of a bomb threat in Charleston, S.C., police said. No bomb was found.

In 2022, shortly after the leak of a draft opinion overturning the Roe vs. Wade abortion decision, a would-be assassin was arrested near the home of Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh with weapons and zip ties. Threats to the Supreme Court increased after that leak and have continued to grow, Kagan said.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. has condemned the threats to all U.S. judges, saying during a speech in March that criticism of judicial opinions is understandable, but personally directed hostility is “dangerous, and it’s got to stop.”

Whitehurst writes for the Associated Press.

This July 14th appears to be one of the key days in the political process that Venezuela has been experiencing since January 3rd. Early in the morning, the 2015 National Assembly announced a joint work agenda starting August 1st “as a roadmap to promote stability, democracy, and national recovery.”

NEW YORK — The sudden death of Sen. Lindsey Graham, a top ally of President Trump and one of Washington’s best-known politicians, is renewing focus on the country’s aging lawmakers.

Graham, a South Carolina Republican who had turned 71 just two days before dying on Saturday, was far younger than many of his Senate colleagues and appeared to have been in good health. He suffered a tear in his aorta, according to a preliminary report from the medical examiner.

It was the second time in less than a month that emergency personnel were dispatched to the home of a U.S. senator. In early June, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the former Republican Senate leader, was hospitalized for undisclosed reasons.

After weeks of increasingly dire speculation about his health, he finally revealed on Sunday that he had fallen and suffered from mild pneumonia. He released a photo, complete with a copy of the day’s newspaper.

Graham’s death and McConnell’s hospitalization have come amid an ongoing reckoning about the nation’s aging leaders, two years after the disastrous presidential debate that sparked widespread panic among Democrats about then-81-year-old President Biden’s capacities and accusations of a cover-up.

Some politicians have continued to obscure details about their health challenges, asking for privacy despite their public positions, and fueling conspiracy theories.

“I think we need some transparency,” Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said Monday. “I wish Sen. McConnell and his team would have done that earlier. I think it would have resolved a lot of questions.”

McConnell is admitted to a hospital

McConnell, who at 84 is only the third-oldest member of the Senate, was admitted to the hospital on June 14 with barely any explanation. Aides said he was “receiving excellent care” but offered no details about his condition.

The dearth of information fueled a wave of speculation about his prognosis, with Laura Loomer, a Trump ally and conspiracy theorist, claiming on social media that a “high level source close to the White House” had told her he was “officially brain dead.”

But McConnell, who will retire from Congress at the end of January after serving as the longest-ever Senate leader, said in a statement that he is on the mend. He said a fall had led to his hospitalization and that he was “briefly unconscious” and treated for mild pneumonia.

“You all know how folks of my generation often hesitate to share the vulnerability that comes with growing older,” he said. “Even in the public eye, I feel that same instinct — I can’t help it.”

That wasn’t enough to put speculation to rest. On social media, many refused to believe the veracity of a photo his office released that included the front page of the sports section of the Washington Post.

Conspiracy theories about McConnell’s health are “a symptom of our times,” said Sen. Rand Paul, a Republican who is also from McConnell’s home state of Kentucky. Paul said people should “give him a break.”

“People think they have a right to know everyone’s medical problems,” he said, “but I don’t know, where does it begin and where does it end?”

Trump’s medical reports offer limited details

The oldest person ever elected president, at age 78, has long offered only the rosiest picture of his health.

“Everything checked out PERFECTLY,” he boasted after his last physical in May, adding that he took yet another cognitive test aimed at detecting early dementia and has “aced them all.”

His past medical reports have been criticized for offering limited detail and including statistics that some health professionals have viewed with skepticism.

When he first ran for president in 2016, Trump declined to release his health records, breaking with longtime precedent. He instead offered a four-paragraph note from his doctor declaring that he would be “the healthiest individual ever elected to the presidency.” Rep. Ronny Jackson (R-Texas), White House doctor during Trump’s first term, later drew headlines when he extolled the president’s “incredibly good genes.”

When he was infected with COVID-19 in the midst of his 2020 reelection campaign, Trump’s doctors and aides withheld key details of his treatment and tried to downplay the severity of his illness.

And after an attempted assassination at a Pennsylvania rally, Trump aides kept the public in the dark for days, declining to discuss the extent of his injuries or release medical records after assuring he was “fine.”

Kean Jr. goes absent for months

The obfuscation extends beyond the septuagenarian and octogenarian set. New Jersey Republican Rep. Tom Kean Jr. spent four months missing without explanation before he finally disclosed late last month that he had been in treatment for depression.

He said in a brief floor speech after his return that he had remained silent about his condition because he is a “private person by nature.”

He won an uncontested primary during his absence, despite missing more than 100 votes in the House, and is running for reelection.

The approach stood in contrast to Sen. John Fetterman, a Pennsylvania Democrat, who disclosed his hospitalization for clinical depression the day after he was admitted to Walter Reed National Military Medical Center for treatment. He also suffered a stroke while running for office.

Biden’s stumbles doom his reelection effort

Biden’s halting gait, frail appearance and frequent verbal stumbles eventually doomed his 2024 reelection campaign. After a debate in which he frequently lost his train of thought, he chose to withdraw from the race, sparking an unprecedented swap at the top of the Democratic ticket that ultimately paved the way for Trump’s return to office.

Many others have refused to retire. California Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a Democrat, died in office in 2023 at the age of 90, after years of declining health, including a bout of shingles. Though she returned to the Senate after her illness, she appeared frail and confused at times. It was later revealed that her office had failed to disclose in real time that she had contracted encephalitis while recovering.

Longtime Republican Rep. Kay Granger of Texas spent the final months of her more than two decades in Congress, when she was in her early 80s, suffering from what her office called “unforeseen health challenges” that made travel to Washington difficult.

Eleanor Holmes Norton, 89, the longtime House delegate for the District of Columbia, announced earlier this year that she would not run for reelection amid questions about her competency.

Colvin writes for the Associated Press. AP writers Mary Clare Jalonick and Lisa Mascaro in Washington contributed to this report.

NEW YORK — Mahmoud Khalil is suing the federal government and several private groups, alleging they were part of a conspiracy to suppress criticism of Israel by doxing, jailing and attempting to deport supporters of the pro-Palestinian movement.

The lawsuit, filed in federal court Tuesday, alleges a coordinated campaign among senior officials of President Trump’s administration, leaders of the Heritage Foundation and two online surveillance groups, Canary Mission and Betar.

According to Khalil’s lawyers, that “public-private partnership” — first brought to light in a separate trial last year — may violate the Ku Klux Klan Act, a Reconstruction-era law that sought to restrict government coordination with vigilante groups.

Inquiries to the Heritage Foundation, Canary Mission and Betar were not immediately returned on Tuesday.

A former graduate student at Columbia University, Khalil, 31, gained prominence as a spokesperson and leader for student activists protesting against Israel and its actions in Gaza.

Khalil, a legal permanent resident who is married to a U.S. citizen, was arrested in March 2025 by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in his campus apartment. He quickly became the face of the Trump administration crackdown on pro-Palestinian demonstrators.

He then spent 104 days in a Louisiana immigration jail, missing the birth of his first child, before a federal judge in New Jersey ordered his release.

Khalil’s deportation case, a priority for the Trump administration, has moved with unusual speed through executive-branch-controlled immigration courts, and may soon wind up before the U.S. Supreme Court.

He has forcefully denied that his role in pro-Palestinian protests amounts to antisemitism.

“My beliefs are not wanting my tax money or tuition going toward investments in weapons manufacturers for a genocide,” he previously told The Associated Press. “It’s as simple as that.”

Offenhartz writes for the Associated Press.

The federal government agreed to temporarily hold off on construction of a planned Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in Northern California.

The voluntary pause until Sept. 9 comes after the California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta and Santa Clara County officials sued the Trump administration last month to block the facility from being developed near Gilroy. The lawsuit remains ongoing.

“This pause in the construction, demolition, and development at the site of the challenged ICE facility is a significant step towards protecting our people, our communities, and our environment while the case remains ongoing,” Bonta said in a statement Monday night.

The Department of Homeland Security, which oversees ICE, didn’t immediately reply to a request for comment.

State and local officials believe the facility will be used for short-term detention of up to 150 people at a time, though ICE denied that it would be a detention center.

Community members and advocates for immigrants swiftly opposed the project. ICE has consistently looked to increase its detention capacity in California, where eight detention centers can now hold a combined 9,000 people, though the state has long been a thorn in the agency’s side.

The halt is part of a compromise between both sides involved in the legal action. After the state and county submitted a request for the court to temporarily halt the project, a hearing was set for Oct. 7.

Now, state and federal officials jointly requested that the court move up the hearing by at least a month. The agreement also extends how much time the federal government has to respond.

A federal judge signed off on the agreement Monday night.

The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in San José, alleges that the leased land is zoned exclusively for agricultural use and that the federal government violated laws requiring state and county notification, as well as procedural steps before beginning construction.

A proposal to make daylight saving time the year-round default nationwide is once again coming before Congress.

And, as in the past in both California and nationally, proponents and opponents of the switch cite the potential effects (good or bad) on health, business and agriculture as reasons to support or oppose the plan.

The House is expected to vote on the Sunshine Protection Act this week, according to the office of Rep. Vern Buchanan (R-Fla.), the bill’s author.

The Senate version of the bill, SB 29, is sponsored by Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.). In a statement last year he said, “More daylight after work means more business and more active, safer California communities.”

Most of the U.S. went on daylight saving time in the spring, moving clocks one hour ahead of standard time. The bill would end the “fall back” to standard time that typically takes place in November. The change would mean darker mornings and later sunsets. President Trump has indicated that he supports the plan.

It won’t be the first time the debate over timekeeping has made its way to Capitol Hill. In 2022, a bill to make daylight saving time permanent was approved by the Senate, but the effort stalled in the House.

“It’s clear that year-round daylight saving time is a popular, commonsense reform that will improve everyday life for millions of Americans,” Buchanan said in a statement to The Times. “Passing my bipartisan Sunshine Protection Act will bring us one step closer to ending the outdated and unpopular practice of changing our clocks twice a year.”

Areas that already do not observe daylight saving time would be able to stay on permanent standard time, according to the bill text. For example, Arizona and Hawaii do not move their clocks forward or backward.

Lawmakers in California and other states could opt out making daylight saving time permanent, but would need to decide before the law takes effect, Josh Gregory, a senior advisor to Buchanan, said in an email.

The effort has drawn support from both sides of the aisle. In California, Reps. Jay Obernolte (R-Big Bear Lake), Ken Calvert (R-Corona) and Young Kim (R-Anaheim Hills) are cosponsors of H.R. 139.

The proposal also has bipartisan opposition.

Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) has also been a vocal opponent of permanent daylight saving time. In a speech last year, Cotton argued that while year-round daylight saving time might benefit some activities and areas — such as golfing in Florida and Alabama — residents of northern states and on the western sides of time zones might not see the sun rise until 9 a.m. in the winter.

Cotton raised concerns that students would need to walk to school in the dark and risk being struck by drivers, as was the case in 1974 when the U.S. briefly adopted year-round daylight saving time to combat an energy crisis.

“The darkness of permanent daylight saving time would be especially harmful for schoolchildren and working Americans,” Cotton said.

Rep. Nanette Diaz Barragán (D-San Pedro) told The Times in a statement that she plans to vote against the bill because “medical experts have warned that permanent daylight saving time is bad for our health.”

She supports a different proposal, the Sunshine for Our Kids Act, which seeks to make permanent standard time the default nationwide but gives states the option to opt out. The bill, HR 9638, has been endorsed by the American Academy of Sleep Medicine.

Stanford professor Jamie Zeitzer, a physiologist who studies circadian cycles and how humans respond to light, supports ending the twice-a-year time changes.

The “spring forward” shift results in a loss of sleep and has been associated with a number of negative health effects, he said. The spring clock change has also been linked to more car accidents and cardiovascular incidents, he added.

Zeitzer’s research found that the darker mornings and brighter evenings of permanent daylight saving time weaken the circadian clock for many people.

“The abundance of biological evidence is clear that permanent standard time is a better solution,” Zeitzer said. “When you have a more robust light signal early in the morning, that will help keep your internal circadian system synchronized to the day.”

A 2025 AP-NORC survey found that the current system of changing the clocks twice a year is unpopular. According to the poll of nearly 1,300 U.S. adults, only 12% of respondents favored the current system, while 47% were opposed and 40% were neutral.

In the business world, there’s no consensus on making daylight saving time permanent. Many chambers of commerce and businesses that want to lure customers later in the day generally support it, while agricultural interests and some industries oppose it.

As for making standard time permanent, that faces opposition too. Among the opponents: golf course owners.

Jay Karen, the chief executive officer of the National Golf Course Owners Assn., testified at a congressional hearing in November that losing extra evening daylight could cost the industry $1.6 billion in green fees alone because so many Americans tend to golf in the afternoon or evening.

Buchanan’s office said in a statement that the “well-documented benefits of having more sunshine later in the day after school and after work will be beneficial for millions of Americans’ health and well-being.”

There have been previous attempts to put an end to the twice-annual clock adjustments in California.

In 2018, California voters approved Proposition 7, which was supposed to give the Legislature the authority to impose year-round daylight saving time — but only if the federal government allowed states to do so. It has not yet led to any meaningful change.

Earlier this year, state Sen. Roger Niello (R-Fair Oaks) introduced SB 1197, which seeks to “ditch the switch” by moving the state to permanent standard time.

A spokesperson for Niello’s office said that because his previous efforts failed to gain traction, his current proposal includes a provision requiring California to conform if the federal government adopts permanent daylight saving time.

They were Mexican immigrants, both named Lorenzo.

They came to this country without papers as teenagers. Lack of legal status didn’t stop them from building beautiful lives — a wife, a home, a loving dog. A blue-collar job that paid the bills, weekend carne asadas with friends and family, children who followed their father’s example of hard work.

The Lorenzos enjoyed the fruits of their labor in their adopted land, even as they battled to become American citizens while politicians demonized immigrants as invaders and worse.

Lorenzo Arellano arrived in the United States in 1968 and didn’t get his citizenship until nearly 30 years later. Back then, the path to naturalization was far easier.

Lorenzo Salgado Araujo arrived in the early 1990s, when those opportunities were becoming severely limited.

Lorenzo Arellano is my father, a happily retired truck driver living in Anaheim.

Lorenzo Salgado Araujo, 52, who ran his own construction crew, was on his way to a job with his brother and two other men when an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent shot him dead on July 7 in Houston.

When I see a photo of Salgado Araujo beaming in front of a cake with the number 52 on it at the well-kept home he built with his own hands, I’m reminded that we’ll be celebrating my father’s 75th birthday next month. When I see video of Salgado Araujo’s feet twitching on the ground with two ICE agents next to him as he bleeds out and moans for help, I weep.

Only geography, age and Donald Trump separated the Lorenzos. Even their children — he had three boys, while my father had two boys and two girls — are similar. The Salgado Araujos, like the Arellanos, are college-educated. The eldest son, Ronaldo, is a teacher like my sisters. He wears glasses like me and is now telling the story of his father to the nation, as I have for decades.

I write about my Papi as the puckish personification of immigrant America.

Ronaldo is eulogizing his dad way too soon.

“He wanted nothing else in life but to provide for his wife and see his sons become great people,” Ronaldo said proudly at a news conference the day after his father’s death — words I’ve always said about my Papi. “He did not deserve to be reduced to a headline of ‘Mexican man shot and killed by ICE’” — words I hope to never utter but can sadly see as a possibility given la migra’s unapologetic shoot-first approach and indiscriminate targeting of anyone brown.

Salgado Araujo’s killing came as part of the Trump administration’s newest deportation surge — the New York Times reported that the feds have arrested nearly 2,000 people a day since the end of June. The rate is higher than ICE’s campaign of terror last summer, yet it hasn’t drawn the same attention, fulfilling the promise of newish Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin that la migra would operate far more quietly and efficiently than under his reckless predecessor, Kristi Noem.

Those quiet times are over.

Ronaldo Salgado, son of Lorenzo Salgado Araujo, dries his tears while talking at a news conference on July 8 in Houston. His father was shot and killed by ICE agents the day before.

(David J. Phillip / Associated Press)

Vigils are popping up across the country in Salgado Araujo’s name. Stories about his life and death have replaced those about Mexico’s World Cup run on my social media timelines. They are heartbreaking, infuriating and a baleful reminder for Mexican Americans that these last five weeks of soccer, as joyful as they were, didn’t change our precarious status in this country under President Trump.

“He deserved to live a quiet life as a husband, a father and a job creator for dozens of men who also wanted the American dream,” Ronaldo said at the news conference through tears as his younger brother, Lorenzo Jr., comforted him. That their father never will — that the Department of Homeland Security is now smearing his name by claiming he “weaponized” his van by trying to run over an agent, even though video evidence proves no such thing — is the latest indictment against the Trump administration’s cruelty toward the undocumented.

Salgado Araujo wasn’t even the target of ICE’s operation. His family said he had applied for a work permit and was on his way toward finally obtaining legal status.

We should heed Ronaldo’s words about his father. As people protest and seek justice, we should also hail the life of Lorenzo Salgado Araujo the way we one day will hail the life of Lorenzo Arellano — as Mexicans who made it, challenges be damned. And we should continue to fight for immigrants who remain in legal limbo, afraid for their lives more than ever.

I called my father to ask how he felt about a tocayo — someone with the same first name — losing his life to la migra.

“I put myself in his place and lament that ese [that] Lorenzo couldn’t get the citizenship that I could,” Papi said in Spanish.

He remembered how immigration agents “did it with respect” when they caught him living in this country illegally in the 1970s and 1980s.

“They asked you for your papers, and if you didn’t have them, they put handcuffs on you, you got deported and that was that. None of these beatings or shootings that are happening now under Trump,” he said. The worst it ever got was when he said he was going to Los Angeles, and an agent snapped that he was going to L.A. but now had to return to Mexico.

Papi asked me what justification ICE has offered for killing Salgado Araujo.

“I hope they put those people who killed him in prison for many years,” he said with disgust. “Will they?”

I replied that probably wasn’t going to happen. ICE has shot and killed 11 people during Trump’s second term, both citizens and noncitizens, and scores more have died in immigration detention. No agents have faced charges for any of these deaths. The agents involved in Salgado Araujo’s killing didn’t even have dashboard cameras or body cameras, a convenient oversight that a Department of Homeland Security spokesperson blamed on “multiple government shutdowns.”

“Pues, Dios sabe que todo se paga en la vida,” my dad responded. Well, God knows you reap what you sow.

Ronaldo Salgado and Lorenzo Jr., sons of Lorenzo Salgado Araujo, hold a photograph of their father during a news conference July 8 in Houston.

(David J. Phillip / Associated Press)

Nothing can bring Lorenzo Salgado Araujo back to his loved ones. But I hope they find solace in his namesake, St. Lawrence. Tradition has it that Roman authorities roasted the Spanish deacon to death after Emperor Valerian demanded that he turn over the treasures of the Church. Instead, Lawrence presented the emperor with the city’s poor and maligned, insisting that he confront the oppression he had forced on them.

May we remember Lorenzo Salgado Araujo as a modern-day martyr, killed because our government refused to give him and so many others a chance at living in this country without fear.

May his name resonate through the ages as embodying the promise and tragedy of the American dream.

MINNEAPOLIS — Minnesota prosecutors announced Monday that they have obtained key evidence in their ongoing investigations into fatal shootings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti during pitched protests against a federal immigration enforcement crackdown in the state earlier this year.

“Through the cooperation of our federal partners we have obtained the hard drives of previously withheld evidence in the killings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti and the shooting of Julio Sosa-Celis,” Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty said. “We have also obtained some of the physical evidence that was previously withheld, including Renee Good’s car.”

Statements, police body camera video and other evidence had previously been withheld by federal officials in the killings.

She said state and local investigators now also have in their possession Good’s damaged car.

Good, a 37-year-old mother of three, was shot and killed in her car while leaving an anti-immigration enforcement protest in Minneapolis on Jan. 7 as U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents surged through the region.

Her death and that of Pretti, a 37-year-old intensive care nurse shot and killed by federal officers just weeks later during a Jan. 24 protest, sparked outrage across the country and calls to rein in immigration enforcement.

“The wonderful thing now is we have all the evidence,” Moriarty said.

Investigators are going through all the evidence, including hard drives with statements, hours of video recorded by body-worn cameras and the car, Moriarty said.

“We need transparency. We need cooperation. Our community needs it,” she said. “Our democracy requires it.”

At the end of June, Minnesota Atty. Gen. Keith Ellison and Moriarty asked a federal judge to push out the deadlines in their lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice because they said they were in the midst of recently reinitiated “ongoing discussions” with the FBI about information sharing.

Those ongoing discussions with the FBI about information sharing are likely to affect Minnesota’s request for summary judgment in the case, Ellison and Moriarty wrote in their motion to the court.

The attorneys representing the federal government signed onto the motion.

Ellison said he remains “deeply troubled that the federal government spent more than half a year attempting to conceal this evidence from state investigators.”

“It should never have taken this long for Minnesota law enforcement to gain access to the federal government’s evidence,” he said in a statement. “I hope that this is the beginning of a major course correction on the part of the federal government.”

There have been at least eight deaths since the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement campaign began last year, but nobody has been charged in connection with them.

A Minneapolis resident, Julio Cesar Sosa-Celis, was also shot and injured in his home while ICE agents were in pursuit of another man.

In May, Christian Castro, an ICE agent, was arrested and charged with assault as well as falsely reporting a crime in connection with that Jan. 14 nonfatal shooting.

Prosecutors say Castro, 52, fired through a home’s front door and shot Sosa-Celis in the thigh.

In April, Gregory Donnell Morgan Jr., another ICE agent, was charged with pointing his gun at a motorist and passenger on a Minneapolis highway.

Prosecutors said at the time it was the first criminal case against a federal officer involved in the Minnesota immigration crackdown.

On Monday, ICE was involved in the fatal shooting in Maine, according to state House Speaker Ryan Fecteau, a Democrat.

Details of what transpired in Biddeford, a coastal city of about 23,000 people roughly 15 miles southwest of Portland, remain unclear.

Last week, an ICE agent in Houston fatally shot a Mexican national who had lived in the U.S. for decades as the homebuilder drove his construction crew to a job site.

The federal Department of Homeland Security, which oversees ICE, has acknowledged officers were looking for someone else when they attempted to stop Lorenzo Salgado Araujo’s vehicle. The agency maintains Salgado Araujo rammed an ICE vehicle, prompting an officer to open fire in self-defense.

Marcelo and Boone write for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — President Trump’s lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service over his leaked tax returns was filed for an “improper purpose,” a judge said Monday in a scathing decision that referred one of his lawyers for discipline and characterized the $10-billion complaint as an exercise in self-dealing.

U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams accused Trump of having manipulated the court system when he sued a federal agency under his control, bypassing a requirement that parties in a lawsuit must have adverse interests and laying the groundwork for a settlement last spring that granted him immunity from tax audits and created a fund to compensate allies of the president who say they were unjustly persecuted.

Though the practical impacts of the ruling may be limited given the administration’s public pronouncements that the so-called $1.776 billion Anti-Weaponization Fund has been abandoned, the judge’s ruling nonetheless amounts to a scathing rebuke of the Trump administration and resurfaces a politically damaging storyline for acting Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche just as he prepares to face the Senate Judiciary Committee for his confirmation hearing Wednesday.

“The nature of the suit itself and the conduct of the Parties and counsel from its filing make plain that this was an attempt to use the Court to provide some legitimacy to an agreement to confer immunity to people and entities affiliated with the President and to earmark billions of dollars from American taxpayers to redress grievances not defined in the law,” Williams wrote in her ruling.

She added: “The President may be the functional ‘dominus litus’ of the Executive Branch, but as a party to a civil suit, he, as well as all the parties and lawyers before a court, are bound by the rules. Ensuring that our courts are used only for the express purpose created by the Constitution is the obligation of every judge and an obligation that this Court must discharge in light of the matter before it. ”

The judge pointed to Blanche’s congressional testimony in early June in which he revealed that the “anti-weaponization” fund was no longer moving forward amid intense bipartisan backlash. Though nothing had been filed in court, Blanche appeared confident in his testimony that he “could speak for, and bind, both sides of this matter,” the judge wrote.

“Acting Attorney General Blanche’s apparent capacity to speak for both Plaintiffs and Defendants, sign a ‘settlement’ document on behalf of all Parties to this action, and then repudiate part of that agreement, demonstrates that there was only one party whose interests were being represented throughout this case,” the judge wrote.

Tucker and Richer write for the Associated Press. AP writers Fatima Hussein and Michelle L. Price contributed to this report.

BIDDEFORD, Maine — A federal immigration agent fatally shot a motorist in Maine on Monday, the second time in a week that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers have used deadly force.

Sen. Angus King, I-Me., said Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin told him the agent opened fire in Biddeford after the man tried to use his vehicle as a weapon against agents who were pursuing him for deportation.

“He was in a vehicle — pulled out in the vehicle, and the term the secretary used was “weaponized” the vehicle and was shot by an ICE agent,” King said.

Bystander video taken after the shooting showed agents trying to slow a white sedan that was going in circles in an intersection in Biddeford, a coastal city of about 23,000 people roughly 15 miles southwest of Portland. Images from the scene showed bullet holes in the vehicle’s windshield.

The agents involved in the shooting didn’t have body-worn cameras, King said, relaying information shared by Mullin. The FBI is leading the investigation, he said.

“The question is, what did he do with his vehicle,” King told reporters in Portland before boarding a flight to Washington. “Were officers threatened? Were the threats rising to the level that justified deadly force?

“That’s what this investigation is all about and I certainly intend to stay after it to do everything I can to be sure the investigation is as transparent and thorough as possible.”

In a statement, Sen. Susan Collins, R-Me., said the shooting “requires a full and impartial investigation of what happened.”

Maine House Speaker Ryan Fecteau, a Democrat, said in social media post: “This morning a shooting occurred in Biddeford. A person was killed. ICE was involved,” Fecteau wrote. “State Police and the Department of Public Safety are now on scene to gather details and would expect the FBI to investigate as well.”

The man shot was a 26-year-old from Colombia, advocates say

The man who was shot was a 26-year-old Colombian man who was authorized to work in the U.S. and had a Social Security number, according to a joint statement from advocacy groups Maine Immigrants’ Rights Coalition and Presente!

After the shooting, the man’s family contacted the Immigrants’ Rights Coalition through a hotline, according to Mufalo Chitam, the organization’s executive director.

“It’s a young family and he was leaving to go to work,” Chitam told The Associated Press.

The family is not ready to identify the man or speak publicly about the shooting, Chitam added.

“We are grieving, we are furious, and we will not allow his death to be treated as routine or inevitable,” Chitam said. “How much more harm must our communities endure before those with the power to act acknowledge that this has gone too far?”

Protesters gather near the scene

ICE and the Maine Department of Public Safety didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment. Kristen Setera, an FBI spokesperson, said the FBI “responded to assist on-scene immediately following this morning’s shooting incident in Biddeford, Maine,” but she declined to comment further.

Dozens of anti-ICE demonstrators had gathered in Biddeford by Monday afternoon.

Amy Goodman, who is from nearby Wells, arrived with a sign that said “Stop Killing Us” and directed it toward police working at the scene.

“Sadly, it’s something we’re seeing a whole lot more often lately, and I’m mad about it,” said Goodman, who was wearing a shirt that said “ICE is best when crushed.”

Project Relief, an immigrant rights group, wrote in a social media post that one of its community members was killed “during an encounter with ICE in Biddeford” and that it was in contact with the person’s family. The group described the person as “young,” but didn’t provide an age or other identifying details.

“This was a young person whose life was cut short,” the group said, calling for justice and support for the family and community.

Biddeford Saco for Racial Justice planned a noon protest against ICE in Mechanics Park, which sits along the Saco River in downtown Biddeford.

Police blocked access to the shooting scene, which is in a neighborhood of mostly multifamily homes, churches and businesses near downtown. Several protesters stood nearby, with some holding signs condemning ICE’s presence in the community and state.

Gov. Janet Mills issued a statement saying she had been briefed on the fatal shooting “involving Federal law enforcement” and that the State Police are at the scene and working with the state attorney general’s office, chief medical examiner’s office and federal officials to determine what happened.

“I know that situations like these are alarming and frightening,” said Mills, a Democrat.

A recent uptick in Trump’s immigration crackdown

The fatal shooting in Maine was at least the ninth death from an encounter with federal immigration officials since the start of the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown and the second in a week, following the killing of a Houston man.

The reported shooting comes amid a newly intensified push by the Trump administration to carry out its mass deportations agenda. During the five-day period at the end of June, ICE arrested more than 10,000 people. The figures indicate that while the administration is no longer cracking down on individual cities, the arrests continue and are surging.

Democratic Rep. Chellie Pingree, of Maine, said in a video posted on social media that she was driving to Portland to catch a flight to Washington when she learned of the reported shooting. She said she was seeking answers about the circumstances surrounding the shooting, including whether officers were wearing body cameras, adding, “More than anything else, I want to know, ‘Why are you in Maine?’”

Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows, a Democrat who is running for Senate, said on X that she would not speculate about the circumstances of the shooting but called for ICE to be removed from communities, writing, “It’s time to get ICE off our streets.”

Not Maine’s first brush with ICE

ICE had a significant presence in Maine earlier this year, which resulted in several large demonstrations against the agency.

The Department of Homeland Security, which oversees ICE, named the operation “Catch of the Day,” an apparent play on Maine’s seafood industry, just as it has done for other enforcement surges, like “Patriot” in Massachusetts, “Metro Surge” in Minnesota and “Midway Blitz” in Chicago.

Immigration officials said in late January that they had ceased “enhanced operations” in Maine after making hundreds of arrests. A Homeland Security spokesperson said at the time that some Maine arrests were of people “convicted of horrific crimes including aggravated assault, false imprisonment, and endangering the welfare of a child.” But court records painted a slightly different story: While some had felony convictions, others were detainees with unresolved immigration proceedings or who were arrested but never convicted of a crime.

The Trump administration’s immigration crackdowns received widespread condemnation last winter after the killings of Alex Pretti and Renee Good in Minnesota. Last week, an ICE officer fatally shot 52-year-old Salgado Araujo, of Houston, after he was pursued by federal agents driving unmarked vehicles while he was taking his construction crew to their latest job site.

Whittle and Willingham write for the Associated Press. Willingham reported from Boston. AP reporter Jack Brook contributed to this report.

CHARLESTON, S.C. — President Trump said Monday he’s recommended that Lindsey Graham’s sister be named as his temporary replacement in the U.S. Senate.

Trump posted on social media that Gov. Henry McMaster should appoint Darline Graham Nordone to fulfill the rest of Graham’s term, which expires in January. Graham died over the weekend at age 71, and McMaster is expected to announce his pick later Monday.

After their parents died at a young age, Graham was left to raise his sister, whom he later adopted. The pair were very close, and Graham’s sister was by his side as he filed reelection paperwork earlier this year.

A special election will be held next month to pick a new Republican nominee in the general election for Graham’s seat. He had been seeking a fifth term this year.

The rare open Senate seat has ignited a scramble among South Carolina’s most ambitious conservatives, who have been eager to climb the political ladder.

Republicans just finished a sprawling and bruising contest to figure out their nominee for succeeding McMaster, who is wrapping up his second term. State Atty. Gen. Alan Wilson won the nomination, overcoming a field that included Lt. Gov. Pamela Evette, Rep. Nancy Mace and Ralph Norman — all of whom are now eyeing Graham’s seat following his death over the weekend.

How will a special primary work?

According to South Carolina law, a one-week filing period for a special primary election begins on the second Tuesday after the candidate’s death, or July 21.

The special primary election would be held on the second Tuesday after that filing period closes, or Aug. 11. Any necessary runoff would follow two weeks after that, or Aug. 25.

From that point, the new nominee would have just over two months to campaign for the general election on Nov. 3.

All of this is problematic according to federal law, which requires military and overseas ballots to go out 45 days before any federal election. For the general election primary, that would have been June 27. Federal Election Commission officials didn’t immediately return a message seeking clarity about the process.

Who could replace Graham?

Graham died on Saturday night, and a preliminary medical examiner report said he suffered a tear in his aorta, known as an aortic dissection.

In the hours after Graham’s death was announced, South Carolina’s Republican circles were already swirling with rumors about possible replacements. Given the proximity of November’s election, it’s likely that whomever McMaster appoints could be a top contender in the special primary, although it’s possible that McMaster’s choice will only serve as a temporary caretaker.

Evette, who has served nearly eight years alongside McMaster and received his endorsement in the governor’s race, is one possibility. She lost the June 23 runoff to Wilson.

A person with knowledge of Evette’s thinking but not authorized to discuss it publicly said that she was getting encouragement from across the state and feels she would have good chances in the special primary.

It’s unlikely that any House member would be appointed to finish Graham’s current term, since Republicans have such a slim majority in the chamber.

U.S. Rep. Joe Wilson, a rumored replacement, said he assured Trump on Sunday that “my goal is to remain in the House to keep his two-vote majority for the American people!!!”

However, that doesn’t mean that House members won’t run for the next full term. A person with knowledge of Mace’s thinking but not authorized to speak about it publicly said she was considering the race. Mace is not running for reelection to the House.

But another Republican from the state, Rep. Russell Fry, could be a possibility. The two-term lawmaker represents the growing area around Myrtle Beach, and he’s been a top Trump ally.

A spokesman for businessman Mark Lynch, whom Graham defeated in the primary, didn’t return a message Sunday.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who lived in South Carolina before joining the Trump administration, has fielded calls about potentially replacing Graham but doesn’t have interest in the role, according to a person who insisted on anonymity to describe private conversations.

How does Graham’s death affect the general election?

No Democrat has won a Senate seat in South Carolina in decades, and Republicans in recent history typically take statewide seats by double digits. When he last ran in 2020, Graham defeated his Democratic opponent, Jaime Harrison, by a 10 percentage point margin.

So while history suggests that Graham was en route to a fifth term, Republicans are carefully surveying the landscape.

Charleston pediatrician Annie Andrews won the Democratic nomination last month and has raised more than $8 million in the race, and she had just under $3 million cash on hand at the end of May, according to federal filings. Graham had taken in $6 million, with just over $4 million on hand.

In a statement Sunday, Andrews called on South Carolinians to join her “in setting partisanship aside and offering gratitude” to Graham for his service.

Harrison, noting that he and Graham “had our share of political disagreements,” wrote on social media that he “always appreciated that even in our fiercest political battles, we could still share a conversation, a laugh, and a mutual respect for South Carolina and the institutions we were both privileged to serve.”

What happens to South Carolina’s Republican clout?

Graham leaves a major void in the Senate, where seniority can determine influence. He served more than two decades in the chamber, positioning himself to lead committees and set the agenda.

Sen. Tim Scott, South Carolina’s junior senator, has been in office only since 2012 — short by the state’s standards. Fritz Hollings served for 38 years, and Strom Thurmond was there for 47.

Scott, who co-chaired Graham’s reelection effort, described his former colleague as “irreplaceable.”

“America lost a statesman, but I lost a friend,” he told ABC’s “This Week.”

Kinnard writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Fatima Hussein in Washington contributed to this report.

California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta and 11 other Democratic state attorneys general filed a lawsuit Monday to block Paramount Skydance’s proposed $111-billion takeover of Warner Bros. Discovery — a last-ditch effort to derail a deal that would transform Hollywood.

Tech scion David Ellison’s proposed merger has been hurtling toward the finish line after securing approvals from the U.S. Justice Department and numerous foreign governments. President Trump, an ally of Ellison’s billionaire father Larry Ellison, favors the deal. He is eager for a big shakeup at CNN, which is currently controlled by Warner Bros.

David Ellison now faces his biggest challenge yet as he attempts to build a new entertainment behemoth.

A Paramount representative did not immediately comment.

The suit, filed in federal court in San Francisco, alleges that the proposed merger would violate the U.S. Clayton Act, a century-old antitrust law to prevent mergers that weaken competition and increase costs for consumers.

“Consolidation here not only leads to higher prices — it also leads to fewer opportunities for important stories to come to life, and fewer ways for audiences to encounter stories, ideas, and perspectives beyond their own experiences,” Bonta said in a statement.

“California and our sister states are fighting for free and fair markets, not rigged markets,” he said.

California and the 11 other states, including New York, New Jersey, Washington and Colorado, allege the merger would devastate the theatrical film business by combining two historic film studio rivals. The Ellison family would control such storied franchises as Harry Potter, Bugs Bunny, Batman, “Top Gun” and “Game of Thrones.”

The proposed purchase also would unite two prominent news organizations — CNN and CBS News.

The states have asked Paramount to delay the closing of its Warner Bros. takeover until the litigation can be resolved.

If Paramount refuses, Bonta said the coalition would seek a temporary restraining order asking a judge to hold up the merger, a move that would cause costly delays and escalate legal expenses for Paramount in their quest to finalize the deal.

Larry Ellison, co-founder of software giant Oracle, is bankrolling his son’s ambitions to acquire a second major entertainment company in less than a year. The Ellison family acquired control of CBS-owner Paramount in August and, at the time, David Ellison touted the move of Paramount’s headquarters from New York’s Times Square to Hollywood.

Now, Paramount is reportedly threatening to leave California in the face of Bonta’s legal action.

If the merger goes through, Paramount would own four streaming services, including Warner’s HBO Max and the dominant U.S. cable TV channel owner with HBO, TBS, HGTV, Animal Planet, Food Network, Comedy Central and Nickelodeon.

The U.S. Justice Department last month approved the merger, saying the combination would likely bolster competition — not harm it. The agency’s decision had been expected because of Larry Ellison’s strong support of Trump.

In a show of confidence earlier this year, the Ellisons agreed to increase the payout to Warner investors should the regulatory approval process drag on. Those extra 25-cent-per-share payments begin with the October-December quarter, and would add more than $650 million in deal costs each quarter — giving David Ellison an increased incentive to quickly close the deal.

The proposed merger has sparked fears in Hollywood that it will bring thousands of job losses — similar to past consolidations, including Walt Disney Co.’s 2019 takeover of Fox entertainment properties.

Some theater owners, hard hit by the pandemic and production slowdowns, have expressed concerns the merger would lead to fewer films being made.

The new colossus would significantly dampen competition, Bonta and the other Democrat prosecutors argue. They pointed to the wide-release movie film distribution business, where Warner Bros. and Paramount control about 27% of the market.

After the merger just four companies — Paramount-Warner, Disney, NBCUniversal and Sony Pictures — would control 86% of the films that were widely released, Bonta said.

Paramount has said the deal will boost competition — not hamper it. Ellison has promised to continue releasing 30 films a year with a combined Warner Bros.-Paramount studio, roughly the current output of the two studios.

Ellison also vowed to protect the HBO brand.

Another concern is the licensing of basic cable TV channels, including CNN and HGTV, to pay-TV providers such as Charter’s Spectrum, DirecTV and Google’s YouTube TV. Warner Bros. is the second largest cable channel owner and Paramount is the third largest. Together their channels would represent about 27% of the market.

The typical threshold for antitrust concerns is at least 30% marketshare.

More than 5,000 entertainment industry workers, including Jane Fonda, Ben Stiller, Bryan Cranston, Javier Bardem, Lin-Manuel Miranda and Mark Ruffalo, signed an open letter calling on Bonta to block the merger.

Some have expressed concerns about marrying CNN and CBS News following months of turmoil at CBS News since David Ellison hired journalist Bari Weiss as CBS News editor in chief. Last month, Weiss orchestrated a dramatic shakeup at the iconic “60 Minutes” news program, with top executives and three well-known correspondents tossed out.

The Ellison family recently shed its movie theater chain, which it picked up as part of the Paramount acquisition, to clear the way for the Warner deal.

California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta is leading an effort by state attorneys general to block Paramount’s proposed takeover of Warner Bros. Discovery.

(Paul Kuroda/For The Times)

The deal also faces opposition outside the U.S.
. The British culture minister in late June said she was weighing whether to intervene in the deal due to concerns about maintaining a competitive media market. Britain’s Competition and Markets Authority also has opened an investigation into Paramount’s proposed merger.

In April, a federal judge in Sacramento granted a request from Bonta and seven other attorneys general for a preliminary injunction, which freezes the merger of Nexstar Media Group, which owns KTLA-TV Channel 5, and Tegna. The deal was designed to create the nation’s largest TV outlet group .

A larger group of state attorneys general also won a New York jury verdict against Live Nation Entertainment and its subsidiary Ticketmaster. Jurors found that Live Nation had illegally monopolized the live concert industry.

Bonta also has an ongoing case against Amazon for price fixing, which the company denies.

Still, legal experts say the states may face an uphill climb to detrail the Paramount-Warner Bros. merger because the arrival of Netflix, Amazon and Apple dramatically shifted the landscape.

The tech giants, which introduced consumer-friendly streaming options, have lessened the influence of traditional companies like Paramount and Warner Bros.

Paramount’s deal would mark the third time Warner has changed hands in the last decade.

AT&T bought the company in 2018 and then sold it to the smaller Discovery four years later. That deal left Warner Bros. burdened by debt, leading to deep cost cuts and setting the stage for the Ellison takeover.

SACRAMENTO — Recent news about literacy, education and general smarts in California and across the country has been somewhat distressing.

Along with claims that Americans are becoming illiterate, here in the Golden State there are worries that even the highest-achieving students aren’t prepared for our universities, and a study shows backsliding in civil rights protections in the vacuum created by federal changes under the Trump administration.

Despite being close to terming out of office, and also otherwise occupied with his ever-emerging presidential run, Gov. Gavin Newsom last week found time to announce a consequential, if controversial, move that has the potential to vastly improve educational outcomes for California kids: switching out an independent, voter-chosen leader for a hired gun.

In legislation signed last week, Newsom basically eviscerated the role of the elected superintendent of public instruction and instead shifted oversight of our K-12 schools to a newly created education commissioner — to be appointed by the governor.

The change, set to happen early next year, has been described as a “power grab” by some, and on its surface could be seen that way. The conservative candidate for state superintendent — Sonja Shaw, who says she is running to stop “political ideologies being shoved down everybody’s throats” — quickly claimed Newsom’s move was all about stopping her.

In reality, power grab or not, it’s the kind of reform we should all support — a long-overdue push to create accountability in a hot-mess system where there are too many people almost-sorta in charge of too many conflicting priorities.

‘A’ for accountability

It’s to Newsom’s credit that he’s setting up his successor to helm a system that at least has a chance at coherence, even if it raises the stakes for the next governor to deliver.

For years — decades, really — streamlining the governing structure of schools “has been proposed by Republicans and Democrats and bipartisan and nonpartisan commissions,” Linda Darling-Hammond told me. She’s a professor emeritus at Stanford University, an advisor to the governor and, by any measure, one of the preeminent education policy experts in the country.

“It’s not at all political. It is really about making the system run well,” she said. “The world is changing, the economy is changing. There’s just a need to be very efficient and effective in making policy and then implementing that policy.”

“Run well” is the key there. California operates the biggest and most diverse school system in the country. We’ve got roughly 10,000 regular schools (depending on how you count), including about 1,200 charter schools, around 1,00 school districts and 58 counties, each with their own slice of local control over those schools, according to the Department of Education.

That’s about 5.7 million students, nearly 300,000 teachers and $150 billion in costs (counting the new funding in the next budget).

To be kind, this system does not always run well. That’s in no small part because oversight and control are fragmented, overlapping and confusing. Currently, the State Board of Education sets policies, but the elected superintendent implements them through the Department of Education. Then control runs downhill to individual school districts, filtering through local school boards and even principals.

The board can’t control how the superintendent does their job, and vice versa. In fact, they don’t always agree, despite (or because of) the shotgun wedding nature of their relationship. At times, it can feel like they are working against each other. Never mind the complexities of local control.

This has been especially true in recent years as Newsom and the Legislature have pushed through big changes, such as the new prekindergarten grade, that have required massive coordination and effort. At the local level, administrators often complain there is little clarity on what is expected of them and, too often, outright conflict.

“The idea of having policy in one place and implementation in the other is really crazy,” Michael Kirst told me. He’s professor emeritus of education at Stanford and the longest-serving president of California’s State Board of Education, serving under both of Jerry Brown’s gubernatorial stints.

Newsom’s proposed system promises “much clearer, cleaner accountability,” Kirst said.

Expertise counts

It also has the benefit of putting an actual education expert in charge of schools. Because the superintendent role is elected, it has too often been coveted by career politicians looking for a landing spot. Its incumbent, Tony Thurmond, had a background in social work before running for various offices, but that kind of experience isn’t always the case. Neither is experience running a major organization with thousands of employees.

While Newsom’s plan leaves many, if not most, of the details to be ironed out later (a frustrating strategy he’s used more than once to keep the ball rolling on policy without having the drag of actual detail), it does promise to put in someone with the kind of high-level educational policy experience that should be required when managing this vast and important endeavor.

Kirst points out that this will be a “powerful position” charged with making sure our schools are indeed run well, and at the end of the day, it gives us one person to blame if they don’t: the governor.

So if schools don’t improve and our kids don’t learn, voters will know exactly who failed.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: Trump ousts members of bipartisan election commission ahead of midterms
The California edge: The Work of Helping A.I. Destroy Work
The L.A. Times Special: In bed 23 at Adelanto ICE detention center, a terrified teenager missed his mom

Stay Golden,
Anita Chabria

—
Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Sign up here to get it in your inbox.

Based on the words of President Trump, America is well on the way to becoming a “global superpower in manufacturing” — indeed, as he declared in a Father’s Day social media post, we are already experiencing the “BEST ECONOMY EVER.” (Capitalization’s his.)

Here’s what the government’s own statistics tell us: Manufacturing investment has crashed during his watch, with construction spending in the manufacturing sector down 26.4% from Trump’s inauguration through May, to $174.8 billion. That’s the lowest figure since February 2023, when the economy was in the midst of a post-pandemic recovery.

White House spokesman Kush Desai told me by email that “the last two jobs reports” showed manufacturing job growth. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported a seasonally-adjusted decline of 2,000 manufacturing workers in May and a gain of 3,000 in June. But the June 2026 figure was 38,000 jobs, or about 0.3% below the level in June 2025, and 75,000 or about 0.6% below the level in January 2025, when Trump took office.

Desai said that “thanks to President Trump’s proven agenda of tariffs, deregulation, and tax cuts, American manufacturing will continue to rebound.”

There’s little mystery about what has come between Trump’s ambition and the real world. To a large extent it’s Trump’s economic program, particularly his tariff policies and, more recently, his war with Iran. Those have injected a level of uncertainty for corporate managements pondering whether to spend money on expansion that they haven’t had to confront in years.

The tariffs and the war have driven up manufacturers’ costs for raw materials and overseas shipping. The general economic atmosphere doesn’t help. U.S. gross domestic product growth came in at a 2.1% annualized rate in the first quarter of this year, but the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta expects it to have fallen to 1.3% in the second quarter ended June 30.

Meanwhile, the University of Michigan consumer confidence index reached 44.8 in May, its lowest level ever (though it improved to 49.5 in June). Wages have been rising modestly, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, but those gains have been eaten up by higher prices, especially for gasoline and food.

To put things another way, the actual figures show the U.S. economy to be sputtering, and the “vibe economy” as measured by consumer confidence is doing even worse.

Now that Trump’s second term is about to reach its 18-month mark, let’s unpack the factors causing the discrepancy between his ambitions and claims, and the reality.

Trump declared economic victory just as his term was starting. On March 20, 2025, he proclaimed a “manufacturing renaissance” in the U.S. That was based on what he said were “trillions of dollars in new investments” he had “already secured in tech-based manufacturing.”

A White House statement said “the list of manufacturing wins is endless.” The provided list was a roster of announcements, not groundbreakings, much less completed ventures.

Business executives quite properly have taken these pledges with mounds of salt. “Announcements are what people say they’re going to do, but dollars spent is what’s actually happening,” Didi Caldwell, chief executive of a firm that helps companies find factory sites, told the Financial Times. “From where we’re standing, we are not seeing signs of a manufacturing renaissance in the U.S.”

Indeed, at least some of these announcements have had the flavor of performative efforts to satisfy Trump’s amour propre and extract government concessions.

For example, Apple Chief Executive Tim Cook appeared with Trump at the White House in August to announce a $600-billion U.S. spending plan to take place over four years. That was a $100-billion increase over its previously-announced program.

More to the point, however, it incorporated spending with suppliers that Apple had been working with for years. Mentioned in the news announcement was a commitment to buy cover glass for iPhones from Corning. But Corning has been supplying that glass since the first iPhone appeared in 2007. In any case, the announcement appeared to secure a commitment from Trump to exempt Apple from tariffs imposed on imported chips.

Apple’s announcement Wednesday that it will spend $30 billion to buy chips from Broadcom was similarly ambiguous. The announcement didn’t provide details about the terms of the commitment or the timing of its expenditures. I asked Apple for details and whether the deal was related to a desire to remain in Trump’s favor, but didn’t hear back.

A similar phenomenon occurred during Trump’s first term; Trump had built much of his 2016 presidential campaign on a promise to increase manufacturing jobs in the United States. He blamed shrinkage in the manufacturing sector on trade agreements such as NAFTA and the policies of the Chinese, and took credit when an American manufacturer agreed to create or save jobs in the United States.

As I reported in 2019, many of those arrangements turned out to be exaggerated or bogus, or predated Trump’s claim. Some disappeared as soon as public attention turned elsewhere, or were outweighed by job cuts made elsewhere by the same companies.

Trump’s tariffs appear to have had a direct effect on manufacturing employment in the U.S. Since Trump’s inauguration, the manufacturing sector has shed about 75,000 jobs, or 0.6%. After April 2, 2025, when he announced global “liberation day” tariffs supposedly as a response to years of unfair treatment of American exports, the decline picked up pace, with a shrinkage of 68,000 manufacturing jobs.

The Supreme Court invalidated those tariffs in February, but others are still in place, including tariffs on imported steel and aluminum and on goods from China. Nor has he ceased threatening partners with trade wars. As recently as Tuesday, he said he would cut off all trade with Spain because of that country’s disagreement with him over its defense spending and its criticism of his Iran war.

As it happens, Spain is one of the few countries with which the U.S. has a trade surplus. That means that any cutoff, which trade experts think will be unlikely, would come at a cost to the U.S.

One might have hoped that Trump had learned a lesson from his first-term trade war with China. That conflict provoked a sharp contraction in the manufacturing economy, with the Institute for Supply Management’s purchasing managers index falling to 49.1 by mid-2019. (A reading below 50 signifies contraction.)

The ISM index began to recover toward the end of Trump’s term but fell again during the pandemic. Lately it has been falling again, to 53.3 in June from 54 in May.

The Iran war is another deadweight on domestic manufacturing. That’s partially the consequence of blockages of the Strait of Hormuz, the crucial thoroughfare not only for middle eastern oil, but also for such industrial inputs as fertilizer and aluminum. Cement, concrete, olive oil and spices are also among commodities produced in the region that use the strait as an outlet to reach the outside world.

Uncertainties in the region, tensions between the U.S. and China, and heightened concerns over the safety of shipping overall have driven up shipping costs between the far east and the U.S. The price of shipping a benchmark 40-foot container from China to the West Coast has nearly quadrupled to $6,687 now from about $1,700 just before the Iran war began, according to an index maintained by the cargo firm Freightos — even though shipping prices typically decline during this time of year.

There can be little doubt that the U.S. would benefit from an industrial policy — if it’s coherent. China supplanted America as the world’s leading exporter of manufactured goods in 2010, and the gap has only widened since then. China’s dominance may be hard to reverse, as it’s built on lower labor costs and transport infrastructure that enjoys focused government investment.

Tariffs could be a component of a new industrial policy, but Trump’s tariffs aren’t rationally geared to protecting domestic industries that need protection. They’re expressions of his whims, and as such they’re totally ineffective. If there are government investment policies targeting industries that need assistance, they’re not apparent to economists or industrialists.

Trump can talk as much as he likes about a golden age for U.S. manufacturing, but from his first term through this one, it’s nothing but talk. And talk, of course, is cheap.

More than three dozen California legislators are calling for Gov. Gavin Newsom to exempt the state’s film and TV production incentive program from a recently approved cap on corporate tax credits, warning that without action it will be “significantly kneecapped.”

Though the state’s budget has already been approved, the legislators say a solution must be devised before the end of the year so that production companies do not lose the “full value of tax credits they earned in exchange for creating middle-class entertainment industry jobs,” according to a letter dated Friday and addressed to Newsom, State Senate President Pro Tempore Monique Limón and Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas.

“Tax credits earned for creating jobs in motion picture and television production are not the same as tax credits provided for research and development,” the letter states. The legislation “creates short-term budget savings by reneging on commitments made to the entertainment industry and the working families who depend upon it for their livelihoods.”

The letter comes shortly after Newsom signed his final state budget as California’s governor, a $351.7-billion spending plan that includes new limitations on corporate tax credits.

The budget includes a provision that restricts the maximum tax credit companies can claim in a given year to $5 million or 50% of a company’s tax state tax liability, whichever is greater.

Hollywood industry representatives had warned the governor’s office that the new restrictions could affect the state’s production incentive program, which was just bolstered last year to an annual cap of $750 million.

The film and TV industry in Southern California has struggled to rebound from the effects of the pandemic, the dual writers’ and actors’ strikes in 2023 and the exodus of production to other states and countries.

Members who voted for the budget bill had believed there was a carve-out for the film and TV tax credit program, said Assemblyman Rick Chavez Zbur (D-Los Angeles), chair of the Assembly Democratic Caucus.

“I don’t think that anyone understood what this cap was, what it did and that it effectively kneecapped and reverses the progress that we made last year,” Zbur, who co-authored last year’s bill, said in an interview. “We need to have people understand that these changes, which I think people believed were minor, are really significant and will result in significant job loss if we don’t fix them.”

The new changes to the state’s film and TV tax credit program, which included expanded eligibility for additional shows and films, came after intense lobbying from studios and industry workers, who argued that more funding was necessary to lure production back from other states and countries.

Last week, the California Film Commission said the expanded tax credit program was set to deliver $6.6 billion in direct production spending in-state and more than 34,000 cast and crew jobs across the 170 total film and TV shows that received production incentives this year.

WASHINGTON — The sudden death of Sen. Lindsey Graham, the veteran South Carolina Republican lawmaker, is scrambling the state’s U.S. Senate race as Republicans face a fast primary election to replace him on the ballot.

Graham, 71, who died Saturday after what the D.C. medical examiner called an aorta rupture, was seeking a fifth term in the Senate. Even as his political allies publicly mourned his loss, jockeying began over the vacancy, and President Trump signaled an intention to weigh in.

“I have somebody that I think would be great, but I don’t want to say it now because it’s just, you know, it’s too soon with Lindsey,” Trump, who ordered American flags to be lowered to half-staff in Graham’s honor, said Sunday on NBC News’ “Meet the Press.” “I don’t want to even talk about anybody, but I do have somebody that I think is really good.”

Graham’s death eats into Republicans’ voting majority in the Senate, as does the absence of Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, who has been hospitalized for weeks. It adds new uncertainty for the GOP at a time when the party is contending with Trump’s declining popularity among Americans and tensions have been high among Senate Republicans at odds with Trump.

Graham’s death creates the second major shakeup of a Senate race in a week, following Democratic candidate Graham Platner’s dropping out in Maine. Like that state’s Democrats, South Carolina Republicans now face a snap process for choosing a new nominee four months before the November midterms.

But whereas Maine Democrats are expected to decide Platner’s replacement at a convention in two weeks, South Carolina Republican voters will choose Graham’s replacement next month at the ballot box.

Whether the absence of an incumbent could tighten the race or force the GOP to funnel extra money into it remains to be seen. South Carolina is a reliably red state and Graham’s seat was not widely seen as competitive; the race has been rated as solidly Republican by Cook Political Report.

“I expect we’ll have a good November,” said Drew McKissick, chairman of the South Carolina Republican Party, but, he added: “You never take anything for granted, and that’s the last thing I would do in a situation like this.”

McKissick remembered Graham as dedicated to helping his party across levels and in sometimes little-noticed ways, assisting county organizations and down-ballot candidates.

“His time [was] spent on so many issues that were incredibly important to our party,” McKissick said. “He was a staunch pro-life senator with no equal.”

To replace him on the November ballot, the party must hold a special election, according to state election law. Republicans who want to vie for the seat will be able to file starting July 21, and the primary election will be Aug. 11, with a possible Aug. 25 runoff.

Graham was opposed by Democrat Annie Andrews, a pediatrician, who in a statement Sunday called the senator “a man of great faith who proudly served our nation.”

“I hope that South Carolinians will join me in setting partisanship aside and offering gratitude to Senator Lindsey Graham for his service to the great state of South Carolina,” Andrews wrote.

Because it is now an open seat, that changes the race, said Jay Parmley, executive director of the South Carolina Democratic Party.

It will require the “rejiggering” of campaign strategy built around opposing Graham, but the Democrats’ big-picture approach of countering Trump and MAGA Republican values will stand regardless of who becomes the new nominee, Parmley said. He predicted the race would be competitive.

“This absolutely is in play,” Parmley said of the seat. “I think it was in play before … but now, I think it’s game on.”

Democrats must retain their seats in three competitive states and flip seats in at least four others. The party has largely focused on Maine, Alaska, Iowa, North Carolina, Ohio and Texas for possible flips.

South Carolina remains a stretch for Democrats, so Graham’s death likely doesn’t change the party’s calculus, said Democratic strategist Andrew DeStefano.

“The math is still very clear and doable,” DeStefano said. “I would rather be Dems than Republicans right now, even with the Senate math and even playing in some tough states.”

Under South Carolina law, Gov. Henry McMaster, a Republican, can appoint someone to fill Graham’s vacant seat until January. In a statement, McMaster said Graham was “irreplaceable,” calling him “the fiercest of fighters for South Carolina and America.”

If a member of the South Carolina congressional delegation were to be appointed to the seat, it would erode the party’s slim margin in that chamber — something some House Republicans were reportedly seeking to avoid. At least one, Rep. Joe Wilson, said Sunday he had told Trump would not seek the seat in order to preserve the House majority.

In Kentucky, McConnell is set to retire at the end of this term, and a race is underway to fill his vacant seat in November. If he were to die before the new session of Congress begins in January, it could set off a legal fight over an untested Kentucky state law requiring a special election to fill a Senate vacancy, but would not affect the November race.

On Sunday, McConnell said in a statement he had been hospitalized after a fall. Little information had been released from his office about his condition, causing questions to swirl. “Just tell us what’s going on,” Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear, a Democrat, urged Saturday on X.

In Maine, Democrats last week announced a July 25 convention where 601 county delegates and state party members will select a nominee to replace Platner.

“The circumstances are different between the two states,” said David Farmer, a Maine-based Democratic strategist, “but it’s certainly shaping up to be a strange midterm election with enormous stakes for the country.”

Sen. Lindsey Graham, the prominent Republican from South Carolina who served in the Senate for more than two decades, died after suffering an aortic dissection, his office said Sunday.

Graham died unexpectedly Saturday night, his office announced, shortly after he had returned to Washington after a trip to Ukraine.

In a statement, his spokesperson said a preliminary report from the medical examiner for the District of Columbia found that the 71-year-old senator died of aortic dissection due to arteriosclerotic cardiovascular disease. With aortic dissection, a tear occurs in the wall of the aorta.

According to the Mayo Clinic, aortic dissection is not very common, and its symptoms may be mistakenly attributed to other health conditions. It usually affects men in their 60s and 70s. If the blood from the dissection travels outside the artery, the condition is often fatal.

A former military lawyer who reached the rank of colonel in the Air Force, Graham ran for the Republican nomination for president in 2016. Initially a cutting, vocal critic of then-candidate Donald Trump during the election, Graham became one of the president’s staunchest allies after Trump’s election.

“Senator Lindsey Graham, one of the greatest people and Senators I have ever known, is dead!” Trump posted on his social media platform, Truth, on Sunday. “He was always working, and was a true American Patriot.”

Graham was known as a C student in high school, and was the first member of his family to attend college. His mother died while he attended the University of South Carolina, and his father died of a heart attack during Graham’s first semester of law school.

He served as a judge advocate in the Air Force, eventually becoming the chief prosecutor for the Air Force in Europe.

He was first elected to serve as senator for South Carolina in November 2002.

In a social media post on X, Vice President JD Vance described Graham as one of the most powerful lawmakers, and recalled an incident where he and Graham got into a shouting match over a funding bill for the war in Ukraine.

Later the same day, he wrote in the post, Graham was advocating for rail legislation that Vance supported.

“That was Lindsey Graham,” he wrote. “He fought like hell for the things he believed in, and he was just as willing to go to bat for you when it counted.”

Graham had been scheduled to appear on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday to discuss his trip to Ukraine. Instead, President Trump appeared in his stead, where he said the senator had been “like a member of the family.”

Trump called into several Sunday news programs to discuss Graham’s death, and said he had spoken to Graham on Saturday evening.

Trump told CNN’s Jake Tapper that the South Carolina senator had said he was “tired.”

WASHINGTON — Sen. Mitch McConnell on Sunday revealed for the first time that a fall led to his hospitalization, breaking the silence about his condition after weeks of speculation about the Kentucky Republican’s health.

McConnell, 84, said in a statement that he has undergone a battery of tests as doctors try to determine what led to his fall. He explained the long silence about his condition by saying that “folks of my generation often hesitate to share the vulnerability that comes with growing older.”

“Even in the public eye, I feel that same instinct — I can’t help it,” he said.

McConnell said he is now in a rehabilitation center and will not be returning to the Senate “quite yet.” He said he continues to work with his staff on Senate business in the meantime.

The statement included a smiling picture of the senator with his wife, Elaine Chao, a tacit response to speculation online that McConnell had died or was incapacitated.

It comes following his hospitalization on June 14. McConnell’s office for weeks provided little information, saying only that he was “receiving excellent care” and recovering.

As his hospital stay grew longer, speculation about his condition became so intense that Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear, a Democrat, took the extraordinary step of asking that McConnell update the public about his health in a “transparent manner.”

A Democratic senator alleges that whistleblowers have detailed several problems stemming from rushed or improper reconstruction of the Kennedy Center, adding a new layer to the travails of the arts complex after President Trump tried to seize control of it and its name.

Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island said in a release Saturday that he had received a whistleblower disclosure from the Government Accountability Project, a nonprofit whistleblower protection group, alleging that “the Center rushed a series of renovations driven by the President’s aesthetic whims and his desire to star in a series of televised events in December.”

“The Center’s subservience to the President’s desires and its corner-cutting contracting practices have resulted in steel columns that are rusting through fresh paint, a reflecting pool that may have to be torn out and rebuilt, and a brand-new bathroom floor torn out over an offending tile color,” Whitehouse said. “This is waste, and it treats a national memorial to President Kennedy as if it were a private renovation project.”

Whitehouse released a letter he wrote to the Kennedy Center’s executive director, Matt Floca, seeking answers by July 23. He said the whistleblower report included “firsthand accounts of multiple former Center project managers, supported by contemporaneous documents and photographs.” He also included an 83-page appendix full of internal center documents, emails and photos of apparently shoddy construction.

The allegations in the letter include that the center rushed work before it was authorized by Congress because it wanted it to be complete for Trump to accept the so-called FIFA Peace Prize that the soccer federation awarded him.

In doing so, the letter alleges, the center didn’t follow required contracting guidelines and wasted money replacing a bathroom because the president didn’t like the color and inking no-bid contracts. One $8-million contract to replace the concert hall’s floor went to a firm with no experience in concert halls, Whitehouse contended.

The Kennedy Center did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Trump seized control of the arts and culture venue named for President Kennedy at the beginning of his second term. Trump ousted the center’s leadership and replaced it with a Board of Trustees that named him chairman and added his name to the building.

Democrats sued to remove it, and a federal judge ruled that Trump’s name must come off the venue, noting that only Congress has authority to rename it. Trump also tried to close the center for two years, only to be ordered by the court to keep it open.

Many artists have boycotted the venue in protest of the president’s actions.

Riccardi writes for the Associated Press.