access

Aug. 19 (UPI) — Britain backed down on demand for “backdoor” access to Apple users’ data, U.S. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard said.

Gabbard wrote in a post on X that the British government agreed to drop the request for access to Apple’s encrypted data after discussions between the new nations.

“Over the past few months, I’ve been working closely with our partners in the U.K., alongside [President Doanld Trump] and [Vice President JD Vance], to ensure Americans’ private data remains private and our Constitutional rights and civil liberties are protected,” Gabbad wrote. “As a result, the UK has agreed to drop its mandate for Apple to provide a ‘back door’ that would have enabled access to the protected encrypted data of American citizens and encroached on our civil liberties.”

In February, Apple pulled its Advanced Data Protection end-to-end iCloud encryption from British customers’ devices after the government requested access to the data. Following the events of the British government pressuring Apple to build a “backdoor” to allow government authorities to access user iCloud data.

It was not immediately clear whether Apple would restore access to British users following the agreement.

Apple cannot view the data of its customers who have activated its advanced data protection.

“We have never built a backdoor or master key to any of our products or services, and we never will,” the company said.

Leeds United fan Colson Smith is given exclusive behind-the-scenes access to pre-season training as the newly promoted side prepare for their return to the Premier League.

Get all the latest news and views from Leeds United

WATCH MORE: Who will vote for McTominay in the Ballon d’Or?

Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia – When four Chinese vessels joined with Russian ships earlier this month in joint naval drills in the Sea of Japan, few eyebrows were raised.

Moscow and Beijing have been reinforcing their military partnership in recent years as they seek to counterbalance what they see as the United States-led global order.

But what did raise eyebrows among defence analysts and regional governments had occurred several weeks earlier when China sent its aircraft carriers into the Pacific together for the first time.

Maritime expert and former United States Air Force Colonel Ray Powell described the “simultaneous deployment” of China’s two aircraft carriers east of the Philippines as a “historic” moment as the country races to realise Chinese President Xi Jinping’s ambition of having a world-class navy by 2035.

“No nation except the US has operated dual carrier groups at such distances since [World War II],” said Powell, director of SeaLight, a maritime transparency project of the Gordian Knot Center at Stanford University.

“While it will take years for China’s still-nascent carrier capabilities to approach that of America’s, this wasn’t just a training exercise – it was China demonstrating it can now contest and even deny US access to crucial sea lanes,” Powell told Al Jazeera.

China’s state-run news agency Xinhua described the exercise by the aircraft carriers as a “far-sea combat-oriented training”, and the state-affiliated Global Times reported that China was soon poised to enter the “three-aircraft-carrier era”, when its Fujian carrier enters service later this year.

East Asia is a ‘home game’ for China

China currently has two operational aircraft carriers – the Liaoning and Shandong – and the Fujian is undergoing sea trials.

While the Chinese navy operates the world’s largest naval fleet with more than 370 ships compared with the US’s 251 active ships in commission, Beijing still lacks the global logistics network and advanced nuclear submarine technology required of a truly mature blue water force, Powell said.

Beijing’s three aircraft carriers run on diesel compared with Washington’s 11 carriers, all of which are nuclear powered.

But “gaps” in naval capabilities are closing between the US and China.

“[China] fully intends to close these gaps and is applying tremendous resources toward that end, and with its rapidly improving technical prowess and vastly superior shipbuilding capacity, it has demonstrated its potential to get there,” Powell said.

Beijing’s more immediate focus is not directed towards competing with the US globally, Powell added.

Rather, China is focused on changing the balance of power and convincing its allies and adversaries to accept China’s dominance within its chosen sphere of influence in East Asia.

The second option, if ever necessary, is to defeat them.

“East Asia is a ‘home game’ for China – a place where it can augment its small carrier force through its far larger land-based air and rocket forces – including so-called [aircraft] ‘carrier killer’ missile systems that can strike targets up to 4,000km [2,485 miles] away,” Powell said.

Regionally, while the Philippines engages in increasingly frequent high seas confrontations with the Chinese coastguard, it is Japan that is watching China’s naval build-up with concern, experts said.

Japan’s Defence Minister Gen Nakatani said in June – after confirming that China’s two carriers had operated simultaneously in the Pacific for the first time – that Beijing apparently aims “to advance its operational capability of the distant sea and airspace”.

With the US increasingly perceived as becoming more inward-looking under President Donald Trump, Japan is considered a growing force in the contested maritime terrain in the Asia Pacific region amid what Tokyo has called “the most severe and complex security environment since the end of World War II”.

‘Preparation for a more uncertain future’

Even before Trump’s second stint as US president, Japan had embarked on the most pivotal shift in post-World War II military spending.

Tokyo’s defence spending and related costs are expected to total 9.9 trillion yen (about $67bn) for fiscal year 2025, equivalent to 1.8 percent of Japan’s gross domestic product (GDP), and the government has committed to raising spending on defence to 2 percent of GDP by 2027, according to Japanese media reports.

“[Japan’s] naval capacity is growing steadily, not just in support of the US alliance but in quiet preparation for a more uncertain future – perhaps even one in which America withdraws from the Pacific,” said Mike Burke, lecturer at Tokyo-based Meiji University.

Collin Koh, senior fellow at the Singapore-based Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies (IDSS), also said that China’s growing military might, assertiveness and proclivity to resort to coercive behaviour have “aggravated Japan’s threat perception”.

But Japan alone cannot guarantee security in such a regional hotspot as the South China Sea, said Burke.

Instead, Tokyo’s goal is to check Beijing’s growing power through a Japanese presence and building partnerships with other regional players.

This year alone so far, Japan has deployed two naval fleets to “realise” what Japanese officials describe as a free and open Asia Pacific region. The first fleet was deployed from January 4 to May 10 and docked in 12 countries, including Malaysia, Singapore, the Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Oman.

The second was deployed on April 21 and is ongoing until November, with port calls in some 23 countries, as well as roles in multilateral military exercises.

Japan aims to build trust with other allies, Burke said, noting that Japan has worked on its soft power by funding radar systems, investing in civil infrastructure from ports to rail networks in Southeast Asia, and supporting maritime domain awareness initiatives in the region.

Noriyuki Shikata, Japan’s ambassador to Malaysia, described Tokyo’s approach as a strength at home and reinforcing collaboration abroad with “like-minded countries and others with whom Japan cooperates”, in order to uphold and realise a free and open international order.

“Japan has been strengthening its defence capabilities to the point at which Japan can take the primary responsibility for dealing with invasions against Japan, and disrupt and defeat such threats while obtaining the support of its [US] ally and other security partners,” the ambassador told Al Jazeera.

Zachary Abuza, professor of Southeast Asia studies and security at Washington, DC-based National War College, said the Japan Maritime Self-Defence Force (JMSDF) is a world-class navy that is focused on building the highest level of capabilities.

Abuza also described Japan’s submarine force as “exceptional”, while it is also building up its capabilities, including more high-end antiship missiles.

“All of these developments should give the Chinese some pause,” Abuza told Al Jazeera in a recent interview.

“That said, they [the Japanese] are nervous about Trump’s commitment to treaty obligations, and you can see the Japan Self-Defence Force is trying to strengthen its strategic autonomy,” he said.

‘Chinese assertiveness could result in an accident’

Geng Shuang, charge d’affaires of China’s permanent mission to the United Nations, said earlier this year that China was committed to working with the “countries concerned” to address conflicting claims in the South China Sea through peaceful dialogue.

He also lambasted the threat posed by the US navy’s freedom of navigation operations in the contested sea.

“The United States, under the banner of freedom of navigation, has frequently sent its military vessels to the South China Sea to flex its muscles and openly stir up confrontation between regional countries,” Geng was quoted as saying by Xinhua.

China claims almost all of the South China Sea, a vast area spanning approximately 3.6 million square kilometres (1.38 million square miles) that is rich in hydrocarbons and one of the world’s major shipping routes.

Vietnam, the Philippines, Taiwan, Malaysia and Brunei are claimants to various parts of the sea.

Ralph Cossa, chairman of the Honolulu-based Pacific Forum research institute, said “the challenge to freedom of navigation is a global one”.

But the challenges posed are particularly worrying when it comes to the rival superpowers China and the US.

“I don’t think anyone wants a direct conflict or is looking to start a fight,” Cossa said.

“But I worry that Chinese assertiveness could result in an accident that it would prove difficult for either side to walk away or back down from,” Cossa said.

Speaking on the sidelines of the Institute of Strategic and International Studies’ Asia Pacific Roundtable 2025 summit in Kuala Lumpur earlier this year, Do Thanh Hai, deputy director-general at Vietnam’s East Sea Institute Diplomatic Academy, said no one will emerge unscathed from an incident in the disputed region.

“Any disruption in the South China Sea will affect all,” he told Al Jazeera.

WASHINGTON — White House officials announced Friday they have found evidence that Mark Middleton, a former presidential aide, abused his White House access to impress business clients. He has been barred from entering the executive mansion without high-level approval, they said.

The decision came in response to indications that Middleton, a former aide to presidential advisor Thomas F. “Mack” McLarty, had flaunted his White House connections in an effort to become an international deal-maker.

Among other things, he is accused of using his White House business cards and keeping a voice-mail message on the White House telephone system long after he had left his job there. He also is accused of taking business clients to the White House dining room without authorization and portraying himself as someone with influence among President Clinton’s inner circle.

The announcement also reflected an effort on the part of the president to take affirmative steps in response to the burgeoning controversy over illegal and questionable fund-raising for the Democratic Party. While Middleton may prove to be little more than a bit player in the fund-raising saga, revelation of his actions caused the White House considerable embarrassment at a time when it is trying to fend off the scandal.

Before Middleton left the White House in February 1995, he was the chief aide to McLarty, who served initially as White House chief of staff and later as a senior presidential advisor. McLarty chose Middleton as his deputy after watching the young man work as a fund-raiser for Clinton in Arkansas in 1992.

Middleton, 32, a former Little Rock lawyer, also was a friend of Democratic fund-raiser John Huang, who was responsible for raising millions of dollars from Asian American sources–some of which has been returned by the Democratic Party because it was from illegal or questionable sources.

According to a political consultant in Taiwan, Middleton discussed the possibility of accepting an illegal $15-million contribution for the Democratic campaign from an official of the ruling Kuomintang, or Nationalist Party, in Taipei. Both he and Kuomintang officials have denied the allegation.

Middleton issued a statement Friday acknowledging that “questions have been raised about whether I misused access to the White House for personal gain. I categorically deny any implication that I acted improperly.”

Aides Raise Questions

Many of the questions about Middleton were raised by presidential aides who have spent the last week charting the former employee’s comings and goings at the White House in the nearly two years since he resigned.

The record they uncovered shows that Middleton entered the White House complex 65 times between February 1995 and last September and often roamed the premises and dined in the White House mess.

White House Press Secretary Mike McCurry said the record suggests that Middleton abused his access, even though his business activities apparently were not in violation of ethics rules restricting what former presidential appointees can do.

“If you’re a visitor to the White House, you’re not supposed to be roaming the building [and] you’re not supposed to go to the White House mess, except with a White House employee,” a White House official explained.

Approval Condition

McCurry said that White House employees have been told that Middleton will not be allowed to enter unless he has the approval of the chief of staff. Until now, Middleton, like any other former employee, has been able to enter the complex at the invitation of anyone who works at the executive mansion.

“The White House looks askance at anyone misrepresenting themselves as a representative of the White House,” McCurry emphasized.

According to White House records, Middleton saw the president on six of his visits to the White House since February 1995. On one occasion, he accompanied James Riady, scion of a wealthy Indonesian family and a close friend of the president. They engaged Clinton in a discussion of U.S. trade policy with China.

Before joining the administration as a Commerce Department official, Huang was employed by the Riadys’ Lippo Bank. Middleton apparently made the acquaintance of both Riady and Huang in Little Rock, where they worked for Worthen Bank in the mid-1980s.

On another occasion after leaving his government post, officials said, Middleton attended a presidential reception at the White House accompanied by Siti Hediati Harijadi, the daughter of President Suharto of Indonesia. According to Middleton’s lawyer, Robert Luskin, Middleton is trying to broker a business deal for Suharto’s daughter.

Records show that eight of Middleton’s post-employment visits were authorized by McLarty. But White House officials said that McLarty remembers only one such visit, on March 20, 1995, when Middleton brought his new employer, Steven Green, then-owner of Samsonite and other companies, to the White House.

But most of Middleton’s visits to the executive mansion were authorized by lower-level employees who were Middleton’s friends. It was on these visits that White House officials suspect he took advantage of his access to escort potential clients, such as Suharto’s daughter, through the hallways and to the dining room.

For his part, Middleton claims that most of his visits were personal. “I visited the White House often because that is where my friends worked,” he said in his statement.

Visits Explained

But he acknowledged that he was occasionally accompanied by business associates.

“On a few occasions–probably less than 10 in total–I also had breakfast or lunch in the White House mess, sometimes with persons who were friends or business associates of mine,” he said. “I took them there as a courtesy and as an act of friendship. I never discussed business, raised money or arranged meetings with any White House official in connection with any of these visits.

“I never implied in any fashion that I still held a position in the White House or that I had any special influence there; I do not believe that anyone ever understood my efforts to arrange a lunch or a tour as anything other than as the modest gestures that they were.”

McCurry said that Middleton’s voice-mail message recently was erased from the White House telephone system. Officials are trying to decide whether to establish a policy governing how long such messages can be retained after an employee leaves.

“There was no good reason for his voice mail to be active for more than a year,” McCurry said.

As McLarty’s deputy, Middleton was often present during his boss’s meetings with U.S. and foreign business executives, such as the Riadys. At Enron, a Houston-based energy company, for example, executives recalled that they often talked to Middleton when McLarty was unavailable and developed a friendship with him.

Luskin, Middleton’s lawyer, said that his client received an “ethics briefing” shortly after he resigned. He was reminded that federal law prohibits him from lobbying the government on any issue in which he had been “personally or substantially involved.”

Different Standard

But Middleton was not asked to adhere to the much tougher standard imposed on those designated “senior employees.” That standard would have barred him from lobbying the White House on any issue, officials said.

Middleton maintained his relationship with the Riadys and corporate executives, such as those at Enron, after leaving the White House.

Not long after he had left, Middleton established his own company, CommerceCorp International, with an office on Pennsylvania Avenue near the White House. He traveled abroad, looking for business opportunities.

“I am going to Asia, the Middle East and beyond,” Middleton told an Arkansas business publication in February 1995 as he embarked on an overseas tour. “I’m going out to meet people I have built relationships with.”

Middleton called on one of Riady’s business partners, Hashim Ning, in June 1995, while the elderly Indonesian was recovering from surgery. He brought with him a personal get-well letter from Clinton. After Ning died, his relatives contributed $450,000 last year to the Democratic Party.

On Friday, Middleton said that he was “not responsible in any way” for the contribution made by Ning’s relatives.

Middleton also went to Taiwan on Aug. 1, 1995. While there, according to a Taiwanese political consultant who said he was present, the former White House aide met with the chief financial officer of the Kuomintang and discussed a $15-million contribution–a discussion denied by both Middleton and the Kuomintang official. Such foreign contributions to U.S. campaigns are illegal.

Middleton’s accuser, C.P. Chen, said that Middleton also encouraged Kuomintang to hire him as its Washington lobbyist to provide a “direct channel” to Clinton. Middleton has denied making any such solicitations.

Amy Weiss Tobe, spokeswoman for the Democratic National Committee, said that Middleton was not authorized to raise funds for the Democrats.

However, White House officials confirmed that Middleton had been involved in raising money for the Clinton Birthplace Foundation, a group that intends to make a historic site out of the president’s childhood home in Hope, Ark.

In Taiwan, a businessman who also met with Middleton recalls that the young man was looking for a foreign business partner for Wal-Mart Stores Inc. and other U.S. firms. The businessman, who declined to be identified, said that he admonished Middleton about trying to use his official contacts to make deals.

As this businessman recalled their conversation: “I told him, ‘Mark, this is not the way to do business. You are too young. You’re using your position for business. But really you’re being used by others.’ ”

Luskin said that Middleton was not employed by the Riadys or the governments of Indonesia or Taiwan, even though he maintained close contact with them. Luskin declined to name any of Middleton’s business clients.

Times staff writers Maggie Farley in Taiwan and Richard Serrano in Little Rock, Ark., contributed to this story.

CHICAGO — During Donald Trump’s campaign for president last year, he sought to ease the concerns of voters alarmed that the Supreme Court he helped shape during his first term had overturned the constitutional right to abortion, saying that he did not oppose abortion but thought the issue should be decided by individual states.

More than six months into Trump’s second term in the White House, a review by the Associated Press shows that several of his nominees to the federal courts have revealed antiabortion views, been associated with antiabortion groups or defended abortion restrictions.

Several have helped defend their state’s abortion restrictions in court, and some have been involved in cases with national impact, including on access to medication abortion.

The nominees, with lifetime appointments, would be in position to roll back abortion rights long after Trump leaves the White House.

Trump’s shifting positions

Trump has repeatedly shifted his messaging on abortion, often giving contradictory or vague answers.

In the years before the 2024 campaign, Trump had voiced support for a federal ban on abortion on or after 20 weeks in pregnancy and said he might support a national ban around 15 weeks. He later settled on messaging that decisions about abortion access should be left to the states.

Throughout his campaign, Trump has alternated between taking credit for appointing the Supreme Court justices who helped overturn Roe vs. Wade and striking a more neutral tone. That’s been an effort to navigate the political divide between his base of antiabortion supporters and the broader public, which largely supports access to abortion.

Nominees’ views

One Trump nominee called abortion a “barbaric practice,” while another referred to himself as a “zealot” for the antiabortion movement. A nominee from Tennessee said abortion deserves special scrutiny because “this is the only medical procedure that terminates a life.”

One from Missouri spread misinformation about medication abortion, including that it “starves the baby to death in the womb” in a lawsuit aiming to challenge the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of the abortion pill mifepristone.

Legal experts and abortion rights advocates warn of a methodical remaking of the federal courts in a way that could pose enduring threats to abortion access nationwide.

Bernadette Meyler, a professor of constitutional law at Stanford University, said judicial appointments “are a way of federally shaping the abortion question without going through Congress or making a big, explicit statement.”

“It’s a way to cover up a little bit what is happening in the abortion sphere compared to legislation or executive orders that may be more visible, dramatic and spark more backlash,” she said.

White House’s position

Harrison Fields, a White House spokesperson, said that “every nominee of the President represents his promises to the American people and aligns with the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark ruling.”

“The Democrats’ extreme position on abortion was rejected in November in favor of President Trump’s commonsense approach, which allows states to decide, supports the sanctity of human life, and prevents taxpayer funding of abortion,” Fields said in a statement to the AP.

Trump focused primarily on the economy and immigration during his 2024 campaign, the issues that surveys showed were the most important topics for voters.

Views across the abortion divide

Antiabortion advocates say it’s premature to determine whether the nominees will support their objectives, but they’re hopeful based on the names put forth so far.

“We look forward to four more years of nominees cut from that mold,” said Katie Glenn Daniel, director of legal affairs for the national antiabortion organization SBA Pro-Life America.

Abortion-rights advocates said Trump is embedding abortion opponents into the judiciary one judge at a time.

“This just feeds into this larger strategy where Trump has gotten away with distancing himself from abortion, saying he’s going to leave it to the states, while simultaneously appointing antiabortion extremists at all levels of government,” said Mini Timmaraju, president of the national abortion rights organization Reproductive Freedom for All, formerly known as NARAL Pro-Choice America,

Fernando writes for the Associated Press.

Prices for the eponymous Swiss watches, Swiss chocolate and Swiss cheese could skyrocket in a week as a result of President Trump’s trade war.

Switzerland, home to some the world’s most recognizable luxury brands, now faces an upcoming 39% tariff from the U.S. Industry groups on Friday warned that both Swiss companies and American consumers could pay the price.

Trump signed an executive order Thursday placing tariffs on many U.S. trade partners — the next step in his trade agenda that will test the global economy and alliances — that’s set to take effect next Thursday. The order applies to 66 countries, the European Union, Taiwan and the Falkland Islands.

In Switzerland, officials failed to reach a final agreement with the U.S. after Trump initially threatened a 31% tariff in April. Swiss companies will now have one of the steepest export duties — only Laos, Myanmar and Syria had higher figures, at 40-41%. The 27-member EU bloc and Britain, meanwhile, negotiated 15% and 10% tariffs, respectively.

Figure came as a surprise

The Swiss government spent Friday — the country’s National Day — reeling from the news. Swiss President Karin Keller-Sutter said that the 39% figure was a surprise, because negotiators had hashed out a deal last month with the Trump administration that apparently wasn’t approved by the American leader himself.

“We will now analyze the situation and try to find a solution,” Keller-Sutter told reporters. “I can’t say what the outcome will be, but it will certainly damage the economy.”

The U.S. goods trade deficit with Switzerland was $38.5 billion last year, a 56.9% increase over 2023, according to the Office of the United States Trade Representative. Keller-Sutter said that she believes Trump ultimately chose the 39% tariff, because the figure rounded up from the $38.5 billion goods trade deficit.

“It was clear that the president was focused on the trade deficit and only this issue,” she said.

Time is ticking for watch companies

For Swiss watch companies, whose products already come with price tags in the tens of thousands — if not the hundreds of thousands — of euros, a timepiece for an arm could cost a leg, too, come next week.

The 39% figure was especially galling to the Federation of the Swiss Watch Industry, because Switzerland in 2024 got rid of import tariffs on all industrial goods.

“As Switzerland has eliminated all custom duties on imported industrial products, there is no problem with reciprocity between Switzerland and the U.S.,” the federation said in a statement. “The tariffs constitute a severe problem for our bilateral relations.”

Swiss watch exports were already facing a prolonged slowdown, with significant declines in the United States, Japan and Hong Kong, according to the federation’s June figures, the most recent available.

Swatch and Rolex declined to comment Friday. Representatives for Patek Philippe, IWC and Breitling didn’t respond to requests for comment.

Sour taste for Swiss chocolatiers

Multinational chocolatiers Nestlé and Lindt & Sprüngli said they have production lines in the U.S. for American customers. But small- and medium-sized Swiss companies are predicted to suffer under the tariffs.

Roger Wehrli, chief executive of the Association of Swiss Chocolate Manufacturers. also known as Chocosuisse, said Switzerland exports 7% of its chocolate production to the U.S.

It’s not just the 39% tariff that’s the issue. Once the manufacturers factor in the exchange rate between U.S. dollars and Swiss francs ($1 to 1.23 francs on Friday), Wehrli said, it’s close to a 50% increase in costs for the Swiss companies. And that’s a big number to pass on to American consumers, if the already-slim margins aren’t further reduced.

“I expect that our industry will lose customers in the United States, and that sales volumes will decrease heavily,” he told The Associated Press.

Wehrli said that he wants Swiss chocolatiers to sell to other markets around the globe to make up the difference. Still, he hopes American customers remember that Swiss quality beats cheaper quantity.

“I think even if prices for Swiss chocolate increase due to the very high tariffs, I think it’s worth (it) to buy Swiss chocolate,” he said. “It’s worth (it) to really eat it consciously and to really enjoy it instead of eating a lot.”

Tough pill for Swiss pharmaceuticals

Swiss pharmaceuticals powerhouse Roche says that it’s working to ensure its patients and customers worldwide have access to their medications and diagnostics amid the Trump tariff war.

“While we believe pharmaceuticals and diagnostics should be exempt from tariffs to protect patient access, supply chains and ultimately future innovation, we are prepared for potential tariffs being implemented and confident in managing any impacts,” the statement said.

The company in April announced that it plans to invest $50 billion in the United States over the next five years, creating 12,000 jobs. The company already employs more than 25,000 people in the U.S.

Meanwhile, Novartis, another major Swiss pharmaceutical firm, said in a statement that it was reviewing Trump’s executive order.

“We remain committed to finding ways to improve access and affordability for patients,” it said.

Dazio writes for the Associated Press. AP writers Pietro De Cristofaro in Berlin, and David McHugh in Frankfurt, Germany, contributed to this report.

Two times around, the US president and the prime minister went, looking down on Donald Trump’s new golf course north of Aberdeen.

Finally, they came into land, days of diplomacy garnished with absurdity.

Downing Street are reconciled to the Trumpian ways of doing international affairs.

If doing a few airborne laps of the president’s new Scottish golf course are par for the course on board the presidential helicopter and en route to a private dinner with him, so be it.

This notionally “private” trip for Trump has been actually very public.

Of course it has: it is how the president rolls.

The president’s private interests are talked up in public office, even down to the quality of the plywood at Trump’s Turnberry golf course in Ayrshire, where he was before he flew on to Aberdeenshire.

And all this on his first trip to the UK since his re-election, but just weeks before he makes an unprecedented second state visit here in September.

The talks at Turnberry began with the spectacle of the president gushing about the prime minister’s wife, Victoria, as she stood alongside him, the entire conversation almost drowned out by a nearby bagpiper.

The leaders then spent more than half an hour talking one on one, before a classic of the Trumpian genre – a rolling, free-wheeling question-and-answer session with reporters, lasting more than an hour.

The topic list: turbines, Germany, free speech, Scottish independence, China, the King, interest rates, pharmaceuticals. Among other things.

For Sir Keir Starmer, both on and off camera, this all amounts to invaluable face time with Trump, even sharing a lift on Air Force One, burnishing a relationship as solid as it is improbable.

The jeopardy for him is clear too though: riding shotgun with a free-wheeling president at ease shooting the breeze with reporters seemingly forever.

Sir Keir interjected with care, to defend the mayor of London, heavily criticised by the president, to explain his immigration policy and his outlook on Gaza.

An earlier rolling encounter with reporters took No 10 by surprise: the prime minister’s wife, standing next to the president, perfecting her poker face as the questions – and answers – flowed and flowed.

As ever, the key question is what can this relationship deliver for the UK?

Downing Street regard the access moments like this offer as invaluable.

They are pleased that the president’s language on Gaza amounts to what they see as a toughening of his outlook and what they hope might be an alignment with the discussions the UK, France and Germany have been having in recent days.

Let’s see.

On Tuesday, the cabinet will gather at 14:00 for a rare summer meeting, some ministers attending in person in Downing Street, others joining remotely.

The focus will be on Gaza – and the latest move from many to see if, collectively, the beginnings of a solution can be found to the horrific pictures we’re currently seeing from the Middle East.

Lawyers seeking a temporary restraining order against an immigration detention center in the Florida Everglades say that “Alligator Alcatraz” detainees have been barred from meeting attorneys, are being held without any charges and that a federal immigration court has canceled bond hearings.

A virtual hearing in federal court in Miami was being held Monday on a lawsuit that was filed July 16. A new motion on the case was filed Friday.

Lawyers who have shown up for bond hearings for “Alligator Alcatraz” detainees have been told that the immigration court doesn’t have jurisdiction over their clients, the attorneys wrote in court papers. The immigration attorneys demanded that federal and state officials identify an immigration court that has jurisdiction over the detainees and start accepting petitions for bond, claiming the detainees constitutional rights to due process are being violated.

“This is an unprecedented situation where hundreds of detainees are held incommunicado, with no ability to access the courts, under legal authority that has never been explained and may not exist,” the immigration attorneys wrote. “This is an unprecedented and disturbing situation.”

The lawsuit is the second one challenging “Alligator Alcatraz.” Environmental groups last month sued federal and state officials asking that the project built on an airstrip in the heart of the Florida Everglades be halted because the process didn’t follow state and federal environmental laws.

Critics have condemned the facility as a cruel and inhumane threat to the ecologically sensitive wetlands, while Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and other Republican state officials have defended it as part of the state’s aggressive push to support President Trump’s crackdown on illegal immigration.

U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has praised Florida for coming forward with the idea, as the department looks to significantly expand its immigration detention capacity.

Schneider writes for the Associated Press.

It was just past 12:30 a.m. on June 9 when Los Angeles County Sheriff’s deputies responded to a burglary in progress at a home in Lynwood.

Upon arrival, according to the department’s incident summary, they saw Federico Rodriguez, 45, through a window, holding what appeared to be a pair of scissors.

Hearing screams inside, deputies forced a door open and entered the home, where they found Rodriguez repeatedly stabbing a woman. Sgt. Marcos Esquivel immediately drew his handgun, footage from his body-worn camera showed, and fired multiple shots that killed Rodriguez.

The incident was the fifth of six fatal shootings by deputies that the sheriff’s department has reported so far this year.

The woman Rodriguez was stabbing survived. But despite the apparently life-saving actions of the deputies, two days later the case became a point of controversy in a broader dispute between the department and L.A. County’s Office of Inspector General, which investigates misconduct and the use of deadly force by law enforcement.

The inspector general’s office sent a letter on June 11 to the County Board of Supervisors raising concerns that officials have been blocked from scenes of shootings by deputies and deaths in county jails.

Inspector General Max Huntsman said his office interprets the state law that led to its creation over a decade ago as giving him and his staff the authority to conduct meaningful on-site investigations, with state legislation approved in 2020 strengthening that power.

Inspector General Max Huntsman listens to testimony in the Robinson Courtroom at Loyola Law School in 2024.

(Irfan Khan / Los Angeles Times)

Huntsman said allowing his staff to tour scenes of shootings and receive information directly from homicide detectives and other sheriff’s department personnel while the dead bodies have yet to be removed is essential for proper oversight.

But the sheriff’s department has repeatedly denied or limited access, Huntsman said. The June 11 letter announced the “indefinite suspension of Office of Inspector General regular rollouts to deputy-involved shootings and in-custody deaths.”

Huntsman said the decision to halt the rollouts was a response to a persistent lack of transparency by the sheriff’s department.

“The purpose of going there is to conduct an independent investigation. If all we’re doing is standing around being fed what they want us to know, that is not an independent investigation,” he told The Times. “We’re not going to pretend to be doing it when we only get to peek under the curtain.”

At the Civilian Oversight Commission meeting on July 17, Sheriff Robert Luna said his department “will now have a process in place” to allow officials responding to shooting scenes to contact an assistant sheriff to ensure “a little more oversight” over the process.

An interior view of the Altadena Sheriff Station in January.

(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

Luna called Huntsman’s June 11 letter “alarming,” but disputed how many times officials had been turned away, saying he was only aware of it happening “once — at least in the last five years.”

Commissioner Jamon Hicks inquired further, asking whether the department could be incorrect about the number of times access has been restricted or denied, given that the inspector general’s office alleges it has been a recurring issue.

“It could be, and I’d love to see the information,” Luna said. “I’ve been provided none of that to date.”

Huntsman told The Times that officials from his office were “prohibited from entering” Rodriguez’s home on July 9, as were members of the district attorney’s office and the sheriff’s department’s Internal Affairs Bureau. It was at least the seventh time the sheriff’s department had improperly limited access since 2020, he said.

In a statement, the sheriff’s department said the “claim that the OIG was denied access on June 9 at a [deputy-involved shooting] scene in Lynwood is inaccurate.”

“An OIG representative was on scene and was given the same briefing, along with the concerned Division Chief, Internal Affairs Bureau, Civil Litigation Bureau, Training Bureau, and the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office,” the statement said.

An exterior view of the hiring banner outside the Altadena Sheriff Station in January.

(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

The statement went on to say that the department is “only aware of one incident on February 27, 2025,” in which the OIG was denied access to a deputy-involved shooting scene.

“The Sheriff’s Department remains firmly committed to transparency in law enforcement and continues to work closely and cooperatively with all oversight bodies,” the statement said.

During the July 17 meeting, Dara Williams, chief deputy of the Office of Inspector General, said the office’s personnel often arrive at shooting scenes hours after deputies have pulled the trigger because of the logistical challenges of traveling across the county. Sheriff’s department homicide detectives typically present preliminary findings and offer tours of the scenes.

But on several occasions, the watchdogs have been denied access entirely, leaving them to rely solely on whatever information the sheriff’s department chooses to release, Williams said.

Hans Johnson, the Civil Oversight Commission’s newly elected chair, said investigators can’t do their jobs properly without being able to scrutinize homicide scenes.

“We count on you, in part, as eyes and ears in the community and in these high-value and very troubling cases of fatalities and deaths,” he said at the July 17 meeting.

Williams said the the sheriff’s department has also been “painfully slow” responding to requests for additional information and records following homicides by deputies. She said that in one particularly egregious example, “we served a subpoena in October of last year and we are still waiting for documents and answers.”

Responding to Huntsman’s letter on June 16, Luna wrote to the Board of Supervisors that the department’s Office of Constitutional Policing “has assisted the OIG by providing Department information to 49 of 53 instances” since January. “Suffice it to say,” he added later in the letter, “robust communications take place between the OIG and the Department. Any assertion to the contrary is false.”

Luna said sometimes access could be restricted to preserve evidence, but Williams said she does not “think it’s fair to say that we were excluded” for that reason.

Williams told the commission she was not allowed to tour a scene earlier this year that Huntsman later told The Times was a Feb. 27 incident in Rosemead.

The sheriff’s department’s incident summary stated that Deputy Gregory Chico shot Susan Lu, 56, after she refused commands to drop a meat cleaver and raised the blade “toward deputies.” Lu was taken to a hospital and declared dead later that day.

In his June 16 letter, Luna wrote that “the OIG, Internal Affairs Bureau (IAB), other Department units, and executives were denied access … due to concerns regarding evidence preservation, given the confined area and complexity of the scene layout.”

Williams told the commission “there was a narrow hallway but the actual incident took place in a bedroom, so I don’t know why we couldn’t have walked down that narrow hallway to just view into the bedroom” where the homicide took place.

“The bottom line,” she added later, “is we don’t want to mislead the public to give them the idea that this is actually effective oversight because, once again, we’re just getting the information from the department.”

The U.S. Court of Appeals on Tuesday denied an appeal by the Associated Press for a hearing on its efforts to restore full access to cover presidential events, not ending its case but allowing the White House to continue its control over access to President Trump.

The news outlet wanted the court to overturn a three-judge panel’s June 6 ruling not to let AP back into the events until merits of the news organization’s lawsuit against Trump was decided. But the court on Tuesday declined to hear that appeal.

It all stems from Trump’s decision in February to keep AP journalists out of the Oval Office, Air Force One and other events too small for a full press corps, in retaliation for the news outlet’s decision not to follow his lead in changing the Gulf of Mexico’s name.

The AP sued in response. In April, a district court ruled that the administration could not exclude journalists based on their opinions. The Trump administration immediately turned to the U.S. Court of Appeals to successfully delay implementation of the ruling before the court could consider the full merits of the case.

Next up: This fall, the appeals court considers those full merits.

“We are disappointed by today’s procedural decision but remain focused on the strong district court opinion in support of free speech as we have our case heard,” said Patrick Maks, an AP spokesman. “As we’ve said throughout, the press and the public have a fundamental right to speak freely without government retaliation.”

The White House did not immediately return a request for comment.

Since the start of the case, the White House has instituted new rules for access to the limited-space events. AP photographers have been regularly permitted back, but its reporters only occasionally.

On Monday, the White House said it would not allow a reporter from the Wall Street Journal onto Air Force One to cover Trump’s weekend trip to Scotland because of the outlet’s “fake and defamatory conduct” in a story about the president and late financier Jeffrey Epstein.

Bauder writes for the Associated Press.

SACRAMENTO — For nearly 20 years, Maria would call her sister — a nurse in Mexico — for advice on how to manage her asthma and control her husband’s diabetes instead of going to the doctor in California.

She didn’t have legal status, so she couldn’t get health insurance and skipped routine exams, relying instead on home remedies and, at times, getting inhalers from Mexico. She insisted on using only her first name for fear of deportation.

Things changed for Maria and many others in recent years when some Democratic-led states opened up their health insurance programs to low-income immigrants regardless of their legal status. Maria and her husband signed up the day the program began last year.

“It changed immensely, like from Earth to the heavens,” Maria said in Spanish of Medi-Cal, California’s Medicaid program. “Having the peace of mind of getting insurance leads me to getting sick less.”

At least seven states and the District of Columbia have offered coverage for immigrants, mostly since 2020. But three of them have done an about-face, ending or limiting coverage for hundreds of thousands of immigrants who aren’t in the U.S. legally — California, Illinois and Minnesota.

The programs cost much more than officials had projected at a time when the states are facing multibillion-dollar deficits now and in the future. In Illinois, adult immigrants ages 42 to 64 without legal status have lost their healthcare to save an estimated $404 million. All adult immigrants in Minnesota no longer have access to the state program, saving nearly $57 million. In California, no one will automatically lose coverage, but new enrollments for adults will stop in 2026 to save more than $3 billion over several years.

Cuts in all three states were backed by Democratic governors who once championed expanding health coverage to immigrants.

The Trump administration this week shared the home addresses, ethnicities and personal data of all Medicaid recipients with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials. Twenty states, including California, Illinois and Minnesota, have sued.

Healthcare providers told the Associated Press that all of those factors, especially the fear of being arrested or deported, are having a chilling effect on people seeking care. And states may have to spend more money down the road because immigrants will avoid preventive healthcare and end up needing to go to safety-net hospitals.

“I feel like they continue to squeeze you more and more to the point where you’ll burst,” Maria said, referencing all the uncertainties for people who are in the U.S. without legal permission.

‘People are going to die’

People who run free and community health clinics in California and Minnesota said patients who got on state Medicaid programs received knee replacements and heart procedures and were diagnosed for serious conditions like late-stage cancer.

CommunityHealth is one of the nation’s largest free clinics, serving many uninsured and underinsured immigrants in the Chicago area who have no other options for treatment. That includes the people who lost coverage July 1 when Illinois ended its Health Benefits for Immigrants Adults Program, which served about 31,500 people ages 42 to 64.

One of CommunityHealth’s community outreach workers and care coordinator said Eastern European patients she works with started coming in with questions about what the change meant for them. She said many of the patients also don’t speak English and don’t have transportation to get to clinics that can treat them. The worker spoke to the AP on condition of anonymity to protect patients’ privacy.

Health Finders Collective in Minnesota’s rural Rice and Steele counties south of Minneapolis serves low-income and underinsured patients, including large populations of Latino immigrants and Somali refugees. Executive director Charlie Mandile said his clinics are seeing patients rushing to squeeze in appointments and procedures before 19,000 people age 18 and older are kicked off insurance at the end of the year.

Free and community health clinics in all three states say they will keep serving patients regardless of insurance coverage — but that might get harder after the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services decided this month to restrict federally qualified health centers from treating people without legal status.

CommunityHealth Chief Executive Stephanie Willding said she always worried about the stability of the program because it was fully state funded, “but truthfully, we thought that day was much, much further away.”

“People are going to die. Some people are going to go untreated,” Alicia Hardy, chief executive officer of CommuniCARE+OLE clinics in California, said of the state’s Medicaid changes. “It’s hard to see the humanity in the decision-making that’s happening right now.”

A spokesperson for the Minnesota Department of Health said ending the state’s program will decrease MinnesotaCare spending in the short term, but she acknowledged healthcare costs would rise elsewhere, including uncompensated care at hospitals.

Minnesota House Speaker Lisa Demuth, a Republican, said the state’s program was not sustainable.

“It wasn’t about trying to be non-compassionate or not caring about people,” she said. “When we looked at the state budget, the dollars were not there to support what was passed and what was being spent.”

Demuth also noted that children will still have coverage, and adults lacking permanent legal status can buy private health insurance.

Healthcare providers also are worried that preventable conditions will go unmanaged, and people will avoid care until they end up in emergency rooms — where care will be available under federal law.

One of those safety-net public hospitals, Cook County Health in Chicago, treated about 8,000 patients from Illinois’ program last year. Dr. Erik Mikaitis, the health system’s CEO, said doing so brought in $111 million in revenue.

But he anticipated other providers who billed through the program could close, he said. “Things can become unstable very quickly,” he said.

Monthly fees, federal policies create barriers

State lawmakers said California’s Medi-Cal changes stem from budget issues — a $12-billion deficit this year, with larger ones projected ahead. Democratic state leaders last month agreed to stop new enrollment starting in 2026 for all low-income adults without legal status. Those under 60 remaining on the program will have to pay a $30 monthly fee in 2027.

States are also bracing for impact from federal policies. Cuts to Medicaid and other programs in President Trump’s massive tax and spending bill include a 10% cut to the federal share of Medicaid expansion costs to states that offer health benefits to immigrants starting October 2027.

California health officials estimate roughly 200,000 people will lose coverage after the first full year of restricted enrollment, though Gov. Gavin Newsom maintains that even with the rollbacks, California provides the most expansive healthcare coverage for poor adults.

Every new bill requires a shift in Maria’s monthly calculations to make ends meet. She believes many people won’t be able to afford the $30-a-month premiums and will instead go back to self-medication or skip treatment altogether.

“It was a total triumph,” she said of Medi-Cal expansion. “But now that all of this is coming our way, we’re going backwards to a worse place.”

Fear and tension about immigration raids are changing patient behavior, too. Providers told the AP that, as immigration raids ramped up, their patients were requesting more virtual appointments, not showing up to routine doctor’s visits and not picking up prescriptions for their chronic conditions.

Maria has the option to keep her coverage. But she is weighing the health of her family against risking what they’ve built in the U.S.

“It’s going to be very difficult,” Maria said of her decision to remain on the program. “If it comes to the point where my husband gets sick and his life is at risk, well then, obviously, we have to choose his life.”

Nguyễn and Shastri write for the Associated Press and reported from Sacramento and Milwaukee, respectively. AP journalist Godofredo Vasquez in San Francisco contributed to this report.

The Trump administration is forging ahead with a plan that is sure to fuel alarm across California’s immigrant communities: handing over the personal data of millions of Medicaid recipients to federal immigration officials who seek to track down people living in the U.S. illegally.

The huge trove of private information, which includes home addresses, social security numbers and ethnicities of 79 million Medicaid enrollees, will allow officials with Immigration and Customs Enforcement greater latitude to locate immigrants they suspect are undocumented, according to an agreement signed this week between the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and the Department of Homeland Security and obtained by the Associated Press.

“ICE will use the CMS data to allow ICE to receive identity and location information on aliens identified by ICE,” the agreement says.

The plan, which has not been announced publicly, is the latest step by the Trump administration to gather sensitive information about people living in the U.S. as it seeks to deliver on its pledge to crack down on illegal immigration and arrest 3,000 undocumented immigrants a day. It is certain to face legal challenges.

Critics have sounded the alarm ever since the Trump administration directed the CMS last month to send the DHS personal information on Medicaid enrollees, including non-U.S. citizens registered in state-funded programs in California, Illinois, Washington and Washington, D.C.

These states operate state-funded Medicaid programs for immigrants who are otherwise ineligible for federal Medicaid and had committed not to bill the federal government.

California Senators Alex Padilla and Adam Schiff warned last month of potential violations of federal privacy laws as Trump officials made plans to share personal health data.

“These actions not only raise ethical issues but are contrary to longstanding HHS policy and raise significant concerns about possible violations of federal law,” the Senators wrote in a letter to U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., DHS Secretary Kristi Noem and CMS Administrator Mehmet Oz.

“We are deeply troubled that this administration intends to use individuals’ private health information for the unrelated purpose of possible enforcement actions targeting lawful noncitizens and mixed status families,” Padilla and Schiff said in a statement. “The decision by HHS to share confidential health information with DHS is a remarkable departure from established federal privacy protections that should alarm all Americans.”

DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin declined to answer questions about whether immigration officials are now accessing the personal Medicaid data or how they plan to use it.

“President Trump consistently promised to protect Medicaid for eligible beneficiaries,” McLaughlin said in a statement. “To keep that promise after Joe Biden flooded our country with tens of millions of illegal aliens CMS and DHS are exploring an initiative to ensure that illegal aliens are not receiving Medicaid benefits that are meant for law-abiding Americans.”

Undocumented immigrants are not permitted to enroll in Medicaid, a joint federal and state program that helps cover medical costs for low-income individuals. The program also limits benefits for other lawfully present immigrants, with some required to undergo waiting periods before they can receive coverage.

However, federal law requires states to offer emergency Medicaid, coverage that pays for lifesaving services in emergency rooms to everyone, including non-U.S. citizens.

A 2024 Congressional Budget Office report found that a total of $27 billion was spent on emergency Medicaid for non-citizens between 2017 and 2023. That number represents less than 1% of overall spending on Medicaid during that time period. Nevertheless, Trump and other federal leaders have pushed to reduce spending on Medicaid, alleging that undocumented immigrants have been taking advantage of the program.

Hannah Katch, a CMS advisor during the Biden administration who previously worked for California Medicaid, told The Times that the Trump administration’s plan to turn over Medicaid data represented “an incredible violation of trust.”

The data that states send to CMS has certain protections and requirements in statute and also by custom, Katch said. For CMS to share the information of Medicaid enrollees outside the agency, she said, would have a devastating impact on people who depend on emergency Medicaid to access critical care.

“Making people afraid to seek care when they are experiencing a medical emergency, or when their child is experiencing a medical emergency, it is an incredibly cruel action to take,” Katch said.

Elizabeth Laird, the director of equity in civic technology at the Center for Democracy & Technology, said the sharing of such data would further erode people’s trust in government.

“By turning over some of our most sensitive healthcare data to ICE, Health and Human Services has fundamentally betrayed the trust of almost 80 million people,” she said in a statement to The Times.

“This jaw-dropping development proves that the Administration’s claim of using this information to prevent fraud is a Trojan horse that instead will primarily advance their goal of deporting millions of people,” she said. “Over 90 percent of entitlement fraud is committed by U.S. citizens, underscoring the false pretense of sharing this information with ICE.”

The plan to share Medicaid data is not the first time the Trump administration has sought to share personal information across departments. In May, the Department of Agriculture told states they had to turn over data on the recipients of SNAP food benefits.

Last month, the California Medical Assn. warned that the Trump administration’s sharing of personal Medicaid data would put nearly 15 million patients and their families at risk statewide.

Dr. René Bravo, CMA’s president elect, said that sending sensitive patient information to deportation officials “will have a devastating impact on communities and access to care that all people need.”

“Our job is not protecting the borders, it’s protecting our patients and providing the best health care possible, “ Bravo said in a statement. “When patients come to us it’s often the most vulnerable times in their lives, and we offer a safe space for their care.”

Orange County’s Office of Immigrant and Refugee Affairs notified the public last month that the CMS had been directed to send DHS personal information of Medicaid enrollees, including non-citizens.

“This data, provided for the purpose of administering healthcare, may now be used to locate individuals for immigration enforcement or to challenge their future immigration applications,” the statement read.

The agency wrote that it had already heard of increased anxiety among clients who are fearful that their personal information could be used against them if they seek health care services.

“We are concerned this will further erode trust in public institutions and care providers,” the agency wrote.

Orange County Supervisor Vicente Sarmiento, who represents a large Latino population that includes Santa Ana and portions of Anaheim, said the families enrolled in Medi-Cal did so with the reasonable expectation their information would be kept private.

He called the action a “cruel breach” that erodes people’s trust in government.

“These actions discourage participation in healthcare and mean that some individuals may not seek needed medical services,” he said in a statement. “This hurts the overall community, creates serious public health concerns, and increases costs for our healthcare system.”

Jose Serrano, director of Orange County’s Office of Immigrant and Refugee Affairs, said certain information about those who sign up for benefits has long been shared with the state, which passes it along to the federal government for research, funding and eligibility purposes.

“The one thing that is different during this time is that the information is being used against people, especially those who are immigrants,” he said.

The situation has already caused anxiety among immigrant populations in Orange County, Serrano said. Some have reached out to the agency asking whether they can un-enroll from programs or change their addresses for fear that they or their families may be targeted by immigration officials.

“The truth is immigrants spend more and invest more in our communities and the economy then they take away,” Serrano said, adding that it’s unfortunate that this medical information is “going to be used against the same families that are already investing in our communities through the taxes they pay on a yearly basis.”

MIAMI — Worms in the food. Toilets that don’t flush, flooding floors with fecal waste. Days without a shower or prescription medicine. Mosquitoes and insects everywhere. Lights on all night. Air conditioners that suddenly shut off in the tropical heat. Detainees forced to use recorded phone lines to speak with their lawyers and loved ones.

Only days after President Trump toured a new immigration detention center in the Florida Everglades that officials have dubbed “Alligator Alcatraz,” these are some of the conditions described by people held inside.

Attorneys, advocates, detainees and families are speaking out about the makeshift migrant detention center that Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis’ administration raced to build on an isolated airstrip surrounded by swampland. The center began accepting detainees on July 2.

“These are human beings who have inherent rights, and they have a right to dignity,” said immigration attorney Josephine Arroyo. “And they’re violating a lot of their rights by putting them there.”

Government officials have adamantly disputed the conditions described by detainees, their attorneys and family members, but have provided few details, and have denied access to the media. A televised tour for Trump and DeSantis showed rows of chain-link cages, each containing dozens of bunk beds, under large white tents.

“The reporting on the conditions in the facility is completely false. The facility meets all required standards and is in good working order,” said Stephanie Hartman, a spokesperson for the Florida Division of Emergency Management, which built the center.

A group of Democratic lawmakers sued the DeSantis administration for access. The administration is allowing a site visit by state legislators and members of Congress on Saturday.

Descriptions from attorneys and families differ from the government’s ‘model’

Families and attorneys who spoke with the Associated Press relayed detainees’ accounts of a place they say is unsanitary and lacks adequate medical care, pushing some into a state of extreme distress.

Such conditions make other immigration detention centers where advocates and staff have warned of unsanitary confinements, medical neglect and a lack of food and water seem “advanced,” said immigration attorney Atara Eig.

Trump and his allies have praised this detention center’s harshness and remoteness as befitting the “worst of the worst” and as a national model for the deterrence needed to persuade immigrants to “self-deport” from the United States.

But among those locked inside the chain-link enclosures are people with no criminal records, and at least one teenage boy, attorneys told the AP.

Concerns about medical care, lack of medicines

Immigration attorney Katie Blankenship described a concerning lack of medical care at the facility, relaying an account from a 35-year-old Cuban client who told his wife that detainees go days without a shower. The toilets are in the same space as the bunk beds and can’t handle their needs, she said.

The wife, a 28-year-old green card holder and the mother of the couple’s 2-year-old daughter, who is a U.S. citizen, relayed his complaints to the AP. Fearing government retaliation against her and her detained husband, she asked not to be identified.

“They have no way to bathe, no way to wash their mouths, the toilet overflows and the floor is flooded with pee and poop,” the woman told the AP. “They eat once a day and have two minutes to eat. The meals have worms,” she added.

The woman said the detainees “all went on a hunger strike” on Thursday night to protest the conditions.

“There are days when I don’t know anything about him until the evening,” she said, describing waiting for his calls, interrupted every three minutes by an announcement that the conversation is being recorded.

No meetings with attorneys

The detainees’ attorneys say their due process rights are among numerous constitutional protections being denied.

Blankenship is among the lawyers who have been refused access. After traveling to the remote facility and waiting for hours to speak with her clients, including a 15-year-old Mexican boy with no criminal charges, she was turned away by a security guard who told her to wait for a phone call in 48 hours that would notify her when she could return.

“I said, well, what’s the phone number that I can follow up with that? There is none,” Blankenship recalled. “You have due process obligations, and this is a violation of it.”

Arroyo’s client, a 36-year-old Mexican man who came to the U.S. as a child, has been detained at the center since Saturday after being picked up for driving with a suspended license in Florida’s Orange County. He’s a beneficiary of the DACA program, created to protect young adults who were brought to the U.S. as children from deportation and to provide them with work authorization.

Blankenship’s Cuban client paid a bond and was told he’d be freed on a criminal charge in Miami, only to be detained and transferred to the Everglades.

Eig has been seeking the release of a client in his 50s with no criminal record and a stay of removal, meaning the government can’t legally deport him while he appeals. But she hasn’t been able to get a bond hearing. She’s heard that an immigration court inside the Krome Detention Center in Miami “may be hearing cases” from the Everglades facility, but as of Friday, they were still waiting.

“Jurisdiction remains an issue,” Eig said, adding “the issue of who’s in charge over there is very concerning.”

Salomon and Payne write for the Associated Press. Payne reported from Tallahassee, Fla.

July 5 (UPI) — Five Florida state Democrat lawmakers on Thursday were denied access to the state’s newly opened “migrant” detention facility that has been dubbed “Alligator Alcatraz.”

State Representatives Michele Rayner, Anna Eskamani and Angie Nixon and Senators Carlos Guillermo Smith and Shevrin Jones were turned away while attempting to tour the facility, The Hill reported.

State law enforcement officers from several agencies stopped the lawmakers from entering the facility after showing up for an unannounced inspection of the facility that President Donald Trump and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis toured on Tuesday and before detainees arrived there.

Safety concerns cited

Eskamani said they were told they could not tour the facility due to “safety concerns,” CNN reported.

“If it’s unsafe for us, how is it safe for the detainees?” Eskamani said she asked the general counsel for the Florida Division of Emergency Management.

The Florida lawmakers said they have the legal authority to inspect the detention facility.

“Florida law gives legislators the authority to make unannounced visits to state-run facilities,” Jones said in a post on X made on Thursday afternoon.

Jones said the group went to the detention facility “to inspect conditions and check on the well-being of the people inside.”

A group statement issued on Thursday accuses state officials of a “blatant abuse of power and an attempt to conceal human rights violations from the public eye.”

The facility received its first 500 detainees midweek and eventually will be capable of holding up to 3,000 detainees while undergoing deportation proceedings.

Not a federal facility

The detention facility is located in the Everglades along U.S. 41, about 70 miles west of Miami.

A local airport previously occupied the site, which Florida officials converted into a detention facility in eight days, DeSantis said while touring it with Trump on Tuesday.

Although Trump toured it, the facility is not a federal operation.

“The Department of Homeland Security has not implemented, authorized, directed or funded Florida’s temporary detention center,” DHS attorneys said in a court filing made on Thursday, the Miami Herald reported.

The filing is in response to a lawsuit challenging the detention facility’s purpose, which prompted the Department of Justice to defend its existence.

The DOJ “has defended President Trump’s immigration agenda in court since day one and we are proud to protect ‘Alligator Alcatraz’ from baseless, politically motivated legal schemes,” Attorney General Pam Bondi said in a statement issued on Thursday.

Florida officials are considering adding two more such facilities to help hold and process detainees who are undergoing deportation proceedings.

The Department of Defense is deploying 200 Marines to Florida to assist with logistical and administrative support.

June 28 (UPI) — The latest version of the Senate’s federal budget reconciliation bill would limit the availability of student loans for future borrowers by revising federal student loan programs and regulations.

The budget bill that already has passed the House of Representatives and the Senate version would place a maximum amount on how much people could borrow through the federal Parent PLUS and graduate student loans to help them pay for their college educations.

The House-approved version would limit undergraduate borrowing to $50,000, while the Senate version would limit that amount to $65,000.

Graduate students would see limits of $100,000 for most master’s programs, while the borrowing limit for professional degrees would be $150,000 in the House version and $200,000 in the Senate bill.

Supporters of the proposed limits say they could save taxpayers more than $300 billion and make it harder for college and university administrators to raise tuition costs and fees.

Opponents say it would make it harder for disadvantaged students to attend college.

“It’s abundantly clear that the budget reconciliation package would reduce access to higher education and healthcare and jeopardize [the University of California’s] ability to carry out its public service mission,” Chris Harrington, U.C. associate vice president for Federal Governmental Relations, said on Monday in a letter to the state’s House delegation in May.

The House-approved bill would eliminate Pell Grants for part-time students, subsidized loans for undergrads and Graduate PLUS loans for graduate and professional students, according to the University of California.

It also would limit eligibility for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and Medicaid benefits for low-income students.

The Senate’s version of the proposed fiscal year 2026 budget reconciliation bill numbers 940 pages and might be voted on as soon as Saturday night.

SACRAMENTO — California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed on Friday a budget that pares back a number of progressive priorities, including a landmark healthcare expansion for low-income adult immigrants without legal status, to close a $12-billion deficit.

It’s the third year in a row the nation’s most populous state has been forced to slash funding or stop some of the programs championed by Democratic leaders. Lawmakers passed the budget earlier in the day following an agreement of a $321-billion spending plan between Newsom and Democratic leaders.

But the whole budget will be void if lawmakers don’t send him legislation to make it easier to build housing by Monday.

The budget avoids some of the most devastating cuts to essential safety net programs, state leaders said. They mostly relied on using state savings, borrowing from special funds and delaying payments to plug the budget hole.

“It’s balanced, it maintains substantial reserves, and it’s focused on supporting Californians,” Newsom said in a statement about the budget.

California also faces potential federal cuts to healthcare programs and broad economic uncertainty that could force even deeper cuts. Newsom in May estimated that federal policies — including on tariffs and immigration enforcement — could reduce state tax revenue by $16 billion.

“We’ve had to make some tough decisions,” Senate President Pro Tempore Mike McGuire said Friday. “I know we’re not going to please everyone, but we’re doing this without any new taxes on everyday Californians.”

Republican lawmakers said they were left out of budget negotiations. They also criticized Democrats for not doing enough to address future deficits, which could range between $17 billion to $24 billion annually.

“We’re increasing borrowing, we’re taking away from the rainy day fund, and we’re not reducing our spending,” said Republican state Sen. Tony Strickland prior to the vote. “And this budget also does nothing about affordability in California.”

Here’s a look at spending in key areas:

Healthcare

Under the budget deal, California will stop enrolling new adult patients without legal status in its state-funded healthcare program for low-income people starting 2026. The state will also implement a $30 monthly premium July 2027 for immigrants remaining on the program, including some with legal status. The premiums would apply to adults under 60 years old.

The changes to the program, known as Medi-Cal, are a scaled-back version of Newsom’s proposal in May. Still, it’s a major blow to an ambitious program started last year to help the state inch closer to a goal of universal healthcare.

Democratic state Sen. María Elena Durazo broke with her party and voted “no” on the healthcare changes, calling them a betrayal of immigrant communities.

The deal also removes $78 million in funding for mental health phone lines, including a program that served 100,000 people annually. It will eliminate funding that helps pay for dental services for low-income people in 2026 and delay implementation of legislation requiring health insurance to cover fertility services by six months to 2026.

But lawmakers also successfully pushed back on several proposed cuts from Newsom that they called “draconian.”

The deal secures funding for a program providing in-home domestic and personal care services for some low-income residents and Californians with disabilities. It also avoids cuts to Planned Parenthood.

Environment

Lawmakers agreed to let the state tap $1 billion from its cap-and-trade program to fund state firefighting efforts. The cap-and-trade program is a market-based system aimed at reducing carbon emissions. Companies have to buy credits to pollute, and that money goes into a fund lawmakers are supposed to tap for climate-related spending.

Newsom wanted to reauthorize the program through 2045, with a guarantee that $1 billion would annually go to the state’s long-delayed high-speed rail project. The budget doesn’t make that commitment, as lawmakers wanted to hash out spending plans outside of the budget process. The rail project currently receives 25% of the cap-and-trade proceeds, which is roughly $1 billion annually depending on the year.

Legislative leaders also approved funding to help transition part-time firefighters into full-time positions. Many state firefighters only work nine months each year, which lawmakers said harms the state’s ability to prevent and fight wildfires. The deal includes $10 million to increase the daily wage for incarcerated firefighters, who earn $5.80 to $10.24 a day currently.

Public safety

The budget agreement will provide $80 million to help implement a tough-on-crime initiative voters overwhelmingly approved last year. The measure makes shoplifting a felony for repeat offenders, increases penalties for some drug charges and gives judges the authority to order people with multiple drug charges into treatment.

Most of the fund, $50 million, will help counties build more behavioral health beds. Probation officers will get $15 million for pretrial services and courts will receive $20 million to support increased caseloads.

Advocates of the measure — including sheriffs, district attorneys and probation officers — said that’s not enough money. Some have estimated it would take around $400 million for the first year of the program.

Other priorities

Newsom and lawmakers agreed to raise the state’s film tax credit from $330 million to $750 million annually to boost Hollywood. The program, a priority for Newsom, will start this year and expire in 2030.

The budget provides $10 million to help support immigration legal services, including deportation defense.

But cities and counties won’t see new funding to help them address homelessness next year, which local leaders said could lead to the loss of thousands of shelter beds.

The budget also doesn’t act on Newsom’s proposal to streamline a project to create a massive underground tunnel to reroute a big part of the state’s water supply.

Nguyễn writes for the Associated Press.

The airport lounge access deal will let travellers enjoy a quiet space away from the crowds, with complimentary snacks, drinks, WiFi and comfortable seating

It is time to set our sights on the upcoming summer holidays. Whether travellers have already secured their booking or are just beginning to plan, the countdown to a sun-soaked getaway has officially started.

Priority Pass is currently offering a 30% discount on airport lounge access, allowing holidaymakers to enjoy chic spaces away from the throngs, complete with complimentary nibbles, beverages, WiFi and cosy seating.

Securing an airport lounge is the ultimate travel hack for dodging jam-packed airports. There are more than 1,700 Priority Pass airport lounges to choose from.

READ MORE: I ditched B&Q paint for an eco-friendly range and it’s transformed my home’

READ MORE: ‘I’ll be wearing Joanie Clothing’s pretty postcard print jumpsuit all summer’

This deal will enable travellers to experience the luxury of first-class without the hefty price tag. Nestled away from the hectic terminal waiting areas, guests can enjoy refreshments, queue-free bathroom facilities and WiFi for work or leisure.

For families jetting off with children, they also provide a welcome break from the chaos of large terminals, making it easier to keep an eye on the little ones and keep them entertained. All Priority Pass airport lounges come equipped with flight information screens.

30% off airport lounge access

30% off

Priority Pass

Buy Now on Priority Pass

Get a discount on airport lounge access with Priority Pass this summer

Some even offer sleep pods for lengthy layovers, and the option to indulge in dedicated spa areas and treatments at an extra charge. The Priority Pass digital membership is instantly available via the app, allowing travellers to book and unwind as soon as they sign up.

Unlike one-off lounge passes, Priority Pass allows usage on both outbound and return flights, whereas a single-day lounge pass only covers one leg of the journey. This typically works out cheaper than purchasing a single-use entry pass for a departure lounge, and the more frequently you use the lounges, the more cost-effective your subscription becomes.

If Priority Pass airport lounges don’t quite tick all your boxes, single-use airport passes can be booked through Expedia, with Heathrow Airport lounges starting from £34. There are also other options available for airports across the UK and further afield. It’s worth mentioning that Holiday Extras offers a variety of airport lounge deals, along with car hire, hotel stays and more.

The Priority Pass app comes with additional benefits such as early access to duty-free shopping, premium fitness content, and the ability to pre-book lounges. Members can also enjoy spa treatments, gaming zones, pre-order takeout, private transfers, and discounted car rentals worldwide.

Travellers who’ve used Priority Pass airport lounges in the past have been voicing their opinions on Trustpilot. One jet-setter recounted: “Six family members visited the lounge in Florence, Italy, while waiting for our flight back to the USA. It was very relaxing, good food and drinks, nice bathrooms, no wait to get in. Very good experience.”

Another traveller said: “Been using Priority Pass in Europe for over a year. I made 22 visits last year and all of the experiences were smooth. Zero complaints and I would highly recommend Priority Pass to anyone interested.”

A third passenger wrote: “Our experience was very good! The staff at Heathrow Airport was courteous and efficient. The food was good and the lounge was nice although rather crowded! Would definitely use the lounge again!”.

However, it hasn’t been all rosy, with a less satisfied customer commenting: “I like the clubs, but they aren’t at all the airports I fly out of. Lately, they have been crowded and have to wait. Often they are located in different terminals than the one I fly out of.”

Despite a few hiccups, the consensus is that securing a spot in a Priority Pass airport lounge has generally been a hit with flyers. Another user concluded: “Literally a life saver when travelling. I love having a place to relax and grab a bite to eat or a drink before a flight. It’s truly a game changer.”

Charter Communications is returning the Walt Disney Co.-owned cable channels that were dropped from its Spectrum TV service in 2023 after the two sides negotiated new terms for carrying ESPN and ABC.

The companies announced Thursday an “expanded distribution agreement” that will give Spectrum TV Select customers the ad-supported version of streaming platform Hulu and eight linear TV channels: Disney Jr., Disney XD, Freeform, FXX, FXM, Nat Geo Wild, Nat Geo Mundo and BabyTV. They will be added at no additional cost for subscribers.

The cable channels were dropped in 2023 when the companies were unable to agree on terms for carrying ESPN and ABC, which led to a 10-day blackout for Spectrum customers.. The standoff kept tennis fans in Spectrum homes from seeing ESPN’s U.S. Open coverage and threatened access to the season premiere of “Monday Night Football.”

At the time, Charter resolved the dispute by agreeing to pay higher fees to keep the rights to carry the main engines of Disney’s TV lineup — including ESPN and ABC — but had to sacrifice some of the company’s smaller channels. Charter had sought to get free access to Disney’s streaming channels for its customers as well.

The terms of the expanded deal to return the dropped channels and add Hulu were not disclosed beyond saying it was “financially net positive for both companies.” It’s likely Disney needed to maintain the distribution of the channels to Charter’s nearly 15 million cable homes to keep them viable for advertisers.

“These channels expand Spectrum’s entertainment offering and create meaningful value for both companies by boosting advertising reach and strengthening audience engagement across platforms,” Charter said in its announcement of the deal.

The Disney-Charter pact is a sign of how both programmers and cable and satellite services are being more flexible as they contend with the steady decline of pay TV customers. Pricing is a key reason consumers have abandoned traditional TV for streaming.

Separately, satellite TV provider DirecTV announced Thursday it will offer a new slimmed-down package of channels called MyKids, designed for younger viewers. The package offered for $19.99 a month will provide access to kid- and teen-oriented channels from Disney, Paramount Global, Warner Bros. Discovery and Weigel Broadcasting.

MyKids, which includes Nickelodeon, Disney Channel, Cartoon Network and MeTV Toons, is one of the newest lower priced genre-based packages DirecTV is offering to customers. In addition to MyKids, DirecTV customers can select packages with news, entertainment, sports and Spanish-language channels, all priced well under the monthly cost of subscribing to the entire channel lineup.

Rep. Judy Chu first went inside the immigrant detention center in Adelanto in 2014, and conditions were bad.

When she made it back inside the privately run facility in the Mojave desert last week, things weren’t much better.

“It is just scandalous as to how it has not improved,” she told me.

Truth be told, conditions are likely to get worse, if only because of sheer numbers and chaos. Which makes it all the more important to have elected leaders like Chu willing to put themselves on the front lines to give a voice to the truly, really voiceless.

As tens of thousands of immigrants are chased down and incarcerated across the United States, oversight of their detention has become both increasingly difficult and important.

Shortly after the unannounced visit to Adelanto by Chu and four other members of Congress a few days ago, ICE announced new rules attempting to further limit access by lawmakers to its facilities — despite clear federal law allowing them unannounced entrance to such lockups. While Chu and others have called these new curbs on access illegal, they are still likely to be enforced until and unless courts rule otherwise.

The narrow, fragile line of the judicial branch is holding, for now.

But families and even lawyers are struggling to keep track of those who vanish into these facilities, many of which — including Adelanto — are operated by private, for-profit companies raking in millions of dollars from the government.

GEO Group, the publicly traded company that runs Adelanto, has reported more than $600 million in revenue so far this year and projects $31 million in additional annualized revenue from Adelanto at full capacity. Maybe DOGE wants to look into the fact that GEO often gets paid a “guaranteed minimum,” according to a report by the California Department of Justice — regardless of how many detainees are in a facility. Sounds like waste.

When the Trump administration started its attack on Los Angeles a few weeks ago, Chu started receiving calls from her constituents asking for help. She represents Altadena, Pasadena and other areas where there are large populations of immigrants, and as the daughter of an immigrant, she relates.

Her mom came here from China as a 19-year-old bride. Chu’s dad was born in the United States.

“I feel such a heavy responsibility to change things for them, to change things for the better,” she said. “I am surrounded by immigrants every day. This is a district of immigrants. My relatives are immigrants. My friends are immigrants. Yes, my life is immigrants.”

A few days ago, she tried to visit the Metropolitan Detention Center in downtown Los Angeles, where many of the recent protests have been focused, and where many of the people detained in Los Angeles have reportedly been held at first. She’d heard that even though it’s not meant to be more than a stopover, folks have been staying there longer.

“The fact that these raids are so severe, so massive, it just seems very obvious to me that they would not be treating the detainees in a humane way. And that’s what I wanted to find out,” she told me.

But no luck. Authorities turned her away at the door.

So a few days later she decided to show up unannounced — which is her right as a federal lawmaker — at Adelanto.

Guess what: No luck.

Officers there chained the gate shut, she said, and wouldn’t even talk to her.

“To actually just be locked out like that was unbelievable,” she said. “We shouted that we were members of Congress. We held signs up saying that we were members of Congress, and in fact, there was a car parked only a few feet away inside the facility. The job of that person was just to watch us. Wow.”

Wow indeed.

Undeterred, she came back a few days later when the gate was unlocked. This time, she drove straight inside, not asking permission.

Her staff “deliberately dropped me off inside the lobby before they knew that we were there,” she said.

She got out at the front door and was granted entry.

“The ICE agent said, ‘Oh, well, we thought you were protesters the time before,’” she said. “And that cannot be true, you know, considering all of our yelling and signs. But anyway.”

She was armed with the names of people from her district who had been detained, and she asked to see them. She got to speak to some of them, but everyone wanted her help. At the start of the year, Adelanto held only a handful of people, having been nearly closed by a court order during COVID-19. Now it holds about 1,100, and can take up to about 1,900.

“These detainees were jumping up and down trying to get our attention,” she said. What they told her was disturbing, and casually cruel. No ability to change clothes for 10 days. Filthy showers. No access to telephones because they need a PIN number and no matter how many times they request one, it never seems to materialize. No idea how long they would be held, or what would happen next.

“It could be weeks,” she said. “It could be years.”

Vanished.

“It is horrendous,” she said. “And it is ripping our communities apart,”

Indeed it is, especially in Southern California, where immigrants — documented and not — are entwined in the fabric of our lives and our communities.

Which is why people like Chu are so vital to what happens next. Not enough of our lawmakers have spoken up, much less taken action, against the erosion of civil rights and legal norms currently underway. Chu has spent a decade trying to bring accountability to immigration detention and knows this sordid industry better than any. It’s work that many never notice but that matters to the families whose loved ones are scooped up and disappeared into a system that, even in its best days, is convoluted.

“These are not the criminals and rapists that Trump promised he would get rid of,” Chu said. “These are hard-working people who are trying to make a living and doing their best to support their families. These are your friends and neighbors, and as we’ve seen, U.S. citizens have also been arrested. So next it could be you.”

Or her. Other lawmakers have been arrested and charged for attempting to enter detention centers on the East Coast, and Sen. Alex Padilla was knocked over and handcuffed recently for interrupting a news conference by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.

We are in the era when questions are often met with mockery or silence — or even violence — from authorities, and everyday champions are vital. Propaganda and lies have become the norms, and few have the ability to bear witness to truth inside places of state power such as detention centers.

So it’s also an era when having people who will stand up in the face of increasing fear and chaos is the difference between being vanished for who-knows-how-long and being found.

Even if it’s inside Adelanto.

SACRAMENTO — The vast majority of California voters support expanding access to translated ballots for people who speak limited English, an effort that would likely increase turnout, a new poll found.

That finding comes from a poll released Monday by the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies, which conducted the survey in five languages — English, Spanish, Chinese, Korean and Vietnamese — to capture voter sentiment in a state where more than a quarter of residents are foreign born.

The poll, conducted for the nonprofit Evelyn and Walter Haas Jr. Fund, found that about 70% of California’s registered voters agreed that eligible voters who speak limited English should be provided with ballots translated into their preferred language. Support was strong among all age groups, races and ethnicities, as well as among Democrats and independent voters. Republicans were closely divided.

“I think in the country as a whole there’s a lot of debate and struggle over how inclusive a democracy we’re going to be and a lot of controversy over immigration, immigrant rights, immigrant inclusion,” said political scientist Eric Schickler, co-director of the Institute of Governmental Studies. “It’s timely just thinking about the question of inclusion of different groups — who feels fully American and is allowed to feel fully American in our political system.”

Schickler and others said that, according to the latest estimates, more than 3 million registered voters in California self-identify as limited-English proficient. As of February, just under 23 million Californians were registered to vote.

Under state and federal law, California is required to provide bilingual voting assistance to Spanish speakers. Nine counties — Alameda, Contra Costa, Los Angeles, Orange, Sacramento, San Diego, San Francisco, San Mateo and Santa Clara — must provide voting materials in at least one language other than English or Spanish.

Translated sample ballots and other assistance also must be made available in Spanish or other languages in counties or precincts where the state has determined at least 3% of the voting-age residents are members of a single-language minority and don’t understand English well enough to vote without assistance.

The Berkeley survey found that 82% of Democrats supported providing translated ballot materials to limited-English voters, as did 72% of voters registered as “no party preference.” Among Republicans, 45% supported providing the translated ballots, while 42% did not.

According to the poll, most California voters also favored a proposal that recently went before the state Legislature that would have allowed all limited-English-speaking communities that meet a minimum threshold in a county to receive translated versions of all voting materials.

Legislation to that effect, SB 266, proposed by Sen. Sabrina Cervantes (D-Riverside), failed to pass out of the Senate Appropriations Committee. A more ambitious bill to expand access to translated ballots and materials, AB 884, passed the Legislature in 2024, but was vetoed by Gov. Gavin Newsom. The governor stated that while he supported expanding ballot access, the bill would have cost tens of millions of dollars not included in the budget.

Providing translated ballots to California voters with limited English proficiency is critical in a state that is home to such a diverse electorate — and is known for its complex state and local ballot measures, said Rosalind Gold of the National Assn. of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials Educational Fund.

“Even folks who are very educated and native-born English speakers find trying to decipher the description of a ballot measure and what it means to be challenging,” Gold said.

Providing translated sample ballots and other election materials to voters does not go far enough, she said: The official ballots themselves, whether for Californians who vote by mail or those who vote at polling stations, should be provided in a voter’s preferred language.

“It is difficult to basically, kind of go back and forth between the ballot you’re going to be marking your choices on and a sample ballot or a facsimile ballot that’s in your native language,” Gold said. “When people can directly vote on a ballot that is in a language that they are more familiar with, it just demystifies the whole process.”

The Berkeley survey found that, among limited-English speakers who lacked access to translated election materials or were unsure if it was provided, 87% said they would be more likely to vote in future elections if they received a ballot in their preferred language. A similar number said receiving those translated ballots would make it easier for them to vote.

The poll surveyed 6,474 registered voters throughout California from June 2-6.