America

The US, Canada and Mexico will co-host the World Cup between 11 June and 19 July.

Iran are scheduled to play two games in Los Angeles, against New Zealand on 15 June and Belgium on 21 June, and then Egypt in Seattle on 26 June.

US secretary of state Marco Rubio said last week that no-one with ties to the IRGC would be admitted to the country.

“We are going to the World Cup, for which we qualified, and our host is Fifa – not Mr Trump or America,” Taj said.

“If they accept hosting us, then they must also accept that they must not insult our military institutions in any way.

“Because if they do, then naturally it could create the same kind of situation that happened in Canada, where there was a possibility we might have to return.

“So there must be this kind of guarantee so that we can go with peace of mind.”

The US and Israel launched air strikes on Iran in February.

Iran was the only Fifa federation among the 211 member countries that did not have representation at the Fifa congress in Vancouver.

Fifa president Gianni Infantino said Iran will be going to the US and playing as scheduled – despite Iran’s request in March for its matches to be moved to Mexico.

As Israel faces growing international isolation over its regional wars, President Isaac Herzog is set to visit two countries in Central America – Panama and Costa Rica – to boost ties.

“President Herzog’s visit to Panama and Costa Rica reflects the importance of Israel’s ties with countries across Latin America and the renewed momentum in Israel’s relations with Central and South American nations,” a statement from the Israeli Foreign Ministry reads.

Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, which has prompted an International Criminal Court arrest warrant for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over alleged war crimes, has made it a source of growing opprobrium around the world.

But a handful of countries, most of them led by allies of United States President Donald Trump, have continued to tout their strong ties with Israel, which has sought to maintain those relationships via diplomatic outreach.

What will Herzog’s visit consist of, what will it seek to accomplish, and what can it tell us about Israel’s diplomatic goals in Latin America?

When will the trip take place?

The Israeli Foreign Ministry has said that President Herzog will depart Israel on May 6 for a four-day official visit to Panama and Costa Rica.

Where will Herzog visit, and who will he meet?

The Israeli president will visit Panama first, meeting with President Jose Raul Mulino and government officials before continuing to Costa Rica to attend the inauguration of President-elect Laura Fernandez Delgado.

Herzog was invited to attend the ceremony by the outgoing pro-Israel President Rodrigo Chaves Robles and will also attend a dinner for heads of state. He will also meet with members of the Jewish community in both countries.

What is the significance of a visit by an Israeli president to Panama?

The Israeli Foreign Ministry has said that the Israeli president’s visit to Panama is the “first in history” and will help bolster ties with a country that it calls a “true friend of Israel and a current member of the UN Security Council”.

The meeting between Herzog and Mulino will follow up on discussions on bilateral ties held by the two leaders at the World Economic Forum in Davos in January.

Is the trip connected to Panama’s status at the UN?

As Israel faces growing isolation on the world stage, it has sought dependable allies at international fora such as the United Nations, and the Israeli Foreign Ministry’s statement notes Panama’s current two-year term as a non-permanent member of the UN Security Council.

While votes in the UN General Assembly have often gone overwhelmingly against Israel in recent years, Panama and Costa Rica have been among those who have joined with Israel and the US or abstained from voting.

Panama and Costa Rica both abstained from a 2024 United Nations resolution calling on Israel to end its illegal occupation of Palestinian territory, and Panama was one of just 12 countries to abstain from a September vote in support of a two-state solution.

Herzog’s visit may be an effort to ensure that Panama remains an ally of Israel during its time on the UNSC.

What is Israel’s endgame for this regional tour?

While the United States is, by far, Israel’s most important ally, it has also celebrated partnerships with countries such as the United Arab Emirates in the Middle East and Argentinian President Javier Milei in South America.

Many of Israel’s allies are also close partners of the US, and some countries in Central America — many of them small states that depend on US support and trade — may see a closer partnership with Israel as a means of signalling their alignment with US interests.

Herzog’s visit will seek to strengthen those relationships, with the Foreign Ministry stating that the trip will bolster “strategic partnership between Israel and the countries and peoples of the region” and underscore the status of those countries as important allies.

Israel has celebrated previous steps deepening relations with countries in the region, including a free trade agreement it signed with Costa Rica in December, along with the opening of a trade office in Jerusalem, which Israel claims as its capital but is considered illegally occupied under international law.

The US Department of State expressed support for those agreements, stating that they would “deepen cooperation between Israel and Latin America, grounded in shared interests and real potential for prosperity”.

Is Israel trying to curtail the growing support for the Palestinian cause in Latin America?

Herzog’s trip may also seek to counter outspoken support for Palestine in Latin America, where leaders on the political left, such as Colombian President Gustavo Petro and Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, have emerged as vocal critics of Israel.

President Lula recently condemned Israel’s seizure and detention of participants in a humanitarian aid flotilla bound for Gaza that included Brazilian national Thiago Avila, calling it an “unjustifiable action” that should be roundly condemned.

“The detention of the flotilla activists in international waters had already represented a serious affront to international law,” Lula said.

In this episode of Reframe, Varsha Gandikota-Nellutla, general coordinator of Progressive International, speaks with former Colombian Environment Minister Susana Muhamad about how Latin America should respond to the age of United States President Donald Trump. Muhamad argues that challenging a long history of imperial dominance begins with reclaiming sovereignty, particularly over natural resources like minerals and oil.

Muhamad is a Colombian politician and environmentalist who served as the minister of environment and sustainable development from 2022 to 2025.

WASHINGTON — The State Department said that it is preparing a limited release of commemorative U.S. passports celebrating America’s 250th birthday that feature a picture of President Trump, who would be the first living president to be featured in the travel document.

The concept for the special passport, including a rendering of Trump’s stern-looking visage, had been under consideration for months before finally being approved late Monday and publicly announced Tuesday. Between 25,000 and 30,000 of the new passports will be available to applicants at the Washington passport office beginning shortly before July 4.

It’s the latest instance of Trump having his name and likeness added to buildings, documents and other highly visible tributes. There are efforts to put Trump’s signature on all new U.S. paper currency, also a first for a sitting president, as well as to include his image on a gold commemorative coin to celebrate the country’s founding.

The commemorative passport will be the default document for people applying in person at the Washington office, although those who want a standard passport will be able to get one by applying online or outside Washington, officials said.

“As the United States celebrates America’s 250th anniversary in July, the State Department is preparing to release a limited number of specially designed U.S. passports to commemorate this historic occasion,” State Department spokesman Tommy Pigott said.

“These passports will feature customized artwork and enhanced imagery while maintaining the same security features that make the U.S. passport the most secure documents in the world,” he said.

The limited release passport will feature Trump’s picture over a gold imprimatur of his signature to an interior page, while the cover will feature the words “United States of America” in bold gold print at the top and “Passport” at the bottom — a reversal of the standard cover.

In addition, a small gold laminate American flag, with the number 250 encircled by stars, will be at the bottom of the back cover.

The Bulwark reported earlier on the commemorative passports.

The only presidents featured in current U.S. passports are in a double-page depiction of Mount Rushmore in South Dakota — George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Theodore Roosevelt and Abraham Lincoln.

Other depictions include the Statue of Liberty, the Liberty Bell and Independence Hall in Philadelphia, and scenes of the Great Plains, mountains and islands. Current passports also contain quotations from Martin Luther King Jr. as well as Presidents Washington, Jefferson, Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy and Dwight Eisenhower.

The addition of Trump’s picture and signature to the passport book is the newest step his aides have taken to increase the president’s visibility, including adding his name to the U.S. Institute of Peace building and the Kennedy Center performing arts venue.

Trump also has made waves with his plans for a new White House ballroom and a massive arch to be built at one of the entrances to Washington from Virginia.

Lee writes for the Associated Press.

China has detained nearly 70 Panamanian-flagged ships after a Supreme Court ruling on the Panama Canal, US officials say.

Bolivia, Costa Rica, Guyana, Paraguay, Trinidad and Tobago, and the United States have released a joint statement in support of Panama, while criticising Chinese economic retaliation, after a Hong Kong-based conglomerate lost a legal dispute over the management of ports on the Panama Canal.

Panama’s Supreme Court in late January annulled contracts that had allowed a subsidiary of Hong Kong’s CK Hutchison to administer the Balboa and Cristobal port terminals on the Panama Canal after deeming the decades-old agreements unconstitutional.

In their joint statement on Tuesday, the six countries claimed that following the court ruling, China has retaliated against Panama with “targeted economic pressure” on Panamanian-flagged ships.

China detained nearly 70 Panamanian-flagged ships in March, according to the US Federal Maritime Commission, a number “far exceeding historical norms”.

“These actions – following the decision of Panama’s independent Supreme Court regarding the Balboa and Cristobal terminals – are a blatant attempt to politicise maritime trade and infringe on the sovereignty of the nations of our hemisphere,” the signatories said.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said separately on X that Washington was “deeply concerned” by China’s economic pressure on Panama.

“We stand in solidarity with Panama. Any attempts to undermine Panama’s sovereignty are a threat to us all,” he said.

China has previously accused the US of “bullying” and trying to smear its reputation in Latin America, while it described the Panamanian Supreme Court ruling as “absurd” and “shameful”.

US Federal Maritime Commission head Laura DiBella said last month that Beijing’s detention of Panamanian ships had repercussions for both Panama and the US.

“These intensified inspections were carried out under informal directives and appear intended to punish Panama after the transfer of Hutchison’s port assets,” DiBella said.

“Given that Panama‑flagged ships carry a meaningful share of US containerised trade, these actions could result in significant commercial and strategic consequences to US shipping,” she said.

‘States know how vulnerable shipping is’

Panama’s decision to invalidate the contracts held by CK Hutchison’s subsidiary Panama Ports Company was made at a time of heightened media attention around the Panama Canal amid threats by US President Donald Trump to seize the strategic waterway.

Trump had made the approximately 80km (49-mile) waterway a focus of his second administration, alleging in his inaugural address in January 2025 that China was “operating” the canal and pledging that the US would “take back” control.

US officials allege that, in addition to targeting Panama and its interests, China has also retaliated against shipping giants Maersk and the Mediterranean Shipping Company (MSC), whose subsidiaries were granted 18-month contracts to administer the Balboa and Cristobal terminals after CK Hutchison was removed.

Representatives of Maersk and MSC were both summoned by China’s Ministry of Transport for “high-level discussions”, the Federal Maritime Commission said in March, while Chinese shipping giant COSCO has suspended operations at the Balboa terminal.

CK Hutchison, through its Panama Ports Company subsidiary, is separately pursuing international arbitration against the government of Panama and seeking more than $2bn in damages.

David Smith, an associate professor at the University of Sydney’s US Studies Centre, said that the Panama Canal dispute and China’s retaliation were the latest example of how shipping has become a political target, from Latin America to the Strait of Hormuz and the Red Sea in the Middle East.

“We have taken for granted that the world runs on container ships just freely sailing around the world,” he told Al Jazeera.

“What we’re seeing now is that states know how vulnerable shipping is. They know they can cut shipping lanes off if necessary. It should not surprise us from now on if ships and shipping in general become pawns in international politics.”

The ongoing Iran war has reshaped global energy dynamics, shifting influence away from OPEC toward the United States. Traditionally, OPEC and key producers like Saudi Arabia acted as “swing suppliers,” adjusting output to stabilize markets.

However, disruptions caused by the closure of the Strait of Hormuz have left millions of barrels stranded, limiting OPEC’s ability to respond and opening space for the United States to take on that stabilizing role.

Collapse of OPEC’s Leverage

The near shutdown of Gulf energy routes has forced major producers to cut output significantly. Even Saudi Arabia’s alternative export routes have proven insufficient to offset the scale of disruption.

This has weakened OPEC’s traditional power, which relied heavily on spare production capacity to manage supply shocks and influence prices.

Rise of U.S. Energy Dominance

The United States has stepped in decisively, leveraging its position as the world’s largest oil producer. Since surpassing both Saudi Arabia and Russia in output in 2018, the U.S. has built unmatched capacity to influence global markets.

Exports have surged to record levels, with both crude and refined products flowing to regions hit hardest by supply shortages, particularly in Asia. This rapid response has helped cushion the global economy from a deeper energy crisis.

Strategic Tools Beyond Production

Washington’s influence extends beyond production alone. The government has released oil from its Strategic Petroleum Reserve, providing an additional buffer against supply shocks.

It has also used sanctions policy as a flexible tool, selectively easing restrictions on Russian and Iranian oil to increase global supply when needed, while tightening measures to maintain geopolitical pressure.

Economic and Political Impact

For U.S. producers, the crisis has generated substantial financial gains through higher export revenues. At the same time, Washington’s actions have helped stabilize global markets, reinforcing its role as a central player in the energy system.

However, these moves carry political risks, including potential contradictions between economic goals and foreign policy objectives.

Limits of U.S. Power

Despite its growing influence, the United States cannot fully replicate OPEC’s traditional role. Unlike centralized producers, the U.S. oil industry operates within market constraints, limiting the government’s ability to directly control output.

Policies such as export restrictions could theoretically impact global prices, but would also risk damaging domestic production systems and relations with international partners.

Analysis

The Iran war has accelerated a structural shift in global energy power. The United States has effectively become a “swing supplier,” not through coordinated production cuts like OPEC, but through a combination of market scale, strategic reserves, and policy flexibility.

This transformation highlights a new model of energy influence, where rapid responsiveness and financial depth replace centralized control. While OPEC remains relevant, its ability to dominate global supply dynamics has been significantly weakened under current conditions.

At the same time, U.S. dominance introduces new complexities. Balancing domestic political pressures, international alliances, and market stability requires careful calibration. The use of sanctions as a supply management tool also raises questions about long term consistency in foreign policy.

Ultimately, the shift signals a more fragmented and dynamic energy landscape. The United States may not control the market in the traditional sense, but its ability to shape outcomes quickly and at scale makes it the most influential actor in the current crisis.

With information from Reuters.

LONDON — The challenge for King Charles III as he arrives in the United States this week is, as always, to live up to his mother’s example.

The late Queen Elizabeth II wowed Congress in 1991 with a speech that celebrated the shared democratic traditions of Britain and the United States, quoted Abraham Lincoln, Franklin D. Roosevelt and Ralph Waldo Emerson, and highlighted the deep bonds between the two nations.

Those themes will also be at the top of Charles’ agenda as he celebrates America’s 250th birthday and seeks to calm tensions surrounding Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s refusal to support President Trump’s war against Iran, said Douglas Brinkley, a presidential historian at Rice University in Texas.

“We’ve got to always make the distinction that there’s a difference between the government of the U.K. and the kings and queens of Great Britain, who are really always coming to try to put [on] a good face,” Brinkley told the Associated Press. “Politics come and go; prime ministers, presidents, come and go; but there’s something deeper about the special relationship between the United States and the U.K.”

Charles and Queen Camilla begin a four-day trip on Monday, when they will have tea with the president and First Lady Melania Trump, then tour the White House beehive, in a nod to the king’s focus on the environment.

The formal arrival ceremony will take place Tuesday, with a 21-gun salute, brass bands playing the national anthems of both countries and a contingent of U.S. service members passing in review. The ceremonies will be followed by a meeting between Trump and Charles.

Behind the scenes

But beneath the pomp and pageantry will be a carefully choreographed diplomatic event staged, like all royal visits, at the request of the British government. Starmer resisted pressure to cancel it after Trump belittled the British military’s sacrifices in Afghanistan and criticized him personally for failing to back the U.S. in its war alongside Israel against Iran.

Despite those tensions, Trump has continued to speak warmly about Charles.

“History has shown that President Trump really tries to be impressive whenever he’s dealing with British royalty,” Brinkley said. “And I’m sure it’ll be the same this time around.”

Ever since 1939, when King George VI became the first British monarch to set foot on the soil of the country’s former colony, there’s been a special sort of excitement whenever the royals come to the United States.

Take that first visit, which took place as World War II loomed over Europe. The royals toured the East Coast and attended a picnic at President Roosevelt’s private home in Hyde Park, N.Y. “King tries hot dog and asks for more,’’ declared the New York Times.

But the big moment was when the royals traveled to Mount Vernon to lay a wreath at the tomb of George Washington. It showed respect at a time of isolationism.

“People could see the handwriting on the wall and know that it was going to be important for the United States and Britain to stay strong for fighting against Hitler,” said Barbara Perry, a presidential scholar at the University of Virginia’s Miller Center.

But bonding over sausages had broader benefits, helping the royals build links to the general public as well as its leadership. After war broke out in September 1939, Queen Elizabeth, the wife of George VI and mother of the future Elizabeth II, wrote to First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt to say how moved she’d been by letters from Americans who enclosed small sums for British forces.

“Sometimes, during the last terrible months, we have felt rather lonely in our fight against evil things, but I can honestly say that our hearts have been lightened by the knowledge that friends in America understand what we are fighting for,’’ she wrote.

The queen’s connection

Queen Elizabeth II built on those relationships, making four state visits to the U.S. during her 70-year reign. She joined President Ford in celebrating America’s bicentennial in 1976 and met with President George W. Bush in 2007 as British and American forces fought in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Smoothing turbulent waters and reminding both sides about their common bonds were what those trips were all about.

Charles’ visit will be no different. It includes a commemoration of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, a ceremony honoring fallen service members and an event to be attended by Queen Camilla to mark the 100th anniversary of Winnie the Pooh stories by British author A.A. Milne.

Certain events will be avoided.

The royals won’t meet with Jeffrey Epstein’s victims, despite calls for the king to address his accusations related to his brother Andrew’s links to the convicted sex offender. Nor are there plans for Charles to meet with his son Prince Harry, who has been a critic of the monarchy since giving up royal duties and moving to California.

Those issues aren’t the priority, said Robert Hardman, author of “Elizabeth II: In Private. In Public. The Inside Story.”

“He’s going because 250 years ago the Founding Fathers of the USA kicked out his great-times-five grandfather, and he’s going to say, `No hard feelings, it’s been a great divorce, we’ve had a lovely 250 years and let’s reflect on the high points,’’’ Hardman said. “I mean, there are going to be some very, very large elephants in the room during that visit … but, you know, there are plenty of other things for the king to focus on.”

History, not politics

Charles’ speech to a joint session of Congress offers the chance to deliver the message that long-term friendship is more important than transient disputes.

He is also likely to offer a bit of humor, as his mother did when she addressed lawmakers in 1991.

Wearing soft peach amid a sea of gray suits, the diminutive monarch began her remarks with a joke about an earlier blunder at the White House when her lectern was so tall it obscured the audience’s view of her.

“I do hope you can see me today from where you are,’’ she deadpanned.

The chamber erupted in laughter. A standing ovation followed. Then she launched into a speech about democratic values, the rule of law and the Atlantic Alliance — the foundation of NATO.

Those are values that critics of the current U.S. administration say it has retreated from in recent years. But Charles will offer his own take on those ideas, Brinkley said.

“The theme of the speech is going to be American exceptionalism, American history, the importance of U.S.-British alliance, and some memories from the past,” he said. “But also about the love affair the two countries share with each other, even though it goes over rocky rapids from time to time.”

Kirka writes for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — When families flocked to Yosemite National Park during their recent spring breaks, some met two-hour waits at the entrance gates. At a lakeside spot in the North Cascades in Washington state, there hasn’t been enough staff to open the visitors center. And in Death Valley, water was shut off at two campgrounds.

National parks staff and advocates fear that such issues could only worsen this summer, as the park system faces the busy season with a dramatically reduced staff. At Yosemite, concerns are compounded by the National Park Service’s recent elimination of the park’s timed-entry reservation system, which led to the long spring-break lines.

“We’re definitely really nervous and anxious about the upcoming season, especially with the staff shortage we already have,” said a National Federation of Federal Employees union member at Yosemite who requested anonymity to speak candidly.

The National Park Service has lost nearly a quarter of its staff to buyouts, early retirements and other departures since the Trump administration took office last year, according to an estimate by the National Parks Conservation Assn. This month, the administration proposed cutting nearly 3,000 more positions in its 2027 budget. It also offered a recent new round of buyouts.

The push to cut the park system even further — ahead not only of peak season but of America’s 250th birthday, which the Trump administration has promoted in relation to national parks — has underscored ongoing questions about how smoothly parks can operate as warm weather and summer vacations draw tourists.

Interior Secretary Doug Burgum defended the budget proposal on Capitol Hill last week, telling senators that the visitor experience to parks can be improved even while spending and staff reductions are made.

He said the agency plans to hire 5,500 seasonal workers and asked Congress to approve funding for those employees to work for nine-month stints rather than six months.

“All of that’s going to help us get this thing in shape, even with an overall reduction,” Burgum said Wednesday.

He was met with skepticism by Democrats, who confronted him over the spending proposal.

“That is just a recipe for disaster,” Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) told Burgum.

Congress will have the final say on the proposed cuts, but in the meantime, the reductions that have already occurred presented challenges last season and appear likely to do so again, said Cheryl Schreier, a retired superintendent of Mount Rushmore National Memorial and chair of the Coalition to Protect America’s National Parks.

Whether the parks will get enough qualified candidates to hire the number of seasonal workers needed is also “a really big concern,” she said. “It’s really important to have all of those individuals to be able to operate a park in a good fashion.”

Campers prepare food in Yosemite Valley last December. 9, 2025 in Yosemite, CA.

(Eric Thayer/Los Angeles Times)

The lower staffing has prompted worry about parks’ capacity for emergency response, protection of the natural landscape and custodial maintenance. Fewer rangers could mean, for instance, fewer people to reach dehydrated, stranded or lost hikers, said Chance Wilcox, California desert director for the National Parks Conservation Assn.

A park service spokesperson said Friday that staffing decisions are made based on local conditions at each park and that the agency is “focused on ensuring parks remain open, accessible, and safe for visitors.”

About 323 million people visit America’s national parks annually, according to the Interior Department. While the parks can expect heavy traffic, a drop in international tourism and the rise in gas prices has injected additional uncertainty into the tourism industry this year.

The number of Canadians visiting the United States has dropped since Trump took office, according to the Canadian government — with the number of Canadians making car trips to the United States this March declining by 35% compared with March 2024.

The Interior Department also instituted a new $100-per-person fee for non-Americans entering 11 of the most popular parks, a move to raise money for the parks but an extra squeeze for Canadians coming across the border and other international visitors.

At the Senate and House hearings on the Interior budget, Burgum presented a vision of the national parks system as one where most employees should be working at a park and interacting with visitors, and said he was more focused on filling those roles than jobs in regional offices.

“Our goal is to have more people actually working in the parks,” he told senators.

An Interior Department spokesperson said the agency was “advancing high-priority improvements” across the system.

“Secretary Burgum has been clear that resources should be prioritized toward visitor-facing services, public safety, maintenance, and projects that improve the experience for the American people,” an Interior Department spokesperson said in a statement Friday.

Critics say that strategy displays a misunderstanding of how the 109-year-old agency functions. Employees who work on contracts, human resources, IT, communications and other organizational and administrative jobs are essential to keeping the parks running, Wilcox said.

“If everything were visitor- or front-facing, the entire agency would collapse from behind,” said Wilcox, of the National Parks Conservation Assn.

The decision to discontinue the reservation system at Yosemite — as well as at Arches and Glacier national parks — is another part of Interior’s mission to bring more people into the parks. The concept was “designed to expand public access” this summer, the park service said in announcing the policy in February. It kept the timed-entry reservation system in Rocky Mountain National Park for the peak season.

Visitors take pictures while walking through Muir Woods National Monument on July 24, 2025 in Muir Woods National Monument, California.

(Justin Sullivan / Getty Images)

In addition to causing long lines, cramming too many people into the parks at once could lead to environmental damage, particularly if people park cars in natural areas, said Don Neubacher, a retired Yosemite superintendent and member of the Coalition to Protect America’s National Parks.

“It’s going to be mass chaos,” he said.

On a Saturday at the end of March, Jon Christenson of Coarsegold, Calif., drove to the park with his 38-year-old son. They were surprised to encounter a two-hour wait to get into the park, plus at least a half-hour hunt for parking after they made it through the gates, he said.

“It was almost like Disneyland. It was really uncomfortable from the standpoint of just so many people,” said Christenson, 82. “It’s kind of troubling to see that they’ve opened up the floodgates and now it’s kind of ruining the experience for everybody.”

Rangers there are doing multiple jobs, and last summer they helped clean bathrooms in the absence of custodial staff, the Yosemite union member said. Now they, too, are concerned about the potential for gridlock.

The worker asked summer visitors to bring patience: “The folks at the National Park Service … they will be grateful for any compassion and empathy.”

Members of the Writers Guild of America have officially ratified their newest contract with the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers.

More than 90% of the 11,000 voting members in both WGA East and West registered their support of the new agreement. The voting period closed Friday at noon, after the union first struck a tentative deal earlier this month.

The new contract includes a robust healthcare plan in which studios pay over $320 million to sustain the health fund, higher residual rates — including a provision for a “success bonus” for the most popular streaming shows from 50% of the base residual to 75% — and language on the licensing of work for AI training.

“The first reaction [from members] was relief that we were not going to be going into a period of labor strife or strike authorization vote, in the midst of this contraction,” said John August, the co-chair of WGA’s negotiating committee, referring to the ongoing challenges in the industry. “Members want to work, and they want to get back to doing their job.”

Negotiations between the union and film and TV studios began in March, as the union’s current contract expires May 1. August said that, at the beginning of the negotiations, expanding the healthcare plan was a top priority. The union was able to secure increases that would raise the cap that companies pay to as high as $400,000 by 2028.

Union officials say the current cap has remained unchanged for two decades as healthcare contributions have steadily declined because there are fewer working writers.

But under the new contract, members would, for the first time, have to start contributing to their healthcare costs to the tune of $75 per month. The earnings threshold to get coverage would increase by about $7,000 to $53,773, leaving many members concerned about the higher cost.

“This is all difficult. Healthcare in America is not a good situation. But we were really mindful, as we always are, of trying to make sure the career of writing is sustainable,” negotiating committee co-chair Danielle Sanchez-Witzel said.

Additionally, the contract terms have been extended from the WGA’s usual three years to four — though it is not the first time the guild has added more time to its deal with the studios. Sanchez-Witzel clarified that the four-year period for the new contract ”is, by no means, a standard. This is just what we needed this year and what we agreed to for this cycle.”

“We were here in 2026 trying to get some things that we didn’t get earlier [in previous negotiation cycles] and happy for the progress we made,” she said.

The WGA is the first of the Hollywood unions to strike a deal with the studios. AMPTP congratulated the WGA on the ratification in a statement released shortly after the vote totals were announced.

“This deal reflects a collaborative approach that supports both writers and the industry’s long-term stability,” AMPTP said.

SAG-AFTRA and the Directors Guild of America still need to negotiate new contracts.

The actors’ union began its negotiations in February and extended those talks in March, but paused to allow AMPTP to finish its deal with the writers’ union. SAG-AFTRA’s and the DGA’s contracts expire June 30.

MORE than three decades after London helped launch her career, Tori Amos is back in the city, headlining the Royal Albert Hall for a tenth time. 

The US singer is chatty and upbeat despite staying up until 5am, still riding the high of her gig the night before. 

With her striking red hair falling in waves and her vivid green eye make-up, Maryland-raised Tori, who has called Cornwall home since the late Nineties, looks every inch the star. 

“London was the place that gave me my big exposure explosion,” she says.

“It really did shake my life up. And here we are again. 

“London broke Silent All These Years in the autumn of 1991, and then launched [debut album] Little Earthquakes, which rippled out to the States and the rest of the world.

plug pulled

Brit band cancel gig at final hour after ‘unexpected medical situation’

singing sensations

Where the Osmonds are now: About 70s group as Alan Osmond dies at 76

“America really discovered me through London, and then the UK did, too. From there, it just kept rippling outwards.” 

On her forthcoming 18th album, In Times Of Dragons, Amos turns political dread, female resistance and personal storytelling into something unique and mythic.  

She says: “I’m very reclusive at home and I’m not very sociable there so when I’m on tour I go from this insular life, where I do a lot of reading, music and writing, and step into this much more exposed life.” 

The contrast between Amos’s secluded home life and her role as a performer feeds directly into an album shaped by both personal reflection and political unease. 

The record is a response to the current political climate in America because, as a songwriter “a lot of my work is documenting time,” she tells me. 

“That’s what I did with Little Earthquakes, which followed my time of failure after [her synth band] Y Kant Tori Read when I had to go back to play piano bars.  

“I have a history of documenting things — my miscarriage in 1998 and that journey, then my 2002 album Scarlet’s Walk which documented 9/11 when I actually wrote some of it on the tour bus.” 

The idea for In Times Of Dragons came through the muses — otherworldly entities — that Amos believes bring her music.  

She has spoken widely about these guiding forces, which she says have inspired her songwriting since childhood.

And last year she published children’s book Tori And The Muses, all about them. 

She says: “This message came to me through the muses that I needed to document America at this pivotal time in history. 

“And I had to personalise this.

“It came to me a year ago that I needed to be me in the story and be closely connected to one of these people, and what that would look like, because they are personally affecting us. 

“I had to turn the volume on that to create this narrative, whatever turning into a dragon looks like.” 

The album follows the story of Tori trapped in a world run by billionaire tech moguls and lizard dragons, who threaten democracy through corporate greed and authoritarianism. 

Amos says: “Jane Mayer writes about the genesis of this in Dark Money, which is one of the most important books people need to read if they’re asking, ‘How did we get here?’. 

“This has been going on since the Seventies.

“As Mayer documents, figures like the Koch brothers — and I use that as an umbrella term for a wider movement — helped shape it, along with super PACs [organisations that spend millions supporting political candidates] and all the rest. 

“It seems there was an understanding that progressive teaching in universities had to be excavated, cut back and penetrated by a very tight right-wing philosophy that is now upon us. 

“And I’m not just talking about Republicans and Democrats. I’m talking about tyranny versus democracy.

“If you had asked me about this even around the Scarlet’s Walk era, I was already going after it through that record, and then through [2007 album] American Doll Posse during the Bush-Cheney administration with the wars, the manipulation, all of that. 

“Then there was a period of relief, when a different, more inclusive philosophy came in, whatever your politics are. 

“For me, it’s about the philosophy.

“As a songwriter, I’ve been tracking that through my career. 

“On this record, I had to take a personal journey and look at the effects of what this very small cabal of men is doing — and there are women involved too, we can’t get confused about that. 

“There’s Cambridge Analytica, the involvements of the Mercers, Rebekah Mercer [the right-wing US heiress and political donor] and all those interconnections.” 

The album’s story sees Amos’s character flee and reunite with her daughter.

This part is played by her real-life daughter Natashya, who co-wrote tracks Veins, Strawberry Moon and Stronger Together — the latter of which she also sings backing vocals on, and is one of the most emotional songs on the record. 

“She was in DC at the time, in law school, and she graduates in a few weeks,” says Amos proudly.  

“She’s going into criminal law and really had her finger on the pulse. 

“On a daily basis she’s seeing things that the wider public probably isn’t, unless you’re a political journalist. 

“We’re so inundated that the little freedoms being quietly taken away can be missed. 

“Criminal law is her calling.

“So, writing these songs with her, with her understanding of what’s happening in the field she’s chosen, and her exposure to the shock of what is being torn to pieces, was hugely important. 

“She says we are past constitutional crisis and what’s going on is absolutely shocking.” 

The final song, written last- minute for the album, is Ode To Minnesota — a response to the deaths caused by ICE agents there. 

She says: “Heinous, atrocious crimes are being committed and so this is the world of the record.”  

Amos, 62, has a long history of addressing America in song, and In Times Of Dragons continues that while exploring wider patterns of male power. 

It’s also a reminder of her role as a feminist icon and the influence she’s had on artists such as Lady Gaga, Florence Welch and St Vincent (real name Annie Clark).  

“Annie’s one of my dear friends,” she says of St Vincent.

“She’s fabulous. We have a giggle and I’m thrilled for her, for her art, and for the way she’s balancing motherhood so beautifully. 

“It’s lovely to see people who came to my shows when they were younger. 

“She’s talked to me about Choirgirl [Tori’s 1988 album From The Choirgirl Hotel] and what it meant to her when she first heard it, and we’ve had laughs about that. 

“And it’s the same with the guys too. 

“I’m off to an event later and the guy doing the Q&A used to stand by the stage door as a teenage gay kid.  

“To see these people grow up, and to still be able to bask in their creativity and development, is a beautiful thing to witness.” 

But while Amos is moved by the artists and fans who have grown up with her work, she is hesitant to define her own feminist legacy. 

She says: “It’s not for me to say, that’s more for other people to decide. 

“Believe it or not, I’m a bit introverted about that.

“What I think I’ve tried to do, and what I have done, is there for those who know it. 

“What’s important to remember is that there was no social media then.

“When people ask, ‘Was it easier back then?’, well, in some ways no, and in others yes. 

“We did have a music business with a few women in record companies, though only a few in executive positions.

“One or two could balls their way through, but you really had to.

“And if you didn’t have that tenacity in the Nineties — especially to get played on radio — it was tough. 

“At an alternative station in the States, they might add two women out of 64 slots, and the other 62 would be men.  

“I’ve spoken about that with some of my contemporaries over the years, Alanis [Morissette] being one of them, and it was not a good feeling — knowing that talented women with very good records were simply not being added to the station. 

“And touring took money. 

“That’s why I never had tour support.

“In the early days, I went out with just a piano, my tour manager and a sound guy. That was it. 

“We kept the costs down, and luckily the shows sold out, because the Press had really got behind me.” 

Today, Amos points to Dolly Parton as proof that women can keep evolving, performing and owning the stage on their own terms as they get older.

“She is fantastic and she’s aware we are a different generation that played this game and played it well,” says Amos.

“There are women who are still playing the game beautifully, and they still have the physicality and the health to do it.  

“I used to have a three-and-a-half octave range when I was doing those one-woman shows.

“But with the change of life — becoming a dragon, if that’s the menopause analogy — you adapt or you collapse.

“For me, it wasn’t a crisis in the way it has been for some women we’ve read about in the Press, and I have huge empathy for that.

“But vocally, I did have to make changes. 

“I didn’t want to alter the top lines of songs with those very high, wide-ranging melodies, so on the last tour I simply didn’t play them.  

“Then I thought, ‘No, that isn’t what I want.

“I want the whole catalogue available to me as a storyteller’. 

“So, I decided to bring in backing singers who could hit those notes.

“It was a strategic, compositional choice.

“I didn’t want to be in a position where I could only perform 40 per cent of my catalogue because of range. 

“And we’re having a blast. 

“They’re amazing singers. 

“I’ve gained four notes at the lower end and I feel like I’m down there rocking with Nick Cave, but that’s the trade-off. 

“I gained more on the lower end, while recognising that if I want to play those songs, you can only transpose them down so far before they lose their essence. 

“I have so much respect for Nick Cave.

“I used to run into him in the early Nineties.

“His work has always been a beacon of beauty and darkness — expansive work that makes you think.” 

Like Cave, Amos remains restlessly creative, and she is already thinking about where to go next.  

“After something as demanding as this, I’m doing a prequel to children’s book Tori And The Muses — that will be out next year,” she says.

“Her journey as a little girl with her muses.  

“It’s due next April — and there may be music to go with it too.” 

•  In Times Of Dragons is out on May 1. 

TORI AMOS 

In Times Of Dragons 

★★★★☆

The scriptural passage that President Trump plans to read Tuesday evening in a livestreamed Bible-reading marathon dates back to the depiction of an ancient event — but it’s one that carries a highly charged significance in the current religious and political climate.

It has long been quoted and promoted by those who believe America was founded as a Christian nation and should be one. It’s from the seventh chapter of 2 Chronicles, a book in the Hebrew (Old Testament) portion of the Bible.

The 14th verse — the one most often quoted — says:

“If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.”

Trump is among hundreds who are taking turns reading the entire Bible aloud over the course of a week. Most of the readings are taking place at the Museum of the Bible in Washington, though Trump’s is coming by video from the Oval Office.

A passage often quoted at National Day of Prayer events

The Chronicles passage has for decades been a major theme at annual National Day of Prayer events. Organizers of the America Reads the Bible marathon invited Trump to read from it. “It’s a powerful statement that he decided to read that passage,” said Bunni Pounds, founder of Christians Engaged, which organized the project.

The passage has been recited over the decades at countless rallies, services and events, often organized around the disputed belief that America was created as a Christian nation and needs to repent of its sins and return to God. The passage has particularly been associated with annual events commemorating the National Day of Prayer, which has taken various forms since the mid-20th century and became fixed by law on the first Thursday in May since the 1980s.

The verse is set in a context far from modern America — during the reign of King Solomon in ancient Israel some 3,000 years ago. Solomon is presiding over the dedication of the first temple in Jerusalem, and in a lengthy prayer he asks for divine mercy if a future generation sins, is punished with military or natural disaster and then repents. In the key passage, God replies with a promise of restoration.

Critics say the passage is used out of context

But the use of the passage in modern settings has its critics.

The Chronicles passage is “a popular verse among Christian nationalists and has been for quite some time,” said Brian Kaylor, a Baptist pastor and president and editor-in-chief of Word&Way, a progressive site covering faith and politics.

He said its use has taken on a partisan and polarizing tone, often used in tandem with a promotion of a belief in a Christian America in an increasingly diverse country.

“This verse is not about the United States,” said Kaylor, author of “The Bible According to Christian Nationalists: Exploiting Scripture for Political Power.” It is “a promise made to one particular person in one particular moment. It doesn’t really work to pull it out of context and apply it to whatever you want to.”

But many have done so recently and in decades past, either saying America has a divinely ordained destiny similar to ancient Israel’s or simply that they believe every nation has a duty to follow God and repent when needed.

President Dwight D. Eisenhower took the oath of office in 1953 with his hand on a Bible opened to the 2 Chronicles passage. President Ronald Reagan quoted the passage in a proclamation declaring 1984’s National Day of Prayer. A speaker at the 2024 Republican National Convention also quoted it.

The National Day of Prayer, while officially nonsectarian, has long been drawn particular promotion and participation from evangelical Christians. Readings of the “If my people” passage has been a staple of such events.

Politicians, others joining in the Bible-reading marathon

Evangelicals — a loyal Republican voting bloc for decades — have formed a crucial part of Trump’s electoral base. His rallies have featured a fusion of Christian and national symbols and rhetoric, featuring songs like “God Bless USA” and T-shirts with slogans like “Jesus is my savior, Trump is my president.”

Many other Republican politicians are taking part in the Bible reading, along with celebrities, pastors and others. And Trump isn’t the only one reading a passage significant to his office or mission.

Mike Huckabee, a Baptist pastor and U.S. ambassador to Israel, is reading from a Genesis passage in which God says he will bless those who bless Abraham — a passage popular with many evangelicals who believe they have a biblical mandate to support Israel.

David Barton, whose Wallbuilders promotes belief in America as a Christian nation, will read from a passage that gave his organization its name, in which Nehemiah rebuilds the broken walls of Jerusalem.

Smith writes for the Associated Press.

On the first Sunday night of Coachella, headliner Karol G told her American fans, and her global audience, to keep fighting.

“This is for my Latinos that have been struggling in this country lately,” the Colombian superstar told the tens of thousands watching her in person, and many more on the fest’s livestream. She’d recently criticized ICE in a Playboy interview, but this set was about her fans’ resolve. “We want everyone to feel welcome to our culture, so I want everyone to feel proud of where you come from. Don’t feel fear — feel pride!” she said.

Any artist would be proud to play that caliber of headline slot. But right now, many foreign acts also feel fear — or at least wariness — about booking substantial tours in the United States. A year of brutal ICE raids, tensions at border crossings and policed political speech, coupled with sky-high prices for expedited visas, fuel and other touring logistics, could push international acts away from the U.S.

“The fears that ICE would raid shows didn’t really materialize, but there is a chilling effect,” said Andy Gensler, editor of the touring-biz trade bible Pollstar. “Trump’s only been back in office a year, so we haven’t fully seen the effects, but it does send a message that if you’re a political artist you won’t get a visa. With the economic shock of gas prices and tourism way down, the signifiers are out there.”

The music economy is still thriving in SoCal. Coachella sold out with record spending from fans, and fears that ICE might show up for a prominent Latin headliner proved unfounded. (The agency did not respond to a request for comment on Coachella, and Lt. Deirdre Vickers of the Riverside County Sheriff’s office said that their office “does not participate in immigration enforcement operations.”)

But in smaller venues featuring emerging and mid-tier global acts, some see trouble ahead.

Pollstar’s Gensler estimates that the total number of concerts in the U.S. they tracked for the first quarter of 2026 was down about 17% from last year. That could be due to many economic factors — but slower international touring could be contributing.

“The U.S. is still incredibly lucrative market, the arena and stadium level buildings are vast and you can make more money here than any market in the world,” Gensler said. “But I’ve heard anecdotally that fewer people are going to South by Southwest, and tourism from Canada is way down, and that includes music tourism to California. As barriers go up, and the economic shock of gas prices impacts touring, it’s hard to know how that will all shake out.”

Talent firms who specialize in bringing young acts to the U.S. began noticing pullback before this year’s festival season. Adam Lewis is the head of Planetary Group, a marketing agency that produces and promoting musician showcases in the U.S., with a significant roster of artists from abroad. He said that performers who ordinarily would leap at the chance to play U.S. festivals are taking hard looks at the payoffs and risks.

“Artists are thinking twice, based on what the government is doing right now,” Lewis said. “You can look at the economics — the fees are cost prohibitive to get a visa. People are scared, at the bottom line. Artists and industry people are afraid to come to the U.S. for any music event. The money is going elsewhere.”

South by Southwest, the March Texas confab for music, film and tech, was among the first festivals to feel a pinch this year. Several sources said they saw fewer foreign showcases and acts amid a broader culling of music. In 2025, Canada canceled its popular annual showcase, after deciding that hostile policies made the risks not worth the rewards. Many still pulled off successful events, but acknowledged the mood has shifted.

“The perception of how hard it’s gotten has taken root, and that has meant that not as many acts will take the chance on the threat of being turned away or risking future entry,” said Angela Dorgan, the director of Music From Ireland, the Irish Music Export office (which is funded by Culture Ireland). That organization has helped break acts like CMAT (a hit at Coachella this year) and Fontaines DC in the U.S.

“Artists want to continue to come here in spite of the trouble and not stay away because of it. There’s a unique pull to America for all Irish people, so we don’t want to see you hurting,” Dorgan said. ”Irish artists feel that their U.S. fans need music more than ever now and want to continue to connect with and support their fans.”

Takafumi Sugahara, the organizer of “Tokyo Calling X Inspired By Tokyo,” a Japanese showcase at South by Southwest, agreed: “Bringing artists to the United States has always been challenging when it comes to obtaining visas, but it feels like the process has become even more difficult than before — perhaps due to the current political climate under the current administration.”

Fans watch Karol G perform at the Coachella stage last weekend. “We want everyone to feel welcome to our culture, so I want everyone to feel proud of where you come from. Don’t feel fear — feel pride!” the Colombian superstar said.

(Christina House / Los Angeles Times)

After high-profile incidents of tourist detainments and fear of reprisals for political speech, those worries and long-dreaded expenses may shift their priorities. “From my point of view, the impact of global conflicts or wars does not seem to be affecting artists’ decisions very strongly for now,” they said. “However, if the current situation were to worsen, it’s possible that we could begin to see that change.”

Coachella usually hits a few visa snafus every year (this year, the English electronic artist Tourist had to cancel. Last year, it was FKA Twigs). Yet the Grammy-winning Malian Algerian group Tinariwen had to cancel a major tour this year, after the Trump administration placed severe new travel restrictions on 19 countries, including Mali. Folk legend Cat Stevens scotched a book tour after visa problems. Outspoken acts like the U.K.’s Bob Vylan have been denied U.S. visas for criticizing Israel, and the Irish rap group Kneecap faced hurdles after their visa sponsor, Independent Artist Group, dropped them for similar reasons last year.

The Times spoke to one European band (who asked not to be named, for fear of reprisals from the U.S. government) who had a substantial tour of U.S. theaters booked last year, before their visas were denied just days before the tour was due to begin. They were forced to cancel those dates and reschedule for spring 2026, losing tens of thousands of dollars in up-front costs and non-refundable fees. (A performance visa routinely costs $6,000 with now-necessary expedited processing.)

“Our manager said, ‘This has never happened before, but even though you paid lot of money and the check cleared, you won’t have visas,’” the band said. They wondered if their pro-Palestinian advocacy might have played a role, but now believe it was due to changes in their application forms.

That small discrepancy “meant we lost tens of thousands of [dollars], which for a mid-tier band with a loyal cult following, was quite ruinous,” they said. “We had to put on fundraising shows to get to zero, then re-apply for visas, and paid four grand extra to expedite them. We took out a loan to pay it. We felt relentlessly fleeced,” they said. “We love the U.S., but now there is a reality in which we have to cut our losses and stop coming. A lot of bands are giving up on the U.S., for sure.”

“It’s a different feeling now where the U.S. government can do anything to us, and we just have to take it,” they added. “They’re moving the goalposts the whole time. It’s scary.”

That fate can befall even major acts, particularly those from Latin America.

Last year, superstar Mexican singer Julión Álvarez canceled his concert for a planned 50,000 fans in Arlington, Texas, when his touring visa was revoked. Grupo Firme faced a similar fate at the La Onda festival in Napa Valley. Los Alegres del Barranco saw their visas canceled after they projected an image of drug kingpin “El Mencho” during a concert.

“That was a moment where people realize how serious or scary it can get for promoters with this administration when comes to the visa situation, how quickly things can change and you can lose millions,” said Oscar Aréliz, a Latin music expert at Pollstar.

An act the caliber of Karol G might not face quite the same risks, though she told Playboy that “If you say the thing, maybe the next day you’ll get a call: ‘Hey, we are taking your visa away.’ You become bait, because some people want to show their power.”

If it can happen to a stadium-filler like Álvarez, it can happen to anyone. That might make some Latin acts prioritize other regions.

Bad Bunny demurred on touring the continental U.S. for fear of ICE raids at his shows, opting for a lengthy residence in his home territory of Puerto Rico instead.

Local Latin music hubs like Santa Fe Springs and Pico Rivera have suffered greatly under recent ICE raids and have seen fans retreat in fear. Las Vegas is a major touring destination for acts during Mexican independence celebrations in September, but now “it feels different,” Aréliz said. He expects the city — typically boisterous with Latin acts then — to lose a big chunk of music tourism from the north and south.

“Vegas’ top tourist countries are Canada and Mexico, so we’re going to see other countries benefit from this. If acts struggle to tour here because of the visa situation, they’re going to tour Mexico and Latin America instead,” he added.

Tours typically book a year in advance, so the full effects of the visa issues and ICE fears may not be felt until later in 2026 or 2027. The results of the midterm elections may change global perception of America’s safety. The country is still an incredibly valuable touring market for acts that can make it work.

But the world’s music community now looks at the U.S. like an old friend going through a rough patch: They’ll be happy to see us once we pull it together.

“Certainly over the last number of years in the U.S., we have been thinking of where we could find these new audiences for Irish music,” Dorgan said. “The unofficial theme of our at home showcase Ireland Music Week was, ‘America. We are not breaking up with you, but we are seeing other people.’”

Washington, DC – United States President Donald Trump has been unambiguous about his desire for Congress to pass the SAVE America Act, a sweeping voting law that supporters say will boost election security and that detractors say risks disenfranchising millions of voters.

The push has gained new urgency, with the US Senate continuing debate on the law following a two-week recess.

The president has said the bill, which at its core would create higher documentation standards for proving citizenship when registering to vote and casting a ballot, is his top priority ahead of the midterm elections in November, which will determine which party controls the Senate and the US House of Representatives.

The bill has near-total support from Republicans, with Democrats remaining largely unified in opposition. It passed in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives in February along party lines.

The measure has since remained stalled in Congress, where Republicans control 53 out of 100 seats, short of the 60 votes it will likely need to pass.

That is, unless party leaders move to change the chamber’s longstanding rules, a transformative approach considered a”nuclear” option that will reverberate for years to come.

Here’s what to know.

What would the SAVE America Act do?

The version of the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) America Act passed by the House in February would require voters to provide proof of citizenship – a birth certificate or passport – when registering to vote. It would also implement stricter voter identification requirements for individuals casting ballots, whether by mail or in person.

Under the US Constitution, states administer elections, and currently have different processes for registering voters and confirming citizenship. Voting by noncitizens is already illegal, and all people registering to vote attest they are US citizens under threat of perjury.

The bill does not provide any funding for the new verification processes, which would be effective immediately upon the bill being signed into law.

The legislation would also require all states to run their voter rolls through a US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) “Alien Verification Eligibility” system to identify potential noncitizens already enrolled.

It would include criminal penalties for election officials who register voters without the required documentation.

What has Trump said about the SAVE Act?

The US president has long maintained that elections in the country are marred by widespread fraud, including noncitizen voting, despite there being no evidence to support these claims.

Even the conservative Heritage Foundation, which has influenced many of Trump’s policies, has found only exceedingly rare instances of voter fraud over decades of US elections.

Trump’s focus on election administration dates back to his 2020 loss to former US President Joe Biden, which he continues to maintain was the result of the vote being “stolen”. Again, no evidence has emerged to back those claims.

The president has called the SAVE America Act “one of the most IMPORTANT & CONSEQUENTIAL pieces of legislation in the history of Congress, and America itself”.

In March, he vowed not to sign any other bills into law until the legislation was passed. He has further vowed not to endorse any Republicans who do not support the legislation.

Trump also told members of his party in March that passing the bill would “guarantee” their success not only in the midterm elections but in the years to come.

Several top Republicans have embraced Trump’s messaging, with US House Speaker Mike Johnson saying opponents of the legislation “want illegal aliens to vote in our elections”.

What have critics said about the SAVE Act?

Critics have said the bill would be tantamount to widespread voter disenfranchisement, creating onerous barriers to address what several studies show to be the fleetingly rare problem of noncitizens registering to vote.

Several studies have shown that about 11 percent of eligible voters do not have access to birth certificates, while 52 percent do not have valid passports. All told, a recent study by several election-monitoring groups found that about nine percent of eligible voters in the US do not have easy access to documents proving citizenship, accounting for about 21.3 million people.

Several groups, including the Bipartisan Policy Center, have argued the legislation risks doing more damage than good. Data from a USCIS voter verification system, which some states already use to identify noncitizens in their voter rolls, found that only 0.04 percent of reviewed cases were flagged as potential noncitizens.

But as noted by the Bipartisan Policy Center, evidence indicates that the rate may be considerably lower, pointing to a review by Travis County, Texas that found that a quarter of the voters flagged by USCIS had actually provided proof of citizenship.

In another example, a review of all registered voters in Utah from 2025 to 2026 found only a single instance of a noncitizen registered to vote out of more than two million voters. There were no confirmed instances of a noncitizen actually voting.

Top Democrats have echoed those criticisms, while charging that Trump is seeking to influence the outcome of the midterms as part of what they call a years-long effort to politicise voting administration.

“The only thing Republicans are trying to save with this legislation is their own skin in the next election,” Chuck Schumer, the top Democrat in the Senate, said earlier this week.

Could it affect women and name changes?

A main point of contention for opponents of the legislation is the additional barriers it could create for individuals, primarily women, who changed their last names after marriage or for other reasons.

An estimated 69 million women in the US lack easy access to documentation linking their current legal names to those at birth, according to the League of Women Voters, which has been a leading opponent of the bill.

The requirement for extra documentation for some married women creates inherent inequality in the system, the organisation has argued.

The law would further create extra barriers for individuals who move regularly, including members of the military, and those who have been afflicted by disruptive life changes, including natural disasters, opponents have argued.

How does this relate to the filibuster?

The so-called “filibuster” is a procedural rule in the Senate that can be used to require 60 votes to pass most bills, as opposed to a simple majority of 51 votes in the 100-seat chamber.

Parties in the minority have long used the rule to temper the party in the majority, with Republicans and Democrats rarely holding a filibuster-proof 60 seats.

Being a rule of the Senate’s own making, it could be easily scrapped by the party in power. However, doing so has long been seen as a “nuclear” option. While it would offer short-term benefits to the majority party, it would undermine the same party if it becomes the minority in future elections.

Nevertheless, Trump has heaped pressure on Republican leaders in the Senate to scrap the rule, writing on Truth Social in March, they need to “Kill the Filibuster”.

What happens next?

Debate remains ongoing in the Senate over the legislation, but major shifts in support are seen as extremely unlikely.

Republicans are unlikely to bring the legislation to a vote if they do not have the support for it to pass.

Currently, there is no plan to hold a vote to do away with the filibuster, which would require only a simple majority.

Lawmakers have also not yet pursued other, more incremental procedural manoeuvres to pass the bill without 60 votes.