attempt

President Trump targeted birthright citizenship again Thursday by signing a pair of executive orders purporting to narrow it — including by cracking down on “birth tourism” and limiting which children born to immigrants in the U.S. qualify.

The new orders follow a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in June that rejected an attempt by Trump to end birthright citizenship outright.

During a signing ceremony in the Oval Office, Trump called that decision by the high court “very unfair” and said the new orders were an attempt to end birthright citizenship by other means.

“Our country suffers because of it, and we’re ending it a different way,” he said.

Trump promised “big crackdowns” on birth tourism, or the practice of pregnant foreign mothers coming to the United States, or foreign fathers using surrogates already in the U.S., specifically to ensure their children receive U.S. citizenship.

Trump said an entire industry has been built up around the practice, turning birthright citizenship into “a joke.”

“Wealthy people are building businesses around birthright citizenship. That’s not the way it’s supposed to work. It’s a disgrace,” he said. “They’re buying their way in, and we’re not going to let it happen.”

The orders were immediately criticized by proponents of birthright citizenship as an indefensible attempt by the president and his administration to make an end run around the Supreme Court’s clear finding that the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution cannot be undone by the president.

The amendment reads in part, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”

In an apparent response to the president’s new orders, California Gov. Gavin Newsom posted that exact language to the social media platform X. Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) also responded on the platform, writing, “Trump doesn’t understand the Constitution — but the 14th Amendment’s promise of birthright citizenship and equality speaks for itself.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said in a statement that Trump’s “continued crusade to end birthright citizenship is blatantly illegal,” that Democrats would challenge the orders, and that the president had “set himself up for yet another loss in the courts.”

“If you are born in America, you are American — period. The Constitution says it and the Supreme Court has affirmed it,” Schumer said.

A spokesperson for California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta’s office, which successfully sued alongside other Democrat-led states to block Trump’s first order purporting to end birthright citizenship, said attorneys there were reviewing the latest orders late Thursday.

The American Civil Liberties Union, which also sued to block the first order, denounced the new orders — and predicted they, too, would fall.

“The Supreme Court already decided this issue: Birthright citizenship is guaranteed by the Constitution. No additional executive order can change the meaning of the Constitution,” Cody Wofsy, deputy director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project, said in a statement. “Any executive order that tries to rewrite birthright citizenship will meet the same fate as the last one.”

Trump’s order on birth tourism defines the practice as “the entry of any foreign national into the United States via a nonimmigrant visa for the purpose of giving birth on American soil,” or “any effort by any foreign national to facilitate” such entry.

It orders the Homeland Security and State departments to ramp up controls to block such entries, including through the denial or revocation of visas and other travel authorizations for individuals suspecting of participating in such efforts.

“Foreign nationals seeking temporary admission into the United States must adhere to the purposes for which the Congress has authorized their temporary admission, and cannot be permitted to circumvent the immigration laws in an attempt to vest themselves and their children with lasting benefits that are irreconcilable with their nonimmigrant status,” the order reads.

The order purporting to limit which children born in the U.S. are eligible for birthright citizenship describes “certain categories of children” who it says “do not fall within the rule of birthright citizenship as announced by the Supreme Court.”

It orders U.S. agencies not to provide citizenship documents to any child whose parents are not citizens if either of their parents is a foreign government employee, ambassador or a member of a foreign terrorist organization; was “engaged in a commercial transaction to purchase or access birthright citizenship” for them or to ensure their mother was in the U.S. when she gave birth to them; or had paid for a surrogate in the U.S. to give birth to them.

Echoing arguments made before the Supreme Court in defense of Trump’s first order purporting to end birthright citizenship, Trump and other White House officials claimed on Thursday that birthright citizenship was only ever intended for the children of slaves.

“This was done right after the Civil War. This was for the babies of slaves,” Trump said.

Others have said that argument “disregards the historical record” — which clearly shows lawmakers understood that the amendment’s language was much broader than that.

White House officials said the orders would prevent a large number of children from receiving birthright citizenship, hailing it as momentous.

“It ends what has been one of the gravest and most egregious abuses of the American system, and it keeps American citizenship safe,” said Stephen Miller, one of Trump’s top advisors on immigration.

Asked if the new orders would withstand judicial scrutiny, Trump predicted they would, before directing the question to White House staff secretary Will Scharf.

“What we’re doing is taking legally validated means that are clearly within our disposal and targeting them square on to this birth tourism industry,” Scharf said. “There’s absolutely nothing in here that runs afoul of any of the Supreme Court’s opinions on the subject.”

Vice President JD Vance also hailed the move.

“Our immigration system has been exploited by those who treat citizenship as a commercial transaction, not a sacred bond. President Trump is taking bold steps to combat birth tourism and restore our sovereignty. A serious nation owes its citizens nothing less,” he wrote on X.

In its 6-3 decision in June, the Supreme Court rejected Trump’s first order purporting to end birthright citizenship outright, finding that the 14th Amendment — with very few exceptions — provided a right to children born in the U.S. that could not be undone by the president.

“Citizenship, then and now, was the right to have rights — to freely participate in our political community,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts wrote for the court. “The Framers of the 14th Amendment extended that promise to ‘every free-born person in this land.’ We keep that promise today.”

Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Amy Coney Barrett and Ketanji Brown Jackson joined Roberts in full, with Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh concurring with the outcome based on separate federal law. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel A. Alito and Neil M. Gorsuch dissented.

The ruling was a major defeat for Trump, and was cheered by immigrant rights advocates, including many in California, as the final say on the matter — though Trump signaled almost immediately that the fight wasn’t over.

MI London bowler Richard Gleeson is on for his hat-trick after dismissing SunRisers Leeds’ Zak Crawley and Benny Howell in two balls, only for number 11 batter Abrar Ahmed to spoil his moment by hitting a six.

FOLLOW LIVE: MI London v Sunrisers Leeds

Available to UK users only.

A video showing two plainclothes ICE agents tackling a man at the Las Vegas airport before walking away after bystanders intervened has reignited criticism of the agency’s arrest tactics. ICE later said he was arrested at Los Angeles Airport for overstaying his visa.

MADISON, Wis. — The Wisconsin Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected an attempt by a conservative activist to obtain guardianship records in an effort to find ineligible voters in the presidential battleground state.

The case has been wending its way through the courts for years and stems from attempts by conservatives to overturn President Biden’s victory in Wisconsin over President Trump in 2020.

Here’s what to know:

A conservative activist brought the case

The case tested the line between protecting personal privacy rights and ensuring that ineligible people can’t vote.

Former travel executive Ron Heuer and a group he leads, the Wisconsin Voter Alliance, brought the lawsuit in 2022 alleging that the number of ineligible voters doesn’t match the count on Wisconsin’s voter registration list. The lawsuit doesn’t specify how many people could be affected.

In Wisconsin, a guardianship order is granted by a court giving a person certain legal rights over another who is determined to be unable to make decisions about their life. A court has the power to remove the right to vote from a person under a guardianship order if the person is determined to be unable to understand “the objective of the election process.”

Heuer asked the state Supreme Court to rule that counties must release records filed when a judge determines that someone isn’t competent to vote so that those names can be compared to the voter registration list.

Heuer’s attorney, Erick Kaardal, argued that privacy concerns could be balanced with the public’s right to access government records by redacting identifying or sensitive information on the forms.

But the attorney for Walworth County said those seeking access to the records wanted to cross-check ineligible voters against the names of those registered. They can’t do that, attorney Sam Hall said during oral arguments, without releasing the person’s name and address.

Hall praised the ruling, saying it “protects the privacy of vulnerable individuals while preserving their dignity.”

Kaardal did not immediately return an email seeking comment.

The Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council, which advocates for public access to documents but did not take a position on this case, said the court’s decision was “narrowly tailored and should not have a huge impact.”

The council praised the court for clarifying the standard for deciding similar cases in the future, but that “it’s always disappointing when access to public information is curtailed.”

Signs supporting Judge Susan Crawford, and voting and election officials adorn the front yard of a home on South 16th Street on election day April 1, 2025, in Milwaukee.

(Kayla Wolf / Associated Press)

Liberal justices who control Wisconsin Supreme Court reject the case

In the 5-2 ruling on Tuesday, the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s liberal majority along with conservative Justice Brian Hagedorn ruled that the records are not public as the conservative activist had claimed.

The court took the case after two lower state appeals courts issued divergent rulings. One appeals court, based in Madison, denied access to the records while another appeals court, based in Waukesha, said in 2023 that the records should be made public.

It ordered Walworth County to release them with birth dates and case numbers redacted.

The Supreme Court overturned the appeals court ruling that the records should be made public.

State law is clear that the records being sought are not public and “the Alliance has no right to the records,” Justice Janet Protasiewicz wrote for the majority.

Conservative justices Annette Ziegler and Rebecca Bradley dissented, saying the court adopted “an overbroad and unworkable definition of what records pertain to a finding of incompetency” to include the forms that indicate a person has been found ineligible to vote.

Those forms are not pertinent to the finding of incompetency and are therefore subject to the open records law, Ziegler and Bradley wrote.

The case was one of several targeting the 2020 election

The case was an attempt by those who questioned the outcome of the 2020 presidential race to cast doubt on the integrity of elections in the presidential swing state. Heuer and the WVA filed lawsuits in 13 Wisconsin counties in 2022 seeking guardianship records.

Heuer and the WVA have pushed conspiracy theories about the 2020 election in a failed attempt to overturn Biden’s win in Wisconsin. Heuer was hired as an investigator in the discredited 2020 election probe led by former Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Michael Gableman. The probe found no evidence of fraud or abuse that would have changed the election results.

The WVA also filed two unsuccessful lawsuits that sought to overturn Biden’s win in Wisconsin.

Trump won Wisconsin in 2024 after losing in 2020

Biden defeated Trump by nearly 21,000 votes in Wisconsin in 2020, a result that has withstood independent and partisan audits and reviews, as well as lawsuits and the recounts Trump requested. Trump won Wisconsin in 2024 by about 29,000 votes.

There are no pending lawsuits challenging the results of the 2024 election or calls to investigate the outcome.

Bauer writes for the Associated Press.

ATLANTA — The U.S. Department of Justice cannot have the names of and contact information for every person who worked during the 2020 election in Georgia’s Fulton County, a federal judge ruled Tuesday.

The Justice Department in April obtained a grand jury subpoena seeking the names and personal contact information of county employees and volunteer poll workers. President Trump has long claimed without evidence that widespread voter fraud in Georgia’s most populous county, a Democratic stronghold, cost him victory in the state in 2020.

Fulton County asked a judge to quash the subpoena, arguing it was meant to “target, harass and punish the President’s perceived political opponents” and that it was “grossly over broad and untethered to any reasonable need.”

“Given the low need for the subpoenaed information and the highly burdensome nature of the disclosure of the same, the Subpoena is unreasonable and must be quashed,” U.S. District Judge William Ray wrote in his ruling, calling the scope of the request “staggering.”

Emails seeking comment were sent to both the Justice Department and Fulton County.

Although grand juries often work with federal prosecutors to investigate alleged crimes, “that does not give the DOJ the right to use the Grand Jury to do whatever the DOJ wants,” he wrote.

Even if the records sought by the Justice Department could help find people who worked for the county during the 2020 election who support the theory that the election was unfair, the information couldn’t be used to charge anyone, Ray wrote.

“That is because the statute of limitations for any possible crime arising from the 2020 Election has long expired,” he wrote.

The subpoena came after the FBI in January served a search warrant at the Fulton County election hub and seized hundreds of boxes of ballots and other documents from the 2020 election. A federal judge in May denied the county’s request to force the federal government to return the ballots.

The Justice Department argued in a court filing that the subpoena was the “next step in the normal investigative process” and that it seeks “records identifying persons with relevant knowledge.”

Kamal Ghali, a lawyer for the county, argued that the subpoena “will chill participation by election workers” and that the statute of limitations for any of the alleged misconduct had already lapsed.

Justice Department lawyer William McComb argued the statute of limitations issue is not relevant at the investigative stage. The point of the investigation is to figure out what charges can be brought, he said.

“My point is, as we sit here now, we are not sure what charges can be brought. That’s the whole point of the investigation,” he said.

The request for election workers’ contact information, McComb said, “would simply be a pathway to determine and speak with and interview certain individuals who worked at the polls who may have seen, heard or done something in and of themselves.”

The judge noted that the Justice Department had expressed concern about possible criminal actions in the years that followed the election, including an alleged failure by the county to preserve electronic ballot images. But he pointed out that the subpoena seeks information related to what happened during the 2020 election and its immediate aftermath.

“In these hyper-political times in which we currently live, there are sure to be some who disagree with this decision because they believe the allegations of fraud in the 2020 Election and believe that ‘light’ should be brought to those claims,” Ray wrote.

He added that nothing prevents continued investigation into those allegations by people who believe those claims — such as Congress or even the Justice Department — but the power of the grand jury, “which exists to investigate potential crimes and to bring viable indictments” cannot be used for that purpose. Otherwise, anyone in power could use the grand jury process to subpoena personal information of citizens “with no legitimate law enforcement purpose,” he wrote.

“Thus, everyone, whether you support the President or you do not, or whether you believe the 2020 Election was fair or believe that it was not, should be concerned about the DOJ’s ability to utilize the power of the Grand Jury to appropriate your private information without a legitimate purpose,” Ray wrote.

Brumback writes for the Associated Press.

The Lakers secured their starting center of the future in a massive trade with Utah on Wednesday, agreeing to send two first-round picks (2031 and 2033) and two pick swaps (2028 and 2030) to the Jazz in exchange for 24-year-old Walker Kessler, sources not authorized to speak publicly on the matter confirmed Wednesday to The Times.

Kessler, who was limited to five games last season because of a shoulder injury, is expected to sign a four-year, $130-million contract with the Lakers, people with knowledge of the situation said.

The center was a restricted free agent, but the Lakers worked around difficult negotiating limitations by throwing in nearly every first-round asset they had in addition to digging into their $51 million in salary-cap space. If the Lakers had only presented an offer sheet to the Jazz to lure Kessler away instead of working on a trade, Utah would have had until July 7 to match the offer.

Kessler’s addition, a day after LeBron James told the Lakers that he’d return for an unprecedented 24th season elsewhere, highlighted a flurry of transactions that will help the Lakers remake their roster around Luka Doncic. Soon after the Kessler trade Wednesday, the Lakers agreed to terms with three free agents — center Sandro Mamukelashviki, guard Quentin Grimes and guard Collin Sexton.

Kessler is a much-needed defensive backstop. The 7-foot-2 center has averaged 2.4 blocks over his career. He was off to a strong start last season in Utah before a season-ending shoulder injury. The previous season, he averaged 11.1 points and 12.2 rebounds. His 4.6 offensive rebounds per game in 2024-25 led the league.

Mamukelashvili declined a $2.8-million player option with the Toronto Raptors and was rewarded with a four-year, $52-million deal with the Lakers, a person with knowledge of the situation confirmed to The Times. Primarily coming off the bench, the Georgian center averaged 11.2 points and 4.8 rebounds for the Raptors last season.

Toronto’s Sandro Mamukelashvili scores on a layup in front of Wizards forward Anthony Gill on Feb. 28 in Washington.

(Scott Taetsch / Getty Images)

His three-point shooting has improved in recent seasons; Mamushkelasvili shot 38.9% from three-point range last season on 3.7 attempts per game, improving from 37.3% on 2.6 attempts the previous season. The long-range shooting element would stand out in a revamped front line that includes the return Deandre Ayton, who was the Lakers’ major free agent signing last year. He exercised a $8.1-million player option after career lows in points (12.5), rebounds (eight) and minutes (27.2) per game.

Grimes, 26, averaged 13.4 points, 3.6 rebounds and 3.3 assists for the Philadelphia 76ers last season. He agreed to a four-year, $60-million contract, The Times confirmed.

Sexton agreed to a two-year, $19-million contract, The Times confirmed, after the guard played for the Charlotte Hornets and Chicago Bulls last year. The Lakers will be his fifth team in his eight-year career, which began in Cleveland, where he was named All-Rookie second team in 2019.

RYLAN has apologised after being forced to pull out of his BBC Radio Two show.

The 37-year-old was due to be on air today, but failed to make it home from Nice, France.

The radio host had to be replaced at the eleventh hour after being stranded abroad.

Calling into Emma Willis‘ show to explain his predicament, Rylan said: “I decided to go away with my partner and a couple of my friends to Nice for a few days and just enjoy the sun.

“I didn’t have work this week, I’d managed to clear my diary and I was like, that’s amazing.

“I was flying back very early this morning, so I went to the airport and it was like, ‘no’.

speaks out

Rylan Clark hits out about friends being ‘cancelled’ after Scott Mills sacking

ON THE SPOT

Squirming Rylan stunned as he’s grilled on cheating before taking swipe at ex

“I was like, “sorry?’

“At one point I was going to get on an eight-hour train, which still would have made me late for work, but would have got me home today.

“In the end I thought, ‘you know what, you’ve done well for yourself, I’m just going to stay another day’.

“What can I do? I’m not going to be able to make the show today so I thought I can either really stress myself out about this and sweat my foundation off my forehead or I’m just going to have to swallow it and deal with it and go, ‘what a shame, there’s worse places to be’.”

Rylan was replaced by Mark Goodier, with a BBC rep confirming on social media: “Rylan got stranded somewhere Nice…”

Rylan replied in the comments, writing: “So unprofessional.”

He also went on his Instagram, telling fans: “Soz about today’s show.

“I blame everyone but myself.

“Genuinely had it all sussed out and then flights all cancelled.

“Thanks Mark for stepping in you legend. Gonna have a rosé and think of you all.”

Mark stepped up to the hotseat for Rylan to host the film and TV quiz Couch Potatoes and discovered how listeners’ holiday dilemmas turned into a feel-good success story.

Rylan will be back next week to host his three-hour show Rylan On Saturday which airs weekly at 3pm.

Sciver-Brunt first injured her calf on 29 April, suffering what was then described by England as a “minor” tear when playing in domestic cricket.

She subsequently sat out series against New Zealand and India at the start of the international summer before returning for England’s World Cup warm-up matches.

The England captain came through warm-ups against Australia and India and the first match of the World Cup against Sri Lanka but reported ‘tightness’ in a win over Ireland 10 days ago.

She has not played since and England will either play their semi-final on Tuesday or Thursday next week, depending on other results.

“The one thing you need is time,” Worth said.

“You need time to allow the muscle to repair and then strengthen in the right way. Those timelines are tight, particularly given a history of previous injuries in the same area, but not impossible.”

Calf injuries are a regular issue for cricketers. England’s leading wicket-taker James Anderson had calf problems in the latter part of his career.

Worth said this is because of issues specific to cricket, like batters having to sprint from a standing start or bowlers slamming their front foot into the crease in their delivery stride, and the make-up of the muscle.

“You have two different types of tissue that come together,” he said. “You have your calf which is the upper bit and then the Achilles tendon.

“Wherever there are two types of tissue in terms of composition, that is often where there is a weak point.

“Things like taking a run, going from 0 to 100mph, are really difficult to replicate in rehabilitation.

“You have the immediate calming down on inflammation but tendons like load and need to strengthen.

“It is very difficult to get the balance between working the muscle enough and not pushing it too far.

“Quite often calf injuries are tricky because you feel like you have done the work and you put them back onto the field in a match situation and something goes again.”

WASHINGTON — Initial efforts in the Senate failed Thursday to block the $1.8-billion fund that the Trump administration has sought to establish to pay people who claim the government wronged them, though further attempts were likely to come Thursday afternoon.

Republicans narrowly voted down a Democratic amendment to ban the payout fund and then Democrats killed a Republican amendment, which would have prohibited the use of federal money for the fund but would have sent $1.7 billion to the Justice Department’s fraud division.

It was the second effort in Congress to rebuke President Trump in two days, following the House vote Wednesday to rein in Trump’s war powers in Iran.

The dueling amendments were proposed by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.). They were attached to the reconciliation bill that would fund Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Border Patrol, a high priority for Republicans.

The votes came as the Senate began a “vote-a-rama,” during which lawmakers were expected to propose a stream of amendments to the immigration bill on various topics.

The Trump administration’s plan for the payment fund — widely seen as a way for Trump to compensate his political allies, including those who participated in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol — set off particular ire from some GOP lawmakers.

The plan has fueled growing unrest within parts of Trump’s party over his governance, compounded by the president’s endorsement of primary challengers to Sens. John Cornyn (R-Texas) and Bill Cassidy (R-La.), as well as Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), which angered some Republican senators.

Cassidy, who lost his primary and has since voiced strong opposition to Trump’s $1.8-billion fund, became a key player in the Thursday votes, voting down Schumer’s amendment but supporting Tillis’.

On Wednesday, Cassidy joined with Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) to argue in a court filing that the $1.8-billion fund circumvents Congress’ authority and violates the Constitution’s spending and appropriations clauses.

“It is an unconstitutional attempt to spend the People’s money without Congressional approval,” Cassidy and Booker wrote in an amicus brief filed in the federal court case challenging the fund.

The fund was created by the Justice Department to settle a lawsuit brought by Trump against the Internal Revenue Service over the leak of his tax returns. Trump and his sons agreed to drop their personal lawsuit against the government in exchange for the creation of the $1.776-billion fund. Critics immediately questioned the plan, and it drew a rare backlash from Republicans.

In late May, GOP senators derailed plans to vote on the immigration bill over their displeasure with the payout fund and with Trump’s desire to use taxpayer funds for his planned White House ballroom. Senate Republicans removed the ballroom funding from the immigration package Wednesday, another setback for Trump.

The Trump administration sought to back away from its plans for the fund this week, following bipartisan outcry and a federal court ruling that temporarily blocked any payouts from the fund. Acting Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche said Tuesday the administration would end its plans to move ahead with the concept.

But Trump on Wednesday told reporters he didn’t know whether the fund was dead, calling it “a beautiful thing.”

After Schumer proposed the first amendment to ban the fund Thursday morning, the Senate came to a standstill as three key Republican senators deliberated. Schumer framed his effort to ban the fund Thursday as a way to force a referendum on Trump’s plan.

The amendment “offers Republicans a choice: Do you support Donald Trump’s $2 billion taxpayer-funded slush fund, or do you want to protect the American people and their paychecks?” Schumer said on the Senate floor before the vote.

Sen. Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio) urged Republicans to reject the amendment, saying Democrats were planning to “play so many games” on Thursday during the marathon session.

“We are going to fund immigration enforcement and border patrol, and I urge my Republican colleagues to stay united on that singular mission,” Moreno said.

The amendment failed after Cassidy voted against it. Republican Sens. Susan Collins of Maine, Jon Husted of Ohio and Dan Sullivan of Alaska voted in favor.

Schumer’s amendment was uniformly supported by Democrats, including California Sens. Adam Schiff and Alex Padilla.

Tillis, who also voted against Schumer’s amendment, immediately proposed his amendment. Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Oregon) urged Democrats to oppose it, saying that the proposal would create “a new slush fund” by giving the money to the Justice Department.

“We heard over the last 48 hours that the acting attorney general said that this fund’s not moving forward. All this amendment does is codify what I believe the policy of the DOJ is,” Tillis said on the floor before voting began on his amendment. “This [fund] is unpopular, this administration has said they’re not moving forward with it; this is an opportunity for us to put it to bed.”

Responded Merkley: “Taking one slush fund and eliminating it and then creating a new slush fund still under control of the attorney general is not the way to go. The way to go is to get rid of these slush funds altogether.”

Trump has faced a recent string of failures, including the House vote Wednesday, a court ruling to remove his name from the Kennedy Center and a record-low approval rating among Americans as concern rises about economic issues, gas prices and Trump’s war with Iran.

On Wednesday, Trump lashed out against the four Republicans who backed the House war powers resolution, calling it “an unpatriotic thing” to do and calling the vote “meaningless.”

“They’re GRANDSTANDERS! They should be ashamed of themselves. MAGA!!! President DJT,” Trump wrote.

Times staff writer Ana Ceballos, in Washington, contributed to this report.

SAVANNAH Guthrie has quietly dropped hundreds of thousands on private investigators in a desperate attempt to find her mother months after she was abducted from her home.

The U.S. Sun can report that the Today anchor, 54, has shelled out around $500,000 to keep the search going for Nancy, 84, after losing faith in the official investigation. 

Though many have lost hope that Nancy will ever be found, Savannah “has told everyone involved that the search will continue for as long as necessary,” an insider told The U.S. Sun.

“She is not prepared to stop looking for her mother. She feels that depending only on the official investigation is not enough anymore – that’s why she’s investing so heavily in private investigators and outside specialists.”

The source said that the heartbroken daughter has hired an “entire independent team” who are “working leads every day” to help bring her beloved mother home.

This top-notch team includes former agents, security experts, and investigators, the insider claimed.

Read More Savannah Guthrie

‘ISN’T SHE RICH ENOUGH?’

Inside Savannah Guthrie’s plan for ‘second act’ in entertainment

According to the insider, the veteran journalist became disillusioned with the official investigation.

“She became increasingly disappointed with how communication from authorities changed over time,” they added.

“What once felt urgent started to feel far more routine.”

“When Savannah learned there would no longer be direct contact with the sheriff, she took that very personally,” the insider continued.

“She felt the family was being pushed further away from the center of the investigation.”

Meanwhile, a second insider explained: “The financial cost has become enormous, but Savannah doesn’t care about the money.”

“Right now, every dollar is worth spending if it helps bring her mother home.

“By now, the costs have climbed well into the mid-six figures. 

“And remember,  Savannah was once willing to pay a ransom, so spending big on the search is nothing new for her.”

“She keeps telling friends the same thing: The family can’t stop searching.

“Hope is the only thing driving her right now.”

The second insider claimed Savannah is still “emotionally devastated,” despite her smiley demeanor on the morning show each day.

“But she still believes there’s a chance her mother can be found, and that belief is what keeps the private search going every single day.”

Rob Shuter’s Naughty But Nice Substack was the first to report on Savannah’s ongoing investigator efforts into Nancy‘s disappearance. 

More than 100 days have passed since Nancy Guthrie disappeared from her bed in the early morning hours of February 1.

As the Pima County Sheriff’s Office remains tight-lipped, a feud has erupted behind the scenes between local cops and the highest levels of federal law enforcement.

FBI Director Kash Patel went on national television to blast local authorities, claiming they completely botched the opening hours of the investigation. 

Speaking with Fox News host Sean Hannity, Patel emphasized that while missing persons cases technically fall under local jurisdiction, the first 48 hours are the absolute most critical window to find someone alive. 

According to the FBI chief, federal agents were left twiddling their thumbs for four straight days before locals finally let them in.

Once the Bureau secured access, they immediately bypassed local roadblocks to recover chilling Nest security camera footage from Guthrie’s front porch. 

The terrifying video shows a masked predator messing with potted plants to block the camera view before tearing the device off the wall. 

Patel took direct credit for the breakthrough, noting the Bureau had to coordinate directly with Google just to get those haunting images out to the public.

The finger-pointing did not stop there. Patel openly slammed Pima County Sheriff Chris Nanos for bypassing the FBI’s world-class crime lab in Quantico, Virginia. 

Instead, local police shipped crucial DNA evidence found inside Nancy’s home to a private laboratory down in Florida.

Timeline of Nancy Guthrie’s disappearance

Nancy Guthrie, the 84-year-old mother of Today show co-anchor Savannah Guthrie, disappeared from her home on February 1, 2026.

Timeline:

• January 31: Nancy is last seen by her family
  • 5:32pm: Nancy travels to her daughter’s home for dinner, about 11 minutes from her own house.
  • 9:48pm: Family members drop off Nancy Guthrie at her home in Tucson. Her garage door closes two minutes later.
• February 1: Nancy is reported missing and a search begins
  • 1:47am: Nancy’s doorbell camera disconnects
  • 2:12am: Camera software detects a person moving in range of the camera. There is no video, and Nancy does not have a storage description.
  • 2:28am: Nancy’s pacemaker app disconnects from her phone, which is later found still at her house.
  • Around 11am: A parishioner at Nancy’s church calls the mom’s children and says she failed to show up for service.
  • 11:56am: Family members arrive at Nancy’s house to check on her.
  • 12:03pm: The family calls 911 to report Nancy missing.
  • 8:55pm: The Pima County Sheriff’s Office gives its first press conference and reveals some clues found at Nancy’s home caused “grave concern.” Sheriff Chris Nanos says helicopters, drones, and infrared cameras are all being utilized in the search.
• February 2: Search crews pull back. Nancy’s home is considered a crime scene. Savannah releases a statement thanking supporters for their prayers, which her co-hosts read on Today.
• February 3: A trail of blood is pictured outside Nancy’s home, where there were reportedly signs of forced entry. Nanos admits they have no suspects, no leads, and no videos that could lead to Nancy’s recovery. He and the FBI beg for more tips and accounts.
• February 4, 8pm: Savannah and her siblings release a heartbreaking video directed at their mother’s abductors asking for proof she is alive and saying they’re willing to work with them to get her back.
• February 5: FBI offers $50,000 reward for information on the case.
  • 5pm: First ransom demand deadline for millions in Bitcoin passes. Guthrie family releases demand to speak “directly” to the kidnappers, saying, “We want to talk to you and we are waiting for contact.”
  • Blood is confirmed to be Nancy’s.
• February 7: Savannah and her siblings share a video stating they received a message from kidnappers and are willing to pay.
• February 9, 5pm: Second ransom demand deadline, reportedly with “much more serious” conditions.
  • Savannah posts a video asking the public to report anything strange to law enforcement.
• February 10: The FBI release surveillance footage of the armed masked suspect outside Guthrie’s house on the night she disappeared.
• February 11: A man is detained in Rio Rico, about 19 miles south of Tucson. The individual was released after being questioned by authorities.
• February 12: Suspect described as 5’9″-5’10” carrying a black Ozark Trail backpack (Walmart exclusive).
• February 13: A second man is detained by police after being pulled over by Pima County officers near a Culver’s in Tucson. The man, identified as Luke Daley, was questioned and has since been released.
• February 15: DNA is collected from a discarded glove found 2 miles away that matches surveillance.
• February 16: Sheriff Nanos clears the Guthrie family and their spouses of any involvement.
• February 24: The Guthrie family increased the family’s reward for information to $1million.
• March 4: DNA on the glove is traced to a restaurant worker, and the person is cleared of any involvement.
• March 16: ABC News reports that more images have been obtained from motion-activated cameras.
• March 26: Savannah’s first on-camera interview since her mother’s disappearance airs.

Patel claimed he had hundreds of federal agents and intelligence analysts deployed to Phoenix and Tucson on standby, ready to flood the neighborhood and process the DNA evidence within days. 

He expressed frustration that the Bureau was sidelined, arguing their premier lab could have cracked open better leads by now.

Sheriff Nanos is fiercely hitting back against the narrative. 

In an official statement, Nanos denied keeping the feds in the dark, insisting that members of the FBI Task Force were actually boots-on-the-ground at the scene alongside local detectives from the very beginning. 

Nanos fired back that both his department and Nancy’s own family notified federal authorities immediately.

Former UK Open champion Andrew Gilding claimed his first ProTour title on his 442nd attempt by winning the Players Championship 16 event in Leicester.

Previously a six-time runner-up, Gilding defeated Jonny Clayton 8-3 in the final on Wednesday.

The 55-year-old Englishman scooped the £15,000 top prize after racing into a 5-1 lead, hitting double 10 to secure victory.

“I’ve been waiting for this for a long while. I can’t believe it,” Gilding said.

“I’ve had some great finals before. I remember playing Gary Anderson many years ago, he had a 112 average and I had a 107 average. But I finally got over the line.

“Your form dips and rises. You just have to be patient. I’ve had such a good start to the season, I’ve more or less qualified for everything now.”