cites

A prominent lawmaker in the United States has announced he will return donations from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), highlighting the powerful pro-Israel lobby group’s waning appeal among Democrats.

Congressman Seth Moulton distanced himself from AIPAC on Thursday, citing the group’s support for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Moulton is slated to challenge progressive Senator Ed Markey in next year’s Democratic primaries, ahead of the midterm elections.

The move by Moulton, a centrist and strong supporter of Israel, shows that backing from AIPAC is increasingly becoming a political liability for Democrats after the horrors Israel has unleashed on Gaza.

“In recent years, AIPAC has aligned itself too closely with Prime Minister [Benjamin] Netanyahu’s government,” Moulton said in a statement.

“I’m a friend of Israel, but not of its current government, and AIPAC’s mission today is to back that government. I don’t support that direction. That’s why I’ve decided to return the donations I’ve received, and I will not be accepting their support.”

For decades, Israel has leveraged its political connections and network of wealthy donors to push for unconditional support for its policies.

In 2022, AIPAC organised a political action committee (PAC) to exert sway in US elections, mostly using its financial might to help defeat progressive candidates critical of Israel in Democratic primaries.

Last year, the group helped oust two vocal critics of Israel in Congress – Jamaal Bowman and Cori Bush – by backing their primary challengers with tens of millions of dollars.

I am returning AIPAC donations and refusing to accept any donations or support from them.

The FEC filing I made yesterday reflects that we are returning donations. pic.twitter.com/shBgHmYB1s

— Seth Moulton (@sethmoulton) October 16, 2025

Increased scrutiny

But Israel’s war on Gaza has led to an outpouring of criticisms, with leading rights groups and United Nations investigators calling it a genocide.

In light of that outcry, AIPAC’s role in US politics has come under greater scrutiny, particularly in Democratic circles where support for Israel has slipped to historic lows.

Moreover, AIPAC has endorsed far-right candidates like Congressman Randy Fine – who celebrated the killing of a US citizen by Israel and openly called for starving Palestinians in Gaza – which further alienated some Democrats.

AIPAC’s critics often liken it to the National Rifle Association (NRA), the once-bipartisan gun rights lobby that Democrats now reject nearly universally.

Usamah Andrabi, a spokesperson for the progressive group Justice Democrats, said AIPAC and its affiliates “are transforming from a lobby that establishment Democrats could rely on to buy a seat in Washington into a kiss of death for candidates who have their support”.

“Our movement’s work to demand the Democratic Party reject AIPAC as a toxic pariah is not only working but ensuring that the pro-genocide Israel lobby’s influence in Washington is waning,” Andrabi told Al Jazeera.

Even on the right of the ideological spectrum, some figures in President Donald Trump’s “America First” movement have been critical of AIPAC’s outsized influence.

In August, the lobby group accused right-wing Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene of betraying “American values” over her criticism of Israel.

Greene shot back, saying that AIPAC serves the interests of a foreign government. “I’m as AMERICAN as they come! I can’t be bought and I’m not backing down,” she wrote in a social media post.

AIPAC is expected to target some key races in next year’s midterm elections, including the Democratic Senate primary in Michigan, where progressive candidate Abdul El-Sayed is facing off against staunch Israel supporter Haley Stevens.

In 2022, the lobby group helped Stevens defeat then-Congressman Andy Levin, who hails from a prominent Michigan Jewish family, in a House primary.

While it is one of the better-known lobby groups in the US, AIPAC is among dozens of pro-Israel advocacy organisations across the country, including some that also raise funds for candidates, such as NORPAC.

Throughout the assault on Gaza, AIPAC echoed the falsehood that there is no Israeli-imposed famine in the territory and defended the Israeli military’s genocidal conduct while calling for more US aid to the country.

AIPAC argues that it is a thoroughly American organisation with 100 percent of its funding coming from inside the US. It denies taking direction from Israel.

But the lobby group is almost always in full alignment with the Israeli government.

AIPAC members also often meet with Israeli leaders. The group also organises free trips for US lawmakers to travel to Israel and meet with Israeli officials.

‘It’s interesting’

The pro-Israel group’s unflinching support for Netanyahu’s government puts it at odds with the overwhelming majority of Democrats.

A poll this month from the Pew Research Center showed only 18 percent of Democratic respondents have favourable views of the Israeli government.

Still, Democratic Party leaders have continued to associate with AIPAC and accept its endorsement. In August, House Democratic Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar joined lawmakers on an AIPAC-sponsored trip to Israel.

That same month, AIPAC-endorsed House Minority Whip Katherine Clark earned the group’s praise after walking back comments where she decried the “starvation and genocide and destruction of Gaza”.

California Governor Gavin Newsom – who is widely seen as a potential presidential candidate in 2028 – also skirted a question about AIPAC in an interview this week.

Asked about the organisation on the Higher Learning podcast, Newsom said AIPAC is not relevant to his day-to-day life.

“I haven’t thought about AIPAC, and it’s interesting. You’re like the first to bring up AIPAC in years, which is interesting,” he said.

In response to Moulton’s comments on Thursday, AIPAC issued a defiant statement, accusing the Democrat of “abandoning his friends to grab a headline”.

“His statement comes after years of him repeatedly asking for our endorsement and is a clear message to AIPAC members in Massachusetts, and millions of pro-Israel Democrats nationwide, that he rejects their support and will not stand with them,” the group said in a social media post.

Reporting from Washington — By a 5-4 vote, the U.S. Supreme Court kept in place Wednesday its order blocking video coverage of the trial of California’s Proposition 8, with a conservative majority ruling that defenders of the ban on same-sex marriage would likely face “irreparable harm” if the proceedings were broadcast to the public.

“It would be difficult — if not impossible — to reverse the harm of those broadcasts,” the court wrote in an unsigned opinion. The witnesses, including paid experts, could suffer “harassment,” and they “might be less likely to cooperate in any future proceedings.” The high court also faulted U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker for changing the rules “at the eleventh hour” to “allow the broadcasting of this high-profile trial” that will decide whether gays and lesbians have a right to marry in California.

The unsigned opinion clearly speaks for Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., and Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Anthony M. Kennedy and Samuel A. Alito Jr.

The four liberal justices dissented and accused their colleagues of changing the court’s rules so as to “micromanage” a trial judge.

“The Court today issues an order that will prevent the transmission of proceedings in a nonjury civil case of great public interest to five other federal courthouses,” wrote Justice Stephen G. Breyer. “The majority’s action today is unusual. It grants a stay in order . . . to intervene in a matter of local court administration that it would not (and should not) consider. It cites no precedent for doing so. It identifies no real harm, let alone ‘irreparable harm’. . . . And the public interest weighs in favor of providing access to the courts.”

Justices John Paul Stevens, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor agreed.

The court’s order means that the trial can be seen only inside the courthouse in San Francisco.

Last week, Walker said the trial would be taped each day and posted on YouTube each evening. On Monday, he revised that plan somewhat and said the video coverage would appear on the court’s website. He also planned to have the proceedings streamed live to several courthouses around the country.

But the high court issued a temporary order Monday morning to stop the video coverage. The extent of the split became apparent Wednesday afternoon when the court issued the 17-page opinion and 10-page dissent.

The majority cited newspaper accounts from the last year to bolster its contention that opponents of same-sex marriage have been “subject to harassment,” including “confrontational phone calls and e-mail messages” and even “death threats.” Under the court’s rules, the justices do not intervene in pending cases unless they are convinced that the appealing side has a strong legal claim as well as evidence of “an irreparable harm” if the court fails to act.

Breyer scoffed at the notion that the witnesses in this case would face harm, because they have gone on television in the past to advocate their views. “They are all experts or advocates who have either already appeared on television or Internet broadcasts, already toured the state advocating a ‘yes’ vote on Proposition 8,” he said.

Advocates for equal marriage rights lambasted the decision. “The Supreme Court just struck a huge blow against transparency and accountability,” said Rick Jacobs, chairman of the Courage Campaign in Los Angeles. “The five conservative justices are enabling Prop. 8 supporters to mask their radical views. This historic trial will remain largely hidden from public view.”

Edward Whelan, a conservative critic of Walker, praised the majority for acting to rebuke him. He accused Walker of seeking a “show trial” in San Francisco to intimidate and embarrass the defenders of California’s voter initiative prohibiting same-sex marriage.

[email protected]

In an interview with the Rio Ferdinand Presents Podcast, external, the ex-Anfield captain said there had been “five or six really interesting phone calls” since he left Saudi Arabian club Al-Ettifaq in January.

“I haven’t been ready because I haven’t got that [coaching] team set around me. And the timing hasn’t been right,” he explained.

“My daughter’s just had a baby. I’ve just become a grandad. I wasn’t ready. I haven’t got my staff ready.

“So unfortunately, those opportunities have come at the wrong time, if you like.

“But if the right call comes my way, the right club, the right challenge, and I’ve got my people set, which I will have at some point, I’ll take that challenge on because it’s in me.”

Gerrard was in charge at Ibrox from 2018 to 2021, winning the title in his last season.

“I know where I’m strong and I know there’s areas where I need good support and I need special skill sets to make me better and stronger in terms of my staff and my group,” he added.

“I felt like I had that to a tee at Rangers [with Gary McAllister and Michael Beale]. A lot of coach changes at Aston Villa and over in Saudi, I don’t think helped me from a personal point of view.

“I’d love another go at some point.

“I want to change a few things and improve a few things and come back fresh, with a few different people around myself.

“I’d love another couple of challenges doing this and that’s what I’m working on in the background at the moment.

“A few different ideas, a few different people around me.

“Now I’m enjoying family time and doing a lot of things that I haven’t been able to do. But there’s a part of me that still feels that there’s a bit of unfinished business in terms of wanting to go in and face another couple of exciting challenges.”

Israel said ‘terrorist organisations’ were motivated to exact revenge on it due to its recent military campaigns against Iran and in Gaza.

Israel’s National Security Council (NSC) has sharpened its travel warnings for Israelis visiting and staying in the United Arab Emirates, citing a heightened risk of “terrorist organisations” carrying out attacks in the Gulf State.

In a statement published on Thursday, the NSC cited a growing threat from “terrorist organisations (The Iranians, Hamas, Hezbollah and Global Jihad)” attacking Israeli targets, motivated by Israel’s military operations in the Middle East.

“They are driven by heightened motivation to exact revenge following Operation Rising Lion, in addition to the anti-Israel and pro-Palestinian incitement which has intensified since the start of Operation Iron Swords, and even more so in response to Hamas’ starvation campaign,” it said, using the names for its military assaults on Iran and Gaza.

Israel is facing mounting international pressure over Gaza’s ongoing starvation crisis, caused by the Israeli military’s months-long blockade on aid entering the Palestinian enclave.

In 2020, the UAE became the most prominent Arab state in 30 years to establish formal ties with Israel under a United States-brokered agreement dubbed the Abraham Accords. The country’s Israeli and Jewish community has grown larger and more visible in the years since the accords were signed.

But the NSC statement said “past experience” has taught Israel that “terrorist organisations often focus their efforts in neighbouring countries”.

“In light of this, the NSC is reiterating the possibility that they will try to carry out attacks against Israeli and Jewish targets in the UAE, especially on Jewish holidays and Shabbat,” it added.

The NSC’s travel alert for the UAE – which remains unchanged at level 3 – strongly advises against non-essential travel and urges Israeli citizens to “seriously reconsider” visiting the Gulf state.

While the UAE is viewed as one of the safest places in the Middle East, three people were sentenced to death there in March for the murder of an Israeli-Moldovan rabbi.

The Abu Dhabi Federal Appeal Court ruled that the November killing of 28-year-old Zvi Kogan – a representative of Orthodox Jewish organisation Chabad in the UAE – was committed by the defendants in pursuance of a “terrorist purpose”.

July 18 (UPI) — A federal judge overturned the approval by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers of a mixed-use project in Chico, Calif., after environmentalists claimed it will destroy the natural habitat of threatened species.

At issue was the Stonegate Development Project, a 314-acre development. It was to include 423 single-family residential lots, 13.4 acres of multi-family residential land uses, 36.6 acres of commercial land uses, 5.4 acres of storm water facilities, 3.5 acres of park and a 137-acre, open-space preserve, the ruling said.

U.S. District Judge Daniel Calabretta gave summary judgment requested by the Center for Biological Diversity and AquAlliance and halted implementation of the project until the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service prepares a legally adequate biological opinion that the development wouldn’t jeopardize protected species.

Calabretta, a President Joe Biden appointee, wrote that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service issued a Biological Opinion for the project in early 2020. That opinion “acknowledged there would be harm to some ESA-listed species, but that the project would not jeopardize the continued survival and recovery of the listed fairy shrimp, tadpole shrimp and meadowfoam.” It also did not analyze impacts on the giant garter snake, he added.

“The court finds that federal defendants’ failure to consider potential effects on the ESA-listed giant garter snake was based on a faulty assumption that there have been no sightings of the snake within five miles of the project renders its Biological Opinion arbitrary and capricious,” Calabretta said.

According to the conservation groups, the project also would permanently destroy 9.14 acres of wetlands. But some meadowfoam habitat may be established through mitigation efforts.

The Butte County meadowfoam is found nowhere in the world but Butte County, Calif., the Center for Biological Diversity said. The species has only 21 distinct populations remaining, and the project would destroy one population and further encroach on two others.

According to the fish and wildlife service, the giant garter snake is one of the largest garter snakes, reaching 63.7 inches long. It has been listed as threatened since 1993 and now only exists in three counties in California. Only about 5% of its historical wetland habitat remains.

Vernal pool fairy shrimp are restricted to vernal pools found in California and southern Oregon. They are found in 32 counties across California’s Central Valley, central coast and southern California and in Jackson County in southern Oregon, the service said.

The Trump administration says the cartel is responsible for a significant share of fentanyl entering the country.

The United States has imposed sanctions against five leaders of a Mexican drug cartel for killings, including the prime suspect in the murder of Mexican influencer Valeria Marquez, and drug trafficking, the US Department of the Treasury has said.

The sanctions levied on Wednesday target the Cartel de Jalisco Nueva Generacion (CJNG), which the Trump administration says is responsible for a significant share of fentanyl and other illegal drugs entering the US.

The cartel is said to use murder, including the targeted killing of women, as a weapon of intimidation against its rivals.

“The vicious attack highlights the brutal prevalence of femicide, or the killing of women on account of their gender, in Mexico. Femicide often goes unpunished and affects a significant portion of Mexico’s women,”  the Treasury Department said in a statement.

In February, the Trump administration designated CJNG as a “Foreign Terrorist Organization” and “Specially Designated Global Terrorist.”

The cartel is led by Nemesio Ruben “El Mencho” Oseguera Cervantes, who was among the five leaders named on Wednesday. The US authorities have offered a $15m reward for information leading to his capture.

A cartel commander closely linked to him, Ricardo Ruiz Velasco, was also sanctioned.

Ruiz has been identified as the prime suspect in the murder of his purported romantic partner, TikTok influencer Marquez, the Treasury Department said.

Marquez, 23, was killed in May in the beauty salon where she worked in the city of Zapopan by a man who entered and shot her as she livestreamed a video on TikTok, the Jalisco state prosecutor said.

Other leaders sanctioned include Julio Alberto Castillo Rodriguez, Gonzalo Mendoza Gaytan and Audias Flores Silva, according to the Treasury Department statement.