divided

GRAPEVINE, Texas — Conservatives are holding one of their largest annual gatherings at a perilous political moment for President Trump and with open division on the right over the war he launched in Iran.

While Trump maintains broad support among conservatives, the war in Iran is more than a wrinkle for activists drawn to his “America First” campaign pledge against getting involved in foreign conflicts. A new AP-NORC poll shows about 59% of Americans think the military action in Iran is excessive. The debate will be a subtext — and likely flare publicly — as thousands of activists, influencers and Republican lawmakers gather at the Conservative Political Action Conference that begins Wednesday outside Dallas.

The event also comes a day after a Democrat flipped the Florida state legislative seat that’s home to Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate.

The gathering will be a contrast to the celebratory meeting one year ago when Trump, newly returned to office, vowed to “forge a new and lasting political majority” and Elon Musk wielded a chain saw to symbolize how the Republican administration was slashing the government workforce and red tape.

This year, neither Trump nor Vice President JD Vance has been publicly announced as speaking to the gathering. But among those who are slated to speak are big names in the MAGA movement who have voiced conflicting views on the Iran war.

“This is obviously going to be a hot topic,” said John Gizzi, a CPAC veteran and columnist for the conservative media outlet Newsmax, who noted the possibility of greater U.S. involvement over an uncertain length of time.

Some featured speakers are divided over Iran and Israel

Among the featured speakers scheduled at the four-day event is longtime Trump ally Steve Bannon. Bannon said during his “War Room” podcast this month that should the war become “a hard slog,” it could cost the GOP conservative voters ahead of the midterms.

“We are going to bleed support,” Bannon said.

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, who supports the war, also is on the agenda at the Gaylord Texan Resort and Convention Center.

“I think President Trump was exactly right to act to protect Americans,” Cruz said last week in a CBS News interview.

Former Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz’s scheduled speaking slot is a reminder of the disagreement among some conservatives about the U.S. military alliance with Israel against Iran.

Gaetz, host of a show on the conservative One America News Network, has said the U.S. has been too cozy with Israel as popular conservative personalities such as Tucker Carlson have challenged conservatives’ longtime bond with the country, prompting criticism from GOP groups, including pro-Israel Republicans, of antisemitism.

Others scheduled to speak include Trump border czar Tom Homan and former Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Whatley, who is running for the U.S. Senate in North Carolina.

Trump’s standing is strong among his base

A year after Trump presided over the group’s jubilant conference upon his return to office, he is in a much different place.

At war while worries about jobs and household costs linger, his approval is down. His signature domestic policy, aimed at tightening voting rules ahead of November’s midterm elections, has stalled in a Congress his party controls, while the House Republican majority is in jeopardy and the party’s hold on the Senate is less certain than a year ago.

Despite the dividing lines, Trump enjoys enduring approval from his party’s right flank. Eighty-six percent of conservatives said they approved of the president’s job performance in a February AP-NORC poll.

And while Trump’s supporters remain devoted, some within the most conservative circles say division over Iran could signal trouble for Republicans in November.

Texas Rep. Steve Toth, who plans to attend CPAC, suggested that Trump’s support remains robust among conservatives but that Republican messaging on the war could be stronger.

“From MAGA people, for the most part, I don’t hear frustration with the president,” said Toth, who beat incumbent Republican Rep. Dan Crenshaw in Texas’ March 3 primary. “I don’t know that we’re doing a great job at communicating the full ramifications.”

Texas’ GOP Senate primary is a lingering issue

Another stark reminder of the contrast with last year is Texas’ unresolved Senate primary, a particular political headache for Trump.

Texas Attorney Gen. Ken Paxton, who is challenging four-term GOP Sen. John Cornyn, not only is attending the event but also has one of the event’s premier speaking roles, the Ronald Reagan Dinner on Friday evening. Cornyn is not attending the Texas conference.

Trump said three weeks ago he would soon endorse one of them after Paxton finished narrowly behind Cornyn in the March 3 primary, though neither received a majority to avoid a May 26 runoff.

Trump implored whoever didn’t get the endorsement to drop out, writing in a social media post that the bitter contest “cannot, for the good of the Party, and our Country, itself, be allowed to go on any longer.”

The deadline for candidates to remove their names from the May 26 runoff ballot passed last week, as Paxton and Cornyn were launching stepped-up attack ads targeting one another.

Beaumont and Catalini write for the Associated Press. Catalini reported from Morrisville, Pa. AP writer Amelia Thomson DeVeaux in Washington contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON  — The Trump administration urged the Supreme Court on Tuesday to rule that it may block migrants from applying for asylum at ports of entry along the southern border.

The administration’s lawyers argued that the right to asylum, which arose in response to Nazi Germany and the Holocaust, does not extend to those who are stopped just short of a border post in California, Arizona or Texas.

They pointed to part of the immigration law that says a non-citizen who “arrives in the United States … may apply for asylum.”

“You can’t arrive in the United States while you’re still standing in Mexico. That should be the end of this case,” Vivek Suri, a Justice Department attorney, told the court.

Immigration rights advocates called this claim “perverse” and illogical. They said such a rule would encourage migrants to cross the border illegally rather than present themselves legally at a border post.

The justices sounded divided and a bit uncertain over how to proceed. But the conservative majority is nonetheless likely to uphold the administration’s broad power over immigration enforcement.

Several of the justices noted, however, the Trump administration is not currently enforcing a “remain in Mexico” policy.

Liberal Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson questioned why the court would make a major decision on immigration and asylum with no immediate, practical impact.

The case posed a fundamental clash between the government’s need to manage surges at the border and the moral and historic right to offer asylum to those fleeing persecution.

In 1939, more than 900 Jewish refugees who were fleeing Nazi Germany aboard the MS St. Louis were turned away by Cuba and the United States. They were forced to return to Europe and more than 250 of them died in the Holocaust.

The worldwide moral reckoning spurred many nations, including the United States, to adopt new laws which offer protection to those fleeing persecution.

In the Refugee Act of 1980, Congress said that non-citizens either “physically present in the United States” or “at a land border or port of entry” may apply for asylum.

To be eligible for asylum, a non-citizen had to demonstrate a well-founded fear of persecution in their home country due to their race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.

Only a small percentage of applicants win their asylum claims, and only after years of litigation.

But faced with overwhelming surge of migrants, the Obama administration in 2016 adopted a “metering” policy that required people to wait on the Mexican side of the border.

The Trump and Biden administrations maintained such policies for a time.

Immigrant rights advocates sued, contending the metering policy was illegal. They won before a federal judge in San Diego who ruled the migrants had a right to claim asylum.

In a 2-1 decision, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed in 2024.

“To ‘arrive’ means ‘to reach a destination,’” Judge Michelle Friedland wrote for the appeals court. “A person who presents herself to an official at the border has ‘arrived.’”

The Trump administration appealed.

Solicitor Gen. D. John Sauer said the “ordinary meaning of ‘arrives in’ refers to entering a specific place, not just coming close to it. An alien who is stopped in Mexico does not arrive in the United States.”

On Tuesday, the Justice Department attorney said the court should reverse the 9th Circuit and uphold the government’s broad power to block migrants approaching the border.

“I can’t predict the next border surge,” Suri said.

“For more than 45 years, Congress has guaranteed people arriving at our borders the right to seek asylum, consistent with our international treaty obligations,” said Kelsi Corkran, Supreme Court director of the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection, who argued the case. “Yet this administration believes that Congress gave it discretion to completely ignore those requirements, and turn back those who are seeking refuge from persecution at its whim.”

“The people turned away at our border are fleeing rape, torture, kidnapping, and death threats. You cannot tell families running for their lives to go back and wait in danger because their suffering is inconvenient,” said Nicole Elizabeth Ramos, border rights project directo at Al Otro Lado which was the plaintiff in the case. “We brought this case because the United States made a legal and moral commitment to protect people fleeing persecution.”

Saturday Night Live has launched in the UK tonight after plenty of buzz.

Saturday Night Live has arrived in the UK after months of anticipation, with Tina Fey stepping in to host.

As SNL UK launched on Sky, viewers were all saying the same thing as they tuned in to watch the very first sketch, which poked fun at Prime Minister Keir Starmer.

Comedy legend and SNL veteran Tina is the first host to introduce the show to audiences, while Jamie Dornan and Riz Ahmed have also been announced as future hosts.

The 75-minute episode features Wet Leg as the first musical guest, with Wolf Alice and Kasabian to follow in future episodes.

“I am so excited for you to meet your cast, they are wonderful,” Tina told the audience, before promising to “stay out of their way tonight as much as possible”.

Viewers were divided as opening skit played out, with many complaining about the amount of laughter coming from the crowd. Some even wondered if it was canned, but this is not the case, as the show is filmed in front of a live studio audience.

“Are they seriously doing canned laughter on SNLUK?” one person asked on X (Twitter), as another quizzed: “Surely that laughter isn’t real on Saturday Night Love UK?”

A third asked: “Hang on? Is this laughter canned? It surely can’t be. But the audience is being weirdly compliant.”

“The audience need to calm down a bit,” another person advised, while one more suggested it was a technical issue, adding: “The laugh track is leveled/mixed wrong and it’s annoying me… “

However, other fans shared their appreciation for the show, with one writing: “Was so critical about the idea of SNLUK. 2 minutes in and I’m cryin.”

“Unpopular opinion: Saturday Night Live UK will be considered a great success this time next year,” a second penned.

“Got to admit, I did get a bit giddy at ‘Live from London, it’s Saturday Night Live!'” another commented, as one more person enthused: “I’m loving the opening sequence.”

Saturday Night Live UK debuted tonight on Sky and streaming service Now at 10pm. It was originally scheduled for just six episodes but received an extension before launch, meaning it will now run every Saturday for the next eight weeks.

The entertainment show includes a blend of sketch comedy, stand-up and live music, much like its US counterpart.

The show also mirrors its American predecessor with an opening monologue and signature segments like the Weekend Update, presented by Colin Jost and Michael Che in the US.

Saturday Night Live, created by Lorne Michaels, is a TV institution in the United States and first started in 1975.

Tina Fey appeared on the sketch programme from 1997 to 2006, and based her hit comedy series 30 Rock on her experiences working on the show.

The UK line-up of comedians features several major names from the comedy circuit as well as some up-and-coming talent.

The ensemble cast includes Hammed Animashaun, Ania Magliano, Emma Sidi, Celeste Dring, Ayoade Bamgboye, Larry Dean, George Fouracres, Annabel Marlow, Al Nash, Jack Shep, and Paddy Young.

Writers for the show include 8 Out of 10 Cats writer Charlie Skelton, Stath Lets Flats actor and comedian Al Roberts and Have I Got News For You’s Bella Hull.

Get Sky’s new TV and Netflix bundle

This article contains affiliate links, we will receive a commission on any sales we generate from it. Learn more

£15

Sky

Get Sky Stream here

TV lovers can now get Sky TV, Netflix and Discovery+ for £15 per month with the new Essential TV bundle.

This delivers live and on-demand TV without a satellite dish or aerial and includes hit shows like The Last of Us and Squid Game.

Lead producer James Longman said of the launch: “The UK is absolutely packed with incredible comedy talent right now and this cast represents the freshest voices we have, they’re bold, exciting and of course, incredibly funny.

“The chemistry between them is something special and we can’t wait to share this funny group of people with the world.”

Phil Edgar Jones, executive director of Unscripted Originals at Sky, said: “We all need a laugh like never before, so we’re beyond excited to bring Saturday Night Live to the UK, only 50 short years after it first launched in the US.

“The show’s long-standing legacy of discovering and nurturing outstanding comedy talent speaks for itself, and this UK version will build on that legacy with the support of Lorne Michaels, a brilliant local production team, and an exciting new generation of voices. Saturday nights are looking bright!”

Saturday Night Live UK is available to watch on Sky and Now TV on Saturdays at 10pm.

When governing body offficials the Africa Cup of Nations title to Morocco, overturning Senegal’s victory two months after the chaotic final, football fans were stunned.

The impact of the decision could spread beyond sport and weaken the bond between the nations.

While Moroccan fans took to the streets to celebrate their team’s belated success, the decision by the Confederation of African Football (CAF) was met with disbelief in Senegal, with fans and authorities calling the decision “unjust”.

Senegal’s government on Wednesday said it will pursue “all appropriate legal avenues” to overturn the decision and called for an international investigation into “suspected corruption” within African football’s governing body.

The Senegal Football Federation (FSF) then announced on Thursday that it had instructed lawyers, apparently carrying through its threat to take the matter to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). Such a move could lead to a yearlong legal battle before a ruling.

CAF’s appeals board on Tuesday ruled that Senegal forfeited the final by leaving the field of play without the referee’s authorisation, and it awarded Morocco a default 3-0 win.

The game was delayed for 14 minutes as most of the Senegalese players and staff returned to their dressing room, while Senegal fans battled stewards behind one of the goals in protest against a controversial penalty call for Morocco after Senegal had a goal ruled out.

The players returned, Morocco missed the penalty, and Senegal won the match 1-0 in extra time.

What are the bonds that tie Morocco and Senegal?

Morocco and Senegal have long shared close ties built on religion, trade and culture. Tijaniyyah, a Sufi Muslim order, is widely followed in both countries. Moroccan banks and companies heavily invest in Senegal’s finance and agriculture sectors. Cultural exchanges include student programs, migration and joint festivals.

But the tensions surrounding the final and CAF’s appeals court decision to overturn Senegal’s victory have put a strain on the relationship between the two countries.

Last month, 18 Senegal fans who were arrested on charges of hooliganism at the final were given prison terms of up to a year by a Moroccan court. The Senegalese government has expressed solidarity with the Senegalese supporters.

Seydina Issa Laye Diop, president of the Senegalese national team’s fan group called “12th Gainde”, told The Associated Press on Thursday that the incidents should not damage the relationship between Senegal and Morocco.

“However, there are limits: if this continues, it could somewhat affect the pride of the Senegalese people,” Diop said. “If the goal is to preserve friendship, then it must be nurtured. Small gestures can have a big impact. These are things we can move past, especially since, during the trial, no solid argument has justified the continued detention of these supporters.”

Mariama Ndeye, a student in Senegal’s capital Dakar, said the decision has negatively affected her view of Moroccans.

“When everything goes well, they call us their brothers. But when things don’t go their way, they start being nasty,” Ndeye said.

Politics and sport are rarely separated as Senegal and Morocco find out

On Wednesday, Morocco’s embassy in Dakar called on Moroccans in Senegal to “demonstrate restraint, vigilance, and a sense of responsibility.”

“It is important to recall that, in all circumstances, it is only a match, the outcome of which should never justify any form of escalation or excessive remarks between brotherly peoples,” the embassy said.

While the dispute has remained centred around the football match, bad feelings have spread more generally.

In Casablanca, home appliances business owner Ismail Fnani said he felt like other African countries were rooting against Morocco during the final.

“Honestly, my views toward Senegalese and sub-Saharan Africans changed after this,” he said. “We used to feel sympathy and help them because they were migrants who had struggled to get here. Where there was once sympathy and compassion, now I will treat them as they have treated us.”

Mohamed el-Arabi, who works in a grocery shop in Casablanca, said he did not celebrate the decision awarding Morocco the title.

“We would have preferred it to stay with Senegal because it doesn’t feel right otherwise,” El Arabi said.

“People here have started hating Senegalese. They no longer provide them with help. We used to be like brothers, especially since they are Muslims like us, but that is no longer the case,” he added.

The Senegalese government’s allegation of “suspected corruption” at CAF followed anger at perceived favouritism towards Morocco, which is a 2030 World Cup co-host and has invested heavily to become a football superpower.

On Wednesday, CAF President Patrice Motsepe defended the body against perceptions of favouritism towards Morocco.

“Not a single country in Africa will be treated in a manner that is more preferential, or more advantageous, or more favourable than any other country on the African continent,” Motsepe said in a video published on the CAF website.

Sometimes, journalists indulge in myths and delusions they claim to decry.

This grating inclination has been on almost giddy display in the still evolving aftermath of United States President Donald Trump’s rash decision to join Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in launching a war with Iran.

Like falling dominoes, a “narrative” gathered momentum among the America’s “progressive” commentariat, insisting that Trump’s order to go to war offended large swaths of the MAGA movement and set off a seismic split in his ardent base.

It is a silly myth and a seductive delusion.

Sure, a handful of familiar MAGA personalities have grumbled that another Middle East conflict betrays the “America First” pledge that helped propel Trump back to the White House.

Conservative commentator Megyn Kelly has questioned whether the US is drifting, yet again, into an endless war without purpose or meaning. Podcaster Joe Rogan has talked about the conflict’s disastrous, unintended consequences. Former Fox News host Tucker Carlson has warned that the unprovoked attack could trigger chaos across an already volatile region.

Trump, of course, parried the backlash with trademark coarseness. He lashed out. He dismissed the naysayers. He mocked allies who briefly turned detractors.

Headlines blared that a domestic quarrel threatened to engulf his MAGA disciples in a “civil war.”

The idea that MAGA has fractured is fantasy. Disquiet is not rupture. Dissent is not rebellion.

The MAGA “movement” is not a conventional coalition held together by consensus around a coherent, considered set of principles or policies.

MAGA remains what it has always been: a political phenomenon built to burnish one man’s ego and narcissism. As long as that man is Trump, the “movement” bends to his designs and whims. It adjusts; and, inevitably, snaps back into loyal line.

That loyalty remains the movement’s signature force.

For nearly a decade, Trump has tested its limits. He has weathered scandals that would have devoured most politicians. Two impeachments. Criminal convictions. A litany of controversies, including his close and lengthy friendship with the architect of a worldwide sex trafficking ring, the notorious paedophile, Jeffrey Epstein.

Through it all, MAGA has, if anything, tightened its loving embrace of Trump.

The notion that a fraternal dispute over foreign policy would shatter the vice-like bond is absurd. That bond is emotion. It is visceral.

For his embittered supporters, Trump is the embodiment of grievance-fuelled defiance. He is a charismatic champion against enemies in Washington — the gilded establishment, the media, the global order who treats them with derision and contempt.

Within that parochial framework, Trump’s actions at home and abroad are filtered through the prism of fidelity. When Trump unleashes a war that he once opposed, his devout followers accept his shifting rationales — however obtuse or contradictory. They believe he sees threats others ignore. They believe he acts when others hesitate.

Indeed, polls confirm their steadfast confidence in Trump’s judgement and his enduring appeal.

The Republican Party has always harboured different instincts. Some supporters lean towards isolationism. Others favour aggressive displays of the America’s unparalleled power.

While there may be hints of unease among Republicans about the prospect of a long, costly war with Iran, that unease has not led, and likely will not lead, to a broad revolt anytime soon.

Trump’s standing within the Republican Party remains strong. His approval among Republican voters remains high. They trust him.

That trust trumps the simmering doubts raised by a small, albeit prominent, slice of MAGA fawning pundits and a few recalcitrant members of Congress.

Kelly knows it. Rogan knows it. Carlson knows it.

The trio understands that they operate inside a MAGA universe fashioned and controlled by Trump. Their popularity and influence depend on staying there. They know the defining rule of Trump’s gravitational pull: stray too far and you will be cast out.

Predictably, Carlson avoided escalation.

Instead, he declared his allegiance. He made plain that he still “loves” Trump. He reminded listeners that Trump had reshaped American politics.

Kelly and Rogan may question the risks and dangers of war, but neither would wage a sustained attack on the president. Neither would dare tell Trump’s loyalists to abandon him.

A fleeting disagreement over Trump’s reckless adventure in Iran will not translate into a lasting break.

Even the most high-profile MAGA hucksters recognise that confronting Trump invites retribution and disaster. Their audiences overlap. Their reach thrives in the same ideological ecosystem.

Picking an ultimately losing fight with the ecosystem’s vengeful anchor is rarely good business.

So, MAGA is, at the moment, experiencing a touch of turbulence. It will pass.

Which is why the constant search by establishment media for a dramatic MAGA schism keeps producing the standard result.

Nothing much changes.

Every time Trump sparks outrage, the same prediction appears. This time, the base will rebel. This time, the coalition will splinter.

This forecast is a tired ritual. It ignores the fundamental nature of the MAGA compact. That connection is not rooted in briefs or blueprints. It is a secular religion where the leader is never wrong.

Myopic scribes mistake a fracas for a collapse. They see tension and hope for a divorce. The believers are not preoccupied with the logistics of war or the mercurial logic of “America First”. They care about the man who gave them a voice.

Once the friction fades, the sceptics will retreat. They have nowhere else to go. The undeniable magnetism of Trump’s celebrity and command of MAGA reels most reluctant strays back.

To leave that agreeable orbit permanently is to vanish into irrelevance — a bleak fate for provocateurs who have forged lucrative careers amplifying Trump’s ignorance, intolerance, and fury.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.