Donald Trump

Iran claims responsibility for downing two US warplanes, as search under way for missing crewmember.

Iran has claimed responsibility for shooting down two US warplanes.

Two American crewmembers were rescued and one airman remains missing after a F-15E Strike Eagle went down over the Kohgiluyeh and Boyer-Ahmad provinces and an A-10 Warthog crashed into the Gulf, according to US media reports.

Iranians took to the streets in Tehran to celebrate what authorities described as a major military success.

Iranian officials said the downing of the aircraft demonstrates that Tehran still has the capability to confront US and Israeli forces, despite the Trump administration’s claims that the country’s military infrastructure has been severely damaged.

The incidents mark a significant escalation in the conflict, with search and rescue operations under way for the missing US crewmember.

Here is what we know about the latest developments:

In Iran

• Major escalation: US forces are conducting search and rescue operations for a missing crewmember after Iran downed two American warplanes. A US Black Hawk helicopter involved in the search was also hit by Iranian fire but managed to remain airborne, according to US media reports.
• Defence system: Iran said a “new advanced defence system” downed the aircraft, contradicting earlier US claims that its air defences had been destroyed.
• Casualties and damage: The human toll continues to rise with at least 2,076 people killed and 26,500 wounded in Iran since the start of the war on February 28, according to Iranian authorities.

War diplomacy

• Diplomacy stalls: Iran’s semi-official news agency Fars on Friday reported that Tehran had rejected a US proposal for a 48-hour ceasefire. The US did not confirm or comment on the report, which cited an unnamed source.
• War of words: Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian questioned whether the US is sincere about diplomacy, accusing Washington of hypocrisy and asking the world to judge “which side engages in dialogue and negotiation, and which in terrorism” after a recent attack that killed the wife of a senior Iranian official.
• Appeal to world: Pezeshkian said he consulted Finland’s president over US President Donald Trump’s threat to bomb Iran “back to the Stone Ages”, calling the remark a clear admission of intent to commit a “massive war crime” and warning the international community against remaining neutral.

In the Gulf

•  One killed at UAE gas site: An Egyptian national was killed and four others wounded after a fire at a gas complex in Abu Dhabi, caused by falling debris from an intercepted attack, the Government Media Office said.
• Kuwait reports strikes: Authorities said Iranian strikes hit an oil refinery and a desalination plant, though Tehran denied targeting the water facility.
• Drone interception in Bahrain: In Bahrain, the Ministry of Interior reported that four people were injured and several homes were damaged in the Sitra area after shrapnel fell from an intercepted Iranian drone.

In the US

• Trump briefed on downed plane, Iran hunts for pilot: Trump has been briefed about the downing of a military jet in Iran that has triggered a major search and rescue operation for a missing crewmember, the White House said. US media reported that another crewmember was rescued.

• Propaganda impact: Geopolitical analyst Phyllis Bennis said the downing of a US fighter jet and search for the missing airman could make it harder for the White House to maintain public support for the war, particularly among Trump’s MAGA base. The incident “changes the propaganda equation”, even if it does not change the military balance, she told Al Jazeera.

• Trump seeks $1.5 trillion defence budget: Trump asked lawmakers to approve a massive $1.5 trillion defence budget for 2027, as the US faces rising costs from its war with Iran and mounting global security commitments.

In Israel

• Strikes on Israel: Iran launched missile attacks on southern Israel, sparking a fire at an industrial site in the Negev region.
• Economic and societal toll: Simultaneous conflicts in Iran, Gaza and Lebanon have cost Israel an estimated $112bn, leading to significant cracks in the nation’s economy. Daily civilian life remains heavily disrupted, with schools across the country keeping their doors closed.
• Political shifts and public opinion: Despite the disruption, 78 percent of Jewish Israelis still support the war against Iran, though pollsters warn this backing could eventually erode. Amidst the ongoing conflict, the Israeli government has lurched further to the right, recently passing a record $271bn budget as well as a highly controversial death penalty law targeting Palestinians.

In Lebanon and Syria

•  Man killed in Syria: State media in Syria said Israeli fire killed a man in the Quneitra province in the country’s south near the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights.
• Lebanon Front: Israel destroyed two critical bridges in Lebanon’s Bekaa Valley, while Hezbollah claimed responsibility for multiple missile strikes against Israeli soldiers and artillery in southern Lebanon.

Oil, energy and food

• Australia faces petrol shortages: Australia’s government urged motorists to fill their cars at city petrol stations ahead of any long road trips over the Easter holiday. Energy Minister Chris Bowen said hundreds of service stations in rural towns had run out of diesel nationally.
• Food prices rise: The UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) said its Food Price Index, which measures the monthly changes in international prices of a basket of food commodities, rose 2.4 percent in March.
• Free bus rides in Pakistan: State-run public transport in Pakistan’s capital and most populous province will be free for the coming month, officials said Friday.

April 3 (UPI) — The Trump Administration has requested $152 million in its fiscal year 2027 federal budget proposal to refurbish and reopen Alcatraz as a prison.

President Donald Trump first broached the idea of reopening the prison on Alcatraz Island in the San Francisco Bay in May 2025, but with the administration’s release of its budget proposal to Congress he is looking to put his plan in motion.

Alcatraz was closed in 1963 after 30 years as an active prison that has become famous for its former inmates and stories of attempted escapes, but has long been a popular tourist attraction that sees more than one million people per year visit the island, the San Francisco Chronicle reported.

In the budget proposal, the administration argued that restoring Alcatraz is an appropriate response to the federal Bureau of Prisons housing “violent criminals in crumbling detention centers.”

“The Budget affirms the President’s commitment to rebuild Alcatraz as a state-of-the-art secure prison facility, providing $152 million to cover the first year of project costs,” the budget proposal said.

The request is part of the administration’s $5 billion request for the BOP, and its larger intent is to improve working conditions and pay to stem shortages of correctional officers.

While the $152 million is projected to over the first year of refurbishing the prison, there are no details of the project or longer-term details included in the proposal.

In 2025, however, when Trump said he’d directed his administration to start looking into reopening Alcatraz as a prison, his administration suggested that the multi-year project to make it usable could cost around $2 billion.

The prison originally was closed because it was so expensive to run — every supply needed for the facility has to be brought there by boat because it is in the middle of the San Francisco Bay — and had at least 36 inmates attempt a total of 14 separate escapes in its 30 years as a prison.

“Alcatraz is a historic museum that belongs to the public, and San Franciscans will not stand for Washington turning one of our most iconic landmarks into a political prop,” U.S. Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., told The Los Angeles Times.

Rights groups have raised concerns about Trump’s efforts to change election administration before November’s midterms.

About two dozen Democrat-led states have filed a lawsuit against the administration of United States President Donald Trump to block an executive order setting new limits on mail-in ballots.

Friday’s lawsuit comes as voting rights groups charge that Trump is seeking to make it more difficult to vote before the consequential midterm elections in November.

Trump, meanwhile, has argued that his efforts are meant to counter rampant voter fraud in US elections.

That opinion runs counter to the findings of independent election monitors, including the conservative Heritage Foundation, whose decades-spanning database has found an exceedingly low rate of election fraud.

New ‌York Attorney General Letitia James was among the attorneys general in 23 states and the District of Columbia who filed Friday’s suit, alongside the governor of Pennsylvania.

In a statement, she argued that Trump’s executive order exceeded his presidential power.

“Free and fair elections are the cornerstone of our democracy, and no president has the power to rewrite the rules on his own,” James said.

Trump’s latest executive order, signed on Tuesday, calls on the Department of Homeland Security to “compile and transmit” a list of United States citizens who are eligible to vote in each state.

It then requires the United States Postal Service (USPS) to “transmit ballots only to individuals enrolled on a State-specific Mail-in and Absentee Participation List, ensuring that only eligible absentee or mail-in voters receive absentee or mail-in ballots”.

Voting rights groups have said the measures would likely rely on an incomplete federal list of US citizens and would heap too much responsibility on USPS.

Mail-in voting has increased across the US, in states that lean both Republican and Democratic, particularly after the COVID-19 pandemic. In the 2024 elections, a third of all ballots were cast by mail.

In Friday’s lawsuit, the states argue that Trump’s order violates the US Constitution, which says that state officials decide the “times, places and manner” of elections.

The states further maintain that only Congress can pass new restrictions related to how elections are conducted. Forcing a change to election administration so close to the November elections will also create chaos, according to the lawsuit.

The midterm elections will determine which party controls the US House of Representatives and Senate.

Trump has previously voiced concern that he may face impeachment proceedings, should the Republican Party see its majorities in both chambers disappear.

For years, Trump has maintained, without evidence, that his 2020 election loss was the result of widespread fraud, and he has pledged reforms to the voting system.

He previously signed executive orders seeking to overhaul US election administration, although they have been mostly blocked by the court system.

The Department of Justice has also sued several states in an attempt to gain access to voter information, and the FBI seized ballots from the 2020 election during a raid last January in Fulton County, Georgia, further stoking concerns.

Trump, meanwhile, has been pushing lawmakers to pass the “SAVE America Act”, which would require increased proof of US citizenship when registering to vote, including a birth certificate or a passport, as well as a photo ID to cast a ballot.

Rights groups have warned the measures could disenfranchise many voters, including women who changed their last name upon marrying.

A United States federal judge has once again batted down a pair of subpoenas from the administration of President Donald Trump seeking information about Jerome Powell, the chairman of the Federal Reserve, the country’s central bank.

In a brief, six-page opinion published on Friday, Judge James Boasberg rejected the Department of Justice’s motion to reconsider his earlier ruling rejecting the subpoenas.

“The Government’s arguments do not come close to convincing the Court that a different outcome is warranted,” Boasberg wrote.

On March 13, Boasberg, a judge for the federal court in the District of Columbia, nullified the subpoenas on the basis that they were issued for an “improper purpose”: to pressure Powell into compliance with the president’s demands.

Trump and Powell — an appointee from the president’s first term — have been at loggerheads since the Republican leader returned to the White House in January 2025.

Although the Federal Reserve is an independent government agency, not subject to political demands, Trump has repeatedly called on the bank to slash interest rates, and he has denounced Powell as “incompetent”, “crooked” and a “fool” for not following suit.

For months, pressure had been building from the Trump White House to investigate Powell and push him prematurely from his job as Federal Reserve chair. Powell’s term is slated to expire in May.

Much of the Trump administration’s focus has fallen on renovations to the Federal Reserve’s historic 1930s buildings in Washington, DC, which have gone over budget.

The administration has pointed to the cost overruns as evidence of malfeasance.

Last July, for instance, Trump appointee William Pulte called on Congress to investigate Powell for “political bias” and “deceptive” testimony related to the renovation project.

The following month, Trump posted on his platform Truth Social that he was considering “a major lawsuit against Powell” in response to “horrible, and grossly incompetent” work on the renovations.

The pressure reached a climax on January 11, when Powell made a rare statement announcing he was under a Justice Department investigation over the renovation project. He dismissed the probe as a “pretext” to undermine the Federal Reserve’s leadership over monetary policy.

“The threat of criminal charges is a consequence of the Federal Reserve setting interest rates based on our best assessment of what will serve the public, rather than following the preferences of the president,” Powell said.

The Federal Reserve has since sought to have the subpoenas into Powell’s behaviour tossed.

Boasberg sided with the central bank in his initial ruling, and in Friday’s opinion, he called the Trump administration’s efforts to change his mind insufficient.

The Justice Department had argued that it does not need to produce evidence of a crime to seek a grand jury subpoena.

Boasberg agreed with that point, but he said subpoenas were also subject to a legal standard that bars them from being issued for “improper” purposes.

“The subpoena power ‘is not unlimited’ and may not be abused,” Boasberg wrote, citing court precedent.

He therefore ruled that the lack of evidence overall against Powell was relevant to the legality of the subpoenas.

“The controlling legal question is what these ‘subpoena[s’] dominant purpose’ is: pressuring Powell to lower rates or resign, or pursuing a legitimate investigation opened because the facts suggested wrongdoing,” Boasberg said.

“Resolving that question requires probing whether the Government’s asserted basis for the subpoenas — suspicions of fraud and lying to Congress — is colorable or tenuous. That inquiry, in turn, means asking how much evidence there is to back up the Government’s assertions.”

Boasberg underscored that he has seen no suggestion that Powell committed criminal wrongdoing and pointed to the long list of statements Trump has made attacking the Federal Reserve chair, suggesting an ulterior motive.

“The Government’s fundamental problem is that it has presented no evidence whatsoever of fraud,” he concluded.

Friday’s ruling is likely to set the stage for the Trump administration to appeal. US Attorney Jeanine Pirro has previously denied any political motivation for the investigation.

She has also asserted that Boasberg is “without legal authority” to nullify the subpoenas.

April 3 (UPI) — President Donald Trump has requested that Congress increase the Pentagon’s budget by $1.5 trillion for fiscal year 2027 on Friday.

The additional funding the president is asking for is a 40% increase over the current budget. At the same time he is requesting a 10% decrease in all non-defense spending, cutting about $73 billion from domestic programs.

Some of the programs that Trump is proposing to reduce funding to include environmental, renewable energy, transportation and infrastructure programs. About $1.6 billion would be eliminated from National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration research programs.

The budget request is being led by White House Budget Director Russell Vought, the author of Project 2025.

“The 2027 budget builds on the president’s vision by continuing to constrain non-defense spending and reform the federal government,” Vought wrote in a message to Congress. “A historic paradigm shift in the budget process is occurring and is producing real results for the American public. Fiscal futility is ending. Together, we will achieve significant budgetary savings for the American people while implementing the president’s bold vision.”

The request comes on the heels of Trump’s speech on Wednesday, in which he said the United States cannot “take care of day care, Medicaid, Medicare, all of these individual things.” Instead, the United States must focus on war.

“Don’t send any money for day care, because the United States can’t take care of day care,” Trump said Wednesday. “We’re fighting wars. We can’t take care of day care.”

Fiscal year 2027 begins in October.

The White House published a top-line fact sheet summarizing the request for more defense spending on Friday, along with additional documents highlighting the president’s spending goals. It outlines Trump’s wish to “reinvigorate” the military.

Trump is calling on Republicans in Congress to approve $350 billion in additional funds through reconciliation for obtaining munitions and expanding the defense industry.

By taking $350 billion in additional funding through the budget reconciliation process, Republicans could avoid the Senate filibuster and the need to negotiate with Democrats on Capitol Hill.

Trump is also requesting $40.8 billion in discretionary funding for the Department of Justice, a $4.7 billion increase over its current budget. The White House says this is to continue the Trump administration’s efforts to “stop the migrant crime epidemic.”

Another $1.47 billion is being requested for the Department of Defense to add resources to the southern border, including sensors and surveillance technology.

South Korean stocks soared by nearly 3 percent Friday, as Iran’s discussions with Oman on a protocol to monitor traffic through the Strait of Hormuz boosted hopes of easing oil supply disruptions despite heightened tensions in the Middle East. The Korean won strengthened sharply against the U.S. dollar.

The benchmark Korea Composite Stock Price Index (KOSPI) added 143.25 points, or 2.74 percent, to 5,377.30, rebounding from sharp losses in the previous session.

Trading volume was moderate at 1.12 billion shares, with a total value of 22.13 trillion won (US$14.69 billion), as gainers outnumbered losers 664 to 224.

Foreign and institutional investors bought a net 814.57 billion won and 716.93 billion won worth of shares, respectively, while individuals sold a net 2.09 trillion won worth of shares.

The rebound followed news that Tehran was drafting a protocol with Oman to monitor maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, raising hope of progress toward reopening the waterway.

The strategic waterway has effectively been shut since the outbreak of war in the Middle East in late February, driving up global oil prices due to supply disruptions.

Dozens of countries are also seeking ways to resume shipments through the Strait of Hormuz after U.S. President Donald Trump warned of an “extremely hard” attack on Iran within the next two to three weeks, while urging countries that rely on the key shipping route for energy imports to “take care of” it themselves.

“Iran has said the measure is intended to ensure safety and improve services, suggesting that the blockade of the waterway may be easing,” Seo Sang-young, a researcher at Mirae Asset Securities, said.

Top-cap shares finished mixed.

Market bellwether Samsung Electronics surged 4.37 percent to 186,200 won, while chip giant SK hynix soared 5.54 percent to 876,000 won.

Defense giant Hanwha Aerospace climbed 2.26 percent to 1,449,000 won, and artificial intelligence investment firm SK Square went up 2.88 percent to 483,000 won. Nuclear power plant builder Doosan Enerbility jumped 3.21 percent to 96,600 won.

Shipbuilders gathered ground. Local industry leader HD Hyundai Heavy spiked 9.23 percent to 479,000 won, and its rival Hanwha Ocean went up 7.29 percent to 128,000 won.

Carmakers finished mixed. Top automaker Hyundai Motor advanced 1.18 percent to 471,000 won, while its affiliate Kia fell 0.27 percent to 150,200 won.

Leading battery maker LG Energy Solution fell 1.48 percent to 398,500 won, and bio giant Samsung Biologics lost 1.96 percent to 1,554,000 won. Leading financial firm KB Financial shed 0.68 percent to 145,500 won.

The local currency was quoted at 1,505.2 won against the U.S. dollar as of 3:30 p.m., up 14.5 won from the previous session.

Copyright (c) Yonhap News Agency prohibits its content from being redistributed or reprinted without consent, and forbids the content from being learned and used by artificial intelligence systems.

Iran says it is ready to counter any US-Israeli attacks, insisting its military capabilities remain intact despite Donald Trump’s claims they’ve been ‘decimated.’

Fuel shocks from the US-Israel war on Iran are rippling worldwide, as Strait of Hormuz disruptions push prices higher. From Nigeria to Vietnam and India, workers face soaring costs, longer hours and lost jobs amid a deepening global energy crisis.

Ten Muslim civil rights groups have issued a joint letter denouncing the arrest of a Palestinian American community leader in Wisconsin, Salah Sarsour.

The president of the Islamic Society of Milwaukee and a vocal Palestinian advocate, Sarsour was reportedly pulled over by 10 federal agents from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) while driving on March 30.

The joint letter explains that Sarsour was transferred to a detention facility in Illinois, then to Indiana, leaving his family “scrambling to determine his whereabouts”.

A lawful permanent resident, he had lived in the US for 32 years, according to the letter, and his wife and children are all US citizens. Sarsour has been in immigration detention ever since his arrest.

“We must be clear that Salah is being targeted on the basis of his Palestinian and Muslim background,” the letter, issued Thursday, said.

It was co-signed by organisations including the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the Muslim Legal Fund of America, and the US Council of Muslim Organizations.

The groups noted that, under President Donald Trump, a number of immigrant activists, scholars and foreign students had been targeted for deportation based on their pro-Palestinian solidarity.

“His detention reflects a troubling trend we’ve seen with Mahmoud Khalil, Leqaa Kordia, Mohsen Mahdawi and other voices critical of Israeli oppression,” the groups wrote.

“This administration is weaponizing the U.S. justice system to advance the interests of a foreign state, Israel, at a time when it is carrying out a genocide in Gaza.”

The groups have launched an online campaign for Sarsour’s legal defence. By Thursday afternoon, it had earned over $35,500 in donations.

While the Trump administration has yet to issue a statement about Sarsour’s arrest, it has taken a hardline approach to pro-Palestinian activism.

When running for re-election in 2024, Trump pledged to crack down on protesters denouncing human rights abuses during Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza.

According to statements obtained by the Washington Post in May 2024, Trump reportedly called the protest movement a “radical revolution” and said that, if he were elected, he planned “to set that movement back 25 or 30 years”.

Within months of taking office in January 2025, Trump proceeded to take action.

Starting in March 2025, his administration moved to strip hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funds from universities that saw protests unfold on their campuses, citing claims of anti-Semitism.

Federal agents also arrested legal permanent residents like Mahmoud Khalil, a Palestinian student leader, stripping him of his green card.

One scholar, Rumeysa Ozturk of Turkiye, saw her student visa revoked for co-signing a pro-Palestinian opinion piece in her school’s student newspaper.

The arrests and subsequent efforts to rapidly deport the activists and scholars have prompted widespread condemnation as a violation of the Constitution’s First Amendment right to free speech and protest.

Officials in Wisconsin have been among the leaders to denounce Sarsour’s arrest as the latest in a series of efforts to stifle free speech. Two local alderpersons, JoCasta Zamarripa and Alex Bower, called the situation a “nightmare”.

“This is an illegal detention of a longtime permanent U.S. resident, as Mr Sarsour is a Milwaukeean who is lawfully present in our community,” they wrote in a joint statement on Thursday.

“The unacceptable activities by ICE — and especially illegally detaining citizens without due process — must stop immediately. How dare federal ICE agents come into our community and unlawfully detain a grandfather, a faith leader, a Wisconsinite!”

State Senator Chris Larson, meanwhile, underscored that the federal government has yet to offer any reasons publicly for Sarsour’s arrest.

“We have already seen numerous Muslim activists unfairly and unlawfully targeted by the Trump Administration for their beliefs and their speech,” Larson wrote.

“These Unconstitutional assaults on our freedoms should alarm all of us. When any individual or group is targeted by the government for their speech, all of our freedoms are threatened.”

US president has said that he will use tariffs to bring down costly pharmaceutical drugs, but the impact remains uncertain.

United States President Donald Trump has signed an executive order that could slap long-threatened tariffs of up to 100 percent on some patented drugs if pharmaceutical companies don’t reach deals with his administration in the coming months.

Under Thursday’s executive order, companies that have signed a “most favoured nation” pricing deal and are actively building facilities in the US will have a zero-percent tariff.

For those that don’t have a pricing deal but are building such projects in the US, a 20 percent tariff will apply, but it will increase to 100 percent in four years.

A senior administration official told reporters on a press call that companies still have months to negotiate before the 100 percent tariffs kick in. Bigger companies will have 120 days, and 180 days are offered for everyone else.

The official, speaking on condition of anonymity to preview the executive order before it was issued, did not identify any companies or drugs that were in jeopardy of getting hit with the increased tariffs.

But the source noted the administration had already reached 17 pricing deals with major drugmakers, 13 of which have signed.

In Thursday’s executive order, Trump wrote that he deemed the tariffs necessary “to address the threatened impairment of the national security posed by imports of pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical ingredients”.

The order arrived on the first anniversary of Trump’s so-called Liberation Day, when the president unveiled sweeping new import taxes on nearly every country in the world, sending the stock market reeling. Those “Liberation Day” tariffs were among the duties the Supreme Court overturned in February.

Critics, pharmaceutical leaders and medical groups warned of the consequences the new tariffs could bring.

Stephen J Ubl, the CEO of the pharmaceutical company trade group PhRMA, said taxes “on cutting-edge medicines will increase costs and could jeopardize billions in US investments”.

He pointed to America’s already large footprint in biopharmaceutical manufacturing and noted medicines sourced from other countries “overwhelmingly come from reliable US allies”.

Trump has launched a barrage of new import taxes on US trading partners since the start of his second term and repeatedly pledged sky-high levies on foreign-made drugs.

But the administration has also used the threat of new levies to strike deals with major companies — like Pfizer, Eli Lilly and Bristol Myers Squibb — over the last year, with promises of lower prices for new drugs.

Beyond company-specific rates, a handful of countries have reached trade frameworks with the US to further cap tariffs on drugs sent to the US.

The European Union, Japan, Korea and Switzerland will see a 15 percent US tariff on patented pharmaceuticals, matching previously agreed rates for most goods.

Meanwhile, the United Kingdom will get 10 percent, which Thursday’s order noted would “then reduce to zero” under future trade agreements.

The UK previously said it secured a zero-percent tariff rate for all British medicines exported to the US for at least three years.

Former clerk Tina Peters has become a cause celebre for the election denial movement and President Donald Trump.

An appeals court in the state of Colorado has ordered the resentencing of Tina Peters, a former county clerk convicted of involvement in an election meddling scheme in the United States.

The court overturned Peters’s nine-year prison sentence on Thursday, but not her conviction for helping to tamper with voting machines after the 2020 presidential race.

Her case has become a cause celebre for President Donald Trump and the election denial movement, after it emerged that she was seeking evidence to support Trump’s false claim that his 2020 loss was due to massive fraud.

In Thursday’s decision, the three-judge appeals panel ruled that a lower court had considered Peters’s personal beliefs when deciding upon a punishment, thereby rendering the sentence improper.

“The trial court’s comments about Peters’s belief in the existence of 2020 election fraud went beyond relevant considerations for her sentencing,” the appeals court wrote.

The panel cited comments from Judge Matthew Barrett, who blasted Peters as a “charlatan” promoting “snake oil” claims.

“Her offence was not her belief, however misguided the trial court deemed it to be, in the existence of such election fraud,” the appeals court said. “It was her deceitful actions in her attempt to gather evidence of such fraud.”

Peters was convicted in August 2024 for helping someone from outside the government gain access to the Mesa County election system and make copies.

That person was affiliated with efforts to overturn Trump’s 2020 loss, and the copies they obtained were then shared on social media.

False claims that the 2020 election was marred by massive fraud have been a persistent fixation for Trump and his allies, even after his successful re-election in 2024.

Trump’s efforts to remain in office after his 2020 defeat were the subject of a 2023 criminal indictment brought by former special counsel Jack Smith.

He alleged that Trump led a criminal conspiracy to undermine the election process and rally supporters to overturn the results. Those charges, however, were ultimately dropped when Trump took office again in 2025, as the US Justice Department has a policy against prosecuting sitting presidents.

Since his inauguration, Trump has continued to push the claims he won the 2020 race. He has also used his allegations of fraud to demand greater control over the country’s election infrastructure in advance of the upcoming 2026 midterm elections.

In December, the president pardoned Peters, even though she was not in federal custody, and the presidential power of pardon does not extend to state crimes.

The appeals court panel confirmed on Thursday that Trump’s pardon had no impact on state offences.

“We have found no instance where the presidential pardon power has been stretched in such a way as to invade an individual state’s sovereignty,” the panel said.

State Governor Jared Polis suggested last month that he could consider clemency for Peters.

Legal groups in Uganda have announced that a dozen deportees from the United States are expected to land in the country, following a deal with President Donald Trump.

On Thursday, the Uganda Law Society and the East Africa Law Society announced they had gone to court to challenge the deportation, which they called “an undignified, harrowing and dehumanising process”.

“We have approached the Courts of Law in Uganda and the region, seeking bespoke reliefs designed to arrest this patent international illegality,” Asiimwe Anthony, the vice president of the Uganda Law Society, wrote in a statement.

“Our perspective of the matter is broader than a single act of deportation. We view it as but one gust from the ill winds of transnational repression that are blowing across our world.”

Thursday’s deportation marks the first confirmed instance of deportees being transferred from the US to Uganda.

The 12 people reportedly landed at the Entebbe International Airport, some 40 kilometres (25 miles) from Kampala, by private aircraft. No identifying information was provided about the deportees.

But the deportation is the latest example of Trump’s far-reaching efforts to offload immigrants to “third countries”, where they have no personal connections — and may not even know the language.

Scrutiny of third country deportations

So far, Trump has struck deals with a number of countries to accept deported foreigners. They include at least six African countries, among them Equatorial Guinea, Ghana, Rwanda, Eswatini and South Sudan.

The deal with Uganda came to light last August. The country’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs confirmed that the agreement was a “temporary arrangement” and that priority would be given to deportees from other African countries.

Unaccompanied children and people with criminal records would not be allowed under the deal, according to the ministry’s statement at the time.

It is unclear whether Uganda received payment for its decision to accept third-country deportations.

Other countries, though, have signed multimillion-dollar deals. El Salvador was given nearly $6m to imprison deportees from the US, Equatorial Guinea got $7.5m, and Eswatini nabbed $5.1m.

There is no official estimate about the total cost of these third-country deals, but Senate Democrats in the US have estimated that at least $40m in funding has been given as incentives for countries to accept deportations.

Most of those funds, the Democrats added, were disbursed in lump sums before any deportees arrived. They also note that those funds are separate from the additional costs of the deportation flights: US military aircraft can cost $32,000 per hour to operate.

“Through its third country deportation deals, the Trump Administration is putting millions of taxpayer dollars into the hands of foreign governments, while turning a blind eye to the human costs,” Democratic Senator Jeanne Shaheen said in a February statement.

“For an Administration that claims to be reigning in fraud, waste and abuse, this policy is the epitome of all three.”

Critics have also questioned whether the countries receiving US deportees are adequately safe.

In the past, the US has criticised Uganda for “significant human rights abuses”, citing reports of extrajudicial killings, life-threatening prison conditions, and torture and other degrading treatment from government agencies.

It also noted that Uganda had government restrictions against human rights and civil society organisations, and that consensual same-sex conduct was outlawed.

According to the United Nations, Uganda already plays host to nearly 1.7 million refugees and asylum seekers, as people flee violence in neighbouring countries like the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and South Sudan.

An ‘authoritarian project’?

In his letter on Thursday, Anthony, the vice president of the Uganda Law Society, called the US deportations part of a “broader authoritarian project” that his group felt compelled to oppose.

“This development and the attendant illegalities that accompany it are reminiscent of a dark past that the global family of humanity supposedly put behind itself in the pursuit of the ideal that every human being is born equal,” Anthony wrote.

He added that US actions under Trump were paving the way for similar policies elsewhere.

“In the United States, the militarisation of society has given carte blanche to captured democracies in Africa to carry on with despotism unchecked,” he said.

Still, the Trump administration has defended the deportations as legal under the US Immigration and Nationality Act, which has loopholes for removals to “safe third countries”.

The Trump administration has also pointed to diplomatic assurances from the “third countries” in question that US deportees would not face persecution.

The “third-country” policy has, however, faced numerous legal challenges. While the US Supreme Court has largely let such removals proceed, a lower court once again ruled in February that the policy could infringe upon immigrants’ due process rights.

In the case of Salvadoran immigrant Kilmar Abrego Garcia, lawyers have even argued that his deportation to a country far from home was evidence of “vindictiveness” on the part of the Trump administration.

Uganda has been floated as one of the destinations for Garcia, who was wrongfully deported in March 2025 and then returned to the US in June, only to face deportation proceedings once more.

Trump has pushed an aggressive programme of mass deportation since returning to the White House for a second term in 2025.

At least 675,000 people have been removed under his administration as of January, according to US government statistics.

April 2 (UPI) — A Colorado appeals court on Thursday threw out the sentence of Tina Peters, a former elections clerk, who was convicted in an election data case.

Peters was sentenced to nine years in prison in August 2024 on seven of the 10 counts for which she was charged.

She allowed an unauthorized person to make copies of voting machine hard drives that included classified information. The data from those drives was then leaked online by conspiracy theorists who falsely said it proved President Donald Trump correct in his assertion that the 2020 election was “stolen.”

Trump later pardoned Peters, but Colorado officials said he has no power to do so because she was convicted by the state. He has since pressured Colorado Gov. Jared Polis to pardon her.

The judges of the Colorado Court of Appeals ruled that District Judge Matthew Barrett wrongfully used Peters’ beliefs and promotion of election fraud conspiracy theories in his sentencing.

“We reverse her sentence because it was based in part on improper consideration of her exercise of her right to free speech,” the court wrote, sending her case back to the trial judge. Now Barrett must re-sentence Peters without using her beliefs to make the decision, the appeals judges said.

At the sentencing, Barrett said Peters had no remorse and called her a “charlatan” who abused her position to “peddle snake oil.”

“I am convinced you would do it all over again if you could,” The Hill reported Barrett said. “You’re as defiant as any defendant this court has ever seen.”

In its decision, the appeals court said her beliefs shouldn’t color the sentencing.

“Her offense was not her belief, however misguided the trial court deemed it to be, in the existence of such election fraud; it was her deceitful actions in her attempt to gather evidence of such fraud. Indeed, under these circumstances, just as her purported beliefs underlying her motive for her actions were not relevant to her defense, the trial court should not have considered those beliefs relevant when imposing sentence.”

The appeals court did not overturn Peters’ conviction and formally said Trump doesn’t have the power to pardon a person for state law offenses.

“The crux of Peters’ argument is that the phrase ‘Offences against the United States’ includes an offense against any of the states in the union,” the court wrote. “We join what appears to us to be every other appellate court that has addressed the issue and reject such an expansive reading of the phrase.”

Peters served as a clerk in Mesa County, Colo., whose county seat is Grand Junction, in western Colorado.

She was convicted on three counts of attempting to influence a public servant and one count each of conspiracy to commit criminal impersonation, first-degree misconduct, violation of duty and failure to comply with the requirements of the secretary of state.

EXPLAINER

As the war enters day 34, US President Donald Trump said Washington was close to achieving its objectives.

Iran has launched a new wave of missiles at Israel after United States President Donald Trump said Washington had “destroyed the Iranian military” and was close to achieving its war objectives.

Trump’s address to the nation came hours after he said Tehran had asked for a ceasefire, a claim Iran denied.

Meanwhile, Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian said his country held no hostility towards the people of the United States, Europe or neighbouring countries.

Here is what we know:

In Iran

• War intensifies: The US-Israel war on Iran continues to escalate, with US-Israeli bombing campaigns causing casualties and damage across the country, while Iranian forces continue missile and drone counterattacks.
• Stalled diplomacy: Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said that while Iran has received messages from the US, trust remains “at zero” for any potential negotiations.
• Appeals to Americans: Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian has called on the US public to question Washington’s motives for continuing the war. In an open letter shared by state broadcaster PressTV, he asked whether Trump’s “America First” policy was “truly among the priorities of the US government today”.
• Iran calls US demands ‘irrational’: Iran said on Thursday that Washington’s demands were “maximalist and irrational” and denied any negotiations were under way on a ceasefire to end the war.
• Senior Iranian politician wounded in strike: Former Iranian foreign minister Kamal Kharazi was seriously wounded when a strike hit his Tehran home, killing his wife, Iranian media reported. Kharazi has reportedly been involved in the back-channel communication involving Pakistan, aimed at bringing Tehran and Washington back to the negotiating table.

In the Gulf

• Intercepted missiles: The United Arab Emirates said it has been intercepting incoming missiles and drones launched by Iran.
• Trump thanks Gulf allies: During his speech, Trump specifically thanked the Gulf states, acknowledging that they have come under fire from Iran in retaliation for the strikes. He praised their support and pledged that the US “will not let them get hurt or fail in any way, shape or form”.
• Tanker struck off Qatar: A tanker has been hit by a projectile off the coast of Qatar’s capital Doha, a British maritime security agency said, reporting damage but no casualties.

In the US

• Trump’s address to the US: Trump gave a speech claiming that the core strategic objectives of the US in the war are “nearing completion” and pledged to “finish the job”.
• Disputed ceasefire claims: The US president said that Iran requested a ceasefire, a statement that Tehran was quick to deny.
• Trump speech shows ‘no clear plan’: Trita Parsi of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft said Trump’s primetime address offered little new and largely repeated his recent statements. “It was essentially a summary of all the tweets he has issued over the last 30 days,” Parsi said, adding that the lack of new details suggests the president does not have a clear plan.

In Israel

• Israel says Iran launches more missiles: Israel’s military said early on Thursday its air defences were operating to down missiles fired from Iran. “Defensive systems are operating to intercept the threat,” the Israeli military said on its official Telegram account.
• Israel medics say 14 wounded: Israel’s emergency services said 14 people, including an 11-year-old girl, were wounded near Tel Aviv during a missile attack that the military blamed on Iran.
• Trump speech welcomed in Israel: According to Al Jazeera’s Rob McBride in Amman, Trump’s timeline for the war appears to align closely with Israel’s PM Benjamin Netanyahu’s own assessment of the campaign, after the US president said in a televised address that Washington was close to achieving its objectives and that the conflict could end within weeks.

In Lebanon, Iraq

• Strike on Beirut: Israel killed a senior Hezbollah commander in an attack on Beirut that killed at least seven people, according to Lebanon’s Ministry of Public Health.
• Air strike on Iraq base kills seven fighters: An aerial attack on a military base in Iraq’s western Anbar province killed seven fighters and wounded 13 others, according to the country’s Ministry of Defence. The strikes on Wednesday hit a military healthcare clinic at the Habbaniyah base.

World economy

• World Bank raises alarm: The World Bank is “extremely concerned” about the impact the conflict will have on inflation, jobs and food security, and is in talks with member states on how to address immediate needs in the crisis, a top official told AFP on Wednesday.
• Stocks rally, oil falls: Global stocks rallied on Wednesday and oil prices fell after Trump said the war could be over within weeks, despite Tehran pushing back against his comments.

April 1 (UPI) — President Donald Trump told the nation Wednesday night that the U.S. military was close to achieving its goals in the war against Iran and would bomb the nation “back to the stone ages where they belong” over the next two weeks to finish the job.

In the nearly 20-minute, prime-time address to the nation, Trump repeated claims of military successes in the war, while offering little new information about the progress of Operation Epic Fury.

He said U.S. forces “have delivered swift, decisive, overwhelming victories on the battlefield” and “never in the history of warfare has an enemy suffered such clear and devastating large-scale losses in a matter of weeks.”

“Our enemies are losing and America, as it has been for the five years under my presidency, is winning and now winning bigger than ever before,” he said.

Trump offered no specifics on how or precisely when the war will end, while claiming the military objectives he announced shortly after the war began in late February were “nearing completion.”

“We’re going to finish the job. And we’re going to finish it very fast. We’re getting very close,” he said.

In his early Feb. 28 address, he said the military goals were to defend the American people by eliminating threats posed by Iran; ensure its proxy militias no longer destabilize the region and attack U.S. forces; destroy its missile capabilities, missile industry and navy; and ensure the Iranian regime does not obtain a nuclear weapon.

His first address notably encouraged regime change, urging Iranians to “take over your government.”

In his address Wednesday night, Trump claimed regime change had occurred, though there has been no clear indication Iran is under fundamentally different leadership.

Democrats were quick to criticize Trump over what they called shifting military objectives and for failing to lay out an exit plan.

“This war of impulse & illusion is plagued by confused, chaotic & contradictory objectives — none seem to have been achieved,” Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut said in a statement.

Trump also said the U.S. military was fighting the war to help its allies, while calling on those who receive oil that transits through the important Strait of Hormuz chokepoint to “take care of that passage.”

Iran has been maintaining a blockade of the important trade route through which 20% of global oil and liquefied natural gas flow by attacking tankers that attempt passage.

The near halt in energy deliveries through the route has drive up gas prices at pumps in the United States and across the world but also the price of oil on the markets to $106.05 a barrel for Brent crude, compared to about $72 before the war.

He instructed those nations reliant on the Hormuz Strait to seize it from Iran.

“They must cherish it. They must grab it and cherish it,” he said. “They can do it easily. We will be helpful, but they should take the lead in protecting the oil that they so desperately depend on.”

But even if they do not act, “when this conflict is over, the strait will open up naturally,” he said. “It’ll just open up naturally.”

While briefly touching on the economic effects of the war on Americans, he blamed Iran for attacking tankers and Persian Gulf countries while assuring them that the economic situation would have been worse if they hadn’t attacked Iran and allowed it to secure a nuclear weapon.

“This is yet more proof that Iran can never be trusted with nuclear weapons. They will use them and they will use them quickly,” he said. “It would lead to decades of extortion, economic pain and instability worse than you can ever imagine.”

Threats against Iran were also made. Despite ssaying the U.S. military will “hit them extremely hard over the next two weeks,” American forces will attack key oil and electric generating plants if Iran does not reach an agreement with the United States, seemingly to end the war.

Trump late last month offered Iran an ultimatum to reach an agreement with the United States to reopen the Strait of Hormuz or have its energy facilities obliterated. He gave them an April 6 deadline.

On Tuesday, the president told reporters that a deal with Iran was unnecessary.

In concluding his address Wednesday night, he referred to the war as “a true investment in your children and grandchildren’s future.”

“Tonight, every American can look forward to a day when we are finally free from the wickedness of Iranian aggression and the specter of nuclear blackmail,” he said.

April 1 (UPI) — A federal judge ruled that a civil suit against President Donald Trump for his actions on Jan. 6, 2021, can continue.

District Court Judge Amit Mehta ruled Tuesday that Trump’s speech on the Ellipse in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 6 was not covered by the Supreme Court‘s immunity ruling, meaning it could not be considered a core presidential act.

The suit was brought by several Democratic lawmakers and Oakland, Calif., Mayor Barbara J. Lee. The American Civil Liberties Union is also helping with the case.

“President Trump has not shown that the Speech reasonably can be understood as falling within the outer perimeter of his Presidential duties,” Mehta wrote in his decision. “The content of the Ellipse Speech confirms that it is not covered by official-acts immunity.”

Trump has tried to get the case thrown out by claiming presidential immunity for his actions on that day and in the weeks before it.

But Mehta said, “Nearly all the individuals who ran the nuts and bolts of the operation [the Jan. 6 rally] were former Campaign officials, paid staff or consultants, who had concluded their formal work for the Campaign within the 60 days prior to January 6. In fact, on January 4, the President met with [Katrina] Pierson, still a senior campaign advisor only four days prior, in the White House to discuss the Rally’s production elements and speaker list. She — not White House officials — communicated the President’s wishes back to Rally organizers.”

Mehta also declared that Trump’s phone call to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger asking him to “find” more votes “can only reasonably be viewed as the act of an office-seeker” and was an effort “to alter the outcome of Georgia’s election, not those of an incumbent President acting in his official capacity.”

Joseph Sellers, an attorney for the plaintiffs, said he welcomed the ruling.

“We’re very pleased that the court recognized that President Trump cannot avoid accountability for his conduct on Jan. 6, 2021,” Sellers said in an interview with Politico. “This decision, if it holds up, is going to pave the way to a trial in federal district court on these claims.”

In a statement, Trump’s legal team disputed the judge’s conclusion.

“The facts show that on January 6, 2021, President Trump was acting on behalf of the American people, carrying out his official duties as President of the United States,” Politico reported the statement said. “President Trump will continue to fight back against the Democrat Witch Hoaxes and keep delivering historic results for the American People.”

“Donald Trump thinks he can get away with murder,” Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., one of the plaintiffs, said in a statement.

“This lawsuit is long overdue for his hand in the destruction of our Capitol and the attack on our democracy on January 6. This case is for my colleagues, the brave Capitol Police officers, Americans everywhere, and the future of our nation. Those who incited and fueled the violence must be held responsible. I’m thankful that we will get some accountability and some measure of closure from that dark day. And that finally, the truth will come to light. We deserve it,” Swalwell said.

A senior Iranian official has laughed in response to US President Donald Trump’s claim that Iran’s president has asked for a ceasefire, Al Jazeera’s Ali Hashem says Trump’s comments come a day after Iran’s foreign minister said his country was not looking for a ceasefire.

April 1 (UPI) — The U.S. Supreme Court is hearing oral arguments in a case on Wednesday that could reshape what it means to be a U.S. citizen.

The case, Trump vs. Barbara, is over President Donald Trump‘s Jan. 20, 2025, executive order “Protecting the meaning and value of American citizenship,” which seeks to change the application of the Citizenship Clause, ending birthright citizenship.

In his executive order, Trump argued that the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution “has never been interpreted to extend citizenship universally to everyone born within the United States.”

The law of the land, as it has been recognized since the ratification of the 14th Amendment in 1868, has been that “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.”

Trump’s executive order remains blocked from taking effect, with lower courts affirming that his attempt to end birthright citizenship is unconstitutional. In December, the Supreme Court agreed to take up the case, beginning with oral arguments starting on Wednesday.

U.S. Solicitor General John Sauer will argue on behalf of the Trump administration.

“If the Trump executive order is upheld, it would mark an enormous change in how the United States understands who is a citizen and who is not,” Kate Masur, John D. MacArthur Professor of History at Northwestern University, told UPI.

Masur filed an amicus brief supporting a challenge to Trump’s executive order.

“There’s certainly never been a president who issued an executive order trying to undermine birthright citizenship in this way,” Masur said. “Congress has repeatedly, through legislation, affirmed birthright citizenship and the Supreme Court has also affirmed birthright citizenship.”

The Trump administration’s argument against birthright citizenship hinges on its interpretation of the term “jurisdiction” in the context of the clause “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.”

In an amicus brief by Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and other Republican lawmakers, they contest that the authors of the 14th Amendment could have written “subject to the laws.” Instead, the use of the term “jurisdiction” requires “allegiance” to the United States.

“Allegiance is also a reciprocal relationship. The person must be present with the consent of the sovereign, a factor on which this Court extensively relied in United States v. Wong Kim Ark,” the Republican lawmakers argue. “But illegal aliens and their children are present in the United States without consent, i.e., only by defying its laws.”

The lawmakers also argue that their interpretation of total allegiance looks to “early English caselaw.”

The challenges to birthright citizenship by Republicans are not new, Masur said.

The Wong Kim Ark case that the Republican lawmakers referred to affirmed birthright citizenship under the 14th Amendment. The case was brought on when the U.S. government denied the son of Chinese Immigrants, Wong Kim Ark, re-entry into the United States.

Ark, who was born in San Francisco, had taken a trip to China and was detained upon his return to the United States. The case took place in 1898, more than a decade after the passage of the Chinese Exclusion Act, which prohibited Chinese workers from seeking citizenship in the United States.

Since Wong Kim Ark, there have continued to be opponents of birthright citizenship, though the immigrant groups their movements targeted have changed. Since the 1990s, immigrants from Spanish-speaking countries have largely been the central focus of those seeking to end birthright citizenship.

Former Sen. Steve King, R-Iowa, repeatedly introduced legislation on Capitol Hill trying to end birthright citizenship. His most recent effort was in 2015. In 2019, King was removed from all committee assignments after defending white supremacy and white nationalism, following years of racist comments throughout his 17-year career.

“The thing that these movements have in common over time is their desire to limit who among people born in the United States gets to be a citizen,” Masur said. “Usually it is driven by various anti-immigrant sentiments.”

Daisy Hernandez, author of Citizenship: Notes on an American Myth, told UPI that there are modern examples of what happens when birthright citizenship is taken away.

The Dominican Republic amended its constitution in 2010 to remove birthright citizenship for Haitians in the country. In 2013, it made the law retroactive to 1929, removing the citizenship of an estimated 200,000 people overnight.

“That is an example of what would happen in the United States. However, for us it would happen in terms of millions of people,” Hernandez said.

Children of immigrants who have their citizenship revoked become stateless, Hernandez explained. With no country to call home, they are left adrift without the right to exist anywhere.

“Statelessness means that you have no government which you can turn to in any way,” she said. “It means you do not have any documentation of any kind. You don’t have documentation that you have a right to be anywhere. The philosopher Hannah Arendt said ‘citizenship is the right to have rights.’ You need a government to recognize that you have rights.”

There are more than 4 million children in the United States who have parents who are undocumented immigrants.

If Trump’s executive order is allowed to stand by the Supreme Court, Hernandez and Masur said the United States could return to an era of the 19th century when citizenship varied from state to state.

“It is really jarring to remember once upon a time certain states within the United States recognized the citizenship and humanity of Black Americans and we had other states that did not,” Hernandez said. “So are we going to end up in a situation where a child born to an undocumented parent is recognized as a citizen as long as they stay within the state of New York or of Massachusetts but would then become stateless if they crossed into Connecticut or further south or further west?”

Most countries in the Western Hemisphere recognize birthright citizenship. The Dominican Republic and Colombia are rare exceptions.

“We have always understood being American as being very closely tied with birthright citizenship,” Hernandez said. “It would be a collapse of how we understand American identity in the United States.”

Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi tells Talk to Al Jazeera that Iran is not negotiating with the United States, despite ongoing exchanges of messages, including direct communication from US envoy Steve Witkoff.

Araghchi says talks lack trust, adding that no response has been given to US proposals, and that there is no basis for negotiations. Araghchi outlines Iran’s conditions for ending the war, warns against threats and deadlines, and signals a readiness to continue defending the country as regional tensions escalate.

April 1 (UPI) — A federal judge has blocked construction of President Donald Trump‘s $400 million White House ballroom, ruling the New York real estate developer does not have congressional authorization to continue the project.

“The President of the United States is the steward of the White House for future generations of First Families. He is not, however, the owner!” U.S. District Judge Richard Leon for the District of Columbia wrote in the ruling.

Trump has said building a White House ballroom had been a dream of his since before he was president. Construction of the 90,000-square-foot building began with the demolition of the East Wing of the White House in October. Initially said to cost $200 million, the ballroom’s price tag has since doubled. Trump has said it will be financed by private donors.

In December, the National Trust for Historic Preservation sued the Trump administration to halt construction, arguing the project has not been authorized by Congress as required by U.S. law.

In response, the Trump administration has claimed Congress has already given him authority to construct the project, pointing to a statute that Leon, a President George W. Bush appointee, said only permits the president “to conduct ordinary maintenance and repair of the White House.”

Leon said the Trump administration’s understanding of the law assumes Congress has granted “nearly unlimited power to the President to construct anything, anywhere on federal land in the District of Columbia, regardless of the source of funds.”

“This clearly is not how Congress and former Presidents have managed the White House for centuries, and this Court will not be the first to hold that Congress has ceded its powers in such a significant fashion,” he said in the 35-page ruling.

For Trump to continue with the project, he can ask Congress to either appropriate the funds or approve of another funding scheme, he said.

“Unfortunately for Defendants, unless and until Congress blesses this project through statutory authorization, construction has to stop!”

In awarding the National Trust for Historic Preservation an injunction, Leon delayed its enforcement for 14 days in acknowledgment that the Trump administration intends to appeal his decision and that stopping an ongoing construction project may raise logistical issues.

“We are pleased with Judge Leon’s ruling today to order a halt to any further ballroom construction until the Administration complies with the law and obtains express authorization to go forward,” Carol Quillen, president and CEO of the nonprofit organization, said in a statement.

“This is a win for the American people on a project that forever impacts one of the most beloved and iconic places in our nation.”

Trump lambasted the decision on his Truth Social platform.

“He is WRONG! Congressional approval has never been given on anything in these circumstances, big or small, having to do with construction at the White House,” he said in a statement.

In an earlier statement issued after the ruling was made, Trump insulted the National Trust for Historic Preservation as “a Radical Left Group of Lunatics.”

According to the White House Historical Association, Congress has long been responsible for appropriating funds for the care, repair, refurnishing and maintenance of the White House, and Congress approved the Truman-era reconstruction project from 1948 to 1952.