Donald Trump

Nov. 12 (UPI) — Adelita Grijalva was sworn in Wednesday afternoon on the floor of the House of Representatives by Speaker Mike Johnson after the Democrat was elected two months ago in Arizona.

Immediately after the ceremony, she became the 218th House member to sign the discharge petition, the bare minimum to approve a floor vote on legislation compelling the federal government to release the case files of Jeffrey Epstein.

Grijalva, 55, won a special election Sept. 23 to fill the vacant 7th Congressional District seat after Rep. Raul Grijalva, her father and fellow Democrat, died March 13. Six days later, Democrat Gov. Katie Hobbs ordered dates for the primary and general election.

Democrats now hold 214 House seats to the Republicans’ 2019, with two still vacant.

Wednesday’s ceremony occurred before the scheduled House vote on the Senate-approved measure to fund the federal government so that it can reopen after being shut down for a record 43 days.

Johnson didn’t swear her in while the House was on an extended recess that started Sept. 19 and lasted until Wednesday amid the federal government shutdown.

“What is most concerning is not what this administration has done, but what the majority in this body has failed to do: Hold Trump accountable as a coequal branch of government that we are,” Grijalva told House members.

Grijalva said the delay deprived 813,000 people in southern Arizona of her support while the shutdown endured.

Grijalva didn’t have a working office phone, an office budget or the ability to use government systems. She also couldn’t open office in her southern Arizona district.

“This is an abuse of power,” she said. “One individual should not be able to unilaterally obstruct the swearing in of a duly elected member of Congress for political reasons.”

Johnson earlier said he would swear in Grijalva when the House reconvened, which spurred federal lawsuits accusing the House speaker of delaying the matter.

John was accused of delaying the swearing in so the petition wouldn’t have enough votes to look at the Department of Justice investigation of the financier and convicted sex offender involving minors who committed suicide while jailed in New York City and was awaiting a federal trial on other charges.

Johnson told reporters Wednesday night that the House will vote next week on whether to force the release of documents. He said he would bypass the seven-day waiting period and instead “we’re going to put that on the floor for a full vote next week, as soon as we get back.”

The petition has signatures from all Democrats and four Republicans.

Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna of California told reporters Wednesday night: “I believe we’re going to get 40, 50 Republicans voting with us on the release. And if we get that kind of overwhelming vote, that’s going to push the Senate and it’s going to push for a release of the files from the Justice Department.”

Khanna and Republican Thomas Massie of Kentucky introduced the Epstein Files Transparency Act in July.

Grijalva signed it with two Epstein survivors watching in the gallery.

“Just this morning, House Democrats released more emails showing that Trump knew more about Epstein’s abuses than he previously acknowledged,” she said. “It’s about time for Congress to restore its role as a check and balance on this administration and fight for we, the American people.

She added: “Justice cannot wait another day.”

The House earlier released more than 33,000 pages of files from the Epstein case that were redacted only to protect the names of witnesses and block information related to child abuse.

The petition must pass the Republican-controlled Senate before making it to President Donald Trump‘s desk.

Johnson has said the delay in swearing in Grijalva had nothing to do with the Epstein files, which the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee has been investigating.

House Democrats said Johnson could have called a pro forma session of the House to swear in Grijalva and said he had done so earlier this year to swear in two Republican representatives, The Hill reported.

One vacant seat in Tennessee leans Republican and will be filled by a special election in December, according to CNN.

Another vacancy in Texas has two Democrats as the final two candidates in a runoff election that will be held in January.

United States President Donald Trump is committed to providing Americans with $2,000 cheques using money that has come into government coffers from Trump’s tariffs.

On Wednesday, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters that Trump’s staff is exploring how to go about making the plan a reality.

The president proposed the idea on his Truth Social media platform on Sunday, five days after his Republican Party lost elections in Virginia, New Jersey and elsewhere largely because of voter discontent with his economic stewardship — specifically, the high cost of living.

A new AP-NORC poll finds that 67 percent of Americans disapprove of Trump’s handling of the economy, while 33 percent approve.

The tariffs are bringing in so much money, the president posted, that “a dividend of at least $2000 a person (not including high income people!) will be paid to everyone.’’

“Trump has taken to his favorite policymaking forum, Truth Social, to make yet another guarantee that Americans are going to receive dividend [cheques] from the revenues collected by tariffs,” Alex Jacquez, who served on the National Economic Council under former US President Joe Biden, said in a statement provided to Al Jazeera.

“It’s interesting that Trump’s arguments—which he has been pushing forward for several months now on Truth Social—do not match the arguments that his lawyers are making in court. It seems he is trying to pressure the Justices by implying that this will be some massive economic disaster if they rule against the tariffs.”

Budget experts have scoffed at Trump’s tariff dividend plan, which conjured memories of the Trump administration’s short-lived plan for Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) dividend cheques financed by billionaire Elon Musk’s federal budget cuts.

“The numbers just don’t check out,″ Erica York, vice president of federal tax policy at the nonpartisan Tax Foundation, told the Associated Press.

Details are scarce, including what the income limits would be and whether payments would go to children.

Even Trump’s US Treasury secretary, Scott Bessent, sounded a bit blindsided by the audacious dividend plan.

Appearing on Sunday on the ABC News programme This Week, Bessent said he hadn’t discussed the dividend with the president and suggested that it might not mean that Americans would get a cheque from the government. Instead, Bessent said, the rebate might take the form of tax cuts.

The tariffs are certainly raising money — $195bn in the budget year that ended September 30, up 153 percent from $77bn in fiscal 2024. But they still account for less than four percent of federal revenue, and have done little to dent the federal budget deficit, a staggering $1.8 trillion in fiscal 2025.

Budget wonks say Trump’s dividend math doesn’t work.

John Ricco, an analyst with the Budget Lab at Yale University, reckons that Trump’s tariffs will bring in $200bn to $300bn a year in revenue. But a $2,000 dividend — if it went to all Americans, including children — would cost $600bn. “It’s clear that the revenue coming in would not be adequate,” Ricco said.

The analyst also noted that Trump couldn’t just pay the dividends on his own. That would require legislation from Congress.

Legal challenges

Moreover, the centrepiece of Trump’s protectionist trade policies — double-digit taxes on imports from almost every country in the world — may not survive a legal challenge that has reached the US Supreme Court.

In a hearing last week, the court’s justices sounded sceptical about the Trump administration’s assertion of sweeping power to declare national emergencies to justify the tariffs. Trump has bypassed Congress, which has authority under the US Constitution to levy taxes, including tariffs.

If the court strikes down the tariffs, the Trump administration may be refunding money to the importers who paid them, not sending dividend cheques to American families. Trump could find other ways to impose tariffs, even if he loses at the Supreme Court, but it could be cumbersome and time-consuming.

Mainstream economists and budget analysts note that tariffs are paid by US importers who then generally try to pass along the cost to their customers through higher prices.

The dividend plan “misses the mark,” the Tax Foundation’s York said. “If the goal is relief for Americans, just get rid of the tariffs.”

Oanaminthe, Haiti – It’s a Monday afternoon at the Foi et Joie school in rural northeast Haiti, and the grounds are a swirl of khaki and blue uniforms, as hundreds of children run around after lunch.

In front of the headmaster’s office, a tall man in a baseball cap stands in the shade of a mango tree.

Antoine Nelson, 43, is the father of five children in the school. He’s also one of the small-scale farmers growing the beans, plantains, okra, papaya and other produce served for lunch here, and he has arrived to help deliver food.

“I sell what the school serves,” Nelson explained. “It’s an advantage for me as a parent.”

Nelson is among the more than 32,000 farmers across Haiti whose produce goes to the World Food Programme, a United Nations agency, for distribution to local schools.

Together, the farmers feed an estimated 600,000 students each day.

Their work is part of a shift in how the World Food Programme operates in Haiti, the most impoverished country in the Western Hemisphere.

Rather than solely importing food to crisis-ravaged regions, the UN organisation has also worked to increase its collaborations with local farmers around the world.

But in Haiti, this change has been particularly swift. Over the last decade, the World Food Programme went from sourcing no school meals from within Haiti to procuring approximately 72 percent locally. It aims to reach 100 percent by 2030.

The organisation’s local procurement of emergency food aid also increased significantly during the same period.

This year, however, has brought new hurdles. In the first months of President Donald Trump’s second term, the United States has slashed funding for the World Food Programme.

The agency announced in October it faces a financial shortfall of $44m in Haiti alone over the next six months.

And the need for assistance continues to grow. Gang violence has shuttered public services, choked off roadways, and displaced more than a million people.

A record 5.7 million Haitians are facing “acute levels of hunger” as of October — more than the World Food Programme is able to reach.

“Needs continue to outpace resources,” Wanja Kaaria, the programme’s director in Haiti, said in a recent statement. “We simply don’t have the resources to meet all the growing needs.”

But for Nelson, outreach efforts like the school lunch programme have been a lifeline.

Before his involvement, he remembers days when he could not afford to feed his children breakfast or give them lunch money for school.

“They wouldn’t take in what the teacher was saying because they were hungry,” he said. “But now, when the school gives food, they retain whatever the teacher says. It helps the children advance in school.”

Now, experts warn some food assistance programmes could disappear if funding continues to dwindle — potentially turning back the clock on efforts to empower Haitian farmers.

Nov. 12 (UPI) — Cryptocurrency firm Coinbase said its planning to leave Delaware and reincorporate its business in Texas.

The move to reincorporate in the Lone Star state was unanimously approved and recommended by the Coinbase board of directors.

A rough 78% majority of Coinbase shareholders approved the action.

“Delaware’s legal framework once provided companies with consistency. But no more,” Paul Grewal, Coinbase’s chief legal officer, wrote in a Wall Street Journal Journal op-ed.

Coinbase now follows Elon Musk-owned Tesla in exiting Delaware to move its new base to Texas.

The crypto giant’s Texas legal counsel pointed to a state law signed by Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, in May that “strengthens” the state’s corporate legal framework, and supposedly “creates certainty and predictability” that served as the vehicle that helped create the business environment for Coinbase to make the move.

In February, Musk wrote on his X platform that he recommended Delaware-incorporated companies move “to another state as soon as possible.”

Texas’ Senate bill 29 aimed to make the state a “preferred jurisdiction for legal domestication, by creating an environment where ambitious, innovative companies can thrive,” Chris Converse, a partner at international law firm Foley and Lardner’s Dallas office who helped draft and push the law, told UPI in a statement.

It arrived after a Delaware court ruled against Tesla paying the ex-White House DOGE adviser a $56 billion pay package.

Grawal claimed Delaware’s Chancery Court provided “unpredictable outcomes” for the digital currency platform.

Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong, like Musk, was a significant backer of U.S. President Donald Trump and his 2024 presidential campaign.

Nov. 12 (UPI) — Hundreds of Chicago Immigrations and Customs Enforcement detainees will be freed soon after a judge ordered them released on bond.

On Wednesday, District Judge Jeff Cummings ordered bond for at least 615 people in a lawsuit brought by civil rights groups. The people held were arrested in Operation Midway Blitz, President Donald Trump‘s law enforcement operation in Chicago.

Those who will be released must be granted bond by noon Nov. 21, the ruling said. People eligible are those who have no mandatory detention orders and do not pose significant risk.

NBC 5 Chicago investigated the claim that the government has arrested the “worst of the worst,” showing that 85% of those arrested have no criminal convictions.

Cummings ordered the Department of Justice to review all remaining arrests through Wednesday and have a list by Nov. 19.

The plaintiffs in the case, the National Immigrant Justice Center, argued that hundreds of arrests by ICE agents were carried out in violation of a consent decree in Illinois and five neighboring states, according to 7 Eyewitness News. The decree puts limits on warrantless arrests.

The decree said that to arrest someone without a warrant, ICE agents must pre-determine if there is probable cause to believe the person is in the country illegally, and whether they are also a flight risk. Immigrant advocates say ICE has ignored those rules.

“As we’re digging into it, we are very concerned that many, if not most [of ICE arrests], are violations of our consent decree,” Mark Fleming of the National Immigrant Justice Center told 7 Eyewitness News.

“Our initial analysis is that it’s over 3,000 arrests,” that are in violation of the consent decree, Fleming said.

“We’ve started to dig into the case file that they produced to us, and the vast majority are violations. If they did not have a prior order of removal, in almost all circumstances, they’ve been uniformly violating the consent decree.”

The government’s attorneys have argued that Congress had stripped the courts of the power to grant parole to large groups of immigrants in ICE custody.

“Federal courts cannot order the Department of Homeland Security to release any aliens on parole because Congress has stripped them of that authority,” they said.

US President Donald Trump called the corruption trial against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu a ‘political, unjustified prosecution’ as he requested the country’s president pardon him. However, under Israeli law, such a request can only be made by the person accused of wrongdoing, a legal representative, or a family member.

The House of Representatives will hold a session to vote on legislation to end the longest shutdown in US history.

Nov. 12 (UPI) — U.S. President Donald Trump signaled his intention to push ahead with a $1 billion lawsuit against the BBC, saying he had an obligation due to the “fraudulent” way it had edited a speech he made right before the Capitol Hill riots in 2021.

Speaking to Fox News on Tuesday night, Trump said he had to take legal action because the public service broadcaster “butchered up” the speech he gave to supporters outside the White House on Jan. 6 and had deceived viewers.

The speech formed part of a documentary, Trump: A Second Chance, that went out on the BBC network just before the Nov. 4 U.S. elections, although the BBC maintains that it was not available to view outside of the United Kingdom.

“They defrauded the public and they’ve admitted it. They actually changed my Jan. 6 speech which was a beautiful speech, which was a very calming speech, and made it sound radical. It was very dishonest,” Trump said.

Trump said he had a duty to go ahead and file a defamation lawsuit against the BBC because he “can’t allow people to do that,” in the same way he had been forced to pursue CBS over an interview with Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris that aired four weeks before the election on Nov. 4.

CBS settled Trump’s $20 billion claim out of court for $16 million in July.

The BBC has acknowledged receipt of a letter from Trump’s legal team demanding a “full and fair retraction” of the documentary, an immediate apology, and that the BBC “appropriately compensate President Trump for the harm caused.”

It said the BBC must comply by 5 p.m. EST on Friday, to which the corporation has said it would respond “directly in due course.”

The director-general and the head of news both resigned Sunday after it was revealed the corporation’s Panorama program spliced together two sections of Trump’s speech 53 minutes apart without telling viewers it had done so.

The edited version made it sound as if Trump was inciting his supporters to march on the Capitol and “fight” when what he actually said was that they should all walk down to the Capitol “peacefully and patriotically” and “we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women.”

No complaint was raised at the time the documentary aired but the incident has reignited a furious domestic debate about the BBC’s editorial impartiality and the internal culture of the institution which is funded by a $229 annual license that households with a TV must pay.

If the BBC chose to fight the case, which Trump’s lawyer intends to file in the state of Florida, significant obstacles mean long odds on Trump’s chances of prevailing.

For his lawsuit to succeed, his team would have to convince a court that Trump had “suffered overwhelming financial and reputational harm” as a result of the program, as stated in the letter to the BBC.

BBC Chairman Samir Shah has already apologized for what he said was an “error of judgment.”

“We accept that the way the speech was edited did give the impression of a direct call for violent action. The BBC would like to apologize for that error of judgment,” Shah told a parliamentary committee Monday.

However, while that could go against the corporation, as an apparent admission of liability, the case would still have to overcome major challenges.

Legal expert Joshua Rozenberg KC called for the BBC to go further and “draft a retraction and apology in terms that the president’s lawyer finds acceptable” and for the retraction to feature as prominently as the original broadcast.

Writing on his blog post Tuesday, Rozenburg said the BBC would have to pay compensation but suggested that, based on previous legal claims brought by Trump, it would be an out-of-court settlement.

“It won’t be cheap. But it will be cheaper than a billion dollars,” he said.

SEOUL, Nov. 12 (UPI) — South Korea will again co-sponsor a United Nations resolution condemning North Korea‘s human rights violations, its Foreign Ministry confirmed Wednesday, amid speculation that Seoul might withhold support in an effort to improve relations with Pyongyang.

The draft resolution, introduced last week to the Third Committee of the U.N. General Assembly, “condemns in the strongest terms the long-standing and ongoing systematic, widespread and gross violations of human rights in and by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, including those that may amount to crimes against humanity.”

The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is the official name of North Korea.

The resolution calls on Pyongyang to “respect, protect and fulfill all human rights and fundamental freedoms” and to “immediately close the political prison camps and release all political prisoners unconditionally.”

South Korea was among the 41 U.N. member states that co-sponsored the resolution, maintaining the position of former President Yoon Suk Yeol’s conservative government.

The Foreign Ministry said Wednesday that Seoul’s approach to North Korean human rights would remain a matter of principle.

“Our government, recognizing the importance of substantially improving the human rights of North Korean citizens and committed to continuing cooperation with the international community to this end, has participated as a co-sponsor of this resolution,” the ministry said in a statement sent to UPI.

The move comes as Seoul weighs how to balance engagement with Pyongyang against pressure to address its human rights record. President Lee Jae Myung has made efforts to improve relations between the two Koreas since taking office in June, with conciliatory gestures such as dismantling propaganda loudspeakers and restricting activist groups from floating balloons carrying information across the border.

He has expressed support for renewed diplomacy between U.S. President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, saying last month he hoped Trump would have a chance to play the role of “peacemaker” on the Korean Peninsula.

South Korea co-sponsored the resolution from 2008 through 2018, but withdrew during a period of inter-Korean detente between 2019 and 2022 under then-President Moon Jae-in.

In late October, Human Rights Watch and 20 other groups sent an open letter urging Lee’s government to back the resolution, warning that recent domestic policy shifts “signal a troubling move away from support for the victims of North Korea’s repression.”

The rights watchdog praised Seoul for its support on Wednesday.

“South Korea’s co-sponsorship showcases leadership as a democracy upholding law and dignity,” Lina Yoon, senior Korea researcher at Human Rights Watch, told UPI.

“Seoul should sustain it, by supporting U.N. accountability, protecting North Korean escapees, expanding information flows and pressing Pyongyang along with other governments for reforms to end repression,” she said.

The United States was not among the sponsoring countries. In February, President Trump signed an executive order withdrawing the United States from the U.N. Human Rights Council, reinstating the position he adopted during his previous term.

North Korea has long rejected such resolutions as hostile acts, accusing the United Nations and Western powers of using human rights as a pretext to undermine its government.

Following the adoption of last year’s measure, Pyongyang’s Foreign Ministry denounced it as a “politically motivated provocation.”

A September report by the U.N. Human Rights Office found that North Korea’s human rights situation “has not improved over the past decade and, in many instances, has degraded,” citing worsening food shortages, widespread forced labor and tight restrictions on movement and expression.

The U.N. General Assembly is expected to vote on the resolution in December.

Nov. 12 (UPI) — A government watchdog has called on the bar associations of Florida and Virginia to investigate lawyer Lindsey Halligan on grounds for violating numerous rules of professional conduct by carrying out prosecutions against President Donald Trump‘s political rivals.

Halligan, a former personal attorney to the president who lacks prosecutorial experience, was named interim U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia by Trump after her predecessor resigned amid pressure to bring criminal charges against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.

Comey, a Republican, investigated potential collusion between Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign and Russia. James successfully secured a civil fraud verdict against Trump and his businesses, but the judgment was vacated and is being appealed.

Since taking up the position of interim U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Halligan has filed charges against both Comey and James.

The former FBI director has been charged with obstructing justice in connection with a 2020 investigation into his Russian collusion probe. James has been charged with bank fraud and making false statements on a financial statement in connection with an alleged misrepresentation of property she purchased in Virginia in 2020.

Both cases have come under serious scrutiny by legal experts, with Campaign for Accountability stating that Halligan brought the charges against Trump’s rivals “despite a dearth of evidence that either committed any crimes.”

The nonprofit watchdog on Tuesday sent letters to the Florida Bar and Virginia Bar to investigate the Florida-licensed attorney.

According to the letters, Campaign for Accountability alleges that by indicting Comey and James, Halligan violated several rules of both bars, including those requiring competence, prohibiting the prosecution of a charge a prosecutor knows is unsupported by probable cause and prohibiting dishonesty, deceit, misrepresentation or prejudicial conduct.

It also alleges that Halligan’s actions pressuring reporter Anna Bower about her coverage of the case against James last month violated Justice Department regulations prohibiting pretrial publicity.

“Ms. Halligan’s actions with respect to the prosecution of Mr. Comey and Ms. James, and her Signal exchange with Ms. Bower, appear to represent a serious breach of her ethical obligations,” Michelle Kuppersmith, executive director of Campaign for Accountability, said in the letter to both states’ bars.

“The committee has a responsibility to stop Ms. Halligan from abusing her position and her Florida bar license for improper purposes. Failing to discipline Ms. Halligan under these egregious circumstances will embolden others who would use our system of justice for their own political ends.”

Both Comey and James have pleaded not guilty to all charges.

Nov. 12 (UPI) — Colombian President Gustavo Petro has ordered the South American nation’s security authorities to cease sharing intelligence with the United States over the Trump administration’s continued attacks on vessels in the Caribbean and Pacific Ocean.

“An order is given to all levels of intelligence within the public security forces to suspend the sending of communications and other dealings with U.S. security agencies,” Petro said in the statement on X.

“This measure will remain in effect as long as the missile attacks on boats in the Caribbean continue.”

At least 75 people have been killed in 19 known U.S. military attacks targeting boats in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific since Sept. 2. The Trump administration accuses the vessels of shipping narcotics for drug cartels that it has designated as terrorist organizations.

The attacks have drawn both domestic and international criticism and allegations of potential war crimes and extrajudicial killings perpetrated by the United States. Petro has also accused Trump of murder, saying one of the attacks in mid-September killed a fisherman named Alejandro Carranza.

The Trump administration has defended the strikes as necessary to protect Americans from the drugs the boats are allegedly bringing into the United States. President Donald Trump has also seemingly rejected the notion of seeking congressional approval for the strikes, stating last month that “I think we are just going to kill people that are bringing drugs into our country.”

The announcement Tuesday came on the heels of Petro recalling Colombia’s ambassador to Washington for consultations in response to a photo released by the White House on Oct. 21 in which Deputy Chief of Staff James Blair is seen holding a folder that contains photos of Petro and Venezuela’s authoritarian president, Nicolas Maduro, in prison jumpsuits.

The actions are expected to further strain relations between the two allies, which have become fraught during the Trump administration. Petro has been a critic of the American leader’s hardline immigration and drug enforcement policies, and Trump has accused Petro of not doing enough to curb the manufacturing of drugs in the South American nation.

Trump has imposed sanctions on Petro and his immediate family members on accusations that Petro is permitting drug cartels to conduct their business without impediment.

Petro has rejected the accusations and, in turn, accused the Trump administration of lying. His administration maintains drug production is declining under Petro’s tenure.

“The fight against drugs must be subordinated to the human rights of the Caribbean people,” Petro said Tuesday.

Nov. 11 (UPI) — Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy on Tuesday warned that the crisis facing air travel in the United States, exasperated by the ongoing government shutdown, is going to get worse unless Congress acts.

Speaking to reporters at Chicago O’Hare International Airport, Duffy said air travel will “radically slow down” as the country approaches the weekend if lawmakers don’t vote to approve legislation that is before the House to fund the government through January.

“You’re going to see this Friday, Saturday and Sunday — big disruption thus far — massively more disruption as we come into the weekend, if the government doesn’t open,” he said during the press conference.

The United States was grappling with a air traffic controller shortage before the government shutdown, but the situation deteriorated after federal funding lapsed, with most air traffic controllers required to work without pay.

On Friday, the Federal Aviation Administration ordered a 4% reduction in flights at 40 airports, resulting in thousands of delayed and canceled flights.

The Transportation Department has seen what Duffy called “significant staffing shortages,” causing “very rough travel days” last weekend.

During the press conference, Duffy called on air traffic controllers to come into work, explaining that within 24 to 48 hours after the shutdown ends, they will receive 70% of their backpay and the remainder within a week.

“So I encourage all of them to come to work, to be patriots, and help navigate the airspace effectively for the American people,” he said.

On Monday night, the Senate passed legislation to end the record 42-day government shutdown, sending the bill to the House for consideration.

If passed by the House, it will go to the desk of President Donald Trump for his signature.

Decision follows Senate vote to reopen the government, but legal saga has brought uncertainty to millions who need food assistance.

The highest court in the United States has extended a previous order allowing President Donald Trump to withhold food assistance to tens of millions of people in the US amid the government shutdown.

In a ruling on Tuesday, the Supreme Court extended a previous pause that it had granted the Trump administration after a lower court ordered the government to pay out about $4bn in food benefits for November.

Advocates have said that withholding the funds could have calamitous effects on people who depend on food benefits through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), although the issue could be made moot as the shutdown appears to be drawing to a close.

The Supreme Court decision comes one day after the Senate on Monday approved compromise legislation that would end the longest government shutdown in US history, breaking a weeks-long impasse that has disrupted food benefits for millions, left hundreds of thousands of federal workers unpaid and snarled air traffic as a lack of air traffic controllers forced cancellations.

The battle over SNAP benefits has underlined the Trump administration’s aggressive efforts to slash government employment and roll back access to programmes that it had previously criticised under the auspices of the shutdown.

While it is common for some benefits and programmes to face delays or other issues during government shutdowns, food benefits ceased entirely at the start of November for the first time in the programme’s 60-year history.

The decision set off a series of legal challenges and several weeks of back-and-forth rulings that have kept those who rely on food assistance in a state of limbo.

A judge had ruled last week that the government must fully fund benefits for November, a decision the administration challenged. The Supreme Court had paused that order, but the stay was set to expire on Thursday.

A Virginia transportation security officer has accused the United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) of sex discrimination over a policy that bars transgender officers from performing security screening pat-downs, according to a federal lawsuit.

The Transportation Security Administration (TSA), which operates under the DHS, enacted the policy in February to comply with President Donald Trump’s executive order declaring two unchangeable sexes: male and female.

The Associated Press (AP) news agency obtained internal documents explaining the policy change from four independent sources, including one current and two former TSA workers.

Those documents explain that “transgender officers will no longer engage in pat-down duties, which are conducted based on both the traveller’s and officer’s biological sex. In addition, transgender officers will no longer serve as a TSA-required witness when a traveller elects to have a pat-down conducted in a private screening area”.

Until February, the TSA assigned officers work consistent with their gender identity, based on a 2021 management directive. The agency told the AP that it rescinded this directive to comply with Trump’s January 20 executive order.

Although transgender officers “shall continue to be eligible to perform all other security screening functions consistent with their certifications” and must attend all required training, they will not be allowed to demonstrate how to conduct pat-downs as part of their training or while training others, according to the internal documents.

A transgender officer at Dulles international airport, Danielle Mittereder, alleged in her lawsuit filed on Friday that the new policy, which also bars her from using TSA facility restrooms that align with her gender identity, violates civil rights law.

“Solely because she is transgender, TSA now prohibits Plaintiff from conducting core functions of her job, impedes her advancement to higher-level positions and specialised certifications, excludes her from TSA-controlled facilities, and subjects her identity to unwanted and undue scrutiny each workday,” the complaint says.

Mittereder declined to speak with the AP, but her lawyer, Jonathan Puth, called the TSA policy “terribly demeaning and 100 percent illegal”.

TSA spokesperson Russell Read declined to comment, citing pending litigation. But he said the new policy directs that “male Transportation Security Officers will conduct pat-down procedures on male passengers, and female Transportation Security Officers will conduct pat-down procedures on female passengers, based on operational needs”.

The legal battle comes amid mounting reports of workplace discrimination against transgender federal employees during Trump’s second administration. It is also happening at a time when the TSA’s ranks are already stretched thin due to the ongoing government shutdown that has left thousands of agents working without pay.

Other transgender officers describe similar challenges to Mittereder.

Kai Regan worked for six years at Harry Reid international airport in Las Vegas before leaving in July, in large part because of the new policy.

Worried that he would be fired for his gender identity, he retired earlier than planned rather than “waiting for the bomb to drop”.

Regan, who is not involved in the Virginia case, transitioned from female to male in 2021. He said he had conducted pat-downs on men without issue until the policy change.

“It made me feel inadequate at my job, not because I can’t physically do it but because they put that on me,” said the 61-year-old.

Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, a legal organisation that has repeatedly challenged the second Trump administration in court, called the TSA policy “arbitrary and discriminatory”.

“There’s no evidence or data we’re aware of to suggest that a person can’t perform their duties satisfactorily as a TSA agent based on their gender identity,” Perryman said.

The DHS pushed back on assertions by some legal experts that its policy is discriminatory.

“Does the AP want female travellers to be subjected to pat-downs by male TSA officers?” Homeland Security spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin asked in a written response to questions by the AP. “What a useless and fundamentally dangerous idea, to prioritise mental delusion over the comfort and safety of American travellers.”

Airport security expert and University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign professor Sheldon H Jacobson, whose research contributed to the design of TSA PreCheck, said that the practice of matching the officer’s sex to the passenger’s is aimed at minimising passenger discomfort during screening.

Travellers can generally request another officer if they prefer, he added.

Deciding where transgender officers fit into this practice “creates a little bit of uncertainty”, Jacobson said. But because transgender officers likely make up a small percent of the TSA’s workforce, he said the new policy is unlikely to cause major delays.

“It could be a bit of an inconvenience, but it would not inhibit the operation of the airport security checkpoint,” Jacobson said.

The TSA’s policy for passengers is that they be screened based on physical appearance as judged by an officer, according to internal documents. If a passenger corrects an officer’s assumption, “the traveller should be patted down based on his/her declared sex”.

For passengers who tell an officer “that they are neither a male nor female”, the policy says officers must advise “that pat-down screening must be conducted by an officer of the same sex” and contact a supervisor if concerns persist.

The documents also say that transgender officers “will not be adversely affected” in pay, promotions or awards, and that the TSA “is committed to providing a work environment free from unlawful discrimination and retaliation”.

But the lawsuit argues otherwise, saying the policy impedes Mittereder’s career prospects because “all paths toward advancement require that she be able to perform pat-downs and train others to do so”, Puth said.

According to the lawsuit, Mittereder started in her role in June 2024 and never received complaints related to her job performance, including pat-down responsibilities. Supervisors awarded her the highest-available performance rating, and “have praised her professionalism, skills, knowledge, and rapport with fellow officers and the public”, the lawsuit said.

“This is somebody who is really dedicated to her job and wants to make a career at TSA,” Puth said. “And while her gender identity was never an issue for her in the past, all of a sudden, it’s something that has to be confronted every single day.”

Being unable to perform her full job duties has caused Mittereder to suffer fear, anxiety and depression, as well as embarrassment and humiliation by forcing her to disclose her gender identity to co-workers, the complaint says.

It adds that the ban places an additional burden on already-outnumbered female officers who have to pick up Mittereder’s pat-down duties.

American Federation of Government Employees national president Everett Kelley urged the TSA leadership to reconsider the policy “for the good of its workforce and the flying public”.

“This policy does nothing to improve airport security,” Kelley said, “and in fact could lead to delays in the screening of airline passengers since it means there will be fewer officers available to perform pat-down searches”.

Arrival of US aircraft carrier off Latin America fuels speculation that US could try to overthrow Venezuelan government.

The Venezuelan government has said it is preparing its armed forces in the event of an invasion or military attack by the United States.

A statement shared by Minister of People’s Power for Defence Vladimir Padrino on Tuesday said that the preparations include the “massive deployment of ground, aerial, naval, riverine and missile forces”, as well as the participation of police, militias and citizens’ units.

The announcement comes as the arrival of a US aircraft carrier in the region fuels speculation of possible military action aimed at collapsing the government of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, a longtime US rival.

Tensions between the two countries have escalated since the return of US President Donald Trump for a second term in January.

On Tuesday, the Pentagon confirmed that the Gerald R Ford Carrier Strike Group — which includes the world’s largest aircraft carrier — had arrived in the Caribbean Sea, bearing at least 4,000 sailors as well as “tactical aircraft”.

In recent weeks, the US government has also surged troops to areas near the Caribbean, including Puerto Rico, El Salvador, Panama and Trinidad and Tobago, for training exercises and other operations.

The Trump administration has framed such deployments as necessary “to disrupt illicit drug trafficking and protect the homeland”. Trump officials have also accused Maduro of masterminding the activities of Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan gang with a relatively modest presence in the US.

But Maduro and his allies have accused the US of “imperialistic” aims.

Questions remain, however, about whether Venezuela is equipped to fend off any US military advances.

Experts say the Maduro government has sought to project an image of military preparedness in the face of a large buildup of US forces in the Caribbean, but it could face difficulties from a lack of personnel and up-to-date equipment.

While the government has used possible US intervention to rally support, Maduro is also struggling with widespread discontent at home and growing diplomatic isolation following a contested election in 2024, marred by allegations of widespread fraud and a crackdown on protesters.

The military buildup in the Caribbean region began after the start of a series of US military strikes on September 2.

The US has carried out at least 19 air strikes against alleged drug-trafficking vessels in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific Ocean, killing approximately 75 people.

Trump has suggested that land strikes “are going to be next”. But when asked in late October whether he was considering attacks within Venezuela, Trump replied, “No”.

Legal experts say that a military attack on Venezuela would likely violate international law, and recent polling from the research firm YouGov suggests that about 47 percent of people in the US would oppose land attacks on Venezuelan territory. About 19 percent, meanwhile, say they would support such attacks.

While Venezuela’s armed forces have expressed support for Maduro and said they would resist a US attack, the Reuters news agency has reported that the government has struggled to provide members of the armed forces with adequate food and supplies.

The use of additional paramilitary and police forces could represent an effort to plug the holes in Venezuela’s lacklustre military capacity. Reuters reported that a government memo includes plans for small units at about 280 locations, where they could use sabotage and guerrilla tactics for “prolonged resistance” against any potential US incursion.

Republican-controlled House of Representatives is expected to approve funding bill to re-open US federal government in coming days.

United States President Donald Trump has called the looming end of the government shutdown a “big victory” after the Senate passed a bill to fund federal agencies.

Trump congratulated Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson and Senate Majority Leader John Thune on Tuesday for the soon-to-be-approved funding bill.

“Congratulations to you and to John and to everybody on a very big victory,” Trump said, addressing Johnson at a Veterans Day event.

“We’re opening up our country — should have never been closed.”

The US president’s comments signal that he views the shutdown crisis as a political win for his Republican Party, which is set to end the budgeting impasse in Congress without meeting the Democrats’ key demand: extending healthcare subsidies.

The Senate passed the funding bill late on Monday in a 60-40 vote that saw eight members of the Democratic caucus backing the proposal.

The Republican-controlled House of Representatives is expected to pass the budget in the coming days to end the shutdown, which has been the longest in US history. Assuming the House approves the bill, it will then go to Trump’s desk, and the president is expected to sign it into law.

In the US system, Congress is tasked with funding the government.

If lawmakers fail to pass a budget, the federal government goes into shutdown mode, where it stops paying most employees and sends non-essential workers home.

The current shutdown started on October 1.

Republicans control the House, Senate and White House, but their narrow majority in the Senate had previously prevented them from passing a continuing resolution to keep the government funded.

In the 100-seat Senate, major legislation must generally be passed with at least 60 votes to overcome the filibuster, a legislative procedure that allows the minority party to block bills it opposes.

The Democratic caucus holds 47 seats in the chamber, which allowed it to successfully wield the filibuster until this week’s divisive vote.

Until Monday, Democrats had largely been united in opposition to the Republicans’ funding bill. They had previously maintained they would only approve government funding if the bill included provisions to extend healthcare subsidies under the Affordable Care Act, which are set to expire at the end of the year.

Those subsidies, Democrats argued, help millions of Americans afford their medical insurance.

But Trump had threatened to ramp up the pressure against Democrats by cutting programmes he associated with their party.

During the shutdown, for example, Trump tried to withhold food benefits for low-income families – a policy that is being challenged in the courts.

The shutdown crisis has also led to flight delays and cancellations across the country due to a shortage of available air traffic controllers, who have been working without pay.

Monday’s Senate vote paved the way for a resolution to the crisis. But it has sparked infighting amongst Democrats, with segments of the party voicing disappointment with senators who backed the bill.

The issue has also intensified criticism against Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, who voted against the proposal but failed to keep his caucus united in opposition to it.

“Sen. Schumer has failed to meet this moment and is out of touch with the American people. The Democratic Party needs leaders who fight and deliver for working people,” Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib said in a social media post on Monday.

“Schumer should step down.”

Senator John Fetterman, one of the most conservative Democrats in the Senate, defended his vote on Tuesday.

“When you’re confronting mass, mass chaos, you know, I don’t think you should respond with more chaos, or fight with more chaos,” Fetterman told the ABC talk show The View. “It’s like, no, we need to be the party of order and logic.”

Nov. 11 (UPI) — President Donald Trump mentioned political correctness, President Joe Biden and renaming Veterans Day at Arlington National Cemetery after laying a wreath for the holiday.

Trump said he plans to rename the holiday celebrated on Nov. 11 as “Victory Day for World War I.”

“You know, I was recently at an event and I saw France was celebrating Victory Day, but we didn’t,” he said. “And I saw France was celebrating another Victory Day for World War II, and other countries were celebrating. They were all celebrating.

“We’re the one that won the wars. … And we could do for plenty of other wars, but we’ll start with those two. Maybe someday somebody else will add a couple of more, ’cause we won a lot of good ones.”

Veterans Day was originally named Armistice Day to celebrate the end of World War I. But it eventually became Veterans Day to celebrate all who have served in the U.S. Armed Forces.

Since he took office, Trump has been on a renaming streak. He has renamed the Gulf of Mexico to the “Gulf of America,” the Persian Gulf to the “Arabian Gulf,” Mount Denali to “Mount McKinley” and the Department of Defense to the “Department of War.”

“Under the Trump administration, we are restoring the pride and the winning spirit of the United States military,” he said at Arlington. “That’s why we have officially renamed the Department of Defense back to the original name, Department of War.”

He also complained about political correctness.

“We don’t like being politically correct, so we’re not going to be politically correct anymore,” Trump said. “From now on when we fight a war, we only fight for one reason: to win.”

He thanked American troops for their service.

“And we want to also say thank you for carrying America’s fate on your strong, very broad, and proud shoulders,” he said. “Each of you has earned the respect and the gratitude of our entire nation.

“We love you. We salute you, and we will never forget what you have done to keep America safe, sovereign, and free.”

Trump also used the speech to attack the Biden administration and its management of the Veterans Administration.

“And the other thing is, we fired thousands of people who didn’t take care of our great veterans,” he said. “They were sadists. They were sick people. They were thieves. They were everything you want to name. And we got rid of over 9,000 of them.

“And then, when Biden came in, he hired them back, many of them. But we got rid of them. And I think we got rid of them permanently. We replaced them with people who love our veterans, not people who are sick people.”

The Department of Veterans Affairs laid off more than 2,400 people in February.

US airlines cancel 1,200 flights, marking five days of disruptions caused by the prolonged government shutdown.

Airlines in the United States have cancelled nearly 1,200 flights, marking the fifth consecutive day of mass delays and cancellations sparked by the country’s longest-ever government shutdown.

In addition to cancellations on Tuesday, passengers continued to face long wait times, as more than 1,300 domestic and international flights were delayed in the morning.

New York’s LaGuardia Airport, in particular, is seeing significant hold-ups, with average delays of one hour and 40 minutes, according to FlightAware — a platform that tracks flight disruptions worldwide.

On Monday, there were more than 2,400 cancelled flights to, from and within the US, along with over 9,500 delayed flights, according to the same tracker.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) last week instructed airlines to cut 4 percent of daily flights from Friday at 40 major airports due to air traffic control staffing shortages. Reductions rose to 6 percent on Tuesday, then 8 percent on Thursday, and are expected to reach 10 percent by November 14th.

Airlines and the FAA are in talks over whether these cuts will be eased as a record-setting 42-day government shutdown draws to a close.

An end to the shutdown appears to be in sight. On Monday, the Senate passed a bill to reopen the federal government. It now heads to the House of Representatives and, if approved, will go to President Donald Trump’s desk for signing. Once signed, the bill would reopen the government.

Despite progress on Capitol Hill, the president has urged air traffic controllers across the country to return to work, warning that their pay could be “docked” if they do not comply. He also claimed that those who remained on duty during the shutdown would receive a $10,000 bonus.

On Wall Street, airline stocks are taking a hit amid persistent cancellations. As of 11am in New York (16:00 GMT), Delta Air Lines had fallen 1.26 percent since the market opened on Tuesday. United Airlines was down 1.7 percent, while American Airlines had tumbled more than 1.8 percent.

Budget carriers are also being hit hard. New York-based JetBlue has dropped by more than 2 percent, Dallas-based Southwest by 1.8 percent, and Alaska Airlines is down roughly 2.1 percent.

Nov. 11 (UPI) — Flight cancellations in the United States reached nearly 1,200 early Tuesday as the Federal Aviation Administration further reduced flights amid the record-breaking government shutdown.

The flight reductions increased from the 5% imposed Friday to 6% Tuesday. Those figures were expected to further increase to 8% on Thursday and 10% on Friday, according to The Hill.

Flight tracking website FlightAware said there were 1,194 cancellations within, into or out of the United States as of 11 a.m. EST. There were slightly more delays — 1,239.

The site’s so-called MiseryMap shows the greatest numbers of flight disruptions at Chicago O’Hare International Airport, LaGuardia Airport in New York City, Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, John F. Kennedy International Airport, Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport, Boston Logan International Airport and Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport.

Chicago-area airports faced extra complications this week after heavy snowfall led to some cancellations Monday. Light snow continued early Tuesday, ABC News reported.

The FAA ordered dozens of airports to reduce both private and commercial flights to accommodate for a growing number of air traffic controllers missing work amid the government shutdown and lack of pay.

The shutdown, which reached its 42nd day Tuesday, could be on its way to a resolution after the Senate approved bipartisan legislation to temporarily fund the government Monday. The House must now vote on the legislation before it can be sent to President Donald Trump‘s desk for a signature.

Over the weekend, United States President Donald Trump promised Americans $2,000 each from the “trillions of dollars” in tariff revenue he said his administration has collected.

During his second term, Trump has imposed tariffs broadly on countries and on specific goods such as drugs, steel and cars.

“People that are against Tariffs are FOOLS!” Trump said in a November 9 Truth Social post. “We are taking in Trillions of Dollars and will soon begin paying down our ENORMOUS DEBT, $37 Trillion. Record Investment in the USA, plants and factories going up all over the place. A dividend of at least $2000 a person (not including high income people!) will be paid to everyone.”

How seriously should people take his pledge? Experts urged caution.

Tariffs are projected to generate well below “trillions” a year, making it harder to pay each person $2,000. And the administration already said it would use the tariff revenue to either pay for existing tax cuts or to reduce the federal debt.

Trump’s post came days after the US Supreme Court heard arguments about the legality of his tariff policy. The justices are weighing whether Trump has the power to unilaterally impose tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. If the justices rule against Trump, much of the expected future tariff revenue would not materialise.

What Trump proposed, and who would qualify

The administration has published no plans for the tariff dividends, and in a November 9 ABC News interview, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said he had not spoken to Trump about giving Americans a dividend payment.

Details about a potential payment have been limited to Truth Social posts.

Trump said “everyone”, excluding “high income people”, would get the money, but did not explain the criteria for high-income people. He also did not say whether children would receive the payment.

In a November 10 Truth Social post, Trump said his administration would first pay $2,000 to “low and middle income USA Citizens” and then use the remaining tariff revenues to “substantially pay down national debt”.

Trump has not said what form the payments might take. Bessent said the dividend “could come in lots of forms, in lots of ways. You know, it could be just the tax decreases that we are seeing on the president’s agenda. You know, no tax on tips, no tax on overtime, no tax on Social Security, deductibility of auto loans. So, you know, those are substantial deductions.”

Analysts said it is a stretch to rebrand an already promised tax cut as a new dividend.

Trump has previously discussed paying Americans with tariff revenue.

“We have so much money coming in, we’re thinking about a little rebate, but the big thing we want to do is pay down debt,” he told reporters on July 25. “We’re thinking about a rebate.”

Days later, Senator Josh Hawley introduced legislation that would give $600 tariff rebate cheques to each American adult and child. Hawley’s bill has not advanced.

Tariff revenue collected versus cost of ‘dividend’ payment

Trump made the imposition of tariffs one of his signature campaign promises for the 2024 presidential election. Since taking office in January, he has enacted tariffs on a scale not seen in the US in almost a century; the current overall average tariff rate is 18 percent, the highest since 1934, according to Yale Budget Lab.

Through the end of October, the federal government collected $309.2bn in tariff revenue, compared with $165.4bn through the same point in 2024, an increase of $143.8bn.

The centre-right Tax Foundation projects that tariff revenue will continue to increase to more than $200bn a year if the tariffs remain in place.

Erica York, the Tax Foundation’s vice president of federal tax policy, estimated in a November 9 X post that a $2,000 tariff dividend for each person earning less than $100,000 would equal 150 million adult recipients. That would cost nearly $300bn, York calculated, or more if children qualified. That is more than the tariffs have raised so far, she said.

The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget projected that Trump’s proposal could cost $600bn, depending on how it is structured.

The administration previously detailed other uses for tariff revenue

The Trump administration already promised to use tariff revenue for other purposes, including reducing the country’s deficit and offsetting the cost of the GOP tax and spending bill Trump signed into law in July.

As Trump announced new tariffs on April 2, he said he would “use trillions and trillions of dollars to reduce our taxes and pay down our national debt”.

Bessent has made the same promise, falsely saying in July that tariffs were “going to pay off our deficit”.

The treasury secretary said in August that he and Trump were “laser-focused on paying down the debt”.

“I think we’re going to bring down the deficit-to-GDP,” Bessent said in an August 19 CNBC interview. “We’ll start paying down debt and then, at a point, that can be used as an offset to the American people.”

Tariffs’ current cost to Americans 

Tariffs are already costing Americans money, analysts say. Independent estimates range from about $1,600 to $2,600 a year per household. Given the similarity of these amounts to Trump’s proposed dividend, York said it would be more efficient to remove the tariffs.

Joseph Rosenberg, Urban Institute-Brookings Institution Tax Policy Centre senior fellow, said a $2,000 dividend in the form of a cheque would require congressional approval – and lawmakers have already declined to act on that idea once.

When members of Congress approved the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, “They had the ability to include a tariff dividend, but they didn’t”, Rosenberg said.