face

States administering a federal food aid program serving about 42 million Americans faced uncertainty Monday over whether they can — and should — provide full monthly benefits during an ongoing legal battle involving the U.S. government shutdown.

President Donald Trump’s administration over the weekend demanded that states “undo” full benefits that were paid under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program during a one-day window between when a federal judge ordered full funding and a Supreme Court justice put a temporary pause on that order.

A federal appeals court in Boston left the full benefits order in place on Sunday, though the Supreme Court order ensures the government won’t have to pay out for at least 48 hours. The Trump administration is also expected to ask the justices to step in again, and Congress is considering whether to fund SNAP as part of a proposal to end the government shutdown.

Some states are warning of “catastrophic operational disruptions” if the Trump administration does not reimburse them for those SNAP benefits they already authorized. Meanwhile, other states are providing partial monthly SNAP benefits with federal money or using their own funds to load electronic benefit cards for SNAP recipients.

Millions receive aid while others wait

Trump’s administration initially said SNAP benefits would not be available in November because of the government shutdown. After some states and nonprofit groups sued, two judges each ruled the administration could not skip November’s benefits entirely.

The administration then said it would use an emergency reserve fund to provide 65% of the maximum monthly benefit. On Thursday, U.S. District Judge John J. McConnell said that wasn’t good enough, and ordered full funding for SNAP benefits by Friday.

Some states acted quickly to direct their EBT vendors to disburse full monthly benefits to SNAP recipients. Millions of people in those states received funds to buy groceries before Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson put McConnell’s order on hold Friday night, pending further deliberation by an appeals court.

Millions more people still have not received SNAP payments for November, because their states were waiting on further guidance from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which administers SNAP.

Trump’s administration has argued that the judicial order to provide full benefits violates the Constitution by infringing on the spending power of the legislative and executive branches.

States are fighting attempt to freeze SNAP benefits

On Sunday, the Trump administration said states had moved too quickly and erroneously released full SNAP benefits after last week’s rulings.

“States must immediately undo any steps taken to issue full SNAP benefits for November 2025,” Patrick Penn, deputy undersecretary of Agriculture, wrote to state SNAP directors. He warned that states could face penalties if they did not comply.

Wisconsin, which was among the first to load full benefits after McConnell’s order, had its federal reimbursement frozen. As a result, the state’s SNAP account could be depleted as soon Monday, leaving no money to reimburse stores that sell food to SNAP recipients, according to a court filing submitted by those that had sued.

Some Democratic governors vowed to challenge any federal attempt to claw back money.

In Connecticut, Democratic Gov. Ned Lamont said “those who received their benefits should not worry about losing them.”

“No, Connecticut does not need to take back SNAP benefits already sent to the 360,000 people who depend on them for food and who should have never been caught in the middle of this political fight,” Lamont said. “We have their back.”

Lieb and Mulvihill write for the Associated Press. Associated Press writers Scott Bauer in Madison, Wisconsin; John Hanna in Topeka, Kansas; and Nicholas Riccardi in Denver contributed to this report.

Opposition party Chadema said that its deputy secretary-general, Amani Golugwa, was arrested early on Saturday.

Police in Tanzania have arrested a senior opposition official after more than 200 people were charged with treason over a wave of protests against last month’s general election.

Opposition party Chadema said that its deputy secretary-general, Amani Golugwa, was arrested early on Saturday. He is the third senior Chadema official in detention, after leader Tundu Lissu and deputy leader John Heche were arrested before the October 29 vote.

The arrest comes a day after more than 200 people were charged with treason for alleged involvement in the protests triggered by the disputed election.

Lawyer Peter Kibatala told the news agency AFP that more than 250 people “were arraigned in three separate cases … and they’re all charged with two sets of offences.”

“The first set of offences is a conspiracy to commit treason. And the second set of offences is treason itself,” he said.

President Samia Suluhu Hassan, who took office in 2021 after the death of her predecessor, won the poll with 98 percent of the vote, according to the electoral commission, but Chadema has branded the election a “sham”.

It said in a statement on X that the government intended to “cripple the Party’s leadership” and “paralyse its operations”, adding that police were now targeting “lower levels”, with some being “forced to confess to organising demonstrations”.

Police confirmed the arrest of Golugwa and nine other people in connection with an investigation into the unrest, which saw security forces launch a crackdown on protesters.

“The police force, in collaboration with other defence and security agencies, is continuing a serious manhunt,” the police said in a statement, adding that Chadema’s Secretary-General John Mnyika and the party’s head of communications, Brenda Rupia, were on its wanted list.

High death toll

Protests erupted on October 29 in the cities of Dar-es-Salaam, Arusha, Mwanza and Mbeya, as well as several regions across the country, police said in Saturday’s statement, laying out the extent of the unrest for the first time.

The authorities have so far declined to release the death toll.

The Catholic Church in Tanzania has said that hundreds of people were killed. Chadema has claimed that more than 1,000 people were killed and that security forces had hidden bodies to cover up the scale of the brutality.

The Kenya Human Rights Commission, a watchdog group in the neighbouring country, asserted in a statement on Friday that 3,000 people were killed, with thousands still missing.

The commission provided a link to pictorial evidence in its possession showing many victims “bore head and chest gunshot wounds, leaving no doubt these were targeted killings, not crowd-control actions”.

The African Union said this week that the election “did not comply with AU principles, normative frameworks, and other international obligations and standards for democratic elections.”

AU observers reported ballot stuffing at several polling stations, and cases where voters were issued multiple ballots.

Single-party rule has been the norm in Tanzania since the advent of multiparty politics in 1992. But Hassan is accused of ruling with an iron fist that does not tolerate opposition.

Anisimova went into the match having won six of their previous 10 meetings, though they have met at each of the past three Grand Slams and Sabalenka edged that particular head-to-head two wins to one.

She prevailed in straight sets in the French Open fourth round and the US Open final, while Anisimova was victorious over three sets in their Wimbledon semi-final.

Their semi-final in Riyadh promised much – and delivered.

The first two games took 18 minutes to complete. Anisimova saved three break points to hold in the opener, then Sabalenka fought back from 0-40 down to do likewise.

The match clock had just ticked past an hour when Sabalenka eventually clinched the first set.

Anisimova, who failed to win the opening set in all four of her matches during her WTA Finals debut, responded brilliantly by racing into a 4-0 lead in the second and levelling the contest.

In a tight decider, Sabalenka’s backhand return winner to settle the seventh game sealed a decisive break of serve, and there was a warm embrace between the two players at the net when Anisimova sent a forehand wide on match point.

“I told Amanda that she should be proud of her season – she’s played incredible tennis for the whole season and it’s just the beginning,” said Sabalenka.

“I know she’s probably disappointed but there are many more things coming her way.”

Six police officers will face a misconduct process following an investigation into their action after three people died in a car crash.

Sophie Russon, 20, Eve Smith, 21, Darcy Ross, 21, Rafel Jeanne, 24, and Shane Loughlin, 32, were last seen at about 02:00 GMT on 4 March 2023 after they went missing on a night out.

Two days after the crash, Gwent Police confirmed the car had been found on the A48 near Cardiff, with three of the five occupants tragically killed.

Former NFL wide receiver Antonio Brown has been extradited from Dubai to the United States to face a charge of second degree attempted murder relating to a shooting incident in May.

The Miami Police department said the former Pittsburgh Steelers, New England Patriots and Tampa Bay Buccaneers player was “located in Dubai and was apprehended” before being “extradited to Essex County, NJ (New Jersey), by US Marshals”.

The added Brown was being held there prior to being moved to the Miami-Dade County Jail.

Following an investigation into the incident in May, police issued an arrest warrant in June which alleged Brown took a gun from a security guard and fired two shots at a man he had brawled with earlier on.

No arrests were made at the time and no injuries were reported.

Brown had been detained by police at the time of the incident before being released.

“I was jumped by multiple individuals who tried to steal my jewellery and cause physical harm to me,” claimed Brown in a social media post. “Contrary to some video circulating.

“Police temporarily detained me until they received my side of the story and then released me. I went home that night and was not arrested.”

Brown played for the Tampa Bay Buccaneers and scored a touchdown as they beat the Kansas City Chiefs to win the Super Bowl at the end of the 2020-2021 season.

Flights to Orlando, New York, Miami and Los Angeles are all set to be affected by the historic US government shutdown

Thousands of British travellers headed to the United States face either severe delays or flight cancellations as the US government’s shutdown shows no sign of ending.

Those with plans to fly to or return from the States are being advised that they could face disruption after the Trump administration announced a ten per cent to air traffic control. The ongoing US federal government shutdown is also affecting other areas of travel, airport staffing, and access to major tourist attractions.

The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) has updated its guidance for UK travellers, cautioning that those flying to or through the US may face longer queues, delayed flights and reduced services at airports. Officials have also advised visitors to check in advance whether famous landmarks, national parks and museums remain open, as many are federally funded and may now have limited access or be closed altogether.

The warning comes after Washington lawmakers failed to agree on new funding for government operations, leading to a shutdown on 1 October that has left hundreds of thousands of federal workers unpaid and key services running on skeleton staff. The situation has become the latest flashpoint in the deepening political standoff between Democrats and Republicans in Congress.

In its updated travel advisory, the FCDO states: “There could be travel disruptions, including flight delays and longer queue times at some airports, due to the current US federal government shutdown. Check for messaging from your travel provider or airline and follow their guidance. There may also be restrictions on access to some federally-managed tourist attractions. Please check the relevant websites in advance.”

While the US Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and air traffic control services are still operating, many employees are either working without pay or calling in sick, placing pressure on staffing levels. Travel industry analysts warn that prolonged shortages could lead to further delays, particularly at major international gateways such as New York’s JFK Airport, Los Angeles International, Orlando, and Atlanta.

Tourists planning domestic flights within the US may also see longer wait times at security checkpoints, which could disrupt connecting flights and cause knock-on delays across the country. Airlines operating transatlantic services have begun issuing their own advisories. Some are advising passengers to arrive at airports earlier than usual for check-in and security screening, and to regularly monitor their flight status.

Another area of concern is the possible closure of major tourist attractions. National parks, including Grand Canyon, Yosemite, Yellowstone, and the Great Smoky Mountains, are overseen by the National Park Service, which is affected by the government shutdown. Historically, visitor centres, museums, restrooms, guided tours, and safety patrols have all been suspended during previous shutdowns, leaving tourists with little access or support.

In major cities, museums such as the Smithsonian Institution in Washington DC, the National Air and Space Museum, and the National Museum of American History may also face reduced opening hours or temporary closure if funding is not restored.

Holidaymakers are being encouraged to verify opening times before visiting, and to have backup plans in case venues are closed. Travel providers say travellers should be prepared to be flexible, especially those on multi-stop itineraries.

The Foreign Office guidance is precautionary rather than alarmist. Flights between the UK and US remain operational, most major tourist hubs continue to function, and hotels, restaurants and privately-run attractions are unaffected. But experts say travellers should avoid assuming everything will run as normal.

The shutdown stems from a political deadlock in Congress over government spending.

Republican lawmakers, particularly those aligned with President Donald Trump, have blocked funding bills in a bid to push for cuts to public services and changes to government programmes. Democrats have refused to agree to the proposals, saying they would damage key areas of the economy and the welfare system.

Without a funding agreement, government departments have been forced to limit operations. Essential services, including national security and emergency response, continue to operate. But many civil servants are furloughed without pay, and non-essential federal programmes are pausing operations until funding is restored.

List of airports that will see thousands of flights cancelled starting Friday

Anchorage International

Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International

Boston Logan International

Baltimore/Washington International

Charlotte Douglas International

Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International

Dallas Love

Ronald Reagan Washington National

Denver International

Dallas/Fort Worth International

Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County

Newark Liberty International

Fort Lauderdale/Hollywood International

Honolulu International

Houston Hobby

Washington Dulles International

George Bush Houston Intercontinental

Indianapolis International

New York John F Kennedy International

Las Vegas McCarran International

Los Angeles International

New York LaGuardia

Orlando International

Chicago Midway

Memphis International

Miami International

Minneapolis/St Paul International

Oakland International

Ontario International

Chicago O’Hare International

Portland International

Philadelphia International

Phoenix Sky Harbor International

San Diego International

Louisville International

Seattle/Tacoma International

San Francisco International

Salt Lake City International

Teterboro

Tampa International

The U.S. Supreme Court’s skeptical questioning of former President Donald Trump’s global tariffs has fueled speculation that his trade measures may be struck down, potentially upending the already fragile trade landscape.

The case centers on Trump’s use of the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose sweeping tariffs on imports. The law grants presidents broad authority to regulate trade during national emergencies but makes no mention of tariffs, raising constitutional questions about the limits of executive power.

During oral arguments on Wednesday, justices across the ideological spectrum except Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas appeared doubtful that Trump had legal authority to levy such blanket global tariffs.

Trade experts now warn that if the court invalidates Trump’s tariff policy, it could trigger a new wave of economic uncertainty, as the administration is expected to pivot quickly to other trade laws to reimpose duties.

Why It Matters

The outcome of this case could reshape U.S. trade policy for years. Businesses have paid over $100 billion in IEEPA-related tariffs since 2025, and a ruling against Trump could open a complex refund battle or force the White House to seek alternative legal pathways for its protectionist agenda.

Corporate leaders, already weary of erratic trade shifts, say a ruling either way offers little stability. “Even if it goes against IEEPA, the uncertainty still continues,” said David Young of the Conference Board, who briefed dozens of CEOs after the hearing.

Trump Administration: Faces potential legal defeat but can pivot to Section 232 (Trade Expansion Act of 1962) or Section 122 (Trade Act of 1974), both of which allow temporary or national security-based tariffs.

U.S. Supreme Court: Balancing presidential powers with statutory limits on trade actions.

Businesses & Importers: Risk being caught in regulatory limbo over refunds and future duties.

Federal Reserve: Monitoring potential economic fallout from prolonged trade instability.

Refunds Could Get “Messy”

Justice Amy Coney Barrett raised concerns about how refund claims would be handled if the tariffs are ruled illegal, calling it “a mess” for courts to manage.
Lawyer Neal Katyal, representing five small businesses challenging the tariffs, said only those firms would automatically receive refunds, while others must file administrative protests a process that could take up to a year.

Customs lawyer Joseph Spraragen added that if the court orders refunds, the Customs and Border Protection’s automated system could process them, but he warned, “The administration is not going to be eager to just roll over and give refunds.”

Economic and Policy Repercussions

Analysts expect the administration to rely on alternative statutes if IEEPA tariffs are overturned. However, implementing new duties under those laws could be slow and bureaucratic, potentially delaying trade certainty until 2026.

Natixis economist Christopher Hodge said such a ruling would be only a “temporary setback” for Trump’s trade agenda, predicting renewed tariff rounds or trade negotiations in the coming year.

Meanwhile, Federal Reserve Governor Stephen Miran warned the uncertainty could act as a drag on economic growth, though it might also prompt looser monetary policy if trade instability dampens business confidence.

What’s Next

A Supreme Court ruling is expected in early 2026, leaving companies in limbo over the future of U.S. tariff policy.
If Trump’s powers under IEEPA are curtailed, analysts expect a new wave of trade maneuvers potentially invoking national security provisions to maintain his “America First” economic approach, prolonging the climate of global trade unpredictability.

With information from Reuters.

The Chicago Cubs’ Kyle Tucker runs the bases after hitting a solo home run during the seventh inning of Game 4 of their NLDS against the Milwaukee Brewers.

(Nam Y. Huh / Associated Press)

The most obvious area of need for next year’s Dodgers will be in the outfield.

Andy Pages will be back, trying to build upon his 27-homer campaign in 2025. Teoscar Hernández will enter the second of his three-year contract, trying to rebound from his injury-plagued struggles this past summer.

But the third spot remains wide open, with Michael Conforto hitting free agency after his dismal performance on a one-year, $17 million deal this past year, and Alex Call having been used in more of a depth role after his arrival of this year’s trade deadline.

Internally, the Dodgers don’t have an immediate plug-and-play option, as top prospects Josue De Paula, Zyhir Hope, Eduardo Quintero and Mike Sirota remain a ways away from the majors.

Thus, don’t be surprised to see the Dodgers linked with big names on either the free-agent or trade market this winter, starting with top free-agent prize Kyle Tucker.

Since the summer, industry speculation has swirled about the Dodgers’ expected pursuit of Tucker this offseason. The four-time All-Star did not finish 2025 well while nursing a couple injuries, but remains one of the premier left-handed bats in the sport, and could command upward of $400-$500 million on a long-term deal — a hefty price tag, but certainly not one beyond the Dodgers’ capabilities.

Free agency will include other notable outfield options. Cody Bellinger is hitting the open market, though a reunion with the Dodgers has always seemed like a long shot. Harrison Bader and Trent Grisham could provide more glove-first alternatives, and have been linked with the Dodgers in the past.

Then there are potential trade candidates, from left fielder Steven Kwan of the Cleveland Guardians to utilityman Brendan Donovan of the St. Louis Cardinals, also players the Dodgers have inquired about in the past.

The Dodgers could construct their 2026 roster in other ways, thanks to the versatility Tommy Edman provides in center field. But another outfield addition remains their most logical priority this winter. And there will be no shortage of possibilities.

WASHINGTON  — The Supreme Court’s conservatives face a test of their own making this week as they decide whether President Trump had the legal authority to impose tariffs on imports from nations across the globe.

At issue are import taxes that are paid by American businesses and consumers.

Small-business owners had sued, including a maker of “learning toys” in Illinois and a New York importer of wines and spirits. They said Trump’s ever-changing tariffs had severely disrupted their businesses, and they won rulings declaring the president had exceeded his authority.

On Wednesday, the justices will hear their first major challenge to Trump’s claims of unilateral executive power. And the outcome is likely to turn on three doctrines that have been championed by the court’s conservatives.

First, they say the Constitution should be interpreted based on its original meaning. Its opening words say: “All legislative powers … shall be vested” in Congress, and the elected representatives “shall have the power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposes and excises.”

Second, they believe the laws passed by Congress should be interpreted based on their words. They call this “textualism,” which rejects a more liberal and open-ended approach that included the general purpose of the law.

Trump and his lawyers say his sweeping “Liberation Day” tariffs were authorized by the International Economic Emergency Powers Act, or IEEPA.

That 1977 law says the president may declare a national emergency to “deal with any unusual and extraordinary threat” involving national security, foreign policy or the economy of the United States. Faced with such an emergency, he may “investigate, block … or regulate” the “importation or exportation” of any property.

Trump said the nation’s “persistent” balance of payments deficit over five decades was such an “unusual and extraordinary threat.”

In the past, the law has been used to impose sanctions or freeze the assets of Iran, Syria and North Korea or groups of terrorists. It does not use the words “tariffs” or “duties,” and it had not been used for tariffs prior to this year.

The third doctrine arose with Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and is called the “major questions” doctrine.

He and the five other conservatives said they were skeptical of far-reaching and costly regulations issued by the Obama and Biden administrations involving matters such as climate change, student loan forgiveness or mandatory COVID-19 vaccinations for 84 million Americans.

Congress makes the laws, not federal regulators, they said in West Virginia vs. Environmental Protection Agency in 2022.

And unless there is a “clear congressional authorization,” Roberts said the court will not uphold assertions of “extravagant statutory power over the national economy.”

Now all three doctrines are before the justices, since the lower courts relied on them in ruling against Trump.

No one disputes that the president could impose sweeping worldwide tariffs if he had sought and won approval from the Republican-controlled Congress. However, he insisted the power was his alone.

In a social media post, Trump called the case on tariffs “one of the most important in the History of the Country. If a President is not allowed to use Tariffs, we will be at a major disadvantage against all other Countries throughout the World, especially the ‘Majors.’ In a true sense, we would be defenseless! Tariffs have brought us Great Wealth and National Security in the nine months that I have had the Honor to serve as President.”

Solicitor Gen. D. John Sauer, his top courtroom attorney, argues that tariffs involve foreign affairs and national security. And if so, the court should defer to the president.

“IEEPA authorizes the imposition of regulatory tariffs on foreign imports to deal with foreign threats — which crucially differ from domestic taxation,” he wrote last month.

For the same reason, “the major questions doctrine … does not apply here,” he said. It is limited to domestic matters, not foreign affairs, he argued.

Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh has sounded the same note in the past.

Sauer will also seek to persuade the court that the word “regulate” imports includes imposing tariffs.

The challengers are supported by prominent conservatives, including Stanford law professor Michael McConnell.

In 2001, he and John Roberts were nominated for a federal appeals court at the same time by President George W. Bush, and he later served with now-Justice Neil M. Gorsuch on the U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver.

He is the lead counsel for one group of small-business owners.

“This case is what the American Revolution was all about. A tax wasn’t legitimate unless it was imposed by the people’s representatives,” McConnell said. “The president has no power to impose taxes on American citizens without Congress.”

His brief argues that Trump is claiming a power unlike any in American history.

“Until the 1900s, Congress exercised its tariff power directly, and every delegation since has been explicit and strictly limited,” he wrote in Trump vs. V.O.S. Selections. “Here, the government contends that the President may impose tariffs on the American people whenever he wants, at any rate he wants, for any countries and products he wants, for as long as he wants — simply by declaring longstanding U.S. trade deficits a national ‘emergency’ and an ‘unusual and extraordinary threat,’ declarations the government tells us are unreviewable. The president can even change his mind tomorrow and back again the day after that.”

He said the “major questions” doctrine fully applies here.

Two years ago, he noted the court called Biden’s proposed student loan forgiveness “staggering by any measure” because it could cost more than $430 billion. By comparison, he said, the Tax Foundation estimated that Trump’s tariffs will impose $1.7 trillion in new taxes on Americans by 2035.

The case figures to be a major test of whether the Roberts court will put any legal limits on Trump’s powers as president.

But the outcome will not be the final word on tariffs. Administration officials have said that if they lose, they will seek to impose them under other federal laws that involve national security.

Still pending before the court is an emergency appeal testing the president’s power to send National Guard troops to American cities over the objection of the governor and local officials.

Last week, the court asked for further briefs on the Militia Act of 1908, which says the president may call up the National Guard if he cannot “with the regular forces … execute the laws of the United States.”

The government had assumed the regular forces were the police and federal agents, but a law professor said the regular forces in the original law referred to the military.

The justices asked for a clarification from both sides by Nov. 17.

Bam Adebayo had 25 points and 10 rebounds, Norman Powell added 21 points in his return to Southern California and the Miami Heat held off the Clippers 120-119 on Monday night.

Powell was a key member of the Clippers for three seasons before being traded to the Heat before this season.

Andrew Wiggins scored 17 points and Kel’el Ware added 16 to help the Heat end a two-game losing streak and win on the road for the second time in five games. Miami is 1-2 to open a four-game trip.

James Harden scored 29 points and Kawhi Leonard added 27 as the Clippers lost at home for the first time in four games this season.

Ivica Zubac had nine points and 12 rebounds for the Clippers. Derrick Jones Jr., Bradley Beal and John Collins each scored 12 points.

The Heat shot 54.2% from the field and made 12 of their 25 three-point attempts to 50% for the Clippers, who were 17 of 41 from long range. The Clippers had 21 turnovers that the Heat turned into 37 points.

Miami led 120-116 after two free throws from Adebayo with 56 seconds remaining. Adebayo missed a shot inside with 26 seconds left and Harden made a three-pointer on the other end with 20 seconds left to pull the Clippers within a point.

The Clippers had a chance to win it, but Leonard missed a 26-foot step-back three-pointer at the buzzer.

The Clippers trailed by as many as 13 points in the third quarter before getting even 105-105 with 9:55 remaining on a three-pointer from veteran Chris Paul.

Pot One: France, Germany, Spain & Sweden.

Pot Two: Netherlands, England, Italy & Norway.

Pot Three: Denmark, Austria, Iceland & Poland.

Pot Four: Slovenia, Serbia, Ukraine & Republic of Ireland.

The four groups in World Cup qualifying will contain a team from each of the seeded pots.

England and the Republic of Ireland will be in League A for World Cup qualifying, and will head into the campaign knowing that they are already guaranteed a play-off.

Despite winning the Euros, the Lionesses are in the second tier and that could mean the latest chapter in their rivalry with Spain.

Sarina Wiegman’s side also faced France and Sweden on their way to victory in July, and will back themselves to win automatic qualification no matter who they are drawn against from pot one.

England and the Republic of Ireland were in the same group for Euro 2025 qualifying and could face off again.

In a group that also contained heavyweights France and Sweden, the Irish were relegated, but a stunning promotion play-off win over Belgium saw them return to League A at the first time of asking.

Led by Katie McCabe, the Republic of Ireland qualified for the 2023 World Cup but missed out on the Euros after losing to Wales.

Being back in the top tier puts Carla Ward’s side in the best position to rectify that for the World Cup.

Catatumbo, Colombia – The Catatumbo region, which stretches along the border with Venezuela in the department of Norte de Santander, is Colombia’s most volatile frontier.

Endowed with oil reserves and coca crops but impoverished and neglected, this border area has historically been a site of violent competition between armed groups fighting for territorial control.

The National Liberation Army (ELN), Colombia’s largest remaining guerrilla force, maintains a strong and organised presence, operating across the porous border with Venezuela.

It is there that some of their fighters pick up an Al Jazeera reporting team and drive us to meet their commanders.

Tensions remain high in this region. In January, thousands of people were displaced because of the fighting between the ELN and a dissident faction from the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) that continues to operate in some parts of the country in spite of peace agreements brokered in 2016.

The fight is over control of the territory and access to the border with Venezuela, which is a crucial way to move drugs out of the country.

Entering the area, it’s immediately apparent that the ELN is in total control here. There is no evidence of the country’s military. ELN flags decorate the sideroads, and the signs give a clear message of the way the group’s members see Colombia right now.

“Total peace is a failure,” they say.

There is also no mobile phone signal. People tell the Al Jazeera team that telephone companies do not want to pay a tax to the armed groups controlling the territory.

When President Gustavo Petro took office, he promised to implement a total peace plan with Colombia’s armed groups. But the negotiations have not been easy, especially with the ELN.

Government offcials suspended the peace talks because of the fighting in Catatumbo, but now say they are ready to reinitiate talks.

Al Jazeera meets with Commander Ricardo and Commander Silvana in a small house in the middle of the mountains. The interview has to be fast, they say, as they are concerned about a potential attack and reconnaissance drones that have been circulating in the area.

The commanders are accompanied by some of their fighters. Asked how many they have in the area, they respond, “We are thousands, and not everyone is wearing their uniforms. Some are urban guerrillas.”

The government estimates the ELN has around 3,000 fighters. But the figure could be much higher.

Commander Ricardo, who is in charge of the region, says he believes there could be a chance for peace.

“The ELN has been battling for a political solution for 30 years with various difficulties,” he says. “We believed that with Petro, we would advance in the process. But that did not happen. There’s never been peace in Colombia. What we have is the peace of the graves.”

The group and the government had been meeting in Mexico prior to the suspension of the talks. “If the accords we had in Mexico are still there, I believe our central command would agree [it] could open up the way for a political solution to this conflict”, Commander Ricardo tells Al Jazeera.

US drugs threat

But it’s not just the fight with the Colombian state that has armed groups here on alert. The United States military campaign against alleged drug vessels in the Caribbean and Pacific – and the US’s aggressive posture towards the government of neighbouring Venezuela – have brought an international dimension to what was once an internal Colombian conflict.

The administration of US President Donald Trump refers to these people not as guerrillas but “narco-terrorists”, and has not ruled out the possibility of attacking them on Colombian soil.

The US operation, which began in early September, has killed more than 62 people, including nationals from Venezuela and Colombia, and destroyed 14 boats and a semi-submersible.

Some of the commanders have an extradition request from the US, and the government says they are wanted criminals.

The US strikes against boats allegedly carrying drugs in the Caribbean and the military build-up in the region to ramp up pressure on Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro are seen by the ELN as another act of US imperialism.

The US government claims one of those boats belonged to the ELN. “Why don’t they capture them and show the world what they captured and what they are they trafficking?” Commander Ricardo asks. “But no, they erase them with a bomb.”

He also warns about the possibility of the ELN joining in the fight against the US. “In the hypothesis that Trump attacks Venezuela, we will have to see how we respond, but it’s not just us,” he says. “[It’s] all of Latin America because I am sure there are going to be many, many people who will grab a weapon and fight because it’s too much. The fact that the United States can step over people without respecting their self-determination has to end.”

The ELN was inspired by the Cuban revolution. But over the years, it has been involved in kidnappings, killings, extortion, and drug trafficking.

Commander Silvana, who joined the group when she was a teen, says the ELN is not like other armed groups in the country.

“Our principles indicate that we are not involved in drug trafficking,” she says. “We have told this to the international community. What we have is taxes in the territories we have been controlling for over 60 years. And if there is coca, of course, we tax it, too.”

Colombia has been a crucial US ally in the region over the decades in the fight against drug trafficking. But Petro has increasingly questioned the US policy in the Caribbean, arguing that Washington’s approach to security and migration reflects out-of-date Cold War logic rather than the region’s current realities.

He has criticised the US military presence and naval operations near Venezuela, warning that such tactics risk increasing tensions instead of promoting cooperation.

Trump has accused Petro, who is a former guerrilla, of being a drug trafficker himself.

Petro responded angrily, writing on X, “Colombia has never been rude to the United States. To the contrary, it has loved its culture very much. But you are rude and ignorant about Colombia.”

Colombia’s Foreign Ministry also condemned Trump’s remarks as offensive and a direct threat to the country’s sovereignty, and vowed to seek international support in defence of Petro and Colombian autonomy.

The belligerent US approach to Venezuela and Colombia, both led by leftist presidents – and the heightened possibility of a US military intervention – risk turning a local Colombia conflict into a broader regional one.

Everyone on the ground is now assessing how they will respond if the US government gives its military the green light to attack Venezuela.

Ireland’s 40-29 win in Chicago nine years ago was one of the apogees in the team’s history, while the intensity and stakes of the World Cup quarter-final extracted herculean efforts from both sides in what is widely considered the rivalry’s apex.

But Saturday’s entry did not resemble either of those games.

Neither team reached anywhere near their maximum, and with a raft of protracted stoppages for tackle reviews and injuries, it failed to deliver an interest-generating spectacle in a country which is hosting the World Cup in six years.

Ultimately, New Zealand will not care. For them, a long-awaited fifth Grand Slam of the northern hemisphere remains in play after a second-half surge that yielded three tries in 15 minutes.

Ireland, however, have much to stew on.

Last year, they opened their autumn campaign with a loss to the All Blacks. Their performance in Dublin that night was one of the flattest of the Farrell era and they were not much better here.

There were, at least, some positives. They responded strongly to Tadhg Beirne’s highly controversial early red card to lead 10-0 thanks to a Jack Crowley penalty and Tadhg Furlong’s first try since 2021.

Elsewhere, Stuart McCloskey, a surprise inclusion at inside centre, shone in his first appearance against the All Blacks before being forced off injured, while Ryan Baird staked his claim to be a regular fixture in the back row.

But while they led for 57 minutes, Ireland never seemed fully in control. Having lost a tenacious operator in Beirne, they were bested at the breakdown and missed crucial tackles, while a creaky lineout blunted their ability to create opportunities and ramp up scoreboard pressure.