Politics

A new report from the city controller’s office questions the effectiveness of the LAPD’s signature crisis response program, saying clinicians trained in de-escalation too often are forced to defer to armed patrol officers.

For years, Los Angeles Police Department officials have touted the success of the Systemwide Mental Assessment Response Team, or SMART. But critics say the program, which pairs licensed specialists with officers in unmarked cars, is failing in the crucial initial minutes of encounters when multiple police shootings of mentally ill people have occurred.

Dinah M. Manning, chief of strategic initiatives and senior advisor in the controller’s office, said the report found an “inherent contradiction” in the SMART program.

Even though its purpose is to send in clinicians and tap their expertise to avoid killings, LAPD policy still requires armed patrol officers to clear a scene of any potential threats beforehand.

Traditional police units almost always take charge, even on calls in which no weapon is involved, such as a person threatening to commit suicide, Manning said.

Referring to SMART as a co-response program “is pretty much a misnomer in this case,” she said. “How is it that we’re ending up with so many fatalities?”

An LAPD spokesperson declined to comment in response to questions about the report.

LAPD officers have opened fire 35 times this year; in recent years, department statistics showed at least a third of all police shootings involved someone with obvious signs of emotional distress.

The report pointed to other shortcomings with the SMART program, which is housed within the department’s Mental Health Unit. Officers detailed to the units receive no specialized training, the report said, also finding that the department has failed to properly track uses of force on mental health-related calls.

The department’s existing use of force policy “falls short” of best practices for dealing with people in mental distress, the controller’s report said. The LAPD’s policy, it said, “only makes cursory mention of ‘vulnerable populations’ without expounding on the dynamic realities presented in encounters with people who have a mental health condition or appear to be in a mental health crisis.”

Too often in cases in which SMART responds, the report said, the outcome is that the person in crisis is placed on an involuntary 72-hour hold. Such scenarios do not involve an arrest or criminal charges; instead the person is held under state law that allows for detention if a person poses a threat to themselves or others.

The controller’s report comes amid a continued debate in L.A. and elsewhere about how officials should respond to emergencies involving mental health, homelessness, substance use or minor traffic incidents.

The city has expanded its alternative programs in recent years, but proponents warn that looming cuts in federal spending for social safety net programs under the Trump administration could hinder efforts to scale up and have more impact.

LAPD leaders in the past offered support of such programs, while cautioning that any call has the potential to quickly spiral into violence, necessitating the presence of officers.

Oct. 29 (UPI) — A federal judge has disqualified President Donald Trump‘s top prosecutor in Los Angeles, ruling Bill Essayli has been unlawfully serving as interim U.S. attorney for the Central District of California since late July.

The order was issued Tuesday by Judge J. Michael Seabright of the Federal District Court in Hawaii, stating Essayli “is not lawfully serving as Acting United States Attorney for the Central District of California.”

The effect of the order, however, was unclear, as it states that though he may not continue in the role as interim U.S. attorney, he may continue to perform his duties as first assistant United States attorney.

“For those who didn’t read the entire order, nothing is changing,” Essayli said in a statement.

“I continue serving as the top federal prosecutor in the Central District of California.”

The ruling comes in response to motions filed by three defendants seeking to dismiss indictments brought against them and to disqualify Essayli as acting U.S. attorney.

Essayli, who was appointed by the Trump administration, was sworn in on April 2 to serve as the interim U.S. attorney for 120 days.

As his term was nearing its end on July 31, Attorney General Pam Bondi appointed Essayli as a special attorney, effective upon his resignation as interim U.S. attorney.

In his ruling Tuesday, Seabright, a President George W. Bush appointee, said that Essayli assumed the role of acting U.S. attorney in violation of the Federal Vacancies Reform Act, which limits the amount of time prosecutors may fill federal positions without Senate approval.

“Simply stated: Essayli unlawfully assumed the role of Acting United States Attorney for the Central District of California. He has been unlawfully serving in that capacity since his resignation from the interim role on July 29, 2025,” he said.

“He is disqualified from serving in that role.”

Despite his ruling on Essayli, Seabright denied the three defendants’ request to dismiss their indictments, stating “the prosecutions remain valid.”

The ruling is the latest going against the Trump administration’s attempts to employ people in high-ranking positions without securing congressional approval.

In August, a federal judge ruled Alina Habba, a former personal Trump lawyer, was illegally serving as acting U.S. Attorney for New Jersey after her 12-day interim term expired.

Last month, a federal judge ruled that Sigal Chattah had been unlawfully serving as Acting U.S. Attorney for the District of Nevada.

Both decisions are being appealed.

Polls suggest anti-Islam lawmaker Geert Wilders and his Freedom Party on course to win largest number of seats.

People in the Netherlands are voting in a high-stakes snap election dominated by immigration and housing issues that will test the strength of the far right, which is on the rise across Europe.

Voting began at 7:30am (06:30 GMT) on Wednesday, and polls suggested anti-Islam lawmaker Geert Wilders and his far-right Freedom Party (PVV) are on course to win the largest number of seats in the 150-member House of Representatives. However, three more moderate parties are closing the gap, and half the electorate is undecided.

After the results are known, parties have to negotiate the makeup of the next coalition government in a system of proportional representation that means no party can reach the 76 seats needed to govern alone.

The key question is whether other parties will work with Wilders – known as the “Dutch Trump”, a reference to the United States president – who sparked the elections by pulling the PVV out of a fractious four-way coalition and collapsing the previous government in a row over immigration.

All mainstream parties have ruled out a partnership with him again, finding his views too unpalatable and viewing him as an untrustworthy coalition partner. It seems likely that the leader of the party that polls second will most likely become prime minister.

Reporting from The Hague, Al Jazeera’s Step Vaessen said the election campaign had been “dominated by calls to limit immigration” with “some violent protests against refugee centres”.

In a pre-election interview with the news agency AFP, Wilders said people were “fed up with mass immigration and the change of culture and the influx of people who really do not culturally belong here”.

“The future of our nation is at stake,” he said.

Rob Jetten – leader of the centre-left D66 party, which wants to rein in migration but also accommodate asylum seekers – told Wilders that voters can “choose again tomorrow to listen to your grumpy hatred for another 20 years or choose with positive energy to simply get to work and tackle this problem and solve it”.

Frans Timmermans, a former European Commission vice president who now leads the centre-left bloc of the Labour Party and Green Left, said in the final debate before the elections that he was “looking forward to the day – and that day is tomorrow – that we can put an end to the Wilders era”.

Beyond immigration, the housing crisis that especially affects young people in the densely populated country has been a key campaign issue.

The electoral commission has registered 27 parties and 1,166 candidates running for the House of Representatives.

That means a big ballot paper because it bears the names of all the parties and the candidates on each party’s list.

Polls close at 9pm (20:00 GMT).

President Samia Suluhu Hassan is expected to win the election as the two main opposition parties have been barred from taking part.

Polls have opened in Tanzania for presidential and parliamentary elections being held without the leading opposition party, as the government has been violently cracking down on dissent ahead of the vote.

More than 37 million registered voters will cast their ballots from 7am local time (4:00 GMT) until 4pm (13:00 GMT). The election commission says it will announce the results within three days of election day.

President Samia Suluhu Hassan, 65, is expected to win after candidates from the two leading opposition parties were barred from standing.

The leader of Tanzania’s main opposition party, Chadema’s Tundu Lissu, is on trial for treason, charges he denies. The electoral commission disqualified Chadema in April after it refused to sign an electoral code of conduct.

The commission also disqualified Luhaga Mpina, the candidate for the second largest opposition party, ACT-Wazalendo, after an objection from the attorney general, leaving only candidates from minor parties taking on Hassan.

In addition to the presidential election, voters will choose members of the country’s 400-seat parliament and a president and politicians in the semiautonomous Zanzibar archipelago.

Hassan’s governing party Chama Cha Mapinduzi (CCM), whose predecessor party led the struggle for independence for mainland Tanzania in the 1950s, has dominated national politics since its founding in 1977.

Hassan, one of just two female heads of state in Africa, won plaudits after coming to power in 2021 for easing repression of political opponents and censorship that proliferated under her predecessor, John Magufuli, who died in office.

But in the last two years, rights campaigners and opposition candidates have accused the government of unexplained abductions of its critics.

She maintains her government is committed to respecting human rights and last year ordered an investigation into the reports of abductions. No official findings have been made public.

Stifling opposition

UN human rights experts have called on Hassan’s government to immediately stop the enforced disappearance of political opponents, human rights defenders and journalists “as a tool of repression in the electoral context”.

They said more than 200 cases of enforced disappearance had been recorded in Tanzania since 2019.

A recent Amnesty International report detailed a “wave of terror” including “enforced disappearance and torture … and extrajudicial killings of opposition figures and activists”.

Human Rights Watch said “the authorities have suppressed the political opposition and critics of the ruling party, stifled the media, and failed to ensure the electoral commission’s independence”.

US crisis-monitoring group Armed Conflict Location & Event Data (ACLED) said the ruling CCM was intent on maintaining its status as the “last hegemonic liberation party in southern Africa” and avoiding the recent electoral pressures faced by counterparts in South Africa, Namibia and Zimbabwe.

In September 2024, the body of Ali Mohamed Kibao, a member of the secretariat of the opposition Chadema party, was found after two armed men forced him off a bus heading from Dar-es-Salaam to the northeastern port city of Tanga.

There are fears that even members of CCM are being targeted. Humphrey Polepole, a former CCM spokesman and ambassador to Cuba, went missing from his home this month after resigning and criticising Hassan. His family found blood stains in his home.

The Tanganyika Law Society says it has confirmed 83 abductions since Hassan came to power, with another 20 reported in recent weeks.

Protests are rare in Tanzania, in part thanks to a relatively healthy economy, which grew by 5.5 percent last year, according to the World Bank, on the back of strong agriculture, tourism and mining sectors.

Hassan has promised big infrastructure projects and universal health insurance in a bid to win over voters.

Oct. 29 (UPI) — The U.S. Senate on Tuesday night passed legislation terminating the national emergency declaration to impose duties on Brazilian imports, dealing a blow to President Donald Trump‘s use of the punitive economic measures to penalize the South American country for prosecuting his ally, former President Jair Bolsonaro.

The Senate voted 52-48 in favor of S.J. Res. 18, with five Republicans — Sens. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, Thom Tillis of North Carolina, Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Rand Paul, also of Kentucky — joining their Democratic colleagues in ending the emergency and, consequently, the tariffs.

The bipartisan bill was introduced by Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., and Paul.

Speaking from the floor prior to the vote Tuesday, Paul criticized the tariffs as a tax being levied against the people of the United States — taxes, which fall under the purview of the House of Representatives, not that of the executive branch.

“The Senate is compelled to act because one person in our country wishes to raise taxes without the approval of the Senate, without the approval of the House, without the approval of the Constitution,” he said, referring to Trump.

“The idea that one person can raise taxes is contrary to our founding principles.”

Tariffs have been a central mechanism of Trump’s trade and foreign policy, using them to right what he sees as improper trade relations as well as to penalize nations he feels are doing him and the United States wrong.

Starting in April, Trump imposed a 10% baseline tariff on nearly every country under a national emergency declaration, the legality of which is being challenged in court. In late July, Trump imposed an additional 40% tariff on Brazil via an executive order under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.

Trump had threatened Brazil with tariffs over how Bolsonaro “has been treated.”

Bolsonaro was being prosecuted at the time the tariffs were imposed for attempting a coup following his 2022 election loss to current President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. In September, he was sentenced to 27 years in prison.

In his floor speech Tuesday, Kaine asked what threat to the U.S. economy, national security or foreign policy did Brazil pose to the United States to necessitate the national emergency.

“We have a trade surplus with Brazil: $7 billion a year in goods, $23 billion a year in services,” he said. “This president has said their prosecution of a disgraced politician is a national emergency for the United States? How could that be? Mr. President, if this is a national emergency, any president of any party could say that anything is a national emergency for the United States.”

Voters in Tanzania are heading to polling booths on Wednesday to vote for a new president, as well as members of parliament and councillors, in elections which are expected to continue the ruling Chama Cha Mapinduzi (CCM) – or Party of Revolution’s – 64-year-long grip on power.

Despite a bevy of candidates in the lineup, incumbent President Samia Suluhu Hassan, analysts say, is virtually unchallenged and will almost certainly win, following what rights groups say has been a heavy crackdown on popular opposition members, activists and journalists.

Key challengers Tundu Lissu of the largest opposition party, Chadema, and Luhaga Mpina of ACT-Wazalendo, have been barred from standing, thus eliminating any real threat to Hassan. Other presidential candidates on the ballot lack political backing and are unlikely to make much impact on voters, analysts say.

The East African nation is replete with rolling savannas and wildlife, making it a hotspot for safari tourism. It is also home to Africa’s tallest mountain, Mount Kilimanjaro, as well as a host of important landmarks, like the Ngorongoro Crater and the Serengeti. Precious minerals, such as the unique tanzanite – a blue gemstone – and gold, as well as agricultural exports, contribute significantly to foreign earnings.

Central Dodoma is the country’s capital, while the economic hub is coastal Dar-es-Salaam. Swahili is the lingua franca, while different local groups speak several other languages.

Here’s what to expect at the polls:

What are people voting for and how will the elections be decided?

Voters are choosing a president, parliament members and local councillors for the 29 regions in mainland Tanzania. A president and parliament members will also be elected in the autonomous island of Zanzibar.

Winners are elected by plurality or simple majority vote – the candidate with the most votes wins.

Authorities declared that Wednesday would be a public holiday to allow people to vote, while early voting began in Zanzibar on Tuesday.

How many people are voting?

More than 37 million of the 60 million population are registered to vote. To vote, you must be a citizen aged 18 or over.

Voter turnout in the last general elections in 2020 was just 50.72 percent, however, according to the International Foundation for Electoral Systems.

Who is President Samia Suluhu Hassan and why is she regarded as a shoe-in?

Formerly the country’s vice president, Hassan, 65, automatically ascended to the position of president following the death of former President John Magufuli in March 2021, to serve out the remainder of his term.

Hassan is presently one of only two African female leaders, the other being Namibia’s Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah. She is the sixth president and the first female leader of her country. She was previously minister of trade for Zanzibar, where she is from.

This will be Hassan’s first attempt at the ballot, and the election was supposed to be a test of how Tanzanians view her leadership so far. However, analysts say the fact that her two strongest challengers have been barred from the polls means the president is running with virtually no competition.

After taking office in 2021, Hassan immediately began reversing controversial policies implemented by Magafuli, an isolationist leader who denied that COVID-19 existed and refused to issue policies regarding quarantines or vaccines.

Under Hassan, Tanzania joined the international COVAX facility, directed by institutions like the World Health Organization, to help distribute vaccines to developing countries, especially in Africa.

Hassan also struck a reconciliatory tone with opposition leaders by lifting a six-year ban on political rallies imposed by Magufuli.

She focused on completing large-scale Magafuli-era development projects and launched new ones, especially around railway infrastructure and rural electrification. The president’s supporters, therefore, praise her record in infrastructure development, improving access to education and improving overall stability of governance in the country.

However, while many hoped Tanzania would become more democratic under her leadership, Hassan’s style of governance has become increasingly authoritarian, analysts say, and now more closely resembles that of her predecessor.

In a report ahead of the elections, Amnesty International found that Hassan’s government has intensified “repressive practices” and has targeted opposition leaders, civil society activists and groups, journalists and other dissenting voices with forced disappearances, arrests, harassment and even torture.

Tanzania’s government has consistently denied all accusations of human rights violations.

Hassan’s campaign rallies have been highly visible across the country – but hers has been nearly the only major national campaign, with smaller parties sticking to their particular regions.

Some opposition parties are now calling for a boycott of the elections altogether. Speaking to Al Jazeera, Chadema party member John Kitoka, who is currently in hiding to avoid arrest, said the elections are “completely a sham”.

How are opposition parties being dealt with?

Last week, Hassan urged Tanzanians to ignore calls to boycott the vote and warned against protests.

“The only demonstrations that will exist are those of people going to the polling stations to vote. There will be no other demonstrations. There will be no security threat,” she said.

Tanzania’s police have also warned against creating or distributing “inciting” content on social media, threatening that those caught will face prosecution. The country routinely restricts access to social media on specific occasions, such as during protests. Only select traditional media have been approved to provide coverage of the elections.

In the autonomous Zanzibar, which will also elect a president and parliament members, there is more of an atmosphere of competitive elections, observers say. Incumbent leader Hussein Mwinyi of the ruling CCM is facing off against the ACT-Wazalendo candidate Othman Masoud, who has been serving as his vice president in a coalition government.

Why have key opposition candidates been barred from standing?

Tundu Lissu, 57, is the charismatic and widely popular opposition Chadema candidate who lived in exile in Belgium for several years during the Magufuli era. His party, which calls for free elections, reduction of presidential powers, and promotion of human rights, has been barred from the vote for failing to meet a submission deadline, and Lissu is currently in custody for alleged “treasonous” remarks he made ahead of the elections.

The move followed Lissu’s comments during a Chadema rally in the southern town of Mbinga on April 3, during which he urged his supporters to boycott the elections if Hassan’s government did not institute electoral reforms before the vote. Lissu was calling on the government to change the makeup of the Independent National Election Commission, arguing that the agency should not include people appointed directly by Hassan.

Government officials claimed his statements were “inciting” and arrested Lissu on April 9.

Three days later, the electoral commission disqualified Chadema from this election – and all others until 2030 – on the grounds that the party had failed to sign a mandatory Electoral Code of Conduct due on April 12.

Local media reported that two Chadema party members attending a rally in support of Lissu on April 24 were also arrested by the Tanzanian police.

Last week, Chadema deputy chairperson John Heche, deputy chairperson of Chadema, was detained while attempting to attend Lissu’s trial at the Dar-es-Salaam High Court. He has not been seen since.

Lissu has been detained often. He survived an assassination attempt in 2017 after he was shot 16 times.

In August, the elections commission also barred opposition candidate Luhaga Mpina, 50, of the ACT-Wazalendo, the second-largest opposition party. Mpina, a parliament member who broke away from the ruling CCM in August to join ACT-Wazalendo – also known as the Alliance for Change and Transparency – was barred for allegedly failing to follow the rules for nominations during the presidential primaries.

Hassan will compete with 16 other candidates –  none of whom are from major national parties or have an established political presence.

What are the key issues for this election?

Shrinking democratic freedoms

Observers say Tanzania’s democracy, already fragile during the presidency of Magafuli, is at risk as a result of the Hassan government’s tightening of political freedoms and crackdowns on the media.

Amnesty International notes that electoral rights violations were apparent in 2020 under Magufuli, but have worsened ahead of this week’s polls.

Human Rights Watch and the United Nations human rights agency (UNHCR) have similarly documented reports of rights violations under Hassan’s government, noting in particular the disappearance of two regional activists, Boniface Mwangi from Kenya and Agather Atuhaire from Uganda, who travelled to witness Lissu’s trial but were detained in Dar-es-Salaam on May 19, 2025.

Mwangi was reportedly tortured and dumped in a coastal Kenyan town, while Atuhaire reported being sexually assaulted before also being abandoned at the border with Uganda.

“More than 200 cases of enforced disappearance have been recorded in Tanzania since 2019,” the UNHCR noted.

Business and economy

Tanzania’s economic growth has been stable with inflation staying below the Central Bank’s 5 percent target in recent years, according to the World Bank.

Unlike its neighbour, Kenya, the lower-middle-income country has avoided debt distress, with GDP boosted by high demand for its gold, tourism and agricultural commodities like cashew nuts, coffee and cotton. However, the World Bank noted that 49 percent of the population lives below the international poverty line.

While growth has attracted foreign investment, government policies have negatively impacted the business landscape: In July, Hassan’s government introduced new restrictions banning foreigners from owning and operating businesses in 15 sectors, including mobile money transfers, tour guiding, small-scale mining and on-farm crop buying.

Officials argued that too many foreigners were engaging in informal businesses that ought to benefit Tanzanians. The move played to recent protests against the rising influx of Chinese products and businesses in Tanzanian markets, analysts say. Foreigners are also banned from owning beauty salons, souvenir shops and radio and TV stations.

The move proved controversial in the regional East African Community bloc, particularly in neighbouring Kenya, whose citizens make up a significant population of business owners in the country, having taken advantage of the free-movement policy within the bloc.

Conservation challenges

While abundant wildlife and natural resources have boosted the economy via tourism, Tanzania faces major challenges in managing human-wildlife conflict.

Clashes between humans, particularly in rural areas, and wild animals are becoming more common due to population growth and climate change, which is pushing animals closer to human settlements in search of food and water.

Human-elephant flare-ups are most common. Between 2012 and 2019, more than 1,000 human-wildlife mortality cases were reported nationwide, according to data from Queen’s University, Canada.

While the government provides financial and material compensation to the families of those affected by human-wildlife conflict incidents, families often complain of receiving funds late.

Meanwhile, there is tension between the government and indigenous groups such as the Maasai, who are resisting being evicted to make more room for conservation space to be used for tourism.

Last year, crackdowns on Maasai protesters and resulting outrage from groups led to the World Bank suspending a $150m conservation grant, and the European Union cancelling Tanzania’s eligibility for a separate $20m grant.

L.A. County supervisors have unanimously approved an $828-million settlement for alleged victims of childhood sexual abuse, finalizing the deal while questions mount over the legitimacy of some claims in a separate multibillion-dollar payout that they agreed to this spring.

The settlement approved Tuesday brings the county’s spending on sex abuse litigation this year to nearly $5 billion, with the bulk of that total coming from a $4-billion deal made in April to resolve thousands of claims filed by people who said they were abused decades ago in county-run juvenile detention centers and foster homes.

The latest settlement involves similar claims brought by 414 clients of three law firms who opted to negotiate separately from the rest. The $4-billion settlement initially covered roughly 6,800 claims, but has ballooned to more than 11,000.

The larger settlement has come under scrutiny after The Times found nine people who said they were paid to sue. Four said they were told to fabricate the claims. All had lawsuits filed by Downtown LA Law Group, which represents more than 2,700 clients in the first settlement.

The firm has denied paying clients to sue and said it has “systems in place to help weed out false or exaggerated allegations.” The firm has asked the court to dismiss three claims on behalf of allegedly fraudulent plaintiffs this month.

Downtown LA Law Group will be required to detail any claims that came to it through recruiters, the county’s top attorney said Tuesday. The firm has denied any wrongdoing.

(Carlin Stiehl / Los Angeles Times)

The settlement approved Tuesday involves cases only from Arias Sanguinetti Wang & Team, Manly, Stewart & Finaldi, and Panish Shea Ravipudi and has no cases from DTLA. But the firm nevertheless took center stage Tuesday as the supervisors pressed their top attorney on how the lawsuits were vetted.

“What were we doing prior to this article?” said Supervisor Kathryn Barger, referencing The Times’ reporting from earlier this month.

The county was in a tough spot, county counsel Dawyn Harrison explained. Many plaintiff attorneys didn’t want the county interviewing their clients, she said. And a judge had temporarily paused the discovery process, providing the county little insight into the identities of the thousands of people suing.

Harrison said Tuesday that DTLA cases now will be required to go through a “completely new level of review” beyond the standard vetting that was already underway by retired Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Louis Meisinger. In addition to having a new retired Superior Court judge vet all their cases, DTLA must provide the county with information on plaintiffs acquired through “a recruiter or vendor,” she said.

“DTLA is required to identify every recruiter it used, a list of each plaintiff brought in per recruiter, information about any funds that changed hands, and a declaration under oath by each recruiter identifying what was done, what was said, and any monies paid,” Harrison said.

It’s an unusual request.

California law bans a practice known as capping, in which non-attorneys directly solicit or procure clients to sign up for lawsuits with a law firm.

DTLA has denied knowledge of any of its clients receiving payments to sue and said the firm wants “justice for real victims” of sexual abuse.

“If we ever became aware that anyone associated with us, in any capacity, did such a thing, we would end our relationship with them immediately,” the firm said.

The rush of lawsuits was kicked off by a now-controversial bill known as AB 218, which changed the statute of limitations for victims of sexual abuse and created a new window to sue. The county, which is responsible for the safety of children inside juvenile carceral facilities and foster care, has seen more than 12,000 claims and counting since the law took effect in 2020.

The allegations of fraud that now hover over these cases was the fault of “an unmanageable law,” not the county’s vetting process, Harrison said.

“AB 218 erased those guardrails and allowed decades-old claims that no one can meaningfully vet,” she said.

The county’s lawyers and politicians have become increasingly loud critics of the law, which they say has left them facing a deluge of decades-old claims with no records. Supervisor Hilda Solis said she felt the county had become the “guinea pig” for the bill.

Joe Nicchitta, the county’s acting chief executive officer, estimated that anywhere between $1 billion to $2 billion in county taxpayer money from the settlements will go to attorneys.

“The law had some very noble intentions but it has been … and I’m just going to say what I think, hijacked by the plaintiff’s bar,” he said. “They do all of the vetting, they do all of the intake, they advertise extensively. They’re incentivized to bring as many cases as possible.”

Nicchitta said he’d heard rumors that venture capitalists were poking around Sacramento to find out “whether or not we have enough cash to pay for another settlement, so that they can finance a law firm to bring another round of settlements against us.”

“It’s clear to me the system is ruptured,” he said.

Courtney Thom, who was the lead attorney on cases from Manly, Stewart & Finaldi, said she believed the county was blaming the new state law for the failures of its own lawyers.

“To blame AB 218 and say that’s what enabled the fraud is just a pathetic attempt to deflect responsibility,” Thom said. “Our firm has been saying for two years we’re concerned about fraud.”

Mike Arias, who represents clients in the latest settlement as a partner with Arias Sanguinetti Wang & Team, said the three firms involved stopped adding clients more than a year ago.

“That’s a big distinction,” Arias said. “We said, at the time, the number of plaintiffs would not change. Ethically, my view was that’s who we represent and who we’re going to negotiate for.”

Arias said the allocation for the second settlement will be done by retired Orange County Superior Court Judge Gail Andler, who specializes in overseeing sexual abuse litigation. Potential payouts will range between $750,000 and $3.25 million, he said.

Victims say the money represents a sliver of justice for the abuse they say they suffered while confined in county custody — little of which has been criminally prosecuted.

One man, who is part of the settlement and asked not to be identified, said he has no idea what happened to the probation official who he alleges raped him at around 16 while he was asleep in his cell at Barry J. Nidorf Juvenile Hall, knocked out on sleep medication.

“I had no control in that place,” said the man, now 34. “My body hasn’t ever felt the same since.”

The county has launched an “AB 218 fraud hotline” where tipsters can report misconduct related to the flood of sex abuse claims.

(Rebecca Ellis / Los Angeles Times)

The county recently launched an “AB 218 fraud hotline” where tipsters can report misconduct related to the flood of claims. The county says it also plans to start a hotline for victims to safely report allegations of sex abuse in its facilities.

“It is illegal for anyone to file, pay for, or receive payments for making fake claims of childhood sexual abuse,” states a banner now running atop the county website with a hand doling out hundred-dollar bills.

The county also has launched a website that asks people to report if they were offered cash to sue, which law firms were involved, and whether they were coached, among other questions.

Supervisor Holly Mitchell, whose district includes the South Central social services office where seven people told The Times they were paid to sue, said she wanted to see the hotlines advertised as aggressively as the plaintiff attorneys advertised for their cases.

“You couldn’t turn on an urban radio station without hearing a commercial advertising these cases,” Mitchell said. “I certainly hope whatever we use, as we talk about our outreach, that we lean in as hard.”

A federal judge Tuesday ruled that Acting U.S. Atty. Bill Essayli is not lawfully serving in that role, but declined to dismiss criminal indictments that were challenged by defense attorneys.

Senior Judge J. Michael Seabright from the District of Hawaii was brought in to oversee the case after federal judges in Los Angeles recused themselves. In his ruling, Seabright said Essayli “unlawfully assumed the role of Acting United States Attorney” but can remain in charge under a different title.

Seabright said Essayli “remains the First Assistant United States Attorney” and can “perform the functions and duties of that office.”

Essayli, a former Riverside County assemblyman, was appointed as the region’s interim top federal prosecutor by U.S. Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi in April.

The top prosecutors in charge of U.S. Attorney’s offices are supposed to be confirmed by the U.S. Senate or a panel of federal judges, but the Trump administration has circumvented the normal process in order to allow Essayli and others to remain on the job without facing a vote.

Essayli’s temporary appointment was set to expire in late July, but the White House never moved to nominate him to a permanent role, instead opting to use an unprecedented legal maneuver to shift his title to “acting,” extending his term for an additional nine months.

Challenges to Essayli’s appointment have been brought in at least three criminal cases, with defense lawyers arguing that charges brought under his watch are invalid. The federal public defender’s office in Los Angeles asked the judge to disqualify Essayli from participating in and supervising criminal prosecutions in the district.

The U.S. Attorney’s office in Los Angeles did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Seabright’s ruling comes amid similar challenges across the country to the Trump administration’s tactics for installing loyalists who wield the power to bring criminal charges and sue on the government’s behalf.

A federal judge in August determined Alina Habba has been illegally occupying the U.S. attorney post in New Jersey, although that order was put on hold pending appeal. Last month a federal judge disqualified Nevada’s top federal prosecutor, Sigal Chattah, from several cases, concluding she “is not validly serving as acting U.S. attorney.” Chattah’s disqualification also is paused while the Department of Justice appeals the decision.

James Comey, the former FBI director charged with lying to Congress, cited the Nevada and New Jersey cases in a recent filing and is now challenging the legality of Trump’s appointment of Lindsey Halligan as U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia. Halligan was appointed after his predecessor, also a Trump appointee, refused to seek charges against Comey.

Since taking office, Essayli has doggedly pursued President Trump’s agenda, championing hard-line immigration enforcement in Southern California, often using the president’s language at news conferences. Essayli’s tenure has sparked discord in the office, with dozens of career DOJ prosecutors quitting.

The judge’s ruling Tuesday conceded arguments from the Justice Department that Essayli would continue leading the U.S. Attorney’s office in L.A. regardless of how the judged decided on the challenge to his status.

Assistant U.S. Atty. Alexander P. Robbins said that because Essayli also has been designated as first assistant U.S. attorney, he would retain his authority even if stripped of the “acting” title.

Bondi in July also appointed him as a “special attorney.” Robbins told the judge that “there’s no developed challenge to Mr. Essayli’s appointment as a special attorney or his designation as a first assistant.”

The prosecutor told the judge the government believes Essayli’s term will end Feb. 24 and that afterward the role of acting U.S. attorney will remain vacant.

Robbins argued in a court filing that the court shouldn’t order Essayli “to remove the prosecutorial and supervisory hats that many others in this Office wear, sowing chaos and confusion into the internal workings of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the largest district in the country.”

When asked by a Times reporter last month about the motion to disqualify him, Essayli said “the president won the election.”

“The American people provided him a mandate to run the executive branch, including the U.S. attorney’s office, and I look forward to serving at the pleasure of the president,” he said during a news conference.

The United States has revoked the visa of Nigerian author and playwright Wole Soyinka, who became the first African writer to win the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1986.

Speaking at Kongi’s Harvest Gallery in Lagos on Tuesday, Soyinka read aloud from a notice sent on October 23 from the local US consulate, asking him to arrive with his passport so that his visa could be nullified.

The author called it, with characteristic humour, a “rather curious love letter” to receive.

“We request you bring your visa to the US Consulate General Lagos for physical cancellation. To schedule an appointment, please email — et cetera, et cetera — in advance of the appointment,” Soyinka recited, skimming the letter.

Closing his laptop, the author joked with the audience that he did not have time to fulfil its request.

“I like people who have a sense of humour, and this is one of the most humorous sentences or requests I’ve had in all my life,” Soyinka said.

“Would any of you like to volunteer in my place? Take the passport for me? I’m a little bit busy and rushed.”

Soyinka’s visa was issued last year, under US President Joe Biden. But in the intervening time, a new president has taken office: Donald Trump.

Since beginning his second term in January, Trump has overseen a crackdown on immigration, and his administration has removed visas and green cards from individuals whom it sees as out of step with the Republican president’s policies.

At Tuesday’s event, Soyinka struck a bemused tone, though he indicated the visa revocation would prevent him from visiting the US for literary and cultural events.

“I want to assure the consulate, the Americans here, that I am very content with the revocation of my visa,” Soyinka said.

He also quipped about his past experiences writing about the Ugandan military leader Idi Amin. “Maybe it’s about time also to write a play about Donald Trump,” he said.

Nobel Prize winners in the crosshairs

Soyinka is a towering figure in African literature, with a career that spans genres, from journalism to poetry to translation.

He is the author of several novels, including Season of Anomy and Chronicles from the Land of the Happiest People on Earth, as well as numerous short stories.

The 91-year-old author has also championed the fight against censorship. “Books and all forms of writing are terror to those who wish to suppress the truth,” he wrote.

He has lectured on the subject in New York City for PEN America, a free speech nonprofit. As recently as 2021, he returned to the US to present scholar and former colleague Henry Louis Gates Jr with the nonprofit’s Literary Service Award.

But Soyinka is not the first Nobel winner to see his US visa stripped away in the wake of Trump’s return to office, despite the US president’s own ambitions of earning the international prize.

Oscar Arias, a former president of Costa Rica and the winner of the 1987 Nobel Peace Prize, also found his visa cancelled in April.

Arias was previously honoured by the Nobel Committee for his efforts to end armed conflicts in Central American countries like Nicaragua, El Salvador and Guatemala.

While the letter Arias received from the US government gave no reason for his visa’s cancellation, the former president told NPR’s Morning Edition radio show that officials indicated it was because of his ties to China.

“During my second administration from 2006 to 2010, I established diplomatic relations with China, and that’s because it has the second-largest economy in the world,” Arias explained.

But, Arias added, he could not rule out the possibility that there were other reasons for his visa’s removal.

“I have to imagine that my criticism of President Trump might have played a role,” Arias told NPR. “The president has a personality that is not open to criticism or disagreements.”

Soyinka likewise has a reputation for being outspoken, both about domestic politics in his native Nigeria and international affairs.

He has, for example, denounced Trump on multiple occasions, including for the “brutal, cruel and often unbelievable treatment being meted out to strangers, immigrants”.

In 2017, he confirmed to the magazine The Atlantic that he had destroyed his US green card — his permanent residency permit — to protest Trump’s first election in 2016.

“As long as Trump is in charge, if I absolutely have to visit the United States, I prefer to go in the queue for a regular visa with others,” he told the magazine.

The point was, he explained, to show that he was “no longer part of the society, not even as a resident”.

In Tuesday’s remarks, Soyinka reaffirmed that he no longer had his green card. “Unfortunately, when I was looking at my green card, it fell between the fingers of a pair of scissors, and it got cut into a couple of pieces,” he said, flashing his tongue-in-cheek humour.

He also emphasised he continues to have close friends in the US, and that the local consulate staff has consistently treated him courteously.

His work had long caused him to face persecution in Nigeria — though, famously, during a stint in solitary confinement, he continued to write using toilet paper — and eventually, in the 1990s, he sought refuge in the US.

During his time in North America, he took up teaching posts at prestigious universities like Harvard, Yale and Emory.

Targeting ‘hostile attitudes’

The Trump administration, however, has pledged to revoke visas from individuals it deems to be a threat to its national security and foreign policy interests.

In June, Trump issued a proclamation calling on his government tighten immigration procedures, in an effort to ensure that visa-holders “do not bear hostile attitudes toward its citizens, culture, government, institutions, or founding principles”.

What qualifies as a “hostile attitude” towards US culture is unclear. Human rights advocates have noted that such broad language could be used as a smokescreen to crack down on dissent.

Free speech, after all, is protected under the First Amendment of the US Constitution and is considered a foundational principle in the country, protecting individual expression from government shackles.

After Arias was stripped of his visa, the Economists for Peace and Security, a United Nations-accredited nonprofit, was among those to express outrage.

“This action, taken without explanation, raises serious concerns about the treatment of a globally respected elder statesman who has dedicated his life to peace, democracy, and diplomacy,” the nonprofit wrote in its statement.

“Disagreements on foreign policy or political perspective should not lead to punitive measures against individuals who have made significant contributions to international peace and stability.”

International students, commenters on social media, and acting government officials have also faced backlash for expressing their opinions and having unfavourable foreign ties.

Earlier this month, Panamanian President Jose Raul Mulino voiced concern that members of his government had seen their visas cancelled over their diplomatic ties to China.

And in September, while visiting New York City, Colombian President Gustavo Petro saw his visa yanked within hours of giving a critical speech to the United Nations and participating in a protest against Israel’s war in Gaza.

The US Department of State subsequently called Petro’s actions “reckless and incendiary”.

Separately, the State Department announced on October 14 that six foreign nationals would see their visas annulled for criticising the assassinated conservative activist Charlie Kirk, a close associate of Trump.

Soyinka questioned Trump’s stated motives for cancelling so many visas at Tuesday’s literary event in Lagos, asking if they really made a difference for US national security.

“Governments have a way of papering things for their own survival,” he said.

“I want people to understand that the revocation of one visa, 10 visas, a thousand visas will not affect the national interests of any astute leader.”

CHICAGO — A judge on Tuesday ordered a senior U.S. Border Patrol official to meet her each evening to discuss the government’s immigration crackdown in the Chicago area, an extraordinary step following weeks of street confrontations, tear gas volleys and complaints of excessive force.

“Yes, ma’am,” responded Greg Bovino, who has become the face of the Trump administration’s immigration sweeps in America’s big cities.

Bovino got an earful from U.S. District Judge Sara Ellis as soon as he settled into the witness chair in his green uniform.

Ellis quickly expressed concerns about video and other images from an illegal immigration drive that has produced more than 1,800 arrests since September. The hearing is the latest in a lawsuit by news outlets and protesters who say agents have used too much force, including tear gas, during demonstrations.

“My role is not to tell you that you can or cannot enforce validly passed laws by Congress. … My role is simply to see that in the enforcement of those laws, the agents are acting in a manner that is consistent with the Constitution,” the judge said.

Bovino is chief of the Border Patrol sector in El Centro, Calif., one of nine sectors on the Mexican border.

The judge wants him to meet her in person daily at 6 p.m. “to hear about how the day went.”

“I suspect, that now knowing where we are and that he understands what I expect, I don’t know that we’re going to see a whole lot of tear gas deployed in the next week,” Ellis said.

Ellis zeroed in on reports that Border Patrol agents disrupted a children’s Halloween parade with tear gas on the city’s Northwest Side over the weekend. Neighbors had gathered in the street as someone was arrested.

“Those kids were tear-gassed on their way to celebrate Halloween in their local school parking lot,” Ellis said. “And I can only imagine how terrified they were. These kids, you can imagine, their sense of safety was shattered on Saturday. And it’s going to take a long time for that to come back, if ever.”

Ellis ordered Bovino to produce all use-of-force reports since Sept. 2 from agents involved in Operation Midway Blitz. She first demanded them by the end of Tuesday, but Bovino said it would be “physically impossible” because of the “sheer amount.”

Lawyers for the government have repeatedly defended the actions of agents, including those from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and told the judge that videos and other portrayals have been one-sided.

Besides his court appearance, Bovino still must sit for a deposition, an interview in private, with lawyers from both sides.

The judge has already ordered agents to wear badges, and she’s banned them from using certain riot control techniques against peaceful protesters and journalists. She subsequently required body cameras after the use of tear gas raised concerns that agents were not following her initial order.

Ellis set a Friday deadline for Bovino to get a camera and to complete training.

Attorneys representing a coalition of news outlets and protesters claim he violated the judge’s use-of-force order in Little Village, a Mexican enclave in Chicago, and they filed an image of him allegedly “throwing tear gas into a crowd without justification.”

Over the weekend, masked agents and unmarked SUVs were seen on Chicago’s wealthier, predominantly white North Side, where video showed chemical agents deployed in a street. Agents have been recorded using tear gas several times over the past few weeks.

Bovino also led the immigration operation in Los Angeles in recent months, leading to thousands of arrests. Agents smashed car windows, blew open a door to a house and patrolled MacArthur Park on horseback.

Fernando writes for the Associated Press.

SAN FRANCISCO — A federal judge in San Francisco on Tuesday indefinitely barred the Trump administration from firing federal employees during the government shutdown, saying that labor unions were likely to prevail on their claims that the cuts were arbitrary and politically motivated.

U.S. District Judge Susan Illston granted a preliminary injunction that bars the firings while a lawsuit challenging them plays out. She previously issued a temporary restraining order against the job cuts that was set to expire Wednesday.

Illston, who was nominated by former President Clinton, has said she believes evidence will show the mass firings were illegal and in excess of authority.

Federal agencies are enjoined from issuing layoff notices or acting on notices issued since the government shut down Oct. 1. Illston said her order does not apply to notices sent before the shutdown.

The Republican administration has slashed jobs in education, health and other areas it says are favored by Democrats. The administration also said it will not tap roughly $5 billion in contingency funds to keep benefits through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, commonly referred to as SNAP, flowing into November.

The American Federation of Government Employees and other labor unions sued to stop the “reductions in force” layoffs, saying the firings were an abuse of power designed to punish workers and pressure Congress.

“President Trump is using the government shutdown as a pretense to illegally fire thousands of federal workers — specifically those employees carrying out programs and policies that the administration finds objectionable,” AFGE National President Everett Kelley said in a statement thanking the court.

The White House referred a request for comment to the Office of Management and Budget, which did not immediately respond.

Lawyers for the government say the district court does not have the authority to hear personnel challenges and that President Trump has broad authority to reduce the federal workforce as he pledged to do during his campaign.

“The president was elected on this specific platform,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael Velchik said. “The American people selected someone known above all else for his eloquence in communicating to employees that you’re fired; this is what they voted for.”

Trump starred on a long-running reality TV series called “The Apprentice” in which his signature catchphrase was telling candidates they were fired.

About 4,100 layoff notices have gone out since Oct. 10, some sent to work email addresses that furloughed employees are not allowed to check. Some personnel were called back to work, without pay, to issue layoff notices to others.

The lawsuit has expanded to include employees represented by additional labor unions, including the National Treasury Employees Union, the American Federation of Teachers, and the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers. All Cabinet departments and two dozen independent agencies are included in the lawsuit.

Democratic lawmakers are demanding that any deal to reopen the government address expiring health care subsidies that have made health insurance more affordable for millions of Americans. They also want any government funding bill to reverse the Medicaid cuts in Trump’s big tax breaks and spending cuts bill passed this summer.

Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson has refused to negotiate with Democrats until they agree to reopen the government.

This is now the second-longest shutdown in U.S. history. The longest occurred during Trump’s first term over his demands for funds to build the Mexico border wall. That one ended in 2019 after 35 days.

Har writes for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — President Trump faces the most important international meeting of his second term so far on Thursday: face-to-face negotiations with Xi Jinping, who has made China a formidable economic and military challenger to the United States.

The two presidents face a vast agenda during their meeting in Seoul, beginning with the two countries’ escalating trade war over tariffs and high-tech exports. The list also includes U.S. demands for a Chinese crackdown on fentanyl, China’s aid to Russia in its war with Ukraine, the future of Taiwan and China’s growing nuclear arsenal.

Trump has already promised, characteristically, that the meeting will be a major success.

“It’s going to be fantastic for both countries, and it’s going to be fantastic for the entire world,” he said last week.

But it isn’t yet clear that the summit’s concrete results will measure up to that high standard.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Sunday that the two sides have agreed to a “framework” under which China would delay implementing tight controls on rare earth elements, minerals crucial for the production of high-tech products from smartphones and electric vehicles to military aircraft and missiles. He said China has also agreed to resume buying soybeans from U.S. farmers and to crack down on fentanyl components.

In return, Bessent said, the United States will back down from its stinging tariffs on Chinese goods.

Nicholas Burns, the U.S. ambassador in Beijing under then-President Biden, said that kind of deal would amount to “an uneasy trade truce rather than a comprehensive trade deal.”

“That may be the best we can expect,” he said in an interview Monday. Still, he added, “it will be a positive step to stabilize world markets and allow the continuation of U.S.-China trade for the time being.”

But U.S. and Chinese officials have been close-mouthed on what, if anything, has been agreed on regarding Xi’s other big trade demand: easier U.S. restrictions on high-tech exports to China, especially advanced semiconductor chips used for artificial intelligence.

Burns said the two superpowers’ technology competition is “the most sensitive … in terms of where this relationship will head, which country will emerge more powerful.”

Giving China easy access to advanced semiconductors “would only help [the Chinese army] in its competition with the U.S. military for power in the Indo-Pacific,” he warned.

Other former officials and China hawks outside the administration have said, even more pointedly, that they worry that Trump may be too willing to trade long-term technology assets for short-term trade deals.

In August, Trump eased export controls to allow Nvidia, the world leader in AI chips, to sell more semiconductors to China — in an unusual deal under which the U.S. company would pay 15% of its revenue from the sales to the U.S. Treasury.

Matthew Pottinger, Trump’s top China advisor in his first term, protested in a recent podcast interview that the deal risked trading a strategic technology advantage “for $20 billion and Nvidia’s bottom line.”

Underlying the controversy over technology, some China watchers warn, is a basic mismatch between the two presidents: Trump is focused almost entirely on trade and commercial deals, while Xi is focused on displacing the United States as the biggest economic and military power in Asia.

“I don’t think the administration has a strategy toward China,” said Bonnie Glaser, a China expert at the German Marshall Fund of the United States. “It has a trade strategy, not a China strategy.”

“The administration does not seem to be focused on competition with China,” said Jonathan Czin, a former CIA analyst now at Washington’s Brookings Institution. “It’s focused on deal making. … It’s tactics without strategy.”

“We’ve fallen into a kind of trade and technology myopia,” he added. “We’re not talking about issues like China’s coercion [of smaller countries] in the South China Sea. … China doesn’t want to have that bigger, broader conversation.”

It isn’t clear that Trump and Xi will have either the time or inclination to talk in detail about anything other than trade.

And even on the front-burner economic issues, this week’s ceasefire is unlikely to produce a permanent peace.

“As with all such agreements, the devil will be in the details,” Burns, the former ambassador, said. “The two countries will remain fierce trade rivals. Expect friction ahead and further trade duels well into 2026.”

“Buckle up,” Czin said. “There are likely more sudden moves from Beijing ahead.”

In the long run, Trump’s legacy in U.S.-China relations will rest not only on trade deals but on the larger competition for economic and military power in the Pacific Rim. No matter how this week’s meetings go, those challenges still lie ahead.

PORTLAND, Maine — Maine’s elections in recent years have been relatively free of problems, and verified cases of voter fraud are exceedingly rare.

That’s not stopping Republicans from pushing for major changes in the way the state conducts its voting.

Maine is one of two states with election-related initiatives on the Nov. 4 ballot but is putting the most far-reaching measure before voters. In Texas, Republicans are asking voters to make clear in the state constitution that people who are not U.S. citizens are ineligible to vote.

Maine’s Question 1 centers on requiring voter ID, but is more sweeping in nature. The initiative, which has the backing of an influential conservative group in the state, also would limit the use of drop boxes to just one per municipality and create restrictions for absentee voting even as the practice has been growing in popularity.

Voters in both states will decide on the measures at a time when President Trump continues to lie about widespread fraud leading to his loss in the 2020 presidential election and make unsubstantiated claims about future election-rigging, a strategy that has become routine during election years. Republicans in Congress and state legislatures have been pushing for proof of citizenship requirements to register and vote, but with only limited success.

Maine’s initiative would impose voter ID, restrict absentee voting

The Maine proposal seeks to require voters to produce a voter ID before casting a ballot, a provision that has been adopted in several other states, mostly those controlled by Republicans. In April, Wisconsin voters enshrined that state’s existing voter ID law into the state’s constitution.

Question 1 also would eliminate two days of absentee voting, prohibit requests for absentee ballots by phone or family members, end absentee voter status for seniors and people with disabilities, and limit the number of drop boxes, among other changes.

Absentee voting is popular in Maine, where Democrats control the Legislature and governor’s office and voters have elected a Republican and an independent as U.S. senators. Nearly half of voters there used absentee voting in the 2024 presidential election.

Gov. Janet Mills is one of many Democrats in the state speaking out against the proposed changes.

“Whether you vote in person or by absentee ballot, you can trust that your vote will be counted fairly,” Mills said. “But that fundamental right to vote is under attack from Question 1.”

Proponents of the voter ID push said it’s about shoring up election security.

“There’s been a lot of noise about what it would supposedly do, but here’s the simple truth: Question 1 is about securing Maine’s elections,” said Republican Rep. Laurel Libby, a proponent of the measure.

A key supporter of the ballot initiative is Dinner Table PAC, a conservative group in the state. Dinner Table launched Voter ID for ME, which has raised more than $600,000 to promote the initiative. The bulk of that money has come from the Republican State Leadership Committee, which advocates for Republican candidates and initiatives at the state level through the country. Save Maine Absentee Voting, a state group that opposes the initiative, has raised more than $1.6 million, with the National Education Assn. as its top donor.

The campaigning for and against the initiative is playing out as the state and FBI are investigating how dozens of unmarked ballots meant to be used in this year’s election arrived inside a woman’s Amazon order. The secretary of state’s office says the blank ballots, still bundled and wrapped in plastic, will not be used in the election.

Texas voters consider a citizenship requirement

In Texas, voters are deciding whether to add wording to the state constitution that Republican Gov. Greg Abbott and other backers said would guarantee that noncitizens will not be able to vote in elections there. State and federal laws already make it illegal for noncitizens to vote.

Thirteen states have made similar changes to their constitutions since North Dakota first did in 2018. Proposed constitutional amendments are on the November 2026 ballot in Kansas and South Dakota.

The measures have so far proven popular, winning approval with an average of 72% of the vote.

“I think it needs to sweep the nation,” said Republican state Rep. A.J. Louderback, who represents a district southwest of Houston. “I think we need to clean this mess up.”

Voters already have to attest they are U.S. citizens when they register, and voting by noncitizens, which is rare, is punishable as a felony and can lead to deportation.

Louderback and other supporters of such amendments point to policies in at least 20 communities across the country that allow noncitizens to vote in local elections, though none are in Texas. They include Oakland and San Francisco, where noncitizens can cast ballots in school board races if they have children in the public schools, the District of Columbia, and several towns in Maryland and Vermont.

Other states, including Kansas, have wording in their constitutions putting a citizenship requirement in affirmative terms: Any U.S. citizen over 18 is eligible to vote. In some states, amendments have rewritten the language to make it more of a prohibition: Only U.S. citizens are eligible to vote.

The article on voting in the Texas Constitution currently begins with a list of three “classes of persons not allowed to vote”: people under 18, convicted felons and those “who have been determined mentally incompetent by a court.” The Nov. 4 amendment would add a fourth, “persons who are not citizens of the United States.”

Critics say the proposed changes are unnecessary

Critics say the Maine voter ID requirement and Texas noncitizen prohibition are solutions in search of a problem and promote a longstanding conservative GOP narrative that noncitizen voting is a significant problem, when in fact it’s exceedingly rare.

In Texas, the secretary of state’s office recently announced it had found the names of 2,700 “potential noncitizens” on its registration rolls out of the state’s nearly 18.5 million registered voters.

Veronikah Warms, staff attorney at the Texas Civil Rights Project, said pushing the narrative encourages discrimination and stokes fear of state retaliation among naturalized citizens and people of color. Her group works to protect the rights of those groups and immigrants and opposes the proposed amendment.

“It just doesn’t serve any purpose besides furthering the lie that noncitizens are trying to subvert our democratic process,” she said. “This is just furthering a harmful narrative that will make it scarier for people to actually exercise their constitutional right.”

In Maine, approval of Question 1 would most likely make voting more difficult overall, said Mark Brewer, chair of the University of Maine political science department. He added that claims of widespread voter fraud are unsupported by evidence.

“The data show that the more hoops and restrictions you put on voting, the harder it is to vote and the fewer people will vote,” he said.

Whittle and Hanna write for the Associated Press. Hanna reported from Topeka, Kan.

NEW YORK — President Trump’s lawyers have asked a New York state appeals court to toss out his hush money criminal conviction, saying federal law preempts state law and there was no intent to commit a crime.

The lawyers filed their written arguments with the state’s mid-level appeals court just before midnight Monday.

In June, the lawyers asked a federal appeals court to move the case to federal court, where the Republican president can challenge the conviction on presidential immunity grounds. The appeals court has not yet ruled.

Trump was convicted in May 2024 of 34 felony counts of falsifying business records to conceal a hush money payment to adult film actor Stormy Daniels, whose affair allegations threatened to upend his 2016 presidential campaign. Trump denies her claim and said he did nothing wrong. It was the only one of the four criminal cases against him to go to trial.

Trump was sentenced in January to what’s known as an unconditional discharge, leaving his conviction on the books but sparing him jail, probation, a fine or other punishment.

Appearing by video at his sentencing, Trump called the case a “political witch hunt,” “a weaponization of government” and “an embarrassment to New York.”

The Manhattan district attorney’s office, which prosecuted the case, will have a chance to respond to the appeals arguments in court papers. A message seeking comment was left with the office Tuesday.

At trial, prosecutors said Trump mislabeled payments to his then-lawyer Michael Cohen as legal fees to conceal that he was actually reimbursing the $130,000 that Cohen paid Daniels to keep her quiet in the final weeks of Trump’s successful 2016 presidential run.

At the time, Daniels was considering going public with a claim that she and the married Trump had a 2006 sexual encounter that Trump has consistently denied.

In their arguments to the New York state appeals court, Trump’s lawyers wrote that the prosecution of Trump was “the most politically charged prosecution in our Nation’s history.”

They said Trump was the victim of a Democratic district attorney in Manhattan who “concocted a purported felony by stacking time-barred misdemeanors under a convoluted legal theory” during a contentious presidential election in which Trump was the leading Republican candidate.

They wrote that federal law preempts the “misdemeanor-turned-felony charges” because the charges rely on an alleged violation of federal campaign regulations that states cannot enforce.

They said the trial was also spoiled when prosecutors introduced official presidential acts that the Supreme Court has made clear cannot be used as evidence against a U.S. president.

“Beyond these fatal flaws, the evidence was clearly insufficient to convict,” the lawyers wrote.

The lawyers also attacked the conviction on the grounds that “pure, evidence-free speculation” was behind the effort by prosecutors to persuade jurors that Trump was thinking about the 2020 election when he allegedly decided to reimburse Cohen.

Neumeister writes for the Associated Press.

Oct. 28 (UPI) — With the impending loss of benefits under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program potentially causing low-income Americans and their families to go hungry, 25 states have filed suit to force the federal government to release funds for the program during the federal government shutdown.

Starting Saturday, SNAP benefits will not be distributed. The program gives food aid to 40 million Americans.

In past government shutdowns, the USDA used a contingency fund to pay out SNAP benefits. Last week, the President Donald Trump administration said it won’t be using contingency funds to pay for SNAP.

“We just can’t do it without the government being open,” Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins said on Oct. 21. “By Nov. 1, we are very hopeful this government reopens and we can begin moving that money out. But right now, half the states are shut down on SNAP.”

The lawsuit said this has never happened before.

“Because of USDA’s actions, SNAP benefits will be delayed for the first time since the program’s inception. … Suspending SNAP benefits in these circumstances is both contrary to law and arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act,” the lawsuit said.

New York Attorney General Letitia James released a statement on the suit:

“Millions of Americans are about to go hungry because the federal government has chosen to withhold food assistance it is legally obligated to provide,” James said.

“SNAP is one of our nation’s most effective tools to fight hunger, and the USDA has the money to keep it running. There is no excuse for this administration to abandon families who rely on SNAP, or food stamps, as a lifeline. The federal government must do its job to protect families.”

On Fox News, Rollins was asked if the Agriculture well had truly run dry, CNBC reported.

“100% unequivocally, USDA does not have the $9.2 billion that it would require,” Rollins said.

“There’s not just pots of $9.2 billion sitting around. And what’s particularly rich about New York saying that, or California, or any of these other blue states that have filed the lawsuit to say, ‘Oh no, we’re going to go, you guys, USDA, go find the money,'” Rollins said.

The lawsuit alleges that the USDA has the money and won’t spend it. The plaintiffs are led by the attorneys general of Massachusetts, California, Arizona and Minnesota. The states and the District of Columbia asked a judge to reply quickly to force the USDA to use the contingency funds for November.

On Tuesday, another Senate vote to reopen the government failed.

NASHVILLE — A federal judge in Tennessee on Monday warned of possible sanctions against top Trump administration officials if they continue to make inflammatory statements about Kilmar Abrego Garcia that could prejudice his coming trial.

U.S. District Judge Waverly Crenshaw filed an order late on Monday instructing local prosecutors in Nashville to provide a copy of his opinion to all Justice Department and Department of Homeland Security employees, including Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.

“Government employees have made extrajudicial statements that are troubling, especially where many of them are exaggerated if not simply inaccurate,” Crenshaw writes.

He lists a number of examples of prohibited statements as outlined in the local rules for the U.S. District Court of Middle Tennessee. They include any statements about the “character, credibility, reputation, or criminal record of a party” and “any opinion as to the accused’s guilt or innocence.”

“DOJ and DHS employees who fail to comply with the requirement to refrain from making any statement that ‘will have a substantial likelihood of materially prejudicing’ this criminal prosecution may be subject to sanctions,” his order reads.

Earlier this year, Abrego Garcia’s mistaken deportation to El Salvador, where he was held in a notoriously brutal prison despite having no criminal record, helped galvanize opposition to President Trump’s immigration crackdown. Facing mounting public pressure and a court order, the Trump administration brought him back to the U.S. in June, but only after issuing an arrest warrant on human smuggling charges in Tennessee. Abrego Garcia has pleaded not guilty to those charges and asked Crenshaw to dismiss them.

Meanwhile, Trump administration officials have waged a relentless public relations campaign against Abrego Garcia, repeatedly referring to him as a member of the MS-13 gang and even implicating him in a murder. Crenshaw’s opinion cites statements from several top officials, including Bondi and Noem, as potentially damaging to Abrego Garcia’s right to a fair trial. He also admonishes Abrego Garcia’s defense attorneys for publicly disclosing details of plea agreement negotiations.

Abrego Garcia has an American wife and child and has lived in Maryland for years, but he immigrated to the U.S. illegally from El Salvador as a teenager. In 2019, an immigration judge granted him protection from being deported back to his home country, finding he had a well-founded fear of violence there from a gang that targeted his family.

Since his return to the U.S. in June, Immigration and Customs Enforcement has announced plans to deport him to a series of African countries, most recently Liberia.

Loller writes for the Associated Press.

More air traffic controllers are calling in sick, often to work another job to pay for groceries and medicines.

United States air traffic controllers will miss their paycheques because of the ongoing government shutdown, raising concerns that mounting financial stress could take a toll on the already understaffed employees who guide thousands of flights each day.

Paycheques were due on Tuesday.

Flight delays are becoming more common across the country as more controllers call out sick because the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) was already so short on controllers before the shutdown.

Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy and National Air Traffic Controllers Association President Nick Daniels have continued to emphasise the pressure that controllers are feeling. They say the problems are likely to only get worse the longer the shutdown continues.

Not only are controllers worrying about how to pay for their mortgages and groceries, but Daniels said some of them are also grappling with how to pay for the medicine needed to keep their children alive.

Duffy said he heard from one controller who had to tell his daughter she couldn’t join the travelling volleyball team she had earned a spot on because he couldn’t afford the cost during the shutdown.

“Air traffic controllers have to have 100 percent of focus 100 percent of the time,” Daniels said Tuesday at a news conference alongside Duffy at LaGuardia Airport in New York City. “And I’m watching air traffic controllers going to work. I’m getting the stories. They’re worried about paying for medicine for their daughter. I got a message from a controller that said, ‘I’m running out of money. And if she doesn’t get the medicine she needs, she dies. That’s the end.’”

The FAA restricts the number of flights landing and taking off at an airport anytime there is a shortage of controllers to ensure safety. Most of the time, that has meant delays — sometimes hours long — at airports like New Jersey’s Newark Liberty International Airport or Burbank Airport in California. But over the weekend, Los Angeles International Airport actually had to stop all flights for nearly two hours.

Controllers are planning to assemble outside at least 17 airports nationwide on Tuesday to hand out leaflets urging an end to the shutdown as soon as possible.

Money worries

The number of controllers calling in sick has increased during the shutdown – both because of their frustration with the situation and because controllers need the time off to work second jobs instead of continuing to work six days a week, as many of them routinely do. Duffy has said that controllers could be fired if they abuse their sick time, but the vast majority of them have continued to show up for work every day.

Air traffic controller Joe Segretto, who works at a regional radar facility that directs planes in and out of airports in the New York area, said morale is suffering as controllers worry more about money.

“The pressure is real,” Segretto said. “We have people trying to keep these planes safe. We have trainees — who are trying to learn a new job that is very fast-paced, very stressful, very complex — now having to worry about how they’re going to pay bills.”

Duffy said the shutdown is also making it harder for the government to reduce the longstanding shortage of about 3,000 controllers. He said that some students have dropped out of the air traffic controller academy in Oklahoma City, and younger controllers who are still training to do the job might abandon the career because they can’t afford to go without pay.

“This shutdown is making it harder for me to accomplish those goals,” Duffy said.

The longer the 27-day shutdown continues, the more pressure will continue to build on the US Congress to reach an agreement to reopen the government. During the 35-day shutdown in President Donald Trump’s first term, the disruptions to flights across the country contributed to the end of that disruption. But so far, Democrats and Republicans have shown little sign of reaching a deal to fund the government.

Michaela Thompson, an unemployed mother in the San Fernando Valley, relies on federal assistance to afford the specialized baby formula her 15-month-old daughter needs because of a feeding disorder. At $47 for a five-day supply, it’s out of her reach otherwise.

But with the federal shutdown blocking upcoming disbursements of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits — previously known as food stamps — Thompson said she doesn’t know how she’s going to fill her daughter’s bottles.

“It feels like the world is kind of crumbling right now,” she said. “I’m terrified for my family and my daughter.”

Millions of low-income families who rely on SNAP benefits to put food on the table in California and across the country — about 1 in 8 Americans — are confronting similar fears this week, as federal and state officials warn that November funds will not be issued without a resolution to the ongoing federal shutdown and Congress shows no sign of a breakthrough.

Gov. Gavin Newsom and state Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta announced Tuesday that California is joining other Democrat-led states in suing the Trump administration to force SNAP payments through the use of contingency funds, but the litigation — even if successful — won’t prevent all the disruptions.

Army Spc. Jazmine Contreras, center, and Pfc. Vivian Almaraz, right, of the 40th Division Sustainment Brigade, Army National Guard, Los Alamitos, help workers and volunteers pack boxes of produce at the Los Angeles Regional Food Bank on Friday.

(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

It is already too late for some of the 5.5 million California residents — including 2 million children — who rely on such benefits to receive them in time to buy groceries after Friday, when many will have already used up their October benefits, state officials said. Advocates warned of a tidal wave of need as home pantries and CalFresh cards run empty — which they said is no longer a risk but a certainty.

“We are past the point at which it is possible to prevent harm,” said Andrew Cheyne, managing director of public policy at the organization End Child Poverty California.

About 41.7 million Americans were served through SNAP per month in fiscal 2024, at an annual cost of nearly $100 billion, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

State officials, local governments and nonprofit organizations are scrambling to get the word out to families and to redirect millions of dollars in emergency funding to stock more food at local food banks or load gift cards for the neediest families, but many say the capacity to respond is insufficient — and are bracing for a deluge of need.

“People really don’t understand the scale and scope of what is happening and the ripple effect it will have on the economy and with people just meeting their basic needs,” said Angela F. Williams, president and chief executive of United Way.

Already, United Way is seeing an uptick in calls to its 211 centers nationwide from people looking for help with groceries, utility bills and rent, Williams said. “There’s a critical crisis that has been brewing for a while, and it’s reaching a fevered pitch.”

Cheyne said many families are well aware of the looming disruption to aid and scrambling to prepare, including by going to state food banks for groceries. Newsom has activated the National Guard to help handle that influx in California.

However, Cheyne said many others will likely find out about the disruption while standing in grocery store checkouts.

“We anticipate a huge surge in people extremely upset to find out that they’ve literally shopped, and the groceries are in their cart, and their kids are probably with them, and then they get to the checkout, and then it’s, ‘transaction denied: insufficient funds.’”

Children and older people — who make up more than 63% of SNAP recipients in California — going hungry across America is a dire enough political spectacle that politicians of both parties have worked aggressively to prevent it in the past, including during previous government shutdowns. But this time around, they seem resigned to that outcome.

Members of the military and their families receive food donated by Feeding San Diego food bank on Friday.

(Sandy Huffaker / AFP / Getty Images)

Republicans and Democrats have been unable to reach a deal on the budget impasse as Democrats fight Republicans over their decision to slash healthcare subsidies relied on by millions of Americans. With no end in sight to the nearly month-long shutdown, federal workers who are either furloughed or working without pay — including many in California — are facing financial strain and increasingly showing up at food pantries, officials said.

A deluge of SNAP recipients will only add to the lines, and some food bank leaders are becoming increasingly worried about security at those facilities if they are overwhelmed by need.

Pointing fingers

In a statement posted to its website Monday, the Department of Agriculture wrote that Senate Democrats had repeatedly voted not to restore the SNAP funds by passing a short-term Republican spending measure.

“Bottom line, the well has run dry,” it said. “We are approaching an inflection point for Senate Democrats.”

The Trump administration had said Friday that it cannot legally dip into contingency funds to continue funding SNAP into November, even as it uses nontraditional means to pay for the salaries of active-duty military and federal law enforcement.

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) walks through Statuary Hall at the Capitol on Tuesday.

(Samuel Corum / Bloomberg / Getty Images)

The administration has used tariff revenue to temporarily fund the Women, Infants and Children Nutrition Program, which serves about 6.7 million women and children nationally, though it is unclear how long it will continue do so. The California Department of Public Health said the state WIC program, which supports about half of all babies born in California, should “remain fully operational through Nov. 30, assuming no unexpected changes.”

On Capitol Hill, negotiations to end the shutdown have mostly ground to a halt. Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) once again refused to call House members back into session this week, sparking criticism from Democrats and some Republicans who want to negotiate a deal to reopen the government. In the Senate, negotiations remain at a stalemate.

Senate Democrats, meanwhile, have relentlessly blamed President Trump and his administration for causing the disruption to food aid, just as they have blamed the president for the shutdown overall.

“Donald Trump has the power to ensure 40 million people don’t go hungry during the shutdown. But he wishes to inflict the maximum pain on those who can least afford it. He won’t fund food. But he’s happy to build a golden ballroom,” Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) wrote Monday on X.

Schiff was referring to a $250-million ballroom Trump has planned for the White House, which he recently set into motion by demolishing the historic East Wing.

A member of the U.S. Navy waits in line to receive food from volunteers with Feeding San Diego food bank.

(Sandy Huffanker / AFP / Getty Images)

State and local responses

States have responded to the looming cut in different ways. Some have promised to backfill SNAP funding from their own coffers, though federal officials have warned they will not be reimbursed.

Newsom has stood up the National Guard and directed tens of millions of dollars to state food banks, but has made no promises to directly supplement missing SNAP benefits with state dollars — despite advocacy groups calling on him to do so.

On Friday, dozens of organizations wrote a letter to Newsom and other state officials estimating the total amount of lapsed funding for November to be about $1.1 billion, and calling on them to use state funds to cover the total amount to prevent “a crisis of unthinkable magnitude.”

Carlos Marquez III, executive director of the County Welfare Directors Assn. of California, said counties and other local agencies are responding in a number of ways, including making contributions to local food banks and looking for ways to redirect local funds — and find matching philanthropic dollars — to directly backfill missing SNAP benefits.

Los Angeles County, which has about 1.5 million SNAP recipients, has already approved a $10-million expenditure to support local food banks, its Department of Children and Family Services has identified an additional $2 million to redirect, and its partners providing managed care plans to SNAP recipients have committed another $5 million, he said.

He said his group has advocated for Newsom to declare a statewide emergency, which would help equalize the response statewide and allow for mutual aid agreements between wealthier and poorer areas.

He said his group also is advocating for the state to begin using school lunch programs to direct additional food to families with younger children at home, and to work with local senior care facilities to make sure elderly SNAP recipients are also being helped.

What comes next?

Williams, of United Way, said the organization’s local chapters are “looking for partners on the ground” to provide additional support moving forward, as needs will persist.

“It seems like every day the needs just become more and more pressing, and I’m concerned, honestly, not only about the economic toll that is being taken on individuals, I’m concerned about the mental health and emotional toll this is taking on people,” Williams said. “My hope is that people from all sectors will step up and say, ‘How can we be good neighbors?’”

On Friday, National Guard troops began a 30-day deployment at the Los Angeles Regional Food Bank, where they are sorting produce and packing food boxes. Due to “heightened concern” in the community about the military’s role in Trump’s immigration crackdown, the troops will be working in warehouses and not interacting directly with the public, said Chief Executive Michael Flood.

Flood said there has already been a surge in demand from laid-off federal workers in Los Angeles, but he’s expecting demand to increase markedly beginning Saturday, and building up distribution capacity similar to what was in place during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic — which seemed odd, considering “this is a man-made disaster.”

“It doesn’t have to happen,” Flood said. “Folks in D.C. can prevent this from happening.”

WASHINGTON — House Republicans on Tuesday unveiled their long-promised report on former President Biden’s use of the autopen, delivering a blistering critique of his time in office and inner circle that largely rehashes public information while making sweeping accusations about the workings of his White House.

The GOP report does not include any concrete evidence that aides conspired to enact policies without Biden’s knowledge or that the president was unaware of laws, pardons or executive orders signed in his name. But Republicans said their findings cast doubt on all of Biden’s actions in office. They sent a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi urging a full investigation. President Trump ordered a similar inquiry earlier this year.

At its core, the report advances contested claims that Biden’s mental state declined to a degree that allowed White House officials to enact policies without his knowledge. It focuses heavily on the pardons he granted in office, including to his son, Hunter Biden, based on depositions with close Biden aides.

“The cost of the scheme to hide the fallout of President Biden’s diminished physical and mental acuity was great but will likely never be fully calculated,” the report reads. “The cover-up put American national security at risk and the nation’s trust in its leaders in jeopardy.”

Biden has strenuously denied he was unaware of his administration’s actions, calling such claims “ridiculous and false.” Democrats on the House Oversight committee denounced the probe as a distraction and waste of time.

Republicans are shifting attention back to Biden at a tumultuous time, 10 months into Trump’s presidency, with the government shut down and Congress at a standstill over legislation to fund it. House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., has kept the House out of session for nearly a month, with most public-facing committee work grinding to a halt.

The report on Biden was largely compiled over several months before the shutdown began. Based on interviews with more than a dozen members of Biden’s inner circle, the report offers few new revelations, instead drawing broad conclusions from unanswered questions.

It includes repeated references to polls of Biden’s approval rating and perceptions of his public gaffes and apparent aging, much of it publicly known.

It alleges a “cover-up of the president’s cognitive decline” orchestrated by Biden’s inner circle and takes particular aim at Biden’s doctor, Kevin O’Connor, who invoked his Fifth Amendment right against testifying. Republicans also singled out senior aides Anthony Bernal and Annie Tomasini, who similarly pleaded the Fifth. All three “should face further scrutiny” from the Justice Department, Republicans said.

Republicans also sent a letter to the D.C. Board of Medicine urging that O’Connor face “discipline, sanction or revocation of his medical license” and “be barred from the practice of medicine in the District of Columbia.”

The report does not include full transcripts of the at-times multiple hours of recorded testimony that witnesses delivered before the committee. It repeatedly scolds Biden officials and Democratic allies for defending Biden’s mental state.

“The inner-most circle, or cocoon, of the White House senior staff organized one of the largest scandals in American history — hiding a cognitively failing president and refusing any means of confirmation of such demise,” the report says.

While the report claims that record-keeping policies in the Biden White House “were so lax that the chain of custody for a given decision is difficult or impossible to establish,” Republicans do not offer any concrete instances of the chain of command being violated or a policy being enacted without Biden’s knowledge.

Still, Republicans argue that Biden’s use of the autopen should be considered invalid unless there is documented proof of him approving a decision.

“Barring evidence of executive actions taken during the Biden presidency showing that President Biden indeed took a particular executive action, the committee deems those actions taken through use of the autopen as void,” the report says.

Democrats and legal experts have warned that broad scrutiny of executive actions could pose future legal headaches for the Trump administration and congressional Republicans, who also often enact policies directed by lawmakers through devices like the presidential autopen.

Brown and Cappelletti write for the Associated Press.

TOKYO — President Trump treated his time in Japan on Tuesday as a victory lap — befriending the new Japanese prime minister, taking her with him as he spoke to U.S. troops aboard an aircraft carrier and then unveiling several major energy and technology projects in America to be funded by Japan.

Sanae Takaichi, who became the country’s first female prime minister only days ago, solidified her relationship with Trump while defending her country’s economic interests. She talked baseball, stationed a Ford F-150 truck outside their meeting and greeted Trump with, by his estimation, a firm handshake.

By the end of the day, Trump — by his administration’s count — came close to nailing down the goal of $550 billion in Japanese investment as part of a trade framework. At a dinner for business leaders in Tokyo, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick announced up to $490 billion in commitments, including $100 billion each for nuclear projects involving Westinghouse and GE Vernova.

“You’re great business people,” Trump told the gathered executives before the dinner. “Our country will not let you down.”

It was not immediately clear how the investments would operate and how they compared with previous plans, but Trump declared a win as he capped off a day of bonding with Takaichi.

Trump and Japanese PM swap warm words

The compliments started as soon as the two leaders met on Tuesday morning. “That’s a very strong handshake,” Trump said to Takaichi.

She talked about watching the third game of the U.S. World Series before the event, and said Japan would give Washington 250 cherry trees and fireworks for July 4 celebrations to honor America’s 250th anniversary next year.

Takaichi emphasized her ties to the late Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, her archconservative mentor who had forged a friendship with Trump during his first term through their shared interest of golf.

“As a matter of fact, Prime Minister Abe often told me about your dynamic diplomacy,” she said, later gifting Trump a putter used by Abe.

Trump told her it was a “big deal” that she is Japan’s first woman prime minister, and said the U.S. is committed to Japan. While the president is known for not shying away from publicly scolding his foreign counterparts, he had nothing but praise for Takaichi.

“Anything I can do to help Japan, we will be there,” Trump said. “We are an ally at the strongest level.”

Takaichi laid out a charm offensive, serving American beef and rice mixed with Japanese ingredients during a working lunch, where the two leaders also discussed efforts to end Russia’s war in Ukraine. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters that Takaichi would be nominating Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize.

The two leaders signed black “Japan is Back” baseball caps that resembled Trump’s own red “Make America Great Again” caps.

Reporters arriving for the meeting were hustled past a gold-hued Ford F-150 outside the Akasaka Palace, which is Tokyo’s guest house for visiting foreign leaders.

Trump has often complained that Japan doesn’t buy American vehicles, which are often too wide to be practical on narrow Japanese streets. But the Japanese government is considering buying a fleet of Ford trucks for road and infrastructure inspection.

They vow a ‘golden age’ for alliance and cooperation on critical minerals

Both leaders signed the implementation of an agreement for the “golden age” of their nations’ alliance, a short affirmation of a framework under which the U.S. will tax goods imported from Japan at 15% while Japan creates a $550 billion fund of investments in the U.S.

Later, at a dinner at the U.S. embassy in Tokyo packed with CEOs including Apple’s Tim Cook, Trump reveled in the deals. Trump and Takaichi also signed an agreement to cooperate on critical minerals and rare earths.

Trump has focused his foreign policy toward Asia around tariffs and trade, but on Tuesday he also spoke aboard the USS George Washington, an aircraft carrier docked at an American naval base near Tokyo. The president brought Takaichi with him and she also spoke as Japan plans to increase its military spending.

The president talked about individual units on the aircraft carrier, his political opponents, national security and the U.S. economy, saying that Takaichi had told him that Toyota would be investing $10 billion in auto plants in America.

Trump arrived in Tokyo on Monday, meeting the emperor in a ceremonial visit after a brief trip to Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, for the annual summit of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.

Trump is scheduled to leave Japan on Wednesday for South Korea, which is hosting the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit. Trump plans to meet with South Korean President Lee Jae Myung.

On Thursday, Trump is expected to cap off his Asia trip with a highly anticipated meeting with Chinese leader Xi Jinping. There were signs that tensions between the U.S. and China were cooling off before the planned meeting in South Korea. Top negotiators from each country said a trade deal was coming together, which could prevent a potentially damaging confrontation between the world’s two largest economies.

Boak and Megerian write for the Associated Press. Megerian reported from Seoul, South Korea. Mayuko Ono and Mari Yamaguchi in Tokyo contributed to this report.