politics

Tina Peters was recently released early from prison amid a pressure campaign from President Trump after the former Colorado elections official was convicted of tampering with voting machines.

Now, the top elections official in a conservative California county with a long history of voting controversies is seeking to hire her to help run elections there.

Clint Curtis, the registrar of voters in Shasta County, said on a local radio show Sunday that he planned to hire Peters as the assistant registrar next month, just weeks ahead of the November election.

“Tina Peters, she’s now available, so we’re going to pull her in. She has experience, and she’s able to take the rocks and arrows,” Curtis told the hosts of “Jefferson State of Mine,” a show hosted by leaders of the State of Jefferson secession movement.

When asked about her health, which her attorneys said declined in prison, Curtis, himself a longtime election denier, quipped: “Getting out of prison really helps your ability.”

In response to questions from The Times about the hiring process, Curtis said in an email Tuesday afternoon that “counties are very slow” in bringing in new staffers and that Peters would be brought on “as a consultant.”

“Her duties would be to assist with supervision of the November election,” Curtis wrote. “None of our consultants have access to the voting systems, so she would be insulated from false claims.”

A bank of surveillance screens hangs in the public observation room at the Shasta County elections office in Redding, Calif., in February.

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

Peters, the former clerk in Mesa County, Colo., was convicted in 2024 and sentenced to nine years behind bars for breaching her county’s voting machines as part of a scheme to show that the 2020 election was rigged against Trump — a claim that has been repeatedly debunked.

She was found guilty of helping an outside computer expert — an associate of pro-Trump conspiracy theorist and MyPillow chief executive Mike Lindell — gain unauthorized access to Mesa County’s Dominion election equipment in 2021 and make copies of its hard drive before and after a software upgrade.

Peters was released from prison in June. Colorado Gov. Jared Polis, a Democrat, commuted her sentence after months of haranguing from the president. Trump issued a pardon for Peters in December, but since her conviction was for state, not federal, crimes, it fell outside his purview.

‘Monkey business’ and a not-so-open job

In a statement to The Times on Tuesday, Peters’ attorney, Peter Ticktin, said she was “giving consideration to helping in the efforts in Shasta County as there most definitely has been monkey business in the way the election was handled.”

Ticktin, who cited his client’s “effort to get the invasive machines out of our election process,” did not elaborate on which election had alleged problems or what kind of role she had been offered.

The terms of Peters’ parole forbid her from leaving the state without permission from her parole officer, although, after her release, she visited Trump at the White House.

Talk about hiring Peters in Shasta County set off alarm bells across California.

Gov. Gavin Newsom’s press office tweeted Monday that Peters “should still be in prison” and that “the state is investigating this.”

“Tina Peters, she’s now available, so we’re going to pull her in,” says Clint Curtis, Shasta County registrar of voters. “She has experience, and she’s able to take the rocks and arrows.”

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

And Sen. Alex Padilla, a Democrat, wrote on Facebook that talk of her hiring “should be stopped immediately. “

Brent Turner, the Shasta County assistant registrar whom Curtis suggested he would replace, said there’s one glaring problem with that plan: He hasn’t quit.

“I am the assistant registrar, last I checked, and until further notice I’m planning on continuing to serve the public in that role,” Turner said in an interview Tuesday.

Turner said he had not spoken to Curtis for days and that he learned his boss was floating Peters’ name as a replacement from a local reporter who called him Sunday for comment.

On the “Jefferson State of Mine” broadcast, Curtis said of Turner: ”He got sick on me. I was hoping he’d just, like, retire on June 2 and go away and let me fill [the position], but he didn’t.”

Turner said it was “inappropriate” for Curtis to speak publicly about his health and that he had not given him permission to do so.

Miranda Angel, a Shasta County spokeswoman, said in an email Monday that “there is no formal proposal or application” to replace Turner and that “any prospective employee or consultant would go through the same hiring process as anyone else seeking employment with the county.”

An elections office embroiled in controversy

Shasta County made national headlines in 2023 when its Board of Supervisors ditched Dominion voting machines based on unfounded claims of fraud and opted to hand-count ballots for more than 110,000 registered voters — quickly prompting a new state law that banned them from doing so.

Curtis, a 68-year-old attorney whose claims about rigged voting machines stretch to the early 2000s, took over the elections office last spring.

He was appointed by the county Board of Supervisors to fill the position vacated by two previous registrars who resigned for health reasons that they said were exacerbated by the stress of the job.

Curtis stands in the election counting area on Feb. 25 in Redding, Calif. Curtis installed a controversial election observer area filled with cameras trained on election workers’ hands as they feed ballots into machines.

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

Curtis lived in Florida then, had no previous ties to the area, and had never run an election. He got the position after advocating for hand-counting ballots and bragging in a public job interview that he had worked with Mike Lindell.

In Shasta County, he promptly eliminated nine of the vast, mostly-rural county’s 13 ballot dropboxes. He accused his predecessors in the elections office, without evidence, of stuffing ballots to sabotage conservative Republicans, and he called on federal authorities to raid his office and seize ballots.

Curtis also publicly advocated for Measure B, a voter-approved measure that would eliminate most voting by mail and require ballots to be hand-counted, among other sweeping changes.

California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta and Secretary of State Shirley Weber, the state’s top elections official, sued Shasta County over the citizens’ initiative in mid-June, arguing that it violated numerous state election laws and must be struck down before the November election.

Shasta County Superior Court Judge Benjamin L. Hanna this month issued a preliminary injunction that temporarily blocks implementation of Measure B, which voters approved in the June primary.

In that same election, Curtis was voted out of office. He will be replaced in January by Joanna Francescut, the former longtime assistant registrar, whom he fired.

A censure — and another reprimand

When Curtis spoke on the radio broadcast Sunday about hiring Peters — with whom, he said, he has regular phone conversations — he was under formal censure by the Board of Supervisors for his treatment of staff.

This spring, the county released the findings of two personnel investigations into Curtis’ conduct that were spurred by concerns raised by elections employees and their union representatives.

An internal investigation and an external probe by Oppenheimer Investigations Group found that Curtis made phone calls related to his own campaign during county work hours and casually threatened to kill, spank, slap or “throat punch” staffers.

He threatened to have one employee dragged out of the office by their hair, according to an internal investigation report by Monica Fugitt, the county’s director of support services.

“Mr. Curtis has demonstrated a clear pattern of unprofessional and abusive conduct toward staff,” wrote Fugitt, who recommended Curtis be physically separated from the elections staff, working at a different physical location or remotely because of his “pervasive abusive conduct.”

Curtis has denied the findings.

The Board of Supervisors censured Curtis on Aug. 11.

He responded by inviting reporters to the elections office in downtown Redding, where he showed them security footage that, he said, showed employees breaking into a room in the building, the news outlet Shasta Scout reported.

A woman walks past a ballot drop box in the Shasta County city of Anderson on Feb. 25.

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

Curtis allowed reporters to take video of the footage and said he had not discussed the matter with the staffers, Shasta Scout reported.

The county condemned those actions in an Aug. 14 news release, saying he “has repeatedly been advised of appropriate procedures for addressing and investigating personnel matters and advised of the importance of maintaining confidentiality of such matters.”

Curtis, the county wrote, showed “complete disregard for those procedures as well as employees’ due process rights.”

In an email Tuesday, Shasta County deputy chief executive officer Stewart Buettell said the county and its Board of Supervisors do not have the power to terminate Curtis’ employment because he was appointed to fill a vacancy in an elected position.

“As soon as they assume that office, it’s as if they were elected,” Buettell said. To be removed from the office, he said, Curtis would have to be recalled by voters.

A photo published last week by Shasta Scout shows a pair of doors to a room in the elections office containing ballots from the June election. Curtis sealed the doors with locks, duct tape and red-lettered signs that read: “KEEP OUT PER ROV CLINT CURTIS.”

“I had facilities put this lock on and destroy the keys,” Curtis told the news outlet. “So if someone comes … they have to bring a warrant and a bolt cutter. That’s the only way to get in that room.”

Turner, the assistant registrar, told The Times that “Clint seems to be taking issue with some of the ballots in his own race” that he lost.

Democrat Xavier Becerra pledged on Tuesday to participate in more than one debate against Steve Hilton, his GOP rival in the California governor’s race.

“We will have debates, and between now and Nov. 3, we will continue to go out there and meet with folks to make sure they have an opportunity to see the candidates,” Becerra told reporters after greeting business owners, community leaders and voters in a walking tour of Little Tokyo. “Voters need to have good information. We’ll make sure they have it, and there will be debates.”

Xavier Becerra, center, who is running for governor of California, talks with Roy Kuroyawagi, owner of Japangeles in Little Tokyo on Tuesday.

(Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)

Hilton has been needling Becerra for not being as publicly visible on the campaign trail since the two men advanced in the June primary. The British-born conservative strategist and political commentator raises chickens at his Silicon Valley home and has said he named one of them “Xavier.”

“Xavier Becerra wants to be governor while dodging questions from the press and a debate with me,” Hilton posted on the social media platform X earlier this month.”What else do you expect from a lazy, arrogant, entitled ‘empty suit’ 36-year machine politician.”

Becerra held a 55% to 37% lead over Hilton in a UC Berkeley/L.A. Times poll released Thursday. The margin is unsurprising given the edge that Democrats have in voter registration over Republicans in a state that last elected GOP politicians to statewide office in 2006.

Becerra, asked Tuesday about Hilton’s criticism that he was “coasting” to election in the November general election to replace termed-out Gov. Gavin Newsom, rejected the notion.

“Well, if I were trying to coast, I’d be out on the coast right now instead of here with you all and making a nice visit to Little Tokyo,” he said outside of an Asian-fusion gastropub on an oppressively hot, muggy afternoon. “Listen, this is all about making sure voters have a choice. We’ll get out there and make sure we’re front and center with them … even if it’s a little hot.”

Becerra spoke with reporters after visiting Little Tokyo businesses and chatting with locals and visitors.

When a group of young women pledged to vote for him in the gubernatorial race, Becerra urged them to vote against Proposition 39, a ballot measure that would require Californians to provide government-issued identification when voting and election officials to verify registered voters are U.S. citizens.

“Please vote against that. That would deter people from voting,” Becerra said, making a thumbs-down gesture. “I’m not joking.”

Becerra later told reporters that the proposition, which likely California voters oppose, according to polls, is a direct attack on the state’s elections by President Trump.

“The president has insisted on trying to disrupt elections. When he can’t do it in Washington, D.C., he’s trying to do it in our state directly,” Becerra said. “Prop. 39 is President Trump’s effort to try to interfere in our election. We have to resist it. We have to oppose it. And I hope people know that Prop. 39 is just a prop for Donald Trump. And anyone who believes that we have to see more people vote, we have to see robust elections, should be voting against Prop. 39.”

Becerra also enjoyed a little shopping.

At Japangeles, he purchased a ball cap with “L.A.” superimposed over Japanese characters for “Nihon,” what the Japanese call their own country; at Cafe Dulce, he picked up a fruit tart; and at a 123-year-old Japanese confectionery, he bought sweet mango mochi wrapped in a thin, fluffy pancake.

His visit Tuesday came during the community’s annual Nisei Week festival, which celebrates Japanese American culture and history. Becerra represented the area during his time in Congress. He ran into several people he had known over his long political career, including former Los Angeles City Councilmember Jan Perry, and Brian Kito, the third-generation owner of the Fugetsu-Do Bakery.

Kito showed Becerra a picture of the then-congressman swearing him in as a neighborhood council president more than a decade ago.

“It was a nice reunion,” Kito said. “He’s a true gentleman. … I’m hoping nothing but success for him.”

WASHINGTON — The only remaining U.S. aircraft carrier patrolling the Pacific departed Asia through Singapore last week en route to the Middle East, marking the latest step in a steady drawdown of American military assets across the region.

An armada of naval forces, alongside a constellation of air-defense and missile capabilities, has been removed from a theater the Trump administration said just last year would be the battleground of the coming century.

And now, President Trump’s surprise decision this week to curtail military exercises with South Korea has further fueled anxiety across Asia, where Washington’s closest allies fear violent consequences from a vacuum of American power.

Trump said his decision to withdraw U.S. participation from the annual military drills was de-escalatory, claiming they would needlessly provoke North Korea’s dictator, Kim Jong Un, with whom he has recently been in touch.

But he also blamed Seoul for its decision to not take part in his war with Iran.

“I said, ‘Would you like to give us a little hand?’ ” Trump told reporters. “He said, ‘No thanks,’ and I said, ‘Wait a minute — we have 39,000 soldiers over there, guarding you from Kim Jong Un, your next-door neighbor, and you’re not going to help us.’ ”

“That’s strange,” Trump added. “We can’t go around and protect all of these countries, especially when they’re not there to help us.”

South Korea’s president, Lee Jae Myung, responded to Trump’s last-minute decision to pull back from the drills with a degree of alarm.

“From now on, we must prepare measures with even the worst-case scenario in mind,” Lee said, “on the premise that the Middle East situation may be prolonged.”

It was the latest jolt to South Korea’s confidence in an alliance that has formed a cornerstone of Washington’s defense strategy in Asia since the end of World War II.

The Pentagon has kept its THAAD missile-defense batteries on the Korean peninsula. But in March, it moved some of the system’s radars and forward-positioned interceptors toward the Middle East, as the Iran war strained U.S. missile-defense stocks. Analysts estimate the conflict has consumed more than 40% of the Pentagon’s THAAD interceptor inventory.

The diversion was accompanied by the redeployment of dozens of combat and dry-cargo ships, mine countermeasure vessels, and guided-missile destroyers out of the region, ahead of the departure of the strike group centered on the nuclear-powered USS George Washington, which is now on its way to the Middle East.

Other U.S. allies in the region reacted swiftly to Trump’s pullback from the Korean exercises.

The Australian government said it remained “deeply concerned” with North Korea’s nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs, while Japan’s defense minister, Shinjiro Koizumi, warned of historic stakes.

“As Japan faces the most severe and complicated security environment in the post-war era, the cooperation among Japan, the United States and South Korea is critical to the peace and stability of the region,” Koizumi said in a statement.

And Beijing has been quick to capitalize on the vacuum.

China’s Foreign Ministry mocked that the United States “has become addicted to quitting groups and scrapping treaties,” while its military began installing permanent infrastructure in Taiwan’s exclusive economic zone within days of the George Washington’s departure.

“The current international landscape has once again proven that only by ensuring the effective operation of the multilateral system can we prevent the spread of the law of the jungle,” said Mao Ning, a spokesman for the Chinese Foreign Ministry, “and keep the international order from being dominated by the logic that ‘might makes right and force represents justice.’”

Speaking with journalists in the Oval Office on Monday, Trump said that his communication with Kim was “making things safer” in the region.

He did not offer details on their conversations.

“Kim Jong Un has always treated me with great respect,” Trump said, confirming that the North Korean leader had replied to his overtures.

“I understand him,” Trump added. “He understands me.”

Though I don’t regularly attend Mass, I fondly remember the two years in high school when I prepared for the sacrament of Communion.

In the basement of St. Boniface Church in Anaheim on weekday afternoons and weekend mornings in the mid-1990s, my sister, about 20 other teenagers and I learned about the tenets of our faith.

We were inculcated with the importance of charity, love toward all, good works and humility, and urged to carry those virtues into adulthood. I didn’t agree with everything our lay teachers espoused — why abortion should be outlawed, why necking was bad, why only men could become priests — but I learned enough important moral lessons that I still proudly call myself Catholic.

Confirmation is meant to bring recipients closer to God and “imprints on the soul an indelible spiritual mark,” according to the Vatican’s official guide to its doctrine. What especially stayed with my classmates and me was, well, us.

We were white, Filipino, Vietnamese and Latino, children of working-class parents and equals in the eyes of God. Church fairs were as likely to serve pancit and spring rolls as hamburgers and tacos. When we finally received confirmation at a special Mass at St. Boniface attended by then-Bishop Norman McFarland, we exemplified not just the future of the church but also the promise of a better tomorrow for the United States.

Our parish lived and practiced American Catholicism’s long tradition of welcoming the stranger, the outcast, the refugee — following the example and words of the Gospel we read every Sunday. But even as we committed ourselves to the path of Christ, politicians in California waged a war against illegal immigrants and anything that suggested diversity — a xenophobia that would culminate decades later with President Trump’s election.

Trump is a walking manifestation of the seven deadly sins, to the point that he has depicted himself as Jesus and a pope on social media. Nevertheless, a majority of Catholics — thankfully no one in my immediate family — voted for him in each of his three presidential elections, with support topping out at 55% in 2024, per the Pew Research Center.

Catholics were a key constituency in every sector Trump needed for his historic victory against Kamala Harris. Swing states with old-line communities like Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. Boom states like Nevada and Florida. And especially Latinos, who voted for Trump in numbers never before seen for a Republican presidential candidate. Latino Catholics went even harder for Trump: The Public Religion Research Institute found their support for him increased by 17 percentage points from 2016 to 2024, even as his white Catholic support dropped from 64% to 59%.

Issues from abortion to the economy to transgender rights spurred Catholics to side with Trump, but his hard-line stance against immigration was especially popular. As immigrant Catholics were being demonized, echoing previous eras of American history, too many Catholics sided with the demonizers.

Maria Marin and her husband, Martin Marin, pose with a cardboard cutout of Pope Leo XIV during the Archdiocese of Chicago’s celebration of Leo at Rate Field on June 14, 2025.

(Pat Nabong/Chicago Sun-Times via Associated Press)

A June 2024 survey by Georgetown’s Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate, which tracks American Catholic life, showed that 43% of respondents supported lower levels of immigration. A month into Trump’s second term, 41% of American Catholics thought that increased immigration in recent years had changed the U.S. “for the worse,” compared with 33% who felt it made life better, according to a Pew Research Center poll.

In the lead-up to the 2024 election, I argued about the dignity of Venezuelan and Salvadoran migrants with people from my parents’ native ranchos in Mexico, who came to this country without papers and are regular churchgoers. I sighed in disappointment as former confirmation classmates whose refugee parents fled tyrannical rulers, just like the Holy Family, posted approvingly on social media about Trump’s vow to build a bigger, nastier border wall.

Catholics have frequently exemplified the best and worst tendencies of American society. We’ve been brutal conquistadors and the huddled masses yearning to be free, trailblazing politicians and the millions who stood silently during our church’s sex abuse scandals. Trump’s support among Catholics represented a new low. But by some miracle of God, more and more of those supporters are finally seeing him for who he is.

On Aug. 12 — the feast day of Jane Frances de Chantal, the patron saint of forgotten people — the Public Religion Research Institute released a survey showing that 62% of Catholics think unfavorably of Trump, while 57% oppose his handling of immigration, both legal and illegal. If this repentance transforms into votes against MAGA in the midterms, the rest of Trump’s presidency is doomed.

The poll offers no insight into why Catholic support for Trump has cratered. The easy explanation would be the president’s enmity toward Pope Leo XIV, who has preached a gospel of kindness toward the undocumented and spoken out against the quagmire in Iran. When the Trump administration invited the native-born Chicagoan to visit the U.S. for America’s 250th anniversary, Leo instead decided to spend his Fourth of July on Lampedusa, the Ellis Island of the Mediterranean.

But the poll noted that Leo’s predecessor, Pope Francis, had higher favorability ratings among American Catholics during the same time in their respective reigns — 90% to Leo’s 75%.

Trump’s popularity is also collapsing among Americans as a whole. Only about a third support him, according to an a recent Reuters/Ipsos poll — the poorest showing of his second term, matching the lowest numbers of his first term. But for Catholics, it’s not just high prices, the Iran War and Trump’s drift toward despotism that makes him so onerous.

The Catholics in his government, from Supreme Court justices to Cabinet members to Vice President JD Vance, are acting as a rubber stamp for an imperious ruler, instead of imitations of Christ. Trump’s immigration sweeps are hitting American Catholicism so hard that bishops have allowed the faithful to stay home instead of attending Mass.

What reason is there left for good Catholics to support Trump? If ever a group needed to break away from him, it’s us.

What’s been especially galling about Trump’s second term, from a Catholic perspective, is his gleeful cruelty.

Proverbs 21:13 states, “Whoever closes his ear to the cry of the poor will himself call out and not be answered.” Conservatives who have criticized Pope Leo for taking on Trump over his nastiness toward the meek don’t get that his motive isn’t political — this has been standard Vatican doctrine going back to his namesake, Leo XIII. In an influential 1891 encyclical urging the world to stand by the working class, Leo XIII pointed out that sacrificing oneself “for the benefit of others, is man’s surest antidote against the insolence of the world and immoderate love of self.”

Is there any statement more contrary to MAGA than that?

Cardinals Robert McElroy, Christophe Pierre and Joseph Tobin and Archbishop Bernard Hebda speak to reporters after a Mass in solidarity with migrants at the Chapel of St. Thomas Aquinas on Feb. 27, 2026, in St. Paul, Minn.

(Mark Vancleave/Associated Press)

The Catholics who supported Trump may have forgotten Leo XIII’s words as they repeatedly voted for him. But that’s the beauty of our faith. We can admit our errors and seek to right them through another sacrament — confession.

“Through such an admission man looks squarely at the sins he is guilty of,” reads the catechism of the Catholic Church. That way, people can “take responsibility” for their faults and reconcile with God “in order to make a new future possible.” And the way to do that is by “doing something more to make amends for the sin.”

Catholics are supposed to confess our sins privately. But we must repent of Trump publicly and loudly at the ballot box this November and urge others to follow.

We helped usher in Trump. We must now lead in exorcising him from American society once and for all.

Former Maj. Gen. John Bruce Medaris, the military director of the nation’s unmanned space program who after a seemingly miraculous recovery from cancer devoted his remaining years to the Episcopal priesthood, has died of the disease, it was learned Sunday.

Medaris was 88 when he died Wednesday at his summer home in Highlands, N.C., after a long struggle against bone and lung cancer. The announcement was made by friends in Florida and reported by United Press International.

He had commanded the Army’s early space program, the Army Ballistic Missile Agency, when it orbited America’s first satellite on Jan. 31, 1958. The program was soon turned over to the civilian control of the new National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

Col. Pat Patterson of Maitland, Fla., a friend of Medaris’ for 47 years, said the former general had picked the nation’s first team of space scientists, both military and civilian, “and I have never seen a team surpass that one.”

The historic team that built those first missiles was headed by German scientist Wernher Von Braun, father of the Saturn V rocket that was to send Americans to the moon and a pioneer in the development of Germany’s wartime V-2 rocket. Kurt H. Debus, the Kennedy Space Center’s first director, was another team member.

The expatriated German scientists that included Von Braun had been sent after the war to Ft. Bliss, Tex., and later transferred to the small north Alabama cotton town of Huntsville where Medaris became their commander.

There was little sense of urgency about the nation’s embryonic space program until the Korean War broke out in 1950. Then seven years later, on Oct. 4, 1957, the Soviet Union launched the 184-pound Sputnik I, the world’s first orbiting satellite.

On Dec. 6, Medaris’ team tried to respond by sending a three-pound satellite into orbit, but the Vanguard rocket which was to have propelled it rose two feet off its Cape Canaveral launch pad and exploded into a giant fireball.

America finally got into space Jan. 31 when a Jupiter C booster hurled the 31-pound Explorer I into orbit. The satellite discovered the Van Allen Radiation Belt.

Medaris was born in Milford, Ohio, and at 16 lied about his age to get into the Marines. After a couple of years, he resigned and tried his hand at business, where he made but then lost a fortune.

Medaris entered the Army as a second lieutenant and came through 300 days of World War II combat unscathed.

An ordnance expert, he served as chief of the first Army contingent to Argentina from 1949 to 1952, and in 1955 was named commander of the Ballistic Missile Agency.

He became known as an aggressive, often arrogant commander who would roll over anyone in his way. He even carried a swagger stick for emphasis.

But in 1964, four years after retiring from the service, he was stricken with bone cancer and told he had only 18 months to live. Eighteen months later he was not only still alive, but the cancer somehow had gone into remission.

“The thought had sometimes crossed my mind that perhaps a power, or whatever it was, was keeping me intact because there was some important job that I was destined to do,” he said in a 1970 interview.

He told the Los Angeles Times in a 1982 interview from Cape Canaveral, where he had gone as an honored guest to watch the launch of the space shuttle Columbia, that he decided to repay the debt by service to his church.

He said he originally intended to become only an Episcopal deacon but “soon I found myself irresistibly forced into (other) situations.” He thus became the Very Rev. John B. Medaris, rector of Anglican churches in Maitland and Orlando, Fla.

In recent years, the International Aerospace Hall of Fame made Medaris a fellow, its highest award. The Army awarded him the first Medaris Award to Army Space Pioneers.

In the meantime, the cancer resurfaced in 1970 but again went into remission, returning only recently.

Although he had become a man of God, he did not lose the aggressiveness that had marked his military days and remained particularly critical of the decisions made many years earlier that separated military and civilian space objectives.

“It’s one of the greatest mistakes we ever made.”

In early results from the special election runoff to complete the congressional term of disgraced former Rep. Eric Swalwell, state Sen. Aisha Wahab was in the lead late Tuesday by a narrow margin.

Wahab (D-Hayward) is competing against Melissa Hernandez, president of the Bay Area Rapid Transit Board and the former mayor of Dublin.

According to Associated Press results, Wahab had 51.0% of the vote to Hernandez’s 49.0% as of 10:11 p.m. with 62% of votes counted.

Swalwell’s District 14 seat has been vacant since he resigned in April amid sexual assault allegations, which he has repeatedly denied.

Wahab and Hernandez were the finalists in the June 16 special primary, in which the top two finishers regardless of party affiliation advanced to Tuesday’s special election.

The two also will compete, once again, in the fall in a slightly redrawn district for a full term that begins in January 2027.

Both versions of the district are contained entirely within Alameda County in the East Bay. The current district includes Hayward, Livermore, Pleasanton and Union City, as well as parts of San Leandro, Fremont and Dublin.

The two candidates are both Democrats, but Wahab leans more progressive, while Hernandez is generally considered the more moderate candidate.

Earlier this summer, Wahab initially emerged as the clear front-runner. She placed first in both the June 16 special primary for the partial-term seat and the June 2 primary for the full-term seat — leading Hernandez by more than 20 percentage points in both races.

But the race became much more competitive after the pro-Israel lobbying group American Israel Public Affairs Committee funneled millions into campaign materials designed to defeat Wahab, who has publicly criticized Israel’s military actions in Gaza and called the humanitarian crisis there a genocide. Hernandez has said she supports Israel’s right to defend itself, but neither candidate has made the conflict a core part of their campaign.

United Democracy Project, a super political action committee backed by AIPAC, spent $1.2 million on the race in August in support of Hernandez and in opposition to Wahab, according to Federal Election Commission records. Another group, Bold America, which has received funding from United Democracy Project, has recently spent about $1.7 million supporting Hernandez.

In total, around $3.7 million in outside funding has been spent to promote Hernandez’s campaign since mid-July, compared to around $400,000 spent in support of Wahab’s campaign during the same time frame.

Over the course of the campaign, Hernandez has more than doubled Wahab’s fundraising and spending. However, both candidates ended July with roughly even amounts of cash in the bank.

Times staff writer Clara Harter contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — Federal regulators have given preliminary approval for a cryptocurrency venture tied to President Trump and his family to operate a digital-asset bank, a decision that has drawn immediate condemnation from Senate Democrats who are now pushing legislation to bar such an action.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), the top Democrat on the Senate Banking Committee, and nine other Senate Democrats introduced a bill Saturday that would bar the president, the vice president, their immediate family members and other senior government officials from owning or controlling banks.

The measure was proposed a day after the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency — which is part of the Trump administration — granted conditional approval for World Liberty Trust Co. to become a trust bank. The firm was founded in 2024 by two of Trump’s sons and the sons of Steve Witkoff, the Trump administration’s special envoy to the Middle East.

If the firm gets final approval, it would not act like a conventional bank and take deposits or make loans. Instead, the chartered bank would be able to issue and manage cryptocurrencies and digital assets. But the move would grant new financial powers to the Trump family’s crypto business, which has already shown to be profitable for the president in his first year back in the White House.

Trump’s financial disclosures show the president has earned more than $1.2 billion from crypto-related projects as he has pushed to deregulate the digital-asset industry. He hauled in more than $500 million from his World Liberty Financial business selling new crypto products and is a significant owner of the firm through an entity called DT Marks DEFI LLC, which holds about a 38% stake.

Aside from World Liberty Financial, Trump last year took in more than $600 million from sales of souvenir-type “meme” coins stamped with his likeness.

Trump’s crypto windfall has lately fueled Democrats’ argument that the president stands to personally gain from the same regulatory apparatus he oversees, and has led to acrimonious negotiations in Capitol Hill over how to regulate the industry.

The White House said Tuesday “there are no conflicts of interest.” But the recent decision by federal regulators in relation to World Liberty Financial is now giving more ammunition to Democrats, who have pushed for more ethical guardrails to crack down on the Trump family’s crypto ventures.

“This is the most brazen act of self-dealing our financial system has ever seen — and Congress cannot allow it to stand,” Warren said in a statement. “The Ending Presidential Corruption in Banking Act will close the door on this kind of unprecedented corruption.”

Sen. Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.) said the decision to allow a Trump-linked crypto firm to charter its own bank is “injecting risk into our financial system and fueling the Trump family’s business endeavors.”

“It is Congress’ responsibility and duty now to rein in this corruption and ensure that bank charters, deposit insurance, and other banking licenses cannot be handed out to entities influenced or controlled by any President’s family,” Alsobrooks said in a statement.

David Wachsman, a spokesperson for World Liberty Financial, disputed the criticism, saying the preliminary approval is “great news for consumer and investor protection advocates and for the American financial services industry.”

“Critics are missing the point: World Liberty Financial is running towards regulation and continuous oversight, not away from it,” Wachsman said in a statement. “World Liberty Trust Company’s national charter will ensure robust and permanent regulatory supervision from the OCC, a federal banking regulator, that will outlast the Trump administration.”

Wachsman said World Liberty will be required to provide weekly reports about its operations that will be subject to independent reviews. He added that federal banking laws such as anti-money-laundering rules and consumer protection statutes will be “directly applicable and enforceable.”

The White House did not comment directly about the administration’s involvement with the World Liberty application to charter a bank. But in a statement, the White House disputed claims that the president’s decisions in office have financially benefited him and his allies.

“All of President Trump’s investment holdings are in held in fully discretionary accounts managed by independent third-party financial institutions,” Anna Kelly, a White House spokesperson, said in a statement. “The President only acts in the best interests of the American public — which is why they overwhelmingly re-elected him to this office, despite years of lies and false accusations against him and his businesses from the fake news media.”

Kelly added: “There are no conflicts of interest.”

Aug. 18 (UPI) — President Donald Trump late Tuesday announced a three-day pause on imposing 50% tariffs on Canada less than two hours before they were to go into effect, saying a trade deal has been made.

The tariffs were to go into effect at 12:01 a.m. Wednesday, but were delayed by Trump’s announcement on social media issued about 90 minutes before the deadline.

No specifics on what the deal entailed were offered, though Trump said the controversial Keystone XL Pipeline project, revoked by former President Joe Biden over climate change concerns, “may be awoke from the grave!”

The deal remains to be finalized, he said.

While congratulating Trump, U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer added that the deal includes “comprehensive access for all American goods,” economic security commitments, digital trade alignment and other provisions protecting the U.S. market.

Prime Minister Mark Carney of Canada has yet to comment.

Greer had been leading negotiations with Canadian representatives ahead of the deadline. He said last week that the negotiators were reviewing options and that he expects Canada to drop certain measures it had already taken in response to the U.S. tariffs, The New York Times reported.

“If a country retaliates against us, we’re obviously not going to tolerate that,” Greer told reporters Friday. “We’ll take action. My sense is the Canadians want to have a more conciliatory approach, but we’ll see.”

Trump signed orders in July to impose 50% tariffs on $20 billion worth of Canadian goods, including cement and hockey sticks, representing about 2% of the entire trade between the United States and Canada, starting Wednesday.

“President Trump is taking action to hold Canada accountable for its continued discrimination against and unreasonable and unequal treatment of U.S. commerce that has burdened and disadvantaged hard-working Americans,” the White House said in a statement at the time.

On Aug. 5, he called Canada “nasty” in a Las Vegas speech.

“Canada’s nasty. They are. They’re nasty,” Trump said. “I love the people, but they’re nasty. Nasty leadership.”

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney and Trump spoke on the phone Monday, a Carney spokeswoman said. She didn’t give any details.

Canadian negotiators also want to ease the tariffs already imposed on Ottawa industries. There are tariffs of up to 50% on steel, aluminum and autos. Some tariffs also affect Canadian softwood lumber.

Canadian lumber manufacturing CEO John Brink told CTV that tariffs have devastated the lumber industry. He said, “most of the lumber industry in Canada is paying up to 45.16% in tariffs and duties combined. So the effect has been devastating.”

Brink said about half of British Columbia’s lumber manufacturing capacity has shut down.

“There used to be 800 secondary manufacturers in British Columbia alone. We are now down to about 50. Not all due to tariffs and duties, but due to a combination of [factors],” Brink added.

“I think the big question for the United States is: Are they even interested in securing an agreement, a deal, some kind of operational détente, or is Trump’s real objective just to flex? Is it just to demonstrate he’s in control? In which case, we’re chasing a phantom deal,” CTV News political commentator Scott Reid said.

He added that the deadline will be “the most important, most significant and most treacherous of Mark Carney’s political career.”

Greer has said he expects Canada to make concessions if a deal goes through. But not everyone in the Great White North wants that.

“Canadians elected Mark Carney to both stand up to Trump while also trying to negotiate a deal, or negotiate down the tariffs, and I don’t think those are mutually exclusive, but it is a narrow path for sure,” said Brian Clow, a former senior official in Prime Minister Justin Trudeau‘s government, The Times reported.

If no deal is made, expect the trade war to escalate, Clow said.

“If the U.S. decides to proceed with imposing these new tariffs tomorrow, Canada, although this current government has eased back on retaliation, will have to respond in some way,” he said.

Former senior White House trade adviser Kelly Ann Shaw told CTV that negotiations look “promising” for Canada.

“I’ve been involved in a number of international trade negotiations and other negotiations throughout my career, and the hardest issues always get resolved at the very last moment,” Shaw told CTV Tuesday.

“So I don’t expect any sort of announcement until later today, possibly as late as midnight,” Shaw said. “But the fact the two parties are still at the table, I take as a good sign.”

Trump has long used tariffs as a mechanism for both punishment and negotiation, and during his second term, he attempted to impose sweeping tariffs, including against Canada, but they were thrown out by the U.S. Supreme Court in February.

The tariffs paused late Tuesday were to join the 10% import duty on many Canadian goods, as well as previously imposed tariffs ranging from 10% to 50% on products, such as steel, aluminum, copper, automobiles and softwood lumber.

Canada responded by imposing a temporary 25% tariff on certain wood cabinets and vanities, as well as a 25% tariff on U.S. vehicles, as well as selected steel and aluminum products, among others.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement is pitching a plan to help shield local police officers who make immigration arrests from possible financial consequences if they are accused of on-duty misconduct.

The agency is proposing to subsidize liability insurance for state and local officers who are trained and deputized to enforce federal immigration laws, according to a planning document published Friday.

ICE’s partnerships with local departments have soared since President Trump returned to the White House last year and may get an additional boost with liability insurance by removing a hurdle that has made some local police departments reluctant to join. The Associated Press is the first to report on this insurance proposal.

Under the plan, officers would purchase insurance covering up to $500,000 in personal liability, which typically funds legal fees, settlements and judgments. Officers would be reimbursed up to $250 annually — roughly what the insurance is expected to cost.

One prominent critic of ICE’s immigration crackdown said the program would be yet another way for officers to avoid personal accountability for misconduct.

“The concern here is that ICE is going above and beyond to guarantee law enforcement does not have even the slightest risk of liability for violating Americans’ rights while helping ICE arrest people,” said David Bier, director of immigration studies at the Cato Institute, who has called on Congress to make it easier to sue ICE agents for wrongdoing.

ICE outlined the plan in a document informing industry officials that it is considering hiring a contractor to help provide outreach, training and communications support for its so-called 287(g) partnerships with local departments, which are named for a section of a 1996 immigration law. The contractor would hire the insurance vendor and process the reimbursements, among other tasks.

ICE has asked for industry feedback by Thursday. The proposed timeline for launching the program and its estimated cost are unclear.

ICE had no immediate comment on the plan.

Arrests by ICE’s local partners have spiked since last year

During Trump’s second term, ICE has offered generous financial incentives to participating local agencies, increasing the number who have partnered with the federal government, as well as the number of arrests.

Nearly 1,600 agencies in 32 states now have agreements to participate in ICE’s task force model, in which trained local officers can interrogate, arrest and charge people suspected of being in the country illegally, according to ICE data.

Departments qualify for funding to help cover expenses like their officers’ pay, equipment and vehicles. With encouragement from state and local Republican officials, agencies in Florida, Texas, Oklahoma and Georgia have been among the leaders.

Arrests made through such programs jumped to an average of 3,000 per month in the first two months of 2026, according to the most recent ICE data provided to the University of California Berkeley’s Deportation Data Project. That compares to a monthly average of 250 in 2024 under President Biden.

Local departments, officers worried about liability for ICE work

As local officers increasingly carry out federal immigration work, they and their departments have expressed concerns about the civil liability that could result from claims alleging excessive use of force, wrongful arrest and illegal search and seizure, among other things.

That’s because insurance policies that cover their local work may not apply. Pennsylvania’s risk pool, for instance, recently made clear that it would exclude “proactive immigration enforcement activities” from coverage, forcing several participating counties to search for other insurance options.

Butler County Sheriff Michael Slupe said he found insurance to cover his 13 deputies participating in the program at a cost of $20,000 in annual premiums.

“I want to make sure the guys are additionally covered, so we had to spend the money,” he said, adding that federal funding would cover the cost.

Federal officers usually enjoy legal immunities and a government-funded defense when they face lawsuits. But those protections may not always apply to local officers, which has heightened their concerns over liability and the need for insurance.

Although civil lawsuits are the main concern, professional liability insurance typically helps cover legal fees for officers facing criminal investigations as well.

Sheriffs’ group says ICE’s insurance idea sounds promising

Justin Smith, a former Colorado sheriff who is executive director of the National Sheriffs’ Assn., said ICE’s plan sounds promising and that he was eager to speak with ICE about how the plan would work.

Smith said he has shared concerns with ICE that some sheriffs are reluctant to join the partnerships because of the potential liability at a time when immigration enforcement faces intense public protests and media scrutiny. Smith said others who are partnering with ICE have already started facing legal claims tied to their immigration work, which can be costly whether or not deputies are ultimately found to have done anything wrong.

“Right now, any time you are working on immigration there is going to be a much higher potential for there being problems and having suits and issues,” he said. “They’re recognizing that it is a different environment. And I think trying to be good partners with us as best they can.”

Under their agreements, ICE warns local departments that they are responsible for the costs of incidents that give rise to liability. But it seeks to reduce the risk by saying local officers performing ICE-authorized functions are “acting under color of federal authority,” which would bar lawsuits against individual officers.

The agreements also state that local officers who face civil lawsuits can ask the U.S. Department of Justice to represent them, and that ICE will generally support their requests. But the final decision on whether to do so rests with the department.

Foley writes for the Associated Press.

PORTLAND, Maine — The person Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents targeted in Maine last month when an officer shot and killed a motorist was a roommate who was not subject to a final removal order, a Democratic congresswoman from the state said.

Johan Sebastián Durán Guerrero, a 25-year-old Colombian national, was shot and killed by an ICE agent in a car near his Biddeford home on July 13. Rep. Chellie Pingree said during a hearing in Maine on Monday that ICE’s intended target was Durán Guerrero’s roommate, who was the owner of the car Durán Guerrero was driving.

Pingree called the discovery a “shocking revelation in clear contradiction to what ICE” and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security have said about the shooting. She added that it was previously established Durán Guerrero was not the intended target and also did not have a final order of removal, but did have a pending asylum case and a valid work permit.

“Johan Sebastián Durán Guerrero should be alive today,” Pingree said during the hearing. “More than a month later, there are still so many basic questions that remain unanswered by ICE and the Trump administration.”

The Department of Homeland Security said in a statement late Monday that it stands by its prior assessment of the shooting. ICE was conducting “targeted surveillance on the last known address of an illegal alien with a final order of removal,” a spokesperson for the agency said.

“We are not going to disclose law enforcement sensitive intelligence and methods. Nowhere did we state that Johan Sebastián Durán Guerrero or his roommate were the target of the operation,” the spokesperson said.

The shooting of Durán Guerrero remains under investigation by the office of the Maine attorney general. Pingree was among several Democratic House members who spoke at a hearing in Biddeford on Monday to discuss ICE’s use of deadly force in the state. The Department of Homeland Security said at the time of the shooting that Durán Guerrero attempted to flee the scene and the ICE officer discharged his weapon because he feared for public safety.

Pingree and other Democratic members of Congress have also called for answers from Homeland Security about its training and vetting of agents after it was disclosed that the ICE officer involved in the shooting had a history of violent behavior and mental health issues. The shooting also appeared to lead to a policy change in which ICE would suspend most vehicle stops, but President Trump swiftly expressed opposition to that change.

Whittle writes for the Associated Press.

SACRAMENTO — A state lawmaker from San Diego has proposed fast-tracking the construction of an arena and housing project, drawing criticism from opponents who argue the site is not suitable for large-scale development because of flooding.

State Sen. Akilah Weber Pierson (D-La Mesa) wrote a letter last week to a powerful Assembly chair that outlines proposed amendments to Senate Bill 344 to help Midway Rising, a project backed by Los Angeles Rams owner Stan Kroenke, avoid potential lawsuits related to its environmental review.

“As amended, SB 344 would deem the Midway Rising Specific Plan Subsequent Environmental Impact Report to be in full compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, or CEQA,” Weber Pierson wrote to the Assemblymember Blanca Pacheco, chair of Assembly Rules Committee.

“In order to promote the swift and deliberate development of affordable housing in the City of San Diego, an urgency clause is needed for this measure.”

Developers are seeking to replace the decades-old Pechanga Arena, and build a new 16,000-seat facility, 4,254 homes, including up to 2,000 affordable units, and commercial and outdoor space. The site is south of Mission Bay.

Parts of the development could rise to a maximum height of 25 stories, according to project’s environmental impact report.

Sports teams, including minor league hockey team the San Diego Gulls, play at the Pechanga Arena. The arena is surrounded by parking lots, which are used for weekend swap meets.

The Assembly Rules Committee on Monday approved an urgency clause to Senate Bill 344, which mean it needs a 2/3 vote of both houses to pass and would go into effect immediately upon the governor’s signature.

Weber Pierson told the Times Monday that the amendments intended to help Midway Rising “haven’t crossed” the desk, meaning that the language hasn’t been inserted into Senate Bill 344. If the amendments go into the bill, “then at that point, I think we can have a conversation,” she said.

Brad Termini, the chief executive of Zephyr, one of Midway Rising’s development partners, said the proposed legislation “will help prevent frivolous lawsuits from causing unnecessary delays and keep the project on track to break ground next year, accelerating the delivery of much-needed housing in San Diego.”

The Kroenke Group didn’t immediately provide comment. Kroenke, the owner of the Rams, was announced as the major investor in Midway Rising in 2023.

Former San Diego Assemblymember Lori Saldaña, a longtime critic of the proposal, called the proposed amendments “reckless and rushed.”

“It removes the opportunity for the public and organizations to weigh in,” said Saldaña.

State lawmakers routinely carve out environmental exemptions for proposed sports stadiums, sometime in the closing days of the legislative session. The legislature has until the end of August to pass or reject scores of bills.

Former Senate Leader Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento) led his colleagues in passing a bill in 2013 that helped the Sacramento Kings arena by limiting environmental lawsuits. The new arena for the Golden State Warriors basketball team in San Francisco also benefited from CEQA reforms passed by state lawmakers in 2011.

The landmark 1970 legislation is credited with helping to protect the state’s environment, but it is also criticized for blocking development.

Since it passed, the CEQA has been a consideration in how most major projects get approved in California. The law requires the disclosure of any effects a development might have on the environment, an evaluation of alternatives and, in many cases, proposed changes that would reduce those environmental effects to a level of insignificance.

Weber Pierson also previously authored Senate Bill 958, another bill that will help the arena, that is awaiting a vote in the Assembly.

That bill states that the environmental impacts of a project that are associated with increased building height, including noise, shadows, or the potential to attract wildlife, shall not be considered significant impacts on the environment.

The bill only applies to specific developments, including those that are proposed on an graded infill site and those that pay construction workers a prevailing wage.

Weber Pierson said that SB 958 “is not special-interest legislation” during a Aug. 9 public forum about the project, describing it a broad-based housing tool, according to the Peninsula Beacon.

The publication reported that the forum “got testy at several points, with some audience members openly booing” the speakers.

Eric Law, chairman of the Penisula Community Planning Board, criticized the state senator’s proposed amendments in an interview Monday.

“The continued efforts to push legislation specific to Midway is misguided and unneeded,” said Law, whose group provides input to the city on planning issues.

Law said his group isn’t opposed to development, but wants the city to stick to the current three-story limit for the area.

“We absolutely endorse the idea of redevelopment — that place is kind of an armpit,” Law said of Pechanga Arena. “They need affordable housing and better housing — you just don’t need to do it over 30 feet.”

The San Diego City Council still needs to approve the project.

Saldaña said the developers are ignoring the growing sea-level rise that is causing nearby street flooding.

Saldaña said she was out Tuesday night in the area with volunteers from community planning groups, including Law, and witnessed groundwater “literally coming up and flooding the streets.”

“Not a drop of rain had fallen,” she said. “It’s just the higher sea level pushing the groundwater to the surface.”

Weber Pierson told the Times that Saldaña should bring her concerns about flooding to the developer and city officials.

WASHINGTON  — The Supreme Court was urged Tuesday to block construction of President Trump’s huge new ballroom until Congress weighs in. A decision, perhaps only temporary, is likely by Friday.

Acting on his own, Trump had the East Wing of the White House torn down in October and ordered work to start on a massive new building that would dwarf the old executive mansion and seat 1,000 guests for dinner.

But a federal judge in Washington ruled that Trump had overstepped his authority, and the U.S. Court of Appeals agreed in a 2-1 ruling on Aug. 7.

Those judges would stop the above-ground construction but put their decision on hold until this Friday. This gave the administration time to appeal to the Supreme Court.

The National Trust for Historic Preservation had sued, arguing that the president has no authority to erect new buildings on government property.

Federal law protects “historic buildings, parks, and places, including perhaps the most revered site in our nation: the White House and President’s Park,” the group told the court Tuesday. It is “more than the President’s residence” and “is owned by American people.”

The historic trust said Trump is moving quickly so as to bypass the law.

“Rather than obtain permission from Congress,” Trump and his appointees “have instead decided to try to outrun judicial review,” it said.

Meanwhile, Trump’s lawyers have taken to describing the ballroom as a national security project.

Last week, Solicitor Gen. D. John Sauer told the justices they should throw out the “extraordinary and unlawful injunction that will halt the ongoing construction of the integrated military complex” because “a totally secure ballroom space … is vitally required by national security.”

He also contended it is too late for judges to intervene.

“Today, the project is 65% complete in its entirety, and moving quickly toward total completion. A concrete-and-steel superstructure stretches five stories deep and 70 feet high, and occupies nearly 50,000 square feet, with construction on and above the second-story level above ground.”

While the plans have changed, the “work has followed a single coherent design,” he wrote. “By now, it has passed the point where major changes to [that] design are feasible.”

U.S. District Judge Richard Leon, a George W. Bush appointee who ruled on the lawsuits, agreed the White House may proceed with the underground work to create a safe and secure location for the president, his family and White House employees.

The solicitor general said a new and secure ballroom is also crucial for social gatherings and foreign dignitaries.

He said that if Leon’s ruling is “allowed to go into effect, the injunction would wrongfully install a single district judge as sole arbiter of what further construction is strictly necessary to protect the safety of the President, his family, staff members, and visitors to the White House, including foreign dignitaries, and presidents and prime ministers of other countries.”

Sauer also argued the lawsuit should be thrown out on the grounds that National Trust for Historic Preservation and its members have no standing to sue because they have not suffered a particular injury.

The D.C. Circuit judges split on that issue. Judges Patricia Millett, an Obama appointee, and Bradley Garcia, a Biden appointee, ruled the plaintiffs had standing to sue. Judge Neomi Rao, a Trump appointee, dissented and said the members of the historic trust did not have standing.

State Attorney General Keith Ellison has called for the transfer of an ICE agent accused of lying about a nonfatal shooting.

Minnesota’s attorney general is suing the governor of Texas to force the extradition of a federal agent charged with shooting and wounding a man during President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown in Minneapolis.

In a lawsuit filed on Tuesday, Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison argued that Texas Governor Greg Abbott has refused to fulfil his “mandatory” obligation to transfer Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent Christian Castro, so that he may stand trial.

“Governor Abbott has withheld the warrant and held up Castro’s extradition for nearly three months,” Ellison told reporters on Tuesday. “He has no discretion to decline to do so.”

Ellison also asked the US district court in southern Texas to bar Cameron County Sheriff Manuel Trevino from allowing Castro’s release from jail.

Castro’s case has become part of a national debate over transparency and excessive violence during Trump’s mass deportation campaign.

The agent was involved in the January 14 shooting of Julio Cesar Sosa-Celis, a Venezuelan man living in Minnesota. Officials allege that Castro fired a gun into Sosa-Celis’s front door, striking him in the leg.

Initially, the Trump administration said the agents had fired in self-defence, accusing Sosa-Celis and two other people of attacking officers with a broom and a snow shovel during an immigration enforcement operation.

Then-Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem went so far as to call the incident the “attempted murder” of an ICE agent.

But video emerged contradicting the ICE agents’ testimony, and in February, federal prosecutors dropped the charges they had filed against Sosa-Celis and his housemate, Alfredo Aljorna.

In a statement that month, ICE’s then-Acting Director Todd Lyons confirmed that Castro and a second ICE agent appeared to have lied about the incident. The two officers were subsequently placed on administrative leave.

“A joint review by ICE and the Department of Justice (DOJ) of video evidence has revealed that sworn testimony provided by two separate officers appears to have made untruthful statements,” Lyons said in a statement at the time.

In May, the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office charged Castro with four counts of second-degree assault and one count of falsely reporting a crime.

“Mr Castro is an ICE agent. But his federal badge does not make him immune from state charges for his criminal conduct in Minnesota,” Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty said in a statement.

Castro was arrested on May 29 in Texas, and he has remained in detention since.

But Ellison has expressed concern that Texas officials – including Abbott, an ally of President Trump – could seek Castro’s release rather than have him face trial.

The Minnesota attorney general described Castro as a flight risk, likely to flee across the US border to Mexico.

“We know that [Castro] has some connections to Mexico, and we know that he has some thought of at some point going to Mexico,” Ellison said. “So, we do believe he’s a risk.”

Abbott’s office told The Associated Press in a statement that it would not comment on “pending extradition matters”.

Under Texas law, Ellison said the 52-year-old Castro could be released from custody as soon as next week – 90 days after he was detained – if Abbott does not agree to his extradition.

The Sosa-Celis shooting was one of several cases this year that prompted questions about the use of deadly force during immigration proceedings.

The Minneapolis area was the subject of one of Trump’s most intense immigration enforcement campaigns, dubbed Operation Metro Surge.

Lasting from December to February, Operation Metro Surge saw what critics considered to be escalating tactics from immigration officials, including warrantless house searches.

Two US citizens, Renee Good and Alex Pretty, were killed by agents during protests against the operation.

Lawmakers in the United States have renewed calls for answers about conditions on board the USS Abraham Lincoln, suggesting that reports emerging from the aircraft carrier may belie a troubling pattern.

In at least three separate appeals, Democrats called for more information about how the Navy prepared for the vessel’s record-breaking deployment.

The aircraft carrier has been involved in military operations against Venezuela as well as the US-Israel war on Iran since it departed from San Diego, California, in November.

The ship has yet to dock for a port call in the time since. Having spent more than 260 days at sea, it has broken the US Navy’s record for the longest deployment without a stop.

Reports have emerged in recent weeks about crew members attempting to jump overboard amid shortages of food and other supplies.

On Tuesday, US Representative Pat Ryan published a letter sent to acting Navy Secretary Hung Cao and signed by 22 members of Congress.

It noted that the lengthy deployments “have become a pattern in the Administration’s handling of its war against Iran”.

The war, which began on February 28, shows no sign of ending. Ryan pointed out that the USS Gerald Ford had also broken records for the length of its deployment as part of the Iran war, and it, too, was the subject of worrying reports about strain on sailors’ health. The ship returned to the US in April.

“The reported conditions on the Lincoln, following so soon after the reported conditions on the Ford, leave Congress and the public concerned that the Department is not adapting quickly enough to the conditions,” Ryan wrote in his letter, dated August 14.

He also questioned whether US Central Command (CENTCOM), which oversees military operations in the Middle East, was “taking the appropriate steps to mitigate the continued challenges in our fleet”.

A delegation of California lawmakers, including Senators Adam Schiff and Alex Padilla, has also sent a letter to the Pentagon calling for an inquiry.

Separately, a group of Democratic senators addressed another letter, dated August 15, to Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, demanding answers and calling for accountability.

“This is a symptom of poor planning by both you and the President and exacerbated by the deeply unsound decision to start a war with Iran,” that letter said.

“Open-ended deployments driven by an open-ended war have real consequences for our servicemembers, and we are seeing those consequences now.”

The appeals for more information come as the USS Lincoln prepares to navigate home.

Cao revealed last week that the USS Lincoln would soon return to the US. The announcement coincided with reports that the USS George Washington has been rerouted from the Pacific Ocean to replace its fellow aircraft carrier.

But the USS Washington’s departure leaves no aircraft carrier in the Western Pacific, long portrayed as a region of strategic interest for the US as it seeks to check China’s territorial ambitions.

President Donald Trump and his defence officials, meanwhile, have argued that reports about the USS Lincoln’s conditions have been overblown.

Hegseth, for instance, has called the reports of conditions “completely misrepresented”. Trump last week also said the vessel had not been deployed “nearly long enough”.

On Monday, the president brushed aside questions about the USS Lincoln’s conditions as part of a “CNN fake report”.

Admiral Brad Cooper, the head of US Central Command, has also released a statement on social media this week, saying he has visited the USS Lincoln in recent days and found the crew “awe-inspiring”.

“This doesn’t mean that all is perfect,” he wrote. “Find any of the nearly 4 million Navy veterans in America today and they will likely tell you that service at sea for long periods isn’t for everyone.”

But he applauded the USS Lincoln’s leadership for having made “mental health and crew resilience” a priority.

Unlike Democrats, members of Trump’s Republican Party have largely not responded to the reports of mental health strain and supply shortages on the USS Lincoln.

However, Representative Don Bacon voiced concern during an interview on CBS News’s Face the Nation programme on Sunday.

“We should have oversight,” he said.

When Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass amplified the results last week of a favorable political poll that turned out to be fake, she was inadvertently following in the footsteps of conservative Detroit singer Kid Rock.

In 2017, as Rock — real name Robert Ritchie — publicly contemplated a run for U.S. Senate is his home state of Michigan, he posted on social media the results of a poll conducted by a firm calling itself Delphi Analytica that showed him leading Democratic incumbent Debbie Stabenow.

But those results were bogus. The people behind Delphi Analytica took down their website and refused to be identified, telling a local reporter: “Thanks again and go kid rock.”

Little is known about who was responsible for a poll supposedly conducted by an outfit calling itself Median Strategies showing Bass with a wide lead in the L.A. mayoral race over Councilmember Nithya Raman.

The group told The Times on Monday that its results were also fake.

But the episode has revived questions about whether political polling can be trusted, particularly in light of several recent high-profile primary races in which the polls seemed to have gotten the results wrong.

In the Michigan Democratic primary for the U.S. Senate, a number of preelection polls showed progressive Abdul El-Sayed holding a commanding, double-digit lead over Rep. Haley Stevens (D-Mich.), but on election night, El-Sayed eked out a one-point victory.

In Wisconsin, numerous polls showed progressive state Rep. Francesca Hong leading Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley in the Democratic primary for governor. Crowley narrowly defeated Hong in the primary.

Median Strategies — the entity behind the fake Los Angeles poll — claimed on social media that it had also conducted polling in the Wisconsin Democratic gubernatorial race and that it had also gotten it wrong about Hong.

Polling in primary elections can be particularly difficult, because it can be hard to know who will actually show up on election day, said Christian Grose, a USC political science professor. Both Michigan and Wisconsin also hold open primaries, meaning that any voter can cast a ballot in a race, regardless of party affiliation, making it harder for pollsters to predict exactly who will cast a ballot on election day.

Experts say fake polls are exceedingly rare but that these recent election results highlight the differences between high- and low-quality polls and how much easier it has become to conduct less rigorous polling.

“The barriers to entry are a lot lower now than they were 20 to 30 years ago,” said Charles Franklin, a professor of law and public policy at Marquette Law School who conducts the Marquette Law School Poll.

Put simply, a poll is a series of questions asked of a sample of people in a given locality, state or country whose opinions are supposed to represent the attitudes of everyone in the coverage area of the poll. Pollsters typically weigh the responses they receive — sometimes amplifying the voices of respondents from a particular ethnic group, for example — to ensure that the results are representative of the population they are surveying.

For decades, survey respondents were typically contacted by phone.

That work was expensive, Franklin said.

“You needed a call center, you needed to hire interviewers and you needed some sort of data processing,” he said.

But now as modes of communication have changed — many people have ditched landlines and are hesitant to answer calls from unknown numbers on their cellphone — polling operations have adopted a wide variety of methods to try to contact survey respondents, including e-mail, text-messages and online surveys, which sometimes offer incentives to encourage participation.

Online polls can be conducted much more cheaply than polling using other modes of communication, but the quality can also vary widely.

Historically, most polls randomly contacted survey respondents, backed by research showing that a random sample of the population — adjusted appropriately by demographics and other factors — would give a more accurate picture of the public’s attitude on a particular question.

But not all online polling relies on a randomly selected group of respondents, and when respondents are offered an incentive — such as cash — to complete an online survey, it can lead to inaccurate results.

The Pew Research Center released a report in 2024 showing that these so-called opt-in surveys did a particularly bad job of capturing the attitudes of adults under 30 and Latino adults. Researchers at Pew, for example, asked respondents in one survey if they were licensed to operate a type of nuclear submarine. In the survey, 12% of respondents under 30 said yes. In reality, the share of people under 30 holding such a license “rounds to zero,” the report said.

While even legitimate pollsters can get election results wrong — a poll represents public opinion at the time it was taken, and that can change — experts say there are a few key things to look out for when vetting the quality of a survey.

“The more transparent a poll is — in terms of its data and methods — the more you should believe it,” said Grose, who also conducts the California Elections and Policy Poll.

Franklin said that pollsters with a track record are typically more trustworthy, as their future business and reputation relies on their accuracy.

He said that polling conducted by upstart organizations is not necessarily bad, but that the people conducting it don’t necessarily have the training or expertise of more established outfits.

Inaccurate polling can misinform voters and lead to election night surprises, but it can also have a corrosive effect on elections themselves.

“Polling can drive outcomes,” Grose said. “Favorable polls lead to more fundraising. There’s a bandwagon effect.”

Legal challenges flared this week over an Inland Empire school district’s alleged removal of library books and, separately, on its efforts to require parental notification on student gender identity — policies strongly supported by the school board president, Sonja Shaw, a leading contender to become the next state schools superintendent.

One policy of Chino Valley Unified allows parents and others to force the removal of school library books to which they object, resulting in books with sexual content or with LGBTQ+ themes being pulled off shelves, according to a complaint filed this week by a leading public-interest law firm and local parents.

The complaint, filed with the California Department of Education, asks the state agency to investigate whether education codes have been violated. The complaint also seeks to invalidate the policy and have books returned to shelves.

The other Chino Valley Unified policy under legal scrutiny would require school employees to notify parents when students express gender-identity issues at school — even if the students want to keep this information secret from their parents. The Chino Valley school board passed its notification policy in July 2023, but a state judge put the policy on hold and subsequently ruled it illegal.

However, the Chino Valley school board is seeking to reinstate the policy in light of recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions. A court hearing on the matter had been scheduled for Wednesday, but has been moved to Sept. 15.

The San Bernardino County school system of 26,000 students adopted both policies under the leadership of school board President Shaw, a conservative Republican running for the office of state superintendent of public instruction. Shaw finished first in the June primary among 10 candidates, seven of them Democrats who appeared to split the Democratic vote among them.

On Wednesday, Shaw had not yet had an opportunity to review the book-policy complaint, but said both policies ultimately look out for children by safeguarding the rights of parents.

“I believe the larger issue is whether parents are going to remain the primary decision-makers for their children or whether Sacramento continues to chip away at that role,” Shaw said. “I will always stand on the side of parents.”

The book policy “is about ensuring that sexually explicit material is not placed in the hands of children in our schools,” Shaw said. “That is a reasonable responsibility for a school board, and I believe parents overwhelmingly expect us to exercise that responsibility.”

The challenge to the policies comes in the context of the November election, which pits Shaw against second-place finisher Richard Barrera, a Democrat.

Barrera said that some parents may agree with some of Shaw’s positions on culture war issues, but not with her entire agenda.

“I would say that the overwhelming majority of parents of students in our public schools find the agenda that Sonja Shaw is promoting to be terrifying,” Barrera said. “The idea that we’re going to restrict access to books for students, the idea that we are going to pick on and bully LGBTQ students, and particularly transgender students, is not a reflection of the values of parents in California.”

Barrera, the president of the San Diego Unified school board, also works as a senior state Education Department staffer, but has no involvement in handing complaints such as the one just filed, the department said.

Books removed from shelves

The Chino Valley school board adopted the book restriction policy in October 2023.

The district policy permits any community member to call for removing a library book. Such a demand, according to the policy, must be acted on immediately, with the book’s removal occurring within three days. A subsequent hearing within 45 days allows for public testimony, board discussion and a board vote, which would be the final decision.

Before the policy was adopted, community members had complained in public hearings about specific books and dramatically read aloud sexually explicit passages at board meetings to make their point. Defenders of the books said the passages were taken out of context in works that needed to be considered in their entirety.

The district began acting on its new book-removal policy before receiving any formal complaints, according to the filing submitted to state officials by Los Angeles-based Public Counsel.

In the fall of 2023, district officials asked schools for an inventory of specific titles public speakers had complained about at board meetings. Also included in the inventory were some books perceived as likely to be challenged.

Shortly after, parents and employees were no longer able to find copies of some of these books on the public-facing, book-search system, these critics told The Times in early 2024.

During this early period, only one formal complaint about a specific book was immediately received, a November 2023 request to remove the Bible “in all its forms” based on the Bible’s sexual content. This request was not carried out, the Public Counsel complaint states.

Other requests were submitted in October 2024 and covered 14 books, including: “Looking for Alaska” by John Green; “A Court of Mist and Fury” by Sarah J. Maas; “Beloved” by Toni Morrison; “Juliet Takes a Breath” by Gabby Rivera; and “More Happy Than Not” by Adam Silvera.

The complaint to the Education Department also alleges the removal this year from at least one library of an unnamed book by Maya Angelou and an unnamed middle school book that touched on sexual identity.

The complaint alleges that the Chino Valley policy is unlawful under state law and unconstitutional under state and federal law. It also alleges that, even if the policy were to survive the legal test, Chino Valley did not follow its own rules. The complaint states there is no evidence of any public hearings or board votes on a challenged or removed book.

The state Education Department had no immediate response to the filing of the complaint.

A consistent theme in the removed books was LGBTQ+ content, according to the complaint. Targeting that content would amount to unlawful discrimination against LGBTQ+ individuals, who are explicitly protected against discrimination in California, said Elizabeth Graves, senior staff attorney in the educational equity unit of Public Counsel.

Ultimately, books were removed “not because they contain sexually obscene material, but because they contain content protected by law,” Graves said. “The school district appears to be targeting books that are featuring LGBTQ people, or written by LGBTQ authors.”

The state education code, Graves said, “really calls out how important accurate and inclusive education is for students, especially LGBTQ people, Black, Indigenous, and other peoples of color.”

Graves said that Public Counsel filed its complaint with the California Education Department because it can carry out an expedited complaint process in as little as 60 days.

Shaw said that if anyone questioned the district’s management of its policy, the matter could have been brought directly to district officials. Her issue, she said, is simply sexually explicit, graphic description — not references to sex. Parents can find that explicit material for their children in a public library if they choose, she added.

Parent notification on gender issues

Chino Valley became the first school district in California to adopt a parental notification policy in July 2023. It required that a school administrator, counselor or teacher notify parents if a student requests to be treated as a gender different from the student’s biological sex in any facet of school or in school records.

California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta quickly sued to stop the policy and San Bernardino County Superior Court Judge Michael Sachs barred nearly all its elements. But he did allow parents to be notified of any student requests to change school records; for example, if a student requested to be known by a different name on a class roster.

In March, however, in a California case, a U.S. Supreme Court majority ruled that parents had a right to be told — if they asked — about their child’s sexual orientation issues at school. A lower court in the same case — Mirabelli vs. Bonta — had already ruled that school staff could not be barred from informing parents if they wanted to.

Since then, California Justice Center and Advocates for Faith & Freedom have filed a motion asking the state court to dissolve the injunction blocking Chino Valley’s original parent notification policy.

“Chino Valley is now in the impossible position of being subject to two conflicting permanent injunctions,” said attorney Emily Rae.

“The original policy was important because parents have a fundamental right to know what is happening with their own children,” Shaw said. “The U.S. Supreme Court has recognized the fundamental role parents play in raising and directing the upbringing of their children. Schools should not replace parents.”

Bonta’s office asserted in court papers that the original ruling should stand because the other recent rulings did not directly apply and because the Chino policy “discriminated against transgender and gender nonconforming students by forcing school personnel to ‘out’ those students to their parents, even if their parents have not asked for such notification; even when disclosure would result in physical, emotional, or psychological abuse; and even when less harmful alternatives … were available.”

Aug. 18 (UPI) — A group of university organizations and labor unions filed a federal lawsuit Tuesday challenging a new government rule that limits the time international students can spend in the United States.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security announced the final rule last month, ending the previous “duration of status” policy for international students.

Under that rule, the United States admitted students with F-1 and J-1 visas for the duration of their status: That is, they entered to pursue a course of study and remained until they earned their chosen degree or degrees.

Students needed to maintain a required course load and comply with the general conditions of their immigration status. There are about 1.5 million students with F-1 and J-1 visas in the United States.

Under the changed policy, international students are capped at four-year stays unless they undergo a federal review to be considered for an extension. Such reviews are to include submitting biometric information and undergoing security, identity and fraud screening.

In announcing the final rule, Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin said the duration of status policy “undermined national security” and that the new rule restores the U.S. ability to “properly screen and manage those who remain in our country.”

The group filing the lawsuit Tuesday asked for a preliminary injunction stopping the new rule before it is implemented. The Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration (one of the parties to the lawsuit) said the Department of Homeland Security did not adequately justify or assess the rule, address public comments on it or consider better alternatives.

“These changes will create significant uncertainty and administrative burdens for international students and exchange visitors and the institutions that support them,” the Alliance said in a statement. “They will also interfere with academic decision-making, disrupt students’ educational and professional plans and undermine the ability of U.S. colleges and universities to attract and retain global talent.”

Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, also a party to the lawsuit, said the new rule shows that the United States is “once again breaking the law for its own political purposes and, in doing so, is hurting Americans and American enterprise.”

“And it’s using international students — who we’ve welcomed here to help us — as its pawns,” Weingarten said. “American is a leader in cutting-edge research because generations of scientists from every corner of the globe have been free to pursue difficult questions, challenge conventional wisdom, collaborate openly and publish their findings — without political interference.”

The new rule also requires journalists with I visas to renew their status every 240 days. Jon Schleuss — the president of the NewsGuild-CWA, also a party to the lawsuit — said those visas support the important work of international journalists in the United States.

“Our First Amendment makes it clear that the United States is supposed to be a champion of a free press, not an opponent,” Schleuss said. “These rule changes are just another attempt by this administration to chill reporting done by talented journalists.”

NASHVILLE — The Justice Department is pushing to revive criminal charges against Kilmar Abrego Garcia, telling a federal appeals court late Monday that a judge erred in his scathing ruling that called the case against the man mistakenly deported to an El Salvador prison an “abuse of prosecuting power.”

The government is appealing the May ruling by U.S. District Judge Waverly Crenshaw that threw out charges of human smuggling against the Salvadoran national. The ruling amounted to an extraordinary rebuke of a Justice Department that under President Trump has repeatedly been accused of targeting defendants for political purposes.

Crenshaw found that Abrego Garcia would never have faced criminal charges had he not successfully sued the government over his 2025 deportation. The ruling was an embarrassment for the Trump administration, which only brought him back after securing a criminal indictment against him.

Crenshaw stopped short of finding the government acted with “actual vindictiveness,” a rarely-met standard that usually requires evidence such as a prosecutor admitting that charges were filed in retaliation against someone. But the judge did find there was enough evidence of “presumptive vindictiveness.”

That included the timing of the indictment. Homeland Security had been aware of the 2022 traffic stop in Tennessee that was the basis for the human smuggling charges for more than two years before Abrego Garcia was deported. The agency only reopened the case and began investigating in earnest after Abrego Garcia was ordered returned to the U.S.

Crenshaw also found that statements by U.S. Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche, who was a deputy at the time, suggested the Justice Department was targeting Abrego Garcia because he won his wrongful-deportation case.

In a brief filed Monday night with the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, federal prosecutors argued that Crenshaw got it wrong. Blanche’s statements, they argue, demonstrated a legitimate motive for prosecuting him. His rationale reflected a “normal assessment of the societal interest in punishment,” not an “improper penalty,” they said. The statements “explained that the government was seeking to protect the public and confirm its prior assertions about Abrego’s criminal activity,” the brief states.

But even if Blanche’s statements reflected an animus against Abrego Garcia, they are irrelevant because the person who actually brought the charges was then-Acting U.S. Atty. for the Middle District of Tennessee Rob McGuire, the brief states — rehashing an argument thoroughly rejected by Crenshaw that McGuire’s motives were the only motives that mattered in the case.

Crenshaw’s ruling noted the sustained oversight of the case by top Justice Department officials, including regular communications between McGuire and Associate Deputy Atty. Gen. Aakash Singh, in finding that the criminal case was thoroughly tainted. Crenshaw also noted that prosecutors never called as a witness the investigator who actually reopened the case, to explain why.

Abrego Garcia, 31, is a Salvadoran citizen with an American wife and child who has lived in Maryland for years, although he immigrated to the U.S. illegally as a teenager. A 2019 order by an immigration judge prohibited his deportation to El Salvador, finding he had a “well founded fear” of a gang that had targeted his family there. The judge allowed him to live and work in the U.S. under Immigration and Customs Enforcement supervision, but he was not given residency status.

Blocked from re-deporting Abrego Garcia to El Salvador, the Trump administration has vowed to deport him to a third county, threatening to send him to Uganda, Eswatini, Ghana and, most recently, Liberia. Abrego Garcia has said he would agree to be deported to Costa Rica, which has said it will accept him, but the government has so far declined to send him there.

He is fighting deportation to Liberia in a separate federal court case in Maryland.

Loller writes for the Associated Press.

The interim government is still upset that the coverage of the disaster’s aftermath showed its faults in plain sight. So, it was answered by a manufactured lie. The State media system released a short “documentary” titled “Autopsy of a Lie”, claiming that the negligence in the official response to the June 24^th earthquakes is just a false narrative pushed by the media. 

In a fact-checking analysis to debunk it, Cazadores de Fake News reports the interim government is fishing to isolate quotes from the UN and the US officers as proof that the international community praised a State response “that existed, but was perceived by large parts of the affected population as insufficient.”

The propaganda effort to turn around the domestic and global backlash on the State’s reaction to the earthquakes merged with the officially-launched “reconstruction phase,” with both the Venezuela Reborn Plan and the accompanying economic assistance in the form of credits. However, the regime is not only trying to save its face, but using the earthquakes as a subject to focus attention on how they want to be seen, and remove it from where they don’t want eyes. 

The disaster made its entrance into the dialogue talks between delegations of the 2015 National Assembly (picked by the Trump administration) and the interim government: when announcing the start of the first round of talks on August 1st, “attention to the double earthquake” was not only put on the agenda, but placed at the top. “Strengthening of democracy” and “political rights and guarantees”, the issues that many see as the core reason for this process in the first place, were put as second and third, respectively.

On August 12, the first round of talks ended with a couple of agreements: the first one was a joint effort to recover the gold reserves held by the UK in the Bank of England for the quake’s recovery. This one seems like a confirmation of what Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello said back on July 30, that one of the main positions of the government’s delegation during the dialogue talks was the lifting of most of the economic sanctions still in place.

“These are not times for polarization to insist; these are not times for miserly exploitation, these are times to lend a hand. And we’ll see that the biggest comfort to the pain that afflicts our souls is the rebirth,” Jorge Rodríguez said on July 24.

The second one was the beginning of a process that could eventually lead to the renovation of the Venezuelan Supreme Court (TSJ), seen as the first concrete step toward establishing a new electoral authority in the near future, a major achievement that cannot be underestimated. 

The introduction of the seismic disaster in the talks’ agenda might signal to the chavista base that the regime is controlling the matter, and looking to compensate for any other concessions made. 

On the other hand, what happened on June 24 could serve as a plausible pretext to avoid necessary reforms or flexibilize restrictions that Venezuelans have struggled with for many years is understandable for some, as economist Ricardo Hausmann told last month to Forbes Centroamérica:

“What happened in Venezuela is a human and economic tragedy… But the biggest risk is that the earthquake could become an excuse to continue depriving Venezuelans of their rights.”

This brings another aspect to consider: the open use of the tragedy for political messaging.

It’s normal that in times when a nation suffers some sort of calamity, that a response by those in power is to rally around national unity in times of crisis. This also happened in Venezuela after June 24, with both Delcy and Jorge Rodriguez repeatedly making public calls in that regard.

For example, Jorge Rodriguez said on July 24 in commemoration of the quakes’ first month: “These are not times for polarization to insist; these are not times for miserly exploitation, these are times to lend a hand. And we’ll see that the biggest comfort to the pain that afflicts our souls is the rebirth.” The use of the last word isn’t casual, as it was already in use for several weeks in State media and came a couple of weeks before the actual reconstruction plan was introduced.

But given the precedents when chavismo used this kind of messaging before, this is likely less targeted to the overall citizenry at large and instead focused on holding their internal coalition together. This has worked well with the higher echelons of power structures but for certain parts of the larger chavista movement, this message rings hollow in the wake of the cozy relation between the regime and the Trump administration. And they’re making themselves noticed.

They’re already doing that with the most pressing issue in most parts of the country: the electric crisis, which in the last week saw an increase in both the length of blackouts and the power bill.

On June 28, a group of former chavista officials (including former Vice-President Elias Jaua) signed a document titled “Declaration of Maracay” under the name Voices For National Independence, demanding the defense of national sovereignty and the Constitution, in response to “the situation of tutelage the country currently faces. The text called for a “wider national unity”. Early this month, there was a public demonstration in Caracas echoing those very same points.

After a month and half since the disaster, the interim government remains committed to navigating the next few months by using it as a narrative device that could help them weather the surging amount of problems ahead but exposing at length some of its previous failures. At the moment, they’re already doing that with the most pressing issue in most parts of the country: the electric crisis, which in the last week saw an increase in both the length of blackouts and the power bill.

The governors of Aragua and Carabobo pointed at the damage caused by the June 24 quakes to the electricity generation system as one of the reasons behind it. Diosdado Cabello made the same talking point a few days later, while also blaming the Súper Niño event.

As the State is adjusting the effects of the disaster into other issues, public opinion is putting the magnifying glass on its handling of the doublet earthquake. Neighboring Colombia recently suffered a terrible seismic event of its own, but comparisons between how the two nations and their respective governments responded soon started to appear.

ST. PAUL, Minn. — Minnesota Atty. Gen. Keith Ellison sued Texas Gov. Greg Abbott on Tuesday, seeking to compel the extradition of an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent to stand trial for assault and falsely reporting a crime in the wounding of a man during the agency’s crackdown in Minneapolis.

Ellison said he would request a temporary restraining order barring the Cameron County Sheriff’s Office in Texas from releasing ICE agent Christian Castro and requiring Abbott to sign the extradition warrant allowing Minnesota law enforcement agents to take custody of him.

Castro was arrested 11 days after Minneapolis prosecutors charged him with assault and falsely reporting a crime in the Jan. 14 nonfatal shooting of Julio Cesar Sosa-Celis. The criminal complaint alleges that Castro fired a gun at the front door of a home in Minneapolis, striking a victim in the leg before lodging in a child’s bedroom wall, and then knowingly provided false information to an officer about it.

Ellison said at a news conference that unless he’s extradited, Castro faces release from jail next week — 90 days since he was detained — under Texas law, and could flee the U.S. from the border town where he’s being held.

“Christian Castro has been charged with breaking the law in Minnesota,” Ellison said. “He must face justice in Minnesota. Gov. Abbott should have granted Gov. Walz’s extradition request long ago and is required to do so now.”

“Christian Castro is not above the law and Greg Abbott isn’t either,” Ellison added.

Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty said the legal action taken Tuesday to compel Castro’s extradition “should be a completely unnecessary lawsuit.” Officials at the jail and local prosecutors in Texas have been “very cooperative,” she said — “it is not supposed to be controversial.”

She said that since Castro’s arrest, Texas has extradited three unrelated criminal defendants without incident to Minnesota at the request of state authorities.

Gov. Abbott has received communication with us on an ongoing basis, including recently,” Ellison said. “We have to take the position that they are refusing to honor the extradition request.”

Vancleave writes for the Associated Press.

FCC faces scrutiny as Disney claims licence renewal order is tied to political motives against ABC’s coverage.

Disney has filed a lawsuit against the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) amid efforts to stop an early licence review for eight ABC-owned and -operated stations around the United States.

In the lawsuit filed in a federal court in Washington, DC, the media giant alleged the early renewal is an effort by the administration of US President Donald Trump to intimidate the company after infuriating the president.

In April, the FCC ordered the network’s stations, which include its affiliates in New York and Los Angeles, to file their licence renewals ahead of schedule despite the fact that for six of its stations, the current term isn’t even halfway finished. The station with the closest deadline is WTVD in Durham, North Carolina, but that is not until December 2028. The network says the move is part of a political “retaliatory campaign”.

“Again and again, the Administration has attacked ABC’s speech – the stories its journalists report and the viewpoints its network programs air. Over time, those attacks have escalated into express demands that ABC be stripped of its broadcast licenses because of its speech,” the 46-page complaint said.

The suit presented a wave of Truth Social posts that the president posted in 2025 threatening the network, among them one saying that the network “should lose their Licences for their unfair coverage of Republicans and/or Conservatives”.

The FCC said the April licence renewal call was a result of diversity, equity and inclusion practices at ABC’s parent company, Disney, and an investigation into the ABC network’s talk show programme The View.

In March, FCC Chairman Brendan Carr threatened broadcasters, saying stations airing “fake news” could lose their licences amid Trump’s frustration with coverage of the US-Israel war on Iran.

Not long after, Trump demanded that ABC fire late-night host Jimmy Kimmel over comments he made before the White House correspondents dinner shooting in which he called first lady Melania Trump an “expectant widow”. Trump responded to them after the shooting, characterising them “a call to violence”.

Free speech advocates have praised ABC for the lawsuit.

“It’s about time for someone to take Brendan Carr and his FCC to court over their endless campaign of intimidation and retaliation against journalism that displeases Carr’s thin-skinned boss,” Seth Stern, director of advocacy at the Freedom of the Press Foundation, told Al Jazeera.

“No matter what pretexts he asserts, Carr’s modus operandi is clear: to serve as Trump’s censorship tsar and abuse his office to repeatedly and exclusively target Trump’s perceived adversaries in the media, whether through sham proceedings or threatening letters and X posts.”

The network called for a “speedy hearing” in the complaint as well as a temporary restraining order.

News of the lawsuit sent Disney’s stock surging in morning trading by 1.1 percent.

WASHINGTON — A federal district judge said Tuesday that paint tests on a 19th-century historic landmark building next to the White House can go ahead, advancing President Trump’s plans to add a new coat of white paint to the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, for now.

Trump has suggested the massive building be painted as part of his push to remake and beautify the nation’s capital. Planners said the paint job would cost at least $7.5 million.

The proposal to paint the building has alarmed preservationists, architects, historians and others who argue that granite is not meant to be painted and that paint would trap moisture and degrade the stone.

U.S. District Judge Dabney L. Friedrich said plaintiffs in an ongoing case had not shown that minimal tests planned for the historic building would cause irreparable harm if those tests go ahead.

The plaintiffs, which include cultural preservationist groups, had sought a restraining order and a temporary injunction to stop the Trump administration from conducting tests and other preparatory work.

At issue was whether that work would get ahead of a larger question before the court over whether the General Services Administration could delegate its authority for such a project to the Executive Office.

“The plaintiffs’ motion rises and falls on irreparable harm,” Friedrich said from the bench. The test areas would include about 8 square feet of the building’s massive exterior and several panels that can’t be seen by the public, she said.

Friedrich said that while she was allowing that test to move ahead, she would not hesitate to step in and rule if the administration moved beyond the limited testing. She asked the parties to provide a status report by next Tuesday and ordered regular reports following that.

Gregory Werkheiser, a lawyer with Cultural Heritage Partners and one of the plaintiffs, said that while he and others challenging the painting plan were disappointed, “the reasons we brought this case are untouched by today’s decision.”

The larger issue, he said, is whether “the president has taken power illegally from the GSA and put it in his office in terms of this project and the implications of that. If that holds true for historic properties around the country, that could be devastating.”

Fields writes for the Associated Press.