politics

If elected governor in November, Republican Steve Hilton said Tuesday he would eliminate the state Department of Motor Vehicles and slash registration fees for car owners — expressing confidence that the Democratic-controlled Legislature would embrace the plan.

“My starting expectation would be, they would be with me on things to reduce the cost of living, so let’s work together,” he told The Times on Tuesday.

Hilton said that once state lawmakers met with him and realized he was not the “caricature” his critics portray, they would realize that he is “not a particularly tribal person. I’m just looking to solve problems, and we all agree about the cost of living.”

Eliminating a state agency would require approval from the state Legislature, where Democrats hold super majorities in both chambers. Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas (D-Hollister) and Senate President Pro Tem Monique Limón (D-Santa Barbara) have both endorsed Hilton’s Democratic rival in the governor’s race, former Biden cabinet member Xavier Becerra.

The Becerra campaign scoffed at Hilton’s confidence.

“You can’t spend a year calling Democrats a failure and then expect two-thirds of both chambers to take your calls,” said Becerra spokesperson Jonathan Underland. “Steve is in for a very rude awakening, and the fact that he can’t see it coming just shows how little he understands the job he’s asking for.“

Hilton announced his plan at a news conference outside of a DMV office in West Hollywood, where he touted proposals to eliminate the state agency, which has a $1.6-billion budget, and reduce the annual vehicle registration fee to $73 per year.

“We are going to shut down this bloated, nanny-state bureaucratic agency that treats Californians with complete contempt,” he said to cheers at the event. “We are done with it. Enough is enough with the DMV. Enough is enough with sky-high registration rates. We are done.”

Hilton said he could issue an executive order to reduce the vehicle licensing fees, as Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger did less than an hour after being sworn into office upon winning the 2003 recall election. While the fee is set by state tax code, governors can waive it in specific circumstances, as Schwarzenegger did.

Californians currently register more than 36 million vehicles with the DMV each year, and the average annual fee paid for each is $329, according to the state Legislative Analyst’s Office. The registration fees, along with driver’s license costs and other fees related to the California Highway Patrol and identification cards collected by the DMV, are the primary funding sources of the CHP and DMV.

Hilton said the state currently reaps $11 billion to $12 billion per year from vehicle registration fees, and that his proposal would reduce the revenue to roughly $2.7 billion. He said he would make up for the revenue shortfall created by the proposal — and other plans, including eliminating state taxes on the first $150,000 of income — by reducing the state’s workforce by 10% and agency budgets by 5%.

To eliminate a state agency, Hilton would need legislative approval, although he says that if Sacramento lawmakers were to rebuff his efforts, he could use the budget to slash the DMV’s operations.

Hilton cited a discussion he had with Schwarzenegger at an August dinner at the movie star’s Brentwood estate.

“Arnold said the Democrats who led the Legislature when he was there much preferred” having a Republican governor to a Democratic one, Hilton said.

Hilton lacks Schwarzenegger’s worldwide fame, and the nation and Sacramento are far more polarized than when the Austrian bodybuilder turned action movie star took office. Still, Hilton’s vehicle registration proposal is reminiscent of a major plank of Schwarzenegger’s successful 2003 campaign to recall and replace Democratic Gov. Gray Davis.

Davis had tripled the state’s annual vehicle license fee shortly after being reelected in 2002 to help address a state budget shortfall. Schwarzenegger seized upon the issue during the recall campaign, at one point dropping a wrecking ball from a five-story crane onto a car spray-painted with the words “Davis Car Tax” in front of a cheering crowd in Costa Mesa.

“We had the biggest action star in the world. He’s going to show action,” said Rob Stutzman, who worked as one of Schwarzenegger’s top advisors. “Arnold demanded it. It was always a production to tell a story. He was genius at it.”

“Californians got a huge increase in their vehicle license fee and it was being done to backfill a deficit arguably revealed to them by surprise after the [2002] election,” Stutzman said.

Stutzman said the fee created a backlash that fueled the recall campaign against Davis, along with rolling blackouts during the energy crisis of 2000 to 2001.

Schwarzenegger’s executive order reducing the license fee to its former rate resulted in billions of dollars of losses to the state’s general fund. The Republican had to respond with spending cuts as well as issuing bonds to make up for the shortfall.

SACRAMENTO — Gov. Gavin Newsom’s pending defamation case against Fox News could go to trial in early 2028, around the same time the governor could be running a 2028 campaign for president.

Newsom sued the news network last year over its coverage of a phone call that took place between the governor and President Trump in June 2025, as unrest simmered over federal immigration raids in downtown Los Angeles. The governor accused the news outlet of intentionally manipulating its coverage to give the appearance that he lied about the call.

Despite an on-air apology from Fox News host Jesse Watters and attempts from the network to have the lawsuit thrown out, a Delaware Superior Court judge late last month set a trial date for March 6, 2028. Newsom filed the lawsuit in Delaware, where Fox News and its parent company, Fox Corp., are incorporated.

Newsom’s final term in office ends in early January and he is considering a run for president. The lawsuit seeks $787 million in damages, the same amount the network paid to settle a defamation suit brought by voting machine company Dominion. The company accused Fox News of airing false claims that voting machines were manipulated to help Joe Biden win the 2020 presidential election.

Lawyers for Fox News sought to have the case dismissed and Newsom ordered to pay attorneys’ fees. Judge Sean P. Lugg denied both motions this year, a ruling upheld by the Delaware Supreme Court.

“We will continue to vigorously defend against Governor Newsom’s meritless claims, which directly implicate core First Amendment protections for free speech, political commentary and a free press,” the network said in a statement to The Times.

“No media empire, no matter how rich and powerful, should get to lie to the American people with impunity,” said Michael Teter, the attorney representing Newsom in the case. “Governor Newsom is holding Fox accountable — and looks forward to proving this case in court. The truth matters.”

The case stems from a phone call between Trump and Newsom in early June 2025 as unrest brewed in Los Angeles over federal immigration raids and hours before the president took control of state National Guard troops, ordering them to protect federal buildings and immigration agents.

Newsom’s lawsuit accuses Fox hosts Watters and John Roberts, along with two senior news staffers, of misrepresenting Trump’s statements and asserting that Newsom lied about whether the call had happened.

The governor had previously publicly spoken about a late-night phone call he had with Trump on June 6 in California, which was early June 7 for Trump on the East Coast. He said that the National Guard was never discussed during that call and that the two did not speak about the immigration raids and protests again.

Trump told reporters on June 10 that he had spoken with Newsom “a day ago.”

“Called him up to tell him, got to do a better job, he’s doing a bad job,” Trump said.

Newsom disputed Trump’s timeline, writing on social media, “There was no call. Not even a voicemail.”

Roberts then said on social media and on air that Trump sent him evidence that the call took place. Newsom’s lawsuit accused Roberts of leaving out key details about the time of the call.

Roberts “did not provide the critical fact that on June 10, President Trump had stated that he had spoken to Governor Newsom ‘a day ago.’ Nor did Mr. Roberts note that June 6 — or June 7 at 1:23 am — is not ‘a day ago’ when one is speaking on June 10,” the complaint states.

The lawsuit also accused Watters’ show of playing a clip of Trump’s remarks that was edited to remove the president’s reference to “a day ago.”

“Newsom responded, and he said there wasn’t a phone call,” Watters said after showing the clip. “He said Trump never called him. Not even a voicemail, he said. But John Roberts got Trump’s call logs, and it shows Trump called him late Friday night and they talked for 16 minutes. Why would Newsom lie and claim Trump never called him? Why would he do that?”

A caption at the bottom of the screen during the report read, “Gavin lied about Trump’s call.”

Weeks later, Watters acknowledged the mistake and apologized, saying Newsom “wasn’t lying. He was just confusing and unclear.”

Newsom declined to drop the suit and in court documents demanded a jury trial.

Getting a trial date doesn’t necessarily mean a trial will take place, Loyola Law School professor Jessica Levinson said.

Fox’s “motion to dismiss was denied. That means the case is continuing,” she said. “But what’s also happening throughout all of this is the sides are probably talking about some sort of settlement.”

The case now enters the discovery phase, where each side collects evidence to build their case.

Court records show Fox News lawyers last month sent subpoenas to Newsom’s political action committee and several top advisors, including his chief of staff, Nathan Barankin; communications director Bob Salladay; legal affairs secretary David Sapp; and political consultants Ace Smith, Lindsey Cobia, Jason Elliott and Nathan Click.

The subpoenas ordered them to produce documents related to the network’s coverage of Newsom, the phone call with Trump and the governor’s response strategy.

If a trial does happen, Levinson said, the timing could either help or hurt Newsom’s potential presidential campaign.

“He can use it as a talking point and say, ‘I don’t leave any stone unturned. I’m seeking to vindicate my reputation. I believe in the truth, and the other side does not believe in the truth. That’s why I’m bringing this case.’ So, he can use it as a part of his stump,” she said.

But if the trial proceeds and Newsom believes it would take time away from his campaign, he could ask for it to be moved to a different date.

“Trial dates get changed all the time for much less,” Levinson said.

Barrow pledges new power infrastructure, including a 24-megawatt plant, to tackle The Gambia’s worsening electricity crisis.

Gambian President Adama Barrow has said the country will boost energy supplies by next month, hoping to quell violent protests over prolonged power outages as the premier stands for re-election.

Protesters burned tyres and built barricades blocking traffic, demanding that Barrow resign, in The Gambia’s capital, Banjul, and nearby cities on Monday and Tuesday.

Police used tear gas to disperse crowds who gathered in multiple locations, including near Barrow’s residence and the National Water and Electricity Corporation (NAWEC) headquarters, which supplies the country’s electricity.

Barrow declared the outages an emergency and a “national security issue” during a visit to a NAWEC power station. In a national address, he announced that the government would install a 24-megawatt generation machine by the end of October.

“I know that the fans have stopped turning, children work in the dark, mothers throw away stale food, and the heat is unbearable by day and by night,” Barrow said.

The rolling blackouts are taking place during the West African country’s hot season and have lasted up to 48 hours in some places.

The Gambian president also announced an additional 50-megawatt solar power plant that would begin construction soon.

NAWEC Managing Director Gallo said the prolonged electricity cuts were in part due to climate change and the US-Israel war on Iran. The electricity provider, in a statement released in August, also claimed that it was experiencing an “unforeseen surge” in demand due to high temperatures.

The blackouts come just months ahead of the December presidential election, in which Barrow is running for a third term.

Reading scores among 15-year-olds in the United States have fallen to the lowest level in about 25 years, according to an international education assessment.

On Tuesday, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) released findings from the 2025 Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), a global metric for educational achievement.

The results showed that US reading scores fell 14 points from 2022, the last time PISA results were released.

The decline was part of a broader international trend, with an OECD average from 23 countries also dropping 16 points.

But the US stood out for the size of its performance gap. Some 25.7 percent of US students were ranked as low performers in reading, while 13.3 percent were flagged as top performers.

“Looking across all 90 participating countries, there was not a single country with significantly wider inequality in reading scores than the US,” Michael Kieffer, a professor of literacy education at New York University, told Al Jazeera. “What is clear is that we are under-serving many students.”

The PISA results come as the administration of US President Donald Trump seeks to reshape the federal government’s role in education.

In March 2025, Trump issued an executive order calling on Education Secretary Linda McMahon to begin the process of dismantling the Department of Education, a federal agency that tracks student achievement, distributes federal education funds and enforces civil rights in schools.

The Education Department, however, does not establish school curriculums or academic standards. That responsibility has traditionally fallen to state and local authorities.

Still, Trump pointed to slipping test scores as a reason to shutter the department. He has also denounced the department for its “entrenched bureaucracy” and called for its responsibilities to be redistributed to the states.

In response to a request for comment on Tuesday, McMahon sent a statement to Al Jazeera echoing Trump’s push.

“The United States of America is a nation built to lead the world, yet our one-size-fits-all federal education bureaucracy has shortchanged our children and stifled our future,” McMahon wrote.

The White House has argued that federal education spending is excessive and has failed to translate into higher standardised test scores.

Since the Education Department was founded in 1979, it has spent more than $3 trillion, according to the White House.

“This moment is a stress test for our nation’s future,” McMahon said in her statement to Al Jazeera. “To pass it, we must enact a hard reset that stops protecting a failed status quo and instead builds a system that empowers state leaders and embraces innovative learning options through school choice.”

“School choice” has been a rallying cry for many US conservatives. The term refers to the practice of diverting taxpayer money away from public education to help parents finance alternative choices for their child’s schooling, like charter schools, homeschooling or private institutions.

The practice is controversial. Critics have accused the “school choice” system of weakening public education in favour of less regulated school systems that receive money with little oversight.

But since returning to office in 2025, Trump has embraced “school choice” as a form of “educational freedom”.

Last year, the Education Department announced $500m for its Charter School Program, touting the funds as the “largest investment” the initiative has ever received.

The money was earmarked to allow states to expand their charter school systems and fund new charter-school developers.

In July 2025, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act – Trump’s signature piece of legislation – also created the first federal tax credit for donations to organisations that provide scholarships for primary and secondary school students, including for private-school tuition and tutoring.

Last month, Trump hosted a “school choice”-themed event at the White House to kick off the start of the new school year.

But critics warn that greater investment in education is needed across the board to reverse diminishing test scores.

“PISA 2025 shows that reversing declines in student performance is urgent,” OECD Secretary-General Mathias Cormann said in a statement.

“The most successful education systems focus on fewer areas in greater depth, invest in teachers, engage parents and provide targeted support for the students and schools that need it the most.”

It’s not your imagination. Political discourse on Twitter really has grown meaner in recent years, according to a new study.

The research, published Thursday in the journal Social Psychological and Personality Science, found that the level of incivility in tweets by members of Congress increased by 23% between 2009 and 2019 — a change the study’s authors attribute in part to how Twitter’s “like” and “retweet” buttons reinforce the spread of toxic content.

Its findings mark “the first robust evidence that incivility is rising among American politicians on Twitter,” wrote the study’s authors, hailing from several U.S. and Canadian universities.

Researchers examined 1.3 million tweets from official congressional accounts between 2009 and 2019. To quantify the levels of incivility, they used artificial intelligence to analyze the messages and assign a toxicity score from 0 to 100, reflecting the likelihood that someone would consider the text to be rude or disrespectful.

The analysis classified a 2009 tweet by then-Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pa.) with a high incivility score of 45.1 for accusing a rival of “going AWOL” from his congressional post. And a 2019 tweet by Rep. Kevin Hern (R-Okla.) — which said another politician was “endorsing infanticide & proudly doing it!” — scored at 47.6.

To some degree, the increasingly antagonistic tone is due to more civil members of Congress being replaced by less civil ones, the study says. But the findings attribute more of the shift to members themselves changing over time and posting more provocative tweets.

The increase in incivility was most pronounced among liberal Democrats, especially in the first half of President Trump’s term.

“They were much more likely to be reacting negatively to Donald Trump — both his behaviors and his tweets,” said Robb Willer, a co-author and director of the Polarization and Social Change Lab at Stanford University.

The study analyzed tweets during President Obama’s two terms and the first two years of Trump’s presidency. (The sample did not include posts from the contentious 2020 election or the start of President Biden’s term.)

The analysis also evaluated Obama’s and Trump’s tweets. Obama’s posts had an average incivility score of 13.4, which remained fairly steady over his two terms. In Trump’s first year, his score was 18.8, and it climbed to 23.0 by 2019.

The study didn’t place any moral judgments on Twitter incivility, Willer said. People sending harshly worded tweets “might have all sorts of explanations that might be morally well-founded and valid for why they engaged in the speech they did.”

Whatever the motivation, the more toxic tweets stand out in Twitter’s crowded online platform. The average congressional tweets were not especially uncivil, with relatively low scores. But the tweets with higher toxicity scores tended to get much more attention, via retweets and likes, which increase the public’s exposures to such messages and make incivility seem more prominent than it actually is, according to the study.

The study’s results indicate “the people running these accounts are learning from these metrics they can see and doing more of whatever gets likes and retweets,” Willer said.

But, as the common Twitter disclaimer goes, retweets and likes don’t equal endorsement. People may retweet a message to draw attention to content they dislike, for example. Willer said their research indicated that users are largely not fond of toxic tweets, despite appearances to the contrary.

“There’s a possibility here that the Twitter platform, with its pretty spare metrics, may be misleading people that certain tweets are more popular with people … than they really are,” Willer said.

Just as congressional Twitter feeds have grown more toxic, so have the tweets of the general population, the authors said, based on a rough sample of civilian posts.

Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Torrance), one of the most prolific tweeters of California’s congressional delegation, said he wasn’t surprised to hear that incivility has grown on the platform — which he blamed partly on anonymous users and bots. His own feed has plenty of pointed messages to Republicans, often delivered with dry humor, as well as standard fare highlighting his work in Congress.

After 13 years on the platform, Lieu said it’s still hard to predict what will take off in the Twittersphere.

“Sometimes I’ll write what I think is an amazing tweet about a very important policy point and get only a few” likes or retweets, he said. But an evening observation that Scotch and peanut butter make a tasty combination will yield “astronomical” engagement.

One consistent factor for a viral tweet: Trump.

“What I’ve found is in the last five years, when the former president would say something stupid or say something false, and I responded to that, that would get higher engagement,” Lieu said. “If the former president is going to say 27 false things a week, I’m going to try to highlight all 27 false things he said.”

While Twitter has not been seen as a hub of civility for some time, some on the platform expressed fears this week that the tone may worsen now that Tesla Chief Executive Elon Musk is set to take the reins. Musk says Twitter’s current system of content moderation clamps down on speech. He has said he wants fewer restrictions on what can and cannot be posted, although he has not given many specifics; users have warned that loosening the rules could lead to upticks in harassment, abuse or pornographic images.

Republicans, meanwhile, have celebrated Musk’s takeover, anticipating he will lift moderation that they see as silencing their views. Among other issues, they object to Trump and other prominent right-wing politicians being blocked or suspended from the site. And Twitter’s fact-checking of false claims of election fraud and COVID-19 misinformation has had a disproportionate effect on right-leaning accounts.

“The most uncivil aspect of Twitter is the company’s transparent censoring of free speech and silencing of conservatives,” said Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Bonsall). “Additionally, the platform will not reach its potential or best serve its users until it demonstrates a commitment to fundamental fairness. I’m optimistic that may soon happen.”

WASHINGTON — It should have been the safest of political appearances — a group of kids gushing about their love of science and space exploration with Vice President Kamala Harris.

But for Harris, it became a controversy.

The children, it turned out, were paid actors. And the video, filmed on location at the White House and the vice president’s official residence at the Naval Observatory, was promoted on NASA’s YouTube Channel and Harris’ Twitter account last week without making that clear.

The fallout over the video, produced for YouTube’s original programming platform, is the second in recent weeks where a seemingly innocuous appearance by Harris has become modestly troublesome.

Late last month, Harris generated more serious consternation and criticism from pro-Israel Democrats and media for not pushing back when a student at a classroom encounter at George Mason University in Virginia accused Israel of “ethnic genocide.” Harris spent the next several days clarifying her longstanding support for Israel and reaching out to pro-Israel organizations, including the Anti-Defamation League.

Such stumbles have been featured extensively in conservative media, where Harris is a regular target. But they also reinforce concerns among Democrats that Harris has not yet found her political footing since taking office amid high expectations. The presumed front-runner to succeed President Biden on the Democratic ticket in 2024 or 2028, Harris recently enlisted two veteran Democrats to help stabilize her communications efforts.

Harris’ office and NASA would not discuss the decision-making process that led to her participation in the YouTube Original or the administration’s marketing of the special, which was produced by a Canada-based company called Sinking Ship Entertainment.

Harris’s office did not select the children who participated in the YouTube Originals special, a White House official said. A YouTube spokesperson said that “the casting process for this show was no different from typical unscripted kids’ shows across other networks and streaming platforms.”

The special debuted during World Space Week. It features NASA astronaut Shane Kimbrough giving five children the clues for a scavenger hunt that takes them to the U.S. Naval Observatory, where they not-so casually run into Harris, who welcomes them onto the porch of the vice presidential residence.

While sitting in a white chair alongside the children, Harris reminisces about going to the lab with her scientist mother during her childhood and says she is excited to chair the National Space Council. She offers advice to the children about showing their true selves.

“Never let anybody tell you who you are,” she tells them. “You tell them who you are.”

Like many online productions, the special has the feel of something between a kids’-oriented news segment and a scripted show. The children, who introduce themselves with their hometowns, act surprised and excited as they meet the real-life astronaut and the vice president.

Earlier this week, one of the children who appeared in the video described in detail his audition process to KSBW TV in Salinas, which sparked mockery online and news coverage. Harris’ appearance drew especially sharp critiques in conservative news outlets. Fox News, in its coverage, has tried to draw a comparison to the criticism unleashed on former President Trump after his 2015 campaign launch in which he paid people to act like supporters.

Appearing as a guest on Fox News host Tucker Carlson’s show, commentator Candace Owens falsely told viewers that Harris paid children to appear in the special.

White House officials have a long history of appearing as themselves in scripted shows, often with children. First Lady Nancy Reagan promoted her anti-drug message on the popular 1980s sitcom “Diff’rent Strokes,” and then-President Obama participated in a televised sketch alongside comedy duo Keegan-Michael Key and Jordan Peele during the White House Correspondents’ Dinner.

The difference this time was that the show’s format was ambiguous, and its presentation and promotion by Harris and NASA led commentators to believe it had been produced by the government.

Communications consultants said the vice president’s staff should have more thoroughly vetted the program and ensured it was clearly labeled as a reality show with paid actors when the U.S. government promoted it.

Ultimately, Harris’ staff let her down, they said.

“The vice president and the president can’t do their own vetting on things like this,” said Kevin Madden, who served in senior communications roles for Mitt Romney’s 2008 and 2012 campaigns.

Madden added that Harris should not have participated in the program with paid actors, especially “in an era where there is a very high quotient of fake news and misinformation, you have to expect this kind of scrutiny.”

“The criticism [here] becomes warranted,” he said.

WASHINGTON — The Justice Department is demanding testimony before a Florida grand jury in an investigation aiming to establish an intelligence community conspiracy against President Trump, according to multiple people familiar with the matter.

New subpoenas being issued to former government officials represent an escalation in the yearlong investigation as the Justice Department pursues a loosely defined theory that members of the intelligence community who scrutinized Trump over the last decade, including over Russian interference in the 2016 election, conspired against him and violated his rights.

Investigators in recent days contacted some defense lawyers for witnesses advising them of forthcoming grand jury subpoenas. It was not clear how many, as of Tuesday, had received a subpoena or were still waiting to receive one, and the identities of the witnesses receiving subpoenas were also not immediately clear. The people who confirmed the subpoenas spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss a secretive grand jury investigation.

The investigation has focused in large part on the Trump-Russia probe

The contours of the conspiracy investigation aren’t fully known, but agents and prosecutors over the last several months have focused intensely on one of Trump’s chief grievances: the U.S. government response to Russian interference in 2016 and an intelligence community assessment that Moscow meddled on Trump’s behalf at the direction of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Trump, who spent much of his first term shadowed by an investigation into whether his campaign colluded with Russia to sway the outcome of the election, has for years lashed out at the intelligence community finding and cast it as a “deep state” conspiracy to undermine the legitimacy of his win.

Investigators searching for potential crimes in connection with the intelligence community response have conducted numerous voluntary interviews, but the subpoenas prepared for witnesses in recent days represent an apparent effort to lock down sworn testimony before a grand jury.

It remains unclear whether anyone will be charged or for what offense, though lawyers for former CIA Director John Brennan have said they have been informed that he is a target as investigators examine whether he falsely testified to Congress — something he has repeatedly denied. The Justice Department last spring subpoenaed witnesses before a Washington grand jury as part of an investigation into Brennan but swiftly withdrew the subpoenas in favor of voluntary interviews.

The investigation is being run out of Florida, with the Justice Department in April bringing back into government service a top prosecutor from the Reagan administration, Joe diGenova, to serve as a counselor to the attorney general and help lead a team of agents and prosecutors.

DiGenova, who had previously asked then-Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi to appoint him to the job and has openly and repeatedly claimed Trump was the victim of an intelligence community conspiracy, declined to comment Wednesday when reached by the Associated Press.

In an indication of the wide-ranging nature of the investigation, the AP reported last month that DiGenova’s team has sought interviews with law enforcement officials involved in the 2022 FBI search of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago property in Palm Beach, Fla., which recovered a trove of classified documents.

Concerns from defense lawyers about a ‘favored’ judge

Investigators have set up shop in Fort Pierce, Fla., the home court of U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, the Trump-appointed jurist who repeatedly appeared skeptical of the classified documents case against him and ultimately dismissed it after concluding that the prosecutor who filed the charges was illegally appointed.

Lawyers for Brennan last year asked the chief judge of the federal court in Florida to prevent the investigation from being steered to Cannon, whom they described as a “favored” Trump judge. They have since sued the Trump administration, demanding a court order requiring prosecutors to preserve records from the investigation so that Brennan could challenge any potential prosecution of him as vindictive.

Trump came to office in 2017 under scrutiny from the intelligence and law enforcement community about whether his successful campaign had colluded with Russia, which stole politically damaging Democratic emails and orchestrated their release through WikiLeaks as part of a wide-ranging interference scheme.

The FBI and Justice Department investigated but found insufficient evidence to prove a criminal conspiracy between Russia and the Trump campaign, though investigators did find the campaign eagerly hoped to benefit from Moscow’s help.

Subsequent investigations by an inspector general and Justice Department prosecutors identified errors by agents who conducted the Russia probe but found no evidence of criminal wrongdoing by senior law enforcement officials or an anti-Trump conspiracy like what prosecutors are now hoping to prove.

Deeply frustrated by those outcomes, Trump has amplified his demands for retribution, which the Justice Department heeded last year by directing that prosecutors utilize a grand jury. Last year, Bondi directed prosecutors to put evidence before a grand jury after the release of documents aimed at calling into question the legitimacy of the Trump-Russia inquiry.

Tucker writes for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — A trade war between the United States and Canada entered a new phase Tuesday as Ottawa’s retaliatory tariffs on American goods took effect, escalating a dispute that has steadily strained relations between the allies.

Canada’s tariffs, which came into force just after midnight, cover roughly $20 billion in U.S. goods and impose duties of as much as 50% on products, from steel and aluminum to farm equipment, clothing and electronics. The list also reaches into the everyday commerce that binds the two economies, including cheese, seafood and cosmetics.

It was the latest sign that relations between the two neighbors have reached their lowest point in decades, after Trump dismissed Canada as the 51st American state, moved to rename Lake Ontario and mocked its armed forces.

Ottawa’s latest measures are a response to tariffs imposed by President Trump last month on Canadian exports. The two governments had appeared close to a trade deal just a month ago. But talks broke down in dramatic fashion, leaving both sides aggrieved and accusing the other of negotiating in bad faith.

In a post Tuesday, Trump said Canada “has been ripping us off for years” and threatened to respond by removing access for Canadian businesses to key American markets.

“What many do not realize is that the Canadian Government, including Canadian Provinces, have banned American Small Businesses and Companies from selling into their Government Procurement Markets,” Trump wrote. “This is the case even though Canada gets broad access into the massive American Government Procurement Market, including those of our States.

“That is not reciprocity, it is a Canadian Trade Scam. From now on, NO RECIPROCITY — NO ACCESS!” he continued. “I am hereby directing the [General Services Administration], working with the [U.S. Trade Representative], to take all necessary steps to REMOVE Canadian-origin products from GSA’s Multiple Award Schedules unless Canada restores full and fair reciprocity for American Farmers and Companies.”

Canada’s prime minister, Mark Carney, has characterized the confrontation as more than a dispute over tariffs, arguing that demands by a bullying Trump administration threaten Canada’s economic independence.

In a video released Tuesday, Carney argued that in the past, the United States has tried to use tariffs to “break us,” only to have Canada’s economy grow stronger and more diversified. He urged Canadians to buy Canadian and break economic dependency from the United States.

“This won’t be easy, and I won’t pretend otherwise,” Carney said. “But Canadians have faced difficult stretches before, and what has carried us through has never ever been any one measure. It’s always been Canadians looking out for each other.”

Trump, meanwhile, has pressed Canada to make concessions on trade and has warned of further tariffs, including potentially higher duties on Canadian automobiles. He also threatened to ban the sale of aircraft from Canada’s Bombardier unless its products are manufactured in the United States.

“If they want our Market, they must build here, and stop treating America like a ‘piggybank,’” Trump wrote on Truth Social on Monday. “BUY AMERICAN. FLY ON AMERICAN AIRLINERS. ENJOY AMERICAN LIQUOR AND BEVERAGES. SAIL ON LAKE AMERICA. AMERICA FIRST!”

Earlier Monday, Trump posted an image showing Mexico, Canada, Central America, Greenland and Caribbean nations with the colors of the American flag. He also posted a caricature of him and Carney playing hockey in which Trump tells him: “Get up, Governor.”

Both sides stand to lose in a trade war poised to hurt businesses large and small across the world’s longest international border.

A prolonged economic conflict poses long-term risks for Canada, which faces price hikes and investment losses from the United States, by far its largest trading partner.

But Americans may also confront higher costs at a time when inflation is already a stubborn problem for the Trump administration. And the trade war may be felt most in northern border states set to hold midterm elections that could swing control of the U.S. Senate, becoming yet another political challenge for embattled Republican lawmakers.

In Maine, Republican Sen. Susan Collins, who is seeking reelection, has called Trump’s tariffs “a mistake.” In Michigan, Democratic Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed released a video Tuesday highlighting everyday goods that have risen more than 30% over the last year, including Tide Pods, toilet paper and Tim Hortons coffee, as the trade conflict and war in Iran drive up costs.

American alcohol has also been the target of boycotts imposed by several Canadian provinces since March 2025 in response to earlier tariffs on Canadian goods by Trump.

The boycotts since then have erased roughly $360 million in revenue for the U.S. wine industry, according to a Wine Institute report, which represents California wineries. Canada makes up more than 35% of the export market for U.S. wine, more than the EU, U.K. and China markets combined.

For some California winemakers, the impact was even greater. One Sonoma winery referenced in the report said Canada made up about 85% of its international sales. Multiple wineries have had to lay off employees because of hits to their business.

“It’s had a tremendous negative impact,” said Julie Berge, vice president of communications at the Wine Institute.

Wine is not the only California business that has taken a hit — tourism has also seen a sharp decline in arrivals from Canada. In 2025, visitors from the country dropped by 20%.

Canada also targeted the agriculture, electronics and transportation equipment industries with its tariffs announced Tuesday, all of which have a presence in California.

Soon after the World Cup brought positive international attention and tourists to the United States, Trump escalated trade tensions with Canada.

“You went from this really high, exciting moment for the U.S. in terms of international attention, to the next week, it’s negative again,” Deborah Friedland, a hospitality consultant at financial services firm Eisner Advisory Group, told the Associated Press. “It’s one step forward and two steps back.”

Times staff writers Wilner and Ceballos reported from Washington and Duneja from Los Angeles.

Sept. 8, 2026 3:02 PM PT

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Tuesday rebuffed an appeal from Missouri officials who wanted to use new congressional districts backed by President Trump in the November election, a defeat for Republicans who had hoped the new map could help them hold onto their slim House majority.

The justices let stand a decision by Missouri’s top court, which said the new districts were automatically suspended by a citizen petition demanding a statewide vote.

The ruling marks a rare setback for Republicans in a nationwide redistricting battle that Trump urged Republicans to launch last year.

Missouri’s new districts were used in the August primaries. But the Missouri Supreme Court ruled in September that the state must revert to districts adopted after the last census.

Republican state Atty. Gen. Catherine Hanaway, who appealed, had argued it would violate federal rights to switch districts for voters between the primary and general elections. She also said it would cause confusion.

Missouri currently is represented in the U.S. House by six Republicans and two Democrats who were elected under districts that Republican state officials approved in 2022.

But at Trump’s urging, Missouri Gov. Mike Kehoe called the Legislature into a special session last year to redraw congressional boundaries to their advantage ahead of the midterms.

The revised map targeted the 5th Congressional District, held by longtime Democratic Rep. Emanuel Cleaver of Kansas City. It reassigned portions of Kansas City to two neighboring districts represented by Republicans and stretched the remainder of Cleaver’s district far eastward into rural Republican areas.

Cleaver was unopposed in the Democratic primary. State Sen. Rick Brattin won the Republican primary in the reshaped district.

On the same day as the primary, Republican Secretary of State Denny Hoskins rejected a petition with thousands of signatures seeking to force a November referendum on the map. Hoskins asserted that Missouri’s Constitution doesn’t allow a referendum on congressional redistricting. A lower court agreed, but the state Supreme Court reversed Hoskins’ decision.

The state’s top court said the new districts were retroactively frozen in December, when the petition signatures were submitted, and thus never became law. Hoskins on Tuesday assigned the redistricting referendum as Proposition A on the November ballot, in compliance with the state court order.

The Missouri Constitution does not specifically say that a referendum can be used for congressional redistricting. But the state Supreme Court said a constitutional provision allowing a referendum on “any act” of the Legislature encompasses congressional redistricting legislation.

Missouri was the second Republican-led state, after Texas, to respond to Trump’s call last year to redraw congressional districts. Several other states followed. All told, Republicans had hoped to win as many as 16 additional seats from new House maps enacted in eight states — Texas, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, Florida, Tennessee, Louisiana and Alabama. Democrats, whose counterattack faced several setbacks, think they could win up to six additional seats from new districts in California and Utah.

It remains to be seen whether the redistricting works as intended for Republicans. The president’s party historically has lost congressional seats in the midterms, and Trump’s poor approval ratings could provide an extra hurdle for Republican candidates.

Whitehurst and Lieb write for the Associated Press.

Allegations of misconduct between two justices threaten to pull court into political battles ahead of upcoming election.

Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Andre Mendonca has ordered the suspension of federal police chief Andrei Rodrigues and the force’s intelligence chief Leandro Almada amid growing divisions that have tested the credibility of the country’s highest court.

The suspensions were announced on Tuesday. Mendonca, appointed by former right-wing President Jair Bolsonaro, has accused Rodrigues and Almada of producing six illegal reports on the activities of justices.

The move was backed by a majority on one of the high court’s five-member panels.

But it is likely to be challenged by the government, possibly pulling the administration of leftist President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva into a political battle ahead of October’s presidential election.

“Investigating possible evidence of crimes is correct,” Institutional Relations Minister Jose Guimaraes, a top aide to Lula, said in response to the decision on social media. “But this measure smells electoral to me. That cannot happen.”

Polls show Lula and Jair Bolsonaro’s eldest son, Senator Flavio Bolsonaro, in a tight race ahead of the first round of voting on October 4.

The Supreme Court has been roiled by mutual accusations of wrongdoing between Justice Alexandre de Moraes, appointed under centre-right President Michel Temer, and Mendonca, a Bolsonaro appointee.

De Moraes has become a prominent target of right-wing criticism, particularly after he oversaw the case against Jair Bolsonaro for plotting a coup after the 2022 election.

A report detailing possible links between de Moraes and disgraced banker Daniel Vorcaro was made public by Mendonca last week.

De Moraes, however, responded by accusing Mendonca of abusing his power, citing federal police intelligence reports and urging the court to investigate him. Mendonca has now challenged the legality of those reports.

The Vorcaro corruption scandal has widened to include powerful political figures on both the left and right.

Vorcaro was arrested in 2025 for allegedly overseeing one of the largest bank fraud schemes in the history of Brazil, leaving billions in owed money.

Flavio Bolsonaro has also faced scrutiny for his ties with Vorcaro, after he approached the banker for assistance in funding a film about his father. Jair Bolsonaro is currently serving a 27-year prison sentence.

The right-wing senator used Tuesday’s suspension to push his claim that the prosecution of his father was a political “witch-hunt”. The Federal Police had recommended charges be brought against the elder Bolsonaro in November 2024.

“Lula’s special group in the Federal Police officially unmasked,” Senator Bolsonaro wrote in a social media post. “May the honourable and glorious Federal Police regain its autonomy to go after criminals, and not Lula’s political adversaries.”

William Marcel Murad, the federal police’s executive director, released a statement saying that Rodrigues has the agency’s “full confidence” and that agents “will not be shaken by attacks”.

Sept. 8, 2026 9:01 AM PT

WASHINGTON — Work on the White House North Portico appears to be nearing completion before Chinese President Xi Jinping’s state visit to the United States in late September.

Scaffolding was being taken down Tuesday after workers over Labor Day weekend removed a shroud that had obscured the work. The Executive Mansion’s front columns had been covered since July. The work, ordered by President Trump, began in June.

The portico was first completed in 1830 during Andrew Jackson’s presidency. Administration officials said previously that stonework and plaster on the structure were being refurbished because of routine damage from age and weather exposure.

Trump has said he noticed it was in “deplorable condition” before insisting on repairs. The work is part of the president’s sweeping overhaul of the White House and other federal property in the nation’s capital — with most of his more ambitious moves drawing lawsuits and criticism from preservationists.

Trump said last week that workers finished construction of a helipad on the South Lawn.

His signature project, a White House ballroom and underground bunker, continues as legal fights play out. Multiple lawsuits were filed after Trump demolished the East Wing before going through the usual regulatory steps for major work on historic federal buildings in Washington. The massive project will add more square footage than what the existing White House footprint comprises.

That means Trump must host Xi’s state dinner, scheduled for Sept. 24, in existing spaces and in a construction zone — a circumstance that will afford the president a new opportunity to extol his ballroom project.

Barrow and Martin write for the Associated Press. Barrow reported from Atlanta.

Dana Williamson, California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s onetime chief of staff, is seeking to delay her criminal sentencing date for political corruption because of health issues, according to documents filed last week in federal court.

Williamson’s attorney McGregor Scott, asked the court to delay her Sept. 17 sentencing and seal documents related to her health condition.

Scott submitted documents that reference a Sept. 4 surgery that Williamson underwent, medical records, and a text message from Williamson’s mother about the surgery.

Williamson underwent a liver transplant earlier this year, prompting a judge to delay a February hearing in her case.

A spokesperson for the U.S. attorney’s office for the Eastern District of California didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment about the requested sentencing delay.

Scott declined to comment.

Williamson, who worked for Newsom until 2024, pleaded guilty in May to three counts, including committing bank and wire fraud.

Williamson, a veteran political consultant who also formerly worked for former Govs. Jerry Brown and Gray Davis, admitted she took part in a scheme from 2022 to 2024 to skim campaign funds from then-U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, now a leading candidate for governor, and divert the money to Becerra’s then-chief of staff.

She also admitted in her plea deal to filing a false tax form in 2024 and lying to FBI agents that same year.

Beyond lying to the FBI about the scheme involving Becerra, Williamson misled federal authorities on another topic, the plea agreement stated.

She lied to FBI agents when asked about the state’s lawsuit against video game company Activision Blizzard Inc., details contained in the November indictment against Williamson and other public records show.

WASHINGTON — Nearly a quarter century after a day “etched forever into the memories of Americans,” President Trump honored the victims of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on Tuesday by vowing to “never forget.”

The event at the Ellipse was spearheaded by the Tunnel to Towers Foundation and showcased a massive, 21-foot, nearly 17,000-pound steel beam recovered from the South Tower of the World Trade Center in New York, which had traveled for months across the country as part of the Steel Across America tour.

The steel beam will make its way through New York in a procession on Friday by retracing the steps of fallen New York City firefighter Stephen Siller. Trump’s presence at the event on Tuesday just outside the White House began a week of commemorations that will culminate in several events on Friday, including one at the Pentagon that Trump will attend.

“This battered piece of steel here today on the Ellipse is a reminder that America is blessed with a strength no fire can consume, no evil can conquer and no terror can destroy,” Trump said.

Trump noted that the Sept. 11 attacks were one of few moments in history that “divide time into really what came before” and after.

His remarks briefly dipped into the political, as Trump warned of people turning a “communistic way” — a reference to his frequent attacks on Democrats as more democratic socialists gain influence in the party.

During his remarks, Trump paid particular tribute to two men who died in the attacks: Jeffrey Palazzo, a New York City firefighter, and Welles Crowther, a young equities trader who became known as the “man in the red bandanna” after rescuing several people in the attacks.

Trump said the U.S. Coast Guard will commission a new fast-response cutter this weekend in New York in honor of Palazzo, a Coast Guard reservist who was working out of Staten Island’s Rescue Squad 5 when he responded to the attacks 25 years ago.

And the president recognized Crowther, also a volunteer firefighter, by awarding him the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

Crowther’s mother, Alison, and sister, Paige, accepted the award, which is considered the nation’s highest civilian honor.

In attendance were a smattering of top Cabinet officials and members of Congress, including Republican Reps. Mike Lawler of New York and Dan Meuser, whose Pennsylvania district is near Shanksville, where Flight 93 crashed on Sept. 11, 2001.

Trump praised at length Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, who was chairman and CEO of Cantor Fitzgerald, a financial firm that had been housed at the World Trade Center. Lutnick lost his younger brother, Gary, as well as more than 650 employees in the attacks.

“He’s done an amazing job,” Trump said of Lutnick. “He’s rebuilt Cantor Fitzgerald, and he’s given much of the profits to some of the families or the families of people who perished.”

About 150 first responders from New York, as well as some from Washington and Pennsylvania, were in attendance, Trump said.

“This steel beam represents the best of our country,” said Frank Siller, the foundation’s chairman and CEO who is the brother of Stephen Siller. “It’s important to recognize that the heroism that was exhibited that fateful day was nothing short of incredible.”

Kim writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Will Weissert contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — Republicans appeared to have a firm grip on the Senate heading into the final two years of President Trump’s term. But with less than two months until Election Day, control of the chamber is now up for grabs.

Democrats have found themselves competing in states that once seemed beyond their reach as Trump’s slipping approval ratings and voters’ dissatisfaction with the economy create a difficult political environment for Republicans. But races Democrats once counted on winning have also become more complicated.

It’s a battle that’s expected to exceed $3.4 billion in spending across all races during the midterm campaign. The implications are huge for Trump’s agenda and his ability to fill administration jobs and open court seats for the remainder of his term, as the Senate is empowered to confirm or block presidential nominees.

Republicans say it’s unlikely for everything to break in Democrats’ favor, but they acknowledge they’re facing a difficult landscape. Senate Majority Leader John Thune told South Dakota’s KELOLAND News last week that he does “worry” about losing the chamber.

“I’m a realist,” Thune said. “I don’t ever try and sugarcoat things. I think it’s a competitive environment right now.”

Democrats face a scrambled path to the majority

Democrats need to net four seats to win the majority. The original path had been to hold Michigan, Georgia and New Hampshire while winning back Republican-held seats in Alaska, Maine, North Carolina and Ohio. But things have changed.

“We now have multiple paths for the majority,” Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer said last month. “We found new states — Iowa, Texas — which people a year ago weren’t even paying attention to.”

Some of the states where Democrats were feeling most optimistic at the start of the election cycle, such as Michigan and Maine, have grown murkier.

In Michigan, where there’s an open seat this fall, no GOP candidate has won a Senate race since 1994. But Democrats are struggling to unite behind nominee Abdul El-Sayed. The favorite of progressives narrowly defeated moderate U.S. Rep. Haley Stevens in the August primary, and feelings remain raw from a bruising contest that saw nearly $70 million spent against El-Sayed.

Republicans believe Mike Rogers, who lost the 2024 Senate race by fewer than 20,000 votes, has an improved shot against El-Sayed. The Senate Leadership Fund — Senate Republicans’ spending PAC — added $6 million to its Michigan advertising investment after El-Sayed won, bringing their total spending to $51 million, the third-highest total.

Democrats also saw a prime opportunity to finally defeat five-term Republican Sen. Susan Collins in Maine, where Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris won more votes than Trump in 2024.

Progressive Graham Platner easily won the nomination in June, but he left the race the next month over a sexual assault allegation that he denies. Democratic delegates in late July chose Troy Jackson, a lesser-known former state legislative leader, to replace him.

Jackson has been forced to play catch-up. Collins and aligned super PACs have spent almost $80 million so far, according to the ad-tracking firm AdImpact, while Jackson and Democratic-aligned groups have spent and reserved close to $45 million since he became the nominee.

As one path narrowed for Democrats, others widened

Democrats increasingly see a real possibility in Texas, a state that has been an elusive goal for decades, and other GOP-led states including Iowa, Alaska and Ohio.

In Texas, Democrat James Talarico faces state Attorney General Ken Paxton, who ousted four-term incumbent Republican Sen. John Cornyn to win the GOP nomination. Senate GOP leadership backed Cornyn, seeing him as the stronger general election candidate.

Paxton has been shadowed for decades by legal and ethical questions, including indictments for securities fraud, though he was not convicted.

Talarico and allied groups have spent nearly $30 million on advertising since the May runoff, compared to less than $3 million by pro-Paxton groups. The political fund associated with Trump last week spent $10 million on TV and digital ads to help Paxton — the first major general election investment by MAGA Inc. for the midterms. Senate GOP leaders had petitioned Trump’s political team to spend some of the more than $400 million it had last month to help Paxton.

Democrats have also upped their spending in Alaska, Iowa, Ohio and North Carolina, all states currently held by Republicans. The GOP, meanwhile, is feeling more optimistic about New Hampshire as well as Michigan, while spending more to defend seats in Iowa and Alaska.

The expanded map has upped the anticipated total spending this cycle. AdImpact in June projected $3.4 billion in advertising spending on Senate races, a significant increase from the $2.8 billion the ad spending firm projected in the fall of 2025.

Why more states are in play than expected

Democrats’ path has widened in part because of Trump’s slumping job approval, notably on handling the economy, which was at 32% according to an AP-NORC poll in July — down from 40% in March 2025, shortly after he took office.

Trump’s trade policies and the war in Iran, with its corresponding inflated fuel costs, have added to the economic uncertainty for voters less than two months before Election Day.

“Things still cost too much. And so we’ve got to work on that issue,” Republican Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio told The Associated Press. “We understand that and we know that’s real.”

Ohio Sen. Jon Husted heard the concern firsthand at a roundtable last month. Husted is looking to fend off a comeback from former Sen. Sherrod Brown in another key matchup for both parties.

During the discussion on housing, one attendee told Husted that costs were “skyrocketing” in part because of uncertainty around tariffs.

“Uncertainty is the killer to this economy,” said Dean Windham, a real estate developer who previously ran for office as a Republican.

Some Republican Senate candidates have defended Trump’s policies while confronting concerns about their economic impact.

In Michigan, where Trump’s tariffs on Canada have become a central issue, Rogers has backed the president’s approach while leaving room for disagreement.

“President Trump is right to put America First — and tariffs are necessary, but are not a one-size-fits-all solution,” Rogers said in a recent statement.

Republicans believe the math still favors them

Even if Democrats hold every seat they currently control, they would need to flip at least two seats in states Trump carried by double digits in 2024 to win the majority.

Republicans are betting that those underlying advantages will matter more as Election Day approaches — particularly as Trump and the party turn their attention toward mobilizing voters who helped return him to the White House.

Trump told reporters last week that he will “be making a lot of stops” in the last 30 days before the election.

This week, Republicans will hold a midterm convention in Texas, where Trump is set to speak and top Senate candidates including Rogers and Husted are expected to attend.

But Republicans acknowledge they have work to do.

“Politics is local,” Republican Sen. Mike Rounds of South Dakota said. He pointed to Trump’s decision to import beef, which he said made farmers and ranchers “feel just like the administration pulled the rug right off from underneath” them.

“They’re hurt,” Rounds said. “They feel like they’ve been let down.”

Cappelletti, Beaumont and Jalonick write for the Associated Press. Beaumont reported from Des Moines, Iowa.

Sept. 8, 2026 7:54 AM PT

MIAMI — Secretary of State Marco Rubio begins a three-nation tour of Latin America on Tuesday, visiting U.S.-aligned conservative leaders as the Trump administration steps up military operations to combat drug trafficking and seeks further inroads in the Western Hemisphere aimed at improving America’s energy standing and combating illegal migration.

Just a week after sealing a massive oil deal with Venezuelan leaders after a U.S. military operation in January deposed then-leader Nicolás Maduro, Rubio was traveling to neighboring Colombia to meet President Abelardo de la Espriella. Colombia’s new leader has embraced President Trump’s policies on issues ranging from drugs to immigration and energy.

De la Espriella is one of a new generation of right-wing conservatives to win election and show support for Trump’s muscular approach to a region that had tilted leftward in recent decades.

In announcing the trip last week, which also will take Rubio to Ecuador and Peru, the State Department said Rubio and all three leaders would be discussing “enhanced cooperation in the shared fight against narcoterrorism, which threatens our hemisphere.”

Rubio visits as Latin American allies help expanded efforts to fight drug trafficking

The trip comes a day after U.S. forces intercepted and sank another Ecuadorian vessel that Washington accuses of links to the criminal group Los Choneros.

It was the latest action by the U.S. against boats and vessels in Latin America that it says are involved in drug trafficking. Expanded operations in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean began a year ago, coinciding with an extreme crackdown on migrants in the U.S. illegally, many of them from Latin America.

The vessel sunk Monday was the fifth targeted by U.S. forces in the region in less than two weeks — in most cases with the cooperation or at least tacit support of the conservative leaders with whom Rubio will meet.

But unlike strikes on alleged drug-trafficking boats in Latin American waters that began in September 2025, those on board the vessel were removed and transferred to Ecuadorian authorities. It appears to be a shift after a series of strikes on boats over the year have killed at least 227 people, which the Trump administration accuses of being “narcoterrorists” but without providing evidence.

The U.S. military carried out at least two of those deadly strikes last month before starting to intercept floating refueling stations that it says support illicit drug trafficking operations at sea.

Colombia’s president vows to crack down on drug trafficking and immigration

Colombian Foreign Minister Omar Bula said in a video released Tuesday that Rubio’s visit marks the beginning of “rebuilding a strategic alliance with the United States, our main partner in the region.” He affirmed that Colombia will focus on discussing security, which includes combating drug trafficking, trade, and the defense of “shared values.”

De la Espriella has promised to take a hard line against drug traffickers and pledges to deport thousands of migrants who are in Colombia without residence permits, mainly Venezuelans, as he tries to make significant changes to the nation’s immigration policies that he says will reduce crime.

After taking office last month, De la Espriella brought Colombia into the Americas Counter Cartels Coalition and strengthened long-standing security cooperation with the United States, following strained relations during the 2022-2026 administration of progressive Gustavo Petro.

In just a month in office, De la Espriella has carried out at least three bombings against illegal armed groups and increased military operations. However, several minors have died during the bombings, which has drawn criticism from opposition leaders.

As part of his security strategy, he has focused his efforts on showcasing the results of military operations. However, there was criticism from the opposition and the state-run Ombudsman’s Office after De la Espriella displayed the bodies of alleged criminals wrapped in white bags on the ground alongside seized ammunition.

After winning the election, De la Espriella identified several leaders of Colombia’s illegal armed groups as “military targets.” Last week, he announced that the first of these, Naín Andrés Pérez Toncel, alias “Bendito Menor,” one of the leaders of the Self-Defense Forces of the Sierra Nevada, an illegal armed group in the north of the country, had been killed by police.

Nicknamed “El Tigre,” or The Tiger, the president has shifted the country’s security policy, closing the peace negotiations initiated by Petro during his administration, which he considers a failed effort that only increased violence in Colombia.

Colombia grapples with illegal armed groups vying for control of territories strategically important for drug trafficking and illegal mining, despite the fact that a decade ago the state signed a historic peace agreement with the FARC rebel group.

After meeting De la Espriella in Barranquilla on the Caribbean, where he will sign a civil nuclear cooperation deal and a critical minerals agreement, Rubio will make a brief stop in Quito.

He will meet Ecuadorian President Daniel Noboa whose government has steadily increased counternarcotics operations conducted with the U.S. military.

Rubio will round out the visit with a stop in Lima, Peru, where he will meet new President Keiko Fujimori — the daughter of former leader Alberto Fujimori — as the government also has taken a rightward turn.

Lee and Suárez write for the Associated Press. Suarez reported from Bogota, Colombia.

One year ago, thousands of young people took to the streets in multiple Nepali cities to protest against corruption. Following the resulting curfews, arrests and the killing of protesters in a crackdown on the demonstrations, the Gen Z‑led movement forced the government from power, ushering in an interim administration and opening the way for new elections.

Now, as Nepal grapples with the aftermath of devastating floods along its border with Tibet, we examine what has changed over the past year – and whether the demands of the Gen Z protesters have been met.

What happened in Nepal last year?

On September 8, 2025, youth-led “Gen Z” protests began in Kathmandu and other cities of Nepal.

Demonstrators who took to the streets were protesting a series of corruption scandals in the country and were also angered by the rising trend of the children of Nepali government officials – dubbed “Nepo kids” – documenting their lavish lifestyles online.

The protests broke out just days after the country blocked 26 social media sites including Facebook, Instagram, X (formerly Twitter), and TikTok for not complying with government rules about “harmful” content. This ban was lifted when the protests began.

Some young demonstrators defied curfews imposed by the authorities after demonstrations began, leading to arrests and the police firing live rounds at protesters, killing about 76 people. Hundreds of protesters were injured and hundreds more arrested. Protesters also set fire to several government buildings, including parliament, and the army was deployed.

Then, on September 9, Prime Minister KP Oli, 74, resigned from his position. Within a week, Nepal’s former Chief Justice Sushila Karki had been appointed as the country’s new interim prime minister.

Ultimately, the protests culminated in the current government being formed in March this year when 35-year-old rapper-turned-politician Balendra Shah was sworn in as the country’s youngest-ever prime minister.

Shah leads the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP), also known as the National Independent Party, a new anti‑establishment party which emerged after the youth-led protests and won more than two‑thirds of the 165 directly elected seats in parliament in March. Traditional parties such as the Nepali Congress and the CPN‑UML have a much smaller representation than ever before.

Although he was not a street organiser of the protests, Shah became one of the most prominent political figures, channelling Gen Z’s anger into his electoral campaign.

What were the key demands of the Gen Z protesters?

They included:

• An end to corruption: Protesters demanded greater transparency and accountability from political elites they view as corrupt, as well as an end to nepotism, whereby the children of those elites live in luxury while many young Nepalis struggle financially.
• Mass resignations and suspensions: Protesters called for the resignation of Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli and the mass resignation of parliamentarians. They also called for an immediate suspension of officials who issued the order to fire on protesters.
• Political overhaul: The protesters called for the dissolution of parliament, establishment of an interim government and holding new general elections.

Have these demands been met?

The demands have been met to some extent.

For instance, Oli resigned in the wake of the Gen Z‑led protests, and several senior members of his government also stepped down. Parliament was dissolved, an interim government was established, and new general elections were held in March this year.

“Despite the loss of life and property during the movement, the interim government successfully conducted peaceful elections, leading to the emergence of a new political force in government,” Yog Raj Lamichhane, an assistant professor at Nepal’s Pokhara University, told Al Jazeera.

“The result reflected public disenchantment with the old political establishment.”

In March this year, Nepal police arrested Oli and former Home Affairs Minister Ramesh Lekhak for their alleged involvement in the deadly crackdown on the protesters last year.

However, both men were released in April after a Supreme Court order asked the police not to indefinitely extend the detention. They remain under investigation in connection with last year’s deadly Gen Z protests, but have not been formally charged.

Furthermore, the issue of corruption among political elites has barely been addressed, observers say.

Dinesh Paudel, professor at the Appalachain State University in the US, told Al Jazeera: “The fundamental concerns and issues raised by the young protestor last year are still the same, and there are no governance style changes even after the new elected government, other than some populist rhetorics on small and cosmetic topics.”

Has the leadership change made any difference?

Some of the young leaders have entered parliament and government, while others remain in activist groups. The divisions between these two groups of people are becoming more apparent as they often clash over how much to compromise with the old political establishment.

Those who were elected to parliament in March mostly belong to the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP), or National Independent Party.

“One of the most exciting and progressive parts is the emergence of youth in politics as most of the parliamentarians are young, educated and have much aspiration to change,” Bishnu Raj Upreti, a public policy analyst and research director at Nepal Centre for Contemporary Research (NCCR), told Al Jazeera.

“The leadership change appears to have brought some positive differences, particularly in the working style of the current prime minister,” Lamichhane said.

However, experts say the younger generation of MPs – those elected under the NIP/RSP banner as well as those in older parties – remains constrained by party hierarchies and Nepal’s entrenched political system.

“They are inexperienced and are still heavily controlled by party structures,” Upreti said. He added that wider generational distrust between young politicians and the older establishment also complicated reform efforts.

“Leadership change has started. It is good, but not enough.”

This has resulted in an apparent divide between those in government positions and those in activist groups.

In May this year, the new government invited Gen Z activists – mostly civil society leaders and youth activists – to give their input for constitutional amendments. However, 25 of the 29 invited boycotted the meeting, saying deeper systemic problems and earlier agreements with the previous administration were being ignored, according to Gen Z activist Aayush Basyal.

Basyal, who was present at the protests last year, said it was “really tricky” for young activists to adjust to working inside the system alongside the new Gen‑Z politicians now in office. “They are trying to cooperate with the authorities they previously challenged, while still pushing for the radical changes they demanded on the streets,” she explained.

“Now the Gen Z protesters of that time are divided into different factions, and some of the factions are vehemently opposing some work of government,” Upreti explained.

“So those who oppose the government are not in positive booking of the government,” Upreti added.

Where are the protesters now?

On Tuesday, families of protesters who were killed in last year’s crackdown organised a formal commemoration at what used to be Nepal’s parliament building.

After functioning as the parliament building for almost two decades, it shut down last year when Gen Z protesters trespassed and set fire to it.

Basyal said the authorities provided tight security amid rumours that some groups might try to incite violence, noting that Nepal’s “media economy” often amplifies sensational incidents even when only a few people are involved.

In the meantime, however, the divide within the Gen Z movement is becoming more stark, particularly what some see as a failure by the new leaders to advocate for protesters.

“The injured protesters have generally received medical treatment and certain monetary compensation,” Lamicchane said.

“However, the concept of compensation remains broader than financial support alone. In my view, the true compensation would be the fulfilment of the promises and objectives that inspired the Gen Z movement and the subsequent formation of a new government.”

Basyal said that while some of the people involved in the movement are now MPs or cabinet ministers, others, from poor, minority backgrounds, who lack money and influence, are still in jail and cannot speak up for themselves.

“There are people still in jail, officially more than 900 and unofficially, maybe like 1,600 plus, who are in jail for arson,” Basyal said.

He said it was troubling that these protesters remain in jail, suggesting this risks becoming “institutionalised” and raising questions over whether the government is effectively celebrating impunity.

Activists, he added, hope the new administration will treat these detainees better, but “that is yet to be seen.”

What still needs to change?

Analysts say structural changes are necessary.

“Although the government has promised reforms, particularly through changes in laws and policies, these commitments have not yet been substantially realised,” Lamichhane said.

Upreti noted that the new government has not begun any structural changes at all.

“Structural changes have to start with changing existing laws and bringing in new laws and policies,” he said.

“From what we’ve seen so far, the new leaders don’t appear to be prioritising that. Massive reform of the bureaucracy is a precondition to achieving the aims of the Gen Z movement, but the government has not yet done meaningful work in this line.”

He added that another important element is to develop better relations and deeper trust with Nepal’s two giant neighbours, India and China, since Nepal’s economic progress and geopolitical balance depend on them.

Experts also say Nepal’s highly centralised system of government is a major obstacle to deeper structural reform.

“Strong collaboration of the federal movement with provincial and local government is the necessary condition for advancing economic progress, but they ignore provincial and local government as they have no provincial and local government. It is not a good approach,” Upreti said.

“Structural changes are necessary and they come from internal power dynamics such as urban-rural divide, inherent conflict between educated elites and peasant farmers and economic and bureaucratically institutionalised corruption,” Patel said. “It is hard to imagine that there will be any structural changes, aiming to making people’s lives better, at this stage and under current circumstances.

“In short, Nepal has missed yet another opportunity from a popular uprising that would fundamentally address Nepali peoples desire for change.”

What’s next?

“This new government seems to be deeply under its own weight of expectation,” Basyal said.

He explained that historically in Nepal, there’s been an “expectation gap”: people expect a lot, governments deliver little, and that gap fuels frustration.

He said that this government has “not been transparent”.

“The prime minister, he doesn’t speak a lot in the parliament. And when he did address the parliament a few times, that was pretty chaotic, as well,” Basyal added.

“If this issue remains unaddressed, it may lead to a second wave of public disenchantment.”

Lamichhane said, however, it will take time to see if the government can address the challenges it faces.

“Let’s hope and wait for changes. Now, it’s not the appropriate time to criticise the government, as Nepal has faced an apocalypse in the form of a massive flood.”

Meanwhile, flags in Nepal flew at half-mast on Monday as the country mourned the more-than-1,300 people who are known to have died in catastrophic floods which ravaged the border region with Tibet late last month. Thousands more people are still missing.

Basyal noted that Nepal’s current constitution was finalised and promulgated in September 2015, only after the devastating April and May earthquakes created urgent political pressure to end nearly a decade of deadlock.

“It feels like the nation comes together only during national disasters. So we’re really hopeful that this sense of unity that is right now will help.”

Days before California voters receive their mail-in ballots, gubernatorial candidates Xavier Becerra, a Democrat, and Steve Hilton, a Republican, will debate in a nationally televised face-off.

On Sept. 30 at CNN’s Burbank studio, the two candidates hoping to succeed termed-out Gov. Gavin Newson are expected to spar over sharply divergent visions for the future of the state. California’s next leader is expected to face pressing fiscal issues, as well as continued battle with the Trump administration.

Given California’s deep Democratic tilt, there was a question whether the two men would debate.

On Aug. 19, Becerra promised multiple debates with Hilton ahead of the general election.

“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 in downtown Los Angeles. “Voters need to have good information. We’ll make sure they have it, and there will be debates.”

The following day, Hilton said he was skeptical of Becerra’s promise.

“I don’t believe him unless he commits to an actual debate. Invitations are on the table for dates and places,” Hilton said. “Why can’t he just accept them? I think he’s lying. I don’t think he wants to do debates because he doesn’t want to debate his record.”

September’s hour-long debate, taking place shortly before county elections officials begin mailing ballots to all the state’s registered voters, will be moderated by the cable network’s anchors Dana Bash and Jake Tapper.

It is the most attention a California gubernatorial contest has drawn since 2010, when “Today” show host Matt Lauer and NBC News Political Director Chuck Todd moderated nationally televised clashes.

That is perhaps unsurprising given how sharply the California electorate has swung left, with no Republican winning a statewide contest since 2006. Two did that year.

While there will not be a studio audience, the debate will air on CNN, CNN International, CNN en Español, CNN.com and related TV and mobile apps for subscribers.

Times staff writer Nicole Nixon contributed to this report.

SACRAMENTO — Democrat Xavier Becerra defended the death penalty while serving as California’s attorney general, a punishment his office actively sought in the case of a gunman convicted of an Orange County mass shooting, but as the front-running candidate for governor he has vowed to block executions if elected in November.

Becerra said he will extend the blanket reprieve for all death row inmates that Gov. Gavin Newsom enacted by executive order in 2019, saying he supported “moving our state away from a costly, flawed system that disproportionately impacts Black and brown communities and too often gets it wrong.”

Those comments have reassured anti-death penalty advocates wary of Becerra, who has stated throughout his career that capital punishment should be an option for victims seeking justice. He reiterated that stance just a decade ago during his confirmation hearing for attorney general, though he also expressed concerns about the unjust application of the punishment.

“I support the death penalty, but I hate the way it’s being executed,” Becerra told state lawmakers in 2017.

“If you commit some heinous crime where you have taken the life of someone else, and you knew that there was a death penalty in place in that place where you committed that crime, then you should face the punishment for what you’ve done,” he explained. “It doesn’t give me pleasure to say that, but I simply do believe there’s a simple justice in that.”

Becerra’s challenger in the Nov. 3 election, former Fox News commentator Steve Hilton, opposes the death penalty but said he would rescind Newsom’s moratorium because it defies the will of voters.

Becerra has said he is concerned by how death sentences historically have been applied, including a highly disproportionate number of condemned inmates who are Black or Latino men and cases in which they later have been exonerated of crimes.

He repeated similar positions last year during a gubernatorial forum in Los Angeles.

“I do not believe every Californian has gotten a fair verdict in these fights,” he said in response to a question about extending Newsom’s moratorium. “But here is what I will tell you: We have to be aggressive in going after crime, especially the most heinous crime. … I will make sure that we have a judiciary system and a prosecution system that takes into account that we must show fairness.”

Though California has not performed an execution since 2006, prosecutors in some areas of the state continue to seek and win death sentences. As of early August, there were 565 condemned inmates in California prisons, according to the state Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

Newsom’s moratorium stops the state from carrying out those sentences.

In California, county district attorneys are responsible for prosecuting the vast majority of accused murderers when they go to trial and also deciding whether to seek the death penalty. The office of the state attorney general is responsible for defending death penalty convictions on appeal.

Becerra sought the death penalty in a murder case his office prosecuted early in his tenure, though unsuccessfully. Scott Dekraai, who was convicted of killing his ex-wife and seven others in a shooting at a Seal Beach beauty salon, was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole after a prosecution scandal involving his case.

Some death penalty opponents criticized Becerra for fighting to uphold the death sentence of Robert Lewis Jr., who was deemed by the California Supreme Court in 2018 to have an intellectual disability that made him ineligible for execution.

“I find that reprehensible,” said Mike Farrell, president of Death Penalty Focus, an advocacy group. A longtime anti-death penalty activist, Farrell is better-known for starring as B.J. Hunnicutt in the TV show “M*A*S*H.”

“It may not have been his idea, but he was part of that process,” he said of Becerra.

Others said Becerra cannot be blamed for doing his job. Former Vice President Kamala Harris faced the same dilemma when she served as state attorney general, as does Rob Bonta, who currently holds the office.

“The AG is in a different position because it’s just inherent in their role to defend convictions and sentences,” said Natasha Minsker of the California Anti-Death Penalty Coalition. “For example, Kamala Harris is very strongly personally opposed to the death penalty and still, while she was AG, the office defended hundreds of death sentences. Same with Rob Bonta. He’s very clearly personally against the death penalty, and his office continues to defend death sentences.”

Becerra’s campaign declined an interview on the subject and referred to his statement in support of extending Newsom’s freeze on executions.

Hilton, his Republican opponent in the race, holds starkly different views.

“If you’re arguing that taking a life is such a serious crime, then I don’t think responding by taking a life actually makes that argument,” he said in an interview last month.

But he said California voters spoke clearly by voting twice — in 2012 and 2016 — against ballot measures that would have repealed the death penalty. “I don’t think it’s OK for a governor to just substitute their personal opinion on an issue where the voters had an explicit and direct say,” he said.

“I strongly believe in holding people accountable for what they do,” Hilton said. “But my sort of fundamental belief is that if we’re saying it’s wrong to kill someone, then the state shouldn’t be doing it, either.”

Hilton also would roll back Democratic-led reforms that have shortened many inmates’ prison sentences by allowing them to seek parole sooner.

End or extend? It’s not that simple

Even if a governor rescinds the moratorium, resuming executions would be a long and complicated process because the state has no approved protocol or facilities to carry out death sentences.

Newsom ordered the dismantling of San Quentin’s death row and execution chamber. Even before he took office, the state’s use of lethal injection drugs was part of a long-running and now-dormant legal battle. And a dwindling number of attorneys who specialize in death penalty cases meant 70% of condemned inmates did not have a lawyer at the end of last year, according to a state report.

California’s death penalty also faces a new legal challenge from groups arguing that capital punishment cases have been administered in a way that is racially discriminatory. In May, the California Supreme Court ordered the attorney general’s office to respond to the arguments and assigned the case to a superior court.

The shifts in California’s criminal justice system are reflected in legal battles waged by the pro-death penalty Criminal Justice Legal Foundation, a nonprofit that supports victims of crime and their families in court.

“We used to do a lot of work in the capital punishment area because that was the area where justice and the sentences were under the greatest attack,” said Kent Scheidegger, the group’s legal director.

But as California’s Democratic-controlled Legislature, governor and, at times, voters adopted measures aimed at reducing the prison population, Scheidegger said the foundation’s efforts increasingly are focused on preserving “the finality of sentences.”

Many capital cases were negotiated as “plea bargains to life without parole on the express promise that this will provide the finality that the victims need most,” he said. “Life without possibility of parole, until recently, meant life without possibility of parole. And now we’ve got one action after another coming out of the government to break down that finality and give people sentenced to life without parole opportunities to get out.”

The group has challenged attempts to expand early release for violent offenders under 2016’s Proposition 57 and new regulations that would allow people sentenced to life without the possibility of parole to seek release.

Twenty-seven states allow the death penalty, but governors in four of them — California, Ohio, Oregon and Pennsylvania — have paused executions.

Slow shifts in public opinion

Attitudes about capital punishment have shifted over time. A 2025 Gallup poll showed 52% of Americans favor the death penalty for people convicted of murder, down from its peak of 80% in 1994.

In a 2023 survey by the Public Policy Institute of California, 62% of adults in the state said they “strongly favor” or “somewhat favor” the death penalty in murder cases. When asked which punishment they prefer for a first-degree murder case, 55% said life without parole and 43% chose the death penalty. More than three-quarters believe there “is some risk that an innocent person will be put to death.”

Despite the changing opinions, Minsker, of the California Anti-Death Penalty Coalition, said there’s little appetite for another repeal attempt because of how expensive ballot measure campaigns have become.

“I am personally one of the strongest proponents of ending the death penalty, and I am not sure I would spend $30 million on that right now, given all the other needs that California has,” said Minsker, a former attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union who ran the unsuccessful 2012 death penalty repeal measure.

Putting an anti-death penalty measure on the statewide ballot also could have put Newsom in an precarious political position. If it failed, Californians would be sending a stinging rebuke to the Democratic governor’s executive decision to grant a blanket reprieve to all condemned inmates.

Minsker is leading a group of criminal justice advocates, faith organizations, prosecutors, murder victim family members and others urging Newsom to commute every death sentence in California before he leaves office.

But advocates are unsure whether Newsom, who is considering a run for president in 2028, would risk the backlash a mass commutation would probably bring. The California Supreme Court also must review executive clemency actions for inmates with more than one felony charge.

Commuting all death sentences to life in prison “would be the coup de grâce,” Farrell said. “However, politically, I’m sure those who are advising him are urging him to have caution in that regard.”

Tehran has threatened “serious consequences” for South Korea if it interferes in the US-Israel war on Iran.

The warning comes amid reports that Seoul is mulling contributing to the US naval blockade of the Strait of Hormuz passage, which has hampered Iran’s oil exports.

In a statement posted on X on Monday, Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei said Iran and South Korea had more than 64 years of diplomatic relations based on mutual respect and that Tehran values that friendship.

However, if South Korea joins the United States in its military actions against Iran at a time when the country is defending itself from what he called US aggression and “war crimes against women and children”, then there will be consequences, he warned.

Baghaei threatened that Iran would regard any military presence or participation in operations by another country in the Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz “would inevitably be regarded as direct support for the aggressor and would have serious consequences”.

“No sovereign and responsible country should succumb to US pressure and intimidation and become complicit in acts of aggression and horrific crimes against the great Iranian nation,” he added.

Seoul did not respond directly, but a Ministry of Foreign Affairs statement on Monday said it is communicating with the international community over the situation in the passageway.

Here’s what we know about how South Korea is getting roped in:

Why is South Korea involved?

Seoul, a close ally of Washington, has been under pressure from US President Donald Trump.

The issues began in mid-August, when Trump revealed in an interview, and later online, that he had spoken to South Korean President Lee Jae Myung and asked that Seoul give “a little hand” in the war on Iran.

According to media reports, the two leaders had spoken over the phone on May 17.

Seoul said, “No, thanks!”, according to Trump’s message on social media.

However, as South Korea now knows, saying no to Trump has repercussions.

On August 16, Trump announced that the US would significantly scale back joint military drills it holds annually with South Korea – the evening before they were scheduled to begin.

The Ulchi Freedom Shield (UFS) exercises are meant to sharpen Seoul’s readiness in case of a North Korean attack. They usually last for more than 11 days but were reduced to five.

In a post on his Truth Social site, Trump claimed the drills were “costly” and that they send a “hostile” signal to North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, with whom he is trying to build a relationship. South Korean Foreign Minister Cho Hyun said in parliament there was no warning from the US.

Trump also questioned why South Korea would refuse his request when thousands of US soldiers are stationed on the Korean Peninsula.

The US also cancelled another military exercise scheduled for September, although South Korea’s military revealed it received a notification much earlier in June, with Washington citing constraints due to the war on Iran.

How has South Korea responded?

President Lee, a liberal who pushes for a dialled-down defence posture, has opted to negotiate. His office earlier released statements saying it hopes for “meaningful dialogue” with Trump.

South Korea’s Yonhap news agency reported on Monday that Washington has, however, “ratcheted up pressure” on Seoul.

On Friday, a South Korean presidential official told Yonhap that Seoul could consider a military contribution to international measures seeking to free up navigation in the passageway as long as it does not affect the country’s defence readiness.

South Korea is looking at various options, the official said, including possible cooperation with France, the United Kingdom and other allies on sending noncombat and search-and-rescue forces.

The South Korean military has also started reviewing assets and troops that could be deployed, including maritime patrol aircraft, explosive ordnance disposal teams and unmanned mine detection and clearing systems, he added.

Such a move would be unpopular. The opposition has spoken out against a possible deployment, as have some within Lee’s ruling Democratic Party. Many South Koreans have also protested against the US-Israel war on Iran.

What is the history of US-South Korea relations?

South Korea became one of the US’s closest allies after Washington backed Seoul against Pyongyang in the Korean War of 1950.

The US supported Seoul’s economic and military growth in the years after. Under a treaty, some 29,000 US soldiers have been stationed permanently on the Korean Peninsula since the end of the war. Seoul has also relied on US defence might to deter nuclear-armed North Korea.

In return, South Korea supported several US wars, including the Iraq War, and is designated an important non-NATO ally.

In 2025, however, Washington imposed a 25 percent tariff on the country, testing relations. Seoul opted to negotiate rather than retaliate, leading the US to lower tariffs to 15 percent.

Many South Koreans were also alarmed after hundreds of South Koreans were arrested in Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids on a Hyundai plant in Georgia in September 2025.

Last October, Trump travelled to Seoul in a historic state visit, and earlier this year, President Lee visited the US. Lee is also trying to resume dialogue between Washington and Pyongyang.

How is South Korea being affected by the US-Israel war on Iran?

South Korea is facing an economic crisis. The country relies on the Gulf supplies via the Strait of Hormuz for 60 to 70 percent of crude imports, meaning supply is being severely hit. The war has led to soaring inflation, causing the Korean won to fall to a 17-year low.

Seoul therefore has an interest in freeing up the strait. However, under Korean law, the government will require parliament’s approval before a military deployment, although some governing party members could oppose it.

Retail employees in Los Angeles working irregular schedules, called in for shifts with just a few hours’ notice, got some relief years ago in the form of a city law requiring large retailers to give them notice of their schedules at least two weeks in advance.

Now, that 2024 law could be expanded to encompass the city’s fast-food industry, whose precarious workforce — largely women from immigrant communities — has long raised concerns over unstable schedules that they say make it difficult to plan their finances, child care, medical appointments and other obligations.

The L.A. City Council’s economic development and jobs committee late last month approved the ordinance, which also would establish a mandatory six-hour paid training to educate workers on minimum wage laws and other labor protections. It goes to the full council for a vote on Tuesday.

The proposal is backed by a statewide union of fast-food workers — established in 2024 — that is affiliated with the Service Employees International Union, which for years has helped organize fast-food employee walkouts over wage theft, safety and pay.

The California Fast Food Workers Union‘s organizing director, Maria Maldonado, said workers often are unaware of their rights regarding heat exposure and other risky conditions common in kitchens. The training, she said, would show them they have recourse and city support for reporting employers when conditions are unsafe.

“If you know there is support to enforce the law, we are going to see a difference in the industry,” Maldonado said.

City Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martinez first introduced the ordinance in 2024.

Although worker-friendly proposals usually are ultimately backed by the L.A. City Council, the process often is lengthy, with business interests lobbying against such measures.

The California Restaurant Assn. wrote in a letter to the council that the ordinance would greatly increase costs in a state that already is expensive to operate in and that it unfairly singles out an industry that has long served as a successful pathway to business ownership for minority entrepreneurs.

In the letter, business groups took issue with third parties administering worker training, arguing that labor groups could use them to prime the workforce for union campaigns.

The ordinance would “not only duplicate existing law but also force neighborhood restaurants to pay thousands of dollars so groups with ulterior motives can hold team members as a captive audience,” the letter said.

The group also argued that training would create third-party access to workers’ data even as many immigrant workers are fearful of heightened immigration enforcement, noting that the training might “require employers to disclose sensitive information to outside entities, creating serious privacy risks.”

A report commissioned by McDonald’s, compiled by the firm Beacon Economics and Pepperdine University, surveyed some 1,200 workers in L.A. County and found that a majority, about 70.6%, opposed the proposed paid training, while 29.4% said they would want such training, the survey said.

California’s fast-food industry employs more than 750,000 people and is a growing sector, according to state data. The state fast-food union has argued that local and state protections are crucial.

Strikes resume in Russia and Ukraine after a three-day pause during US envoys’ visits to the countries’ capitals.

Russia has struck Kyiv after a three-day pause in attacks on the Ukrainian and Russian capitals expired, following a visit by two US envoys that yielded no tangible progress towards peace.

Two residential buildings were damaged by Russian air raids early on Tuesday, city officials in Kyiv said. Drones hit buildings in the capital city as well as in the Boryspil and Fastiv districts on the outskirts of Kyiv, according to the State Emergency Service of Ukraine.

An air raid alert, published by the Kyiv city military administration, urged residents to take shelter due to the threat of an “enemy” drone attack.

Following the reported attacks in Ukraine, Russian regional Governor Roman Busargin said a Ukrainian drone attack injured several people after hitting civilian infrastructure in Saratov, nearly 1000km from Moscow. The number of casualties from both incidents remains unconfirmed (621 miles).

Russia and Ukraine pledged to halt strikes on each other’s capitals for three days as Washington dispatched envoys to Moscow and Kyiv. However, fighting continued elsewhere.

Attacks paused after leaders Vladimir Putin of Russia and Volodymyr Zelenskyy of Ukraine announced the ceasefire during the visits by US President Donald Trump’s envoys, Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, to Moscow and Kyiv over the weekend.

Russia’s state news agency TASS confirmed that the three-day suspension Putin had ordered for his forces expired on Monday evening local time.

Witkoff and Kushner held talks with officials in Moscow and Kyiv regarding ending the conflict. Kremlin aide Yury Ushakov called the more than three-hour meeting in Moscow on Saturday “highly useful”.

After talks with Ukraine’s Zelenskyy, Witkoff said: “We’ve had a very meaningful discussion, substantive, important, and we are very encouraged, and we look forward to continuing this as long as it takes.”

Witkoff also raised the prospects of reviving three-way negotiations to end the war.

A White House official told the Reuters news agency that the next steps regarding the war, which Russia began with a full-scale invasion of its neighbour in February 2022, would be announced in the coming weeks.