politics

Health officials in California are defending the traditional childhood vaccination schedule against efforts by the Trump administration to weaken it.

The longstanding childhood vaccine schedule is safe, California’s top health official said, and continues to be recommended by the American Academy of Pediatrics — the nation’s leading group for pediatricians — as well as the other states in the West Coast Health Alliance: Hawaii, Oregon and Washington.

“They’re safe. They’re important for kids to be thriving and healthy in schools,” Dr. Erica Pan, director of the California Department of Public Health and the state public health officer, said of vaccines. And she credited California’s robust vaccine requirements as a condition of enrollment for schoolchildren as a reason why the state so far has kept a lid on the huge outbreaks of measles seen in other parts of the nation.

Her full-throated defense comes after President Trump issued an executive order Monday recommending that the singular measles, mumps and rubella, or MMR, vaccine should be separated into three and that all childhood immunizations should be given at separate visits “to the maximum extent feasible.”

“We want it in three separate vaccinations, given at separate times,” he said during the signing ceremony. “Together, there could be a possibility they’re quite lethal. And separately it looks like they are not at all lethal, but just very effective.”

The American Academy of Pediatrics blasted the order as “unscientific and dangerous,” and criticized comments made by administration officials suggesting a link between autism and vaccines — a claim that has been discredited by many studies.

“Dozens of studies involving millions of people show there is no link between vaccines and autism, and yet federal leaders continue to promote this outdated, disproven idea to scare families,” said the academy’s president, Dr. Andrew Racine.

The Infectious Diseases Society of America has been equally unequivocal.

“The MMR vaccine does not cause autism,” the group says on an online fact page, adding that the measles vaccine prevents thousands of deaths a year worldwide.

Pan said Trump’s executive order does not change vaccine requirements for schoolchildren in California. And insurance companies continue to cover vaccinations for schoolchildren.

When Trump was asked whether there was any evidence for his claims regarding the MMR vaccine, he answered: “No. What I’ve heard is that there are some people that say it is that way, and I say, ‘Well, let’s say there’s a 5% chance of it. Let’s split it up.’ ”

There is no evidence to back up those assertions, medical organizations and mainstream experts say. The first version of the combination MMR shot was approved in 1971, and versions of it have been given to hundreds of millions of children safely over several generations, with more than 90% of children receiving the shot nationally, experts say.

Combining protection against the three diseases has been considered a miracle of modern medicine. Before the vaccine era, hundreds of children a year in the U.S. were either killed by measles or suffered swelling of the brain as a result of the disease. Tens of thousands were also hospitalized each year.

Mumps can cause deafness and inflame the brain, pancreas, testicles, ovaries and breast tissue. And rubella risks causing severe birth defects in pregnant women.

“There is no data supporting doing this in separate shots,” Pan said. “And, in fact, it will take more visits and more pokes in the arm, literally, for children to do this.”

With vaccination rates declining in many parts of the country, measles has resurged in the U.S. in the past two years, resulting in the first child deaths from the disease in 22 years, as well as hundreds of pediatric hospitalizations.

So far this year, there have been 2,566 cases of measles nationwide, which is already more than the 2,289 reported in all of 2025, according to data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The most recent case count is also higher than any calendar year since 1991 — the final year of the nation’s last measles epidemic.

Beyond scheduling difficulties for parents, clinics and doctors’ offices, no company even makes separate immunizations for measles, mumps and rubella, Pan said. “There’s no scientific basis for it. There’s no current availability to do that.”

Trump’s executive order further recommends that children should get vaccinated against 11 diseases, a reduction from the 18 currently recommended by the CDC. The order also suggested that his administration would challenge certain states’ laws that require vaccination as a condition of entry into schools.

California in 2015 enacted a law that strengthened vaccine requirements for schoolchildren. The law ended the ability of parents to cite personal beliefs in seeking to exempt their children from certain vaccinations.

Children can still be exempted and attend school in California if they have a medical reason. And California law does allow parents to skip immunizations for children who are enrolled in independent study programs and do not receive classroom-based instruction.

California’s law was passed following a large measles outbreak centered at Disneyland that resulted in 131 cases in California alone, and spread to six other states, as well as Canada and Mexico. At least 12 of those infected in California were infants too young to be vaccinated.

After the law passed, California saw its measles vaccination rates improve. In 2013, the vaccination rate among California kindergartners hit a low of 92.3%, below the 95% threshold doctors say is needed to keep a lid on outbreaks. Since the law took effect, that rate has ranged between 95.1% and 97.3%.

The most recent figure was 96.1% for the 2024-25 school year.

States that have suffered large measles outbreaks have poorer vaccination rates. South Carolina, for instance, has been home to an outbreak linked to about 1,000 cases — considered one of the largest in the U.S. in more than 30 years. That state’s most recent kindergarten measles vaccination rate was 91.2%, well below the optimal 95% threshold.

There are five immunizations required as a condition of entry into kindergarten in California: polio; DTaP, which protects against diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis; hepatitis B; MMR; and varicella, or chickenpox.

California’s most severe measles epidemic in recent memory occurred between 1988 and 1990 — an era before health officials recommended children receive a second dose of the measles vaccine. That epidemic led to 75 deaths in California and more than 3,000 hospital admissions. A major problem officials identified at that time was that poor parents could not afford vaccinations for their children. One of the nation’s largest outbreaks in 1989 involved mostly preschool-aged children in Los Angeles.

There was also a national measles epidemic between 1989 and 1991, which, according to a study published by the CDC, led to 166 suspected measles deaths and more than 11,000 hospitalizations.

Recommendations to give children a second dose of the vaccine, and the introduction of the federal Vaccines for Children program in the 1990s to help parents pay for immunizations, were credited with driving measles circulation down to historic lows.

Doctors say that it has been striking to see the U.S. go from a place where ongoing domestic measles transmission was effectively eliminated in 2000 to being on the precipice of the disease regaining a foothold.

“We’re seeing in this country cases, hospitalizations and deaths higher than we’ve seen in over 30 years,” Pan said. “We did such a great job — we eliminated measles by the year 2000, and now we’re going backward.”

According to a new report, the United States federal government has taken a massive step back from its role in protecting civil rights across the country.

On Thursday, the nonprofit Human Rights Watch issued a 112-page analysis of the government’s civil rights activities from January 2025 through the start of 2026, a period that captures the opening months of President Donald Trump’s second term.

The report concludes that the federal agencies responsible for stopping discrimination have largely been gutted of their staff.

Additionally, top-down directives by Trump have de-emphasised the federal government’s role in protecting civil rights across the country, according to the group.

“While claiming to protect all Americans, the administration is rolling back systems that communities have long turned to for relief,” Trey Walk, a researcher at Human Rights Watch, said in a statement.

Which agencies did the report analyse?

The report examines four key agencies within the federal government dedicated to civil rights.

They include the Civil Rights Division at the Department of Justice, the Office of Civil Rights at the Education Department, the Fair Housing Office at the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

Human Rights Watch spoke with current and former federal workers, lawyers, complainants and community groups who had been involved in cases alleging discrimination.

It also reviewed court filings and federal agency directives that illustrated the pivot in priorities under the second Trump administration.

What is the history of civil rights enforcement in the federal government?

The federal government’s role in civil rights protections goes back centuries, starting with the US Constitution.

In 1791, Congress ratified an addition to the country’s founding document that established civil protections like the freedom of religion. Those first 10 amendments became known as the Bill of Rights.

Over the decades, more amendments were added, most notably after the US Civil War, to guarantee rights like equal protection under the law.

While the Constitution contains explicit language about religion and race, critics point out that there is no language that confers equal protection based on sex or gender.

The history of the Department of Justice is closely entwined with the need to enforce civil rights law after the Civil War.

Created in 1870, the department addressed several needs, including a push to professionalise and centralise the country’s federal law enforcement. But it also helped prosecute violent white supremacist groups at a time when local authorities, particularly in southern states, sometimes refused to.

The US Civil Rights Movement, starting in the 1950s, also spurred a surge in federal infrastructure. It was the Civil Rights Act of 1957, for instance, that established a dedicated civil rights division within the Justice Department.

How did federal policy change under Trump?

Trump’s second term ushered in a backlash towards policies broadly considered to be part of the “diversity, equity and inclusion” movement, or DEI.

That movement gained popularity in the early 2020s, particularly after the murder of George Floyd, an unarmed Black man, sparked a public reckoning over racial inequality.

Trump, however, has called DEI “racially discriminatory”. During his campaign for a second term, he argued that there was a “definite anti-white feeling in this country”.

Since starting his second term, Trump has sought to undo policies that his administration argues give unfair advantages to demographics like women and minorities.

In addition, federal agencies like the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division suspended certain cases they were pursuing, including some involving sexual harassment and transgender rights.

New investigations were opened instead, including against the footwear giant Nike, which was accused this year of discrimination against white employees.

In May 2025, the Department of Justice also announced it would halt investigations and reform agreements involving police departments accused of racial discrimination.

Such measures had been taken in places like Louisville, Kentucky, and Minneapolis, Minnesota, after public outcry over the police killings of unarmed Black people, including Floyd.

What did the Human Rights Watch report find?

The report chronicled an overall weakening in the federal bodies designed to protect civil rights.

Job cuts and resignations were part of that trend. The Civil Rights Division at the Department of Justice, for instance, boasted about 365 lawyers in January 2025, when Trump took office.

By the end of that year, three-quarters of those lawyers had left the agency, an exodus driven by what Human Rights Watch called a “coordinated effort to undermine career staff”.

A spokesperson for the Justice Department told Al Jazeera its Civil Rights Division “remains dedicated to protecting the rights of all Americans”.

The department also said it had added 100 personnel since the 2025 departures.

According to the spokesperson, the Civil Rights Division is currently focused on “protecting religious liberty, Second Amendment rights, and women’s and girls’ spaces, standing against illegal race-based policymaking and DEI, and defending parents’ fundamental right to direct their children’s upbringing and education”.

What other offices were affected?

Other agencies in the Human Rights Watch report likewise saw a decrease in their ranks as well as a reduction in their civil rights work.

The Office of Fair Housing went from 31 staffers to 11 by mid-2025. Some 115 complaints prepared by the office and referred to the Justice Department for possible legal action were quashed, according to the report.

At the Department of Education, the Office for Civil Rights initially had 568 workers across 12 offices when Trump took office in 2025. Within a few months, seven of those offices were shuttered, and half of the civil rights-related workers were gone.

Between May and September 2025, the office dismissed about 90 percent of the nearly 10,000 complaints it received, a higher rate than it would have in the past, the report said.

What has been the impact of these changes?

Human Rights Watch found that many victims and communities grappling with discrimination no longer had the benefit of a federal agency to help them in their cases.

One community housing group told Human Rights Watch that the Department of Housing and Urban Development no longer responds in a timely fashion to reported instances of anti-LGBTQ discrimination.

Some federal agencies also appear to have walked away from their role in monitoring discrimination and overseeing reforms around the country, according to the report.

The Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights has a long history of investigating discrimination claims and working with school districts to enact change.

But Human Rights Watch observed that the office has largely stopped dealing with complaints under Trump.

While the Office of Civil Rights required policy changes or monitoring in response to 336 cases in the first half of 2024, only 59 cases received such a remedy over a similar period in 2025.

In Springfield, Massachusetts, for instance, parents complained after white students held a mock “slave auction” on the social media platform Snapchat, where they bid for the sale of their fellow Black students. That case is no longer being pursued by the Office of Civil Rights as of last year.

A new poll shows Lula leading Bolsonaro, but the gap has closed ahead of Brazil’s high-stakes presidential election.

Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva has retained his lead over right-wing Senator Flavio Bolsonaro ahead of October’s election, according to a new poll.

A Quaest survey published on Friday found Lula would take 43 percent of the vote in a simulated run-off, against 40 percent for Bolsonaro, effectively a statistical tie given the poll’s two-point margin of error.

The result marks a narrowing from an earlier Quaest poll on August 5, which had put Lula ahead by a wider five-point margin, 44 percent to 39 percent.

In a first-round scenario, Lula leads more comfortably with 38 percent, followed by Bolsonaro at 31 percent. Three other candidates trail far behind: Renan Santos and Ronaldo Caiado each polled at 4 percent, and Romeu Zema at 2 percent.

Under Brazilian electoral rules, if no candidate secures more than half the valid votes in the first round, the top two finishers advance to a run-off.

Flavio Bolsonaro, the eldest son of former President Jair Bolsonaro, has emerged as the standard-bearer for Brazil’s right after his father was barred from running in the election.

The elder Bolsonaro was ruled ineligible for office after Brazil’s top electoral court found he had abused his power while in office. He was later convicted separately over a plot to overturn his 2022 election loss to Lula.

The poll, conducted by Quaest between August 10 and 13, surveyed 2,004 people and was commissioned by the Brazilian media group Globo.

Lula launched his re-election bid on August 2 at the Workers’ Party convention in Sao Paulo, casting himself as a defender of Brazilian “sovereignty” as pressure from the administration of United States President Donald Trump looms over the race.

He called for increased defence spending and pledged to shield Brazil’s reserves of rare earths and other critical minerals from foreign control. “I want to be prepared, so that no one invades this country,” he said.

He warned that China, the US and France would not get access to Brazil’s mineral wealth without respecting the country’s sovereignty. He also told the convention: “In Brazil, we do not accept anyone sticking their nose where it does not belong.”

Trump has maintained close ties with the Bolsonaros. In June, Lula warned Trump not to interfere in the presidential race.

“Don’t meddle in the Brazilian elections, because the Brazilian elections are a Brazilian problem, just as American elections are their business, not mine,” Lula said.

With the race tightening two months out from the vote, the results so far have shown a competitive presidential race, even as Lula continues to hold a narrow structural advantage heading into the final stretch of the campaign.

WASHINGTON — A person has been arrested in connection with vandalism at the World War II Memorial on the National Mall in Washington, D.C., U.S. Atty. for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro announced Friday.

Pirro announced on X that her office was filing two felony charges against Melissa L. Farris. Pirro said the felony charges are “Depredation Against Property of the United States and Destruction of Veterans’ Memorials.” The offenses carry penalties of up to 10 years in prison.

On Thursday, the words “Clean hands dirty $” were found painted on the monument and bubbles filled a fountain.

“Vandalizing our World War II Memorial is a despicable attack on a sacred monument honoring the Americans who fought and died for our freedom. Those Americans include my father and grandfather,” Pirro wrote.

A woman identified on her Facebook page as Melissa Lovewell posted a video Thursday in which she is seen taking cans of spray paint from her bag and then painting the monument.

“I will wait here to be arrested for spraying our veterans’ fountain,” she says. “It was me, I’m doing it, it’s on camera.”

In a video posted Friday, the woman, who in a separate post said she had been in Washington for three weeks, said she was turning herself in.

The arrest warrant filed in the case indicated that witnesses took pictures of the vandalism occurring, which were circulated among U.S. Park Police officers.

One officer recognized the suspect as someone they arrested Aug. 10 “for unlawfully camping on federal property” just blocks away. She livestreamed that arrest, the warrant said.

The suspect was identified by her Kentucky driver’s license as Melissa L. Farris, of Elizabethtown, Ky.

Farris was expected to be arraigned Friday. The public defender’s office said she was not yet listed in the system and had not been assigned an attorney.

The incident sparked harsh rebukes from Pirro and President Trump and comes after the president blamed damage to the nearby Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool on vandals, without providing evidence. That case prompted charges against multiple people, which were dropped when Pirro said evidence showed the damage came from botched repairs after Trump’s renovation at the site.

“Our beautiful World War II Memorial was just hit by Spray Painting Vandals,” Trump said on Friday on his Truth Social site. “First the Reflecting Pool, now this.”

The Interior Department said that the U.S. Park Police were on the scene following the Thursday vandalism and an investigation was ongoing. “The public should know we will find the person responsible for this disgusting act,” the department said.

The Friends of the National World War II Memorial, a nonprofit organization that helps maintain the site, said: “There are many places in our country for expression, debate, and disagreement. A national memorial honoring those who served and those who never returned home should never be used as a canvas for vandalism.”

The Veterans of Foreign Wars called the vandalism “an act of profound disrespect, a slap in the face to the veterans who served and sacrificed and to the families who carried that burden at home.”

A former Olympian was charged in late July with deliberately damaging the Reflecting Pool, but the Justice Department later moved to dismiss that case, saying evidence prosecutors had received refuted the idea that vandals were to blame.

Trump sharply criticized Pirro’s assessment that damage to the Reflecting Pool was the result of shoddy construction and not the work of vandals, as he claimed.

The case dismissal was an embarrassing setback for a Justice Department that had previously echoed Trump’s claims and billed the prosecution as accountability for damage at a Washington landmark, a pet project of Trump. Pirro’s decision to drop the case was also a rare moment during Trump’s second term of an aide or political appointee openly defying him.

Fields writes for the Associated Press.

President Trump’s goal of ending gender-affirming care is not improper and cannot be the basis for quashing a subpoena issued by the Justice Department against a provider of medical treatment for transgender youth, a divided federal appeals court ruled Friday.

The Justice Department announced last year that it had issued more than 20 subpoenas to doctors and clinics that provide gender-affirming care as part of an effort to investigate healthcare fraud. Federal judges have quashed many of the subpoenas as illegitimate efforts to intimidate providers into ending care.

In a 2-1 decision, a panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the efficacy and long-term risks of the treatments are “uncertain,” and the president has the power to align the Justice Department’s enforcement priorities with his broader policy goals.

“Every President has law enforcement priorities, just as every President has signature policies (often, the former are components of the latter),” wrote Judge Carlos Bea.

Bea, a nominee of Republican President George W. Bush, was joined in the opinion by Daniel Bress, a Trump nominee. They reversed a ruling that quashed the subpoena against telemedicine provider QueerDoc, sending the case back to the district court to consider other arguments.

The subpoena seeks QueerDoc’s personnel files, billing documents, communications with drug manufacturers and records of patients who were prescribed puberty blockers or hormone therapy, among other information, according to the 9th Circuit decision.

American Civil Liberties Union attorney Adrien Leavitt, who represented Washington state-based QueerDoc, said the ACLU would continue fighting the subpoena in district court. QueerDoc has also argued the subpoena is overbroad and burdensome. The Justice Department has said it has reason to believe the company may be misleading people about puberty blockers and hormones.

“We’re ready to continue defending one of the most fundamental principles of healthcare: every patient’s right to confidential medical care,” Leavitt said in a statement.

He said the San Francisco-based 9th Circuit was the first appeals court to weigh in on the subpoenas.

Trump has signed one executive order defining sex as only male or female — and as unchangeable — and another that seeks to end federal funding of the care for patients under 19. The latter order also directs the Justice Department to “prioritize investigations” into violations of a drug safety law by “any entity that may be misleading the public about long-term side effects of chemical and surgical mutilation.”

Gender-affirming care includes a range of medical and mental health services to support a person’s gender identity, including when it’s different from the sex they were assigned at birth. It encompasses counseling, medications that block puberty and hormone therapy to produce physical changes as well as surgeries to transform chests and genitals, though those are rare for minors.

Most major medical groups say access to the treatment is important for those with gender dysphoria and see gender as existing along a spectrum.

The 9th Circuit majority called discussion around gender-affirming care “an unsettled scientific debate” and said the Trump administration could also justify its opposition to the treatment on ethical or philosophical grounds.

Thanawala writes for the Associated Press.

A U.S. soldier’s wife who spent more than a month in federal immigration detention said she is back home after officers removed her from a deportation flight to Brazil.

This month, the Associated Press highlighted Maisa Lopes Eliaser as one of dozens of spouses or parents of U.S. troops who had been detained after President Trump’s administration rolled back protections for military families amid its push for mass deportations. Following the AP’s reporting, a group of Congressional Democrats launched an investigation into deportations of military service members and their families.

Eliaser was placed on a deportation flight Wednesday to her native Brazil when Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers on the plane received a phone call about her mid-flight, she told the AP. She said she was then asked by an ICE officer whether she wanted to continue on to Brazil or go back to the U.S.

“Who made the call? We don’t know,” said Eliaser’s husband, Army Staff Sgt. Alexis Jaramillo. “But someone made the phone call, and then she came back.”

While other detainees were led off the plane in Brazil, Eliaser stayed on board and returned to Louisiana. ICE officers told her she was “famous” because there were videos about her case, she said.

The Department of Homeland Security, which oversees ICE, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Homeland Security previously told AP that Eliaser, 32, had been issued a final order of removal by an immigration judge on April 15, after overstaying the tourist visa she used to enter the U.S. in 2019.

Jaramillo, a 43-year-old aviation operations specialist who has served in the Army for more than a decade, took leave of his duties training soldiers in Fort Polk, La., to care for Eliaser’s 5-year-old son after she was detained on July 8.

Jaramillo said Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly of Arizona, a former Navy officer, also looked into his wife’s case. Kelly’s office didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

“This family’s reunion is proof of what’s possible when people set politics aside and do right by those who serve,” Danitza James, who heads Repatriate Our Patriots, a nonprofit that supports military families facing deportation and helped with Eliaser’s case, said at a news conference. “We won’t stop until every military family facing detention gets the same chance at justice.”

Eliaser, who was detained in July while at an immigration appointment, has another appointment scheduled for Monday in an effort to reopen her case and advance her green card application. Jaramillo is a U.S. citizen, and the couple have been married since 2024.

Jaramillo said he has been told that there will be no further issues with Eliaser’s case, but the couple is still concerned.

“We are really, really, really scared about it, but you know, we have to go,” Jaramillo said. “I told the person who gave me the appointment, ‘Hey sir, don’t play with me, I’ve been through a lot.’”

Eliaser said she still is struggling to sleep and is afraid she will be sent back to the detention facility, where she said she was treated like “an animal.”

“It felt like I was in a nightmare,” Eliaser said. “I could not believe what was happening until I returned to my house. Day by day, I’m trying to recover from this trauma.”

There have been similar interventions in other high-profile cases over the last year. Annie Ramos, 22, was detained by immigration authorities as her husband, an Army staff sergeant, was preparing to deploy. She was released after a public outcry. Around the same time, U.S. Sen. Tammy Duckworth, a Democrat and combat veteran, told the AP that she personally contacted Homeland Security to call for the release of Deisy Rivera Ortega, the immigrant wife of an Army sergeant who did three tours in Afghanistan, after learning about her case from advocacy groups. She eventually was released from custody.

Brook and Riddle write for the Associated Press.

Members of the US Congress have called for a probe into conditions amid reports of sailors attempting to jump ship.

United States President Donald Trump has dismissed concerns about conditions on board the USS Abraham Lincoln during its lengthy deployment as part of the US-Israel war with Iran.

Speaking to reporters on Friday, Trump rejected the assertion that the families of those on board the aircraft carrier are worried about their loved ones. “No, they’re not,” Trump said.

When asked if the aircraft carrier had been deployed too long, Trump replied: “No, no, no, not nearly enough.”

His remarks follow a series of reports this week, documenting supply shortages and mental health strain on the USS Abraham Lincoln. That includes accounts of individuals attempting to jump from the ship.

The aircraft carrier left in November from a base in San Diego, California, and it has since been involved in January’s military operation against Venezuela and, more recently, the war against Iran.

Its deployment was expected to end in May, but that timeframe has been extended. It has spent more than 250 days at sea without a port stop, setting a record for the US Navy. More than 5,000 sailors and Marines are housed on board.

Several US lawmakers have since called for an inquiry into conditions on board the ship. One Democratic senator, Ruben Gallego, has also called on the Navy to allow a bipartisan delegation to visit the ship to assess the state of affairs.

Still, the Trump administration has repeatedly denied worsening conditions on the USS Abraham Lincoln.

On Friday, a US official told Al Jazeera the Navy had “not observed an increase in suicidal ideations or attempts aboard the ship”.

The official added that there were five chaplains, one psychologist, one social worker, three “behavioral health technicians”, and one “embedded integrated prevention coordination (EIPC) counselor” on board the vessel. There is also an emotional support dog on board.

‘What military objective?’

While Trump downplayed the length of the deployment, he did confirm reports that the aircraft carrier will be swapped out in the near future.

“That ship is moving right now or very shortly, and it’s being replaced with another very similar ship,” Trump said on Friday.

In a letter to Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth earlier this week, Senator Richard Blumenthal, a Democrat, asked for information on conditions on the boat, including what metrics the Navy was using to measure the mental health of the crew.

“What military objective is the continued deployment of the Lincoln intended to achieve in Iran, and how does the Department assess whether the carrier’s continued presence is necessary to accomplish that objective?” he asked.

The focus on conditions aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln come as diplomatic efforts to end the US-Israeli war in Iran show no signs of breakthrough. The war began with a US and Israel-led offensive on February 28.

In June, the US and Iran signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) that called for an immediate pause to the fighting.

But last month, the memorandum collapsed amid a dispute over the Strait of Hormuz, a key waterway for trade.

The subsequent escalation saw the US re-impose its naval blockade on Iranian ports and Iran constrict traffic through the strait once more.

Iran has since focused its diplomatic efforts on reaching an agreement with Oman over travel routes in the waterway, which is a key artery for oil, natural gas, fertiliser and other goods.

Democratic lawmakers and military families are pressing the Pentagon for answers after reports emerged that thousands of sailors aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln have endured food shortages, plumbing failures and severe fatigue during deployment that has stretched more than 260 days.

The roughly 5,000-person crew, which left San Diego in November and has been stationed in the Middle East to support the U.S. war against Iran, has spent a record amount of uninterrupted time at sea. Now, families of those on board have begun speaking out publicly, describing concerns about mental health and supply issues aboard the aircraft carrier.

Since those reports — which Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth characterized as “completely misrepresented” — the U.S. military announced plans to send the USS George Washington, a Pacific-based aircraft carrier, to relieve the USS Abraham Lincoln.

But when asked Friday for a reaction, Trump downplayed families’ concerns and characterized the length of the deployment as “not nearly long enough.”

The president’s remarks stand in contrast to the concerns raised by lawmakers and military families, including reports by the Military Times and the Stars and Stripes that sailors tried to jump overboard as the deployment kept going.

“The plans in the works to relieve the USS Lincoln are not enough,” Rep. Mike Levin (D-San Diego) wrote in a letter to Hegseth on Thursday. “We need clear and honest information from the Department of Defense about the operational failures that led to the problems aboard the USS Lincoln to ensure this never happens again.”

Morale aboard a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier already is difficult to maintain without a record-breaking stint, said Julie Roland, a retired veteran Navy lieutenant commander who worked briefly on the USS Lincoln.

Between the lack of sun below deck for some nonpilot personnel and rooms packed with triple-bunk beds, the conditions on vessels like the Lincoln can be difficult to bear. Although service members expect such difficulties, the situation on the USS Lincoln raises additional concern among sailors, Roland said.

“I know what months at sea does to a person even when the ship has hot chow and working plumbing,” Roland said. “The warrior ethos shouldn’t have to include bravely facing water contamination. … Even warfighters need basic care.”

Roland added that she was not surprised to hear complaints of poor living conditions from sailors on board, given that their few days of reprieve for port call constantly were being delayed. She said she received videos showing trash being tossed overboard because of broken incinerators, heard stories of a lack of proper medical supplies and kept in touch with one sailor who detailed his mental health deterioration as days dragged on aboard the Lincoln.

“The magnitude of difference between official information from the Department of Defense and firsthand reports from the crew should be troubling, and may have serious implications about what else the Pentagon may be withholding regarding the conflict in Iran,” Roland added.

In his letter to Hegseth, Levin said the Trump administration needs to answer concerns from military families and loves ones about the conditions aboard. He said he heard concerns about moldy showers, broken toilets, lack of hot water, lack of access to fresh produce and supply shortages.

Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-San Diego), who serves on the House Armed Services Committee, also demanded answers from U.S. military leaders on what she called “horrific” reports of the conditions aboard the ship.

Tensions over the situation also prompted military leaders to hold in-person and virtual meetings last week with the families of the sailors and Marines. Both meetings were combative, according to a recording obtained by MS NOW.

During the in-person meeting at the Naval Air Station North Island in San Diego, Navy leaders were unable to tell families when their loves ones would be relieved from duty. Spouses, in turn, asked what was being done to address issues of mental health and exhaustion, MS NOW reported.

Concerns about mental health deteriorating on these types of deployments are well-founded.

A study of nearly 1,000 sailors published in the journal Military Medicine in January 2025 found that service members aboard Navy ships suffer the highest rates of “serious psychological distress” compared to other branches of the U.S. military. Among the reasons are “unique stressors, such as poor habitability, noise and demanding scheduled that leave inadequate time for sleep and rest,” the study found.

Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said the USS Abraham Lincoln was not an “isolated case” and demanded an inquiry.

“Recent carrier deployments have repeatedly stretched beyond their original anticipated duration, suggesting that extended deployments may be becoming a feature rather than an exception of the Navy’s force-generation model,” Blumenthal wrote.

Hegseth told reporters on Thursday that “some deployments are longer than others.”

“What they do in those high seas and those austere conditions with less port calls, it’s incredible. And Americans don’t understand what it’s like to do that,” he said, while adding that he wants “folks rotated as quickly as possible.”

In a message to the crew aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln, Hegseth said: “We’re going to do everything we can for you. We are so grateful for the dedication of that crew and others.”

The US has not confirmed the revocation, which comes amid crackdown on Mexican politicians with alleged ties to cartels.

The son of former Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador has accused the United States of revoking his visa in a politically motivated manoeuvre.

Andres Manuel Lopez Beltran made the allegation late on Thursday in a public letter addressed to US President Donald Trump and posted on social media.

He accused US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and his deputy, Christopher Landau, of ordering the visa revocation.

“There is no reason whatsoever to justify such an arrogant action,” Lopez Beltran wrote to Trump. “It is worth emphasising that these officials have no evidence against me regarding any immoral or criminal act.”

The US State Department has not publicly responded to his claim.

His letter comes as part of a trend of visa revocations from the US. Several Mexican officials, across the political spectrum, have had their visas cancelled, as part of what the Trump administration characterises as a broad crackdown on individuals linked to drug cartels.

Who is Lopez Beltran?

The 39-year-old Lopez Beltran is a prominent politician in Mexico, having recently stepped down from the leadership of the left-wing Morena party.

His father founded the party in 2011 and went on to govern Mexico as its president from 2018 to 2024.

Currently, another Morena politician, Claudia Sheinbaum, holds the presidency, and Morena boasts decisive majorities in both chambers of Mexico’s Congress.

Lopez Beltran is expected to run for a seat in the Chamber of Deputies next year.

For much of his father’s presidency, Lopez Beltran stayed out of party politics, instead focusing on his chocolate business.

However, he was elected Morena’s secretary of organisation in September 2024, just weeks before his father left office.

In his letter, Lopez Beltran called the revocation “a ⁠⁠crude and perverse act”, saying US officials target Mexican politicians by falsely labelling them as “communists”, “threats to US security” or “narco-terrorists”.

Sheinbaum reacts to letter

On Friday, Sheinbaum said she was unaware of any investigations by Mexican prosecutors into Lopez Beltran.

“This amounts to interference ⁠⁠in Mexican politics,” Sheinbaum said at her morning news briefing. “I see no other reason for it.”

Sheinbaum has also walked a careful line in responding to the Trump administration’s hardline approach to cartels and cross-border crime, pledging to cooperate.

But she has also said she would protect Mexico’s sovereignty from any foreign interference, and while she has welcomed collaboration with US intelligence, she has reportedly declined Trump’s offers of US military action on Mexican soil.

Last month, she also rejected a statement by the head of the US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) that her government has ties to organised crime, a frequent Trump talking point.

In April, she decried the US’s decision to charge Sinaloa Governor Ruben Rocha, another Morena party official, with drug trafficking and weapons-related offences.

She has argued that the indictment lacks evidence and that such investigations should be left to Mexican prosecutors.

The Trump administration has accused Rocha’s campaign of having worked with the powerful Sinaloa Cartel, the criminal organisation it considers a “foreign terrorist organisation”.

Rocha announced in May that he would take a temporary leave of absence from his position as governor to defend himself from the charges.

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration has largely ended a pathway to citizenship for DACA recipients who marry U.S. citizens.

President Trump tried, unsuccessfully, to end DACA during his first term. This week’s action reflects his administration’s ongoing focus on the Obama-era program that shields from deportation hundreds of thousands of immigrants, often referred to as Dreamers, who were brought to the U.S. as children.

“It was inevitable that what Trump was going to do in office this time was to embark on a massive delegalization mission,” said Karen Tumlin, director of the Justice Action Center in Los Angeles. “That’s what this is.”

Tumlin was referring to a ruling by an administrative immigration court that was published Thursday.

The ruling concerns a travel provision afforded to recipients of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, the program created in 2012. The provision allowed DACA recipients to travel in ways other people without legal status cannot.

DACA isn’t technically a form of legal status, though its recipients are granted work permits.

For immigrants who entered the U.S. illegally, leaving the country or being deported triggers a penalty — many are banned from coming back into the U.S. for a decade.

Most people who qualify for legal residency, or a green card, have to serve that 10-year ban before they can apply for a green card, which can lead to citizenship.

But DACA recipients, under the travel provision called advance parole, could leave the U.S. for school, work or humanitarian reasons. When they returned through an airport or border, the stain of their original unlawful entry was erased.

With the penalty wiped away, a DACA recipient married to a U.S. citizen or who had another way to obtain legal residency could start that process for a green card without delay.

Thursday’s ruling by the Board of Immigration Appeals does away with that benefit.

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services spokesman Zach Kahler said the decision confirms a “straightforward principle” that departing the U.S. has meaning.

“The immigration laws enacted by Congress impose consequences when someone who has accrued unlawful presence, leaves the country and later seeks admission, including when that departure occurs under advance parole,” he said. “U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services will ensure that immigration filings are decided based on the laws, regulations, and binding legal precedent that govern each case.”

Immigration attorneys and other advocates quickly convened Thursday to determine how the ruling will affect immigrants.

Tumlin said some DACA recipients can still safely travel with advance parole, while for others — particularly those with deportation orders — it would be too risky to leave. She said DACA recipients should consult with an immigration attorney before traveling.

“For over a decade, I could reassure my clients that traveling on Advance Parole was a safe option,” Shilpa Malik, an immigration lawyer in Florida wrote Thursday on X. “What was once a vital protection is now gone.”

Under the ruling, having the travel document may no longer protect certain DACA recipients when they return from their trips abroad, because leaving could expose them to the years-long ban.

The decision also makes obtaining green cards more difficult. Tumlin said some DACA recipients could qualify for waivers that allow them to avoid the years-long reentry ban, but the waivers are granted under limited circumstances.

The latest federal data show there are 455,000 DACA recipients in the U.S. as of March, with about 126,000 in California.

According to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, 45,447 DACA recipients were approved for advance parole as of Aug. 21, 2017.

About 76,000 DACA recipients had become legal residents as of July 31, 2019, most after marrying a U.S. citizen, according to the research service. It’s unclear how many DACA recipients have obtained advance parole or green cards since then.

Path2Papers, a project at Cornell Law School, analyzed 1,600 consults and estimated that around 60% of DACA recipients would be subject to the 10-year ban.

Republicans have viewed advance parole as an abuse of the immigration system.

The office of Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) blasted the provision, saying in 2017 that “the Obama administration allowed thousands of DACA recipients to exploit an immigration law loophole to obtain green cards.”

Last year, Grassley introduced a bill to guarantee that it would no longer be used by immigrants seeking to adjust their legal status. This week’s ruling essentially accomplishes that goal.

The immigration appeals board’s decision applies to future travel. People who previously traveled and returned to the U.S. won’t be affected and could still adjust their immigration status.

Tumlin said Thursday’s decision is yet another effort to change the goalposts for DACA recipients by an administration that has resorted to ending the program “through death by a thousand cuts.”

The Department of Homeland Security has arrested hundreds of immigrants with DACA, and in a February letter to U.S. senators, then-Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said the agency had deported 86 DACA recipients between Jan. 1 and Nov. 19, 2025.

One of those was Maria de Jesus Estrada Juarez, a Sacramento mother who was deported a day after her green card interview. A federal judge later ordered the agency to bring her back to the U.S.

The pay gap between executives and their employees has widened from 2024 to 2025, with chief executives making 312 times what their median worker earned, according to the AFL-CIO, the largest coalition of labour unions in the United States.

That’s up from the previous rate of 285 times the median worker salary for executives working in the companies listed on the S&P 500 index.

The figures were released on Thursday as part of the AFL-CIO’s annual Paywatch report, which tracks the growing gulf in wages.

The labour federation warned that the divide in pay risks having broader effects for the global marketplace. If CEOs are focused on increasing their paycheques, the AFL-CIO warned that they may be less concerned about the stability of their companies — or of the economy overall.

“Excessive CEO compensation contributes to growing economic inequality,” the AFL-CIO wrote. “It creates the risk that CEOs will make short-term decisions to maximize their pay, even if it hurts the company’s long-term health.”

In determining the executive-to-worker pay ratio, the AFL-CIO explained it had to exclude one outlier: the world’s richest man, Elon Musk.

In 2025, Musk made $158bn as CEO of the electric vehicle company Tesla — 2.5 million times more than the company’s average employee. His salary even dwarfed the company’s revenue for the year, which was $94bn.

That same year, the carmaker reported a 3 percent decline in revenue. Sales dropped by roughly 9 percent, as some consumers boycotted the company over Musk’s participation in President Donald Trump’s second administration.

Tesla also faced 11 vehicle recalls last year, accounting for 745,000 of its cars.

For the first half of 2025, Musk served as the head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), an office Trump established to oversee cuts to the federal workforce and spending.

He also oversees multiple business interests beyond Tesla, including the social media platform X and the rocket company SpaceX.

In June, the initial public offering (IPO) for SpaceX’s stock briefly ballooned Musk’s net worth, and he was listed for a short time as the world’s first trillionaire.

Including Musk, on average, the pay for a chief executive in an S&P 500 company jumped 1,700 percent last year to reach $3.1bn.

Excluding Musk, the increase was slightly more modest. Whereas in 2024 the average CEO pay was roughly $19m, in 2025 the figure increased by 21 percent to $22.8m.

That sum is nearly double the average compensation package for chief executives a decade ago.

Uneven distribution across industries

Different industries, however, saw varying ratios in executive-to-worker income.

The biggest pay disparity was in the manufacturing sector, with the average CEO making $696m and the average worker in the industry making slightly more than $93,000.

That amounted to a more-than-11,000 percent difference in their salaries. Tesla marks the biggest disparity in the sector, helping to drive the pay ratio higher.

The industry with the second-highest pay ratio was the arts, entertainment and recreation sector, where executives make an average of $24.6m, compared to an average of around $25,000 for median workers. The difference was a ratio of 1,057 to one.

One of the most stark examples of a pay divide was the coffee chain Starbucks, where the average worker made $17,279 — only $1,629 higher than the federal poverty line in 2025.

With CEO Brian Niccol earning north of $30m last year, experts estimate the pay ratio in the company is 1,794 to one.

The AFL-CIO’s report also showed that Amazon, Dollar Tree, FedEx, McDonald’s and Walmart workers are the largest recipients of social assistance programmes.

Amazon CEO Andy Jassy made 51 times more than the company’s average employee, while McDonald’s CEO Chris Kempczinski made 1,082 times more than the average worker at the Chicago, Illinois-based fast-food giant.

Trump posts surge in earnings

Thursday’s report also examined Trump’s income during the first year of his second term in office.

Trump’s campaigns for public office have largely hinged on his record as a businessman, and he has pitched himself to voters as uniquely qualified to address the country’s economic needs.

But critics have accused him of profiting from the presidency, whether through trademarks or policies favourable to his business interests, including cryptocurrency.

The AFL-CIO report found that Trump’s income surged 254 percent last year, over what he made in 2024, before his return to the White House.

The $2.2bn worth of income he earned in 2025 stemmed largely from World Liberty Financial, the Trump family’s cryptocurrency venture, and the sale of meme coins.

Those earnings are roughly 43,154 times what the median US worker made last year, according to the AFL-CIO. Approximately 37 percent of US adults cannot cover a $400 emergency expense.

This comes as US consumer sentiment slipped 8 percent, with consumers growing more wary of business conditions and the strength of their personal finances, according to a report from the University of Michigan released on Friday.

The labour market is also experiencing a downturn, with the US economy shedding 23,000 jobs in July, according to a monthly report from the US Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).

The Conference Board, a nonprofit think tank focused on the economy, also found last month that confidence in the state of the US economy is trending downward for the third consecutive month.

WASHINGTON — President Trump’s administration has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to allow the White House to resume construction on its $400 million ballroom project while it appeals a lower court’s order to halt the work.

Trump’s solicitor general on Friday petitioned the high court to suspend last week’s decision by a three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

The divided panel ruled last week Trump must stop the White House ballroom’s construction because Congress has not approved the project. The panel’s majority said Trump doesn’t have the unilateral authority to build a 90,000-square-foot ballroom where the White House’s East Wing stood before he ordered its demolition last fall.

The lower court suspended its own ruling for two weeks to give Trump’s Republican administration time to appeal to the Supreme Court. The solicitor general asked the Supreme Court to rule on its stay petition before the appeals court panel’s decision takes effect on Aug. 21.

“This case involves an extraordinary and unlawful injunction that will halt the ongoing construction of the integrated military complex, including a totally secure ballroom space, at the East Wing of the White House, which is vitally required by national security,” the solicitor general wrote.

The lower court’s 2-1 decision sided with historic preservationists who sued to stop construction of the ballroom.

The administration argues that the president, not Congress or the courts, has unimpeded authority to renovate the White House. The current state of the project, essentially an open construction site, makes it harder to protect the White House, the Justice Department contends.

The administration also says the National Trust for Historic Preservation does not have the legal right, or standing, to sue over the ballroom.

During an appeals court hearing in early June, an administration lawyer defended a broad view of presidential control over iconic public facilities.

The government could bulldoze the Statue of Liberty and the White House, Justice Department lawyer Yaakov Roth said in response to a hypothetical question, and the descendants of immigrants who came through Ellis Island and the enslaved people who built the White House would not have standing to sue.

Kunzelman writes for the Associated Press.

Aug. 14 (UPI) — A federal trade court threw out a legal challenge to President Trump’s executive order scrapping the so-called “de minimis” exemption loophole under which goods worth less than $800 could enter the United States duty free.

Three judges sitting in the U.S. Court of International Trade ruled Thursday that Trump had the legal authority to invoke the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to eliminate de minimis, in contrast to his April 2025 “liberation day” global tariffs which it ruled were unlawful, a decision the Supreme Court subsequently upheld.

“In reaching this conclusion, we find that the President’s power to ‘nullify [or] void . . . exercising any . . . privilege’ does not run afoul of separation of powers principles,” they wrote in their judgment.

The judges found the removal of the exemption did not constitute “an exercise of the power of the purse” and “is not an exercise of the power to legislate.”

In the global tariffs case, the Supreme Court came to the opposite conclusion, ruling that Trump could not act without approval from Congress.

Trump hailed Thursday’s ruling as a “big win” for his resolve to get rid of what he said was a “ridiculous giveaway… one of the most DESPICABLE loopholes in American Trade Policy” that he said was costing the U.S. Treasury more than $10 billion in revenue from tariffs that it would otherwise receive.

“For years, Foreign Shippers could send packages worth up to $800 into our Country, DUTY FREE, NO TARIFF, far less scrutiny. It became a giant loophole for TARIFF Cheats — and a Pipeline exploited by Fentanyl Traffickers, Counterfeiters, and other Criminals shipping dangerous and illegal products into America. The numbers were staggering. In 2024 alone, de minimis cost America an estimated 10.8 BILLION DOLLARS in foregone TARIFF Revenue, and an astonishing share of narcotics and counterfeit seizures came through the de minimis channel,” said Trump.

Detroit Axle, a Michigan-based auto-parts distributor, brought the de minimis case last year on grounds Trump had overstepped his authority under IEEPA. The firm’s legal counsel did not immediately comment on the ruling.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection netted more than a billion dollars in 2025 from the ending of de minimis and the court ruling clears the way for it to continue until it is permanently eliminated when Trump’s One Big Beautiful tax cut and spending bill kicks in next July.

SACRAMENTO — Pauline Davis, the former “Lady of the Lakes” who as an assemblywoman for 24 years guided some of California’s most significant water development proposals through the Legislature, is dead at 78.

Her family said Davis died Thursday at her Sacramento home. She had been under treatment for asbestos-caused lung cancer the last three months.

Her Assembly career was the longest of any woman in either house of the California Legislature. Based in Portola, she represented all or part of 12 rural Northern California counties from the Pacific Ocean to the Nevada border.

In her 12 terms, she served under five governors and eight Assembly speakers and was described by former Speaker Leo T. McCarthy as “the most effective legislator in representing her district that I have ever seen.”

She first sought an Assembly seat in 1952 after the death of her husband, Assemblyman Lester T. Davis, who had served since 1947. She operated a Sacramento gift shop for several years after her retirement in 1976.

Davis was born in a Czech-American community in Nebraska and did not begin learning English until elementary school.

A former railroad dispatcher and telephone operator, Davis was known as the “Lady of the Lakes” for her advocacy of recreational and water development projects in the state’s rural areas.

She coauthored the $130 million Davis-Grunsky Act for local water development in the 1960s. She also wrote laws adding recreation and natural resource protection to the State Water Project and creating a system of roadside rest areas for motorists.

In her first year in the Legislature, she authored a bill requiring equal pay for equal work by women. It never got out of committee.

From 1960 to 1966, Davis was the sole woman in the 120-member Legislature.

“Chauvinism?” she answered when a reporter asked her in 1974 about life in the male-dominated institution. “I don’t give them a chance. I’m so accustomed to being on my own, I just don’t give them a chance.”

She is survived by her son, State Appeals Court Justice Rodney Davis of Carmichael; two daughters, Karen Mier of Sacramento and Marlene Wagner of Citrus Heights; seven grandchildren and four great grandchildren.

An exhibit highlighting her legislative career is scheduled next month in the rotunda of the state Capitol.

Aug. 14 (UPI) — Reform U.K. leader Nigel Farage was re-elected to parliament on Friday, five weeks after he resigned his seat specifically in order to ask voters to back him amid a probe by parliamentary standards authorities into a $6.8 million gift he received before the 2024 general election.

With a turnout of 44.4%, Farage won the Clacton byelection with a 12,784 vote majority — winning about 1,000 votes more than when he won the seat the first time around in the July 2024 general election — but Thursday’s vote was boycotted by all main political parties who dismissed it as a political stunt by Farage to distract from the investigation.

As a result, the election was contested by an array of more than 35 parties including Reform rival Reclaim, independents and several novelty candidates including Count Binface, who came second with 9,455 votes, and three from the Monster Raving Loony Party that included Nick the Incredible Flying Brick, Howling Laud Hope and Baron von Thunderclap.

“The result in Clacton speaks for itself,” Farage wrote on X.

Farage didn’t attend the count or declaration of the result at Clacton Leisure Center early Friday with a party spokesman citing “a credible threat against him.”

Speaking at a victory party nearby Farage said the county police had advised him to stay away.

“I’m sad to say that after 33 years of being a candidate in active politics, I’ve been advised tonight by Essex Police that there is an organized campaign to disrupt and degrade the result. I’m damned if I’m going to stand on a stage having won a resounding victory, a ringing endorsement of all that I’ve tried to fight for and you’ve tried to fight for and be demeaned and humiliated by nobodies,” said Farage.

The BBC said Essex Police had told it the force had not warned any candidate not to attend.

Runner-up Count Binface, whose real name is Jonathan Harvey, told reporters he had sought and received assurances from Essex Police that there was no threat to the election events and it was 100% safe to proceed as normal.

“Let’s all meet for part 2 of the Clacton byelection, coming soon to a leisure centre near you,” said Harvey, referencing the possibility of doing it all again in a few months if the House of Commons votes to suspend Farage in the event he is found in breach of parliamentary rules.

A suspension of 10 or more parliamentary business days would automatically trigger a recall petition that requires the signatures of at least 10% of registered voters in the Clacton constituency to remove Farage and trigger another byelection.

Neither the sanction from the parliamentary standards commission, censure from his fellow MP’s or a recall would make him ineligible to try to win the seat back.

Farage is being investigated for allegedly failing to inform parliamentary authorities about a $6.8 million gift from Christopher Harborne, a British cypto billionaire based in Thailand.

Farage denies the allegations and says he has followed all the rules, arguing he was not required to declare the money because it was before he decided to run for parliament and it was a personal contribution to pay for his private security.

He is also under scrutiny, although not by the parliamentary standards commission, over his ties to convicted U.S. fraudster George Cottrell, with Reform acknowledging Farage accepted security, staff and accommodation from Cottrell in the run up to the 2024 election.

The developments come three weeks after London’s Met Police launched an investigation into payments to Reform U.K. allegedly from George Cottrell’s mother, Fiona Cottrell, that are alleged to have been routed via a company owned by the party’s deputy leader.

California voters are sharply divided over a ballot measure to impose a one-time tax on billionaires to help fund healthcare programs, a proposal already triggering a fierce and expensive political fight as the November election approaches, according to a poll released Friday.

More than half of likely voters oppose a separate measure that would require Californians to provide identification when voting and election officials to verify registered voters are U.S. citizens, the survey showed.

The two controversial proposals are among the 14 ballot measures Californians will decide in the Nov. 3 election. Proposition 40, which would impose the tax on billionaires’ assets, has reached the precipice of nationwide debates over economic inequality and liberal overreach. The Republican-led voter ID measure, Proposition 39, emerged amid President Trump’s baseless claims of widespread voter fraud.

Among likely California voters, 48% support Proposition 40, compared with 41% who oppose the proposed wealth tax and 11% who are undecided, according to a new poll by UC Berkeley’s Institute of Governmental Studies that is co-sponsored by The Times.

Proposition 40’s failure to crack 50% support among voters at this point in the electoral cycle is a potential red flag, said IGS poll director Mark DiCamillo. Traditionally, Californians who are undecided on ballot measures tend to vote against them, he said.

“It’s got an early lead, but it’s not a very large lead, and it’s not a majority,” he said. “Usually, for ballot propositions, you want the yes side to be above 50%, and that’s not where it is right now.”

The proposal was crafted by a healthcare workers’ union to compensate for an estimated $100 billion in federal healthcare cuts approved by Trump and congressional Republicans that it argues will cause devastating harm to millions of California’s most vulnerable residents. Proposition 40 would impose a one-time 5% tax on the assets of billionaires who resided in California as of Jan. 1, with some exceptions.

Democrats and their allies are splintered over the proposal. Some, including Gov. Gavin Newsom, argue it will prompt the wealthy to flee California, further harming its volatile budget, which is dependent on the state’s richest residents. The California Democratic Party and leading progressives support the measure, with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) calling it a modest tax necessary to help Californians struggling because of cuts imposed by Republicans to pay for tax breaks for the wealthy.

While Democratic voters mostly support the ballot measure and Republicans largely oppose it, younger Californians are far more likely to say they plan to vote for it compared to seniors. Minorities, women and lower-income voters are also more supportive of the measure than white voters, men and Californians who earn at least $200,000 annually. Union households support the measure, while non-union families are evenly divided about it.

Turnout will be pivotal, DiCamillo said. While younger Californians are historically less likely to vote, especially in midterm elections, if they are energized by the issues championed by socialist Democrats, including New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, that could boost the wealth tax proposal’s prospects.

The survey found that voters are far less aware of two competing ballot measures aimed at nullifying the proposed wealth tax.

Proposition 41 would prohibit new taxes from being exempt from voter-approved state spending limits and require audits of new levies. Proposition 42 would ban new taxes on personal property and some retroactive state taxes. If the wealth tax is approved and either of the countermeasures receives more votes, the proposed billionaires’ tax would not go into effect.

The poll found that 35% of likely voters supported Proposition 41, with 37% opposing it. On Proposition 42, 40% of voters backed the measure, and 37% opposed it.

Roughly one out of every four of the voters surveyed on those two measures said they were undecided. DiCamillo said he expects that to change as the anti-wealth tax campaigns, which are expected to be well-organized and well-funded, ramp up their messaging to voters.

“There’s going to be a lot of campaigning, apparently on the no side especially. So we’ll see,” he said. “But you know, I think it’s confusing to voters in some ways.”

Among the other controversial measures on the Nov. 3 ballot is Proposition 39, a measure pushed by Republicans that would require all voters in future elections to show government-issued identification every time they vote in person or provide a special PIN or the last four digits of their Social Security number when submitting mail-in ballots.

The measure would also require the California secretary of state and county election officials to verify that registered voters are U.S. citizens by “using government data,” which according to supporters could include information in the federal Social Security Administration database, jury summons information and other government records.

Just over half of California’s likely voters oppose the ballot measure, while 42% support it. Californians are predictably divided along partisan lines. Eight out of 10 Democrats oppose the proposal, while more than nine out of 10 Republicans support it. Voters not affiliated with either major political party oppose it 54%, while 36% support it.

Proponents of voter ID contend that such laws prevent election fraud and, along with proof-of-citizenship mandates, prevent noncitizens from voting. Opponents say ID mandates threaten the fundamental constitutional rights of Americans who do not have the mandated documentation readily available, and that the restrictions are unnecessary given that voting by noncitizens is rare and already outlawed in the U.S.

The Republican-led push for the voter ID initiative comes at a time of growing distrust in the integrity of the electoral process nationwide, a wariness intensified by President Trump’s baseless claims that the 2020 election was stolen from him and false assertions that droves of undocumented immigrants are swaying elections with illegal votes.

“It’s a very traditional Democrat versus Republican split,” DiCamillo said, adding that it would be surprising to see major shifts in the numbers. “Once these things get solidified in terms of the partisan splits, without any other kinds of splits like we’re seeing in Prop. 40, you know that’s usually the dominant theme.”

The Berkeley IGS/Times poll findings are based on an online survey in English and Spanish of 4,207 California registered voters, 2,310 of whom are considered likely voters, from Aug. 3-9. The results are estimated to have a margin of error of about 2.5 percentage points in either direction in the likely voter sample, and larger numbers for subgroups.

The Trump administration has moved heavy-duty construction equipment into Big Bend National Park and started work on a border security project despite bipartisan concern about damage to the environmentally sensitive area of west Texas.

Bulldozers and other machinery appeared last week in the remote park, which sits about 300 miles southeast of El Paso and includes one of the least crossed stretches of the U.S.-Mexico border, according to Laiken Jordahl, a national public lands advocate for the Center for Biological Diversity, which has sued the Biden and Trump administrations seeking to halt border-wall construction.

Jordahl said he and other activists watching the work have seen bulldozers plowing through vegetation “clearing a path for the barriers, the wall or whatever is going in.”

U.S. Customs and Border Protection “is building an access road, improving existing roads, installing detection technology and placing vehicle barriers in limited, strategic locations,” Commissioner Rodney Scott, the agency’s top official, said in an email Thursday. “We are securing this park to protect its legacy — keeping it safe, secure, and pristine so American families can enjoy the beauty of our country, free from fear of cartel activity.”

The Trump administration is moving ahead with the project over the objections of not just environmental activists and others opposed to the crackdown on immigration, but also local residents, many of them Republicans who otherwise support President Trump, as well as retiring GOP Sen. John Cornyn. They note that the rugged terrain — mostly desert with steep ravines and scrubland covered in creosote bushes and prickly pear cactus — serves as a natural barrier from anyone trying to cross from Mexico, making the infrastructure unnecessary.

They say the construction and equipment will mar the landscape and imperil the animals who live in the park, including javelinas, ringtails, mountain lions and desert bighorn sheep.

In June, Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin formally waived all environmental laws and reviews that could otherwise slow any work in the park.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott’s office has said he supports using every tool available to help deter illegal immigration, including deploying technology in rugged and isolated areas such as Big Bend.

Trump has long pledged to build a wall along all of the roughly 2,000-mile U.S. border with Mexico, though Customs and Border Protection has repeatedly said it wouldn’t build his preferred 30-foot barrier in the environmentally sensitive park.

Earlier this year, the administration issued a $1.7-billion contract for the project in Big Bend. The vehicle barriers set to be installed are typically 5-foot steel posts set a few feet apart and intended to block cars or trucks from crossing.

The park is part of the Border Patrol’s Big Bend Sector, which has for decades been one of the least crossed areas along the whole of the border. In June, agents there made 148 arrests. Since Oct. 1, the start of the government’s fiscal year, agents have made 1,509 arrests, about 1.5% of all apprehensions along the Mexican border, according to Customs and Border Patrol arrest data.

Brandon Herrera, the GOP candidate for a House district that includes the park, met with White House and Department of Homeland Security officials in March to pitch a less-invasive “alternative solution.”

In a letter this month, Cornyn asked Mullin to meet with local officials who have voiced concerns over the project, citing complaints about its effect on the region’s natural beauty, wildlife, cultural sites and economy. Cornyn wrote that his “constituents believe that the 1,000-foot riverbank cliffs and remote Big Bend terrain offers its own source of deterrence for any illegal migrants crossing into the United States.”

James Talarico, a Democratic state representative running to succeed Cornyn in the U.S. Senate, echoed the Republican’s concerns and called the project irresponsible spending.

“This monument to corruption represents wasteful, irresponsible government spending that no Texan asked for, enriching wealthy contractors without making Texans one bit safer,” he said.

Texas’ Big Bend region relies on tourism as an economic driver, with more than 568,000 visitors to the national park in 2025. Local businesses in Terlingua, a small gateway town west of the park, have revolted against the proposed wall, with workers at one restaurant wearing shirts that read “No Al Muro” — No to the Wall.

Caldwell and Lovinger write for Bloomberg.

Pyongyang has accused the US of pushing the world ‘to the brink of nuclear war’.

North Korea has denounced major United States-South Korea military drills set to start next week as a provocation that heightens tensions on the Korean Peninsula.

The US-Japan-South Korea military cooperation is turning into a nuclear alliance, and North Korea will respond to a new level of threat with a new level of deterrent, a spokesperson for North Korea’s Foreign Ministry said on Friday, according to Pyongyang’s Korean Central News Agency (KCNA).

Pyongyang routinely denounces military drills in the south as a provocation that heightens tensions.

The drills – named “Ulchi Freedom Shield” – are due to start on August 17 and will last until August 27. They will incorporate exercises to counter drones, GPS disruption, and cyberattacks as the US and its allies adapt to North Korea’s evolving capabilities.

“The US announced that the forthcoming exercises are quite different from the ones of the past five years and intended to master the ability of fighting a war on the basis of the new aspects of modern warfare,” the North Korean Foreign Ministry spokesperson said in the statement.

“It is our consistent principle of ensuring security to respond to a new level of a threat with a new level of a deterrent,” the statement, published by KCNA, added.

Lessons learned in Russia-Ukraine

North Korea sent an estimated 12,000-15,000 soldiers to fight for Russia in its war against Ukraine, and the country is now thought to be preparing the deployment of another 10,000.

Thousands died, but the deal provided North Korea with valuable battlefield experience, as well as payment in arms, energy and direct financial support, according to reports.

Colonel Ryan Donald, spokesperson for the US and South Korean Combined Forces Command, said this week that North Korea’s deployment to the European war had changed the threat his soldiers may face on the Korean Peninsula.

“They’ve taken those lessons they learned there and brought them back to North Korea,” he told reporters. “Our training accounts for that threat.”

Pyongyang’s Foreign Ministry statement said the US-South Korea drills are being staged “at a time when military and political situation is becoming more serious with each passing day in Europe, the Middle East and other parts of the world”.

North Korea also said on Friday that it would further strengthen its nuclear deterrence, accusing the US of lowering its threshold for nuclear weapons usage and pushing the world “to the brink of nuclear war”.

On Wednesday, North Korea fired a ballistic missile towards the sea off the Korean Peninsula’s east coast, just six days after firing another missile.

The Ulchi Freedom Shield drills will include 18,000 South Korean soldiers and counterparts from the 28,500-strong US contingent in the country.

Profile

RON UNZ

* Born: Sept. 20, 1961, Los Angeles

* Residence: Palo Alto

* Current position: Full-time candidate for governor, on leave from managing his small software company.

* Education: Bachelor’s degrees in physics and history, Harvard University. Phi Beta Kappa. Recipient of a Churchill Science Fellowship to Cambridge University in England, where he studied quantum gravitation under Stephen Hawking.

* Career highlights: In the late 1980s, Unz took a leave of absence from Stanford University, where he was enrolled in a Ph.D. program in theoretical physics. He worked as an associate at a New York City mortgage finance company. In 1988, he founded Wall Street Analytics Inc., a financial services software company.

* Family: Unmarried

The Record

Ron Unz has no public record and brings an unusual, if not unique, background to his quest for California’s top public office. He has a strong record of academic and intellectual achievement. His IQ has been estimated at 214–what one expert calls “one in a million”–and as a teen-ager he won first place in the national Westinghouse talent search competition for a paper on black holes. He is a physicist as well as an expert on the Spartan naval empire.

After working for a New York City mortgage finance company, Unz founded his own small firm that sells specialized computer programs to Wall Street firms. The firm has become highly successful during the last six years and has made Unz a wealthy man.

Although he has no political experience, he says he has long had an interest in politics and has contributed hundreds of thousands of dollars to conservative think tanks and causes.

Unz says his years in the business world have prepared him well to govern California. “In terms of the sectors of the American economy that create wealth, I have more experience than the other four candidates together, times a factor of a few,” he said.

The Speech: In His Own Words

I believe that the Republican Party stands for clear principles and firm ideas–smaller government, lower taxes, fewer regulations and traditional values–and that Pete Wilson stands for nothing except his political ambition.

Over the past three years, Pete Wilson and the Democrats have enacted the largest state tax increase in American history, deepening our recession and destroying jobs. Pete Wilson and the Democrats have led our Golden State to the brink of ruin. A choice between Pete Wilson and the Democrats means no choice at all for the people of California.

Unlike Pete Wilson, I have not abandoned the mainstream of the Republican Party . . . and its basic principles. . . . Under Ronald Reagan, these were the ideas which swept the nation and the world. I am the Republican candidate for governor.

Unlike Pete Wilson, my affiliation with the Republican Party is not hereditary: I come from a family of Democrats. But when that former Democrat Ronald Reagan transformed the Republican Party into the party of the ordinary working people of America, it became my party.

Unlike Pete Wilson, I didn’t attend an elite prep school, but received my education in the public schools of Los Angeles, back when they still provided an outstanding education for all of our children, rich and poor alike. It was this education which provided me with the tools of opportunity I needed to achieve economic success. But today, I am disgusted by the decay of our school system.

Unlike Pete Wilson, I don’t believe we should raise taxes again and again, until our entrepreneurs and small businesses are faced with some of the highest tax rates in America, driving our jobs and prosperity to other states. . . .

Unlike Pete Wilson, who has been on government and political payrolls for almost 30 years as a lifelong career politician, I come from the private business sector, the part of our economy which actually creates the wealth, provides the jobs and pays the taxes. I understand the value of money and the long hours required to earn it. I reject the waste that is routinely accepted by the special interest politicians who don’t understand what it’s like to earn a living in the real world.

Unlike Pete Wilson, who has little or no comprehension of the industries of tomorrow, I come from a scientific and technological background. I know that California’s future prosperity cannot be based merely upon jobs to build and maintain Pete Wilson’s endless array of future prisons.

I know that the high-technology industries of tomorrow such as computers, telecommunications, biotechnology and the entertainment industry can be the foundation of California’s prosperity. I see that the widespread adoption of telecommuting could make our freeway traffic jams a thing of the past. . . .

My grandparents came to California in the 1920s and 1930s as poor European immigrants, willing to work hard to provide a better life for their children.

I am a native-born Californian who remembers the hope and optimism and endless sense of possibility which the California Dream once meant to us. Our state has the finest climate, enormous natural beauty, and tremendous scientific and technological resources unequaled any place in the world.

The primary obstacle on our road to recovery is the deep failure of our own overgrown state government. Join with me in overcoming this one obstacle, and together we can restore the Golden State which we all remember.

Rick Cole and his new employer, the city of Azusa, have one thing in common: an image problem.

Cole, who will start work as Azusa’s city manager in July, is a former Pasadena mayor known for his razor-sharp mind and switchblade tongue.

Azusa is an often overlooked town with a name derived from the Shoshone word for skunk. Landmarks include a landfill and a quarry, and its commercial core is so bleak that an AM/PM convenience store ranks among the city’s top sales tax generators.

“It’s really a desperate hour. We’ve become the caboose of the foothill communities,” said Cristina Madrid, mayor of the eastern San Gabriel Valley city of 45,000.

Madrid said the council needs to look beyond conventional solutions and people to turn the town around. She assesses Azusa’s condition with the raw honesty and resolve she says is needed, and many say Rick Cole exemplifies. “As the caboose, we want a jump-start, not incremental progress,” Madrid said.

In Cole, the council has picked an activist and politician who was a leader in turning Pasadena’s blighted downtown into one of Southern California’s most popular shopping and entertainment districts. They also are handing over the city’s management to someone who has never worked as a city administrator. But in the process they are saving money, paying Cole $30,000 less than the $130,000 his predecessor made.

It is a choice the council made with its eyes wide open, picking Cole from an applicant pool otherwise composed of career bureaucrats. “We went way out of the box,” Madrid said.

Cole’s lack of administrative experience has some wondering how he will handle the intricacies of managing a city staff of 265 while also answering to a City Council.

“It is a hard adjustment from assistant city manager or department head to city manager, it will be even harder for a guy with no experience,” said Alhambra City Manager Julio Fuentes, who was Azusa’s city manager in the late 1980s.

Before entering politics, Cole was involved in civil rights and anti-Vietnam war activities, and had been a journalist. While city managers tend to be quiet and careful not to offend their council bosses, Cole has always been blunt about his beliefs.

*

As Pasadena’s vice mayor, he criticized the Tournament of Roses for appointing a direct descendant of Christopher Columbus as grand marshal of the 1992 Rose Parade. Citing the injustices of the 16th century Spanish conquest, Cole blasted the choice as one made by “an organization totally controlled by aging white men.”

But Cole has proven that he can compromise as well as provoke. A year after his swipe at the tournament, Cole lauded the group for including minorities and women in its executive committee.

Even in praising Azusa for selecting him, Cole reveals his distaste for the status quo. “I’m always amazed at how cautious and dull big institutions tend to be. When in doubt, they tend to promote mediocrity,” he said, contrasting Azusa’s boldness with what might be expected in most cities.

Since leaving the Pasadena council in 1995, Cole has been the regional director of the Local Government Commission, a nonprofit urban policy research group. As city manager, he will have a chance to practice the kind of community-building policies that he has been preaching. “It’s a chance to walk the walk,” Cole said.

Pasadena City Councilman and former Mayor William Paparian, who served on the council with Cole, said it will be a tough, if not impossible, move. Paparian doubted that he himself could make the switch to administration. “I could probably bluff my way through it for a while, but that’s about it.”

Paparian, who calls himself an “ex-friend” of Cole’s, nevertheless said Cole has helped to transform Pasadena and his vision could benefit Azusa. Paparian said that as an activist, Cole was a leader in bringing about district-based City Council elections, which enabled minorities to win council seats. “He brought social consciousness to the city that had been the conservative bastion of Southern California,” he said.

Born in Royal Oak, Mich., in 1953, Cole has lived in Pasadena since his childhood, and has captured public attention since his teens. At Blair High School he wrote for an underground newspaper called Iskra, named for a paper edited by Lenin, and was active in civil rights and antiwar protests.

He worked on the 1972 presidential campaign of antiwar Republican Rep. Paul N. (Pete) McCloskey and the unsuccessful congressional campaign of Brooklyn antiwar activist Allard K. Lowenstein.

Cole resigned from a job as a student liaison for the Pasadena Unified School District after conservative board members accused him of using his position to organize demonstrations, an allegation that he denies.

At 21, Cole entered American University in Washington, D.C. A year later, he transferred to Occidental College in Eagle Rock.

*

As a student journalist, Cole and classmate John Hinrichs won a Los Angeles Press Club award for an investigative story on the denial of a promotion to the college’s only black professor. Cole and Hinrichs made headlines when the college accused them of stealing documents from the administration building. The students were eventually cleared.

After college, Cole earned a master’s degree in journalism from Columbia University and founded the Pasadena Weekly before winning election to the council in 1983.

Despite his seemingly radical past, Cole defies ideological categories. He has written columns expressing admiration for figures as disparate as Jonathan Jackson, his Blair classmate slain in a famous 1971 gun battle at a San Rafael courthouse in which a judge also lost his life, and the late Robert Finch, a Republican lieutenant governor and Nixon Cabinet member.

“I was raised in a Republican home, and my father always said ‘It’s not important what you think, but that you think,’ ” Cole said.

Cole sees his outspokenness and his background as a politician who had to rally public support as strengths that Azusa needs. “You have to tell people straight what the problems are, and include them in the solutions. That’s the Rick Cole approach,” he said.

Speaking of Azusa, Cole might well be addressing his own challenges in his new job. “There are real problems and image problems. The image problems are the tougher ones,” he said.

Azusa’s real problems are a $1-million-a-year deficit, a decaying downtown and lagging community involvement, Cole said.

Like several cities in the east San Gabriel Valley, Azusa’s population has soared in the last 20 years, growing 50% since 1980. Cole hopes to get more of the newer residents involved in civic affairs through such efforts as seeking neighborhood participation in developing a new general plan.

Cole has been a critic of depending on large retail stores for tax revenue, and wants to try other approaches.

*

Instead of commercial real estate development, Cole wants to focus on improving Azusa’s downtown. He hopes to turn Azusa Avenue, the main thoroughfare, into a two-way street to provide easier access to the stores lining it.

The city also should find marketing niches for commercial development, he said. One such niche would be the city’s location abutting the Angeles National Forest. Cole wants to secure funding to reopen California 39 through the forest, which has been closed since the 1960s. Cole said that reopening the road would bring more people through the city and could fuel businesses such as ski and camping shops.

Cole may have a ready solution for some of the city’s woes. Rosedale, an 1,800-unit housing development, has already been proposed and is working its way through the approval process.

Azusa’s leaders hope that Cole also will be an ace in the hole. “He’s a high-risk, high-gain guy,” Paparian said. “Azusa’s gambling that with him they’ll come down on the gain side.”