request

When major disasters strike, Americans are routinely waiting weeks — or even months — to receive presidential approval for aid. And if they live in a state that didn’t support President Trump, chances are greater that aid will be denied.

Since taking office last year, Trump has approved about 65 requests for major disaster declarations and denied more than two dozen others from states, tribes or territories seeking federal financial assistance following hurricanes, tornadoes, storms, floods and fires.

Trump has taken longer on average to approve disaster requests than any other president, according to an Associated Press analysis of data dating back to 1989, when a federal law setting new parameters for disaster determinations was implemented. And no other president has such a disparity in denials between states that supported him politically and those that did not.

The delays and denials come as Trump’s administration contemplates a makeover of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which administers disaster aid. Major disaster declarations are intended for events that are beyond the resources of state and local governments.

Trump is saying yes to Republicans more than Democrats

During his second term, Trump has denied a greater percentage of disaster requests than any president dating to 1989. Those denials have not been evenly distributed among states.

Trump has approved 80% of the disaster requests from Republican governors but only about 60% from Democratic governors, according to the AP’s analysis of FEMA data.

The discrepancy is even more apparent when analyzing major disaster declarations based on presidential elections. Trump has approved more than three-fourths of the requests from states that voted for him in the 2024 election but less than half the requests from states that did not. Although there are federal criteria for disaster aid, decisions ultimately are at the president’s discretion.

A batch of denials earlier this month included four Democratic states — Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York and Rhode Island — seeking federal aid for a February snowstorm.

“The President’s denial is part of a pattern of extreme partisanship as he tries to shift a heavier economic burden onto blue states. Disaster aid should be merit-based, not politicized,” Rhode Island’s Democratic U.S. Senate and House members said in a joint statement.

White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said in a statement that “there is no politicization to the President’s decisions on disaster relief.”

During his first term, Trump actually approved a greater share of requests from states that had opposed him than those that supported him.

Yet no other president had such a wide partisan divide in disaster declarations as currently exists under Trump. Obama approved 87% of the disaster requests from Democratic governors during his second term and 79% from Republican governors, but Obama’s approval rate was identical for states that voted for and against him.

When requests are denied, individuals, insurers and local governments are left to shoulder the costs themselves.

Trump is waiting longer to declare disasters

Since Trump assumed office last year, it’s taken him an average of a month and a half to approve major disaster declarations after receiving a request from the governor or chief executive of a state, territory or tribe, the AP found. Because it can take several weeks after a disaster for officials to inspect the damage and submit a request, the total wait time often has exceeded two months.

By comparison, Trump approved major disaster requests in an average of about three weeks during his first term, a pace similar to President Joe Biden. Their predecessors — Presidents Barack Obama, George W. Bush, Clinton and George H.W. Bush — all had average disaster approval times of less than two weeks.

All presidents have taken longer to approve some requests. But that’s become the norm in Trump’s second term. Of Trump’s approvals, 70% have taken at least a month — up from about one-quarter of requests during Trump’s first term and Biden’s administration, and fewer than 10% under their predecessors.

Jackson said that Trump conducts a more thorough review than any administration before him, “ensuring American tax dollars are used appropriately and efficiently by the states to supplement — not substitute — their obligation to respond to and recover from disasters.”

The longer the approval process takes, the longer people must wait to receive federal aid for daily living expenses, temporary lodging and home repairs. Delays in major disaster declarations also can hamper recovery efforts by local officials uncertain whether they will receive federal reimbursement for cleaning up debris and rebuilding infrastructure.

FEMA nominee is pledging faster decisions

FEMA has had four different temporary leaders since Trump took office in January 2025. One of those, Cameron Hamilton, is awaiting Senate confirmation as the agency’s permanent director.

During a Senate committee hearing last month, Hamilton said he would try to speed up disaster declaration decisions and reimbursements. He also pledged to ensure that FEMA is objective, fair and reasonable in reviewing disaster declaration requests and making recommendations to the president.

Hamilton, a former Navy SEAL, had been fired as FEMA’s acting director in May 2025 after publicly disagreeing with Trump’s idea of dismantling the agency. His reemergence signals that Trump now may support changes to FEMA instead of an outright elimination of the agency.

Panel’s recommendations could lead to more denials

A council appointed by Trump has recommended a series of changes to FEMA that would shift greater responsibility to states, potentially reducing the number of major disaster declarations and the amount of federal money paid out.

The council suggested revised criteria to qualify for presidential declarations, including a prerequisite of annual minimum expenditures by states, territories and tribes.

Another recommendation, which would require congressional approval, would reduce the federal government’s share of the disaster aid from a minimum of 75% to 50% of the costs, leaving state and local governments more to cover. For governments approved for assistance, federal funding could get there quicker — within 30 days of a federal disaster declaration, instead of waiting months or years for reimbursements that are based on proof of expenditures.

For individuals, the council recommended consolidating several different types of aid into one payment targeted for those whose homes are uninhabitable.

Lieb and Wildeman write for the Associated Press.

New Mexico says the withheld records are critical to its criminal investigation into alleged abuse at Epstein’s ranch.

The United States Department of Justice (USDOJ) has said it cannot provide the state of New Mexico with unredacted files pertaining to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

In a social media post on Wednesday, it argued that doing so would violate existing law.

“Federal law, court orders, and privacy protections for victims and witnesses do not allow us to release millions of unredacted documents,” the department wrote.

The post came in response to pressure from New Mexico’s Department of Justice, led by state Attorney General Raul Torrez, a Democrat.

In a letter released to the public last week, Torrez accused the administration of President Donald Trump of obstructing his state’s investigation by refusing to release critical documents.

But the US Justice Department (USDOJ) pushed back in Wednesday’s post, claiming Torrez’s request fell outside its authority.

“We will continue to follow federal law and the court orders that are in place,” the Justice Department said. “To capitulate to their demands would be to break federal law. Is that what the [New Mexico attorney general] is suggesting?”

The Epstein scandal has been a pressure point for the Trump administration since the Republican leader began his second term in 2025.

Critics say the administration has fallen short of its commitment to transparency, with some speculating that officials may be shielding powerful figures featured in the Epstein files.

Trump himself was part of Epstein’s social circle. He has denied any knowledge of Epstein’s crimes.

Epstein is accused of directing a sex-trafficking ring whose victims number in the hundreds.

In 2019, during Trump’s first administration, federal prosecutors called on New Mexico to suspend its investigation into Epstein’s activities in the state to allow their own case to proceed.

Epstein, however, died that year while in jail. His death was deemed a suicide.

New Mexico reopened its investigation in February after the second Trump administration released millions of records under the Epstein Files Transparency Act.

In his letter this month, Torrez explained that his office has spent more than five months seeking the unredacted federal records it needs to proceed with its probe.

But the office has yet to receive all the files it requested, Torrez said. He called the Justice Department’s actions a “deliberate choice not to cooperate”.

“Every day the USDOJ withholds these records, the case that could be brought on behalf of New Mexico survivors becomes more difficult to make,” Torrez wrote.

“Witnesses relocate and become unreachable, memories already strained by years of trauma and silence continue to fade, physical and documentary evidence degrades or is lost.”

New Mexico is examining allegations that women and girls were trafficked to Epstein’s Zorro Ranch, a sprawling property he owned south of Santa Fe from 1993 until his death.

Documents released by the US Justice Department in January include an unverified tip about videos of sexual abuse and the alleged burial of two foreign girls on the property.

Survivors like the late Virginia Giuffre have also made allegations about sexual assault and other crimes taking place on the ranch. State officials say those allegations were never fully investigated.

The dispute comes amid growing scrutiny of the Trump administration’s handling of the Epstein files.

The administration continues to face questions about whether it fully complied with the Epstein Files Transparency Act, passed in November.

It required the Justice Department to publish its Epstein-related records within 30 days, with limited redactions to protect victims.

Millions of files were eventually released, many with heavy redactions, while the identities of some victims were exposed.

WASHINGTON — Dozens of people held at a sprawling Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in Texas say they were either beaten by guards or witnessed others being beaten, according to a new report issued by legal and human rights advocates.

The 84-page report issued jointly Wednesday by Human Rights Watch and the American Civil Liberties Union also says men and women held at Camp East Montana, located at the U.S. Army’s Fort Bliss in El Paso, recounted being denied necessary medical care, forced to live in filthy conditions and fed inedible meals. Detainees also said they were prevented from contacting their lawyers or family members.

Of the 71 detainees contacted over a five month period, 64 — about 90% of those interviewed — said they had either personally been assaulted by the staff or had seen others physically abused, according to the report.

“ICE’s Camp East Montana is a human rights disaster,” said Angélica César, a fellow at Human Rights Watch and the ACLU who was a lead researcher for the report. “The U.S. government should shut it down, conduct independent investigations into all abuses and deaths in custody, and put an end to mass deportations and mandatory immigration detention.”

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

The new accounts of violence and substandard living conditions inside Camp East Montana are consistent with earlier reports by The Associated Press and others. At least three detainees held at the facility since it opened in August have died, including a 55-year-old Cuban migrant who was handcuffed and stopped breathing earlier this year after being held down by guards.

A local medical examiner later ruled that death a homicide and a federal report issued last month said evidence in the case was “missing or destroyed.” That report by the Government Accountability Office found mismanagement by the Department of Homeland Security had created unsafe conditions that contributed to detainee deaths and suffering even as millions of wasted tax dollars enriched contractors.

In March, ICE replaced Acquisition Logistics, LLC, the prime contractor that had been awarded a deal last year worth up to $1.3 billion to build and manage the camp. The Virginia company had no prior experience running an ICE detention facility, had never won a federal contract worth more than $16 million and lacked a functioning website.

The change came as an internal ICE review documented 49 deficiencies, which it defines as violations of detention standards or policies, in areas including the use of force and restraints, security and medical care.

Despite the change in contractors, interviews conducted by Human Rights Watch and the ACLU as recently as last month found serious problems at the camp have persisted.

Detainees recounted degrading and inhumane living conditions that included bathrooms covered in feces, flooded housing units and no access to soap or other basic hygiene supplies, according to the report. They also reported being held indoors for weeks without meaningful access to recreation, sunlight or fresh air.

People also described receiving spoiled food and inconsistent meal schedules, with delays of up to 12 hours between meals.

The report recounts detainees saying that guards beat detainees in response to hunger strikes, requests for medical attention and complaints regarding detention conditions. Several people said that guards imposed collective punishment, striking or assaulting multiple people after accusing one detainee of violating rules, according to the report.

Researchers found that staff pressured and coerced those held there into abandoning immigration claims and accepting removal to third countries if they could not be sent back to their own country. The detainees said they were threatened with violence, criminal prosecution, and indefinite detention if they refused deportation.

In some cases, the report concluded, the circumstances of ICE detention could amount to enforced disappearances, a potential violation of international human rights law.

Human Rights Watch and the ACLU called on the Trump administration to close Camp East Montana and to allow independent investigations into deaths in custody, excessive force, medical neglect and enforced disappearances.

“The abuses documented at Fort Bliss are the predictable outcome of the Trump administration’s mass deportation agenda, its brutal expansion of immigration detention, and the erosion of federal oversight mechanisms,” said César, the lead researcher. “People at Camp East Montana are human beings who deserve to be treated with dignity and protected from harm.”

Biesecker writes for the Associated Press.

The federal government agreed to temporarily hold off on construction of a planned Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in Northern California.

The voluntary pause until Sept. 9 comes after the California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta and Santa Clara County officials sued the Trump administration last month to block the facility from being developed near Gilroy. The lawsuit remains ongoing.

“This pause in the construction, demolition, and development at the site of the challenged ICE facility is a significant step towards protecting our people, our communities, and our environment while the case remains ongoing,” Bonta said in a statement Monday night.

The Department of Homeland Security, which oversees ICE, didn’t immediately reply to a request for comment.

State and local officials believe the facility will be used for short-term detention of up to 150 people at a time, though ICE denied that it would be a detention center.

Community members and advocates for immigrants swiftly opposed the project. ICE has consistently looked to increase its detention capacity in California, where eight detention centers can now hold a combined 9,000 people, though the state has long been a thorn in the agency’s side.

The halt is part of a compromise between both sides involved in the legal action. After the state and county submitted a request for the court to temporarily halt the project, a hearing was set for Oct. 7.

Now, state and federal officials jointly requested that the court move up the hearing by at least a month. The agreement also extends how much time the federal government has to respond.

A federal judge signed off on the agreement Monday night.

The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in San José, alleges that the leased land is zoned exclusively for agricultural use and that the federal government violated laws requiring state and county notification, as well as procedural steps before beginning construction.

Tom Segura and Christina Pazsitzky have reportedly split.

The comedy power couple are calling it quits after 18 years of marriage, according to TMZ. A source told the outlet that the pair separated a couple of months ago but remain amicable and plan to continue co-hosting their podcast, “Your Mom’s House.”

Reps for Segura and Pazsitzky did not immediately respond to The Times’ request for comment.

Segura, 47, and Pazsitzky, 50, tied the knot in November 2008. Segura told “TigerBelly” podcast in 2018 that he met Pazsitzky while they were both doing open mic nights around Los Angeles. She was in a relationship with someone else (whom she lived with), so Segura and Pazsitzky were just friends. According to Segura, there was no flirtation in the early days, and he treated her with the respect he did any other fellow comic.

“I always thought she was attractive, but she was taken,” he said. “And then I got the call from one of my spies. … They broke up. And I was like, ‘I’m gonna swing in there, see what’s up.’”

According to Segura, he tried to ask Pazsitzky on what he thought was an L.A.-appropriate date — a hike — and she said no. He thought that meant she wasn’t interested in him, when, really, she just wasn’t interested in hiking.

“I called her the next time, and she’s like, ‘Hey, I know this bar you can still smoke at. Do you want to go there?’ And I was like, ‘OK. This is why she doesn’t want to go on a hike.’ So then, yeah, we went on dates and it just continued.”

Both comedians have used their marriage as source material for their comedy routines over the years and discuss their relationship on various podcast appearances, but especially on their own podcast, “Your Mom’s House,” which debuted in 2012.

In 2024, Pazsitzky told The Times that when they launched the podcast “we lived in a crummy two-bedroom apartment, we were newlyweds and we had no money. We got a mixing board, two mics and a computer, and at that point, we slept in one room and used the other room as an office. It bordered this other house where this lady would cook the smelliest food and have aggressive sex.”

“Oh, yeah, she was newly divorced and very performative with orgasms too,” Segura added.

The couple, who have two children, also spoke about their relocation from Los Angeles to Austin, Texas, in search of a slower pace and easier travel while touring. “Our lives are very normal, and we’re grounded family people. At the end of the day, we come home, our kids fart on Tom’s head, and I make dinner.”

Luke Wilson has reportedly welcomed his first child with girlfriend Kendall Yates.

The new parents were spotted with their baby at a Tuesday press event for Wilson’s upcoming Netflix series, “The Hawk,” according to People and Page Six. The “Bottle Rocket” actor and his partner brought their newborn daughter in a carrier to the Newport Beach reception and introduced her to Wilson’s castmates and other attendees, per the outlets’ sources.

Representatives for Wilson did not immediately respond on Thursday to The Times’ request for comment.

Wilson, 54, and Yates, 24, have reportedly been linked since at least 2023. They have mostly kept their relationship away from the spotlight, but attended an afterparty for the Los Angeles premiere of Kevin Costner’s “Horizon: An American Saga — Chapter 1” together in 2024.

The “Idiocracy” actor has addressed his desire to have kids and his role as an uncle over the years. In a 2007 People interview, Wilson — then single — mentioned he “definitely want[ed] [kids] at some point.” In 2023, while promoting “Merry Little Batman,” Wilson spoke about being “a pretty good uncle” to brother Owen Wilson’s kids.

“They’re great little kids,” Wilson said of his nephews in an interview with Conan O’Brien in 2020. “The kind that make me want to have some kids of my own, which I should get on sooner rather than later.”

“I just don’t want to be one of those dads that has to pay somebody in the neighborhood to throw the football with his kid because I can’t,” he joked.

A three-judge panel on Wednesday denied a request from the Kennedy Center’s board to keep President Trump’s name on the institution while the board appeals an earlier ruling that dubbed the name change illegal and had it rescinded.

It’s another setback for the board of trustees, of which Trump is chairman, in a saga that began earlier this year when the Kennedy Center became: “The Donald J. Trump and The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts.”

The conspicuous addition, and ensuing legal battle, became symbolic of Trump’s broader push to imprint his legacy — and, in this case, his actual name — on the nation’s capitol in his final term.

The panel of judges wrote Wednesday that the request “failed to show how they will be irreparably injured” if Trump’s name remains off the building through the appeal process.

The board had argued that the the removal “threatens to impede” fundraising efforts, but the judges found that claim came without the support of “specific facts or evidence.”

The Kennedy Center did not immediately respond to an emailed request for comment.

A federal judge earlier this year ruled that the name change was illegal, and Trump’s name was removed from the building’s white marble facade in June.

Bedayn writes for the Associated Press.

JACKSON, Miss. — The former mayor of Mississippi’s capital city and the former City Council president have pleaded guilty in a bribery scheme one week before they were set to face trial.

Former Jackson Mayor Chokwe Antar Lumumba and former Jackson City Council President Aaron Banks pleaded guilty Monday to one count of conspiracy. Their pleas came after Hinds County District Attorney Jody Owens pleaded guilty last week and resigned. All three are Democrats.

Two other people — Angelique Lee, the Democratic former vice president of the Jackson City Council, and Sherik Marve Smith, a businessman and relative of Owens — had already pleaded guilty to bribery charges.

A November 2024 indictment accused Owens of taking at least $115,000 from two FBI agents posing as real estate developers and facilitating more than $80,000 in bribe payments to Banks, Lumumba and Lee in exchange for their help greenlighting a development project.

Lumumba, Banks and Owens could be sentenced to up to five years in prison. Their sentencing hearings are set for Oct. 15.

Lumumba, who previously called the charges a political prosecution, lost his reelection bid last year. His lawyers did not immediately respond to The Associated Press’ requests for comment.

Banks’ lawyer declined to comment.

Bates writes for the Associated Press.

ATLANTA — The U.S. Department of Justice cannot have the names of and contact information for every person who worked during the 2020 election in Georgia’s Fulton County, a federal judge ruled Tuesday.

The Justice Department in April obtained a grand jury subpoena seeking the names and personal contact information of county employees and volunteer poll workers. President Trump has long claimed without evidence that widespread voter fraud in Georgia’s most populous county, a Democratic stronghold, cost him victory in the state in 2020.

Fulton County asked a judge to quash the subpoena, arguing it was meant to “target, harass and punish the President’s perceived political opponents” and that it was “grossly over broad and untethered to any reasonable need.”

“Given the low need for the subpoenaed information and the highly burdensome nature of the disclosure of the same, the Subpoena is unreasonable and must be quashed,” U.S. District Judge William Ray wrote in his ruling, calling the scope of the request “staggering.”

Emails seeking comment were sent to both the Justice Department and Fulton County.

Although grand juries often work with federal prosecutors to investigate alleged crimes, “that does not give the DOJ the right to use the Grand Jury to do whatever the DOJ wants,” he wrote.

Even if the records sought by the Justice Department could help find people who worked for the county during the 2020 election who support the theory that the election was unfair, the information couldn’t be used to charge anyone, Ray wrote.

“That is because the statute of limitations for any possible crime arising from the 2020 Election has long expired,” he wrote.

The subpoena came after the FBI in January served a search warrant at the Fulton County election hub and seized hundreds of boxes of ballots and other documents from the 2020 election. A federal judge in May denied the county’s request to force the federal government to return the ballots.

The Justice Department argued in a court filing that the subpoena was the “next step in the normal investigative process” and that it seeks “records identifying persons with relevant knowledge.”

Kamal Ghali, a lawyer for the county, argued that the subpoena “will chill participation by election workers” and that the statute of limitations for any of the alleged misconduct had already lapsed.

Justice Department lawyer William McComb argued the statute of limitations issue is not relevant at the investigative stage. The point of the investigation is to figure out what charges can be brought, he said.

“My point is, as we sit here now, we are not sure what charges can be brought. That’s the whole point of the investigation,” he said.

The request for election workers’ contact information, McComb said, “would simply be a pathway to determine and speak with and interview certain individuals who worked at the polls who may have seen, heard or done something in and of themselves.”

The judge noted that the Justice Department had expressed concern about possible criminal actions in the years that followed the election, including an alleged failure by the county to preserve electronic ballot images. But he pointed out that the subpoena seeks information related to what happened during the 2020 election and its immediate aftermath.

“In these hyper-political times in which we currently live, there are sure to be some who disagree with this decision because they believe the allegations of fraud in the 2020 Election and believe that ‘light’ should be brought to those claims,” Ray wrote.

He added that nothing prevents continued investigation into those allegations by people who believe those claims — such as Congress or even the Justice Department — but the power of the grand jury, “which exists to investigate potential crimes and to bring viable indictments” cannot be used for that purpose. Otherwise, anyone in power could use the grand jury process to subpoena personal information of citizens “with no legitimate law enforcement purpose,” he wrote.

“Thus, everyone, whether you support the President or you do not, or whether you believe the 2020 Election was fair or believe that it was not, should be concerned about the DOJ’s ability to utilize the power of the Grand Jury to appropriate your private information without a legitimate purpose,” Ray wrote.

Brumback writes for the Associated Press.

Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce’s love story will reach new heights this week with a totally low-key two-day wedding bash at New York’s Madison Square Garden.

The billionaire pop titan and the NFL star, both 36, kicked off their wedding festivities Thursday afternoon with a rehearsal dinner at the famed sports arena. They have all but confirmed that they will then exchange their vows Friday in a grand MSG celebration with around 1,000 guests (including Swift’s celebrity friends and Kelce’s fellow sports stars) in attendance, at least according to numerous reports. The celebrity wedding will also reportedly feature heightened security around Madison Square Garden, performances by Stevie Nicks and Tim McGraw, and a red carpet outside the arena.

Representatives for Madison Square Garden, Swift and Kelce have not responded to The Times’ requests for comment.

Swift and Kelce’s relationship began nearly three years ago during the singer’s blockbuster Eras tour with a simple request and a friendship bracelet. Read on to revisit the roots of Swift and Kelce’s whirlwind romance turned generational love story, from the Kelce brothers’ “New Heights” podcast to a romantic garden engagement.

July 2023: Travis Kelce shoots his shot

Swift and Kelce’s romance can be traced back to summer 2023, when the Kansas City Chiefs tight end attended an Eras tour concert at Arrowhead Stadium, the Chiefs’ house. Kelce — a self-proclaimed Swiftie — told brother Jason Kelce in an episode of their “New Heights” podcast that he had a friendship bracelet with his phone number on it but didn’t get it to the singer. “I was a little … hurt I didn’t get to hand her one of the bracelets I made for her,” he said at the time. Eventually, the two got in touch.

September 2023: Taylor Swift shows up for her guy

Taylor Swift watches the Chiefs take on the Chicago Bears at Arrowhead Stadium in Kansas City, Mo., on Sept. 24, 2023.

(David Eulitt / Getty Images)

The then-rumored romance quickly became commentary fodder for NFL broadcasts (sometimes to sports fans’ chagrin) but took a turn when Swift seemingly accepted Kelce’s personal invitation to a home game. She was seen cheering for him in a private box alongside his mother, Donna Kelce. Soon enough, Swift became a staple in the Chiefs audience. In the following months, Swift and Kelce further solidified their relationship, making it paparazzi-official during an after-party for “Saturday Night Live” and on her Eras tour in November when the singer changed her “Karma” lyrics to reference her budding romance.

February 2024: Super Bowl LVIII (Taylor’s Version)

Chiefs tight end Travis Kelce and Taylor Swift smooch after Kansas City Chiefs defeated the San Francisco 49ers at the Super Bowl in Las Vegas in February 2024.

(John Locher / Associated Press)

Swift and Kelce’s love notably played out at Super Bowl LVIII, where the Chiefs faced the San Francisco 49ers. When the Chiefs won, the Grammy winner joined Kelce on the field, kissing and hugging him. A week before the big game, Swift announced her album, “Tortured Poets Department,” at the Grammy Awards. The album seemingly refers to Kelce in songs “The Alchemy” and “So High School.”

The pair continued going strong throughout 2024. As Swift‘s tour continued, Kelce joined his superstar girlfriend on stage in London. She also returned regularly to Arrowhead Stadium for Chiefs home games during the 2024-25 NFL season. Swift ended her Eras tour in December 2024 and hosted a private wrap party to celebrate her musical marathon. Of course, beau Kelce was in attendance.

August 2025: Baby, just say ‘yes!’

The following year was a relatively quieter one for the couple. Kelce and his Chiefs failed to beat the Philadelphia Eagles at Super Bowl LIX and Swift was in the midst of recovering from her tour and preparing for her newest album. But just when there seemed to be a lull in all things Taylor-Travis, the couple hit some major milestones.

First, Swift finally appeared on the Kelce brothers’ “New Heights” podcast. Remember, that’s where all of this started. The couple, of course, spoke about their whirlwind romance, but the main headline was that Swift would release her album “The Life of a Showgirl” later that fall. With songs “Redwood” and “Wish List,” it was pretty clear Kelce inspired Swift during the songwriting process.

Second, and more importantly, “Love Story” singer Swift announced on Instagram that she and Kelce were engaged. She shared photos from their dreamy garden proposal with the caption: “Your English teacher and your gym teacher are getting married.” Kelce popped the question with an elongated old mine cut cushion set within an engraved gold band. Speculation on the details of their nuptials, including date and location, were almost immediately underway.

Since their engagement, Kelce and Swift have appeared together at a handful of high-profile events including the iHeartRadio Music Awards in March, courtside at Rocket Arena in Cleveland during the 2026 NBA playoffs and the Songwriters Hall of Fame induction ceremony in June, which honored Swift.

For now, welcome to New York, soon-to-be Mr. and Mrs.

Lionel Richie brought the first stop on his summer tour with Earth, Wind & Fire to an abrupt stop Wednesday evening, citing his health.

The 77-year-old Grammy winner, hitmaker of “Hello” and “Say You, Say Me,” unexpectedly hit pause on the concert at the Grand Casino Arena in St. Paul, Minn., after taking a seat on stage multiple times during his performance of “Dancing on the Ceiling” and telling his audience he felt “dizzy,” according to videos shared on social media.

“What I have learned about my years of being in the business, when you are feeling dizzy, sit your a— down,” he joked, according to a TikTok posted Wednesday evening by user ynaffitmocha. “When you are feeling strange about yourself, sit your a— down.”

Moments later, saxophonist Dino Soldo informed the audience that the singer was “not feeling well” and would not continue the concert. A representative for the singer did not respond to a request for comment, but TMZ reported on Thursday the singer-songwriter was hospitalized after the health scare. Paramedics reportedly met the artist backstage and transported him to a nearby hospital out of precaution.

A spokesperson for the Saint Paul Fire Department did not immediately respond to a request for confirmation on Thursday.

Live Nation announced “American Idol” judge Richie and Earth, Wind & Fire’s joint tour in January, unveiling a 26-city circuit that includes stops in Chicago, Orlando, San Francisco and Los Angeles. Richie and the “September” group are next set to perform at the United Center in Chicago on Friday and again at Schottenstein Center in Columbus, Ohio. It is currently unclear whether Richie will resume performing for those concerts.

Richie and Earth, Wind & Fire are scheduled to play Inglewood’s Intuit Dome on Aug. 9. The tour ends Aug. 14 with a show at the Moody Center in Austin.

For as long as I’ve been a journalist, which is a really long time, public entities have hated public records requests, even while claiming they don’t.

Ask your typical elected or hired official, from the governor to the animal control folks, and they’ll tell you transparency is vital and sunshine in government a key value.

Then turn in the most benign of public records requests — access to a calendar, for example — and prepare for weeks of delays and excuses. Want emails or financial records or, heaven forbid, anything from the police? Months or even years may pass before a single page is delivered, no joke.

That’s why I am deeply concerned about a bill winding its way through the California Legislature that would definitely slow down public records requests and likely make them more difficult and expensive. At its worst, it could push people into costly court battles just for having the audacity to ask for information.

The legislation, Assembly Bill 1821, is authored by Democratic Assemblymember Blanca Pacheco, whose district includes Norwalk, Downey and Bell, where legendary scandals are Example 1 of why public records matter.

Pacheco’s office told me Wednesday that the troubles with the bill are far from what Pacheco set out to do.

“It was never the author’s intention to take away people’s rights to a [Public Records Act] request,” said her chief of staff, Nikki Johnson.

Johnson said the bill was meant to curtail malicious records requests, which do happen, where a citizen goes after copious amounts of records just to be a jerk and cost the government time and money.

It was also meant to address the growing problem of artificial intelligence and other for-profit businesses requesting thousands of records with the intent of using the information to create money-making products — think of sites that already sell publicly available personal information as “background checks.”

I believe Johnson on the good intentions of the bill in addressing those real if nebulous difficulties, but you know what they say about the best-laid plans.

The bill passed through the Assembly recently with ease, largely because most of its problematic portions (I’ll get to those in a minute) were removed — though not all. Even in a watered-down form, which basically gave government more time to answer requests, I found myself in the unlikely position of agreeing with conservative Republican Assemblymember and Trump supporter Carl DeMaio of San Diego, who offered some of the only opposition from elected leaders during the Assembly vote.

“We cannot police the public’s right to know, and we want to err on the side of transparency in how government agencies operate,” DeMaio said.

Amen, brother.

But the Democratic-controlled Assembly erred on the side of secrecy and slowdown instead, and the measure sailed to the Senate, where seemingly out of the blue, a bunch of new provisions were added that fill it with loopholes, vague language and tons of room for abuse.

David Snyder, executive director of the First Amendment Coalition, said the bill as written now was “comprehensively bad for transparency and therefore for government accountability.”

Sean McMorris, transparency, ethics and accountability program manager for the advocacy organization California Common Cause, put it even more forcefully. He pointed out that “public records are the public’s records.”

“They’re not owned by the government,” he said. But this bill would shift that paradigm and make the public “prove why you need them.”

“It’s going to chill people who want to make requests, and it’s going to complicate the process, and it’s just wrong,” McMorris said.

In its new form, the bill basically allows government entities to decide if they feel a public records request is malicious or for commercial gain. If they do, they can petition a court to intervene — potentially sparking both legal costs and new fees associated with fulfilling the request.

It would also, Snyder said, force a requester to explain why they wanted the records — something California law has repeatedly avoided because it gives power to government to treat those it perceives as enemies differently.

In this age of fairness and reason, it’s hard to imagine a government official misusing power to keep secrets, but I’m told it happens. That makes it all the more crucial that people not be forced to explain why they want information, or if they will use it to, say, expose corruption — be it wrongdoing by a single individual or the entire system.

Faced with unintended consequences, Assemblymember Blanca Pacheco (D-Downey), shown in 2023, will seek to scale back the bill to its original form, according to her chief of staff.

(Rich Polk / Getty Images for Equality California)

“I have little doubt that some agencies will use that provision to overburden requesters that they view as political opponents, requesters that they view as just a hassle, requesters that ask for things the government doesn’t want to disclose,” Snyder said. “They can bring the requester into court, and at a minimum, slow down the process, and probably more likely get the requester to simply withdraw.”

As written, the bill also gives a shoddy carve-out meant to protect journalists, but which in reality could be used to curtail requests from freelancers, student journalists and more.

McMorris said access to public records is a “moral issue,” and fixing any problems with the current law requires “a scalpel, not a meat ax.”

This bill, he warned, is a meat ax.

“I don’t discount that there are abusive requests, and that there are requests that really are a burden on government agencies, but the law right now has ways for government agencies to address that,” he pointed out. “Once these laws go into place, they’re going to be hard to roll back.”

It could “fundamentally change” our access to public records, he said.

Johnson, Pacheco’s chief of staff, told me that faced with all these unintended consequences, the Assembly member is going to ask for the amendments to be removed, and for the bill to progress as it was written when it passed the Assembly. That could happen as early as next week, when the bill with the new provisions is scheduled to come up again in a Senate committee for debate.

Reverting to the bill the Assembly voted on would be better, but slowing down public records is in government’s best interests, not the people’s. The bill does nothing to address the problems it seeks to fix, but stretches out the time officials have to simply tell a requester if any records do exist — never mind delivering them.

So even back to its watered-down form, the bill remains a meat ax for a scalpel problem, chopping up transparency with good intentions.

Major League Baseball says it has no concerns about Dodgers and Rams head team physician Dr. Neal ElAttrache working with players.

ElAttrache was questioned by MLB on June 12 following a detailed report by the New York Times that the renowned surgeon and sports medicine expert supported the therapeutic use of performance-enhancing drugs by UFC star Conor McGregor.

“MLB took our responsibility to conduct due diligence in this matter seriously. We interviewed Dr. Neal ElAttrache last week, covering multiple topics, and he answered our questions thoroughly,” MLB said in a statement obtained by The Times Tuesday night.

“Based on our interview, the review of relevant records, Dr. ElAttrache’s long history of support for and cooperation with the Joint Drug Program and the fact that no Therapeutic Use Exemption requests of this nature have been submitted by Dr. ElAttrache or anyone else, we do not have any concerns regarding Dr. ElAttrache’s treatment of MLB players, or his adherence to the Joint Drug Programs and related rules.

“We consider this matter closed.”

ElAttrache performed surgery on McGregor in July 2021, inserting a rod, plates and screws into his left leg after the fighter broke his tibia and fibula during a mixed martial arts bout against Dustin Poirier in Las Vegas.

McGregor’s recovery was lengthy and arduous. ElAttrache told the New York Times that while he did not prescribe steroids for McGregor, he referred him to a specialist who did. Furthermore, ElAttrache wrote a letter supporting McGregor’s request for a therapeutic use exemption from UFC drug policies.

“I felt it would be appropriate to consult other physicians with expertise in bone healing/bone metabolism,” ElAttrache told the New York Times via text. “I recommended the consultations but not the course of treatment.”

ElAttrache said he told McGregor to check with UFC drug testers about prescriptions the consultant gave him. “I purposely wasn’t involved with his evaluation by the consultant nor with prescribing medication,” ElAttrache said.

The exemption request was denied by the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency, the drug testing organization the UFC used at the time, triggering a split between the two organizations. McGregor withdrew from the UFC anti-doping program shortly thereafter and no longer was required to undergo testing for banned substances.

The report prompted MLB to talk with ElAttrache about his approach to treating players.

ElAttrache, operating primarily out of the Cedars-Sinai Kerlan-Jobe Orthopaedic Clinic in Los Angeles, has performed elbow or shoulder surgeries on prominent Dodgers past and present, including Shohei Ohtani, Clayton Kershaw, Tony Gonsolin and Walker Buehler as well as former Rams stars Cooper Kupp and Cam Akers.

Among the hundreds of surgeries performed over three decades by ElAttrache, his patients include the four 2024 MLB most valuable player and Cy Young Award winners — Ohtani, Aaron Judge, Chris Sale and Tarik Skubal. ElAttrache’s patients include 18 of 29 players who won the MVP or Cy Young awards over the past 10 years.

“I have spoken with MLB and I am very comfortable with the process that the league and I will complete to assure the public that I have followed every rule and regulation in my medical treatment of athletes without exception,” ElAttrache said in a statement to the Los Angeles Times earlier this month. “My record is completely clean, including in this case.”

Times staff writers Steve Henson, Bill Shaikin, Sam Farmer and Gary Klein contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — More than $350 million from President Trump’s “big, beautiful bill” has been quietly directed to White House security, an allotment that Democrats warn appears to be helping fund his new ballroom project — despite the president’s insistence that no taxpayer dollars would be used.

The apportionment of funds, which the White House’s Office of Management and Budget made late Friday, comes from two accounts that were intended to provide the U.S. Secret Service with extra money for hiring and training in the aftermath of last year’s assassination attempts on the president, according to Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee. The shift was made days after Congress rejected a $1-billion request for the White House in a Homeland Security bill that Trump signed into law and as the ballroom project is tangled in legal challenges.

Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Chuck Grassley, whose panel initially drafted the security funding, said Thursday he was unaware of the allocations.

“The president said that it was all going to be paid for with private money,” said Grassley (R-Iowa). “And that’s what the country expects.”

Sen. Jeff Merkley of Oregon, the top Democrat on the Senate Budget Committee, charged that Trump’s actions are potentially illegal.

“After repeatedly telling the American people that zero taxpayer dollars would be spent on his gold-plated ballroom boondoggle, now Trump appears to be using a smoke and mirrors tactic,” Merkley said in a statement.

“Trump has proven that he can’t be trusted to follow the law,” Merkley said. “He only cares about wasting taxpayer money on his vanity projects.”

Ballroom project hits setbacks

Trump has faced setbacks in his attempts to build the ballroom on the White House grounds, where he ordered the demolition of the storied East Wing to make way for it.

Touring the construction site last month, Trump called the development a “gift” to the American people. He has repeatedly said that it is being paid for by donations — which has also run into ethics questions from watchdogs concerned about potential corruption and conflicts of interest.

Congress refused the Trump administration’s request for $1 billion for the ballroom last month. The administration wanted the money as part of a Homeland Security bill, but Republican and Democratic lawmakers rejected efforts to tack it on. It became politically toxic at a time when Americans are reeling from inflationary high costs of living.

The Washington Post reported earlier this week that the price tag for the project has ballooned to $600 million, according to a project summary prepared by the contractor, with more than half of that funding coming from taxpayers. Roll Call first reported on the apportionment of new funds for White House security.

At its core, arguments are swirling over how much of the White House project is to bolster security underground, with bomb shelters and a medical facility, and how much of the costs are related to the president’s promised 999-seat ballroom on top.

White House says Trump and donors are paying for the ballroom

A spokesman for the White House said that Trump and donors are funding some $400 million for the ballroom development, and that the coordination with the Secret Service had been noted in the initial announcement of the project.

“The East Wing Modernization Project is inextricably tied to the security of the President, the White House grounds and the certain security infrastructure assets,” said White House spokesman Davis R. Ingle in a statement.

He said the events over the past weekend, including an alleged attack plan targeting the UFC Freedom 250 event at the White House, proves why the project is needed.

“President Trump and generous American patriots are funding the ballroom to the tune of approximately $400 million, which will be a secure and appropriate venue for Presidents for generations to come,” he said.

Government lawyers have argued that the project includes critical security features to guard against a range of threats, such as drones and missiles.

The White House has said in court documents that the East Wing project would be “heavily fortified,” including bomb shelters, military installations and a medical facility underneath the ballroom. The Secret Service told senators last month that $220 million of the White House’s $1-billion request would go to harden the ballroom addition, with bulletproof glass, drone detection technologies, chemical and other systems.

The rest of the money would go for other security improvements, according to a document provided to Senate Republicans, including $180 million for a new, “long overdue” White House visitors screening facility.

Congress holds power of the purse

The shifting funds are certain to ignite growing concerns in Congress over the separation of powers, and the president’s use of federal funds allocated by lawmakers.

The money comes from Trump’s big tax breaks and spending cuts bill that the president signed into law last summer. It provided more than $1 billion for Secret Service resources, including “personnel, training facilities, programming, and technology; and performance, retention, and signing bonuses.”

The provision was uncontested at the time, even as Democrats voted against the broader bill. Democrats said they did not challenge this section or try to strip it out from the package.

Under the Constitution, only Congress has the specific authority to allocate funds across the federal government, including the executive and judicial branch operations.

While the president holds the power to sign — or veto — those appropriation bills, once the funding becomes law, it largely must stand.

Mascaro writes for the Associated Press.

Gov. Gavin Newsom on Monday accused the Justice Department of launching — at President Trump’s request — a baseless and politically-motivated investigation into him and his wife, First Partner Jennifer Siebel Newsom.

“After calling for my arrest last year, Donald Trump directed his Department of Justice to investigate me,” Newsom said. “And just in the last week, I’ve learned his campaign has reached my own home: to get me, he’s coming after my wife, Jen.”

Newsom adamantly denied any wrongdoing by him or his wife. The White House referred questions to the Justice Department, which declined to comment.

A source familiar with the matter who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss it publicly told The Times that there are two probes underway, one related to Newsom’s former chief of staff, Dana Williamson, and one related to Siebel Newsom’s taxes.

• Share via Close extra sharing options

The source said both investigations have been ongoing for about a year; were launched by prosecutors in Sacramento based on information provided by whistleblowers and other local sources in California; and were not the result of directives out of Washington or the White House.

Newsom said that in recent days, “federal agents have knocked on the doors of family friends and former employees,” and have been “demanding records,” “digging through years and years of random documents” and “abusing the grand jury process” in a quest to find any kind of wrongdoing by him or his wife.

“Not because they found a crime. Because they are simply trying to find one,” he said.

Newsom did not describe the specific nature of the alleged probe, the line of questioning faced by friends and employees or the types of records taken or reviewed by federal investigators. But he alleged that Trump instigated the probe because Newsom is considering running for president in 2028, and because Trump “hates that I’ve consistently called him out — over and over again — for his lies and deceit.”

“He has turned the levers of government into his own personal power ministries to reward cronies and to try to jail his opponents,” Newsom said.

Newsom cited Justice Department investigations of several other of the president’s political opponents, including Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), New York Atty. Gen. Letitia James, former FBI director James Comey, former Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell and former vice presidential candidate Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz.

“One by one, anyone who has challenged Donald Trump has ended up on his hit list,” he said. “And today, I proudly join that list.”

This article will be updated.

June 10 (UPI) — A Norwegian appeals court has denied a request from Marius Borg Høiby, son of Norwegian Crown Princess Mette-Merit, to leave custody because of his mothers’ illness. Høiby is behind bars while he awaits a verdict in his rape trial.

The court overturned a verdict by a lower court Monday that had ordered Høiby’s release before the verdict, which is expected June 15. Hoiby, 29, is facing 40 criminal charges and has been in custody since February.

Princess Mette-Merit, 52, has pulmonary fibrosis, a chronic lung condition, The BBC reported. Her doctors added her to a lung transplant list last week.

“We are very, very disappointed. I find the decision almost incomprehensible,” defense lawyer Ellen Holager Andenæs said to Norwegian news outlet VG, as cited by Nine.com.au.

Høiby had told the lower court that “sitting inside while I know Mum is so sick is unbearable,” The BBC said.

Høiby was detained before his trial after new allegations of assault and violating a restraining order. The appeals court disagreed with the lower court that had ordered his release, saying his risk of reoffending was “virtually unchanged” since its earlier decision.

“As the Court of Appeals sees it, this is not a question of will, but a question of ability, lifestyle and risk factors,” the ruling said. It noted that Høiby is not the only one in prison with a family member affected by serious illness and will not receive special treatment.

Høiby denies four counts of rape but had admitted to lesser charges such as drug possession and traffic offenses. The judges are also considering charges of violence, threats and abusive behavior within a relationship.

Høiby was born before his mother married Norwegian Crown Prince Haakon and is not a member of the royal family. He was first arrested in August 2024.

Los Angeles’ music industry, in recent years, has generally supported progressive causes. But as the primaries for the city’s mayoral race and California‘s governorship wrapped up Tuesday, some music executives and performers have supported and donated large amounts to Spencer Pratt, the right-leaning activist and reality TV star running for mayor.

According to data from the Los Angeles City Ethics Commission, Pratt’s supporters include two members of the record industry’s most powerful family who donated the maximum amount allowed by law.

Pratt is a registered Republican whose heated rhetoric about homeless “zombies” and AI-created advertisements have rankled progressives and delighted conservatives. He has received support from President Trump, who told reporters that “I’d like to see him do well. He’s a character. I don’t know him, I assume he probably supports me… I heard he’s a big MAGA person.”

In response, Pratt told TMZ that “Everybody wants me to succeed because L.A. is the most important city in the country. The only support I need is from moms that wanna feel safe in Los Angeles. I’m laser-focused on that.”

Universal Music Group is home to some of music’s most outspoken progressives, including Olivia Rodrigo and Billie Eilish, whose brother and collaborator Finneas O’Connell donated $250 to the progressive mayoral candidate Nithya Raman on May 6.

Earlier this year, UMG’s chairman and chief executive Lucian Grainge presented Rodrigo with the company’s Universal Music Group x REVERB Amplifier Award, which advocates for “social and environmental nonprofit campaigns through the cultural power of music,” according to a release.

On May 9, Grainge (listed as a resident of Pacific Palisades, where Pratt lost his home in the 2025 fires) maxed out with an $1,800 donation to Pratt’s campaign, as previously reported in The Times. A representative for UMG did not immediately return a request for comment on Grainge’s donation.

He’s not the only Pratt donor in the family.

Grainge’s son Elliot ascended through the record industry with his 10k Projects label, and now heads UMG’s competitor Atlantic Records. Vocal progressives like Cardi B, the Marías and Charli XCX are some of the label’s most high-profile acts.

On May 8, Elliot Grainge also gave $1,800 to Pratt‘s campaign. A representative for Atlantic did not immediately return a request for comment.

Last month, the record producer and composing titan David Foster and his wife, singer Katharine McPhee, performed at a fundraiser for Pratt where they crooned a version of Tina Turner’s hit “The Best” to the mayoral hopeful. “Spencer, you’re simply the best. Better than all the rest. Better than Karen Bass and Nithya Raman,” McPhee sang.

At Warner Music, Gabz Landman, the senior vice president for A&R at Warner Chappell, its powerful music publishing wing, who has worked with Dua Lipa, Laufey and Amy Allen, gave $105.24 to Pratt on Feb. 4. Through a Warner Music representative, Landman said the donation was for merchandise given to a friend, and was not intended as support for Pratt’s campaign.

The superstar EDM producer and DJ Kaskade has left supportive messages on Pratt’s social media, commenting on one of the candidate’s posts that “At this point, who is buying in to Bass’s fairytale narrative?! I am still shocked she hasn’t resigned!” The DJ and producer Diplo also left a supportive comment — a prayer-hands emoji and “please” — on one of Pratt’s social media posts. Records do not show any personal donations to Pratt’s campaign from either artist.

Public records do not show any donations to Pratt’s campaign from live-industry executives atop firms like Live Nation, AEG or Goldenvoice.

A Los Angeles County Superior Court judge has denied Bill Cosby’s request for a new trial after a civil jury recently found he was liable for $19 million in damages in a sexual assault case.

Judge Bradley S. Phillips ruled Friday that Cosby did not prove there was “any irregularity” in the court proceedings that would have prevented him from getting a fair trial and that the damages awarded to his accuser were not “excessive.”

“The Court finds that there was sufficient evidence … to support the jury’s finding that defendant’s conduct caused plaintiff’s damages,” Phillips wrote in Friday’s order.

In March, a jury awarded former waitress Donna Motsinger $19.25 million in damages after she sued Cosby in 2023, alleging that the disgraced comedian drugged and sexually assaulted her in 1972 after escorting her to one of his shows.

Motsinger, now 84, claimed Cosby picked her up at her home and gave her wine and a pill she thought was aspirin on the way to the venue.

“Next thing she knew, she was going in and out of consciousness while two men attending to Mr. Cosby were putting her in the limousine,” the original complaint said. “The last thing Ms. Motsinger recalls were flashes of light,” before waking up in her house in nothing but underwear.

Cosby has denied Motsinger’s allegations, as well as those brought by dozens of other women who said they had been drugged and sexually assaulted by the former actor. Cosby served about three years in a Pennsylvania prison on sexual assault charges before that case was overturned in 2021.

Cosby had filed a motion for a new trial in the Motsinger case in early April. Attorneys for Cosby did not immediately respond to a request for comment about Friday’s ruling.

Times staff writer Fedor Zarkhin contributed to this report.

A federal judge has declined to halt President Trump’s executive order creating a federal voter list and limiting mail voting, clearing the way for potential sweeping changes in how American elections are run shortly before this year’s midterm elections.

U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols, a Trump appointee in Washington, late Wednesday rejected the request by Democrats and civil rights groups that had argued Trump’s order would likely be found unconstitutional because the states and Congress, not the president, have the power to set election rules. Nichols agreed with the Republican Trump administration’s contention that it was too early to block the order because it has yet to be implemented.

Nichols’ ruling leaves the door open for further challenges when the Trump administration moves to implement the president’s directive. A separate lawsuit seeking to block the executive order is underway in Boston. No matter how rapidly the administration acts, no voting changes are expected during primary elections, which continue into next month.

“The Court recognizes that the Postal Service may ultimately issue a final rule that directly affects Plaintiffs or their members, or that the Government may develop State Citizenship Lists that omit specific individuals due to particularized flaws,” Nichols wrote. “Plaintiffs may, of course, renew their motions if and when those future actions occur. Until then, however, Plaintiffs cannot show that preliminary injunctive relief is warranted.”

The Trump administration has yet to formally issue lists of eligible voters, and those who filed the initial request for a temporary halt said they’d be back if the administration moves in that direction.

“We are ready to resume the fight if and when the administration takes those next steps,” said Juan Proaño, chief executive officer of the League of United Latin American Citizens, one of the organizations that sought the stay from Nichols.

Trump issued the order in March after a bill he supported to overhaul voting stalled in Congress. The order would have had the federal government create a list of eligible voters and then directed the U.S. Postal Service to deliver mail ballots only to those on the list. Election officials argued it was ripe for abuse and could cause chaos, and the postal union has objected to the idea of mail carriers policing ballots.

Since his 2020 presidential election loss to Democrat Joe Biden, Trump has groundlessly claimed mail voting is rife with fraud and has launched a federal investigation into that year’s vote, even though repeated audits and investigations, including ones run by Republicans, found it was free of widespread fraud. Trump also has said he wants to “take over” election administration in Democratic areas.

Democrats and civil rights groups argued it was urgent that Nichols issue a restraining order in the midst of primary season and with states already gearing up for the fall midterm elections.

This was Trump’s second executive order seeking to overhaul elections and voting. His initial election executive order, issued just months after he took office in his second term, has been blocked by multiplefederal judges. That order sought to require documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote, among other changes.

Riccardi writes for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — The Justice Department has opened an investigation into whether E. Jean Carroll, the longtime advice columnist who has said Donald Trump sexually assaulted her in a New York department store 30 years ago, lied during the course of civil litigation against the Republican president, according to a person familiar with the matter.

The person who confirmed the existence of the investigation was not authorized to publicly discuss an ongoing inquiry and spoke on the condition of anonymity. The perjury investigation is being led by the federal prosecutors’ office in Chicago, and acting Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche has had no involvement because of his prior work as Trump’s personal attorney, the person said.

Lawyers for Carroll did not immediately respond to requests for comment from the Associated Press on Thursday.

It’s the latest in a series of investigations the Trump administration Justice Department has opened into perceived adversaries of the president. The actions, including securing an indictment last month against former FBI Director James Comey, have raised alarm from Democrats and former officials that an institution meant to make prosecutorial decisions independent of the White House is being weaponized.

Carroll has said a flirtatious, chance encounter with Trump in 1996 at Bergdorf Goodman’s Fifth Avenue store in Manhattan ended violently. She said Trump slammed her against a dressing room wall, pulled down her tights and forced himself on her. Trump has called the allegations a “made-up scam,” and he has attacked her motivations, saying they were politically driven or arose from a desire to promote her memoir.

A jury in 2023 found Trump liable for sexually abusing Carroll, awarding her $5 million. The following year, another jury awarded Carroll $83.3 million in a defamation case related to Trump’s social media attacks on her.

The Justice Department is scrutinizing a statement Carroll made in the course of the civil litigation that no one else was paying her legal fees. It later became public that a Chicago-based organization backed by Reid Hoffman, the co-founder of LinkedIn, had helped fund Carroll’s case. Trump’s lawyers in the civil case accused Carroll of concealing that information, which they said called into question whether the case was politically motivated.

A court entry earlier this month said Trump won’t have to pay the award until the U.S. Supreme Court gets a chance to review the case or reject an appeal. The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed to a request by one of Trump’s lawyers that it let the president delay the payment to Carroll, though it required that he post a $7.4 million bond to cover any additional interest costs, a request Carroll’s attorney had made.

The Carroll investigation was first reported by CNN.

Richer and Tucker write for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration wants all current and future federal employees to sign nondisclosure agreements, part of a continuing crackdown on leaks to the media.

The notice in the Federal Register from the Office of Personnel Management posted Tuesday asked for comment on a draft NDA to be used by federal agencies for “both new and existing employees.”

“The form is intended to document Federal employees’ acknowledgment of, and agreement to comply with, current legal obligations to safeguard non-public, confidential, or proprietary information, created or obtained through their official duties, while expressly preserving the right to make disclosures authorized by law,” the notice said.

The Office of Personnel Management noted “several recent instances” where internal agency communications related to rulemaking and policy development were disclosed without authorization. It also discussed specific instances in which federal employees at the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security disclosed information without authorization about planned immigration enforcement actions.

In one case, the New York Times and Washington Post received unauthorized information on the U.S. raid on Venezuela in January and delayed “publishing what they knew to avoid endangering U.S. troops,” the request for comment said.

Representatives for the two newspapers did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Ferreting out leaks that the administration deems harmful to its messaging has been a priority across multiple agencies since President Trump returned to the White House. As part of that crackdown, the FBI in January seized the electronic devices of a Washington Post reporter, a move that alarmed media organizations and advocates of press freedom.

One other notable incident occurred last year when dozens of reporters turned in their access badges at the Pentagon, rejecting new rules imposed by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth that would leave journalists vulnerable to expulsion if they sought to report on information — classified or otherwise — that had not been approved by Hegseth for release.

The American Federation of Government Employees did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Iran is moving its World Cup training base from Tucson, Ariz., to Tijuana, the president of the country’s soccer federation said Saturday, removing one of the final hurdles to its participation in this summer’s tournament.

Iran is scheduled to open World Cup play at SoFi Stadium, facing New Zealand on June 15. It will play Belgium in Inglewood six days later before finishing the group stage against Egypt in Seattle. But there had been questions over the Iranian team’s security in the U.S. after American and Israeli attacks on the country began nearly four months ago.

This World Cup will be the first in which a qualifying team will play in a host country with which it was at war. In March, shortly after the war began, Iranian officials began to question whether they should travel to the U.S. for the tournament — doubts that increased after President Trump posted on social media to say he did not believe it was appropriate for Iran to come “for their own life and safety.”

Because the World Cup is being shared with Mexico and Canada, Iran requested permission to move its base across the border, a request Mehdi Taj, president of the Iran Football Federation, said Saturday had been granted.

FIFA, the World Cup organizer, did not immediately confirm to move.

“All team base camps for the countries participating in the World Cup must be approved [by] FIFA,” Taj said in his statement obtained by the Associated Press. “Fortunately, following the requests we submitted and the meetings we held with FIFA and World Cup officials in Istanbul, as well as the webinar meeting we had yesterday in Tehran with the respected FIFA secretary general, our request to change the team’s base from the United States to Mexico was approved.”

Iran’s federation said moving the base camp will resolve potential visa issues since the team will enter the U.S. through Mexico. Taj that the team “may even be able to travel to and from Mexico using Iran Air flights.”

Tijuana is about 50 minutes by air from LAX, about 55 minutes quicker than a flight from Tucson. Iranians have been banned by the U.S. government from receiving visas to enter the U.S., although exceptions are to be made for athletes, coaches, and support personnel involved in the World Cup.