rule

WASHINGTON — Long before he was the top official at the U.S. Postal Service, David Steiner was a corporate executive surfing mid-oughts television when he came across Donald Trump on “The Apprentice.”

He was unimpressed.

“If that is leadership, if that’s what we’re telling people that our culture and our media portrays as leadership, we’re screwed,” Steiner, then the CEO of Waste Management, said during a 2007 speech at the University of Arkansas Clinton School of Public Service. “If that’s leadership, count me out.”

“And for God’s sake,” he added to laughter, “if I have to get my hair to look like that, if I have to do that to be a leader, you can definitely count me out.”

Nearly two decades later, Trump has migrated from reality television to the presidency. And onetime detractors — Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, for example — now loyally execute his agenda.

Trump’s effort to use the Postal Service as a tool to reshape American elections is testing whether Steiner will follow a similar path.

Independent or a Trump ‘pawn’?

When Trump signed an executive order restricting mail ballots this year, Steiner moved quickly to finalize a rule implementing the measure, arguing he had little choice. But after the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the effort, Steiner told The Associated Press that work had stopped on one of the plan’s most controversial elements, a government portal for voter rolls.

He refused to endorse the Republican president’s order as sound policy, saying he was focused on implementation and letting the courts ultimately decide the matter.

“I don’t get to decide what rules that are put on us that I decide to accept or not accept,” he said. “We are an independent agency of the executive branch.”

The episode prompted fierce criticism of Steiner for allowing Trump to deploy an agency designed to be shielded from politics.

Jena Griswold, Colorado’s Democratic secretary of state, called him a “Trump lackey.” Nevada Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar, a Democrat, recently asked Congress to deploy observers to ensure postal workers can scan envelopes holding mail ballots without disruption, saying the Trump administration “has attempted to weaponize federal agencies to interfere in our elections, and the leadership at USPS is going along with it.”

Sen. Elissa Slotkin, D-Mich., accused Steiner of being a Trump “pawn” during a congressional hearing this summer. Dozens of congressional Democrats have pressed Steiner to reveal his interactions with the White House during the development of the mail ballot rule.

Some Republicans have joined in the criticism. Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri, incensed by abandoned mail, called for Steiner’s resignation and introduced legislation to block him from receiving a bonus.

During a lengthy interview, Steiner seemed surprised at points by his reception in Washington. He insisted he wasn’t a “political person” and said he had no intention of stepping down despite the criticism. He dismissed heated congressional appearances as “theater” at odds with more substantive private interactions on Capitol Hill.

Steiner was chagrined, however, at the mention of his 2007 remarks on Trump, delivered well before he launched a political career. Steiner recalled speaking at the university but said he didn’t remember his comments, acknowledging a tendency to be “flippant.”

“That’s funny,” he said. “I don’t recall it.”

The White House didn’t respond to a request for comment on Steiner’s remarks or his stewardship of the Postal Service.

Steiner didn’t follow the traditional path to power in Trump’s Washington

The Postal Service dates to Benjamin Franklin, the first postmaster general, whose portrait and bust are displayed in Steiner’s office overlooking the Washington Wharf. The agency has more than 630,000 employees, dwarfing many Cabinet departments.

While the quickest way to top jobs in Trump’s Washington is often by writing big checks, the 66-year-old Steiner doesn’t appear to have followed that course. He has largely donated to Republicans but also gave to John Kerry’s Democratic presidential campaign in 2004. Unlike his predecessor as postmaster general, Louis DeJoy, Steiner was not a major GOP donor or Trump backer.

Born in Oakland, California, as one of eight children to a father who spent his career at Chevron, Steiner worked in corporate and securities law before moving to Waste Management in 2000. He became CEO in 2004 and ran the company for 12 years. He was also a longtime director at FedEx, where board chairman Brad Martin recalled him as “outcome oriented” and rarely political.

“He’s going to follow the rules. He’s going to follow the law,” Martin said. “I don’t recall us ever talking politics.”

By the time a headhunter contacted Steiner about the postmaster general job, he was largely removed from daily corporate life and initially demurred.

“I talked to my wife, and we both agreed I was happily retired,” he said.

He changed his mind, he said, during a visit to the beaches of Normandy, feeling a sense of civic duty.

Now at the Postal Service, he earns about $346,000 in annual salary along with a relocation bonus that amounts to half his salary, far less than the $17 million in compensation he earned during his final year at Waste Management. His current role is designed to exist one layer removed from the political process, reporting to a board of governors that is selected by the president and confirmed by the Senate.

He was hired in 2025 by a board that was made up of five members, three of whom were Democrats. All but one were appointed by President Joe Biden. That makeup could change as four Trump nominees — all Republicans — await Senate confirmation. Steiner can be fired only by the board.

Steiner said he first met Trump along with Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick at the board’s urging after he was already selected as postmaster general. Since then, he described a minimal relationship with the White House.

“We don’t fly on the radar,” he said.

That is, until Trump revived his effort in March to crack down on mail voting. Steiner said he “wasn’t in on the development piece” of the order and first saw it about a month before it was signed.

“They gave it to us to say, ‘Have your lawyers look at it, and how do you operationalize it?’” Steiner said.

The portal spurred a massive development effort inside the Postal Service while some states criticized it as federal overreach. A whistleblower report released by Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., argued the system was hastily built and riddled with errors, though Steiner said he was confident it could have been unveiled around Sept. 15.

“The heavy lifting was clearly, clearly the IT work,” Steiner said.

Challenges ahead for the Postal Service

Though the Supreme Court dispensed with the rule, the dynamics for the Postal Service don’t get easier.

The agency posted a $9 billion net loss last year, and Steiner has warned it could soon run out of cash unless Congress lifts a $15 billion borrowing cap. Political hurdles have prevented potential cost savings from cutting service or closing some post offices.

And while Trump’s executive order won’t take effect, the Postal Service will still play a critical role in this year’s elections. There are mounting concerns that mail ballots could be rejected for late postmarks. Steiner encouraged voters to get their ballots in a week before the election to avoid problems.

The Postal Service is a rare corner of government still viewed favorably with more than half of Americans, 56%, saying it was doing an “excellent” or “good” job in a Gallup poll conducted last year. That could change if the agency is seen as increasingly political.

Steiner, however, said Americans will judge the Postal Service by their experience of it.

“What they care about is when they get that wedding invitation after the wedding or when they send a package and it disappears,” he said. “If we want to have the trust of the American public, let’s be the best service provider. Everything else is noise.”

Sloan writes for the Associated Press.

Not everyone has to pay – and there’s a simple and legal way to avoid paying this £180 annual fee

People with a Netflix subscription – regardless of their tier – may need to pay a fee of £180, depending on what they watch.

UK households currently pay £180 a year for a colour TV Licence, or £60.50 for a black-and-white set, after the fee increased on April 1, 2026. Failure to pay when needed could land people in hot water, and a fine of £1,000.

Although many people assume a TV Licence only applies to watching the BBC, that is not true. A TV Licence covers far more than BBC content, including:

• All TV channels like BBC, ITV, Channel 4, U&Dave and international channels
• Pay TV services like Sky, Virgin Media and EE TV
• Live TV on streaming services – like YouTube, Netflix, and Amazon Prime Video
• Everything on BBC iPlayer
• Watching, recording and downloading on any device

Do I need a TV Licence to watch Netflix?

It depends. Officials note: “If you are watching a TV programme that is being broadcast live on Netflix, you need to be covered by a TV Licence. You don’t need a TV Licence to watch on-demand programmes on Netflix.”

If you want to keep watching Netflix and avoid paying the Licence fee, simply do not watch any live TV or events on the platform and watch your usual on-demand content. This means you can watch classics like Gilmore Girls, Manifest, Breaking Bad, and the latest competition series, Wonka’s The Golden Ticket – without the need for a TV Licence.

If you live in a shared household, the UK Government confirms: “You need your own TV Licence if you have separate tenancy agreements and you watch TV in your own room.”

You can have one TV Licence for the whole household if you either:

• watch TV in a single shared area
• have a joint tenancy agreement

I have a Netflix subscription – so why do I need a TV Licence?

TV Licensing explains: “Paying for a Netflix subscription grants you access to a large and varied catalogue of movies, series, documentaries and more. Paying for a TV Licence lets you legally watch and record TV on any channel via a range of TV services, including Sky, Freeview, Virgin and Freesat.

“With a TV Licence, you can also watch live on streaming services (e.g. Amazon Prime and Channel 4) and access the full suite of award-winning movies, series and documentaries on BBC iPlayer.

“Some households enjoy having access to Netflix as well as being covered by a licence. Other households prefer to only pay for a TV Licence to watch live on TV and streaming services, including iPlayer, on any device.”

Netflix isn’t the only streaming service you may need to buy a TV Licence for, on top of the subscription fee. TV Licensing further states: “If you’re watching TV showing live on Amazon Prime, you need to be covered by a TV Licence. You don’t need a TV Licence if you’re only watching on-demand programmes on Amazon Prime.”

You could be fined £1,000

You can be fined up to £1,000 if you watch or record live TV without a Licence. TV Licensing warns: “You could be prosecuted if we find that you have been watching, recording or downloading programmes illegally.

“The maximum penalty is a £1,000 fine plus any legal costs and/or compensation you may be ordered to pay. The maximum fine is £2,000 in Guernsey.”

The Southern Section has no authority to tell a school to get rid of a coach. It has no control over personnel matters. But there’s precedent that when a coach knowingly plays an ineligible player, it expects a school district to take appropriate action.

In the case with Inglewood football coach Mil’von James, he has a history of using ineligible players. James came to Inglewood, which is 4-1 this season, after being fired at Hawkins in 2016 following the discovery of ineligible players, resulting in Hawkins forfeiting all of its games to finish 0-13. Since then, the City Section established a rule that teams must exchange rosters before games to verify that players are eligible, known as the “Hawkins rule.”

Inglewood Unified School District administrator James Morris told the Daily Breeze that James is scheduled to return to coach on Friday after missing last week’s game against Long Beach Poly at SoFi. That means he received a two-game suspension for using two ineligible players in a game last month, since it is believed he also didn’t coach a game against Elk Grove Franklin.

James appears to have knowingly played two players listed on the Southern Section transfer portal that had not been cleared when Inglewood played in Austin, Texas, on Aug. 28. Video obtained by The Times shows the players in the game.

Add to that, both players’ names and numbers were missing from Inglewood’s MaxPreps’ roster, something that was also a tactic when James coached at Hawkins and resulted in the new City Section rule to exchange roster before games.

Shame on the Inglewood Unified School District for failing to hold its coach accountable for a serious violation of CIF rules.

If the two-game suspension stands, shame on the Southern Section, too. The message being sent to other coaches and other schools is that it’s OK to cheat as long as you don’t get caught, and if you get caught and only get suspended for two games, it’s worth it.

The Southern Section, under commissioner Mike West, went out of its way to try to catch those breaking transfer rules last year. It was a sign maybe things were changing and people were paying attention to the games being played with more than 17,000 transfers in California. But if the Southern Section settles for a two-game suspension for James, it will lose credibility among coaches and programs trying to follow CIF rules.

Southern Section spokesman Thom Simmons has declined comment and declined to make West available.

As always, they’re afraid of legal action. And it must be pointed out again the Southern Section has no authority to discipline coaches. But at some point, to save credibility, they will need to address this breaking of rules that goes to the core of what the CIF is supposed to guard against.

The Southern Section Council has a meeting on Thursday. If any of the representatives have concerns, maybe then they’ll get to ask West how this could be acceptable.

In 2014 Long Beach Unified suspended Long Beach Poly basketball coach Sharrief Metoyer for one year for after he was caught using an ineligible player during a state basketball playoff game. He did it on purpose being frustrated at the CIF transfer policies. The CIF could not tell administrators what to do. But if they did nothing or put in only a two-game suspension, there’s no doubt that the Southern Section leadership had the authority to take action.

According to Southern Section’s Blue Book rule 500.5, “Any school knowingly or unknowingly violating the rule may be suspended from membership in the CIF Southern Section.”

Hopefully the Southern Section is keeping its options open, but it’s time for West, the commissioner since 2023, to get his credibility back. If not, it’s up to the Southern Section Executive Committee to launch its own investigation of what the section is supposed to do when schools and districts don’t take their rules seriously.

Sept. 23, 2026 3:24 PM PT

WASHINGTON — A federal judge in Rhode Island struck down a Trump administration directive that would have barred some immigrants from accessing certain federal programs, including Head Start preschools, community health clinics and adult education initiatives.

U.S. District Judge Mary McElroy, who was appointed by President Trump in 2019, temporarily barred his administration from moving forward with the rule last year, so it never was implemented. On Monday, she made the injunction permanent.

Officials from the Republican administration had said the directive would stop “illegal aliens” from accessing federal benefits by reclassifying broad swaths of social services programs under a Clinton-era law, the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act.

But the rule also would have swept up many immigrants in the U.S. legally, including work and student visa holders. It also would have barred services from Temporary Protected Status holders, who are granted work permits if the U.S. government determines conditions in their home country are too dangerous to return, along with recipients of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, who were brought to the country illegally as children and receive temporary protection from deportation and work authorization.

Those groups, which are considered “nonqualified aliens” under the law, already are unable to access full Medicaid benefits and federally funded food aid and cash assistance.

The Trump administration issued its directive in July 2025. Democratic attorneys general from 20 states and the District of Columbia sued.

They said the change upended three decades of policy allowing people to access community health clinics, domestic violence shelters and Head Start centers without proving their immigration status. They warned the harms could spread, deterring any immigrant from seeking services and throwing up barriers even for U.S. citizens unable to document their legal status. The new rules also would have put administrative burdens on underfunded social service agencies, including Head Start operators, which might have been forced to close if they were unable to comply with the directive’s new requirements, the lawsuit said.

In her ruling, McElroy declared the directive “unlawful” and said the Trump administration did not follow the proper avenues to rewrite the rules. She called the administration’s actions “procedurally invalid.” She added that the administration still could pursue rule changes through the federal notice-and-comment process, which officials bypassed when they issued the directive last year.

Requests for comment were sent to the departments named as defendants in the wide-ranging lawsuit. The Administration for Children and Families, a division of the Department of Health and Human Services that oversees Head Start, said it does not comment on ongoing litigation. The Labor Department referred inquiries to the Justice Department, which did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

In a statement, New York Atty. Gen. Letitia James, who was among those who sued, hailed the judge’s ruling.

“From cancer screenings to food banks to early childhood education, the federal government’s attempts to decimate the social safety net would have been catastrophic for working families,” James said.

Balingit writes for the Associated Press.

VAPES could be seized in UK airports under a new rule that is coming into force next week.

As it stands, there is not a strict limit on how much e-liquid vapers can bring back with them from their holidays.

But come Thursday, October 1, that is set to change.

From next week, travellers coming into the UK will be limited to just 50ml of liquid, which equates to around five standard bottles of 10ml of juice.

Anyone arriving with over this amount must declare it and pay tax and duty.

Failure to do so, could see your goods confiscated and seized, according to government guidance.

BOOK IT

UK’s best hotels & B&Bs revealed from historic country houses to Europe’s top spa

STRIKE OUT

Europe holiday fears as five-day pilot and crew strike to hit flights next month

With that in mind, you can expect to pay an extra £2.20 on every extra 10ml brought into the UK.

It comes as Brits are set to be charged more for vaping as part of new rules also coming into force on October 1.

The change will see a flat rate of 22p per millilitre or £2.20 per 10ml on vaping liquid, regardless of how much nicotine it contains.

It means a single 10ml bottle of juice currently scanning for £3.99 will rise to £6.63 by next week.

Meanwhile, any three for £10 deals on 10m liquid will rise to £17.92.

The rise in e-liquid duty was first announced in the Spring Budget in 2024 but reconfirmed by former Chancellor Rachel Reeves in the Autumn Budget last year.

When Inglewood High traveled to Texas last month to play Westlake High from Austin, two football players who were listed on the Southern Section transfer portal as not cleared played in the game, according to video obtained by The Times.

Last week, in a game against Long Beach Poly played at SoFi Stadium, Inglewood coach Mil’Von James was not on the sideline, according to a report from the Daily Breeze.

The Southern Section cannot make personnel changes when a school violates rules, but it can prevent teams from playing in the playoffs if schools don’t self-report violations and decline to take action.

The Southern Section and Inglewood Unified School District have declined comment. The two players are still eligible to play this season if cleared. One was cleared last week with a valid change of address. The other has not been cleared. Both are missing from Inglewood’s roster on MaxPreps.

James came to Inglewood, which is 4-1 this season, after being fired at Hawkins in 2016 following the discovery of ineligible players, resulting in Hawkins forfeiting all its games and going 0-13. Since then, the City Section established a rule that teams must exchange rosters before games to verify that players are eligible, known as the “Hawkins rule.”

James took over at Inglewood in 2019 and has built a successful program.

It’s not known if James’ absence will be for one game or multiple games. The only other Southern Section action would be forcing Inglewood to forfeit games the players played in, but the school lost to Westlake, making a forfeit moot.

Prof Aidan Fowler, national director of patient safety at NHS England, said the expansion of Martha’s Rule would give families and NHS staff “a critical new lifeline” to help improve care and save more lives.

Staff can themselves ask for a review from a different team if they are concerned the appropriate action is not being taken.

During the eight-month pilot at the seven trusts, 69 calls were made to dedicated Martha’s Rule phone numbers, including some calls relating to acute deterioration following an urgent clinical review. In some cases, it led to a patient having immediate surgery or being transferred to intensive care.

Prof Fowler said: “Early testing has shown that Martha’s Rule can work well in busy A&Es and builds on the evidence from our adult and children’s wards, where thousands of calls have been made by patients, families and staff to date, with many leading to changes in treatment and potentially life-saving interventions.”

Health minister Baroness Merron said the initiative was part of “wider efforts to put patient safety at the heart of the NHS.”

Actor Jason Watkins, whose two-and-a-half-year-old daughter Maude died from sepsis in 2011, praised the rollout, saying Martha’s rule “is making a difference on the wards”.

“It enables a parent to have a voice and if there is an issue, that is addressed,” he told BBC Breakfast, and urged parents: “if you’re at all worried when you go into A&E, ask for a second opinion.”

Watkins said the rollout of Martha’s law could benefit medical professionals too, explaining: “Those extremely dedicated medical practitioners, nurses, doctors and consultants, it gives them a pause and a thought ‘am I doing everything I can to assess this child accurately?'”.

Patients and their families can check with their local hospital or NHS trust where Martha’s Rule is available by visiting the trust’s website or asking hospital staff.

Scotland is beginning to use Martha’s Rule and Northern Ireland is considering using it, while Wales has a similar scheme called Call4Concern.

A NEW train ticket rule has officially rolled out to make life much easier for travellers.

Passengers on Britain’s biggest train operators will now spend much less money when their train is cancelled.

For the first time, passengers left stranded at stations can use an alternative operator’s service to complete their journey free of charge.

The new rule which came into force on Sunday, September 20 hopes to end limbo at stations following cancellations and end the need for costly re-bookings.

Many regular travellers will be aware that this scheme already operates across all 13 publicly-owned operators, such as LNER, Southern, South Western Railway and Greater Anglia.

However, from now, Avanti West Coast, Chiltern Railways, CrossCountry and Great Western Railway will also be involved, offering more stability on a host of key intercity routes across the UK.

GHOST TRAIN

UK’s busiest long-distance train line cuts HUNDREDS of journeys over Christmas

ON TRACK

First look at £4.3bn UK station set to connect passengers to over 100 locations

East Midlands Railway will also be joining the scheme at a later date.

The new scheme comes ahead of the establishment of Great British Railways (GBR) – a programme to transfer all rail services to public ownership and to create a “one-stop shop” for train travel.

Valid ticket holders can travel with another train operator on a direct or reasonable alternative route, but the service must depart within two hours before or after the original cancelled train.

To claim the new ticket, passengers will need to show their original ticket to customer support staff as a proof of purchase, and will not be required to download the new one.

When the new scheme was unveiled, Rail Minister, Lord Hendy, said: “This is a simple, common-sense change that puts passengers first.

“No one should be left stranded because of a fragmented railway when their journey is disrupted.

“From this weekend, if your train is cancelled, you can get on another operator’s service and carry on your journey without paying again.  

“We’re fixing the railway from the ground up, making it simpler, fairer and easier to use, as we move towards Great British Railways and put public service back at the heart of our railways.”

New mandatory entry requirement for UK travellers is about to come into force

British passport holders could be turned away at the border in Spain, France, Italy and several other destinations due to a post-Brexit scheme set to launch later in 2026.

Once the initiative comes into effect, UK holidaymakers will be required to pay for a digital travel authorisation document to gain entry to around 30 European nations. British travellers will need to register with the European Travel Information and Authorisation System (ETIAS), which will soon become an entry requirement for visa-exempt nationals visiting a specific group of 30 countries.

With a valid ETIAS travel authorisation, travellers can enter these European countries as often as they wish for short-term stays, typically up to 90 days within any 180-day period. Originally, the ETIAS was expected to cost around 7 euros per person, however it has since been confirmed the fee will be nearly triple that amount, coming in at 20 euros per eligible traveller.

Those aged under 18 or over 70 are exempt, meaning a family of four travelling with two children would pay 40 euros in total. Once the scheme is up and running, failing to hold a valid ETIAS could see you refused entry to any of the following countries: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, and Switzerland.

The scheme has faced numerous delays, and it is now anticipated that ETIAS will be launched over the next few months. The ETIAS is stored electronically against the passport.

While the vast majority of applications are expected to be approved “almost immediately”, if the system detects an error in your ETIAS submission, it could face rejection. Reasons for ETIAS applications being refused are reported to include holding an invalid passport, being considered a “risk” or having a Schengen Information System (SIS) alert, submitting an incomplete application, or failing to attend a mandatory interview.

Should your ETIAS application be turned down, you have the right to lodge an appeal.

A major rule will come into force this weekend (Sunday, 20 September) for anyone travelling by train – and it’s good news, with the freedom to board other services

There’s nothing worse than your train being cancelled, even more so when you know the next one isn’t for another hour or two, or perhaps that was the last one of the day. Travellers risk being fined if they’re caught on board a railway line or route that differs from their original ticket, with others opting to fork out for a last-minute train ticket on another line, just so they can get home for the evening.

However, this travel dread is about to ease, as passengers will easily be able to board an alternative service with another train operator for free if their original train has been cancelled. The significant change will launch on Sunday, 20 September, in hopes of making rail travel easier, as more train operators are involved in the new scheme, as confirmed by the government.

While cross-operator ticket acceptance is already available across publicly owned train operators, from Sunday, four major railway companies will join the scheme: Avanti West Coast, Chiltern Railways, CrossCountry and Great Western Railway. This means that a total of 17 train operators will be part of the initiative from this weekend, with East Midlands Railway also set to join, although a date has yet to be confirmed.

What train companies are involved in the scheme?

• c2c
• Gatwick Express
• Greater Anglia
• Great Northern
• LNER
• London Northwestern Railway
• Northern
• Southeastern
• Southern
• Thameslink
• South Western Railway
• Transpennine Express
• West Midlands Railway
• CrossCountry
• Great Western Railway
• Avanti West Coast
• Chiltern Railways

Rail Minister, Lord Hendy, said: “This is a simple, common-sense change that puts passengers first. No one should be left stranded because of a fragmented railway when their journey is disrupted. We’re fixing the railway from the ground up, making it simpler, fairer and easier to use, as we move towards Great British Railways and put public service back at the heart of our railways.”

What do I need to do?

If your original train and route are cancelled, you can simply use that same ticket to board another service with a rival railway operator included in the scheme. There’s no need to buy another ticket or to fork out for any additional fees. It’s important to note that the alternative train you’re boarding must depart two hours before or after your originally booked service. Additionally, the service must be a “direct or reasonable alternative route”.

Are there any other changes to train travel?

Elsewhere, new pay-as-you-go services will be launched across Greater Manchester, the Midlands and the south-east at more than 100 train stations by next year. This is due to a £156 million investment from the government as part of a ticketing scheme.

A new Great British Railways website and app are also in the works, in hopes of making train travel that much easier. Alex Robertson, chief executive of the independent watchdog, Transport Focus, said: “When passengers are delayed, they just want to get where they need to be, not worry about whether their ticket will be accepted on another train.

“This is a welcome change that we have long called for and should make it easier for people when services are cancelled. The key now is making sure passengers get clear information about their options whenever disruption occurs.”

Do you have a travel story to share? Email webtravel@reachplc.com

A NEW train ticket rule will be rolled out this weekend, allowing passengers to switch to rival operators for free.

The changes look to make disrupted journeys smoother for travellers and mean they won’t be forced to purchase last-minute pricey tickets.

Those left stranded after a train cancellation will be able to travel on services run by different operators at no additional charge, the government has announced.

The changes are set to be introduced on Sunday, September 20, and promise a smoother travel experience for those facing disrupted journeys.

Many travellers will be aware that cross-operator ticket acceptance is already available across all publicly owned operators.

However, as of Sunday, CrossCountry, Great Western Railway, Avanti West Coast and Chiltern Railways will all become part of the scheme too.

ON TRACK

Underrated English seaside town is getting a new fast train from London

FULL STEAM

First look at new Great British Railways trains being rolled out across the UK

Passengers travelling on any of the services included in the scheme can hop onto the next train if their original route is cancelled, even if it is a different service run by a different operator, without needing to buy a new ticket.

It must be departing two hours before or after your original cancelled service, and the new journey must be a “direct or reasonable alternative route”.

All that is required to complete a journey is showing customer support staff your original ticket to serve as proof of purchase.

Rail Minister, Lord Hendy, said: “This is a simple, common-sense change that puts passengers first.

“No one should be left stranded because of a fragmented railway when their journey is disrupted.

“We’re fixing the railway from the ground up, making it simpler, fairer and easier to use, as we move towards Great British Railways and put public service back at the heart of our railways.”

It is just one of the moves that comes as part of the government’s overhaul of the rail system.

Ahead of the establishment of Great British Railways, travellers can also expect to see pay-as-you-go services rolled out across Greater Manchester, the Midlands and the south-east thanks to a £156million investment by the Government into new ticketing scheme.

A new GBR website and app is also being designed to act as a “one-stop shop” for those heading out on a rail journey.

Jet2 passengers with flights before midday can check-in and drop off their luggage during a four-and-a-half hour window the day before their trip at 12 UK airports

Jet2 has confirmed a rule allowing passengers with flights before midday to check-in and drop off their luggage a day earlier.

Passengers usually have to arrive at their departure airport at least two hours before their flight and queue at check-in desks to get boarding passes before dropping off luggage.

However, Jet2 offers a twilight check-in service at 12 airports across the UK which allows passengers to bypass this process the night before, making morning departures less stressful.

Not only can passengers save valuable time on the day of their flight, they can also avoid having to wait in long check-in queues to drop off bags.

Jet2’s twilight check-in service is only available to passengers with flights due to depart before midday at the 12 airports listed below.

If you have an eligible flight, you can use the free twilight service within a four and a half hour window the evening before your morning flight and drop your bags off between 4.30pm and 9pm.

Passengers must also check-in for flights online any time from 28 days and no later than 24 hours before their flight via Jet2’s website or app.

Explaining how the service works, Jet2 said: “Check in online. You need to do this no later than 24 hours before your flight, but to make sure you don’t miss out, we recommend you check in as soon as online check-in opens, 28 days before you travel.

“Drop your bags at the airport. One person in your party can drop off up to six people’s bags. Simply take your luggage to the airport between 16:30-21:00 the evening before your flight. Don’t forget your boarding passes and passports!

“Sail straight through to security. On the morning of your flight, bypass check-in and head to security. Relax and enjoy your getaway!”

UK airports where Jet2’s twilight check-in is available

• Birmingham
• Bristol
• East Midlands
• Edinburgh
• Glasgow International
• Leeds Bradford
• Liverpool
• London Gatwick
• London Luton
• London Stansted
• Manchester
• Newcastle

NEW YORK CITY: A five-member international bloc known as the “Quintet” on Thursday rejected the prospect of any “parallel governing structures” in Sudan.

As its representatives wrapped up a “Good Offices” mission to Khartoum, they reaffirmed the need for full respect for the country’s sovereignty, unity and territorial integrity.

The rebuke, a reference to a rival administration the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces seeks to establish amid its conflict with the Sudanese Armed Forces, came after the Quintet — the African Union, the Intergovernmental Authority on Development, the Arab League, the EU and the UN — held talks with Sudanese leaders in an effort to revive a Sudanese-led political process to end the civil war, which began in April 2023.

The delegates met the chair and deputy chair of Sudan’s Transitional Sovereignty Council, the prime minister, and the undersecretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation. They also attended a working dinner hosted by the finance minister that drew a number of political and civilian figures.

Beyond government officials, the Quintet said its representatives met a range of political and civilian groups, including the Democratic Bloc, and heard from a committee tasked with fostering the conditions for a nationwide “Sudanese Dialogue,” which briefed the delegates on its work. A meeting with independent women’s and youth groups concluded the Quintet’s mission.

The bloc described the visit as being “in the spirit of listening to the stakeholders on the ground,” with the aim of linking its diplomatic engagement outside of Sudan with initiatives emerging within the country.

“There is no military solution to the conflict in Sudan,” the Quintet said, adding that any durable political process must be paired with concrete steps to protect civilians and end hostilities.

The bloc said it remained convinced that a “credible and inclusive Sudanese led and Sudanese owned” political track can still deliver a transition to a democratic, civilian-led government that reflects the aspirations of the Sudanese people.

MADRID: Spain’s ‌lower house voted on Thursday to grant citizenship to Sahrawis born when Madrid administered the North African territory of Western Sahara as a colony, a move that could inflame delicate relations with Morocco.

The legislation, which a statement from parliament said was approved with 168 votes in favor, 31 against and 145 abstentions, would also allow descendants of those granted citizenship to acquire it.

Some 70,000 to 110,000 Sahrawis could be eligible for Spanish citizenship, according ‌to local media.

Spain’s ‌ruling Socialist Party and its junior ‌left-wing partner Sumar, which filed the initiative, were among those who supported the bill, while the opposition conservative People’s Party abstained and far-right Vox voted against it.

“With the adoption of this legislation, we are restoring – and I emphasise, restoring – the Spanish national identity card to those Sahrawis who once held it and from whom this state ‌took it away,” said Tesh ‌Sidi of the leftist Sumar coalition, the first woman of Sahrawi ‌origin to serve in parliament.

Tensions with Morocco

Tensions have ‌grown between Spain and Morocco following the mass arrival of at least 70,000 migrants in Spain’s North African enclave of Ceuta in July.

Spain controlled Western Sahara under various administrative arrangements ‌from 1884 until 1976. Morocco claims sovereignty over Western Sahara and began asserting control over the territory after Spanish rule ended.

The Algerian-backed Polisario Front independence movement seeks recognition of an independent state called the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic.

Many Sahrawis live in refugee camps in Tindouf, Algeria, or elsewhere abroad, while others remain in Western Sahara. Spain had supported a referendum in the territory — in line with United Nations resolutions — until Sanchez’s government reversed course in 2022 and backed Morocco’s position. Tensions eased somewhat after that shift, with Madrid describing Rabat’s autonomy proposal for Western Sahara as “serious, credible and realistic”.

JOJO Siwa has addressed whether she’d date women again – as she lifted the lid on her relationship with Chris Hughes.

The US singer and dancer, 23, struck up a romance with Love Island alum Chris, 33, on last year’s edition of Celebrity Big Brother.

Prior to entering the House, JoJo had been in a relationship with Kath Ebbs and identified as a lesbian.

Although during her time on the show, the star later said she wanted to identify as queer.

Speaking more recently on the Wildmen podcast, JoJo refused to rule out dating women again.

She told hosts Dylan Sprouse and Brendan Columbus about her relationship with Chris: “I thought it was just another friend adding to the thing, right?

together again

JoJo Siwa strips to bikini for loved-up reunion with boyfriend Chris Hughes

HUGHE JOB

Chris Hughes lined up for huge new Big Brother job – and JoJo could join him

“Once realised I wasn’t grossed out by the thought of him being a boy, I was like “whoa.”

JoJo continued: “It was definitely… it was weird, because I’d never thought that before.”

The star explained while she had attractive male friends, she never thought of them romantically – joking her bridal party would be “all dudes.”

JoJo went on: “With Chris… it actually was fascinating because I physically thought I would never be with a dude, ever. I just never thought it was possible.

“And people always go, “What if something happened with Chris, who would you date? – boys or would you go for girls?

“At this point, I have no right to say. You can find interviews on me where I’ve sworn how gross dudes are and I’ll never be with one.

“And now I’m head over heels in love with one.

“People always ask that and it’s always just like, “I have no right to say”, but I really do think that Chris is very much so a special dude.”

For the first time since World War II, a far-right party is within reach of power at state level in Germany, after coming first in Saxony-Anhalt on Sunday.

The Alternative for Germany (AfD) won 44 percent of the vote, stopping short of an overall majority but making clear its wide political significance.

On election night, AfD’s leader in the state called on other political groups to cooperate. “As a democrat, I will reach out to all those who wish to work with us to bring about a fundamental political turnaround,” Ulrich Siegmund said.

Yet, forming a government will prove difficult. The AfD has been classified as “far-right extremist” by the domestic intelligence agency and other political groups remain wary of striking an alliance.

The AfD has dismissed accusations of extremism and mainstream parties have been unable to halt its surge in the polls over recent months. Latest polling indicates the party, which stands for strong restrictions on immigration, restoring ties with Russia, cutting support to Ukraine and quitting the euro, is Germany’s most popular at national level.

The Saxony-Anhalt election could be a harbinger of a historic return of the far-right in the 2029 national election, when forecasts say the AfD stands a realistic chance of finishing first.

What happened in Saxony-Anhalt?

Siegmund, the charismatic 35-year-old who attracted thousands to his campaign rallies, said AfD “made history”.

“The people have made it absolutely clear that they finally want political change and, above all, they have shown that they want it with ⁠us,” he told supporters.

The AfD achieved its best-ever election result in Saxony-Anhalt with 44 percent of the vote, leaving all other parties far behind. The incumbent centre-right Christian Democrats (CDU), led by Chancellor Friedrich Merz, scored less than half of that share with 17 percent.

The AfD is projected to gain 39 of the 83 seats in the state parliament in Magdeburg, leaving it three short of the 42 needed for an absolute majority.

That means the party must find allies, but all other mainstream parties refuse to work with the far-right, a strategy of non-cooperation known as the “firewall”. The AfD has so far never participated in a governing coalition in Germany’s 16 states nor in its federal government.

While he now appears willing to strike deals with other parties to come to power, previously Siegmund signalled unwillingness to find middle ground with other political groups. Leading up to the vote, he stated that he was only interested in governing alone to bring about fundamental political change in Germany.

How did AfD fare in recent elections?

The election takes the AfD one step closer to advancing its agenda, while also reflecting the growing unpopularity of Germany’s ruling coalition.

In Saxony-Anhalt, the party more than doubled its vote share — from 21 percent in the last election. By contrast, the CDU’s vote halved from 37 percent to 17 percent, its worst result ever in the east-central German state.

Federal elections last year similarly resulted in a landmark performance by the AfD, which emerged as the largest opposition faction in the Bundestag, the German federal parliament in Berlin. The party came second with 21 percent of the vote, securing its highest-ever showing.

In state elections in Baden-Wurttemberg and Rhineland-Palatinate earlier this year too, the AfD more than doubled its seats — though it still finished third. In 2024, the AfD emerged victorious in the Thuringia state election and second in the Brandenburg state election — both were firsts for the party.

The AfD’s electoral gains in Saxony-Anhalt mirror growing dissatisfaction among voters — especially in the former East Germany — about the stagnant economy, high unemployment and domestic security, which the party largely pins on immigration.

What challenges lie ahead for AfD?

Since its formation in 2013, the AfD has been embroiled in various scandals and has faced major controversies, including alleged foreign espionage links, secret deportation plans and internal nepotism.

The party went from a fringe Eurosceptic group to the country’s most powerful opposition force in little more than a decade, becoming too extreme even for the European Parliament’s far-right Identity & Democracy group. It kicked the party out in May 2024 after lead AfD candidate Maximilian Krah stated that not everyone in the SS – Adolf Hitler’s infamous Nazi paramilitary organisation – was a criminal.

Krah has also been under investigation by German prosecutors for alleged illegal payments, bribery and money laundering linked to China and Russia. The German parliament last year decided to lift the far-right legislator’s immunity to help investigators.

AfD politicians have also come under fire for employing family members, including in Saxony-Anhalt, where several parliamentarians are reported to have employed relatives.

Bundestag President, Julia Klockner, banned seven AfD employees from entering the German parliament over security concerns, after they failed internal background reliability checks due to their ties to right-wing extremist networks and past criminal convictions.

Senior AfD figures also faced a backlash for attending a secretive meeting to discuss mass deportation plans for people with a migration background.

What are the AfD’s prospects for the national election in 2029?

Pollsters are unanimous in forecasting the AfD as the largest party in Germany in the next national election in 2029, with around 28 percent of the vote.

That would mark a major transformation in the German political landscape from 2025, when the CDU and its ally the Christian Social Union together won 28.5 percent of the vote.

Yet even that outcome would not necessarily give AfD the ability to govern. If other parties maintain a “firewall” policy, that could prevent the far-right party from forming a coalition government.

Still, the Saxony-Anhalt election has been received by some politicians as a call for change. “Politics begins with considering reality,” Cem Ozdemir, head of government in the southwestern state of Baden-Wurttemberg and a member of the Green Party, wrote on X.

“That means the AfD is the election winner in Saxony-Anhalt. And that must mean for all democratic forces that nothing can remain as it is, and we must fundamentally reconsider our politics and our political style.”

A major travel change is set to impact British holidaymakers going to and from Europe as of today (7 September), and an expert has issued some crucial advice to avoid disruption

An expert has issued a warning to all Brits travelling to and from Europe as a significant change comes into force.

The European Union’s (EU) Entry/Exit System (EES) was rolled out across airports earlier this year, and, in a bid to reduce travel disruption, member states were permitted to relax some of its restrictions. EU countries such as France, Germany, Italy, Portugal and Spain were allowed to temporarily “lift biometric registration” until the end of summer to ensure there was “some relief for the worst-case scenario”, and temporarily switched off the EES when required.

Many European countries utilised the eased measures, particually during the summer holidays, as the EES requires all British passport holders to create a digital record and register their biometric details, such as fingerprints and a photograph, upon arrival in the Schengen area. However, as of today, Monday, 7 September, the ability to relax EES requirements is expected to have expired, with no formal announcement made of an extension.

With uncertainty building that it could prompt airport chaos if there is no further leeway given to Brits when travelling through the EU and the digital system, an expert has issued a warning about the impacts. Anton Radchenko, aviation expert and CEO of passenger-rights company AirAdvisor, explained: “The part of this most travellers have not clocked is that the risk runs both ways. Everyone worries about queues when arriving in Europe, but British passengers can also become trapped at exit control at a Spanish, Italian or other Schengen airport when trying to fly home.

“If a passenger misses an operating flight solely because of a passport-control queue, there is generally no automatic EU261 right to compensation or free rebooking. Airlines may help voluntarily, but passengers should not assume they will, and many insurance policies only cover specified causes such as public transport failure, so the exact wording needs to be checked.

“If the airline delays the flight because passengers are stuck in the queue, its normal care obligations still apply after the relevant waiting period. If it cancels, passengers remain entitled to a refund or rerouting, even though fixed compensation is unlikely where the border disruption was outside the airline’s control.”

Anton added: “My advice is to treat the return journey as seriously as the flight out. Follow the airport’s arrival-time guidance, go to passport control promptly, alert the airline before the gate closes if the queue becomes excessive and preserve time-stamped evidence showing where the delay occurred.”

There have been reports that some member states may still allow eased measures moving forward, although nothing has been officially announced. A European Commission spokesperson told the Guardian at the beginning of last week: “We are in close and constructive contact with those few member states where some adjustments are needed at certain border crossing points. And during an additional period of operational adjustment that is needed at these few operational border crossing points, the commission stands ready to provide additional support to these member states.”

Meanwhile, Ryanair has called on the EU Commission to “immediately” extend the EES flexibility until next year. Ryanair’s COO Neal McMahon said: “The EU’s handling of EES has been a shambles from start to finish. Airlines, airports and border authorities repeatedly warned Brussels that the rollout was not ready, that it would increase processing times and that it would create excessive queues for passengers. Those warnings were ignored, with EU citizens the ones delayed and disrupted.

“Passengers should not be made to pay the price for the EU’s failed EES rollout. Ryanair calls on the EU Commission to urgently extend the EES derogation until at least Apr 2027, so that airports and border authorities have the time needed to fix malfunctioning kiosks, increase staffing levels and ensure the system can operate efficiently before full enforcement is introduced and passengers are condemned to these excessive border control delays for another season.”

Do you have a travel story to share? Email webtravel@reachplc.com

Sept. 6, 2026 8:33 AM PT

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration on Sunday renewed its appeal to the Supreme Court after a federal judge blocked new restrictions on mail ballots ahead of the midterms.

The filing came after U.S. District Court Judge Indira Talwani extended an order against the U.S. Postal Service enforcing President Trump’s executive order for the November elections.

The legal wrangling comes even as states start sending out mail ballots, leaving the administration little time to make big changes in mail ballot rules.

“Ballots have already begun to be mailed in North Carolina, and more States will begin the mailing process as the injunction remains in place — including Alabama on September 9 and at least five States the week of September 13,” Solicitor Gen. John Sauer said in the filing.

“Once those ballot envelopes enter the mailstream, there is no retrieving them. And while the injunction allows the Postal Service and the States to continue taking steps to ensure that their envelopes satisfy the Rule’s requirements … each day the injunction is in place risks sowing confusion and chaos because the injunction makes those preparatory steps voluntary, rather than mandatory.”

The appeal marks the third time the administration has asked the high court to intervene. The high court has allowed the plan to move forward but not ruled on whether it is legal.

The battle could have major ramifications for this year’s elections, when control of Congress is at stake. Nearly one-third of voters in the U.S. cast mail ballots. Mail ballots are sent to every California voter.

Democratic states and voting rights groups say the changes are unconstitutional and amount to voter suppression. Election officials contend that there isn’t enough time to revise their systems to comply with the new Postal Service directives.

The Trump administration has framed the restrictions as commonsense changes that are within its power to regulate the mail.

“Simply put, the best way to address respondents’ fears about inability to comply with the Rule is to grant an immediate administrative stay of the order, followed by a full stay pending further review,” Sauer said. “That will remove the improper cloud of uncertainty that the district court has cast over the Rule, making clear to all involved that compliance with the Rule is not optional and must start without further delay.”

Trump has long sought to limit mail voting, even though he himself often uses that method to cast his own ballot. He has falsely blamed mail balloting for his 2020 election loss to Democrat Joe Biden, spreading baseless claims of fraud. But so far, he has been unable to change the long-standing voting procedure.

Whitehurst and Fields write for the Associated Press.

A federal judge again Friday blocked the U.S. Postal Service from enacting President Trump’s sweeping new mail ballot rules for the November election, finding that the Postal Service lacks such authority over elections and that neither it nor states such as California are capable of implementing the changes without causing chaos and disenfranchising voters.

U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani noted that election officials from across the country told the court that it is “likely impossible” to comply with the rules, which “makes disenfranchisement more than likely, if not probable” if the Postal Service were to proceed with them.

Talwani’s order — her latest of several halting the plan since this summer — came after a Postal Service whistleblower alleged the agency’s new computer systems for the project are fundamentally flawed; a top Postal Service official acknowledged a key online portal was unfinished; and the Trump administration filed an emergency petition asking the U.S. Supreme Court to allow the plans to proceed anyway.

All this unfolded this week as some of the first mail ballots of the election cycle started going out.

The new rules — which Trump required in a March executive order — would require states to submit complete voter lists to the Postal Service and to adopt new ballot envelopes with individualized voter bar codes designed by the Postal Service, and empower the Postal Service to reject any mail ballots that don’t match those lists.

Trump’s executive order also required the Department of Homeland Security to develop its own lists of eligible citizen voters, ostensibly to be compared against the state lists.

Trump has said the changes are necessary to combat widespread voter fraud, including by non-citizens, though independent election experts say there is no evidence that such fraud exists in large numbers.

Leading Democrats and elections officials in California and other states say the new rules constitute an unlawful federal overreach into state-run elections and a thinly veiled effort by the Trump administration to suppress the vote in a midterm election the GOP is poised to lose.

Talwani, an appointee of President Obama, agreed, finding that the states and voting rights groups are likely to succeed in their claims that the U.S. Constitution reserves the right to regulate elections to the states and Congress — not the executive branch.

Talwani issued her order after holding a contentious hearing in federal court in Boston on Thursday, where she questioned the Postal Service and the dozen conservative-led states supporting it on their ability to implement the changes in time for the Nov. 3 elections. She also heard from California, other liberal-led states and voting rights groups that it would be impossible.

California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta, whose office is helping lead the states’ challenge, hailed Talwani’s order as a crucial reprieve.

“We’ve now secured longer-term relief that will keep the USPS changes blocked while our case moves forward,” Bonta said in a statement to The Times. “We will continue to take all steps to stop the Trump Administration from trampling on voting rights and restricting mail voting.”

Bonta’s office also criticized Department of Justice attorneys for rushing to the Supreme Court before Talwani could issue her order or the U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals could weigh in on an appeal the department had already filed on the matter.

Walter Garcia, a Bonta spokesman, said the Justice Department had “flouted standard procedural rules” by approaching the high court before the lower courts had weighed in, despite the fact that the Postal Service acknowledged Thursday that it was not ready to launch its new portal.

“It defies common sense that they would seek emergency relief from the U.S. Supreme Court when USPS is unprepared to implement the rule now,” Garcia said.

State law requires that all registered voters be sent a ballot in the mail, and more than 80% of California voters have used those ballots to vote in recent elections.

In its emergency petition to the Supreme Court, the Trump administration argued that an earlier temporary restraining order by Talwani to halt the new rules from taking effect was “baseless” and would cause “serious irreparable harm” to the federal government, states and voting public.

“To forestall those harms and protect the public interest, this Court should grant an immediate stay, making clear to States that they should begin efforts to comply if they have not done so already,” wrote Solicitor Gen. D. John Sauer.

The swirl of litigation has created uncertainty around the Nov. 3 election. It also reflects the Trump administration’s desperate race to get the lower court orders lifted and the new rules implemented in time for that election — the rushed nature of which was a prime focus of the whistleblower.

The unidentified Postal Service employee alleged in a statement released Tuesday by congressional Democrats and submitted in court by Bonta’s office that the agency has been rushing to implement the changes — in defiance of an earlier court order — using “an entirely new and untested set of IT systems” that could cause “catastrophic problems” and disenfranchise millions of voters nationwide.

The Postal Service in a statement Friday said that while its system was developed on an “accelerated schedule,” quality and security standards “were not compromised,” and the agency stands behind “both the rigor of our process and the resulting system.”

At Thursday’s hearing, Talwani appeared frustrated when a Justice Department attorney was unable to tell her the status of the portal.

In a subsequent declaration hours later, Steven W. Monteith, the Postal Service’s chief customer and marketing officer, said officials were still making “refinements” to the portal, but anticipated being able to make it available “for voluntary use by sometime next week.”

Talwani previously issued an order blocking the Postal Service changes from being implemented in California and more than 20 other suing states in June. The Trump administration appealed that decision to the 1st Circuit, which declined to lift it, and then on an emergency basis to the U.S. Supreme Court. In early August, Talwani issued a second ruling for the League of Women Voters and other voting rights groups, blocking the changes nationwide.

On Aug. 24, the Supreme Court set aside Talwani’s order in the states’ case, finding that the states’ challenge was essentially premature because the Postal Service had yet to formally initiate the changes or require state compliance. However, the court explicitly noted that it was not reaching any conclusions as to the legality of the pending rules themselves. “On that score, time will tell,” it said.

The states and voting rights groups promptly filed new lawsuits challenging the legality of the rules, which the Postal Service formally issued Aug. 21. And it is in those cases that Talwani issued her ruling Friday.

She wrote that the voting rights groups had standing to challenge the Postal Service rules nationwide in part because the “chaos” created by the rules’ stiff deadlines significantly interfered with their mission to provide voters with accurate and reliable information about how to vote — and whether to use mail ballots to do so.

David Becker, executive director of the nonpartisan Center for Election Innovation & Research, said in remarks prior to Talwani’s Friday order that he was “very, very confident” that the Postal Service changes will be blocked for the upcoming elections, and that “mail voting is going to go forward as conveniently and securely as it always has.”

That’s in part because election officials nationwide are “telling the courts that even if they wanted to, they could not implement it,” he said — including in a legal filing Becker helped nearly 100 local elections officials from red and blue states file in separate litigation challenging the rules.