A travel warning has been issued to Brits jetting off abroad(Image: Getty Images/Stock Image)
Airports across the nation will be bracing for another busy travel season as we head towards the October half-term, with thousands of families set to jet off abroad on a sun-soaked getaway. But amid the excitement, holidaymakers have been issued a warning and advised to be well prepared for the new rules.
Some UK airports have upgraded their security scanners, meaning that travellers can carry up to 2 litres of liquid through security and no longer need to remove liquids from their hand luggage. Additional rules have also been introduced for security checks, which can vary from airport to airport, making it even more confusing when travelling abroad.
To ensure that holidaymakers are fully prepared before jetting off abroad in the coming weeks, Heathrow Airport issued an update to all travellers. Taking to X, formerly Twitter, the UK’s largest airport shared its “top tips” for going through security and warned: “Security requirements may vary by destination, both within and outside the UK.”
It comes as Heathrow has upgraded its security scanners. On the airport website, they confirmed: “You can now keep liquids and large electronic items in your cabin bag, so getting through security is quicker and easier”. They then outlined that passengers passing through Heathrow should:
The change is thanks to new CT scanners that provide security staff with detailed 3D images of bags, allowing travellers to keep their two-litre liquids in their hand luggage when passing through airport security. However, it’s important to understand that “not all airports use the same security equipment”, as Heathrow warned.
They said: “If you’re flying from another UK or international airport, check the local security rules before you travel. Liquid limits and security checks may be different.” They further explained that “many airports outside Heathrow still have a 100ml liquids limit” and it’s best to check the rules before travelling. This also applies to UK airports, with many still obtaining the 100ml rule.
While many UK airports still have the 100ml liquid rule in place, some have relaxed measures. A number of airports no longer require travellers to store their liquids in a clear plastic bag, and they can also be kept in their hand luggage when going through security. However, as specific rules can vary, it’s best to check directly with the airport you’re flying from, especially in the run-up to the October half-term.
Do you have a travel story to share? Email webtravel@reachplc.com
NEW travel technology is being rolled out across UK airports – which will let you leave without having to scan your passport.
There is nothing worse than returning from your holiday tired and wanting to go home, only to have to dig out your passport to travel through the e-gates.
But within the next few weeks new ‘contactless borders’ are expected to be installed at Birmingham and East Midlands airports which won’t require you to scan your passport.
Instead, the new system will scan your face and match it to your passport image stored in its system.
The system would work by airlines sending passport images of British passengers arriving each day, to border control.
Anyone then not recognised at an e-gate, will be asked to revert to the current method of scanning their passport.
Read more on travel inspo
If this also failed, then the passenger would need to go to a manned border force desk.
The aim of the new process is to reduce long queues at airports.
The Times reports that it would then eventually be used across all e-gates at a number of airports.
This includes Birmingham, Bristol, Cardiff, East Midlands, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Gatwick, Heathrow, London City, Luton, Manchester, Newcastle and Stansted airports, by early next year.
Initially, it would only be for British passport holders, but could extend to other nationalities in the future.
Phil Douglas, the director general of Border Force, said: “It will mean we have a more secure border and a much faster transit through the airport.
“It’s quicker, it’s more modern, it’s more secure.”
Other new e–gate rules were rolled out earlier this year, which now allows kids aged as young as eight to use them, rather than manual checks.
The amendment aims to clarify campaign finance rules for candidates running for a seat on the board of education, which overseas LAUSD and its approximately 350,000 students.
Repetitive language in the Los Angeles City Charter would be deleted and would make clear the same campaign finance rules apply to both mayoral candidates and board of education candidates, except in certain instances, the measure says.
Among those requirements are rules governing campaign contribution limits, filing deadlines, public disclosures and fundraising windows.
Judge Leibowitz’s decision underscores state jurisdiction over voter qualifications, limiting federal actions.
Published On 2 Oct 20262 Oct 2026
A United States federal judge has ruled that a law criminalising voting by noncitizens is unconstitutional, dealing a setback for President Donald Trump’s administration as it cracks down on alleged election fraud ahead of November’s midterm elections.
US District Judge David Leibowitz in Miami dismissed a federal case on Thursday against Chelsea Cox, a Florida resident originally from Jamaica who had been charged in October 2025 with illegally voting in the 2020 presidential election.
list of 3 itemsend of list
Leibowitz, who was nominated to the bench by former Democratic President Joe Biden, found that under the US Constitution, only individual states, not the US Congress, have the authority to set voter qualifications.
Since every state already requires US citizenship to vote, he wrote, it is up to Florida, not the Department of Justice, to prosecute Cox for breaking that rule. “Florida can and does,” he wrote, noting the state already has its own laws against the conduct Cox is accused of.
The ruling applies only to Cox’s case and it does not bind judges elsewhere, though about 45 similar cases remain pending nationwide. At least four other defendants have raised the same constitutional challenge.
Court filings show Cox entered the US as a tourist in 1999, overstayed her visa, and later used a fraudulent birth certificate from the US Virgin Islands, a US territory in the Caribbean, to obtain a Florida driver’s licence and register to vote in 2012.
Trump has falsely claimed that noncitizen voting, which is already illegal and rare, cost him the 2020 election, and has cast it as part of a broader effort by Democrats to dilute Republican support.
The Department of Justice has charged at least 60 people with the offence since Trump returned to office in January 2025.
Among 129 people charged with “voting by an alien” since 2021, none was accused of conspiring to sway an election, backing a candidate, or being paid to vote, according to Reuters. Most were found to be lawful permanent residents who had registered by mistake or on the incorrect advice of an election worker or government clerk.
Cox’s lawyer, Bruce Udolf, welcomed the ruling and said he hoped authorities would not now seek to deport her, citing her declining health conditions.
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers have been ordered not to engage in high-speed car chases and to make vehicle stops only if they have completed specific training, under new internal guidance issued after several drivers were shot in encounters with ICE.
A memo sent to officers in ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations division and obtained by the Associated Press warned they are not any under circumstances authorized to chase vehicles that fail to pull over. Instead, officers should take down the vehicles’ information for further investigation, according to the memo signed by ICE’s executive associate director, Marcos D. Charles, and dated Wednesday.
The new guidance comes after ICE-initiated vehicle stops have repeatedly escalated when drivers have refused to cooperate or tried to flee. ICE agents have opened fire during more than a dozen such encounters since last year, killing at least four people and wounding several others.
President Trump’s administration has faced internal tension over how to handle traffic stops, which are seen as particularly high-risk encounters.
After fatal shootings of drivers in Maine and Texas in July, ICE officers were directed to temporarily pause most vehicle stops. But the next day, Trump went on social media to direct the agency to continue traffic stops, calling them “one of ICE’s most important and effective Crime Fighting tools.”
ICE has faced intense pressure from the White House to deport more people who are in the country illegally, and its arrests have reached record numbers. At the same time, the agency’s rapid hiring spree last year resulted in some poorly vetted and trained officers hitting the streets.
In a statement, ICE downplayed the significance of the memo, which said the new guidance was intended to replace and amend previous directives issued earlier this year, last year and in 2018.
“Occasionally, ICE leadership issues guidance reminders to law enforcement officers,” the statement said. “Vehicle stops and arrests of illegal aliens continue.”
The new memo outlines steps intended to improve the safety of vehicle stops for ICE officers, drivers they are targeting, their passengers and the public.
The memo told ICE’s field office directors that they must ensure vehicles used for traffic stops have lights and sirens that let the public know they are law enforcement vehicles when activated. Underthe guidance, all officers on the scenes of vehicle stops must wear and activate their body cameras.
In addition, only officers who have completed one of five specific agency training courses can conduct vehicle stops. Officers who have not completed the courses can participate in vehicle stops only “in a support capacity” as passengers and cannot be the drivers of any of the vehicles involved.
The guidance says ICE officers can continue to use a controversial technique known as pinning, which is defined as “using a vehicle or physical barrier to trap or stop a car,” but only if they have received special training. Similarly, only trained officers can use spike strips that deflate tires to prevent drivers from fleeing.
The memo came the day that courtroom testimony highlighted ways in which two ICE officers involved in a vehicle stop, pursuit and shooting that wounded a delivery driver in Austin last month would not have complied with the new guidance.
During a bond hearing for Wilber Rafael Garces Perez, testimony showed that the officer who shot him wasn’t wearing a body-worn camera. The ICE officer who did have a camera was driving in a separate car and turned it off during the pursuit.
Prosecutors presented surveillance video that showed an ICE agent chasing Garces Perez at high speeds through residential streets after he fled an initial traffic stop.
Garces Perez faces federal assault charges after investigators say he struck an ICE officer with his driver’s side mirror. That officer then shot into Perez’s vehicle, lodging a bullet in his back, officials say.
Attorneys for Garces Perez have called the charges against him “retaliation” and have argued that the camera footage was inconclusive because it didn’t fully capture the moment when he allegedly tried to flee.
Foley writes for the Associated Press. AP reporter Anna Wilder contributed to this report from Austin, Texas.
Putin warned the West he would deploy nuclear weapons if necessary to defend the Russian Baltic exclave of Kaliningrad.
Published On 1 Oct 20261 Oct 2026
Russian President Vladimir Putin has ruled out a ceasefire on long-range strikes with Ukraine as Moscow steps up its campaign of aerial attacks on Kyiv.
“We are told: ‘Let them stop striking your refineries, and you will stop striking their ships.’ It is simply ridiculous,” Putin said on Thursday at the Valdai political forum in Moscow.
list of 3 itemsend of list
The remarks followed a meeting between United States President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in New York on September 22, when Zelenskyy said Kyiv was ready to cease strikes on Russian oil refineries and other energy facilities if Moscow also stopped its attacks on Ukrainian energy infrastructure.
Speaking at the forum of the Moscow-based think tank, Putin said Ukraine had “partially achieved its objectives” with these strikes, with attacks on Russian oil refineries having cost the country 1 percent of its gross domestic product (GDP), but added that Russia was now responding in kind.
Russia has ramped up long-range strikes, targeting Ukraine’s steel companies as well as supply chains, notably in the rail sector. Ukraine accuses Moscow of deliberately hitting civilian targets and keeping Kyiv on a near-constant state of alert as it braces for another tough winter.
A Russian drone struck a school in Kyiv on Thursday, according to city officials, as the Ukrainian capital endured relentless aerial attacks. No casualties were reported as children and staff at the school were in shelters when the drone hit.
Putin added that Russia would prefer to end the conflict in Ukraine through talks and wanted it to be a neutral country after the end of hostilities.
The nuclear option
He warned the West not to escalate the standoff over Ukraine by threatening the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad, which is wedged between Poland and Lithuania, and pledged to defend it with nuclear weapons if necessary.
“If it comes to a direct attack on the Russian Federation – in this case, we are referring to Kaliningrad, and perhaps other territories as well – the question of the Russian Federation deploying all the weapons at our country’s disposal will, of course, inevitably and immediately be on the agenda,” he said.
Putin’s comments followed a diplomatic note which NATO said this week it had received from Russia, warning the Western military alliance it would be ready to resort to nuclear weapons if NATO attempted to cut off Russia’s Baltic exclave.
Putin warned that cycles of escalation in international conflict could quickly lead to dangerous scenarios. “We must realise that the moment when nothing can be changed any longer may come very quickly and unexpectedly for everyone. The logic of escalating, increasingly harsh retaliatory measures leads to a fatal point of no return,” he said.
On the contrary, in the event of a “favourable scenario”, Putin said the assets of Western companies that Moscow had seized could potentially be returned. Putin last month ordered the seizure of businesses and assets of Swiss food giant Nestle, French retailer Auchan, the former Leroy Merlin DIY chain and German wholesaler and food retailer Metro.
A STRICT beach rule is set to be lifted today after being enforced for more than five months.
Hundreds of seaside locations across the UK will now be open to all visitors.
Dog walkers will be able to walk their pets on Britain’s beaches once more, as the seasonal ban is lifted today (October 1).
More than 600 coastal areas across the UK will now welcome a host of four-legged friends, with dogs able to visit the sites any time of the day.
The rule typically comes into force from May until the end of September, which sees dogs banned from beaches entirely or restricted to certain areas.
Other councils place timed entry restrictions, where pups are not allowed at the seaside during the busiest periods – usually from 10am to 6pm.
The rules come under Public Spaces Protection Orders (PSPOs), which can result in fixed penalties when breached.
In this case, first-time offenders may be given a penalty of £100, with a maximum fine of £500.
However, even with the ban lifted, some councils still require dogs to be on leads while walking on footpaths, promenades, piers and zig zags.
The seasonal ban comes every year with the aim of keeping beaches clean and safe during the busier summer months, especially when children may be visiting the coast.
Foul left behind by pets can also act as a major health hazard – even if the majority of dog owners are responsible enough to pick it up.
The rules do not apply to guide dogs, who are allowed on beaches at all times while working and in a harness.
A United States immigration judge has ruled the leader of Wisconsin’s largest mosque can be deported under a controversial law that United States President Donald Trump’s administration has used against non-citizens advocating for Palestinian rights.
Judge Jayme Salinardi ruled on Wednesday that Palestinian-born Salah Sarsour, president of the Islamic Society of Milwaukee, can be removed from the US based in part on a memo by Secretary of State Marco Rubio that “his actions undermine US foreign policy to combat antisemitism around the world”, according to his lawyers.
list of 4 itemsend of list
Sarsour, who has lived in the US for more than three decades, called the ruling “deeply disappointing”.
“I will continue fighting to defend the right to free speech and to stay in the country I have called home for more than three decades,” he told The Associated Press news agency.
His lawyer, Patrick Taurel, strongly rejected the decision.
“I wish the world could see the evidence that we presented and hear the testimony that the court heard because the case we presented compels only one conclusion, which is that Salah is not deportable,” Taurel told reporters on Wednesday.
“He’s done nothing wrong. He should be given back his green card, frankly, with an apology for what’s being done to him.”
The ruling does not mean Sarsour will be immediately deported.
His lawyers have 60 days to argue that sending Sarsour back would put him at risk of torture, which could protect him from deportation under the Convention Against Torture. If they lose, they plan to appeal. Taurel said he can’t be deported while that appeal is pending and will remain in the US for the “foreseeable future”.
Sarsour was detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers in Milwaukee in March, nine months after Rubio issued a memo declaring him deportable on foreign policy grounds.
The June 2025 memo invoked a rarely-used US law that allows the Secretary of State to seek the deportation of non-citizens whose presence could have “potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences.” The administration has used the same provision against pro-Palestinian activists Mahmoud Khalil and Mohsen Mahdawi.
Sarsour’s lawyers criticised the “extreme deference” Salinardi gave to Rubio’s memo. But Taurel said the judge believed his hands were tied by an earlier ruling in Khalil’s case, which found that a letter from the Secretary of State could be enough to make someone deportable on foreign policy grounds.
That meant Salinardi could not look behind Rubio’s decision to examine the evidence supporting it, Taurel said.
“If the Secretary of State says the person is deportable, it is game over,” he told reporters Wednesday.
The government did not win on all of its arguments.
Salinardi rejected its allegation that Sarsour had lied on his green card application. Taurel said the judge also rejected an allegation that Sarsour had falsely claimed to be a US citizen in order to vote.
Al Jazeera reached out to the State Department and the Department of Homeland Security but did not receive responses by the time of publication.
Sarsour is separately fighting the Trump administration in federal court over his detention while his deportation case is ongoing.
A federal judge ordered his release from ICE custody in June after 81 days, questioning why decades-old convictions that US authorities had long known about suddenly justified detaining him. The judge found there was a “substantial” case that the government was retaliating against him for speaking out about Palestinian rights.
The Trump administration has appealed his release, arguing that Sarsour’s convictions in Israel make him a security threat. He was imprisoned in 1988 after confessing to throwing stones and a Molotov cocktail at Israeli military personnel, and was convicted again in 1995 over an attempt to hold weapons.
Sarsour denies the offences, and his lawyers say the confessions were forced through torture. His former lawyer, Jawad Boulos, testified in August that Sarsour was coerced into signing confessions and was not convicted of an offence tying him to a “terrorist” organisation.
Taurel criticised Salinardi for giving what he called “extreme deference” to Israeli government records submitted by ICE, which Sarsour’s lawyers argue were incomplete and relied on confessions obtained through torture.
“A great deal of evidence we presented was ignored,” Taurel said.
The evidence challenged Israel’s military court system, where he said secret evidence can be used and Palestinians can be denied access to lawyers for extended periods.
Luna Droubi, an attorney representing Sarsour, said the case raises broader questions about whether immigrants can speak freely on political issues without fear of being targeted by the government.
“Why raise these arrests now?” she said. “Do I have the right to speak out about issues that matter to me? What if I draw a political cartoon? Am I going to be arrested and detained because of that?”
Sarsour said being deported to the occupied West Bank “means the end of my life”.
His lawyers argue his prior treatment in Israeli custody shows he could face torture if sent back. Taurel said Sarsour’s former lawyer testified that his case stood out because Sarsour told him that Shin Bet, Israel’s internal security agency, had taken him to hospital while in custody.
The judge also named Jordan as a possible destination. Sarsour travelled to the US on a Jordanian-issued document, but his lawyers say he is not a Jordanian citizen and has no right to live there. They believe he could ultimately be returned to the West Bank and Israeli custody if sent to Jordan.
CHICAGO — The U.S. can deport the leader of Wisconsin’s largest mosque — an outspoken advocate of Palestinian rights — on the grounds that he is a threat to national security, an immigration judge ruled Wednesday.
Salah Sarsour was detained in Milwaukee in March by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers. A federal judge ordered Sarsour’s release in June, saying he raised a “substantial” claim that the Trump administration was targeting him for speaking out against Israel and advocating for Palestinian rights.
Sarsour called the ruling “deeply disappointing,” but said he intends to appeal.
“I will continue fighting to defend the right to free speech and to stay in the country I have called home for more than three decades,” Sarsour said in a statement.
Government attorneys say Sarsour’s decades-old convictions in Israel make him a threat to national security and accuse him of lying on his green card application. Judge Jayme Salinardi, with the Chicago Immigration Court, found him removable on foreign-policy grounds but tossed out the government’s claim that Sarsour lied to immigration authorities.
Sarsour, who was born in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, was imprisoned in Israel in 1988 after confessing to throwing a Molotov cocktail and stones at Israeli military personnel. In 1995, he was convicted of attempting to possess weapons. Sarsour denies committing those crimes. His attorneys say he was tortured and coerced into confessing in both instances.
Sarsour, the president of the Islamic Society of Milwaukee, does not have a criminal record in the U.S., where he has lived since 1993. His attorneys say the U.S. government has known about Sarsour’s convictions in Israel since he arrived.
Deportation to the West Bank “means the end of my life,” Sarsour told the Associated Press on Tuesday.
One of his attorneys, Patrick Taurel, told the AP that Sarsour’s earlier treatment by Israeli authorities is “probably a good indicator of what awaits him” if he is deported.
At a status hearing Wednesday, Taurel pressed the judge to specify that Sarsour can only be deported to Israel or the Palestinian territories. Jordan, a country to which Sarsour has no connection, is listed as a possible destination on the order of removal.
Sarsour was instructed by immigration officers to list Jordan as his home country on an immigration form because his preferred entry — “Palestine” — is not a fully independent, unified state. But he “has no right to reside in Jordan,” Taurel said.
Salinardi declined, calling it an issue to be addressed on appeal.
Taurel said Wednesday that Sarsour is being unfairly targeted.
“If Salah can be deported for his speech in support of Palestinian rights, anyone can face the same fate,” he said.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio issued a memo in June 2025 invoking a rarely used immigration provision saying Sarsour could be deported on the same grounds as Mahmoud Khalil and Mohsen Mahdawi, both advocates for Palestinian rights whom the Trump administration has tried to expel, according to court documents.
Before the judge’s ruling, Taurel said Sarsour would need to demonstrate on appeal that he could be tortured again if he were deported.
“It’s a very high bar, although I think we can meet it in this case, given what Salah has already experienced, and given the government of Israel’s treatment” of others like him, Taurel said.
A notice of appeal is due within 30 days. Salinardi did not schedule a new hearing and announced he is retiring and that Judge Craig Defoe will oversee the case going forward.
Jawad Boulos, who represented Sarsour when he was convicted in Israel, testified in August that Sarsour was coerced into confessing and that he wasn’t convicted of any charge tying him to a terrorist organization. He said Sarsour was tortured by Shin Bet, Israel’s internal security agency.
The Department of Homeland Security challenged Boulos about the torture allegations, questioning how he could know it was true.
Sarsour’s current defense team has asked why U.S. authorities waited until this year to detain him. Taurel said the government has known about Sarsour’s imprisonment in Israel for decades and that he has not concealed that from immigration authorities.
Experts on forced confessions and the treatment of Palestinian prisoners in Israeli prisons also testified in Sarsour’s defense. Israeli military courts have faced repeated scrutiny over allegations of limited due process and the high conviction rate of Palestinians. Israel rejects the claims.
In June, U.S. District Judge James Patrick Hanlon ordered Sarsour released from ICE custody saying he could have a case arguing the U.S. government detained him in retaliation for protected speech. Further, Hanlon said, government attorneys had not explained why Sarsour was suddenly considered a threat after decades as a lawful permanent resident.
The Trump administration has appealed Hanlon’s ruling.
Sarsour, who has Type 2 diabetes, lost more than 30 pounds while detained by ICE, and his blood sugar levels were checked only once a month, putting him at risk of organ failure or death, his attorneys said.
An investigation by KFF Health News and the Associated Press found that hundreds of detainees in at least 33 states have filed federal lawsuits with similar allegations of medical neglect.
Mayes-Osterman writes for the Associated Press.
NEW rules for Brits travelling from the UK to Ireland via the ferry have come into force today.
For the first time in over 100 years, passengers are required to carry a valid passport or risk being denied boarding.
Prior to today, passengers were not required to show a passport when taking the crossing.
Instead, they were asked to have another form of photo ID with a photograph like a driving licence or a bus pass.
Now, travellers have been told to carry a valid passport due to the UK Border Force is tightening rules on “accuracy and integrity of passenger data before boarding”.
Routes affected will be between Britain and the the Republic of Ireland of which Irish Ferries operates two routes.
These go between Holyhead and Dublin, and Pembroke and Rosslare.
Another ferry enforcing these rules is Stena Line which has crossings between Holyhead and Dublin as well as Fishguard and Rosslare.
Irish Ferries explained: “This is a change to the current ID accepted and means that from 28 September, no other forms of photo ID will be accepted by Irish Ferries for any passengers, including Irish and UK citizens
“This is to ensure compliance with UK Border Force requirements relating to the accuracy and integrity of passenger data before boarding.“
Previously, passengers didn’t have to carry their passports with them because of what’s known as The Common Travel Area (CTA).
The CTA is a passport-free zone involving the UK, Ireland, the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands dating back to 1923.
British and Irish citizens don’t legally need a passport to travel between the two destinations.
But carrying passports has since became a requirement by airlines like Ryanair and Aer Lingus for passengers flying between the two destinations.
The US president said he would end a so-called ‘EV mandate’ that steered consumers to electric vehicles.
Published On 26 Sep 202626 Sep 2026
United States President Donald Trump has announced new fuel economy standards that roll back requirements adopted under his predecessor, arguing they will lower automobile prices and encourage manufacturers to expand production in the US.
In a social media post on Saturday, Trump said the new standards would “TERMINATE” what he called former US President Joe Biden’s “EV (electric vehicle) mandate”, accusing the previous administration of imposing costly requirements on carmakers and steering consumers towards electric vehicles.
list of 3 itemsend of list
“These new Standards will take the waste out of building cars in America. That means LOWER PRICES, saving families thousands on a new, beautiful, and safe car,” Trump wrote.
The changes form part of a broader Trump administration effort to reverse Biden-era policies supporting lower-emission vehicles, increasing the gap between US policy and global trends favouring electric vehicles.
While Trump and US Republicans have used the term “EV mandate” to describe higher fuel efficiency requirements instituted under Biden, a Democrat, there are no federal guidelines or laws that require Americans to buy electric cars or bar the sale of ones powered by petrol.
At the centre are Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards. This system, established by the US Congress in 1975, requires automakers to meet average fuel economy targets across all cars and light trucks they sell, meaning that a brand that sells an inefficient vehicle would also have to sell a more efficient one to help comply with the government’s standards.
Under rules finalised by the Biden administration in 2024, the required fleetwide fuel economy was scheduled to rise from 39.1 miles per gallon (mpg) to about 50.4mpg by 2031. The administration said then the measures would reduce fuel consumption and emissions to combat climate change while helping motorists save money at the pump.
As a result, auto manufacturers have ramped up production of EVs to help meet the Biden-imposed fuel economy requirements. The Republican-controlled US Congress, however, gutted consumer tax incentives last year for electric vehicles as part of Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act.
Trump did not provide details regarding what the new fuel economy standards would be. But in December 2025, he announced a proposal that would set the industry fleetwide average for light-duty vehicles at roughly 34.5mpg by 2031, more than 30 percent lower than the Biden-era rule.
In a reposting of Trump’s announcement, US Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said an announcement would be “COMING MONDAY”.
Al Jazeera has reached out to the White House for comment.
Tokyo, Japan – Nearly eight years after moving to Japan for work, Abdul feels more accustomed to life in the East Asian country than in his native Bangladesh.
But as the Japanese government moves to tighten the rules for permanent residency and public sentiment towards immigrants sours, Abdul is reconsidering his future.
list of 4 itemsend of list
“I don’t know what the Japanese government will do in the future, if they’ll make things stricter again,” Abdul, a tech engineer who lives in northern Tokyo with his Bangladeshi wife, told Al Jazeera.
Abdul, who is preparing to apply for both permanent residency and citizenship, is aware of the possibility that he may soon have to leave.
“I have to be prepared if both of my applications are rejected,” said Abdul, who asked not to be identified by his real name.
“Right now, I am starting to look for opportunities outside of Japan.”
Under rules set to come into effect in phases from October 1, applicants for permanent residency will need to show that their annual household income exceeds the Japanese average – a stipulation that will be applied retroactively for applications submitted since April – and demonstrate Japanese-language proficiency.
Applicants will also be required to have a pension pot equivalent to 30 years of payouts.
In an announcement detailing the changes, Japan’s Immigration Services Agency stressed the need for foreigners to “live independently” and have “a stable life without the risk of becoming a burden”.
Sarah Nelkin, an American who has lived in Japan for the last 14 years, is among the many long-term residents who fear they will not qualify under the new rules.
A lover of Japanese animation and video games, Nelkin first moved to Japan as a university student and has since built a career in the country’s bustling entertainment industry.
Like Abdul, Nelkin, who submitted an application for permanent residency shortly before the announcement of the changes, is anxious about what the future holds.
If her application is rejected, she plans to apply to become a Japanese citizen – which would mean giving up her US citizenship, as Japan does not recognise dual nationality.
“I’ve lived my entire adult life in Japan … I would rather not give up my American passport. My mother lives in the US, and I want to retain my citizenship for a lot of reasons, like visiting family,” Nelkin told Al Jazeera.
“But at this point, I might have to give up my American nationality.”
Risa Hagiwara, a professor of economics at Meikai University in Urayasu, Japan, said the changes reflect a shift towards a “selective and conditional” immigration policy that is in tension with Japan’s need for labour amid a shrinking population.
“Japan needs foreign workers because of labour shortages. But if the conditions for long-term settlement become substantially more difficult, this could potentially reduce Japan’s attractiveness to foreign workers who are considering Japan as a place to build their long-term lives,” Hagiwara told Al Jazeera.
Immigration has become an increasingly hot-button topic in historically homogenous Japan.
Japan’s foreign resident population remains small compared with developed peers such as the United Kingdom and France, where 10 to 15 percent of residents were born overseas.
But it has been growing fast, hitting a record 4.12 million people, or about 3 percent of the total population, as of the end of 2025, according to government data.
By some estimates, Japan’s foreign-born population could reach the OECD average of 10 percent by 2070.
Meanwhile, the number of Japanese nationals fell by more than 900,000 between January 2025 and 2026 amid the country’s rock-bottom birthrate, according to government figures.
Hagiwara said that Japan is at a crossroads as foreign-born residents play an increasingly important role in Japanese society.
“If Japan wants to rely on foreign workers to address labour shortages, it also needs to consider what happens after they come to Japan,” Hagiwara said.
“The question is increasingly not only ‘how many foreign workers does Japan need?’, but also ‘what kind of society does Japan want to build with the people who come here?’” she said.
Japan’s mooted immigration shake-up comes amid a broader rightward shift in the country’s politics.
While campaigning for the leadership of the conservative Liberal Democratic Party last year, Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi said the country should “reconsider, at least for now, policies that allow in people with completely different cultures and backgrounds”.
Takaichi’s subsequent coalition agreement with the right-wing Japan Innovation Party (JIP) pledged a firm stance against foreigners who break the rules, as well as steps to address “potential social friction” from a growing foreign population.
At the same time, the far-right, anti-immigration Sanseito party has gained ground with its “Japan First” messaging, winning a record 15 seats at the most recent lower-house election to become the third-largest opposition party.
Public opinion has also moved against immigrants.
In a recent survey by the Institute of Social Science at the University of Tokyo, 56.3 percent of Japanese people said they opposed accepting more foreigners, up from 35.6 percent in 2024.
Nelkin and Abdul have both felt the change in sentiment.
“Before 2024, I never felt any discrimination against foreigners, but recently there has been a shift … especially online,” Abdul said.
Nelkin said peers have become outspoken in their dislike of foreigners.
“Even seemingly decent people are just saying racist stuff,” she said.
“I’ve worked for this country and specifically avoided breaking any rules, and they’re saying you are never enough,” she added. “That’s really hard.”
The California Supreme Court excoriated Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco over his seizure of hundreds of thousands of Proposition 50 ballots earlier this year, ordering the former gubernatorial candidate to immediately hand over all remaining material in a pair of scathing decisions on Thursday.
“We hold that the seizure of the ballots was unlawful,” wrote Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero. “While allegations of election improprieties are a very serious matter, our Elections Code contains numerous established mechanisms for investigating and proving misconduct that do not compromise the integrity of voted ballots — contrary to the means employed here.”
The ruling comes less than two weeks before Californians will start casting ballots in the race for governor and a handful of hotly contested congressional midterms — nationally watched elections that would be vulnerable to similar interference unless the court gave clear orders, advocates warned at oral arguments last month.
“It’s bound to be repeated again,” said Chad W. Dunn of the UCLA Voting Rights Project, which led the first of two election interference suits against Bianco, a popular MAGA personality and former Republican candidate for governor.
Bianco has long flirted with President Trump’s election fraud conspiracy movement. Though the ballot seizures in February were widely seen as a campaign stunt, the legal theory behind them — that local lawmen can commandeer voter materials from elections officials, and that sheriffs are unanswerable to officials who outrank them, including attorneys general — belongs to a larger “constitutional sheriffs” ideology.
California‘s seven Supreme Court justices appeared by turns perplexed by and incredulous of those theories during oral arguments last month.
“You are walking into a very dense thicket of very specific laws that govern elections in particular and I think it’s a very established cannon of interpretation that the specific trumps the general,” Justice Goodwin H. Liu said.
The ballot battle emerged from a Riverside County pilot program meant to boost voter confidence, a handwritten tally that ultimately fell about 46,000 votes short of the official count, sparking claims of fraud.
Riverside County Registrar of Voters Art Tinoco met with the county board of supervisors and the citizens’ group behind the claim and carefully explained how the discrepancy emerged. Yet, Bianco pursued warrants to seize more than 650,000 ballots, alleging they were evidence in an investigation of wide-ranging election fraud.
When he learned of the warrants, California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta ordered Bianco to stand down. Instead, the sheriff accelerated his plans, dispatching armed deputies from Riverside County’s Special Investigations Bureau, Emergency Response Team and SWAT unit to sweep up the votes.
Later, Bianco directed his underlings to begin counting those ballots by hand — a potential felony under state law, which forbids anyone other than an election official from so much as touching a ballot container.
When Bonta again ordered him to stop, Bianco argued the attorney general had no authority to command him, later claiming in court that the law conferred only an “advise and consent” role.
In fact, California courts have spent more than a century delineating power between the state’s attorney general and local sheriffs and prosecutors. Voters took the matter a step further in 1934, endorsing a ballot initiative that clearly named the attorney general as California’s top law enforcement official, and put the state’s other lawmen beneath him.
In a footnote, justices also took a swipe at Bianco’s initial effort to have the case tossed for lack of standing — a move apparently undertaken on the legal advice of an elaborate artificial intelligence hallucination.
“In his preliminary briefing, Bianco challenged petitioners’ standing based on misquoted passages from, and an incorrect recitation of our holding in, Common Cause v. Board of Supervisors,” Guerrero wrote. “We disapprove of the improper use of artificial intelligence tools, which apparently contributed to the significant error that occurred here and remind counsel of attorneys’ professional duties of competence and candor to the court.”
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.
A day after unveiling Pontes, its system for settling tokenised assets in central bank money, the ECB has set out how it wants Europe’s crypto rulebook rewritten.
The response, published on Tuesday by the European System of Central Banks, which groups the ECB with the EU’s national central banks, argues for tougher rules on stablecoins, staking and crypto firms.
It feeds into the European Commission’s review of the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation, known as MiCA, the EU’s rulebook for cryptocurrencies and the firms that trade them.
MiCA has applied since December 2024, and the last transitional deadline for existing operators expired on 1 July, including Binance, the world’s largest exchange, to stop serving European customers.
The Commission’s consultation will close on 30 September, a month later than planned.
The central banks’ recommendations are not binding, and the Commission will weigh them alongside other responses before deciding whether to reopen the law.
EU diplomats have told Euronews they expect a revision in 2027, which would need the approval of the European Parliament and member states.
Stablecoins are cryptocurrencies designed to hold a steady value, usually by tracking the US dollar.
MiCA already bars both issuers and crypto exchanges from paying interest on them, and the central banks want it kept that way.
“The payment of stablecoin remuneration should continue to be prohibited,” the ECB response says.
Their targets are the workarounds. Some exchanges, the response notes, offer crypto lending, borrowing and staking, “thereby replicating the economic effect of interest payments through ancillary or unregulated services.”
The central banks want the ban extended to those activities and to indirect rewards, such as certain loyalty-programme benefits, calling it “a clear legislative priority”.
Washington has gone the other way.
The 2025 GENIUS Act banned US stablecoin issuers from paying interest but left exchanges free to offer rewards, and whether to close that gap became one of the most contested fights over the CLARITY Act, the landmark crypto bill that fell ten votes short in the US Senate on 15 September.
The central banks want stronger tools against tokens pegged to foreign currencies.
It would be useful, they say, if authorities could impose “a prohibition to issue new tokens, as well as an obligation to redeem existing tokens” on issuers where central banks judge that the tokens pose a threat, including to financial stability.
More broadly, they see limited benefit in stablecoins for everyday payments at home, given instant bank transfers and the planned digital euro. They warn that MiCA provides no legal basis for issuing the same stablecoin both inside and outside the EU.
In a bank run, European reserves could end up paying holders elsewhere, while “EU authorities cannot determine with certainty how many tokens are held within the Union.”
Eurozone central banks also do not currently let stablecoin issuers hold customer funds with them.
A token fully backed by central bank money, the response warns, “would effectively result in a ‘synthetic’ central bank digital currency” that is essentially a private imitation of the digital euro and could, in theory, drain deposits from commercial banks, especially under stress.
On staking, where users lock up crypto in exchange for rewards, the response is blunt: “Staking, lending and borrowing of crypto-assets should be regulated at Union level.”
Where a firm takes customers’ crypto and promises to return it, potentially with a premium, the central banks argue that the arrangement can be “comparable to the taking of repayable funds”, in the language of banking.
The same applies to decentralised finance, or DeFi, where lending and trading run on automated software rather than through a company.
MiCA exempts fully decentralised services but never defines the term, and the central banks cite studies showing that full decentralisation is rarely, if ever, achieved, leaving it unclear who is in control.
The central banks also back a Commission proposal to move licensing and supervision of crypto firms from national regulators to ESMA, the EU’s markets watchdog.
Currently, one national licence covers the whole bloc, which was the route Binance originally pursued in Greece.
The Wall Street Journal reported last week, citing people familiar with the discussions, that ECB President Christine Lagarde urged Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis not to approve Binance’s application because of the exchange’s past compliance problems and fears that its scale could deepen the use of US dollar stablecoins in Europe.
A senior Greek regulator, according to the newspaper, told the exchange that Lagarde wanted the decision delayed until ESMA took over, the same shift the central banks endorse in Tuesday’s response. Binance withdrew the application on 24 June.
Neither the ECB nor the Greek regulator has confirmed the account. The ECB, which has no formal role in licensing crypto firms, declined to comment, while Binance said it would “not comment on speculation”.
A WOMAN from the UK was stopped at the border abroad after she was told she had overstayed in Europe – despite her not.
Paula Pugh was going on holiday to Italy but was taken back to the UK after systems showed she had overstayed her limit of 90 days in a 180-day period in the Schengen Area.
EES has been causing chaos for lots of Brits since it was first introduced earlier this year including airport delays and missed flights,
But now, it is also causing problems for passengers by incorrectly claiming they are staying too long in Europe.
Talking to The Telegraph, Paula Pugh, 60, explained how she was escorted out of Italy and taken back to the UK because of the error.
Travelling with her husband and cousin for a five-day trip to southern Italy, Paula was flagged at border control shortly after landing.
She was accused of overstaying her 90 limit in the Schengen Area despite taking just three short visits to Spain and one to France – which totted up to 22 days.
Talking to the publication Paula explained she “wasn’t allowed to go anywhere without a police presence.”
Paula was put on a flight home on the same day from another airport with Ryanair along with her family.
Her passport was given to the captain for the duration of their flight.
She added: “My husband then asked the cabin crew where I would get my passport, and we had to walk to the front of the plane.
“Somebody came onto the plane, took me off the plane, had a look, gave me my passport, and said ‘There you go.’ As though it was all over and all forgotten.
“I’m still very upset when I think about it.”
The cancelled trip and return flights home cost the family around £2,000.
Now, Paula is trying to get her record corrected.
Previously, Brits were manually stamped in and out of a country at border control. EES has replaced that with the taking of biometrics and fingerprints.
However, in some cases where EES has been turned off at airports due to faults, or delays, the exit for Brits has not been recorded and the days spent in the Schengen Area continues without them knowing.
A UK Government spokesman told The Telegraph: “While EES is an EU scheme, we recognise this is a significant change for British travellers, and advise that they read the latest Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) Travel Advice about the scheme before travelling.“
In August, the UK Foreign Office altered its advice to Brits asking them to carry evidence of when they last left the EU, to avoid being wrongly refused entry.
Brits travelling from the UK to Europe can spend 90 days out of every 180 in the EU – staying over this limit will mean both refusal of entry and a fine.
In some cases a fine can be as much as £8,550.
Advice from the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) reads: “If you believe you have been incorrectly entered into EES or your record of time spent in the Schengen area is incorrect, approach border officials when you next cross the Schengen border and request a correction.
“If you are exempt, carry documentation confirming your status. If you believe your time spent in the Schengen area has been recorded incorrectly, raise this with border officials and be prepared to provide supporting evidence if requested.”
If you want to check the days left on your record before travelling, the The European Commission has an EES online tool.
South Korea will continue efforts to facilitate talks between Washington and Pyongyang.
Published On 18 Sep 202618 Sep 2026
South Korean President Lee Jae Myung said on Friday that United States President Donald Trump wants dialogue with Pyongyang and confirmed Seoul will not be deploying troops to intervene militarily in the Iran war.
“Trump clearly wants dialogue with North Korea,” Lee said on Friday.
list of 3 itemsend of list
He added that while such talks are uncertain, they are not impossible.
South Korea was continuing “preliminary coordination efforts” to facilitate dialogue between North Korea and the US.
“The resumption of North Korea-US dialogue would be far easier than resuming inter-Korean dialogue,” he said, according to South Korean news agency Yonhap.
Trump, seeking to revive the bond he claims to have forged with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un in his first term, said he plans to meet Kim later this year.
The US president said it was important to “get along” with Kim, adding that Pyongyang now had 57 “very powerful” nuclear weapons.
Seoul has assessed that Pyongyang has about 80-120 nuclear warheads.
North Korea, which has secured critical backing from Russia in recent years, did not clearly respond to Trump.
Inter-Korean relations reached a high in 2018 but deteriorated after talks between Kim and Trump collapsed in February 2019.
On Thursday, a court in Seoul ordered North Korea to pay roughly $32.5m for blowing up the Inter-Korean Liaison Office building in 2020. The office was intended to improve relations on the peninsula but was destroyed amid rising tensions between the neighbours.
South Korea is working to strengthen relations with other regional partners. The first-ever presidential summit between Seoul and five Central Asian states was held on Wednesday, aiming to establish deeper economic engagement with the Russian-allied countries.
Despite growing pressure from the US, Lee reiterated three times that South Korea will not deploy troops to the Strait of Hormuz.
“Let it be clear. There will be no dispatch of troops that will lead to involvement in a conflict. There will be no engagement or involvement in war,” Lee said.
The South Korean government found itself at odds with large parts of Korean society as protests broke out in recent weeks opposing a potential deployment of South Korean military assets to the Strait of Hormuz.
Lee added that South Korea will “carry out the minimum necessary activities” to protect its own merchant ships and oil shipping routes.
10:46, 15 Sep 2026Updated 10:46, 15 Sep 2026
The new rules came into force this morning(Image: Twenty47studio via Getty Images)
The Foreign Office has warned Brits to check their paperwork is in order as a country changes its entry rules.
As of today, Thailand’s entry system has changed. After two years running a generous scheme under which citizens of 93 countries and territories could enter visa-free for stays of up to 60 days, a harsher system has taken over. Effective this morning, the length of stay has been cut in half from 60 days to 30 days for many nationalities.
For US, UK, Australian and Canadian citizens, the principle remains straightforward: no visa is required for a tourist stay of up to 30 days in Thailand. However, the visa-free period has been halved from 60 to 30. If you want to stay in the country for longer than that, you’ll have to apply for an extension of up to 30 additional days. The Thai government has indicated that this should be granted.
Another major change is that the visa-free scheme now applies only to tourists. Those entering the country for work or other purposes now use the visa category corresponding to their activity.
The reform also reintroduces a restriction on land-border entries, with those using the 30-day visa exemption allowed only two land-border crossings per calendar year. Nationals of Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore are not subject to this limit.
Ahead of the changes coming into effect today, the UK’s Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) issued updated advice to Brits, a record-breaking million of whom visited Thailand last year. The government warned of the consequences of overstaying your visa or visa-free period.
“If you overstay the period of your visa, you will get a fine of 500 Thai baht a day up to a maximum of 20,000 baht. You risk being:
“Conditions in detention centres can be harsh.”
Thailand relaxed its visa rules in 2024, expanding the number of countries that qualified for visa-exemption, while extending the maximum length of stay to 60, in a bid to boost its tourism sector post-Covid. Tourism accounts for as much of 20% of the country’s GDP.
However, the rise in visitor numbers has caused tensions in the country. Back in May government spokesperson Rachada Dhanadirek told reporters that while tourism provided “benefits, such as boosting the economy”, the former visa scheme had allowed people to “exploit” the system. Foreigners overstaying and illegally operating businesses in tourism hotspots, without the proper permits, is a particular concern in parts of the country.
The full FCDO advice reads: “From 15 September 2026, if you enter Thailand under the visa exemption scheme, you can stay for up to 30 days for tourism. If you entered Thailand before 15 September 2026, you will usually be allowed to stay for the period granted when you arrived. If you want to stay longer, you must get the appropriate visa before you travel or, if eligible, apply for an extension through the Thai immigration authorities.
“You may be asked to show that you meet the entry requirements. This could include proof that you have enough money for your stay (at least 10,000 Thai baht per person or 20,000 Thai baht per family) and evidence of onward or return travel. British nationals have been refused entry for failing to provide this evidence.
“If you overstay your permission to stay in Thailand, you could be fined, detained, deported or banned from re-entering the country. Make sure you understand the conditions of your stay and get any visa extension you need before your permission expires.”
Alongside the entry guidance, the Foreign Office has revised its advice on Thailand’s rainy season and the dangers posed by heavy downpours.
The rainy season generally runs from May to October across most of the country, and from November to March in Koh Samui and south-east Thailand. However, the updated guidance warns that “weather patterns have become increasingly unpredictable and periods of intense rainfall can occur across Thailand.”
It continues: “Heavy rainfall can cause flash flooding, landslides and disruption to transport, particularly in northern, north-eastern and mountainous areas. Conditions can change rapidly and may result in road closures and local travel disruption. Lakes, caves and waterfalls are particularly at risk of dangerous flash flooding.”
Holidaymakers should follow instructions from local authorities and keep a close eye on weather warnings from the Thai Meteorological Department.
POWER banks are an essential when it comes to travel – but there are strict rules in place for them.
Most know the main ones – like it cannot be used inflight – but here’s one some of you might not know about which could see it taken off you before boarding.
Most airlines allow power banks up to 100Wh without special approval onboard.
But anything over that, without the say-so from the airline, and they could be confiscated for being too big and some countries being particularly strict.
The Wh – which translates to watt-hours – should be printed on the label of your power bank and if travelling on most planes it needs to be under 100Wh or less.
In places like China and Japan, some passengers have had their large power banks taken off them.
Someone on Reddit explained: “Accidentally brought a power bank that was larger than 100 watt-hour on my international trip.
“It passed US TSA as under 100, clocked 106 and 136 watt-hour in two airports in China and refused on board as over 180Wh at Guangzhou International Airport.”
Rules are strict in Japan too with Japan Airlines currently allowing two power banks with 160Wh or less in hand luggage – but that is going down to 100Wh from January 2027.
A lot have warned that the label with the Wh must be clear or risk it being taken off you as well.
Someone else said: “It is the label that matters and if you have old ones that is too faint, it is almost foregone conclusion that it will be taken.
“Friends encountered in Korea and China recently where their older power banks were taken as it wasn’t clear enough.”
For those travelling to China, there is another requirement and this is that all power banks must be marked clearly with the mark ‘CCC’.
The 3C mark is a China Compulsory Certification and the power banks must also be 100Wh or under for all flights.
Any power banks over 160Wh require airline approval – and anything over that is banned.
Most airlines will also only allow one power bank onboard – but check prior to flying as some do allow two.
Power banks must be stored in hand luggage during a flight but not used while in the air as the lithium battery inside is a fire risk – and storing them in the wrong way can cause huge disruption.
In May of this year, an easyJet flight travelling from Egypt to the UK was forced to divert to Rome after a passenger revealed they had left a phone connected and charging via a power bank in their checked luggage
In July last year, a power bank caught fire on a Bangkok Airways flight from Samui to Hong Kong.
WASHINGTON — A federal judge has ruled that a plan by the Trump administration to slash staffing at the federal agency tasked with responding to disasters by 50% was unlawful.
The opinion issued late Friday marked a victory for labor groups who had sued the agency. The labor organizations had argued that plans by the Department of Homeland Security, which was then led by Secretary Kristi Noem, violated congressional protections that were designed to safeguard the independence of the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
The issue of the FEMA staffing was part of a much larger lawsuit filed by the American Federation of Government Employees and other labor groups, contesting efforts by the Trump administration to slash the federal workforce.
U.S. District Judge Susan Illston wrote in her opinion that top Homeland Security officials late last year directed FEMA’s leadership to submit a staffing plan that included a 50% staffing cut even though the agency’s own supervisors objected.
“Frankly, the FEMA staffing plan number appears as if pulled from thin air,” wrote Illston.
FEMA responded in a statement late Saturday saying that while it does not comment on personnel matters and ongoing litigation, “DHS and FEMA are ready for the 2026 hurricane season.”
“We’re ensuring workforce stability and a strong, deployable force for upcoming national events and potential disasters; making the agency leaner, faster and laser-focused on supporting state, local, tribal and territorial partners before, during and after disasters,” the statement said. “FEMA continues to maintain a roster of experienced leadership and support staff across headquarters and regional offices.”
The Department of Homeland Security did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
In the opinion, Illston wrote that it was clear that the government violated rules established after 2005’s Hurricane Katrina that put decisions on staffing levels squarely in the hands of FEMA, not the Department of Homeland Security, and that prevented Homeland Security from “substantially” reducing the “functions” of FEMA.
Illston didn’t order a specific remedy to carry out her opinion but directed the two sides to meet and decide on a course of relief.
Although FEMA has experienced terminations, the 50% staffing cuts ultimately were not carried out. In recent months, after top leadership changes at FEMA and the Department of Homeland Security, the agency has rehired some staffers who were let go.
FEMA was one of the agencies targeted for staff reductions in the federal government as part of a broad Trump administration plan to reduce the size of government. The embattled agency has been buffeted by mass staff departures, disruptions of grant programs and delays of disaster aid.
In May, a Trump-appointed FEMA Review Council submitted a final report recommending sweeping changes to how the agency supports states, tribes and territories in disaster.
The final version backed away from the recommendation to cut the FEMA workforce by 50%, which was included in a December 2025 draft reviewed by the Associated Press.
The council instead recommended the agency conduct a “strategic review” to determine “appropriate staffing levels.”
In an August report, the Government Accountability Office said it found that the departures of thousands of staff in 2025 resulted in a “loss of institutional knowledge and experienced personnel” and “exacerbated longstanding workforce challenges.”
More than 4,300 employees, or about 17% of FEMA’s workforce, separated from the agency in the 2025 budget year, with over 1,500 through voluntary reductions. The agency also made about 2,900 new hires.
The GAO recently recommended to Congress that it “consider requiring” FEMA to base “significant workforce decisions” on a more strategic planning process.
Without it, the GAO found, “FEMA cannot be assured that the agency is positioned to effectively meet its mission needs.”
Santana writes for the Associated Press.
WASHINGTON: A federal judge has ruled that a plan by the Trump administration to slash staffing at the federal agency tasked with responding to disasters by 50% was unlawful.
The opinion issued late Friday marked a victory for labor groups who had sued the agency. The labor organization had argued that plans by the Department of Homeland Security violated congressional protections that were designed to safeguard the independence of the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
The issue of the FEMA staffing was part of a much larger lawsuit filed by the American Federation of Government Employees and other labor groups, pushing back on efforts by the Trump administration to slash the federal workforce.
U.S. District Judge Susan Illston wrote in her opinion that top Homeland Security officials late last year directed FEMA’s leadership to submit a staffing plan that included a 50% staffing cut even though the agency’s own supervisors objected.
“Frankly, the FEMA staffing plan number appears as if pulled from thin air,” wrote Illston.
The Department of Homeland Security and FEMA did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Illston wrote that it was clear that the government violated rules established after 2005’s Hurricane Katrina that put decisions on staffing levels squarely in the hands of FEMA, not the Department of Homeland Security and that prevented DHS from “substantially” reducing the “functions” of FEMA.
Illston didn’t order a specific remedy to carry out her opinion but directed the two sides to meet and decide on a course of relief.
Although FEMA has experienced terminations, the 50% staffing cuts ultimately were not carried out. In recent months, after top leadership changes at FEMA and the Department of Homeland Security, the agency has rehired some staffers who were let go.
FEMA was one of the agencies targeted in the federal government for staff reductions as part of a broad Trump administration plan to reduce the size of government. The embattled agency has been buffeted by mass staff departures, disruptions of grant programs, and delays of disaster aid.
In May, a Trump-appointed FEMA Review Council submitted a final report recommending sweeping changes to how the agency supports states, tribes and territories in disaster.
The final version backed away from the recommendation to cut the FEMA workforce by 50%, which was included in a December 2025 draft reviewed by The Associated Press.
The council instead recommended the agency conduct a “strategic review” to determine “appropriate staffing levels.”
In an August report, the Government Accountability Office said it found the departures of thousands of staff in 2025 resulted in a “loss of institutional knowledge and experienced personnel” and “exacerbated longstanding workforce challenges.”
More than 4,300 employees, or about 17% of FEMA’s workforce, separated from the agency in the 2025 budget year, with over 1,500 through voluntary reductions. The agency also made about 2,900 new hires.
The GAO recently recommended to Congress that it “consider requiring” FEMA to base “significant workforce decisions” on a more strategic planning process.
Without it, the GAO found, “FEMA cannot be assured that the agency is positioned to effectively meet its mission needs.”
