trump

WASHINGTON — An upcoming celebration of the nation’s 250th anniversary, “The Great American State Fair,” recently had several musical guests back out, partly over the event’s ties to President Trump. Now, Trump himself is slated to headline the festivities.

“I understand Artists are getting ‘the yips’ having to do with their performance,” Trump posted on his social media platform Saturday. With a boastful and derisive flourish, he adding that he was thinking of bringing “the man who some say is the Greatest President in History (THE GOAT!), DONALD J. TRUMP, to take the place of these highly paid, Third Rate ‘Artists.’”

The group organizing the June fair on Washington’s National Mall, Freedom 250, confirmed the billing in a statement Saturday, writing, “We are excited to announce that President Trump will personally kick off this historic celebration on Wednesday, June 24.”

Danielle Alvarez, a spokesperson for Freedom 250, said the fair that is officially scheduled from June 25 through July 10 will feature exhibits, family friendly attractions, flyovers and musical performances — by those still remaining on the program.

Trump was dismissive of the acts that backed out, insulting them and suggesting in a follow-up post that the solution is to “Cancel it.”

“We should have a giant MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN RALLY, for 250, instead of having overpriced singers, who nobody wants to hear, whose music is boring, and yet who do nothing but complain,” he wrote.

Freedom 250 is billed as nonpartisan, but it was launched last year by Trump and is led by a former State Department appointee from the president’s first term. Several artists, including Bret Michaels, the Commodores and Martina McBride dropped out last week.

Michaels and other artists have said that they were misled about the theme of the shows or were otherwise wary of being caught up in a political fight. McBride, in a statement on Instagram, said she had been “presented with an opportunity to perform at a nonpartisan event but that turned out to be misleading.”

Other artists plan to attend, including Flo Rida, Fab Morvan of Milli Vanilli and Vanilla Ice. The latter’s representative previously said that the “Ice Ice Baby” rapper was “proud to help celebrate America’s 250th Anniversary!”

Bedayn and Binkley write for the Associated Press. AP writer Eric Tucker contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — David Johnston was a licensed attorney when he illegally entered the U.S. Capitol with a mob of President Trump’s supporters on Jan. 6, 2021. More than five years later, the South Carolina man is offering to help fellow “J6ers” apply for payouts from the Trump administration’s nearly $1.8-billion fund for people claiming to be victims of a “weaponized” government.

He’ll do it for a 10% cut of any award, capped at $5,000 apiece.

“I think the narrative is changing” about how the history of that day is being told, Johnston said in a video he posted to social media. “I think good things are happening for us.”

Hundreds of Trump loyalists pleaded guilty to storming the Capitol, admitting under oath that they broke the law. Some were convicted of sedition, and many attacked police officers while trying to overturn Trump’s election loss. Now pardoned by Trump, many hope to capitalize on their crimes by tapping into the $1.776-billion settlement fund designed to compensate the president’s allies who claim they were politically prosecuted.

A bipartisan backlash to the fund and a legal roadblock have not dimmed the celebratory response from Jan. 6 rioters clamoring for a share of the taxpayer money. Some are staking claims even though the government has not established an application process and a judge has frozen the fund’s formation, at least temporarily.

Seeking payouts

The fund’s critics see it as another vehicle for Trump and his allies to whitewash the events of Jan. 6, retroactively justify the mob’s assault on a pillar of American democracy and reward some of Trump’s most loyal followers.

Jason Riddle, a military veteran from New Hampshire who was sentenced to 90 days behind bars after pleading guilty to riot charges, publicly rejected a pardon from Trump. Likewise, he said it would be “ridiculous” for him or any other Jan. 6 rioter to get government compensation.

“I’d love money, but I can’t accept that. That would bother me for the rest of my life,” he said. “We weren’t innocently persecuted just because of who we are or who we vote for. We were persecuted for committing criminal behavior in the Capitol of the United States.”

Plenty of other “J6ers” do not share Riddle’s reluctance.

A Florida man who posed for photos with then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s stolen lectern argued on social media that he deserves to be compensated for the cost of his infamy. A rioter from New Jersey described by prosecutors as a Nazi sympathizer hailed the fund as “good news not just for J6ers but all victims of weaponization.” A Texas man who received a seven-year prison sentence for storming the Capitol with a metal tomahawk celebrated the fund as “payback” for “victims of Biden’s tyranny,” referring to President Biden.

Oregon resident Pamela Hemphill, sentenced to 60 days in jail for her conviction, rejected a pardon from Trump but has drafted a written claim for compensation from the fund. Unlike scores of rioters who claim to be victims of a government weaponized by Democrats, Hemphill blames Trump for her legal troubles. Her claims letter says she is seeking $5 million in compensation.

“I wouldn’t have been through all of this if Trump hadn’t lied about the election being stolen,” she said during a telephone interview. “It’s a direct result of his lies that I was even there that day.”

Legal and political challenges

It is an open question whether anyone convicted of a Capitol riot-related crime could be eligible for payments from a fund created to resolve Trump’s lawsuit against the IRS over the leak of his tax returns.

Acting Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche has not ruled out that possibility. Blanche said there are no limits on who can apply, but he noted that the fund’s five commissioners — all yet to be named — will decide who deserves to be compensated and why, based on factors such as “what the person did, his sentence, how much time he was in jail.”

“That’s up to the commissioners,” Blanche told the Associated Press on Thursday when asked about his position on whether violent Jan. 6 defendants should be eligible for payments.

“You have to define something and then stick to it. That’s something I’ve been hesitant to try to do, because it’s very fact-intensive,” Blanche said. ”Me sitting here and talking in hypotheticals is something that I don’t think is fair to the process.”

It is unclear whether Congress would block payments to Jan. 6 defendants. Senate Republicans who are angry about the settlement have said they want to place parameters on the fund as part of a Department of Homeland Security spending bill. They abruptly left town this month after a tense meeting with Blanche and will return Monday with the situation unresolved.

A federal judge in Virginia has frozen the fund’s establishment and temporarily blocked any processing or paying of claims. The judge issued that ruling Friday in one of at least three lawsuits challenging the fund.

Brendan Ballou, a former prosecutor who tried several Jan. 6 cases before leaving the Department of Justice last year, sued on behalf of two police officers who helped defend the Capitol from the mob. Ballou views the fund’s creation as part of a broader Trump campaign to undermine democratic institutions and rewrite the history of Jan. 6.

“And if the president is successful in that effort, if he’s able to get people to either forget or condone that day, he knows that he can get people to accept any attack on democracy,” Ballou said.

‘I want vengeance’

Nearly 1,600 people were charged with Capitol riot-related federal crimes. More than 1,200 were convicted and sentenced before Trump issued mass pardons and ordered the dismissal of all pending Jan. 6 cases upon his return to the White House last year. Trump also freed far-right extremist group members who were imprisoned for plotting to attack the Capitol to keep Trump in office after he lost the 2020 presidential election to Biden.

The self-described “J6 community” isn’t the only pro-Trump constituency angling for cuts of the money after being charged with or convicted of crimes.

Meshawn Maddock, who was charged as being a fake elector for Trump in Michigan before a judge dismissed the case last year, said she and her husband, state Rep. Matt Maddock, “absolutely” plan on making a claim. She believes the fund’s use of taxpayer money is justified because it “paid for the prosecution and investigation of the years that I was being hunted down.”

“I want vengeance and I want retribution,” Maddock said.

Trump’s campaign to recast the violence of Jan. 6 as a peaceful protest seems to have emboldened many convicted rioters.

Johnston’s eagerness to help other Capitol rioters with claims contrasts with his remorse he expressed at his sentencing in 2022. He apologized for his “terrible lapse in judgment” before a judge sentenced him to three weeks in jail and three months of home detention. He pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor trespassing charge.

“It was a dumb, dumb thing to do,” Johnston told the judge. “I am 100% responsible for what I did that day.”

Kunzelman writes for the Associated Press. AP writers Jamie Stengle, Mary Claire Jalonick and Joey Cappelletti contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON  — The Supreme Court heads into the final month of its yearly term facing decisions on birthright citizenship, gun rights, transgender athletes and President Trump’s power over independent agencies.

Unlike in years past, the term’s most significant rulings were not left for the last week in June.

The court dealt Trump a major defeat in February by striking down his sweeping worldwide tariffs. The president is likely to suffer a second defeat when the justices reject his plan to revise the citizenship laws via an executive order.

Republicans won when the court struck down a Louisiana congressional district that favored a Black Democrat.

That decision has already shifted several congressional districts toward the GOP, but its greatest impact will be seen in 2028 and 2030.

Republicans are likely to prevail in two other pending cases.

One would free party committees to raise and spend more money to support their candidates. A second would change state laws to bar counting of mail ballots that arrive after election day.

The justices have 26 cases waiting to be decided before they go on a summer recess. Here are the major cases due for decision:

Trump and birthright citizenship

Does the 14th Amendment of 1868 mean what it says about who is a citizen?

It declares: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States.”

The Supreme Court upheld that understanding in 1898, ruling that Wong Kim Ark, who was born to Chinese parents in San Francisco, was a U.S. citizen at birth. Congress adopted birthright citizenship in the Immigration and Nationality Acts of 1940 and 1952.

But on his first day back in the White House, Trump issued an executive order to deny citizenship to the newborns of parents who in the country unlawfully or temporarily on a student, work or tourist visa.

Judges blocked the order from taking effect, and in April, the justices gave a skeptical hearing to Trump’s lawyers as the president sat in the gallery.

The best outcome for Trump would be a ruling that rejects his executive order based on U.S. immigration law alone. Although a defeat, that could in theory permit Congress to revise the law and deny citizenship to the newborns of so-called “birth tourists.” (Trump vs. Barbara)

Guns and drugs

Can the government make it a crime for “habitual users of unlawful drugs” to have a gun, or does that violate 2nd Amendment rights?

Since 1968, federal law has prohibited gun possession by anyone who is an “unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance.”

The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in a Texas case struck down this provision as unconstitutional, except for someone who is “under an impairing influence” of drugs at the time of his arrest.

The Trump administration appealed and urged the Supreme Court to uphold the law against “habitual users of unlawful drugs,” including regular users of marijuana. (U.S. vs. Hemani)

In a second gun rights case, the court will decide whether Hawaii, California and three other states led by Democrats may forbid licensed gun owners from carrying a firearm into stores or private businesses open to the public unless they have the “express authorization” of the owners. (Wolford vs. Lopez)

Transgender athletes and school sports

Can states maintain separate sports teams for boys and girls “based on biological sex determined at birth” or does excluding transgender girls violate the Title IX law or the Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection?

The justices heard appeals from West Virginia and Idaho after lower courts ruled they had discriminated against transgender girls, and most of them sounded ready to rule for the states.

The only question was whether the court will rule narrowly to uphold laws in the red states or go further to decide how Title IX applies nationwide. (West Virginia vs. B.P.J. and Little vs. Hecox)

Trump and independent agencies

Can the president fire the leaders of special agencies who were given a fixed term by Congress?

For most of American history, Congress created new boards or commissions with a specific mission, such as regulating railroad rates in the 1880s or nuclear power in the 1970s. By law, these agencies are led by a bipartisan board of experts who had a fixed term and could be fired only for cause.

But Trump and the court’s conservatives believe the president has the executive authority to control the government and to fire agency officials — but with one exception. The majority wants to preserve the independence of the Federal Reserve Board. (Trump vs. Slaughter)

Separately, the court will rule on whether Trump had the power to fire Fed Governor Lisa Cook for cause. He alleged she engaged in mortgage fraud and dismissed her in a social media post. The justices blocked her removal and sounded ready to rule she deserved due process of law and a full hearing to contest the allegations. (Trump vs. Cook)

Temporary Protected Status

Can the Trump administration cancel legal protection for more than 300,000 Haitians and Syrians who are living and working in this country?

In 1990, Congress created this protected status for foreign nationals who could not return home safely because of armed conflicts or natural disasters.

The Obama administration extended protection to Haitians and Syrians. Last year, Trump’s then-Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem sought to terminate it, but judges blocked her orders because it was still dangerous and unsafe in those countries.

Before the Supreme Court, Trump’s lawyers argued the law forbids “judicial review” of these executive decisions. (Mullin vs. Doe)

Campaign funds and political parties

Do the 50-year-old limits on how much political party committees can raise and spend to directly support their candidates violate the 1st Amendment?

During the Watergate era, Congress adopted limits on money in political campaigns, but the court has struck down the spending limits on free speech grounds. Left standing were the limits on direct contributions to candidates, including from political parties.

Republicans led by then-Sen. JD Vance sued, arguing the party limits were outdated and unwise in an era when super PACs are free to spend huge sums on campaigns. (National Republican Senatorial Committee vs. FEC)

The court also will rule on the GOP’s bid to strike down laws in California and most states that allow for counting mail ballots that were postmarked by election day but arrive a few days later. (Watson vs. Republican National Committee)

WASHINGTON — Mired in a persistent cost of living crisis and an unpopular war with Iran, President Trump reached a perilous milestone last week, registering an approval rating of 34% in a top-tier poll — a record low less than halfway through his second term.

The results mark one of the sharpest polling collapses of any modern president. The data, from the Economist and YouGov, brings Trump back down to his political nadir, matching a number he hasn’t seen since the immediate aftermath of the Jan. 6 attack five years ago.

It follows on several other surveys published in recent days showing the president entering precarious political territory roughly six months ahead of the midterm elections, raising alarm bells in Republican campaign offices across the country over the party’s prospects in the fall.

It has also led pollsters to question long-standing assumptions about the president’s floor of support, wondering whether it is at risk of giving way.

“It’s harder to get lower, but it’s possible depending on what he does,” said Christopher Wlezien, a political scientist at the University of Texas at Austin. “To get that number down, you are going to have to eat into his core.”

Trump’s base of support remains strong, reinforcing a long-standing theory among pollsters that partisanship now serves as a direct proxy for presidential approval. But softening Republican support on specific policy matters — including top voter priorities, such as the economy — have begun raising questions among experts whether further erosion is possible.

A New York Times poll found his approval at 38%, and a Politico poll recorded a similar erosion, driven by a majority of Americans — including 18% of Trump supporters — stating they are financially worse off than they were before he resumed office.

Roughly 2 out of 3 Americans oppose the war Trump started with Iran. And the coalition that swept him back into office — including a surge in support from Latino, independent and young voters — has effectively disappeared.

While the downward trend looks like a story of a presidency in perpetual trouble, political scientists see a more complicated picture.

“Polarization has raised the floor and lowered the ceiling for approval ratings,” said Brandon Rottinghaus, a professor of political science at the University of Houston. “Dramatic swings are less common because approval ratings are now fixed to partisanship.”

The comparison to George W. Bush, whose numbers famously soared after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and cratered into the mid-20s after Hurricane Katrina and the Iraq war, is instructive of how polarization has changed in the Trump era.

Bush governed in a country capable of moving together, in favor or against a president, in response to major events. Americans are no longer swayed in that way when it comes to their views of the president, Rottinghaus argues.

“Approval ratings today are increasingly a measure of who the president is rather than what the president does,” he said.

Trump, in his own way, has seemed to nod at this dynamic. When challenged on his standing with the public, or when a Republican lawmaker breaks with him over a policy issue, he has made the argument that he and the MAGA movement are inseparable. In other words, that opposition to any decision he makes is opposition to the movement itself.

“MAGA is me. MAGA loves everything I do, and I love everything I do,” Trump said in a January interview with NBC News when asked if his base supports long-term military interventions abroad.

Rottinghaus compared the questions about presidential approval as the “same as asking whether you’re Republican or not.”

“So why ask it,” he said.

Gallup, the organization that had tracked presidential approval for eight decades, announced earlier this year that it would stop publishing approval ratings of individual political figures, a shift that underscores how the traditional measure of a politician’s popularity has evolved.

When asked about the change, a Gallup spokesperson told the Washington Post at the time that “the context around these measures has changed.”

“They are now widely produced, aggregated and interpreted, and no longer represent an area where Gallup can make its most distinctive contribution,” the spokesperson added.

US officials indicate Tehran may take days to respond to Trump’s tougher terms on a potential agreement to end the nearly three-month war.

President Donald Trump sought to change several terms of a proposal to end the US-Israel war on Iran, according to media reports in the United States, as a finalised deal remains elusive.

The New York Times reported on Saturday that Trump’s changes involved toughening the deal terms, and the US has sent the new framework back to be considered by Iran, according to officials familiar with the proceedings.

The report said it was not immediately clear what the changes entailed. However, Axios reported Trump wanted to reinforce multiple points of the deal that he felt were important, such as what to do with Iran’s nuclear material.

A senior US official told Axios that Trump was informed it could take three days for Iran to respond.

“They’re literally in caves, and they’re not using email,” the official told Axios.

“There will be a deal. The imminence of it, we’ll see. We’re willing to wait so the president gets what he asks for. It could be a week. It could be less. It could be more. At the turn of the week, we hope to have something,” the official added.

The new tweaks could prolong negotiations between the parties for days before a decision is reached on whether the deal would end the war, which began after the US and Israel attacked Iran on February 28.

US sources told the AFP news agency that the proposal had been waiting on Trump’s sign-off, but he made no decision after a White House Situation Room meeting on Friday.

Trump has said his priorities for any deal included Iran agreeing to never develop nuclear weapons and the reopening of the blockaded Strait of Hormuz, through which roughly 20 percent of the world’s oil supply transits.

On Saturday, the Iranian military’s Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters reasserted the country’s control over the strait, warning that foreign commercial and military vessels would be targeted if they did not comply with regulations governing passage through the strategic waterway.

Tehran has also said repeatedly that it does not intend to build nuclear weapons. In March 2025, Tulsi Gabbard, the former US director of national intelligence, testified to Congress that Washington “continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon”.

WASHINGTON — President Trump on Friday gave his endorsement to a January study by the Department of Health and Human Services that calls for cutting the number of vaccines recommended for every American child.

An executive order from Trump directs federal agencies to align their policies behind the study, which recommended an overhaul long called for by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. The study found that the United States recommends more childhood vaccines than many peer nations.

The Trump administration previously moved to narrow the number of recommended childhood vaccines in response to the report, but the move was blocked by a federal judge in Massachusetts. The administration is appealing the decision.

The study recommends vaccinating all children against 11 diseases. Several others would be recommended only for high-risk groups or when doctors recommend them in what’s called “shared decision-making.” That includes vaccines for flu, rotavirus, hepatitis A, hepatitis B, some forms of meningitis and RSV.

Trump’s order adds weight behind the study at a time when the administration had appeared to be trying to shift focus away from Kennedy’s more contentious vaccine policies and toward topics with more widespread support among medical professionals, such as healthful eating.

The order directs the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to review the study and “take any appropriate steps” to update its vaccine recommendations. It says the CDC should “provide maximum flexibility to parents and doctors” and directs agencies to make sure all actions, regulations and funding are aligned with the study.

The order adds that any changes should ensure that Americans retain their current access to vaccines.

States, not the federal government, have the authority to require vaccinations for schoolchildren. While CDC requirements often influence those state regulations, some states have begun creating their own alliances to counter the Trump administration’s guidance on vaccines.

Trump directed the Department of Health and Human Services to carry out the study in December.

Kennedy is a longtime activist against vaccines and has sought ways to inject his skepticism about the shots into national guidance, running counter to the overwhelming consensus of medical experts. Last year, he announced the CDC would no longer recommend COVID-19 vaccines for healthy children and pregnant women, though public health experts said they saw no new data to justify the change.

Last June, he fired a 17-member CDC vaccine advisory committee and later installed several of his own replacements, including vaccine skeptics.

The January report found that vaccine recommendations for American children had increased in recent decades. It also highlighted countries where no vaccines are required to attend school.

Binkley writes for the Associated Press.

NEW YORK — American businesses big and small have started receiving tariff refunds after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that President Trump lacked the constitutional authority to impose higher import taxes on goods from nearly every other country.

The process could grind to a halt, however, after the Trump administration said Friday that it intended to appeal a federal judge’s order to allow all companies that paid the illegal import taxes to seek refunds, not just the ones that filed lawsuits.

Until the Department of Justice informed the judge of its planned appeal, the refund system overseen by U.S. Customs and Border Protection had been working fairly smoothly. Refunds reached the bank accounts of the first successful applicants on May 12, about three weeks after American importers and their customs brokers could start submitting claims through an online system, according to CBP.

Applications for refunds totaling $85 billion — more than half of the $166 billion the agency estimated the government owes to companies that paid the illegal tariffs on imported goods — were accepted for processing as of May 22, CBP reported in a legal filing earlier in the week. It said it had so far directed the Treasury Department to issue $20.6 billion in refunds.

The administration revealed its appeal preparations while objecting to a demand by Judge Richard K. Eaton for CBP Commissioner Rodney Scott to appear in the U.S. Court of International Trade to answer questions about how long it would take to repay all 330,000 importers that might be eligible for refunds. The judge has scheduled a June 9 hearing on why he shouldn’t require the government do whatever it takes to speed up the process.

Justice Department lawyers asked Eaton to allow one or two of Scott’s deputies to appear in his place, arguing that as a high-ranking presidential appointee, the CBP chief could not be compelled to testify in court. They also argued that Eaton exceeded his own authority when he determined in March that the Supreme Court’s ruling entitled “all importers of record’’ to refunds.

“For that reason, defendants intend to appeal the court’s universal injunction,” the lawyers wrote, adding that CBP would continue to move “as quickly as it can to process refunds in a phased approach” for businesses that filed some 485 pending trade court complaints to assert their rights to refunds.

In a terse reply Friday, Eaton said he needed to hear directly from Scott whether the government would return all of the money it collected between when Trump imposed what he called “reciprocal” tariffs on goods from most countries in April 2025 and when the Supreme Court struck them down in late February.

“This case involves $166 billion,” the judge wrote. “It is undisputed that the remedy for this unlawful collection is for the United States government to refund the unlawfully collected duties.”

Some national retail chains said they planned to use their tariff refunds to lower customer prices on some items. Walmart Chief Financial Officer John David Rainey told analysts last week that the company would implement price cuts even though the maximum refund it might be eligible for represented less than half of 1% of Walmart’s $483 billion in annual U.S. sales.

Some smaller companies told the Associated Press that the partial refunds they’ve received so far would go toward paying remaining or future tariffs, reducing debt or just keeping the lights on after more than a year of uncertainty and additional import costs.

Jay Foreman, chief executive of toy company Basic Fun, said he received about $450,000, or 7% of his total claim, over two consecutive days this month. He took the initial repayment as a positive sign but said that after having less than $10,000 refunded since then, the process seemed like a “total slow roll.”

“It’s time to release the funds back into the economy, especially given how much we and others need these funds to support our businesses and fund our operations,” Foreman said.

Anderson writes for the Associated Press.

May 30 (UPI) — President Donald Trump announced on Truth Social Saturday that he may take the stage for a rally at the “Freedom 250” event series set for June 25 to July 10 at the National Mall in Washington, D.C.

Trump posted at noon Saturday that “Artists are getting ‘the yips’ having to do with their performance[s]” so he may step in.

“I am thinking about bringing the Number One Attraction anywhere in the World, the man who gets much larger audiences than Elvis in his prime, and he does so without a guitar, the man who loves our Country more than anyone else, and the man who some say is the Greatest President in History (THE GOAT!), DONALD J. TRUMP, to take the place of these highly paid, Third Rate “Artists,” and give a major speech, rallying the Country forward like I have done ever since being President!”

He went on to say he would do an “America is Back” rally on “Wednesday,” though he didn’t clarify which day. It appears he means June 25, which is when Martina McBride was scheduled to perform, though she and Brett Michaels both backed out on Friday.

“Two years ago, the United States was DEAD. Now we have the ‘HOTTEST’ Country anywhere in the World. I don’t want so-called ‘Artists’ that get paid far too much money, who aren’t happy. I only want to be surrounded by Happy People, Smart People, Successful People, and People that know how to WIN. So, by copy of this TRUTH, I am ordering my Representatives to look at the feasibility of doing an AMERICA IS BACK Rally on Wednesday, Washington, D.C., same time, same location. Only Great Patriots invited — It will be a Wild and Beautiful Celebration of America! President DONALD J. TRUMP”

The concerts were scheduled for each Thursday, Friday and Saturday night of the 16-day festival, also billed as “The Great American State Fair.”

As of now, only two artists appear to still be on the bill: Vanilla Ice and Flo Rida.

Along with McBride and Michaels, Young MC, Morris Day of Morris Day and The Time, and The Commodores were among the other artists to drop out of the event.

Good morning, and welcome to L.A. on the Record — our City Hall newsletter. It’s David Zahniser, with an assist from Noah Goldberg, Melissa Gomez and Sandra McDonald, giving you the latest on city and county government.

Los Angeles City Councilmember Monica Rodriguez has had some pretty tough words over the years for Mayor Karen Bass and her administration.

Rodriguez, who is running unopposed in Tuesday’s election, repeatedly criticized Bass’ Inside Safe program, which moves homeless people indoors, saying it lacked financial oversight. She voted against the mayor’s budget last year, saying too much was going to Inside Safe. She was especially harsh in the wake of the Palisades fire, saying that Bass’ team botched the first few months of the recovery.

That might make her an ideal person to endorse Councilmember Nithya Raman, who is running to unseat Bass in Tuesday’s primary and has leveled similar critiques. Instead, Rodriguez has emerged as an unexpected ally of the incumbent.

During the campaign, Rodriguez has appeared with Bass at events in Eagle Rock, Pacoima and even Sherman Oaks, located in Raman’s district. She popped up in a campaign flier from Latinos Por Karen Bass. And she’s been dinging Raman over everything from economic development to policies around outdoor barbecues.

Rodriguez explained her decision to support Bass in an interview, saying she views the incumbent as being far more willing to entertain opposing views than Raman — and understands that “not everyone thinks the same way.” Bass also is more consistent on the issues, Rodriguez said.

Raman, by contrast, has shifted her positions on police spending, the tax hike known as Measure ULA and even who should be the next mayor, jumping into the race after she endorsed Bass, Rodriguez said.

“I don’t know what she stands for,” she said.

Raman’s campaign declined to comment on Rodriguez’s remarks. But former former Deputy Mayor Rick Cole, a Raman supporter, said he is surprised to see Rodriguez line up behind Bass, given how critical she has been over the years.

“Monica is a self-described maverick, so it’s ironic that she’s thrown in with the establishment on this. But sometimes personalities play a role,” he said.

Rodriguez had been talked up at one point as a possible opponent of Bass in this year’s election. If Bass wins a second and final term, the mayor’s race would be wide open in 2030.

Pratt accuses Bass of electioneering

It was a small yet upbeat event staged by Bass’ reelection campaign: The mayor, accompanied by supporters chanting “four more years,” walking up to an official drop box and putting in her ballot.

That miniature rally, staged last weekend near the city’s Memorial Branch Library, was captured on video and circulated by Bass’ campaign. But it has drawn a complaint from mayoral candidate Spencer Pratt, who accused the mayor of violating a state law prohibiting electioneering near a polling place or voter drop box.

In a complaint filed with the city clerk, Pratt attorney Peter McNulty said Bass and her supporters improperly solicited votes, waved campaigns signs and “engaged in blatant electioneering” near a voting location.

“Such clear violations of electioneering restrictions show a reckless disregard for the rule of law and an apparent belief that she need not comply with relevant restrictions that apply to all other candidates,” he wrote.

The Bass campaign pushed back on those allegations, saying the video features footage from two locations near the drop box. The portion that featured the Bass campaign signs was filmed 200 feet away — twice the distance required by law, said Alex Stack, a Bass spokesperson.

“Spencer is just mad that his supporters are AI cartoons and we have real Angelenos,” he said. “We follow the rules.”

Pratt’s lawyer said in his letter that he wants the city to investigate. He also filed a complaint with the state, citing the state election law that prohibits the dissemination of “visible or audible electioneering information” near a polling place or drop box.

Feldstein Soto flames Airbnb

City Atty. Hydee Feldstein Soto has been getting hit from both directions over the last few weeks.

On one side, a committee with at least $450,000 in funding from the Consumer Attorneys of California has been pumping out campaign ads promoting her opponent, Deputy Atty. Gen. Marissa Roy. On the other, a campaign committee heavily bankrolled by Airbnb is running ads for Deputy Dist. Atty. John McKinney, another opponent in the race.

Feldstein Soto has countered with a television ad that highlights her office’s lawsuit against Airbnb, which accuses the company of engaging in price gouging after the Palisades fire. Staring into the camera, Feldstein Soto said Airbnb and other special interests “are spending millions to try and get rid of me.”

“They think L.A. belongs to them,” she says. “I know it belongs to you.”

Feldstein Soto had raised about $860,000 for her campaign through May 16, compared with about $680,000 for Roy and about $122,000 for McKinney. But those fundraising efforts, which face strict limits under the city’s ethics laws, have been overshadowed by the unlimited spending from Airbnb and the others.

Angelenos for Progress, a pro-McKinney committee sponsored by the Central City Assn., received at least $2.1 million from Airbnb over the last month, pouring that money into campaign videos and television ads.

Justin Wesson, senior public policy manager for Airbnb in California, said in a statement that McKinney’s campaign platform is “focused on keeping Los Angeles communities safe and vibrant, including for Angelenos who share their home and their guests that contribute to the local economy.”

In recent weeks, Airbnb has been pushing the city’s elected officials to loosen L.A.’s home-sharing regulations, by allowing owners of second homes to lease their properties on short-term rental platforms.

Airbnb has put big money into other committees, including those that support Tim Gaspar, who is running to replace Councilmember Bob Blumenfield, and Jose Ugarte, who is running to replace Councilmember Curren Price.

Team Raman woos Huang, without success

We mentioned a few weeks back that Raman supporters have been noisily demanding that mayoral candidate Rae Huang drop out of the race, saying she was siphoning left-of-center votes away Raman. Turns out Raman’s campaign was trying to persuade her to pull the plug as well.

Raman campaign strategist Jeff Millman reached out to Huang advisor Bill Przylucki earlier this month about getting the community organizer to drop her mayoral bid, according to Huang spokesperson Emel Shaikh.

The overture from the Raman camp, first reported by LA Material, took place after the May 6 NBC LA debate but before a Fox debate planned for the next week, Shaikh said.

“She never really entertained the idea,” Shaikh said.

Raman, speaking with reporters on Friday, said she knew that people from both campaigns were conferring.

“I’m sure [Huang] was aware of it as well,” she said. “And I think we were really talking about how to achieve a bold, progressive vision for Los Angeles. Both of us got into this race because we felt a deep sense of dissatisfaction with the status quo.”

Millman, a veteran of L.A. politics, worked for former Mayor Eric Garcetti and was a spokesperson for Austin Beutner’s mayoral bid before his campaign ended in January. After Beutner dropped out, he moved to the Raman campaign. Przylucki is the former executive director of the progressive nonprofit Ground Game LA.

Supporters of Raman contend that Huang doesn’t have a path to victory — and could deprive Raman of a chance to compete in the Nov. 3 runoff. Asked whether she feels the same way, Raman said she is focused on getting her voters to the polls.

At this point, Raman is neck and neck with Bass and slightly ahead of Pratt, according to a poll from the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies, which was co-sponsored by The Times.

State of play

— A THREE-WAY RACE: Bass, Raman and Pratt are locked in a tight three-way contest, with the mayor holding a statistically insignificant lead in the run-up to Tuesday, the latest UC Berkeley-L.A. Times poll found. Bass had 26% support from likely voters, followed by Raman with 25% support and Pratt at 22%.

Bass, appearing at City Hall Thursday, said she’s not worried about failing to make the top two, telling an audience there are many polls that show different results. “I feel confident about Tuesday,” she said.

— AN EMBATTLED MAYOR: The Times took a look at Bass’ first term and the events that have put her political future in peril. Although some point to the city’s handling of the massively destructive Palisades fire, others say her troubles go much deeper.

— READING THE ROOM: While Bass has had difficulty managing the city, Raman faces a different issue: her struggle to forge working relationships with colleagues and allies. No one on the council, including those backed by the DSA, have endorsed her. Raman allies downplayed the issue, saying her strength is her independence.

— CUTTING CRIME: Even with L.A. experiencing fewer murders than at any point in 60 years, crime remains a potent issue in the mayor’s race. Pratt has been portraying the city as a lethal hellscape. Meanwhile, even some of Bass’ supporters have been shocked by how “aggressively pro-police she has been,” said former Councilmember Mike Bonin, who heads the Pat Brown Institute at Cal State, LA.

— DOWNTOWN IN THE DUMPS: Meanwhile, downtown business owners say they are struggling with crime, homelessness and aging infrastructure — all issues that have become central to the mayor’s race.

— LOVE, MOM: The mother of city controller candidate Zach Sokoloff has pumped at least $7.5 million into an independent expenditure campaign supporting him as he seeks to unseat City Controller Kenneth Mejia. The incumbent has accused the Sokoloff family of trying to buy the seat. Sheryl Sokoloff has declined to comment.

— SHERIFF SHOWDOWN: Los Angeles County Sheriff Robert Luna is in a rematch against former Sheriff Alex Villanueva, while also facing six other opponents. (Villanueva was unseated by Luna in 2022.) The top two vote getters will head to the Nov. 3 runoff.

— WAITING FOR THE WAGE: The council finalized its plan to delay a series of minimum wage hikes for hotel and airport workers this week, ensuring that the wage won’t reach $30 until January 2030 instead of July 2028.

— D&D AND DSA: Democratic Socialists of America, whose L.A. chapter is campaigning for five candidates in the city election, took in $30,000 at a Dungeons & Dragons-themed fundraiser. The candidates took part in the action, playing fantasy characters who still keep one foot in the political world.

— CALLING THE COPS: Looking to prevent copper wire theft, the Department of Water and Power is seeking to create its own police force.

— OUT OF THE FRYING PAN: The council on Wednesday confirmed Gabrielle Amster as the latest general manager for the animal services department, which oversees the city’s network of animal shelters. Amster had been serving as vice president of shelter engagement for DocuPet, a national pet registration business, according to her resume.

QUICK HITS

• Where is Inside Safe? Bass’ signature initiative to tackle homelessness did not launch any new encampment operations this week.
• On the docket next week: The election, obviously! If you haven’t cast a ballot by mail, make sure you show up at a voting center!

Stay in touch

That’s it for this week! Send your questions, comments and gossip to LAontheRecord@latimes.com. Did a friend forward you this email? Sign up here to get it in your inbox every Saturday morning.

Trump envoy Tom Barrack to exit formal Syria post but retain key role managing US policy in Syria and Iraq.

US Special Envoy for Syria Tom Barrack will step down from his post following the expiration of his formal mandate, but he is set to maintain a central diplomatic role managing policy for Syria and Iraq, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced.

Barrack, a billionaire real estate investor and longtime confidant of President Donald Trump, has served as the administration’s primary envoy to Syria since May 2025, while concurrently serving as the US ambassador to Turkiye.

“Ambassador Tom Barrack has played an invaluable role as our Special Envoy to Syria,” Rubio wrote in a statement posted on the social media platform X. “While that title is expiring, he will continue to play a leading role for the Trump Administration in Syria and Iraq, where his expertise, relationships, and understanding of the America First agenda will continue to deliver wins on behalf of our great country.”

“Barrack’s special envoy title has expired, but his role has not, and he remains Washington’s lead on Syria, Iraq, and Turkiye,” Nanar Hawach, senior Syria analyst at the think tank International Crisis Group, told Al Jazeera.

“The expiry changes little in practice, because he was already coordinating those three files together before it lapsed. By keeping him in place without naming a successor, Washington signals it wants continuity and his existing access rather than a reset on Syria.”

During his yearlong tenure as Syria envoy, Barrack oversaw Washington’s pivot towards the post-Assad administration of interim Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa. He heavily influenced US policy by pushing for the easing of heavy economic sanctions on Damascus and coordinating counter-Islamic State operations alongside regional allies, including Turkiye and Gulf Arab states.

The private equity mogul raised substantial capital from Emirati sovereign funds. While acquitted in 2022 of federal charges that he acted as an unregistered agent for Abu Dhabi, his connections routinely led to questions about Gulf financial influence over US policy.

Barrack’s tenure in Syria also drew significant scrutiny. His mediation of a ceasefire and integration pact between Damascus and the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) drew sharp criticism from the Kurdish leadership, who accused Washington of abandoning its longtime allies to favour central state authority.

He also prompted intense backlash in Lebanon after warning journalists at a chaotic news conference to act “civilised” rather than “animalistic”.

His public assertions that “benevolent monarchy” and authoritarian governance are better suited for the Middle East than democracy caused controversy, while opposition leaders in Turkiye, where he remains ambassador, routinely criticised him for behaving like a “colonial governor”.

State Department officials have not yet announced a successor for the Syria envoy position.

Trump weighs next steps on Iran deal as Tehran insists negotiations are continuing and no final agreement exists.

Prospects for a US-Iran agreement to end the conflict remained uncertain on Friday, with President Donald Trump saying he would make a “final determination” on a deal, while Iranian officials stressed that no understanding had yet been reached.

Iran’s chief negotiator, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, said Tehran would judge any agreement by actions rather than words, adding that no steps would be taken unless Washington acted first.

Meanwhile, fighting continued elsewhere in the region. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Israeli forces had advanced beyond Lebanon’s Litani River, as Israeli attacks across Lebanon on Friday left dozens more civilians reportedly killed or wounded.

Here is what we know:

In Iran

• Iran says talks continue, but no deal yet: Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei said exchanges with the United States are continuing but stressed that no final agreement has been reached. He rejected Trump’s demands-based approach and described the US naval blockade as illegal, adding that Tehran would judge any easing of restrictions by actions rather than words.
  

War diplomacy

• CENTCOM highlights ongoing regional patrols: US Central Command (CENTCOM) said its forces remain “present and vigilant” across the region, sharing an image of an F-16 fighter jet conducting a patrol over the Middle East.
• US pushes allies to boost defence spending: Speaking at the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore, US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Trump plans a $1.5 trillion investment in defence and described it as part of a historic expansion of America’s military-industrial base. Hegseth urged allies to spend at least 3.5 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) on defence, warning that countries that fail to do so could face changes in their relationship with Washington. He also reiterated that the US remains committed to preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.
• Washington praises Israel-Lebanon security talks: The US Department of Defense described military-to-military talks between Israeli and Lebanese delegations in Washington as “productive”, saying they focused on regional security and stability. The Pentagon also reaffirmed support for Lebanon’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.

In the US

• Uncertainty remains after White House talks: Reporting from the White House, Al Jazeera’s Alan Fisher said there was still no clarity after Trump’s Situation Room meeting on whether a final agreement with Iran had been reached. Fisher said any easing of restrictions around the Strait of Hormuz could signal progress, but officials are still waiting for concrete details from the White House.

In Israel

• Air raid sirens sound in northern Israel: The Israeli military said it intercepted several projectiles launched from Lebanon, while another landed near Kiryat Shmona in northern Israel. The military reported no casualties and did not specify whether the projectiles were rockets or drones.

In Lebanon

• Netanyahu says Israeli troops have crossed the Litani River: Israel’s Netanyahu said Israeli forces have advanced north of the Litani River near Nabatieh, signalling an expansion of operations in southern Lebanon. The move comes amid ongoing Israel-Lebanon talks and could be followed by further strikes on Beirut and the western Bekaa Valley.

US President Donald Trump has announced he plans to withdraw his leadership from the John F Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, after a federal judge ruled he could no longer have his name on the building.

On Friday, in a 580-word post, Trump blasted Judge Christopher Cooper as reckless. He also painted the performing arts centre as a dilapidated structure only he could restore.

“Unfortunately, Judge Cooper and the Radical Left would rather see it DIE than have President Trump transform it into something that everyone could be proud of,” Trump wrote, referring to himself in third person.

But Trump’s interventions at the Kennedy Center, a national performing arts centre in Washington, DC, have been controversial from the start.

Construction on the building began in 1964, shortly after President John F Kennedy was assassinated.

That year, his successor, Lyndon B Johnson, signed into law an act of Congress that established the site as a “living memorial” to the slain leader.

But since starting his second term, Trump has sought to reshape Washington, DC, in his own image, undertaking construction projects and erecting banners with his photograph.

Within weeks of his inauguration, in February 2025, he fired Democratic members of the Kennedy Center’s bipartisan board and replaced them with his picks.

He also terminated the leadership of the centre’s longtime president, Deborah Rutter. The board quickly elected Trump as chair instead.

But some of the biggest backlash came in December, when the board went a step further and voted to rename the building “The Donald J Trump and the John F Kennedy Memorial Center for the Performing Arts”.

Within a day, construction crews were seen outside the arts centre, adding Trump’s name to the outside of the edifice.

Critics immediately denounced the effort as a violation of the 1964 law, not to mention a sign of disrespect towards the late Kennedy.

Amid public pressure and a string of cancellations from performers, Trump announced in February he would shutter the arts centre for two years, starting in July. He cited renovations as his rationale for the sudden closure.

US Representative Joyce Beatty, a Kennedy Center trustee, sued to stop the closure from happening. She also sought the removal of Trump’s name.

Inside the court’s ruling

In Friday’s ruling, Judge Cooper — an appointee of former President Barack Obama — sided with Beatty’s requests.

He ordered that Trump’s name must be removed from the theatre’s facade, as well as any other signage or official materials, within 14 days, citing the 1964 law.

“The Kennedy Center’s organic statute makes crystal clear that the Center is to be named for President Kennedy, and it cannot bear any other formal name or public memorial based on the Board’s unilateral say-so,” Cooper wrote.

“Congress gave the Kennedy Center its name, and only Congress can change it.”

Cooper also overturned the Trump-led board’s decision to strip trustees like Beatty of the right to vote on Kennedy Center matters. Beatty is one of several bipartisan trustees who have a seat on the board by virtue of an act of Congress.

“If trustees presumptively possess the right to vote, what, if anything, authorizes the Board to unilaterally strip certain trustees of voting rights?” Cooper asked in his decision, striking down the Trump-era policy.

“Absent Congressional authorization, the Board may not deprive a duly-appointed Kennedy Center trustee of her right to vote on Board matters on which all other trustees are entitled to vote.”

In the last part of his 94-page decision, Cooper turned his attention to the Kennedy Center’s imminent closure.

He pointed to statements and plans from Trump administration officials touting the use of the performing arts facility before the July closure date, saying they undermined the assertion that the building was somehow hazardous.

“Former Kennedy Center President [Richard] Grenell emphasized that the Center would be one of the ‘premiere spots’ for America’s 250th celebration — quite a concerning idea if the Center is as dangerous as the Defendants now represent,” Cooper wrote, alluding to events scheduled for the coming weeks.

He later added, “Up until February 1, the Center was planning to proceed apace with some form of phased construction and cited no safety concerns about that plan.”

While closing the Kennedy Center is within the board’s powers, Cooper concluded that the board had likely violated its duty to administer the centre “as a prudent person would” under the law.

He therefore issued a temporary injunction against the centre’s closure. “The trustees might have assessed the propriety of closure in a number of prudent ways. This was not one,” he wrote.

Reactions to the ruling

The ruling prompted an incensed rebuttal from Trump on his Truth Social platform. The president pledged to transfer oversight of the facility to Congress, under whose mandate the centre already operates.

“We are going to be working with Congress to transfer this failing Institution back to them so they can make a determination as to what to do with it,” Trump wrote.

He also blasted Cooper as a partisan actor who had treated him “unfairly”, echoing similar criticisms he had levied against other judges.

“Judge Cooper should be ashamed of himself! I cannot be involved with a situation where danger to the Public is allowed to flourish in plain and open sight,” Trump said.

“Unless I am free to do what I do better than anyone else, bring this Institution back, physically, financially, and artistically, I have no interest in continuing what could only be a hopeless journey into ‘NEVER NEVER LAND.’”

Beatty, meanwhile, applauded the ruling as a victory against unchecked power, unfettered by the law.

“The Kennedy Center is an institution that belongs to the American people, not to Donald Trump,” she wrote.

“He has desecrated this sacred memorial for his own vanity. I am proud to have fought for the rule of law and to protect this sacred institution.”

It was a busy week in music.

The announcement Wednesday of a concert series honoring the country’s 250th anniversary prompted a swift reaction, and it wasn’t from zealous fans. Within hours of the lineup reveal, multiple music acts slated to play the Great American State Fair declared they were dropping out of the 16-day event after discovering it was part of an initiative out of the Trump White House.

Young MC, Morris Day and Martina McBride were among those who said they would not perform at the concert series scheduled for June and July on the National Mall.

“I have informed my agents that I will not be performing at the Freedom 250 event,” “Bust a Move” rapper Young MC, a.k.a. Marvin Young, posted Wednesday. “The artists were never told about any political involvement with the event.”

Day, frontman of the Prince-affiliated funk/soul group Time, also bowed out. He simply wrote, “It’s a No for Me.”

And country singer McBride described the opportunity as “misleading” in a post on Thursday.

Acts who announced they would not take part in the event were still listed as part of the lineup on Freedom 250’s website as of Friday morning. Described on the website as a “World Fair-style celebration of America’’s [sic] 250th birthday…,” the organization positions itself as “non-partisan” but “working together with the White House Task Force 250.”

The organization also says that it acts as “the official public-private partnership that connects, aligns, and amplifies national and local efforts to deliver the defining presidential moments of this anniversary year.”

I’ll give you a minute to parse that jumble of words …

Meanwhile, another major music concert with more transparent political leanings was announced on Wednesday. Trump critics Bruce Springsteen and Rage Against the Machine guitarist Tom Morello revealed they’re launching a Power to the People festival set for Oct. 3 at Merriweather Post Pavilion in Columbia, Md. And as of Friday, no one had dropped off its roster.

Springsteen and Morello are slated to headline, as are the Foo Fighters, Brittany Howard, Joan Baez and Dave Matthews.

Morello, who is currently on tour with Springsteen, announced the festival on-stage at Nationals Park on Wednesday night. “The Power to the People festival is about freedom, justice, equality and rock and roll,” he said. “It’s about the power everyday human beings have when they come together through music, art, community and action. We’re honored to bring this incredible lineup to the D.C. area for a day that celebrates the spirit of activism, creativity and hope.”

Springsteen was more direct in his indictment of the White House and the fight to preserve democracy. “This American tragedy can only be stopped by the American people: you. There is no one coming to save us. We’ve got to do it ourselves,” said Springsteen on Wednesday during the sold-out tour stop in Washington, D.C. “So join us and let’s fight for the America that we love. Do you hear me, Washington?”

Power to the People is scheduled a month before the November midterms, and includes Dropkick Murphys, Jack Black, Serj Tankian, Cypress Hill, Killer Mike, Taylor Momsen and the Linda Lindas. A portion of the proceeds from ticket sales will benefit the organizations VoteRiders, whose mission is to eliminate ID barriers to the ballot box so eligible voters can cast a ballot, and HeadCount, who help register voters at concerts, festivals, sports and community events.

Artists who had committed to playing the Freedom 250, Great American State Fair — or just pick a name already — and who swiftly dropped out when they saw it was touched by Trump, were busy this week distancing themselves from the event.

“Our music has always been our voice and we choose not to publicly affiliate with any single political party,” the Commodores said in a statement on social media.

Poison frontman Bret Michaels and ‘80s sensation Milli Vanilli were also among the acts who announced they would not be playing the event. (New incarnation of) Milli Vanilli singer Jodie Rocco said the group had not been asked to perform, despite being announced in the lineup.

Artists who still appear to be part of the lineup for the curiously titled national state fair are rapper Flo-Rida and 1980s MTV staples C+C Music Factory and Vanilla Ice. The last appeared at Trump’s New Year’s Eve party at Mar-a-Lago.

Freedom 250 was reminded this week that artists have freedom too. To do or not.

MIAMI — The Trump administration has extended protections shielding about 11,000 Lebanese from deportation, allowing them to stay and work in the United States for another six months.

The decision, announced Thursday by the Department of Homeland Security, marked a rare reprieve for people protected by temporary measures that have been harshly criticized by Republicans. The extension comes amid ongoing fighting in southern Lebanon between Israeli troops and Hezbollah fighters.

The decision was automatic, meaning that the administration missed the deadline by which it was supposed to decide on whether to extend the measure called Temporary Protected Status for Lebanese people living in the U.S. who are covered by the program. By statute, the status automatically extends for six months if the department misses the deadline.

It was an unusual outcome for an administration that has canceled the protections that had covered people from 13 countries, including Venezuela, Haiti, Nicaragua and Syria from deportation.

TPS was created by Congress in 1990 to prevent deportations to countries suffering from natural disasters or civil strife, giving people authorization to work in increments of up to 18 months. More than 1 million immigrants from 17 countries were protected by TPS at the beginning of the Trump administration, after the Biden administration greatly expanded its use.

The program has been at the center of a controversy.

Republicans and critics of TPS argue that the program and its protections deviate from their original temporary intent, taking on a quasi-permanent character when extended. Its defenders assert that it is a fundamental humanitarian program that prevents vulnerable individuals from being forced to return to dangerous conditions.

The DHS notice said that former DHS Secretary Kristi Noem and current Secretary Markwayne Mullin, who has led the department for the last two months, “were unable to make an informed determination on Lebanon’s TPS designation.”

The extension allows existing beneficiaries to keep their protections through Nov. 27, “if they still meet the eligibility requirements for TPS,” according to the notice. The work permits that were already issued for Lebanese TPS holders will be valid until the same day.

This is the second time the Trump administration has automatically extended a TPS designation. The first happened nearly a year ago with South Sudan, but the protections were terminated in November 2025, after the six-month extension period.

There are dozens of lawsuits challenging the termination of TPS at federal courts in different states. The Supreme Court is set to make a decision on TPS that protected Haitians and Syrians during the summer, and the result is expected to have an impact on all the other cases.

Advocates welcomed the extension.

“Extending Temporary Protected Status means Lebanese nationals in the United States will not be forced back into dangerous conditions but allowed to stay and continue supporting their families and contributing to their local communities,” said Kelly Razzouk, vice president of policy and advocacy at the International Rescue Committee.

José Palma, national coordinator of the National TPS Alliance — an advocacy group that has fought in federal courts against the cancellation of TPS for several countries—welcomed the extension of protections for the Lebanese.

“But we need to find a permanent solution for all TPS beneficiaries,” he warned.

Salomon writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Rebecca Santana contributed to this report.

President Donald Trump on Friday announced he was lifting the U.S. blockade on Iranian ports enacted last month. The move comes amid media reports and administration messaging that Washington and Tehran appear to be drawing closer to a deal that could lead to ending the conflict. Iranian officials have rejected that notion. TWZ cannot confirm either side’s assertions.

“Ships caught in the Strait due to our amazing and unprecedented Naval Blockade, which will now be lifted, may start the process of ‘heading home!’” Trump proclaimed on Truth Social, referring to the Strait of Hormuz. The strategic chokepoint has been largely closed to most traffic by Iran since not long after the launch of Epic Fury on Feb. 28.

Trump’s comments may reflect a still unsigned Memorandum of Agreement with Iran that paves the way for reopening the Strait and is designed to create negotiating space to deal with the larger issues of Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

“Iran must agree that they will never have a Nuclear Weapon or Bomb,” the U.S. leader added. “The Hormuz Strait must be immediately open, no tolls, for unrestricted shipping traffic, in both directions. All water mines (bombs), if any, will be terminated (we have removed, through detonation, numerous such mines with our great underwater mine sweepers. Iran will complete the immediate removal and/or detonation of any mines that are left, which will not be many!).”

Last month, the head of U.S. Central Command stated that he was deploying uncrewed underwater vehicles (UUVs) to the region for the counter-mine effort. UUVs are a critical part of modern minesweeping operations.

“The Strait of Hormuz is an international sea passage and an essential trade corridor that supports regional and global economic prosperity,” Admiral Brad Cooper said in an April 11 media release. “Additional U.S. forces, including underwater drones, will join the clearance effort in the coming days.”

The Navy has various types of uncrewed undersea vehicles, remotely operated vehicles and an airborne mine neutralization system to perform mine sweeping operations. You can read more about these systems and how they work in our story about minesweepers here.

Knifefish Surface Mine Countermeasure (SMCM) Unmanned Undersea Vehicle (UUV)

Trump ordered the blockade on April 13 to create economic pressure on Iran by limiting its ability to export oil or import needed weapons or other materiel. 

“As of May 29, 115 commercial vessels have been redirected to ensure no commerce enters or leaves Iranian ports,” CENTCOM said in a post Friday morning about an hour before Trump made his announcement about the blockade.

U.S. forces continue to enforce the blockade against Iran. As of May 29, 115 commercial vessels have been redirected to ensure no commerce enters or leaves Iranian ports. pic.twitter.com/ioKe4A6p7T

— U.S. Central Command (@CENTCOM) May 29, 2026

Trump did not spell out the mechanics for ending the blockade and CENTCOM declined to say what Trump’s announcement means for the assets arrayed around the region to enforce it. The command referred us to the White House, which did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

It is also unclear why Trump would lift the blockade at such a critical time, before any agreement is signed. According to various media reports, such a move would have been in conjunction with Iran easing its restrictions on Strait shipping. However, Iranian officials have insisted that has yet to happen. In essence, the U.S. lifting the blockade on Iran would do nothing for mariners trapped in the Persian Gulf unless Iran also lifts its threats to attack ships transiting the waterway without its permission.

According to Axios, the memorandum between Iran and the U.S. calls for the following:

• The U.S. naval blockade will also be lifted, but that will happen in proportion to the restoration of commercial shipping, a U.S. official said. The U.S. would also issue some sanctions waivers to allow Iran to sell oil freely.
• The MOU will include an Iranian commitment not to pursue a nuclear weapon, the officials said. It will also state that the first issues to be negotiated during the 60-day window will be how to dispose of Iran’s highly enriched uranium and how to address Iranian enrichment.

The U.S. will commit to discuss sanctions relief and the release of frozen Iranian funds as part of the negotiations, the publication added.

• The MOU will also include a discussion of a mechanism to help Iran start receiving goods and humanitarian aid.
• The MOU would also state that the war between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon would end — an issue on which Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have had at least one tense discussion.

In addition to stating that he lifted the blockade, Trump also claimed in his Truth Social post that the U.S. and Iran reached an understanding on Tehran’s supply of highly enriched uranium.

“The enriched material, sometimes referred to as ‘Nuclear Dust,’ which is buried deep underground with virtually collapsed mountains, caused by our powerful B2 Bomber attack 11 months ago, sitting on top of it, will be unearthed by the United States (which, it is agreed, is the only Country, along with China, with the mechanical capability of doing so!), in close coordination and conjunction with the Islamic Republic of Iran, plus the International Atomic Energy Agency, and DESTROYED. No money will be exchanged, until further notice,” Trump asserted. “Other items, of far less importance, have been agreed to.”

Iranian officials have rejected Trump’s claims.

“No final understanding has been reached between Iran and the US so far,” according to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC)-connectedTasnim News Agency.

“Trump’s post follows his usual pattern of one-sided, self-aggrandizing statements,” the outlet added. “His claims about lifting the naval blockade should be viewed with skepticism—and even if implemented, it would merely mark the cessation of one ceasefire violation, as the blockade should never have been imposed in the first place.”

“Trump’s nuclear claims are baseless, as no details on that issue have been discussed,” Tasnim posited. “His insistence on not releasing Iran’s blocked funds only deepens Tehran’s doubts about Washington’s seriousness.”

No final understanding has been reached between Iran and the US so far, according to Tasnim News Agency.

According to the report, Trump’s post follows his usual pattern of one-sided, self-aggrandizing statements. pic.twitter.com/bRDZfjGT7K

— Press TV 🔻 (@PressTV) May 29, 2026

In his post, Trump said that he “will be meeting now, in the Situation Room, to make a final determination,” on the agreement with Iran.

This is a developing story.

UPDATE: 2:36 PM EDT –

Trump “left a two-hour meeting on a possible deal with Iran without making a decision,” The New York Times reported, citing a senior administration official.

The administration “believes it is close to an agreement but there are still certain matters being debated including the unfreezing of funds for the Iranians,” the newspaper added.

NYT: “President Trump’s meeting in the Situation Room lasted about two hours, but the president did not reach a decision on any new deal with #Iran, according to a senior administration official who spoke on condition of anonymity to speak about internal deliberations.

“The…

— Jason Brodsky (@JasonMBrodsky) May 29, 2026

In the wake of Trump’s claims and media reports about negotiations with Iran, some positive economic news is emerging

“Stocks rose in afternoon trading on Wall Street Friday, adding to the all-time highs they set a day earlier,” CBS News reported. “The S&P 500 rose 0.2% Friday. The index is coming off six gains in a row and is headed for a ninth straight winning week, which would be the longest such streak since 2023.”

The Dow Jones Industrial Average “rose 382 points, or 0.8%, as of 12:01 p.m. Eastern,” the outlet added. “The Nasdaq composite rose 0.2%. Every major index is on track for records and to close out May with solid gains.”

Of course, all that could change should talks break down and major hostilities resume.

“U.S. stock markets are surging toward new records as of May 29, 2026, driven by breakthrough reports of a potential $300 billion peace and reconstruction framework between the U.S. and Iran”

Well?https://t.co/q9OoxkZYhz

— Don Keyhoty🇺🇸🇺🇦🇩🇰🇮🇪 (@dkearnsjr) May 29, 2026

UPDATE: 3:24 PM EDT –

The United Arab Emirates “carried out dozens of airstrikes against Iran beginning in the early days of the war and continuing through the day after the April cease-fire was announced,” The Wall Street Journal reported, citing people familiar with the matter. This represents a “deeper involvement than was previously known in the air campaign led by the U.S. and Israel,” the publication added.

The attacks were conducted in coordination with the U.S. and Israel, both of which provided intelligence, the people said. “They included targets on Qeshm and Abu Musa islands in the Strait of Hormuz; Bandar Abbas; the oil refinery on Lavan island in the Persian Gulf; and the Asaluyeh petrochemical complex” the Journal continued.

During the Iran War, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) carried out dozens of airstrikes against Iran in coordination with Israel and the United States, beginning in the early days of the war and continuing through the day after the ongoing ceasefire was announced, targeting both… pic.twitter.com/FvyIYVw2qk

— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) May 29, 2026

UPDATE: 3:47 PM EDT –

Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf says “Tehran secures its diplomatic advantages through missiles rather than talks,” according to the official Iranian Press TV news outlet.

Contact the author: howard@twz.com

WASHINGTON — A federal judge ruled Friday that President Trump’s name was illegally added to the Kennedy Center and blocked the administration from closing the cultural and arts venue for major renovations.

U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper in Washington, D.C., ruled that the Kennedy Center board’s March 16 vote to close the facility was “ill-informed and seemingly preordained” with no regard for its legal obligations.

“The trustees might have assessed the propriety of closure in a number of prudent ways. This was not one,” he wrote.

Cooper also concluded that the board “overstepped its statutory bounds” by unilaterally adding Trump’s name to the center. Congress gave the Kennedy Center its name, and only Congress can change it, he said.

Roma Daravi, the Kennedy Center’s vice president of public relations, said Friday the institution is “confident that on appeal the court will uphold the Board’s will to recognize President Trump’s historic contributions to our nation’s cultural center.” She said the decision would be reviewed “carefully.”

“Though the reality remains — the Center requires an urgent and significant restoration – a truth that even the plaintiff acknowledges,” Daravi said. “With $257 million secured by President Trump and approved by Congress, the resources are in place and we remain committed to pursuing every lawful avenue to ensure the Trump Kennedy Center is restored as a national cultural landmark for all Americans to enjoy.”

Cooper held hearings in late April for parallel lawsuits challenging the project. One was filed by a group of cultural and historic preservation organizations. The other was brought Rep. Joyce Beatty, an Ohio Democrat who serves as an ex-officio member of the Kennedy Center’s board. He ruled in favor of Beatty’s request but rejected the other challenge.

Justice Department attorneys said renovation plans for the building are limited in scope and well within the board’s authority to make without needing outside approvals.

The plaintiffs worry the president and his board allies will flout preservation rules designed to maintain the building’s historic fabric. In earlier statements in court hearings, attorneys for Beatty and the preservation groups raised doubts about the limited scope of the project, pointing to Trump’s statements that he would “fully expose” the building’s steel skeleton. Beatty has said she was “very fearful that we’ll see what happened with the East Wing and what happened with the Rose Garden” if the center is closed and the renovations allowed unsupervised, referring to major changes the president has made at the White House.

Trump, a Republican, has taken a keen interest in the Kennedy Center’s operations since he returned to White House last year. He installed a handpicked board that named him chairman. His name was added to the facade of a building that is considered a living monument to President John F. Kennedy.

The Kennedy Center has kept up performances ahead of the closure, though at a much slower pace than in previous years. Trump attended the premiere of the musical “Chicago” in March and other shows, including “Moulin Rouge” are slated for June.

Bill Maher, the comedian who has had an up and down relationship with Trump, is expected to be awarded the Mark Twain Prize for American Humor on June 28, an event that was anticipated to be one of the final big moments at the Kennedy Center before the closure.

Cooper was nominated to the bench by Democratic President Obama.

Kunzelman and Sloan write for the Associated Press.

US President Donald Trump posted online that he’s heading into the Situation Room at the White House to make a “final determination” on potentially finalising a peace deal with Iran. Al Jazeera’s Patty Culhane reports from the White House.

US President Donald Trump said Sunday that negotiations with Iran are “orderly and constructive” and vowed the blockade will remain in place until a final agreement is reached, Anadolu reports.

“The Blockade will remain in full force and effect until an agreement is reached, certified, and signed. Both sides must take their time and get it right. There can be no mistakes!,” Trump said in a post on his social media platform Truth Social.

He also said US-Iran relations are becoming “much more professional and productive,” while warning that Tehran must not develop or acquire a nuclear weapon.

Trump further thanked Middle Eastern countries for their “support and cooperation,” saying engagement would be strengthened through broader participation in the Abraham Accords, and suggested Iran could one day join the framework.

He criticized the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, calling it “one of the worst agreements ever made,” and again blamed former President Barack Obama’s administration for what he described as a flawed agreement that opened a path toward nuclear weapons development.

Trump said the current negotiations with Iran are “far better” and part of a more effective approach, insisting the ongoing process will prevent Tehran from obtaining nuclear arms.

OPINION: Escape or Escalate: Trump’s Tactical Crossroads in the Iran Conflict

Deep mistrust remains between Washington and Tehran as Iran’s top negotiator urges action, not words.

United States President Donald Trump says he is meeting in the Situation Room to make a “final determination” on a possible deal with Iran that could extend the ceasefire and reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

However, deep mistrust remains between the two sides. Iran’s top negotiator, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, said earlier on Friday that Tehran would judge any agreement by actions rather than promises as talks continue.

In his latest post on the Truth Social platform, Trump on Friday set out numerous conditions for Tehran to accept, including: never having a nuclear weapon or bomb, the Strait of Hormuz being open in both directions and without tolls, the removal of any remaining mines left in the Strait, and the US unearthing and destroying Iran’s enriched uranium that is buried.

“Ships caught in the Strait due to our amazing and unprecedented Naval Blockade, which will now be lifted, may start the process of ‘heading home!’” Trump wrote.

“No money will be exchanged until further notice. Other items, of far less importance, have been agreed to. I will be meeting now, in the Situation Room, to make a final determination,” he added.

Reporting from the White House, Al Jazeera’s Patty Culhane said that in the past, the Trump administration has indicated that a deal has been reached, only to find out it has not.

“If this was in fact a deal, it would be the entire wishlist of what the US was demanding and none of the concessions that Iranian were asking for,” she explained.

Uncertainty about the details of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) has grown over the past week amid ongoing distrust between the two sides as they seek to end the three-month-long war.

On Thursday, White House sources told Al Jazeera that the US and Iran had reached a tentative agreement to extend the ceasefire by 60 days to allow for formal negotiations, but Trump has yet to sign off.

Moreover, earlier on Friday, Iran’s top negotiator Ghalibaf said that Tehran did not trust “guarantees and words, only actions are the criterion”.

“No action will be taken before the other side acts,” he said in a social media post, without elaborating.

“The winner of any agreement is the one who is better prepared for war the day after,” the Iranian official added.

Still, Iranian state news outlet Fars, citing sources, reported on Friday that the agreement with the US was in its final stages of ratification, but no final decision has been made yet.

The sources stressed that there were no provisions about destroying Iran’s nuclear materials in the MOU and added that arrangements for the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz could include the monitoring and inspection of ships.

WASHINGTON — A framework agreement to end the U.S. war with Iran is all but settled, pending sign-off from the presidents of the two warring sides, President Trump said Friday, projecting optimism that a deal could finally be at hand.

Yet doubt cast a shadow over the diplomatic process entering the weekend as Trump faced a politically fraught decision to enter an agreement that would invariably require significant concessions to Tehran.

The negotiations have faced severe headwinds in recent days, with both sides accusing the other of violating a fragile ceasefire that has largely stopped the fighting since April.

On his Truth Social site, Trump said he had summoned his top aides to the White House Situation Room to decide on the deal.

The agreement would see an end to the U.S. naval blockade on Iranian ports and the removal of Iranian mines from the Strait of Hormuz, an international waterway through which 20% of the world’s energy supply passes each day. The strait, Trump wrote, will reopen with “no tolls” for “unrestricted shipping traffic, in both directions.”

And “Iran must agree that they will never have a Nuclear Weapon or Bomb,” Trump wrote, noting that Iran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium, the key ingredient for nuclear weapons, “will be unearthed by the United States (which, it is agreed, is the only Country, along with China, with the mechanical capability of doing so!), in close coordination and conjunction with the Islamic Republic of Iran, plus the International Atomic Energy Agency, and DESTROYED.”

“No money will be exchanged, until further notice,” he added.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent also said the deal would require Iran to disavow the continuation of its domestic nuclear program — a diplomatic feat never before achieved throughout a quarter century of international negotiations over Iran’s nuclear work.

It is unclear whether Tehran would go that far. And Iran’s negotiators expressed defiance on Friday, stating that there was “no trust in guarantees or words” from the American side.

“No step will be taken before the other side acts first,” said Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, the speaker of Iran’s Parliament. “We do not gain concessions through dialogue, but through missiles.”

It remains unclear when the Trump administration would ease sanctions on Iran, how extensive that relief would be, or what form it would take — questions that fueled Republican criticism of the Obama-era nuclear deal more than a decade ago.

The working diplomatic document would formally extend the existing ceasefire for 60 days, allowing for a more detailed negotiation to take place over Iran’s nuclear program. But the truce as it currently stands is on perilous ground. Iran launched a ballistic missile on Thursday at Kuwait, a close U.S. ally, after American forces took “defensive” actions against Iranian missile launchers and mine laying boats it had launched in the strait.

The war has proven historically unpopular with the American public, and has seen oil prices soar since the U.S. military, in partnership with Israel, launched its first strikes against Iran in February.

Bessent said he is hopeful that oil prices would drop quickly once an agreement is signed. But industry analysts say the effects of the war on the oil market could last for months, if not years, with the stability of traffic through the Strait of Hormuz now in question for commercial shippers.

While oil has dropped to under $100 a barrel, markets appeared skittish on Friday over the prospects for a deal, with mixed messages appearing to emerge out of the region.

It is also unclear whether a U.S. agreement with Iran would in any way bind Israel’s hands in its military operations, either in Iran or in Lebanon, where an Iranian proxy militia, Hezbollah, has vowed to keep up the fight.

Israel has ramped up strikes against Hezbollah targets in recent days, jeopardizing a delicate ceasefire negotiated with the Lebanese government, a deal encouraged by the Trump administration in order to grease the wheels for its talks with Tehran.

Trump has been uncharacteristically silent on the prospects of an agreement in recent days, expressing cautious optimism in limited exchanges with reporters.

“It’s hard to say exactly when or if the president’s going to sign,” Vice President JD Vance, who has led the U.S. diplomatic team, told reporters, noting that “the nuclear stuff” is still subject to negotiation. “We’re going back and forth on a couple of language points.”

“I do think that we’ve made a lot of progress here,” Vance added. “Hopefully we’ll continue to make progress, and the president will be in a position where he can endorse the agreement. But obviously, that’s still TBD.”

WASHINGTON — A federal judge on Friday temporarily blocked President Trump’s administration from paying any claims through a new $1.776 billion settlement fund for the Republican president’s allies who believe they were victims of a weaponized government.

U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema in Alexandria, Va., also barred the government from moving forward with the fund’s creation while litigation is pending to challenge it.

The judge, who was nominated to the bench by President Clinton, a Democrat, scheduled a June 12 hearing for arguments on whether to extend the order blocking payouts from an “Anti-Weaponization Fund.” The government created the fund to resolve Trump’s lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service over the leak of his tax returns.

The White House declined to comment on the judge’s ruling and referred all questions to the Justice Department, which didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

The fund has generated a fierce backlash since it was announced last week, with even Republicans pressing acting Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche over the eligibility considerations and the possibility that even violent rioters at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, would be free to seek compensation.

The Justice Department hasn’t formed the five-member commission that will decide on payout criteria, so there has been no money paid out yet or claims accepted.

Plaintiffs’ attorneys from the legal advocacy group Democracy Forward are seeking a court order halting the fund’s implementation and preventing the Trump administration from disbursing any payouts from it. The federal suit claims there is no legal basis or accountability behind the fund.

The Virginia lawsuit’s plaintiffs include a fired prosecutor and a college professor acquitted of assaulting federal agents at a protest.

“The unlawfulness that has imbued the Anti-Weaponization Fund from its inception requires that it be wholly dismantled,” the suit says.

At least two other lawsuits, both filed separately in Washington, also are challenging the fund’s creation. A lawsuit filed by the advocacy group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington refers to the fund as “a jaw-dropping act of presidential corruption.” Two police officers who helped defend the Capitol from a mob of Trump supporters sued last week.

During a congressional hearing, Blanche wouldn’t rule out the possibility that rioters who assaulted police on Jan. 6 could be eligible for fund payouts.

Nearly 1,600 people were charged with Capitol riot-related federal crimes. Over 1,200 were convicted and sentenced before Trump handed out mass pardons, commuted prison sentences and ordered the dismissal of every pending Jan. 6 criminal case last year.

Kunzelman writes for the Associated Press. AP writers Darlene Superville, Alanna Durkin Richer and Eric Tucker contributed to this report.