trump

It took decades for John Chiang to hustle into the top ranks of California politics, and he relished all the schmoozing along the way.

On Lunar New Year, Chiang turned up at a firecracker party in Westminster. Weeks later, he woke early for a cattlemen’s breakfast in Sacramento. When the Fresno Rotary Club sought a luncheon speaker, Chiang made time.

His nonstop networking has paid dividends. He won five elections in a rout, most recently in 2014 for state treasurer.

Yet to many Californians, Chiang is just a vaguely familiar name, often mispronounced. (It’s Chung, not Chang.) It shows up on ballots, somewhere near the middle.

But now that he’s running for governor, Chiang is competing on a much bigger stage. Voters pay close attention to the top of the ticket, appraising character and personality.

For the first time in his career, the way that Chiang’s reserved, low-key demeanor comes off on television will matter — all the more so in a race against fellow Democrats Antonio Villaraigosa and Gavin Newsom, two of the state’s most charismatic politicians.

A strait-laced finance man, Chiang, 55, dismissed the former mayors of Los Angeles and San Francisco as “stylish” — more showhorse than workhorse.

Chiang, who lives in a condo around the corner from a South Bay mall, wears baggy suits from Nordstrom Rack. He called himself “Torrance stylish,” then burst out laughing.

“I’m quite OK with being a season behind,” he said.

At a time of constant drama in the Trump White House, Chiang hopes that Californians will turn to a more ordinary style of leadership, as they did when they elected Gray Davis governor a generation ago.

His manner can come off as unpolished. Chiang, unlike his nimble opponents, can get mired in explaining the likes of “surplus money investment pools” — not surprising for a onetime high school mathlete who majored in finance and won election to California’s Board of Equalization on his way up to state controller and treasurer.

“He’s sort of an accidental politician,” said Michael Genest, who was state finance director under Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Chiang has already banked nearly $9 million for the governor’s race, ensuring he’ll have plenty to spend on ads before the June 2018 primary.

For now, he is playing up his defiant streak. In 2008, when he was controller, he refused to obey Schwarzenegger’s order to cut the pay of state workers to minimum wage until lawmakers passed a budget.

State Treasurer John Chiang, holding the microphone, flaunts his off-key singing at a karaoke stop in Santa Ana with a group of young Democrats on June 23. (Video by Michael Finnegan / Los Angeles Times)

“I was the last person standing, and I said, ‘Gov. Schwarzenegger, you don’t do that to 200,000 good people,’ ” Chiang told union leaders at a labor gathering last month in Orange County.

In 2011, Chiang enraged legislators by docking their pay during another budget impasse, saying they’d breached a law that punishes them for late spending plans. He boasts that friends in the Legislature stopped talking to him.

“It made me the most unpopular person in Sacramento,” Chiang told a crowd in Anaheim.

Critics see a pattern of crass opportunism. “It’s all about what’s best for himself and what will generate headlines — not what’s best for the state,” said Matt David, a Republican strategist who was deputy chief of staff to Schwarzenegger.

The son of immigrants from Taiwan, Chiang grew up with three younger siblings in Palos Heights, Ill. His father was a plastics engineer, his mother a full-time parent.

They were the first Asian family to move into the mainly white upscale Chicago suburb in the 1960s, when Chiang was just starting grade school. He recalls rampant bigotry — taunts, fights, vandalism and “ugly racial epithets.” It left him feeling isolated but taught him empathy.

“The hurt goes deep,” he said. “It makes me who I am.”

At home, Chiang’s parents spoke mostly English, but also Taiwanese Hokkien, Mandarin and Japanese. Every few years, the family would visit relatives in Taiwan, which was under Japanese occupation when Chiang’s parents were children.

Chiang remembers his mother cooking delicious Chinese food for his school lunches. But to fit in, he begged her to switch to American sandwiches, preferably on Wonder bread.

“I was petrified bringing lunch to school,” Chiang said. “Everybody had peanut butter and jelly sandwiches.”

At 12 years old, he was captivated by the Watergate hearings. “All I knew is the president lied, and he had secret tapes, and it was like, ‘Oooooh, the president has secret tapes.’ ”

He was stunned by the prominence of a Japanese American, Hawaii Sen. Daniel Inouye, in the congressional investigation of President Nixon. It was a jarring counterpoint to the racism in his own neighborhood.

“You’re just trying to get dignity and respect, and you’re thinking, ‘Oh, how did that guy get to be a United States senator?’ ”

State Treasurer and Democratic gubernatorial candidate John Chiang attends the Los Angeles Current Affairs Forum on June 1.

(Marcus Yam / Los Angeles Times)

Chiang graduated in 1984 from the University of South Florida in Tampa, then interned on Capitol Hill while earning a law degree at Georgetown University in Washington. He worked for one Democratic congressman from Illinois (Lane Evans) and two from California (Norman Mineta and Robert Matsui).

“I was always interested in public policy,” Chiang said. “I fell in love with it in Washington, D.C.”

In 1988, he moved to Los Angeles to work downtown at the Internal Revenue Service. He settled in Chatsworth. But the job — screening corporate pension plans — left him “emotionally barren,” Chiang said.

He quickly left the IRS to work on the campaign for Proposition 100, a measure to reward good drivers with lower car-insurance rates. Voters rejected it, but Chiang was hooked on campaign work.

For a decade, he bounced from one to the next: Gray Davis for controller, Kathleen Brown for treasurer, Mel Levine for U.S. Senate, Barbara Boxer for U.S. Senate, Don Perata for controller, Brown again — this time for governor.

Chiang was an all-purpose operative, raising money, writing speeches and rounding up political support. He also took staff jobs for Davis at the controller’s office and for Boxer at her Senate office in L.A.

“He’s incredibly competent, he’s very smart and he’s very likable — kind of rare in the business,” said Marc Litchman, who in the ’80s and ’90s raised money with Chiang for Westside and San Fernando Valley candidates.

“A lot of people fold under the pressure of all that rejection or people dodging you, and John, he took it in stride,” he said.

Chiang’s genuine fondness for political events — nights, weekends, no matter — was striking to Bob Blumenfield, a longtime friend now on the L.A. City Council.

“It’s almost frightening how much of his life he’s given to being everywhere,” Blumenfield said.

Following Chiang’s path was his more outgoing younger sister, Joyce. She, too, got a law degree at Georgetown University. After a stint at the congressional office of Democrat Howard Berman of the San Fernando Valley, she went to work as a lawyer at what was then the Immigration and Naturalization Service. Chiang saw a future for his sister in elected office.

But one evening in January 1999, she vanished on her way home to the apartment that she shared with their brother Roger in Washington’s Dupont Circle. She was 28 years old. A few months later, her body washed up on the Potomac River. Police ultimately concluded the cause was homicide, but no killer was caught.

“She was the person I was closest to in the world, so her loss is devastating,” Chiang said, his voice cracking.

Trouble struck the family again in 2005, when Roger Chiang admitted to embezzling more than $360,000 from the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, where he worked as outreach director. He served a year in prison.

State Treasurer John Chiang has described himself on the campaign trail as a “tough, strong fiscal watchdog.”

(Justin Sullivan / Getty Images)

John Chiang, who has no children, is separated from his wife of 10 years. In his scant spare time, he likes to visit his six godchildren, play poker or watch sports or “Game of Thrones” with friends.

When he campaigns, Chiang describes himself as a “tough, strong fiscal watchdog.” He takes credit for uncovering $9.5 billion in waste, fraud and abuse in state and local government spending.

“It’s not just about the numbers, it’s about values — where you put the money,” Chiang told a dozen young Democrats eating taquitos and sipping margaritas at a karaoke stop in Santa Ana. “That’s why I’m tough with the buck — because it helps you reduce student debt.”

When the karaoke started, he stepped on stage and gamely launched into a rendition of the Eagles’ “Hotel California,” exposing his off-key singing. He tried to mute it by passing the microphone to others on stage.

Trump presidency eases Gavin Newsom’s path in his second run for California governor »

Chiang likes to engage crowds by asking each person to share a dream before posing a question, a request that befuddles many.

“My dream is to eliminate German cockroaches,” one woman declared to a roar of laughter at a Disneyland pest-control conference where Chiang was the featured speaker.

Eventually, Chiang will market himself in 30-second television commercials to give Californians a better sense of who he is. For now, he’s mostly dashing from one event to another — an Israeli Consulate reception, an Encino Chamber of Commerce lunch, a gala for FilipinoAmerican lawyers. That approach got him this far, and he’s sticking to it.

About this story: This is one in a series of articles about the candidates vying to succeed Jerry Brown as governor of California in the 2018 election. Learn more about them at latimes.com/CA2018.

michael.finnegan@latimes.com

@finneganLAT

ALSO

Can California’s fractured GOP get it together to nominate a candidate for governor?

What’s Delaine Eastin thinking? The long-shot candidate for governor explains

Sign up for the free politics newsletter

Updates on California politics

Aug. 15 (UPI) — President Donald Trump on Friday said he wants the Strait of Hormuz to become U.S. territory.

Speaking at an event in New York, Trump said he plans to declare ownership of the waterway between Oman and Iran once the war is over.

“After we finish defeating Iran, which is being very badly defeated, pretty soon I’ll be declaring the Hormuz strait a territory of the United States,” Trump said, as reported by the Guardian.

“Essentially, that’s what it is,” he added. “We have the blockade — no ships get through unless we want them to.”

Iran’s deputy foreign minister, Kazem Gharibabadi, on Saturday called the president’s remarks “fanciful delusions.”

“Once and for all, accept the reality: up to this point, you have suffered strategic and heavy defeats,” Gharibabadi said in a statement on X. “The Strait of Hormuz has been Iranian, is Iranian, and will remain Iranian.”

“This strait will only be closed and opened under Iran’s command, and as long as you do not accept the reality of defeat and cease your fanciful delusions, Iran will continue to enforce the blockade,” Gharibabadi added.

Traffic through the strait, through which 20% of the world’s oil and gas usually pass, has slowed dramatically since Trump launched the war with Iran on Feb. 28.

Six ships traveled through the strait last weekend, where usually as many as 140 would pass in a single day, The Hill reported.

Both Trump and Iranian officials claim to have control of the strait.

“We have control over it, nobody else, only us,” Trump told reporters earlier this week, The Hill reported. “Our Navy is unbelievable and things are going great for our country.”

WASHINGTON — President Trump’s war against Iran is stretching the limits of U.S. aircraft carriers and leaving the western Pacific without one of the key American warships as China shows more signs of aggression.

The USS George Washington is departing the Pacific to relieve the USS Abraham Lincoln in the Middle East, amid growing concerns about mental health and supply issues aboard the long-deployed carrier. The Lincoln has had its time at sea extended from its original May return date to support the war in Iran.

The lack of a U.S. carrier in the Pacific may be short-lived if the Navy deploys another in the next couple of months. But it shows how the open-ended operations with Iran are running some American sailors ragged, analysts say, while the Trump administration further retreats from the Asia-Pacific region and focuses on the Western Hemisphere.

“The administration says that the Pacific is supposed to be the most important behind the Western Hemisphere,” said Greg Poling, director of the Southeast Asia Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Instead, the U.S. is “doing the exact opposite” of its previously expressed goal of pulling out of the Middle East.

American allies in the Pacific are unsettled over the unpredictability of the Trump administration, Poling said, while China “is quite happy with U.S. distraction, with the frustration of U.S. allies and partners.”

China may take advantage

Beijing sees the U.S. military presence in the region as a threat to China’s rise and an obstacle to its ambition to seize Taiwan, the self-governing island it claims as its own. But the United States has argued that the Pacific region is too important economically to lose.

No one expects China to invade Taiwan just because an American aircraft carrier has left the region. But the carrier’s absence gives the Chinese another opportunity to show its strength, said Bryan Clark, a former Navy submariner who is a defense analyst at the Hudson Institute.

“They’re using this as part of the narrative to demonstrate to the Philippines, to Japan, to Indonesia and others that the U.S. is not the big dog in the western Pacific anymore,” Clark said. “They would just prefer that countries in the region decide that China is the bigger power and the U.S. is not able to guarantee their security anymore.”

China conducted naval exercises this week with Indonesia and recently has shown signs of aggression toward Japan and the Philippines, two key U.S. allies that also have territorial disputes with Beijing.

China carried out military drills this month near the Scarborough Shoal in the South China Sea. Both China and the Philippines have claims over the shoal. Last month, a Chinese guided-missile destroyer conducted a live-fire exercise off Japan’s southernmost island of Okinotori.

Adm. Frank Bradley, head of the U.S. Special Operations Command, has been trying to reassure regional allies of Washington’s commitment. He was in Manila on Thursday, telling his Filipino counterparts that U.S. special operations forces are ready to step up joint exercises to strengthen the countries’ alliance. He also is expected to travel to Japan.

Evan Sankey, a policy analyst at the Cato Institute who focuses on U.S. policy toward China, said aircraft carriers provide psychological assurance to U.S. allies. The absence of carriers in the region, he said, “adds to the general sense that the U.S. is distracted by events in the Middle East.”

Trump has relied on aircraft carriers for military actions

Trump has relied heavily on aircraft carriers to support his numerous military operations during his second term. The USS Gerald R. Ford returned home in mid-May after an 11-month deployment, the longest since the Vietnam War, during which it supported the U.S. fight against Iran and the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.

The Ford had experienced a fire in a laundry space that forced the carrier to turn around and return to the Mediterranean Sea for repairs and left hundreds of sailors without places to sleep.

The USS Lincoln has been at sea 268 days as of Saturday, a record deployment without a port visit, as the Ford had. Democratic lawmakers and families of the sailors have been calling for investigations and greater visibility into conditions aboard the ship, which is preparing to return to its home port in San Diego.

Warships and their crews can handle only so much, said Robert Farley, who teaches national security and diplomacy at the University of Kentucky and often writes about aircraft carriers.

“People don’t get enough rest. It’s psychologically exhausting. And R&R is part of keeping the crew healthy,” Farley said. “Sometimes it’s framed as, ‘These people haven’t had a vacation.’ But we are dealing with well-known limits on the capacity of a crew to operate at top efficiency over time. And that just declines.”

Clark, of the Hudson Institute, said the squeeze on the nation’s aircraft carriers stems from the lack of preparation and planning for the Iran war.

“If we were going to mobilize to do this kind of conflict, and we anticipated it might go this long, we might have done some changes to the carrier schedule to make sure more would be available,” Clark said.

Clark said the Navy has 11 aircraft carriers and typically deploys two or three at a time. But it could soon deploy four if the USS Theodore Roosevelt leaves San Diego for the Middle East, allowing the Washington to return to Pacific.

But the massive warships will need maintenance, probably causing a bottleneck at the nation’s only two carrier shipyards.

“We’ll end up with a maintenance debt that needs to be paid for the next few years,” Clark said. “We’ll probably have less carrier presence than we’ve had in the previous years because carriers will be lined up to get into the shipyard.”

Role in modern warfare

Michael Swaine, a senior research fellow in the Quincy Institute’s East Asia Program, questions the future need for aircraft carriers as warfare rapidly changes.

Carriers can be more easily targeted with drones and missiles, particularly by an adversary such as China, Swaine said, while smaller ships and submarines can be as effective in striking targets as the fighter jets that launch off a carrier.

Top Navy officials have indicated a desire to move away from a heavy reliance on carriers. Adm. Daryl Caudle, chief of naval operations, told the Associated Press in February that he wants to convince commanders to use smaller, newer ships and other assets instead of consistently turning to huge aircraft carriers.

Finley and Tang write for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — A federal judge has refused to block the Trump administration from taking steps to build 62 miles of international border wall along part of a Native American tribe’s reservation without its consent.

U.S. District Judge Richard Leon in Washington denied the Tohono O’odham Nation’s request for a court-ordered halt to border wall construction on its 2.8-million-acre reservation. Leon ruled Friday that the tribe hasn’t established that a border wall will change its reservation boundaries without congressional authority.

The judge also rejected the tribe’s claim that the planned border wall would illegally trespass on its reservation.

“And in any event, I find that the Government’s interests in securing the border, enforcing immigration laws, and ensuring public safety outweigh any surviving irreparable harms at this juncture,” Leon wrote.

The tribe released a statement late Friday strongly disagreeing with the decision.

“Too many critical issues were not adequately addressed, such as inevitable impacts construction will have on the Nation’s land and the permanent destruction of sacred sites,” Tohono O’odham Nation Chairman Verlon M. Jose said. “The Nation will consider all possible options for moving forward, as this issue is simply too important to the O’odham.”

The O’odham reservation in the Sonoran Desert in Arizona abuts 62 miles of the Mexico border. The tribe has more than 37,000 members, including thousands who live in Mexico.

Building the border wall would lead to “significant devastation” on the reservation, including the destruction of mountain peaks that are sacred to the O’odham, tribe attorneys said.

“It would fray the ties between O’odham communities and families on opposite sides of the border, interfere significantly with O’odham religious rituals and practices, and destroy plant and animal resources sacred to the O’odham,” the lawyers wrote.

In 1907, President Theodore Roosevelt issued a proclamation reserving a 60-foot strip of public land along the U.S.-Mexico border for a buffer zone dubbed the “Roosevelt Reservation,” which was formed a decade before the reservation’s establishment.

Tribe attorneys say it is “fanciful at best” to suggest that border wall construction can be confined to a 60-foot-wide corridor.

During a July 22 hearing, Leon appeared to be skeptical that U.S. laws tip in favor of the tribe’s bid for a preliminary injunction, calling it an “extraordinary” request. Leon, who was nominated to the bench by President George W. Bush, said he couldn’t find a previous court ruling under comparable circumstances.

“This is a novel case with novel issues,” the judge said.

Kunzelman writes for the Associated Press.

A United States aircraft carrier, the USS George Washington, has begun to depart the western Pacific Ocean, leaving its port in Da Nang, Vietnam, for an anticipated deployment to the Middle East.

The ship is expected to replace the USS Abraham Lincoln, which is currently participating in the US-Israeli war against Iran.

The vessel’s movement on Saturday comes amid mounting concerns about the conditions on board the USS Lincoln, sparked by reports of sailors attempting to jump overboard.

The USS Lincoln has been deployed without a port stop for more than 266 days, a record duration for the Navy. It houses about 5,000 sailors and Marines.

In the wake of reports about supply shortages and mental health strain on the ship, US President Donald Trump and acting Secretary of the Navy Hung Cao indicated that the vessel would be rotated. The Pentagon has not confirmed, however, that the USS Lincoln will be replaced by the USS Washington.

The department historically has not commented on movements of key military assets, citing security concerns.

Analysts note that the USS Washington’s departure from the Pacific leaves no US aircraft carrier in the strategically significant region, where the US has long acted as a bulwark against China’s might.

Back-and-forth over conditions

Members of the Trump administration have spent much of this week batting away reports about deteriorating conditions on the USS Lincoln.

US media outlets have carried reports not only of sailors attempting to leap from the vessel, but also of diminishing hygiene supplies and paltry food, as well as issues with plumbing and waste disposal.

Several US senators have called for more information about the conditions on board and the reason for its record-setting deployment.

Since leaving San Diego, California, last November, the USS Lincoln has been sent to support military operations in Venezuela, before leaving for the Middle East shortly thereafter.

Its deployment was supposed to end in May. But after the US and Israel launched a war against Iran in February, its mission was extended indefinitely.

The war with Iran has shown no signs so far of ending, though fighting has remained largely subdued in recent days. Talks have stalled over issues including control of the Strait of Hormuz, a strategic waterway for global trade.

Speaking to reporters on Friday, Trump downplayed concerns about the ship, saying instead the length of the aircraft carrier’s deployment was “not nearly enough”.

A day earlier, Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth said conditions on board had been “completely misrepresented”.

In a separate statement on Friday, Cao maintained the issues on board the ship were not dire, but he acknowledged “a small number of mental health cases were treated with no loss of life”.

He added that meal plans had been adjusted “when fresh resupply was unavailable”, but not a single meal had been missed.

“There is no question our young men and women have been pushed to their limits  — but they have never broken,” he said.

Still, some analysts say Iranian attacks have taken a toll on US military assets across the region, particularly a US Navy base in Bahrain. That has likely complicated typical resupply and maintenance procedures for aircraft carriers like the USS Lincoln.

Concerns about China

News of the USS Washington’s shift from the Pacific has spurred concern that its departure may further harm US deterrence against China. It was not clear if or when another carrier would be deployed to the region.

Bryan Clark, a former Navy submariner and defence analyst at the Hudson Institute, a think tank, told The Associated Press that Beijing may try to project strength in the aircraft carrier’s absence to unnerve US allies in the region.

“They’re using this as part of the narrative to demonstrate to the Philippines, to Japan, to Indonesia and others that the US is not the big dog in the western Pacific any more,” Clark said.

“They would just prefer that countries in the region decide that China is the bigger power and the US is not able to guarantee their security any more.”

Clark added he did not believe the change would in and of itself embolden China to launch an attack on Taiwan, the self-governing island it claims as its own.

Still, the shift comes as the US contends with a reported depletion in both its offensive and defensive weapon supplies as a result of the war with Iran.

Those shortages have already piqued concerns of a declining US ability to serve as deterrence against military aggression. Critics point out that a country like China, unlike Iran, has advanced military technology and a sprawling air force, which could pose a challenge to the US military.

Like the USS Lincoln, the USS Washington is a Nimitz-class nuclear-powered aircraft carrier. It has the capability to carry more than 6,000 passengers and about 90 aircraft.

Reporting from Washington — Will the second time be a charm for Judge Thomas M. Hardiman?

Hardiman, 53, was the runner-up last year in the seat that went to Justice Neil M. Gorsuch.

He has a solidly conservative record, including a strong defense of gun rights. And Hardiman’s working-class background could bring a fresh perspective to the nation’s highest court, giving him a special appeal to the voters who propelled President Trump’s drive to the White House.

He would become the current court’s only non-Ivy League graduate. The first in his family to graduate from college, Hardiman drove a cab to help pay his tuition.

As a young man, he learned Spanish, studied in Mexico and worked with Ayuda, a legal aid clinic in Washington, where he represented Spanish-speaking immigrants, including those who were seeking political asylum.

Beyond that, Hardiman had an inside advantage: He serves on the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia along with Judge Maryanne Trump Barry, who has reportedly urged her brother to choose him.

Hardiman’s compelling personal back story may make him harder for Senate Democrats to oppose.

But he has not appeared to be among Trump’s top three candidates in the search to replace retiring Justice Anthony M. Kennedy.

He has been seen as a capable, hardworking and well-liked judge. But he did not have a national reputation as a legal thinker, and even lawyers in Pittsburgh said last year that they do not see him as Supreme Court material.

“He takes the case before him and looks at the facts and precedents, but without imposing an overarching view of the law,” said University of Pittsburgh law professor Arthur Hellman. “It’s hard to assess what he would be like as a Supreme Court justice. My guess is that he will be a cautious judge, at least for a few years.”

President George W. Bush chose Hardiman to become a district judge in 2003 and then elevated him to the appeals court two years later, when he won unanimous confirmation from the Senate.

Hardiman does not have record of strident comments on issues such as abortion or gay rights that could fuel opposition in the Senate.

He grew up in Waltham, Mass., where his father ran a company that provided taxi service and school transportation. Hardiman won a merit scholarship to go the University of Notre Dame, and he earned his law degree at Georgetown University in Washington. He practiced law in Washington before moving to Pittsburgh. His wife, Lori Zappala Hardiman, comes from a prominent Democratic family long active in Pittsburgh politics.

He staked out a strong position four years ago in favor of the 2nd Amendment right to carry a gun in public. He dissented when the 3rd Circuit upheld a New Jersey law that required people seeking gun permits to demonstrate a “justifiable need” to be armed. Several plaintiffs who had been turned down for permits sued, alleging the restriction violated the 2nd Amendment.

A district judge upheld the law — as did the 3rd Circuit, by a 2-1 vote. The majority said that although the Supreme Court had recognized a right to have a gun at home for self-defense, it had not ruled the Constitution protected the right to carry a gun in public.

Hardiman wrote a 40-page dissent, arguing the high court and Justice Scalia described the 2nd Amendment as protecting a right to “self-defense.” Because “the need for self-defense naturally exists outside and inside the home, I would hold the 2nd Amendment applies outside the home,” he wrote in Drake vs. Filko.

In passing the law, “New Jersey has decided that fewer handguns legally carried in public means less crime…. It is obvious that the justifiable need requirement functions as a rationing system designed to limit the number of handguns carried in New Jersey,” he wrote, maintaining that the law could not stand in the face of 2nd Amendment challenge.

The law survived an appeal to the Supreme Court, however. The justices, without comment, turned down a petition in 2014 asking them to review the 3rd Circuit’s decision.

Hardiman also wrote an important opinion that upheld the power of jailers to strip-search all new inmates, even those being held briefly for failing to pay a fine who do not appear to a pose a security risk. A class-action suit was brought on behalf of people who had been arrested and strip-searched in a county jail in New Jersey. They alleged these full-body exams amounted to “unreasonable searches” in violation of the 4th Amendment. The lead plaintiff, Albert Florence, had been arrested and briefly jailed for not paying a fine. It later turned out he had paid the fine.

A district judge ruled for the plaintiffs, but Hardiman spoke for a 2-1 majority to throw out their claim. “We do not minimize the extreme intrusion on privacy associated with a strip search by law enforcement officers,” he wrote, but he added that “the prevention of the entry of illegal weapons and drugs is vital to the protection of inmates and prison personnel alike.”

The Supreme Court agreed to hear an appeal in the case, Florence vs. Board of Chosen Freeholders, but affirmed Hardiman’s 3rd Circuit decision by a 5-4 vote in 2012.

However, Hardiman’s judicial record is not uniformly conservative, which raises concerns among conservatives.

In 2009, one of his opinions for the 3rd Circuit revived a claim of “gender stereotyping discrimination” brought by a man who said he was harassed, ridiculed and finally fired from his job at a specialty printing company because he was seen as effeminate.

Hardiman noted that neither Congress nor the Supreme Court had outlawed discrimination based on an employee’s sexual orientation. However, he said, the justices had said employees may sue if they are fired for failing to conform to “gender stereotypes.” In the case of Prowel vs. Wise, he cleared the way for the fired employee to take his claim before a jury.

david.savage@latimes.com

On Twitter: DavidGSavage

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

It was a move this week that drew immediate blowback: Council President Marqueece Harris-Dawson pulled Councilmember Nithya Raman off of her position as chair of the city’s housing and homelessness committee, just as Raman enters the homestretch in her campaign to unseat Mayor Karen Bass.

Raman quickly suggested that she was being punished for challenging Bass, a Harris-Dawson ally. On a video titled “Bass’ Ally Removed Me as Chair,” she portrayed the move as retribution for saying City Controller Kenneth Mejia should audit the mayor’s homeless programs.

“Mayor Bass and her allies are protecting what we all know is a deeply broken status quo, one that is not serving any person here in the city of Los Angeles,” she said.

For months, many at City Hall had expected Raman to make a stink if she was yanked from her post, transforming herself into a martyr. So what exactly was Harris-Dawson thinking?

In an interview Friday, Harris-Dawson said the removal of Raman as committee chair was simply one piece in a larger effort to make the council’s committees work better — and not punishment at all.

“If I were trying to punish her, I would have moved her off [her post] the day after she filed to run for mayor” back in February, he said.

Harris-Dawson said he split Raman’s committee into two — one focused on housing, the other on homelessness — because the two subjects were simply too big for a single committee to handle effectively. He said he and Raman had talked extensively about that idea, disagreeing on whether the two topics should have been combined.

The homelessness committee needs someone who can focus their undivided attention on the ongoing crises surrounding homeless services — including the Trump administration’s effort to strip hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding, Harris-Dawson said.

“We’ve got to be able to move, and move in the most efficient manner possible,” he said.

Councilmember Nithya Raman attends a city council meeting at City Hall in downtown Los Angeles on August 14, 2026.

(Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)

As part of the reshuffling, Harris-Dawson picked Councilmember Ysabel Jurado, who represents Skid Row, to lead the now renamed homelessness and health committee. Jurado will also sit on the new three-member housing committee, which will be chaired by Councilmember Imelda Padilla.

Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martínez, fresh off his reelection victory, will head up the council’s economic development committee, replacing Councilmember Curren Price, who leaves at the end of the year.

Even Councilmember Monica Rodriguez landed a spot in charge of the committee that deals with parks, a pet issue of hers. Harris-Dawson stripped Rodriguez of her committee seats last year, after she criticized his leadership.

The new assignments could give Harris-Dawson a base of support the next time there’s a vote on his presidency. Harris-Dawson dismissed the idea that there was any connection, calling such speculation “completely inaccurate.”

The committee assignments take effect next month.

Raman will continue serving on the five-member homelessness committee, just not as its chair. She will head the council committee dealing with immigration and civil rights. She even broadened her portfolio in some ways, securing a seat on the public safety committee, which deals with police and fire responses.

“If you’re on a committee, you definitely can get things done, and you don’t have to be the chair,” Harris-Dawson said.

Raman offered a different take, telling reporters on Friday that a committee chair simply has more authority, setting the agenda.

“You also have some more power in trying to get the departments to reply — although even my best efforts to get the departments to reply to report-backs didn’t work,” she said.

Not happy with the homeless count

The hot potato that is homelessness now heads to Jurado, at a critical time for the city and her district.

Jurado’s district, which takes in downtown and parts of the Eastside, saw a 23% increase in unsheltered homelessness, according to this year’s homeless count. On top of that, The Times recently reported that the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority, which runs the count, failed to tally hundreds of residents at a Skid Row shelter in 2024 and 2025, skewing this year’s citywide numbers.

Jurado voiced frustration over those issues, saying city officials shouldn’t have to spend time and money verifying data that “should have been accurate from the start.”

She isn’t the only one voicing displeasure.

Harris-Dawson questioned the accuracy of the count in his own South L.A. district, where LAHSA reported a 127% increase in unsheltered homelessness.

Harris-Dawson thinks the big increase may stem from a single census tract south of Manchester Avenue between Normandie and Van Ness avenues. In that area, LAHSA said it found 277 unsheltered homeless people.

Last year, the agency counted 19, Harris-Dawson said.

“A jump of this magnitude in a single corridor strongly suggests a data collection or processing error rather than an actual change on the ground,” according to a motion signed this week by Harris-Dawson that calls for an explanation.

LAHSA officials didn’t respond to requests for comment.

Sherman Oaks Smackdown, Part II

It was the most personal of the mayoral debates staged last spring: Bass and Raman going mano a mano in front of an audience at the Sherman Oaks Homeowners Assn.

During that 90-minute back-and-forth, the two took shots at each other over homelessness, police hiring and their respective leadership styles, among other things.

Now, with the Nov. 3 runoff approaching, Bass and Raman are set for a Valley rematch on Wednesday, which will again feature Fox11’s Phil Shuman, as well as a panel of representatives from Sherman Oaks community groups.

Reservations have been filling up for in-person attendance. The event will also be live streamed on www.soha914.com and aired on LAist 89.3, organizers said.

State of play

— HITTING HUD: In a scathing order, a federal judge blocked the Trump administration from taking control of federal funding for homelessness programs across L.A. County. In his preliminary injunction, U.S. District Judge David O. Carter said the Department of Housing and Urban Development acted arbitrarily and capriciously when it suspended LAHSA from managing federal funds.

— LOATHING LAHSA: Federal officials also denounced LAHSA as corrupt and incompetent during an appearance at the Dream Center, a faith-based residential treatment center. LAHSA pushed back, saying the federal government has failed to provide evidence of graft or abuse.

— RETURN ENGAGEMENT: The mayor’s Inside Safe homelessness program is spending more and more time going back to the same locations. Data reviewed by The Times showed that, in the fourth quarter of 2025, four out of every five Inside Safe operations were carried out in places already visited by its outreach teams. The repopulation problem has been especially pronounced along the 110 Freeway in South L.A.

— WAREHOUSE WOES: City leaders have accused Lineage, whose warehouse in Boyle Heights was destroyed by fire, of blowing past the city’s 45-day deadline for removing millions of pounds of rotting food from its property. Lineage reported Friday that the task was 94% done. Bass wants the city’s lawyers to take Lineage to court and impose penalties.

— RISKY BUSINESS: A divided City Council finalized an agreement aimed at controlling the city’s costs during the 2028 Summer Olympic Games, amid complaints that the event poses a major financial risk.

— TRAIN IN VAIN: Despite months of test runs, the Automated People Mover train is facing new uncertainty, with a bond rating downgrade and a legal battle between the city and the contractor.

— ZEROING IN: City Controller Kenneth Mejia told The Times he’s planning to use his auditing authority to examine spending by LA28, the privately run committee that is staging the Games.

— BUMMER NUMBERS: Euthanasia rates for cats and kittens are up in a big way in L.A. this year, according to the city’s latest stats.

— LICENSE TO CARRY: The federal government and the county’s Sheriff’s Department have reached a settlement over what prosecutors alleged was a pattern of delaying applications for permits to carry concealed firearms. The Sheriff’s Department has cut its waiting times and now complies with statutory deadlines, officials said.

— END OF THE PARTY: A mansion in Encino, located in the western end of Raman’s district, has become a massive party house, drawing a neighborhood outcry.

QUICK HITS

• Where is Inside Safe? The mayor’s signature homeless program went to the area around Bessemer Street and Cedros Avenue in Van Nuys, an area represented by Padilla.
• On the docket next week: As we mentioned earlier, Bass and Raman go head to head in Sherman Oaks on Wednesday. Tune in!

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Infectious Diseases Society of America has been equally unequivocal.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Which agencies did the report analyse?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

How did federal policy change under Trump?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

What did the Human Rights Watch report find?

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

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

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

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

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

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

What other offices were affected?

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

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

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

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

What has been the impact of these changes?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Fields writes for the Associated Press.

US president’s words come as Treasury chief says US will use economic measures against Iran that have ‘never been seen’.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Thanawala writes for the Associated Press.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

‘What military objective?’

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Kunzelman writes for the Associated Press.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Caldwell and Lovinger write for Bloomberg.

Brazil has not yet decided whether it will proceed with retaliatory measures, but has committed to defending its position.

Brazil has opened consultations into potential retaliatory measures against the United States following the imposition of 25 percent tariffs on a range of Brazilian exports.

The new US tariffs are “unjustified and arbitrary”, and Brazil will “continue to defend its position in all appropriate forums”, the Brazilian government said in a statement on Thursday.

The step is the beginning of the reciprocity process that could eventually see Brazil introduce retaliatory measures, including tariffs, on imports from the US.

This early stage involves further diplomatic consultations with US trade authorities.

In July, the US imposed a surcharge of 25 percent on some Brazilian imports, including sugar, clothing, paper and steel, alleging unfair trade practices. The US also hit Brazil – and a host of other countries – with an additional 12.5 percent tariff linked to allegations of lax enforcement of forced labour bans.

While no decision has yet been made, Brazil’s retaliatory options include imposing taxes or fees, eliminating exemptions or reducing import tariffs, or even restricting imports of American goods or services.

A source told the Reuters news agency that further measures could go beyond tariffs, for example by suspending pharmaceutical and agricultural patents.

The US runs a trade surplus with Brazil, meaning it sells the country goods and services worth more than it imports from it. In 2026 so far, the US has exported $26.5bn worth to Brazil and imported $17bn, according to the US Census Bureau.

Multiple rounds of tariffs

Under President Donald Trump, the US has repeatedly sought to impose sweeping tariffs on imports into the US, lamenting the US’s trade deficit with countries around the world.

In April 2025, the White House announced the introduction of a minimum 10 percent tariff on nearly every country, in what Trump and his team dubbed the “Liberation Day” tariffs.

Those were struck down by US courts this year, but the latest round of tariffs is widely seen as a replacement for the failed Liberation Day tariffs, designed to survive challenges in the US court system.

Things people don’t want to do this summer, as evidenced by poor ratings: Watch CBS news anchor Tony Doukopil. Tune into Paramount+’s sci-fi teen drama “Star Trek: Starfleet Academy.” Read President Trump’s Truth Social posts.

No matter how much Trump posts, and he has been posting a lot lately, traffic to the platform he uses as his megaphone for official White House statements and personal rants has fallen off significantly this summer. Last month, the overall number of monthly visitors to Truth Social was down about 36% from where it was in 2025, according to the online tracking firm Similarweb. The numbers were similarly dismal in June.

But Trump’s slumping media fortunes may soon get an infusion of cash, or bitcoin, or whatever it takes to line his coffers before the jig is up.

Never one to leave a source of income untapped, the president has come up with yet another way to add to the $2.2 billion he made in just the first year of his second term. His majority-owned Trump Media & Technology Group earlier this month announced that it was rolling out a new service aimed at cashing in on the president’s every word.

Truth API is a subscription service that offers early access to posts from Trump and other notable users of the platform, for a price. It’s charging fees of up to $100,000 and month.

But there’s a hiccup in the president’s latest grift. On Wednesday, media organizations Freedom of the Press Foundation and The Intercept sued Trump, filing a complaint saying that providing quicker access to his posts to those who pay was “extraordinary, corrupt, and unconstitutional.”

Their suit alleges that Truth API contradicts the First Amendment’s guarantee of equal public access to the president’s statements and violates the Fifth Amendment by granting preferential access for “unreasonable sums.” The lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, asked the court to block Trump from publishing official government information exclusively on Truth Social.

So why is this particular money-making scheme garnering so much attention outside Trump’s many other grifts? Because a president’s words can, and often do, sway the stock market. In the frenetic world of Wall Street trading, early access to statements and news from the Commander-in-Chief gives subscribers an edge, and as NPR pointed out, that could mean a difference of millions of dollars.

Unlike any other sitting U.S. president, Trump in his second term has ignored traditional means of communication such as press briefings, live addresses or posting official announcements, executive actions, press releases, and statements on the official White House Website. He’s done so in favor of communicating through his own privately controlled platform, delivering wild posting sprees that often forgo the fact-based, informative briefings we the people still need from our elected officials. But even back when he was using Twitter (now X) during his first term, the White House said his tweets should be considered official statements.

That standard still holds for his frequent barrages of boasts, insults, threats, grouses and indecipherable dispatches via Truth Social. After the humiliating failure of his America 250 celebration, he fired off 67 posts on Truth Social in just two hours, posting almost every single minute between 11:12 a.m. and 1:14 p.m. His musings ranged from attacks on a federal judge to a photo of himself at a 1991 New York City tree-lighting ceremony with his “Home Alone 2” co-stars.

That spree is now among the thousands more posts from the president, that have not been followed up by announcements from the White House outside of Truth Social. “In other words, President Trump’s posts are the only way to get official government news,” the lawsuit said.

Trump Media & Technology Group, or TMTG, is majority-owned by the president. It was launched following Trump’s account suspension across mainstream social platforms including Twitter, Facebook and YouTube. The platforms cited risks of inciting violence following the Jan. 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol riot. Trump responded by creating his own platform, and Truth Social debuted in 2022.

But the platform’s parent company, TMTG, has lost money ever since it went public in 2024. On Monday, Trump Media reported a $238-million loss for the second quarter, tied mostly to cryptocurrency assets. Executives told investors on a conference call that they are now going to focus their energy on Truth Social and soft-explained their latest scheme to profit off the presidency.

“Our customers will get published and publicly available posts fractionally faster” than everyone else,” said Kevin McGurn, the company’s interim chief executive. He added that such early access is a “well-established business practice.”

Unless it’s a sitting U.S. president doing the selling. We’re in uncharted territory, once again. But another big question around this new subscription service is whether investors and traders can trust the intelligence they get from early access to Trump’s posts.

It was revealed this week that the president published deceptive information last month, putting the lives of dozens in danger. Before leaving a NATO meeting in Turkey, he posted that he’d be riding on the older Air Force One “for old time’s sake” instead of the newly retrofitted, Qatari-donated jet. His misdirection was part of an elaborate ruse to mask his transfer from Air Force One to a military fighter jet following intel that Iran may be targeting the president’s plane. The subterfuge involved him stowing away in an airport catering container to sneak onto the jet. Of course a president has to be protected, but Air Force One still had members of the press and his administration aboard when they sent it into the sky. Essentially, they were unwitting decoys.

Sometimes a president has to lie to stay safe. And often times this president peddles misinformation as a means to other ends, like amassing more money for himself while holding onto his seat of power. Paying for early access to Trump’s posts is a great idea — for Trump.

The Kennedy Center Board of Trustees on Thursday voted to move forward with President Trump’s plan to close the building for renovations for two years, according to the Associated Press. During the same meeting, the board, which is filled with the president’s allies, also voted to inscribe Trump’s name on the building.

The votes came after a federal judge in May ordered a halt to Trump’s plan to close the center, and also that Trump’s name be removed from the building, where it had been added to the venue’s official name. The new inscription will read, “Restored and Renovated by President Donald J. Trump,” according to the New York Times. Rep. Joyce Beatty confirmed the news to the AP. The move appears to be an attempt to sidestep U.S. District Judge Christopher R. Cooper’s ruling that the law “makes crystal clear that the Center is to be named for President Kennedy.”

Cooper wrote in that same ruling that the board’s original vote in March to close the venue beginning July 5 was “ill-informed and seemingly preordained.” But he left open the possibility of a closure if — after a more thorough investigation by the board into the plan — the decision was again made. The board’s recent vote came after it reviewed information about the repercussions and costs of a closure. This included three scenarios: a full closure, a partial closure over a period of five years and a limited series of phased closures, sources close to the situation told the AP, asking to remain anonymous.

It is unclear if the recent vote will again face legal pushback.

The Kennedy Center has been in crisis for more than a year, beginning in February 2025 when Trump fired its board and appointed himself chairman. He swiftly selected Richard Grenell, a former ambassador to Germany and a staunch ally, as acting director of the center. Under Trump and Grenell, the venue ruptured audiences and lost a slew of high-profile shows and artists including “Hamilton,” Shonda Rhimes and Ben Folds. The Washington National Opera also left the venue, which it had occupied for decades.

The situation worsened late last year after the board voted to rename the venue the Donald J. Trump and the John F. Kennedy Memorial Center for the Performing Arts. Performers, including jazz musician Chuck Redd, canceled a variety of holiday shows. The Kennedy Center threatened to sue Redd, creating a legal drama that continued until this week when a superior court judge in Washington, D.C., ordered the center to pay more than $250,000 to Redd to cover attorneys’ fees and other legal costs.

WASHINGTON — Public health experts have been quick to condemn an executive order from President Trump aimed at upending childhood vaccinations in the U.S., but the biggest obstacles may be the unprecedented financial and logistical challenges it would impose on parents, health providers and drugmakers.

Monday’s announcement by the Republican president calls for separating combination shots — including the measles, mumps and rubella, or MMR, vaccine — into separate injections. Appointments for that and other vaccinations should be spaced out whenever possible, the order states.

To accomplish that, drugmakers would need to revive a slate of individual vaccines that have not been marketed separately in the U.S. for decades. They would also have to build new manufacturing plants capable of producing millions more vaccine doses than the nation currently uses.

For parents, unbundling the MMR vaccine and spacing out the shots would mean returning to the doctor’s office many more times than is currently needed. Those appointments could also strain pediatricians who typically administer the shots, while driving up costs tied to syringes and other medical supplies.

Studies in the U.S. and other countries have shown that combination vaccines increase the likelihood that children will be fully protected from infectious diseases before starting school.

Health experts say there is no scientific basis for changing course.

“We do things that are less convenient and more expensive if there’s a good reason to do it,” said Dr. Anna Durbin, of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. “There is no good justification for this. I think it’s very bad public health policy.”

Trump’s plan would require vaccine manufacturing overhaul

Under Trump’s executive order, federal officials are instructed to develop within 90 days plans for breaking up the MMR shot and spacing out other vaccines.

But pharmaceutical scientists and former regulators say those changes would likely take years and require drugmakers to spend tens of millions of dollars on new studies and manufacturing facilities.

Currently, there are no individual vaccines in the U.S. for measles, mumps or rubella. All the vaccines approved for those viruses by the Food and Drug Administration are combination shots. That three-in-one approach has been the standard in the U.S. since the early 1970s.

Dr. Jesse Goodman, a former FDA vaccine chief, said companies would have to conduct large studies showing new individual shots produced immune system-boosting reactions in children similar to the current versions.

Companies might also have to demonstrate the safety of new manufacturing facilities and procedures, given that individual measles shots haven’t been widely produced in the U.S. for roughly a half-century.

“The question is how much has changed since then and how comfortable will the FDA and the companies be relying on those comparisons?” said Goodman, who is now a professor at Georgetown University.

Designing, constructing and getting federal sign-off for new vaccine plants typically takes about five years, according to industry experts.

Additionally, Goodman said the FDA would have to review and license each unbundled vaccine separately, a process with no precedent.

“I don’t think there’s any comparable example of removing hugely effective public health measures that protect babies for no documented scientific reason,” he said.

Individual shots for measles and related diseases tend to be used by lower-income countries that can’t afford the MMR shot. Merck, GSK and the handful of other companies that supply U.S. childhood vaccines make only the combination shot.

In separate statements, Merck and GSK said they stand by the safety and effectiveness of their products. Neither discussed plans to unbundle their shots.

“To date, there has been no published scientific evidence that shows any benefit in separating the combination MMR vaccine into three individual shots,” Merck said in an emailed statement.

Parents would need to make many more trips to the doctor

The MMR shot is currently delivered in two doses — the first at the age of 1 and the second dose after age 4. Splitting up the shot into its three separate components would mean six office visits. Spacing out other shots for pertussis and other infectious diseases could multiply the number of visits many more times.

As the number of visits goes up, parents are more likely to miss appointments or stop making them, according to Durbin.

“It’s going to be less convenient, more expensive and you’re going to have fewer people getting vaccinated,” she said.

Since last year, Trump has repeatedly expressed concern about the number of vaccinations U.S. children are receiving and called on Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to reduce the number. Kennedy and other officials have pointed to smaller countries, such as Denmark, that recommended slightly fewer vaccines than the U.S.

But breaking up combination shots will result in kids receiving many more individual shots than other comparable nations, Durbin notes.

White House spokesman Kush Desai said the Trump administration’s efforts on the MMR vaccine “will give parents more options on timing and frequency for their children, which ultimately will increase vaccination rates for all three diseases.”

Vaccine order is not legally binding

Despite the precedent-breaking nature of Trump’s order, some experts are skeptical it will result in meaningful changes.

Neither the White House nor the FDA can compel drugmakers to develop and seek approval for new vaccines. And from a business perspective, companies have little incentive to develop individual versions of vaccines they already sell in combination shots.

“They’d be competing against themselves, and there’s no reason to do that,” said Dr. Paul Offit, a Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia vaccine researcher and former government adviser.

While Trump’s order calls for more federal research and recommendations, only state governments have the legal authority to require vaccinations for schoolchildren. The order simply advises states to consider updating their laws to reflect the Trump administration’s approach.

“I think states will ignore this,” Offit said. “I think that bottom line is that we don’t need to look to Donald Trump for our medical advice.”

Perrone writes for the Associated Press. AP videojournalist Mary Conlon in New York contributed to this report.