Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr has shown an ability to make a lot of noise at the government agency known in recent years to be a little sleepy.
But his April 28 announcement that the Walt Disney Co.’s eight ABC TV stations will undergo an early review of their broadcast licenses is his loudest action yet taken on behalf of President Trump, who repeatedly threatened media outlets that he believes are critical of him.
Carr is calling for the review two years before any of the station licenses are up, citing the agency’s inquiry into Disney’s diversity, equity and inclusion policies and whether they violated federal anti-discrimination rules.
The timing of Carr’s move is raising eyebrows as it comes after First Lady Melania Trump’s call for the firing of ABC late-night host Jimmy Kimmel over his April 23 comedy bit on the White House correspondents’ dinner. A tuxedo-clad Kimmel called Melania Trump “beautiful,” saying she had “the glow of an expectant widow.”
The first lady’s remarks came after a man armed with a shotgun, handgun and several knives breached security at the Washington black-tie event on April 25. The suspect, Cole Tomas Allen of Torrance, was arrested and faces three criminal charges, including attempting to assassinate the president.
Kimmel’s gag became ammunition for right-wing commentators, who claim the left is stoking political violence.
The host said the joke was about the age difference between the 79-year-old president and his wife. Kimmel denied it was a call for violence and has continued to mock the president on his show.
Carr insisted at a Washington news conference last week that his demand for a review is not related to Kimmel’s remarks.
Although many are skeptical, Carr, who was at the April 25 dinner, told The Times there would be an action related to ABC coming soon. The conversation occurred hours before the shots were fired.
The investigation into Disney’s practices began in March 2025, part of a broader effort by the Trump administration to reverse DEI initiatives across private companies, federal agencies, universities and other organizations.
After the 2020 police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis, which spurred the Black Lives Matter movement, companies such as Disney and NBC-owned Comcast aggressively promoted their diversity efforts.
But experts believe Carr is acting on ABC at the behest of Trump, as the chairman has often expressed support on social media whenever the president criticizes one of the broadcast TV news outlets.
“It might be the case that Disney can get some early relief by saying this should be dismissed because this is really a 1st Amendment issue,” said James Speta, a professor at the Northwestern University School of Law. “We all know what’s going on here — the administration doesn’t like the speech that’s coming out of the talent on the broadcasting airwaves.”
Disney is not commenting on Carr’s DEI investigation, but it earlier defended the record of its TV stations, which are ratings leaders in most markets. “We are confident that record demonstrates our continued qualifications as licensees under the Communications Act and the First Amendment and are prepared to show that through the appropriate legal channels,” the company said.
Here’s a primer on what to know and the challenges Disney may face.
Why are TV stations licensed by the government?
Government licensing regulates the spectrum allocated to broadcast channels, largely to prevent interference between TV signals. When renewals come up, the license holder must demonstrate that the station is serving the public interest by providing local news, program diversity and educational and informational shows for children. The procedure once occurred every three years, but deregulation efforts have extended that period to the current span of eight years.
When was the last time a TV station faced a significant license renewal challenge?
The most notable recent example was Fox Corp.’s Philadelphia station WTXF, which was up for a license renewal in October 2023. Activist groups filing the challenge said Fox was unfit to own the outlet after a judge ruled earlier that year that the company’s Fox News Channel had spread falsehoods about voter fraud in the 2020 election.
Fox News, which operates on cable and satellite and is therefore not subject to FCC control, has a different management team than the parent company’s local TV stations, which mostly cover their communities and do not typically present political commentary. The FCC rejected the renewal challenge in January 2025, noting that none of the false information on Fox News was heard on the Philadelphia station. WTXF was not cited in Dominion’s lawsuit.
Are there any other examples?
Yes. Other White House administrations have threatened to pull TV station licenses in response to negative news coverage. At the height of the Watergate scandal in the 1970s, Richard Nixon’s allies unsuccessfully attempted to challenge the TV licenses of three stations then owned by the Washington Post.
Has a company ever lost its broadcast license?
RKO General, a unit of the General Tire and Rubber Co., was the last company to lose broadcast TV station licenses in 1987, including Los Angeles outlet KHJ. The case was related to corporate malfeasance and not broadcast content on the stations.
The process to revoke the RKO licenses took seven years from the moment the FCC voted in favor of the move.
But isn’t this case different?
Yes. Although the rule Carr mentioned is legitimate, the FCC has rarely if ever acted on it, according to one veteran TV executive who was not authorized to speak publicly on the matter. If Disney or any other company was found to violate the nondiscrimination rule, they would in previous eras probably be subjected to a just a fine, not the denial of a license, which would be viewed by many as government censorship.
What happens in the event that ABC licenses are not renewed?
Nothing immediately, as the licenses are in effect through 2028 to 2032, depending on the outlet. If Disney had to sell the stations, the price would probably be depressed due to pressure to unload the properties.
But public communications attorney Andrew Jay Schwartzman told The Times last month that the bar for denying a renewal is high and any effort would be tied up in court on constitutional grounds.
“The law intentionally sets out a very steep burden for the FCC to deny a license renewal; the process takes many years, during which time the licensee continues to operate normally under ‘continuing operating authority,’” Schwartzman said.
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court’s conservative majority sounded ready Wednesday to rule that the Trump administration may end the temporary protection that has been granted to more than 1.3 million immigrants from troubled countries.
Congress in 1990 authorized Temporary Protected Status, or TPS, for noncitizens who could not safely return home because their native country was wracked by war, violence or natural disasters. If those people passed a strict background check, they could stay and work legally in this country.
But President Trump came to office believing too many immigrants had been granted permission to enter and stay indefinitely.
Last year, his Department of Homeland Security moved to cancel the temporary humanitarian protection for immigrants from 13 countries, including Venezuela, Haiti, Syria, Honduras and Nicaragua. Court challenges on behalf of Haitians and Syrians were consolidated into a single case, Mullin vs. Doe, which the justices heard Wednesday.
Immigrant-rights advocates challenged those decisions as political and unjustified, and they won orders from federal judges that blocked the cancellations.
But Trump’s lawyers filed an emergency appeal at the Supreme Court arguing the judges had overstepped their authority. They pointed to a provision in the 1990 law that bars “judicial review” of the government’s decision to end temporary protection for a particular country.
The justices ruled for the administration and set aside the lower court rulings in a series of 6-3 orders.
Faced with criticism over its brief and unexplained orders, the justices agreed to hear arguments on the TPS issue on the last day of oral arguments for this term.
But the ideological divide appeared to be unchanged.
Solicitor Gen. D. John Sauer said Congress had prohibited “judicial micromanagement” of these decisions, and none of six conservatives disagreed.
UCLA law professor Ahilan T. Arulanantham, representing several thousand Syrians, said the Homeland Security secretary had failed to consult the State Department, which says it is unsafe to travel there.
He said the government “reads the statute like it’s a blank check … to give the secretary the power to expel people who have done nothing wrong.”
Chicago attorney Geoffrey Pipoply, representing more than 350,000 Haitians, said the cancellations were driven by “the president’s racial animus toward non-white immigrants.”
The court’s three liberals argued the administration failed to follow the procedural steps required under the law. But that argument failed to gain traction.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett and her husband adopted two children from Haiti who are citizens. Like most of the conservatives, she asked few questions during the argument.
WASHINGTON — The Senate Banking Committee voted on party lines Wednesday to approve Kevin Warsh as the next chair of the Federal Reserve to replace Jerome Powell, a longtime target of President Trump’s insults for not cutting borrowing costs as far as the president wanted.
The vote was 13-11, with all Republican senators voting in favor and Democrats opposed.
Warsh is a former top Fed official but has also been a sharp critic of the institution and Powell’s leadership. He has called the inflation spike to 9.1% in 2022 the central bank’s biggest policy mistake in four decades. A vote on his nomination probably won’t take place until next month, but he could be confirmed by the time Powell’s term as chair ends May 15.
The Senate Banking vote is the first of two key events surrounding the future of the Fed’s leadership. Also Wednesday, Powell is presiding over what will probably be his last meeting of the Fed’s interest rate-setting committee. At a news conference Wednesday afternoon, Powell may indicate whether he will remain as a member of the central bank’s board of governors after his term as chair ends.
It would be unusual for Powell to stay, but doing so would deprive the Trump administration of an opportunity to appoint a new member to the board. Powell may choose to stay if he sees it as necessary to protect the Fed’s independence, which has become part of his legacy as its leader.
Sen. Tim Scott, a South Carolina Republican and chair of the committee, said Warsh is “battle tested” and added that, “It is incredibly important that we break the bind of Bidenomics on households across this nation.”
Sen. Elizabeth Warren, a Democrat from Massachusetts, criticized the banking panel for voting on Warsh’s nomination. Doing so “will bring the president one step closer to completing his illegal attempt to seize control of the Fed and artificially juice the economy,” she said, citing Trump’s effort to fire Fed governor Lisa Cook and investigate Powell.
The Fed on Wednesday is widely expected to leave its key rate unchanged at about 3.6% for its third straight meeting, defying Trump’s calls for lower rates.
Warsh has called for “regime change” at the Fed and could alter many of its practices, including the economics models it focuses on, how it communicates with the public, and how large its bondholdings will be in the long run.
Those changes could affect financial markets, but otherwise won’t necessarily be visible to the general public. But Warsh has also advocated for additional interest rate cuts, which could potentially lower borrowing costs for mortgages, auto loans, and business loans. He will face barriers to implementing those cuts anytime soon, however, largely because the Iran war has caused a spike in gas prices, pushing inflation to a two-year high of 3.3%.
The Fed typically keeps rates elevated, or even raises them, to combat worsening inflation.
Most of the other 11 members of the Fed’s rate-setting committee have indicated they would prefer to wait and evaluate where inflation and the economy are headed before making any changes to rates. It could take time for Warsh to build up enough influence to push for rapid rate cuts. He will also replace Stephen Miran, a member of the Fed’s rate-setting committee who was appointed by Trump last September and is the most consistent advocate for rate reductions at the central bank.
Warsh also faces questions about his independence from the White House, a key issue that dogged him during a Senate Banking hearing last week. On Wednesday, Warren said, “Mr. Warsh is a Trump sock puppet who is so cowed by the president that he could not even say that Trump lost the 2020 election.”
Last December, Trump called for much lower interest rates in a social media post, and added that “anyone who does not agree with me will never be Fed chair!” And just last week he told Fox Business that he expects rates to head lower, “when Kevin gets in.”
Warsh denied at his hearing, however, that Trump had ever pressured him directly to cut rates.
WASHINGTON — The State Department said that it is preparing a limited release of commemorative U.S. passports celebrating America’s 250th birthday that feature a picture of President Trump, who would be the first living president to be featured in the travel document.
The concept for the special passport, including a rendering of Trump’s stern-looking visage, had been under consideration for months before finally being approved late Monday and publicly announced Tuesday. Between 25,000 and 30,000 of the new passports will be available to applicants at the Washington passport office beginning shortly before July 4.
It’s the latest instance of Trump having his name and likeness added to buildings, documents and other highly visible tributes. There are efforts to put Trump’s signature on all new U.S. paper currency, also a first for a sitting president, as well as to include his image on a gold commemorative coin to celebrate the country’s founding.
The commemorative passport will be the default document for people applying in person at the Washington office, although those who want a standard passport will be able to get one by applying online or outside Washington, officials said.
“As the United States celebrates America’s 250th anniversary in July, the State Department is preparing to release a limited number of specially designed U.S. passports to commemorate this historic occasion,” State Department spokesman Tommy Pigott said.
“These passports will feature customized artwork and enhanced imagery while maintaining the same security features that make the U.S. passport the most secure documents in the world,” he said.
The limited release passport will feature Trump’s picture over a gold imprimatur of his signature to an interior page, while the cover will feature the words “United States of America” in bold gold print at the top and “Passport” at the bottom — a reversal of the standard cover.
In addition, a small gold laminate American flag, with the number 250 encircled by stars, will be at the bottom of the back cover.
The Bulwark reported earlier on the commemorative passports.
The only presidents featured in current U.S. passports are in a double-page depiction of Mount Rushmore in South Dakota — George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Theodore Roosevelt and Abraham Lincoln.
Other depictions include the Statue of Liberty, the Liberty Bell and Independence Hall in Philadelphia, and scenes of the Great Plains, mountains and islands. Current passports also contain quotations from Martin Luther King Jr. as well as Presidents Washington, Jefferson, Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy and Dwight Eisenhower.
The addition of Trump’s picture and signature to the passport book is the newest step his aides have taken to increase the president’s visibility, including adding his name to the U.S. Institute of Peace building and the Kennedy Center performing arts venue.
Trump also has made waves with his plans for a new White House ballroom and a massive arch to be built at one of the entrances to Washington from Virginia.
In a 3-0 ruling, court says Trump administration misread a decades-old immigration law to justify mandatory detention.
A United States federal appeals court has rejected the Trump administration’s practice of subjecting most people arrested in its immigration crackdown to mandatory detention without the opportunity to seek release on bond.
In a 3-0 ruling on Tuesday, a panel of the New York-based US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit said the administration relied on a novel but incorrect interpretation of a decades-old immigration law to justify the policy.
Recommended Stories
list of 4 itemsend of list
Writing for the panel, US Circuit Judge Joseph F Bianco, a Trump appointee, warned that the government’s reading “would send a seismic shock through our immigration detention system and society”, straining already overcrowded facilities, separating families and disrupting communities.
Lawyers for the Trump administration say the mandatory detention policy is legal under the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, passed in 1996.
But Bianco said the government had made “an attempt to muddy” the law’s “textually clear waters”, arguing that the administration’s interpretation “defies the statute’s context, structure, history, and purpose” and contradicts “longstanding executive branch practice”.
Under the Trump administration policy, the Department of Homeland Security last year took the position that non-citizens already living in the US, not just those arriving at the border, qualify as “applicants for admission” and are subject to mandatory detention.
Under federal immigration law, “applicants for admission” to the US are detained while their cases proceed in immigration courts and are ineligible for bond hearings.
The Department of Homeland Security has been denying bond hearings to immigrants arrested across the country, including those who have been living in the US for years without any criminal history, the Associated Press (AP) news agency reports.
That is a departure from the practice under previous US administrations, when most non-citizens with no criminal record who were arrested away from the border were given the opportunity to request a bond while their cases moved through immigration court, according to AP.
In such cases, bonds were often granted to people who were deemed not to be flight risks, and mandatory detention was limited to those who had just entered the country.
Amy Belsher, director of immigrants rights’ litigation at the New York Civil Liberties Union, said the appeals court ruling affirmed “that the Trump administration’s policy of detaining immigrants without any process is unlawful and cannot stand”.
“The government cannot mandatorily detain millions of noncitizens, many of whom have lived here for decades, without an opportunity to seek release. It defies the Constitution, the Immigration and Nationality Act, and basic human decency,” Belsher said in a statement.
Conflicting rulings set stage for Supreme Court review
The New York court’s decision comes after two other appeals courts ruled in favour of the Trump administration’s policy.
Acknowledging the opposing rulings, Judge Bianco said the panel was parting ways with them and instead aligning with more than 370 lower-court judges nationwide who have rejected the administration’s position as a misreading of the law.
The split among the courts increases the likelihood that the US Supreme Court will weigh in.
The latest ruling also upheld an order by a New York judge that led to the release of Brazilian national Ricardo Aparecido Barbosa da Cunha, who was arrested by immigration officials last year while driving to work after living in the US for more than 20 years.
“The court was right to conclude the Trump administration can’t just reinterpret the law at its own whim,” Michael Tan, a lawyer for Barbosa at the American Civil Liberties Union, said in a statement.
The Department of Justice, which is defending the mandatory detention policy in court, did not respond to a request for comment.
One day Delcy Rodríguez calls for a reform to the justice system after announcing the sudden revocation of the amnesty law her brother sponsored. The other, rumors suggest she’ll reshuffle the country’s higher court without providing any indication of who the new magistrates are going to be. The central bank president she recently named prepares to disclose figures to the IMF for the first time in decades.
The public does little else than follow the news, as if things were normal. Futile debate has emerged on social media over whether the new US chief of mission in Caracas is more hawkish than his predecessor. Or if the opposition has racist tendencies because a singer (once popular in the 2000s) called Delcy an ape in the opposition’s largest rally in years.
The picture of the country in recent weeks is one of Delcy Rodríguez calling the shots with near-total freedom. She has been enjoying a clear head start over a potential presidential election, as she crisscrosses Venezuela on what amounts to an unofficial campaign tour. In Caracas, she keeps changing everything so that nothing really changes. She is intent on controlling government offices in the next four years through newly promoted loyalists and a clean inflow of petrodollars. The chavista elite has looked more confident in the meantime, touring with Delcy in sky-blue outfits, leading cartoonish chants for peace and national union as if the internal contradictions that surfaced two months ago were now less important, because the possibility of survival looks clearer.
Back in February, optimists would discuss the scope of Washington’s coercion capacity over the “caretaker” regime, the boundaries that (if crossed) would trigger a “second wave” of attacks, the disappearance of Alex Saab as a prelude of a broader purge against other “untouchables” that overtly normalized the commission of terror. Now, lunatics like Diosdado Cabello’s nephew, Alejandro Rondón, claim on social media that “the recess is about to end” the same day Delcy says the amnesty scheme ran its course and Cabello recounts an unlikely justice system crackdown.
What followed January 3rdwas a paradigm change with positive practical consequences for society that chavismo quickly learned to manage if not reverse.
Alejandro doesn’t look like the brightest dude. He’s another chavista nepo-kid working for the other Cabello uncle that controls Venezuela’s taxing authority, Jose David, though Alejandro made a name for himself with rage-baiting tweets that celebrated Maduro’s “victory” in 2024 and claimed the opposition were terrorists who falsified the official voting records (i.e. Diosdado’s talking points during the tun-tun operation).]
But an emboldened member of the Cabello Rondón clan is a troubling sign for those who fled the country after being placed on “treason” blacklists. It also undercuts the very notions of pluralism and national reconciliation that Marco Rubio invoked three months ago when outlining his vision for Venezuela’s democratic transition before US senators. Shortly thereafter, Rondón drove the point home by publicly wishing Donald Trump well after the shooting at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner. The message seems clear: the arrangement with Team Trump is comfortable enough that, however fraught the geopolitical backdrop, they can afford to be flippant—even in public. They remain, unmistakably, the bullies in town.
The long wait for elections (or just a calendar?)
What followed January 3rd was a paradigm change with positive practical consequences for society that chavismo quickly learned to manage if not reverse. Allies of Maria Corina Machado who spent the past two years jailed or hiding are back in the street, even providing testimonies about their imprisonment. The student movement has undergone a revival, liaising with human rights groups to set up carefully-controlled protests. Censorship isn’t what it used to be, so journalists have tried to take advantage of that opening. Pensioners and public workers have perhaps become the loudest actor in confronting Rodríguez, despite having to face colectivos and National Guards whenever they hit the streets.
Repression has become less intense, but the lack of a clear electoral calendar keeps the opposition on the sidelines, waiting for the arrival of Machado, which is no less paralyzing. The amnesty law passed on February 19 effectively funneled the release of political prisoners, shattering expectations of a “landmark outcome” that would speed up the process.
Indeed, the statute’s contents make more than 180 supposed military rebels ineligible, although the release of a handful of FANB officers in recent days reinforces the idea that a law wasn’t necessary to get people out of jail. Nearly 300 civilians are still imprisoned, and we haven’t seen significant breakthroughs in the past few weeks.
According to figures from NGO Foro Penal (based on documented cases), the political prisoner population fell by 40% in the two months following the US military intervention—dropping from 863 detainees in late December to 526 by March 2. The pace has clearly slowed since then. Chavismo released 36 people between March and April, and 17 over the past 18 days (about 6% of the pre–January 3 total). The regime still resorts to sporadic arbitrary arrests and intimidation. Alexis Paparoni, an opposition figure in Mérida (and brother of Carlos Paparoni), was briefly detained while traveling and later released under precautionary measures. A similar incident occurred last weekend with a government employee in Guárico, who was detained for having a note on his desk bearing the now-infamous slur directed at Delcy.
“These prisoners are currently incarcerated because POTUShas chosen to appease and praise the perpetrators instead of supporting their victims,” Burelli recently told Senator Scott.
The White House appears satisfied with results so far. Venezuela is now subject to sweeping sanctions relief across oil, gas, minerals, and fertilizers, while OFAC has issued waivers allowing operations with public banks. Most notably, Delcy Rodríguez has been removed from the Specially Designated Nationals list—effectively unfreezing her US-based assets and clearing the way for financial dealings under American jurisdiction.
The opposition leadership has largely stuck to its 2025 strategy of projecting trust and patience toward Donald Trump. María Corina Machado continues to argue that Trump is the head of state who has done the most to advance Venezuela’s liberation and maintains that the Rodríguez government is dismantling the Maduro-era “structures of corruption and repression.” However, she acknowledged last week that a bout of political instability cannot be ruled out.
“The risk is that if people feel the path [toward freedom and democracy] is beginning to close, they may start to push back in a disorganized and potentially anarchic way,” she told esRadio hosts in Madrid. “That’s why a clearly defined electoral calendar is a guarantee of peace and stability. That would help people accept that this process will last a bit longer, as institutions must be strengthened and we need to take time to prepare for a truly impeccable election.”
Running out of patience
Criticism of the Trump administration’s handling in Venezuela continues to grow among groups of scholars and foreign policy observers, while opposition parties remain largely quiet and prefer to let Machado formulate their stance.
But in general, there’s a tense awareness that the waters are getting muddy. Some in journalism, and other opposition allies are starting to lose their patience.
Venezuelan journalist Sebastiana Barraez, an outspoken critic of chavismo and popular source on repression, told her audience that Venezuelan people have no guarantees about their future. Two days ago, she admitted the overthrow of Nicolás Maduro had raised hopes of a new democracy and true institutional recovery.
“It turns out none of that is happening,” Barráez said. “In Venezuela, Trump is promoting the interests of the United States. The problem is that those interests are not compatible with what we Venezuelans are looking for.”
Pedro Mario Burelli, an independent advisor for the opposition, is among the few figures to be pressing Washington over its ties with Delcy Rodríguez, calling Trump’s decision to elevate her an “incoherent strategy.” He has warned that doing business with Minerven makes the US an effective enabler of environmental crimes in Venezuela’s south. In March, he told The Atlantic that the remaining political prisoners now belong to Trump and Rubio.
“These prisoners are currently incarcerated because POTUS has chosen to appease and praise the perpetrators instead of supporting their victims. Constantly praising Delcy is disgraceful and an insult to the vast majority of Venezuelans”, Burelli told GOP Senator Rick Scott on Sunday.“Faulting her, as you and some of your colleagues do, is disingenuous. Venezuelans rightfully expect, and deserve, much more from democratically elected US officials.”
While Massie has long dominated elections in Kentucky’s 4th district, polling this year shows a tighter race than expected.
A Quantus Insights survey conducted from April 6 to 7 showed Massie leading Gallrein 46.8 percent to 37.7 percent.
Another survey conducted by Big Data Poll in early April had Massie ahead with 52.4 percent to Gallrein’s 47.6 percent.
The relatively close primary could be a bellwether for Republican voting trends nationwide, according to Stephen Voss, a political science professor at the University of Kentucky.
“Massie is an early opportunity to see what Republican voters will do when their pro-Trump leanings clash with their conservative leanings,” Voss said. “That is the great puzzle of this race.”
This is not the first time Trump has turned against Massie, though. In 2020, another election year, Trump famously petitioned to “throw Massie out of the Republican Party”.
But by 2022, Trump had reversed course, endorsing Massie over a challenger who questioned the congressman’s commitment to the president.
Still, the past year has widened the rift between Trump and Massie, leading the president to make his most aggressive moves yet to unseat the congressman.
The two Republicans clashed on a range of issues in 2025. Massie, for example, opposed the president on his tax and spending measures, fearing increases to the national debt.
That meant voting against Trump’s signature piece of legislation, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, last July.
The Kentucky Republican also denounced Trump’s campaign of foreign intervention. Last June, NBC News reported that it was after Massie criticised Trump’s strikes on Iran that the president’s allies began laying the groundwork for a primary challenge.
Massie also led the charge to compel the Department of Justice to release all the files related to the investigation into Jeffrey Epstein, the late financier and convicted child sex offender.
Shortly thereafter, Trump gave his stamp of approval to Gallrein, posting on his Truth Social site, “RUN, ED, RUN.”
By that point, Gallrein, a military veteran and fifth-generation farmer, had yet to enter the race. Four days later, on October 21, he launched his bid.
Critics argue Gallrein’s platform does not offer much of a distinction from Massie’s. His campaign website lists his priorities as cutting taxes, reducing government spending, protecting gun rights and opposing abortion — issues Massie also supports.
“I don’t think he’s offering any kind of alternative, except for being the selection of Donald Trump,” Kahne said. “I think that’s it. That’s the only thing he has to offer.”
But Gallrein has drawn heavily from Trump’s endorsement, using it as a badge of loyalty and authenticity.
“You deserve an authentic, true Republican conservative that stands shoulder to shoulder with our president and the Republican Party,” Gallrein declared at the Trump rally in March.
Trump, meanwhile, told the crowd he had grown so frustrated that he just wanted “somebody with a warm body to beat Massie”.
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court will hear arguments this week over whether the Trump administration may revoke temporary protected status for about 350,000 Haitian and 6,100 Syrian immigrants.
TPS allows people who are already in the United States to legally reside and work here if they are unable to safely return to their home country because of a sudden emergency such as war or a natural disaster. The humanitarian program, enacted by Congress in 1990, has since been used by Republican and Democratic administrations alike.
Since President Trump returned to office last year, his administration has terminated such protections for immigrants from 13 countries. Court challenges on behalf of Haitians and Syrians have been consolidated into a single case, Mullin vs. Doe, which the justices will hear Wednesday.
The high court’s ruling could eventually have sweeping repercussions for all 1.3 million immigrants from the 17 countries that were designated for TPS at the start of this administration. That’s because the federal government is arguing that decisions regarding the program are almost entirely immune from review by courts.
“Temporary means temporary and the final word will not be from activist judges legislating from the bench,” a Department of Homeland Security spokesperson, who did not provide their name, wrote in response to a request for comment.
Lower courts have repeatedly deemed the administration’s actions improper.
“We’re seeing clear gamesmanship from government to insulate all TPS decision-making from any oversight,” said Emi MacLean, a senior staff attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California, who is counsel in the case for Syrians and in other cases challenging five of the terminations. “They’ve created a farce of a process to justify the ends that they sought, which was to strip humanitarian protections from over a million people.”
In the Trump administration’s appeal, Solicitor Gen. D. John Sauer argued that Congress gave the Homeland Security secretary the power to grant or end the temporary protected status for troubled countries and barred judges from intervening.
He pointed to a provision that says: “There is no judicial review of any determination of the [secretary] with respect to the designation, or termination or extension of a designation, of a foreign state.”
Citing this hands-off provision, Trump’s lawyers won brief emergency orders last year that allowed the administration to strip legal protections from about 600,000 Venezuelans. In that case, then-Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem had quickly reversed an extension granted by the Biden administration three days before Trump was sworn in.
The circumstances surrounding the Syria and Haiti cases are different. Advocates for the immigrants argue that the administration failed to conduct the required process to properly evaluate each country’s conditions.
They point to emails in July from a Homeland Security official to a State Department official. The Homeland Security official listed TPS designations coming up for review — Syria, South Sudan, Myanmar and Ethiopia. In response, the State Department official wrote: “I confirm that State has no foreign policy concerns with ending these TPS designations.”
State Department travel advisories for both countries warn people against traveling to either because of the risk of terrorism, kidnapping and widespread violence. U.S. citizens are advised to prepare a will.
For Syria, the advisory cites active armed conflict since 2011. For Haiti, it says the country has been under a national state of emergency since March 2024.
But Federal Register notices announcing the terminations said country conditions had sufficiently improved. The notice for Syria, for example, says “the Secretary has determined that, while some sporadic and episodic violence occurs in Syria, the situation no longer meets the criteria for an ongoing armed conflict that poses a serious threat to the personal safety of returning Syrian nationals.”
If the government loses, Homeland Security officials would have to reevaluate the TPS decisions in consultation with the State Department and make a decision based entirely on the country conditions themselves.
The government could start over, in that case, and still find that TPS is no longer warranted — if the process bears that out.
In a friend-of-the-court brief led by immigration law scholars at Georgetown and Temple universities, they explained that before TPS existed, similar forms of humanitarian relief were determined by the executive branch “without reference to any statutory criteria or constraints, and with little if any explanation for why nationals of certain countries received protection while others did not.”
With TPS in 1990, Congress sought to end that “unfettered discretion,” they wrote. Instead, the statute requires the Homeland Security secretary to terminate TPS if the review finds that conditions justifying the designation no longer exist. Otherwise, the law states, it “is extended.”
“The point of the TPS statute was to depoliticize humanitarian decisions,” said MacLean, the ACLU attorney. “Secretary Noem in all of her TPS decisions has completely undermined that fundamental goal.”
Ahilan Arulanantham, who is arguing for the Syria case on Wednesday, added that if the government wins, “it also means they could probably grant TPS to countries that don’t deserve it.” Arulanantham, co-director of the Center for Immigration Law and Policy at UCLA, has represented the National TPS Alliance in separate litigation during this administration and Trump’s first.
Top Homeland Security and State Department officials from the George W. Bush, Obama, Trump and Biden administrations filed a brief arguing that the Trump administration’s terminations of TPS for Syria and Haiti were “not based on evidence and sharply departed from past inter-agency practices.”
Haiti was originally designated for TPS in 2010 after a massive earthquake devastated the country and redesignated because of subsequent natural disasters and gang violence. In November, Noem announced that she would terminate TPS for Haiti, effective Feb. 3. She wrote in the Federal Register that “there are no extraordinary and temporary conditions in Haiti” that prevent Haitians from safely returning.
But even if there were, she continued, “termination of Temporary Protected Status of Haiti is still required because it is contrary to the national interest of the United States.”
The Homeland Security spokesperson said TPS for Haiti “was never intended to be a de facto amnesty program, yet that’s how previous administrations have used it for decades.”
Syria, meanwhile, “has been a hotbed of terrorism and extremism for nearly two decades,” the spokesperson wrote, “and it is contrary to our national interest to allow Syrians to remain in our country.”
In the Federal Register notice for Syria, Noem added that maintaining its TPS designation would “complicate the administration’s broader diplomatic engagement with Syria’s transitional government” by undermining peace-building efforts.
The Supreme Court will take up the question of whether the Homeland Security secretary can use national interest as a reason to revoke TPS. Attorneys for the TPS holders believe any decision to revoke TPS must come down to the country conditions alone.
Syria and Haiti are among the countries for which the Trump administration has also paused processing all immigration benefits. If their TPS protections expire, those immigrants would become vulnerable to detention and deportation even if they are eligible for other forms of relief.
U.S. Solicitor Gen. D. John Sauer argued that Congress gave the Homeland Security secretary the power to grant or end the temporary protected status for troubled countries and barred judges from intervening.
(Aaron Schwartz / Getty Images)
Attorneys for the TPS holders say the terminations were also driven by racial animus. They point to various statements by Trump over the years, including his false claim that Haitians were eating the pets of people in Springfield, Ohio, that they “probably have AIDS” and that Haiti is among the “shithole countries” from which he would permanently pause migration.
Among those affected is a 35-year-old Haitian woman who has lived in the U.S. since 2000 and is raising her four U.S. citizen children in a Southern state. The woman requested to be identified by her middle and last initials, B.B., out of concern for her immigration case.
After graduating high school, B.B. got into nursing school but couldn’t attend because she didn’t qualify for financial aid. She said later getting TPS allowed her to become a certified nursing assistant, and she now works as a medical coordinator while owning a nail salon and three real estate properties.
Though B.B.’s TPS remains active because of the court proceedings, her driver’s license expired Feb. 3 and she has since had to rely on friends and rideshares to get around while repeatedly requesting a renewal.
She said she worries most about her children. If she were deported back to Haiti, she said, she would leave them in the U.S. for their own safety.
“It’s like planning your death,” she said. “I’m 35 and I already have a will — not because I’m going to die but because of the situation.”
On a call with reporters, attorneys and advocates, a Syrian man said he earned his master’s degree in the U.S. and now works in the healthcare industry. The man, who was identified by a pseudonym, said he and his wife are afraid of what their future will look like.
“TPS gave us something we had not had in years: a place to settle and a moment to grieve,” he said, later adding that “telling Syrians to go back right now is not a policy — it’s abandonment.”
Among the public, there is broad support for TPS and other humanitarian programs. According to a poll conducted last month by the firm Equis Research, 68% of Latino and 65% of non-Latino voters support fighting to give back legal protection to those who have lost their temporary protected status or asylum protections as a result of the current administration’s actions.
Earlier this month, the House voted in favor of a bill that would require new Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin to redesignate Haiti for TPS. Among those who crossed the political aisle to support it were 10 Republicans and Rep. Kevin Kiley, an independent from Rocklin, Calif., who caucuses with Republicans. The measure faces an uphill battle in the Senate.
In an interview with The Times, Kiley said his vote was about common sense and being humane.
“It’s particularly dangerous for people that would be returning where the gangs that are ravaging the country are just lying in wait outside the airport in Port-au-Prince,” he said, referring to the Haitian capital.
And because most won’t return willingly, Kiley added, “really all you’d be doing is removing work authorization from 350,000-some people who are going to mostly remain in the country, who will not be able to work anymore and may end up being more reliant on public assistance in states where they’re eligible.”
At the same time, Kiley said, the TPS system hasn’t worked as intended because most so-called temporary designations drag on.
“The system needs to be reformed,” he said. “But that’s all separate and apart from what we do with the folks who were already given this designation.”
Times staff writer David G. Savage in Washington contributed to this report.
The shooting of a Secret Service agent at the White House Correspondents’ Association dinner on Saturday night has raised concerns about the safety of political leaders amid rising political violence. Despite hundreds of agents from various law enforcement agencies being assigned to secure the event, a suspect armed with a shotgun and other weapons was able to approach just one floor above where prominent figures, including President Donald Trump, Vice President JD Vance, and several cabinet members, were dining.
The alleged gunman, who carried a shotgun, a handgun, and knives, was reportedly staying at the Washington Hilton hotel, where the dinner took place. Trump’s remarks following the incident highlighted the dangers of his role, noting the hotel is “not particularly a secure building. ” This vulnerability is concerning given recent assassination attempts against him during the 2024 presidential campaign.
Attendees had to pass through metal detectors at the ballroom, but only needed tickets to access the hotel, which was open to other guests. Many attendees faced demonstrators protesting the Trump administration’s policies. Video footage showed the gunman rushing past a security checkpoint before shooting the agent, after which he was tackled and arrested by officials.
Inside the ballroom, guests were dining when gunshots were heard. Secret Service agents quickly acted to protect Trump and Vance, while security responses varied for other officials, with some agents forming shields and others reacting differently. The timing for evacuating protectees differed, with some leaving almost immediately and others remaining longer. Trump, who has faced close calls with violence in the past, later acknowledged that carrying on with the event was not feasible after the attack.
The Trump administration’s historic move to reclassify state-licensed medical marijuana as a less-dangerous drug was cheered by some advocates but for others, it fell far short for the thousands still incarcerated on federal cannabis-related convictions.
The executive order, which acting Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche signed Thursday, does not address current penalties for possessing and selling marijuana or those jailed with yearslong sentences.
“While this is a victory, the fight is far from over,” said Jason Ortiz, director of strategic initiatives for the Last Prisoner Project, a nonprofit focused on cannabis criminal justice reform.
Proponents of legalizing marijuana as well as overhauling prison sentencing say this order, which does not completely decriminalize the drug, benefits only cannabis researchers, growers and others in Big Weed. Meanwhile, thousands — many of whom are people of color — are stuck serving harsh sentences for marijuana-related offenses. Or they have served their time but having a conviction on their record has made life difficult.
Now, advocates are calling on Congress and state lawmakers to take concrete steps to ensure those with marijuana-related convictions receive fair treatment or be forgiven altogether.
Prisoners and their families look for hope
Blanche’s order reclassifies state-licensed medical marijuana as a less-dangerous drug. The major policy shift, which both Presidents Obama and Joe Biden had considered, means cannabis won’t be grouped with drugs like heroin.
But it does not legalize marijuana for medical or recreational use. It shifts licensed medical marijuana from Schedule I — reserved for drugs without medical use and with high potential for abuse — to the less strictly regulated Schedule III. This will likely give licensed medical marijuana operators and cannabis researchers a major tax break and less stringent barriers to doing normal business.
Virtually no one imprisoned at the federal level is there solely for marijuana possession. But many are there for large-scale possession, trafficking offenses or both.
Hector Ruben McGurk, 66, has been serving life without the possibility of parole since 2007 for transporting thousands of pounds of marijuana and money laundering. He is currently imprisoned in Beaumont, Texas, over 800 miles from his son’s El Paso home. His incarceration has been hard on his son, said McGurk’s daughter-in-law, Ferna Anguiano. And the distance makes visits logistically difficult.
So it’s tempting to see this order as a glimmer of hope, given that the family believes McGurk’s punishment far outweighs his crimes. But Anguiano has no idea how to navigate lobbying for his release.
“His release date is death,” Anguiano said. “I mean, we see all this stuff on the news — bigger cases, fatal cases — and people are going in and out of prison and coming out to their families.”
They try to keep in touch through phone calls and a prison texting service. They’re concerned about McGurk’s health and his diabetes management. It would be a dream come true for him to come home.
“He deserves a second chance,” Anguiano said. “Yes, it was a poor decision he did in his lifetime. He was younger. But he is not a bad person. I think it’s fair to say he has served enough time for it.”
It’s not clear whether punishments would be different had marijuana always been scheduled differently, drug policy experts say.
“In addition to schedule-specific penalties, there are marijuana-specific penalties that have nothing to do with the schedule,” said Cat Packer, director of drug markets and legal regulation at the nonprofit Drug Policy Alliance. “Even if marijuana were to be moved to Schedule V, those criminal penalties would still exist and there are mandatory minimums for simple possession.”
Racial disparities exist in convictions and Big Weed
Destigmatizing marijuana has long been an issue for both political parties. Obama commuted the sentences of about 1,900 federal prisoners, almost all of whom were incarcerated for nonviolent drug crimes. Biden pardoned 6,500 people convicted of use and simple possession of marijuana on federal lands and in the District of Columbia. President Trump’s administration has taken far fewer drug clemency actions and does not have an overarching policy directing such actions.
“What many people on the right and the left would like is to move marijuana from this ‘just as bad as heroin’ category and to just sort of de-schedule it entirely,” said Marta Nelson, director of sentencing reform at the Vera Institute of Justice. “Regulate it like you do alcohol or tobacco.”
Studies show Black Americans are roughly 3.7 to 4 times more likely to be arrested for marijuana possession than white Americans, despite usage rates being roughly the same across racial groups. Federal-level marijuana cases are pretty small today, but those serving sentences for federal drug offenses are overwhelmingly Hispanic and Black, according to Justice Department and Bureau of Justice Statistics data.
The racial disparity with drug convictions is reminiscent of 2010 legislation Obama signed reducing the gap between mandatory sentences for crack cocaine versus powder cocaine. In 2018, Trump made it apply retroactively.
Because business owners with state medical marijuana licenses are predominantly white, the tax relief created by the rescheduling will also likely give a leg up to mostly white businesses, Packer said. A lot of equity programs won’t apply.
“This is going to, in my mind, widen the gap, the financial disparities, the business disparities that currently exist between Black and brown, Latino and white owners in the cannabis industry because licenses were not distributed equitably,” Packer said.
Possible next steps for marijuana convictions
In theory, Trump could issue a blanket pardon like he did for Jan. 6 rioters. But Nelson thinks that is highly doubtful.
“Having marijuana convictions on the record for things like mass immigration enforcement is helpful to the administration,” Nelson said.
An impactful next step would be for Congress to outline very comprehensive legislation addressing existing marijuana-related convictions, expungements and industry regulations, she added.
The Last Prisoner Project and other organizations are planning to renew a dialogue with federal lawmakers, including the Congressional Cannabis Caucus, which includes Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota and Republican Rep. David Joyce of Ohio. They will also continue to lobby for Trump to conduct a large-scale act of commutation and clemency.
Advocates are also hoping Trump’s order will prompt every state to rethink their marijuana classification and penalties.
“It is imperative that every state review their situation, as a lot of their controlled substances at the state level are tied to the federal government,” Ortiz said. “We’re gonna see other states that are going to need a little help from the public to remind them what the right thing to do is.”
WASHINGTON — An appeals court on Friday blocked President Trump’s executive order suspending asylum access, a key pillar of the Republican president’s plan to crack down on migration at the southern border of the U.S.
A three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit found that immigration laws give people the right to apply for asylum at the border, and the president can’t circumvent that.
The panel concluded that the Immigration and Nationality Act doesn’t authorize the president to remove the plaintiffs under “procedures of his own making,” allow him to suspend plaintiffs’ right to apply for asylum or curtail procedures for adjudicating their anti-torture claims.
“The power by proclamation to temporarily suspend the entry of specified foreign individuals into the United States does not contain implicit authority to override the INA’s mandatory process to summarily remove foreign individuals,” wrote Judge J. Michelle Childs, who was nominated to the bench by Democratic President Biden.
The White House didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.
ACLU attorney Lee Gelernt said in a statement that the appellate ruling is “essential for those fleeing danger who have been denied even a hearing to present asylum claims under the Trump administration’s unlawful and inhumane executive order.”
Judge Justin Walker, a Trump nominee, wrote a partial dissent. He said the law gives immigrants protections against removal to countries where they would be persecuted, but the administration can issue broad denials of asylum applications.
Walker, however, agreed with the majority that the president cannot deport migrants to countries where they will be persecuted or strip them of mandatory procedures that protect against their removal.
Judge Cornelia Pillard, who was nominated by Democratic President Obama, also heard the case.
Judges say Trump’s order for swift removal at the border ‘cast aside federal laws affording’ right to seek asylum.
Published On 24 Apr 202624 Apr 2026
An appeals court has ruled that President Donald Trump’s ban on asylum applications in the United States is unlawful, dealing a setback to the administration’s immigration crackdown.
In a decision released on Friday, a three-judge panel from the US Court of Appeals in Washington, DC, found that existing laws — namely the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) — give people the right to apply for asylum at the border.
Recommended Stories
list of 3 itemsend of list
Trump had issued the asylum ban in a proclamation on January 20, 2025, on the first day of his second term.
But the appeals court questioned whether suspending asylum unilaterally was within the president’s power.
“Congress did not intend to grant the Executive the expansive removal authority it asserts,” the ruling said.
“The Proclamation and Guidance are thus unlawful to the extent that they circumvent the INA’s removal procedures and cast aside federal laws affording individuals the right to apply and be considered for asylum or withholding of removal protections.”
The decision validated a ruling by a lower court. While the judges blocked Trump’s order, it is unclear what its immediate impact will be. Already, the White House has signalled it plans to appeal.
Trump made immigration a major pillar of his 2024 re-election campaign, pledging to repel what he describes as an “invasion” of migrants by shutting down the southern border of the US.
Asylum in the US can be granted to people facing “persecution based on race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group”. Such protections have been recognised as a fundamental human right under international law.
But unauthorised border crossings reached record levels during the administration of President Joe Biden, which had itself imposed asylum restrictions.
Millions of migrants — many suffering from gang violence and political persecution in Central and South America — have claimed asylum upon reaching the US.
Nearly 945,000 filed for asylum in 2023, according to the Department of Homeland Security.
In his January 2025 decree, Trump suspended “the physical entry of aliens involved in an invasion into the United States across the southern border”.
The proclamation was quickly challenged in court, as other measures in Trump’s immigration crackdown have been.
But the appeals court panel concluded that the INA does not authorise the president to remove the plaintiffs under “procedures of his own making”.
Nor does it allow him to suspend the plaintiffs’ right to apply for asylum or curtail procedures for adjudicating claims of torture and persecution.
“The power by proclamation to temporarily suspend the entry of specified foreign individuals into the United States does not contain implicit authority to override the INA’s mandatory process to summarily remove foreign individuals,” wrote Judge J Michelle Childs, a Biden appointee.
The Trump administration will likely appeal the ruling to the full appellate court and subsequently to the Supreme Court.
The White House stressed after the court’s decision that banning asylum is part of Trump’s constitutional powers as commander-in-chief.
“We have liberal judges across the country who are acting against this president for political purposes. They are not acting as true litigators of the law. They are looking at these cases from a political lens,” White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt told reporters.
Several Iranian officials have stressed that their country is united, rejecting United States President Donald Trump’s claims of a rift in the leadership in Tehran.
Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf all issued statements rejecting the United States president’s assertion.
Recommended Stories
list of 3 itemsend of list
Pezeshkian and Ghalibaf joined the Supreme National Security Council in posting the same message on X.
“In Iran, there are no radicals or moderates,” it said.
“We are all ‘Iranian’ and ‘revolutionary’, and with the iron unity of the nation and government, with complete obedience to the Supreme Leader of the Revolution, we will make the aggressor criminal regret his actions.”
Mohammad Reza Aref, Iran’s first vice president, also shared the statement, adding another note in English.
“Iran is not a land of rifts, but a stronghold of unity,” Aref said. “Our political diversity is our democracy, yet in times of peril, we are a ‘Single Hand’ under one flag. To protect our soil and dignity, we transcend all labels. We are one soul, one nation.”
Iranian Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei has not made a public appearance since replacing his father, Ali Khamenei, who was killed by US-Israeli strikes on February 28.
US officials have said that the younger Khamenei was wounded and “disfigured” in the strike that killed his father.
The New York Times reported on Thursday, citing unidentified Iranian officials, that Khamenei is gravely wounded but remains “mentally sharp”.
Trump and his aides have been reiterating daily over the past week that there are major disagreements among Iranian leaders.
The US president claimed that Iranians are “having a very hard time figuring out who their leader is”, alleging that there is “crazy” infighting between “moderates” and “hardliners” in Tehran.
Citing the supposed rift by Trump could serve to justify the extension of the ceasefire while also putting the blame on Iran for the stalled diplomacy.
Tehran, however, has stressed over the past days that the talks – previously scheduled to take place in Pakistan – are not happening due to the US blockade on its country’s ports.
On Thursday, Araghchi dismissed allegations that the Iranian military is at odds with the political leadership.
“The failure of Israel’s terrorist killings is reflected in how Iran’s state institutions continue to act with unity, purpose, and discipline,” he wrote on X.
“The battlefield and diplomacy are fully coordinated fronts in the same war. Iranians are all united, more than ever before.”
diplomatic impasse with the US, with Trump suggesting that he is comfortable with the status quo of blockading Iran’s ports to inflict economic pain on the country without resuming the war or rushing towards a conclusive deal.
“Iran’s Navy is lying at the bottom of the Sea, their Air Force is demolished, their Anti-Aircraft and Radar Weaponry is gone, their leaders are no longer with us, the Blockade is airtight and strong and, from there, it only gets worse — Time is not on their side!” Trump said on social media on Thursday.
“A Deal will only be made when it’s appropriate and good for the United States of America, our Allies and, in fact, the rest of the World.”
But the truce under the status quo remains tenuous. Air defences were activated over Tehran earlier on Thursday, but there has been no official confirmation of an attack against the country.
Earlier on Thursday, Trump said the US military will “shoot and kill” Iranian laying mines in the Strait of Hormuz, which could spark a response
And oil prices are once again rising due to the uncertainty and the double blockade in the Gulf – Iran closing down Hormuz and the US naval siege on Iranian ports.
Israel also appears ready to rejoin the war. Defence Minister Israel Katz said on Thursday his country is awaiting the green light from Trump to return Iran to the “age of darkness”.
“Israel is prepared to renew the war against Iran. The [Israeli military] is ready in defence and offence, and the targets are marked,” Katz said, according to the Times of Israel newspaper.
From protests to quiet resistance, dissent is rising inside the United States military over the US-Israel war on Iran.
As the US expands its war with Iran, opposition is growing – not just among the public, but inside the military itself. Some service members are questioning orders, exploring conscientious objection, and speaking out. What’s driving this shift, and how far could it go?
In this episode:
Mike Prysner (@MikePrysner), Executive Director of the Center on Conscience & War
Episode credits:
This episode was produced by Marcos Bartolomé, Tamara Khandaker, and Sarí El-Khalili with Spencer Cline, Tuleen Barakat, and our host, Malika Bilal. It was edited by Tamara Khandaker and Noor Wazwaz.
Our sound designer is Alex Roldan. Our video editors are Hisham Abu Salah and Mohannad al-Melhem. Alexandra Locke is The Take’s executive producer.
Kevin Warsh, United States President Donald Trump’s pick to lead the Federal Reserve, has addressed concerns about his independence pending his appointment to the bank amid fears that Trump could sway his decisions on monetary policy.
On Tuesday, Warsh — who served on the central bank’s Board of Governors from 2006 to 2011 — faced waves of criticism during a confirmation hearing of the Senate Banking Committee where Democrats voiced concerns about the Fed’s independence should he be appointed to lead the organisation.
Recommended Stories
list of 4 itemsend of list
Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the committee, questioned Warsh’s independence, alleging that he would be a “sock puppet” for Trump, concerns he pushed back against and addressed in his opening testimony.
“I do not believe the operational independence of monetary policy is particularly threatened when elected officials — presidents, senators, or members of the House — state their views on interest rates,” Warsh said.
“Monetary policy independence is essential. Monetary policymakers must act in the nation’s interest . . . their decisions the product of analytic rigour, meaningful deliberation, and unclouded decision-making.”
Warsh, 56, also called for “regime change” at the US central bank, including a new approach for controlling inflation and a communications overhaul that may discourage his colleagues from saying too much about the direction of monetary policy.
Warsh blamed the central bank for an inflation surge after it slashed interest rates to nearly zero in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, a move that continues to hurt US households.
Concerned by the implications of artificial intelligence for jobs – expected to increase productivity – and prices, he said he would move quickly to see if new data tools could provide better insight on inflation, and would also discourage policymakers from saying too much about where interest rates might be heading.
“What the Fed needs are reforms to its frameworks and reforms to its communications,” the former Fed governor said. “Too many Fed officials opine about where interest rates should be … That is quite unhelpful.”
Warsh has also long been an advocate for shrinking the Fed’s $6.7 trillion balance sheet. In the Tuesday hearing, he said any such plans would take time and must be publicly discussed well in advance.
Jai Kedia, a research fellow at the Center for Monetary and Financial Alternatives at the libertarian Cato Institute, told Al Jazeera that there were many “encouraging” signs in Warsh’s candidacy.
“Warsh is presenting himself as a regime change candidate at a time when the Fed needs serious reform,” Kedia noted. “Particularly encouraging was his understanding of the negative effects of QE and his focus on reducing the balance sheet. He also correctly criticised mission creep and acknowledged that the Fed did better when it kept its focus on the dual mandate [of keeping inflation at 2 percent and increasing employment].”
Quantitative easing or QE is an unconventional monetary policy under which a central bank lowers interest rates, among other measures, to boost the economy, a step taken by central banks in several developed countries during the pandemic.
Warsh’s private investments, at well over $100m, are also under scrutiny. Among them are two holdings in the Juggernaut Fund LP, apparently part of his work advising for the Duquesne Family Office, the private investment firm of Stanley Druckenmiller.
Warsh’s nearly 70-page financial disclosure also showed that his other holdings include investments in Elon Musk’s SpaceX and the prediction trading platform Polymarket.
“I agreed to divest virtually all of my financial assets, the large majority of which will be divested” before taking office, Warsh said without giving any details.
Warsh noted that selling his holdings comes with challenges. He said that when that process is completed, he would have “virtually no financial assets” and “we’ll be sitting in something like cash”.
Warren, however, questioned him about the divestment plan. “Do we have any way to verify that, in fact, these sales will occur if we have no idea what’s in them?” she asked.
Political hurdles
The hearing quickly turned contentious, and the pace of Warsh’s confirmation process through the Senate remained in doubt.
He would not directly say that Trump lost the 2020 election – a statement of fact that Senator Warren said was a litmus test of Warsh’s independence from the Republican president who nominated him for the top Fed job.
Yet even amidst the focus on independence, Warsh needs 13 votes to clear the 24-member Senate Banking Committee.
North Carolina Senator Thom Tillis said he would vote against Trump’s nominee and join Democrats, which would create a 12–12 split. The committee has 13 Republican members and 11 Democrats.
Tillis said he would not vote for any Trump nominee until an investigation into current Fed Governor Jerome Powell, whose term ends May 15, is either concluded or called off. Last month, federal prosecutors said they found no evidence of wrongdoing. But Jeanine Pirro, the US Attorney for the District of Columbia, has not indicated that the investigation will be dropped.
Tillis said on Tuesday that he would support Warsh’s nomination once the probe into Powell is dropped.
“Today’s confirmation hearing underscored that Warsh is aiming for independence with guardrails,” noted Selma Hepp, chief Economist of Cotality, a market analytics company. “He rejected being a political ‘sock puppet’ and argued the Fed protects its autonomy by ‘staying in its lane.’ He offered no pre-commitment on rates, while emphasising inflation discipline, a large balance sheet, and a desire for clearer Fed communication.”
Noel Dixon, senior macro strategist at State Street, said that with Warsh, the US would have a “dovish-leaning Fed”.
“When a senator asked him if he would lower rates to 1 percent – I guess Trump had indicated that he would like to have rates below 2 percent – Warsh didn’t really say no to that,” Dixon noted. “He didn’t say that it would increase prices. He kind of leaned on it and said there would be a lagged effect, and he was just very noncommittal to that. So it’s almost like – just reading between the lines – he’s giving himself space to maintain possible justification for rate cuts by the end of the year.”
On Tuesday, he said he would be “disappointed” if the Fed did not lower interest rates.
Tuesday’s remarks follow comments in December, when the US president said he would not appoint anyone to lead the central bank unless they agreed with him.
“The public needs to know whether Mr. Warsh will have the courage of his convictions or if he’s willing to compromise his independence and accommodate more Wall Street deregulation,” Graham Steele, an academic fellow at the Rock Center for Corporate Governance at Stanford University, told Al Jazeera in an email.
Warsh has praised the administration for its push for increased bank deregulation. In a November 2025 op-ed for the Wall Street Journal, Warsh claimed that Trump’s “deregulatory agenda” is “the most significant since President Ronald Reagan’s”.
A Cuban Foreign Ministry official said the exchange with Washington was ‘respectful and professional’ and devoid of threats.
Published On 21 Apr 202621 Apr 2026
The Cuban government has confirmed that it held recent talks in Havana with officials from the United States, as tensions remain high between the two countries over Washington’s energy blockade of the Caribbean country.
Alejandro Garcia del Toro, deputy director general in charge of US affairs at the Cuban Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said on Monday that the US delegation included assistant secretaries of state, and the Cuban delegation included representatives at the level of deputy foreign minister.
Recommended Stories
list of 4 itemsend of list
Garcia de Toro said that the US delegation did not issue any threats or deadlines as had been reported by some US media outlets.
“The entire exchange was conducted with respect and professionalism,” he said.
In comments reported by Cuba’s Communist Party newspaper Granma, Garcia del Toro emphasised that ending the three-month-old US oil blockade was “a top priority” for the Cuban government in the talks, and accused Washington of “blackmail” for threatening countries that export oil to Cuba with tariffs.
“This act of economic coercion is an unjustified punishment for the entire Cuban population,” he said.
“It is also a form of global blackmail against sovereign states, which have every right to export fuel to Cuba, in accordance with the principles of free trade,” he added.
US news outlet Axios reported on Friday that officials from US President Donald Trump’s administration held multiple meetings in Havana on April 10, including with Raul Guillermo Rodriguez Castro, grandson of former President Raul Castro. The meetings marked the first time that American diplomats had flown into Cuba since 2016 in a new diplomatic push.
According to reports, US officials laid out several conditions for negotiations with Cuba to continue, including the release of prominent political prisoners, an end to political repression, and liberalising the island’s ailing economy.
The Reuters news agency said that US proposals for Cuba also include allowing Elon Musk’s Starlink internet terminals into the country and providing compensation for Americans and US corporations for assets confiscated by Cuba after the 1959 revolution. Washington is also concerned about the influence of foreign powers on the island, a US official told the news agency.
Trump has hinted at military intervention in Cuba and warned of tariffs on any country that sells or supplies oil to Cuba. The fuel blockade has aggravated Cuba’s economic and energy crisis, leading to warnings of a humanitarian disaster.
Cubans have also braced for a possible attack following Trump’s repeated warnings that the country will be “next” after his war on Iran and the US military’s abduction of Venezuela’s President Nicolas Maduro in January.
Last week, Cuban President Miguel Diaz-Canel said that his country was prepared to fight if the US carried through on its threats.
The leaders of Mexico, Spain and Brazil on Saturday voiced concern over the “dramatic situation” in Cuba and urged “sincere and respectful dialogue”.
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said on Monday there was no evident justification for the US to attack Cuba.
“The ability to defend oneself does not mean the right to intervene militarily in other states when their political systems do not match what others might have in mind,” he said.
Chavez-DeRemer is the third high-profile female official to leave the Trump administration after recent departures of Kristi Noem and Pam Bondi.
Published On 21 Apr 202621 Apr 2026
US Secretary of Labour Lori Chavez-DeRemer will be leaving her post in the administration of President Donald Trump, the White House has said.
Chavez-DeRemer is the third woman to leave the Trump administration since March, when the president fired Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem in the wake of federal immigration raids in Minnesota that led to the deaths of two protesters. Trump also ousted Attorney General Pam Bondi earlier this month.
Recommended Stories
list of 4 itemsend of list
Chavez-DeRemer has done a “phenomenal job” protecting American workers and is set to “take a position in the private sector”, White House Director of Communications Steven Cheung said in a post on X late on Monday, announcing the labour secretary’s departure.
“Keith Sonderling will take on the role of Acting Secretary of Labor,” Cheung added, referring to the current deputy labour secretary.
While Cheung did not give a reason for Chavez-DeRemer’s departure, the New York Post reported in January that she was under investigation for “pursuing an ‘inappropriate’ relationship with a subordinate” and drinking in her office during the work day.
Al Jazeera was unable to independently verify the allegations.
From the beginning of her tenure, Chavez-DeRemer had some notable differences with other members of Trump’s inner circle.
She had voiced support for the pro-union Protecting the Right to Organize Act (PRO Act), earning support for her nomination from some Democrats.
Her appointment was also seen as favoured by Sean O’Brien, the president of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, who notably spoke in support of Trump’s re-election campaign at the Republican National Convention in July 2024.
However, as the labour secretary, Chavez-DeRemer’s positions have more closely aligned with the Trump administration’s overall anti-regulatory policies, according to US media outlets. During her tenure as secretary, the Labor Department stalled on responding to calls for limits on silica exposure from Appalachian coal miners suffering from the occupational black lung disease.
Chavez-DeRemer is not the first top official to leave the Labor Department during Trump’s second term.
In August 2025, Trump fired the director of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), Erika McEntarfer, who was appointed by previous President Joe Biden, after a report showed that hiring had slowed in July and was worse in May and June than had previously been reported.
Chavez-DeRemer had supported the president’s move at the time.
“I support the President’s decision to replace Biden’s Commissioner and ensure the American People can trust the important and influential data coming from BLS,” Chavez-DeRemer said in a post on X following McEntarfer’s removal.
WASHINGTON — Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer is out of President Trump’s Cabinet, the White House said Monday, after multiple allegations of abusing her position’s power, including having an affair with a subordinate and drinking alcohol on the job.
Chavez-DeRemer is the third Trump Cabinet member to leave her post after Trump fired his embattled Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem in March and ousted Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi earlier this month.
Unlike other recent Cabinet departures, Chavez-DeRemer’s exit was announced by a White House aide, not by the president on his social media account.
“Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer will be leaving the Administration to take a position in the private sector,” White House communications director Steven Cheung said on the social media site X. “She has done a phenomenal job in her role by protecting American workers, enacting fair labor practices, and helping Americans gain additional skills to improve their lives.”
He said Keith Sonderling, the current deputy labor secretary, would become acting labor secretary in her place. The news outlet NOTUS was the first to report Chavez-DeRemer’s resignation.
Labor chief, family members faced multiple allegations
Chavez-DeRamer’s departure follows reports that began surfacing in January that she was under a series of investigations.
A New York Times report last Wednesday revealed that the Labor Department’s inspector general was reviewing material showing Chavez-DeRemer and her top aides and family members routinely sent personal messages and requests to young staff members.
Chavez-DeRemer’s husband and father exchanged text messages with young female staff members, according to the newspaper. Some of the staffers were instructed by the secretary and her former deputy chief of staff to “pay attention” to her family, people familiar with the investigation told the Times.
Those messages were uncovered as part of a broader investigation of Chavez-DeRamer’s leadership that began after the New York Post reported in January that a complaint filed with the Labor Department’s inspector general accused Chavez-DeRemer of a relationship with the subordinate.
She also faced allegations that she drank alcohol on the job, and that she tasked aides to plan official trips for primarily personal reasons.
Both the White House and the Labor Department initially said the reports of wrongdoing were baseless. But the official denials became less full-throated as more allegations emerged — and when Chavez-DeRemer might be out of a job became something of an open question in Washington.
At least four Labor Department officials have already been forced from their jobs as the investigation progressed, including Chavez-DeRemer’s former chief of staff and deputy chief of staff, as well as a member of her security detail, with whom she was accused of having the affair, the New York Times reported.
She enjoyed union support — rare for a Republican
Confirmed to Trump’s Cabinet in a 67-32 vote in March 2025, Chavez-DeRemer is a former House GOP lawmaker who had represented a swing district in Oregon. She enjoyed unusual support from unions as a Republican but lost reelection in November 2024.
In her single term in Congress, Chavez-DeRemer backed legislation that would make it easier to unionize on a federal level, as well as a separate bill aimed at protecting Social Security benefits for public-sector employees.
Some prominent labor unions, including the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, backed Chavez-DeRemer, who is a daughter of a Teamster, for Labor secretary. Trump’s decision to pick her was viewed by some political observers as a way to appeal to voters who are members of or affiliated with labor organizations.
But other powerful labor leaders were skeptical when she was tapped for the job, unconvinced that Chavez-DeRemer would pursue a union-friendly agenda as a part of the incoming GOP administration. In her Senate confirmation hearing, some senators questioned whether she would be able to uphold that reputation in an administration that fired thousands of federal employees.
She was a key figure in Trump’s deregulatory push
Aside from reports of wrongdoing in recent months, Chavez-DeRemer had been one of Trump’s more lower-profile Cabinet picks but took key steps to advance the administration’s deregulatory agenda during her tenure.
For instance, the Labor Department last year moved to rewrite or repeal more than 60 workplace regulations it saw as obsolete. The rollbacks included minimum wage requirements for home healthcare workers and people with disabilities, and rules governing exposure to harmful substances and safety procedures at mines. The effort drew condemnation from union leaders and workplace safety experts.
The proposed changes also included eliminating a requirement that employers provide adequate lighting for construction sites and seat belts for agriculture workers in most employer-provided transportation.
During Chavez-DeRemer’s tenure, the Trump administration canceled millions of dollars in international grants that a Labor Department division administered to combat child labor and slave labor around the world, ending their work that had helped reduce the number of child laborers worldwide by 78 million over the last two decades.
The Labor Department has a broad mandate as it relates to the U.S. workforce, including reporting the U.S. unemployment rate, regulating workplace health and safety standards, investigating minimum wage, child labor and overtime pay disputes, and applying laws on union organizing and unlawful terminations.
Kim writes for the Associated Press. AP writers Cathy Bussewitz in New York and Will Weissert in Washington contributed to this report.
Bombs are in and art is out as the Trump administration’s proposed 2027 budget requests $1.5 trillion in defense spending (up 44% from last year), while again attempting to snuff out the National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities, as well as the Institute of Museum and Library Services.
The budget proposal released earlier this month calls for just enough money to permanently wind down the operations of each agency: $29 million for the NEA (down from $207 million); $38 million for the NEH (down from $207 million); and $6 million for the IMLS (down from $291.8 million).
Congress has the final say about whether or not these cuts actually get made, and Sept. 30 is the deadline to pass next year’s budget. (Failure to do so could result in yet another government shutdown.) It’s worth remembering that Trump tried to defund these organizations last year and was thwarted by Congress. But the administration did successfully choke off funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which ceased operations in January.
It’s hard to know how this renewed threat to agencies that collectively support thousands of arts programs and initiatives across all 50 states, Puerto Rico and Washington, D.C., will play out, especially because the only constant in this administration is its mercurial temperament. Plus, Congress doesn’t have a great track record of keeping Trump in check (see Venezuela, Iran, the White House East Wing, the Kennedy Center, etc.). The ongoing war in Iran, which pundits warn could last until the midterms, may also impact how Congress decides to vote.
In times of conflict and chaos, we need the arts — a sentiment so obvious it normally goes without saying. But this moment somehow feels different. There were many alarming moves that Trump wanted to make during his first term that the so-called adults in the room allegedly kept him from achieving. Those adults are gone and he is now surrounded with enablers. This means the unthinkable is now possible — as we have seen time and again over the past 15 months.
In a country without the NEA, NEH and IMLS, hundreds of small local arts groups would likely cease to exist entirely — and with them, the community, education and enlightenment that underpin our increasingly fragile, fractured society. We can close our eyes until it happens, or we can start urgently ringing the alarm bells. I vote for the latter. Here’s a link to get you started.
I’m Arts editor Jessica Gelt banging a gong. This is your arts and culture news for the week.
Dispatch: mots take on AI at Flux Festival
A participant experiences “The Pledge,” part of artist duo mots’ acclaimed “AI & Me” series, on view April 25 at Blum Gallery, Culver City, as part of Flux Festival.
(mots / Daniela Nedovescu and Octavian Mot)
Artist duo mots is staging one of its exploratory AI-centered exhibits — “The Pledge” — at the upcoming Flux Festival at Bloom Gallery in Culver City (April 24 and 25). Last year, mots received quite a bit of attention for its U.S. premiere of “AI & Me,” part of Tribeca Festival’s Immersive Program. That piece, according to mots website, “dives into the weird dynamics between humans and artificial intelligence,” by placing people in a confessional style booth while AI tells them exactly what it thinks of them.
“The Pledge” takes that concept further by inviting participants to stand on a stage while AI-generates a statement about them— one that is solely based on appearance. The person then must decide whether to read the AI feedback aloud into a microphone or leave. If you decide to share, you become part of the permanent video installation.
In this moment of deep AI anxiety, the mots’ work is tapping into more than just a playful back and forth between man and machine.
“On one hand, we’re thrilled to see people lining up to interact with the pieces we build; on the other, we’re trying to gather the courage to destroy them and stop this madness before it’s too late,” the mots write on their website.
— Jessica Gelt
Dispatch: Monster Party
The adult-centric interactive melodrama “Monster Party,” at Rita House through April 25.
(Clint Keller)
“Monster Party” starts with a moment of ecstasy. Then the adult-centric interactive play gets demented — a bit demonic, even. We meet characters shrouded in mystery. Guests at a cocktail party, there’s a writer working on a book about supernatural creatures, a vacuum salesman with a closely guarded secret, a repressed religious fanatic and more. None of them can remember how or why they ended up at this soiree, hosted by the confidently cryptic Baroness, a character who clearly delights in creating sin and madness. We’ll soon find out this isn’t an event for the lucky.
But that’s not just what makes “Monster Party” special. Remounted after a short theatrical run in 2024, the work from immersive creator Matt Dorado intermixes the personal and political. Lurid, humorous and sexy, “Monster Party” is also a scathing critique of how political systems can drive one mad.
Set during the Lavender Scare, the anti-communist purge of LGBTQ+ people from the U.S. government in the 1950s, “Monster Party” opens with camp and then descends into very real horrors of life in the United States. You’ll drink, play parlor games and gradually uncover one dark skeleton after another.
The intimate production is limited to 50 guests per showing, and cocktails are included in the $159.45 ticket. Come ready to socialize.
8 p.m. Thursdays and Friday; 3 and 8 p.m. Saturdays, through April 26. Rita House, 5971 W. 3rd Street monsterpartyshow.com
— Todd Martens
You’re reading Essential Arts
Our critics and reporters guide you through events and happenings of L.A.
By continuing, you agree to our Terms of Service, which include arbitration and a class action waiver. You agree that we and our third-party vendors may collect and use your information, including through cookies, pixels and similar technologies, for the purposes set forth in our Privacy Policy such as personalizing your experience and ads.
The week ahead: A curated calendar
FRIDAY Chaya Czernowin Monday Evening Concerts presents the U.S. premiere of the Harvard-based Israeli composer’s “Poetica,” which she describes as “a journey of one into themselves,” performed by percussionist Steven Schick and the percussion ensemble Red Fish Blue Fish. 8 p.m. Zipper Hall at the Colburn School, 200 S. Grand Ave., downtown L.A. mondayeveningconcerts.org
The Last Days of Judas Iscariot O.C. theater companies the Wayward Artist and Larking House team up for Stephen Adly Guirgis’ bold, darkly comedic courtroom drama set in Purgatory. Directed by Lizzy McCabe. 7:30 p.m. Friday and Saturday and April 23-35. Irvine United Congregational Church, 4915 Alton Pkwy., Irvine. thewaywardartist.org
Harry Fonseca “Portrait of the Artist as a Young Coyote,” an exhibition of more than 30 paintings, prints and works on paper, follows the path of the late Native artist’s alter-ego, the Trickster Coyote, an exploration of his own identity and a means of challenging existing narratives. Also being exhibited is “Sedej Tuulémisé (Blood Relations),” featuring paintings by emerging artist Deerstine Suehead. Noon-5 p.m. Tuesday-Saturday, through July 3. PDC Design Galleries, 750 N San Vicente, West Hollywood. pacificdesigncenter.com
Ryan Bancroft will conduct the L.A. Phil this weekend at Walt Disney Concert Hall.
(Carlin Stiehl/For The Times)
Shostakovich & Sibelius Ryan Bancroft conducts the Los Angeles Philharmonic with cellist Alisa Weilerstein playing one of her specialties, Shostakovich’s “Second Cello Concerto.” 8 p.m. Friday; 2 p.m. Saturday and Sunday. Walt Disney Concert Hall, 111 S. Grand Ave., downtown L.A. laphil.com
Liu Xiaodong For the work presented in the exhibition “Host,” the figurative painter trained his eye on a Detroit tattoo artist with a penchant for medieval battle recreations. 10 a.m.-6 p.m. Tuesdays-Saturday, through June 13. Lisson, 1037 N. Sycamore Ave., L.A. lissongallery.com
SATURDAY Back to Oz MUSE/IQUE salutes a truly American fairy tale through music with pieces from “The Wonderful Wizard,” “The Wiz,” and “Wicked,” performed by Carmen Cusack, LaVance Colley, Nathan Granner, DC6 Singers Collective and the MUSE/IQUE Orchestra. 5 p.m. Saturday and Sunday; 7:30 p.m. Thursday and April 24; 2:30 and 7:30 p.m. April 25; and 2:30 p.m. April 26. Mark Taper Forum, 135 N. Grand Ave., downtown L.A. muse-ique.com
Colored People’s Time: A History Play From Civil War to civil rights, Leslie Lee’s drama, directed by Ben Guillory, examines the lives of Black Americans through a century of struggle. 8 p.m. Thursday-Saturdays; 3 p.m. Sundays, through May 17. Los Angeles Theatre Center, Theatre Four, 514 S. Spring St., downtown L.A. therobeytheatrecompany.org
The Expanding Field: MOCA’s Collection from the 1940s to 1970s Works by Mark Rothko, Luchita Hurtado, Piet Mondrian, On Kawara, Robert Rauschenberg, Betye Saar, Anne Truitt and others illustrate the breadth of the museum’s holdings. Saturday through Sept. 20. Museum of Contemporary Art, 250 S. Grand Ave., downtown L.A. moca.org
Falstaff Craig Colclough stars in LA Opera’s production of the energetic Verdi comedy about two wives turning the tables on an unwanted suitor in merry olde England. 7:30 p.m. Saturday; 2 p.m. April 26; 7:30 p.m. April 30, May 2 and 6; 2 p.m. May 10. Dorothy Chandler Pavilion, 135 N. Grand Ave., downtown L.A. laopera.org
Steven Culp and Joey Stromberg in “For Want of a Horse” at the Echo Theater Company.
(Cooper Bates)
For Want of a Horse Olivia Dufault’s comedy about an unusual love triangle involving a horse opens Echo Theater Company’s 2026 season. Directed by Elana Luo. Opening night, 8 p.m. Saturday; 8 p.m. Fridays and Saturdays; 4 p.m. Sundays; 8 p.m. Mondays, through May 25. Echo Theater Company, Atwater Village Theatre, 3269 Casitas Ave. echotheatercompany.com
Hear Now Music Festival A chamber concert doubleheader (separate admissions): The matinee features Lyris Quartet, Brightwork Ensemble and HEX performing Hugh Levick’s “No Pasaran” for brass quintet; Ania Vu’s “Small Tenderness” for vocal ensemble and string quartet; Liviu Marinescu’s “String Quartet No. 1”; Bryan Chiu’s “Anthology” for piano and horn; and Tom Flaherty’s, “Recess” for string quartet. Lyris Quartet and Brightwork Ensemble return for the evening show with mezzo-soprano Peabody Southwell, and the music of Peter Knell, “Canciones de Agua” for mezzo-soprano and violin; Sean Heim, “there is no such thing as time” for mixed ensemble; Vera Ivanova’s “The Firebird’s Feather,” for flute solo; and Jordan Nelson’s “Join” for string quartet. Chamber Concert 1, 3 p.m. (2 p.m. preview); Chamber Concert 2, 8 p.m. (7 p.m. preview). First Lutheran Church of Venice, 815 Venice Blvd. hearnowmusicfestival.com
Claudia Keep In the exhibition “Water, Water, Everywhere,” the painter finds fascinating details in the life-giving liquid and all its forms, including rivers, ocean waves, clouds and afternoon coffee. Opening reception, 4-6 p.m. Saturday; the exhibition runs through May 30. Parker Gallery, 6700 Melrose Ave., L.A. parkergallery.com
Kinship & Community: Selections from the Texas African American Photography Archive The exhibition, a collaboration between Art + Practice and the California African American Museum, shares the work of Black photographers who documented life in the urban neighborhoods and rural villages of eastern Texas from 1944 to 1984. Saturday evening, exhibition curator and NYU professor Nicole R. Fleetwood and Getty Research Institute curator LeRonn P. Brooks will discuss the exhibition and the volatile time of great change that it captures. The exhibition opening is 11 a.m.-5 p.m. Saturday and runs through Sept. 5. Art + Practice exhibitions space, 3401 W. 43rd Pl. L.A. Conversation, 6-7:30 p.m. Saturday. Art + Practice programs space, 4334 Degnan Blvd., L.A. artandpractice.org
Majestic Tango Directed and produced by Miriam Larici and Leonardo Barrionuevo, this program features 13 dancers and six musicians using music, movement and storytelling to convey the passionate energy of Buenos Aires. 8 p.m. Irvine Barclay Theatre, 4242 Campus Dr. thebarclay.org
Richard Mayhew, “West Bay,” 2004 Oil on canvas 36” x 48’.
Richard Mayhew “Understory” surveys the artist’s work created between 1960 and 2023, when he saw his expressive landscapes as “an artistic reclamation of the land stolen from his Black, Shinnecock, and Cherokee-Lumbee ancestors.” Opening reception, 6-8 p.m. Saturday; exhibition runs through May 30. Karma, 7351 Santa Monica Blvd., L.A. karmakarma.org
Natural HERstory Drag performance meets real science in this 30-minute STEAM musical, developed by Drag Arts Lab and the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, and designed to engage elementary-aged learners. 11 a.m. Annenberg Community Beachhouse, 415 Pacific Coast Hwy., Santa Monica. eventbrite.com
Parsons Dance David Parsons’ New York City-based troupe marks its 40th anniversary with a program set to the music of Milton Nascimento; Giancarlo De Trizio; Champion, Four Set & Skrillex (featuring Naisha); Miles Davis; Sheila Chandra; and Yusuf/Cat Stevens 7:30 p.m. Saturday; 2 p.m. Sunday. BroadStage, Santa Monica College Performing Arts Center, 1310 11th St. broadstage.org
The Storyteller of East LA The Latino Theater Co. has the world premiere of Evelina Fernández’s magical realist drama about a 90-year-old woman with dementia and the challenges faced by her family and caregivers. Directed by Jose Luis Valenzuela. 8 p.m. Thursdays-Saturdays; 2 p.m. Sundays, through May 17. Los Angeles Theatre Center, 514 S Spring St., downtown L.A. latinotheaterco.org
Verdi in España The Verdi Chorus performs sequences from the composer’s operas “Don Carlo,” “Il Trovatore,” “La Traviata” and “Ernani,” alongside Bizet’s “Carmen” and selections from Spanish composers Catán, Granados, Giménez, Torroba and De Falla. 7:30 p.m. Saturday; 4 p.m. Sunday. First Presbyterian Church, 1220 2nd St., Santa Monica. verdichorus.org
SUNDAY Mozart’s Requiem Grant Gershon conducts the Los Angeles Master Chorale in Mozart’s final masterpiece, plus the West Coast premiere of Fanny Mendelssohn’s “Oratorio on Scenes from the Bible.” 7 p.m. Walt Disney Concert Hall, 111 S. Grand Ave., downtown L.A. lamasterchorale.org
TUESDAY Yuja Wang and Mahler Chamber Orchestra The celebrated pianist continues her long-standing collaboration with MCO for a program featuring works by Segei Prokofiev and Alexander Tzfasman. 8 p.m. Tuesday. McCallum Theatre, 73000 Fred Waring Dr., Palm Desert; 8 p.m. Wednesday. Segerstrom Center for the Arts, 600 Town Center Drive, Costa Mesa; 7 p.m. Thursday. Granada Theatre, 1214 State St, Santa Barbara; 8 p.m. April 25. The Saroya, 18111 Nordhoff Street, Northridge. mahlerchamber.com
WEDNESDAY Khorus Harmonia Katey Sagal and Kurt Sutter are producing ten performances of this choral concert to benefit the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights and The Wounded Warrior Project. 8 p.m. Wednesdays-Saturdays; 4 p.m. Sundays, through May 2. Hudson Backstage Theatre, 6539 Santa Monica Blvd. onstage411.com
This Ends Badly The theater collective Frank’s presents an evening of short plays by Frank Demma, Marlane Meyer, John Pellech, John Pollono, Benjamin Weissman and Sharon Yablon. 8 p.m. Wednesdays, through May 13. Echo Theater Company, Atwater Village Theatre, 3269 Casitas Ave. echotheatercompany.ludus.com
Arts anywhere
New and recent releases of arts-related media.
The British Museum in London.
(Kin Cheung / Associated Press)
British Museum As excitement builds for the opening of the new Geffen Galleries at LACMA on Sunday (for priority members; May 4 for the general public), one’s appetite may be whetted to visit other museums. Why not start in London with the British Museum? The sprightly 273-year-old institution boasts a collection of eight million works and draws more than six million visitors each year. But there’s no need for a plane ticket or a Tardis to see it. Google Arts & Culture offers virtual tours that allow you to wander the halls and grounds for free (and it won’t rain!). artsandculture.google.com
Philip Glass
Two opportunities to see the work of one of the finest American composers will soon be available with the click of a button or a tap of a screen. First up is “The Complete Philip Glass Piano Etudes featuring 10 Pianists” (which was performed at Walt Disney Concert Hall in 2024) streaming live from the 3,500-seat Hill Auditorium on the campus of the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor. 4:30 p.m. Saturday and on demand through April 28. youtube.com
Six days later, the Paris Opera offers its current, sold-out production of “Satyagraha,” Glass’ revelatory, triptych portrait of Gandhi. Directed by choreographers Bobbi Jean Smith and Or Schraiber, with a cast including Anthony Roth Costanzo and Davóne Tines — all four members of AMOC*, American Modern Opera Company — the show will be presented live on the Paris Opera Play streaming platform (for $14) at 10:30 a.m. April 24. POP’s live broadcasts are typically available on demand for 30 days following transmission. play.operadeparis.fr
— Kevin Crust
Culture news and the SoCal scene
Pooya Mohseni, from left, Ava Lalezarzadeh, Tala Ashe and Marjan Neshat in “English” by Sanaz Toossi at the Wallis Annenberg Center for the Performing Arts.
(Joan Marcus)
With the U.S. at war with Iran, “This is an important moment to experience ‘English,’ Sanaz Toossi’s Pulitzer Prize-winning drama, set in an English-language classroom outside of Tehran in 2008,” writes Times theater critic Charles McNulty. “The play, now having its L.A. premiere at the Wallis Annenberg Center for the Performing Arts, reminds us of the lives — the hopes, the dreams, the sorrows — on the other side of the headlines.”
It’s been an anxious journey for Bob Baker Marionette Theater since 2019 when it was forced out of its downtown home of 55 years. After a lengthy search, the nonprofit signed a 10-year lease for a former cinema-turned-Korean Church in Highland Park. With that, however, came the accompanying stress of being renters in L.A. But good news has arrived: the beloved theater “has entered into an agreement to purchase its [current] home at the corner of York Boulevard and North Avenue 50,” reports Times features columnist Todd Martens.
The Samuel Oschin Air and Space Center is a major expansion of the California Science Center.
(Myung J. Chun/Los Angeles Times)
California Science Center has completed construction on its new $450-million Samuel Oschin Air & Space Center, which houses the Endeavor shuttle. Staff writer Malia Mendez headed onsite to get the scoop on the, “sleek 20-story, 200,000-square-foot new building rising over Exposition Park,” nearly doubling the museum’s exhibition space.
Architecture writer Sam Lubell put together a fascinating Q&A with Peter Zumthor in which the Geffen Galleries’ architect addresses a number of ongoing criticisms about his creation, including its loss of square-footage.
In case you missed it: Pop singer Pink has will host the 79th Tony Awards. “The award ceremony returns to New York City’s Radio City Music Hall on June 7, with nominations announced May 5,” writes Times reporting fellow Iris Kwok.
Enjoying this newsletter? Consider subscribing to the Los Angeles Times
It’s been a decade since the Mike Kelley Foundation for the Arts began awarding Infinite Expansion Grants to local contemporary arts organizations. The money has always mattered, but means even more during a time of great uncertainly about federal support for the arts (as I wrote in my newsletter intro). This year’s round of grantees was just announced, with nine L.A. contemporary arts groups sharing $400,000 in support. These groups, a news release says, “exemplify risk-taking, critical inquiry, and community engagement,” and include Art in the Park Community Cultural Programs; Color Compton; Cal State University, Northridge Foundation on behalf of CSUN Art Galleries; Barnsdall Art Park Foundation on behalf of Los Angeles Municipal Art Gallery (LAMAG); Los Angeles Performance Practice; Monday Evening Concerts; Clockshop; Institute of Contemporary Art, Los Angeles (ICA LA); and the Vincent Price Art Museum Foundation.
Big change is coming to the Soraya and California State University, Northridge. Artistic and Executive Director Thor Steingraber, is leaving his position after 12 years to become president and chief executive at Vivo Performing Arts in Boston. The Soraya has also announced Steingraber‘s replacement: Chad Hilligus. Hilligus arrives at CSUN from the Gallo Center for the Arts in Modesto where he served as chief executive and curated more than 100 multidisciplinary live performances.
And another leadership shakeup has come to the Los Angeles Master Chorale, which announced that its current president and chief executive, Scott Altman, will step down on June 5 to become executive director of Miami City Ballet. Master Chorale board member William Tully will serve as interim president while the group launches a national search for a replacement.
WASHINGTON — Lawyers for President Trump are engaged in talks with the IRS to resolve a $10-billion lawsuit the president filed against his own tax collection agency over the leak of his tax information to news outlets between 2018 and 2020.
In a federal court filing Friday, Trump asks a judge to pause the case for 90 days while the two sides work to reach a settlement or resolution.
“This limited pause will neither prejudice the parties nor delay ultimate resolution,” the filing says. “Rather, the extension will promote judicial economy and allow the Parties to explore avenues that could narrow or resolve the issues efficiently.”
Tax and ethics experts say the lawsuit raises a plethora of legal and ethical questions, including the propriety of the leader of the executive branch pursuing scorched-earth litigation against the very government he oversees.
Earlier this year, Trump filed a lawsuit in a Florida federal court, alleging that a previous leak of his and the Trump Organization’s confidential tax records caused “reputational and financial harm, public embarrassment, unfairly tarnished their business reputations, portrayed them in a false light, and negatively affected President Trump, and the other Plaintiffs’ public standing.”
The president’s sons, Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, are also plaintiffs in the suit.
In 2024, former IRS contractor Charles Edward Littlejohn, of Washington — who worked for Booz Allen Hamilton, a defense and national security tech firm — was sentenced to five years in prison after pleading guilty to leaking tax information about President Trump and others to two news outlets between 2018 and 2020.
The outlets were not named in the charging documents, but the description and time frame align with stories about Trump’s tax returns in the New York Times and reporting about wealthy Americans’ taxes in the nonprofit investigative journalism organization ProPublica. The 2020 New York Times report found Trump paid $750 in federal income tax the year he first entered the White House, and no income tax at all some years, thanks to reported colossal losses.
When asked in February how he would handle any potential damages from the case, Trump said, “I think what we’ll do is do something for charity.”
“We could make it a substantial amount,” he said at the time. “Nobody would care because it’s going to go to numerous very good charities.”
Several ethics watchdog groups have filed friend-of-the-court briefs challenging the president’s lawsuit.
The watchdog group Democracy Forward’s February filing states that the case is “extraordinary because the President controls both sides of the litigation, which raises the prospect of collusive litigation tactics,” and “the conflicts of interest make it uncertain whether the Department of Justice will zealously defend the public fisc in the same way that it has against other plaintiffs claiming damages for related events.”
Until recently, President Trump always found a way to fail forward, through a combination of spin, threats, payoffs and bluster.
OK, that’s the simplistic interpretation. The fine print tells a less-glamorous story: a man born on third base who spent decades insisting he’d hit a triple.
Still, it’s hard to argue with success. When Trump entered politics, he redefined the rules of the game. Rivals who tried to outflank him on policy detail, ideological consistency and institutional norms found themselves either vanquished or assimilated by the Borg.
By my lights, only once during Trump’s admittedly chaotic first term did he run into something that his playbook couldn’t at least mitigate or parry: the COVID-19 pandemic. For the final year of his presidency, reality refused to negotiate, and political gravity reasserted itself. It turns out, viruses aren’t susceptible to the Art of The Deal.
But then, miraculously, Trump wriggled through legal jeopardy, bulldozed his way past more conventional Republicans and Democrats, and re-emerged victorious in 2024.
If anything, that comeback reinforced the idea that Trump could survive anything by virtue of his playbook.
By the start of his second term, he’d made impressive headway in co-opting not only individuals but also major institutions within big tech, the media and academia.
Even in foreign affairs, Trump’s sense that any problem could be solved via force, intimidation or money was confirmed when he captured Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and installed Maduro’s vice president, Delcy Rodríguez, as a sort of puppet leader. Everyone has a price, right?
Unfortunately for Trump, no. Not everyone does.
Lately, the president has encountered a different kind of resistance — adversaries motivated by something bigger and more transcendent than money, power or the avoidance of pain.
In dealing with Iran, for instance, Trump has confronted people operating under a wholly different set of incentives. It’s a regime guided by a mix of ideology, radical religious doctrine and long-term strategic interests that don’t always align with short-term material gain.
(Now perhaps, having punished Trump enough already, Iran will finally come to the negotiating table. But even if that happens, it will have occurred after exacting a steep price — so steep, in fact, that it may already be too late for Trump to plausibly claim a win.)
It turns out, you can’t easily intimidate or pay off a true believer who isn’t afraid to die and believes they have God on their side.
A similar (though obviously not morally equivalent) dynamic is now also on display in the form of Trump’s skirmish with Pope Leo XIV, a man who commands moral authority. He opposes the war in Iran (“Blessed are the peacemakers”) and has demonstrated a stubborn refusal to back down to Trump’s attempts at bullying.
“Woe to those who manipulate religion and the very name of God for their own military, economic and political gain, dragging that which is sacred into darkness and filth,” Leo said during a tour of Africa. It’s a remark that the American pope seemed to implicitly be aiming at the American president.
Here’s what Trump doesn’t understand: There are still pockets of the world where concepts like faith and national identity outweigh tangible incentives. Where sacrifice and suffering are an accepted part of the plan.
When facing these sorts of foes, Trump’s usual operating system starts to look less like a cheat code and more like a category error.
But he can’t see this because Trump is always prone to a sort of cynical projection — of assuming everyone views the world in the same base, carnal, corrupt way he sees it.
Whether it was his incredulity that Denmark wouldn’t sell Greenland, rhetoric that seemed to discount the motivations of those who serve and sacrifice in the military, or his affinity for nakedly transactional gulf states, the pattern is familiar: a tendency to view decisions through a cost-benefit lens that not everyone shares.
To be fair, that lens has often served him well. In arenas where power, money and leverage dominate, Trump’s approach is eerily effective.
But after years of taming secular, “rational” opponents, he is fighting a two-front war against people who see their struggles as moral and spiritual.
They aren’t stronger in a conventional sense. But they are, in a very real sense, less susceptible to Trump’s methods.
For perhaps the first time in his life, Donald Trump finds himself facing adversaries who aren’t just immune to his usual Trumpian playbook but are playing a different game altogether.
