union

It has been nearly three years since Hollywood writers went on a historic strike that lasted 148 days and ushered in an extraordinary period of labor unrest that virtually shut down the film and TV business.

Now, writers are poised to commence another round of bargaining with the major studios on a new three-year film and TV contract. Few observers think the union is girding for another showdown, especially at a time when many of its members are struggling to find work amid media consolidation and belt-tightening.

But in advance of negotiations that begin on Monday , union leaders are eager to dispel any perception that they might have scaled back their demands.

“Our members have shown many times that they’re willing to fight for what we need as a collective group,” WGA West President Michele Mulroney said in an interview. “And there’s no exception here.”

With its current contract expiring on May 1, the WGA hopes to improve its members’ healthcare plans, increase streaming residuals and expand AI protections.

Michele Mulroney speaks as the Screen Actors Guild (SAG-AFTRA) and Writers Guild of America (WGA) join GLAAD in releasing the 11TH Annual GLAAD Studio Responsibility Index at The Village at Ed Gould Plaza Los Angeles LGBT Center in Los Angeles, California, on September 14, 2023.

(Michael Tran/AFP via Getty Images)

Ellen Stutzman, the union’s executive director, said despite popular belief, the studios have weathered the transition from cable television to streaming “very well,” citing their efforts to maximize revenue with streaming bundling, rising subscription fees and advertising revenue.

“Writers are watching as Netflix and Paramount are fighting it out to acquire Warner Bros… Paramount is spending $81 billion,” said Stutzman. “There’s money for a fair deal for writers.”

The union leaders agree that this year’s negotiations are all focused on the sustainability of a writer’s career.

A spokesperson from the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers, which represents the major studios in negotiations, said in a statement that they look forward “to engaging in a constructive and collaborative bargaining process with the WGA. Through continued good-faith dialogue, we are confident we can reach balanced solutions that support talented writers while sustaining the long-term success and stability of our industry and its workforce.”

A top priority for the WGA is to increase the caps that companies contribute to the union’s healthcare plan. Union officials say the current cap has remain unchanged for two decades as healthcare contributions have steadily declined due to fewer writers working.

AI is also top of mind for the WGA.

In 2023, the guild secured various AI protections by establishing that AI isn’t a writer and nothing it produces is considered literary material.

But as major studios start to make deals with AI companies, like Disney’s $1 billion investment into OpenAI’s Sora platform, many writers are concerned about how their work could be used.

“AI is using [studios’] IP, which is stuff that we wrote to license these models,” said John August, the co-host of the “Scriptnotes” podcast and WGA’s negotiating committee co-chair. “With the Sora deal, it seems clear that the companies intend to monetize this IP for use with AI.”

August says the union will be skeptical toward arguments that it’s still too early to seek more safeguards around such a nascent industry, citing the union’s past history with the rise of DVDs and the internet and how profoundly those technologies changed the compensation for writers.

“If you’re taking the work that we created to generate AI outputs, we are owed money. They’re using our work to do something down the road,” added August.

WGA’s negotiating committee also is looking to boost streaming residuals, expand the minimum number of people allowed in a writers’ room and add protections for scribes working on pilots.

“We very much hope that lessons were learned in 2023 and that the AMPTP will come to the table ready to take our proposal seriously and to make a fair deal, and to do that quickly,” Mulroney said. “It provides stability for the companies and for our membership. It’s better for everybody.”

WGA is entering contract negotiations nearly a month after the actors’ union, SAG-AFTRA, began its bargaining sessions. Last week,
the AMPTP said it was extending negotiations another seven days.

Long security lines snaked into baggage claim areas and parking garages at some U.S. airports over the weekend, a possible indicator of more widespread travel problems as the latest government shutdown drags on.

That kind of disruption, while not yet widespread, is not a concern that typically surfaces at San Francisco International Airport, the largest of nearly two dozen U.S. airports where screening checkpoints are staffed by private contractors under a little-used federal program that allows airports to outsource security screenings while maintaining TSA oversight.

Because contractors’ pay comes from a federal contract, it often continues even when the government shuts down.

“The money’s already been allocated, the payments have already been made, and that continues without interruption,” SFO spokesperson Doug Yakel told the Associated Press. “That is a very nice place to be.”

The contrast draws attention to a long-running debate in the aviation industry: Can private contractors operating under TSA oversight provide a stopgap — and shield airport security operations from the political impasses that can disrupt U.S. air travel?

Some aviation experts see the TSA screening program as a potential model for keeping security lines moving with fewer disruptions during shutdowns. At SFO, that system helped maintain screening operations during last year’s record 43-day shutdown, Yakel said.

But critics caution that privatization is not a silver bullet and could introduce new risks. The union representing federal screeners argues that moving operations to private companies could erode job protections and reduce pay and benefits for workers already facing high turnover amid demanding conditions.

How the program works

Established in 2004, TSA’s screening partnership program allows airports to use private security companies chosen by the federal government to run checkpoints while TSA retains authority over procedures and oversight. The agency says private screeners receive the same security background checks as their federal counterparts.

The program “provides needed relief to staffing shortages brought on by a government shutdown,” TSA said in a statement to AP.

In addition to SFO, other participating airports include Kansas City International Airport, Atlantic City International Airport and Orlando Sanford International Airport.

The vast majority of the nation’s roughly 400 commercial airports, meanwhile, rely on federal screening officers employed directly by TSA. During shutdowns, those workers must continue reporting for duty even though they stop getting paid — a dynamic that has historically led to higher absenteeism and slower-moving checkpoints the longer a shutdown lasts.

The current partial shutdown affects only the Department of Homeland Security, which includes TSA. Democrats in Congress refused to fund the department over objections to its immigration enforcement tactics. The lapse marks the third shutdown in less than a year to leave TSA workers temporarily without pay — and once the government reopens, to have to wait for backpay.

Those disruptions can ripple through the travel system, cascading problems across already crowded flight schedules. The strain is especially acute this time of year as airlines and airports brace for what they expect will be one of the busiest spring break travel seasons on record.

San Francisco’s airport is a ‘litmus test’

Aviation security expert Sheldon Jacobson, whose research contributed to the design of TSA PreCheck, said the program’s success at SFO, a large international airport, shows that privatization “is something that needs to be explored.”

SFO is among the top 15 busiest airports in the U.S. when measured by passenger traffic. A major hub for international travel, it is the second-busiest airport in California behind Los Angeles International Airport.

“It’s operated just as well as any other airport,” Jacobson said, adding that SFO’s multiple concourses and status as a hub for United Airlines demonstrate that even large-scale operations can be managed effectively under this model. “If SFO is the litmus test for delivering this privatized product, then many other airports can do it, too.”

Jacobson noted that most airports currently using the program are smaller, but “the scale issue should not be a limiting factor,” and he called for a broader conversation on how such options could deliver government services efficiently and benefit travelers.

“Of course TSA would have oversight. It’s not like they’re freewheeling on their own,” he said of privately contracted screeners. “We might as well use a government shutdown that affects air travel as an opportunity to begin that discussion.”

Why TSA’s union opposes the private model

The American Federation of Government Employees, which represents TSA officers, has long opposed privatization.

“We will never advocate for any privatization of any federal employees. We don’t believe that’ll work,” Johnny Jones, secretary-treasurer of the TSA union’s bargaining unit, said in a brief phone call this week.

In a blog post on its website, the union argues it could weaken accountability for aviation security — one of the reasons Congress chose to federalize airport screening after the Sept. 11 attacks.

The union also warned that private companies could face pressure to cut costs in ways that affect training, staffing levels and employee benefits. Relying on contractors, the union says, could create inconsistencies between airports if different companies operate checkpoints across the country, potentially complicating oversight of a system designed to maintain uniform national security standards.

“We have to remember the TSA was created in the wake of 9/11 when there were no security standards or very minimal security standards,” said airline industry analyst Henry Harteveldt, president of Atmosphere Research Group. “The TSA came around, they established very stringent airport screening security requirements, which exist to this day.”

Others say there are simpler ways to address the shutdown problem.

Industry groups — including the U.S. Travel Assn., Airlines for America and the American Assn. of Airport Executives — are urging Congress to pass legislation that would ensure aviation workers are paid regardless of the government’s funding status.

“Every time Washington fails to fund the government, these essential workers pay the price. So do travelers. So does the economy,” Geoff Freeman, U.S. Travel Assn.’s president, said in a statement. “That is why America’s travel industry has come together, because this workforce is too important, and the stakes are too high, for this to keep happening.”

An unintended benefit of outsourcing screeners

Republican lawmakers have pushed in recent years to dismantle the agency entirely. Last year, two GOP senators introduced the “Abolish TSA Act,” which would phase out the agency and transfer oversight to a new office charged with aviation security. Supporters of the long-shot legislation say privatized screening could be more efficient and less vulnerable to shutdowns.

TSA leadership has signaled an openness to discussion. Speaking at a House Appropriations subcommittee hearing last year, Ha Nguyen McNeill, a senior official performing the duties of TSA administrator, said “nothing is off the table” regarding potential privatization.

“If a new privatization scheme makes sense, then we’re happy to have that discussion to see what we can come up with,” McNeill said. “It’s not an all-or-nothing game.”

At SFO, officials say its screening model was adopted more than 20 years ago for reasons unrelated to government shutdowns. But with shutdowns in recent years growing longer and more disruptive, the airport says its arrangement has revealed an unintended benefit: fewer staffing disruptions at checkpoints.

“The benefits, I think, are compelling,” Harteveldt said. “The real issue is making sure that any vendor, any partner to the TSA, upholds the strict standards that TSA has established and works with TSA to ensure that screening remains efficient and finds ways to make it even better.”

Yamat writes for the Associated Press. AP video journalist Haven Daley contributed to this report from San Francisco.

NEW YORK — The WNBA and its players’ union met again Wednesday, hours after a marathon negotiating session over a new collective bargaining agreement.

The two sides ended a 12-hour negotiation at 5 a.m. EDT without reaching a deal. They started talking again Wednesday afternoon and discussions were ongoing at sundown.

Union executive director Terri Carmichael Jackson said Wednesday morning that there were “a lot of conversations going in the right direction.”

WNBA commissioner Cathy Engelbert came out of the hotel where negotiations took place to talk to reporters briefly.

“It’s complex, but we’re working towards a win-win deal like we’ve been saying, transformational deal for these players. That balances all the things we’ve been trying to balance with continued investment by our owners,” she said. “So, we’re working hard towards that and still have work to do.”

Executive committee members Nneka Ogwumike, Breanna Stewart, Alysha Clark and Brianna Turner once again were at the hotel with Jackson and the union staff. The league was represented by Engelbert, head of league operations Bethany Donaphin and New York Liberty owner Clara Wu Tsai. Connecticut Sun president Jen Rizzotti joined the negotiating team on Wednesday.

Neither side left the hotel during the marathon bargaining session. A day later, both sides were outside during breaks enjoying an unseasonably warm mid-March day in Manhattan.

The sides have been exchanging proposals during the bargaining sessions over the last two days, a person familiar with the negotiations told the Associated Press. The person spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the discussions.

Revenue sharing and housing are key sticking points between the sides, as well as assigning a franchise tag to a player and benefits for retired players.

The league had said that at least a handshake agreement on a labor deal would need to be done by Tuesday to start the season as scheduled.

“We’ve got to get this deal done. We’ve got to get it done soon,” said Engelbert, who didn’t take questions from reporters.

When a deal is reached in principle, the league has said it would need a few weeks to finish off the CBA. After that work is done, the expansion draft for new franchises in Portland and Toronto would be held sometime between April 1-6, according to a timetable obtained by the AP.

Free agent qualifying offers, including franchise player tags, would be sent out April 7-8. Teams would then have three days to negotiate with the more than 80% of players who are free agents. The signing period would take place from April 12-18.

Training camps would open the next day and the season would be able to start on May 8.

But for any of that to happen, the two sides have to figure out a revenue sharing model. The union’s proposal from a week ago had asked for an average of 26% of the gross revenue — revenue before expenses — over the course of the CBA. That would include only 25% in the first year. The league has said that number was unrealistic.

The WNBA’s last few proposals have offered more than 70% of net revenue, with that number going up as the league continues to grow.

It took months of effort, lobbying and mounds of cash for Paramount Skydance to finally clinch its prize of Warner Bros. Discovery.

Now, however, the David Ellison-led company faces a long and challenging road to merge these two media giants and set it up for a successful future.

Key to that will be striking a delicate balancing act between investment and paying down its debt load of $79 billion, which is massive even by Hollywood standards.

Notably, the figure is even greater than Warner’s nearly $55 billion of debt post-merger with Discovery, a burden that hamstrung the company for years and led to successive rounds of layoffs and relentless cost cutting.

Last week, my colleague Meg James wrote about the concerns Fitch Ratings and S&P Global Ratings have about Paramount’s credit, given the mountain of debt the company will now carry. Fitch downgraded its credit to BB+ — “junk” territory — from BBB-, and S&P Global Ratings placed the company’s ratings on “negative watch.”

Carrying that amount of debt comes with significant risks.

For one, a company with a lot of debt that is “junk”-rated is going to be under pressure to cut costs. “Junk status” means a company’s debt is rated below the level that credit agencies consider investment grade. Such a rating means it can be more expensive to refinance or take out new loans, raising the cost of capital.

Paramount executives have already said they plan to find $6 billion in “synergies” within three years, though they’ve emphasized that the majority of their cost cutting will come from “non-labor sources,” including consolidating their streaming technology and cloud providers, combining IT systems across the company and “optimizing the combined real estate footprint and the broader corporate overhead,” among other ideas.

And as I wrote last week, most Hollywood observers and those familiar with Ellison’s plans predict that Paramount will be forced make steep layoffs to offset the cost of the deal and eliminate overlapping roles and functions between the two historic studios.

At the same time, in order to compete with well-funded rivals, Paramount-Warner Bros. will also need to invest in new programming — something that can be difficult for a heavily leveraged business .

Paramount executives have said their cost-cutting efforts won’t include a reduction in production capacity, and Ellison has reiterated that there will be continued spending on programming. Beyond content, he’ll also likely need to invest in improving the technology along with the look and feel of the streaming platforms.

“Whether or not they have the capital to do all of that and to try to get their leverage down is something I’m curious to hear about,” said Naveen Sarma of S&P Global Ratings.

It’s possible that Paramount may not be able to pursue a good opportunity in the future because it has used up all its debt capacity and can’t raise additional financing, said Kelly Shue, a professor of finance at Yale School of Management.

“It might cause them to underinvest in good projects in the future,” she said.

And the company needs to spend on good projects.

The economics of this deal hinge on the combined heft of Paramount and Warner’s two libraries and valuable intellectual property, which will unite Harry Potter, DC Studios, SpongeBob SquarePants and “Mission Impossible” all under one roof.

Building up its streaming platform, which will combine Paramount+ with HBO Max, is important for competing with the behemoth Netflix, which bowed out of the Warner Bros. auction.

And on the theatrical side, Ellison has said the combined company will release 30 films a year — 15 from each studio. That would be a substantial increase from 2025, when the two companies released 18 films — eight at Paramount and 10 from Warner Bros.

“While studios content budgets might not come under immediate focus for cost cutting, we have a hard time seeing no content costs savings considering opportunities to reallocate or pull back from at least the linear networks,” MoffettNathanson’s Robert Fishman wrote in a note to clients last week.

Of course, all of this would come only after the deal’s completion. On the immediate horizon, Paramount needs to secure international regulatory approval as well as at home. Although state attorneys general including Rob Bonta of California have said this is not a “done deal,” most analysts expect that any opposition there is only likely to slow — not stop — the transaction.

A very masculine year in film

A recent study from San Diego State University put a number on something we all suspected: The percentage of female protagonists in the top 100 films last year dropped. A lot.

Female protagonists made up just 29% of the top-grossing films in 2025, down from 42% in 2024, according to the university’s annual study of women’s representation in top films. A selection of film titles from the last year says it all: “The Running Man,” “A Working Man,” “Superman.”

That 29% figure has, unfortunately, been very consistent over the years — it was the same in 2016 and has largely hovered in the range of high 20s to low 30s for the last decade, with a few exceptions (40% in 2019 and 42% in 2024).

Focusing on just the protagonists in the top 100 films means that small fluctuations can change that percentage greatly.

But when the study looked at a broader sample size of the more than 1,900 characters in those films, the results weren’t much better.

The percentage of women in speaking roles was 38%, up just 1% from 2024. And the percentage of major female characters declined to 36% in 2025 from 39% the year before.

The fact that these figures have not moved much, in spite of the countless panels and think pieces about the issue, suggests there isn’t much will in Hollywood to change, said Martha Lauzen, author of the study and founder and executive director of San Diego State’s Center for the Study of Women in Television and Film.

“Representation is social relevancy and social capital,” she told me. “So when you see fewer women than men, that’s a message.”

Stuff We Wrote

Film shoots

Number of the week

Walt Disney Co. and Pixar’s “Hoppers” came in big at the box office this weekend with a $46-million opening in the U.S. and Canada — the strongest domestic debut for an original animated movie since “Coco” in 2017. Globally, the film made $88 million.

The reception is an encouraging sign for original animated movies, which have largely struggled at the box office since the COVID-19 pandemic while their sequel counterparts have shined.

What I’m watching

Several months ago, some friends and I started a movie club, where we each nominate a film we want to watch and we rotate who gets to make the final selection. Last week, we watched the 1996 comedy “First Wives Club,” which I had never seen but loved for its goofy antics, unexpected song-and-dance number and the focus on the enduring power of female friendships.

I know a lot of people who suffer from a chronic malady that gets worse each time there’s news out of Washington. Supporters of the current president of the United States might refer to this condition as a side effect of Trump derangement syndrome, but it’s more like Trump fatigue syndrome.

Symptoms can include a desire to tune out for a spell, stick your head in an ice bucket, or find another way to numb the senses.

But some brave souls, instead of looking away, step into the fray.

Bert Voorhees, for instance.

I came upon his name while reading coverage of the Monday evening demonstration at City Hall in downtown L.A., where protesters railed against the bombing of Iran — the latest example of Trump acting as if he’s king of the world and answerable to nobody, including Congress, the courts or the American people.

On the steps of L.A. City Hall, people attend the March 2 Answer Coalition rally protesting the attack on Iran by the U.S. and Israel.

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

With missiles flying, civilians dying and chaos spreading, Voorhees told USA Today that the Iranian ayatollah’s violence against his own people did not justify a U.S. military assault. In Voorhees’ mind, it’s American democracy that is under attack.

“If people don’t stand up and get loud about this, all together right now, we’re not going to have a country,” the northeast San Fernando Valley resident said. “So, it’s time for people to get serious, get in the streets.”

I called Voorhees, a retired lawyer and teacher, and we had a long chat that continued the next day over lunch in Montrose. We’re both in our 70s, and we both have trouble aligning the country we’re living in with the vision we had for it as younger men. Who could have anticipated years of bullying and name-calling, pathological lying about a “stolen” election or the routing of congressional and judicial opposition?

I confessed to Voorhees that I completely misread the direction this country was heading back when the first Black president in history termed out in 2016. I would have bet that as a more diverse and tolerant population came of voting age, old divisions would fade slowly into history and the U.S. would keep pushing toward higher elevations.

Silly me.

Voorhees says he’s demonstrated hundreds of times, but with immigration raids and now the war in Iran, President Trump is keeping him extra busy. “If people don’t stand up and get loud about this, all together right now, we’re not going to have a country,” said Voorhees. “So, it’s time for people to get serious, get in the streets.”

(Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)

Maybe it was the naively wishful thinking of a parent wanting his kids to live in a more evolved country rather than one filled with Neanderthal notions about science, medicine, climate, and non-white immigrants.

To Voorhees, these are reasons to raise hell rather than to lose faith, and he’s not alone. The No Kings rallies in greater L.A. were massive. Home Depot civilian patrols have looked out for hard-working neighbors because “silence is violence.” The whistle brigades are defending their communities.

Denise Giardina, a Huntington Beach book seller and friend of Voorhees’, has been on Home Depot patrols in her community and said planning various political actions is practically a full-time job.

“I have daughters and wanted them to have more rights than me, and I’m not sure that’s going to happen,” Giardina said.

When Giardina needs a break, she goes for a hike, which serves as a reminder that a single protest doesn’t change the world, but small steps matter.

“Sometimes you can’t think about the end,” she said. “It’s just one foot in front of the other. It’s not government that’s going to save us. It’s going to be the people.”

A crowd gathered at Los Angeles City Hall on March 2 to protest the bombing of Iran by the United States and Israel.

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

Roseanne Constantino, a Silver Lake graphic designer whose activism includes knocking on doors during election cycles, sending postcards and making phone calls, has been on the front lines with Voorhees and shares his sense of duty.

“I mean, for people to say, ‘I can’t watch the news, I’m numb, I’m overwhelmed, I have to tune out,’ is so much privilege talking, because they can tune out, because they’re safe,” Constantino said.

“I find it’s like a gateway drug,” she added, “because even people who have never done anything activist in their life eventually find themselves at a protest and are buoyed by the community and the sense of purpose and expression of opposition, but also of the love of democracy.”

To Voorhees, “democracy is a privilege,” and your participation does not end with voting. “You’ve got to make sure they do the right things,” he said, “and that requires paying attention and supervising them, if you will. Politicians are supposed to work for us.”

Voorhees told me that under President Obama, when drones were used in targeted overseas killings, he took to the streets in protest.

“I’m an equal opportunity activist, but we just haven’t had in my lifetime a person so determined to destroy democracy,” Voorhees said. “I called Reagan a fascist, and Reagan felt like a fascist until I met this man, who is the head of a fascist movement in this country.”

I wagered that the bombing of Iran by the America-first president — who promised to end rather than start wars — was Trump’s way of projecting strength at a time of weakness. Many of the president’s true believers are applauding, but it seems that nothing was learned from past Middle East meddling that ended badly, and with no thoughtful consideration of what comes next, Epic Fury could be followed by Epic Quagmire.

Voorhees insists this wasn’t just a show of might, but an act of distraction.

From the Epstein files, for instance. From the empty promises about lower prices for groceries and consumer goods, the droopy favorability ratings, midterm election fears and the mess created by tariffs that cost American merchants millions of dollars and were declared illegal.

Voorhees is mad about all of that, but made a point of clarification.

He’s not demoralized.

More than 200 people protest the U.S. and Israel’s war against Iran in front of City Hall in downtown Los Angeles on Saturday. Protesters carried Mexican, Palestinian and Iranian flags at the rally organized by the Answer Coalition.

(Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)

“The arc of the universe bends toward justice,” Voorhees said, “but it doesn’t do it steadily. There are retreats. Two steps forward, one back. One step forward, three back. We’re in one of those periods. … But we can overcome, and I believe in the long run we probably will.”

Minneapolis is the model, he said. When two innocent people were killed in immigration raids, the community came together and rose in protest, forcing a retreat of Trump’s forces and sparking a national conversation about the brutal tactics.

“Minneapolis pushed back against that with humanity, and that’s the future we want to build,” Voorhees said. “That’s the future Martin Luther King Jr. always wanted. That’s the beloved community. That’s the ticket.”

Things will change only if “we get up off the couch,” said Voorhees, who attended another antiwar protest Saturday on the steps of City Hall with a sign that asked, “Who Would Jesus Bomb?”

“You can march ahead with a heavy heart and a downcast head, or dance ahead with a smile and a tune on your lips, hand in hand with people you care about. Why not do that? All empires fall. All kings and tyrants fail in the end. Sometimes it’s fast. Sometimes it’s slow. But that day is coming and, as the Twin Cities proved, love is stronger than hate, if only just.”

steve.lopez@latimes.com

Four days after the stunning news that Paramount Skydance would acquire Warner Bros. Discovery, Paramount executives tried to calm fears that the blockbuster deal would result in massive layoffs.

In a call Monday, Paramount Chief Strategy Officer and Chief Operating Officer Andy Gordon told Wall Street analysts that $6 billion in merger “synergies” would come from “non-labor sources” and not a “reduction in production capacity.”

Instead, Gordon said, the company would reduce costs by consolidating its streaming technology and cloud providers, finding marketing efficiencies and “optimizing the combined real estate footprint,” likely an allusion to widely anticipated plans that the new owners will consolidate operations around the Warner Bros. lot in Burbank.

Efficiencies aside, most Hollywood observers — including people who are familiar with Paramount Skydance Chief Executive David Ellison’s plans — predict that Paramount will be forced to make large-scale layoffs in order to offset the enormous costs of the mega-deal, which is valued at more than $111 billion (counting debt).

It’s a reasonable expectation, at least if history is any guide.

Many at Warner dread the kinds of cuts seen after Walt Disney Co. bought most of 21st Century Fox’s assets, resulting in thousands of layoffs as the two companies combined operations and shed redundant jobs.

In the case of Warner-Paramount, the new company will have two film and TV studios, as well as two streaming businesses, two legal departments, two marketing departments and so on. It’s doubtful these overlapping functions will survive budget cuts.

Already, consolidation plans are underway.

This week Paramount announced it would combine the two streaming services — Paramount+ and HBO Max — to reach a total of more than 200 million subscribers and better compete against the behemoth Netflix, which boasts 325 million subscribers worldwide.

Ellison was full of praise for the HBO team on Monday’s analyst call, saying the premium service was a “crown jewel” and that it will “continue to have the resources and independence to do what it does best.”

He also reiterated that there is “no intention to pull back on production,” and that the company intends to make 30 films a year — 15 apiece from Paramount and Warner Bros.

“We have all the economic incentives to make sure that we grow this business and are going to invest in content to basically achieve those goals,” Ellison said Monday.

But this deal also includes $79 billion in net debt — a staggering load that overshadows even that of the merger that resulted in Warner Bros. Discovery. That amount became an albatross around that company’s neck and led to waves of layoffs.

“What everybody’s hoping is that the noise that’s being made around prioritizing content will hold true,” said Kevin Klowden, a Milken Institute fellow focused on entertainment and technology. “But until they see that happen, it’s really a question.”

Further job losses would be a blow to an industry that has been reeling from a steady drumbeat of job cuts fueled by media consolidation, dwindling streaming profits and the migration of film and TV jobs to cheaper states and countries.

Paramount executives have said the deal is expected to close in the fiscal third quarter of this year, and Ellison said he was “absolutely confident” they will meet that goal, based on conversations with regulators.

Despite support from the Trump administration, the acquisition is not yet final. Already, California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta said he was in communication with other states’ attorneys general about challenging the merger on antitrust grounds, saying it wasn’t a “done deal.”

And on Monday, Rep. Sam Liccardo (D-San José), Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) called on Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi and White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles to provide details of their conversations about the merger with Ellison and Netflix co-Chief Executive Ted Sarandos, highlighting the role of politics in the auction.

Paramount plans to keep the two studios separate for now, though company executives have discussed combining operations at the Warner Bros. Burbank lot at some point, according to sources close to Paramount who were not authorized to speak publicly. That could mean a wind down at the historic Paramount lot on Melrose Avenue — and more job losses.

The anxiety over looming cuts is especially deep inside Warner, where staff are still trying to process the news, according to people I spoke with. They noted that when Netflix was the winning bidder, co-Chief Executives Sarandos and Greg Peters came to the Burbank lot and spoke with several hundred of Warner’s senior leaders and outlined their plans, giving staff more clarity about a future under their ownership. No such conversations have occurred with the Paramount team, they said.

“I think genuinely, everyone’s nervous and a little uneasy,” said one Warner Bros. Discovery employee. “With the Netflix option, people had become a little more hopeful. But this outcome is a little more frightening for the staff.”

Stuff We Wrote

Film shoots

Number of the week

After 30 years, the Ghostface killer has still got it. Paramount Pictures and Spyglass Media Group’s “Scream 7” topped the box office this last weekend with $64.1 million in the U.S. and Canada, marking a franchise-best domestic opening. Globally, the film made $97.2 million.

The film centered on original franchise actors Neve Campbell and Courteney Cox, and featured numerous callbacks to the previous movies.

But the film’s debut did not come without controversy. Pro-Palestinian groups protested outside the “Scream 7” premiere on the Paramount lot last week and called for a boycott of the film after franchise star Melissa Barrera was fired more than two years ago for her comments on the Israel-Hamas war.

What I’m watching

On Sunday, I watched the UCLA women’s basketball team dominate USC in what I think is one of the best college rivalries out there (though I’m probably biased. Go Bruins!)

The Writers Guild of America West has canceled its awards ceremony scheduled to take place March 8 as its staff union members continue to strike, demanding higher pay and protections against artificial intelligence.

In a letter sent to members on Sunday, WGA West’s board of directors, including President Michele Mulroney, wrote, “The non-supervisory staff of the WGAW are currently on strike and the Guild would not ask our members or guests to cross a picket line to attend the awards show. The WGAW staff have a right to strike and our exceptional nominees and honorees deserve an uncomplicated celebration of their achievements.”

The New York ceremony, scheduled on the same day, is expected go forward while an alternative celebration for Los Angeles-based nominees will take place at a later date, according to the letter.

Comedian and actor Atsuko Okatsuka was set to host the L.A. show, while filmmaker James Cameron was to receive the WGA West Laurel Award.

WGA union staffers have been striking outside the guild’s Los Angeles headquarters on Fairfax Avenue since Feb. 17. The union alleged that management did not intend to reach an agreement on the pending contract. Further, it claimed that guild management had “surveilled workers for union activity, terminated union supporters, and engaged in bad faith surface bargaining.”

On Tuesday, the labor organization said that management had raised the specter of canceling the ceremony during a call about contraction negotiations.

“Make no mistake: this is an attempt by WGAW management to drive a wedge between WGSU and WGA membership when we should be building unity ahead of MBA [Minimum Basic Agreement] negotiations with the AMPTP [Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers],” wrote the staff union. “We urge Guild management to end this strike now,” the union wrote on Instagram.

The union, made up of more than 100 employees who work in areas including legal, communications and residuals, was formed last spring and first authorized a strike in January with 82% of its members. Contract negotiations, which began in September, have focused on the use of artificial intelligence, pay raises and “basic protections” including grievance procedures.

The WGA has said that it offered “comprehensive proposals with numerous union protections and improvements to compensation and benefits.”

The ceremony’s cancellation, coming just weeks before the Academy Awards, casts a shadow over the upcoming contraction negotiations between the WGA and the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers, which represents the studios and streamers.

In 2023, the WGA went on a strike lasting 148 days, the second-longest strike in the union’s history.

Times staff writer Cerys Davies contributed to this report.

At a time when so many forces seem to be dividing us as a nation, it is tragic that President Trump seeks to co-opt or destroy whatever remaining threads unite us.

I refer, of course, to the U.S. men’s Olympic hockey team winning gold: the kind of victory that normally causes Americans to forget their differences and instead focus on something wholesome, like chanting “USA” while mispronouncing the names of the European players we defeated before taking on Canada.

This should have been pure civic oxygen. Instead, we got video of Kash Patel pounding beers with the players — which is not illegal, but does make you wonder whether the head of the Federal Bureau of Investigation has a desk somewhere with neglected paperwork that might hold the answers to the D.B. Cooper mystery.

Then came the presidential phone call to the men’s team, during which Trump joked about having to invite the women’s team to the State of the Union, too, or risk impeachment — the sort of sexist humor that lands best if you’re a 79-year-old billionaire and not a 23-year-old athlete wondering whether C-SPAN is recording. (The U.S. women’s hockey team also brought home the gold this year, also after beating Canada. The White House invited the women to the State of the Union, and they declined.)

It’s hard to blame the players on the men’s team who were subjected to Trump’s joke. They didn’t invite this. They’re not Muhammad Ali taking a principled stand against Vietnam, or Tommie Smith and John Carlos raising fists for Black power at the Olympics in 1968, or even Colin Kaepernick protesting police brutality by kneeling during the national anthem. They’re just hockey bros who survived a brutal game and were suddenly confronted with two of the most powerful figures in the federal government — and a cooler full of beer.

When the FBI director wants to hang, you don’t say, “Sorry, sir, we have a team curfew.” And when the president calls, you definitely don’t say, “Can you hold? We’re trying to remain serious, bipartisan and chivalrous.” Under those circumstances, most agreeable young men would salute, smile and try to skate past it.

But symbolism matters. If the team becomes perceived as a partisan mascot, then the victory stops belonging to the country and starts belonging to a faction. That would be bad for everyone, including the team, because politics is the fastest way to turn something fun into something divisive.

And Trump’s meddling with the medal winners didn’t end after his call. It continued during Tuesday night’s State of the Union address, when Trump spent six minutes honoring the team, going so far as to announce that he would award the Presidential Medal of Freedom to goalie Connor Hellebuyck.

To be sure, presidents have always tried to bask in reflected glory. The main difference with Trump, as always, is scale. He doesn’t just associate himself with popular institutions; he absorbs them in the popular mind.

We’ve seen this dynamic play out with evangelical Christianity, law enforcement, the nation of Israel and various cultural symbols. Once something gets labeled as “Trump-adjacent,” millions of Americans are drawn to it. However, millions of other Americans recoil from it, which is not healthy for institutions that are supposed to serve everyone. (And what happens to those institutions when Trump is replaced by someone from the opposing party?)

Meanwhile, our culture keeps splitting into niche markets. Heck, this year’s Super Bowl necessitated two separate halftime shows to accommodate our divided political and cultural worldviews. In the past, this would have been deemed both unnecessary and logistically impossible.

But today, absent a common culture, entertainment companies micro-target via demographics. Many shows code either right or left — rural or urban. The success of the western drama “Yellowstone,” which spawned imitators such as “Ransom Canyon” on Netflix, demonstrates the success of appealing to MAGA-leaning viewers. Meanwhile, most “prestige” TV shows skew leftward. The same cultural divides now exist among comedians and musicians and in almost every aspect of American life.

None of this was caused by Trump — technology (cable news, the internet, the iPhone) made narrowcasting possible — but he weaponized it for politics. And whereas most modern politicians tried to build broad majorities the way broadcast TV once chased ratings — by offending as few people as possible — Trump came not to bring peace but division.

Now, unity isn’t automatically virtuous. North Korea is unified. So is a cult. Americans are supposed to disagree — it’s practically written into the Constitution. Disagreement is baked into our national identity like free speech and complaining about taxes.

But a functioning republic needs a few shared experiences that aren’t immediately sorted into red and blue bins. And when Olympic gold medals get drafted into the culture wars, that’s when you know we’re running out of common ground.

You might think conservatives — traditionally worried about social cohesion and anomie — would lament this erosion of a mainstream national identity. Instead, they keep supporting the political equivalent of a lawn mower aimed at the delicate fabric of our nation.

So here we are. The state of the union is divided. But how long can a house divided against itself stand?

We are, as they say, skating on thin ice.

Matt K. Lewis is the author of “Filthy Rich Politicians” and “Too Dumb to Fail.”

Over 32.6 million viewers watched President Trump address the nation on Tuesday night, according to Nielsen data.

It’s both the smallest audience Trump has received for the annual speech to a joint session of Congress, and the longest State of the Union address in recent history.

This was the president’s first State of the Union address of his second term. Previously, his addresses scored 45.5 million in 2018, 46.8 million in 2019 and 37.1 million in 2020, the Nielsen data show.

This year’s speech clocked in at 107 minutes, topping the previous record set by President Clinton in 2000.

Facing low approval ratings, Trump played up positive economic numbers, some of which were misstated, and the administration’s aggressive crackdown on undocumented immigrants, drawing polarized reactions in the chamber.

Trump also recognized the Men’s Olympic hockey team, which won its first gold medal since 1980 on Sunday with its victory against Canada, and a number of other guests attended the address, including the widow of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk and Paramount Skydance’s CEO David Ellison.

The U.S. Olympic men’s ice hockey team arrives for the State of the Union address .

(Kenny Holston / Pool, Getty Images)

There were 15 networks that televised the speech. Fox News had the largest audience with 9.1 million viewers. ABC was second with 5.1 million, followed by NBC‘s 3.6 million, CBS’ 3.3 million, MS NOW’s 2.4 million, CNN’s 2.2 million, and the Fox broadcast network’s 2.1 million.

It was the Los Angeles Hispanic Republican Club’s potluck party for President Trump’s State of the Union address, but there was a problem:

Not many Hispanics showed up. Or people, period.

About half of the the 20-some folks who trudged into the club’s Woodland Hills offices were Latino. Four of them were chairman David Hernandez and his family.

“People are sick, hurt, or fed up with politics,” the soft-spoken 77-year-old told me with a laugh before the speech began.

It was a dramatic turn from three years ago, when Trump reclaimed the White House with 48% of the Latino vote, the highest percentage ever captured by a Republican presidential candidate. A record number of California Latinos won legislative seats. The Hispanic Republican Club opened chapters in Ventura and Orange counties. Rodriguez now sits on the California Republican Party board of directors along with former Cudahy mayor and fellow club member Jack Guerrero.

How the quesadillas have flipped. CNN poll released earlier this week showed Latino support for Trump went from 41% last February to just 22% right now.

“It’s the visuals of those raids,” Hernandez acknowledged with a sigh. “It only makes sense that people will feel afraid. Some of our supporters and friends, they’re suffering.”

He turned to his vice chair, Tony Barragan, who reviews restaurants for the club’s weekly radio show. Near them, a table hosted three clipboards fat with paperwork for new members to fill. It had a total of one name. “How many of the places you’ve visited are feeling the crunch?”

“Half,” Barragan replied. His father came to the United States from Mexico illegally then became a pioneering Mexican restaurateur in Los Angeles.

“We gotta win the Hispanic vote. I hope that he [Trump] changes his approach and remembers that all men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights.”

Fat chance of that, Tony.

The cheers were muted as the State of the Union pageantry kicked off. When Trump claimed early on that “inflation is plummeting, incomes are rising fast, the roaring economy is roaring like never before,” only one club member offered a golf clap.

Maybe the audience knew that was just too big of a whopper.

No one seemed particularly animated in the beginning except Rolando Salmerón. He sat in the front cheering and fist-pumping and chanting “USA! USA!” every time Republicans gave Trump a standing ovation.

Los Angeles Hispanic Republican Club chairman David Hernandez hosts a political radio talk show at the studios of AM Radio 870 in Glendale in 2022.

(Luis Sinco / Los Angeles Times)

The electrical engineer, who gave his age as “over 1,000,” came to the United States from El Salvador illegally in 1975 but was now a citizen. He told me during dinner that Trump had done “more good in one year than Democrats ever did in 30” and especially supported his deportation deluge because MS-13 members assaulted and bullied his son during his high school years.

“Trump deported three million people — Obama deported way more,” said Salmerón. He wore a hat emblazoned with “FIGHT” over the famous photo of a bloodied Trump raising his fist just after a would-be assassin’s bullet grazed his ear. On the bill was an embroidered version of the president’s signature. “Unfortunately, the media that we have — including the L.A. Times — doesn’t say the truth.”

I mean, I think the truth is Trump’s deportation machine might not hesitate to hassle Señor Salmerón over here, like it has other Latinos, if he was in the wrong place at the wrong time.

We watched Trump’s speech on Fox News, which kept cutting to unflattering shots of conservative scapegoats like Rep. Ilhan Omar and Sen. Elizabeth Warren. Those prompts uncorked snide comments from members — “Traitor!” someone yelled when the television flashed an image of Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett — that turned the atmosphere in the room from reserved to suddenly rollicking.

Hernandez, however, stayed silent.

While Trump bloviated about tariffs, the Hispanic Republican Club chair nibbled on dessert. As the triumphant U.S. men’s hockey team made a cameo, Hernandez was looking at his smartphone. Taxes, illegal immigration, foreign policy — nothing seemed to move Hernandez even as his fellow members got rowdier and rowdier. When Rep. Brad Sherman appeared on the screen, Hernandez finally said something: “There’s our congressman!”

But once Trump began to attack his enemies, Hernandez began to whisper comments with a smile to his daughter, who sat at the lonely check-in table. He laughed after the president gestured to the Democrats sitting glumly before him in the House of Representatives chambers and growled, “These people are crazy.” When Trump announced the awarding of Medals of Honors to a Korean War fighter pilot and a Marine who helped to capture former Venezuela dictator Nicolás Maduro, Hernandez — a Navy veteran — finally applauded.

I thought Trump’s speech, the longest State of the Union address ever, was a giant, xenophobic bore. So did viewers — a CNN survey found it was his worst-received State of the Union address ever and ranked even lower than any of Joe Biden’s attempts. But at the Hispanic Republic Club bash, we skeptics might as well been living in a different dimension.

“I liked the personal touch,” Hernandez told me after. “We need more of that. This is a marathon, not a sprint.”

“It was beautiful,” said 68-year-old Ricardo Benitez, who’s running for a state assembly seat in the San Fernando Valley and greeted Salmerón with a “¿Entonces, cipote? [What’s up, man?] — the only Spanish I heard all night. The Salvadoran immigrant was impressed by “how our president acknowledged victims of crime and how he freed Venezuela…He’s doing a good job regardless of what his enemies are saying.”

Benitez scoffed when I asked if he thought Trump’s immigration raids would cost Republicans Latino support in this year’s midterms.

“Democrats don’t know anything. They think the immigration raids will stop people from voting. That’s not true. Deportations have always happened. Obama deported more people.”

Various political flyers for various republican candidates sit on a table at the offices of L.A. Hispanic Republican Club on Tuesday in Woodland Hills.

(Ronaldo Bolanos / Los Angeles Times)

Nearby, Lani Kane helped to clear tables. “I like that [Trump] honored civilians and our military,” said the 50-year-old, whose T-shirt identified her as a daughter of a World War II veteran. “But in a way, I understand why Democrats don’t like him. The speech was all ‘I, I, I.’”

The Sylmar resident stayed quiet when I asked if she thought Latinos would stay with the GOP for the midterms and beyond.

“If Republicans can continue to promote our values and protect our youth and lower taxes, I hope they do,” Kane finally said.

But did she think they would? This time, Kane nodded vigorously.

“I think Hispanics are starting to wake up.”

Well, I agree with her there. But I don’t think they’re waking up the way Kane thinks.

When myself and a Times photographer thanked the group and left, the number of Latinos at the Los Angeles Hispanic Republican Club State of the Union potluck, already small, dropped by a quarter.

WASHINGTON — To defend an increasingly unpopular immigration crackdown during his State of the Union speech, President Trump highlighted the victims of crimes perpetuated by undocumented immigrants.

But as Democrats pointed out, the president’s lengthy speech made no reference to the U.S. citizens, including Renee Good and Alex Pretti in Minneapolis, who were killed by immigration agents.

Recent polls show public approval of Trump’s immigration policies has fallen to record lows level since he returned to the White House. One poll, released Feb. 17 by Reuters and the market research firm Ipsos, showed just 38% of respondents felt Trump was doing a good job on immigration.

Another poll, published last month by Fox News, showed 59% of voters say U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement is “too aggressive.”

“As President Trump brags about his immigration enforcement at tonight’s State of the Union, I can think only of Renee Nicole Good, Alex Pretti and the three dozen people who have died in ICE custody since Trump took office,” Rep. Mark DeSaulnier (D-Concord) wrote on X.

Within the first few minutes of his address on Tuesday night, Trump highlighted “the strongest and most secure border in American history, by far.” He also offered — at least momentarily — a softer tone, adding that “We will always allow people to come in legally, people that will love our country and will work hard to maintain our country.”

In reality, the administration has restricted legal immigration. It has revoked humanitarian benefits for hundreds of thousands of people, and an indefinite pause on all asylum applications filed with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.

Guests invited by various lawmakers to attend Trump’s speech offered dueling visions of the administration’s mass deportation effort.

Rep. Randy Feenstra (R-Iowa) said he would bring the father and brother of Sarah Root, who was killed in 2016 after a drunk driver, who was in the U.S. illegally, crashed into her vehicle. Trump held an event Monday for “angel families,” those with a relative who was killed by an undocumented immigrant, and signed a proclamation honoring such victims of crimes.

Democrats, meanwhile, invited immigrants, family members of those detained or deported, and U.S. citizens who were violently arrested by immigration agents.

Rep. Mike Levin (D-San Juan Capistrano), for example, said he was bringing the daughter of a Laguna Niguel couple deported last year to Colombia after their arrest during a routine check-in with ICE. And Rep. Jesus Garcia (D-Ill.) invited Marimar Martinez, a Chicago woman shot five times by Border Patrol Agent Charles Exum.

On X, the Department of Homeland Security shot back at Democrats with immigrant guests, saying the lawmakers are “once again prioritizing illegal aliens above the safety of American citizens.”

On Tuesday morning, Rep. Maria Elvira Salazar (R-Fla.) held a news conference on “the state of immigration,” flanked by Christian pastors, in which she touted her Dignity Act, which would provide permanent legal status to immigrants who meet certain benchmarks.

“Throughout the Scripture, there are two kinds of leaders: those who persecute faith communities and those who protect them,” she said.

California Sen. Adam Schiff was among the Democrats to boycott Trump’s speech, and he cited immigration enforcement as one reason for his absence.

“I have not missed the State of the Union in the 25 years I’ve been in Congress, but we have never had a president violate the Constitution, the laws every day with seeming impunity,” Schiff told Meidas Touch outside the Capitol. “We’ve never had masked armed, poorly trained agents, victimizing our cities, demanding to see people’s papers.”

Trump repeated claims about immigration that have been debunked, such as his assertion that President Biden’s immigration polices allowed millions of people to pour into the U.S. from prisons and mental institutions.

Trump also highlighted a figure he has often turned to — that Democrats let in “11,888 murderers.” That number, an inaccurate description of federal data, refers to immigrants who, over the course of decades (including the first Trump administration) were convicted of homicide, usually after their arrival in the U.S. Those immigrants are listed on ICE’s “non-detained docket” typically because they are currently serving their prison sentences.

Turning to Minnesota, Trump said Somalis have defrauded $19 billion from American taxpayers and referred to them derogatorily as “Somali pirates.”

Trump went beyond Somalis to disparage many immigrants, saying “there are large parts of the world where bribery, corruptions and lawlessness are the norm, not the exception.”

“Importing these cultures through unrestricted immigration and open borders brings those problems right here to the USA, and it is the American people who pay the price,” he said.

Trump also highlighted the case of Dalilah Coleman, 6, of Bakersfield who was left with a traumatic brain injury after a 2024 car crash in California.

He called on Congress to pass the Dalilah Law, which would bar states from granting commercial drivers licenses to immigrants without lawful status. He said, without proof, that “most illegal aliens do not speak English and cannot read even the most basic road signs.”

A year after Dalilah’s accident her family met with Partap Singh, the detained Indian immigrant responsible for the crash, at the Mesa Verde ICE Processing Center in Bakersfield. Marcus Coleman, her father, told Fox26 News that the focus shouldn’t be on Singh’s legal status because similar accidents happen every day.

Also present Tuesday night were the parents of Sarah Beckstrom, the West Virginia National Guard member shot and killed in Washington, D.C. by an Afghan immigrant, as well as Andrew Wolfe, who was also shot and survived.

Trump awarded Wolfe and Beckstrom the Purple Heart. He called Rahmanullah Lakanwal, the man charged in the shooting, a “terrorist monster.” Lakanwal legally entered the U.S. from Afghanistan through a Biden administration program in 2021 and his asylum application was approved under the Trump administration last April.

Turning his attention the fall’s midterm elections, Trump warned his supporters that if allowed back into power, Democrats would reopen the borders “to some of the worst criminals anywhere in the world.”

Trump then invited legislators to stand if they agreed with him that “the first duty of the American government is to protect American citizens, not illegal aliens.”

Republicans stood, offering one of the longest standing ovations of the night. Democrats remained seated.

Trump told Democrats they should be ashamed for not standing up.

“You have killed Americans!” Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) yelled from the audience. “You should be ashamed.”

President Trump, speaking for well over an hour, shattered the record on Tuesday for the length of a State of the Union address.

Speaking for about 100 minutes, the nation’s leader touched upon a broad range of domestic and international topics, bragged about his accomplishments and awarded the nation’s highest honors to a pilot who participated in the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, a 100-year-old Korean War veteran, and a 32-year-old goalie for the gold-medal-winning Olympic men’s hockey team.

The previous record-holder was President Clinton, famously known for his Southern-twang verbosity. He spoke for nearly 90 minutes during his final State of the Union address in 2000.

The address is prescribed by the Constitution and calls for the president to apprise Congress about the state of the union. Over time the address has become a vehicle for presidents to address the nation’s residents, claim legislative victories and foreshadow upcoming policy goals.

Just over a century ago, President Harding’s and President Coolidge’s addresses were aired on the radio. In 1947, President Truman’s address was the first to be broadcast on television. As viewership grew, the annual speech has taken on greater gravity, leading to notable and controversial moments in American politics.

Rep. Joe Wilson (R-S.C.) famously shouted “You lie!” during President Obama’s 2009 address to Congress when he spoke about healthcare policy. Then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) created a viral moment when she tore apart a copy of Trump’s text after he delivered the State of the Union in 2020.

On Tuesday night, Rep. Al Green, a Democrat from Louisiana, was escorted out of the chamber after he held a small sign that read: “BLACK PEOPLE AREN’T APES.”

The United States, President Trump said Tuesday night, is “bigger, better, richer and stronger than ever.”

“We are the hottest country anywhere in the world,” Trump said in his State of the Union address. “The economy is roaring like never before. America is respected again like never before. We’re winning so much we can’t take it.”

Not so, countered U.S. Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.).

“We just heard Donald Trump do what he does best: lie,” Padilla said.

In a Spanish-language rebuttal delivered on behalf of the Democratic Party, Padilla rebuked the president’s claim that he has brought about the “golden age of America,” accusing Trump of spurring economic uncertainty and plunging U.S. cities into violence.

President Trump gives his State of the Union address to a joint session of Congress at the Capitol in Washington.

(J. Scott Applewhite / Associated Press)

“The truth is that the State of our Union does not feel strong for everyone,” Padilla said. “Not when the costs of rent, food and electricity keep rising. Not when Republicans raise our medical costs to fund tax cuts for billionaires. And definitely not when federal agents — armed and masked — terrorize our communities by targeting people because of the color of their skin or for speaking Spanish — including immigrants with legal status and citizens.”

Padilla and Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger, who delivered the Democratic rebuttal in English, countered Trump’s upbeat pronouncements by painting a starkly different picture of a country that is deeply divided months before critical midterm congressional elections.

Trump, whose approval ratings have slumped amid concerns about the economy and the harsh tactics deployed in his mass-deportation campaign, touted what he described as victories on foreign policy, including the U.S. ouster of Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro, and a slowing of inflation.

Padilla sought to counter those claims and rally support for Democrats, who have struggled to formulate an effective response to Trump as he has dominated national discourse in recent years.

Spanberger, speaking from Colonial Williamsburg in Virginia, questioned whether Trump is working on behalf of Americans — or in his own self-interest.

Trump, she said, repeatedly has sought to deflect attention away from accusations that he is using the Oval Office to enrich himself and his family and the scandal involving Jeffrey Epstein, the disgraced financier and sex offender.

“We did not hear the truth from our president,” Spanberger said. “He lied, he scapegoated and he distracted.”

Spanberger, who beat her Republican opponent in the purple state of Virginia last fall by 15 points, said voters are struggling under Trump’s policies and beginning to turn on him. Political winds, she said, are shifting in favor of the Democrats.

Padilla focused heavily on the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown in cities such as Los Angeles and Minneapolis, where agents this year killed two U.S. citizens who were protesting deportations.

“We see ICE agents using excessive force: entering homes without judicial warrants and shooting at cars with families still inside,” Padilla said. “We are living a nightmare that divides and destroys our communities.”

He was, he said, partly speaking from experience.

Last year, federal agents tackled Padilla to the floor and handcuffed him after he sought to question Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem at a news conference in Los Angeles.

Padilla referenced the incident in his speech and encouraged others to defy Trump.

“I am still here standing. Still fighting,” he said. “And I know you are still standing and still fighting too.”

“Trump does not want us to recognize our power,” he said.

Padilla also slipped in a reference to Puerto Rican pop star Bad Bunny, who was criticized by Trump for performing in Spanish during the halftime of the Super Bowl.

“As Bad Bunny reminded us a few weeks ago: ‘Together, we are America.’” Padilla said. “Together, we rise, because our faith is stronger than any disappointment or any obstacle — including Trump. And together, we will build the future our children deserve.”

In his State of the Union speech Tuesday night, President Trump struck a confident and defiant tone — claiming huge victories tackling crime in major U.S. cities, securing the nation’s borders, deporting undocumented immigrants, bringing down costs for American households and commanding respect for the U.S. on the world stage.

“The state of our union is strong,” Trump said — at a time when he is significantly weakened politically, with a sluggish economy, shrinking support for his signature immigration crackdown and some of the lowest approval ratings of his political career.

Trump delivered his speech — the longest State of the Union on record — to a heavily divided Congress, receiving steady applause from Republicans and little other than stone-faced glares and momentary bursts of outrage and frustration from Democrats.

Trump employed his usual superlatives

Throughout his speech, Trump spoke in superlatives, as is common for him — mostly to project a rosy picture.

He said he “inherited a nation in crisis,” with a “stagnate economy” and a “wide open border,” with “rampant crime” and “wars and chaos” around the world, but that under his leadership, “we have achieved a transformation like no one has ever seen before and a turnaround for the ages.”

“Our nation is back — bigger, better, richer and stronger than ever before,” he said.

He said U.S. military forces had conducted one of the greatest military actions “in world history” when they entered Venezuela at the start of the year to depose and capture then-President Nicolás Maduro to face drug charges in the U.S.

He said U.S. enemies are now “scared.” He said the economy is now “roaring.” He said U.S. military and police are now “stacked,” and that the nation now has the “strongest and most secure border in American history,” with “zero” undocumented immigrants getting into the U.S. in the last nine months.

He said the country had seen the “biggest decline” in violent crime since 1900 despite reliable crime data not going back that far, that the military is setting “records for recruitment,” that natural gas production is at an “all time high,” and that more Americans are working than “at any time in the history of our country.”

He gave out two Medals of Honor, a Purple Heart, and a Presidential Medal of Freedom during his speech.

“We’re winning so much that we really don’t know what to do about it. People are asking me, ‘Please, please, please, Mr. President, we’re winning so much we can’t take it anymore,’” Trump said. “I say, ‘No, no, no, you’re going to win again, you’re going to win big, you’re going to win bigger than ever.”

Bullish on the economy, despite the polls

Trump was clearly working to convince Americans tuning in that the economy is strong.

Many Americans are unhappy with Trump’s handling of the economy, according to polling. A recent Washington Post-ABC News-Ipsos poll found that 57% of respondents disapproved of Trump’s managing of the economy, and 64% disapproved of his handling of tariffs.

However, Trump pushed a bullish message on his impact on the economy, saying that President Biden had given him “the worst inflation in the history of our country,” and he had driven it down.

“We are doing really well,” he said. “Those prices are plummeting downward.”

He cited his policy to end tax on tipped wages, said mortgage rates have come down, and argued that his policies would soon bring down healthcare costs for American families substantially — despite millions of people facing higher costs due to the elimination by Republicans of healthcare subsidies in their recent “Big Beautiful Bill.”

Trump suggested that Democrats ruined the economy and drove up costs for Americans. “You caused that problem,” he told those in the room, as Republicans stood and clapped. He also suggested Democrats had picked the issue of “affordability” as a political issue to focus on for nothing.

“They just used it — somebody gave it to them,” he said.

Flexing on the global front

Trump said that, in addition to increasing safety in the U.S., he had increased “security” for Americans abroad and U.S. “dominance” in the Western Hemisphere.

He claimed to have “ended eight wars” in nations abroad, a dubious claim that Democrats in the room dismissed.

He said Secretary of State Marco Rubio will go down as “the best ever.”

Trump called Venezuela a “new friend and partner” since the U.S. deposed Maduro, from whom the U.S. has since received some 80 million barrels of oil.

“As president I will make peace wherever I can, but I will never hesitate to confront threats to America wherever I must,” Trump said.

He praised the U.S. attack on Iran’s nuclear sites in June, said the country was warned not to build new weapons capabilities, and that the U.S. is in negotiations with Iran but hasn’t heard the “secret words” that they will never have a nuclear weapon.

Four from SCOTUS

Trump criticized the U.S. Supreme Court — but not heavily, as some had expected.

Just days prior, the court ruled that sweeping tariffs Trump had imposed on international trading partners — a signature piece of his economic policy — were illegal.

The 6-3 decision, in which Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and both Trump-appointed justices Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett joined the court’s three liberal-leaning justices in ruling against the president, riled Trump, who said he was pleased with the three conservative justices who voted in favor of upholding his tariffs — Samuel Alito, Brett Kavanaugh and Clarence Thomas — and upset with the six others.

He said those six were “barely invited” to observe the speech. He also suggested, without evidence, that the court was under foreign influence, and not ruling in the best interests of Americans.

On Tuesday night, four justices showed up for the speech, including three who had voted against the president: Roberts, as well as Justices Barrett, Kavanaugh and the liberal-leaning Elena Kagan. Not present were Gorsuch, Alito, Thomas, and the court’s two other liberal justices, Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson.

Before his speech, Trump cordially shook the hands of all four justices present. During his speech, Trump said the ruling was “very unfortunate,” but that the good news was that many of the nations who had struck trade deals with the U.S. based on the tariffs would continue with those deals. The justices sat stone faced, their hands in their laps.

Big claims and promises

Trump accented his speech with several teased programs and calls on Congress to act.

He suggested that, in the future, tariffs he would impose on trading partners might replace the income tax system in the U.S.

He said his administration would begin to provide working Americans with retirement plans similar to those held by federal workers, with the government matching up to $1,000 in contributions to such plans by those Americans each year.

He alleged that Somali immigrant “pirates” have “pillaged” and “ransacked” Minnesota through fraud, that similar fraud is occurring in California and other states, and that he was launching a “war on fraud,” to be led by Vice President JD Vance.

He also called on Congress to pass a law banning states from granting commercial driver’s licenses to undocumented immigrants.

Shortly after, Trump asked everyone in the room to stand if they agreed with the statement that “the first duty of the American government is to protect American citizens, not illegal aliens.”

Republicans stood and cheered. Democrats stayed seated. Trump told the latter they should be ashamed of themselves. Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), who was born in Somalia, screamed “Liar,” and “You have killed Americans!”

Times staff writer Ana Ceballos, in Washington, D.C., contributed to this report.

Boycotts. Prebuttals. Rebuttals. Historic guests.

California members of the U.S. Senate and the House of Representatives’ approach to President Trump’s State of the Union address Tuesday night are as varied as their politics and their districts.

Before the speech, Sen. Adam Schiff described Trump as an out-of-control and corrupt president who has ignored pressing issues such as climate change in order to enrich himself and punish his political enemies, including by turning the U.S. Department of Justice and the rest of the federal government into a “personal fiefdom,” unbound by the law.

“From the birth of our nation, our founders were obsessed with preventing tyranny and the emergence of another king, another despot. They created checks and balances, separation of powers, an independent judiciary. They understood that the greatest threat to liberty wasn’t foreign invasion, it was the concentration of power in the hands of one person or faction,” Schiff said on the floor of the U.S. Senate. “This president has systematically dismantled these safeguards in his second term.”

Schiff is among the Democrats boycotting the speech. Other Californians include Reps. Robert Garcia (D-Long Beach), Sara Jacobs (D-San Diego), Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-Los Angeles) and Julia Brownley (D-Westlake Village).

Sen. Alex Padilla, the son of immigrants who was tackled in Los Angeles last year when he attempted to ask Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem a question during the immigration raids, will deliver a Spanish-language response after Trump’s address on television and online.

California has the largest congressional delegation in the nation, so its elected officials frequently have an outsized presence in the nation’s capital. An especially memorable moment was when then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) ripped up a copy of Trump’s speech after the 2020 State of the Union address.

It’s unclear whether California elected officials plan anything as dramatic tonight. But their guests are notable.

Though Garcia is not attending the speech, his guest at the event is Annie Farmer, a woman who was abused at the age of 16 by sexual predators Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Dublin), who is attending, is bringing Teresa J. Helm — another Epstein abuse survivor.

Others plan to bring constituents from their districts — Rep. Ken Calvert (R-Corona) is bringing Ben Benoit, the Riverside County auditor-controller who is a longtime friend.

Pelosi’s guest is the Rev. Devon Jerome Crawford, senior pastor of historic Third Baptist Church of San Francisco. And some have surprise guests who will be unveiled later tonight.

Feb. 24 (UPI) — The Olympic gold-winning U.S. men’s hockey team and several survivors of Jeffrey Epstein‘s sex trafficking scheme will be among the dozens of people invited to attend President Donald Trump‘s State of the Union address on Tuesday.

It’s Trump’s first official State of the Union address during his second term in office, though in March 2025, he did address a joint session of Congress. His theme this year is “America at 250: Strong, Prosperous and Respected,” unnamed officials who have seen a draft of the speech told CNN.

To that end, Trump has invited Team USA’s men’s hockey team to attend the speech at the U.S. Capitol, two days after they won the gold medal in a game against Canada in Milan, Italy. It was the men’s first gold medal in hockey since the 1980 “Miracle on Ice” team won in Lake Placid, N.Y.

Trump’s invitation — which came during a phone conversation over speakerphone with FBI Director Kash Patel and the team — caused a stir Sunday after the president said he’d also have to invite the women’s team. His comment was met by laughter among some of the men in the locker room, though at least one did yell out that Team USA was “two for two,” seemingly in support of the women.

The women’s hockey team also won gold in a final game against Team Canada. It was their third Olympic gold medal after 1998 and 2018. After Trump’s comments, they declined his invitation to Tuesday’s State of the Union.

First lady Melania Trump invited two people to sit with her during the speech — Sierra Burns, 24, who took part in Trump’s Foster Youth to Independence program; and Everest Nevraumont, 10, who attends a school that incorporates artificial intelligence curriculum.

Meanwhile, several Democratic members of Congress have invited survivors of sex abuser Epstein, The Hill reported. Rep. Suhas Subramanyam, D-Va., and Jamie Raskin, D-Md., invited the family of the late Virginia Giuffre; Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., invited Haley Robson; Rep. James Walkinshaw, D-Va., invited Jess Michaels; Rep. Robert Garcia, D-Calif., invited Annie Farmer, the sister of survivor Maria Farmer; House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., invited Marina Lacerda; and Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., invited Dani Bensky.

Some of those survivors, however, will be attending the State of the Union without their respective hosts. Some Democratic lawmakers intend to skip the speech entirely or participate other events in protest of Trump’s policies.

A coalition of liberal activist groups, including MoveOn Civic Action, is holding a so-called “People’s State of the Union” event on the National Mall around the same time as Trump’s speech. The group said the event will include “everyday Americans most impacted by Trump’s dangerous agenda.”

Lawmakers expected to attend the event include Sens. Ed Markey of Massachusetts, Jeff Merkley of Oregon, Chris Murphy of Connecticut, Tina Smith of Minnesota, Adam Schiff of California and Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, along with Reps. Yassamin Ansari of Arizona, Becca Balint of Vermont, Greg Casar of Texas, Veronica Escobar of Texas, Pramila Jayapal of Washington, Delia Ramirez of Illinois, Bonnie Watson Coleman of New Jersey, John Larson of Connecticut and April Delaney of Maryland, The Hill reported.

The National Press Club is also hosting an event it’s calling “State of the Swamp” to take place ahead of Trump’s speech. Reps. Jason Crow, D-Colo., and Seth Moulton, D-Mass., plan to attend both this event and Trump’s speech, while Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore.’s office said he’ll only be attending the “State of the Swamp.”

Rep. Ami Bera, D-Calif., said he plans to boycott the State of the Union this year.

“After watching President Trump run roughshod over the Constitution, display utter disregard for Congress, and openly engage in corruption as he and his family use the office to enrich themselves and tarnish this country that I love, I will not give him the dignity of having my presence at the State of the Union,” Bera said.

The pitched battle for Warner Bros. took yet another turn Monday night as Paramount Skydance enhanced its bid for the storied studio.

The decision by Warner Bros. Discovery to leave the door slightly ajar for Paramount came after weeks of pressure from its leader, tech scion David Ellison, and his billionaire father, Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison.

The media company has been vying to acquire Warner since late last year, and that fight only increased after the “Casablanca” and “Harry Potter” studio chose Netflix as the winning bidder back in December.

The bidding war has divided Hollywood’s creative community, with filmmakers, producers and unions all staking positions on the deal.

The latest to weigh in was “Avatar” and “Titanic” director James Cameron, who reportedly described Warner’s sale to Netflix as “disastrous for the theatrical motion picture business” in a Feb. 10 letter to Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), chair of the Senate subcommittee on antitrust, competition policy and consumer rights.

“I am very familiar not only with ships that sail, but also those that sink,” he wrote. “And the theatrical experience of movies could become a sinking ship.”

Actor Mark Ruffalo shot back at Cameron: “Are you also against the monopolization that a Paramount acquisition would create? Or is it just that of Netflix?” he posted on Threads over the weekend, adding that he was “speaking on behalf of hundreds of thousands of filmmakers worldwide.”

Regardless of which bidder prevails, consolidation in the industry is a major fear, particularly after waves of job cuts due to the pandemic and pullbacks in production spending amid streaming losses. And for the theatrical exhibition business, any merger revives concerns about an even greater decrease in films headed to theaters — particularly if the winning bidder is Netflix.

The health and future of cinemas is an especially sensitive topic in Hollywood. Box office revenue still has not returned to pre-pandemic levels, and some fear it never will, leaving theaters scrambling for alternative ways to fill their auditoriums.

Paramount has positioned itself as a champion for theatrical films, and David Ellison has said a combined Paramount and Warner Bros. would release 30 films a year.

But theater owner trade group Cinema United and the Writers Guild of America have warned that further consolidation would further concentrate the entertainment business, bringing more layoffs and theater closures.

Netflix co-Chief Executive Ted Sarandos has since tried to temper these concerns.

In a recent Senate subcommittee hearing, he pledged to maintain a 45-day theatrical window for Warner Bros. films, while also saying the deal would increase production investments going forward. In a recent letter to Lee responding to Cameron’s missive, Sarandos said he had previously spoken with the director in December about Netflix’s plans for Warner Bros., and that he had been “very supportive.”

Then there’s the politics of it all.

My colleague Meg James has written about Paramount’s efforts to use its political influence with the Trump administration to push its deal — and undermine Netflix’s. Paramount has declined to comment on the matter.

To put it mildly, Trump is a deeply unpopular figure in liberal-leaning Hollywood.

Creatives have feared a chilling effect on speech, particularly after Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr has aggressively tried to enforce long-dormant rules that require broadcast TV stations to give equal time to opposing candidates. The free-speech matter came to a head last year, when Carr warned that ABC could lose its TV station licenses after late-night host Jimmy Kimmel made a remark about slain conservative activist Charlie Kirk.

More recently, the equal-time rules resurfaced when CBS late-night host Stephen Colbert blasted his own network over its handling of his interview with Democratic Senate candidate James Talarico. Colbert said that CBS told him he could not air the interview because it would require giving equal time to Talarico’s opponents in the Senate primary and that he was instructed not to talk about the issue on the air, which he refused. CBS has disputed Colbert’s comments, saying he was not prohibited from airing the interview.

News industry insiders also raised concerns after the installation of Bari Weiss as editor in chief of CBS News. Two months into her tenure, she made the decision to pull a “60 Minutes” episode that investigated the alleged abuse of detainees sent from the U.S. to an El Salvador prison, a highly unusual step that critics interpreted as a decision to placate the Trump administration.

CBS News, which aired the episode in January, denied the claim, saying the piece had only been held for additional reporting.

On the film side, Paramount continues to make deals with creatives, including the irreverent South Park creators, who have churned out parodies of the Trump administration, “Wicked” director Jon M. Chu and writer, producer and actor Issa Rae, who in a statement earlier this year vowed to “tell stories for and by the diverse communities that have supported my work over the years.”

As the Warner Bros. deal drama unfolds, we’ll see how the lines continue to form in Hollywood’s creative class.

Stuff We Wrote

Film shoots

Number of the week

Sony Pictures Animation’s “Goat” led the domestic box office this weekend with an estimated three-day total of $17 million, beating out the Margot Robbie and Jacob Elordi-led “Wuthering Heights.”

The film, which was also produced by Warriors star Stephen Curry’s production company, has bucked the trend for original animated movies, which have largely faltered at theaters in recent years.

What I’m watching

Last week, I watched more Olympic figure skating (who didn’t watch Alysa Liu’s joyful, gold medal-winning performance?), but I’m also now re-watching 2000s teen detective drama “Veronica Mars.” I’m not Gen Z, but my newfound zeal for comfort TV is not unlike the story my colleague Stephen Battaglio wrote last year about young people’s interest in nostalgic shows.

WASHINGTON — President Trump is set to deliver a high-stakes State of the Union address on Tuesday night at 6 p.m. Pacific time before a joint session of Congress in the U.S. Capitol.

The president is expected to emphasize economic issues, an immigration crackdown that has been central to his agenda, and tariffs in the wake of a recent legal setback to his trade agenda.

Here is what to know about the event:

How to watch

The remarks will be shown live on major broadcast networks and cable news channels. Another way to watch live is through the public affairs network C-SPAN. The White House will stream the address on its website.

What to expect in the speech

Trump is expected to focus on his immigration crackdown and his promises to go after what he says is government “waste, fraud and abuse,” as previewed in two White House videos on Monday.

One year back in office, Trump has led an aggressive deportation campaign that has involved violent arrests, troops in American cities and an uptick in detentions. The tactics used by federal immigration agents have raised concerns among lawmakers in the aftermath of the fatal shooting of two U.S. citizens in Minneapolis. Those concerns are central to ongoing standoff over funding for the Department of Homeland Security.

It will also be worth watching how Trump talks about future efforts to target waste and abuse in public spending, an effort that has often roped in blue states like California.

Who will deliver responses?

Democrats have picked Gov. Abigail Spanberger of Virginia and Sen. Alex Padilla of California to deliver the Democratic responses to Trump’s speech.

Spanberger will give her remarks in English, while Padilla will deliver the Spanish-language response.

Padilla’s remarks will be live-streamed here.

WASHINGTON — President Trump will deliver his annual State of the Union address Tuesday night at a moment of unusual upheaval, confronting a cascade of crises that have left Washington unsettled and his own political standing diminished early in his second term.

When lawmakers gather to hear the president’s agenda for the year ahead, the scene is expected to reflect an undeterred president under increasing political strain.

The president is facing a partial government shutdown triggered by his administration’s aggressive deportation campaign, rising tensions over the United States’ involvement in foreign conflicts and growing domestic dissent that is fracturing the president’s political alliances and aggravating his rivals.

Adding to the turbulent atmosphere is the economic unease in an election year. The president, who a year ago promised to bring down prices for consumers, insisted Monday that America has “the greatest economy we’ve ever had” even though public polling shows economic pressures are worrying a majority of Americans.

Trump said he plans to talk about the country’s economic successes in his speech, saying “it is going to be a long speech because we have so much to talk about.”

Republicans have recently pushed Trump to focus on the push to lower costs, a message they see as crucial to help them keep control of Congress. What remains to be seen is how much of Trump’s economic message will be colored by a Supreme Court decision last week that struck down his use of tariffs, a key portion of his economic agenda. In recent days, the president has remained defiant on the issue, lashing out at the justices for delivering a legal setback on his tariffs, and looking to impose new global tariffs in a different way.

Trump said Monday he does not need to seek congressional approval to impose new levies, even though the nation’s highest court ruled his tariffs cannot stand without the approval of Congress.

“As president, I do not have to go back to Congress to get approval of Tariffs,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “It has already been gotten, in many forms, a long time ago!”

Trump’s rebuke underscores the president’s increasingly combative posture toward both the judiciary and Congress, at a time when he is heavily relying on his executive authority to advance sweeping policies on immigration, trade and national security.

His willingness to wield executive authority has been seen in the last year as the president led U.S. forces to capture former Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, threatened to seize Greenland, considered an attack on Iran and eyed an armed conflict with drug cartels in Mexico.

At home, Trump has said he thinks the federal government should assert control over state elections as he continues to push false claims of a stolen 2020 election.

Whether that will happen remains to be seen as Republican leaders, and other conservative lawmakers, voice opposition to some of the president’s legislative pitches.

In recent months, Congress has tried to reassert its authority over the executive branch — in some cases led by small Republican defections by lawmakers who have grown concerned about the president’s involvement in foreign wars and his economic policies.

One of the most notable rebukes to Trump’s authority occurred late last year, when a bipartisan group of lawmakers secured legislation that forced the Trump administration to release investigative files related to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

While Trump maintains the release of those files cleared him of wrongdoing, the findings have so far ensnared key figures in Trump’s political orbit and reinforced a sense of scandal that continues to loom over his administration. Anger over the administration’s handling of the Epstein case has led to bipartisan backlash, even prompting some conservatives to call for U.S. Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi to resign.

Another sign of the polarized moment Trump will face Tuesday night will be led by Democrats.

About a dozen Democrats in the Senate and House of Representatives plan to boycott the president’s speech and participate in what they have dubbed the “People’s State of the Union.”

“I will not be attending the State of the Union,” U.S. Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) said in a social media video over the weekend. “We cannot treat this as normal. This is not business as usual. I will not give him the audience he craves for the lies that he tells.”

In recent years, lawmakers who wished to disavow the president’s address would typically stand and shout in protest, disrupt the remarks or coordinate outfits to signal their opposition.

In 2020, for example, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) stood behind Trump at the podium as he delivered his remarks and then shredded a copy of his script. She later called it a “manifesto of mistruths.”

This year, even the president’s allies appear to be on notice.

While it is a long-standing custom for the Supreme Court justices to attend the president’s annual address, Trump told reporters on Friday that the six justices who voted against his tariffs policy were “barely” invited to the event.

“Three of them are invited,” he said.

Trump’s State of the Union remarks will be dissected to see how he intends to advance his agenda and to deal with a divided Congress that remains at a standstill over how to fund the Department of Homeland Security.

The partial government shutdown was triggered by partisan tensions over Trump’s aggressive immigration crackdown in Minneapolis, where two U.S. citizens were shot and killed by federal agents.

At a White House event Monday, Trump lamented that public polling shows waning support for federal immigration agents.

“It just amazes me that there is not more support out there,” Trump said. “We actually have a silent support, I think it is silent.”

The EGM news comes at a time of turmoil for Welsh rugby off the field.

Swansea Council has applied for a High Court injunction to halt the proposed deal between the WRU and Ospreys owners Y11 Sport and Media to buy rivals Cardiff.

Ospreys are under threat of being removed from the professional tier with owners Y11 the WRU’s preferred bidders to buy Cardiff from the governing body.

The WRU wants to cut one professional men’s side in Wales with Ospreys now in the firing line if Y11 buy Cardiff.

The WRU has told Swansea Council a deal will not be completed with Y11 before 16 March.

On the field, Wales, who have lost the opening three games against France, England and Scotland, finish their Six Nations campaign against Italy in Cardiff on Saturday 14 March after travelling to face Ireland in Dublin eight days before.

The WRU statement continued: “The WRU published its plans for the future of the elite game in Wales at the end of October 2025, following an extensive consultation process.

“We are now focused on rolling out that plan and have been working tirelessly with the key stakeholders during the last months to agree a consensus on its implementation.

“This detailed work has been undertaken with the professional clubs, the United Rugby Championship and player representatives, and we remain committed to reaching consensus on the next steps.

“We ask all stakeholders to continue working with us. We recognise that change is challenging, but it is essential for the long-term health of the game in Wales.”