united states

Betting on the experience

Investors, however, are more bullish on the eatertainment model than they are on traditional restaurants, Camillo says.

“A padel [another racket sport rising in popularity] court or a bowling lane is a much more durable, less trend-driven revenue stream than a dining room seat, and it comes with better real estate economics. It’s not competing purely on per-seat turns. F&B just juices the model on top of that.”

Private equity isn’t just investing in dine-in pickleball concepts because the sport is popular among Americans. Landlords are eager to lease to pickleball concepts for multiple reasons. Large indoor pickleball facilities can absorb anywhere from 30,000sq ft (2,800sq metres) to 70,000sq ft (6,500sq metres), giving new leases of life to former sites of shuttered big-box retail stores, department stores and grocery stores. Look at where many of these pickleball venues are located on a map, and you’ll see that they frequently correlate with suburban developments needing traffic.

Pickleball is “a draw for strip centres and malls as well as it brings in traffic where people will shop and eat after they are finished”, says Jeff Lichtenstein, CEO and broker at Echo Commercial Properties. “In South Florida, there is a lot of demand for this, especially in the summertime or when it rains as the country clubs and other communities don’t have indoor facilities. People need AC to play in the summer.”

In other words, investors aren’t simply betting on pickleball remaining popular. They’re betting that these venues can generate recurring revenue while helping revive struggling retail corridors. The business appeals to landlords and investors for the same reason it appeals to customers: It keeps people in one place longer.

For consumers, that extra time translates into something that has become increasingly difficult to find in the restaurant industry: value. Indeed, when dinner is paired with a fun activity, patrons are happier to hand over their credit card: 21 percent of Americans said they were willing to pay more at an eatertainment venue than at a traditional restaurant, according to a 2019 study conducted by SevenRooms, a data-driven hospitality platform.

“These eatertainment venues, pickleball or otherwise, are very popular now as people look for greater value when dining out,” says Maeve Webster, president of the food industry consultancy Menu Matters.

“Restaurants have been struggling with prices, quality, consistency and, as a result, their value proposition,” Webster added. “Places like this offer guests more than just a meal, which makes for a far greater value proposition. And all of this is coming at a time when people are placing a far greater emphasis on experiences and human connections.”

Increasingly, meeting up has become about more than just eating and drinking; people want to do something together. OpenTable, an online platform for learning about restaurants and booking reservations, reports a 46 percent year-over-year rise in experiential dining from 2024 to 2025, with 37 percent of consumers saying they wanted more of it in 2026.

The Physical Activity Council, which conducts an annual study to establish levels of personal activity and identify key trends in sports, fitness and recreational participation in the US, estimates that since 2020, the number of “inactive” Americans has dropped by 13.6 million, or 18 percent.

Those changing habits have helped eatertainment concepts attract private equity interest. But these firms must ensure return on their investment, which has increasingly taken the form of private corporate events and membership models. Monthly membership fees at the nation’s most popular dine-in pickleball venues range from $75 to $149 a month but include perks like food and beverage discounts and dedicated court times.

“From a recurring revenue perspective, when you make it a subscription, the business can forecast revenue more accurately,” Bhasin says. “They’re not making margin off the superusers. The users who only come in every couple weeks are where they make their margin.”

We’ve seen the recurring membership model become standard at country clubs, golf courses and bowling leagues. The more successful these businesses become financially, the more exclusive they risk becoming socially.

Bhasin hopes pickleball club operators can find ways to preserve affordability.

“My request to private equity companies is: Can we find a way to offer deals?” Bhasin says. “It’s meant to be a ubiquitous experience, but the prices are a barrier to entry.”

Still, a dine-in pickleball venue membership is much more affordable for the average American than, say, a country club, where monthly dues can range from a few hundred dollars to $2,000 on top of a hefty initiation fee.

Electric Pickle offers free court reservations every day until 4pm from June through August. The promotion makes the experience more affordable, but it’s also smart business strategy. If most guests visit in the evening, free daytime court reservations may generate food and beverage sales that otherwise wouldn’t exist.

Defending singles champions Carlos Alcaraz and Aryna Sabalenka have sailed into the last 16 of the US Open as tennis icons Serena and Venus Williams suffered an agonising defeat on their long-awaited return to Grand Slam doubles.

Alcaraz, coming off a four-month injury absence, beat China’s Wu Yibing 6-3, 6-4, 6-1 on Friday to book his place in the fourth round, while Sabalenka was similarly dominant in a 6-3, 6-4 defeat of Kamilla Rakhimova.

Alcaraz will face 20th-seeded American Tommy Paul for a place in the quarterfinals after Paul beat 15th-seeded Alexander Bublik 6-4, 3-6, 6-7 (4/7), 6-1, 6-3.

“The way he plays is unbelievable, the rhythm he has on every shot – forehand, backhand,” Alcaraz said of Wu. “His balls skid a lot on the court and, for me, it’s really difficult to control sometimes.

“But I think I stayed there. I played aggressive. I played smart in the toughest moments.”

Wu recovered an early break in each of the first two sets, but Alcaraz pocketed both with breaks in the final games, and after saving a pair of break points in the first game of the third, the Spaniard rolled home.

“I think my level is really good,” he said. “I’ve got into the rhythm of the competition. I’m getting there.”

World number one Sabalenka did not face a break point in her dismissal of Rakhimova, firing 29 winners with 10 aces.

The numbers did not tell the whole tale of a match that saw 92nd-ranked Rakhimova challenge Sabalenka in a second-set slugfest.

Sabalenka was also unimpressed by the pervasive smell of marijuana – an increasingly common issue at the US Open – wafting down from the stands during her match.

“It’s a bit tricky to handle that smell while you’re trying to compete at your best,” said Sabalenka, who at one point complained to the umpire about the issue.

Sabalenka, who must repeat as champion to have a chance of remaining number one, next faces Taylor Townsend, the 96th-ranked American who beat 15th-seeded Russian Diana Shnaider 6-2, 6-7 (3/7), 6-3.

Williams sisters lose thriller

With Alcaraz and Sabalenka among the early starters, all eyes on the evening session were on the Williams sisters, partnering in a Grand Slam doubles event for the first time since 2022.

The duo returned to the US Open stage comes after 23-time Grand Slam singles champion Serena came out of a four-year retirement to play at Wimbledon.

But the most famous sister act in tennis – who won 14 Grand Slam doubles titles together along with three Olympic gold medals – were beaten 6-3, 6-7 (6/8), 7-6 (10/7) by 14th seeds Chan Hao-ching of Taiwan and Australia’s Maya Joint in a marathon three-hour battle.

The Williams duo had shown flashes of their brilliant best after recovering from losing the first set to level the match after taking the second set on a tie-break.

Momentum and a raucous New York crowd appeared to be carrying them towards victory after they sprinted into a 5-0 lead in the third-set tie-break. But Chan and Joint fought back superbly to erase the deficit before clinching victory.

Pegula through, Muchova upset

In other singles action on Friday, third-seeded American Jessica Pegula, one of the players with a chance to knock Sabalenka off her No 1 perch, mounted a desperate fightback to beat Canadian Leylah Fernandez 1-6, 6-4, 6-3 in a battle of former finalists.

Elsewhere, Ukraine’s Marta Kostyuk beat Russian Ekaterina Alexandrova 6-3, 6-2 and American Emma Navarro upset seventh-seeded Czech Karolina Muchova 6-3, 7-5.

Back in the men’s draw, American 11th seed Frances Tiafoe was a comfortable 6-4, 6-2, 6-4 victor over Monaco’s Valentin Vacherot, seeded 22.

Tiafoe’s win earned him a last 16 showdown with Russian seventh seed Daniil Medvedev.

Medvedev was a similarly unfussy winner over French 26th seed Arthur Rinderknech, easing to a 6-4, 6-4, 6-4 win in just under two hours.

Unseeded former world number three Stefanos Tsitsipas – whose ranking has plummeted to 53 – meanwhile toppled 18th seed Jiri Lehecka, 2-6, 6-1, 7-6 (7/3), 6-1 to reach the US Open fourth round for the first time.

Tsitsipas will face American eighth seed Ben Shelton in the last 16. Shelton defeated Canada’s Denis Shapovalov 7-6 (7/3), 6-7 (5/7), 6-3, 6-4 in the late match.

US sanctions Turkish bank over alleged IRGC ties, accusing it of facilitating millions in transactions for Iran.

The United States Treasury Department has imposed sanctions on a Turkish bank and its subsidiaries over alleged ties to Iran, as Washington seeks to economically isolate Tehran.

The Treasury Department accused Golden Global Yatirim Bankasi Anonim Sirketi (Golden Global Bank) on Friday of facilitating “tens of millions of dollars’ worth of transactions for the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-Qods Force” and providing the Iranian government with banking access to move its funds internationally.

Washington alleged the bank “was established for the purpose of enabling Iran’s rahbar network [shadow banking system] to transfer oil revenues from China to Turkey” using gold and cash.

Golden Global Bank responded on Friday, saying it fulfilled all local and international banking compliance rules and would take legal action against the US-imposed sanctions.

There are no transactions conducted by Golden Global Bank that could substantiate the claims made by the US, the bank said in a news release.

“We will exercise all our rights of objection and legal recourse in the most effective manner and will take the necessary actions at the earliest against these allegations and the decision,” the Turkish bank added.

“Financial institutions continue to find out the hard way that we are serious about Operation Economic Outcast,” said Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent in a statement published by the department on Friday.

The sanctions place the bank and its two subsidiaries on the US Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC)’s Specially Designated Nationals list, cutting off access to the US financial system.

The bank said individuals and entities named in the OFAC decision “have never been and are not currently customers” of Golden Global.

US Ambassador to Turkiye Tom Barrack said on Saturday that it would be a mistake for Turkish officials “to read [the US’s] narrow measure as a judgement upon Turkiye”.

“The health of the Turkish financial system is not in question; the conduct of one institution was,” Barrack said on X.

Last week, the US took steps towards severing the UAE operations of Egypt’s second-largest bank from financial access after accusing it of processing transactions for companies linked to Iran’s shadow-banking system.

Bessent said on Tuesday on the sidelines of a G20 summit that Washington would likely announce a bank sanction this week and another next week, as it ramps up its economic campaign against Tehran.

World number one Aryna Sabalenka’s straight-sets US Open win against Kamilla Rakhimova stopped by smell of cannabis.

World number one Aryna Sabalenka had an unusual interruption during ⁠her US Open third-round ⁠match, stopping play to alert the umpire to a strong smell of cannabis drifting onto the Louis Armstrong Stadium court.

Sabalenka, who ⁠had made a fast start to go 3-0 ahead before securing a straight-sets win against Uzbekistan’s Kamilla Rakhimova, raised the issue during her second service game on Friday, pointing ⁠out the smell before play resumed.

“Someone is smoking weed,” top seed Sabalenka told umpire Eva Asderaki-Moore as she was serving 30-0 up. “Would you mind to… because it’s so strong.”

Sabalenka later told reporters she was not objecting to anyone enjoying themselves, but asked for the smoking ‌to be kept away from the court.

“I was like, Guys, you can do whatever, you can smoke whatever, you can relax as much as you can, but please to not do it around the tennis courts,” a smiling Sabalenka said. “It’s a bit tricky to handle that smell while you’re trying to compete at your best.”

The odour of cannabis has become a familiar — if unwelcome — feature at ⁠Flushing Meadows, with players complaining about the distraction in the ⁠past.

While smoking is not permitted inside the grounds, recreational cannabis is legal for adults 21 and older in New York, and smoke from people in the surrounding Flushing Meadows-Corona Park can drift into the tennis ⁠complex and onto the courts.

Sabalenka said she had smelled cannabis before during the tournament but never so strongly during a ⁠match, with Friday’s wind apparently carrying the odour into ⁠the stadium.

“That strong, yeah. Also, because it was a bit windy,” she said. “I don’t know if it was coming from the crowd or was from the outside because the wind blows it into the stadium.

“I ‌just hope they are a bit more aware of that stuff,” she added, before laughing when the questions returned to the subject. “Come on, guys. I think there is ‌nothing ‌else to say about weed. I’m just asking people not to smoke it next to the tennis court.”

The United States economy has added 162,000 jobs in August, with large gains in local government education and food services.

The unemployment rate remained unchanged, according to the monthly jobs report released by the US Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) on Friday.

The data was well above analysts’ expectations. Economists polled by Reuters had forecast 56,000 gains, the Wall Street Journal forecast 53,000, and Bloomberg had forecast 55,000, following a loss of 23,000 in July.

Local government education, or public schools, accounted for nearly 42,000 of the jobs added as the 2026–27 school year begins across much of the US. Teachers typically fall off payrolls during the summer months when school is not in session.

Food service jobs also saw large increases, with the sector adding 59,000 jobs for the month of August compared with the month prior.

There were also gains in construction, which added 22,000 jobs, and healthcare, which added 12,000.

The information sector, which accounts for industries like data processing, web hosting, publishing, broadcasting and telecommunications, fell by 23,000, with notable layoffs at companies including Scripps TV and Zillow, which fall under the umbrella of these industries.

The financial activities sector, which accounts for industries like insurance, commercial banking and real estate, dropped by 12,000.

Mixed data

The data comes in sharp contrast to the ADP national employment report, which tracks private payrolls and found 38,000 jobs added across the US economy.

Meanwhile, the Labor Department’s Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey (JOLTS) report released on Tuesday revealed job openings were slightly changed, with 7.3 million in July, up from 7.2 million the previous month, while total separations fell to 5.1 million in July from 5.3 million in June.

The move in job gains comes ahead of the US Federal Reserve’s policy meeting later this month, where the central bank will vote on interest rates. Amid the job gains, CME Group’s FedWatch, which tracks the likelihood of monetary policy decisions, had a 60 percent chance of a 25 basis point rate increase to 3.75–4.00 percent, up from 49 percent on Thursday.

US President Donald Trump was quick to comment on the jobs report and push for rate cuts.

“Lower the interest rates because the U.S.A. is a much stronger credit than it was a short time ago!” he said in a post on his social media platform Truth Social.

He also ramped up threats to cut off trade with nations that the US has a deficit with if the central bank does not cut rates.

Despite a strong jobs report, US markets are trending downwards. The Nasdaq is down 0.2 percent, the Dow Jones Industrial Average is down 0.5 percent, and the S&P 500 is down 0.3 percent amid Trump’s comments.

Meanwhile, Canada released its jobs report amid the ongoing trade dispute with the US. The Canadian economy lost 41,700 jobs, according to Statistics Canada, with the unemployment rate holding steady at 6.4 percent.

“We expect the economy will continue struggling to create jobs in the near term as mounting headwinds from new US-Canada tariffs, greater uncertainty from a flare-up in the trade war, and the ongoing Iran conflict and a shrinking population weigh on hiring,” Tony Stillo, director of Canada Economics at Oxford Economics, said in a note provided to Al Jazeera.

As the United States and Iran exchanged attacks this week, one date was increasingly looming over the conflict.

The US midterm elections on November 3 could prove a pivotal moment in the war, as senior advisers to President Donald Trump seek to prevent the conflict from returning to all-out war before the polls when Republicans will be defending narrow majorities in both houses of Congress.

The push for restraint comes as Washington turns to economic pressure on Iran instead of military force. In August, the Trump administration announced its so-called “Economic D-Day”, imposing sanctions on 60 entities that it says facilitate oil revenues for trade with Iran and threatening other countries doing business with Tehran with secondary sanctions.

At the same time, the US naval blockade of Iranian ports in and around the Strait of Hormuz continues to exert pressure on Tehran’s oil exports.

Vice President JD Vance has meanwhile sought to downplay the war, which the US and Israel launched with attacks on Iran on February 28, as rising fuel prices and public opposition in the US threaten to become political liabilities for Republicans before the vote.

But there are clear limits to the restraint the Trump administration can show, with US forces continuing to strike Iran in recent days, and US leaders insist that further military action remains an option. Vance said this week that “everything that could happen is on the table,” including economic, military, diplomatic and covert pressure.

That leaves the coming two months as a particularly tricky period to navigate. Washington will want to avoid an all-out war while ratcheting up economic pressure, but Iran has its own calculations and could respond militarily anyway, potentially forcing the US into an escalation it would rather avoid before Americans go to the polls.

Here’s what we know.

Why do the midterms matter for Trump?

The midterms will determine whether the Republican Party can retain its narrow control of Congress. If the war escalates again before then, that could persuade more people to vote against the Trump administration.

Containing the fighting until November, therefore, may help prevent an already deeply unpopular war from dominating the political agenda.

A late-August Reuters/Ipsos poll suggested that just 31 percent of Americans support the war, compared with 63 percent who oppose it. Trump’s approval rating has also fallen since the outbreak of hostilities, from 40 percent to 33 percent, according to Reuters/Ipsos polling.

Observers say the Trump administration did not expect things to get to this point.

In early March, Trump insisted the war would last for “four or five weeks”. Instead, the conflict has dragged on, and unexpected consequences – including Iran’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz causing energy prices to spike – have made it even more unpopular with US households.

US diesel prices hit a record high on Thursday, surpassing the previous peak recorded in 2022, as higher crude oil prices and refining bottlenecks drove up the cost of a fuel that underpins much of the US economy.

That is particularly damaging for a president who campaigned partly on a promise to dramatically reduce energy costs – as well as not to get involved in “unnecessary” wars.

The fallout from the war has not stopped at the petrol pump. Sustained increases in fuel and transport costs feed into the price of groceries, manufactured goods and other everyday purchases – potentially worsening inflation when Democrats are making the cost of living a defining issue for the midterm campaign.

A Politico poll conducted in August suggested that 61 percent of Americans believe the Iran war had made life more expensive for their families, four percentage points higher than a month earlier.

Can Trump keep the war contained until November?

There are signs that his administration is trying to do exactly that.

In recent weeks, Washington has intensified its campaign to economically isolate Iran, threatening severe sanctions against countries that continue trading with it while maintaining military pressure around the Strait of Hormuz.

With strikes on Iran earlier this week, Trump has also indicated he is willing to engage in sporadic attacks, while trying to keep the war from escalating back to all-out conflict.

Senior administration officials have simultaneously sought to play down the scale of the military confrontation. Asked at a White House briefing whether the Iran war would be resolved before the midterm elections, Vice President JD Vance said he “wouldn’t call it a war” and claimed there was “no active shooting right now”.

Asked when Iran would stop attacking commercial shipping, Vance said: “You would have to ask the Iranians.” He also said the conflict was having “less effect day by day” on global energy markets. The US claims it is escorting about 30 ships per night through the Strait of Hormuz – and officials claimed some 18 million barrels of oil were transported through on Tuesday this week. However, shipping data does not appear to fully support this claim.

Trying to maintain a strategy of “no war, no peace” with sporadic attacks is high-risk, analysts have warned. Negar Mortazavi, senior fellow at the Washington, DC-based Center for International Policy, told Al Jazeera this week: “Tehran will not capitulate under [economic] pressure. Both sides may believe they can control the escalation, but every new exchange increases the risk of a wider regional conflict.”

One of the US attacks this week is also believed to have hit a civilian home where a wedding was taking place in Kuhestak, southern Iran, killing at least four people, including children, and wounding dozens.

Furthermore, The Washington Post reported on Sunday that senior Army, Navy and Air Force leaders have warned Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth in a written assessment that continuing the war at its current pace is unsustainable and risks undermining US military readiness in other parts of the world.

Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the US-based Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, told Al Jazeera that this week’s attacks point to a US strategy that remains deeply unsettled.

“I think it’s quite likely that what we’re seeing right now is just complete military, strategic disarray on the American position in which the positions, the actions, the tactics, the strategies keep on getting changed,” Parsi said.

Washington had imposed sweeping economic sanctions on Iran in an apparent attempt to make further military intervention unnecessary, he noted. “Seven days later, the US is back into bombing Iran.”

The US appears to be “jumping from one position to the other”, he added.

What are Iran’s calculations?

While the most recent attacks between the US and Iran have been less intense than the heavy exchanges seen in the early weeks of the war and during the two flare-ups in July, the risk of escalation is high. And it may be in Iran’s interests for that to happen sooner rather than later.

Iran has excelled at the use of asymmetric warfare against an enemy with considerable military might – using cheap, mass-produced drones to exhaust US supplies of very expensive defensive systems, and launching attacks on US allies around the Gulf, sowing disharmony.

In particular, Tehran has demonstrated that it can severely disrupt maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, causing global economic consequences.

Continued Iranian attacks on US or regional military assets, shipping or energy infrastructure would place pressure on Washington to retaliate more strongly than via the few attacks it has carried out this week, creating the possibility of an escalatory cycle that could return the two countries to a much wider war regardless of the White House’s electoral calculations.

Furthermore, Washington’s economic strategy to isolate Tehran – an attempt to move away from open warfare – may in fact create a greater Iranian incentive to retaliate.

Parsi told Al Jazeera that Iranian officials appear to believe Trump ultimately intends to restart the war on a larger scale but is just waiting until after the midterms.

That creates a potentially dangerous calculation for Tehran, where it is better to escalate now – while Trump is at his most politically vulnerable. “The reaction of the Iranians to that might be to actually trigger the war themselves early right before the midterm elections in order to maximise the pain that will impose on the US president,” Parsi said.

What happens after November?

Reuters reported on Wednesday that senior White House officials are already considering whether to intensify military operations against Iran after the November 3 vote, although no decision has been made on returning to full-scale conflict, it reported.

A Republican victory in the midterms could give Trump greater political room for this option, particularly if the administration interprets the result as approval – or at least lack of enough disapproval – for the war despite the economic consequences for voters.

A Republican defeat presents a more complicated picture, however. On the one hand, losing one or both chambers of Congress will constrain the administration, as Congress controls government funding. Democratic control of the House or Senate would also give Trump’s opponents greater scope to hold hearings, investigate the US conduct of the war and challenge requests for additional military spending.

Conversely, with Trump no longer facing a congressional election, he may feel less pressure to contain the war, experts fear.

Parsi warned that an electoral defeat could therefore have the opposite effect to what Tehran might expect.

“I’m not so sure that it’s going to pay off necessarily for the Iranians because a Trump that is humiliated at the elections, who is faced with a Democratic [majority] House [of Representatives] and potentially a Democratic Senate, may also become a much more desperate and reckless president,” he said.

ChatGPT creator’s latest release comes amid heightened fears following AI-led hacking of the startup Hugging Face.

OpenAI has announced the release of what it says is its most advanced AI model, amid heightened scrutiny of the risks of the frontier technology escaping human control.

The $852bn start-up said in its announcement on Thursday that GPT‑6 Astra, the “world’s most intelligent and aligned” AI model, earned perfect or near-perfect scores in key benchmarks of AI reasoning, beating both its prior release GPT 5.6 Sol and rival Anthropic’s Claude Fable 5.

The ChatGPT creator said GPT‑6 would become available to the general public in the coming days, following its initial launch with a “limited set of organisations”.

OpenAI’s latest release comes as the AI industry is at the centre of a lively public debate about the dangers of the cutting-edge technology following the AI-led hacking of the startup Hugging Face in July.

An independent probe into the cyberattack found that hundreds of OpenAI’s AI agents had begun communicating among themselves before breaking out of their controlled environment and compromising Hugging Face’s servers.

On Thursday, US Senator Bernie Sanders, an Independent, and US House Representative Greg Casar, a Democrat, unveiled legislation that would pause the development of advanced AI until the establishment of federal safety rules and an outright ban on the creation of “superintelligent” AI.

“Nearly every day, there is a frightening new story about how Big Tech companies are losing control of the technology they are developing, with potentially cataclysmic results,” Sanders said in a statement announcing the legislation, which is unlikely to advance due to the Republicans’ control of all three branches of the US government.

“The leaders of the major AI companies publicly acknowledge that they do not fully understand the technology and that it is escaping their control. It is irresponsible for society to allow them to move forward and make these products even more advanced.”

In its announcement, OpenAI devoted significant space to AI safety, highlighting both GPT‑6’s potential to do harm and its safety features.

Toby Walsh, a professor and AI expert at the University of New South Wales, Sydney, said that while OpenAI is clearly “neck and neck” in the race to lead AI, the technology remains inconsistent and in need of greater scrutiny.

“The intelligence in artificial intelligence is still today very jagged,” Walsh said. “There are simple things that even the best AI models do poorly.

“And it’s hard to see how the AI companies, including OpenAI, are slowing down to address justified concerns around cyber risk, when new models are being released at an ever greater and greater rate.”

Roman Yampolskiy, a computer scientist at the University of Louisville, said GPT‑6 marks a “meaningful” advance that raises the stakes for AI safety.

“The key question is whether capabilities are improving faster than our ability to reliably understand, predict and control these systems,” Yampolskiy said.

“I see little evidence that this gap is closing.”

Critics argue that the administration’s arcade games prioritise entertainment over pressing issues like rising costs and foreign conflicts.

The White House’s unveiling of five arcade-style games on its website, each believed to be promoting a different policy of United States President Donald Trump’s agenda, has ignited backlash, with critics accusing the administration of prioritising entertainment over addressing rising living costs and the ongoing war on Iran.

Announced on Thursday, the games include “Build the Wall” where players run to capture little green figures before they reach a border wall; “Rio Run”, a Snake-style game in which players gather border crossers along a fence; “Supply Line”, in which players reject food items that fail to meet “Make America Healthy Again” standards; “Flappy Bill,” a Flappy Bird-style game in which a bald eagle carries legislation over the National Mall; and “Trump Savings Tycoon”, in which players catch flying cash and gold bars to “fill your kids’ Trump Accounts,” in reference to the administration’s child savings programme.

“Heating oil is near an all-time high but hey you can play Border Czar Tom Homan in a video game,” Senator Matt Lesser wrote on X.

Rights groups have also criticised the administration for the gaming website.

“Makes me sick. They’ve been playing games with people’s lives for years, now they’ve made a video game of what they’re doing,” Amerika Garcia Grewal, co-director of the Frontera Federation in Eagle Pass, Texas, told AFP news agency.

The game designers “have lost touch with what it means to be human and care for others”.

Adriana Jasso, programme coordinator for AMIGOS San Diego Community, who works at the border, said the arcade-style games showed a fundamental “lack of seriousness” from the administration.

“The cruelty, the extremity of the administration … is no longer surprising,” she said.

In recent months, Trump has faced mounting criticism over the economic toll of the war on Iran and his broader domestic agenda.

The conflict has kept the Strait of Hormuz closed for nearly six months, disrupting global supplies of oil and natural gas and fertiliser, and pushing US inflation above the Federal Reserve’s 2-percent target, according to reporting by Texas Public Radio.

Trump has also faced criticism over tariff policies that the Supreme Court partly struck down earlier this year, along with cuts to food assistance programmes and the expiration of Affordable Care Act tax credits, all of which economists say have compounded the squeeze on household budgets.

The White House, meanwhile, appeared unfazed, posting “CAN’T STOP WINNING” on X alongside a link to the games.

The Missouri Supreme Court has unanimously blocked a congressional map backed by United States President Donald Trump ahead of November’s midterm elections, restoring the state’s previous districts.

Thursday’s ruling delivered a rare judicial rebuke to Trump in the national battle over redistricting. But it is unlikely to be the final word in the case, with Republican officials already pledging to appeal the ruling.

At the heart of the case is a congressional map signed into law in September 2025, designed to help Republicans win an extra seat in the US House of Representatives this year.

But the partisan redistricting effort prompted a popular backlash, with nearly 300,000 Missouri residents signing a petition to instead put the new map to a vote.

Missouri’s Secretary of State Denny Hoskins rejected the petition as legally insufficient. That set up the legal fight, which the Missouri Supreme Court decided on Thursday.

“The referendum petition was legal, sufficient, and timely, and the secretary incorrectly concluded otherwise,” the court wrote in its ruling.

It added that the Missouri Constitution has made such petitions legal, and “no exception applies”. The court is staffed by seven judges, five of whom are Republican-appointed.

The decision, however, places Missouri in a complicated position. Two months remain until the midterm elections, and ballots will soon be printed.

There are also outstanding legal questions over whether a state’s general election can use different congressional districts than its primaries did.

Missouri Attorney General Catherine Hanaway, a Republican, said she would immediately appeal the ruling to the US Supreme Court. She called Thursday’s decision a “full-fledged constitutional crisis”.

“Never before in American history has a court overturned a congressional map after a primary and before a general election,” she said in a statement.

Trump also denounced the ruling in a social media post, calling it “horrible, ridiculous, and unConstitutional”.

“The Missouri Supreme Court just ridiculously ruled in favor of changing the maps back to what they were a long time ago. It’s called, Ancient History,” he wrote.

Last year, Trump triggered the nationwide redistricting fight when he approached Texas state lawmakers to redraw their maps in a way that would give Republicans an advantage.

Normally, congressional maps are redrawn once every 10 years to reflect census results.

But Trump encouraged Republican-led states to issue new maps mid-decade, as a strategy to help the right-wing party maintain control over the House.

Some 10 states ultimately decided to redistrict, including Missouri. Most tilted in favour of Republicans. California, meanwhile, redrew its map to skew Democratic.

Prior to Thursday’s ruling, Missouri’s Supreme Court affirmed that the special legislative action to change the state’s congressional map was lawful. In the US, no federal law bars partisan redistricting, known as gerrymandering.

But Thursday’s decision upheld the legality of the petition campaign to put the map up for a vote.

The Missouri Supreme Court barred the 2025 map from being used in November’s midterm election or any future election until Missouri voters approve it first.

The group People Not Politicians spearheaded the referendum petition. In a statement on Thursday, it applauded the state court’s decision, which overturned a lower court ruling.

“Supreme Court of Missouri has ruled: Missourians will vote on politicians’ rigged map,” the group wrote on social media.

It also blamed Missouri’s secretary of state for any hurdles to restoring the old map.

“Hoskins had the power to prevent all this confusion months ago — and he chose not to,” the group said.

A day before the court’s ruling, hundreds of people rallied outside the state Supreme Court, chanting: “Let us vote!”

Grant Christensen, a resident of Jefferson City and referendum supporter, said he had signed the petition.

“Gerrymandering is the same as voter suppression,” Christensen said. “Cutting up districts in order to steer them to vote one way or the other is not fair.”

Missouri’s 2025 congressional map had already shaped the state’s primary elections. Critics, however, point out that Hoskins did not reject the referendum until August 4, the day of the party primaries.

The outcome of the legal battle is likely to be most pivotal for Missouri’s 5th congressional district, currently held by Democrat Emanuel Cleaver. His district, which encompasses parts of Kansas City, was reshaped to favour Republicans.

Authorities say agent fired into home with people inside, lied about circumstances.

Federal prosecutors in the United States have charged an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officer accused of lying under oath to investigators regarding the shooting of a Venezuelan man during an immigration crackdown this year.

Prosecutors alleged that Christian Castro lied to federal investigators about the events that led up to him firing on 24-year-old Julio Cesar Sosa-Celis through the door of a Minnesota home in January.

The Associated Press news agency and The New York Times reported the indictment, quoting a person familiar with the matter who was not authorised to discuss the investigation publicly. It was expected to be unsealed when Castro is detained.

Castro, a former Department of Homeland Security agent, also faces multiple state felony charges in Minnesota related to the nonfatal shooting, including assault with a dangerous weapon.

Authorities in the Midwestern state had sought to extradite Castro from Texas to face trial. Texas Governor Greg Abbott, a Republican and President Donald Trump loyalist, declined to cooperate with the request.

The ensuing standoff left Castro detained in Texas for 90 days before his release last week. Under Texas law, the state cannot hold the subject of an extradition order for longer than that. His whereabouts were unclear as of Thursday.

The charges mark a rare move by the Department of Justice under Trump.

Trump’s top officials have repeatedly argued that immigration agents maintain broad protections while conducting enforcement, a position rejected by many legal experts.

For example, no one has been charged in the fatal shootings by immigration agents of Renee Nicole Good and Alex Pretti in Minneapolis in January.

An Associated Press review conducted in February found about two dozen ICE employees and contractors had faced criminal charges since 2020.

An American Civil Liberties Union report released in July documented instances of violent tactics or other civil rights violations in about a third of 1,200 immigration enforcement incidents reviewed in 2025 alone.

Video evidence contradicts statement

The Trump administration distanced itself from the Castro case after video emerged contradicting the agent’s initial accounts of the confrontation.

Castro told investigators that Sosa-Celis had attacked him, which the surveillance footage showed did not happen.

Todd Lyons, then acting head of ICE, said at the time that the footage “has revealed that sworn testimony provided by two separate officers appears to have made untruthful statements”.

Castro and a fellow agent chased Alfredo Aljorna, a Venezuelan national, after a traffic stop, according to charging documents.

Aljorna fled to the home he shared with Sosa-Celis. After a brief scramble, the two men ran inside. Castro then shot through the closed door, “knowing [the home] was occupied by several people”, the documents said.

One witness said there were two children in the house when Castro opened fire. Sosa-Celis was hit in the leg.

Federal authorities have since suspended Castro and dropped all charges against Sosa-Celis and his co-defendant, who were both initially accused of forcibly assaulting an ICE officer. The other agent involved in the incident was also suspended, but has not yet been charged.

Thursday’s indictment comes after ProPublica this week reported that Department of Justice (DOJ) officials had blocked prosecutors from pursuing more serious civil rights charges against Castro, including “deprivation of rights under color of law”.

However, a source close to the investigation told the AP the active investigation could still result in civil rights charges.

The Trump administration has scaled back the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division and dismantled several Biden-era police oversight initiatives since returning to office in January 2025.

That has come as the administration has revved up its mass deportation campaign across the country.

In August, immigration agents detained 50,925 people with the Department of Homeland Security hailing it as a new record for the “highest number of illegal aliens arrested in a single month”.

The United States and Iran continue to make competing claims about who has greater control of the critical Strait of Hormuz in the Gulf.

Washington claims the strait is open and that dozens of ships, carrying millions of barrels of oil, are passing through each day. US President Donald Trump claimed last month that the US was in “total control” of the waterway, through which one-fifth of the world’s oil and gas is shipped during peacetime, but which has been closed since the US-Israel war on Iran began six months ago.

Iran, however, says the strait remains under its control and is closed except to pre-approved vessels using its designated channels. It has warned that other ships attempting to transit risk being targeted.

So what is really going on in the strait – and what explains the divergent accounts?

What are the latest US claims about the Strait of Hormuz?

The US says shipping through the Strait of Hormuz has significantly increased in recent weeks.

Two US officials told CNN that 40 commercial ships carrying some 18 million barrels of oil passed through the strait under US military escort on Tuesday, in what would be a new wartime record.

Trump gave a similar figure on Monday, saying the US Navy was helping some 30 ships pass through Hormuz every night. He later said the waterway was “under USA control”.

In terms of oil, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said that “at least 10 million barrels” were getting through the strait each day, with between 15 million and 17 million on Tuesday.

The assessment comes after US CENTCOM commander Brad Cooper claimed last week that the US military had cleared Hormuz’s transit lanes of sea mines.

Before the war began, an average of around 100 ships and 20 million barrels of oil are estimated to have passed through the waterway each day.

According to figures from PortWatch, this has fallen to an overall average of seven vessels since March.

What does Iran claim about the strait?

Iran has acknowledged that some vessels are getting through the strait, but insists it remains in control of the waterway.

Iran’s Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf on Tuesday said “the enemy managed to get some ships” through Hormuz, but stressed that Iranian forces remain “in complete control of the strait and will not allow it to be opened”.

Ghalibaf accused the US of giving ships “false guarantees” about their ability to cross a southern route in Hormuz, warning that ships that try to do so would be targeted.

The following day, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) claimed two oil tankers had hit mines and were disabled while trying to cross an “illegal route” in the strait. Saudi Arabia, meanwhile, claimed an Iranian attack hit a Saudi oil tanker, killing two Filipino sailors.

What does shipping data show?

The latest ship-tracking data paints a different picture than the US claims, with far fewer vessels recorded as transiting the strait.

According to marine analytics firm Kpler, just six vessels crossed the strait on Wednesday, 11 on Tuesday and five on Monday. It put the 10-day average at 13 vessels per day.

Other ship-trafficking services show a similar pattern. Maritime data firm Lloyd’s List Intelligence recorded an average of around 12 transits per day from August 26 to September 1, though the latest data may be incomplete “due to a lag in identifying dark transits”, said the firm’s maritime intelligence and research director, Bridget Diakun. This means that some ships are switching off their tracking beacons.

From August 17-23, Lloyd’s List Intelligence recorded “about 14 non-Iranian-linked ships each day”, Diakun told Al Jazeera.

All these figures are far lower than the US claim that 40 ships transited the strait on Tuesday.

The Joint Maritime Information Center (JMIC), which monitors threats to shipping in the region, said in a September 1 advisory that commercial traffic through Hormuz was “far below baseline”, despite a “modest uptick from recent lows”.

The advisory put the risk level for Hormuz at “severe”, citing a “continued risk of drifting or uncharted mines”, despite US claims to have cleared the strait of mines.

What explains the discrepancy?

Diakun told Al Jazeera that it is difficult to explain the gap between US-claimed transit figures and those recorded by ship trackers without insight into how the US tallies its own figures.

She said it’s possible the US includes smaller or non-cargo-carrying ships in its total, unlike Lloyd’s, which only counts “cargo-carrying vessels over 10,000 dwt [deadweight tonnage]”.

Eirik Hooper, a senior associate covering the ports and terminals sector for maritime research consultancy Drewry, also pointed to possible differences in how the US counts vessel transits.

“A US operational count plausibly includes everything that moved under or near naval protection: naval auxiliaries, offshore support and tugs, coastal and small craft [and] dhows,” said Hooper, noting that ship-tracking firm Kpler filters out such vessels “on size or cargo grounds”.

Hooper also said the US has access to “satellite, airborne and other sensor coverage plus its own convoy manifests”, which enables it to see vessels not immediately picked up by the normal automatic identification system (AIS) tracking system.

“By late August, the majority of Hormuz crossings were classified ‘dark’ or unknown by route, and AIS data counts often need to be revised to include vessels that switch off their transponders, with confirmed movements backdated,” said Hooper.

More generally, both the US and Iran have an incentive to play up their influence in the strait, the status of which has become a major sticking point in their six-month conflict.

Former US Ambassador Henry Ensher recently told Al Jazeera that he believes the latest cycle of US-Iran confrontation was likely triggered by CENTCOM’s claims to have de-mined that strait, and said “both sides would be well served to stop talking quite so much”.

The global energy order is changing.

US President Donald Trump celebrated on Truth Social what he called the “biggest oil deal in history” – a 100-year concession on 17 oil fields in Venezuela that would secure 65 billion barrels of oil.

Around the same time, QatarEnergy informed Edison, one of its biggest European customers, that force majeure on its liquefied natural gas (LNG) deliveries would continue until early November. Five more cargoes were cancelled, taking the total to 29, or about 3.8 billion cubic metres of gas.

The contract has run since 2009 and normally covers roughly a tenth of Italy’s annual consumption. Edison has kept supplying its customers by finding replacement cargoes elsewhere, including in the US.

For decades, the bargain between Washington and the Gulf was clear. The US protected the region and kept its sea lanes open; Gulf producers supplied the energy on which the global economy depended and settled their sales in dollars to benefit the US economy.

That bargain has been turned on its head. America no longer simply protects Gulf energy. It competes with it, and increasingly profits when the Gulf cannot deliver due to insecurity.

Six months of war have reportedly impacted Qatar’s LNG exports significantly. Other Gulf countries like Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and the UAE have seen a substantial drop in oil exports as well. Meanwhile, US oil and gas have moved into the space left behind, with US energy giants raking in record-high profits.

It is important here to distinguish between the US as a government and the dense network of private interests that operates around it. Washington wants strategic leverage over Iran and continued influence over the Gulf states. Energy companies want access to reserves, favourable regulation, profitable prices and new customers. Trump brings the two together under the banner of energy dominance. State power opens the door; private capital walks through it.

Israel adds another layer. Chevron operates its two main offshore gas fields, owning almost 40 percent of the Leviathan gasfield and 25 percent of the Tamar gasfield. Leviathan is expanding after a $35bn agreement was signed last year to increase exports to Egypt.

Israel is therefore not an independent energy rival to the US in the way Qatar is. Its growing role as an Eastern Mediterranean gas hub is tied to a US operator and fits comfortably within a US-backed regional system linking Israel, Egypt and Jordan.

Chevron is the thread running through much of this story. It has major interests in US production, controls Israel’s most important gas assets and is positioned to expand in Venezuela. This does not mean Chevron determines foreign policy. It does show how easily the exercise of American power can translate into commercial opportunity for American companies.

Israel is also determined not to let the confrontation with Iran end on terms it considers not to be in its interest. The US-Iran memorandum of understanding signed in June fell well short of Israeli war aims. Israel said it was not bound by all its provisions, insisted on freedom of action in Lebanon and briefly resumed attacks while the US was trying to sustain negotiations.

For Israel, ceasefires have tended to be pauses, not settlements: opportunities to regroup while preserving the option of striking again. The reasons are chiefly strategic. Israel wants to prevent Iran from rebuilding its nuclear, missile and regional capabilities, while Israeli leaders fear accepting a deal and looking weak ahead of elections.

The consequences of Israel pushing for continuous conflict align with US energy interests. Continued pressure on Iran keeps the Strait of Hormuz insecure, Gulf exports vulnerable and risk premiums for energy transport high. Israel and US energy companies do not need to be following a common plan for their interests to reinforce one another.

Price is where the argument becomes clearest. Trump talks constantly about cheap oil, but US producers cannot prosper if it becomes too cheap. A Dallas Federal Reserve survey found that US companies needed an average price of about $43 a barrel to operate existing wells and $66 to drill new ones profitably. The two main Permian basins sit at roughly $61 to $62.

Trump therefore needs a narrow band: oil cheap enough to contain inflation, but expensive enough to keep shale, fracking and export investment alive. Gulf insecurity helps maintain it. The disruption need not be catastrophic. It only has to keep prices at a point where the next American well makes economic sense.

This may help explain the attraction of a no-war, no-peace outcome. A full regional war could close Hormuz, send prices soaring and threaten Chevron’s Israeli operations. A durable settlement would remove the risk premium, restore confidence in Gulf supply and limit Israel’s freedom of action.

Managed insecurity sits conveniently between the two: enough restraint to protect US-linked production, but not enough diplomacy to make Gulf energy entirely dependable again.

Israel keeps Iran under pressure. Washington retains leverage over its allies. US producers gain customers and commercially supportive prices. The danger lies in the convergence: Several powerful actors now have something to gain from preventing the crisis from reaching a final resolution.

The Gulf still holds vast reserves and enjoys production costs US companies cannot match. But reserves alone no longer decide market power. Reliability does. Only an estimated 3.5 to 5.5 million barrels a day can bypass Hormuz through Saudi and Emirati pipelines. The rest remains exposed to a single point of failure, despite decades of arms purchases, foreign bases and security guarantees.

The greatest threat to the Gulf’s energy future is not depletion. It is that customers learn to live without it. Every delayed tanker strengthens the case for an Atlantic alternative. Every Qatari cargo replaced by US LNG creates a relationship that may endure long after the war.

US power once rested partly on protecting the flow of Gulf energy. It now rests increasingly on replacing it.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

Ousted Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro has urged a United States judge to dismiss the criminal drug trafficking charges against him, arguing he should be immune from prosecution as the head of a sovereign country.

Maduro’s lawyer, Barry Pollack, made the appeal in a Manhattan district court on Wednesday.

His legal team has petitioned District Judge Alvin Hellerstein to dismiss the case, which will test the willingness of US courts to apply international law to criminal cases.

Maduro was abducted and imprisoned on January 3, after US President Donald Trump authorised a military raid in Caracas. The former Venezuelan leader, who has been held in a Brooklyn federal jail, has pleaded not guilty and is scheduled to go on trial on June 1, 2027, if his effort to dismiss the case is unsuccessful.

The principle that sitting heads of state are immune from prosecution abroad is a longstanding tenet of international law, seen as fundamental to diplomacy.

Judge Hellerstein had given Pollack a Wednesday deadline to file his motion to dismiss the case.

Pollack has argued that Hellerstein lacks jurisdiction, both because sovereign heads of state enjoy complete immunity and because the acts that Maduro is accused of would have been part of his official duties.

“This unprecedented prosecution violates the absolute immunity from criminal jurisdiction to which heads of state and foreign officials acting in their official capacities have been entitled for hundreds of years,” Pollack wrote.

Pollack added that Maduro was falsely accused and “vehemently denies” the allegations.

A spokesperson for the Manhattan US Attorney’s office, which brought the charges, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Maduro faces uphill battle

Legal experts have told the Reuters news agency that Maduro faces an uphill battle.

Washington has not recognised Maduro as Venezuela’s president for years, due to disputed elections. Courts tend to defer to the US president and his cabinet in disputes over who is recognised as a foreign country’s leader.

US criminal cases involving heads of foreign states are extremely rare, but precedent offers little encouragement for Maduro. In 1990, a federal judge in Miami rejected former Panamanian military leader Manuel Noriega’s attempt to assert head-of-state immunity, in part because he never officially held the title of president.

The US stopped recognising Maduro in 2019, when he was inaugurated for a second time after a 2018 election that critics say was rigged. Washington also called his 2024 re-election fraudulent.

Maduro says both votes were fair and has long accused the US of seeking his ouster to gain control of the South American country’s oil wealth.

Pollack, however, wrote that Washington’s assessment that Maduro lacked legitimacy was not relevant.

“Unlike in Noriega, the Executive Branch does not dispute that Mr Maduro was Venezuela’s head of state, but instead merely claims that, after 2019, he did not occupy that position legitimately,” Pollack wrote.

Venezuela run by Maduro’s vice president

Since Maduro’s abduction, his former vice president and socialist ally, Delcy Rodriguez, has run Venezuela as its interim leader.

She has also increased cooperation with the Trump administration. Last month, the two countries reached an unprecedented deal that would see the US take over about one-fifth of Venezuela’s oil reserves.

Pollack wrote that it was “incongruous” for the US to recognise Rodriguez, who was appointed by Maduro, and not Maduro himself. He pointed to statements by Rodriguez and officials in her government, made in January and February, indicating that they still considered Maduro Venezuela’s legitimate head of state.

Rodriguez’s government has since gone silent on the matter. Some murals of Maduro in Caracas have been painted over in recent months.

Prosecutors have until October 2 to respond to Maduro’s motion to dismiss the indictment, and Hellerstein will hold a hearing on the dismissal effort on November 17.

The ruling follows a 6-3 decision from the Supreme Court that found Trump’s effort to limit birthright citizenship was illegal.

A United States federal judge in Maryland has blocked President Donald Trump’s latest effort to roll back birthright citizenship, after the Supreme Court ruled that his last attempt violated the Constitution.

District Judge Deborah Boardman issued a preliminary injunction on Wednesday against Trump’s new executive order, which was issued on August 6.

The new order took aim at what Trump has called “birth tourism”, the practice of intentionally giving birth on foreign soil.

It sought to deny citizenship to children of foreign nationals in certain groups, including those accused of engaging in a commercial transaction to obtain citizenship or classified as an “alien enemy”.

Boardman, however, said the order was unconstitutional for the same reason Trump’s previous effort failed. She cited the Supreme Court’s June decision in the case Barbara v Trump.

The order “is almost certainly unconstitutional as applied to the certified class for the simple reason that the Supreme Court in Barbara already decided that the children in the class are citizens at birth”, she wrote.

“This Court must, once again, preliminarily enjoin enforcement of the President’s most recent attempt to strip the right to citizenship from them.”

In the Barbara case, the Supreme Court ruled six to three that birthright citizenship was protected under the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution.

Birthright citizenship confers automatic citizenship on anyone born in the US, outside of a handful of narrow exceptions, such as the children of diplomats or invading armies.

The constitutional basis for birthright citizenship has been upheld in several Supreme Court cases over the years, most notably in US v Wong Kim Ark, the case of an American man born to Chinese parents.

But Trump campaigned for a second term as president on the pledge to crack down on immigration into the country.

One of his promises was to reform the concept of birthright citizenship. Trump and his allies have argued that children of temporary or undocumented immigrants do not qualify for the right, as they are not under the “jurisdiction” of the US.

Since the Supreme Court defeat in June, Trump and his allies have continued to probe for ways to challenge the constitutional protections for birthright citizenship.

Wednesday’s legal challenge was brought by immigrant rights advocates and families, including groups like the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project.

They had previously won an injunction from Boardman last year, blocking the Trump administration from enforcing his initial executive order about birthright citizenship.

Last week, Boardman instructed the plaintiffs to revise their complaint to specifically address the second executive order, rather than relying on the same material used for the first.

But she signalled scepticism at the time about the constitutionality of Trump’s latest attempt, calling it “unprecedented”.

“The Supreme Court has spoken: Children in the certified class are ‘citizens at birth’,” she wrote in Wednesday’s decision.

Multiple new cases have been filed against OpenAI, alleging ChatGPT played a role in the Tumbler Ridge mass shooting.

OpenAI is facing another wave of lawsuits in the wake of the February mass shooting in Tumbler Ridge in Canada’s province of British Columbia, which left eight people dead.

On Wednesday, 30 new complaints were reportedly filed in a United States federal court in California, including teachers and students who were witnesses and survivors at the school where most of the shooting took place, joining seven initial lawsuits filed in April.

The lawsuits accuse the San Francisco, California-based artificial intelligence giant and its CEO, Sam Altman, of negligence, as well as aiding and abetting a mass shooting.

The suits, brought by lawyer Jay Edelson, allege that the company knew about the intentions of the 18-year-old shooter who, in her interactions with OpenAI’s chatbot ChatGPT, had described scenarios involving gun violence, but that the leadership did not report their concerns to law enforcement, echoing earlier lawsuits on the matter.

In April, Altman penned a letter to the community apologising that the company did not alert law enforcement about the shooter, Jesse Van Rootselaar.

“While I know words can never be enough, I believe an apology is necessary to recognize the harm and irreversible loss your community has suffered,” Altman wrote in the letter.

Authorities say that Van Rootselaar killed her mother and half-brother before going to the Tumbler Ridge Secondary School and opening fire. Five children and one educator were killed at the school. More than 25 others were wounded before Van Rootselaar died from what police described as a self-inflicted gunshot wound.

One of the new cases filed was on behalf of a 13-year-old identified as A C, who played dead after watching the shooter kill their classmates and the teacher. Another new case was brought by a grade seven teacher named Deidre Rushlow, who hid under her desk with her students during the rampage.

“There isn’t a day that goes by that I don’t think about what happened at Tumbler Ridge, or the victims of this devastating tragedy and their families. It’s a constant and sobering reminder of the important and incredibly difficult work that many people in my team do each and every day,” Jason Kwon, OpenAI’s head of strategy, wrote in a post on X on Wednesday.

“We’ve been approaching this litigation with respect for both the legal process and the families and victims of this tragedy, and we’ll continue to engage in good faith with that process.”

Edelson did not respond to Al Jazeera’s request for comment.

Growing legal pressure

In July, British Columbia’s Attorney General Niki Sharma announced that the province would also pursue “all legal avenues to hold OpenAI and its decision-makers accountable” for the shooting.

The company has faced a growing slate of suits, apart from the ones from British Columbia, alleging that its product played a role in incidents that led to users harming others and themselves.

A recent lawsuit in Florida alleges that the company “actively assisted and encouraged the mass shooting” at Florida State University in April 2025.

There are other complaints filed on behalf of victims across the US and Canada alleging that the victims took their own lives after being pushed by ChatGPT to do so, including a case in Quebec earlier this year.

Senator Thom Tillis accuses Pentagon chief of ‘inept mismanagement’ as US military is strained by war on Iran.

United States Senator Thom Tillis has called on President Donald Trump to fire Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth for creating a “leadership void” within the military amid the ongoing war with Iran.

In a social media post on Wednesday, Tillis contrasted Hegseth unfavourably with former Army Secretary Dan Driscoll, who submitted his resignation on Monday amid reported disagreements with the Pentagon chief.

“I have never witnessed more inept management of the brave men and women who serve our country. He is intimidated by competence and retreats to ginning up culture wars instead of soberly attending to the vital work of our national defense and the health and well-being of our fighting force,” the North Carolina senator wrote.

“I urge the President to find a new leader at the Pentagon who will retain and empower our military talent rather than diminish it.”

Tillis is a member of Trump’s Republican Party. But in recent years, he has become an increasingly vocal critic from within the party over policies he fears harm democracy.

In June 2025, amid criticism from Trump, Tillis announced he would not be seeking re-election in November’s congressional midterm polls. His term ends in January.

Early in Trump’s second term as president, Tillis was among the senators who voted to confirm Hegseth, a military veteran and former TV host, despite criticisms of his conduct towards women and his past work.

Tillis only confirmed his vote in favour of Hegseth at the last minute, appearing to share some of the concerns being debated in the Senate.

Since taking office as defence secretary, Hegseth has pursued controversial changes to the Pentagon, including attempts to limit journalistic access to the Defence Department.

He has also undertaken a wide-ranging effort to root out what he calls “wokeness” from the military.

That effort has reportedly included firing top military leaders, blocking promotions, removing transgender service members and reviewing admissions standards for top military academies.

In Wednesday’s post, Tillis pointed to some of those efforts, questioning why Hegseth appeared fixated on culture war issues rather than modernising the military.

He pointed to evolving forms of warfare in Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and in the US-Israeli war against Iran.

“Our understanding and assumptions of warfare are being challenged in places like Ukraine and Iran, and Dan [Driscoll] understands the old way of doing business no longer applies,” said Tillis.

The senator then proceeded to imply that Driscoll’s departure was a direct result of Hegseth’s mismanagement.

“If we had a Secretary of Defense who maintained the same priorities and forward-thinking, he would be fighting to retain talented leaders like Dan and the many flag officers he has forced into retirement. Instead, he is creating a leadership void at the top of our military ranks,” Tillis added.

Hegseth has faced growing scrutiny in recent months as the US struggles to achieve its goals in the war on Iran, launched on February 28. The war hit its six-month mark last week with no end in sight.

Media reports indicate that the war has left the Pentagon struggling with shrinking munitions stockpiles that could hinder the US military in future actions.

The war has also taken a toll on the popularity of the Trump administration, which has seen approval numbers sink ahead of the November congressional election.

Since the war began, fuel prices have skyrocketed, and the conflict has spread across the Middle East.

More than two-thirds of Americans disapprove of the administration’s handling of the war, according to a University of Massachusetts poll released on August 31.

United States President Donald Trump’s face has officially found its way onto the country’s currency.

On Tuesday at 12pm Eastern Time (16:00 GMT), the US Mint began circulating – and selling – a “once-in-a-generation” $1 coin bearing Trump’s likeness to commemorate the nation’s 250th anniversary.

The gold-coloured coins feature Trump’s portrait on one side, alongside inscriptions of “LIBERTY” and “IN GOD WE TRUST”. On the reverse is an illustration of the US presidential seal with “250” inscribed on its shield.

The US Mint says the coins “capture the spirit, pride, and legacy of a nation approaching its landmark anniversary”.

It’s the first time in nearly 100 years that a living person has been featured on US currency, drawing a heavy dose of criticism, since such honours are largely reserved for long-dead dignitaries.

How did this $1 coin come to be? Here’s what you need to know:

Why is this being done?

Since Trump returned to the White House last year, the administration has taken steps to put his name or image on an array of buildings and items, including the Kennedy Center, the US Institute of Peace, National Parks passes, a limited-edition passport and a $1m “gold card” visa that was announced last year.

The Trump administration has tied some of those efforts to celebrations of the country’s semiquincentennial, the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence.

On July 15, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent first announced the coin in a post on social media. Bessent said the coin “celebrates the strength of American values, and the promise of a nation dedicated to preserving freedom for all”.

The Trump administration has also pointed to another anniversary coin as a precedent for the Trump-branded $1 piece.

In 1926, for the 150th anniversary of the country, the US Mint struck a coin featuring side-by-side portraits of George Washington and Calvin Coolidge, a president who was in office at the time.

But critics have pointed out that the 1926 coin was commemorative and not intended for circulation as currency.

Are there other proposals for Trump-themed currency?

In May, Bessent also said preparations were under way to print a new $250 banknote featuring Trump’s face.

Bessent added that the Trump administration was seeking congressional approval for the new bill.

How much are the new coins?

Despite the coin being valued at $1, consumers can purchase a 25-coin roll for $61 or a 100-coin bag for $154.50 — a significant mark-up.

While the coins are being sold at a premium, the US Mint emphasises they are not solely decorative.

They are valid currency and can be used to make everyday purchases, just like a $1 bill.

Is it legal?

US federal law states: “Only the portrait of a deceased individual may appear on United States currency and securities.”

Congress passed that law in 1866 after a Department of the Treasury official, Spencer M Clark, put his own face on a note valued at five cents, angering lawmakers.

However, during his first term, Trump signed legislation known as the Circulating Collection Coin Redesign Act of 2020 (CCRA), which gave the Treasury the authority to mint $1 coins “with designs emblematic of the United States semiquincentennial”.

That law prohibits the portrait of “any person, living or dead” on the reverse side of those coins. However, Trump’s image on the new $1 coin appears on the obverse — the front of the coin — meaning it likely complies with the law.

What opposition does this face?

Late last year, Democratic Senators Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada and Jeff Merkley of Oregon introduced legislation that would block Trump from placing his face on the coin.

“While monarchs put their faces on coins, America has never had and never will have a king,” Cortez Masto said. “Our legislation would codify this country’s long-standing tradition of not putting living Presidents on American coins. Congress must pass it without delay.” Their bill did not become law.

The Treasury Department and US Mint did not immediately respond to Al Jazeera’s request for comment.

That Girl is back.

Olympic gold medalist Jordan Chiles announced her intention to train for the L.A. Olympics on Wednesday, publicly beginning her attempt for a third Olympic Games in a video narrated by NBA legend Michael Jordan.

“Why again?” says Jordan, whom Chiles is named after. “Because the dream is still there.”

Chiles helped the United States to a team gold medal in 2024, competing in all four events in the final. She won her first individual Olympic medal, a bronze on floor with her energetic Beyoncé-inspired routine, but that result still is being considered by the Court of Arbitration for Sport after controversy involving the inquiry process that led to Chiles’ score being upgraded to overtake Romania’s Ana Barbosu.

Chiles is the fourth member of that gold medal-winning team to announce a comeback for the 2028 Olympics, joining Suni Lee, Jade Carey and Hezly Rivera. Simone Biles, the 29-year-old, 11-time Olympic medalist, has not officially come out of retirement.

Before Biles, a U.S. female gymnast had not competed in three Olympic Games in 24 years. Dominique Dawes, who competed in her third Olympics in 2000, Linda Metheny and Muriel Grossfield are the only other American women to accomplish the feat. But in a sport no longer dominated by teenage one-hit wonders, there will be three women vying to join the exclusive triple Olympian club in 2028.

Chiles used college experience to help raise her game after winning a team silver in her first Olympic experience in Tokyo, and after returning from Paris with gold, she finished a standout college career at UCLA. The 23-time All-American won her second and third individual NCAA titles, on bars last year and floor this year, and won the AAI Award, which goes to the top senior gymnast in the nation. She had 19 perfect 10s in her college career, which ranks third in UCLA history. On Tuesday, UCLA announced Chiles would return to the team as a student coach.

“Jordan has made an incredible impact on our program over the years,” UCLA gymnastics coach Janelle McDonald said in a statement. “I’m excited to watch her continue that influence in a new capacity as she steps into this next chapter with student coaching. Her energy, passion, leadership and gymnastics experience will make a unique and positive impact on our team this coming year!”

Outside of the gym, Chiles has capitalized on her Olympic stardom. She was a finalist on “Dancing with the Stars” and authored a memoir, “I’m That Girl: Living the Power of my Dreams.” She was named to Time Magazine’s 100 most influential people in sports this year and has been a ubiquitous presence on red carpets and at major sporting events and galas.

With her post-gymnastics life rolling, Chiles still is choosing to return to training with less than two years remaining until the 2028 Games.

“When the world asks why she’s back for a third time,” Jordan says in Chiles’ announcement video, “the answer’s simple.”

“Why not?” Chiles chimes in.