Whats

The big break-up: The president of the United States, Donald Trump, has parted ways with the richest man in the world, billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk.

Once their friendship reaped rewards for both: Musk donated around hundreds of millions of dollars to Trump’s re-election campaign and the president created a role for Musk in his government.

But political, or fiscal, differences soured the relationship, and what was once a mutually beneficial alliance deteriorated into an exchange of insults on social media.

So, did Elon Musk’s position undermine US democracy?

And do Donald Trump’s friendships and interests influence US policy?

Presenter: Elizabeth Puranam

Guests:

Niall Stanage – Political analyst and White House columnist for The Hill newspaper

Dan Ives – Technology analyst and managing director of Wedbush Securities

Faiz Siddiqui – Author of, Hubris Maximus: The Shattering of Elon Musk

AN INTERACTIVE tool can show you the best budget festival near you this summer.

This handy tool shows how you can max out your festival experiences – on a budget.

2

2

Input your postcode and your favourite partying partner’s, and it will show all the summer shindigs you could be going to.

From comedy to music fests of all genres – the tool has it all.

It comes after research of 2,000 adults found Gen Z’s ideal summer would consist of five festivals and four trips abroad – but they have less than £1,000 to spend.

They would like to have a day at the beach seven times and go on four staycations during the three hottest months of the year.

And visiting a theme park is a summer must for 23 per cent.

But 79 per cent aren’t sure they’ll be able to afford everything they’d like to do – so, nearly four in 10 are planning to find cost-effective ways to travel to make the most of their budget.

Despite this, 23 per cent insist on tickets to at least one music festival this summer and a holiday abroad with pals is a ‘non-negotiable’.

But 24 per cent won’t compromise on comfortable and reliable travel to any events they go to.

As three quarters believe quality transport between events is important, because they want to be comfortable on long journeys (46 per cent) and want to get their trip off to the best start (44 per cent).

John Boughton, commercial director for National Express, which commissioned the research, said: “While the appetite for adventure is sky-high, the reality of rising costs means many young people are having to balance their dreams with what’s actually doable.

“As our tool shows, we are lucky enough to have hundreds of festivals and events around the UK at our fingertips, but a big blocker is the cost of an entertainment-filled weekend in a field – the prices can be well into the hundreds.

“That’s why we’re seeing Gen Z getting smart with their spending—being selective, savvy and seeking out ways to make the most of their money, with the travel there and back being key.”

The research also found Gen Z would like to attend six BBQs this summer and have fish and chips by the beach six times, while 29 per cent would love to spend more cash on dining out or takeaways, to save the strain of cooking.

And one in five have made plans to splash out on one or two key things this summer, but 17 per cent admit they’ve barely thought about it.

However, 72 per cent now feel as though having fun in the summer is a ‘luxury’, according to the OnePoll.com figures.

Although 43 per cent still say it’s more important to have fun in the sun – compared to the 15 per cent who reckon being sensible is a better option.

John Boughton, commercial director for National Express, added: “Ultimately, Gen Z aren’t prepared to sit the summer out.

“They’re finding clever ways to stay in the moment, prioritise what matters most, and still have an unforgettable time and it is encouraging that they are looking for affordable, reliable and comfortable travel to get the most out of their summer.

“This is a generation that thrives on fun, freedom and flexibility—and they’re making it work, one plan at a time.”

The Dutch government collapsed on Tuesday after far-right politician Geert Wilders pulled out of the right-wing coalition after a dispute over anti-immigration measures his party had proposed.

Wilders’ decision prompted the Dutch cabinet and Prime Minister Dick Schoof to resign.

Here is what triggered the government’s collapse, and what happens next:

Why did Wilders withdraw?

Wilders announced the withdrawal of his right-wing party, the Party for Freedom (PVV), from the 11-month-old right-wing Netherlands coalition government. Wilders said the other three parties in the coalition had failed to back his plans to crack down on asylum for refugees.

“No signature under our asylum plans. The PVV leaves the coalition,” Wilders wrote in an X post on Tuesday after a brief meeting in parliament with party leaders. Besides PVV, the coalition comprised People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD), the Farmer-Citizen Movement (BBB) and the New Social Contract (NSC).

On May 26, Wilders announced a 10-point plan to extensively slash migration, deploying army officials at the Dutch land borders and rejecting all asylum seekers. Wilders threatened, back then, that his party would pull out of the coalition if migration policy was not toughened.

The four parties cumulatively held 88 seats in the country’s 150-seat House of Representatives.

The PVV won the latest November 2023 election with 23 percent of the vote and 37 seats, the highest number of seats in the parliament out of all parties.

The majority mark in the House is 76 seats. The withdrawal leaves the coalition with only 51 seats.

When did Schoof step down?

After Wilders announced the withdrawal, an emergency cabinet meeting was called. After this, Schoof announced that he would step down, hours after the PVV withdrawal.

“I have told party leaders repeatedly in recent days that the collapse of the cabinet would be unnecessary and irresponsible,” Schoof said in the emergency cabinet meeting. “We are facing major challenges both nationally and internationally that require decisiveness from us.”

How did other Dutch leaders react?

Other leaders in the coalition called Wilders “irresponsible” and blamed him for putting his own political interests ahead of the country.

“There is a war on our continent. Instead of meeting the challenge, Wilders is showing he is not willing to take responsibility,” said Dilan Yesilgoz, leader of the VVD, which has 24 seats in the the House.

“It is irresponsible to take down the government at this point,” NSC leader Nicolien van Vroonhoven said about Wilders. The NSC has 20 seats.

Head of the opposition GreenLeft-Labour alliance Frans Timmermans said he could “see no other way to form a stable government” than early elections.

What’s next?

Schoof will now formally submit his resignation to the head of state, Dutch King Willem-Alexander. After this, elections are expected to be called. It is likely that the election will be held sometime in October or November, based on previous cycles.

As of May 31, polls show that Wilders’ PVV has lost a little of its support, from 23 percent in the 2023 election to 20 percent.

This brings the party almost at par with the GreenLeft-Labour alliance, which has 19 percent of support and 25 seats in the lower house of parliament, the second highest number of seats after the PVV.

The fragmented politics of the Netherlands makes it difficult to predict which party will win the election. It is unlikely for a single party to win the 76-seat majority and it takes months for a coalition to form. According to the Dutch election authority’s data, no single party has ever won a majority since the first direct elections in 1848.

What happens until elections?

Schoof has said he and the other ministers of the coalition will continue with their positions in a caretaker government until a new government is formed after elections.

The political crisis comes as the Netherlands is scheduled to host a summit of NATO leaders at The Hague on June 24-25. Mark Rutte, the current secretary-general of NATO, was the prime minister of the Netherlands from 2010 to 2024. Rutte was affiliated with the VVD.

Schoof had also been involved in European efforts to provide support to Ukraine in its war against Russia. In February, the Dutch PM was present at a meeting with other European leaders in Paris where the leaders pledged to provide Ukraine with security guarantees.

What’s in Trump’s ‘big, beautiful’ budget bill?
Al Jazeera’s Heidi Zhou-Castro breaks down the bill that Donald Trump claims will usher in an economic golden age, whilst others warn it could add significantly to the national debt.

Elon Musk may have resigned from the Department of Government Efficiency, but few believe he’s stepping away from power. In under a year, DOGE brought Silicon Valley-style disruption to Washington, consolidating federal data and dismantling oversight. Now, Musk is expected to channel what he gained into a private AI venture – with public systems still in reach.

Karol Nawrocki, Poland’s right-wing opposition candidate, narrowly won the second round of voting in the country’s presidential election on Sunday, according to the National Electoral Commission (NEC).

Here is all you need to know about the results:

Who won the presidential election in Poland?

Nawrocki won with 50.89 percent of the votes, the NEC website updated early on Monday.

He defeated liberal Warsaw Mayor Rafal Trzaskowski, who secured 49.11 percent of the vote.

The outcome was a surprise because exit polls had projected a narrow loss for Nawrocki.

What happened in the first round of the election?

The first round took place on May 18, where, as expected, none of the 13 presidential candidates could manage to reach a 50 percent threshold.

Trzaskowski won 31.4 percent of the vote, while Nawrocki got 29.5 percent. As the top two candidates, Nawrocki and Trzaskowski proceeded to the run-off.

Who is Karol Nawrocki, Poland’s new president?

Nawrocki, 42, is a conservative historian and amateur boxer.

He contested as an independent candidate, backed by the outgoing president, Andrzej Duda’s Law and Justice (PiS), Poland’s main opposition party.

The newly elected president’s academic work, as a historian, centred on anti-communist resistance. At the moment, he runs the Institute of National Remembrance, a Warsaw-based government-funded research institute that studies the history of Poland during World War II and the period of communism until 1990.

At the institute, Nawrocki has removed Soviet memorials, upsetting Russia.

He administered the Museum of the Second World War in the Polish city of Gdansk from 2017 to 2021.

Nawrocki has had his share of controversies. In 2018, he published a book about a notorious gangster under the pseudonym “Tadeusz Batyr”. In public comments, Nawrocki and Batyr praised each other, without revealing they were the same person.

United States President Donald Trump’s administration threw its weight behind Nawrocki in the Polish election. The US group Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) held its first meeting in Poland on May 27. “We need you to elect the right leader,” US Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said during the CPAC event.

Calling Trzaskowski “an absolute train wreck of a leader”, Noem said, “I just had the opportunity to meet with Karol and listen: he needs to be the next president of Poland. Do you understand me?”

How did Nawrocki win?

Experts say the consistency of Nawrocki’s messaging on the campaign trail may have earned him his win.

“People choose someone they see as strong, clear, and consistent,” Liliana Smiech, chairwoman of the Foundation Council at Warsaw Institute, a Polish nonprofit think tank specialising in geopolitics and international affairs, told Al Jazeera.

“Even with the accusations against him, voters preferred his firmness over Trzaskowski’s constant rebranding. Trzaskowski tried to be everything to everyone and ended up convincing no one. Nawrocki looks like someone who can handle pressure. He became the president for difficult times.”

Unlike Trzaskowski, Smiech said, Nawrocki “didn’t try to please everyone”.

Yet he managed to please enough voters to win.

What is the significance of Nawrocki’s win?

Most of the power in Poland rests in the hands of the prime minister. The incumbent, Donald Tusk, leads a centre-right coalition government, and Trzaskowski was the ruling alliance’s candidate.

Nawrocki has been deeply critical of the Tusk administration. The president has the ability to veto legislation and influence military and foreign policy decisions.

On the campaign trail, Nawrocki promised to lower taxes and pull Poland out of the European Union’s Pact on Migration and Asylum, an agreement on new rules for managing migration and setting a common asylum system; and the European Green Deal, which sets benchmarks for environmental protection for the EU, such as the complete cessation of net emissions of greenhouse gases by 2050.

Like other candidates, including Trzaskowski, Nawrocki called for Poland to spend up to 5 percent of its gross domestic product (GDP) on defence. Poland spent 3.8 percent of its GDP on military expenditure in 2023, according to World Bank data.

“Some expected a wave of support for the left or liberal side, especially among young people. That didn’t happen. Nawrocki won in the 18-39 age group,” Smiech said.

“It’s a clear message: people still care about sovereignty, tradition, and strong leadership. Even younger voters are not buying into the idea of a ‘new progressive Poland’.”

What were the key issues in the Polish election?

The Russia-Ukraine war, which began in February 2022, is a concerning issue for the Poles, who are fearful of a spillover of Russian aggression to Poland due to its proximity to Ukraine.

While Poland initially threw its full support behind Ukraine, tensions have grown between Poland and Ukraine.

Nawrocki is opposed to Ukraine joining NATO and the EU.

Yet, at the same time, Poland and Nawrocki remain deeply suspicious of Russia.

On May 12, the Polish Ministry of Foreign Affairs said an investigation had revealed that Russian intelligence agencies had orchestrated a massive fire at a shopping centre in Warsaw in May 2024. This is why multiple candidates in this election proposed raising the defence budget to 5 percent of the GDP.

Abortion is a key issue in Poland, which has some of the strictest abortion laws in Europe. In August 2024, Prime Minister Tusk acknowledged that he did not have enough backing from parliament to deliver on one of his key campaign promises and change the abortion law. PiS, which backed Nawrocki, is opposed to any legalisation of abortion.

Other issues included economic concerns about taxes, housing costs and the state of public transport.

What’s next?

Nawrocki is expected to be sworn in on August 6.

Smeich said Nawrocki will need to prove that he is not just good at campaigning, but also at governing.

“Expectations are high. People want someone who will defend Poland’s interests, stay firm under pressure, and not give in to media or foreign influence. He’s starting his term in a tough moment — exactly the kind of moment he was elected for.”

THIS is the chilling moment the doomed Titan sub imploded as it was captured on video from its own support ship.

Footage reveals the sound of when OceanGate’s submersible catastrophically failed during its descent to the Titanic wreck in June 2023.

10

10

10

10

The haunting video was obtained by the BBC and presented to the US Coast Guard’s Marine Board of Investigation.

It shows Wendy Rush – wife of OceanGate boss Stockton Rush – staring at a computer used to receive messages from the Titan when a deep metallic thud rings out.

Wendy, visibly startled, freezes before glancing up and asking the crew: “What was that bang?”

Seconds later, a message arrives from the sub: “dropped two wts” – a reference to the Titan shedding weights to control its dive.

But the timing of the message was tragically misleading.

According to investigators, the sub had already imploded.

The sound reached the surface faster than the delayed text, giving the false impression all was well.

All five people onboard were killed instantly when the vessel collapsed under immense pressure at a depth of around 3,300m – just 90 minutes into the £195,000-a-head journey.

The doomed expedition claimed the lives of CEO Stockton Rush, British explorer Hamish Harding, French Titanic expert Paul-Henri Nargeolet, and British-Pakistani businessman Shahzada Dawood and his 19-year-old son Suleman.

A BBC documentary, in which the footage is featured, will also reveal chilling new findings – including that the Titan’s carbon fibre hull began failing a full year before the fatal dive.

Lieutenant Commander Katie Williams from the USCG said: “Delamination at dive 80 was the beginning of the end.

“And everyone that stepped onboard the Titan after dive 80 was risking their life.”

The documentary details how carbon fibre, an unconventional choice for deep-sea vessels, started to separate in 2022.

On that dive, passengers heard a loud bang, but Rush reportedly reassured them it was “the sub shifting in its frame.”

The USCG has since confirmed that noise was a sign the hull was beginning to break apart.

Despite warnings from experts and former OceanGate staff – one calling the sub an “abomination” – Titan continued making dives.

Deep-sea explorer Victor Vescovo admitted: “I specifically told them that it was simply a matter of time before it failed catastrophically.”

Businessman Oisin Fanning, who was onboard for the last two successful dives, said: “If you’re asking a simple question: ‘Would I go again knowing what I know now?’ – the answer is no.”

10

10

The mangled wreckage of the Titan was later recovered from the Atlantic seabed, along with clothing, stickers and business cards.

The USCG has confirmed “presumed human remains” were found and matched to the victims.

Christine Dawood, who lost her husband Shahzada and son Suleman, told the BBC the tragedy had changed her forever.

“I don’t think that anybody who goes through loss and such a trauma can ever be the same.”

The harrowing footage comes as the USCG prepares to release its final report later this year, with legal fallout already beginning.

In April, billionaire heiress Karen Lo launched a £1million lawsuit after her trip aboard Titan was axed.

The Hong Kong businesswoman, worth around £758million, paid £680,000 for the once-in-a-lifetime voyage – only for it to be cancelled after the sub was struck by lightning in 2018.

She was promised priority rebooking, but after the sub imploded in 2023, she demanded her money back.

10

10

10

10

Lo is now suing Henry Cookson’s ultra-luxury travel firm, arguing it broke the contract.

The company denies wrongdoing, insisting she declined to use her credit for alternative trips and that the refund policy was clear.

Meanwhile, earlier this year, a 20-second audio clip recorded 900 miles from the implosion site emerged, capturing what experts believe was the actual moment the Titan was crushed.

The eerie recording revealed the “acoustic signature” of the vessel’s final seconds.

Rescue hopes were initially high when Titan vanished from sonar on June 18, 2023.

But days later, its shattered remains were discovered scattered across the ocean floor – an area the size of six football pitches.

The Titan was last heard from at 10.47am with the message: “dropped two wts.”

Six seconds later, it vanished from sonar.

The support ship Polar Prince sent a final message at 10.49am: “lost tracking.”

Communication was never re-established.

OceanGate later issued a statement: “We again offer our deepest condolences to the families of those who died on June 18, 2023… It would be inappropriate to respond further while we await the agencies’ reports.”

The investigation continues.

Searching for patio furniture that is attractive, affordable and long-lasting is like seeking the holy grail: We want to believe it exists, but we’re not entirely sure.

“Outdoor furniture is tough,” said Tatiana Tensen, co-founder of the Eastside Staging Company that has been staging homes in L.A. for a decade. “While we look at the majority of our inventory as an asset, we understand that most patio furniture has a shelf-life of one, maybe two years. After that, most of it ends up being gifted to our local Buy Nothing group.”

Still, Tensen, who shops for furniture as part of her job, was able to offer a few tips on what to look for when investing in outdoor pieces.

“Certain brands like Salterini, Brown Jordan and Eames made outdoor furniture that lasted decades,” she said. “Materials also matter in terms of longevity. Powder-coated metals and well-patina’d teak will stay fresh and current for years.” She added that investing in good outdoor fabrics is also key. “There is a reason why Sunbrella is so popular,” she said.

Many people purchase patio furniture online from chain stores like Crate & Barrel, Restoration Hardware, Ikea, Costco and Home Depot or online retailers like Article and Wayfair. Others have had luck with Facebook Marketplace, where they say getting a deal is like finding a needle in a haystack but can yield a huge payoff if you’re willing to put in the time and energy. The list below is for people like me who prefer to shop at brick-and-mortar stores, aren’t afraid of vintage items and like supporting local businesses.

With help from designers, prop stylists, set decorators and the always informative Atwater Village Mom’s Facebook Group, I’ve assembled this road map to help you find whatever the patio furniture holy grail means for you. Maybe it’s a gorgeous teak peace that’s pricey but will last forever, or a mosaic tile table made by hand. Perhaps you can tolerate a little rust on a midcentury piece if the price is right, or you’re willing to shell out for a perfectly revamped chaise with new powder coating and fresh vinyl straps in the color of your choice.

Whatever it is you hope to find, I’m wishing you best of luck on your quest — and plenty of outdoor lounging.

WASHINGTON — House Republicans are getting closer to passing President Trump’s tax breaks, spending cuts and beefed-up border security as Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) attempts to pass the package over unified Democratic opposition by Memorial Day.

House committees have labored for months on the legislation, which exceeds 1,000 pages and is titled the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” a nod to Trump himself.

GOP divisions have narrowed but continue as fiscal conservatives worry the bill doesn’t do enough to curb Medicaid spending, while Republicans from competitive swing districts have expressed concerns about the prospect of their constituents losing access to health coverage and food assistance.

Democrats say they will fight what House party leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) calls “this extreme and toxic bill.”

Here’s a look at what’s in and out of the legislative package so far.

Tax cuts for individuals and businesses

Republicans are looking to make permanent the individual income and estate tax cuts passed in Trump’s first term, in 2017, plus enact promises he made on the 2024 campaign trail to not tax tips, overtime and interest on some auto loans.

To partially offset the lost revenue, Republicans propose repealing or phasing out more quickly the clean energy tax credits passed during Joe Biden’s presidency, helping to bring down the overall cost of the tax portion to about $3.8 trillion.

The bill includes a temporary boost in the standard deduction — a $1,000 increase for individuals, bringing it to $16,000 for individual filers, and a $2,000 boost for joint filers, bringing it to $32,000. The deduction reduces the amount of income that is actually subject to income tax.

There is also a temporary $500 increase in the child tax credit, bringing it to $2,500 for 2025 through 2028. It then returns to $2,000 and will increase to account for inflation.

The estate tax exemption rises to $15 million and is adjusted for inflation going forward.

Several of the provisions Trump promised in the campaign would be temporary, lasting roughly through his term in office. The tax breaks for tips, overtime and car loan interest expire at the end of 2028. That’s also the case for a $4,000 increase in the standard deduction for seniors.

Among the various business tax provisions, small businesses, including partnerships and S corporations, will be able to subtract 23% of their qualified business income from their taxes. The deduction has been 20%.

Businesses will temporarily be allowed to fully expense domestic research and development costs in the year they occur and the cost of machinery, equipment and other qualifying assets. This encourages businesses to invest in ways that enhances their productivity.

Parents and older Americans face work requirements for food assistance

House Republicans would reduce spending on food aid, what is known as the Supplemental Nutrition and Assistance Program, by about $267 billion over 10 years.

States would shoulder 5% of benefit costs, beginning in fiscal 2028, and 75% of the administrative costs. Currently, states pay none of the benefit and half of the administration costs.

Republicans also are expanding the work requirements to receive food aid. Under current law, able-bodied adults without dependents must fulfill work requirements until they are 54, and that would change under the bill to age 64.

Also, some parents are currently exempt from work requirements until their children are 18; that would change so only those caring for a dependent child under the age of 7 are exempt.

At the same time, the legislation would invest $60 billion in new money for agriculture programs, sending aid to farmers.

New work requirements for Medicaid

A focal point of the package is nearly $700 billion in reduced spending in the Medicaid program, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

To be eligible for Medicaid, there would be new “community engagement requirements” of at least 80 hours per month of work, education or service for able-bodied adults without dependents. The new requirement would not kick in until Jan. 1, 2029, after Trump leaves office. People would also have to verify their eligibility for the program twice a year, rather than just once.

Republicans are looking to generate savings with new work requirements. But Democrats warn that millions of Americans will lose coverage.

An estimate from the Congressional Budget Office said the proposals would reduce the number of people with healthcare by at least 7.6 million from the Medicaid changes, and possibly more with other changes to the Affordable Care Act.

Applicants could not qualify for Medicaid if they have a home that is valued at more than $1 million.

No taxes on gun silencers, no money for Planned Parenthood and more

Republicans are also using the package to reward allies and disadvantage political foes.

The package would eliminate a $200 tax on gun silencers that has existed since Congress passed the National Firearms Act in 1934. The elimination of the tax is supported by theNational Rifle Assn.

The group Giffords, which works to reduce gun violence, said silencers make it more difficult to recognize the sound of gunfire and locate the source of gunshots, impairing the ability of law enforcement to respond to active shooters.

Republicans are also looking to prohibit Medicaid funds from going to Planned Parenthood, which provides abortion care and other services. Democrats say defunding the organization would make it harder for millions of patients to get cancer screenings, pap tests and birth control.

‘MAGA’ kids $1,000 savings accounts

“MAGA” is shorthand for Trump’s signature line, “Make America Great Again.” But in this case, it means “Money Accounts for Growth and Advancement.”

For parents or guardians who open new “MAGA” accounts for their children, the federal government will contribute $1,000 for babies born between Jan. 1, 2024 and Dec. 31, 2028.

Families could add $5,000 a year, with the account holders unable to take distributions before age 18. Then, they could access up to 50% of the money to pay for higher education, training and first-time home purchases. At age 30, account holders have access to the full balance of the account for any purpose.

Funding for Trump’s mass deportation operation

The legislation would provide $46.5 billion to revive construction of Trump’s wall along the U.S.-Mexico border, and more money for the deportation agenda.

There’s $4 billion to hire an additional 3,000 new Border Patrol agents as well as 5,000 new customs officers, and $2.1 billion for signing and retention bonuses. There’s also funds for 10,000 more Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers and investigators.

It includes major changes to immigration policy, imposing a $1,000 fee on migrants seeking asylum — something the nation has never done, putting it on par with a few others, including Australia and Iran.

Overall, the plan is to remove 1 million immigrants annually and house 100,000 people in detention centers.

More money for the Pentagon and Trump’s ‘Golden Dome’

There’s also nearly $150 billion in new money for the Defense Department and national security.

It would provide $25 billion for Trump’s “Golden Dome for America,” a long-envisioned missile defense shield, $21 billion to restock the nation’s ammunition arsenal, $34 billion to expand the naval fleet with more shipbuilding and some $5 billion for border security.

It also includes $9 billion for servicemember quality-of-life-related issues, including housing, healthcare and special pay.

Tax on university endowments and overhaul of student loans

A wholesale revamping of the student loan program is key to the legislation, providing $330 billion in budget cuts and savings.

The proposal would replace all existing student loan repayment plans with just two: a standard option with monthly payments spread out over 10 to 25 years and a “repayment assistance” plan that is generally less generous than those it would replace.

Among other changes, the bill would repeal Biden-era regulations that made it easier for borrowers to get loans canceled if their colleges defrauded them or closed suddenly.

There would be a tax increase, up to 21%, on some university endowments.

More drilling, mining on public lands

To generate revenue, one section would allow increased leasing of public lands for drilling, mining and logging while clearing the path for more development by speeding up government approvals.

Royalty rates paid by companies to extract oil, gas and coal would be cut, reversing Biden’s attempts to curb fossil fuels to help address climate change.

In a last-minute add, Republicans also included a provision authorizing sales of hundreds of thousands of acres of public lands in Nevada and Utah, prompting outrage from Democrats and environmentalists.

Freking and Mascaro write for the Associated Press. AP writers Collin Binkley and Mary Clare Jalonick in Washington and Matthew Brown in Billings, Mont., contributed to this report.

Carol Parks, the chief of Los Angeles’ Emergency Management Department, sat before a budget committee last year and painted a dire picture.

Although tasked with responding to crises in the nation’s most disaster-prone region, her department had received just a tiny fraction of the city’s budget and was getting by with a staff of roughly 30.

There was no staffer devoted full-time to disaster recovery, which meant that if an earthquake or major wildfire struck, the city would have to scramble.

But the City Council and Mayor Karen Bass balked at devoting more money to the department.

Seven months later, flames tore through Pacific Palisades and nearby communities, destroying more than 6,000 structures and displacing tens of thousands.

Now, the Emergency Management Department is in charge of coordinating the monumental task of recovery — but with a budget smaller than what the city’s Police Department uses in roughly two days.

To supplement the bare-bones emergency management team, Bass turned to an Illinois-based disaster recovery firm, Hagerty Consulting, inking a yearlong contract for up to $10 million. She also brought a former EMD general manager, Jim Featherstone, back from retirement to serve as the de facto recovery chief.

More than four months after the fire, Palisades residents and some of their elected officials are increasingly frustrated, asking: Who is in charge? What have they been doing? How is Hagerty spending its time? And what is the plan to restore the Palisades?

L.A. brings on Hagerty

As flames chewed through the Palisades on Jan. 7, EMD assigned a mid-level staffer to take on the recovery. Soon, Featherstone — a former firefighter who once served as interim LAFD chief — arrived at the emergency operations center.

In public, Bass touted civic leader Steve Soboroff as the city’s recovery czar, with a controversy over his salary taking center stage for a period.

Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, left, and her disaster recovery czar Steve Soboroff, right, at Palisades Recreation Center in January.

(Brian van der Brug/Los Angeles Times)

In practice, Featherstone — a self-described “operator” and “tactical person” — assumed the recovery director role, helping to choreograph a massive, multiagency response.

Zach Seidl, a spokesperson for Bass, disputed that characterization and said the two men had different roles. Featherstone’s “role is largely internal to the City,” while Soboroff, whose term ended last month, “worked externally with the community along with other engagement teams within the Mayor’s Office,” Seidl said in an email.

While the city code puts EMD in charge of coordinating disaster recovery, it operates with fewer resources than similar departments in other large California cities. A 2022 audit found that L.A. spent $1.56 per resident on emergency management — far less than Long Beach at $2.26 and San Francisco at $7.59.

With such a small team for a 469-square-mile city, EMD has struggled to staff its emergency operations center in crises, prepare for events like the 2028 Olympics and help residents recover from smaller-scale calamities like building fires, storms and mudslides.

Parks told the City Council in a 2024 memo that her department “lacks the experience and dedicated staff to oversee long-term recovery projects.” After recent emergencies, EMD handled recovery duties “on an ad hoc basis,” yielding “delays, postponements and possible denial of disaster relief funds,” she wrote.

To boost EMD, Bass in early February tapped Hagerty after hearing proposals from firms including AECOM and IEM. Her reasons for choosing Hagerty were unclear, although the firm had already signed a wildfire recovery contract with L.A. County’s emergency management office and had long worked with the state Office of Emergency Services.

It’s not unusual for a state or local government to retain a recovery consultant after a disaster, even if it has a recovery arm of its own. Hagerty has routinely been hired to help with hurricane recovery, including managing billions of dollars in funding after Superstorm Sandy in New York in 2012.

Because Bass hired Hagerty under her emergency authority, the city has also solicited bids for a longer-term recovery contract worth $30 million over three years, with Hagerty among the companies vying for it.

Initially, Hagerty spent “a significant amount” of time compensating for the lack of a city recovery team, said Featherstone, who supervises Hagerty’s work, at a budget hearing last month.

By contrast, L.A. County had a dedicated recovery operation that consultants could plug into — and the muscle memory from recent disasters like the Woolsey fire.

“The structure had to be built out,” Featherstone told council members at the budget hearing. “Folks were pulled out of their regular day-to-day functions … to start to build out a recovery capability.”

Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass speaks with Pacific Palisades residents at a debris removal town hall on Jan. 26 in Santa Monica.

(Gina Ferazzi/Los Angeles Times)

That structure is a series of tactical teams focused on issues including infrastructure, economics, health and housing. Under each umbrella are multiple working groups composed of several city departments working with federal and regional agencies.

Under the infrastructure team, for example, is a debris removal group, a utilities team and a group for hazards such as mudslides, according to a recording of a recovery meeting reviewed by The Times. The housing team, meanwhile, brings together the Department of Building and Safety and the city Planning Department to streamline the permitting process.

Debris removal was one of the first orders of business — so that group was among the first to be organized and has been the “busiest,” as one EMD staffer said in a recording of an internal March meeting.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has the primary responsibility for clearing debris from lots, with most expected to be done by Memorial Day and the rest largely due to be finished this summer. The city, with Hagerty, helped explain the debris removal process to residents, including the decision to opt in to the Army Corps cleanup or do it on their own.

With Hagerty’s guidance, the Emergency Management Department also created a dashboard showing the progress of debris removal, with real-time maps tracking the status of each lot.

Tracey Phillips, a Hagerty executive, told City Council members in March that her firm was organizing these tactical teams and holding weekly meetings so that “we can develop a short-term and mid-term operational framework.”

“This is the first step to that: [determining] who the players are, getting them in the room, getting them trained up and developing that operational cadence,” Phillips explained. “It’s already happening — it’s just not being reported and it’s not kind of coalesced yet.”

As of mid-March, Hagerty had about 22 employees working on Palisades fire recovery, billing the city at hourly rates ranging from $80 to nearly $400 per employee.

City Councilmember Monica Rodriguez is among those who say that some of the money used for Hagerty would have been better spent bolstering the Emergency Management Department’s rank and file — as Parks had requested last year.

“I don’t understand their purpose. I don’t need another contractor,” Rodriguez said in an interview. “What my city staff needs is staff to do the work.”

Asked whether funding for Hagerty would be better spent on EMD, Seidl, the spokesperson for Bass, said most of the firm’s work is reimbursable by the federal government, a point that Featherstone made at a March budget hearing. Featherstone also suggested that Hagerty’s guidance could yield more funding in the long run because of the firm’s expertise with the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

Hagerty and Featherstone declined interview requests from The Times. Joseph Riser, a spokesperson for EMD, provided written responses to questions.

EMD was “very pleased” with Hagerty for building out recovery teams “where they did not previously exist,” Riser said, noting that the firm has improved coordination and provided “high-level briefings” to City Hall and department general managers, among other duties.

Seidl emphasized that the mayor has taken steps to preserve EMD’s budget, “even in difficult budget times like this year.” He also touted steps the city has taken to hasten the recovery, like a one-stop permitting and rebuilding center, measures to allow for the re-issuance of permits for homes built in recent years, and restoring water and power in two months compared to the 18 months it took in Paradise after the 2018 Camp fire.

“Despite one of the worst natural disasters in recent history, L.A.’s recovery effort is on track to be the fastest in modern California history,” Seidl said.

Palisades residents strike back

Some Palisades residents say that Hagerty and EMD — and ultimately, Bass and her team — have done a poor job of communicating what their plan is going forward.

Citing the cornucopia of government agencies involved in the rebuild, City Councilmember Traci Park, whose district includes the Palisades, said, “Sometimes it feels like there are so many people in charge that no one is in charge.”

Maryam Zar, who runs the Palisades Recovery Coalition, said that at times, “we feel like we are doing this ourselves.”

Pacific Palisades residents attend a town hall on the L.A. Fire Health Study featuring leading scientists on post-fire health in the backyard of a private residence on Tuesday in Los Angeles. The study is a 10-year effort to study the exposures to dangerous substances and consequent health effects.

(Gina Ferazzi/Los Angeles Times)

Zar and her group have been among the most vocal advocates for a logistics plan governing how thousands of homes will be rebuilt in a community with narrow streets and already-snarled traffic.

The group has circulated ideas that include a concrete plant in the Palisades, short-term housing for construction crews and one-way roads to ease congestion.

Zar said that Hagerty has “shown up to community meetings, and they have been so unable to deliver any kind of information.”

In an interview, Park said that “for weeks and weeks now,” she also has been asking Hagerty and city departments for “a logistics and operations plan” for moving people, vehicles and materials in and out of the Palisades.

Park has visited Lahaina, Hawaii, which was devastated by a wildfire in 2023, and studied other communities rebuilding from fires. She said those areas had consultants who were “very, very engaged” with communities in identifying priorities and solving problems. She wants the city and Hagerty to push forward on a longer-term recovery plan that establishes criteria for fire-safe rebuilding and a timeline for restoring parks, schools, libraries and businesses.

“I know that those things can take significant time to develop. But this is Los Angeles, and this is the Pacific Palisades, and we are not waiting around,” she said, adding that she and her constituents were “moving at warp speed.”

Riser, the EMD spokesperson, said that traffic and logistics were not handled in a “single, static, formal plan,” but that problems were being addressed in coordination with city and state agencies. He also said EMD has brought in traffic experts to “structure this work more effectively.”

“Recovery is dynamic and complex and changes daily as debris is cleared, infrastructure is repaired, and reentry phases evolve,” Riser said.

Frustration with Hagerty boiled over at an April 10 meeting of the Palisades community council, where Hagerty representative Harrison Newton touted recovery as “a chance to become more resilient to the next disaster.”

Residents could barely contain their fury, criticizing Newton for an abstract presentation that seemed divorced from their real needs around rebuilding, permitting and traffic control.

“It feels extremely generic,” said Lee Ann Daly, who then turned her ire toward City Hall. “You need to know that we have a trust issue with the people who are paying you. … We have a trust issue, and it’s huge.”

Palisades resident Kimberly Bloom, whose home burned in the fire, pressed Newton to provide a “concrete example” of Hagerty’s work in a prior disaster “that is not just another layer of bureaucracy, because that’s what it feels like at the moment.”

Newton referred residents to Hagerty’s website and spoke of how his firm provides “augmentation support,” prompting residents to interrupt and criticize his use of jargon.

After some back and forth, Newton emphasized that he and his team were trying to accelerate the city’s response to the issues raised by residents. Hagerty, he said, was “bringing more people to bear so they’re less thinly stretched, and you’re achieving work faster.”

What lies ahead

So far, more than 1,500 parcels in the Palisades have received a final sign-off from L.A. County that they are cleared of debris, paving the way to begin rebuilding.

As of this week, 54 construction permits for 40 addresses have been issued in the Palisades, said Seidl, who noted that hundreds of permit applications are now under review.

The burden will increasingly shift onto city agencies like the Department of Building and Safety to serve thousands of homeowners and businesses seeking plan checks, permits, inspections and certificates of occupancy.

The logistics of whole neighborhoods undertaking simultaneous construction projects on hillside streets, with only a few major arteries in and out, will test the recovery framework that EMD and Hagerty have been working to erect.

In the coming weeks, Bass is expected to name a new chief recovery officer, and her team is “currently interviewing … qualified candidates,” Seidl said. Featherstone, who was initially hired on a 120-day appointment, is now serving as an assistant general manager at EMD, and Parks, the EMD chief, has asked for funding in the coming fiscal year’s budget to keep him.

Hagerty could be replaced by a different firm if it loses the competitive bidding process for the multi-year recovery contract. One of the many “deliverables” for that contract is developing a long-term recovery plan.

That type of overarching plan governing the rebuilding — and direct communication about the plan — is what residents and local officials say they have been pleading for.

“We have more debris clearing to do, but we are also breaking ground on new buildings,” said Councilmember Park. “If we don’t get those plans under control and in place, this is going to turn into ‘The Hunger Games’ very quickly.”

It was one of US President Donald Trump’s most ambitious executive orders, and it came just hours after he took office for his second term: ending the United States’ decades-long policy of birthright citizenship.

And just three days after Trump issued the order, a federal judge in Washington state blocked the decree from going into effect. In the months that followed, two other federal judges joined in issuing nationwide injunctions.

On Thursday, the issue will reach the US Supreme Court, with the 6-3 conservative dominated bench set to hear oral arguments in the case. What the court decides could be transformative.

Proponents have long argued that the practice of granting citizenship to all those born on US soil is woven into the national fabric.

American Civil Liberties Union executive director Anthony Romero did not mince words in January, when he called Trump’s order a “reckless and ruthless repudiation of American values”, destined to create a “permanent subclass of people born in the US who are denied full rights as Americans”.

Meanwhile, a smaller but vocal contingency, empowered by Trump, has maintained that the practice is based on faulty constitutional interpretation and serves as an incentive for undocumented migration. The Trump administration has called it “birth tourism”.

Here’s what to expect from Thursday’s hearing:

What time will it start?

The hearing will start at 9am local (14:00 GMT).

What is at stake?

The most fundamental question that could be answered by the top court is whether birthright citizenship will be allowed to continue.

Proponents point to the US Constitution’s 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, which reads: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside”.

A subsequent 1898 Supreme Court case, United States v Wong Kim Ark, interpreted the language as applying to all immigrants, creating a precedent that has since stood.

Some studies estimate that about 150,000 immigrant infants are born with citizenship every year under the policy.

The Trump administration, in contrast, has embraced the theory that babies born to noncitizens are not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the US, and therefore are not constitutionally guaranteed citizenship.
Speaking to reporters in April, Trump described a scenario of “tourists coming in and touching a piece of sand and then all of a sudden, there’s citizenship”. He has embraced the theory that the 14th Amendment was meant to apply only to former slaves, and not newly arriving immigrants

At the time, Trump predicted it would be “easy” to win the case based on that logic.

Could the outcome be more complicated?

Yes. The Trump administration has taken a strategically unique tack in the case.

In their emergency filing to the Supreme Court, they have focused on the actions of the three judges who blocked Trump’s order from going into effect nationwide.

They argue the orders extend beyond the judges’ authorities and should only apply to the plaintiffs or jurisdictions directly connected to Trump’s executive order.

Theoretically, the Supreme Court could rule on whether the judges can issue nationwide injunctions, without ruling on whether birthright citizenship is, in fact, protected by the Constitution.

For example, if the justices rule that the lower judges exceeded their power, but do not make a determination on the constitutional merits of birthright citizenship, the executive order would only be blocked in the 22 states that successfully challenged Trump’s order.

Attorneys General in those states had challenged the order in a joint lawsuit, with a federal judge in Massachusetts ruling in their favour in February.

Birthright citizenship would effectively be banned in 28 other states unless they also successfully challenge the order or until the Supreme Court makes a future ruling.

The possibility has split legal scholars, with some arguing it is unlikely the Supreme Court would make the narrower decision on the scope of the lower judges’ power without also ruling on the underlying constitutional merits of birthright citizenship.

Could the ruling extend beyond birthright citizenship?

Yes. If the justices do decide to only address the scope of the lower judges’ power, the implications could extend far beyond the birthright citizenship question.

It would also apply to several other Trump executive orders that have been blocked by a federal judge’s national injunction, also called “universal injunctions”. Those include several Trump executive orders seeking to unilaterally transform the federal government, the military, and how funding is disbursed to states, to name a few.

In a written filing in the birthright citizenship case, the Department of Justice pointed to the wider implications, saying the need for the Supreme Court’s “intervention has become urgent as universal injunctions have reached tsunami levels”.

Meanwhile, the plaintiffs in the Maryland case that successfully challenged Trump’s birthright order said doing away with national injunctions would create different tiers of rights depending on an individual’s geographical location.

“An infant would be a United States citizen and full member of society if born in New Jersey, but a deportable noncitizen if born in Tennessee,” they wrote in a court filing.