In an unexpected turn of events on the eve of the US midterm elections, President Donald Trump’s administration on Monday asked the Supreme Court to temporarily block California from counting mail-in ballots from more than 20,000 registered voters who federal officials allege are likely non-US citizens.&nbsp;&nbsp;Escalating a legal fight that could affect thousands of voters, the Justice Department filed the ‌emergency request as it seeks to prevent counting the disputed ballots until each voter’s citizenship status can be verified.A federal appeals court had on Friday refused the request.&nbsp;Trump’s fellow Republicans are fighting to retain control of Congress in Tuesday’s midterms. California is the most populous US state and a Democratic stronghold.The Trump administration has intensified its focus on alleged noncitizen voting in the run-up to the midterms.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-midterms-2026-abdul-el-sayed-comes-under-fire-for-saying-males-in-girls-sports-is-manufactured-issue-1793633930588">US midterms 2026: Abdul El-Sayed comes under fire for saying males in girls’ sports is ‘manufactured’ issue</a>&nbsp;“Once California commingles the challenged ballots with lawful ones, there is no way to get the challenged ballots back,” the Justice Department said in its request to the Supreme Court.&nbsp;The administration has asked the Supreme Court to order California to separate any ballots cast by people on the list from other ballots and not to count them until those voters are verified as citizens. It also urged the court ⁠to act quickly by ordering the ballots to be set aside on an interim basis while the justices formally decide the Justice Department’s request.&nbsp;The US Constitution assigns the responsibility of administering elections to states, though the federal government has some oversight. The lawsuit marks a rare federal intervention in the voting process and signals the likelihood of the administration contesting the election results in court.The administration had sought to restrict voting by mail, a mode used more often by Democratic-leaning voters, but the Supreme Court rebuffed that effort in September.&nbsp;&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/democrat-haley-stevens-endorses-gop-against-el-sayed-in-michigan-senate-race-after-feud-over-israel-1793560987311">Democrat Haley Stevens endorses GOP against El-Sayed in Michigan Senate race after feud over Israel</a>&nbsp;A federal judge on Sunday dismissed the administration's lawsuit concerning the US Senate race in Alaska.The list of 20,000 registered voters was prepared by the US Department of Homeland Security and sent to California officials and to Los Angeles County officials.&nbsp;The Justice Department last month claimed in federal court that California is unlawfully preventing its enforcement of a 1996 US law that makes it a criminal offence for noncitizens to vote in federal elections. It said California’s action violated the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause, which holds that federal law generally ‌preempts state ⁠law.&nbsp;California has said that the state’s safeguards against noncitizen voting are robust and that the lawsuit threatens to deprive 20,000 people of their right to vote based on vague accusations.&nbsp;&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/engage-with-open-heart-to-avoid-fresh-election-israel-s-president-isaac-herzog-tells-parties-1793555229077">‘Engage with open heart to avoid fresh election,’ Israel’s President Isaac Herzog tells parties</a>&nbsp;California has 52 seats in the House of Representatives, more than any other state. Democrats need a net gain of four House seats to win a majority in the chamber.&nbsp;The San Francisco-based 9th US ⁠Circuit Court of Appeals had on Friday refused to block the ballots, stating that the state’s power over election procedures and California’s “comprehensive statutory scheme to ensure the integrity of its elections,” including a system for canceling registrations if a voter is shown to be ineligible.&nbsp;The Justice Department has told election officials in all 50 states that they could face criminal prosecution if they knowingly allow noncitizens to remain on their rolls or cast ballots.

The Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court to order California to separate any ballots cast by people on the list from other ballots and not to count them until those voters are verified. It also urged the court ⁠to quickly order the ballots to be set aside on an interim basis.

In an unexpected turn of events on the eve of the US midterm elections, President Donald Trump’s administration on Monday asked the Supreme Court to temporarily block California from counting mail-in ballots from more than 20,000 registered voters who federal officials allege are likely non-US citizens. Escalating a legal fight that could affect thousands of voters, the Justice Department filed the ‌emergency request as it seeks to prevent counting the disputed ballots until each voter’s citizenship status can be verified. A federal appeals court had on Friday refused the request. Trump’s fellow Republicans are fighting to retain control of Congress in Tuesday’s midterms. California is the most populous US state and a Democratic stronghold. The Trump administration has intensified its focus on alleged noncitizen voting in the run-up to the midterms. Also Read: US midterms 2026: Abdul El-Sayed comes under fire for saying males in girls’ sports is ‘manufactured’ issue “Once California commingles the challenged ballots with lawful ones, there is no way to get the challenged ballots back,” the Justice Department said in its request to the Supreme Court. The administration has asked the Supreme Court to order California to separate any ballots cast by people on the list from other ballots and not to count them until those voters are verified as citizens. It also urged the court ⁠to act quickly by ordering the ballots to be set aside on an interim basis while the justices formally decide the Justice Department’s request. The US Constitution assigns the responsibility of administering elections to states, though the federal government has some oversight. The lawsuit marks a rare federal intervention in the voting process and signals the likelihood of the administration contesting the election results in court. The administration had sought to restrict voting by mail, a mode used more often by Democratic-leaning voters, but the Supreme Court rebuffed that effort in September. Also Read: Democrat Haley Stevens endorses GOP against El-Sayed in Michigan Senate race after feud over Israel A federal judge on Sunday dismissed the administration's lawsuit concerning the US Senate race in Alaska. The list of 20,000 registered voters was prepared by the US Department of Homeland Security and sent to California officials and to Los Angeles County officials. The Justice Department last month claimed in federal court that California is unlawfully preventing its enforcement of a 1996 US law that makes it a criminal offence for noncitizens to vote in federal elections. It said California’s action violated the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause, which holds that federal law generally ‌preempts state ⁠law. California has said that the state’s safeguards against noncitizen voting are robust and that the lawsuit threatens to deprive 20,000 people of their right to vote based on vague accusations. Also Read: ‘Engage with open heart to avoid fresh election,’ Israel’s President Isaac Herzog tells parties California has 52 seats in the House of Representatives, more than any other state. Democrats need a net gain of four House seats to win a majority in the chamber. The San Francisco-based 9th US ⁠Circuit Court of Appeals had on Friday refused to block the ballots, stating that the state’s power over election procedures and California’s “comprehensive statutory scheme to ensure the integrity of its elections,” including a system for canceling registrations if a voter is shown to be ineligible. The Justice Department has told election officials in all 50 states that they could face criminal prosecution if they knowingly allow noncitizens to remain on their rolls or cast ballots.

The Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court to order California to separate any ballots cast by people on the list from other ballots and not to count them until those voters are verified. It also urged the court ⁠to quickly order the ballots to be set aside on an interim basis.

‘Block, segregate mail-in ballots’: Trump admin takes California ballot fight to Supreme Court

The United States on Wednesday (Oct 14) finalised and codified a rule ending automatic extensions of employment authorisation documents (EADs) for eligible foreign nationals awaiting renewal of their work permits. The move particularly matters for the tens of thousands of Indians working in the US and their spouses. Here's all you need to know.<h2>Why it matters for Indians in America</h2>The biggest concern for Indian families is that eligible H-4 spouses of H-1B visa holders could lose the ability to work while waiting for their employment authorisation renewals. Under the finalised US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) rule, filing a renewal application on time will no longer automatically extend work authorisation for the categories covered by the change.For Indian families already navigating lengthy employment-based green card backlogs, the consequences could be significant. Many H-4 spouses, largely women, have built careers in the US while their partners pursue permanent residency. If an existing Employment Authorisation Document (EAD) expires before a renewal is approved, those covered by the rule may have to stop working, potentially disrupting household income, career progression and financial planning.Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/visa-applications-made-easier-for-northeast-india-as-guwahati-opens-new-centre-1792127827908">Visa applications made easier for Northeast India as Guwahati opens new centre</a><h2>Why the change matters</h2>The automatic extension policy was originally designed to prevent immigrants from losing their jobs because of delays at US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). Eligible applicants could previously continue working for up to 540 days after their permits expired while renewals were pending.The revised rule, which takes effect on October 14, removes that protection for covered renewal applications. Applicants generally can file for renewal only within 180 days of their EAD's expiry, leaving limited room to absorb lengthy processing delays.The scale of the backlog adds to the concern. As of June 30, 2026, more than 432,000 EAD renewal applications had been pending for at least six months, including over 91,000 that had been awaiting decisions for more than 18 months, according to figures cited in the supplied reports.Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/us-india-origin-congresswoman-pramila-jayapal-criticises-india-over-sir-exercise-alleges-130-million-people-being-purged-from-electoral-rolls-1792038655277">US: India-origin Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal criticises India over SIR, alleges 130 million being 'purged' from electoral rolls</a><h2>Who is affected, and who is exempt?</h2>The change affects certain categories of foreign nationals who rely on EADs, including eligible H-4 spouses of H-1B workers and some asylum seekers. DHS says ending automatic extensions will allow authorities to conduct more frequent eligibility and security checks.However, the change does not apply uniformly to all foreign workers. Eligible spouses of L-1 visa holders can work without an EAD, while F-1 students who timely apply for STEM Optional Practical Training extensions retain a separate 180-day automatic extension under a different provision.<h2>Legal challenge offers limited relief</h2>The policy has also faced a legal challenge. A US district court in California issued a preliminary injunction on September 10, 2026, in favour of seven plaintiffs who challenged the interim rule, finding that DHS had not adequately followed the procedures required under the Administrative Procedure Act. However, the relief was limited to those plaintiffs and did not apply nationwide.The administration has also signalled a possible future move to remove H-4 spouses from the categories eligible for employment authorisation.

US has ended automatic work permit extensions for certain immigrants, raising concerns for Indian H-4 spouses of H-1B workers. Here's why the move matters to the Indian diaspora in America.

The United States on Wednesday (Oct 14) finalised and codified a rule ending automatic extensions of employment authorisation documents (EADs) for eligible foreign nationals awaiting renewal of their work permits. The move particularly matters for the tens of thousands of Indians working in the US and their spouses. Here's all you need to know. Why it matters for Indians in America The biggest concern for Indian families is that eligible H-4 spouses of H-1B visa holders could lose the ability to work while waiting for their employment authorisation renewals. Under the finalised US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) rule, filing a renewal application on time will no longer automatically extend work authorisation for the categories covered by the change. For Indian families already navigating lengthy employment-based green card backlogs, the consequences could be significant. Many H-4 spouses, largely women, have built careers in the US while their partners pursue permanent residency. If an existing Employment Authorisation Document (EAD) expires before a renewal is approved, those covered by the rule may have to stop working, potentially disrupting household income, career progression and financial planning. Also read | Visa applications made easier for Northeast India as Guwahati opens new centre Why the change matters The automatic extension policy was originally designed to prevent immigrants from losing their jobs because of delays at US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). Eligible applicants could previously continue working for up to 540 days after their permits expired while renewals were pending. The revised rule, which takes effect on October 14, removes that protection for covered renewal applications. Applicants generally can file for renewal only within 180 days of their EAD's expiry, leaving limited room to absorb lengthy processing delays. The scale of the backlog adds to the concern. As of June 30, 2026, more than 432,000 EAD renewal applications had been pending for at least six months, including over 91,000 that had been awaiting decisions for more than 18 months, according to figures cited in the supplied reports. Also read | US: India-origin Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal criticises India over SIR, alleges 130 million being 'purged' from electoral rolls Who is affected, and who is exempt? The change affects certain categories of foreign nationals who rely on EADs, including eligible H-4 spouses of H-1B workers and some asylum seekers. DHS says ending automatic extensions will allow authorities to conduct more frequent eligibility and security checks. However, the change does not apply uniformly to all foreign workers. Eligible spouses of L-1 visa holders can work without an EAD, while F-1 students who timely apply for STEM Optional Practical Training extensions retain a separate 180-day automatic extension under a different provision. Legal challenge offers limited relief The policy has also faced a legal challenge. A US district court in California issued a preliminary injunction on September 10, 2026, in favour of seven plaintiffs who challenged the interim rule, finding that DHS had not adequately followed the procedures required under the Administrative Procedure Act. However, the relief was limited to those plaintiffs and did not apply nationwide. The administration has also signalled a possible future move to remove H-4 spouses from the categories eligible for employment authorisation.

US has ended automatic work permit extensions for certain immigrants, raising concerns for Indian H-4 spouses of H-1B workers. Here's why the move matters to the Indian diaspora in America.

US ends automatic work permit extensions; Indian workers lose 540-day safety net: What it means

The US Treasury Department on Tuesday (Oct 13) announced penalties exceeding $1.2 billion against Bank of America, accusing the lender of violating anti-money laundering and sanctions laws, including failing to report more than $5 billion in suspicious transactions. The department said some of the transactions raised national security concerns, including activity allegedly linked to Chinese money laundering networks and illicit finance along the US-Mexico border. Bank of America shares fell 2.6 per cent in after-hours trading following the announcement.The penalties include $1.2 billion assessed by the Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), alongside a $750 million civil penalty imposed by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), one of the bank’s key regulators.Separately, the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) announced an $11.6 million settlement over what it described as apparent violations of multiple sanctions programmes covering Iran, Russia, narcotics and global terrorism.“Today’s actions send a clear message that even the biggest financial institutions are not above the law,” US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said. He added that failures by a major bank to meet its anti-money laundering and sanctions obligations could expose the wider US financial system to significant risks from illicit finance.<h2>Bank of America faces fresh compliance scrutiny</h2>The announcement comes a day before Bank of America is scheduled to report its third-quarter earnings, putting the regulatory action in focus for investors.A bank spokesperson told AFP that the results would include a $1.2 billion charge, reducing net income by around 17 cents per share. The spokesperson said the institution remained committed to addressing concerns raised by regulators. “We will continue to support federal and local law enforcement across thousands of investigations and report hundreds of thousands of suspicious activity reports each year,” the spokesperson said.US regulators have also issued a consent order requiring the bank to work with a third party to identify and report suspicious transactions that had previously gone undetected. The institution must undergo an independent review of its suspicious-activity monitoring systems and other due-diligence procedures.<h2>Regulators cite earlier order and continued violations</h2>Bank of America was already subject to a December 2024 cease-and-desist order directing it to address deficiencies in its anti-money laundering programme and compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act. The Treasury said the bank failed to give compliance the required priority despite agreeing to the earlier order.OCC Comptroller Jonathan Gould described the violations as “egregious and continued” and said the $750 million civil penalty was the largest the regulator had imposed on a bank.

The US Treasury has announced more than $1.2 billion in penalties against Bank of America over alleged anti-money laundering and sanctions violations. Regulators say the bank failed to report more than $5 billion in suspicious transactions.


The US Treasury Department on Tuesday (Oct 13) announced penalties exceeding $1.2 billion against Bank of America, accusing the lender of violating anti-money laundering and sanctions laws, including failing to report more than $5 billion in suspicious transactions. The department said some of the transactions raised national security concerns, including activity allegedly linked to Chinese money laundering networks and illicit finance along the US-Mexico border. Bank of America shares fell 2.6 per cent in after-hours trading following the announcement. The penalties include $1.2 billion assessed by the Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), alongside a $750 million civil penalty imposed by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), one of the bank’s key regulators. Separately, the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) announced an $11.6 million settlement over what it described as apparent violations of multiple sanctions programmes covering Iran, Russia, narcotics and global terrorism. “Today’s actions send a clear message that even the biggest financial institutions are not above the law,” US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said. He added that failures by a major bank to meet its anti-money laundering and sanctions obligations could expose the wider US financial system to significant risks from illicit finance. Bank of America faces fresh compliance scrutiny The announcement comes a day before Bank of America is scheduled to report its third-quarter earnings, putting the regulatory action in focus for investors. A bank spokesperson told AFP that the results would include a $1.2 billion charge, reducing net income by around 17 cents per share. The spokesperson said the institution remained committed to addressing concerns raised by regulators. “We will continue to support federal and local law enforcement across thousands of investigations and report hundreds of thousands of suspicious activity reports each year,” the spokesperson said. US regulators have also issued a consent order requiring the bank to work with a third party to identify and report suspicious transactions that had previously gone undetected. The institution must undergo an independent review of its suspicious-activity monitoring systems and other due-diligence procedures. Regulators cite earlier order and continued violations Bank of America was already subject to a December 2024 cease-and-desist order directing it to address deficiencies in its anti-money laundering programme and compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act. The Treasury said the bank failed to give compliance the required priority despite agreeing to the earlier order. OCC Comptroller Jonathan Gould described the violations as “egregious and continued” and said the $750 million civil penalty was the largest the regulator had imposed on a bank.

The US Treasury has announced more than $1.2 billion in penalties against Bank of America over alleged anti-money laundering and sanctions violations. Regulators say the bank failed to report more than $5 billion in suspicious transactions.

US Treasury hits Bank of America with over $1.2 billion in penalties over suspicious transactions and Chinese money-laundering links

Trump administration is pushing more than $175 million of the State Department’s flagship human rights fund toward conservative and far-right initiatives abroad just before funding expired on September 30. Approximately $176.9 million out of $205 million appropriated for the HRDF was moved into 43 specific awards.&nbsp;Among the awards were a huge $40m grant for an anti-communism fund support led by the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation (VOC). Another was for a group advancing white Afrikaner rights in South Africa, a $1 million campaign against Brazil’s Supreme Court. The Trump administration has clashed with the Lula government and has imposed sanctions on Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes.A third is focused on Nigeria, where the administration has alleged “mass slaughter” of Christians. Millions earmarked to build a “western civilizational norms” in Europe, fund right-wing media consortiums, and document what the administration terms "democratic backsliding" tied to mass migration and supranational regulations. The new slate includes opposition to regulation, Brexit, immigration, anti-communism, Christian protection and opposition to “gender ideology”. It names possible recipients in Poland, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Hungary, and the Balkans with “anti-communist” and “natural rights” approaches.Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/global-diesel-crisis-supply-crack-spreads-record-high-1791049895459">Diesel crisis deepens as global supplies shrink, crack spreads hit record highs</a>“The President promised to combat the destructive woke agenda that has done so much damage to our country and to the world,” State Department spokesperson Tommy Pigott said. “We will never apologise for defending Western civilisation, opposing censorship, ending the era of mass migration, and taking action against government-sponsored race-based discrimination in South Africa.”The funding allocation marks a major shift in US foreign policy, moving away from traditional human rights and democracy support in repressive or authoritarian nations to fund ideological allies and causes in established democracies. It is consistent with the US National Security Strategy, where it had mentioned prioritising the protection of Western civilisation in Europe, which the US think is facing a “civilisational erasure”.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;

The Trump administration has allocated more than $175 million from a US human rights fund to 43 awards covering anti-communism, migration, courts and Western civilisational causes.

Trump administration is pushing more than $175 million of the State Department’s flagship human rights fund toward conservative and far-right initiatives abroad just before funding expired on September 30. Approximately $176.9 million out of $205 million appropriated for the HRDF was moved into 43 specific awards. Among the awards were a huge $40m grant for an anti-communism fund support led by the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation (VOC). Another was for a group advancing white Afrikaner rights in South Africa, a $1 million campaign against Brazil’s Supreme Court. The Trump administration has clashed with the Lula government and has imposed sanctions on Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes. A third is focused on Nigeria, where the administration has alleged “mass slaughter” of Christians. Millions earmarked to build a “western civilizational norms” in Europe, fund right-wing media consortiums, and document what the administration terms "democratic backsliding" tied to mass migration and supranational regulations. The new slate includes opposition to regulation, Brexit, immigration, anti-communism, Christian protection and opposition to “gender ideology”. It names possible recipients in Poland, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Hungary, and the Balkans with “anti-communist” and “natural rights” approaches. Also Read: Diesel crisis deepens as global supplies shrink, crack spreads hit record highs “The President promised to combat the destructive woke agenda that has done so much damage to our country and to the world,” State Department spokesperson Tommy Pigott said. “We will never apologise for defending Western civilisation, opposing censorship, ending the era of mass migration, and taking action against government-sponsored race-based discrimination in South Africa.” The funding allocation marks a major shift in US foreign policy, moving away from traditional human rights and democracy support in repressive or authoritarian nations to fund ideological allies and causes in established democracies. It is consistent with the US National Security Strategy, where it had mentioned prioritising the protection of Western civilisation in Europe, which the US think is facing a “civilisational erasure”.

The Trump administration has allocated more than $175 million from a US human rights fund to 43 awards covering anti-communism, migration, courts and Western civilisational causes.

Trump administration redirects over $175mn human rights fund to far-right causes abroad

Questions are mounting over Natalie Harp’s role inside the White House and the level of access and influence she has around President Donald Trump.

The scrutiny intensified after reports published private letters Harp allegedly wrote to Trump during or shortly after a 2023 trip to Scotland and Ireland. The letters reportedly expressed strong personal devotion to the president and a desire to maintain his approval.

Harp is described as a special assistant and executive assistant to Trump, and reports have portrayed her as an important gatekeeper within his inner circle. Questions have also been raised about her reported access to Trump’s Truth Social account and her alleged role as a conduit for people seeking to reach the president.

Who Is Natalie Harp? Trump Aide’s Close Access to President Raises National Security Questions

Karoline Leavitt is set to leave her position as White House press secretary at the end of August, and President Donald Trump has begun teasing possible contenders to replace her.

At a rally in South Carolina, Trump praised Leavitt’s performance while joking about her decision to leave the demanding White House role after the birth of her second child. Leavitt became the youngest White House press secretary in U.S. history when she took the position at the age of 28.

Trump said there is no shortage of interest in the position and suggested that the role has become more attractive under Leavitt. Among the names he mentioned are Scott Jennings, a CNN commentator and Trump supporter, and Margo Martin, a longtime Trump communications aide.

Karoline Leavitt Set to Leave White House Press Secretary Post | Trump Reveals Possible Replacements

Questions are growing over Natalie Harp’s role inside the White House, her close access to President Donald Trump and the extent of her reported influence around the president.

The scrutiny follows reports about private letters Harp allegedly wrote to Trump after accompanying him during a 2023 trip to Scotland and Ireland. The reported letters described her deep personal devotion to Trump and her desire to maintain his approval.

Harp, who serves as a special assistant and executive assistant to President Trump, has reportedly been described as an important gatekeeper around the president. Reports have also raised questions about her access to Trump and her role in facilitating contact with him.

Former officials and political commentators have raised concerns about whether her level of access and influence is appropriate, including potential national-security implications. The White House, however, has defended Harp as one of Trump's most loyal and hardworking aides and has rejected criticism of her role.

Natalie Harp’s White House Role Under Scrutiny | Trump Ally’s Access And Influence Questioned

The U.S. State Department has announced a funding opportunity for a research project focused on hateful rhetoric and violence affecting minority communities in South Africa. The proposed programme aims to document incidents, assess access to justice and examine whether minority communities receive equal protection.

Reports say the funding could total around $1 million, with Afrikaners specifically identified among the communities to be studied. The development comes amid growing tensions between Washington and Pretoria over U.S. concerns regarding the treatment of South Africa’s white Afrikaner minority.

 U.S. State Departmentraises Funds for African White Minorities 

A US federal court on Thursday (August 13) dismissed a lawsuit filed by the Trump administration against Harvard University over allegations of antisemitism during pro-Palestinian protests on campus.&nbsp;District Judge Richard Stearns in Boston ruled that the administration had failed to sufficiently establish that Harvard violated a provision of the Civil Rights Act that prohibits discrimination based on race, nationality and other factors.<h2>Court rejects Trump administration’s case</h2>The administration's complaint largely focused on several incidents allegedly reported in March 2025. Stearns said the incidents were “too isolated and episodic” to establish an ongoing violation of civil rights by Harvard.&nbsp;The ruling comes after President Donald Trump launched a campaign against major American universities during his second term. His administration accused universities of allowing pro-Palestinian movements to operate freely on campuses amid the Israeli offensive in the Gaza Strip.&nbsp;The Department of Justice filed its complaint in March, accusing Harvard's faculty and leadership of failing to address antisemitism and discrimination against Jews and Israelis.&nbsp;"Harvard let anti-Israeli demonstrators occupy its libraries. Harvard allowed an anti-Israeli encampment to persist for twenty days in violation of university policy," the department said.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/jharkhand-protest-police-book-600-protesters-over-assembly-march-in-ranchi-1786627463383">Jharkhand students protest: Police book 600 protesters over Assembly march in Ranchi</a>&nbsp;<h2>Harvard also challenged funding freeze</h2>The Trump administration had earlier moved to block more than $2.2 billion in federal research grants for Harvard. The administration cited concerns over campus protests and compliance with Title VI rules related to antisemitism.&nbsp;Harvard challenged the funding freeze in federal court, arguing that the move was an unconstitutional attempt to impose political and ideological control over academic freedom and the university's internal governance.&nbsp;US District Judge Allison D. Burroughs later quashed the funding freeze.

A US federal court has dismissed the Trump administration's lawsuit against Harvard University, ruling that the government failed to prove the university violated civil rights laws over alleged antisemitism during pro-Palestinian campus protests.

A US federal court on Thursday (August 13) dismissed a lawsuit filed by the Trump administration against Harvard University over allegations of antisemitism during pro-Palestinian protests on campus. District Judge Richard Stearns in Boston ruled that the administration had failed to sufficiently establish that Harvard violated a provision of the Civil Rights Act that prohibits discrimination based on race, nationality and other factors. Court rejects Trump administration’s case The administration's complaint largely focused on several incidents allegedly reported in March 2025. Stearns said the incidents were “too isolated and episodic” to establish an ongoing violation of civil rights by Harvard. The ruling comes after President Donald Trump launched a campaign against major American universities during his second term. His administration accused universities of allowing pro-Palestinian movements to operate freely on campuses amid the Israeli offensive in the Gaza Strip. The Department of Justice filed its complaint in March, accusing Harvard's faculty and leadership of failing to address antisemitism and discrimination against Jews and Israelis. "Harvard let anti-Israeli demonstrators occupy its libraries. Harvard allowed an anti-Israeli encampment to persist for twenty days in violation of university policy," the department said. Also Read: Jharkhand students protest: Police book 600 protesters over Assembly march in Ranchi Harvard also challenged funding freeze The Trump administration had earlier moved to block more than $2.2 billion in federal research grants for Harvard. The administration cited concerns over campus protests and compliance with Title VI rules related to antisemitism. Harvard challenged the funding freeze in federal court, arguing that the move was an unconstitutional attempt to impose political and ideological control over academic freedom and the university's internal governance. US District Judge Allison D. Burroughs later quashed the funding freeze.

A US federal court has dismissed the Trump administration's lawsuit against Harvard University, ruling that the government failed to prove the university violated civil rights laws over alleged antisemitism during pro-Palestinian campus protests.

US court rejects Trump administration case accusing Harvard of antisemitism

Reports say there had been multiple attempts by crew members onboard USS Abraham Lincoln to jump overboard. Pressure is mounting on Trump with despair growing amid the Iran war. Tune into Gravitas at 9 PM to find out more.

US Military Meltdown in Gulf Signals End of Trump Era | GRAVITAS

A fiery exchange unfolded during a White House press briefing involving Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt and reporters, with questions focusing on the Trump administration’s claims and media coverage. Leavitt has repeatedly engaged in heated exchanges with journalists during White House briefings, including confrontations over coverage of the Iran conflict.

The latest moments have renewed debate over the relationship between the Trump administration and the White House press corps, with reporters challenging official statements while Leavitt strongly defending the administration’s position.

Watch the full report for the key exchanges, fact-check moments and the latest developments from the White House.


 War of Words, Fact Check Moments on White House Press Secy Leavitt

US President Donald Trump on Wednesday (Aug 12) signed a national security presidential memorandum aimed at expanding the government’s ability to use cyber operations against “transnational criminal organisations” operating from abroad. The White House said the directive is intended to help federal law enforcement target foreign-based networks involved in ransomware attacks, financial fraud and other cyber-enabled crimes affecting Americans.According to a White House fact sheet, the memorandum instructs the administration to “leverage the capability and innovation of the private sector to help conduct these cyber operations under the direction, control, and authority of the US Government.”The directive creates a framework for private companies to work with federal, state, local, tribal and territorial agencies, as well as other private entities, to collect threat intelligence and propose cyber operations against designated criminal organisations.A key element of the memorandum assigns the Department of Homeland Security, through the Homeland Security Task Force’s National Coordination Center, to establish a program “to conduct specific cyber operations that disrupt foreign TCOs.” The initiative will be overseen jointly by DHS and the Department of Justice.Under federal supervision, vetted companies will be allowed to conduct “cyber surveillance operations” and “cyber effects operations” against approved targets.“Cyber effects includes the potential ​manipulation, disruption, denial, degradation, ​or destruction of ⁠information systems, networks, physical or virtual infrastructure controlled by information systems, or information resident thereon,” the memo reads.The memorandum defines cyber effects operations as including the “manipulation, disruption, denial, degradation, or destruction of information systems, networks, physical or virtual infrastructure controlled by information systems, or information resident thereon.”Companies participating in the program must maintain a bond or escrow of at least $1 million.The involvement of private firms in offensive cyber activities is not unprecedented, but it has long drawn scrutiny from cybersecurity experts and former officials. Critics have warned that outsourcing cyber operations could increase the risk of escalation, unintended consequences and coordination challenges across government agencies.The White House argues the new framework will strengthen the government’s ability to disrupt criminal organisations that exploit foreign jurisdictions to target Americans.

US President Donald Trump signed a memo allowing vetted private firms to join government-directed cyber operations, including surveillance and disruption, targeting foreign criminal networks.

US President Donald Trump on Wednesday (Aug 12) signed a national security presidential memorandum aimed at expanding the government’s ability to use cyber operations against “transnational criminal organisations” operating from abroad. The White House said the directive is intended to help federal law enforcement target foreign-based networks involved in ransomware attacks, financial fraud and other cyber-enabled crimes affecting Americans. According to a White House fact sheet, the memorandum instructs the administration to “leverage the capability and innovation of the private sector to help conduct these cyber operations under the direction, control, and authority of the US Government.” The directive creates a framework for private companies to work with federal, state, local, tribal and territorial agencies, as well as other private entities, to collect threat intelligence and propose cyber operations against designated criminal organisations. A key element of the memorandum assigns the Department of Homeland Security, through the Homeland Security Task Force’s National Coordination Center, to establish a program “to conduct specific cyber operations that disrupt foreign TCOs.” The initiative will be overseen jointly by DHS and the Department of Justice. Under federal supervision, vetted companies will be allowed to conduct “cyber surveillance operations” and “cyber effects operations” against approved targets. “Cyber effects includes the potential manipulation, disruption, denial, degradation, or destruction of ⁠information systems, networks, physical or virtual infrastructure controlled by information systems, or information resident thereon,” the memo reads. The memorandum defines cyber effects operations as including the “manipulation, disruption, denial, degradation, or destruction of information systems, networks, physical or virtual infrastructure controlled by information systems, or information resident thereon.” Companies participating in the program must maintain a bond or escrow of at least $1 million. The involvement of private firms in offensive cyber activities is not unprecedented, but it has long drawn scrutiny from cybersecurity experts and former officials. Critics have warned that outsourcing cyber operations could increase the risk of escalation, unintended consequences and coordination challenges across government agencies. The White House argues the new framework will strengthen the government’s ability to disrupt criminal organisations that exploit foreign jurisdictions to target Americans.

US President Donald Trump signed a memo allowing vetted private firms to join government-directed cyber operations, including surveillance and disruption, targeting foreign criminal networks.

Trump admin to use cyber attacks against foreign criminals? Here’s what new memo says

Donald Trump’s foreign policy and economic agenda are facing growing challenges as tariffs, the Iran conflict and stalled Russia-Ukraine peace efforts reshape the global political landscape.

From sweeping tariff policies and their impact on global trade to the escalating Iran conflict, Trump’s approach to international affairs is facing intense scrutiny. At the same time, efforts to end the Russia-Ukraine war have struggled to produce a lasting breakthrough, raising questions over Washington’s ability to deliver a negotiated settlement.

The developments come as allies, rivals and financial markets closely watch the Trump administration’s next moves. Tariffs have created uncertainty for businesses and economies, while conflicts in the Middle East and Europe continue to test US diplomatic influence.

Is Trump losing momentum on some of his biggest foreign-policy promises? Or could his administration still turn these challenges into political and diplomatic victories?

Watch the full analysis for a closer look at Trump, tariffs, Iran, the Russia-Ukraine war, peace talks and the wider geopolitical fallout.

Trump's Fall: Tariffs, Iran War, Failed Russia-Ukraine Peace Talks & More...

US President Donald Trump has suffered a major legal setback after a federal appeals court upheld an order halting work on his planned White House ballroom.

The US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit ruled 2–1 against the Trump administration, agreeing that such a major overhaul of the White House requires explicit approval from Congress. The court said the decision over whether to construct a massive ballroom belongs to Congress rather than the executive branch.

The ruling puts Trump's estimated $400 million project on hold. The appeals court has paused its decision for two weeks, giving the Trump administration time to ask the US Supreme Court to intervene.

US Appeals Court Blocks Trump’s $400 Million White House Ballroom Project

US President Donald Trump has renewed his effort to remove Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, reigniting a major legal and political battle over presidential power and the independence of America's central bank.

The Trump administration is seeking Cook's removal over allegations involving mortgage documents from 2021, before she joined the Federal Reserve in 2022. Trump has accused Cook of mortgage fraud, while Cook denies wrongdoing and her lawyers have called the allegations baseless and politically motivated.

The Supreme Court previously ruled 5–4 that Cook could remain in her position while she challenges her removal, finding that she had not been given the required procedural protections. However, the ruling did not permanently prevent Trump from attempting to remove her again.

Chief Justice John Roberts indicated that the president could pursue removal if Cook received proper notice and an opportunity to respond. Cook's deadline to respond is August 26.

Trump Renews Effort to Fire Fed Governor Lisa Cook | Battle Over Federal Reserve Independence

A major controversy has erupted after a map of Africa displayed by the U.S. State Department at the AIDS 2026 Conference in Rio de Janeiro reportedly mislabeled every African country.

The incorrect map quickly drew criticism from delegates and observers after analyses found major geographical errors, including Nigeria being shown as a landlocked country in the Sahara, Mozambique placed in the Horn of Africa, and Ivory Coast located on the wrong side of the continent.

The controversy deepened after reports revealed that the presentation slide contained an AI watermark, indicating it had been created using OpenAI tools. The U.S. State Department accepted responsibility for the mistake, saying a staff member hastily modified the presentation before the event. OpenAI said it was investigating the reports surrounding the incident.

U.S. Govt's Map of Africa Sparks Controversy | Wion 

The Trump administration is facing growing scrutiny over the handling of US military casualty records linked to the Iran war. A reported discrepancy on the Pentagon’s casualty website has triggered criticism from lawmakers, military analysts, and opponents who accuse officials of changing classifications to reduce the visible impact of American losses. According to reports, four recent US military deaths temporarily disappeared from the Defense Department’s casualty reporting website. When they returned, they were listed under a different category called “Overseas Operations” instead of Operation Epic Fury.

Pentagon Faces Backlash Over US Iran War Casualty Records | Trump Administration Under Fire

The Trump administration is facing mounting criticism over how US military casualties from the Iran conflict are being reported. A controversy erupted after four American service members who died during the conflict temporarily disappeared from the Pentagon's casualty reporting website before reappearing under a different category.

Critics argue the reclassification could obscure the true human cost of the conflict and influence legal and political debates surrounding the war. Democratic lawmakers have demanded greater transparency, while questions continue over whether the administration's reporting complies with the War Powers Act and provides the public with a complete picture of US military losses.

Pentagon Under Fire Over Iran War Casualty Records | Trump Administration Faces Backlash

US President Donald Trump returned to the White House Correspondents' Dinner, three months after the original event was cancelled following an assassination attempt. Speaking before journalists, lawmakers, and senior officials, Trump reflected on the attack, joked about running for another term, and once again criticized the media and his political opponents.

During his speech, Trump held up a "Trump 2028" cap, joked about seeking a third and even fourth term despite constitutional limits, and mocked what he described as "Trump Derangement Syndrome." The event was held under heightened security with Secret Service, National Guard, and police presence around the venue.

Trump returns to White House Correspondents' Dinner | Jokes about 2028, mocks media & third term

The Trump administration has ruled out any involvement in the extradition proceedings involving Andrew Tate and Tristan Tate. White House officials, including Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, said the administration will not intervene in the legal process. The development comes as British prosecutors have filed additional charges against the Tate brothers. Andrew Tate now faces 42 allegations, while Tristan Tate faces 17. The charges include rape, sex trafficking, assault, and offenses involving sexual images. The brothers also continue to face separate criminal investigations in Romania related to human trafficking, sexual offenses, and money laundering.

Trump White House refuses to intervene in Andrew & Tristan Tate UK Extradition Case

The US Justice Department has withdrawn subpoenas issued to The New York Times over reports concerning the security features of Air Force One. The newspaper had challenged the government’s requests for phone records and grand jury testimony, arguing that the move could intimidate journalists and violate First Amendment protections for press freedom. During a court hearing, federal prosecutors agreed to withdraw the subpoenas. The dispute began after a New York Times report raised questions about security features on a donated aircraft linked to Air Force One, including concerns over missile defense systems. President Donald Trump dismissed the concerns, saying the aircraft was being sent to a British air base for viewing by US troops and would undergo modifications.

US Justice Department withdraws subpoenas against New York Times over Air Force one Security report

The Trump administration has accused Chinese AI startup Moonshot AI of illegally using Anthropic's proprietary AI technology to develop its latest Kimi K3 model. US officials claim Moonshot AI relied on outputs from Anthropic's Claude model without authorization and even used advanced Nvidia AI chips for training. The allegations have intensified the ongoing US-China technology rivalry, with Washington now considering sanctions and trade restrictions against the company.

China has rejected the accusations, calling them unfounded, while Anthropic has previously alleged that multiple Chinese AI firms violated its terms of service. Watch this report for the latest developments in the escalating global AI race.

Trump Administration accuses Moonshot AI of using Anthropic's AI Technology without authorisation

The United States has designated Mexico’s Juarez Cartel and Los Alegres group as foreign terrorist organizations, marking a major escalation in Washington’s fight against drug cartels. The US State Department said the groups were involved in attacks affecting American citizens and interests, including a 2019 attack that killed nine members of the Mormon community in Mexico.

US designates Mexican cartels as terror groups in major drug war escalation

US President Donald Trump has intensified his criticism of major American media networks after ABC and NBC declined to air his prime-time election security address live. Trump accused the broadcasters of political bias and claimed they were part of a conspiracy against him, even calling for possible revocation of their licenses. The networks defended their decisions, citing editorial judgment, while the controversy has reignited the long-running battle between Trump and mainstream US media.

Trump vs. US media: President Donald Trump escalates fight over election speech coverage 

President Donald Trump's longtime teleprompter operator, Gabriel Perez, is under investigation by federal regulators over alleged bets placed on prediction market platform Kalshi related to Trump's speeches. According to reports, Perez allegedly earned more than $90,000 in profits by predicting words and phrases Trump would mention during scheduled addresses. Kalshi flagged the trades as suspicious, froze most of the alleged profits, and referred the matter for review by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). Perez, who has operated Trump's teleprompter since the 2016 presidential campaign, is now at the center of an investigation raising fresh concerns over insider information and prediction market trading

Trump suspends teleprompter operator over Kalshi betting allegations, White house says

The Trump administration has released a new batch of declassified US military files on unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAPs), including infrared footage of a mysterious star-shaped object over the Yellow Sea. The Pentagon says the videos are intended to improve transparency but cautions that they do not confirm extraterrestrial activity. Investigators continue examining whether the sightings involve foreign technology, classified programs, sensor effects, or other conventional explanations.

Pentagon releases new UFO files: Mysterious star-shaped object caught on US Military camera

The Supreme Court on Monday ruled that states can count mail ballots that are cast by election day but arrive later, rejecting the Trump administration’s push to block the practice. The 5-4 decision upholds a Mississippi law that had permitted the counting of mail-in ballots that were postmarked before election day but arrived up to five days afterwards.&nbsp;The ruling marks a significant political defeat for President Donald Trump, who called the decision a “tremendous loss”. Trump has repeatedly said that mail-in ballots are vulnerable to fraud.&nbsp;The states that allow late-arriving postal ballots are mostly Democratic-leaning, although a few Republican-led ones also allow a grace period.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/yasin-malik-faces-trial-in-sarla-bhat-rape-murder-case-35-years-after-brutal-crime-instilled-fear-in-kashmiri-pandits-triggered-exodus-1782752930044">Yasin Malik faces trial in Sarla Bhat rape-murder case 35 years after brutal crime instilled fear in Kashmiri Pandits</a>&nbsp;The top court’s ruling could affect voting deadlines in more than a dozen states that will be pivotal in deciding which party controls Congress after the midterm elections in November.&nbsp;Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote the court’s majority opinion, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and the court’s three liberal justices. In the opinion, Justice Barrett wrote that the ruling does not conflict with existing federal law, which stipulates that the “Tuesday next after the 1st Monday in November” is the “day for the election”.&nbsp;“The election-day statutes say nothing about ballot receipt, and we cannot add to the words Congress chose,” she wrote.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/delhi-s-ev-policy-no-tax-registration-fees-on-electric-cars-under-rs-30-lakh-no-new-petrol-bikes-from-2028-1782743406485">Delhi’s EV policy: No tax, registration fees on electric cars under Rs 30 lakh, no new petrol bikes from 2028</a> Conservative Justice Samuel Alito said in his written dissent that the acceptance of late-arriving ballots effectively postpones the date on which the electorate’s choice is made, and federal law precludes that postponement.&nbsp;“Today’s decision leaves open opportunities for voter fraud that may further undermine Americans’ faith in the integrity of this country’s election,” he wrote. “Diverse sources have recognised that mail-in ballots increase the potential for fraud.”&nbsp;Trump signed an executive order in March to stop mail-in voting ahead of midterm electionsThe US president has repeatedly criticised mail-in ballots and said that the practice prevented him from winning the 2020 election against Joe Biden.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/supreme-court-refuses-urgent-hearing-of-ram-temple-petitions-saying-heavens-are-not-going-to-fall-1782739148242">Supreme Court refuses urgent hearing of Ram Temple petitions, saying, 'Heavens are not going to fall’</a> Reacting to the Supreme Court ruling, Trump called on lawmakers to pass the Save America Act, which would mandate photo ID and proof of citizenship for voters and also ban mail-in ballots, with exceptions made only in cases of illness, disability, travel or military deployments.&nbsp;“There is no excuse for a politician, or otherwise, to be against the above three requirements,” Trump said of the Save America Act in a post on Truth Social. “There is only one reason to oppose - cheating.”&nbsp;Last week, Trump had cancelled the signing of a bipartisan housing bill, saying he would make it a law only if the Save America Act were passed.&nbsp;Republicans argue that the law requires ballots to be not just postmarked but received by that date.&nbsp;“Election-day receipt promotes election integrity and voter confidence as much today as it did when Congress passed that law,” the Trump administration told the Supreme Court in a legal brief.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/at-least-five-killed-in-mass-shooting-in-northern-germany-s-stade-town-suspect-detained-say-police-1782735568424">At least six killed in mass shooting in northern Germany’s Stade town; suspect detained, say police</a> Republican National Committee chairman Joe Gruters said after the court’s decision on Monday, “Democrats are inviting chaos at the ballot box by allowing elections to drag on for days and weeks after voters cast their ballots.”&nbsp;More than a dozen states allow mail-in ballots to be received after election day, including Alaska, Texas, Nevada, Virginia, and California.&nbsp;“This is a win for voters, plain and simple,” California governor Gavin Newsom said on X. “Today’s ruling helps ensure mailed-in-ballots get counted and people’s voices are heard through the democratic process.”&nbsp;All 50 states require ballots to be marked and submitted by the day of the election. But in 14 states and the District of Columbia, election officials will accept and count mail ballots that are postmarked by Election Day but received after that day. Twenty-nine states and D.C. allow at least some military and overseas ballots to be received after Election Day.

The top court’s ruling could affect voting deadlines in more than a dozen states that will be pivotal in deciding which party controls Congress after the midterm elections in November. The states that allow late-arriving postal ballots are mostly Democratic-leaning.

The Supreme Court on Monday ruled that states can count mail ballots that are cast by election day but arrive later, rejecting the Trump administration’s push to block the practice. The 5-4 decision upholds a Mississippi law that had permitted the counting of mail-in ballots that were postmarked before election day but arrived up to five days afterwards. The ruling marks a significant political defeat for President Donald Trump, who called the decision a “tremendous loss”. Trump has repeatedly said that mail-in ballots are vulnerable to fraud. The states that allow late-arriving postal ballots are mostly Democratic-leaning, although a few Republican-led ones also allow a grace period. Also Read: Yasin Malik faces trial in Sarla Bhat rape-murder case 35 years after brutal crime instilled fear in Kashmiri Pandits The top court’s ruling could affect voting deadlines in more than a dozen states that will be pivotal in deciding which party controls Congress after the midterm elections in November. Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote the court’s majority opinion, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and the court’s three liberal justices. In the opinion, Justice Barrett wrote that the ruling does not conflict with existing federal law, which stipulates that the “Tuesday next after the 1st Monday in November” is the “day for the election”. “The election-day statutes say nothing about ballot receipt, and we cannot add to the words Congress chose,” she wrote. Also Read: Delhi’s EV policy: No tax, registration fees on electric cars under Rs 30 lakh, no new petrol bikes from 2028 Conservative Justice Samuel Alito said in his written dissent that the acceptance of late-arriving ballots effectively postpones the date on which the electorate’s choice is made, and federal law precludes that postponement. “Today’s decision leaves open opportunities for voter fraud that may further undermine Americans’ faith in the integrity of this country’s election,” he wrote. “Diverse sources have recognised that mail-in ballots increase the potential for fraud.” Trump signed an executive order in March to stop mail-in voting ahead of midterm elections The US president has repeatedly criticised mail-in ballots and said that the practice prevented him from winning the 2020 election against Joe Biden. Also Read: Supreme Court refuses urgent hearing of Ram Temple petitions, saying, 'Heavens are not going to fall’ Reacting to the Supreme Court ruling, Trump called on lawmakers to pass the Save America Act, which would mandate photo ID and proof of citizenship for voters and also ban mail-in ballots, with exceptions made only in cases of illness, disability, travel or military deployments. “There is no excuse for a politician, or otherwise, to be against the above three requirements,” Trump said of the Save America Act in a post on Truth Social. “There is only one reason to oppose - cheating.” Last week, Trump had cancelled the signing of a bipartisan housing bill, saying he would make it a law only if the Save America Act were passed. Republicans argue that the law requires ballots to be not just postmarked but received by that date. “Election-day receipt promotes election integrity and voter confidence as much today as it did when Congress passed that law,” the Trump administration told the Supreme Court in a legal brief. Also Read: At least six killed in mass shooting in northern Germany’s Stade town; suspect detained, say police Republican National Committee chairman Joe Gruters said after the court’s decision on Monday, “Democrats are inviting chaos at the ballot box by allowing elections to drag on for days and weeks after voters cast their ballots.” More than a dozen states allow mail-in ballots to be received after election day, including Alaska, Texas, Nevada, Virginia, and California. “This is a win for voters, plain and simple,” California governor Gavin Newsom said on X. “Today’s ruling helps ensure mailed-in-ballots get counted and people’s voices are heard through the democratic process.” All 50 states require ballots to be marked and submitted by the day of the election. But in 14 states and the District of Columbia, election officials will accept and count mail ballots that are postmarked by Election Day but received after that day. Twenty-nine states and D.C. allow at least some military and overseas ballots to be received after Election Day.

The top court’s ruling could affect voting deadlines in more than a dozen states that will be pivotal in deciding which party controls Congress after the midterm elections in November. The states that allow late-arriving postal ballots are mostly Democratic-leaning.

US Supreme Court allows states to count mail-in ballots that arrive late; Trump calls it ‘tremendous loss’

The Trump administration and Anthropic have been engaged in a long feud since it emerged that Claude was used for Operation Absolute Resolve, the capture of Nicolas Maduro. Here is a timeline of the conflict that refuses to end.

The Trump administration and Anthropic have been engaged in a long feud since it emerged that Claude was used for Operation Absolute Resolve, the capture of Nicolas Maduro. Here is a timeline of the conflict that refuses to end.

Feud between Anthropic and Trump administration explained: What is going on?

A federal judge in California on Tuesday (June 24) has barred the Trump administration from making arrests at immigration courts across the United States. The ruling came after federal agents increasingly began detaining migrants outside immigration courts following their asylum hearings after President Donald Trump returned to office. The practice placed many migrants in a difficult position, as failing to appear for immigration hearings can, in certain cases, be considered an offence and may increase the risk of deportation. As a result, many felt compelled to attend court despite the possibility of being arrested.&nbsp;Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/germany-cancels-six-f126-frigates-after-delays-plans-shift-to-smaller-warships-1782292012007">Germany cancels six F126 frigates after delays, plans shift to smaller warships</a> US District Judge P. Casey Pitts found that the policy breached the Administrative Procedure Act, describing it as “arbitrary and capricious.” He said both ICE and the Executive Office for Immigration Review had not offered adequate justification for the policy and noted that the presence of enforcement agents at courthouses created a “chilling effect” on migrants seeking legal relief. Meanwhile, James Percival, general counsel at Homeland Security, condemned the ruling, stating that a noncitizen ordered to be deported by an immigration judge should be considered similar to the act of a defendant convicted of a crime. "A district judge ordering otherwise is naked judicial activism in service of an anti-American, open borders agenda," he said on his social media platform X. Trump has pushed the boundaries of executive authority in his efforts to tighten immigration enforcement against undocumented migrants, arguing that the United States is facing an influx of criminals and other individuals he considers undesirable.

James Percival, general counsel at Homeland Security, condemned the ruling, stating that a noncitizen ordered to be deported by an immigration judge should be considered similar to the act of a defendant convicted of a crime.

A federal judge in California on Tuesday (June 24) has barred the Trump administration from making arrests at immigration courts across the United States. The ruling came after federal agents increasingly began detaining migrants outside immigration courts following their asylum hearings after President Donald Trump returned to office. The practice placed many migrants in a difficult position, as failing to appear for immigration hearings can, in certain cases, be considered an offence and may increase the risk of deportation. As a result, many felt compelled to attend court despite the possibility of being arrested. Also read: Germany cancels six F126 frigates after delays, plans shift to smaller warships US District Judge P. Casey Pitts found that the policy breached the Administrative Procedure Act, describing it as “arbitrary and capricious.” He said both ICE and the Executive Office for Immigration Review had not offered adequate justification for the policy and noted that the presence of enforcement agents at courthouses created a “chilling effect” on migrants seeking legal relief. Meanwhile, James Percival, general counsel at Homeland Security, condemned the ruling, stating that a noncitizen ordered to be deported by an immigration judge should be considered similar to the act of a defendant convicted of a crime. "A district judge ordering otherwise is naked judicial activism in service of an anti-American, open borders agenda," he said on his social media platform X. Trump has pushed the boundaries of executive authority in his efforts to tighten immigration enforcement against undocumented migrants, arguing that the United States is facing an influx of criminals and other individuals he considers undesirable.

James Percival, general counsel at Homeland Security, condemned the ruling, stating that a noncitizen ordered to be deported by an immigration judge should be considered similar to the act of a defendant convicted of a crime.

US Federal court bars Trump administration from detaining migrants at immigration hearings

The US Department of Defense is reportedly seeking $80 billion to cover costs from the ​Iran war and other expenses. This comes as US President Donald Trump faces backlash over spending billions of taxpayer dollars on the Middle East conflict as oil prices and inflation reached soaring high in the country. This comes after the US and Iran virtually signed a memorandum of understanding to end the war and reopen the strategic Strait of Hormuz.According to a Wall Street Journal report, citing people familiar with the matter, Deputy Defense Secretary Stephen Feinberg made the request to lawmakers seeking the fund. The newspaper added that the Pentagon has expressed concerns over running out of money for operations in the coming months unless a new wartime spending bill is passed by Congress. The situation may lead to the US military needing to make cuts in training and troop deployment along the US-Mexico border as part of a crackdown against illegal aliens.Last month, the Pentagon said that the cost of the Iran war has reached nearly $29 billion. However, Democrats and other critics have suggested that the actual cost, including the damage caused by Iranian attacks, may be much higher.AlMeanwhile, concerns about the shortage of US weapons stockpiles have also surfaced – a claim that the Trump administration has repeatedly denied. Doubts renewed after the US paused arms sales to Taiwan, with acting US Navy Secretary Hung Cao citing the conflict in the Middle East as the reason behind the move.If approved, the proposed $80 billion funding package would be allocated to replenishing munitions, covering military personnel salaries, and supporting naval operations.<h2>Trump admin faces backlash over war</h2>Meanwhile, several lawmakers have warned that they will oppose any additional war funding unless Congress formally authorises the conflict. Democrats have accused Trump of violating the constitutional authorisation by launching military action without congressional approval.Under the War Powers Act, a US president must obtain congressional authorisation within 60 days of committing American forces to hostilities. Democrats argue that the deadline has already passed, putting the administration in violation of the law.

The Pentagon is reportedly seeking $80 billion for Iran war costs and military operations. The request faces opposition from lawmakers, who question rising expenses, stockpile concerns and Trump's legal authority.

The US Department of Defense is reportedly seeking $80 billion to cover costs from the Iran war and other expenses. This comes as US President Donald Trump faces backlash over spending billions of taxpayer dollars on the Middle East conflict as oil prices and inflation reached soaring high in the country. This comes after the US and Iran virtually signed a memorandum of understanding to end the war and reopen the strategic Strait of Hormuz. According to a Wall Street Journal report, citing people familiar with the matter, Deputy Defense Secretary Stephen Feinberg made the request to lawmakers seeking the fund. The newspaper added that the Pentagon has expressed concerns over running out of money for operations in the coming months unless a new wartime spending bill is passed by Congress. The situation may lead to the US military needing to make cuts in training and troop deployment along the US-Mexico border as part of a crackdown against illegal aliens. Last month, the Pentagon said that the cost of the Iran war has reached nearly $29 billion. However, Democrats and other critics have suggested that the actual cost, including the damage caused by Iranian attacks, may be much higher. Al Meanwhile, concerns about the shortage of US weapons stockpiles have also surfaced – a claim that the Trump administration has repeatedly denied. Doubts renewed after the US paused arms sales to Taiwan, with acting US Navy Secretary Hung Cao citing the conflict in the Middle East as the reason behind the move. If approved, the proposed $80 billion funding package would be allocated to replenishing munitions, covering military personnel salaries, and supporting naval operations. Trump admin faces backlash over war Meanwhile, several lawmakers have warned that they will oppose any additional war funding unless Congress formally authorises the conflict. Democrats have accused Trump of violating the constitutional authorisation by launching military action without congressional approval. Under the War Powers Act, a US president must obtain congressional authorisation within 60 days of committing American forces to hostilities. Democrats argue that the deadline has already passed, putting the administration in violation of the law.

The Pentagon is reportedly seeking $80 billion for Iran war costs and military operations. The request faces opposition from lawmakers, who question rising expenses, stockpile concerns and Trump's legal authority.

Pentagon running out of money? Trump admin seeks $80 billion for Iran war costs

trump-administration

Trump Administration, News on Trump Administration, stories on Trump Administration, articles on Trump Administration, Trump Administration stories at Wion, Trump Administration news, Trump Administration latest news

trump administration

‘Block, segregate mail-in ballots’: Trump admin takes California ballot fight to Supreme Court

US ends automatic work permit extensions: What it means for Indians

US fines Bank of America $1.2 billion, flags Chinese money-laundering links

Trump administration redirects over $175mn to far-right causes abroad

Who Is Natalie Harp? Trump Aide’s Close Access to President Raises National Security Questions

Karoline Leavitt Set to Leave White House Press Secretary Post | Trump Reveals Possible Replacements

Natalie Harp’s White House Role Under Scrutiny | Trump Ally’s Access And Influence Questioned

U.S. State Departmentraises Funds for African White Minorities

US court rejects Trump administration case accusing Harvard of antisemitism

US Military Meltdown in Gulf Signals End of Trump Era | GRAVITAS

War of Words, Fact Check Moments on White House Press Secy Leavitt

Trump admin to use cyber attacks against foreign criminals? What new memo says

Trump's Fall: Tariffs, Iran War, Failed Russia-Ukraine Peace Talks & More...

Trump's Fall: Tariffs, Iran War, Failed Russia-Ukraine Peace Talks & More...

US Appeals Court Blocks Trump’s $400 Million White House Ballroom Project

Trump Renews Effort to Fire Fed Governor Lisa Cook | Battle Over Federal Reserve Independence

U.S. Govt's Map of Africa Sparks Controversy | Wion

Pentagon Faces Backlash Over US Iran War Casualty Records | Trump Administration Under Fire

Pentagon Under Fire Over Iran War Casualty Records | Trump Administration Faces Backlash

Trump returns to White House Correspondents' Dinner | Jokes about 2028, mocks media & third term

Trump White House refuses to intervene in Andrew & Tristan Tate UK Extradition Case

US Justice Department withdraws subpoenas against New York Times over Air Force one Security report

Trump Administration accuses Moonshot AI of using Anthropic's AI Technology without authorisation

US designates Mexican cartels as terror groups in major drug war escalation