Category: Nation & World

  • The 1966 day in the other Philadelphia that showcased the greatness of Martin Luther King Jr.

    The 1966 day in the other Philadelphia that showcased the greatness of Martin Luther King Jr.

    “This is the day he will die,” thought Roy Reed, a reporter for the New York Times.

    On June 21, 1966, Reed was standing behind Martin Luther King Jr., who was surrounded by about 300 hostile white people in Philadelphia, Miss. King had led a delegation from the Meredith March Against Fear to commemorate the second anniversary of the killings of the civil rights activists James Chaney, Andrew Goodman and Mickey Schwerner.

    King was trying to navigate a rocky path full of obstacles: the threats of southern racists, a frayed alliance with President Lyndon B. Johnson and dissent within the civil rights movement.

    His response showcased his greatest gifts — and his actions on June 21 painted a nuanced picture of what made King so influential. Much of our historical memory of the civil rights leader deifies him, a marker of the nation’s racial progress. It also, however, dramatically oversimplifies the man and the movement he helped lead. It cloaks the divisions within the civil rights movement, along with King’s struggle to harness different factions and tactics toward his goals.

    The enshrinement of King also prevents Americans from seeing just how he married the ideals of American democracy with the righteous struggles of Black Americans. It eludes how he exhibited both spiritual power and political acumen. Looking at King’s actions during the Meredith March, by contrast, spotlights three of his most important roles in the civil rights movement: as an icon of moral courage, as a lodestone for Black activism and as an architect of sustainable ideals for a social justice movement.

    All of these qualities were on display on the extraordinary day of June 21, 1966.

    The Meredith March began on June 5 with one man, James Meredith, who had planned to walk from Memphis to Jackson, encouraging voter registration. On the second day, he got shot, and though he survived, the major civil rights organizations transformed his quest into a mass march.

    By the time King gathered with the activists in Mississippi two weeks later, the big story was Black Power. On June 16, Stokely Carmichael introduced the new slogan as a message of self-determination. It implicitly criticized King’s bedrock values of nonviolence and racial integration.

    On the morning of June 21, King met the marchers at a Black church — and he looked scared, with good reason. Philadelphia, in west-central Mississippi, was off the main route of the march. Instead of protection from the state police, the marchers were under the jurisdiction of Cecil Price, the deputy sheriff at the center of the federal conspiracy trial the three civil rights activists’ killing.

    During their procession to Philadelphia’s town square, the marchers were jeered, spat upon and sprayed with hoses. The air was thick with danger.

    Surrounded by his flock and his foes, King steeled himself. “I am not afraid of any man,” he proclaimed. “We are going to work together for freedom. We are here to save America.”

    Despite the hostile crowd, King didn’t duck the heinous violence that the march was commemorating. He remembered the movement’s martyrs. “I believe in my heart that the murderers are somewhere around me,” he intoned.

    “They’re right behind you!” shouted a white boy. The mob hooted. Price smirked.

    As the activists left, the mob tossed eggs, rocks and bottles. Scuffles broke out. The marchers reached the Black district just before some white toughs arrived, brandishing knives, wrenches and ax handles.

    Made By History sponsors. FOR USE ON MADE BY HISTORY STORIES ONLY.

    Confronted by murderous hatred, he was a model of resolve and principle. His fortitude reassured his fellow marchers and it projected the movement’s integrity to the broader public.

    After his speech in Philadelphia, King boarded a tiny, twin-engine plane for Sunflower County, in the Mississippi Delta, to speak at a voter registration rally.

    “It was like a messiah walking through the community,” recalled local organizer Charles McLaurin. Alongside the legendary Fannie Lou Hamer, McLaurin had led a 10-mile march from the town of Sunflower to the county courthouse in Indianola.

    There, King revealed his magnetic power. Wherever he went, Black folks followed. Because he was in Indianola, over 300 people attended the rally. As was the case throughout King’s life, his reputation attracted a big turnout and his charisma compelled political participation. More than any other figure, he drew people into the southern civil rights movement.

    King’s day was not yet done. He got back on the plane, headed for Yazoo City, on the southern edge of the Delta, where the Meredith Marchers had stopped for the night.

    King arrived for a nighttime rally in a public park. Radical activists gave speeches promising bloody retaliation if white people attacked them again. They won roars from the large crowd. Black Power, with its vows for self-defense and independence, struck emotional chords that exposed the widening fault lines in the movement.

    Yet, even as the crowd cheered the rhetoric of Black militants, it reserved its greatest adoration for King. To reach the podium, he waded through the masses. Old ladies jostled each other to touch him, while weathered farmers pressed their palms into his.

    And as this tumultuous, grueling day turned into a sweaty, bug-filled night, King painted a vision for the movement. He understood the need for Black political power. He acknowledged that Mississippi was afflicted by oppression. But segregation and violence were plagues on everyone, Black and white. To survive, to thrive, Black people needed a “coalition of conscience.”

    “Now,” he said, “I’m ready to die myself.” In his classic style, he weaved together the rhythms of the pulpit with the ideals of American democracy.

    “When I die I’m going to die for something, and at that moment, I guess, it will be necessary, but I’m trying to say something to you, my friends, that I hope we will all gain tonight, and that is that we have a power.” He recalled the movement’s great triumphs and celebrated their destiny to redeem the nation. In the process, he touched people’s souls.

    By insisting on his ideals, and by summoning his greatest oratorical powers, King maintained his slippery grasp on the march’s message. In its final days, the Meredith March encountered more violence, including a tear gas attack in the town of Canton. Yet amid the cries of Black Power, the marchers maintained the discipline of nonviolence. They arrived in the capital city of Jackson for the largest civil rights demonstration in the history of Mississippi, signaling the resonance of mass protest in the lives of Black Americans

    On the Meredith March, King illustrated why his birthday is a federal holiday, a memorial in the National Mall’s Tidal Basin celebrates his legacy and nearly 1,000 streets bear his name. He was neither a saint nor the movement’s single leader. But he exhibited the qualities of leadership, in the service of forging a genuine democracy.

    King demonstrated profound courage, setting a meaningful example. He pulled followers into his orbit, articulating principles that resonated with people. And he insisted that a crusade for justice demanded the best of its advocates, investing their cause with the deepest meaning.

    Throughout his glorious and tragic journey with the civil rights movement, King shared these blessings. Sometimes he did it all on one single day.

    Aram Goudsouzian is the Bizot Professor of History at the University of Memphis. His books include the award-winning Down to the Crossroads: Civil Rights, Black Power, and the Meredith March Against Fear.

    Made by History takes readers beyond the headlines with articles written and edited by professional historians. Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of The Inquirer.

  • Trump administration sues Philadelphia over ‘ICE Out’ face mask ban for law enforcement

    Trump administration sues Philadelphia over ‘ICE Out’ face mask ban for law enforcement

    President Donald Trump’s administration sued Philadelphia and some of its top officials Thursday over a new ordinance that bars law enforcement officers from concealing their identities and effectively bans federal immigration agents from wearing masks.

    The law, part of City Council’s recently adopted “ICE Out” package of legislation imposing some of the nation’s toughest local restrictions on immigration agents, is “blatantly unconstitutional,” the lawsuit said.

    “Such an ordinance also undermines the principles of federalism that underlie our entire constitutional order by seeking to prevent effective federal law enforcement within Philadelphia,” according to the complaint.

    The ordinance makes it a crime for any law enforcement officer, including Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, to wear face coverings or conceal personal identifiers like badges and nameplates while carrying out their official duties in the city, and it requires officers to identify themselves. It also prohibits the use of unmarked vehicles.

    The bill includes exceptions allowing officers to wear masks in certain circumstances, such as medical emergencies or SWAT operations.

    An officer who violates the ordinance could be prosecuted, and risks up to 90 days in jail plus a fine.

    The suit, filed in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, names as defendants the city, Mayor Cherelle L. Parker, District Attorney Larry Krasner, and City Solicitor Renee Garcia. It asks a federal judge to find the bills unconstitutional, warning that federal agents could suffer irreparable harm if the policy remains in place.

    “Protecting officers’ personal identities is particularly important during high-risk enforcement operations involving individuals with violent criminal history, gang affiliations, transnational criminal organizations, and known or suspected terrorists,” the suit says.

    The lawsuit marks the Trump administration’s most significant action targeting Philadelphia’s immigrant-friendly policies to date.

    “Today we regrettably had to sue the birthplace of this great Nation,” Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward said in a statement. “But we will not sit by while Philadelphia flagrantly violates our Constitution, seeking to criminally punish our Nation’s law enforcement heroes merely for doing their job.”

    Philadelphia has long been known as a sanctuary city primarily because it does not comply with ICE-issued detainers, in which federal agents ask local jails to facilitate the arrest of undocumented immigrants in their custody.

    But Parker has largely avoided direct confrontation with the White House over the issue, a reversal from the combative stance of her predecessor, former Mayor Jim Kenney.

    Parker’s supporters credit her with careful, crafty management of the city’s relationship with Trump, noting Philadelphia has been spared from the surges of federal agents the president has sent to other cities. But immigration advocates say Parker has backed away from a fight at a time when strong action is most needed.

    The tension surfaced when Parker decided to let the mask bill became law without her signature, after Garcia warned the mayor that the provisions might not be legally enforceable.

    Council members, however, wanted to take a more proactive stance against Trump’s nationwide deportation campaign. And they seem to have gotten his attention.

    Councilmember Kendra Brooks, who coauthored the “ICE Out” package, said she “will not back down from this fight.”

    “Philadelphia doesn’t like bullies. And we certainly don’t like masked PPD officers or ICE agents terrorizing our neighbors,” Brooks said in a statement. “The people of this city expected our leaders to fight back against Trump’s invasion. That’s what we did when we passed ICE Out.”

    Brooks noted that the lawsuit cites the Parker administration’s publicly aired concerns about the bill, and said other jurisdictions targeted by Trump after they passed legislation restraining ICE have not had to deal with that dynamic.

    “Other lawsuits aren’t dealing with the City’s own words about the laws being used against them,” Brooks said.

    The Parker administration declined to comment.

    The Pennsylvania Immigration Coalition condemned the lawsuit as a political effort to undermine local policies that keep families safe, strengthen public trust, and ensure city resources serve Philadelphians.

    “Once again the Trump administration is using the courts to wage a political campaign against immigrant communities, instead of addressing the real needs of our country,” coalition executive director Jasmine Rivera said in a statement. “Pennsylvanians have been clear, they do not want more immigration enforcement and detention centers, they want affordable education, healthcare, and housing.”

    Councilmember Rue Landau, the legislation’s other coauthor, criticized Trump for “targeting Philadelphia because our city dared to stand up and say that masked federal agents should not be able to operate in our communities and target our vulnerable neighbors without accountability.”

    ‘We will arrest you’

    In addition to banning officers from concealing their identities, the “ICE Out” package, which in April passed Council with a veto-proof supermajority, prohibits federal immigration agencies from staging raids on city-owned property, bans discrimination on the basis of citizenship status, and prohibits the city from engaging in most forms of information-sharing with ICE.

    The legislation also codified some of Philadelphia’s long-standing sanctuary city policies that had been established only through executive order — most notably a ban on city jails honoring ICE detainers not accompanied by judicial warrants.

    Parker signed six of the seven bills in May, and allowed the ban on agents hiding their identities to become law without her signature.

    Parker did not sign the bill after Garcia expressed concern about the ban’s “significant legal and operational challenges,” the suit notes. The mayor’s signature would signal the Parker administration’s intent to enforce the requirement, the solicitor said, and would send an inaccurate signal that the prohibition was enforceable.

    While Parker might have attempted to distance herself from the requirement by not signing the bill, the lawsuit quotes Krasner threatening federal agents with prosecution.

    “We will arrest you. We will put handcuffs on you. We will close those cuffs. We will put you in a cell,” Krasner said in January. “We will do everything in our power to convict you and we will make sure you serve your entire sentence because Donald Trump has no power whatsoever to pardon you.”

    Larry Krasner shown here during a press conference at City Hall to announce a package of bills aimed at pushing back against ICE enforcement in Philadelphia, January 27, 2026.

    Philly case could have national stakes

    The complaint makes clear that by bringing this lawsuit, the Department of Justice is not closing the door on challenges to other ICE Out ordinances.

    Around the country, more and more Democratic-led communities are attempting to regulate what ICE can and cannot do within their jurisdictions. And doing so with the support of immigrant communities.

    “In all the ways that ICE agents terrorize and violate the rights of our community, masked kidnappings are ones we consistently see and hear about,” said Erika Guadalupe Núñez, executive director of Juntos, the South- Philadelphia-based immigrant advocacy organization.

    She said, however, that “we’re part of a strong local movement organized to fight back, and we all embody the spirit of this city, we will not back down easily.”

    In March, the Montgomery County Board of Commissioners passed a resolution that restricted the agency from using county property or resources for civil investigations.

    Issues around masks and identification have been particularly contentious.

    Activists in Philadelphia and elsewhere say ICE arrests often look like kidnappings or muggings, where men in ordinary clothes, with no visible identification, suddenly descend on their target. The people being arrested may think they are being attacked by criminals.

    Several states, including New Jersey and New York, have passed laws to ban law enforcement officers, including ICE, from wearing facial coverings while on duty.

    In April, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld a lower court’s injunction on a California law that required federal agents to “visibly display identification.” The unanimous three-judge panel ruled that the requirement violated the Constitution’s supremacy clause, which bars the states from regulating federal government activities.

    New Jersey Gov. Mikie Sherrill signed bills in March that essentially banned ICE agents and police from wearing masks on the job, drawing pushback from Republican lawmakers. The Trump administration sued New Jersey in federal court in April, and the New Jersey Monitor and others reported that ICE agents continued to cover their faces during recent clashes with demonstrators outside the Delaney Hall immigrant detention center in Newark.

    The Trump administration says federal immigration officers wear face coverings to protect themselves and their families from anti-ICE activists who may seek to identify and harm them. Assaults and death threats are on the rise, the administration said.

  • Trump FDA chief is leaving after angering pharma CEOs, vaping lobbyists, and anti-abortion groups

    WASHINGTON — The head of the Food and Drug Administration, Marty Makary, is resigning after a rocky tenure that drew months of complaints from health industry executives, anti-abortion activists, vaping lobbyists, and other allies of President Donald Trump.

    News of Makary’s departure Tuesday came just 13 months after he was confirmed to lead the powerful regulatory agency.

    A surgeon and health researcher, Makary came to prominence among Republicans as an outspoken critic of COVID-19 health measures during the pandemic, when he frequently appeared on Fox News Channel. But he struggled to manage the FDA’s bureaucracy and failed to win the confidence of its staff after mass layoffs, leadership upheavals, and a series of controversies in which the agency’s scientific principles appeared to be overridden by political interests, including those of Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

    “He’s a great doctor, and he was having some difficulty,” Trump told reporters outside the White House. “But he’s going to go on and he’s going to do well.”

    Trump later confirmed in a social media post that Kyle Diamantas, the agency’s chief for foods, is expected to take over as acting commissioner. Diamantas is an attorney with personal ties to Donald Trump Jr.

    In that post, the president included what appeared to be a text message from Makary submitting his resignation. In it, he noted that “I announced 50 major FDA reforms. Joe Biden’s FDA had none,” and thanked Trump for the chance to serve.

    The FDA commissioner, as the leader of an agency that regulates billions of dollars in consumer goods and medicines, is often required to juggle competing priorities that straddle science and politics.

    Makary faced a unique challenge in balancing calls by Trump and other Republicans to cut red tape at the FDA, while also tending to Kennedy’s interest in scrutinizing the safety of vaccines, drugs, and food additives. The decision to get rid of Makary was made by Kennedy, and then the White House signed off on it, according to an administration official who was granted anonymity because they were not authorized to describe internal dynamics.

    Virtually all of the FDA’s senior career officials resigned, retired or were forced out in the first year of the second-term Trump administration, leading to a steady stream of leaks and negative stories in the media cataloging low morale, dysfunction and frustration among staff.

    Makary’s handpicked deputy, Vinay Prasad, was pushed out of the agency twice in less than a year for running afoul of specialty drugmakers and groups for patients with rare diseases. Makary appeared poised to weather the controversy, despite an ongoing pressure campaign calling on Trump to fire him.

    Recent weeks brought fresh criticisms from other interest groups that the White House considers key to Republican chances in November elections.

    Anti-abortion groups have accused Makary of slow-walking an internal review of the abortion pill mifepristone, which has been on the market for 25 years but remains a target for conservative activists. They are seeking to roll back FDA rules that currently allow the pill to be sent through the mail.

    “We look forward to a new FDA commissioner who will put an end to the mail-order abortion drug regime,” said Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America.

    Vaping executives told Trump that Makary was blocking approval of their products, including new flavored e-cigarettes seen as crucial to the industry’s survival.

    Last week, the agency abruptly changed course, authorizing the first fruit-flavored e-cigarettes and issuing guidelines that loosened marketing for major manufacturers. But it wasn’t enough to keep Makary in the job.

    A permanent replacement for the FDA job will need to be nominated by Trump and confirmed by the Senate.

    Faster drug reviews are overshadowed

    As a former regular on Fox News, Makary was aggressive about promoting his accomplishments on cable television and podcasts and in online opinion pieces.

    A string of initiatives from Makary aimed to speed up or streamline FDA drug reviews, including dropping certain study requirements, incorporating artificial intelligence into drug evaluations and offering expedited reviews to medicines that support “national interests.”

    But pharmaceutical executives rely on the predictability and consistency of FDA decisions, even more than speedy reviews. Makary’s efforts on drug reviews were overshadowed by internal conflicts and disputes that created headaches for drugmakers, investors and patients.

    More than a half-dozen drugmakers studying therapies for rare or hard-to-treat diseases said they received rejection letters or requests to run additional studies for drugs that had previously been given the go-ahead by FDA staff. Those drugs were primarily overseen by Prasad, who stepped down for a second time from his role as the FDA’s vaccine and biotech chief in April.

    Vaccine moves denounced

    Prasad repeatedly overruled vaccine staffers to restrict eligibility for new coronavirus shots. In February, Prasad initially refused to even consider Moderna’s mRNA shot for flu. The FDA was forced to reverse itself after Moderna pledged to formally challenge the decision and called for intervention by the White House.

    Some of Makary and Prasad’s most controversial vaccine proposals never came to fruition, despite stoking confusion and anxiety within the FDA and beyond.

    In an internal memo in November, Prasad claimed — without publishing evidence — that the FDA had linked COVID-19 shots to the deaths of 10 children. Prasad used that to justify a planned overhaul of the agency’s approach to approving vaccines.

    A dozen former FDA commissioners issued a scathing denunciation of the plan, warning it would “undermine the public interest” and decimate vaccine development. The FDA has not released its analysis of the deaths or its plan for the vaccine overhaul.

    FDA’s drug center had a revolving door

    In the FDA’s drug center, which is the agency’s largest division, Makary oversaw a revolving door of leadership changes. Six people served as director over the course of one year.

    Makary’s initial pick for the job, George Tidmarsh, was forced to resign after allegations that he used his FDA position to pursue a personal vendetta against a former business partner.

    His replacement, longtime FDA cancer specialist Rick Pazdur, announced he would retire after just three weeks on the job, after clashing with Makary on multiple issues surrounding drug reviews.

    With Makary’s departure, the fate of many of his fledgling initiatives is uncertain.

    Most of the programs Makary introduced have not gone through federal rulemaking required to enshrine them in U.S. law. Democrats in Congress have questioned the legality of some of those efforts, including a program that offers drugmakers expedited reviews for innovative medicines.

  • Denver airport security initially missed trespasser who was killed by plane on runway

    Denver airport security initially missed trespasser who was killed by plane on runway

    FORT COLLINS, Colo. — Workers at Denver airport initially missed a security breach by man who scaled an 8-foot perimeter fence and crossed a runway where he was hit and killed in a fiery collision by a plane with 231 people on board, authorities said Tuesday.

    The runway fatality underscores the longstanding challenge of keeping intruders out of major airports. Denver International Airport sprawls across 53 square miles — twice the size of Manhattan — on open prairie northeast of the city center.

    The 41-year-old trespasser triggered an alarm as he crossed into the airport in a remote area about 2 miles from the terminal late Friday night. But security personnel mistakenly attributed that alarm to a herd of deer that was nearby.

    Authorities said the man died by suicide. However, no note from the victim was immediately recovered. The manner of death was determined based on the investigation at the scene, a records review, and a postmortem examination, said Sterling McLaren, chief medical examiner for the city and county of Denver.

    The collision involving the Frontier Airlines plane as it was taking off for Los Angeles sparked an engine fire that forced passengers to evacuate via slides. Twelve people sustained minor injuries and five were taken to hospitals. Four have since been released, said airport Chief Executive Officer Phillip Washington.

    A black-and-white video released by the airport shows, from a distance, a figure walking toward the runway with arms swaying. The person crosses onto the runway at a slight angle and seconds later the plane is seen speeding past. It strikes the person with its right engine, which bursts into flame.

    Federal officials notified the airport

    A few minutes before the man scaled the fence, a ground-based radar system activated in the area, triggering an alarm. An airport worker checked a surveillance camera and saw a herd of deer in the same area but did not initially see the trespasser, Washington said.

    “The camera view was alternating between the wildlife and the individual. There are some ditches in the area, so the person was out of view for a bit as well,” Washington said.

    He said federal officials notified the airport about the trespasser. Because of the remote location and short time period between the man scaling the fence and crossing the runway, Washington said airport personnel were not able to intervene.

    The man crossed about 650 feet from the fence to the runway before being struck and killed by the Frontier Airlines plane traveling at 150 mph on takeoff.

    The plane’s engine caused the man’s death, McLaren said. She described it as “a purposeful act with a foreseeable fatal outcome.”

    Denver Police Chief Ron Thomas said investigators were contacting the man’s family and those who knew him to seek more information about his motivations.

    Trespassers breaching airport perimeters is a regular problem, with perhaps dozens annually nationwide, said security expert Jeff Price, who was assistant director of security at the Denver airport in the 1990s. The airport is surrounded by about 36 miles of perimeter fence, which airport officials say is continuously inspected.

    The vast majority of airport trespassers are intoxicated or simply “messing around just to see if they could do it,” said Price, adding that they typically don’t pose a real threat. Denver also gets the rare individual who will jump the fence seeking to prove a long-running conspiracy theory about a UFO base being based at the airport, he said.

    The Transportation Security Administration oversees airport security programs, including perimeter security requirements.

    “It’s really not that difficult to jump an airport perimeter fence,” Price said. “They meet the standards for TSA, but the standards are not that robust.”

    The fences are typically 6 to 8 feet tall with barbed wire at the top, he said. They must be approved by federal inspectors, but there are no set rules on their construction. Major airports such as Denver typically also have intrusion detection systems that include cameras and motion sensors, he said. Some systems detect the seismic impact of people dropping to the ground, Price said.

    Evacuation under scrutiny

    The person was killed on the airport’s easternmost north-south runway and at least 1.25 miles from any airport buildings. Empty fields and croplands surround Denver International Airport in most directions. Distant trees and structures in the video showed that the person was headed toward the airport when they crossed the runway.

    The Transportation Security Administration has regulatory oversight of airport security programs, including perimeter security requirements.

    Separately, the National Transportation Safety Board on Sunday said it is gathering information about the evacuation.

    An agency spokesperson said an investigation would be launched if it’s determined the injuries meet the agency’s definition for “serious.” That can include a person requiring hospitalization for more than 48 hours, suffering a broken bone or second- or third-degree burns affecting more than 5% of their body.

    This story includes discussion of suicide. If you or someone you know needs help, the national suicide and crisis lifeline in the U.S. is available by calling or texting 988. There is also an online chat at 988lifeline.org

  • Spotify 20 is like Wrapped — but it includes all your messy years, too

    Spotify 20 is like Wrapped — but it includes all your messy years, too

    Spotify is reading you for filth again, and it’s not even December yet.

    In honor of the streaming service’s 20th anniversary, it’s ready to embarrass you with 20 years’ worth of listening history — or as many years as you’ve used the app.

    The streaming platform dropped Spotify 20 on Tuesday, a feature that lets users look back at their time on the app in a digestible, data-forward and visually aesthetic way.

    It’s kind of like Spotify Wrapped — the popular annual wrap-up — but it sums up decades of users’ ever-evolving music tastes instead of just one calendar year.

    “Spotify 20: Your Party of the Year(s) … gives you a playful, nostalgia-driven look back at your music listening history,” the platform said in a statement. “It reveals the moments that have defined your time with us through never-before-shared data.”

    The feature is only available via Spotify’s mobile app and concludes with a playlist (that’s also desktop-friendly) of your top 120 tracks.

    The wrap-up also tells you: your first day on Spotify, the total number of songs you’ve streamed, the first song you listened to on Spotify, and your all-time most-streamed artist.

    Taylor Swift performs during the first of three Eras Tour performances at Lincoln Financial Field in Philadelphia on Friday, May 12, 2023. .

    In addition to personal stats, Spotify crunched the numbers for all its users’ listening history over the last two decades. Perhaps unsurprisingly, the most-streamed artist across the board over the last 20 years was none other than Berks County native Taylor Swift. The most-streamed song over 20 years was “Blinding Lights” by The Weeknd.

    Hilariously, Spotify 20 was a surprise to the general public, meaning users couldn’t try to intentionally manipulate their results the way they do with Wrapped. That said, this is your warning that you have about six months and change until Spotify Wrapped 2026 drops.

    If you’d like to try the Spotify 20 feature yourself, click the prompt within the app or visit spotify.com/20 and scan the QR code with your phone.

  • Airbnb is turning on its ‘anti-party’ technology for Memorial Day weekend

    Airbnb is turning on its ‘anti-party’ technology for Memorial Day weekend

    Airbnb is activating its “anti-party” technology again for Memorial Day weekend as the global rental property giant doubles down on its no-party policies.

    Temporary changes to the online booking system will deter potential “higher risk” bookings during Memorial Day weekend. At the time of publishing, Airbnb did not specify the exact dates and times the technology would be operating.

    Last year, Airbnb said this technology deterred nearly 11,000 people from booking entire homes over Memorial Day weekend. In Philadelphia, 85 people were deterred from entire-home booking that same time period.

    The system looks at the type of listing being booked, the duration of the stay, the distance from the guest’s primary location, and whether the booking is made last minute, to determine whether a booking should be deterred, according to Airbnb.

    Airbnb has tied certain entire-home bookings to the potentially disruptive parties for which rental platforms garnered a reputation in earlier years, including in the Philadelphia region. Muhammad Ali’s Cherry Hill mansion, which still operates as a rental property on platforms like Vrbo and Expedia, was the site of countless “wild parties” that led police to visit the home 97 times between 2018 and 2019, according to an Inquirer report.

    The anti-party technology deters potential house party bookings toward private room listing or hotels hosted on the platform.

    “Our investment in anti-party technology, along with clear policies and consequences, reflects our commitment to supporting positive stays and countering the rare few who would try to break the trust our platform and local communities are built on,” said Rog Kaiser, vice president of fraud and safety operations at Airbnb.

    In 2022, Airbnb made its COVID-era “party ban” permanent, making it against the rules for all users year-round to book entire homes solely for large parties.

    Airbnb was also reminding parents and guardians that children under 18 cannot have Airbnb accounts and parents cannot book rentals for underage guests without the parent being on-site. Violating these rules can lead to bans and financial costs in the case of damages.

    Since these measures were put in place, in 2025, less than 1% of U.S. rental bookings resulted in a report of a party to Airbnb, according to the company.

  • Supreme Court limits key provision of the landmark Voting Rights Act

    WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Wednesday sharply weakened a key provision of the landmark Voting Rights Act, a ruling that limits the consideration of race in drawing voting maps and could usher in Republican gains in the House.

    The decision is expected to touch off a scramble by Republicans to redraw majority-minority districts, especially in the South. New districts could shift the balance of power in Congress by imperiling the reelection prospects of some Black Democrats, possibly as soon as November’s midterms in some instances. Representatives of color in state legislatures and local offices could also be redistricted out.

    The court’s conservative majority found Louisiana unlawfully discriminated by race when it created a second majority-Black congressional district to comply with the VRA. But the court did not strike down the provision, known as Section 2, as unconstitutional, as many voting rights advocates had feared it would. Still, the court’s liberal justices and voting rights experts said it was effectively gutted.

    The ruling carries significant symbolic weight, scaling back the last major pillar of a 60-year-old law long considered one of the marquee achievements of the civil rights era. The Voting Rights Act bans discriminatory voting practices such as literacy tests and poll taxes, and has helped greatly increase minority representation in state and federal offices.

    In an ideologically divided 6-3 ruling, the conservative justices created a higher bar for the law’s powerful provision that allows states to use race to draw maps that help minority communities elect candidates of their choice. Section 2 is aimed at combating discriminatory gerrymandering that weakens the power of Black, Latino, Native American, and Asian voters.

    States must walk a careful line when drawing maps for voting districts. The Voting Rights Act directs states to consider race to some degree when redistricting to ensure that racial minority groups have an opportunity to elect representatives who reflect their priorities. Maps explicitly drawn along racial lines, however, violate the equal-protection clause of the 14th Amendment and the 15th Amendment’s ban on racial discrimination in voting practices.

    Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. wrote the opinion for the majority, saying it was time to rework Section 2 given gains in ending racial discrimination, the use of VRA lawsuits for partisan purposes, and advances in technology that have made it easier to draw legislative districts that balance partisan interests and racial considerations.

    Alito wrote that going forward, plaintiffs would have to show that a state intentionally discriminated against a minority group in drawing a map, rather than simply showing that members of the minority group did not have the opportunity to elect a candidate of their choice when certain circumstances are met.

    “Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act … was designed to enforce the Constitution — not collide with it,” he wrote. “Unfortunately, lower courts have sometimes applied this Court’s [Section] 2 precedents in a way that forces States to engage in the very race-based discrimination that the Constitution forbids.”

    The decision came over the sharp objections of the court’s three liberals. Justice Elena Kagan delivered the dissent from the bench, signaling strong disagreement. In her opinion, Kagan lamented that in rulings over the last decade, the court’s conservative justices had carried out a “demolition” of the VRA that was now complete. She predicted a precipitous decline in minority representation in political office.

    “The consequences are likely to be far-reaching and grave. Today’s decision renders Section 2 all but a dead letter. In the States where that law continues to matter — the States still marked by residential segregation and racially polarized voting — minority voters can now be cracked out of the electoral process,” Kagan wrote, referring to the process of drawing maps that break up minority voting blocks.

    The decision continues a trend by the court’s conservative majority to roll back race-conscious efforts to redress discriminatory practices. It comes two years after another major decision to restrict race-based affirmative action in college admissions.

    The ruling lands as a nationwide redistricting war has broken out between Republicans and Democrats, both of which have taken the unusual step of redrawing district lines between censuses to try to secure partisan advantages in this year’s races for Congress. Republicans currently hold a slim majority.

    Professor Richard L. Hasen, an election law expert at UCLA, said Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act still stands but is all but eviscerated.

    “The opinion weakens application of the Voting Rights Act to make it a much weaker, and potentially toothless, law,” Hasen wrote on his blog. “It is hard to overstate how much this weakens the Voting Rights Act.”

    NAACP president Derrick Johnson said in a statement that the ruling was a major strike to minority political power.

    “Today’s decision is a devastating blow to what remains of the Voting Rights Act, and a license for corrupt politicians who want to rig the system by silencing entire communities,” Johnson said. “The Supreme Court betrayed Black voters, they betrayed America, and they betrayed our democracy. This ruling is a major setback for our nation and threatens to erode the hard-won victories we’ve fought, bled, and died for.”

    The Trump administration hailed the ruling in a statement.

    “This is a complete and total victory for American voters,” White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson wrote. “The color of one’s skin should not dictate which congressional district you belong in. We commend the court for putting an end to the unconstitutional abuse of the Voting Rights Act and protecting civil rights.”

    Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill called the ruling “seismic” and applauded it in a statement.

    “The Supreme Court has ended Louisiana’s long-running nightmare of federal courts coercing the state to draw a racially discriminatory map,” Murrill said.

    The complicated dispute over the Louisiana voting district has dragged on for years and had been before the court last term.

    The case began in 2022 when Black voters and civil rights groups sued Louisiana under Section 2, saying a new voting map drafted after the 2020 Census shortchanged African American voters. The map had only one Black-majority district out of six. African Americans make up one-third of the state’s population.

    A federal court ruled for the plaintiffs and ordered the state to draw a new map with a second Black-majority district. After further legal wrangling, the Louisiana legislature drafted one in 2024.

    The new map, which was drawn in part to protect the seats of Republican incumbents, including House Speaker Mike Johnson and House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, created a Black-majority district that meandered across the state from Baton Rouge to Shreveport.

    A group of self-described “non-Black voter[s]” sued, arguing the new map was an unconstitutional racial gerrymander that violated the equal-protection clause. A federal district court panel ruled for the non-Black plaintiffs and put a hold on the redrawn map.

    The Supreme Court eventually allowed the map with two Black-majority districts to go into effect for the 2024 congressional election. Voters chose Cleo Fields, a Black Democrat, for the new district.

    The non-Black voters brought their case to the Supreme Court once again. Last term, the justices decided to hold off on a ruling and asked both sides to address whether creation of the second Black-majority district violated the 14th and 15th Amendments, before taking up the case again this term.

    During arguments in October, Louisiana Solicitor General Benjamin Aguiñaga told the justices that any “race-based redistricting is fundamentally contradictory to our Constitution.” He also said that Louisiana had changed in recent decades, so the need for Section 2 had been obviated.

    “It requires striking enough members of the majority race to sufficiently diminish their voting strength, and it requires drawing in enough members of a minority race to sufficiently augment their voting strength,” Aguiñaga said. “Embedded within these express targets are racial stereotypes that this court has long criticized.”

    Kagan asked an attorney for Black voters in Louisiana what impact gutting Section 2 would have.

    “The results would be pretty catastrophic,” said Janai Nelson, the president of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund.

    “We only have the diversity we see across the South because of litigation” under the voting rights law, Nelson said, adding that it had been “crucial to diversifying leadership” in Louisiana and other states. She said no Black person has been elected to statewide office in Louisiana to date.

    The decision follows another by the Supreme Court involving Section 2 in 2023. In that case, the justices ruled Alabama created electoral maps that unlawfully diluted the power of Black residents. That ruling surprised many court watchers because the justices have chipped away at the VRA in recent years.

    In the most significant ruling in 2013, the justices struck down Section 5 of the VRA, which required states with a history of discriminating against minority voters to get changes to electoral law approved by the federal government or a judge. Most of the states covered by the provision are in the South.

    The latest ruling is likely to contribute to the uncertainty surrounding the nation’s electoral maps amid the unprecedented wave of mid-decade redistricting. Ordinarily, states redraw their lines at the beginning of each decade after the U.S. Census Bureau alerts states to population shifts.

    President Donald Trump, concerned Republicans could lose their fragile House majority, began pressing Republican-led states last summer to draw new lines ahead of the midterm elections. Republicans drew better lines for themselves in Ohio, Missouri, North Carolina, and Texas that could give them strong shots at picking up nine more seats.

    Florida Republicans are planning to carve up their districts to give their party up to four more districts, and were debating their plan on the floor of the state House when the court released its decision. Legislators approved the plan Wednesday afternoon.

    In response, voters in California approved a new map that will give Democrats up to five more House seats, and voters in Virginia approved a plan to redraw their map. The Supreme Court turned aside a challenge to the California map in February.

    The Supreme Court’s decision probably gives Republicans an opportunity to draw even more districts in their favor.

    The deadlines for most states to redraw their maps before the midterms have passed, but it is possible some states push to change those rules. Either way, the ruling could set Republicans up for advantages in 2028 and beyond. In the wake of the decision, Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R., Tenn.) called on lawmakers in her state to redraw maps to create an extra Republican seat in Memphis.

    This Supreme Court term is shaping up as a consequential one for election-related law.

    In one major case, the court will decide the constitutionality of counting mail-in ballots that arrive after an election, provided they are postmarked by Election Day. The justices also allowed a lawsuit by a Republican congressman from Illinois who is challenging the state’s mail-in ballot law.

    The justices heard arguments in December over whether to lift restrictions on parties spending money in coordination with candidates, which could be the latest chance for the court to curtail campaign finance limits.

    This article contains information from the Associated Press.

  • Supreme Court wrestles with Trump effort to end temporary protections for migrants

    WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court’s conservative majority on Wednesday appeared sympathetic to the Trump administration’s arguments that it can cancel temporary humanitarian protections for Haitian and Syrian immigrants living legally in the United States, hearing a pair of cases that could let the government deport hundreds of thousands of people starting this year.

    The cases test a key part of President Donald Trump’s immigration agenda, which has sought not only to deport undocumented immigrants but also to narrow the legal pathways for immigrants to reside in the United States. As he campaigned for his second presidential term, Trump vowed to revoke temporary protected status for Haitian immigrants while spreading baseless claims that Haitian residents in Springfield, Ohio, were killing and eating their neighbors’ pets.

    Several of the court’s conservative justices appeared skeptical of arguments made by immigrants’ attorneys that courts have the authority to review whether Kristi Noem, who until recently was the homeland security secretary, took the proper steps to cancel the protections. The 1990 law that created TPS says there is no “judicial review” of the secretary’s “determination.”

    “If we apply ordinary meaning of that term here, I really don’t understand how you can prevail,” Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. told the lawyers.

    Much of the harder questioning for the Trump administration came from the court’s liberal justices, who probed Solicitor General D. John Sauer on the TPS holders’ allegations that Noem did not take the required steps in canceling the protections. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson asked if, under the government’s theory, Noem could make a decision using a “Ouija board.

    The liberal justices also highlighted Trump’s past comments that some immigrants were “poisoning the blood” of the United States, his favoring White South African refugees over immigrants of color, and his use of expletives to disparage countries including Haiti. Such comments suggest the administration acted from racial animus, the immigrants’ attorneys have argued.

    “What about ‘poisoning the blood of Americans’?” Jackson asked, before listing other remarks.

    Sauer said the statements referred to immigrants who were criminals or depend on welfare, neither of which applied to TPS holders.

    The potential impact of the Supreme Court’s opinion, which is expected by June, extends well beyond Haitians to approximately 1.3 million immigrants from 17 countries who had temporary protected status when Trump took office. Since then, the Department of Homeland Security has sought to eliminate protections for 13 of those countries, including Haiti, Syria, and several others the State Department still considers highly dangerous.

    Congress created TPS in 1990 to protect immigrants in the United States from being deported to countries engulfed in an armed conflict, a natural disaster, or another extraordinary crisis, allowing them to work legally in the U.S. for up to 18 months. Applicants to the program cannot have serious criminal records, and they must pay fees and pass a background check.

    The U.S. government can renew the protections — and has, multiple times, drawing criticism from Trump for allowing the provisional status to last for years, even decades.

    “Keep in mind, this is temporary protected status,” Sauer told the court. “The word temporary is used again and again in the statute, including its title. And we’re looking at a situation where there have been initial designations that go back to 1991 in the case of Somalia …”

    Attorneys for the immigrants countered that they are entitled to a fair process.

    “We’re talking about the power to mass expel people who have done nothing wrong to countries that remain unsafe,” said attorney Ahilan Arulanantham. “And our view is it is unlikely that a refugee protection statute would have given that power to the secretary.”

    In February 2025, Noem made good on Trump’s promise to limit the program, kicking off the process to cancel temporary protections for more than 353,000 Haitian migrants. They had first received protections in 2010 following Haiti’s devastating 7.0-magnitude earthquake, and the protections had been extended to include those who arrived later. Haiti has faced multiple crises, including the 2021 assassination of its president and widespread gang violence.

    Although conditions in Haiti remained “concerning,” Noem said last year, she argued that Haiti was largely safe for TPS holders to return to. Even if there were safety concerns, she argued, offering protections to Haitians was no longer in the “national interest” because the program was acting as a “pull factor” for illegal immigration.

    In September, Noem terminated temporary protected status for a little more than 6,000 Syrian immigrants. They had received protections starting in 2012 amid the violent crackdown by Syria’s then-leader Bashar al-Assad. Because Assad’s regime fell in 2024 — and the country’s brutal civil war had subsided to “sporadic, isolated episodes of violence” — Noem said she had determined that Syrians also could return to their home country.

    Lawyers for the immigrants pointed to State Department advisories that warn U.S. citizens not to travel to either country because of risks of terrorism, kidnapping, and armed conflict. The advisories recommend that visitors establish “proof of life” protocols in case they are taken hostage, “to confirm that you are being held captive and alive.”

    In light of those dangers, lawyers for Haitians and Syrians sued to block the terminations, arguing that Noem did not follow requirements in the law that she assess a country’s condition before deciding whether it is safe. They said that Noem scarcely consulted with other agencies in identifying risks and that the decisions to end TPS were motivated by racial animus.

    The Trump administration denies that. Moreover, it points to the Immigration Act of 1990, a bipartisan law that established the temporary protected status program, which says terminating a country’s status is entirely the secretary’s decision and cannot be challenged in court.

    “‘[N]o judicial review’ means what it says,” the government wrote in its brief to the court.

    The conservative justices were largely sympathetic to that argument. Justice Neil M. Gorsuch said he was “struggling” with the arguments by the immigrants’ attorneys that a court acting to postpone Noem’s determinations was not an example of the judiciary stepping in.

    Geoffrey M. Pipoly, a lawyer for the Haitian TPS holders, responded, “It’s difficult for me to answer that question without pointing out —”

    “It’s difficult for me to answer the question, too,” Gorsuch cut in.

    In both cases, lower courts sided with the immigrants. In the case of the Haitians, a federal judge in D.C. found that the termination was probably motivated by racial animus, pointing to Trump’s comments about the migrants in Springfield eating dogs and cats.

    When the Supreme Court agreed to hear the cases, the justices left the lower-court orders in effect, meaning Syrian and Haitian immigrants still have valid work permits and are protected from deportation for now.

    The prospect of Haitians losing temporary protections has drawn concern from members of the caregiving industry, who say that nursing homes across the country rely heavily on nurses and nurse’s aides from that country.

    In April, House Democrats and Republicans voted to restore the temporary protections for Haitian migrants, voicing similar concerns. That legislative effort faces an uncertain fate in the Senate, however, and would need Trump’s signature to go into effect.

  • Trump voices frustration with allies as Iran war and strait closure push fuel prices higher

    Trump voices frustration with allies as Iran war and strait closure push fuel prices higher

    DUBAI, United Arab Emirates — President Donald Trump lashed out Tuesday at allies who have been unwilling to do more to support the U.S. war effort against Iran, telling them to “go get your own oil” and saying it was not America’s job to secure the Strait of Hormuz.

    The president said the military could end its offensive in two to three weeks and that the U.S. “will not have anything to do with” what happens next in the strait that has been closed by the Islamic Republic. Instead, he told reporters, the responsibility for keeping the vital waterway open will rest with countries that rely on it.

    There’s “no reason for us to do this,” Trump said after signing an executive order that seeks to restrict mail-in voting. “That’s not for us. That’ll be for France. That’ll be for whoever’s using the strait.”

    The White House said Trump would deliver a prime-time address Wednesday evening to update the public on the war.

    In other developments, the closure of the strait sent average U.S. gas prices past $4 a gallon, and U.S. strikes hit the central city of Isfahan, sending a massive fireball into the sky. Tehran attacked a fully loaded Kuwaiti oil tanker in the Persian Gulf.

    The attacks showed the intensity of the war more than a month after the U.S. and Israel launched it. The conflict has left more than 3,000 dead and caused major disruptions to the world’s supply of oil and natural gas, roiling global markets and pushing up the cost of many basic goods.

    Trump, whose comments have vacillated between talk that diplomatic progress is being made with Iran and threats to widen the war, had earlier shared footage of the attack on Isfahan.

    Fuel prices rise, rattling global markets

    Iran’s stranglehold on the strait, the waterway leading out of the Persian Gulf through which a fifth of the world’s oil is transported during peacetime, has driven up global oil prices, as have Tehran’s attacks on regional energy infrastructure.

    Spot prices of Brent crude, the international standard, hovered around $107 a barrel Tuesday, up more than 45% since the war started Feb. 28.

    In a social media post, Trump directed blame at U.S. allies such as the United Kingdom and France that have refused to enter a war with no clear endgame that they were not consulted on.

    “You’ll have to start learning how to fight for yourself, the U.S.A. won’t be there to help you anymore, just like you weren’t there for us. Iran has been, essentially, decimated. The hard part is done. Go get your own oil!” Trump wrote.

    He singled out France for not letting planes fly over French territory while taking military supplies to Israel.

    France has allowed the U.S. Air Force to use the Istres base in southern France because it had guarantees that planes landing there would not be involved in carrying out strikes.

    Allies have refused to get involved

    Spain, which has emerged as Europe’s loudest critic of the war, said Monday that it had closed its airspace for U.S. planes involved in the conflict.

    Italy recently refused to allow U.S. military assets to use the Sigonella air base in Sicily for an operation linked to the offensive, an official with knowledge of the matter said, confirming a local press report. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly.

    Italian Defense Minister Guido Crosetto wrote on X that Italy is still allowing the U.S. to use its bases, adding that there has been no cooling of relations between the two countries.

    Journalist kidnapped in Iraq identified

    An American journalist was kidnapped Tuesday in Baghdad, and Iraqi security forces are pursuing her captors, Iraqi officials said. The journalist was identified as freelancer Shelly Kittleson by Al-Monitor, one of the news outlets she worked for.

    A U.S. official blamed the Iranian-backed Iraqi militia Kataib Hezbollah.

    Two cars were involved in the kidnapping, one of which crashed, and a person inside was apprehended. The journalist was then transferred to a second car that fled the scene, according to two Iraqi security officials who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about the case.

    Dylan Johnson, U.S. assistant secretary of state for public affairs, said on X that the State Department had “fulfilled our duty to warn this individual of threats against them.”

    In a statement, Al-Monitor said it stands by her “vital reporting.” Kittleson has been a longtime freelancer in the region, reporting extensively from Syria and Iraq.

    Another aircraft carrier deploys to Middle East

    The aircraft carrier USS George H. W. Bush deployed Tuesday from Norfolk, Va., and is slated to head to the Middle East, two U.S. officials said. They spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive military plans.

    It would be the third carrier sent out to support the Iran war, along with the USS Gerald R. Ford, which is now undergoing repairs, and the USS Abraham Lincoln, which arrived in the region in January.

    Trump warned this week that if a ceasefire is not reached “shortly,” and if the strait is not reopened, the U.S. would broaden its offensive, including by attacking the Kharg Island oil export hub and possibly desalination plants.

    Speaking at the Pentagon, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth would not say if U.S. ground forces would enter the war. “We don’t want to have to do more militarily than we have to,” he said.

    A ground invasion could alienate Iranians who despise the ruling theocracy and who rose up in mass protests that were crushed earlier this year. Some could see it as an attack on Iran itself and rally around the flag.

    Since the Iran war began, 13 U.S. service members have been killed and 348 wounded, six seriously, according to a formal count provided Tuesday by Capt. Tim Hawkins, spokesman for U.S. Central Command.

    Iran hits oil tanker as Israel strikes Iran and Lebanon

    The Israeli military said early Wednesday that it had killed a senior Hezbollah commander and another senior leader in two separate strikes in the Beirut area.

    Military officials said they launched strikes targeting what they described as Hezbollah infrastructure in the Lebanese capital. Defense Minister Israel Katz said Israel plans to control the area south of the Litani River — some 20 miles north of the border.

    Israel invaded southern Lebanon after Hezbollah began launching missiles into northern Israel days after the outbreak of the wider war. Many Lebanese fear another prolonged military occupation.

    In Iran, authorities say more than 1,900 people have been killed, while 19 have been reported dead in Israel.

    Two dozen people have died in Gulf states and the occupied West Bank. In Lebanon, officials said more than 1,200 people have been killed, and more than 1 million displaced.

    Ten Israeli soldiers have died in Lebanon, including four announced Tuesday.

  • Israeli police prevent Catholic leaders from celebrating Palm Sunday Mass at Jerusalem church

    TEL AVIV, Israel — The Israeli police prevented Catholic leaders from entering the Church of the Holy Sepulchre to celebrate Mass on the Christian holiday of Palm Sunday for the first time in centuries, the Latin Patriarchate said Sunday.

    Jerusalem’s major holy sites are closed because of the ongoing Iran war, including the church, as the city has come under frequent fire from Iranian missiles.

    The Catholic Church called the police decision “a manifestly unreasonable and grossly disproportionate measure.” It prevented two of the church’s top religious leaders, including Cardinal Pierbattista Pizzaballa and the head of the Custos in the Holy Land, from celebrating Palm Sunday at the place where Christians believe Jesus was crucified.

    Palm Sunday commemorates Jesus’ triumphant entry into Jerusalem and launches the Holy Week commemorations for Christians who follow the Latin calendar, which culminates in Easter next Sunday.

    The Israeli police said it had notified the Catholic Church on Saturday that no Mass could take place on Palm Sunday because of safety considerations, the lack of access for emergency vehicles in narrow alleys of the Old City, and lack of adequate shelter.

    However, the Latin Patriarchate said the Church of the Holy Sepulchre has been hosting Masses that aren’t open to the public since the Iran war began on Feb. 28, and it was unclear why Sunday’s Mass and access by the two priests was any different.

    “It’s a very, very sacred day for Christians and in our opinion there was no justification for such a decision or such an action,” said Farid Jubran, the spokesperson for the Latin Patriarchate of Jerusalem.

    Jubran said that the church had requested permission from the police for a few religious leaders to enter the church for a private Mass on Sunday — not one that was open to the public. The Patriarchate said that the decision impeded freedom of worship and the status quo in Jerusalem.

    The traditional Palm Sunday procession normally sees tens of thousands of Christians from around the world walk from the Mount of Olives down the narrow, hilly streets toward the Old City, waving palm fronds and singing.

    The Patriarchate canceled the traditional processional last week because of safety concerns, and has held Masses limited to fewer than 50 worshipers in compliance with the Israeli military’s guidelines for civilians.

    Pizzaballa celebrated Mass in the nearby St. Savior’s Monastery, a soaring marble church which is located next to an underground music school that the Israeli military has deemed a safe shelter space. Later on Sunday, Pizzaballa held a prayer for peace at the Dominus Flevit Shrine on the Mount of Olives, but kept his homily concentrated on Jesus and didn’t mention the morning’s incident.

    In Rome, Pope Leo XIV said Sunday that God doesn’t listen to the prayers of those who make war or cite God to justify their violence, as he prayed especially for Christians in the Middle East during a Palm Sunday Mass in St. Peter’s Square.

    With the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran entering its second month and Russia’s ongoing campaign in Ukraine, Leo dedicated his Palm Sunday homily to his insistence that God is the “king of peace” who rejects violence.

    “Brothers and sisters, this is our God: Jesus, King of Peace, who rejects war, whom no one can use to justify war,” Leo said. “He does not listen to the prayers of those who wage war, but rejects them, saying: ‘Even though you make many prayers, I will not listen: Your hands are full of blood.’”

    Leaders on all sides of the Iran war have used religion to justify their actions. U.S. officials, especially Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, have invoked their Christian faith to cast the war as a Christian nation trying to vanquish its foes with military might.

    Russia’s Orthodox Church, too, has justified Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as a “holy war” against a Western world it considers has fallen into evil.

    In a special blessing at the end of Mass, Leo said he was praying especially for Christians in the Middle East who are “suffering the consequences of an atrocious conflict. In many cases, they cannot live fully the rites of these holy days.”

    The Vatican spokesperson didn’t immediately respond when asked to comment on the Jerusalem incident.

    Italy condemns decision

    Italy formally protested the incident in Jerusalem to Israeli authorities. Premier Giorgia Meloni said that the police action “constitutes an offense not only against believers but against every community that recognizes religious freedom.”

    “The Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem is a sacred site of Christianity, and as such must be preserved and protected for the celebration of sacred rites,” Meloni said. “Preventing the Patriarch of Jerusalem and the Custos of the Holy Land from entering, especially on a solemnity central to the faith such as Palm Sunday, constitutes an offense not only against believers but against every community that recognizes religious freedom.”

    Meloni’s conservative government tried to keep a balanced position with Israel during the war in Gaza, supporting Israel’s right to defense but condemning the toll on Palestinians.

    The Italian leader has also said that Italy won’t participate in the Iran war, while affirming that the Islamic Republic can’t be allowed to possess nuclear weapons.

    Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani instructed Italy’s ambassador to Israel to convey the protest “and to reaffirm Italy’s commitment to protecting religious freedom at all times and under all circumstances.”

    In addition, Tajani summoned the Israeli ambassador to Italy for talks on Monday at the Italian Foreign Ministry to seek clarification about the decision.

    Israeli leader explains closure

    Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Sunday evening that there was no “malicious intent” and that the cardinal was prevented from accessing the church because of safety concerns, but that Israel would try to partially open the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in the coming days.

    “Given the holiness of the week leading up to Easter for the world’s Christians, Israel’s security arms are putting together a plan to enable church leaders to worship at the holy site in the coming days,” Netanyahu wrote on X.

    The Western Wall, the holiest site where Jews can pray, is also mostly closed because of safety issues, but authorities are letting up to 50 people at a time pray in an enclosed area adjacent to the plaza.

    Smaller churches, synagogues, and mosques are open in Jerusalem’s Old City if they are located within a certain distance of a bomb shelter deemed acceptable by Israel’s military and if gatherings are kept under 50 people.